Question for the pro mets

[Jim Cantore]

Based on the season so far. and based on the patterns so far. If you had to make a prediction, what kind of season would you say this would be?

Would it be a 1996 or 1999 with the carolinas getting slammed, or 2004 with storms slipping under the bermuda high and Florida getting royally pounded. Or 2005 with alot of powerful homegrown storms and a non existant cape verde season, or something nothing like any of those?

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

Me I would say that this year will have a strong Azores high up to 500 milibars...But(500 to 200 millibars) above that a a fairly strong tutt over the central Atlantic near 25 north/55 down into the caribbean(Central/eastern Part) with east coast troughs forming and keeping the western Atlatnic from 70 to the coast least faverable.

1# Expect systems to move quickly across the Atlatnic on the base of the Azores high. Which should slowly move northward which should help the waves to slow down.

2# The TUTT should stick around this for the next few weeks at least. Maybe into mid to late August. Then we will see a weaking of it.


3# The east coast trough could help make another 1996 if it sets up farther westward. If it sets up farther eastward expect a 1995 with alot of recurvers/Gulf of Mexico cyclones forming.

I expect 15 named storms.

[Rainband]

Based on the season so far. and based on the patterns so far. If you had to make a prediction, what kind of season would you say this would be?

Would it be a 1996 or 1999 with the carolinas getting slammed, or 2004 with storms slipping under the bermuda high and Florida getting royally pounded. Or 2005 with alot of powerful homegrown storms and a non existant cape verde season, or something nothing like any of those?

I am not a pro met but. The season hasn't even started and they don't have a crystal Ball

[whereverwx]

I expect 15 named storms.

Well, that is higher than your earlier prediction of 13/5/2.

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

I upped it to 15 in mid may, from my old 13 in march.

[cycloneye]

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic ... &start=620

Above is the official storm2k poll for the 2006 season. Matt is right about upgrading his numbers from 13 to 15.He did the upgrade on the 5th of May.

[Stratusxpeye]

I'm not a pro-met either but will be looking forward to some of the replies in this thread. No one can tell the furture but with patterns and the season over a month it it should be clearer now than it was in may or even june as to how the season will play out.

The maps made in may regarding whos most at risk so far have been half and half. Alberto hit FL Big bend which was the lowest on the map and 91L With TS force winds and rains hit NC area which was one of the highest on the map.

[wxman57]

Very little has changed since I began talking about the 2006 season back in November of 2005 when I made my first presentation reviewing 2005 and looking ahead to 2006.

The Bermuda High is certainly a good bit stronger and ridges farther west than it did in 2005, perhaps a partial result of the PDO going cool-phase recently. This is a very similar pattern (cool PDO/warm Atlantic MDO) to what was seen from the 1940s through the 1960s.

A stronger Bermuda High means stronger trade winds and increasing low-level shear across the main deveopment region. This would lead to fewer named storms. In the 1940s-1960s, the average number of named storms per season was between 9 and 10. But the NHC is now naming subtropical systems and satellite allows for the discovery of a few storms each season that might have been missed in the pre-satellite era, so I expect that the new average will be closer to 12-13 named storms per season.

The trof located inland along the east U.S. Coast, combined with a stronger Bermuda High may mean an increased risk of a landfalling storm along the east coast from Florida to NC, possibly even up to Long Island. And with the PDO possibly going cool phase for several decades while the Atlantic is warm, the increased risk to the east U.S. Coast is not just for 2006, but for 15-20 more years.

There is less correlation to increased Gulf of Mexico hurricanes with the current pattern, but I have identified a slightly increased risk of landfalls in Texas and Louisiana during this pattern. With a stronger Bermuda High, the NW Gulf may have a better shot of being hit by a hurricane in August or early September.

So we might have a similar pattern of landfalls as 1996 or 1999, but the Bermuda High may be a bit stronger than those two years, so I would expect probably 1 major hurricane to enter the Gulf of Mexico. Certainly not 5 majors in the Gulf in 2006.

I think my forecast of 15 named storms for 2006 still looks good. Could even be a bit high.

[wxman57]

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=82278&start=620

Above is the official storm2k poll for the 2006 season. Matt is right about upgrading his numbers from 13 to 15.He did the upgrade on the 5th of May.

I get a message saying that the above URL doesn't exist. Can you check that link, cycloneye?

[bigmoney755]

What does everyone think about major hurricanes? NOAA is calling for 4-6 major hurricanes. Last year we had 7, so for them to predict up to 6 is staggering. By the way, the number of hurricanes, storms, and major hurricanes predicted by NOAA in their May outlook exceeds the 2005 outlook.

2006 May NOAA Atlantic hurricane outlook:
80% chance of an above-normal hurricane season
13-16 named storms
8-10 hurricanes
4-6 major hurricanes

2005 May NOAA Atlantic hurricane outlook:
70% chance of an above-normal hurricane season
12-15 named storms
7-9 hurricanes
3-5 major hurricanes

[cycloneye]

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=82278&start=620

Above is the official storm2k poll for the 2006 season. Matt is right about upgrading his numbers from 13 to 15.He did the upgrade on the 5th of May.

I get a message saying that the above URL doesn't exist. Can you check that link, cycloneye?

57,I can open the poll link.

[wxman57]

What does everyone think about major hurricanes? NOAA is calling for 4-6 major hurricanes. Last year we had 7, so for them to predict up to 6 is staggering. By the way, the number of hurricanes, storms, and major hurricanes predicted by NOAA in their May outlook exceeds the 2005 outlook.

2006 May NOAA Atlantic hurricane outlook:
80% chance of an above-normal hurricane season
13-16 named storms
8-10 hurricanes
4-6 major hurricanes

2005 May NOAA Atlantic hurricane outlook:
70% chance of an above-normal hurricane season
12-15 named storms
7-9 hurricanes
3-5 major hurricanes

I wouldn't make the assumption that because the NHC may be predicting higher numbers for 2006 (Dr. Gray/Phil too) than they did in 2005 that the 2006 season will have more named storms/hurricanes/majors than 2005. I think that 2005 set a new standard and forecasters are less afraid to go with higher numbers now. As evidence, how many pre-season forecasts here on S2K prior to 2005 forecast 20 or more named storms? Not many, I'd wager.

It's clear that conditions across the central to western Caribbean (and Gulf) are much less favorable for development than they were in 2006. And SSTs are quite a bit cooler. The average number of major hurricanes in the 1940s-1960s was about 4-6, so the NHC prediction is not out of line with climatology. I think 4-5 is probably about right. We could easily end 2006 with a total of only 12-14 named storms, with most of them coming in August and September - just like a normal season.

[bigmoney755]

I wouldn't make the assumption that because the NHC may be predicting higher numbers for 2006 (Dr. Gray/Phil too) than they did in 2005 that the 2006 season will have more named storms/hurricanes/majors than 2005. I think that 2005 set a new standard and forecasters are less afraid to go with higher numbers now. As evidence, how many pre-season forecasts here on S2K prior to 2005 forecast 20 or more named storms? Not many, I'd wager.

Well NOAA is predicting an 80% chance that 2006 will be above normal. The chances of a normal season are only 15% and 5% for an below normal season. The best experts in the world made this prediction and I highly doubt they based the prediction on what happened in 2005. I would not compare what people on a website say to the professionals at NOAA.

From the 2006 May outlook: Warmer ocean water combined with lower wind shear, weaker easterly trade winds, and a more favorable wind pattern in the mid-levels of the atmosphere are the factors that collectively will favor the development of storms in greater numbers and to greater intensity.

[wxman57]

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=82278&start=620

Above is the official storm2k poll for the 2006 season. Matt is right about upgrading his numbers from 13 to 15.He did the upgrade on the 5th of May.

I get a message saying that the above URL doesn't exist. Can you check that link, cycloneye?

57,I can open the poll link.

I get the following message with both IE 6.0 and NS 8.1:
The topic or post you requested does not exist

[wxman57]

I wouldn't make the assumption that because the NHC may be predicting higher numbers for 2006 (Dr. Gray/Phil too) than they did in 2005 that the 2006 season will have more named storms/hurricanes/majors than 2005. I think that 2005 set a new standard and forecasters are less afraid to go with higher numbers now. As evidence, how many pre-season forecasts here on S2K prior to 2005 forecast 20 or more named storms? Not many, I'd wager.

Well NOAA is predicting an 80% chance that 2006 will be above normal. The chances of a normal season are only 15% and 5% for an below normal season. The best experts in the world made this prediction and I highly doubt they based the prediction on what happened in 2005. I would not compare what people on a website say to the professionals at NOAA.

From the 2006 May outlook: Warmer ocean water combined with lower wind shear, weaker easterly trade winds, and a more favorable wind pattern in the mid-levels of the atmosphere are the factors that collectively will favor the development of storms in greater numbers and to greater intensity.

So what's your point? I certainly agree that 2005 will be a bit above normal -- normal being 10-11 named storms in a season. My main point was to say that just because the NHC is going with higher numbers at the start of the 2006 season doesn't mean there will be more than 27-28 named storms. And don't think for a second that the total number of storms in 2005 hasn't swayed their numbers upward a bit. I've attended all of their presentations this past spring and have spoken to a number of the NHC forecasters.

[bigmoney755]

So what's your point? I certainly agree that 2005 will be a bit above normal -- normal being 10-11 named storms in a season. My main point was to say that just because the NHC is going with higher numbers at the start of the 2006 season doesn't mean there will be more than 27-28 named storms. And don't think for a second that the total number of storms in 2005 hasn't swayed their numbers upward a bit. I've attended all of their presentations this past spring and have spoken to a number of the NHC forecasters.

The point is that you and everyone else saying this year will have x number of storms is just a guess. The best experts in the world predicted 2005 to have 12-15 named storms. We had 27. Right not it is only July 3rd and we have people pinpointing exactly what they think this year will bring. It is July 3rd and we have people saying to expect "1 major hurricane to enter the gulf of mexico". Nobody predicted 27 named storms by July 3rd 2005. Nobody knows what 2006 will bring. Let's just take it day by day and not act like we know exactly what will happen in 2006.

[Jim Cantore]

As evidence, how many pre-season forecasts here on S2K prior to 2005 forecast 20 or more named storms? Not many, I'd wager.

I'd commit someone for saying 28 storms at the beginning for 2005

[wxman57]

So what's your point? I certainly agree that 2005 will be a bit above normal -- normal being 10-11 named storms in a season. My main point was to say that just because the NHC is going with higher numbers at the start of the 2006 season doesn't mean there will be more than 27-28 named storms. And don't think for a second that the total number of storms in 2005 hasn't swayed their numbers upward a bit. I've attended all of their presentations this past spring and have spoken to a number of the NHC forecasters.

The point is that you and everyone else saying this year will have x number of storms is just a guess. The best experts in the world predicted 2005 to have 12-15 named storms. We had 27. Right not it is only July 3rd and we have people pinpointing exactly what they think this year will bring. It is July 3rd and we have people saying to expect "1 major hurricane to enter the gulf of mexico". Nobody predicted 27 named storms by July 3rd 2005. Nobody knows what 2006 will bring. Let's just take it day by day and not act like we know exactly what will happen in 2006.

You are correct, we cannot accurately predict the number of named storms in the coming season, but we are getting good at determining if a season will be above or below normal as far as numbers. I've done a tremendous amount of research on major hurricane activity in the Gulf of Mexico in recent years. Over the past 106 years, there have been a number of periods of 5 or more years with no major hurricanes in the Gulf. The average is one major hurricane in the Gulf every 1-2 years. For the northwest Gulf (north of 25N/west of 88W), it's one major hurricane every 2-3 years. Those numbers applied even to the active years of the 1940s-1960s. So by going with 1 (possibly 2) major hurricanes in the Gulf, I'm going with climatology. It's just very rare to get more than 1-2 major hurricanes in the Gulf in a season.

Here's a graphic to demonstrate my point. Note that in the vast majority of seasons, the Gulf saw 0-1 major hurricanes.

http://myweb.cableone.net/nolasue/gomhurricanes.gif

[southerngale]

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=82278&start=620

Above is the official storm2k poll for the 2006 season. Matt is right about upgrading his numbers from 13 to 15.He did the upgrade on the 5th of May.

I get a message saying that the above URL doesn't exist. Can you check that link, cycloneye?

57,I can open the poll link.

I get the following message with both IE 6.0 and NS 8.1:
The topic or post you requested does not exist

Try again. He had moved the thread to the staff forum. I moved it back to the board so the link should work now.

[wxmann_91]

2004, 2002, 1954, 1967, 1980, and 1988 would be my best possible analogs this year. But I am no pro

Reason: strong Bermuda High should drive most storms into Mexico or S. Texas. East Coast, especially from S. Carolina and north, seems to be targeted as well with possible CV storms and an East Coast trough. We could see an intense burst of activity in August and September, and finish off with a benign ending. 2004 and 2002 are for timing of the formations (again only approximately), and a blend of 1954, 1967, 1980, and 1988 should be track.