ATL: SAM - Remnants - Discussion

[TheDreamTraveler]

It's actually crazy just how strong this storm is this far south and east in the atlantic

[Sciencerocks]

LOCATION...13.5N 49.0W
ABOUT 990 MI...1595 KM ESE OF THE NORTHERN LEEWARD ISLANDS
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...145 MPH...230 KM/H
PRESENT MOVEMENT...WNW OR 295 DEGREES AT 8 MPH...13 KM/H
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...943 MB...27.85 INCHES

I disagree.

[DioBrando]

Some dropsonde surface
winds have been as high as 162 kt, which is more representative of a
gust

[Hammy]

145-50 range seems reasonable though I also feel the data gives evidence that it was likely a bit stronger earlier in the day as the satellite appearance is less symmetric.

[supercane4867]

Stewart's reasoning:

It's been an interesting evening with regards to analyzing the
various data from a NOAA Hurricane Hunter research flight into
Hurricane Sam. Dropsonde data in both the southeast and northwest
quadrants indicate that small eyewall mesovortices and possibly even
tornado-scale vortices were present based on the wind profiles
showing sharply opposite-direction winds from what would normally be
expected in those regions of the hurricane. Some dropsonde surface
winds have been as high as 162 kt, which is more representative of a
gust, while SFMR surface winds have been as high as 133 kt. However,
the strongest 700-mb flight-level winds have been 138-139 kt in the
northeastern quadrant, which equates to about 125-kt tangential
surface winds. Three dropsondes released in the eye indicate that
the pressure had remained steady at 943-944 mb during the duration
of the aircraft reconnoiter. That pressure equates to about 125 kt
based on various pressure-wind relationships. Based on that estimate
and the 700-mb flight-level to surface-wind conversion, the advisory
intensity is 125 kt, which is representative of the mean tangential
winds and no localized wind perturbations.

So TL;DR: those dropsonde wind profiles are recognized as the result of mesoscale features

[Ubuntwo]

From the discussion:

while SFMR surface winds have been as high as 133 kt.

From the last VDM:

L. 144 kt

I'm a little confused here.

[Yellow Evan]

Rejection of SFMR readings because they don’t meet some arbitrary (if applied uniformly) 90% ratio is too far I’m sorry.

[supercane4867]

From the discussion:

while SFMR surface winds have been as high as 133 kt.

From the last VDM:

L. 144 kt

I'm a little confused here.

It's being discarded due to the large discrepancy between SFMR and FL readings from the same dataset

[Yellow Evan]

Completely agree with a longtime meteorologist here.

 https://twitter.com/derekortt/status/1441960435289399299

[Teban54]

I have access to some Chinese forums for weather enthusiasts, who are usually angry about JTWC's underestimations (just like all the WPac watchers here are). They're redirecting their anger on NHC now.

[Ubuntwo]

It's being discarded due to the large discrepancy between SFMR and FL readings from the same dataset

If they're tossing out unflagged SFMR now, shouldn't that bear mention in the discussion?

[DioBrando]

I have access to some Chinese forums for weather enthusiasts, who are usually angry about JTWC's underestimations (just like all the WPac watchers here are). They're redirecting their anger on NHC now.

ayo hit me up with the link or screencaps buddy boyo thanks in advance

[Yellow Evan]

 https://twitter.com/franklinjamesl/status/1441962210197114880

[Ubuntwo]

I guess this formalizes the rejection of SFMR >=135kt. At least until ongoing research is completed. Something to keep in mind moving forward.

[Yellow Evan]

 https://twitter.com/andyhazelton/status/1441960618379067392




 https://twitter.com/andyhazelton/status/1441963318529433601




 https://twitter.com/andyhazelton/status/1441961561728368645

[supercane4867]

Based on my past experience if Sam manages to peak at a higher intensity in the next strengthening cycle (if there is one), the initial peak could very well be revised upward in the best track or TCR after all.

[cycloneye]

The question is if they will go up in intensity on post season analysis. What is the take of the members about this?

[Teban54]

I have access to some Chinese forums for weather enthusiasts, who are usually angry about JTWC's underestimations (just like all the WPac watchers here are). They're redirecting their anger on NHC now.

ayo hit me up with the link or screencaps buddy boyo thanks in advance

Here you go, with my quick translations:


(Source)
FYI, I don't think they're genuinely showing disrespect towards the NHC or any other agencies; it's more of a joke. And this post does not represent my own opinion, though personally I do think 125 kts is an underestimate.

(Even though SSHWS is not officially used in the WPac, not even by their own CMA, it's pretty commonly used among weather enthusiasts.)

[Yellow Evan]

The question is if they will go up in intensity on post season analysis. What is the take of the members about this?

As long as Stewart doesn’t do the TCR, it’ll probably be upped.

[Stormybajan]

The question is if they will go up in intensity on post season analysis. What is the take of the members about this?

Yes imo, I think in post season they may go 150 mph at 18z