2016 TCRs

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
Hammy
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 3780
Age: 35
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: 2016 TCRs

#61 Postby Hammy » Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:53 pm

Nicole is out before Lisa which is just making me more curious as to what's going on with that one.
0 likes   
The above post is not official and should not be used as such. It is the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. It is not endorsed by any professional institution or storm2k.org. For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.
---
My comics.
http://tba.cfw.me/
http://tbakids.cfw.me/

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs

#62 Postby CrazyC83 » Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:36 pm

Hammy wrote:Nicole is out before Lisa which is just making me more curious as to what's going on with that one.


There is often one or two storms that come out strangely late. But usually late TCR's are either for the most notable storms (i.e. major landfalls) or those with disputed statuses or classifications.
0 likes   

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs

#63 Postby CrazyC83 » Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:46 pm

Nicole was NOT a landfall on Bermuda, which makes sense given the relatively modest winds recorded there compared to aircraft (I had previously suspected it had weakened well below the operationally assessed 105 kt at the time, despite the fact that aircraft supported such).
0 likes   

User avatar
galaxy401
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1462
Age: 24
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:04 pm
Location: Casa Grande, Arizona

Re: 2016 TCRs

#64 Postby galaxy401 » Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:07 pm

Big thing to note with Nicole was after it passed Bermuda. It remained a tropical cyclone but according to the report, Nicole was transitioning to an extratropical cyclone before it regained tropical characteristics. May have been close to subtropical.
0 likes   
I don't get hurricanes here but I do get their remnants.

User avatar
Hammy
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 3780
Age: 35
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: 2016 TCRs

#65 Postby Hammy » Thu Feb 16, 2017 5:27 pm

CrazyC83 wrote:Nicole was NOT a landfall on Bermuda, which makes sense given the relatively modest winds recorded there compared to aircraft (I had previously suspected it had weakened well below the operationally assessed 105 kt at the time, despite the fact that aircraft supported such).


Being small as it is, wouldn't Bermuda have missed the strongest winds as the island is smaller than the eye and thus didn't receive any of the eastern half?
0 likes   
The above post is not official and should not be used as such. It is the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. It is not endorsed by any professional institution or storm2k.org. For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.
---
My comics.
http://tba.cfw.me/
http://tbakids.cfw.me/

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs

#66 Postby CrazyC83 » Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:09 pm

Lisa and Seymour are out.

Remaining NHC TCR's: Matthew, Blas, Howard, Roslyn, Ulika
0 likes   

User avatar
galaxy401
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1462
Age: 24
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:04 pm
Location: Casa Grande, Arizona

Re: 2016 TCRs

#67 Postby galaxy401 » Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:00 pm

After a lull, Ulika has been released.
0 likes   
I don't get hurricanes here but I do get their remnants.

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs

#68 Postby CrazyC83 » Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:20 pm

It seems the NHC is late publishing them, usually they are all out by now especially with the WMO meeting next week. I wonder why the delay?
1 likes   

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs

#69 Postby CrazyC83 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:56 pm

Blas is out.

Only awaiting Matthew, Howard and Roslyn.
0 likes   

User avatar
TheAustinMan
Category 3
Category 3
Posts: 834
Age: 19
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:26 pm
Location: Oak Hill, TX (Southwest Austin)
Contact:

Re: 2016 TCRs

#70 Postby TheAustinMan » Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:41 pm

In case anyone was curious in the average amount of time it takes for a TCR to be published... here's a chart. I wasn't able to get data on some storms because only the date of revision was listed and not the original publication date. Atlantic storms only for this data below, but I imagine EPAC figures would look similar.

Image
0 likes   
ImageImageImage
- Treat my opinions with a grain of salt. For official information see your local weather service/RSMC.
- Stop by and chat on Storm2K's IRC channel (#storm2k on irc.esper.net, or click here)

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs

#71 Postby CrazyC83 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:14 pm

TheAustinMan wrote:In case anyone was curious in the average amount of time it takes for a TCR to be published... here's a chart. I wasn't able to get data on some storms because only the date of revision was listed and not the original publication date. Atlantic storms only for this data below, but I imagine EPAC figures would look similar.

http://i.imgur.com/kZyJxvc.png


Slower seasons (especially when both the EPAC and Atlantic are near or below normal) are generally quicker, plus before about 2003 or so they were not as in depth.
0 likes   

User avatar
galaxy401
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1462
Age: 24
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:04 pm
Location: Casa Grande, Arizona

Re: 2016 TCRs

#72 Postby galaxy401 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:27 pm

Nice to see a report again, been awhile since the last one. Blas formed over 9 months ago. Surprised Howard and Roslyn are taking awhile considering they were short lived storms. Matthew is understandable due to a lot of stuff to write and detail.
0 likes   
I don't get hurricanes here but I do get their remnants.

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs

#73 Postby CrazyC83 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:14 pm

Howard and Roslyn just released, finishing off the EPAC.

Only Matthew is still outstanding, and that should be over 100 pages long.
0 likes   

J_J99
Tropical Depression
Tropical Depression
Posts: 63
Age: 19
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 9:43 pm
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: 2016 TCRs

#74 Postby J_J99 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:21 am

I hope the TCR is released soon for Matthew.... its been killing me to know what Matthew was really doing during its lifetime.

Any predictions from you all about what the NHC may change intensity, track, damage estimates, etc?
0 likes   
The following post is NOT an official forecast and should not be used as such. It is just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. It is NOT endorsed by any professional institution including storm2k.org For Official Information please refer to the NHC and NWS products.

User avatar
cycloneye
Storm2k Moderator
Storm2k Moderator
Posts: 115618
Age: 62
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re: 2016 TCRs

#75 Postby cycloneye » Tue Apr 04, 2017 9:04 am

Hurricane Matthew report is up.

A extract of report:

Matthew’s estimated peak intensity of 145 kt at 0000 UTC 1 October is based on SFMRmeasured surface winds of 143 kt at 0010 UTC. Post-storm quality control checks made by the NOAA Hurricane Research Division (HRD) suggest that was a reliable report. These peak wind speeds were observed at the end of the rapid intensification cycle, during which time Matthew’s radius of maximum winds had contracted down from 30 n mi to approximately 5 n mi.

Matthew’s estimated minimum central pressure of 934 mb, which was first observed at 0000 UTC 4 October, is based on a dropwindsonde surface pressure measurement of 934 mb at 2343 UTC 3 October, which was accompanied by a surface wind of 4 kt. The estimated central pressure of 942 mb at the time of Matthew’s 145-kt peak intensity is based on a dropwindsonde surface pressure measurement of 944 mb at 0125 UTC 1 October, which was accompanied by a surface wind of 18 kt

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/AL142016_Matthew.pdf
0 likes   
Visit the Caribbean-Central America Weather Thread where you can find at first post web cams,radars
and observations from Caribbean basin members Click Here

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs= Hurricane Matthew report is up

#76 Postby CrazyC83 » Tue Apr 04, 2017 11:02 am

Quite a few interesting things I noted in the Matthew report.

1) If you look at the graph near the end, the KZC P-W for 145 kt at its wind peak was 916mb, while the actual pressure was 942mb. There was a significant difference in pressure there - so there may have been some other factors that allowed it to become a Cat 5 during that time.

2) They kept the intensity constant in the 11 hours before Haiti landfall. Yet it appears the satellite presentation improved in that time (with no Recon available). I would have at least gone 135 kt there and had a lower minimum pressure.

3) Some of the intensities near the coast were increased - the SC landfall upped from 65 to 75 kt.
0 likes   

Alyono
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 6960
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2013 3:52 pm
Location: Texas Coast

Re: 2016 TCRs= Hurricane Matthew report is up

#77 Postby Alyono » Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:19 pm

CrazyC83 wrote:Quite a few interesting things I noted in the Matthew report.

1) If you look at the graph near the end, the KZC P-W for 145 kt at its wind peak was 916mb, while the actual pressure was 942mb. There was a significant difference in pressure there - so there may have been some other factors that allowed it to become a Cat 5 during that time.

2) They kept the intensity constant in the 11 hours before Haiti landfall. Yet it appears the satellite presentation improved in that time (with no Recon available). I would have at least gone 135 kt there and had a lower minimum pressure.

3) Some of the intensities near the coast were increased - the SC landfall upped from 65 to 75 kt.


That's why you NEVER rely upon a P/W relationship 100%. The south-central Caribbean almost ALWAYS has higher pressures than what would be expected given a particular wind speed. Likewise, the NW Caribbean and Gulf often require lower than expected pressures to support a given wind
1 likes   

User avatar
1900hurricane
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4345
Age: 28
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:04 pm
Location: College Station, TX
Contact:

Re: 2016 TCRs= Hurricane Matthew report is up

#78 Postby 1900hurricane » Tue Apr 04, 2017 2:25 pm

The finalized data pushes Matthew's ACE above 50*10**4 kt**2 and put the year almost to 140*10**4 kt**2, the highest since 2010.
0 likes   
Wayward meteorology student on a journey back to the promised land.

Follow me on Twitter at @1900hurricane : Read blogs at https://1900hurricane.wordpress.com/

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27435
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2016 TCRs= Hurricane Matthew report is up

#79 Postby CrazyC83 » Tue Apr 04, 2017 4:13 pm

It makes me wonder - should Felix in 2007 be revisited?

At peak intensity, it had some similarities to Matthew - quite a high pressure, very deep convection and tons of lightning in the eyewall. It was analyzed at 150 kt based on a blend of data including an SFMR reading of 163 kt and flight-level winds of 161 kt, which supports about 145 kt (a data gap also existed as Recon was forced to leave due to graupel in the eyewall). Maybe the 163 kt SFMR is accurate and the peak intensity should be raised to 160 or 165 kt?

In the case of Matthew, the flight-level winds never supported Cat 5 (highest were 143 kt at the time of lowest pressure, and they were around 140 kt at peak intensity, supporting an intensity of around 125 kt at that time), and in rapidly intensifying storms the 90% rule has been proven to often be inaccurate and an underestimate, particularly when convectively active.
0 likes   

Alyono
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 6960
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2013 3:52 pm
Location: Texas Coast

Re: 2016 TCRs= Hurricane Matthew report is up

#80 Postby Alyono » Tue Apr 04, 2017 5:56 pm

CrazyC83 wrote:It makes me wonder - should Felix in 2007 be revisited?

At peak intensity, it had some similarities to Matthew - quite a high pressure, very deep convection and tons of lightning in the eyewall. It was analyzed at 150 kt based on a blend of data including an SFMR reading of 163 kt and flight-level winds of 161 kt, which supports about 145 kt (a data gap also existed as Recon was forced to leave due to graupel in the eyewall). Maybe the 163 kt SFMR is accurate and the peak intensity should be raised to 160 or 165 kt?

In the case of Matthew, the flight-level winds never supported Cat 5 (highest were 143 kt at the time of lowest pressure, and they were around 140 kt at peak intensity, supporting an intensity of around 125 kt at that time), and in rapidly intensifying storms the 90% rule has been proven to often be inaccurate and an underestimate, particularly when convectively active.


of course it should. As should Andrew
0 likes   


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 1900hurricane, AnnularCane, crownweather, euro6208, Google Adsense [Bot], Ntxw, SconnieCane and 29 guests