ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
Steve
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:41 pm
Location: NOT a State-caster

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10881 Postby Steve » Mon Oct 10, 2016 9:46 am

538 had a note that CoreLogic (c) is estimating this to have been a $4-6 billion storm. Also, VA added a death overnight.
0 likes   

psyclone
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 2668
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: palm harbor fl

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10882 Postby psyclone » Mon Oct 10, 2016 11:08 am

Steve wrote:538 had a note that CoreLogic (c) is estimating this to have been a $4-6 billion storm. Also, VA added a death overnight.


St Johns county alone is estimating $2 billion in damage. This will be a high dollar event not because it wiped out a give spot...but rather spread misery over a remarkably wide area.
0 likes   

smithtim
Tropical Depression
Tropical Depression
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 1:43 pm

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10883 Postby smithtim » Mon Oct 10, 2016 11:28 am

Vdogg wrote:Very good post from a local met on forecast error, including an apology. This has caused quite an uproar in our community. Some people lost everything they had and they're lashing out. I feel this is a good explanation.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 2365187416

"Where the forecast failed…

Some of you are angry, upset, or disappointed. I’ve seen the messages and comments, and I totally understand. And I am angry, upset, and disappointed that we didn’t do a better job regarding Matthew’s impacts here in Hampton Roads.

Forecasting tropical cyclones is not easy. A small shift, wobble, or change in a storm’s path, even by 50 miles, can mean the difference between 40 mph winds and 80 mph winds. And Matthew was one of the more difficult storms to forecast. From the beginning, Matthew never did what it was supposed to do. Remember that sudden strengthening in the Caribbean, when it went from a Category 1 to a Category 5 hurricane in 24 hours? Or the shift in the track from Jamaica to Haiti? Or that Matthew was supposed to miss, then hit the Florida coast? It’s not an exact science, and it won’t be for a long time to come.

That brings us to uncertainty. Uncertainty in the track and uncertainty in the effects. We, as meteorologists, need to do a better job of expressing uncertainty to you, the public. Often times, we are met with criticism for being wishy-washy or vague when we try to express the parts of the forecast we are uncertain about. In the past few years, the meteorological team at 13News Now has moved away from showing the “center line” of a tropical forecast track within the “cone of uncertainty” for that very reason: it’s not certain. The storm could go anywhere in the cone, and even, on some occasions, outside the cone. In fact, the current day-five margin of error in a tropical cyclone’s position is still over 230 miles. And intensity forecasts are often off by quite a bit as well. Why? Because the atmosphere is too complex, too dynamic to be pinned down by a bunch of mathematical equations. We are getting better, our computer models are getting better, but we are not perfect.

So what happened? The hook. There was growing confidence by mid-week that the storm would move up the coast, and an approaching cold front/trough would cause the storm to turn east. There was uncertainty as to when exactly that would happen, but nearly all the models called for it well south of Cape Hatteras. And, that’s pretty much what happened. Except for one thing…instead of simply deflecting Matthew away from the area, Matthew began to be influenced by the front in ways nearly all the models failed to see until it was almost happening. Matthew was transitioning from a tropical cyclone into a nor’easter – and those are two completely different storms.

Tropical cyclones tend to be compact storms in many ways, with their strongest winds near the center, the eye. When Matthew was moving up the east coast of Florida, the eye remained a few dozen miles off the shoreline. This is why many areas of Florida saw winds and wind gusts less than ours. Once Matthew made it to the Georgia and South Carolina coasts, we saw the greater impact because the storm came ashore. Nor’easters, however, tend to have large, expansive wind fields. As Matthew began that transition from a tropical cyclone to a nor’easter, its wind field began to expand, spreading north and west. The approaching cold front was then no longer working to push a tropical cyclone out to sea, but was working to enhance a transitioning nor’easter, focusing the band of heavy rain over Southeast Virginia into central North Carolina, and pulling the storm northeast instead of deflecting it into the forecasted hook.

Yes, this was something we should have seen as a possible scenario earlier. There were small signs Friday night that this scenario might happen. In response to those signs, we started increasing some of the rainfall and wind forecasts. There was quite a bit of discussion behind-the-scenes, as the new models came in, that the storm might be starting to change. Was this an aberration in the models? Or were they picking up on something more? And that was the dilemma – when confronted with conflicting information – is the new data in error, or is it showing us something new, something unexpected?

At one point Friday we showed a bar graph that had various rainfall forecasts from four different computer models. Some called for 8, 9, or 10 inches of rain, while others called for 2, 3 or 4 inches. As had been the case with Matthew throughout the storm’s lifespan, we were left with two very different solutions. The time was drawing close and we needed to make the call. The call was made to increase our rainfall and wind forecasts from where they had been on Thursday and Friday morning. Still, it was not enough. To use a sports analogy, we punted. And we didn’t do the best job expressing the uncertainty I mentioned early on. We had caveats to our forecasts, stated verbally, saying if the storm got closer than expected, we would see worse conditions. Unfortunately, those sorts of caveats can’t always be covered in 140 characters on social media.

The one concern we did address, quite extensively in fact, was the saturated ground, and how that would impact the trees and power outages. After coming off of the second wettest September on record, we were worried how the tress, with their canopies full of leaves and their roots in saturated soil, would react to the gusty winds. It was a fine line. Had this storm and these winds come after a dry spell, we wouldn’t see the issues we are seeing now. We learned from Isabel, back in 2003, what a saturated soil can do to trees, particularly pines, when their roots can’t keep hold. While it doesn’t appear to be as widespread as Isabel, we are seeing power outages due to wind-felled trees. And those effects will be felt for several more days.

After each storm, we take a look back at the data and the forecasts and see what we did right, what we did wrong, and where we can improve. We will do that in the coming days and weeks. We will learn from our mistakes.

You trust us and welcome us into your homes each day, expecting us to give you the best and most accurate forecast. Most of the time, we deliver on those expectations. I feel like we failed to deliver on those expectations, and that’s why I am angry, upset, and disappointed today."


This is a nice post thanks for sharing...Now I would like to add something to it but let me first say I'm kinda out of the loop as to exactly what happened with the storm up north as I evacuated my oceanside home in New Smyrna Beach & while I've been home to only minor damage and water I've been so busy tending to my other rental properties + helping those in need in my community like elderly who had trees down that we all got together cut etc etc

Anyways let me say this as a community of forecasters we've got to damm dependent on models...bottom line is the reason rapid intensification was missed in Caribbean is that a computer model didn't tell us exactly what mph but but how many old schoolers were saying yeah that thing has possibility to bomb out! Likewise with track out sea vs FLa and I could go on with many examples but let's think solution. I noticed whens Matthew was <24 hours from FLa I read a post from my former student Aric that basically said "if your still reading models at this point it's just entertainment" and that's spot on at that point it's touch & go follow the trajectory and look at surrounding environmental! And if you did that and saw no players to move the track you'd called both then point where Matthew almost touched ( the eyewall nearly touched south NSB but it opened up ) & then turned - which I did on a scrap of paper in my hotel evacuated.

Now if a local weather person can call the great 1900 Galveston huricane with nothing but wind readings from various surrounding coastal location reports I think we can do much better today!!! IMHO it's time to quit taking all our time & effort trying to perfect these computer models and instead focus more on the scientific theory. I'm not really in the loop with that research but it just seems like we've given up: ohh rapid intensification we don't really understand that & eyewall replacement cycles nahh that either... but we can! I'm sure work is ongoing and I'd love to learn / read but I haven't seen


Anybody remember Andrew? Now please I'm not trying to bash NHC as they do great work & the truth is we'll never really be able to predict the future but what they do is amazing as is! I'm just bringing that up to emphasize the importance... I really hope some dialog can be had and forecasts can perhaps have two components firstly here's what the computers saying LONG TERM TRACK and here's what common sense tells us in short term. OK yeah thats sort of in NHC discussion part of forecast but the general public can't understand that...if it was split & breif to point maybe one normal 5 day cone & one new 24-48 hour analysis? Then if we as a community really move forward the science of EWRC, RI, interaction between storm/surrounding etc etc I expect that short term common sense forecast will be spot on which of course will lead to better long term. And for any of you pros reading this thinking who's this idiot well I'm a research prof got a PhD in applied maths several masters and serve as an editorial board for a top tier journal in fluid mechanics - which is of course what this all boils down to - and I'd be interested to talk maybe do some research as I think a lot can be learned by just analyzing prior storm data looking for key common factor that either lead to or prevented this phenomenon from happening. Please feel free to email or whatever
3 likes   
Disclaimer: while I am PhD who does research I'm rambling here so this post should be taken only for entertainment...use nhc.noaa.gov for official forecasts!

FLoridian living round here for a while: 2016 Matthew & 1998 Earl lived barrier island landfall. Also lived nearby/inland for: 2017 Irma & 2004 Frances,Jeanne & 1992 Andrew

tolakram
Admin
Admin
Posts: 13540
Age: 55
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:23 pm
Location: Florence, KY (name is Mark)

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10884 Postby tolakram » Mon Oct 10, 2016 11:56 am

Anyways let me say this as a community of forecasters we've got to damm dependent on models...bottom line is the reason rapid intensification was missed in Caribbean is that a computer model didn't tell us exactly what mph but but how many old schoolers were saying yeah that thing has possibility to bomb out!


Both GFS and Euro had a rapidly deepening storm in the Caribbean but the NHC did not bite. Alonyo was all over them about it. Models were quite good with this storm, and I reject the idea that the community is too dependent on models, unless you're listening to the wrong forecasters. Except for the rapid intensification in the Caribbean and the post tropical track change the NHC forecast we pretty darn good. There are those that stick to one beloved model that end up getting it wrong every time, this time included. The blend worked again, as usual.

Here was the GFS for hour 162 way back on Sept 25th.

Image

As far as the track, here was one of their best tracks well before it got near Florida.

Image

Unfortunately it got worse.

Image

The rest of your points don't make good sense to me. the models ARE the scientific research and have IMPROVED forecasts greatly and most importantly, verifiably.
2 likes   
M a r k
- - - - -

The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. Posts are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K.org. For official information and forecasts, please refer to NHC and NWS products.

User avatar
1900hurricane
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 3563
Age: 27
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:04 pm
Location: College Station, TX
Contact:

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10885 Postby 1900hurricane » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:08 pm

1 likes   
Wayward meteorology student on a journey back to the promised land.

Follow me on Twitter at @1900hurricane : Read blogs at https://1900hurricane.wordpress.com/

User avatar
TheAustinMan
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 771
Age: 18
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:26 pm
Location: Oak Hill, TX (Southwest Austin)
Contact:

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10886 Postby TheAustinMan » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:30 pm

Here's a look at every track the GFS depicted prior to the designation of Invest 97L. The tracks into the Gulf of Mexico were all from GFS runs prior to September 25. Tracks shifted east after that date, and as we eventually saw in the models as Matthew developed, took the middle ground with a run up the east coast (not depicted here):

Image
2 likes   
ImageImageImage
- Treat my opinions with a grain of salt. For official information see your local weather service/RSMC.
- Stop by and chat on Storm2K's IRC channel (#storm2k on irc.esper.net, or click here)

terstorm1012
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 1282
Age: 36
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:36 pm
Location: Millersburg, PA

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10887 Postby terstorm1012 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 1:14 pm

I'd say the models did very well with the data given to them.

As for why Gordon was not retired (and should have been)---Haiti had no real functioning government in 1994. Remember, the US had to intervene there earlier that year.

I hope they request Matthew is retired though. I don't think anyone wants to see that storm name ever again.
0 likes   
my posts in this forum are NOT official forecast and should not be used as such. They are just my opinion (to which I welcome challenges!) and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or storm2k.org. For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products

User avatar
syfr
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:33 pm
Location: East Central NC

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10888 Postby syfr » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:42 pm

Just got power back SE of Raleigh. Lost a 60ft maple....
1 likes   
I'm not a meteorologist, I'm an electronics engineer. While I can probably fix your toaster oven, you're not going to learn about storms from me!

User avatar
northjaxpro
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 6018
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10889 Postby northjaxpro » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:44 pm

The death toll in the U.S. from Matthew is now at 20.
0 likes   
Monitoring the 2018 Meteorological Summer Season from Northeast Florida

________________________________________________________________________________________

Fay 2008 Beryl 2012 Debby 2012 Colin 2016 Hermine 2016 Julia 2016 Matthew 2016 Irma 2017

smithtim
Tropical Depression
Tropical Depression
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 1:43 pm

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10890 Postby smithtim » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:38 pm

tolakram wrote:
Anyways let me say this as a community of forecasters we've got to damm dependent on models...bottom line is the reason rapid intensification was missed in Caribbean is that a computer model didn't tell us exactly what mph but but how many old schoolers were saying yeah that thing has possibility to bomb out!


Both GFS and Euro had a rapidly deepening storm in the Caribbean but the NHC did not bite. Alonyo was all over them about it. Models were quite good with this storm, and I reject the idea that the community is too dependent on models, unless you're listening to the wrong forecasters. Except for the rapid intensification in the Caribbean and the post tropical track change the NHC forecast we pretty darn good. There are those that stick to one beloved model that end up getting it wrong every time, this time included. The blend worked again, as usual.

Here was the GFS for hour 162 way back on Sept 25th.

Image

As far as the track, here was one of their best tracks well before it got near Florida.

Image

Unfortunately it got worse.

Image

The rest of your points don't make good sense to me. the models ARE the scientific research and have IMPROVED forecasts greatly and most importantly, verifiably.


Please don't get me wrong I'm not saying the models are no good - I work with a bunch of numerical PhD guys that create models and write code for phenomenon more complex than this and trust me I appreciate the work they do - my point is we have to get to the bottom of rapid intensification & EWRC.

I agree 100% that overall the models did quite well on track, but the next step in us moving forecasting forward is solving the unknowns with

1/ defineing likelyhoods of rapid intensification - it appears to be linked to certain subdomains of the basin & only when conditions are set up.

2/ defining the likelihood of what a storm will do when it begins an EWRC... i.e. will it handle it & bomb out or will it spare us and drop 20mph like Matthew did?

And I don't think computing will solve those...I think some old school common sense "gut hypothesis" backed up with detailed statistical analysis..this is what I'd be really interested to do some research on and think it'd lead to some deeper understanding. If y'all know some direction please share - maybe some papers or other recent studies etc etc

Thank you in advance
0 likes   
Disclaimer: while I am PhD who does research I'm rambling here so this post should be taken only for entertainment...use nhc.noaa.gov for official forecasts!

FLoridian living round here for a while: 2016 Matthew & 1998 Earl lived barrier island landfall. Also lived nearby/inland for: 2017 Irma & 2004 Frances,Jeanne & 1992 Andrew

emeraldislenc
Category 1
Category 1
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10891 Postby emeraldislenc » Tue Oct 11, 2016 4:31 pm

Flooding in Eastern NC is just horrible. So many people are facing difficult situations. Let's keep them in our prayers.
2 likes   

GCANE
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 4819
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 am

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10892 Postby GCANE » Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:55 am

Mike Theiss shows us the complete destruction of Baracoa Cuba caused by Hurricane Matthew



Link: https://youtu.be/sac7xsxK4vE
0 likes   

Ken711
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 510
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 12:48 pm

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10893 Postby Ken711 » Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:01 am

emeraldislenc wrote:Flooding in Eastern NC is just horrible. So many people are facing difficult situations. Let's keep them in our prayers.


The amount of rain that Matthew produced was terrible.
0 likes   

User avatar
galaxy401
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1228
Age: 23
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:04 pm
Location: Casa Grande, Arizona

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10894 Postby galaxy401 » Thu Oct 13, 2016 12:00 pm

Looks like they don't quite know the exact death toll in Haiti. One report listed around 470 people dead.
0 likes   
I don't get hurricanes here but I do get their remnants.

User avatar
abajan
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 5:10 am
Location: Barbados

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10895 Postby abajan » Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:49 pm

galaxy401 wrote:Looks like they don't quite know the exact death toll in Haiti. One report listed around 470 people dead.

They never do. For example, death toll estimates for the earthquake in 2010 range from 45,000 to 316,000! Best guess for Matthew toll is just over 1000. From what I've just found on Google, the 470 figure is the minimum confirmed for "just one district of the southwest region".
2 likes   

bob rulz
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1424
Age: 28
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10896 Postby bob rulz » Fri Oct 14, 2016 2:34 am

I would be shocked if it's not a fair bit higher than 1,000
0 likes   

J_J99
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 43
Age: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 9:43 pm
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10897 Postby J_J99 » Fri Oct 14, 2016 5:50 am

I am probably not the only one that thinks that Matthew was VERY close to Cat 5 Strength near Haiti since recon was not able to get a good fix near landfall..... going to be a very interesting post season analysis.

Had that mini-Katrina look right before landfall.

Still praying for the Haitians.... they did not deserve a natural disaster.
Image
0 likes   
The following post is NOT an official forecast and should not be used as such. It is just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. It is NOT endorsed by any professional institution including storm2k.org For Official Information please refer to the NHC and NWS products.

Ken711
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 510
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 12:48 pm

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10898 Postby Ken711 » Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:18 am

0 likes   

terstorm1012
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 1282
Age: 36
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:36 pm
Location: Millersburg, PA

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10899 Postby terstorm1012 » Fri Oct 14, 2016 10:09 am

NWS Charleston SC has released a preliminary report on Matthew's impacts on its region. Surprising amount of wind damage in Beaufort Co which makes me wonder if post-analysis will bump up its final landfall intensity.

https://www.weather.gov/media/chs/event ... ATTHEW.pdf
0 likes   

OuterBanker
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 10:53 am
Location: Nags Head, NC
Contact:

Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion

#10900 Postby OuterBanker » Fri Oct 14, 2016 11:01 am

Sitting in a laundromat washing tennis shoes, hats, things that I don't want to put in my washer. 12 in water in my house and rental. Estimate in excess of 100k in damages. First time I've had to respond. Ironically the Thursday which brought Matthew over the OBX that NHC had prior was actually much more accurate than the so called hook away. Everyone from Eastern NC to Virginia breathed a sigh of relief. And let their guard down. I've lived here for 42 years and my present home for 34 yrs and never thought that our home would flood. Well, I stepped out of bed at 3am into a foot of water. My neighbor didn't have flood insurance and is now suffering the consequences. Federal Flood agents have already inspected our properties. Already learned a tip to pass on. Most of the outer Banks is on septic systems, not central sewage. So water is contaminated with sewage. Flood insurance pays more if contaminated. Get a Mason jar of your flood water as sample for the government. Find receipts for all loses and document them. I guess the final word is that it really didn't matter which projection was more correct. The outcome would remain the same. Flooding from Matthew in eastern NC will be historic.
4 likes   


Return to “2016”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests