Rita,Comments,Sat Pics,Models Thread

[jkt21787]

Models have backed off intensification a bit.

[msbee]

Derek, I am sorry. I stilll don't undertsand.
I guess you mean this thing has the ptoential to be bigger than anything we have seen?

[wx247]

Models have backed off intensification a bit.

125kts vs. 112kts

It is what it is... the truth will come via observations.

Let's see if it is a trend.

[CronkPSU]

Models have backed off intensification a bit.

interesting considering the intensification that occured today and what looks to be favorable conditions the next few days

[Brent]

At this rate, it's going to be stronger than 112 kt tomorrow.

[MiamiensisWx]

I think the backing off with the models on intensification is due to potentially increasing shear/unfavorable conditions in the Gulf of Mexico. Right now, there is 20KT to 30KT shear ahead of Rita. Also, the south and southwestern sides of Rita on infra-red look a bit more raggedy now... this may be a trend due to increasing shear. There appears to be less acceptance of a building anticyclone to aid intensification, which is reflected in the models and, potentially later on, forecasts.

Anyone else think this is interesting... or think I'm wrong?

[Scorpion]

I think you're quite wrong. The models must be on crack to think this will only get to 112 kts.

[MiamiensisWx]

Before an argument starts here, everyone just do your best to ignore inappropriate posts by some members who may just want to see a 190MPH Category Five monster and do anything to support their view... even by criticising the NHC and/or all the models.

Scorpion... does such a member sound familiar to you? You don't have to answer... I'm trying to say this in a nice way, too. After all, there is the saying, "If you've got nothing good to say, don't say anything at all."

[Derek Ortt]

SHIPS backed off because of one thing

the previous 6 hours had a 5KT increase in wind speed vs a 25KT increase for the 6 hours before that

Persistence is a major factor in that model as it is statistical and dynamical

not sure why anyone thinks it is a trend, when the model is often wrong because the wrong initial intensity is inputted into the model

[curtadams]

I think the backing off with the models on intensification is due to potentially increasing shear/unfavorable conditions in the Gulf of Mexico. Right now, there is 20KT to 30KT shear ahead of Rita. Also, the south and southwestern sides of Rita on infra-red look a bit more raggedy now... this may be a trend due to increasing shear. There appears to be less acceptance of a building anticyclone to aid intensification, which is reflected in the models and, potentially later on, forecasts.

Anyone else think this is interesting... or think I'm wrong?

That's "friendly shear" until she crosses it. Sly high and nly low reinforces her own wind fields. Some of it is her own doing by now.

One thing to remember is that the models can't be expected to do well on these ultra-strong hurricanes. There's not enough data. Naturally the same applies to our intutions. Expect the unexpected.

[MiamiensisWx]

Oh... thanks for the information, Ortt! I thought other models were being referred to.

[HurricaneQueen]

To lighten this up some. I was wondering why TS Warnings had not been dropped for the SW Coast of FL. Well, we just found out. The very worst of the rainbands is going through our area right now. Thunder, lightning, heavy winds and a real downpour. Haven't seen this combo all day although we have had periods of rain and some gusts off and on.

Lynn

[Scorpion]

Before an argument starts here, everyone just do your best to ignore inappropriate posts by some members who may just want to see a 190MPH Category Five monster and do anything to support their view... even by criticising the NHC and/or all the models.

Scorpion... does such a member sound familiar to you? You don't have to answer... I'm trying to say this in a nice way, too. After all, there is the saying, "If you've got nothing good to say, don't say anything at all."

No, I responded because you were quite wrong about models indicating more shear. The NHC is increasing the intensity forecast every advisory. As is every pro met forecast I have seen.

[wx247]

SHIPS backed off because of one thing

the previous 6 hours had a 5KT increase in wind speed vs a 25KT increase for the 6 hours before that

Persistence is a major factor in that model as it is statistical and dynamical

not sure why anyone thinks it is a trend, when the model is often wrong because the wrong initial intensity is inputted into the model

I wasn't speaking simply about the models... I was referring to Rita. My point was that the models from run to run may change, but we need to pay attention to trends in observations versus the run to run changes.

[canetracker]

http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/satellite/displaySat.php?region=PIR&itype=wv&size=small&endDate=20050920&endTime=-1&duration=8

[gatorcane]

looks like a NW wobble over the past hour or so. Why?

[MortisFL]

looks like a NW wobble over the past hour or so. Why?

I'm not seeing any NW wobble..looks like west to me, just like the NHC 8pm advisory said.

[hicksta]

LOL no NW wobble at all!
http://maps.wunderground.com/data/640x4 ... r_anim.gif

[gatorcane]

http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/DATA/RT/float-ir4-loop.html

[Lowpressure]

Would I be correct in assuming based on recon the TS wind field is rather large and getting uniform?