Weatherfreak000 wrote:i swore i'd eat my shoe if 91L developed lol.
I know Brent knows that, guess i'm getting my crow...

You sure did say that.

I hate this storm BTW.

Moderator: S2k Moderators
Derek Ortt wrote:must be closed earth relative, not storm relative
tallywx wrote:Derek Ortt wrote:must be closed earth relative, not storm relative
That's interesting. What is the fundamental reason behind that requirement? Another way to think about this is to spin a plastic cylinder on a piece of paper. Move that cylinder "northward" at a speed greater than the rate at which you are spinning the cylinder. Plot the left-hand side of the cylinder on graph paper below over time and you obviously won't see any southerly directionality to the progression of points; yet, you can't argue that the cylinder is not still a "closed" entity, notwithstanding the lack of storm relative detection of the closed properties.
All the cylinder would have to then do is slow down within the surroundings and voila, it's suddenly closed.
curtadams wrote:tallywx wrote:Derek Ortt wrote:must be closed earth relative, not storm relative
That's interesting. What is the fundamental reason behind that requirement? Another way to think about this is to spin a plastic cylinder on a piece of paper. Move that cylinder "northward" at a speed greater than the rate at which you are spinning the cylinder. Plot the left-hand side of the cylinder on graph paper below over time and you obviously won't see any southerly directionality to the progression of points; yet, you can't argue that the cylinder is not still a "closed" entity, notwithstanding the lack of storm relative detection of the closed properties.
All the cylinder would have to then do is slow down within the surroundings and voila, it's suddenly closed.
Probably because an aircraft can't measure storm relative. In complicated developing-TD situations it can be hard even to define, what with winds going every which way. They can bend the rules if required for public safety.