{"title":"Forecasting of tropical cyclones ASANI (2022) and MOCHA (2023) over the Bay of Bengal - real time challenges to forecasters","authors":"S.D. Kotal, T. Arulalan, M. Mohapatra","doi":"10.1016/j.tcrr.2024.06.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study examines the track and intensity forecasts of two typical Bay of Bengal tropical cyclones (TC) ASANI and MOCHA. The analysis of various Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) model forecasts [ECMWF (European Centre for Medium range Weather Forecast), NCEP (National Centers for Environmental Prediction), NCUM (National Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecast-Unified Model), IMD (India Meteorological Department), HWRF (Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting)], MME (Multi-model Ensemble), SCIP (Statistical Cyclone Intensity Prediction) model, and OFCL (Official) forecasts shows that intensity forecasts of ASANI and track forecasts of MOCHA were reasonably good, but there were large errors and wide variation in track forecasts of ASANI and in intensity forecasts of MOCHA. Among all model forecasts, the track forecast errors of IMD model and MME were least in general for ASANI and MOCHA respectively. Also, the landfall point forecast errors of IMD were least for ASANI, and the MME and OFCL forecast errors were least for MOCHA. No model is found to be consistently better for landfall time forecast for ASANI, and the errors of ECMWF, IMD and HWRF were least and of same order for MOCHA. The intensity forecast errors of OFCL and SCIP were least for ASANI, and the forecast errors of HWRF, IMD, NCEP, SCIP and OFCL were comparable and least for MOCHA up to 48 h forecast and HWRF errors were least thereafter in general. The ECMWF model forecast errors for intensity were found to be highest for both the TCs. The results also show that although there is significant improvement of track forecasts and limited or no improvement of intensity forecast in previous decades but challenges still persists in real time forecasting of both track and intensity due to wide variation and inconsistency of model forecasts for different TC cases.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44442,"journal":{"name":"Tropical Cyclone Research and Review","volume":"13 2","pages":"Pages 88-112"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2225603224000286/pdfft?md5=cf62cdb235d90184fc7d52c4c7588dc3&pid=1-s2.0-S2225603224000286-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tropical Cyclone Research and Review","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2225603224000286","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study examines the track and intensity forecasts of two typical Bay of Bengal tropical cyclones (TC) ASANI and MOCHA. The analysis of various Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) model forecasts [ECMWF (European Centre for Medium range Weather Forecast), NCEP (National Centers for Environmental Prediction), NCUM (National Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecast-Unified Model), IMD (India Meteorological Department), HWRF (Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting)], MME (Multi-model Ensemble), SCIP (Statistical Cyclone Intensity Prediction) model, and OFCL (Official) forecasts shows that intensity forecasts of ASANI and track forecasts of MOCHA were reasonably good, but there were large errors and wide variation in track forecasts of ASANI and in intensity forecasts of MOCHA. Among all model forecasts, the track forecast errors of IMD model and MME were least in general for ASANI and MOCHA respectively. Also, the landfall point forecast errors of IMD were least for ASANI, and the MME and OFCL forecast errors were least for MOCHA. No model is found to be consistently better for landfall time forecast for ASANI, and the errors of ECMWF, IMD and HWRF were least and of same order for MOCHA. The intensity forecast errors of OFCL and SCIP were least for ASANI, and the forecast errors of HWRF, IMD, NCEP, SCIP and OFCL were comparable and least for MOCHA up to 48 h forecast and HWRF errors were least thereafter in general. The ECMWF model forecast errors for intensity were found to be highest for both the TCs. The results also show that although there is significant improvement of track forecasts and limited or no improvement of intensity forecast in previous decades but challenges still persists in real time forecasting of both track and intensity due to wide variation and inconsistency of model forecasts for different TC cases.
期刊介绍:
Tropical Cyclone Research and Review is an international journal focusing on tropical cyclone monitoring, forecasting, and research as well as associated hydrological effects and disaster risk reduction. This journal is edited and published by the ESCAP/WMO Typhoon Committee (TC) and the Shanghai Typhoon Institute of the China Meteorology Administration (STI/CMA). Contributions from all tropical cyclone basins are welcome.
Scope of the journal includes:
• Reviews of tropical cyclones exhibiting unusual characteristics or behavior or resulting in disastrous impacts on Typhoon Committee Members and other regional WMO bodies
• Advances in applied and basic tropical cyclone research or technology to improve tropical cyclone forecasts and warnings
• Basic theoretical studies of tropical cyclones
• Event reports, compelling images, and topic review reports of tropical cyclones
• Impacts, risk assessments, and risk management techniques related to tropical cyclones