Tropical Fish Storm Cindy explodes over the North Atlantic

“Wade says:
July 20, 2011 at 6:36 pm
It has been my opinion that NOAA rushes to name storms to make it seem like there are more tropical cyclones due to global warming”
There has been a big change in storm warnings in recent decades. It’s not a conspiracy. Better observation, tracking, and prediction allow us to issue much more informative severe weather alerts to protect people and commerce. I don’t think it’s and ebil plot to take over the world. It’s probably a good thing.

In addition to small, short lived storms, other storms probably under-counted in the past include category fives:
http://ams.confex.com/ams/91Annual/webprogram/Paper181447.html

Forgot to link, sorry.
http://www.ec.gc.ca/ouragans-hurricanes/default.asp?lang=En&n=5C4829A9-1

Sigh…
http://www.ec.gc.ca/ouragans-hurricanes/default.asp?lang=En&n=4343267B-1

I’ve been observing and forecasting weather professionally for about 60 years. One of my duties has been to monitor the development and movement of Tropical cyclones in the Atlantic Basin. There is no doubt in my mind that the larger number of named storms in the past decade is the result of better observational techniques which include satellite information and reconnaissance aircraft. But that’s not the whole story. Neither of these techniques was available in 1933 when 21 storms equivalent to named storms today were reported. One requirement for achieving a high number in those pre 1950 years was that the storms move through the western third of the Atlantic where there were more land areas and ships of opportunity to provide observations. In fact, there were more ships reporting major hurricanes in those days than there are today. The simple reason for that counterintuitive fact is that with so little warning of the development and movement of storms in the Tropical Atlantic, many ships wound up being caught in their circulation than is the case today. Take a look at the synoptic ship reports today while a TS or HU is in progress and you’ll see a wide void in the vicinity of, and downstream from, the active storm systems. [You can see a similar absence of aircraft in a region where a cluster of severe thunderstorms are in in progress. These are fascinating to watch in real-time at an ATC tracking center]. So, there are some years when there really are many more storms than normal. NHC’s chart of TS Climate history shows a regimal pattern of annual TC frequency in which there may be about a decade of low numbers preceded and followed by decades of high numbers.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/climo/images/atlhist_lowres_sm.gif
In recent years there seems to be a tendency to name almost anything that exhibits a cyclonic circulation. So far this season we have had three named storms, none of which in the past would have been characterized as being as intense and these were designated to be. Looking at the criteria used for naming these systems, one sees a notable absence of genuine ground (or sea-surface) truth.
TS Arlene was named at 7PM CDT June 28th in the Southern Bay of Campeche with estimated winds of 35kts. The storm moved westward into Mexico 2 days later with sustained winds purported to be 55kts with the forecasted possibility of it becoming an HU before moving inland. It didn’t. The highest winds I saw reported at ground stations near the path were about 40kts.
TS Bret was named at 11pm EDT on July 17th north of the NE Bahamas with highest winds of 35kts based on recon FL winds of 43-45kts and a few SFMR surface winds analyzed as being about 36-37kts. Bret drifted slowly southward some convection around the E semicircle but with evidence of northerly shear starting to develop. Winds were estimated at 45kts with a SLP of 1001mbs. By 5pm EDT on the 18th, with northeasterly wind shear pushing most of the convection into the SW quadrant leaving the surface circulation exposed to the NNE, recon and dropsondes data and “believable” SFMR winds of 50+kts and a SLP of 996mbs, prompted NHC to increase the intensity to 55kts. Forecasters opined that the storm had a chance to make HU strength if it got its act together before increasing NE shear took it apart. Unfortunately, the subsequent recon pass and the accompanying satellite pix showed less organization with the central pressure rising to 998mbs by 11PM EDT and Bret’s intensity was reduced to 50kts. Further weakening occurred during the next 24 hours as the storm completed a tight cyclonic loop and headed NNEWD. The strength was maintained at 45kts through the morning hours of the 20th and then dropped to 40kts in the evening and 35kts at 11PM. This minimal TS strength of 35kts was retained through the 21st thanks to NHC supplying life support to a system that consisted of a naked, broad low-level circulation devoid of any significant convection. They finally pulled the plug earlier this evening dropping the peak winds to 30kts. Now the reason for highlighting the quote “believable” is to provide some evidence that SFMR winds cannot be uncritically relied upon without further examination of the surface conditions at the points they were sampled. The algorithms which solve for the wind speeds are based on the thermal characteristics of wind-driven spray just above the ocean surface. Were a particular sample to be taken in, say, a heavy rain burst, the resulting estimates could be much too high. As sophisticated as this measurement system is, there is a significant amount of subjectivity and expertise involved in the resolution of this data. It makes one think of how some analysts can derive temperatures from ancient tree-rings.
TS Cindy developed along or just ahead a quasi-stationary front north of Bermuda and well east of the Mid-Atlantic Coast and was picked up by NHC Wednesday afternoon, June 20th. There was some question as to whether it was a sub-Tropical low or a Tropical low since it had characteristics of both types. I had little doubt which way they would go, and sure enough they opted for a TC. In the absence of nearby surface data, NHC relied on several of the advanced techniques for determining surface wind speeds using methodology developed at CIRA at Colorado State and TAFB at NHC which incorporated data from the AMSU satellite and possibly the SSM/I data. They found enough of an array of winds to determine that there was probably a 35kt wind somewhere near the center and at 5PM EDT the system was named TS Cindy located at 35.2°N and 53.8°W. (Technically, the Tropical Atlantic is usually designated as beginning at 35.0°N and extending southward, but compared to other determinations, that’s probably just nit-picking). The system was in an area of strong west-southwesterly wind shear of 25-35kts and increasing, and the SST in the area was about 28°C. These parameters would suggest that it might have been more properly designated as a Sub-Tropical system, especially in the absence of a well-formed eye. During Wed night and into midday Thu the 21st, NHC increased the intensity to 50kts although the satellite (Dvorak) analyses had the strength ranging from 35-40kts. Late this past evening, warming cloud tops signaled a weakening of convection mostly due to the rapidly declining SSTs along the storm track. Since it is now showing a warm core, it will probably dissipate as a “Post-Tropical” system rather than convert to an extra-Tropical one.
Now in the case of these three storms, in none of them has there been a report from a reliable land-based, shipboard or buoy platform that has reported a wind in excess of 43kts (that for Arlene on the Mexican Coast) or 33kts for either Bret or Cindy. I doubt whether Bret ever had a sustained 35kt surface wind. Cindy could certainly have exceeded 35kts due to a strong baroclinic zone in the SE quadrant on Thursday. What nags at me is that thanks to these three duds, we have already burned 3 of the names on this year’s TS list from storms that might never have been reported in the pre-satellite era. To some that might be merely an academic distinction. However, corrupts the climatological data base. There is a strong and rarely disputed motivation to produce high numbers, possibly to satisfy a coterie of “climate scientists” who have theorized that warming marine conditions due to climate change will lead to larger numbers of Tropical storms and hurricanes. This is not to say that this hyping of the numbers implies anything sinister; it may be nothing more than rooting for the home team.