ATL : INVEST 92L - DISCUSSION

[canes04]

Is 92L trying to comeback from the dead? I would not write this off just yet.

[Blown Away]

Per Jeff Master's:

The Atlantic is quiet
The 92L low pressure system, now located about 300 miles east of the northern Lesser Antilles Islands, has been completely disrupted by wind shear and dry air, and is no longer a threat to develop. The remnants of 92L, which are currently kicking up some strong thunderstorms due to interaction with an upper-level trough of low pressure, will bring heavy rain showers and wind gusts up to 35 mph to the northern Lesser Antilles Islands tonight through Friday, and into Puerto Rico Friday night through Saturday. On Sunday, the disturbance could bring heavy rains to northern Haiti. The earthquake zone in southern Haiti may also receive heavy enough rains to be of concern for the 1.5 million people living in tents and under tarps.

None of the reliable computer models is predicting formation of a tropical cyclone in the Atlantic over the next seven days, though the GFS model was suggesting a weak development moving through the southern Lesser Antilles Islands seven days from now.

[tolakram]

..."Subject: G7) Does an active June and July mean the rest of the season will be busy too?"
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/G7.html

I sense people will read this and get the wrong idea, similar to how people get the hebert box backwards.

So it could be said that a JJ storm in this region is pretty much a "sufficient" (though not "necessary") condition for a year to produce at least average activity. (I.e., Not all years with average to above-average total overall activity have had a JJ storm in that region, but almost all years with that type of JJ storm produce average to above-average activity.)


This is why, IMO, the fact that we almost (and possibly did) have a TD in this region points to a more active season. But the fact that we did not have a TD here would not point to a less active season.

[OuterBanker]

LOL, I love it. Some are writing off the season already

If 92l had been named a td it would have been a first that far east. And there is a real legitimate argument that at one point it was a td.

It was never forecast to survive west of the shear. And there is still a chance the remnants could get into the Gulf and develop.

Be patient, we will have plenty to talk about this season.

[ConvergenceZone]

I don't think anyone is writing the season off. I haven't seen anyone say that. I do agree though that in no way is this season going to be like 2005. I think that's what posters are saying. Didn't we run the alphabet in that year plus? Even the mets have said that 2005 was a once in a century type occurance. ....

I still think it will be an active year, but it might take awhile for all that shear in the carib to subside. I think by the middle of the July we will see out first storm though, and that's only a month away

[vbhoutex]

If you go through history, specifically years such as 1933, 1995, 2005, etc., hyperactive seasons all (not just average seasons but insane), a staple of them has been a significant June cyclone. The fact that we're not likely to see a cyclone form in June due to factors such as the MJO not being phased correctly at the moment in the Atlantic to help kickstart storms in combination with the fate that met 92L in combination with the dry air/shear in that area has me seriously questioning whether or not this season will come close to meeting the high-end projections. I think there's little chance that this year will equate to 2005 now. I could be wrong, of course.

I should add that the Gulf of Mexico can absolutely not sustain any cyclone activity of any sort whatsoever right now; so, we should all pray that 92L's bust is, indeed, a early sign that we are looking at a typical season, not a 2005 redux.

I should also add that I found the La Nina to Neutral to El Nino average storm numbers fascinating. La Nina years have just a few more storms than El Nino storms do interestingly enough. It takes neutral to have an insane season on the average.

Now I don't doubt that 2010 will have several majors and possibly even a cat 4/5, but for the moment, I am going to remain firmly in the skeptical camp about just how active this year will be. If I had to do over it again, I would lower my numbers substantiially from the 20 that I went with in May in the S2K poll.

If I had to guess, I think we'll see a year analgous to 1996, 1998 or 1999. Upon further review, it appears that even 1999 had a June storm, Arlene, and it was on June 11th! 2010 is falling behind. 1998 didn't begin until July 27th though and was a very bad year with Georges. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we don't ramp up for a signfiicant period yet to come.

Say what? Would you please back up the bolded statement with facts? That is a very bold statement to make without any kind of back up facts and one I don't believe can be backed up with facts.

[Blown Away]

Wow, 92L's broad mid level circulation is sure creating some intense convection as it interacts w/ the shear. Convection is building along the broad circulation! NHC may throw a "Code Yellow" back on this area.
http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/goes/east/tatl/loop-avn.html

[Blown Away]

You know convection is firing around the broad circulation.
http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/goes/flt/t1/loop-vis.html

[KWT]

Convection is ok but its very linear looking to me, barely any turning with the wave and the shear looks pretty torrid at the moment!

[Gustywind]

Convection is repopping nicely...

[JTD]

If you go through history, specifically years such as 1933, 1995, 2005, etc., hyperactive seasons all (not just average seasons but insane), a staple of them has been a significant June cyclone. The fact that we're not likely to see a cyclone form in June due to factors such as the MJO not being phased correctly at the moment in the Atlantic to help kickstart storms in combination with the fate that met 92L in combination with the dry air/shear in that area has me seriously questioning whether or not this season will come close to meeting the high-end projections. I think there's little chance that this year will equate to 2005 now. I could be wrong, of course.

I should add that the Gulf of Mexico can absolutely not sustain any cyclone activity of any sort whatsoever right now; so, we should all pray that 92L's bust is, indeed, a early sign that we are looking at a typical season, not a 2005 redux.

I should also add that I found the La Nina to Neutral to El Nino average storm numbers fascinating. La Nina years have just a few more storms than El Nino storms do interestingly enough. It takes neutral to have an insane season on the average.

Now I don't doubt that 2010 will have several majors and possibly even a cat 4/5, but for the moment, I am going to remain firmly in the skeptical camp about just how active this year will be. If I had to do over it again, I would lower my numbers substantiially from the 20 that I went with in May in the S2K poll.

If I had to guess, I think we'll see a year analgous to 1996, 1998 or 1999. Upon further review, it appears that even 1999 had a June storm, Arlene, and it was on June 11th! 2010 is falling behind. 1998 didn't begin until July 27th though and was a very bad year with Georges. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we don't ramp up for a signfiicant period yet to come.

Say what? Would you please back up the bolded statement with facts? That is a very bold statement to make without any kind of back up facts and one I don't believe can be backed up with facts.

Excuse me. Perhaps, you shouldn't read into what I say what you think I say and only what I do say. I was referring to the oil spill. Even a strong tropical storm would disrupt the oil relief efforts in a substantial way. Of course, the GOM is roaring to go cyclogenesis wise. It almost always is. I meant that the people of the GOM do not need a storm to disrupt their lives right now and indeed it would be a huge blow. What is wrong with that?

Also, further I am not saying that this year won't have numerous storms. I just no longer think it will reach the Greek Alphabet.

[NOLA2010]

If you go through history, specifically years such as 1933, 1995, 2005, etc., hyperactive seasons all (not just average seasons but insane), a staple of them has been a significant June cyclone. The fact that we're not likely to see a cyclone form in June due to factors such as the MJO not being phased correctly at the moment in the Atlantic to help kickstart storms in combination with the fate that met 92L in combination with the dry air/shear in that area has me seriously questioning whether or not this season will come close to meeting the high-end projections. I think there's little chance that this year will equate to 2005 now. I could be wrong, of course.

I should add that the Gulf of Mexico can absolutely not sustain any cyclone activity of any sort whatsoever right now; so, we should all pray that 92L's bust is, indeed, a early sign that we are looking at a typical season, not a 2005 redux.

I should also add that I found the La Nina to Neutral to El Nino average storm numbers fascinating. La Nina years have just a few more storms than El Nino storms do interestingly enough. It takes neutral to have an insane season on the average.

Now I don't doubt that 2010 will have several majors and possibly even a cat 4/5, but for the moment, I am going to remain firmly in the skeptical camp about just how active this year will be. If I had to do over it again, I would lower my numbers substantiially from the 20 that I went with in May in the S2K poll.

If I had to guess, I think we'll see a year analgous to 1996, 1998 or 1999. Upon further review, it appears that even 1999 had a June storm, Arlene, and it was on June 11th! 2010 is falling behind. 1998 didn't begin until July 27th though and was a very bad year with Georges. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we don't ramp up for a signfiicant period yet to come.

Say what? Would you please back up the bolded statement with facts? That is a very bold statement to make without any kind of back up facts and one I don't believe can be backed up with facts.

I think he might of been talking about the oil spill

[NOLA2010]

If you go through history, specifically years such as 1933, 1995, 2005, etc., hyperactive seasons all (not just average seasons but insane), a staple of them has been a significant June cyclone. The fact that we're not likely to see a cyclone form in June due to factors such as the MJO not being phased correctly at the moment in the Atlantic to help kickstart storms in combination with the fate that met 92L in combination with the dry air/shear in that area has me seriously questioning whether or not this season will come close to meeting the high-end projections. I think there's little chance that this year will equate to 2005 now. I could be wrong, of course.

I should add that the Gulf of Mexico can absolutely not sustain any cyclone activity of any sort whatsoever right now; so, we should all pray that 92L's bust is, indeed, a early sign that we are looking at a typical season, not a 2005 redux.

I should also add that I found the La Nina to Neutral to El Nino average storm numbers fascinating. La Nina years have just a few more storms than El Nino storms do interestingly enough. It takes neutral to have an insane season on the average.

Now I don't doubt that 2010 will have several majors and possibly even a cat 4/5, but for the moment, I am going to remain firmly in the skeptical camp about just how active this year will be. If I had to do over it again, I would lower my numbers substantiially from the 20 that I went with in May in the S2K poll.

If I had to guess, I think we'll see a year analgous to 1996, 1998 or 1999. Upon further review, it appears that even 1999 had a June storm, Arlene, and it was on June 11th! 2010 is falling behind. 1998 didn't begin until July 27th though and was a very bad year with Georges. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we don't ramp up for a signfiicant period yet to come.

Say what? Would you please back up the bolded statement with facts? That is a very bold statement to make without any kind of back up facts and one I don't believe can be backed up with facts.

Excuse me. Perhaps, you shouldn't read into what I say what you think I say and only what I do say. I was referring to the oil spill. Even a strong tropical storm would disrupt the oil relief efforts in a substantial way. Of course, the GOM is roaring to go cyclogenesis wise. It almost always is. I meant that the people of the GOM do not need a storm to disrupt their lives right now and indeed it would be a huge blow. What is wrong with that?

He beat me to it!

[JTD]

:blowup:

TROPICAL WEATHER OUTLOOK
NWS TPC/NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
200 AM EDT THU JUN 17 2010

FOR THE NORTH ATLANTIC...CARIBBEAN SEA AND THE GULF OF MEXICO...

TROPICAL CYCLONE FORMATION IS NOT EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT 48 HOURS.

$$
FORECASTER AVILA

Oh and I see TD's post above about June storms, I remain firmly convinced there is NO correlation. We would only need an AVERAGE of 5 storms in July-October to get to 20. Easily manageable(I'm sure August/September will probably have more than that). This season could easily compete with 2005 still, just because we're behind it now doesn't mean we can't catch up. 2005 had lulls with no storms... Could the season be slow? Sure it could... the predictions could all be wrong, but with SST's at record levels I'm afraid they won't be. As much as I love tracking hurricanes, the last thing I want to see is a major in the Gulf with the current oil spill, but that's a story I hope we don't have to deal with.

Now if July is slow, well, the odds of 20 storms goes down significantly, but we're talking weeks from now! Way too early to tell. I've seen the Atlantic be dead one week and the next week have 3-4 storms at once. You can't predict anything based on June when climo is against many storms.

Brent,

I would ordinarily agree with you. It's just that with La Nina coming on so strong, I'm not sure what affect that will have in slowing things down.

BTW, thanks NOLA.

[cycloneye]

Well,as of this post,92L has not been deactivated.Maybe,they are still watching the system to see if it forms a LLC down the road. What it will do is bring plenty of squally weather to the NE Caribbean this weekend.More about local effects at the big Caribbean thread at U.S & Caribbean forum. viewtopic.php?f=24&t=85676&p=1992197#p1992197

ftp://ftp.tpc.ncep.noaa.gov/atcf/tcweb/

[Blown Away]

Visible: http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/goes/flt/t1/loop-vis.html
IR: http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/goes/flt/t1/loop-avn.html

IMO, if intense convection keep firing around broad circulation the NHC will tag "Code Yellow". If the circulation can move more NW the shear will ease once it reaches PR.

[Ivanhater]

12z GFS developing 92 in Florida straits and Gulf

[lrak]

I see a wee bit of spin.

And the circulation looks to be just ahead of the convection now.

[Brent]

TROPICAL WEATHER OUTLOOK
NWS TPC/NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
200 PM EDT THU JUN 17 2010

FOR THE NORTH ATLANTIC...CARIBBEAN SEA AND THE GULF OF MEXICO...

A STRONG TROPICAL WAVE APPROACHING THE LEEWARD ISLANDS IS PRODUCING
DISORGANIZED SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS AS IT MOVES TO THE
WEST-NORTHWEST AT ABOUT 15 MPH. ALTHOUGH STRONG UPPER-LEVEL WINDS
SHOULD PREVENT TROPICAL CYCLONE FORMATION...LOCALLY HEAVY RAIN AND
GUSTY WINDS ARE POSSIBLE IN THE LEEWARD ISLANDS AND PUERTO RICO
OVER THE NEXT DAY OR TWO. THERE IS A LOW CHANCE...NEAR 0
PERCENT...OF THIS SYSTEM BECOMING A TROPICAL CYCLONE DURING THE
NEXT 48 HOURS.

TROPICAL CYCLONE FORMATION IS NOT EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT 48 HOURS.

$$
FORECASTER BLAKE

[Nederlander]

Code Yellow again