*******************************************************************************
15150 06/10/1901 M= 5 1 SNBR= 359 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
15150 06/11/1901 M= 5 1 SNBR= 378 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** ***
15155 06/10*171 822 35 0*179 827 35 0*187 830 35 0*195 832 35 0
(10th is removed from the revised HURDAT.)
15160 06/11*204 835 35 0*212 837 35 0*219 840 35 0*226 843 35 0
15160 06/11*193 823 25 0*200 830 25 0*207 835 30 0*214 839 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15165 06/12*233 846 35 0*240 849 35 0*247 852 35 0*254 856 35 0
15165 06/12*221 843 35 0*229 847 35 0*240 850 35 0*251 852 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15170 06/13*262 860 35 0*269 864 35 0*276 868 35 0*283 871 35 0
15170 06/13*261 852 35 0*274 850 35 0*285 847 35 0*295 846 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15175 06/14*290 874 35 0*297 877 35 0*304 880 35 0*313 883 35 0
15175 06/14*305 847 30 0*315 848 30 0*325 850 25 0*338 854 25 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
(15th is new to HURDAT.)
15177 06/15*349 862 25 0*359 870 25 0*370 880 25 0*385 897 25 0
15180 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity from that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These
track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable. Winds reduced to
tropical depression status on 11th, since observations indicate that tropical
storm status was not reached until the 12th. Inland decay model of
Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over the southeast U.S.
********************************************************************************
15185 07/02/1901 M= 9 2 SNBR= 360 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
15185 07/01/1901 M=10 2 SNBR= 379 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** ** ***
(1st is new to HURDAT.)
15187 07/01* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 90 540 35 0* 95 550 35 0
15190 07/02* 0 0 0 0*132 575 35 0*131 590 35 0*130 607 35 0
15190 07/02*102 562 35 0*108 574 35 0*115 587 35 0*123 601 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15195 07/03*130 624 35 0*130 640 40 0*131 657 40 0*132 674 40 0
15195 07/03*132 619 35 0*142 636 40 0*153 657 40 0*159 674 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
15200 07/04*133 690 45 0*135 706 50 0*137 720 55 0*140 732 55 0
15200 07/04*163 692 45 0*166 708 50 0*170 725 55 0*174 736 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15205 07/05*142 742 60 0*145 752 60 0*149 762 60 0*154 774 60 0
15205 07/05*178 746 60 0*183 755 60 0*187 765 60 0*189 774 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15210 07/06*159 787 55 0*164 799 55 0*170 810 55 0*176 820 50 0
15210 07/06*192 783 60 0*194 793 60 0*197 803 60 0*201 810 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15215 07/07*181 829 50 0*187 838 50 0*193 846 50 0*199 854 45 0
15215 07/07*206 819 60 0*210 826 60 0*215 835 60 0*219 843 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15220 07/08*206 862 45 0*213 870 45 0*220 878 45 0*227 884 45 0
15220 07/08*222 850 60 0*226 859 60 0*230 870 60 0*235 879 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15225 07/09*235 894 45 0*243 903 45 0*251 912 40 0*260 924 40 0
15225 07/09*241 887 60 0*248 896 60 0*253 905 60 0*260 919 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** **
15230 07/10*269 938 40 0*279 952 40 0*289 965 35 0*300 978 30 0
15230 07/10*269 935 55 0*279 950 50 0*289 965 35 0*300 978 30 0
*** ** *** **
15235 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations
to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Winds boosted from the 6th to
the 10th based upon 60 kt ship observation on the 9th. A 4' storm tide was
reported in Galveston, Texas (Connor 1956).
********************************************************************************
15240 07/05/1901 M= 9 3 SNBR= 361 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
15240 07/04/1901 M=10 3 SNBR= 380 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
** ** ***
(4th is new to HURDAT.)
15242 07/04* 95 555 30 0*102 558 30 0*110 563 30 0*118 570 30 0
15245 07/05* 0 0 0 0*136 600 35 0*141 608 35 0*146 617 35 0
15245 07/05*125 578 35 0*132 587 35 0*137 597 35 0*144 608 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15250 07/06*150 625 35 0*155 633 40 0*159 641 45 0*163 648 50 0
15250 07/06*150 619 35 0*155 630 40 0*159 641 45 0*166 651 50 0
*** *** *** ***
15255 07/07*168 655 60 0*172 661 65 0*177 668 70 0*189 680 75 0
15255 07/07*174 663 55 0*182 676 60 0*190 690 60 0*200 702 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15260 07/08*205 697 80 0*222 715 80 0*238 730 85 0*254 742 85 0
15260 07/08*213 713 60 0*228 722 60 0*245 733 60 0*264 745 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15265 07/09*269 752 85 0*285 757 85 0*300 756 85 0*314 748 85 0
15265 07/09*277 758 60 0*290 766 60 0*305 767 60 0*318 759 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15270 07/10*326 740 85 0*336 738 85 0*345 737 85 0*352 739 85 0
15270 07/10*330 751 65 0*337 742 70 0*346 738 70 0*357 738 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15275 07/11*356 741 80 0*360 750 75 0*356 762 65 0*353 764 50 0
15275 07/11*361 746 70 0*361 756 70 0*356 762 60 0*353 764 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** **
15280 07/12*347 766 40 0*342 768 40 0*340 771 35 0*339 776 35 0
15285 07/13*338 781 35 0*338 788 35 0*338 795 35 0*339 802 30 0
15285 07/13*340 781 35 0*342 788 35 0*345 795 35 0*348 802 30 0
*** *** *** ***
15290 HR NC1
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Winds
are reduced from the 7th to the 11th, since observations indicate that the
system did not obtain hurricane force until about the 10th. Additionally,
there is no evidence for the system attaining more than a Category 1 hurricane
status, thus peak winds are reduced from 85 kt down to 70 kt. Landfall
as a Category 1 hurricane in the U.S. as reported in Table 6 of Neumann
et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT is retained. The
storm is known as "San Cirilo" for its impacts in Puerto Rico.
********************************************************************************
15295 08/04/1901 M=15 4 SNBR= 362 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
15295 08/02/1901 M=17 4 SNBR= 381 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
** ** *** *
(2nd and 3rd are new to HURDAT.)
15296 08/02*326 384 25 0*323 391 25 0*320 400 25 0*316 411 25 0
15298 08/03*311 423 25 0*305 437 25 0*300 450 25 0*293 463 25 0
15300 08/04* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*264 495 35 0*263 516 35 0
15300 08/04*286 473 30 0*277 488 30 0*270 500 30 0*263 516 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** **
15305 08/05*261 535 35 0*258 553 35 0*257 569 35 0*256 583 35 0
15305 08/05*256 532 30 0*249 548 30 0*245 565 30 0*242 579 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15310 08/06*256 596 35 0*255 609 35 0*254 623 35 0*253 639 35 0
15310 08/06*239 593 30 0*237 608 30 0*237 623 30 0*239 639 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** **
15315 08/07*252 656 35 0*250 673 35 0*249 688 35 0*249 702 40 0
15315 08/07*242 657 30 0*246 675 30 0*250 690 30 0*253 702 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** **
15320 08/08*248 714 40 0*248 725 40 0*248 734 40 0*249 743 40 0
15320 08/08*255 716 30 0*255 727 30 0*255 740 30 0*254 745 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15325 08/09*250 750 40 0*250 756 40 0*252 764 40 0*253 771 40 0
15325 08/09*250 750 35 0*250 756 35 0*252 764 40 0*253 771 40 0
** **
15330 08/10*254 778 40 0*256 784 40 0*258 790 40 0*261 796 40 0
15335 08/11*264 803 40 0*267 809 35 0*269 815 35 0*270 821 40 0
15335 08/11*264 804 35 0*267 813 35 0*269 821 40 0*270 827 45 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** **
15340 08/12*272 828 45 0*273 835 55 0*274 842 65 0*274 850 70 0
15340 08/12*272 832 50 0*273 837 55 0*274 842 65 0*274 848 70 0
*** ** *** ***
15345 08/13*275 859 75 0*275 868 80 0*275 876 80 0*276 884 85 0
15345 08/13*275 854 75 0*275 860 80 0*275 867 80 0*276 876 80 0
*** *** *** *** **
15350 08/14*278 890 85 0*279 895 85 0*281 897 85 0*284 898 85 0
15350 08/14*279 887 80 0*283 893 80 0*287 897 80 0*291 898 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** **
15355 08/15*288 898 80 0*293 897 75 0*299 895 65 973*305 892 50 0
15355 08/15*294 895 80 0*297 892 80 0*300 890 80 0*305 887 70 973
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ** ***
15360 08/16*311 890 40 0*318 889 35 0E326 892 35 0E335 895 30 0
15360 08/16*310 883 60 0*315 881 45 0*320 880 40 0*330 887 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
2
15365 08/17E344 898 30 0E354 900 30 0E363 899 25 0E371 893 25 0
15365 08/17E340 895 30 0E350 900 30 0E363 899 25 0E371 893 25 0
*** *** ***
15370 08/18E378 887 25 0E384 878 25 0E390 868 25 0E398 854 25 0
15375 HR LA2 MS2
15375 HR LA1 MS1 AL1
*** *** ***
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track
and intensity changes are found to be reasonable. Analysis of 973 mb
central pressure from Ho et al. (1987) is based upon a peripheral
pressure of 993 mb from Mobile along with an estimated 33 nmi radius of
maximum wind. (This analysis of central pressure was very similar to the
estimation in Jarrell et al. (1992) taken from Connor (1956) of 972 mb.)
A 973 mb central pressure suggests 85 kt from the Gulf of Mexico
wind-pressure relationship. Given that this radius of maximum wind is
larger than climatological value (of 23 nmi for this latitude and
central pressure - Vickery et al. 2000), a maximum sustained windspeed
of 80 kt is chosen at landfall making this system a Category 1 hurricane.
This is a downgrade from the Category 2 at U.S. landfall reported in
Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in
HURDAT. Winds from the 13th to the 15th adjusted accordingly. Winds
increased on the 16th based upon observed wind reports for the day. Storm
tides of 8' were observed in Port Eads, Louisiana and Mobile, Alabama
(Connor 1956, Cline 1926).
********************************************************************************
15376 08/18/1901 M= 5 5 SNBR= 382 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15377 08/18* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*115 530 30 0*116 540 30 0
15378 08/19*117 548 30 0*119 557 30 0*120 567 35 0*121 577 35 0
15379 08/20*122 586 40 0*122 595 40 0*123 603 45 0*123 612 45 0
15380 08/21*124 622 40 0*124 633 35 0*125 645 30 0*126 658 30 0
15381 08/22*126 671 25 0*126 683 25 0*127 695 25 0*128 710 25 0
15382 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
15380 08/30/1901 M=13 5 SNBR= 363 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15380 08/29/1901 M=14 6 SNBR= 383 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** * ***
(29th new to HURDAT.)
15383 08/29* 0 0 0 0*136 224 30 0*137 240 35 0*139 259 35 0
15385 08/30*141 360 50 0*142 372 50 0*145 380 55 0*147 387 60 0
15385 08/30*141 274 40 0*142 288 40 0*143 302 45 0*144 315 45 0
*** ** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15390 08/31*149 395 65 0*152 404 70 0*156 414 70 0*160 426 75 0
15390 08/31*145 330 50 0*147 345 50 0*150 363 55 0*151 377 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15395 09/01*165 440 80 0*171 453 80 0*176 462 85 0*181 470 85 0
15395 09/01*154 390 60 0*157 404 60 0*163 420 65 0*168 432 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15400 09/02*185 474 85 0*190 480 85 0*195 486 85 0*200 492 85 0
15400 09/02*174 446 70 0*180 460 70 0*185 475 75 0*189 488 75 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15405 09/03*206 498 90 0*212 504 90 0*219 510 95 0*227 517 95 0
15405 09/03*192 501 80 0*196 514 80 0*200 527 85 0*207 542 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15410 09/04*237 526 100 0*246 535 100 0*255 543 105 0*262 550 105 0
15410 09/04*215 556 90 0*226 570 90 0*240 580 90 0*250 584 90 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15415 09/05*268 557 105 0*275 564 105 0*282 570 105 0*290 576 100 0
15415 09/05*261 587 90 0*271 589 90 0*280 590 90 0*288 591 90 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15420 09/06*298 581 95 0*307 585 90 0*315 587 85 0*323 583 85 0
15420 09/06*295 592 90 0*301 591 90 0*307 590 85 0*316 586 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15425 09/07*330 578 85 0*336 570 85 0*342 561 85 0*347 553 85 0
15425 09/07*326 578 85 0*336 570 85 0*342 561 85 0*347 553 85 0
***
15430 09/08*352 540 85 0*356 519 80 0*358 500 80 0*360 475 80 0
15430 09/08*352 540 85 0*356 520 80 0*358 500 80 0*360 475 80 0
***
15435 09/09*360 444 80 0*362 413 80 0*370 390 80 0*381 381 75 0
15435 09/09*360 444 80 0*362 413 80 0*370 390 80 0*381 374 75 0
***
15440 09/10*397 377 70 0*415 379 70 0E431 378 65 0E445 368 65 0
15440 09/10*395 357 70 0*410 338 70 0*430 320 65 0*444 309 65 0
*** *** *** *** **** *** **** ***
15445 09/11E469 325 55 0E480 290 45 0E486 250 40 0E492 200 35 0
15445 09/11E458 293 55 0E473 277 45 0E486 250 40 0E492 200 35 0
*** *** *** ***
15450 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally
storm number 5. These track and intensity changes are found to be
reasonable. A 991 mb peripheral pressure on 12Z of the 8th supports
winds of at least 62 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship - winds
maintained at 80 kt. Peak winds are reduced from 105 kt down to 90 kt, since
observations available support only a Category 1 hurricane, or Category 2
hurricane at most. Winds reduced from the 1st to the 6th accordingly.
********************************************************************************
15455 09/09/1901 M=11 6 SNBR= 364 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
15455 09/09/1901 M=11 7 SNBR= 384 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
15460 09/09* 0 0 0 0*188 493 35 0*186 504 35 0*184 518 35 0
15460 09/09* 0 0 0 0*176 507 35 0*175 520 35 0*175 532 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
15465 09/10*184 532 35 0*183 546 35 0*183 560 35 0*182 574 35 0
15465 09/10*174 546 35 0*174 560 35 0*173 573 35 0*174 588 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15470 09/11*182 587 35 0*181 600 40 0*182 614 40 0*183 630 40 0
15470 09/11*175 601 35 0*176 613 40 0*178 627 45 0*181 643 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
15475 09/12*185 647 40 0*186 665 40 0*186 682 40 0*188 698 35 0
15475 09/12*184 656 50 0*185 669 50 0*186 682 50 0*187 696 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** ** *** *** **
15480 09/13*190 714 35 0*192 730 35 0*194 742 35 0*197 757 40 0
15480 09/13*188 710 35 0*189 726 35 0*190 743 45 0*191 757 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** **
15485 09/14*199 770 40 0*201 783 45 0*204 796 45 0*208 809 50 0
15485 09/14*192 770 55 0*194 783 60 0*197 795 65 0*201 806 65 0
*** ** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15490 09/15*214 822 50 0*221 834 50 0*228 847 50 0*234 857 50 0
15490 09/15*205 819 70 0*210 833 70 0*215 845 70 0*220 856 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15495 09/16*240 864 50 0*245 869 50 0*251 875 50 0*257 880 50 0
15495 09/16*226 865 60 0*233 873 55 0*243 880 50 0*253 885 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
15500 09/17*263 883 50 0*270 885 50 0*278 887 45 0*289 882 45 0
15500 09/17*265 885 50 0*277 881 50 0*290 875 50 0*303 867 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
15505 09/18*302 873 40 0*316 850 35 0E330 812 35 0E342 770 35 0
15505 09/18*316 853 40 0*325 834 35 0*330 812 35 0*342 770 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** * *
15510 09/19E358 742 35 0E371 725 35 0E387 700 35 0E405 672 35 0
15510 09/19E358 742 40 0E371 725 45 0E387 700 50 0E405 672 50 0
** ** ** **
15515 TS
15515 HR
**
The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997) is to upgrade the storm
to a hurricane in the vicinity of Cuba. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made
reasonable small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et
al. (1999), originally storm number 6. This upgrade to a hurricane is
based upon the re-analysis work of Perez (2000), which analyzed the storm as
a Category 1 hurricane in the vicinity of Cuba. Winds are increased
accordingly on the 13th to the 16th. A peripheral pressure of 1001 mb (06Z
on the 12th) suggests winds of at least 45 kt from the southern wind-pressure
relationship - 50 kt used in best track. Winds adjusted accordingly on the
11th and 12th. The storm is known as "San Leoncio" or "San Vicente IV" for
its impacts in Puerto Rico.
********************************************************************************
15520 09/12/1901 M= 6 7 SNBR= 365 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15520 09/12/1901 M= 6 8 SNBR= 385 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
15525 09/12*111 281 35 0*115 285 35 0*121 289 35 0*127 291 35 0
15530 09/13*133 294 35 0*138 295 35 0*143 296 35 0*148 296 35 0
15530 09/13*133 294 40 0*138 295 40 0*143 296 45 0*148 296 45 0
** ** ** **
15535 09/14*153 296 35 0*158 294 40 0*162 292 40 0*166 291 40 0
15535 09/14*153 296 50 0*158 294 50 0*162 292 50 0*166 291 50 0
** ** ** **
15540 09/15*170 290 40 0*174 290 35 0*178 292 35 0*181 294 35 0
15540 09/15*170 290 45 0*174 290 40 0*178 292 35 0*181 294 35 0
** **
15545 09/16*184 298 35 0*186 302 35 0*189 307 35 0*191 309 35 0
15550 09/17*194 311 35 0*198 314 35 0*202 316 35 0*208 320 30 0
15555 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1997) introduced no changes to the track shown in
Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 7. However, ship reports
indicate that the storm was somewhat stronger than originally indicated
in HURDAT. Winds increased on the 13th to the 15th accordingly.
********************************************************************************
15560 09/21/1901 M=12 8 SNBR= 366 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
15560 09/21/1901 M=12 9 SNBR= 386 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
15565 09/21*110 802 35 0*115 804 35 0*120 806 35 0*125 808 35 0
15565 09/21*137 730 35 0*138 740 35 0*140 750 35 0*142 759 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15570 09/22*130 810 35 0*135 813 35 0*140 815 35 0*146 817 35 0
15570 09/22*144 769 35 0*147 780 35 0*150 790 35 0*152 798 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15575 09/23*151 820 35 0*157 822 35 0*163 825 35 0*168 828 35 0
15575 09/23*155 806 35 0*159 813 35 0*165 820 35 0*169 823 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15580 09/24*173 831 35 0*178 834 35 0*183 837 35 0*189 840 35 0
15580 09/24*174 825 35 0*180 828 35 0*185 830 35 0*188 832 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15585 09/25*194 843 35 0*201 846 35 0*207 849 40 0*213 852 40 0
15585 09/25*192 833 35 0*196 834 35 0*200 835 40 0*203 837 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15590 09/26*220 853 40 0*228 854 45 0*238 855 45 0*250 855 45 0
15590 09/26*207 838 40 0*211 839 45 0*215 840 45 0*221 842 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15595 09/27*263 853 40 0*275 851 40 0*288 848 40 0*300 843 40 0
15595 09/27*232 845 40 0*243 848 40 0*255 850 40 0*270 849 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15600 09/28*312 839 40 0*325 835 40 0E337 830 35 0E354 823 35 0
15600 09/28*288 847 40 0*306 845 35 0E325 840 35 0E351 827 35 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
15605 09/29E378 814 30 0E403 801 25 0E425 786 25 0E442 765 25 0
15610 09/30E457 745 25 0E470 725 25 0E480 674 25 0E482 639 30 0
15610 09/30E457 745 25 0E470 725 25 0E480 685 25 0E482 639 30 0
***
15615 10/01E482 601 30 0E483 559 35 0E485 515 35 0E490 461 40 0
15620 10/02E508 394 40 0E531 326 45 0E553 270 45 0* 0 0 0 0
15625 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 8. These
track changes are found to be reasonable. Track adjusted slightly on the
30th to allow for a more realistic translational velocity.
********************************************************************************
15630 10/07/1901 M= 8 9 SNBR= 367 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15630 10/05/1901 M=10 10 SNBR= 387 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** ** ***
(The 5th and 6th are new to HURDAT.)
15632 10/05*120 515 35 0*122 517 35 0*125 520 35 0*127 523 35 0
15634 10/06*130 526 40 0*132 529 40 0*135 533 40 0*138 537 45 0
15635 10/07*147 508 35 0*148 520 35 0*150 531 35 0*151 542 35 0
15635 10/07*142 541 50 0*146 545 55 0*150 550 60 0*155 556 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15640 10/08*153 554 35 0*155 567 35 0*158 581 35 0*161 597 35 0
15640 10/08*162 567 60 0*169 576 60 0*175 585 55 0*184 596 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15645 10/09*165 615 35 0*172 634 35 0*178 650 35 0*185 662 35 0
15645 10/09*194 606 45 0*202 614 40 0*210 623 35 0*218 637 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
15650 10/10*193 675 35 0*204 689 35 0*220 700 35 0*240 702 35 0
15650 10/10*227 655 35 0*240 670 35 0*256 685 35 0*277 690 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15655 10/11*261 689 40 0*281 670 40 0*302 651 45 0*323 638 45 0
15655 10/11E303 685 40 0E330 672 40 0E350 650 45 0E358 638 45 0
**** *** **** *** **** *** ****
15660 10/12*346 625 45 0*366 613 40 0E381 600 35 0E392 587 35 0
15660 10/12E365 625 45 0E373 613 40 0E381 600 35 0E392 587 35 0
**** ****
15665 10/13E402 570 35 0E411 556 35 0E420 541 35 0E430 516 35 0
15670 10/14E439 484 35 0E449 444 35 0E458 400 35 0* 0 0 0 0
15675 TS
The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997) is to provide a more
realistic position on the 5th. The Partagas and Diaz position on the 5th
required a motion toward the northeast, which is not supported by climatology
or available ship observations. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made large
though reasonable alterations to the track and intensity from that shown in
Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 9. Winds increased from the
7th to the 9th based upon ship reports in Partagas and Diaz.
********************************************************************************
15676 10/15/1901 M= 4 11 SNBR= 388 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15677 10/15*210 800 30 0*215 793 30 0*220 785 30 0*225 777 35 0
15678 10/16*229 767 40 0*233 758 45 0*237 750 50 0*243 737 50 0
15679 10/17*252 724 50 0*258 711 50 0*265 695 45 0*269 684 40 0
15679 10/18*273 672 40 0E276 661 40 0E280 650 40 0E284 637 40 0
15679 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
15680 10/31/1901 M= 7 10 SNBR= 368 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15680 10/30/1901 M= 8 12 SNBR= 389 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * ** ***
(The 30th is new to HURDAT.)
15682 10/30* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*193 673 30 0*205 672 30 0
15685 10/31* 0 0 0 0*217 688 35 0*225 680 35 0*235 672 35 0
15685 10/31*217 671 35 0*229 669 35 0*240 667 35 0*247 664 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15690 11/01*243 665 35 0*251 659 35 0*258 653 40 0*263 648 40 0
15690 11/01*254 661 40 0*261 657 45 0*267 653 50 0*274 649 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15695 11/02*268 644 45 0*273 639 45 0*278 634 45 0*284 628 50 0
15695 11/02*280 646 55 0*286 642 60 0*293 635 60 0*296 628 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** **
15700 11/03*290 622 50 0*297 616 50 0*305 610 50 0*313 604 50 0
15700 11/03*300 620 70 0*305 611 70 0*312 603 70 0*324 591 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15705 11/04*322 599 50 0*331 594 50 0*340 590 50 0*351 585 50 0
15705 11/04*340 581 65 0*356 571 60 0*368 563 55 0*374 557 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
15710 11/05*364 578 50 0*374 565 50 0*378 550 45 0*380 538 45 0
15710 11/05*379 555 50 0*383 550 50 0*385 545 45 0*383 534 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15715 11/06*381 525 40 0*381 512 40 0*381 500 35 0*383 485 30 0
15715 11/06E378 525 40 0E373 515 40 0E370 505 35 0E370 492 30 0
**** **** *** **** *** **** ***
15720 TS
15720 HR
**
The major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997) is to upgrade the storm to a
hurricane. A peripheral pressure of 989 mb (12Z on the 3rd) suggests winds
of at least 65 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt
chosen for the best track. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable
small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 10. A peripheral pressure of 1001 mb (12Z on
the 1st) suggests winds of at least 45 kt from the southern wind-
pressure relationship - 50 kt chosen for the best track. Winds changed
accordingly from the 1st to the 4th based upon these measurements.
*******************************************************************************
1901 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1997) 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) October 5, 1901: One gale force report, insufficient to determine if
system was tropical storm intensity.
*******************************************************************************
15725 06/10/1902 M= 7 1 SNBR= 369 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
15725 06/12/1902 M= 6 1 SNBR= 390 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * ***
15730 06/10* 0 0 0 0*134 817 35 0*138 819 35 0*141 821 35 0
15735 06/11*144 823 35 0*150 826 35 0*158 828 35 0*168 831 35 0
(The 10th and 11th are removed from HURDAT.)
15740 06/12*178 834 35 0*189 837 35 0*201 840 35 0*213 843 35 0
15740 06/12* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*177 840 30 0*191 836 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15745 06/13*226 845 35 0*238 847 40 0*250 848 40 0*262 848 45 0
15745 06/13*207 833 35 0*222 831 40 0*238 830 45 0*249 832 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
15750 06/14*275 847 45 0*287 845 45 0*299 841 40 0*306 838 30 0
15750 06/14*259 835 50 0*269 838 50 0*280 840 50 0*290 839 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15755 06/15*312 835 25 0*320 832 25 0*331 825 25 0*336 821 25 0
15755 06/15*300 836 45 0*310 832 40 0*320 825 35 0*330 817 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15760 06/16E344 814 25 0E352 807 25 0E360 798 25 0E370 780 25 0
15760 06/16*340 807 35 0*352 795 35 0E367 780 40 0E386 749 40 0
**** *** ** * *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
(The 17th is new to HURDAT.)
15762 06/17E419 715 35 0E450 682 35 0E475 660 30 0E494 640 30 0
15765 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. Winds increased slightly from
the 13th to the 16th based upon ship and coastal observations.
********************************************************************************
15770 06/19/1902 M=10 2 SNBR= 370 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
15770 06/21/1902 M= 9 2 SNBR= 391 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** ** ***
15775 06/19* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*170 850 35 0*173 858 35 0
15780 06/20*175 866 40 0*177 873 40 0*181 880 40 0*183 885 35 0
(The 19th and 20th are removed from HURDAT.)
15785 06/21*185 890 35 0*187 895 35 0*189 899 35 0*192 907 35 0
15785 06/21*172 921 25 0*176 924 25 0*180 927 25 0*182 929 25 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15790 06/22*195 915 35 0*197 922 35 0*199 928 40 0*202 932 40 0
15790 06/22*184 930 30 0*187 932 30 0*190 935 30 0*192 937 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15795 06/23*205 935 45 0*208 938 45 0*211 942 50 0*215 946 50 0
15795 06/23*195 939 30 0*197 941 30 0*200 943 30 0*203 945 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15800 06/24*219 950 55 0*223 954 60 0*228 958 65 0*233 961 70 0
15800 06/24*205 946 30 0*207 948 30 0*210 950 35 0*215 953 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15805 06/25*238 964 70 0*243 966 70 0*248 968 70 0*253 969 70 0
15805 06/25*221 956 45 0*227 960 50 0*233 963 55 0*239 966 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15810 06/26*258 970 70 0*264 970 70 0*270 970 75 0*278 970 80 0
15810 06/26*247 968 65 0*255 969 70 0*264 970 65 0*272 971 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
15815 06/27*288 969 65 0*299 967 50 0*310 965 40 0*321 962 30 0
15815 06/27*281 972 50 0*290 973 45 0*300 974 40 0*315 972 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** **
15820 06/28*332 959 30 0*343 954 25 0E354 949 25 0* 0 0 0 0
15820 06/28*328 966 35 0*342 959 35 0E358 945 35 0E376 923 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
(The 29th was not in HURDAT previously.)
15822 06/29E395 886 35 0E406 854 35 0E415 820 35 0E418 786 35 0
15825 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. Despite HURDAT having 80 kt at
landfall originally and Neumann et al. (1999) showing hurricane intensity in
the track plot up to landfall in Texas, this storm was not listed in Neumann
et al.'s Table 6 or HURDAT's U.S. hurricane characterization as a U.S.
landfalling hurricane. More significantly, Connor (1956) specifically
listed this system as being "not hurricane intensity" at landfall in Texas.
For the re-analysis here, it was decided to reduce the hurricane to just
below hurricane force before landfall in Texas based upon Connor's
assessment, but still maintaining a peak intensity of 70 kt while over the
open Gulf of Mexico. A peripheral pressure of 995 mb (on the 26th) suggests
winds of at least 54 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship at
landfall - 60 kt chosen for best track, which is a reduction from 80 kt
previously in HURDAT.
********************************************************************************
15830 09/16/1902 M=10 3 SNBR= 371 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15830 09/16/1902 M=10 3 SNBR= 392 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
15835 09/16* 0 0 0 0* 82 330 35 0* 85 336 35 0* 90 342 35 0
15835 09/16* 0 0 0 0* 77 308 35 0* 80 320 35 0* 85 332 35 0
** *** ** *** ** ***
15840 09/17* 95 350 35 0* 99 360 35 0*104 375 35 0*110 394 35 0
15840 09/17* 92 345 35 0* 98 360 35 0*104 375 35 0*109 389 35 0
** *** ** *** ***
15845 09/18*116 411 40 0*123 430 40 0*129 448 40 0*134 464 45 0
15845 09/18*114 403 40 0*119 417 40 0*123 430 40 0*126 444 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15850 09/19*139 480 50 0*146 498 50 0*153 514 55 0*167 523 60 0
15850 09/19*131 461 50 0*136 477 50 0*143 493 55 0*153 509 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15855 09/20*180 528 65 0*194 530 70 0*210 530 75 0*229 526 80 0
15855 09/20*168 523 65 0*189 530 70 0*210 530 75 0*229 526 80 0
*** *** ***
15860 09/21*250 515 85 0*271 502 85 0*290 490 85 0*305 480 85 0
15860 09/21*247 517 85 0*265 505 85 0*283 495 85 0*302 484 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15865 09/22*322 469 80 0*336 460 75 0E348 448 75 0E359 422 70 0
15865 09/22*321 473 80 0*336 460 75 0E348 448 75 0E358 429 70 0
*** *** *** ***
15870 09/23E369 401 65 0E379 381 65 0E389 361 60 0E399 349 55 0
15870 09/23E368 414 65 0E378 399 65 0E387 385 60 0E395 371 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15875 09/24E407 341 55 0E416 332 50 0E426 323 50 0E439 314 45 0
15875 09/24E404 358 55 0E413 345 50 0E423 331 50 0E440 317 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15880 09/25E456 303 45 0E476 296 45 0E498 288 40 0E516 292 40 0
15880 09/25E457 304 45 0E476 296 45 0E498 288 40 0E516 292 40 0
*** ***
15885 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A
peripheral pressure of 981 mb (12Z on the 21st) suggests winds of at least
74 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt retained in
best track.
********************************************************************************
15890 10/03/1902 M=11 4 SNBR= 372 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
15890 10/03/1902 M=11 4 SNBR= 393 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
15895 10/03* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*140 930 50 0*150 930 50 0
15895 10/03*140 938 30 0*145 940 30 0*150 942 30 0*155 943 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15900 10/04*159 930 50 0*167 929 45 0*172 929 40 0*176 928 40 0
15900 10/04*160 944 30 0*165 945 30 0*170 946 30 0*175 947 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15905 10/05*179 927 40 0*182 927 45 0*184 926 50 0*186 926 55 0
15905 10/05*180 948 30 0*185 949 30 0*187 949 35 0*188 947 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15910 10/06*188 926 60 0*189 925 60 0*191 925 65 0*193 925 70 0
15910 10/06*189 944 55 0*191 940 60 0*193 937 65 0*195 933 75 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
15915 10/07*195 924 70 0*198 923 75 0*201 924 75 0*205 923 80 0
15915 10/07*197 929 85 0*200 925 90 970*203 920 90 0*207 915 90 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
15920 10/08*211 922 80 0*219 921 85 0*228 920 85 0*235 918 85 0
15920 10/08*211 911 90 0*215 908 90 0*220 905 90 0*227 902 90 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15925 10/09*243 916 85 0*251 913 85 0*260 909 80 0*269 906 70 0
15925 10/09*234 900 90 0*239 899 85 0*245 897 80 0*253 895 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15930 10/10*277 903 65 0*285 898 60 0*294 892 60 0*303 883 50 0
15930 10/10*262 891 65 0*271 888 60 0*280 885 55 0*294 878 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** ***
15935 10/11E314 874 40 0E325 863 35 0E337 848 35 0E349 828 35 0
15935 10/11*310 869 40 0E325 859 35 0E337 848 35 0E349 828 35 0
**** *** ***
15940 10/12E366 799 35 0E376 780 35 0E388 728 35 0E399 691 35 0
15940 10/12E364 805 35 0E376 780 35 0E388 728 35 0E399 691 35 0
*** ***
15945 10/13E409 655 35 0E419 610 40 0E428 551 40 0* 0 0 0 0
15950 HR
One major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who otherwise made large,
but reasonable alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et
al. (1999). The formation of the system in the Gulf of Tehuantepec as
found in Neumann et al. has been retained, though slightly altered in
track based upon observations collected by Partagas and Diaz. Trek across
the Mexico likely to be at tropical depression intensity. A central
pressure of 970 mb (at 09Z on the 7th) suggests winds of 89 kt from the
Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship - 90 kt utilized in best track.
Winds are adjusted according on the 6th through the 9th. Slight alteration
in track on the 12th to provide for a more realistic translational velocity.
********************************************************************************
15955 11/01/1902 M= 6 5 SNBR= 373 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15955 11/01/1902 M= 6 5 SNBR= 394 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
15960 11/01* 0 0 0 0*221 621 35 0*231 630 35 0*242 638 35 0
15960 11/01*200 673 30 0*210 683 30 0*225 673 35 0*246 663 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
15965 11/02*253 640 35 0*266 642 35 0*279 642 40 0*295 637 40 0
15965 11/02*266 653 35 0*287 639 40 0*305 626 45 0*318 613 50 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15970 11/03*311 625 40 0*327 611 40 0*342 590 45 0*352 575 45 0
15970 11/03*327 603 55 0*335 592 60 0*343 580 60 0*348 572 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
15975 11/04*362 560 45 0*372 543 45 0*377 530 50 0*381 520 50 0
15975 11/04*352 565 60 0*357 557 55 0*360 550 50 0*363 538 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
15980 11/05*385 510 50 0*388 500 50 0*390 490 50 0*392 480 40 0
15980 11/05*366 528 50 0*368 519 50 0*370 510 50 0*371 498 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15985 11/06*394 470 35 0*396 460 30 0*397 450 25 0*398 439 20 0
15985 11/06*371 486 35 0*370 474 30 0*370 465 25 0*371 454 20 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
15990 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A
peripheral pressure of 993 mb (at 12Z on the 3rd) suggests winds of at least
59 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 60 kt chosen for best
track. (A slightly higher wind speed could have been chosen, but given the
time of year - early November - with cooler SSTs prevailing a more
conservative value is chosen.) Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 2nd
through the 4th.
*******************************************************************************
1902 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1997) 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 25-28, 1902: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
15995 07/19/1903 M= 8 1 SNBR= 374 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
15995 07/21/1903 M= 6 1 SNBR= 395 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * ***
16000 07/19* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*165 618 35 0*172 639 35 0
16005 07/20*179 656 35 0*185 668 35 0*193 683 35 0*200 697 40 0
(The 19th and 20th are omitted from the new HURDAT.)
16010 07/21*209 710 45 0*216 720 55 0*225 732 60 0*236 742 60 0
16010 07/21*200 678 35 0*207 689 35 0*215 700 35 0*225 712 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16015 07/22*248 748 60 0*261 750 70 0*273 750 80 0*284 747 85 0
16015 07/22*237 726 35 0*249 738 35 0*265 750 40 0*276 755 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16020 07/23*295 742 90 0*305 737 90 0*316 730 90 0*324 723 90 0
16020 07/23*288 756 45 0*299 754 50 0*310 750 55 0*322 736 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16025 07/24*332 716 90 0*340 705 90 0*347 696 85 0*353 685 85 0
16025 07/24*334 716 65 0*343 701 70 0*353 685 70 0*364 669 70 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16030 07/25*358 672 80 0*364 656 75 0*370 638 70 0*378 605 70 0
16030 07/25*373 652 70 0*379 636 65 0*385 615 60 0*393 580 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16035 07/26*388 570 60 0*398 535 50 0E410 503 45 0E425 466 40 0
16035 07/26*399 547 50 0E405 514 50 0E410 485 45 0E414 457 40 0
*** *** ** **** *** *** *** ***
16040 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. Partagas and Diaz'
analysis documented that this hurricane reached, at best, a Category 1
hurricane status. Thus peak winds are reduced from 90 kt to 70 kt
and winds are adjusted downward accordingly for the lifetime of this
system.
********************************************************************************
16045 08/06/1903 M=11 2 SNBR= 375 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16045 08/06/1903 M=11 2 SNBR= 396 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
16050 08/06* 0 0 0 0*125 432 50 0*125 450 50 0*127 470 50 0
16050 08/06* 0 0 0 0*118 423 50 0*120 435 50 0*123 447 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
16055 08/07*130 488 55 0*132 505 65 0*134 520 70 0*136 533 70 0
16055 08/07*126 460 55 0*131 475 65 0*135 490 70 0*137 509 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16060 08/08*138 544 70 0*139 556 70 0*141 569 70 0*143 583 75 0
16060 08/08*138 526 70 0*138 541 70 0*140 560 70 0*143 578 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16065 08/09*144 598 75 0*145 614 80 0*147 630 80 0*149 647 80 0
16065 08/09*144 598 80 0*145 614 90 970*147 630 100 0*149 647 105 0
** ** *** *** ***
16070 08/10*152 664 85 0*156 682 85 0*160 700 90 0*165 720 90 0
16070 08/10*152 664 105 0*156 682 105 0*160 700 105 0*166 720 105 0
*** *** *** ***
16075 08/11*170 741 90 0*176 762 95 0*182 780 100 0*189 796 105 0
16075 08/11*172 738 105 0*177 756 105 0*183 773 105 0*186 787 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16080 08/12*193 810 105 0*197 823 105 0*200 836 105 0*203 849 100 0
16080 08/12*190 800 105 0*194 811 105 958*197 825 105 0*201 840 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16085 08/13*206 861 95 0*208 873 90 0*210 884 90 0*211 892 85 0
16085 08/13*204 856 105 0*208 873 85 0*210 884 70 0*212 894 65 0
*** *** *** ** ** *** *** **
16090 08/14*212 900 85 0*213 909 85 0*215 914 85 0*217 923 85 0
16090 08/14*214 904 70 0*217 914 70 0*220 925 70 0*221 934 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16095 08/15*220 930 85 0*224 940 85 0*228 950 85 0*230 960 80 0
16095 08/15*223 943 70 0*226 951 70 986*230 960 70 0*231 968 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
16100 08/16*232 968 75 0*234 975 50 0*234 986 40 0*232 996 35 0
16100 08/16*230 976 70 0*228 983 50 0*225 990 40 0*220 996 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** ***
16105 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
A central pressure of 970 mb (0430Z on the 9th) suggests winds of 89 kt from
the southern wind-pressure relationship - 90 kt utilized in best track, up
from 80 kt previously. A peripheral pressure of 975 mb (0930Z on the
11th) suggests winds of at least 84 kt from the southern wind-pressure
relationship and a wind measurement of 105 kt was observed - 105 kt used in
the best track, up from 100 kt previously. A central pressure of 958 mb
(05Z on the 12th) suggests winds of 102 kt from the southern wind-pressure
relationship and a wind measurement of 100 kt was observed - 105 kt retained
in best track. A central pressure of 986 mb (03Z on the 15th) suggests
winds of 68 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt
used in best track, down from 85 kt. Winds adjusted accordingly from the
9th to the 16th. Inland decay model of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized
for inland winds over the Yucatan of Mexico. Full lifecycle of this
hurricane is not known, due to lack of information about its genesis stage.
********************************************************************************
16110 09/09/1903 M= 8 3 SNBR= 376 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
16110 09/09/1903 M= 8 3 SNBR= 397 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
16115 09/09* 0 0 0 0*214 724 50 0*218 734 50 0*222 740 50 0
16120 09/10*226 747 55 0*232 753 60 0*238 760 65 0*240 765 70 0
16120 09/10*226 747 55 0*232 753 60 0*238 760 65 0*245 767 70 0
*** ***
16125 09/11*244 769 80 0*249 775 85 0*254 784 85 0*258 791 85 0
16125 09/11*251 775 75 0*255 782 75 0*257 789 75 0*259 796 75 976
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
16130 09/12*264 803 75 0*269 812 65 0*273 821 60 988*278 829 50 0
16130 09/12*262 803 70 0*267 812 60 0*273 821 55 988*277 829 50 0
*** ** *** ** ** ***
16135 09/13*281 836 55 0*285 842 60 0*289 848 65 0*295 853 70 0
16135 09/13*281 836 60 0*285 842 70 0*289 848 80 0*295 853 80 0
** ** ** **
16140 09/14*303 857 65 0*310 859 55 0*316 860 35 0*320 860 35 0
16140 09/14*303 857 80 0*310 859 60 0*316 860 45 0*320 860 35 0
** ** **
16145 09/15*324 859 35 0*327 856 35 0*330 853 35 0*333 849 35 0
16150 09/16*336 843 35 0*338 837 35 0*340 830 35 0*339 823 30 0
16150 09/16*336 843 30 0*338 837 30 0*340 830 30 0*339 823 30 0
** ** **
16155 HRCFL2AFL1
16155 HRCFL1AFL1
****
Two major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) where made to the track of
this hurricane. The first alteration is to bring the center of the system
to just west of Nassau near 00 UTC on the 10th, based upon wind and pressure
observations. The second major alteration is to utilize the Ho
et al. (1987) landfall position for Southeast Florida, which does better
match the possible central position from Cat Cay. Partagas and Diaz
otherwise made reasonable small alterations to the track and intensity
shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A central pressure of 976 mb (11th) suggests
winds of 80 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship. However, Ho
et al. estimate a large (43 nmi) RMW, so that winds are chosen to be 75 kt
which matches the observed winds in Jupiter, Florida - this is a moderate
reduction from the original HURDAT. Ho et al.'s estimate of 977 mb at
landfall in Southeast Florida was based upon a peripheral pressure of 996 mb
from Tampa. This is consistent with the measured 976 mb central pressure
from Cat Cay, Bahamas. The 75 kt at landfall in Southeast Florida makes this
hurricane a Category 1, which is downgraded from the estimate of Category 2
in Neumann et al.'s (1999) Table 6/U.S. hurricane characterization in
HURDAT. A storm tide of 8' was recorded at Jupiter, Florida (Barnes 1998a).
A peripheral pressure of 985 mb (at 22Z on the 13th) suggests winds of at
least 70 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship. A storm tide
value of 10' was recorded at Apalachicola, Florida (Barnes 1998a). Winds
at landfall are estimated at 80 kt based upon these observations, which is
increased slightly from the 70 kt originally in HURDAT. The 80 kt at landfall
in the panhandle of Florida retains the Category 1 in Neumann et al.'s
assessment. Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 13th and 14th.
Full lifecycle of this hurricane is not known, due to lack of information
about its genesis stage.
********************************************************************************
16160 09/12/1903 M= 6 4 SNBR= 377 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
16160 09/12/1903 M= 6 4 SNBR= 398 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
***
16165 09/12*225 556 60 0*233 564 60 0*242 573 70 0*251 583 70 0
16165 09/12*225 556 60 0*233 564 60 0*242 573 60 0*254 587 60 0
** *** *** **
16170 09/13*260 594 70 0*268 607 70 0*275 620 70 0*281 636 70 0
16170 09/13*265 604 60 0*274 622 60 0*280 640 60 0*284 652 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16175 09/14*286 654 70 0*292 672 70 0*297 686 70 0*303 696 70 0
16175 09/14*288 665 60 0*291 678 60 0*295 690 60 0*301 703 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16180 09/15*309 704 70 0*315 712 75 0*321 718 80 0*331 723 85 0
16180 09/15*308 715 70 0*316 726 75 0*325 733 80 0*341 740 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16185 09/16*346 728 85 0*364 733 80 0*384 739 70 0*400 747 65 0
16185 09/16*362 745 80 0*380 746 75 0*393 747 70 990*403 750 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** **
16190 09/17*410 756 55 0*419 764 45 0E430 772 40 0E448 770 30 0
16190 09/17*411 755 55 0*419 763 45 0E430 770 40 0E448 770 30 0
*** *** *** ***
16195 HR NJ1 NY1 CT1
16195 HR NJ1 DE1
*** ***
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A
peripheral pressure of 997 mb (15Z on the 16th) suggests winds of at least
53 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt chosen for best
track which is the same as the original HURDAT. 990 mb was analyzed as the
central pressure at landfall in Jarrell et al. (1992), which suggests winds
of 63 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship. Intensity at landfall
is retained as a Category 1 at New Jersey (70 kt) - which agrees with Table 6
in Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT. A ship
report of hurricane force winds at the Delaware Capes (from Roth and Cobb
2001) suggests that the Delaware coast also experienced Category 1
conditions. However, observations collected by Partagas and Diaz indicate
that New York and Connecticut were not likely affected by sustained
hurricane winds so that they are removed from being listed as a Category 1
at landfall. Full lifecycle of this hurricane is not known, due to lack of
information about its genesis stage.
********************************************************************************
16200 09/20/1903 M= 7 5 SNBR= 378 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16200 09/19/1903 M= 8 5 SNBR= 399 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * ***
(The 19th is new to HURDAT.)
16202 09/19*208 716 30 0*213 717 30 0*217 717 30 0*220 717 30 0
16205 09/20*219 716 35 0*225 714 35 0*230 712 35 0*234 713 35 0
16205 09/20*223 717 30 0*226 717 30 0*230 717 30 0*235 718 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16210 09/21*239 714 35 0*243 716 35 0*247 718 40 0*251 720 40 0
16210 09/21*241 720 30 0*246 722 30 0*250 725 30 0*255 727 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16215 09/22*254 722 45 0*258 724 45 0*262 726 45 0*267 728 45 0
16215 09/22*260 729 30 0*265 731 30 0*270 733 35 0*275 735 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16220 09/23*272 729 45 0*278 729 45 0*284 729 45 0*290 729 45 0
16220 09/23*279 736 40 0*285 736 40 0*290 737 45 0*300 739 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
16225 09/24*297 727 50 0*303 724 50 0*310 720 50 0*318 713 50 0
16225 09/24*314 740 50 0*328 738 50 0*340 730 50 0*347 716 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16230 09/25*328 703 50 0*339 691 45 0*347 675 45 0*351 659 40 0
16230 09/25*351 704 50 0*354 690 45 0*355 675 45 0*360 653 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16235 09/26*358 637 35 0*360 611 30 0*366 582 25 0* 0 0 0 0
16235 09/26*367 627 35 0*373 601 30 0*378 575 25 0*382 556 25 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
16240 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. A peripheral pressure of
1003 mb (12Z on the 24th) suggests winds of at least 43 kt from the
subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 50 kt retained in HURDAT.
A peripheral pressure of 1004 mb (12Z on the 25th) suggests winds of
at least 42 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship - 45 kt
retained in HURDAT.
********************************************************************************
16245 09/26/1903 M= 5 6 SNBR= 379 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16245 09/26/1903 M= 5 6 SNBR= 400 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
16250 09/26* 0 0 0 0*229 588 40 0*233 600 40 0*236 616 40 0
16255 09/27*239 628 45 0*243 638 50 0*248 646 50 0*261 653 55 0
16255 09/27*239 628 45 0*243 638 50 0*248 646 55 0*260 653 60 0
** *** **
16260 09/28*274 654 60 0*288 652 65 0*302 647 70 0*316 637 75 0
16260 09/28*273 657 70 0*287 657 80 0*300 655 90 0*321 642 95 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16265 09/29*331 624 80 0*346 606 85 0*362 576 85 0*379 530 85 0
16265 09/29*341 623 95 0*360 591 95 0*375 563 90 0*394 528 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
16270 09/30*388 500 80 0E406 462 75 0E435 410 70 0* 0 0 0 0
16270 09/30*412 486 80 0E427 448 75 0E445 405 70 0E465 355 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** **** *** **
16275 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
A peripheral pressure of 988 mb (16Z on the 28th) suggests winds of
at least 66 kt - 95 kt is chosen for the best track which is appropriate
given hurricane force winds were observed in Bermuda on the weak side of
the storm.
********************************************************************************
16280 10/01/1903 M=10 7 SNBR= 380 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16280 10/01/1903 M=10 7 SNBR= 401 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
16285 10/01*202 575 60 0*204 588 60 0*208 600 65 0*214 612 70 0
16285 10/01*170 560 60 0*177 573 60 0*185 585 60 0*194 597 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
16290 10/02*221 620 70 0*229 628 70 0*237 634 70 0*247 636 70 0
16290 10/02*203 610 65 0*215 622 70 0*230 635 70 0*243 638 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16295 10/03*259 633 70 0*271 629 70 0*281 622 75 0*290 612 75 0
16295 10/03*254 637 70 0*263 634 70 0*273 630 75 0*280 627 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16300 10/04*297 603 80 0*301 593 80 0*301 580 85 0*299 566 85 0
16300 10/04*289 622 80 0*295 616 80 0*300 607 85 0*305 591 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16305 10/05*296 552 85 0*293 538 85 0*289 525 85 0*286 510 80 0
16305 10/05*306 572 85 0*304 552 85 0*300 534 85 0*295 519 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16310 10/06*284 497 75 0*282 484 70 0*279 471 70 0*273 470 70 0
16310 10/06*289 502 75 0*281 488 70 0*270 480 70 0*268 482 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16315 10/07*268 478 70 0*269 488 70 0*272 493 70 0*279 489 70 0
16315 10/07*267 484 70 0*268 487 70 0*270 490 70 0*276 488 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16320 10/08*281 482 70 0*282 472 70 0*283 465 70 0*284 450 65 0
16320 10/08*280 482 70 0*282 472 70 0*283 462 70 0*285 450 65 0
*** *** ***
16325 10/09*285 434 65 0*286 419 60 0*288 404 50 0*293 390 45 0
16325 10/09*290 431 65 0*295 415 60 0*300 400 50 0*305 387 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16330 10/10E301 375 40 0E312 362 35 0E324 350 35 0* 0 0 0 0
16330 10/10E309 375 40 0E316 362 35 0E324 350 35 0E336 332 35 0
*** *** **** *** **
16335 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
Full lifecycle of this hurricane is not known, due to lack of information
about its genesis stage.
********************************************************************************
16340 10/05/1903 M= 6 8 SNBR= 381 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16340 10/05/1903 M= 6 8 SNBR= 402 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
16345 10/05*240 688 40 0*244 691 45 0*250 695 50 0*257 695 55 0
16345 10/05*255 725 35 0*257 723 35 0*260 720 40 0*263 717 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16350 10/06*263 694 55 0*268 692 60 0*272 690 65 0*275 688 70 0
16350 10/06*266 713 40 0*269 709 40 0*272 705 40 0*275 701 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** **
16355 10/07*278 685 70 0*280 683 70 0*283 680 70 0*286 676 70 0
16355 10/07*278 697 40 0*281 693 40 0*285 688 40 0*290 682 45 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16360 10/08*289 671 70 0*292 666 70 0*297 661 75 0*300 660 75 0
16360 10/08*295 674 50 0*300 669 55 0*305 665 60 0*311 662 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16365 10/09*304 660 80 0*309 662 85 0*313 668 85 0*316 677 85 0
16365 10/09*317 659 60 0*323 657 60 0*330 655 60 0*337 653 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16370 10/10*319 691 85 0*322 709 75 0*330 730 70 0E344 737 70 0
16370 10/10*345 652 55 0*353 651 50 0E361 650 50 0E372 648 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
16375 HR
16375 TS
**
Major changes were made to this system from that proposed by Partagas and
Diaz (1997). Portions of track that they proposed are not reasonable.
After re-examination of available observations for this system from
the Historical Weather Map series, new track positions are proposed for
the 5th through the 8th, which are different from both Neumann et al.
(1999) as well as Partagas and Diaz. These position are only moderately
altered from those seen in Neumann et al. (Partagas and Diaz' apparent
error was in focusing upon a possible position based on one ship [at 23N,
75W] on the 6th. However, space-time continuity with data on the 7th and
8th was not consistent with what they believed occurred on the 6th.)
Positions for the 9th and 10th proposed by Partagas and Diaz are large
alterations to what appears in Neumann et al., but do look quite
reasonable and are retained as suggested. (On the 9th, a strong front
entered the Atlantic from the U.S. east coast accompanied by an
extratropical low centered near 35N, 73W. On the 10th, the
extratropical low had drifted north (37N, 73.5W) and intensified, while
the tropical storm was becoming absorbed into the extratropical system
near the warm frontal boundary on the east side of the extratropical low.)
Partagas and Diaz analyzed this tropical system as peaking as a tropical
storm, rather than as a hurricane as found in Neumann et al. and HURDAT.
Partagas and Diaz' characterization of the intensity is retained here.
Two peripheral pressures of 997 mb (both at 12Z on the 9th) suggest winds
of at least 53 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 60 kt
chosen for the best track. Peak winds reduced from the standard
Category 2 (85 kt) down to a strong tropical storm (60 kt), since
available observations support a substantially weaker system. A storm
tide of 9' attributed to this system observed in Norfolk, Virginia (Roth
and Cobb 2001) was instead caused by the separate, strong extratropical
storm system.
********************************************************************************
16376 10/21/1903 M= 7 9 SNBR= 403 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16376 10/21* 0 0 0 0*212 720 30 0*215 725 30 0*219 729 30 0
16376 10/22*225 733 30 0*232 736 30 0*240 740 30 0*248 742 30 0
16376 10/23*256 743 30 0*263 743 30 0*270 743 35 0*279 745 40 0
16376 10/24*290 748 45 0*301 751 50 0*312 750 50 0E324 745 50 0
16376 10/25E336 731 50 0E345 715 50 0E358 695 50 0E380 669 50 0
16376 10/26E405 637 50 0E428 604 50 0E450 575 45 0E473 554 40 0
16376 10/27E491 537 40 0E511 524 40 0E530 510 35 0E552 495 35 0
16376 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
16380 11/17/1903 M= 9 9 SNBR= 382 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16380 11/17/1903 M= 9 10 SNBR= 404 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ***
16385 11/17* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*197 396 35 0*201 410 35 0
16385 11/17* 0 0 0 0*190 370 35 0*195 385 35 0*199 397 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** ***
16390 11/18*205 420 35 0*211 432 35 0*219 444 35 0*228 456 35 0
16390 11/18*204 413 35 0*211 429 35 0*219 444 35 0*228 456 35 0
*** *** ***
16395 11/19*237 468 35 0*245 480 40 0*255 493 45 0*264 500 50 0
16395 11/19*237 468 35 0*245 480 40 0*255 493 45 0*264 498 50 0
***
16400 11/20*273 502 60 0*282 500 65 0*290 492 70 0*292 483 70 0
16400 11/20*273 496 60 0*282 493 65 0*290 485 70 0*292 477 70 0
*** *** *** ** ***
16405 11/21*293 473 70 0*293 462 75 0*293 454 75 0*295 447 80 0
16405 11/21*293 471 70 0*293 462 70 0*293 454 70 0*295 447 70 0
*** *** ** ** **
16410 11/22*297 441 80 0*300 436 85 0*304 432 85 0*313 429 85 0
16410 11/22*297 441 70 0*300 436 70 0*304 432 70 0*313 429 70 0
** ** ** **
16415 11/23*328 427 85 0*343 425 80 0*354 423 75 0*363 421 70 0
16415 11/23*328 427 70 0*343 425 70 0*354 423 70 0*363 421 70 0
** ** **
16420 11/24*370 419 70 0*377 417 70 0*385 414 70 0*394 409 70 0
16425 11/25*403 405 65 0*413 400 65 0*422 396 65 0E435 389 50 0
16430 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 9. Peak winds are reduced from the standard
Category 2 (85 kt) down to Category 1 (70 kt) based upon available
observations that suggest that the system was, at most, a minimal
hurricane.
********************************************************************************
1903 - 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 (1997)
in mid-June 1903:
"1903 Additional system #1 Block Island and Nantucket observations
suggest tropical storm force winds, although the structure of the
system is not clear. Needs further research."
Upon investigation of this system from the Monthly Weather Review, the COADS
ship database, the Historical Weather Map series, and coastal station data,
this system did cause winds of gale force both over the Atlantic and at the
coast, but it had an extratropical storm structure at that time. The system
formed near the northern Bahamas on the 9th; apparently achieved tropical
depression status on the 10th near 28N, 78W; moved to the north-northeast on
the 11th with maximum winds of 30kt; merged with a frontal boundary and
intensified on the 12th; made landfall late on the 12th in New York;
moved northward and occluded over land on the 13th; and weakened on
the 14th near Lake Erie. Peak winds from this storm were 63 kt E at
Block Island (this corrects to 52 kt after accounting for the high bias
of the anemometer and converting to a peak 1 min wind), 42 kt SE at
Nantucket, 36 kt E at Boston, 35 kt E at Portland, and a COADS ship of
35 kt SE at 37N, 70W. Lowest sea level pressure observed was 997 mb at
New York City. (All peak observations were on the 12th of June).
However, the system at the time of tropical storm force conditions had
already acquired a baroclinic structure. As an example, New York City
experienced 67 F temperature and 65 F dewpoint with a 27 kt E wind
under light rain conditions at 12 UTC on the 12th. This became 57 F
temperature, 54 F dewpoint with a 5 kt W wind under cloudy conditions
a day later. Such changes are typical of that experienced in the region.
This structure is consistent with a moderate cold frontal feature.
Thus the system was likely not a tropical storm and is not included
into HURDAT.
Partagas and Diaz (1997) 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) August 20-23, 1903: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
3) November 23-26, 1903: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
4) The NHC Best Track Change Committee requested further investigation into
a possible storm system identified by the Committee from information
within Monthly Weather Review:
"1903 Additional system for 10-11 Sept. A possible depression
in the Gulf of Mexico. Isaac Cline states that warnings were
issued. System not noted in P+D. Needs further research."
Upon investigation of this system from the Monthly Weather Review, the COADS
ship database, the Historical Weather Map series, and coastal station data,
this system did cause heavy rains and winds up to 25 kt in the northern
Gulf of Mexico and in Louisiana and Texas. However, there was no closed
circulation with this system and it did not produce gale force winds.
Therefore, this system will not be included into HURDAT.
********************************************************************************
16435 06/11/1904 M= 4 1 SNBR= 383 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16435 06/10/1904 M= 5 1 SNBR= 405 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * ***
(The 10th is new to HURDAT.)
16437 06/10* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*130 805 30 0*136 807 30 0
16440 06/11* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*155 793 35 0*159 792 35 0
16440 06/11*142 807 30 0*146 805 30 0*150 803 30 0*157 802 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16445 06/12*164 792 35 0*168 791 35 0*172 790 35 0*176 788 35 0
16445 06/12*162 801 35 0*168 799 40 0*173 797 45 0*177 795 50 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16455 06/13*180 786 40 0*184 783 45 0*188 780 50 0*192 778 55 0
16450 06/13*181 792 55 0*184 789 60 0*187 785 65 0*194 777 70 0
*** *** ** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16455 06/14*195 774 60 0*197 770 55 0*199 765 35 0*201 760 25 0
16455 06/14*203 768 55 0*211 760 40 0*220 753 35 0*229 746 25 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
16460 TS
16460 HR
**
The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997) is to increase the storm
to minimal hurricane status (Category 1 - 70 kt) at landfall in Cuba, based
upon the analysis from Perez (2000). Partagas and Diaz otherwise made
reasonable small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et
al. (1999). Winds are also boosted from the 12th and the 13th based upon
observations in Jamaica listed by Partagas and Diaz. Winds reduced on the
14th, due to earlier landfall in revised HURDAT.
********************************************************************************
16465 09/08/1904 M= 8 2 SNBR= 384 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
16465 09/08/1904 M= 8 2 SNBR= 406 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
***
16470 09/08*193 539 60 0*196 550 60 0*200 561 65 0*205 575 70 0
16470 09/08*162 540 50 0*167 548 50 0*173 557 50 0*181 571 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16475 09/09*210 586 70 0*214 596 70 0*218 606 70 0*223 615 70 0
16475 09/09*190 586 50 0*199 603 50 0*210 620 50 0*217 630 50 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16480 09/10*226 621 70 0*230 630 70 0*236 640 70 0*241 650 70 0
16480 09/10*225 642 50 0*234 655 50 0*240 665 50 0*247 673 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16485 09/11*245 659 70 0*249 667 70 0*254 676 75 0*259 685 75 0
16485 09/11*251 680 50 0*255 690 50 0*259 700 50 0*262 708 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16490 09/12*263 693 75 0*267 702 80 0*271 711 85 0*275 721 85 0
16490 09/12*266 716 55 0*268 723 60 0*270 730 65 0*272 738 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16495 09/13*280 732 85 0*284 742 85 0*290 753 85 0*296 760 85 0
16495 09/13*276 747 70 0*281 757 70 0*290 767 70 0*297 774 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** *** **
16500 09/14*305 770 85 0*315 780 80 0*327 790 75 0*346 792 65 0
16500 09/14*304 780 70 0*315 785 70 0*327 790 70 0*346 795 60 0
*** *** ** *** ** ** *** **
16505 09/15E365 776 65 0E391 750 65 0E420 703 65 0E459 640 55 0
16505 09/15*365 776 55 0E391 750 65 0E420 703 75 0E459 640 55 0
* ** **
16510 HR SC1
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Peak
winds reduced from Category 2 (85 kt) down to Category 1 (70 kt) as a hurricane
since observations indicate that the system was, at best, a minimal hurricane.
Winds reduced accordingly from the 8th to the 14th. Winds are increased on
the 15th due to observations over New England in Partagas and Diaz while
during its extratropical stage. Landfall at South Carolina as a 70 kt
Category 1 agrees with assessment in the U.S. landfall categorization
in HURDAT/Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999). It is to be noted that
this system had hurricane force winds (and produced these along the U.S.
coast) during its extratropical stage on the 15th. Full lifecycle of this
hurricane is not known, due to lack of information about its genesis stage.
********************************************************************************
16515 10/12/1904 M=10 3 SNBR= 385 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
16515 10/12/1904 M=10 3 SNBR= 407 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
*** *
16520 10/12* 0 0 0 0*153 757 35 0*153 764 35 0*154 771 35 0
16525 10/13*156 777 35 0*159 782 35 0*164 787 35 0*171 791 35 0
16525 10/13*159 777 35 0*164 782 35 0*170 787 40 0*175 791 40 0
*** *** *** ** *** **
16530 10/14*179 793 35 0*186 795 35 0*193 797 40 0*199 798 40 0
16530 10/14*180 793 40 0*186 795 40 0*193 797 45 0*198 798 50 0
*** ** ** ** *** **
16535 10/15*204 799 45 0*209 799 45 0*215 800 40 0*221 799 40 0
16535 10/15*201 799 55 0*206 799 60 0*210 800 65 0*214 800 65 0
*** ** *** ** *** ** *** *** **
16540 10/16*228 797 40 0*235 795 45 0*242 793 55 0*248 791 65 0
16540 10/16*217 800 65 0*220 800 55 0*225 800 50 0*233 799 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16545 10/17*253 792 65 0*256 794 65 0*260 798 65 0*260 805 60 0
16545 10/17*242 799 65 0*251 801 70 0*257 807 60 0*259 809 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16550 10/18*260 809 55 0*257 814 45 0*252 816 40 0*253 809 35 0
16550 10/18*262 811 45 0*265 814 40 0*267 817 40 0*268 823 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
16555 10/19*259 808 30 0*263 809 25 0*267 810 25 0*269 809 20 0
16555 10/19*267 825 35 0*266 826 35 0*263 827 35 0*259 826 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16560 10/20*271 807 20 0*273 806 20 0*275 805 20 0*277 802 20 0
16560 10/20*256 822 35 0*254 816 35 0*255 810 35 0*258 800 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16565 10/21*280 799 20 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
16565 10/21*261 790 25 0*265 782 20 0*270 770 20 0*274 759 20 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16570 HR
16570 HRCFL1
****
The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997) is to increase the storm
to minimal hurricane status (Category 1 - 65 kt) at landfall in Cuba, based
upon the analysis from Perez (2000). Winds increased accordingly on the 14th
through the 16th. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
A peripheral pressure of 1004 mb (12Z on the 12th) suggests winds of at least
39 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 40 kt chosen for best
track. A peripheral pressure of 989 mb (05Z on the 17th) suggests winds
of at least 65 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt
chosen for best track. Winds at landfall in southeast Florida are
estimated at 70 kt, making this a Category 1 landfall which is consistent
with the original HURDAT 6 hourly intensity estimate just before landfall
(which had 65 kt). However, Table 6 in Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane
characterization in HURDAT did not list this as a U.S. landfalling
hurricane. A peripheral pressure of 1001 mb (12Z on the 20th) suggests
winds of at least 43 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship -
35 kt chosen for best track since the center had already made a second
landfall by this time. Inland decay model of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995)
utilized for inland winds over Florida.
********************************************************************************
16575 10/19/1904 M= 5 4 SNBR= 386 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16575 10/19/1904 M= 7 4 SNBR= 408 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
16580 10/19* 0 0 0 0*260 462 35 0*258 470 35 0*255 479 35 0
16580 10/19* 0 0 0 0*258 454 35 0*250 463 35 0*238 475 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
16585 10/20*250 488 35 0*247 497 35 0*245 506 35 0*244 514 35 0
16585 10/20*227 488 35 0*221 503 35 0*225 516 35 0*230 522 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16590 10/21*244 522 40 0*244 529 40 0*245 537 45 0*246 544 45 0
16590 10/21*236 523 40 0*243 522 40 0*250 520 45 0*260 522 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16595 10/22*250 550 45 0*254 555 45 0*260 560 40 0*265 564 35 0
16595 10/22*267 528 45 0*275 536 45 0*285 545 40 0*296 553 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16600 10/23*275 570 35 0*286 573 35 0*300 578 30 0* 0 0 0 0
16600 10/23*311 561 35 0*328 568 35 0*350 575 35 0*367 575 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
(24th and 25th are new to HURDAT.)
16601 10/24E392 567 35 0E417 556 35 0E445 540 35 0E473 512 35 0
16602 10/25E504 484 35 0E534 454 35 0E560 425 35 0E578 395 35 0
16605 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. A peripheral pressure of
1005 mb (12Z on the 21st) suggests winds of at least 38 kt from the
subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 45 kt retained in best track.
********************************************************************************
16610 10/29/1904 M= 8 5 SNBR= 387 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
16610 10/31/1904 M= 7 5 SNBR= 409 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * ***
16615 10/29* 0 0 0 0*199 860 35 0*203 868 40 0*206 875 35 0
16620 10/30*208 881 35 0*212 889 35 0*217 896 35 0*222 901 35 0
(The 29th and 30th are deleted from HURDAT.)
16625 10/31*226 906 35 0*231 911 35 0*237 916 35 0*242 919 35 0
16625 10/31* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*200 913 35 0*204 918 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
16630 11/01*246 920 35 0*251 920 40 0*257 919 40 0*262 918 45 0
16630 11/01*210 920 35 0*216 922 40 0*223 920 40 0*231 917 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16635 11/02*268 915 45 0*274 911 45 0*282 906 40 0*290 899 35 0
16635 11/02*238 914 45 0*244 911 45 0*253 907 40 0*265 898 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16640 11/03*300 891 35 0*309 879 35 0*316 864 35 0*316 843 35 0
16640 11/03*278 889 35 0*291 881 35 0*303 867 35 0*313 848 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
16645 11/04*319 828 35 0*328 806 35 0*336 786 35 0*340 765 35 0
16645 11/04*321 827 30 0*329 804 30 0E335 780 35 0E338 760 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** **** *** **** ***
16650 11/05*344 745 35 0*349 724 35 0*353 703 30 0*360 685 25 0
16650 11/05E345 734 35 0E351 711 35 0E360 687 35 0E377 660 35 0
**** *** **** *** **** *** ** **** ***
(The 6th is new to HURDAT.)
16652 11/06E400 624 35 0E424 593 35 0E450 575 35 0E466 557 35 0
16655 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. A peripheral pressure of
1005 mb (12Z on the 31st) suggests winds of at least 34 kt - 35 kt retained
in best track. Inland decay model of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized for
inland winds over the Southeast U.S.
********************************************************************************
1904 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1997) mentioned five additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out
of HURDAT for the following reasons:
1) September 3-5, 1904: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) September 24-30, 1904: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
3) October 10-16, 1904: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
4) October 28-November 2, 1904: Gale force intensity, but likely
extratropical.
5) November 9-14, 1904: Numerous gale to hurricane force observations, but
likely was an extratropical storm.
********************************************************************************
16660 09/06/1905 M= 2 1 SNBR= 388 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16660 09/06/1905 M= 3 1 SNBR= 410 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
16665 09/06* 0 0 0 0*140 580 50 0*140 590 50 0*140 600 50 0
16665 09/06* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*116 585 50 0*120 598 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** ***
16670 09/07*141 609 50 0*141 618 50 0*141 627 40 0*141 640 30 0
16670 09/07*125 611 50 0*130 628 50 0*135 643 40 0*139 658 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
(The 8th is new to HURDAT.)
16672 09/08*144 673 30 0*149 689 30 0*153 703 30 0*159 721 25 0
16675 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track
and intensity changes are found to be reasonable. Full lifecycle
of this tropical storm is not known, due to lack of information about its
genesis stage.
********************************************************************************
17350 09/11/1905 M= 6 2 SNBR= 389 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17350 09/11/1905 M= 6 2 SNBR= 411 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
17355 09/11* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*195 510 35 0*197 521 35 0
17360 09/12*200 533 35 0*202 541 35 0*205 550 40 0*210 560 40 0
17365 09/13*214 568 40 0*218 574 45 0*221 579 50 0*223 583 50 0
17370 09/14*226 586 50 0*229 588 50 0*232 591 45 0*238 594 40 0
17375 09/15*244 597 35 0*250 600 35 0*255 603 35 0*259 606 35 0
17380 09/16*263 611 35 0*267 615 35 0*270 620 30 0*272 625 30 0
17385 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1997) introduced no changes from that shown in Neumann
et al. (1999).
********************************************************************************
16720 09/24/1905 M= 7 3 SNBR= 390 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
16720 09/24/1905 M= 7 3 SNBR= 412 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
***
16725 09/24* 0 0 0 0*177 840 35 0*182 847 35 0*186 854 35 0
16730 09/25*190 860 35 0*194 867 40 0*199 874 40 0*204 881 35 0
16735 09/26*209 888 35 0*215 897 35 0*222 905 35 0*229 909 40 0
16735 09/26*209 888 35 0*215 897 35 0*222 905 45 0*229 909 45 0
** **
16740 09/27*237 914 40 0*245 918 40 0*253 920 40 0*259 922 45 0
16740 09/27*237 914 45 0*245 918 45 0*253 920 45 0*259 922 45 0
** ** **
16745 09/28*265 924 45 0*272 926 45 0*277 927 45 0*283 928 45 0
16750 09/29*287 927 45 0*292 926 45 0*298 925 40 0*306 918 35 0
16755 09/30*317 909 35 0*330 912 35 0*341 920 35 0*348 934 30 0
16760 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1997) did not introduce any changes for this storm from
that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral pressures of 1002 mb
(12Z on the 26th) suggests winds of at least 41 kt from the Gulf of Mexico
wind-pressure relationship - 45 kt chosen for best track. Winds are
adjusted accordingly on the 26th and 27th. Another peripheral pressure of
1002 mb (on the 28th) suggests winds of at least 41 kt - 40 kt retained for
best track at 12Z since the storm was inland by this time.
********************************************************************************
16765 10/01/1905 M=13 4 SNBR= 391 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16765 10/01/1905 M=13 4 SNBR= 413 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
16770 10/01* 0 0 0 0*107 797 60 0*110 797 60 0*111 797 60 0
16770 10/01* 0 0 0 0*110 792 30 0*110 790 30 0*111 788 30 0
*** *** ** *** ** *** **
16775 10/02*113 796 60 0*115 796 60 0*117 795 60 0*119 794 60 0
16775 10/02*113 787 30 0*115 786 30 0*117 785 30 0*119 783 30 0
*** ** *** ** *** ** *** **
16780 10/03*121 793 70 0*124 792 70 0*128 790 70 0*133 788 70 0
16780 10/03*121 782 35 0*124 781 35 0*127 780 35 0*132 779 35 0
*** ** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16785 10/04*138 786 70 0*145 782 70 0*150 779 70 0*158 773 70 0
16785 10/04*137 778 40 0*141 777 40 0*145 775 45 0*152 770 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16790 10/05*164 769 70 0*171 764 70 0*178 758 70 0*184 754 70 0
16790 10/05*158 765 50 0*163 760 50 0*170 755 55 0*181 748 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16795 10/06*190 749 70 0*196 742 70 0*202 737 70 0*211 729 70 0
16795 10/06*192 742 60 0*202 736 60 0*210 730 60 0*221 723 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16800 10/07*222 717 70 0*233 707 70 0*242 697 70 0*249 690 70 0
16800 10/07*232 717 60 0*243 711 60 0*253 705 60 0*264 696 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16805 10/08*255 684 70 0*262 677 70 0E270 670 75 0E280 660 75 0
16805 10/08*273 686 65 0*281 676 70 0*290 665 75 0*301 650 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** **** *** **** *** **
16810 10/09E290 650 80 0E300 640 80 0E310 630 85 0E320 613 85 0
16810 10/09*308 637 95 0*317 621 105 0*323 605 105 0*329 575 105 0
**** *** ** **** *** *** **** *** *** **** *** ***
16815 10/10E330 593 85 0E340 571 85 0E350 550 85 0E363 528 85 0
16815 10/10*333 548 105 0*340 522 100 0*350 500 95 0*363 486 90 0
**** *** *** * *** *** * *** *** * *** **
16820 10/11E379 502 85 0E396 479 85 0E410 460 75 0E421 450 65 0
16820 10/11*379 479 85 0E396 471 80 0E410 460 80 0E429 448 80 945
* *** *** ** ** *** *** ** ***
16825 10/12E431 448 55 0E442 449 50 0E455 452 45 0E467 458 40 0
16825 10/12E452 450 75 0E470 460 70 0E490 475 65 0E501 484 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16830 10/13E480 464 40 0E493 478 35 0E508 498 35 0E523 512 35 0
16830 10/13E510 492 45 0E521 501 35 0E530 510 35 0E540 521 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16835 HR
The only major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) are to retain the 1st
and 2nd as a tropical depression rather than eliminating it from the best
track and to delay the extratropical stage until the 11th. Partagas and
Diaz otherwise made reasonable small alterations to the track and intensity
shown in Neumann et al. (1999). A peripheral pressure of 1004 mb (12Z on
the 4th) suggests winds of at least 39 kt - 45 kt chosen for best track.
A possible central pressure of 945 mb (20Z on the 11th) suggests winds of
100 kt from the northern wind-pressure relationship - 80 kt chosen for best
track since the hurricane had already transitioned to an extratropical storm.
However, because of the very low pressures encountered, it is likely that it
retained tropical characteristics close to the observation date. It is
concluded that this hurricane reached Category 3 hurricane status (105 kt)
before becoming extratropical. Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 8th
through the 13th.
********************************************************************************
16840 10/05/1905 M= 6 5 SNBR= 392 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
16840 10/05/1905 M= 7 5 SNBR= 414 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
16845 10/05* 0 0 0 0*230 889 35 0*230 895 35 0*230 899 35 0
16845 10/05* 0 0 0 0*230 889 35 0*230 895 40 0*230 899 40 0
** **
16850 10/06*231 904 35 0*233 908 35 0*236 911 35 0*240 916 35 0
16850 10/06*231 904 40 0*233 908 40 0*236 911 40 0*240 916 40 0
** ** ** **
16855 10/07*244 920 35 0*249 924 35 0*252 926 35 0*256 928 40 0
16855 10/07*244 920 40 0*249 924 40 0*252 926 40 0*256 927 40 0
** ** ** ***
16860 10/08*258 929 45 0*260 930 45 0*263 930 45 0*267 931 45 0
16860 10/08*258 927 45 0*260 926 45 0*263 925 45 0*267 924 45 0
*** *** *** ***
16865 10/09*273 930 45 0*280 927 45 0*287 920 40 0*296 913 35 0
16865 10/09*273 923 45 0*280 922 45 0*287 920 45 0*296 913 40 0
*** *** ** **
16870 10/10*307 905 35 0*320 898 30 0*335 887 25 0* 0 0 0 0
16870 10/10*307 905 35 0E320 898 30 0E335 887 25 0E347 865 25 0
* * **** *** **
(The 11th is new to HURDAT.)
16872 10/11E356 843 25 0E364 824 25 0E373 800 25 0E385 777 25 0
16875 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. A peripheral pressure of
1003 mb (12Z on the 5th) suggests winds of at least 39 kt from the Gulf of
Mexico wind-pressure relationship - 40 kt chosen for best track.
********************************************************************************
1905 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1997) mentioned four additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out
of HURDAT for the following reasons:
1) August 18-20, 1905: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) August 27-30, 1905: Gale force intensity, but likely extratropical.
3) September 27, 1905: Gale to hurricane force observations found, but
likely was an extratropical storm.
4) November 28-December 3, 1905: Gale force intensity, but likely
extratropical.
********************************************************************************
16880 06/08/1906 M= 6 1 SNBR= 393 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
16880 06/08/1906 M= 7 1 SNBR= 415 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
16885 06/08* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*194 836 35 0*204 839 35 0
16885 06/08* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*194 836 35 0*204 837 35 0
***
16890 06/09*214 842 35 0*222 844 35 0*229 845 35 0*234 846 35 0
16890 06/09*214 838 35 0*222 839 35 0*230 840 40 0*235 841 45 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
16895 06/10*239 847 40 0*244 847 40 0*250 848 45 0*258 849 45 0
16895 06/10*239 842 45 0*244 842 45 0*250 843 45 0*254 844 45 0
*** ** *** ** *** *** ***
16900 06/11*264 850 45 0*268 851 45 0*274 852 45 0*278 853 45 0
16900 06/11*258 846 45 0*261 848 45 0*265 850 45 0*270 852 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16905 06/12*282 854 45 0*286 855 45 0*291 856 45 0*300 856 40 0
16905 06/12*275 854 45 0*280 855 45 0*287 855 45 0*296 856 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** **
16910 06/13*307 856 40 0*318 857 35 0*330 857 35 0*341 860 30 0
16910 06/13*307 856 40 0*318 857 35 0*330 857 35 0*346 865 30 0
*** ***
(The 14th is new to HURDAT.)
16912 06/14E362 877 30 0E380 891 30 0E400 895 30 0E418 898 30 0
16915 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These large
track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable. A peripheral
pressure of 1002 mb (21Z on the 9th) suggests winds of at least 41 kt from
the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship - winds chosen to be 45 kt
in best track and winds on the 9th and 10th are adjusted accordingly.
********************************************************************************
16920 06/14/1906 M=10 2 SNBR= 394 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
16920 06/14/1906 M=10 2 SNBR= 416 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
***
16925 06/14* 0 0 0 0*226 752 35 0*226 757 35 0*226 762 35 0
16925 06/14* 0 0 0 0*229 764 35 0*230 775 35 0*231 782 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
16930 06/15*226 767 35 0*227 773 40 0*227 778 40 0*228 784 45 0
16930 06/15*231 790 35 0*232 798 40 0*233 805 40 0*233 808 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16935 06/16*229 791 45 0*230 797 50 0*231 803 55 0*238 808 60 0
16935 06/16*233 811 50 0*233 813 55 0*235 815 60 0*240 815 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16940 06/17*246 810 65 0*255 809 70 0*267 804 70 0*279 795 75 0
16940 06/17*245 813 70 0*250 809 75 979*257 803 75 0*267 790 75 0
*** *** ** *** ** *** *** *** ** *** ***
16945 06/18*291 785 80 0*300 772 80 0*310 761 85 0*324 744 85 0
16945 06/18*281 775 80 0*295 761 80 0*310 747 85 0*324 734 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
16950 06/19*336 728 90 0*344 714 90 0*351 701 90 0*353 695 85 0
16950 06/19*338 723 90 0*351 712 90 0*363 695 90 0*367 682 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16955 06/20*355 689 80 0*357 682 75 0*357 674 65 0*356 664 65 0
16955 06/20*366 672 80 0*363 660 75 0*360 650 65 0*357 646 65 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
16960 06/21*354 652 55 0*353 641 50 0*353 630 45 0*355 623 45 0
16960 06/21*354 641 55 0*351 636 50 0*350 630 45 0*352 623 45 0
*** *** *** *** ***
16965 06/22*358 616 45 0*360 608 40 0*363 600 40 0*367 590 40 0
16965 06/22*356 616 45 0*358 608 40 0*360 600 40 0*363 590 40 0
*** *** *** ***
16970 06/23*372 578 35 0*377 565 35 0*382 551 35 0E390 530 30 0
16970 06/23*365 578 35 0*368 565 35 0*370 551 35 0E373 530 30 0
*** *** *** ***
16975 HRCFL1
16975 HRBFL1CFL1
****
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Ho et. al. (1987)
analyzed a central pressure at landfall of 979 mb and a RMW of 26 nmi in
peninsula Florida. This central pressure suggests winds of 79 kt from the
southern wind-pressure relationship. Given an RMW slightly larger than what
is typical at this latitude and central pressure (Vickery et al. 2000), the
maximum sustained windspeed at landfall is estimated at 75 kt. Thus the
hurricane is retained as a Category 1 hurricane at landfall in the Florida
Keys and southern Florida, agreeing with Table 6 in Neumann et al. (1999)/
U.S. hurricane categorization in HURDAT.
********************************************************************************
16976 08/22/1906 M= 4 3 SNBR= 417 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16977 08/22* 0 0 0 0*287 531 30 0*290 540 30 0*294 548 30 0
16978 08/23*299 556 35 0*305 565 35 0*313 567 40 0*321 564 45 0
16979 08/24*326 558 50 0*330 551 55 0*338 541 60 0*349 528 60 0
16979 08/25*364 512 55 0E375 497 50 0E390 480 45 0E402 463 40 0
16979 TS
No changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
16980 08/25/1906 M=19 3 SNBR= 395 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
16980 08/25/1906 M=19 4 SNBR= 418 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
16985 08/25*127 265 65 0*129 276 65 0*131 287 70 0*133 298 70 0
16985 08/25* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*140 210 35 0*140 225 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16990 08/26*135 309 70 0*137 321 70 0*139 332 70 0*139 343 70 0
16990 08/26*140 240 40 0*140 255 40 0*140 270 45 0*140 285 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
16995 08/27*140 355 70 0*140 366 70 0*140 380 70 0*141 386 70 0
16995 08/27*140 300 50 0*140 315 50 0*140 330 55 0*140 346 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17000 08/28*141 394 70 0*142 401 70 0*142 410 70 0*143 421 70 0
17000 08/28*139 362 60 0*139 378 60 0*138 395 65 0*138 412 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17005 08/29*144 432 70 0*144 442 70 0*145 453 70 0*145 465 70 0
17005 08/29*137 428 70 0*137 444 70 0*136 460 70 0*136 477 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17010 08/30*145 477 75 0*145 491 75 0*146 506 75 0*148 524 80 0
17010 08/30*136 493 75 0*135 509 75 0*135 525 75 0*137 540 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17015 08/31*151 539 80 0*154 554 80 0*158 569 85 0*160 577 85 0
17015 08/31*141 553 80 0*145 565 80 0*150 575 85 0*155 583 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17020 09/01*164 585 85 0*168 593 85 0*172 601 90 0*175 608 90 0
17020 09/01*160 590 85 0*165 600 85 0*170 607 90 0*175 614 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17025 09/02*178 613 90 0*181 619 90 0*184 625 90 0*188 633 95 0
17025 09/02*180 622 90 0*185 631 90 0*190 640 90 0*193 647 95 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17030 09/03*192 643 95 0*194 650 100 0*197 659 100 0*199 668 105 0
17030 09/03*196 654 95 0*198 660 100 0*200 667 100 0*203 676 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17035 09/04*202 675 105 0*206 683 110 0*211 692 110 0*215 700 110 0
17035 09/04*206 683 105 0*209 690 110 0*213 696 110 0*216 702 110 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17040 09/05*220 706 115 0*225 712 115 0*231 720 115 0*235 727 115 0
17040 09/05*221 708 115 0*225 714 115 0*231 720 115 0*235 727 115 0
*** *** ***
17045 09/06*239 734 115 0*244 740 115 0*250 747 115 0*259 750 110 0
17045 09/06*239 734 115 0*244 740 115 0*250 747 115 0*258 756 110 0
*** ***
17050 09/07*269 750 110 0*276 747 110 0*283 740 105 0*290 731 100 0
17050 09/07*268 764 110 0*279 766 110 0*290 760 110 0*295 748 110 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17055 09/08*296 722 100 0*301 714 95 0*307 704 95 0*311 693 95 0
17055 09/08*298 735 110 0*300 721 110 0*303 705 110 0*307 693 110 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17060 09/09*315 682 90 0*319 673 90 0*324 664 90 0*334 650 85 0
17060 09/09*313 681 105 0*319 669 105 0*325 657 105 0*336 643 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17065 09/10*344 638 85 0*357 621 85 0*378 600 80 0*398 581 80 0
17065 09/10*347 629 100 0*358 614 100 0*370 600 100 0*384 569 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17070 09/11*421 561 80 0*447 533 75 0E470 490 70 0E490 427 65 0
17070 09/11*400 528 95 950*422 488 85 0E450 450 75 0E475 404 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
17075 09/12E508 367 60 0E536 314 55 0E564 259 50 0* 0 0 0 0
17075 09/12E495 354 60 0E513 303 55 0E530 250 50 0E540 203 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** **** *** **
17080 HR
Major changes are made to the track proposed by Partagas and Diaz (1997) for
the 25th through the 30th. The track is begun on the 25th farther to
the east based upon re-examination of the Historical Weather Map series.
Track determined through the 30th based upon analysis of available
observational data along with a reasonable extrapolation of the storm in
time. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable small alterations to the
track and large changes (early in the hurricane's lifecycle) to the intensity
shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm number 3. A peripheral
pressure of 982 mb (07Z on the 7th) suggests winds of at least 72 kt from the
subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 110 kt retained in the best track.
A possible central pressure of 950 mb (01Z on the 11th) suggests winds of
97 kt - 95 kt chosen for the best track. Winds are adjusted upward from the
7th to the 11th accordingly.
********************************************************************************
17085 09/03/1906 M=16 4 SNBR= 396 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
17085 09/03/1906 M=16 5 SNBR= 419 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
* *** *
17090 09/03* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*102 330 35 0*103 337 35 0
17095 09/04*103 342 35 0*104 349 35 0*105 357 35 0*106 366 35 0
17100 09/05*109 376 35 0*112 385 35 0*116 395 35 0*120 405 35 0
17105 09/06*124 414 40 0*128 423 40 0*132 432 45 0*137 442 45 0
17105 09/06*124 414 35 0*128 423 35 0*132 432 35 0*137 442 35 0
** ** ** **
17110 09/07*141 449 45 0*146 456 45 0*151 462 50 0*153 466 50 0
17110 09/07*141 449 40 0*146 456 40 0*151 462 40 0*153 466 40 0
** ** ** **
17115 09/08*155 471 55 0*157 475 55 0*160 480 60 0*164 487 60 0
17115 09/08*155 471 40 0*157 475 40 0*160 480 40 0*164 484 40 0
** ** ** *** **
17120 09/09*169 495 60 0*174 503 65 0*179 510 65 0*183 515 70 0
17120 09/09*169 488 45 0*175 491 45 0*180 493 45 0*184 496 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17125 09/10*187 520 70 0*190 524 70 0*195 529 70 0*201 536 75 0
17125 09/10*188 499 50 0*193 503 50 0*197 507 50 0*202 513 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17130 09/11*207 544 75 0*216 556 75 0*224 569 80 0*230 581 80 0
17130 09/11*206 521 55 0*208 530 55 0*210 540 55 0*214 553 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17135 09/12*233 593 80 0*237 606 80 0*240 619 80 0*242 626 85 0
17135 09/12*218 565 60 0*222 577 60 0*227 590 65 0*230 602 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17140 09/13*245 632 85 0*249 639 85 0*254 645 85 0*260 650 85 0
17140 09/13*232 612 70 0*236 623 70 0*243 633 75 0*253 641 75 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17145 09/14*265 654 85 0*271 657 90 0*280 660 90 0*289 664 90 0
17145 09/14*266 647 80 0*279 655 80 0*290 663 80 0*295 667 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17150 09/15*296 668 95 0*303 670 95 0*310 675 100 0*314 683 105 0
17150 09/15*299 671 80 0*302 675 80 0*305 680 80 0*309 685 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17155 09/16*317 692 110 0*319 701 115 0*321 711 125 0*323 722 125 0
17155 09/16*312 690 80 0*315 697 80 0*317 707 80 0*320 720 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17160 09/17*325 735 120 0*328 748 110 0*332 763 100 0*335 781 85 0
17160 09/17*320 734 80 0*321 751 80 0*323 767 80 0*329 782 80 977
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
17165 09/18*338 795 60 0*341 808 40 0*347 821 30 0*353 834 30 0
17165 09/18*335 798 60 0*343 815 40 0*350 830 30 0*355 845 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17170 HR SC3 NC3
17170 HR SC1 NC1
*** ***
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large but
reasonable alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al.
(1999). This hurricane - originally storm number 4 - was listed as a
Category 3 at landfall in North and South Carolina with a central pressure
of 947 mb (Neumann et al. 1999; Jarrell et al. 1992). This was based upon
a supposed surface pressure reading of 945 mb at Cape Fear, North Carolina.
Both Ho et al. (1987) and Partagas and Diaz (1997) reject this measurement
as being erroneous since it does not correspond to nearby pressure
measurements nor do wind observations suggest that the center went over
Cape Fear. (Instead, landfall is analyzed at being near Georgetown, South
Carolina - over 60 nmi to the southwest of Cape Fear.) It is worth noting
that the _Monthly Weather Review_ at the time did not mention this supposed
947 mb central pressure reading, nor did Tannehill (1938). Barnes (1998b)
corroborates the damages and impacts of having a much weaker hurricane than
a 947 mb hurricane in the shipping, coastal and inland effects in the
Carolinas. The apparent source for 947 mb was Dunn and Miller (1960), which
gave the surface pressure value without any attribution. Instead, Ho et al.
(1987) analyze this hurricane as a 977 mb hurricane with a RMW of 30 nmi at
landfall in the Carolinas, which much better matches the observed wind
observations, pressure observations and damage incurred along the coast.
Such a central pressure with a near-climatological RMW (for that central
pressure and latitude) supports a wind speed of 79 kt from the subtropical
wind-pressure relationship - 80 kt utilized in best track. Such an
intensity corresponds well with the moderate wind damage incurred in South
Carolina, from newspaper archives in Charleston and Georgetown analyzed by
Prof. Cary Mock at the University of South Carolina. Without evidence for
a major hurricane at landfall in the United States, there is no support for
this hurricane ever being more than a minimal (Category 1) hurricane at its
peak. Winds are adjusted from the 13th to the 19th accordingly.
********************************************************************************
17175 09/19/1906 M=11 5 SNBR= 397 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
17175 09/19/1906 M=12 6 SNBR= 420 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
** * *** *
17180 09/19* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*149 725 35 0*149 730 35 0
17180 09/19* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*120 770 30 0*121 775 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** **
17185 09/20*149 736 35 0*150 742 35 0*150 751 35 0*150 760 35 0
17185 09/20*122 779 35 0*123 783 35 0*125 787 35 0*128 792 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17190 09/21*151 771 35 0*152 781 35 0*154 791 35 0*157 799 35 0
17190 09/21*132 797 35 0*136 801 35 0*140 805 35 0*146 809 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17195 09/22*161 806 40 0*165 812 40 0*170 819 45 0*175 826 45 0
17195 09/22*152 813 40 0*158 818 40 0*163 823 45 0*169 828 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17200 09/23*180 830 50 0*185 835 50 0*193 840 55 0*200 844 60 0
17200 09/23*175 832 50 0*181 837 50 0*187 840 55 0*193 843 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17205 09/24*206 847 65 0*212 850 70 0*220 854 75 0*227 856 80 0
17205 09/24*200 846 65 0*206 848 70 0*214 851 75 0*219 852 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17210 09/25*234 859 85 0*240 861 90 0*248 863 95 0*255 865 100 0
17210 09/25*223 855 85 0*228 857 90 0*233 860 95 0*240 863 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17215 09/26*261 867 105 0*268 870 110 0*275 872 120 0*284 877 125 0
17215 09/26*247 866 105 0*255 868 105 0*263 870 105 953*273 874 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17220 09/27*292 880 125 0*298 882 120 0*306 886 115 0*312 888 60 0
17220 09/27*284 879 100 0*294 884 95 0*304 887 95 958*314 890 65 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
17225 09/28*324 892 50 0*336 896 40 0*347 899 40 0*357 901 35 0
17225 09/28*324 893 50 0*336 896 40 0*347 899 40 0*356 902 35 0
*** *** ***
17230 09/29*367 901 35 0*376 899 30 0E385 897 30 0* 0 0 0 0
17230 09/29*366 904 35 0*373 905 30 0E380 903 30 0E382 894 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** **** *** **
(The 30th is new to HURDAT.)
17232 09/30E380 884 30 0E373 875 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
17235 HR MS3 AL3
17235 HR MS2 AL2AFL2 LA1
***************
The only major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) are to retain the 19th
as a tropical depression rather than eliminating it from the best track and
to extend the extratropical stage until 06Z on the 30th. Partagas and Diaz
otherwise made large alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann
et al. (1999). These track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.
This hurricane was formerly storm number 5 in Neumann et al. (1999).
Perez (2000) analyzed this hurricane causing Category 1 hurricane
conditions in western Cuba, but did keep the center of the storm just
offshore the coast. This is in agreement with the small changes that Partagas
and Diaz introduced for the hurricane near Cuba. A central pressure of
953 mb (at 12Z on the 26th) suggests winds of 107 kt from the Gulf of
Mexico wind-pressure relationship - 105 kt are utilized in the best track.
A pressure value of 965 mb (at 12Z on the 27th) measured by a ship in the
eye of the hurricane anchored off Scranton, MS suggests winds of 94 kt
from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship. Ho et al. (1987)
utilized this 965 mb observation as the hurricane's landfall central pressure
at the U.S. coastline and estimated a RMW of 43 nmi. However, Jarrell et al.
(1992) (from Connor 1956) suggested a central pressure value at U.S. landfall
of 958 mb. This value is likely closer to the actual central pressure
given that the ship's 965 mb was a "pegged" value for at least 45 minutes,
leading to the probability that the value was an underestimate of how
deep the hurricane was. 958 mb central pressure in the Gulf of Mexico
suggests maximum sustained winds of 102 kt. The RMW value of 43 nmi from
Ho et al. is much larger than what climatology for a central pressure value
of 958 mb and 30 deg N latitude calls for (22 nmi), suggesting the winds
should be moderately lower than what the standard wind-pressure relationship
calls for. 95 kt at landfall are chosen for the best track, making this a
Category 2. This is a change from that shown in Table 6 of Neumann et al.
(1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT. Winds are adjusted
accordingly on the 26th and 27th. Storm tide measurements of 14' in
Galt, Florida (Barnes 1998a) and 11' in Pensacola, Florida were observed
(Cline 1926).
********************************************************************************
17240 09/22/1906 M=11 6 SNBR= 398 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17240 09/22/1906 M=11 7 SNBR= 421 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
17245 09/22* 0 0 0 0*244 339 35 0*250 344 35 0*256 352 35 0
17245 09/22*303 319 50 0*296 329 50 0*290 338 50 0*283 347 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17250 09/23*261 358 35 0*265 365 35 0*269 371 40 0*270 377 40 0
17250 09/23*277 356 55 0*273 364 55 0*269 371 60 0*266 378 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17255 09/24*271 381 40 0*272 386 40 0*272 392 40 0*276 405 45 0
17255 09/24*263 385 60 0*261 392 60 0*260 400 60 0*258 407 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17260 09/25*285 430 45 0*288 439 45 0*290 449 45 0*290 461 45 0
17260 09/25*257 415 60 0*257 422 60 0*257 430 60 0*257 437 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17265 09/26*285 468 50 0*276 469 50 0*270 464 50 0*270 457 50 0
17265 09/26*260 443 60 0*264 446 60 0*270 447 60 0*275 447 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17270 09/27*271 447 50 0*274 438 50 0*278 430 50 0*284 424 50 0
17270 09/27*279 444 60 0*282 440 60 0*286 433 60 0*292 423 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17275 09/28*290 420 50 0*297 415 50 0*304 406 50 0*312 386 55 0
17275 09/28*299 410 60 0*305 397 60 0*310 385 60 0*317 370 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17280 09/29*320 365 55 0*329 343 60 0*339 322 60 0*351 302 60 0
17280 09/29*324 354 60 0*331 337 60 0*339 322 60 0*347 308 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** ***
17285 09/30*365 284 60 0*381 265 55 0E398 245 50 0E409 229 45 0
17285 09/30*358 296 60 0*367 287 55 0*377 277 50 0*392 263 45 0
*** *** *** *** **** *** **** ***
17290 10/01E418 217 40 0E427 203 35 0E437 187 35 0E448 167 35 0
17290 10/01*408 244 40 0E421 225 35 0E433 205 35 0E448 180 35 0
**** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17295 10/02E461 144 30 0E474 119 30 0E488 92 30 0* 0 0 0 0
17295 10/02E465 150 30 0E485 112 30 0E500 80 30 0E515 47 30 0
**** *** *** *** *** *** **** *** **
17300 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally
storm number 6. A loop which was originally described by the track of
the storm is now removed. A peripheral pressure of 1000 mb (at 12Z on the
22nd) suggests winds of at least 48 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure
relationship - 50 kt used in best track. A peripheral pressure of 994 mb
(at 12Z on the 23rd) suggests winds of at least 58 kt from the subtropical
wind-pressure relationship - 60 kt used in best track. Winds are increased
accordingly from the 22nd through the 29th (which had 60 kt in the
original HURDAT). Lifecycle of this tropical storm is not complete as
information on the genesis is not available.
********************************************************************************
17305 10/08/1906 M= 3 7 SNBR= 399 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17305 10/08/1906 M=16 8 SNBR= 422 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
** * *** * *
17310 10/08* 0 0 0 0*110 790 35 0*111 797 35 0*113 804 50 0
17310 10/08* 0 0 0 0*113 764 35 0*113 773 35 0*113 783 50 0
*** *** *** *** ***
17315 10/09*114 809 65 0*115 815 85 0*117 820 85 0*120 827 85 0
17315 10/09*113 793 65 0*113 804 75 0*115 815 85 0*117 824 95 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** **
17320 10/10*123 835 85 0*125 843 60 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
17320 10/10*121 831 105 0*126 839 80 0*130 846 70 0*132 851 65 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17325 HR
17330 10/11/1906 M=12 8 SNBR= 400 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
(These two lines are removed from the new HURDAT.)
17335 10/11* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*144 611 50 0*145 625 50 0
17335 10/11*134 855 60 0*137 859 55 0*140 863 50 0*144 867 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** **
17340 10/12*145 639 55 0*146 653 60 0*147 667 65 0*149 681 70 0
17340 10/12*147 869 40 0*151 871 40 0*155 873 50 0*158 874 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17345 10/13*150 696 70 0*152 711 70 0*154 725 70 0*156 739 70 0
17345 10/13*161 876 65 0*164 878 70 0*167 880 75 0*169 881 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
17350 10/14*158 752 75 0*160 764 75 0*162 776 75 0*164 787 80 0
17350 10/14*171 882 70 0*174 883 65 0*177 883 60 0*179 883 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17355 10/15*167 798 80 0*170 808 80 0*174 818 85 0*181 828 85 0
17355 10/15*181 882 50 0*183 881 50 0*185 880 50 0*188 878 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17360 10/16*189 838 85 0*197 845 90 0*205 847 95 0*213 846 100 0
17360 10/16*191 876 50 0*193 873 60 0*195 870 70 0*198 863 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ***
17365 10/17*221 842 105 0*229 836 110 0*237 826 115 0*244 818 115 0
17365 10/17*200 857 90 0*203 851 100 0*207 840 105 0*215 827 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17370 10/18*249 811 110 0*255 806 105 0*261 800 100 0*268 792 95 0
17370 10/18*226 821 105 0*239 816 105 0*253 807 105 953*266 795 95 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17375 10/19*276 786 90 0*283 782 85 0*291 779 80 0*300 780 80 0
17375 10/19*279 786 90 0*290 781 85 0*300 780 80 0*305 780 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
17380 10/20*306 781 75 0*311 783 70 0*318 790 65 0*312 797 50 0
17380 10/20*309 780 75 0*314 781 75 0*317 783 70 0*321 793 70 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17385 10/21*307 800 45 0*300 804 40 0*293 807 40 0*287 810 35 0
17385 10/21*317 804 60 0*307 812 50 0*295 815 40 0*290 815 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
17390 10/22*282 812 30 0*276 815 30 0*271 817 25 0*266 819 25 0
17390 10/22*283 816 30 0*273 817 30 0*260 820 25 0*249 828 25 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
(The 23rd is new to HURDAT.)
17392 10/23*240 838 25 0*231 848 25 0*223 857 25 0*215 866 25 0
17395 HRCFL2
17395 HRBFL3CFL3
********
No major changes were made to the track suggested by Partagas and Diaz
(1997). They made large alterations from Neumann et al. (1999) by
combining storm numbers 7 and 8 into a single hurricane with a revised track
and intensity. These dramatic changes are found to be reasonable. The
hurricane is increased to Category 3 intensity at landfall in Nicaragua
(105 kt) based upon the reported 15' storm tide and the vast destruction in
the country. Winds are thus increased on the 9th and 10th. Perez (2000)
analyzed this hurricane as a Category 3 hurricane at landfall in Cuba.
Winds for the hurricane at Cuba landfall are thus lowered from 115 kt down
to 105 kt on the 17th and 18th. Perez also altered the track for this
hurricane eastward even more than provided by Partagas and Diaz such that
the hurricane went on the east side of the Isle of Pines. The track here
reflects this re-analysis. Ho et al. (1987) had analyzed a central pressure
of 967 mb and an RMW of 16 nmi for landfall in southern Florida.
However, land-based readings of pressure were as low as 953 mb in Miami.
This is taken to be the central pressure for this hurricane, which suggests
winds of 100 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship. Descriptions
from Barnes (1998a) suggest a small inner core of this system with an RMW
on the order of 10-12 nmi. Such an RMW is somewhat smaller than that
expected from this central pressure and latitude (~17 nmi - Vickery et al.
2000). Thus highest winds near the time of landfall in southern Florida are
suggested to be 105 kt, making this system a major (Category 3) hurricane
for the region. A Category 3 categorization is an upgrade from the
Category 2 listing found in Table 6 or Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane
characterization in HURDAT. This upgrade does, however, agree with the
assessment by Partagas and Diaz. A peripheral pressure of 987 mb (at 22Z on
the 20th) suggest winds of at least 67 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure
relationship - winds chosen to be 70 kt for best track. Winds are adjusted
accordingly on the 20th and 21st.
********************************************************************************
17400 10/13/1906 M= 5 9 SNBR= 401 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
17400 10/14/1906 M= 4 9 SNBR= 423 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * *** *
17405 10/13* 0 0 0 0*331 609 35 0*333 616 35 0*335 623 35 0
(The 13th is omitted from HURDAT.)
17410 10/14*337 630 35 0*338 637 35 0*338 644 35 0*337 658 35 0
17410 10/14* 0 0 0 0*337 620 35 0*337 635 35 0*337 651 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** ***
17415 10/15*336 671 35 0*334 684 35 0*332 697 35 0*329 710 35 0
17415 10/15*336 669 40 0*334 682 40 0*332 697 45 0*327 714 45 0
*** ** *** ** ** *** *** **
17420 10/16*326 723 35 0*322 737 35 0*318 750 35 0*313 764 35 0
17420 10/16*321 731 45 0*312 749 45 0*305 765 45 0*301 773 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17425 10/17*308 779 35 0*303 794 35 0*297 810 35 0* 0 0 0 0
17425 10/17*299 780 40 0*296 787 35 0*293 795 30 0*288 806 25 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
17430 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
Peripheral pressures of 1003 mb (at 12Z on the 15th and 16th) suggests winds
of at least 43 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 45 kt
chosen for best track. Winds increased accordingly on the 15th to the 17th.
XING set equal to "0" since landfall occurred after decay to tropical
depression status.
********************************************************************************
17435 10/16/1906 M= 5 10 SNBR= 402 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17435 10/15/1906 M= 6 10 SNBR= 424 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * ***
(The 15th is new to HURDAT.)
17438 10/15* 0 0 0 0*210 694 35 0*217 700 35 0*227 707 35 0
17440 10/16* 0 0 0 0*263 706 35 0*266 700 35 0*269 694 35 0
17440 10/16*239 713 35 0*252 716 35 0*262 713 35 0*271 710 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17445 10/17*271 689 35 0*273 685 35 0*275 680 35 0*278 675 35 0
17445 10/17*278 704 35 0*282 698 35 0*285 693 35 0*288 685 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17450 10/18*281 670 40 0*284 666 40 0*286 660 45 0*284 645 45 0
17450 10/18*290 677 40 0*292 669 40 0*293 660 45 0*293 650 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17455 10/19*279 635 40 0*275 621 35 0*274 605 30 0*275 597 30 0
17455 10/19*293 640 40 0*293 630 40 0*293 620 35 0*293 610 35 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17460 10/20*276 590 30 0*277 583 25 0*278 576 25 0*280 569 25 0
17460 10/20*292 600 30 0*291 590 30 0*290 580 25 0*289 571 25 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
17465 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable.
********************************************************************************
17470 11/06/1906 M= 4 11 SNBR= 403 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17470 11/05/1906 M= 6 11 SNBR= 425 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
(The 5th is new to HURDAT.)
17472 11/05*185 825 30 0*190 825 30 0*195 825 35 0*199 824 40 0
17475 11/06* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*150 767 35 0*163 780 35 0
17475 11/06*203 821 45 0*207 818 50 0*210 815 55 0*213 810 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17480 11/07*175 788 35 0*188 793 35 0*200 796 35 0*212 795 35 0
17480 11/07*215 805 65 0*217 800 70 0*220 793 60 0*224 784 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17485 11/08*224 789 35 0*236 776 35 0*247 760 35 0*252 749 35 0
17485 11/08*227 776 45 0*230 766 40 0*233 757 35 0*236 748 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17490 11/09*255 740 35 0*257 731 35 0*260 720 30 0*266 706 30 0
17490 11/09*239 739 35 0*242 730 35 0*245 723 35 0*248 715 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
(The 10th is new to HURDAT.)
17492 11/10E251 705 30 0E255 695 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
17495 TS
17495 HR
**
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. Perez (2000) analyzed this as
a Category 1 landfall in Cuba, agreeing with Partagas and Diaz' assessment.
Thus this tropical storm is upgraded to a hurricane in the vicinity of
central Cuba. A peripheral pressure of 997 mb (at 02Z on the 7th) suggests
winds of at least 53 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 65 kt
utilized in best track.
********************************************************************************
1906 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1997) mentioned three additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out
of HURDAT for the following reasons:
1) September 16, 1906: Possible new hurricane, but location not known.
2) October 13, 1906: At least one gale force wind report, but unclear if
system was closed circulation.
3) October 14-15, 1906: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
17500 06/24/1907 M= 6 1 SNBR= 404 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
17500 06/24/1907 M= 7 1 SNBR= 426 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
17505 06/24* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*160 780 35 0*161 788 35 0
17510 06/25*164 797 35 0*167 806 35 0*170 815 35 0*177 824 35 0
17515 06/26*186 834 35 0*196 843 35 0*206 853 40 0*218 862 40 0
17520 06/27*229 871 45 0*240 880 45 0*252 889 45 0*262 892 45 0
17520 06/27*229 871 45 0*240 880 45 0*252 889 45 0*262 894 45 0
***
17525 06/28*272 891 45 0*281 880 45 0*288 869 50 0*296 850 50 0
17525 06/28*270 896 45 0*276 894 45 0*283 890 50 0*293 878 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17530 06/29*304 825 45 0*310 810 40 0*322 791 35 0E349 770 30 0
17530 06/29*303 858 50 0*308 835 45 0*318 808 55 0E340 780 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
(The 30th is new to HURDAT.)
17532 06/30E365 760 45 0E392 733 40 0E420 705 35 0E450 675 30 0
17535 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
These changes include shifting the landfall location in Florida westward
of its original position. Winds are increased on the 29th based upon wind
observations from Jacksonville.
********************************************************************************
17540 09/17/1907 M= 7 2 SNBR= 405 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
17540 09/18/1907 M= 6 2 SNBR= 427 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * ***
17545 09/17*225 756 35 0*227 767 35 0*228 778 40 0*229 789 40 0
(The 17th is deleted from HURDAT.)
17550 09/18*230 800 40 0*232 810 40 0*234 819 40 0*236 827 45 0
17550 09/18* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*250 790 30 0*255 803 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17555 09/19*239 835 45 0*242 842 50 0*246 850 50 0*251 859 50 0
17555 09/19*259 816 30 0*263 828 35 0*267 840 35 0*271 850 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17560 09/20*256 865 50 0*261 873 45 0*267 881 45 0*272 887 40 0
17560 09/20*275 858 40 0*279 864 40 0*283 870 40 0*287 876 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
17565 09/21*278 891 40 0*284 895 40 0*290 897 40 0*297 898 35 0
17565 09/21*291 882 40 0*295 887 40 0*300 890 40 0*305 889 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17570 09/22*305 897 35 0*314 889 35 0*322 881 35 0E330 860 35 0
17570 09/22*310 888 35 0*315 884 35 0*321 876 35 0E329 863 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17575 09/23E336 848 35 0E341 835 35 0E356 802 35 0E377 773 30 0
17575 09/23E338 847 35 0E347 830 35 0E357 813 35 0E368 796 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17580 TS
The only major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997) is to begin the storm on
the 18th (as a tropical depression) rather than on the 19th (as a tropical
storm) that Partagas and Diaz suggested. This is based upon the (limited)
data on the 18th that suggests that the storm had developed as a tropical
depression just east of Florida. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made large
track and intensity alterations to that shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
These track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable. Peak winds
for this storm reached, at most, minimal tropical storm status from
available observations. Thus winds are lowered on the 19th and 20th.
********************************************************************************
17585 09/27/1907 M= 3 3 SNBR= 406 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
17585 09/27/1907 M= 4 3 SNBR= 428 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* ***
17590 09/27* 0 0 0 0*223 941 35 0*233 933 35 0*243 925 35 0
17590 09/27* 0 0 0 0*223 941 35 0*233 933 35 0*245 925 35 0
***
17595 09/28*251 919 35 0*262 907 35 0*274 893 40 0*287 879 45 0
17595 09/28*257 913 35 0*270 900 35 0*283 885 40 0*296 866 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17600 09/29*301 858 40 0*315 835 35 0*332 786 35 0E352 745 30 0
17600 09/29*309 843 40 0*318 819 35 0*327 790 35 0E340 755 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
(The 30th is new to HURDAT.)
17602 09/30E355 715 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
17605 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
********************************************************************************
17610 10/17/1907 M= 5 4 SNBR= 407 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17610 10/17/1907 M= 4 4 SNBR= 429 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
17615 10/17*273 598 35 0*280 606 35 0*288 616 35 0*295 623 35 0
17615 10/17* 0 0 0 0*263 674 45 0*264 660 45 0*268 646 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17620 10/18*301 627 35 0*310 630 35 0*318 631 40 0*331 629 40 0
17620 10/18*275 632 45 0*283 618 45 0*290 605 45 0*304 594 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17625 10/19*354 622 45 0*378 602 45 0*402 571 45 0*428 535 40 0
17625 10/19*317 582 45 0*328 573 45 0*340 560 45 0E356 540 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** **** ***
17630 10/20E454 498 40 0E477 467 35 0E500 439 35 0E524 421 35 0
17630 10/20E376 491 40 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
*** *** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
17635 10/21E545 414 35 0E565 409 35 0E587 400 35 0* 0 0 0 0
(The 21st is omitted from the new HURDAT.)
17640 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and
intensity changes are found to be reasonable. A peripheral pressure of
1003 mb (at 12Z on the 17th) suggests winds of at least 43 kt from the
subtropical wind-pressure relationship - winds are chosen at 45 kt for the
best track. Winds are increased accordingly on the 17th and 18th. The full
lifecycle of this tropical storm is not known due to lack of information on
its genesis.
********************************************************************************
17641 11/06/1907 M= 7 5 SNBR= 430 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17642 11/06*315 397 35 0*308 399 35 0*300 400 35 0*295 401 35 0
17643 11/07*289 402 35 0*282 403 35 0*275 405 35 0*272 409 35 0
17643 11/08*269 414 40 0*267 419 40 0*267 425 40 0*272 435 40 0
17643 11/09*281 440 40 0*291 442 40 0*300 445 40 0*308 447 40 0
17643 11/10*318 450 40 0*326 454 40 0*335 460 40 0*341 464 40 0
17643 11/11*347 469 40 0*354 476 40 0*365 480 40 0*377 480 40 0
17643 11/12*387 473 35 0*396 467 35 0*405 460 35 0E417 450 35 0
17643 TS
No changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
1907 - Additional Notes - 2004 REVISION:
1) The NHC Best Track Change Committee requested further investigation into
the storm system first identified by Partagas and Diaz (1997) in late March
to early April 1907:
"1907 additional system #1 This system bears re-evaluation in
light of Ana (2003). There is no doubt of 35 kt winds, but the
structure is not known."
Upon investigation of this system from the Monthly Weather Review, the COADS
ship database and the Historical Weather Map series, this system did produce
tropical storm and hurricane force winds as an extratropical storm system,
but the winds weakened considerably by the time the baroclinic structure
had dissipated. Numerous gale force to hurricane force winds were observed
on the 25th and 26th of March, but the storm system had a well-defined
surface baroclinic frontal feature associated with it. By late on the 27th,
the temperature contrast had dissipated (though with temperatures in the
upper 60s), but no high wind observations were present. From the 28th until
the 31st, the system drifted south but contained no gale force winds near
the center. On the 1st of April, it began moving back to the northeast
without intensification and was likely absorbed by a vigorous extratropical
storm system on the 2nd. Thus during its non-baroclinic phase (from the
27th of March until the 1st of April), it does not appear that tropical
storm intensity was maintained. Thus this system is not added into
HURDAT.
Partagas and Diaz (1997) mentioned three additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out
of HURDAT for the following reasons:
2) September 11-15, 1907: One gale force report, insufficient to determine
if system was of tropical storm intensity.
3) October 3-17, 1907: One gale force report, insufficient to determine
if system was of tropical storm intensity.
4) October 30, 1907: Damage reports in Texas leave it uncertain if system
was a tornado or tropical storm.
********************************************************************************
17645 03/06/1908 M= 4 1 SNBR= 408 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17645 03/06/1908 M= 4 1 SNBR= 431 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
***
17650 03/06* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*238 602 50 0*227 607 55 0
17655 03/07*216 611 65 0*206 615 70 0*197 619 80 0*188 622 85 0
17660 03/08*180 625 85 0*173 628 70 0*166 631 65 0*160 634 65 0
17665 03/09*154 637 65 0*149 640 50 0*144 642 40 0*138 646 35 0
17670 HR
Partagas and Diaz (1997) did not introduce any changes to the track or
from that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). The full lifecycle of this
tropical storm is not known due to lack of information on its genesis.
********************************************************************************
17671 05/24/1908 M= 8 2 SNBR= 432 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
17672 05/24* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*210 717 30 0*217 720 30 0
17672 05/25*224 723 30 0*233 728 30 0*240 735 30 0*247 743 30 0
17672 05/26*254 750 35 0*260 756 35 0*267 763 35 0*272 773 35 0
17672 05/27*277 781 40 0*285 791 45 0*295 795 50 0*301 795 55 0
17672 05/28*306 792 60 0*312 788 65 0*317 783 65 0*323 779 65 0
17672 05/29*328 774 65 0*334 770 65 0*340 765 65 0*348 759 65 989
17672 05/30*356 753 65 0*363 747 60 0*373 740 50 0*394 730 40 0
17672 05/31*418 717 35 0E438 703 35 0E455 690 35 0E464 683 35 0
17673 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997) for this newly documented
hurricane. A possible central pressure of 989 mb suggests winds of 64 kt
from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 65 kt chosen in best
track. Despite this hurricane making landfall, no observations of
hurricane force wind were recorded on the U.S. coast and it is likely
the such winds stayed offshore.
********************************************************************************
17675 07/25/1908 M=10 2 SNBR= 409 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
17675 07/24/1908 M=11 3 SNBR= 433 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
** ** * ***
(24th is new to HURDAT.)
17677 07/24* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*275 750 30 0*278 752 30 0
17680 07/25* 0 0 0 0*285 790 35 0*287 785 35 0*289 780 35 0
17680 07/25*281 755 30 0*284 759 30 0*287 763 35 0*289 766 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
17685 07/26*289 776 35 0*290 773 35 0*290 770 35 0*287 765 35 0
17685 07/26*290 769 35 0*290 772 35 0*290 775 35 0*289 778 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
17690 07/27*279 763 35 0*273 764 35 0*270 768 35 0*270 772 35 0
17690 07/27*287 780 35 0*283 783 35 0*277 785 35 0*273 783 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17695 07/28*272 775 40 0*275 778 55 0*278 780 60 0*281 781 60 0
17695 07/28*271 777 40 0*271 772 55 0*273 770 60 0*277 770 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17700 07/29*285 782 60 0*289 783 60 0*294 783 65 0*302 784 70 0
17700 07/29*280 775 60 0*282 779 60 0*285 782 60 0*294 783 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
17705 07/30*312 785 75 0*322 785 80 0*330 783 85 0*335 781 85 0
17705 07/30*304 783 65 0*314 782 70 0*325 780 70 0*331 779 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17710 07/31*339 778 85 0*343 774 85 0*348 767 75 0*354 760 70 0
17710 07/31*337 776 70 0*342 774 70 0*347 770 70 0*352 758 60 0
*** *** ** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17715 08/01*362 749 70 0*371 737 75 0*380 725 80 0*391 710 85 0
17715 08/01*356 741 60 0*361 728 60 0*365 717 60 0*372 700 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17720 08/02*403 693 85 0*416 675 85 0*430 652 85 0E445 630 75 0
17720 08/02*378 685 60 0*387 669 60 0*400 655 60 0E417 630 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17725 08/03E464 603 60 0E481 585 55 0E496 569 50 0E528 552 50 0
17725 08/03E440 606 60 0E463 585 55 0E485 565 50 0E506 543 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17730 HR NC1
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 2. These track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable.
A peripheral pressure of 988 mb (at 21Z on the 30th) suggests winds of at
least 66 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt chosen
for best track at landfall in North Carolina. This agrees with the
assessment of Table 6 in Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization
in HURDAT. Winds are adjusted downward moderately accordingly from the 30th
and the 31st. There is no indication that the system regained hurricane
strength after passing back into the open Atlantic. Winds reduced
accordingly on the 1st and 2nd to a 60 kt tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
17735 08/30/1908 M= 4 3 SNBR= 410 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17735 08/30/1908 M= 4 4 SNBR= 434 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
17740 08/30* 0 0 0 0*325 722 35 0*327 728 35 0*329 732 35 0
17740 08/30* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*330 725 35 0*330 732 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ***
17745 08/31*331 737 35 0*333 741 40 0*336 748 40 0*339 750 40 0
17745 08/31*330 741 35 0*330 750 40 0*330 760 40 0*332 765 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17750 09/01*342 752 45 0*345 753 45 0*349 753 45 0*353 749 45 0
17750 09/01*338 768 45 0*344 767 45 0*350 763 45 0*361 750 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17755 09/02*357 743 40 0*362 733 40 0*367 721 35 0*374 709 25 0
17755 09/02*372 736 40 0*382 723 40 0*390 707 35 0E398 682 25 0
*** *** *** *** *** **** ***
17760 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 3.
********************************************************************************
1908/04 - 2004 ADDITION:
18900 07/29/1908 M= 6 4 SNBR= 434 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
18901 07/29*296 940 30 0*293 935 30 0*290 930 35 0*287 925 40 0
18902 07/30*284 920 45 0*281 917 50 0*280 915 50 0*281 914 50 0
18903 07/31*283 913 50 0*286 914 50 0*290 915 50 0*293 917 50 0
18904 08/01*297 921 40 0*301 927 35 0*305 930 35 0*309 931 35 0
18905 08/02*312 929 30 0*316 925 30 0*320 920 30 0*324 915 30 0
18906 08/03*328 911 25 0*331 908 25 0*335 905 25 0*340 902 25 0
18907 TS
The NHC Best Track Change Committee requested further investigation into
the storm system first identified by Partagas and Diaz (1997) in late
July 1908:
"1908 additional system #2 It is noted that Isaac Cline felt that
warnings in the Gulf were justified for this system."
Upon investigation of this system from the Monthly Weather Review, the COADS
ship database, the Historical Weather Map series, and station data, this
system was a tropical storm and is thus added into HURDAT.
July 28: Surface trough forming over eastern Texas and Louisiana. Closed
low not yet formed.
July 29: System moves off of the U.S. Gulf coast and develops into a
tropical cyclone. Closed circulation is found from combination of coastal
stations and ship observations. Ship highlight: 25 kt SW and 1004 mb at
27.5N, 91.5W at 22 UTC (COA).
July 30: HWM gives a low of at most 1010 mb at 27.5N, 90W. Center from
additional ship observations in COADS suggests a location closer to 29.0N,
91.5W. Ship highlights: 25 kt SW and 1004 mb at 27.5N, 91.5W at 02 UTC
(COA), 50 kt SW and 1006 mb at 27.5N, 90.5W at 10 UTC (COA), 45 kt SW and
990 mb at 26.0N, 89.0W at 18 UTC (COA). Coastal station highlights:
lowest observed pressure: 1009 mb at 00 UTC at Galveston, 1009 mb at
12 UTC at New Orleans; peak winds 30 kt SE winds in New Orleans at 13
and 14 UTC.
July 31st: HWM gives a low of at most 1012.5 mb at 28N, 92.5W. Center
from additional ship observations in COADS suggests a location closer to the
coast at 29N, 91.5W. No reports of gale force winds.
August 1st: HWM gives a low of at most 1012.5 mb at 31.5N, 93.5W. Center
from additional stations suggests a location closer to 30.5N, 93.0W. No
reports of gale force winds.
August 2nd: HWM gives a low of at most 1010 mb at 32.5N, 91.5W. Center
from additional stations suggests a location closer to 32N, 92W. No reports
of gale force winds.
August 3rd: Station data suggests a closed low near 33.5N, 90.5W. No
reports of gale force winds.
August 4th: The system dissipated.
Status of system as tropical storm was confirmed by several ship wind
and pressure observations. Peripheral pressure of 1004 mb (at 22 UTC
on the 29th and 02 UTC on the 30th) from a ship suggests winds of at least
37 kt. 50 kt chosen for the nearest synoptic times to these pressure
readings up until landfall late on the 31st based primarily upon ship wind
observations. No reports of gale force winds (or equivalent from sea
level pressure readings) were observed over land. However, landfall likely
west of New Orleans, Louisiana in an area of quite sparse meteorological
stations. Thus it is analyzed that the system came ashore as a 50 kt
tropical storm around 2130 UTC on the 31st near 29.5N, 91.9W.
********************************************************************************
1908/05 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1908/04, but became 1908/05 after the addition
of a new storm in July (new 1908/04) - May 2004
1908/05 - 2003 REVISION:
17735 08/30/1908 M= 4 3 SNBR= 410 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17735 08/30/1908 M= 4 4 SNBR= 434 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
17740 08/30* 0 0 0 0*325 722 35 0*327 728 35 0*329 732 35 0
17740 08/30* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*330 725 35 0*330 732 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ***
17745 08/31*331 737 35 0*333 741 40 0*336 748 40 0*339 750 40 0
17745 08/31*330 741 35 0*330 750 40 0*330 760 40 0*332 765 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17750 09/01*342 752 45 0*345 753 45 0*349 753 45 0*353 749 45 0
17750 09/01*338 768 45 0*344 767 45 0*350 763 45 0*361 750 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17755 09/02*357 743 40 0*362 733 40 0*367 721 35 0*374 709 25 0
17755 09/02*372 736 40 0*382 723 40 0*390 707 35 0E398 682 25 0
*** *** *** *** *** **** ***
17760 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 3.
********************************************************************************
1908/06 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1908/05, but became 1908/06 after the addition
of a new storm in July (new 1908/04) - May 2004
1908/06 - 2003 REVISION:
17765 09/07/1908 M=13 4 SNBR= 411 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17765 09/07/1908 M=13 5 SNBR= 435 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
17770 09/07* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*154 517 40 0*159 528 40 0
17775 09/08*163 538 40 0*167 548 40 0*170 558 45 0*172 566 45 0
17780 09/09*174 573 45 0*176 580 50 0*180 595 55 0*183 605 55 0
17780 09/09*174 573 45 0*176 580 50 0*180 591 55 0*183 605 55 0
***
17785 09/10*187 630 60 0*190 650 65 0*194 668 70 0*197 679 75 0
17785 09/10*187 630 60 0*190 650 60 0*194 668 60 0*197 680 60 0
** ** *** **
17790 09/11*200 689 80 0*203 700 85 0* 06 711 85 0*211 720 90 0
17790 09/11*198 692 60 0*201 707 65 0*205 720 75 0*210 729 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17795 09/12*216 728 95 0*221 735 95 0*226 742 100 0*231 749 100 0
17795 09/12*215 737 95 0*219 743 95 0*225 750 100 0*229 755 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17800 09/13*235 754 105 0*240 759 105 0*245 761 105 0*251 759 105 0
17800 09/13*232 758 105 0*238 761 105 0*245 761 105 0*251 759 105 0
*** *** *** ***
17805 09/14*257 755 105 0*264 748 105 0*270 742 105 0*281 729 100 0
17805 09/14*257 755 105 0*262 751 105 0*267 745 105 0*275 736 100 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
17810 09/15*291 715 100 0*301 704 95 0*310 695 90 0*317 691 85 0
17810 09/15*284 726 100 0*291 718 95 0*300 710 90 0*308 702 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17815 09/16*323 687 85 0*329 684 80 0*338 679 80 0*351 670 75 0
17815 09/16*316 694 85 0*325 686 80 0*338 677 80 0*351 672 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17820 09/17*363 663 75 0*378 654 70 0*396 641 70 0*407 631 70 0
17820 09/17*363 668 75 0*378 660 70 0*393 650 70 0*404 639 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
17825 09/18*420 620 70 0*429 610 70 0*438 597 70 0E456 564 60 0
17825 09/18*411 629 70 0*419 618 70 0*430 600 70 0*454 570 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17830 09/19E470 535 55 0E484 514 55 0E500 483 50 0E518 450 50 0
17830 09/19E486 530 55 0E515 496 55 0E540 465 50 0E562 438 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17835 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 4. A peripheral pressure of 993 mb (at 12Z on the
15th) suggests winds of at least 59 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure
relationship - 90 kt retained in the best track. A peripheral pressure of
993 mb (at 12Z on the 18th) suggests winds of at least 59 kt from the
northern wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt retained in the best track.
Slight adjustment in the track on the 9th provides a more realistic
translational velocity.
********************************************************************************
1908/07 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1908/06, but became 1908/07 after the addition
of a new storm in July (new 1908/04) - May 2004
1908/07 - 2003 REVISION:
18655 09/16/1908 M= 3 5 SNBR= 414 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
18655 09/16/1908 M= 3 6 SNBR= 436 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
18660 09/16* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*247 905 40 0*251 911 40 0
18665 09/17*256 917 45 0*260 921 45 0*265 926 50 0*270 931 55 0
18670 09/18*274 934 60 0*279 938 55 0*283 938 35 0*287 934 25 0
18675 TS
Partagas and Diaz (1997) introduced no changes from that shown in Neumann
et al. (1999), originally storm number 5.
********************************************************************************
1908/08 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1908/07, but became 1908/08 after the addition
of a new storm in July (new 1908/04) - May 2004
1908/08 - 2003 REVISION:
17865 09/21/1908 M=17 6 SNBR= 413 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17865 09/21/1908 M=17 7 SNBR= 437 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
17870 09/21* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*120 500 35 0*122 507 35 0
17870 09/21* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*125 460 35 0*127 472 35 0
*** *** *** ***
17875 09/22*124 513 35 0*126 520 35 0*128 527 35 0*130 534 35 0
17875 09/22*129 483 35 0*132 495 35 0*135 507 35 0*138 518 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17880 09/23*132 541 35 0*135 548 35 0*138 556 40 0*142 563 40 0
17880 09/23*139 530 35 0*140 542 35 0*143 553 40 0*145 563 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17885 09/24*146 570 40 0*149 578 40 0*153 584 45 0*157 592 45 0
17885 09/24*148 572 40 0*150 579 40 0*153 587 45 0*155 594 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
17890 09/25*160 600 45 0*164 609 50 0*168 618 50 0*171 627 50 0
17890 09/25*157 603 55 0*158 610 60 0*160 617 65 0*162 627 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17895 09/26*172 637 50 0*173 650 50 0*173 665 50 0*175 673 50 0
17895 09/26*164 641 70 0*165 651 70 0*165 663 70 0*165 674 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17900 09/27*176 680 50 0*178 687 50 0*181 695 45 0*184 705 40 0
17900 09/27*167 685 70 0*168 695 70 0*170 705 70 0*173 711 70 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17905 09/28*187 713 35 0*190 720 35 0*192 727 35 0*194 733 35 0
17905 09/28*176 716 70 0*181 722 70 0*185 727 65 0*187 731 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17910 09/29*196 738 35 0*199 744 35 0*202 750 35 0*206 753 35 0
17910 09/29*191 737 65 0*197 742 70 0*200 745 75 0*204 750 65 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17915 09/30*210 758 35 0*216 764 40 0*222 769 55 0*229 774 65 0
17915 09/30*210 754 70 0*214 759 75 0*220 763 80 0*225 767 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17920 10/01*235 778 70 0*248 784 70 0*258 785 70 0*268 781 75 0
17920 10/01*232 772 90 0*239 777 95 0*247 780 95 0*259 778 95 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17925 10/02*276 773 75 0*284 764 80 0*290 752 85 0*292 739 85 0
17925 10/02*268 765 95 0*275 746 95 0*280 730 95 0*284 721 95 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17930 10/03*294 726 85 0*296 712 85 0*302 698 85 0*304 713 80 0
17930 10/03*287 716 95 0*293 711 90 0*300 715 85 0*297 720 80 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
17935 10/04*295 727 75 0*287 716 70 0*285 702 70 0*287 693 70 0
17935 10/04*292 721 75 0*288 716 70 0*285 710 70 0*290 700 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17940 10/05*290 685 70 0*294 679 70 0*298 673 70 0*303 665 70 0
17940 10/05*297 692 70 0*301 684 70 0*305 675 70 0*308 662 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17945 10/06*308 655 70 0*314 645 70 0*320 634 65 0*325 626 55 0
17945 10/06*311 650 70 0*313 638 70 0*315 627 65 0*318 613 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17950 10/07*331 618 45 0E337 609 40 0E343 600 40 0E354 593 40 0
17950 10/07*320 600 45 0E323 587 40 0E325 575 40 0E328 561 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17955 HR
The was one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997), originally storm
number 5. Partagas and Diaz did not provide evidence that the hurricane
status was retained until transitioning to an extratropical on the 7th,
though this was depicted in their track map. Thus the switch to tropical
storm status on the 6th found in Neumann et al. is kept in the best track.
Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable small alterations to the track
reasonably from that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Partagas and Diaz
analysis of hurricane force through the Caribbean from the 25th to the
28th necessitated large increases to the existing HURDAT intensity
estimates. A peripheral pressure of 990 mb (at 10Z on the 28th) suggests
winds of at least 64 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 70 kt
chosen for the best track. Perez (2000) had analyzed this as a Category 2
hurricane at landfall in Cuba based upon wind and surge caused damage, which
does not seem completely reasonable because of the interaction of the system
with Hispanola. Thus Category 1 hurricane at landfall in Cuba is retained. A
peripheral pressure of 971 mb (at 15Z on the 1st) suggests winds of at least
85 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship - 95 kt chosen for the
best track. Winds increased accordingly from the 25th until the 3rd.
********************************************************************************
1908/09 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1908/08, but became 1908/09 after the addition
of a new storm in July (new 1908/04) - May 2004
1908/09 - 2003 REVISION:
17960 10/15/1908 M= 4 7 SNBR= 414 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
17960 10/14/1908 M= 6 8 SNBR= 438 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * * ***
(The 14th is new to HURDAT.)
17962 10/14* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*117 785 30 0*117 788 30 0
17965 10/15* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*116 778 45 0*117 785 45 0
17965 10/15*117 792 35 0*117 796 40 0*117 800 45 0*117 803 45 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ***
17970 10/16*118 791 50 0*120 797 60 0*122 802 65 0*124 807 70 0
17970 10/16*118 807 50 0*119 811 60 0*120 815 65 0*121 818 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
17975 10/17*126 811 70 0*127 815 70 0*129 820 70 0*130 825 70 0
17975 10/17*122 821 75 0*123 824 80 0*125 827 85 0*126 830 90 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
17980 10/18*132 831 70 0*134 837 70 0*136 843 60 0*138 849 35 0
17980 10/18*127 834 90 0*128 837 65 0*130 840 50 0*133 843 35 0
*** *** ** *** ** *** *** **
(The 19th is new to HURDAT.)
17982 10/19*138 848 30 0*145 855 25 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
17985 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1997), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 7. Intensity is increased at landfall to a
Category 2 hurricane (90 kt) to match descriptions of widespread destruction
("destroying the towns of Rio Grande and Prinzapolca") in Nicaragua.
********************************************************************************
1908/10 - 2004 REVISION:
Note: Storm was originally 1908/09, but became 1908/10 after the addition
of a new storm in July (new 1908/04) - May 2004
1908/10 - 2003 REVISION:
17990 10/21/1908 M= 3 8 SNBR= 415 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
17990 10/19/1908 M= 5 9 SNBR= 439 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * * *** *
(The 19th and 20th are new to HURDAT.)
17992 10/19* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0E350 720 35 0E343 715 35 0
17994 10/20E337 710 35 0E331 705 35 0*325 697 35 0*317 686 35 0
17995 10/21* 0 0 0 0*274 667 35 0*277 682 35 0*280 694 35 0
17995 10/21*307 673 35 0*296 663 35 0*285 660 35 0*275 676 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18000 10/22*284 707 35 0*290 721 35 0*297 735 35 0*305 750 35 0
18000 10/22*274 699 35 0*282 721 35 0*290 740 35 0*303 754 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18005 10/23*314 765 35 0*324 781 35 0*334 797 35 0*342 810 30 0
18005 10/23*314 766 35 0E324 782 35 0E334 797 35 0E342 810 30 0
*** * *** * *
18010 TS
There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1997), originally storm
number 8. The storm - obviously of extratropical origins from Partagas and
Diaz' analysis - is given extratropical status on the 19th and early on the
20th, until transforming to more tropical in nature late on the 20th.
Partagas and Diaz otherwise made large alterations to the track and intensity
shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and intensity changes are found
to be reasonable. Since the storm was determined to have transitioned back
to extratropical before landfall in South Carolina, XING was changed from
"1" to "0".
********************************************************************************
1908 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1997) mentioned four additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave them out
of HURDAT for the following reasons:
1) June 2-5, 1908: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) July 29-30, 1908: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
3) August 5, 1908: One gale force report, insufficient to determine
if system was of tropical storm intensity.
4) October 25-31, 1908: Gale force intensity, but likely extratropical.
********************************************************************************
18011 06/15/1909 M= 5 1 SNBR= 440 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
18012 06/15*106 825 30 0*108 825 30 0*110 825 35 0*112 825 35 0
18013 06/16*115 825 40 0*117 825 40 0*120 825 40 0*122 825 40 0
18014 06/17*124 825 40 0*126 825 40 0*128 825 40 0*130 825 40 0
18014 06/18*132 826 40 0*134 827 40 0*135 828 40 0*137 830 40 0
18014 06/19*138 833 40 0*139 836 35 0*140 840 30 0*140 845 25 0
18014 TS
This newly documented tropical storm comes from the "Case of Jun. 15-18,
1909" in Partagas and Diaz (1999). They had described a low pressure center
in the southwestern Caribbean Sea with two ship reports (on the 15th and
18th) of gale force winds, but had decided not to add this system as
a new storm. After reviewing the data in the June 1909 Historical Weather
Maps, it was determined that there did exist a closed circulation with
convection for five consecutive days and that the two ship reports of
gale force winds were enough evidence that it did reach tropical storm
status. Following the methodology in Partagas and Diaz (1999), positions
for 12Z on the 15th through the 19th were estimated from the Historical
Weather Maps and the remaining synoptic time positions were interpolated.
Ship observations indicate that the system likely reached only weak
tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
18015 06/25/1909 M= 6 1 SNBR= 416 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
18015 06/25/1909 M= 6 2 SNBR= 441 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
* *** *
18020 06/25* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*250 840 35 0*252 847 35 0
18020 06/25* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*250 840 35 0*255 847 35 0
***
18025 06/26*254 853 35 0*256 859 35 0*257 865 40 0*258 871 40 0
18025 06/26*259 855 35 0*263 862 35 0*267 870 40 0*267 877 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18030 06/27*259 876 45 0*259 881 45 0*260 887 50 0*260 895 50 0
18030 06/27*266 885 45 0*266 893 45 0*265 901 50 0*265 909 50 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18035 06/28*260 904 50 0*260 913 50 0*261 921 50 0*262 930 50 0
18035 06/28*264 917 50 0*264 925 50 0*263 933 50 0*263 941 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
18040 06/29*263 938 50 0*264 945 50 0*266 952 50 0*267 959 45 0
18040 06/29*262 949 65 0*262 957 75 0*261 965 85 0*261 973 70 972
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
18045 06/30*268 965 40 0*269 971 40 0*270 977 30 0* 0 0 0 0
18045 06/30*260 980 50 0*260 986 35 0*260 990 30 0* 0 0 0 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
18050 TS
18050 HRATX2
******
Major changes near landfall in Texas are made from Partagas and Diaz (1999),
storm number 1. Based upon analysis of Ellis (1988), this storm is increased
in intensity up to a Category 2 hurricane over the western Gulf of Mexico and
at landfall in Texas and the track is altered to make landfall near
Brownsville. Ellis provides description of damaging impacts in Brownsville
and Harlington, along with a storm tide of 7' and a possible central pressure
of 972 mb. This pressure suggests winds of 86 kt from the Gulf of Mexico
wind-pressure relationship - 85 kt chosen at landfall in Texas making
it a Category 2 hurricane. Thus this is a new U.S. landfalling hurricane,
previously unlisted in Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane
characterization in HURDAT. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable
small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
Below is an analysis provided by David Roth from the _Houston Post_ and
_San Antonio Daily Express_ newspapers from the storm's aftermath (July 1-10)
(though a portion of the rainfall and flooding that occurred likely was
not the direct effect of the hurricane itself):
It rained a great deal from the cyclone...10" fell in 24 hours at
Mercedes TX. Rains swelled the Rio Grande...so much so that is was
expected to cause lowland flooding by July 3. By the 4th, flooding was
occurring along the Rio Grande and San Juan valleys. It was considered
the biggest rise in 5 years for the Rio Grande.
This cyclone set the stage for quite a flood. By the 9th, the Rio
Grande was still rising at Brownsville, and levees gave way west of the
city. Flood conditions were reaching serious proportions in Hidalgo
and Starr counties, as canals began flooding. By that time, Mercedes
was surrounded on 3 sides by water, when Llano Grande Lake overflowed.
The Arroyo Colorado and El Fuest rivers were raging torrents. Many were
forced to abandon their homes throughout the region.
The river was just beginning to fall on the 10th at Fordyce and Rio
Grande City. A number of passengers on a train stranded at Donna were
rescued by boat, and sailed two miles to the railroad tracks near
Mercedes. A large section of the Mexican settlement near Brownsville
(it does not specify) was flooded. A levee break at Ramireno caused
lowlands between there and Brownsville to be flooded.
In Mexico, by the 10th floods in the state of Vera Cruz caused the
Orizaba river to rise out of its banks, surrounding the country with 5-
6 feet of water. Thousands in damage was reported.
Railroad tracks were underwater between Laredo and Monterey on the
2nd. Trains leaving Laredo could get no farther than Lampasas.
Railroad service was "completely demoralized" in northern Mexico due to
washouts between the 1st and the 3rd. Bridges at Salinas, Morelos, and
Villaldama were washed out. Monterey lost 25 railroad bridges and over
200 km of track were washed away in its vicinity. Railroad damage in
this region of Mexico was estimated at $750,000. Rumors circulated that
Sabinas Hidalgo was "gone" after the cyclone...I could not find
anything to substantiate it though. Several km of track was reported
missing north of Zacatecas on the 8th. An additional $500,000 of
damage was incurred there.
As for winds, Brownsville reported a "hurricane from the northwest" on
the 30th, which tore down fences and trees, but did little damage to
buildings. Sounds like a gale for sure...would need to get their
observations from that time period to be certain. Winds reached "high
velocity at times" in Mercedes. At Falfurrias, the winds at times
was "alarming." Winds at Point Isabel reached 65 mph.
Several dwellings and buildings were blown down in Harlingen, Point
Isabel, Donna, San Benito, Norias, and Brazos Pass. Windmills were
leveled at Chapin, along with the Santa Anita and Mesenas ranches.
Damages listed:
McAllen $1,000
Brownsville $2,000
Vera Cruz "thousands"
San Benito $10,000
Harlingen $100,000
Mexico railroads $1,250,000
The Point Isabel storm surge was at least 5 feet when the telegraph
went out...I never saw a later report to see what its final level was.
The Washington Post reported tides over 10 feet above normal in
northeast Mexico, between the Mouth of the Rio Grande and Tampico.
********************************************************************************
18055 06/26/1909 M= 6 2 SNBR= 417 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
18055 06/26/1909 M= 9 3 SNBR= 442 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
* * ***
18060 06/26* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*235 746 35 0*237 751 35 0
18060 06/26* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*210 720 30 0*212 731 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** **
18065 06/27*240 756 35 0*243 762 35 0*247 768 35 0*252 775 35 0
18065 06/27*214 741 30 0*217 751 30 0*220 760 35 0*227 769 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ***
18070 06/28*258 783 35 0*263 791 40 0*268 798 45 0*273 805 40 0
18070 06/28*234 776 35 0*242 785 40 0*250 793 45 0*258 799 45 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
18075 06/29*278 812 35 0*282 818 35 0*287 825 35 0*292 832 35 0
18075 06/29*265 805 40 0*273 811 35 0*280 817 35 0*284 822 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18080 06/30*296 839 35 0*301 847 35 0*306 855 35 0*311 864 30 0
18080 06/30*290 829 35 0*295 834 35 0*300 840 35 0*302 843 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18085 07/01*315 876 30 0*319 890 30 0*322 904 25 0* 0 0 0 0
18085 07/01*304 845 30 0*306 846 30 0*310 847 30 0*313 846 25 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
(The 2nd through the 4th are new to HURDAT.)
18086 07/02*316 843 25 0*319 838 25 0*320 835 25 0*322 828 25 0
18087 07/03*324 817 25 0*324 807 30 0*323 797 30 0*320 783 30 0
18088 07/04*315 770 30 0*310 757 30 0*303 745 30 0*296 732 30 0
18090 TS
There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm
number 2. The storm is kept as a tropical depression on the 26th rather than
dropping this date from HURDAT as suggested by Partagas and Diaz, since there
is no strong evidence that a closed circulation did not exist at that point.
Partagas and Diaz otherwise made large alterations to the track and intensity
shown in Neumann et al. (1999). These track and intensity changes are found
to be reasonable.
********************************************************************************
18095 07/13/1909 M=10 3 SNBR= 418 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
18095 07/13/1909 M=10 4 SNBR= 443 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
* ***
18100 07/13* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*123 605 35 0*123 620 35 0
18100 07/13* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*123 605 30 0*123 620 30 0
** **
18105 07/14*124 635 35 0*126 649 35 0*130 662 35 0*135 674 35 0
18105 07/14*124 635 30 0*126 649 30 0*130 662 30 0*135 674 30 0
** ** ** **
18110 07/15*140 686 35 0*145 698 35 0*149 710 40 0*152 724 40 0
18110 07/15*140 686 30 0*145 698 30 0*149 710 30 0*152 722 30 0
** ** ** *** **
18115 07/16*158 740 40 0*163 755 40 0*168 768 45 0*174 778 45 0
18115 07/16*155 733 30 0*158 744 30 0*160 755 30 0*162 767 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18120 07/17*180 788 45 0*186 797 50 0*192 807 50 0*200 818 55 0
18120 07/17*164 778 35 0*167 789 40 0*172 800 45 0*180 810 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18125 07/18*208 829 55 0*215 840 60 0*222 850 60 0*229 859 65 0
18125 07/18*190 820 55 0*200 830 60 0*210 840 60 0*220 850 65 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18130 07/19*235 868 70 0*241 875 75 0*244 882 85 0*250 888 95 0
18130 07/19*230 859 70 0*240 867 70 0*250 875 70 0*256 883 70 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18135 07/20*255 894 105 0*260 900 110 0*264 906 115 0*269 913 120 0
18135 07/20*261 889 70 0*266 897 70 0*270 906 70 0*274 915 70 985
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18140 07/21*273 919 120 0*278 927 115 0*282 935 105 0*287 945 95 982
18140 07/21*278 925 80 0*282 935 90 0*286 945 100 0*290 955 90 959
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** ***
18145 07/22*293 958 65 0*296 972 30 0*302 988 25 0* 0 0 0 0
18145 07/22*293 965 65 0*296 976 30 0*302 988 25 0* 0 0 0 0
*** ***
18150 HRCTX3
There are two major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm
number 3. First, the storm is kept as a tropical depression on the 13th to
the 16th rather than dropping these dates from HURDAT as suggested by Partagas
and Diaz, since there is no evidence that a closed circulation did not exist
then. Secondly, the storm's landfall location in Texas is adjusted to better
fit the analysis by Ho et al. (1987). Partagas and Diaz otherwise made
reasonable small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et
al. (1999). A central pressure of 985 mb (at 17Z on the 20th) suggests
winds of 70 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship, which are
utilized in the best track. Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 19th
and 20th. Ho et al. also analyzed a central pressure estimate of 959 mb and
a RMW of 19 nmi at landfall in Texas. (This was partially based upon a
peripheral pressure value of 982 mb at 2030Z on the 21st, which was mistakenly
recorded as a central pressure previously.) Jarrell et al. (1992) (based
upon Connor 1956) provided a very similar estimate of 958 mb at landfall
in Texas. The central pressure of 959 mb suggests winds of 101 kt from the
Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship. Since the RMW is very close to
the climatological RMW for this intensity and central pressure (Vickery et
al. 2000), a value of 100 kt is chosen for the best track at landfall. Winds
are adjusted accordingly on the 21st. The 959 mb/100 kt at landfall in Texas
making this a Category 3 hurricane agrees with that recorded in Table 6 of
Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT. A storm
tide of 10' in Galveston and Velasco, Texas was reported by Connor (1956) and
Ellis (1988).
********************************************************************************
18155 07/27/1909 M=16 4 SNBR= 419 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
18155 07/27/1909 M= 5 5 SNBR= 444 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * ***
18160 07/27* 0 0 0 0*107 516 35 0*108 522 35 0*109 528 35 0
18165 07/28*110 536 35 0*111 544 35 0*113 553 35 0*116 564 35 0
18170 07/29*119 576 35 0*121 587 35 0*124 598 35 0*126 607 35 0
18175 07/30*129 616 35 0*131 624 35 0*134 632 35 0*136 639 40 0
18180 07/31*139 647 40 0*141 653 40 0*143 658 45 0*144 662 45 0
18185 08/01*146 666 45 0*147 669 45 0*148 673 45 0*149 677 45 0
18190 08/02*151 682 45 0*152 686 45 0*153 690 45 0*154 693 45 0
18195 08/03*154 696 45 0*154 698 45 0*155 701 45 0*156 705 45 0
18200 08/04*158 709 45 0*159 713 45 0*160 718 50 0*161 723 50 0
18205 08/05*161 729 50 0*162 735 50 0*163 742 50 0*164 749 50 0
(The 27th to the 5th removed from HURDAT.)
18210 08/06*164 757 50 0*165 766 50 0*166 775 50 0*168 785 50 0
18210 08/06*166 795 30 0*173 800 30 0*180 805 30 0*188 812 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18215 08/07*171 795 50 0*175 802 50 0*179 809 50 0*183 828 50 0
18215 08/07*196 820 35 0*206 830 35 0*210 843 40 1004*209 854 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** **** *** *** **
18220 08/08*187 835 45 0*191 842 45 0*195 851 45 0*200 862 45 0
18220 08/08*208 865 40 0*206 876 35 0*205 885 30 0*204 893 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18225 08/09*205 875 35 0*211 888 35 0*216 903 35 0*219 915 35 0
18225 08/09*204 904 30 0*204 914 35 0*205 925 35 0*209 939 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18230 08/10*222 932 35 0*223 949 35 0*224 961 35 0*225 973 35 0
18230 08/10*215 954 35 0*223 970 35 0*230 985 30 0*237 998 25 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
18235 08/11*226 984 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
(The 11th is removed from HURDAT.)
18240 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 4. Partagas and Diaz recommended removing July 27th through
August 5th as no closed circulation existed during its supposed trek across
the eastern and central Caribbean Sea. These dramatic track and intensity
changes are found to be reasonable. A possible central pressure of 1004 mb
(at 12Z on the 7th) suggests winds of 39 kt from the southern wind-pressure
relationship - 40 kt chosen for best track.
********************************************************************************
18245 08/20/1909 M= 9 5 SNBR= 420 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
18245 08/20/1909 M= 9 6 SNBR= 445 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=1
* *** *
18250 08/20* 0 0 0 0*154 545 60 0*156 555 60 0*157 564 70 0
18250 08/20* 0 0 0 0*154 553 60 0*155 563 60 0*157 573 70 0
*** *** *** ***
18255 08/21*158 574 70 0*159 585 70 0*160 598 70 0*161 612 75 0
18255 08/21*159 582 70 0*161 594 70 0*163 605 70 0*165 619 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18260 08/22*162 626 75 0*164 641 75 0*165 655 80 0*167 670 80 0
18260 08/22*167 630 75 0*170 642 75 0*173 657 80 0*176 675 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18265 08/23*168 684 80 0*171 699 85 0*174 714 85 0*178 731 90 0
18265 08/23*179 691 80 0*183 707 70 0*188 723 65 0*199 740 75 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18270 08/24*184 751 90 0*192 772 90 0*199 791 95 0*204 808 95 0
18270 08/24*203 758 65 0*205 776 65 0*206 795 75 0*207 811 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18275 08/25*208 825 100 0*212 841 100 0*214 854 100 0*217 865 105 0
18275 08/25*208 826 95 0*209 841 100 0*210 855 100 0*211 869 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18280 08/26*220 875 105 0*223 885 105 0*228 896 105 0*232 908 105 0
18280 08/26*213 884 80 0*216 897 90 0*220 910 100 0*225 925 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18285 08/27*237 920 100 0*241 932 95 0*244 944 90 0*248 956 85 0
18285 08/27*229 940 105 0*233 955 105 0*237 967 105 0*238 973 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18290 08/28*252 967 70 0*256 979 65 0*260 990 35 0* 0 0 0 0
18290 08/28*237 979 85 0*237 983 55 0*237 987 35 0* 0 0 0 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
18295 HRATX2
18295 HRATX1
****
There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm
number 5. The analysis of Perez (2000) showed that the hurricane made
landfall near Baracoa, Cuba, rather than near Santiago de Cuba as shown in
Partagas and Diaz. Perez' Cuba landfall location is utilized here. Partagas
and Diaz made large alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann
et al. (1999). These track and intensity changes are otherwise reasonable.
Perez also analyzed this hurricane to have made landfall as a Category 2
system, based upon wind-caused damage. However, this does not appear to be
completely reasonable given the hurricanes' interaction with Hispanola and
Category 1 at landfall in Cuba is utilized. The hurricane is maintained in
the Gulf of Mexico as a Category 3 hurricane up until landfall in northeast
Mexico, based upon damages incurred there. The storm had been listed as
causing Category 2 hurricane conditions in southern Texas (Table 6 in Neumann
et al. 1999/U.S. hurricane landfall characterization in HURDAT), but this is
reduced down to Category 1 hurricane impact due to observations of only
minimal hurricane conditions in Texas and due the to distance from the
hurricane center to the Texas coast. The full lifecycle of this tropical
storm is not known due to lack of information on its genesis.
********************************************************************************
18300 08/27/1909 M= 6 6 SNBR= 421 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
18300 08/28/1909 M= 4 7 SNBR= 446 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
** * * ***
18305 08/27*208 689 35 0*214 697 35 0*221 706 35 0*228 717 35 0
(The 27th is omitted from HURDAT.)
18310 08/28*234 730 35 0*239 741 35 0*244 750 40 0*248 757 40 0
18310 08/28*237 730 35 0*246 744 35 0*255 760 40 0*260 773 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18315 08/29*251 764 45 0*255 770 45 0*259 777 45 0*263 784 45 0
18315 08/29*263 785 45 0*264 796 45 0*265 805 40 0*266 809 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** **
18320 08/30*268 790 45 0*272 797 45 0*277 803 35 0*282 807 35 0
18320 08/30*268 812 30 0*271 815 30 0*277 817 30 0*285 813 30 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** *** **
18325 08/31*287 809 35 0*292 810 35 0*297 810 35 0*302 809 30 0
18325 08/31*295 805 35 0*304 797 35 0*310 790 35 0*315 784 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18330 09/01*307 804 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
(The 1st is omitted from the revised HURDAT.)
18335 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999),
originally storm number 6.
********************************************************************************
18340 09/10/1909 M=12 7 SNBR= 422 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=4
18340 09/13/1909 M=10 8 SNBR= 447 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
** ** * *** *
18345 09/10* 0 0 0 0*134 563 35 0*136 579 35 0*137 595 35 0
18350 09/11*138 611 35 0*139 625 35 0*139 636 35 0*139 646 35 0
18355 09/12*139 655 35 0*139 665 35 0*139 674 35 0*139 683 35 0
(The 10th to the 12th were omitted from the revised HURDAT.)
18360 09/13*139 693 35 0*140 702 35 0*141 708 35 0*141 717 35 0
18360 09/13* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*175 710 30 0*178 725 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18365 09/14*142 723 35 0*143 729 35 0*144 738 35 0*145 742 35 0
18365 09/14*181 739 30 0*183 752 30 0*185 765 30 0*187 775 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18370 09/15*146 749 40 0*148 756 40 0*151 764 45 0*157 775 50 0
18370 09/15*189 784 35 0*191 793 40 0*193 800 45 0*195 806 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18375 09/16*167 791 55 0*178 806 60 0*187 812 65 0*194 821 70 0
18375 09/16*197 810 55 0*200 815 60 0*203 820 65 0*206 824 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18380 09/17*202 827 70 0*209 831 70 0*214 836 70 0*218 841 75 0
18380 09/17*209 829 70 0*213 833 75 0*217 837 80 0*220 842 85 976
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** ***
18385 09/18*223 845 75 0*227 849 80 0*231 854 80 0*235 859 85 0
18385 09/18*223 845 75 0*226 849 80 0*229 854 80 0*232 859 85 0
*** *** ***
18390 09/19*240 864 95 0*244 868 110 0*255 873 115 0*262 878 120 0
18390 09/19*235 867 95 0*239 874 105 0*243 880 105 0*248 885 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18395 09/20*272 884 120 0*280 890 110 0*284 896 95 0*296 905 85 0
18395 09/20*254 890 105 0*261 895 105 0*269 901 105 0*277 907 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18400 09/21*310 910 65 990*325 917 50 0*342 918 35 0*359 912 30 0
18400 09/21*295 913 105 952*314 917 75 0*332 915 55 0*350 913 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
(The 22nd is new to HURDAT.)
18402 09/22*368 911 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
18405 HR LA4
18405 HR LA3 MS2
*** ***
One major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who otherwise made large,
but reasonable alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al.
(1999), originally storm number 7. The 13th is retained in HURDAT based
upon a re-examination of the Historical Weather Map series, which indicated
a probable closed circulation existed on that date south of Hispanola. The
track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable. A possible central
pressure of 976 mb (21Z on the 17th) suggests winds of 83 kt - 85 kt chosen
for best track. This agrees with the classification of the hurricane as a
Category 2 at landfall in Cuba (Perez 2000). Winds are adjusted accordingly
on the 17th and 18th. Jarrell et al. (1992) (from Connor 1956) classified
this hurricane at landfall in the United States as 931 mb central pressure
apparently based primarily upon the storm tide of 15' observed in Terrebonne
Bay, Louisiana (Cline 1926). Ho et al. (1987) on the other hand analyzed a
965 mb central pressure from a 990 mb peripheral pressure measurement and an
estimated RMW of 28 nmi. (Note that this 990 mb was mistakenly listed in
HURDAT previously as a central pressure.) Jarvinen (2001, personal
communication), however, showed with SLOSH runs that such an estimate of
central pressure and RMW could not correctly simulate the observed large
storm surge values. David Roth was able to provide descriptions (see below)
of the storm's impact in Louisiana, which corroborated altering the positions
of the hurricane consistent with Cline's analysis of making landfall farther
west than Ho's analysis and substantially faster forward motion. Jarvinen
utilized the new position estimates and iterated possible central pressure
and RMW values with SLOSH to arrive at a best fit of 952 mb and 28 nmi. This
value of central pressure falls between the estimates of Jarrell et al. and
Ho. A 952 mb central pressure suggests winds of 108 kt from the Gulf of
Mexico wind-pressure relationship. Given a RMW which is moderately larger
than that expected climatologically for this central pressure and latitude
(e.g. Vickery et al. 2000) tempered by being a quick moving (18 kt) hurricane
at landfall, the maximum sustained winds at U.S. landfall are a slightly
reduced estimate of 105 kt - making this a Category 3 hurricane at landfall.
A Category 3 designation at landfall in the U.S. is lower than the
Category 4 shown in Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane
characterization in HURDAT. Inland decay model of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995)
utilized for inland winds over Louisiana and Arkansas. Winds are adjusted
accordingly on the 20th through the 22nd.
From the _New Orleans Time-Democrat_ as obtained by David Roth:
The only hurricane to destroy capital domes at both Baton Rouge, LA and
Jackson, MS.
Mobile AL....High southeast gale.
Pass Christian MS....The worst storm that ever struck this place reached its
height last night at 12 o'clock and ruin and wreckage are strewn from one end
of town to the other. The great storm in 1893 did not do so much damage and
cannot surpass this in amount of loss at the Pass and other points.
Bayou Portage MS (just north of Pass Christian)...the water rose at least
fifteen feet and spread over an area of several miles.
Donaldsonville LA...In the morning the wind blew with some velocity and a heavy
rain followed, but it was between 4 and 9 pm that the greatest damage
was done.
New Orleans LA...The wind increased in violence until 6:15 last night (the
20th) when it reached a velocity of 66 mph. An hour later the barometer began
rising, and at an early hour this morning, the disturbance had almost subsided.
Brusly Landing LA...One of the worst storms that has visited this section in
years swept over West Baton Rouge parish yesterday, doing heavy damage. The
wind started at 6 am and steadily increased until 9 pm, when it attained the
force of a hurricane. At 10 pm last night, after the winds abated...
Thibodaux LA...Worst between 4 and 6 pm the 20th.
Norwood LA...Worst between 8 and 10:30 pm, when wind veered to southwest and
lessened in force.
Wilson LA...Severe wind and rain storms between 8 and 11:30 pm.
Washington LA...Stiff NW wind blew all day....worst at night.
Zachary LA....Terrific gale from noon until midnight the 20th.
St. Francisville LA...Most severe wind and rain storm this immediate section
has known in many years came last night (20th) between 6 and 11 pm after a
stormy day.
Lutcher LA..."Terrific gale" reached maximum intensity beginning at 7:30 pm,
continuing for some time.
Lulling LA...A gale of considerable violence from the SE began to blow early on
the morning of the 20th, increasing in violence until 10 pm.
Port Hudson LA...The rain and wind which raged all yesterday (the 20th)
culminated in a hurricane, lasting from 7 to 10 pm.
Covington LA...At 11 pm last night the wind attained a velocity of 50 mph.
Plaquemines LA...Storm at its height at 8 pm.
Abbeville LA...A tropical hurricane raged from 9 am the morning of the 20th
until a late hour that night. The barometer was 28.75 and fell steadily. It
has been thirty years since this section experienced such an equinoctial storm.
********************************************************************************
18410 09/22/1909 M= 9 8 SNBR= 423 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=0
18410 09/24/1909 M= 6 9 SNBR= 448 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** * * *** *
18415 09/22* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*121 795 35 0*125 797 35 0
18420 09/23*130 800 35 0*136 803 35 0*144 806 35 0*153 810 35 0
(The 22nd to the 23th are omitted in the revised HURDAT.)
18425 09/24*162 816 35 0*171 821 35 0*181 823 35 0*191 828 35 0
18425 09/24*220 830 30 0*225 830 30 0*230 830 30 0*235 830 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18430 09/25*200 829 35 0*210 830 35 0*220 830 40 0*230 830 45 0
18430 09/25*241 830 30 0*247 830 30 0*253 828 30 0*258 822 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18435 09/26*241 830 45 0*252 828 40 0*262 823 40 0*272 815 35 0
18435 09/26*263 813 30 0*269 804 30 0*275 795 35 0*280 789 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
18440 09/27*281 807 35 0*289 798 35 0*295 790 35 0*300 783 35 0
18440 09/27*284 784 40 0*290 778 45 0*295 770 50 0*301 750 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** *** **
18445 09/28*304 777 35 0*308 770 40 0*312 758 40 0*318 743 45 0
18445 09/28*306 728 50 0*311 706 45 0*315 687 40 0*318 669 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** **
18450 09/29*322 729 45 0*327 714 35 0*331 700 35 0*334 685 35 0
18450 09/29*322 655 30 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18455 09/30*336 671 35 0*338 657 30 0*340 642 25 0*341 621 25 0
(The 30th is omitted in the revised HURDAT.)
18460 TS
There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm
number 8. Perez (2000 and personal communication), in his analysis of Cuban
tropical cyclones, agrees with not calling this system a tropical storm over
Cuba, but indicated that a closed low did exist near Havana on the 24th.
Thus a track beginning early on the 24th along Neumann et al.'s track just
south of Cuba, but about a day earlier is included. However, Partagas and
Diaz were correct about the lack of a closed circulation on the 22nd and
23rd and thus these dates are removed from HURDAT. Partagas and Diaz
otherwise made large alterations to the track and intensity shown in
Neumann et al. (1999). These track and intensity changes are found to be
reasonable. A peripheral pressure of 1000 mb (at 12Z on the 27th) suggests
winds of at least 48 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure relationship -
50 kt chosen for best track. A peripheral pressure of 1004 mb (at 12Z on
the 28th) suggests winds of at least 40 kt from the subtropical wind-
pressure relationship - 40 kt chosen for best track.
********************************************************************************
18465 10/06/1909 M= 8 9 SNBR= 424 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
18465 10/06/1909 M= 8 10 SNBR= 449 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
** ***
18470 10/06* 0 0 0 0*112 778 50 0*121 780 60 0*123 781 65 0
18470 10/06* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*107 760 30 0*112 763 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18475 10/07*127 782 70 0*132 783 70 0*139 783 70 0*146 784 75 0
18475 10/07*120 768 35 0*128 772 40 0*137 777 45 0*145 782 50 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18480 10/08*157 786 75 0*165 790 80 0*172 798 80 0*175 805 85 0
18480 10/08*154 786 55 0*164 792 60 0*172 798 65 0*177 805 70 0
*** ** *** *** ** ** *** **
18485 10/09*180 811 90 0*184 817 95 0*190 825 95 0*194 830 100 0
18485 10/09*182 811 80 0*186 817 90 0*190 825 95 0*193 832 100 0
*** ** *** ** *** ***
18490 10/10*200 832 105 0*205 834 105 0*210 836 105 0*220 834 105 0
18490 10/10*196 838 105 0*200 842 105 0*205 844 105 0*211 845 105 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18495 10/11*230 830 105 0*235 825 100 0*240 818 90 957*251 804 85 0
18495 10/11*218 845 105 0*226 841 105 0*237 830 105 0*247 810 100 957
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18500 10/12*260 791 80 0*270 776 75 0*278 765 70 0*289 744 70 0
18500 10/12*260 789 90 0*275 768 80 0*290 748 70 0*303 726 60 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** **
18505 10/13*299 725 65 0*309 706 55 0*315 690 45 0*340 648 30 0
18505 10/13*316 700 50 0*329 675 40 0*340 650 35 0*349 629 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** ***
18510 HRCFL3
18510 HRBFL3CFL3
****
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made reasonable small
alterations to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 9. Partagas and Diaz also suggested reasonable large changes to the
intensity on the 6th to the 8th and smaller changes elsewhere. Peripheral
pressure of 965 mb (at 15Z on the 10th) suggests winds of at least 95 kt
from the southern wind-pressure relationship. Winds are retained at 105 kt
for the 10th and 11th. This agrees with the assessment of a Category 3
impact in Cuba by Perez (2000). A central pressure reading at Knight's Key
(from Ho et al. (1987) and Barnes (1998a) of 957 mb (on the 11th) suggests
winds of 103 kt from the southern wind-pressure relationship. Ho et al.
also analyzed a RMW of 22 nmi for this hurricane at landfall in the Florida
Keys. Since this RMW is slightly larger than that expected climatologically
for the center pressure and latitude observed, winds at landfall in the Keys
are estimated at 100 kt. This makes this system a Category 3 hurricane at
landfall in south Florida, which agrees with what is listed in Table 6 of
Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT.
********************************************************************************
18515 11/08/1909 M= 7 10 SNBR= 425 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
18515 11/08/1909 M= 7 11 SNBR= 450 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ***
18520 11/08* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*111 810 35 0*115 808 35 0
18520 11/08* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*105 810 35 0*107 808 35 0
*** ***
18525 11/09*119 806 35 0*122 804 35 0*126 802 35 0*129 800 35 0
18525 11/09*109 806 35 0*111 804 35 0*113 802 35 0*116 800 35 0
*** *** *** ***
18530 11/10*133 797 35 0*136 794 40 0*139 791 40 0*141 788 45 0
18530 11/10*121 797 35 0*127 794 40 0*133 791 40 0*139 788 45 0
*** *** *** ***
18535 11/11*143 785 45 0*146 780 50 0*149 774 50 0*155 765 50 0
18535 11/11*145 785 45 0*151 780 50 0*157 774 50 0*165 767 55 0
*** *** *** *** *** **
18540 11/12*161 752 50 0*167 737 50 0*173 722 50 0*179 707 50 0
18540 11/12*174 760 60 0*182 753 65 0*190 745 70 0*196 735 75 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18545 11/13*185 691 50 0*191 675 45 0*196 660 45 0*201 645 40 0
18545 11/13*201 721 80 0*206 704 85 0*210 685 90 0*213 663 90 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18550 11/14*204 630 40 0*207 615 40 0*209 600 35 0*215 565 30 0
18550 11/14*214 640 90 0*215 615 85 0*215 590 80 0*215 565 75 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** **
18555 TS
18555 HR
**
There are two major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm
number 10. First, Partagas and Diaz recommended keeping this as a tropical
storm. However, two ship reports and hurricane impacts in Hispanola, Grand
Turk and Cuba described in Partagas and Diaz all suggest that this system
reached hurricane strength, likely up to Category 2 intensity at its peak
late on the 13th and early on the 14th. Perez (2000) analyzed this system
as causing Category 1 hurricane conditions in eastern Cuba (on the weak side
of the system). Thus it is estimated that this system was a hurricane from
the 12th to the 14th with a peak intensity of 90 kt. Secondly, Perez
described a major change to the track shown in Neumann et al. (1999) with a
track that took the hurricane closer to Jamaica and between Cuba and
Hispanola, with the center grazing the coast of Haiti. A compromise track
between Perez and Partagas/Diaz was utilized here with Partagas/Diaz track
mainly chosen from the 8th to the 10th, Perez' track primarily used from the
11th to the 13th and Partagas/Diaz track chosen for the 14th. Complete
lifecycle of this hurricane is not available as its decay was not documented.
The hurricane is known as "San Savero" for its impacts in Hispanola.
********************************************************************************
1909 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1999) mentioned three additional systems considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team decided that there was
enough information to include the first system as a new tropical storm
into HURDAT. (See storm 1, 1909.) The re-analysis team agreed to leave
the first and third out of HURDAT for the following reasons:
1) June 2-4, 1909: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
2) October 16-24, 1909: Not enough evidence for tropical storm intensity.
********************************************************************************
18560 08/20/1910 M=12 1 SNBR= 426 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
18560 08/23/1910 M= 7 1 SNBR= 451 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** ***
18565 08/20* 0 0 0 0*124 592 35 0*125 604 35 0*127 616 35 0
18570 08/21*130 629 35 0*133 640 35 0*136 649 35 0*138 657 35 0
18575 08/22*140 665 35 0*142 671 35 0*146 681 35 0*149 691 35 0
(The 20th to the 22nd are omitted from the revised HURDAT.)
18580 08/23*154 702 35 0*159 714 35 0*163 725 35 0*166 735 35 0
18580 08/23* 0 0 0 0*150 620 35 0*155 637 35 0*159 654 35 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18585 08/24*169 745 35 0*171 754 35 0*174 763 35 0*176 771 35 0
18585 08/24*165 673 35 0*172 695 35 0*180 715 35 0*187 728 30 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
18590 08/25*178 778 35 0*180 785 35 0*183 792 35 0*187 801 40 0
18590 08/25*194 740 30 0*203 754 30 0*213 767 30 0*225 775 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18595 08/26*191 808 40 0*195 816 40 0*199 825 40 0*202 832 45 0
18595 08/26*239 781 30 0*256 787 30 0*275 790 30 0*284 790 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18600 08/27*205 839 45 0*208 846 45 0*211 852 50 0*215 858 50 0
18600 08/27E296 790 35 0E307 790 35 0E317 787 35 0E323 784 35 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
18605 08/28*219 863 50 0*222 869 50 0*225 876 50 0*227 883 50 0
18605 08/28E329 780 40 0E335 776 40 0E340 770 40 0E349 761 40 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
18610 08/29*229 891 50 0*231 899 50 0*233 907 50 0*235 915 50 0
18610 08/29E356 754 35 0E363 747 35 0E370 740 30 0E376 734 30 0
**** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** ** **** *** **
18615 08/30*237 924 50 0*239 932 50 0*241 939 45 0*243 948 45 0
18620 08/31*246 961 40 0*248 970 40 0*251 979 35 0*254 988 30 0
(The 30th and 31st are omitted from this storm and included as part of
storm number 450.)
18625 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Note that
the original storm number 1 of 1910 in Neumann et al. was instead found by
Partagas and Diaz to be two separate tropical storms. These dramatic
changes are found to be reasonable. This system is the first of the two
separate storms.
********************************************************************************
18560 08/20/1910 M=12 1 SNBR= 426 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
18526 08/26/1910 M= 6 2 SNBR= 452 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
** ** * ***
18565 08/20* 0 0 0 0*124 592 35 0*125 604 35 0*127 616 35 0
18570 08/21*130 629 35 0*133 640 35 0*136 649 35 0*138 657 35 0
18575 08/22*140 665 35 0*142 671 35 0*146 681 35 0*149 691 35 0
18580 08/23*154 702 35 0*159 714 35 0*163 725 35 0*166 735 35 0
18585 08/24*169 745 35 0*171 754 35 0*174 763 35 0*176 771 35 0
18590 08/25*178 778 35 0*180 785 35 0*183 792 35 0*187 801 40 0
(The 20th to the 25th are omitted from this storm and parts of this track
are included in storm number 445.)
18626 08/26*191 808 40 0*195 816 40 0*199 825 40 0*202 832 45 0
18626 08/26* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*267 917 30 0*267 920 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18626 08/27*205 839 45 0*208 846 45 0*211 852 50 0*215 858 50 0
18626 08/27*267 923 30 0*267 927 30 0*267 930 30 0*267 934 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18626 08/28*219 863 50 0*222 869 50 0*225 876 50 0*227 883 50 0
18626 08/28*266 938 30 0*266 942 30 0*265 945 30 0*265 948 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18626 08/29*229 891 50 0*231 899 50 0*233 907 50 0*235 915 50 0
18626 08/29*264 950 30 0*264 952 30 0*263 955 30 0*262 958 30 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18626 08/30*237 924 50 0*239 932 50 0*241 939 45 0*243 948 45 0
18626 08/30*262 960 35 0*261 962 35 0*260 965 40 0*259 969 40 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18626 08/31*246 961 40 0*248 970 40 0*251 979 35 0*254 988 30 0
18626 08/31*257 972 40 0*255 976 35 0*253 980 30 0*251 985 25 0
*** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18626 TS
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made large alterations
to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Note that
the original storm number 1 of 1910 in Neumann et al. was instead found by
Partagas and Diaz to be two separate tropical storms. These dramatic
track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable. This system is
the second of the two separate storms.
********************************************************************************
18630 09/05/1910 M=11 2 SNBR= 427 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
18630 09/05/1910 M=11 3 SNBR= 453 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
* ***
18635 09/05* 0 0 0 0*170 570 60 0*171 595 65 0*171 606 70 0
18635 09/05* 0 0 0 0*170 583 60 0*171 595 65 0*171 606 70 0
***
18640 09/06*171 617 75 0*172 627 80 0*174 638 80 0*175 649 85 0
18645 09/07*175 660 85 0*176 671 85 0*176 682 80 0*177 694 75 0
18645 09/07*175 660 85 0*176 671 85 0*176 682 80 0*176 697 75 0
***
18650 09/08*177 706 70 0*178 719 70 0*179 731 70 0*181 742 70 0
18650 09/08*177 712 70 0*178 729 70 0*180 747 70 0*183 764 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
18655 09/09*183 754 70 0*185 765 70 0*188 776 70 0*190 788 70 0
18655 09/09*186 778 70 0*190 792 70 0*195 807 70 0*200 818 70 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18660 09/10*194 801 70 0*198 814 75 0*201 825 80 0*207 835 80 0
18660 09/10*205 829 70 0*209 838 75 0*213 847 80 0*217 851 80 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18665 09/11*213 845 85 0*220 855 85 0*225 863 85 0*232 872 85 0
18665 09/11*221 856 85 0*225 862 85 0*229 870 85 0*232 876 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18670 09/12*237 878 90 0*240 883 90 0*244 890 95 0*249 898 100 0
18670 09/12*236 883 90 0*240 889 90 0*244 895 95 0*249 903 95 0
*** *** *** *** *** ***
18675 09/13*253 904 105 0*257 913 105 0*260 922 105 0*262 931 105 0
18675 09/13*253 912 95 0*257 918 95 0*260 925 95 0*262 934 95 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18680 09/14*263 941 100 0*265 952 85 0*266 961 65 0*268 973 65 0
18680 09/14*263 943 95 0*265 953 95 0*266 963 95 0*268 969 95 0
*** *** *** ** *** ** *** **
18685 09/15*269 982 35 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
18685 09/15*269 976 65 0*270 983 45 0*270 990 35 0*270 996 30 0
*** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18690 HRATX2
There are two major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm
number 2. First, hurricane intensity was maintained from the 9th through
the 12th, since Perez (2000) analyzed this system as causing hurricane
conditions in western Cuba. Perez also recommended keeping the hurricane
just offshore of western Cuba (as seen in Neumann et al.) rather than
making landfall in Cuba. Secondly, the landfall position of Partagas and
Diaz being in northeastern Mexico rather than southern Texas is discarded
in favor of the position analyzed by Connor (1956) which was shown in
Neumann et al. (1999). Partagas altered the landfall position incorrectly
based upon sparse, once-daily observations from the Historical Weather Map
series. Partagas and Diaz otherwise made reasonable small alterations to the
track and intensity to that shown in Neumann et al. (1999). Jarrell et al.
(1992) (from Connor 1956) listed this hurricane as a having a central pressure
at landfall of 965 mb, based primarily upon a description of the storm tide
entirely inundating Padre Island, Texas. (It is to be noted that Ho et al.
(1987) did not system as being a U.S. impacting hurricane in their analysis
and that the _Monthly Weather Review_ at the time considered the system a
strong tropical storm.) Assuming that the 965 mb central pressure is valid
(though the evidence supporting it is somewhat sparse), this would suggest a
94 kt sustained windspeed from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship
- 95 kt utilized in best track. 95 kt at landfall in Texas makes this
hurricane a Category 2 in the United States, which agrees with the assessment
in Table 6 of Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane characterization in HURDAT.
The 95 kt windspeed is taken as the peak intensity reached by this system and
winds are adjusted accordingly on the 12th to the 14th. Inland decay model
of Kaplan and DeMaria (1995) utilized for inland winds over Texas and Mexico.
Track of storm is slightly altered on the 5th to provide for a more realistic
translational velocity. The hurricane is known as "San Zacarias II" for its
impacts in Puerto Rico.
*******************************************************************************
18695 09/23/1910 M= 6 3 SNBR= 428 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
18695 09/23/1910 M= 6 4 SNBR= 454 NOT NAMED XING=0 SSS=0
* ***
18700 09/23*255 594 60 0*262 600 65 0*268 606 70 0*272 611 70 0
(The 23rd is omitted from the revised HURDAT.)
18705 09/24*276 615 75 0*283 620 80 0*291 625 85 0*301 631 90 0
18705 09/24* 0 0 0 0*278 605 35 0*283 613 45 0*289 621 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18710 09/25*311 636 95 0*322 639 100 0*333 641 105 0*345 640 105 0
18710 09/25*298 628 65 0*308 634 75 0*320 637 85 0*336 634 85 0
*** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18715 09/26*357 635 100 0*369 629 95 0*380 620 90 0*389 611 85 0
18715 09/26*348 628 85 0*360 619 85 0*370 610 80 0*381 602 75 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18720 09/27*395 602 80 0*399 591 75 0E402 580 70 0E405 565 70 0
18720 09/27*391 594 70 0*401 586 65 0E410 575 60 0E413 563 60 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18725 09/28E406 550 70 0E407 533 70 0E408 517 70 0E406 501 65 0
18725 09/28E411 549 60 0E409 537 60 0E407 520 60 0E405 496 55 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
(The 29th is new to HURDAT.)
18727 09/29E408 461 50 0E410 428 45 0E415 400 40 0E421 374 35 0
18730 HR
No major changes from Partagas and Diaz (1999), who made large alterations to
the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999), originally storm
number 3. These track and intensity changes are found to be reasonable. The
peak intensity of this hurricane is reduced from 105 kt (Category 3) down to
a 85 kt (Category 2) due to available observations that suggest that the
system was substantially weaker. Another solution considered but discarded
was to reduce the peak winds for this hurricane to Category 1 intensity.
Winds are adjusted accordingly on the 24th to the 28th.
*******************************************************************************
18735 10/09/1910 M=15 4 SNBR= 429 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=3
18735 10/09/1910 M=15 5 SNBR= 455 NOT NAMED XING=1 SSS=2
* *** *
18740 10/09* 0 0 0 0*112 795 50 0*113 797 50 0*113 797 50 0
18740 10/09* 0 0 0 0*112 795 30 0*113 797 30 0*113 797 30 0
** ** **
18745 10/10*114 798 50 0*116 799 50 0*118 800 55 0*121 801 55 0
18745 10/10*114 798 30 0*116 799 30 0*118 800 30 0*121 801 30 0
** ** ** **
18750 10/11*124 803 55 0*128 805 60 0*132 807 65 0*137 810 70 0
18750 10/11*124 803 35 0*128 805 35 0*132 807 40 0*138 809 45 0
** ** ** *** *** **
18755 10/12*142 813 75 0*148 815 80 0*155 818 80 0*165 821 85 0
18755 10/12*146 811 50 0*152 813 55 0*160 815 65 0*169 818 75 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18760 10/13*178 824 90 0*191 827 90 0*199 829 95 0*203 830 95 0
18760 10/13*177 821 85 0*186 823 90 0*195 825 95 0*204 827 95 0
*** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18765 10/14*207 832 100 0*210 833 105 0*215 834 105 0*219 835 105 0
18765 10/14*214 830 100 0*223 836 100 960*230 840 90 0*233 842 85 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18770 10/15*225 837 105 0*230 838 95 0*234 839 90 0*242 842 90 0
18770 10/15*236 844 90 0*237 847 90 0*237 850 90 0*236 852 90 0
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** ** *** *** **
18775 10/16*245 848 90 0*238 854 90 0*231 852 95 0*226 845 100 0
18775 10/16*234 853 100 0*232 854 110 0*229 855 120 0*224 854 130 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18780 10/17*227 841 100 0*231 834 105 0*236 830 105 0*245 823 105 0
18780 10/17*221 849 130 924*225 843 125 0*234 835 120 0*244 828 115 941
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18785 10/18*254 819 100 941*265 817 65 0*275 818 60 0*283 819 60 0
18785 10/18*255 822 105 0*265 820 95 955*275 819 70 0*283 819 60 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
18790 10/19*292 820 60 0*301 819 60 0*310 816 60 0*320 806 60 0
18790 10/19*292 819 50 0*301 819 50 0*310 816 50 0*320 806 60 0
*** ** ** **
18795 10/20*327 798 60 0*336 785 60 0*344 771 55 0*353 751 50 0
18795 10/20*327 798 60 0*336 785 60 0*344 771 55 0*353 750 50 0
***
18800 10/21*363 726 45 0E373 696 45 0E382 671 45 0E388 651 40 0
18800 10/21*360 723 45 0E366 690 45 0E370 660 45 0E370 644 40 0
18805 10/22E390 634 40 0E391 618 40 0E385 603 40 0E379 596 40 0
18805 10/22E368 632 40 0E364 618 40 0E360 610 40 0E358 601 40 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
18810 10/23E376 592 35 0E369 586 35 0E361 580 35 0* 0 0 0 0
18810 10/23E357 589 35 0E357 582 35 0E357 573 35 0E357 564 35 0
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
18815 HRBFL3
18815 HRBFL2
****
There is one major change from Partagas and Diaz (1999), originally storm
number 4. They recommended removing the 9th and the 10th from HURDAT, but
it was decided to keep these dates in HURDAT since observations do support
the system having a closed circulation on both days though with tropical
depression intensity. Partagas and Diaz (1999) otherwise made reasonable
small alterations to the track and intensity shown in Neumann et al. (1999).
A central pressure of 960 mb (at 07Z on the 14th) suggests winds of 100 kt
from the southern wind-pressure relationship - 100 kt used in best track at
the first Cuban landfall of this hurricane. Perez (2000) analyzed this
hurricane at its second landfall on the 17th as having a central pressure of
924 mb, based upon a peripheral pressure of 947 mb from the ship "Prince
Crown" (listed in the Partagas and Diaz report). This central pressure
suggests winds of 134 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure relationship
- 130 kt utilized in best track. A central pressure of 941 mb (at 1625Z on
the 17th) suggests winds of 119 kt from the Gulf of Mexico wind-pressure
relationship. 120 kt chosen for 12Z and 115 kt chosen for 18Z on the
17th. Ho et al. (1987) utilized this ship measured central pressure
and an estimate of 28 nmi RMW to be conditions at landfall for this
hurricane in the Southwest Florida. However, observed storm surge for
the region does not correspond with a Category 4 (or even Category 3)
hurricane making landfall (B. Jarvinen, personal communication). Jarrell
et al. (1992), instead, listed this hurricane as making landfall with a
central pressure of 955 mb based upon a measurement in Ft. Myers, Florida.
(The pressure observation can also be found in Partagas and Diaz (1999).)
A 955 mb central pressure suggests winds of 105 kt from the Gulf of Mexico
wind-pressure relationship. With an estimated RMW (from Ho et al.)
substantially larger than expected climatologically for this central
pressure and latitude (about 19 nmi from Vickery et al. 2000), maximum
sustained winds at landfall in Southwest Florida are estimated at 95 kt.
This makes this hurricane a Category 2 hurricane (though near the Category
2-3 boundary) at landfall in the United States, which is weaker than the
Category 3 listing found in Table 6 or Neumann et al. (1999)/U.S. hurricane
characterization in HURDAT. A peripheral pressure of 985 mb (at 21Z on the
18th) suggests winds of at least 70 kt from the subtropical wind-pressure
relationship - 60 kt retained for best track at 18Z and 50 kt chosen for
best track at 00Z on the 19th since the hurricane was inland at that time.
A storm tide measurement of 15' in Key West, Florida was described in Barnes
(1998a). The storm is known as "El Huracan De Los Cinco Dias" for its
impact in Cuba (Partagas and Diaz 1999, Perez 2000).
*******************************************************************************
1910 - Additional Notes:
Partagas and Diaz (1999) mentioned one additional system considered
for inclusion into HURDAT. The re-analysis team agreed to leave it out
of HURDAT for the following reason:
1) September 13-18, 1910: Gale force intensity, but likely extratropical.
********************************************************************************
1992/02 - ANDREW - 2002 ADDITION:
54545 08/16/1992 M=13 2 SNBR=1158 ANDREW XING=1 SSS=4
54545 08/16/1992 M=13 2 SNBR=1158 ANDREW XING=1 SSS=5
*
54550 08/16* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0*108 355 25 1010
54555 08/17*112 374 30 1009*117 396 30 1008*123 420 35 1006*131 442 35 1003
54560 08/18*136 462 40 1002*141 480 45 1001*146 499 45 1000*154 518 45 1000
54565 08/19*163 535 45 1001*172 553 45 1002*180 569 45 1005*188 583 45 1007
54570 08/20*198 593 40 1011*207 600 40 1013*217 607 40 1015*225 615 40 1014
54575 08/21*232 624 45 1014*239 633 45 1010*244 642 50 1007*248 649 50 1004
54580 08/22*253 659 55 1000*256 670 60 994*258 683 70 981*257 697 80 969
54580 08/22*253 659 55 1000*256 670 65 994*258 683 80 981*257 697 95 969
** ** **
54585 08/23*256 711 90 961*255 725 105 947*254 742 120 933*254 758 135 922
54585 08/23*256 711 110 961*255 725 130 947*254 742 145 933*254 758 150 922
*** *** *** ***
54590 08/24*254 775 125 930*254 793 120 937*256 812 110 951*258 831 115 947
54590 08/24*254 775 125 930*254 793 130 937*256 812 115 951*258 831 115 947
*** ***
54595 08/25*262 850 115 943*266 867 115 948*272 882 115 946*278 896 120 941
54595 08/25*262 850 115 943*266 867 115 948*272 882 120 946*278 896 125 941
*** ***
54600 08/26*285 905 120 937*292 913 115 955*301 917 80 973*309 916 50 991
54600 08/26*285 905 125 937*292 913 120 955*301 917 80 973*309 916 50 991
*** ***
54605 08/27*315 911 35 995*321 905 30 997*328 896 30 998*336 884 25 999
54610 08/28*344 867 20 1000*354 840 20 1000* 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0
54615 HRCFL4BFL3 LA3
54615 HRCFL5BFL4 LA3
********
U.S. and Bahamian Hurricane Data
--------------------------------
Date/Time Lat Lon Max Saffir- Central Landfall States
Winds Simpson Pressure Location Affected
8/23/2100Z 25.4N 76.6W 130kt 4 923mb Eleuthera, Ba ---
8/23/2100Z 25.4N 76.6W 140kt 5 923mb Eleuthera, Ba ---
*** *
8/24/0100Z 25.4N 77.8W 125kt 4 931mb Barry Is., Ba ---
8/24/0100Z 25.4N 77.8W 130kt 4 931mb Barry Is., Ba ---
***
8/24/0905Z 25.5N 80.3W 125kt 4 922mb Fender Point CFL4, BFL3
8/24/0905Z 25.5N 80.3W 145kt 5 922mb Fender Point CFL5, BFL4
*** * **** ****
8/26/0830Z 29.6N 91.5W 105kt 3 956mb Pt. Chevreuil LA3
8/26/0830Z 29.6N 91.5W 100kt 3 956mb Pt. Chevreuil LA3
***
After considering the presentations regarding various recommendations for
the revisions of Andrew's best track intensities, the NHC Best Track Change
Committee made alterations to the winds in HURDAT for Hurricane Andrew for
the dates of 22 to 26 August. These changes are made to Hurricane Andrew's
intensity data for the time while the storm was over the Atlantic Ocean just
east of the Bahamas, over the Bahamian islands and south Florida, over the
Gulf of Mexico and at landfall in Louisiana. Neither the best track
positions nor the central pressure values of Andrew were adjusted. The
alterations in wind intensity were based upon the Franklin et al. (2003)
methodology, which is consistent with the work of Dunion et al. (2003) and
Dunion and Powell (2002) as discussed earlier. The changes to HURDAT were
applied for these dates as aircraft reconnaissance observations were
available throughout this period and there were limited in-situ surface
observations indicative of the maximum 1 min surface winds. The revisions
make Andrew a Category 5 hurricane on the SSHS at landfall in both Eleuthera
Island, Bahamas and in southeastern Florida. The maximum 1 min surface wind
for Hurricane Andrew at landfall in mainland southeastern Florida near Fender
Point (8 nmi [13 km] east of Homestead) at 0905 UTC 24 August is officially
estimated to be 145 kt. The original best track landfall intensity estimate
was 125 kt. The peak intensity of Andrew, originally assessed at 135 kt, is
now judged to be 150 kt at 1800 UTC 23 August just east of the northern
Bahamas.
Details of presentations made and minutes of deliberations can be found at:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/index.html
********************************************************************************