Verification of East Pacific ghost storm tracks of August-October 2019
I falsely detected tropical cyclogenesis in East Pacific (north of the
equator and east of 140W longitude) 27 times in August thru October of
2019. During that period, I falsely detected crossover from Atlantic to East Pacific twice. Tracks were made of thirteen systems.
In the calculations, crossover into Atlantic as a tropical cyclone is considered equal to dissipation, and crossover from Atlantic as a tropical cyclone is considered equal to formation or regeneration. Exiting the East Pacific tracking map through its left edge is also considered equal to dissipation.
At the lead time of 1 day (24 hours), there were 5 false detections.
At the lead time of 2 days (48 hours), there was 6 false detections.
At the lead time of 3 days (72 hours), there were 6 false detections.
At the lead time of 4 days (96 hours), there was 8 false detections.
At the lead time of 5 days (120 hours), there was 7 false detections.
At the lead time of 6 days (144 hours), there was 7 false detections.
At the lead time of 7 days (168 hours), there was 4 false detections.
At the lead time of 8 days (192 hours), there were 2 false detections.
At the lead time of 9 days (216 hours), there were 3 false detections.
At the lead time of 10 days (240 hours), there were 3 false detections.
At the lead time of 11 days (264 hours), there were 5 false detections.
At the lead time of 12 days (288 hours), there were 5 false detections.
At the lead time of 13 days (312 hours), there were 9 false detections.
At the lead time of 14 days (336 hours), there were 12 false detections.
At the lead time of 15 days (360 hours), there were 14 false detections.
At the lead time of 16 days (384 hours), there were 16 false detections.
Circle coloration scheme
In the calculations, crossover into Atlantic as a tropical cyclone is considered equal to dissipation, and crossover from Atlantic as a tropical cyclone is considered equal to formation or regeneration. Exiting the East Pacific tracking map through its left edge is also considered equal to dissipation.
At the lead time of 1 day (24 hours), there were 5 false detections.
At the lead time of 2 days (48 hours), there was 6 false detections.
At the lead time of 3 days (72 hours), there were 6 false detections.
At the lead time of 4 days (96 hours), there was 8 false detections.
At the lead time of 5 days (120 hours), there was 7 false detections.
At the lead time of 6 days (144 hours), there was 7 false detections.
At the lead time of 7 days (168 hours), there was 4 false detections.
At the lead time of 8 days (192 hours), there were 2 false detections.
At the lead time of 9 days (216 hours), there were 3 false detections.
At the lead time of 10 days (240 hours), there were 3 false detections.
At the lead time of 11 days (264 hours), there were 5 false detections.
At the lead time of 12 days (288 hours), there were 5 false detections.
At the lead time of 13 days (312 hours), there were 9 false detections.
At the lead time of 14 days (336 hours), there were 12 false detections.
At the lead time of 15 days (360 hours), there were 14 false detections.
At the lead time of 16 days (384 hours), there were 16 false detections.
Circle coloration scheme
System E#35
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Henriette.
System E#36
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Ivo.
System E#37
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Akoni.
Ghost storm E#38
This system was monitored by NHC, and given a medium chance of formation at best.
August 18, 12Z run:
Ghost storm E#39
This system was monitored for cyclogenesis by NHC, but only for 2-5 day range. Here it is visible as cloudiness between Baja California Sur and Jalisco.
August 23, 06Z run:
System E#40
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Juliette.
System E#41
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Kiko.
System E#42
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Lorena.
Ghost storm E#43
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Juliette.
System E#41
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Kiko.System E#42
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Lorena.Ghost storm E#43
September 6, 06Z run:
September 11, 06Z run:
Ghost storm E#44
September 11, 06Z run:
September 13, 00Z run:
System E#45
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Mario.
System E#46
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Narda.
Ghost storm E#47
September 18, 00Z run:
Ghost storm E#48
This system was given by NHC a medium chance of development at best.
September 22, 06Z run:
September 29, 12Z run:
October 2, 06Z run:
Ghost storm E#49
This was given a high chance of formation by NHC.
September 22, 06Z run:
September 23, 06Z run:
September 26, 06Z run:
October 7, 06Z run:
October 9, 06Z run:
October 11, 06Z run:
Ghost storm L#63
Although an Atlantic genesis, this system is identifiable with Potential Tropical Cyclone 17-E. Only one track of L#63 had crossover to EPac.
September 27, 06Z run:
Ghost storm E#50
After L#61, L#62 and L#63, genesis finally shifted to Eastern Pacific, associated with what would become Potential Tropical Cyclone 17-E. Here it is shown just before initiation of PTC advisories.
September 29, 12Z run:
September 30, 12Z run:
October 3, 06Z run:
October 11, 06Z run:
October 13, 06Z run:
October 14, 12Z run:
Ghost storm E#51
This was given a low chance of development by NHC.
October 2, 06Z run:
System E#52
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Priscilla.Ghost storm E#53
October 13, 06Z run:
October 28, 06Z run:
System E#54
was not a ghost storm. Rather, it was Octave.Ghost storm E#55
These tracks continued in November.
October 19, 06Z run:
October 20, 06Z run:
Ghost storm L#76
These Atlantic cyclogeneses continued in November. Not all of them included crossover to EPac.
October 30, 06Z run:
Comments
Post a Comment