Abstract Thought: Is a Typhoon Tip Possible in the Atlantic

[Aslkahuna]

There is one storm that while at sea was significantly larger than Gilbert or Carla and that was the Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944 with hurricane force winds out 200 miles from the center. Carla is next with 175 miles. The '44 hurricane clipped New England but was weaker and smaller by then. Unfortunately, the track data is poor on the '44 storm with the only pressure being listed being that recorded at HAT but old books on hurricanes indicate that from ship data the '44 storm was Cat 5 at peak.

Steve

[P.K.]

There's a big discussion among researchers concerning typhoon wind estimates post-recon and even with recon. Needless to say, there is a LOT of doubt about the estimated wind speeds in many typhoons. One side is trying to claim that recent typhoons/hurricanes are much more intense because of global warming. The other side is saying theat many typhoons' winds were severely underestimated so that there hasn't been much change in intensities.

I've just watched that. I hadn't realised that they only measured 110kt one minute winds in Tip, that would convert to just 86kt ten minute winds at the surface. Note the pressures given for those storms in the 1990s in that presentation are way below (Up to 40hPa in some cases) what it says in the best track so they look a bit suspect to me.

Of course there is always uncertainty with estimating TCs but the RSMCs do the best they can to give what they feel is an appropriate figure.

[CycloneCarl]

It depends upon what you mean by "like Tip". From recent banter back and forth among researchers about recon data back then, I believe that Tip's winds were estimated from a wind-pressure relationship. But, as we saw with Katrina and Rita last year, it's the pressure gradient that defines the peak wind, not the absolute pressure. A big storm like Tip might have a lower pressure gradient from core to outside the eyewall than a tiny hurricane like Wilma. Therefore, Tip's peak winds may have been lower than estimated.

Here's an article suggesting that at least supertyphoons may have been stronger than Tip, but there was no recon at the time.

http://ams.confex.com/ams/26HURR/techpr ... _75465.htm

Another thing, the other TYs they mention were not analysed as strong as they say there. Tip was 20kts stronger than the most intense TY they list.

Yuri (Nov, 1991) - 120kts converts to 138kts
Gay (Nov, 1992) - 110kts converts to 126kts
Angela (Nov, 1995) - 115kts converts to 132kts

Not sure what you mean. The author of the paper Karl Horrau, thinks that Yuri, Gay, and Angela may have peaked at 170 kts based on Dvorak. Here's a quote from his paper:

"Among the strongest TCs in the WPAC since August, 1987, we found three candidates which had ODT numbers higher than Tip, between 8.3 and 8.5, and for a longer time period. These TCs are: Yuri (Nov, 1991), Gay (Nov, 1992) and Angela (Nov, 1995). These typhoons reached manual Dvorak T-numbers of 8.0 without a spiral band and which persisted for six to twelve hours. A remarkable and common feature of these three cyclones was that the ODT and manual Dvorak T-numbers peaked at the same time. The peak MSW of Yuri, Gay and Angela have been estimated at 150 knots, 160 knots and 155 knots, respectively (1991, 1992 and 1995 ATCRs). In addition, in 1997 three TCs were estimated to have peaked at 160 knots: Ivan (Oct), Joan (Oct) and Paka (Dec). If the analysis of these latter typhoons justified 160 knots, this would strongly suggest that Yuri, Gay and Angela were even more intense. So, in conclusion, we believe that these three TCs could be classified at the top of the Dvorak scale with the MSW near 170 knots."

What I'm saying is based on the best track I find it hard to believe that the winds were that much higher in these other storms than indicated. 170kts in that paper would be the equivalent of 148kts in the best track which is way above what they are in it as. (120, 110, and 115kts)

There's a big discussion among researchers concerning typhoon wind estimates post-recon and even with recon. Needless to say, there is a LOT of doubt about the estimated wind speeds in many typhoons. One side is trying to claim that recent typhoons/hurricanes are much more intense because of global warming. The other side is saying theat many typhoons' winds were severely underestimated so that there hasn't been much change in intensities.

By the way, you can see and listen to the entire presentation on that link I posted. Lots more in the actual presentation than in the abstract. Dvorak estimates made those 3 SuperTyphoons look stronger than Tip.

http://ams.confex.com/ams/26HURR/techpr ... _75465.htm

I've just watched that. I hadn't realised that they only measured 110kt one minute winds in Tip, that would convert to just 86kt ten minute winds at the surface. Note the pressures given for those storms in the 1990s in that presentation are way below (Up to 40hPa in some cases) what it says in the best track so they look a bit suspect to me.

Of course there is always uncertainty with estimating TCs but the RSMCs do the best they can to give what they feel is an appropriate figure.

When the research behind the presentation "Have there been any typhoons stronger than Super Typhoon Tip?" linked to above was being conducted, I was fortunate enough to be included in email discussions between the authors and various other interested parties, including meteorologists and TC specialists from around the globe.

This research involved a rigourous examination and Dvorak analysis of many satellite images. Whilst there was much at times vigourous discussion, no one was able to find any significant error with the Dvorak analysis of the images.

It is apparent that the maximum intensity in the NW Pacific best track data is underestimated in the cases mentioned, and there is a strong case for a thorough re-examination of the best track data and the satellite record for all tropical cyclone basins to find and correct other errors that may be present.

[HurricaneHunter914]

Maybe someone can post the picture that showed Super Typhoon Tip compared to the Continental U.S. so some of the new memebers can see his force.

[cycloneye]

Maybe someone can post the picture that showed Super Typhoon Tip compared to the Continental U.S. so some of the new memebers can see his force.

Typhoon Tip

[HurricaneHunter914]

Cycloneye I meant the one showing how big Tip was compared to the U.S.

[Brent]

Cycloneye I meant the one showing how big Tip was compared to the U.S.

[HurricaneHunter914]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Typhoonsizes.jpg

This is what I was talking about.

[P.K.]

Cycloneye I meant the one showing how big Tip was compared to the U.S.

At maximum intensity of 140kts the 50kt winds extended 277km, with 30kt winds out to 647km from the centre. Later in its life when the maximum winds were 100kts the 50kt winds extended out 740km from the centre with 30kt winds out to a distance of 1,110km.

This research involved a rigourous examination and Dvorak analysis of many satellite images. Whilst there was much at times vigourous discussion, no one was able to find any significant error with the Dvorak analysis of the images.

Have you got a link to the wind-Dvorak estimate relationship that the JMA use? I've never been able to find such a page, although if I looked back at past storms I might be able to work it out.

[wxman57]

There is one storm that while at sea was significantly larger than Gilbert or Carla and that was the Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944 with hurricane force winds out 200 miles from the center. Carla is next with 175 miles. The '44 hurricane clipped New England but was weaker and smaller by then. Unfortunately, the track data is poor on the '44 storm with the only pressure being listed being that recorded at HAT but old books on hurricanes indicate that from ship data the '44 storm was Cat 5 at peak.

Steve

I'm curious as to how the hurricane force wind radii were determined in 1944. I assume you mean hurricane #7 of '44. One thing we found in our research is that hurricanes beginning extratropical transition can have huge wind radii. Wilma, last year, was such a hurricane after passing Florida. It's wind field expanded beyond every other hurricane in our study.

[Jim Cantore]

If such a storm formed in the Atlantic and entered the Gulf, what do you think would happen?

Catastrophe

[CycloneCarl]

Have you got a link to the wind-Dvorak estimate relationship that the JMA use? I've never been able to find such a page, although if I looked back at past storms I might be able to work it out.

Sorry, but I have not found such a page either.

[Aslkahuna]

From the following paper present at the recent AMS Conference in Monterey (The Urgent Need for a Re-Analysis of Western North Pacific Tropical Cyclones- Mark A. Lander, University of Guam and Charles P. Guard, National Weather Service, Tiyan, Guam.

T Number JTWC JMA 10-1 minute winds
2.0 30 30 33.6
2.5 35 35 39.2
3.0 45 45 50.4
3.5 55 55 61.6
4.0 65 65 72.8
4.5 77 70 78.4
5.0 90 77 86.24
5.5 102 85 95.2
6.0 115 93 104.14
6.5 127 100 112.0
7.0 140 107 119.84
7.5 155 115 128.8
8.0 170 122 136.64

The 10-1 minute winds represent JMA's derived winds converted to 1-minute winds allowing for a direct comparison with JTWC's derived winds.
Note that JMA's derived winds convert to higher than JT's winds until T5.0 after which they become increasingly less than JT's. Also note that with JMA's derived winds it is only just barely possible to have a typhoon with Cat 5 intensity winds whereas JT uses a similar intensity scheme vs T-number as NHC does. If you talk to the Japanese and some other Asian Mets they will say that JT's winds are overestimated whereas others will say that JMA's are seriously underestimated. The point here is very clear-if you are going to study the intensities of WPAC storms, you had jolly well limit yourself to one datasource and not try to mix them. Furthermore
there is also evidence to suggest that JT's intensities are underestimated
for a period of time after implementation of the Atkinson wind/pressure scale.

Steve

[P.K.]

Thanks. Well one point I will make about that is the JMAs Dvorak relationship has similar increases from T5.0 upwards when converted to one minute winds whereas the NHC one grows increasingly large. I make the JMA winds when converted to one minute averages slightly higher though using the conversion the BoM give of 0.871.

The BoM and M-F seem to use a similar Dvorak relationship as the NHC. I suspect the FMS do as well but I'd have to look up a past storm to see that. I think the IMD may use a different relationship as well as the highest they had Mala was T5.5 and gave winds of 100-110kts, which is higher than the one minute version the NHC use.

[HalloweenGale]

Gay (Nov, 1992) - 110kts converts to 126kts

Typhoon Gay was "The storm that would not die" it became a nasty noreaster off of the carolinas.

[Cyclenall]

Gay (Nov, 1992) - 110kts converts to 126kts

Typhoon Gay was "The storm that would not die" it became a nasty noreaster off of the carolinas.

Are you saying that Typhoon Gay of 1992 was in the Atlantic ocean? If your going to say false information at least state that in your post. Everything in that post is made up.

[HurricaneHunter914]

Yeah I was confused about that post too. I don't think Typhoon Gay which was in the WPAC hit the Carolinas which are in the Atlantic.

[wxman57]

Yeah I was confused about that post too. I don't think Typhoon Gay which was in the WPAC hit the Carolinas which are in the Atlantic.

Nor was there any "Gay" in the Atlantic in 1992. Frances in October was the last storm of 1992.

[Aslkahuna]

After STY Gay went ET in the Pacific, the remnantstracked across into the US bringing high winds and heavy rains frist to the West Coast and AZ and then provided the seedling that became the infamous Nor'easter of December 1992. So while it is correct to say that Gay never impacted the US directly, it is also correct to say that it did indirectly in its extratropical form. This is not an unusual turn of events with the most notorious example being the Columbus Day storm of 1962-the ET remnants of Typhoon Freda which raked the OR coast with sustained winds as high as 120 mph (Category 3).

Steve

[AJC3]

Before you start ripping this person a new one, IIRC there was some talk on the web a while back about a December 1992 gale that was trackable in one form or another from the extratropical low that Gay eventually became.


edited to add: I see Steve had already addressed this by the time I posted. Let me check the old daily wx maps here at the office and see if I can find the system.

This small tidbit from the NWS office in Sioux Falls, SD....

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/?n=suxtrivia12

December 11 -

Super Typhoon Gay traveled across thousands of miles in the Pacific Ocean with winds up to 225 miles an hour in late November. Its remnants then formed into a massive storm off the Aleutian Islands of Alaska. After reforming again in British Columbia and crossing California, it gave birth to another low in Texas. Then on December 11th, 1992, this storm traveled east and became a great "Noreaster" along the U.S. East Coast with 90 mile an hour wind gusts.