Can a forecaster at the NHC or CPHC do this?

[Cyclenall]

I wondered if it was possible for a NHC or CPHC forecaster to request a recon aircraft to go into a Invest or Tropical Cyclone even though it wasn't a threat to land or is probably not going to form. Would CARCAH just tell him no or would they go ahead even if they weren't suppose to? And if CARCAH was "in on it", would the Air Force and NOAA crews go ahead even then without question?

[brunota2003]

It's called training missions

[Cyclenall]

It's called training missions

That wasn't what I was getting at. Were there any training missions for Hurricane Jimena on August 30th? .

[brunota2003]

To be honest, I am not sure? I think pojo would be the best to answer the question.

[pojo]

I wondered if it was possible for a NHC or CPHC forecaster to request a recon aircraft to go into a Invest or Tropical Cyclone even though it wasn't a threat to land or is probably not going to form. Would CARCAH just tell him no or would they go ahead even if they weren't suppose to? And if CARCAH was "in on it", would the Air Force and NOAA crews go ahead even then without question?

It took me a little bit to understand the jist of the question...
The answer would be no on all counts. We don't investigate a system unless there is potential to strike land within the distant future.

[Cyclenall]

I wondered if it was possible for a NHC or CPHC forecaster to request a recon aircraft to go into a Invest or Tropical Cyclone even though it wasn't a threat to land or is probably not going to form. Would CARCAH just tell him no or would they go ahead even if they weren't suppose to? And if CARCAH was "in on it", would the Air Force and NOAA crews go ahead even then without question?

It took me a little bit to understand the jist of the question...
The answer would be no on all counts. We don't investigate a system unless there is potential to strike land within the distant future.

So the answer is Air Force and NOAA crews would refuse to go in even if CARCAH was going against "The rules" by attempting to set it up. Is that right?

[pojo]

So the answer is Air Force and NOAA crews would refuse to go in even if CARCAH was going against "The rules" by attempting to set it up. Is that right?

Q1-'if it was possible for a NHC or CPHC forecaster to request a recon aircraft to go into a Invest or Tropical Cyclone even though it wasn't a threat to land or is probably not going to form.' no
Q2-Would CARCAH just tell him no or would they go ahead even if they weren't suppose to? possibly...CARCAH works right along side the NHC forecasters.... they collaborate with each other to figure out the best option.
Q3-And if CARCAH was "in on it", would the Air Force and NOAA crews go ahead even then without question? We would question the flight... CARCAH usually doesn't disagree with the forecasters.
Q4-So the answer is Air Force and NOAA crews would refuse to go in even if CARCAH was going against "The rules" by attempting to set it up. Is that right? please refer to Q3 answer.

The guys sitting at the CARCAH desk do not second guess the forecasters. The forecasters are forecasters; CARCAH is strictly an liaison between the crews and the forecasters.

[brunota2003]

Would there ever be training missions on a storm that was to pass, say, close to the East Coast, but stay offshore? I know there would at least be research missions, if there was something needing to be researched.

[pojo]

Would there ever be training missions on a storm that was to pass, say, close to the East Coast, but stay offshore? I know there would at least be research missions, if there was something needing to be researched.

If we are flying the storm already than yes.
If we are not flying the storm, it is forecaster's choice.