Can these be wrong?

[CocoaBill]

The 5:30 discussion states this note:

NOTE: ALL MODELS RE-DEVELOP A RIDGE OVER THE WESTERN ATLANTIC JUST OFF THE U.S. EAST COAST IN ABOUT 5 DAYS. THE STRENGTH AND LOCATION OF THIS RIDGE WILL BE CRITICAL IN DETERMINING HOW CLOSE ISABEL WILL GET TO THE UNITED STATES EAST COAST.


Is it often that all these models are incorrect?

The trend of which they discuss does not decrease the EC's risk - especially N FL.

[charleston_hugo_veteran]

I was kinda shocked when I saw the NHC model this morning! It has changed a good bit! :o

[Deenac813]

I was also kind of shocked with the new forecast path.. It brings the storm north of me... I will still be watching though.. you never know.. Does anyone know why the shift in forecast path??

Deena

[Hurrilurker]

The 5:30 discussion states this note:

NOTE: ALL MODELS RE-DEVELOP A RIDGE OVER THE WESTERN ATLANTIC JUST OFF THE U.S. EAST COAST IN ABOUT 5 DAYS. THE STRENGTH AND LOCATION OF THIS RIDGE WILL BE CRITICAL IN DETERMINING HOW CLOSE ISABEL WILL GET TO THE UNITED STATES EAST COAST.


Is it often that all these models are incorrect?

The trend of which they discuss does not decrease the EC's risk - especially N FL.

Occasionally they are incorrect but when all models agree on regular wide-area patterns such as this, it's probably accurate. But there are constantly ridges and troughs building off the coast, so that's not usual at all. It's just that, as they say, small changes in size/location of the ridge, which can't be predicted with absolute accuracy this far out, can have dramatic effects on the track of a moving storm. It's not necessarily good or bad news...yet, though having no ridge would probably allow her to recurve out to sea. It's just means more tense days until anyone knows!