Please at least change the ECMWF summary text

mrpetewx

The Windy overview of ECMWF says:

ECMWF 9km
Very accurate model provided by the 
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather
 Forecasts. Clear winner compared to other 
forecast models.

That may be true in some categories. For snow (levels and new) it is horrifically false, at least at altitude (mountains or not.)

The following is a typical example:

We live at 7050 ft on high plains in Colorado Springs. Just finished a two day round trip to Monte Vista, CO (7500 ft high plains) and nearby NWRs via La Veta Pass.

There was no snow on the ground at any time (except maybe an inch in some shaded north facing slope spots at the top of the pass.)

ECMWF thought we were seeing a foot or more of snow almost everywhere we went, and no less than a half inch except from ~ Pueblo to Walsenburg. (Ground modeled-reality and forecast)

In our region, ICON is far more accurate for snow, both existing depth and new snow.

SUGGESTIONS:

Correct the above summary text
Consider support for different models for different data streams.

Thbanks!

idefix37

@mrpetewx
First of all, this first place among weather models is only noted by the WMO for the classification of global models, those covering the entire world. ICON global is one of these models.
If out of 10 essential parameters for weather forecasting the ECMWF model comes first, we can say that it is the best.
Predicting snow depth is not one of them and in all cases as far as temperature is concerned, we know that the medium resolution of these models does not allow us to get a good appreciation of reality. For local temperature related parameters like snowfall I would recommend high resolution model like HRRR.

idefix37

@mrpetewx
Let's take an example here in Europe.
Today the skies were clear over the Alps, making it possible to see where the snow still remains on the ground.
The Satellite layer shows snow on the Alps mountains and a small amount on the Jura mountain. This mountain range northwest of Geneva is not very high.
(Its name gave the word “Jurassic” known as a geological period
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurassic
… and a famous movie :))

A webcam confirms that the summits are still covered in snow.

What do the different models show about the snow depth layer?

ICON 13km sees no snow on the Jura. Very inaccurate on the Alps compared to the satellite image.

ECMWF 9 km sees some snow on the Jura but not correctly placed. And always coarse on the Alps.

The best forecast is made by ICON-D2 with its high resolution of 2km. It really highlights the snow at the top of the Jura range. And also with more granularity on the Alps compared to the satellite image.

Conclusion
In mountain this Snow depth layer is only really useful with a high resolution model.