• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Tropical Major Hurricane Michael

1300m said:
I never said 90F lol. I said approximately 90, as in I didn't feel like looking up the exact number. I'm well aware SSTs weren't 90F.
Click to expand...

The point is approximately 90F was an egregious approximation to make when you compare apples-apples given how much of a difference even 1 or 2F makes in a hurricane and the error in wind it can yield is something already on the order of 15-20 mph.
 
You could have said mid 80s. I think you where trying to over hype the situation. But don’t worry we will see 90F sea temps very soon as global warming continues to accelerate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1300m said:
It's called generalization. I'm well aware of what the actual SSTs are. How can you over-hype Micahel btw? Why don't you ask the people in Mexico Beach how much the storm should have been hyped? Great comment.
Click to expand...

It could have and will get worse. Sub 900mb storms making landfall are in our near future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1300m said:
So why have you not been on a campaign against the NHC for saying > 85F?
Click to expand...

Because > 85F is still 86F. Round that up to 90F changes the potential kinetic energy from a stereotypical category 4 hurricane to Gilbert (1988)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
1300m said:
We already know what the hurricane's strength was, that entire argument is baseless and irrelevant. This was a post-landfall approximation of SSTs, plain and simple. > 85F can be 100F.
Click to expand...

It's pointless to state it's greater than 85 knowing they're values closer to 95F being observed that better represent the total field being measured.
 
1300m said:
Exactly. So the NHC was more egregiously wrong than I was. Why don't you start emailing them (I have some contacts) and you can share your beefs with them. I'm sure that'll be a wise career move.
Click to expand...

They weren't "more wrong" because SSTs actually were greater than 85 but they weren't approximately 90 like you claimed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
1300m said:
>85 as no upper limit. Approximately 90 has an upper limit of 89.9. More wrong. I'm over you, you can believe that.
Click to expand...

It would be pointless to go anything more than a degree or two from the actual values we know exist from ships, buoys, and satellites because unlike you the NHC knows the difference in kinetic energy it can mean for a storm.
 
I think it's sometimes better to be of fewer words instead of getting into an argument.

A lot of us are here because weather is a hobby for us and we'd like to learn, instead of reading stretches of an argument.

(PS: Other board, and no not that one that gets blotted out here, had people arguing about the intensity about 6-12 hours after the storm made landfall, it was so stupid.)
 
1300m said:
Haha I didn't delete my original account, you obviously are having some trouble comprehending what's actually going on here, per usual. But I'll let you in on this, once I'm gone, the board now sees just what a petulant child they're left with.
Click to expand...

Webberweather53 said:
Good riddance.
Click to expand...

So as Licensed Professional Counselor my going rate for couples counseling is $120 an hr. but for the two of you I am willing to drop it to $95 an hr.

Can we please give it a rest for now. The storm is over and done with. Instead of arguing back-and-forth about the storm...can we keep in mind that lives have been forever changed by this catastrophic event.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
whatalife said:
So as Licensed Professional Counselor my going rate for couples counseling is $120 an hr. but for the two of you I am willing to drop it to $95 an hr.

Can we please give it a rest for now. The storm is over and done with. Instead of arguing back-and-forth about the storm...can we keep in mind that lives have been forever changed by this catastrophic event.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Glad my hourly services aren't required ... LOL
 
On the wind, there were counties in SE or East central VA with over 90% power outages. Watching radar last night you could clearly see the COC was well north of anything modeled so I think that pulled a lot of the advertised extreme wind north with it. Outages in NC were still impressive, just think it would have been worse there if the low exited at the VA NC border like it was modeled.

Enjoy the nice weather post Michael and hope no one on here had any losses!
 
Nomanslandva said:
On the wind, there were counties in SE or East central VA with over 90% power outages. Watching radar last night you could clearly see the COC was well north of anything modeled so I think that pulled a lot of the advertised extreme wind north with it. Outages in NC were still impressive, just think it would have been worse there if the low exited at the VA NC border like it was modeled.

Enjoy the nice weather post Michael and hope no one on here had any losses!
Click to expand...
It definitely went further north than advertised, also taking the tornado threat more north... and you are correct I imagine the power outages would have far exceeded Florence had it traveled east along the border. Still NC had over 600K without power last night which was pretty crazy. And I'm guessing Va was not prepared for what hit them... Michael was it's own storm, history maker and beast, glad it's gone
 
WeatherLC said:
I survived the storm. Lost my car but I survived
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear about the loss but at least you made it. What was the experience like? Was surge pretty bad where you were?

On another note I have to say the 3km NAM probably did the best job overall with the wind gust potential and the rain shield as well. It showed winds gusting 55-70mph in that band versus the 70-90 the HRRR had which appears to have been overdone a little bit. The local tv mets and even the NWS really dropped the ball on this one by waiting until basically the morning of to mention the strong winds that would be impacting western and even central NC. Many were caught off guard by all the wind Michael brought and unfortunately it appears there have been some fatalities in Virginia due to the flooding.
 
snowlover91 said:
Sorry to hear about the loss but at least you made it. What was the experience like? Was surge pretty bad where you were?

On another note I have to say the 3km NAM probably did the best job overall with the wind gust potential and the rain shield as well. It showed winds gusting 55-70mph in that band versus the 70-90 the HRRR had which appears to have been overdone a little bit. The local tv mets and even the NWS really dropped the ball on this one by waiting until basically the morning of to mention the strong winds that would be impacting western and even central NC. Many were caught off guard by all the wind Michael brought and unfortunately it appears there have been some fatalities in Virginia due to the flooding.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think the HRRR has an over mixing bias in the BL that caused it to have stronger surface winds than forecast, it's the same reason this model tends to struggle w/ CAD erosion.
 
Webberweather53 said:
Yeah I think the HRRR has an over mixing bias in the BL that caused it to have stronger surface winds than forecast, it's the same reason this model tends to struggle w/ CAD erosion.
Click to expand...

It could also be that the HRRR seems to really struggle outside of the 8-10 hour range, once we hit that point I noticed it quickly started coming back down to more reasonable numbers whereas the 3km was quite consistent the entire time. Does the mixing bias in the BL tend to be a problem it has in the extended range as well?
 
snowlover91 said:
It could also be that the HRRR seems to really struggle outside of the 8-10 hour range, once we hit that point I noticed it quickly started coming back down to more reasonable numbers whereas the 3km was quite consistent the entire time. Does the mixing bias in the BL tend to be a problem it has in the extended range as well?
Click to expand...

Yeah the errors grow non-linearly and upscale w/ time! There's also a significant contribution from convective feedback in the model here that likely unrealistically enhanced surface winds locally.
 
Webberweather53 said:
Yeah the errors grow non-linearly and upscale w/ time! There's also a significant contribution from convective feedback in the model here that likely unrealistically enhanced surface winds locally.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks! Hopefully the TV Mets and NWS learned from this one and won’t be so quick to discount the mesoscale models next time.
 
Fox News reporting 13 dead and that the death toll "likely will rise" in the coming days - mostly in Florida but as far away as Virginia.
 
For the record, here's the GOM SSTs before and after Michael:

Before (10/5/18): E GOM almost entirely unseasonably warm between 29 and 30C (84-6) with the 84-5ish in the NE GOM likely at or near record highs for early Oct, a key factor in Michael strengthening all the way to landfall to an historic strong cat 4. Note that E GOM is about as warm as the W GOM:
GulfSSTsOct52018.gif

How much cooling did Michael cause? (All due to Michael since there hadn't been any cold fronts there as of yesterday) Check out this map from yesterday (10/11/18), which shows that while the W GOM didn't cool at all (not affected by Michael), the E GOM did cool from 84-6ish (29-30C) to 81-84ish (27.5-29C)(Panama City cooled from 84-85 just before to 81 just after):

GulfSSTsOct112018.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top