Revisiting landfall seasonsal predictions for 2005....

[Steve]

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic ... ight=steve

I've got to go back and read the contents so we can see who was on and who was off. I had forgotten about that thread until I read where Hurricane Alley had put out a pre-season 2006 rough-prediction map. When I saw that thread, I remembered they did pretty well in 2005. And while the entire season is a big blur for your friend in his 5th Wheel FEMA Camper living on his front lawn (that's me btw), I'll try to give 1-5 stars on each of the analyses I posted about in the above-linked thread. As many of you know, I personally believe we're on the verge of being able to predict seasonal landfalling patterns in much the same way Dr. Gray has quantified numbers of storms, hurricanes and intense hurricanes. Many disagree with me, but I sometime in the next 5-15 years, I think we'll mostly all be on board with whomever seems to be hitting the landfalls.

Ratings in a minute...

[Steve]

Bastardi 2 and a half stars. He was excellent with his lanfall intensity issues, not so with the landfall areas. Simply based on his ideas that 2005 would be even more eventuful from a landfall intensity standpoint than 2004 (which was a ballsy call), he gets an extra 1/2 star.

Independent - 1 star - they used some of the wrong data apparently for 2005. They've done well in the past, and probably will again as they tweak their methodology. But knowing those guys as I do, they will not be hanging their hat on their failures of 2005 and will be getting down to business (if they continue their work).

Dr. William Gray & CSU - 2 1/2 stars - They underforecasted again which (as noted in my 7/05 writeup), seems to have be an epidemic for them in supercharged seasons.

Millenium Weather (Gary Gray) - 2 1/2 stars - Their June forecast kind of bombed but their update as better (see link above). They hit a few and missed a few. They talk a good game over there, but they overplay their successes and vastly underplay their failures. I look at their stuff mostly from a curiousity standpoint because I don't put much faith in them (despite the hype they give themselves).

Hurricane Alley - 3 stars - They underplayed the Mexican coastline and overplayed other areas of the US East Coast and NE Texas (which to be fair, did take some heavy-duty impact from Rita). Overall, they did a pretty good job (and IMHO, the best of these 5 outlets).

Anyways, that's just my opinion. I'll be giving all these sites another look when it gets closer to the 2006 season to see what they have to say.

Thanks.

Steve

[Javlin]

I was looking for there verification of 05 I guess it's a memeber service thing now?If you remember they had 02+03 verification or it was 03+04 they numbers looked decent.They also will put out in some time the areas and number of developments within that given area.I have to agree with you in part about these predictions.The research paper done in the UK last year along with Gray's work and cycles with indicators being recognized more and morso.

[mike815]

yes they are as they should be they do a fantastic job

[hcane27]

I was looking for there verification of 05 I guess it's a memeber service thing now?If you remember they had 02+03 verification or it was 03+04 they numbers looked decent.They also will put out in some time the areas and number of developments within that given area.I have to agree with you in part about these predictions.The research paper done in the UK last year along with Gray's work and cycles with indicators being recognized more and morso.

They have just changed the site somewhat .... the verifications are still there ... under the 2006 forecast ... free still

[Javlin]

I was looking for there verification of 05 I guess it's a memeber service thing now?If you remember they had 02+03 verification or it was 03+04 they numbers looked decent.They also will put out in some time the areas and number of developments within that given area.I have to agree with you in part about these predictions.The research paper done in the UK last year along with Gray's work and cycles with indicators being recognized more and morso.

They have just changed the site somewhat .... the verifications are still there ... under the 2006 forecast ... free still

Tks found it for january forcast they did quite well only four misses out of twenty they said.

https://secure.fwhn.com/hurricanealley_ ... php?pid=71

[hcane27]

Tks found it for january forcast they did quite well only four misses out of twenty they said.

https://secure.fwhn.com/hurricanealley_ ... php?pid=71

seems to me 4 is too many .....[/quote]

[Javlin]

Hey thats an 80% I would been happy with some of that in my days at MSU on some those test I did horribily at.