Tropical Cyclones
Main Index Home Page Stock Weather Photos Australian Severe Weather Forum Storm News and Storm Chasing Reports Tropical Cyclones / Hurricanes / Typhoons Weather Data and Links Wild Fires / Bushfires Weather Observation Techniques Weather Picture Catalogue Tornado Pictures and Reports Stock Video Footage and DVDs for sale
Monthly Global Tropical Cyclone Summary September 2004
[Summaries and Track Data] [Prepared by Gary Padgett]


                              SEPTEMBER, 2004

  (For general comments about the nature of these summaries, as well as
  information on how to download the tabular cyclone track files, see
  the Author's Note at the end of this summary.)



     The purpose of this section is to list some websites where many and
  varied types of tropical cyclone information are archived.  Many readers
  will know about these already, but for the benefit of those who don't,
  I wanted to include them.   After a couple of months, I will move this
  note to the ending section of the summary.

  (1) Aircraft Reconnaissance Information

     Various types of messages from reconnaissance aircraft may be
  retrieved from the following FTP site:>

     Information regarding how to interpret the coded reconnaissance
  messages may be found at the following URL:>

  Links are also included to websites with further information about the
  U. S. Air Force 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron and the NOAA Air-
  craft Operations Center.

  (2) Archived Advisories

     All the advisory products (public advisories, forecast/advisories,
  strike probabilities, discussions, various graphics) issued by TPC/NHC
  are archived on TPC's website.  For the current year (using 2004 as an
  example), the archived products can be found at:>

  Links to tropical products archives for earlier years are available at
  the following URL:>

  JTWC warnings for past storms are archived on the NRL Monterry website:>

  On the NRL site, the link to past years can be found in the upper left 
  corner of the screen.

     I am not aware at the moment of any other TCWC which archives all
  its tropical cyclone warning/advisory products for public access, but
  if I learn of any, I will add them to this list.

  (3) Satellite Imagery

     Satellite images of tropical cyclones in various sensor bands are
  available on the NRL Monterrey and University of Wisconsin websites,
  courtesy of Jeff Hawkins and Chris Velden and their associates.  The
  links are:>>

  On the NRL site, the link to past years can be found in the upper left 
  corner of the screen.  For the CIMSS site, a link to data archives is 
  located in the lower left portion of the screen.

     I'm sure there are other sites with available imagery available, and
  as I learn of them, I will add the links to this list.


                           SEPTEMBER HIGHLIGHTS

   --> Two large, severe hurricanes pass through northern Bahamas and
       strike same point on Florida's East Coast
   --> Tropical storm rains cause catastrophic loss of life in Haiti
   --> Long-lived intense hurricane causes great destruction on Grenada,
       Jamaica, Cayman Islands, western Cuba, and north-central U. S.
       Gulf Coast
   --> Japan experiences yet another tropical cyclone strike


              ***** Feature of the Month for September *****


     During the summer (boreal) of 2003, I sent another one of my famous
  surveys to the members of an informal tropical cyclone discussion group
  of which I am a member.   I also recently sent it to a few other persons
  in the tropical cyclone community.   I intend to present the results of
  the survey as monthly features spread over several months, beginning with
  the May, 2004, summary.   The survey consisted of ten multiple-choice
  questions dealing with various tropical or subtropical cyclone-related
  issues, and two or three questions will be considered each month.

     The persons responding to the survey are listed below.  A special
  thanks to each for taking the time to respond to the questions.

  Michael Bath - New South Wales, Australia
  Bruno Benjamin - Guadeloupe, French West Indies
  Eric Blake - TPC/NHC, Miami, Florida, USA
  Pete Bowyer - Canadian Hurricane Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
  Kevin Boyle - Newchapel Observatory, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
  Jeff Callaghan - BoM, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  Simon Clarke - Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  Tony Cristaldi - NWS Office, Melbourne, Florida, USA
  Roger Edson - University of Guam, USA
  Chris Fogarty - Canadian Hurricane Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
  James Franklin - TPC/NHC, Miami, Florida, USA
  Bruce Harper - Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  Julian Heming - UK Meteorological Office, UK
  Karl Hoarau - Cergy-Pontoise University, Paris, France
  Greg Holland - BoM, Australia
  Mark Kersemakers - BoM, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia
  Mark Lander - University of Guam, USA
  Chris Landsea - AOML/HRD, Miami, Florida, USA
  Gary Padgett - Alabama, USA
  Michael V. Padua - Naga City, Philippines
  Michael Pitt - US Navy
  David Roberts - TPC/NHC, Miami, Florida, USA
  David Roth - NOAA/HPC, Maryland, USA
  Matthew Saxby - Queanbeyan, New South Wales, Australia
  Carl Smith - Queensland, Australia
  Phil Smith - Hong Kong, China
  John Wallace - San Antonio, Texas, USA
  Ray Zehr - Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, Colorado, USA

     For each of the survey questions, the format will be as follows:

     (1) the question as it appeared in the original survey

     (2) summary of the responses to each of the possible choices

     (3) some of the comments from various respondents

  Following this I will attempt to present an analysis of the issues
  plus interject my opinions on the subject.

     The monthly feature for September focuses on the final two, and rather
  unrelated, questions on the survey.     One dealt with whether or not
  warnings (as a named tropical cyclone) should be issued for very brief
  systems with an expected lifetime of probably not more than two warning
  cycles, i.e., 12 hours.  The other was concerned with the JTWC-specific
  term "super typhoon" and whether or not it should be retained or dropped.

     There were 28 persons who responded to the survey questions.  For
  some questions, certain persons did not specify an answer, so the total
  number of votes might not always add up to 28.  Also, in some cases the
  respondent was undecided between two of the choices.  In those cases I
  assigned 1/2 vote to each of the two choices.  A word about the comments
  included below:  this article is extremely long as it is, and I could
  not possibly include all the comments which the various respondents
  made.  I have selected certain ones which seem to cover the various 
  issues well, as well as a few which cast a different slant on the 

                     Question # 9 - "One-hit Wonders"

  (1) The question was: a small tropical storm has formed far out at sea,
      is definitely known to meet the criteria for naming and issuing
      warnings, but is no threat to land and almost certainly will not
      exist as a tropical storm for more than 6 or 12 hours due to an
      approaching cold front, or else is entering a region of strong
      vertical shear--for whatever reason, it is pretty evident that no
      more than 1 or 2 warnings as a tropical storm would be issued.  What
      should be done?

      (A) Name and issue the 1 or 2 needed advisories
      (B) Don't name nor issue TC advisories but include as an unnamed
          TS in the seasonal report
      (C) Treat as non-tropical (i.e., small LOW with locally strong
          winds), don't issue TC advisories and don't include as an
          after-the-fact storm

  (2) Summary of Responses

      (A) Name and issue needed advisories:        27.0 votes -  96%
      (B) Don't name but include after-the-fact:    1.0 vote  -   4%
      (C) Ignore as a tropical cyclone:             0.0 votes -   0%

  (3) Some Comments

  Carl Smith (A):  "Even if conditions appear to be about to become
  unfavourable, there is always room for error, and unexpected things can
  happen.  In any case advisories should be issued so marine traffic
  is alerted to its presence."

  Chris Fogarty (A):  "BUT, be confident it is worthy of naming!!!
  Borderline cases should be kept as depressions!  I find in recent years
  some systems are getting named or declared as hurricanes that I have a
  hard time believing, even after checking all kinds of data, sometimes
  I can't convince myself with NHC's decision...or perhaps I'm missing

  Dave Roberts (A):  "If it meets criteria for advisories/ it!
  This is my biggest Pet Peeve."

  David Roth (A):  "Name and issue the 1 or 2 needed advisories.  Since
  there is significant error seen/acknowledged in intensity forecasts, who
  really knows how long the system will survive?  Tropical Depression #5 of
  1988 off New England, the unnamed hurricane in November, 1991, the
  unnamed hurricane/tropical storm of early September, 1992, off New
  England, and the subtropical/tropical storm of late August, 2000, are
  systems that spring to mind (only the 1991 storm is in the TC database)."

  Greg Holland (A):  "Name it and alert shipping.  I don't know a forecast
  system alive that is accurate enough to guarantee a 12-hour life time.
  Reality is that it will be a judgement call by the forecaster."

  James Franklin (A):  "Should be named, BUT, depending on what else is
  going on, this may not always be possible."

  Julian Heming (A):  "'Call it as it is' is the view I take.  Storm
  warnings are for marine traffic as well as landfall predictions, and we
  also need to take a consistent approach in historical records, which are
  closely tied with real-time warnings."

  Kevin Boyle (A):  "Even though it may appear to be a waste of time,
  issuing advisories on a tropical storm is necessary just for awareness
  purposes.  In my opinion if this was not done, then I feel it would be
  pointless warning on a tropical depression far out to sea regardless of
  the number of warnings issued (if it was obvious the depression was not
  going to intensify any more)."

  Mark Lander (A):  "Until our skill at intensity forecasting gets better
  than it is, any cyclone that meets warning criteria as a TS should be
  named.  Many a weak, dissipating cyclone over water has gone on to bigger
  and better things to the embarrassment of all.  Also, in my old days at
  the JTWC on Guam, it was often heard as an excuse not to warn because
  such and such a TC was in the middle of nowhere, and that no one cared,
  and that such and such a TC was a piece of garbage and would never amount
  to anything.  Well, sometimes there are more things that what we could
  imagine going on in the middle of nowhere.  One time a Sydney to Tokyo
  sail race was taking place and the boats ran into trouble in one of these
  "it's just in the middle of nowhere" storms.   I think all TCs should be
  considered a hazard worthy of advisories no matter where it is, or how
  long we think it is going to last."

  Pete Bowyer (A):  "It's longevity and location shouldn't be a factor in
  the classification process."

  Phil Smith (A):  "JMA named a storm that JTWC had shrugged off a year or
  two back.  I believe they were right.  While the storm may not threaten
  land, aeroplane pilots or the masters of ships will pay greater attention
  to a NAME on the weather map than they will to an 'L', and if I were to
  by flying on such a plane, I would like my pilot to have the best
  possible information.  I have heard one commercial pilot say to another:
  "Since they haven't named it yet, we should be able to go straight
  through it." "

  (4) Analysis and Gary's Opinion

     I agree wholeheartedly with the thrust of the above comments--such a
  system should be named, regardless of its expected lifetime....AND,
  regardless of its location.  (We're not dabbling in real estate here!)
  In particular, Julian Heming and Mark Lander sum up my feelings exactly.
  Warnings are for marine traffic just as much as for populations of
  coastal areas--a human life on a ship is just as valuable as one on terra
  firma--and no one can ever say for certain that a sailing vessel won't
  encounter one of those "middle of nowhere" storms.   Also, the integrity
  of the historical database is of utmost importance to me.  And I do agree
  with Phil Smith's assertion that everyone:  the general public, ship
  captains, aviators, oil company executives, etc., definitely pay more
  attention to a tropical (or subtropical) weather system which bears a
  name than to an unnamed system.

     Regarding adding storms after-the-fact, there are occasions when there
  may be uncertainty regarding the intensity, thermal characteristics or
  wind field of a particular system and it is treated as a tropical
  depression, non-tropical LOW, strong tropical wave or monsoon depression
  operationally.  In some cases later data and/or analysis may indicate
  that the system was a tropical or subtropical storm, and such systems
  should certainly be added to the "best tracks" database.  

                       Question #10 - Super Typhoons

  (1) The question was: should JTWC drop the "super typhoon" category and
      begin categorizing NW Pacific TCs according to the Saffir/Simpson
      categories?  Along with this, perhaps reserving the "super typhoon"
      category for typhoons which reach S/S Category 5 status, i.e.,
      140 kts?

      (A) Yes
      (B) No

  (2) Summary of Responses

      (A) Drop the use of "super typhoon":    12.0 votes -  46%
      (B) Retain the term "super typhoon":    14.0 votes -  54%

  (3) Some Comments

  Bruce Harper (B):  "I'm not averse to names which elicit the appropriate
  response--the number categories are not as 'punchy' as the word 'super'.
  Over here they use 'severe' for the same reason, but of course the scales
  are all different.  Nice if everyone could agree (?).  Regarding the S/S:
  this scale needs to be reformed to reflect the fact that it was (loosely)
  based on 3-sec gusts and not maximum 1-min means (gusts)."

  Bruno Benjamin (A):  "I think S/S Category 5 could also be named 'Super
  Hurricane' to match the NWP classification."

  Carl Smith (B):  "No, the storms in each basin have unique
  characteristics.  If category number systems are to be employed I favor
  the Australian system, perhaps adapted to local conditions, as the NW
  Pacific systems have more in common with Australian region systems than
  Atlantic systems, and the Australian maximum gust categories are quite
  relevant to the destructive potential of the cyclone."

  Chris Fogarty (A):  "Good idea--don't overuse 'super'--reserve for
  Cat. 5's, or do away with it and just call it an intense typhoon like
  NHC calls 'intense' hurricanes (Cat. 3+)"

  Chris Landsea (B):  "No, don't drop,  but one could in addition institute
  a Saffir/Simpson scale there.  Only having 'typhoon' (65 kts) and then
  'super typhoon' (130 kts) doesn't provide enough stratification of the
  systems for the public."

  Dave Roberts (no choice):  "I think JTWC should follow the RSMC (JMA) on
  this issue.  Whatever criteria they use."

  David Roth (A):  "Yes.  I like the super typhoon/Category 5 idea."

  Jeff Callaghan (A):  "We should all work towards using the same category

  John Wallace (B):  "The STY category has been used for a very long time,
  and I think it has enough cachet in the NWP for continued use, rather
  than adding the occasionally infuriating S/S system."

  Mark Lander (A):  " I think the introduction of the category system
  would be a great service to the people of the Pacific.  For purely
  sentimental reasons, I would like to see "super typhoon" kept, but
  matching it with the threshold of the Cat. 5 makes sense."

  Michael Bath (no choice):  "I just wish the categories were consistent
  for all basins."

  Pete Bowyer (A):  "Yes, and with 'super typhoon' reserved for Cat 5's
  that reach 150 or 160 knots (as opposed to a 'garden variety' Cat 5)."

  Phil Smith (B):  "'Super Typhoon' makes the average public sit up and
  take notice more easily.  If you introduce the S/S categories, then you
  need to educate the people, and people do not easily adapt to a new way
  of thinking......The only ones who would benefit from a standardisation
  of categories world-wide would be the meteorologists and other weather
  nuts like ourselves who like to keep track of and compare storms all
  around the world.  Keep in mind the question, 'What is the best way to
  keep the public well-informed in each place?'"

  Simon Clarke (A):  "Super typhoon is a bad word anyway.  Severe or Major
  typhoon is better and would take these storms out of the realms of the
  supernatural!!!  In fact a lot of super typhoons are really not that
  'super' anyway when you look at them in detail.  I would like to see
  world-wide consistency in categorisation.  That sets a level playing
  field and makes comparisons much more easy."

  (4) Analysis and Gary's Opinion

     Obviously the respondents were essentially evenly divided on this
  question.  I voted for Option B (retain super typhoon), but this was
  a rather weak opinion.  Actually, I think I would like the idea of
  raising the super typhoon threshold 10 kts and equating it with the
  Saffir/Simpson Category 5.  One objection to redefining the super typhoon
  might be that many typhoons thus labeled in the annual reports would
  no longer be super typhoons, but then again, many of the older super
  typhoons are no longer regarded as such because their peak MSWs have been
  lowered from the often fantastically high values in the old reports.

     Many of the comments strayed from the original question and touched
  on the issue of perhaps a uniform classification scale for tropical
  cyclones.  The two widely-used scales are the Saffir/Simpson scale
  (also slightly enlarged upon by Mark Lander and Chip Guard for use in
  the Pacific islands) and the Australian Cyclone Severity Scale.  In my
  opinion, both scales are very good and well thought out, and I can not
  honestly say one is superior to the other.  They take different
  approaches, and each was devised to enhance warnings and better inform
  the public in their respective countries (the U. S. and Australia).
  I know how well the general public in the U. S. has responded to the
  Saffir/Simpson scale, and I would imagine that the Australian public
  likewise understands and responds to the Australian scale.  So it is
  doubtful either would want to change a system which "ain't broke".

     The perceived problem occurs when one considers a uniform global
  classification scale for enhancing marine warnings and perhaps simply
  for the sake of standardization.   However, in my opinion, a 5-point
  classification scale is not of all that much value to mariners--they are
  trained to read the warnings received from various TCWCs and make their
  decisions based upon the peak winds, the gale and storm radii, direction
  and rate of movement, radii of various sea conditions, etc.  In other
  words, ship captains and meteorologists are experts at digesting and
  acting upon all the technical information contained in tropical cyclone
  warnings.  The whole point of the Saffir/Simpson and Australian cyclone
  scales is to take technical information and reduce it to something
  simpler for the purpose of giving the general public guidance as to how
  to respond to cyclone threats.

     The final monthly feature based on the 2003 survey will be included
  in the December, 2004, summary and will cover Question #8, which dealt
  with the often controversial topic of wind reporting criteria for
  tropical cyclones.

                            ACTIVITY BY BASINS

  ATLANTIC (ATL) - North Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico

  Activity for September: 1 tropical depression
                          1 hurricane **
                          3 intense hurricanes

  ** - system actually reached hurricane intensity in early October

                        Sources of Information

     Most of the information presented below was obtained from the
  various tropical cyclone products issued by the Tropical Prediction
  Center/National Hurricane Center (TPC/NHC) in Miami, Florida:
  discussions, public advisories, forecast/advisories, tropical weather
  outlooks, special tropical disturbance statements, etc.    Some
  additional information may have been gleaned from the monthly
  summaries prepared by the hurricane specialists and available on
  TPC/NHC's website.     All references to sustained winds imply a
  1-minute averaging period unless otherwise noted.

                 Atlantic Tropical Activity for September

     The very active pattern of tropical cyclone activity observed in
  August in the Atlantic basin continued into September, though at a
  slightly less hectic pace.   Four named tropical cyclones formed during
  the month--near the long-term (1950-2003) average of 3.50.  All four
  of these storms reached hurricane intensity, but Tropical Storm Lisa did
  not do so until 2 October, so counts as an October hurricane.  The 1950-
  2003 average number of hurricanes is 2.44, so September was roughly
  average in that department.  It was in the intense hurricane category
  (MSW > 95 kts) that September was well-above the mean.  The long-term
  average number of intense hurricanes is 1.24, and Hurricanes Ivan, Jeanne
  and Karl all achieved that distinction.

     Mighty Hurricane Ivan maintained an intensity at or above Saffir/
  Simpson Category 3 for 10.25 days--certainly near if not setting a new
  record for longevity as an intense hurricane.  The great storm reached
  Category 5 status on three separate occasions during its lifetime, and
  spread death and destruction from the southern Windward Islands to the
  eastern United States.  Hurricane Jeanne, in its early tropical storm
  stages, brought torrential rains to Haiti which led to catastrophic
  loss of life.  After loitering around in the western Atlantic for several
  days and executing a large clockwise loop, Jeanne began a westward march
  which ultimately carried it across the northern Bahamas and into the
  Florida Peninsula on a track almost identical to that followed by
  Hurricane Frances three weeks earlier.   Hurricane Karl became a very
  impressive Category 4 hurricane around mid-month, but fortunately
  followed a harmless track northward through the central Atlantic.  On
  its heels came Tropical Storm Lisa, a very tenacious storm which hung
  out in the east-central tropical Atlantic for almost a week, barely
  clinging to life at times, but eventually following Karl northward
  on a track between Bermuda and the Azores.   Lisa managed to briefly
  reach minimal hurricane intensity in early October before losing its
  tropical characteristics.

     In addition to the named tropical cyclones, there was an additional
  tropical depression for which advisories were issued.  An active tropical
  wave left the coast of Africa on 29 August and passed north of the Cape
  Verde Islands the next day.  The system became fairly well-organized on
  the 31st--SAB gave it a Dvorak classification as high as T2.5/2.5 at
  1800 UTC.  The system likely would have been upgraded to depression
  status, but the next day convection began to wane as the disturbance
  moved into a less-favorable environment.  Over the next several days
  the system moved northwestward, then northward, and finally northeastward
  over the eastern Atlantic.   Deep convection had returned by the 7th,
  although southwesterly shear was inhibiting development somewhat.  The
  system was classified as Tropical Depression 10 at 0600 UTC on the 9th
  of September when located about 365 nm west-southwest of the Azores.
  However, at 1800 UTC convection had diminished and all that remained was
  a low-level cloud swirl; hence, advisories were discontinued.  In post-
  analysis, it was decided to begin the tropical depression stage at
  1200 UTC on 7 September.  A short report on this system, written by
  Richard Pasch, is available at the following URL:>

     Also, as the month of September opened, mighty Hurricane Frances
  was passing north of the Turks and Caicos Islands at its peak intensity
  of 125 kts.  The large storm had fortunately weakened to Category 2
  status before passing over the northwestern Bahamas and subsequently
  striking the Florida coast.  A full report on Frances can be found
  in the August summary, and the official TPC/NHC report on Frances,
  written by Jack Beven, may be found at the following URL:>

                            HURRICANE IVAN
                           2 - 25 September

   A. Storm History

     When I began to write this account of Hurricane Ivan, the TPC/NHC
  official storm report was not available online, so I wrote a fuller
  account than I would have otherwise.  But I have just discovered that
  the official storm report on Ivan, authored by Stacy Stewart, has now
  been placed on TPC/NHC's website.   However, I am still including the
  report which I had written.  Ivan was a classic long-lived Cape Verde
  hurricane which made two landfalls along the U. S. coast and reached
  Saffir/Simpson Category 5 status three times, peaking at 145 kts on
  12 September when located in the northwestern Caribbean Sea near Grand
  Cayman Island.  The great storm's origins lay with a vigorous tropical
  wave which crossed the West African coast on 31 August.   The system
  strengthened into the season's 9th tropical depression on the afternoon
  of 2 September when located about 485 nm southwest of the Cape Verde
  Islands.  Tropical Storm Ivan was christened at 0900 UTC on 3 September
  when the system was centered approximately 530 nm southwest of the Cape
  Verdes.  The system continued westward at an unusually low-latitude
  (for the Atlantic) along the 9th parallel.   Ivan was upgraded to
  hurricane status at 0900 UTC on 5 September when located about 1050 nm
  east-southeast of the Lesser Antilles.  An eye had appeared and satellite
  intensity estimates from TAFB and SAB supported the upgrade.

     Once upgraded to a hurricane, Ivan began to intensify very rapidly.
  A special advisory package was issued at 1700 UTC upgrading Ivan to
  a 100-kt Category 3 hurricane, located 865 nm east of the southern
  Windward Islands and moving quickly westward near 19 kts.  Ivan was
  upgraded to major hurricane status at latitude 10.1N--to the author's
  knowledge this is the southernmost point any Atlantic hurricane on
  record has achieved Category 3 status.  Ivan weakened some on the 6th
  and 7th--the first reconnaissance mission into the hurricane on the
  afternoon of the 6th found a 90-kt hurricane.   This weakening was
  possibly due to some slight westerly shear induced by a weak upper-level
  LOW over the east-central Caribbean, and also to an eyewall replacement
  cycle.  The storm began to re-intensify on the morning of the 7th and
  was back to Category 3 status before it passed near the island of
  Grenada that afternoon with devastating results.  (Ivan was the most
  destructive hurricane to strike Grenada since Hurricane Janet of 1955,
  which also became an intense Category 5 hurricane in the northwestern

     Many tropical cyclones have weakened or met their demise while
  traversing the southeastern Caribbean Sea.   Dunn and Miller in
  _Atlantic Hurricanes_ attribute the lack of significant hurricane
  activity in this region at least in part to the significant divergence
  in the lower tropospheric easterly flow as the easterly trades are
  diverted into the semi-permanent LOW over the Amazon valley.   As Ivan
  chugged along westward, roughly parallel to the Venezuelan coastline,
  it continued to strengthen, reaching Category 5 status at 0600 UTC
  on 9 September when located about 75 nm northeast of Aruba in the
  Netherlands Antilles.  The CP was 922 mb, down 15 mb in 7 hours, and
  an eyewall dropsonde recorded 175 kts at about 192 m above MSL.  Intense
  Hurricane Ivan maintained its estimated 140-kt MSW for 18 hours until
  being downgraded slightly to 130 kts at 10/0000 UTC.  The dangerous
  storm by this time had its sights set on Jamaica, about 280 nm straight
  ahead as it moved west-northwestward at 11 kts.  Very fortunately for
  Jamaica, as Ivan approached the island during the early morning hours
  of 11 September, its eye wobbled westward enough that the core of
  strongest winds remained offshore.  Nonetheless, the island experienced
  hurricane-force winds.

     During the weakening episode on 10 September, Ivan's CP rose to
  937 mb at 10/1800 UTC, then began to drop again, reaching a minimum of
  910 mb around 0000 UTC on the 12th.  This reading ranks Ivan 6th for the
  lowest Atlantic basin CP on record, behind Camille (1969) and Mitch
  (1998) at 905 mb, Allen (1980) at 899 mb, the Labor Day Hurricane of
  1935 at 892 mb, and Gilbert (1988) at 888 mb.  The MSW was estimated at
  145 kts at this time and hurricane-force winds extended outward from
  the center 30 nm to the southwest and 60 nm in the other quadrants.
  The storm at this time was located about 115 nm southeast of Grand
  Cayman, moving generally in a west-northwesterly direction.  Ivan main-
  tained its peak intensity for a 12-hour period before being downgraded
  to Category 4 status again at 12/1200 UTC.  This slight weakening trend
  was likely due to an eyewall replacement cycle.  The great storm weakened
  only to 130 kts before being upgraded to Category 5 status (140 kts) for
  the third time at 0600 UTC on 13 September.   Ivan at this time was
  located about 140 nm southeast of the western tip of Cuba, still moving
  slowly west-northwestward.  The hurricane's third round at Category 5
  status was the longest--30 hours--with the CP dipping down to 912 mb
  for a secondary minimum at 13/1800 UTC.  Around 0000 UTC on 14 September
  the extremely dangerous hurricane's center passed just off the western
  tip of Cuba.  Ivan's track by this time had become more northwesterly as
  the cyclone headed into the confines of the Gulf of Mexico.

     As the hurricane continued north-northwestward into the Gulf of
  Mexico on the morning of the 14th, it began to slowly weaken, likely
  due to a combination of an eyewall replacement cycle, the entrainment of
  some very dry air and a restriction of the outflow in the northwestern
  quadrant.  The MSW had dropped to 120 kts by 14/1800 UTC where it
  remained pegged for 24 hours.  After the completion of the eyewall cycle,
  convection made a temporary comeback, and since Ivan was forecast to
  pass over a warm eddy during the next day or so, a modest strengthening
  was anticipated.  However, this did not materialize and the MSW was
  reduced to 115 kts at 1800 UTC on 15 September.   Ivan was centered
  at this time about 150 nm south of the Alabama coastline and had made
  an expected turn to the north.   Hurricane-force winds extended outward
  90 nm to the east of the center and 75 nm to the west while gales
  covered an area 400 nm in diameter.  Throughout the afternoon and evening
  of the 15th and into the early morning hours of the 16th, the great storm
  continued inexorably toward the Alabama coastline.   The center of Ivan's
  eye appears to have made landfall near Gulf Shores, Alabama, shortly
  after 0700 UTC on the morning of 16 September with the MSW estimated at
  113 kts--an upper-end Category 3 hurricane.  (The intermediate advisory
  nearest landfall gave the MSW as 130 statute miles-per hour, or 113 kts.)

  NOTE: In post-storm analysis it has been determined that Ivan's MSW at
  landfall was 105 kts.

     Hurricane Ivan continued moving inland through west-central Alabama
  as it gradually weakened.   At 1800 UTC the cyclone was downgraded to
  tropical storm status while passing about 70 km west-northwest of
  Montgomery, Alabama.  The weakening Ivan continued north-northeastward
  across Alabama, dropping copious amounts of rainfall, and was down-
  graded to a tropical depression during the evening of the 16th while
  located about 40 km north-northwest of Gadsden, Alabama.  This was
  accomplished on the final TPC/NHC advisory, issued at 17/0300 UTC.
  Warning responsibility was then assumed by HPC in Maryland.  The residual
  depression continued moving northeastward across the southeastern U. S.,
  finally emerging into the Atlantic off the Delmarva Peninsula as an
  extratropical gale.  This LOW became elongated and the southern portion
  of the surface circulation moved southwestward just off the southeastern
  U. S. coast, eventually passing over south Florida and into the Gulf of
  Mexico on 21 September.

     This system began to show signs of intensification, and advisories
  were re-initiated on Tropical Depression Ivan at 2300 UTC on the 22nd,
  placing the center about 135 nm south of the mouth of the Mississippi
  River.  Intensification continued and a reconnaissance plane during the
  evening measured a peak FLW of 47 kts within a convective band to the
  north of the center; hence, the depression was re-upgraded to Tropical
  Storm Ivan at 0300 UTC on 23 September.   The resurrected Ivan continued
  moving northwestward toward the western Louisiana/eastern Texas coasts.
  A peak intensity of 50 kts during this second phase of Ivan's colorful
  career was attained at 23/1500 UTC when a reconnaissance plane found
  70-kt winds at 450 m during the morning within a burst of deep convection
  which had fired off near the LLCC earlier in the morning.   However,
  thunderstorm activity subsequently dwindled and Ivan began to weaken.
  Tropical Storm Ivan crossed the coast just west of Cameron, Louisiana,
  around 0000 UTC on the 24th with peak winds estimated near 40 kts.  The
  system was downgraded once more to a depression at 24/0300 UTC and the
  second "final" TPC/NHC advisory was issued at 0900 UTC with Ivan
  weakening over southeastern Texas.  HPC issued four advisories on Ivan,
  the final one at 25/0900 UTC after the remnant LOW had become no longer
  discernible in surface observations.

     According to a discussion bulletin from NHC, the debate over what to
  call the rejuvenated tropical cyclone in the Gulf of Mexico on the 22nd
  of September was at times animated.   Many tropical cyclone enthusiasts
  and professional meteorologists on various discussion groups were fully
  expecting the system to be named Matthew--the next available name on
  the list.    The decision to apply the name Ivan to the cyclone came 
  somewhat of a surprise.  The NHC discussion bulletin at 23/2300 UTC
  states that the decision was based primarily on the reasonable continuity
  observed in the analysis of the surface and low-level circulation.

  B. Meteorological Observations

     The aforementioned TPC/NHC official storm report on Hurricane Ivan can
  be accessed at the following link:>

     Table 3 in the report lists selected surface observations made during
  the hurricane's lifetime.  The highest sustained wind recorded in
  Grenada was 64 kts, gusting to 101 kts, at Point Salines.   Grand Cayman
  reported the highest wind recorded during Ivan's history--indeed the
  highest wind recorded on land in an Atlantic hurricane in many years.
  At 12/1500 UTC the station recorded a peak 1-min avg wind of 130 kts
  with a peak gust of 149 kts.  Cabo de San Antonio, Cuba, reported a
  MSW of 96 kts with a peak gust of 104 kts as the storm passed just off
  the western tip of the island.  An automated weather observation station
  on the oil drilling platform Ram Powell-VJ956, located about 70 nm south
  of Mobile, Alabama, reported a sustained wind of 102 kts with a gust to
  135 kts at 15/2256 UTC.  (The instrument's elevation was 121.9 m above
  MSL.)  The strongest winds measured in the U. S. were an unofficial
  report from a storm chaser near Gulf Shores, Alabama, of a sustained
  wind of 77 kts with a gust to 99 kts at 0602 UTC on 16 September.  The
  Pensacola Naval Air Station reported a peak wind of 76 kts with a gust
  to 93 kts at 16/0629 UTC.   Television station WEAR-TV in Pensacola
  recorded a storm total rainfall of 401 mm.

     Interested persons should consult the Ivan report for more detailed

  C. Damage and Casualties

     Ivan is responsible for at least 94 deaths:  39 in Grenada, 26 in
  the United States, 18 in Jamaica, 4 in the Dominican Republic, 3 in
  Venezuela, 2 in the Cayman Islands, and 1 each in Tobago and Barbados.
  The storm was also indirectly responsible for 31 deaths in the U. S.

     The total U. S. monetary losses due to Ivan have been estimated
  at $15 billion, ranking Ivan as the 3rd most destructive U. S. hurricane
  to date, after Andrew (1992) and Charley (2004).   The effects of wind
  and water along the Alabama and western Florida Panhandle coastlines
  left behind incredible devastation.   As the slowly-weakening cyclone
  moved northward through west-central Alabama, thousands of homes suffered
  extensive damage due to trees falling on them.   Homes in Montgomery,
  Alabama, about 250 km inland, suffered extensive damage from falling
  trees.  Downed trees were also reported as far inland as Birmingham
  and Atlanta.   Millions of board feet of timber were blown down in the
  forests and woodlands of Northwest Florida and Alabama.

     Ivan left behind a trail of great destruction across the Caribbean.
  Grenada and the Cayman Islands were especially hard-hit, with Cuba,
  Jamaica and other islands also experiencing significant damage.  The
  Caribbean Development Bank has estimated the damage in the region at
  more than US$3 billion.   In the Caymans about 95% of the homes and
  other buildings were damaged or destroyed, and on Grenada more than
  14,000 homes were damaged or destroyed, and 80% of the nutmeg trees
  were destroyed.  On Jamaica at least 47,000 homes were damaged with
  5600 being completely destroyed.

     Many articles concerning Ivan's rampage through the Caribbean can be
  accessed at the following URL:>

  (Report written by Gary Padgett; some material taken from TPC/NHC storm
  report authored by Stacy Stewart)

                            HURRICANE JEANNE
                        13 September - 2 October

  A. Storm History

     The official TPC/NHC report on Hurricane Jeanne, authored by Miles
  Lawrence and Hugh Cobb, is now available at the following URL:>

     Jeanne was the seventh hurricane of the 2004 season and the sixth
  major hurricane (MSW > 96 kts).  (Karl, which formed after Jeanne,
  became a major hurricane earlier than did Jeanne.)  Jeanne formed from
  a tropical wave of African origin and became a tropical depression on
  the 13th just east of the Lesser Antilles.  The depression moved into
  the northeastern Caribbean where it became Tropical Storm Jeanne on
  the 14th.   The cyclone moved inland over southeastern Puerto Rico on
  the 15th almost at hurricane intensity.  After crossing Puerto Rico
  Jeanne continued to intensify, reaching hurricane intensity over the
  Mona Passage before striking the eastern tip of the Dominican Republic.
  Jeanne moved slowly over the northern portion of the island of Hispaniola
  on the 17th and weakened into a tropical depression.  On 18 September,
  after the center had moved northward back over the Atlantic, the original
  LLCC moved westward away from the deep convection while a new center
  formed well to the northeast of the old LLCC.  Tropical Storm Jeanne
  moved slowly through the Turks and Caicos Islands on the 19th, gradually
  regaining its organization and strength.   The slow movement of the
  tropical storm contributed to torrential rainfall over Hispaniola.  The
  attendant flooding and mudslides led to thousands of fatalities in

     The mid-level circulation from the remnants of Hurricane Ivan combined
  with a shortwave trough in the westerlies and moved to the northeastern
  U. S. coast where it eroded the ridge to the north of Jeanne.  As a
  result, Jeanne was left in a region with weak steering flow over the next
  few days.  From the 20th to the 24th Jeanne executed a large clockwise
  loop a few hundred miles east of the northwestern Bahamas.  The cyclone
  regained hurricane intensity on the 20th and had become a Category 2
  hurricane with 85-kt winds by 1200 UTC on the 22nd, but the intensity
  leveled off and Jeanne weakened back to a Category 1 storm on the 24th
  as it moved over its own previous track from a few days earlier and
  encountered cooler waters caused by upwelling.  As the storm moved away
  from the cooler waters, it began to steadily re-intensify, becoming a
  Category 2 hurricane once again at 1800 UTC on the 24th.   Jeanne's
  winds reached 100 kts at 25/1200 UTC as it was reaching Great Abaco
  Island in the northwestern Bahamas.  Jeanne followed a track across
  Great Abaco and Grand Bahama Islands and to the eastern Florida coast
  which was almost identical to that followed by Hurricane Frances three
  weeks earlier.

     Hurricane Jeanne made landfall at the southern end of Hutchinson
  Island just east of Stuart at 0400 UTC on 26 September with peak winds
  estimated at 105 kts over a very small area north of the center.  The
  slowly weakening storm then moved across central Florida, pretty much
  right on top of Frances' track of three weeks earlier.  The hurricane
  weakened to a tropical storm at 26/1800 UTC while centered about 55 km
  north of Tampa, Florida.  In contrast to Frances, Jeanne's center did
  not move back out over the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, although it
  almost reached the coast in the Cedar Keys area.  The weakening tropical
  storm turned northward over Georgia and was downgraded to a tropical
  depression on the 27th.  The depression subsequently moved over the
  Carolinas, Virginia and the Delmarva Peninsula before merging with a
  frontal zone and losing tropical characteristics on the 29th while moving
  eastward away from the U. S. mid-Atlantic coast.

  B. Meteorological Observations

     The highest sustained (1-min avg) surface wind reported in Florida
  was 79 kts at the Melbourne NWS office.   A reading of 69 kts was taken
  on the north shore of Lake Okeechobee at 0515 UTC on the 26th.  A C-MAN
  station on Grand Bahama reported 77 kts at 26/0000 UTC when the center
  was located about 35 nm northwest of the station.  The highest wind gust
  reported in Florida was 111 kts at Ft. Pierce Inlet, and a 106-kt gust
  was reported from Vero Beach.   Rainfalls of up to 200 mm accompanied
  Jeanne as it moved across the Peninsula.  A narrow band of 280-330 mm
  was observed in the vicinity of the eyewall track over Osceola, Broward
  and Indian River counties.  A radar-estimated maximum of 280 mm was
  observed over extreme northeastern Florida in Duval and Nassau counties.

     Many more observations are available in the official storm report at
  the link given above.

  C. Damage and Casualties

     Press reports indicated that more than 3000 persons lost their lives
  in Haiti due to flooding and mudslides, including nearly 2900 in the
  coastal city of Gonaives.  Some 200,000 people in the city lost their
  homes, belongings and livelihoods.  One death directly related to Jeanne
  was reported in Puerto Rico, two in Florida, and one in South Carolina,
  the latter due to a tornado.  The total damage estimate in the U. S. has
  been placed at $6.5 billion.

     More articles concerning the destructive effects of Jeanne in the
  Caribbean may be found at the following website:>

  (Report written by Gary Padgett; some material taken from TPC/NHC storm
  report authored by Miles Lawrence and Hugh Cobb)

                            HURRICANE KARL
                          16 - 26 September

     The official TPC/NHC storm report on Hurricane Karl, authored by
  Jack Beven, is available at the following URL:>

     There is not a whole lot to say about Hurricane Karl.  The storm
  became an impressive Category 4 hurricane but, in stark contrast to
  the preceding several hurricanes, pursued a harmless course northward
  through the mid-Atlantic.  The pre-Karl wave emerged from Africa on
  13 September and had become organized enough to be classified as a
  tropical depression by the 16th--the same day that destructive Hurricane
  Ivan made landfall along the northern Gulf Coast.  Tropical Storm Karl
  was christened on the 17th, and had strengthened into a hurricane the
  next day while moving west-northwestward.  The cyclone became a major
  hurricane (Category 3) early on the 19th, and reached its peak intensity
  of 125 kts on 21 September.  The hurricane had by this time turned
  northward toward a weakness in the subtropical ridge, and on the 22nd
  turned north-northeastward in response to a baroclinic trough developing
  to the north.   Karl weakened to 90 kts on the 22nd, apparently due to
  an eyewall cycle, but rebounded to 110 kts on the 23rd.   Following this
  secondary peak in intensity, Karl began to weaken rather rapidly as it
  began to transform into an extratropical cyclone.  The former Category 4
  hurricane had completed its transition into an extratropical cyclone
  by early on the 25th a little over 500 nm east of Newfoundland.  The
  remnant extratropical LOW eventually reached Norway before being absorbed
  by another LOW.

     No damage or casualties are known to have resulted from Hurricane

  (Report written by Gary Padgett; some material taken TPC/NHC storm
  report authored by Jack Beven)

                              HURRICANE LISA
                         19 September - 3 October

     The official TPC/NHC report on Hurricane Lisa, authored by James
  Franklin and David Roberts, is available at the following URL:>

     Like its predecessor, Hurricane Karl, Lisa moved northward through
  the central Atlantic without ever affecting land.   The progenitor of
  Lisa was an African wave which departed the continent on 16 September.
  The system gradually developed, becoming a tropical depression on the
  19th when located about 450 nm west-southwest of the Cape Verde Islands.
  The synoptic-scale environment was not particularly favorable for
  strengthening.   Hurricane Karl lay a few hundred miles to the west-
  northwest and its outflow was impinging on the depression.  Also, a
  large, active tropical wave was located just a few hundred miles to the
  southeast.  Nonetheless, a very small core began to rapidly organize,
  becoming Tropical Storm Lisa on the morning of the 20th.  Just 18 hours
  later, Lisa reached an initial peak intensity of 60 kts.  However, over
  the next couple of days the tropical storm weakened due to persistent
  northerly shear.  Meanwhile, the disturbance to the east continued to
  approach Lisa, which had essentially stalled.

     The two systems began to undergo a Fujiwhara interaction.  Lisa turned
  southward on the 22nd and then eastward the next day as convection from
  the two systems gradually merged.  Lisa weakened to a tropical depression
  on the 23rd, but was nonetheless able to maintain a small but distinct
  LLCC throughout its merger with the disturbance.  A QuikScat image from
  22 September clearly depicts the two circulations, and there are some
  rain-flagged vectors of 40 kts within the circulation of the easternmost
  disturbance.  This system had been considered a good candidate for
  tropical cyclone development, and had it not moved too close to Lisa
  likely would have became Tropical Storm Matthew.   Lisa completed a
  cyclonic loop on the 24th, and on 25 September turned sharply northward
  ahead of a deep mid to upper-level trough.  As the shear abated Lisa
  began to intensify again as it moved northward, almost reaching hurricane
  intensity again on the 29th.  On the 30th Lisa crossed over some cooler
  water upwelled by Hurricane Karl and convection diminished, the winds
  dropping to 45 kts, even though the eye feature remained distinct.
  (Operationally, the MSW was dropped only to 55 kts during this time.)

     On 1 October the tropical cyclone turned northeastward and accelerated
  ahead of an approaching shortwave trough in the westerlies.   Shear
  lessened and Lisa re-intensified, even though it was over 25 C SSTs.
  Early on 2 October cloud tops had cooled significantly and Dvorak
  estimates reached 77 kts.  Lisa became the season's ninth hurricane
  at 0600 UTC on the 2nd when located about 625 nm southeast of Cape Race,
  Newfoundland.  Amazingly, at this time water temperatures beneath the
  cyclone were around 23 C.  After only about 12 hours, the cloud pattern
  began to deteriorate rapidly and Lisa had lost tropical characteristics
  by early on 3 October.    A few hours later Lisa's remnants had been
  absorbed into a frontal zone.  Operationally, Lisa was upgraded briefly
  to a hurricane for 6 hours on 1 October, but this was disallowed during
  post-storm analysis.

     No damage or casualties are known to have resulted from Tropical Storm

  (Report written by Gary Padgett; some material taken from TPC/NHC storm
  report authored by James Franklin and David Roberts.)


     Huang Chunliang compiled and sent me a few rainfall observations
  from the Caribbean area during the passage of Hurricane Ivan and
  Hurricane Jeanne.  

  A. Ivan Observations

     300.3 mm [10/12-11/12Z]

     373.0 mm [11/06-12/06Z]

     395.8 mm [11/18-12/18Z]

  B. Jeanne Observations

     274.8 mm [13/18-14/18Z]

     422.3 mm [14/12-15/12Z]

     210.3 mm [14/18-15/18Z]

     189.7 mm [15/12-16/12Z]

  SAN JUAN/INT., PUERTO RICO (18.42N 65.98W)
     122.7 mm [15/12-16/12Z]

     141.5 mm [17/12-18/12Z]


  NORTHEAST PACIFIC (NEP) - North Pacific Ocean East of Longitude 180

  Activity for September:  1 hurricane
                           1 intense hurricane

                         Sources of Information

     Most of the information presented below was obtained from the
  various tropical cyclone products issued by the Tropical Prediction
  Center/National Hurricane Center (TPC/NHC) in Miami, Florida (or the
  Central Pacific Hurricane Center (CPHC) in Honolulu, Hawaii, for
  locations west of longitude 140W):  discussions, public advisories,
  forecast/advisories, tropical weather outlooks, special tropical
  disturbance statements, etc.  Some additional information may have
  been gleaned from the monthly summaries prepared by the hurricane
  specialists and available on TPC/NHC's website.  All references to
  sustained winds imply a 1-minute averaging period unless otherwise

             Northeast Pacific Tropical Activity for September

     The long-term averages (1971-2003) for September in the Northeast
  Pacific basin are 3.5 named storms, 2.2 hurricanes, and 1.1 intense
  hurricanes (Category 3+ on the Saffir/Simpson scale).  September, 2004,
  was slightly below normal in this basin with two named cyclones forming.
  However, both reached hurricane intensity and one, Javier, became the
  most intense hurricane of the season with the estimated MSW reaching
  130 kts.  Also, as the month opened, intense Hurricane Howard was
  moving slowly northward well west of Mexico.  Howard began in August and
  was covered in that month's summary.   Reports on Hurricanes Isis and
  Javier follow, the Javier report being authored by John Wallace.  (A big
  thanks to John for his assistance.)

                              HURRICANE ISIS
                             8 - 17 September

     Hurricane Isis was a long-lived tropical storm which very briefly
  reached minimal hurricane intensity.  The disturbance which spawned Isis
  entered the Eastern North Pacific on 3 September and possibly was the
  same tropical wave which had spawned Atlantic Hurricane Frances.
  Advisories were initiated on Tropical Depression 12E at 0900 UTC on
  8 September when it was centered about 475 nm south of Cabo San Lucas.
  Tropical Storm Isis was christened 12 hours later, and the system
  reached an initial peak intensity of 45 kts at 09/0600 UTC when located
  roughly 425 nm south-southwest of Cabo San Lucas.  Thereafter, persistent
  easterly shear inhibited development and caused gradual weakening.
  Isis was downgraded to a tropical depression for 30 hours at 2100 UTC
  on the 10th.  It was re-upgraded to tropical storm status at 12/0300

     From the 9th through the 13th Isis moved on a very persistent and
  steady due westerly track just north of the 17th parallel.  The storm
  remained steady state at 45 kts for a three-day period before beginning
  to intensify some on the 15th.  The peak intensity of 65 kts occurred
  at 15/1200 UTC, based on the appearance of an eye feature and T4.0
  Dvorak classifications from TAFB and SAB.  Easterly shear had diminished,
  but the cyclone had turned to a northwesterly heading which took it
  toward cooler SSTs and more stable air.   Six hours after being upgraded
  to hurricane status, Isis was downgraded back to a tropical storm, and
  24 hours later to a tropical depression.  The final advisory at 17/0600
  UTC placed the remnant LOW about 1325 nm west-southwest of Cabo San
  Lucas.  Considering how rapidly the storm began to deteriorate after
  the upgrade to hurricane intensity, there is the possibility that Isis
  in truth never became a hurricane.

     The official TPC/NHC storm report on Hurricane Isis, authored by
  James Franklin and David Roberts, is available at the following link:>

  (Report written by Gary Padgett)

                           HURRICANE JAVIER
                          10 - 20 September

  A. Storm Origins

     The disturbance that became Javier developed quickly south of the
  Isthmus of Tehuantepec on 10 September, where there had been little trace
  of it only 24 hours earlier.  At 2100 UTC that day it was upgraded to
  Tropical Depression Thirteen-E as it tracked west-northwestward.  The
  depression formed much farther to the east than do most Northeast Pacific
  tropical cyclones, being located about 325 nm south-southeast of Salinas
  Cruz, Mexico.

  B. Synoptic History

     Conditions were not wholly favorable for Thirteen-E's intensification
  at first due to moderate easterly shear, probably induced by the same
  ridge that was steering it west.   Nevertheless, the depression had
  strengthened to Tropical Storm Javier by 1500 UTC on the 11th with the
  shear unabated, however.  The newly-christened Javier was then located
  approximately 325 nm south-southeast of Acapulco.    The synoptic
  environment ensured that Javier intensified slowly but steadily over the
  following day.  In the meantime, the ridge to its north weakened,
  prompting a well-forecast turn towards the northwest late on the 12th
  and into the 13th.  The upper-level environment became somewhat more
  favorable on the 12th, and at 2100 UTC Javier was upgraded to hurricane
  status while centered about 375 nm south-southeast of Manzanillo,

     Hurricane Javier's initially small circulation expanded modestly as
  it tracked northwestward, but there was little else of note about the
  storm until the remarkable developments of the 13th.   At 0300 UTC that
  day it was a healthy but not especially impressive 75-kt hurricane.  Over
  the next 12 hours, however, Javier "bombed" into a powerful Category 4
  system with an estimated MSW of 120 kts.  The dramatic intensification
  continued until 0300 UTC on 14 September when Javier reached its
  estimated peak MSW of 130 kts with an attendant CP of 930 mb.  The
  powerful cyclone was then located about 450 nm south of Mazatlan, Mexico.
  It may have indeed been more powerful, as the MSW estimate was a
  compromise between Dvorak estimates of 127 and 140 kts.  This deepening
  rate represents an average CP drop of 2 mb per hour, which qualifies as
  rapid deepening (1) between 13/0300 UTC and 14/0300 UTC.   It's worth
  noting that upper-level conditions remained less than ideal throughout
  Javier's intensification with shear still limiting outflow to the east.

     Javier's intensity leveled off and dropped slightly after its peak,
  ostensibly due to an eyewall replacement cycle, a common phenomenon in
  the strongest tropical cyclones.  In fact, Javier went through no less
  than four, and possibly five cycles as it continued northwestward,
  roughly parallel to the Mexican coast but well offshore.  Javier was an
  intense hurricane for 3.5 days, longer than any NEP storm since 1999's
  Hurricane Dora.  It also had the distinction of retaining a MSW of
  120 kts or greater longer than any NEP hurricane since Hurricane Linda
  in 1997.  Its rather slow track over favorably warm waters was probably
  a major factor contributing to its longevity.

     The cyclone's MSW dropped below 100 kts late on the 16th, but abruptly
  regained Category 3 status on the next advisory.  However, by mid-day on
  the 17th a final weakening trend began, due to both cooler waters and
  increasing shear.  The question grew as to whether Javier would threaten
  Baja California, as a trough was forecast to further weaken the
  subtropical ridge and take the cyclone northeast across the Peninsula.
  For the time being, the cyclone wobbled slowly northwestward, finally 
  commencing the expected northward turn late on the 18th as it weakened
  more rapidly to a tropical storm nearly devoid of deep convection.  At
  the time of its downgrade, Javier was centered approximately 175 nm
  west of Cabo San Lucas on the southern tip of the Baja California
     Javier was downgraded to a depression the following day, based on both
  satellite observations and an interesting surface observation that showed
  that the MSW was considerably overestimated.     Tropical Depression
  Javier turned to the north-northeast and crossed the coast of Baja
  California near 1200 UTC on the 19th.   The last NHC advisory on Javier
  was issued at 1500 UTC on the 19th while it was over the peninsula, but
  the Hydrometeorological Prediction Center issued a final advisory after
  it was well inland, at 0300 UTC on 20 September, when the dissipating
  system was located roughly 290 km southwest of El Paso, Texas.   The
  convective remnant of the circulation had lost its identity by late that

  C. Meteorological Observations
     According to press reports, Javier's outer circulation and storm
  waves lashed Mexico's West Coast, but as of this writing any damages are
  known to be minor, as the regions most affected by Javier are sparsely
  populated.  No fatalities are known.  The remnant circulation brought
  substantial rains to Mexico and the American Southwest.  Hermosillo, a
  city very close to Javier's track located in the usually-arid state of
  Sonora, received some 16.64 in (42 cm) of rain on September 19th, though
  it is not known if these numbers are the result of instrumental or
  recording errors.  Rainfall amounts in the U.S., as reported by the HPC,
  were typically 1-1.5 in (2.5-3.8 cm), with a high of 2.66 in at Arizona's
  Grand Canyon.

  D. References

  E. Editor's Note

     The official TPC/NHC storm report on Hurricane Javier is now
  available online at:>
  The report was written by Lixion Avila.   According to Lixion's
  report, the African wave which was the progenitor of Javier moved
  off the western African coast on 29 August.  Therefore, the pre-
  Javier wave apparently was the one between the wave which spawned
  Atlantic Tropical Depression 10 and the wave which became mighty
  Hurricane Ivan.

  (Report written by John Wallace)


  NORTHWEST PACIFIC (NWP) - North Pacific Ocean West of Longitude 180

  Activity for September:  5 tropical depressions **
                           2 tropical storms ++
                           1 typhoon
  ** - none of these were classified as tropical depression by JTWC; two
       were treated as tropical depressions by JMA only; two others by
       JMA and NMCC; and another by JMA and PAGASA

  ++ - one of these was not classified as a tropical storm by JTWC, but was
       by several of the Asian TCWCs

                          Sources of Information

     Most of the information presented below is based upon tropical
  cyclone warnings and significant tropical weather outlooks issued
  by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center of the U. S. Air Force and
  Navy (JTWC), located at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.   In the companion
  tropical cyclone tracks file, I normally annotate track coordinates
  from some of the various Asian warning centers when their center
  positions differ from JTWC's by usually 40-50 nm or more.   All
  references to sustained winds imply a 1-minute averaging period
  unless otherwise noted.

     Michael V. Padua of Naga City in the Philippines, owner of the
  Typhoon 2000 website, normally sends me cyclone tracks based upon
  warnings issued by the Japanese Meteorological Agency (JMA) and the
  Philippines' Atmospheric, Geophysical & Astronomical Services
  Administration (PAGASA).  Also, Huang Chunliang of Fuzhou City, China,
  sends data taken from synoptic observations around the Northwest
  Pacific basin.  A very special thanks to Michael and Chunliang for
  the assistance they so reliably provide.

     In the title line for each storm I have referenced all the cyclone
  names/numbers I have available:   JTWC's depression number, the 
  JMA-assigned name (if any), JMA's tropical storm numeric designator,
  and PAGASA's name for systems forming in or passing through their
  area of warning responsibility.

               Northwest Pacific Tropical Activity for September

     Tropical cyclone activity in the Northwest Pacific basin was decidedly
  less than that seen in August.  Three tropical cyclones were named by
  JMA--one of these not considered a tropical storm by JTWC--and only one
  system reached typhoon intensity.  As the month opened, long-lived
  Typhoon Songda was passing through the northern Mariana Islands on its
  way to an eventual landfall in Japan, with a stopover in Okinawa along
  the way.    (The complete report on Songda may be found in the August
  summary.)  Early in the month Tropical Storm Sarika, like its two
  predecessors (Chaba and Songda) passed through the northern Marianas,
  but was much less intense than those typhoons had been in that region.
  Sarika encountered cooler waters and hostile shear and weakened as it
  was moving in the general direction of Japan.   During the second week
  of September, Tropical Storm Haima formed near southwestern Taiwan, moved
  northeastward across the island, then turned northwestward and made 
  landfall in China south of Shanghai.  Haima was classified as a tropical
  storm by all the Asian TCWCs but not by JTWC.  And late in the month,
  Typhoon Meari became another in a series of tropical cyclones to affect
  the Japanese islands this season.

     Five systems were treated as tropical depressions by one or more of
  the Asian warning centres.  Two of these were weak and short-lived and
  were classified as tropical depressions by JMA only.  One was a weak
  LOW just east of Taiwan on 12 and 13 September, and the other occurred
  on 20 September deep in the tropics around 160E.  No tracks were given
  for these systems in the companion tropical cyclone tracks file.

     Short reports follow for the other three tropical depressions.  Huang
  Chunliang sent some meteorological observations for these systems, so
  I have included very brief histories of these three depressions.  Also,
  standard reports follow for Tropical Storms Sarika and Haima and for
  Typhoon Meari/Quinta, all authored by Kevin Boyle.

                         TROPICAL STORM SARIKA
                          (TC-23W / STS 0419)
                            3 - 9 September

  Sarika: contributed by Cambodia, is a type of singing bird.
  A. Storm Origins

     As Super Typhoon Songda was approaching Okinawa, the next tropical 
  cyclone was already taking shape and was first mentioned in JTWC's STWO
  at 0600 UTC 4 September when it was located approximately 440 nm east of
  Saipan.  At this time, animated multi-spectral imagery revealed that 
  convection had become consolidated around a LLCC.  Also, satellite
  imagery revealed the formation of both poleward and equatorward outflow
  channels.  An upper-level analysis indicated a TUTT cell situated 7 to 8
  degrees to the northwest, light wind shear, and favourable diffluence.
  In addition, 850-mb vorticity was elongated, stretching along a west-east
  axis.  Due to the rapid organization and already advanced stage of this
  system, the potential was raised straight to 'fair'.  This was upgraded
  to 'good' and a TCFA issued at 04/1730 UTC after a spiral banding feature
  appeared in enhanced infrared satellite imagery.  The first warning was
  issued six hours later, locating the centre 280 nm east-northeast of
  Saipan.  JMA had been classifying the storm as a tropical depression
  since their first bulletin at 03/1800 UTC.

  B. Synoptic History

     On the 4th of September the northern Marianas were facing the prospect
  of a third tropical cyclone after only recently being pounded by Super
  Typhoons Chaba and Songda.  By 0126 UTC 5 September a typhoon warning
  was in place for the island of Agrihan.  Moving west-northwestwards along
  the southern periphery of the subtropical ridge, Tropical Depression 23W
  was upgraded to Tropical Storm Sarika by both JTWC and JMA at 05/0000
  UTC.  The two agencies estimated their respective MSWs at 45 kts (1-min
  avg) and 50 kts (10-min avg).  Multi-spectral satellite imagery revealed
  organized convection over a possible banding eye at this time.  An upper-
  level LOW located to the southeast was providing an efficient eastern
  outflow channel in addition to the decent equatorial outflow.  It seemed
  only a matter of time before Sarika would reach typhoon intensity,
  especially considering the reputation that small tropical cyclones have
  for rapid strengthening.  Rapid intensification ensued for awhile with
  the MSW rising to 55 kts at 05/0600 UTC and to 60 kts at 05/1200 UTC.
  The strengthening phase then ended and 60 kts turned out to be the peak
  intensity for Sarika.

     At 1200 UTC 5 September Tropical Storm Sarika was moving west-
  northwest at 17 kts and passing 220 nm north of Saipan.    Shortly
  afterward, the system's centre made its closest approach to Agrihan,
  tracking 10 nm south of that island.  Near-typhoon conditions occurred
  on both Agrihan and Pagan while tropical storm-force winds were
  experienced on Alamagan.  At its peak Sarika possessed a very compact
  wind field with gales extending no further than 90 nm from the centre 
  while the radius of strongest winds never exceeded 15 nm.   While all
  this was happening, microwave imagery showed no substantial increase in
  deep convection.  By 05/1800 UTC Sarika had turned westwards and was
  maintaining 60-kt winds.  At this time, the storm was centred about
  100 nm west of Agrihan.

     Tropical Storm Sarika was tracking west-northwest at 16 kts at 0000
  UTC 6 September approximately 300 nm south-southeast of Iwo Jima.  Its
  intensity had changed little since the previous day and its peak MSW of
  60 kts was further maintained until 16/1800 UTC when Sarika began to
  weaken.  The 06/1200 UTC prognosis had indicated no further strengthening
  as the system was moving away from the upper-level LOW that had
  accelerated the eastern outflow channel, and also because Sarika was
  headed for a hostile shearing environment associated with Typhoon
  Songda's outflow.  This shearing had begun at 06/1800 UTC when microwave
  imagery revealed a partially-exposed LLCC with the deep convection being
  displaced to the southwest.  The MSW had fallen to 50 kts by this time.

     The prognostic reasoning message also forecast a change to a poleward
  track as the subtropical ridge shifted eastwards.  This started to occur
  at 0000 UTC 7 September when Sarika turned to the north-northwest at a
  slower pace of 8 kts, approximately 820 nm south of Tokyo, Japan.  At
  this time, microwave imagery revealed a fully-exposed LLCC.  Sarika
  accelerated to 14 kts while weakening to a 45-kt tropical storm.  It
  then slowed as it turned northward at 07/1200 UTC with winds further
  decreasing to 35 kts.  Associated deep convection had separated 90 nm
  from the centre and Sarika was now struggling in the face of strong
  shear, an unfavourably-placed TUTT cell, and cooler than normal SSTs due
  to upwelling from Super Typhoons Chaba and Songda.  It was downgraded to
  a 30-kt tropical depression at 07/1800 UTC and JTWC issued the final
  warning, locating the centre 645 nm south of Tokyo, Japan.    JMA
  maintained this system as a tropical storm until 08/0000 UTC when that
  agency demoted Sarika to a depression.

     JMA estimated a peak MSW of 55 kts and a CP of 980 mb while NMCC
  classified Sarika as a 60-kt Severe Tropical Storm.  The only other
  Asian TCWC to issue bulletins on this system, CWB of Taiwan, estimated
  a peak intensity of 55 kts.

  C. Damage and Casualties

    There were no known damages or casualties associated with Tropical
  Storm Sarika.

  (Report written by Kevin Boyle)

                           TROPICAL DEPRESSION
                       (NMCC-TD04 / NRL Invest 96W)
                             8 - 11 September

     This tropical depression, designated TD-04 by the NMC of China,
  formed on 8 September well to the east of Taiwan, just southeast of
  the Sakishima Islands.  The system moved slowly in a north-northwesterly
  direction over the next couple of days, dissipating as it entered the
  southern Yellow Sea east-northeast of Shanghai on the 11th.  The system
  was treated as a tropical depression by JMA, NMCC and the CWB of Taiwan.
  JTWC issued a TCFA for the disturbance at 10/1400 UTC but cancelled it
  24 hours later.  The following brief report was compiled and sent by
  Huang Chunliang.

  (A) Report on Tropical Depression NMC04 from China

  1. Rainfall Obs

  Linjiang, Jilin Province (WMO54374,41.72N/126.92E) 72.7 mm [12/00-13/00Z]
  Ji'an, Jilin Province (WMO54377,41.10N/126.15E)    58.1 mm [12/00-13/00Z]

  2. Wind Obs

     Both Shengsi (WMO58472, 30.73N/122.45E, Alt 81m) and Dachen Dao
  (WMO58666, 28.45N/121.90E, Alt 84m), Zhejiang Province reported sustained
  winds of gale force on the 11th.

  (B) Report on Tropical Depression NMC04 from Japan
  Naha,Okinawa Pref. (WMO47936,26.21N/127.69E)       63.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  Miyakojima,Okinawa Pref. (WMO47927,24.79N/125.28E) 51.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]

  (Report by Huang Chunliang)

                         TROPICAL STORM HAIMA
                       (TC-24W / TS 0420 / OFEL)
                           10 - 14 September

  Haima: contributed by China, is the sea horse

  A. Storm History

     An interim STWO was issued by JTWC at 10/1400 UTC mentioning an
  area of convection which had persisted approximately 150 nm southwest
  of Taipei, Taiwan.  The convection was located along the southern
  periphery of a possible LLCC.  An upper-level analysis indicated
  moderate vertical shear and favorable divergence.  The development
  potential was upgraded to 'fair' at 1700 UTC as the system continued
  to slowly gain in organization.  At 11/0600 UTC the system was centred
  135 nm south-southwest of Taipei, Taiwan, tracking across the island,
  and had lost much of its associated deep convection.  However, the LLCC
  was still intact east of Taiwan.  JMA began classifying the storm as a
  tropical depression at 11/0000 UTC, upgrading to a 35-kt tropical storm
  at 11/1200 UTC and naming it Haima.  At the same time, the system was
  given the PAGASA name of Ofel when that agency began issuing warnings.

     At 1900 UTC 11 September animated infrared satellite imagery showed
  the LLCC approximately 55 nm southeast of Taipei, Taiwan, and embedded
  in a longwave trough off the coast of China.       Satellite analyses
  indicated that the system exhibited subtropical characteristics with a
  MSW of 30 to 35 kts while QuikScat depicted an elongated wind field,
  also with a MSW of 30 to 35 kts.  Upper-level conditions appeared
  favourable but there was a strong vertical wind shear gradient associated
  with the frontal boundary.  However, the potential was there for the LLCC
  to disengage from the frontal zone and become fully tropical.  Therefore,
  a TCFA was issued.  At 12/0600 UTC Haima was centred 25 nm east-southeast
  of Taipei and moving north-northwest at 6 kts.    At this time multi-
  spectral imagery indicated that the deep convection associated with the
  LLCC had decreased.  Radar showed that most of the convection was located
  mainly in the western and southern quadrants.  However, the possibility
  of a tropical cyclone forming remained 'good'.

     JTWC's first warning on Tropical Depression Haima was issued at 1800
  UTC 12 September with the centre located approximately 100 nm north-
  northeast of Taipei, Taiwan, and moving north-northwest at 5 kts.  The
  system then tracked northwestwards towards the southeast coast of China.
  At 13/0000 UTC it was located 240 nm south of Shanghai, China.  Haima
  made landfall south of Shanghai at 13/0500 UTC before turning towards
  the west-northwest six hours later.  It then resumed its northwesterly
  heading at 13/1800 UTC, the time of issuance of the final warning by
  JTWC.  At this time, satellite imagery revealed that Haima had become a
  completely sheared system due to interaction with the baroclinic zone
  located to its west and all its core convection had gone.  JMA's last
  mention of Haima was at 14/0000 UTC.

     In JTWC's eyes, Haima's MSW (1-min avg) never exceeded 30 kts but
  all Asian agencies regarded this system as a 35-kt tropical storm at
  its peak. JMA estimated 40-kt winds and CP of 996 mb from 11/1800 UTC
  to 12/0600 UTC while PAGASA classified Ofel as a 35-kt storm while it
  was located within their AOR.

  Editor's Note:  The reason JTWC did not issue warnings on this system
  on 11 September was that they considered it to be subtropical.  STWOs
  issued on the 11th and 12th acknowledged the existence of 35-kt winds,
  but it was felt that the system was not fully tropical.  There were
  some who disagreed with this assessment.  David Roth wrote in an e-mail:
  "After checking the JTWC site and looking at the image from 1900 UTC, 
  I don't see anything subtropical about it.  It has central convection 
  and looks like a TD or weak TS.  There does seem to be a front draping 
  over it, but nothing more.  Lots of TCs have fronts draping over the 
  system (in the Atlantic anyway)."

  B. Huang Chunliang Reports

     Following are reports compiled and sent by Huang Chunliang concerning
  observations and storm effects in China, Japan and Korea, respectively.
  A special thanks to Chunliang for sending the data.  (To convert from
  metres/second (m/s) to knots, divide m/s by 0.51444, or to approximate,
  simply double the m/s value.)

  (1) Report on Tropical Storm 0421 (Haima) from China
  {Part I}. Landfall

     According to the NMC warnings, Tropical Storm 0421 (Haima) made
  landfall in Yongqiang Town, Longwan District, Wenzhou City, Zhejiang
  Province around 13/0400 UTC with a MSW of 18 m/s and a CP of 998 hPa.

  {Part II}. Meteorological Obs from Taiwan

  1. Daily Rainfall [09/16-10/16Z] (only Top 5 listed)

  Ranking     Station ID          City/County         Rainfall (mm)
  --------    ----------------    ----------------    ------------- 
  01          CWB C0A88           Taipei County       290.0
  02          CWB C0A89           Taipei County       208.5
  03          CWB C1C48           Taoyuan County      202.5
  04          WMO 46685           Taipei County       195.0
  05          CWB C0A9G           Taipei City         188.5

  2. Daily Rainfall [10/16-11/16Z] (only Top 5 listed)

  Ranking     Station ID          City/County         Rainfall (mm)
  --------    ----------------    ----------------    -------------
  01          CWB C0A9G           Taipei City         611.5
  02          CWB C1A65           Taipei County       393.0
  03          WMO 46685           Taipei County       388.0
  04          CWB C1D48           Taoyuan County      386.0
  05          CWB C1A64           Taipei County       383.5

  3. Daily Rainfall [11/16-12/16Z] (only Top 5 listed)
  Ranking     Station ID          City/County         Rainfall (mm)
  --------    ----------------    ----------------    -------------
  01          CWB C1D40           Hsinchu County      371.0
  02          CWB C0D36           Hsinchu County      333.5
  03          CWB 01A21           Taipei County       291.0
  04          CWB C1C46           Taoyuan County      289.5
  05          CWB C1D42           Hsinchu County      283.0

  4. Peak sustained winds & gusts

     Only those stations that reported peak gusts >= 24.5 m/s (i.e.,
  Beaufort Force 10 or higher) are given:

                                     Peak SW              Peak Gust
  Station (WMO ID)              (mps/dir/Local Date)  (mps/dir/Local Date)
  Lanyu  (46762/59567, Alt 325m)  25.4/230/11th         35.9/220/11th  
  Dongshi (46730, Alt 45m)        19.4/ 50/11th         29.6/ 50/11th
  An Bu  (46691, Alt 1450m)       17.9/350/12th         28.4/ 20/12th
  Wu-Chi (46777, Alt 5m)          14.6/350/11th         24.5/360/11th

  {Part III}. Meteorological Obs from Mainland China

  1. Fuzhou City, Fujian Province

  Pingtan (WMO58944), Fuzhou City recorded a 24-hr rainfall amount of
  250.8 mm [09/00-10/00Z], which turned out to be a new record of daily
  rainfall for September for the station, the former one being 242.4 mm
  recorded on Sep 5, 1958.
  2. Zhejiang, Shandong, Jiangsu and Hebei Provinces

     During the 72-hr period ending at 15/00Z, torrential rains were
  reported by the provinces of Zhejiang, Shandong, Jiangsu and Hebei with
  Fenghua, Zhejiang reporting the highest accumulation of 228 mm.

     Coastal Zhejiang reported gusts of Beaufort Force 8 to 10 during the
  storm with Kanmen reported the highest value of 27.5 m/s.

     Coastal Qingdao City, Shandong Province reported a peak gust of
  Beaufort Force 10 on the 14th.

  {Part IV}. Damage

  1. Zhejiang

     The storm damaged 7,800 ha. of farmland in Zhejiang Province, where
  direct economic losses were estimated to have been over 53 million yuan.

  2. Fuzhou, Fujian

     Floodings and landslides were reported in the county of Pingtan.
  Preliminary statistics indicated that the torrential rains (Sep 7-10),
  including those triggered by the monsoonal flow that gestated the
  pre-Haima depression (i.e., TD-05 per NMC), had caused 54.6 million
  yuan of direct economic losses in Pingtan County and Changle City
  (also a sub-city of Fuzhou City).

  (2) Brief Report on Typhoon 0420 (Haima) from Japan
  1. Ishigakijima, Okinawa (WMO47918, 24.34N 124.16 E, Alt 6m)

  Peak sustained wind: 16.7 m/s [11/2240Z]
            Peak gust: 26.8 m/s [11/1225Z]
  Peak hourly rainfall: 34.5 mm  [12/10-12/11Z]

  2. Yonagunijima, Okinawa (WMO47912, 24.47N 123.01E, Alt 30m)

  Peak sustained wind: 19.1 m/s [11/2120Z]
            Peak gust: 31.1 m/s [11/2037Z]
  Peak hourly rainfall: 54.0 mm  [12/13-12/14Z]

  3. Kabira, Okinawa (JMA94036, 24.46N 124.14E, Alt 7m)

  Peak hourly rainfall: 54.5 mm  [12/10-12/11Z]

  (3) Brief Report on Tropical Storm Haima - Rainfall Obs from Korea

  WANDO (34.40N 126.70E)               104.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  HEUKSANDO (34.68N 125.45E)            91.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  SEOSAN (36.77N 126.50E)               75.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  GWANGJU (35.17N 126.90E)              67.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  GUNSAN (35.98N 126.70E)               60.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  MUNSAN (37.88N 126.75E)               59.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  DONGDUCHEON (37.90N 127.07E)          58.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  INCHEON (37.48N 126.63E)              57.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  JEJU (33.52N 126.53E)                 54.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  SUWON (37.27N 126.98E)                54.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  SEOUL (37.57N 126.97E)                52.5 mm [11/00-12/00Z]

  (Section A written by Kevin Boyle; Section B by Huang Chunliang)

                        TROPICAL DEPRESSION PABLO
                             (NRL Invest 92W)
                            14 - 18 September

     This system was considered a tropical depression by JMA, PAGASA,
  the CWB of Taiwan and the Thai Meteorological Department with PAGASA
  assigning the name Pablo.  JTWC released no warnings, but issued a
  TCFA at 16/2030 UTC and a second alert 24 hours later.  However,
  the formation alert was cancelled at 18/2100 UTC.  Tropical Depression
  Pablo formed deep in the Philippine Sea east of Mindanao, moved west-
  ward across that island, thence turning northwestward and emerging into
  the South China Sea near the Calamian Group.  After crossing the
  Philippine Archipelago the depression began to slowly weaken but limped
  across the South China Sea to near the central Vietnamese coastline
  before dissipating on the 18th.  The maximum winds estimated by any
  agency were 30 kts.  Following is a very brief report of some rainfall
  observations compiled and sent by Huang Chunliang.

  Brief Report on Tropical Depression Pablo
  Rainfall Obs from Viet Nam & Thailand

  THANH HOA (WMO48840,19.75N/105.78E)            134.5 mm [18/12-19/12Z]
  VINH (WMO48845,18.67N/105.68E)                 124.3 mm [18/12-19/12Z]

  UBON RATCHATHANI (WMO48407,15.25N/104.87E)     103.5 mm [18/18-19/18Z]

  (Report by Huang Chunliang)

                           TROPICAL DEPRESSION
                       (NMCC-TD06 / NRL Invest 93W)
                            15 - 16 September

     This tropical depression, designated TD-06 by the NMC of China,
  formed in the northern South China Sea on 15 September well to the
  southeast of Hong Kong and to the southwest of Taiwan.  It moved
  north-northeastward and was located along the coast of China south
  of Fuzhou City early on the 16th when warnings were discontinued.
  The remnants apparently continued northward, bringing moderate rain-
  falls as far north as Korea.  JMA, NMCC and the CWB of Taiwan all
  treated this system as a tropical depression.  JTWC did not issue
  warnings nor a TCFA for the disturbance--it was assigned a 'fair'
  potential for development on the 15th.  The following brief report
  was compiled and sent by Huang Chunliang.

  (A) Report on Tropical Depression NMC06 from China

  {Part I}. Landfall

     According to the NMC warnings, Tropical Depression 06 made landfall
  in Jinjiang City (a sub-city of Quanzhou City), Fujian Province around
  15/1900 UTC with a MSW of 15 m/s and a CP of 1004 hPa.  Interestingly,
  TD-06's track (SW-->NE) along the coastline of Fujian just looked like
  the reverse of that followed earlier by Typhoon Aere (NE-->SW).

  {Part II}. Meteorological Obs

  1. Fujian (rain & wind)

     During the 62-hr period ending at 16/14Z, rains >100 mm were recorded
  in 26 cities/counties, 9 of which reported rains >200 mm.  Huian County
  and Jinjiang City reported rains exceeding 300 mm with the former
  reporting the highest amount of 435 mm.

     The center of the depression passed by very near Fuzhou on the 16th,
  saturating the biggest island (Pingtan Dao) of Fuzhou with torrential
  rains of 126 mm within 6 hours [16/00--16/06Z].

     Coastal Fujian reported gusts of Beaufort Force 8 to 10.  Significant
  obs from insular automatic stations included: Nanri--27.7 m/s,
  Weitou--20.6 m/s, etc.

  2. Taiwan & Zhejiang (rain)

  Dongshi (WMO46730), Taiwan            127 mm [14/16-15/16Z]
  Kinmen (WMO46787), Taiwan             109 mm [14/16-15/16Z]
  Banciao (WMO46688), Taiwan            100 mm [14/16-15/16Z]
  Yuhuan (WMO58667), Zhejiang           106 mm [16/00-17/00Z]
  Dachen Dao (WMO58666), Zhejiang        83 mm [16/18-17/06Z]

  {Part III}. Damage and Casualties

     Preliminary statistics indicated that the depression had caused
  340 million yuan of direct economic losses and was responsible for six
  deaths in the Fujian Province.  TD-06 affected 1,269,000 residents of
  147 towns of 3 cities in the province, where 1,400 houses were toppled,
  123 embankments were damaged and some 92,000 people were evacuated.
  Also, floodings and landslides were reported to have been triggered by
  torrential rains in a few districts.

  (B) Report on Tropical Depression NMC06 from Japan

  Rainfall obs:

  IZUHARA (34.20N/129.30E)        70.0 mm [17/00-18/00Z]

  (C) Report on Tropical Depression NMC06 from Korea

  Rainfall obs:

  SEOGWIPO (33.25N/126.57E)         59.0 mm [17/00-18/00Z]
  SEOGWIPO (33.25N/126.57E)         63.0 mm [17/12-18/12Z]
  WANDO (34.40N/126.70E)            56.0 mm [17/00-18/00Z]
  WANDO (34.40N/126.70E)            55.0 mm [17/12-18/12Z]

  (Report by Huang Chunliang)

                            TYPHOON MEARI
                     (TC-25W / TY 0421 / QUINTA)
                       20 September - 1 October

  Meari: contributed by DPR (North) Korea, means 'echo'
  A. Storm Origins

     At 1030 UTC 18 September an area of convection had persisted 
  approximately 510 nm east of Guam and was initially mentioned in a 
  STWO issued by JTWC at this time.  Initially a 'poor' development 
  potential area, the rather disorganized system began to evolve with 
  deep convection consolidating over a possible LLCC.  However, 'poor'
  potential was maintained until 19/1300 UTC, when it was raised to 
  'fair'.  A TCFA followed at 19/2000 UTC, and this was replaced by the 
  first warning at 20/0000 UTC.  Tropical Depression 25W at this time 
  was located just 35 nm southeast of Guam.  At the same time, JMA also 
  began writing bulletins, classifying the system as a 30-kt (10-min 
  avg) tropical depression.  There was little change in intensity 
  during the 20th as dry air entrainment inhibited further development 
  and the MSW remained at 30 kts.  Tropical Depression 25W turned more 
  westward and began to accelerate as it travelled along the southern 
  periphery of a mid-level steering ridge. 

  B. Synoptic History

     At 0000 UTC 21 September both JTWC and JMA upgraded Tropical 
  Depression 25W to a tropical storm, the latter agency assigning the 
  name Meari.  At this time it was moving away from Guam, centred at 
  that time 180 nm to the west.  Continuing west-northwest, Meari 
  turned towards the northwest as it intensified steadily.  A 37-GHz 
  microwave image at 21/1200 UTC showed early indications of a banding-
  type eye, and the MSW climbed to 55 kts at 21/1800 UTC.  At 22/0000 
  UTC Meari was still heading in a northwesterly direction at around 7 kts 
  and was located approximately 320 nm west-northwest of Guam.    The 
  system was upgraded to typhoon intensity at 22/1200 UTC after CI 
  estimates had reached 65 kts.  Typhoon Meari possessed a very 
  asymmetric circulation.  For example, the 22/1800 UTC JTWC warning 
  (#12) reported gales extending up to 50 nm in the southern semicircle 
  but to a distance of 150 nm in the northeast quadrant.  Typhoon-force 
  winds covered an area 20 nm over the northern semicircle but only 5 nm 
  to the south. 

     Typhoon Meari began to intensify more rapidly on the 23rd.  The storm 
  was still tracking towards the northwest and was centred approximately
  475 nm south-southwest of Iwo Jima at 0000 UTC 23 September.  The MSW
  had increased to 75 kts at this time, and rose to 90 kts six hours later
  when multi-spectral satellite imagery depicted a well-developed eye.
  Meari became a strong 100-kt typhoon at 23/1200 UTC as it approached the
  eastern boundary of PAGASA's area of responsibility.  The storm then
  changed onto a brief west-northwesterly heading as it crossed 135 degrees
  longitude and was then assigned the name Quinta by PAGASA.     After
  reaching 120 kts at 24/0600 UTC, intensification slowed and this strength
  was maintained for the rest of the day.  Meari was still suffering from
  the effects of dry air entrainment, and as a result, deep convection had
  decreased in the northwest quadrant by 24/1800 UTC.  The MSW began to
  nudge downward through the day, during which time the storm continued on
  a general northwesterly track, passing 70 nm south of Okinawa at 
  25/1800 UTC.  Meari weakened to 90 kts at 26/0000 UTC as the storm 
  turned west-northwestward and decelerated.  The storm then began to 
  re-intensify in a more favourable environment, reaching a secondary
  peak of 105 kts at 26/1800 UTC.

     Typhoon Meari ground to a halt at 0000 UTC 27 September while located 
  approximately 170 nm west of Okinawa as it became temporarily stuck 
  between two HIGHs.  A shortwave trough moving eastward through China 
  was forecast to pick up the tropical cyclone and recurve it towards 
  Japan.  A slow northward drift began at 27/0600 UTC and this motion 
  essentially carried the system into more hostile conditions to the 
  north.  As a result, weakening began and the MSW dropped to 90 kts by 
  27/1200 UTC.  Meari's deep convection decreased as the storm turned 
  northeast into an area of strong upper-level shearing associated with 
  the subtropical jet to the north.  By 28/0000 UTC the intensity was 
  down to 75 kts when the typhoon was located 315 nm south-southwest of 
  Sasebo, Japan.  But Meari managed to maintain this strength and even 
  appeared to get itself together a little at 28/0600 UTC when convection
  began to increase.  By 28/1800 UTC Meari was beginning its approach to
  the Japanese island of Kyushu.

     Multi-spectral satellite imagery and radar fixes indicated that 
  Typhoon Meari made landfall over the southern tip of Kyushu at 0000 
  UTC 29 August with a MSW of 70 kts.  At this time, the centre of the 
  storm, having turned towards the east-northeast, was located 85 nm 
  south-southeast of Sasebo, Japan.  Meari proceeded to weaken as it 
  tracked across land and was downgraded to a 60-kt tropical storm at 
  29/0600 UTC, based on CI estimates and synoptic observations from 
  Shikoku.  The forward motion began to accelerate as Meari started to 
  interact with the westerlies, and the combination of dry air entrainment
  and vertical wind shear sapped the tropical cyclone's strength further.
  The MSW dropped to 35 kts at 29/1800 UTC, the time of the final warning
  issued by JTWC.  JMA followed the system until 30/0300 UTC, when it was
  dropped as a tropical cyclone, but continued tracking the remnant LOW
  eastwards into the Pacific via their routine shipping bulletins. 

  C. Damages and Casualties

     News reports indicate that at least 18 people died with several more 
  reported missing as a result of Typhoon Meari.  The worst affected 
  areas appeared to be the prefectures of Mie and Ehime where 
  torrential rains caused widespread flooding and mudslides destroyed 
  several homes.  More than 350 flights were cancelled.  Also, train 
  and ferry services were suspended, stranding thousands of people.

  D. Huang Chunliang Report

     Following is the report received from Huang Chunliang of meteoro-
  logical observations from various Japanese stations in association
  with Typhoon Meari.  A special thanks to Chunliang for sending the
  data.  (To convert metres/sec (m/s) to knots, divide m/s by 0.51444.
  For an approximation, simply double the m/s value.)

  {Part I}. Landfall Obs (based on the JMA warnings)

  1. Typhoon 0421 (MEARI) made landfall near Kushikino City, Kagoshima
     Prefecture around 28/2330 UTC with a MSW of 30 m/s and a CP of
     970 hPa.

  2. Typhoon 0421 (MEARI) made landfall near Sukumo City, Kochi Prefecture
     around 29/0600 UTC with a MSW of 30 m/s and a CP of 980 hPa.

  3. Typhoon 0421 (MEARI) made landfall near Osaka City around 29/1130
     UTC with a MSW of 30 m/s and a CP of 985 hPa.

  {Part II}. Top-5 Storm Total [24/1500-30/1500Z] Obs

  Ranking    Prefecture        Station           Rainfall (mm)
  01         Mie               Owase             904
  02         Nara              Mt.Hidegatake     785
  03         Mie               Kayumi            601
  04         Nara              Kamikitayama      499
  05         Kochi             Hongawa           464

  {Part III}. Top-5 Daily Rainfall Obs

  Ranking    Prefecture        Station           Rainfall (mm)
  01         Mie               Owase             741 [28/1500-29/1500Z]
  02         Nara              Mt.Hidegatake     583 [28/1500-29/1500Z]
  03         Mie               Kayumi           *498 [28/1500-29/1500Z]
  04         Mie               Tsu              *427 [28/1500-29/1500Z]
  05         Mie               Mihama            393 [28/1500-29/1500Z]

  {Part IV}. Top-5 1-hr Rainfall Obs

  Ranking    Prefecture        Station           Rainfall (mm)
  01         Mie               Miyagawa        #*139 [28/2340-29/0040Z]
  02         Mie               Owase             133 [28/2150-28/2250Z]
  03         Nara              Mt.Hidegatake    *109 [28/2320-29/0020Z]
  04         Mie               Mihama            107 [28/2220-28/2320Z]
  05         Hyogo             Gunge            *104 [29/0920-29/1020Z]
  05         Oita              Kunimi           *104 [29/0020-29/0120Z]

  {Part V}. Top-5 Peak Sustained Wind (10-min avg) Obs

  Ranking    Station                                      Peak wind (mps)
  01         Kagoshima, Kagoshima (WMO47827, Alt 4m)      31.5 [28/2220Z]
  02         Makurazaki, Kagoshima (WMO47831, Alt 30m)    31.4 [28/2150Z]
  03         Aburatsu, Miyazaki (WMO47835, Alt 3m)        28.2 [29/0040Z]
  04         Tomogashima, Wakayama (JMA65036, Alt 43m)    25   [29/1030Z]
  05         Omura, Nagasaki (JMA84371, Alt 3m)           24   [29/0040Z]

  {Part VI}. Top-5 Peak Gust Obs

  Ranking    Station                                      Peak wind (mps)
  01         Kagoshima, Kagoshima (WMO47827, Alt 4m)      52.7 [28/2213Z]
  02         Makurazaki, Kagoshima (WMO47831, Alt 30m)    51.4 [28/2108Z]
  03         Aburatsu, Miyazaki (WMO47835, Alt 3m)        43.1 [29/0038Z]
  04         Unzendake, Nagasaki (WMO47818, Alt 678m)     42.0 [29/0221Z]
  05         Akune, Kagoshima (WMO47823, Alt 40m)         40.1 [29/0002Z]

  {Part VII}. Top-5 SLP Obs

  Ranking    Station                             Min SLP (hPa)
  01         Kagoshima, Kagoshima (WMO47827)     975.5 [28/2314Z]
  02         Makurazaki, Kagoshima (WMO47831)    976.9 [28/2244Z]
  03         Nobeoka, Miyazaki (WMO47822)        980.1 [29/0320Z]
  04         Miyakonojo, Miyazaki (WMO47829)     980.9 [29/0059Z]
  04         Miyazaki, Miyazaki (WMO47830)       980.9 [29/0155Z]

  {Part VIII} Tornado Obs

  Place                                     Category    Time (approx.)
  Nago City, Okinawa Prefecture             F1          27/1130Z
  Nakijin Village, Okinawa Prefecture       F1          27/1150Z
  Toyohashi City, Aichi Prefecture          F1          29/1400Z

  {Part IX} References (Japanese versions only)

  Note 1: "*" = record-breaking values for relevant stations.

  Note 2: "#" = peak value as of 29/0100Z. (Power was cut off in that
          station after 29/0100Z.)


     In the August summary I remarked on the unusually high level of
  tropical cyclone activity in the Northwest Pacific basin during that
  month, with 9 named tropical cyclones and 6 typhoons.  (Four weak systems
  were classified as tropical depressions by JMA only.)  Mike Middlebrooke
  at the NWS office in Guam sent me some statistics for past active Augusts
  in that basin.  Following are the numbers he sent:

  Year   August TCs   Typhoons   Tropical Storms   Tropical Depressions
  1960       9           8             1                    0
  1962       8           7             0                    1
  1966       9           5             3                    1
  1967      10           3             4                    3
  1993       8           6             1                    1
  1994       9           6             3                    0
  1996      10           4             3                    3
  1997       8           6             1                    1
  1999       9           4             2                    3
  2000       9           4             3                    2
  2004       9           6             1                    2

     With 8 out of 9 TCs becoming typhoons, 1960 appears to have been the
  most active.  It is very interesting that no years in the 1970s nor
  1980s had particularly notable Augusts.  A special thanks to Mike for
  sending me the information.  (All the above statistics were gleaned
  from JTWC's annual reports.)


  NORTH INDIAN OCEAN (NIO) - Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea

  Activity for September:  1 active monsoon depression
                           1 tropical depression **

  ** - this system was not classified as a tropical depression by JTWC

             North Indian Ocean Tropical Activity for September

     No warnings were issued on any tropical systems in the Bay of Bengal
  or the Arabian Sea during September, but there were two systems worthy
  of mention.  A monsoon depression formed during the second week of the
  month at the head of the Bay of Bengal and persisted for over 10 days.
  According to some information from Roger Edson, the system initially
  was primarily an upper-air system in the mid-troposphere with a surface
  LOW anchored against the mountains.  The IMD treated this LOW as a land
  depression forming in the state of West Gengal by the 12th, and continued
  it as a depression through the 15th, when it was downgraded to a low-
  pressure area.  The LOW drifted slowly northwestward--on the 22nd it
  was located over the northwestern parts of Uttar Pradesh state.  Rains
  spawned by the monsoon depression were responsible for some flooding
  and loss of life in both India and Bangladesh.

     Another system formed in the Arabian Sea during the latter days of
  September and moved northwestward, eventually moving into Oman on the
  29th.  None of the warning agencies, including IMD and the meteorological
  service of Oman, classified this LOW as a depression.  However, both
  SAB's and JTWC's satellite bulletins gave a Dvorak rating of T2.0, and
  QuikScat data indicated winds near 30 kts, so it seems likely this system
  probably was a tropical depression.   This system caused some fairly
  heavy rainfall in Oman on 29th and 30th after making landfall.

     Brief reports follow on both these systems, compiled and sent by
  Huang Chunliang.  A special thanks to Chunliang for sending the data.

                            MONSOON DEPRESSION
                             (NRL Invest 91B)
                            10 - 22 September

  A. Report from India

  {Part I}. Rainfall Obs from India (only 24-hr amounts >= 10 cm listed)

  Bhawanipatna, ORISSA                  11 cm [10/03-11/03Z]
  Sonamura, TRIPURA                     25 cm [12/03-13/03Z]
  Belonia, TRIPURA                      24 cm [12/03-13/03Z]
  Agartala, TRIPURA                     22 cm [12/03-13/03Z]
  Sabroom, TRIPURA                      11 cm [12/03-13/03Z]
  Sonamura, TRIPURA                     17 cm [13/03-14/03Z]
  Agartala, TRIPURA                     10 cm [13/03-14/03Z]
  Krishnanagar, WEST BENGAL             10 cm [14/03-15/03Z]
  Krishnanagar, WEST BENGAL             16 cm [15/03-16/03Z]
  Tantaloi, WEST BENGAL                 17 cm [16/03-17/03Z]
  Suri, WEST BENGAL                     11 cm [16/03-17/03Z]
  Tilpara Barrage, WEST BENGAL          11 cm [16/03-17/03Z]
  Rampurhat, WEST BENGAL                10 cm [16/03-17/03Z]
  Dillighat, ASSAM                      12 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Barkisurya, JHARKHAND                 33 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Talaiya, JHARKHAND                    23 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Konner, JHARKHAND                     13 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Ramgarh, JHARKHAND                    11 cm [17/03-18/03Z]
  Hamirpur, UTTAR PRADESH               12 cm [20/03-21/03Z]
  Shahjina, UTTAR PRADESH               12 cm [20/03-21/03Z]
  Khajuraho, MADHYA PRADESH             18 cm [20/03-21/03Z]
  Shardanagar, UTTAR PRADESH            48 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Neemsar, UTTAR PRADESH                27 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Palliakalan, UTTAR PRADESH            20 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Mohana, UTTAR PRADESH                 16 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Hanumansetu, UTTAR PRADESH            15 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Bani, UTTAR PRADESH                   14 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Lucknow (Control Room), UTTAR PRADESH 13 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Auraiya, UTTAR PRADESH                13 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Kalpi, UTTAR PRADESH                  12 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Kanpur (FM), UTTAR PRADESH            11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Bhatpurwaghat, UTTAR PRADESH          11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Dalmau, UTTAR PRADESH                 11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Lucknow (AP), UTTAR PRADESH           11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Ankinghat, UTTAR PRADESH              11 cm [21/03-22/03Z]
  Marora, UTTARANCHAL                   12 cm [22/03-23/03Z]
  Kotdwar, UTTARANCHAL                  12 cm [22/03-23/03Z]
  Okhalkanda, UTTARANCHAL               12 cm [22/03-23/03Z]

  {Part II}. Damage and Casualties

     Press reports indicated that four or more people drowned and 55,000
  were stranded in flash floods in the northeastern state of Tripura.  And
  3 deaths were reported in the neighboring state of West Bengal, where
  flooding inundated hundreds of villages, leaving 650,000 people homeless.
  What's worse, at least 33 people in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh
  lost their lives during the night of September 21 due to flooding
  triggered by torrential rains.

  B. Report from Bangladesh

  {Part I}. Rainfall Obs (only 24-hr amounts >= 100 mm listed)

  COX'S BAZAR (21.43N 91.93E)           143.0 mm [11/06-12/06Z]
  COX'S BAZAR (21.43N 91.93E)           106.0 mm [12/00-13/00Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E)               147.2 mm [10/18-11/18Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E)               134.0 mm [11/00-12/00Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E)               143.4 mm [11/06-12/06Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E)               120.8 mm [14/12-15/12Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E)               138.8 mm [14/18-15/18Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E)               246.6 mm [15/00-16/00Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E)               280.0 mm [15/12-16/12Z]
  BARISAL (22.75N 90.37E)               258.0 mm [15/18-16/18Z]
  FENI (23.03N 91.42E)                  239.0 mm [12/00-13/00Z]
  FENI (23.03N 91.42E)                  184.0 mm [13/00-14/00Z]
  FENI (23.03N 91.42E)                  141.0 mm [13/06-14/06Z]
  DHAKA (23.77N 90.38E)                 156.3 mm [12/00-13/00Z]
  DHAKA (23.77N 90.38E)                 239.5 mm [13/06-14/06Z]
  DHAKA (23.77N 90.38E)                 117.5 mm [13/18-14/18Z]
  ISHURDI (24.13N 89.05E)               107.2 mm [13/00-14/00Z]
  ISHURDI (24.13N 89.05E)               135.0 mm [13/12-14/12Z]
  ISHURDI (24.13N 89.05E)               116.0 mm [13/18-14/18Z]

  {Part II}. Press Reports

  1. Bangladesh recovering after severe monsoon storms

  Source: Deutsche Presse Agentur
  Date: 19 Sept 2004

  Dhaka (dpa) - Life returned to near normal in Dhaka on Sunday as schools
  and businesses reopened and public transport began plying city streets
  after a week of heavy monsoon showers.  However, a fresh bout of rain at
  the weekend threatened to prolong the misery of the about 10 million
  residents in Bangladesh's crowded capital city.

  At least 30 people died in Dhaka and many neighbourhoods were still under
  water as a result of the rain.  Utility services were also under pressure
  after the week-long downpour.

  Weathermen said an active late monsoon dumped the heaviest rain on Dhaka
  and adjoining suburbs in more than half a century.

  Copyright (c) dpa Deutsche Presse-Agentur

  2. Bangladesh capital paralysed by floods after heaviest rain in 50 years

  Source: Agence France-Presse
  Date: 14 Sept 2004

  DHAKA, Sept 14 (AFP) - Life in the Bangladeshi capital Dhaka came to a
  halt Tuesday amid floods caused by the heaviest rains in half a century.
  At least 18 people have died since Saturday in three days of monsoon 
  downpours across central and southern regions, officials said.  Houses
  were inundated, vehicles stranded and all schools, colleges and
  government offices were closed.  Many shops and private offices in the 
  capital also closed Tuesday, with the water level up to chest height in
  some places.

  Arjumand Habib, deputy director of the Meteorological Department, said
  341 millimetres (13.6 inches) of rain fell Monday in Dhaka, the highest
  amount recorded in the last 50 years.  She added that the rains and
  strong winds, caused by a low-pressure area, were weakening in central
  and southern areas and were expected to move northeasterly towards the
  Sylhet region and India's Assam state.

  The country is still recovering from floods in July and August that left 
  more than 700 dead and forced hundreds of thousands to flee their homes. 
  They were the worst since 1998, when Bangladesh suffered its worst ever 
  flooding.  Floodwaters in the capital were expected to take at least
  24 hours to recede, Mayor Sadek Hossain Khoka said. "City dwellers can't
  operate normally--they are in great misery.  We are hoping that by
  tomorrow afternoon the situation will start getting back to normal," he

  Most fishermen in the coastal Barisal region were obeying advice not to
  put out to sea, but six trawlers capsized overnight and one person was
  missing, officials said Tuesday.  In the southeastern district of
  Noakhali more than 100 mud and bamboo homes were swept away Tuesday
  after a river embankment burst.  In central Manikganj district, roads
  were washed out by flash flooding and the weather was disrupting daily
  life, deputy district administrator Rokhsana Ferdoushi said.

  Ten people died Monday in weather-related accidents.  Four died when a
  boat capsized, while three others were electrocuted.  Three more people
  died when they were electrocuted in two separate incidents in south-
  western Jhenidah district, the official news agency BSS said Tuesday.
  At least eight died during the weekend.

  The monsoon-linked floods across Bangladesh, India and Nepal during July
  and August destroyed crops and livelihoods, swept away homes and killed
  close to 2,000 people in the three countries.  Aid agencies estimate it
  will take Bangladesh, where nearly half the population subsists on under
  a dollar a day, at least a year to recover from the flooding.

  Copyright (c) 2004 Agence France-Presse
  Received by NewsEdge Insight: 09/14/2004 07:15:52

                           TROPICAL DEPRESSION
                             (NRL Invest 93A)
                            25 - 30 September

  Rainfall Obs from Oman

  SALALAH (17.03N 54.08E)               104.2 mm [29/00-30/00Z]
  QAIROON HAIRITI (17.25N 54.08E)        89.4 mm [29/00-30/00Z]
  MINA SALALAH (16.90N 53.92E)           63.2 mm [29/00-30/00Z]


  SOUTHWEST INDIAN OCEAN (SWI) - South Indian Ocean West of Longitude 90E

  Activity for September:  1 tropical depression

            Southwest Indian Ocean Tropical Activity for September

     The 2004-2005 Southern Hemisphere season got off to an early start
  with the formation of a tropical depression (designated as Tropical
  Depression 01) by Meteo France La Reunion.  This system formed just
  west of 90E and subsequently moved southeastward into Perth's AOR where
  it became Tropical Cyclone Phoebe on 2 September (TC-01S per JTWC).
  The report on Tropical Cyclone Phoebe is included in the following
  section of this summary:  Northwest Australia/Southeast Indian Ocean.



  Activity for September:  1 tropical cyclone of storm intensity

                        Sources of Information

     The primary sources of tracking and intensity information for
  Northwest Australia/Southeast Indian Ocean tropical cyclones are 
  the warnings and advices issued by the Tropical Cyclone Warning
  Centres at Perth, Western Australia, and Darwin, Northern Territory. 
  References to sustained winds imply a 10-minute averaging period
  unless otherwise stated.

     In the companion tropical cyclone tracks file, I occasionally
  annotate positions from warnings issued by the Joint Typhoon Warning
  Center (JTWC) of the U. S. Air Force and Navy, located at Pearl
  Harbor, Hawaii, when they differ from the Australian centres' coor-
  dinates by usually 40-50 nm or more.  The JTWC warnings are also the
  source of the 1-minute average maximum sustained wind values included
  in the tracks file.   Additionally, information describing details of
  satellite imagery and atmospheric circulation features included in
  the narratives is often gleaned from the JTWC warnings.

                 Northwest Australia/Southeast Indian Ocean
                      Tropical Activity for September

     A tropical LOW formed just east of longitude 90E at the end of August
  and was designated Tropical Disturbance 01 by MFR.  In early September
  the LOW drifted southeastward into Perth's AOR and intensified into
  Tropical Cyclone Phoebe on the 2nd.  The cyclone's life was rather brief,
  having dissipated by the 4th.   The following report on Phoebe is one
  which I received from Joe Courtney of the Severe Weather Section at BoM
  Perth, and to which I have added a few geographical references.  A very
  special thanks to Joe for sending me the report.

                        TROPICAL CYCLONE PHOEBE
                           (TC-01S / MFR-01)
                        31 August - 4 September

     A LOW developed near 3S/88E on 30 August within an unseasonably active
  monsoon band, coincident with a burst in the MJO.  The LOW moved to the 
  southeast over the next few days, passing into the Perth TCWC area of 
  responsibility on 1 September.  The system suffered from deep-level
  shear--the 850-250 hPa shear exceeded 20 knots throughout its lifetime.
  On 31 August an area of deep convection developed to the west/southwest
  of the LLCC.  This convection was to be persistent for the following 
  four days, although the LLCC remained exposed for almost all of that
  time.  MFR issued the first bulletin on Tropical Disturbance 01 at
  0600 UTC on 31 August, locating the centre approximately 850 nm north-
  west of the Cocos Islands.  The MSW (10-minute mean) was estimated at
  25 kts.

     For most of the system's lifetime, the persistent deep convection was
  typically within 3/4 of a degree to the west-southwest of the low-level 
  centre.  On the 31st and 1st, the low-level centre was not well defined.
  It is likely that gales were occurring under the deep convection but only
  in one quadrant.  Tropical cyclone intensity was estimated at 02/0000 UTC
  when the LLCC was close to the deep convection and QuikScat identified
  gale-force winds in more than one quadrant.  Maximum estimated intensity
  of 45 knots (10-minute mean) was reached late on the 2nd when the low-
  level centre moved closer to the edge of the deep convection.  Perth
  upgraded the LOW to Tropical Cyclone Phoebe at 0400 UTC when the system
  was centred about 430 nm west-northwest of the Cocos Islands.  (JTWC
  had initiated warnings on TC-01S at 02/0000 UTC.)

     Phoebe showed weakening signs on the 3rd but convection again flared
  near the centre a few hours later.  QuikScat showed gales in southern
  and western quadrants at 03/1200 UTC.  However, on the 4th convection
  subsided and the LLCC became less well-defined.   Although convection
  again developed by 1200 UTC, from this point on convection fluctuated
  diurnally, suggesting continued weakening.  Also, by this stage Phoebe
  was moving over cooler waters on the order of 25 C, having originated
  over SSTs of over 27 C.  Perth issued their final gale warning on the
  3rd, but JTWC continued to issue warnings until 04/1200 UTC, when the
  final warning placed the weakening centre about 300 nm west-northwest
  of the Cocos Islands.  The peak intensity (1-minute mean) estimated by
  JTWC was 55 kts at 03/0000 UTC.

     Phoebe remained over open waters throughout its lifetime and there
  were no known impacts.

  (Report based on summary received from BoM Perth, with slight editing
  and a few additions by Gary Padgett)



  Activity for September:  No tropical cyclones


  SOUTH PACIFIC (SPA) - South Pacific Ocean East of Longitude 160E

  Activity for September:  1 non-tropical depression

               South Pacific Tropical Activity for September

     No tropical cyclones formed in the Southern Hemisphere east of
  160E during September.  The Fiji TCWC did issue gale warnings on a
  depression on 10 and 11 September.  This system formed at subtropical
  latitudes well east of the Dateline on the 10th and moved rather quickly
  off to the southeast.   Some of the Fiji bulletins referred to the LOW
  as "Depression D1" instead of with the "F" suffix used for designating
  tropical depressions.  This, plus the latitude, suggests that this was
  either a subtropical or non-tropical system.


                              EXTRA FEATURE

     In order to shorten the amount of typing in preparing the narrative
  material, I have been in the habit of freely using abbreviations and
  acronyms.   I have tried to define most of these with the first usage
  in a given summary, but I may have missed one now and then.  Most of
  these are probably understood by a majority of readers but perhaps a
  few aren't clear to some.  To remedy this I developed a Glossary of
  Abbreviations and Acronyms which I first included in the August, 1998
  summary.  I don't normally include the Glossary in most months in
  order to help keep them from being too long.  If anyone would like to
  receive a copy of the Glossary, please e-mail me and I'll be happy
  to send them a copy.


  AUTHOR'S NOTE:  This summary should be considered a very preliminary 
  overview of the tropical cyclones that occur in each month. The cyclone
  tracks (provided separately) will generally be based upon operational
  warnings issued by the various tropical cyclone warning centers.  The
  information contained therein may differ somewhat from the tracking and
  intensity information obtained from a "best-track" file which is based
  on a detailed post-seasonal analysis of all available data. Information
  on where to find official "best-track" files from the various warning
  centers will be passed along from time to time.

    The track files are not being sent via e-mail.  They can be retrieved
  from the archive sites listed below.  (Note: I do have a limited e-mail
  distribution list for the track files.    If anyone wishes to receive
  these via e-mail, please send me a message.)

    Both the summaries and the track files are standard text files
  created in DOS editor.  Download to disk and use a viewer such as
  Notepad or DOS editor to view the files.

     The first summary in this series covered the month of October,
  1997.   Back issues can be obtained from the following websites
  (courtesy of Michael Bath, Michael V. Padua, Michael Pitt, Chris
  Landsea, and John Diebolt):>>>>>

     Another website where much information about tropical cyclones may
  be found is the website for the UK Meteorological Office.  Their site
  contains a lot of statistical information about tropical cyclones
  globally on a monthly basis.  The URL is:>


     JTWC now has available on its website the complete Annual Tropical 
  Cyclone Report (ATCR) for 2004 (2003-2004 season for the Southern 
  Hemisphere).  ATCRs for earlier years are available also.

     The URL is:>

     Also, TPC/NHC has available on its webpage nice "technicolor"
  tracking charts for the 2004 Atlantic and Eastern North Pacific
  tropical cyclones; also, storm reports for all the 2004 Atlantic
  and Eastern North Pacific cyclones are now available.

     The URL is:>

     A special thanks to Michael Bath of McLeans Ridges, New South Wales,
  Australia, for assisting me with proofreading the summaries.


  Gary Padgett
  E-mail:  [email protected]
  Phone:  334-222-5327

  Kevin Boyle  (Eastern Atlantic, Western Northwest Pacific, South
                China Sea)
  E-mail:  [email protected]

  John Wallace (Assistance with Eastern North Pacific)
  E-mail:  [email protected]

  Huang Chunliang  (Assistance with Western Northwest Pacific, South
                    China Sea)
  E-mail:  [email protected]

  Simon Clarke  (Northeast Australia/Coral Sea, South Pacific)
  E-mail:  [email protected]


Document: summ0409.htm
Updated: 17th May, 2005

[Australian Severe Weather index] [Copyright Notice] [Email Contacts] [Search This Site]