SUMMARY: Part 3 - September TC Summary

From: Gary Padgett (garyp@ALAWEB.COM)
Date: Tue Jan 18 2005 - 11:04:00 EST


                  MONTHLY GLOBAL TROPICAL CYCLONE SUMMARY

                              SEPTEMBER, 2004
                             Third Installment

  (For general comments about the nature of these summaries, as well as
  information on how to download the tabular cyclone track files, see
  the Author's Note at the end of this summary.)

  SPECIAL NOTE: The September summary will be issued in three install-
  ments. The first installment covered the Atlantic basin while the
  second covered the Northwest Pacific basin and an out-of-season South
  Indian Ocean cyclone. This final installment covers the Northeast
  Pacific basin and also contains the Feature of the Month. Some comments
  are also included on some weak North Indian Ocean and South Pacific
  systems.

  *************************************************************************

                           SEPTEMBER HIGHLIGHTS

   --> Two large, severe hurricanes pass through northern Bahamas and
       strike same point on Florida's East Coast
   --> Tropical storm rains cause catastrophic loss of life in Haiti
   --> Long-lived intense hurricane causes great destruction on Grenada,
       Jamaica, Cayman Islands, western Cuba, and north-central U. S.
       Gulf Coast
   --> Japan experiences yet another tropical cyclone strike

  *************************************************************************

              ***** Feature of the Month for September *****

                    ONE-HIT WONDERS AND SUPER TYPHOONS

     During the summer (boreal) of 2003, I sent another one of my famous
  surveys to the members of an informal tropical cyclone discussion group
  of which I am a member. I also recently sent it to a few other persons
  in the tropical cyclone community. I intend to present the results of
  the survey as monthly features spread over several months, beginning with
  the May, 2004, summary. The survey consisted of ten multiple-choice
  questions dealing with various tropical or subtropical cyclone-related
  issues, and two or three questions will be considered each month.

     The persons responding to the survey are listed below. A special
  thanks to each for taking the time to respond to the questions.

  Michael Bath - New South Wales, Australia
  Bruno Benjamin - Guadeloupe, French West Indies
  Eric Blake - TPC/NHC, Miami, Florida, USA
  Pete Bowyer - Canadian Hurricane Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
  Kevin Boyle - Newchapel Observatory, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
  Jeff Callaghan - BoM, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  Simon Clarke - Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  Tony Cristaldi - NWS Office, Melbourne, Florida, USA
  Roger Edson - University of Guam, USA
  Chris Fogarty - Canadian Hurricane Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
  James Franklin - TPC/NHC, Miami, Florida, USA
  Bruce Harper - Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  Julian Heming - UK Meteorological Office, UK
  Karl Hoarau - Cergy-Pontoise University, Paris, France
  Greg Holland - BoM, Australia
  Mark Kersemakers - BoM, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia
  Mark Lander - University of Guam, USA
  Chris Landsea - AOML/HRD, Miami, Florida, USA
  Gary Padgett - Alabama, USA
  Michael V. Padua - Naga City, Philippines
  Michael Pitt - US Navy
  David Roberts - TPC/NHC, Miami, Florida, USA
  David Roth - NOAA/HPC, Maryland, USA
  Matthew Saxby - Queanbeyan, New South Wales, Australia
  Carl Smith - Queensland, Australia
  Phil Smith - Hong Kong, China
  John Wallace - San Antonio, Texas, USA
  Ray Zehr - Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, Colorado, USA

     For each of the survey questions, the format will be as follows:

     (1) the question as it appeared in the original survey

     (2) summary of the responses to each of the possible choices

     (3) some of the comments from various respondents

  Following this I will attempt to present an analysis of the issues
  plus interject my opinions on the subject.

     The monthly feature for September focuses on the final two, and rather
  unrelated, questions on the survey. One dealt with whether or not
  warnings (as a named tropical cyclone) should be issued for very brief
  systems with an expected lifetime of probably not more than two warning
  cycles, i.e., 12 hours. The other was concerned with the JTWC-specific
  term "super typhoon" and whether or not it should be retained or dropped.

     There were 28 persons who responded to the survey questions. For
  some questions, certain persons did not specify an answer, so the total
  number of votes might not always add up to 28. Also, in some cases the
  respondent was undecided between two of the choices. In those cases I
  assigned 1/2 vote to each of the two choices. A word about the comments
  included below: this article is extremely long as it is, and I could
  not possibly include all the comments which the various respondents
  made. I have selected certain ones which seem to cover the various
  issues well, as well as a few which cast a different slant on the
  question.

                     Question # 9 - "One-hit Wonders"
                     --------------------------------

  (1) The question was: a small tropical storm has formed far out at sea,
      is definitely known to meet the criteria for naming and issuing
      warnings, but is no threat to land and almost certainly will not
      exist as a tropical storm for more than 6 or 12 hours due to an
      approaching cold front, or else is entering a region of strong
      vertical shear--for whatever reason, it is pretty evident that no
      more than 1 or 2 warnings as a tropical storm would be issued. What
      should be done?

      (A) Name and issue the 1 or 2 needed advisories
      (B) Don't name nor issue TC advisories but include as an unnamed
          TS in the seasonal report
      (C) Treat as non-tropical (i.e., small LOW with locally strong
          winds), don't issue TC advisories and don't include as an
          after-the-fact storm

  (2) Summary of Responses

      (A) Name and issue needed advisories: 27.0 votes - 96%
      (B) Don't name but include after-the-fact: 1.0 vote - 4%
      (C) Ignore as a tropical cyclone: 0.0 votes - 0%

  (3) Some Comments

  Carl Smith (A): "Even if conditions appear to be about to become
  unfavourable, there is always room for error, and unexpected things can
  happen. In any case advisories should be issued so marine traffic
  is alerted to its presence."

  Chris Fogarty (A): "BUT, be confident it is worthy of naming!!!
  Borderline cases should be kept as depressions! I find in recent years
  some systems are getting named or declared as hurricanes that I have a
  hard time believing, even after checking all kinds of data, sometimes
  I can't convince myself with NHC's decision...or perhaps I'm missing
  something."

  Dave Roberts (A): "If it meets criteria for advisories/warnings...do it!
  This is my biggest Pet Peeve."

  David Roth (A): "Name and issue the 1 or 2 needed advisories. Since
  there is significant error seen/acknowledged in intensity forecasts, who
  really knows how long the system will survive? Tropical Depression #5 of
  1988 off New England, the unnamed hurricane in November, 1991, the
  unnamed hurricane/tropical storm of early September, 1992, off New
  England, and the subtropical/tropical storm of late August, 2000, are
  systems that spring to mind (only the 1991 storm is in the TC database)."

  Greg Holland (A): "Name it and alert shipping. I don't know a forecast
  system alive that is accurate enough to guarantee a 12-hour life time.
  Reality is that it will be a judgement call by the forecaster."

  James Franklin (A): "Should be named, BUT, depending on what else is
  going on, this may not always be possible."

  Julian Heming (A): "'Call it as it is' is the view I take. Storm
  warnings are for marine traffic as well as landfall predictions, and we
  also need to take a consistent approach in historical records, which are
  closely tied with real-time warnings."

  Kevin Boyle (A): "Even though it may appear to be a waste of time,
  issuing advisories on a tropical storm is necessary just for awareness
  purposes. In my opinion if this was not done, then I feel it would be
  pointless warning on a tropical depression far out to sea regardless of
  the number of warnings issued (if it was obvious the depression was not
  going to intensify any more)."

  Mark Lander (A): "Until our skill at intensity forecasting gets better
  than it is, any cyclone that meets warning criteria as a TS should be
  named. Many a weak, dissipating cyclone over water has gone on to bigger
  and better things to the embarrassment of all. Also, in my old days at
  the JTWC on Guam, it was often heard as an excuse not to warn because
  such and such a TC was in the middle of nowhere, and that no one cared,
  and that such and such a TC was a piece of garbage and would never amount
  to anything. Well, sometimes there are more things that what we could
  imagine going on in the middle of nowhere. One time a Sydney to Tokyo
  sail race was taking place and the boats ran into trouble in one of these
  "it's just in the middle of nowhere" storms. I think all TCs should be
  considered a hazard worthy of advisories no matter where it is, or how
  long we think it is going to last."

  Pete Bowyer (A): "It's longevity and location shouldn't be a factor in
  the classification process."

  Phil Smith (A): "JMA named a storm that JTWC had shrugged off a year or
  two back. I believe they were right. While the storm may not threaten
  land, aeroplane pilots or the masters of ships will pay greater attention
  to a NAME on the weather map than they will to an 'L', and if I were to
  by flying on such a plane, I would like my pilot to have the best
  possible information. I have heard one commercial pilot say to another:
  "Since they haven't named it yet, we should be able to go straight
  through it." "

  (4) Analysis and Gary's Opinion

     I agree wholeheartedly with the thrust of the above comments--such a
  system should be named, regardless of its expected lifetime....AND,
  regardless of its location. (We're not dabbling in real estate here!)
  In particular, Julian Heming and Mark Lander sum up my feelings exactly.
  Warnings are for marine traffic just as much as for populations of
  coastal areas--a human life on a ship is just as valuable as one on terra
  firma--and no one can ever say for certain that a sailing vessel won't
  encounter one of those "middle of nowhere" storms. Also, the integrity
  of the historical database is of utmost importance to me. And I do agree
  with Phil Smith's assertion that everyone: the general public, ship
  captains, aviators, oil company executives, etc., definitely pay more
  attention to a tropical (or subtropical) weather system which bears a
  name than to an unnamed system.

     Regarding adding storms after-the-fact, there are occasions when there
  may be uncertainty regarding the intensity, thermal characteristics or
  wind field of a particular system and it is treated as a tropical
  depression, non-tropical LOW, strong tropical wave or monsoon depression
  operationally. In some cases later data and/or analysis may indicate
  that the system was a tropical or subtropical storm, and such systems
  should certainly be added to the "best tracks" database.

                       Question #10 - Super Typhoons
                       -----------------------------

  (1) The question was: should JTWC drop the "super typhoon" category and
      begin categorizing NW Pacific TCs according to the Saffir/Simpson
      categories? Along with this, perhaps reserving the "super typhoon"
      category for typhoons which reach S/S Category 5 status, i.e.,
      140 kts?

      (A) Yes
      (B) No

  (2) Summary of Responses

      (A) Drop the use of "super typhoon": 12.0 votes - 46%
      (B) Retain the term "super typhoon": 14.0 votes - 54%

  (3) Some Comments

  Bruce Harper (B): "I'm not averse to names which elicit the appropriate
  response--the number categories are not as 'punchy' as the word 'super'.
  Over here they use 'severe' for the same reason, but of course the scales
  are all different. Nice if everyone could agree (?). Regarding the S/S:
  this scale needs to be reformed to reflect the fact that it was (loosely)
  based on 3-sec gusts and not maximum 1-min means (gusts)."

  Bruno Benjamin (A): "I think S/S Category 5 could also be named 'Super
  Hurricane' to match the NWP classification."

  Carl Smith (B): "No, the storms in each basin have unique
  characteristics. If category number systems are to be employed I favor
  the Australian system, perhaps adapted to local conditions, as the NW
  Pacific systems have more in common with Australian region systems than
  Atlantic systems, and the Australian maximum gust categories are quite
  relevant to the destructive potential of the cyclone."

  Chris Fogarty (A): "Good idea--don't overuse 'super'--reserve for
  Cat. 5's, or do away with it and just call it an intense typhoon like
  NHC calls 'intense' hurricanes (Cat. 3+)"

  Chris Landsea (B): "No, don't drop, but one could in addition institute
  a Saffir/Simpson scale there. Only having 'typhoon' (65 kts) and then
  'super typhoon' (130 kts) doesn't provide enough stratification of the
  systems for the public."

  Dave Roberts (no choice): "I think JTWC should follow the RSMC (JMA) on
  this issue. Whatever criteria they use."

  David Roth (A): "Yes. I like the super typhoon/Category 5 idea."

  Jeff Callaghan (A): "We should all work towards using the same category
  systems."

  John Wallace (B): "The STY category has been used for a very long time,
  and I think it has enough cachet in the NWP for continued use, rather
  than adding the occasionally infuriating S/S system."

  Mark Lander (A): " I think the introduction of the category system
  would be a great service to the people of the Pacific. For purely
  sentimental reasons, I would like to see "super typhoon" kept, but
  matching it with the threshold of the Cat. 5 makes sense."

  Michael Bath (no choice): "I just wish the categories were consistent
  for all basins."

  Pete Bowyer (A): "Yes, and with 'super typhoon' reserved for Cat 5's
  that reach 150 or 160 knots (as opposed to a 'garden variety' Cat 5)."

  Phil Smith (B): "'Super Typhoon' makes the average public sit up and
  take notice more easily. If you introduce the S/S categories, then you
  need to educate the people, and people do not easily adapt to a new way
  of thinking......The only ones who would benefit from a standardisation
  of categories world-wide would be the meteorologists and other weather
  nuts like ourselves who like to keep track of and compare storms all
  around the world. Keep in mind the question, 'What is the best way to
  keep the public well-informed in each place?'"

  Simon Clarke (A): "Super typhoon is a bad word anyway. Severe or Major
  typhoon is better and would take these storms out of the realms of the
  supernatural!!! In fact a lot of super typhoons are really not that
  'super' anyway when you look at them in detail. I would like to see
  world-wide consistency in categorisation. That sets a level playing
  field and makes comparisons much more easy."

  (4) Analysis and Gary's Opinion

     Obviously the respondents were essentially evenly divided on this
  question. I voted for Option B (retain super typhoon), but this was
  a rather weak opinion. Actually, I think I would like the idea of
  raising the super typhoon threshold 10 kts and equating it with the
  Saffir/Simpson Category 5. One objection to redefining the super typhoon
  might be that many typhoons thus labeled in the annual reports would
  no longer be super typhoons, but then again, many of the older super
  typhoons are no longer regarded as such because their peak MSWs have been
  lowered from the often fantastically high values in the old reports.

     Many of the comments strayed from the original question and touched
  on the issue of perhaps a uniform classification scale for tropical
  cyclones. The two widely-used scales are the Saffir/Simpson scale
  (also slightly enlarged upon by Mark Lander and Chip Guard for use in
  the Pacific islands) and the Australian Cyclone Severity Scale. In my
  opinion, both scales are very good and well thought out, and I can not
  honestly say one is superior to the other. They take different
  approaches, and each was devised to enhance warnings and better inform
  the public in their respective countries (the U. S. and Australia).
  I know how well the general public in the U. S. has responded to the
  Saffir/Simpson scale, and I would imagine that the Australian public
  likewise understands and responds to the Australian scale. So it is
  doubtful either would want to change a system which "ain't broke".

     The perceived problem occurs when one considers a uniform global
  classification scale for enhancing marine warnings and perhaps simply
  for the sake of standardization. However, in my opinion, a 5-point
  classification scale is not of all that much value to mariners--they are
  trained to read the warnings received from various TCWCs and make their
  decisions based upon the peak winds, the gale and storm radii, direction
  and rate of movement, radii of various sea conditions, etc. In other
  words, ship captains and meteorologists are experts at digesting and
  acting upon all the technical information contained in tropical cyclone
  warnings. The whole point of the Saffir/Simpson and Australian cyclone
  scales is to take technical information and reduce it to something
  simpler for the purpose of giving the general public guidance as to how
  to respond to cyclone threats.

     The final monthly feature based on the 2003 survey will be included
  in the December, 2004, summary and will cover Question #8, which dealt
  with the often controversial topic of wind reporting criteria for
  tropical cyclones.

  *************************************************************************

                             ACTIVITY BY BASINS

  ATLANTIC (ATL) - North Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico

  Activity for September: 1 tropical depression
                          1 hurricane **
                          3 intense hurricanes

  ** - system actually reached hurricane intensity in early October

  NOTE!!! The Atlantic basin was covered in the first installment of the
           September summary.

                  ADDENDA TO PART 1 - SEPTEMBER SUMMARY
                  -------------------------------------

     Huang Chunliang compiled and sent me a few rainfall observations
  from the Caribbean area during the passage of Hurricane Ivan and
  Hurricane Jeanne.

  A. Ivan Observations
  --------------------

  SANTO DOMINGO, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC (WMO78486 18.43N 69.88W 14m)
     300.3 mm [10/12-11/12Z]

  KINGSTON/NORMAN MANLEY, JAMAICA (WMO78397 17.93N 76.78W 9m)
     373.0 mm [11/06-12/06Z]

  KINGSTON/NORMAN MANLEY, JAMAICA (WMO78397 17.93N 76.78W 9m)
     395.8 mm [11/18-12/18Z]

  B. Jeanne Observations
  ----------------------

  MELVILLE HALL AIRPORT, DOMINICA (15.53N 61.30W)
     274.8 mm [13/18-14/18Z]

  MELVILLE HALL AIRPORT, DOMINICA (15.53N 61.30W)
     422.3 mm [14/12-15/12Z]

  MELVILLE HALL AIRPORT, DOMINICA (15.53N 61.30W)
     210.3 mm [14/18-15/18Z]

  C. AMALIE/TRUMAN, ST. THOMAS, PUERTO RICO (18.33N 64.97W)
     189.7 mm [15/12-16/12Z]

  SAN JUAN/INT., PUERTO RICO (18.42N 65.98W)
     122.7 mm [15/12-16/12Z]

  PUERTO PLATA, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC (19.75N 70.55W)
     141.5 mm [17/12-18/12Z]

  *************************************************************************

  NORTHEAST PACIFIC (NEP) - North Pacific Ocean East of Longitude 180

  Activity for September: 1 hurricane
                           1 intense hurricane

                         Sources of Information
                         ----------------------

     Most of the information presented below was obtained from the
  various tropical cyclone products issued by the Tropical Prediction
  Center/National Hurricane Center (TPC/NHC) in Miami, Florida (or the
  Central Pacific Hurricane Center (CPHC) in Honolulu, Hawaii, for
  locations west of longitude 140W): discussions, public advisories,
  forecast/advisories, tropical weather outlooks, special tropical
  disturbance statements, etc. Some additional information may have
  been gleaned from the monthly summaries prepared by the hurricane
  specialists and available on TPC/NHC's website. All references to
  sustained winds imply a 1-minute averaging period unless otherwise
  noted.

             Northeast Pacific Tropical Activity for September
             -------------------------------------------------

     The long-term averages (1971-2003) for September in the Northeast
  Pacific basin are 3.5 named storms, 2.2 hurricanes, and 1.1 intense
  hurricanes (Category 3+ on the Saffir/Simpson scale). September, 2004,
  was slightly below normal in this basin with two named cyclones forming.
  However, both reached hurricane intensity and one, Javier, became the
  most intense hurricane of the season with the estimated MSW reaching
  130 kts. Also, as the month opened, intense Hurricane Howard was
  moving slowly northward well west of Mexico. Howard began in August and
  was covered in that month's summary. Reports on Hurricanes Isis and
  Javier follow, the Javier report being authored by John Wallace. (A big
  thanks to John for his assistance.)

                              HURRICANE ISIS
                                 (TC-12E)
                             8 - 17 September
                   ------------------------------------

     Hurricane Isis was a long-lived tropical storm which very briefly
  reached minimal hurricane intensity. The disturbance which spawned Isis
  entered the Eastern North Pacific on 3 September and possibly was the
  same tropical wave which had spawned Atlantic Hurricane Frances.
  Advisories were initiated on Tropical Depression 12E at 0900 UTC on
  8 September when it was centered about 475 nm south of Cabo San Lucas.
  Tropical Storm Isis was christened 12 hours later, and the system
  reached an initial peak intensity of 45 kts at 09/0600 UTC when located
  roughly 425 nm south-southwest of Cabo San Lucas. Thereafter, persistent
  easterly shear inhibited development and caused gradual weakening.
  Isis was downgraded to a tropical depression for 30 hours at 2100 UTC
  on the 10th. It was re-upgraded to tropical storm status at 12/0300
  UTC.

     From the 9th through the 13th Isis moved on a very persistent and
  steady due westerly track just north of the 17th parallel. The storm
  remained steady state at 45 kts for a three-day period before beginning
  to intensify some on the 15th. The peak intensity of 65 kts occurred
  at 15/1200 UTC, based on the appearance of an eye feature and T4.0
  Dvorak classifications from TAFB and SAB. Easterly shear had diminished,
  but the cyclone had turned to a northwesterly heading which took it
  toward cooler SSTs and more stable air. Six hours after being upgraded
  to hurricane status, Isis was downgraded back to a tropical storm, and
  24 hours later to a tropical depression. The final advisory at 17/0600
  UTC placed the remnant LOW about 1325 nm west-southwest of Cabo San
  Lucas. Considering how rapidly the storm began to deteriorate after
  the upgrade to hurricane intensity, there is the possibility that Isis
  in truth never became a hurricane.

     The official TPC/NHC storm report on Hurricane Isis, authored by
  James Franklin and David Roberts, is available at the following link:

     <http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/2004isis.shtml?>

  (Report written by Gary Padgett)

                           HURRICANE JAVIER
                               (TC-13E)
                          10 - 20 September
                -------------------------------------

  A. Storm Origins
  ----------------

     The disturbance that became Javier developed quickly south of the
  Isthmus of Tehuantepec on 10 September, where there had been little trace
  of it only 24 hours earlier. At 2100 UTC that day it was upgraded to
  Tropical Depression Thirteen-E as it tracked west-northwestward. The
  depression formed much farther to the east than do most Northeast Pacific
  tropical cyclones, being located about 325 nm south-southeast of Salinas
  Cruz, Mexico.

  B. Synoptic History
  -------------------

     Conditions were not wholly favorable for Thirteen-E's intensification
  at first due to moderate easterly shear, probably induced by the same
  ridge that was steering it west. Nevertheless, the depression had
  strengthened to Tropical Storm Javier by 1500 UTC on the 11th with the
  shear unabated, however. The newly-christened Javier was then located
  approximately 325 nm south-southeast of Acapulco. The synoptic
  environment ensured that Javier intensified slowly but steadily over the
  following day. In the meantime, the ridge to its north weakened,
  prompting a well-forecast turn towards the northwest late on the 12th
  and into the 13th. The upper-level environment became somewhat more
  favorable on the 12th, and at 2100 UTC Javier was upgraded to hurricane
  status while centered about 375 nm south-southeast of Manzanillo,
  Mexico.

     Hurricane Javier's initially small circulation expanded modestly as
  it tracked northwestward, but there was little else of note about the
  storm until the remarkable developments of the 13th. At 0300 UTC that
  day it was a healthy but not especially impressive 75-kt hurricane. Over
  the next 12 hours, however, Javier "bombed" into a powerful Category 4
  system with an estimated MSW of 120 kts. The dramatic intensification
  continued until 0300 UTC on 14 September when Javier reached its
  estimated peak MSW of 130 kts with an attendant CP of 930 mb. The
  powerful cyclone was then located about 450 nm south of Mazatlan, Mexico.
  It may have indeed been more powerful, as the MSW estimate was a
  compromise between Dvorak estimates of 127 and 140 kts. This deepening
  rate represents an average CP drop of 2 mb per hour, which qualifies as
  rapid deepening (1) between 13/0300 UTC and 14/0300 UTC. It's worth
  noting that upper-level conditions remained less than ideal throughout
  Javier's intensification with shear still limiting outflow to the east.

     Javier's intensity leveled off and dropped slightly after its peak,
  ostensibly due to an eyewall replacement cycle, a common phenomenon in
  the strongest tropical cyclones. In fact, Javier went through no less
  than four, and possibly five cycles as it continued northwestward,
  roughly parallel to the Mexican coast but well offshore. Javier was an
  intense hurricane for 3.5 days, longer than any NEP storm since 1999's
  Hurricane Dora. It also had the distinction of retaining a MSW of
  120 kts or greater longer than any NEP hurricane since Hurricane Linda
  in 1997. Its rather slow track over favorably warm waters was probably
  a major factor contributing to its longevity.

     The cyclone's MSW dropped below 100 kts late on the 16th, but abruptly
  regained Category 3 status on the next advisory. However, by mid-day on
  the 17th a final weakening trend began, due to both cooler waters and
  increasing shear. The question grew as to whether Javier would threaten
  Baja California, as a trough was forecast to further weaken the
  subtropical ridge and take the cyclone northeast across the Peninsula.
  For the time being, the cyclone wobbled slowly northwestward, finally
  commencing the expected northward turn late on the 18th as it weakened
  more rapidly to a tropical storm nearly devoid of deep convection. At
  the time of its downgrade, Javier was centered approximately 175 nm
  west of Cabo San Lucas on the southern tip of the Baja California
  Peninsula.

     Javier was downgraded to a depression the following day, based on both
  satellite observations and an interesting surface observation that showed
  that the MSW was considerably overestimated. Tropical Depression
  Javier turned to the north-northeast and crossed the coast of Baja
  California near 1200 UTC on the 19th. The last NHC advisory on Javier
  was issued at 1500 UTC on the 19th while it was over the peninsula, but
  the Hydrometeorological Prediction Center issued a final advisory after
  it was well inland, at 0300 UTC on 20 September, when the dissipating
  system was located roughly 290 km southwest of El Paso, Texas. The
  convective remnant of the circulation had lost its identity by late that
  day.

  C. Meteorological Observations
  ------------------------------

     According to press reports, Javier's outer circulation and storm
  waves lashed Mexico's West Coast, but as of this writing any damages are
  known to be minor, as the regions most affected by Javier are sparsely
  populated. No fatalities are known. The remnant circulation brought
  substantial rains to Mexico and the American Southwest. Hermosillo, a
  city very close to Javier's track located in the usually-arid state of
  Sonora, received some 16.64 in (42 cm) of rain on September 19th, though
  it is not known if these numbers are the result of instrumental or
  recording errors. Rainfall amounts in the U.S., as reported by the HPC,
  were typically 1-1.5 in (2.5-3.8 cm), with a high of 2.66 in at Arizona's
  Grand Canyon.

  D. References
  -------------

     (1) <http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutgloss.shtml>
     (2)
<http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/tropical2004/JAVIER/JAVIER_archive.shtml>
     (3) <http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2004/JAVIER.shtml?>

  E. Editor's Note
  ----------------

     The official TPC/NHC storm report on Hurricane Javier is now
  available online at: <http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/2004javier.shtml?>
  The report was written by Lixion Avila. According to Lixion's
  report, the African wave which was the progenitor of Javier moved
  off the western African coast on 29 August. Therefore, the pre-
  Javier wave apparently was the one between the wave which spawned
  Atlantic Tropical Depression 10 and the wave which became mighty
  Hurricane Ivan.

  (Report written by John Wallace)

  *************************************************************************

  NORTHWEST PACIFIC (NWP) - North Pacific Ocean West of Longitude 180

  Activity for September: 5 tropical depressions **
                           2 tropical storms ++
                           1 typhoon

  ** - none of these were classified as tropical depression by JTWC; two
       were treated as tropical depressions by JMA only; two others by
       JMA and NMCC; and another by JMA and PAGASA

  ++ - one of these was not classified as a tropical storm by JTWC, but was
       by several of the Asian TCWCs

  NOTE!!! The Northwest Pacific basin was covered in the second
           installment of the September summary.

                  ADDENDA TO PART 2 - SEPTEMBER SUMMARY
                  -------------------------------------

     Following is the report received from Huang Chunliang of meteoro-
  logical observations from various Japanese stations in association
  with Typhoon Meari. A special thanks to Chunliang for sending the
  data. (To convert metres/sec (m/s) to knots, divide m/s by 0.51444.
  For an approximation, simply double the m/s value.)

  {Part I}. Landfall Obs (based on the JMA warnings)
  ==================================================

  1. Typhoon 0421 (MEARI) made landfall near Kushikino City, Kagoshima
     Prefecture around 28/2330 UTC with a MSW of 30 m/s and a CP of
     970 hPa.

  2. Typhoon 0421 (MEARI) made landfall near Sukumo City, Kochi Prefecture
     around 29/0600 UTC with a MSW of 30 m/s and a CP of 980 hPa.

  3. Typhoon 0421 (MEARI) made landfall near Osaka City around 29/1130
     UTC with a MSW of 30 m/s and a CP of 985 hPa.

  {Part II}. Top-5 Storm Total [24/1500-30/1500Z] Obs
  ===================================================

  Ranking Prefecture Station Rainfall (mm)
  -------------------------------------------------------------
  01 Mie Owase 904
  02 Nara Mt.Hidegatake 785
  03 Mie Kayumi 601
  04 Nara Kamikitayama 499
  05 Kochi Hongawa 464

  {Part III}. Top-5 Daily Rainfall Obs
  ====================================

  Ranking Prefecture Station Rainfall (mm)
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
  01 Mie Owase 741 [28/1500-29/1500Z]
  02 Nara Mt.Hidegatake 583 [28/1500-29/1500Z]
  03 Mie Kayumi *498 [28/1500-29/1500Z]
  04 Mie Tsu *427 [28/1500-29/1500Z]
  05 Mie Mihama 393 [28/1500-29/1500Z]

  {Part IV}. Top-5 1-hr Rainfall Obs
  ==================================

  Ranking Prefecture Station Rainfall (mm)
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
  01 Mie Miyagawa #*139 [28/2340-29/0040Z]
  02 Mie Owase 133 [28/2150-28/2250Z]
  03 Nara Mt.Hidegatake *109 [28/2320-29/0020Z]
  04 Mie Mihama 107 [28/2220-28/2320Z]
  05 Hyogo Gunge *104 [29/0920-29/1020Z]
  05 Oita Kunimi *104 [29/0020-29/0120Z]

  {Part V}. Top-5 Peak Sustained Wind (10-min avg) Obs
  ====================================================

  Ranking Station Peak wind (mps)
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
  01 Kagoshima, Kagoshima (WMO47827, Alt 4m) 31.5 [28/2220Z]
  02 Makurazaki, Kagoshima (WMO47831, Alt 30m) 31.4 [28/2150Z]
  03 Aburatsu, Miyazaki (WMO47835, Alt 3m) 28.2 [29/0040Z]
  04 Tomogashima, Wakayama (JMA65036, Alt 43m) 25 [29/1030Z]
  05 Omura, Nagasaki (JMA84371, Alt 3m) 24 [29/0040Z]

  {Part VI}. Top-5 Peak Gust Obs
  ==============================

  Ranking Station Peak wind (mps)
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
  01 Kagoshima, Kagoshima (WMO47827, Alt 4m) 52.7 [28/2213Z]
  02 Makurazaki, Kagoshima (WMO47831, Alt 30m) 51.4 [28/2108Z]
  03 Aburatsu, Miyazaki (WMO47835, Alt 3m) 43.1 [29/0038Z]
  04 Unzendake, Nagasaki (WMO47818, Alt 678m) 42.0 [29/0221Z]
  05 Akune, Kagoshima (WMO47823, Alt 40m) 40.1 [29/0002Z]

  {Part VII}. Top-5 SLP Obs
  =========================

  Ranking Station Min SLP (hPa)
  ----------------------------------------------------------------
  01 Kagoshima, Kagoshima (WMO47827) 975.5 [28/2314Z]
  02 Makurazaki, Kagoshima (WMO47831) 976.9 [28/2244Z]
  03 Nobeoka, Miyazaki (WMO47822) 980.1 [29/0320Z]
  04 Miyakonojo, Miyazaki (WMO47829) 980.9 [29/0059Z]
  04 Miyazaki, Miyazaki (WMO47830) 980.9 [29/0155Z]

  {Part VIII} Tornado Obs
  =======================

  Place Category Time (approx.)
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
  Nago City, Okinawa Prefecture F1 27/1130Z
  Nakijin Village, Okinawa Prefecture F1 27/1150Z
  Toyohashi City, Aichi Prefecture F1 29/1400Z

  {Part IX} References (Japanese versions only)
  =============================================

    <http://www.data.kishou.go.jp>
    <http://www.osaka-jma.go.jp/gyomusyokai/kikocho/saigai/h16/ty200421.pdf>

  Note 1: "*" = record-breaking values for relevant stations.

  Note 2: "#" = peak value as of 29/0100Z. (Power was cut off in that
          station after 29/0100Z.)

  *************************************************************************

  NORTH INDIAN OCEAN (NIO) - Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea

  Activity for September: 1 active monsoon depression
                           1 tropical depression **

  ** - this system was not classified as a tropical depression by JTWC

             North Indian Ocean Tropical Activity for September
             --------------------------------------------------

     No warnings were issued on any tropical systems in the Bay of Bengal
  or the Arabian Sea during September, but there were two systems worthy
  of mention. A monsoon depression formed during the second week of the
  month at the head of the Bay of Bengal and persisted for over 10 days.
  According to some information from Roger Edson, the system initially
  was primarily an upper-air system in the mid-troposphere with a surface
  LOW anchored against the mountains. The IMD treated this LOW as a land
  depression forming in the state of West Gengal by the 12th, and continued
  it as a depression through the 15th, when it was downgraded to a low-
  pressure area. The LOW drifted slowly northwestward--on the 22nd it
  was located over the northwestern parts of Uttar Pradesh state. Rains
  spawned by the monsoon depression were responsible for some flooding
  and loss of life in both India and Bangladesh.

     Another system formed in the Arabian Sea during the latter days of
  September and moved northwestward, eventually moving into Oman on the
  29th. None of the warning agencies, including IMD and the meteorological
  service of Oman, classified this LOW as a depression. However, both
  SAB's and JTWC's satellite bulletins gave a Dvorak rating of T2.0, and
  QuikScat data indicated winds near 30 kts, so it seems likely this system
  probably was a tropical depression. This system caused some fairly
  heavy rainfall in Oman on 29th and 30th after making landfall.

     Brief reports follow on both these systems, compiled and sent by
  Huang Chunliang. A special thanks to Chunliang for sending the data.

                            MONSOON DEPRESSION
                             (NRL Invest 91B)
                            10 - 22 September
                  --------------------------------------

  A. Report from India
  --------------------

  {Part I}. Rainfall Obs from India (only 24-hr amounts >= 10 cm listed)
  ======================================================================

  Bhawanipatna, ORISSA 11 cm [10/03-11/03Z]
  Sonamura, TRIPURA 25 cm [12/03-13/03Z]
  Belonia, TRIPURA 24 cm [12/03-13/03Z]
  Agartala, TRIPURA 22 cm [12/03-13/03Z]
  Sabroom, TRIPURA 11 cm [12/03-13/03Z]
  Sonamura, TRIPURA 17 cm [13/03-14/03Z]
  Agartala, TRIPURA 10 cm [13/03-14/03Z]
  Krishnanagar, WEST BENGAL 10 cm [14/03-15/03Z]
  Krishnanagar, WEST BENGAL 16 cm [15/03-16/03Z]
  Tantaloi, WEST BENGAL 17 cm [16/03-17/03Z]
  Suri, WEST BENGAL 11 cm [16/03-17/03Z]
  Tilpara Barrage, WEST BENGAL 11 cm [16/03-17/03Z]
  Rampurhat, WEST BENGAL 10 cm [16/03-17/03Z]
  Dillighat, ASSAM 12 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Barkisurya, JHARKHAND 33 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Talaiya, JHARKHAND 23 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Konner, JHARKHAND 13 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Ramgarh, JHARKHAND 11 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Hamirpur, UTTAR PRADESH 12 cm [20/03-21/03Z]
  Shahjina, UTTAR PRADESH 12 cm [20/03-21/03Z]
  Khajuraho, MADHYA PRADESH 18 cm [20/03-21/03Z]
  Shardanagar, UTTAR PRADESH 48 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Neemsar, UTTAR PRADESH 27 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Palliakalan, UTTAR PRADESH 20 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Mohana, UTTAR PRADESH 16 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Hanumansetu, UTTAR PRADESH 15 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Bani, UTTAR PRADESH 14 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Lucknow (Control Room), UTTAR PRADESH 13 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Auraiya, UTTAR PRADESH 13 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Kalpi, UTTAR PRADESH 12 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Kanpur (FM), UTTAR PRADESH 11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Bhatpurwaghat, UTTAR PRADESH 11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Dalmau, UTTAR PRADESH 11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Lucknow (AP), UTTAR PRADESH 11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Ankinghat, UTTAR PRADESH 11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Marora, UTTARANCHAL 12 cm [22/03-23/03Z]
  Kotdwar, UTTARANCHAL 12 cm [22/03-23/03Z]
  Okhalkanda, UTTARANCHAL 12 cm [22/03-23/03Z]

  {Part II}. Damage and Casualties
  ================================

     Press reports indicated that four or more people drowned and 55,000
  were stranded in flash floods in the northeastern state of Tripura. And
  3 deaths were reported in the neighboring state of West Bengal, where
  flooding inundated hundreds of villages, leaving 650,000 people homeless.
  What's worse, at least 33 people in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh
  lost their lives during the night of September 21 due to flooding
  triggered by torrential rains.

  B. Report from Bangladesh
  -------------------------

  {Part I}. Rainfall Obs (only 24-hr amounts >= 100 mm listed)
  ============================================================

  COX'S BAZAR (21.43N 91.93E) 143.0 mm [11/06-12/06Z]
  COX'S BAZAR (21.43N 91.93E) 106.0 mm [12/00-13/00Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E) 147.2 mm [10/18-11/18Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E) 134.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E) 143.4 mm [11/06-12/06Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E) 120.8 mm [14/12-15/12Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E) 138.8 mm [14/18-15/18Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E) 246.6 mm [15/00-16/00Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E) 280.0 mm [15/12-16/12Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E) 258.0 mm [15/18-16/18Z]
  FENI (23.03N 91.42E) 239.0 mm [12/00-13/00Z]
  FENI (23.03N 91.42E) 184.0 mm [13/00-14/00Z]
  FENI (23.03N 91.42E) 141.0 mm [13/06-14/06Z]
  DHAKA (23.77N 90.38E) 156.3 mm [12/00-13/00Z]
  DHAKA (23.77N 90.38E) 239.5 mm [13/06-14/06Z]
  DHAKA (23.77N 90.38E) 117.5 mm [13/18-14/18Z]
  ISHURDI (24.13N 89.05E) 107.2 mm [13/00-14/00Z]
  ISHURDI (24.13N 89.05E) 135.0 mm [13/12-14/12Z]
  ISHURDI (24.13N 89.05E) 116.0 mm [13/18-14/18Z]

  {Part II}. Press Reports
  ========================

  1. Bangladesh recovering after severe monsoon storms
  ----------------------------------------------------

  Source: Deutsche Presse Agentur
  Date: 19 Sept 2004

  Dhaka (dpa) - Life returned to near normal in Dhaka on Sunday as schools
  and businesses reopened and public transport began plying city streets
  after a week of heavy monsoon showers. However, a fresh bout of rain at
  the weekend threatened to prolong the misery of the about 10 million
  residents in Bangladesh's crowded capital city.

  At least 30 people died in Dhaka and many neighbourhoods were still under
  water as a result of the rain. Utility services were also under pressure
  after the week-long downpour.

  Weathermen said an active late monsoon dumped the heaviest rain on Dhaka
  and adjoining suburbs in more than half a century.

  Copyright (c) dpa Deutsche Presse-Agentur

  2. Bangladesh capital paralysed by floods after heaviest rain in 50 years
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Source: Agence France-Presse
  Date: 14 Sept 2004

  DHAKA, Sept 14 (AFP) - Life in the Bangladeshi capital Dhaka came to a
  halt Tuesday amid floods caused by the heaviest rains in half a century.
  At least 18 people have died since Saturday in three days of monsoon
  downpours across central and southern regions, officials said. Houses
  were inundated, vehicles stranded and all schools, colleges and
  government offices were closed. Many shops and private offices in the
  capital also closed Tuesday, with the water level up to chest height in
  some places.

  Arjumand Habib, deputy director of the Meteorological Department, said
  341 millimetres (13.6 inches) of rain fell Monday in Dhaka, the highest
  amount recorded in the last 50 years. She added that the rains and
  strong winds, caused by a low-pressure area, were weakening in central
  and southern areas and were expected to move northeasterly towards the
  Sylhet region and India's Assam state.

  The country is still recovering from floods in July and August that left
  more than 700 dead and forced hundreds of thousands to flee their homes.
  They were the worst since 1998, when Bangladesh suffered its worst ever
  flooding. Floodwaters in the capital were expected to take at least
  24 hours to recede, Mayor Sadek Hossain Khoka said. "City dwellers can't
  operate normally--they are in great misery. We are hoping that by
  tomorrow afternoon the situation will start getting back to normal," he
  said.

  Most fishermen in the coastal Barisal region were obeying advice not to
  put out to sea, but six trawlers capsized overnight and one person was
  missing, officials said Tuesday. In the southeastern district of
  Noakhali more than 100 mud and bamboo homes were swept away Tuesday
  after a river embankment burst. In central Manikganj district, roads
  were washed out by flash flooding and the weather was disrupting daily
  life, deputy district administrator Rokhsana Ferdoushi said.

  Ten people died Monday in weather-related accidents. Four died when a
  boat capsized, while three others were electrocuted. Three more people
  died when they were electrocuted in two separate incidents in south-
  western Jhenidah district, the official news agency BSS said Tuesday.
  At least eight died during the weekend.

  The monsoon-linked floods across Bangladesh, India and Nepal during July
  and August destroyed crops and livelihoods, swept away homes and killed
  close to 2,000 people in the three countries. Aid agencies estimate it
  will take Bangladesh, where nearly half the population subsists on under
  a dollar a day, at least a year to recover from the flooding.

  Copyright (c) 2004 Agence France-Presse
  Received by NewsEdge Insight: 09/14/2004 07:15:52

                           TROPICAL DEPRESSION
                             (NRL Invest 93A)
                            25 - 30 September
                 ---------------------------------------

  Rainfall Obs from Oman
  ======================

  SALALAH (17.03N 54.08E) 104.2 mm [29/00-30/00Z]
  QAIROON HAIRITI (17.25N 54.08E) 89.4 mm [29/00-30/00Z]
  MINA SALALAH (16.90N 53.92E) 63.2 mm [29/00-30/00Z]

  *************************************************************************

  SOUTHWEST INDIAN OCEAN (SWI) - South Indian Ocean West of Longitude 90E

  Activity for September: 1 tropical depression

  NOTE!!! The Southwest Indian Ocean basin was covered in the second
           installment of the September summary.

  *************************************************************************

  NORTHWEST AUSTRALIA/SOUTHEAST INDIAN OCEAN (AUW) - From 90E to 135E

  Activity for September: 1 tropical cyclone of storm intensity

  NOTE!!! The Northwest Australia/Southeast Indian Ocean region was
            covered in the second installment of the September summary.

  *************************************************************************

  NORTHEAST AUSTRALIA/CORAL SEA (AUE) - From 135E to 160E

  Activity for September: No tropical cyclones

  *************************************************************************

  SOUTH PACIFIC (SPA) - South Pacific Ocean East of Longitude 160E

  Activity for September: 1 non-tropical depression

               South Pacific Tropical Activity for September
               ---------------------------------------------

     No tropical cyclones formed in the Southern Hemisphere east of
  160E during September. The Fiji TCWC did issue gale warnings on a
  depression on 10 and 11 September. This system formed at subtropical
  latitudes well east of the Dateline on the 10th and moved rather quickly
  off to the southeast. Some of the Fiji bulletins referred to the LOW
  as "Depression D1" instead of with the "F" suffix used for designating
  tropical depressions. This, plus the latitude, suggests that this was
  either a subtropical or non-tropical system.

  *************************************************************************

                              EXTRA FEATURE

     In order to shorten the amount of typing in preparing the narrative
  material, I have been in the habit of freely using abbreviations and
  acronyms. I have tried to define most of these with the first usage
  in a given summary, but I may have missed one now and then. Most of
  these are probably understood by a majority of readers but perhaps a
  few aren't clear to some. To remedy this I developed a Glossary of
  Abbreviations and Acronyms which I first included in the August, 1998
  summary. I don't normally include the Glossary in most months in
  order to help keep them from being too long. If anyone would like to
  receive a copy of the Glossary, please e-mail me and I'll be happy
  to send them a copy.

  *************************************************************************

  AUTHOR'S NOTE: This summary should be considered a very preliminary
  overview of the tropical cyclones that occur in each month. The cyclone
  tracks (provided separately) will generally be based upon operational
  warnings issued by the various tropical cyclone warning centers. The
  information contained therein may differ somewhat from the tracking and
  intensity information obtained from a "best-track" file which is based
  on a detailed post-seasonal analysis of all available data. Information
  on where to find official "best-track" files from the various warning
  centers will be passed along from time to time.

    The track files are not being sent via e-mail. They can be retrieved
  from the archive sites listed below. (Note: I do have a limited e-mail
  distribution list for the track files. If anyone wishes to receive
  these via e-mail, please send me a message.)

    Both the summaries and the track files are standard text files
  created in DOS editor. Download to disk and use a viewer such as
  Notepad or DOS editor to view the files.

     The first summary in this series covered the month of October,
  1997. Back issues can be obtained from the following websites
  (courtesy of Michael Bath, Michael V. Padua, Michael Pitt, Chris
  Landsea, and John Diebolt):

    <http://australiasevereweather.com/cyclones/>
    <http://www.typhoon2000.ph>
    <http://mpittweather.com>
    <ftp://ftp.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/pub/landsea/padgett/>
    <http://www.tropicalcyclone2005.com/>

     Another website where much information about tropical cyclones may
  be found is the website for the UK Meteorological Office. Their site
  contains a lot of statistical information about tropical cyclones
  globally on a monthly basis. The URL is:

    <http://www.met-office.gov.uk/sec2/sec2cyclone/sec2cyclone.html>

                    TROPICAL CYCLONE REPORTS AVAILABLE

     JTWC now has available on its website the complete Annual Tropical
  Cyclone Report (ATCR) for 2003 (2002-2003 season for the Southern
  Hemisphere). ATCRs for earlier years are available also.

     The URL is: <http://199.10.200.33/jtwc.html>

     Also, TPC/NHC has available on its webpage nice "technicolor"
  tracking charts for the 2004 Atlantic and Eastern North Pacific
  tropical cyclones; also, storm reports for all the 2004 Atlantic
  and Eastern North Pacific cyclones are now available.

     The URL is: <http://www.nhc.noaa.gov>

     A special thanks to Michael Bath of McLeans Ridges, New South Wales,
  Australia, for assisting me with proofreading the summaries.

  PREPARED BY

  Gary Padgett
  E-mail: garyp@alaweb.com
  Phone: 334-222-5327

  Kevin Boyle (Eastern Atlantic, Western Northwest Pacific, South
                China Sea)
  E-mail: newchapelobservatory@btinternet.com

  John Wallace (Assistance with Eastern North Pacific)
  E-mail: dosidicus@aol.com

  Huang Chunliang (Assistance with Western Northwest Pacific, South
                    China Sea)
  E-mail: huangchunliang@hotmail.com

  Simon Clarke (Northeast Australia/Coral Sea, South Pacific)
  E-mail: saclarke@iprimus.com.au

  *************************************************************************
  *************************************************************************

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To unsubscribe from WX-TROPL send e-mail to LISTSERV@PO.UIUC.EDU with
"unsub wx-tropl" in the body of your message. For help with WX-TROPL
write to chris@lib.siu.edu or see http://wxlist.5280tech.com. For more
information on tropical weather products, see the NHC Homepage
at http://www.nhc.noaa.gov.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 05 2008 - 03:15:10 EST