SouthFLTropics wrote:I think the proximity of PTC 9 may be an issue in the early going. WXMAN mentioned this possibility on the discussion board.
PTC 9 not much better organization, per GFS, early going...
Moderator: S2k Moderators
SouthFLTropics wrote:I think the proximity of PTC 9 may be an issue in the early going. WXMAN mentioned this possibility on the discussion board.
sma10 wrote:Quite comical actually - thru 96hrs, GFS says 91L, 92L and future 93L is a whole bunch of nothing. Looks like the NHC forecasters may have to go old school the next few days and nowcast with their eyes.
SouthFLTropics wrote:96 Hours...No love for 92L![]()
Hurricaneman wrote:SouthFLTropics wrote:96 Hours...No love for 92L![]()
Every other model is on board so it's probably something wrong in the GFS programming
gatorcane wrote:Despite having a small upper anticyclone over 92L and a larger one over 91L, GFS refuses to show development of both.
SouthFLTropics wrote:132 Hours
Steve wrote:SouthFLTropics wrote:132 Hours
That's astonishing. I'll bet anyone a $100.00 site donation that there is more activity at 132 hours than the GFS is leading on. Anybody.
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Stormybajan and 8 guests