Advances and Challenges at the National Hurricane Center
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
APRIL 2009 R A P P A P O R T E T A L . 395 Advances and Challenges at the National Hurricane Center EDWARD N. RAPPAPORT,JAMES L. FRANKLIN,LIXION A. AVILA,STEPHEN R. BAIG,* JOHN L. BEVEN II, ERIC S. BLAKE,CHRISTOPHER A. BURR,JIANN-GWO JIING,CHRISTOPHER A. JUCKINS,RICHARD D. KNABB,CHRISTOPHER W. LANDSEA,MICHELLE MAINELLI,1 MAX MAYFIELD,# COLIN J. MCADIE, RICHARD J. PASCH,CHRISTOPHER SISKO,STACY R. STEWART, AND AHSHA N. TRIBBLE@ NOAA/National Weather Service/National Hurricane Center, Miami, Florida (Manuscript received 9 February 2008, in final form 1 October 2008) ABSTRACT The National Hurricane Center issues analyses, forecasts, and warnings over large parts of the North Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and in support of many nearby countries. Advances in observational capabil- ities, operational numerical weather prediction, and forecaster tools and support systems over the past 15–20 yr have enabled the center to make more accurate forecasts, extend forecast lead times, and provide new products and services. Important limitations, however, persist. This paper discusses the current workings and state of the nation’s hurricane warning program, and highlights recent improvements and the enabling science and technology. It concludes with a look ahead at opportunities to address challenges. 1. Introduction an expected continued rapid growth of coastal popula- tions and infrastructure. The National Hurricane Center—Past, Present and A large increase in Atlantic basin tropical cyclone Future (Sheets 1990) chronicled the U.S. government events and impacts indeed followed. The activity in- civilian hurricane forecast and warning service from its cluded the busiest season on record (2005, with 28 trop- beginnings in the nineteenth century through the 1980s. ical storms1 and hurricanes), the most intense hurricane It also described the responsibilities, and the tools and (as measured by central pressure) on record (Wilma of processes applied at the end of that period at the Na- 2005), one of the deadliest hurricanes (Mitch of 1998), tionalHurricaneCenter(NHC;seeTable1foralistof the deadliest U.S. hurricane in more than 75 yr and the acronyms and their expansions used in this paper). costliest ever (Katrina of 2005), and the third strongest Sheets’s 1990 review occurred near the end of a ;25 hurricane at U.S. landfall (Andrew of 1992). This period yr period of relatively low hurricane activity and impact also presented its share of critical operational challenges, in the United States after Hurricane Camille (1969). including some memorable instances where forecasts Not coincidentally, storm surge, this country’s greatest fell short of goals. Examples include Andrew’s accel- tropical cyclone threat historically, caused few casual- eration toward Florida, Mitch’s southward movement ties during that period. Like other NHC directors, (Pasch et al. 2001), Wilma’s unprecedented intensifica- Sheets made clear, however, that additional hurricane tion (Beven et al. 2008), and Humberto’s development disasters were imminent and would be exacerbated by during 2007 from a weak low into a landfalling hurri- cane in less than 24 h (Blake 2007). *Retired. Sheets’s article served not only to describe the na- 1Current affiliation: National Centers for Environmental Pre- tion’s hurricane program, but also to educate readers diction Central Operations, Camp Springs, Maryland. on the U.S. hurricane problem. His depiction, based #Current affiliation: WPLG-TV, Miami, Florida. @Current affiliation: National Weather Service/Climate Service on National Weather Service (NWS) storm surge Division, Silver Spring, Maryland. 1 This count includes one subtropical storm. In this paper, the Corresponding author address: Edward N. Rappaport, National term ‘‘tropical cyclone’’ refers to both tropical and subtropical Hurricane Center, 11691 SW 17th St., Miami, FL 33165-2149. systems of depression [,34 kt (17.5 m s21)], storm [34–63 kt (17.5– E-mail: [email protected] 32.4 m s21)], or hurricane [$ 64 kt (32.4 m s21)] intensity. DOI: 10.1175/2008WAF2222128.1 396 WEATHER AND FORECASTING VOLUME 24 TABLE 1. List of key acronyms, and their expansions, used in this TABLE 1. (Continued) paper. Acronym Expansion Acronym Expansion NOGAPS Navy Operational Global Atmospheric Prediction AFFO Announcement of Federal Funding Opportunity System AFOS Automation of Field Operations and Services NPOESS National Polar-Orbiting Environmental AFRES Air Force Reserve Command Satellite System AMSR Aqua Microwave Scanning Radiometer NRL Naval Research Laboratory AMSU Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit NWS National Weather Service ASCAT Advanced Scatterometer OPC Ocean Prediction Center ATCF Automated Tropical Cyclone Forecasting system PDA Personal digital assistant AWC Aviation Weather Center QuikSCAT Quick Scatterometer CARCAH Chief, Aerial Reconnaissance Coordination, RA Regional Association All Hurricanes RMW Radius of maximum wind CLIPER Climatology and persistence RSMC Regional Specialized Meteorological Center DMSP Defense Meteorological Satellite Program RSS Really Simple Syndication DOD Department of Defense SFMR Stepped-Frequency Microwave Radiometer ECMWF European Centre for Medium-Range Weather SHIFOR Statistical Hurricane Intensity Forecast Forecasts SHIPS Statistical Hurricane Intensity Prediction Scheme EMC Environmental Modeling Center SLOSH Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency SOO Science and operations officer GEMPAK General Meteorological Package SRA Scanning Radar Altimeter GFDL Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory SSM/I Special Sensor Microwave Imager GFS Global Forecast System TAFB Tropical Analysis and Forecast Branch GIS Geographic Information System TCR Tropical cyclone report G-IV Gulfstream-IV TDAU Techniques Development and Applications Unit GOES Geostationary Operational Environmental TRMM Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission Satellite TSB Technical Support Branch GPRA Government Performance and Results Act TWO Tropical weather outlook GPS Global positioning system UKMET U.K. Met Office GUNA Consensus model of the GFDL Hurricane Model, USWRP U.S. Weather Research Program the U.K. Met Office Global Model, NOGAPS, WFO Weather Forecast Office and the GFS (formerly known as the Aviation Model) HFIP Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project simulations, of a hurricane putting 20 1 ft (6 1 m) of HFS Hurricane Forecast System HLT Hurricane Liaison Team water in New Orleans and environs was prescient (his HPC Hydrometeorological Prediction Center Fig. 2b). Fifteen years later Katrina struck that area, HRD Hurricane Research Division directly causing about 1500 fatalities2 and causing HSU Hurricane Specialists Unit damage estimated at $81 billion (Beven et al. 2008). HURDAT Hurricane Database Yet, well before its arrival, some had projected the HWRF Hurricane Weather Research and Forecast IT Information technology impact in that area of a strong hurricane would be much JHT Joint Hurricane Testbed worse, with fatalities reaching 60 000 (Cooper and JTWC Joint Typhoon Warning Center Block 2006) or even 100 000 (Schleifstein and McQuaid Lidar Light distance and ranging 2002). MDL Meteorological Development Laboratory By any measure the losses from Katrina are tragic. Put MEOW Maximum envelope of water Meteosat Meteorological Satellite in the context of the above projections, however, the MOM Maximum of maxima relatively low loss of life is noteworthy. Such a result did NAVTEX Navigation Telex Radio not occur by chance, but rather reflects significant cu- N-AWIPS NCEP Advanced Weather Interactive Processing mulative advances in hurricane forecasting, communi- System cation methods, and preparedness processes made by NCAR National Center for Atmospheric Research NCEP National Centers for Environmental Prediction NHC and/or its public and private partners—in many NCO NCEP Central Operations aspects collaboratively. Willoughby et al. (2007) esti- NDFD National Digital Forecast Database mated that such advances ‘‘prevented 66-90% of the NEXRAD Next-Generation Radar NHC National Hurricane Center NHOP National Hurricane Operations Plan 2 NHC’s estimate of 1500 deaths directly attributed to Katrina NMM Nonhydrostatic Mesoscale Model (e.g., Beven et al. 2008) may need to be revised downward to less NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric than 1000 based on a more detailed analysis of the impact on Administration Louisiana (E. Boyd 2007, personal communication). APRIL 2009 R A P P A P O R T E T A L . 397 hurricane-related deaths in the United States that would tures allowing forecast operations to continue through have resulted from techniques used in the 1950s....’’ most local weather and other emergencies. These efforts by NHC and others produced accurate NHC’s $6.4M (fiscal year 2008) budget supports 46 and consistent forecasts for Katrina in the 2–3 days federal government employees and associated infra- before its Gulf landfall—forecasts that were said to have structure. Other components of the federal government saved many lives. United States Senator Jim DeMint of bear the costs for weather observations, computer mod- South Carolina, chairman of the Commerce Commit- eling, most tropical weather research, etc. used by NHC. tee’s Disaster Prediction and Prevention Subcommittee, NHC comprises three operational workgroups, the stated ‘‘These early and accurate forecasts [of Katrina] Hurricane Specialists Unit (HSU), the Tropical Analysis saved countless lives along the Gulf Coast.... We owe a and Forecast Branch (TAFB), and the Technical Sup-