Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,509
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

TS Isaac Banter Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 946
  • Created
  • Last Reply

the cone now stops just short of naples...still got eyes on. even a tropical storm is enough here. we are in a low lying flood prone area on the gordon river by KAPF, TS or stronger calls for evac. 6 month pregnant wife is antsy beyond words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that the Nam is further north and east, but that is at the end of it's run. If I'm not mistaken the Nam is a regional model and not a dynamic global model, this is way to far out for it to be in it's wheel house. In some regards, the handling of this system by the global models is somewhat interesting when compared to Irene last year. The ECMWF was the first to move it west and the rest of the models followed suit. It appears that today's 12z and 18z runs of the GFS ensembles are hinting that a more westerly solution may be in the cards for the next run of the GFS. Time will soon tell, in the mean time I think I will be preparing some of this. :popcorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer a deleted question about NHC's intensity forecast from the other thread-

1) The NHC discussion - Pasch is experienced, and in fact, discussed the difficulty of forecasting intensity as it depends on terrain interactions with Cuba and Hispaniola. mentions the intensity forecast isn't a high confidence forecast.

2) The official track takes Issac well South of the highest peaks of Hispaniola, and crosses narrower, lower peaks on the Southern "fork" of Haiti, and then crosses the higher elevations of eastern Cuba fairly quickly.

Just IMHO, people should read the discos before questioning things in the forecast, because they may have been addressed in the disco.

No idea what the DT aleet-aleet is. Eyeballing 500 mb heights at 0Z from 18Z GFS at MIA, 5899 meters, balloon is 5910. But my eyeball reading of GFS forecast could be a few meters off. Maybe the 18Z GFS was a smidge weak on heights. Or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer a deleted question about NHC's intensity forecast from the other thread-

1) The NHC discussion - Pasch is experienced, and in fact, discussed the difficulty of forecasting intensity as it depends on terrain interactions with Cuba and Hispaniola. mentions the intensity forecast isn't a high confidence forecast.

2) The official track takes Issac well South of the highest peaks of Hispaniola, and crosses narrower, lower peaks on the Southern "fork" of Haiti, and then crosses the higher elevations of eastern Cuba fairly quickly.

Just IMHO, people should read the discos before questioning things in the forecast, because they may have been addressed in the disco.

No idea what the DT aleet-aleet is. Eyeballing 500 mb heights at 0Z from 18Z GFS at MIA, 5899 meters, balloon is 5910. But my eyeball reading of GFS forecast could be a few meters off. Maybe the 18Z GFS was a smidge weak on heights. Or not.

DT basically prints out whatever the ECMWF says as his forecast. Since the ECMWF is much different from the NHC forecast, he expected them to abandon that forecast and go with the ECMWF only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that the Nam is further north and east, but that is at the end of it's run. If I'm not mistaken the Nam is a regional model and not a dynamic global model, this is way to far out for it to be in it's wheel house. In some regards, the handling of this system by the global models is somewhat interesting when compared to Irene last year. The ECMWF was the first to move it west and the rest of the models followed suit. It appears that today's 12z and 18z runs of the GFS ensembles are hinting that a more westerly solution may be in the cards for the next run of the GFS. Time will soon tell, in the mean time I think I will be preparing some of this. :popcorn:

NCEP site used to allow display of NAM in Caribbean, the edge of the display wasn't far East of the Antilles, I don't know if the actual model domain extends to where Isaac is. It is bounded, IIRC, by the previous GFS run, its hour 12 boundaries are from the previous GFS hour 18 conditions..

It appears the trained professionals don't put much stock in it as a tropical model. I don't know if the performance improves on systems further into its domain. Not sure what, if any, differences exist between the NAM-WRF and the HWRF, as far as model physics, although obviously the HWRF nests its cyclones inside a larger outer grid.

Good thing we have a banter thread to discuss how/why NAM is so disrespected as a tropical model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you tweaking your path from earlier at all?

I haven't changed the crude MS Paint forecast at all, so far, unless the 0Z models I trust, the GFS, Euro, and associated ensembles really throw a curve, it'll be a minor adjustment rather than a big swing in the morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if someone posts a picture of a giant pile of monkey scat in this thread, but they put "FWIW" at the beginning of it, that makes it okay?

It's a model (however ****ty it may be a tropical forecasts)...in a banter thread...

My point being, who gives a damn...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer a deleted question about NHC's intensity forecast from the other thread-

1) The NHC discussion - Pasch is experienced, and in fact, discussed the difficulty of forecasting intensity as it depends on terrain interactions with Cuba and Hispaniola. mentions the intensity forecast isn't a high confidence forecast.

2) The official track takes Issac well South of the highest peaks of Hispaniola, and crosses narrower, lower peaks on the Southern "fork" of Haiti, and then crosses the higher elevations of eastern Cuba fairly quickly.

Just IMHO, people should read the discos before questioning things in the forecast, because they may have been addressed in the disco.

No idea what the DT aleet-aleet is. Eyeballing 500 mb heights at 0Z from 18Z GFS at MIA, 5899 meters, balloon is 5910. But my eyeball reading of GFS forecast could be a few meters off. Maybe the 18Z GFS was a smidge weak on heights. Or not.

NHC is also not going to deviate that heavily from a prior forecast. If there is more land interaction they have time to deal with that. Perhaps going too gung ho early slows the process tho who knows right?

And lol at the NAM and DGEX being discussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NHC is also not going to deviate that heavily from a prior forecast. If there is more land interaction they have time to deal with that. Perhaps going too gung ho early slows the process tho who knows right?

And lol at the NAM and DGEX being discussed.

It's kinda to be expected, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's kinda to be expected, I guess.

It IS a banter thread. Last year there was a guy who posted the NOGAPS all the time, and tried to reason why the NOGAPS was a useful tool for forecasting. Mets reminded him every time of what a bad model it was, and he kept right on posting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It IS a banter thread. Last year there was a guy who posted the NOGAPS all the time, and tried to reason why the NOGAPS was a useful tool for forecasting. Mets reminded him every time of what a bad model it was, and he kept right on posting it.

Sorry for causing so much trouble, I would not have responded to his post because this is a banter thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we should throw out the Nam because it doesn't show a gulf hit? Who cares if it's at 84 hours. It's a weather board and we are posting about weather. Also, this is a banter thread.

How can you post here so much without learning anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...