Hurricanes that never lived up the hype?

[Hurricane Mike]

Hurricane Dennis is one that comes to mind. Squeezed between Ivan 2004 and Katrina 2005, Dennis was this unbelievable 928 mb Category 4 monster in the morning and by dinner time the sun was back out in the Panhandle after Dennis slammed right through. I recall it weakened from 145 mph to 115 mph in just a couple of hours. That type of drastic weakening surely lifted winds off the ground and made it seem even less intense.

I think alot of it has to do with last minute weakening prior to landfall. Gustav went from one of the strongest winds ever recorded (in Cuba) to a sloshy rather run-of-the-mill bayou Cat 2. Then it was overshadowed by Ike just days later.

Frances was going to be an unbelievably memorable East Coast hurricane, only to crawl ashore as a wet ragged Cat 2.

That's the most difficult thing. These storms get hyped because they have 140+ mph winds, and then after they come ashore with brief winds of 105 mph in a small area, people look at you and say, "That storm wasn't bad...you're full of it..." and then complacency sets in.

It gets aggravating too when a Hurricane can cross like seven Caribbean islands and never weaken below Cat 4 or 5 and then it crosses Cat Island or Western Cuba and suddenly it just disintegrates. That can make intensity forecasting a nightmare.

[gatorcane]

As bad as was Irma including for FL, I think it was overhyped to some extent for FL because the GFS kept showing runs with SLP in the 880s to 890s hitting S FL after hitting Cuba. Do y'all remember? Examples of actual posts from 9/4/2017 at another BB about the GFS:

"WOW!! 881mb landfall MIA from the SOUTH?? don't know if I have ever seen that"

"Stays sub 930 the length of Florida and emerges back off shore in Northern Florida. Wow"

The vast majority of posters here believed it wouldn't be nearly that strong, but this undoubtedly lead to overhype by less knowledgeable GFS followers. Unfortunately, there will be other storms overdone by the GFS hitting land, which will lead to overhype. The May runs hitting FL with Alberto as a borderline cat 2-3 are a reminder of this GFS bias of overstrengthening.

Well, if I remember correctly, there was a time when Irma wasn't really supposed to hit Cuba, and then cross that area in the FL Straits that was supposed to be extremely favorable for historic intensification, before essentially taking the #1 worst-case-scenario type approach for Miami. I forget which day it was, but one of those days, the forecast was looking so dire, I could barely eat or sleep.

Think that was Wed or Thursday. I know I wasn't a fan of the Bahamas>Key Largo>Homestead>Miami>FTL>WPB track as a huge Cat 5 and was trying to wrap my brain around the idea of an impact that would be worse than Andrew. And that saltwater could come to my house 7 miles inland!

Metro SE Florida impacts from Irma were nothing compared to what the big models were showing just 3 days out. To see the best models in the world keep shifting west with the track each run less than 48-72 hours from landfall was also surprising as it seemed there was strong consensus Irma would landfall in SE Florida or very near. The mass exodus of people leaving South Florida was something that we saw a long time ago with Floyd in 1999 (and wound up recurving before hitting). There was a time I was wondering what I was going to come back to after the storm. Got extremely lucky here with Irma. Unfortunately the hype of Irma may cause some complacency with some folks in SE Florida the next time we are in a similar situation where some may not leave or be properly prepared (but the luck runs out).

[WeatherEmperor]

Well, if I remember correctly, there was a time when Irma wasn't really supposed to hit Cuba, and then cross that area in the FL Straits that was supposed to be extremely favorable for historic intensification, before essentially taking the #1 worst-case-scenario type approach for Miami. I forget which day it was, but one of those days, the forecast was looking so dire, I could barely eat or sleep.

Think that was Wed or Thursday. I know I wasn't a fan of the Bahamas>Key Largo>Homestead>Miami>FTL>WPB track as a huge Cat 5 and was trying to wrap my brain around the idea of an impact that would be worse than Andrew. And that saltwater could come to my house 7 miles inland!

Metro SE Florida impacts from Irma were nothing compared to what the big models were showing just 3 days out. To see the best models in the world keep shifting west with the track each run less than 48-72 hours from landfall was also surprising as it seemed there was strong consensus Irma would landfall in SE Florida or very near. The mass exodus of people leaving South Florida was something that we saw a long time ago with Floyd in 1999 (and wound up recurving before hitting). There was a time I was wondering what I was going to come back to after the storm. Got extremely lucky here with Irma. Unfortunately the hype of Irma may cause some complacency with some folks in SE Florida the next time we are in a similar situation where some may not leave or be properly prepared (but the luck runs out).

Hey Gator,

I totally agree with you about Irma and especially Floyd in terms of predicted impacts in Florida. You are correct: The big models for Irma were showing a nasty hit for SE Florida just 3 days out and I remember saying to myself there is no way they could be wrong 3 days out. 4-5 days out, sure they can change, but no way they are going to change like that less than 3 days out. Late Thursday night September 7th we left town only to find out 6 hours later that the Euro and other models shifted to the west coast of Florida. We drove 24 hours in total to Alabama and I became agitated and frustrated and just had a terrible mood the next few days. This was due to the driving exhaustion.

For me personally, Floyd was the main storm that never lived up to the hype. I believe back in 1999, Floyd caused the largest evacuation in the history of Florida at the time and I remember the panic setting in especially being only 7 years after Andrew hit. I even remember NBC6 weatherman Roland Steadham (are you reading this jlauderdal??) speaking in the most somber voice I have ever heard a meteorologist speak in. The storm turned north far away from Florida and we all know what it did in North Carolina and the mid-atlantic states. I just hope that SE Floridians didn't develop complacency because of Irma because next time we may not be so lucky.

[Hurricane Mike]

Think that was Wed or Thursday. I know I wasn't a fan of the Bahamas>Key Largo>Homestead>Miami>FTL>WPB track as a huge Cat 5 and was trying to wrap my brain around the idea of an impact that would be worse than Andrew. And that saltwater could come to my house 7 miles inland!

Metro SE Florida impacts from Irma were nothing compared to what the big models were showing just 3 days out. To see the best models in the world keep shifting west with the track each run less than 48-72 hours from landfall was also surprising as it seemed there was strong consensus Irma would landfall in SE Florida or very near. The mass exodus of people leaving South Florida was something that we saw a long time ago with Floyd in 1999 (and wound up recurving before hitting). There was a time I was wondering what I was going to come back to after the storm. Got extremely lucky here with Irma. Unfortunately the hype of Irma may cause some complacency with some folks in SE Florida the next time we are in a similar situation where some may not leave or be properly prepared (but the luck runs out).

Hey Gator,

I totally agree with you about Irma and especially Floyd in terms of predicted impacts in Florida. You are correct: The big models for Irma were showing a nasty hit for SE Florida just 3 days out and I remember saying to myself there is no way they could be wrong 3 days out. 4-5 days out, sure they can change, but no way they are going to change like that less than 3 days out. Late Thursday night September 7th we left town only to find out 6 hours later that the Euro and other models shifted to the west coast of Florida. We drove 24 hours in total to Alabama and I became agitated and frustrated and just had a terrible mood the next few days. This was due to the driving exhaustion.

For me personally, Floyd was the main storm that never lived up to the hype. I believe back in 1999, Floyd caused the largest evacuation in the history of Florida at the time and I remember the panic setting in especially being only 7 years after Andrew hit. I even remember NBC6 weatherman Roland Steadham (are you reading this jlauderdal??) speaking in the most somber voice I have ever heard a meteorologist speak in. The storm turned north far away from Florida and we all know what it did in North Carolina and the mid-atlantic states. I just hope that SE Floridians didn't develop complacency because of Irma because next time we may not be so lucky.

See, and that's the thing. Floyd turned, Irma kept west. It's all a game of chance.

[Shell Mound]

On balance, Irma was far less serious than it could have been even for the Florida Keys and the southwestern mainland of the peninsula. The main negative factor was the presence of the upper low over the Gulf of Mexico, which advected dry air and (especially) southwesterly shear over Irma. This accounted for the lopsided radar presentation as Irma approached and moved over the Keys, with a strong northern eyewall and a nearly open, precipitation-free southern quadrant. This became even more pronounced as the cyclone further weakened and struck Marco Island. At that location, there was very little rain in the southern quadrant, and even the winds were weak after the passage of the eye. Videos from storm chasers and local observers confirm this, as does radar. There was actually little difference between conditions in the eye and conditions in the essentially non-existent southern eyewall. All the wind and rain were in the northern quadrant. This, in addition to the inland track, significantly reduced the potential storm surge along the west coast of the Florida peninsula. Only one location in Naples received a storm tide of up to seven feet, with most locations on the west coast noting far lower values. Had Irma been more organised and tracked just off the west coast of the state, widespread storm tides in excess of ten to fifteen feet would have resulted. Despite Irma's large wind field, its organisation was deteriorating as it neared the Keys, the pressure filling from 928 to 931-933 mb before landfall, and had previously experienced disruption over Cuba, and so, aside from a very local storm tide of up to ten feet near the landfall, storm tides on most of the Keys and in mainland SE FL were only in the range of two to five feet, often lower. One would have expected a much larger/widespread storm tide, considering the extent of the fetch (radius of TS and hurricane winds). Only a few days before landfall, many models showed a high-end Cat-4 hitting the Keys. Yet shear and dry air, along with Cuba, greatly reduced what Florida actually received. The scary part is that Irma still became, by far, Florida's costliest hurricane, and still produced severe damage to parts of the state.

In general, shear and dry air have saved the mainland United States from a lot of serious landfalls, especially in recent years. Harvey was the first storm since Charley to break the trend. Maria only weakened due to an eyewall replacement before hitting Puerto Rico, but conditions remained perfect at the time of landfall. Otherwise, virtually every other Cat-4 or Cat-5 cyclone nearing the U.S. since Andrew, whether at that intensity or forecast to potentially reach it, has weakened a lot or failed to be as intense as forecast: Opal, Bret, Floyd, Debby, Lili, Isabel, Frances, Ivan, Dennis, Katrina (LA), Rita, Ernesto (2006), Gustav, Ike, Irene, Ernesto (2012), Erika, and a number of others. Many of these storms, unlike Charley (that rare exception, aside from Harvey), were large systems whose storm surge could have been maximised had they maintained strength as well as size up until landfall. Even during the previous inactive cycle (1970-1994), a number of Cat-4+ systems hit the U.S., even a large system (Hugo), many of which intensified up to landfall (Celia, preliminarily reanalysed to be Cat-4 in TX, and Andrew). The U.S. was also not as lucky during the previous active cycle: look at the number of legendary Cat-4 and Cat-5 hits between 1926-1969. The two Galveston hurricanes, Key West '19, Miami '26, Okeechobee/San Felipe II '28, Labor Day '35, Fort Lauderdale '47, Palm Beach '49, Donna, Carla, Camille...the list goes on. Compare both of these periods to 1995-present. The most recent active cycle, for the most part, has not featured nearly as many of these large and intensifying hits on the mainland U.S. Shear, dry air, and (at times) the East-Coast trough have really made the most recent active cycle much less costly, in general, than a lot of experts expected, showing that active seasons do not necessarily equate with intense and/or worst-case landfalls (and in fact, many "weaker" systems have proven to be devastating in their own right). And obviously, this does nothing to diminish the destruction that occurred in the storms that did occur, even though they could have been far worse in certain respects. But this only goes to show that nature can always top itself, that even the "worst" storms could have been even more destructive, had the factors been aligned more favourably for such an outcome.

Just imagine a repeat of the 1926 or 1928 hurricanes in SE Florida (Miami-Fort Lauderdale-WPB metropolitan area), a Carla-type landfall SW of Galveston, or an 1848-type (Cat-4+) landfall on Tampa/St. Petersburg. Just imagine a Floyd, Dennis, Katrina, Ernesto, (pick your storm) that did something it *didn't* do but *could* have...

[Hurricane Mike]

On balance, Irma was far less serious than it could have been even for the Florida Keys and the southwestern mainland of the peninsula. The main negative factor was the presence of the upper low over the Gulf of Mexico, which advected dry air and (especially) southwesterly shear over Irma. This accounted for the lopsided radar presentation as Irma approached and moved over the Keys, with a strong northern eyewall and a nearly open, precipitation-free southern quadrant. This became even more pronounced as the cyclone further weakened and struck Marco Island. At that location, there was very little rain in the southern quadrant, and even the winds were weak after the passage of the eye. Videos from storm chasers and local observers confirm this, as does radar. There was actually little difference between conditions in the eye and conditions in the essentially non-existent southern eyewall. All the wind and rain were in the northern quadrant. This, in addition to the inland track, significantly reduced the potential storm surge along the west coast of the Florida peninsula. Only one location in Naples received a storm tide of up to seven feet, with most locations on the west coast noting far lower values. Had Irma been more organised and tracked just off the west coast of the state, widespread storm tides in excess of ten to fifteen feet would have resulted. Despite Irma's large wind field, its organisation was deteriorating as it neared the Keys, the pressure filling from 928 to 931-933 mb before landfall, and had previously experienced disruption over Cuba, and so, aside from a very local storm tide of up to ten feet near the landfall, storm tides on most of the Keys and in mainland SE FL were only in the range of two to five feet, often lower. One would have expected a much larger/widespread storm tide, considering the extent of the fetch (radius of TS and hurricane winds). Only a few days before landfall, many models showed a high-end Cat-4 hitting the Keys. Yet shear and dry air, along with Cuba, greatly reduced what Florida actually received. The scary part is that Irma still became, by far, Florida's costliest hurricane, and still produced severe damage to parts of the state.

In general, shear and dry air have saved the mainland United States from a lot of serious landfalls, especially in recent years. Harvey was the first storm since Charley to break the trend. Maria only weakened due to an eyewall replacement before hitting Puerto Rico, but conditions remained perfect at the time of landfall. Otherwise, virtually every other Cat-4 or Cat-5 cyclone nearing the U.S. since Andrew, whether at that intensity or forecast to potentially reach it, has weakened a lot or failed to be as intense as forecast: Opal, Bret, Floyd, Debby, Lili, Isabel, Frances, Ivan, Dennis, Katrina (LA), Rita, Ernesto (2006), Gustav, Ike, Irene, Ernesto (2012), Erika, and a number of others. Many of these storms, unlike Charley (that rare exception, aside from Harvey), were large systems whose storm surge could have been maximised had they maintained strength as well as size up until landfall. Even during the previous inactive cycle (1970-1994), a number of Cat-4+ systems hit the U.S., even a large system (Hugo), many of which intensified up to landfall (Celia, preliminarily reanalysed to be Cat-4 in TX, and Andrew). The U.S. was also not as lucky during the previous active cycle: look at the number of legendary Cat-4 and Cat-5 hits between 1926-1969. The two Galveston hurricanes, Key West '19, Miami '26, Okeechobee/San Felipe II '28, Labor Day '35, Fort Lauderdale '47, Palm Beach '49, Donna, Carla, Camille...the list goes on. Compare both of these periods to 1995-present. The most recent active cycle, for the most part, has not featured nearly as many of these large and intensifying hits on the mainland U.S. Shear, dry air, and (at times) the East-Coast trough have really made the most recent active cycle much less costly, in general, than a lot of experts expected, showing that active seasons do not necessarily equate with intense and/or worst-case landfalls (and in fact, many "weaker" systems have proven to be devastating in their own right). And obviously, this does nothing to diminish the destruction that occurred in the storms that did occur, even though they could have been far worse in certain respects. But this only goes to show that nature can always top itself, that even the "worst" storms could have been even more destructive, had the factors been aligned more favourably for such an outcome.

Just imagine a repeat of the 1926 or 1928 hurricanes in SE Florida (Miami-Fort Lauderdale-WPB metropolitan area), a Carla-type landfall SW of Galveston, or an 1848-type (Cat-4+) landfall on Tampa/St. Petersburg. Just imagine a Floyd, Dennis, Katrina, Ernesto, (pick your storm) that did something it *didn't* do but *could* have...

Great post. That's why I find "return period" discussions so interesting. I have a feeling that the next 1935 Labor Day storm or Camille will occur in the next ten years or so, right on track with average 25-30 yr period (35-69-92-20s) and will likely occur during a slow season. It'll be something along the lines of a small wave that coils up tight quickly and comes into Texas or Florida with Category 5 intensity in the midst of a very inactive season or period of seasons. I keep imagining a quiet June, a quiet July and then BAM a small first named system like an "Arlene" or "Ana" coming into the U.S. with sub-900 mb pressure.

[djones65]

I know someone had already posted that Hurricane Dennis of 2005 may have been an example of an hurricane that was overhyped. I just wanted to add that I think it was a situation more disastrous and contributed to the incredible loss of life from Katrina later that year. I know 2005, 13 years ago, our forecast tools were not NEARLY as good as they are now which resulted in "over" warning of coastal regions which existed for decades previously but in my opinion as become amazingly precise. At least relative to when I was younger and compared to me now. I live on MS coast and have "loved" hurricanes since I was in grade school after Camille. My first hurricane threat that I remember (although I have brief memories being in AFB shelter during Camille at age 4) was Carmen in 1974. We all evacuated scared to death that another monster was coming. Carmen weakened significantly and veered west unfortunately for southcentral Louisiana, but thankfully for Mississippi. Then we experienced Frederic in '79, Elena in '85, and a scare from Ivan in '04. In 2005 I had become an adult with a family and very concerned for my children so we evacuated for Dennis in early July. Of course the storm tracked a bit east of its forecast and fortunately was weakening prior to landfall. But my entire neighborhood evacuated as well and my neighbors were so upset and just complained about how poor the forecasts were. And I swear I said to my wife, "Dennis has just killed more people by not striking here because I knew many stated they weren't leaving again." In any event, Katrina came and I sent my wife and children to Montgomery, AL (they traveled with my extended family). I decided to stay at the house since every neighbor in my cul de sac stayed as well (I must note we are not in a storm surge prone area as we are 3 miles north of the coast.) I regret not going with them. Not because it was so dangerous here as much as I realized the panic my family endured not being able to contact me for more than 5 days after the event.

So what this lengthy and overly worded response means is that sometimes a storm NOT living up to its potential can contribute greatly to the loss of life for future storms especially within the same year.

I know Alyono stated Katrina was overhyped. I cannot disagree more. The MS coast still isn't the same in some areas. Even six months after Katrina (I have lived on MS coast my entire life) I would get lost driving along the coast because all of the landmarks were gone. We didn't have skyscrapers collapsing, but we had barges 800 feet long and three stories high be toppled and pushed inland tens of blocks wiping out everthing in their paths.

I am a firm believer that many of the 238 official deaths in coastal MS were result of complacency. From "well Camille didn't flood here," or " I am not leaving again just a month and half later from the 'dud' Dennis." Just my .02.....

[Hurricane Mike]

I know someone had already posted that Hurricane Dennis of 2005 may have been an example of an hurricane that was overhyped. I just wanted to add that I think it was a situation more disastrous and contributed to the incredible loss of life from Katrina later that year. I know 2005, 13 years ago, our forecast tools were not NEARLY as good as they are now which resulted in "over" warning of coastal regions which existed for decades previously but in my opinion as become amazingly precise. At least relative to when I was younger and compared to me now. I live on MS coast and have "loved" hurricanes since I was in grade school after Camille. My first hurricane threat that I remember (although I have brief memories being in AFB shelter during Camille at age 4) was Carmen in 1974. We all evacuated scared to death that another monster was coming. Carmen weakened significantly and veered west unfortunately for southcentral Louisiana, but thankfully for Mississippi. Then we experienced Frederic in '79, Elena in '85, and a scare from Ivan in '04. In 2005 I had become an adult with a family and very concerned for my children so we evacuated for Dennis in early July. Of course the storm tracked a bit east of its forecast and fortunately was weakening prior to landfall. But my entire neighborhood evacuated as well and my neighbors were so upset and just complained about how poor the forecasts were. And I swear I said to my wife, "Dennis has just killed more people by not striking here because I knew many stated they weren't leaving again." In any event, Katrina came and I sent my wife and children to Montgomery, AL (they traveled with my extended family). I decided to stay at the house since every neighbor in my cul de sac stayed as well (I must note we are not in a storm surge prone area as we are 3 miles north of the coast.) I regret not going with them. Not because it was so dangerous here as much as I realized the panic my family endured not being able to contact me for more than 5 days after the event.

So what this lengthy and overly worded response means is that sometimes a storm NOT living up to its potential can contribute greatly to the loss of life for future storms especially within the same year.

I know Alyono stated Katrina was overhyped. I cannot disagree more. The MS coast still isn't the same in some areas. Even six months after Katrina (I have lived on MS coast my entire life) I would get lost driving along the coast because all of the landmarks were gone. We didn't have skyscrapers collapsing, but we had barges 800 feet long and three stories high be toppled and pushed inland tens of blocks wiping out everthing in their paths.

I am a firm believer that many of the 238 official deaths in coastal MS were result of complacency. From "well Camille didn't flood here," or " I am not leaving again just a month and half later from the 'dud' Dennis." Just my .02.....

Good post. Yeah I don't consider Katrina over-hyped. I think the New Orleans part was half-man made and half-mother nature, but the Mississippi area impact was all Katrina. It was a 30 foot surge impact from a large sized hurricane that had attained 175 mph winds up until 10 hours prior to landfall. All that water didn't have any place to go except right on the coast. I know Camille hit in '69 and devastated areas later destroyed again by Camille, so it does seem to be a rare twice in a century type event. Nonetheless, that area is likely different still today.

[Patrick99]

Think that was Wed or Thursday. I know I wasn't a fan of the Bahamas>Key Largo>Homestead>Miami>FTL>WPB track as a huge Cat 5 and was trying to wrap my brain around the idea of an impact that would be worse than Andrew. And that saltwater could come to my house 7 miles inland!

Metro SE Florida impacts from Irma were nothing compared to what the big models were showing just 3 days out. To see the best models in the world keep shifting west with the track each run less than 48-72 hours from landfall was also surprising as it seemed there was strong consensus Irma would landfall in SE Florida or very near. The mass exodus of people leaving South Florida was something that we saw a long time ago with Floyd in 1999 (and wound up recurving before hitting). There was a time I was wondering what I was going to come back to after the storm. Got extremely lucky here with Irma. Unfortunately the hype of Irma may cause some complacency with some folks in SE Florida the next time we are in a similar situation where some may not leave or be properly prepared (but the luck runs out).

Hey Gator,

I totally agree with you about Irma and especially Floyd in terms of predicted impacts in Florida. You are correct: The big models for Irma were showing a nasty hit for SE Florida just 3 days out and I remember saying to myself there is no way they could be wrong 3 days out. 4-5 days out, sure they can change, but no way they are going to change like that less than 3 days out. Late Thursday night September 7th we left town only to find out 6 hours later that the Euro and other models shifted to the west coast of Florida. We drove 24 hours in total to Alabama and I became agitated and frustrated and just had a terrible mood the next few days. This was due to the driving exhaustion.

For me personally, Floyd was the main storm that never lived up to the hype. I believe back in 1999, Floyd caused the largest evacuation in the history of Florida at the time and I remember the panic setting in especially being only 7 years after Andrew hit. I even remember NBC6 weatherman Roland Steadham (are you reading this jlauderdal??) speaking in the most somber voice I have ever heard a meteorologist speak in. The storm turned north far away from Florida and we all know what it did in North Carolina and the mid-atlantic states. I just hope that SE Floridians didn't develop complacency because of Irma because next time we may not be so lucky.

That's the thing, even the most respected, level-headed weathermen we have around here were speaking as if 190mph Cat 5 Irma into Miami was a done deal. It certainly looked like it that one day before the track started shifting subtly west. It's not like the track even shifted *that* far west from the scary Miami direct hit track, but it was enough.....thankfully. Honestly, I was having a hard time wrapping my head around a storm that would have been markedly worse than Andrew. I was considering brutal scenarios in my head of essentially being forced to leave an entirely decimated South Florida and seek out a new life elsewhere.

Maybe the upper level low and increasing SW shear would have knocked it down a few pegs, but I don't know, I suspect that area in between Andros, the Middle Keys, and Cuba was juiced enough to at least keep it at "weak" Cat 5 strength, especially with less land interaction with Cuba.

Over the years, how many times has South Florida been saved from would-be catastrophic hurricanes by Cuba and Hispaniola? Probably too many times to even bother counting. Even the Yucatan helped save us from a far-worse Wilma.

[gatorcane]

On balance, Irma was far less serious than it could have been even for the Florida Keys and the southwestern mainland of the peninsula. The main negative factor was the presence of the upper low over the Gulf of Mexico, which advected dry air and (especially) southwesterly shear over Irma. This accounted for the lopsided radar presentation as Irma approached and moved over the Keys, with a strong northern eyewall and a nearly open, precipitation-free southern quadrant. This became even more pronounced as the cyclone further weakened and struck Marco Island. At that location, there was very little rain in the southern quadrant, and even the winds were weak after the passage of the eye. Videos from storm chasers and local observers confirm this, as does radar. There was actually little difference between conditions in the eye and conditions in the essentially non-existent southern eyewall. All the wind and rain were in the northern quadrant. This, in addition to the inland track, significantly reduced the potential storm surge along the west coast of the Florida peninsula. Only one location in Naples received a storm tide of up to seven feet, with most locations on the west coast noting far lower values. Had Irma been more organised and tracked just off the west coast of the state, widespread storm tides in excess of ten to fifteen feet would have resulted. Despite Irma's large wind field, its organisation was deteriorating as it neared the Keys, the pressure filling from 928 to 931-933 mb before landfall, and had previously experienced disruption over Cuba, and so, aside from a very local storm tide of up to ten feet near the landfall, storm tides on most of the Keys and in mainland SE FL were only in the range of two to five feet, often lower. One would have expected a much larger/widespread storm tide, considering the extent of the fetch (radius of TS and hurricane winds). Only a few days before landfall, many models showed a high-end Cat-4 hitting the Keys. Yet shear and dry air, along with Cuba, greatly reduced what Florida actually received. The scary part is that Irma still became, by far, Florida's costliest hurricane, and still produced severe damage to parts of the state.

In general, shear and dry air have saved the mainland United States from a lot of serious landfalls, especially in recent years. Harvey was the first storm since Charley to break the trend. Maria only weakened due to an eyewall replacement before hitting Puerto Rico, but conditions remained perfect at the time of landfall. Otherwise, virtually every other Cat-4 or Cat-5 cyclone nearing the U.S. since Andrew, whether at that intensity or forecast to potentially reach it, has weakened a lot or failed to be as intense as forecast: Opal, Bret, Floyd, Debby, Lili, Isabel, Frances, Ivan, Dennis, Katrina (LA), Rita, Ernesto (2006), Gustav, Ike, Irene, Ernesto (2012), Erika, and a number of others. Many of these storms, unlike Charley (that rare exception, aside from Harvey), were large systems whose storm surge could have been maximised had they maintained strength as well as size up until landfall. Even during the previous inactive cycle (1970-1994), a number of Cat-4+ systems hit the U.S., even a large system (Hugo), many of which intensified up to landfall (Celia, preliminarily reanalysed to be Cat-4 in TX, and Andrew). The U.S. was also not as lucky during the previous active cycle: look at the number of legendary Cat-4 and Cat-5 hits between 1926-1969. The two Galveston hurricanes, Key West '19, Miami '26, Okeechobee/San Felipe II '28, Labor Day '35, Fort Lauderdale '47, Palm Beach '49, Donna, Carla, Camille...the list goes on. Compare both of these periods to 1995-present. The most recent active cycle, for the most part, has not featured nearly as many of these large and intensifying hits on the mainland U.S. Shear, dry air, and (at times) the East-Coast trough have really made the most recent active cycle much less costly, in general, than a lot of experts expected, showing that active seasons do not necessarily equate with intense and/or worst-case landfalls (and in fact, many "weaker" systems have proven to be devastating in their own right). And obviously, this does nothing to diminish the destruction that occurred in the storms that did occur, even though they could have been far worse in certain respects. But this only goes to show that nature can always top itself, that even the "worst" storms could have been even more destructive, had the factors been aligned more favourably for such an outcome.

Just imagine a repeat of the 1926 or 1928 hurricanes in SE Florida (Miami-Fort Lauderdale-WPB metropolitan area), a Carla-type landfall SW of Galveston, or an 1848-type (Cat-4+) landfall on Tampa/St. Petersburg. Just imagine a Floyd, Dennis, Katrina, Ernesto, (pick your storm) that did something it *didn't* do but *could* have...

Great post and nice read, you make some excellent points that I agree with, thanks for the comment!

[canes92]

Matthew in 2016 was one of them. He never wanted to make landfall anywhere.

[Alyono]

As I said, Katrina in Mississippi most certainly lived up to the hype

It was Louisiana where it did not. Had it came in as a 4 or a 5 west of New Orleans, we could have been looking at a death toll similar to that of Cyclone Nargis

Another one was Ike. Without the wobble to the north, it hits south of Galveston and pushes 20 feet of water up the Houston Ship Channel, drowning numerous refineries. I was told that the financial crisis in 2008 would have been 10X worse had that happened. Not to mention the numerous fatalities that would have occurred on Galveston. An alternative horrific scenario would have been had it not contracted before landfall. That is what saved the Beaumont/Port Arthur area from total destruction

[facemane]

My vote would go to Georges. I'm talking at the time it struck here on the MS. Coast. I followed it closely on the Weather Channel. I didn't own a computer connected to the internet at the time,so the WC and local media was all I had. Georges peaked at Cat 4 and the buzz was massive destruction once it made landfall in the northern gulf. it never regained Cat 4 status after several land interreactions. It finally made landfall in Biloxi as a Cat 2. My home located just north of Keesler AFB lost power for only 2 days. After Katrina, I was without power for 6 weeks and Land line phone service for 3 months.

[Hurricane Mike]

My vote would go to Georges. I'm talking at the time it struck here on the MS. Coast. I followed it closely on the Weather Channel. I didn't own a computer connected to the internet at the time,so the WC and local media was all I had. Georges peaked at Cat 4 and the buzz was massive destruction once it made landfall in the northern gulf. it never regained Cat 4 status after several land interreactions. It finally made landfall in Biloxi as a Cat 2. My home located just north of Keesler AFB lost power for only 2 days. After Katrina, I was without power for 6 weeks and Land line phone service for 3 months.

Yeah from what I can remember the environment in the Gulf of Mexico was pretty stable when Georges entered and it kind of just kept around 105-110 mph before landfall.

[Noles2016]

Hurricane Dennis is one that comes to mind. Squeezed between Ivan 2004 and Katrina 2005, Dennis was this unbelievable 928 mb Category 4 monster in the morning and by dinner time the sun was back out in the Panhandle after Dennis slammed right through. I recall it weakened from 145 mph to 115 mph in just a couple of hours. That type of drastic weakening surely lifted winds off the ground and made it seem even less intense.

I think alot of it has to do with last minute weakening prior to landfall. Gustav went from one of the strongest winds ever recorded (in Cuba) to a sloshy rather run-of-the-mill bayou Cat 2. Then it was overshadowed by Ike just days later.

Frances was going to be an unbelievably memorable East Coast hurricane, only to crawl ashore as a wet ragged Cat 2.

That's the most difficult thing. These storms get hyped because they have 140+ mph winds, and then after they come ashore with brief winds of 105 mph in a small area, people look at you and say, "That storm wasn't bad...you're full of it..." and then complacency sets in.

It gets aggravating too when a Hurricane can cross like seven Caribbean islands and never weaken below Cat 4 or 5 and then it crosses Cat Island or Western Cuba and suddenly it just disintegrates. That can make intensity forecasting a nightmare.

Dennis brought us 10 to 12 feet of storm surge along Apalachee Bay... ~200 miles east of landfall. Definitely not a dud here.