Tropical Storm Cindy =Downgraded,Last Advisory

#61 Postby **Steve** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:03 pm

992, huh? That's strong. There's an error in the 9a though, says it's moving NNE but it's still at 90.3 and then says expected to turn NNE.

Something's up.

Steve

#62 Postby **JtSmarts** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:05 pm

Has gone from 1000-997-992, with still 5 hours or so till landfall. Looks like she definitely has a chance to become a hurricane.

#63 Postby **dhweather** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:06 pm

They shouldn't have taken that "it will remain a TS PERIOD" party line this afternoon.

#64 Postby **Ivanhater** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:08 pm

992, doesnt that indicate stronger than 70mph? they seem insistent on keeping it a tropical storm, almost to insistent.

#65 Postby **Stormcenter** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:09 pm

ivanhater wrote:992, doesnt that indicate stronger than 70mph? they seem insistent on keeping it a tropical storm, almost to insistent.

Cindy looks like she is moving due north again and on the verge of possibly being a hurricane if not one already. IMO

http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/satelli ... duration=6

#66 Postby **Ivanhater** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:12 pm

i just saw on my hurricane tracking software we are under a hurricane watch, is that true?

#67 Postby **Air Force Met** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:14 pm

dhweather wrote:They shouldn't have taken that "it will remain a TS PERIOD" party line this afternoon.

Yeah...that was a mistake...and to not put out a hurricane watch...especially when they NOW say it might become one...

SOME
SLIGHT STRENGTTHENING IS STILL POSSIBLE UNTIL LANDFALL OCCURS.
DURING THE PAST HOUR...AN OFFSHORE OIL PLATFORM NORTHEAST OF THE
CENTER REPORTED A WIND GUST TO 99 MPH AT A HEIGHT OF 150 FT.

If there is even the slightest strengthening...then it is a hurricane and they have erred on the foolish side (which I think they have already).

Matt-hurricanewatcher · #68 Postby **Matt-hurricanewatcher** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:15 pm

It looks like we have a developing eye. Cindy is rapidly getting stronger all day. Hurricane watches at the least need to be issued.

#69 Postby **Air Force Met** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:16 pm

ivanhater wrote:i just saw on my hurricane tracking software we are under a hurricane watch, is that true?

Not according to the advisory.

Boy...Bastardi is gonna blow a gasket on this one ;-)

Matt-hurricanewatcher · #70 Postby **Matt-hurricanewatcher** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:18 pm

Air Force Met wrote:
ivanhater wrote:i just saw on my hurricane tracking software we are under a hurricane watch, is that true?

Not according to the advisory.

Boy...Bastardi is gonna blow a gasket on this one

I can't say he would be in the wrong this time :wink:

sunny · #71 Postby **sunny** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:19 pm

Matt-hurricanewatcher wrote:It looks like we have a developing eye. Cindy is rapidly getting stronger all day. Hurricane watches at the least need to be issued.

Exactly what Derek said.

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=66217

jkt21787 · #72 Postby **jkt21787** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:20 pm

Matt-hurricanewatcher wrote:
Air Force Met wrote:
ivanhater wrote:i just saw on my hurricane tracking software we are under a hurricane watch, is that true?

Not according to the advisory.

Boy...Bastardi is gonna blow a gasket on this one

I can't say he would be in the wrong this time

JB actually does have a point in this case. Hurricane watches if not warnings should have been issued at 4.

Radar · #73 Postby **Radar** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:24 pm

I believe a hurricane watch should have been posted, just for the simple fact that so many live in manufactored housing in the Coastal LA and MS areas. A hurricane watch/warning would be taken more seriously and possibly have gotten people are out of harms way and into structures that are stronger. What were they thinking????

#74 Postby **Air Force Met** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:27 pm

Now the test will be do they keep it a TS on purpose...or take their mumps if it reaches minimal hurricane strength?

Wouldn't be the first time they didn't upgrade for a reason other than the weather.

Matt-hurricanewatcher · #75 Postby **Matt-hurricanewatcher** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:29 pm

I agree Airforce met. :roll:

gkrangers · #76 Postby **gkrangers** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:30 pm

For what its worth...I think there job isn't solely dependent on the weather unfortunately...and they probably have to take alot into account in situations like this...

AL Chili Pepper · #77 Postby **AL Chili Pepper** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:38 pm

gkrangers wrote:For what its worth...I think there job isn't solely dependent on the weather unfortunately...and they probably have to take alot into account in situations like this...

Like leaving NO out of the watch yesterday. I can understand the reasoning though. If it'd been any stronger, they'd probably have included NO.

T-man · #78 Postby **T-man** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:41 pm

I think something really stinks about all this.

#79 Postby **Frank P** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:45 pm

Yeah I agree, how much is politics playing into the equation.... maybe they just don't want to see the casinos shut down, who in the heck knows.... whether or not they declare it a hurricane is irrevelant to me right now because I am prepared for at least a min Cat 1.... and if it doesn't get there that's OK as well...

#80 Postby **SeaBrz_FL** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 8:46 pm

To my Gulfcoast NOLA Friends -- As you wished me last year (several times), I now send the the same good thoughts back to you getting through Cindy.

Very best wishes for no injuries, little damage, and quick recovery...

and equally important :Partytime:

don't let your legacy down!

Hugs, hugs --

SB

Tropical Storm Cindy =Downgraded,Last Advisory

Who is online