Change the Naming Convention for Tropical Cyclones

[Mr Eyewall]

As you know, the current naming convention rotates a list of names every six years. Instead of recycling the same names over and over again, I recommend using a single master list of names without repeating any one name. The list would run continuously and not restart with a new hurricane season.

There are several advantages to this modified approach:
1. By not reusing names, each tropical cyclone will have a unique ID for historical reference. The current naming convention can create confusion for the public when referencing tropical systems through history. For example, the U.S. has been impacted by three hurricanes with the name “Bob” (1979, 1985, and 1991).

2. Names from all letters of the alphabet would be used instead of routinely only using those at the beginning of the list. For example, on this year’s list, names of Barry, Chantal, and Dean will be used for the fifth time. Yet, names of Van and Wendy have not been used once from a list that was initiated in 1983.

3. During very busy seasons, conventional names will continue to be used instead of resorting to the Greek alphabet.

The WMO can develop a master list of 200 – 250 names and periodically add to it (perhaps once every 10 years) as names are used. The list will contain running sets of male and female names from A to Z.

I believe the public will be receptive to this enhanced naming approach.

[Berwick Bay]

Unfortunately, your naming system just makes too much good sense. So don't expect it to be adopted. I agree totally with you about the current ridiculous naming system. You mentioned three "Bob's" to make U.S. landfall. How about this, two cat 1 Danny's which affected the La. Coast (one in '85 and one in '97). Two important storms named Claudette to strike the same area along the Texas Coast (Tropical Storm Claudette '79 which produced 40 inches of rain, and Hurricane Claudette '03). How UNIMAGINATIVE can a system be? Rotate the same names every six years?? We're lucky they don't name the storms the way they do star systems (system 03-45 or something like that--I think they use numbers). I hated to call the current system Barry. I made up my own name to suit the storm "Mayflower", because it originated in May and was more of a rainmaker, thus mayflowers. Also, I liked the old female names from the fifties and sixties better. I don't know if anyone here can remember, but male names didn't come into use until the late seventies. Man, did it sound funny to talk about "Tropical Storm Bob" a rainmaker to affect La. at that time. It just sounded so "blah". But I guess we're talking about scientists here, and not hairdressers. Still, a little imagination wouldn't hurt anybody.

[Coredesat]

As you know, the current naming convention rotates a list of names every six years. Instead of recycling the same names over and over again, I recommend using a single master list of names without repeating any one name. The list would run continuously and not restart with a new hurricane season.

There are several advantages to this modified approach:
1. By not reusing names, each tropical cyclone will have a unique ID for historical reference. The current naming convention can create confusion for the public when referencing tropical systems through history. For example, the U.S. has been impacted by three hurricanes with the name “Bob” (1979, 1985, and 1991).

2. Names from all letters of the alphabet would be used instead of routinely only using those at the beginning of the list. For example, on this year’s list, names of Barry, Chantal, and Dean will be used for the fifth time. Yet, names of Van and Wendy have not been used once from a list that was initiated in 1983.

3. During very busy seasons, conventional names will continue to be used instead of resorting to the Greek alphabet.

This plan reminds me of the sequential name lists used in most of the other basins (all the basins except for the Eastern Pacific and Southwest Indian Ocean, actually). This could be a reasonable idea and would eliminate the need for Greek-named storms. However, 200-250 names is too much, and names would have to be reused at some point because there aren't an infinite number of names.

It would probably be better for all the member nations of RA IV to submit names to a master list, a la the Western Pacific and North Indian basins. This master list would then be used sequentially and recycled when the list is exhausted. Alternatively, the current lists could be converted to sequential lists, a la Australia and the South Pacific (both those basins have names in alphabetical order that are used sequentially). Both lists could contain Q, X, Y, and Z names if they could be found (I know a few people in real life whose names begin with Q, so there isn't a shortage of names).

[Mr Eyewall]

There are thousands of names that could be used to replenish the master list. It will literally take centuries to go through all of them. There is no shortage of names.

Regarding the number on the list, it should be high enough to avoid the administration of having to frequently add names.

[hial2]

Don't forget,there has to be spanish names in the mix as well...I vote for Hurricane "Celasio"...

[Cyclenall]

We also have to remember the names can't just be any name. They (the WMO) have a set of guidelines when picking new names to replace names that have been retired don't they? If a huge list was made, there might not be as many names available as we would think.

[windstorm99]

Here is a close-up spectacular IR pic of GONU from RAMMB.

[HurricaneRobert]

It's funny that WPac names from six years ago are being repeated now even though it goes by a sequential list. What is magic about the number six? I agree it would be nice to freshen up the list like they do in Australia. Eight Florences is more than enough. Its also incredibly confusing.