ATL: INGRID - Remnants - Discussion

[HurricaneDREW92]

Anyone think we'll see 65kts at 2pm, based on opinion of course and minimal facts.

[CrazyC83]

well... a storm with a lower pressure and a lower peak wind may in fact be the more destructive storm.

The reason... the lower pressure/wind storm would be larger and you would have strong winds over a large area. This can produce very large tidal surges as evidenced by Isaac and Sandy

Very true. They had lighter winds than, say, Humberto 2007, yet did far, far more damage.

[AJC3]

For me defining inensity in terms of pressure is useless, at least to warn people, pressure doesn't make any damage but winds do, if that's the official definition of intenisty it must been changed IMO, Isidore was not stronger than Lili in 2003 yet it had a lowest pressure .

Back on topic, Ingird is deepening at a fast pace even if it's not rapid, I don't see to much shear, juts land interaction.

I don't see a need for any redefining anything. SLP is the metric of a storm's "intensity", while wind speed is the metric of a storm's "strength".


edit: now that I think about it, perhaps the d(wind speed)/dt parameter should be referred to as RS (rapid strengthening), rather than RI. It certainly would make things that much "cleaner"

[Ptarmigan]

well... a storm with a lower pressure and a lower peak wind may in fact be the more destructive storm.

The reason... the lower pressure/wind storm would be larger and you would have strong winds over a large area. This can produce very large tidal surges as evidenced by Isaac and Sandy

Ike and Katrina. Ike had central pressure (951 millibars at landfall) normally seen in Category 3 or 4 hurricane, while Katrina had central pressure (920 millibars at landfall) normally seen in Category 4 or 5 hurricane.

[CrazyC83]

Anyone think we'll see 65kts at 2pm, based on opinion of course and minimal facts.

Not without Recon proof.

[WeatherGuesser]

Still nothing to indicate a TX landfall though, right?

[SeGaBob]

I think Ingrid is strengthening at a steady (but not rapid) pace and could very well be a strong Category 1/weak Category 2 at landfall...

http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/floater ... -long.html



The posts in this forum are NOT official forecast 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.org. For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.

[brunota2003]

well... a storm with a lower pressure and a lower peak wind may in fact be the more destructive storm.

The reason... the lower pressure/wind storm would be larger and you would have strong winds over a large area. This can produce very large tidal surges as evidenced by Isaac and Sandy

But it isn't the *pressure* that kills people or destroys things. It is the much larger wind field, which has more fetch, along with the slope of the ocean floor, etc. That was my point behind using wind for RI (or seperately define wind jumps and stop using RI in publicly available, and highly used, forecasts).

[ROCK]

Still nothing to indicate a TX landfall though, right?

Not at this time..the upper high that's does slid east will be centered over southern LA...now if it would to slide further then we would have to look at this again..

[Hammy]

http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/floaters/10L/flash-vis-long.html
If you look very closely you can see the faint beginnings of an eye possibly forming near 20.7/94.4.

[DJJordan]

I see it too. Thinking cane status later this afternoon or evening.

[ROCK]

The NAVGEM model's forecast of a very large tropical cyclone in the northern Gulf that Rock posted a couple of days ago is one that is making me take pause given how well organized Ingrid looks. I am extremely skeptical of that sort of a track, but given the favorable conditions ahead of Ingrid (contrary to what NHC's discussion pointed towards), wouldn't a larger storm in overall size plus the intensity to back it up take longer to make that turn towards the west. I always thought so.

yeah that was an odd ball run that no other model showed...NAVGEM came in line a few days ago and now looks like everyone else. I have always been skepitcal of a ridge holding for over 4-5 days without weakening in MID-SEPT. just too many SW swinging thru eroding the edges. to be honest no model predicted this intensity this fast and if she dilly dalleys down there too long she is going to find a weakness to the north and that would be bad if she went major on someone.

but guidance is what it is...thats what we follow until it changes.

[JGrin87]

In the past 16 hours, she has been tracking N/NE. Is the ridge over La./Tx. leading the NHC/models to forecast an abrupt westerly turn soon?

[ROCK]

In the past 16 hours, she has been tracking N/NE. Is the ridge over La./Tx. leading the NHC/models to forecast an abrupt westerly turn soon?

yes...the GFS seems awfully slow with ingrid as compared to all other 12Z guidance. Most have this landfall in 48hrs whereas the GFS pushes it out to Tuesday....thats only thing I have saw that differrent....

furthermore if the NHC was worried they would be flying all over the GOM looking at upper level soundings....just my 2 cents.

[JGrin87]

In the past 16 hours, she has been tracking N/NE. Is the ridge over La./Tx. leading the NHC/models to forecast an abrupt westerly turn soon?

[crownweather]

The NAVGEM model's forecast of a very large tropical cyclone in the northern Gulf that Rock posted a couple of days ago is one that is making me take pause given how well organized Ingrid looks. I am extremely skeptical of that sort of a track, but given the favorable conditions ahead of Ingrid (contrary to what NHC's discussion pointed towards), wouldn't a larger storm in overall size plus the intensity to back it up take longer to make that turn towards the west. I always thought so.

yeah that was an odd ball run that no other model showed...NAVGEM came in line a few days ago and now looks like everyone else. I have always been skepitcal of a ridge holding for over 4-5 days without weakening in MID-SEPT. just too many SW swinging thru eroding the edges. to be honest no model predicted this intensity this fast and if she dilly dalleys down there too long she is going to find a weakness to the north and that would be bad if she went major on someone.

but guidance is what it is...thats what we follow until it changes.

Absolutely agree with following what the majority of what guidance says, but it never hurts to give pause and consider the outlying model's forecast, even if for a few milliseconds. Now it seems the guidance is now leaning towards a scenario of taking Ingrid right to the coast and then pushing it into the BOC where it sits and spins down. Gotta love tropical systems, it's like watching a piece of driftwood in a river and forecasting where that piece of wood will end up.

[ScottNAtlanta]

In the past 16 hours, she has been tracking N/NE. Is the ridge over La./Tx. leading the NHC/models to forecast an abrupt westerly turn soon?

yes...the GFS seems awfully slow with ingrid as compared to all other 12Z guidance. Most have this landfall in 48hrs whereas the GFS pushes it out to Tuesday....thats only thing I have saw that differrent....

furthermore if the NHC was worried they would be flying all over the GOM looking at upper level soundings....just my 2 cents.

FYI...
There has been a gulfstream jet taking readings all over the surrounding areas adjacent to Ingrid in the gulf the past couple of hours to get a handle on the conditions in the gulf. I guess they will have their info fed into the 8pm modeling. We shall see if it changes anything

[ScottNAtlanta]

The NAVGEM model's forecast of a very large tropical cyclone in the northern Gulf that Rock posted a couple of days ago is one that is making me take pause given how well organized Ingrid looks. I am extremely skeptical of that sort of a track, but given the favorable conditions ahead of Ingrid (contrary to what NHC's discussion pointed towards), wouldn't a larger storm in overall size plus the intensity to back it up take longer to make that turn towards the west. I always thought so.

yeah that was an odd ball run that no other model showed...NAVGEM came in line a few days ago and now looks like everyone else. I have always been skepitcal of a ridge holding for over 4-5 days without weakening in MID-SEPT. just too many SW swinging thru eroding the edges. to be honest no model predicted this intensity this fast and if she dilly dalleys down there too long she is going to find a weakness to the north and that would be bad if she went major on someone.

but guidance is what it is...thats what we follow until it changes.

Absolutely agree with following what the majority of what guidance says, but it never hurts to give pause and consider the outlying model's forecast, even if for a few milliseconds. Now it seems the guidance is now leaning towards a scenario of taking Ingrid right to the coast and then pushing it into the BOC where it sits and spins down. Gotta love tropical systems, it's like watching a piece of driftwood in a river and forecasting where that piece of wood will end up.

Bastardi did mention in his Sat. Summery (free on the weather bell site) the scenario of this coming ashore then looping back out and heading NE toward that section of the gulf (he did say that was low confindence...ie he didnt know)

[SeGaBob]

Well the NHC's 11am advisory seems to lean toward looping back out as well...(note the due south motion forecasted by 7am Wednesday.)

[ROCK]

Well the NHC's 11am advisory seems to lean toward looping back out as well...(note the due south motion forecasted by 7am Wednesday.)

Yep..GFS has been showing this for some time...guess it was time to consider it..