Met Dr. Steve Lyons: his thoughts on Katrina, etc.

[skysummit]

Oh, there's no way Downtown receieved CAT 3 winds....or maybe even CAT 2. There is some structural damage, but it's not bad at all. Now, there was a LOT of windows that were blown out on the taller buildings but that's because the winds are much stronger up there. From what I've seen along the immediate coast near the Rigolets, Waveland, Ms. and Pass Christian, I do believe those saw sustained CAT 2 winds with CAT 3 gusts. There is a small portion of that area that has pretty decent wind damage.

[Aslkahuna]

Just to point out that overland 145 mph wind gusts can occur with a sustained 100 mph wind-Cat 2. Sustained Cat 3 winds will result in Cat 5 gusts.

Steve

[Audrey2Katrina]

ExtremeWeatherGuy's post:
...but we rate hurricanes by the 1-minute sustained winds, not by the gusts.

No one is arguing that. The point is that there are "unofficial" data in the NHC showing sustained Cat 3 winds at Michoud on their 2nd guage IF you apply the same principle applied to Guage 1 which, using the same "peak wind" term, is reported in the Katrina report to have been a 1-minute sustained wind.

As for the eyewitness thing...if we can not believe what we hear from people and what we see in pictures than what are we to believe?

Wait a minute! I thought it was you who suggested the utter "unreliability" of what this one "thought" or that one "thought". Dunno, maybe I've got quotes mixed up here but I feel that was pretty much something you had said in one of your earlier posts. Regardless, I, and others, ARE going on eyewitness reports, and not just isolated pictures here and there, but the WHOLE picture which we see as we traverse across it every day to this day.

I feel I have pretty good backing to my arguments.

Unquestionably you do. Equally, I feel comfortable with the backing I have, and am not trying to make it an argument so much as an opposing viewpoint.

It would be absurd to think that downtown N.O. got Cat. 3 force winds

I know of NO ONE in here alleging that "downtown" N.O. received sustained Cat 3 winds... not a soul... please correct me if I'm wrong.

Now some places (along the immediate coast of SE Louisiana and Mississippi) may have seen Cat. 3 force winds...

I would concur.

but I do not believe that N.O. westward saw above Cat. 1,

Knowing that New Orleans (NOT DOWNTOWN) extends from the Rigolets to Jefferson Parish, I would respectfully, and strongly disagree--and there are data and meteorologists who would back up my position on that disagreement.

Yes, the gusts may have been much, much higher...but I am referring to sustained winds, and of course there may have been a few local pockets where the winds were a category higher as well, but those areas are few and far between.

Ending on a positive note, we essetially agree here as well; albeit how few and how far is very speculative.

A2K

[Audrey2Katrina]

Just to point out that overland 145 mph wind gusts can occur with a sustained 100 mph wind-Cat 2. Sustained Cat 3 winds will result in Cat 5 gusts.

Steve

Thanks, Steve, and point well taken.

A2K

[Frank P]

I'd like to put my .02 cents in regarding this wind issue speaking only from experience and first hand knowledge.. I'm a Safety Professional and have been involved with some major accident investigations during my aerospace career so I think I have some credibility relating to documenting first hand experiences from an objective perspective... I've experience first hand every hurricane on the MS Coast since Betsy in 65, as have a lot of the posters from the Storm2K family from this area ... and I've never evacuated the city for any... of course that will change this season...

I've seen Camille from Point Cadet (eastern tip); Fredrick, Elena, Georges and a plethora of other storms from my Beach front home on Hwy 90 where I've lived since 1975, and experienced Katrina from Benachi Street (middle of the city)... the only winds from a first hand experience that exceeded Katrina's was of course Camille....... but Katrina certainly exceeded the winds of Elena which hit back in 85... One big difference was that Elena came in relative quickly from a steep angle... while Katrina came in directly from the south and lasted for hours....

I have been outside during every storm, probably a lot longer than I should have ever been... Camille and Fredrick were night falling hurricanes which made them even worse than they seemed... However, from what I've viewed first hand, Katrina's winds were bad enough... regardless, we can argue about the wind forever... just drive along Hwy 90 and see everything gone for blocks and blocks and blocks... and that was not from the wind... Cat 3 winds would never do that... nor Cat 4 for that matter... the surge of this storm was unprecedented and historic beyond debate... and these blocks will be empty for years to come...

[jazzfan1247]

I know of NO ONE in here alleging that "downtown" N.O. received sustained Cat 3 winds... not a soul... please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, you yourself brought up the Max Mayfield allegedly saying New Orleans experienced Cat 3 conditions. Here's the link to that article again:

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/southeast/2006/02/10/65247.htm

I thought it had already been established that this article is pretty much bs. Words and quotes are twisted around to make it more *dramatic*

[ROCK]

I must admit this discussion looks very familiar. Maybe in a past life?

Ivanhater- you can disagree with pro mets all you want but they are the ones issuing the warnings for your safety and others. Have a little respect. They know more than me or you put together, especially when it comes to hurricanes.

Wxmn57- I do appreciate your sound reasoning in this thread as well as the wind charts you post. They do tell the story correctly.

EWG- I know where your coming from and we have talked about this before. So much evidence but still people feel inclined to immortalize this storm as the worst of all time.

Personally, I feel this discussion to be old news and a waste of time. No matter how much official evidence proves to the contrary some will still say it was worse than it really was just b/c they were there. There meaning in NO. Seems to me there was an evacuation going on so how someone can tell me the OFFICIAL wind reports / charts are incorrect and discount all evidence from a pro-MET is IMO absurd. They weren't there either. These are the same people who contend that since WE don't live there, we haven't a clue of what went on except for video and eyewitness accounts. The fact is and remains, these same people are relying on the same evidence /damage that we see.

Again, people can say the NHC, pro Mets on here, are incorrect but the bottom line is: that OFFICIALLY this storm was a 3 coming in with cat 2 / higher gusts inland. Deny it all you want but OFFICIALLY it will be recorded in history as such. A tough pill to swallow Im sure for NO people on here....

have a great day...and I mean that very sincerely....

[Ixolib]

...If anything, I suspect that HRD analysis may be a little generous with the Cat 1-2 winds inland across SE LA and southern MS. By that I mean that not all areas within the Cat 1 or Cat 2 radius received such winds.

According to the HRD map, CAT 3 winds were taking place in my neighborhood. Based on my experience, I tend to agree with your suspicion of the product being over-generous.

At my home here in Biloxi, I maintained throughout Katrina's landfall that the winds just simply did not "seem" very intense. As I've stated in other threads, I recall more extreme winds in both Elena and Georges - and certainly in Camille and Fredrick.

I will concede, however, that it's possible my judgment and/or perception was clouded (or at least diverted) at the time as a result of sea water swirling through our living room.

Out of curiosity, is your neighborhood right off the beach. I could be recalling the map incorrectly; but I thought it only showed Cat 3 right along the beach closer to what may have been near Ocean Springs, but not anywhere in Biloxi. But I concede not living in that area and can't speak with authority on where exactly this map shows.

Folks in my neighborhood who recall vividly winds from Betsy say, on the other hand, that the winds from this one were far worse. I guess all a case of being in the right/wrong place at the right/wrong time.

A2K

When I said this thread was going to create some "interesting" discussion, I had no idea...

Anyway, I'm on the peninsula of Biloxi, about 7/10 of a mile north of the beach and about 1 block south Biloxi Bay. And, in looking at the map, that point that sticks up into the mainland north of me is all CAT 3, and all in Biloxi.

[MiamiensisWx]

Since this is a, well, heated debate, I have some last-minute and cynical (and truthful) humor to share...

[Pearl River]

from Max Mayfield in the Insurance Report

Mayfield pointed out that New Orleans was to the west of where Katrina made landfall, which is supposed to be on the weak side of the hurricane. He said the strongest winds hit Mississippi. Katrina reached category five velocity before going ashore, but Mayfield said New Orleans felt category three winds from the storm.

He's not saying sustained and he is not saying gust. More than likely they were gusts.



jazzfan wrote

Yeah, you yourself brought up the Max Mayfield allegedly saying New Orleans experienced Cat 3 conditions.

I don't believe A2K mention "downtown" New Orleans. It's all others on this thread that have. When we speak of New Orleans, we are speaking from Jefferson Parish to the Rigolets.


ROCK wrote

No matter how much official evidence proves to the contrary some will still say it was worse than it really was just b/c they were there.

For someone who is a lawyer, don't you think that is a ridiculous statement to make. So you wouldn't take the eyewitnesses accounts from those at the scene of a crime who may have witnessed what happened? How much official evidence has convicted the wrong person of a crime?

Evidence can be wrong..aka Andrew 10 years later upgrade.

Also ROCK, when referring to New Orleans as NO, it's N.O.

EWG wrote

As for the eyewitness thing...if we can not believe what we hear from people and what we see in pictures than what are we to believe?

That's why it takes further investigation and sometimes that investigation by experts may take many months, more than 2 or 3, maybe even years, a la Andrew.

[Pearl River]

Just to point out that overland 145 mph wind gusts can occur with a sustained 100 mph wind-Cat 2. Sustained Cat 3 winds will result in Cat 5 gusts.

Steve

Steve, thanks for the info.

PR

[jazzfan1247]

I don't believe A2K mention "downtown" New Orleans. It's all others on this thread that have. When we speak of New Orleans, we are speaking from Jefferson Parish to the Rigolets.

Ok, my mistake, now that I thought about it I probably misunderstood. My main point though was that the journal article cited is quite poor because of its distortions that dramatizes everything...and thus should never be cited or viewed as credible.

[Ivanhater]

I must admit this discussion looks very familiar. Maybe in a past life?

Ivanhater- you can disagree with pro mets all you want but they are the ones issuing the warnings for your safety and others. Have a little respect. They know more than me or you put together, especially when it comes to hurricanes.

Wxmn57- I do appreciate your sound reasoning in this thread as well as the wind charts you post. They do tell the story correctly.

EWG- I know where your coming from and we have talked about this before. So much evidence but still people feel inclined to immortalize this storm as the worst of all time.

Personally, I feel this discussion to be old news and a waste of time. No matter how much official evidence proves to the contrary some will still say it was worse than it really was just b/c they were there. There meaning in NO. Seems to me there was an evacuation going on so how someone can tell me the OFFICIAL wind reports / charts are incorrect and discount all evidence from a pro-MET is IMO absurd. They weren't there either. These are the same people who contend that since WE don't live there, we haven't a clue of what went on except for video and eyewitness accounts. The fact is and remains, these same people are relying on the same evidence /damage that we see.

Again, people can say the NHC, pro Mets on here, are incorrect but the bottom line is: that OFFICIALLY this storm was a 3 coming in with cat 2 / higher gusts inland. Deny it all you want but OFFICIALLY it will be recorded in history as such. A tough pill to swallow Im sure for NO people on here....

have a great day...and I mean that very sincerely....

you are misunderstanding me, i am just stating that some on here need to keep an open mind and look at the POSSIBILITY since in some cases all the data is not available for one reason or another, and I am being VERY respectful when it comes to responding to other posts. I am a met student so there is no reason I would have to have it out for mets. yes, they know more than me but that does not mean they know everything and i am just pointing out that people cannot state that since there was no measurement of x or y wind speed that it did not occur, data is not always available...so i stick to my original post and i was being respectful then and in this one

[Opal storm]

I must admit this discussion looks very familiar. Maybe in a past life?

Ivanhater- you can disagree with pro mets all you want but they are the ones issuing the warnings for your safety and others. Have a little respect. They know more than me or you put together, especially when it comes to hurricanes.

Actually ROCK,I think pro mets need to start showing a little more respect towards other posters.From what I've seen, pro mets post their opinions on things and then bash everybody who disagrees with them,and that's not respectful.They hardly take anybody's opinion into consideration.

I'm not bashing them I'm just saying they need to lighten up on people.I think they do a great job and make excellent points and they are looking out for our safety, but they would be even better if they stopped treating other posters' opinions like garbage.

[Ivanhater]

I must admit this discussion looks very familiar. Maybe in a past life?

Ivanhater- you can disagree with pro mets all you want but they are the ones issuing the warnings for your safety and others. Have a little respect. They know more than me or you put together, especially when it comes to hurricanes.

Actually ROCK,I think pro mets need to start showing a little more respect towards other posters.From what I've seen, pro mets post their opinions on things and then bash everybody who disagrees with them,and that's not respectful.They hardly take anybody's opinion into consideration.

I'm not bashing them I'm just saying they need to lighten up on people.I think they do a great job and make excellent points and they are looking out for our safety, but they would be even better if they stopped treating other posters' opinions like garbage.

my thoughts exactly

[Audrey2Katrina]

I know of NO ONE in here alleging that "downtown" N.O. received sustained Cat 3 winds... not a soul... please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, you yourself brought up the Max Mayfield allegedly saying New Orleans experienced Cat 3 conditions. Here's the link to that article again:

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/southeast/2006/02/10/65247.htm

I thought it had already been established that this article is pretty much bs. Words and quotes are twisted around to make it more *dramatic*

Please note the quotations marks around "DOWNTOWN" in your own quote of MY quote. Nice try to incite an argument, but I did NOT claim that "downtown " received Cat 3 winds there, and I notice your quote fails in proving any such thing. All I used HIS words to illustrate was that New Orleans DID receive Cat 3 winds as per his own words. As far as this "article" being BS... well, I leave it to the peruser, I've never heard any such claim--looks like a reliable source to me, additionally I've seen this quote from Mayfield in more than one place on the internet--no point arguing it as we're both apparently spitting in the wind.

A2K

[Audrey2Katrina]

EWG- I know where your coming from and we have talked about this before. So much evidence but still people feel inclined to immortalize this storm as the worst of all time.

I was wondering how long it would take for the straw-man arguments to be resurrected. YAWWNN!

[to] discount all evidence from a pro-MET is IMO absurd...

Some lifelong pro-METs disagree as well. As far as this immortalizing silliness goes, well, twist the words all you wish, the only thing "some of" us are trying to express is a different viewpoint, which "some people" just can't seem to live with, without looking down their noses at those who dare to disagree.

Simply put, I'll put it plainly. I did not, am not, nor will I ever claim this was to be "immortalized" as the worst storm in history--didn't see that by anyone else either (at least not in terms of winds here in the US)--far too much evidence of more intense storms... deadlier storms... and storms with stronger winds... so please don't try to pigeon-hole what I am trying to assert simply because my viewpoint differs with yours--or for that matter anyone else's.

P.S. "Official" is indeed "official" but has more than once been shown to be inaccurate.. one of the many foibles of being born human.

You have a great day too!

A2K

[Audrey2Katrina]

Anyway, I'm on the peninsula of Biloxi, about 7/10 of a mile north of the beach and about 1 block south Biloxi Bay. And, in looking at the map, that point that sticks up into the mainland north of me is all CAT 3, and all in Biloxi.

Thanks for the info, Ixolib... yup that would put you in the yaller line!

But it does NOT show Buras in that line, and THAT I find beyond conceivable--but hey... too each his/her own, at least it's out there for our consideration!

A2K

[Pearl River]

Opal Storm wrote

ROCK wrote:
I must admit this discussion looks very familiar. Maybe in a past life?

Ivanhater- you can disagree with pro mets all you want but they are the ones issuing the warnings for your safety and others. Have a little respect. They know more than me or you put together, especially when it comes to hurricanes.

Actually ROCK,I think pro mets need to start showing a little more respect towards other posters.From what I've seen, pro mets post their opinions on things and then bash everybody who disagrees with them,and that's not respectful.They hardly take anybody's opinion into consideration.

I'm not bashing them I'm just saying they need to lighten up on people.I think they do a great job and make excellent points and they are looking out for our safety, but they would be even better if they stopped treating other posters' opinions like garbage.

Thank you Opal Storm Thank you

[Pearl River]

A2K wrote

Quote:

[to] discount all evidence from a pro-MET is IMO absurd...


Some lifelong pro-METs disagree as well. As far as this immortalizing silliness goes, well, twist the words all you wish, the only thing "some of" us are trying to express is a different viewpoint, which "some people" just can't seem to live with, without looking down their noses at those who dare to disagree.

Simply put, I'll put it plainly. I did not, am not, nor will I ever claim this was to be "immortalized" as the worst storm in history--didn't see that by anyone else either (at least not in terms of winds here in the US)--far too much evidence of more intense storms... deadlier storms... and storms with stronger winds... so please don't try to pigeon-hole what I am trying to assert simply because my viewpoint differs with yours--or for that matter anyone else's.

P.S. "Official" is indeed "official" but has more than once been shown to be inaccurate.. one of the many foibles of being born human.

You have a great day too!

A2K

A2K, I couldn't have said it any better about the "Official". Remember Andrew's final report in 1992 was the "Official" Report.