CPAC: ISELLE - Post-Tropical

[Alyono]

the radar is not much use with the northern radar being down. Cannot see the northern bands

recon take off at 0430 UTC for a 0600 fix

[Kingarabian]

Convection continues to expand. And look at that banding spreading from SE to SW.

[AdamFirst]

the radar is not much use with the northern radar being down. Cannot see the northern bands

recon take off at 0430 UTC for a 0600 fix

Northern radar is back up and running for the time being.

[Yellow Evan]

South Shore radar down.

[Kingarabian]

What are the latest wind observations?

[AFWeather]

South Shore radar down.

I'm not surprised. All of these radars are probably going to be up and down throughout this event. Welcome to Hawaii weather problems...

[Yellow Evan]

What are the latest wind observations?

Gusts up to 102 mph.

[Kingarabian]

What are the latest wind observations?

Gusts up to 102 mph.

Link please!

[Iceman56]

I lowered the advisory intensity to 65 knots because the various RECON intensity estimate techniques in the 23Z pass gave 66 kt, 67 kt, and 68 kt, with 90% of a max flight level wind of 72 knots giving 65 knots. This made going with 70 kt in the 00z intensity a stretch, but we round up slightly for the sake of safety and likely undersampling. Since the pressure continues to rise slowly, and the satellite and radar presentations of the system looking increasingly sheared, I could not justify retaining the 70 knot intensity at 03z.

If you are finding that the CPHC webpage is slow, you should try hitting refresh. Many times we find that people are getting old info on the page because their browser is loading from the cache. There have been many times I've been on the phone with people insisting the page is old when I'm looking at the our page from the office and it's current. The goal here is to publish the complete advisory package by :45, but the discussion almost always goes last as we put together our thoughts. The package is not officially "late" until synoptic + 3 hour.

And yes, you better believe I am a pro-met.

[Yellow Evan]

What are the latest wind observations?

Gusts up to 102 mph.

Link please!

http://mkwc.ifa.hawaii.edu/current/

[Alyono]

I'm seeing the southern radar just fine

[Alyono]

I lowered the advisory intensity to 65 knots because the various RECON intensity estimate techniques in the 23Z pass gave 66 kt, 67 kt, and 68 kt, with 90% of a max flight level wind of 72 knots giving 65 knots. This made going with 70 kt in the 00z intensity a stretch, but we round up slightly for the sake of safety and likely undersampling. Since the pressure continues to rise slowly, and the satellite and radar presentations of the system looking increasingly sheared, I could not justify retaining the 70 knot intensity at 03z.

If you are finding that the CPHC webpage is slow, you should try hitting refresh. Many times we find that people are getting old info on the page because their browser is loading from the cache. There have been many times I've been on the phone with people insisting the page is old when I'm looking at the our page from the office and it's current. The goal here is to publish the complete advisory package by :45, but the discussion almost always goes last as we put together our thoughts. The package is not officially "late" until synoptic + 3 hour.

And yes, you better believe I am a pro-met.

I have to strongly disagree with lowering of the winds. I am not seeing this any more ragged than when the aircraft measured the 65 to 70 kt winds. Not saying this is the most organized hurricane, but it appears to me, based upon sat and radar, to have maintained intensity.

Would it have been better to wait for recon at 6Z to lower the winds?

[AdamFirst]

What are the latest wind observations?

Gusts up to 102 mph.

That 102 MPH gust is at the Gemini Observatory, Mauna Kea - 13,600 feet.

Inflated just a bit.

[Yellow Evan]

I lowered the advisory intensity to 65 knots because the various RECON intensity estimate techniques in the 23Z pass gave 66 kt, 67 kt, and 68 kt, with 90% of a max flight level wind of 72 knots giving 65 knots. This made going with 70 kt in the 00z intensity a stretch, but we round up slightly for the sake of safety and likely undersampling. Since the pressure continues to rise slowly, and the satellite and radar presentations of the system looking increasingly sheared, I could not justify retaining the 70 knot intensity at 03z.

If you are finding that the CPHC webpage is slow, you should try hitting refresh. Many times we find that people are getting old info on the page because their browser is loading from the cache. There have been many times I've been on the phone with people insisting the page is old when I'm looking at the our page from the office and it's current. The goal here is to publish the complete advisory package by :45, but the discussion almost always goes last as we put together our thoughts. The package is not officially "late" until synoptic + 3 hour.

And yes, you better believe I am a pro-met.

We get frustrated since the CPHC come out later (edit) than the NHC advisories.

[Ptarmigan]

Mauna Kea Weather Station
http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/cgi-bin/dl_gemini.csh

[CrazyC83]

I lowered the advisory intensity to 65 knots because the various RECON intensity estimate techniques in the 23Z pass gave 66 kt, 67 kt, and 68 kt, with 90% of a max flight level wind of 72 knots giving 65 knots. This made going with 70 kt in the 00z intensity a stretch, but we round up slightly for the sake of safety and likely undersampling. Since the pressure continues to rise slowly, and the satellite and radar presentations of the system looking increasingly sheared, I could not justify retaining the 70 knot intensity at 03z.

If you are finding that the CPHC webpage is slow, you should try hitting refresh. Many times we find that people are getting old info on the page because their browser is loading from the cache. There have been many times I've been on the phone with people insisting the page is old when I'm looking at the our page from the office and it's current. The goal here is to publish the complete advisory package by :45, but the discussion almost always goes last as we put together our thoughts. The package is not officially "late" until synoptic + 3 hour.

And yes, you better believe I am a pro-met.

I can understand the thinking. While some have complained, we all know you are dealing with record workload right now, and any help is 5,000 miles away in Miami. No other NWS office has to double as a hurricane forecast center. Although I personally would hand NHC (as the CPHC backup) temporary control for Julio until Iselle is out of the immediate threat area...

I would have personally stuck with 70 kt (regardless of visual opinion - it hasn't changed so much to make it obvious up or down) just for continuity under the next Recon (based on the SFMR reports), making note it is somewhat uncertain. But that is just me.

Although not listed, 60 kt is the forecast landfall intensity?

[Yellow Evan]

I lowered the advisory intensity to 65 knots because the various RECON intensity estimate techniques in the 23Z pass gave 66 kt, 67 kt, and 68 kt, with 90% of a max flight level wind of 72 knots giving 65 knots. This made going with 70 kt in the 00z intensity a stretch, but we round up slightly for the sake of safety and likely undersampling. Since the pressure continues to rise slowly, and the satellite and radar presentations of the system looking increasingly sheared, I could not justify retaining the 70 knot intensity at 03z.

If you are finding that the CPHC webpage is slow, you should try hitting refresh. Many times we find that people are getting old info on the page because their browser is loading from the cache. There have been many times I've been on the phone with people insisting the page is old when I'm looking at the our page from the office and it's current. The goal here is to publish the complete advisory package by :45, but the discussion almost always goes last as we put together our thoughts. The package is not officially "late" until synoptic + 3 hour.

And yes, you better believe I am a pro-met.

I can understand the thinking. While some have complained, we all know you are dealing with record workload right now, and any help is 5,000 miles away in Miami. No other NWS office has to double as a hurricane forecast center. Although I personally would hand NHC (as the CPHC backup) temporary control for Julio until Iselle is out of the immediate threat area...

I would have personally stuck with 70 kt just for continuity under the next Recon (based on the SFMR reports), making note it is somewhat uncertain. But that is just me.

Although not listed, 60 kt is the forecast landfall intensity?

True, I'm sorry if I've been over critical of the CPHC.

I imagine you guys are more weary than us and it's tough on you guys. CPHC needs a bigger staff IMO.

I just don't like these intensity changes right before landfall.

[CrazyC83]

I do think the NHC should continue to do advisories and discussions for Julio until watches are necessary (or until Iselle leaves) to let the CPHC have somewhat of a break - as they are their backup and there is nothing else in NHC territory right now.

[Yellow Evan]

I do think the NHC should continue to do advisories and discussions for Julio until watches are necessary (or until Iselle leaves) to let the CPHC have somewhat of a break - as they are their backup and there is nothing else in NHC territory right now.

CPHC did that with Iniki/Orlene 92, when the NHC took over Orlene's advisories for a bit.

[Kingarabian]

I lowered the advisory intensity to 65 knots because the various RECON intensity estimate techniques in the 23Z pass gave 66 kt, 67 kt, and 68 kt, with 90% of a max flight level wind of 72 knots giving 65 knots. This made going with 70 kt in the 00z intensity a stretch, but we round up slightly for the sake of safety and likely undersampling. Since the pressure continues to rise slowly, and the satellite and radar presentations of the system looking increasingly sheared, I could not justify retaining the 70 knot intensity at 03z.

If you are finding that the CPHC webpage is slow, you should try hitting refresh. Many times we find that people are getting old info on the page because their browser is loading from the cache. There have been many times I've been on the phone with people insisting the page is old when I'm looking at the our page from the office and it's current. The goal here is to publish the complete advisory package by :45, but the discussion almost always goes last as we put together our thoughts. The package is not officially "late" until synoptic + 3 hour.

And yes, you better believe I am a pro-met.

Yeah ignore our bickering.

All this time I though you folks were a separate and independent center. Didn't know the CPHC was a branch from the NWS. I hope they increase the staff and offer some relief.

We also got confused with Genevieve when you folks left it at 40kts for quite some time when it appeared much stronger.