#3276 Postby fci » Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:11 pm
wxman57 wrote:brunota2003 wrote:This doesn't make sense. If it reforms, they'll rename it Dorian? Since when did that rule change? Last I read, in order for a storm to keep the same name, it has to maintain a closed low level circulation the entire time. The remnants have not had a closed LLC in several days...even though if a system forms, it may be from the remnants of Dorian, the name should change.
Right, this would not be named Dorian if it developed. All traces of Dorian are gone, with the possible exception that some of the moisture in the region was transported there by Dorian. No surface low or wave survived. It would be named "Erin". But development appears unlikely.
Wxman, I have the most faith and regard for you more than most others; but on Facebook; the NOAA-NWS responded to a question about a possible name and said "Dorian" (I posted it a page or so back in the thread).
It's not a particularly vital issue, discussing nomenclature; but makes for an interesting discussion nonetheless.
They didn't renumber the invest to 92 so they are associating it with 91 which clearly were the remnants of Dorian.
I'd tend to agree with you but not sure that NOAA-NWS does, or at least not the person who responded from them.
0 likes
Personal Forecast Disclaimer:
My posts are just my opinion and are most likely not backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or storm2k.org. For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.
Bottom line is that I am just expressing my opinion!!!