Is the 2010 season still on track towards 18+ or not?

[hurricaneCW]

If it was an average season, every forecast would get blasted except NOAA's 14-23. Their range is so ridiculous that we could see 12 storms and they'll say they were almost perfect by being 2 off. Everybody would be thinking of excuses as to why it wasn't so active. In reality, there is no excuse for this season not to be active. We're in an active cycle, very warm waters, La Nina conditions, low surface pressures in the MDR, Gulf, and Caribbean, and more.

[Florida1118]

realistically we have had a couple of good candidates for a NS, but just didn't get together. (92L, 96L, and TD#2 I believe) So we could have had 4NS, but they just fell apart of moved inland.

[HurrMark]

Here is a bit of analysis that might be of interest. On Wikipedia (yes, I know it's Wikipedia), I found 12 years that were deemed to be "hyperactive" according to ACE. Note when the second storm formed for each of these years:

2005 28-Jun
1950 20-Aug
1995 5-Jul
2004 3-Aug
1961 2-Sep
1955 3-Aug
1998 19-Aug
1999 18-Aug
2003 28-Jun
1964 28-Jul
1996 5-Jul
1969 11-Aug

As you can see, in 8 of the 12 years, the second named storm did not form until late July or later. So it is still not out of the question that we could still have a "hyperactive" year.

When you look at sheer named storms, here is the list of seasons with at least 13 named storms, and the date the second storm formed:

Year Named Storms Date 2nd storm
2005 28 28-Jun
1933 21 27-Jun
1887 19 17-May
1995 19 5-Jul
1969 18 11-Aug
1936 16 19-Jun
2003 16 28-Jun
2008 16 3-Jul
1916 15 28-Jun
2000 15 13-Aug
2001 15 2-Aug
2004 15 3-Aug
2007 15 31-May
1953 14 11-Aug
1990 14 24-Jul
1998 14 19-Aug
1949 13 23-Aug
1950 13 20-Aug
1971 13 3-Aug
1984 13 28-Aug
1996 13 5-Jul

So for seasons with at least 16 storms, it is rare (at least according to this small sample) that the second storm forms after mid-July...that year was 1969, which had three months straight (Aug-Sept-Oct-early Nov) of something being tracked nearly every single day (it was essentially 2005 without the July). But when you get to 15 and fewer, 9 out of 13 years, you get a near reversal with 9 of 13 "second storms" forming in late July or later.

So I am not going to say that this is going to be a slow season by any stretch. I think we are still in line for significant activity, and climatology agrees. But I think we should all agree that especially given the forecasts of the next 7-10 days, the chances that we will be completing the name list are slim to none at this point.

[HurrMark]

realistically we have had a couple of good candidates for a NS, but just didn't get together. (92L, 96L, and TD#2 I believe) So we could have had 4NS, but they just fell apart of moved inland.

Exactly. If three...or even two...of these had a little more oomph and became named storms, I think many of us would still be talking about the Greek Alphabet...and for good reason. The thing is that when the Gulf or Caribbean are "hot spots" land (fortunately) will play a major factor in terms of development.

[aerology]

Does anyone know of a source of DAILY ACE VALUES data for tropical storm activity, for as many years as possible I could down load and plot, as I have done with tornado production.

http://research.aerology.com/severe-wea ... roduction/

With an eye toward whether daily Lunar declinational angle changes have any correlation to the past patterns, of storm intensity.

Individual storms like Camile, Katrina, and Rita seem to repeat to similar conditions and I would like to plot the relationships in the separate basins and global total for at least several (preferably as many as data is available) years of daily data of ACE strength numbers compiled by a Known reliable source to base my work from.

I think there will appear in the plottings some pattern, whether consistent or not I would like to find out, in case there is enough strength of correlation to base some strength consideration forecasts on in the future.

If any one could drop a link to the tabulated data I would much appreciate it. Google searches don’t do the job it seems, too far off the beaten social media pathways.

Thanks Richard Holle

[KWT]

I think chances of 18NS are looking very slim now but thats because of the factors Wxman57 has said. I personally now think I should have stuck with my orginal ideas that suggested moderate La Nina's can't go above 15NS, logically it seems this season is proving why. Simply put, the La Nina favours blocking in the E.Atlantic, which leads to the three bad issues for June/July development, a stronger AH leading to SAL intrusions, a ULL/TUTT in the NW/W part of the basin driving shear into the heart of June/July developmental zones and La Ninas weaken MJO signals which is one of the prime drivers in early season development.

As Wxman57 said once thats overcome, don't expect much respite, esp with lower tropical pressure verfiying.

[Ptarmigan]

Here is a bit of analysis that might be of interest. On Wikipedia (yes, I know it's Wikipedia), I found 12 years that were deemed to be "hyperactive" according to ACE. Note when the second storm formed for each of these years:

2005 28-Jun
1950 20-Aug
1995 5-Jul
2004 3-Aug
1961 2-Sep
1955 3-Aug
1998 19-Aug
1999 18-Aug
2003 28-Jun
1964 28-Jul
1996 5-Jul
1969 11-Aug

As you can see, in 8 of the 12 years, the second named storm did not form until late July or later. So it is still not out of the question that we could still have a "hyperactive" year.

When you look at sheer named storms, here is the list of seasons with at least 13 named storms, and the date the second storm formed:

Year Named Storms Date 2nd storm
2005 28 28-Jun
1933 21 27-Jun
1887 19 17-May
1995 19 5-Jul
1969 18 11-Aug
1936 16 19-Jun
2003 16 28-Jun
2008 16 3-Jul
1916 15 28-Jun
2000 15 13-Aug
2001 15 2-Aug
2004 15 3-Aug
2007 15 31-May
1953 14 11-Aug
1990 14 24-Jul
1998 14 19-Aug
1949 13 23-Aug
1950 13 20-Aug
1971 13 3-Aug
1984 13 28-Aug
1996 13 5-Jul

So for seasons with at least 16 storms, it is rare (at least according to this small sample) that the second storm forms after mid-July...that year was 1969, which had three months straight (Aug-Sept-Oct-early Nov) of something being tracked nearly every single day (it was essentially 2005 without the July). But when you get to 15 and fewer, 9 out of 13 years, you get a near reversal with 9 of 13 "second storms" forming in late July or later.

So I am not going to say that this is going to be a slow season by any stretch. I think we are still in line for significant activity, and climatology agrees. But I think we should all agree that especially given the forecasts of the next 7-10 days, the chances that we will be completing the name list are slim to none at this point.

I am convinced that we can have a very active season, even if it starts late. 1968 had an early start and guess what happened. It ended on a slow note and no major hurricanes.

[KWT]

It depends on how active you mean, if by very active you mean 15+, then sure its still more than do able, if your talking towards the 20s, your going to struggle...

I personally agree with Wxman57, probably 14-16NS is the more likely range but FWIW I still expect some big ACE returns from this season...

[Ptarmigan]

It depends on how active you mean, if by very active you mean 15+, then sure its still more than do able, if your talking towards the 20s, your going to struggle...

I personally agree with Wxman57, probably 14-16NS is the more likely range but FWIW I still expect some big ACE returns from this season...

I have pointed out how some seasons have really high ACE values despite having average number of storms, while others have lower ACE values, despite having above average number of storms.

[Macrocane]

Interesting what Dr. Jeff Masters says:

Time to cut the forecast numbers for the coming hurricane season?
Here are the number of Atlantic named storms, hurricanes, and intense hurricanes predicted by the various forecast groups in their late May or early June forecasts:

23 named storms: PSU statistical model
20 named storms: UKMET GloSea dynamical model
18.5 named storms, 11 hurricanes, 5 major hurricanes: NOAA hybrid statistical/dynamical model technique
18 named storms, 10 hurricanes, 5 intense hurricanes: CSU statistical model (Phil Klotzbach/Bill Gray)
17.7 named storms, 9.5 hurricanes, 4.4 intense hurricanes: Tropical Storm Risk (TSR), hybrid statistical/dynamical model technique (Note: TSR increased their numbers to 19.1, 10.4, and 4.8 with their July 6 forecast)
17 named storms, 10 hurricanes: FSU dynamical model
10 named storms, 6 hurricanes, 2 intense hurricanes: climatology

The group forecasting the lowest activity was the Florida State University group led by Dr. Tim LaRow. They use a new dynamical forecast model called COAPS, which is funded by a 5-year, $6.2 million grant from NOAA. This year's June forecast by the COAPS model called for 17 named storms and 10 hurricanes. However, Dr. LaRow emailed me yesterday to say that the COAPS model is now calling for reduced activity. Using the state of the atmosphere and ocean as of July 15, a new run of the COAPS model was performed over the weekend. The new forecast is now calling for two fewer hurricanes--a total of 15 named storms and 8 hurricanes (including Alex.) The COAPS model generated an "ensemble" of five different forecasts, done by varying the initial sea surface temperatures by a few percent at the beginning of the model run. These five forecasts came up with a range of 12 - 16 named storms (including Alex), and 7 - 10 hurricanes. It will be interesting to see when CSU issues its August 4 forecast if they also cut their numbers. With only one named storm (Alex) thus far this year, it's getting pretty hard to have a season with 19 or 20 named storms. Only four hurricane seasons since 1851 have had as many as nineteen named storms. These four seasons--1887, 1933, 1995, and 2005--all had at least three named storms by July 20.

[cycloneye]

My numbers on the 2010 storm2k poll of 15/9/4 are looking good as things have evolved so far. August and September must produce at least 6 in each month, and then October / November to get a few more to reach the average of 18 that the different private agencies and the goverment (NOAA) have forecasted.

[KWT]

18BS is still within the realm of possiblity, esp if 97L comes through. 1969 got its 2nd storm in mid August with a burst of activity, so still plenty of time dbefore 18NS+ before unlikely.

[supercane]

Does anyone know of a source of DAILY ACE VALUES data for tropical storm activity, for as many years as possible I could down load and plot, as I have done with tornado production.

Don't know of any pretabulated values, but you could calculate ACE yourself from the HURDAT archive.

[KWT]

We could in theory go from 1NS to 3NS in the next 24hrs and suddenly catch up with seasons like 1995 in one fell swoop, as well as race away from the likes of 1969/1998/1999 and 2004...

[cycloneye]

The formation of Bonnie will help a bit the season to reach or be close to the 18 number.

[somethingfunny]

You know, we're still in July and we've got two storms on the books now. That's twice the average.

From 90L to 98L we've had nine invests. Three of them have become depressions assuming 98L doesn't develop. I believe that's about average, or maybe even above average. It's a good rate for sure. I'll have to check the Storm2K Invest Database for more information.

Here are the dates on which Bonnie has formed in the past:

2010 - July 22
2004 - August 10
1998 - August 19
1992 - September 17 (jeez!)
1986 - June 23
1980 - August 1

I don't know what the deal is with all these ULLs popping all over the place this year, but it seems clear to me that even with less than ideal upper level conditions, 2010 will continue to find a way to pop storms out at a rate that is well above average. 14-15 storms seems to be the minimum, 18 is still very attainable. If we start August with Colin and have 5 storms that month, 6 in September, and 4 in October, that puts us at 17 named storms by Halloween, plus the traditional mid-Atlantic "what is that thing?" in November or December makes 18.

[Macrocane]

Bonnie is the prove that tropical cyclones can form even if the models doesn't predict their genesis, I mean the models only started to sniff Bonnie's development only 3 days ago and they were kind of back and forth, I do think we can still reach 18 named storms.

[Category 5]

Bonnie is the prove that tropical cyclones can form even if the models doesn't predict their genesis, I mean the models only started to sniff Bonnie's development only 3 days ago and they were kind of back and forth, I do think we can still reach 18 named storms.

This is an excellent point, the models are great but sometimes we have to trust our weather instincts, hell, JB will agree with me there.

18 storms is ALWAYS a longshot, some years less than others, but slow start doesn't always mean slow finish, look at 2004, hell, 2006 had a few weeks where we were busting out storms at a good clip. All it takes is one train of strong waves, one stalled front and a few areas of storms to change the complexion of a season (and sometimes, the shape of a coastline)

Wait for the positive MJO people. It will be a ride this Cape Verde season.

[Frank2]

As of July 23:

2005: 7/3/2
2010 (at this minute - subject to change): 2/1/0

I'm starting to guess that the seasonal forecasters are beginning to wonder too, especially since some meteorologists now think the negative MJO for the Atlantic will continue through late August, because even if and when the positive phase does return to this part of the world, if it doesn't happen until after the winter jet migrates southward (and along with it strong cold fronts), positive phase or no the season will be over, so we'll see, but just two weeks from today we'll already be through the first week of August, so the clock is ticking...

Frank

[HURAKAN]

we would need a very active core of the season to reach 18+ storms