NHC reissues 2005 seasonal summary

[Chacor]

The NHC has re-issued its November, 2005 monthly summary of seasonal activity:

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/tw ... inal.shtml

THE FOLLOWING IS A SPECIAL WEB-ONLY VERSION OF THE MONTHLY
TROPICAL WEATHER SUMMARY REGARDING THE 2005 HURRICANE SEASON.
THIS FINAL VERSION WAS RELEASED BY THE NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER
ON JANUARY 23, 2007.

THE 2005 ATLANTIC HURRICANE SEASON WAS THE MOST ACTIVE ON RECORD.
TWENTY-EIGHT TROPICAL STORMS FORMED...INCLUDING ONE SUBTROPICAL
STORM...BREAKING THE OLD RECORD OF 21 SET IN 1933. FIFTEEN STORMS
BECAME HURRICANES...BREAKING THE OLD RECORD OF 12 SET BACK IN
1969. SEVEN OF THE HURRICANES BECAME MAJOR HURRICANES...CATEGORY
THREE OR HIGHER ON THE SAFFIR-SIMPSON HURRICANE SCALE...INCLUDING
FOUR... EMILY...KATRINA...RITA...AND WILMA...THAT REACHED
CATEGORY FIVE INTENSITY. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IN THE AVAILABLE
RECORDS DATING BACK TO 1851 THAT FOUR CATEGORY FIVE HURRICANES
HAVE OCCURRED IN A SEASON. IN CONTRAST...IN AN AVERAGE SEASON
THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN 11 NAMED STORMS...6 HURRICANES... AND 2
MAJOR HURRICANES. THE SEASON ALSO INCLUDED THREE DEPRESSIONS THAT
DID NOT REACH TROPICAL STORM STRENGTH.

Code: Select all

SUMMARY TABLE

NAME              DATES       MAX WIND   DEATHS   U.S. DAMAGE
                  MPH                $MILLION
---------------------------------------------------------------
TS  ARLENE      8-13 JUN         70         1         MINOR
TS  BRET       28-29 JUN         40         1             0
H   CINDY       3-7  JUL         75         1           320
H   DENNIS      4-13 JUL        150        42          2230
H   EMILY      11-21 JUL        160         6         MINOR
TS  FRANKLIN   21-29 JUL         70         0             0
TS  GERT       23-25 JUL         45         0             0
TS  HARVEY      2-8  AUG         65         0             0
H   IRENE       4-18 AUG        105         0             0
TD  TEN        13-14 AUG         35         0             0
TS  JOSE       22-23 AUG         60         6             0
H   KATRINA    23-30 AUG        175      1500         81000
TS  LEE        28 AUG - 2 SEP    40         0             0
H   MARIA       1-10 SEP        115         0             0
H   NATE        5-10 SEP         90         0             0
H   OPHELIA     6-17 SEP         85         1            70
H   PHILIPPE   17-23 SEP         80         0             0
H   RITA       18-26 SEP        180         7         11300
TD  NINETEEN   30 SEP - 2 OCT    30         0             0
H   STAN        1-5  OCT         80        80             0
SS  UNNAMED     4-5  OCT         50         0             0
TS  TAMMY       5-6  OCT         50         0         MINOR
SD  TWENTY-TWO  8-10 OCT         35         0             0
H   VINCE       8-11 OCT         75         0             0
H   WILMA      15-25 OCT        185        23         20600
TS  ALPHA      22-24 OCT         50        26             0
H   BETA       26-31 OCT        115         0             0
TS  GAMMA      14-21 NOV         50        37             0
TS  DELTA      22-28 NOV         70         0             0
H   EPSILON    29 NOV - 8 DEC    85         0             0
TS  ZETA       30 DEC . 6 JAN    65         0             0
--------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE...DATES BASED ON COORDINATED UNIVERSAL TIME (UTC)

FORECASTER STEWART/BEVEN/AVILA/FRANKLIN/KNABB/PASCH/BLAKE

[Coredesat]

Wait, what was changed?

[Derek Ortt]

Rita damage was increased from 10 billion to 11.3 billion

[Derek Ortt]

reading the entire document, there were many things changed.

The origonal summary had Ophelia as 1.6 billion, now the correct 70 million figure was provided. Therde are many other of these changes (including Katrina as a 3... the origonal only has it as a possible three

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

Katrina and Ivan proved one thing, and really katrina, which was a cat5 less then 8 hours before landfall. The surge doe's not go down or very little. Which is why Katrina did most of its damage.

[wxman57]

Katrina and Ivan proved one thing, and really katrina, which was a cat5 less then 8 hours before landfall. The surge doe's not go down or very little. Which is why Katrina did most of its damage.

That statement is not correct. Whether or not Katrina had a tiny area of Cat 5 winds the day before landfall had very little impact on the extensive surge area along the LA/MS coasts. What was much more significant was the fact that hurricane force winds extended out over 100 miles east of the center at landfall. That very large wind field is what produced the large storm surge, not the peak wind over a few square miles the day before.

[Ixolib]

That statement is not correct. Whether or not Katrina had a tiny area of Cat 5 winds the day before landfall had very little impact on the extensive surge area along the LA/MS coasts. What was much more significant was the fact that hurricane force winds extended out over 100 miles east of the center at landfall. That very large wind field is what produced the large storm surge, not the peak wind over a few square miles the day before.

True... But if Katrina had never reached Cat 5 (or 4, or 3) conditions, the possibility of hurricane-force winds existing 100 miles east of her center would have been significantly decreased - relatively speaking. In other words, didn't the size of the storm exist, at least in part, because of her intensity/strength???

On a similar note, what Cat 1 hurricane holds the distance record for sustained hurricane-force winds to the east of its center? Can a Cat 1 cane ever be large enough to hold sustained 100 miles to its east? If so, would the surge impact of that storm be the same as Katrina in a similar landfalling situation?