What will Philip J. Klotzbach/Dr Gray do at August Update?

[x-y-no]

I'm betting they stay the same.

[all_we_know_is_FALLING]

I'm betting they stay the same.

Same here.

[dwg71]

15/8/3 is my guess

[cheezyWXguy]

i say 16/8/5

[LarryWx]

Based on the persistent -SOI since May, I would think they'd lower them several storms. However, I thought they were going to make at least some reduction back in the prior update since the SOI had already reversed sharply from solidly positive in April to negative in May. Regardless, I think they will reduce them at least slightly.

[Jim Hughes]

Based on the persistent -SOI since May, I would think they'd lower them several storms. However, I thought they were going to make at least some reduction back in the prior update since the SOI had already reversed sharply from solidly positive in April to negative in May. Regardless, I think they will reduce them at least slightly.

Things are slightly different now compared to their last update. One of the things that stand out is the 90 day SOI average. It is much less volatile the the 30 day SOI average. The 90 day average is currently > - 5.0 and this does not happen all that often.

Plus the SST anomaly in the ENSO 1+2 Region just recently went positive in the latest weekly update. So it is now in tune with the other three regions for the first time in a while. This has some meaning since the 90 day SOI average is weakly-moderately tilted towards a warming episode. So I would not be surprised if they tweak the higher intensity numbers a little bit.

[kenl01]

Lower them by several storms.

I'd say 13/7/3

[Extremeweatherguy]

I think they may lower the total number of storms, but increase their landfall precentage numbers. I see this as being a less active season with a well above average number of landfalls.

[Frank2]

Re: wxman57's post

I think they'll definitely be lowering the numbers, or they should be. The early-season prerdictors they counted on for the higher total are just not there now. SSTs continue to fall (less major hurricanes) and wind shear remains typically high for this time of year. La Nina will not be present. Bermuda high is much stronger now - stronger trades mean more low-latitude shear. Why would they go so high above average with such conditions present?

I really have to agree - it seems that the unusual '05 season was likely a continuation of the '04 season that began after August 10, 2004 (as some had mentioned last year), and, perhaps that '04/'05 episode ended over the past 6 months, so, this season is far different in that it is "normal" statistically (at least so far), and, if this "normal" pattern does continue, then, we only have another 6-8 weeks of truly "active" season left, depending in part on the northern branch of the jet stream, and, per something mentioned several weeks ago, is why our old NHEML/NHC people did not like those "active for the next 15-20 year" statements, since, even during an active cycle, there are going to be years that are not as busy - the Earth (air/sea/land) is far too complex to pin it to anything absolute...

As for intensity of those storms that might form this year - as the NHC has mentioned, that skill in forecasting still needs improvement, though, the old comparison of a hurricane to a cake recipie seems to be a good analogy - if even one ingredient isn't just right, it'll affect the entire outcome...

Frank

[kenl01]

Excellent post Frank2 !

[Eyewall]

I think that the numbers should go down, but i doubt they will change them..
You never know what may happen, we could see a huge burst in activity soon and it could change everything.

I'm thinking more like 16/7/3

[Andrew92]

I say lowered by a little bit, maybe 13/7/4. Still an above-average year, though.

-Andrew92

[NDG]

If the season proves to be less active than earlier predicted by Dr Gray, it will be the first time that Dr Gray overhypes a season, as he most of the times has been conservative with his numbers in the previous 6 years.

[Andrew92]

If the season proves to be less active than earlier predicted by Dr Gray, it will be the first time that Dr Gray overhypes a season, as he most of the times has been conservative with his numbers in the previous 6 years.

I sorta remember at first 1997 was overhyped, because it came off of hurricane seaons like 1995 and 1996. Still, it's probably better to overhype than be too low.

-Andrew92

[x-y-no]

If the season proves to be less active than earlier predicted by Dr Gray, it will be the first time that Dr Gray overhypes a season, as he most of the times has been conservative with his numbers in the previous 6 years.

I sorta remember at first 1997 was overhyped, because it came off of hurricane seaons like 1995 and 1996. Still, it's probably better to overhype than be too low.

-Andrew92

Offhand, I'm not remembering what Gray predicted about '97, but it would have been very hard to recognize just how powerful that el Nino was going to be - so I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers were high.

[NDG]

If the season proves to be less active than earlier predicted by Dr Gray, it will be the first time that Dr Gray overhypes a season, as he most of the times has been conservative with his numbers in the previous 6 years.

I sorta remember at first 1997 was overhyped, because it came off of hurricane seaons like 1995 and 1996. Still, it's probably better to overhype than be too low.

-Andrew92

Offhand, I'm not remembering what Gray predicted about '97, but it would have been very hard to recognize just how powerful that el Nino was going to be - so I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers were high.

In June of '97 he predicted 11 named storms, the season had 7 tropical named storms & 1 subtropical storm.

[Jim Hughes]

If the season proves to be less active than earlier predicted by Dr Gray, it will be the first time that Dr Gray overhypes a season, as he most of the times has been conservative with his numbers in the previous 6 years.

I sorta remember at first 1997 was overhyped, because it came off of hurricane seaons like 1995 and 1996. Still, it's probably better to overhype than be too low.

-Andrew92

Offhand, I'm not remembering what Gray predicted about '97, but it would have been very hard to recognize just how powerful that el Nino was going to be - so I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers were high.

In June of '97 he predicted 11 named storms, the season had 7 tropical named storms & 1 subtropical storm.

Not true. Just depends upon your forecasting methodology. I forecasted in March 1997 that an EL Nino was developing and that it would equal or exceed the 1982-83 event. I also forecasted down the road, my first ATL outlook ever, that there would be seven named storms and a Category 1 hurricane would make landfall in Louisiana....BULLSEYE...

These two forecasts were given to several news contacts, two science writers, and some others. Both 1996 & 97 were very good forecasting years for me.

[Trader Ron]

I think Dr. Gray lowers to 15/8/4

[dwg71]

15/8/3 is my guess

I was off by one...if I had another guess it would be 13/6/2

[stormtruth]

15/8/3 is my guess

I was off by one...if I had another guess it would be 13/6/2

Sorry, Only Dr. Gray is allowed fifteen guesses.