40/70 Benchmark

Yea, I have interpreted this tropical October regime as a positive development in relation to winter prospects....statistically speaking, trends from October to November tend to augur the prevailing winter pattern more often than not-

On September 17, 2017 at 7:22 PM, griteater said:

Chuck - one thing, it looks like your numbers are off for last winter as it was +NAO

I had +.37, so neutral-positive.

I wouldn't consider that a win for this index, but he knows better than I.

18 hours ago, StormchaserChuck said:

El Nino/-QBO 60% correlated to -NAO

La Nina/+QBO 60% correlated to +NAO

I think the correlation to the AO is stronger, but obviously this is an NAO thread...

-QBO to hopefully provide some polar assist..

Good ole "Jack O"...RIP

Blizzard of 2005 is a bit overrated in my area....several storms in my lifetime were better.

On September 17, 2017 at 8:39 PM, StormchaserChuck said:

Around Neutral. I'm using 500mb maps. sometimes Iceland region is considered because that's the northern dipole in SLP. +AO
 

I am a big fan of your work and methodologies.......and I incorporated your NAO work into last season's out look, but I was somewhat surprised that it wasn't more negative.

Anyway, great work, as always....I think this tool as about as good as any, and probably the best imho.

2 hours ago, NJwx85 said:

Just remember that the average day five track error is 200 miles with tropical cyclones.

And in the mid latitudes, the correction is usually to the east.

I think its noise at thia point-

1 hour ago, ORH_wxman said:

How we do weather in New England:

 

Winter wx events = patriots

backdoor coldfronts = '27 Yankees

tropical threats = Bruins

High end severe threats = Bobby Valentine Red Sox  

 

Man, I forgot what it was like to have a great hurricane season....I have hardly even looked at the winter yet.

I'm used to being balls deep in theories by now....late start.

September has flown by for once-

Just now, Scorpion said:

I have so much family in Puerto Rico and have been so many times. I know the geography very well. The interior areas are getting absolutely wiped out, never seen anything like it, it is like the apocalypse. Flooding on the rate of Harvey in only one day. The destruction is going to be unimaginable. It breaks my heart.

My colleague's 80 yo mother lives in San Juan metro...east side.

She was blessed because she if fine, and her house was not damaged.

1 hour ago, Paragon said:

Might be like Jose- remember Jose was 150 mph at one point too.

 

I think it will be like Jose.

http://easternmassweather.blogspot.com/2017/09/puerto-rico-devastated-maria-poised-to.html

Sorry for the kindergarten graphics, but I'm a primitive hobbyist.

3 hours ago, SnowGoose69 said:

Even if it hits the US I'm not sure what sort of shape it's in at that point.  It's not really taking a trajectory over a favorable area.  I'm thinking a 75-90 mph cane at the worst 

Agree....I don't think its a major threat.

1 hour ago, SnowGoose69 said:

Inevitably the solution all models show now with the scare and then kick out will likely be wrong.  Mostly because it's remote the models could have this handed so correctly this far out.  I'd almost rather see them unanimously showing a direct hit right now 

However there are many more ways for this to miss the US, than hit it.

18 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

It actually made things worse, it wasn't the extreme winds in the tight core that was going to cause Island wide extensive  infrastructure damage,  it was the spreading out of those winds, the rapid cooling of tops at landfall exacerbated the rainfall, what was a tight core with cane winds confined to a 30 mile radius spread those out 100's of miles. There is nothing good save for the areas that would have gotten wind speeds 25 mph higher

Maximum sustained winds weakened.

Only fact I stated.

I believe that is what the Saffir/Simpson Scale is based on.

Obviously there are other factors at play when speaking of structural changes. 

1 minute ago, NJwx85 said:

You're partially correct, and partially incorrect. The winds in the original eyewall were decreasing. That's where the 175MPH winds were yesterday afternoon. At the same time, the winds in the outer or new eyewall were increasing, but there wasn't enough time for the winds to increase back to where they had been in the inner eyewall prior to landfall. 

Bingo.

1 minute ago, clskinsfan said:

Ok. I understand what an ERC is.  But that still doesnt make my comment wrong. The wind speed was decreasing at landfall.

It had weakened, but the weakening was done, as the ERC had completed...essentially, PR caught Marua at the best possible time relative to its internal structural cycle, as I had anticipated yesterday. 

1 minute ago, CoastalWx said:

Well my guess is that is probably was not 155 sustained on the island given past behavior with these ERC...but I was not flying around in it either. That's just an educated guess. I'm sure you have violent gusts that helped make up for it, like we saw with Irma in SW FL.

Agree. I think it was a little weaker..

38 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

The 140 gust was on an island just ENE of PR. I'm sure there were gusts near that in PR..but you won't know probably thanks to power or equipment failure.

How do you feel about the 155mph LF intensity?

Just now, Paragon said:

Figures it'd landfall at 155, Ray, just below Cat 5 intensity.  Now we can have the argument that since winds are reported at 5 mph intervals, why 157 is the minimum for Cat 5, and not 155!  Since a 157 mph wind would never be reported.  Of course, based on the observations, it's doubtful this was even 155 mph sustained on landfall.  More like 135-140.

It intensified more than I had thought....so the difference is because of the 175 mph initial intensity....I was expecting like 155-160mph peak.

3 hours ago, csnavywx said:

ERC progressing alarmingly rapidly per recon data and radar. Outer max already has stronger winds than the inner max. At this rate, she'll be done in a few hours.

 

 

Radar observations from the San Juan WSR-88D and wind data from an
Air Force Reserve Unit Hurricane Hunter aircraft indicate that
Maria has just about completed an eyewall replacement.  Based on
the now-dominant outer eyewall, the eye diameter has increased from
10 n mi to 30 n mi.  This has likely contributed to some weakening,
and based on the latest observations from the Hurricane Hunters, the
intensity is set at 135 kt which is at the top of category 4 range.

Looks like my call wasn't totally off-base after all,...just somewhat aggressive with the weakening.

1 minute ago, LovintheWhiteFluff said:

meant 12z. fixed it. 0z is now. lol

Figured-

2 minutes ago, nycwinter said:

it was more than s scrape the eyewall was 50 miles at least to the north of the island...

Fair enough.

I guess I was speaking in relative terms.

Just now, LovintheWhiteFluff said:

Yes, landfall should be around 0z. 

 

Thanks.

Going to be close on where it weakens a bit, but not looking like it will be much at this point.

What is it, about 12 hrs until PR LF?