Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[CNGL-Leudimin]

A knot is exactly 1.852 km/h.

I presume you understand the difference between knots and mph, yes?

I understand that difference. What happens is I use a different standard for measuring wind speeds. The WMO recommends using a 10 minute lapse, which I also take as reference, while NHC, CPHC and JTWC use a 1 minute lapse, which is approximately 1.14 times higher (However it depends on the environment). This is close to the conversion factor of 1 knot = 1.151 mph. So if I have to quote my 10 minute estimate in mph, I simply take the 1 minute estimate in knots. Except here. Patricia is so damn strong, the two values differ.

[roadman]

The weather teaser on out local news station this afternoon was about tracking Patricia.  Given that we're in Boston, it seemed pretty silly to me.

[SignGeek101]

The weather teaser on out local news station this afternoon was about tracking Patricia.  Given that we're in Boston, it seemed pretty silly to me.

Considering how strong the storm is, you can't blame them for talking about it, especially if the weather in Boston is pretty fair (which I don't know if that's the case or not). It won't be as damaging as Katrina probably, but its strength is sure unique.

They were talking about it here too. Taking air time away from the 'Halloween and snow' and 'leaves are changing colour' weather news.

[US71]

The weather teaser on out local news station this afternoon was about tracking Patricia.  Given that we're in Boston, it seemed pretty silly to me.

Considering how strong the storm is, you can't blame them for talking about it, especially if the weather in Boston is pretty fair (which I don't know if that's the case or not). It won't be as damaging as Katrina probably, but its strength is sure unique.

How do you figure that? It's more powerful than Katrina.

[empirestate]

The weather teaser on out local news station this afternoon was about tracking Patricia.  Given that we're in Boston, it seemed pretty silly to me.

Considering how strong the storm is, you can't blame them for talking about it, especially if the weather in Boston is pretty fair (which I don't know if that's the case or not). It won't be as damaging as Katrina probably, but its strength is sure unique.

How do you figure that? It's more powerful than Katrina.

Smaller, though, and hitting a less-populated area. Still, yeah, you're talking about an amount of damage, not a magnitude. Those affected by Patricia will be no less homeless or dead than those affected by Katrina.

[SignGeek101]

The weather teaser on out local news station this afternoon was about tracking Patricia.  Given that we're in Boston, it seemed pretty silly to me.

Considering how strong the storm is, you can't blame them for talking about it, especially if the weather in Boston is pretty fair (which I don't know if that's the case or not). It won't be as damaging as Katrina probably, but its strength is sure unique.

How do you figure that? It's more powerful than Katrina.

Smaller, though, and hitting a less-populated area. Still, yeah, you're talking about an amount of damage, not a magnitude. Those affected by Patricia will be no less homeless or dead than those affected by Katrina.

I was also thinking about the area it hit. Katrina was so damaging due to the fact that it hit New Orleans, a city below sea level, and breached its dikes. Also, Patricia was supposed to (I'm not sure if it did) weaken very quickly once it made landfall, because it was over a mountain chain, according to the news.

 I'm no expert on this though, so Patricia could be more damaging.

[Pete from Boston]

The weather teaser on out local news station this afternoon was about tracking Patricia.  Given that we're in Boston, it seemed pretty silly to me.

Considering how strong the storm is, you can't blame them for talking about it, especially if the weather in Boston is pretty fair (which I don't know if that's the case or not). It won't be as damaging as Katrina probably, but its strength is sure unique.

They were talking about it here too. Taking air time away from the 'Halloween and snow' and 'leaves are changing colour' weather news.

If I read correctly, the point roadman was making was that it was brought up during the "traffic and weather on the tens" segment on local radio, not during the general news where a story not affecting local weather would be more appropriate.  However, I guess that's when that meteorologist gets his air time, so that's when it happens.

It also is worth noting that a lot of the segments on these metro news radio stations are not local at all, and do these drop-in's for many cities. I realized this when I heard our "local" radio meteorologist Elliott Abrams on the weather report in Pittsburgh as if he was right there downtown at KDKA.

[noelbotevera]

As of around 9:30 AM ET, Patricia heads northeast towards Houston, Texas. The wind speed is 165 mph (still Category 5).

[TravelingBethelite]

...PATRICIA WEAKENS TO A TROPICAL DEPRESSION OVER CENTRAL MEXICO... ...HEAVY RAIN THREAT CONTINUES...
10:00 AM CDT Sat Oct 24
Location: 23.9°N 101.6°W
Moving: NE at 24 mph
Min pressure: 1002 mb
Max sustained: 35 mph

Now she's just a tropical depression, and rapidly weakening. She's soon to dissipate into a trough of low pressure. What a storm, though...

[noelbotevera]

As of 10:44 AM ET (Weather Channel post) and 8 AM PDT, Patricia is on a NNE course towards Texas, a couple hundred or so miles from Laredo. It's still in Mexico, possibly entering the US tomorrow.

[empirestate]

As of around 9:30 AM ET, Patricia heads northeast towards Houston, Texas. The wind speed is 165 mph (still Category 5).

That seems very improbable more than 12 hours after landfall. Perhaps you're seeing the prior day's advisory?


iPhone

[noelbotevera]

As of around 9:30 AM ET, Patricia heads northeast towards Houston, Texas. The wind speed is 165 mph (still Category 5).

That seems very improbable more than 12 hours after landfall. Perhaps you're seeing the prior day's advisory?


iPhone

That was today. I checked the Weather Channel.

[jeffandnicole]

This is also from the weather channel...at 8am PDT. No clue what you could've been looking at.

[Brandon]

The weather teaser on out local news station this afternoon was about tracking Patricia.  Given that we're in Boston, it seemed pretty silly to me.

Considering how strong the storm is, you can't blame them for talking about it, especially if the weather in Boston is pretty fair (which I don't know if that's the case or not). It won't be as damaging as Katrina probably, but its strength is sure unique.

How do you figure that? It's more powerful than Katrina.

Smaller, though, and hitting a less-populated area. Still, yeah, you're talking about an amount of damage, not a magnitude. Those affected by Patricia will be no less homeless or dead than those affected by Katrina.

I was also thinking about the area it hit. Katrina was so damaging due to the fact that it hit New Orleans, a city below sea level, and breached its dikes. Also, Patricia was supposed to (I'm not sure if it did) weaken very quickly once it made landfall, because it was over a mountain chain, according to the news.

 I'm no expert on this though, so Patricia could be more damaging.

Katrina was more a man-made disaster than a natural one in New Orleans.  Had the levees been maintained properly, they would've held.

[Duke87]

Katrina was more a man-made disaster than a natural one in New Orleans.  Had the levees been maintained properly, they would've held.

A couple of the levees also had a design flaw that made them weaker than they were supposed to be from the getgo, they took soil samples where the ground was already the most compressed and thus the strength was measured unconservatively. And then you have the decision to build a city in the middle of the swamp in the first place.

But yeah, very manmade.

[noelbotevera]

UPDATE: Patricia's winds at a measly 30 mph. As of 7 pm CDT (8 PM ET), and 10:12 PM ET as I write the post, Patricia is still on its northeast course towards the United States and Texas. It is currently just about west of Monterrey, with Monterrey being in the southeast side of the tropical storm. It has another 455 miles to go until it hits a major city, Houston, Texas.

[SSOWorld]

Katrina was more a man-made disaster than a natural one in New Orleans.  Had the levees been maintained properly, they would've held.

A couple of the levees also had a design flaw that made them weaker than they were supposed to be from the getgo, they took soil samples where the ground was already the most compressed and thus the strength was measured unconservatively. And then you have the decision to build a city in the middle of the swamp in the first place.

But yeah, very manmade.

true but keep in mind that though Katrina had Cat 3 winds and pressure, it was still accompanied by a larger than usual surge.

[Brandon]

Katrina was more a man-made disaster than a natural one in New Orleans.  Had the levees been maintained properly, they would've held.

A couple of the levees also had a design flaw that made them weaker than they were supposed to be from the getgo, they took soil samples where the ground was already the most compressed and thus the strength was measured unconservatively. And then you have the decision to build a city in the middle of the swamp in the first place.

But yeah, very manmade.

true but keep in mind that though Katrina had Cat 3 winds and pressure, it was still accompanied by a larger than usual surge.

They had Betsy in 1965 do something similar.  They knew from computer modeling over the couple decades prior to Katrina what could happen.  They failed to maintain the levees properly, even letting oak trees grow on and next to them.

A great comparison was made the day after along the canal between Orleans and Jefferson Parishes.  One side was swamped, the other was dry.  One side maintained the levees, the other did not.  If Katrina was all that bad, then the Jefferson Parish levees should've failed as well.  They did not.  Only the Orleans Parish levees failed.

[ET21]

UPDATE: Patricia's winds at a measly 30 mph. As of 7 pm CDT (8 PM ET), and 10:12 PM ET as I write the post, Patricia is still on its northeast course towards the United States and Texas. It is currently just about west of Monterrey, with Monterrey being in the southeast side of the tropical storm. It has another 455 miles to go until it hits a major city, Houston, Texas.

The remnants are gonna give much of the eastern US a good soaking of rainfall, including flooded areas of the Mid South and Texas.

I'll tell you what, the remnant low is forecasted to  turn northerly and bomb out essentially after merging with a Canadian low pressure. Classic autumnal storm by mid week with a possible 980-990 mb center. Patricia might not be done yet

[froggie]

Katrina was more a man-made disaster than a natural one in New Orleans.  Had the levees been maintained properly, they would've held.

Within New Orleans, yes.  But Katrina had such a far-ranging impact that to focus on New Orleans was to miss the big picture with that storm.

true but keep in mind that though Katrina had Cat 3 winds and pressure, it was still accompanied by a larger than usual surge.

Speaking from years of personal experience, it takes far longer for sea waves to die down than it does for winds.  So while Katrina had Cat 3 (borderline Cat 4) winds upon landfall, it very much had a Cat 5 storm surge.


Regarding Patricia, my mother lives in Manzanillo, and Patricia made landfall about 55 miles northwest of there (per National Hurricane Center).  Thankfully, the strongest winds did not extend very far....hurricane force winds only extended about 30 miles from the center.  She lost power and Internet for about half a day but they were restored yesterday.  No word yet on damage but she's promised me some photos.

[Brandon]

Katrina was more a man-made disaster than a natural one in New Orleans.  Had the levees been maintained properly, they would've held.

Within New Orleans, yes.  But Katrina had such a far-ranging impact that to focus on New Orleans was to miss the big picture with that storm.

True, Mississippi was a natural disaster, but we're discussing the effects on NOLA, not Mississippi.

[froggie]

That was geared more towards the previous comment stating that Katrina "did so much damage" because it hit NOLA.  Probably should've quoted that too, earlier.

[CNGL-Leudimin]

Next Sunday the Southern hemisphere cyclone season begins. It is divided into three basins: Southwest Indian, Australia and Southern Pacific (The South Atlantic and Southeast Pacific don't see tropical cyclone activity due to hostile environment). However there has been already a named tropical storm this year, although calling something in the Australia basin a 'tropical storm' is somewhat incorrect given the Australian scale doesn't have such a designation. Tropical storm Raquel, it was already named on July 1st, that is like a tropical storm forming in the Atlantic on January 1st.

By the way, if I was to set up something, I'd call it the Leudimin Tropical Cyclone Center. I wouldn't call it Leudimin Hurricane Center due to its acronym conflicting with that of the Large Hardon Collider [sic].

[CNGL-Leudimin]

Okay, a quick recap: The Eastern Pacific (includes the so-called Central Pacific) kept surprising me up to the very end of 2015: Like it happened in the Atlantic in 2012 and in the Western Pacific in 2013, the weak storm after the big one happened (Tropical Storm Rick in mid November), but then a record-breaking major hurricane formed, Sandra. And when I thought the season was all but done, the last tropical depression formed on New Year's Eve (UTC), thus pushing the end of the season to Undecimber 1st (i.e. January 1st, 2016). And today, just six days after, the first tropical depression of the year has surfaced. Now that is crazy El Niño.

Now for the lists they will use this year, the ones of 2010 but without the retired names. In the Atlantic Igor and Tomas got replaced by Ian and Tobias. In the Eastern Pacific (West to 140ºW) in principle it's the same, but due to that f*cking Islamic State, Ivette will now be used instead of Isis. As it wasn't retired the usual way, I will render that storm as 'Isis Ivette' (But at least it wasn't retired with the season underway and due to be used, unlike Tropical Storm Ivo of 2001 which I have recorded as Tropical Storm Israel instead). It also causes a glitch in my records, as since Isis went unused in 2010 I mark it as retired since 2004, so now my records says had 2010 reached the I storm, it would have been named Ivette instead of Isis.

[Alex]

Again, why do we need to name subtropical systems?

BULLETIN
SUBTROPICAL STORM ALEX ADVISORY NUMBER   1
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL       AL012016
500 PM AST WED JAN 13 2016

...OUT OF SEASON SUBTROPICAL STORM FORMS OVER THE FAR EASTERN
ATLANTIC...


SUMMARY OF 500 PM AST...2100 UTC...INFORMATION
----------------------------------------------
LOCATION...27.1N 30.8W
ABOUT 785 MI...1260 KM SSW OF THE AZORES
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...50 MPH...85 KM/H
PRESENT MOVEMENT...NE OR 55 DEGREES AT 14 MPH...22 KM/H
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...990 MB...29.24 INCHES


WATCHES AND WARNINGS
--------------------
Interests in the Azores should monitor the progress of Alex.


DISCUSSION AND 48-HOUR OUTLOOK
------------------------------
Satellite images indicate that the low pressure system over the
eastern Atlantic has developed into a subtropical storm.
At 500 PM AST (2100 UTC), the center of Subtropical Storm Alex was
located near latitude 27.1 North, longitude 30.8 West.  The storm is
moving toward the northeast near 14 mph (22 km/h), and a turn
toward the north with an increase in forward speed is expected over
the next 48 hours.

Maximum sustained winds are near 50 mph (85 km/h) with higher gusts.
Little change in strength is forecast during the next 48 hours, and
Alex is expected to become an extratopical cyclone before reaching
the Azores on Friday.

Winds of 40 mph extend outward up to 140 miles (220 km) from the
center.

The estimated minimum central pressure is 990 mb (29.24 inches).