2.2.1. Characteristics of the Irma RI Event
Cangialosi et al. (2018) [
5] is the official NHC report on Hurricane Irma, which was a noteworthy storm as it caused widespread devastation and was one of the strongest and costliest hurricanes on record in the Atlantic basin. Irma originated from a tropical wave that left the west coast of Africa on 27 August 2017. It became a hurricane at 0600 UTC 31 August only 30 h after it became a tropical depression, and attained major hurricane status by 0000 UTC 1 September, which was only two days after genesis. Unfortunately, the first RI of 70 kt increase over a 48 h period was when Irma was too far east in the Atlantic and not yet targeted by the GOES-16 meso scans so that no high temporal and spatial AMVs were available to study that first RI event.
Elsberry et al. [
3] documented that the objective satellite consensus SATCON intensity estimates (Velden and Herndon 2020 [
13]) at 30 min intervals were very useful in diagnosing the timing and magnitudes of two RIs and the two decays in Hurricane Joaquin. The SATCON intensities in terms of minimum sea-level pressure (MSLP) for Hurricane Irma are shown in
Figure 5 (red line), and are compared with the NHC working best-track (WBT) intensities (thin black line) that are only available at 6 h synoptic times. Digital SATCON intensities are estimated to the nearest 1 mb and will be compared with the FCDI analyses. Particular attention will be given to the times of MSLP observations from the NOAA P-3 and Gulfstream-4 research aircraft and the Air Force Reserve reconnaissance aircraft (www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Storm-pages/Irma2017/mission.html), which are in situ observations as the aircraft passed through the center (
Figure 5, small black triangles).
For the SATCON versus NHC comparison of MSLP (
Figure 5), the agreement is quite good during the first RI event that began late on 30 August and continued to midday on 31 August. However, large discrepancies between the two MSLP values exist during 1 September and 2 September, which is well before the first aircraft mission in Irma on 3 September that would have clarified which intensity was correct. The SATCON MSLP estimates decrease from 973 mb at 0745 UTC 1 September to 953 mb at 00 UTC 2 September when the NHC MSLP is ~966 mb. Whereas the SATCON remains near 953 mb until 12 UTC 2 September and later decreases to 950 mb at 21 UTC 2 September, the NHC MSLP increases to ~973 mb at 12 UTC 2 September, and then remains constant until 06 UTC 3 September. All of the individual satellite inputs to the SATCON indicate rising MSLPs after 00 UTC 3 September in association with an eyewall replacement cycle (ERC), but the timing of that steep MSLP rise varies among the member satellite estimates. The periodic ATMS sounder estimates (
Figure 5, red triangles) have that steep rise at around 03 UTC 3 September. However, the 30 min ADT (blue dots) that is derived from high spatial and temporal resolution GOES-16 imagery maintains the MSLP at 955 mb until 12 UTC, and then has an 8 mb rise in 2 h. The SATCON goes down the middle of these rising MSLP estimates. At 0915 UTC 3 September when the CIMSS began the high temporal (15 min) resolution AMVs, the SATCON MSLP estimate is ~965 mb, but is still rising rapidly. At the first synoptic time (12 UTC) after the beginning of the high-density GOES-16 AMVs, the NHC WBT and the SATCON both have the MSLP ~970 mb, but this is the beginning of the Irma RI event in the NHC WBT while the SATCON MSLP is still rising. A microwave image at 16 UTC 3 September (not shown) indicates that Irma has a broader eye than at 09 UTC, and suggests an eyewall replacement cycle may be underway consistent with rising MSLP.
As indicated in
Figure 3 and
Figure 4, the FCDI analyses begin from a cold start of the COAMPS-TC initial conditions at a synoptic time, and these initial conditions contain a bogus vortex based on the TC Vitals. Note that this COAMPS-TC bogus vortex is based on the NHC maximum wind estimate, and the MSLP solved from a balance equation will not necessarily be equal to the NHC MSLP estimate, but the HWRF vortex initialization step in Lewis et al. [
6] is designed to be able to match the NHC MSLP estimate as well. Although an ambiguity exists between the SATCON and the NHC WBT intensity estimates at 12 UTC 3 September, in order to facilitate a comparison between the FCDI dynamic initialization and the Lewis et al. [
6] HWRF initialization with the same GOES-16 AMV dataset, the FCDI will begin from 12 UTC 3 September. A 6 h FCDI dynamic initialization to 18 UTC 3 September will be compared in
Section 3 with the Lewis et al. [
6] HWRF initialization centered on the 18 UTC 3 September synoptic time.
Based on both the SATCON and the NHC WBT intensity changes in
Figure 5, four stages of the Irma RI may be defined that are well supported by aircraft MSLP observations: (i) the pre-extreme RI stage; (ii) the extreme RI stage; (iii) the intermediate constant-intensity stage; and (iv) the extended slower RI stage. The NHC pre-extreme stage is defined to begin at 12 UTC 3 September and end with the first NOAA P-3 aircraft MSLP observations in Irma, which were at ~21–22 UTC 3 September (see small, black triangles) with magnitudes near 961 mb. As described above, the NHC MSLP is also 961 mb because such aircraft observations are considered to be highly accurate. Thus, the NHC MSLP evolution is a linear decrease from 967 mb at 12 UTC to 961 mb at 21–23 UTC 3 September. By contrast, the SATCON pre-extreme RI stage is defined to begin at 12 UTC 3 September have a linear decrease from 970 mb to 963 mb at ~04 UTC 4 September, and then have constant MSLP to ~08 UTC 4 September just prior to the extreme RI event according to the SATCON (
Figure 5). Note that the SATCON MSLP is slightly high (~5 mb) at the time of the first NOAA aircraft observations.
Because the NHC file is at 6 h synoptic times, the first segment of this RI event that is designated as extreme RI begins with MSLP = 961 mb at 06 UTC 4 September and ends with 944 mb at 12 UTC 4 September, which is a linear 17 mb decrease in 6 h that is defined by two aircraft mission sets of MSLP observations (
Figure 5, small black triangles). According to the real-time SATCON file, this extreme RI stage begins with MSLP = 962 mb at 0815 UTC and ends with 942 mb at 1045 UTC, which is a 20 mb decrease in only 2.5 h. Thus, the extreme nature of this RI event in Hurricane Irma is better revealed in these SATCON estimates that are not constrained to begin or end on a 6 h synoptic time.
Multiple aircraft MSLP observations during 12 UTC 4 September to 00 UTC 5 September (small, black triangles in
Figure 5) document that the MSLP was nearly constant within +/−2 mb during the intermediate constant-intensity stage. Indeed, seven aircraft MSLP observations within +/−2 h of 00 UTC 5 September document the ending of this constant-intensity stage before the start of the second segment of the RI event. Consequently, the NHC MSLP values vary linearly from ~945 mb at 12 UTC 4 September to ~943 mb at 00 UTC 5 September. Almost all of the 30 min SATCON MSLP estimates from 1145 UTC to 1915 UTC 4 September are within ± 1 mb of 942 mb, which certainly supports the existence of this intermediate constant-intensity stage in Irma.
The first segment of the RI event that is interrupted by this short constant-intensity stage, and then followed by an extended slower RI segment, may not seem important relative to the overall RI event during which the intensity increased from 100 to 155 kt. However, the objective of improved understanding of all four stages of this Irma RI event requires understanding of how the environmental factors or the internal physical processes contributed also during the pre-extreme RI segment, and later contributed to an interruption of the extreme RI stage. Fischer et al. (2020) [
14] have extensively analyzed the NOAA and Air Force aircraft datasets in Irma, and have concluded the Irma RI event was comprised of two rapidly evolving eyewall replacement cycle (ERC) episodes that each completed in less than 12 h. Flight-level and dropwindsonde observations from multiple center overpasses by each aircraft, and with the tail Doppler radars on the NOAA aircraft, allowed Fischer et al. [
14] to construct axisymmetric vortex structure plots for each mission. They propose that the two ERC episodes appear to be linked to how the Irma vortex responded to changing environmental conditions that they estimated from the Statistical Hurricane Intensity Prediction Scheme (SHIPS; De Maria and Kaplan 1994) [
15]. In a future study, we will compare the FCDI three-dimensional analyses of the Irma vortex at the same times as the Fischer et al. [
14] aircraft-based axisymmetric vortex analyses, and compare the continuous (15 min) FCDI-analyzed environmental conditions with the six-hourly SHIPS-based environmental conditions.
Although there were two 6 h gaps between the three clusters of aircraft MSLP observations between 00 UTC 5 September and 00 UTC 6 September (
Figure 5), these aircraft observations document the last RI stage that intensified somewhat slower for an extended period. The SATCON MSLP decrease for this extended slower RI stage begins from 943 mb at 2045 UTC 4 September and continues steadily to a minimum of 915 mb at 0115 UTC 5 September. Note again that neither the starting time nor the ending time is at a 6 h synoptic time. While the NHC WBT has a slower deepening rate for a short period during this stage, the aircraft observations tie down the 915 mb MSLP at 00 UTC 6 September.
As will be demonstrated in
Section 3 below, the post-season, best-track MSLP evolution is a smoothed version of the WBT MSLP values in
Figure 5. Rather than having a constant MSLP stage as in the WBT and the SATCON, the intermediate 12 h period is portrayed as a 7 mb decrease between the previous and the subsequent 6 h periods that have MSLP decreases exceeding 12 mb (Cangialosi, et al. [
5], their Table 1).
2.2.2. AMV-Based FCDI Analyses for Initialization
As indicated in
Figure 3 and
Figure 4, the first FCDI analysis is a cold start from the COAMPS-TC initial conditions (also a cold start) at 12 UTC 3 September (
Figure 6), which is the first synoptic time after the 15 min GOES-16 AMV data became available at 0915 UTC 3 September (
Figure 1b). The FCDI analyses at z = 12,860 m will be described first because it is primarily the cloud-top AMVs that are available above Hurricane Irma, which had an intensity of 100 kt at 12 UTC 3 September according to the NHC best track [
5]. As Irma is to the south of a strong ridge to the north, the primary outflow is toward the west and southwest (
Figure 6a). Note that northerly environmental flow is impinging on the Irma outflow to the northeast of the center, which contributes to the vertical wind shear.
The FCDI wind increments relative to that COAMPS-TC cold-start z = 12,860 m analysis (
Figure 6a), which is also the Control initial conditions, are shown in
Figure 7a. The most notable feature in these FCDI wind increments is the extensive east-west band of wind increments along 20° N that are directed toward the north-northeast with magnitudes as large as 6.5 m s
−1. The interpretation is that the 15 min AMVs are indicating that there is actually outflow in a region that the Control has inflow vectors impinging on the Irma outflow (
Figure 6a). The AMVs are also indicating an extensive east-west orientated convergence area to the south of the Irma center, and localized areas of stronger outflow toward the northeast near 19° N, 44° W and toward the southwest near 17° N, 51° W.
Just 15 min later (
Figure 7b), the FCDI wind increments have the same pattern, but the magnitudes have decreased. This reduction in magnitudes indicates that the model wind fields are already being nudged toward the AMVs. After another 15 min (
Figure 7c), the wind increment magnitudes have been further reduced, and the areas with larger wind increments have shrunk in size. The area to the north along 20° N continues to have the largest magnitude (3–5 m s
−1) outflows against the impinging northerly vectors in the Control (
Figure 6a). Nevertheless, there are also large areas to the south and southwest of the center that now have FCDI wind increments that are less than 1 m s
−1. After one hour of nudging these FCDI wind increments (
Figure 7d), there are still wind increments at the z = 12,860 m indicating the AMVs have larger outflows than the model wind vectors (e.g., toward the north along 20° N and toward the southwest in the area between 15° N–18° N and 50° W–52° W). However, there are two highly localized areas of large magnitude (~5 m s
−1) FCDI wind increments near 18° N, 48° W that may be indicating deep convection in response to the stronger upper-level outflows over the past hour.
Comparing the FCDI z = 12,860 m analysis at tau = 2 h (i.e., 14 UTC 3 September) in
Figure 6b with the Control analysis in
Figure 6a illustrates how the nudging of eight sets of 15 min AMVs has modified the Irma vortex wind field plus the near-environment flow. The blue ring around the center in
Figure 6b indicates a stronger outflow (>30 m s
−1) in all quadrants, but especially outflow toward the northeast and north in the regions with the largest FCDI wind increments in
Figure 7a–c. Indeed, the northerly environmental flow on the east side of the ridge to the north of Irma no longer impinges on the outflow; rather, there is an extensive region of near-zero wind vectors between the northerly environmental flow and the Irma outflow. The strong almost-radial outflow to the west of the center continues some distance before turning anticyclonically to move poleward in advance of the upper-tropospheric trough well to the northwest of the center.
At tau = 4 h (i.e., 16 UTC 3 September) in
Figure 6c, the magnitudes of the outflow vectors in the northwest quadrant exceed 30 m s
−1 and extend ~200 km from the center. The outflow in that quadrant has a cyclonic curvature that quickly turns anticyclonic and then farther west turns poleward in advance of the upper-tropospheric trough. At tau = 6 h (i.e., 18 UTC 3 September) in
Figure 6d, the outflow has become even more asymmetric with no outflow toward the south. The high-speed outflow in the northwest quadrant has extended farther to the west of the center. With just six hours of the GOES-16 AMVs as in
Figure 1b, not only has the upper-level vortex outflow greatly changed, the near-environment flow has also been substantially modified. This highly asymmetric upper-level vortex is then the “warm start” for the 72 h COAMPS-TC forecast rather than an idealized bogus vortex in a cold start as in
Figure 6a.
One of the subtle impacts of the FCDI wind increments is to modify the outflow from an intense, almost-point vortex that becomes evident near 11° N, 43° W in
Figure 6c. These isolated vortices that are vertically oriented are occasionally predicted by the COAMPS-TC at low latitudes well away from the developing vortex center, and because they intensify quickly, the TC vortex tracker may suddenly switch to that center hundreds of kilometers away. Although the nudging of the AMV-based FCDI wind increments does not completely eliminate the outflow from the isolated vortex, the upper-level flow is deflected around its outflow in
Figure 6d.
Another demonstration of the impact of 15 min AMVs in the tau = 6 h (
Figure 6d) is to compare with the 6 h COAMPS-TC forecast (
Figure 8a) from the same cold-start initial conditions in
Figure 6a. Note that the inner-core outflow in
Figure 8a is similarly asymmetric with >30 m s
−1 vectors in an area extending to the north-northwest of the center. However, this 18 UTC 3 September COAMPS-TC forecast has the northerly environmental flow impinging on the outflow in the northeast quadrant just as in the 12 UTC 3 September initial conditions in
Figure 6a. By contrast, the FCDI analysis in
Figure 6d has a broad band of near-zero winds between the outflow in the northeast quadrant and the northerly environmental flow. Consequently, that band of strong northwesterly environmental flow farther to the east has been weakened and displaced to east compared to the same band in
Figure 8a. Whereas the FCDI analysis also has strong outflow from the entire western semi-circle, the COAMPS-TC forecast has almost no outflow in the southwest quadrant. Clearly, the assimilation of the high temporal and spatial resolution GOES-16 AMVs in the 6 h FCDI dynamic initialization between 12 UTC and 18 UTC have had a large impact on the vortex-scale outflow magnitude and direction as well as on the adjacent environmental flow within ~500 km of the center.
The FCDI analyses at z = 12,860 m when hourly GOES-13 AMVs are incorporated instead of 15 min GOES-16 AMVs are displayed in
Supplementary Figure S1. The FCDI wind increments (similar to
Figure 7) for these hourly AMVs are presented in
Figure S2. Since these hourly AMVs are missing the high-density AMVs in the upper troposphere as in
Figure 1b near the center, these FCDI wind increments are only available at outer radii and in the environment. Nevertheless, there are still FCDI z = 12,860 m wind increments of ~5 m s
−1 at the tau = 0 h (
Figure S2a) when there are hourly AMVs with magnitudes and/or directions that deviate from the cold-start COAMPS-TC winds at tau = 0 in
Figure S1a. At tau = 15 min (
Figure S2b), the FCDI wind increments have been further nudged toward the hourly AMVs at tau = 1 h. The tau = 2 h (and 4 h) FCDI analysis in
Figure S1b (
Figure S1c) display the effects of the hourly AMV nudging. Note that the hourly FCDI analysis at 18 UTC 3 September (
Figure S1d) more closely resembles the 6 h COAMPS-TC forecast (
Figure 8a) near the center. Furthermore, the northerly environmental flow is impinging on the hourly FCDI analysis outflow just as in that 6 h COAMPS-TC forecast because no hourly AMVs were available near the center. On the other hand, the concentration of hourly AMVs to the west and northwest of the center leads to the hourly FCDI analysis of the Irma outflow having a similar impact on the environmental flow to the west as in the 15 min FCDI analysis in
Figure 6d.
The differences in the 15 min AMV-based FCDI analyses at z = 300 m elevation (
Figure 9b) relative to the COAMPS-TC initializations are subtler than at z = 12,860 m (
Figure 6). The cold-start COAMPS-TC initial conditions at 12 UTC 3 September (
Figure 9a) have a broad low-level vortex with the Radius of Maximum Wind (RMW) at approximately 35 km, a secondary maximum at 160 km to the north of the center, and the Radius of 18 m s
−1 (R18) is at approximately 500 km to the north of the center. The 6 h COAMPS-TC forecast z = 300 m winds at 18 UTC 3 September that might be an alternative for a warm-start 72 h COAMPS-TC forecast are shown in
Figure 9c. This z = 300 m vortex is more symmetric with the same RMW = 35 km, but no secondary maximum. This vortex is slightly more compact than in
Figure 9a with a R18 ≈ 410 km on the north side. By contrast, the six-hour, 15 min AMV FCDI analysis vortex at z = 300 m (
Figure 9b) is asymmetric and resembles the cold-start COAMPS-TC initial conditions in
Figure 9a, which is not unexpected since those initial conditions were the background flow in the surface wind adjustment that was translated along the target pathway (
Appendix A). However, the 15 min FCDI vortex is slightly more compact with a RMW ≈ 30 km and the R18 ≈ 355 km to the north. Similarly, the hourly AMV FCDI analysis vortex (
Figure 9d) is asymmetric and also resembles those initial conditions that the surface wind adjustment has moved along the target pathway. The hourly FCDI vortex is slightly more broad (RMW ≈ 40 km, R18 ≈ 375 km) than the 15 min AMV FCDI vortex.
More detailed descriptions of the Irma inner-core 300 m wind fields as in
Figure 9 are displayed in
Figure S3. The effect of the symmetric bogus vortex flow for the Control (cold-start) COAMPS-TC at 12 UTC 3 September is evident in
Figure S3a. The six-hour COAMPS-TC forecast
Figure S3e from these initial conditions has a stronger (>54 m s
−1) and broader RMV region, and especially in the northwest quadrant. Much stronger winds exist in the southern semicircle where a minimum of <15 m s
−1 near 17° N in
Figure S3a has been replaced with wind speeds ≈ 45 m s
−1 (
Figure S3c). The six-hour z = 300 m FCDI analysis that has assimilated the 15 min GOES-16 AMVs (which are primarily at the cirrus level) is displayed in
Figure S3b. Two RMWs > 54 m s
−1 are analyzed, with the RMV almost directly east of the center at ~16 km radius and the maximum to the southwest at ~25 km radius. Thus, the inner-core z = 300 m wind field is analyzed to be highly asymmetric due to the incorporation of the 15 min AMVs. Perhaps surprisingly because the hourly GOES-13 AMVs as in
Figure 1a do not have dense coverage above the inner core, nevertheless the six hours of assimilating those hourly AMVs (
Figure S3d) have resulted in a similar highly asymmetric isotach distribution as did the 15 min AMVs (
Figure S3b). The tentative explanation is that the environmental flow on a larger scale than the inner core may also contribute to an asymmetric inner-core vortex structure within the boundary layer of an intense TC.
For both the 15 min AMV FCDI analyses (
Figure 6d and
Figure 9b) and the hourly AMV FCDI analyses (
Figure S1d and
Figure 9d) at 18 UTC 3 September, these become the warm-start initial conditions for the 72 h COAMPS-TC forecasts. That is, the upper-tropospheric wind field has been nudged to be consistent with the 15 min or the hourly AMVs, the mass field has been adjusted to the FCDI wind increments, and the dynamic, thermodynamic, and moisture processes of the COAMPS in the FCDI are the same as in COAMPS-TC forecast model. To avoid a vortex relocation step, the 6 h FCDI analyses should be within the position fix errors, which is the objective of the surface wind adjustment that has a target path from the t = 0 h position to the t = 6 h fix position that is applied each 15 min at the times of new AMV datasets (
Figure 10a, pink dots). For both the 15 min AMV FCDI (blue dots) and the hourly AMV FCDI (green dots), the ending 6 h position is along the target path, but is slow by 40–45 min (~20 km) of target path ending position. Note that the target path for the next FCDI analysis will start at these 15 min AMV FCDI or hourly AMV FCDI ending points, so there is no vortex relocation required. The 6 h COAMPS-TC forecast track (
Figure 10a, gold dots) has had some deviations from the target path and is slightly farther from the target path ending point.
It is emphasized that the Control COAMPS-TC 72 h forecast will be another cold start in which a bogus vortex is placed at the fix point, the wind field is specified to fit the TC Vitals, and the mass field is derived from a dynamic balance equation. As shown in
Figure 8b, this new vortex wind structure at z = 12,860 m is quite different from the 6 h COAMPS-TC forecast vortex wind structure in
Figure 8a. Although the corresponding warm-start FCDI vortex at 18 UTC 3 September will not necessarily have the V
max or the MSLP in the TC Vitals at that time, these two intensity measures of the FCDI vortex are self-consistent and representative of the AMV divergence/convergence forcing. Furthermore, the horizontal and vertical wind structure in the FCDI vortex should be representative of the mesoscale distribution of convective heating. The surface wind adjustment has been demonstrated to be successful in translating the vortex close to the desired target (fix) position. However, the dependence of the 15 min AMV FCDI vortex at z = 300 m after 6 h (
Figure 9b) and the hourly AMV FCDI vortex at z = 300 m after 6 h (
Figure 9d) on the COAMPS-TC vortex in the cold-start initial conditions (
Figure 9a) could be a benefit or a degradation depending on how accurate those COAMPS-TC initial conditions are in this cold-start situation.
2.2.3. COAMPS-TC Forecasts from AMV-Based FCDI Analyses
The 72 h COAMPS-TC forecasts from 18 UTC 3 September by the Control, the hourly AMV-based FCDI analysis, and the 15 min AMV-based FCDI analysis are compared with the NHC best track in
Figure 10b. As indicated above, this Control COAMPS-TC forecast is from the
Figure 8b initial conditions and has a bogus vortex based on the TC Vitals position, intensity, and vortex structure at 18 UTC. Although this Control track forecast has some oscillations in the first 8 h, this Control has the better path forecast at 24 h and 30 h. This Control then has a similar (but slower) path as the COAMPS-TC forecast as the hourly AMV FCDI and 15 min AMV FCDI analyses, which start from the FCDI ending positions in
Figure 8a. Because these FCDI analyses had the surface wind adjustment procedure each vortex was being translated down the correct path at tau = 6 h, and while the corresponding 72 h COAMPS-TC track forecasts initially had a better track forecast than the Control, other factors contribute to an erroneous turn more to the north than the NHC best track. In the future, these FCDI-based COAMPS-TC track forecasts will be repeated with the upscaling of the FCDI Domain 2 fields to NAVGEM as in
Figure 3 to determine whether that procedure will reduce the FCDI track forecast errors at the larger forecast intervals.
The corresponding 72 h COAMPS-TC intensity forecasts from 18 UTC 3 September for the Control, the hourly AMV FCDI analysis, and the 15 min AMV FCDI analysis are provided in
Figure 10c. Note that the NOAA and Air Force Reserve aircraft MSLP observations are displayed as in the SATCOM intensity plot in
Figure 5. Both the Control and the two FCDI-based COAMPS-TC intensity forecasts begin with MSLPs that are 8–10 mb below the NHC initial WBT value. Most importantly, all three COAMPS-TC forecasts predict an immediate rapid deepening instead of rising (or at least near-constant) MSLP as in the SATCON intensity (
Figure 5). Recall from
Figure 6d, and also from
Supplementary Figure S1d, that the cloud-top AMVs over the Irma vortex are consistent with large outflow aloft. The proposed explanation is that the TC Vitals that were used to define the cold-start COAMPS-TC and the cold-start FCDI at 12 UTC 3 September had a MSLP (namely the NHC WBT) that was too high. Specifically, the more likely MSLP (even at 18 UTC 3 September for the Control) based on the ADT values in
Figure 5 is much lower. A future study will examine whether initialization of the FCDI analyses and the COAMPS-TC with MSLPs consistent with the SATCON will provide a more consistent intensity evolution during the pre-extreme RI stage.
Ignoring for now the first ~15 h (9 h) of the two FCDI (Control) intensity forecasts in
Figure 10c as being the adjustment period to the initial conditions, the NHC post-season best-track MSLP is continuing a rapid decrease from 952 mb at 06 UTC 4 September to 945 mb at 12 UTC. However, then the MSLP decrease is only 2–3 mb over the next 12 h, which corresponds to the intermediate constant-intensity stage defined above. The Control COAMPS-TC forecast (
Figure 10c, gold dots) has a rapid MSLP decrease from 954 mb at 03 UTC 4 September to 943 mb at 06 UTC, and then has a 6 h constant-intensity stage before beginning the second rapid MSLP decrease. Thus, the Control forecast misses (or optimistically, just has the wrong timing of) the intermediate constant-intensity stage between 18 UTC 4 September and 03 UTC 5 September according to the aircraft observations.
The 15 min FCDI-based and hourly FCDI-based COAMPS-TC intensity forecasts do not begin the first rapid MSLP deepening until ~12 UTC 4 September (
Figure 10c, blue and green dots). Both of these FCDI-based intensity forecasts rapidly decrease the MSLP approximately 7–8 mb in 6 h. It is noteworthy that the 15 min FCDI-based forecast then has a 7 h constant-intensity stage that matches the aircraft-observed timing and magnitude of the intermediate constant-intensity stage. By contrast, the hourly FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast continues the rapid MSLP deepening for the next 18 h very similar to the Control forecast. That is, the hourly FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast clearly misses the intermediate constant-intensity stage that the 15 min FCDI-based forecast captured very well. Furthermore, the 15 min FCDI-based forecast also resumed the rapid MSLP deepening at the correct time (03 UTC 5 September) according to the aircraft observations, and then had the correct deepening until the next set of aircraft observations approximately 9 h later centered on 12 UTC 5 September (
Figure 10c, blue dots).
The ~10 mb deepening to 915 mb during 18 UTC 5 September to 00 UTC 6 September according to the NHC post-season best track was not predicted by the Control or either of the FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecasts. Rather, all three of these COAMPS-TC forecasts predicted an essentially constant intensity from 18 UTC 5 September until 18 UTC 6 September. The NHC best track also has a constant MSLP for the last 12 h, but at a pressure 15–20 mb lower than the three COAMPS-TC forecasts. The tentative hypothesis to be examined in the future is that these three COAMPS-TC forecast had an increasing poleward track forecast error (
Figure 10b), and such a large poleward track error was not favorable for further deepening.
The 15 min FCDI-based COAMPS-TC z = 12,860 m vector wind forecast (
Figure 11), which starts with the initial conditions of 18 UTC 3 September from
Figure 6b, will be discussed first as the largest impacts of the AMVs are to be expected with that dataset. In just 24 h (
Figure 11b), the outflow has greatly increased in areal extent and in magnitude, and especially in the northern semi-circle. A direct connection of the westward outflow branch with the short-wave trough in the northwest corner has resulted in an acceleration of the jet maximum in advance of that trough. The northward outflow branch has advanced poleward into a region where there was a ridge in the initial conditions (
Figure 11a), and in conjunction with the northeastward outflow branch has deflected the previous northerly environmental flow to the east. Indeed, a northerly jet maximum is predicted near 19° N, 42° W in conjunction with these enhanced Irma outflow branches.
Between tau + 24 h in
Figure 11b and tau + 48 h in
Figure 11c the direct connection of the Irma outflow has weakened with the short-wave trough to the northwest that has now advanced to ~62° W, and has also weakened with the jet maximum to the east since there is an extensive region of light winds in the ridge to the northeast that is between the outflow and that jet to the east. These weakened connections of the Irma outflow with the adjacent synoptic systems may be associated with intermediate 12 h period of interrupted RI as documented by the aircraft observations in
Figure 10c. However, another outflow burst is clearly in process at tau + 48 h (
Figure 11c) compared to outflow areal extent and magnitude, especially to the west and to the north, relative to tau + 24 h (
Figure 11b). Such a vigorous outflow is consistent with an ongoing RI of ~ 20 mb decrease from 18 UTC 4 September (tau + 24 h) to 18 UTC 5 September (tau + 48 h) in
Figure 10c, although further study is required to quantify the timing of the outflow burst versus the RI timing. By tau + 72 h in
Figure 11d, the outflow burst has continued and increased in magnitudes, and again especially to the west and to the northwest. Consequently, the direct connections of the Irma outflow with the adjacent synoptic circulations have been re-established as at tau + 24 h in
Figure 11b. It is noteworthy that the outflow toward the northwest continues to have magnitudes > 30 m s
−1 as it curves anticyclonically to connect with the jet maximum to the east. Rather than a weak anticyclone to the northeast of Irma as at tau + 48 h (
Figure 11c), by tau + 72 h there is a large and intense anticyclone to the east that is trailing Irma. Such a strong outflow and connection to adjacent anticyclone is consistent with the intensity of ~935 mb for this 15 min FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast at 18 UTC 6 September (
Figure 10c, blue dots).
Rather than a warm start from the six-hour COAMPS-TC forecast wind field at 18 UTC 3 September as in
Figure 8a, the Control 72 h COAMPS-TC z = 12,860 m wind forecast begins from the cold-start COAMPS-TC initial conditions with a bogus vortex in
Figure 8b and
Figure 12a. By tau + 24 h (
Figure 12b), the outflow has increased to >30 m s
−1 in the western semicircle, but there is not a direct connection to the short-wave trough and southerly jet to the northwest as in the 15 min FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast in
Figure 11b. The outflow in the northeast quadrant is opposed by impinging northeasterly winds associated with the northerly jet farther to the northeast, which is very different from the strong outflow toward the northeast in
Figure 11b. Recall from
Figure 10c that the Control COAMPS-TC intensity forecast had two short (<6 h) intensifications followed by two constant-intensity (MSLP) periods within the first 24 h. It was only after tau + 22 h (16 UTC 4 September) that the Control forecast began a steady intensification, but during the first 12 h of that intensification was when the aircraft observations were indicating a constant intensity (MSLP).
The Control COAMPS-TC z = 12,860 m wind forecast at tau + 48 h (
Figure 12c) has a ring of outflows around the center with magnitudes > 30 m s
−1. However, these outflows do not appear to be directly connected to the adjacent synoptic circulations. Rather, there is an outer ring of weak wind speeds, which suggests that there is a subsidence between the outflow and that outer ring. By tau + 72 h (
Figure 11d), the Control forecast has strong outflow in the northern and the eastern quadrants that connects with the westerlies to the north and to a jet streak to the east and southeast, respectively. Whereas a strong ridge is trailing Irma in the 72 h Control COAMPS-TC forecast, the 15 min FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast has a large and intense anticyclone just to the east of Irma (
Figure 11d). Nevertheless, both of these COAMPS-TC forecast have the same MSLP = 935 mb intensity at 18 UTC 6 September, which may be attributed to the Control forecast having begun the second RI segment too early according to the aircraft observations.
The 72 h COAMPS-TC z = 12,860 m wind forecast based on the initial conditions from the hourly AMV-based FCDI analysis at 18 UTC 3 September (
Figure S1d) is presented in
Figure 13. Because that initial analysis (repeated in
Figure 13a) had strong outflow to the west of the center by tau + 24 h (
Figure 13b) that outflow toward the west had strengthened and expanded in area and thus had a direct connection to the short wave trough and southerly jet to the northwest, which is quite similar to the 15 min AMV-based FCDI-based 24 h forecast in
Figure 11d. Whereas there was northerly environmental flow impinging on the outflow in the northeast quadrant in the initial conditions, by tau + 24 h (
Figure 13b) the outflow in that quadrant was sufficiently strong to push away to the east the initial impinging environmental flow. However, the outflow toward the north and northeast in the 15 min FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast (
Figure 11b) was even stronger and contributed to a strong ridge to the northeast with a direct connection to a jet streak to the east. In that aspect, the hourly FCDI-based forecast more resembles the Control forecast (
Figure 12c), which had a region of light winds in the ridge to the northeast.
Whereas the 15 min AMV FCDI-based COAMPS-TC tau + 48 h z = 12,860 m wind forecast (
Figure 11c) had indications of a weaker interaction with adjacent synoptic circulations (possibly explaining the 12 h intermediate constant MSLP period), the hourly AMV FCDI-based forecast at tau + 48 h (
Figure 13c) has a stronger outflow with a direct connection to the short wave trough and southerly jet to the north. This outflow distribution and strength may then explain why the hourly AMV FCDI-based intensity forecast (
Figure 10c, green dots) continued the rapid intensification through the 12 h intermediate constant MSLP period according to the aircraft observations. By tau + 72 h (
Figure 13d), the hourly AMV FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast of z = 12,860 m winds more closely resembles the 15 min AMV FCDI-based forecast (
Figure 11d) than it does the Control COAMPS-TC forecast (
Figure 12d). Whereas the hourly AMV FCDI-based forecast has a single outflow dome oriented toward the north, the 15 min AMV FCDI-based forecast has a stronger outflow dome oriented toward the west plus a second outflow dome in the northeast quadrant. Nevertheless, the 72 h intensity forecast for the hourly AMVs has a slightly deeper MSLP (
Figure 10c, green dots), which may be attributed to its continued RI without predicting the 12 h intermediate constant MSLP period as in the aircraft observations.
The COAMPS-TC z = 300 m vector wind forecasts corresponding to the z = 12,850 m vector wind forecasts in
Figure 11,
Figure 12 and
Figure 13 are difficult to intercompare because the differences are concentrated within ± 200 km of the centers. Consequently, isotach analyses at z = 300 m in
Figure S3b for the 15 min AMV FCDI-based analysis, and in
Figure S3d for the hourly AMV FCDI analysis, will be the format for the COAMPS-TC z = 300 m forecast comparisons.
In the warm-start initial conditions for the 15 min AMV FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast (
Figure 14a), one small 55 m s
−1 isotach maximum is just to the east of the center and the second small 55 m s
−1 isotach is to the southwest of the center. At tau + 24 h (
Figure 14b), the isotach maximum exceeds 65 m s
−1 and the inner isotachs are elliptical in shape with a north-south major axis. The RMW to the north is ~ 55 km. At tau + 48 h (
Figure 14c), an elliptical ring of isotachs > 65 m s
−1 encompasses the center, and the major axis is oriented northwest-southeast. There is some indication of a secondary 60 m s
−1 isotach maximum in the northeast quadrant at a radius ≈ 70 km. By tau + 72 h (
Figure 14d), the isotachs near the center are more circular rather than elliptical as in
Figure 14b,c, and they are U-shaped rather than having a linear decrease to zero at the center.
The Control COAMPS-TC z = 300 m isotach forecast begins at 18 UTC 3 September as a cold start with a bogus vortex that is superposed on a background steering flow such that the V
max ≈ 55 m s
−1 is at RMW ≈ 37 km to the north of the center (
Figure 15a). Recall from
Figure 10c (gold dots) that this Control forecast began with a MSLP ≈ 960 mb and had two very rapid (<6 h) deepening periods within the first 12 h and then maintained a near-constant MSLP for ≈ 8 h. In terms of the COAMPS-TC z = 300 m isotach forecast at tau + 24 h (
Figure 15b), a broad nearly symmetric ring of wind speeds exceeding the largest (65 m s
−1) isotach displayed is predicted, with increases as large as 30 m s
−1 at 35 km and beyond to the south of the center. Furthermore, the isotachs near the center are U-shaped rather the linear decrease from the RMW to the center, which is another indication of a very intense storm. By tau + 48 h (
Figure 15c), the ring of wind speeds exceeding 65 m s
−1 has contracted, and the Control forecast has already reached a MSLP ≈ 925 mb (
Figure 10c) by tau + 42 h (12 UTC 5 September). By tau + 72 h (
Figure 15c), a slight weakening is suggested by the less broad ring of >65 m s
−1 winds, a linear decrease in speed is predicted from the RMW to the center, and a highly elliptical isotach pattern exists near the center (resembling the tau + 48 h pattern in
Figure 14c).
Now consider the hourly GOES-13 AMV FCDI-based COAMPS-TC z = 300 m isotach forecast (
Figure 16) in comparison with 15 min GOES-16 AMV FCDI-based (
Figure 14) and Control (
Figure 15) COAMPS-TC forecast. As described above in the discussion of
Figure S3d, the hourly FCDI-based z = 300 m initial conditions in
Figure 16a resemble the 15 min FCDI-based initial conditions in
Figure 14a with slightly weaker inner-core wind vectors. Thus, the hourly FCDI-based tau + 24 h z = 300 m isotach forecast (
Figure S3b) also resembles the 15 min FCDI-based tau + 24 h forecast, except that the maximum wind speeds > 65 m s
−1 are in the western semicircle rather than in the northern semicircle. By contrast, the Control isotach forecast has predicted an asymmetric ring of maximum wind speeds > 65 m s
−1 at tau + 24 h (
Figure 15b). Again at tau + 48 h (
Figure 16c) the hourly FCDI-based forecast has the same isotach pattern as the 15 min FCDI-based forecast (
Figure 14c), but the tight isotach spacing indicates a more intense vortex (lower MSLP) as the hourly FCDI-based forecast continues to deepen through the 12 h intermediate constant-intensity period that was documented by aircraft observations (
Figure 10c, green dots). At tau + 72 h (
Figure 16d), the hourly FCDI-based forecast isotach pattern more resembles the Control isotach pattern (
Figure 15d) with an elliptical shape and northwest-southeast major axis. Thus, it is encouraging that the hourly GOES-13 AMV dataset as in
Figure 1 can provide initial conditions for a rapid intensification of Irma as predicted by the Control forecast. However, both the hourly FCDI-based and the Control COAMPS-TC did not predict (or missed the timing) of the 12 h intermediate constant MSLP period that is a unique characteristic of the Irma RI, and the 15 min FCDI-based COAMPS-TC forecast did predict that characteristic.