Landfall probabilities

[Houstonia]

x-posting with GoPBI...

I read both this message board as well as the GoPBI board, and I've noticed a distinct change in the skepticism about Claudette and landfall predictions.

Earlier, before Claudette began her inital move toward the West, everyone was sure that the NHC was wrong and we along the upper TX/LA coasts had to be on the look out.

When Claudette began her move to the west, that stopped and everyone has been agreeing with the NHC. This is fine--this isn't a "crap on the NHC" posting.

But has anyone noticed the subtle change in the probabilities? Brownsville had previously had the highest percentage chance for landfall. That's fallen below Corpus Christi. Galveston, in the meantime, has gone up. This is all happening, but the NHC has still determined that there will be a Brownsville landfall.

I guess my question is this: Has anyone else noticed these inconsistencies? Is there some explanation for it? Are y'all also confident of the Brownsville landfall? I've noticed that while the models are still in a general agreement of a S. Texas landfall--they are diverging slightly more than they did yesterday at this time.

Please give me your thoughts...

[ColdFront77]

I have seen some inconsistencies with Claudette. Overall the National Hurricane Center is said to be doing a good job with the forecast track.

The slow down to stalling of the systems increases the inconsistencies, or at least it should.

The landfall percentages changing the way they did and the forecast track still remaining for the Brownsville, Texas area doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

As Claudette remains nearly stationary, other weather systems are moving around her. More people should be paying attention to this system not just southern coastal Texas.

[Steve]

Actually CF, they nudged the northern extremity to 26.7. That's not a signiicant change, but it is an acknowledgement.

Steve

[ColdFront77]

Yes, I see that Steve.

[Guest]

Well i for one have kept the same opinion on where she may go but this isnt easy because of her stalling which i think the NHC has done a pretty good job especially considering the pain in the rear this storm is beeing.................Like Coldfront (Tom) said i would be keeping a eye on her if i lived anywhere along the gulfcoast from the FL panhandle west to MX.....................But yes with her stalling surely doesnt help with trying to forecast where she will eventually go.................Right now i would go with a Corpus Christi north to LA boarder landfall but with her stalling people in LA and Farther south in TX still cant let thier guard down because nothing is written in stone yet and as with any tropical system and this one especially they normally in this type of pattern decide to do what they want...................Another thing to consider is not where she makes landfall but which side of her you happen to be if and when she does make landfall and you live close to it...............As most know and this storm is a pretty good example of this..... Most of what wind and rain including storm surge she has will be felt to the North and East of the center of landfall...................Other then that all i can say is stick around here and see what she is up too..................I will have my own forecast potential impact map up in a little bit....................

[vbhoutex]

First of all, we need to remember that Claudette is an inconsistency in and of herself. She is the first TC born in the Central Carib in 117 yrs of records. The area she was born is usually a "graveyard". She has been fighting strong shear for a week and survived.

I have seen what you are talking about Houstonia. At first glance it looks like they are moving the probabilities N which they have a little like Steve said. However, if you look at the probabilities(shown below) you ahve to llok at more than the total number. You also have to look at the individual columns and notice when their numbers are the highest.

LOCATION A B C D E LOCATION A B C D E

26.5N 94.0W 40 X X X 40 FREEPORT TX 8 9 2 1 20
26.6N 95.5W 23 2 1 1 27 PORT O CONNOR TX 10 10 2 2 24
26.7N 97.0W 10 10 2 2 24 CORPUSCHRISTI TX 6 13 3 1 23
MMSO 238N 982W X 1 5 6 12 BROWNSVILLE TX 4 10 4 2 20
MMTM 222N 979W X X 1 6 7 GULF 28N 91W 7 2 X 1 10
MMTX 210N 974W X X X 4 4 GULF 28N 93W 21 1 X 1 23
NEW ORLEANS LA X X X 2 2 GULF 28N 95W 21 3 1 1 26
NEW IBERIA LA X 1 1 3 5 GULF 27N 96W 19 5 2 X 26
PORT ARTHUR TX 1 6 2 3 12 GULF 25N 96W 5 8 3 2 18
GALVESTON TX 5 9 2 2 18

COLUMN DEFINITION PROBABILITIES IN PERCENT
A IS PROBABILITY FROM NOW TO 7PM MON
FOLLOWING ARE ADDITIONAL PROBABILITIES
B FROM 7PM MON TO 7AM TUE
C FROM 7AM TUE TO 7PM TUE
D FROM 7PM TUE TO 7PM WED
E IS TOTAL PROBABILITY FROM NOW TO 7PM WED
X MEANS LESS THAN ONE PERCENT

You will notice that the probabilities for our area are at a total of 18%, which used by itself is definitely higher than it was at 12% earlier. That is a response to the fact that the high pressure ridge is not building E as fast as expected-that is why she is wandering and inching nward sometimes-no steering currents.
Notice in the columns that the highest percentage for our area is from 7pm Mon to 7am Tues. and then it drops to 2% for the following 2 time periods.
Could Claudette come our way-sure. Will she? Not likely unless the ridge does not build in and she is blocked from the west. She needs steering which the supposedly building ridge will begin providing late tomorrow sometime(NE winds in the upper levels pushing her W or WSW.)

Hope this helps.