Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,277
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    weatherman27
    Newest Member
    weatherman27
    Joined

TD 9/Ian Banter


MattPetrulli
 Share

Recommended Posts

Florida either needs to implement policy changes and building codes that prohibit construction in surge zones, or they will have an insurance crisis.  These storms are not going away and are getting more frequent.  Time to stop putting our heads in the sand.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Normandy said:

Florida either needs to implement policy changes and building codes that prohibit construction in surge zones, or they will have an insurance crisis.  These storms are not going away and are getting more frequent.  Time to stop putting our heads in the sand.

What doesn't help is we had a period of 10 years during 2006-2016 where we had zero Category 3 or higher storms make landfall anywhere in the US. That was the longest stretch in recorded history. I feel that also helped lull people into a false sense of security.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Normandy said:

Florida either needs to implement policy changes and building codes that prohibit construction in surge zones, or they will have an insurance crisis.  These storms are not going away and are getting more frequent.  Time to stop putting our heads in the sand.

That and zones where there is no insurance and no government help.  If you live here, you are 100% self insurance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is that Florida actually has some of the best and strongest building codes in the country at least since 2005 and to a lesser extent since 1992. My own house here in Boca is built  to withstand 155MPH winds and a recent garage door replacement is rated at 235mph winds. You will never see wood frame new  construction  in Florida. Everything is reinforced concrete and cinder block.

 

Personally I think that an issue that needs to be addressed is how the GFS and equally important the hurricane models that are based off of it was totally taken to school by not only the Euro but the UK model as well. This is not the first time that this has happened yet the NHC continues to weigh their forecast to what the GFS says.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florida man

 

Central Florida man dies after going outside to drain his pool during Ian

Deputies said the man was using a hose to drain the pool down a hill and into a 30-foot-wide canal.

https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/weather/hurricane/hurricane-ian-tropical-storm-man-dies/77-0dce9684-5c9c-4e44-bd87-4c570763d6dd

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The discussion needs to focus on the forecast, which was marginal at best.  Only 24 hours before was the storm 1) forecasted to come ashore south of Tampa and 2) 1 forecast model called for the storm to track basically along I-4.  And that model was an inhouse model from the Orlando NBC affiliate.  My son in Tampa was planned to evacuate to a friend's house near Naples and decided to ride it out and glad he did. Had he evacuated on Monday to Naples, he would have put himself in the bullseye. Blaming politicians of any party for not evacuating Ft Myers earlier is absurd when Monday & Tuesday's forecast had Tampa in the bullseye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm flabbergasted that people would evacuate down the coast for a hurricane.  I've heard a lot of stories like that.  Whatever happened to going farther inland?

It's one thing if you're evacuating to Mobile, AL for this, but the Fort Myers/Naples area were in the zone where there was a reasonable chance of very bad conditions from days out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

1 hour ago, Hoosier said:

I'm flabbergasted that people would evacuate down the coast for a hurricane.  I've heard a lot of stories like that.  Whatever happened to going farther inland?

It's one thing if you're evacuating to Mobile, AL for this, but the Fort Myers/Naples area were in the zone where there was a reasonable chance of very bad conditions from days out.

This map was posted on 25 Sep, 48 hours before the storm (pulled from the Ian thread).  South and east was the way to evacuate, Tampa is on the southern edge of the cone.  Ft Myers/Naples isnt even the cone at this point.  Forecasting was poor on this one.

Screenshot_20220925_192354.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, floridapirate said:

 

 

This map was posted on 25 Sep, 48 hours before the storm (pulled from the Ian thread).  South and east was the way to evacuate, Tampa is on the southern edge of the cone.  Ft Myers/Naples isnt even the cone at this point.  Forecasting was poor on this one.

Screenshot_20220925_192354.jpg

That’s why the NHC keeps on telling users not to focus on the center path which will shift around, and that hazards can extend well outside of the cone. The NHC explicitly started predicting a 4-7’ storm surge for Lee County starting at 11 pm on Sunday, 9/25. That prediction never went lower on subsequent advisories. You’re not going to convince many on a weather board that Lee County officials did not have enough information to order evacuations sooner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, floridapirate said:

 

 

This map was posted on 25 Sep, 48 hours before the storm (pulled from the Ian thread).  South and east was the way to evacuate, Tampa is on the southern edge of the cone.  Ft Myers/Naples isnt even the cone at this point.  Forecasting was poor on this one.

Screenshot_20220925_192354.jpg

Sorry but where is that map from?

each NHC arum varied a bit, but swfl was never out of the cone. 
In all the years I lived in Florida, especially knowing how hurricanes can change path at the last minute, I would NEVER have thought of going south on the same coast it was forecast to hit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2022 at 11:28 AM, Normandy said:

Could not agree more.  Their aversion to extreme track changes between advisories and reliance on the GFS rendered their performance in this storm fairly poor for their standards

Agree. I saw this starting to happen in the Caribbean when the GFS was organizing Ian way too fast, while it seemed to be getting stronger more at the pace of the EURO. Not to mention nearly everytime I follow the GFS on something, the EURO ends up correct.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NYC10023 said:

Sorry but where is that map from?

each NHC arum varied a bit, but swfl was never out of the cone. 
In all the years I lived in Florida, especially knowing how hurricanes can change path at the last minute, I would NEVER have thought of going south on the same coast it was forecast to hit

I grabbed this from the Ian discussion page.  Point is, Ft Myers and Naples was "safe", not center of the storm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
This map was posted on 25 Sep, 48 hours before the storm (pulled from the Ian thread).  South and east was the way to evacuate, Tampa is on the southern edge of the cone.  Ft Myers/Naples isnt even the cone at this point.  Forecasting was poor on this one.
Screenshot_20220925_192354.thumb.jpg.53ebd2dbc6b79444e61eb089f5c797a2.jpg
I'm sure that some graphic artists could come up with a way to shade around the cone to show the potential breadth of impacts. (Which would then perhaps have shown more clearly a larger impact to the southeast of a land falling hurricane.) I know they do more now with surge forecasts, etc., and they repeat "don't focus just on the cone," but it's pretty clear that that's not good enough. They need a one-glance representation of potential level of impacts based on possible forecast deviations.

(And no, not with a Sharpie!)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is another model posted 26 Sep on the Ian thread by a professional met (Board Member).  Monday afternoon prior to the storm starting in 48 hours and Ft Myers/Naples is relatively safe.  If you were a resident and asked to evacuate, you probably would look at this and decide to stay.  In addition, look at the actual result of onshore at Ft Myers, off shore at Cape Canaveral and consider how far off the models were.

 

TVCN_trendtrack_0 (1).png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, jacindc said:

I'm sure that some graphic artists could come up with a way to shade around the cone to show the potential breadth of impacts. (Which would then perhaps have shown more clearly a larger impact to the southeast of a land falling hurricane.) I know they do more now with surge forecasts, etc., and they repeat "don't focus just on the cone," but it's pretty clear that that's not good enough. They need a one-glance representation of potential level of impacts based on possible forecast deviations.

(And no, not with a Sharpie!)

NHC puts out the wind probability maps which is the type of graphic they should be using for the entire storm. Move away from the cone and stick with a color coded graphic like this but for all impacts, not just wind. 

6E3XP73APZDI3A33FYMXWI6C6Y.webp

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, cptcatz said:

NHC puts out the wind probability maps which is the type of graphic they should be using for the entire storm. Move away from the cone and stick with a color coded graphic like this but for all impacts, not just wind. 

6E3XP73APZDI3A33FYMXWI6C6Y.webp

IMO this would be much better than what is currently used

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That map is for tropical storm winds and depending on the exact detail shows the landfall area at a 50 to 80 percent chance of TS winds

I am sure that the 50 and 64 kt wind maps showed even a lesser chance 

I am sure that map was based on the GFS which failed miserably in this storm at the cost of many many lives 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigtenfan said:

That map is for tropical storm winds and depending on the exact detail shows the landfall area at a 50 to 80 percent chance of TS winds

I am sure that the 50 and 64 kt wind maps showed even a lesser chance 

I am sure that map was based on the GFS which failed miserably in this storm at the cost of many many lives 

I'm saying that the NHC should replace the cone graphic with a SIMILAR graphic to this one which shows the probability of significant impacts (whether it be wind, rain, or storm surge) based on colors. And it doesn't have to be uniform. It can be skewed to show the heavy surge impacts on the south side of the system and heavy rain impacts on the north side like Ian had. But one graphic showing likelihood of impacts would be far more useful than a cone showing where the center might go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, cptcatz said:

I'm saying that the NHC should replace the cone graphic with a SIMILAR graphic to this one which shows the probability of significant impacts (whether it be wind, rain, or storm surge) based on colors. And it doesn't have to be uniform. It can be skewed to show the heavy surge impacts on the south side of the system and heavy rain impacts on the north side like Ian had. But one graphic showing likelihood of impacts would be far more useful than a cone showing where the center might go. 

You may be right about it being better than a cone, but I think going to something probability based could cause its own issues.  Take your basic 30% chance of rain forecast.  Most ordinary people couldn't even tell you what that means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another big bust with nearly every model was the awful intensity forecast. Even the ones further south never showed anything like a sub-940 mb hurricane with 155 mph winds. These models made it seem like conditions would be so god awful that the best Ian would do is 125-130 mph. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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