Potential Tropical Cyclones Discussion Thread

[RL3AO]

It's the middle of June and we've seen our first potential tropical cyclone (and the second one may not be far away). Feel free to post any thoughts and comments about the new system here.

[fendie]

Seems to be working out quite well with TD2 right now! Surely will prove to be better than the previous policy.

[Hammy]

While it's always good to err on the side of caution, I don't think this is the way to do so from a scientific perspective. It seems likely that we're going to start having an increase (02L possibly being the first) of classifiable systems not getting upgraded as they no longer feel the need to upgrade, whereas they could simply declare a system at the time they feel the need to issue warnings (in this case yesterday) and trim down the track afterwards if necessary.

[tolakram]

It's forecasting, not hind casting, so for me it makes perfect sense. I don't see any issue with the science other than, just like any forecast, it's not exact.

[RL3AO]

I don't get the logic of that Hammy. Why should the NHC call something a tropical cyclone when it isn't a tropical cyclone just so that warnings can be issued? It destroys their scientific credibility. This is their solution to this problem. They can issue warnings before genesis AND maintain scientific credibility by calling something a tropical cyclone when it actually develops into a tropical cyclone.

[hurricanehunter69]

It may result in an average reduction in total named storms. I may have to keep this in mind when forecasting my total line for next years seasonal poll.....?

[RL3AO]

It may result in an average reduction in total named storms. I may have to keep this in mind when forecasting my total line for next years seasonal poll.....?

It really shouldn't. They will be starting advisories on systems that have an 80 to 100% chance of development. They're really accurate with those numbers too.

[Hammy]

I don't get the logic of that Hammy. Why should the NHC call something a tropical cyclone when it isn't a tropical cyclone just so that warnings can be issued? It destroys their scientific credibility. This is their solution to this problem. They can issue warnings before genesis AND maintain scientific credibility by calling something a tropical cyclone when it actually develops into a tropical cyclone.

Perhaps then, my issue can be best stated as an apparent reluctance to upgrade without recon if there are other indicators (microwave data and some westerly wind barbs on ASCAT.)

[TheStormExpert]

I'm wondering if this method was used prior to the official start of the season would we still have had Arlene since it was all the way in the North Atlantic?

[RL3AO]

I'm wondering if this method was used prior to the official start of the season would we still have had Arlene since it was all the way in the North Atlantic?

Yes. This won't change how storms are named when they are far away from land. It will only impact storms that form close to land and when waiting until they develop would result in less lead time for a warning.

[tolakram]

Keep in mind the number one job of the NHC is to keep people safe, not count storms.

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/mission.shtml

Mission
(Why We Exist)

To save lives, mitigate property loss, and improve economic

efficiency by issuing the best watches, warnings,

forecasts and analyses of hazardous tropical

weather, and by increasing understanding of these hazards.

[Hammy]

Makes sense.

I just feel there should be a combined balance (with neither being at the expense of the other) in public safety and the scientific/statistical.

[1900hurricane]

I feel like I need a larger sample size to form a clear opinion on the policy overall. However, I can stat at the moment that I do not like having the potential tropical cyclones claim a tropical cyclone designation (like Potential Tropical Cyclone 02L or 03L). Those should be for definite classifiable systems only. I could be slightly biased since I do lots of referencing based on these designations, but that's how I feel about that.

I can somewhat follow the line of thinking that in order to issue advisories and warning, there needs to be a designation of some type, but I would rather them have a different type of designation. Maybe they could get a letter classification, similar to how JMA designates tropical depressions that they expect to upgrade to a tropical storm at some point?

[Hammy]

I feel like I need a larger sample size to form a clear opinion on the policy overall. However, I can stat at the moment that I do not like having the potential tropical cyclones claim a tropical cyclone designation (like Potential Tropical Cyclone 02L or 03L). Those should be for definite classifiable systems only. I could be slightly biased since I do lots of referencing based on these designations, but that's how I feel about that.

I can somewhat follow the line of thinking that in order to issue advisories and warning, there needs to be a designation of some type, but I would rather them have a different type of designation. Maybe they could get a letter classification, similar to how JMA designates tropical depressions that they expect to upgrade to a tropical storm at some point?

A compromise on the numbering could've been to use the NRL designation (92L in this case) for non-developed systems.

[RL3AO]

A compromise on the numbering could've been to use the NRL designation (92L in this case) for non-developed systems.

It's possible. Places like the NHC and even TWC have used the invest designations more recently. Also, to be clear the NHC is designating all invests in the Atlantic and East Pacific. The NRL just accumulates all the info on one site.

[TheStormExpert]

I also feel that unfortunately people take it more seriously when there is a legit named TC as opposed to just seeing a "potential" TC with advisories.

[Hammy]

A compromise on the numbering could've been to use the NRL designation (92L in this case) for non-developed systems.

It's possible. Places like the NHC and even TWC have used the invest designations more recently. Also, to be clear the NHC is designating all invests in the Atlantic and East Pacific. The NRL just accumulates all the info on one site.

Interesting. I wasn't aware of that, though it makes sense since the invests usually appear about the same time as the systems show up in the TWO.

[bamajammer4eva]

I also feel that unfortunately people take it more seriously when there is a legit named TC as opposed to just seeing a "potential" TC with advisories.

I agree with this-they should limit themselves to issuing watches until the storm is designated. Why should somebody miss work and leave the area because of a hurricane warning when there is no confirmed developed tropical system-just like with tornadoes. We don't take action just because conditions are favorable for tornado development so the same rule should apply to hurricanes IMO.

[Hammy]

I also feel that unfortunately people take it more seriously when there is a legit named TC as opposed to just seeing a "potential" TC with advisories.

I agree with this-they should limit themselves to issuing watches until the storm is designated. Why should somebody miss work and leave the area because of a hurricane warning when there is no confirmed developed tropical system-just like with tornadoes. We don't take action just because conditions are favorable for tornado development so the same rule should apply to hurricanes IMO.

Tropical watches and warnings function differently than severe weather watches, largely indicating when the weather will arrive, rather than simply favorable conditions--which is why some sort of policy was needed that necessitated issuing them earlier. In the cases of watches and warnings being issued here, the weather is already there.

[Extratropical94]

Will advisories be discontinued if a PTC that once threatened land moves out to sea and watches/warnings aren't needed anymore? Or will they keep issuing advisories until the PTC has either developed into a TC or dissipated?