Has the Atlantic Hurricane Season ever had two category 4 hurricanes by July 15?! Seems awfully early. In any event, with the newest 2am advisory hurricane Emily is officially a category 4 hurricane.
Anthony
Officially CATEGORY 4...
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.
Officially CATEGORY 4...
0 likes
-
HouTXmetro
- Category 5
- Posts: 3949
- Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:00 pm
- Location: District of Columbia, USA
-
Hurricaneman
- Category 5
- Posts: 7404
- Age: 45
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:24 pm
- Location: central florida
If you look at the loops the little "bumps" Emily has been doing all day are actually trochoidal wobbles. The continuous intensification isn't surprising.
952 is a notch high for an intensifying category 4. Seems like the winds are preceding the pressure drops instead of the other way around.
Emily has bulled through the Caribbean doldrums without any effect. It is a strange intensifier at fast forward speed...
952 is a notch high for an intensifying category 4. Seems like the winds are preceding the pressure drops instead of the other way around.
Emily has bulled through the Caribbean doldrums without any effect. It is a strange intensifier at fast forward speed...
0 likes
-
jasons2k
- Storm2k Executive
- Posts: 8250
- Age: 52
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:32 pm
- Location: The Woodlands, TX
Sanibel wrote:If you look at the loops the little "bumps" Emily has been doing all day are actually trochoidal wobbles. The continuous intensification isn't surprising.
952 is a notch high for an intensifying category 4. Seems like the winds are preceding the pressure drops instead of the other way around.
Emily has bulled through the Caribbean doldrums without any effect. It is a strange intensifier at fast forward speed...
I actually wondered that too - isn't 20mph forward speed a bit fast for a storm to intensify so quickly?
0 likes
-
NC George
- Category 2
- Posts: 635
- Age: 55
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:44 am
- Location: Washington, NC, USA
Sanibel wrote:952 is a notch high for an intensifying category 4. Seems like the winds are preceding the pressure drops instead of the other way around.
.
Well, if its moving forward at 20, 20 mph of the windspeed is forward movement. So I would say this is a fast moving category 3 storm (115 mph winds) producing cat 4 winds in one quadrent due to forward speed.
IMHO, it would be a better way to describe storms in this way, rather than making an entire storm a 'cat 4' just because in one spot they measured high wind speeds.
0 likes
-
Pebbles
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 1994
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 1:42 pm
- Location: New Lenox, IL (SW of Chicago)
NC George wrote:Sanibel wrote:952 is a notch high for an intensifying category 4. Seems like the winds are preceding the pressure drops instead of the other way around.
.
Well, if its moving forward at 20, 20 mph of the windspeed is forward movement. So I would say this is a fast moving category 3 storm (115 mph winds) producing cat 4 winds in one quadrent due to forward speed.
IMHO, it would be a better way to describe storms in this way, rather than making an entire storm a 'cat 4' just because in one spot they measured high wind speeds.
They figure windspeed without forward motion included in it ...she's definitely cat 4...
0 likes
-
HouTXmetro
- Category 5
- Posts: 3949
- Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:00 pm
- Location: District of Columbia, USA
-
NC George
- Category 2
- Posts: 635
- Age: 55
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:44 am
- Location: Washington, NC, USA
Pebbles wrote:
They figure windspeed without forward motion included in it ...she's definitely cat 4...
Nope, had a long discussion with a professional met about this during Dennis. The windspeed reported in the public updates is the actual (if measured) or estimated (if not measured) windspeed that is on the ground, which means inclusive of forward speed winds and cyclonic winds. They even mention in the NHC discussion that the highest winds (125 kt) were in the NE quadrent.
What this means is you DO NOT need to ADD forward speed to the public advisory in order to get actual wind speed on the ground, but that also means you would need to SUBTRACT forward speed in order to get cyclonic wind speed, which, IMHO, is indicative of the actual storm strength. This explains why Mobile, AL got such light effects from Dennis as compared to Panama City Beach - Mobile had winds of less than 80 (120 reported at Navarre Beach minus 20 for forward speed to get cyclonic wind speed, and minus another 20 for being on the west side of the storm where forward speed and cyclonic winds are in opposite directions. )
Coincidently, I was using this same idea in the opposite direction to forecast Dennis being Cat 4 about 1 hour before it went public. My reasoning: Max flight level winds were reported by RECON at 105 kt in the SW quadrent (about 110 mph on the ground,) and Dennis was moving forward at 15. Because this is the quadrent where forward speed and cyclonic speed are opposite, you need to add twice the forward speed in order to get ground windspeed in the NE quadrent. Do this and you get a flight level windspeed of 135 KT, or a 145 mph Cat 4 on the ground. Sure enough, on the next public advisory (Advisory 24,) windspeed was adjusted up to the exact speed my math had predicted, using the same RECON data the NHC uses.
See, the math backs me up every time, and I stand my my original assertion: Emily is a fast moving Cat 3 with Cat 4 winds in the NE quad.
0 likes
NC George wrote:Pebbles wrote:
They figure windspeed without forward motion included in it ...she's definitely cat 4...
Nope, had a long discussion with a professional met about this during Dennis. The windspeed reported in the public updates is the actual (if measured) or estimated (if not measured) windspeed that is on the ground, which means inclusive of forward speed winds and cyclonic winds. They even mention in the NHC discussion that the highest winds (125 kt) were in the NE quadrent.
What this means is you DO NOT need to ADD forward speed to the public advisory in order to get actual wind speed on the ground, but that also means you would need to SUBTRACT forward speed in order to get cyclonic wind speed, which, IMHO, is indicative of the actual storm strength. This explains why Mobile, AL got such light effects from Dennis as compared to Panama City Beach - Mobile had winds of less than 80 (120 reported at Navarre Beach minus 20 for forward speed to get cyclonic wind speed, and minus another 20 for being on the west side of the storm where forward speed and cyclonic winds are in opposite directions. )
Coincidently, I was using this same idea in the opposite direction to forecast Dennis being Cat 4 about 1 hour before it went public. My reasoning: Max flight level winds were reported by RECON at 105 kt in the SW quadrent (about 110 mph on the ground,) and Dennis was moving forward at 15. Because this is the quadrent where forward speed and cyclonic speed are opposite, you need to add twice the forward speed in order to get ground windspeed in the NE quadrent. Do this and you get a flight level windspeed of 135 KT, or a 145 mph Cat 4 on the ground. Sure enough, on the next public advisory (Advisory 24,) windspeed was adjusted up to the exact speed my math had predicted, using the same RECON data the NHC uses.
See, the math backs me up every time, and I stand my my original assertion: Emily is a fast moving Cat 3 with Cat 4 winds in the NE quad.
This is a topic that seems to cause confusion even among meteorologists. I've heard several TV meteorologists say that you need to add the forward speed and just as many state that it's already factored in.
0 likes
-
swimaster20
- Category 1
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 2:41 pm
- Location: The Heart of Cajun Country
abajan wrote:NC George wrote:Pebbles wrote:
They figure windspeed without forward motion included in it ...she's definitely cat 4...
Nope, had a long discussion with a professional met about this during Dennis. The windspeed reported in the public updates is the actual (if measured) or estimated (if not measured) windspeed that is on the ground, which means inclusive of forward speed winds and cyclonic winds. They even mention in the NHC discussion that the highest winds (125 kt) were in the NE quadrent.
What this means is you DO NOT need to ADD forward speed to the public advisory in order to get actual wind speed on the ground, but that also means you would need to SUBTRACT forward speed in order to get cyclonic wind speed, which, IMHO, is indicative of the actual storm strength. This explains why Mobile, AL got such light effects from Dennis as compared to Panama City Beach - Mobile had winds of less than 80 (120 reported at Navarre Beach minus 20 for forward speed to get cyclonic wind speed, and minus another 20 for being on the west side of the storm where forward speed and cyclonic winds are in opposite directions. )
Coincidently, I was using this same idea in the opposite direction to forecast Dennis being Cat 4 about 1 hour before it went public. My reasoning: Max flight level winds were reported by RECON at 105 kt in the SW quadrent (about 110 mph on the ground,) and Dennis was moving forward at 15. Because this is the quadrent where forward speed and cyclonic speed are opposite, you need to add twice the forward speed in order to get ground windspeed in the NE quadrent. Do this and you get a flight level windspeed of 135 KT, or a 145 mph Cat 4 on the ground. Sure enough, on the next public advisory (Advisory 24,) windspeed was adjusted up to the exact speed my math had predicted, using the same RECON data the NHC uses.
See, the math backs me up every time, and I stand my my original assertion: Emily is a fast moving Cat 3 with Cat 4 winds in the NE quad.
This is a topic that seems to cause confusion even among meteorologists. I've heard several TV meteorologists say that you need to add the forward speed and just as many state that it's already factored in.
Same here, abajan, I've also heard many different things about that from Mets.
0 likes