Comments of and replies to the
National Hurricane Center Best-Track Change Committee
Minutes of the best-track change committee meeting, 24 February, 2005
Members Jack Beven, Jim Gross, Richard Pasch, Ed Rappaport, and chair
(Colin McAdie) present.
< Reply by Landsea indented and in " < > " - March 2005 >
The committee met to consider a replacement for Brian Jarvinen, who
recently retired. After some discussion, agreement was reached on a candidate.
The suggestion will be forwarded to Max before further action.
In addition, the committee considered two additional changes submitted by
Landsea et al. for the period 1911 -1914.
1911 #6 (originally #4 in Neumann). This track has undergone several
revisions. The committee accepts the track (positions) as now modified.
However, there are some questions about the intensity. Suggest
increasing the intensity to 45 kt at 12Z on 10/27. This is based on the 40-kt SE
wind (presumably off-shore) at Havana. This also assumes that early morning
is approximately 12Z. Can this be determined?
< Yes, correspondence with Perez indicates that this was the morning
(12 UTC) observation from Havana. Winds are boosted to 45 kt
1913 #6 (new) The committee is in basic agreement with the track, but
again there are some questions about the intensity. Questions revolve
around whether the 992 mb observation was a central pressure, or not
(possibly used in the metadata, but listing in track file (0Z, 10/29)
assumes central). If not central, this would argue for a minimal
hurricane. Also, the fact that the wind was not calm in conjunction with this
observation argues against this being a central pressure. In addition,
if the 80 mph estimate (given uncertainties) at Cape San Antonio was made
at the same time, this would make an even stronger case for a minimal
< Yes, it is agreed that the 992 mb observation was not a central
pressure and that both the pressure and the estimated winds support
including the system as a Category 1 hurricane in Cuba. This is now
so revised. >
Return to Overview