Wind Survey Results

Thanks to all who participated in the Inland Winds survey.  We received significant participation, and the results were quite interesting!  I have posted the survey results online in PDF format for you to download if you wish:

www4.ncsu.edu/~bptyner/Final_writeup_wind.pdf

Please feel free to post comments!

Thanks again for the participation!

Advertisements
This entry was posted in TC Inland and Marine Winds. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Wind Survey Results

  1. Michael Brennan says:

    In response to the comment about wanting to know more about how NHC constructs the quadrant radii forecasts, here is some information about how I go about making the forecasts.

    -For systems near land, we have the benefit of aircraft recon, so we have a much better idea (hopefully) of what the initial quadrant radii are. My impression is that generally our initial radii estimates are better for stronger, more organized TCs. Although we can see large changes in the wind field during ET or other structural changes that can be tough to get a handle on even with recon and ship/buoy data.

    -Most of the time, I am trying to capture the trends in the overall size of the storm, particularly with the outer (34-kt) radii. I won’t make small tweaks (5-10 nm) there, and usually make adjustments in 15 nm or larger increments, especially for hurricanes. For TCs recurving along the East Coast, as noted in the survey, this often gets tricky on the northern periphery of the circulation when the TC wind field can merge with gradient flow associated with a ridge north of the TC.

    -I lean heavily toward the radii-CLIPER models (there are two) when making my forecasts, which is based on climatology and persistence. However, for stronger/larger TCs, we also get guidance from the GFDL and HWRF that can be useful for the hurricane-force radii. Also, the global models such as the GFS can be helpful with the 34 and occasionally 50-kt radii for stronger TCs. Given that these are quadrant radii, I try to be conservative when making the forecast.

    -I try to account for land effects for quadrants that are forecast to be over land, particularly in the shorter term part of the forecast (within 48 hours). At longer time ranges, I don’t try to get too cute with the radii forecasts given how large our average track forecast error can be.

    -One note that my be of interest: The wind speed probability products do *not* use our wind radii forecasts. They use a CLIPER model that takes into account the initial wind radii we specify and then decays those radii toward climatology for the 1,000 realizations that go into the 34, 50, and 64 kt point probabilities.

    I hope this helps answer some questions. These thoughts are based on what I do, and the other hurricane specialists may have different ways of approaching what is obviously a difficult forecast challenge.

    Mike

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s