| Ricreig |
| (User) |
| Tue Nov 30 2004 11:00 AM |
|
Re: New Graphics
|
Quote:What I do NOT like about #3 is that the circles represents an area of possible centers of the storm, not areas that the storm could affect with storm force winds or higher. Skeeters maps are much more informative, convey the LIKELY path, describe the probable areas affected by the storm force winds and are easy to interpret.Quote:
Sorry if this is the wrong place for this post, but NHC needs customer input on one of its graphics. Take a look at this page
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/graphicsprototypes.shtml
I personally favor graphic 3, but let them know what you guys think. Once again, sorry if this is the wrong place for this message. Please move it if necessary.
The NHC should use Skeeter's Maps for their graphics!
But if I had to choose, I'd go with #3 also.
nOTTO at 11...still 93L
NRL
My second choice would be the graphics used by the NRL take into the consideration of the variable size of the wind fields in the 4 quadrants. If Skeetobite could combine the two, his and the NRL somehow, it would be perfect
Neither the NRL nor Skeeter show the area of uncertainty very well, but do they need to? Can they just put 'dotted cones of uncertainty' around the official 'probable' path just like the current NHC graphical depiction? Best of all scenereos: Use Skeetobite's graphics, superimpose the NRL wind fields and put the dotted 'cone of uncertainty' lightly around it all