********************************************************************************
10675 07/03/1891 M= 6 1 SNBR= 282 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
10675 07/03/1891 M= 6 1 SNBR= 293 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
10680 07/03* 0 0 0 0*217 930 35 0*220 932 45 0*224 935 55 0
10685 07/04*229 939 65 0*234 942 75 0*240 945 80 0*247 948 85 0
10685 07/04*229 939 65 0*234 942 75 0*240 945 80 0*247 948 80 0
**
10690 07/05*254 951 85 0*262 954 85 0*271 956 85 0*281 956 85 0
10690 07/05*254 951 80 0*262 954 80 0*271 956 80 0*281 956 80 0
** ** ** **
10695 07/06*292 954 80 0*303 951 70 0*312 947 60 0*319 943 50 0
10695 07/06*292 954 70 0*303 951 60 0*312 947 55 0*319 943 50 0
** ** **
10700 07/07*325 938 45 0*331 931 40 0*337 923 40 0*342 911 35 0
10700 07/07*325 938 45 0*331 931 40 0*337 923 35 0*342 911 30 0
** **
10705 07/08*350 881 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
10705 07/08*346 897 25 0*350 881 25 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
*** *** ** *** *** **
10710 HR
10710 HRBTX1CTX1
********
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral pressure of 990 mb (at
0230Z on the 6th) suggests winds of at least 62 kt from the Gulf of Mexico
wind-pressure relationship - 80 kt chosen for best track, which reduces
the peak intensity originally in HURDAT slightly. Decay to tropical
depression stage over land included before dissipation. Additional
six-hourly position added at end of track to allow for reasonable
translational speed of system.
********************************************************************************
10715 08/17/1891 M=13 2 SNBR= 283 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
10715 08/17/1891 M=13 2 SNBR= 294 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
10720 08/17* 0 0 0 0*133 244 35 0*136 255 35 0*138 266 35 0
10725 08/18*140 277 35 0*142 288 40 0*144 299 50 0*146 310 60 0
10730 08/19*149 320 70 0*152 330 75 0*154 340 80 0*156 349 85 0
10730 08/19*149 320 65 0*152 330 65 0*154 340 65 0*156 349 65 0
** ** ** **
10735 08/20*158 358 85 0*161 367 85 0*163 375 85 0*165 383 85 0
10735 08/20*158 358 65 0*161 367 65 0*163 375 65 0*165 383 65 0
** ** ** **
10740 08/21*167 390 85 0*170 398 85 0*173 406 85 0*177 415 85 0
10740 08/21*167 390 65 0*170 398 65 0*173 406 65 0*177 415 65 0
** ** ** **
10745 08/22*182 426 85 0*187 436 85 0*192 446 85 0*196 455 85 0
10745 08/22*182 426 65 0*187 436 65 0*192 446 65 0*196 455 65 0
** ** ** **
10750 08/23*200 463 85 0*205 471 85 0*209 480 85 0*214 489 85 0
10750 08/23*200 463 65 0*205 471 65 0*209 480 65 0*214 489 65 0
** ** ** **
10755 08/24*218 498 85 0*224 508 85 0*230 518 85 0*237 529 85 0
10755 08/24*218 498 65 0*224 508 65 0*230 518 65 0*237 529 65 0
** ** ** **
10760 08/25*245 540 85 0*253 552 85 0*260 563 85 0*267 573 85 0
10760 08/25*245 540 65 0*253 552 65 0*260 563 65 0*267 573 65 0
** ** ** **
10765 08/26*274 583 85 0*281 592 85 0*288 600 85 0*295 608 85 0
10765 08/26*274 583 65 0*281 592 65 0*288 600 65 0*295 608 65 0
** ** ** **
10770 08/27*302 615 85 0*309 621 85 0*316 627 85 0*324 633 85 0
10770 08/27*302 615 65 0*309 621 65 0*316 627 65 0*324 633 65 0
** ** ** **
10775 08/28*335 637 85 0*347 641 85 0*360 644 80 0*373 646 70 0
10775 08/28*335 637 65 0*347 641 65 0*360 644 65 0*373 646 65 0
** ** ** **
10780 08/29*388 645 65 0*403 644 55 0*419 641 35 0*433 640 25 0
10780 08/29*388 645 65 0E403 644 55 0E419 641 35 0E433 640 25 0
* * *
10785 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Gale force and
greater observations available for this system were the following: 997 mb
sea level pressure (suggestive of at least 53 kt from the subtropical
pressure-wind relationship) at Bermuda on the 27th, a ship (the steamer
"Dunsmurry") capsized in the "hurricane" on the 29th (but no specific
observations were provided), and 50 kt S wind on the 30th and 31st from the
steamer "La Touraine". Thus available observational evidence suggests
that the system may have achieved minimal hurricane intensity, but not
reaching Category 2 status as shown originally. Winds reduced for much of
the system's lifecycle.
********************************************************************************
10790 08/18/1891 M= 8 3 SNBR= 284 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
10790 08/18/1891 M= 8 3 SNBR= 295 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
10795 08/18* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*139 578 35 0*147 597 40 0
10795 08/18* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*133 580 90 0*139 594 100 0
*** *** ** *** *** ***
10800 08/19*155 614 65 0*162 629 75 0*168 640 80 0*174 649 85 0
10800 08/19*147 611 110 961*153 625 110 0*160 640 105 0*165 650 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10805 08/20*179 657 85 0*184 665 80 0*190 672 80 0*196 679 80 0
10805 08/20*170 661 95 0*175 671 90 0*180 680 85 0*187 684 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
10810 08/21*202 686 85 0*207 693 85 0*213 700 85 0*218 709 85 0
10810 08/21*196 686 85 0*203 689 85 0*210 695 85 0*215 702 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10815 08/22*222 718 85 0*226 727 85 0*230 736 85 0*234 744 85 0
10815 08/22*218 710 85 0*221 717 85 0*225 726 85 0*229 735 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10820 08/23*237 752 85 0*240 759 85 0*243 767 85 0*246 775 85 0
10820 08/23*233 745 85 0*238 755 85 0*243 767 85 0*246 775 85 0
*** *** *** ***
10825 08/24*248 782 85 0*251 789 80 0*253 797 75 0*255 806 65 0
10825 08/24*248 782 80 0*251 789 75 0*253 797 70 0*255 806 55 0
** ** ** **
10830 08/25*258 815 60 0*260 826 50 0*262 837 45 0*262 848 35 0
10830 08/25*258 815 50 0*260 826 45 0*262 837 40 0*262 848 35 0
** ** **
10835 HR
10835 HRCFL1
****
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are
found to be reasonable. A central pressure reading of 961 mb (01Z on the
19th) suggests winds of 99 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship
- 110 kt used in best track because of indications of a small radius of
maximum wind (from Father Benito Vines' analysis quoted in the Partagas
and Diaz report) as well as extensive destruction in Martinique. Hurricane
is considered Category 1 (70 kt) at landfall in South Florida, but such
designation is quite uncertain given the lack of observations near the
landfall location. Complete lifecycle of this hurricane is not available
as neither the genesis nor the decay of the system was not documented. The
hurricane is also known as "San Magin", due to the rainfall-induced
flooding that occurred in Puerto Rico.
********************************************************************************
10840 09/02/1891 M= 9 4 SNBR= 285 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
10840 09/02/1891 M= 9 4 SNBR= 296 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
10845 09/02* 0 0 0 0*193 582 35 0*197 592 40 0*199 600 40 0
10850 09/03*201 607 45 0*204 615 50 0*208 623 55 0*213 631 60 0
10855 09/04*218 639 70 0*223 647 75 0*228 655 80 0*234 662 85 0
10860 09/05*239 669 85 0*246 676 85 0*252 683 85 0*260 690 85 0
10865 09/06*271 697 85 0*283 703 85 0*296 710 85 0*310 714 85 0
10870 09/07*327 715 85 0*347 713 85 0*368 703 85 0*395 680 85 0
10875 09/08*426 646 80 0*458 609 75 0*486 579 70 0*509 555 65 0
10880 09/09*529 533 60 0*547 511 55 0*562 492 50 0*575 475 45 0
10880 09/09E529 533 60 0E547 511 55 0E562 492 50 0E575 475 45 0
* * * *
10885 09/10*585 459 40 0*592 445 35 0*597 433 30 0* 0 0 0 0
10885 09/10E585 459 40 0E592 445 35 0E597 433 30 0* 0 0 0 0
* * *
10890 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Only intensity alteration is to
indicate extratropical stage for the hurricane north of 52N.
********************************************************************************
10895 09/16/1891 M=11 5 SNBR= 286 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
10895 09/16/1891 M=11 5 SNBR= 297 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
10900 09/16*193 465 35 0*198 471 35 0*202 478 35 0*207 488 35 0
10905 09/17*213 498 35 0*218 507 35 0*223 516 40 0*228 524 40 0
10910 09/18*232 532 45 0*237 539 50 0*242 547 55 0*248 556 60 0
10915 09/19*254 566 65 0*260 575 70 0*266 583 70 0*272 590 75 0
10920 09/20*277 596 80 0*282 601 80 0*288 607 85 0*294 613 85 0
10920 09/20*281 600 80 0*288 607 80 0*295 615 85 0*300 621 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10925 09/21*300 618 85 0*306 623 85 0*312 628 85 0*318 631 85 0
10925 09/21*305 627 85 0*310 633 85 0*315 637 85 0*320 640 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10930 09/22*324 632 85 0*330 631 85 0*336 630 85 0*342 628 85 0
10930 09/22*325 641 85 0*329 641 85 0*333 640 85 0*340 635 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10935 09/23*349 624 85 0*356 617 85 0*363 607 85 0*370 591 85 0
10935 09/23*348 627 85 0*356 618 85 0*363 607 85 0*370 591 85 0
*** *** ***
10940 09/24*375 573 85 0*379 555 85 0*382 538 85 0*382 523 85 0
10945 09/25*382 508 80 0*382 493 80 0*382 478 75 0*384 463 65 0
10950 09/26*388 448 55 0*394 433 40 0*402 418 35 0*413 397 30 0
10950 09/26*388 448 55 0*394 433 40 0E402 418 40 0E413 397 40 0
* ** * **
10955 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral
pressure reading of 980 mb (05Z on the 22nd) suggests winds of at least
75 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt retained in
the best track.
********************************************************************************
10960 09/29/1891 M=10 6 SNBR= 287 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
10960 09/29/1891 M=10 6 SNBR= 298 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
10965 09/29* 0 0 0 0*207 546 35 0*212 547 35 0*217 550 40 0
10970 09/30*222 554 45 0*228 558 45 0*233 562 50 0*238 566 50 0
10975 10/01*244 571 55 0*249 576 60 0*255 582 60 0*261 590 65 0
10980 10/02*267 600 70 0*274 611 75 0*280 620 80 0*283 626 80 0
10980 10/02*266 597 70 0*271 604 75 0*277 613 80 0*283 620 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10985 10/03*287 633 85 0*291 639 85 0*295 645 85 0*301 653 85 0
10985 10/03*289 627 85 0*294 634 85 0*300 640 85 0*308 646 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10990 10/04*310 662 85 0*318 671 85 0*328 680 85 0*338 684 85 0
10990 10/04*318 654 85 0*327 660 85 0*335 667 85 0*346 675 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
10995 10/05*350 686 85 0*364 688 85 0*380 688 85 0*399 678 85 0
10995 10/05*353 681 85 0*365 687 85 0*380 688 75 0*399 678 65 0
*** *** *** *** ** **
11000 10/06*425 650 85 0*453 616 85 0*472 580 80 0*484 549 75 0
11000 10/06E425 650 55 0E453 616 50 0E472 580 50 0E484 549 50 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11005 10/07*496 517 70 0*506 484 65 0*516 450 65 0*525 414 60 0
11005 10/07E496 517 50 0E506 484 50 0E516 450 50 0E525 414 50 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11010 10/08*534 373 60 0*542 331 55 0*550 295 50 0*568 255 45 0
11010 10/08E534 373 50 0E542 331 50 0E552 295 50 0E568 255 45 0
* ** * ** **** *
11015 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral
pressure reading of 981 mb (01Z on the 4th) suggests winds of at least
74 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt wind retained
in the best track. Winds reduced from the 5th to the 8th due to
observations supporting tropical storm intensity south of and over Canada.
Position altered slightly on last day of system to allow a more realistic
translational velocity.
********************************************************************************
1891/07 - 2003 REVISION:
11020 10/01/1891 M=10 7 SNBR= 288 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11020 10/01/1891 M=10 7 SNBR= 299 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
11025 10/01* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*175 598 35 0*176 608 40 0
11030 10/02*177 619 40 0*177 629 45 0*178 639 45 0*178 649 45 0
11035 10/03*179 659 45 0*179 670 45 0*179 680 45 0*180 690 45 0
11040 10/04*180 701 45 0*182 712 40 0*183 723 40 0*185 734 40 0
11045 10/05*189 745 40 0*193 756 45 0*198 767 45 0*204 778 45 0
11050 10/06*210 788 45 0*218 798 40 0*228 807 40 0*239 812 45 0
11055 10/07*250 812 45 0*262 810 40 0*273 804 40 0*284 797 40 0
11060 10/08*295 789 40 0*306 781 40 0*317 772 45 0*326 763 45 0
11065 10/09*334 753 45 0*342 743 45 0*350 732 45 0*360 718 45 0
11070 10/10*371 702 40 0*384 682 40 0*398 661 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11075 TS
No changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made no alterations to the
track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). (This storm along
with storms 8 and 9 is being further investigated by the re-analysis team.
Alterations - if any - will await the collection of all possible ship and
land based observations.)
1891/07 - 2004 REVISION:
11555 10/01/1891 M=10 7 SNBR= 299 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11020 10/04/1891 M= 7 7 SNBR= 300 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** ** ***
(The 1st through the 3rd are removed from HURDAT.)
11560 10/01* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*175 598 35 0*176 608 40 0
11565 10/02*177 619 40 0*177 629 45 0*178 639 45 0*178 649 45 0
11570 10/03*179 659 45 0*179 670 45 0*179 680 45 0*180 690 45 0
11575 10/04*180 701 45 0*182 712 40 0*183 723 40 0*185 734 40 0
11025 10/04* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*150 790 35 0*160 795 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
11580 10/05*189 745 40 0*193 756 45 0*198 767 45 0*204 778 45 0
11030 10/05*170 800 45 0*175 805 45 0*180 810 45 0*187 815 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
11585 10/06*210 788 45 0*218 798 40 0*228 807 40 0*239 812 45 0
11035 10/06*195 820 45 0*205 823 45 0*215 825 45 0*226 823 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
11590 10/07*250 812 45 0*262 810 40 0*273 804 40 0*284 797 40 0
11040 10/07*237 820 40 0*248 815 45 0*260 810 40 0*271 803 40 1004
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** ****
11595 10/08*295 789 40 0*306 781 40 0*317 772 45 0*326 763 45 0
11045 10/08*282 793 40 0*293 782 40 0*305 770 40 0*318 755 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
11600 10/09*334 753 45 0*342 743 45 0*350 732 45 0*360 718 45 0
11050 10/09E332 740 40 0E346 725 40 0E360 710 45 0E370 695 40 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **** *** **
11605 10/10*371 702 40 0*384 682 40 0*398 661 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11055 10/10E375 675 35 0E378 650 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** *** *** **
11610 TS
U.S. Tropical Storm Landfall Data
---------------------------------
#/Date Time Lat Lon Max States
Winds Affected
7-10/7/1891$ 0000Z 25.0N 81.2W 45kt FL
7-10/7/1891$ 0800Z 25.2N 81.3W 45kt FL
**** **** ****
Three tropical systems in early October were first suggested by Mitchell
(1924), which was utilized in the HURDAT database as well as Neumann et al.
(1999) (storms 7, 8 and 9). In contrast, the Monthly Weather Review summary
of the era suggested one primary low forming in the Caribbean on the 6th,
moving across Cuba and Florida, impacting the U.S. mid-Atlantic states
and dissipating near Nova Scotia on the 14th. MWR also had a secondary
low pressure forming near the Florida Keys on the 9th and merging with
the main low on the 11th. Partagas and Diaz (1996a) believed that, "most
likely, only one storm ... was what happened in reality". However, they
"did not find enough evidence to entirely disprove the existence of the
three storms and, consequently, [they] decided to keep unchanged the tracks
for Storms 7, 8 and 9, 1891."
Subsequent research by the re-analysis team has uncovered evidence to
support a different conclusion to all the above: two storm systems existed -
1) a moderate tropical storm forming in the Caribbean on the 4th, moving
across Cuba and Florida, being absorbed in a frontal boundary and decaying
on the 10th (storm 7); and 2) a weak tropical storm also forming in the
Caribbean on the 7th and becomming extratropical storm system near near the
Florida Keys on the 9th, crossing Florida, slowing and becoming a strong
"Nor'easter" on the 11th to the 13th and decaying on the 15th and 16th over
Nova Scotia and Newfoundland (was storms 8 and 9, now combined into 8).
Storm 9 apparently never existed as a separate storm system, but was in fact
part of the extratropical storm stage for storm 8. Thus the two original
tropical storms and one original hurricane in HURDAT have been replaced with
two tropical storms.
Evidence for this scenario comes from both the COADS ship database, U.S.
station data obtained from NCDC, and Bermuda observations provided by
Mike Chenoweth. These were then plotted and analyzed twice daily from 1 to
15 October, 1891. (Figures showing the station and ship observations and
the team's analyses are provided.)
The remainder of this writeup focusses upon storm 7. The discussion for
the storm 8 (originally storm 8 and storm 9) is contained in that storm's
metadata file.
The early portion of original storm 7's track (1st through the 5th) has
been discounted partly by ship data (especially on the 4th and 5th) but
primarily by the climatological studies of Puerto Rico (Salivia 1972),
Hispanola (Garcia-Bonnelly 1958), and Cuba (Sarasola 1928). The first two
comprehensive tropical cyclone listings indicated that no tropical storm
or hurricane impacted those locations in October 1891. Perez (2003 -
personal communication) reconfirmed the earlier Cuban historical study
that the tropical system in October 1891 formed in the Caribbean and
made landfall in south central Cuba late on the 6th of October, not moving
in along eastern Cuba as suggested in HURDAT and Neumann et al.
Ship data first indicate a closed circulation late on the 4th in the
western Caribbean. Peripheral pressures of 1004 and 1005 mb on the 5th and
6th from ships and Havana suggest winds of at least 39 and 36 kt,
respectively. These along with ship observations suggest a maximum 1 min
wind of about 45 kt for this time period. (Some small weakening over
Cuba is accounted for on the 7th with a return to 45 kt intensity for
landfall in south Florida.) Station observations clearly locate the
center of the storm during its trek across Florida on the 7th. A sea
level pressure of 1004 mb in Jupiter, Florida at 1940 UTC may have been
a central pressure. This suggests winds of about 40 kt, which is
utilized for the HURDAT revision. Over water observations are somewhat
sparse on the 8th and 9th, but enhanced winds in North Carolina (peak of
39 kt at Kitty Hawk and 35 kt at Cape Hatteras) suggest a relatively
close pass east of the state early on the 9th. This likely occurred
soon after the system's extratropical transformation. The storm then likely
dissipated north of Bermuda on the 10th. It is noted that the track
provided here is quite similar from that found in HURDAT and Neumann et al.
(1999) for storm 7 from the 7th to the 10th.
********************************************************************************
1891/08 - 2003 REVISION:
11080 10/06/1891 M= 6 8 SNBR= 289 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11080 10/06/1891 M= 6 8 SNBR= 300 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
11085 10/06* 0 0 0 0*159 830 35 0*164 832 40 0*171 837 40 0
11090 10/07*178 841 45 0*186 844 45 0*193 847 45 0*200 849 45 0
11095 10/08*208 850 45 0*215 850 45 0*223 848 45 0*233 844 45 0
11100 10/09*246 837 45 0*259 831 45 0*270 825 45 0*278 819 40 0
11105 10/10*284 813 35 0*291 807 35 0*298 801 40 0*307 793 45 0
11110 10/11*316 784 45 0*326 774 40 0*337 762 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11115 TS
No changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made no alterations to the
track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). (This storm along
with storms 7 and 9 is being further investigated by the re-analysis team.
Alterations - if any - will await the collection of all possible ship and
land based observations.)
1891/08 - 2004 REVISION:
11615 10/06/1891 M= 6 8 SNBR= 300 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11615 10/07/1891 M=10 8 SNBR= 301 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** *** *
(The 6th removed from HURDAT.)
11620 10/06* 0 0 0 0*159 830 35 0*164 832 40 0*171 837 40 0
11625 10/07*178 841 45 0*186 844 45 0*193 847 45 0*200 849 45 0
11625 10/07* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*180 850 30 0*185 850 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11630 10/08*208 850 45 0*215 850 45 0*223 848 45 0*233 844 45 0
11630 10/08*190 850 35 0*195 850 35 0*200 848 35 0*207 844 35 0
*** ** *** ** *** ** *** **
11635 10/09*246 837 45 0*259 831 45 0*270 825 45 0*278 819 40 0
11635 10/09*215 840 35 0*225 837 40 0*240 835 40 0E255 828 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** **** *** **
11640 10/10*284 813 35 0*291 807 35 0*298 801 40 0*307 793 45 0
11640 10/10E270 815 30 0E284 807 30 0E298 800 30 0E310 788 30 0
**** *** ** **** ** * *** ** **** *** **
11645 10/11*316 784 45 0*326 774 40 0*337 762 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11645 10/11E320 770 30 0E326 758 35 0E332 750 40 0E338 745 45 0
**** *** ** * *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
(The 8th to the 11th from storm 9 removed. The track from storm 9 on the
12th to the 16th incorporated into storm 8's track.)
11655 10/08/1891 M= 9 9 SNBR= 301 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11660 10/08* 0 0 0 0*238 572 35 0*245 582 40 0*251 591 40 0
11665 10/09*256 601 45 0*262 612 50 0*268 625 55 0*274 639 60 0
11670 10/10*280 653 70 0*287 666 75 0*293 680 80 0*299 694 85 0
11675 10/11*305 708 85 0*312 721 85 0*321 735 85 0*330 740 85 0
11680 10/12*340 742 85 0*350 741 85 0*359 740 85 0*366 737 85 0
11680 10/12E344 740 50 0E348 737 55 0E350 735 55 0E354 733 55 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
11685 10/13*373 733 85 0*380 728 85 0*388 721 85 0*395 715 85 0
11685 10/13E360 731 55 0E370 729 55 0E380 725 55 0E390 715 55 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** **
11690 10/14*403 706 85 0*412 694 85 0*422 681 85 0*433 665 85 0
11690 10/14E400 705 55 0E410 695 55 0E420 685 50 0E433 665 45 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** * **
11695 10/15*446 647 80 0*460 626 75 0*475 602 70 0*500 571 65 0
11695 10/15E446 640 40 0E460 620 40 0E475 602 35 0E500 571 30 0
* *** ** * *** ** * ** * **
11700 10/16*530 522 65 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11700 10/16E530 522 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
* **
11650 TS
U.S. Tropical Storm Landfall Data
---------------------------------
#/Date Time Lat Lon Max States
Winds Affected
8-10/9/1891$ 1400Z 25.8N 81.7W 45kt FL
(Removed from listing)
9-10/12/1891* 0600Z 35.0N 74.1W 60kt NC
(Removed from listing)
Three tropical systems in early October were first suggested by Mitchell
(1924), which was utilized in the HURDAT database as well as Neumann et al.
(1999) (storms 7, 8 and 9). In contrast, the Monthly Weather Review summary
of the era suggested one primary low forming in the Caribbean on the 6th,
moving across Cuba and Florida, impacting the U.S. mid-Atlantic states
and dissipating near Nova Scotia on the 14th. MWR also had a secondary
low pressure forming near the Florida Keys on the 9th and merging with
the main low on the 11th. Partagas and Diaz (1996a) believed that, "most
likely, only one storm ... was what happened in reality". However, they
"did not find enough evidence to entirely disprove the existence of the
three storms and, consequently, [they] decided to keep unchanged the tracks
for Storms 7, 8 and 9, 1891."
Subsequent research by the re-analysis team has uncovered evidence to
support a different conclusion to all the above: two storm systems existed -
1) a moderate tropical storm forming in the Caribbean on the 4th, moving
across Cuba and Florida, being absorbed in a frontal boundary and decaying
on the 10th (storm 7); and 2) a weak tropical storm also forming in the
Caribbean on the 7th and becomming extratropical storm system near near the
Florida Keys on the 9th, crossing Florida, slowing and becoming a strong
"Nor'easter" on the 11th to the 13th and decaying on the 15th and 16th over
Nova Scotia and Newfoundland (was storms 8 and 9, now combined into 8).
Storm 9 apparently never existed as a separate storm system, but was in fact
part of the extratropical storm stage for storm 8. Thus the two original
tropical storms and one original hurricane in HURDAT have been replaced with
two tropical storms.
Evidence for this scenario comes from both the COADS ship database, U.S.
station data obtained from NCDC, and Bermuda observations provided by
Mike Chenoweth. These were then plotted and analyzed twice daily from 1 to
15 October, 1891. (Figures showing the station and ship observations and
the team's analyses are provided.)
The remainder of this writeup focusses upon storm 8. The discussion for
the storm 7 is contained in that storm's metadata file.
Original storm 8 and 9 were each depicting a portion of the same storm
system that occurred. The genesis of the revised system is delayed a day
until the 7th in the northwestern Caribbean. By the time it reached
the Florida Keys on the 9th, it had merged with a pre-existing baroclinic
zone and became an extratropical storm. During the two day period
when the system maintained tropical cyclone status, peak observed winds
were 35 kt N from a ship at 14 UTC on the 9th at 21.0N 86.0W and lowest
observed pressures were from same ship: 1004 mb at 22 UTC on the 7th at
20.0N 84.0W and 1005 mb at 10 UTC on the 9th at 21.0N 86.0W (though a time
series of pressure from this ship suggests that the values may be
consistant 2-4 mb too low. 1004 mb peripheral pressure suggests winds of
at least 39 kt from the southern pressure-wind relationship. Peak estimated
winds as a tropical storm are 40 kt on the 9th. However, by the
time the system reached the Florida Keys as an extratropical system, either
it had weakened slightly or had not actually attained tropical storm
intensity. Peak conditions observed were only 21 kt and 1012 mb in Key West
as the system passed just to the west of the city. The extratrpical storm
then moved slowly northeastward across Florida into the Atlantic and then
drifted to the north beginning on the 11th for about 36 hours southeast of
Cape Hatteras. During this time a high built in from the north and west and
in conjunction with the extratropical storm caused strong northeasterly winds
along the U.S. mid-Atlantic and New England coasts. Peak (uncorrected) 5 min
sustained winds reached 57 kt at Kitty Hawk, 63 kt at Cape Hatteras, 41 kt at
Atlantic City, 63 kt at Block Island, and 50 kt at Nantucket. The estimated
maximum 1 min winds for this system during its extratropical stage were
about 55 kt. On the 13th to the 15th, the baroclinic low moved northeastward
and weakened. The baroclinic nature of this system is quite clear - it had
at times a 25F east-west temperature gradient while along the Atlantic coast.
The early portion of the original storm 9 also appears to be incorrect
based upon ship and Bermuda data on the 8th to the 11th. There is no
indication that a low (tropical or baroclinic) came toward the U.S.
Atlantic seaboard from the southeast. However, the portion of original
storm 9's track from the 12th to the 15th does closely match the analysis
here of the extratropical storm stage for this revised storm 8. However,
it is to be noted that the evidence for retaining this system in HURDAT
at all as a tropical storm is marginal given one gale force report and
a couple suspect low pressure readings.
********************************************************************************
1891/09 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1891/10, but became 1891/09 after the removal
of the original 1891/09 - May 2004.
1891/09 - 2003 REVISION:
11175 10/12/1891 M= 9 10 SNBR= 291 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11175 10/12/1891 M= 9 10 SNBR= 302 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11180 10/12* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*125 613 35 0*136 620 45 0
11180 10/12* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*125 613 35 0*136 620 35 0
**
11185 10/13*147 627 60 0*156 632 70 0*162 636 80 0*167 639 80 0
11185 10/13*147 627 40 0*156 632 40 0*162 636 45 0*167 639 45 0
** ** ** **
11190 10/14*172 641 85 0*177 644 85 0*182 646 85 0*187 648 85 0
11190 10/14*172 641 50 0*177 644 50 0*182 646 55 0*187 648 55 0
** ** ** **
11195 10/15*192 650 85 0*197 652 85 0*202 654 85 0*213 656 85 0
11195 10/15*192 650 60 0*197 652 60 0*202 654 65 0*213 656 70 0
** ** ** **
11200 10/16*224 658 85 0*234 660 85 0*245 662 85 0*256 663 85 0
11200 10/16*224 658 75 0*234 660 75 0*245 662 75 0*256 663 75 0
** ** ** **
11205 10/17*267 662 85 0*277 661 85 0*288 660 85 0*297 659 85 0
11205 10/17*267 662 75 0*277 661 75 0*288 660 75 0*297 659 75 0
** ** ** **
11210 10/18*303 659 85 0*310 658 85 0*320 657 85 0*334 655 85 0
11210 10/18*303 659 75 0*310 658 75 0*320 657 75 0*334 655 75 0
** ** ** **
11215 10/19*353 653 85 0*372 649 85 0*390 639 85 0*409 623 85 0
11215 10/19*353 653 75 0*372 649 75 0*390 639 70 0*409 623 65 0
** ** ** **
11220 10/20*430 602 80 0*448 582 65 0*465 570 60 0*485 575 35 0
11220 10/20*430 602 60 0*448 582 50 0*465 570 40 0*485 575 35 0
** ** ** **
11225 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996a) did not introduce any track changes from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999) for this hurricane. Gale force and
greater observations available for this system were the following:
"gales of hurricane force" on the 17th east-northeast of the Bahamas,
60 kt SE-SW wind and 992 mb on the 18th at Bermuda (this peripheral
sea level pressure suggests winds of at least 61 kt from the subtropical
wind-pressure relationship - 75 kt utilized), 70 kt wind on the 19th
("Ocean Prince") at 36 N, 62 W. Available observational evidence
suggests that the peak intensity for this hurricane was a minimal
hurricane (Category 1), rather than the standard Category 2 (85 kt)
originally in HURDAT. Winds are reduced accordingly from the 13th to
the 20th. Hurricane intensity attained after passing through the Lesser
Antilles.
********************************************************************************
1891/10 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1891/11, but became 1891/10 after the removal
of the original 1891/10 - May 2004.
1891/10 - 2003 REVISION:
11230 11/03/1891 M= 4 11 SNBR= 292 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11230 11/03/1891 M= 4 11 SNBR= 303 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11235 11/03*241 738 35 0*250 725 35 0*257 716 40 0*268 703 45 0
11240 11/04*279 687 45 0*291 668 50 0*302 647 50 0*313 621 50 0
11245 11/05*325 592 50 0*338 562 50 0*352 538 45 0*380 512 40 0
11250 11/06*416 490 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11255 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). The only change is to renumber the
storm number for the year.
********************************************************************************
1891 - Additional Notes - 2004 REVISION:
1) The NHC Best Track Change Committee requested further investigation into
the possible storm system first identified by Partagas and Diaz (1996b)
in mid-July 1891:
"1891 additional system #1 (July) MWR mentions 'gale' winds.
This system may warrant further research. Is there any COADS?"
Upon investigation of this system in the Monthly Weather Review, from
the COADS ship database, and coastal station data, this system was of
tropical depression intensity at its peak. The COADS data were sparse
in the vicinity of the system until the 12th, when it was east of the
U.S. mid-Atlantic states. Peak ship observations were 25 kt and 1014 mb,
though a weak closed circulation was analyzed. Station data were also
obtained for Jacksonville, Jupiter, Titusville, Savannah, Charleston,
Wilmington, Cape Hatteras, Kitty Hawk, Baltimore, Atlantic City, New
York City, New London, New Haven, Block Island and Nantucket. Peak
observed winds were 36 mph at Kitty Hawk (10th and 11th) and at
Cape Hatteras (11th). These observations also support tropical depression
status for this system. While "fresh to strong gales" were mentioned
in the Monthly Weather Review, no evidence for these were to be found
from any source. Thus this system is not added into HURDAT.
2) September 11-12, 1891: Partagas and Diaz (1996b) had investigated
this system for possibility of inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team
agreed with Partagas and Diaz to leave it out of HURDAT as there was not
enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
3) September 14-15, 1891: Partagas and Diaz (1996b) had investigated
this system for possibility of inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team
agreed with Partagas and Diaz to leave it out of HURDAT as there was not
enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
4) The NHC Best Track Change Committee requested further investigation into
the possible storm system first identified by Partagas and Diaz (1996b)
in mid-September 1891:
"1891 additional system #4 (Sept) MWR gives TS force winds at
coastal stations. This system is also given a high probability
by P+D, and bears further investigation."
Upon investigation of this system in the Monthly Weather Review, from
the COADS ship database, and coastal station data, a closed circulation for
this system could not be found. The COADS ship data did not provide any
observations near the system, though the station data was quite thorough
with observations obtained for Key West, Jupiter, Titusville, Tampa,
Jacksonville, Pensacola, Mobile, Port Eads, New Orleans and Galveston.
These data indicate that a disturbance did cross the Gulf of Mexico
being located roughly along longitude 78W on the 17th, 80W on
the 18th, 82W on the 19th, 85W on the 20th, 88W on the 21st, and 90W
on the 22nd. Peak winds recorded in association with this system were
40 mph E at Titusville on the 19th, 48 mph NE at New Orleans on the 20th,
and 40 mph NE at Galveston on the 20th. However, only easterly winds were
reported from these locations and lowest pressure recorded was only
1014 mb at Key West on the 19th. It is possible that this was a
tropical storm, but confirming observations for having a closed
circulation were not found. (It is also possible that the system was
a vigorous easterly wave with no closed circulation and a NNE-SSW oriented
wave axis.) Thus because of the uncertainty and lack of having an observed
closed circulation, this system is not included into HURDAT.
5) Storm 9 in Partagas and Diaz (1996a) and Neumann et al. (1999) apparently
did not exist as a separate tropical cyclone, but was in fact part of the
extratropical storm stage for storm 8. Thus this system is removed from
HURDAT. Details on the observations for this removal can be found within
the discussion of storm 8. Below is the original HURDAT entry for this
system:
11120 10/08/1891 M= 9 9 SNBR= 290 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11125 10/08* 0 0 0 0*238 572 35 0*245 582 40 0*251 591 40 0
11130 10/09*256 601 45 0*262 612 50 0*268 625 55 0*274 639 60 0
11135 10/10*280 653 70 0*287 666 75 0*293 680 80 0*299 694 85 0
11140 10/11*305 708 85 0*312 721 85 0*321 735 85 0*330 740 85 0
11145 10/12*340 742 85 0*350 741 85 0*359 740 85 0*366 737 85 0
11150 10/13*373 733 85 0*380 728 85 0*388 721 85 0*395 715 85 0
11155 10/14*403 706 85 0*412 694 85 0*422 681 85 0*433 665 85 0
11160 10/15*446 647 80 0*460 626 75 0*475 602 70 0*500 571 65 0
11165 10/16*530 522 65 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11170 HR
********************************************************************************
11260 06/10/1892 M= 7 1 SNBR= 293 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11260 06/09/1892 M= 8 1 SNBR= 304 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * ***
(9th not in HURDAT previously.)
11262 06/09*208 831 35 0*213 834 35 0*217 837 35 0*221 838 35 0
11265 06/10*237 853 35 0*245 844 35 0*250 836 40 0*258 824 40 0
11265 06/10*229 839 35 0*238 838 35 0*247 833 40 0*252 822 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
11270 06/11*265 812 45 0*272 801 45 0*278 792 35 0*283 781 35 0
11270 06/11*258 810 35 0*264 799 35 0*270 787 35 0*276 776 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
11275 06/12*287 771 40 0*290 761 45 0*293 751 45 0*296 740 45 0
11275 06/12*282 767 40 0*289 758 45 0*293 751 45 0*296 740 45 0
*** *** *** ***
11280 06/13*299 728 45 0*302 719 45 0*304 716 45 0*310 716 45 0
11285 06/14*314 720 45 0*313 727 45 0*312 736 45 0*312 741 45 0
11290 06/15*313 747 45 0*315 753 45 0*318 758 45 0*320 760 45 0
11295 06/16*323 760 45 0*326 760 40 0*330 760 40 0*335 760 35 0
11300 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are found
to be reasonable.
********************************************************************************
11305 08/16/1892 M= 9 2 SNBR= 294 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11305 08/15/1892 M=10 2 SNBR= 305 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** ***
(15th not previously in HURDAT.)
11307 08/15*180 545 35 0*180 555 35 0*180 565 35 0*181 575 35 0
11310 08/16* 0 0 0 0*181 563 35 0*181 573 40 0*184 585 45 0
11310 08/16*182 585 35 0*185 595 35 0*189 605 40 0*193 614 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
11315 08/17*187 597 55 0*192 609 60 0*197 620 65 0*203 631 70 0
11315 08/17*197 622 45 0*201 630 45 0*206 637 50 0*211 643 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11320 08/18*210 642 75 0*218 652 80 0*228 662 80 0*241 673 85 0
11320 08/18*215 650 55 0*220 657 55 0*228 663 60 0*240 670 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** *** **
11325 08/19*258 677 85 0*274 678 85 0*288 679 85 0*299 678 85 0
11325 08/19*249 673 65 0*259 677 65 0*270 680 65 0*284 684 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11330 08/20*310 676 85 0*320 673 85 0*331 669 85 0*342 665 85 0
11330 08/20*300 686 65 0*318 686 65 0*335 680 65 0*351 672 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11335 08/21*354 660 85 0*368 652 85 0*400 630 85 0*417 616 85 0
11335 08/21*364 662 65 0*382 647 65 0*400 630 65 0*417 616 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** ** **
11340 08/22*435 598 80 0*452 578 70 0*470 552 70 0*492 515 70 0
11340 08/22E435 598 60 0E452 578 55 0E470 552 50 0E492 515 50 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11345 08/23*519 470 70 0*547 435 70 0*570 410 70 0*584 393 70 0
11345 08/23E519 470 50 0E547 435 50 0E570 410 50 0E584 393 50 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11350 08/24*595 370 70 0*601 336 65 0*606 310 60 0*609 283 55 0
11350 08/24E595 370 45 0E601 336 45 0E606 310 40 0E609 283 40 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11355 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999) for this hurricane.
Available gale force or greater observations are as follows: 40 kt SE wind
on Aug. 17 at 21.6 N, 60.1 W (steamship "Francia"), 60 kt S-SE wind at 00 UTC
on Aug. 19 at 24.3 N, 65.4 W (steamer "Duart Castle"), 35 kt SW wind and
1006 mb at 10 UTC on Aug. 20 at Bermuda, and NW-N "gales of hurricane force
along the trans-Atlantic shipping routes between 50 and 65 W on Aug. 22.
These observations indicate that the system peaked at minimal hurricane
status, rather than the standard Category 2 (85 kt) originally found in
HURDAT. The hurricane is estimated to have transitioned to extratropical on
the 22nd based upon ship reports of strong northerly gales between 50 and 65W.
********************************************************************************
11360 09/03/1892 M=15 3 SNBR= 295 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11360 09/03/1892 M=15 3 SNBR= 306 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11365 09/03* 0 0 0 0*115 330 35 0*116 346 35 0*119 363 40 0
11370 09/04*122 378 40 0*124 391 40 0*127 402 45 0*129 410 50 0
11375 09/05*132 417 50 0*134 423 55 0*137 431 60 0*142 442 65 0
11380 09/06*148 454 65 0*154 466 70 0*161 475 75 0*168 482 75 0
11385 09/07*174 488 80 0*181 494 85 0*187 499 85 0*193 504 85 0
11390 09/08*199 509 85 0*205 513 85 0*212 518 85 0*220 523 85 0
11395 09/09*229 527 85 0*238 531 85 0*247 534 85 0*256 536 85 0
11400 09/10*264 538 85 0*273 540 85 0*281 541 85 0*290 543 85 0
11405 09/11*298 544 85 0*307 545 85 0*317 546 85 0*329 545 85 0
11410 09/12*345 540 85 0*361 532 85 0*376 522 85 0*389 509 85 0
11415 09/13*403 493 85 0*415 473 85 0*428 450 85 0*440 423 80 0
11420 09/14*451 393 75 0*461 363 70 0*470 338 65 0*477 316 60 0
11425 09/15*482 294 60 0*485 272 55 0*487 250 55 0*482 228 50 0
11430 09/16*475 206 50 0*468 184 50 0*462 162 50 0*456 144 50 0
11435 09/17*451 131 45 0*447 122 40 0*443 115 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11440 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). No observations of gale force or
greater winds were found for this system. Without data for substantiating
changes to HURDAT's original intensity estimates, no alterations are made
for this hurricane.
********************************************************************************
11445 09/09/1892 M= 9 4 SNBR= 296 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11445 09/08/1892 M=10 4 SNBR= 307 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** ** ***
(The 8th is new to HURDAT.)
11447 09/08* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*220 928 35 0
11450 09/09*220 928 35 0*228 934 35 0*241 942 40 0*249 944 45 0
11450 09/09*227 932 35 0*234 937 35 0*241 942 40 0*249 944 45 0
*** *** *** ***
11455 09/10*256 942 50 0*261 939 50 0*266 936 50 0*269 933 50 0
11460 09/11*271 929 50 0*274 924 50 0*276 920 50 0*279 916 50 0
11465 09/12*283 912 50 0*289 907 50 0*297 901 45 0*309 889 40 0
11470 09/13*327 877 35 0*347 865 35 0*368 854 35 0*392 843 35 0
11470 09/13*327 877 35 0*347 865 35 0E368 854 40 0E392 843 45 0
* ** * **
11475 09/14*419 831 35 0*443 820 35 0*462 808 35 0*476 792 35 0
11475 09/14E419 831 50 0E443 820 50 0E462 808 45 0E476 792 45 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11480 09/15*489 771 35 0*502 746 35 0*514 720 35 0*526 689 35 0
11480 09/15E489 771 40 0E502 746 40 0E514 720 35 0E526 689 35 0
* ** * ** * *
11485 09/16*539 652 35 0*551 615 35 0*563 584 35 0*574 560 35 0
11485 09/16E539 652 35 0E551 615 35 0E563 584 35 0E574 560 35 0
* * * *
11490 09/17*584 542 35 0*594 528 35 0*603 519 35 0* 0 0 0 0
11490 09/17E584 542 35 0E594 528 35 0E603 519 35 0* 0 0 0 0
* * *
11495 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Track extended back in time slightly
and adjusted to provide for a more reasonable translational velocity at
the beginning of the storm. Winds are intensified overland while
undergoing extratropical transition due to wind and pressure observations.
********************************************************************************
11500 09/13/1892 M=11 5 SNBR= 297 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11500 09/12/1892 M=12 5 SNBR= 308 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** ***
(12th not originally in HURDAT.)
11502 09/12*153 195 35 0*154 205 40 0*155 215 45 0*156 223 50 0
11505 09/13* 0 0 0 0*153 194 35 0*154 207 35 0*156 219 35 0
11505 09/13*157 230 55 0*159 236 60 0*160 241 65 0*162 248 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11510 09/14*158 231 35 0*160 242 40 0*163 254 50 0*166 266 60 0
11510 09/14*164 255 75 0*166 262 80 0*169 270 85 0*171 277 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11515 09/15*169 277 70 0*172 289 75 0*176 300 80 0*180 311 80 0
11515 09/15*173 284 85 0*174 292 85 0*176 300 85 0*180 311 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** ** **
11520 09/16*184 323 85 0*189 334 85 0*194 345 85 0*199 356 85 0
11525 09/17*205 367 85 0*210 378 85 0*215 389 85 0*220 398 85 0
11530 09/18*224 406 85 0*229 414 85 0*234 422 85 0*239 431 85 0
11535 09/19*245 440 85 0*250 449 85 0*256 458 85 0*261 466 85 0
11540 09/20*267 474 85 0*272 482 85 0*277 489 85 0*283 495 80 0
11545 09/21*290 500 80 0*298 504 80 0*306 507 75 0*316 509 70 0
11550 09/22*326 507 70 0*337 503 70 0*347 497 65 0*355 487 60 0
11555 09/23*363 473 50 0*369 454 45 0*375 432 35 0*382 419 25 0
11560 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999) for this hurricane.
Winds increased from the 12th to the 15th to account for hurricane
conditions experienced in and near the Cape Verde Islands.
********************************************************************************
11845 09/25/1892 M= 3 6 SNBR= 298 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11845 09/25/1892 M= 3 6 SNBR= 309 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11850 09/25* 0 0 0 0*195 922 35 0*196 929 40 0*199 936 40 0
11855 09/26*203 943 45 0*208 949 50 0*213 955 50 0*219 961 50 0
11860 09/27*225 966 50 0*231 971 50 0*238 976 45 0*243 979 35 0
11865 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996a) introduced no changes from that shown in Neumann
et al. (1999).
********************************************************************************
11590 10/05/1892 M=11 7 SNBR= 299 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11590 10/05/1892 M=12 7 SNBR= 310 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ***
11595 10/05*115 562 35 0*113 570 40 0*112 576 45 0*112 578 50 0
11595 10/05*115 562 35 0*113 570 40 0*112 576 45 0*112 582 50 0
***
11600 10/06*112 583 55 0*111 589 55 0*111 598 60 0*111 609 65 0
11600 10/06*112 587 55 0*111 592 55 0*111 600 60 0*111 609 65 0
*** *** ***
11605 10/07*111 620 70 0*112 632 75 0*113 644 80 0*115 657 80 0
11610 10/08*116 670 85 0*118 683 85 0*120 696 85 0*122 708 85 0
11615 10/09*124 720 85 0*125 731 85 0*127 743 85 0*129 756 85 0
11620 10/10*131 769 85 0*134 783 85 0*137 795 85 0*140 805 85 0
11625 10/11*143 813 85 0*146 821 85 0*150 830 85 0*155 841 85 0
11625 10/11*143 813 85 0*146 821 85 0*150 830 85 0*155 841 80 0
**
11630 10/12*159 851 85 0*164 862 85 0*169 872 80 0*174 883 75 0
11630 10/12*159 851 75 0*164 862 80 0*169 872 85 0*174 883 85 0
** ** ** **
11635 10/13*179 893 70 0*183 904 70 0*187 914 70 0*190 923 70 0
11635 10/13*179 893 60 0*183 904 55 0*187 914 55 0*190 923 65 0
** ** ** **
11640 10/14*193 930 70 0*195 935 75 0*198 941 80 0*200 947 85 0
11645 10/15*203 954 85 0*206 960 85 0*209 966 80 0*213 973 35 0
11645 10/15*203 954 85 0*206 960 85 0*209 966 80 0*213 973 70 0
**
(16th not previously in HURDAT.)
11647 10/16*217 980 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11650 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Positions on the 5th and 6th are
adjusted slightly to provide realistic translational velocities. Winds are
adjusted to better accommodate passage over land. Additional six hour
position/intensity added on the 16th to allow for reasonable (but quick)
decay over the mountainous terrain of Mexico.
********************************************************************************
11655 10/13/1892 M= 8 8 SNBR= 300 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11655 10/13/1892 M= 8 8 SNBR= 311 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11660 10/13* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*262 695 35 0
11660 10/13*260 712 40 0*265 707 50 0*270 700 60 0*275 691 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11665 10/14*269 682 35 0*275 671 35 0*280 661 40 0*285 650 40 0
11665 10/14*280 683 70 0*285 677 75 0*290 670 80 0*296 662 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11670 10/15*290 640 45 0*295 632 45 0*300 626 50 0*302 623 50 0
11670 10/15*301 656 80 0*306 649 80 0*310 643 80 0*315 634 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11675 10/16*304 620 50 0*307 616 50 0*311 609 50 0*316 599 50 0
11675 10/16*320 626 75 0*325 617 70 0*330 609 60 0*337 597 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** ***
11680 10/17*322 588 50 0*330 575 50 0*339 561 50 0*350 547 50 0
11680 10/17*344 582 50 0*350 572 50 0*355 560 50 0*362 546 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
11685 10/18*363 532 50 0*376 517 50 0*388 502 50 0*397 487 50 0
11685 10/18E370 531 50 0E378 518 50 0E388 502 50 0E397 487 50 0
**** *** **** *** * *
11690 10/19*404 473 50 0*411 463 50 0*419 455 45 0*432 446 45 0
11690 10/19E404 473 50 0E411 463 50 0E419 455 45 0E432 446 45 0
* * * *
11695 10/20*448 441 45 0*462 449 40 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11695 10/20E448 441 45 0E462 449 40 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
* *
11700 TS
11700 HR
**
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Intensity is
increased to Category 1 (80 kt) hurricane based upon reports of hurricane
force ship observations on the 13th as well as 60 kt observed wind in
Bermuda in the weak semi-circle of the storm on the 15th.
********************************************************************************
11705 10/21/1892 M= 9 9 SNBR= 301 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
11705 10/21/1892 M= 9 9 SNBR= 312 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
11710 10/21*230 926 35 0*232 922 35 0*235 917 40 0*237 914 40 0
11715 10/22*239 910 40 0*242 906 45 0*246 900 45 0*251 894 45 0
11720 10/23*255 887 45 0*260 879 45 0*262 872 45 0*266 863 45 0
11720 10/23*255 887 45 0*259 879 45 0*262 872 45 0*266 863 45 0
***
11725 10/24*269 855 45 0*271 848 45 0*273 840 45 0*276 830 45 0
11725 10/24*269 855 45 0*271 848 45 0*273 840 45 0*276 827 45 0
***
11730 10/25*278 820 40 0*280 810 40 0*282 799 35 0*284 780 35 0
11730 10/25*280 810 40 0*283 792 35 0*285 777 35 0*286 765 35 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
11735 10/26*287 763 35 0*290 748 40 0*293 735 40 0*297 721 45 0
11735 10/26*288 756 35 0*290 746 40 0*293 735 40 0*297 721 45 0
*** *** ***
11740 10/27*305 710 45 0*312 702 45 0*320 695 45 0*327 689 45 0
11745 10/28*333 683 45 0*340 678 45 0*347 672 45 0*358 666 45 0
11750 10/29*366 662 45 0*375 660 40 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11755 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
********************************************************************************
1892 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) 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 11-14, 1892: Gale force intensity, but likely extratropical.
2) September 12, 1892: Possible new hurricane, but location not known.
3) October 1-2, 1892: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
11760 06/12/1893 M= 9 1 SNBR= 302 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
11760 06/12/1893 M= 9 1 SNBR= 313 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
*** *
11765 06/12* 0 0 0 0*205 952 35 0*212 947 40 0*217 943 45 0
11770 06/13*222 939 55 0*227 934 65 0*233 927 75 0*240 919 80 0
11770 06/13*222 939 50 0*227 934 55 0*233 927 60 0*240 919 60 0
** ** ** **
11775 06/14*245 912 85 0*252 904 85 0*258 897 85 0*262 889 85 0
11775 06/14*245 912 60 0*252 904 60 0*258 897 60 0*262 889 60 0
** ** ** **
11780 06/15*266 882 85 0*270 874 85 0*275 867 85 0*286 853 80 0
11780 06/15*266 882 60 0*270 874 60 0*277 865 60 0*286 853 60 0
** ** *** *** ** **
11785 06/16*301 834 70 0*317 815 55 0*331 798 50 0*343 784 50 0
11785 06/16*301 834 50 0*317 815 45 0*331 798 50 0*343 784 50 0
** **
11790 06/17*355 771 50 0*366 757 55 0*375 743 60 0*383 729 65 0
11795 06/18*390 716 70 0*398 702 75 0*405 688 80 0*412 668 80 0
11795 06/18*390 716 65 0*398 702 65 0*405 688 65 0*412 668 65 0
** ** ** **
11800 06/19*420 641 85 0*427 613 85 0*434 593 85 0*440 580 85 0
11800 06/19*420 641 65 0*427 613 65 0*434 593 65 0*440 580 65 0
** ** ** **
11805 06/20*445 568 80 0*450 558 75 0*454 550 70 0*459 540 65 0
11805 06/20E445 568 60 0E450 558 60 0E454 550 60 0E459 540 60 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11810 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Available observational data for
Florida indicates that the system was likely of strong tropical storm
intensity at landfall. Hurricane is downgraded from the original standard
Category 2 (85 kt) to a Category 1 (65 kt) hurricane at peak intensity,
since observational evidence suggests that it was (at most) a minimal
hurricane.
********************************************************************************
11815 07/04/1893 M= 4 2 SNBR= 303 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11815 07/04/1893 M= 4 2 SNBR= 314 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11820 07/04* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*111 792 35 0*118 798 40 0
11825 07/05*126 804 50 0*133 812 60 0*140 820 70 0*147 829 80 0
11825 07/05*126 804 50 0*133 812 60 0*140 820 70 0*147 829 85 0
**
11830 07/06*154 839 85 0*160 849 85 0*167 860 85 0*172 870 80 0
11830 07/06*154 839 75 0*160 849 70 0*167 860 80 0*172 870 80 0
** ** **
11835 07/07*179 882 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
11835 07/07*179 882 80 0*184 895 60 0*187 910 40 0*190 925 30 0
** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
11840 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Winds reduced slightly on the 6th
due to the center of the hurricane passing over Honduras, though original
landfall intensity at Nicaragua/Honduras retained (85 kt). Three position and
intensity values were added on the 7th because original final position was
not over land. These allow for a reasonable decay of the hurricane over
land by using the Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) inland decay model.
********************************************************************************
11845 08/13/1893 M=13 3 SNBR= 304 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11845 08/13/1893 M=13 3 SNBR= 315 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11850 08/13* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 96 505 35 0*103 515 40 0
11855 08/14*109 526 40 0*116 537 45 0*122 548 50 0*129 560 55 0
11860 08/15*135 573 60 0*142 585 65 0*148 597 65 0*154 608 70 0
11865 08/16*160 618 75 0*166 629 80 0*172 639 80 0*178 649 85 0
11865 08/16*160 618 75 0*166 629 80 0*172 639 90 0*176 649 100 0
** *** ***
11870 08/17*183 660 90 0*188 670 90 0*194 680 95 0*200 689 100 0
11870 08/17*180 659 100 0*185 670 90 0*190 680 95 0*196 689 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
11875 08/18*206 697 100 0*212 704 105 0*218 712 105 0*225 721 105 0
11875 08/18*202 697 100 0*209 704 105 0*218 712 105 0*225 721 105 0
*** ***
11880 08/19*232 729 105 0*240 738 105 0*248 747 105 0*257 754 105 0
11885 08/20*267 757 105 0*279 758 105 0*301 753 105 0*308 750 105 0
11885 08/20*267 757 105 0*279 758 105 0*291 755 100 0*308 750 95 0
*** *** *** ***
11890 08/21*327 738 105 0*348 723 105 0*370 706 105 0*395 686 100 0
11890 08/21*327 738 90 0*348 723 90 0*370 706 90 0*395 686 80 0
*** *** *** ***
11895 08/22*422 663 100 0*448 638 95 0*474 597 90 0*499 553 85 0
11895 08/22*422 663 70 0E448 638 60 0E474 597 50 0E494 553 50 0
*** * ** * ** **** **
11900 08/23*507 525 80 0*513 500 75 0*519 480 70 0*511 451 65 0
11900 08/23E507 525 50 0E513 500 50 0E516 480 50 0E511 451 50 0
* ** * ** **** ** * **
11905 08/24*504 431 65 0*496 418 60 0*491 400 60 0*492 387 60 0
11905 08/24E504 431 50 0E496 418 50 0E491 400 50 0E492 387 50 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11910 08/25*494 371 60 0*497 360 60 0*500 350 60 0*506 339 60 0
11910 08/25E494 371 50 0E497 360 45 0E500 350 40 0E506 339 35 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11915 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996a), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Analysis from
Boose et al. (2003) documents widespread Fujita-scale F2 wind-caused
damage over Puerto Rico. Thus winds increased to 100 kt (Category 3) at
landfall over that island. Winds are increased accordingly on the
16th and 17th. Observational evidence found in Partagas and Diaz suggests
a weakening of the system after recurvature - winds are reduced from the
20th to the 22nd accordingly. Additionally, no evidence is available that
indicates that the storm struck as a hurricane in Canada. Winds reduced
from the 23rd to the 25th accordingly. The hurricane is known as "San
Roque III" in Puerto Rico from the impacts in that island.
********************************************************************************
11920 08/15/1893 M=12 4 SNBR= 305 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
11920 08/15/1893 M=12 4 SNBR= 316 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
11925 08/15* 0 0 0 0*140 365 35 0*142 377 40 0*144 386 45 0
11930 08/16*147 396 45 0*149 405 50 0*151 415 55 0*153 426 60 0
11935 08/17*156 437 65 0*159 448 65 0*161 459 70 0*163 469 75 0
11940 08/18*165 479 80 0*168 489 85 0*172 499 85 0*176 513 85 0
11945 08/19*180 529 85 0*185 545 85 0*191 558 85 0*197 570 85 0
11950 08/20*203 581 85 0*210 592 85 0*216 603 85 0*222 614 85 0
11955 08/21*227 624 85 0*233 635 85 0*239 649 85 0*244 658 85 0
11955 08/21*227 624 85 0*233 635 85 0*239 646 85 0*244 658 85 0
***
11960 08/22*252 671 85 0*261 684 85 0*271 698 85 0*284 707 85 0
11960 08/22*252 671 85 0*261 684 90 0*271 698 95 0*284 707 100 0
** ** ***
11965 08/23*298 716 85 0*314 725 85 0*331 732 85 0*353 737 85 0
11965 08/23*298 716 100 952*314 725 100 0*331 732 100 0*350 737 95 0
*** *** *** *** *** **
11970 08/24*373 740 85 0*394 739 80 0*414 735 80 0*434 724 75 0
11970 08/24*368 740 85 0*386 739 80 0*407 739 75 986*430 730 60 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** **
11975 08/25*454 707 70 0*474 685 65 0*493 660 60 0*506 631 60 0
11975 08/25E454 710 55 0E474 685 50 0E493 660 45 0E506 631 45 0
* *** ** * ** * ** * **
11980 08/26*511 597 60 0*511 565 60 0*507 538 60 0*500 514 60 0
11980 08/26E511 597 40 0E511 565 40 0E507 538 40 0E500 514 40 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
11985 HR
11985 HR NY1 VA1
*** ***
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Track near landfall slightly altered
to better fit passage of the eye over New York City. A central pressure
of 952 mb (03Z on the 23rd) suggests winds of 101 kt from the subtropical
wind-pressure relationship - supporting upgrading this hurricane to a 100 kt
Category 3 for best track. A peripheral pressure of 990 mb (11Z on the 24th)
suggests winds of at least 63 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship
- 75 kt chosen for best track. Estimate of RMW of 45 nmi provided by
Coch and Jarvinen (2000), while an estimate of 30 nmi for RMW was provided
by Boose et al. (2001) based upon observations and modeling of observed
wind-caused damages. The latter estimate is chosen here, as this may provide
a more direct RMW result for this region. Given the track of the hurricane
and the estimated RMW, SLOSH model runs suggest a central pressure of 986 mb
(Jarvinen, personal communication) - which corresponds to 67 kt maximum
sustained winds from the northern wind-pressure relationship. 75 kt winds
chosen for best track at landfall, which is reasonable given the slightly
smaller than usual RMW at this latitude and central pressure. Thus the U.S.
landfall intensity determined here is a 75 kt Category 1 hurricane in New
York, which is at the low end of the range of the Fujita-scale F2 (upper
Category 1 to all of Category 2) damage analyzed in Boose et al. (2001).
Additionally, the changes introduced here in intensity on the 24th and 25th
after landfall match closely the analysis of wind-caused damage by Boose
et al. (2001). Hurricane also known as the "Midnight Storm" (Coch and
Jarvinen 2000).
********************************************************************************
11990 08/15/1893 M= 5 5 SNBR= 306 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
11990 08/15/1893 M= 5 5 SNBR= 317 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
11995 08/15* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*322 604 35 0*331 621 40 0
12000 08/16*342 640 45 0*355 661 55 0*370 670 60 0*384 661 70 0
12005 08/17*402 647 80 0*419 627 85 0*434 608 85 0*448 588 85 0
12010 08/18*461 568 85 0*473 547 80 0*484 525 70 0*499 497 65 0
12010 08/18*461 568 85 0*473 547 80 0*484 525 70 0*495 497 65 0
***
12015 08/19*505 479 65 0*517 445 65 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
12015 08/19*505 474 65 0*517 445 65 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
***
12020 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Small track changes are introduced on
the 18th and 19th for more realistic translational velocities. No
observations of gale force or greater wind reports could be located for
this system (except for an indirect report from Bermuda of a "hurricane ...
moving northward between that station and Halifax" on the 15th). Without
data for substantiating changes to HURDAT's original intensity estimates, no
alterations are made to the intensity for this hurricane.
********************************************************************************
12025 08/15/1893 M=19 6 SNBR= 307 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
12025 08/15/1893 M=19 6 SNBR= 318 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
*** *
12030 08/15* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*181 202 40 0*176 209 40 0
12035 08/16*172 216 40 0*168 224 40 0*165 232 40 0*162 241 40 0
12040 08/17*160 250 40 0*158 260 40 0*156 269 40 0*155 278 45 0
12045 08/18*154 286 45 0*154 294 50 0*155 303 50 0*156 313 55 0
12050 08/19*158 324 55 0*161 338 60 0*165 354 65 0*170 374 70 0
12055 08/20*175 396 75 0*180 419 80 0*186 440 85 0*192 458 90 0
12055 08/20*175 396 75 0*180 419 80 0*186 440 85 0*192 458 85 0
**
12060 08/21*198 476 90 0*205 494 95 0*210 510 100 0*214 525 100 0
12060 08/21*198 476 85 0*205 494 85 0*210 510 85 0*214 525 85 0
** ** ** **
12065 08/22*217 540 100 0*219 555 105 972*220 570 105 0*221 585 105 0
12065 08/22*217 540 85 0*219 555 85 972*220 570 90 0*221 585 95 0
** ** *** ***
12070 08/23*223 600 105 0*224 614 105 0*225 627 105 0*226 639 105 0
12070 08/23*223 600 100 0*224 614 105 0*225 627 105 0*226 639 105 0
***
12075 08/24*228 649 105 0*229 659 105 0*230 670 105 0*232 681 105 0
12080 08/25*235 693 105 0*238 704 105 0*241 716 105 0*244 729 105 0
12085 08/26*247 742 105 0*251 756 105 0*255 769 105 0*261 780 105 0
12090 08/27*270 789 105 0*281 797 105 0*292 804 105 0*303 809 100 0
12090 08/27*270 789 105 0*280 798 105 0*290 803 105 0*297 806 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
12095 08/28*315 812 95 0*327 812 90 0*340 810 85 0*354 805 80 0
12095 08/28*306 807 100 954*321 812 90 958*339 811 75 0*354 805 65 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** **
12100 08/29*368 796 75 0*384 782 70 0*402 760 70 0*420 737 65 0
12100 08/29*368 796 60 0*384 782 55 0*402 760 55 0*420 737 55 0
** ** ** **
12105 08/30*443 707 60 0*466 677 60 0*490 647 55 0*501 630 55 0
12105 08/30*443 707 50 0*466 677 50 0*486 650 50 0*501 630 50 0
** ** *** *** ** **
12110 08/31*513 609 55 0*522 589 50 0*530 570 50 0*536 552 50 0
12110 08/31E513 609 50 0E522 589 50 0E530 570 50 0E536 552 50 0
* ** * * *
12115 09/01*541 535 50 0*545 518 50 0*547 500 50 0*545 481 50 0
12115 09/01E541 535 50 0E545 518 50 0E547 500 50 0E545 481 50 0
* * * *
12120 09/02*544 461 50 0*542 441 50 0*540 420 50 0*539 391 50 0
12120 09/02E544 461 50 0E542 441 50 0E540 420 50 0E539 391 50 0
* * * *
12125 HR
12125 HR GA3 SC3 NC1 DFL1
*** *** *** ****
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Track altered slightly based upon
analysis from Ho (1989). A central pressure on the 22nd of 972 mb (was
already in best-track) suggests winds of 87 kt from the southern wind-
pressure relationship - 85 kt chosen for best track. A peripheral pressure
of 965 mb (on the 26th) suggests winds of at least 90 kt from the
subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 105 kt retained in best track.
For the intensity near landfall, the analysis from Ho is not accepted
because of concerns of two aspects. First the 18.2 foot storm tide
reported for Savannah Beach likely also includes a large wave component as
well. B. Jarvinen (personal communication) estimates that the storm tide
itself was closer to 11-13 foot, 2-3 foot of which was due to the astronomical
high tide. (Thus a storm surge of 9-10 foot appears to be the most
credible estimate.) A central pressure shortly after landfall of 958 mb
(05Z on the 28th in Savannah) suggests winds of 96 kt from the subtropical
wind-pressure relationship - 90 kt retained in best track since the center
of the hurricane has already made landfall. Ho discounted this central
pressure measurement from the Weather Bureau office in Savannah in favor of
a measurement of 938 mb taken by a private citizen. This 938 mb value
is dubious since it was not a calibrated instrument and that the eye of
the hurricane clearly went over the Savannah Weather Bureau office.
Using the 958 mb central pressure, a central pressure of 954 mb
at landfall is estimated via methodology from Ho et al. (1987) which
uses inland central pressure and time from landfall to the inland
central pressure measurement. (In this case, the time was approximately
one hour for the hurricane to transit from the coast to Savannah - a
distance of 17 nmi.) A landfall value of 954 mb for the central pressure
corresponds to 99 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship -
100 kt is chosen as the wind speed at landfall, since the RMW estimate
of 23 nmi (Ho 1989) is very close to the average value for that latitude
and central pressure (Vickery et al. 2000). Thus the hurricane is
determined here to be a 100 kt Category 3 at landfall with a central
pressure around 954 mb, not the 931 mb of a Category 4 hurricane
suggested by Ho (1989). Winds after landfall were reduced to reflect
no observation of hurricane force north of North Carolina as described
in Partagas and Diaz (1996b). Small track changes are introduced on
the 30th for more realistic translational velocities. Storm is known as
the "Sea Islands Hurricane" for its impact in Georgia and South Carolina.
********************************************************************************
12415 08/20/1893 M=10 7 SNBR= 308 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
12415 08/20/1893 M=10 7 SNBR= 319 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
12420 08/20* 0 0 0 0*118 272 35 0*120 280 40 0*123 287 45 0
12425 08/21*126 294 45 0*129 301 50 0*132 308 55 0*136 315 60 0
12430 08/22*140 321 65 0*144 328 70 0*148 334 75 0*151 340 75 0
12435 08/23*154 346 80 0*158 353 80 0*161 359 85 0*165 365 85 0
12440 08/24*170 371 85 0*175 378 85 0*181 384 85 0*187 390 85 0
12445 08/25*193 396 85 0*201 401 85 0*210 407 85 0*221 411 85 0
12450 08/26*233 414 85 0*246 413 85 0*260 410 85 0*274 403 85 0
12455 08/27*289 391 85 0*305 376 85 0*321 359 85 0*338 340 85 0
12460 08/28*353 323 85 0*373 305 80 0*400 280 75 0*409 265 70 0
12460 08/28*353 323 85 0*373 305 80 0*393 285 75 0*409 265 70 0
*** ***
12465 08/29*414 251 65 0*418 240 60 0*420 230 55 0*421 216 50 0
12470 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) introduced no changes from that shown in Neumann
et al. (1999). Small track changes are introduced on the 28th for more
realistic translational velocities.
********************************************************************************
12190 09/04/1893 M= 6 8 SNBR= 309 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
12190 09/04/1893 M= 6 8 SNBR= 320 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
*** *
12195 09/04* 0 0 0 0*184 853 35 0*190 861 40 0*195 870 45 0
12200 09/05*201 879 55 0*209 887 60 0*221 899 65 0*229 908 70 0
12200 09/05*201 879 40 0*209 887 35 0*221 899 45 0*229 908 55 0
** ** ** **
12205 09/06*240 918 80 0*252 925 85 0*269 930 85 0*274 928 85 0
12205 09/06*240 918 65 0*252 925 75 0*264 930 85 0*274 928 85 0
** ** ***
12210 09/07*279 923 85 0*283 919 85 0*290 913 85 0*298 905 80 0
12210 09/07*279 923 85 0*283 919 85 0*290 913 85 0*298 905 70 0
**
12215 09/08*307 900 75 0*317 894 70 0*328 890 65 0*330 889 60 0
12215 09/08*307 900 55 0*317 894 45 0*325 890 40 0*330 889 35 0
** ** *** ** **
12220 09/09*333 888 55 0*340 887 45 0*348 885 40 0*351 885 35 0
12220 09/09*333 888 35 0*340 887 30 0*348 885 30 0*351 885 30 0
** ** ** **
12225 HR
12225 HR LA2
***
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Winds from the 5th to the 6th reduced
to take into account moving over the Yucatan of Mexico. Observations
show no evidence for hurricane intensity for nearly a full day over
the southeast U.S. Winds reduced inland via the Kaplan and DeMaria (1995)
inland decay model modified to allow slightly less weakening while
transit over the swamps of southeast Louisiana. Small track changes are
introduced on the 6th and the 8th for more realistic translational velocities.
********************************************************************************
12230 09/25/1893 M=21 9 SNBR= 310 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
12230 09/25/1893 M=21 9 SNBR= 321 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
*** *
12235 09/25* 0 0 0 0*116 250 35 0*116 258 40 0*117 267 45 0
12240 09/26*117 275 50 0*117 283 55 0*117 291 60 0*117 298 65 0
12240 09/26*117 275 45 0*117 283 45 0*117 291 50 0*117 298 50 0
** ** ** **
12245 09/27*117 305 70 0*117 311 75 0*117 319 80 0*117 328 85 0
12245 09/27*117 305 55 0*117 311 55 0*117 319 60 0*117 328 60 0
** ** ** **
12250 09/28*117 336 90 0*118 345 95 0*118 354 95 0*118 363 100 0
12250 09/28*117 336 65 0*118 345 65 0*118 354 65 0*118 363 65 0
** ** ** ***
12255 09/29*118 372 100 0*118 381 105 0*118 390 105 0*118 398 105 0
12255 09/29*118 372 65 0*118 381 65 0*118 390 65 0*118 398 65 0
*** *** *** ***
12260 09/30*119 405 105 0*119 412 105 0*120 420 105 0*121 430 105 0
12260 09/30*119 405 65 0*119 412 65 0*120 420 65 0*121 430 70 0
*** *** *** ***
12265 10/01*123 439 105 0*125 449 105 0*128 459 105 0*130 469 105 0
12265 10/01*123 439 75 0*125 449 80 0*128 459 85 0*130 469 90 0
*** *** *** ***
12270 10/02*133 480 105 0*136 490 105 0*140 500 105 0*144 509 105 0
12270 10/02*133 480 95 0*136 490 100 0*140 500 105 0*144 509 105 0
*** ***
12275 10/03*148 516 105 0*152 522 105 0*157 527 105 0*163 532 105 0
12280 10/04*169 537 105 0*176 542 105 0*182 547 105 0*188 552 105 0
12285 10/05*193 557 105 0*198 562 105 0*203 567 105 0*208 572 105 0
12290 10/06*212 577 105 0*215 582 105 0*218 587 105 0*220 592 105 0
12295 10/07*222 598 105 0*224 604 105 0*226 610 105 0*228 617 105 0
12300 10/08*229 625 105 0*231 633 105 0*233 642 105 0*235 651 105 0
12305 10/09*237 660 105 0*239 669 105 0*241 678 105 0*243 687 105 0
12310 10/10*245 695 105 0*248 703 105 0*250 712 105 0*252 722 105 0
12315 10/11*255 732 105 0*258 742 105 0*261 752 105 0*264 762 105 0
12320 10/12*268 771 100 0*272 781 100 0*276 790 100 0*282 797 95 0
12320 10/12*268 771 105 0*272 781 105 0*276 790 105 0*282 797 105 0
*** *** *** ***
12325 10/13*293 801 95 0*309 801 90 0*329 797 85 0*357 793 80 0
12325 10/13*293 806 105 0*308 808 105 0*326 797 105 955*350 786 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
12330 10/14*391 786 70 0*427 776 60 0*457 764 55 0*483 748 50 0
12330 10/14*387 781 65 0*427 776 60 0E457 764 60 0E483 748 60 0
*** *** ** * ** * **
12335 10/15*507 729 45 0*529 707 40 0*549 682 35 0*570 660 35 0
12335 10/15E507 729 60 0E529 707 60 0E549 682 50 0E570 660 40 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
12340 HR
12340 HR SC3 NC2 VA1
*** *** ***
The only minor change from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), is to use the track
analyzed by Ho (1989) near the landfall in the United States. Partagas
and Diaz otherwise made reasonable small track changes from that shown in
Neumann et al. (1999). It is to be noted, however, that such a long
slow translational speed of this hurricane before recurvature is very
unusual and does open the possibility that there were actually two
separate tropical cyclones instead of just the one indicated here. Until
more definitive information is uncovered, this will be retained relatively
unchanged from Neumann et al. (1999). A reduction in winds from the 28th
until the 2nd was included to make it consistent with available observations,
which indicate at most a minimal (Category 1) hurricane on these dates. A
peripheral pressure of 972 mb (21Z on the 12th) suggests winds of at least
84 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship. Peripheral pressures
(possibly central pressures) of 962 mb (on the 13th) and 959 mb (16Z on
the 13th) suggests winds of at least 93 and 95 kt, respectively, from
the wind-pressure relationship. Ho (1989) utilized these reports and
an estimate of the RMW of 15 nmi to obtain an estimated central pressure
of 955 mb. This supports winds of 99 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure
relationship. Given the small RMW for this latitude and central pressure,
winds in the best track are boosted slightly to 105 kt at landfall.
Storm tide values of 14 foot are reported in Ho (1989) for Pawley's Island.
Intensity increased after landfall on the 14th and 15th due to indications
that it became a strong extratropical storm in Canada.
********************************************************************************
12345 09/27/1893 M= 9 10 SNBR= 311 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
12345 09/27/1893 M= 9 10 SNBR= 322 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=4
***
12350 09/27* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*164 817 35 0*170 826 40 0
12355 09/28*177 834 55 0*183 842 65 0*190 850 75 0*197 858 85 0
12360 09/29*203 865 85 0*210 873 80 0*217 880 80 0*224 887 80 0
12365 09/30*231 892 85 0*238 897 85 0*245 902 85 0*251 906 85 0
12370 10/01*257 908 85 0*262 910 85 0*269 910 85 0*276 909 85 0
12370 10/01*257 908 85 0*262 910 85 0*269 910 95 0*276 909 105 0
** ***
12375 10/02*284 905 85 0*291 900 85 0*299 893 80 956*305 887 75 0
12375 10/02*284 905 115 0*291 900 115 948*299 893 95 0*305 887 85 0
*** *** *** ** *** **
12380 10/03*313 878 65 0*320 867 55 0*327 855 50 0*334 839 45 0
12385 10/04*340 818 40 0*346 797 40 0*351 780 35 0*354 760 35 0
12390 10/05*353 740 35 0*352 722 35 0*350 704 35 0* 0 0 0 0
12395 HR
12395 HR LA4 MS2 AL2
*** *** ***
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Ho (1989) provided central pressure
estimates for the two U.S. landfalls that this hurricane made. For landfall
in Mississippi, a central pressure of 956 mb was derived from a peripheral
pressure measurement of 970 mb (at 16Z on the 2nd) and an estimated
17 nmi RMW. Ho also indicated that there was a 20 foot storm tide reported
in Caminadaville, Louisiana and 10-12 foot storm tide in Pass Christian,
Mississippi. However, examination of the pressure measurements reveals
that the 970 mb was likely a true central pressure value, not a peripheral
observation. (However, this pressure measurement is not included above
since the timing was at 1530 UTC, not within the +/-2 hours of synoptic
time needed for inclusion in HURDAT. This value is though included in the
U.S. landfalling table.) This central pressure corresponds to 89 kt from the
Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship. Since Ho's reported RMW is smaller
than what would be expected on average for this central pressure and
latitude (Vickery et al. 2000), a windspeed of 95 kt is chosen for the best
track. This places the storm as a landfalling Category 2 in Mississippi
and Alabama, though near the lower boundary of Category 3.
For landfall in Louisiana, there also appear to be concerns with Ho's (1989)
estimate of intensity. Ho used an inland decay pressure model (Ho et al.
1987) to obtain an estimate of 940 mb central pressure. (The south
Florida inland decay pressure model was utilized for this particular
hurricane, since this is more appropriate given its track over marsh-covered
south Louisiana.) Using instead the landfall value at Mississippi of
970 mb central pressure, an estimate of 948 mb at landfall in Louisiana is
obtained. This central pressure corresponds to 112 kt from the Gulf of
Mexico wind-pressure relationship. Since the Ho estimated RMW at the
Louisiana landfall (12 nmi) is smaller than what is average for this central
pressure and latitude, a maximum sustained wind at landfall in Louisiana is
estimated at 115 kt. SLOSH runs with these central pressure and RMW values
(B. Jarvinen, personal communication), however, can simulate a maximum storm
tide of only about 8 feet at Caminadaville - much smaller than supposedly
observed. As this island has a maximum height of 5 feet above mean sea
level and is completely overtopped by storm surges from strong hurricanes,
the 20 foot value is suspect. 115 kt at landfall in Louisiana makes this a
Category 4 hurricane, though it is near the upper boundary of Category 3.
The hurricane is known as the "Chenier Caminanda Hurricane" for its impacts
in Louisiana.
********************************************************************************
12400 10/20/1893 M= 4 11 SNBR= 312 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
12400 10/20/1893 M= 4 11 SNBR= 323 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
12405 10/20* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*180 820 35 0*195 806 45 0
12405 10/20* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*180 820 30 0*195 806 30 0
** **
12410 10/21*210 794 50 0*225 785 50 0*240 780 45 0*256 777 45 0
12410 10/21*210 794 30 0*225 785 30 0*240 780 35 0*256 777 40 0
** ** ** **
12415 10/22*272 778 50 0*288 778 50 0*305 776 50 0*323 771 50 0
12415 10/22*272 778 45 0*288 778 50 0*305 776 50 0*323 771 50 0
**
12420 10/23*342 760 50 0*363 751 45 0*384 759 40 0*400 780 35 0
12425 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Perez (2000 and personal communication)
indicate that this system was not of tropical storm intensity until
north of Cuba. Thus intensities reduced on the 20th through the 22nd.
********************************************************************************
12430 11/05/1893 M= 6 12 SNBR= 313 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
12430 11/05/1893 M= 8 12 SNBR= 324 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* *** *
12435 11/05* 0 0 0 0*178 797 35 0*186 798 40 0*197 797 50 0
12435 11/05*267 708 35 0*268 717 35 0*270 725 40 0*272 731 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12440 11/06*208 795 50 0*220 792 45 0*233 789 45 0*247 785 45 0
12440 11/06*274 736 50 0*277 741 45 0*280 745 45 0*284 749 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12445 11/07*260 782 50 0*273 778 50 0*287 774 50 0*301 770 50 0
12445 11/07*291 753 50 0*298 755 50 0*305 757 55 0*315 759 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
12450 11/08*314 767 50 0*328 764 50 0*341 760 50 0*352 753 50 0
12450 11/08*325 759 60 0*336 757 60 0*345 753 60 0*356 746 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
12455 11/09*359 747 45 0*364 739 45 0*368 731 40 0*373 719 35 0
12455 11/09*366 736 55 0*372 727 55 0*377 713 50 0*384 691 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
12460 11/10*379 705 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
12460 11/10E391 663 45 0E396 632 45 0E400 605 40 0E404 576 40 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
(11th and 12th are new additions to HURDAT.)
12462 11/11E406 548 40 0E408 521 40 0E410 490 40 0E410 469 40 0
12464 11/12E410 449 40 0E410 426 40 0E410 405 40 0E410 379 40 0
12465 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are found
to be reasonable. Winds increased from the 7th to the 9th based upon wind
measurements along U.S. coast. Storm did not actually hit land as per best
track positions and track book, so "XING=0" is utilized.
********************************************************************************
1893 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) mentioned two additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out
of HURDAT for the following reasons:
1) May 12-13, 1893: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) July 6, 1893: Damage reports in Cuba leave it uncertain if system was a
tornado or tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
12466 06/06/1894 M= 4 1 SNBR= 325 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
12467 06/06*190 774 35 0*190 778 35 0*190 783 35 0*190 789 35 0
12468 06/07*191 794 35 0*192 801 35 0*193 807 35 0*194 812 35 0
12469 06/08*195 821 35 0*196 827 35 0*197 833 35 0*199 838 35 0
12469 06/09*201 844 35 0*204 850 35 0*207 855 35 0*210 860 35 0
12469 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b) for this newly documented
tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
12470 08/05/1894 M= 4 1 SNBR= 314 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
12470 08/05/1894 M= 5 2 SNBR= 326 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* * ***
12475 08/05* 0 0 0 0*264 893 35 0*270 890 40 0*275 886 40 0
12480 08/06*279 882 45 0*283 879 50 0*287 876 50 0*290 874 50 0
12480 08/06*279 882 45 0*283 879 50 0*287 876 50 0*290 875 50 0
***
12485 08/07*294 872 50 0*297 871 50 0*300 871 50 0*304 872 50 0
12485 08/07*294 874 50 0*297 874 50 0*300 875 50 0*303 876 50 0
*** *** *** *** ***
12490 08/08*308 874 45 0*312 876 40 0*316 880 35 0*318 885 30 0
12490 08/08*306 877 45 0*309 882 40 0*310 887 35 0*311 891 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
(9th of August newly added to HURDAT.)
12492 08/09*312 895 30 0*313 899 25 0*315 905 25 0*317 915 25 0
12495 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 1.
********************************************************************************
12500 08/30/1894 M=11 2 SNBR= 315 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
12500 08/30/1894 M=11 3 SNBR= 327 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
12505 08/30*132 348 35 0*134 360 35 0*136 375 40 0*138 387 40 0
12510 08/31*140 399 45 0*142 411 45 0*144 423 45 0*147 435 50 0
12515 09/01*149 447 50 0*152 458 55 0*158 470 55 0*165 482 60 0
12520 09/02*172 495 65 0*179 508 65 0*186 521 70 0*193 533 75 0
12525 09/03*200 545 75 0*207 555 80 0*214 564 80 0*221 571 85 0
12530 09/04*227 576 85 0*234 580 85 0*240 584 85 0*247 588 85 0
12535 09/05*254 592 85 0*261 595 85 0*268 597 85 0*276 597 85 0
12540 09/06*284 595 85 0*293 592 85 0*301 588 85 0*309 583 85 0
12540 09/06*284 595 90 0*293 592 95 0*301 588 100 0*309 583 100 0
** ** *** ***
12545 09/07*318 577 85 0*327 569 85 0*336 560 85 0*347 549 85 0
12545 09/07*318 577 100 0*327 569 100 0*336 560 100 0*347 549 100 0
*** *** *** ***
12550 09/08*362 534 85 0*380 516 85 0*400 496 85 0*423 473 80 0
12550 09/08*362 534 100 948*380 516 100 0*400 496 100 0*423 473 90 0
*** *** *** *** **
12555 09/09*450 445 80 0*480 414 75 0*513 380 70 0*540 357 70 0
12555 09/09*450 445 80 0*480 414 75 0*513 380 70 0E540 357 70 0
*
12560 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 2. Pressure
measurement (may have been a central pressure) of 948 mb (on the 8th) suggests
winds of at least 98 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship - 100 kt
chosen for best track. Winds increased from the 6th to the 8th accordingly,
as hurricanes tend to reach maximum intensity at or just after recurvature.
********************************************************************************
12565 09/18/1894 M=13 3 SNBR= 316 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
12565 09/18/1894 M=14 4 SNBR= 328 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
** * *** *
12570 09/18*120 503 35 0*122 511 40 0*124 522 45 0*126 531 50 0
12570 09/18*134 505 35 0*134 510 40 0*135 517 45 0*136 526 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12575 09/19*128 540 55 0*131 549 65 0*133 558 70 0*135 567 80 0
12575 09/19*137 535 55 0*139 545 65 0*140 555 70 0*141 563 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12580 09/20*138 577 85 0*141 588 90 0*145 599 95 0*149 612 100 0
12580 09/20*143 575 85 0*145 586 90 0*147 597 95 0*149 611 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12585 09/21*153 627 105 0*158 642 105 0*162 655 105 0*166 667 105 0
12590 09/22*169 678 100 0*173 690 95 0*178 702 90 0*183 715 85 0
12590 09/22*170 679 100 0*176 693 95 0*183 710 90 0*188 727 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
12595 09/23*188 728 85 0*194 740 85 0*199 753 85 0*204 766 85 0
12595 09/23*194 743 80 0*199 758 85 0*205 770 70 0*209 782 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
12600 09/24*210 779 85 0*215 791 80 0*220 804 75 0*227 812 70 0
12600 09/24*214 794 70 0*218 806 70 0*225 815 65 0*229 817 60 994
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
12605 09/25*236 817 75 0*247 819 90 0*257 820 105 0*267 819 105 0
12605 09/25*234 819 65 0*240 820 70 0*250 820 80 985*263 820 90 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12610 09/26*276 817 95 0*286 815 80 0*295 812 70 0*305 809 70 0
12610 09/26*276 817 75 0*286 815 60 0*295 812 65 0*304 810 70 0
** ** ** *** ***
12615 09/27*314 806 75 0*324 803 75 0*332 798 80 0*338 792 80 0
12615 09/27*312 809 75 0*320 807 80 0*330 803 70 0*337 794 65 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
12620 09/28*342 786 80 0*346 781 70 0*351 774 60 0*355 767 60 0
12620 09/28*340 785 60 0*344 776 60 0*347 767 60 0*352 763 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
12625 09/29*360 761 65 0*365 756 65 0*370 750 70 0*375 745 70 0
12625 09/29*358 758 60 0*365 754 70 0*370 750 75 0*375 745 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** **
12630 09/30*381 739 65 0*386 734 50 0*392 729 35 0*398 723 30 0
12630 09/30*384 739 65 0*392 732 50 0*397 725 40 0*402 715 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
(October 1st new to HURDAT.)
12632 10/01*407 700 35 0*412 676 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
12635 HR
12635 HRBFL2DFL1 SC1 VA1
******** *** ***
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 3. Peak winds of 105 kt in the eastern Caribbean are retained, since
the wind-caused damage in Puerto Rico is consistent with a strong hurricane
passing south of the island (Boose et al. 2003). 85 kt retained at landfall
in Cuba - agreeing with assessment by Perez (2000). Changes made to the track
near Cuba are consistent with modifications suggested by Perez (2000). A
central pressure of 994 mb (21Z on the 24th) suggests winds of 58 kt from the
southern wind-pressure relationship - 60 kt utilized. Central pressure of
985 mb (11Z on the 25th) suggests winds of 71 kt from the southern wind-
pressure relationship - 80 kt used due to observed winds in Key West. A
peripheral pressure of 986 mb (07Z on the 27th) suggests winds of at least
68 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 80 kt utilized in best
track at 06Z and at landfall in South Carolina. A storm tide of 10' was
observed in Charleston (Partagas and Diaz 1996b). Landfall in southwest
Florida is suggested to be at a windspeed of 90 kt (with an estimated central
pressure of 975 mb) given the intensification from a 60 kt tropical storm (with
994 mb central pressure) over Havana to a 80 kt Category 1 hurricane (with
985 mb central pressure) over Key West. Analysis of historical tropical storms
and hurricanes impacting Georgia and Northeast Florida by Sandrik (2001)
suggests that the hurricane had also impacted Northeast Florida with Category 1
hurricane conditions as it reintensified quickly as it left the Northeast
Florida coast. System regained hurricane intensity again right as it made
oceanfall from North Carolina, as shown in the sustained hurricane force winds
in Cape Henry, Virginia (Roth and Cobb 2001). Hurricane is known as
"San Mateo" for its impacts in Puerto Rico. Hurricane is known as "Huracan
de Sagua la Grande" for its impacts in Cuba.
********************************************************************************
12640 10/01/1894 M=12 4 SNBR= 317 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
12640 10/01/1894 M=12 5 SNBR= 329 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
* *** *
12645 10/01*125 791 35 0*130 795 35 0*135 798 40 0*140 802 40 0
12650 10/02*145 806 45 0*149 809 45 0*154 813 50 0*159 816 55 0
12655 10/03*163 820 60 0*167 823 60 0*172 826 65 0*177 830 70 0
12660 10/04*183 834 75 0*189 838 75 0*195 842 80 0*200 845 85 0
12665 10/05*206 849 90 0*212 853 90 0*217 856 95 0*223 859 95 0
12665 10/05*206 849 90 0*212 853 90 0*217 856 95 0*220 859 95 0
***
12670 10/06*228 862 100 0*234 865 100 0*240 867 105 0*247 869 105 0
12670 10/06*225 862 100 0*230 865 100 0*237 870 105 0*243 875 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
12675 10/07*255 870 105 0*264 870 105 0*271 870 105 0*276 869 105 0
12675 10/07*247 877 105 0*252 881 105 0*257 883 105 0*261 884 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12680 10/08*279 867 105 0*282 864 105 0*286 861 100 0*292 856 95 0
12680 10/08*266 884 105 0*271 884 105 0*277 883 105 0*287 877 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12685 10/09*300 848 90 0*310 836 80 0*322 822 75 0*339 797 70 0
12685 10/09*297 863 105 0*307 847 85 0*317 830 70 0*330 803 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
12690 10/10*355 775 65 0*374 755 65 0*394 740 60 0*420 719 55 0
12690 10/10*352 775 60 0*374 755 65 0*394 740 75 0*420 719 55 0
*** ** **
12695 10/11*448 702 55 0*476 689 50 0*500 673 45 0*520 662 40 0
12695 10/11E448 702 45 0E476 689 45 0E500 673 45 0E520 662 40 0
* ** * ** * *
12700 10/12*537 652 35 0*551 643 35 0*563 635 35 0* 0 0 0 0
12700 10/12E537 652 35 0E551 643 35 0E563 635 35 0* 0 0 0 0
* * *
12705 HR
12705 HRAFL3 GA1 NY1 RI1
**** *** *** ***
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 4. Peripheral pressure of 961 mb (14 UTC on the 8th) suggests winds of
at least 99 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship - 105 kt in
best track used here and at landfall in Florida. Peripheral pressure of 984 mb
(on the 10th) suggests winds of at least 69 kt from the northern wind-
pressure relationship - 75 kt chosen for best track and landfall in
New York/Rhode Island, which is also supported by wind observations at Block
Island, R.I.
********************************************************************************
12710 10/11/1894 M=10 5 SNBR= 318 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
12710 10/11/1894 M=10 6 SNBR= 330 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
12715 10/11*108 577 35 0*113 583 40 0*120 590 40 0*126 597 45 0
12715 10/11*108 577 35 0*113 583 45 0*120 590 55 0*126 597 65 0
** ** **
12720 10/12*132 603 50 0*138 609 55 0*145 615 60 0*152 621 65 0
12720 10/12*132 603 75 0*138 609 85 0*145 615 85 0*149 621 85 0
** ** ** *** **
12725 10/13*159 626 70 0*166 631 75 0*173 636 80 0*180 640 85 0
12725 10/13*154 628 85 0*159 634 85 0*167 640 85 0*175 645 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
12730 10/14*187 644 85 0*194 648 85 0*201 652 85 0*208 656 85 0
12730 10/14*181 649 85 0*187 652 85 0*193 655 85 0*202 658 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12735 10/15*216 659 85 0*224 662 85 0*231 665 85 0*238 667 85 0
12735 10/15*209 660 85 0*217 662 85 0*225 665 85 0*231 665 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
12740 10/16*244 668 85 0*251 669 85 0*258 669 85 0*266 668 85 0
12740 10/16*237 666 95 0*243 666 105 0*250 667 115 0*261 667 115 931
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12745 10/17*274 666 85 0*282 663 85 0*290 657 85 0*298 650 85 0
12745 10/17*274 666 115 0*282 663 115 0*290 657 110 0*300 647 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
12750 10/18*305 641 85 0*312 631 85 0*320 620 85 0*329 608 85 0
12750 10/18*311 632 100 0*323 617 95 0*333 603 90 0*341 593 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
12755 10/19*340 595 85 0*351 582 85 0*360 570 85 0*367 563 80 0
12755 10/19*348 584 85 0*354 577 85 0*360 570 85 0*367 563 80 0
*** *** *** ***
12760 10/20*373 558 80 0*377 555 75 0*380 552 70 0*384 548 70 0
12765 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 5. Winds increased from the 11th to the 13th based upon destruction
in St. Lucia. Central pressure of 931 mb (21Z on the 16th) suggests winds of
116 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 115 kt chosen for
best track. Winds increased from the 16th to the 18th accordingly. Full
lifecycle of this hurricane is not known, due to lack of information about
its decay after the 20th.
********************************************************************************
12770 10/21/1894 M=11 6 SNBR= 319 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
12770 10/21/1894 M=11 7 SNBR= 331 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
12775 10/21* 0 0 0 0*210 603 35 0*215 610 40 0*218 617 40 0
12780 10/22*221 624 45 0*224 632 45 0*227 640 50 0*228 649 50 0
12785 10/23*229 659 55 0*232 670 60 0*235 681 65 0*241 695 65 0
12790 10/24*247 711 70 0*254 728 75 0*261 740 75 0*268 745 80 0
12790 10/24*245 706 70 0*249 718 75 0*255 730 75 0*258 735 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12795 10/25*274 746 85 0*281 744 85 0*288 741 85 0*296 737 85 0
12795 10/25*262 742 85 0*266 743 85 0*270 740 85 0*280 726 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12800 10/26*305 732 85 0*317 724 85 0*331 710 85 0*351 689 85 0
12800 10/26*290 710 85 0*300 695 85 0*310 680 85 0*329 654 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12805 10/27*378 662 85 0*403 632 85 0*421 600 85 0*433 563 85 0
12805 10/27*349 624 85 0*371 594 85 0*390 570 85 0*411 544 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12810 10/28*443 522 85 0*451 484 85 0*458 458 85 0*464 441 85 0
12810 10/28*432 515 90 0*447 487 90 0*458 458 95 0*464 441 95 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** ** **
12815 10/29*470 426 85 0*476 413 85 0*481 400 85 0*486 388 85 0
12815 10/29*470 426 95 955*476 413 90 0E481 400 85 0E486 388 85 0
** *** ** * *
12820 10/30*490 376 85 0*494 363 80 0*499 350 80 0*505 334 75 0
12820 10/30E490 376 85 0E494 363 80 0E499 350 80 0E505 334 75 0
* * * *
12825 10/31*513 315 70 0*521 293 65 0*530 270 65 0* 0 0 0 0
12825 10/31E513 315 70 0E521 293 65 0E530 270 65 0* 0 0 0 0
* * *
12830 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 6.
These track changes are found to be reasonable. Peripheral pressure (possible
central pressure) of 975 mb on the 28th suggests winds of at least 78 kt from
the northern wind-pressure relationship - winds kept at 85 kt in best track.
A possible central pressure of 955 mb on the 29th suggests winds of at least
93 kt - 95 kt chosen for best track. Winds are increased accordingly on the
28th and 29th.
*******************************************************************************
1894 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) 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) August 27-31, 1894: Gale observations found, but likely was an
extratropical storm.
2) September 16-21, 1894: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
3) October 16-18, 1894: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
*******************************************************************************
12835 08/14/1895 M= 4 1 SNBR= 320 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
12835 08/14/1895 M= 4 1 SNBR= 332 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
12840 08/14* 0 0 0 0*272 913 35 0*276 910 40 0*279 908 45 0
12845 08/15*283 905 45 0*286 903 50 0*289 900 50 0*292 897 50 0
12850 08/16*296 894 50 0*299 891 45 0*302 888 45 0*307 886 40 0
12855 08/17*313 884 40 0*321 882 40 0*330 881 35 0*338 879 30 0
12855 08/17*313 884 35 0*321 882 30 0*330 881 25 0*338 879 25 0
** ** ** **
12860 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Winds reduced after landfall with the
Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) inland wind decay model.
********************************************************************************
12865 08/22/1895 M= 8 2 SNBR= 321 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
12865 08/22/1895 M= 9 2 SNBR= 333 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
* *** *
12870 08/22*134 583 35 0*137 596 40 0*140 607 45 0*143 619 50 0
12875 08/23*145 631 55 0*148 644 55 0*150 658 60 0*153 672 65 0
12880 08/24*155 687 70 0*158 702 75 0*160 717 75 0*162 731 80 0
12880 08/24*155 687 70 0*158 702 75 0*160 717 75 0*164 733 80 0
*** ***
12885 08/25*164 745 80 0*167 758 80 0*170 772 85 0*175 789 85 0
12885 08/25*169 751 80 0*174 770 80 0*180 790 85 0*184 802 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
12890 08/26*184 809 85 0*194 829 85 0*202 845 85 0*209 858 85 0
12890 08/26*188 813 85 0*194 829 85 0*202 845 85 0*209 858 85 0
*** ***
12895 08/27*215 870 85 0*221 880 85 0*226 890 85 0*230 899 85 0
12900 08/28*234 907 85 0*239 916 85 0*243 925 80 0*248 935 80 0
12900 08/28*233 905 85 0*236 914 85 0*240 923 85 0*243 931 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
12905 08/29*252 946 75 0*257 958 70 0*262 970 65 0*266 978 35 0
12905 08/29*245 939 95 0*246 947 95 0*247 955 95 0*248 963 95 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
(30th is new to HURDAT.)
12907 08/30*249 971 95 0*250 979 65 0*251 987 40 0*252 995 30 0
12910 HR
12910 HRATX1
****
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are
found to be reasonable. Perez (2000) analyzed this hurricane as causing
Category 1 conditions in western Cuba, which is consistent with the existing
track and intensity of Category 2 hurricane passing just offshore of the
island. Winds increased to 95 kt (Category 2) until landfall in Mexico, due
to destruction in Mexico described in Ellis (1988). Hurricane analyzed as
causing Category 1 conditions in extreme southern Texas based upon
description in Ellis.
********************************************************************************
12915 09/28/1895 M=10 3 SNBR= 322 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
12915 09/28/1895 M=10 3 SNBR= 334 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
12920 09/28*193 860 35 0*196 866 35 0*199 872 35 0*203 882 35 0
12920 09/28*193 860 35 0*196 866 35 0*199 872 35 0*203 882 30 0
**
12925 09/29*207 890 35 0*212 895 35 0*216 897 40 0*221 897 40 0
12925 09/29*207 890 30 0*212 895 30 0*216 897 40 0*221 897 40 0
** **
12930 09/30*227 895 45 0*232 892 45 0*237 885 50 0*238 871 50 0
12935 10/01*238 858 50 0*238 845 50 0*239 834 50 0*240 825 50 0
12940 10/02*242 815 50 0*245 807 50 0*249 799 50 0*252 792 50 0
12945 10/03*256 786 50 0*262 780 50 0*270 772 50 0*280 762 50 0
12950 10/04*290 751 50 0*301 740 50 0*311 729 50 0*321 719 50 0
12955 10/05*330 710 50 0*340 700 50 0*350 690 50 0*362 678 50 0
12960 10/06*376 664 50 0*392 648 50 0*409 630 50 0*426 611 45 0
12965 10/07*444 590 40 0*463 568 40 0*482 544 40 0* 0 0 0 0
12970 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Winds reduced on the 28th and 29th
due to passage over the Yucatan.
********************************************************************************
12975 10/02/1895 M= 6 4 SNBR= 323 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
12975 10/02/1895 M= 6 4 SNBR= 335 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
12980 10/02*174 829 35 0*177 837 40 0*180 846 45 0*183 855 50 0
12980 10/02*174 829 35 0*177 837 35 0*180 846 35 0*183 855 35 0
** ** **
12985 10/03*186 863 50 0*190 872 45 0*193 880 35 0*196 888 35 0
12985 10/03*186 863 35 0*190 872 35 0*193 880 30 0*196 888 30 0
** ** ** **
12990 10/04*200 895 35 0*203 902 40 0*207 910 45 0*211 919 50 0
12990 10/04*200 895 30 0*203 902 30 0*207 910 35 0*211 919 35 0
** ** ** **
12995 10/05*214 928 50 0*218 938 50 0*222 947 50 0*226 955 50 0
12995 10/05*214 928 35 0*218 938 35 0*222 947 35 0*226 955 35 0
** ** ** **
13000 10/06*232 960 50 0*239 963 50 0*247 965 50 0*259 964 50 0
13000 10/06*232 960 35 0*239 963 35 0*247 965 35 0*259 964 35 0
** ** ** **
13005 10/07*277 956 45 0*299 944 35 0*324 926 30 0* 0 0 0 0
13005 10/07*277 956 35 0*299 944 30 0*324 926 25 0* 0 0 0 0
** ** **
13010 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). No gale force winds (or equivalent
in sea level pressure) were found for this system. Peak winds observed were
only 25-30 kt in Texas and Louisiana. Partagas and Diaz commented that
since the system was not mentioned in _Monthly Weather Review_, it must have
been a "very weak" storm. Thus winds are reduced for lifetime of storm since
available observations indicate that the system was, at best, a minimal
tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
13015 10/12/1895 M=15 5 SNBR= 324 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
13015 10/12/1895 M=15 5 SNBR= 336 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
13020 10/12*120 448 35 0*120 455 40 0*120 465 45 0*120 475 50 0
13020 10/12*120 448 35 0*120 455 35 0*120 465 40 0*120 475 40 0
** ** **
13025 10/13*120 485 55 0*120 494 60 0*120 504 65 0*121 514 70 0
13025 10/13*120 485 45 0*120 494 45 0*120 504 50 0*121 514 50 0
** ** ** **
13030 10/14*122 524 75 0*123 535 80 0*124 546 85 0*125 558 90 0
13030 10/14*122 524 50 0*123 535 50 0*124 546 50 0*125 558 50 0
** ** ** **
13035 10/15*125 570 90 0*126 583 95 0*127 596 95 0*129 610 100 0
13035 10/15*125 570 50 0*126 583 50 0*127 596 50 0*129 610 50 0
** ** ** ***
13040 10/16*131 624 100 0*133 639 105 0*135 653 105 0*136 666 105 0
13040 10/16*131 624 55 0*133 639 60 0*135 653 65 0*136 666 70 0
*** *** *** ***
13045 10/17*138 679 105 0*139 692 105 0*140 704 105 0*141 715 105 0
13045 10/17*138 679 75 0*139 692 80 0*140 704 85 0*141 715 90 0
*** *** *** ***
13050 10/18*142 726 105 0*144 737 105 0*149 747 105 0*156 757 105 0
13050 10/18*143 730 90 0*146 745 90 0*150 760 90 0*153 775 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13055 10/19*163 766 105 0*170 775 105 0*178 783 105 0*185 789 105 0
13055 10/19*157 795 90 0*161 810 90 0*165 815 90 0*171 818 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13060 10/20*193 794 105 0*200 797 105 0*208 799 105 0*215 800 100 0
13060 10/20*177 820 90 0*183 820 90 0*189 820 90 0*195 820 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13065 10/21*223 799 95 0*230 799 90 0*238 797 85 0*245 795 85 0
13065 10/21*201 820 90 0*207 817 90 0*213 813 90 0*222 807 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** ** *** ***
13070 10/22*251 791 85 0*258 787 90 0*264 782 95 0*271 775 95 0
13070 10/22*234 800 85 0*248 792 90 0*262 784 90 0*271 775 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** **
13075 10/23*278 765 100 0*285 752 100 0*292 735 100 0*300 715 105 0
13075 10/23*278 765 90 0*285 752 90 0*292 735 90 0*299 717 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
13080 10/24*309 692 105 0*318 666 105 0*327 638 105 0*339 609 105 0
13080 10/24*304 702 90 0*309 689 90 0*315 670 90 0*327 638 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13085 10/25*350 579 105 0*352 549 105 0*350 515 100 0*347 486 95 0
13085 10/25*342 595 90 0*349 549 90 0*350 515 85 0*347 486 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** **
13090 10/26*344 454 90 0*342 421 65 0*340 388 35 0* 0 0 0 0
13090 10/26*344 454 65 0E342 421 55 0E340 388 45 0* 0 0 0 0
** * ** * **
13095 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are
found to be reasonable. Winds reduced from the 12th to the 15th, since the
observations indicate that the system was, at most, a moderate tropical storm
going through the Lesser Antilles. Perez (2000) documents that this hurricane
made landfall as a Category 2 hurricane in Cuba - winds reduced from the 16th
to the 21st accordingly. A peripheral pressure of 973 mb (at 17Z on the 21st)
suggests winds of at least 86 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship
- 90 kt chosen for best track in agreement with assessment of Category 2 by
Perez. Changes made to the track near Cuba are consistent with modifications
suggested by Perez (2000). Winds reduced from the 22nd to the 26th since
observations indicate that the storm was only a moderate (Category 1 or 2)
hurricane in the Atlantic.
********************************************************************************
13440 10/13/1895 M= 5 6 SNBR= 325 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
13440 10/13/1895 M= 5 6 SNBR= 337 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
13445 10/13* 0 0 0 0*194 937 35 0*200 930 35 0*206 924 35 0
13450 10/14*212 918 35 0*217 911 35 0*222 904 35 0*226 897 35 0
13455 10/15*231 888 35 0*235 880 35 0*239 870 35 0*243 859 35 0
13460 10/16*248 846 35 0*252 832 35 0*256 816 35 0*264 802 30 0
13465 10/17*276 786 25 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
13470 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) introduced no changes from that shown in Neumann
et al. (1999).
*******************************************************************************
1895 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) mentioned two additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out
of HURDAT for the following reasons:
1) September 21, 1895: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) November 1-3, 1895: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
13135 07/04/1896 M= 9 1 SNBR= 326 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
13135 07/04/1896 M= 9 1 SNBR= 338 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
*** *
13140 07/04* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*209 811 35 0*218 820 45 0
13140 07/04* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*209 811 35 0*218 820 40 0
**
13145 07/05*226 828 50 0*234 836 60 0*242 842 75 0*249 847 80 0
13145 07/05*226 828 45 0*234 836 45 0*242 842 55 0*249 847 65 0
** ** ** **
13150 07/06*256 852 85 0*263 856 85 0*270 860 85 0*277 862 85 0
13150 07/06*256 852 75 0*263 856 85 0*270 860 85 0*277 862 85 0
**
13155 07/07*284 862 85 0*290 862 85 0*297 861 80 0*305 861 75 0
13155 07/07*284 865 85 0*290 866 85 0*297 867 85 0*305 864 85 0
*** *** *** ** *** **
13160 07/08*314 860 65 0*326 854 60 0*340 850 55 0*356 847 45 0
13160 07/08*316 853 60 0*324 843 45 0*333 835 35 0*345 829 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
13165 07/09*373 844 40 0*390 842 40 0*406 840 35 0*421 838 35 0
13165 07/09*364 832 30 0*385 840 30 0*406 840 25 0*421 838 25 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** ** **
13170 07/10*436 835 30 0*451 833 30 0*467 830 25 0*483 822 25 0
13170 07/10*436 835 25 0*451 833 25 0*467 830 25 0*483 822 25 0
** **
13175 07/11*500 808 25 0*517 788 25 0*535 765 25 0*553 741 25 0
13180 07/12*571 713 25 0*589 683 25 0*608 649 25 0* 0 0 0 0
13185 HR
13185 HRAFL2
****
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Winds reduced from
the 4th to the 6th since there were no observations in Cuba of a strong
tropical storm or hurricane. Based upon the 72 mph sustained wind out of
the north at Pensacola reported in _Monthly Weather Review_, the Category 2
(85 kt) at landfall originally in HURDAT appears reasonable. Inland decay
model of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over the
Southeast U.S.
********************************************************************************
13190 08/30/1896 M=13 2 SNBR= 327 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
13190 08/30/1896 M=13 2 SNBR= 339 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
13195 08/30* 0 0 0 0*140 596 35 0*145 605 50 0*149 614 65 0
13200 08/31*153 624 80 0*158 633 95 0*163 642 100 0*169 651 105 0
13200 08/31*153 624 80 0*158 633 85 0*163 642 85 0*169 651 85 0
** *** ***
13205 09/01*175 660 105 0*181 669 100 0*186 678 90 0*190 686 85 0
13205 09/01*175 660 85 0*181 669 85 0*186 678 75 0*190 686 80 0
*** *** ** **
13210 09/02*193 692 85 0*197 699 85 0*200 706 85 0*203 714 85 0
13215 09/03*206 722 85 0*209 731 90 0*212 739 95 0*215 747 95 0
13215 09/03*206 722 85 0*209 731 85 0*212 739 85 0*215 747 85 0
** ** **
13220 09/04*218 754 100 0*222 762 100 0*227 768 105 0*233 772 105 0
13220 09/04*218 754 85 0*222 762 85 0*227 768 85 0*233 772 90 0
*** *** *** ***
13225 09/05*239 773 105 0*245 773 105 0*252 772 105 0*259 770 105 0
13225 09/05*239 773 95 0*245 773 100 0*252 772 100 0*259 770 100 0
*** *** *** ***
13230 09/06*265 768 105 0*272 764 105 0*278 758 105 0*285 750 105 0
13230 09/06*265 768 100 0*272 764 100 0*278 758 100 0*285 750 100 0
*** *** *** ***
13235 09/07*291 741 105 0*298 732 105 0*304 723 105 0*313 715 105 0
13235 09/07*291 741 100 956*298 732 100 0*304 723 100 0*313 715 100 0
*** *** *** *** ***
13240 09/08*324 707 105 0*336 700 105 0*346 695 105 0*354 692 105 0
13240 09/08*324 707 100 0*336 700 100 0*346 695 100 0*354 692 100 0
*** *** *** ***
13245 09/09*362 691 105 0*370 691 105 0*378 691 105 0*386 691 105 0
13245 09/09*362 691 100 0*370 691 95 0*378 691 90 0*386 693 85 0
*** *** *** *** ***
13250 09/10*393 692 100 0*400 692 100 0*408 693 95 0*417 694 90 0
13250 09/10*393 697 80 0*400 702 75 0*410 706 70 0*420 707 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
13255 09/11*426 694 85 0*437 695 80 0*448 696 80 0*460 700 75 0
13255 09/11E430 705 50 0E439 701 45 0E448 696 40 0E457 690 40 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** * ** **** *** **
13260 HR
13260 HR RI1 MA1
*** ***
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations to
the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are found to be
reasonable. Boose et al. (2003) analyze the wind-caused damage for this
hurricane at landfall in Puerto Rico as only isolated Fujita-scale F1 damage,
which does not support intensity as a major hurricane landfall. Winds are
reduced accordingly on the 31st and 1st to Category 2 (85 kt) intensity. Perez
(2000 and personal communication) indicate that this hurricane produced only
tropical storm conditions over Cuba during its close trek just offshore the
coast. Thus winds are reduced somewhat on the 3rd through the 5th. A central
pressure of 956 mb at 00Z on the 7th suggests winds of 98 kt from the
subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 100 kt is utilized in the best track.
Winds adjusted from the 5th to the 9th accordingly. Hurricane is determined
from wind observations to be a Category 1 hurricane in New England; winds
adjusted accordingly from the 9th to the 11th. Winds at landfall (Category 1)
and inland agree with assessment by Boose et al. (2001), based upon modeling
of wind-caused damages. Boose et al. (2001) also estimated a RMW of 30 nmi.
Hurricane is known as "San Ramon Nonato III" or "San Gil" for its impacts in
Puerto Rico.
********************************************************************************
13605 09/18/1896 M=11 3 SNBR= 328 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
13605 09/18/1896 M=11 3 SNBR= 340 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
13610 09/18*171 551 35 0*175 565 40 0*178 580 40 0*182 593 45 0
13615 09/19*187 606 50 0*191 618 55 0*196 628 60 0*201 637 65 0
13620 09/20*206 645 70 0*211 653 75 0*216 662 80 0*221 672 85 0
13625 09/21*227 683 85 0*234 694 85 0*241 705 85 0*249 715 85 0
13630 09/22*258 724 85 0*269 733 85 0*280 740 85 0*292 741 85 0
13635 09/23*304 738 85 0*317 727 85 0*330 710 85 0*344 690 85 0
13640 09/24*360 669 85 0*375 647 85 0*389 627 85 0*402 608 85 0
13645 09/25*413 589 85 0*425 570 85 0*438 550 85 0*452 529 85 0
13650 09/26*467 505 85 0*482 479 85 0*497 450 85 0*512 419 85 0
13655 09/27*528 388 85 0*543 357 80 0*558 325 80 0*571 293 75 0
13660 09/28*582 261 70 0*592 229 70 0*600 197 65 0* 0 0 0 0
13665 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) introduced no changes from that shown in Neumann
et al. (1999).
********************************************************************************
13330 09/22/1896 M= 9 4 SNBR= 329 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
13330 09/22/1896 M= 9 4 SNBR= 341 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
*** *
13335 09/22* 0 0 0 0*167 618 35 0*167 628 40 0*167 638 45 0
13335 09/22* 0 0 0 0*167 618 35 0*167 628 35 0*167 638 35 0
** **
13340 09/23*167 647 50 0*168 656 60 0*168 665 65 0*168 673 70 0
13340 09/23*167 647 40 0*168 656 40 0*168 665 45 0*168 673 45 0
** ** ** **
13345 09/24*169 680 80 0*169 687 85 0*170 698 90 0*171 711 95 0
13345 09/24*169 680 50 0*169 687 50 0*170 698 55 0*171 711 55 0
** ** ** **
13350 09/25*171 724 100 0*172 736 100 0*173 749 105 0*174 762 105 0
13350 09/25*171 724 60 0*172 736 60 0*173 749 65 0*174 762 65 0
*** *** *** ***
13355 09/26*177 774 105 0*180 787 105 0*185 800 105 0*191 812 105 0
13355 09/26*177 774 70 0*180 787 75 0*185 800 80 0*188 809 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
13360 09/27*199 822 105 0*207 831 105 0*216 840 105 0*225 848 105 0
13360 09/27*191 819 90 0*194 828 95 0*197 837 100 0*201 842 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13365 09/28*234 854 105 0*244 856 105 0*254 855 100 0*265 850 100 0
13365 09/28*206 849 110 0*214 853 110 0*223 855 110 0*238 853 110 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13370 09/29*279 841 95 0*295 832 90 0*312 824 80 0*338 808 75 0
13370 09/29*253 851 110 0*270 842 110 960*296 829 100 963*322 812 85 973
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** ***
13375 09/30*369 790 65 992*410 775 50 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
13375 09/30*357 792 70 988E395 785 60 987E420 790 50 0* 0 0 0 0
*** *** ** ******* *** ** ******* *** **
13380 HR
13380 HRAFL3DFL3 GA2 SC1 NC1 VA1
******** *** *** *** ***
The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who otherwise made
reasonable small alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
is to use the track analyzed by Sandrik et al. (2001) near the landfall in
the United States. Winds reduced from the 22nd until the 27th since
observations from Partagas and Diaz only support intensification to
hurricane status as it approached Cuba. Perez (2001) analyzes the impacts
of this hurricane as Category 1 in Cuba, consistent with the track chosen
as just offshore the west tip of Cuba as a major hurricane. Sandrik et al.
(2001) analyzed the landfall as a 960 mb hurricane in Florida with a 15 nmi
radius of maximum winds. This central pressure suggests 100 kt from the
Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship. With a smaller than usual RMW
for this central pressure and latitude (22 nmi on average - Vickery et al.
2000) and a rapid forward motion (30 kt at landfall), winds are estimated at
110 kt at landfall. A 963 mb central pressure estimated via Ho's methodology
for 12Z on the 29th suggests 92 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure
relationship - 100 kt chosen due to small RMW and fast speed of motion
although the hurricane is overland. A 973 mb central pressure estimated via
Ho's methodology for 18Z on the 29th suggests winds of 83 kt for maximum
sustained winds, 85 kt is chosen for the best track for the same reasons
above. A 988 mb central pressure estimated for 00Z on the 30th suggests
winds of 65 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship, which is
boosted to 70 kt for the same reasons above. (Note that this was
originally recorded in HURDAT as 992 mb, which was a peripheral pressure
measurement not a central pressure.) Finally, an observed central pressure
(at 04Z on the 30th) of 987 mb occurred as the storm was going extratropical.
********************************************************************************
13385 10/07/1896 M=10 5 SNBR= 330 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
13385 10/07/1896 M=10 5 SNBR= 342 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
*** *
13390 10/07*225 912 35 0*230 902 40 0*234 890 50 0*236 882 60 0
13390 10/07*225 912 35 0*230 902 40 0*234 892 45 0*236 882 50 0
*** ** **
13395 10/08*239 873 70 0*242 863 80 0*248 852 85 0*255 839 85 0
13395 10/08*239 873 50 0*242 863 50 0*248 852 50 0*255 839 50 0
** ** ** **
13400 10/09*262 825 85 0*270 811 80 0*278 800 70 0*286 791 70 0
13400 10/09*262 825 50 0*270 811 40 0*278 800 35 0*286 791 45 0
** ** ** **
13405 10/10*294 782 75 0*302 774 80 0*310 767 80 0*318 760 85 0
13405 10/10*294 782 50 0*302 774 55 0*310 767 60 0*318 760 65 0
** ** ** **
13410 10/11*327 753 85 0*335 747 85 0*343 739 85 0*351 731 85 0
13410 10/11*327 753 75 0*335 747 85 0*343 739 85 0*351 731 85 0
**
13415 10/12*358 723 85 0*366 714 85 0*373 706 85 0*380 698 85 0
13420 10/13*386 689 85 0*393 680 85 0*400 672 85 0*408 664 85 0
13420 10/13*386 689 80 0*393 680 75 0*400 672 70 0*408 664 65 0
** ** ** **
13425 10/14*416 657 85 0*424 649 85 0*432 642 85 0*440 635 85 0
13425 10/14E416 657 60 0E424 649 55 0E432 642 50 0E440 635 45 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
13430 10/15*449 629 80 0*458 622 75 0*467 615 70 0*481 600 65 0
13430 10/15E449 629 40 0E458 622 35 0E467 615 35 0E481 600 35 0
* ** * ** * ** * **
13435 10/16*502 570 55 0*528 528 45 0*557 482 40 0* 0 0 0 0
13435 10/16E502 570 35 0E528 528 35 0E557 482 35 0* 0 0 0 0
* ** * ** * **
13440 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Winds reduced while in Gulf of Mexico
since observations do not support hurricane status there or at landfall
in Florida. Winds reduced from the 13th until the 16th since observations
do not indicate hurricane intensity north of 41N or at landfall in Canada.
Small alteration to the track on the 7th provides a more realistic
translational velocity.
********************************************************************************
13445 10/26/1896 M=15 6 SNBR= 331 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
13445 10/26/1896 M=15 6 SNBR= 343 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
13450 10/26* 0 0 0 0* 87 442 35 0* 87 450 35 0* 88 455 40 0
13455 10/27* 89 460 40 0* 90 466 45 0* 92 474 45 0* 95 483 50 0
13460 10/28* 98 492 55 0*101 501 60 0*105 510 65 0*109 519 65 0
13465 10/29*114 528 70 0*120 537 75 0*126 546 80 0*134 553 85 0
13470 10/30*142 557 85 0*151 559 85 0*161 560 85 0*172 560 85 0
13475 10/31*183 558 85 0*194 555 85 0*204 550 85 0*214 543 85 0
13480 11/01*223 536 85 0*231 529 85 0*239 523 85 0*247 517 85 0
13485 11/02*254 512 85 0*261 506 85 0*267 500 85 0*273 494 85 0
13490 11/03*279 488 85 0*285 481 85 0*291 475 85 0*297 468 85 0
13495 11/04*303 461 85 0*309 454 85 0*315 446 85 0*323 436 85 0
13500 11/05*333 424 85 0*345 411 85 0*356 403 85 0*370 393 85 0
13505 11/06*384 390 85 0*398 397 85 0*404 410 80 0*404 415 80 0
13510 11/07*401 421 80 0*396 426 75 0*390 430 75 0*385 430 75 0
13515 11/08*379 425 70 0*374 417 70 0*370 407 65 0*366 396 60 0
13520 11/09*364 383 55 0*362 367 50 0*360 350 45 0*360 339 35 0
13525 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). The only observation possibly
available for this system is from Bark "Gerald C. Tobay" on Oct. 28th at
21.2N 62.5W where "it came in a whirlwind with rain, thunder and lightning
... lasted only 20 minutes" and caused substantial damage to the ship. As
Partagas and Diaz discussed, this ship was about 800 miles to the northwest
of the hurricane's position on the 28th. So either the observation is
unrelated to the hurricane or the storm was a large system with an outer
rainband (and possible embedded tornado) that impacted the ship. Without
additional data for substantiating changes to HURDAT's original intensity
estimates, no alterations are made to this hurricane.
********************************************************************************
13527 11/27/1896 M= 3 7 SNBR= 344 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
13527 11/27*109 611 35 0*112 613 35 0*115 615 40 0*120 617 40 0
13527 11/28*127 618 45 0*134 619 45 0*140 620 50 0*149 622 50 0
13527 11/29*160 623 50 0*170 624 50 0*180 625 40 0*196 623 35 0
13527 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b) for this newly documented
tropical storm.
*******************************************************************************
1896 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) 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) August 28-29, 1896: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
13530 08/31/1897 M=11 1 SNBR= 332 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
13530 08/31/1897 M=11 1 SNBR= 345 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
13535 08/31* 0 0 0 0*140 240 35 0*140 250 35 0*141 261 35 0
13540 09/01*142 273 35 0*143 284 40 0*145 295 55 0*147 306 65 0
13545 09/02*150 317 70 0*153 328 75 0*156 339 75 0*160 350 80 0
13550 09/03*164 361 80 0*169 372 85 0*175 383 85 0*181 395 85 0
13555 09/04*188 408 85 0*195 422 85 0*203 435 85 0*211 448 85 0
13560 09/05*220 462 85 0*229 475 85 0*239 488 85 0*250 498 85 0
13565 09/06*262 502 85 0*275 502 85 0*286 499 85 0*296 494 85 0
13570 09/07*304 487 85 0*313 480 85 0*322 472 85 0*332 464 85 0
13575 09/08*344 455 85 0*356 443 85 0*370 425 85 0*387 402 85 0
13580 09/09*408 373 85 0*430 345 80 0*448 319 80 0*463 294 75 0
13585 09/10*477 269 65 0*489 244 55 0*499 219 50 0*511 194 50 0
13585 09/10E477 269 65 0E489 244 55 0E499 219 50 0E511 194 50 0
* * * *
13590 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral pressure of 972 mb
apparently close to the eye (11 UTC on the 7th) supports at least 84 kt
from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt retained in the
best track. Extratropical stage is suggested to begin on the 10th, while
north of 45N.
********************************************************************************
13595 09/10/1897 M= 4 2 SNBR= 333 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
13595 09/10/1897 M= 4 2 SNBR= 346 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
13600 09/10* 0 0 0 0*237 800 65 0*240 810 65 0*244 819 65 0
13600 09/10* 0 0 0 0*237 800 50 0*240 810 55 0*244 819 60 0
** ** **
13605 09/11*248 829 65 0*254 836 75 0*260 846 80 0*266 856 85 0
13605 09/11*248 829 65 0*254 836 75 0*260 846 75 0*266 856 75 0
** **
13610 09/12*272 868 85 0*278 879 85 0*284 892 80 0*289 906 75 0
13610 09/12*272 868 75 0*278 879 75 0*283 892 75 0*288 905 75 0
** ** *** ** *** ***
13615 09/13*295 920 70 0*299 936 65 0*304 952 50 0*327 965 40 0
13615 09/13*293 922 75 0*298 941 75 0*303 957 50 0*312 975 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
13620 HR
13620 HRCTX1 LA1
**** ***
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). The hurricane is
lowered to a tropical storm on the 10th, since observations in Key West
do not indicate hurricane force had yet been reached. The hurricane is
downgraded from Category 2 (85 kt) to Category 1 (75 kt) over the Gulf of
Mexico and at landfall in Texas/Louisiana, due to evidence from observed winds,
6 ft of storm tide in Sabine Pass (Partagas and Diaz 1996b) and damage in
Texas/Louisiana. Full lifecycle of this hurricane is not known, due to lack of
information about its genesis.
********************************************************************************
13625 09/20/1897 M= 6 3 SNBR= 334 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
13625 09/20/1897 M= 6 3 SNBR= 347 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
13630 09/20*221 844 40 0*232 842 40 0*243 838 40 0*253 831 40 0
13630 09/20* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*243 838 40 0*253 831 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** **
13635 09/21*263 825 40 0*273 819 40 0*283 814 35 0*293 808 35 0
13635 09/21*263 825 60 0*273 819 50 0*283 814 45 0*293 807 40 0
** ** ** *** **
13640 09/22*303 802 35 0*314 795 40 0*324 789 40 0*333 783 40 0
13640 09/22*303 799 45 0*314 790 50 0*324 783 55 0*333 776 60 0
*** ** *** ** *** ** *** **
13645 09/23*342 777 40 0*349 772 40 0*358 766 40 0*368 759 40 0
13645 09/23*341 769 60 0*348 762 60 0*355 753 60 0*366 746 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
13650 09/24*381 751 40 0*396 740 40 0*412 728 35 0*433 706 30 0
13650 09/24*383 741 60 0*397 736 55 0*410 725 45 0*433 706 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** **
13655 09/25*459 667 30 0*490 612 30 0*525 550 25 0* 0 0 0 0
13660 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are found
to be reasonable. Storm is boosted to a strong tropical storm at landfall
in Florida based upon description of impacts. Storm is boosted to a strong
tropical storm while passing along the Atlantic seaboard, but not enough
evidence was found to support Partagas and Diaz' suggestion to upgrade this
to a hurricane.
********************************************************************************
13661 09/25/1897 M= 5 4 SNBR= 348 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
13662 09/25*196 829 35 0*198 832 35 0*200 835 35 0*203 838 35 0
13663 09/26*205 840 35 0*207 842 35 0*210 845 35 0*214 848 35 0
13664 09/27*219 851 35 0*224 853 35 0*230 855 40 0*238 856 40 0
13665 09/28*247 857 40 0*254 856 40 0*259 855 40 0*263 854 40 0
13666 09/29*266 852 40 0*268 849 40 0*270 845 40 0*272 838 35 0
13667 TS
This newly documented tropical storm is incorporated from Partagas and Diaz
(1996a) without alteration.
********************************************************************************
13665 10/09/1897 M=14 4 SNBR= 335 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
13665 10/09/1897 M=14 5 SNBR= 349 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
13670 10/09* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*124 617 40 0
13675 10/10*125 626 40 0*127 638 40 0*130 649 40 0*132 661 40 0
13680 10/11*134 672 40 0*136 684 40 0*138 696 40 0*140 708 40 0
13685 10/12*141 720 40 0*142 733 40 0*144 745 40 0*146 758 40 0
13690 10/13*148 771 40 0*151 784 40 0*155 796 40 0*160 807 40 0
13695 10/14*166 815 40 0*172 823 40 0*178 829 40 0*184 835 40 0
13695 10/14*163 811 40 0*167 816 40 0*170 820 40 0*173 823 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13700 10/15*189 841 40 0*195 846 40 0*200 850 40 0*205 854 40 0
13700 10/15*176 826 40 0*178 828 40 0*180 830 40 0*183 831 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13705 10/16*210 857 40 0*214 859 40 0*219 860 40 0*225 861 40 0
13705 10/16*184 831 40 0*185 831 40 0*187 830 40 0*190 828 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
13710 10/17*231 860 40 0*236 859 40 0*241 857 40 0*245 854 40 0
13710 10/17*192 825 40 0*194 823 45 0*197 820 50 0*199 816 55 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
13715 10/18*248 851 40 0*251 847 40 0*254 844 40 0*257 841 40 0
13715 10/18*201 811 60 0*203 808 65 0*206 803 70 0*212 796 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
13720 10/19*260 837 40 0*263 834 40 0*266 830 35 0*277 822 35 0
13720 10/19*218 789 70 0*225 782 60 0*233 777 55 0*253 772 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
13725 10/20*299 807 40 0*323 787 40 0*343 765 40 0*358 742 40 0
13725 10/20*275 767 55 0*298 765 55 0*322 763 55 0*346 758 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
13730 10/21*372 718 40 0*383 693 40 0*390 670 40 0*393 651 40 0
13730 10/21*372 744 50 0*388 719 45 0E397 690 40 0E401 663 40 0
*** ** *** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
13735 10/22*396 636 40 0*398 619 40 0*400 595 40 0*401 574 40 0
13735 10/22E399 640 40 0E398 619 40 0E400 595 40 0E401 574 40 0
**** *** * * *
13740 TS
13740 HR
**
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 4.
These track changes are found to be reasonable. Peripheral pressure of
993 mb (on the 18th) suggests winds of at least 59 kt from the southern
wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt used in best track which is consistent
with analysis of a Category 1 landfall in Cuba (Perez 2000). Changes made
to the track near Cuba are consistent with modifications suggested by
Perez (2000). Storm is thus upgraded to a hurricane and winds are
increased accordingly from the 17th until the 21st. The hurricane is known
as "Ciclon de Tunas de Zaza" due to its impacts in Cuba (Perez 2000).
********************************************************************************
13745 10/23/1897 M= 9 5 SNBR= 336 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
13745 10/23/1897 M= 9 6 SNBR= 350 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* *** *
13750 10/23* 0 0 0 0*245 773 50 0*258 769 50 0*275 761 50 0
13755 10/24*291 755 50 0*306 750 50 0*321 745 50 0*335 740 50 0
13760 10/25*347 737 50 0*359 732 55 0*370 741 55 0*367 753 55 0
13760 10/25*347 735 50 0*359 732 55 0*370 741 55 0*367 753 55 0
***
13765 10/26*359 758 50 0*350 754 45 0*348 750 40 0*345 748 40 0
13765 10/26*359 758 50 0*350 754 45 0*347 751 40 0*345 748 40 0
*** ***
13770 10/27*343 744 45 0*340 738 50 0*338 730 50 0*337 721 50 0
13775 10/28*337 712 50 0*336 702 50 0*336 692 50 0*340 681 50 0
13775 10/28*336 712 50 0*336 702 50 0*336 692 50 0*340 681 50 0
***
13780 10/29*348 668 50 0*355 657 50 0*365 647 50 0*372 639 50 0
13780 10/29*348 668 50 0*355 657 50 0E365 647 50 0E372 639 50 0
* *
13785 10/30*378 633 50 0*385 627 50 0*392 620 50 0*400 613 50 0
13785 10/30E378 633 50 0E385 627 50 0E392 620 50 0E400 613 50 0
* * * *
13790 10/31*409 606 50 0*418 598 50 0*426 590 50 0*436 574 50 0
13790 10/31E409 606 50 0E418 598 50 0E426 590 50 0E436 578 50 0
* * * * ***
13795 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 5. Slight
adjustments to track made on the 25th, 26th, 28th and 31st to allow for more
realistic translational velocities. Extratropical stage indicated for portion
of track as it moved toward the northeast north of 36N in late October. Full
lifecycle of this tropical storm is not known, due to lack of information
about its genesis.
*******************************************************************************
1897 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) 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) August 15, 1897: Damage reports in Nicaragua leave it uncertain if
system was a tornado or tropical storm.
*******************************************************************************
13800 08/02/1898 M= 2 1 SNBR= 337 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
13800 08/02/1898 M= 2 1 SNBR= 351 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
13805 08/02*268 792 35 0*274 810 70 0*280 826 65 0*289 838 65 0
13805 08/02*268 792 35 0*274 810 30 0*280 826 35 0*289 838 55 0
** ** **
13810 08/03*298 849 65 0*306 861 60 0*315 872 35 0*320 882 25 0
13810 08/03*298 849 70 0*306 861 50 0*315 872 35 0*320 882 25 0
** **
13815 HR
13815 HRAFL1
****
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Inland decay model of Kaplan and
DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over the Southeast U.S. Category 1
landfall status maintained in Northwest Florida, but available observational
data (i.e., the _Monthly Weather Review_ described it as a "feeble disturbance
near Jupiter" with maximum sustained winds of 32 kt from the east on Aug.
1st) suggests that the system was only a weak tropical storm at its
first landfall in peninsular Florida.
********************************************************************************
13820 08/30/1898 M= 3 2 SNBR= 338 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
13820 08/30/1898 M= 3 2 SNBR= 352 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
13825 08/30* 0 0 0 0*293 791 35 0*301 794 65 0*309 798 80 0
13825 08/30* 0 0 0 0*293 791 35 0*301 794 65 0*309 798 75 0
**
13830 08/31*315 802 85 0*320 807 85 0*324 814 65 990*326 822 60 0
13830 08/31*315 802 75 0*320 807 75 0*324 814 60 *326 822 50 0
** ** ** *** **
13835 09/01*326 831 45 0*327 841 40 0*328 853 35 0*331 866 30 0
13840 HR
13840 HR GA1 SC1
*** ***
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Inland decay model of Kaplan and
DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over the Southeast U.S. A
peripheral pressure (incorrectly listed as a central pressure in original
version of HURDAT) of 990 mb (at 09Z on the 31st) suggests winds of at
least 63 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 75 kt chosen
for best track.
********************************************************************************
13841 09/03/1898 M= 4 3 SNBR= 353 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
13842 09/03* 0 0 0 0*408 421 70 0*420 410 70 0*429 398 70 0
13843 09/04*439 383 70 0*449 369 70 0*460 355 70 0*468 343 70 0
13844 09/05*477 328 70 0*486 314 70 0E495 300 60 0E507 280 50 0
13845 09/06E520 253 45 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
13846 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b) for this newly documented
hurricane.
********************************************************************************
13845 09/05/1898 M=16 3 SNBR= 339 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
13845 09/05/1898 M=16 4 SNBR= 354 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
13850 09/05* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*112 269 35 0*114 290 35 0
13855 09/06*115 310 40 0*116 328 45 0*117 344 55 0*117 358 65 0
13860 09/07*117 372 70 0*118 385 75 0*119 399 80 0*119 414 80 0
13865 09/08*120 430 85 0*120 446 85 0*120 462 85 0*120 481 85 0
13865 09/08*120 430 85 0*120 446 85 0*120 462 85 0*120 477 85 0
***
13870 09/09*120 501 85 0*120 521 85 0*121 537 85 0*121 549 85 0
13870 09/09*120 491 85 0*120 503 85 0*120 515 85 0*120 526 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
13875 09/10*122 559 85 0*123 569 85 0*125 579 85 0*130 595 85 0
13875 09/10*121 541 85 0*122 556 85 0*123 570 85 0*123 580 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
13880 09/11*136 609 85 0*145 620 85 0*153 628 85 0*162 630 85 0
13880 09/11*125 589 95 0*127 598 95 0*130 607 95 0*136 615 95 965
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
13885 09/12*169 632 85 0*177 633 85 0*185 634 85 0*191 635 85 0
13885 09/12*145 622 95 0*157 628 95 0*170 633 95 0*183 635 95 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** **
13890 09/13*197 636 85 0*204 637 85 0*210 639 85 0*217 640 85 0
13890 09/13*197 636 95 0*204 637 95 0*210 639 95 0*217 640 95 0
** ** ** **
13895 09/14*223 642 85 0*229 644 85 0*236 648 85 0*239 649 85 0
13895 09/14*223 642 90 0*229 644 85 0*236 648 85 0*239 649 85 0
**
13900 09/15*243 652 85 0*247 655 85 0*250 658 85 0*254 662 85 0
13905 09/16*258 666 85 0*262 671 85 0*266 675 85 0*272 679 85 0
13910 09/17*281 685 85 0*290 690 85 0*300 693 85 0*309 691 85 0
13915 09/18*319 687 85 0*330 680 85 0*340 672 85 0*352 659 85 0
13920 09/19*366 647 85 0*382 634 80 0*400 620 75 0*422 603 65 0
13925 09/20*451 583 55 0*485 563 45 0*520 541 40 0* 0 0 0 0
13925 09/20E451 583 55 0E485 563 45 0E520 541 40 0* 0 0 0 0
* *
13930 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 3. A central pressure of 965mb (on 16Z on the 11th) suggests winds of
95 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship. Given the estimated
motion of the hurricane and wind reports from St. Vincent, a RMW of 15 nmi is
analyzed which is close to the climatological RMW for that central pressure
and latitude (14 nmi, from Vickery et al. 2000). Thus 95 kt is chosen for
landfall in the Lesser Antilles. Winds are altered from the 8th to the 14th
accordingly.
********************************************************************************
13935 09/12/1898 M=11 4 SNBR= 340 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
13935 09/12/1898 M=11 5 SNBR= 355 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
13940 09/12* 0 0 0 0*129 791 50 0*132 795 50 0*135 797 50 0
13945 09/13*138 799 50 0*141 802 50 0*144 804 50 0*147 807 50 0
13950 09/14*149 809 50 0*152 812 50 0*154 815 50 0*156 818 50 0
13955 09/15*159 821 50 0*161 825 50 0*163 831 50 0*166 840 50 0
13960 09/16*169 851 50 0*172 863 50 0*176 875 50 0*180 887 50 0
13960 09/16*169 851 50 0*172 863 50 0*176 875 50 0*180 887 40 0
**
13965 09/17*185 900 45 0*191 913 40 0*199 924 40 0*208 932 45 0
13965 09/17*185 900 35 0*191 913 40 0*199 924 40 0*208 932 45 0
**
13970 09/18*217 936 45 0*225 938 50 0*234 939 50 0*243 939 50 0
13975 09/19*252 939 50 0*260 938 50 0*269 937 50 0*277 935 50 0
13980 09/20*284 933 50 0*291 930 50 0*298 928 50 0*305 925 45 0
13980 09/20*284 933 50 0*291 930 50 0*298 928 45 0*305 925 40 0
** **
13985 09/21*313 923 40 0*320 920 35 0*327 917 35 0*339 913 35 0
13985 09/21*313 923 35 0*320 920 35 0*327 917 30 0*339 913 30 0
** ** **
13990 09/22*358 910 35 0*380 905 35 0*399 900 35 0* 0 0 0 0
13990 09/22*358 910 30 0*380 905 25 0*399 900 25 0* 0 0 0 0
** ** **
13995 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 4. Inland decay
model of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over Central
America and the Southeast U.S.
********************************************************************************
14055 09/20/1898 M= 9 6 SNBR= 342 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
14055 09/20/1898 M= 9 6 SNBR= 356 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
14060 09/20* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*110 798 50 0*121 806 50 0
14065 09/21*131 813 50 0*140 820 50 0*148 826 50 0*154 831 50 0
14070 09/22*161 835 50 0*167 840 50 0*173 845 50 0*180 851 50 0
14075 09/23*187 857 50 0*194 863 50 0*200 869 50 0*205 875 50 0
14075 09/23*187 857 50 0*194 863 50 0*200 869 50 0*205 875 40 0
**
14080 09/24*210 881 45 0*214 886 40 0*218 892 40 0*222 897 40 0
14080 09/24*210 881 35 0*214 886 35 0*218 892 40 0*222 897 40 0
** **
14085 09/25*225 902 45 0*229 907 50 0*233 912 50 0*237 918 50 0
14090 09/26*241 924 50 0*245 931 50 0*250 937 50 0*255 942 50 0
14095 09/27*261 945 50 0*267 947 50 0*273 948 50 0*279 949 50 0
14100 09/28*286 948 45 0*293 947 40 0*300 945 35 0*309 944 30 0
14100 09/28*286 948 50 0*293 947 50 0*300 945 40 0*309 944 30 0
** ** **
14105 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Inland decay model of Kaplan and
DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over Central America and the
Texas. 50 kt sustained winds maintained until landfall in Texas, rather
than weakening indicated in original HURDAT before reaching the coast.
********************************************************************************
14110 09/25/1898 M=12 7 SNBR= 343 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=9
14110 09/25/1898 M=12 7 SNBR= 357 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=4
*** *
14115 09/25*162 583 35 0*166 587 40 0*171 592 40 0*175 598 45 0
14115 09/25*162 583 35 0*166 587 40 0*171 592 40 0*177 598 45 0
***
14120 09/26*179 605 50 0*183 611 60 0*187 617 65 0*191 623 70 0
14120 09/26*184 608 50 0*191 617 60 0*197 625 65 0*205 634 65 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
14125 09/27*194 630 80 0*197 636 85 0*201 642 90 0*205 648 95 0
14125 09/27*213 643 65 0*219 651 70 0*225 660 75 0*232 670 80 977
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
14130 09/28*210 654 95 0*216 661 95 0*222 667 95 0*228 673 95 0
14130 09/28*237 678 85 0*244 689 90 0*250 700 95 0*254 706 95 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
14135 09/29*234 679 95 0*241 684 95 0*247 690 95 0*254 696 95 0
14135 09/29*258 712 95 0*262 719 95 0*265 725 95 0*268 730 95 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14140 09/30*260 703 95 0*267 710 95 0*273 717 95 0*278 724 95 0
14140 09/30*271 735 95 0*272 739 95 0*275 745 95 0*279 752 95 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14145 10/01*283 732 95 0*287 741 95 0*292 751 95 0*297 763 95 0
14145 10/01*283 759 95 0*287 766 100 0*290 773 105 0*293 780 110 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14150 10/02*302 779 90 0*307 794 90 0*312 808 85 0*317 820 75 0
14150 10/02*296 787 115 0*299 796 115 0*304 806 115 938*311 818 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
14155 10/03*323 831 65 0*329 842 60 0*335 852 55 0*343 861 50 0
14155 10/03*319 831 65 0*327 842 45 0*335 852 35 0*343 861 30 0
*** *** ** ** **
14160 10/04*352 869 45 0*364 875 40 0*376 879 40 0*391 876 35 0
14160 10/04*352 869 30 0*364 875 30 0*376 879 30 0*391 876 30 0
** ** ** **
14165 10/05*410 862 35 0*429 838 30 0*445 808 30 0*456 770 30 0
14165 10/05*410 862 25 0*429 838 25 0*445 808 25 0*456 770 25 0
** ** ** **
14170 10/06*464 720 25 0*468 658 25 0*470 588 25 0*480 528 25 0
14175 HR
14175 HR GA4DFL2
*******
The major change from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), was to incorporate the
findings of Sandrik and Jarvinen (1999). Partagas and Diaz otherwise made
reasonable small alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
A central pressure of 977 mb (on 18Z on the 27th) suggests winds of 81 kt
from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 80 kt used in the best track.
Winds adjusted on the 26th to the 28th accordingly. Sandrik and Jarvinen
(1999) analyzed a 938 mb central pressure at landfall based upon SLOSH runs
with observed storm surge values (16' maximum at Brunswick, Georgia) and an
estimated RMW of 18 n.mi. 938 mb central pressure suggests winds of 112 kt
from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship. A slightly higher value -
115 kt - is chosen at landfall because of the slightly smaller RMW than
would be expected climatologically (Vickery et al. 2000). Inland winds
adjusted downward based upon inland decay model and analysis of observations
from Sandrik (1998).
********************************************************************************
14000 09/20/1898 M= 9 5 SNBR= 341 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14000 09/25/1898 M= 4 8 SNBR= 358 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * * *** *
14005 09/20* 0 0 0 0*155 593 50 0*157 600 50 0*160 607 50 0
14010 09/21*164 614 50 0*167 620 50 0*170 627 50 0*173 633 50 0
14015 09/22*175 639 50 0*178 645 45 0*181 651 40 0*185 659 40 0
14020 09/23*189 669 40 0*193 678 45 0*197 686 50 0*200 692 50 0
14025 09/24*203 698 50 0*207 704 50 0*210 710 50 0*214 716 50 0
(20th through the 24th are omitted. Storm started on the 25th.)
14030 09/25*217 722 50 0*221 728 50 0*225 734 50 0*229 740 50 0
14030 09/25* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*241 830 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14035 09/26*234 747 50 0*239 754 50 0*244 760 50 0*250 765 50 0
14035 09/26*248 814 35 0*254 800 40 0*260 790 40 0*264 782 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14040 09/27*256 768 50 0*262 770 50 0*268 770 50 0*273 768 45 0
14040 09/27*268 775 50 0*272 768 50 0*276 762 50 0*279 758 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14045 09/28*277 764 45 0*281 758 40 0*285 750 35 0*289 740 30 0
14045 09/28*281 755 45 0*283 752 40 0*285 750 35 0*287 748 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** **
14050 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 5.
These dramatic track changes are found to be reasonable. Track altered
slightly on the 28th to provide for a more realistic translational velocity.
********************************************************************************
1898/08 - 2003 REVISION:
14000 09/20/1898 M= 9 5 SNBR= 341 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14000 09/25/1898 M= 4 8 SNBR= 358 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * * *** *
14005 09/20* 0 0 0 0*155 593 50 0*157 600 50 0*160 607 50 0
14010 09/21*164 614 50 0*167 620 50 0*170 627 50 0*173 633 50 0
14015 09/22*175 639 50 0*178 645 45 0*181 651 40 0*185 659 40 0
14020 09/23*189 669 40 0*193 678 45 0*197 686 50 0*200 692 50 0
14025 09/24*203 698 50 0*207 704 50 0*210 710 50 0*214 716 50 0
(20th through the 24th are omitted. Storm started on the 25th.)
14030 09/25*217 722 50 0*221 728 50 0*225 734 50 0*229 740 50 0
14030 09/25* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*241 830 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14035 09/26*234 747 50 0*239 754 50 0*244 760 50 0*250 765 50 0
14035 09/26*248 814 35 0*254 800 40 0*260 790 40 0*264 782 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14040 09/27*256 768 50 0*262 770 50 0*268 770 50 0*273 768 45 0
14040 09/27*268 775 50 0*272 768 50 0*276 762 50 0*279 758 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14045 09/28*277 764 45 0*281 758 40 0*285 750 35 0*289 740 30 0
14045 09/28*281 755 45 0*283 752 40 0*285 750 35 0*287 748 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** **
14050 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 5.
These dramatic track changes are found to be reasonable. Track altered
slightly on the 28th to provide for a more realistic translational velocity.
1898/08 - 2004 REVISION:
14830 09/25/1898 M= 4 8 SNBR= 358 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
14830 09/25/1898 M= 4 8 SNBR= 358 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
*
14835 09/25* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*241 830 35 0
14835 09/25* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*205 845 30 0
*** *** **
14840 09/26*248 814 35 0*254 800 40 0*260 790 40 0*264 782 45 0
14840 09/26*210 840 30 0*217 833 30 0*225 825 30 1008*235 813 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** **** *** *** **
14845 09/27*268 775 50 0*272 768 50 0*276 762 50 0*279 758 45 0
14845 09/27*245 800 35 0*255 790 40 0*265 780 45 0*270 772 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
14850 09/28*281 755 45 0*283 752 40 0*285 750 35 0*287 748 35 0
14850 09/28*275 764 45 0*280 757 40 0*285 750 35 0*287 748 35 0
*** *** *** ***
14855 TS
U.S. Tropical Storm Landfall Data
---------------------------------
#/Date Time Lat Lon Max States
Winds Affected
8-9/26/1898 0600Z 25.1 80.8 40 FL
(Removed from listing)
The NHC Best Track Change Committee requested that additional
research be done into this tropical storm and storm 1898/8:
"1898, Storms #7 and #8: While the series of events that Chris
has gone with matches what was originally stated in the Monthly
Weather Review, the meteorology of this situation troubles me.
Storm #8 is moving northeastward on the northwest side of storm
#7 - a developing major hurricane - and by 28 September the
two systems are only 400-500 n mi apart. Would a northeastward
motion for storm #8 be reasonable under those conditions? Chris
needs to give this situation a closer look."
Upon investigation of this system from the Monthly Weather Review, the
COADS ship database, and coastal station data, this system's track and
intensity record has been substantially altered. However, that there was
a tropical cyclone that moved generally to the northeast in advance of
an intensifying hurricane was confirmed. The relevant ship and station data
are included in the attached spreadsheet.
Ship data on the 25th and early on the 26th indicated a disturbance becoming
organized in the south central Gulf of Mexico/northwestern Caribbean
Sea. A weak vortex moved across western Cuba on the 26th accompanied by
winds of less than gale force. (The 1008 mb pressure minimum recorded
in Havana may have been a central pressure measurement, which suggests
winds of 28 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship. 30 kt
utilized at 12 UTC on the 26th.) Tampa's pressure readings reached a
minimum of 1011 mb at 1930 UTC on the 26th, indicating a closest point of
approach near that time. While no gale force winds (or equivalent in pressure)
were recorded at any time for this system, the combination of coastal and
ship observations do confirm that a closed circulation existed and that
it moved off to the northeast (just off of the southeast coast of Florida)
on the 27th and 28th with a gradual decrease in forward speed. The track
was adjusted for the lifetime of the system. The intensity was reduced to a
tropical depression during its trek across Cuba and ramped back up to the
original tropical storm intensity thereafter. It is possible, however, that
this system never achieved tropical storm status, as no COADS or station
data provide any direct evidence of tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
14251 10/21/1898 M= 3 10 SNBR= 360 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14252 10/21*185 858 35 0*190 856 35 0*195 853 35 0*200 850 35 0
14253 10/22*206 847 40 0*211 843 40 0*218 837 40 0*226 828 40 0
14254 10/23*235 816 35 0*242 804 40 0E250 790 35 0E263 769 35 0
14255 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b) for this newly documented
tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
14255 10/27/1898 M= 9 9 SNBR= 345 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14255 10/27/1898 M= 9 11 SNBR= 361 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ***
14260 10/27* 0 0 0 0*179 612 50 0*177 626 50 0*176 637 50 0
14265 10/28*175 648 50 0*174 659 50 0*174 670 50 0*174 681 50 0
14270 10/29*174 692 50 0*174 703 50 0*174 713 50 0*174 723 50 0
14275 10/30*174 732 50 0*174 741 50 0*174 749 50 0*174 757 50 0
14280 10/31*174 766 50 0*174 774 50 0*174 782 50 0*174 791 50 0
14285 11/01*175 800 50 0*176 808 50 0*177 817 50 0*177 824 50 0
14290 11/02*177 830 50 0*178 836 50 0*178 843 50 0*179 851 50 0
14295 11/03*180 859 50 0*180 868 50 0*181 878 50 0*181 889 45 0
14295 11/03*180 859 50 0*180 868 50 0*181 878 40 0*181 889 35 0
** **
14300 11/04*182 901 40 0*182 913 30 0*182 927 25 0*183 938 20 0
14300 11/04*182 901 30 0*182 913 30 0*182 927 25 0*183 938 20 0
**
14305 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 9. Partagas
and Diaz did indicate substantial doubt that the storm did in fact exist
(since their only documentation of this system comes from Mitchell
[1924], which offers no details on the storm). However, observations
from Rivas, Nicaragua (11.4N, 85.8W) from the December 1898 _Monthly Weather
Review_ do indicate a closed circulation to the north at the time that
this tropical storm would have been by passing that location. Thus this
tropical storm will be kept in the HURDAT database. Inland decay model of
Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over Central America. Full
lifecycle of this tropical storm is not known, due to lack of information about
its genesis stage.
********************************************************************************
1898 - Additional Notes - 2004 ADDITION:
1) The NHC Best Track Change Committee identified a possible new tropical
storm to add into HURDAT for 1898:
"1898 - note possible additional system. Significant rainfall
in Jamaica found in MWR. No wind data, but a pressure is given
of 28.66. (May 23-27)."
Upon investigation of this system in the Monthly Weather Review and from
the COADS ship database, this system - while producing huge amounts of
rainfall in Jamaica and some reports of gusty winds - did not have a
closed circulation and thus was not a tropical cyclone. (The "28.66"
report was actually the rainfall, not pressure, that occurred in one
day at Cinchona Plantation, Jamaica on the 25th.)
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) mentioned two additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out
of HURDAT for the following reasons:
2) September 9-11, 1898: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
3) November 5-7, 1898: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
*******************************************************************************
14306 06/26/1899 M= 2 1 SNBR= 362 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
14307 06/26* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*275 930 35 0*278 936 35 0
14308 06/27*282 942 35 0*288 948 35 0*295 955 30 0*303 962 25 0
14309 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b) for this newly documented
tropical storm. It is noted, however, that the evidence that this was
a tropical cyclone of tropical storm intensity was not completely
conclusive, as no reports of gale force winds (or pressure/damage
equivalent) were obtained.
********************************************************************************
14310 07/31/1899 M= 3 1 SNBR= 346 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
14310 07/28/1899 M= 6 2 SNBR= 363 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
* * *** *
(28th to the 30th are new to HURDAT.)
14311 07/28* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*170 695 70 0*183 708 70 0
14312 07/29*196 723 50 0*205 739 40 0*213 755 40 0*220 768 40 0
14313 07/30*229 781 40 0*241 796 40 0*251 808 35 0*258 817 35 0
14315 07/31* 0 0 0 0*262 846 60 0*270 850 65 0*277 853 70 0
14315 07/31*263 823 45 0*269 830 55 0*275 835 65 0*279 838 75 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** **
14320 08/01*285 852 70 0*290 850 70 0*297 846 65 0*301 844 55 0
14320 08/01*283 841 85 0*288 843 85 0*293 845 85 0*298 848 85 979
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
14325 08/02*305 843 45 0*308 841 40 0*311 839 35 0*313 837 30 0
14325 08/02*304 852 60 0*310 856 45 0*315 860 35 0*323 865 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
14330 HR
14330 HRAFL2
****
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 1.
These dramatic track changes are found to be reasonable. Hurricane status is
indicated at landfall in the Dominican Republic based upon description of
damages in Partagas and Diaz (1996b). A central pressure of 979 mb (on the
1st from Barnes 1998a) suggests winds of 78 kt - 85 kt chosen for best track
because of analysis described in Partagas and Diaz (1996b) that the hurricane
had a smaller than usual size. (For a given central pressure, a hurricane
with a smaller radius of maximum winds will have stronger winds than a
larger RMW hurricane.) Assessment as Category 2 at landfall in
Florida is an upgrade from tropical storm at landfall status indicated in
Neumann et al. (1999). Full lifecycle of this tropical storm is not known,
due to lack of information about its genesis stage.
********************************************************************************
14335 08/03/1899 M=22 2 SNBR= 347 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
14335 08/03/1899 M=33 3 SNBR= 364 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
** * ***
14340 08/03*118 330 35 0*120 347 35 0*121 360 35 0*123 373 35 0
14340 08/03*117 310 35 0*118 324 45 0*120 340 50 0*122 357 55 995
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
14345 08/04*125 385 35 0*128 399 40 0*130 412 45 0*132 426 50 0
14345 08/04*124 374 60 0*126 388 60 0*127 403 60 0*130 420 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14350 08/05*135 440 50 0*137 455 55 0*140 470 60 0*143 487 65 0
14350 08/05*135 440 60 0*137 455 60 0*140 470 60 0*143 487 65 0
** **
14355 08/06*146 506 70 0*148 524 75 0*151 542 80 0*154 558 80 0
14355 08/06*146 506 70 0*148 524 75 0*151 542 80 0*154 558 90 0
**
14360 08/07*157 574 85 0*159 590 85 0*162 605 90 0*165 620 90 0
14360 08/07*157 574 100 0*159 590 110 0*162 605 120 0*165 620 130 930
*** *** *** *** ***
14365 08/08*169 634 90 0*174 647 95 0*178 658 100 940*183 668 100 0
14365 08/08*169 634 130 0*174 648 125 0*180 662 120 940*186 673 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14370 08/09*187 678 100 0*192 687 100 0*196 697 100 0*199 707 105 0
14370 08/09*189 681 105 0*193 689 105 0*197 698 105 0*201 706 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14375 08/10*202 716 105 0*205 726 105 0*208 735 105 0*211 744 105 0
14375 08/10*204 714 105 0*207 722 105 0*210 730 105 0*214 737 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14380 08/11*214 751 105 0*218 758 105 0*222 764 105 0*229 772 105 0
14380 08/11*220 745 105 0*225 753 105 0*230 760 105 0*234 765 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14385 08/12*235 779 105 0*243 784 105 0*250 789 105 0*255 791 105 0
14385 08/12*238 770 105 0*242 774 105 0*245 777 105 0*251 780 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14390 08/13*260 793 105 0*265 795 105 0*270 796 105 0*276 798 105 0
14390 08/13*256 782 105 0*262 784 105 0*270 786 105 0*276 788 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
14395 08/14*283 800 105 0*290 800 105 0*297 800 105 0*303 798 105 0
14395 08/14*283 790 105 0*290 791 105 0*297 790 105 0*303 789 105 0
*** *** *** ***
14400 08/15*308 796 105 0*314 793 105 0*319 789 105 0*322 784 105 0
14400 08/15*309 787 105 0*313 784 105 0*317 780 105 0*322 775 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14405 08/16*325 778 105 0*328 774 105 0*330 770 105 0*338 762 105 0
14405 08/16*326 769 105 0*328 762 105 0*330 755 105 0*333 750 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
14410 08/17*341 758 105 0*345 755 100 0*349 755 95 0*352 758 90 968
14410 08/17*337 746 105 0*341 744 105 0*345 745 105 0*348 750 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14415 08/18*355 761 85 969*359 761 80 0*363 757 80 0*366 751 75 0
14415 08/18*351 757 105 0*357 760 90 0*363 757 80 0*364 755 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** ***
14420 08/19*370 744 75 0*374 737 70 0*378 730 70 0*381 723 65 0
14420 08/19*364 753 75 0*364 750 70 0*365 747 70 0*370 740 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
14425 08/20*385 715 65 0*388 703 65 0*390 688 60 0E391 671 60 0
14425 08/20*377 729 70 0*383 719 70 0*388 707 70 0*393 690 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** **** *** **
14430 08/21E392 653 55 0E391 636 55 0E390 621 55 0E389 606 50 0
14430 08/21*394 673 70 0*395 654 70 0*397 635 70 0*395 613 65 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
14435 08/22E387 591 50 0E384 575 50 0E380 557 50 0E376 538 50 0
14435 08/22E393 589 60 0E391 565 55 0E387 543 50 0E383 529 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
14440 08/23E372 518 50 0E369 500 45 0E365 483 45 0E362 468 45 0
14440 08/23E379 520 50 0E373 509 45 0E367 500 45 0E360 490 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14445 08/24E359 455 45 0E357 440 40 0E357 425 40 0* 0 0 0 0
14445 08/24E354 482 45 0E347 472 40 0E343 460 40 0E342 450 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
(25th through the 4th are new to HURDAT.)
14446 08/25E343 441 40 0E346 433 40 0E353 430 40 0E356 430 40 0
14447 08/26*360 432 40 0*363 433 40 0*365 435 40 0*368 437 40 0
14448 08/27*372 440 40 0*375 442 40 0*377 445 40 0*382 447 40 0
14449 08/28*387 449 40 0*394 450 40 0*400 450 40 0*403 447 40 0
14450 08/29*406 441 40 0*406 435 40 0*405 430 40 0*405 427 40 0
14451 08/30*405 423 40 0*405 419 40 0*403 415 40 0*402 412 40 0
14452 08/31*401 409 40 0*400 405 40 0*400 400 40 0*399 393 40 0
14453 09/01*399 387 40 0*399 379 40 0*400 370 40 0*399 357 40 0
14454 09/02*397 347 45 0*395 333 50 0*390 320 55 0*383 311 60 0
14455 09/03*379 305 65 0*375 296 70 0*373 287 70 0*378 275 65 0
14456 09/04E390 255 60 0E415 225 55 0E450 185 50 0E490 155 45 0
14450 HR NC3
The only major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b) are to extend the track
through the 4th as an extratropical storm based upon available ship
observations and to reposition the hurricane slightly more offshore Florida
to account for relatively weak winds along the coast despite having a strong
hurricane offshore. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable though
large alterations to the track that shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally
storm number 2. Central pressure of 995 mb (18Z on the 3rd) suggests winds of
56 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 55 kt utilized in best
track. Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 3rd to the 5th. A central
pressure of 930 mb (on the 7th) suggests winds of 128 kt from the southern
wind-pressure relationship - 130 kt utilized in best track. Winds are
adjusted accordingly on the 6th to the 8th. A central pressure of 940 mb
(around 12Z on the 8th) suggests winds of 119 kt from the southern wind-
pressure relationship - 120 kt used in best track. This agrees with the
assessment of Boose et al. (2003) in their wind-caused damage estimates of
extensive Fujita-scale F3 damage from this hurricane. The 968 and 969 mb
central pressures originally listed in HURDAT are determined to be peripheral
pressures (though they do suggest winds of at least 83 kt from the northern
wind-pressure relationship) - 105 kt retained in best track up to landfall in
North Carolina. Landfall as a Category 3 (~105 kt) supported by peripheral
pressure and wind reports along with extensive wind and surge damage reported
in Barnes (1998b). Assessment as Category 3 retains that indicated in the
U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT/Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999).
Peripheral pressure of 983 mb (at 12Z on the 3rd) suggests winds of at least
70 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship - 75 kt utilized in best
track. The hurricane is known as "San Ciriaco" for its impact in Puerto
Rico.
********************************************************************************
14455 08/29/1899 M=11 3 SNBR= 348 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14455 08/29/1899 M=11 4 SNBR= 364 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
14460 08/29* 0 0 0 0*150 582 60 0*150 585 60 0*150 598 60 0
14460 08/29* 0 0 0 0*168 573 60 0*168 585 60 0*168 597 60 0
*** *** *** *** ***
14465 08/30*150 611 65 0*151 624 70 0*153 637 70 0*156 654 70 0
14465 08/30*168 608 65 0*168 619 70 0*167 630 70 0*166 641 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14470 08/31*159 671 70 0*164 688 70 0*169 704 70 0*172 712 70 0
14470 08/31*166 654 70 0*166 667 70 0*165 680 70 0*166 690 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14475 09/01*177 720 70 0*182 726 70 0*189 731 70 0*195 733 70 0
14475 09/01*167 700 70 0*170 710 70 0*175 720 70 0*185 722 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
14480 09/02*202 735 70 0*209 735 75 0*216 734 80 0*225 731 85 0
14480 09/02*192 721 40 0*200 719 50 0*207 717 55 0*217 712 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14485 09/03*233 728 90 0*242 724 90 0*250 720 95 0*264 712 100 0
14485 09/03*226 708 65 0*236 703 75 0*245 700 85 0*257 693 90 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ***
14490 09/04*278 703 105 0*291 693 105 0*304 683 105 0*315 671 105 0
14490 09/04*270 687 90 0*282 681 90 0*295 675 85 0*316 660 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14495 09/05*327 657 105 0*339 640 100 0E350 623 95 0E359 604 90 0
14495 09/05*333 639 75 0*345 617 65 0E355 595 60 0E361 583 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ***
14500 09/06E366 583 90 0E372 562 85 0E380 544 85 0E389 530 85 0
14500 09/06E366 571 60 0E372 558 60 0E380 544 60 0E389 530 60 0
*** ** *** ** ** **
14505 09/07E398 517 75 0E408 507 70 0E418 498 60 0E429 490 55 0
14505 09/07E398 517 60 0E408 507 60 0E418 498 60 0E429 490 55 0
** **
14510 09/08E441 482 50 0E454 476 45 0E467 471 40 0E481 470 40 0
14515 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and moderate changes to the intensity shown in
Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 3. Available observations
of gale force or greater winds (or equivalent in sea level pressure) are as
follows: 60 kt S at 12 UTC on Aug. 31 from a ship at 15.5N, 67W; 45 kt SW
on Aug. 31 at San Juan; 50 kt SE at 12 UTC on Sep. 3 from a ship at 25N,
67.5W; 70 kt on Sep. 3 from the ship "Kilpatrick" at 25N, 68.6W; 40 kt NE
at 12 UTC on Sep. 4 from a ship at 30N, 69W; 50 kt SSE at 12 UTC on Sep. 4
from a ship at 30N, 63.7W; "winds of hurricane force blew over Bermuda in a
12 hours storm" on Sep. 4. Winds unchanged along track through Caribbean as
available observations from ships and coastal stations are consistent with a
strong tropical storm/weak hurricane. Winds reduced while storm transited
over Hispanola from Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) inland decay model, modified
to account for mountainous terrain. Peak winds reduced from Category 3
(105 kt) to Category 2 (90 kt), since data from ship reports and observations
in Bermuda supports a weaker hurricane. Winds reduced accordingly from the
3rd to the 7th.
********************************************************************************
14520 09/03/1899 M=13 4 SNBR= 349 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14520 09/03/1899 M=13 5 SNBR= 366 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
14525 09/03*132 384 35 0*132 402 35 0*134 420 35 0*138 440 35 0
14530 09/04*142 458 35 0*145 473 35 0*147 483 40 0*149 490 45 0
14535 09/05*150 497 50 0*151 504 55 0*153 511 60 0*155 519 65 0
14540 09/06*158 527 70 0*160 534 70 0*162 542 70 0*164 549 70 0
14545 09/07*165 554 70 0*166 560 75 0*168 568 80 0*170 577 85 0
14550 09/08*173 587 85 0*177 596 90 0*180 606 95 0*183 615 100 0
14550 09/08*172 586 85 0*173 595 90 0*175 605 95 0*180 617 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14555 09/09*187 625 100 0*192 634 105 0*198 643 105 0*206 654 105 0
14555 09/09*184 626 100 0*189 636 105 0*195 645 105 0*200 657 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14560 09/10*216 667 105 0*225 680 105 0*234 691 105 0*243 698 105 0
14560 09/10*205 668 105 0*211 677 105 0*217 687 105 0*225 694 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14565 09/11*251 701 105 0*260 701 105 0*268 699 100 0*277 694 100 0
14565 09/11*232 696 105 0*242 698 105 0*250 700 105 0*259 698 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14570 09/12*285 688 95 0*294 680 90 0*302 672 90 0*309 663 85 0
14570 09/12*269 696 105 0*278 690 105 0*287 683 105 0*298 673 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14575 09/13*315 654 85 0*323 643 85 0*333 632 85 0*348 619 85 0
14575 09/13*310 660 105 0*322 646 105 939*335 632 105 0*349 619 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14580 09/14*364 604 80 0*381 589 80 0*398 575 70 0*414 563 65 0
14580 09/14*365 605 95 0*385 588 90 0*405 570 85 0*431 551 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14585 09/15*431 552 55 0E447 541 50 0E464 532 45 0E484 522 40 0
14585 09/15*458 535 75 0E489 525 60 0E520 525 50 0E550 530 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
14590 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 4. A central pressure of 939 mb (07Z on the 13th) suggests winds of
111 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship. Wind reports from
Bermuda allow an estimation of 30 nmi for the RMW, which is larger than usual
(~21 nmi) for this central pressure and latitude (Vickery et al. 2000). Thus
105 kt chosen for best track during track near Bermuda and winds are adjusted
accordingly from the 11th to the 13th. Winds increased on the 14th and 15th
based upon ship observations and damage reports in Canada. Extratropical
transition delayed, as per Partagas and Diaz' suggestion, until after landfall
in Canada.
********************************************************************************
14595 10/02/1899 M= 7 5 SNBR= 350 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
14595 10/02/1899 M= 7 6 SNBR= 367 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
14600 10/02* 0 0 0 0*200 841 35 0*205 847 35 0*211 852 35 0
14600 10/02* 0 0 0 0*200 841 35 0*205 847 35 0*211 851 40 0
*** **
14605 10/03*217 856 35 0*223 860 35 0*230 862 35 0*238 863 35 0
14605 10/03*218 855 40 0*227 860 40 0*237 865 45 0*245 868 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14610 10/04*246 863 35 0*254 862 40 0*262 860 40 0*268 857 35 0
14610 10/04*255 871 50 0*265 872 50 0*273 870 50 0*278 860 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14615 10/05*273 852 35 0*280 843 40 0*290 830 40 0*305 812 40 0
14615 10/05*278 848 50 0*278 835 50 0*280 825 40 0*293 811 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
14620 10/06*322 792 40 0*339 769 40 0E357 745 35 0E374 720 35 0
14620 10/06*309 796 40 0E324 783 40 0E344 763 35 0E371 727 35 0
*** *** **** *** *** *** *** ***
14625 10/07E391 695 35 0E408 669 35 0E426 642 35 0E445 614 35 0
14625 10/07E403 688 35 0E436 648 35 0E463 613 35 0E493 575 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14630 10/08E468 585 35 0E492 556 35 0E518 525 35 0E543 502 35 0
14630 10/08E522 537 35 0E550 499 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
*** *** *** *** **** *** ** **** *** **
14635 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 5. Winds increased slightly based upon ship reports and land stations
for the 2nd to the 5th.
********************************************************************************
14636 10/10/1899 M= 5 7 SNBR= 368 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14637 10/10* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*100 350 40 0*107 357 40 0
14638 10/11*113 363 40 0*119 369 40 0*125 375 40 0*132 382 40 0
14639 10/12*138 388 40 0*144 394 40 0*150 400 40 0*157 405 40 0
14640 10/13*163 410 40 0*169 414 40 0*175 418 40 0*183 423 40 0
14641 10/14*193 427 40 0*204 431 40 0*215 435 40 0* 0 0 0 0
14642 TS
Evidence provided in the "Special statement" section of Partagas and Diaz
(1996b) suggests strongly that a tropical storm existed in the eastern
Atlantic from at least the 10th through the 14th of October. Thus a best
track was created for this newly documented tropical storm. Based upon
two ships showing gale force winds on the 10th and 14th, respectively,
12Z positions of 12.5N 37.5W (10th) and 21.5N 43.5W (14th) were
estimated. A smooth track was created based upon these two positions.
Full lifecycle of this tropical storm is not known, due to lack of
information about its genesis and decay stages.
********************************************************************************
14640 10/23/1899 M=13 6 SNBR= 351 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
14640 10/26/1899 M=10 8 SNBR= 369 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
** ** * *** *
14645 10/23* 0 0 0 0*117 803 50 0*120 804 50 0*123 805 50 0
14650 10/24*125 806 55 0*128 807 60 0*130 808 65 0*133 809 70 0
14655 10/25*135 810 70 0*138 810 65 0*140 811 65 0*142 811 70 0
(The 23rd through the 25th are deleted from the revised HURDAT.)
14660 10/26*145 812 70 0*148 813 70 0*152 813 70 0*157 814 70 0
14660 10/26*162 788 35 0*166 789 35 0*170 790 35 0*174 791 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14665 10/27*163 816 70 0*169 817 70 0*175 818 70 0*181 818 70 0
14665 10/27*178 792 40 0*182 793 40 0*185 794 45 0*188 795 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14670 10/28*187 817 70 0*193 814 70 0*199 811 70 0*205 807 70 0
14670 10/28*191 796 55 0*194 797 60 0*200 798 65 0*206 797 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
14675 10/29*213 803 70 0*221 798 70 0*229 794 70 0*243 789 70 0
14675 10/29*213 796 70 0*221 795 70 0*229 794 60 0*239 790 65 0
*** *** ** *** ***
14680 10/30*255 786 75 0*267 783 80 0*280 780 85 0*293 780 85 0
14680 10/30*255 786 75 0*267 783 85 0*280 780 95 0*293 783 95 0
** ** *** **
14685 10/31*305 783 85 0*319 788 85 0*332 789 80 0*350 784 70 0
14685 10/31*310 786 95 0*327 789 95 0*345 790 75 0*362 783 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
14690 11/01E375 773 55 0E401 758 50 0E422 739 45 0E438 717 45 0
14690 11/01E381 771 50 0E401 758 50 0E422 739 45 0E438 717 45 0
*** *** **
14695 11/02E453 689 40 0E466 654 40 0E476 612 40 0E484 559 40 0
14700 11/03E489 497 45 0E495 435 50 0E503 380 50 0E513 332 50 0
14705 11/04E524 285 45 0E536 242 40 0E550 202 40 0E578 175 40 0
14710 HR SC1 NC1
14710 HR SC2 NC2
*** ***
One major change from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who otherwise made large,
but reasonable alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 6. After reconsideration of the available
observations, it was analyzed that the system did begin on the 26th, but
likely south of Jamaica instead of east. Track is adjusted accordingly on
the 26th through the 28th. With deletion of the 23rd through the 25th and
a new genesis point on the 26th south of Hispanola, winds are reduced from
the 26th to the 28th to reflect a reasonable intensification rate. A
peripheral pressure of 996 mb (on 05Z on the 29th) suggests winds of at
least 55 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt chosen for
best track which is consistent with available ship observations and
re-analysis work of Perez (2000) that suggests landfall in Cuba as a
Category 1 hurricane. Winds reduced slightly on the 29th after Cuban
landfall. Ho (1989) estimated a central pressure of 955 mb at landfall in the
Carolinas, based upon a peripheral pressure measurement of 979 mb (10Z on the
31st), an estimated RMW of 35 nmi, and an environmental pressure of 1012 mb.
This central pressure suggests winds of 99 kt from the subtropical wind-
pressure relationship. Given the larger than climatology (~25 nmi from
Vickery et al. 2000) RMW, 95 kt chosen in the best track for landfall in the
Carolinas. Winds increased accordingly on the 30th and 31st. Landfall as a
Category 2 in the Carolinas (95 kt) is lowered from the Category 3 shown in
Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999), but increased from the Category 1 in the
U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT. Inland decay model of Kaplan and
DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over the middle Atlantic states.
A storm tide of 8' was observed in Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina
(Ho 1989) and 9' was observed in Norfolk, Virginia (Roth and Cobb 2001).
********************************************************************************
14711 11/07/1899 M= 4 9 SNBR= 370 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14712 11/07*117 783 35 0*122 779 35 0*127 775 40 0*136 772 40 0
14713 11/08*146 768 45 0*159 765 50 0*170 765 55 0*180 765 55 0
14714 11/09*189 766 45 0*198 767 45 0*207 767 35 0*225 761 35 0
14715 11/10*244 748 30 0*260 733 30 0*275 713 30 0*284 695 30 0
14716 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b) for this newly documented
tropical storm - storm number 8 in Partagas and Diaz.
********************************************************************************
1899 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) mentioned three additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team decided that there was
enough information to include the third system as a new tropical storm
into HURDAT. (See storm 7, 1899.) The re-analysis team agreed to leave
the first two out of HURDAT for the following reasons:
1) September 24-26, 1899: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) October 7-9, 1899: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
*******************************************************************************
14715 08/27/1900 M=20 1 SNBR= 352 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=4
14715 08/27/1900 M=20 1 SNBR= 371 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=4
***
14720 08/27*160 435 35 0*160 448 35 0*162 458 35 0*162 470 35 0
14720 08/27*150 421 35 0*152 434 35 0*153 447 35 0*154 456 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14725 08/28*163 482 35 0*163 494 35 0*164 505 35 0*165 516 35 0
14725 08/28*156 466 35 0*158 479 35 0*160 491 35 0*161 503 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14730 08/29*165 527 35 0*166 537 35 0*167 548 40 0*168 559 40 0
14730 08/29*163 514 35 0*164 524 35 0*165 537 40 0*166 551 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14735 08/30*168 570 40 0*169 581 40 0*170 592 45 0*171 605 45 0
14735 08/30*168 566 40 0*169 580 40 0*170 593 45 0*170 606 45 0
*** *** *** *** ***
14740 08/31*172 620 45 0*174 635 45 0*175 647 45 0*176 657 45 0
14740 08/31*171 619 45 0*172 633 45 0*173 647 45 0*174 656 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14745 09/01*178 668 45 0*179 678 45 0*181 688 45 0*183 699 40 0
14745 09/01*175 664 45 0*176 674 45 0*177 683 45 0*180 692 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14750 09/02*186 709 40 0*189 720 35 0*192 730 35 0*194 740 35 0
14750 09/02*183 703 40 0*187 713 35 0*190 723 35 0*193 732 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14755 09/03*195 748 35 0*196 757 35 0*198 765 35 0*202 773 35 0
14755 09/03*195 741 35 0*197 750 35 0*200 760 35 0*203 766 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14760 09/04*206 782 35 0*210 790 35 0*215 797 35 0*220 803 40 0
14760 09/04*206 772 35 0*210 777 35 0*213 783 35 0*216 789 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** **
14765 09/05*225 808 50 0*230 813 55 0*235 817 60 0*240 823 80 974
14765 09/05*220 795 35 0*224 801 35 0*230 807 45 0*235 815 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
14770 09/06*246 829 85 0*251 835 90 0*255 841 95 0*258 853 100 0
14770 09/06*241 823 60 0*248 832 65 0*255 841 75 0*261 852 85 974
*** *** ** *** *** ** ** *** *** *** ***
14775 09/07*260 865 105 0*262 874 105 0*264 887 110 0*266 897 110 0
14775 09/07*265 862 95 0*268 874 105 0*270 887 115 0*272 897 125 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14780 09/08*269 906 115 0*273 915 115 0*278 924 115 0*284 935 115 0
14780 09/08*274 906 125 0*276 915 125 0*278 924 125 0*282 935 125 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14785 09/09*291 946 115 964*300 958 65 0*310 969 50 0*322 976 45 0
14785 09/09*289 947 125 936*298 959 90 0*310 969 65 0*322 976 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** ** **
14790 09/10*334 978 40 0*347 978 40 0*360 976 35 0*374 973 35 0
14790 09/10*334 978 45 0*347 978 40 0*360 976 35 0*374 973 30 0
** **
14795 09/11*388 965 35 0*402 951 35 0E415 924 35 0E426 886 35 0
14795 09/11*388 965 30 0*402 951 30 0E415 924 40 0E426 886 50 0
** ** ** **
14800 09/12E434 842 40 0E443 794 40 0E452 745 40 0E463 693 40 0
14800 09/12E434 842 55 0E443 794 60 0E452 745 65 0E463 693 65 0
** ** ** **
14805 09/13E475 640 45 0E486 587 45 0E497 539 45 0E506 498 45 0
14805 09/13E475 640 65 0E486 587 65 0E497 539 65 0E506 498 60 0
** ** ** **
14810 09/14E514 462 45 0E521 430 45 0E530 400 45 0E541 372 45 0
14810 09/14E514 462 55 0E521 430 50 0E530 400 45 0E541 372 45 0
** **
14815 09/15E553 346 45 0E567 322 40 0E582 300 40 0E600 280 35 0
14820 HRCTX4
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral pressure
of 996 mb (at 23Z on the 5th) suggests winds of at least 53 kt from the
Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship - 60 kt chosen for best track.
The 974 mb central pressure originally listed as occurring at 18Z on the
5th actually occurred at 19Z on the 6th. This central pressure suggests
winds of 84 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt
chosen for best track. Winds adjusted on the 5th to the 7th based on
these pressure reports. Winds maintained at 35 kt during the 4th and 5th
while traversing over Cuba based upon reports of no more than minimum
gale force winds over land. The 964 mb pressure listed as a central
pressure (at 00Z on the 9th) is actually a peripheral pressure. Ho et al.
(1987) utilized this information to analyze this hurricane as a 936 mb
hurricane at landfall in Texas with a 14 nmi RMW. This value is close to
the 931 mb central pressure estimated in Jarrell et al. (1992) at landfall,
which is from an estimate by Connor (1956). A 936 mb central pressure
suggests winds of 123 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship.
Given the slightly smaller than climatological RMW (Vickery et al. 2000,
~18 nmi), maximum sustained winds at landfall are estimated at 125 kt. This
is consistent with the assessment of Category 4 at landfall from Neumann
et al. (1999) in their Table 6/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT.
Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 7th through the 9th. A storm tide of
20' in Galveston is reported in Partagas and Diaz (1995b). Inland decay
model of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over the
central U.S. Intensities increased from the 11th to the 14th based upon
observations of strong winds during extratropical phase in the northern
United States and Canada (Partagas and Diaz 1996b).
********************************************************************************
14950 09/13/1900 M= 6 4 SNBR= 355 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14950 09/07/1900 M=13 2 SNBR= 372 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** * ***
(7th to the 12th are new to HURDAT.)
14951 09/07*145 280 35 0*147 295 40 0*150 310 45 0*152 323 50 0
14952 09/08*153 336 55 0*154 348 60 0*155 360 60 0*157 373 60 0
14953 09/09*158 386 60 0*159 398 60 0*160 410 60 0*162 423 60 0
14954 09/10*163 436 60 0*164 448 60 0*165 460 60 0*167 472 60 0
14955 09/11*168 483 60 0*169 494 60 0*170 505 60 0*172 517 60 0
14956 09/12*173 528 60 0*174 539 60 0*175 550 60 0*177 561 60 0
14955 09/13*185 549 60 0*187 559 60 0*190 570 65 0*193 579 70 0
14955 09/13*180 572 60 0*185 583 60 0*190 593 65 0*195 600 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14960 09/14*197 587 75 0*202 596 80 0*206 606 80 0*210 615 85 0
14960 09/14*200 606 75 0*205 613 80 0*210 620 80 0*214 625 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14965 09/15*215 624 85 0*221 632 85 0*227 640 85 0*234 647 85 0
14965 09/15*218 631 85 0*222 635 85 0*227 640 85 0*234 647 85 0
*** *** *** ***
14970 09/16*242 652 90 0*251 655 95 0*260 658 100 0*270 659 105 0
14970 09/16*238 650 90 0*243 653 95 0*250 655 100 0*260 657 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14975 09/17*280 657 105 0*290 652 100 0*300 645 95 0*310 635 85 0
14975 09/17*271 656 105 0*282 654 105 0*293 650 100 0*311 641 95 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
14980 09/18*321 620 75 0*331 601 65 0*342 580 50 0*350 560 35 0
14980 09/18*332 626 85 0*351 604 75 0*365 580 65 0*380 560 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** *** **
(19th new to HURDAT.)
14982 09/19*397 533 35 0*415 498 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
14985 HR
The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1996b) is to extend the track
back to the 7th based upon ship observations. Partagas and Diaz otherwise
made reasonable small alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 4. Winds are increased on the 17th and 18th to
account for observations in Bermuda on weak (west) side of hurricane.
********************************************************************************
14825 09/09/1900 M=15 2 SNBR= 353 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14825 09/08/1900 M=16 3 SNBR= 373 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** * ***
(8th not previously in HURDAT.)
14828 09/08* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*100 185 40 0*103 194 45 0
14830 09/09* 0 0 0 0*123 223 60 0*128 232 60 0*131 240 65 0
14830 09/09*106 203 50 0*109 212 55 0*112 221 60 0*116 230 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
14835 09/10*133 248 70 0*134 255 70 0*136 263 70 0*137 270 70 0
14835 09/10*120 239 70 0*125 248 70 0*130 257 70 0*135 263 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14840 09/11*138 277 70 0*140 283 70 0*141 290 75 0*142 298 80 0
14840 09/11*140 270 70 0*145 277 70 0*150 283 75 0*155 291 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14845 09/12*144 308 85 0*147 318 85 0*150 327 85 0*158 334 85 0
14845 09/12*159 299 85 0*164 306 85 0*171 313 85 0*186 320 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14850 09/13*173 342 85 0*189 344 85 0*202 345 85 0*212 345 85 0
14850 09/13*197 326 85 0*208 330 85 0*220 335 85 0*230 339 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14855 09/14*221 344 85 0*230 343 85 0*237 341 85 0*243 340 85 0
14855 09/14*240 343 85 0*250 347 85 0*260 350 85 0*269 346 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14860 09/15*248 338 80 0*253 336 75 0*258 333 75 0*264 329 75 0
14860 09/15*281 339 80 0*290 331 75 0*297 323 75 0*300 318 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14865 09/16*268 327 75 0*270 323 75 0*274 319 75 0*276 316 75 0
14865 09/16*302 313 75 0*304 307 75 0*304 300 75 0*303 295 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14870 09/17*278 312 75 0*279 308 75 0*280 303 75 0*278 295 75 0
14870 09/17*301 290 75 0*295 288 75 0*290 290 75 0*288 295 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14875 09/18*273 294 75 0*270 300 75 0*268 312 70 0*265 323 70 0
14875 09/18*286 301 75 0*284 307 75 0*282 315 70 0*278 325 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14880 09/19*263 336 65 0*262 351 65 0*261 366 65 0*264 382 65 0
14880 09/19*272 337 65 0*267 349 65 0*265 365 65 0*266 381 65 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14885 09/20*270 399 65 0*275 416 60 0*280 430 50 0*284 442 45 0
14890 09/21*289 451 40 0*293 459 40 0*296 466 35 0*298 472 35 0
14895 09/22*299 477 35 0*300 483 35 0*301 489 35 0*302 495 30 0
14900 09/23*303 502 30 0*303 508 25 0*304 515 25 0*306 522 20 0
14905 HR
The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), is to extend the track
back to the 8th based upon ship observations. Partagas and Diaz otherwise
made reasonable small alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 2. A peripheral pressure of 1004 mb (at 12Z on the
8th) suggests winds of at least 39 kt from the southern wind-pressure
relationship - 40 kt chosen for best track.
********************************************************************************
14910 09/10/1900 M= 6 3 SNBR= 354 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
14910 09/11/1900 M= 5 4 SNBR= 374 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * * ***
14915 09/10* 0 0 0 0*211 831 35 0*218 837 35 0*227 851 35 0
(10th deleted from HURDAT.)
14920 09/11*235 863 35 0*243 874 40 0*251 880 40 0*259 893 45 0
14920 09/11*200 852 35 0*209 860 40 0*218 870 40 0*228 876 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14925 09/12*266 901 45 0*273 905 45 0*280 905 45 0*287 901 45 0
14925 09/12*238 882 45 0*248 887 45 0*260 893 45 0*270 897 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
14930 09/13*294 896 45 0*300 891 35 0*306 887 35 0*310 884 35 0
14930 09/13*281 898 45 0*291 895 40 0*300 890 35 0*305 886 35 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
14935 09/14*313 881 35 0*316 878 35 0*320 874 35 0*324 869 35 0
14935 09/14*310 883 30 0*315 878 30 0*320 874 30 0*324 869 30 0
*** *** ** *** ** ** **
14940 09/15*328 863 35 0*333 855 35 0*337 847 30 0*340 833 25 0
14940 09/15*328 863 25 0*333 855 25 0*337 847 25 0*340 833 25 0
** ** **
14945 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). This tropical storm was
originally storm 3 in Neumann et al. The track changes are found
to be reasonable. A peripheral pressure of 1005 mb (around 12Z on the 13th)
suggests winds of at least 34 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure
relationship - 35 kt retained in best track. Inland decay model of Kaplan and
DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over the southeast U.S.
********************************************************************************
14990 10/04/1900 M=11 5 SNBR= 356 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
14990 10/04/1900 M=11 5 SNBR= 375 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
14995 10/04* 0 0 0 0*212 613 35 0*223 623 35 0*232 628 35 0
14995 10/04* 0 0 0 0*212 613 30 0*222 623 30 0*232 628 30 0
** *** ** **
15000 10/05*245 631 35 0*253 637 35 0*259 644 40 0*263 653 40 0
15000 10/05*242 631 30 0*251 637 30 0*259 644 30 0*263 653 30 0
*** ** *** ** ** **
15005 10/06*267 662 40 0*270 671 40 0*272 680 40 0*273 688 40 0
15005 10/06*267 662 30 0*270 671 30 0*272 680 30 0*273 688 30 0
** ** ** **
15010 10/07*273 695 40 0*273 702 45 0*274 709 45 0*275 716 45 0
15010 10/07*273 695 35 0*273 702 35 0*274 709 40 0*275 716 45 0
** ** **
15015 10/08*277 722 50 0*280 727 50 0*283 728 55 0*287 726 55 0
15015 10/08*275 724 50 0*271 729 50 0*265 730 55 0*264 721 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15020 10/09*293 721 60 0*299 715 60 0*306 708 60 0*313 701 60 0
15020 10/09*269 715 60 0*276 711 60 0*290 705 60 0*307 695 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15025 10/10*321 695 60 0*329 688 55 0E340 680 50 0E355 672 45 0
15025 10/10*334 688 60 0E364 685 55 0E385 685 50 0E398 685 45 0
*** *** **** *** *** *** *** ***
15030 10/11E376 664 40 0E397 655 40 0E415 647 40 0E428 639 40 0
15030 10/11E412 685 40 0E428 681 40 0E440 670 40 0E452 639 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15035 10/12E438 631 40 0E448 623 40 0E462 615 40 0E480 597 40 0
15035 10/12E460 606 40 0E471 584 40 0E485 565 40 0E497 549 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15040 10/13E499 564 35 0E519 527 35 0E537 500 35 0E553 482 35 0
15040 10/13E511 531 35 0E523 516 35 0E537 500 35 0E553 482 35 0
*** *** *** ***
15045 10/14E568 468 35 0E582 457 35 0E595 451 35 0* 0 0 0 0
15050 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), 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. However, the track
change on the 11th to bring it inland as an extratropical storm over
Nova Scotia has only moderate evidence and thus is altered with some
uncertainty. Small track alterations on the 4th and 5th to allow for a
more realistic translational velocity.
********************************************************************************
15055 10/08/1900 M= 8 6 SNBR= 357 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
15055 10/10/1900 M= 6 6 SNBR= 376 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * ***
15060 10/08* 0 0 0 0*178 855 35 0*181 866 40 0*189 879 40 0
15065 10/09*196 889 35 0*203 898 35 0*210 905 35 0*216 910 35 0
(8th to 9th deleted in new HURDAT.)
15070 10/10*220 913 35 0*225 913 35 0*232 910 35 0*241 904 35 0
15070 10/10* 0 0 0 0*210 914 35 0*220 910 35 0*235 907 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15075 10/11*250 896 35 0*260 885 40 0*270 872 40 0*280 857 40 0
15075 10/11*248 902 35 0*261 894 40 0*273 885 40 0*285 866 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15080 10/12*290 840 40 0*300 824 35 0E311 808 35 0E322 793 35 0
15080 10/12*292 842 40 0*300 824 35 0E311 808 35 0E322 793 35 0
*** ***
15085 10/13E334 780 35 0E346 766 35 0E358 754 35 0E369 749 35 0
15090 10/14E380 745 35 0E392 741 35 0E403 737 35 0E419 724 30 0
15095 10/15E441 707 30 0E468 686 25 0E497 661 25 0E528 638 25 0
15100 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who made large alterations to
the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track changes are found to
be reasonable.
********************************************************************************
15105 10/23/1900 M= 7 7 SNBR= 358 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15105 10/24/1900 M= 6 7 SNBR= 377 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * ***
15110 10/23* 0 0 0 0*133 602 35 0*138 612 35 0*142 621 35 0
(23rd removed from HURDAT.)
15115 10/24*146 630 35 0*151 638 35 0*157 646 35 0*163 653 35 0
15115 10/24*150 645 30 0*155 652 30 0*160 660 30 0*165 668 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15120 10/25*170 660 35 0*176 667 35 0*183 674 35 0*190 682 35 0
15120 10/25*170 676 30 0*175 685 30 0*180 695 30 0*185 705 30 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15125 10/26*196 690 35 0*203 699 35 0*210 708 35 0*216 719 40 0
15125 10/26*190 715 30 0*195 725 30 0*200 733 35 0*206 739 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
15130 10/27*222 729 40 0*231 739 40 0*240 749 40 0*251 749 45 0
15130 10/27*212 744 40 0*218 748 40 0*225 750 40 0*236 748 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15135 10/28*279 742 45 0*293 729 45 0*307 712 45 0*321 697 45 0
15135 10/28*256 744 45 0*272 738 45 0*290 728 45 0*315 714 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15140 10/29*335 683 45 0*348 668 45 0*360 653 45 0E388 630 45 0
15140 10/29E348 693 45 0E380 673 45 0E415 650 45 0E450 630 45 0
**** *** **** *** **** *** ***
15145 TS
One major change from Partagas and Diaz (1996b), who otherwise made large,
but reasonable alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
Track is extended back to the 24th based upon available observational
data that indicates the system existed as a tropical depression in
the Caribbean.
********************************************************************************
1900 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1996b) 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 9-13, 1900: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) June 12-17, 1900: One gale force report, insufficient to determine if
system was tropical storm intensity.
3) July 25-27, 1900: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
4) October 4-5, 1900: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
*******************************************************************************