The Histories of Well-Documented Maritime Cyclones as Portrayed by an Automated Tracking Method

Abstract

Abstract This study examines extratropical cyclone tracks, central pressure, and maximum intensification rates from a widely used automated cyclone tracking scheme and compares them with the manual tracking of five well-known North Atlantic cyclones whose histories are available in the refereed literature. The automated tracking scheme is applied to sea level pressure data from four different reanalyses of varying levels of sophistication to test the sensitivity of the results to input data resolution and quality. Further, we test the tracking scheme using lower-tropospheric vorticity obtained from the most recent reanalysis (ERA5) for four of these cyclone events. Substantial discrepancies in cyclone position, intensity, and maximum intensification rates exist between the manual tracking and the automated tracking and are not eliminated by using higher-resolution reanalyses or by “turning off” the spatial smoothing feature of the automated tracking scheme (needed to reduce spurious cyclone detections). The results point to a particular problem in detecting weaker and earlier stage cyclones and confirm findings from studies that have examined a broad range of cyclone tracking schemes for a range of reanalyses. Notably, this early cyclone stage often involves a smaller-scale secondary cyclogenesis or cyclone wave, which are detected by the automated scheme only after subsequent growth in the ensuing 6–12 h. It is known that these early stages are critical for a comprehensive understanding of rapid intensification events. A discussion of possible future solutions to this problem is presented. Significance Statement Because of the availability of large modern datasets portraying sea level pressure across the globe, meteorologists have turned to automated detection and tracking of midlatitude cyclones. Detection and tracking are of interest since these storm systems play an important role in weather and climate and potential changes in their location, frequency, and intensity are of considerable societal interest given climate change. This paper compares the results obtained from one commonly used automated tracking method with tracks obtained by human analysts. We find substantial discrepancies in cyclone position, intensity, and intensification rates and that these differences are not eliminated by using improved analyses. A discussion of possible future solutions is presented.