ATL: INVEST 92L - Models

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
ROCK
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 9254
Age: 53
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 7:30 am
Location: Kemah, Texas

Re: ATL: INVEST 92L - Models

#301 Postby ROCK » Fri Aug 16, 2013 2:15 pm

:uarrow: someone said they would eat their hat if this came to Texas....LESTER I am calling you out.....lol
0 likes   

User avatar
brunota2003
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 9476
Age: 33
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 9:56 pm
Location: Stanton, KY...formerly Havelock, NC
Contact:

Re: Re:

#302 Postby brunota2003 » Fri Aug 16, 2013 2:18 pm

Portastorm wrote:
brunota2003 wrote:What was the TS that formed and hit Texas a couple years back? The one that went from full of convection offshore to absolutely nothing in a matter of 4 or 6 hrs?


Tropical Storm Don in 2011. The saddest excuse for a named system many of us have ever seen.

That's the one. Any chance this system could repeat that, since Texas is so dry?
0 likes   
Just a small town southern boy helping other humans.

Bailey1777
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 6:23 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

#303 Postby Bailey1777 » Fri Aug 16, 2013 2:20 pm

hey rock isnt there a small window so that if it doesnt start nw ward itll get blocked and sent west?
0 likes   

User avatar
ROCK
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 9254
Age: 53
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 7:30 am
Location: Kemah, Texas

Re:

#304 Postby ROCK » Fri Aug 16, 2013 2:23 pm

Bailey1777 wrote:hey rock isnt there a small window so that if it doesnt start nw ward itll get blocked and sent west?


there has always been a small window with 92L...I still think MX or STX and a slight chance for mid-Texas coast but again no guidance suggests anything more than a weak TD or TS.
0 likes   

User avatar
Nikki
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:38 pm
Location: Santa Fe, TX (yes I typed that right TEXAS not New Mexico, I am about 20 miles from Galveston, TX)

Re: Re:

#305 Postby Nikki » Fri Aug 16, 2013 2:23 pm

brunota2003 wrote:
Portastorm wrote:
brunota2003 wrote:What was the TS that formed and hit Texas a couple years back? The one that went from full of convection offshore to absolutely nothing in a matter of 4 or 6 hrs?


Tropical Storm Don in 2011. The saddest excuse for a named system many of us have ever seen.

That's the one. Any chance this system could repeat that, since Texas is so dry?



I am not a pro, but Texas isn't as dry as we were in 2011....hopefully that would help it not eat Don! :D
0 likes   
My name is Nicole and this is what I go by in Storm2k chat! Come chat with us! We have fun in there too!!

A teacher's purpose is not to create students in her own image, but to develop students who can create their own image. ~Author Unknown

Alicia, Allison, Rita, Ike

User avatar
Portastorm
Storm2k Moderator
Storm2k Moderator
Posts: 9787
Age: 61
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2003 9:16 am
Location: South Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Re:

#306 Postby Portastorm » Fri Aug 16, 2013 2:26 pm

perk wrote:
Portastorm wrote:
brunota2003 wrote:What was the TS that formed and hit Texas a couple years back? The one that went from full of convection offshore to absolutely nothing in a matter of 4 or 6 hrs?


Tropical Storm Don in 2011. The saddest excuse for a named system many of us have ever seen.



Portastorm what's your take on the 18z models posted by cycloneye.


I would go back to what wxman57 said a few hours ago ... any track at this point is highly suspect. I mean ... we're still dealing with just a semi-naked low level swirl. I wouldn't trust any model outcome until/if this system gets its act together. Then you can start looking at things like where did the model initialize the system, etc. Until then, I think any hooting and hollering about where 92L may end up is just that ... hooting and hollering. :wink:

Hopefully at the very least it will increase moisture values in south Texas and provide a more active seabreeze or more active diurnal convective cycle next week.
0 likes   
Any forecasts under my name are to be taken with a grain of salt. Get your best forecasts from the National Weather Service and National Hurricane Center.

I'm a certified Advanced SKYWARN-trained spotter and am active on Twitter at @TravisCOSW, a social media partner of the NWS Austin-San Antonio office.

User avatar
Rgv20
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 2456
Age: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Edinburg/McAllen Tx

#307 Postby Rgv20 » Fri Aug 16, 2013 3:31 pm

12zECMWF Ensembles are still hinting at 92L possibly organizing a bit more in the Western GOM in 48 to 72hrs.


Forecast for Monday Morning
Image

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
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.

Javlin
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1568
Age: 62
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 7:58 pm
Location: ms gulf coast

Re: ATL: INVEST 92L - Models

#308 Postby Javlin » Fri Aug 16, 2013 6:05 pm

I have been looking at the FIM and it for one has not deviated form the NGOM for a few days now.On 8/13 was TX/LA line to AL/FL line today none of the windshield wiper stuff.I like to see how this model plays out could be one of interest for future reference.
0 likes   

User avatar
ROCK
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 9254
Age: 53
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 7:30 am
Location: Kemah, Texas

Re: ATL: INVEST 92L - Models

#309 Postby ROCK » Fri Aug 16, 2013 7:42 pm

0 likes   

User avatar
NDG
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 14933
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:14 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: ATL: INVEST 92L - Models

#310 Postby NDG » Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:48 pm

Interesting that the 0z early tropical models were started on the dying LLC moving southward.
In another words, those models are trash, IMO.
0 likes   

Stormlover2012
Category 1
Category 1
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 11:03 am

Re: ATL: INVEST 92L - Models

#311 Postby Stormlover2012 » Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:50 pm

Yeah I was about to say the same thing, intialization was horrible.
0 likes   

Bailey1777
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 6:23 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

#312 Postby Bailey1777 » Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:58 pm

hey rock i like that spaghetti....now if we could get a player you know.
0 likes   

Alyono
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 6961
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2013 3:52 pm
Location: Texas Coast

#313 Postby Alyono » Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:08 pm

EC ensembles have only about a 50 percent chance of development
0 likes   

User avatar
LaBreeze
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1497
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 1:57 pm
Location: SW Louisiana

Re:

#314 Postby LaBreeze » Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:13 pm

Bailey1777 wrote:hey rock i like that spaghetti....now if we could get a player you know.


Lots of spaghetti, but where's the meatball?
0 likes   

User avatar
gatorcane
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 23499
Age: 46
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 3:54 pm
Location: Boca Raton, FL

#315 Postby gatorcane » Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:22 am

Looking back at what the models originally showed what would happen with this invest this weekend in the Mon-Wed timeframe this past week, it's interesting that the ECMWF/UKMET solutions seems to have gotten it right which basically called for no development and the low-level vorticity to head towards the BOC and get stretched out.

On the other hand, the GFS/FIM/CMC did not get the outcome correct which repeatedly called for NW GOM and Northern GOM solutions with a consolidated system heading towards the north. Yes, those models eventually stopped showing this solution but after the ECMWF/UKMET already picked up on that several days earlier.

Levi Cowan did say in his update last Wed. the ECMWF is better at handling the synoptic pattern than the GFS with systems in the Western Caribbean where 92L formed and it looks like that model has proven itself again.
0 likes   

User avatar
ROCK
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 9254
Age: 53
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 7:30 am
Location: Kemah, Texas

Re:

#316 Postby ROCK » Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:44 am

gatorcane wrote:Looking back at what the models originally showed what would happen with this invest this weekend in the Mon-Wed timeframe this past week, it's interesting that the ECMWF/UKMET solutions seems to have gotten it right which basically called for no development and the low-level vorticity to head towards the BOC and get stretched out.

On the other hand, the GFS/FIM/CMC did not get the outcome correct which repeatedly called for NW GOM and Northern GOM solutions with a consolidated system heading towards the north. Yes, those models eventually stopped showing this solution but after the ECMWF/UKMET already picked up on that several days earlier.

Levi Cowan did say in his update last Wed. the ECMWF is better at handling the synoptic pattern than the GFS with systems in the Western Caribbean where 92L formed and it looks like that model has proven itself again.



agree....its hard to go against the EURO as many NWS METS rely heavily on it....
0 likes   

User avatar
ROCK
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 9254
Age: 53
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 7:30 am
Location: Kemah, Texas

Re: ATL: INVEST 92L - Models

#317 Postby ROCK » Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:45 am

NDG wrote:Interesting that the 0z early tropical models were started on the dying LLC moving southward.
In another words, those models are trash, IMO.



really, the dying LLC is the only thing keeping 92L alive as seen on this am scans....
0 likes   

User avatar
Kingarabian
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 15437
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 3:06 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

#318 Postby Kingarabian » Sun Aug 18, 2013 2:32 pm

I guess that FIM model busted as well.

The NOGAPS and the CMC also busted.

GFS corrected itself and followed the ECMWF.
0 likes   
RIP Kobe Bryant


Return to “2013”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests