Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 112 posts

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#101

Post by haubey »

js2 wrote: post #94
haubey wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. I will say that we are relatively lucky in that we live inland, so we didn't have to worry about storm surge, in a newer suburb that had its power lines underground. We maybe lost 20 minutes of power during Wilma. I have family that lives in East Ft. Lauderdale, they were out of power for two weeks.

I was in Miami, Coral Gables specifically, for this guy: https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/gifs/1992andy1.gif I hope you never have to live through one of those. Not fun. Good luck with Dorian.

Wasn't alive for this one, but this was one that my parents got out of the way for. With the forecast shifting south every day, I have a sneaking feeling this could be another one they get out of the way for. The problem with Dorian is it looks like it's going to hit south, and then move up the state. Nowhere really to go.

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#103

Post by lonelappde »

dmurray wrote: post #17
acchow wrote: post #10

"The National Hurricane Center says cones will contain the path of the storm center only 60 to 70 percent of the time" Sounds like the communications fix is easy. Increase the uncertainty to 90-95% which also increases the cone size. And make it blood red and tell anyone inside the red that they need to be prepared. "Hurricanes are also hundreds of miles wide, and the cone shows only the possible path of the storm’s…

Right. Some of the "popular interpretations" dismissed in the article are correct, or wrong only in degree rather than in kind. Your home is more in danger inside the cone than out of it, and it is more in danger at the centre of the projected path than at the fringes of the cone. If the problem is that people with a low to moderate risk of losing their home or their lives don't prepare enough, then yeah, show a wide…

But probably is not intensity. Half chance of full intensity doesn't mean full chance of half intensity. If you'd evacuate the red zone but not the yellow understand, do you really understand the bet you are making?

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#104

Post by lonelappde »

ukyrgf wrote: post #64
matwood wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been living with hurricanes my entire life, and have been through many (the largest was Hugo in '89). The problem with all these cones is when they extend them beyond 72 hours. At that point, if we used your suggestion, the entire east coast could be in the cone. That means either no one pays attention, or everyone evacuates and next time ignores the warnings. What officials (and the news) need to do is tell eve…

I feel like the news and government response has been to very strongly err on the side of caution lately. The moment the path was updated to move to a direct hit of north Florida yesterday, grocery stores and gas stations were flooded with people preparing a week in advance. 10 or 15 years ago you'd hear a lot of "well a storm hasn't hit here in 100 years" in the region, but nobody fucks around like that anymore.

Evacuation should be done relatively late/certain. Preparation should be done weeks to months in advance.

Frankly I wish stores would have random "everything costs 2x" days all the time to teach people the importance of stocking up on necessities.

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#105

Post by jbarberu »

matwood wrote: post #42
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> prepared And tell them how to prepare. Florida native and I've live here all my life. If you're within the radius of hurricane force winds, live near the coast, live in a flood prone area, live in a shed, live in a trailer, you should take these storms seriously. If you're inland, and not in a shed or trailer, you should be fine if you don't do something stupid, like stand outside. Don't go out and hurricanes are r…

> And tell them how to prepare. Exactly. I made a comment above that mentioned the mass migration to the coasts means that many people do not have years of experience dealing with hurricanes. What you just said is common sense for you and I, but may be a complete unknown to someone who just moved from NJ or Ohio.

I moved to Florida from Sweden 1.5y ago. The most extreme weather preparations I've done in the past were putting the garden furniture in the garage so it wouldn't tip over.

Currently prepping for Dorian in Orlando :)

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#106

Post by ridaj »

duanem wrote: post #92
ridaj wrote: post #89

I personally feel like the "spaghetti bundle" representation of the data (where a random sample of potential paths are drawn) was the most straightforward image of the uncertainty embedded in the forecast. Has it been considered as a means of public communication?

I've just implemented this in Flowx[1], the Android weather app I develop. I have the "spaghetti bundle" but it was a major improvement when I added dots indicating the location of the hurricane center with time, as shown in this YouTube video[2] [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.enzuredigi... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I46IJcnf_bY

These look very cool!!

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#107

Post by gdubs »

I’ve always thought the term “Cone of Uncertainty” sounded like something out of a kitschy TV show from the 1960s.

The “spaghetti models” are what I tend to look at. A blend between those and the cone might alleviate some of the confusion about what the cone represents.

But a serious question: is this about the general public becoming more distracted? Did people not understand these graphics two decades ago?

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#108

Post by paulddraper »

chrisco255 wrote: post #95
albertocairo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Jsight, Alberto Cairo here. I wrote the piece, but didn't design the maps, so I'll ask. In any case, even if there's an inconsistency between the maps in the piece—which are intended to be illustrative, I guess—and the NHC ones, it doesn't undermine, I think, the overall message, which is that, regardless of whether you are inside of the cone or outside and close to it, it's safer to prepare just in case. People s…

Having been raised in Florida, you live through so many which are hyped up and so many of them end up missing or diverting away from the state altogether that people get cocky about it. Getting hit by the eye of the hurricane is much different than getting hit by the outer bands or even the middle core of it. The strongest winds are near the eye. The rest of the storm can still do rain and wind damage but it's nowher…

Cocky Floridian here.

Having lived in Florida for many year, I'll say hurricanes are terribly destructive but in most* cases, the risk to humans is minimal. Stay in your house (unless it's a prefab), or go down the local shelter.

The worst parts of a hurricane are property damage, lost power, no gas, etc. It's much different than a wildfire or a tornado.

Call me an idiot, but risk vs reward...I'm gonna stay put. I've saved thousands in property damage that way too.

---

* If you build a city below sea level, that can turn out pretty bad. Also, if you are in poor health, live directly on the beach, or live somewhere without shelters or robust infrastructure.

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#109

Post by jnbiche »

mnw21cam wrote: post #98
jnbiche wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My personal rule to consider evacuating is a cat 4+ As you know well having lived through Hugo, the S/S category pertains to the wind speed. However, it's the flooding and storm surge, not the wind, that are by far the most deadly features of a hurricane. I'd be much more wary of a big, slow moving cat 2 arriving right at high tide and full moon than I would be a small, fast moving cat 4 arriving at low tide and a…

Note for the record that large tides (spring tides) are associated with full moon and new moon. Smaller tides (neap tides) are associated with half moons.

You're absolutely right. I've been living away from the coast for too long now (~15 years).

Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts

#110

Post by albertocairo »

Retric wrote: post #87
albertocairo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Jsight, Alberto Cairo here. I wrote the piece, but didn't design the maps, so I'll ask. In any case, even if there's an inconsistency between the maps in the piece—which are intended to be illustrative, I guess—and the NHC ones, it doesn't undermine, I think, the overall message, which is that, regardless of whether you are inside of the cone or outside and close to it, it's safer to prepare just in case. People s…

Risks are higher at the center of the cone. A hypothetical 100 mile wide storm that’s 40 miles west of the centerline still covers the centerline, but likely misses the eastern edge. Also, staggered evacuation is a good thing, you don’t want everyone in a city to decide to leave at the same time.

That might be true mathematically but talking to forecasters who work on this, they greatly de-emphasize the center line. Instead, they do emphasize that the forecast is the cone, not the center line alone. They direct your attention away from the center line (readers tend to stick too much to it), and say something similar to what is in the article: areas outside will be likely affected, everyone should take precautions and prepare regardless of where we are — and we should read other graphics and messages that can tell us, for instance, whether there may be storm surge, flooding, or whether we need to evacuate or not; the cone tells us nothing about any of that.
Post reply on HN