2005 Season Retrospective
Moderator: S2k Moderators
Forum rules
The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.
- storm_in_a_teacup
- Category 1
- Posts: 435
- Age: 32
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:01 pm
- Location: Huntsville, Alabama (originally from Houston)
- Contact:
2005 Season Retrospective
Thought this video was interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU873F-9pNo
Hard to believe it's been 20 years oh man...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU873F-9pNo
Hard to believe it's been 20 years oh man...
4 likes
I know I can't straddle the atmosphere...just a tiny storm in your teacup, girl.
- MGC
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 5907
- Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2003 9:05 pm
- Location: Pass Christian MS, or what is left.
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
3 likes
- storm_in_a_teacup
- Category 1
- Posts: 435
- Age: 32
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:01 pm
- Location: Huntsville, Alabama (originally from Houston)
- Contact:
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
MGC wrote:We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
Sorry if I breached a taboo topic in a disrespectful way.
My main experience with 2005 was just the Rita evacuation
1 likes
I know I can't straddle the atmosphere...just a tiny storm in your teacup, girl.
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
MGC wrote:We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
By here, do you mean this site or where you live? If the latter, I can understand why, but if it’s here on the site that makes no sense.
1 likes
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
As a Floridian and hurricane fanatic, 2004 and 2005 were a great set of years, and I think many lessons were learned that helped people prepare for the decently active two decades ahead, hopefully.
1 likes
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
storm_in_a_teacup wrote:MGC wrote:We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
Sorry if I breached a taboo topic in a disrespectful way.
My main experience with 2005 was just the Rita evacuation
No hurricane season is a taboo topic, I think he was just referring to his area.
0 likes
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
Fancy1002 wrote:MGC wrote:We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
By here, do you mean this site or where you live? If the latter, I can understand why, but if it’s here on the site that makes no sense.
Suffice it to say, the inference was probably akin to the expression "knock on wood" or perhaps not wishing to conjure up "bad spirit juju". Kinda in the same vain that many S. Floridians are careful to not invoke "the A name" when discussing long range (GFS lol) threats to our state.
3 likes
Andy D
(For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.)
(For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.)
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
chaser1 wrote:Fancy1002 wrote:MGC wrote:We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
By here, do you mean this site or where you live? If the latter, I can understand why, but if it’s here on the site that makes no sense.
Suffice it to say, the inference was probably akin to the expression "knock on wood" or perhaps not wishing to conjure up "bad spirit juju". Kinda in the same vain that many S. Floridians are careful to not invoke "the A name" when discussing long range (GFS lol) threats to our state.
Like I said that doesn’t make any sense to me. Why would you not want to bring up Andrew when talking about hypothetical storms or potential storms that could cause significantly more destruction to the Miami area due to the increase in urbanization and development that’s taken place over the last 35 years. Treating stuff like superstition seriously only hurts people‘s preparation attitudes. It’s the same kind of mindset like someone in Tampa saying oh don’t worry the hurricane will turn away or weaken, it happens every time. Eventually, it’s not gonna happen and I’d rather be prepared and safe than sorry.
0 likes
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
chaser1 wrote:Fancy1002 wrote:MGC wrote:We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
By here, do you mean this site or where you live? If the latter, I can understand why, but if it’s here on the site that makes no sense.
Suffice it to say, the inference was probably akin to the expression "knock on wood" or perhaps not wishing to conjure up "bad spirit juju". Kinda in the same vain that many S. Floridians are careful to not invoke "the A name" when discussing long range (GFS lol) threats to our state.
I went through Charlie when I was younger, and when I saw Ian coming in 2022, that one song just kept going through my head, bigger better faster stronger, except the faster part lol
0 likes
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
Fancy1002 wrote:chaser1 wrote:Fancy1002 wrote:By here, do you mean this site or where you live? If the latter, I can understand why, but if it’s here on the site that makes no sense.
Suffice it to say, the inference was probably akin to the expression "knock on wood" or perhaps not wishing to conjure up "bad spirit juju". Kinda in the same vain that many S. Floridians are careful to not invoke "the A name" when discussing long range (GFS lol) threats to our state.
Like I said that doesn’t make any sense to me. Why would you not want to bring up Andrew when talking about hypothetical storms or potential storms that could cause significantly more destruction to the Miami area due to the increase in urbanization and development that’s taken place over the last 35 years. Treating stuff like superstition seriously only hurts people‘s preparation attitudes. It’s the same kind of mindset like someone in Tampa saying oh don’t worry the hurricane will turn away or weaken, it happens every time. Eventually, it’s not gonna happen and I’d rather be prepared and safe than sorry.
I understand where you are coming from. You make some good points and are viewing historical data, as a scientist would analyze the subject. What I think you fail to understand, is the concept of perspective. That's okay though because perspective won't prevent you from learning or understanding about Meteorology, just possibly hinder your understanding of others.
You mentioned that you went through Charlie when you were younger. Charlie turned into a beast as it struck SW Florida and crossed Northeastward across the state. It brought some of the worst wind damage that Central Florida had ever seen. I recall the landfall quite well. A chaser friend and I intercepted the landfall and filmed its destruction from underneath the protective overhang of a Port Charlotte hospital ER entrance. Even while outside witnessing the fury of the storm, I saw no floating dead bodies. No friends or family of mine lost their lives or ended up injured. I did not witness starvation nor emergency responders coming in by boat or helicopter. Heck, I wasn't even inconvenienced by having to live without electricity, running water, A/C or fresh food like my sister and many others that lived in the Winter Park and greater Orlando area did for several weeks. Btw, where were you and your family during Charlie?
0 likes
Andy D
(For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.)
(For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.)
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
chaser1 wrote:Fancy1002 wrote:chaser1 wrote:
Suffice it to say, the inference was probably akin to the expression "knock on wood" or perhaps not wishing to conjure up "bad spirit juju". Kinda in the same vain that many S. Floridians are careful to not invoke "the A name" when discussing long range (GFS lol) threats to our state.
Like I said that doesn’t make any sense to me. Why would you not want to bring up Andrew when talking about hypothetical storms or potential storms that could cause significantly more destruction to the Miami area due to the increase in urbanization and development that’s taken place over the last 35 years. Treating stuff like superstition seriously only hurts people‘s preparation attitudes. It’s the same kind of mindset like someone in Tampa saying oh don’t worry the hurricane will turn away or weaken, it happens every time. Eventually, it’s not gonna happen and I’d rather be prepared and safe than sorry.
I understand where you are coming from. You make some good points and are viewing historical data, as a scientist would analyze the subject. What I think you fail to understand, is the concept of perspective. That's okay though because perspective won't prevent you from learning or understanding about Meteorology, just possibly hinder your understanding of others.
You mentioned that you went through Charlie when you were younger. Charlie turned into a beast as it struck SW Florida and crossed Northeastward across the state. It brought some of the worst wind damage that Central Florida had ever seen. I recall the landfall quite well. A chaser friend and I intercepted the landfall and filmed its destruction from underneath the protective overhang of a Port Charlotte hospital ER entrance. Even while outside witnessing the fury of the storm, I saw no floating dead bodies. No friends or family of mine lost their lives or ended up injured. I did not witness starvation nor emergency responders coming in by boat or helicopter. Heck, I wasn't even inconvenienced by having to live without electricity, running water, A/C or fresh food like my sister and many others that lived in the Winter Park and greater Orlando area did for several weeks. Btw, where were you and your family during Charlie?
Charlie went through our neighborhood in Orlando when I was nine years old, that was also my first experience going through the eye of a hurricane. It took out many of the trees in our neighborhood and literally had us trapped in the neighborhood for at least a couple weeks. And of course, Francis and Jean decided to pay a visit not long after. That was a hell of a year. By the time the season was over, I think our neighborhood had lost like 70% of its trees, and oak water point was known for its trees
It was also that season that started my unhealthy obsession with hurricanes.
1 likes
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
Fancy1002 wrote:chaser1 wrote:Fancy1002 wrote:Like I said that doesn’t make any sense to me. Why would you not want to bring up Andrew when talking about hypothetical storms or potential storms that could cause significantly more destruction to the Miami area due to the increase in urbanization and development that’s taken place over the last 35 years. Treating stuff like superstition seriously only hurts people‘s preparation attitudes. It’s the same kind of mindset like someone in Tampa saying oh don’t worry the hurricane will turn away or weaken, it happens every time. Eventually, it’s not gonna happen and I’d rather be prepared and safe than sorry.
I understand where you are coming from. You make some good points and are viewing historical data, as a scientist would analyze the subject. What I think you fail to understand, is the concept of perspective. That's okay though because perspective won't prevent you from learning or understanding about Meteorology, just possibly hinder your understanding of others.
You mentioned that you went through Charlie when you were younger. Charlie turned into a beast as it struck SW Florida and crossed Northeastward across the state. It brought some of the worst wind damage that Central Florida had ever seen. I recall the landfall quite well. A chaser friend and I intercepted the landfall and filmed its destruction from underneath the protective overhang of a Port Charlotte hospital ER entrance. Even while outside witnessing the fury of the storm, I saw no floating dead bodies. No friends or family of mine lost their lives or ended up injured. I did not witness starvation nor emergency responders coming in by boat or helicopter. Heck, I wasn't even inconvenienced by having to live without electricity, running water, A/C or fresh food like my sister and many others that lived in the Winter Park and greater Orlando area did for several weeks. Btw, where were you and your family during Charlie?
Charlie went through our neighborhood in Orlando when I was nine years old, that was also my first experience going through the eye of a hurricane. It took out many of the trees in our neighborhood and literally had us trapped in the neighborhood for at least a couple weeks. And of course, Francis and Jean decided to pay a visit not long after. That was a hell of a year. By the time the season was over, I think our neighborhood had lost like 70% of its trees, and oak water point was known for its trees
It was also that season that started my unhealthy obsession with hurricanes.
So true, the tree damage alone that occurred to the densely populated suburban region here in Central Florida simply overwhelmed the entire infrastructure. Even beyond whatever damage that occurred to people's homes, roofs, and cars was the widespread impact to the electrical and traffic grids. Many people lived through that experienced and even now, look back in awe.
As a kid, it was the day to day progression of watching and being fascinated by the convective afternoon thunderstorms that built up over the Everglades and then pushed eastward over the Kendall and then the coast, that ignited my interest in Weather.
Sadly, there are those extreme and rare weather events SO severe, that the impact is mentally, emotionally, and physically scarring to an extent that is very difficult to express or to understand. For many people those life experiences were not something that "they lived through". For some particular communities an event was something "they survived" (and witnessed others who did not).
0 likes
Andy D
(For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.)
(For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.)
- MGC
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 5907
- Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2003 9:05 pm
- Location: Pass Christian MS, or what is left.
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
Fancy1002 wrote:MGC wrote:We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
By here, do you mean this site or where you live? If the latter, I can understand why, but if it’s here on the site that makes no sense.
Where I live. I would never advocate the restriction of opinion here on S2K......MGC
2 likes
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
MGC wrote:Fancy1002 wrote:MGC wrote:We don't talk about the 2005 hurricane season here. Katrina is referred to as "the hurricane " in Pass Christian. 20 years and a lot of the beach front is still vacant.
By here, do you mean this site or where you live? If the latter, I can understand why, but if it’s here on the site that makes no sense.
Where I live. I would never advocate the restriction of opinion here on S2K......MGC
OK, I just wanted to be sure because I think teacup took it a different way
1 likes
-
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 34099
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
- Location: Deep South, for the first time!
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
One thought might be to reanalyze some of the storms. I've taken another look at Katrina, and here's what I would change. I'm not knowledgeable enough to adjust the size of the storms. Red - stronger, blue - new point, green - weaker.
AL122005, KATRINA, 34,
20050823, 1800, , TD, 23.1N, 75.1W, 30, 1008, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 0000, , TS, 23.4N, 75.7W, 35, 1007, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 0600, , TS, 23.8N, 76.2W, 35, 1005, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 1200, , TS, 24.5N, 76.5W, 40, 1004, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 1800, , TS, 25.4N, 76.9W, 45, 1001, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 0000, , TS, 26.0N, 77.7W, 45, 1000, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 0600, , TS, 26.1N, 78.4W, 50, 995, 60, 60, 0, 0, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 1200, , TS, 26.2N, 79.0W, 60, 990, 60, 60, 30, 50, 20, 20, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 1800, , HU, 26.2N, 79.6W, 65, 985, 70, 70, 50, 60, 25, 25, 20, 20, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 2230, L, HU, 26.0N, 80.1W, 70, 982, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 15
20050826, 0000, , HU, 25.9N, 80.3W, 70, 983, 70, 70, 50, 40, 20, 20, 20, 20, 10, 10, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 0600, , HU, 25.4N, 81.3W, 65, 985, 75, 75, 40, 30, 60, 60, 20, 20, 10, 10, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 1200, , HU, 25.1N, 82.0W, 80, 974, 75, 75, 45, 25, 60, 60, 25, 20, 20, 20, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 1800, , HU, 24.9N, 82.6W, 90, 965, 75, 75, 55, 35, 60, 60, 35, 20, 20, 20, 15, 10, -999
20050827, 0000, , HU, 24.6N, 83.3W, 95, 956, 90, 75, 75, 75, 60, 60, 40, 30, 25, 25, 20, 15, -999
20050827, 0600, , HU, 24.4N, 84.0W, 100, 944, 130, 90, 90, 130, 60, 60, 45, 60, 35, 30, 30, 25, -999
20050827, 1200, , HU, 24.4N, 84.7W, 100, 940, 130, 90, 90, 130, 60, 60, 45, 60, 35, 30, 30, 25, -999
20050827, 1800, , HU, 24.5N, 85.3W, 95, 951, 140, 90, 90, 130, 70, 70, 60, 70, 45, 35, 35, 35, -999
20050828, 0000, , HU, 24.8N, 85.9W, 105, 939, 140, 100, 100, 140, 80, 80, 65, 80, 60, 45, 45, 50, -999
20050828, 0600, , HU, 25.2N, 86.7W, 130, 922, 160, 160, 125, 140, 100, 100, 75, 100, 75, 75, 50, 75, -999
20050828, 0900, R, HU, 25.4N, 87.2W, 140, 915, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999
20050828, 1200, , HU, 25.7N, 87.7W, 150, 909, 180, 180, 125, 140, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 50, 75, -999
20050828, 1500, W, HU, 26.1N, 88.1W, 155, 905, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999
20050828, 1800, , HU, 26.3N, 88.6W, 150, 902, 200, 180, 125, 180, 120, 120, 75, 120, 90, 90, 50, 90, -999
20050829, 0000, , HU, 27.2N, 89.2W, 140, 904, 200, 200, 150, 180, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 60, 80, -999
20050829, 0600, , HU, 28.2N, 89.6W, 120, 909, 200, 200, 150, 150, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 60, 70, -999
20050829, 1110, L, HU, 29.3N, 89.6W, 105, 920, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 20
20050829, 1200, , HU, 29.5N, 89.6W, 105, 922, 200, 200, 150, 100, 120, 120, 75, 75, 90, 90, 60, 60, -999
20050829, 1445, L, HU, 30.2N, 89.6W, 105, 925, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 20
20050829, 1800, , HU, 31.1N, 89.6W, 85, 944, 100, 180, 100, 100, 75, 100, 75, 75, 50, 50, 30, 30, -999
20050830, 0000, , TS, 32.6N, 89.1W, 55, 961, 75, 90, 90, 50, 50, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 0600, , TS, 34.1N, 88.6W, 40, 981, 75, 90, 75, 50, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 1200, , TD, 35.6N, 88.0W, 30, 987, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 1800, , TD, 37.0N, 87.0W, 30, 990, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050831, 0000, , TD, 38.6N, 85.3W, 30, 994, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050831, 0600, , TD, 40.1N, 82.9W, 25, 996, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
A few highlights:
* Genesis is unchanged, but the other early intensities are increased and I think it became a tropical storm 12 hours earlier. The first Recon mission had low-level winds of 39 kt, while the second found 45 kt at 925 mb. That supports 35 kt at 00Z and 06Z. Radar data also suggested stronger intensities on the 25th.
* The landfall intensity in Florida is maintained at 70 kt. An intensity of 75 kt was considered due to sparse observations given the limited observations and data, however, that was inconclusive. The landfall pressure of 982 mb is based on slight weakening before it reached the NHC building which measured 983 mb. HURDAT and the TCR have a discrepancy as the TCR suggests that it weakened below hurricane strength when it left Florida, then quickly regained it - the TCR should have a point there for that. However, the analysis I have suggests that Katrina remained a hurricane all the way across, and departed with 65 kt winds.
* The first RI period is moved upwards based on Recon data. Katrina probably became a major hurricane a little earlier, I estimate 06Z on the 27th. After that, the ERC is more pronounced and a brief weakening is introduced, dropping to 95 kt at 18Z that day as winds were found to be a bit lower (alongside the rise in pressure from 940 mb to 951 mb). Re-intensification would follow afterward though, and the most memorable RI period early on the 28th sees increases.
* There was no Recon between about 0330Z on the 28th (935 mb and 137 kt FL winds) and about 0930Z that day (915 mb, next pass at 1100Z found 153 kt FL and the following pass at 1330Z found 166 kt FL winds). It is likely Katrina had reached category 5 intensity by about 08-09Z. The 06Z intensity is increased to reflect that. Added a BT point at 09Z as well.
* The peak intensity is increased to 155 kt, and happened earlier than in HURDAT - at 15Z. That is based on a combination of the 166 kt FL winds (which have been found to sometimes have a low bias when rapidly intensifying) and the T7.5 Dvorak rating, as there was no SFMR at the time. By the time of minimum pressure - 902 mb (just after 18Z), the winds were likely already decreasing, and a combination of flight level and SFMR readings suggested the weakening probably began a bit earlier.
* The dramatic structural changes were already underway at 00Z and the pressure-wind mismatch began. It was probably still a category 5 at 00Z, but not for much longer, despite an extremely low pressure. The weakening phase is largely unchanged.
* The landfall intensity of Katrina has long been controversial. Flight-level winds were 133 kt, which should support 120 kt. However, it was clear by then that a 90% estimate was no longer reflective of the true intensity, and 80% would support 106 kt. A dropsonde in the eyewall supported 100-105 kt. The SFMR measured 96 kt, although that isn't very accurate in shallow water. My estimate after learning of all data from 20 years of experience is that the landfall intensity was 105 kt. Most of that weakening likely occurred in the 00Z-09Z period, and the radar structure actually improved a bit before final landfall at 15Z in Mississippi. As a result, the intensity was likely still 105 kt at that time, same as estimated now. The landfall pressure of 920 mb is unchanged, based on a reading in the eye in Buras and aircraft readings of 918 and 922 mb around that time.
* After landfall, data was limited so I tried to smooth things out with the limited observations available. I also think it never became extratropical as there wasn't a clear frontal structure early on the 31st. It probably remained a tropical cyclone until 12Z, when it opened up into a trough and was eventually absorbed by another front over Canada.
This is all based on 20 years of learning and new knowledge I have.
AL122005, KATRINA, 34,
20050823, 1800, , TD, 23.1N, 75.1W, 30, 1008, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 0000, , TS, 23.4N, 75.7W, 35, 1007, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 0600, , TS, 23.8N, 76.2W, 35, 1005, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 1200, , TS, 24.5N, 76.5W, 40, 1004, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 1800, , TS, 25.4N, 76.9W, 45, 1001, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 0000, , TS, 26.0N, 77.7W, 45, 1000, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 0600, , TS, 26.1N, 78.4W, 50, 995, 60, 60, 0, 0, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 1200, , TS, 26.2N, 79.0W, 60, 990, 60, 60, 30, 50, 20, 20, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 1800, , HU, 26.2N, 79.6W, 65, 985, 70, 70, 50, 60, 25, 25, 20, 20, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 2230, L, HU, 26.0N, 80.1W, 70, 982, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 15
20050826, 0000, , HU, 25.9N, 80.3W, 70, 983, 70, 70, 50, 40, 20, 20, 20, 20, 10, 10, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 0600, , HU, 25.4N, 81.3W, 65, 985, 75, 75, 40, 30, 60, 60, 20, 20, 10, 10, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 1200, , HU, 25.1N, 82.0W, 80, 974, 75, 75, 45, 25, 60, 60, 25, 20, 20, 20, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 1800, , HU, 24.9N, 82.6W, 90, 965, 75, 75, 55, 35, 60, 60, 35, 20, 20, 20, 15, 10, -999
20050827, 0000, , HU, 24.6N, 83.3W, 95, 956, 90, 75, 75, 75, 60, 60, 40, 30, 25, 25, 20, 15, -999
20050827, 0600, , HU, 24.4N, 84.0W, 100, 944, 130, 90, 90, 130, 60, 60, 45, 60, 35, 30, 30, 25, -999
20050827, 1200, , HU, 24.4N, 84.7W, 100, 940, 130, 90, 90, 130, 60, 60, 45, 60, 35, 30, 30, 25, -999
20050827, 1800, , HU, 24.5N, 85.3W, 95, 951, 140, 90, 90, 130, 70, 70, 60, 70, 45, 35, 35, 35, -999
20050828, 0000, , HU, 24.8N, 85.9W, 105, 939, 140, 100, 100, 140, 80, 80, 65, 80, 60, 45, 45, 50, -999
20050828, 0600, , HU, 25.2N, 86.7W, 130, 922, 160, 160, 125, 140, 100, 100, 75, 100, 75, 75, 50, 75, -999
20050828, 0900, R, HU, 25.4N, 87.2W, 140, 915, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999
20050828, 1200, , HU, 25.7N, 87.7W, 150, 909, 180, 180, 125, 140, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 50, 75, -999
20050828, 1500, W, HU, 26.1N, 88.1W, 155, 905, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999
20050828, 1800, , HU, 26.3N, 88.6W, 150, 902, 200, 180, 125, 180, 120, 120, 75, 120, 90, 90, 50, 90, -999
20050829, 0000, , HU, 27.2N, 89.2W, 140, 904, 200, 200, 150, 180, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 60, 80, -999
20050829, 0600, , HU, 28.2N, 89.6W, 120, 909, 200, 200, 150, 150, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 60, 70, -999
20050829, 1110, L, HU, 29.3N, 89.6W, 105, 920, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 20
20050829, 1200, , HU, 29.5N, 89.6W, 105, 922, 200, 200, 150, 100, 120, 120, 75, 75, 90, 90, 60, 60, -999
20050829, 1445, L, HU, 30.2N, 89.6W, 105, 925, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 20
20050829, 1800, , HU, 31.1N, 89.6W, 85, 944, 100, 180, 100, 100, 75, 100, 75, 75, 50, 50, 30, 30, -999
20050830, 0000, , TS, 32.6N, 89.1W, 55, 961, 75, 90, 90, 50, 50, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 0600, , TS, 34.1N, 88.6W, 40, 981, 75, 90, 75, 50, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 1200, , TD, 35.6N, 88.0W, 30, 987, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 1800, , TD, 37.0N, 87.0W, 30, 990, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050831, 0000, , TD, 38.6N, 85.3W, 30, 994, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050831, 0600, , TD, 40.1N, 82.9W, 25, 996, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
A few highlights:
* Genesis is unchanged, but the other early intensities are increased and I think it became a tropical storm 12 hours earlier. The first Recon mission had low-level winds of 39 kt, while the second found 45 kt at 925 mb. That supports 35 kt at 00Z and 06Z. Radar data also suggested stronger intensities on the 25th.
* The landfall intensity in Florida is maintained at 70 kt. An intensity of 75 kt was considered due to sparse observations given the limited observations and data, however, that was inconclusive. The landfall pressure of 982 mb is based on slight weakening before it reached the NHC building which measured 983 mb. HURDAT and the TCR have a discrepancy as the TCR suggests that it weakened below hurricane strength when it left Florida, then quickly regained it - the TCR should have a point there for that. However, the analysis I have suggests that Katrina remained a hurricane all the way across, and departed with 65 kt winds.
* The first RI period is moved upwards based on Recon data. Katrina probably became a major hurricane a little earlier, I estimate 06Z on the 27th. After that, the ERC is more pronounced and a brief weakening is introduced, dropping to 95 kt at 18Z that day as winds were found to be a bit lower (alongside the rise in pressure from 940 mb to 951 mb). Re-intensification would follow afterward though, and the most memorable RI period early on the 28th sees increases.
* There was no Recon between about 0330Z on the 28th (935 mb and 137 kt FL winds) and about 0930Z that day (915 mb, next pass at 1100Z found 153 kt FL and the following pass at 1330Z found 166 kt FL winds). It is likely Katrina had reached category 5 intensity by about 08-09Z. The 06Z intensity is increased to reflect that. Added a BT point at 09Z as well.
* The peak intensity is increased to 155 kt, and happened earlier than in HURDAT - at 15Z. That is based on a combination of the 166 kt FL winds (which have been found to sometimes have a low bias when rapidly intensifying) and the T7.5 Dvorak rating, as there was no SFMR at the time. By the time of minimum pressure - 902 mb (just after 18Z), the winds were likely already decreasing, and a combination of flight level and SFMR readings suggested the weakening probably began a bit earlier.
* The dramatic structural changes were already underway at 00Z and the pressure-wind mismatch began. It was probably still a category 5 at 00Z, but not for much longer, despite an extremely low pressure. The weakening phase is largely unchanged.
* The landfall intensity of Katrina has long been controversial. Flight-level winds were 133 kt, which should support 120 kt. However, it was clear by then that a 90% estimate was no longer reflective of the true intensity, and 80% would support 106 kt. A dropsonde in the eyewall supported 100-105 kt. The SFMR measured 96 kt, although that isn't very accurate in shallow water. My estimate after learning of all data from 20 years of experience is that the landfall intensity was 105 kt. Most of that weakening likely occurred in the 00Z-09Z period, and the radar structure actually improved a bit before final landfall at 15Z in Mississippi. As a result, the intensity was likely still 105 kt at that time, same as estimated now. The landfall pressure of 920 mb is unchanged, based on a reading in the eye in Buras and aircraft readings of 918 and 922 mb around that time.
* After landfall, data was limited so I tried to smooth things out with the limited observations available. I also think it never became extratropical as there wasn't a clear frontal structure early on the 31st. It probably remained a tropical cyclone until 12Z, when it opened up into a trough and was eventually absorbed by another front over Canada.
This is all based on 20 years of learning and new knowledge I have.
6 likes
-
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 34099
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
- Location: Deep South, for the first time!
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
As far as other 2005 storms, my thoughts on the actual peak intensities:
Arlene - 60 kt / 989 mb
Bret - 40 kt / 1002 mb
Cindy - 65 kt / 992 mb
Dennis - 135 kt / 930 mb
Emily - 140 kt / 929 mb
Franklin - 60 kt / 994 mb
Gert - 40 kt / 1005 mb
Harvey - 55 kt / 991 mb
Irene - 85 kt / 978 mb
Jose - 55 kt / 998 mb
Katrina - 155 kt / 902 mb
Lee - 35 kt / 1007 mb
Maria - 100 kt / 962 mb
Nate - 85 kt / 979 mb
Ophelia - 80 kt / 976 mb
Philippe - 75 kt / 982 mb
Rita - 155 kt / 895 mb
Stan - 75 kt / 977 mb
Tammy - 45 kt / 1001 mb
Vince - 65 kt / 988 mb
Wilma - 170 kt / 878 mb
Alpha - 50 kt / 1000 mb
Beta - 100 kt / 967 mb
Gamma - 45 kt / 999 mb
Delta - 65 kt / 977 mb
Epsilon - 75 kt / 974 mb
Zeta - 60 kt / 989 mb
Arlene - 60 kt / 989 mb
Bret - 40 kt / 1002 mb
Cindy - 65 kt / 992 mb
Dennis - 135 kt / 930 mb
Emily - 140 kt / 929 mb
Franklin - 60 kt / 994 mb
Gert - 40 kt / 1005 mb
Harvey - 55 kt / 991 mb
Irene - 85 kt / 978 mb
Jose - 55 kt / 998 mb
Katrina - 155 kt / 902 mb
Lee - 35 kt / 1007 mb
Maria - 100 kt / 962 mb
Nate - 85 kt / 979 mb
Ophelia - 80 kt / 976 mb
Philippe - 75 kt / 982 mb
Rita - 155 kt / 895 mb
Stan - 75 kt / 977 mb
Tammy - 45 kt / 1001 mb
Vince - 65 kt / 988 mb
Wilma - 170 kt / 878 mb
Alpha - 50 kt / 1000 mb
Beta - 100 kt / 967 mb
Gamma - 45 kt / 999 mb
Delta - 65 kt / 977 mb
Epsilon - 75 kt / 974 mb
Zeta - 60 kt / 989 mb
2 likes
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
CrazyC83 wrote:As far as other 2005 storms, my thoughts on the actual peak intensities:
Wilma - 170 kt / 878 mb
What's the reasoning on this one? Also do you have any thoughts on landfall intensities for other storms that year?
0 likes
- storm_in_a_teacup
- Category 1
- Posts: 435
- Age: 32
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:01 pm
- Location: Huntsville, Alabama (originally from Houston)
- Contact:
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
CrazyC83 wrote:One thought might be to reanalyze some of the storms. I've taken another look at Katrina, and here's what I would change. I'm not knowledgeable enough to adjust the size of the storms. Red - stronger, blue - new point, green - weaker.
AL122005, KATRINA, 34,
20050823, 1800, , TD, 23.1N, 75.1W, 30, 1008, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 0000, , TS, 23.4N, 75.7W, 35, 1007, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 0600, , TS, 23.8N, 76.2W, 35, 1005, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 1200, , TS, 24.5N, 76.5W, 40, 1004, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050824, 1800, , TS, 25.4N, 76.9W, 45, 1001, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 0000, , TS, 26.0N, 77.7W, 45, 1000, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 0600, , TS, 26.1N, 78.4W, 50, 995, 60, 60, 0, 0, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 1200, , TS, 26.2N, 79.0W, 60, 990, 60, 60, 30, 50, 20, 20, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 1800, , HU, 26.2N, 79.6W, 65, 985, 70, 70, 50, 60, 25, 25, 20, 20, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050825, 2230, L, HU, 26.0N, 80.1W, 70, 982, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 15
20050826, 0000, , HU, 25.9N, 80.3W, 70, 983, 70, 70, 50, 40, 20, 20, 20, 20, 10, 10, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 0600, , HU, 25.4N, 81.3W, 65, 985, 75, 75, 40, 30, 60, 60, 20, 20, 10, 10, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 1200, , HU, 25.1N, 82.0W, 80, 974, 75, 75, 45, 25, 60, 60, 25, 20, 20, 20, 10, 10, -999
20050826, 1800, , HU, 24.9N, 82.6W, 90, 965, 75, 75, 55, 35, 60, 60, 35, 20, 20, 20, 15, 10, -999
20050827, 0000, , HU, 24.6N, 83.3W, 95, 956, 90, 75, 75, 75, 60, 60, 40, 30, 25, 25, 20, 15, -999
20050827, 0600, , HU, 24.4N, 84.0W, 100, 944, 130, 90, 90, 130, 60, 60, 45, 60, 35, 30, 30, 25, -999
20050827, 1200, , HU, 24.4N, 84.7W, 100, 940, 130, 90, 90, 130, 60, 60, 45, 60, 35, 30, 30, 25, -999
20050827, 1800, , HU, 24.5N, 85.3W, 95, 951, 140, 90, 90, 130, 70, 70, 60, 70, 45, 35, 35, 35, -999
20050828, 0000, , HU, 24.8N, 85.9W, 105, 939, 140, 100, 100, 140, 80, 80, 65, 80, 60, 45, 45, 50, -999
20050828, 0600, , HU, 25.2N, 86.7W, 130, 922, 160, 160, 125, 140, 100, 100, 75, 100, 75, 75, 50, 75, -999
20050828, 0900, R, HU, 25.4N, 87.2W, 140, 915, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999
20050828, 1200, , HU, 25.7N, 87.7W, 150, 909, 180, 180, 125, 140, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 50, 75, -999
20050828, 1500, W, HU, 26.1N, 88.1W, 155, 905, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999
20050828, 1800, , HU, 26.3N, 88.6W, 150, 902, 200, 180, 125, 180, 120, 120, 75, 120, 90, 90, 50, 90, -999
20050829, 0000, , HU, 27.2N, 89.2W, 140, 904, 200, 200, 150, 180, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 60, 80, -999
20050829, 0600, , HU, 28.2N, 89.6W, 120, 909, 200, 200, 150, 150, 120, 120, 75, 100, 90, 90, 60, 70, -999
20050829, 1110, L, HU, 29.3N, 89.6W, 105, 920, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 20
20050829, 1200, , HU, 29.5N, 89.6W, 105, 922, 200, 200, 150, 100, 120, 120, 75, 75, 90, 90, 60, 60, -999
20050829, 1445, L, HU, 30.2N, 89.6W, 105, 925, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, 20
20050829, 1800, , HU, 31.1N, 89.6W, 85, 944, 100, 180, 100, 100, 75, 100, 75, 75, 50, 50, 30, 30, -999
20050830, 0000, , TS, 32.6N, 89.1W, 55, 961, 75, 90, 90, 50, 50, 60, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 0600, , TS, 34.1N, 88.6W, 40, 981, 75, 90, 75, 50, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 1200, , TD, 35.6N, 88.0W, 30, 987, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050830, 1800, , TD, 37.0N, 87.0W, 30, 990, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050831, 0000, , TD, 38.6N, 85.3W, 30, 994, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
20050831, 0600, , TD, 40.1N, 82.9W, 25, 996, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -999
A few highlights:
* Genesis is unchanged, but the other early intensities are increased and I think it became a tropical storm 12 hours earlier. The first Recon mission had low-level winds of 39 kt, while the second found 45 kt at 925 mb. That supports 35 kt at 00Z and 06Z. Radar data also suggested stronger intensities on the 25th.
* The landfall intensity in Florida is maintained at 70 kt. An intensity of 75 kt was considered due to sparse observations given the limited observations and data, however, that was inconclusive. The landfall pressure of 982 mb is based on slight weakening before it reached the NHC building which measured 983 mb. HURDAT and the TCR have a discrepancy as the TCR suggests that it weakened below hurricane strength when it left Florida, then quickly regained it - the TCR should have a point there for that. However, the analysis I have suggests that Katrina remained a hurricane all the way across, and departed with 65 kt winds.
* The first RI period is moved upwards based on Recon data. Katrina probably became a major hurricane a little earlier, I estimate 06Z on the 27th. After that, the ERC is more pronounced and a brief weakening is introduced, dropping to 95 kt at 18Z that day as winds were found to be a bit lower (alongside the rise in pressure from 940 mb to 951 mb). Re-intensification would follow afterward though, and the most memorable RI period early on the 28th sees increases.
* There was no Recon between about 0330Z on the 28th (935 mb and 137 kt FL winds) and about 0930Z that day (915 mb, next pass at 1100Z found 153 kt FL and the following pass at 1330Z found 166 kt FL winds). It is likely Katrina had reached category 5 intensity by about 08-09Z. The 06Z intensity is increased to reflect that. Added a BT point at 09Z as well.
* The peak intensity is increased to 155 kt, and happened earlier than in HURDAT - at 15Z. That is based on a combination of the 166 kt FL winds (which have been found to sometimes have a low bias when rapidly intensifying) and the T7.5 Dvorak rating, as there was no SFMR at the time. By the time of minimum pressure - 902 mb (just after 18Z), the winds were likely already decreasing, and a combination of flight level and SFMR readings suggested the weakening probably began a bit earlier.
* The dramatic structural changes were already underway at 00Z and the pressure-wind mismatch began. It was probably still a category 5 at 00Z, but not for much longer, despite an extremely low pressure. The weakening phase is largely unchanged.
* The landfall intensity of Katrina has long been controversial. Flight-level winds were 133 kt, which should support 120 kt. However, it was clear by then that a 90% estimate was no longer reflective of the true intensity, and 80% would support 106 kt. A dropsonde in the eyewall supported 100-105 kt. The SFMR measured 96 kt, although that isn't very accurate in shallow water. My estimate after learning of all data from 20 years of experience is that the landfall intensity was 105 kt. Most of that weakening likely occurred in the 00Z-09Z period, and the radar structure actually improved a bit before final landfall at 15Z in Mississippi. As a result, the intensity was likely still 105 kt at that time, same as estimated now. The landfall pressure of 920 mb is unchanged, based on a reading in the eye in Buras and aircraft readings of 918 and 922 mb around that time.
* After landfall, data was limited so I tried to smooth things out with the limited observations available. I also think it never became extratropical as there wasn't a clear frontal structure early on the 31st. It probably remained a tropical cyclone until 12Z, when it opened up into a trough and was eventually absorbed by another front over Canada.
This is all based on 20 years of learning and new knowledge I have.
lol you're just obsessed with Katrina. I don't even know this many stats for the black holes I study for my job.
1 likes
I know I can't straddle the atmosphere...just a tiny storm in your teacup, girl.
-
- Category 4
- Posts: 950
- Age: 24
- Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:33 pm
- Location: New Jersey
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
ljmac75 wrote:CrazyC83 wrote:As far as other 2005 storms, my thoughts on the actual peak intensities:
Wilma - 170 kt / 878 mb
What's the reasoning on this one? Also do you have any thoughts on landfall intensities for other storms that year?
It was stated in the TCR that the pressure was still falling at the time of the 882 peak (based on the 0804Z drop of 884 w/ 23 kt wind), and that there was a good chance it continued to fall for a little while afterwards. Based on infrared satellite imagery (seen here), the peak likely occurred around 10-11z, as that’s when the -80C tops began to quickly warm which was consistent with an ERC that began likely setting in around that time, which was hinted at in the 11am advisory. The extrapolated pressure was 881 as noted, and given an additional two hours of deepening up until peak appearance before it began degrading, suggests an additional 2-3 mb drop, which would put Wilma’s peak at at 878 mb. A slight increase in winds is also plausible, hence the 170 kt estimate from Crazy, although I do have slight reservations with that considering Wilma was monsoonal in nature and consistently had a much lower pressure on average for much of its Caribbean lifetime - the most anomalous being 55 kt / 988 mb and 135 kt / 892 mb at 00z 10/18 and 00z 10/20 respectively. I personally have it a bit lower at 165 kt but 878 is still fine for the pressure.
4 likes
-
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 34099
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 pm
- Location: Deep South, for the first time!
Re: 2005 Season Retrospective
ljmac75 wrote:CrazyC83 wrote:As far as other 2005 storms, my thoughts on the actual peak intensities:
Wilma - 170 kt / 878 mb
What's the reasoning on this one? Also do you have any thoughts on landfall intensities for other storms that year?
That is based on continued intensification after the Recon plane left. The flight found winds of 168 kt at flight level, and given the explosive intensification, 90% may be too conservative. It was probably 160-165 kt at that time, and likely strengthened a bit more. I believe Dvorak was nearly T8.0 as well once adjusted for the tiny eye.
0 likes
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 7cardinal, LarryWx, pepecool20, riapal, Tak5 and 85 guests