Hurricane Camille Satellite Image

[Derek Ortt]

We had a respectable surge here on the Mississippi Coast from both Ike and Gustav. I'd rather face a small Cat-4 like Charley than a big Cat-2 like Ike. The water destroys so much more.....MGC

unless you are one of the unlucky ones that encounter the cat 4 winds. Whe gusts in a cat 4 are basically EF4 tornadoes (EF5 in a cat 5)

[Derek Ortt]

What would be worse? A Category 4-5 weakening to a Category 3 before landfall? Or a Category 1 rapidly intensifying to a Category 3 before landfall?

maybe a steady state would be the worst, like an Ike or an Isabel, but a little stronger. Especially a large steady state hurricane like those two were

Kind of like Elena in 1985?

Actually, what would have happened if Elena had tracked slightly to the south and ended up moving over Lake Pontchartrain?

that is one of the scenarios I fear the most... landfall directly into New Orleans. Only one worse is NYC in any type of large hurricane

[MGC]

The 1947 hurricane that slamed south Florida eventually made landfall directly over New Orleans. In fact, I believe that was the last hurricane to have the eye pass directly over the city. The hurricane approached on an angle similar to Elena, only futher south. Since there were no levees along Lake Ponchatrain in 1947, there was extensive flooding in the city from the lake. The levee system was expanded only to be proven inadequate in 1965 when Hurricane Betsy again flooded much of the city. Levees were again improved after Betsy to only fail again for Katrina......MGC

[Pearl River]

Due to the technology difference between satellite pictures 40 years apart, I don't think you can look at Camille's pictures and say she was or wasn't a cat-5. If you read the the information contained in the storm wallet for Camille, there is a report from William Saffir and one of the comments he makes is about the Mississippi Power Company Bldg structure in Gulport. He states that the damage was caused by winds in the 170 mph range, sustained, not gusts. I lived in Slidell at the time, on the western side about 20 miles from where Camille made landfall and winds were reported sustained at 100 mph. Also, if you read Dr. Bob Sheets book, Hurricane Watch, he explains what Dr Simpson, who director of the NHC at the time said about Camille. The C-130 penetrated the eye and measured the pressure at 26.62 and they could see the sea surface. The copilot stated they have never seen the wind whipped sea like what they saw. He said the velocity was beyond what they used in training which accounted for winds up to 150 mph. The crew and NHC forecasters decided to estimate the winds at 190 mph. Dr Simpson also said that Washington looked at the satellite pictures and thought Camille was weakening, but he decided to get an aircraft in there to make sure.

All the Navy recon planes were in P.R for Stormfury except 2 aging Constellations and they refused to penetrate amilles eyewall, so Dr Simpson made a call to a weather squadron at Scott AFB, Ill and they sent the C-130.

[Derek Ortt]

visual estimates are the least reliable and are no longer used for determining the peak winds

as for damage, there are many more factors than just the winds. How was the construction? Was the structure struck by flying debris, etc

regardless as to whether Camielle was a 4 as I beleive or a 5, it was a very destructive hurricane indeed

[MGC]

Camille was the reason Saffir and Simpson developed the SS scale.....MGC

[Pearl River]

William Saffir best describes the damage to the building in his report, but if I remember correctly, the damage was not caused by flying debris nor surge. Other factors of course were figured into it, such as max windspeed recorded at Keesler based on the distance to the AFB from where the eye crossed the coast.

Also, George Cry, former LA state climotologist, in his post storm report suggested wind gusts as high as 160 mph in eastern St Tammany Parish. He characterized the damage as "skips and spots". Mississippi Test Facility recorded a low pressure of 28.00 inches at 2355 cdt on Aug.17. The minimum pressure in Slidell was 28.56 at 2240 cdt.

[ToxicTiger]

I rode out both Betsy and Camille on Canal Street, within walking distance from downtown New Orleans. Even though we were on the weak side of a small Camille, I will never understand how Slidell recorded a pressure of 28.56 inches and we never even lost electricity less than 30 miles away.

Those that don't believe that Camille was a tiny storm, please chew on that one for a while. We didn't get electricity back from Betsy for 10 long, hot days.

[vbhoutex]

I was in Gulf Breeze(Pensacola) FL for Camille and if what we had in terms of weather from Camille is indicative of a "tiny" hurricane I don't even want to think about what a big cane would be. BTW, I have been on the GOM coast for 54 years so I do know my tropics, especially related to the GOM. I have been through several canes, the last one being Ike. Camille was lopsided obviously, by both radar and by reports. It was very obvious when one drove through the area after the fact and before all the clean up was done. No Camille was not a huge storm, but she sure wasn't tiny.

[MGC]

I lived in New Orleans East during the 60's. The difference between Betsy and Camille in New Orleans was like night and day. Betsy's large circulation uprooted many trees in NO East, while Camille didn't uproot one in my area. The total destruction from Camille in Orleans Parish didn't start to out past Chef Pass.....MGC

[Ptarmigan]

Camille was larger than average size. Larger than let say Alicia of 1983. Betsy was quite large.

[wxman57]

Camille was larger than average size. Larger than let say Alicia of 1983. Betsy was quite large.

The best track database has Camille's hurricane force winds a bit larger than Betsy's at around 75nm from the center compared to 69-70nm from the center for Betsy. Alicia's hurricane-force winds averaged about 60nm from its center. But keep in mind recon data is VERY suspicious prior to the era of modern recon. Surface winds weren't even measured back then unless the hurricane passed over an observation location.

ftp://rammftp.cira.colostate.edu/demari ... oradii.txt

[MGC]

In the NHC TCR, Camille is described as "small intense storm." An oil rig reported a gust to 170mph.

This from the TCR...."The small intense storm began to weaken as it moved north-northwestward through central Mississippi. Wind gusts up to 100mph extended north to near Prentis (about 100 miles inland) but were confined to about a 25 mile path."

I don't see where ya'll get that Camille was larger than average....MGC

[wxman57]

In the NHC TCR, Camille is described as "small intense storm." An oil rig reported a gust to 170mph.

This from the TCR...."The small intense storm began to weaken as it moved north-northwestward through central Mississippi. Wind gusts up to 100mph extended north to near Prentis (about 100 miles inland) but were confined to about a 25 mile path."

I don't see where ya'll get that Camille was larger than average....MGC

You have to check the best track database link above. At landfall, Camille's hurricane-force winds extended out over 75nm from the center. Now that's no small hurricane. However, if you check just about every hurricane from 1851-1987, the average size hurricane force wind field was 60-80nm. From 1988-2008, that average radius is MUCH lower because recon could actually measure surface winds after 1988. So we really don't know how big hurricane wind fields were before modern recon.

I highlighted the hurricane-force wind field in the hurricanes below:

AL0369 CAMILLE 081800 1969 29.4 89.1 165 909 157 147 128 135 104 99 90 94 80 77 72 74

AL0365 BETSY 091000 1965 28.3 89.2 135 941 180 151 130 151 108 96 87 96 79 72 66 72

AL0183 ALICIA 081806 1983 28.9 95.0 100 963 185 168 147 161 99 93 85 90 67 64 59 62

And Katrina - not very much larger than Camille according to the best track database:
AL1205 KATRINA 082906 2005 28.2 89.6 125 913 200 200 150 150 120 120 75 100 90 90 60 70

Rita at landfall:
AL1805 RITA 092406 2005 29.4 93.6 100 935 180 160 120 120 120 100 80 90 75 60 40 60

Now I do think that most of those pre-1988 hurricanes' wind fields were probably over-estimated. Perhaps considerably. But that's all we have to go with for now.

[Derek Ortt]

In the NHC TCR, Camille is described as "small intense storm." An oil rig reported a gust to 170mph.

This from the TCR...."The small intense storm began to weaken as it moved north-northwestward through central Mississippi. Wind gusts up to 100mph extended north to near Prentis (about 100 miles inland) but were confined to about a 25 mile path."

I don't see where ya'll get that Camille was larger than average....MGC

those prelim reports do not mean that much, to be honest

also, they were comparing Camielle with storms like carla. Of course Camielle was small compared to Carla

satellite imagery was in its infancy and it was not really known how large storms really were then

[MGC]

So, where is the final report on Camille? Was one ever published?...MGC

[Derek Ortt]

we'll have to wait for the reanalysis project to get to Camielle as any report from 1969 is going to be suspect based upon the how little was known about TCs then

[Ptarmigan]

Here is Camille Post Storm Wind Analyses.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Storm_page ... /wind.html

Also, here is Betsy.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Storm_page ... /wind.html

[brunota2003]

Max Observed Surface Wind according to the map (link above) is 129 knots, or about 150 mph.

[MGC]

They have Betsy at 123 KTS only slightly weaker than Camille.....doubt it....MGC