Hurricane Forecast cone

[j24vt]

I think people tend to focus on the icon in the center of the track when looking at the cone.  I would like to see the NHC change the way it is represented for the 3, 4, and 5 day predictions. Instead of placing the icon in the center of the cone consider placing an icon on each edge of the cone for days 3-5 and connecting them across the cone similar to what is done in the experimental forecast of the arrival of tropical force winds.

[Hoosier]

This subject was talked about a bit in the main thread.  It's good that the default track map on the NHC site doesn't use a center line, but there is still an option to turn on the center line. The media could help by not having a center line on their graphics.  As far as what you're suggesting, not a bad idea, or even getting rid of the little icons and just showing the expected storm type (M, H, S, D) at various times.

[j24vt]

M, H, S, and D are what I was referring to as the icons.

[jburns]

On 9/11/2017 at 6:31 PM, Hoosier said:

This subject was talked about a bit in the main thread.  It's good that the default track map on the NHC site doesn't use a center line, but there is still an option to turn on the center line. The media could help by not having a center line on their graphics.  As far as what you're suggesting, not a bad idea, or even getting rid of the little icons and just showing the expected storm type (M, H, S, D) at various times.

There is no need for any changes. The maps and explanations that accompany them are perfectly clear.  If you think about it, what you are asking the NHC mets to do is to hide their professional opinion of the most likely path based on their analysis and substitute a general area of equal probability, which it is not. The public has some responsibility here.  I strongly object to adjusting data for the lowest common denominator. It is a waste of time because you can't fix stupid.

[Hoosier]

1 hour ago, jburns said:

There is no need for any changes. The maps and explanations that accompany them are perfectly clear.  If you think about it, what you are asking the NHC mets to do is to hide their professional opinion of the most likely path based on their analysis and substitute a general area of equal probability, which it is not. The public has some responsibility here.  I strongly object to adjusting data for the lowest common denominator. It is a waste of time because you can't fix stupid.

I know NHC says to not focus on the line/center points, but it falls on too many deaf ears.  I wonder how many people still think Charley "busted" since it didn't make landfall around Tampa.  Or in Irma's case, the center points being closer to Miami for a while and then it ultimately made landfall on the western side of the state.  imo, any steps that can help increase public trust in meteorologists is a good thing, even if there is some element of appealing to the lowest common denominator. 

[jburns]

47 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

I know NHC says to not focus on the line/center points, but it falls on too many deaf ears.  I wonder how many people still think Charley "busted" since it didn't make landfall around Tampa.  Or in Irma's case, the center points being closer to Miami for a while and then it ultimately made landfall on the western side of the state.  imo, any steps that can help increase public trust in meteorologists is a good thing, even if there is some element of appealing to the lowest common denominator. 

1

Tha's why we have Darwin.

[mfgmfg]

How about something closer to how The Weather Channel does it - no icon in the center of the cone, but a line across:

[JC-CT]

There is no need for any changes. The maps and explanations that accompany them are perfectly clear.  If you think about it, what you are asking the NHC mets to do is to hide their professional opinion of the most likely path based on their analysis and substitute a general area of equal probability, which it is not. The public has some responsibility here.  I strongly object to adjusting data for the lowest common denominator. It is a waste of time because you can't fix stupid.

Tell that to Joaquin. Watch out NYC!

[donsutherland1]

My worry concerning using only the cone might be that in the short-run, it could have a desired impact. In the long-run, as hurricane conditions fail to develop in portions of the cone during some storms e.g., those with smaller radii of hurricane-force winds, there might be thinking that the forecast was "wrong," especially among those who might have evacuated, even as it wasn't. That could undermine confidence in future NHC forecasts.