Andrew should have been Charley or Danielle

Derek Ortt · #1 Postby **Derek Ortt** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 12:28 am

Andrew should have been CHARLEY or DANIELLE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Atlan ... ane_season

look at what was near Bermuda in May of 1992. There is no way that is not a cane. Also of note (while perusing this article) is that the reanalysis may add a hurricane landfall to the USA in 1992... to Virginia in Jaunary

Jim Cantore · #2 Postby **Jim Cantore** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 12:42 am

Is there any images of this January Storm? Or at least the date?

Derek Ortt · #3 Postby **Derek Ortt** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 12:45 am

A polar low formed offshore the Mid-Atlantic States and moved up Chesapeake Bay into northern Virginia, with surprisingly warm mid-level temperatures and an eye feature, which was quite pronounced on WSR-88D radar imagery, and wind gusts to 87 mph/140 km/h at Chincoteague, Virginia on January 4. This system is being evaluated for addition into the hurricane database as either a subtropical or tropical cyclone.
from the Wiki article... Jan 4. There appears to be doppler data from it, though I havn't seen it.

The May storm... well... lets just say that a poorly trained chicken would have figured that out based solely upon that sat imagery (which looks to be at least 75KT) and looks better than some of the hurricanes (ERNESTO)

Coredesat · #4 Postby **Coredesat** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 4:12 am

I'm assuming it's this system:

ftp://eclipse.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/isccp/b ... E-7-IR.jpg

#5 Postby **JonathanBelles** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:45 am

wow if they had changed thhe name we would have had 2 bad charley's

#6 Postby **AnnularCane** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:48 am

fact789 wrote:wow if they had changed thhe name we would have had 2 bad charley's

No, if Andrew had been Charley, the name would have been retired in 1992.

Derek Ortt · #7 Postby **Derek Ortt** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 12:19 pm

from looking at that single static image of the Jan 1992 "Cane"... it looks better than some that have been classified in recent years. I can understand not getting that one (and there would have been other coastal warnings... though I would have classified it if the thermodynamic data supported tropical or subtropical status)... but the May storm seems like Brazil's handling of the hurricane that made landfall there in March of 2004

Ptarmigan · #8 Postby **Ptarmigan** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 12:28 pm

Interesting. So it appears 1992 may have been more active than previously thought.

Ptarmigan · #9 Postby **Ptarmigan** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 12:32 pm

Coredesat wrote:I'm assuming it's this system:

ftp://eclipse.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/isccp/b ... E-7-IR.jpg

Thanks for the link. It goes up to 1974, but nothing in them. Hopefully there will be images soon. I checked that link. Looks sort of like a hurricane to me. Also, I happen to check March 4, 1992, when Houston was pelted by heavy rains and flood. It was caused by a line of slow moving thunderstorms that came from a low pressure system that spun over the Texas Panhandle. The May 17-18, 1989 flood was too caused by a low pressure system over the Midwest.

March 4, 1992
May 17-18, 1989

Derek Ortt · #10 Postby **Derek Ortt** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 9:53 pm

ftp://eclipse.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/isccp/b ... /1992/137/

the Wiki article is a bit off... that's not the same system. The actual system is in the link above, and it appears more subtropical in nature

Ptarmigan · #11 Postby **Ptarmigan** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 10:08 pm

Derek Ortt wrote:ftp://eclipse.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/isccp/b1/.D2790P/images/1992/137/

the Wiki article is a bit off... that's not the same system. The actual system is in the link above, and it appears more subtropical in nature

You know how Wiki are. They have all types of people contributing.

Coredesat · #12 Postby **Coredesat** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 10:44 pm

True, but the tropical cyclone project there has some of the highest standards of any of the projects on the website. Occasionally, mistakes are made, but aside from that, it's a fairly solid project (a met from the HPC works on it).

Ptarmigan · #13 Postby **Ptarmigan** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:12 am

Coredesat wrote:True, but the tropical cyclone project there has some of the highest standards of any of the projects on the website. Occasionally, mistakes are made, but aside from that, it's a fairly solid project (a met from the HPC works on it).

They are really helpful when it comes to stats about hurricanes. 8-)

#14 Postby **CrazyC83** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:10 am

Coredesat wrote:I'm assuming it's this system:

ftp://eclipse.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/isccp/b ... E-7-IR.jpg

Looks like a classic Nor'easter to me. The eye isn't even banded, and the trailing cold front is clearly defined.

#15 Postby **CrazyC83** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:14 am

AnnularCane wrote:
fact789 wrote:wow if they had changed thhe name we would have had 2 bad charley's

No, if Andrew had been Charley, the name would have been retired in 1992.

As it is, Andrew should still be on the list today - Andrew would have been Bonnie under current naming rules...

Coredesat · #16 Postby **Coredesat** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 9:20 pm

I forgot to mention that the HPC met on the project actually added the information about the possible system himself. :oops:

Derek Ortt · #17 Postby **Derek Ortt** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:03 pm

if what happened in 1992 happened today... Hurricane Andrew still would have been a memorable landfalling cane in all liklihood... a cane slamming into the mid Atlantic to wish everyone a belated Happy New Year. It probably would have been classified today

Hurricaneman · #18 Postby **Hurricaneman** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:27 am

If it wre me, the name would have been danielle

Andrew should have been Charley or Danielle

Andrew should have been Charley or Danielle

Who is online