Personal analysis of historical Atlantic tropical cyclones

This is the general tropical discussion area. Anyone can take their shot at predicting a storms path.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Forum rules

The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.

Help Support Storm2K
Message
Author
MiamiensisWx

Personal analysis of historical Atlantic tropical cyclones

#1 Postby MiamiensisWx » Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:19 pm

My intensity estimates:

1915 "Galveston" - 120 kt (140 mph) at peak
1915 "New Orleans" - 125 kt (145 mph) at peak
1919 "Florida Keys" - 140 kt (160 mph) at peak
1921 "Tampa Bay" - 120 kt (140 mph) at peak; 100 kt (115 mph) in FL
1924 "Cuba" - 140 kt (160 mph) at peak
1926 (Storm 1) - 105 kt (120 mph) at peak; 85 kt (100 mph) in FL
1926 (Storm 4) - 90 kt (105 mph) at peak
1926 "Great Miami" - 125 kt (145 mph) at peak; 120 kt (140 mph) in SE FL
1928 "Okeechobee" - 140 kt (160 mph) at peak and PR landfall; 115 kt (135 mph) in FL
1929 (Storm 2) - 130 kt (150 mph) at peak; 105 kt (120 mph) in FL Keys
1932 "Texas" - 120 kt (140 mph) at peak; 115 kt (135 mph) in TX
1932 "Cuba" - 140 kt (160 mph) at peak
1933 (Storm 8) - 120 kt (140 mph) in the Atlantic
1933 (Storm 15) - 135 kt (155 mph) east of Yucatan; major hurricane at both MX landfalls
1933 (Storm 18) - 100 kt (115 mph) at peak
1935 "Labor Day" - 160 kt (185 mph) at peak and landfall in FL Keys
1938 "Long Island Express" - 145 kt (165 mph) at peak; 105 kt (120 mph) in NY and New England
1944 "Great Atlantic" - 125 kt (145 mph) at peak; large TC
1944 "Pinar del Rio" - 115 kt (135 mph) at peak and landfall in Cuba; 95 kt (110 mph) in FL; very large TC
1945 (Storm 9) - 115 kt (130 mph) at peak and landfall in SE FL
1946 (Storm 5) - 85 kt (100 mph) at peak
1947 "Fort Lauderdale" - 125 kt (145 mph) at peak; 105 kt (120 mph) in SE FL; 85 kt (100 mph) in LA
1950 (King) - 100 kt (115 mph) at peak and landfall in FL
1960 (Donna) - 130 kt (150 mph) at peak; 115 kt (135 mph) in FL Keys; 100 kt (115 mph) near Naples, FL
1960 (Ethel) - 85 kt (100 mph) at peak
1966 (Inez) - 140 kt (160 mph) at peak; compact, west-moving TC
1969 (Camille) - 160 kt (185 mph) and ~895 mb at peak; 145 kt (165 mph) and ~909 mb in MS

Four new Category 5 hurricanes (1919, 1924, 1932, and Inez 1966)
Twelve cyclones' wind speeds have been increased (versus HURDAT)
Fifteen cyclones' wind speeds have decreased (versus HURDAT)

I also believe Katrina's Gulf coast landfall should be classified as a Category 5 hurricane on another scale... it had Category 3 winds per Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale, but other factors suggest that Katrina and Rita should be regarded as Category 5 and strong Category 4 hurricanes in the United States.
0 likes   

Cryomaniac
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:26 pm
Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK
Contact:

Re: Personal analysis of historical Atlantic tropical cyclones

#2 Postby Cryomaniac » Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:36 pm

MiamiensisWx wrote:I also believe Katrina's Gulf coast landfall should be classified as a Category 5 hurricane on another scale... it had Category 3 winds per Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale, but other factors suggest that Katrina and Rita should be regarded as Category 5 and strong Category 4 hurricanes in the United States.


That would just be confusing, in my opinion.
0 likes   

User avatar
Aquawind
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 6714
Age: 62
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 10:41 pm
Location: Salisbury, NC
Contact:

Re: Personal analysis of historical Atlantic tropical cyclones

#3 Postby Aquawind » Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:59 pm

Cryomaniac wrote:
MiamiensisWx wrote:I also believe Katrina's Gulf coast landfall should be classified as a Category 5 hurricane on another scale... it had Category 3 winds per Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale, but other factors suggest that Katrina and Rita should be regarded as Category 5 and strong Category 4 hurricanes in the United States.


That would just be confusing, in my opinion.


Exactly.. I think we all know the Hurricane scale needs to be modified like the tornado scale was for a better description of the storms impact. Problem is do have enough data to accurately change the historical data as well. I don't think so..at least no far back. So as usual we just have a microscopic blip of data in relation to the earth's timeframe and reclassifying past storms will be like starting over historically..ugh. Actually we have no choice and need to get it right now for the sake of future impacts. Plenty of work ahead for researching Met students.
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#4 Postby Derek Ortt » Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 pm

huh, Miami? Classifying Katrina as a 5 would be totally groundless. And Rita as a 4 is simply unacceptable. Even the cat 3 designation of Rita is intolerable to this met
0 likes   

User avatar
Ptarmigan
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 5316
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:06 pm

Re:

#5 Postby Ptarmigan » Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:14 pm

Derek Ortt wrote:huh, Miami? Classifying Katrina as a 5 would be totally groundless. And Rita as a 4 is simply unacceptable. Even the cat 3 designation of Rita is intolerable to this met


I've seen satellite images of Rita and it probably was a Cat. 3, but it was over water as it made landfall. Kinda like Alicia.
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#6 Postby Derek Ortt » Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:05 am

there were 4 planes in Rita at once 12 hours before landfall... none found cat 3 winds. Rita weakened a little more in the 12 hours before landfall
0 likes   

User avatar
Ptarmigan
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 5316
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:06 pm

Re:

#7 Postby Ptarmigan » Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:10 am

Derek Ortt wrote:there were 4 planes in Rita at once 12 hours before landfall... none found cat 3 winds. Rita weakened a little more in the 12 hours before landfall


I wonder why it is still listed as a Category 3 than? It had a central pressure of 938 millibars at landfall. Rita would be the lowest pressure hurricane to not be a major hurricane. It was large right before landfall.
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#8 Postby Derek Ortt » Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:03 am

the reasoning for keeping Rita as a 3 were that the planes may have missed the highest winds. That is a method I personally disagree with, but I understand why it is used.
0 likes   

Ed Mahmoud

Re:

#9 Postby Ed Mahmoud » Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:10 am

Derek Ortt wrote:the reasoning for keeping Rita as a 3 were that the planes may have missed the highest winds. That is a method I personally disagree with, but I understand why it is used.



Is it strictly wind used for S-S classifications? I only ask because Katrina did cause a storm surge equal/greater than Cat 5 Camille at landfall, even if winds were only Cat 3 at landfall.
0 likes   

User avatar
Bocadude85
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2991
Age: 38
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:20 pm
Location: Honolulu,Hi

#10 Postby Bocadude85 » Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:40 am

I disagree with the 105kts for the 1947 hurricane, a sustained wind of 155mph was recorded at Hillsboro Lighhouse, though it was recorded at a elevated location. My best guess would be it made landfall at 115kts.. just my opinion though.
0 likes   

User avatar
wxman57
Moderator-Pro Met
Moderator-Pro Met
Posts: 22989
Age: 67
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:06 pm
Location: Houston, TX (southwest)

Re: Re:

#11 Postby wxman57 » Fri Feb 08, 2008 3:30 pm

Ed Mahmoud wrote:
Is it strictly wind used for S-S classifications? I only ask because Katrina did cause a storm surge equal/greater than Cat 5 Camille at landfall, even if winds were only Cat 3 at landfall.


Yes, SS is strictly max wind speed. It was never designed as anything more. Storm surge is not as dependent on peak winds as it is the size of the max wind field. A Cat 3 hurricane cannot produce a "Cat 5 surge". Camille's surge was representative of what a large Cat 3 would be expected to produce. Same with Rita as a borderline Cat 2/3. Radius of max winds is far more important than the peak wind in a small part of the hurricane as far as surge production.

SS should NOT be used to estimate surge. For example, a Cat 3 on the SS scale could produce a surge anywhere from 4-6 feet to over 30 feet, depending on where it hits, forward speed, angle it hits the coast, bathymetry of coastal waters, and wind field size. Peak wind (SS category) doesn't affect surge much.
0 likes   

Squarethecircle
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2165
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:00 pm
Location: Fairfax, VA

#12 Postby Squarethecircle » Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:44 pm

It's interesting to note that there are four different factors in tropical cyclones that, while tending to have some sort of correlation, really don't relate very specifically. Those would be intensity, wind speed, surge, and size, size being the one that correlates with the others the least, and the strongest correlation being that between intensity and wind speed.

I find it fairly silly that there are conversion charts between these factors.
0 likes   

User avatar
wxman57
Moderator-Pro Met
Moderator-Pro Met
Posts: 22989
Age: 67
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:06 pm
Location: Houston, TX (southwest)

Re:

#13 Postby wxman57 » Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:57 pm

Squarethecircle wrote:It's interesting to note that there are four different factors in tropical cyclones that, while tending to have some sort of correlation, really don't relate very specifically. Those would be intensity, wind speed, surge, and size, size being the one that correlates with the others the least, and the strongest correlation being that between intensity and wind speed.

I find it fairly silly that there are conversion charts between these factors.


I have no idea what you just said. Perhaps my brain stopped functioning as it's Friday afternoon and time to leave for home. ;-)
0 likes   

Squarethecircle
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2165
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:00 pm
Location: Fairfax, VA

#14 Postby Squarethecircle » Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:58 pm

:uarrow: That's my excuse. :cheesy:
0 likes   

Ed Mahmoud

Re: Re:

#15 Postby Ed Mahmoud » Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:03 pm

wxman57 wrote:
Squarethecircle wrote:It's interesting to note that there are four different factors in tropical cyclones that, while tending to have some sort of correlation, really don't relate very specifically. Those would be intensity, wind speed, surge, and size, size being the one that correlates with the others the least, and the strongest correlation being that between intensity and wind speed.

I find it fairly silly that there are conversion charts between these factors.


I have no idea what you just said. Perhaps my brain stopped functioning as it's Friday afternoon and time to leave for home. ;-)



Maybe, by intensity, we're talking central pressure. Maybe.
0 likes   

Squarethecircle
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2165
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:00 pm
Location: Fairfax, VA

#16 Postby Squarethecircle » Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:05 pm

:uarrow: That's what I mean by intensity, yes.

Edit: Also, it shouldn't be factors, it should be characteristics.
0 likes   

User avatar
MGC
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2003 9:05 pm
Location: Pass Christian MS, or what is left.

Re: Personal analysis of historical Atlantic tropical cyclones

#17 Postby MGC » Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:18 pm

What is the probability that an aircraft flying though a tropical cyclone is going to sample the strongest winds? A GPS sonde is just a two foot long canister floating down on a parachute inside a hurricane perhaps 300 mile across. I'd imagine the aircraft crew would have to have incredible skill to time the exact release point to capture maxium winds. SMFR is a remarkable instrument but with only a 28 degree beamwith, only the area directly under the aircraft is sampled. This is equivelent of drawing a line through the hurricane. The chances of detecting a wind max IMO is greater than with the sonde but the probability that the maxium winds in the hurricane being sampled is still low. There are questions of SFMR accuracy above 100KTS and in shallow waters. Tail mounted doppler radar provide a three-dimensional wind analyses. Real time doppler analyses has been available to the NHC since the 2005 season. Land based radar has the problem of distance. Surface winds must be estimated using standard reduction methods which are subject to error due to differing eyewall wind profiles. Forecaster today have an array of sensors unavaible only a few years ago. Much has been learned since the development of the GPS dropsonde. Andrew was upgraded to a Cat-5 hurricane based on GPS dropsonde data. Since many historical hurricanes have been classified based on pressure, and with the recent findings that a 920mb lanfalling hurricane (Katrina) is only a Cat-3, I would not be surprised that many hurricanes from the past are reduced in intensity (wind speed).......MGC
0 likes   

CrazyC83
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 34005
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Deep South, for the first time!

#18 Postby CrazyC83 » Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:45 pm

Looking at those case studies, I think the 1919 storm also had a strange pressure-wind relationship. Using the NHC site mentioning old data, I think that storm had a huge pressure gradient.

My guess for the peak intensity of that storm: 155 kt/893mb, after going into rapid deepening once over the Loop Current and just clearing the Dry Tortugas (927mb at that point). I think it was the strongest storm in the Atlantic basin without a pinhole eye, a bit under Rita.

My guess for the Texas landfall: 100 kt/932mb, which I think actually strengthened slightly before landfall (was 95 kt/936mb) as it got out of an eyewall cycle. Hence the huge storm surge in Corpus Christi and the catastrophe in the ocean.
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#19 Postby Derek Ortt » Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:43 pm

the 1919 storm has been reanalysed already. I believe they went with 110KT for the Texas landfall
0 likes   

User avatar
Ptarmigan
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 5316
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:06 pm

Re: Personal analysis of historical Atlantic tropical cyclones

#20 Postby Ptarmigan » Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:54 pm

I imagine the 1919 Florida Keys was a monster hurricane like Carla.
0 likes   


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AnnularCane and 25 guests