Patrick99 wrote:chaser1 wrote:LarryWx wrote:
1) I just looked and found, believe it or not, not one TC on record that formed during the interval Sep. 25- Oct. 31 south of 15N between 65 and 75W.
2) I just took another look at all of the years and I inadvertently left off three storms, meaning 25 analogs instead of 22. One of these 3 is actually the only Gulf coast hit of the 25, #6 of 1879:
http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif
The other two consist of a hit south of the CONUS and one that dissipated over open water:
- #4 of 1876 hit south of the CONUS: http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif
- Judith of 1966 dissipated over open water: http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif
Therefore, I'll be updating the two posts related to this for the purpose of accuracy. It doesn't change things too much from we've discussed.
Amazing and surprising, huh?? Especially considering how many October storms hit Florida over all of those years? Guess it just goes to show that for at least Florida to have gotten hit, it must have required a storm to form WEST of 75W and NORTH of 15N (essentially north of Honduras and east of Yucatan/Belize); call it "the deadly square" lol. For some reason I had thought that tracks might have come from points south and east of there.
Didn't King hit Miami from the SE, from pretty much the same point "they" expect Matthew to start its turn north? Also Inez.
Hmm, both similar but different. King actually formed off the NE corner of Honduras and swung up to the northeast and then less broadly back toward the NNW. But yes, it did approach S. Florida from the SSE. Inez on the other hand formed in the MDR at a higher latitude than Matthew but very steadily tracked more or less westward until it took a sharp north turn at about 80W (as models are calling for here closer to 74W). Inez only moved northward through Cuba and in the W. Bahamas took a sharp west turn again and continued through S. Florida and on its merry westward way. Those two storms seemingly had quite strong ridging just off the SE Conus. Whether that strong ridging was very evident at that time, I don't know. Probably was for Inez given its pretty solid westward motion over time.