Texas Supercomputer Upgrading the Hurricane Forecast 31
aarondubrow writes "Researchers used the Ranger supercomputer to test a new, high-resolution hurricane forecasting system that incorporates Doppler radar data from planes flying into the storm. The forecasts were shown to improve intensity predictions by an average of 20 to 40 percent over the official forecasts of the National Hurricane Center (NHC). The prediction system is being hailed as a breakthrough and is one of a handful being assessed by the NHC to become part of the operational forecasting system used in emergency situations."
Badly needed (Score:5, Insightful)
As TFA states, while the location predictions have been improving significantly, the best hurricane intensity predictions are only slightly better than what can be obtained from a Ouija board. (No offense intended to those in the field; I know it's a tough problem.)
Just defining "intensity" in a useful way can be difficult. For example, if Storm A has a region in the Northeast quadrant with 100 mph (161 km/h) winds, but elsewhere winds do not exceed 80 mph (129 km/h), and Storm B has 100 mph (161 km/h) winds in all four quadrants, both have the same max wind speed. Which is more intense? What if Storm B has 95 mph (153 km/h) winds in all four quadrants? What if the two storms have the same wind speeds, but are different sizes? If Storm C has lower wind speed than Storm D but, due to its slower forward speed or other reasons, drops five times as much rain, which one was the more intense storm?
When I counsel high school and college students, I always tell them to "work on important problems." Even though I make a point of saying that the definition of "important" is "what's important to you," I am always asked for examples of "important problems." Getting better hurricane intensity forecasts is one of the examples I always mention.
Re:Badly needed (Score:4, Insightful)
No one cares. Honestly. Because anyone who lives in hurricane zones is already well acquainted with quadrants and which side of the hurricane they'd rather be on when it passes by.
As long as this is an overall step up quantifying and predicting hurricanes, those little details like that will only matter to the specialists and parsers such as yourself. Everybody on the ground will just be happy that things got a little more refined and predictable.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody on the ground will just be happy that things got a little more refined and predictable.
But who on the ground even knows that things got more refined and predictable?
After all, everyone on the ground sees the same news media clowns struggling to stand upright in the same puddle of water getting lashed by
winds in areas especially selected for their wind tunnel effect. The media is constantly preaching of doom and gloom and great destruction from storms which are ALREADY predicted via current methods to be largely spent by time of arrival. Disaster theater.
When will you ever see a government a
Re: (Score:1)
But who on the ground even knows that things got more refined and predictable?
After all, everyone on the ground sees the same news media clowns struggling to stand upright in the same puddle of water getting lashed by winds in areas especially selected for their wind tunnel effect. The media is constantly preaching of doom and gloom and great destruction from storms which are ALREADY predicted via current methods to be largely spent by time of arrival. Disaster theater.
This is indeed a problem, but when you live in a Hurricane-prone area you typically aren't watching the national news, which is trying to make $$$ by making a spectacle. You're probably watching the local news stations which are relatively more informative. In fact, when Hurricane Gustav hit New Orleans in 2008, I remember the guy on the local Fox station explicitly told us NOT to watch Fox News, since it was just sensationalist and trying to scare people.
In any case, it doesn't hurt to err on the side of
Re: (Score:2)
No one cares.
C'mon -- you can do better than that. Things can't get "a little more refined and predictable" if the phenomenon we are predicting is incompletely defined, to the point that no two people have the same understanding of the concept.
Besides, anyone who lives in hurricane zones is also well acquainted with the fact that the present intensity forecasts are terrible, which leads to cycles of over- and under-preparation by the populace. It would be nice if we could tell, say, three days in advance whether a Cat
Re: (Score:1)
Having lived in the region at that time (panhandle of Florida) I can te
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. And you will notice that they did not predict the intensity surge from Cat 3 to Cat 5: They only issued the "Doomsday" message in response to the storm's increase in intensity. It would have been nice if the surge were forecast a day or two earlier, so that a more orderly evacuation could be made.
If it had made landfall as a weak Category 3 -- especially if the high wind field was over a small area -- and the storm made landfall in a sparsely populated area, e.g., Franklin County, everyone in the mo
Re: (Score:1)
Lets see, sea vessels(fishing, shipping, etc), air travel oh...and a flash flood are really....flashy in a watery grave, infrastructure damaging sorta way.
Re: (Score:2)
"Just defining "intensity" in a useful way can be difficult."
It doesn't seem that bad. Most of the relevant disaster-planning data can be expressed by giving both the average windspeed and the maximum windspeed. That lets people know both what they're likely to expect and the worst case they should plan for.
I strongly suspect, however, due to the rotational nature of hurricaines, that windspeed does not actually vary over "quadrants" very much, but is instead strongly correlated with radial distance from th
Re: (Score:3)
It doesn't seem that bad.
Um, sorry, but speak to your climatologist first. These storms are big, and the problem is that, when they come ashore, each location will experience a different wind profile. Thus there is no single "average" wind speed to forecast upon landfall -- every location will experience something different, and listing some kind of two-dimensional overall average of the storm isn't much help: Not only do the storms vary significantly in size, but the size of the eye varies significantly, too. To make matters s
Improve by 40%? (Score:1)
...to improve intensity predictions by an average of 20 to 40 percent...
Can someone more knowledgeable in this area explain this in laymen's terms?
Can they now predict whether or not a specific tree will be uprooted? Or just give a 40% more accurate estimate for damage in an area?
Or are they now 40% less off when they predict the wind speeds of a hurricane?
Curious,
AC.
Upgraded to Guess from Wild Ass Guess. (Score:3)
Some more advances and we will be at Educated Guess.
Re: (Score:2)
It never will, due to cumulative uncertainty in chaotic systems.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect that, at the Macro level, chaotic uncertainty is overwhelmed by statistical probabilities.
Re: (Score:3)
Why not replace the hurricane plane with a bunch of drones equipped for the task. Then you could have a half dozen flying around the hurricane at the same time. Yes that is just moving the pilot from the cockpit to command room (or where ever they sit), until they make them autonomous.
Given the loss of life record for hurricane hunter planes, the case for drones simply hasn't been made.
The last hurricane hunter lost was in 1974 [wikipedia.org], the prior one in 1955 [navyhurricanehunters.com]. Far more of these planes were damaged on the ground than in the air.
Its doubtful drones would survive anywhere near as successfully, or produce anywhere near as much good data. Storms change slowly. An hour by hour measurement system is not warranted, and all of the tracking work (and an increasing amount of the measurement work) can be
Re: (Score:2)
That is misleading; I've heard other groups say texas has been a loser state for longer. Depends on what one measures I suppose...
Federal indirect spending is probably not being counted by them; and many things leave out the super massive corporate welfare which is not an easy thing to total up (in part because it is corruption related that whole area benefits from obscurity) while all the social programs are well tracked. Corporate welfare beats out welfare by a huge margin (medicare and social security a
Re: (Score:2)
You believe whatever you have to believe to maintain that fragile sense of superiority ya have going on there.