Tropical cyclone tracking thread

Started by CNGL-Leudimin, May 07, 2015, 11:08:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

CNGL-Leudimin

A knot is exactly 1.852 km/h.
Quote from: froggie on October 23, 2015, 11:15:29 AM
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.
Supporter of the construction of several running gags, including I-366 with a speed limit of 85 mph (137 km/h) and the Hypotenuse.

Please note that I may mention "invalid" FM channels, i.e. ending in an even number or down to 87.5. These are valid in Europe.


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.
"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

SignGeek101

Quote from: roadman on October 23, 2015, 05:43:14 PM
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

Quote from: SignGeek101 on October 24, 2015, 02:41:30 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 23, 2015, 05:43:14 PM
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.
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

empirestate

Quote from: US71 on October 24, 2015, 03:10:43 AM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on October 24, 2015, 02:41:30 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 23, 2015, 05:43:14 PM
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

Quote from: empirestate on October 24, 2015, 06:55:19 AM
Quote from: US71 on October 24, 2015, 03:10:43 AM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on October 24, 2015, 02:41:30 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 23, 2015, 05:43:14 PM
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


Quote from: SignGeek101 on October 24, 2015, 02:41:30 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 23, 2015, 05:43:14 PM
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...
"Imprisoned by the freedom of the road!" - Ronnie Milsap
See my photos at: http://bit.ly/1Qi81ws

Now I decide where I go...

2018 Ford Fusion SE - proud new owner!

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


Quote from: noelbotevera on October 24, 2015, 12:01:23 PM
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

Quote from: empirestate on October 24, 2015, 01:25:05 PM

Quote from: noelbotevera on October 24, 2015, 12:01:23 PM
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

Quote from: SignGeek101 on October 24, 2015, 11:06:13 AM
Quote from: empirestate on October 24, 2015, 06:55:19 AM
Quote from: US71 on October 24, 2015, 03:10:43 AM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on October 24, 2015, 02:41:30 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 23, 2015, 05:43:14 PM
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.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

Duke87

Quote from: Brandon on October 24, 2015, 02:30:37 PM
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.

If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

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

Quote from: Duke87 on October 24, 2015, 09:31:18 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 24, 2015, 02:30:37 PM
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.
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

Brandon

Quote from: SSOWorld on October 25, 2015, 08:01:24 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on October 24, 2015, 09:31:18 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 24, 2015, 02:30:37 PM
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.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

ET21

#93
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 24, 2015, 10:15:32 PM
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
The local weatherman, trust me I can be 99.9% right!
"Show where you're going, without forgetting where you're from"

Clinched:
IL: I-88, I-180, I-190, I-290, I-294, I-355, IL-390
IN: I-80, I-94
SD: I-190
WI: I-90, I-94
MI: I-94, I-196
MN: I-90

froggie

Quote from: BrandonKatrina 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.

Quote from: SSOWorldtrue 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

Quote from: froggie on October 25, 2015, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: BrandonKatrina 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.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

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].
Supporter of the construction of several running gags, including I-366 with a speed limit of 85 mph (137 km/h) and the Hypotenuse.

Please note that I may mention "invalid" FM channels, i.e. ending in an even number or down to 87.5. These are valid in Europe.

CNGL-Leudimin

#98
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.
Supporter of the construction of several running gags, including I-366 with a speed limit of 85 mph (137 km/h) and the Hypotenuse.

Please note that I may mention "invalid" FM channels, i.e. ending in an even number or down to 87.5. These are valid in Europe.

Alex

Again, why do we need to name subtropical systems?

QuoteBULLETIN
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).



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.