2004 Model Varifications

[Aquawind]

http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/research/N ... C-HWRF.pdf

So the NOGAPS did bad in track..GUNA did well...

Official Forecast did well on intensity comapred to the models...Well done!

Look at those SSTs in the wake of Frances!

Also looks like they are addressing intialization issues with the GFDL in 2005.

GFDL is to be replaced with HWRF for 2007..


http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/research/N ... 04/TPC.pdf

Looks we are improving our hurricane forecasting.

The Charlie bombing was a nightmare scenario.. -17mb in 4.5 hours!

I remember all of the false systems developing near CV and they were nuttin..They are adressing the cyclogenesis issue as well..


Good Reading..

Paul

[Derek Ortt]

nogaps had the correct heading, but was off on the forward speed

[MWatkins]

nogaps had the correct heading, but was off on the forward speed

Which...of course...makes track forecasting so difficult...it's a 3D problem. Actually...as I think about it...it's a 4 dimentional problem. Lemee explain.

2D's are covered by lat and long.

The third D is speed. As Derek points out...NOGAPS blows the forward speed and created large errors because the storm has to be at point x and y by z time. If it lags behind the forecast time point by...say...2 days...then the forecast error ( difference between the forecast position and actual position) can be significant...even if the ultimate x/y pair verifies along the way.

The 4th D is intensity. If...for example...a storm completely weakens and gets confined to a shallow layer...then a track forecast for a hurricane could be way off...since the steering layers that control a weak storm are different than a developed hurrciane.

Track forecasting is a 4D problem...you have to get 4 things right:

Lat
Long
Speed
Intensity

And even then...you're only half way there. This stuff...is not easy.

MW