2018 Cyclones Retirement

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
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4159
Age: 69
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#21 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:36 pm

Can someone, then, please explain--if they retire storms based on catastrophic damage and high death toll---how did Nate get retired last year? I've seen FAR worse storms than Nate--that did not get retired at all.
0 likes   

HurricaneRyan
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 606
Age: 24
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:05 pm

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#22 Postby HurricaneRyan » Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:42 pm

Audrey2Katrina wrote:Can someone, then, please explain--if they retire storms based on catastrophic damage and high death toll---how did Nate get retired last year? I've seen FAR worse storms than Nate--that did not get retired at all.


Costa Rica doesn't get hit by storms often, and it was pretty bad in Costa Rica. Same reason Otto got the boot the year before.
2 likes   
I'm wide awake

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4159
Age: 69
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#23 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Mon Sep 17, 2018 12:52 am

HurricaneRyan wrote:
Audrey2Katrina wrote:Can someone, then, please explain--if they retire storms based on catastrophic damage and high death toll---how did Nate get retired last year? I've seen FAR worse storms than Nate--that did not get retired at all.


Costa Rica doesn't get hit by storms often, and it was pretty bad in Costa Rica. Same reason Otto got the boot the year before.


The storm was NEVER over a Cat 1, and the death toll in Costa Rica is 14 -- Nicaragua had 2 more than that--not trying to under play the tragedy of even one death.. but all in all, there were storms that killed hundreds if not thousands over Haiti that never got retired. Nate being retired was an unfunny joke. JMHO.
0 likes   

HurricaneRyan
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 606
Age: 24
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:05 pm

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#24 Postby HurricaneRyan » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:56 am

Audrey2Katrina wrote:
HurricaneRyan wrote:
Audrey2Katrina wrote:Can someone, then, please explain--if they retire storms based on catastrophic damage and high death toll---how did Nate get retired last year? I've seen FAR worse storms than Nate--that did not get retired at all.


Costa Rica doesn't get hit by storms often, and it was pretty bad in Costa Rica. Same reason Otto got the boot the year before.


The storm was NEVER over a Cat 1, and the death toll in Costa Rica is 14 -- Nicaragua had 2 more than that--not trying to under play the tragedy of even one death.. but all in all, there were storms that killed hundreds if not thousands over Haiti that never got retired. Nate being retired was an unfunny joke. JMHO.


Each country has a representative when it comes to retirement cases. Haiti is not very vocal while Costa Rica is when there has been major disasters. Gordon and Hanna both should have been retired, but Haiti never requested it. Otta and Nate were both bad for Costa Rica's standards, and they requested retirement.
2 likes   
I'm wide awake

User avatar
Chris90
Tropical Storm
Tropical Storm
Posts: 186
Age: 28
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:36 pm

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#25 Postby Chris90 » Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:02 am

Audrey2Katrina wrote:
HurricaneRyan wrote:
Audrey2Katrina wrote:Can someone, then, please explain--if they retire storms based on catastrophic damage and high death toll---how did Nate get retired last year? I've seen FAR worse storms than Nate--that did not get retired at all.


Costa Rica doesn't get hit by storms often, and it was pretty bad in Costa Rica. Same reason Otto got the boot the year before.


The storm was NEVER over a Cat 1, and the death toll in Costa Rica is 14 -- Nicaragua had 2 more than that--not trying to under play the tragedy of even one death.. but all in all, there were storms that killed hundreds if not thousands over Haiti that never got retired. Nate being retired was an unfunny joke. JMHO.



Nate was the costliest natural disaster in Costa Rican history. The grand total from all the impacts in Central America and the USA came to $787 million and 48 total deaths, so I think Nate earned his retirement.

I do see what you are saying though about how other storms have been catastrophic and failed to get retired. From what I understand, and I may be wrong, but some countries are better about requesting retirement than others. A country, or multiple countries in the case of high impact storms, have to request retirement and then it is considered by the WMO when they meet and they either approve or deny the request. I think public perception is that the NHC is solely in charge of deciding this matter and it isn't the case. Like Emily 2005 for example. Plenty of people thought Emily should qualify for retirement that year, but I don't think any of the countries affected requested retirement and the US couldn't request because we didn't have a case for retirement. Therefore Emily remained on the list.
There have been cases where retirement requests were denied. EPAC storm Daniel of 2006 got a retirement request from some agency or organization in Hawaii I think due to "threat of damage/impact" but the request was denied because that wasn't a strong enough case for retirement.
So it really comes down to the country/countries affected have to first put in a request, and generally the case is strong enough that the name will be retired. So yes, there are storms that have occurred where I'm sure a retirement case could have been made and been approved, it just came down to the fact that the appropriate agencies never submitted a retirement case.
2 likes   
Ready for N.Hem winter and to track S.Hem cyclones.

User avatar
DioBrando
Tropical Depression
Tropical Depression
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 12:45 pm

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#26 Postby DioBrando » Mon Sep 17, 2018 3:04 am

Torino wrote:2018 cyclones retirement (so far):

Australia: Marcus (retired);
South Pacific: Gita, Hola;
WPac: Mangkhut;
Atlantic: Florence.

Those are the guaranteed (imo).

CPac: Lane
1 likes   

User avatar
EquusStorm
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 671
Age: 28
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 1:04 pm
Location: Jasper and Foley, AL
Contact:

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#27 Postby EquusStorm » Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:52 am

CPac/EPac have a super weird and eccentric track record on retirements; this year's Lane is less deadly than and at most only marginally more damaging than Lane of 2006, BUT Hawaii tends to get stuff retired far more than Mexico. That said, Iselle in 2014 didn't get axed, but Lane is costlier and significantly wetter. Certainly possible.
2 likes   
...but still, though, a lot more interesting than the 2013 season.

Not a meteorologist, in fact more of an idiot than anything. You should probably check with the NHC or a local NWS office for official information.

Torino
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:34 am

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#28 Postby Torino » Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:21 pm

Chris90 wrote:
Audrey2Katrina wrote:
HurricaneRyan wrote:
Costa Rica doesn't get hit by storms often, and it was pretty bad in Costa Rica. Same reason Otto got the boot the year before.


The storm was NEVER over a Cat 1, and the death toll in Costa Rica is 14 -- Nicaragua had 2 more than that--not trying to under play the tragedy of even one death.. but all in all, there were storms that killed hundreds if not thousands over Haiti that never got retired. Nate being retired was an unfunny joke. JMHO.



Nate was the costliest natural disaster in Costa Rican history. The grand total from all the impacts in Central America and the USA came to $787 million and 48 total deaths, so I think Nate earned his retirement.

I do see what you are saying though about how other storms have been catastrophic and failed to get retired. From what I understand, and I may be wrong, but some countries are better about requesting retirement than others. A country, or multiple countries in the case of high impact storms, have to request retirement and then it is considered by the WMO when they meet and they either approve or deny the request. I think public perception is that the NHC is solely in charge of deciding this matter and it isn't the case. Like Emily 2005 for example. Plenty of people thought Emily should qualify for retirement that year, but I don't think any of the countries affected requested retirement and the US couldn't request because we didn't have a case for retirement. Therefore Emily remained on the list.
There have been cases where retirement requests were denied. EPAC storm Daniel of 2006 got a retirement request from some agency or organization in Hawaii I think due to "threat of damage/impact" but the request was denied because that wasn't a strong enough case for retirement.
So it really comes down to the country/countries affected have to first put in a request, and generally the case is strong enough that the name will be retired. So yes, there are storms that have occurred where I'm sure a retirement case could have been made and been approved, it just came down to the fact that the appropriate agencies never submitted a retirement case.


Costa Rica also requested the retirement of "Tomas" (together with Curaçao and St. Lucia), which means any RA IV member country can request a retirement, not only the most affected ones.
http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/tcp/d ... _final.pdf

About Nate, that's more than enough to justify a retirement.
1 likes   

GSBHurricane
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:12 am

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#29 Postby GSBHurricane » Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:57 pm

Nate had a very understandable case from Costa for its retirement. According to their president, it caused the biggest crisis in Costa Rican history and the numbers support it (at least the worst since Cesar of 1996). Granted, I might not have voted for its retirement myself since Cesar killed more people in the country and caused more damage to Costa Rica than Nate when adjusted for GDP. Nevertheless I can understand why they would vote for it.

Now, onto Florence. It has a high chance for retirement but I don’t think it’s a lock. It turns out that the US didn’t request Matthew’s retirement, with $10 billion in damage and 49 people dead roughly where the worst of Florence hit (yet they requested Lili of 2002 and Joaquin a few years back). Instead it was Cuba and Haiti that asked for its retirement. This, along with Tomas in 2010 and possibly Felix and Noel Rica in 2007, shows that more than one country can ask for a name’s retirement if they feel it’s necessary. It’s possible the US didn’t see Matthew as bad for the Carolinas as say Hugo or Floyd or even Matthew’s Cuban and Haitian impacts. So far, Florence has killed about 25 people and it looks like it’ll have similar damage figures to Matthew ($10 billion or so, maybe up to $15 billion). If Matthew is any indication, Florence might not be a goner after all.
1 likes   

GSBHurricane
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:12 am

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#30 Postby GSBHurricane » Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:16 pm

DioBrando wrote:
Torino wrote:2018 cyclones retirement (so far):

Australia: Marcus (retired);
South Pacific: Gita, Hola;
WPac: Mangkhut;
Atlantic: Florence.

Those are the guaranteed (imo).

CPac: Lane

PAGASA: Henry, Inday, Josie, and Ompong
0 likes   

HurricaneRyan
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 606
Age: 24
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:05 pm

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#31 Postby HurricaneRyan » Tue Sep 18, 2018 3:09 am

GSBHurricane wrote:Nate had a very understandable case from Costa for its retirement. According to their president, it caused the biggest crisis in Costa Rican history and the numbers support it (at least the worst since Cesar of 1996). Granted, I might not have voted for its retirement myself since Cesar killed more people in the country and caused more damage to Costa Rica than Nate when adjusted for GDP. Nevertheless I can understand why they would vote for it.

Now, onto Florence. It has a high chance for retirement but I don’t think it’s a lock. It turns out that the US didn’t request Matthew’s retirement, with $10 billion in damage and 49 people dead roughly where the worst of Florence hit (yet they requested Lili of 2002 and Joaquin a few years back). Instead it was Cuba and Haiti that asked for its retirement. This, along with Tomas in 2010 and possibly Felix and Noel Rica in 2007, shows that more than one country can ask for a name’s retirement if they feel it’s necessary. It’s possible the US didn’t see Matthew as bad for the Carolinas as say Hugo or Floyd or even Matthew’s Cuban and Haitian impacts. So far, Florence has killed about 25 people and it looks like it’ll have similar damage figures to Matthew ($10 billion or so, maybe up to $15 billion). If Matthew is any indication, Florence might not be a goner after all.


Not retiring a storm that causes $10 billion in damage is really saying a lot about inflation then don't you think?
1 likes   
I'm wide awake

GSBHurricane
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:12 am

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#32 Postby GSBHurricane » Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:22 am

HurricaneRyan wrote:
GSBHurricane wrote:Nate had a very understandable case from Costa for its retirement. According to their president, it caused the biggest crisis in Costa Rican history and the numbers support it (at least the worst since Cesar of 1996). Granted, I might not have voted for its retirement myself since Cesar killed more people in the country and caused more damage to Costa Rica than Nate when adjusted for GDP. Nevertheless I can understand why they would vote for it.

Now, onto Florence. It has a high chance for retirement but I don’t think it’s a lock. It turns out that the US didn’t request Matthew’s retirement, with $10 billion in damage and 49 people dead roughly where the worst of Florence hit (yet they requested Lili of 2002 and Joaquin a few years back). Instead it was Cuba and Haiti that asked for its retirement. This, along with Tomas in 2010 and possibly Felix and Noel Rica in 2007, shows that more than one country can ask for a name’s retirement if they feel it’s necessary. It’s possible the US didn’t see Matthew as bad for the Carolinas as say Hugo or Floyd or even Matthew’s Cuban and Haitian impacts. So far, Florence has killed about 25 people and it looks like it’ll have similar damage figures to Matthew ($10 billion or so, maybe up to $15 billion). If Matthew is any indication, Florence might not be a goner after all.


Not retiring a storm that causes $10 billion in damage is really saying a lot about inflation then don't you think?

Not so much inflation as it was the 2004 and especially 2005 seasons changing the game forever imo. I think we would’ve seen names like Lee 2011 or Isaac 2012 being retired if storms like Ivan or Katrina hadn’t set the bar so high. Location I think is also a factor. If Matthew/Florence caused $10 billion to New York and New England instead of the Carolinas they probably would be requested by the US for retirement.
1 likes   

GSBHurricane
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:12 am

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#33 Postby GSBHurricane » Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:42 am

I also don’t think Lane will be retired. If Iselle, which caused up to $325 million in damage for Hawaii, wasn’t retired then I think Lane won’t stand much of a chance either. Granted, Lane was much stronger than Iselle when it threatened Hawaii but higher rainfall totals and stronger winds doesn’t always translate into more damage and higher retirement chances.
0 likes   

User avatar
EquusStorm
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 671
Age: 28
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 1:04 pm
Location: Jasper and Foley, AL
Contact:

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#34 Postby EquusStorm » Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:26 am

Being deadlier than Fran and significantly more expensive than Floyd AND Fran, perhaps as costly as the two storms combined (I've heard Florence estimates from $10-20b, so we will see) I have my doubts Florence stays. Sure, those were before the 04-05 seasons of terror, but Gustav was axed in 08 with $8b, and so was Irene in 11 with similar death AND damage numbers as Florence.

But retirement remains incredibly arbitrary and seemingly random half the time, so who knows
3 likes   
...but still, though, a lot more interesting than the 2013 season.

Not a meteorologist, in fact more of an idiot than anything. You should probably check with the NHC or a local NWS office for official information.

Cleveland Kent Evans
Tropical Storm
Tropical Storm
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 4:02 pm

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#35 Postby Cleveland Kent Evans » Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:53 am

EquusStorm wrote:
But retirement remains incredibly arbitrary and seemingly random half the time, so who knows


Well, yes. Do we even know who makes the decision in the USA bureaucracy as to whether a retirement will be asked for? Is it an individual or a committee? Are these persons employed by the National Hurricane Center or is that decision made by someone higher up in the NOAA chain of command? Has anyone ever tried to develop any specific criteria for this decision, or is it just entirely subjective and based on the emotions or whims of whatever individual or group makes the decision year by year? If anyone here knows the answers to these questions, please share. :?:
0 likes   

GSBHurricane
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:12 am

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#36 Postby GSBHurricane » Tue Sep 18, 2018 11:10 am

EquusStorm wrote:Being deadlier than Fran and significantly more expensive than Floyd AND Fran, perhaps as costly as the two storms combined (I've heard Florence estimates from $10-20b, so we will see) I have my doubts Florence stays. Sure, those were before the 04-05 seasons of terror, but Gustav was axed in 08 with $8b, and so was Irene in 11 with similar death AND damage numbers as Florence.

But retirement remains incredibly arbitrary and seemingly random half the time, so who knows

Gustav was requested for retirement by Cuba, hence the name Gonzalo replacing it. Or at least Cuba was first in line to ask for Gustav's retirement. Regarding Irene, most of the damage from the storm came from the northeastern US which gets hurricanes noticeably less frequently than areas further south like the Carolinas, Florida, or the Gulf Coast.
0 likes   

User avatar
EquusStorm
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 671
Age: 28
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 1:04 pm
Location: Jasper and Foley, AL
Contact:

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#37 Postby EquusStorm » Tue Sep 18, 2018 11:59 am

Ah. I was actually not really sure if Gustav was requested by Cuba or the US so that clears that up a little; Cuba requesting it makes more sense as it was a rather intense hit there. The first of three category four hits that year actually, heh.

Still, a likely $15 billion hit is no laughing matter even if the Carolinas have had similar storms, so I just feel that with that and the endless media attention reminding people of the name Florence over and over it's got at least a >50% shot; i think it'd be the costliest by far to not be retired.

I do wonder if with the other US hits not requested by the US but by another badly affected country, the US didn't request it because they assumed another affected country would go ahead and do so. No way to know that probably though
2 likes   
...but still, though, a lot more interesting than the 2013 season.

Not a meteorologist, in fact more of an idiot than anything. You should probably check with the NHC or a local NWS office for official information.

User avatar
EquusStorm
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 671
Age: 28
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 1:04 pm
Location: Jasper and Foley, AL
Contact:

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#38 Postby EquusStorm » Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:52 pm

I have never believed Emily deserved retirement for its rather minimal damage and death toll in Mexico despite its intensity (vastly overshadowed by Wilma later anyway) and the only real case would be elsewhere or just for meteorological reasons, but few names have had more significant incarnations so close to the retirement threshold. But I think that's getting a little off topic in the 2018 specific retirement thread
0 likes   
...but still, though, a lot more interesting than the 2013 season.

Not a meteorologist, in fact more of an idiot than anything. You should probably check with the NHC or a local NWS office for official information.

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 27384
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#39 Postby CrazyC83 » Tue Sep 18, 2018 2:32 pm

HurricaneRyan wrote:Lane is the only storm in the EPAC that could possibly have a case, since Hawaii doesn't get as many threats as mainland US. It was the second highest rainfall total after Harvey. But other than that I didn't hear much on damage from it.


It wasn't that bad from a damage perspective from what I can tell. Iselle probably did more damage than Lane, as the heavy rain was concentrated in remote areas.
0 likes   

Torino
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:34 am

Re: 2018 Cyclones Retirement

#40 Postby Torino » Tue Sep 18, 2018 4:43 pm

Florence is out for sure now, so my three options to replace it are "Felicity", "Faith" and "Francine".
I'm not sure about Lane. They didn't retire Iselle, but Hawaii requested the retirement of several names in 2006 (which wasn't approved by the WMO). So who knows, it's 50/50 I guess. In EPac, I prefer names that are common in Spanish and English speaking countries, so to replace Lane, I go with "Lucas", "Leo" and "Levi". I think it shouldn't be retired though.
0 likes   


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests