NOAA getting desperate?
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:20:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

While the conditions are greatest for
a Tropical Storm to originate in the Tropics, it is not limited to the
Tropics.

If is doesn't originate in the tropics, then it isn't a tropical
storm.

Relying on a definition that is a bizzllion years old doesn't make it
right.

So Chuck, what's your next treatise?

NOAA getting desperate?
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:26:27 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

It appears that the definition used to include historical Tropical
Storms and Hurricanes from 1886 forward is the same one used today.

Yes - you've mentioned that more than once.

Chuck.

NOAA getting desperate?
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 06:52:45 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Tropical Depression:
A tropical cyclone in which the maximum sustained surface wind speed
(using the U.S. 1-minute average) is 33 kt (38 mph or 62 km/hr) or less.

By the way, notice the term TROPICAL cyclone?

TROPICAL?

Here's the accepted definitions:

Terms to Know

Tropical Distrubance-An unorganized area of thunderstorms in the
TROPICS that maintains itself for 24 hours. It is the first step in
hurricane development.

Tropical Depression-A mass of thunderstorms with a weak cyclonic
circulation in the TROPICS with winds less than 39 mph.

Last time I knew, 37.8N, 64.9W isn't tropical. And the storm formed
two degrees south of 37.8.

The tropics are defined as:

The geographic region of the Earth centered on the equator and limited
in latitude by the Tropic of Cancer in the northern hemisphere, at
approximately 23°30' (23.5°) N latitude, and the Tropic of Capricorn
in the southern hemisphere at 23°30' (23.5°) S latitude. This region
is also referred to as the tropical zone.

NOAA getting desperate?
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:34:03 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

The fact that they are changing the rules may affect things far beyond
the obvious......

Agreed.

By their criteria, the storm of November 10th, 1975 in Lake Superior
should have been called a hurricane rather than a gale.

The proper terminology should be gale.

A gale is a very strong wind of at least 28 knots, 32 mph, or 51 km/h;
and up to 55 knots, 63 mph, or 102 km/h.

It is divided into three or four categories:

A moderate gale or near gale is up to 33 kt., 38 mph, or 61 km/h, and
a small craft advisory is issued.
A fresh gale or just gale is 34~40 kt., 39~46 mph, or 62~74 km/h, and
a gale warning is issued.
A strong gale is 41~47 kt., 47~54 mph, or 75~88 km/h, and usually a
gale warning is issued or maintained.
A whole gale or storm is 48 kt., 55 mph, or 89 km/h or greater, and a
storm warning is issued.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :)

NOAA getting desperate?
 

On Jul 31, 7:06?am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:26:27 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"

wrote:
It appears that the definition used to include historical Tropical
Storms and Hurricanes from 1886 forward is the same one used today.

Yes - you've mentioned that more than once.

Chuck.





"Chuck" ??????????

C'mon, Tom. That has no class at all.

NOAA getting desperate?
 

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:34:03 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:



I really wish I understood this. It is difficult enough trying to
compare observational data pre-satellite to the modern forecasting
tools without changing the rules enroute.

Apparently the rules changed in 2002, but I really don't know the
reason why.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subtropical_cyclone

Not to be a conspiracy theorist... and not being able to sort out the
chicken-and-egg aspect of this... however, it should be noted that
"naming" a storm may trigger specific clauses in many insurance
policies. Also, recently, there has been a class of insurance that
specifically covers hurricanes (which are generally define by having
been "named").
http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/i...icanwindstorm/

The fact that they are changing the rules may affect things far beyond
the obvious......

That is certainly true in Florida. Your homeowners does not cover
damage from a "named storm". You need windstorm insurance. Like
"flood" that is a separate policy and windstorm may have a 5-10%
deductible.

My understanding is that it there has to be "hurricane" warnings, not just a
named storm, some where in the state of Florida.

NOAA getting desperate?
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:20:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Yes, and the next thing you know we'll be seeing another well
researched article showing that the number of tropical storms has
doubled.

Wayne,
From what I can tell, the current definition of tropical storm goes
back to at least 1992, and probably is older. It describes a type of
storm, and the intensity of the storm and includes storms that develop
in the Tropics or the Subtropics. While the conditions are greatest for
a Tropical Storm to originate in the Tropics, it is not limited to the
Tropics.

I understand that. My point I guess, if I really had one, is that
NOAA does seem to be stretching a bit on some of these calls. I
believe that was SW Tom's point as well. It's not entirely irrelevant
either. By way of example, my insurance policy on the Grand Banks has
a clause whereby the deductible doubles for damage caused by a "named"
storm.

There was in fact a study released within the last week which
purported to show that the number of Atlantic hurricanes has doubled
in the last 100 years. Although that is possible, it seems much more
likely that vastly improved detection methodology is responsible for
much of the increase. Thanks to satellite technology virtually no
weather disturbance goes undetected these days.

NOAA getting desperate?
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:20:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

While the conditions are greatest for
a Tropical Storm to originate in the Tropics, it is not limited to the
Tropics.

If is doesn't originate in the tropics, then it isn't a tropical
storm.

Relying on a definition that is a bizzllion years old doesn't make it
right.

So Chuck, what's your next treatise?

Tom,
How many words and idioms do you know that make zero sense if you take
them literally?

NOAA getting desperate?
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 06:52:45 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Tropical Depression:
A tropical cyclone in which the maximum sustained surface wind speed
(using the U.S. 1-minute average) is 33 kt (38 mph or 62 km/hr) or less.

Yes Chuck.

Your point was that NOAA was naming the storms to validate their
forecast. I was just pointing out that this is not new. I really can't
figure out what your point with "Yes Chuck" was or is.

NOAA getting desperate?
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:37:43 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Jul 31, 7:06?am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:26:27 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"

wrote:
It appears that the definition used to include historical Tropical
Storms and Hurricanes from 1886 forward is the same one used today.

Yes - you've mentioned that more than once.

Chuck...

"Chuck" ??????????

C'mon, Tom. That has no class at all.

It was a joke - like as in...

Never mind.

Sorry you were offended. I apologize.