• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jpeters3

  1. Yeah, you were right to argue about that one. I can't think of another comparable example.
  2. FWIW, KTLH is consistently showing 160-170 mph maximum inbound returns in the right quadrant.
  3. You can also look at the KLCH radar - no indication of secondary reflectivity max there. Just a MASSIVE inner eyewall.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. I doubt it's attenuation. Looks like a real signal to me.
  10. Starting to see a bit of erosion of the SW eyewall in radar.
  11. Looks like a sonde got 947 mb with 7 kt at the surface. There's your pressure.
  12. 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.
  13. 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
  14. He's not completely insane in the observation that if continued NW motion were to occur, this thing would make landfall smack dab on Galveston. What should be emphasized is that models show a more northward turn which should take it toward Port Arthur. But there is nothing in the current trajectory that suggests Houston is "safe."
  15. Uh, if it were at Houston's latitude, it would have made landfall already... Edit: I suspect you are seeing Corpus Christi on the map.
  16. This seems to support ~ 948 mb.
  17. If this is supported by a dropsonde, we have yet another 7-8 hPa drop between passes. Amazing.
  18. That was me... (where is the Picard facepalm meme when you need it...) EDIT by jburns. Here you go.
  19. Ok, I will be nicer. I was feeling a bit defensive of the person they jumped on because they were only responding (in good fun) to my suggestion for guesses.
  20. FWIW, CIMSS site is back up. ADT is at 6.5, 929 mb, 127 kt.
  21. Go poop on somebody else's parade. There is room for a little bit of responsible fun here.