Category6 wrote:SouthDadeFish wrote:Really starting to get annoyed by all these spaghetti plots of deterministic models, half of which are trash. I know many on this board understand what they mean and that they can change, but from social media, I get the feeling a good chunk of the public is being deceived.
Use the ensembles to your advantage. Even in the notoriously under-dispersive GEFS, there are still multiple members that hit FL, including the west side of FL. The EC ensembles are actually centered on FL. The ensembles are designed to represent the amount of uncertainty in a given forecast. With the large spread in the members, it is clear there is a lot we are still unsure about in the track forecast of Hurricane Irma. Anyone within this spread should not let their guard down. There is a reason the NHC's cone is as wide as it is. This is a tricky forecast. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
Sorry for the rant.
Amateur here, don't know much about models. Can you explain the difference between the singular model tracks posted on here and the ones you see on the news vs. the ensembles? Thanks!
My attempt at explaining:
Basically, different organizations run a main model (deterministic), if you will, at a relatively high spatial resolution, using the best observations we have. Then we also run ensembles, which are slightly lower resolution versions of the same model (for the most part) that try to account for things we are unsure of. For example, one ensemble member may have a stronger ridge to the N of Irma than the deterministic model to account for potential error in observations or a lack of observations. Another ensemble member may have a stronger trough than the deterministic model. As a result, the outcome of the ensemble simulations will be different. By running many different ensemble simulations, we hope to capture the total range of realistic possible outcomes. We can then use this information to get an idea for what the probability of a certain outcome is. If many ensemble members are predicting a similar outcome, then that forecast is believed to be more likely.
That explanation was crudely summarized and those mets more familiar with modeling can feel free to correct anything I said.
More info here:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/model-data/model-datasets/global-ensemble-forecast-system-gefs