Different information for non-ATL TCs

[GrayLancer18]

I'm looking for intensity data for some WPAC and SHPAC tropical cyclones and found it differs between sources.

My go-to place is Wikipedia but there's also the NOAA Historical Hurricane Tracks (https://coast.noaa.gov/hurricanes/#map=4/32/-80) and the International Best Track Archive, or IBTRACS (http://ibtracs.unca.edu/index.php?name=browse-year-basin).

All are in agreement in terms of wind speed but when it comes to the minimum barometric pressure there are some incongruences with the NOAA website usually agreeing with IBTRACS while Wikipedia tends to be more conservative.

Examples (the first min pressure data is Wikipedia's; the second is NOAA/IBTRAC's):

Hagibis: 915 mbar vs 890.

Cyclone Yasi of 2011: 929 vs 922.

Bopha, 2012: 930 vs 911.

Cyclone Zoe: 890 vs 879.

And the biggest difference....Cyclone Monica. Has a pressure of 916 on Wikipedia but a crazy 876 on the other sources.


It's not always Wikipedia vs NOAA and IBTRACS...

Haiyan has a min pressure of 895mbar on its Wikipedia and NOAA pages but 890mbar on IBTRACS.

Meranti has 890 on Wikipedia and IBTRACS but 895 on NOAA.

Cyclone Winston has Wikipedia and IBTRACS agreeing on 884 while the NOAA has it at 907.

Yutu 2019 has 900 on Wikipedia, 904 on NOAA and 895 on IBTRACS...


Which information source should I go with?

I have a bias to side with the one that has the most intense pressure data or NOAA's since it's an official government source but maybe the people who work on the Wiki articles know something that go against that more intense data from NOAA and IBTRAC?

[TyphoonNara]

For all the non-Western hemisphere basins, the RSMCs are not US-based institutions. For example, in the Western Pacific, the RSMC is JMA instead of the JTWC. Despite that, the JTWC will often estimate its own minimum pressure for storms in these basins. And these often have some discrepancies (for example, in the case of Typhoon Surigae, the minimum pressure estimated by JMA and JTWC is 895mb and 888mb respectively). In Wikipedia pages, while the 1-minute sustained wind speeds estimated by JTWC is often quoted, the pressure is often taken from the estimations of the RSMCs. On the contrary, being US-based archives, the NOAA/IBTRAC will use the JTWC-estimated pressures instead. This creates the discrepancies that you have observed.

As for which estimate is more accurate, there is no way to tell since all the non-Western hemisphere basins don't have the luxury of recon. That being said, I would say take the JMA numbers with a grain of salt as their pressures for intense WPac storms are likely to be higher than reality. (This could be inferred by comparing the real measured pressures of WPac storms in the recon era before the 1980s with the estimated pressures by JMA.)

[Hayabusa]

Yutu 2019 has 900 on Wikipedia, 904 on NOAA and 895 on IBTRACS...

Which information source should I go with?

I have a bias to side with the one that has the most intense pressure data or NOAA's since it's an official government source but maybe the people who work on the Wiki articles know something that go against that more intense data from NOAA and IBTRAC?

The source of that 895 mb came from CMA (China's weather agency). I guess IBTrACS picks the most minimum pressure whichever agency (JMA,JTWC,CMA,HKO) it came from, while NOAA uses JTWC's data.

Hard to say which is more reliable since there's no more recon in the Northwestern Pacific but if your preference is 1 min (JTWC) estimates than 10 min (JMA), I'd go with the former.

[GrayLancer18]

For all the non-Western hemisphere basins, the RSMCs are not US-based institutions. For example, in the Western Pacific, the RSMC is JMA instead of the JTWC. Despite that, the JTWC will often estimate its own minimum pressure for storms in these basins. And these often have some discrepancies (for example, in the case of Typhoon Surigae, the minimum pressure estimated by JMA and JTWC is 895mb and 888mb respectively). In Wikipedia pages, while the 1-minute sustained wind speeds estimated by JTWC is often quoted, the pressure is often taken from the estimations of the RSMCs. On the contrary, being US-based archives, the NOAA/IBTRAC will use the JTWC-estimated pressures instead. This creates the discrepancies that you have observed.

Thank you for the explanation.

It's true that, because of the lack of recon, there is no way to tell which agency has the closest measurement.

If there were to be something like an official encyclopedia of tropical cyclones, I wonder if they would use RSMCs data or state all the measurements from each meteorological service.

As for which estimate is more accurate, there is no way to tell since all the non-Western hemisphere basins don't have the luxury of recon. That being said, I would say take the JMA numbers with a grain of salt as their pressures for intense WPac storms are likely to be higher than reality. (This could be inferred by comparing the real measured pressures of WPac storms in the recon era before the 1980s with the estimated pressures by JMA.)

I have noticed that the JMA sometimes keeps the same pressure intensity through long periods of time while the JTWC's more...sensitive?