Accuwx Issues Same Prediction Again

[terstorm1012]

Christy...they use analogs and teleconnections in their forecasting, which I personally have found to be a good way to forecast averages over a time period. It's not an exact science, but the atmosphere does seem to follow a pattern from year to year over series of years. It just basically means, as I understand it, "Hmm, the mean pattern looks like the year 19xx. In 19xx, these weather events occured. Therefore, I'm going to hazard a guess that these weather events will reoccur this year if the right conditions come together." It isn't saying the 4th, 8th and 11th named storms are going to tear up the East Coast, not at all. At least this is how I understand their forecasting using analogs and teleconnections, there's probably more to it and I admit I probably need more education on the subject.

[Extremeweatherguy]

FWIW, The 2006 Accuweather hurricane risk forecast graphic...

http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/pub/images/promos/hurr2006/hurrisk.jpg

Texas = High risk!

I am just afraid with all this warmer water in the Gulf that a strong storm like Rita will plow into Galveston/Houston without weakening any! THAT would be the worst case scenario, and I can see it happening this year for sure.

[Portastorm]

FWIW, The 2006 Accuweather hurricane risk forecast graphic...

http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/pub/images/promos/hurr2006/hurrisk.jpg

Texas = High risk!

I am just afraid with all this warmer water in the Gulf that a strong storm like Rita will plow into Galveston/Houston without weakening any! THAT would be the worst case scenario, and I can see it happening this year for sure.

I have no scientific support for this ... just a hunch ... but I suspect if we do see a Texas hit this hurricane season, it'll be closer to Corpus or even further south towards Brownsville.

[CHRISTY]

Christy...they use analogs and teleconnections in their forecasting, which I personally have found to be a good way to forecast averages over a time period. It's not an exact science, but the atmosphere does seem to follow a pattern from year to year over series of years. It just basically means, as I understand it, "Hmm, the mean pattern looks like the year 19xx. In 19xx, these weather events occured. Therefore, I'm going to hazard a guess that these weather events will reoccur this year if the right conditions come together." It isn't saying the 4th, 8th and 11th named storms are going to tear up the East Coast, not at all. At least this is how I understand their forecasting using analogs and teleconnections, there's probably more to it and I admit I probably need more education on the subject.

Right but how can u know what the atmosphere will be doing lets say mid september or the begining of october now one can tell you what is going to happen.thats why there only predictions!which iam not putting to much into.

[Steve]

Here's what I got from the article and the video:

1) El Nino, Gulf, Atlantic, El Nino, Gulf, Atlantic.
2) Some analog years are 1954 and 1998 (or was it 1999?)
3) NE TX/SW LA used to get hit ever 3-4 years a long time ago in similar Atlantic warming patterns.
4) The NE US hasn't been hit by a major since 1938, and therefore, they will most likely not be prepared for what the Gulf Coast, FL, SC and NC have experienced in recent generations. Also, because storms sometimes move faster in those latitudes, people need to be prepared sooner rather than later.
5) Bastardi thinks that perhaps a short-cut storm heading up NNW toward the east coast is likely going to happen in the near future (next 5 years), so he's giving a headsup on it this year.
6) Models at the end of the month are bringing a piece of remnant energy into the Gulf which could mean trouble for the Western Gulf over the central or eastern Gulf.
7) It's gonna be a wild hurricane season.

It all sounds reasonable to me. I don't agree 100% with where they're going with it, but since I don't have Joe's landfall intensity forecast (not even sure if he's gonna do one this year since I don't subscribe any more), so I'm not sure if he's totally on board with what the company is doing, whether he's driving that data, or if he's going to venture out a little on his own. It is nice that the NE Gulf looks to be spared this year if their company's forecast verifies. Pensacola to Navarre needs another year to finish getting the beaches back in order.

Steve

[Extremeweatherguy]

FWIW, The 2006 Accuweather hurricane risk forecast graphic...

http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/pub/images/promos/hurr2006/hurrisk.jpg

Texas = High risk!

I am just afraid with all this warmer water in the Gulf that a strong storm like Rita will plow into Galveston/Houston without weakening any! THAT would be the worst case scenario, and I can see it happening this year for sure.

I have no scientific support for this ... just a hunch ... but I suspect if we do see a Texas hit this hurricane season, it'll be closer to Corpus or even further south towards Brownsville.

I am not so sure. They may, they may not. Truly I think it is too early to know for sure. Another thing to think about is that we may see multiple hits this season. May be one storm will hit down that way and another will hit further north. I just feel that the Houston area has been too lucky in recent years.

[terstorm1012]

That was sort of what I was attempting to boil it down to, but you've done it far better than me ,thanks!

Here's what I got from the article and the video:

1) El Nino, Gulf, Atlantic, El Nino, Gulf, Atlantic.
2) Some analog years are 1954 and 1998 (or was it 1999?)
3) NE TX/SW LA used to get hit ever 3-4 years a long time ago in similar Atlantic warming patterns.
4) The NE US hasn't been hit by a major since 1938, and therefore, they will most likely not be prepared for what the Gulf Coast, FL, SC and NC have experienced in recent generations. Also, because storms sometimes move faster in those latitudes, people need to be prepared sooner rather than later.
5) Bastardi thinks that perhaps a short-cut storm heading up NNW toward the east coast is likely going to happen in the near future (next 5 years), so he's giving a headsup on it this year.
6) Models at the end of the month are bringing a piece of remnant energy into the Gulf which could mean trouble for the Western Gulf over the central or eastern Gulf.
7) It's gonna be a wild hurricane season.

It all sounds reasonable to me. I don't agree 100% with where they're going with it, but since I don't have Joe's landfall intensity forecast (not even sure if he's gonna do one this year since I don't subscribe any more), so I'm not sure if he's totally on board with what the company is doing, whether he's driving that data, or if he's going to venture out a little on his own. It is nice that the NE Gulf looks to be spared this year if their company's forecast verifies. Pensacola to Navarre needs another year to finish getting the beaches back in order.

Steve

[jasons2k]

I will say something about the landfall forecast image, I can see how analogs and patterns may put the NE US at a higher risk than climatology.

But to say the area from the Hudson to Cape Cod is at a "high risk" for a strike seems a bit odd to me. To take a once in a 50-year or 100-year event and say that there is a high chance that THIS year is THE year is quite....well I can think of a word but I'd get suspended...

Even if all the meteorological stars were aligned perfectly, the odds of a direct strike there is still low for any given year, even if the region is overdue. I suppose we'll see.

Also, I don't think any part of the Gulf Coast should let their guard down. I think TX is definitely due but anything can happen. I don't think these predictions (not just this one) of heavily weighting Texas and "sparing" the NC/NE Gulf Coast will mean very much, especially later in the season.

[spinfan4eva]

Well, hope yall prepare well this year. Looks like by that map, those of us in Jax fla have the lowest probabillity on the entire US Coast including Maine.
http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/p ... urrisk.jpg

Looks like Joe B recreated the Noaa Hurricane Climo Map quite well. KUDOS!
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/tropicalwx/ ... ob_ann.htm

[T-man]

Hey Y'all, I'm worried about the high risk for Texas, because of what occured here last year when Rita went that way. A big storm brushing by us on the way to Texas will inundate our low lying coastal parishes again. We simply do not have any real barrier islands, or much coastal marshland left to slow down, or hold back a storm surge.

[benny]

Well, hope yall prepare well this year. Looks like by that map, those of us in Jax fla have the lowest probabillity on the entire US Coast including Maine.
http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/p ... urrisk.jpg

Looks like Joe B recreated the Noaa Hurricane Climo Map quite well. KUDOS!
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/tropicalwx/ ... ob_ann.htm

Any verification of Joe B's forecasts that he has made for the past few years is nonexistent. Why? Because you can't verify those kinds of qualitative forecasts. Furthermore there is no scientific method involved. What about landfall probabilities? If he really thinks he has a skillful method that isn't just a bunch of hand-waving.. then he should write it up and publish it. I'd like to see some real science before giving this any credit whatsoever. Shame on Reuters for making this "news". Analogs are a dangerous technique when dealing with rare events... ie hurricane landfalls. They don't even happen on a yearly basis in the active era (see 2000,01). Time will tell I suppose.. but even if some parts of the forecast verify, is there true skill (like saying South Florida has a high chance of a hurricane? Anyone with a climo map can say that)???

[Steve]

>>But to say the area from the Hudson to Cape Cod is at a "high risk" for a strike seems a bit odd to me. To take a once in a 50-year or 100-year event and say that there is a high chance that THIS year is THE year is quite....well I can think of a word but I'd get suspended...

From the video, they said "as compared to normal." So it's not like VA Beach has a greater chance of being hit than say Escambia County, FL, but as compared to normal, they elevated their chances.

Benny,

A lot of people agree with what you're saying. Don't shoot the messenger, but the way he does it (and it's open for debate as to whether or not it's a real verification scheme or not) is like this:

Tropical Depression = 1 point
Tropical Storm = 2 points
Category 1 = 4 points
Category 2 = 8 points
Category 3 = 16 points
Category 4 = 32 points
Category 5 = 64 points

The "category" is based 50% on landfalling pressure and 50% on the highest measured winds to remove some bias vs. the NHC.

The US and Canadian coastlines are broken up into "x" number of landfalling regions. Each region is given a numerical representation of expected landfall intensity based on the scoring system above. A total number of "landfall impact" is also tabulated for all areas and a basis for $ in insured damage is given. The thing that gets weird to me is that if a storm like Katrina affects Louisiana as a Cat 4 (32 points), MS/AL/NW FL as Cat 3 (16 points) and then say exits the coast in North Carolina with TS conditions, they 2 points. It would be technically easy to fudge a few points here and there.

On the other hand, last year's summer update (July or early August) "ramped" up the numbers for the NC Gulf based on what they were seeing. Obviously this was a good prognostication since the LA zone got Katrina and Rita (48 points between them after Cindy's Cat 1 and Dennis' TS effects). And that's not even important. What was important was that Joe B was saying in his early videos (the May release) that his numbers were ridiculous and would exceed landfall intensity for 2004. However, there was no way he could use the numbers as he figured them out because no one would believe him and his bosses would never let him get away with releasing what he had figured. So he toned it down. Maybe he was onto something considering we had like 7 or 8 landfalls last year including 5 or 6 hurricanes.

Steve

[KatDaddy]

I guess we will see. Joe B has been very good at long range patterns over the years. For short term forecast he has been right as many times as wrong. Bottom line I repsect his forecasts as well everyone else which obviously includes the TPC and other private organizations such as ImpactWeather.

[MBismyPlayground]

All I can say is that I hope JB is wrong wrong wrong..... Just so happens here in the Myrtle Beach area they have closed down several hurricane shelters, saying that they are now not safe or are being renovated. So at this point, anything major would be devastating to people who cannot get out and away.

[Jagno]

http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/pub/images/promos/hurr2006/hurrisk.jpg[/quote]

It's nice to see LA. and the area eastward along the GOM in the moderate to low risk. Those folks do need a break not saying that everyone else doesn't but that area has been hit hard recently.[/quote]


Thanks for the compassion but unfortunately my corner of Louisiana is in the HIGH area.

[rockyman]

All I need to know about JB's predictions is summed up with his "risk map": Nova Scotia has a higher risk of a hurricane landfall than the Florida Panhandle. Even in a "bad (good) year," the Florida Panhandle should have a higher risk than Nova Scotia. This goes so far against climatology that it's ridiculous.

According to Hurricanecity.com, Cape Sable in Nova Scotia experiences a "direct hit" an average of once every 45 years. Destin once every 9.64 years.

I recommend everyone save this risk map now, because I doubt you'll see it again at the end of the season.

[HURAKAN]

I recommend everyone save this risk map now, because I doubt you'll see it again at the end of the season.

Depends, if it goes mostly their way, then you will see it again in November or December. If not, which is mostl likely, they would probably tend to forget that they ever made a map predicting landfall for the 2006 season.

[jasons2k]

All I need to know about JB's predictions is summed up with his "risk map": Nova Scotia has a higher risk of a hurricane landfall than the Florida Panhandle. Even in a "bad (good) year," the Florida Panhandle should have a higher risk than Nova Scotia. This goes so far against climatology that it's ridiculous.

According to Hurricanecity.com, Cape Sable in Nova Scotia experiences a "direct hit" an average of once every 45 years. Destin once every 9.64 years.

I recommend everyone save this risk map now, because I doubt you'll see it again at the end of the season.

Yep, that was the point of my post. Apparently, in the video, it's explained that these risks are relative to normal. IMO it should say so on the map then. Otherwise, normally intelligent people are just confused.

[Patrick99]

All I need to know about JB's predictions is summed up with his "risk map": Nova Scotia has a higher risk of a hurricane landfall than the Florida Panhandle. Even in a "bad (good) year," the Florida Panhandle should have a higher risk than Nova Scotia. This goes so far against climatology that it's ridiculous.

According to Hurricanecity.com, Cape Sable in Nova Scotia experiences a "direct hit" an average of once every 45 years. Destin once every 9.64 years. .

I thought the same thing. It seems more than vaguely ridiculous to give such a large swath of the Gulf Coast a pass on that "risk map," while hyping Cape Cod and Nova Scotia. Even if you preface it by "as compared to normal," it still doesn't make that much sense. It just gives a bad impression...Nova Scotia in the dark red while Destin is in the green.

Whether it was intended or not, the map gives the impression that all of you on the FL/AL/MS Gulf Coast have nothing to worry about this hurricane season. ROFLMAO...

[CrazyC83]

Well, hope yall prepare well this year. Looks like by that map, those of us in Jax fla have the lowest probabillity on the entire US Coast including Maine.
http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/p ... urrisk.jpg

Looks like Joe B recreated the Noaa Hurricane Climo Map quite well. KUDOS!
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/tropicalwx/ ... ob_ann.htm

I disagree with that. Personally, here is how I see it:

I see a high or extreme risk for the ENTIRE East Coast from Key West to Newfoundland (and even a moderate risk in Greenland and Iceland!). There is an extreme risk in S Florida and from South Carolina to Long Island.

The Gulf Coast ranges from a moderate risk in the FL Big Bend and parts of S Mexico to extreme risk in most of Texas and NE Mexico, with a high risk everywhere else.

The Caribbean has moderate risk in the southernmost islands, high risk in the Leewards, Puerto Rico, Hispaniola, Jamaica and eastern Cuba, and extreme risk in the Windwards, the Bahamas and western Cuba.

Central America has extreme risk on the Yucatan coast, high risk in parts of Nicaragua and Honduras, moderate risk in Belize and Costa Rica and low risk in Panama. There is also a low risk on the northern coast of South America.

Bermuda also has a high risk, and the Azores and Cape Verdes have a moderate risk. The Canary Islands and the European coast have a low risk.