Moderator: S2k Moderators
That looks a lot better (and probably a lot easier to use/less resource-heavy) than Google Earth's database.
Hammy wrote::uarrow: That looks a lot better (and probably a lot easier to use/less resource-heavy) than Google Earth's database.
Since I'm in this thread, anybody have a clue when the 1964-70 (even if unofficial) report will be out? All that's out there is an abstract with a summary video for the period from 2016.
GSBHurricane wrote:Hammy wrote::uarrow: That looks a lot better (and probably a lot easier to use/less resource-heavy) than Google Earth's database.
Since I'm in this thread, anybody have a clue when the 1964-70 (even if unofficial) report will be out? All that's out there is an abstract with a summary video for the period from 2016.
I thought it was from 2018. But I see your point. Anyway, I really don’t know why they haven’t published the results yet, unless there was a case of several changes being rejected. Hopefully soon.
1900hurricane wrote:Regarding Joan '88, I created a plot from the 20th Century Reanalysis v2 dataset to estimate OCI and ROCI to use with KZC. For OCI, I have 1008 mb, and for ROCI, I have 285 nm. For storm speed, I took the distance between the 00Z and 06Z best track points and divided by six for the six hour average speed, which ended up being 6.83 kt. L is 11.9ºN from best track, and P is 932 mb also from best track. When all plugged into KZC, expected Vmax is a cool 130 kt even.>>> from KZCeq import KZC, KZCroci
>>> p = 932
>>> c = 41 / 6
>>> c
6.833333333333333
>>> 9.5 * 30
285.0
>>> roci = 285
>>> l = 11.9
>>> oci = 1008
>>> p0 = 1000
>>> v = 100
>>> while p0 >= p:
v = v + 0.1
p0 = KZC(KZCroci(v, c, roci, l), oci)
>>> print('%3.0f' % v)
130
https://i.imgur.com/3XTYkUb.gif
I've been playing with the ROCI version of KZC a little bit, and for the most part it appears to match up very well with the TS wind radius version that is operationally used. It does diverge a little bit towards the 'windier' out beyond 155 kt or so, but not exceptionally so, and I actually prefer the ROCI version when it comes to weaker storms that sometimes have inconsistent wind radii. Naturally, I then pulled up some old surface charts of past storms and computed away. Here's a few that I did.1900hurricane: p = 936, c = 13.8, roci = 250, l = 29.1, oci = 1009, v = 121 kt
(p = 931) v = 127 kt
Andrew '92: p = 922, c = 17.3, roci = 113, l = 25.5, oci = 1013, v = 148 kt
Celia '70: p = 945, c = 13.3, roci = 120, l = 27.6, oci = 1009, v = 114 kt
Camille '69: p = 900, c = 14.0, roci = 120, l = 30.3, oci = 1003, v = 156 kt
Carla '61: p = 931, c = 4.33, roci = 375, l = 28.0, oci = 1004, v = 114 kt
Ptarmigan wrote:1900hurricane wrote:Regarding Joan '88, I created a plot from the 20th Century Reanalysis v2 dataset to estimate OCI and ROCI to use with KZC. For OCI, I have 1008 mb, and for ROCI, I have 285 nm. For storm speed, I took the distance between the 00Z and 06Z best track points and divided by six for the six hour average speed, which ended up being 6.83 kt. L is 11.9ºN from best track, and P is 932 mb also from best track. When all plugged into KZC, expected Vmax is a cool 130 kt even.>>> from KZCeq import KZC, KZCroci
>>> p = 932
>>> c = 41 / 6
>>> c
6.833333333333333
>>> 9.5 * 30
285.0
>>> roci = 285
>>> l = 11.9
>>> oci = 1008
>>> p0 = 1000
>>> v = 100
>>> while p0 >= p:
v = v + 0.1
p0 = KZC(KZCroci(v, c, roci, l), oci)
>>> print('%3.0f' % v)
130
https://i.imgur.com/3XTYkUb.gif
I've been playing with the ROCI version of KZC a little bit, and for the most part it appears to match up very well with the TS wind radius version that is operationally used. It does diverge a little bit towards the 'windier' out beyond 155 kt or so, but not exceptionally so, and I actually prefer the ROCI version when it comes to weaker storms that sometimes have inconsistent wind radii. Naturally, I then pulled up some old surface charts of past storms and computed away. Here's a few that I did.1900hurricane: p = 936, c = 13.8, roci = 250, l = 29.1, oci = 1009, v = 121 kt
(p = 931) v = 127 kt
Andrew '92: p = 922, c = 17.3, roci = 113, l = 25.5, oci = 1013, v = 148 kt
Celia '70: p = 945, c = 13.3, roci = 120, l = 27.6, oci = 1009, v = 114 kt
Camille '69: p = 900, c = 14.0, roci = 120, l = 30.3, oci = 1003, v = 156 kt
Carla '61: p = 931, c = 4.33, roci = 375, l = 28.0, oci = 1004, v = 114 kt
Interesting. How did you come with ROCI? It would be interesting to see how large other hurricanes were like the 1886 Indianola Hurricane.
I figured Carla is a large hurricane. The ROCI is much larger than Ike.
Hurricanehink wrote:https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/data_sub/re_anal.html - it appears that the 1961-1965 reanalysis is complete. HURDAT has the new updated numbers in the comparison between the original year and the reanalyzed season, which gives us 1 additional storm in 1961 (and 2 fewer major hurricanes), 2 more storms in 1962 (and one fewer major hurricane), one more storm in 1963, one more storm in 1964 (with two fewer major hurricanes), and four more storms in 1965. That's a total of nine new storms in this five year period.
Hurricanehink wrote:https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/data_sub/re_anal.html - it appears that the 1961-1965 reanalysis is complete. HURDAT has the new updated numbers in the comparison between the original year and the reanalyzed season, which gives us 1 additional storm in 1961 (and 2 fewer major hurricanes), 2 more storms in 1962 (and one fewer major hurricane), one more storm in 1963, one more storm in 1964 (with two fewer major hurricanes), and four more storms in 1965. That's a total of nine new storms in this five year period.
GSBHurricane wrote:Hurricanehink wrote:https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/data_sub/re_anal.html - it appears that the 1961-1965 reanalysis is complete. HURDAT has the new updated numbers in the comparison between the original year and the reanalyzed season, which gives us 1 additional storm in 1961 (and 2 fewer major hurricanes), 2 more storms in 1962 (and one fewer major hurricane), one more storm in 1963, one more storm in 1964 (with two fewer major hurricanes), and four more storms in 1965. That's a total of nine new storms in this five year period.
Where did you find the exact changes because I looked in HURDAT and they aren’t there.
Shell Mound wrote:Actually, the full reanalysis has just been released.
Reanalysis Highlights:
1961
*CARLA downgraded from Cat-5 (150 kt) to Cat-4 (125 kt) at peak
**Landfall in TX confirmed as Cat-4 (125 kt / 931 mb), based in part on surface wind measurements of 127 kt in Port Lavaca
**Lowest pressure reduced to 927 mb pre-landfall, based on reconnaissance data
*DEBBIE confirmed as having impacted Ireland as an extratropical cyclone, not a hurricane
*ESTHER upgraded to Cat-5 (140 kt / 919 mb) at peak over the western Atlantic, based on aircraft data
*FRANCES upgraded to Cat-4 (115 kt / 948 mb) at peak over the western Atlantic
*HATTIE maintained as Cat-5; peak increased to 145 kt / 914 mb, based on aircraft data
**Landfall in Belize estimated at 130 kt / 924 mb, based on data from a ship in the eye
1962
*New hurricane discovered in late November and early December (80 kt!)
1963
*ARLENE upgraded to major hurricane (100 kt / 969 mb) over the western Atlantic
**Landfall in Bermuda estimated at 95 kt / 975 mb, based on local observations
*CINDY downgraded to tropical storm (55 kt / 996 mb) at peak and landfall in TX
*FLORA increased to 130 kt / 933 mb at peak; landfall in Haiti estimated at 130 kt (!)
**Major hurricane impact in Cuba (105 kt / 973 mb)
*GINNY now indicated as having impacted Nova Scotia as a strong Cat-2 (95 kt / 948 mb!), not an extratropical cyclone
1964
*A new hurricane, of Cabo-Verde origin, discovered in late July and early August (75 kt / 990 mb!)
*Tiny ABBY increased to near-hurricane status at landfall in TX (60 kt / 1000 mb)
*CLEO maintained at Cat-4 peak over the Caribbean; lowest pressure reduced to 938 mb (!)
**Landfall in Haiti estimated at 130 kt (!); landfall in FL kept at Cat-2 status (95 kt / 968 mb)
*DORA estimated at borderline-Cat-3 status in FL (95 kt / 966 mb)
*HILDA downgraded to Cat-2 at landfall in LA (90 kt / 959 mb)
*ISBELL downgraded to Cat-2 at landfall in FL (90 kt / 970 mb)
1965
*ANNA significantly increased to 90 kt (!) at peak over the North Atlantic
*BETSY upgraded to Cat-4 (115 kt / 946 mb) at landfall in LA
*ELENA significantly increased to 95 kt / 977 mb at peak over the North Atlantic
Users browsing this forum: Hurricane2022 and 94 guests
_SWA.JPG){kind=link}