Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Hurricane Sandy - Model and Medium Range Discussion


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 280
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The high and low tide measurements for NY Harbor and vicinity for Monday and Tuesday will be comparable, though slightly less than what was present for Irene. During Irene, I believe an annual maximum tide was present. I don't know if Monday afternoon's high tide or Tuesday's morning's high tide will be more impacting in this case.

Based on the surge height and that it's still steeply rising at the end of the NWS forecast period, I wouldn't be very confident that the Irene water level measurement isn't exceeded.

nybat.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a while, but at the end it whips it due west, landfall in southern Jersey.

GFDL is Delaware Bay, Canadian and GFS near NYC. Things are tightening up just a bit

While all of the model waffling was going on in the days leading up to Isaac's landfall on the coast, I found the EC ENS mean to be the most consistent and ultimately accurate guidance in targeting an area somewhere from SE LA to near MOB. Seems like the EC ENS has been targeting NJ to NYC pretty consistently with Sandy, and op EC is now trending that way as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for anyone who might be involved in creating hurricane track graphics: I love how the "cone of uncertainty" reflects well the increasing uncertainty of the track/location with time, graphically, as in the NHC track graphics. However, those graphics don't convey any degree of uncertainty in time, as the system evolves, i.e., there's a single point for 24, 48, 72 hours, etc., when we all know that those "points" are really where the hurricane will be at 24 +/- 2 hrs, 48 +/- 4 hrs, 72 +/- 8 hrs, etc. (just using made up numbers to reflect the concept). I would think the NHC could include those +/- uncertainty estimates in time for the time points on the graphics pretty easily and I think they would help readers grasp, better, that the forecast has growing uncertainties in both location and time, as a function of time. Anyone ever thought much about this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for anyone who might be involved in creating hurricane track graphics: I love how the "cone of uncertainty" reflects well the increasing uncertainty of the track/location with time, graphically, as in the NHC track graphics. However, those graphics don't convey any degree of uncertainty in time, as the system evolves, i.e., there's a single point for 24, 48, 72 hours, etc., when we all know that those "points" are really where the hurricane will be at 24 +/- 2 hrs, 48 +/- 4 hrs, 72 +/- 8 hrs, etc. (just using made up numbers to reflect the concept). I would think the NHC could include those +/- uncertainty estimates in time for the time points on the graphics pretty easily and I think they would help readers grasp, better, that the forecast has growing uncertainties in both location and time, as a function of time. Anyone ever thought much about this?

The timing aspect actually is taken into account, but not displayed very well on the NHC graphics. Each forecast point actually has a circle around it representing possible errors, and the cone is constructed simply by connecting the circles. That's why you see a semicircle at the end of the cone.

EDIT: The wunderground graphics actually display it well:

http://www.wunderground.com/tropical/tracking/at201218_5day.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The timing aspect actually is taken into account, but not displayed very well on the NHC graphics. Each forecast point actually has a circle around it representing possible errors, and the cone is constructed simply by connecting the circles. That's why you see a semicircle at the end of the cone.

EDIT: The wunderground graphics actually display it well:

http://www.wundergro...01218_5day.html

Hadn't seen those - that works nicely. NHC doesn't have those on the main pages I look at - just the semicircle at the end of the cone.

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/graphics_at3.shtml?5-daynl?large#contents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FL winds at 650 millibars are fairly low, but the estimated central pressure has fallen to around 966 millibars. That indicates even though the satellite presentation indicates a strongly sheared, disorganized system.

URNT12 KWBC 262327

VORTEX DATA MESSAGE AL182012

A. 26/22:50:05Z

B. 27 deg 21 min N

077 deg 11 min W

C. NA

D. 45 kt

E. 356 deg 51 nm

F. 090 deg 48 kt

G. 358 deg 88 nm

H. EXTRAP 966 mb

I. 6 C / 3656 m

J. 14 C / 3658 m

K. 8 C / NA

L. NA

M. NA

N. 1345 / NA

O. 1 / 2 nm

P. NOAA2 1218A SANDY OB 12

SLP EXTRAP FROM 12000FT

MAX OUTBOUND FL WIND AND MAX FL WIND 52 KT S QUAD 22:59:18Z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NAM coming in and FWIW it looks so far a very lot like the Euro with both the storm and the short wave that comes into the SE and causes the phasing.

And i thought i was overly tired and seeing things and i have been mentioning to others that the NAM is really Looking Euro'ish and is much more defined and looks much more potent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RGEM looked about 10% stronger at 48h than trend on 18z RGEM, has 540 dm upper low and 966 mb surface low at 34N 70W. Pretty sure that GGEM will be past this point any minute now but I'm noting this for continuity. The NL-QC block had a 582 dm centre near Goose Bay. Slight trend of what nobody wants to see, intensification of block. RGEM also looked more vigorous than the 18z version in this next 24-48h, steady height falls and northeast motion (unlike 18z when the cyclone stalled in last 12h).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You won't see me saying this very often when it comes to NOGAPS. The ECMWF and NOGAPS have been very consistent with the track of this storm. However as far the center of low pressure for this system I tend to lean towards the NOGAP model. NOGAP seems to want to go to sub 960mb not sub 950 like the Euro suggests. That may be splitting hairs as either solution would be problematic from Delmarva to NYC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This storm is why people go into meteorology, just once during my lifetime could I put out a forecast for a storm of this magnitude. Forecasters looking at all the models runs are starting to say it was worth the expense, even if I'm not on TV lol. By the way I am a weather junkie, I could have become a met if it weren't for the heavy math and calculus that were involved in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This storm is why people go into meteorology, just once during my lifetime could I put out a forecast for a storm of this magnitude. Forecasters looking at all the models runs are starting to say it was worth the expense, even if I'm not on TV lol. By the way I am a weather junkie, I could have become a met if it weren't for the heavy math and calculus that were involved in it.

Same here! Been collecting weather data for 16 years and whenever a weather system/event is news worthy, I save the article(s). For this storm I have been saving model maps and projections. - See how it all comes out in the end!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...