Talk:Hurricane Vince (2005)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hurricane Vince (2005) article.
Article policies
Good article Hurricane Vince (2005) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
Hurricanes
 This page is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones.
Merge talk
 The possible merging of this article has been discussed by editors of the WikiProject.

Contents

[edit] Weather cat?

I'm looking for an article or category for bizarre weather events to place this into... CrazyC83 15:56, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] HH ref?

Is there a source for the bit about the Hurricane Hunters investigating the storm? I find it very unlikely that the U.S. would send an aircraft all the way across the Atlantic to investigate a storm that had no chance of affecting the U.S. Perhaps it was an aircraft out of the Azores and not a true Hurricane Hunter that investigated? --Holderca1 16:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image

We need to get that awesome pic on the Wunderground site that AySz88 linked to on the main talk page for the infobox. The image there now is not as good and is the same one from the main article.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 16:37, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Done (though not in the infobox). --AySz88^-^ 03:22, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merging

I propose merging this with the main page (2005 Atlantic hurricane season). Sure, it's notable and pretty neat, but so was Hurricane Ivan in 1980, so were other storms, but this isn't notable to be its own article. What is wrong with the main page? Hurricanehink 22:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I was thinking the same. But as I thought about it some more, the article is well developed and it establishes notability. It is unique in where it formed and the fact that it reached hurricane status, the fact that it landed on the Iberian etc. I would therefore oppose the merge. 12.220.47.145 23:10, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
As Hurricane Faith only did marginal damage, and as Hurricane Vince is far more noteworthy in its oddities than Faith, and as Faith has its own article, so too should Vince. --69.86.16.61 02:23, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
I guess it is noteworthy enough. OK, I'll change my mind. Hurricanehink 11:40, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
What? Hurricane Faith is not even in the same ballpark. Vince and others may have formed or gone unusually far north, but Faith defined it. The unimpuned circulation of Faith was tracked as far north as Franz Josef Land, just 300 miles from the North Pole! It was a tropical system into the GIUK Gap! It brought tropical storm force wind gusts to Murmansk, Russia, roughly 100 miles north of the Arctic Circle! I'm sorry, but comparing Faith to Vince is like comparing Hank Aaron to Derek Jeter. I consider Faith one of the most amazing tropical cyclones to ever exist in the Atlantic. Vince barely makes the top 10.
E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:39, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Well if Vince is sitting at #10 for you, then it definitely deserves its own article. Unless you are saying only 9 Atlantic tropical cyclones in history deserve their own article. PK9 23:51, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
I vote merge. The picture in this article should be moved to the main page though. TimL 09:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
There is quite a bit of information in the article. And its well written, I don't see the need to merge a well written article. 12.220.47.145 03:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Vince has several notable qualities attributed to it. It is a first in several of these ways too. Because of those reasons and that this article is already very informative, I would oppose a merger with the main 2005 Atlantic Hurricane Season article. 68.115.4.162 18:34, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
I think that Vince should remain having its own article. I specifically searched Wikipedia for it.

[edit] Farthest north and east

Everybody says Vince is the Farthest North and Eastern formation of any Tropical Cyclone in the Atlantic Basin. Sure, I agree with it being the farthest north, but I looked at every year on Unisys and saw plenty of Tropical Systems forming farther east than 19.1 degrees W. Here is a list:
Hurricane #3 (1900) Longitude 18.5. A tropical Storm at the time.
Hurricane Able (1952) Longitude 19.0. A tropical deppresion at the time.
Tropical Storm Becky (1962) Longitude 18.8. A tropical deppression at the time.
Hurricane Dora (1964) Longitude 18.0. A tropical deppression at the time.
Tropical Storm Ginger (1967) Ad. 1 Longitude 18.3. It was a tropical deppression at the time.
Ad. 2 Longitude 18.2. "
Ad. 3 Longitude 18.1. It was a tropical storm at the time.
Ad. 4 Longitude 18.2. "
Ad. 5 Longitude 18.5. "
Ad. 6 Longitude 18.9. "
Tropical Storm Christine (1973) Ad. 1 Longitude 14.0 (on land in Africa). It was a tropical deppression at the time.
Ad. 2 Longitude 15.2. "
Ad. 3 Longitude 16.4. "
Ad. 4 Longitude 17.7. "
Ad. 5 Longitude 19.0. "
Hurricane Frances (1980) Longitude 19.0. It was a tropical deppression at the time.
Tropical Strom Dennis (1987) Longitude 18.4. It was a tropical deppression at the time.
Tropical Storm #6 (1988) Ad. 1 Longitude 17.5. It was a tropical deppression at the time.
Ad. 2 Longitude 18.0. "
Ad. 3 Longitude 18.5. It was a tropical storm at the time.
Ad. 4 Longitude 19.0. "
Ad. 5 Longitude 19.1. "
Hurricane Jeanne (1998) Ad. 1 Longitude 17.4. It was a tropical deppression at the time.
Ad. 2 Longitude 18.2. "
Hurricane Cindy (1999) Longitude 18.9. It Tropical deppression at the time.
Hurricane Alberto (2000) Longitude 18.0. It was a tropical deppression at the time.
And of course, Hurricane Vince (2005)

Unlike Vince, they all moved westward, just developed early. Vince remained that far east and actually went even farther. CrazyC83 19:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Tropical Storm #6 went up north and stayed to the east.[1]

The area where Vince formed, on the 150 year record of tropical cyclones in the Atlantic, is over 500 miles or so away from any other storm track. Vince existed in an area where no tropical cyclone on record had ever been before. -- Hurricane Eric - my dropsonde - archive 03:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
At [2] you can see the tracks of all tropical cyclones (including depressions and subtropical) of the last 155 years. On this map Vince is certainly way off by itself (2005 storms are not pictured). However the 2005 season article claimed Vince was the farthest-north and farthest-east storm ever to reach hurricane strength. This is wrong; numerous storms (including Irene for starters) were further north. I'm pretty sure several of the storms listed there also formed further east. I believe the original NHC claim was that it was the furthest northeast for any tropical system (not hurricane) to develop...which I will believe. Jdorje 23:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Sure there hasn't been a storm ever to form in that area, but that's not what everyone says. They just say it's the farthest north and east formation of a storm. Wrong! Only North!

Please sign your comments. And, I am rather doubtful that it is the farthest north a storm has ever developed, though I suppose it depends on your definition of "storm". It is certainly not the farthest north a hurricane has ever developed; it might be the farthest north a tropical storm or tropical depression has (I have no counter-examples for this yet). Jdorje 00:47, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Hurricane #8 in 1991 formed became tropical at 36 degrees north. [3] I think this might have a record for furthest northeast, though. But others have it beat for north alone and east alone. --Patteroast 09:40, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Can't you just look in the history and write the information about when I wrote this if you care that much about it. Novemeber 16, 2005 (I don't know UTC time, New Englander here!)Ca. 5:45 PM EST

You don't need to use UTC... Just sign with 4 tildes (~) - User:Burwellian 01:07, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh. I see. Now that you said that the Halloween Storm Formed at 36N, I don't agree with north or east. Maybe the National Hurricane Center Meant NOrtheast.24.128.149.7 14:14, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Well I've found the text for the citation of "farthest north and east". It's in Dr. William Gray's review of the 2005 atlantic hurricane season at http://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Forecasts/2005/nov2005/ I suppose it can be argued that those are Dr. Gray's words, not empirical evidence, but it's a source nonetheless. PK9 23:58, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah but I still don't know what "farthest north and east" means. There are three possible interpretations, and I think we've already made clear that "farthest north and farthest east" is not the correct one. Jdorje 01:08, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The answer

Unless someone can explain what this "record" means, I will remove it. It is sufficient to say that the hurricane formed unusually far to the northeast without making incorrect and confusing claims. Jdorje 01:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, the problem is this. The record is supposedly that vince is the "farthest north and east any tropical cyclone has formed in the atlantic". Now, there are several issues to argue about.

  • Tropical cyclone means tropical-storm strength. I suppose we can assume this means initial formation.
  • Farthest north and east at first glance means "farthest north and farthest east", meaning that no cyclone formed farther north or farther east; as explained below this is certainly false. It could mean "farthest (north and east)", so that no cyclone as formed farther north *and* farther east; this record seems to hold up but it doesn't mean anything since many storms can claim this. Or it could mean "farthest northeast", which is terrible wording but does seem to be the correct record.

According to the advisories, vince formed at (-19.2, 34.0).

The farthest-east-forming cyclones are:

year number name longitude
1967 7 GINGER -18.1
1900 3 NOT NAMED -18.5
1988 6 NOT NAMED -18.5
1927 2 NOT NAMED -19.3
2005 Vince -19.2 (pending tcr)

And the farthest-north-forming cyclones are:

year number name longitude
1858 2 NOT NAMED 45.0
1855 2 NOT NAMED 44.0
1988 1 ALBERTO 41.5
1898 3 NOT NAMED 40.8
1869 1 NOT NAMED 40.5
1971 2 NOT NAMED 40.5
1860 3 NOT NAMED 40.0
1866 5 NOT NAMED 40.0
1980 3 CHARLEY 39.6
1863 2 NOT NAMED 39.4
1876 1 NOT NAMED 39.0
1984 4 CESAR 38.9
1972 3 BETTY 38.8
1981 3 CINDY 38.7
1859 2 NOT NAMED 38.5
1884 1 NOT NAMED 38.5
1912 3 NOT NAMED 38.0
2001 14 NOEL 37.8
1863 1 NOT NAMED 37.7
1980 11 KARL 37.7
1882 1 NOT NAMED 37.5
1990 5 EDOUARD 37.4
1853 4 NOT NAMED 37.0
1969 10 NOT NAMED 37.0
1970 4 NOT NAMED 37.0
1971 1 ARLENE 36.7
1991 1 ANA 36.2
1991 8 NOT NAMED 36.2
1913 5 NOT NAMED 36.0
1981 2 BRET 36.0
1966 2 BECKY 35.8
1980 9 IVAN 35.6
1859 4 NOT NAMED 35.5
1878 3 NOT NAMED 35.5
2002 1 ARTHUR 35.5
1861 7 NOT NAMED 35.3
1881 7 NOT NAMED 35.3
1969 11 NOT NAMED 35.3
1985 8 HENRI 35.3
1988 5 ERNESTO 35.2
1977 3 CLARA 35.1
1978 10 IRMA 35.1
1968 4 DOLLY 35.0
1975 4 DORIS 34.9
2001 11 KAREN 34.9
1963 3 NOT NAMED 34.8
1961 6 NOT NAMED 34.7
2002 10 JOSEPHINE 34.7
1969 16 NOT NAMED 34.5
1861 3 NOT NAMED 34.4
1971 3 BETH 34.4
1975 1 AMY 34.4
1980 7 GEORGES 34.4
2005 Vince 34.0 (pending tcr)

And the farthest northeast-forming storms (highest latitude + longitude) are:

year number name latitude + longitude
2005 Vince 14.8 (pending tcr)
1980 9 IVAN 11.0
1990 5 EDOUARD 5.4
1858 2 NOT NAMED 5.0
1978 10 IRMA 3.6
1855 2 NOT NAMED 2.0
1967 7 GINGER -0.1

because of the roundness of the earth, I'm not positive that latitude + longitude is the correct way to measure northeasterliness. However it does seem that vince is the farthest northeast that any storm has formed.

Jdorje 02:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Since we do have sources for this record, it should at least be noted that people say that Vince is the "farthest northeast", but also that there is uncertainty over what that means. --AySz88^-^ 03:26, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, we do have a source: the best-track data. The problem is it's hard to verify the record from the source. In the above tables, I made a list (via a computer) of how far northeast every storm formed (reached ts strength), and Vince is, indeed, by far the most northeast of them. But this is still hard to verify...you can look at the best-track and see the point of formation of each storm, and by looking at a couple of storms you can convince yourself the list is correct. But verifying every one by hand would not be feasible. Jdorje 03:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
The record is this: Vince formed with latitude+longitude (i.e., "northeasterliness") of 14.8. The next closest was 1988's Ivan, at 11.0 (nearly 4 degrees off; note that a degree does not correspond to an exact distance however). The dropoff is very quick; the sixth most northeasterly storm is Ginger at -0.1, nearly a full 15 degrees to the southwest of where vince formed. Jdorje 03:38, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Wait, so the best track data itself is dubious?
The "sources" I had been talking about were things like Gray's season summary, which lists Vince's northeastern-most formation, and I have to assume that someone verified the record at Dr. Gray's place. --AySz88^-^ 18:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
No, the best-track data is the most official source, although it is still just an estimate (which the NHC may revise in future through re-analysis), and the s:Atlantic hurricane best track isn't always complete since it only gives the track at 6-hour intervals. This is much more official than Gray's season summary, since (1) he could easily have made a mistake and (2) the best-track may be revised in future, which would potentially change the records (although unlikely in this case since the record is set by a huge margin). — jdorje (talk) 18:44, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
In particular on point (2), Gray's summary was written before the Vince TCR comes out. The TCR will of course include Vince's best-track, which is more accurate than the advisory data. — jdorje (talk) 18:45, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Map

Now that we have all this data, why don't we just compile it into a map with the various positions? That would make a great visual assistance to these abstract coordinates, and drive the nail home. Circeus 19:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Annular hurricane?

Looking at the image of Vince, it looks the type of hurricane described by Annular hurricane. Is this possible? Reub2000 11:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I doubt it, the eyewall isn't complete enough. It reminds me more of Cyclone Catarina. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 15:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Split infinitive question

The NHC had decided not to declare the system a tropical cyclone because the water temperature was too low for one to normally develop. Is the meaning here that it was too cold to develop in a normal fashion or that it was colder than the temperatures in which a storm normally would develop. I'm guessing the latter, but can anyone verify this? Thanks. Rockhopper10r 23:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

While Vince did get off to a subtropical start, the transition to tropical cyclone shortly thereafter makes me think that the development of Vince was fairly normal. But with hurricanes, normal is somewhat relative. I'd say the latter option. 68.115.4.162 22:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Todo

Find more information of substance, and clarify or remove the "farthest north and east" record. Jdorje 21:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

There's some information that may clarify Vince's unusual formation: [4]. Good kitty 04:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smallest Hurricane??

Is it true that Vince was the smallest hurricane on record? Fishhead|§ 22:53, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Extremely unlikely. What's your source? — jdorje (talk) 22:56, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Isn't TC Tracy the smallest? Icelandic Hurricane 21:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Tracy was a Typhoon,not a Hurricane. Circeus 21:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Technically it was a cyclone, but when you say smallest hurricane, most people assume you mean tropical cyclone. Hurricanehink 21:13, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alberto 88 furthest north?

It mentions that Alberto from 1988 formed further north than Vince, but from what I can tell from the 1988 Atlantic hurricane season article, it didn't. I don't know which Alberto that is supposed to talk about, but someone needs to fix it. Jamie|C 22:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Alberto became a tropical storm further north than Vince. That's probably it. Hurricanehink 22:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
The table several pages up lists the farthest-north-forming storms. There are a large number of storms that formed (reached TS strength) further north than vince. Alberto is the farthest-north-forming one since 1860. — jdorje (talk) 23:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] The Spanish Armada Hurricane?

Apparently, there was a hurricane on record in 1588 that hit the Spanish Armada, which would definetly make it the northernmost hurricane ever since the Armada at the time was slightly northwest of Ireland. The referr about the hurricane is here. Scroll down to 2.6, the return to spain.The Spanish Armada Hurricane

I changed the wording slightly to make it less ambiguous Jamie|C
There is no evidence that that was a hurricane. It is more likely it was an extratropical storm (e.g., Hurricane Maria) or a so-called European windstorm. Additionally, Vince was not the northernmost hurricane, so this discussion isn't really relevant. Tropical storms have struck Ireland before but they don't form there. — jdorje (talk) 02:26, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
But theres no evidence that it was an extratropical storm ether, since it occured in 1588, it possbile to be a freak-late season hurricane that strayed off its course. Storm05 14:57, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Uh, climatology is probably the biggest evidence. Given that no storm was there in recorded history is probably a big hint. It probably was a simple extratropical storm. Hurricanehink (talk) 15:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Climatology recordes did not exist in 1588 (and any climatology records before the modern age are specutive) and you cant that there was no storm in recorded history because it happened in 1588 before people even track (and any records at that time might have been lost over time) and it occured in late July or early August which is possbily that this storm might have been a cape verde type hurricane that became extratropical. Storm05 17:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you on the last part. It could have once been a hurricane that became extratropical. However, I doubt, looking at the climatology of the last 150 years, that a tropical system could exist in the English Channel. Hurricanehink (talk) 17:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
I think it really unlikely that this was a tropical system at the time it struck the Spanish, (not in the Channel Hink, but further north near Ireland), but that does not mean it wasn't tropical in origin. We are talking about 1588 here, which was near the start of the Little Ice Age, I would suspect northern waters to be slightly colder than is presently the case. A source from the period calling it a hurricane in no way implies it was a tropical cyclone, it only suggests hurricane strength winds were present. Another example is the Great Storm of 1987 which was commonly called a "hurricane"; it was quite clearly non-tropical, though it did produce hurricane-force gusts.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Update Tag

Why was the update tag added to this article? The last paragraph of the storm history summarizes the TCR. TimL 21:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I added it because glancing at the storm history has many numbers that are incorrect based on the TCR. All that's needed is a review of the storm history, comparing to the TCR info. — jdorje (talk) 21:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't see what you are talking about and am removing the tag. TimL 04:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
For starters, it doesn't even mention how, or when, the storm actually formed. I reverted it to put it back up. Hurricanehink 12:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I merged the last paragraph into the first paragraph and corrected the second paragraph wrt dissipation. TimL 17:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ineresting Radar Image

I uploaded an interesting radar image from the TCR which shows the cyclonic circulation of vince just off the coast of Portugal. Anyone think it should go in the article? TimL 18:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, just saw it. I added it in. Hurricanehink 23:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Todo2

Rewriting this one was nasty, the storm history was awful as it stood; in my biased opinion it is much better now. I think that (the thumbnail of) the radar pic should be made smaller, it looks a bit too big as it stands - maybe crop the top half of it? Apart from that... more copyediting, ("which defies general thought..."- needs sourcing) and perhaps some press reports?--Nilfanion 23:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Good idea on the pic. Hurricanehink 23:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A-Class article process?

Sorry, if this is the wrong place to put my question, please excuse my inexperience. I've seen that this article is already a good article, so is there a process similar to the good article process to bring it up to an A-Class article? 65.8.35.224 19:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Sweeps Review: Pass

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to go through the article and update all of the access dates of the inline citations and fix any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)