TS Florence,Analysis,Sat Pics Thread #5
Moderator: S2k Moderators
Forum rules
The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.
- wxman57
- Moderator-Pro Met
- Posts: 23014
- Age: 67
- Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:06 pm
- Location: Houston, TX (southwest)
AJC3 wrote:wxman57 wrote:By the way, I see the center near 18.6N/50.4W at 17Z on McIDAS imagery. Movement appears to be toward 010 degrees. That said, I think this vortex may be rotating around a broad center that's farther west-northwest. The system isn't moving toward 010 deg. Certianly not showing signs of getting stronger.
On high res imagery, I see a roiling mess of at least two, perhaps three vortices which appears to be rotating around a common point. This thing is a disorganized mess right now.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/wxman0071 ... g_Mess.jpg
Yep, that's what I see. Vorex to ENE, one to WNW,and a "phantom" vortex to the south.
0 likes
-
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 11430
- Age: 35
- Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:00 pm
- Location: School: Florida State University (Tallahassee, FL) Home: St. Petersburg, Florida
- Contact:
if the ull is located directly nw of system would this mean based on the direct shear on the sytsem (basically the amount of difference between the shear blowing AGAINST the current forward storm movement) that;
even if the ULL and FLO were still the same miles apart but with ull to the wsw of the strom (prob. location in 36 hours) that the total shear on the system would be less since the direct shear would be reduced since in this position (ull to the wsw) that the flow around the upper level low would be inducing more south east shear which since the system is moving to the wnw or nw would be (less total shear since the shear would be going with the direction of the storm
so based on ull moving sw/ wsw and flo moving WNW then the shear should start turning more to the south later today / tonite and then south east later
even if the ULL and FLO were still the same miles apart but with ull to the wsw of the strom (prob. location in 36 hours) that the total shear on the system would be less since the direct shear would be reduced since in this position (ull to the wsw) that the flow around the upper level low would be inducing more south east shear which since the system is moving to the wnw or nw would be (less total shear since the shear would be going with the direction of the storm
so based on ull moving sw/ wsw and flo moving WNW then the shear should start turning more to the south later today / tonite and then south east later
0 likes
- KFDM Meteorologist
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 9:52 pm
- Location: Upper Texas Coast/Orange County
-
- Tropical Storm
- Posts: 197
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:21 am
this trashing of models is really becoming old
Do people not know how these tools work? They provide good guidance through 5 days, if used properly. But to completely throw them out would be to go back to the 1950s way of forecasting, and be prepared for multiple trips to the 1,000 mile club
Do people not know how these tools work? They provide good guidance through 5 days, if used properly. But to completely throw them out would be to go back to the 1950s way of forecasting, and be prepared for multiple trips to the 1,000 mile club
0 likes
-
- Tropical Storm
- Posts: 197
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:21 am
you have to admit derek they have been bad this yearDerek Ortt wrote:this trashing of models is really becoming old
Do people not know how these tools work? They provide good guidance through 5 days, if used properly. But to completely throw them out would be to go back to the 1950s way of forecasting, and be prepared for multiple trips to the 1,000 mile club
0 likes
-
- Category 2
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 4:37 pm
- Location: Spring Hill Fl.
flhurricaneguy wrote:you have to admit derek they have been bad this yearDerek Ortt wrote:this trashing of models is really becoming old
Do people not know how these tools work? They provide good guidance through 5 days, if used properly. But to completely throw them out would be to go back to the 1950s way of forecasting, and be prepared for multiple trips to the 1,000 mile club
This may be the first system this year with enough umph for them to get a handle on.
0 likes
Derek Ortt wrote:this trashing of models is really becoming old
Do people not know how these tools work? They provide good guidance through 5 days, if used properly. But to completely throw them out would be to go back to the 1950s way of forecasting, and be prepared for multiple trips to the 1,000 mile club
No offense, but recently the 1950s way of forecasting seems better sometimes. We spend millions of dollars every year on these pieces of technology, and we are really no closer to figuring out what makes these hurricanes tick than we were back then. Even Brian Norcross said so in a special he did the other day. I think that is why people would say that. Now 1-3 day forecasting, that is a different animal, but this far out, don't think so.
0 likes
they have not been as bad as one here may think
They struggled a little with Ernesto... but have been very good with the other storms. They were what accurately predicted the demise of Chris, the formation of Florence, and many other things
The models seem bad as people who do not know how to use them use them incorrectly as absolute tracks
They struggled a little with Ernesto... but have been very good with the other storms. They were what accurately predicted the demise of Chris, the formation of Florence, and many other things
The models seem bad as people who do not know how to use them use them incorrectly as absolute tracks
0 likes
No offense, but recently the 1950s way of forecasting seems better sometimes. We spend millions of dollars every year on these pieces of technology, and we are really no closer to figuring out what makes these hurricanes tick than we were back then. Even Brian Norcross said so in a special he did the other day. I think that is why people would say that. Now 1-3 day forecasting, that is a different animal, but this far out, don't think so.
OK, so it would be better if we had errors of 2,000 miles on a regular basis and hurricane warnings with 3 hours of lead time for a hurricane of an unknown intensity? Come on
OK, so it would be better if we had errors of 2,000 miles on a regular basis and hurricane warnings with 3 hours of lead time for a hurricane of an unknown intensity? Come on
0 likes
- MBismyPlayground
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 765
- Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 9:25 pm
- Location: myrtle beach, sc
- Contact:
Derek Ortt wrote:this trashing of models is really becoming old
Do people not know how these tools work? They provide good guidance through 5 days, if used properly. But to completely throw them out would be to go back to the 1950s way of forecasting, and be prepared for multiple trips to the 1,000 mile club
I would agree... Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't these computer models? Based on the input by humans, professional humans, but all based on info they recieve.
And no one and nothing is completely perfect, but without these models, we would have no clue at all.
0 likes
Derek Ortt wrote:they have not been as bad as one here may think
They struggled a little with Ernesto... but have been very good with the other storms. They were what accurately predicted the demise of Chris, the formation of Florence, and many other things
The models seem bad as people who do not know how to use them use them incorrectly as absolute tracks
Come on derek you know they were bad
0 likes
Derek Ortt wrote:No offense, but recently the 1950s way of forecasting seems better sometimes. We spend millions of dollars every year on these pieces of technology, and we are really no closer to figuring out what makes these hurricanes tick than we were back then. Even Brian Norcross said so in a special he did the other day. I think that is why people would say that. Now 1-3 day forecasting, that is a different animal, but this far out, don't think so.
OK, so it would be better if we had errors of 2,000 miles on a regular basis and hurricane warnings with 3 hours of lead time for a hurricane of an unknown intensity? Come on
I think you may be going over the top just a little. My grandparents were still alive in the 50's and 60's and they knew more than 3 hours ahead of time when a hurricane was about to strike.
0 likes
I give this storm a 5% percent chance that the models are incorrect and the ridge builds further west to allow for a US landfall.
Except for Eastern New England and Western Nova Scotia I give a 20% chance for landfall there,in that the storm could travel a little further west than models have it before it makes it turns north.
I give a 75%, that simply all the models are correct in the turn and there is landfall over Eastern Nova Scotia, New Foundland or none at all.
Let me also add that the models have been so far on the money forecasting this storm's movement and also the sypnotic features developing over the Eastern Seaboard and North Atlantic. I don't think we have another "Erensto" here.
Except for Eastern New England and Western Nova Scotia I give a 20% chance for landfall there,in that the storm could travel a little further west than models have it before it makes it turns north.
I give a 75%, that simply all the models are correct in the turn and there is landfall over Eastern Nova Scotia, New Foundland or none at all.
Let me also add that the models have been so far on the money forecasting this storm's movement and also the sypnotic features developing over the Eastern Seaboard and North Atlantic. I don't think we have another "Erensto" here.
Last edited by Thunder44 on Wed Sep 06, 2006 3:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.
0 likes
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Hurrilurker and 45 guests