********************************************************************************
10675 07/03/1891 M= 6 1 SNBR= 282 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
10675 07/03/1891 M= 6 1 SNBR= 293 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
10680 07/03* 0 0 0 0*217 930 35 0*220 932 45 0*224 935 55 0
10685 07/04*229 939 65 0*234 942 75 0*240 945 80 0*247 948 85 0
10685 07/04*229 939 65 0*234 942 75 0*240 945 80 0*247 948 80 0
**
10690 07/05*254 951 85 0*262 954 85 0*271 956 85 0*281 956 85 0
10690 07/05*254 951 80 0*262 954 80 0*271 956 80 0*281 956 80 0
** ** ** **
10695 07/06*292 954 80 0*303 951 70 0*312 947 60 0*319 943 50 0
10695 07/06*292 954 70 0*303 951 60 0*312 947 55 0*319 943 50 0
** ** **
10700 07/07*325 938 45 0*331 931 40 0*337 923 40 0*342 911 35 0
10700 07/07*325 938 45 0*331 931 40 0*337 923 35 0*342 911 30 0
** **
10705 07/08*350 881 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
10705 07/08*346 897 25 0*350 881 25 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
*** *** ** *** *** **
10710 HR
10710 HRBTX1CTX1
********
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral pressure of 990 mb (at
0230Z on the 6th) suggests winds of at least 62 kt from the Gulf of Mexico
wind-pressure relationship - 80 kt chosen for best track, which reduces
the peak intensity originally in HURDAT slightly. Decay to tropical
depression stage over land included before dissipation. Additional
six-hourly position added at end of track to allow for reasonable
translational speed of system.
********************************************************************************
10715 08/17/1891 M=13 2 SNBR= 283 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
10715 08/17/1891 M=13 2 SNBR= 294 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
10720 08/17* 0 0 0 0*133 244 35 0*136 255 35 0*138 266 35 0
10725 08/18*140 277 35 0*142 288 40 0*144 299 50 0*146 310 60 0
10730 08/19*149 320 70 0*152 330 75 0*154 340 80 0*156 349 85 0
10730 08/19*149 320 65 0*152 330 65 0*154 340 65 0*156 349 65 0
** ** ** **
10735 08/20*158 358 85 0*161 367 85 0*163 375 85 0*165 383 85 0
10735 08/20*158 358 65 0*161 367 65 0*163 375 65 0*165 383 65 0
** ** ** **
10740 08/21*167 390 85 0*170 398 85 0*173 406 85 0*177 415 85 0
10740 08/21*167 390 65 0*170 398 65 0*173 406 65 0*177 415 65 0
** ** ** **
10745 08/22*182 426 85 0*187 436 85 0*192 446 85 0*196 455 85 0
10745 08/22*182 426 65 0*187 436 65 0*192 446 65 0*196 455 65 0
** ** ** **
10750 08/23*200 463 85 0*205 471 85 0*209 480 85 0*214 489 85 0
10750 08/23*200 463 65 0*205 471 65 0*209 480 65 0*214 489 65 0
** ** ** **
10755 08/24*218 498 85 0*224 508 85 0*230 518 85 0*237 529 85 0
10755 08/24*218 498 65 0*224 508 65 0*230 518 65 0*237 529 65 0
** ** ** **
10760 08/25*245 540 85 0*253 552 85 0*260 563 85 0*267 573 85 0
10760 08/25*245 540 65 0*253 552 65 0*260 563 65 0*267 573 65 0
** ** ** **
10765 08/26*274 583 85 0*281 592 85 0*288 600 85 0*295 608 85 0
10765 08/26*274 583 65 0*281 592 65 0*288 600 65 0*295 608 65 0
** ** ** **
10770 08/27*302 615 85 0*309 621 85 0*316 627 85 0*324 633 85 0
10770 08/27*302 615 65 0*309 621 65 0*316 627 65 0*324 633 65 0
** ** ** **
10775 08/28*335 637 85 0*347 641 85 0*360 644 80 0*373 646 70 0
10775 08/28*335 637 65 0*347 641 65 0*360 644 65 0*373 646 65 0
** ** ** **
10780 08/29*388 645 65 0*403 644 55 0*419 641 35 0*433 640 25 0
10780 08/29*388 645 65 0E403 644 55 0E419 641 35 0E433 640 25 0
* * *
10785 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Gale force and
greater observations available for this system were the following: 997 mb
sea level pressure (suggestive of at least 53 kt from the subtropical
pressure-wind relationship) at Bermuda on the 27th, a ship (the steamer
"Dunsmurry") capsized in the "hurricane" on the 29th (but no specific
observations were provided), and 50 kt S wind on the 30th and 31st from the
steamer "La Touraine". Thus available observational evidence suggests
that the system may have achieved minimal hurricane intensity, but not
reaching Category 2 status as shown originally. Winds reduced for much of
the system's lifecycle.
********************************************************************************
10790 08/18/1891 M= 8 3 SNBR= 284 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
10790 08/18/1891 M= 8 3 SNBR= 295 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
10795 08/18* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*139 578 35 0*147 597 40 0
10795 08/18* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*133 580 90 0*139 594 100 0
*** *** ** *** *** ***
10800 08/19*155 614 65 0*162 629 75 0*168 640 80 0*174 649 85 0
10800 08/19*147 611 110 961*153 625 110 0*160 640 105 0*165 650 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10805 08/20*179 657 85 0*184 665 80 0*190 672 80 0*196 679 80 0
10805 08/20*170 661 95 0*175 671 90 0*180 680 85 0*187 684 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
10810 08/21*202 686 85 0*207 693 85 0*213 700 85 0*218 709 85 0
10810 08/21*196 686 85 0*203 689 85 0*210 695 85 0*215 702 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10815 08/22*222 718 85 0*226 727 85 0*230 736 85 0*234 744 85 0
10815 08/22*218 710 85 0*221 717 85 0*225 726 85 0*229 735 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10820 08/23*237 752 85 0*240 759 85 0*243 767 85 0*246 775 85 0
10820 08/23*233 745 85 0*238 755 85 0*243 767 85 0*246 775 85 0
*** *** *** ***
10825 08/24*248 782 85 0*251 789 80 0*253 797 75 0*255 806 65 0
10825 08/24*248 782 80 0*251 789 75 0*253 797 70 0*255 806 55 0
** ** ** **
10830 08/25*258 815 60 0*260 826 50 0*262 837 45 0*262 848 35 0
10830 08/25*258 815 50 0*260 826 45 0*262 837 40 0*262 848 35 0
** ** **
10835 HR
10835 HRCFL1
****
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are
found to be reasonable. A central pressure reading of 961 mb (01Z on the
19th) suggests winds of 99 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship
- 110 kt used in best track because of indications of a small radius of
maximum wind (from Father Benito Vines' analysis quoted in the Partagas
and Diaz report) as well as extensive destruction in Martinique. Hurricane
is considered Category 1 (70 kt) at landfall in South Florida, but such
designation is quite uncertain given the lack of observations near the
landfall location. Complete lifecycle of this hurricane is not available
as neither the genesis nor the decay of the system was not documented. The
hurricane is also known as "San Magin", due to the rainfall-induced
flooding that occurred in Puerto Rico.
********************************************************************************
10840 09/02/1891 M= 9 4 SNBR= 285 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
10840 09/02/1891 M= 9 4 SNBR= 296 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
10845 09/02* 0 0 0 0*193 582 35 0*197 592 40 0*199 600 40 0
10850 09/03*201 607 45 0*204 615 50 0*208 623 55 0*213 631 60 0
10855 09/04*218 639 70 0*223 647 75 0*228 655 80 0*234 662 85 0
10860 09/05*239 669 85 0*246 676 85 0*252 683 85 0*260 690 85 0
10865 09/06*271 697 85 0*283 703 85 0*296 710 85 0*310 714 85 0
10870 09/07*327 715 85 0*347 713 85 0*368 703 85 0*395 680 85 0
10875 09/08*426 646 80 0*458 609 75 0*486 579 70 0*509 555 65 0
10880 09/09*529 533 60 0*547 511 55 0*562 492 50 0*575 475 45 0
10880 09/09E529 533 60 0E547 511 55 0E562 492 50 0E575 475 45 0
* * * *
10885 09/10*585 459 40 0*592 445 35 0*597 433 30 0* 0 0 0 0
10885 09/10E585 459 40 0E592 445 35 0E597 433 30 0* 0 0 0 0
* * *
10890 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Only intensity alteration is to
indicate extratropical stage for the hurricane north of 52N.
********************************************************************************
10895 09/16/1891 M=11 5 SNBR= 286 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
10895 09/16/1891 M=11 5 SNBR= 297 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
10900 09/16*193 465 35 0*198 471 35 0*202 478 35 0*207 488 35 0
10905 09/17*213 498 35 0*218 507 35 0*223 516 40 0*228 524 40 0
10910 09/18*232 532 45 0*237 539 50 0*242 547 55 0*248 556 60 0
10915 09/19*254 566 65 0*260 575 70 0*266 583 70 0*272 590 75 0
10920 09/20*277 596 80 0*282 601 80 0*288 607 85 0*294 613 85 0
10920 09/20*281 600 80 0*288 607 80 0*295 615 85 0*300 621 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10925 09/21*300 618 85 0*306 623 85 0*312 628 85 0*318 631 85 0
10925 09/21*305 627 85 0*310 633 85 0*315 637 85 0*320 640 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10930 09/22*324 632 85 0*330 631 85 0*336 630 85 0*342 628 85 0
10930 09/22*325 641 85 0*329 641 85 0*333 640 85 0*340 635 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10935 09/23*349 624 85 0*356 617 85 0*363 607 85 0*370 591 85 0
10935 09/23*348 627 85 0*356 618 85 0*363 607 85 0*370 591 85 0
*** *** ***
10940 09/24*375 573 85 0*379 555 85 0*382 538 85 0*382 523 85 0
10945 09/25*382 508 80 0*382 493 80 0*382 478 75 0*384 463 65 0
10950 09/26*388 448 55 0*394 433 40 0*402 418 35 0*413 397 30 0
10950 09/26*388 448 55 0*394 433 40 0E402 418 40 0E413 397 40 0
* ** * **
10955 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral
pressure reading of 980 mb (05Z on the 22nd) suggests winds of at least
75 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt retained in
the best track.
********************************************************************************
10960 09/29/1891 M=10 6 SNBR= 287 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
10960 09/29/1891 M=10 6 SNBR= 298 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
10965 09/29* 0 0 0 0*207 546 35 0*212 547 35 0*217 550 40 0
10970 09/30*222 554 45 0*228 558 45 0*233 562 50 0*238 566 50 0
10975 10/01*244 571 55 0*249 576 60 0*255 582 60 0*261 590 65 0
10980 10/02*267 600 70 0*274 611 75 0*280 620 80 0*283 626 80 0
10980 10/02*266 597 70 0*271 604 75 0*277 613 80 0*283 620 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10985 10/03*287 633 85 0*291 639 85 0*295 645 85 0*301 653 85 0
10985 10/03*289 627 85 0*294 634 85 0*300 640 85 0*308 646 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10990 10/04*310 662 85 0*318 671 85 0*328 680 85 0*338 684 85 0
10990 10/04*318 654 85 0*327 660 85 0*335 667 85 0*346 675 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10995 10/05*350 686 85 0*364 688 85 0*380 688 85 0*399 678 85 0
10995 10/05*353 681 85 0*365 687 85 0*380 688 75 0*399 678 65 0
*** *** *** *** ** **
11000 10/06*425 650 85 0*453 616 85 0*472 580 80 0*484 549 75 0
11000 10/06E425 650 55 0E453 616 50 0E472 580 50 0E484 549 50 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11005 10/07*496 517 70 0*506 484 65 0*516 450 65 0*525 414 60 0
11005 10/07E496 517 50 0E506 484 50 0E516 450 50 0E525 414 50 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11010 10/08*534 373 60 0*542 331 55 0*550 295 50 0*568 255 45 0
11010 10/08E534 373 50 0E542 331 50 0E552 295 50 0E568 255 45 0
* ** * ** **** *
11015 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral
pressure reading of 981 mb (01Z on the 4th) suggests winds of at least
74 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt wind retained
in the best track. Winds reduced from the 5th to the 8th due to
observations supporting tropical storm intensity south of and over Canada.
Position altered slightly on last day of system to allow a more realistic
translational velocity.
********************************************************************************
1891/07 - 2003 REVISION:
11020 10/01/1891 M=10 7 SNBR= 288 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11020 10/01/1891 M=10 7 SNBR= 299 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
11025 10/01* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*175 598 35 0*176 608 40 0
11030 10/02*177 619 40 0*177 629 45 0*178 639 45 0*178 649 45 0
11035 10/03*179 659 45 0*179 670 45 0*179 680 45 0*180 690 45 0
11040 10/04*180 701 45 0*182 712 40 0*183 723 40 0*185 734 40 0
11045 10/05*189 745 40 0*193 756 45 0*198 767 45 0*204 778 45 0
11050 10/06*210 788 45 0*218 798 40 0*228 807 40 0*239 812 45 0
11055 10/07*250 812 45 0*262 810 40 0*273 804 40 0*284 797 40 0
11060 10/08*295 789 40 0*306 781 40 0*317 772 45 0*326 763 45 0
11065 10/09*334 753 45 0*342 743 45 0*350 732 45 0*360 718 45 0
11070 10/10*371 702 40 0*384 682 40 0*398 661 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11075 TS
No changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made no alterations to the
track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). (This storm along
with storms 8 and 9 is being further investigated by the re-analysis team.
Alterations - if any - will await the collection of all possible ship and
land based observations.)
1891/07 - 2004 REVISION:
11555 10/01/1891 M=10 7 SNBR= 299 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11020 10/04/1891 M= 7 7 SNBR= 300 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** ** ***
(The 1st through the 3rd are removed from HURDAT.)
11560 10/01* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*175 598 35 0*176 608 40 0
11565 10/02*177 619 40 0*177 629 45 0*178 639 45 0*178 649 45 0
11570 10/03*179 659 45 0*179 670 45 0*179 680 45 0*180 690 45 0
11575 10/04*180 701 45 0*182 712 40 0*183 723 40 0*185 734 40 0
11025 10/04* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*150 790 35 0*160 795 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
11580 10/05*189 745 40 0*193 756 45 0*198 767 45 0*204 778 45 0
11030 10/05*170 800 45 0*175 805 45 0*180 810 45 0*187 815 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
11585 10/06*210 788 45 0*218 798 40 0*228 807 40 0*239 812 45 0
11035 10/06*195 820 45 0*205 823 45 0*215 825 45 0*226 823 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
11590 10/07*250 812 45 0*262 810 40 0*273 804 40 0*284 797 40 0
11040 10/07*237 820 40 0*248 815 45 0*260 810 40 0*271 803 40 1004
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** ****
11595 10/08*295 789 40 0*306 781 40 0*317 772 45 0*326 763 45 0
11045 10/08*282 793 40 0*293 782 40 0*305 770 40 0*318 755 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
11600 10/09*334 753 45 0*342 743 45 0*350 732 45 0*360 718 45 0
11050 10/09E332 740 40 0E346 725 40 0E360 710 45 0E370 695 40 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **** *** **
11605 10/10*371 702 40 0*384 682 40 0*398 661 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11055 10/10E375 675 35 0E378 650 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** *** *** **
11610 TS
U.S. Tropical Storm Landfall Data
---------------------------------
#/Date Time Lat Lon Max States
Winds Affected
7-10/7/1891$ 0000Z 25.0N 81.2W 45kt FL
7-10/7/1891$ 0800Z 25.2N 81.3W 45kt FL
**** **** ****
Three tropical systems in early October were first suggested by Mitchell
(1924), which was utilized in the HURDAT database as well as Neumann et al.
(1999) (storms 7, 8 and 9). In contrast, the Monthly Weather Review summary
of the era suggested one primary low forming in the Caribbean on the 6th,
moving across Cuba and Florida, impacting the U.S. mid-Atlantic states
and dissipating near Nova Scotia on the 14th. MWR also had a secondary
low pressure forming near the Florida Keys on the 9th and merging with
the main low on the 11th. Partagas and Diaz (1996a) believed that, "most
likely, only one storm ... was what happened in reality". However, they
"did not find enough evidence to entirely disprove the existence of the
three storms and, consequently, [they] decided to keep unchanged the tracks
for Storms 7, 8 and 9, 1891."
Subsequent research by the re-analysis team has uncovered evidence to
support a different conclusion to all the above: two storm systems existed -
1) a moderate tropical storm forming in the Caribbean on the 4th, moving
across Cuba and Florida, being absorbed in a frontal boundary and decaying
on the 10th (storm 7); and 2) a weak tropical storm also forming in the
Caribbean on the 7th and becomming extratropical storm system near near the
Florida Keys on the 9th, crossing Florida, slowing and becoming a strong
"Nor'easter" on the 11th to the 13th and decaying on the 15th and 16th over
Nova Scotia and Newfoundland (was storms 8 and 9, now combined into 8).
Storm 9 apparently never existed as a separate storm system, but was in fact
part of the extratropical storm stage for storm 8. Thus the two original
tropical storms and one original hurricane in HURDAT have been replaced with
two tropical storms.
Evidence for this scenario comes from both the COADS ship database, U.S.
station data obtained from NCDC, and Bermuda observations provided by
Mike Chenoweth. These were then plotted and analyzed twice daily from 1 to
15 October, 1891. (Figures showing the
station and ship observations and the team's analyses are provided.)
The remainder of this writeup focusses upon storm 7. The discussion for
the storm 8 (originally storm 8 and storm 9) is contained in that storm's
metadata file.
The early portion of original storm 7's track (1st through the 5th) has
been discounted partly by ship data (especially on the 4th and 5th) but
primarily by the climatological studies of Puerto Rico (Salivia 1972),
Hispanola (Garcia-Bonnelly 1958), and Cuba (Sarasola 1928). The first two
comprehensive tropical cyclone listings indicated that no tropical storm
or hurricane impacted those locations in October 1891. Perez (2003 -
personal communication) reconfirmed the earlier Cuban historical study
that the tropical system in October 1891 formed in the Caribbean and
made landfall in south central Cuba late on the 6th of October, not moving
in along eastern Cuba as suggested in HURDAT and Neumann et al.
Ship data first indicate a closed circulation late on the 4th in the
western Caribbean. Peripheral pressures of 1004 and 1005 mb on the 5th and
6th from ships and Havana suggest winds of at least 39 and 36 kt,
respectively. These along with ship observations suggest a maximum 1 min
wind of about 45 kt for this time period. (Some small weakening over
Cuba is accounted for on the 7th with a return to 45 kt intensity for
landfall in south Florida.) Station observations clearly locate the
center of the storm during its trek across Florida on the 7th. A sea
level pressure of 1004 mb in Jupiter, Florida at 1940 UTC may have been
a central pressure. This suggests winds of about 40 kt, which is
utilized for the HURDAT revision. Over water observations are somewhat
sparse on the 8th and 9th, but enhanced winds in North Carolina (peak of
39 kt at Kitty Hawk and 35 kt at Cape Hatteras) suggest a relatively
close pass east of the state early on the 9th. This likely occurred
soon after the system's extratropical transformation. The storm then likely
dissipated north of Bermuda on the 10th. It is noted that the track
provided here is quite similar from that found in HURDAT and Neumann et al.
(1999) for storm 7 from the 7th to the 10th.
********************************************************************************
1891/08 - 2003 REVISION:
11080 10/06/1891 M= 6 8 SNBR= 289 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11080 10/06/1891 M= 6 8 SNBR= 300 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
11085 10/06* 0 0 0 0*159 830 35 0*164 832 40 0*171 837 40 0
11090 10/07*178 841 45 0*186 844 45 0*193 847 45 0*200 849 45 0
11095 10/08*208 850 45 0*215 850 45 0*223 848 45 0*233 844 45 0
11100 10/09*246 837 45 0*259 831 45 0*270 825 45 0*278 819 40 0
11105 10/10*284 813 35 0*291 807 35 0*298 801 40 0*307 793 45 0
11110 10/11*316 784 45 0*326 774 40 0*337 762 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11115 TS
No changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made no alterations to the
track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). (This storm along
with storms 7 and 9 is being further investigated by the re-analysis team.
Alterations - if any - will await the collection of all possible ship and
land based observations.)
1891/08 - 2004 REVISION:
11615 10/06/1891 M= 6 8 SNBR= 300 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11615 10/07/1891 M=10 8 SNBR= 301 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** *** *
(The 6th removed from HURDAT.)
11620 10/06* 0 0 0 0*159 830 35 0*164 832 40 0*171 837 40 0
11625 10/07*178 841 45 0*186 844 45 0*193 847 45 0*200 849 45 0
11625 10/07* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*180 850 30 0*185 850 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11630 10/08*208 850 45 0*215 850 45 0*223 848 45 0*233 844 45 0
11630 10/08*190 850 35 0*195 850 35 0*200 848 35 0*207 844 35 0
*** ** *** ** *** ** *** **
11635 10/09*246 837 45 0*259 831 45 0*270 825 45 0*278 819 40 0
11635 10/09*215 840 35 0*225 837 40 0*240 835 40 0E255 828 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** **** *** **
11640 10/10*284 813 35 0*291 807 35 0*298 801 40 0*307 793 45 0
11640 10/10E270 815 30 0E284 807 30 0E298 800 30 0E310 788 30 0
**** *** ** **** ** * *** ** **** *** **
11645 10/11*316 784 45 0*326 774 40 0*337 762 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11645 10/11E320 770 30 0E326 758 35 0E332 750 40 0E338 745 45 0
**** *** ** * *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
(The 8th to the 11th from storm 9 removed. The track from storm 9 on the
12th to the 16th incorporated into storm 8's track.)
11655 10/08/1891 M= 9 9 SNBR= 301 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11660 10/08* 0 0 0 0*238 572 35 0*245 582 40 0*251 591 40 0
11665 10/09*256 601 45 0*262 612 50 0*268 625 55 0*274 639 60 0
11670 10/10*280 653 70 0*287 666 75 0*293 680 80 0*299 694 85 0
11675 10/11*305 708 85 0*312 721 85 0*321 735 85 0*330 740 85 0
11680 10/12*340 742 85 0*350 741 85 0*359 740 85 0*366 737 85 0
11680 10/12E344 740 50 0E348 737 55 0E350 735 55 0E354 733 55 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
11685 10/13*373 733 85 0*380 728 85 0*388 721 85 0*395 715 85 0
11685 10/13E360 731 55 0E370 729 55 0E380 725 55 0E390 715 55 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** **
11690 10/14*403 706 85 0*412 694 85 0*422 681 85 0*433 665 85 0
11690 10/14E400 705 55 0E410 695 55 0E420 685 50 0E433 665 45 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** * **
11695 10/15*446 647 80 0*460 626 75 0*475 602 70 0*500 571 65 0
11695 10/15E446 640 40 0E460 620 40 0E475 602 35 0E500 571 30 0
* *** ** * *** ** * ** * **
11700 10/16*530 522 65 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11700 10/16E530 522 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
* **
11650 TS
U.S. Tropical Storm Landfall Data
---------------------------------
#/Date Time Lat Lon Max States
Winds Affected
8-10/9/1891$ 1400Z 25.8N 81.7W 45kt FL
(Removed from listing)
9-10/12/1891* 0600Z 35.0N 74.1W 60kt NC
(Removed from listing)
Three tropical systems in early October were first suggested by Mitchell
(1924), which was utilized in the HURDAT database as well as Neumann et al.
(1999) (storms 7, 8 and 9). In contrast, the Monthly Weather Review summary
of the era suggested one primary low forming in the Caribbean on the 6th,
moving across Cuba and Florida, impacting the U.S. mid-Atlantic states
and dissipating near Nova Scotia on the 14th. MWR also had a secondary
low pressure forming near the Florida Keys on the 9th and merging with
the main low on the 11th. Partagas and Diaz (1996a) believed that, "most
likely, only one storm ... was what happened in reality". However, they
"did not find enough evidence to entirely disprove the existence of the
three storms and, consequently, [they] decided to keep unchanged the tracks
for Storms 7, 8 and 9, 1891."
Subsequent research by the re-analysis team has uncovered evidence to
support a different conclusion to all the above: two storm systems existed -
1) a moderate tropical storm forming in the Caribbean on the 4th, moving
across Cuba and Florida, being absorbed in a frontal boundary and decaying
on the 10th (storm 7); and 2) a weak tropical storm also forming in the
Caribbean on the 7th and becomming extratropical storm system near near the
Florida Keys on the 9th, crossing Florida, slowing and becoming a strong
"Nor'easter" on the 11th to the 13th and decaying on the 15th and 16th over
Nova Scotia and Newfoundland (was storms 8 and 9, now combined into 8).
Storm 9 apparently never existed as a separate storm system, but was in fact
part of the extratropical storm stage for storm 8. Thus the two original
tropical storms and one original hurricane in HURDAT have been replaced with
two tropical storms.
Evidence for this scenario comes from both the COADS ship database, U.S.
station data obtained from NCDC, and Bermuda observations provided by
Mike Chenoweth. These were then plotted and analyzed twice daily from 1 to
15 October, 1891. (Figures showing the
station and ship observations and the team's analyses are provided.)
The remainder of this writeup focusses upon storm 8. The discussion for
the storm 7 is contained in that storm's metadata file.
Original storm 8 and 9 were each depicting a portion of the same storm
system that occurred. The genesis of the revised system is delayed a day
until the 7th in the northwestern Caribbean. By the time it reached
the Florida Keys on the 9th, it had merged with a pre-existing baroclinic
zone and became an extratropical storm. During the two day period
when the system maintained tropical cyclone status, peak observed winds
were 35 kt N from a ship at 14 UTC on the 9th at 21.0N 86.0W and lowest
observed pressures were from same ship: 1004 mb at 22 UTC on the 7th at
20.0N 84.0W and 1005 mb at 10 UTC on the 9th at 21.0N 86.0W (though a time
series of pressure from this ship suggests that the values may be
consistant 2-4 mb too low. 1004 mb peripheral pressure suggests winds of
at least 39 kt from the southern pressure-wind relationship. Peak estimated
winds as a tropical storm are 40 kt on the 9th. However, by the
time the system reached the Florida Keys as an extratropical system, either
it had weakened slightly or had not actually attained tropical storm
intensity. Peak conditions observed were only 21 kt and 1012 mb in Key West
as the system passed just to the west of the city. The extratrpical storm
then moved slowly northeastward across Florida into the Atlantic and then
drifted to the north beginning on the 11th for about 36 hours southeast of
Cape Hatteras. During this time a high built in from the north and west and
in conjunction with the extratropical storm caused strong northeasterly winds
along the U.S. mid-Atlantic and New England coasts. Peak (uncorrected) 5 min
sustained winds reached 57 kt at Kitty Hawk, 63 kt at Cape Hatteras, 41 kt at
Atlantic City, 63 kt at Block Island, and 50 kt at Nantucket. The estimated
maximum 1 min winds for this system during its extratropical stage were
about 55 kt. On the 13th to the 15th, the baroclinic low moved northeastward
and weakened. The baroclinic nature of this system is quite clear - it had
at times a 25F east-west temperature gradient while along the Atlantic coast.
The early portion of the original storm 9 also appears to be incorrect
based upon ship and Bermuda data on the 8th to the 11th. There is no
indication that a low (tropical or baroclinic) came toward the U.S.
Atlantic seaboard from the southeast. However, the portion of original
storm 9's track from the 12th to the 15th does closely match the analysis
here of the extratropical storm stage for this revised storm 8. However,
it is to be noted that the evidence for retaining this system in HURDAT
at all as a tropical storm is marginal given one gale force report and
a couple suspect low pressure readings.
********************************************************************************
1891/09 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1891/10, but became 1891/09 after the removal
of the original 1891/09 - May 2004.
1891/09 - 2003 REVISION:
11175 10/12/1891 M= 9 10 SNBR= 291 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11175 10/12/1891 M= 9 10 SNBR= 302 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11180 10/12* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*125 613 35 0*136 620 45 0
11180 10/12* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*125 613 35 0*136 620 35 0
**
11185 10/13*147 627 60 0*156 632 70 0*162 636 80 0*167 639 80 0
11185 10/13*147 627 40 0*156 632 40 0*162 636 45 0*167 639 45 0
** ** ** **
11190 10/14*172 641 85 0*177 644 85 0*182 646 85 0*187 648 85 0
11190 10/14*172 641 50 0*177 644 50 0*182 646 55 0*187 648 55 0
** ** ** **
11195 10/15*192 650 85 0*197 652 85 0*202 654 85 0*213 656 85 0
11195 10/15*192 650 60 0*197 652 60 0*202 654 65 0*213 656 70 0
** ** ** **
11200 10/16*224 658 85 0*234 660 85 0*245 662 85 0*256 663 85 0
11200 10/16*224 658 75 0*234 660 75 0*245 662 75 0*256 663 75 0
** ** ** **
11205 10/17*267 662 85 0*277 661 85 0*288 660 85 0*297 659 85 0
11205 10/17*267 662 75 0*277 661 75 0*288 660 75 0*297 659 75 0
** ** ** **
11210 10/18*303 659 85 0*310 658 85 0*320 657 85 0*334 655 85 0
11210 10/18*303 659 75 0*310 658 75 0*320 657 75 0*334 655 75 0
** ** ** **
11215 10/19*353 653 85 0*372 649 85 0*390 639 85 0*409 623 85 0
11215 10/19*353 653 75 0*372 649 75 0*390 639 70 0*409 623 65 0
** ** ** **
11220 10/20*430 602 80 0*448 582 65 0*465 570 60 0*485 575 35 0
11220 10/20*430 602 60 0*448 582 50 0*465 570 40 0*485 575 35 0
** ** ** **
11225 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996a) did not introduce any track changes from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999) for this hurricane. Gale force and
greater observations available for this system were the following:
"gales of hurricane force" on the 17th east-northeast of the Bahamas,
60 kt SE-SW wind and 992 mb on the 18th at Bermuda (this peripheral
sea level pressure suggests winds of at least 61 kt from the subtropical
wind-pressure relationship - 75 kt utilized), 70 kt wind on the 19th
("Ocean Prince") at 36 N, 62 W. Available observational evidence
suggests that the peak intensity for this hurricane was a minimal
hurricane (Category 1), rather than the standard Category 2 (85 kt)
originally in HURDAT. Winds are reduced accordingly from the 13th to
the 20th. Hurricane intensity attained after passing through the Lesser
Antilles.
********************************************************************************
1891/10 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1891/11, but became 1891/10 after the removal
of the original 1891/10 - May 2004.
1891/10 - 2003 REVISION:
11230 11/03/1891 M= 4 11 SNBR= 292 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11230 11/03/1891 M= 4 11 SNBR= 303 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11235 11/03*241 738 35 0*250 725 35 0*257 716 40 0*268 703 45 0
11240 11/04*279 687 45 0*291 668 50 0*302 647 50 0*313 621 50 0
11245 11/05*325 592 50 0*338 562 50 0*352 538 45 0*380 512 40 0
11250 11/06*416 490 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11255 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). The only change is to renumber the
storm number for the year.
********************************************************************************
1891 - Additional Notes - 2004 REVISION:
1) The NHC Best Track Change Committee requested further investigation into
the possible storm system first identified by Partagas and Diaz (1996b)
in mid-July 1891:
"1891 additional system #1 (July) MWR mentions 'gale' winds.
This system may warrant further research. Is there any COADS?"
Upon investigation of this system in the Monthly Weather Review, from
the COADS ship database, and coastal station data, this system was of
tropical depression intensity at its peak. The COADS data were sparse
in the vicinity of the system until the 12th, when it was east of the
U.S. mid-Atlantic states. Peak ship observations were 25 kt and 1014 mb,
though a weak closed circulation was analyzed. Station data were also
obtained for Jacksonville, Jupiter, Titusville, Savannah, Charleston,
Wilmington, Cape Hatteras, Kitty Hawk, Baltimore, Atlantic City, New
York City, New London, New Haven, Block Island and Nantucket. Peak
observed winds were 36 mph at Kitty Hawk (10th and 11th) and at
Cape Hatteras (11th). These observations also support tropical depression
status for this system. While "fresh to strong gales" were mentioned
in the Monthly Weather Review, no evidence for these were to be found
from any source. Thus this system is not added into HURDAT.
2) September 11-12, 1891: Partagas and Diaz (1996b) had investigated
this system for possibility of inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team
agreed with Partagas and Diaz to leave it out of HURDAT as there was not
enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
3) September 14-15, 1891: Partagas and Diaz (1996b) had investigated
this system for possibility of inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team
agreed with Partagas and Diaz to leave it out of HURDAT as there was not
enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
4) The NHC Best Track Change Committee requested further investigation into
the possible storm system first identified by Partagas and Diaz (1996b)
in mid-September 1891:
"1891 additional system #4 (Sept) MWR gives TS force winds at
coastal stations. This system is also given a high probability
by P+D, and bears further investigation."
Upon investigation of this system in the Monthly Weather Review, from
the COADS ship database, and coastal station data, a closed circulation for
this system could not be found. The COADS ship data did not provide any
observations near the system, though the station data was quite thorough
with observations obtained for Key West, Jupiter, Titusville, Tampa,
Jacksonville, Pensacola, Mobile, Port Eads, New Orleans and Galveston.
These data indicate that a disturbance did cross the Gulf of Mexico
being located roughly along longitude 78W on the 17th, 80W on
the 18th, 82W on the 19th, 85W on the 20th, 88W on the 21st, and 90W
on the 22nd. Peak winds recorded in association with this system were
40 mph E at Titusville on the 19th, 48 mph NE at New Orleans on the 20th,
and 40 mph NE at Galveston on the 20th. However, only easterly winds were
reported from these locations and lowest pressure recorded was only
1014 mb at Key West on the 19th. It is possible that this was a
tropical storm, but confirming observations for having a closed
circulation were not found. (It is also possible that the system was
a vigorous easterly wave with no closed circulation and a NNE-SSW oriented
wave axis.) Thus because of the uncertainty and lack of having an observed
closed circulation, this system is not included into HURDAT.
5) Storm 9 in Partagas and Diaz (1996a) and Neumann et al. (1999) apparently
did not exist as a separate tropical cyclone, but was in fact part of the
extratropical storm stage for storm 8. Thus this system is removed from
HURDAT. Details on the observations for this removal can be found within
the discussion of storm 8. (Figures showing
the station and ship observations and the team's analyses are provided.).
Below is the original HURDAT entry for this system:
11120 10/08/1891 M= 9 9 SNBR= 290 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11125 10/08* 0 0 0 0*238 572 35 0*245 582 40 0*251 591 40 0
11130 10/09*256 601 45 0*262 612 50 0*268 625 55 0*274 639 60 0
11135 10/10*280 653 70 0*287 666 75 0*293 680 80 0*299 694 85 0
11140 10/11*305 708 85 0*312 721 85 0*321 735 85 0*330 740 85 0
11145 10/12*340 742 85 0*350 741 85 0*359 740 85 0*366 737 85 0
11150 10/13*373 733 85 0*380 728 85 0*388 721 85 0*395 715 85 0
11155 10/14*403 706 85 0*412 694 85 0*422 681 85 0*433 665 85 0
11160 10/15*446 647 80 0*460 626 75 0*475 602 70 0*500 571 65 0
11165 10/16*530 522 65 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11170 HR
********************************************************************************