Arlene-first storm and in early June--what does this mean???

[Anonymous]

On average, an early start to a hurricane season means a less active peak as has been mentioned in posts on the MB... That would mean dr gray may be a little high in his Forecast of 15 named storms. However, this is the highest prediction he has EVER had and maybe this is just the beginnings of a season that is gonna be active ALL SEASON LONG! There is already rumor that 91L is about to be shown in the caribbean and models show this area becoming a storm So is this the beginnings of a season like no other, or does early activity indicate a less active season overall as it has in the past??? Or does the early activity mean absolutely nothing?

[Brent]

I don't think it means anything... one way or the other.

[Anonymous]

Matt Carrier made a good point..and I tend to agree. I'll mention it in my tropical update video tomorrow morning.

[dhweather]

Each season is like a snowflake - no two will be exactly alike.
Similar, perhaps, but not alike.

I don't believe that early activity is an indicator for the entire season.

[gatorcane]

The Cape Verde season has nothing to do with early GOM and Caribbean storms.

[StormChasr]

I think this question assumes a crystal ball, which I do not possess---my guess is that the hurricane season will be whatever it turns out to be. Definitely not a dull one, IMHO.

[Lowpressure]

It is early, but it really doesn't mean anything. Be more concerned about the long term Bermuda High positioning.

[Anonymous]

From another tread posted a little bit ago.....

should be repeated that an active june does not mean an active season. IN fact, the odds favor a QUIET season if June is active (see the paper by Dr Gray)

Yet we run a tie between this will be a season like no other and first storm means nothing--This first storm could very well just be a wake up call for all and a heads up that mom nature is not playying around this year!

[Guest]

I don't think it means much. Of course, you can look at trends in past DECADES and see what happened, but it is highly doubtful that one could recognize a clear-cut, or near clear-cut, connection.

It is weather, and an early start means very little. About the only thing I can say is that the seaon has started in early June, and we still have the remainder of June, July...etc to get through with.

[Anonymous]

Wow--look at this year which started in early June--10 storms affected land and 2 didnt





Details are here http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... index.html

[Brent]

12 storms though... that's not that insane.

Lots of landfalls though. 2 in June hit in almost the same spot about a week later.

Proof that you don't need an insanely high number of storms to have a bad year.

[Anonymous]

12 storms though... that's not that insane.

Lots of landfalls though. 2 in June hit in almost the same spot about a week later.

Proof that you don't need an insanely high number of storms to have a bad year.

4 affected FLA

[Andrew92]

I just said it in another thread.....look at 1933 and 2003, two years that already had two storms before July.

Both seasons were crazy.

-Andrew92

[Andrew92]

12 storms though... that's not that insane.

Lots of landfalls though. 2 in June hit in almost the same spot about a week later.

Proof that you don't need an insanely high number of storms to have a bad year.

4 affected FLA

No, 4 affected Texas. 3 did directly hit Florida, along with another one that came close to Miami.

-Andrew92

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

Do you see how theres no cape verde storms. Back in those times the record was poor. There could of been 15 or more named storms. Its really a shot in the dark.

[Andrew92]

You have a point Matt....however, some of those that hit the U.S. probably did develop off of Africa.

Also, while I don't think this will be the case for 1933, there were "two" storms in one year, 1906, that were re-analyzed and it was discovered that these "two" were in fact the same storm.

In that 1906 scenario, the "first" hit Central America and then "dissipated." Then, supposedly, the "second" developed in the eastern Caribbean and later hit Florida as a major hurricane. Well, as it turns out, those "two" storms were the SAME storm.

Nonetheless, 1906 had at least one other storm, so the count of TS's was not affected by this...in fact, there may have been two other storms.

-Andrew92

[Anonymous]

12 storms though... that's not that insane.

Lots of landfalls though. 2 in June hit in almost the same spot about a week later.

Proof that you don't need an insanely high number of storms to have a bad year.

4 affected FLA

No, 4 affected Texas. 3 did directly hit Florida, along with another one that came close to Miami.

-Andrew92

So, you dont count the FLA Keys as Fla???

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif

Storm5

I consider that a hit http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif

[Andrew92]

12 storms though... that's not that insane.

Lots of landfalls though. 2 in June hit in almost the same spot about a week later.

Proof that you don't need an insanely high number of storms to have a bad year.

4 affected FLA

No, 4 affected Texas. 3 did directly hit Florida, along with another one that came close to Miami.

-Andrew92

So, you dont count the FLA Keys as Fla???

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif

Storm5

I consider that a hit http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif

Whoops. Missed that one.

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

Every year is different. In 150 years of data, and which only around 60 years of it is close is shoting in the dark. I think the 1850 to 1890 could of been quit active. I would not be at all suprized if some year over the last 500 years had over 30 storms. Thats just how much we really know. The truth of the story is this year could be very active or it could be a 1997 with a early storm. We will have to see.

[Anonymous]

12 storms though... that's not that insane.

Lots of landfalls though. 2 in June hit in almost the same spot about a week later.

Proof that you don't need an insanely high number of storms to have a bad year.

4 affected FLA

No, 4 affected Texas. 3 did directly hit Florida, along with another one that came close to Miami.

-Andrew92

So, you dont count the FLA Keys as Fla???

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif

Storm5

I consider that a hit http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... /track.gif

Whoops. Missed that one.

Thats cool--who knows what will happen in 2005 but it promises to be an extremely active season which may be starting early