WPAC: KILO - Post-Tropical

[Alyono]

I am tempted to use the dart board method of forecasting given the high degree of uncertainty

[Yellow Evan]

I am tempted to use the dart board method of forecasting given the high degree of uncertainty

I'd follow the TVCE here, even though they may be unrealistic.

[Kingarabian]

So the 00z Euro and 00z GFS switched spots. What.

Basically the Euro gets it pulled really close to Hawaii moving NE and then gets yanked to the NW.

[Yellow Evan]

So the 00z Euro and 00z GFS switched spots. What.

I've seen that happen before.

I'm torn myself. One side of me thinks the storm will hit the trough, another side of me thinks it won't.

When was the last time the GFS forecast a system to hit a trough and it missed? There are several instances of the other way around.

[Alyono]

I am tempted to use the dart board method of forecasting given the high degree of uncertainty

I'd follow the TVCE here, even though they may be unrealistic.

I've calculated some objective probabilities and lets just say they are a mess. No confidence as to where this will go

[Yellow Evan]

I am tempted to use the dart board method of forecasting given the high degree of uncertainty

I'd follow the TVCE here, even though they may be unrealistic.

I've calculated some objective probabilities and lets just say they are a mess. No confidence as to where this will go

Normally, I'd say go back to square one and follow CLIPER, but we have a limited record of such storms in this part of the world.

FTR, I don't mind the CPHC track.

[Kingarabian]

It's to the point where you can't even look at the consensus models anymore.

Right now it's best to use Alyono's marker which is 165W. If Kilo gets there before turning, Hawaii should be safe.

And monitor satellite trends as well. Models are generally agreeing that a stronger Kilo is needed to affect Hawaii.

[Yellow Evan]

It's to the point where you can't even look at the consensus models anymore.

Right now it's best to use Alyono's marker which is 165W. If Kilo gets there before turning, Hawaii should be safe.

And monitor satellite trends as well. Models are generally agreeing that a stronger Kilo is needed to affect Hawaii.

Well it doesn't look as bad on satellite anymore. And keep in mind there's a small conservative bias in the models. It's gonna come down to how fast the mid-level shear subsides.

[Yellow Evan]

CPHC finally doing Dvorak right.



TXPN41 PHFO 220607
TCSNP1

CENTRAL PACIFIC TROPICAL CYCLONE SUMMARY - FIXES
NWS CENTRAL PACIFIC HURRICANE CENTER HONOLULU HI
0543 UTC SAT AUG 22 2015

A. Tropical depression kilo.

B. 22/0530Z.

C. 13.8°N.

D. 155.0°W.

E. Goes-15.

F. T1.5/2.5/w1.0/24 hrs.

G. Ir/eir.

H. Remarks: Shear pattern less than 75 nm from deep convection yields a DT of 1.5. MET and PT agree. Final T based on DT.

I. Addl positions none.

$$

Gibbs.

[Yellow Evan]

Even this is worthless at this point...

Code: Select all

                    * EAST PACIFIC SHIPS INTENSITY FORECAST          *
                    * IR SAT DATA AVAILABLE,       OHC AVAILABLE     *
                    *  KILO        CP032015  08/22/15  06 UTC        *

TIME (HR)          0     6    12    18    24    36    48    60    72    84    96   108   120
V (KT) NO LAND    30    30    31    33    34    39    45    50    53    56    57    59    58
V (KT) LAND       30    30    31    33    34    39    45    50    53    56    57    59    58
V (KT) LGE mod    30    29    29    29    30    32    35    39    44    49    55    60    63
Storm Type      TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP

SHEAR (KT)        15    11    10     8     7    12     8    10     7    14    19    23    25
SHEAR ADJ (KT)    -1    -1     0    -3    -3    -4    -6    -5    -5    -4    -5    -2     0
SHEAR DIR         48    28     9   346   322   334   353   336   314   291   282   282   273
SST (C)         29.0  28.7  28.5  28.4  28.3  28.3  28.3  28.4  28.4  28.4  28.2  28.1  27.9
POT. INT. (KT)   157   154   151   150   148   146   145   146   146   146   145   143   140
200 MB T (C)   -52.2 -52.3 -52.3 -51.9 -51.8 -52.3 -51.9 -52.3 -52.0 -52.5 -52.3 -52.9 -52.7
TH_E DEV (C)       8     9     9     9     9     9     9     8     9     9     8     7     6
700-500 MB RH     63    64    65    65    65    71    74    75    75    73    75    76    76
MODEL VTX (KT)    13    12    13    13    11    11    11    12    12    13    14    15    16
850 MB ENV VOR    78    63    50    40    37    16    10    -2    -9   -17    -2    13    29
200 MB DIV        21    14    21    41    34    31    51    27    25    17     5    10    38
700-850 TADV      -8    -4     0    -1    -2     0     1     2     2     3     0     0     0
LAND (KM)        645   622   644   696   774   771   711   648   585   478   333   227   140
LAT (DEG N)     13.1  13.6  14.1  14.6  15.0  15.8  16.8  17.7  18.4  19.2  20.0  20.7  21.4
LONG(DEG W)    156.0 157.5 159.0 160.4 161.8 163.2 163.8 164.0 163.9 163.3 162.2 161.5 161.0
STM SPEED (KT)    15    15    15    14    11     7     5     4     4     5     6     4     4
HEAT CONTENT      33    50    51    42    42    58    63    62    57    54    60    46    34

[Alyono]

no... CPHC still having issues. That fix is only 1 full degree east of the recon position

[Kingarabian]

It's to the point where you can't even look at the consensus models anymore.

Right now it's best to use Alyono's marker which is 165W. If Kilo gets there before turning, Hawaii should be safe.

And monitor satellite trends as well. Models are generally agreeing that a stronger Kilo is needed to affect Hawaii.

Well it doesn't look as bad on satellite anymore. And keep in mind there's a small conservative bias in the models. It's gonna come down to how fast the mid-level shear subsides.

Maybe it's best to stick with the HWRF/GFDL like TropicalAnalystwx13 said. They've been the most consistent unfortunately.

[Kingarabian]

I've noted that you and others on here have no problem believing in SHIPS or whatever other analysis when it shows bigger storms and greater danger to people. Do you actually WANT this thing to get strong and dangerous for the people living here?

Chill. It's because SHIPS has been off since Kilo's inception.

Actually if you've bothered to pay attention to the previous pages on how bad the models have been flip flopping, you would fully understand.

[Yellow Evan]

Maybe it's best to stick with the HWRF/GFDL like TropicalAnalystwx13 said. They've been the most consistent unfortunately.

Agreed, though worth noting that the HWRF/GFDL had a east bias with Ana last year. No two storms are like, however.

[Yellow Evan]

What's wrong with it? Is it because it doesn't strengthen Kilo as much as you want it to?

I've noted that you and others on here have no problem believing in SHIPS or whatever other analysis when it shows bigger storms and greater danger to people. Do you actually WANT this thing to get strong and dangerous for the people living here?

The wind shear forecast is too high in the short-term and too low in the long term.

We have no problem believing analysis when they appear the most plausible.

If you wanna go that far, the models that bring this away from Hawaii are much stronger in the long-ranged.

[cane2cane]

I've noted that you and others on here have no problem believing in SHIPS or whatever other analysis when it shows bigger storms and greater danger to people. Do you actually WANT this thing to get strong and dangerous for the people living here?

Chill. It's because SHIPS has been off since Kilo's inception.

Really? How? I'm pretty sure SHIPS kept it at low TD/low TS strength to this point.

I've read through this thread with increasing anger at the bias that is evident in about 80% of the posts. Most of you WANT this to get huge and dangerous, for what i assume, is for entertainment value.

I thought this was a site about the science of storms/cyclones. I didn't realize i was actually reading a site where folks want to entertain themselves by hoping for cyclones, rubbernecking at trainwreck cyclones that can kill thousands and devastate countless more.

[Kingarabian]

I've noted that you and others on here have no problem believing in SHIPS or whatever other analysis when it shows bigger storms and greater danger to people. Do you actually WANT this thing to get strong and dangerous for the people living here?

Chill. It's because SHIPS has been off since Kilo's inception.

Really? How? I'm pretty sure SHIPS kept it at low TD/low TS strength to this point.

No it did not. You're not reading the outputs right. It had this becoming a hurricane and sometimes a strong Cat.2 numerous times.

[Yellow Evan]

No it did not. You're not reading the outputs right. It had this becoming a hurricane and sometimes a strong Cat.2 numerous times.

This was the output from five days ago for instance.

Low moderate shear here. Nothing to stop a formidable tropical cyclone though.

Code: Select all

                    * EAST PACIFIC SHIPS INTENSITY FORECAST          *
                    * IR SAT DATA AVAILABLE,       OHC AVAILABLE     *
                    *  INVEST      CP932015  08/18/15  00 UTC        *

TIME (HR)          0     6    12    18    24    36    48    60    72    84    96   108   120
V (KT) NO LAND    20    22    25    28    30    35    40    49    55    60    62    65    66
V (KT) LAND       20    22    25    28    30    35    40    49    55    60    62    65    66
V (KT) LGE mod    20    21    22    23    24    26    28    31    35    40    46    53    61
Storm Type      TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP  TROP

SHEAR (KT)         6     8    13    13     9    10     6    14    18    12    11     8     9
SHEAR ADJ (KT)     9    10     7     4     5     2     3     0    -1    -1    -2    -7    -5
SHEAR DIR         43    30    40    39    28     6    21    87    89    69    77    94    87
SST (C)         29.7  29.7  29.6  29.6  29.6  29.5  29.4  29.4  29.4  29.3  29.0  28.5  28.1
POT. INT. (KT)   160   160   159   159   159   158   158   159   159   159   156   150   146
200 MB T (C)   -51.4 -51.9 -52.3 -52.2 -51.6 -52.2 -51.7 -52.5 -51.7 -52.6 -51.8 -52.2 -52.0
TH_E DEV (C)       7     8     8     8     8     8     7     7     7     8     8     8     9
700-500 MB RH     66    67    67    67    69    72    73    72    70    68    64    63    62
MODEL VTX (KT)     7     8     8     8     8     8     7  LOST  LOST  LOST  LOST  LOST  LOST
850 MB ENV VOR    38    35    33    33    42    48    49    59    75    78    58    47    23
200 MB DIV       159   143   114    96    78    52    95   109   117    72    61    47    52
700-850 TADV       2     2     3     3     4     2     0    -3    -2    -4     0     2     0
LAND (KM)       1830  1779  1729  1675  1621  1520  1383  1213  1018   824   639   546   511
LAT (DEG N)      7.5   7.8   8.0   8.3   8.6   9.2   9.9  10.7  11.5  12.2  13.2  14.2  15.5
LONG(DEG W)    143.2 143.6 144.0 144.4 144.8 145.5 146.6 148.1 150.0 152.3 154.8 157.1 158.9
STM SPEED (KT)     5     5     5     5     5     5     7     9    11    12    13    11    11
HEAT CONTENT      42    38    35    32    27    19    15    24    36    30    18    30    32

  FORECAST TRACK FROM BAMM      INITIAL HEADING/SPEED (DEG/KT):270/  5      CX,CY:  -4/  0
  T-12 MAX WIND:  20            PRESSURE OF STEERING LEVEL (MB):  499  (MEAN=581)
  GOES IR BRIGHTNESS TEMP. STD DEV.  50-200 KM RAD:  14.4 (MEAN=14.5)
  % GOES IR PIXELS WITH T < -20 C    50-200 KM RAD:  83.0 (MEAN=65.0)

                        INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO INTENSITY CHANGE
                         6   12   18   24   36   48   60   72   84   96  108  120
                        ----------------------------------------------------------
  SAMPLE MEAN CHANGE     0.   0.   0.   1.   1.   1.   0.   0.  -1.  -1.  -2.  -2.
  SST POTENTIAL          0.  -1.   0.   1.   7.  15.  24.  31.  36.  39.  41.  42.
  VERTICAL SHEAR MAG     1.   2.   2.   3.   4.   5.   5.   4.   4.   5.   6.   7.
  VERTICAL SHEAR ADJ    -1.  -1.  -2.  -2.  -3.  -3.  -2.  -2.  -1.  -1.  -1.   0.
  VERTICAL SHEAR DIR     1.   1.   2.   3.   4.   6.   9.  11.  13.  14.  14.  14.
  PERSISTENCE            0.   0.   0.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.   0.   0.
  200/250 MB TEMP.       0.  -1.  -2.  -3.  -6.  -8. -11. -13. -14. -15. -15. -14.
  THETA_E EXCESS         0.   0.   0.   0.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -2.  -2.  -2.  -2.  -2.
  700-500 MB RH          0.   0.   0.   1.   1.   2.   2.   3.   3.   4.   4.   4.
  MODEL VTX TENDENCY     0.   0.   1.   1.   1.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.   0.   0.   0.
  850 MB ENV VORTICITY   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   1.   1.   2.   2.   3.   4.   4.
  200 MB DIVERGENCE      1.   2.   2.   3.   3.   3.   3.   2.   1.   0.  -2.  -3.
  850-700 T ADVEC        0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.
  ZONAL STORM MOTION     0.   0.   0.  -1.  -1.  -2.  -2.  -2.  -2.  -2.  -2.  -2.
  STEERING LEVEL PRES    0.   0.   0.   0.   0.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.  -1.
  DAYS FROM CLIM. PEAK   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   0.   1.   1.   1.   1.   1.
  GOES PREDICTORS        1.   2.   3.   4.   4.   3.   2.   1.   0.  -1.  -2.  -1.
  OCEAN HEAT CONTENT     0.   1.   1.   1.   1.   1.   1.   1.   1.   1.   1.   1.
                        ----------------------------------------------------------
  TOTAL CHANGE           2.   5.   8.  10.  15.  20.  29.  35.  40.  42.  45.  46.

   ** 2013 E. Pacific RI INDEX CP932015 INVEST     08/18/15  00 UTC **
           ( 30 KT OR MORE MAX WIND INCREASE IN NEXT 24 HR)
 
 12 HR PERSISTENCE (KT):   0.0 Range:-22.0 to  38.5 Scaled/Wgted Val:  0.4/  0.8
 850-200 MB SHEAR (KT) :   9.7 Range: 18.7 to   1.4 Scaled/Wgted Val:  0.5/  0.7
 POT = MPI-VMAX (KT)   : 139.0 Range: 40.3 to 141.7 Scaled/Wgted Val:  1.0/  1.0
 STD DEV OF IR BR TEMP :  14.4 Range: 38.9 to   2.4 Scaled/Wgted Val:  0.7/  0.7
 Heat content (KJ/cm2) :  34.8 Range:  3.6 to  75.9 Scaled/Wgted Val:  0.4/  0.4
 D200 (10**7s-1)       : 118.0 Range:-11.0 to 135.3 Scaled/Wgted Val:  0.9/  0.6
 % area w/pixels <-30 C:  75.0 Range: 41.4 to 100.0 Scaled/Wgted Val:  0.6/  0.3
 850-700 MB REL HUM (%):  73.8 Range: 57.6 to  96.8 Scaled/Wgted Val:  0.4/ -0.1
 
 Prob of RI for 25 kt RI threshold=    51% is   3.9 times the sample mean(13.1%)
 Prob of RI for 30 kt RI threshold=    31% is   3.6 times the sample mean( 8.7%)
 Prob of RI for 35 kt RI threshold=    22% is   3.7 times the sample mean( 6.0%)
 Prob of RI for 40 kt RI threshold=    17% is   4.0 times the sample mean( 4.3%)

[Kingarabian]

I've noted that you and others on here have no problem believing in SHIPS or whatever other analysis when it shows bigger storms and greater danger to people. Do you actually WANT this thing to get strong and dangerous for the people living here?

Chill. It's because SHIPS has been off since Kilo's inception.

Really? How? I'm pretty sure SHIPS kept it at low TD/low TS strength to this point.

I've read through this thread with increasing anger at the bias that is evident in about 80% of the posts. Most of you WANT this to get huge and dangerous, for what i assume, is for entertainment value.

I thought this was a site about the science of storms/cyclones. I didn't realize i was actually reading a site where folks want to entertain themselves by hoping for cyclones, rubbernecking at trainwreck cyclones that can kill thousands and devastate countless more.

You can't prove anything you just said about us. A lot of people on here are worried about the well being of the people of Hawaii. No one on here has ever said they want this to be a strong hurricane, and no one on here ever implied they want "cyclones, rubbernecking at trainwreck cyclones that can kill thousands and devastate countless more".

[Yellow Evan]

Guys, back on topic.

0z GFS ensemble members haven't shifted too much and some still veer this towards Hawaii.