Talk:1992 Atlantic hurricane season

message: *Subtropical Storm One
*Hurricane Bonnie
*Hurricane Charley
*Tropical Storm Danielle- Sorry bout the crappy quality, but this is the best there is. Hurricanehink
*Tropical Storm Earl- See above. Hurricanehink
*Hurricane Frances
:Another year down, and that was lucky. Not sure how far back every storm will have an image on them. Hurricanehink 20:28, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images for each storm 

message: Where is the Subtropical Storm One trackmap?
:On the main page... Hurricanehink 23:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subtropical Storm One 

message: Thanks for the person who added the depressions info, but next time remember that depressions have no tracks juan andrés 04:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, I forgot about that one when I added the pics. Hurricanehink 12:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Tropical Depression 

message: Before my latest copyedit, the Andrew section was horrendous (it didn't even mention that the storm struck Florida!).  I added some more quick info, but I marked this as  since it needs some "real" storm history. — jdorje (talk) 08:36, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Define, "real" storm history, because I cant find anything wrong with the info in this section if not then im removing the  banner since it only clutters up the article and that no one had disscussed anything about it. Storm05 17:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The andrew section defies the principle of notability: the most notable storms should have the most detail.  However andrew has the *least* detail of any storm this season.  Unlike every other storm it has no meteorological details like "Strong upper-level westerly winds weakened the storm", it just says it formed, reached cat5 intensity, and made landfall. — jdorje (talk) 20:13, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andrew 

message: Whats up with the lame pictures of Danielle and Earl? No offense to who put them there, but you gotta have somethin better than that? Anything? Cyclone1 02:33, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know they are horrible, but that is the best that exists online. The website that provided other similar time period images doesn't work for those storms. Hurricanehink 02:37, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dude, I am so sorry. I just figured that out when i tried to change them. Heh.. I feel bad now. Cyclone1 02:40, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, no problem. That's exactly what I thought in the first place; can I find anything better than these horrible images. Unfortunately no, but oh well. It's fine ;) Hurricanehink 12:42, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol. Cyclone1 17:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is up!? 

message: :I created a Userbox in honor of Hurricane Andrew →  → User remember Andrew.  Feel free to add this to your userpage. FishHead 3:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andrew 

message: Danielle and Earl Global pics have showed up on GIBBS!! Hooray! Out with the crappy pics! I'll upload them. Danielle at landfall and the only decent picture of Earl moving away from land. Anything is better than what we have now. →Cyclone1→ 14:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, Lord thats much better! →Cyclone1→ 14:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. That must be new, as when I look through there, those storms weren't working. Hurricanehink (talk) 15:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, man I'm as surprised as you are. →Cyclone1→ 20:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GIBBS Breakthrough 

message: I dont think so because there's no way that storm that visable be undetected. That infomation about that storm is false. Storm05 14:43, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily. It looks similar to the Gibbs image. Maybe the NHC though it was frontal operationally, and never went into further detail for the storm. It should go in an other storms section, with a disclaimer that the NHC did not upgrade it. --Hurricanehink (talk) 17:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The image/system is not fake; my first tour of the NHC occurred while the system was existant in the western Atlantic.  I believe there was a 50 kt, 1002 hPa ship report that came in during the system's life cycle.  I'm wondering if the image is from the May 10-13 system rather than the one present a few days later...that system did appear more tropical/subtropical.  It is best not to comment further upon it; the NASA image looks good, doesn't it?  Thegreatdr 17:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so... I had a heart attack when I found that image. But what other storm are you talking about? →Cyclone1→ 11:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, I found it. Formed on May 16. It does look more (sub)tropical than the other.  →Cyclone1→ 12:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fake Image

message: While I have your attention, consider these images from September 12, 1992 offshore New England:  Visible Infrared
Visible 2
Infrared 2
Visible 3
Infrared 3.  This is why I added the system in as another possible storm.  It briefly sported an eye on visible imagery between roughly 1500-1800 UTC, although it is not terribly obvious on this imagery.  When the center went over Sable Island, Nova Scotia as a deteriorating cyclone, they issued a special observation declaring that the sun was dimly visible.  There is a high chance this cyclone will be added to the database, when the reanalysis gets to 1992 in the next several years.  Thegreatdr 18:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very cool! →Cyclone1→ 04:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: September 12, 1992 near-hurricane offshore New England

message: ...that's one January polar low, one May Bermuda storm, and one September hurricane. And those are just the ones posted here. I have, in my own satellite archive Another January low off of Florida. That's 4 and counting. →Cyclone1→ 12:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Bermuda storm is clearly non tropical on the infrared: . See how the bands are all detached from the center? The polar low and the other January storm also look non-tropical. The only one that intrigues me is the September storm. That storm looks quite tropical with a tight inner core and decent outflow. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 22:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, who knows what they'll update and what they leave as just a blurb in this talk page? Nobody knows now, though some people will know earlier than others. (lucky...) →Cyclone1→ 04:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I checked the camex website and concluded (and agreeing with E.Brown) that there is no way that the may storm went undected (or not reconizied by the NHC) when the website say it had a clear eye and etc, and that "may hurricane" looks like Hurricane Bonnie in September of '92. Because of this, I concluded that the info on that website is false. Storm05 13:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Listen to what you're saying, Storm05. NASA's not playing a prank on us. They didn't fabricate a no-name storm out of Hurricane Bonnie. And saying that if a storm has a clear eye, the NHC will recognize it? They can leave storms with eyes out of the database, you know. →Cyclone1→ 18:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Camex.4.com is a commerical website and not a NASA website and thus the info in it is dubious. Storm05 16:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still credited to NASA, though. Hurricanehink (talk) 16:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, just for the record, the picture is actually Hurricane Fefa, not the May storm. Which comes to the conclusion that the infomation on the Camex.4.com webiste is compeletly bogus. Storm05 14:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: So, If anyone's keeping score...

message: After breezing by the hurricane pages, I can now say for certain I know what that image is. The timestamp wasn't wrong, as it actually was captured on 8-11-1991, except the subject of the image is really Hurricane Fefa in the Pacific. Proof is here and on the 1991 Pacific hurricane season page. 
Jake52 My talk 02:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Real Identity of the Camex May Storm Image

message: Just to make sure, there were nine depressions that year. That number doesn't include Frances, but does include the subtropical storm. Good kitty 18:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say there were ten depressions, including Frances and the subtropical storm. Subtropical cyclones should count for depressions, IMO. --Hurricanehink (talk) 20:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put nine because I think Frances went from extratropical->tropical->back Good kitty 00:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But I think that Total depressions means total everything (total TD+STD+TS+STS+H). Basically, total depressions should be however high the number would've gotten on NRL (which gives a number to every TD, STD, TS, STS, and H regardless of origin). Hurricanehink (talk) 01:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I was thinking at first, but Frances is a rare exception in that it was never a depression at any of its stages. We've never counted extratropical storms in the seasons. Good kitty 02:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But Frances would have been assigned a number on NRL, as it became tropical, so it should be included as a depression. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Depressions 

message: Due to the controversy about some of the system list in the Other storms section, I have decided to remove that section all together. Here is some information about the "Other storms":
*A report on the storm in January 1992 
*May Bermuda storm 
Other information, including satellite images, can be viewed in a previous discussion on this page.--12george1 (talk) 21:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other storms section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 1992 Atlantic hurricane season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111011042947/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A6.html to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A6.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:24, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 1992 Atlantic hurricane season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131214201025/http://typhoon.atmos.colostate.edu/Includes/Documents/Publications/forecast_verifications.xls to http://typhoon.atmos.colostate.edu/Includes/Documents/Publications/forecast_verifications.xls
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928013818/http://www.cityofannamaria.com/files/Hurricane-Flood-Preparedness-2006.pdf to http://www.cityofannamaria.com/files/Hurricane-Flood-Preparedness-2006.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:38, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified