HURRICANES 202: (PART TWO) WIND-PRESSURE RELATIONSHIP

By: ncforecaster , 6:16 AM GMT on June 27, 2008

Share this Blog
0
+

Hey everyone,

This blog entry will constitute "part Two" of our discussion on the "generalized" wind-pressure relationship (WPR) for Tropical Cyclones (TC) of the Atlantic Basin. In the succeeding blog entry on this topic, we reviewed the basics as to how "wind" itself is generated by the "pressure gradient", and its direct influence on the WPR. As alluded to in the previous entry, this generalized WPR for Atlantic Basin TC's is influenced by other factors that make a direct one to one relationship between a given Barometricv pressure (BP) and a corresponding Maximum Sustained Wind speed (MSW) problematic. Moreover, we also reviewed the origination of the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale (SSHS) and the reasoning behind its inception in 1973, as well as the specific criteria used in categorizing TC's that achieve hurricane intensity (i.e. MSW of 74 mph or greater).

With all the aforementioned in mind, I need to emphasize a couple of important points regarding this particular subject matter before we disect it in much greater detail. First, the "generalized" WPR discussed here and used by the National Hurricane Center (NHC) is not a substitute for direct observations of the MSW and/or the BP associated with a particular TC. In most cases, it is used in determining either the MSW or the BP in the absence of the direct measurement of this data by Recon aircraft (the NHC currently uses a systematic formula devised in order to extrapolate the MSW at flight level down to the surface which is not without its own inherient flaws as well) and/or land based anemometers (that are either disabled prior to measuring the MSW or were not in the vicinity thereof). Secondly, this particular discussion is focused primaril;y on the WPR of Atlantic Basin TC's and the various components (i.e characteristics) of an individual storm that have a direct influence on the accompanying "pressure gradient". That being said, this topic doesn't take into account the various factors involved with cyclogenesis and intensity change associated with TC's as discussed in previous blogs in this series (such as SST, vertical wind shear, etc.). Once again, I think it's important to display the current Atlantic Basin (also used for the East Pacific Basin as well) Hurricane intensity/damage potential scale known as the SSHS. From there, we will discuss the factors unique to individual hurricanes that influence the aforementioned WPR and make accurate estimation of TC intensity so inheriently complex.

THE WIND-PRESSURE CATEGORIZATION OF THE SSHS:

Category One: MSW (74-95 mph)/ Bp (> 980 mb).

Category Two: MSW (96-110 mph)/ BP (979-965 mb).

Category Three: MSW (111-130 mph)/ BP (964-945 mb).

Category Four: MSW (131-155 mph)/ BP (944-920 mb).

Category Five: MSW (>155 mph)/ BP (<920 mb).

Note: The SSHS also includes associated Storm Surge heights above mean sea level for each category, that I have purposely ommitted, since it's not relevant to this particular discussion. On the other hand, I should mention that there is a 5-10% decrease in the MSW on the beaches as opposed to the offshore waters due to friction at the land/ocean interface.

WHAT UNIQUE TROPICAL CYCLONE COMPONENTS INFLUENCE THE WPR?

In this section, we will review the six most influential TC components that alter the "generalized" WPR as outlined in the SSHS. These six unique TC components are size, ambient (emvironmental) pressures, translational speed, latitude, intensity change, and storm structure. With that in mind, lets examine each one of these aforementioned TC componants in greater detail.

A) Ambient (Environmental) pressures: The ambient pressure is the atmospheric pressure measured at sea level, in which the TC is embedded. Since the MSW is essentially a function of the "pressure gradient balance", one uses a simple numerical equation whereby the lowest BP of the TC is subtracted from the surrounding sea level pressures (SSLP) to ascertain the "pressure deficit". With all other factors being equal, the larger the "pressure deficit" for a given TC, the greater the velocity of the MSW. For ststistical purposes, Landsea, et. al. (2007) suggests a 5 knot increase in the MSW for hurricanes with SSLP > 1016 mb, and a 5 knot decrease in the MSW for those embedded in SSLP of < 1010 mb, with all other factors being equal.

B) Size: The size of a TC is determined by measuring the maximum extent of Tropical Storm force winds (i.e. sustained winds of at least 39 mph) or to the distance of the outermost isobar on the synoptic analysis. As we discussed in the preceeding blog, the "pressure gradient" is directly responsible for the velocity of the wind. Consequently, a smaller TC will generate higher MSW than a large one with the same BP, as a result of the differences in pressure being distributed over a much shorter distance. This same priniple applies to determining the radius of Maximum winds (RMW) which is also used to determine the attendant "pressure gradient" when estimating the MSW from a BP. Once again, Landsea, et. al (2007) suggests a 5 knot increase in the MSW for hurricanes that have RMW 25-50% smaller than the climatilogical averages with all other things being equal. In cases where the RMW is 50% smaller than average, Landsea suggests a 10 knot increase in the MSW.

C) Translational Speed: The "Translational speed" is simply described as the speed of the storms forward motion. Generally speaking, storms moving at faster speeds have slightly higher MSW. These higher MSW are the result of the storms forward momentum being an additive factor on the wind velocity in the right front quadrant of the TC, since its counter clockwise winds are blowing in the same direction that the storm is moving. Landsea, et. al. (2007) suggests a 5 knot increase in the MSW for hurricanes with translational speeds > 50% the climatilogical average, and 5 knot decrease for hurricanes moving at forward speeds > 50% less than average with all other factors being equal.

D) Latitude: The "latitude" that the TC is traversing also has an influence on the MSW. The "Coriolis Force" increases with Latitude, which requires less tangiable "wind" to balance the "pressure gradient" force. As a result, TC's located at higher latitudes require lower central pressures to generate the equivilant MSW, with all other factors being equal. Accordingly, studies by Brown et. al. (2006) and Landsea et. al. (2007) suggested that category one and two hurricanes had stronger winds and BP 3-5 mb lower south of 25N. For major hurricanes (category 3-5), their research suggested a 5-8 mb varience between those located south and north of 25N latitude. One further point noted in Brown et. al (2006) is that there was very little difference in the WPR between linear observations of the Atlantic and Carribean. On the other hand, they did report that their research shows that hurricanes with BP < 965 mb (Category three or greater) had MSW that were 3-4 knots less than the other respective sub-basins.

E) Intensity Change: The "generalized" WPR can also be impacted by the "intensity change" of a respective TC. Often times, intensifying TC's of hurricane intensity will have lower central pressures for a particular MSW, as opposed to those that are "steady state" or "weakening". In most cases, there is a "lag" time between a significant drop in a storms BP and the corresponding increase in its MSW. Based on the studies performed by Brown et. al. (2006), the Authors suggest 4-5 knot variance in the MSW for category one to three hurricanes that either increase or decrease in intensity during a 12 hour period. For category four and five hurricanes, they suggest a 10-12 knot variation in the MSW for the same 12 hour period of "intensity change".

F) Storm Structure: This component focuses on structual changes associated with a respective TC. This is yet another caveot that must be taken into consideration when estimating the MSW and/or BP of a particular storm. In general, TC's continue to grow in size in proportion with the longetivity of its life span. In most cases, a TC's size is the result of either environmental changes (such as latitude) or internal structual changes (such as eyewall replacement cycles 'ERC'). Moreover, the ERC leads to the formation of double eyewalls (creating a second wind maximum) which would also influence the WPR.

IN SUMMARY:

The WPR is an important tool used by forecasters both operationally and during post storm reanalysis, in determining the MSW and/or the BP for a TC, in the absence of direct measurements by either Recon aircraft or land based anemometers. Although the best indicator of a particular storms intensity is its BP, there are various factors that influence the corresponding WPR, that make an accurate estimation of the MSW somewhat problematic. The six main storm components detailed in this particular blog entry can alter the "generalized" WPR, and ensure that no two hurricanes are created equal (i.e. exactly alike). That being said, the majority of Atlantic Basin Hurricanes due match up fairly well (relatively speaking) with the WPR categorizations associated with the SSHS. In short, this discussion of the WPR in Atlantic Basin Tropical Cyclones further emphasizes the immense complexities involved with TC forecasting, as well as accurate post storm reanalysis of individual storms.

MY NEXT BLOG ENTRY:

As time allows, I hope to write a blog entry discussing the Dvorak Intensity Scale, which is the current WPR model used to determine TC intensity for Atlantic Basin storms in the absence of direct Recon observations. Once again, this particular blog entry focused solely on the various storm components that influence the WPR, and should not be confused with the factors that influence cyclogenesis and intensity change such as SST, vertical wind shear, etc. As always, I want to thank each and everyone of you who has taken the time to read and/or post in my blog.:) Most importantly, I want to wish you a great rest of the night, and a truly blessed "Friday".:)

Most Sincerely,
Tony

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

Sign In or Register Sign In or Register

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 23 - 1

Page: 1 — Blog Index

23. quasigeostropic
4:30 PM GMT on July 02, 2008
Hey Tony, IMO I dont think you need to waste such valuable insight on Jeff Master's blog. Reason I say this is its become a playpen for immaturity which I have witnessed a lot of lately....The reason why there is so much confusion is because of the deep contrasting levels of maturity and misunderstanding(rumors get started)....Again, it's only my opinion, and it is just fine with me if you continue to post there...thought I would let you know.
Member Since: November 20, 2007 Posts: 21 Comments: 192
22. MississippiWx
3:44 PM GMT on July 02, 2008
Thanks for the response, Tony! According to the Navy site, 92L has become 02L NoName. Obviously, 92L has become our second tropical depression! Your 51% chance was right, Tony (by 1%)! You gave 92L a slightly better chance of developing than not developing. A true forecaster! LOL!

Apologies on getting your well-thought blog on a different subject!
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 17 Comments: 10284
21. ncforecaster
6:57 AM GMT on July 02, 2008
Hey Alec,

Thanks so much for the excellent email, and I have subsequently responded to it.:) Moreover, thanks for the very kind words, and I too hope you have a great rest of the week as well.:)

Your friend,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
20. ncforecaster
6:54 AM GMT on July 02, 2008
Hey Andrew,

Thanks for taking the time to post once again and sharing your thoughts on the future of 92L. In reading your expectations on this system, I feel as though your own synoptic reasoning for the future progression of 92L is very sound.

At the current time, I would place the probability of further intensification of 92L into a T.D. within the next 48 hours at a somewhat cautious 51% (it would be much easier to suggest a 50% probability to cover myself). During this time, the system should be guided generally westward (W to WNW) by the A/B High. As you noted, the SST are very favorable, and the wind shear is is also condusive for further development. In the latest Satellite imagery (visible, IR, and Water vapor), the low level center is very identifiable associated with sustained heavy convection, and the development of some nice banding features. Based on all the aforementioned, one might wonder why I am not more robust with my intensity forecast.

First, I was always taught to be cautious (especially when dealing with the probabilities of cyclogenesis) because it truly is one of the most difficult aspects of tropical cyclone forecasting. Secondly, I am someone who places alot of emphasis on climatology and that would suggest a definite mitigating factor for development this far east in the Atlantic for early July. Thirdly, I was taught to look for "persistance" when evaluating a prospective Tropical wave (or any TC for that matter). In general terms, this means a 6 hour trend at minimum, and more likely 12 hours for a system that is as well developed as 92L at the present time. That being said, it is always important to observe a full 24 hour cycle of a prospective Tropical wave looking for "persistance" in development and its ability to sustain deep convection. In doing so, forecasters are able to observe the system as it goes through both the diurnal minimum, as well as the Diurnal Maximum in order to accurately guage its true potential.

These are a few of the forecasting generalities I learned from my two brief internships at the NHC 14 and 22 years ago respectively. This is why the NHC is more cautious than most others when it comes to evaluating a prospective tropical wave and its subsequent potential for cyclogenesis. As a result, I don't typically comment much on tropical waves until they have become tropical cyclones (i.e. T.D. intensity or greater), with the inherient and immense complexities involved with cyclogenesis. In addition, the major Global models are not as reliable when it comes to forecasting both future track and intensity of tropical waves as they are with tropical cyclones (accurate initialiation of the models being a significant factor).

In short, my best educated GUESS of a 51% probability that 92L will achieve Tropical Depression intensity within the next 48-72 hours is rather uncharacteristic for me, for a tropical wave so far out in the Eastern Atlantic at this time of year. As far as track forecasts beyond 72 hours, it is way too premature to speculate much on that at the present time. That being said, I would place a greater probability (at this time if I had to choose) on this system not directly impacting the Islands of the Eastern Carribean (but it's just simply too early to make such a definitive forecast on that). Thanks again for sharing your own excellent observations, and I look forward to talking with you again soon.:)

Your friend,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
19. quasigeostropic
8:26 PM GMT on July 01, 2008
Hey Tony, you got WUG mail. Dont want to pull blog off topic....Have a great week!=)
Member Since: November 20, 2007 Posts: 21 Comments: 192
18. MississippiWx
3:48 PM GMT on July 01, 2008
Gonna get off topic here a bit, but how about Invest 92L this morning? WOW! Very impressive wave/low pressure coming off the coast of Africa today. It's not just a ball of convection that immediately dies once over the cool waters of the E Atl. The wave is accompanied by convection and a surface circulation! Also, the waters off the coast of Africa (south of the Cape Verdes)are as warm as anywhere in the Tropical Atlantic--including the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean! Surprisingly, the waters in the Central and Eastern Caribbean have yet to warm much. We can probably thank strong easterly trade winds (from the A/B High) and several unusually strong tropical waves moving over these same areas for the cooler water temps. Fortunately, these waves haven't been able to survive past the Eastern Caribbean thanks to a persistent TUTT (tropical upper-tropospheric trough), which has caused 30-40kts of wind shear. However, it seems a change in the winds is coming! Our luck may be running out as this TUTT moves out and 92L perhaps slides into the picture. If 92L strengthens quickly, it will feel the effects of a weakness in the upper atmosphere caused by an upper level low pressure breaking down part of the A/B high and move north in response. If not, 92L will continue on a west to west-northwest movement, bring more of a threat to the island chain and eventually the Western Caribbean. A southerly track also increases the threat of impacting the U.S. in some way, form or fashion. As we all know, it's way too early to worry about anything in the U.S., especially since it's not even a depression (however, I have seen less organized depressions in my day! LOL!)! Now is the time to check up on hurricane plans and emergency kits!

Ok! Whew! Sorry for my little novel! I just like to type out my thoughts for someone else to read. That way, if I'm right, people will have read my thoughts! LOL...but if I'm wrong...ahhhh I'm never wrong! :-)
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 17 Comments: 10284
17. ncforecaster
10:54 AM GMT on July 01, 2008
Hey 92L,

Thanks so much for taking the time to post.:) In regards to your post about "wind shear", I will simply repost the following comments from this particular blog entry in regards to that.

"Once again, this particular blog entry focused solely on the various storm components that influence the WPR, and should not be confused with the factors that influence cyclogenesis and intensity change such as SST, vertical wind shear, etc,"

That being said, I appreciate you taking the time to post, and hope you have a great rest of the day.:)

Most sincerely,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
16. ncforecaster
10:47 AM GMT on July 01, 2008
Hey Alec,

Thanks so much for taking the time to post once again, and for the very kind words.:) Moreover, it's great to see you taking a stand on the A/GW debate, and pointing out that there is "no sound substantial evidence" to support such conclusions. For me, it is so disappointing to see a political agenda usurp the fundamentals of sound science, as I firmly believe is the case with A/GW.

Thanks again Alec, and I too hope you have a great rest of the week as well.:)

Your friend,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
15. ncforecaster
10:30 AM GMT on July 01, 2008
Hey Andrew,

It's great to see you posting, and I greatly appreciate the very thoughtful post.:) I can totally empathize with you on your sentiments relative to finding time to blog here, for I typically go through periods of more, and less activity respectively, here myself (based upon family and work responsibilities). With that being said, I always appreciate the time you so thoughtfully give of yourself to post in my blog. Most importantly, I hope you have a great rest of the week, and I look forward to talking with you soon.:)

Your friend,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
14. 92LisAwesome
10:17 AM GMT on July 01, 2008
wind shear
13. ncforecaster
10:16 AM GMT on July 01, 2008
Hey Suwanee,

Thanks so much for the very kind words.:) It is so great to see you posting, and it is always a pleasure to talk with you. I hope you have a great week, and I look forward to talking with you again soon.:)

Your friend,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
12. quasigeostropic
12:15 AM GMT on June 30, 2008
I personally find it amazing that so many can so easily accept the human induced climate change theory based upon modeling data that is trying to forecast for 100 years in advance, when similar models can't even accurately forecast regional conditions more than a month in advance, at best.

I completely agree with you 100%. That is what I've been trying to say to so many people. I don't mean to pull this blog off topic but just had to run this by you. I want to educated people on sound scientific foundations and to warn people of the dangers in just agreeing w/AWG with no substantial sound evidence to back it up. Hope you have a great rest of the week. ~Alec
Member Since: November 20, 2007 Posts: 21 Comments: 192
11. MississippiWx
9:10 PM GMT on June 29, 2008
Hiya, Tony!

Apologies on not commenting in a while. It's easy to get blogged-out when nothing too exciting/interesting is happening in the tropics! Nice entry and keep up the good posting! Things are soon to heat up and people who are not familiar with the info you're giving will be able to use it to better their understanding of what is actually happening during and after formation of a tropical cyclone!
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 17 Comments: 10284
10. Suwanee
12:53 PM GMT on June 29, 2008
Tony, a great blog series!
9. ncforecaster
10:16 AM GMT on June 29, 2008
Hey Alec,

Thanks so much for the very kind words, and it's always great to see you posting.:) First, I completely agree that Volcanic eruptions and similar events do appear to impact the Stratosphere to some degree (naturally there is always going to be inherient uncertainty in just how significant that impact might be). That being said, I personally don't believe the nuclear testing period that began in 1952 has had any noticiable long term impact on the Stratosphere.

Interestingly, the proponants of human induced climate change suggest this argument as a way of trying to explain away the extended period of "cooling" seen worldwide from 1940-1976. Keep in mind, this was also the same time that many climate scientists suggested we were headed for a new "Ice Age". Obviously, that didn't occur, as Global tempratures began to warm once again. As a result, many climate scientists are now suggesting major consequences of their new claim of human inducd "Global Warming".

In reality, the facts don't support the theory of human induced GW in and of itself. In regards to the observed cooling period of 1940-1976, it stands as a major impediment to the supporters of human induced GW that they try to explain away by the nuclear testing argument. The first nuclear testing took place in 1952, and that immediately eliminates 12 years of that argument without any scientific merit to support the claim that the other 24 years were directly impacted by it.

In my own humble opinion, this is far more of a political argument rather than a scientific one. It is far more likely that the current warming trend is simply related to natural variability of the climate that runs in cycles (as seen with the AMO and ENSO cycles for example). The tangiable evidence is the same, and I would suggest that the arguments in support of human induced climate change are founded in ones presuppositions. The climate modeling is naturally going to be flawed for projections that far out in time, and the results will always be influenced by the data used in the initialization of the models. With that in mind, I personally find it amazing that so many can so easily accept the human induced climate change theory based upon modeling data that is trying to forecast for 100 years in advance, when similar models can't even accurately forecast regional conditions more than a month in advance, at best. In short, I don't believe that the nuclear testing you alluded to has had any noticiable impact on long term climate trends.

On a different note, I wanted to take this opportunity to express how much I respect your own vast knowledge of meterology itself, and your willingness to share it with others via your outstanding blogs.:) Most importantly, I want to wish you a great rest of the weekend, and I look forward to talking with you soon.:)

Your friend,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
8. ncforecaster
8:44 AM GMT on June 29, 2008
Hey WeatherGeek,

Hey I will be in the outer banks for vacation. What is the weather supposed to be like along the coast? Also how warm will the water be?

Thanks for taking the time to post.:) To best answer your questions, I will simply post a couple of links that will provide the information you seek in "real time". As a result, you can keep abreast of the current conditions, forecast for the next seven days for a specific area in the region, as well as the latest water temperatures around the area where you will be vacationing.

That being said, here is the link to the Newport/Morehead City NWS office. Simply click on the map of the area where you will be vacatioing at the time, and it will display the current conditions, forecast for the next seven days, and any and all pertnent warnings that may exist for hazerdous weather.

In this link, click on the bouy stations that are shown closest to the area you will be vacationing for the current water temperatures. Currently, the water temperatures range from 82 degrees F near Beaufort on the Southern Outer Banks to as low as 69 degrees F at Duck Pier. Other nearby Obs show 86 at the Oregon Inlet Marina to 70-75 just NNE of that locality.

Most importantly, I hope you have a safe and truly wonderful time on your vacation, and a great rest of the weekend,:)

Most sincerely,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
7. quasigeostropic
6:42 PM GMT on June 28, 2008
Hey Tony, sorry for the off topic response but I got a question for you. There were big climatic shifts in the 1970s......The cold war was just about ending around that time. Before that there was a HUGE amount of nuclear testing going on. Do you think that might have played at least some role in altering climate? We know that volcanoes and huge events like this spew huge amounts into the stratosphere where contaminants can be trapped for decades and block sunlight and/or chemically deplete ozone to a degree...What are your thoughts on this? Thanks for your informative blog and replies. ~Alec
Member Since: November 20, 2007 Posts: 21 Comments: 192
6. weathergeek5
6:31 PM GMT on June 28, 2008
Hey I will be in the outer banks for vacation. What is the weather supposed to be like along the coast? Also how warm will the water be?
Member Since: December 25, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 1744
5. ncforecaster
10:00 AM GMT on June 28, 2008
Hey Outrocket,

Thanks for posting and providing a most interesting observation as to how a "wobble" in storm motion could influence the tangiable wind speed within differing areas of the eyewall (if I understood it correctly).

In discussing the influence of the translation speed of a hurricane on its MSW, I am assuming all other factors are equal in application to the "generalized" WPR. As a result, storm motion is shown to have a small influence on the MSW in a hurricane. In Landsea et. al. (2007), they suggest that the variance in wind speeds between the right and left side of the hurricane is 2 times the translational speed for TC's moving less than 20 knots. That being said, they also point out that there is "substantial uncertainty and nonuniformity of this impact on TC winds."

In short, research shows that translational speed of hurricanes do have a "small" influence on the MSW, but that there is still alot of uncertainty in just how "small" of a factor it is. Based on my own previous experience (14 years ago), and all the research I've read since that time, it appears any influence that a "wobble" in a storms forward motion would have on the assymetrical wind distrubution within the eyewall would be rather "small" as well. As you pointed out in your post, it is all of these small caveots that highlight the relative uncertainty in trying to accurately determine the MSW based solely on BP alone. On the other hand, all of the research over the past few decades has shown that BP is by far the very best indicator of storm intensity with all other things being equal, because the velocity of the wind itself is the direct result of the atendant "pressure gradient". Consequently, environmental pressures and the size of the storm (RMW) are the two most significant factors influencing the WPR for a given hurricane.

Thanks again Outrocket for yet another very informative and excellent post. Most importantly, I want to wish you a great "Saturday", and rest of the weekend.:)

Your friend,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
4. outrocket
3:52 AM GMT on June 28, 2008
Ok you made me think.......Makes you wonder what effect a wobble has on the wind speed.
We realize the wobble happens during ERCs,change in direction,speed and land falls so the question is: What is the rate or speed of that wobble and how it can effect the speed of the wind flow in given areas around and in the eye wall??...add the speed of the wobble when in direction of the forward movement and subtract when not?? That is one way of explaining the uncertainty of predicting wind speed by pressure because you know the rate of wobble wont be a constant....

Member Since: July 15, 2005 Posts: 104 Comments: 11016
3. ncforecaster
2:13 AM GMT on June 28, 2008
Hey everyone,

I just wanted to take a moment to wish each one of you a great rest of the day, and weekend to come.:)

Most sincerely,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374
1. ncforecaster
6:23 AM GMT on June 27, 2008
Hey everyone,

I just wanted to ask you to please excuse any and all typos and/or grammatical errors in this blog entry, for it's already after 2 AM EDT, and I'd prefer to wait to proof read this entry for the time being.:) Most importantly, I want to wish each and everyone of you a great rest of the night, and a wonderful "Friday".:)

Most sincerely,
Tony
Member Since: May 17, 2006 Posts: 108 Comments: 1374

Viewing: 23 - 1

Page: 1 — Blog Index

Top of Page

About ncforecaster

ncforecaster's Recent Photos

Tony
Hurricane Dennis
Just Me:)