@mattcdobson.bsky.social
Thanks for the post Simon, but a question.
ECMWF IFS (since cycle 41r2 in 2016) has a horizontal resolution of ~9km. ERA5 has a horizonal res of ~31km.
Would assessing the 10mb 60N zonal wind from just the T+0 of the IFS (with its higher res) be preferable to using ERA5 in this particular case?
ECMWF IFS (since cycle 41r2 in 2016) has a horizontal resolution of ~9km. ERA5 has a horizonal res of ~31km.
Would assessing the 10mb 60N zonal wind from just the T+0 of the IFS (with its higher res) be preferable to using ERA5 in this particular case?
December 9, 2025 at 9:45 AM
Thanks for the post Simon, but a question.
ECMWF IFS (since cycle 41r2 in 2016) has a horizontal resolution of ~9km. ERA5 has a horizonal res of ~31km.
Would assessing the 10mb 60N zonal wind from just the T+0 of the IFS (with its higher res) be preferable to using ERA5 in this particular case?
ECMWF IFS (since cycle 41r2 in 2016) has a horizontal resolution of ~9km. ERA5 has a horizonal res of ~31km.
Would assessing the 10mb 60N zonal wind from just the T+0 of the IFS (with its higher res) be preferable to using ERA5 in this particular case?