Hurricane/Tides

Cumberlandjg

Senior Member
Anyone got an idea on how the hurricane might effect the tides on our coast if it makes a direct landfall in the Carolinas? Currently forecast for St Marys/Brunswick is calling for a nice weekend, think that is going to hold up?
 

Miguel Cervantes

Jedi Master
There will be significant influence to the onshore wave height as Florence approaches late Wednesday through most of Thursday. As it gets closer to the NC shoreline the winds will shift from land to offshore along the Ga coast and diminish as it continues to landfall.
 

Mayberry

Member
I have an inshore trip planned around Shellman's Bluff next weekend (9/21). How will this storm affect the fishing a week after the storm? Much better, or will it ruin fishing for a few weeks?
 

Miguel Cervantes

Jedi Master
I have an inshore trip planned around Shellman's Bluff next weekend (9/21). How will this storm affect the fishing a week after the storm? Much better, or will it ruin fishing for a few weeks?
Two ways to look at that. New moon equals high tides and storm surge will mimic a ton of rain on a spring tide that washes a lot of bait out of the marsh, however those onshore winds may keep everything pushed inshore. On the flip side, a strong flow to the SE will blow the water out of the creeks keeping a lot of bait inshore. I wouldn't want to be the one to make the call on that one.
 

Miguel Cervantes

Jedi Master
The 11 pm graphic just came out and the projected landfall has taken a shift to the north. If it keeps this trend up perhaps the Ga Coast can escape relatively unscathed outside of an initial surge. Wednesday will be a much more informative day.
 

Cumberlandjg

Senior Member
The 11 pm graphic just came out and the projected landfall has taken a shift to the north. If it keeps this trend up perhaps the Ga Coast can escape relatively unscathed outside of an initial surge. Wednesday will be a much more informative day.


Those graphics are showing significant wave heights around 2 ft around St Marys area so fishing intercoastal and the creeks should be good as long as wind isnt too bad.

All the forecasts I see call for 5-10 mph W winds but I do not know if they account for the storm. Not sure how much rain to expect either.
 

cuda67bnl

Senior Member
I’ve got a boat chartered Saturday, out of Darien. Will be shore/pier fishing Thursday and Friday. Hope it all stays way north!
 

Miguel Cervantes

Jedi Master
Those graphics are showing significant wave heights around 2 ft around St Marys area so fishing intercoastal and the creeks should be good as long as wind isnt too bad.

All the forecasts I see call for 5-10 mph W winds but I do not know if they account for the storm. Not sure how much rain to expect either.
If the latest models are close to right you won't be heading down this weekend. There's still just too much disagreement among all of the model products and I am hopeful that tomorrow will bring more agreement and a better idea of landfall and track.
 

Mayberry

Member
My trip isn't for this weekend. It's next weekend. I'm wondering what this shift in the storm will do for fishing inshore around Georgia, 200 miles west of where the storm makes landfall.
 

Miguel Cervantes

Jedi Master
My trip isn't for this weekend. It's next weekend. I'm wondering what this shift in the storm will do for fishing inshore around Georgia, 200 miles west of where the storm makes landfall.
A week away should be fine, unless another storm comes along. They are lined up like jets landing at Hartsfield-Jackson airport right now.
 

GeorgiaBob

Senior Member
The following is my best guess, and it does differ a little from the "pro" forcasters, I am right and they are wrong because I have - - bigger dice! :p

We are already expecting higher tides (lunar high cycle) plus the "push" caused by significant wave action piling more water onshore, so expect coastal high tides anywhere from one to three feet greater than normal. The combination of enhanced wave action and greater volume of water pushing into the rivers will cause a lot of mudding, silting, disturbed waters, and some nasty tidal flows inshore.

On the other hand, storm surge will almost exclusively be northern coastal South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia (partly dependent on landfall) so the storm surge likely will have very little impact on coastal Georgia. More good news is that both long period waves and the storm waves should begin to settle along the coast from Cumberland up through St Simons by Saturday. Near shore boating will still be rough, but doable. Tidal river boating could be tricky.

By next weekend the fish will probably be pretty hungry after missing out on a bunch of meals due to messy waters. Tides will have settled some, but guessing wave action 10 days into the future is probably more difficult than picking the next Kentucky Derby winner a year in advance!
 

joboo

Senior Member
Ugh, we are headed down Sat morning for a week long fishing trip. Not sure if the whole Family can reschedule vacations to wait another week.
Now I just saw where one model sends it back south East into Ga.
Decisions, decisions....
 

Steve762us

Senior Member
The following is my best guess, and it does differ a little from the "pro" forcasters, I am right and they are wrong because I have - - bigger dice! :p

If we're down to dice measuring, I'll say I don't put any faith into the
landfall predictions, more than 72 hours out--and really, 48 hours out.

Now they're showing it coming close to NC, but hooking south and paralleling
the SC coast...
 

Miguel Cervantes

Jedi Master
If we're down to dice measuring, I'll say I don't put any faith into the
landfall predictions, more than 72 hours out--and really, 48 hours out.

Now they're showing it coming close to NC, but hooking south and paralleling
the SC coast...
Anything outside of 24 hours with this storm is sketchy. 12 hours could even be subject. That being said, I put all of the most likely scenarios in the MET SHACK a few minutes ago.
 

GeorgiaBob

Senior Member
Much of the hurricane "forecasting" is ill informed guesswork, but people still believe in the Fed Government and it's magic NOAA - far too much. The National Hurricane Center guesses about every hurricane and is off every time - by significant numbers. The AVERAGE error in hurricane tracks is over 130 miles for their three day projections and 30% of the time they are completely wrong about their 5 day "cone of uncertainty."

They usually are also wrong about overall size, track speed, and wind speed. As a simple "for instance," go back to the NHC forecast strength of Florence for today from their forcast just two days ago, 145 mph up to 155mph. The actual reports for today are below 130mph (115kts). That is still a very powerful hurricane, but there is also a VERY significant difference in the damage caused by 150mph winds and 125mph winds.

I am not a professional meteorologist but I can read, and I do have a memory, so I can figure out when it is really stupid to depend on NOAA-NHC, and when their efforts make some sense. For Florence, the positions of existing high and low pressure areas, sheer winds, warm waters, and fronts, made it likely that Florence would to hit the coast somewhere north of Charleston, SC and then wander about. The rest of the NHC forecasting was just computer modelling (another way of saying guesswork).

And remember - those weather models, that cannot figure out where a hurricane is going to hit a day or two from now, are the same computer models used to "forecast" man made catastrophic global warming over the next 80 years.
 

Miguel Cervantes

Jedi Master
And remember - those weather models, that cannot figure out where a hurricane is going to hit a day or two from now, are the same computer models used to "forecast" man made catastrophic global warming over the next 80 years.
Actually they are not. 10 day and mesoscale models are for short term forecasting.

The Global Warming scam scientist used models such as the MJO and various other long range Oscillation models plus longer range data while in putting flawed information in order to get the desire results to fit their agenda.
 

GeorgiaBob

Senior Member
Actually they are not. 10 day and mesoscale models are for short term forecasting.

The Global Warming scam scientist used models such as the MJO and various other long range Oscillation models plus longer range data while in putting flawed information in order to get the desire results to fit their agenda.

You are, in detail, correct, I stand PARTIALLY corrected. But as a generality I am also correct. The short term forecasting models, surface wind models, upper atmosphere wind patterning models, mid term general models, long term (as in 10 days or more) prediction models, seasonal forecasting models, and global predictors (annual, multi-seasonal, and global long term [multi-year] and global warming models are all direct descendants of a group of weather (storm) forecast computer models developed in the mid- 1970s.

Nearly every computer weather model, including all of the generally accepted "global warming" computer models, still includes actual code from the first generation weather models. To a limited extent, the models work - short term - and that is why they are used. Unfortunately, the models are too often misused. Just like NOAA/NHC attempts to predict the path and strength of hurricanes for 5 days into the future, when the models and historical data can reasonable predict no better than 60% accuracy at no more than two to three days.

The same concept of "loading historical data" into a predictive computer model, and adding current information, in an effort to predict what will happen next, is used both for current weather forecasting and for global "warming" models. And both types of computer models share some original weather code. On that basis, I claim that my original statement is valid.

Your point about flawed (or just as accurate, "falsified") data in "global warming" data is also valid. But even with correct historical data, the models simply could not work. There are too few reporting stations for accurate global coverage. The time frame is tiny (in every case less than 200 years of limited reporting). The capability of current computers too limited to process the necessary amount of data. And just as important - none of the "global warming" models account for "natural" factors like vulcanism, solar impact variation, or shifts in magnetic poles.
 
Top