Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Tracking Hurricane Matthew and any potential impacts to New England


USCAPEWEATHERAF

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
19 minutes ago, SnowlieSnowstormson said:

I am so confused right now. How was I rude? 

You posted an your thoughts/opinion and someone else responded to those thoughts and opinions and you then sarcastically said that they weren't being polite and rolled eyes at their response.  How would you consider that IRL?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sums it up nicely:


What we don`t know yet...
*  Final track.  Current uncertainty cone suggests that Matthew will
   be anywhere from over the Carolinas to as far as 400 nm offshore
   as of Saturday evening.  This will likely change based on how the
   pattern evolves.
*  Intensity.  Interaction with higher latitude features could alter
   the current forecast intensity of the storm as it moves farther
   north.
*  Potential impacts regardless of track.  Even a miss or near miss
   will result in some impacts across southern New England.  These
   include the marine impacts listed above as well as the potential
   for heavy rainfall either with Matthew or with a Predecessor
   Rainfall Event (PRE).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

Last page was brutal.  Rains have always been the biggest threat.  See what the rest of the 12z suite brings.  I'm not closing the shades on impact down this way with winds and rains.

Still way too early to rule out anything really. I think hedging east the smart play given climo at our latitude and the general depth of the trough, but hedging is definitely not the same as locking a solution in...esp 5 days out.

 

We're just now getting into the model range where they'll have a bit of skill...enough to at least start narrowing the goalposts more than 300 miles...the day 8-10 model solution discussion was pure fodder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

This sums it up nicely:


What we don`t know yet...
*  Final track.  Current uncertainty cone suggests that Matthew will
   be anywhere from over the Carolinas to as far as 400 nm offshore
   as of Saturday evening.  This will likely change based on how the
   pattern evolves.
*  Intensity.  Interaction with higher latitude features could alter
   the current forecast intensity of the storm as it moves farther
   north.
*  Potential impacts regardless of track.  Even a miss or near miss
   will result in some impacts across southern New England.  These
   include the marine impacts listed above as well as the potential
   for heavy rainfall either with Matthew or with a Predecessor
   Rainfall Event (PRE).

Well stated.  People need to stop claiming victory for the Euro, or for any other model.  Anything can happen at this point, and New England as well as NJ and NY need the rain, so perhaps people shouldn't be rooting for a complete miss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see anyone doing naked hi 5s or anything. For days a lot of us have been talking about the issues of a further east track.  We discuss this not because we are hoping for a miss....we discuss this with the background knowledge of climo, looking at the players on the field, and guidance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ORH_wxman said:

Still way too early to rule out anything really. I think hedging east the smart play given climo at our latitude and the general depth of the trough, but hedging is definitely not the same as locking a solution in...esp 5 days out.

 

We're just now getting into the model range where they'll have a bit of skill...enough to at least start narrowing the goalposts more than 300 miles...the day 8-10 model solution discussion was pure fodder.

Easy for you to say. Suffice to say... it's crunch time here. Model de jure uh that's the question, which is less wrong? You'd think FL is dodging a bullet with a parallel track, those exposed to a more perpendicular track (if) at LF are in-line for a thrashing.  Matthew gets beyond Cuba I contend the track jumps W and each model run thereafter has a LF in C FL.        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ROOSTA said:

Easy for you to say. Suffice to say... it's crunch time here. Model de jure uh that's the question, which is less wrong? You'd think FL is dodging a bullet with a parallel track, those exposed to a more perpendicular track (if) at LF are in-line for a thrashing.  Matthew gets beyond Cuba I contend the track jumps W and each model run thereafter has a LF in C FL.        

Why???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, weathafella said:

Come on-your name is eyewall-get your game on!

Well the first thing I am watching is how the core emerges post-Haiti and so far the data suggests it is already deepening once again meaning a minimal core disruption. Eastern Cuba will be its next challenge. Thereafter there is no shortage of heat content and a favorable enough environment for intensification in the short term. This is going to have longer term implications for the forecast downrange. Obviously the amount of amplification in the approaching trough and timing of the storm's northward movement will mean everything and both of those are key factors in the run to run variability. I haven't had the time to look at the teleconnectors as to why the GFS is modeling a somewhat weaker trough in the latest run but none the less I am not confortable in making any firm call for New England right now. It is not off the table at this point by any means though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

I didn't see anyone doing naked hi 5s or anything. For days a lot of us have been talking about the issues of a further east track.  We discuss this not because we are hoping for a miss....we discuss this with the background knowledge of climo, looking at the players on the field, and guidance. 

just seems odd such a big jump on the ensembles.. usually they are slower to trend, new data maybe?

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...