Riptide Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 TC's are defined by more than a wind threshold...those who are complaining about things seem to be ignoring the other parts of the criteria for a TS. IE; A well-defined Low-level circulation and persistent convection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mencken_Fan Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 You did....or perhaps you were saying(lulz, "typing") that Tropical Storm Cindy did not reach the qualifications of a TC. Hi Riptide. I'm sorry to use your post this way but this general discussion is a perfect example of why I don't often post. This makes twice that someone believed I was talking about Cindy; an idea created wholly by the reader and not by me. I'll even quote myself from my earlier post: "And my comment was not directed towards anything this year (because I've paid scant little attention to the junk out there so far) but to storms in years past when I did follow closely even the bottom of the barrel stuff. Yet I can only wonder how many people think I was referring to Cindy. This is because some readers "see" what they expect or want to see instead of what's actually written. Am I 100% in favor of counting all tropical storms? Absolutely! My point was to note how the definition of a tropical storm had changed since the Neil Frank days. And my personal view is that some TC's in years past shouldn't have been named. (Like most people I have no problem with the vast majority of TC's; it's just that once in a blue moon they'll throw a name on something that bears no resemblance to an actual "storm.") Crimany...you'd think I committed scientific intellectual murder or something! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 IE; A well-defined Low-level circulation and persistent convection. That is where they get a little subjective, how much convection is enough, how 'tight' the low level circulation is. I think NHC is sometimes a little slow to classify, especially on systems not a threat to the US, but its more a quibble than a major complaint. If M_F wants to name particular named storms he doesn't think deserved a name, we could look at them on a case by case basis, I suppose. A little discussion when there are no big cyclones in the basin, IMHO, not a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mencken_Fan Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 TC's are defined by more than a wind threshold...those who are complaining about things seem to be ignoring the other parts of the criteria for a TS. Yes we know that....but you of all people should at least be able to read the context of speech; and not see what isn't there. I need escape to richarddawkins.net before I lose my mind! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riptide Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Hi Riptide. I'm sorry to use your post this way but this general discussion is a perfect example of why I don't often post. This makes twice that someone believed I was talking about Cindy; an idea created wholly by the reader and not by me. I'll even quote myself from my earlier post: "And my comment was not directed towards anything this year (because I've paid scant little attention to the junk out there so far) but to storms in years past when I did follow closely even the bottom of the barrel stuff. Yet I can only wonder how many people think I was referring to Cindy. This is because some readers "see" what they expect or want to see instead of what's actually written. Am I 100% in favor of counting all tropical storms? Absolutely! My point was to note how the definition of a tropical storm had changed since the Neil Frank days. And my personal view is that some TC's in years past shouldn't have been named. (Like most people I have no problem with the vast majority of TC's; it's just that once in a blue moon they'll throw a name on something that bears no resemblance to an actual "storm.") Crimany...you'd think I committed scientific intellectual murder or something! I see what you are trying to say but I don't think your point holds much water. This is the satellite era so it's hard to misclassify anything. I agree with you about the bottom of the barrel stuff, not of much significant to humanity...that's for sure. I enjoy reading your posts, even if they are divergent. That's the whole point of discussion forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtlehurricane Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Hi Riptide. I'm sorry to use your post this way but this general discussion is a perfect example of why I don't often post. This makes twice that someone believed I was talking about Cindy; an idea created wholly by the reader and not by me. I'll even quote myself from my earlier post: "And my comment was not directed towards anything this year (because I've paid scant little attention to the junk out there so far) but to storms in years past when I did follow closely even the bottom of the barrel stuff. Yet I can only wonder how many people think I was referring to Cindy. This is because some readers "see" what they expect or want to see instead of what's actually written. Am I 100% in favor of counting all tropical storms? Absolutely! My point was to note how the definition of a tropical storm had changed since the Neil Frank days. And my personal view is that some TC's in years past shouldn't have been named. (Like most people I have no problem with the vast majority of TC's; it's just that once in a blue moon they'll throw a name on something that bears no resemblance to an actual "storm.") Crimany...you'd think I committed scientific intellectual murder or something! The definition of a TS hasn't changed as far as I know, our observations have simply gotten better so now we can catch weaker/transient ones. The name tropical storm isn't meant to convey that it is particularly strong so your argument is basically pointless... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunny and Warm Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 How does the greater number of storms being classified in this era effect insurance rates for those near the coast? If I was an insurance company, I'd be raising rates if 20 formed on average versus 12, even if there always were 20 that formed and 8 never got named. There are other examples of naming TC's having an effect outside of science. Food for thought. <I agree that we should name everything that falls under the criteria, I'm just pointing out that some industries gain in this> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Insurance companies probably charge by the landfall, and at least in Texas, early in the satellite era, Hurricane Celia was enough to force the state to set up TWIA, which is an insurer of last resort. I believe it is pooled coverage (shared risk) determined by market share in Texas. All property owners in coastal counties, and part of Harris County (Houston metro) are eligible to get windstorm insurance through TWIA. There is at least one law firm now specializing in suing TWIA over Ike damages, because TWIA doesn't pay on flooding/storm surge damage, with people arguing they had wind damage before the surge hit their homes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k*** Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 My point was to note how the definition of a tropical storm had changed since the Neil Frank days. And my personal view is that some TC's in years past shouldn't have been named. (Like most people I have no problem with the vast majority of TC's; it's just that once in a blue moon they'll throw a name on something that bears no resemblance to an actual "storm.") The definition of a tropical storm HAS NOT changed, and your personal viewpoint on what a storm "resembles" is an awfully silly criteria for judging whether it is a TC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 The definition of a tropical storm HAS NOT changed, and your personal viewpoint on what a storm "resembles" is an awfully silly criteria for judging whether it is a TC. I'm not a good source of info on past weak storms, and I'm not trying to give M_F a hard time, but if he wants to give an example of a storm he thinks shouldn't have been classified, I'm sure some of the more knowledgeable like Phil could discuss it. Or I could look at it's satellite picture on Wiki and read the NHC archive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k*** Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I'm not a good source of info on past weak storms, and I'm not trying to give M_F a hard time, but if he wants to give an example of a storm he thinks shouldn't have been classified, I'm sure some of the more knowledgeable like Phil could discuss it. Or I could look at it's satellite picture on Wiki and read the NHC archive... I am trying to give M_F a hard time. He's aggressively wrong just about every time he goes on these diatribes about tropical-related stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil882 Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Hmm lets try to switch back to what we were discussing yesterday. I'm under the impression that A-H and neutercanes were independently bad science, but I'm not 100% sure on that. I found something while trying to look up information about the Saffir-Simpson scale that was a little troubling. Earlier versions of this scale – known as the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale – incorporated central pressure and storm surge as components of the categories. The central pressure was used during the 1970s and 1980s as a proxy for the winds as accurate wind speed intensity measurements from aircraft reconnaissance were not routinely available for hurricanes until 1990[5]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Hmm lets try to switch back to what we were discussing yesterday. I found something while trying to look up information about the Saffir-Simpson scale that was a little troubling. Yep. The 70s were just a bad era for hurricane science. Not that it's totally gone or anything. I remember some arguing about Alex being Cat 3 last year because it was 948mb, as if the MSLP is the only relevant thing for determining the intensity of hurricanes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil882 Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Yep. The 70s were just a bad era for hurricane science. Not that it's totally gone or anything. I remember some arguing about Alex being Cat 3 last year because it was 948mb, as if the MSLP is the only relevant thing for determining the intensity of hurricanes. Old habits die hard I suppose. Considering the Saffir-Simpson scale was only recently changed in 2010 to reflect the uselessness of pressure determining the intensity of a storm, it might be quite some time before the rest of the scientific community (even less the public) comes to terms with the change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivanhater Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 New Lemon in the Central ATL A TROPICAL WAVE LOCATED ABOUT 750 MILES EAST OF THE WINDWARD ISLANDS IS PRODUCING DISORGANIZED SHOWER AND THUNDERSTORM ACTIVITY. SOME SLOW DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SYSTEM IS POSSIBLE DURING THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS AS IT MOVES TOWARD THE WEST-NORTHWEST AT 15 TO 20 MPH. THERE IS A LOW CHANCE...10 PERCENT...OF THIS SYSTEM BECOMING A TROPICAL CYCLONE DURING THE NEXT 48 HOURS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riptide Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I am trying to give M_F a hard time. He's aggressively wrong just about every time he goes on these diatribes about tropical-related stuff. Quite the usage of words, sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Crimany...you'd think I committed scientific intellectual murder or something! Now that you mention it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atownwxwatcher Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 name='k***' timestamp='1311269618' post='824898']I am trying to give M_F a hard time. He's aggressively wrong just about every time he goes on these diatribes about tropical-related stuff. Well it looks like Neil Frank would probably agree with the person Some meteorologists, including former hurricane center director Neil Frank, say as many as six of this year's 14 named tropical systems might have failed in earlier decades to earn "named storm" status. "They seem to be naming storms a lot more than they used to," said Frank, who directed the hurricane center from 1974 to 1987 and is now chief meteorologist for KHOU-TV. "This year, I would put at least four storms in a very questionable category, and maybe even six. Source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 New Lemon in the Central ATL If this one doesn't take it from the wind shear outside of its "oasis" and Hispaniola, then it will become the ultimate weenie scenario storm system...you know the kind of scenario where a ridge builds over an approaching hurricane...you know the kind of pattern rainstorm kept searching for over and over and over...in f--king February. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k*** Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Are marsupial pouches called oases now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott747 Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Wouldn't bat an eye if it was downgraded in any re-analysis. Going old school. This goes back when I really started being dismissive about pressure readings and took some heat for it. http://www.easternus...ost__p__1690583 I think we are beginning to learn that the pressure reading may be somewhat misleading in correlation to wind speed. The only sustained winds found over 100 kt were at flight level right before landfall by recon. Yep. The 70s were just a bad era for hurricane science. Not that it's totally gone or anything. I remember some arguing about Alex being Cat 3 last year because it was 948mb, as if the MSLP is the only relevant thing for determining the intensity of hurricanes. Old habits die hard I suppose. Considering the Saffir-Simpson scale was only recently changed in 2010 to reflect the uselessness of pressure determining the intensity of a storm, it might be quite some time before the rest of the scientific community (even less the public) comes to terms with the change. Just pulling up the quote from Eastern that I posted a few days ago. That was back in early 07 and we generally fixated on the pressure to wind relationship with our small core group. I already had some reservations and really began to have doubt with some of the readings we saw that year with Dean and Felix. IIRC we had some heated discussion about the relationship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 If this one doesn't take it from the wind shear outside of its "oasis" and Hispaniola, then it will become the ultimate weenie scenario storm system...you know the kind of scenario where a ridge builds over an approaching hurricane...you know the kind of pattern rainstorm kept searching for over and over and over...in f--king February. Just for clarification, are you saying this is an Andrew repeat, an Isabel repeat, or a 1938 repeat? I need to know which subforum's weenies to alert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Well it looks like Neil Frank would probably agree with the person Some meteorologists, including former hurricane center director Neil Frank, say as many as six of this year's 14 named tropical systems might have failed in earlier decades to earn "named storm" status. "They seem to be naming storms a lot more than they used to," said Frank, who directed the hurricane center from 1974 to 1987 and is now chief meteorologist for KHOU-TV. "This year, I would put at least four storms in a very questionable category, and maybe even six. Source A director of the NHC in that period of time might say something like that because of their horrible timing with the -AMO period. But I think any reasonable person, especially one with scientific credentials, can see why they have been naming more storms since that period of time. No one can possibly be that short-sighted right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riptide Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Just for clarification, are you saying this is an Andrew repeat, an Isabel repeat, or a 1938 repeat? I need to know which subforum's weenies to alert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Are marsupial pouches called oases now? Since nomenclature is just not the thing these days, I decided to speak in my personal terminology because that is how science ought to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstorm93 Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivanhater Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 If this one doesn't take it from the wind shear outside of its "oasis" and Hispaniola, then it will become the ultimate weenie scenario storm system...you know the kind of scenario where a ridge builds over an approaching hurricane...you know the kind of pattern rainstorm kept searching for over and over and over...in f--king February. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 GFS shows the Southern part of that hauling through the Caribbean, reaching CA in 4 days while the Northern end lags back, producing a stretched out looking -meh- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivanhater Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 12z Euro shows the disturbance moving through the Florida Straits then the Upper Texas coast as a weak reflection. The Track is interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hurricaneman Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 If the Euro comes true, it will be a double edge sword for Texas, they would possibly get the rain they need, but this could be much stronger than modeled and possibly be a big problem, but as we all know things can change and probably will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.