Yea I know we have had many(5) major hurricanes already this year, but were they really all major storms? None of these storms, except Karl, crossed any coastlines where we have weather observation. Danielle & Earl's winds were measured by AF Recon flights, but no surface stations, including buoys, reported winds even to hurricane force. A big deal was made about Igor and Julia being Cat. 4 storms at the same time, but when AF Recon finally was able to measure winds in Igor, it found the 145 mph winds estimated by Satellite imagery were really 125 mph. Julia remains so far at sea that all we have are satellite estimates. Now we have Karl. AF Recon found winds of 115 making Karl a Cat. 3, BUT when it made landfall only 10-15 miles north of Veracruz just after noon today, the Veracruz peak sustained winds were 46 MPH. What is going on here? You might say Veracruz was on the 'weak" side of the storm and that Karl was a small storm, however 10-15 miles from the center should have placed the Veracruz weather station in the eyewall. Reminds me of a discussion several years back at a hurricane conference where wind engineers thought NHC was over estimating wind speeds in most tropical systems since ground truth observations rarely confirmed such strong wind speeds. Just something to think about.
There is NOTHING out there right now that we need to be concerned about. Computer models beyond 10 days are rarely reliable so why start a "buzz" when there is nothing to follow? Enjoy this last weekend of official summer...it'll still feel like summer, except the longer nights are starting to work their magic.
22 comments:
Confused... Tuesday you said, "Tonight's program showed you how truly awesome Mother Nature is to watch as Hurricane Igor is nearly a Cat 5" from the satellite pictures you reviewed and referred to Igor as "awesome" and now you are down playing the strength of Igor along with others claiming NHC over estimating these storms winds?? That wouldn't be because the number of named storms and major hurricanes is getting closer to the NHC prediction?
I'm confused too because the "buzz" about long range models was started by you, Bob, in Tuesday's blog when you said that a model "hinted" of a Carribean disturbance getting into the Gulf. If they're not reliable outside 10 days, why mention it at all?
I dreamed it was cold, foggy and I was taking some killer pictures at twilight in the French Quarter...I can't wait!!!
"Estimated by satellite" are the key words here Caveman. It's like a "glamour shot" of someone. From afar they look great but when you get up close they are not as "strong" as they first appeared! As far as the predictions are concerned, which one would you be talking about?? The NHC changes its numbers as they go! They also pick a 6 or 7 number range! 18 to 23 storms this year? They change forecasts every other month between March and November depending on development! THAT IS FACT! even I can do that...
Thanks, Bob. It's always good to hear from a REAL forecaster....
I do appreciate knowing what the models have to say in that I'd rather be fully informed than otherwise. However, it's still a matter of "take this for what it's worth."
I'm ticked off that Caveman has to question Bob's experience and credibility...
I saw Bob's satellite loops and those hurricanes, they looked mighty impressive. When Bob showed Igor with that classic donut shape and also showing how when the sun rises and sets you get that shading on one side of the eye wall, that we were looking at a serious eye wall and hurricane. And yes until you get the Recon flights into the storm can you tell the actual speed.
I think computers can be a double edge sword at times.
Having read Bob's blog, what he says doesnt surprise me that the NHC would over estimate the powere of these storm...they have been wanting to report the worst so the Gov't can push Cap and Tax down our throats and get some people to believe we need it, thank God none of these storm has directly hit the U.S.
In fact even if we didn't believe our Gov't, this administration is passing laws most of the public doesnt want to begin with.
Caveman, I would be more confused as to why we need a 6 months moritorium on drilling oil. So far 3 rigs have already moved their equipment to Africa and Eygpt, never to return. thats lost jobs, lost revenue, lost oil....add that to an economy thats already fragile. Here was one field that was productive and you trash it.
In the years to come when you start paying $8+ more for a gallon of gas, maybe something then will smack you in the head.
Good grief, a hurricane strength discussion turns into an oil debate?
It's just odd how it's mentioned how "awesome" Igor in a satellite run and knocking on the doors of being a Cat 5 and then it's being said how everyone made a "big deal" out of Igor being a Cat 4 along with another storm at the sametime and maybe the NHC is over estimating wind speeds on purpose. I highly doubt the NHC center is fudging wind speed data to simply hit their predictions for the season esp with the half the world watching them. Of course the NHC gives a range for number of storms predicted... it is a forecast. Heck most weatherman all give a range of highs and lows in their forecasts and those are short range ones, so the NHC giving a range of storms on a forecast that is months out is nothing to be dogging them about.
As far as long range models those that used or qoute them have been critized big time using them because they are so unreliable yet they are now mentioned and referred to quite alot on this blog...
$8 for gas in the years to come? Well yeah more than likely at some point in the future... it's called inflation.
What's your deal Caveman? The satellite views of Igor where awesome. Period. Nothing changes that. Bob doesn't need to retract it in the process of noting that the wind speeds may not have been all they were cracked up to be. I found this posting by Bob to be a very interesting commentary and not something heard from the media often enough. There's nothing confusing here, you just don't like to hear that maybe we're not experiencing man-made storms the likes of which the universe has never seen.
Bob,
Do you believe the mountainous terrain just west of Veracruz would have significantly weakened the offshore flow created by Karl and that's why only tropical storm conditions were reported as apposed to hurricane conditions?
Kitchy-koo,
You never answered the questions that "junior" asked. I thought you were keeping it REAL?
Caveman and Bourbon,
Just for the record, the National Hurricane Center does not make seasonal hurricane outlooks. NOAA does, but they are in a completely different sector. As a result the NHC does not self verify their own forecasts. Hopefully this ends any kind of conspiracies that the NHC is fudging numbers.
Caveman, Bob could tell you that the sky is blue, and you would argue. Go bother someone else and get a life man. If you don't like what Bob says, don't come over here anymore.
OnlyReal,
Why do you assume I was directing my comment towards you? Methinks you're a bit egotistical. Go play.
Wow I come here to read what people say about the weather. Not read everybody fighting like they are still in highschool. Get over it!
Can we please keep the personal attacks to ourselves and stick to weather on here? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Like my Daddy always said, 'if you can't say anything, nice, don't say anything at all!' That goes for everyone. This is not a social slam and pick apart everything that anyone says blog, it should be for weather only!!!
Excuse me Magister, What gives you the audacity to tell ONLYREAL to "go play"? He may be a teenager but his meteorological knowledge is light years ahead of yours. Ive been reading his posts for over a year and a half along with Bob's and I enjoy their opinions. But I haven't seen one valuable peep from your big mouth. How about you go play instead of trying to have a power trip bossing around others.
Onlyreal: I think you may be a little confused about NOAA which is under The dept of Commerce along with who and how the 2010 hurricane prediction numbers are made. Dr. Jane Lubchenco, the bigwig at NOAA hasn't a clue on how to forecast/predict hurricanes so she passes this task onto the CPC (Climate Prediction Ctr out of Camp Springs, Maryland) makes the prediction led by Dr. Bell the lead forecaster and his team. He gathers input from the NHC team and Stanley Goldenburg from the HRC (Hurricane Research Div). Dr. Bell doesn't just come up with the numbers himself, actually the input from the NHC folks influences the numbers the most. And yes the NHC does verify their own forecasts.... And guess what the National Weather Service established the Climate Prediction Center! And yes all these do fall under the agency of NOAA along with countless others such as Marine Fishery Services etc. etc. So in reality yes the NHC does pretty much make the yearly predictions... CPC just has the honor of releasing the numbers.
Actually I guess you could say the National Weather Services issues the yearly hurricane prediction since the Climate Prediction Center is a division of theirs....
Very nice, Caveman. I stand corrected.
Speaking of the potential Caribbean threat; its currently located near 12N 52W or several hundred miles east of the Lesser Antilles. All global models are in agreement this morning of this system developing once in the central Caribbean, however, there are differences in the synoptic(large-scale) pattern between models thus there are major differences in track of this system once west of 80W with the Euro more west sending this system into Mexico thanks to continued ridging over the deep south while the GFS does what it does best and weakens ridging in its mid range and sends the system into S. Florida and off the East Coast. I expect the GFS to gradually trend towards the stronger ridging solution over the next several days since the Euro is the better model and since strong ridging over the south has been the overall pattern all summer long.
Stay tuned!
-ONLYREAL
I think the original comment, which I agree with conceptually, wasn't inferred properly. No one is questioning Bob's expertise, but asking for an explanation (which is reflecting Bob's mentioned curiosities). This was not about oil or politics. The discipline to remain on-topic, not digress into personal opinionated commentaries about oil or politics, is desired by most that read these. The bickering has already prevented anything constructive to come from this thread, but curiosities remain. Now, why is it that satellite imagery suggests storms are stronger than they are? Is it possible the dynamics behind hurricanes are somehow different than what we have learned to believe? These storms appeared to be monsters, but were seemingly over-estimated by the evidence that usually serves to be adequate. This isn't some secret conspiracy, but the pure pursuit of science. I'd say that I believe long range forecasters (like a certain Dr. everyone waits for storm number predictions annually, who is not habitually on-target) had their psyches damaged by the devastation of the 2005 season, are prone to let a little paranoia inflate the numbers beyond just science (not an assertion, but a theory). However, it is apparent we still have much to learn about the dynamics behind hurricanes, their antagonists and inhibitors. When we have expectations based on what should be ample facts, and the reality proves otherwise, it's human nature to wonder why. So, it's science's ambition to seek answers to such questions arise, as well as why they are often directed at experienced meteorologists, such as Bob. Bob was seeing and inferring the same things, but at least retained an open mind to question whether the accuracy of our measurement schemes based on imagery, as they now seem to be inconclusive.
Post a Comment