Exciting News - two more stoms added!!!

[David Douglas]

(with tongue firmly in cheek)

"Gray and Klotzbach, professors at the Department of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University, now estimate that the full 2008 Atlantic basin hurricane season will have about nine hurricanes (average is 5.9), 17 named storms (average is 9.6), 90 named storm days (average is 49.1), 45 hurricane days (average is 24.5), five intense (Category 3-4-5) hurricanes (average is 2.3) and 11 intense hurricane days (average is 5.0)."

-----

OK - year after year it's the same crock. I'm not going to put down legitimate meteorological research, but each year Dr. Gray and his team will send out "updates" in press releases. Give me a break. They raised the estimate from 15 storms to 17 storms. Is there really science behind going from 15 to 17? That would seem to be well within the margin of error and we all know first hand the margin of error with long term models.

These guys have got to be doing this for publicity only. I can think of no other legitimate reason for this to be a "press release" year after year.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

(with tongue firmly in cheek)
OK - year after year it's the same crock. I'm not going to put down legitimate meteorological research, but each year Dr. Gray and his team will send out "updates" in press releases. Give me a break. They raised the estimate from 15 storms to 17 storms. Is there really science behind going from 15 to 17? That would seem to be well within the margin of error and we all know first hand the margin of error with long term models.

These guys have got to be doing this for publicity only. I can think of no other legitimate reason for this to be a "press release" year after year.

<devil's advocate>

Are you guys getting sick of the SPC's updated Day 1 Convective Outlooks? I mean, it's cheating if they update the 6z SWODY1 at 13z, and it's a crock that the SPC updates the Day 1 Outlook again at 1630z and 20z. We all know how junky some of the models can be when it comes to forecasting convective storm environments (SRH, CAPE, etc), What's the difference between the 5% tornado probability and the 10% tornado probability? We know that we can't forecast tornadoes well to begin with, so certainly that 5% difference in forecasts is well within the margin of error. Even if it seems that Tds will be higher than usual and wind shear will be stronger than expected (read, for this simile: warmer-than-usual SSTs and lighter shear in the tropics), the SPC should not be updating their initial forecast, and they shouldn't even be trying to forecast storms to begin with...

If nothing else, the SPC watch and convective outlook were a complete bust for the past 3 days, so they should just stop trying to forecast severe storms and tornadoes.

</devil's advocate>
I'm not a big fan of seasonal tropical cyclone forecasts, but I don't see why they should be trashed altogether. There are some large-scale "features" that are relatively easy to see (e.g. are the SSTs basin-wide higher than normal?), and favorable large-scale enviroments TEND to yield more storms in the mean. This does NOT mean that any particular year will be particularly active or slow, since there are many small-scale details that can't be forecast more than a few days ahead of time (much less months ahead of time). To go back to the severe storm simile used above, if we think there will be a mean trough in the eastern US through May and June with frequent cold air intrusions into and through the Gulf of Mexico, it's probably a good bet that, in the mean, tornado and supercell activity in the Plains will be less frequent. Such a synoptic setup does not preclude tornado outbreaks in itself, though. I feel comfortable making the comparison to SPC forecasts and tornadic storms since 1-2 day forecasts for local storm-scale events (with lifetimes of 1-6 hours, usually) are not too proportionally dissimilar to tropical season forecasts of 2-3 months for large-scale tropical cyclones (with lifetimes of 1-2 weeks). This isn't quite the same, obviously, but I feel it's similar.

The biggest problem I see if the reporting of such forecasts, and the lack of discussion/realization of the degree of error in the forecast. Of course, that will work itself out over time, for better or for worse, as people tune out such forecasts since they didn't verify well in the past.

 

[David Douglas]

You make some good points, but I'd counter that the one day outlooks are driven by short term events driven by longer term patterns. You need to keep the day-one accurate with the short term events as the day goes on (specific triple point locations, cloud cover, outflow boundaries, temperatures, moisture tongues, LLJ, and the list goes on)

I don't know what drives one changing from 15 storms to 17 named storms over a several month period - AND doing a press release to the media. Granted, I don't keep up with tropical prediction methods.

I would also say that a 5% or 10% tornado probably within a certain area is probably more accurate than saying we're going to have 17 named storms rather than 15 names storms this season.

I think that the HPC's tropical forecast and discussion are a great way to handle it. They have also done a great job this year with their "invest" updates. I'm not trashing HPC or NOAA at all - just the seemingly media grabbing attention of the fellows in Co. In their defense, I'm sure that they are doing some cool research and they need to make sure that they continue to get funded by the NSF and AIG - Lexington Insurance Company. I'd probably do the same thing

BTW, I've never seen a "press release" from the SPC for CNN and the media outlets on a High Risk day. That's not to say that the local weather jockeys won't give you the "Stay tuned to your weather authority" schpeel.

Fun stuff for the soap box...

 

[scott r currens]

Are you guys getting sick of the SPC's updated Day 1 Convective Outlooks?

That sounds like a great idea. I'd love to see how everyone does without the SPC forecasts. I think there is a tendency for chasers to ignore areas outside the SPC's outlooks even if they (the chaser) sees something the SPC might of missed.

 

[rdale]

BTW, I've never seen a "press release" from the SPC for CNN and the media outlets on a High Risk day.

I might equate the PWO's with "press releases." They are for the general public, i.e. those not going to SPC's homepage or reading discussions... Not labeled the same - but same purpose.