ATL: ANDREA - Post-Tropical - Discussion

[WeatherBoy2000]

Should have done so 30 hours ago! But I think they're doing it because they're going to extend the time back to that point post season and wanted to give it a name.

Yeah I'm inclined to believe that as well. This has arguably been a TC since Sunday night or so. We already knew it had a solid LLC and there's been periods of sustained convection up until recently.

If that's the case, I don't see why they couldn't have given Andrea the "unnamed storm" treatment instead.

[sasha_B]

If that's the case, I don't see why they couldn't have given Andrea the "unnamed storm" treatment instead.

Why wouldn't it be preferable for storms that meet the criteria for naming to have a name? The "unnamed storm treatment" seems like something to be avoided, for the sake of consistency.

[Sciencerocks]

[Woofde]

If that's the case, I don't see why they couldn't have given Andrea the "unnamed storm" treatment instead.

Why wouldn't it be preferable for storms that meet the criteria for naming to have a name? The "unnamed storm treatment" seems like something to be avoided, for the sake of consistency.

I would agree. Much better to avoid the confusion of having "Unnamed Storm 1" on the timeline in post season analysis. I don't really understand why people call storm names "wasted", if it's qualifiably a TC give it a name. Why add inconsistencies based on whether it's pretty?

[captainbarbossa19]

If that's the case, I don't see why they couldn't have given Andrea the "unnamed storm" treatment instead.

Why wouldn't it be preferable for storms that meet the criteria for naming to have a name? The "unnamed storm treatment" seems like something to be avoided, for the sake of consistency.

I would agree. Much better to avoid the confusion of having "Unnamed Storm 1" on the timeline in post season analysis. I don't really understand why people call storm names "wasted", if it's qualifiably a TC give it a name. Why add inconsistencies based on whether it's pretty?

On the advisory, NHC states that the system "has met" the criteria for TC status. They mention the lack of deep convection at the time of naming, but I think it may have been better to mention something behind the reasoning to delay naming. It's a bit odd to wait until the storm is essentially dying to name it if it had already met the criteria approximately 36 hours before the advisory. The general convention is around 6 hours of sustained deep convection and a closed low with the minimum wind requirement to name a storm.

[wwizard]

If that's the case, I don't see why they couldn't have given Andrea the "unnamed storm" treatment instead.

Why wouldn't it be preferable for storms that meet the criteria for naming to have a name? The "unnamed storm treatment" seems like something to be avoided, for the sake of consistency.

I would agree. Much better to avoid the confusion of having "Unnamed Storm 1" on the timeline in post season analysis. I don't really understand why people call storm names "wasted", if it's qualifiably a TC give it a name. Why add inconsistencies based on whether it's pretty?

Agreed. I’ve never understood the wasted name thing that some have. Why does it matter? If it meets the criteria then it is what it is. The issue I have is that it probably should have been named long before it was. If not for the increased convection this morning we’d probably be looking at an unnamed storm post-analysis. And by the way, an unnamed storm still counts in the totals so it really doesn’t make a difference.

[WeatherBoy2000]

Why wouldn't it be preferable for storms that meet the criteria for naming to have a name? The "unnamed storm treatment" seems like something to be avoided, for the sake of consistency.

I would agree. Much better to avoid the confusion of having "Unnamed Storm 1" on the timeline in post season analysis. I don't really understand why people call storm names "wasted", if it's qualifiably a TC give it a name. Why add inconsistencies based on whether it's pretty?

Agreed. I’ve never understood the wasted name thing that some have. Why does it matter? If it meets the criteria then it is what it is. The issue I have is that it probably should have been named long before it was. If not for the increased convection this morning we’d probably be looking at an unnamed storm post-analysis. And by the way, an unnamed storm still counts in the totals so it really doesn’t make a difference.

My comment wasn't meant to imply that Andrea shouldn't have been counted as a storm. I just found it odd that they waited until it was practically dead to name it, could've just been something to acknowledge in the post season at this point. I don't think an "unnamed storm" report here or there is a big deal to acknowledge storms that were largely missed during the season.

[MarioProtVI]

AL, 01, 2025062500, , BEST, 0, 383N, 457W, 30, 1015, LO, 34, NEQ, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1019, 100, 60, 0, 0, L, 0, , 0, 0, ANDREA

And gone already. At least we got a June storm Even funnier when the majority of its operational life was when i was down at the beach today (bc it was 100 here in Central NJ )

[Sciencerocks]

Andrea is literally the weakest name on the list! I am not kidding
2007
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subtropic ... drea_(2007)
[img]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... _1615Z.png[img]

2013
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_ ... drea_(2013)
[img]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... _1845Z.jpg[img]

2019
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Atla ... orm_Andrea
[img]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... _1745Z.jpg[img]