NHC director Bill Proenza under fire
New National Hurricane Center director Bill Proenza is in hot water for his outspoken criticism of his bosses, according to Miami Herald stories published in the past few days. The acting head of the National Weather Service, Mary Glackin, visited his office in Miami Friday and handed him a three-page letter of reprimand. Proenza shared the contents of the letter with his staff and the media, a pretty gutsy move for a guy just appointed to the job. However, Proenza's boss, Ms. Glackin, is on the job for just a few more months--on September 2, Jack Hayes takes over as boss of the National Weather Service. Proenza can probably get away with his criticism of his bosses while there a major shake up at the top. See the View From the Surface blog this week for further speculations, and for any follow-up articles that might be published on this topic.
Figure 1. The NASA QuikSCAT satellite. Image credit: NASA Earth Observatory.
Replacement for the aging QuikSCAT satellite?
Proenza has been particularly outspoken in his desire to see a replacement for the aging QuikSCAT satellite, which measures surface winds over remote ocean areas, and has been credited with improving 72-hour hurricane track forecasts by 16%. His comments may be having an effect. On May 24, the improved Hurricane Tracking and Forecasting Act of 2007 (Senate Bill S. 1509) was introduced before the Senate. The bill, introduced by Sen. Landrieu, D-LA, and co-sponsored by John Kerry and Florida's two senators, asks for $375 million to build a replacement for the QuikSCAT satellite. Bravo to Mr. Proenza for speaking out on this important issue! Some excepts from the bill:
(5) The QuikSCAT satellite was built in just 12 months and was launched with a 3-year design life, but continues to perform per specifications, with its backup transmitter, as it enters into its 8th year--5 years past its projected lifespan.
(6) The QuikSCAT satellite provides daily coverage of 90 percent of the world's oceans, and its data has been a vital contribution to National Weather Service forecasts and warnings over water since 2000.
(7) Despite its continuing performance, the QuikSCAT satellite is well beyond its expected design life and a replacement is urgently needed because, according to the National Hurricane Center, without the QuikSCAT satellite--
(A) hurricane forecasting would be 16 percent less accurate 72 hours before hurricane landfall and 10 percent less accurate 48 hours before hurricane landfall resulting in--
(i) with a 16 percent loss of accuracy at 72 hours before landfall, the area expected to be under hurricane danger would rise from 197 miles to 228 miles on average; and
(ii) with a 10 percent loss of accuracy at 48 hours before landfall, the area expected to be under hurricane danger would rise from 136 miles to 150 miles on average; and
(B) greater inaccuracy of this type would lead to more `false alarm' evacuations along the Gulf Coast and Atlantic Coast and decrease the possibility of impacted populations sufficiently heeding mandatory evacuations.
The bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and awaits consideration there. The Chair of that committee is Senator Inouye from hurricane-prone Hawaii, so the bill has a decent chance of making it out of committee to the Senate floor. If your senator is on the committee, please write them to let them know what you think about the bill:
Democrats:
Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (HI)
John D. Rockefeller, IV (WV)
John F. Kerry (MA)
Byron L. Dorgan (ND)
Barbara Boxer (CA)
Bill Nelson (FL)
Maria Cantwell (WA)
Frank R. Lautenberg (NJ)
Mark Pryor (AR)
Thomas Carper (DE)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Amy Klobuchar (MN)
Republicans:
Vice Chairman Ted Stevens (AK)
John McCain (AZ)
Trent Lott (MS)
Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Olympia J. Snowe (ME)
Gordon H. Smith (OR)
John Ensign (NV)
John E. Sununu (NH)
Jim DeMint (SC)
David Vitter (LA)
John Thune (SD)
There is no activity in the tropical Atlantic worth mentioning, and none of the computer models are forecasting any development over the coming week. I'll have a new blog on Wednesday.
Jeff Masters
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 — Blog Index
Chris and Ernesto tracks, IF (IF being keyword) this year were to be like 2006 with troughing, are STILL possible. You can't just turn your eyes off of a season that has BARELY started. It's not even July yet... Sheesh. And most July's only have 1-2 storms anyway...
People put too much faith in both history and the previous hurricane season, when they make their predictions for the current season. 2006 was inactive, and troughing took place, I won't deny that. El Niño and the SAL outbreak played a huge part in the season. A lot of things tried to develop, but didn't. However, SAL hasn't even been PROVEN yet to have an affect on Atlantic hurricanes. Granted, it probably DOES, but it hasn't been proven yet. And just because one dust outbreak occurs sporadically, doesn't really mean anything. Conditions change, as I always say. JUST because 2006 was inactive and had "troughing" doesn't mean 2007 will do the same. Plain and simple, just because there are troughs hanging around for June doesn't mean 2006 is in store for 2007. That is purely wishcasting. Long-range forecasts are hard to do anyway, and we have little skill in that field. Wait and see what happens in 2007 is all we can really say. Sure, current conditions can give us a CLUE about what is happening or what may happen this hurricane season, but truthfully, we don't know what's in store, and we know that.
As for reliance on history, you pretty much do have to use that for your forecasts. However, in each year, conditions for tropical cyclone formation change, so history is rather flawed too. 1968 was predicted to start early and indeed did with 3 storms (2 hurricanes) in the month of June alone. However, another storm did not occur until August 10. There were also no major hurricanes that year at all.
You should use current data, as well as model cosensus, your OWN experience (people never use that). Don't rely on long-range forecasts all that much, since they are easily flawed.
Again, PLEASE leave me a comment on this. I want to know what you guys think.
dont talk to JP like that i like JP vary march
I dissagree that until something is " proven " that we cant give it serious consideration.
yeah I've heard that before is a great underestimate though just wondering the average error it has?
Alright, no problem. I don't mind. I understand perfectly. :)
and as for the others,I see neutral ENSO and a 2004-like season.
Sort of like what I see, WBK.
BTW, wouldn't it have been easier to just mail me back? >_>
Looks severe from where I sit !
If that keeps up, we will not have a lot of Atlantic activity.
What I have seen over the years is that the climatology is quite reliable. I agree that the long range forecasts have limited skill. Predicting hurricanes, though, is not particularly interesting to me.
What I find most interesting to watch are the almosts, might have beens and never were's. Once a hurricane cranks up, it tends to look like just another hurricane to me. We can watch those in the Pacific or Indian Ocean, too. With the humongous amount of data available nowadays (feel the buoy, be the buoy--and QuikScat is just freaking wild) in the Atlantic, we can glimpse the subtleties, and those subtle things are more apparent with the weaker systems.
The way people react to hurricanes is also fascinating, both on this forum and in the streets. The panic that shut down Houston two days before Rita made landfall was amazing.
Viewing: 601 - 651
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 — Blog Index