another storm

[Steve]

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N12394985.htm

[Martin]

Are u kiddin me? Is it just me or is this ridiculous. We shouldnt have to wait this long for this type of information. Reminds me how it took them 4 years to figure out Hurricane Andrew was a Cat 5 and not 4.

[Steve]

maybe we will find out that last September a cat 2 hit Long Island and nobody knew.LOL

[HurricaneJosh]

Originally Posted by Martin

Are u kiddin me? Is it just me or is this ridiculous. We shouldnt have to wait this long for this type of information. Reminds me how it took them 4 years to figure out Hurricane Andrew was a Cat 5 and not 4.

:) To the NHC's defense, they had their hands quite full last season and-- from what I could gather-- not enough funding to really monitor all of these storms as closely as they needed to be. And this ST was way way way out in the Atlantic. So I think we can let it go this time. ;)

[Steve]

Not enough funding is an excuse that has worn itself thin with me from the government sector. If I used that reasoning to my boss I would probably get demoted. As for being busy, during a "storm event" in one area, if I was to miss something in another client area, there would be no excuse. NHC may have more to do that our small 20 person private company, but they also have more folks over there. I'll accept that it was way out there and an insignificant storm. Just my two cents for what's its worth.

Originally Posted by HurricaneJosh

:) To the NHC's defense, they had their hands quite full last season and-- from what I could gather-- not enough funding to really monitor all of these storms as closely as they needed to be. And this ST was way way way out in the Atlantic. So I think we can let it go this time. ;)

[Martin]

I agree with Steve. It gives us a false sense regarding every Hurricane season to date.

I mean, is it ok to close the book on the 2003 hurricane season or will another TD or TS will be found from old data..

[HurricaneJosh]

Steve & Martin, you both make valid points and I agree with you.

On the other hand, I also appreciate that the NHC does such careful post-analysis that they can sometimes bring to light systems that might have been completely missed in previous years. I think overall the quality of the data and analysis has only improved with time. If you compare a standard Tropical Cyclone Report issued these days with what was produced, say, twenty years ago, the amount of detail and analysis is amazing. So, overall, I give them points for being more exacting and in-depth in general.

This having been said, of greater interest to me than the posthumous upgrade of this remote subtropical system are the post-analysis upgrades to hurricane status of two recent landfalling systems: Gaston 2004 and Cindy 2005. Since those storms actually threatened-- and made landfall in-- the USA, the upgrades are quite significant!