2017 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
wxman57
Moderator-Pro Met
Moderator-Pro Met
Posts: 18813
Age: 61
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:06 pm
Location: Houston, TX (southwest)

Re: 2017 TCRs (Irma peak intensity lowered to 155kt)

#141 Postby wxman57 » Thu Mar 22, 2018 11:16 am

CrazyC83 wrote:Many countries have released their reports for impacts in 2017 to be submitted to the WMO meeting next month.

http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/tcp/HC-40.html

Re: Irma, a site on Anguilla reported a 10-min sustained wind of 165 kt (which would translate to a 1-min wind of about 183 kt). That was likely not reliable though.


I saw that multi-page report from Anguilla a few days ago but can't find the link. Anyone here have the link?
0 likes   

User avatar
DANKENGINE420
Tropical Depression
Tropical Depression
Posts: 51
Age: 21
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:14 pm
Location: nsw, au

Re: 2017 TCRs

#142 Postby DANKENGINE420 » Thu Mar 22, 2018 12:58 pm

smh at the speed of which even baby hurricanes like franklin are being written
0 likes   
♥ lane ♥ 20 ♥ she/her/hers/herself ♥ aussie


CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27556
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2017 TCRs

#144 Postby CrazyC83 » Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:15 pm

I thought that was an official ASOS site that measured that gust? That would be in line with expected for a cat 3 landfall though.
0 likes   

User avatar
Hammy
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 3887
Age: 36
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: 2017 TCRs

#145 Postby Hammy » Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:28 pm

DANKENGINE420 wrote:smh at the speed of which even baby hurricanes like franklin are being written


It's possible that at the moment all resources are dedicated to writing Maria's report.
5 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/

User avatar
cycloneye
Storm2k Moderator
Storm2k Moderator
Posts: 116621
Age: 63
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re: 2017 TCRs

#146 Postby cycloneye » Sat Mar 24, 2018 5:38 am

cycloneye wrote:
Hammy wrote:
DANKENGINE420 wrote:smh at the speed of which even baby hurricanes like franklin are being written


It's possible that at the moment all resources are dedicated to writing Maria's report.


Even the remaining EPAC reports have not been released since Hilary on Febuary 12th,I asume for that same reason.
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: 27556
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2017 TCRs

#147 Postby CrazyC83 » Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:21 am

Hammy wrote:
DANKENGINE420 wrote:smh at the speed of which even baby hurricanes like franklin are being written


It's possible that at the moment all resources are dedicated to writing Maria's report.


Most likely they are hard at work on the Maria report, I agree.
0 likes   

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

Re: 2017 TCRs

#148 Postby Alyono » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:24 pm

Franklin is up

I wouldn't count on an all hands on deck for Maria. It likely has less to detail than did Irma to be honest
1 likes   

User avatar
cycloneye
Storm2k Moderator
Storm2k Moderator
Posts: 116621
Age: 63
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re: 2017 TCRs

#149 Postby cycloneye » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:44 pm

Excerpt from Franklin's report.

Franklin again steadily strengthened, reaching hurricane status near 1800 UTC that
day and reaching a peak intensity of 75 kt at 0000 UTC 10 August
1 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

User avatar
Shell Mound
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 395
Age: 26
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:39 pm

Re: 2017 TCRs

#150 Postby Shell Mound » Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:13 pm

CrazyC83 wrote:I thought that was an official ASOS site that measured that gust? That would be in line with expected for a cat 3 landfall though.

The meteorologist tweeted that the 123-knot value adjusts to a standard (three-second) gust, not sustained wind, of ~91 knots at the standard 10-m elevation. This would imply peak sustained, 10-m winds of about 65 to 70 knots at the Naples Municipal Airport, which was inland and slightly to the west of the centre of the eye. Taking the location into account, the data would suggest a landfall intensity of ~90 to 95 knots. Perhaps that would account, in part, for the relatively minimal structural damage in Naples, besides strict construction codes. I wonder if the storm chaser's 97-knot value on Marco Island was also measured above the standard 10-m elevation. There wasn't much evidence of sustained Cat-4 winds on Big Pine Key, as a station in the eastern eyewall measured a top gust of only 104 knots, and reconnaissance closest to the landfall time, both SFMR and flight-level winds, averaged out to ~110 knots, even though the mission went through the northeastern quadrant. The 119-knot SFMR a few hours earlier, just before landfall, could have also been subject to shoaling. The swath of damage-derived gusts up to 139 knots on Big Pine Key, according to the NWS in Key West, was due to a mesovortex. Based on all evidence, Irma was probably 110 knots in the Keys and a high-end Category 2, ~90 to 95 knots, at its second landfall, on Marco Island.
0 likes   
Tracking weather since 1992 | Following S2K since 2005
The views herein are the author's alone. Please defer to the N.H.C./N.W.S. for official information.

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

Re: 2017 TCRs

#151 Postby Alyono » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:30 pm

Shell Mound wrote:
CrazyC83 wrote:I thought that was an official ASOS site that measured that gust? That would be in line with expected for a cat 3 landfall though.

The meteorologist tweeted that the 123-knot value adjusts to a standard (three-second) gust, not sustained wind, of ~91 knots at the standard 10-m elevation. This would imply peak sustained, 10-m winds of about 65 to 70 knots at the Naples Municipal Airport, which was inland and slightly to the west of the centre of the eye. Taking the location into account, the data would suggest a landfall intensity of ~90 to 95 knots. Perhaps that would account, in part, for the relatively minimal structural damage in Naples, besides strict construction codes. I wonder if the storm chaser's 97-knot value on Marco Island was also measured above the standard 10-m elevation. There wasn't much evidence of sustained Cat-4 winds on Big Pine Key, as a station in the eastern eyewall measured a top gust of only 104 knots, and reconnaissance closest to the landfall time, both SFMR and flight-level winds, averaged out to ~110 knots, even though the mission went through the northeastern quadrant. The 119-knot SFMR a few hours earlier, just before landfall, could have also been subject to shoaling. The swath of damage-derived gusts up to 139 knots on Big Pine Key, according to the NWS in Key West, was due to a mesovortex. Based on all evidence, Irma was probably 110 knots in the Keys and a high-end Category 2, ~90 to 95 knots, at its second landfall, on Marco Island.


how many hurricane chasers set up large towers that go above 10m elevation? Unless that reading was on a bridge, it may have been below 10m elevation
2 likes   

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27556
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2017 TCRs

#152 Postby CrazyC83 » Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:11 pm

Alyono wrote:
Shell Mound wrote:
CrazyC83 wrote:I thought that was an official ASOS site that measured that gust? That would be in line with expected for a cat 3 landfall though.

The meteorologist tweeted that the 123-knot value adjusts to a standard (three-second) gust, not sustained wind, of ~91 knots at the standard 10-m elevation. This would imply peak sustained, 10-m winds of about 65 to 70 knots at the Naples Municipal Airport, which was inland and slightly to the west of the centre of the eye. Taking the location into account, the data would suggest a landfall intensity of ~90 to 95 knots. Perhaps that would account, in part, for the relatively minimal structural damage in Naples, besides strict construction codes. I wonder if the storm chaser's 97-knot value on Marco Island was also measured above the standard 10-m elevation. There wasn't much evidence of sustained Cat-4 winds on Big Pine Key, as a station in the eastern eyewall measured a top gust of only 104 knots, and reconnaissance closest to the landfall time, both SFMR and flight-level winds, averaged out to ~110 knots, even though the mission went through the northeastern quadrant. The 119-knot SFMR a few hours earlier, just before landfall, could have also been subject to shoaling. The swath of damage-derived gusts up to 139 knots on Big Pine Key, according to the NWS in Key West, was due to a mesovortex. Based on all evidence, Irma was probably 110 knots in the Keys and a high-end Category 2, ~90 to 95 knots, at its second landfall, on Marco Island.


how many hurricane chasers set up large towers that go above 10m elevation? Unless that reading was on a bridge, it may have been below 10m elevation


AFAIK, the only bridges to Marco Island are low-level causeways. Hence it should be either at or below standard elevation. If that was below 10m, then 105 kt would be a better estimate for the final landfall.
0 likes   

NotoSans
Category 4
Category 4
Posts: 977
Age: 19
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 1:15 am
Location: Hong Kong
Contact:

Re: 2017 TCRs

#153 Postby NotoSans » Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:56 am

The report for TD Eight-E has been released as well.
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/EP082017_Eight-E.pdf

Reports to be released:

ATL
TS Emily
Hu Gert
MH Maria
HU Nate
MH Ophelia

EPAC
TS Greg
Hu Max
HU Norma
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 RSMC and NWS products.

User avatar
galaxy401
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1478
Age: 24
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:04 pm
Location: Casa Grande, Arizona

Re: 2017 TCRs

#154 Postby galaxy401 » Wed Mar 28, 2018 12:21 pm

I forgot about that TD in the Pacific. Published 8 months after it formed.

Find interesting to note that in the report, the Depression formed around 36 hours earlier then the first NHC advisory. That means this storm formed before Greg did (unless Greg's report also changes it). Therefore, this Depression should technically be called Seven-E.
0 likes   
I don't get hurricanes here but I do get their remnants.

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27556
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2017 TCRs

#155 Postby CrazyC83 » Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:56 pm

galaxy401 wrote:I forgot about that TD in the Pacific. Published 8 months after it formed.

Find interesting to note that in the report, the Depression formed around 36 hours earlier then the first NHC advisory. That means this storm formed before Greg did (unless Greg's report also changes it). Therefore, this Depression should technically be called Seven-E.


The report also says that 08E may have actually been a tropical storm based on AMSU and ADT, but they have a high uncertainty range at low intensities. ADT generally doesn't do well until you get to at least 50 kt anyway. Hence, I agree on leaving it a TD.
0 likes   

BadLarry95
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 9:40 pm

Re: 2017 TCRs

#156 Postby BadLarry95 » Mon Apr 02, 2018 7:19 am

I wonder what’s taking so long for Emily and Gert. I get why Maria is and Nate/Ophelia we’re significant too
0 likes   

NotoSans
Category 4
Category 4
Posts: 977
Age: 19
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 1:15 am
Location: Hong Kong
Contact:

Re: 2017 TCRs

#157 Postby NotoSans » Tue Apr 03, 2018 9:03 am

1 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 RSMC and NWS products.

User avatar
CyclonicFury
Category 3
Category 3
Posts: 838
Age: 20
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:32 pm
Location: NC
Contact:

Re: 2017 TCRs

#158 Postby CyclonicFury » Tue Apr 03, 2018 9:50 am

NotoSans wrote:Hurricane NORMA is out.
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/EP172017_Norma.pdf

Interesting that it developed from part of the same wave that spawned Irma. Didn’t know that.
2 likes   
NCSU meteorology student and weather blogger at www.cyclonicfury.com. My forecasts and thoughts are NOT official, for official forecasts please consult the National Hurricane Center.

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27556
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2017 TCRs

#159 Postby CrazyC83 » Wed Apr 04, 2018 2:23 pm

BadLarry95 wrote:I wonder what’s taking so long for Emily and Gert. I get why Maria is and Nate/Ophelia we’re significant too


Probably lower priority at NHC, they are having to spend so much time and energy on the big ones like Harvey, Irma and Maria that they just keep pushing it off.
2 likes   

User avatar
Hammy
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 3887
Age: 36
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: 2017 TCRs

#160 Postby Hammy » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:42 pm

Gert's report is out, upped to 95kt as many here thought. https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/AL082017_Gert.pdf
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/


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cajungal, CyclonicFury, Google Adsense [Bot], HurricaneFan, HurricaneMaster_PR, riapal, Siker and 59 guests