NHC discussion and models???

#1 Postby **Blown Away** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:07 pm

I don't get it, the NHC keeps adjusting their track left and S with each advisory, but the models keep adjusting to the right. Their seems to be a decent chance at this time for a Carolina storm but the models don't even come close???

http://www.wunderground.com/tropical/tr ... model.html

NCHurricane · #2 Postby **NCHurricane** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:13 pm

Just keep in mind the disclaimer at upper right: "Computer models subject to large errors." Especially the further out they forecast.

Personally, I think if it holds together it will be similar to Isabel.

WindRunner · #3 Postby **WindRunner** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:16 pm

The models sure don't think so, but we know how moody they can be.

NCHurricane · #4 Postby **NCHurricane** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:18 pm

Very true. I hope they ARE right. 8-)

#5 Postby **Blown Away** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:25 pm

The models have to be underestimating the ridge and they all have the storm WNW to NW now, looks like it's heading @280
rate now. I see a drastic change coming in the next few advisories. IMO

dwg71 · #6 Postby **dwg71** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:26 pm

Blown_away wrote:The models have to be underestimating the ridge and they all have the storm WNW to NW now, looks like it's heading @280
rate now. I see a drastic change coming in the next few advisories. IMO

in which way. more fishy or more landy... I made that word up, but feel free to use it

gpickett00 · #7 Postby **gpickett00** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:15 pm

By his location, (Florida) I would guess "landy"

Swimdude · #8 Postby **Swimdude** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:17 pm

I know the ridge is a HUGE factor... But when Emily was around, I heard much discussion about the theory that larger and more powerful storms tend to pull themselves "poleward." Is this true; keeping the ridge in consideration?

mahicks · #9 Postby **mahicks** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:23 pm

dwg71 wrote:
Blown_away wrote:The models have to be underestimating the ridge and they all have the storm WNW to NW now, looks like it's heading @280
rate now. I see a drastic change coming in the next few advisories. IMO

in which way. more fishy or more landy... I made that word up, but feel free to use it

LOL....Landy...thats funny..

I'll put that one in the "use never" column...

Also in that column will be "Irene is Bombing"

Just Kiddin :-)

rainstorm · #10 Postby **rainstorm** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:33 pm

similar to isabel?

in 2003 there was a huge cool high located over new england, and it was cool and dry here the day before isabel.

the set up has no similarities at all

djtil · #11 Postby **djtil** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:04 pm

they caught themselves jumping with a couple of the models that have since come back in line with the curvature solution..for continuity sake they only came a little right........next couple advisories and they will come back inline with the consensus i think and show a 100-200 mile us coast miss.

#12 Postby **CronkPSU** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:12 pm

djtil wrote:they caught themselves jumping with a couple of the models that have since come back in line with the curvature solution..for continuity sake they only came a little right........next couple advisories and they will come back inline with the consensus i think and show a 100-200 mile us coast miss.

not all the models seem to be saying what you are...seems like most are saying a US landfall

<img src="http://euler.atmos.colostate.edu/~vigh/guidance/atlantic/early1.png">

mahicks · #13 Postby **mahicks** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:25 pm

CronkPSU wrote:
djtil wrote:they caught themselves jumping with a couple of the models that have since come back in line with the curvature solution..for continuity sake they only came a little right........next couple advisories and they will come back inline with the consensus i think and show a 100-200 mile us coast miss.

not all the models seem to be saying what you are...seems like most are saying a US landfall

<img src="http://euler.atmos.colostate.edu/~vigh/guidance/atlantic/early1.png">

awe....come on...IMHO Clipper is the best model there is..Xtrap runs a close second! :lol:

#14 Postby **CronkPSU** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:28 pm

good ole clipper is nothing if not persistent, he has had the same track the last 3 days

gkrangers · #15 Postby **gkrangers** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:32 pm

CronkPSU wrote:good ole clipper is nothing if not persistent, he has had the same track the last 3 days

Do you know what Cliper is?

KeyLargoDave · #16 Postby **KeyLargoDave** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:15 pm

Climatology and persistence, basically xtrap and database, with a vector initialization and weighting for day of year.

If Clipper is ever right, they are out of a job.

KeyLargoDave · #17 Postby **KeyLargoDave** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:16 pm

And that was a joke right, "Cipper is nothing if not persistent"?

Or did you mean "consistent"

There's lies, damn lies, and Clipper.

gkrangers · #18 Postby **gkrangers** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:17 pm

KeyLargoDave wrote:And that was a joke right, "Cipper is nothing if not persistent"?

Or did you mean "consistent"

There's lies, damn lies, and Clipper.

Heh, yep...

I just asked them to see if I had to explain that Cliper isn't really a model, or if they knew.

KeyLargoDave · #19 Postby **KeyLargoDave** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:24 pm

It's funny, stats are nothing compared to atmosphere, and yet I can still get a shiver if one's developing and -- "Andrew was in that same spot when it started bombing..."

#20 Postby **CronkPSU** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:26 pm

it was a bad joke, sorry my warped sense of humor takes a while to get used too, should have used an emoticon

NHC discussion and models???

NHC discussion and models???

Who is online