TS Ernesto #9 Sat pics, models,analysis thread
Moderator: S2k Moderators
Forum rules
The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.
- skysummit
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 5305
- Age: 49
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: Ponchatoula, LA
- Contact:
cinlfla wrote:Air Force Met wrote:Extremeweatherguy wrote: AFM do you agree with the NHC's eastward shift? or should I still be concerned here in Houston?
The NHC doesn't really believe in their eastward shift...but they had to do something. When Bevin asked the HPC which model they thought had the best handle on the ridge and its evolution...they said:
"None of them. They are all...including the ensembles...having problems"
Bevin agreed...but they had to do something so they split the diff.
How is that for forecast confidence?
What do you mean they don't believe in their eastward shift, what do they do over there .....eny meny miny moo.... and then go with that model.
Why don't they just stop the models at the Yucatan until they get a better handle on things instead of scaring the crap out of people
Like he said....they had to do something since a few of the models shifted east. Since there is so much discrepency in the models, they're basically taking it right down the middle of the spread for now, but are highly unsure.
0 likes
-
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 7191
- Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 5:46 am
- Location: NE Fort Lauderdale
- Contact:
rnbaida wrote:does anyone have a link to where i can get live recon reports?
thank you
http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=88788
0 likes
- jasons2k
- Storm2k Executive
- Posts: 8245
- Age: 51
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:32 pm
- Location: The Woodlands, TX
cinlfla wrote:Air Force Met wrote:Extremeweatherguy wrote: AFM do you agree with the NHC's eastward shift? or should I still be concerned here in Houston?
The NHC doesn't really believe in their eastward shift...but they had to do something. When Bevin asked the HPC which model they thought had the best handle on the ridge and its evolution...they said:
"None of them. They are all...including the ensembles...having problems"
Bevin agreed...but they had to do something so they split the diff.
How is that for forecast confidence?
What do you mean they don't believe in their eastward shift, what do they do over there .....eny meny miny moo.... and then go with that model.
Why don't they just stop the models at the Yucatan until they get a better handle on things instead of scaring the crap out of people
Umm, that's exactly one reason why they slow it down in the later periods. They even admitted so in a discussion yesterday. They're afraid to extend the 5-day out closer to a landfall point b/c 1) this is oil country and 2) it impacts areas still recovering from last year. There is TREMENDOUS pressure on the NHC to get it right so they are holding off as long as possible....the landfall implications with this system are enormous.
0 likes
rnbaida wrote:Mac wrote:rnbaida wrote:
Isnt it really starting to loose its convection? could it be from the shear or is just a normal phase that it is going through?
That "whispy" appearance is not shearing. Several of the mets explained last night that it is a sign of outflow improving...in other words, the storm is strengthening.
that is what i thought but i was just making sure...
Just woke up.. coffee time. Seems that nothing changed since early early AM. That "feathering" in the WSW is where it started last eve as well.
0 likes
-
- Military Met
- Posts: 4372
- Age: 56
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 9:30 am
- Location: Roan Mountain, TN
Mac wrote:rnbaida wrote:
Isnt it really starting to loose its convection? could it be from the shear or is just a normal phase that it is going through?
That "whispy" appearance is not shearing. Several of the mets explained last night that it is a sign of outflow improving...in other words, the storm is strengthening.
I guess you missed my post. There is still some undercutting shear. Shear at a level beneath the cirrus outflow.
If you look at the loop below...you can clearly see some lower level cirrus...probably around 25-30K feet...being blow in towards the LLC from the WSW and W...while the high cirrus...above 40K is fanning out.
Loop
0 likes
- SouthFloridawx
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 8346
- Age: 46
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:16 am
- Location: Sarasota, FL
- Contact:
Ya know the people who want to discuss the synoptic pattern, current changing conditions of the system, forecast models and stuff like that.... it is really hard because there are 25 new posts every 2 minutes. I really do not see apoint to having these large threads.
Last edited by SouthFloridawx on Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
0 likes
-
- Category 2
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 5:05 pm
-
- Category 5
- Posts: 2718
- Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:58 pm
- Location: Beaumont, TX
Air Force Met wrote:Mac wrote:rnbaida wrote:
Isnt it really starting to loose its convection? could it be from the shear or is just a normal phase that it is going through?
That "whispy" appearance is not shearing. Several of the mets explained last night that it is a sign of outflow improving...in other words, the storm is strengthening.
I guess you missed my post. There is still some undercutting shear. Shear at a level beneath the cirrus outflow.
If you look at the loop below...you can clearly see some lower level cirrus...probably around 25-30K feet...being blow in towards the LLC from the WSW and W...while the high cirrus...above 40K is fanning out.
Loop
No. I didn't miss your post. That "whispy" appearance on the northwest side of the storm appeared late last night as well. I speculated at that time that it was being caused by shear. I was informed by several of the mets online that it was not being caused by shear, but by improved outflow as the shear was abating. It's in the thread if you care to dig it out. If you disagree with your colleagues, I'd be interested in hearing a more detailed explanation as to why.
0 likes
-
- Military Met
- Posts: 4372
- Age: 56
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 9:30 am
- Location: Roan Mountain, TN
skysummit wrote:Like he said....they had to do something since a few of the models shifted east. Since there is so much discrepency in the models, they're basically taking it right down the middle of the spread for now, but are highly unsure.
Yep...they are highly uncertain as to what it will do. They even mentioned it stalling as a possibility. The meteorologist in them is not buying the weakness as advertised...but the met in them also says when these models show something...trust it.
ME: I think as long as the GFS shows a weak storm in its runs...then throw it out and the GFDL it is run on. Look at the synoptic pattern instead. That leads me to still call for TX/LA....NOLA to mid-TX coast...but leaning more LA.
0 likes
- Extremeweatherguy
- Category 5
- Posts: 11095
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:13 pm
- Location: Florida
That's what i'm thinking too AFM. I think this could possibly be a SW Louisiana storm like Rita, but coming in at a slightly different angle.Air Force Met wrote:skysummit wrote:Like he said....they had to do something since a few of the models shifted east. Since there is so much discrepency in the models, they're basically taking it right down the middle of the spread for now, but are highly unsure.
Yep...they are highly uncertain as to what it will do. They even mentioned it stalling as a possibility. The meteorologist in them is not buying the weakness as advertised...but the met in them also says when these models show something...trust it.
ME: I think as long as the GFS shows a weak storm in its runs...then throw it out and the GFDL it is run on. Look at the synoptic pattern instead. That leads me to still call for TX/LA....NOLA to mid-TX coast...but leaning more LA.
0 likes
-
- Military Met
- Posts: 4372
- Age: 56
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 9:30 am
- Location: Roan Mountain, TN
Mac wrote:No. I didn't miss your post. That "whispy" appearance on the northwest side of the storm appeared late last night as well. I speculated at that time that it was being caused by shear. I was informed by several of the mets online that it was not being caused by shear, but by improved outflow as the shear was abating. It's in the thread if you care to dig it out. If you disagree with your colleagues, I'd be interested in hearing a more detailed explanation as to why.
I think if ANY of my cohorts will look at the loop...as will anyone...they will clearly see the undercutting shear. It is very obvious. Its weakening...but it is still there and is a common phenom. in these situations....when the shear pattern evolves into an outflow pattern.
0 likes
- cajungal
- Category 5
- Posts: 2330
- Age: 49
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 9:34 pm
- Location: Schriever, Louisiana (60 miles southwest of New Orleans)
I am thinking the same feeling, too. Again thanks pro mets. For all your hard work and time explaining these things to us in simple terms.Air Force Met wrote:skysummit wrote:Like he said....they had to do something since a few of the models shifted east. Since there is so much discrepency in the models, they're basically taking it right down the middle of the spread for now, but are highly unsure.
Yep...they are highly uncertain as to what it will do. They even mentioned it stalling as a possibility. The meteorologist in them is not buying the weakness as advertised...but the met in them also says when these models show something...trust it.
ME: I think as long as the GFS shows a weak storm in its runs...then throw it out and the GFDL it is run on. Look at the synoptic pattern instead. That leads me to still call for TX/LA....NOLA to mid-TX coast...but leaning more LA.
0 likes
Air Force Met wrote:Mac wrote:No. I didn't miss your post. That "whispy" appearance on the northwest side of the storm appeared late last night as well. I speculated at that time that it was being caused by shear. I was informed by several of the mets online that it was not being caused by shear, but by improved outflow as the shear was abating. It's in the thread if you care to dig it out. If you disagree with your colleagues, I'd be interested in hearing a more detailed explanation as to why.
I think if ANY of my cohorts will look at the loop...as will anyone...they will clearly see the undercutting shear. It is very obvious. Its weakening...but it is still there and is a common phenom. in these situations....when the shear pattern evolves into an outflow pattern.
So you are saying that as the shear is abating it is improving the outflow of the storm??? Or are you saying something else?
0 likes
-
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 6684
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 11:27 am
- Location: Houston, TX
Air Force Met wrote:skysummit wrote:Like he said....they had to do something since a few of the models shifted east. Since there is so much discrepency in the models, they're basically taking it right down the middle of the spread for now, but are highly unsure.
Yep...they are highly uncertain as to what it will do. They even mentioned it stalling as a possibility. The meteorologist in them is not buying the weakness as advertised...but the met in them also says when these models show something...trust it.
ME: I think as long as the GFS shows a weak storm in its runs...then throw it out and the GFDL it is run on. Look at the synoptic pattern instead. That leads me to still call for TX/LA....NOLA to mid-TX coast...but leaning more LA.
The models are seeing something the Mets are missing or the its the other way around.

0 likes
- skysummit
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 5305
- Age: 49
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: Ponchatoula, LA
- Contact:
Air Force Met wrote:Mac wrote:No. I didn't miss your post. That "whispy" appearance on the northwest side of the storm appeared late last night as well. I speculated at that time that it was being caused by shear. I was informed by several of the mets online that it was not being caused by shear, but by improved outflow as the shear was abating. It's in the thread if you care to dig it out. If you disagree with your colleagues, I'd be interested in hearing a more detailed explanation as to why.
I think if ANY of my cohorts will look at the loop...as will anyone...they will clearly see the undercutting shear. It is very obvious. Its weakening...but it is still there and is a common phenom. in these situations....when the shear pattern evolves into an outflow pattern.
...and AFM if I'm reading that correctly, and looking at charts correctly means this "outflow" pattern will eventually give Ernesto his upper level anticyclonic flow enabling him to begin organizing down the road. Correct?
0 likes
-
- Category 5
- Posts: 2718
- Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:58 pm
- Location: Beaumont, TX
My gut has been telling me Grand Isle/New Orleans for some reason but I pray not....As long as SE Tx doesnt get a direct hit we are in good shape...Do have a hard time believing a weak front would actually reach us but who the heck knows???
NHC is a firm believer of something pushing more east now...JB i think this morning at 4am had eye over Cameron Parish, La...
When everyone started posting Texas, Texas, Texas...that was the first set of runs....
WOW...ULL near Grand Cayman shearing but is moving away before it hits it head on!
NHC is a firm believer of something pushing more east now...JB i think this morning at 4am had eye over Cameron Parish, La...
When everyone started posting Texas, Texas, Texas...that was the first set of runs....
WOW...ULL near Grand Cayman shearing but is moving away before it hits it head on!
Last edited by Wx_Warrior on Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
0 likes
-
- Military Met
- Posts: 4372
- Age: 56
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 9:30 am
- Location: Roan Mountain, TN
Mac wrote: That "whispy" appearance on the northwest side of the storm appeared late last night as well. I speculated at that time that it was being caused by shear.
PS-And that whispy appearance is outflow...at a difference level. Here is the deal...and I say this for the education of all:
Undercutting shear is hard to see on IR at night because the resolution is lower and the satellite only picks up the brightness of the coldest cloud. So...if there is a -50C cloud....it won't see the -20C cloud below it. Thus...you can't see clouds moving in different directions at the same location...you only see the coldest one. Plus the resolution is lower than a vis.
When we get vis imagery...you are just seeing a picture of what is happening and the lower clouds can be seen through the colder clouds. Now the warmer cirrus is being seen beneath the colder cirrus. The colder cirrus (higher up) is moving out WNW...but the warmer cirrus beneath it is moving E still...although a lot slower. At night you would only see the colder cirrus.
Make sense?
0 likes
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests