How strong was Hurricane Melissa 2025?

[Yellow Evan]

170 knots based off FL reductions in the weaker quad and TDR data suggesting winds up to 15 knots stronger in the northeast.

~891 mbar works as peak pressure at 12z given it was 892 and rising shortly thereafter.

[FireRat]

The wind damage I've seen from Melissa '25 is absolutely jaw-dropping. No question this is some of the worst wind-damage from an Atlantic landfall since 1935, definitely a high-end Cat 5 with winds over 175 mph.
Just unreal, images from various posts on X.

[Easterlywave]

The wind damage I've seen from Melissa '25 is absolutely jaw-dropping. No question this is some of the worst wind-damage from an Atlantic landfall since 1935, definitely a high-end Cat 5 with winds over 175 mph.
Just unreal, images from various posts on X.

https://i.ibb.co/k25RxL14/G5-ICQ0-WW8-AA4fj-G.jpg

Those images from Jamaica look like Hiroshima after atom bomb was dropped in1945. Also reminds me of reports of Hurricane Janet, 1955, where at least 175 mph winds (the anemometer blew away at that point) tore Chetumel, Mx apart. Janet flattened Swan Island shortly before that. The only recon. plane to be lost in the Atlantic happened in the W. Carib. and 914 pressure was recorded at one point. Below is Swan Island,

[FireRat]

The wind damage I've seen from Melissa '25 is absolutely jaw-dropping. No question this is some of the worst wind-damage from an Atlantic landfall since 1935, definitely a high-end Cat 5 with winds over 175 mph.
Just unreal, images from various posts on X.

https://i.ibb.co/k25RxL14/G5-ICQ0-WW8-AA4fj-G.jpg

Those images from Jamaica look like Hiroshima after atom bomb was dropped in1945. Also reminds me of reports of Hurricane Janet, 1955, where at least 175 mph winds (the anemometer blew away at that point) tore Chetumel, Mx apart. Janet flattened Swan Island shortly before that. The only recon. plane to be lost in the Atlantic happened in the W. Carib. and 914 pressure was recorded at one point. Below is Swan Island,
[url]https://i.postimg.cc/KzVHb5R8/swan-island.jpg [/url]

Wow! Janet was a beast!! Never seen such extreme damage from that storm before, certainly up there with the strongest landfalls of all time. Swan Island got flattened! Truly sad about that recon plane, nasty hurricane.

[aspen]

Josh has released his long-awaited Hurricane Melissa report. One of his barometers recorded a minimum pressure of 926.0mb at 17:20z, placed at 18.0438N 77.9105W. His other three barometers bottomed out at 927.1-927.3mb.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... SA2025.pdf

Since recon provided us with the pressure gradient ahead of landfall, it shouldn’t be too difficult to work backwards towards the center using Josh’s measurement and determine the minimum landfall pressure. Since I don’t have that pressure gradient data, for now I’ve focused on obtaining more precise estimates of Melissa’s position and distance from Josh’s barometer. I used Google Maps with his most zoomed-in map as reference, but I may still be a few hundredths of a degree off with my estimates. This is what I get:
—17:00z: Melissa at 18.1000N/77.9968W, 5.95 nmi from Kestrel Meter No 936.
—17:20z: Melissa at 18.1331N/77.9968W, 7.18 nmi from Kestrel Meter No 936.

[MarioProtVI]

Josh has released his long-awaited Hurricane Melissa report. One of his barometers recorded a minimum pressure of 926.0mb at 17:20z, placed at 18.0438N 77.9105W. His other three barometers bottomed out at 927.1-927.3mb.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... SA2025.pdf

Since recon provided us with the pressure gradient ahead of landfall, it shouldn’t be too difficult to work backwards towards the center using Josh’s measurement and determine the minimum landfall pressure. Since I don’t have that pressure gradient data, for now I’ve focused on obtaining more precise estimates of Melissa’s position and distance from Josh’s barometer. I used Google Maps with his most zoomed-in map as reference, but I may still be a few hundredths of a degree off with my estimates. This is what I get:
—17:00z: Melissa at 18.1000N/77.9968W, 5.95 nmi from Kestrel Meter No 936.
—17:20z: Melissa at 18.1331N/77.9968W, 7.18 nmi from Kestrel Meter No 936.

Using calculations, this gives out an estimated pressure of 905.8 mb. Given this, it definitely seems to confirm Melissa weakened some before landfall. Using this, and checking with CKZ, I would peg the landfall intensity at 150 kt / 906 mb. Lets see if NHC goes with this, as they have used Josh’s analysis many times before.

[aspen]

Josh has released his long-awaited Hurricane Melissa report. One of his barometers recorded a minimum pressure of 926.0mb at 17:20z, placed at 18.0438N 77.9105W. His other three barometers bottomed out at 927.1-927.3mb.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... SA2025.pdf

Since recon provided us with the pressure gradient ahead of landfall, it shouldn’t be too difficult to work backwards towards the center using Josh’s measurement and determine the minimum landfall pressure. Since I don’t have that pressure gradient data, for now I’ve focused on obtaining more precise estimates of Melissa’s position and distance from Josh’s barometer. I used Google Maps with his most zoomed-in map as reference, but I may still be a few hundredths of a degree off with my estimates. This is what I get:
—17:00z: Melissa at 18.1000N/77.9968W, 5.95 nmi from Kestrel Meter No 936.
—17:20z: Melissa at 18.1331N/77.9968W, 7.18 nmi from Kestrel Meter No 936.

Using calculations, this gives out an estimated pressure of 905.8 mb. Given this, it definitely seems to confirm Melissa weakened some before landfall. Using this, and checking with CKZ, I would peg the landfall intensity at 150 kt / 906 mb. Lets see if NHC goes with this, as they have used Josh’s analysis many times before.

That would be a 3-4 mb/hr filling rate if that holds up. A little higher than I would’ve expected, even with the warming convection in the inner CDO. The eye still maintained a good structure up to 1 hr before landfall.

I went back to the recon thread to see if I could compare Josh’s measurement with anything from AF or NOAA. The latter had the most consistent extrapolated measurements during its NW eyewall penetration. Using the data points at 13:44:30z (comparable pressure to Josh’s observations) and 13:46:30z (lowest FL winds, likely center), I got a pressure difference of 32.6mb (927.7mb to 895.1mb) across a distance of 0.086 degrees. At 17:00z, Josh was 0.103 degrees SE of Melissa’s center. So this might still support a sub-900 landfall if this comparison is adequate. What were the calculations you used to yield 905.8mb?

[MarioProtVI]

Josh has released his long-awaited Hurricane Melissa report. One of his barometers recorded a minimum pressure of 926.0mb at 17:20z, placed at 18.0438N 77.9105W. His other three barometers bottomed out at 927.1-927.3mb.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... SA2025.pdf

Since recon provided us with the pressure gradient ahead of landfall, it shouldn’t be too difficult to work backwards towards the center using Josh’s measurement and determine the minimum landfall pressure. Since I don’t have that pressure gradient data, for now I’ve focused on obtaining more precise estimates of Melissa’s position and distance from Josh’s barometer. I used Google Maps with his most zoomed-in map as reference, but I may still be a few hundredths of a degree off with my estimates. This is what I get:
—17:00z: Melissa at 18.1000N/77.9968W, 5.95 nmi from Kestrel Meter No 936.
—17:20z: Melissa at 18.1331N/77.9968W, 7.18 nmi from Kestrel Meter No 936.

Using calculations, this gives out an estimated pressure of 905.8 mb. Given this, it definitely seems to confirm Melissa weakened some before landfall. Using this, and checking with CKZ, I would peg the landfall intensity at 150 kt / 906 mb. Lets see if NHC goes with this, as they have used Josh’s analysis many times before.

That would be a 3-4 mb/hr filling rate if that holds up. A little higher than I would’ve expected, even with the warming convection in the inner CDO. The eye still maintained a good structure up to 1 hr before landfall.

I went back to the recon thread to see if I could compare Josh’s measurement with anything from AF or NOAA. The latter had the most consistent extrapolated measurements during its NW eyewall penetration. Using the data points at 13:44:30z (comparable pressure to Josh’s observations) and 13:46:30z (lowest FL winds, likely center), I got a pressure difference of 32.6mb (927.7mb to 895.1mb) across a distance of 0.086 degrees. At 17:00z, Josh was 0.103 degrees SE of Melissa’s center. So this might still support a sub-900 landfall if this comparison is adequate. What were the calculations you used to yield 905.8mb?

926.0 mb, 5 mi distance, 8 nmi RMW, 1006 mb ROCI. Though I calculated that before Josh replied to someone saying the RMW was most likely 5 nmi. However I don’t believe 5 nmi works because that gives out 891 which is not representative at all. Hence, I think the true RMW was most likely 6 nmi, of which that gives out 899.8 or ~900 mb for a landfall. The monkey wrenc seems to be how much was this following the only trend we saw before landfall, as we only had two fixes, that being 892 at 1302z and 894 at 1346z, which suggests ~3 mb/hr filling rate until landfall at 17z, which would be around roughly ~903 mb. It really sucks that we couldn’t get constant recon up until just before landfall so we’d have a better grasp on how much it filled into landfall, given NHC only kept 160 kt/892 mb at landfall for continuity purposes it seems (which is fine, just makes the post analysis a headache).

[ncforecaster89]

Using calculations, this gives out an estimated pressure of 905.8 mb. Given this, it definitely seems to confirm Melissa weakened some before landfall. Using this, and checking with CKZ, I would peg the landfall intensity at 150 kt / 906 mb. Lets see if NHC goes with this, as they have used Josh’s analysis many times before.

That would be a 3-4 mb/hr filling rate if that holds up. A little higher than I would’ve expected, even with the warming convection in the inner CDO. The eye still maintained a good structure up to 1 hr before landfall.

I went back to the recon thread to see if I could compare Josh’s measurement with anything from AF or NOAA. The latter had the most consistent extrapolated measurements during its NW eyewall penetration. Using the data points at 13:44:30z (comparable pressure to Josh’s observations) and 13:46:30z (lowest FL winds, likely center), I got a pressure difference of 32.6mb (927.7mb to 895.1mb) across a distance of 0.086 degrees. At 17:00z, Josh was 0.103 degrees SE of Melissa’s center. So this might still support a sub-900 landfall if this comparison is adequate. What were the calculations you used to yield 905.8mb?

926.0 mb, 5 mi distance, 8 nmi RMW, 1006 mb ROCI. Though I calculated that before Josh replied to someone saying the RMW was most likely 5 nmi. However I don’t believe 5 nmi works because that gives out 891 which is not representative at all. Hence, I think the true RMW was most likely 6 nmi, of which that gives out 899.8 or ~900 mb for a landfall. The monkey wrenc seems to be how much was this following the only trend we saw before landfall, as we only had two fixes, that being 892 at 1302z and 894 at 1346z, which suggests ~3 mb/hr filling rate until landfall at 17z, which would be around roughly ~903 mb. It really sucks that we couldn’t get constant recon up until just before landfall so we’d have a better grasp on how much it filled into landfall, given NHC only kept 160 kt/892 mb at landfall for continuity purposes it seems (which is fine, just makes the post analysis a headache).

I completely agree with your intensity estimate. Given there weren’t any further reconnaissance observations following the 1346z center fix, it’s going to be a little more subjective than any of us would like, unfortunately.

The Objective Data:

1) There was a 2 mb rise in the central pressure between the last two reconnaissance center fixes. Simple extrapolation would equate to an estimate of 903 mb at landfall (17z).

2) Josh measured a pressure of 926 mb at 1720z inside the RMW, and right at the edge of the SE portion of the eye (light rain and winds well below hurricane force).

3) Since there were no additional RECON observations after 1350z, we are left with a less definitive answer as to the precise RMW at 17z. Having said that, the RMW was 8 n mi at the last center fix. Prior to that time, there was a SAR pass at 11:10z that calculated a RMW of 7 n mi.

4) There was substantial degradation of the infrared satellite presentation following the aforementioned last RECON mission…consisting of significantly warming CDO convection (especially in the eyewall region) and an increasingly less defined eye structure.

The scholoemer equation has a pressure of 905.8 mb using the 8 n mi RMW and Josh’s distance from the center of the eye. That would equate to 900 mb for a RMW of 7 n mi.

Taking all these data into account, I’d set the 17z landfall intensity at a possibly generous 155 kt/903 mb.

As mentioned previously, nothing’s changed regarding my estimate of 165 kt/890 mb for Melissa’s peak intensity at 12z.

[CrazyC83]

The known data are pressures of 892 mb at 1302Z and 894 mb at 1346Z. There is a bit of uncertainty as the planes were struggling (and quickly turned around), however, the satellite estimates line up with a peak around that time or slightly earlier. It all seems to support 892 mb around 1400Z as a peak intensity.

Could it be possible that Melissa peaked a bit earlier, say 1200Z, with a pressure around 890 mb? The last penetration before then was around 0530Z with 900 mb. However, that is not supported by the deepening rates between 1800Z and 0600Z the previous day - it would represent a slight acceleration when satellite data didn't necessarily suggest such.

From what I could tell, he was probably 6 nm from the eye center at the time of landfall, and the RMW was likely 8 nm and the Daily Weather Map should the OCI at 1008 mb. I tried the Schloemer equation, using 897 mb as a central pressure, and got 926 mb for a value at his location. That lines up perfectly with my assessment of a landfall pressure of 897 mb.

[ncforecaster89]

The known data are pressures of 892 mb at 1302Z and 894 mb at 1346Z. There is a bit of uncertainty as the planes were struggling (and quickly turned around), however, the satellite estimates line up with a peak around that time or slightly earlier. It all seems to support 892 mb around 1400Z as a peak intensity.

Could it be possible that Melissa peaked a bit earlier, say 1200Z, with a pressure around 890 mb? The last penetration before then was around 0530Z with 900 mb. However, that is not supported by the deepening rates between 1800Z and 0600Z the previous day - it would represent a slight acceleration when satellite data didn't necessarily suggest such.

From what I could tell, he was probably 6 nm from the eye center at the time of landfall, and the RMW was likely 8 nm and the Daily Weather Map should the OCI at 1008 mb. I tried the Schloemer equation, using 897 mb as a central pressure, and got 926 mb for a value at his location. That lines up perfectly with my assessment of a landfall pressure of 897 mb.

With the objective reconnaissance data showing a 894 mb pressure at 1346z and it having been an increase from the earlier 1302z center fix of 892 mb, I’m genuinely confused as to how you come to an estimate of 892 mb at 14z?

Without that second center fix, I could buy an 897 mb estimate of the central pressure at landfall, but given it was already 894 mb at 1346z, it’s inconceivable to me to assume the pressure *only* rose another 3 mb during those last 3.25 hours prior to landfall given the continually degrading satellite presentation, thereafter.

I can accept a 900 mb estimate, personally, but anything lower just doesn’t objectively match the available data and corresponding observations, in my opinion. Even so, it’s really a relatively small difference in assessment and I genuinely respect your own personal opinion on the subject.