Will Laura be upgraded to a cat 5 landfall?

[DestinHurricane]

I figured we should start a thread to have this discussion.

I think it will be a very close call. Dropsponde showed cat 5 winds but FL didn't support it. I'll guess no it won't be upgraded.

Mods can add a poll if they would like.

[CyclonicFury]

I think no, strongest gusts were not anywhere close to Category 5 force, and the highest flight level and SFMR winds do not support Category 5 intensity.

[Ivanhater]

I figured we should start a thread to have this discussion.

I think it will be a very close call. Dropsponde showed cat 5 winds but FL didn't support it. I'll guess no it won't be upgraded.

Mods can add a poll if they would like.

Poll created.

[cheezyWXguy]

I think no, strongest gusts were not anywhere close to Category 5 force, and the highest flight level and SFMR winds do not support Category 5 intensity.

Practically no surface observations along the coast where the highest winds would have occurred. Regardless, I don’t think cat5 winds existed there and 150mph is probably justified.

[otowntiger]

I figured we should start a thread to have this discussion.

I think it will be a very close call. Dropsponde showed cat 5 winds but FL didn't support it. I'll guess no it won't be upgraded.

Mods can add a poll if they would like.

I say no. I'm not seeing the kind of wind damage I'd expect from a cat 4 much less a cat 5 on the ground. Also prelim.wind reports on the ground nowhere near cat 4 or 5. I've only seen cat 4 gusts in very limited reports. I think Michael will be in the end measured as the most intense.

[cheezyWXguy]

I figured we should start a thread to have this discussion.

I think it will be a very close call. Dropsponde showed cat 5 winds but FL didn't support it. I'll guess no it won't be upgraded.

Mods can add a poll if they would like.

I say no. I'm not seeing the kind of wind damage I'd expect from a cat 4 much less a cat 5 on the ground. Also prelim.wind reports on the ground nowhere near cat 4 or 5. I've only seen cat 4 gusts in very limited reports. I think Michael will be in the end measured as the most intense.

It’s important to note that just about all of the observations came from locations from about 30 miles inland. Even over swamplands these winds would be reduced by a couple of categories over that distance. I am quite convinced this was a mid-upper cat4 at landfall, just not a cat5.

[tomatkins]

Right

I figured we should start a thread to have this discussion.

I think it will be a very close call. Dropsponde showed cat 5 winds but FL didn't support it. I'll guess no it won't be upgraded.

Mods can add a poll if they would like.

I say no. I'm not seeing the kind of wind damage I'd expect from a cat 4 much less a cat 5 on the ground. Also prelim.wind reports on the ground nowhere near cat 4 or 5. I've only seen cat 4 gusts in very limited reports. I think Michael will be in the end measured as the most intense.

It’s important to note that just about all of the observations came from locations from about 30 miles inland. Even over swamplands these winds would be reduced by a couple of categories over that distance. I am quite convinced this was a mid-upper cat4 at landfall, just not a cat5.

Not only that, but the places that were in the eastern eyewall (east of Cameron) on the coast there are swamps with very little to damage. Has anyone made it out to Creole or east of there to see what thats like. Because even Cameron wouldn't necessarily have gotten the worst winds.

[FireRat]

I think no as well, Cat 4 with 150 mph winds sounds about right, and the gators probably were the only ones who got those winds. The barometric pressure was also a bit too high for a Cat 5, unlike Michael which bottomed at 919 mb.

[jopatura]

I think there could be a case for 155 mph winds, but not Category 5. If she had another hour or two over water she probably would have made it. The conditions were there and I’m fairly certain the numbers they were picking up was because she was trying to strengthen.

The conditions aren’t the same, but even compared to Michael the damage just isn’t quite there. Buildings were pushed around in Cameron, but there were more walls standing then I expected. Even the storm surge seemed a lot tamer then some of the monsters that ballooned to “Category 6” and were downgraded before landfall.

[Yellow Evan]

135 yes but the conssitent evidence is not there for 140 given FL peaked at 146 and there was only one SFMR reading of 137.

[toad strangler]

No on Cat 5 although much still needs to come out on damage assessment. But I doubt she was a 5.

[Kingarabian]

Yeah I think at the end of the day this was easily not a Cat.5. However it did intensify all the way until landfall so we have to give it that as a lot of storms struggle to do so while they're about to landfall.

[Hammy]

135kt/155mph is about the highest recon supported. There's been a lot of comparisons to Michael but Laura's satellite appearance wasn't quite there, there was a large area of warmer cloud tops on the eastern portion, and Michael likely had a more favorable upper air setup as it was moving parallel with the upper SW flow.

[galaxy401]

As many have already said, I don't think there's enough evidence to support an upgrade to a Cat 5. Recon data and land obs reports from Michael were a little stronger than Laura. I do think there is sufficient evidence to support raising the intensity to 155 mph by a combination of Recon and Doppler.

[cycloneye]

Poll closes for voting on August 29 at 3:01 PM EDT.

[AJC3]

Poll closes for voting on August 29 at 3:01 PM EDT.

The masses have spoken, and overwhelmingly so far!

[Audrey2Katrina]

I think no, strongest gusts were not anywhere close to Category 5 force, and the highest flight level and SFMR winds do not support Category 5 intensity.

Practically no surface observations along the coast where the highest winds would have occurred. Regardless, I don’t think cat5 winds existed there and 150mph is probably justified.

Personally, I don't believe any 150 mph winds hit anywhere at landfall. I know about recon and doppler measurements but every surface based instrument where the storm came in, and all readings from Lake Charles Airport, and from University of Florida in the areas around there, both before, and those after the storm, none of them that I saw showed anything sustained over 109 mph. Now I'm sure there were embedded winds much higher--but not enough to say it was 150 sustained. I'll say definitely not. Pressure isn't quite low enough either although I think it maxed intensity at 938 hPa which I suppose would make it "possible", I say nope.

[Audrey2Katrina]

I figured we should start a thread to have this discussion.

I think it will be a very close call. Dropsponde showed cat 5 winds but FL didn't support it. I'll guess no it won't be upgraded.

Mods can add a poll if they would like.

I say no. I'm not seeing the kind of wind damage I'd expect from a cat 4 much less a cat 5 on the ground. Also prelim.wind reports on the ground nowhere near cat 4 or 5. I've only seen cat 4 gusts in very limited reports. I think Michael will be in the end measured as the most intense.

Couldn't agree more... read the data from buoy at Calcasieu Pass just as the eye approached, was over it, and passed it.. max winds measured -- nowhere near a Cat 4 I know that's only one location---but also agree that not a single ground report shows anything approaching a 4. If you're counting gusts (and I think some sources are) then yeah I've seen high end Cat 4 gusts.. but that's not how you gauge categories.

[Ubuntwo]

Almost certainly not, but there are some interesting things to note.

For one, Laura's leveling off in the hours leading up to landfall seems attributable to hitting the max potential intensity for the area, which is a high end cat 4/~930mb:

This is also supported by the 'little evidence of shear' noted by the NHC in advisory 29.

If the storm reached a higher max wind speed I believe it was in the gap between NE eyewall passes. The storm appeared to reach peak satellite appearance around this time with a slight decline leading up until landfall. (again, possibly attributable to running into a lower MPI area)

With that said, I don't think the "low" surface obs have much weight in terms of landfall intensity. Michael, which I'm sure we all agree was a cat 5, had max land obs of 92G112kt @ Tyndall, similar to winds recorded in Lake Charles (both of these anemometers failed soon after). The max sustained wind values only ever verify in a narrow band along the coast that recieves the RFQ. For Laura, this quad went without observations until it reached Lake Charles - 30 miles inland - where friction and land interaction certainly had a reducing effect on winds. So I don't think intensity was overstated either.

[Audrey2Katrina]

"both of these anemometers failed soon after" The anemometers at Lake Charles worked as it approached, as it passed, and after it passed to the west slightly. The Buoy never failed in its wind readings all the way through, so I think the comparison to Michael fails on that aspect. Bottom line is we'll never really know, because unlike Michael, no major populated areas or structures around landfall, hence those who want to believe it was 150 or more will believe it, and those who don't won't... regardless of what they are presented with. And I believe that applies to both sides.