Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Aussie (& S-Hemisphere) Cyclone Action 2011-2012


Recommended Posts

Please. :lol: It's not like you get excited about Cat 5s on this side, either. I barely remember you posting about Yasi last year.

But when it comes to sleet in Houston, oh boy! :D

Unlike you, I have a life beyond interest in all things tropical. I do have 'local' interests as well, you know.:P Texas City had a possible tornado very near where you where during Ike, yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 547
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Unlike you, I have a life beyond interest in all things tropical. I do have 'local' interests as well, you know. :P

C'mon.

Texas City had a possible tornado very near where you where during Ike, yesterday.

Ha! I read about that and of course remembered being there. It was kind of trippy thinking about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heidi is strenghtening-- now a Cat 2 with an intensity of 986 mb/50 kt (10-min). More intensification is possible before the center crosses the coast near Port Hedland withing the next 12 hr. On the American scale, this is approaching hurricane strength.

Thanks, Roger, for the radar link. The latest still shows a well-defined core and some good rainbands. A nice little system:

post-19-0-23641500-1326276457.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The latest advice indicates the pressure has lowered to 980 mb-- however, the radar signature looks to me like it's becoming a tad less distinct on the last few frames.

Motion has slowed a bit-- and that will delay landfall a little. The advice warns of gusts up to ~75 kt near where the center crosses-- including the Port Hedland area. The highest gust at the Port Hedland Airport has been 34 kt, with the pressure holding more or less steady over the last several hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed.

But, still-- it is interesting the way our surface obs almost never reach the best-track or operational values, whereas it does happen in Oz. Perhaps they're just more conservative in their overall approach to assessing intensity?

No, I'm saying the error bars are larger in Oz because they only have Dvorak so it is much more likely that they can underestimate a storm than NHC. When you have synoptic surveillance missions, you are likely getting close to the actual Vmax at flight level, so it's going to be a lot harder for NHC to underestimate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I'm saying the error bars are larger in Oz because they only have Dvorak so it is much more likely that they can underestimate a storm than NHC. When you have synoptic surveillance missions, you are likely getting close to the actual Vmax at flight level, so it's going to be a lot harder for NHC to underestimate it.

So you're saying that the BoM will always underestimate-- but not overestimate? Can't Dvorak estimates misfire in both directions?

Also, I remember reading something about the BoM's methdodology for upgrades, and it actually is a bit different, if I remember correctly. For example, they require a system to maintain winds of 34 kt (10-min) for a specific number of hours before upgrading it to a cyclone, whereas I believe the NHC just needs a single, moment-in-time instance or estimate of the threshold speed. I'll try to dig up that info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're saying that the BoM will always underestimate-- but not overestimate? Can't Dvorak estimates misfire in both directions?

Also, I remember reading something about the BoM's methdodology for upgrades, and it actually is a bit different, if I remember correctly. For example, they require a system to maintain winds of 34 kt (10-min) for a specific number of hours before upgrading it to a cyclone, whereas I believe the NHC just needs a single, moment-in-time instance or estimate of the threshold speed. I'll try to dig up that info.

I'm saying their errors will be larger in general. Absolutely Dvorak can misfire in both directions (though to me at least, it seems to have a low bias for smaller systems).

I believe you are correct re: the duration of time. The only time standard NHC uses relates to central convection, not winds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying their errors will be larger in general. Absolutely Dvorak can misfire in both directions (though to me at least, it seems to have a low bias for smaller systems).

I believe you are correct re: the duration of time. The only time standard NHC uses relates to central convection, not winds.

Yeah, I've read some papers Re: wind/pressure relationships that talk about how Dvorak tends to underestimate microcane intensities. So maybe Heidi is an example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winds at Bedout Island are down to 45 kt, and the pressure is up to 993 mb and rising. The low pressure of 987 mb coincided with the max wind of 60 kt, which occurred as the center passed just to the W.

Winds in Port Hedland are now pegged at over 25 kt, with consistent gusts to gale force.

It seems to me that the cyclone has a very small core:

post-19-0-14840500-1326294017.gif

post-19-0-83602400-1326294055.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure of my pressure relationships for the basin, or even how to calculate up a 10 minute sustained to a 1 minute sustained, but this is a hurricane if a high end Cat 2 is ~70 mph/10 minutes.

That is worth being interested.

Agreed.

For our scale... Convert 10-min to 1-min using a factor of ~1.136. So 60 kt (10-min) = ~68 kt (1-min)-- a solid Cat 1 for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...