jpeters3

Meteorologist
  • Content Count

    588
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jpeters3

  1. There is obviously still time, and pressure seems to still be falling. New recon is inbound, so lets see what they find in the NW quad. But I doubt there will even be a post-season upgrade unless there is something unflagged > 140 combined with dropsonde data that at least implicitly supports this intensity.
  2. There were numerous indicators of > 140 kt in the case of Michael. We haven't seen that yet here.
  3. I agree with this. Upgrade to cat 5 probably means confident SFMR > 140, perhaps with dropsonde support. We definitely don't have that yet.
  4. He clearly meant the first landfall in LA.
  5. There needs to be an all encompassing "you're just f**ed" warning.
  6. SFMR on the northern side getting MIGHTY close to 140 kt
  7. The 155 mph cat4 vs cat5 on PR is quibbling, given that the threshold for cat 5 is 157 mph.
  8. I actually found it quite humorous
  9. Yeah i'm with you. Saying the outflow looks restricted seems like grasping for straws at this point. Satellite presentation looks better than ever. ADT holding at T6.5, as high as ever.
  10. Yeah, you were right to argue about that one. I can't think of another comparable example.
  11. FWIW, KTLH is consistently showing 160-170 mph maximum inbound returns in the right quadrant.
  12. You can also look at the KLCH radar - no indication of secondary reflectivity max there. Just a MASSIVE inner eyewall.
  13. Recall the argument over whether a 929 mb cat 5 was possible in the Gulf? Seems like we could end up with a ~940 mb cat 5 by the time this is over.
  14. Regarding the weak returns in the southern eyewall, this appears to be a robust signature (It has been persistent from all radar vantages), and is probably indicative of southwesterly shear. Doesn't necessarily mean the onset of weakening at all - to the contrary, the satellite presentation looks the best it has yet. If you recall, Harvey made landfall with a similar "incomplete" eyewall signature, whilst rapidly intensifying. It's simply an observation that indicates the presence of some shear in the environment.
  15. I still maintain that if they had a pressure sensor issue, they would not be flying. This is a pretty serious aviation hazard. So this has to be something to do with the algorithm that they are using to calculate the reduction.
  16. I think the fact that it shows up in the same spot from multiple radars, and it's consistent with southeasterly shear that we know is in the vicinity of the storms, suggests that it is a real feature.
  17. The center is close enough that attenuation or beam overshoot shouldn't be an issue. This gap also shows up on multiple radars in the same spot.
  18. I doubt it's attenuation. Looks like a real signal to me.
  19. Starting to see a bit of erosion of the SW eyewall in radar.
  20. Looks like a sonde got 947 mb with 7 kt at the surface. There's your pressure.
  21. I'm don't think this is accurate. I think the eye size has more to do with the history of the TC (intensity fluctuations, ERCs, land interaction), than the latitude. Remember, Charlie had a pinhole at a similar latitude. Edit: TC cores are very close to cyclostrophic balance, so the Coriolis doesn't have much of a practical effect in the eyewall.
  22. Just to set the record straight, the black is the projected path. Red is Houston. Edit: ahh shit, none of my annotations showed up. Oh well, it's a nice image anyway. CODNEXLAB-GOES-East-meso-meso1-truecolor-19_41Z-20200826_map-glm_flash_-2-1n-10-100-1 (dragged).pdf