Why did the NHC bother to name Andrea?

[DanKellFla]

Sorry if this has been addressed elsewhere, but durring Andreas naming, I was sick. I tried searching the threads, but that is kind of daunting. I am a little confused as to why Andrea was given a name. It was sub-tropical, before the official season and barely had a center of circulation. Thanks.

[wxman57]

Sorry if this has been addressed elsewhere, but durring Andreas naming, I was sick. I tried searching the threads, but that is kind of daunting. I am a little confused as to why Andrea was given a name. It was sub-tropical, before the official season and barely had a center of circulation. Thanks.

Actually, you have that backwards. The non-tropical low which was named Andrea had a very strong circulation last Sunday night/Monday with sustained winds approaching hurricane force. There's no question about Andrea's circulation, but it was a cold-core winter type storm center, just like the Nor'easter that dumped snow across the northeast U.S. a few weeks ago. The NHC doesn't name such storms, they're covered by other agencies.

The real question was if/when the low might acquire at least some tropical characteristics such as warming in the core aloft, convection near the center, stronger winds near the center vs. well away from the center, etc. There were no indications of any tropical characteristics on Tuesday as Andrea's winds dropped to 45-55 mph. By Wednesday, Andrea had begun moving closer to the SE U.S. coast, making it a possible threat to the people living there. Since the center was forecast to track across the Gulf Stream (SSTs nearing 80F), and since some models suggested that the core might warm a bit, it was decided to send out a plane to search for subtropical storm transition.

The first recon plane was sent in at high altitude - 300 millibars, something that is not normally done. The purpose of this high-altitude penetration was to search for core warming from the top-down. The plane found the core cold-core all the way down to about 950 mb, where a slight warming was detected. There was a great amount of discussion among forecsters and researchers as to whether such slight warming qualified the low as subtropical or not. In the end, the NHC decided to err on the side of caution and name it Andrea (as the surface winds had dropped to 40-45 mph - the weakest in 3 days).

Andrea continued to weaken after being named, probably losing those 40-45 mph winds within 3-6 hours after it was named. But the NHC held onto STS status in the unlikely event that Andrea might continue a slow transformation to tropical (being over the Gulf Stream). But that never happened, and the NHC realized there was little chance of Andrea being a threat, so it was downgraded and advisories discontinued.

The above pretty much states the facts. Now I'll offer my own commentary. Whille I realize that the NHC has a very difficult job (protecting the lives of the general public), I can't help wondering why there would be any need for the NHC to get involved with this system so that the public would be warned. Andrea caused the most damage (and loss of life) 2 days before it was named. Is the NHC the only agency that can adequatly warn the public of such dangers? What about the NWS? The formation of what was to become Andrea was being discussed Friday, May 4th, so it was no surprise when it developed early Monday morning. The NWS could have put out storm warnings before it developed, alerting the public to the danger, and continued those storm warnings as Andrea weakened Tuesday and Wednesday. The NHC almost lookes silly naming a weakening, questionably subtropical low that had already produced damage for 2 days. If regular NWS advisories don't work, then perhaps the process needs changing.

[DanKellFla]

Thanks, great explanation. Your commentary makes a really good point. I was wondering the same thing that you express so well.