So far...

[KWT]

Tio be honest Wxman57 I really don't put much trust into that particular product, its been poor on many different occasions from what I've seen...and actually I've gotta be honest and say it looks actually a touch above normal on that map overall...

The main problem this year so far has been the waves have been quite southerly and have often just run out of real estate. The other issue is the shear has been quite high throughout the main developmental zones for June and July has been where the shear has been. I think once we see the CV region open up for development you'll start seeing better development and quicker strengthening occuring.

[scogor]

Keep 2004 in mind, my friends...Bonnie made landfall in Florida's Big Bend area (as I recall) on the same day that Charley ramsacked Charlotte County and followed the Peace River and then I-4 on its way out of Florida--in mid-August. For us Floridians, the "season" doesn't begin until at the earliest late July--I'm not exactly sure whether Bonnie's "early" entry into Florida (with a "Cape Verde" origin, yet!!) correlates to a more active season but Bonnie's path and its early arrival is nonetheless curious and a bit disquieting. Not a met but have lived in Florida for more than 25 years and cannot ignore the higher than normal sea temps and what appears to be an earlier than usual Cape Verde season.

[jcoffee]

Florida has been lucky of late. It will be surprising if Florida does not return to an annual 1 or 2 hurricanes a year pattern.

[KWT]

I wouldn't describe Bonnie as being a CV system, though for sure it was a proper tropical wave that created both Alex and Bonnie and if I remember correctly when that happens more then once before August it tends to suggest a busier then normal season will occur.

[scogor]

KWT, you may be right about Bonnie not being a "true" CV system but it does seem that we tracked it out in the Atlantic for a number of days which is rare for this time of the year.

[KWT]

Yeah you can clearly trace back the wave to Africa as the thread Cycloneye started showed.

[LarryWx]

Well, I think what's makes many of us (myself included) wonder about this season is the busted 2006 forecast - that was the busted forecast of all time, since almost all professional folks had forecast a continuation of 2005 - thankfully the earlier and stronger than expected El Nino put an end to that, but it's that doubt that still lingers when it comes to another "busier than average season" forecast...

Frank,
Maybe you're just trying to quiet the 2010 hyperactive season people I disagree with. I can understand that if that is what you're doing. However, I also know that you often have a tendency of downplaying the tropics too much, in general, based on your extensive posting history...almost in an antiwishcaster role. So, I have no choice but to take your comments with a grain of salt. I feel that comparing to 2006 is ill-advised. 2006 was an El Nino, as you noted, vs. the current La Nina. I, too, recall 2006 being overhyped due to prior very busy seasons, and I, in the face of the 2006 extreme hype (many forecasts here were for high teens+ in # of NS), predicted a slightly below average season due to the El Nino (9 NS, 5 H....at another BB) and ended up very close to reality (10 NS, 5 H). Also, there were no U.S. hurricane hits. Whereas the total # of NS for 2010 may very well end up too high, the current La Nina, along with the near record warm Atlantic (strong +AMO), means that there is likely going to be a very active AUG-OCT, including significant U.S. impact. There is little reason to believe this is going to be anywhere near as inactive as 2006's slightly below average overall season as well as zero U.S. hurricane hits. Activity through 7/25 is well above the longterm avg. %wise being that the longterm average is only ~1 NS. Moreover, La Nina's typically have a slower June-July combined vs. El Nino's as per the following:

El Nino v. La Nina (since 1950): # NS mo. by mo.

Month..............El Nino..................La Nina
May/Jun............1.0........................0.5
Jul....................0.6........................0.9
Aug..................2.3........................3.2
Sep..................3.4........................4.3
Oct...................1.3........................2.0
Nov..................0.3........................0.4

Note that the 2 NS through 7/25/10 is even ahead of the 1.4 for just La Nina's since 1950 all the way through 7/31! So, I see no good reason to try to downplay the 2010 season based on the season to date. It is ahead of climo. June/July are typically pretty wimpy even in many overall active seasons. The meat of the season climowise is 8/15-10/15. The vast majority of major U.S. hurricane hits have occurred during that interval (based on several hundreds of years of records). In other words, it isn't supposed to be active yet (even in a La Nina).

If you sincerely do have doubts about the # of NS expectations, consider these seasons' total # of NS: 1969, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2004, 2007.

- 1969 had zero NS by 7/25 (1st one on 7/26) and ended with 18. Had two U.S. H hits including cat 5 Camille.
- 1998 had zero NS by 7/25 and ended with 14. (La Nina) Had three U.S. H hits.
- 2000 had zero NS by 7/25 and ended with 15. (La Nina) Had no U.S. H hits.
- 2001 had one NS by 7/25 and ended with 15. Had no U.S. H hits.
- 2004 had zero NS by 7/25 and ended with 15. Had five U.S. H hits, including majors Charlie, Jeanne, and Ivan.
- 2007 had two NS by 7/25 and ended with 15. (La Nina) Had one U.S. H hit.

Granted, two of these six seasons had zero U.S. H hits, even including one of the La Nina's. So, even I'll admit that the U.S. H hit expectation is probably more up in the air/more of a throw of the dice. However, these six seasons combined still averaged nearly 2 U.S. H hits vs. the zero of 2006. Also, note that all 11 U.S. H hits were in either AUG or SEP.

So, in summary, we may very well not reach the high teens in # of NS since that high of a # is pretty extreme, but there's little reason to believe that 2010 will be wimpy like 2006 based on the season to date especially when considering the La Nina as well as near record +AMO.

[gatorcane]

Wow, a well thought-out, really great post here. Larry I agree 100% with everything you wrote in that post. For those that would like to sound the season cancel flag at this point, this is the post to read.

[Stephanie]

Thank you Larry.

The standard graph showing the steep rise of tropical activity in August and September isn't just an optical illusion. It's supported by hard facts like you just presented.

[lonelymike]

Well, I think what's makes many of us (myself included) wonder about this season is the busted 2006 forecast - that was the busted forecast of all time, since almost all professional folks had forecast a continuation of 2005 - thankfully the earlier and stronger than expected El Nino put an end to that, but it's that doubt that still lingers when it comes to another "busier than average season" forecast...

Frank,
Maybe you're just trying to quiet the 2010 hyperactive season people I disagree with. I can understand that if that is what you're doing. However, I also know that you often have a tendency of downplaying the tropics too much, in general, based on your extensive posting history...almost in an antiwishcaster role. So, I have no choice but to take your comments with a grain of salt. I feel that comparing to 2006 is ill-advised. 2006 was an El Nino, as you noted, vs. the current La Nina. I, too, recall 2006 being overhyped due to prior very busy seasons, and I, in the face of the 2006 extreme hype (many forecasts here were for high teens+ in # of NS), predicted a slightly below average season due to the El Nino (9 NS, 5 H....at another BB) and ended up very close to reality (10 NS, 5 H). Also, there were no U.S. hurricane hits. Whereas the total # of NS for 2010 may very well end up too high, the current La Nina, along with the near record warm Atlantic (strong +AMO), means that there is likely going to be a very active AUG-OCT, including significant U.S. impact. There is little reason to believe this is going to be anywhere near as inactive as 2006's slightly below average overall season as well as zero U.S. hurricane hits. Activity through 7/25 is well above the longterm avg. %wise being that the longterm average is only ~1 NS. Moreover, La Nina's typically have a slower June-July combined vs. El Nino's as per the following:

El Nino v. La Nina (since 1950): # NS mo. by mo.

Month..............El Nino..................La Nina
May/Jun............1.0........................0.5
Jul....................0.6........................0.9
Aug..................2.3........................3.2
Sep..................3.4........................4.3
Oct...................1.3........................2.0
Nov..................0.3........................0.4

Note that the 2 NS through 7/25/10 is even ahead of the 1.4 for just La Nina's since 1950 all the way through 7/31! So, I see no good reason to try to downplay the 2010 season based on the season to date. It is ahead of climo. June/July are typically pretty wimpy even in many overall active seasons. The meat of the season climowise is 8/15-10/15. The vast majority of major U.S. hurricane hits have occurred during that interval (based on several hundreds of years of records). In other words, it isn't supposed to be active yet (even in a La Nina).

If you sincerely do have doubts about the # of NS expectations, consider these seasons' total # of NS: 1969, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2004, 2007.

- 1969 had zero NS by 7/25 (1st one on 7/26) and ended with 18. Had two U.S. H hits including cat 5 Camille.
- 1998 had zero NS by 7/25 and ended with 14. (La Nina) Had three U.S. H hits.
- 2000 had zero NS by 7/25 and ended with 15. (La Nina) Had no U.S. H hits.
- 2001 had one NS by 7/25 and ended with 15. Had no U.S. H hits.
- 2004 had zero NS by 7/25 and ended with 15. Had five U.S. H hits, including majors Charlie, Jeanne, and Ivan.
- 2007 had two NS by 7/25 and ended with 15. (La Nina) Had one U.S. H hit.

Granted, two of these six seasons had zero U.S. H hits, even including one of the La Nina's. So, even I'll admit that the U.S. H hit expectation is probably more up in the air/more of a throw of the dice. However, these six seasons combined still averaged nearly 2 U.S. H hits vs. the zero of 2006. Also, note that all 11 U.S. H hits were in either AUG or SEP.

So, in summary, we may very well not reach the high teens in # of NS since that high of a # is pretty extreme, but there's little reason to believe that 2010 will be wimpy like 2006 based on the season to date especially when considering the La Nina as well as near record +AMO.[/quote

Doesn't really matter how many storms we have. It's all based on where they go. Steering patterns matter more than how many storms we have. Nice well thought out post Larry

[KWT]

Given we are now in moderate La Nina, probably the debate will need to shift from high numbers of storms to a discussion about the probable high quality of storms with a much elevated risk of system heading westwards towards the US/Caribbean/Central America. I know Joe B has mentioned similar notions.

Probably a 14-16NS type season but with some big systems and probably a couple of 2-3 week long systems.

[cycloneye]

Given we are now in moderate La Nina, probably the debate will need to shift from high numbers of storms to a discussion about the probable high quality of storms with a much elevated risk of system heading westwards towards the US/Caribbean/Central America. I know Joe B has mentioned similar notions.

Probably a 14-16NS type season but with some big systems and probably a couple of 2-3 week long systems.

Agree KWT. Quality vs quantity looks like what we will see this season. In other words,big ACE numbers vs less than 17 named storms and that is what may cause the season to be hyperactive.

Larry,great work.

[fci]

Larry:
That was an awesome post.

THANK YOU for putting facts behind what many suspect to be the case about the season.

[Frank2]

However, I also know that you often have a tendency of downplaying the tropics too much...

Larrywx,

By your message count you might not have been here in 2006 - I was punched in the stomach so many times that summer because of my statements saying that the increasing shear seemed to be an indicator that the "continuation of 2005" was not going to happen...

The problem is that weather, like fishing and farming, does require that the person really get to know the weather - and not just because they like to see a certain kind of weather (we prefer tropical cyclones or thunderstorms, while skiiers wish for snow, and surfers hope for high waves, etc.), and sometimes that means accepting that the weather that is making itself felt isn't what we desired...

It must be the hardest thing for a farmer to sense that a drought is underway, but to accept it rather than say, "I believe we'll have a record rainfall next month" is better because the person is accepting reality and that in itself gives a person comfort...

In 2006 many who like to follow or experience a hurricane were thinking the same way - but that didn't change the reality that El Nino had arrived, earlier and stronger than expected, and in the end the many critical comments that I endured that summer were for nothing, and that's not to say that "I was right, they were wrong", but, after all, for many years I did work for some of the pioneers in this field and hopefully at least did learn a few things from them - some of which they taught me themselves - when it came to understanding the tropics, though even they always admitted they didn't and couldn't know everything about it, and was the reason they resisted Dr. Gray's way of thinking (he being the pioneer of the seasonal forecast), believing it was just a way to create a media frenzy each spring - which it has...

And, sure, after my Andrew experience (as with those who suffered Katrina, Ivan, etc.), that will temper a person's desire to see another hurricane - but even then, I have to remind myself that my negative feelings do not change reality, and if we do end up with a very busy August and September and a serious hurricane threat develops, I won't be the one to say "It's nothing", since that would be a disservice to the many who visit here, but if it seems to be heading towards dissipation (SHIPS not withstanding - lol), then I'll be the one to point that out, too...

Frank

[tolakram]

but that didn't change the reality that El Nino had arrived, earlier and stronger than expected, and in the end the many critical comments that I endured that summer were for nothing,

But Frank,

this is a La Nina year and we know more now than we did then. No, we don't know everything of course, and probably never will, but what we do know is this year has a good chance to be deadly. I am also of the belief that conditions worsen prior to the El Nino appearing because it's the winds, or lack of them, that create the El Nino. The Nino, Nina are lagging indicators of the change.

So, ignoring the ocean temps and simply looking at the winds this is setting up to be a bad year with very favorable conditions during the heart of the hurricane season.

If it's a slow year then we will learn something new ... I hope.

[Frank2]

True - and I realized after posting someone would point that out (LOL), but was just replying per Larry's comment that perhaps I'm a bit too much leaning in the other direction (lol)...

And it might be true - sort of like conservatives and liberals...

Frank

[KWT]

In many ways what is happening now is what we saw in 2007, whilst the shear is below normal there is speed shear (where certain levelsn are faster then the others) which caused big issues for Bonnie to start with....Then there is also the systems trying to form just before land (we saw numerous such storms in 2007, Humberto being the most memorable)

I made numerous posts in Feb/March in the ENSO thread that if the La Nina comes in too strongly we are limited to a 13-15NS type season but the ACE could easily still be very high indeed and I think its increasingly clear thats what is happening...

I do hope this season will bust the idea that just because we have a moderate La Nina numbers will be super high, etc...that only works to a point, after a while the lack of MJO actually helps to reduce activity in the first half of the season.

[george_r_1961]

Frank2 im going to have to respectfully disagree with you. As pointed out earlier in this thread we have had some busy(and horrific) seasons that got off to a slow start. I dont think what we are seeing now is unusual for late July at all.

In conclusion I think the Atlantic basin will explode and soon. Maybe 10 days.

[MGC]

If things don't start cooking in a couple of weeks I'll entertain the thought that we may not see a hyper active season. I for one is thankful that the ULL disrupted Bonnie. Had an upper high ben in place of an ULL I'd likely be sitting here without power.......MGC

[Frank2]

Everyone has good points, though last evening Jim Cantore pointed out the remarkable fact (as he refered to it) that the IR showed absolutely no convection between the Bahamas and Africa - or 4,000 miles of thunderstorm-free air...

Not very often that that amount of ocean is void of any significant weather...

I'm sure those who generated the seasonal forecasts are arguing among themselves (on another web site - lol) about what's going on, though I have to agree that statistically July is normally the most inactive month (not counting November)...

Frank