| wxman007 |
| (Meteorologist) |
| Thu Sep 22 2005 06:58 PM |
Re: Hurricane Rita Tracking West Northwest in the Gulf
|
Quote:
How can the NHC be so consercative in it's track predictions when 50% of this board was on target with a more eastern landfall than originally predicted DAYS ago?
I have read this board for a long time and have found the information posted on this board is sometimes 24 hours ahead of the NHC predictions.
I have a radical theory as to the reasons, politics.
This board has no political ties to government, we see the facts as they are and arent afraid to make a prediction. This position makes a profound difference in delivery of the facts as they are presented translating into absolute speed. This is how the NHC shoul be, unteathered by politics, more lives would invariably be saved as delivery of information would increase.
Any thoughts?
Yup...quite a few.
It is really easy to second-guess NHC. I have done it on the air a number of times, and on this board at times as well. But one little thing you have to remember is they are the ones responsible for issuing the warnings and watches. A hurricane watch (not warning) costs local government approx 1 million dollars for every mile of coastline in the watch. This is a huge responsibility that they have, and knowing the guys down there, they take it very seriously.
That said, the forecast method they use is actually the real issue here. Consensus model forecasting will generally give you better overall results over an entire season, but on a storm-by-storm basis it can lead to errors. In addition, you will never see NHC make huge track changes at 72 hrs out, and rarely at 48...the will make gradual shifts in the track as the certainty increases (as they have done with this storm). Right or wrong, that is the most prduent method in my opinion.