NHC will use new computer model to forecast intensity

[cycloneye]

http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=1868578

The question is if already this new computer model has been used in past seasons or it will be a new tool this year to forecast intensity as it is not made public.

[Derek Ortt]

It's not a new computer model at all. It is a part of SHIPS and has been for a few years

[wx247]

Thanks for the link Luis and the info Derek.

[MWatkins]

Derek,

While it's great that you are an active participant in the research community, not everybody is (this board is for everybody, and often times the uninformed public doesn't know what models are being used in testing runs). I don't Luis is off-base with his post (or the article either)because:

A. The article CALLS it (the model) a new forecast model on multiple occassions
B. The headline is:

Forecasters use new tool to predict rapid storm intensification

My guess, and again I'm not as "well connected", is this is a new (or a test index moving into operational mode) statistical index against the SHIPS model that looks for predictors of rapid intensification. I could be wrong, but any time a new data set is obtained using predictors that may already exist, it constitutes a new data model even though it is run against existing data.

FYI...just in case anyone is wondering...an index is basically an average of averages. I can explain more if you're interested.

Where I work, we model against 40 million records and every type of variable you can imagine. Even though we slice up our existing data, when we do it differently then decide to use it operationally, it's considered new.

Maybe if the post was titled:

"Forecasters to Take New Statistical Index from Test to Operational Phase This Year" you would have felt better.

But again, I think the distinction is that this article appears in a NEWSPAPER, not Monthly Weather Review or an AMS bulletin.

MW

[Derek Ortt]

Mike,

there are updates to the RI index that are made every year. Last year, the operational SHIPS had 5, but an experimental version had 7. I do believe that new changes have been made to the experimental SHIPS this year. What I got from the newspaper (and once I return from my mini-vacation, I can confirm this), was that the RI parameters would be made available to emergency management on a real time basis.

One note about RI, even if all parameters are met, there is a less than 50% chance of RI occurring. The chances are always against RI occurring

[Scott_inVA]

Mike,

there are updates to the RI index that are made every year. Last year, the operational SHIPS had 5, but an experimental version had 7. I do believe that new changes have been made to the experimental SHIPS this year. What I got from the newspaper (and once I return from my mini-vacation, I can confirm this), was that the RI parameters would be made available to emergency management on a real time basis.

One note about RI, even if all parameters are met, there is a less than 50% chance of RI occurring. The chances are always against RI occurring

My (somewhat limited) understanding is this isn't new. ES had prior limited extrapolations of the 5 day which the media last claimed was "new"; it was not...it became operational. Much of this seems to be based on physics of the MRF/AVN/GFS.

Mini-vacation, Derek? WTF...I've had 1 vacation day all year. Does that mean I had a micro-vacation???

[Derek Ortt]

only 1 day? geez

this is my second (and most likely, last) 1 week vacation of the year. Once we start getting canes, it is very long days at work then, as usual

[MWatkins]

One note about RI, even if all parameters are met, there is a less than 50% chance of RI occurring. The chances are always against RI occurring

That sounds right. Recalling Debby...David and a myraid of other storms where rapid intensification was expected but never occured ties in with this idea well.

Still...I bet a huge spike in the index will be enough to alert the TPC and the OEM's that they need to pay attention. Now that I think about it...Avila in paticular has referred to the 5 know factors tied to intensification in TPC forecast discussions.

Thanks for the additional info...

MW

[Derek Ortt]

This has went wrong before for systems just emerging. isidore was a total flop where all 5 RI factors were met. David, is not a surprise to me due to PV being conserved and the time it takes for the system to spin up again after expanding over land. Hit Florida before it could regain the necessary vorticity to make it to cat 3 or higher again