GARY PADGETT'S MONTHLY GLOBAL TROPICAL CYCLONE SUMMARY SEPTEMBER, 2004 (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 FEATURE - SOURCES OF TROPICAL CYCLONE INFORMATION The purpose of this section is to list some websites where many and varied types of tropical cyclone information are archived. Many readers will know about these already, but for the benefit of those who don't, I wanted to include them. After a couple of months, I will move this note to the ending section of the summary. (1) Aircraft Reconnaissance Information --------------------------------------- Various types of messages from reconnaissance aircraft may be retrieved from the following FTP site: Information regarding how to interpret the coded reconnaissance messages may be found at the following URL: Links are also included to websites with further information about the U. S. Air Force 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron and the NOAA Air- craft Operations Center. (2) Archived Advisories ----------------------- All the advisory products (public advisories, forecast/advisories, strike probabilities, discussions, various graphics) issued by TPC/NHC are archived on TPC's website. For the current year (using 2004 as an example), the archived products can be found at: Links to tropical products archives for earlier years are available at the following URL: JTWC warnings for past storms are archived on the NRL Monterry website: On the NRL site, the link to past years can be found in the upper left corner of the screen. I am not aware at the moment of any other TCWC which archives all its tropical cyclone warning/advisory products for public access, but if I learn of any, I will add them to this list. (3) Satellite Imagery --------------------- Satellite images of tropical cyclones in various sensor bands are available on the NRL Monterrey and University of Wisconsin websites, courtesy of Jeff Hawkins and Chris Velden and their associates. The links are: On the NRL site, the link to past years can be found in the upper left corner of the screen. For the CIMSS site, a link to data archives is located in the lower left portion of the screen. I'm sure there are other sites with available imagery available, and as I learn of them, I will add the links to this list. ************************************************************************* 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 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: 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. Atlantic Tropical Activity for September ---------------------------------------- The very active pattern of tropical cyclone activity observed in August in the Atlantic basin continued into September, though at a slightly less hectic pace. Four named tropical cyclones formed during the month--near the long-term (1950-2003) average of 3.50. All four of these storms reached hurricane intensity, but Tropical Storm Lisa did not do so until 2 October, so counts as an October hurricane. The 1950- 2003 average number of hurricanes is 2.44, so September was roughly average in that department. It was in the intense hurricane category (MSW > 95 kts) that September was well-above the mean. The long-term average number of intense hurricanes is 1.24, and Hurricanes Ivan, Jeanne and Karl all achieved that distinction. Mighty Hurricane Ivan maintained an intensity at or above Saffir/ Simpson Category 3 for 10.25 days--certainly near if not setting a new record for longevity as an intense hurricane. The great storm reached Category 5 status on three separate occasions during its lifetime, and spread death and destruction from the southern Windward Islands to the eastern United States. Hurricane Jeanne, in its early tropical storm stages, brought torrential rains to Haiti which led to catastrophic loss of life. After loitering around in the western Atlantic for several days and executing a large clockwise loop, Jeanne began a westward march which ultimately carried it across the northern Bahamas and into the Florida Peninsula on a track almost identical to that followed by Hurricane Frances three weeks earlier. Hurricane Karl became a very impressive Category 4 hurricane around mid-month, but fortunately followed a harmless track northward through the central Atlantic. On its heels came Tropical Storm Lisa, a very tenacious storm which hung out in the east-central tropical Atlantic for almost a week, barely clinging to life at times, but eventually following Karl northward on a track between Bermuda and the Azores. Lisa managed to briefly reach minimal hurricane intensity in early October before losing its tropical characteristics. In addition to the named tropical cyclones, there was an additional tropical depression for which advisories were issued. An active tropical wave left the coast of Africa on 29 August and passed north of the Cape Verde Islands the next day. The system became fairly well-organized on the 31st--SAB gave it a Dvorak classification as high as T2.5/2.5 at 1800 UTC. The system likely would have been upgraded to depression status, but the next day convection began to wane as the disturbance moved into a less-favorable environment. Over the next several days the system moved northwestward, then northward, and finally northeastward over the eastern Atlantic. Deep convection had returned by the 7th, although southwesterly shear was inhibiting development somewhat. The system was classified as Tropical Depression 10 at 0600 UTC on the 9th of September when located about 365 nm west-southwest of the Azores. However, at 1800 UTC convection had diminished and all that remained was a low-level cloud swirl; hence, advisories were discontinued. In post- analysis, it was decided to begin the tropical depression stage at 1200 UTC on 7 September. A short report on this system, written by Richard Pasch, is available at the following URL: Also, as the month of September opened, mighty Hurricane Frances was passing north of the Turks and Caicos Islands at its peak intensity of 125 kts. The large storm had fortunately weakened to Category 2 status before passing over the northwestern Bahamas and subsequently striking the Florida coast. A full report on Frances can be found in the August summary, and the official TPC/NHC report on Frances, written by Jack Beven, may be found at the following URL: HURRICANE IVAN (TC-09) 2 - 25 September ------------------------------------ A. Storm History ---------------- When I began to write this account of Hurricane Ivan, the TPC/NHC official storm report was not available online, so I wrote a fuller account than I would have otherwise. But I have just discovered that the official storm report on Ivan, authored by Stacy Stewart, has now been placed on TPC/NHC's website. However, I am still including the report which I had written. Ivan was a classic long-lived Cape Verde hurricane which made two landfalls along the U. S. coast and reached Saffir/Simpson Category 5 status three times, peaking at 145 kts on 12 September when located in the northwestern Caribbean Sea near Grand Cayman Island. The great storm's origins lay with a vigorous tropical wave which crossed the West African coast on 31 August. The system strengthened into the season's 9th tropical depression on the afternoon of 2 September when located about 485 nm southwest of the Cape Verde Islands. Tropical Storm Ivan was christened at 0900 UTC on 3 September when the system was centered approximately 530 nm southwest of the Cape Verdes. The system continued westward at an unusually low-latitude (for the Atlantic) along the 9th parallel. Ivan was upgraded to hurricane status at 0900 UTC on 5 September when located about 1050 nm east-southeast of the Lesser Antilles. An eye had appeared and satellite intensity estimates from TAFB and SAB supported the upgrade. Once upgraded to a hurricane, Ivan began to intensify very rapidly. A special advisory package was issued at 1700 UTC upgrading Ivan to a 100-kt Category 3 hurricane, located 865 nm east of the southern Windward Islands and moving quickly westward near 19 kts. Ivan was upgraded to major hurricane status at latitude 10.1N--to the author's knowledge this is the southernmost point any Atlantic hurricane on record has achieved Category 3 status. Ivan weakened some on the 6th and 7th--the first reconnaissance mission into the hurricane on the afternoon of the 6th found a 90-kt hurricane. This weakening was possibly due to some slight westerly shear induced by a weak upper-level LOW over the east-central Caribbean, and also to an eyewall replacement cycle. The storm began to re-intensify on the morning of the 7th and was back to Category 3 status before it passed near the island of Grenada that afternoon with devastating results. (Ivan was the most destructive hurricane to strike Grenada since Hurricane Janet of 1955, which also became an intense Category 5 hurricane in the northwestern Caribbean.) Many tropical cyclones have weakened or met their demise while traversing the southeastern Caribbean Sea. Dunn and Miller in _Atlantic Hurricanes_ attribute the lack of significant hurricane activity in this region at least in part to the significant divergence in the lower tropospheric easterly flow as the easterly trades are diverted into the semi-permanent LOW over the Amazon valley. As Ivan chugged along westward, roughly parallel to the Venezuelan coastline, it continued to strengthen, reaching Category 5 status at 0600 UTC on 9 September when located about 75 nm northeast of Aruba in the Netherlands Antilles. The CP was 922 mb, down 15 mb in 7 hours, and an eyewall dropsonde recorded 175 kts at about 192 m above MSL. Intense Hurricane Ivan maintained its estimated 140-kt MSW for 18 hours until being downgraded slightly to 130 kts at 10/0000 UTC. The dangerous storm by this time had its sights set on Jamaica, about 280 nm straight ahead as it moved west-northwestward at 11 kts. Very fortunately for Jamaica, as Ivan approached the island during the early morning hours of 11 September, its eye wobbled westward enough that the core of strongest winds remained offshore. Nonetheless, the island experienced hurricane-force winds. During the weakening episode on 10 September, Ivan's CP rose to 937 mb at 10/1800 UTC, then began to drop again, reaching a minimum of 910 mb around 0000 UTC on the 12th. This reading ranks Ivan 6th for the lowest Atlantic basin CP on record, behind Camille (1969) and Mitch (1998) at 905 mb, Allen (1980) at 899 mb, the Labor Day Hurricane of 1935 at 892 mb, and Gilbert (1988) at 888 mb. The MSW was estimated at 145 kts at this time and hurricane-force winds extended outward from the center 30 nm to the southwest and 60 nm in the other quadrants. The storm at this time was located about 115 nm southeast of Grand Cayman, moving generally in a west-northwesterly direction. Ivan main- tained its peak intensity for a 12-hour period before being downgraded to Category 4 status again at 12/1200 UTC. This slight weakening trend was likely due to an eyewall replacement cycle. The great storm weakened only to 130 kts before being upgraded to Category 5 status (140 kts) for the third time at 0600 UTC on 13 September. Ivan at this time was located about 140 nm southeast of the western tip of Cuba, still moving slowly west-northwestward. The hurricane's third round at Category 5 status was the longest--30 hours--with the CP dipping down to 912 mb for a secondary minimum at 13/1800 UTC. Around 0000 UTC on 14 September the extremely dangerous hurricane's center passed just off the western tip of Cuba. Ivan's track by this time had become more northwesterly as the cyclone headed into the confines of the Gulf of Mexico. As the hurricane continued north-northwestward into the Gulf of Mexico on the morning of the 14th, it began to slowly weaken, likely due to a combination of an eyewall replacement cycle, the entrainment of some very dry air and a restriction of the outflow in the northwestern quadrant. The MSW had dropped to 120 kts by 14/1800 UTC where it remained pegged for 24 hours. After the completion of the eyewall cycle, convection made a temporary comeback, and since Ivan was forecast to pass over a warm eddy during the next day or so, a modest strengthening was anticipated. However, this did not materialize and the MSW was reduced to 115 kts at 1800 UTC on 15 September. Ivan was centered at this time about 150 nm south of the Alabama coastline and had made an expected turn to the north. Hurricane-force winds extended outward 90 nm to the east of the center and 75 nm to the west while gales covered an area 400 nm in diameter. Throughout the afternoon and evening of the 15th and into the early morning hours of the 16th, the great storm continued inexorably toward the Alabama coastline. The center of Ivan's eye appears to have made landfall near Gulf Shores, Alabama, shortly after 0700 UTC on the morning of 16 September with the MSW estimated at 113 kts--an upper-end Category 3 hurricane. (The intermediate advisory nearest landfall gave the MSW as 130 statute miles-per hour, or 113 kts.) NOTE: In post-storm analysis it has been determined that Ivan's MSW at landfall was 105 kts. Hurricane Ivan continued moving inland through west-central Alabama as it gradually weakened. At 1800 UTC the cyclone was downgraded to tropical storm status while passing about 70 km west-northwest of Montgomery, Alabama. The weakening Ivan continued north-northeastward across Alabama, dropping copious amounts of rainfall, and was down- graded to a tropical depression during the evening of the 16th while located about 40 km north-northwest of Gadsden, Alabama. This was accomplished on the final TPC/NHC advisory, issued at 17/0300 UTC. Warning responsibility was then assumed by HPC in Maryland. The residual depression continued moving northeastward across the southeastern U. S., finally emerging into the Atlantic off the Delmarva Peninsula as an extratropical gale. This LOW became elongated and the southern portion of the surface circulation moved southwestward just off the southeastern U. S. coast, eventually passing over south Florida and into the Gulf of Mexico on 21 September. This system began to show signs of intensification, and advisories were re-initiated on Tropical Depression Ivan at 2300 UTC on the 22nd, placing the center about 135 nm south of the mouth of the Mississippi River. Intensification continued and a reconnaissance plane during the evening measured a peak FLW of 47 kts within a convective band to the north of the center; hence, the depression was re-upgraded to Tropical Storm Ivan at 0300 UTC on 23 September. The resurrected Ivan continued moving northwestward toward the western Louisiana/eastern Texas coasts. A peak intensity of 50 kts during this second phase of Ivan's colorful career was attained at 23/1500 UTC when a reconnaissance plane found 70-kt winds at 450 m during the morning within a burst of deep convection which had fired off near the LLCC earlier in the morning. However, thunderstorm activity subsequently dwindled and Ivan began to weaken. Tropical Storm Ivan crossed the coast just west of Cameron, Louisiana, around 0000 UTC on the 24th with peak winds estimated near 40 kts. The system was downgraded once more to a depression at 24/0300 UTC and the second "final" TPC/NHC advisory was issued at 0900 UTC with Ivan weakening over southeastern Texas. HPC issued four advisories on Ivan, the final one at 25/0900 UTC after the remnant LOW had become no longer discernible in surface observations. According to a discussion bulletin from NHC, the debate over what to call the rejuvenated tropical cyclone in the Gulf of Mexico on the 22nd of September was at times animated. Many tropical cyclone enthusiasts and professional meteorologists on various discussion groups were fully expecting the system to be named Matthew--the next available name on the list. The decision to apply the name Ivan to the cyclone came somewhat of a surprise. The NHC discussion bulletin at 23/2300 UTC states that the decision was based primarily on the reasonable continuity observed in the analysis of the surface and low-level circulation. B. Meteorological Observations ------------------------------ The aforementioned TPC/NHC official storm report on Hurricane Ivan can be accessed at the following link: Table 3 in the report lists selected surface observations made during the hurricane's lifetime. The highest sustained wind recorded in Grenada was 64 kts, gusting to 101 kts, at Point Salines. Grand Cayman reported the highest wind recorded during Ivan's history--indeed the highest wind recorded on land in an Atlantic hurricane in many years. At 12/1500 UTC the station recorded a peak 1-min avg wind of 130 kts with a peak gust of 149 kts. Cabo de San Antonio, Cuba, reported a MSW of 96 kts with a peak gust of 104 kts as the storm passed just off the western tip of the island. An automated weather observation station on the oil drilling platform Ram Powell-VJ956, located about 70 nm south of Mobile, Alabama, reported a sustained wind of 102 kts with a gust to 135 kts at 15/2256 UTC. (The instrument's elevation was 121.9 m above MSL.) The strongest winds measured in the U. S. were an unofficial report from a storm chaser near Gulf Shores, Alabama, of a sustained wind of 77 kts with a gust to 99 kts at 0602 UTC on 16 September. The Pensacola Naval Air Station reported a peak wind of 76 kts with a gust to 93 kts at 16/0629 UTC. Television station WEAR-TV in Pensacola recorded a storm total rainfall of 401 mm. Interested persons should consult the Ivan report for more detailed information. C. Damage and Casualties ------------------------ Ivan is responsible for at least 94 deaths: 39 in Grenada, 26 in the United States, 18 in Jamaica, 4 in the Dominican Republic, 3 in Venezuela, 2 in the Cayman Islands, and 1 each in Tobago and Barbados. The storm was also indirectly responsible for 31 deaths in the U. S. The total U. S. monetary losses due to Ivan have been estimated at $15 billion, ranking Ivan as the 3rd most destructive U. S. hurricane to date, after Andrew (1992) and Charley (2004). The effects of wind and water along the Alabama and western Florida Panhandle coastlines left behind incredible devastation. As the slowly-weakening cyclone moved northward through west-central Alabama, thousands of homes suffered extensive damage due to trees falling on them. Homes in Montgomery, Alabama, about 250 km inland, suffered extensive damage from falling trees. Downed trees were also reported as far inland as Birmingham and Atlanta. Millions of board feet of timber were blown down in the forests and woodlands of Northwest Florida and Alabama. Ivan left behind a trail of great destruction across the Caribbean. Grenada and the Cayman Islands were especially hard-hit, with Cuba, Jamaica and other islands also experiencing significant damage. The Caribbean Development Bank has estimated the damage in the region at more than US$3 billion. In the Caymans about 95% of the homes and other buildings were damaged or destroyed, and on Grenada more than 14,000 homes were damaged or destroyed, and 80% of the nutmeg trees were destroyed. On Jamaica at least 47,000 homes were damaged with 5600 being completely destroyed. Many articles concerning Ivan's rampage through the Caribbean can be accessed at the following URL: (Report written by Gary Padgett; some material taken from TPC/NHC storm report authored by Stacy Stewart) HURRICANE JEANNE (TC-11) 13 September - 2 October -------------------------------------------- A. Storm History ---------------- The official TPC/NHC report on Hurricane Jeanne, authored by Miles Lawrence and Hugh Cobb, is now available at the following URL: Jeanne was the seventh hurricane of the 2004 season and the sixth major hurricane (MSW > 96 kts). (Karl, which formed after Jeanne, became a major hurricane earlier than did Jeanne.) Jeanne formed from a tropical wave of African origin and became a tropical depression on the 13th just east of the Lesser Antilles. The depression moved into the northeastern Caribbean where it became Tropical Storm Jeanne on the 14th. The cyclone moved inland over southeastern Puerto Rico on the 15th almost at hurricane intensity. After crossing Puerto Rico Jeanne continued to intensify, reaching hurricane intensity over the Mona Passage before striking the eastern tip of the Dominican Republic. Jeanne moved slowly over the northern portion of the island of Hispaniola on the 17th and weakened into a tropical depression. On 18 September, after the center had moved northward back over the Atlantic, the original LLCC moved westward away from the deep convection while a new center formed well to the northeast of the old LLCC. Tropical Storm Jeanne moved slowly through the Turks and Caicos Islands on the 19th, gradually regaining its organization and strength. The slow movement of the tropical storm contributed to torrential rainfall over Hispaniola. The attendant flooding and mudslides led to thousands of fatalities in Haiti. The mid-level circulation from the remnants of Hurricane Ivan combined with a shortwave trough in the westerlies and moved to the northeastern U. S. coast where it eroded the ridge to the north of Jeanne. As a result, Jeanne was left in a region with weak steering flow over the next few days. From the 20th to the 24th Jeanne executed a large clockwise loop a few hundred miles east of the northwestern Bahamas. The cyclone regained hurricane intensity on the 20th and had become a Category 2 hurricane with 85-kt winds by 1200 UTC on the 22nd, but the intensity leveled off and Jeanne weakened back to a Category 1 storm on the 24th as it moved over its own previous track from a few days earlier and encountered cooler waters caused by upwelling. As the storm moved away from the cooler waters, it began to steadily re-intensify, becoming a Category 2 hurricane once again at 1800 UTC on the 24th. Jeanne's winds reached 100 kts at 25/1200 UTC as it was reaching Great Abaco Island in the northwestern Bahamas. Jeanne followed a track across Great Abaco and Grand Bahama Islands and to the eastern Florida coast which was almost identical to that followed by Hurricane Frances three weeks earlier. Hurricane Jeanne made landfall at the southern end of Hutchinson Island just east of Stuart at 0400 UTC on 26 September with peak winds estimated at 105 kts over a very small area north of the center. The slowly weakening storm then moved across central Florida, pretty much right on top of Frances' track of three weeks earlier. The hurricane weakened to a tropical storm at 26/1800 UTC while centered about 55 km north of Tampa, Florida. In contrast to Frances, Jeanne's center did not move back out over the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, although it almost reached the coast in the Cedar Keys area. The weakening tropical storm turned northward over Georgia and was downgraded to a tropical depression on the 27th. The depression subsequently moved over the Carolinas, Virginia and the Delmarva Peninsula before merging with a frontal zone and losing tropical characteristics on the 29th while moving eastward away from the U. S. mid-Atlantic coast. B. Meteorological Observations ------------------------------ The highest sustained (1-min avg) surface wind reported in Florida was 79 kts at the Melbourne NWS office. A reading of 69 kts was taken on the north shore of Lake Okeechobee at 0515 UTC on the 26th. A C-MAN station on Grand Bahama reported 77 kts at 26/0000 UTC when the center was located about 35 nm northwest of the station. The highest wind gust reported in Florida was 111 kts at Ft. Pierce Inlet, and a 106-kt gust was reported from Vero Beach. Rainfalls of up to 200 mm accompanied Jeanne as it moved across the Peninsula. A narrow band of 280-330 mm was observed in the vicinity of the eyewall track over Osceola, Broward and Indian River counties. A radar-estimated maximum of 280 mm was observed over extreme northeastern Florida in Duval and Nassau counties. Many more observations are available in the official storm report at the link given above. C. Damage and Casualties ------------------------ Press reports indicated that more than 3000 persons lost their lives in Haiti due to flooding and mudslides, including nearly 2900 in the coastal city of Gonaives. Some 200,000 people in the city lost their homes, belongings and livelihoods. One death directly related to Jeanne was reported in Puerto Rico, two in Florida, and one in South Carolina, the latter due to a tornado. The total damage estimate in the U. S. has been placed at $6.5 billion. More articles concerning the destructive effects of Jeanne in the Caribbean may be found at the following website: (Report written by Gary Padgett; some material taken from TPC/NHC storm report authored by Miles Lawrence and Hugh Cobb) HURRICANE KARL (TC-12) 16 - 26 September ------------------------------------- The official TPC/NHC storm report on Hurricane Karl, authored by Jack Beven, is available at the following URL: There is not a whole lot to say about Hurricane Karl. The storm became an impressive Category 4 hurricane but, in stark contrast to the preceding several hurricanes, pursued a harmless course northward through the mid-Atlantic. The pre-Karl wave emerged from Africa on 13 September and had become organized enough to be classified as a tropical depression by the 16th--the same day that destructive Hurricane Ivan made landfall along the northern Gulf Coast. Tropical Storm Karl was christened on the 17th, and had strengthened into a hurricane the next day while moving west-northwestward. The cyclone became a major hurricane (Category 3) early on the 19th, and reached its peak intensity of 125 kts on 21 September. The hurricane had by this time turned northward toward a weakness in the subtropical ridge, and on the 22nd turned north-northeastward in response to a baroclinic trough developing to the north. Karl weakened to 90 kts on the 22nd, apparently due to an eyewall cycle, but rebounded to 110 kts on the 23rd. Following this secondary peak in intensity, Karl began to weaken rather rapidly as it began to transform into an extratropical cyclone. The former Category 4 hurricane had completed its transition into an extratropical cyclone by early on the 25th a little over 500 nm east of Newfoundland. The remnant extratropical LOW eventually reached Norway before being absorbed by another LOW. No damage or casualties are known to have resulted from Hurricane Karl. (Report written by Gary Padgett; some material taken TPC/NHC storm report authored by Jack Beven) HURRICANE LISA (TC-13) 19 September - 3 October -------------------------------------------- The official TPC/NHC report on Hurricane Lisa, authored by James Franklin and David Roberts, is available at the following URL: Like its predecessor, Hurricane Karl, Lisa moved northward through the central Atlantic without ever affecting land. The progenitor of Lisa was an African wave which departed the continent on 16 September. The system gradually developed, becoming a tropical depression on the 19th when located about 450 nm west-southwest of the Cape Verde Islands. The synoptic-scale environment was not particularly favorable for strengthening. Hurricane Karl lay a few hundred miles to the west- northwest and its outflow was impinging on the depression. Also, a large, active tropical wave was located just a few hundred miles to the southeast. Nonetheless, a very small core began to rapidly organize, becoming Tropical Storm Lisa on the morning of the 20th. Just 18 hours later, Lisa reached an initial peak intensity of 60 kts. However, over the next couple of days the tropical storm weakened due to persistent northerly shear. Meanwhile, the disturbance to the east continued to approach Lisa, which had essentially stalled. The two systems began to undergo a Fujiwhara interaction. Lisa turned southward on the 22nd and then eastward the next day as convection from the two systems gradually merged. Lisa weakened to a tropical depression on the 23rd, but was nonetheless able to maintain a small but distinct LLCC throughout its merger with the disturbance. A QuikScat image from 22 September clearly depicts the two circulations, and there are some rain-flagged vectors of 40 kts within the circulation of the easternmost disturbance. This system had been considered a good candidate for tropical cyclone development, and had it not moved too close to Lisa likely would have became Tropical Storm Matthew. Lisa completed a cyclonic loop on the 24th, and on 25 September turned sharply northward ahead of a deep mid to upper-level trough. As the shear abated Lisa began to intensify again as it moved northward, almost reaching hurricane intensity again on the 29th. On the 30th Lisa crossed over some cooler water upwelled by Hurricane Karl and convection diminished, the winds dropping to 45 kts, even though the eye feature remained distinct. (Operationally, the MSW was dropped only to 55 kts during this time.) On 1 October the tropical cyclone turned northeastward and accelerated ahead of an approaching shortwave trough in the westerlies. Shear lessened and Lisa re-intensified, even though it was over 25 C SSTs. Early on 2 October cloud tops had cooled significantly and Dvorak estimates reached 77 kts. Lisa became the season's ninth hurricane at 0600 UTC on the 2nd when located about 625 nm southeast of Cape Race, Newfoundland. Amazingly, at this time water temperatures beneath the cyclone were around 23 C. After only about 12 hours, the cloud pattern began to deteriorate rapidly and Lisa had lost tropical characteristics by early on 3 October. A few hours later Lisa's remnants had been absorbed into a frontal zone. Operationally, Lisa was upgraded briefly to a hurricane for 6 hours on 1 October, but this was disallowed during post-storm analysis. No damage or casualties are known to have resulted from Tropical Storm Lisa. (Report written by Gary Padgett; some material taken from TPC/NHC storm report authored by James Franklin and David Roberts.) ADDENDA TO IVAN AND JEANNE REPORTS ---------------------------------- 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: (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) (2) (3) E. Editor's Note ---------------- The official TPC/NHC storm report on Hurricane Javier is now available online at: 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 Sources of Information ---------------------- Most of the information presented below is based upon tropical cyclone warnings and significant tropical weather outlooks issued by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center of the U. S. Air Force and Navy (JTWC), located at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. In the companion tropical cyclone tracks file, I normally annotate track coordinates from some of the various Asian warning centers when their center positions differ from JTWC's by usually 40-50 nm or more. All references to sustained winds imply a 1-minute averaging period unless otherwise noted. Michael V. Padua of Naga City in the Philippines, owner of the Typhoon 2000 website, normally sends me cyclone tracks based upon warnings issued by the Japanese Meteorological Agency (JMA) and the Philippines' Atmospheric, Geophysical & Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). Also, Huang Chunliang of Fuzhou City, China, sends data taken from synoptic observations around the Northwest Pacific basin. A very special thanks to Michael and Chunliang for the assistance they so reliably provide. In the title line for each storm I have referenced all the cyclone names/numbers I have available: JTWC's depression number, the JMA-assigned name (if any), JMA's tropical storm numeric designator, and PAGASA's name for systems forming in or passing through their area of warning responsibility. Northwest Pacific Tropical Activity for September ------------------------------------------------- Tropical cyclone activity in the Northwest Pacific basin was decidedly less than that seen in August. Three tropical cyclones were named by JMA--one of these not considered a tropical storm by JTWC--and only one system reached typhoon intensity. As the month opened, long-lived Typhoon Songda was passing through the northern Mariana Islands on its way to an eventual landfall in Japan, with a stopover in Okinawa along the way. (The complete report on Songda may be found in the August summary.) Early in the month Tropical Storm Sarika, like its two predecessors (Chaba and Songda) passed through the northern Marianas, but was much less intense than those typhoons had been in that region. Sarika encountered cooler waters and hostile shear and weakened as it was moving in the general direction of Japan. During the second week of September, Tropical Storm Haima formed near southwestern Taiwan, moved northeastward across the island, then turned northwestward and made landfall in China south of Shanghai. Haima was classified as a tropical storm by all the Asian TCWCs but not by JTWC. And late in the month, Typhoon Meari became another in a series of tropical cyclones to affect the Japanese islands this season. Five systems were treated as tropical depressions by one or more of the Asian warning centres. Two of these were weak and short-lived and were classified as tropical depressions by JMA only. One was a weak LOW just east of Taiwan on 12 and 13 September, and the other occurred on 20 September deep in the tropics around 160E. No tracks were given for these systems in the companion tropical cyclone tracks file. Short reports follow for the other three tropical depressions. Huang Chunliang sent some meteorological observations for these systems, so I have included very brief histories of these three depressions. Also, standard reports follow for Tropical Storms Sarika and Haima and for Typhoon Meari/Quinta, all authored by Kevin Boyle. TROPICAL STORM SARIKA (TC-23W / STS 0419) 3 - 9 September ----------------------------------------- Sarika: contributed by Cambodia, is a type of singing bird. A. Storm Origins ---------------- As Super Typhoon Songda was approaching Okinawa, the next tropical cyclone was already taking shape and was first mentioned in JTWC's STWO at 0600 UTC 4 September when it was located approximately 440 nm east of Saipan. At this time, animated multi-spectral imagery revealed that convection had become consolidated around a LLCC. Also, satellite imagery revealed the formation of both poleward and equatorward outflow channels. An upper-level analysis indicated a TUTT cell situated 7 to 8 degrees to the northwest, light wind shear, and favourable diffluence. In addition, 850-mb vorticity was elongated, stretching along a west-east axis. Due to the rapid organization and already advanced stage of this system, the potential was raised straight to 'fair'. This was upgraded to 'good' and a TCFA issued at 04/1730 UTC after a spiral banding feature appeared in enhanced infrared satellite imagery. The first warning was issued six hours later, locating the centre 280 nm east-northeast of Saipan. JMA had been classifying the storm as a tropical depression since their first bulletin at 03/1800 UTC. B. Synoptic History ------------------- On the 4th of September the northern Marianas were facing the prospect of a third tropical cyclone after only recently being pounded by Super Typhoons Chaba and Songda. By 0126 UTC 5 September a typhoon warning was in place for the island of Agrihan. Moving west-northwestwards along the southern periphery of the subtropical ridge, Tropical Depression 23W was upgraded to Tropical Storm Sarika by both JTWC and JMA at 05/0000 UTC. The two agencies estimated their respective MSWs at 45 kts (1-min avg) and 50 kts (10-min avg). Multi-spectral satellite imagery revealed organized convection over a possible banding eye at this time. An upper- level LOW located to the southeast was providing an efficient eastern outflow channel in addition to the decent equatorial outflow. It seemed only a matter of time before Sarika would reach typhoon intensity, especially considering the reputation that small tropical cyclones have for rapid strengthening. Rapid intensification ensued for awhile with the MSW rising to 55 kts at 05/0600 UTC and to 60 kts at 05/1200 UTC. The strengthening phase then ended and 60 kts turned out to be the peak intensity for Sarika. At 1200 UTC 5 September Tropical Storm Sarika was moving west- northwest at 17 kts and passing 220 nm north of Saipan. Shortly afterward, the system's centre made its closest approach to Agrihan, tracking 10 nm south of that island. Near-typhoon conditions occurred on both Agrihan and Pagan while tropical storm-force winds were experienced on Alamagan. At its peak Sarika possessed a very compact wind field with gales extending no further than 90 nm from the centre while the radius of strongest winds never exceeded 15 nm. While all this was happening, microwave imagery showed no substantial increase in deep convection. By 05/1800 UTC Sarika had turned westwards and was maintaining 60-kt winds. At this time, the storm was centred about 100 nm west of Agrihan. Tropical Storm Sarika was tracking west-northwest at 16 kts at 0000 UTC 6 September approximately 300 nm south-southeast of Iwo Jima. Its intensity had changed little since the previous day and its peak MSW of 60 kts was further maintained until 16/1800 UTC when Sarika began to weaken. The 06/1200 UTC prognosis had indicated no further strengthening as the system was moving away from the upper-level LOW that had accelerated the eastern outflow channel, and also because Sarika was headed for a hostile shearing environment associated with Typhoon Songda's outflow. This shearing had begun at 06/1800 UTC when microwave imagery revealed a partially-exposed LLCC with the deep convection being displaced to the southwest. The MSW had fallen to 50 kts by this time. The prognostic reasoning message also forecast a change to a poleward track as the subtropical ridge shifted eastwards. This started to occur at 0000 UTC 7 September when Sarika turned to the north-northwest at a slower pace of 8 kts, approximately 820 nm south of Tokyo, Japan. At this time, microwave imagery revealed a fully-exposed LLCC. Sarika accelerated to 14 kts while weakening to a 45-kt tropical storm. It then slowed as it turned northward at 07/1200 UTC with winds further decreasing to 35 kts. Associated deep convection had separated 90 nm from the centre and Sarika was now struggling in the face of strong shear, an unfavourably-placed TUTT cell, and cooler than normal SSTs due to upwelling from Super Typhoons Chaba and Songda. It was downgraded to a 30-kt tropical depression at 07/1800 UTC and JTWC issued the final warning, locating the centre 645 nm south of Tokyo, Japan. JMA maintained this system as a tropical storm until 08/0000 UTC when that agency demoted Sarika to a depression. JMA estimated a peak MSW of 55 kts and a CP of 980 mb while NMCC classified Sarika as a 60-kt Severe Tropical Storm. The only other Asian TCWC to issue bulletins on this system, CWB of Taiwan, estimated a peak intensity of 55 kts. C. Damage and Casualties ------------------------ There were no known damages or casualties associated with Tropical Storm Sarika. (Report written by Kevin Boyle) TROPICAL DEPRESSION (NMCC-TD04 / NRL Invest 96W) 8 - 11 September ------------------------------------------------ This tropical depression, designated TD-04 by the NMC of China, formed on 8 September well to the east of Taiwan, just southeast of the Sakishima Islands. The system moved slowly in a north-northwesterly direction over the next couple of days, dissipating as it entered the southern Yellow Sea east-northeast of Shanghai on the 11th. The system was treated as a tropical depression by JMA, NMCC and the CWB of Taiwan. JTWC issued a TCFA for the disturbance at 10/1400 UTC but cancelled it 24 hours later. The following brief report was compiled and sent by Huang Chunliang. (A) Report on Tropical Depression NMC04 from China ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1. Rainfall Obs --------------- Linjiang, Jilin Province (WMO54374,41.72N/126.92E) 72.7 mm [12/00-13/00Z] Ji'an, Jilin Province (WMO54377,41.10N/126.15E) 58.1 mm [12/00-13/00Z] 2. Wind Obs ----------- Both Shengsi (WMO58472, 30.73N/122.45E, Alt 81m) and Dachen Dao (WMO58666, 28.45N/121.90E, Alt 84m), Zhejiang Province reported sustained winds of gale force on the 11th. (B) Report on Tropical Depression NMC04 from Japan ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Naha,Okinawa Pref. (WMO47936,26.21N/127.69E) 63.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z] Miyakojima,Okinawa Pref. (WMO47927,24.79N/125.28E) 51.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z] (Report by Huang Chunliang) TROPICAL STORM HAIMA (TC-24W / TS 0420 / OFEL) 10 - 14 September --------------------------------------------- Haima: contributed by China, is the sea horse A. Storm History ---------------- An interim STWO was issued by JTWC at 10/1400 UTC mentioning an area of convection which had persisted approximately 150 nm southwest of Taipei, Taiwan. The convection was located along the southern periphery of a possible LLCC. An upper-level analysis indicated moderate vertical shear and favorable divergence. The development potential was upgraded to 'fair' at 1700 UTC as the system continued to slowly gain in organization. At 11/0600 UTC the system was centred 135 nm south-southwest of Taipei, Taiwan, tracking across the island, and had lost much of its associated deep convection. However, the LLCC was still intact east of Taiwan. JMA began classifying the storm as a tropical depression at 11/0000 UTC, upgrading to a 35-kt tropical storm at 11/1200 UTC and naming it Haima. At the same time, the system was given the PAGASA name of Ofel when that agency began issuing warnings. At 1900 UTC 11 September animated infrared satellite imagery showed the LLCC approximately 55 nm southeast of Taipei, Taiwan, and embedded in a longwave trough off the coast of China. Satellite analyses indicated that the system exhibited subtropical characteristics with a MSW of 30 to 35 kts while QuikScat depicted an elongated wind field, also with a MSW of 30 to 35 kts. Upper-level conditions appeared favourable but there was a strong vertical wind shear gradient associated with the frontal boundary. However, the potential was there for the LLCC to disengage from the frontal zone and become fully tropical. Therefore, a TCFA was issued. At 12/0600 UTC Haima was centred 25 nm east-southeast of Taipei and moving north-northwest at 6 kts. At this time multi- spectral imagery indicated that the deep convection associated with the LLCC had decreased. Radar showed that most of the convection was located mainly in the western and southern quadrants. However, the possibility of a tropical cyclone forming remained 'good'. JTWC's first warning on Tropical Depression Haima was issued at 1800 UTC 12 September with the centre located approximately 100 nm north- northeast of Taipei, Taiwan, and moving north-northwest at 5 kts. The system then tracked northwestwards towards the southeast coast of China. At 13/0000 UTC it was located 240 nm south of Shanghai, China. Haima made landfall south of Shanghai at 13/0500 UTC before turning towards the west-northwest six hours later. It then resumed its northwesterly heading at 13/1800 UTC, the time of issuance of the final warning by JTWC. At this time, satellite imagery revealed that Haima had become a completely sheared system due to interaction with the baroclinic zone located to its west and all its core convection had gone. JMA's last mention of Haima was at 14/0000 UTC. In JTWC's eyes, Haima's MSW (1-min avg) never exceeded 30 kts but all Asian agencies regarded this system as a 35-kt tropical storm at its peak. JMA estimated 40-kt winds and CP of 996 mb from 11/1800 UTC to 12/0600 UTC while PAGASA classified Ofel as a 35-kt storm while it was located within their AOR. Editor's Note: The reason JTWC did not issue warnings on this system on 11 September was that they considered it to be subtropical. STWOs issued on the 11th and 12th acknowledged the existence of 35-kt winds, but it was felt that the system was not fully tropical. There were some who disagreed with this assessment. David Roth wrote in an e-mail: "After checking the JTWC site and looking at the image from 1900 UTC, I don't see anything subtropical about it. It has central convection and looks like a TD or weak TS. There does seem to be a front draping over it, but nothing more. Lots of TCs have fronts draping over the system (in the Atlantic anyway)." B. Huang Chunliang Reports -------------------------- Following are reports compiled and sent by Huang Chunliang concerning observations and storm effects in China, Japan and Korea, respectively. A special thanks to Chunliang for sending the data. (To convert from metres/second (m/s) to knots, divide m/s by 0.51444, or to approximate, simply double the m/s value.) (1) Report on Tropical Storm 0421 (Haima) from China ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ {Part I}. Landfall ================== According to the NMC warnings, Tropical Storm 0421 (Haima) made landfall in Yongqiang Town, Longwan District, Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province around 13/0400 UTC with a MSW of 18 m/s and a CP of 998 hPa. {Part II}. Meteorological Obs from Taiwan ========================================= 1. Daily Rainfall [09/16-10/16Z] (only Top 5 listed) ---------------------------------------------------- Ranking Station ID City/County Rainfall (mm) -------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------- 01 CWB C0A88 Taipei County 290.0 02 CWB C0A89 Taipei County 208.5 03 CWB C1C48 Taoyuan County 202.5 04 WMO 46685 Taipei County 195.0 05 CWB C0A9G Taipei City 188.5 2. Daily Rainfall [10/16-11/16Z] (only Top 5 listed) ---------------------------------------------------- Ranking Station ID City/County Rainfall (mm) -------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------- 01 CWB C0A9G Taipei City 611.5 02 CWB C1A65 Taipei County 393.0 03 WMO 46685 Taipei County 388.0 04 CWB C1D48 Taoyuan County 386.0 05 CWB C1A64 Taipei County 383.5 3. Daily Rainfall [11/16-12/16Z] (only Top 5 listed) ---------------------------------------------------- Ranking Station ID City/County Rainfall (mm) -------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------- 01 CWB C1D40 Hsinchu County 371.0 02 CWB C0D36 Hsinchu County 333.5 03 CWB 01A21 Taipei County 291.0 04 CWB C1C46 Taoyuan County 289.5 05 CWB C1D42 Hsinchu County 283.0 4. Peak sustained winds & gusts ------------------------------- Only those stations that reported peak gusts >= 24.5 m/s (i.e., Beaufort Force 10 or higher) are given: Peak SW Peak Gust Station (WMO ID) (mps/dir/Local Date) (mps/dir/Local Date) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Lanyu (46762/59567, Alt 325m) 25.4/230/11th 35.9/220/11th Dongshi (46730, Alt 45m) 19.4/ 50/11th 29.6/ 50/11th An Bu (46691, Alt 1450m) 17.9/350/12th 28.4/ 20/12th Wu-Chi (46777, Alt 5m) 14.6/350/11th 24.5/360/11th {Part III}. Meteorological Obs from Mainland China ================================================== 1. Fuzhou City, Fujian Province ------------------------------- Pingtan (WMO58944), Fuzhou City recorded a 24-hr rainfall amount of 250.8 mm [09/00-10/00Z], which turned out to be a new record of daily rainfall for September for the station, the former one being 242.4 mm recorded on Sep 5, 1958. 2. Zhejiang, Shandong, Jiangsu and Hebei Provinces -------------------------------------------------- During the 72-hr period ending at 15/00Z, torrential rains were reported by the provinces of Zhejiang, Shandong, Jiangsu and Hebei with Fenghua, Zhejiang reporting the highest accumulation of 228 mm. Coastal Zhejiang reported gusts of Beaufort Force 8 to 10 during the storm with Kanmen reported the highest value of 27.5 m/s. Coastal Qingdao City, Shandong Province reported a peak gust of Beaufort Force 10 on the 14th. {Part IV}. Damage ================= 1. Zhejiang ----------- The storm damaged 7,800 ha. of farmland in Zhejiang Province, where direct economic losses were estimated to have been over 53 million yuan. 2. Fuzhou, Fujian ----------------- Floodings and landslides were reported in the county of Pingtan. Preliminary statistics indicated that the torrential rains (Sep 7-10), including those triggered by the monsoonal flow that gestated the pre-Haima depression (i.e., TD-05 per NMC), had caused 54.6 million yuan of direct economic losses in Pingtan County and Changle City (also a sub-city of Fuzhou City). (2) Brief Report on Typhoon 0420 (Haima) from Japan +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1. Ishigakijima, Okinawa (WMO47918, 24.34N 124.16 E, Alt 6m) ------------------------------------------------------------ Peak sustained wind: 16.7 m/s [11/2240Z] Peak gust: 26.8 m/s [11/1225Z] Peak hourly rainfall: 34.5 mm [12/10-12/11Z] 2. Yonagunijima, Okinawa (WMO47912, 24.47N 123.01E, Alt 30m) ------------------------------------------------------------ Peak sustained wind: 19.1 m/s [11/2120Z] Peak gust: 31.1 m/s [11/2037Z] Peak hourly rainfall: 54.0 mm [12/13-12/14Z] 3. Kabira, Okinawa (JMA94036, 24.46N 124.14E, Alt 7m) ----------------------------------------------------- Peak hourly rainfall: 54.5 mm [12/10-12/11Z] (3) Brief Report on Tropical Storm Haima - Rainfall Obs from Korea ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WANDO (34.40N 126.70E) 104.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z] HEUKSANDO (34.68N 125.45E) 91.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z] SEOSAN (36.77N 126.50E) 75.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z] GWANGJU (35.17N 126.90E) 67.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z] GUNSAN (35.98N 126.70E) 60.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z] MUNSAN (37.88N 126.75E) 59.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z] DONGDUCHEON (37.90N 127.07E) 58.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z] INCHEON (37.48N 126.63E) 57.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z] JEJU (33.52N 126.53E) 54.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z] SUWON (37.27N 126.98E) 54.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z] SEOUL (37.57N 126.97E) 52.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z] (Section A written by Kevin Boyle; Section B by Huang Chunliang) TROPICAL DEPRESSION PABLO (NRL Invest 92W) 14 - 18 September --------------------------------------------- This system was considered a tropical depression by JMA, PAGASA, the CWB of Taiwan and the Thai Meteorological Department with PAGASA assigning the name Pablo. JTWC released no warnings, but issued a TCFA at 16/2030 UTC and a second alert 24 hours later. However, the formation alert was cancelled at 18/2100 UTC. Tropical Depression Pablo formed deep in the Philippine Sea east of Mindanao, moved west- ward across that island, thence turning northwestward and emerging into the South China Sea near the Calamian Group. After crossing the Philippine Archipelago the depression began to slowly weaken but limped across the South China Sea to near the central Vietnamese coastline before dissipating on the 18th. The maximum winds estimated by any agency were 30 kts. Following is a very brief report of some rainfall observations compiled and sent by Huang Chunliang. Brief Report on Tropical Depression Pablo +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Rainfall Obs from Viet Nam & Thailand ===================================== Vietnam ------- THANH HOA (WMO48840,19.75N/105.78E) 134.5 mm [18/12-19/12Z] VINH (WMO48845,18.67N/105.68E) 124.3 mm [18/12-19/12Z] Thailand -------- UBON RATCHATHANI (WMO48407,15.25N/104.87E) 103.5 mm [18/18-19/18Z] (Report by Huang Chunliang) TROPICAL DEPRESSION (NMCC-TD06 / NRL Invest 93W) 15 - 16 September ------------------------------------------------ This tropical depression, designated TD-06 by the NMC of China, formed in the northern South China Sea on 15 September well to the southeast of Hong Kong and to the southwest of Taiwan. It moved north-northeastward and was located along the coast of China south of Fuzhou City early on the 16th when warnings were discontinued. The remnants apparently continued northward, bringing moderate rain- falls as far north as Korea. JMA, NMCC and the CWB of Taiwan all treated this system as a tropical depression. JTWC did not issue warnings nor a TCFA for the disturbance--it was assigned a 'fair' potential for development on the 15th. The following brief report was compiled and sent by Huang Chunliang. (A) Report on Tropical Depression NMC06 from China ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ {Part I}. Landfall ================== According to the NMC warnings, Tropical Depression 06 made landfall in Jinjiang City (a sub-city of Quanzhou City), Fujian Province around 15/1900 UTC with a MSW of 15 m/s and a CP of 1004 hPa. Interestingly, TD-06's track (SW-->NE) along the coastline of Fujian just looked like the reverse of that followed earlier by Typhoon Aere (NE-->SW). {Part II}. Meteorological Obs ============================= 1. Fujian (rain & wind) ----------------------- During the 62-hr period ending at 16/14Z, rains >100 mm were recorded in 26 cities/counties, 9 of which reported rains >200 mm. Huian County and Jinjiang City reported rains exceeding 300 mm with the former reporting the highest amount of 435 mm. The center of the depression passed by very near Fuzhou on the 16th, saturating the biggest island (Pingtan Dao) of Fuzhou with torrential rains of 126 mm within 6 hours [16/00--16/06Z]. Coastal Fujian reported gusts of Beaufort Force 8 to 10. Significant obs from insular automatic stations included: Nanri--27.7 m/s, Weitou--20.6 m/s, etc. 2. Taiwan & Zhejiang (rain) --------------------------- Dongshi (WMO46730), Taiwan 127 mm [14/16-15/16Z] Kinmen (WMO46787), Taiwan 109 mm [14/16-15/16Z] Banciao (WMO46688), Taiwan 100 mm [14/16-15/16Z] Yuhuan (WMO58667), Zhejiang 106 mm [16/00-17/00Z] Dachen Dao (WMO58666), Zhejiang 83 mm [16/18-17/06Z] {Part III}. Damage and Casualties ================================= Preliminary statistics indicated that the depression had caused 340 million yuan of direct economic losses and was responsible for six deaths in the Fujian Province. TD-06 affected 1,269,000 residents of 147 towns of 3 cities in the province, where 1,400 houses were toppled, 123 embankments were damaged and some 92,000 people were evacuated. Also, floodings and landslides were reported to have been triggered by torrential rains in a few districts. (B) Report on Tropical Depression NMC06 from Japan ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Rainfall obs: IZUHARA (34.20N/129.30E) 70.0 mm [17/00-18/00Z] (C) Report on Tropical Depression NMC06 from Korea ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Rainfall obs: SEOGWIPO (33.25N/126.57E) 59.0 mm [17/00-18/00Z] SEOGWIPO (33.25N/126.57E) 63.0 mm [17/12-18/12Z] WANDO (34.40N/126.70E) 56.0 mm [17/00-18/00Z] WANDO (34.40N/126.70E) 55.0 mm [17/12-18/12Z] (Report by Huang Chunliang) TYPHOON MEARI (TC-25W / TY 0421 / QUINTA) 20 September - 1 October ----------------------------------------------- Meari: contributed by DPR (North) Korea, means 'echo' A. Storm Origins ---------------- At 1030 UTC 18 September an area of convection had persisted approximately 510 nm east of Guam and was initially mentioned in a STWO issued by JTWC at this time. Initially a 'poor' development potential area, the rather disorganized system began to evolve with deep convection consolidating over a possible LLCC. However, 'poor' potential was maintained until 19/1300 UTC, when it was raised to 'fair'. A TCFA followed at 19/2000 UTC, and this was replaced by the first warning at 20/0000 UTC. Tropical Depression 25W at this time was located just 35 nm southeast of Guam. At the same time, JMA also began writing bulletins, classifying the system as a 30-kt (10-min avg) tropical depression. There was little change in intensity during the 20th as dry air entrainment inhibited further development and the MSW remained at 30 kts. Tropical Depression 25W turned more westward and began to accelerate as it travelled along the southern periphery of a mid-level steering ridge. B. Synoptic History ------------------- At 0000 UTC 21 September both JTWC and JMA upgraded Tropical Depression 25W to a tropical storm, the latter agency assigning the name Meari. At this time it was moving away from Guam, centred at that time 180 nm to the west. Continuing west-northwest, Meari turned towards the northwest as it intensified steadily. A 37-GHz microwave image at 21/1200 UTC showed early indications of a banding- type eye, and the MSW climbed to 55 kts at 21/1800 UTC. At 22/0000 UTC Meari was still heading in a northwesterly direction at around 7 kts and was located approximately 320 nm west-northwest of Guam. The system was upgraded to typhoon intensity at 22/1200 UTC after CI estimates had reached 65 kts. Typhoon Meari possessed a very asymmetric circulation. For example, the 22/1800 UTC JTWC warning (#12) reported gales extending up to 50 nm in the southern semicircle but to a distance of 150 nm in the northeast quadrant. Typhoon-force winds covered an area 20 nm over the northern semicircle but only 5 nm to the south. Typhoon Meari began to intensify more rapidly on the 23rd. The storm was still tracking towards the northwest and was centred approximately 475 nm south-southwest of Iwo Jima at 0000 UTC 23 September. The MSW had increased to 75 kts at this time, and rose to 90 kts six hours later when multi-spectral satellite imagery depicted a well-developed eye. Meari became a strong 100-kt typhoon at 23/1200 UTC as it approached the eastern boundary of PAGASA's area of responsibility. The storm then changed onto a brief west-northwesterly heading as it crossed 135 degrees longitude and was then assigned the name Quinta by PAGASA. After reaching 120 kts at 24/0600 UTC, intensification slowed and this strength was maintained for the rest of the day. Meari was still suffering from the effects of dry air entrainment, and as a result, deep convection had decreased in the northwest quadrant by 24/1800 UTC. The MSW began to nudge downward through the day, during which time the storm continued on a general northwesterly track, passing 70 nm south of Okinawa at 25/1800 UTC. Meari weakened to 90 kts at 26/0000 UTC as the storm turned west-northwestward and decelerated. The storm then began to re-intensify in a more favourable environment, reaching a secondary peak of 105 kts at 26/1800 UTC. Typhoon Meari ground to a halt at 0000 UTC 27 September while located approximately 170 nm west of Okinawa as it became temporarily stuck between two HIGHs. A shortwave trough moving eastward through China was forecast to pick up the tropical cyclone and recurve it towards Japan. A slow northward drift began at 27/0600 UTC and this motion essentially carried the system into more hostile conditions to the north. As a result, weakening began and the MSW dropped to 90 kts by 27/1200 UTC. Meari's deep convection decreased as the storm turned northeast into an area of strong upper-level shearing associated with the subtropical jet to the north. By 28/0000 UTC the intensity was down to 75 kts when the typhoon was located 315 nm south-southwest of Sasebo, Japan. But Meari managed to maintain this strength and even appeared to get itself together a little at 28/0600 UTC when convection began to increase. By 28/1800 UTC Meari was beginning its approach to the Japanese island of Kyushu. Multi-spectral satellite imagery and radar fixes indicated that Typhoon Meari made landfall over the southern tip of Kyushu at 0000 UTC 29 August with a MSW of 70 kts. At this time, the centre of the storm, having turned towards the east-northeast, was located 85 nm south-southeast of Sasebo, Japan. Meari proceeded to weaken as it tracked across land and was downgraded to a 60-kt tropical storm at 29/0600 UTC, based on CI estimates and synoptic observations from Shikoku. The forward motion began to accelerate as Meari started to interact with the westerlies, and the combination of dry air entrainment and vertical wind shear sapped the tropical cyclone's strength further. The MSW dropped to 35 kts at 29/1800 UTC, the time of the final warning issued by JTWC. JMA followed the system until 30/0300 UTC, when it was dropped as a tropical cyclone, but continued tracking the remnant LOW eastwards into the Pacific via their routine shipping bulletins. C. Damages and Casualties ------------------------- News reports indicate that at least 18 people died with several more reported missing as a result of Typhoon Meari. The worst affected areas appeared to be the prefectures of Mie and Ehime where torrential rains caused widespread flooding and mudslides destroyed several homes. More than 350 flights were cancelled. Also, train and ferry services were suspended, stranding thousands of people. D. Huang Chunliang Report ------------------------- 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) ============================================= 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.) ADDENDUM TO AUGUST TROPICAL CYCLONE SUMMARY ------------------------------------------- In the August summary I remarked on the unusually high level of tropical cyclone activity in the Northwest Pacific basin during that month, with 9 named tropical cyclones and 6 typhoons. (Four weak systems were classified as tropical depressions by JMA only.) Mike Middlebrooke at the NWS office in Guam sent me some statistics for past active Augusts in that basin. Following are the numbers he sent: Year August TCs Typhoons Tropical Storms Tropical Depressions --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1960 9 8 1 0 1962 8 7 0 1 1966 9 5 3 1 1967 10 3 4 3 1993 8 6 1 1 1994 9 6 3 0 1996 10 4 3 3 1997 8 6 1 1 1999 9 4 2 3 2000 9 4 3 2 2004 9 6 1 2 With 8 out of 9 TCs becoming typhoons, 1960 appears to have been the most active. It is very interesting that no years in the 1970s nor 1980s had particularly notable Augusts. A special thanks to Mike for sending me the information. (All the above statistics were gleaned from JTWC's annual reports.) ************************************************************************* 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 Southwest Indian Ocean Tropical Activity for September ------------------------------------------------------ The 2004-2005 Southern Hemisphere season got off to an early start with the formation of a tropical depression (designated as Tropical Depression 01) by Meteo France La Reunion. This system formed just west of 90E and subsequently moved southeastward into Perth's AOR where it became Tropical Cyclone Phoebe on 2 September (TC-01S per JTWC). The report on Tropical Cyclone Phoebe is included in the following section of this summary: Northwest Australia/Southeast Indian Ocean. ************************************************************************* NORTHWEST AUSTRALIA/SOUTHEAST INDIAN OCEAN (AUW) - From 90E to 135E Activity for September: 1 tropical cyclone of storm intensity Sources of Information ---------------------- The primary sources of tracking and intensity information for Northwest Australia/Southeast Indian Ocean tropical cyclones are the warnings and advices issued by the Tropical Cyclone Warning Centres at Perth, Western Australia, and Darwin, Northern Territory. References to sustained winds imply a 10-minute averaging period unless otherwise stated. In the companion tropical cyclone tracks file, I occasionally annotate positions from warnings issued by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) of the U. S. Air Force and Navy, located at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, when they differ from the Australian centres' coor- dinates by usually 40-50 nm or more. The JTWC warnings are also the source of the 1-minute average maximum sustained wind values included in the tracks file. Additionally, information describing details of satellite imagery and atmospheric circulation features included in the narratives is often gleaned from the JTWC warnings. Northwest Australia/Southeast Indian Ocean Tropical Activity for September ------------------------------------------ A tropical LOW formed just east of longitude 90E at the end of August and was designated Tropical Disturbance 01 by MFR. In early September the LOW drifted southeastward into Perth's AOR and intensified into Tropical Cyclone Phoebe on the 2nd. The cyclone's life was rather brief, having dissipated by the 4th. The following report on Phoebe is one which I received from Joe Courtney of the Severe Weather Section at BoM Perth, and to which I have added a few geographical references. A very special thanks to Joe for sending me the report. TROPICAL CYCLONE PHOEBE (TC-01S / MFR-01) 31 August - 4 September ------------------------------------------- A LOW developed near 3S/88E on 30 August within an unseasonably active monsoon band, coincident with a burst in the MJO. The LOW moved to the southeast over the next few days, passing into the Perth TCWC area of responsibility on 1 September. The system suffered from deep-level shear--the 850-250 hPa shear exceeded 20 knots throughout its lifetime. On 31 August an area of deep convection developed to the west/southwest of the LLCC. This convection was to be persistent for the following four days, although the LLCC remained exposed for almost all of that time. MFR issued the first bulletin on Tropical Disturbance 01 at 0600 UTC on 31 August, locating the centre approximately 850 nm north- west of the Cocos Islands. The MSW (10-minute mean) was estimated at 25 kts. For most of the system's lifetime, the persistent deep convection was typically within 3/4 of a degree to the west-southwest of the low-level centre. On the 31st and 1st, the low-level centre was not well defined. It is likely that gales were occurring under the deep convection but only in one quadrant. Tropical cyclone intensity was estimated at 02/0000 UTC when the LLCC was close to the deep convection and QuikScat identified gale-force winds in more than one quadrant. Maximum estimated intensity of 45 knots (10-minute mean) was reached late on the 2nd when the low- level centre moved closer to the edge of the deep convection. Perth upgraded the LOW to Tropical Cyclone Phoebe at 0400 UTC when the system was centred about 430 nm west-northwest of the Cocos Islands. (JTWC had initiated warnings on TC-01S at 02/0000 UTC.) Phoebe showed weakening signs on the 3rd but convection again flared near the centre a few hours later. QuikScat showed gales in southern and western quadrants at 03/1200 UTC. However, on the 4th convection subsided and the LLCC became less well-defined. Although convection again developed by 1200 UTC, from this point on convection fluctuated diurnally, suggesting continued weakening. Also, by this stage Phoebe was moving over cooler waters on the order of 25 C, having originated over SSTs of over 27 C. Perth issued their final gale warning on the 3rd, but JTWC continued to issue warnings until 04/1200 UTC, when the final warning placed the weakening centre about 300 nm west-northwest of the Cocos Islands. The peak intensity (1-minute mean) estimated by JTWC was 55 kts at 03/0000 UTC. Phoebe remained over open waters throughout its lifetime and there were no known impacts. (Report based on summary received from BoM Perth, with slight editing and a few additions by Gary Padgett) ************************************************************************* 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): 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: TROPICAL CYCLONE REPORTS AVAILABLE JTWC now has available on its website the complete Annual Tropical Cyclone Report (ATCR) for 2004 (2003-2004 season for the Southern Hemisphere). ATCRs for earlier years are available also. The URL is: 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: 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 ************************************************************************* ************************************************************************* Uploaded: 01.27.05 / Typhoon2000.ph, Typhoon2000.com