WRC Rally Sweden 2020

[Katvala]

I can say the same for yr.no - have received nothing but false forecasts for years. It used to be very reliable service but changed many years ago.

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

I think complaining about bad weather forecasting is a common thing for generations lol. Weather changes, often unexpectedly

AccuWeather is fairly wrong as it bases itself on the average temperatures of the past.

Yr at least tells you what forecast is very uncertain etc

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

[SubaruNorway]

Yr is correct where i work in Norway, been snowing for three days here now and 20-25cm. Had rain almost to the minute when I looked at the radar in Mökkipëra on year!

[linni]

I can say the same for yr.no - have received nothing but false forecasts for years. It used to be very reliable service but changed many years ago.

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

Agree, Yr is not perfect, but mostly you can trust it. Gismeteo used to be very precise, but about 8 -10 years ago they changed their modelling algorhytms and after that things went sideways.

[Mirek]

Yr used to be good for our country but in the last two or three years it became much worse. Now it's not very reliable at least for here.

[Franky]

Yr has become less accurate, but still better than Accuweather, which is far from accurate. But this winter it doesn't matter which service you follow, longer than two day forecast rarely stays the same.

[cali]

Yes, I have yet to find a reliable weather forecast provider unless it's Bluuford

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

[Franky]

Yes, I have yet to find a reliable weather forecast provider unless it's Bluuford

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

You need to make him an offer, he can't refuse

[mknight]

YR.no is a web interface presenting results of different models depending on where you are.

For NO, SWE and FIN it presents results of AROME MEPS (and AROME Arctic north of Scandinavia) models. This is a cooperation model developed by meteorological institutes of the 3 countries and is the most accurate and detailed (in horizontal resolution) model for that area.

For other countries YR interface gives results of ECMWF operational model (which sits in England and is a cooperation of just about all European countries). The ECMWF model has much lower horizontal resolution and is typically less adjusted to "local/country" specific conditions, so by definition it should be less accurate. The ECMWF operational prediction model is available to all countries that are part of the ECMWF and is often used as a starting point of their own models.

Therefore YR.no results outside of Scandinavia should basically always be less accurate than local models. If they are not it reflects poorly on the local models. Off course this is valid only on a statistical basis and not for each moment. It can also be location dependent.

What happened some years ago when YR was first introduced is that people from a lot of countries outside of Scandinavia started using it because the web-interfaces from their local forecasts were hopelessly bad or non-existing in comparison. Often this was "by design" since the local meteorological institutes sold their detailed predictions for income.

EDIT: The results from the global American GFS model are also available at multiple sites, but those have similar resolution issues as ECMWF one. But off course at a given point of time they can be both better or worse than ECMWF or local models.

[cali]

YR.no is a web interface presenting results of different models depending on where you are.

For NO, SWE and FIN it presents results of AROME MEPS (and AROME Arctic north of Scandinavia) models. This is a cooperation model developed by meteorological institutes of the 3 countries and is the most accurate and detailed (in horizontal resolution) model for that area.

For other countries YR interface gives results of ECMWF operational model (which sits in England and is a cooperation of just about all European countries). The ECMWF model has much lower horizontal resolution and is typically less adjusted to "local/country" specific conditions, so by definition it should be less accurate. The ECMWF operational prediction model is available to all countries that are part of the ECMWF and is often used as a starting point of their own models.

Therefore YR.no results outside of Scandinavia should basically always be less accurate than local models. If they are not it reflects poorly on the local models. Off course this is valid only on a statistical basis and not for each moment. It can also be location dependent.

What happened some years ago when YR was first introduced is that people from a lot of countries outside of Scandinavia started using it because the web-interfaces from their local forecasts were hopelessly bad or non-existing in comparison. Often this was "by design" since the local meteorological institutes sold their detailed predictions for income.

EDIT: The results from the global American GFS model are also available at multiple sites, but those have similar resolution issues as ECMWF one. But off course at a given point of time they can be both better or worse than ECMWF or local models.

That explains why scandinavians receive accurate results and the rest of us are still struggling to get reliable forecasts. Thanks!

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

[masa90]

Well to me yr.no for example predicts plus weather for most of next week. So lets see. Still holding on my decision on whatever to go or not.