Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,514
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    CHSVol
    Newest Member
    CHSVol
    Joined

PTC Matthew

PaEasternWX

By PaEasternWX,
in Tropical Headquarters

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Master of Disaster

Master of Disaster

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Bacon Strips said:

the coast guard should move some Buoy floaters (or whatever their called)  into the path of Matt.   We need as much data as possible as he's moving in.  

We were basically relying on 1 buoy as it was about to hit Haiti.

The United States Coast Guard has no buoys that record sea conditions or atmospheric conditions. They are all Aids to Navigation based. NOAA has the only buoys that do that and the Coast Guard will on occasion install them for NOAA. In my four years working buoys for the CG, I can remember setting two in the Gulf of Alaska. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pcbjr

pcbjr

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, WishingForWarmWeather said:

Since I can't see pictures, can you elaborate to the general area of "the e coast" it is? Central, near cocoa beach? 

roughly north of WPB to St. A ; seems to go a bit E off of Jax (based on what I can see on this screen)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beanskip

beanskip

Posted
Posted

So here is a question that has been on my mind -- how close to shore would the eye need to pass for the distinction between "landfall" and "raking the coast" essentially be moot (at least for those on the immediate coast)? That is, if the eye is, say, 25 miles offshore of Anycoastaltown, Fla., is this appreciably better than an actual landfall. What if it's 10 miles, or 50? The angle of approach is going to make typical nomenclature less relevant, imo.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NaoPos

NaoPos

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Thesolmachine said:

It appears the GFS has the storm a lot weaker then it currently is. Does it think the mountain ranges will keep it that weak and it won't reintensify? How does the lack of intensity effect it's model and track? 

Its just the resolution of the global model. The physics behind the computing makes sure it balances out. Don't worry about it too much. 

Someone already posted the hi-res GFS a few posts back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wxmx

wxmx

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, beanskip said:

So here is a question that has been on my mind -- how close to shore would the eye need to pass for the distinction between "landfall" and "raking the coast" essentially be moot (at least for those on the immediate coast)? That is, if the eye is, say, 25 miles offshore of Anycoastaltown, Fla., is this appreciably better than an actual landfall. What if it's 10 miles, or 50? The angle of approach is going to make typical nomenclature less relevant, imo.  

You can use the 'direct hit' nomenclature. For a direct hit you don't need a landfall, just the eyewall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Windspeed

Windspeed

Posted
Posted

Looks like the trough does miss Matthew. Kicks it ENE then due E after flirting with landfall near Charleston. This may get left behind like the Euro solution, though perhaps not the long motion back to the SW towards the end of the run. This thing will probably be under a lot of heavy shear if it gets left behind by the trough and left to meander east of the Carolinas with heights modeled to build in from the Gulf.

Edit: The remnant system merges with what's left of the trough and heads out. No complete stall and bend back like the Euro.

Major take away is that the GFS is a bit further west, slower and a tad weaker, but ultimately recurves east. Doesn't take it into North Carolina.





Link to comment
Share on other sites
pcbjr

pcbjr

Posted
Posted

Being a north coastal Floridian and having been through my share of 'Canes in various parts of the state, I'd like to add this to the mix.

The east coast is over built and inhabited by a good number of folks that have never experienced a storm. The devistation of trees down, lack of power, flooding in some of the suburbs and golf course communities located between the Intracoastal and the shore, and just pure panic, is enough to make me pray for a big east trend, real soon. More folks could hurt themselves trying to do what they don't know, than the storm itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SnowGoose69

SnowGoose69

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, pcbjr said:

Being a north coastal Floridian and having been through my share of 'Canes in various pats of the state, I'd like to add this to the mix.

The east coast is over built and inhabited by a good number of folks that have never experienced a storm. The devistation of trees down, lack of power, flooding in some of the suburbs and golf course communities located between the Intracoastal and the shore, and just pure panic, is enough to make me pray for a big east trend, real soon. More folks could hurt themselves trying to do what they don't know, than the storm itself.

There was a time 15-20 years ago where anything north of north Miami Beach or Hollywood wouldn't have been as catastrophic, but it sure is now.  The coastal high rises and other businesses and homes have gone up in locations further north since then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Windspeed

Windspeed

Posted
Posted
As Greg Fishel just said, when that many euro ensemble members show a certain path, you can't ignore it.

 

I'm with the Euro.  And now the GFS is caving toward that solution.  This thing will hopefully be a nonevent for the Carolinas.  Suits me perfectly.  I don't want wind and rain up here.

Hopefully you are correct (i.e..North Carolina, mid-Atlantic). But it is still early. If the trough starts to be modeled to dig deeper and has a higher amplitude, the runs may start pulling Matthew further north. We've had several big changes the past few days with the models. Another change wouldn't be surprising. Especially from this trajectory of a track curve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Master of Disaster

Master of Disaster

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said:

There was a time 15-20 years ago where anything north of north Miami Beach or Hollywood wouldn't have been as catastrophic, but it sure is now.  The coastal high rises and other businesses and homes have gone up in locations further north since then. 

Then throw in the fact that not one but three towers have been proposed in Miami 2 of which will exceed 1000 feet and the current highest tower, 4 seasons is 780 feet. I was under the impression the FAA limited tower heights in Miami due to path restrictions to Miami International however it appears they removed any restrictions allowing for 1000 or higher behemoths to be built in probably the most high risk hurricane zone in the country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Windspeed

Windspeed

Posted
Posted
I thought a higher amplitude trough would initiative a recurve and kick the storm out.

It's also a matter of timing with respect to Matthew's position and the trough, but if the trough digs deeper and the ridge holds east, the hurricane would keep a N to NNE track longer versus a sharper recurve NE-ENE from a flatter and more zonal westerly mid-level flow.

It's not like we're talking about a negative tilting trough. But a deeper trough could pull the hurricane further North.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • wxmx unpinned this topic

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...