Wave in Eastern Atlantic

[jaxfladude]

[jaxfladude]

Possible dean path again....Looking at steering currents.

That is good news since Dean has all but cooled those waters for the rest of the hurricane season....

if you look at some of the global models, they are showing some good ridging across the subtropical atlantic. For example, the GFS is showing ridging all the way out to 144 hours. But the ridging is not as strong across the Southern CONUS which would possibly allow a track into the GOM or SE US -- that would also be consistent with climatology (unlike Dean which stayed at a low lattitude).

It's early to say for sure but just some food for thought at this point.

Note the GFS has not even picked up on this wave developing yet (so it may not develop)
http://moe.met.fsu.edu/cgi-bin/gfstc2.c ... hour=144hr

I rather have some other food for thought...(no more named storms)

[RL3AO]

Possible dean path again....Looking at steering currents.

That is good news since Dean has all but cooled those waters for the rest of the hurricane season....

Those waters will heat up quickly.

[jaxfladude]

Possible dean path again....Looking at steering currents.

That is good news since Dean has all but cooled those waters for the rest of the hurricane season....

Those waters will heat up quickly.

I want Dean to the Grand Finale..we all got our Cat 5 Hurricane that we all wanted...
Prayers to those affect by Dean

[JTD]

if you look at some of the global models, they are showing some good ridging across the subtropical atlantic. For example, the GFS is showing ridging all the way out to 144 hours. But the ridging is not as strong across the Southern CONUS which would possibly allow a track into the GOM or SE US -- that would also be consistent with climatology (unlike Dean which stayed at a low lattitude).

It's early to say for sure but just some food for thought at this point.

Note the GFS has not even picked up on this wave developing yet (so it may not develop)
http://moe.met.fsu.edu/cgi-bin/gfstc2.c ... hour=144hr

I rather have some other food for thought...(no more named storms)

Jaxfladude,

I feel that a majority of the members on this forum want to have tropical systems develop, as they are here to follow tropical activity after all and are tropical weather enthusiasts. It'd be like hoping for no winter storms on the winter weather forum. The purpose of this forum would be defeated if no more named storms form.

[miamicanes177]

Possible dean path again....Looking at steering currents.

That is good news since Dean has all but cooled those waters for the rest of the hurricane season....

Those waters will heat up quickly.

For the record, the caribbean right now will support a category 5 hurricane stronger than Dean ever was throughout the entirety of his existence. Indeed, the caribbean will right now support a hurricane with a pressure below 900mb. Please do not be fooled by Dr. Jeff Masters in his latest theatrics. Dean did little to cool off the large and deep waters of the caribbean.

[tolakram]

For the record, the caribbean right now will support a category 5 hurricane stronger than Dean ever was throughout the entirety of his existence. Indeed, the caribbean will right now support a hurricane with a pressure below 900mb. Please do not be fooled by Dr. Jeff Masters in his latest theatrics. Dean did little to cool off the large and deep waters of the caribbean.

Did you read the blog entry? Why are you so quick to insult Masters? You make the above claim and back it up with nothing? Inappropriate post in my opinion.

[ConvergenceZone]

if you look at some of the global models, they are showing some good ridging across the subtropical atlantic. For example, the GFS is showing ridging all the way out to 144 hours. But the ridging is not as strong across the Southern CONUS which would possibly allow a track into the GOM or SE US -- that would also be consistent with climatology (unlike Dean which stayed at a low lattitude).

It's early to say for sure but just some food for thought at this point.

Note the GFS has not even picked up on this wave developing yet (so it may not develop)
http://moe.met.fsu.edu/cgi-bin/gfstc2.c ... hour=144hr

I rather have some other food for thought...(no more named storms)

Jaxfladude,

I feel that a majority of the members on this forum want to have tropical systems develop, as they are here to follow tropical activity after all and are tropical weather enthusiasts. It'd be like hoping for no winter storms on the winter weather forum. The purpose of this forum would be defeated if no more named storms form.

Hehe, that is a good and valid point...What would be the point in having this form if no hurricanes/tropical storms develop??...

[MiamiensisWx]

Must have been the wrong year. Need to ask Mike Watkins which one it was. Sorry.

It was Storm Two in the 1903 season. It transversed the Caribbean basin and intensified to an intense hurricane (Category 3). Some differences: it made landfall on Jamaica and Tulum, Mexico (further north than Dean).

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/1903/2/track.gif

Additionally, Janet (1955) followed a similar path. I think it is more analogous to Dean's intensity and landfall locations.

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/1955/JANET/track.gif

That's your daily hurricane history lesson!

That is good news since Dean has all but cooled those waters for the rest of the hurricane season....

Hmm - your recent statements have been intriguing. Where is your basis (reasoning) for the "season cancel" posts? Oceanic heat content is quite abundant below the surface. It is not akin to 2005, but it should support more tropical cyclogenesis under favorable conditions. The conditions in the (traditionally) hostile eastern Atlantic are following climatology. Note the demise of SAL, which is courtesy of a developing trough over northwestern Africa. Additionally, the strong 500 mbar subtropical ridge has weakened, so the mid-level stability (and shear) could subside over the next several weeks. You should read 'CaneFreak's analyses. I think we are witnessing another 1998, 1999, or 2001. Those active seasons did not receive the "F" storm until September 7 and 8 (respectively). 1998 and 2001 featured 14 or 15 named systems. The strong easterlies over the equatorial Pacific and other atmospheric indicators support the presence of neutral conditions (likely heading toward La Nina).

http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/tropic/real-time/wavetrak/winds/m8split.html

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2007238at.jpg

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/data/anomnight.8.27.2007.gif

It boils down to the debate over -removed-, and I think it should be addressed. It enters every thread, and it (literally) has been ruining this board. I'm a Florida resident, and I obviously don't want more landfalls (United States or elsewhere). I have seen the destructive effects after Frances, Jeanne, and Wilma (they obviously do not surpass the death toll and impact of Katrina and Rita). Most people do not want the aftermath of these storms, but the fascination never ends. I can understand the people who study and enjoy landfalling tropical systems. Additionally, in spite of the criticism toward those who want 'canes, I want to make an important point. Two of our resident storm chasers are the excellent Mark Sudduth and Jesse Bass (Hurricanetrack.com and Virginia Storm Photo). Mark has (repeatedly) stated his love for landfalling storms, but he never receives harsh attacks. Actually, he is adored by the people here and on other boards. It boggles my mind. Most attacks are directed toward other miscellaneous posters. Tornado chasers (ala Sam Sagnella) post on Storm2K, but these people never receive criticism over their severe weather interests.

Here's the moral of the story. We should really stop the hand-wringling over this issue - it holds truth for both sides. This debate is a distraction: it insults people on all angles; it takes value away from the outstanding discussion; and it divides this board between those who love storms, people who experienced the aftermath, and other "fence sitters". Everyone has a different approach and background toward meteorology. Unfortunately, it revealed itself in its worst form (see some recent threads). These "Florida -removed- vs. Gulf coast trauma" posts (and others) demonize everyone on this forums. Everyone should back off: posters should be more sensitive toward those who were affected, while others who suffered should take things into perspective. We should realize our similarities: we came to this board for information (not -removed- debates).

I'll jump off the soapbox.

[ConvergenceZone]

Those waters will heat up quickly. For the record, the caribbean right now will support a category 5 hurricane stronger than Dean ever was throughout the entirety of his existence. Indeed, the caribbean will right now support a hurricane with a pressure below 900mb. Please do not be fooled by Dr. Jeff Masters in his latest theatrics. Dean did little to cool off the large and deep waters of the caribbean.

Dude, no offense, but can you please back up this statement with some data?? I think it was Cycloneye that posted the map of the obviously cooled waters, and what do you mean "stronger than Dean ever was"? Remember, this isn't 2005 nor is it "The day after tomorrow"

[windstorm99]

Jeff masters theatrics!I think jeff masters knows exactly what he is talking about and to be honest makes perfect sence when you have an extremely powerful hurricane moving through the area.Jeff masters has tons of experience and his knowledge is greatly appreciated on WU and in the tropical weather community.

[RL3AO]

Convection has died out. Lets see what it can do with D-max.

[cycloneye]

Well,since page 6 of the thread has been about other topics apart from the wave,I am returning the discussions to it.



Some new convection comming back,however it has to persist for NHC to take a closer look meaning invest.

[hial2]

Jaxfladude,

I feel that a majority of the members on this forum want to have tropical systems develop, as they are here to follow tropical activity after all and are tropical weather enthusiasts. It'd be like hoping for no winter storms on the winter weather forum. The purpose of this forum would be defeated if no more named storms form.[/quote]

Hehe, that is a good and valid point...What would be the point in having this form if no hurricanes/tropical storms develop??... [/quote]

I'ts 2 forces fighting each other...the addictive adrenaline rush of a hurricane aiming right at you..the air crackles with electricity, exitement and fear.. vs the realities of the aftermath..you want it to happen and you don't..just like going on patrol in the jungles of SE ASIA

[cycloneye]

Well,since page 6 of the thread has been about other topics apart from the wave,I am returning the discussions to it.

[Blown Away]

[/quote]I'ts 2 forces fighting each other...the addictive adrenaline rush of a hurricane aiming right at you..the air crackles with electricity, exitement and fear.. vs the realities of the aftermath..you want it to happen and you don't..just like going on patrol in the jungles of SE ASIA[/quote]

Great description, to young to understand what patrolling the Asian jungles was like, but thanks for doing that, the USA is a country worth fighting for.

[Cyclone1]

Returning to the topic...

I think we could see a flare up tonight, but that's just pure speculation. DM, and all.

[RL3AO]

Great description, to young to understand what patrolling the Asian jungles was like, but thanks for doing that, the USA is a country worth fighting for.

Keep posts on topic please.

[windstorm99]

Great description, to young to understand what patrolling the Asian jungles was like, but thanks for doing that, the USA is a country worth fighting for.

Keep posts on topic please.

Asian jungles!What in gods name does this have to to with tropical weather lol....

Anyway slow development if any sounds reasonable to me.Not looking to healthy at the present time.

[SouthFloridawx]

Cycloneye, I know you stated that we should get back to the topic. I just wanted to point out that I thought this post was, very well thought out, and thoughts from both sides (all sides) were mentioned. We are not even @ peak season, and even Derek Ortt, mentioned that, la nina years often end up being late bloomers. I don't believe the season is dead, and even if it is... You could have been tracking hurricanes back in the 70's and 80's, they you would have been really depressed. Take what you can get, and enjoy it... I don't mean the aftermath of such, I mean the tracking, analyzing and the awe inspiring nature of weather we have here.

Season is not dead, season is not going to be hyperactive. If either one is the case, I won't mind, it's still going to be history and your still going to be able to learn from it. No two storms are exactly the same.

Must have been the wrong year. Need to ask Mike Watkins which one it was. Sorry.

It was Storm Two in the 1903 season. It transversed the Caribbean basin and intensified to an intense hurricane (Category 3). Some differences: it made landfall on Jamaica and Tulum, Mexico (further north than Dean).

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/1903/2/track.gif

Additionally, Janet (1955) followed a similar path. I think it is more analogous to Dean's intensity and landfall locations.

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/1955/JANET/track.gif

That's your daily hurricane history lesson!

That is good news since Dean has all but cooled those waters for the rest of the hurricane season....

Hmm - your recent statements have been intriguing. Where is your basis (reasoning) for the "season cancel" posts? Oceanic heat content is quite abundant below the surface. It is not akin to 2005, but it should support more tropical cyclogenesis under favorable conditions. The conditions in the (traditionally) hostile eastern Atlantic are following climatology. Note the demise of SAL, which is courtesy of a developing trough over northwestern Africa. Additionally, the strong 500 mbar subtropical ridge has weakened, so the mid-level stability (and shear) could subside over the next several weeks. You should read 'CaneFreak's analyses. I think we are witnessing another 1998, 1999, or 2001. Those active seasons did not receive the "F" storm until September 7 and 8 (respectively). 1998 and 2001 featured 14 or 15 named systems. The strong easterlies over the equatorial Pacific and other atmospheric indicators support the presence of neutral conditions (likely heading toward La Nina).

http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/tropic/real-time/wavetrak/winds/m8split.html

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2007238at.jpg

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/data/anomnight.8.27.2007.gif

It boils down to the debate over -removed-, and I think it should be addressed. It enters every thread, and it (literally) has been ruining this board. I'm a Florida resident, and I obviously don't want more landfalls (United States or elsewhere). I have seen the destructive effects after Frances, Jeanne, and Wilma (they obviously do not surpass the death toll and impact of Katrina and Rita). Most people do not want the aftermath of these storms, but the fascination never ends. I can understand the people who study and enjoy landfalling tropical systems. Additionally, in spite of the criticism toward those who want 'canes, I want to make an important point. Two of our resident storm chasers are the excellent Mark Sudduth and Jesse Bass (Hurricanetrack.com and Virginia Storm Photo). Mark has (repeatedly) stated his love for landfalling storms, but he never receives harsh attacks. Actually, he is adored by the people here and on other boards. It boggles my mind. Most attacks are directed toward other miscellaneous posters. Tornado chasers (ala Sam Sagnella) post on Storm2K, but these people never receive criticism over their severe weather interests.

Here's the moral of the story. We should really stop the hand-wringling over this issue - it holds truth for both sides. This debate is a distraction: it insults people on all angles; it takes value away from the outstanding discussion; and it divides this board between those who love storms, people who experienced the aftermath, and other "fence sitters". Everyone has a different approach and background toward meteorology. Unfortunately, it revealed itself in its worst form (see some recent threads). These "Florida -removed- vs. Gulf coast trauma" posts (and others) demonize everyone on this forums. Everyone should back off: posters should be more sensitive toward those who were affected, while others who suffered should take things into perspective. We should realize our similarities: we came to this board for information (not -removed- debates).

I'll jump off the soapbox.