fasterdisaster wrote:Air Force Met wrote:fasterdisaster wrote:Saying a recurve is 'likely' is absolutely ludicrous. Half the models and the NHC still do not call for this.
I think that's a little insulting. There is nothing ludicrous about it. There is a very good reason to forecast the beginnings of a recurve. Many of the models are starting to show a sharper hook at the end of day 4 and 5...into the break.
I wasn't trying to insult you, I apologize, and I wasn't referring to your sentiments. As a pro met you can say whatever you forecast and it deserves respect, and I don't think it's ludicrous to say you think it will happen but some other members (again not you) were saying that he would miss the US and there was nothing to worry about when the NHC doesn't call for this and none of the models give a track where the US would be out of the woods.
This from the discussion.
THE BIG QUESTION AT LONGER RANGES IS IF AND WHEN IKE WILL ROTATE AROUND THE WESTERN PERIPHERY OF THAT
RIDGE...WHICH WILL DETERMINE WHETHER IKE DIRECTLY AFFECTS
ANY LAND AREAS.
I can also tell you that from the calls that they are not discounting the idea that Ike could entirely miss the US coast. Just because the track doesn't show it doesn't mean they aren't considering it.
And...the AVNO is calling for a miss off the east coast. The UKMET implies it (and teh NHC is no longer discounting them per the call).
So...some model is calling for a track that kees the US out of the woods.