I think this season ultimately did live up to most expectations, although definitely not in the way that most people were expecting. The biggest reason I would say 2024 met expectations was because of the large number of highly impactful or uniquely memorable hurricanes: I am personally of the belief that the qualitative human impact and perception of a hurricane season is more important than individual quantitative metrics. Those quantitative metrics, however, do still hold importance for analysis; to this point I know a lot of people, myself among them, were saying they expected a 2017-esque quality over quantity season and that was certainly what happened. 2024 was not some early 2020 shotgun slopfest of short-lived tropical storms popping up left and right; in fact over 60 percent of 2024's named storms were hurricanes. 2004 is another point of reference, exactly 20 years later, in terms of a higher-quality season that featured devastating impacts to Florida specifically. All things considered 2024 had an incredibly high bar to clear just to meet expectations given several reputable forecasters (NOAA included) put out their highest initial forecasts ever. Of those predictions 2024 ultimately met some while falling short of a few others. There in fact were really only two individual metrics by which 2024 fell short of expectations:
Named Storms - Most forecasters predicted more than 20 named storms this year with the NHC giving a broader range from 17-25, and this is one of two metrics by which 2024 really ended up on the lower end of expectations. This, however, is one of the more difficult metrics to forecast especially at the higher end. Exceeding 20 named systems pretty much relies on a decently large number of subtropical systems or early season gyre/gulf spinups that are famously difficult to predict from before the season as they rely on intraseasonal conditions being conducive at the exact right moment. Most forecasts for hurricanes and major hurricanes were just about spot on, and forecasters were correct in stating that there would be a high number of destructive landfalling hurricanes. All in all I would not call a season with 11 hurricanes and 5 major hurricanes, with 8 and 4 of those respectively making landfall, a lackluster season by any means.
ACE - The other metric that fell short of forecasts was ACE, and this is the more substantive discussion point from a seasonal forecasting perspective. My guess is that given the high MDR temps and the favorable background conditions, forecasters expected a lot more long tracking MDR hurricanes ala 1995/2004/2017. While we did get several decently long-lived strong systems this year, most were the result of systems developing very far west in the basin (Francine, Helene, Milton, Raphael) and making landfall at strength rather than tropical waves developing early and occurring out in the open ocean where longer tracks would be possible. There were also several more weak systems that would have had a conducive environment to strengthen had it not been for land interaction (Nadine, Oscar, Sara). The two long tracking major hurricanes that did occur this year (Beryl and Kirk) were also moving very fast, which limited ACE accrual. All this results in ACE being relatively low for a season with 11 hurricanes and 5 major hurricanes. If we again compare, 2017 went 17/10/6 with 226 ACE whereas 2024 is preliminarily at 18/11/5 with 161 ACE. In 2017 3 storms (Irma, Jose, Maria) individually generated over 40 ACE whereas in 2024 Beryl was the peak individual ACE generator at 35. Despite its ACE shortcomings, 2024 still managed to eke its way into hyperactive status with a legendary and devastating late season.
I would ultimately peg both of these forecasting shortcomings on the difficulty of predicting intraseasonal forcing factors in cyclogenesis. Had the monsoon trough been further south tropical waves that eventually formed these systems would have been in more conducive conditions for development further east and we likely would have seen higher ACE; if steering currents resulted in Kirk or Beryl being slower ACE would have shot up as well. Had the subtropics been more productive 2024 may well have met the NS forecasts. In fact, the past two years have really been opposite sides of the same coin in illustrating the importance of intraseasonal conditions: 2023 showed that a favorable local environment combined with high SSTs can allow storms to overcome an oppressive background state at the right time, whereas September 2024 showed that no level of favorable background conditions or high SSTs can overcome a situationally hostile environment. In years like 2024 where the macroscale background conditions are highly favorable it really does take every microscale factor falling perfectly into place to get numbers like 20+ NS or 200+ ACE, and these factors are at this point in time near impossible to accurately predict further than on the order of weeks out. Until these intraseasonal factors are able to be predicted, assuming of course they can be predicted in any practical manner, there will continue to be both hits and misses with upper echelon seasons like this.
As I mentioned above the biggest reason this year will be remembered IMO is for the large number of uniquely impactful or notable hurricanes. These are what I call archetypal storms: storms that due to some aspect of their lifespan/impact (i.e. rate of intensification, overall duration, early/late formation, lethality, or type of damage) are uniquely memorable and serve as
the reference to compare future storms to in that aspect. These storms often, but not always, set basin records. Some past examples would be Ivan for tornado impact, Katrina/Harvey for flooding, Wilma for intensity, Mitch for lethality, Sandy for size, etc. I would say at least two storms this year are archetype defining storms in some regard, with a few more that will still be notable future reference points if not archetypal:
Beryl - Beryl is now the unequivocal reference point for intense early season storms, surpassing Dennis and Emily. Nothing about Beryl was opportunistic, it wasn't some lucky gyre or Gulf spinup, it was a full-fledged tropical wave MDR major hurricane in June and was at the time (pre-September shutdown) indicative of this year's optimal conditions. Like Kaiju said above, every time there is a strong early-season model signal in the future we will be awash with "Beryl 2.0" comments. Beryl also set numerous records that are unlikely to be broken for some time.
Helene - Helene will, at least in the US, likely be the archetypal storm for inland damage and lethality. Similar landslide and flooding damage is unfortunately fairly common in the Caribbean and Central America where mountainous topography is present closer to the ocean, but in the US most property damage and deaths occur due to storm surge and freshwater flooding very close to the coast. Helene brought the danger that hurricanes pose to mountainous regions to the US for the first time in recent memory and will serve as a stark reminder of how water can pose a much more severe threat than wind and how life-threatening conditions extend far away from the point of landfall. This is not to understate the impact on Florida's Gulf Coast; Helene's storm surge north of Venice is likely the worst in living memory save those who were alive in 1921.
Milton - While Milton isn't topping any record lists, it certainly isn't slacking either. Should Milton get dropped a millibar or two in the TCR it will come close to or tie Rita for record low Gulf pressure, although this record is somewhat arbitrary given the fact that the 1935 Labor Day Hurricane set its lowest pressure all of a few miles from the technical boundary of the Gulf and was almost definitely still lower than Rita when it crossed that boundary. Regardless, a sub-900mb Atlantic storm is anywhere from a once-in-a-decade to once-in-a-generation occurrence so Milton will continue to be the most recent reference point for a while. When people talk about memorable recon flights Milton will undoubtedly be mentioned both for the morning flight that had insane pressure drops between passes and for the afternoon flight that recorded the 897mb pressure; also mentioned will likely be the anxiety-inducing gap between those two flights worrying that recon would miss the peak, which it still might have but at least it got the important measurement.
Personally, considering I was all of 4 years old for Wilma (sorry if that makes you feel old
) this is certainly the craziest storm that I have tracked. The morning Milton bombed out I was sitting in line for sandbags refreshing the HDOB page like a madman, and that afternoon I was in my car all packed up and ready to evacuate but wanting to see that sub-900mb reading as it came out. That's a day I'm not going to forget soon for a variety of reasons. I also hope but am not optimistic that Milton will finally be the death of the "[location] Shield" discussion, even if Tampa evaded the worst case scenario. Return periods are a fine thing to talk about when discussing the statistical likelihood of an event, but once we are looking at an individual storm that has consolidated its time to throw statistics and probability out of the window and start talking about meteorology.
Kirk - While again not being an archetypal storm, Kirk will be talked about for one of two reasons depending on its TCR. It will either be mentioned as one of the largest post-season adjustments in recent history, or it will become a patron deity of the cult of storms without recon at their peak that people insist were actually Category 5s, joining the likes of Sam, Eta, Iota, Jose, Igor, etc. Should the latter case play out there will be endless pedantic discussion of whether or not Kirk was actually a Category 5. Ultimately with Kirk there is some objective evidence (ADT CI# >7.0, 21C eye temp, >90C difference between the eye and CDO) that could support a C5 intensity, and some subjective analysis from professional meteorologists that don't support C5 intensity. I expect the NHC to defer to the latter in the absence of objective direct wind measurements from recon and they would be perfectly justified in doing so, but I also hope that some deference to the objective evidence would warrant a 5-10kt TCR adjustment.
To say all this much more concisely this year has captured something that I've felt for a long time, which is that no singular quantitative factor can perfectly or completely capture the entirety of a hurricane season. NS/H/MH count won't tell you anything about the quality of those storms, ACE won't tell you anything about the cost or devastation of a season, the number of landfalls won't tell you anything about how conducive the MDR was that year.
I think its important across all STEM fields to take a moment from time to time to stop thinking strictly quantitatively and consider situations qualitatively. Forecasters predicted that this year would be a very active and devastating year with a high number of landfalling systems. In this regard I think that 2024 certainly met if not exceeded expectations, even if it did so in a way that was not traditionally or climatologically expected.
