geez keith. guess i shouldn't go to disney world this july.
i'm gonna leave the six-month lead individual storm forecasting to keith.. reckon i'll just explain my numbers as lysis suggests we who wish to qualify them should. very well.
my numbers are crazy high.. 17/11/5. it's a departure from my old strategy of going with high-average numbers.. which worked well in the late '90s and to a lesser degree the last couple of years. last year i interpreted the warm ENSO conditions in the pacific to mean a slightly inhibited season.. which was every bit reasonable.. but the result was another 15 system year with a couple of marginal systems that nearly pushed the numbers higher.. and five major hurricanes. all five of these major hurricanes affected the u.s. (two weren't major at the time though). so, the first year i've predicted and gone low, we get what is probably the landmark year of the decade. natural.
so anyway, what is different about this year. ENSO is doing roughly the same thing.. i believe tilting back to neutral. so using 2003/2004 type numbers. don't think the truncated october that we had last year will happen in '05. i like the idea of a 2003-like, spread season. odds are always for a system prior to august. one of the big questions i have in mind is whether we'll go back to a segment, mjo-driven season. 2004 wasn't that sort of year.. mjo just didn't do much to affect the temporal distribution of systems.
this is outside of sheer numbers, but the one other thing i'm pondering is what effects el nino had on the mean global circulation in august/september last year. ridging persisted on the japanese and u.s. coasts and drove storm after storm westward into them. the ENSO warm event was mostly a western and central pacific event.. which has happened some in recent years. but the cool water spike off peru was essentially gone.. i wonder if that tipped the scales and shifted that notorious saving-grace of an east coast trough inland, and brought the storm track west with it. doubt i'll be able to write my thesis paper on it.. but if i ever go for a doctorate.. oh i'll worry about that later.
i'll probably adjust my numbers down later.. i've finally conceded and given up my shred of pride in having outpredicted with a december forecast the june numbers from more official sources for a few seasons.. but of course that was mostly luck. when i have a better feel for the pulse of things, later in the spring, i'll probably tweak them a little. but i don't think they'll come down much. i'm betting '05 will be another active one.. but active seasons aren't always bad. it's not how many form this season, it's whose door they come knocking on.
HF 0328z27january