wxmx

7 minutes ago, bluewave said:

No problem. At least on the current forecast track, it looks like the core would be further west into San Juan than with Hugo in 1989. So it will be interesting to see if the current track holds or shifts a little bit.

The San Narciso hurricane from 1867 would be near the worst case scenario for San Juan, had it kept it's intensity as a major for a little longer.

1 minute ago, thess said:

Could the mod/mods who keep deleting or hiding my posts shoot me a DM and explain why? Other posts regarding the fake pics were not deleted. This happened during Irma too. If you've got something specific against me, and god knows why since I rarely post, just ban my account and save everyone time.

I didn't delete them, but they are removed to keep the thread clutter free...nothing against you.

Just now, bluewave said:

This is the realistic worst track since its very unlikely that that a major would hit there from the NE.

Probably, just nitpicking...sorry  .... Also, an E-W track would be a little worse than the SE track...but that's just me being argumentative.

4 minutes ago, bluewave said:

 

You can see what a bad spot San Juan would be in from a SE approach should it verify.

 

 

 

 

 

I see that, that's why I said that a TC approaching from the SE would be bad. But the absolute worse would be from the same TC coming from the NE...untouched RFQ with N winds, longer time for piling surge as well.

3 minutes ago, bluewave said:

This is probably the worst track a storm can take for San Juan if it verifies since the strongest winds will be from the NE directly off the water.

 

 

 

Worst track would be from a TC coming from the NE. Since that's an unlikely track, a track from the E or SE are the next on bad tracks.

19 minutes ago, Drz1111 said:

Keep in mind that protection from cyclones is in fact one of the reasons that San Juan is located where it is.  Particularly in the colonial era, protection from cyclones was critically important, so most Caribbean / SE Asia capitals are on the leeward side of their respective islands or otherwise protected from the usual cyclone track (the great exception is Santo Domingo, which is overdue for a big hit).

And Kingston

We may have an ERC underway.

Based on a 941.6mb extrapolated pressure, it's in an intensifying cycle once again (vs 945.2 the previous pass)

Looks like central pressure is up to the 940s

Recon missed the eye. 134FL/125SFMR and 936mb extrapolated, but outside the eye

1 minute ago, vinylfreak89 said:

I think timestamps are a better explanation of the discrepancy. Goes 16 hasn't updated in over an hour

Not true

6 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Could be stadium effect playing optical games with you. 

Or the parallax effect

136FL/139SFMR ... and central pressure in the 920s...that's at least a 135 kts hurricane, borderline cat 4-5

There was a flagged 152 kts SFMR as well. 

7 minutes ago, Eskimo Joe said:

Eye becoming visible on satellite.  Cat 4 by tomorrow AM?

Or right now? Dropsonde in the SE eyewall up to 122 kts at the surface. 957mb in the latest vortex message

Models have been playing catchup with this cold shot for MBY. Strato snow is now in play, I think. Cold is stronger, earlier than forecasted, plus is drizzling, which most models didn't show. To be fair, drizzle is usually not well forecasted. Not saying there will be any accumulation, qpf is going to be meager, but maybe some surprise dusting in the morning...not bad considering we are almost 2 years since last subfreezing temp.

Early November and my early swim laps are still a delight in an open air pool

Just a couple of weak cold fronts have gone through MBY, when the average should be closer to 5-6. Tampico had 8" of rain yesterday (my parents live there) in less than 3 hours, with rainfall rates of 5"/hr at times (close to 6"/h at some point). Flash flooding was tremendous. This happens when there's still and abundant pool of moisture and a very warm Gulf still, while upper atmosphere is slowly cooling, even a weak disturbance can get these things going in a violent fashion.

It seems so, as a strong CCKW/MJO pulse appears to be headed for the Atlantic past week 1

(Credit: http://mikeventrice.weebly.com/mjo.html)

They acknowledge the chair in the wall and the hose in the tree as evidence of the strength of the tornado.

It looks like the branch partially detached from the tree because of the action of the wind, the hose blew in and then the branch snapped back

I don't think he was saying that there are no structures that can withstand those wind speeds. He's saying that if there are none in the path of the tornado, then they have no basis to say that the extreme wind speeds were present.

Ok, gotcha. This limitation is for all tornado ratings, but they show more often the stronger the tornado.

If there's no structure/DI deemed strong enough to withstand winds >210 mph, then that's all they can estimate. It's an inherent limitation to the rating process and why the wind estimates, particularly in EF-5 tornadoes, tell one very little.

But there are structures that can withstand winds >210 ... though they are not that common (think reinforced concrete structures). Not sure if the gap between those type of structures and well built structures that can't withstand winds >210 mph is large, or if there's no calibration for the kind of winds that could destroy the "super-structures". IOW, what would be the kind of damage for 220mph? for 250mph?

Personally, I consider 140 kt low-end Cat 5 and 145 kt borderline low-end/medium.

But that's beside the point, because with 'canes, it's totally different. Although the SS scale is open-ended, hurricane winds are can actually be measured (as opposed to exclusively estimated based on damage) and based on this, we have a good idea of the upper limit in the N Atlantic, which seems to be ~165 kt. So although the scale is open-ended, decades of recon data give us a pretty-clear upper limit. Given this, one can say:

140-145 kt = low-end

150-155 kt = medium

160-165 kt = high-end

With tornadoes, this is all theoretical. With the new EF scale, which has only been applied for a few years, we really have no idea what the upper limit is, and so saying "low-end" or "high-end" doesn't make sense. Twenty years from now, surveyors can come to the conclusion that tornado wind speeds really can't exceed 220 mph-- in which case, 210 mph wouldn't be "low end"-- whereas if they estimate some tornadoes have winds of 250 mph, then 210 mph would be "low-end".

I really understood your point from the beginning, I was playing devil's advocate. Also I thought your range for low-end EF-5 was really restrictive... being that EF-5 baseline is >200mph and 210mph wasn't a low-end in your opinion, you left only 205mph as the unique value for low-end EF-5s (going by 5mph increments)... but I see your point about the realistic upper end in windspeed of a tornado (which I think it can be >220mph)

Since the scale is open-ended, there can be no high-end.

Would a 145kt Cat 5 hurricane be low end? That's ~10mph above the cat 5 baseline

But then why even say "low-end", if that's the norm?

P.S. I would consider 205 mph low-end, but not 210 mph or more. Given that each scale range is only ~30-35 mph, I would consider 10 mph above the threshold well into that range.

What would be a high-end EF5?