Re: my blog on the models and Hermine best was UKMET not ECMWF or GFS
Posted by Chris in Tampa on 9/11/2016, 7:44 pm
Two things helped the NHC out... recon and timing.

The models unfortunately didn't always have much recon. And the NHC started advisories when things were still a bit unclear, but things were clearer than they had been.


27 missions total.

Early one there were some NOAA research missions and even an Air Force mission to sample north of the storm, but serious recon started around Florida.

I'm sure the NHC was relieved that recon didn't find a well defined enough center until around Florida. Otherwise, advisories would have come sooner. A forecast made much further east would have probably been all over the place with a lot of variation in the intensity. The NHC ended up doing well. They issued a hurricane watch almost a full day before the depression even became a storm. So thanks in part due to timing, they did very well. The NE was simply difficult and they did pretty good. The storm didn't recover like they thought it could, but the path was still pretty close. Predicting how far offshore it would be was going to be tough and I think that was communicated pretty well. Even before the first landfall they were talking about uncertainty and how it could linger off the NE for a few days.

I don't know if a lot more recon helped more later on or if the models would have still been as all over the place early on, on path and intensity, as they were. It may just be that the models continue to not do as well with something that has yet to develop. The purpose of the NOAA missions early on I believe were to research the start of a storm, so maybe this was a good one to cover. Why does something develop while another something doesn't? Maybe some research will help with that.

We're reminded though why it is good to have multiple global models. It's actually better that we see failures at times from the Euro. Otherwise, everyone always looks at it. A model is obviously not always going to be right, but if it is wrong enough people will still pay attention to more of the global models rather than more heavily relying on one. Personally I have not purposefully looked at the Canadian or NAVGEM recently, other than when someone happens to post about it. I guess out of curiosity I should check them out sometimes. I have not looked at models too much this year, but I guess I always forget about the UK because it is not on the Tropical Tidbits page. ( http://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/ ) I like to see the global models graphically too.
74
In this thread:
my blog on the models and Hermine best was UKMET not ECMWF or GFS - jimw, 9/8/2016, 11:02 am
< Return to the front page of the: message board | monthly archive this page is in
Post A Reply
This thread has been archived and can no longer receive replies.