Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

This is the general tropical discussion area. Anyone can take their shot at predicting a storms path.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Forum rules

The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.

Help Support Storm2K
Message
Author
MarioProtVI
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 663
Age: 22
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:33 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#721 Postby MarioProtVI » Fri Feb 24, 2023 1:46 pm

 https://twitter.com/doomhaMwx/status/1629129334257762305



More evidence for Lorenzo not being a C5 at all. Supposedly “935 mb” or whatever according to NHC but this buoy estimate indicates an intensity of only 115-120 kt.
1 likes   

User avatar
Yellow Evan
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 15948
Age: 25
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:48 pm
Location: Henderson, Nevada/Honolulu, HI
Contact:

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#722 Postby Yellow Evan » Fri Feb 24, 2023 6:38 pm

That buoy supports 938 mbar or so using the scho equation. Definitely stronger than 115-120 but go ahead.
5 likes   

ljmac75
Tropical Depression
Tropical Depression
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2023 12:30 am

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#723 Postby ljmac75 » Thu May 18, 2023 5:49 pm

One intense storm nobody seems to have mentioned here is Cyclone George. Per the Australian BOM it peaked with a minimum central pressure of 902 mbar. The cyclone report for it does not seem to explain what that estimate is based on though, and the JTWC has it being much less intense so I don't know if it counts.
0 likes   

User avatar
1900hurricane
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 6044
Age: 32
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:04 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#724 Postby 1900hurricane » Wed May 31, 2023 8:39 pm

ljmac75 wrote:One intense storm nobody seems to have mentioned here is Cyclone George. Per the Australian BOM it peaked with a minimum central pressure of 902 mbar. The cyclone report for it does not seem to explain what that estimate is based on though, and the JTWC has it being much less intense so I don't know if it counts.

George is one of the last storms that had a pressure assigned to it using the old Atkinson & Holliday Wind/Pressure relationship, known with the shorthand of AH77. George impacted Bedout Island as it approached the coast, where it recorded at the time the highest 10 minute sustained wind in all of Australia. Using that reading and the strengthening trend, BoM estimated a AUS C5 landfall with winds of 125 kt. JTWC on the other hand was using satellite estimates. Regardless, George was a a strong TC at landfall, but it probably did not have a 902 mb pressure.

That wind record at Bedout Island I mentioned? That was actually broken just this past April at the same recording station by Cyclone Ilsa.
6 likes   
Contract Meteorologist. TAMU & MSST. Fiercely authentic, one of a kind. We are all given free will, so choose a life meant to be lived. We are the Masters of our own Stories.
Opinions expressed are mine alone.

Follow me on Twitter at @1900hurricane : Read blogs at https://1900hurricane.wordpress.com/

User avatar
1900hurricane
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 6044
Age: 32
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:04 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#725 Postby 1900hurricane » Thu Jun 01, 2023 8:05 pm

Here's a few images of George near peak intensity/landfall.

Image

Image

Also, here's a few of Ilsa.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
3 likes   
Contract Meteorologist. TAMU & MSST. Fiercely authentic, one of a kind. We are all given free will, so choose a life meant to be lived. We are the Masters of our own Stories.
Opinions expressed are mine alone.

Follow me on Twitter at @1900hurricane : Read blogs at https://1900hurricane.wordpress.com/

ljmac75
Tropical Depression
Tropical Depression
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2023 12:30 am

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#726 Postby ljmac75 » Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:08 pm

1900hurricane wrote:
ljmac75 wrote:One intense storm nobody seems to have mentioned here is Cyclone George. Per the Australian BOM it peaked with a minimum central pressure of 902 mbar. The cyclone report for it does not seem to explain what that estimate is based on though, and the JTWC has it being much less intense so I don't know if it counts.

George is one of the last storms that had a pressure assigned to it using the old Atkinson & Holliday Wind/Pressure relationship, known with the shorthand of AH77. George impacted Bedout Island as it approached the coast, where it recorded at the time the highest 10 minute sustained wind in all of Australia. Using that reading and the strengthening trend, BoM estimated a AUS C5 landfall with winds of 125 kt. JTWC on the other hand was using satellite estimates. Regardless, George was a a strong TC at landfall, but it probably did not have a 902 mb pressure.

That wind record at Bedout Island I mentioned? That was actually broken just this past April at the same recording station by Cyclone Ilsa.


I saw how the record was broken by Ilsa, I wonder what the highest record ten-minute speed is worldwide. Highest I can think of at the moment is Maria on Dominica at 130 kt. Glad someone was able to explain that George pressure, without recon and the sparse population I guess there's not much else that can be done to estimate pressure but base it on wind.
0 likes   

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 33393
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#727 Postby CrazyC83 » Mon Jun 05, 2023 11:01 pm

1900hurricane wrote:
ljmac75 wrote:One intense storm nobody seems to have mentioned here is Cyclone George. Per the Australian BOM it peaked with a minimum central pressure of 902 mbar. The cyclone report for it does not seem to explain what that estimate is based on though, and the JTWC has it being much less intense so I don't know if it counts.

George is one of the last storms that had a pressure assigned to it using the old Atkinson & Holliday Wind/Pressure relationship, known with the shorthand of AH77. George impacted Bedout Island as it approached the coast, where it recorded at the time the highest 10 minute sustained wind in all of Australia. Using that reading and the strengthening trend, BoM estimated a AUS C5 landfall with winds of 125 kt. JTWC on the other hand was using satellite estimates. Regardless, George was a a strong TC at landfall, but it probably did not have a 902 mb pressure.

That wind record at Bedout Island I mentioned? That was actually broken just this past April at the same recording station by Cyclone Ilsa.


Based on the images, I would estimate (1-min) winds around 130-135 kt. It kind of reminds me of Eta and Iota, very deep convection but not a particularly warm eye. There's no way the pressure was 902 if that was the case - such would support around 924-932 mb.
0 likes   

MarioProtVI
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 663
Age: 22
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:33 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#728 Postby MarioProtVI » Mon Nov 06, 2023 7:10 pm

I know it’s been mentioned before, but with the 10th anniversary tomorrow I feel some fresh input could be necessary on Haiyan:

Image

It really does suck that U.S.-funded reconnaissance flights ended in the WPac in the 80s because this is probably THE reason why we still need it there because of storms like Haiyan. The true intensity will never be known, but I do give credit to JTWC for putting this at 170 kt. However, I think it was likely a bit stronger (and when you compare to Patricia 2 years later), so I’d go 175 kt with maybe a slight chance for 180 kt. Pressure though was likely high because of low latitude so it’s definitely not what Dvorak was saying it was (definitely not 858), but it probably was around 880 or so. In my analysis I have it as 175 kt / 878 mb.
8 likes   

User avatar
kevin
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1766
Age: 25
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 4:35 am

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#729 Postby kevin » Tue Nov 07, 2023 6:02 am

MarioProtVI wrote:I know it’s been mentioned before, but with the 10th anniversary tomorrow I feel some fresh input could be necessary on Haiyan:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Typhoon_Haiyan_2013_landfall_loop.gif

It really does suck that U.S.-funded reconnaissance flights ended in the WPac in the 80s because this is probably THE reason why we still need it there because of storms like Haiyan. The true intensity will never be known, but I do give credit to JTWC for putting this at 170 kt. However, I think it was likely a bit stronger (and when you compare to Patricia 2 years later), so I’d go 175 kt with maybe a slight chance for 180 kt. Pressure though was likely high because of low latitude so it’s definitely not what Dvorak was saying it was (definitely not 858), but it probably was around 880 or so. In my analysis I have it as 175 kt / 878 mb.


With KZC and the following inputs I also get an intensity of 878 mb.

V_max = 170 kt
C (translation speed) = 22.3 kt
R34 (gale-force winds radius) = 215 nm
Latitude = 10.2 deg
P_env = 1006 mb

Pressure estimate (KZC < 18N) = 878 mb

If the true intensity was 175 kt then the pressure estimate becomes 871 mb. Because of the uncertainty between 170 and 175 kt I'd put the pressure estimate at ~875 mb. One of the most intense TCs in modern history, but imo just a little bit less intense than Tip. But indeed very unfortunate that there are no recon planes anymore. I think there are many TCs in the 870s mb (Haiyan, Surigae, Meranti) since the 1980s but we just don't know due to the lack of recon. And KZC for Patricia results in 862 - 870 mb at peak intensity in between recon flights, but I understand that NHC doesn't want to make an official world record without in-flight measurements and thus went with the slightly more conservative 872 mb. I might do a KZC reanalysis at some point to make imo more accurate pressure estimates of WPAC TCs than the ones we currently have.
1 likes   

User avatar
Nimbus
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4928
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 10:54 am

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#730 Postby Nimbus » Tue Nov 07, 2023 8:19 am

kevin wrote:
MarioProtVI wrote:I know it’s been mentioned before, but with the 10th anniversary tomorrow I feel some fresh input could be necessary on Haiyan:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Typhoon_Haiyan_2013_landfall_loop.gif

It really does suck that U.S.-funded reconnaissance flights ended in the WPac in the 80s because this is probably THE reason why we still need it there because of storms like Haiyan. The true intensity will never be known, but I do give credit to JTWC for putting this at 170 kt. However, I think it was likely a bit stronger (and when you compare to Patricia 2 years later), so I’d go 175 kt with maybe a slight chance for 180 kt. Pressure though was likely high because of low latitude so it’s definitely not what Dvorak was saying it was (definitely not 858), but it probably was around 880 or so. In my analysis I have it as 175 kt / 878 mb.


With KZC and the following inputs I also get an intensity of 878 mb.

V_max = 170 kt
C (translation speed) = 22.3 kt
R34 (gale-force winds radius) = 215 nm
Latitude = 10.2 deg
P_env = 1006 mb

Pressure estimate (KZC < 18N) = 878 mb

If the true intensity was 175 kt then the pressure estimate becomes 871 mb. Because of the uncertainty between 170 and 175 kt I'd put the pressure estimate at ~875 mb. One of the most intense TCs in modern history, but imo just a little bit less intense than Tip. But indeed very unfortunate that there are no recon planes anymore. I think there are many TCs in the 870s mb (Haiyan, Surigae, Meranti) since the 1980s but we just don't know due to the lack of recon. And KZC for Patricia results in 862 - 870 mb at peak intensity in between recon flights, but I understand that NHC doesn't want to make an official world record without in-flight measurements and thus went with the slightly more conservative 872 mb. I might do a KZC reanalysis at some point to make imo more accurate pressure estimates of WPAC TCs than the ones we currently have.


There may be Chinese military data from that era that is still classified, any country that regulates their internet to the point that they have to wait for the official party to open their umbrellas, probably has no need to know.
0 likes   

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 33393
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#731 Postby CrazyC83 » Tue Nov 07, 2023 3:18 pm

kevin wrote:
MarioProtVI wrote:I know it’s been mentioned before, but with the 10th anniversary tomorrow I feel some fresh input could be necessary on Haiyan:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Typhoon_Haiyan_2013_landfall_loop.gif

It really does suck that U.S.-funded reconnaissance flights ended in the WPac in the 80s because this is probably THE reason why we still need it there because of storms like Haiyan. The true intensity will never be known, but I do give credit to JTWC for putting this at 170 kt. However, I think it was likely a bit stronger (and when you compare to Patricia 2 years later), so I’d go 175 kt with maybe a slight chance for 180 kt. Pressure though was likely high because of low latitude so it’s definitely not what Dvorak was saying it was (definitely not 858), but it probably was around 880 or so. In my analysis I have it as 175 kt / 878 mb.


With KZC and the following inputs I also get an intensity of 878 mb.

V_max = 170 kt
C (translation speed) = 22.3 kt
R34 (gale-force winds radius) = 215 nm
Latitude = 10.2 deg
P_env = 1006 mb

Pressure estimate (KZC < 18N) = 878 mb

If the true intensity was 175 kt then the pressure estimate becomes 871 mb. Because of the uncertainty between 170 and 175 kt I'd put the pressure estimate at ~875 mb. One of the most intense TCs in modern history, but imo just a little bit less intense than Tip. But indeed very unfortunate that there are no recon planes anymore. I think there are many TCs in the 870s mb (Haiyan, Surigae, Meranti) since the 1980s but we just don't know due to the lack of recon. And KZC for Patricia results in 862 - 870 mb at peak intensity in between recon flights, but I understand that NHC doesn't want to make an official world record without in-flight measurements and thus went with the slightly more conservative 872 mb. I might do a KZC reanalysis at some point to make imo more accurate pressure estimates of WPAC TCs than the ones we currently have.


What would 185 kt for Haiyan result in with the KZC? That is my guess using the limited data from Patricia and Megi (2010), and Haiyan looked to be similar to Patricia and clearly stronger than Megi.
1 likes   

User avatar
kevin
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1766
Age: 25
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 4:35 am

Re: Discussion of Intense Tropical Cyclones

#732 Postby kevin » Tue Nov 07, 2023 7:27 pm

CrazyC83 wrote:
kevin wrote:
MarioProtVI wrote:I know it’s been mentioned before, but with the 10th anniversary tomorrow I feel some fresh input could be necessary on Haiyan:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Typhoon_Haiyan_2013_landfall_loop.gif

It really does suck that U.S.-funded reconnaissance flights ended in the WPac in the 80s because this is probably THE reason why we still need it there because of storms like Haiyan. The true intensity will never be known, but I do give credit to JTWC for putting this at 170 kt. However, I think it was likely a bit stronger (and when you compare to Patricia 2 years later), so I’d go 175 kt with maybe a slight chance for 180 kt. Pressure though was likely high because of low latitude so it’s definitely not what Dvorak was saying it was (definitely not 858), but it probably was around 880 or so. In my analysis I have it as 175 kt / 878 mb.


With KZC and the following inputs I also get an intensity of 878 mb.

V_max = 170 kt
C (translation speed) = 22.3 kt
R34 (gale-force winds radius) = 215 nm
Latitude = 10.2 deg
P_env = 1006 mb

Pressure estimate (KZC < 18N) = 878 mb

If the true intensity was 175 kt then the pressure estimate becomes 871 mb. Because of the uncertainty between 170 and 175 kt I'd put the pressure estimate at ~875 mb. One of the most intense TCs in modern history, but imo just a little bit less intense than Tip. But indeed very unfortunate that there are no recon planes anymore. I think there are many TCs in the 870s mb (Haiyan, Surigae, Meranti) since the 1980s but we just don't know due to the lack of recon. And KZC for Patricia results in 862 - 870 mb at peak intensity in between recon flights, but I understand that NHC doesn't want to make an official world record without in-flight measurements and thus went with the slightly more conservative 872 mb. I might do a KZC reanalysis at some point to make imo more accurate pressure estimates of WPAC TCs than the ones we currently have.


What would 185 kt for Haiyan result in with the KZC? That is my guess using the limited data from Patricia and Megi (2010), and Haiyan looked to be similar to Patricia and clearly stronger than Megi.


Pressure depening on Vmax (the other variables stay the same).

170 kt = 878 mb
175 kt = 871 mb
180 kt = 864 mb
185 kt = 856 mb
0 likes   


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kazmit, zzzh and 58 guests