Are we still in a an active hurricane cycle

[boca]

Is their scientific proof of how long this active period will last. Are we still in this active period.The reason why I posted this is because I don't know what factors to determine an active cycle to a quiet cycle. I know the water temps this time of year are warm to support activity so thats not it. Is it the jet stream, QBO cycle,the MDR, and the level of SAL, also rainfall in Africa.

[Frank2]

That's a really good question - my own opinion is that it possibly has ended, since it began in 1995, and, it's been found that these active cycles last from approximately 15 to 20 years, so, it's very possible that it's ended early, since the "15 to 20 years" is just a relative number...

[windstorm99]

My take on this is that even though we are in an active cycle it does not mean every season will be super active in between there can be years with slow activity.I suspect that this over all pattern of increased activity will be with us for atleast another 5-10 years if not more.

[boca]

What weather factors come together for an active period to come about versus in inactive period like from 1970 thru 1994? I been wondering about this for months.

[HURAKAN]

In the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s we experienced a period of higher hurricane activity than normal. Nonetheless, there were season that were average or below average, and that's keeping in mind that maybe two, three or four storms could have been missed in any of those seasons.









Therefore, if we have been in a period of higher hurricane activity since 1995, and records indicate so, it's not unusual to have years with cyclone activity less than normal.

[hurricanetrack]

I wonder- how many people were asking if perhaps the active cycle had ended on July 18, 2004? We had ZERO named storms up to that point.

Also, let's look at 1998 and 1999. Once we got past the "A" storms, the "B" hurricanes did not form until later in August and look what happened in those years.

I think that 2005 really spoiled a lot of people. Me included. Have we forgotten the normal climatological evolution of when tropical cyclone activity is supposed to begin peaking?

While it is natural, perhaps, to speculate that the recent cycle of increased hurricane activity for the Atlantic has ended, I see no reason, yet, to think this myself. Not because 2006 was almost dead on normal and certainly not because we have already had 2 named storms in 2007. Patience is all that is needed. I told Jesse yesterday, "a watched pot never boils".

[cpdaman]

i never ever bought the 15-20 year time table for an active cycle

and i think they can only measure how long these time tables are in hindsight

and they forecast/guess how long they may last based on a prior one or two active periods which date back only a 100 years or so (probably less based on no satelite's 100 years ago and reliance on ship reports)

and making extrapolations based on relatively such little data is potentially very in-accurate. there could have been an active cycle in 1850 for 5 years or 8 years. it is a guess/forecast like the number of storms they expect to form each year

[windstorm99]

2005 was a year that will never be seen again atleast not in our lifetime but the point is in a normal season things are usually quite during june and july with the meat of the season coming in august,september, and october.Also one thing to keep in mind is we do not need 20 named storms to have a bad season cause we could easily see 12-14 named systems in 07 but if out those 6-7 make landfall this year could very easily go down as being worse the 2005.

www.Adrian's Weather.com

[gtsmith]

I've often wondered how accurate those storm tracks were for the years without sat recon. Indeed, I often wonder how they even tracked storms then, ships reports as the poster above me mentioned, but what happens when no ships were in the area. Even with sat recon and invest flights into storms, today there can be difficulty pinpointing the center of a storm. If old maps are accurate then my hats off to those scientists involved at the time.

[Ed Mahmoud]

IIRC, in an average year, JUne and July combined have a shade over 1 named cyclone.


So it isn't exactly a slow year, yet.

[angelwing]

It only takes 1 to make it a memorable season remember Andrew didn't come until August and if I remember that season correctly, I think there were 2 tropical depressions beforehand

[DESTRUCTION5]

Depends what you want to call an active hurricane Cycle..If you have an average of 11 storms and you get 12 that will be considered active right? I foresee 12-14 names this year IMO...

[Steve]

I think a lot (though not all) of the responses in this thread are really off base and irrelevant.

The primary factor in "active cycle" is the alternating warming and cooling of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The "15-20" year cycle is wrong because that's not even how it's classified. It's 20-30 or more years. We are only in Year 12 of this cycle. The Atlantic will eventually again begin cooling (as it did from 1970-1994), but let's don't forget that even when it does, there will be some vicious storms that will landfall in the United States, Canada, Central America and the islands. As best as I can tell, the difference comes from the fact that we are much less likely to have hyper-seasons in the Atlantic during the Pacific warming phase.

Now don't get me wrong, the cycle can't end soon enough for residents of Florida and Louisiana with our homeowner's insurance policies. And this will eventually be a problem in coastal sections of Texas, Alabama, Mississippi and possibly some east coast states as well.

For all you want to know, see NOAA's magazine story.

http://www.magazine.noaa.gov/stories/mag184.htm

Steve

[gtsmith]

[qoute]here will be some vicious storms that will landfall in the United States, Canada, Central America and the islands[/quote]

has there actually been a canadian landfall of a 'vicious' tropical system? Just curious...

[windstorm99]

[qoute]here will be some vicious storms that will landfall in the United States, Canada, Central America and the islands

has there actually been a canadian landfall of a 'vicious' tropical system? Just curious...[/quote]


Yes in 1995 hurricane luis affected the area as a cat3 and in 1893 another storm made landfall in St. Margaret’s Bay in Nova Scotia.

You can find more on Canada'sTropical Cyclone Statistics here.

[Stormcenter]

I wonder- how many people were asking if perhaps the active cycle had ended on July 18, 2004? We had ZERO named storms up to that point.

Also, let's look at 1998 and 1999. Once we got past the "A" storms, the "B" hurricanes did not form until later in August and look what happened in those years.

I think that 2005 really spoiled a lot of people. Me included. Have we forgotten the normal climatological evolution of when tropical cyclone activity is supposed to begin peaking?

While it is natural, perhaps, to speculate that the recent cycle of increased hurricane activity for the Atlantic has ended, I see no reason, yet, to think this myself. Not because 2006 was almost dead on normal and certainly not because we have already had 2 named storms in 2007. Patience is all that is needed. I told Jesse yesterday, "a watched pot never boils".

Excellent post! I'm still hoping with fingers and toes crossed that
2007 is a repeat of 2006. We just really don't need anything like
2004 or 2005 for another 20-30 years at least. Yeah I know that
is probably wishful thinking on my part. I'm still predicting 11-13
named storms including the two we already had for the remainder of the season. Now the "key" question is just how many, if any, will become major hurricanes and make landfall on the U.S. mainland or it's properties.

[gtsmith]

thanks for that windstorm

[Andrew92]

[qoute]here will be some vicious storms that will landfall in the United States, Canada, Central America and the islands

Juan in 2003 as well.

[Category 5]

I don't think we can truely tell yet. We'd have to wait a few more years to know for sure.

[wxmann_91]

Yes, SST's are the main determining factor in whether we are in an "active" cycle or not. Note that we can have above average SST's but below normal activity. But relative to the climatological record, an active cycle tends to have higher total season ACE each season compared to quiet cycle seasons.

Also, I've noticed that La Nina seasons tend to have late starts, but explosive endings.