Forecast maps on track for new look

This is the general tropical discussion area. Anyone can take their shot at predicting a storms path.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Forum rules

The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.

Help Support Storm2K
Message
Author
User avatar
Ixolib
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2741
Age: 68
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 8:55 pm
Location: Biloxi, MS

#21 Postby Ixolib » Sun Nov 28, 2004 9:40 pm

Hurricanehink wrote:Noting should be changed, IMO. Charley hit in the area of the hurricane warning. Sure, it was supposed to go further north, but it doesn't change that the people of Punta Gorda should have been prepared. Hurricane forecasting is a still inexact science, and the public should realize that hurricanes have large wind fields.


Which is exactly why the line should be removed and replaced with the circles - which would be more indicitave of the large windfield. Because the "line" with Charley indicated a more northern landfall, folks further south (i.e., Punta Gorda) may have reacted less than appropriate - even though they were well within the warned area.

I agree - many of those with "limited" knowledge probably do perceive tropical systems as a "point" on a map. At least that may be their perception until they find themselves smack dab in the NE quadrant of a storm who's "line" may be depicted many miles away from their exact location.

Using the circles - sans the line - I believe the general public may be more inclined to react in a manner more appropriate for the threat.

If we're going to agree that the general public is not "educated" about these storms, their tracks, and their windfields, then that's all the more reason to eliminate the line.
0 likes   

Derecho
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 3:15 pm

#22 Postby Derecho » Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:16 pm

Well, this has been well hashed out, but:

1) The number of people in "the public" reading the discussions is incredibly microscopic. I would not be surprised if not a single private citizen in, say, Punta Gorda read any of the Charley discussions. Hence, it could not have been the cause of any interpretive problems.

2) The NWS isn't the CIA; stuff from the discussion will leak out anyway.

3) Heck, even JTWC makes its prognostic reasoning public, and you could make a 10 times more effective case for them to remove those from view.

4) I strongly suspect Derek would get off on seeing the discussions, everyone else not having access, and getting to be Mr. Big Shot as people beg him to drop hints...

"Oh please oh please Derek tell us about the discussion!" blah blah blah
0 likes   

MWatkins
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 2574
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2002 7:51 pm
Location: SE Florida
Contact:

#23 Postby MWatkins » Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:48 pm

Derek Ortt wrote:how about educating the people to use the line properly, or as I have advocated on many occasions, <b>ONLY RELEASE THE PUBLIC ADVISORIES!</b> and keep the technical discussions for the mets, who can comprehend them. The public advisories contain sufficient informatin so that a person can make the necessary decisions regarding life and property based upon them alone. Combined with emergency managment officials' information, the people are fully informed and the discussions are not even needed for the general public (yes, weather enthusiasts will become mad, but when I have thought of the issue, the weather enthusiast makes up only a fraction of a percent of the population and I have also found that the general public is quite confused regarding the discussions; therefore, <b>I ENCOURAGE WEATHER ENTHUSIASTS TO THINK AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, NOT AS AN ENTHUSIAST REGARDING THIS MATTER</b>)


It is not often that I agree with Derecho...but in this case...we have seen eye to eye all year.

Your thinking is nothing less than short-sighted and selfish.. Your persistent need to control information is disconcerting...the spirit of meteorology has ALWAYS been to share information...you can...as you always seem to do...avoid replying to this reply. But your ideas are dangerous. We live in an open society...if the govt wants to handle the weather...and especially hurricanes...then they MUST make the information public.

Ironically...the very venue you seek to "display" your knowledge is the one you are railing against. By your own logic...YOU should not be posting independant forecasts and YOU should not be posting "inside" information that everyone else seems to be able to find anyway. You are by your own argument hurting the field of weather. Which is it? Good or bad to post technical discussions?

Guess what...I have seen NHC discussions since 1993...due to a friend on the inside. Should I be arrested by the secret police?

The concept that meteorology is some secret society once again rears it's ugly head. Should anyone without a poly-sci degree not discuss politics? If I don't have a math degree can I not safely solve a math problem?

Once again...unbelievable.

MW
0 likes   
Updating on the twitter now: http://www.twitter.com/@watkinstrack

Matt-hurricanewatcher

#24 Postby Matt-hurricanewatcher » Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:51 pm

Mw, I agree with you. It should be free to the public we pay the taxes for it. The day the information is controled by the govement is the day I shoot my self in the head.
0 likes   

User avatar
cycloneye
Admin
Admin
Posts: 148503
Age: 69
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

#25 Postby cycloneye » Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:11 pm

Bumping this thread that is important for all to see the new proposed forecast grafics and you can contact Noaa about which is your preference.
0 likes   
Visit the Caribbean-Central America Weather Thread where you can find at first post web cams,radars
and observations from Caribbean basin members Click Here

User avatar
Wnghs2007
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 6836
Age: 36
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Gwinnett-Barrow Line; Georgia
Contact:

#26 Postby Wnghs2007 » Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:11 pm

Mine is to stay the same. Even though I thought the circles looked good the other day. They just seem to big in what I saw tonight.
0 likes   

User avatar
vbhoutex
Storm2k Executive
Storm2k Executive
Posts: 29133
Age: 74
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 11:31 pm
Location: Cypress, TX
Contact:

#27 Postby vbhoutex » Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:52 pm

I am leaning more towards the circles now. They will get smaller as landfall approaches and that would automatically narrow the "area of concern" without using a line. Perhaps a circle within a circle to indicate the probable windfield also without getting down to a point like is used now along with the line.
0 likes   
Skywarn, C.E.R.T.
Please click below to donate to STORM2K to help with the expenses of keeping the site going:
Image

User avatar
Wnghs2007
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 6836
Age: 36
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Gwinnett-Barrow Line; Georgia
Contact:

#28 Postby Wnghs2007 » Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:16 pm

vbhoutex wrote:I am leaning more towards the circles now. They will get smaller as landfall approaches and that would automatically narrow the "area of concern" without using a line. Perhaps a circle within a circle to indicate the probable windfield also without getting down to a point like is used now along with the line.


Well I like it the way it is now. They got a shaded area where it would have circles. So its almost the same without the track and all.
0 likes   


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AnnularCane, Cpv17 and 41 guests