Joe Bastardi: 16-18 named storms, top 10 year

[Texas Snowman]

As per JB's post, I shudder at the implications of anything even remotely related to 2005.

Especially where we are now economically as a nation.

An especially bad season (which seems highly possible to me) and/or a particularly bad hit or two on the U.S. coastline (especially around the petroleum industry refineries or ports on the Gulf Coast) scares the bejeebers out of me in terms of what it would mean $$$ to the U.S.

Question: with all of the references to home grown storms I'm seeing, what is the strongest example of a home grown storm?

[Texas Snowman]

Saw the video. No changes from April video. Forecasts 16-18 named storms, 15 west of 55W. Of those 16-18 named storms, 6 storms (TS or greater) passing near or striking the U.S., 2 of those major hurricanes. Congregation of tracks across the northern Caribbean Islands then either turning north (SE U.S.) or heading into the Gulf.

That all seems reasonable.

Wxman57, I agree totally that given the current info heading into this year's season (based on my very limited understanding of tropical meterology) that such numbers seem reasonable.

Not that it matters I guess, but I have a really bad feeling in my gut about this season based on the input I see from mets like you...

[SETXWXLADY]

As per JB's post, I shudder at the implications of anything even remotely related to 2005.

Especially where we are now economically as a nation.

An especially bad season (which seems highly possible to me) and/or a particularly bad hit or two on the U.S. coastline (especially around the petroleum industry refineries or ports on the Gulf Coast) scares the bejeebers out of me in terms of what it would mean $$$ to the U.S.

Question: with all of the references to home grown storms I'm seeing, what is the strongest example of a home grown storm?

[Texas Snowman]

I think we will be able to use the MJO to our benefit, as in 2008. Right now, it is organizing in a way that 40 days from now would have me concerned a storm develops, and I expect to see a June tropical cyclone threat this year, perhaps as many as two by July 4th.

[/b][/quote]

So if I understand correctly, JB is thinking that the MJO would lean the 2010 season more towards 2008 than 2005, correct?

Still, it concerns me that he is thinking that there will be the possibility of as many as two cyclone threats by 7/4.

Which leads to a possibly dumb question on my part - is early multiple storm formation typically an indicator of highly active seasons to continue on?

Case in point: In 2005 you had Arlene and Bret form in June. In July that year, you had Dennis and Emily early on; then Franklin the middle of the month; and finally Gert late in the month.

And we all know what happened after that...

[Texas Snowman]

As per JB's post, I shudder at the implications of anything even remotely related to 2005.

Especially where we are now economically as a nation.

An especially bad season (which seems highly possible to me) and/or a particularly bad hit or two on the U.S. coastline (especially around the petroleum industry refineries or ports on the Gulf Coast) scares the bejeebers out of me in terms of what it would mean $$$ to the U.S.

Question: with all of the references to home grown storms I'm seeing, what is the strongest example of a home grown storm?

Boy do I feel stupid...I guess it's too late for me to be up worrying about the 2010 season.

Thanks for the reminder SETXWXLADY.

Don't know how I could have possibly forgotten about Audrey...

[KWT]

Case in point: In 2005 you had Arlene and Bret form in June. In July that year, you had Dennis and Emily early on; then Franklin the middle of the month; and finally Gert late in the month.

And we all know what happened after that...

Quick answer would be not really no, 1997 had a very active start to the season yet ended up the slowest of all the years between 1995-2010 so far...we had 5 systems (including an unamed STS as well) by July 16th, which means 1997 was actually as active as 2005 was at that point, but obviously both seasons ended up at totally different ends of the spectrum really.

[Macrocane]

Quick answer would be not really no, 1997 had a very active start to the season yet ended up the slowest of all the years between 1995-2010 so far...we had 5 systems (including an unamed STS as well) by July 16th, which means 1997 was actually as active as 2005 was at that point, but obviously both seasons ended up at totally different ends of the spectrum really.

The number of storms at that point was the same but the intensity of them was different

1997: 5/2/0 (1 STS, 2 TS and 2 cat 1)
2005: 5/3/2 (2 TS, 1 cat1, 1 cat 4 and 1 cat 5)

So at that point the 2005 was already showing signs of very favorable conditions.

[Category 5]

If you think about it, these kind of debates and projections are rather pointless. As many analogs as you can find, you can't really closely compare two different hurricane seasons or two different set ups and get a great indication of whats going to happen. There a variables that will come into play during the season that will change the playing field (for instance what if a huge SAL gets blown off of Africa in Mid August? nobody can predict that). Or what if a freak cold front dips down into the gulf in august (see 2004)? On average, the earliest you can really say what kind of season you're going to have is about mid august (and I'm probably being a little generous there). And predicting what kind of tracks we'll see is nothing short of a fantasy. The GFS can barely nail the track of an active storm 5 days out let alone plotting the 2010 season in May. A slight shift in the Bermuda high for example could change the game completely midseason. People read way too much into this stuff.

[StormClouds63]

I have a hunch that this season will be more comparable to 1998 than 2005.

Audrey is well remembered in this part of the Gulf Coast region. The re-analysis of Audrey revealed somewhat lower wind speeds and higher pressure than previously thought. However, it was still a terrible disaster with over 500 deaths.

Here's a link to some of the revised data on Audrey. Hurricane Audrey is in Section 11. This is an outstanding publication with data on several other "infamous" storms:

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/12Tides.pdf

[KWT]

Not really the case though Category 5, sure there will be systems that slip the net but you can get a generally good idea of the broad synoptics, for example whether the subtropicsl belt will be stronger then normal, etc...

[SETXWXLADY]

Don't feel bad Texas Snowman. My only new year's resolution this year was to keep track of what day it is. And as with many a resolution it has failed miserably.

StormClouds63 Thanks for the link. Is fascinating.

Category 5 I think its ok to discuss and hypothesize about what may be coming up in the season. Some people here want to learn about what causes these things. How they form, travel, strengthen, weaken... I personally want to know all I can about hurricanes. And we do know that things can always change. But as KWT pointed out you actually can figure out some things ahead of time. And discussion is good. I learn something new every time I participate in one. And some of these discussions very much have a point. We can learn from the past. Analogs and such. If there were never discussions about these things the NHC would never have added an inland hurricane warning. Which was badly needed just ask anyone who has ever been through one inland. Another thing they changed was separating the wind warnings from the surge warnings. And I can only think they are basing that on lessons learned from previous years. Yes the NHC is learning right along with us. But it would be foolish not to take former storms, years, patterns into account when facing a new season. Anyway. It's all good just how I see things.

[Category 5]

Not really the case though Category 5, sure there will be systems that slip the net but you can get a generally good idea of the broad synoptics, for example whether the subtropicsl belt will be stronger then normal, etc...

Well here's the problem, while it can be used for this (it doesn't take into account many things though) the general public reads these projections, and 99.9% of them wouldn't understand a word of your post.

[Texas Snowman]

People read way too much into this stuff.

Your point is well taken. But I don't agree that you can't look at analog years and come up with broad-brush ideas. Certain atmospheric seasonal patterns tend to produce certain outcomes.

Will an invading cold front or change in position of the BH change the game up? Certainly. But those are more localized and specific conditions that can't be analyzed until shortly before they happen.

But as stated, I do think broad seasonal tendencies can be analyzed and at least give a general idea of what might be - key words, might be - forthcoming.

For this season, it seems likely that an active year looms. Where those storms go, what kind of damage they do, etc. remains to be seen.

Besides....good natured poke coming...I notice that you've read "into these things" more than 8K times on Storm 2K!

[Texas Snowman]

Not really the case though Category 5, sure there will be systems that slip the net but you can get a generally good idea of the broad synoptics, for example whether the subtropicsl belt will be stronger then normal, etc...

Well here's the problem, while it can be used for this (it doesn't take into account many things though) the general public reads these projections, and 99.9% of them wouldn't understand a word of your post.

I think that the only real problem would come if these projections incited some sort of panic.

But IMO panic is something that can only happen relative to an individual storm looming.

Concern is another thing however. And I think that based on the idea that an active and perhaps very active season is looming (especially after last season's inactivity), there needs to be concern among the general public.

Concern that prompts them to pay closer attention to the tropics, to have their supplies and plans in place early, and concern that has them ready to promptly act if that becomes necessary.

[jinftl]

Completely agree...panic is very much a 'fight or flight' response to an actual threat to one's own home in one's own community. The dialogue that is going on as we approach this season is probably not all bad...a heightened awareness as we approach any season by those along the coast is always a prudent thing if it sparks proactive planning and preparation.

One thing that many folks on the coast experienced from the late 1960s to the 1990s was a once-in-a-generation storm that is referred to as 'the bad one'. The seasons of 2004, 2005, and 2008 are still fresh...and folks are still recovering. It is important for the public to realize that because they experienced storms in one of these seasons, that doesn't mean they are somehow off the hook from additional direct impacts for another 20 or 30 years. That is not always going to be the case.

Take one look at the 1940s and 1960s in Florida to see that hurricanes can in fact hit the same area over and over in a range of a few years.

I think that the only real problem would come if these projections incited some sort of panic.

But IMO panic is something that can only happen relative to an individual storm looming.

Concern is another thing however. And I think that based on the idea that an active and perhaps very active season is looming (especially after last season's inactivity), there needs to be concern among the general public.

Concern that prompts them to pay closer attention to the tropics, to have their supplies and plans in place early, and concern that has them ready to promptly act if that becomes necessary.

[Texas Snowman]

Take one look at the 1940s and 1960s in Florida to see that hurricanes can in fact hit the same area over and over in a range of a few years.

Or the 1950s in the Carolinas.

[Texas Snowman]

Case in point to what I was referring too. From Wiki regarding Hurricane Ike:

"Reports said as many as 40 percent of Galveston's citizens may have not paid attention to the warnings."

and...

"Even though there were advance evacuation plans, Mary Jo Naschke, spokesperson for the city of Galveston, estimated that (as of Friday morning) a quarter of the city's residents paid no attention to calls for them to evacuate, despite predictions that most of Galveston Island would suffer heavy flooding storm tide."

Consider the well-known fact that Ike made landfall on the eastern tip of Galveston Island, producing a MASSIVE storm surge in Crystal Beach, Gilchrist, etc.

Wiped out dozens and dozens and dozens of homes and most deaths occurred there.

And yet many areas of Galveston proper were still flooded greatly by the storm surge. Where thousands had chosen NOT to evacuate from the approach of a Cat 2 wind storm with a Cat 5 storm surge.

What would that death toll been if Ike hadn't jogged NE in its last few hours and he had hit the coast on the western tip of Galveston Island instead? The resulting death toll might have boggled the mind and been as bad or worse as Katrina was.

Panic is a bad thing, obviously.

But I'm not sure you can get the public living in coastal areas motivated and concerned enough when a major hurricane is threatening their area.

[Cookie]

Its getting the Balance right.

[jinftl]

These videos are very convincing if those in a surge area who are told to leave opt to stay and confront a direct hit....chilling to this day to watch these...but also very important for folks to remind themselves of what can happen as we approach another season.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQkksAVB ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZi1Mk2N ... =1&index=6

But I'm not sure you can get the public living in coastal areas motivated and concerned enough when a major hurricane is threatening their area.

[wxman57]

Ike didn't have a "Cat 5 storm surge", it had a Cat 2 storm surge. That's what a large Cat 2 can produce as far as a storm surge. Only a Cat 5 can produce a Cat 5 storm surge, though a small Cat 5 would produce less of a surge than a large Cat 2 (like Ike). Time to stop referring to storm surges as being related to the Saffir-Simpson scale, it's only a wind scale and not a surge scale.

By the way, Texas City never called for an evacuation with Ike. Ike's surge reached the top of the dike, depositing debris on top of the dike. Had Ike moved ashore just 10-20 miles farther down the coast (southern Galveston), then Ike's surge would have topped the dike and put 6-12 feet of water into Texas City and 6-9 feet of water into other communities along the west side of Galveston Bay (League City, Clear Lake, etc.)