Moderator: S2k Moderators
gatorcane wrote:NHC discussion snippet:This intensification has occurred despite analyzed southwesterly shear of around 20 kt
Looking at the SAT loop, looks extremely impressive and doesn't seem sheared at all.
Imagine if there is very little shear what would happen?!?
Maybe we even get a CAT 4 or 5 out of this in the Caribbean once the shear abates in a couple of days?
NDG wrote:caneman wrote:NDG wrote:
If anything, getting closer to South America helped Matthew strengthen, staying away from the low level jet over the middle of the Caribbean Sea between Hispaniola & S.A., that's the real killer, not down slopping winds from the S.A. Mountains, IMO.
Felix '07 did the same thing, I remember many forecasters back then calling it to weaken or not strengthen much because of "downslopping winds off of the S.A. mountains but it also went over rapid intensification in this same general area.
Again those are rare in that area. I think since Matthew was developed it had less if any impact. I've not seen any evidence of increase in low level jet in that area. In reality it could be more than just one thing. Either way, we need to get back on topic.
We are on topic, and is one that needs to be studied, Felix entered the eastern Caribbean as a weak TS and it strengthened into a Major Hurricane even closer to S.A.
All I am saying is that if either Felix or Matthew would been further away from SA over the middle of Caribbean closer to Hispaniola they would had not strengthened line they did.
Elsiecoro wrote:about to check my Hebert boxes lol
chris_fit wrote:What happened to recon? Really weird pattern and didn't go for center?
chaser1 wrote:There's no question as I see it that any increased westward track would seemingly imply a greater threat to the CONUS as a whole. I think Gatorcane made a good point suggesting that perhaps a further westward position might simply cause a hurricane to then travel possibly NNE rather than an earlier due north turn possibly resulting in the same end result. That would make perfect sense as I see it, IF we were dealing with a steering mechanism as clear cut as a digging shortwave that is clearly reflected at the 500mb level. I think this scenario is different though and even though deep layer steering is not necessarily limited to 500mb winds, what I understand to be one of the steering mechanisms is a weakness in the Gulf (and then later in the forecast, a stronger large cut-off low); These features clearly show up at 200mb, and obviously extend somewhat lower in the atmosphere too but there's a pretty big difference between the extent of influence that an over-all weakness might have thus causing an impetus for a slow northward motion, verses the swift deep layer flow ahead of an advancing short wave. That's the primary reason that all along I've been wracking my brain to figure why nearly all the models have been so insistent on such an abrupt turn to the north, but even more doubtful that such a large and deep hurricane at a low latitude would be so quick to picked up by relative weak steering influences. It is entirely sensible that an eventual WNW to NW track would ensue as a large hurricane were to round the western edge of a weakening ridge to its north (which is in itself a little suspect) and slowly toward a weakness in the Gulf. Ordinarily though, that would be the ideal set up to anticipate a hurricane potentially into the Gulf as a result.
If Matthew should track as far south as 13N and reach 78W (or points west of there) than given the present steering mechanisms in place, I just would not think that a NNE motion would occur while moving through the Caribbean. I think the result could imply a lessened impact on Jamaica and a greater threat for Matthew to approach W. Cuba, and possibly Florida and raises the risk of a possible N. Gulf Coast risk as well. On the less radical swing of deviation though, I do think that an increased risk to Florida and potentially the Carolina's would result if a slightly further west (or WSW) motion continued a couple degrees further west than originally anticipated.
northjaxpro wrote:chaser1 wrote:There's no question as I see it that any increased westward track would seemingly imply a greater threat to the CONUS as a whole. I think Gatorcane made a good point suggesting that perhaps a further westward position might simply cause a hurricane to then travel possibly NNE rather than an earlier due north turn possibly resulting in the same end result. That would make perfect sense as I see it, IF we were dealing with a steering mechanism as clear cut as a digging shortwave that is clearly reflected at the 500mb level. I think this scenario is different though and even though deep layer steering is not necessarily limited to 500mb winds, what I understand to be one of the steering mechanisms is a weakness in the Gulf (and then later in the forecast, a stronger large cut-off low); These features clearly show up at 200mb, and obviously extend somewhat lower in the atmosphere too but there's a pretty big difference between the extent of influence that an over-all weakness might have thus causing an impetus for a slow northward motion, verses the swift deep layer flow ahead of an advancing short wave. That's the primary reason that all along I've been wracking my brain to figure why nearly all the models have been so insistent on such an abrupt turn to the north, but even more doubtful that such a large and deep hurricane at a low latitude would be so quick to picked up by relative weak steering influences. It is entirely sensible that an eventual WNW to NW track would ensue as a large hurricane were to round the western edge of a weakening ridge to its north (which is in itself a little suspect) and slowly toward a weakness in the Gulf. Ordinarily though, that would be the ideal set up to anticipate a hurricane potentially into the Gulf as a result.
If Matthew should track as far south as 13N and reach 78W (or points west of there) than given the present steering mechanisms in place, I just would not think that a NNE motion would occur while moving through the Caribbean. I think the result could imply a lessened impact on Jamaica and a greater threat for Matthew to approach W. Cuba, and possibly Florida and raises the risk of a possible N. Gulf Coast risk as well. On the less radical swing of deviation though, I do think that an increased risk to Florida and potentially the Carolina's would result if a slightly further west (or WSW) motion continued a couple degrees further west than originally anticipated.
This is a good analysis chaser1. You nade good points and observations. Just goes to show what I have been discussing since this was a pouch. This is one of the most complex forecasts in which lots can still occur with Matthew. By no means is anyone in the all-clear with regards to the U.S. at this time.
northjaxpro wrote:chaser1 wrote:There's no question as I see it that any increased westward track would seemingly imply a greater threat to the CONUS as a whole. I think Gatorcane made a good point suggesting that perhaps a further westward position might simply cause a hurricane to then travel possibly NNE rather than an earlier due north turn possibly resulting in the same end result. That would make perfect sense as I see it, IF we were dealing with a steering mechanism as clear cut as a digging shortwave that is clearly reflected at the 500mb level. I think this scenario is different though and even though deep layer steering is not necessarily limited to 500mb winds, what I understand to be one of the steering mechanisms is a weakness in the Gulf (and then later in the forecast, a stronger large cut-off low); These features clearly show up at 200mb, and obviously extend somewhat lower in the atmosphere too but there's a pretty big difference between the extent of influence that an over-all weakness might have thus causing an impetus for a slow northward motion, verses the swift deep layer flow ahead of an advancing short wave. That's the primary reason that all along I've been wracking my brain to figure why nearly all the models have been so insistent on such an abrupt turn to the north, but even more doubtful that such a large and deep hurricane at a low latitude would be so quick to picked up by relative weak steering influences. It is entirely sensible that an eventual WNW to NW track would ensue as a large hurricane were to round the western edge of a weakening ridge to its north (which is in itself a little suspect) and slowly toward a weakness in the Gulf. Ordinarily though, that would be the ideal set up to anticipate a hurricane potentially into the Gulf as a result.
If Matthew should track as far south as 13N and reach 78W (or points west of there) than given the present steering mechanisms in place, I just would not think that a NNE motion would occur while moving through the Caribbean. I think the result could imply a lessened impact on Jamaica and a greater threat for Matthew to approach W. Cuba, and possibly Florida and raises the risk of a possible N. Gulf Coast risk as well. On the less radical swing of deviation though, I do think that an increased risk to Florida and potentially the Carolina's would result if a slightly further west (or WSW) motion continued a couple degrees further west than originally anticipated.
This is a good analysis chaser1. You nade good points and observations. Just goes to show what I have been discussing since this was a pouch. This is one of the most complex forecasts in which lots can still occur with Matthew. By no means is anyone in the all-clear with regards to the U.S. at this time.
Yellow Evan wrote:ADT keeps missing the eye. When we need it the most.
Yellow Evan wrote:ADT keeps missing the eye. When we need it the most.
Just my fried brain cells trying to make sense of it all. I'll be curiously watching off and on later into tonight and tomm a.m. to see if Matthew has been maintaining its forward speed and westward motion. I think the point i'm looking at which would really move the bar (er.. cone) is whether Matthew reaches 77W at or below 15N. Sure, a sudden turn to the north could then occur but i'd guess that turn would be slightly more gradual and NNW at first. I think that by noon tomm. it might be clear whether Matthew will possibly cross that point or turn as forecast east of there.Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
