ATL: MATTHEW - Post-Tropical - Discussion
Moderator: S2k Moderators
- FLpanhandle91
- Category 5
- Posts: 1033
- Age: 34
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 3:50 pm
- Location: Fort Walton Beach, FL
- Hypercane_Kyle
- Category 5
- Posts: 3352
- Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2015 7:58 pm
- Location: Cape Canaveral, FL
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
Just to throw a wrench in everything, the 00z GFS is still showing Matthew making landfall in Cape Canaveral in 12 hours.
Last edited by Hypercane_Kyle on Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.
0 likes
My posts are my own personal opinion, defer to the National Hurricane Center (NHC) and other NOAA products for decision making during hurricane season.
-
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 1243
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 9:45 am
- Location: Ft. Collins, CO
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
Andrew92 wrote:tolakram wrote:Aric Dunn wrote:Radar showing another wobble more to yhe wnw to nw. Heading still right towards central florida
I have a calibrated napkin that when I line up the various points appears to show it missing the cape by a smidgen. My technique is infallible. What I do note is that the larger eye may indeed bring the eyewall over the cape, though not count as a landfall.
It won't count as a landfall in that situation, I agree. However, I think it would still be a "hit" according to the records if Matthew's eyewall comes ashore like that. Kinda like Emily (1993), Alex (2004), and Ophelia (2005). Someone correct me if I am wrong!
-Andrew92
Correct--if not a landfall, then definitely a direct hit. I thought that I saw a tweet from NHC earlier today saying that Matthew made landfall on Grand Bahama Island. The eye just barely scraped the island though.
1 likes
-
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 1243
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 9:45 am
- Location: Ft. Collins, CO
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
ncweatherwizard wrote:Andrew92 wrote:tolakram wrote:
I have a calibrated napkin that when I line up the various points appears to show it missing the cape by a smidgen. My technique is infallible. What I do note is that the larger eye may indeed bring the eyewall over the cape, though not count as a landfall.
It won't count as a landfall in that situation, I agree. However, I think it would still be a "hit" according to the records if Matthew's eyewall comes ashore like that. Kinda like Emily (1993), Alex (2004), and Ophelia (2005). Someone correct me if I am wrong!
-Andrew92
Correct--if not a landfall, then definitely a direct hit. I thought that I saw a tweet from NHC earlier today saying that Matthew made landfall on Grand Bahama Island. The eye just barely scraped the island though.
Never mind. It obviously crossed the western tip of the island.
0 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
WilmingtonSandbar wrote:psyclone wrote:fci wrote:
With all due respect when a Category 4 storm is threatening your area; talk about what's going to happen in a few days takes a back seat.
Is that a surprise to you?
It's also a function of the geographic distribution of posters. We have a boatload of Florida folks on here and while I can't speak for the rest of them...when the cane is in radar range...I'm not looking a models. North Carolina will get its deserved attention in due time. But first we have FL/GA/SC.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on one point Psyclone. Even though this board is probably in the top 3 of tropical weather information sites, it has always been notoriously Florida centric. When Matthew clears Florida, traffic will drop off 80% from what it is now. GA, SC, and NC will not "get it's deserved attention". I'm not upset. I know that at least 80%, and probably 90% of the members are from Florida, so I understand. I just wish that the zeal for tropical weather was as strong when Florida wasn't effected.
That's a valid point. I'm guessing a bunch of florida folks will have cleanup or storm fatigue. I'm happy to be in the latter group since I'm out of the impact zone. But the bigger problem is we don't have as many NC posters as we used to (posters will naturally be backyard-centric)...the irony is that this is likely as result of NC's recent streak of good luck WRT TC hits. I'd love to see more posters from GA/Carolinas...they're probably underrepresented relative to their risk.
2 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
Hypercane_Kyle wrote:Just to throw a wrench in everything, the 00z GFS is still showing Matthew making landfall in Cape Canaveral in 12 hours.
it is just offshore
may bring cat 2 winds over Cape Canaveral though
0 likes
- JKingTampa
- Tropical Storm
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:16 pm
- Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
I live on the west coast of Florida so its fun watching all these wobbles. Don't expect much at all but I work overnight and the power here goes out when a leave touches the lines it seems. lmao.
1 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
ncweatherwizard wrote:Andrew92 wrote:tolakram wrote:
I have a calibrated napkin that when I line up the various points appears to show it missing the cape by a smidgen. My technique is infallible. What I do note is that the larger eye may indeed bring the eyewall over the cape, though not count as a landfall.
It won't count as a landfall in that situation, I agree. However, I think it would still be a "hit" according to the records if Matthew's eyewall comes ashore like that. Kinda like Emily (1993), Alex (2004), and Ophelia (2005). Someone correct me if I am wrong!
-Andrew92
Correct--if not a landfall, then definitely a direct hit. I thought that I saw a tweet from NHC earlier today saying that Matthew made landfall on Grand Bahama Island. The eye just barely scraped the island though.
I consider eyewall going over land as a landfall.
0 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
I haven't logged in in YEARS...But just wanted to give some well wishes to all of you on the East Coast. Missed tracking with you all. Even though I'm in California now where the weather couldn't be more boring, I will have to check in more often. Stay safe!
1 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
Ptarmigan wrote:ncweatherwizard wrote:Andrew92 wrote:
It won't count as a landfall in that situation, I agree. However, I think it would still be a "hit" according to the records if Matthew's eyewall comes ashore like that. Kinda like Emily (1993), Alex (2004), and Ophelia (2005). Someone correct me if I am wrong!
-Andrew92
Correct--if not a landfall, then definitely a direct hit. I thought that I saw a tweet from NHC earlier today saying that Matthew made landfall on Grand Bahama Island. The eye just barely scraped the island though.
I consider eyewall going over land as a landfall.
If it has concentric eyewalls would the outer one going over land still be considered a hit?
0 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
stephen23 wrote:Aric Dunn wrote:Radar showing another wobble more to yhe wnw to nw. Heading still right towards central florida
I mentioned this a while back and Ozonepete got all over me for it.
Rightfully so. It's BS to claim a wobble as evidence that the storm is making a hard left turn. Either that or you both are legally blind. I really wish there could be a forum just for pro met discussion. It gets old having to sift through all the noise here. I can't believe how much patience some of the mods have.
2 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
Did anyone notice the weather channel graphic had storm surge listed at 9 to 12 inches on their South Carolina graphic about an hour ago.? They meant feet right? That's a dangerous error. I haven't seen if they corrected it.
0 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
MetroMike wrote:Ptarmigan wrote:ncweatherwizard wrote:
Correct--if not a landfall, then definitely a direct hit. I thought that I saw a tweet from NHC earlier today saying that Matthew made landfall on Grand Bahama Island. The eye just barely scraped the island though.
I consider eyewall going over land as a landfall.
If it has concentric eyewalls would the outer one going over land still be considered a hit?
Still a hit to me.
0 likes
-
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 1243
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 9:45 am
- Location: Ft. Collins, CO
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
About 85 kts SFMR and 105 kts FL in the NW quadrant of outer eyewall now.
Edit: Typo. 85 kts SFMR, not 95kts.
Edit: Typo. 85 kts SFMR, not 95kts.
Last edited by ncweatherwizard on Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 likes
- brunota2003
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 9476
- Age: 34
- Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 9:56 pm
- Location: Stanton, KY...formerly Havelock, NC
- Contact:
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
It looks like the outer eyewall is about 75 miles from Cape Canaveral, and the inner eyewall is about 95 miles from the Cape...given a forward motion of ~13 mph, that gives about 5.7 hours until the outer eyewall hits, and 7.3 hours until the inner eyewall hits (if it veered close enough for that).
0 likes
Just a small town southern boy helping other humans.
- Hurricaneman
- Category 5
- Posts: 7351
- Age: 45
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:24 pm
- Location: central florida
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
ncweatherwizard wrote:About 95 kts SFMR and 105 kts FL in the NW quadrant of outer eyewall now.
now were getting near cat 3 winds in the outer eyewall
1 likes
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
crm6360 wrote:stephen23 wrote:Aric Dunn wrote:Radar showing another wobble more to yhe wnw to nw. Heading still right towards central florida
I mentioned this a while back and Ozonepete got all over me for it.
Rightfully so. It's BS to claim a wobble as evidence that the storm is making a hard left turn. Either that or you both are legally blind. I really wish there could be a forum just for pro met discussion. It gets old having to sift through all the noise here. I can't believe how much patience some of the mods have.
Most of the input the pro mets give is a direct answer to a question that was asked, so I don't know how restricting not-mets would really be productive.
0 likes
The above post is not official and should not be used as such. It is the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. It is not endorsed by any professional institution or storm2k.org. For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.
-
- Category 2
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:09 am
- Location: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
Pressure where I am in West Palm Beach has leveled off at 992 mb. Looks like the storm is at its closest point/starting to move away from me. Still pretty gusty out though.
WPTV is reporting that Martin County Sherrifs are in their safe zone. 70 mph wind gusts reported.
WPTV is reporting that Martin County Sherrifs are in their safe zone. 70 mph wind gusts reported.
0 likes
- Andrew92
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 3247
- Age: 41
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 12:35 am
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
MetroMike wrote:Ptarmigan wrote:ncweatherwizard wrote:
Correct--if not a landfall, then definitely a direct hit. I thought that I saw a tweet from NHC earlier today saying that Matthew made landfall on Grand Bahama Island. The eye just barely scraped the island though.
I consider eyewall going over land as a landfall.
If it has concentric eyewalls would the outer one going over land still be considered a hit?
I think it would. Someone help me out here too, but my understanding is if hurricane force sustained winds reach even just the coast in the US, it would count as a hit, even if the center is just offshore.
There was one hurricane that hit Mexico a fair distance south of the Texas border in the early 20th century that I am pretty sure counts as a Texas hurricane hit for similar reasons.
-Andrew92
0 likes
-
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 1243
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 9:45 am
- Location: Ft. Collins, CO
Re: ATL: MATTHEW - Hurricane - Discussion
Ptarmigan wrote:MetroMike wrote:Ptarmigan wrote:
I consider eyewall going over land as a landfall.
If it has concentric eyewalls would the outer one going over land still be considered a hit?
Still a hit to me.
I had messed up about saying the eye just scraped land. It did, in fact go over the western tip. Also, I think the outer wall striking would be considered a direct hit. Here's the definition per NHC:
Direct hit: A close approach of a tropical cyclone to a particular location. For locations on the left-hand side of a tropical cyclone's track (looking in the direction of motion), a direct hit occurs when the cyclone passes to within a distance equal to the cyclone's radius of maximum wind. For locations on the right-hand side of the track, a direct hit occurs when the cyclone passes to within a distance equal to twice the radius of maximum wind. Compare indirect hit, strike.
With the outer wall displaying a strong wind maximum, even at the surface now, I think the outer wall hitting will suffice.
1 likes
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests