I don't like being told that what I see with my own eyes and the knowledge that I do possess and being told to rely on a blending of ALL the models of which many are inconsistant.
Really sorry here but I want analysis.. not explanation of models. I wanted it in 1996.. now I understand the models and I have to tell you something... they are inconsistent fickle lovers. Best left at the altar. You find the model that is reading the situation the best...the environment.. both high and lows and wind flow and you watch it more carefully than the others. If it aint broken dont fix it and if it isn't working..don't use it.
Right now the ridge is stronger than it is being read. As said by Stewart who is one of the all time best (in my opinon) and if you look at the WV (which we use BECAUSE it shows better pics of the HIGHS) you will see there is a big problem and it isn't in Houston..
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
Thread views: 87920
Note: This is NOT an official page. It is run by weather hobbyists and should not be used as a replacement for official sources.
CFHC's main servers are currently located at Hostdime.com in Orlando, FL.
Image Server Network thanks to Mike Potts and Amazon Web Services. If you have static file hosting space that allows dns aliasing contact us to help out! Some Maps Provided by:
Great thanks to all who donated and everyone who uses the site as well.
Site designed for 800x600+ resolution
When in doubt, take the word of the National Hurricane Center