Reanalysis questions

This is the general tropical discussion area. Anyone can take their shot at predicting a storms path.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Forum rules

The posts in this forum are NOT official forecast and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.

Help Support Storm2K
Message
Author
User avatar
Yellow Evan
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 10214
Age: 19
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:48 pm
Location: Henderson, Nevada/Norman, Oklahoma
Contact:

#201 Postby Yellow Evan » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:23 pm

When is 1954-1963 suppose to be approved into HURDAT?
0 likes   

CrazyC83
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 26793
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

#202 Postby CrazyC83 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:33 pm

Checking it out!!!

I would think 1951-55 will be in HURDAT in early 2015.
0 likes   

User avatar
HURAKAN
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 46080
Age: 30
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 4:34 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Re:

#203 Postby HURAKAN » Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:41 pm

Yellow Evan wrote:When is 1954-1963 suppose to be approved into HURDAT?


probably, all those years will be available by next year
0 likes   

CrazyC83
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 26793
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

#204 Postby CrazyC83 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:12 pm

Great work there Sandy/Hurakan!!!!!!!!

I have spent this evening reading it...
0 likes   

User avatar
HURAKAN
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 46080
Age: 30
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 4:34 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Re:

#205 Postby HURAKAN » Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:42 pm

CrazyC83 wrote:Great work there Sandy/Hurakan!!!!!!!!

I have spent this evening reading it...


thank you!!
0 likes   

User avatar
Ptarmigan
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 5013
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:06 pm

Re: Reanalysis questions

#206 Postby Ptarmigan » Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:56 pm

Lot of interesting data. I did not know a tropical storm hit Louisiana in May 1957, not too long before Audrey paid a visit. 1962 did not have a major hurricane like 1968, 1972, 1986, 1994, and 2013. 1962 and 1968 were in warm AMO.
0 likes   

User avatar
Andrew92
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 3241
Age: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 12:35 am
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

#207 Postby Andrew92 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 10:49 pm

Great read!

Some observations from what I know about these storms, starting with the US. I wondered about some being upgraded or downgraded, and some have been confirmed while some have stayed the same. I am not at all surprised about the 1954 findings. For 1955, I thought Diane could have gone either way with its original pressure, but it remains a hurricane. Connie and Ione were no surprises. I am pretty surprised that Flossy actually increased between landfalls in 1956. No surprises about Audrey dropping to a Category 3, and given Alex was similar and a Category 2 I wasn't ruling that out either. No surprises with 1958 either with Ella as a tropical storm or Helene. I didn't think about Cindy in 1959, but I don't think I'm surprised with her downgrade, and I'm not surprised at all that Debra remains a hurricane, but I am surprised Gracie was a Category 4 at landfall.

As for 1960, no surprises with Donna but I was up in the air about Ethel. I'm not surprised her intensity was lowered but I couldn't have foreseen her still as a Category 3. However, I still leaned towards her as a hurricane hit. I always have thought Carla was a Category 4 in Texas, no surprise there. However, I did wonder somewhat about Esther. I think the tropical storm call is a good one for New England, but there was no way in my mind it weakened from a Category 3 to a tropical storm immediately offshore in such a short timespan, and so I gave this storm a respectable chance of being a hurricane strike, just not making landfall. No surprises with 1962, though I wondered if Alma was a hurricane closer to North Carolina than originally assessed. Finally, I always had suspicions on Cindy in 1963, and am not at all surprised with her downgrade. I wasn't ruling out Ginny as bringing hurricane winds into North Carolina as it was a large storm and was not far offshore, but no-go I guess there and not too surprised.

And some of the others now. Florence in 1954, Gladys in 1955, and Fifi in 1958 did not surprise me with their downgrades to tropical storms, though I forgot about Debra in 1963. Linda was an interesting finding in 1955! I also had no idea Greta was such a large storm either, but maybe I don't know the 50's storm as well as I should. Also, I am completely unsurprised by Anna in 1961's downgraded to a pedestrian hurricane, and Debbie as a hurricane in Ireland always seemed weird to me. Maybe I shouldn't be surprised with Ella in 1962's downgrade to a Category 2, and I always compared 2013 to that year, and 1962 now has no majors. Maybe I just didn't think about that storm too much. Finally, no other real surprises with 1963.

Keep up the great work!

-Andrew92
0 likes   

User avatar
somethingfunny
ChatStaff
ChatStaff
Posts: 3681
Age: 29
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Eastern Dallas County, TX

Re: Reanalysis questions

#208 Postby somethingfunny » Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:46 am

Janet retains its 150kt landfall intensity. :eek:

Sandy, this whole paper is amazing.
0 likes   
I am not a meteorologist, and any posts made by me are not official forecasts or to be used as such. These posts are just my opinions and are probably silly opinions.

Click here to join us in Storm2k.org's official (and operational!) chatroom!

Rules for the Storm2k.org chatroom

User avatar
Ptarmigan
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 5013
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:06 pm

Re:

#209 Postby Ptarmigan » Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:17 pm

Andrew92 wrote:Great read!

Some observations from what I know about these storms, starting with the US. I wondered about some being upgraded or downgraded, and some have been confirmed while some have stayed the same. I am not at all surprised about the 1954 findings. For 1955, I thought Diane could have gone either way with its original pressure, but it remains a hurricane. Connie and Ione were no surprises. I am pretty surprised that Flossy actually increased between landfalls in 1956. No surprises about Audrey dropping to a Category 3, and given Alex was similar and a Category 2 I wasn't ruling that out either. No surprises with 1958 either with Ella as a tropical storm or Helene. I didn't think about Cindy in 1959, but I don't think I'm surprised with her downgrade, and I'm not surprised at all that Debra remains a hurricane, but I am surprised Gracie was a Category 4 at landfall.

As for 1960, no surprises with Donna but I was up in the air about Ethel. I'm not surprised her intensity was lowered but I couldn't have foreseen her still as a Category 3. However, I still leaned towards her as a hurricane hit. I always have thought Carla was a Category 4 in Texas, no surprise there. However, I did wonder somewhat about Esther. I think the tropical storm call is a good one for New England, but there was no way in my mind it weakened from a Category 3 to a tropical storm immediately offshore in such a short timespan, and so I gave this storm a respectable chance of being a hurricane strike, just not making landfall. No surprises with 1962, though I wondered if Alma was a hurricane closer to North Carolina than originally assessed. Finally, I always had suspicions on Cindy in 1963, and am not at all surprised with her downgrade. I wasn't ruling out Ginny as bringing hurricane winds into North Carolina as it was a large storm and was not far offshore, but no-go I guess there and not too surprised.

And some of the others now. Florence in 1954, Gladys in 1955, and Fifi in 1958 did not surprise me with their downgrades to tropical storms, though I forgot about Debra in 1963. Linda was an interesting finding in 1955! I also had no idea Greta was such a large storm either, but maybe I don't know the 50's storm as well as I should. Also, I am completely unsurprised by Anna in 1961's downgraded to a pedestrian hurricane, and Debbie as a hurricane in Ireland always seemed weird to me. Maybe I shouldn't be surprised with Ella in 1962's downgrade to a Category 2, and I always compared 2013 to that year, and 1962 now has no majors. Maybe I just didn't think about that storm too much. Finally, no other real surprises with 1963.

Keep up the great work!

-Andrew92


I thought the same with 1962 being similar to 2013. There was neither El Nino or La Nina that time. I would guess dry air.
0 likes   

User avatar
Andrew92
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 3241
Age: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 12:35 am
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

#210 Postby Andrew92 » Wed Sep 03, 2014 11:10 pm

Not to mention, I wonder just what kind of El Nino 1963 produced, as I have come to understand that was such a year. I think I've heard it was some kind of weird Modoki episode....maybe like this year?

I remember wxman57 saying the last time there were no depressions in the Gulf prior to September 1 was indeed 1963, until now of course. Cindy is also being downgraded to a tropical storm, although Ginny did scrape very close to North Carolina and I know produced some rough weather. I read some old newspapers on Google News a while back that say winds on the coast may have gotten to 70 mph, though who knows what the technology was like back then. But that was my basis for wondering about a strike as a hurricane without landfall.

Or maybe Arthur is better being compared to Alma from 1962? It certainly followed a much more similar path to that storm than Ginny. Either way, lots of parallels for this 2013-14 period with 1962-63, in my opinion.

I dunno, maybe I'll never fully figure it out. Plus, along with the infamous Flora, Arlene and Beulah were also majors in 1963, albeit barely. Still haven't seen a major hurricane in the Atlantic since Sandy in October 2012, but I have to think that will end this month sometime, even if it isn't showing up on models for now since it could be later than we think.

-Andrew92
0 likes   

tatertawt24
Category 1
Category 1
Posts: 302
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:57 pm

Re: Reanalysis questions

#211 Postby tatertawt24 » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:21 am

I figured this was a good place to post this:

http://www.weather.com/storms/hurricane ... ne-camille

Apparently this video was uploaded August 28th of this year. I hadn't seen it until just now. :eek: Anyway, I know the quality isn't great, and you can't see the eye, but what do you make of the satellite loop shown near the beginning? Was it weakening like Katrina/Ivan/Opal?

One thing I will point out is how huge it looks on satellite imagery -- but that can be deceiving. Hurricane Wilma, at her peak, looked huge but had a tiny, tiny core. I don't remember off the top of my head what the RMW was but I think it was pretty small.
0 likes   
Personal Forecast Disclaimer:
The posts in this forum are NOT official forecast and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or storm2k.org. For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.

CrazyC83
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 26793
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

#212 Postby CrazyC83 » Wed May 13, 2015 9:55 pm

If not already completed, 1951-55 is being released as we speak. Some data at least is now on the HURDAT page.
0 likes   

CrazyC83
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 26793
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

#213 Postby CrazyC83 » Thu May 14, 2015 10:38 am

Some highlights of 1951-55:

* Net decrease of one US hurricane. Add Hazel 1953 (FL) as it was a Cat 1 at landfall and not a tropical storm, subtract Diane 1955 (NC) and Carol 1953 (ME) - both only had tropical storm impacts.

* Net decrease of three US major hurricanes - Edna 1954 (MA), Connie and Ione 1955 (NC) all downgraded to Cat 2. Only US majors in that period were Carol and Hazel 1954.

* Carol 1953 upgraded to Cat 5 peak, while Easy 1951 downgraded to Cat 4 peak. Janet 1955 remains Cat 5 as expected.

* The February 1952 storm not only confirmed, but found to actually have had 60 kt winds (near hurricane intensity).

* No more pre-season majors. Able 1951 downgraded from Cat 3 peak to Cat 1 peak.

* 13 new storms added, with one removed (a TS in October 1953 found to be a continuation of Gail). Net gain of one hurricane and net loss of five major hurricanes.
0 likes   

User avatar
galaxy401
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1168
Age: 22
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:04 pm
Location: Casa Grande, Arizona

#214 Postby galaxy401 » Thu May 14, 2015 12:05 pm

This was during the time of some of the earliest recon flights and they probably overestimated the winds in the hurricanes which is most likely why many of the storms were downgraded. Also worth noting that Carol 1954 was confirmed to be a Cat 3 at landfall (debated whether it was a category 3 or 2 at landfall). No changes at all to Janet it appears in both winds and pressure.

There was also a storm that formed in January 1951 which might make it the earliest forming tropical system of a year.
0 likes   
I don't get hurricanes here but I do get their remnants.

CrazyC83
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 26793
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re:

#215 Postby CrazyC83 » Thu May 14, 2015 12:10 pm

galaxy401 wrote:This was during the time of some of the earliest recon flights and they probably overestimated the winds in the hurricanes which is most likely why many of the storms were downgraded. Also worth noting that Carol 1954 was confirmed to be a Cat 3 at landfall (debated whether it was a category 3 or 2 at landfall). No changes at all to Janet it appears in both winds and pressure.

There was also a storm that formed in January 1951 which might make it the earliest forming tropical system of a year.


Indeed, most of the downgrades of the high-end storms were because the wind measurements were unreliable. They looked much more at pressure readings, and simply put, they didn't match. In some cases, storms were classified as majors with pressures in the 980s or 990s (which would support a Cat 1 at most).

I'd have dropped Hazel to Cat 3 personally (and barely so with winds of 100 kt) given the data and size of the storm.
0 likes   

User avatar
Hybridstorm_November2001
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 2534
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: SW New Brunswick, Canada
Contact:

Re: Reanalysis questions

#216 Postby Hybridstorm_November2001 » Thu May 14, 2015 12:15 pm

I don't think everything has been updated yet, because Carol (1954) is still listed in HURDAT 2 database as 85 kt peak intensity (minimum cat. 3 is 100 kt).

I'm also a tad surprised at Edna's downgrade seeing how every reanalysis article I've read on the storm up until now claims a 100-105 kt landfall intensity at SE Mass. (including one chaired by Chris Landsea). I wonder why they ultimately decided against cat. 3? Perhaps wind field size, which was rather expansive.
0 likes   

CrazyC83
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 26793
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: Reanalysis questions

#217 Postby CrazyC83 » Thu May 14, 2015 12:20 pm

Hybridstorm_November2001 wrote:I don't think everything has been updated yet, because Carol (1954) is still listed in HURDAT 2 database as 85 kt peak intensity (minimum cat. 3 is 100 kt).

I'm also a tad surprised at Edna's downgrade seeing how every reanalysis article I've read on the storm up until now claims a 100-105 kt landfall intensity at SE Mass. (including one chaired by Chris Landsea). I wonder why they ultimately decided against cat. 3? Perhaps wind field size, which was rather expansive.


Wind field size was larger than first though, plus the determination the landfall pressure was 950 instead of 947 or so.
0 likes   

CrazyC83
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 26793
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

#218 Postby CrazyC83 » Thu May 14, 2015 1:02 pm

Next should be 1956-60 which shouldn't be too far away, since HURAKAN did all the work there and it only needs review and discussion.

I think the late 1960s and 1970s will see a lot of (mostly weak) storms added, since we know about satellites a lot more than we did then. Dvorak estimates could be made when they didn't in real time. I think a T2.5 analysis would be enough to get consideration, although requiring additional data to support an upgrade. A T3.0 would likely add it to HURDAT no matter what.
0 likes   

User avatar
Hybridstorm_November2001
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 2534
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: SW New Brunswick, Canada
Contact:

Re: Reanalysis questions

#219 Postby Hybridstorm_November2001 » Thu May 14, 2015 1:22 pm

CrazyC83 wrote:
Hybridstorm_November2001 wrote:I don't think everything has been updated yet, because Carol (1954) is still listed in HURDAT 2 database as 85 kt peak intensity (minimum cat. 3 is 100 kt).

I'm also a tad surprised at Edna's downgrade seeing how every reanalysis article I've read on the storm up until now claims a 100-105 kt landfall intensity at SE Mass. (including one chaired by Chris Landsea). I wonder why they ultimately decided against cat. 3? Perhaps wind field size, which was rather expansive.


Wind field size was larger than first though, plus the determination the landfall pressure was 950 instead of 947 or so.


Do you have a link to the raw data, or how they interpreted it? I can't seem to find the data sets for 1951-1955 on the reanalysis site.
0 likes   

CrazyC83
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 26793
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: Reanalysis questions

#220 Postby CrazyC83 » Thu May 14, 2015 1:54 pm

Hybridstorm_November2001 wrote:
CrazyC83 wrote:
Hybridstorm_November2001 wrote:I don't think everything has been updated yet, because Carol (1954) is still listed in HURDAT 2 database as 85 kt peak intensity (minimum cat. 3 is 100 kt).

I'm also a tad surprised at Edna's downgrade seeing how every reanalysis article I've read on the storm up until now claims a 100-105 kt landfall intensity at SE Mass. (including one chaired by Chris Landsea). I wonder why they ultimately decided against cat. 3? Perhaps wind field size, which was rather expansive.


Wind field size was larger than first though, plus the determination the landfall pressure was 950 instead of 947 or so.


Do you have a link to the raw data, or how they interpreted it? I can't seem to find the data sets for 1951-1955 on the reanalysis site.


http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/met ... aster.html has all the details.
0 likes   


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests