vortex95

In one fell swoop, @CoastalWx could get rid of his "imagined" Weymouth drought! LOL.

A September nor'easter of this strength here is uncharted waters. That high to the N and the way the low comes up so deep? This would be impressive in mid-winter. Extraordinary patterns often result in extraordinary individual wx events!

And @ineedsnow I bet thinks the UKX2 intensity fcst is DA BOMB?!

Link to that excellent SST analysis?

Immediate coast yes, but that's not where I am talking about. The low slows stalls over 22-24 C SSTs. Stop using SSTs closest to Weymouth as if that is the world! Your IMBY bias needs to end...

@CoastalWxwill conclude this..."we blow all our chances way too early in the season! El NIno SUXS"

The Dvorak color table really gives an ideal of CDO intensity and symmetry!

NHC mentioned last night the depth of the 30-31 C ocean temp was quite deep in this area, but still some slight upwelling would occur for such an intense and slow-moving TC. That could reduce max potential a bit. Just thinking of how low the pressure can get. Only Patricia has EPAC pressure below 900 mb.

Did we not work out something with Mexico with regard to potential threats? Granted, Polo likely avoids landfall, but it will pass close enough to cause problems (i.e. flooding). We may have. The first time I recall a scheduled recon into a EPAC system was Linda in Sep 1997 b/c it was originally fcst to recurve and hit srn CA! Other than that, it was just the occasional NOAA research mission. It may be if the TC is fcst to get intense and is close to Mexico, they do recons.

See my edit. I'm not upset at all. I just need to be clear. That's ok. Being clear on social media is not always easy. Context and tone is often challenge! I think that's were emojis come in.

To clarify, I don't know for sure the exact reasons why Sandy was not called a hurricane at landfall, but I think one reason is there were no hurricanes warnings in effect N of ORF. How does that look from a agency PR standpoint? No warnings? You know how that sentiment goes in the public's eye. Yes, there were non-tropical warnings out by local WFOs covering the dangerous conditions, but really, which do you think the public would react to more and take seriously, gale/storm/high wind warnings, or hurricane warnings? And this was not doing it for the sake of jacking up the level or warnings for public safety, there was a significant chance that Sandy would still be a hurricane at landfall, and NHC has a relatively low threshold policy for model probabilities when they issue tropical watches/warnings. You can see this often and I'm sure some notice at times. TS warning that far away or in that location and you ask yourself, "are the chances for sustained 34 kt winds that probable?" You can see this a lot for systems passing offshore from the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast, where you can't apply the same reasoning to TC wind fields here as in the tropical and subtropics since TCs become asymmetrical and move faster at mid-latitudes And we knew the storm surge alone was going be very high/record impact in NJ and NYC. Sandy is one of the few times truly the absolute intense hype days ahead of time IMHO was warranted for this region, since a NW moving, large hurricane making landfall in NJ was unheard of prior.

I hope you are not upset. Debate/discussion is what science is all about, so talking about this all is not a counterproductive notion. I was talking in general as how things are not always done by meteorological standards only and there are many external factors out there. That's not a conspiracy, that's just how society is, and not unique to the wx field. I don't know specific reason(s) why Sandy called what is was at landfall, but something doesn't jibe w/ empirical observations and standard/practices done w/ many other TCs in the similar state of transition, and it is not just me who have questioned things. And we are talking about what it is called (tropical or not), not specific reasons why, and just that it is not always objective or supports the evidence. You wrote: "Whatever their reasons in 1991 for a large hybrid system that gains an inner symmetrical tropical surface low." Sandy was very similar to this. It was a large hybrid system once it got to the Bahamas, then then on the day of landfall, and inner symmetrical tropical sfc low developed. So I go back to the consistency of standard/practices here. As I have said, we've seen many times NHC keep a TC tropical when it clearly not anymore, or declare something that does not fit the definition of a TC, but it is close to land. Whether it is close to land or not should be irrelevant. I mentioned this w/ Fay, when another noted they seemed to delay calling it even a TD when it was likely it was since it was no threat to land. Semantics do count. What something is called officially or not has significant impact, such as in the legal profession. And exact details/meanings count in the sciences. An ET low and TC has a number of similarities, but also sig differences. Same thing for a mesocyclonic tornado and landspout. And they way things are, what something is called or not does matter outside the met sciences in the social/economic/political realms and their influences are there.

Look at the loop here that shows the evolution before and after the time of the image you showed. https://rammb-data.cira.colostate.edu/tc_realtime/loop.asp?product=4kmirimg&storm_identifier=al062026&starting_image=2026al06_4kmirimg_202609201250.gif&ending_image=2026al06_4kmirimg_202609202220.gif That's not a real eye, just a residual dry slot that happens to look like one. You can see the continuous dry slot poke in towards the center before the feature forms, end then that feature goes away almost immediately. You have to be careful taking single images in such a case when TCs are developing and dry air is in proximity.

Regardless of the inadequacies of insurance policy, Sandy transitioned prior to landfall, and this was even confirmed in post-analysis. The mets at the NHC aren't going to get involved in politics, and they do not undermine their scientific work for the benefit of the private sector despite any conspiracies to the contrary. Granted, you didn't present this as your own opinion, but that of some others, but let us squash that discussion before it begins. NHC has at times. The Perfect Storm in Oct-Nov 1991. That clearly transitioned to a hurricane and they actually had a recon in it and confirmed it was a hurricane. Yet they did not declare it operationally. Yes, in post-season analysis they did, but was clear what it was operationally, and they did not declare/name it. That's being unscientific and not meteorologically objective. Call a system for what it is. If one doesn't, that suggests other factors outside the met science. I can give other examples less obvious but still suspect. This doesn't mean they are "bad" or otherwise, just it is the reality of things. Not all decisions in wx are made independent of external non-scientific factors.

Yes, one of many things that can be different, depending on the state or county, and unquestionably this has been a factor at times. Sandy's classification at landfall I think was political/economic. The decisions not to go w/ tropical watches/warnings N of ORF was ridiculous given what the models were showing, and when it actually went more tropical that day of landfall, they still did not back off. Also, tropical storm force winds occurred on the coast before it was declared PT, so there you go. It was still solid warm cold up to 200 mb at landfall, Looking at the AMSU polar pass show this clearly. Hurricanes don't just go PT/ET in an instant, It is gradual process most of the time. It like when JTWC says in their advisories "becoming extratropical." Sandy's inner core was weakening at landfall, but it had not dissipated completely. Pressure was up only 6 mb at landfall from the 940 mb peak. And the argument that fronts has made its to the center is weak. We have seen a number of times NHC declare a system that has fronts a TC when it was clear from satellite it still had fronts attached to the center. And we've seen systems that looked far less tropical that Sandy at landfall and they are called/declared TCs. So they are not always consistent/meteorologically objective. I recall a NWS tropical met from a WFO in the Northeast at a conference some time ago. He thought Sandy was still a hurricane at landfall and just in transition phase, like almost all hurricanes that hit New England. You don't see them stop being called hurricanes just before landfall.