Forecast Central

Forecast of the Day • A National Weather Forecasting Contest

Show All Forecasters Together OR Show Divisions Separately

Friday March 27, 2020

Assignment: Predict the 24 hr maximum temperature (deg F) for Wichita-Mid-Continent, KS (KICT)

For Friday's high temperature in Wichita, Kansas, we have another example where the two main U.S. models are disagreeing strongly. The NAM statistical forecast highs are 55 and 65 F, but the GFS statistical forecasts are in the 80's! So let's forecast Tmax for Wichita and see which model does better. Apparently the name of the airport changed from Mid-Continent to Dwight D. Eisenhower National Airport a few years ago.

Question: Why do the two models disagree so much? Here is a part of the NWS forecast discussion for Wichita; see if you can make sense of it: "Uncertainty grows as we move into Friday, with the NAM/HREF showing the cold front surging southward into the Southern Plains in the wake of the overnight convection. The latest HREF only goes out to 12Z on Fri but it looks strikingly similar to the NAM which keeps all of our forecast area in a stable post-frontal regime on Friday. If the NAM/HREF verify which seems likely, high temperatures may be 15-20 degrees too warm."

What Happened?

Sometimes when the two models disagree, the answer is somewhere in the middle. But in this case, the NAM model was very right and the GFS was wrong, wrong, wrong. All of the GFS runs, even the very latest one, insisted that the high temperature would be in the 80's at Wichita, but instead it only reached 66 F in the cool, cloudy air to the north of the front. Coffeyville, Kansas reached 80 F, about 150 miles to the southeast. So strong fronts can sometimes cause large forecast errors.

Forecasts for Wichita-Mid-Continent, KS (KICT)
Forecaster Tmax, deg F (error) Comment Day Score
OBSERVED 66 Tmax FINAL (minor problem).
Reference
PERSISTENCE 74 (8) 2.2
CLIMATE 61.6 (-4.4) NCDC Climate Normals, 1981-2010 2.8
MOS
GFS-MOS-18-DAY01 87 (21) 0
GFS-MOS-12-DAY01 85 (19) 0.3
GFS-MOS-00-DAY00 84 (18) 0.5
GFS-MOS-18-DAY02 83 (17) 0.7
GFS-MOS-00-DAY01 83 (17) 0.7
GFS-MOS-12-DAY02 82 (16) 0.8
GFS-MOS-06-DAY02 80 (14) 1.2
NAM-MOS-12-DAY02 55 (-11) 1.7
NAM-MOS-00-DAY00 70 (4) 2.9
NAM-MOS-12-DAY01 68 (2) 3.2
NAM-MOS-00-DAY01 65 (-1) 3.4
StokesEarlyCollegeHigh-Mr.Price-SpringEarth/Env.Sciences
1. Jasper15 67 (1) 3.4
2. Hailey15 68 (2) 3.2
2. Mikayleigh15 68 (2) 3.2
2. Hannah15 68 (2) 3.2
5. Shelby15 70 (4) 2.9
5. Shyann15 70 (4) 2.9
7. Emily15 61.6 (-4.4) 2.8
8. Grace15 72 (6) 2.5
8. Gianni15 60 (-6) 2.5
8. EmilyV15 72 (6) 2.5
8. T-Dawg15 72 (6) 2.5
8. Anna15 72 (6) 2.5
13. Elizabeth15 73 (7) 2.3
13. Miles15 73 (7) 2.3
13. Dorothy15 73 (7) 2.3
16. Joscelyn15 73.5 (7.5) 2.3
16. Alex15 73.5 (7.5) 2.3
18. Leah15 74 (8) 2.2
19. Lizzie15 75 (9) 2.0
19. Abbygale15 75 (9) 2.0
19. Mathison15 75 (9) 2.0
19. Autumn15 75 (9) 2.0
23. Django15 76 (10) 1.8
24. Josh15 78 (12) The two models disagree so much because one is taking in account that the cold front will not arrive that quick so it will be in a post-frontal regime. 1.5
25. Eavenly15 81 (15) humidity ?? 1.0
26. EmilyS15 82 (16) 0.8
27. Briley15 84 (18) Yee 0.5
28. Gus15 41 (-25) 0
Open
1. ashleigh15 62 (-4) 2.9
2. kendra15 73 (7) 2.3