Should STS/SDS Andrea have ever been named?

[jaxfladude]

Well the question has to asked if the official naming of the system off the East Florida coast should have ever been done so in the first place.
All Andrea did has done is for a few days(yesterday and today) to lower the fire danger. However the fire danger will not lowered for long(and may even get worse due to no helpful rainfall were it was needed). The rains the area needed very badly DID NOT OCCUR AS WAS THE HOPE.
I think the folks at the NHC/TPC jumped the gun on a dying low pressure system and wanted to get a name in for funding reasons later on and to get some early media exposure ........
Rant ends now........

[AnnularCane]

Yes.

[JonathanBelles]

I do think It should have been named. In fact, I think it should have been named earlier.

[Extremeweatherguy]

Yes it should have been named. It was a subtropical cyclone, and it met the criteria needed by the NHC (and I don't think they were naming it for any other reason than to do their job right).

[hurricanedude]

of course it should have been named, as i also agree earlier...the bouy off the coast of Hatteras had sustained winds of 63mph with gusts to 80mph....just because the system didnt bring drought relief...dont mean it should not get named, that would imply that anystorm that didnt hit land shouldnt be named...silly!

[Derecho]

I think the folks at the NHC/TPC jumped the gun on a dying low pressure system and wanted to get a name in for funding reasons later on and to get some early media exposure ........
Rant ends now........

I've seen this claimed repeatedly for various systems for years, and it gets more unjustified every time.

I haven't personally met any people there, but know people that have, and of course I've seen them on TV plenty, and it's hard to imagine some Masonic Temple conspiracy meeting where hooded Mayfield or Proenza in a darkened room is rubbing his hands together with an evil grin, saying "Let's NAME this system and get more funding next year MUHHAAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHA!"

Considering NHC gets bashed about equally for not naming stuff and for naming stuff, it suggests they're right most of time.

[Downdraft]

The season hasn't even really begun and the arm chair quarterbacks want to bash the experts. It met the criteria so it got named, period end of discussion.

[StormTracker]

To me this situation falls into the "better safe than sorry" category! If it would have been the other way around and they hadn't given the system a name, then the arm chair quarterbacks would have bashed the experts for that (like some of us have been and are saying now, "it should have been named earlier")! For most of us, this is a hobby..let the experts do their job!!!

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

Keep in Mind that Andrea was
not Purely Tropical, it was Subtropical
Yes, according to the NHC, Andrea met
the criteria for Subtropical Storm Status.

[trendal]

Yes!

[HURAKAN]

It's not because of better safe than sorry, it's not because of funding, it's not because they wanted to name the system, it's not to fulfill their forecast of named storms for the season. The system acquired some tropical characteristics which were not only visible in the satellite images, but were also explored and confirmed by the RECON missions. The system was cold-core to begin, but like many non-tropical systems that spend sometime over warm waters and have at least marginal favorable upper-level conditions, acquired subtropical characteristics and was named. There is nothing more to it.

I went the 9th of April to the NHC with my General Meteorology class at FIU, you could say it was a field trip. Most of the Meteorologists were outside of town in meetings or other events, and only the necessary personnel was there. The tour of the place was given by Chris Landsea and only Gladys Rubio and Lixion Avila were working in the Tropical Meteorology section. So, do you really think that they would waste their time just naming something for the heck of it? I don't think so and it's absurd and an insult for the folks at the TPC. They take, like I do and many of us here, very seriously every storm knowing that their prompt and accurate information could save lives.

You could even say that since they were not sure of the storm characteristics, they planned a RECON mission to confirm or deny the suspicions that the storm was subtropical or even tropical. The RECON mission found a temp. of 75ºF (20ºC) in the center of the storm. If it were a cold-core, then the temperature should have been a lot lower and not similar or equal to the SST were the storm was located. In true warm-core system we usually find temps. above 80ºF. Therefore, to end, Andrea was named correctly and there is no doubt of it. If you want to deny it, base it on facts and not opinions.

Sandy Delgado
<HURAKAN>

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

The nhc fellowed what is a subtropical cyclone, and did a good job with this system. This is not perfectly tropical but yes it deserved its name. It is also not rare, storms much stronger then this has formed in May. So this has nothing to do with globull warming or anything, but facts. It also had a 3.0 ST and a weak warm core in both Fsu and recon.

Grace is another story.

[curtadams]

I don't see how their decision was debatable. It was obviously a cyclone and appeared to have become hybrid on sat. They sent in recon and found a) it was TS strength and b) was demonstrably hybrid, ie subtropical. So, proven TS strength, proven subtropical nature, what else could they possibly do besides name it? If anything, they were too conservative because Andrea was looking subtropical the day before. However, that's their policy, which is not to name anything until either there's a slamdunk sat presentation or recon.

[ncupsscweather]

Yes it should have been named, but it should have been named earlier then what it was when it was at is strongest.

[MiamiensisWx]

It's not because of better safe than sorry, it's not because of funding, it's not because they wanted to name the system, it's not to fulfill their forecast of named storms for the season. The system acquired some tropical characteristics which were not only visible in the satellite images, but were also explored and confirmed by the RECON missions. The system was cold-core to begin, but like many non-tropical systems that spend sometime over warm waters and have at least marginal favorable upper-level conditions, acquired subtropical characteristics and was named. There is nothing more to it.

I went the 9th of April to the NHC with my General Meteorology class at FIU, you could say it was a field trip. Most of the Meteorologists were outside of town in meetings or other events, and only the necessary personnel was there. The tour of the place was given by Chris Landsea and only Gladys Rubio and Lixion Avila were working in the Tropical Meteorology section. So, do you really think that they would waste their time just naming something for the heck of it? I don't think so and it's absurd and an insult for the folks at the TPC. They take, like I do and many of us here, very seriously every storm knowing that their prompt and accurate information could save lives.

You could even say that since they were not sure of the storm characteristics, they planned a RECON mission to confirm or deny the suspicions that the storm was subtropical or even tropical. The RECON mission found a temp. of 75ºF (20ºC) in the center of the storm. If it were a cold-core, then the temperature should have been a lot lower and not similar or equal to the SST were the storm was located. In true warm-core system we usually find temps. above 80ºF. Therefore, to end, Andrea was named correctly and there is no doubt of it. If you want to deny it, base it on facts and not opinions.

Sandy Delgado
<HURAKAN>

I don't see how their decision was debatable. It was obviously a cyclone and appeared to have become hybrid on sat. They sent in recon and found a) it was TS strength and b) was demonstrably hybrid, ie subtropical. So, proven TS strength, proven subtropical nature, what else could they possibly do besides name it? If anything, they were too conservative because Andrea was looking subtropical the day before. However, that's their policy, which is not to name anything until either there's a slamdunk sat presentation or recon.

The season hasn't even really begun and the arm chair quarterbacks want to bash the experts. It met the criteria so it got named, period end of discussion.

I completely agree with many of the posts in this thread. I do not see the basis for the complaints directed toward the TPC.

This system clearly deserved its classification as a named subtropical cyclone. The surface and flight-level wind data (per reconnaissance aircraft) strongly supported winds of 35KT (39 mph) or greater within the squalls. In addition, analysis of the core sufficiently backed the information. I believe the TPC did an excellent job with the classification, overall movement, and general intensity. The solitary issue involved the lack of a downgrade at the 5:00 p.m. EDT advisory. At that time, I believed the weaker gradient supported lower winds. In addition, convection was scarce and the low-level circulation was exposed. Of course I could have been wrong. Overall, I had no other complaints of the TPC. They were outstanding when dealing with Andrea.

I rest my case.

[Rainband]

The season hasn't even really begun and the arm chair quarterbacks want to bash the experts. It met the criteria so it got named, period end of discussion.

[CrazyC83]

I think yes, and in retrospect, I would have named it on Tuesday morning by (what would have been) the 11 am advisory. I wonder what they will find in the post-storm analysis in terms of when it was named...

[Stratosphere747]

I don't think the issue should be the naming of this system. No question that it met the parameters to be named.

The better question is - Why are we naming subtropical systems? Might as well put an asterisk by the numbers for every season before 2002, which then begs the question of what is a normal, numerical season.

[CrazyC83]

I don't think the issue should be the naming of this system. No question that it met the parameters to be named.

The better question is - Why are we naming subtropical systems? Might as well put an asterisk by the numbers for every season before 2002, which then begs the question of what is a normal, numerical season.

Why were we not naming them? A large number of subtropical storms turn tropical, they have some characteristics of tropical storms and the old numbering system was downright confusing (1992 had STS1 then TD1 then TD2 before Andrew...)

[CronkPSU]

Well the question has to asked if the official naming of the system off the East Florida coast should have ever been done so in the first place.
All Andrea did has done is for a few days(yesterday and today) to lower the fire danger. .

how did it lower the fire danger...it increased it big time with all the winds and hardly any rains