Debby (2006)

A tropical depression formed from a strong African easterly wave on 21 August 2006 about 225 nautical miles (nm) south‑southeast of Praia in the Cape Verde Islands. The system moved generally west‑northwestward, passed about 100 nm southwest of the southern Cape Verde Islands on 22 August, became Tropical Storm Debby on 23 August, held roughly the same strength for two days while tracking northwestward over the eastern Atlantic, then weakened beginning 25 August and degenerated to a remnant low by 26 August. The remnant low moved northward ahead of an approaching frontal trough and dissipated early on 28 August about midway across the north‑central Atlantic.

Debby passed close enough to the southern Cape Verde Islands on 22 August to bring thunderstorms and gusty winds to the islands of Fogo and Brava; a tropical storm warning for the Cape Verde Islands was issued on 21 August and discontinued on 22 August. Debby did not make any landfalls as a tropical cyclone; it stayed over open water for its entire lifetime and never struck continental land.

The maximum sustained winds for Debby were estimated at 45 knots (about 52 mph), and the minimum central pressure at the time of minimum pressure was 999 mb. That peak intensity corresponds to a moderate tropical storm (below hurricane strength). The peak wind estimate was supported by several QuikSCAT satellite passes.

Observed impacts were minimal. Wind gusts up to about 30 knots were reported on Fogo in the Cape Verde Islands, and there were no reports of storm surge, no measured surge heights cited in the record, and no reports of damage. Rainfall totals of note were not reported in the Tropical Cyclone Report for populated locations beyond general mentions of thunderstorms over the southern islands.

There were no reported deaths—direct or indirect—and no confirmed damage associated with Debby. Forecasts initially expected faster development, and intensity guidance had a high bias with several forecasts calling for hurricane strength; official track forecasts performed better than average for this storm, with smaller-than-normal track errors, while intensity forecasts tended to overestimate strengthening because models underestimated the nearby dry, stable air and marginal ocean temperatures that limited intensification.