AccuWeather Hurricane Threat

[HURAKAN]

The AccuWeather.com hurricane center issued the hurricane forecast for this upcoming season early this week. Included in the forecast is the threat of a damaging hurricane strike across the United States. The AccuWeather.com hurricane center is led by Expert Sr. Meteorologist Joe Bastardi. You can view his complete hurricane season forecast on Pro.AccuWeather.com

[chris_fit]

Interesting. How accurate have these forecasts been in the past? I went the website listed but you have to sign up and stuff

[The Dark Knight]

Looks like a Gulf season.....

[Derecho]

Interesting. How accurate have these forecasts been in the past? I went the website listed but you have to sign up and stuff

They're generally so complicated they're hard to verify.

And really, looking at the map, other than the relatively lower chance for the East Coast of FL, it's not that far off a ranking from climatology; it's not really much of a bold statement at all.

Virtually any combination of US landfalls in any given season could be spun into a "success" for that forecast map.

[SupertyphoonTip]

Interesting. How accurate have these forecasts been in the past? I went the website listed but you have to sign up and stuff

Joe B.'s forecasts (using the Hurricane Landfall Intensity Scale) have done quite well the past few years. Last year, the Carolinas had the highest rating on the scale, which worked out well with Isabel. For this year, he is forecasting more than double the average landfall intensity. His analog years all have a lot of activity in the eastern GOM, hence the Florida intensity ratings. All of his "zones" of activity are forecasted to be above average except for Louisiana, which should be around average.

[MWatkins]

Virtually any combination of US landfalls in any given season could be spun into a "success" for that forecast map.

Which just about sums up any Bastardi forecast. If the EC of Florida does get clipped by a hurricane...he could proclaim he was only a few miles off and call that a successful forecast.

Plus...stuff like this needs to measured over a period of 20 years or more in my opinion...to seperate out skill. 3 landfalls in a year are hardly adequate for a sample size.

MW

[ColdFront77]

In other words he (Bastardi) shouldn't of issued this?

[MWatkins]

In other words he (Bastardi) shouldn't of issued this?

I don't want to pass judgement on should or shouldn't...my comment is more on how he goes about the forecast...unless there are no landfalls this year...anything that happens can be called a successful forecast.

If we were playing cards against this forecast...the cards would be stacked.

MW

[ColdFront77]

This probably doesn't make any sense... I don't believe I was actually directly responding to you, MW.

[MWatkins]

This probably doesn't make any sense... I don't believe I was actually directly responding to you, MW.

I didn't take it that way...I think your question was a fair one. I thought I might go ahead an answer just in case...

Take care...

MW

[ColdFront77]

Fair enough. Sorry for come across rude... a general mood of someone like me. You probably understand.

[SupertyphoonTip]

Virtually any combination of US landfalls in any given season could be spun into a "success" for that forecast map.

Which just about sums up any Bastardi forecast. If the EC of Florida does get clipped by a hurricane...he could proclaim he was only a few miles off and call that a successful forecast.

Last season, when he was expecting a Florida landfall and didn't get one, and wound up quite a bit off for the zone, he admitted his mistake and even with this year's forecast he mentioned it. However, all other areas were done well, which balanced out his score. IMO he admits his mistakes quite frequently in his forecasts (which is more than the NHC does, by the way), not to mention that a lot of times he's the one that's right.

[ColdFront77]

Bastardi obviously can't know where a tropical cyclone is going to make landfall. I wouldn't call him wrong, but I think things different than most of the population. So I guess I am "incorrect."

[sea oat]

ummm no offense but aren't the forcasting tools getting a little bit more sophisticated like with medicine? 20 years ago only a few ppl had cancer, now it seems that everyone does thanks to diagnostic tools. just my two cents. have a great fourth

[wxman57]

Bastardi obviously can't know where a tropical cyclone is going to make landfall. I wouldn't call him wrong, but I think things different than most of the population. So I guess I am "incorrect."

Right, he can't know where each hurricane will make landfall, but he CAN identify steering patterns (see my signature below). His forecast exactly mirrors what I've been saying. Florida first, Texas second, Carolinas 3rd. The trof that has dominated the east U.S. coast for the past 8-10 years is gone, it retrograded much farther west. That opens up the Caribbean for passage and likely means less early recurvature this season.

[Anonymous]

I do agree with the general forecast. JB has W. FL under the gun, which is our main threat area this season. In addition, LA is unusually quiet based on his research, and that is in agreement with what we came up with a few months ago.

[Steve H.]

But what I see as inconsistent in the pattern with his forecast is that later recurvature would put SE Florida and the keys in harms way. He shows from Ft. Pierce to Islamorada as a "7"? The "1" he has on the map for the Florida west coast doe NOT represent a delayed curving Atlantic storm, but a GOM or western caribbean origin hurricane; unless it pulls a Donna, and she affected the SE FL coast as well.

[wxman57]

But what I see as inconsistent in the pattern with his forecast is that later recurvature would put SE Florida and the keys in harms way. He shows from Ft. Pierce to Islamorada as a "7"? The "1" he has on the map for the Florida west coast doe NOT represent a delayed curving Atlantic storm, but a GOM or western caribbean origin hurricane; unless it pulls a Donna, and she affected the SE FL coast as well.

Well, it could mean a REALLY delayed recurvature, like west thru the Caribbean, into the Gulf, then NE to western FL. Basically, he sees the steering pattern as taking more storms west through the Caribbean into the Gulf. I agree, but don't differentiate between either side of the FL peninsula. Both sides are at high risk.

[Anonymous]

He has two 8's and no 9's.

[MWatkins]

But what I see as inconsistent in the pattern with his forecast is that later recurvature would put SE Florida and the keys in harms way. He shows from Ft. Pierce to Islamorada as a "7"? The "1" he has on the map for the Florida west coast doe NOT represent a delayed curving Atlantic storm, but a GOM or western caribbean origin hurricane; unless it pulls a Donna, and she affected the SE FL coast as well.

Well, it could mean a REALLY delayed recurvature, like west thru the Caribbean, into the Gulf, then NE to western FL. Basically, he sees the steering pattern as taking more storms west through the Caribbean into the Gulf. I agree, but don't differentiate between either side of the FL peninsula. Both sides are at high risk.

That's what I don't get about these types of forecasts. How does anyone know for sure that a sysyem will or will not recurve at 80W. Last time I checked storms by themselves dont choose a side of 80W to head north.

How can the #1 landfall area be directly adjacent to an area of below normal probablility?

MW