********************************************************************************
1906
********************************************************************************
1906/01
16880 06/08/1906 M= 6  1 SNBR= 393 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
16880 06/08/1906 M= 7  1 SNBR= 415 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
                    *          ***

16885 06/08*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*194 836  35    0*204 839  35    0
16885 06/08*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*194 836  35    0*204 837  35    0
                                                                   ***

16890 06/09*214 842  35    0*222 844  35    0*229 845  35    0*234 846  35    0
16890 06/09*214 838  35    0*222 839  35    0*230 840  40    0*235 841  45    0
                ***              ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **

16895 06/10*239 847  40    0*244 847  40    0*250 848  45    0*258 849  45    0
16895 06/10*239 842  45    0*244 842  45    0*250 843  45    0*254 844  45    0
                ***  **          ***  **          ***          *** ***

16900 06/11*264 850  45    0*268 851  45    0*274 852  45    0*278 853  45    0
16900 06/11*258 846  45    0*261 848  45    0*265 850  45    0*270 852  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

16905 06/12*282 854  45    0*286 855  45    0*291 856  45    0*300 856  40    0
16905 06/12*275 854  45    0*280 855  45    0*287 855  45    0*296 856  45    0
            ***              ***              *** ***          ***      **

16910 06/13*307 856  40    0*318 857  35    0*330 857  35    0*341 860  30    0
16910 06/13*307 856  40    0*318 857  35    0*330 857  35    0*346 865  30    0
                                                               *** ***

(The 14th is new to HURDAT.)
16912 06/14E362 877  30    0E380 891  30    0E400 895  30    0E418 898  30    0

16915 TS

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  These large
track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.  A peripheral
pressure of 1002 mb (21Z on the 9th) suggests winds of at least 41 kt from
the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship - winds chosen to be 45 kt
in best track and winds on the 9th and 10th are adjusted accordingly.

********************************************************************************
1906/02

16920 06/14/1906 M=10  2 SNBR= 394 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=1
16920 06/14/1906 M=10  2 SNBR= 416 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=1
                               ***
  
16925 06/14*  0   0   0    0*226 752  35    0*226 757  35    0*226 762  35    0
16925 06/14*  0   0   0    0*229 764  35    0*230 775  35    0*231 782  35    0
                             *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

16930 06/15*226 767  35    0*227 773  40    0*227 778  40    0*228 784  45    0
16930 06/15*231 790  35    0*232 798  40    0*233 805  40    0*233 808  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

16935 06/16*229 791  45    0*230 797  50    0*231 803  55    0*238 808  60    0
16935 06/16*233 811  50    0*233 813  55    0*235 815  60    0*240 815  65    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

16940 06/17*246 810  65    0*255 809  70    0*267 804  70    0*279 795  75    0
16940 06/17*245 813  70    0*250 809  75  979*257 803  75    0*267 790  75    0
            *** ***  **      ***      **  *** *** ***  **      *** ***

16945 06/18*291 785  80    0*300 772  80    0*310 761  85    0*324 744  85    0
16945 06/18*281 775  80    0*295 761  80    0*310 747  85    0*324 734  85    0
            *** ***          *** ***              ***              ***

16950 06/19*336 728  90    0*344 714  90    0*351 701  90    0*353 695  85    0
16950 06/19*338 723  90    0*351 712  90    0*363 695  90    0*367 682  85    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

16955 06/20*355 689  80    0*357 682  75    0*357 674  65    0*356 664  65    0
16955 06/20*366 672  80    0*363 660  75    0*360 650  65    0*357 646  65    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

16960 06/21*354 652  55    0*353 641  50    0*353 630  45    0*355 623  45    0
16960 06/21*354 641  55    0*351 636  50    0*350 630  45    0*352 623  45    0
                ***          *** ***          ***              ***

16965 06/22*358 616  45    0*360 608  40    0*363 600  40    0*367 590  40    0
16965 06/22*356 616  45    0*358 608  40    0*360 600  40    0*363 590  40    0
            ***              ***              ***              ***

16970 06/23*372 578  35    0*377 565  35    0*382 551  35    0E390 530  30    0
16970 06/23*365 578  35    0*368 565  35    0*370 551  35    0E373 530  30    0
            ***              ***              ***              ***

16975 HRCFL1
16975 HRBFL1CFL1
        ****

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small 
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  Ho et. al. (1987)
analyzed a central pressure at landfall of 979 mb and a RMW of 26 nmi in 
peninsula Florida.  This central pressure suggests winds of 79 kt from the 
southern wind-pressure relationship.  Given an RMW slightly larger than what 
is typical at this latitude and central pressure (Vickery et al. 2000), the 
maximum sustained windspeed at landfall is estimated at 75 kt.  Thus the 
hurricane is retained as a Category 1 hurricane at landfall in the Florida 
Keys and southern Florida, agreeing with Table 6 in Neumann et al. (1999)/
U.S. hurricane categorization in HURDAT.

********************************************************************************
1906/03

16976 08/22/1906 M= 4  3 SNBR= 417 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
16977 08/22*  0   0   0    0*287 531  30    0*290 540  30    0*294 548  30    0
16978 08/23*299 556  35    0*305 565  35    0*313 567  40    0*321 564  45    0
16979 08/24*326 558  50    0*330 551  55    0*338 541  60    0*349 528  60    0
16979 08/25*364 512  55    0E375 497  50    0E390 480  45    0E402 463  40    0
16979 TS

No changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
tropical storm.

********************************************************************************
1906/04

16980 08/25/1906 M=19  3 SNBR= 395 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
16980 08/25/1906 M=19  4 SNBR= 418 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                       *       ***

16985 08/25*127 265  65    0*129 276  65    0*131 287  70    0*133 298  70    0
16985 08/25*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*140 210  35    0*140 225  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  ** 

16990 08/26*135 309  70    0*137 321  70    0*139 332  70    0*139 343  70    0
16990 08/26*140 240  40    0*140 255  40    0*140 270  45    0*140 285  45    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

16995 08/27*140 355  70    0*140 366  70    0*140 380  70    0*141 386  70    0
16995 08/27*140 300  50    0*140 315  50    0*140 330  55    0*140 346  55    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17000 08/28*141 394  70    0*142 401  70    0*142 410  70    0*143 421  70    0
17000 08/28*139 362  60    0*139 378  60    0*138 395  65    0*138 412  65    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17005 08/29*144 432  70    0*144 442  70    0*145 453  70    0*145 465  70    0
17005 08/29*137 428  70    0*137 444  70    0*136 460  70    0*136 477  70    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17010 08/30*145 477  75    0*145 491  75    0*146 506  75    0*148 524  80    0
17010 08/30*136 493  75    0*135 509  75    0*135 525  75    0*137 540  80    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17015 08/31*151 539  80    0*154 554  80    0*158 569  85    0*160 577  85    0
17015 08/31*141 553  80    0*145 565  80    0*150 575  85    0*155 583  85    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17020 09/01*164 585  85    0*168 593  85    0*172 601  90    0*175 608  90    0
17020 09/01*160 590  85    0*165 600  85    0*170 607  90    0*175 614  90    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***              *** 

17025 09/02*178 613  90    0*181 619  90    0*184 625  90    0*188 633  95    0
17025 09/02*180 622  90    0*185 631  90    0*190 640  90    0*193 647  95    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17030 09/03*192 643  95    0*194 650 100    0*197 659 100    0*199 668 105    0
17030 09/03*196 654  95    0*198 660 100    0*200 667 100    0*203 676 105    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17035 09/04*202 675 105    0*206 683 110    0*211 692 110    0*215 700 110    0
17035 09/04*206 683 105    0*209 690 110    0*213 696 110    0*216 702 110    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17040 09/05*220 706 115    0*225 712 115    0*231 720 115    0*235 727 115    0
17040 09/05*221 708 115    0*225 714 115    0*231 720 115    0*235 727 115    0
            *** ***              ***                 

17045 09/06*239 734 115    0*244 740 115    0*250 747 115    0*259 750 110    0
17045 09/06*239 734 115    0*244 740 115    0*250 747 115    0*258 756 110    0
                                                               *** ***

17050 09/07*269 750 110    0*276 747 110    0*283 740 105    0*290 731 100    0
17050 09/07*268 764 110    0*279 766 110    0*290 760 110    0*295 748 110    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** *** ***      *** *** ***

17055 09/08*296 722 100    0*301 714  95    0*307 704  95    0*311 693  95    0
17055 09/08*298 735 110    0*300 721 110    0*303 705 110    0*307 693 110    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***      ***     ***

17060 09/09*315 682  90    0*319 673  90    0*324 664  90    0*334 650  85    0
17060 09/09*313 681 105    0*319 669 105    0*325 657 105    0*336 643 105    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***

17065 09/10*344 638  85    0*357 621  85    0*378 600  80    0*398 581  80    0
17065 09/10*347 629 100    0*358 614 100    0*370 600 100    0*384 569 100    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      ***     ***      *** *** ***

17070 09/11*421 561  80    0*447 533  75    0E470 490  70    0E490 427  65    0
17070 09/11*400 528  95  950*422 488  85    0E450 450  75    0E475 404  65    0
            *** ***  **  *** *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** *** 

17075 09/12E508 367  60    0E536 314  55    0E564 259  50    0*  0   0   0    0
17075 09/12E495 354  60    0E513 303  55    0E530 250  50    0E540 203  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***         **** ***  **

17080 HR      

Major changes are made to the track proposed by Partagas and Diaz (1997) for
the 25th through the 30th.  The track is begun on the 25th farther to
the east based upon re-examination of the Historical Weather Map series.
Track determined through the 30th based upon analysis of available 
observational data along with a reasonable extrapolation of the storm in 
time.  Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable small alterations to the 
track and large changes (early in the hurricane's lifecycle) to the intensity 
shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 3.  A peripheral 
pressure of 982 mb (07Z on the 7th) suggests winds of at least 72 kt from the 
subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 110 kt retained in the best track.  
A possible central pressure of 950 mb (01Z on the 11th) suggests winds of 
97 kt - 95 kt chosen for the best track.  Winds are adjusted upward from the 
7th to the 11th accordingly.

********************************************************************************
1906/05

17085 09/03/1906 M=16  4 SNBR= 396 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
17085 09/03/1906 M=16  5 SNBR= 419 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=1
                       *       ***                        *

17090 09/03*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*102 330  35    0*103 337  35    0
17095 09/04*103 342  35    0*104 349  35    0*105 357  35    0*106 366  35    0
17100 09/05*109 376  35    0*112 385  35    0*116 395  35    0*120 405  35    0
17105 09/06*124 414  40    0*128 423  40    0*132 432  45    0*137 442  45    0
17105 09/06*124 414  35    0*128 423  35    0*132 432  35    0*137 442  35    0
                     **               **               **               **

17110 09/07*141 449  45    0*146 456  45    0*151 462  50    0*153 466  50    0
17110 09/07*141 449  40    0*146 456  40    0*151 462  40    0*153 466  40    0
                     **               **               **               **

17115 09/08*155 471  55    0*157 475  55    0*160 480  60    0*164 487  60    0
17115 09/08*155 471  40    0*157 475  40    0*160 480  40    0*164 484  40    0
                     **               **               **          ***  **

17120 09/09*169 495  60    0*174 503  65    0*179 510  65    0*183 515  70    0
17120 09/09*169 488  45    0*175 491  45    0*180 493  45    0*184 496  45    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17125 09/10*187 520  70    0*190 524  70    0*195 529  70    0*201 536  75    0
17125 09/10*188 499  50    0*193 503  50    0*197 507  50    0*202 513  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17130 09/11*207 544  75    0*216 556  75    0*224 569  80    0*230 581  80    0
17130 09/11*206 521  55    0*208 530  55    0*210 540  55    0*214 553  55    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17135 09/12*233 593  80    0*237 606  80    0*240 619  80    0*242 626  85    0
17135 09/12*218 565  60    0*222 577  60    0*227 590  65    0*230 602  65    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17140 09/13*245 632  85    0*249 639  85    0*254 645  85    0*260 650  85    0
17140 09/13*232 612  70    0*236 623  70    0*243 633  75    0*253 641  75    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17145 09/14*265 654  85    0*271 657  90    0*280 660  90    0*289 664  90    0
17145 09/14*266 647  80    0*279 655  80    0*290 663  80    0*295 667  80    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17150 09/15*296 668  95    0*303 670  95    0*310 675 100    0*314 683 105    0
17150 09/15*299 671  80    0*302 675  80    0*305 680  80    0*309 685  80    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17155 09/16*317 692 110    0*319 701 115    0*321 711 125    0*323 722 125    0
17155 09/16*312 690  80    0*315 697  80    0*317 707  80    0*320 720  80    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17160 09/17*325 735 120    0*328 748 110    0*332 763 100    0*335 781  85    0
17160 09/17*320 734  80    0*321 751  80    0*323 767  80    0*329 782  80  977
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **  ***

17165 09/18*338 795  60    0*341 808  40    0*347 821  30    0*353 834  30    0
17165 09/18*335 798  60    0*343 815  40    0*350 830  30    0*355 845  30    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17170 HR SC3 NC3
17170 HR SC1 NC1
         *** ***

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large but 
reasonable alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. 
(1999).  This hurricane - originally storm number 4 - was listed as a 
Category 3 at landfall in North and South Carolina with a central pressure 
of 947 mb (Neumann et al. 1999; Jarrell et al. 1992).  This was based upon 
a supposed surface pressure reading of 945 mb at Cape Fear, North Carolina.  
Both Ho et al. (1987) and Partagas and Diaz (1997) reject this measurement 
as being erroneous since it does not correspond to nearby pressure 
measurements nor do wind observations suggest that the center went over 
Cape Fear.  (Instead, landfall is analyzed at being near Georgetown, South 
Carolina - over 60 nmi to the southwest of Cape Fear.)  It is worth noting 
that the _Monthly Weather Review_ at the time did not mention this supposed
947 mb central pressure reading, nor did Tannehill (1938).  Barnes (1998b) 
corroborates the damages and impacts of having a much weaker hurricane than 
a 947 mb hurricane in the shipping, coastal and inland effects in the 
Carolinas.  The apparent source for 947 mb was Dunn and Miller (1960), which 
gave the surface pressure value without any attribution.  Instead, Ho et al. 
(1987) analyze this hurricane as a 977 mb hurricane with a RMW of 30 nmi at 
landfall in the Carolinas, which much better matches the observed wind 
observations, pressure observations and damage incurred along the coast.  
Such a central pressure with a near-climatological RMW (for that central 
pressure and latitude) supports a wind speed of 79 kt from the subtropical 
wind-pressure relationship - 80 kt utilized in best track.  Such an 
intensity corresponds well with the moderate wind damage incurred in South 
Carolina, from newspaper archives in Charleston and Georgetown analyzed by 
Prof. Cary Mock at the University of South Carolina.  Without evidence for 
a major hurricane at landfall in the United States, there is no support for 
this hurricane ever being more than a minimal (Category 1) hurricane at its 
peak.  Winds are adjusted from the 13th to the 19th accordingly.

********************************************************************************
1906/06

17175 09/19/1906 M=11  5 SNBR= 397 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
17175 09/19/1906 M=12  6 SNBR= 420 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=2
                   **  *       ***                        *

17180 09/19*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*149 725  35    0*149 730  35    0
17180 09/19*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*120 770  30    0*121 775  30    0
                                              *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17185 09/20*149 736  35    0*150 742  35    0*150 751  35    0*150 760  35    0
17185 09/20*122 779  35    0*123 783  35    0*125 787  35    0*128 792  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17190 09/21*151 771  35    0*152 781  35    0*154 791  35    0*157 799  35    0
17190 09/21*132 797  35    0*136 801  35    0*140 805  35    0*146 809  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17195 09/22*161 806  40    0*165 812  40    0*170 819  45    0*175 826  45    0
17195 09/22*152 813  40    0*158 818  40    0*163 823  45    0*169 828  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17200 09/23*180 830  50    0*185 835  50    0*193 840  55    0*200 844  60    0
17200 09/23*175 832  50    0*181 837  50    0*187 840  55    0*193 843  60    0
            *** ***          *** ***          ***              *** ***

17205 09/24*206 847  65    0*212 850  70    0*220 854  75    0*227 856  80    0
17205 09/24*200 846  65    0*206 848  70    0*214 851  75    0*219 852  80    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17210 09/25*234 859  85    0*240 861  90    0*248 863  95    0*255 865 100    0
17210 09/25*223 855  85    0*228 857  90    0*233 860  95    0*240 863 100    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17215 09/26*261 867 105    0*268 870 110    0*275 872 120    0*284 877 125    0
17215 09/26*247 866 105    0*255 868 105    0*263 870 105  953*273 874 100    0
            *** ***          *** *** ***      *** *** ***  *** *** *** ***

17220 09/27*292 880 125    0*298 882 120    0*306 886 115    0*312 888  60    0
17220 09/27*284 879 100    0*294 884  95    0*304 887  95  958*314 890  65    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***  *** *** ***  **

17225 09/28*324 892  50    0*336 896  40    0*347 899  40    0*357 901  35    0
17225 09/28*324 893  50    0*336 896  40    0*347 899  40    0*356 902  35    0
                ***                                            *** ***

17230 09/29*367 901  35    0*376 899  30    0E385 897  30    0*  0   0   0    0
17230 09/29*366 904  35    0*373 905  30    0E380 903  30    0E382 894  30    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***         **** ***  **

(The 30th is new to HURDAT.)
17232 09/30E380 884  30    0E373 875  30    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0

17235 HR MS3 AL3
17235 HR MS2 AL2AFL2 LA1
         ***************

The only major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) are to retain the 19th 
as a tropical depression rather than eliminating it from the best track and 
to extend the extratropical stage until 06Z on the 30th.  Partagas and Diaz
otherwise made large alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann 
et al. (1999).  These track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.
This hurricane was formerly storm number 5 in Neumann et al. (1999).
Perez (2000) analyzed this hurricane causing Category 1 hurricane 
conditions in western Cuba, but did keep the center of the storm just
offshore the coast.  This is in agreement with the small changes that Partagas
and Diaz introduced for the hurricane near Cuba.  A central pressure of
953 mb (at 12Z on the 26th) suggests winds of 107 kt from the Gulf of
Mexico wind-pressure relationship - 105 kt are utilized in the best track.  
A pressure value of 965 mb (at 12Z on the 27th) measured by a ship in the
eye of the hurricane anchored off Scranton, MS suggests winds of 94 kt 
from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship.  Ho et al. (1987) 
utilized this 965 mb observation as the hurricane's landfall central pressure 
at the U.S. coastline and estimated a RMW of 43 nmi.  However, Jarrell et al. 
(1992) (from Connor 1956) suggested a central pressure value at U.S. landfall 
of 958 mb.  This value is likely closer to the actual central pressure
given that the ship's 965 mb was a "pegged" value for at least 45 minutes,
leading to the probability that the value was an underestimate of how 
deep the hurricane was.  958 mb central pressure in the Gulf of Mexico
suggests maximum sustained winds of 102 kt.  The RMW value of 43 nmi from 
Ho et al. is much larger than what climatology for a central pressure value 
of 958 mb and 30 deg N latitude calls for (22 nmi), suggesting the winds 
should be moderately lower than what the standard wind-pressure relationship
calls for.  95 kt at landfall are chosen for the best track, making this a 
Category 2.  This is a change from that shown in Table 6 of Neumann et al. 
(1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT.  Winds are adjusted
accordingly on the 26th and 27th.  Storm tide measurements of 14' in
Galt, Florida (Barnes 1998a) and 11' in Pensacola, Florida were observed 
(Cline 1926).

********************************************************************************
1906/07

17240 09/22/1906 M=11  6 SNBR= 398 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17240 09/22/1906 M=11  7 SNBR= 421 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                       *       ***

17245 09/22*  0   0   0    0*244 339  35    0*250 344  35    0*256 352  35    0
17245 09/22*303 319  50    0*296 329  50    0*290 338  50    0*283 347  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17250 09/23*261 358  35    0*265 365  35    0*269 371  40    0*270 377  40    0
17250 09/23*277 356  55    0*273 364  55    0*269 371  60    0*266 378  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17255 09/24*271 381  40    0*272 386  40    0*272 392  40    0*276 405  45    0
17255 09/24*263 385  60    0*261 392  60    0*260 400  60    0*258 407  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17260 09/25*285 430  45    0*288 439  45    0*290 449  45    0*290 461  45    0
17260 09/25*257 415  60    0*257 422  60    0*257 430  60    0*257 437  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17265 09/26*285 468  50    0*276 469  50    0*270 464  50    0*270 457  50    0
17265 09/26*260 443  60    0*264 446  60    0*270 447  60    0*275 447  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17270 09/27*271 447  50    0*274 438  50    0*278 430  50    0*284 424  50    0
17270 09/27*279 444  60    0*282 440  60    0*286 433  60    0*292 423  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17275 09/28*290 420  50    0*297 415  50    0*304 406  50    0*312 386  55    0
17275 09/28*299 410  60    0*305 397  60    0*310 385  60    0*317 370  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17280 09/29*320 365  55    0*329 343  60    0*339 322  60    0*351 302  60    0
17280 09/29*324 354  60    0*331 337  60    0*339 322  60    0*347 308  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***                           *** *** 

17285 09/30*365 284  60    0*381 265  55    0E398 245  50    0E409 229  45    0
17285 09/30*358 296  60    0*367 287  55    0*377 277  50    0*392 263  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***         **** ***         **** ***

17290 10/01E418 217  40    0E427 203  35    0E437 187  35    0E448 167  35    0
17290 10/01*408 244  40    0E421 225  35    0E433 205  35    0E448 180  35    0
           **** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17295 10/02E461 144  30    0E474 119  30    0E488  92  30    0*  0   0   0    0
17295 10/02E465 150  30    0E485 112  30    0E500  80  30    0E515  47  30    0
           **** ***          *** ***          *** ***         **** ***  **

17300 TS

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally
storm number 6.  A loop which was originally described by the track of
the storm is now removed.  A peripheral pressure of 1000 mb (at 12Z on the 
22nd) suggests winds of at least 48 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure
relationship - 50 kt used in best track.  A peripheral pressure of 994 mb
(at 12Z on the 23rd) suggests winds of at least 58 kt from the subtropical
wind-pressure relationship - 60 kt used in best track.  Winds are increased
accordingly from the 22nd through the 29th (which had 60 kt in the
original HURDAT).  Lifecycle of this tropical storm is not complete as 
information on the genesis is not available.

********************************************************************************
1906/08

17305 10/08/1906 M= 3  7 SNBR= 399 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17305 10/08/1906 M=16  8 SNBR= 422 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
                   **  *       ***                  *     *

17310 10/08*  0   0   0    0*110 790  35    0*111 797  35    0*113 804  50    0
17310 10/08*  0   0   0    0*113 764  35    0*113 773  35    0*113 783  50    0
                             *** ***          *** ***              ***

17315 10/09*114 809  65    0*115 815  85    0*117 820  85    0*120 827  85    0
17315 10/09*113 793  65    0*113 804  75    0*115 815  85    0*117 824  95    0
            *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***  **

17320 10/10*123 835  85    0*125 843  60    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0
17320 10/10*121 831 105    0*126 839  80    0*130 846  70    0*132 851  65    0
            *** *** ***      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17325 HR
17330 10/11/1906 M=12  8 SNBR= 400 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=2
(These two lines are removed from the new HURDAT.)

17335 10/11*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*144 611  50    0*145 625  50    0
17335 10/11*134 855  60    0*137 859  55    0*140 863  50    0*144 867  45    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***  **

17340 10/12*145 639  55    0*146 653  60    0*147 667  65    0*149 681  70    0
17340 10/12*147 869  40    0*151 871  40    0*155 873  50    0*158 874  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17345 10/13*150 696  70    0*152 711  70    0*154 725  70    0*156 739  70    0
17345 10/13*161 876  65    0*164 878  70    0*167 880  75    0*169 881  80    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  ** 

17350 10/14*158 752  75    0*160 764  75    0*162 776  75    0*164 787  80    0
17350 10/14*171 882  70    0*174 883  65    0*177 883  60    0*179 883  55    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  ** 

17355 10/15*167 798  80    0*170 808  80    0*174 818  85    0*181 828  85    0
17355 10/15*181 882  50    0*183 881  50    0*185 880  50    0*188 878  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  ** 

17360 10/16*189 838  85    0*197 845  90    0*205 847  95    0*213 846 100    0
17360 10/16*191 876  50    0*193 873  60    0*195 870  70    0*198 863  80    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** *** *** 

17365 10/17*221 842 105    0*229 836 110    0*237 826 115    0*244 818 115    0
17365 10/17*200 857  90    0*203 851 100    0*207 840 105    0*215 827 105    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** *** 

17370 10/18*249 811 110    0*255 806 105    0*261 800 100    0*268 792  95    0
17370 10/18*226 821 105    0*239 816 105    0*253 807 105  953*266 795  95    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***  *** *** ***    

17375 10/19*276 786  90    0*283 782  85    0*291 779  80    0*300 780  80    0
17375 10/19*279 786  90    0*290 781  85    0*300 780  80    0*305 780  80    0
            ***              *** ***          *** ***          *** 

17380 10/20*306 781  75    0*311 783  70    0*318 790  65    0*312 797  50    0
17380 10/20*309 780  75    0*314 781  75    0*317 783  70    0*321 793  70    0
            *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17385 10/21*307 800  45    0*300 804  40    0*293 807  40    0*287 810  35    0
17385 10/21*317 804  60    0*307 812  50    0*295 815  40    0*290 815  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***          *** *** 

17390 10/22*282 812  30    0*276 815  30    0*271 817  25    0*266 819  25    0
17390 10/22*283 816  30    0*273 817  30    0*260 820  25    0*249 828  25    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  

(The 23rd is new to HURDAT.)
17392 10/23*240 838  25    0*231 848  25    0*223 857  25    0*215 866  25    0

17395 HRCFL2
17395 HRBFL3CFL3
        ********

No major changes were made to the track suggested by Partagas and Diaz 
(1997).  They made large alterations from Neumann et al. (1999) by 
combining storm numbers 7 and 8 into a single hurricane with a revised track 
and intensity.  These dramatic changes are found to be reasonable.  The 
hurricane is increased to Category 3 intensity at landfall in Nicaragua 
(105 kt) based upon the reported 15' storm tide and the vast destruction in 
the country.  Winds are thus increased on the 9th and 10th.  Perez (2000) 
analyzed this hurricane as a Category 3 hurricane at landfall in Cuba.  
Winds for the hurricane at Cuba landfall are thus lowered from 115 kt down 
to 105 kt on the 17th and 18th.  Perez also altered the track for this 
hurricane eastward even more than provided by Partagas and Diaz such that 
the hurricane went on the east side of the Isle of Pines.  The track here 
reflects this re-analysis.  Ho et al. (1987) had analyzed a central pressure
of 967 mb and an RMW of 16 nmi for landfall in southern Florida.  
However, land-based readings of pressure were as low as 953 mb in Miami.
This is taken to be the central pressure for this hurricane, which suggests
winds of 100 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship.  Descriptions
from Barnes (1998a) suggest a small inner core of this system with an RMW
on the order of 10-12 nmi.  Such an RMW is somewhat smaller than that 
expected from this central pressure and latitude (~17 nmi - Vickery et al.
2000).  Thus highest winds near the time of landfall in southern Florida are 
suggested to be 105 kt, making this system a major (Category 3) hurricane
for the region.  A Category 3 categorization is an upgrade from the 
Category 2 listing found in Table 6 or Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane 
characterization in HURDAT.  This upgrade does, however, agree with the
assessment by Partagas and Diaz.  A peripheral pressure of 987 mb (at 22Z on 
the 20th) suggest winds of at least 67 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure 
relationship - winds chosen to be 70 kt for best track.  Winds are adjusted 
accordingly on the 20th and 21st.

********************************************************************************
1906/09

17400 10/13/1906 M= 5  9 SNBR= 401 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
17400 10/14/1906 M= 4  9 SNBR= 423 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
         **         *          ***                  *

17405 10/13*  0   0   0    0*331 609  35    0*333 616  35    0*335 623  35    0
(The 13th is omitted from HURDAT.)

17410 10/14*337 630  35    0*338 637  35    0*338 644  35    0*337 658  35    0
17410 10/14*  0   0   0    0*337 620  35    0*337 635  35    0*337 651  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***              ***

17415 10/15*336 671  35    0*334 684  35    0*332 697  35    0*329 710  35    0
17415 10/15*336 669  40    0*334 682  40    0*332 697  45    0*327 714  45    0
                ***  **          ***  **               **      *** ***  **

17420 10/16*326 723  35    0*322 737  35    0*318 750  35    0*313 764  35    0
17420 10/16*321 731  45    0*312 749  45    0*305 765  45    0*301 773  40    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17425 10/17*308 779  35    0*303 794  35    0*297 810  35    0*  0   0   0    0
17425 10/17*299 780  40    0*296 787  35    0*293 795  30    0*288 806  25    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17430 TS

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  
Peripheral pressures of 1003 mb (at 12Z on the 15th and 16th) suggests winds 
of at least 43 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 45 kt 
chosen for best track.  Winds increased accordingly on the 15th to the 17th.
XING set equal to "0" since landfall occurred after decay to tropical
depression status.

********************************************************************************
1906/10

17435 10/16/1906 M= 5 10 SNBR= 402 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17435 10/15/1906 M= 6 10 SNBR= 424 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
         **         *          ***

(The 15th is new to HURDAT.)
17438 10/15*  0   0   0    0*210 694  35    0*217 700  35    0*227 707  35    0

17440 10/16*  0   0   0    0*263 706  35    0*266 700  35    0*269 694  35    0
17440 10/16*239 713  35    0*252 716  35    0*262 713  35    0*271 710  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17445 10/17*271 689  35    0*273 685  35    0*275 680  35    0*278 675  35    0
17445 10/17*278 704  35    0*282 698  35    0*285 693  35    0*288 685  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17450 10/18*281 670  40    0*284 666  40    0*286 660  45    0*284 645  45    0
17450 10/18*290 677  40    0*292 669  40    0*293 660  45    0*293 650  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***          ***              *** ***

17455 10/19*279 635  40    0*275 621  35    0*274 605  30    0*275 597  30    0
17455 10/19*293 640  40    0*293 630  40    0*293 620  35    0*293 610  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17460 10/20*276 590  30    0*277 583  25    0*278 576  25    0*280 569  25    0
17460 10/20*292 600  30    0*291 590  30    0*290 580  25    0*289 571  25    0
            *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***  
       
17465 TS

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. 

********************************************************************************
1906/11

17470 11/06/1906 M= 4 11 SNBR= 403 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17470 11/05/1906 M= 6 11 SNBR= 425 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                    *          ***

(The 5th is new to HURDAT.)
17472 11/05*185 825  30    0*190 825  30    0*195 825  35    0*199 824  40    0

17475 11/06*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*150 767  35    0*163 780  35    0
17475 11/06*203 821  45    0*207 818  50    0*210 815  55    0*213 810  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17480 11/07*175 788  35    0*188 793  35    0*200 796  35    0*212 795  35    0
17480 11/07*215 805  65    0*217 800  70    0*220 793  60    0*224 784  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17485 11/08*224 789  35    0*236 776  35    0*247 760  35    0*252 749  35    0
17485 11/08*227 776  45    0*230 766  40    0*233 757  35    0*236 748  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17490 11/09*255 740  35    0*257 731  35    0*260 720  30    0*266 706  30    0
17490 11/09*239 739  35    0*242 730  35    0*245 723  35    0*248 715  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

(The 10th is new to HURDAT.)
17492 11/10E251 705  30    0E255 695  30    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0

17495 TS
17495 HR
      **

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable.  Perez (2000) analyzed this as 
a Category 1 landfall in Cuba, agreeing with Partagas and Diaz' assessment.  
Thus this tropical storm is upgraded to a hurricane in the vicinity of 
central Cuba.  A peripheral pressure of 997 mb (at 02Z on the 7th) suggests 
winds of at least 53 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 65 kt 
utilized in best track.

********************************************************************************

1906 - Additional Notes:

Partagas and Diaz (1997) mentioned three additional systems considered 
for inclusion into HURDAT.  The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out 
of HURDAT for the following reasons:

1) September 16, 1906:  Possible new hurricane, but location not known.
2) October 13, 1906:  At least one gale force wind report, but unclear if 
   system was closed circulation.
3) October 14-15, 1906:  Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.

********************************************************************************
1907
********************************************************************************
1907/01

17500 06/24/1907 M= 6  1 SNBR= 404 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
17500 06/24/1907 M= 7  1 SNBR= 426 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
                    *          ***

17505 06/24*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*160 780  35    0*161 788  35    0
17510 06/25*164 797  35    0*167 806  35    0*170 815  35    0*177 824  35    0
17515 06/26*186 834  35    0*196 843  35    0*206 853  40    0*218 862  40    0
17520 06/27*229 871  45    0*240 880  45    0*252 889  45    0*262 892  45    0
17520 06/27*229 871  45    0*240 880  45    0*252 889  45    0*262 894  45    0
                                                                   ***

17525 06/28*272 891  45    0*281 880  45    0*288 869  50    0*296 850  50    0
17525 06/28*270 896  45    0*276 894  45    0*283 890  50    0*293 878  50    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17530 06/29*304 825  45    0*310 810  40    0*322 791  35    0E349 770  30    0
17530 06/29*303 858  50    0*308 835  45    0*318 808  55    0E340 780  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

(The 30th is new to HURDAT.)
17532 06/30E365 760  45    0E392 733  40    0E420 705  35    0E450 675  30    0

17535 TS

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). 
These changes include shifting the landfall location in Florida westward
of its original position.  Winds are increased on the 29th based upon wind 
observations from Jacksonville.

********************************************************************************
1907/02

17540 09/17/1907 M= 7  2 SNBR= 405 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
17540 09/18/1907 M= 6  2 SNBR= 427 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
         **         *          ***

17545 09/17*225 756  35    0*227 767  35    0*228 778  40    0*229 789  40    0
(The 17th is deleted from HURDAT.)

17550 09/18*230 800  40    0*232 810  40    0*234 819  40    0*236 827  45    0
17550 09/18*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*250 790  30    0*255 803  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17555 09/19*239 835  45    0*242 842  50    0*246 850  50    0*251 859  50    0
17555 09/19*259 816  30    0*263 828  35    0*267 840  35    0*271 850  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17560 09/20*256 865  50    0*261 873  45    0*267 881  45    0*272 887  40    0
17560 09/20*275 858  40    0*279 864  40    0*283 870  40    0*287 876  40    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** *** 

17565 09/21*278 891  40    0*284 895  40    0*290 897  40    0*297 898  35    0
17565 09/21*291 882  40    0*295 887  40    0*300 890  40    0*305 889  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17570 09/22*305 897  35    0*314 889  35    0*322 881  35    0E330 860  35    0
17570 09/22*310 888  35    0*315 884  35    0*321 876  35    0E329 863  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17575 09/23E336 848  35    0E341 835  35    0E356 802  35    0E377 773  30    0
17575 09/23E338 847  35    0E347 830  35    0E357 813  35    0E368 796  30    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17580 TS

The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997) is to begin the storm on 
the 18th (as a tropical depression) rather than on the 19th (as a tropical 
storm) that Partagas and Diaz suggested.  This is based upon the (limited) 
data on the 18th that suggests that the storm had developed as a tropical 
depression just east of Florida.  Partagas and Diaz otherwise made large 
track and intensity alterations to that shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
These track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.  Peak winds
for this storm reached, at most, minimal tropical storm status from
available observations.  Thus winds are lowered on the 19th and 20th.

********************************************************************************
1907/03

17585 09/27/1907 M= 3  3 SNBR= 406 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
17585 09/27/1907 M= 4  3 SNBR= 428 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
                    *          ***               

17590 09/27*  0   0   0    0*223 941  35    0*233 933  35    0*243 925  35    0
17590 09/27*  0   0   0    0*223 941  35    0*233 933  35    0*245 925  35    0
                                                               ***

17595 09/28*251 919  35    0*262 907  35    0*274 893  40    0*287 879  45    0
17595 09/28*257 913  35    0*270 900  35    0*283 885  40    0*296 866  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17600 09/29*301 858  40    0*315 835  35    0*332 786  35    0E352 745  30    0
17600 09/29*309 843  40    0*318 819  35    0*327 790  35    0E340 755  30    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

(The 30th is new to HURDAT.)
17602 09/30E355 715  30    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0

17605 TS

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).

********************************************************************************
1907/04

17610 10/17/1907 M= 5  4 SNBR= 407 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17610 10/17/1907 M= 4  4 SNBR= 429 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                    *          ***

17615 10/17*273 598  35    0*280 606  35    0*288 616  35    0*295 623  35    0
17615 10/17*  0   0   0    0*263 674  45    0*264 660  45    0*268 646  45    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17620 10/18*301 627  35    0*310 630  35    0*318 631  40    0*331 629  40    0
17620 10/18*275 632  45    0*283 618  45    0*290 605  45    0*304 594  45    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17625 10/19*354 622  45    0*378 602  45    0*402 571  45    0*428 535  40    0
17625 10/19*317 582  45    0*328 573  45    0*340 560  45    0E356 540  40    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***         **** ***

17630 10/20E454 498  40    0E477 467  35    0E500 439  35    0E524 421  35    0
17630 10/20E376 491  40    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0
            *** ***         **** ***  **     **** ***  **     **** ***  **

17635 10/21E545 414  35    0E565 409  35    0E587 400  35    0*  0   0   0    0
(The 21st is omitted from the new HURDAT.)

17640 TS    

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable.  A peripheral pressure of 
1003 mb (at 12Z on the 17th) suggests winds of at least 43 kt from the 
subtropical wind-pressure relationship - winds are chosen at 45 kt for the 
best track.  Winds are increased accordingly on the 17th and 18th.  The full 
lifecycle of this tropical storm is not known due to lack of information on 
its genesis.

********************************************************************************
1907/05

17641 11/06/1907 M= 7  5 SNBR= 430 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17642 11/06*315 397  35    0*308 399  35    0*300 400  35    0*295 401  35    0
17643 11/07*289 402  35    0*282 403  35    0*275 405  35    0*272 409  35    0
17643 11/08*269 414  40    0*267 419  40    0*267 425  40    0*272 435  40    0
17643 11/09*281 440  40    0*291 442  40    0*300 445  40    0*308 447  40    0
17643 11/10*318 450  40    0*326 454  40    0*335 460  40    0*341 464  40    0
17643 11/11*347 469  40    0*354 476  40    0*365 480  40    0*377 480  40    0
17643 11/12*387 473  35    0*396 467  35    0*405 460  35    0E417 450  35    0
17643 TS

No changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
tropical storm.

********************************************************************************

1907 - Additional Notes:

Partagas and Diaz (1997) mentioned four additional systems considered 
for inclusion into HURDAT.  The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out 
of HURDAT for the following reasons:

1) March 25-April 1, 1907:  Numerous gale to hurricane force observations, 
   but likely was an extratropical storm.
2) September 11-15, 1907:  One gale force report, insufficient to determine 
   if system was of tropical storm intensity.
3) October 3-17, 1907:  One gale force report, insufficient to determine 
   if system was of tropical storm intensity.
4) October 30, 1907:  Damage reports in Texas leave it uncertain if system 
   was a tornado or tropical storm.

********************************************************************************
1908
********************************************************************************
1908/01

17645 03/06/1908 M= 4  1 SNBR= 408 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17645 03/06/1908 M= 4  1 SNBR= 431 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                               ***

17650 03/06*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*238 602  50    0*227 607  55    0
17655 03/07*216 611  65    0*206 615  70    0*197 619  80    0*188 622  85    0
17660 03/08*180 625  85    0*173 628  70    0*166 631  65    0*160 634  65    0
17665 03/09*154 637  65    0*149 640  50    0*144 642  40    0*138 646  35    0
17670 HR    

Partagas and Diaz (1997) did not introduce any changes to the track or
from that shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  The full lifecycle of this 
tropical storm is not known due to lack of information on its genesis.

********************************************************************************
1908/02

17671 05/24/1908 M= 8  2 SNBR= 432 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0

17672 05/24*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*210 717  30    0*217 720  30    0
17672 05/25*224 723  30    0*233 728  30    0*240 735  30    0*247 743  30    0
17672 05/26*254 750  35    0*260 756  35    0*267 763  35    0*272 773  35    0
17672 05/27*277 781  40    0*285 791  45    0*295 795  50    0*301 795  55    0
17672 05/28*306 792  60    0*312 788  65    0*317 783  65    0*323 779  65    0
17672 05/29*328 774  65    0*334 770  65    0*340 765  65    0*348 759  65  989
17672 05/30*356 753  65    0*363 747  60    0*373 740  50    0*394 730  40    0
17672 05/31*418 717  35    0E438 703  35    0E455 690  35    0E464 683  35    0
17673 HR

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
hurricane.  A possible central pressure of 989 mb suggests winds of 64 kt
from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 65 kt chosen in best
track.  Despite this hurricane making landfall, no observations of
hurricane force wind were recorded on the U.S. coast and it is likely
the such winds stayed offshore.  

********************************************************************************
1908/03

17675 07/25/1908 M=10  2 SNBR= 409 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=1
17675 07/24/1908 M=11  3 SNBR= 433 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=1
         **        **  *       ***

(24th is new to HURDAT.)
17677 07/24*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*275 750  30    0*278 752  30    0

17680 07/25*  0   0   0    0*285 790  35    0*287 785  35    0*289 780  35    0
17680 07/25*281 755  30    0*284 759  30    0*287 763  35    0*289 766  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **          ***              ***

17685 07/26*289 776  35    0*290 773  35    0*290 770  35    0*287 765  35    0
17685 07/26*290 769  35    0*290 772  35    0*290 775  35    0*289 778  35    0
            *** ***              ***              ***          *** ***

17690 07/27*279 763  35    0*273 764  35    0*270 768  35    0*270 772  35    0
17690 07/27*287 780  35    0*283 783  35    0*277 785  35    0*273 783  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17695 07/28*272 775  40    0*275 778  55    0*278 780  60    0*281 781  60    0
17695 07/28*271 777  40    0*271 772  55    0*273 770  60    0*277 770  60    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17700 07/29*285 782  60    0*289 783  60    0*294 783  65    0*302 784  70    0
17700 07/29*280 775  60    0*282 779  60    0*285 782  60    0*294 783  60    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17705 07/30*312 785  75    0*322 785  80    0*330 783  85    0*335 781  85    0
17705 07/30*304 783  65    0*314 782  70    0*325 780  70    0*331 779  70    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17710 07/31*339 778  85    0*343 774  85    0*348 767  75    0*354 760  70    0
17710 07/31*337 776  70    0*342 774  70    0*347 770  70    0*352 758  60    0
            *** ***  **      ***      **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17715 08/01*362 749  70    0*371 737  75    0*380 725  80    0*391 710  85    0
17715 08/01*356 741  60    0*361 728  60    0*365 717  60    0*372 700  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17720 08/02*403 693  85    0*416 675  85    0*430 652  85    0E445 630  75    0
17720 08/02*378 685  60    0*387 669  60    0*400 655  60    0E417 630  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17725 08/03E464 603  60    0E481 585  55    0E496 569  50    0E528 552  50    0
17725 08/03E440 606  60    0E463 585  55    0E485 565  50    0E506 543  50    0
            *** ***          ***              *** ***          *** ***

17730 HR NC1

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm 
number 2.  These track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.
A peripheral pressure of 988 mb (at 21Z on the 30th) suggests winds of at 
least 66 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt chosen 
for best track at landfall in North Carolina.  This agrees with the 
assessment of Table 6 in Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization 
in HURDAT.  Winds are adjusted downward moderately accordingly from the 30th 
and the 31st.  There is no indication that the system regained hurricane 
strength after passing back into the open Atlantic.  Winds reduced 
accordingly on the 1st and 2nd to a 60 kt tropical storm intensity.

********************************************************************************
1908/04

17735 08/30/1908 M= 4  3 SNBR= 410 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17735 08/30/1908 M= 4  4 SNBR= 434 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                       *       ***

17740 08/30*  0   0   0    0*325 722  35    0*327 728  35    0*329 732  35    0
17740 08/30*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*330 725  35    0*330 732  35    0
                             *** ***  **      *** ***          ***    

17745 08/31*331 737  35    0*333 741  40    0*336 748  40    0*339 750  40    0
17745 08/31*330 741  35    0*330 750  40    0*330 760  40    0*332 765  40    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17750 09/01*342 752  45    0*345 753  45    0*349 753  45    0*353 749  45    0
17750 09/01*338 768  45    0*344 767  45    0*350 763  45    0*361 750  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17755 09/02*357 743  40    0*362 733  40    0*367 721  35    0*374 709  25    0
17755 09/02*372 736  40    0*382 723  40    0*390 707  35    0E398 682  25    0
            *** ***          ***              *** ***         **** ***

17760 TS  

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), 
originally storm number 3.  

********************************************************************************
1908/05

17765 09/07/1908 M=13  4 SNBR= 411 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17765 09/07/1908 M=13  5 SNBR= 435 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                       *       ***

17770 09/07*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*154 517  40    0*159 528  40    0
17775 09/08*163 538  40    0*167 548  40    0*170 558  45    0*172 566  45    0
17780 09/09*174 573  45    0*176 580  50    0*180 595  55    0*183 605  55    0
17780 09/09*174 573  45    0*176 580  50    0*180 591  55    0*183 605  55    0
                                                  ***

17785 09/10*187 630  60    0*190 650  65    0*194 668  70    0*197 679  75    0
17785 09/10*187 630  60    0*190 650  60    0*194 668  60    0*197 680  60    0
                                      **               **          ***  **

17790 09/11*200 689  80    0*203 700  85    0*206 711  85    0*211 720  90    0
17790 09/11*198 692  60    0*201 707  65    0*205 720  75    0*210 729  85    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **
       
17795 09/12*216 728  95    0*221 735  95    0*226 742 100    0*231 749 100    0
17795 09/12*215 737  95    0*219 743  95    0*225 750 100    0*229 755 100    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17800 09/13*235 754 105    0*240 759 105    0*245 761 105    0*251 759 105    0
17800 09/13*232 758 105    0*238 761 105    0*245 761 105    0*251 759 105    0
            *** ***          *** ***       

17805 09/14*257 755 105    0*264 748 105    0*270 742 105    0*281 729 100    0
17805 09/14*257 755 105    0*262 751 105    0*267 745 105    0*275 736 100    0
                             *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

17810 09/15*291 715 100    0*301 704  95    0*310 695  90    0*317 691  85    0
17810 09/15*284 726 100    0*291 718  95    0*300 710  90    0*308 702  85    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17815 09/16*323 687  85    0*329 684  80    0*338 679  80    0*351 670  75    0
17815 09/16*316 694  85    0*325 686  80    0*338 677  80    0*351 672  75    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17820 09/17*363 663  75    0*378 654  70    0*396 641  70    0*407 631  70    0
17820 09/17*363 668  75    0*378 660  70    0*393 650  70    0*404 639  70    0
                ***              ***          *** ***          *** ***

17825 09/18*420 620  70    0*429 610  70    0*438 597  70    0E456 564  60    0
17825 09/18*411 629  70    0*419 618  70    0*430 600  70    0*454 570  60    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17830 09/19E470 535  55    0E484 514  55    0E500 483  50    0E518 450  50    0
17830 09/19E486 530  55    0E515 496  55    0E540 465  50    0E562 438  50    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17835 HR    

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), 
originally storm number 4.  A peripheral pressure of 993 mb (at 12Z on the 
15th) suggests winds of at least 59 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure 
relationship - 90 kt retained in the best track.  A peripheral pressure of 
993 mb (at 12Z on the 18th) suggests winds of at least 59 kt from the 
northern wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt retained in the best track.  
Slight adjustment in the track on the 9th provides a more realistic 
translational velocity.

********************************************************************************
1908/06

18655 09/16/1908 M= 3  5 SNBR= 414 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
18655 09/16/1908 M= 3  6 SNBR= 436 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                       *       ***

18660 09/16*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*247 905  40    0*251 911  40    0
18665 09/17*256 917  45    0*260 921  45    0*265 926  50    0*270 931  55    0
18670 09/18*274 934  60    0*279 938  55    0*283 938  35    0*287 934  25    0
18675 TS

Partagas and Diaz (1997) introduced no changes from that shown in Neumann
et al. (1999), originally storm number 5.

********************************************************************************
1908/07

17865 09/21/1908 M=17  6 SNBR= 413 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17865 09/21/1908 M=17  7 SNBR= 437 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                       *       ***

17870 09/21*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*120 500  35    0*122 507  35    0
17870 09/21*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*125 460  35    0*127 472  35    0
                                              *** ***          *** ***

17875 09/22*124 513  35    0*126 520  35    0*128 527  35    0*130 534  35    0
17875 09/22*129 483  35    0*132 495  35    0*135 507  35    0*138 518  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17880 09/23*132 541  35    0*135 548  35    0*138 556  40    0*142 563  40    0
17880 09/23*139 530  35    0*140 542  35    0*143 553  40    0*145 563  40    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** 

17885 09/24*146 570  40    0*149 578  40    0*153 584  45    0*157 592  45    0
17885 09/24*148 572  40    0*150 579  40    0*153 587  45    0*155 594  50    0
            *** ***          *** ***              ***          *** ***  **

17890 09/25*160 600  45    0*164 609  50    0*168 618  50    0*171 627  50    0
17890 09/25*157 603  55    0*158 610  60    0*160 617  65    0*162 627  70    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17895 09/26*172 637  50    0*173 650  50    0*173 665  50    0*175 673  50    0
17895 09/26*164 641  70    0*165 651  70    0*165 663  70    0*165 674  70    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17900 09/27*176 680  50    0*178 687  50    0*181 695  45    0*184 705  40    0
17900 09/27*167 685  70    0*168 695  70    0*170 705  70    0*173 711  70    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17905 09/28*187 713  35    0*190 720  35    0*192 727  35    0*194 733  35    0
17905 09/28*176 716  70    0*181 722  70    0*185 727  65    0*187 731  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17910 09/29*196 738  35    0*199 744  35    0*202 750  35    0*206 753  35    0
17910 09/29*191 737  65    0*197 742  70    0*200 745  75    0*204 750  65    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17915 09/30*210 758  35    0*216 764  40    0*222 769  55    0*229 774  65    0
17915 09/30*210 754  70    0*214 759  75    0*220 763  80    0*225 767  85    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17920 10/01*235 778  70    0*248 784  70    0*258 785  70    0*268 781  75    0
17920 10/01*232 772  90    0*239 777  95    0*247 780  95    0*259 778  95    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17925 10/02*276 773  75    0*284 764  80    0*290 752  85    0*292 739  85    0
17925 10/02*268 765  95    0*275 746  95    0*280 730  95    0*284 721  95    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17930 10/03*294 726  85    0*296 712  85    0*302 698  85    0*304 713  80    0
17930 10/03*287 716  95    0*293 711  90    0*300 715  85    0*297 720  80    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***  

17935 10/04*295 727  75    0*287 716  70    0*285 702  70    0*287 693  70    0
17935 10/04*292 721  75    0*288 716  70    0*285 710  70    0*290 700  70    0
            *** ***          ***              *** ***          *** ***

17940 10/05*290 685  70    0*294 679  70    0*298 673  70    0*303 665  70    0
17940 10/05*297 692  70    0*301 684  70    0*305 675  70    0*308 662  70    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17945 10/06*308 655  70    0*314 645  70    0*320 634  65    0*325 626  55    0
17945 10/06*311 650  70    0*313 638  70    0*315 627  65    0*318 613  55    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17950 10/07*331 618  45    0E337 609  40    0E343 600  40    0E354 593  40    0
17950 10/07*320 600  45    0E323 587  40    0E325 575  40    0E328 561  40    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17955 HR    

The was one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997), originally storm 
number 5.  Partagas and Diaz did not provide evidence that the hurricane 
status was retained until transitioning to an extratropical on the 7th,
though this was depicted in their track map.  Thus the switch to tropical 
storm status on the 6th found in Neumann et al. is kept in the best track.
Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable small alterations to the track 
reasonably from that shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  Partagas and Diaz
analysis of hurricane force through the Caribbean from the 25th to the
28th necessitated large increases to the existing HURDAT intensity 
estimates.  A peripheral pressure of 990 mb (at 10Z on the 28th) suggests 
winds of at least 64 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt 
chosen for the best track.  Perez (2000) had analyzed this as a Category 2 
hurricane at landfall in Cuba based upon wind and surge caused damage, which 
does not seem completely reasonable because of the interaction of the system 
with Hispanola.  Thus Category 1 hurricane at landfall in Cuba is retained.  A 
peripheral pressure of 971 mb (at 15Z on the 1st) suggests winds of at least 
85 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 95 kt chosen for the 
best track.  Winds increased accordingly from the 25th until the 3rd.

********************************************************************************
1908/08

17960 10/15/1908 M= 4  7 SNBR= 414 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
17960 10/14/1908 M= 6  8 SNBR= 438 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
         **         *  *       *** 

(The 14th is new to HURDAT.)
17962 10/14*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*117 785  30    0*117 788  30    0

17965 10/15*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*116 778  45    0*117 785  45    0
17965 10/15*117 792  35    0*117 796  40    0*117 800  45    0*117 803  45    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***              ***

17970 10/16*118 791  50    0*120 797  60    0*122 802  65    0*124 807  70    0
17970 10/16*118 807  50    0*119 811  60    0*120 815  65    0*121 818  70    0
                ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

17975 10/17*126 811  70    0*127 815  70    0*129 820  70    0*130 825  70    0
17975 10/17*122 821  75    0*123 824  80    0*125 827  85    0*126 830  90    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

17980 10/18*132 831  70    0*134 837  70    0*136 843  60    0*138 849  35    0
17980 10/18*127 834  90    0*128 837  65    0*130 840  50    0*133 843  35    0
            *** ***  **      ***      **      *** ***  **

(The 19th is new to HURDAT.)
17982 10/19*138 848  30    0*145 855  25    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0

17985 HR

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), 
originally storm number 7.  Intensity is increased at landfall to a 
Category 2 hurricane (90 kt) to match descriptions of widespread destruction
("destroying the towns of Rio Grande and Prinzapolca") in Nicaragua.

********************************************************************************
1908/09

17990 10/21/1908 M= 3  8 SNBR= 415 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
17990 10/19/1908 M= 5  9 SNBR= 439 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
         **         *  *       ***                  *

(The 19th and 20th are new to HURDAT.)
17992 10/19*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0E350 720  35    0E343 715  35    0
17994 10/20E337 710  35    0E331 705  35    0*325 697  35    0*317 686  35    0

17995 10/21*  0   0   0    0*274 667  35    0*277 682  35    0*280 694  35    0
17995 10/21*307 673  35    0*296 663  35    0*285 660  35    0*275 676  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18000 10/22*284 707  35    0*290 721  35    0*297 735  35    0*305 750  35    0
18000 10/22*274 699  35    0*282 721  35    0*290 740  35    0*303 754  35    0
            *** ***          ***              *** ***          *** ***

18005 10/23*314 765  35    0*324 781  35    0*334 797  35    0*342 810  30    0
18005 10/23*314 766  35    0E324 782  35    0E334 797  35    0E342 810  30    0
                ***         *    ***         *                *

18010 TS

There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997), originally storm
number 8.  The storm - obviously of extratropical origins from Partagas and 
Diaz' analysis - is given extratropical status on the 19th and early on the 
20th, until transforming to more tropical in nature late on the 20th.  
Partagas and Diaz otherwise made large alterations to the track and intensity 
shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  These track and intensity changes are found
to be reasonable.  Since the storm was determined to have transitioned back 
to extratropical before landfall in South Carolina, XING was changed from 
"1" to "0".

********************************************************************************

1908 - Additional Notes:

Partagas and Diaz (1997) mentioned four additional systems considered 
for inclusion into HURDAT.  The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out 
of HURDAT for the following reasons:

1) June 2-5, 1908:  Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) July 29-30, 1908:  Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
3) August 5, 1908:  One gale force report, insufficient to determine 
   if system was of tropical storm intensity.
4) October 25-31, 1908:  Gale force intensity, but likely extratropical.

********************************************************************************
1909
********************************************************************************
1909/01

18011 06/15/1909 M= 5  1 SNBR= 440 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
18012 06/15*106 825  30    0*108 825  30    0*110 825  35    0*112 825  35    0
18013 06/16*115 825  40    0*117 825  40    0*120 825  40    0*122 825  40    0
18014 06/17*124 825  40    0*126 825  40    0*128 825  40    0*130 825  40    0
18014 06/18*132 826  40    0*134 827  40    0*135 828  40    0*137 830  40    0
18014 06/19*138 833  40    0*139 836  35    0*140 840  30    0*140 845  25    0
18014 TS

This newly documented tropical storm comes from the "Case of Jun. 15-18,
1909" in Partagas and Diaz (1999).  They had described a low pressure center
in the southwestern Caribbean Sea with two ship reports (on the 15th and
18th) of gale force winds, but had decided not to add this system as
a new storm.  After reviewing the data in the June 1909 Historical Weather
Maps, it was determined that there did exist a closed circulation with
convection for five consecutive days and that the two ship reports of
gale force winds were enough evidence that it did reach tropical storm
status.  Following the methodology in Partagas and Diaz (1999), positions
for 12Z on the 15th through the 19th were estimated from the Historical
Weather Maps and the remaining synoptic time positions were interpolated.
Ship observations indicate that the system likely reached only weak
tropical storm intensity.

********************************************************************************
1909/02

18015 06/25/1909 M= 6  1 SNBR= 416 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
18015 06/25/1909 M= 6  2 SNBR= 441 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=2
                       *       ***                        *

18020 06/25*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*250 840  35    0*252 847  35    0
18020 06/25*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*250 840  35    0*255 847  35    0
                                                               ***  

18025 06/26*254 853  35    0*256 859  35    0*257 865  40    0*258 871  40    0
18025 06/26*259 855  35    0*263 862  35    0*267 870  40    0*267 877  40    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18030 06/27*259 876  45    0*259 881  45    0*260 887  50    0*260 895  50    0
18030 06/27*266 885  45    0*266 893  45    0*265 901  50    0*265 909  50    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18035 06/28*260 904  50    0*260 913  50    0*261 921  50    0*262 930  50    0
18035 06/28*264 917  50    0*264 925  50    0*263 933  50    0*263 941  55    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  **

18040 06/29*263 938  50    0*264 945  50    0*266 952  50    0*267 959  45    0
18040 06/29*262 949  65    0*262 957  75    0*261 965  85    0*261 973  70  972 
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **  ***

18045 06/30*268 965  40    0*269 971  40    0*270 977  30    0*  0   0   0    0
18045 06/30*260 980  50    0*260 986  35    0*260 990  30    0*  0   0   0    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***

18050 TS     
18050 HRATX2
      ******

Major changes near landfall in Texas are made from Partagas and Diaz (1999),
storm number 1.  Based upon analysis of Ellis (1988), this storm is increased
in intensity up to a Category 2 hurricane over the western Gulf of Mexico and 
at landfall in Texas and the track is altered to make landfall near
Brownsville.  Ellis provides description of damaging impacts in Brownsville 
and Harlington, along with a storm tide of 7' and a possible central pressure 
of 972 mb.  This pressure suggests winds of 86 kt from the Gulf of Mexico 
wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt chosen at landfall in Texas making
it a Category 2 hurricane.  Thus this is a new U.S. landfalling hurricane, 
previously unlisted in Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane
characterization in HURDAT.  Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable 
small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).

Below is an analysis provided by David Roth from the _Houston Post_ and 
_San Antonio Daily Express_ newspapers from the storm's aftermath (July 1-10)
(though a portion of the rainfall and flooding that occurred likely was
not the direct effect of the hurricane itself):

It rained a great deal from the cyclone...10" fell in 24 hours at
Mercedes TX.  Rains swelled the Rio Grande...so much so that is was
expected to cause lowland flooding by July 3.  By the 4th, flooding was
occurring along the Rio Grande and San Juan valleys.  It was considered
the biggest rise in 5 years for the Rio Grande.

This cyclone set the stage for quite a flood.  By the 9th, the Rio
Grande was still rising at Brownsville, and levees gave way west of the
city.  Flood conditions were reaching serious proportions in Hidalgo
and Starr counties, as canals began flooding.  By that time, Mercedes
was surrounded on 3 sides by water, when Llano Grande Lake overflowed.
The Arroyo Colorado and El Fuest rivers were raging torrents. Many were
forced to abandon their homes throughout the region.

The river was just beginning to fall on the 10th at Fordyce and Rio
Grande City.  A number of passengers on a train stranded at Donna were
rescued by boat, and sailed two miles to the railroad tracks near
Mercedes.  A large section of the Mexican settlement near Brownsville
(it does not specify) was flooded.  A levee break at Ramireno caused
lowlands between there and Brownsville to be flooded.

In Mexico, by the 10th floods in the state of Vera Cruz caused the
Orizaba river to rise out of its banks, surrounding the country with 5-
6 feet of water.  Thousands in damage was reported.

Railroad tracks were underwater between Laredo and Monterey on the
2nd.  Trains leaving Laredo could get no farther than Lampasas.
Railroad service was "completely demoralized" in northern Mexico due to
washouts between the 1st and the 3rd.  Bridges at Salinas, Morelos, and
Villaldama were washed out.  Monterey lost 25 railroad bridges and over
200 km of track were washed away in its vicinity.  Railroad damage in
this region of Mexico was estimated at $750,000.  Rumors circulated that
Sabinas Hidalgo was "gone" after the cyclone...I could not find
anything to substantiate it though. Several km of track was reported
missing north of Zacatecas on the 8th.  An additional $500,000 of
damage was incurred there.

As for winds, Brownsville reported a "hurricane from the northwest" on
the 30th, which tore down fences and trees, but did little damage to
buildings.  Sounds like a gale for sure...would need to get their
observations from that time period to be certain.  Winds reached "high
velocity at times" in Mercedes.  At Falfurrias, the winds at times
was "alarming."  Winds at Point Isabel reached 65 mph.

Several dwellings and buildings were blown down in Harlingen, Point
Isabel, Donna, San Benito, Norias, and Brazos Pass.  Windmills were
leveled at Chapin, along with the Santa Anita and Mesenas ranches.

Damages listed:
McAllen              $1,000
Brownsville          $2,000
Vera Cruz        "thousands"
San Benito          $10,000
Harlingen          $100,000
Mexico railroads $1,250,000

The Point Isabel storm surge was at least 5 feet when the telegraph
went out...I never saw a later report to see what its final level was.
The Washington Post reported tides over 10 feet above normal in
northeast Mexico, between the Mouth of the Rio Grande and Tampico.

********************************************************************************
1909/03

18055 06/26/1909 M= 6  2 SNBR= 417 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
18055 06/26/1909 M= 9  3 SNBR= 442 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
                    *  *       ***

18060 06/26*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*235 746  35    0*237 751  35    0
18060 06/26*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*210 720  30    0*212 731  30    0
                                              *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18065 06/27*240 756  35    0*243 762  35    0*247 768  35    0*252 775  35    0
18065 06/27*214 741  30    0*217 751  30    0*220 760  35    0*227 769  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***

18070 06/28*258 783  35    0*263 791  40    0*268 798  45    0*273 805  40    0
18070 06/28*234 776  35    0*242 785  40    0*250 793  45    0*258 799  45    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  **

18075 06/29*278 812  35    0*282 818  35    0*287 825  35    0*292 832  35    0
18075 06/29*265 805  40    0*273 811  35    0*280 817  35    0*284 822  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18080 06/30*296 839  35    0*301 847  35    0*306 855  35    0*311 864  30    0
18080 06/30*290 829  35    0*295 834  35    0*300 840  35    0*302 843  30    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18085 07/01*315 876  30    0*319 890  30    0*322 904  25    0*  0   0   0    0
18085 07/01*304 845  30    0*306 846  30    0*310 847  30    0*313 846  25    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **

(The 2nd through the 4th are new to HURDAT.)
18086 07/02*316 843  25    0*319 838  25    0*320 835  25    0*322 828  25    0
18087 07/03*324 817  25    0*324 807  30    0*323 797  30    0*320 783  30    0
18088 07/04*315 770  30    0*310 757  30    0*303 745  30    0*296 732  30    0

18090 TS    

There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm 
number 2.  The storm is kept as a tropical depression on the 26th rather than 
dropping this date from HURDAT as suggested by Partagas and Diaz, since there
is no strong evidence that a closed circulation did not exist at that point.
Partagas and Diaz otherwise made large alterations to the track and intensity 
shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  These track and intensity changes are found
to be reasonable.

********************************************************************************
1909/04

18095 07/13/1909 M=10  3 SNBR= 418 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
18095 07/13/1909 M=10  4 SNBR= 443 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
                       *       ***                  

18100 07/13*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*123 605  35    0*123 620  35    0
18100 07/13*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*123 605  30    0*123 620  30    0
                                                       **               **

18105 07/14*124 635  35    0*126 649  35    0*130 662  35    0*135 674  35    0
18105 07/14*124 635  30    0*126 649  30    0*130 662  30    0*135 674  30    0
                     **               **               **               **

18110 07/15*140 686  35    0*145 698  35    0*149 710  40    0*152 724  40    0
18110 07/15*140 686  30    0*145 698  30    0*149 710  30    0*152 722  30    0
                     **               **               **          ***  **

18115 07/16*158 740  40    0*163 755  40    0*168 768  45    0*174 778  45    0
18115 07/16*155 733  30    0*158 744  30    0*160 755  30    0*162 767  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18120 07/17*180 788  45    0*186 797  50    0*192 807  50    0*200 818  55    0
18120 07/17*164 778  35    0*167 789  40    0*172 800  45    0*180 810  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18125 07/18*208 829  55    0*215 840  60    0*222 850  60    0*229 859  65    0
18125 07/18*190 820  55    0*200 830  60    0*210 840  60    0*220 850  65    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  

18130 07/19*235 868  70    0*241 875  75    0*244 882  85    0*250 888  95    0
18130 07/19*230 859  70    0*240 867  70    0*250 875  70    0*256 883  70    0
            *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18135 07/20*255 894 105    0*260 900 110    0*264 906 115    0*269 913 120    0
18135 07/20*261 889  70    0*266 897  70    0*270 906  70    0*274 915  70  985 
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      ***     ***      *** *** ***  ***

18140 07/21*273 919 120    0*278 927 115    0*282 935 105    0*287 945  95  982
18140 07/21*278 925  80    0*282 935  90    0*286 945 100    0*290 955  90  959
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** ***  **  ***

18145 07/22*293 958  65    0*296 972  30    0*302 988  25    0*  0   0   0    0
18145 07/22*293 965  65    0*296 976  30    0*302 988  25    0*  0   0   0    0
                ***              ***

18150 HRCTX3

There are two major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm 
number 3.  First, the storm is kept as a tropical depression on the 13th to 
the 16th rather than dropping these dates from HURDAT as suggested by Partagas
and Diaz, since there is no evidence that a closed circulation did not exist 
then.  Secondly, the storm's landfall location in Texas is adjusted to better 
fit the analysis by Ho et al. (1987).  Partagas and Diaz otherwise made
reasonable small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et 
al. (1999).  A central pressure of 985 mb (at 17Z on the 20th) suggests 
winds of 70 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship, which are
utilized in the best track.  Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 19th
and 20th.  Ho et al. also analyzed a central pressure estimate of 959 mb and 
a RMW of 19 nmi at landfall in Texas.  (This was partially based upon a 
peripheral pressure value of 982 mb at 2030Z on the 21st, which was mistakenly
recorded as a central pressure previously.)  Jarrell et al. (1992) (based
upon Connor 1956) provided a very similar estimate of 958 mb at landfall
in Texas.  The central pressure of 959 mb suggests winds of 101 kt from the 
Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship.   Since the RMW is very close to 
the climatological RMW for this intensity and central pressure (Vickery et 
al. 2000), a value of 100 kt is chosen for the best track at landfall.  Winds 
are adjusted accordingly on the 21st.  The 959 mb/100 kt at landfall in Texas 
making this a Category 3 hurricane agrees with that recorded in Table 6 of 
Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT.  A storm 
tide of 10' in Galveston and Velasco, Texas was reported by Connor (1956) and 
Ellis (1988).

********************************************************************************
1909/05

18155 07/27/1909 M=16  4 SNBR= 419 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
18155 07/27/1909 M= 5  5 SNBR= 444 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                   **  *       ***

18160 07/27*  0   0   0    0*107 516  35    0*108 522  35    0*109 528  35    0
18165 07/28*110 536  35    0*111 544  35    0*113 553  35    0*116 564  35    0
18170 07/29*119 576  35    0*121 587  35    0*124 598  35    0*126 607  35    0
18175 07/30*129 616  35    0*131 624  35    0*134 632  35    0*136 639  40    0
18180 07/31*139 647  40    0*141 653  40    0*143 658  45    0*144 662  45    0
18185 08/01*146 666  45    0*147 669  45    0*148 673  45    0*149 677  45    0
18190 08/02*151 682  45    0*152 686  45    0*153 690  45    0*154 693  45    0
18195 08/03*154 696  45    0*154 698  45    0*155 701  45    0*156 705  45    0
18200 08/04*158 709  45    0*159 713  45    0*160 718  50    0*161 723  50    0
18205 08/05*161 729  50    0*162 735  50    0*163 742  50    0*164 749  50    0
(The 27th to the 5th removed from HURDAT.)

18210 08/06*164 757  50    0*165 766  50    0*166 775  50    0*168 785  50    0
18210 08/06*166 795  30    0*173 800  30    0*180 805  30    0*188 812  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18215 08/07*171 795  50    0*175 802  50    0*179 809  50    0*183 828  50    0
18215 08/07*196 820  35    0*206 830  35    0*210 843  40 1004*209 854  40    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  ** **** *** ***  **

18220 08/08*187 835  45    0*191 842  45    0*195 851  45    0*200 862  45    0
18220 08/08*208 865  40    0*206 876  35    0*205 885  30    0*204 893  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18225 08/09*205 875  35    0*211 888  35    0*216 903  35    0*219 915  35    0
18225 08/09*204 904  30    0*204 914  35    0*205 925  35    0*209 939  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18230 08/10*222 932  35    0*223 949  35    0*224 961  35    0*225 973  35    0
18230 08/10*215 954  35    0*223 970  35    0*230 985  30    0*237 998  25    0
            *** ***  **          ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18235 08/11*226 984  30    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0
(The 11th is removed from HURDAT.)

18240 TS    

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm 
number 4.  Partagas and Diaz recommended removing July 27th through 
August 5th as no closed circulation existed during its supposed trek across 
the eastern and central Caribbean Sea.  These dramatic track and intensity 
changes are found to be reasonable.  A possible central pressure of 1004 mb 
(at 12Z on the 7th) suggests winds of 39 kt from the southern wind-pressure 
relationship - 40 kt chosen for best track.

********************************************************************************
1909/06

18245 08/20/1909 M= 9  5 SNBR= 420 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=2
18245 08/20/1909 M= 9  6 SNBR= 445 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=1
                       *       ***                        *

18250 08/20*  0   0   0    0*154 545  60    0*156 555  60    0*157 564  70    0
18250 08/20*  0   0   0    0*154 553  60    0*155 563  60    0*157 573  70    0
                                 ***          *** ***              ***

18255 08/21*158 574  70    0*159 585  70    0*160 598  70    0*161 612  75    0
18255 08/21*159 582  70    0*161 594  70    0*163 605  70    0*165 619  75    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18260 08/22*162 626  75    0*164 641  75    0*165 655  80    0*167 670  80    0
18260 08/22*167 630  75    0*170 642  75    0*173 657  80    0*176 675  80    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18265 08/23*168 684  80    0*171 699  85    0*174 714  85    0*178 731  90    0
18265 08/23*179 691  80    0*183 707  70    0*188 723  65    0*199 740  75    0
            *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18270 08/24*184 751  90    0*192 772  90    0*199 791  95    0*204 808  95    0
18270 08/24*203 758  65    0*205 776  65    0*206 795  75    0*207 811  85    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18275 08/25*208 825 100    0*212 841 100    0*214 854 100    0*217 865 105    0
18275 08/25*208 826  95    0*209 841 100    0*210 855 100    0*211 869  90    0
                *** ***      ***              *** ***          *** *** ***

18280 08/26*220 875 105    0*223 885 105    0*228 896 105    0*232 908 105    0
18280 08/26*213 884  80    0*216 897  90    0*220 910 100    0*225 925 105    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** 

18285 08/27*237 920 100    0*241 932  95    0*244 944  90    0*248 956  85    0
18285 08/27*229 940 105    0*233 955 105    0*237 967 105    0*238 973 105    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***

18290 08/28*252 967  70    0*256 979  65    0*260 990  35    0*  0   0   0    0
18290 08/28*237 979  85    0*237 983  55    0*237 987  35    0*  0   0   0    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** *** 

18295 HRATX2    
18295 HRATX1    
        ****

There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm 
number 5.  The analysis of Perez (2000) showed that the hurricane made 
landfall near Baracoa, Cuba, rather than near Santiago de Cuba as shown in 
Partagas and Diaz.  Perez' Cuba landfall location is utilized here.  Partagas
and Diaz made large alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann 
et al. (1999).  These track and intensity changes are otherwise reasonable.
Perez also analyzed this hurricane to have made landfall as a Category 2
system, based upon wind-caused damage.  However, this does not appear to be
completely reasonable given the hurricanes' interaction with Hispanola and
Category 1 at landfall in Cuba is utilized.  The hurricane is maintained in 
the Gulf of Mexico as a Category 3 hurricane up until landfall in northeast 
Mexico, based upon damages incurred there.  The storm had been listed as 
causing Category 2 hurricane conditions in southern Texas (Table 6 in Neumann 
et al. 1999/U.S. hurricane landfall characterization in HURDAT), but this is 
reduced down to Category 1 hurricane impact due to observations of only 
minimal hurricane conditions in Texas and due the to distance from the 
hurricane center to the Texas coast. The full lifecycle of this tropical 
storm is not known due to lack of information on its genesis.

********************************************************************************
1909/07

18300 08/27/1909 M= 6  6 SNBR= 421 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
18300 08/28/1909 M= 4  7 SNBR= 446 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
         **         *  *       ***

18305 08/27*208 689  35    0*214 697  35    0*221 706  35    0*228 717  35    0
(The 27th is omitted from HURDAT.)

18310 08/28*234 730  35    0*239 741  35    0*244 750  40    0*248 757  40    0
18310 08/28*237 730  35    0*246 744  35    0*255 760  40    0*260 773  40    0
            ***              *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18315 08/29*251 764  45    0*255 770  45    0*259 777  45    0*263 784  45    0
18315 08/29*263 785  45    0*264 796  45    0*265 805  40    0*266 809  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18320 08/30*268 790  45    0*272 797  45    0*277 803  35    0*282 807  35    0
18320 08/30*268 812  30    0*271 815  30    0*277 817  30    0*285 813  30    0
                ***  **      *** ***  **          ***  **      *** ***  **

18325 08/31*287 809  35    0*292 810  35    0*297 810  35    0*302 809  30    0
18325 08/31*295 805  35    0*304 797  35    0*310 790  35    0*315 784  30    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***
   
18330 09/01*307 804  30    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0
(The 1st is omitted from the revised HURDAT.)

18335 TS  

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), 
originally storm number 6.

********************************************************************************
1909/08

18340 09/10/1909 M=12  7 SNBR= 422 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=4
18340 09/13/1909 M=10  8 SNBR= 447 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
         **        **  *       ***                        *  

18345 09/10*  0   0   0    0*134 563  35    0*136 579  35    0*137 595  35    0
18350 09/11*138 611  35    0*139 625  35    0*139 636  35    0*139 646  35    0
18355 09/12*139 655  35    0*139 665  35    0*139 674  35    0*139 683  35    0
(The 10th to the 12th were omitted from the revised HURDAT.)

18360 09/13*139 693  35    0*140 702  35    0*141 708  35    0*141 717  35    0
18360 09/13*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*175 710  30    0*178 725  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18365 09/14*142 723  35    0*143 729  35    0*144 738  35    0*145 742  35    0
18365 09/14*181 739  30    0*183 752  30    0*185 765  30    0*187 775  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18370 09/15*146 749  40    0*148 756  40    0*151 764  45    0*157 775  50    0
18370 09/15*189 784  35    0*191 793  40    0*193 800  45    0*195 806  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  

18375 09/16*167 791  55    0*178 806  60    0*187 812  65    0*194 821  70    0
18375 09/16*197 810  55    0*200 815  60    0*203 820  65    0*206 824  70    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  

18380 09/17*202 827  70    0*209 831  70    0*214 836  70    0*218 841  75    0
18380 09/17*209 829  70    0*213 833  75    0*217 837  80    0*220 842  85  976
            *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **  ***

18385 09/18*223 845  75    0*227 849  80    0*231 854  80    0*235 859  85    0
18385 09/18*223 845  75    0*226 849  80    0*229 854  80    0*232 859  85    0
                             ***              ***              ***

18390 09/19*240 864  95    0*244 868 110    0*255 873 115    0*262 878 120    0
18390 09/19*235 867  95    0*239 874 105    0*243 880 105    0*248 885 105    0
            *** ***          *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***

18395 09/20*272 884 120    0*280 890 110    0*284 896  95    0*296 905  85    0
18395 09/20*254 890 105    0*261 895 105    0*269 901 105    0*277 907 105    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** *** 

18400 09/21*310 910  65  990*325 917  50    0*342 918  35    0*359 912  30    0
18400 09/21*295 913 105  952*314 917  75    0*332 915  55    0*350 913  40    0
            *** *** ***  *** ***      **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

(The 22nd is new to HURDAT.)
18402 09/22*368 911  30    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0 

18405 HR LA4
18405 HR LA3 MS2
         *** ***

One major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who otherwise made large,
but reasonable alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. 
(1999), originally storm number 7.  The 13th is retained in HURDAT based
upon a re-examination of the Historical Weather Map series, which indicated
a probable closed circulation existed on that date south of Hispanola.  The 
track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.  A possible central 
pressure of 976 mb (21Z on the 17th) suggests winds of 83 kt - 85 kt chosen 
for best track.  This agrees with the classification of the hurricane as a 
Category 2 at landfall in Cuba (Perez 2000).  Winds are adjusted accordingly 
on the 17th and 18th.  Jarrell et al. (1992) (from Connor 1956) classified 
this hurricane at landfall in the United States as 931 mb central pressure 
apparently based primarily upon the storm tide of 15' observed in Terrebonne 
Bay, Louisiana (Cline 1926).  Ho et al. (1987) on the other hand analyzed a 
965 mb central pressure from a 990 mb peripheral pressure measurement and an 
estimated RMW of 28 nmi.  (Note that this 990 mb was mistakenly listed in 
HURDAT previously as a central pressure.)  Jarvinen (2001, personal 
communication), however, showed with SLOSH runs that such an estimate of 
central pressure and RMW could not correctly simulate the observed large 
storm surge values.  David Roth was able to provide descriptions (see below) 
of the storm's impact in Louisiana, which corroborated altering the positions 
of the hurricane consistent with Cline's analysis of making landfall farther 
west than Ho's analysis and substantially faster forward motion.  Jarvinen 
utilized the new position estimates and iterated possible central pressure 
and RMW values with SLOSH to arrive at a best fit of 952 mb and 28 nmi.  This 
value of central pressure falls between the estimates of Jarrell et al. and 
Ho.  A 952 mb central pressure suggests winds of 108 kt from the Gulf of 
Mexico wind-pressure relationship.  Given a RMW which is moderately larger 
than that expected climatologically for this central pressure and latitude 
(e.g. Vickery et al. 2000) tempered by being a quick moving (18 kt) hurricane 
at landfall, the maximum sustained winds at U.S. landfall are a slightly 
reduced estimate of 105 kt - making this a Category 3 hurricane at landfall.  
A Category 3 designation at landfall in the U.S. is lower than the 
Category 4 shown in Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S.  hurricane 
characterization in HURDAT.  Inland decay model of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) 
utilized for inland winds over Louisiana and Arkansas.  Winds are adjusted 
accordingly on the 20th through the 22nd.

From the _New Orleans Time-Democrat_ as obtained by David Roth:
The only hurricane to destroy capital domes at both Baton Rouge, LA and 
Jackson, MS.
Mobile AL....High southeast gale.
Pass Christian MS....The worst storm that ever struck this place reached its
height last night at 12 o'clock and ruin and wreckage are strewn from one end 
of town to the other.  The great storm in 1893 did not do so much damage and 
cannot surpass this in amount of loss at the Pass and other points.
Bayou Portage MS (just north of Pass Christian)...the water rose at least 
fifteen feet and spread over an area of several miles.
Donaldsonville LA...In the morning the wind blew with some velocity and a heavy
rain followed, but it was between 4 and 9 pm that the greatest damage
was done.
New Orleans LA...The wind increased in violence until 6:15 last night (the 
20th) when it reached a velocity of 66 mph.  An hour later the barometer began
rising, and at an early hour this morning, the disturbance had almost subsided.
Brusly Landing LA...One of the worst storms that has visited this section in
years swept over West Baton Rouge parish yesterday, doing heavy damage. The
wind started at 6 am and steadily increased until 9 pm, when it attained the 
force of a hurricane.  At 10 pm last night, after the winds abated...
Thibodaux LA...Worst between 4 and 6 pm the 20th. 
Norwood LA...Worst between 8 and 10:30 pm, when wind veered to southwest and
lessened in force.
Wilson LA...Severe wind and rain storms between 8 and 11:30 pm.
Washington LA...Stiff NW wind blew all day....worst at night.
Zachary LA....Terrific gale from noon until midnight the 20th.
St. Francisville LA...Most severe wind and rain storm this immediate section 
has known in many years came last night (20th) between 6 and 11 pm after a 
stormy day.
Lutcher LA..."Terrific gale" reached maximum intensity beginning at 7:30 pm,
continuing for some time.
Lulling LA...A gale of considerable violence from the SE began to blow early on
the morning of the 20th, increasing in violence until 10 pm.
Port Hudson LA...The rain and wind which raged all yesterday (the 20th) 
culminated in a hurricane, lasting from 7 to 10 pm.
Covington LA...At 11 pm last night the wind attained a velocity of 50 mph.
Plaquemines LA...Storm at its height at 8 pm.
Abbeville LA...A tropical hurricane raged from 9 am the morning of the 20th 
until a late hour that night. The barometer was 28.75 and fell steadily.  It 
has been thirty years since this section experienced such an equinoctial storm.


********************************************************************************
1909/09

18410 09/22/1909 M= 9  8 SNBR= 423 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=0
18410 09/24/1909 M= 6  9 SNBR= 448 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
         **         *  *       ***                  *

18415 09/22*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*121 795  35    0*125 797  35    0
18420 09/23*130 800  35    0*136 803  35    0*144 806  35    0*153 810  35    0
(The 22nd to the 23th are omitted in the revised HURDAT.)

18425 09/24*162 816  35    0*171 821  35    0*181 823  35    0*191 828  35    0
18425 09/24*220 830  30    0*225 830  30    0*230 830  30    0*235 830  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18430 09/25*200 829  35    0*210 830  35    0*220 830  40    0*230 830  45    0
18430 09/25*241 830  30    0*247 830  30    0*253 828  30    0*258 822  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18435 09/26*241 830  45    0*252 828  40    0*262 823  40    0*272 815  35    0
18435 09/26*263 813  30    0*269 804  30    0*275 795  35    0*280 789  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  

18440 09/27*281 807  35    0*289 798  35    0*295 790  35    0*300 783  35    0
18440 09/27*284 784  40    0*290 778  45    0*295 770  50    0*301 750  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **          ***  **      *** ***  **

18445 09/28*304 777  35    0*308 770  40    0*312 758  40    0*318 743  45    0
18445 09/28*306 728  50    0*311 706  45    0*315 687  40    0*318 669  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***              ***  **

18450 09/29*322 729  45    0*327 714  35    0*331 700  35    0*334 685  35    0
18450 09/29*322 655  30    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0
                ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18455 09/30*336 671  35    0*338 657  30    0*340 642  25    0*341 621  25    0
(The 30th is omitted in the revised HURDAT.)

18460 TS

There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm 
number 8.  Perez (2000 and personal communication), in his analysis of Cuban 
tropical cyclones, agrees with not calling this system a tropical storm over 
Cuba, but indicated that a closed low did exist near Havana on the 24th.  
Thus a track beginning early on the 24th along Neumann et al.'s track just
south of Cuba, but about a day earlier is included.  However, Partagas and
Diaz were correct about the lack of a closed circulation on the 22nd and
23rd and thus these dates are removed from HURDAT.  Partagas and Diaz 
otherwise made large alterations to the track and intensity shown in 
Neumann et al. (1999).  These track and intensity changes are found to be 
reasonable.  A peripheral pressure of 1000 mb (at 12Z on the 27th) suggests 
winds of at least 48 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 
50 kt chosen for best track.  A peripheral pressure of 1004 mb (at 12Z on 
the 28th) suggests winds of at least 40 kt from the subtropical wind-
pressure relationship - 40 kt chosen for best track.

********************************************************************************
1909/10

18465 10/06/1909 M= 8  9 SNBR= 424 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
18465 10/06/1909 M= 8 10 SNBR= 449 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
                      **       ***                        

18470 10/06*  0   0   0    0*112 778  50    0*121 780  60    0*123 781  65    0
18470 10/06*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*107 760  30    0*112 763  30    0
                             *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18475 10/07*127 782  70    0*132 783  70    0*139 783  70    0*146 784  75    0
18475 10/07*120 768  35    0*128 772  40    0*137 777  45    0*145 782  50    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18480 10/08*157 786  75    0*165 790  80    0*172 798  80    0*175 805  85    0
18480 10/08*154 786  55    0*164 792  60    0*172 798  65    0*177 805  70    0
            ***      **      *** ***  **               **      ***      **

18485 10/09*180 811  90    0*184 817  95    0*190 825  95    0*194 830 100    0
18485 10/09*182 811  80    0*186 817  90    0*190 825  95    0*193 832 100    0
            ***      **      ***      **                       *** ***  

18490 10/10*200 832 105    0*205 834 105    0*210 836 105    0*220 834 105    0
18490 10/10*196 838 105    0*200 842 105    0*205 844 105    0*211 845 105    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** *** 

18495 10/11*230 830 105    0*235 825 100    0*240 818  90  957*251 804  85    0
18495 10/11*218 845 105    0*226 841 105    0*237 830 105    0*247 810 100  957 
            *** ***          *** ***          *** *** ***  *** *** *** ***  ***

18500 10/12*260 791  80    0*270 776  75    0*278 765  70    0*289 744  70    0
18500 10/12*260 789  90    0*275 768  80    0*290 748  70    0*303 726  60    0
                ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***  **

18505 10/13*299 725  65    0*309 706  55    0*315 690  45    0*340 648  30    0
18505 10/13*316 700  50    0*329 675  40    0*340 650  35    0*349 629  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  

18510 HRCFL3
18510 HRBFL3CFL3
        ****

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm 
number 9.  Partagas and Diaz also suggested reasonable large changes to the
intensity on the 6th to the 8th and smaller changes elsewhere.  Peripheral 
pressure of 965 mb (at 15Z on the 10th) suggests winds of at least 95 kt 
from the southern wind-pressure relationship.  Winds are retained at 105 kt 
for the 10th and 11th.  This agrees with the assessment of a Category 3 
impact in Cuba by Perez (2000).  A central pressure reading at Knight's Key 
(from Ho et al. (1987) and Barnes (1998a) of 957 mb (on the 11th) suggests 
winds of 103 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship.  Ho et al. 
also analyzed a RMW of 22 nmi for this hurricane at landfall in the Florida 
Keys.  Since this RMW is slightly larger than that expected climatologically 
for the center pressure and latitude observed, winds at landfall in the Keys 
are estimated at 100 kt.  This makes this system a Category 3 hurricane at 
landfall in south Florida, which agrees with what is listed in Table 6 of 
Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT.

********************************************************************************
1909/11

18515 11/08/1909 M= 7 10 SNBR= 425 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
18515 11/08/1909 M= 7 11 SNBR= 450 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                      **       ***    

18520 11/08*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*111 810  35    0*115 808  35    0
18520 11/08*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*105 810  35    0*107 808  35    0
                                              ***              ***

18525 11/09*119 806  35    0*122 804  35    0*126 802  35    0*129 800  35    0
18525 11/09*109 806  35    0*111 804  35    0*113 802  35    0*116 800  35    0
            ***              ***              ***              ***

18530 11/10*133 797  35    0*136 794  40    0*139 791  40    0*141 788  45    0
18530 11/10*121 797  35    0*127 794  40    0*133 791  40    0*139 788  45    0
            ***              ***              ***              ***

18535 11/11*143 785  45    0*146 780  50    0*149 774  50    0*155 765  50    0
18535 11/11*145 785  45    0*151 780  50    0*157 774  50    0*165 767  55    0
            ***              ***              ***              *** ***  **

18540 11/12*161 752  50    0*167 737  50    0*173 722  50    0*179 707  50    0
18540 11/12*174 760  60    0*182 753  65    0*190 745  70    0*196 735  75    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18545 11/13*185 691  50    0*191 675  45    0*196 660  45    0*201 645  40    0
18545 11/13*201 721  80    0*206 704  85    0*210 685  90    0*213 663  90    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18550 11/14*204 630  40    0*207 615  40    0*209 600  35    0*215 565  30    0
18550 11/14*214 640  90    0*215 615  85    0*215 590  80    0*215 565  75    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **               **

18555 TS
18555 HR
      **

There are two major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm 
number 10.   First, Partagas and Diaz recommended keeping this as a tropical 
storm.  However, two ship reports and hurricane impacts in Hispanola, Grand 
Turk and Cuba described in Partagas and Diaz all suggest that this system 
reached hurricane strength, likely up to Category 2 intensity at its peak 
late on the 13th and early on the 14th.  Perez (2000) analyzed this system 
as causing Category 1 hurricane conditions in eastern Cuba (on the weak side 
of the system).  Thus it is estimated that this system was a hurricane from 
the 12th to the 14th with a peak intensity of 90 kt.  Secondly, Perez 
described a major change to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999) with a 
track that took the hurricane closer to Jamaica and between Cuba and 
Hispanola, with the center grazing the coast of Haiti.  A compromise track 
between Perez and Partagas/Diaz was utilized here with Partagas/Diaz track 
mainly chosen from the 8th to the 10th, Perez' track primarily used from the 
11th to the 13th and Partagas/Diaz track chosen for the 14th.  Complete 
lifecycle of this hurricane is not available as its decay was not documented.  
The hurricane is known as "San Savero" for its impacts in Hispanola.

********************************************************************************

1909 - Additional Notes:

Partagas and Diaz (1999) mentioned three additional systems considered 
for inclusion into HURDAT.  The re-analysis team decided that there was
enough information to include the first system as a new tropical storm 
into HURDAT.  (See storm 1, 1909.)  The re-analysis team agreed to leave 
the first and third out of HURDAT for the following reasons:

1) June 2-4, 1909:  Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) October 16-24, 1909:  Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.

********************************************************************************
1910
********************************************************************************
1910/01

18560 08/20/1910 M=12  1 SNBR= 426 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
18560 08/23/1910 M= 7  1 SNBR= 451 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
         **        **          ***

18565 08/20*  0   0   0    0*124 592  35    0*125 604  35    0*127 616  35    0
18570 08/21*130 629  35    0*133 640  35    0*136 649  35    0*138 657  35    0
18575 08/22*140 665  35    0*142 671  35    0*146 681  35    0*149 691  35    0
(The 20th to the 22nd are omitted from the revised HURDAT.)

18580 08/23*154 702  35    0*159 714  35    0*163 725  35    0*166 735  35    0
18580 08/23*  0   0   0    0*150 620  35    0*155 637  35    0*159 654  35    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18585 08/24*169 745  35    0*171 754  35    0*174 763  35    0*176 771  35    0
18585 08/24*165 673  35    0*172 695  35    0*180 715  35    0*187 728  30    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  **

18590 08/25*178 778  35    0*180 785  35    0*183 792  35    0*187 801  40    0
18590 08/25*194 740  30    0*203 754  30    0*213 767  30    0*225 775  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18595 08/26*191 808  40    0*195 816  40    0*199 825  40    0*202 832  45    0
18595 08/26*239 781  30    0*256 787  30    0*275 790  30    0*284 790  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18600 08/27*205 839  45    0*208 846  45    0*211 852  50    0*215 858  50    0
18600 08/27E296 790  35    0E307 790  35    0E317 787  35    0E323 784  35    0
           **** ***  **     **** ***  **     **** ***  **     **** ***  **

18605 08/28*219 863  50    0*222 869  50    0*225 876  50    0*227 883  50    0
18605 08/28E329 780  40    0E335 776  40    0E340 770  40    0E349 761  40    0
           **** ***  **     **** ***  **     **** ***  **     **** ***  **

18610 08/29*229 891  50    0*231 899  50    0*233 907  50    0*235 915  50    0
18610 08/29E356 754  35    0E363 747  35    0E370 740  30    0E376 734  30    0
           **** ***  **     **** ***  **     **** ***  **     **** ***  **

18615 08/30*237 924  50    0*239 932  50    0*241 939  45    0*243 948  45    0
18620 08/31*246 961  40    0*248 970  40    0*251 979  35    0*254 988  30    0
(The 30th and 31st are omitted from this storm and included as part of
storm number 450.)

18625 TS

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  Note that
the original storm number 1 of 1910 in Neumann et al. was instead found by
Partagas and Diaz to be two separate tropical storms.  These dramatic
changes are found to be reasonable.  This system is the first of the two 
separate storms.

********************************************************************************
1910/02

18560 08/20/1910 M=12  1 SNBR= 426 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
18526 08/26/1910 M= 6  2 SNBR= 452 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
         **        **  *       ***     

18565 08/20*  0   0   0    0*124 592  35    0*125 604  35    0*127 616  35    0
18570 08/21*130 629  35    0*133 640  35    0*136 649  35    0*138 657  35    0
18575 08/22*140 665  35    0*142 671  35    0*146 681  35    0*149 691  35    0
18580 08/23*154 702  35    0*159 714  35    0*163 725  35    0*166 735  35    0
18585 08/24*169 745  35    0*171 754  35    0*174 763  35    0*176 771  35    0
18590 08/25*178 778  35    0*180 785  35    0*183 792  35    0*187 801  40    0
(The 20th to the 25th are omitted from this storm and parts of this track
are included in storm number 445.)

18626 08/26*191 808  40    0*195 816  40    0*199 825  40    0*202 832  45    0
18626 08/26*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*267 917  30    0*267 920  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18626 08/27*205 839  45    0*208 846  45    0*211 852  50    0*215 858  50    0
18626 08/27*267 923  30    0*267 927  30    0*267 930  30    0*267 934  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18626 08/28*219 863  50    0*222 869  50    0*225 876  50    0*227 883  50    0
18626 08/28*266 938  30    0*266 942  30    0*265 945  30    0*265 948  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18626 08/29*229 891  50    0*231 899  50    0*233 907  50    0*235 915  50    0
18626 08/29*264 950  30    0*264 952  30    0*263 955  30    0*262 958  30    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18626 08/30*237 924  50    0*239 932  50    0*241 939  45    0*243 948  45    0
18626 08/30*262 960  35    0*261 962  35    0*260 965  40    0*259 969  40    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18626 08/31*246 961  40    0*248 970  40    0*251 979  35    0*254 988  30    0
18626 08/31*257 972  40    0*255 976  35    0*253 980  30    0*251 985  25    0
            *** ***          *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18626 TS

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  Note that
the original storm number 1 of 1910 in Neumann et al. was instead found by
Partagas and Diaz to be two separate tropical storms.  These dramatic
track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.  This system is
the second of the two separate storms.

********************************************************************************
1910/03

18630 09/05/1910 M=11  2 SNBR= 427 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=2
18630 09/05/1910 M=11  3 SNBR= 453 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=2
                       *       ***                       

18635 09/05*  0   0   0    0*170 570  60    0*171 595  65    0*171 606  70    0
18635 09/05*  0   0   0    0*170 583  60    0*171 595  65    0*171 606  70    0
                                 ***

18640 09/06*171 617  75    0*172 627  80    0*174 638  80    0*175 649  85    0
18645 09/07*175 660  85    0*176 671  85    0*176 682  80    0*177 694  75    0
18645 09/07*175 660  85    0*176 671  85    0*176 682  80    0*176 697  75    0
                                                                   ***

18650 09/08*177 706  70    0*178 719  70    0*179 731  70    0*181 742  70    0
18650 09/08*177 712  70    0*178 729  70    0*180 747  70    0*183 764  70    0
                ***              ***          *** ***          *** ***

18655 09/09*183 754  70    0*185 765  70    0*188 776  70    0*190 788  70    0
18655 09/09*186 778  70    0*190 792  70    0*195 807  70    0*200 818  70    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18660 09/10*194 801  70    0*198 814  75    0*201 825  80    0*207 835  80    0
18660 09/10*205 829  70    0*209 838  75    0*213 847  80    0*217 851  80    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18665 09/11*213 845  85    0*220 855  85    0*225 863  85    0*232 872  85    0
18665 09/11*221 856  85    0*225 862  85    0*229 870  85    0*232 876  85    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***              ***

18670 09/12*237 878  90    0*240 883  90    0*244 890  95    0*249 898 100    0
18670 09/12*236 883  90    0*240 889  90    0*244 895  95    0*249 903  95    0
            *** ***              ***              ***              *** ***

18675 09/13*253 904 105    0*257 913 105    0*260 922 105    0*262 931 105    0
18675 09/13*253 912  95    0*257 918  95    0*260 925  95    0*262 934  95    0
                *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***

18680 09/14*263 941 100    0*265 952  85    0*266 961  65    0*268 973  65    0
18680 09/14*263 943  95    0*265 953  95    0*266 963  95    0*268 969  95    0
                *** ***          ***  **          ***  **          ***  **

18685 09/15*269 982  35    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0
18685 09/15*269 976  65    0*270 983  45    0*270 990  35    0*270 996  30    0
                ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18690 HRATX2

There are two major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm 
number 2.  First, hurricane intensity was maintained from the 9th through 
the 12th, since Perez (2000) analyzed this system as causing hurricane 
conditions in western Cuba.  Perez also recommended keeping the hurricane 
just offshore of western Cuba (as seen in Neumann et al.) rather than 
making landfall in Cuba.  Secondly, the landfall position of Partagas and 
Diaz being in northeastern Mexico rather than southern Texas is discarded 
in favor of the position analyzed by Connor (1956) which was shown in 
Neumann et al. (1999).  Partagas altered the landfall position incorrectly 
based upon sparse, once-daily observations from the Historical Weather Map 
series.  Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable small alterations to the 
track and intensity to that shown in Neumann et al. (1999).  Jarrell et al. 
(1992) (from Connor 1956) listed this hurricane as a having a central pressure 
at landfall of 965 mb, based primarily upon a description of the storm tide 
entirely inundating Padre Island, Texas.  (It is to be noted that Ho et al. 
(1987) did not system as being a U.S. impacting hurricane in their analysis
and that the _Monthly Weather Review_ at the time considered the system a
strong tropical storm.)  Assuming that the 965 mb central pressure is valid 
(though the evidence supporting it is somewhat sparse), this would suggest a 
94 kt sustained windspeed from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship 
- 95 kt utilized in best track.  95 kt at landfall in Texas makes this 
hurricane a Category 2 in the United States, which agrees with the assessment 
in Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT.
The 95 kt windspeed is taken as the peak intensity reached by this system and 
winds are adjusted accordingly on the 12th to the 14th.  Inland decay model 
of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over Texas and Mexico.  
Track of storm is slightly altered on the 5th to provide for a more realistic 
translational velocity.  The hurricane is known as "San Zacarias II" for its 
impacts in Puerto Rico.

*******************************************************************************
1910/04

18695 09/23/1910 M= 6  3 SNBR= 428 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
18695 09/23/1910 M= 6  4 SNBR= 454 NOT NAMED   XING=0 SSS=0
                       *       ***

18700 09/23*255 594  60    0*262 600  65    0*268 606  70    0*272 611  70    0
(The 23rd is omitted from the revised HURDAT.)

18705 09/24*276 615  75    0*283 620  80    0*291 625  85    0*301 631  90    0
18705 09/24*  0   0   0    0*278 605  35    0*283 613  45    0*289 621  55    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18710 09/25*311 636  95    0*322 639 100    0*333 641 105    0*345 640 105    0
18710 09/25*298 628  65    0*308 634  75    0*320 637  85    0*336 634  85    0
            *** ***  **      *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***

18715 09/26*357 635 100    0*369 629  95    0*380 620  90    0*389 611  85    0
18715 09/26*348 628  85    0*360 619  85    0*370 610  80    0*381 602  75    0
            *** *** ***      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18720 09/27*395 602  80    0*399 591  75    0E402 580  70    0E405 565  70    0
18720 09/27*391 594  70    0*401 586  65    0E410 575  60    0E413 563  60    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18725 09/28E406 550  70    0E407 533  70    0E408 517  70    0E406 501  65    0
18725 09/28E411 549  60    0E409 537  60    0E407 520  60    0E405 496  55    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

(The 29th is new to HURDAT.)
18727 09/29E408 461  50    0E410 428  45    0E415 400  40    0E421 374  35    0

18730 HR    

No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm 
number 3.  These track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.  The 
peak intensity of this hurricane is reduced from 105 kt (Category 3) down to 
a 85 kt (Category 2) due to available observations that suggest that the 
system was substantially weaker.  Another solution considered but discarded 
was to reduce the peak winds for this hurricane to Category 1 intensity.   
Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 24th to the 28th.

*******************************************************************************
1910/05

18735 10/09/1910 M=15  4 SNBR= 429 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=3
18735 10/09/1910 M=15  5 SNBR= 455 NOT NAMED   XING=1 SSS=2
                       *       ***                        *

18740 10/09*  0   0   0    0*112 795  50    0*113 797  50    0*113 797  50    0
18740 10/09*  0   0   0    0*112 795  30    0*113 797  30    0*113 797  30    0
                                      **               **               **

18745 10/10*114 798  50    0*116 799  50    0*118 800  55    0*121 801  55    0
18745 10/10*114 798  30    0*116 799  30    0*118 800  30    0*121 801  30    0
                     **               **               **               **

18750 10/11*124 803  55    0*128 805  60    0*132 807  65    0*137 810  70    0
18750 10/11*124 803  35    0*128 805  35    0*132 807  40    0*138 809  45    0
                     **               **               **      *** ***  **

18755 10/12*142 813  75    0*148 815  80    0*155 818  80    0*165 821  85    0
18755 10/12*146 811  50    0*152 813  55    0*160 815  65    0*169 818  75    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18760 10/13*178 824  90    0*191 827  90    0*199 829  95    0*203 830  95    0
18760 10/13*177 821  85    0*186 823  90    0*195 825  95    0*204 827  95    0
            *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18765 10/14*207 832 100    0*210 833 105    0*215 834 105    0*219 835 105    0
18765 10/14*214 830 100    0*223 836 100  960*230 840  90    0*233 842  85    0
            *** *** ***      *** *** ***  *** *** *** ***      *** *** ***

18770 10/15*225 837 105    0*230 838  95    0*234 839  90    0*242 842  90    0
18770 10/15*236 844  90    0*237 847  90    0*237 850  90    0*236 852  90    0
            *** *** ***      *** ***  **      *** ***  **      *** ***  **

18775 10/16*245 848  90    0*238 854  90    0*231 852  95    0*226 845 100    0
18775 10/16*234 853 100    0*232 854 110    0*229 855 120    0*224 854 130    0
            *** *** ***      ***     ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***

18780 10/17*227 841 100    0*231 834 105    0*236 830 105    0*245 823 105    0
18780 10/17*221 849 130  924*225 843 125    0*234 835 120    0*244 828 115  941 
            *** *** ***  *** *** *** ***      *** *** ***      *** *** ***  ***

18785 10/18*254 819 100  941*265 817  65    0*275 818  60    0*283 819  60    0
18785 10/18*255 822 105    0*265 820  95  955*275 819  70    0*283 819  60    0
            *** *** ***  ***     *** ***  ***     ***  **     

18790 10/19*292 820  60    0*301 819  60    0*310 816  60    0*320 806  60    0
18790 10/19*292 819  50    0*301 819  50    0*310 816  50    0*320 806  60    0
                ***  **               **               **

18795 10/20*327 798  60    0*336 785  60    0*344 771  55    0*353 751  50    0
18795 10/20*327 798  60    0*336 785  60    0*344 771  55    0*353 750  50    0
                                                                   ***

18800 10/21*363 726  45    0E373 696  45    0E382 671  45    0E388 651  40    0
18800 10/21*360 723  45    0E366 690  45    0E370 660  45    0E370 644  40    0

18805 10/22E390 634  40    0E391 618  40    0E385 603  40    0E379 596  40    0
18805 10/22E368 632  40    0E364 618  40    0E360 610  40    0E358 601  40    0
            *** ***          ***              *** ***          *** ***  

18810 10/23E376 592  35    0E369 586  35    0E361 580  35    0*  0   0   0    0
18810 10/23E357 589  35    0E357 582  35    0E357 573  35    0E357 564  35    0
            *** ***          *** ***          *** ***          *** ***  **

18815 HRBFL3
18815 HRBFL2
        ****

There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm 
number 4.  They recommended removing the 9th and the 10th from HURDAT, but 
it was decided to keep these dates in HURDAT since observations do support 
the system having a closed circulation on both days though with tropical 
depression intensity.  Partagas and Diaz (1999) otherwise made reasonable
small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). 
A central pressure of 960 mb (at 07Z on the 14th) suggests winds of 100 kt 
from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 100 kt used in best track at 
the first Cuban landfall of this hurricane.  Perez (2000) analyzed this 
hurricane at its second landfall on the 17th as having a central pressure of 
924 mb, based upon a peripheral pressure of 947 mb from the ship "Prince
Crown" (listed in the Partagas and Diaz report).  This central pressure 
suggests winds of 134 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship 
- 130 kt utilized in best track.  A central pressure of 941 mb (at 1625Z on 
the 17th) suggests winds of 119 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure 
relationship.  120 kt chosen for 12Z and 115 kt chosen for 18Z on the
17th.  Ho et al. (1987) utilized this ship measured central pressure 
and an estimate of 28 nmi RMW to be conditions at landfall for this
hurricane in the Southwest Florida.  However, observed storm surge for
the region does not correspond with a Category 4 (or even Category 3)
hurricane making landfall (B. Jarvinen, personal communication).  Jarrell 
et al. (1992), instead, listed this hurricane as making landfall with a 
central pressure of 955 mb based upon a measurement in Ft. Myers, Florida.
(The pressure observation can also be found in Partagas and Diaz (1999).)
A 955 mb central pressure suggests winds of 105 kt from the Gulf of Mexico
wind-pressure relationship.  With an estimated RMW (from Ho et al.) 
substantially larger than expected climatologically for this central 
pressure and latitude (about 19 nmi from Vickery et al. 2000), maximum 
sustained winds at landfall in Southwest Florida are estimated at 95 kt.
This makes this hurricane a Category 2 hurricane (though near the Category
2-3 boundary) at landfall in the United States, which is weaker than the
Category 3 listing found in Table 6 or Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane
characterization in HURDAT.  A peripheral pressure of 985 mb (at 21Z on the 
18th) suggests winds of at least 70 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure 
relationship - 60 kt retained for best track at 18Z and 50 kt chosen for 
best track at 00Z on the 19th since the hurricane was inland at that time.  
A storm tide measurement of 15' in Key West, Florida was described in Barnes 
(1998a).  The storm is known as "El Huracan De Los Cinco Dias" for its 
impact in Cuba (Partagas and Diaz 1999, Perez 2000).

*******************************************************************************

1910 - Additional Notes:

Partagas and Diaz (1999) mentioned one additional system considered 
for inclusion into HURDAT.  The re-analysis team agreed to leave it out 
of HURDAT for the following reason:

1) September 13-18, 1910:  Gale force intensity, but likely extratropical.

********************************************************************************

1992/02 - ANDREW - 2002 ADDITION:

54545 08/16/1992 M=13  2 SNBR=1158 ANDREW      XING=1 SSS=4
54545 08/16/1992 M=13  2 SNBR=1158 ANDREW      XING=1 SSS=5
                                                          *

54550 08/16*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*108 355  25 1010
54555 08/17*112 374  30 1009*117 396  30 1008*123 420  35 1006*131 442  35 1003
54560 08/18*136 462  40 1002*141 480  45 1001*146 499  45 1000*154 518  45 1000
54565 08/19*163 535  45 1001*172 553  45 1002*180 569  45 1005*188 583  45 1007
54570 08/20*198 593  40 1011*207 600  40 1013*217 607  40 1015*225 615  40 1014
54575 08/21*232 624  45 1014*239 633  45 1010*244 642  50 1007*248 649  50 1004

54580 08/22*253 659  55 1000*256 670  60  994*258 683  70  981*257 697  80  969
54580 08/22*253 659  55 1000*256 670  65  994*258 683  80  981*257 697  95  969
                                      **               **               **

54585 08/23*256 711  90  961*255 725 105  947*254 742 120  933*254 758 135  922
54585 08/23*256 711 110  961*255 725 130  947*254 742 145  933*254 758 150  922
                    ***              ***              ***              ***

54590 08/24*254 775 125  930*254 793 120  937*256 812 110  951*258 831 115  947
54590 08/24*254 775 125  930*254 793 130  937*256 812 115  951*258 831 115  947
                                     ***              ***

54595 08/25*262 850 115  943*266 867 115  948*272 882 115  946*278 896 120  941
54595 08/25*262 850 115  943*266 867 115  948*272 882 120  946*278 896 125  941
                                                      ***              ***

54600 08/26*285 905 120  937*292 913 115  955*301 917  80  973*309 916  50  991
54600 08/26*285 905 125  937*292 913 120  955*301 917  80  973*309 916  50  991
                    ***              ***    

54605 08/27*315 911  35  995*321 905  30  997*328 896  30  998*336 884  25  999
54610 08/28*344 867  20 1000*354 840  20 1000*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0

54615 HRCFL4BFL3 LA3
54615 HRCFL5BFL4 LA3
        ********
		
U.S. and Bahamian Hurricane Data
--------------------------------
Date/Time   Lat    Lon    Max  Saffir- Central   Landfall       States
                         Winds Simpson Pressure  Location       Affected
8/23/2100Z  25.4N  76.6W  130kt   4     923mb    Eleuthera, Ba  ---	
8/23/2100Z  25.4N  76.6W  140kt   5     923mb    Eleuthera, Ba  ---
                          ***     *

8/24/0100Z  25.4N  77.8W  125kt   4     931mb    Barry Is., Ba  ---
8/24/0100Z  25.4N  77.8W  130kt   4     931mb    Barry Is., Ba  ---
                          ***

8/24/0905Z  25.5N  80.3W  125kt   4     922mb    Fender Point   CFL4, BFL3
8/24/0905Z  25.5N  80.3W  145kt   5     922mb    Fender Point   CFL5, BFL4
                          ***     *                             ****  ****

8/26/0830Z  29.6N  91.5W  105kt   3     956mb    Pt. Chevreuil  LA3
8/26/0830Z  29.6N  91.5W  100kt   3     956mb    Pt. Chevreuil  LA3
                          ***

After considering the presentations regarding various recommendations for 
the revisions of Andrew's best track intensities, the NHC Best Track Change 
Committee made alterations to the winds in HURDAT for Hurricane Andrew for 
the dates of 22 to 26 August.  These changes are made to Hurricane Andrew's 
intensity data for the time while the storm was over the Atlantic Ocean just 
east of the Bahamas, over the Bahamian islands and south Florida, over the 
Gulf of Mexico and at landfall in Louisiana.  Neither the best track 
positions nor the central pressure values of Andrew were adjusted.  The 
alterations in wind intensity were based upon the Franklin et al. (2003) 
methodology, which is consistent with the work of Dunion et al. (2003) and 
Dunion and Powell (2002) as discussed earlier.  The changes to HURDAT were 
applied for these dates as aircraft reconnaissance observations were 
available throughout this period and there were limited in-situ surface 
observations indicative of the maximum 1 min surface winds.  The revisions 
make Andrew a Category 5 hurricane on the SSHS at landfall in both Eleuthera 
Island, Bahamas and in southeastern Florida.  The maximum 1 min surface wind 
for Hurricane Andrew at landfall in mainland southeastern Florida near Fender 
Point (8 nmi [13 km] east of Homestead) at 0905 UTC 24 August is officially 
estimated to be 145 kt.  The original best track landfall intensity estimate 
was 125 kt.  The peak intensity of Andrew, originally assessed at 135 kt, is 
now judged to be 150 kt at 1800 UTC 23 August just east of the northern 
Bahamas.   
Details of presentations made and minutes of deliberations can be found at:
   http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/index.html

********************************************************************************