Another Monster Goes *POOF*

[Mac]

Taking nothing away from anything caused by storms Opal, Lili, Ivan, Dennis or Emily, I think I know what you're saying (Mac). What these storms all have in common is that they Diminished from a higher intensity sometime prior to landfall, an intensity widely publicized at a time when evacuation decisions were being made.

OPAL was at 125 mph, down from 150
LILI was at 105 mph, down from 145
IVAN was at 130 mph, down from 165
DENNIS was at 120 mph, down from 150
EMILY was at 135 mph, down from 155

While these storms didn't exactly "fall apart", they did lose some of the punch and power that would make most people leave or consider leaving. If folks get the notion that every storm will weaken by 2 or 3 notches on the Safford-Simpson scale, many may stay put. I think that's all Mac's saying here. Why evacuate if the storm's bark is worse that it's bite?

Personally I wouldn't count on anything weakening. However evacuating is stressful, expensive, a huge hassle and for me regarding Dennis, costly at my job. But it comes down to keeping my family out of harms way. Hopefully that is the issue that most will consider and therefore refuse to take chances.

Thanks. That's exactly what I was saying. I think the problem some of all have is that WE KNOW what these hurricanes can do. WE UNDERSTAND that Emily could have just as easily have hit Cozumel as an intensifying Cat 4/5 rather than in a disorganization phase. But Bubba, your typical family man who is working 40 to 60 hours a week just to pay his rent and light bill from month to month, might be willing to hedge his bets. He might be thinking, "How am I going to pay my rent if I evacuate for a week?" He might be willing to take the risk and stay based upon what he's seen in the past. And Bubba's family is going to end up dead. BUT, if we end up with a better understanding of the HOW and WHY of storms intensify or weaken at various stages of their life, we might be able to tell Bubba, "Unlike Emily, this storm is entering phase "x", which means it should be as strong or stronger at landfall than it currently is."

We're just not there yet.

[NC George]

Exactly! Why do they mix to the surface in some situations and not in others? Is our flight data less accurate than we think?

My question exactly, and a point I have been trying to raise on this forum recently.

[EDR1222]

135 mph Category 4....no communication from Cozumel...that's poof?

I don't think he is trying to say the storms were not significant. And yes, it is true that several storms have weakened just prior to landfall.

Sometimes, strong storms that are on a weakening trend do significantly less damage than they would if they were strengthening before landfall. When storms are on a weakening trend the strongest winds near the center are usually at higher elevations. So if it is maybe 135 mph but weakening, you won't get the damage that a storm at 115 and strengthening rapidly might do. I remember Steve Lyons discussing this when Dennis was coming ashore in Florida.

Just a thought.

But, Emily wasnt rapidly weakening....her pressure leveled off and her flight level winds NEVER decreased during the day.

Actually during the 6-8 hours prior to landfall the central pressure had risen from 948 to 955 millibars, so there was some weakening taking place.

[coco]

Mac Said: I'm a little troubled by the fact that this seems to be happening so much lately. I'm worried that Bubba is going to put his family in harm's way because he thinks this is the way hurricanes typically behave.

Worried about Bubba??? I take this to mean you are worried about the uneducated who maybe doesn't read newspapers or watch TV? Well, I think you should worry about the over-educated, multi-degreed professionals who don't let their employees leave work in time to pack their trailers or gather their families in time to evacuate from when a hurricane/tropical storm is barreling down on them. That is who you should worried about. It is usually those of us with little or nothing, i.e. us bubbas (in this case a bubbette), who typically worry or lose sleep or spend countless hours on Storm 2K to read into where or if a hurricane is headed our way.[/quote]

[mahicks]

Not the damage they could or should have received????????????????????????????

What you don't realize you, .......nevermind...

Emily, Dennis, were smaller storms....They had DEVISTATING damage paths, just smaller in width. I bet you were one that posted after Dennis calling him a dud too?? That "dud" completely removed a co-workers condo in Navarre, and I mean COMPLETELY REMOVED....No debris, no anthing....Completely removed their house from the beach...Thank god it's just a second home.

As far as Emily, were you there???? Have you seen very many pictures released??? If so, did they cover a good width of the Yucatan??? I think not.
This storm caused as much damage as any other 135mph hurricane will. It just had a smaller path of destruction....I know you are intitled to post what ever you feel like here, and I respect that...But....My opinion is to TOTALLY not agree with yours.

Enough Ranting...Sorry Everyone.
-Michael

[HurryKane]

Enough Ranting...Sorry Everyone.
-Michael

Don't apologize. It's a very good rant with important points.

[abajan]

...(in this case a bubbette)...

ROFL... This is the first time I've ever heard that word. Funny stuff, that!

Too funny, man.

[gkrangers]

135 mph Category 4....no communication from Cozumel...that's poof?

I don't think he is trying to say the storms were not significant. And yes, it is true that several storms have weakened just prior to landfall.

Sometimes, strong storms that are on a weakening trend do significantly less damage than they would if they were strengthening before landfall. When storms are on a weakening trend the strongest winds near the center are usually at higher elevations. So if it is maybe 135 mph but weakening, you won't get the damage that a storm at 115 and strengthening rapidly might do. I remember Steve Lyons discussing this when Dennis was coming ashore in Florida.

Just a thought.

But, Emily wasnt rapidly weakening....her pressure leveled off and her flight level winds NEVER decreased during the day.

Actually during the 6-8 hours prior to landfall the central pressure had risen from 948 to 955 millibars, so there was some weakening taking place.

The pressure was level for several hours...and flight level winds showed an increase while recon was in the storm. This wasn't a Dennis like scenario. Infrared also showed better organization, better symmetry as she approached Cozumel. Which is why I'm hesitant to say it was in a weakening trend at landfall...

[Mac]

Mac Said: I'm a little troubled by the fact that this seems to be happening so much lately. I'm worried that Bubba is going to put his family in harm's way because he thinks this is the way hurricanes typically behave.

Worried about Bubba??? I take this to mean you are worried about the uneducated who maybe doesn't read newspapers or watch TV? Well, I think you should worry about the over-educated, multi-degreed professionals who don't let their employees leave work in time to pack their trailers or gather their families in time to evacuate from when a hurricane/tropical storm is barreling down on them. That is who you should worried about. It is usually those of us with little or nothing, i.e. us bubbas (in this case a bubbette), who typically worry or lose sleep or spend countless hours on Storm 2K to read into where or if a hurricane is headed our way.

[/quote]

It would seem you have read way too much into what I wrote and unfairly imply meanings which don't in fact exist.

Show me where I suggested that "Bubba" was in any way uneducated, or without such resources as newspapers or television. Did you get all of that just from a name? If so, perhaps YOU are the one with the bias issue here. In my mind, I portrayed Bubba as an honest, hard-working many living paycheck to paycheck to provide for his family, and who might no heed evacuation orders due to his concern over his ability to provide for his family if he does. There are no shortage of such people along the Gulf coast.

Regarding you having "little or nothing." You apparently have a computer--or at least access to a computer. So you have a hell of a lot more than many people do. And if you're truly worried about how "little" you have, you might consider spending lest time on chat forums and a little more time earning money.

[Mac]

Not the damage they could or should have received????????????????????????????

What you don't realize you, .......nevermind...

Emily, Dennis, were smaller storms....They had DEVISTATING damage paths, just smaller in width. I bet you were one that posted after Dennis calling him a dud too?? That "dud" completely removed a co-workers condo in Navarre, and I mean COMPLETELY REMOVED....No debris, no anthing....Completely removed their house from the beach...Thank god it's just a second home.

As far as Emily, were you there???? Have you seen very many pictures released??? If so, did they cover a good width of the Yucatan??? I think not.
This storm caused as much damage as any other 135mph hurricane will. It just had a smaller path of destruction....I know you are intitled to post what ever you feel like here, and I respect that...But....My opinion is to TOTALLY not agree with yours.

Enough Ranting...Sorry Everyone.
-Michael

Yes, could have--or should have--received.

The NHC reported 135 mph sustained winds at landfall. That's a Category 4 hurricane. Per the NHC:

Category Two Hurricane:
Winds 96-110 mph (83-95 kt or 154-177 km/hr). Storm surge generally 6-8 feet above normal. Some roofing material, door, and window damage of buildings. Considerable damage to shrubbery and trees with some trees blown down. Considerable damage to mobile homes, poorly constructed signs, and piers. Coastal and low-lying escape routes flood 2-4 hours before arrival of the hurricane center. Small craft in unprotected anchorages break moorings. Hurricane Bonnie of 1998 was a Category Two hurricane when it hit the North Carolina coast, while Hurricane Georges of 1998 was a Category Two Hurricane when it hit the Florida Keys and the Mississippi Gulf Coast.


Category Three Hurricane:
Winds 111-130 mph (96-113 kt or 178-209 km/hr). Storm surge generally 9-12 ft above normal. Some structural damage to small residences and utility buildings with a minor amount of curtainwall failures. Damage to shrubbery and trees with foliage blown off trees and large trees blown down. Mobile homes and poorly constructed signs are destroyed. Low-lying escape routes are cut by rising water 3-5 hours before arrival of the center of the hurricane. Flooding near the coast destroys smaller structures with larger structures damaged by battering from floating debris. Terrain continuously lower than 5 ft above mean sea level may be flooded inland 8 miles (13 km) or more. Evacuation of low-lying residences with several blocks of the shoreline may be required. Hurricanes Roxanne of 1995 and Fran of 1996 were Category Three hurricanes at landfall on the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico and in North Carolina, respectively.


Category Four Hurricane:
Winds 131-155 mph (114-135 kt or 210-249 km/hr). Storm surge generally 13-18 ft above normal. More extensive curtainwall failures with some complete roof structure failures on small residences. Shrubs, trees, and all signs are blown down. Complete destruction of mobile homes. Extensive damage to doors and windows. Low-lying escape routes may be cut by rising water 3-5 hours before arrival of the center of the hurricane. Major damage to lower floors of structures near the shore. Terrain lower than 10 ft above sea level may be flooded requiring massive evacuation of residential areas as far inland as 6 miles (10 km). Hurricane Luis of 1995 was a Category Four hurricane while moving over the Leeward Islands. Hurricanes Felix and Opal of 1995 also reached Category Four status at peak intensity.

So, according to NHC reports, Cozumel SHOULD HAVE sustained Cat 4 damage. But if they have, I haven't seen reports of it yet. The reports I have read report Cat 2/3 damage. And considering Emily was once a Cat 5 hurricane, Cozumel COULD HAVE received far worse than it did.

[mahicks]

But if they have, I haven't seen reports of it yet. The reports I have read report Cat 2/3 damage. And considering Emily was once a Cat 5 hurricane, Cozumel COULD HAVE received far worse than it did.

First off....Look around the web a little....I've seen some footage already that supports at least category 3 and some 4 damage...To be honest...yes mostly I see cat 2 damage so far...I'm very sorry that Emily disappointed you. BTW the video footage from Jeff Gammons shows a tower made by Rohn/Radian.... an RT12 to be exact...installed by Radian Industries... Just so you know, that tower is rated for sustained 140 mph winds

Secondly....There was never enough evidence for the NHC to give Em a Cat 5 status...Hence...she was never a Cat 5 for any amount of time. (Even though my personal opinion is she was for a very very brief time period.)

Thank You for responding.
-Michael

[Mac]

But if they have, I haven't seen reports of it yet. The reports I have read report Cat 2/3 damage. And considering Emily was once a Cat 5 hurricane, Cozumel COULD HAVE received far worse than it did.

First off....Look around the web a little....I've seen some footage already that supports at least category 3 and some 4 damage...To be honest...yes mostly I see cat 2 damage so far...I'm very sorry that Emily disappointed you. BTW the video footage from Jeff Gammons shows a tower made by Rohn/Radian.... an RT12 to be exact...installed by Radian Industries... Just so you know, that tower is rated for sustained 140 mph winds

Secondly....There was never enough evidence for the NHC to give Em a Cat 5 status...Hence...she was never a Cat 5 for any amount of time. (Even though my personal opinion is she was for a very very brief time period.)

Thank You for responding.
-Michael

I'm sorry, but I have yet to see any reports of Cat 4 damage. The SEVERE damage you would expect to see with a Cat 4 hurricane just hasn't been there. What limited reports of severe damage that has been reported has been to poorly constructed areas.

Regarding you assertion that I was disappointed that Emily didn't do more damage--why don't you go get yourself a stiff drink to see if it will kill the bug that crawled up your butt. I'm more than a little tired of people putting words into my mouth. Neither the content nor tone of my original post implied I was "disappointed" by the lack of damage, but "concerned" because of a trend with these monster storms weakening just prior to landfall lately.

I'm glad that I wasn't in Cozumel. And I feel empathy for the folks there--both locals and tourists alike. But they are lucky. Damn lucky. Based upon intensity reports, Cozumel should have fared much worse than it did. And I'm interested in learning more about why it didn't, given the intensity at landfall.

Sure, everyone can tender their theories regarding why more Cat 4 damage did not occur with 135 mph sustained winds. But the truth of the matter is, nobody can definitely say. Which was the point of my intial post. I think NOAA needs to be more actively engaged in conducting research regarding this topic. And I'm not blaming NOAA either. I'm sure they need more research dollars. Considering the billions of dollars in damage these hurricanes cause in the U.S. alone, I think they should get those research dollars too.

[mf_dolphin]

Let's lighten up the tone folks. And for the record, the use of "bubba" in your post sure did sound condescending and in a derogatory tone to me.

Let's also keep in mind that the damage is far from documented yet. There are several thing I see that may have aided Cozumel:

1. The storm was small as therefore the worst of the high damage zone would have been fairly confined.

2. Most of the pictures so far I've seen have been from the western side of Cozumal (tourist area). This area would have been spared the brunt of storm surge which is one of the most destructive forces on coastal areas.

3. The speed at which Emily went through the area. While not a sprinter Emily was moving at a fairly quick pace as she crossed Cozumel thus minimizing the 'time on target" so to speak.

[Derek Ortt]

actually,

Ivan was down to 120 at landfall

[Mac]

Let's lighten up the tone folks. And for the record, the use of "bubba" in your post sure did sound condescending and in a derogatory tone to me.

Let's also keep in mind that the damage is far from documented yet. There are several thing I see that may have aided Cozumel:

1. The storm was small as therefore the worst of the high damage zone would have been fairly confined.

2. Most of the pictures so far I've seen have been from the western side of Cozumal (tourist area). This area would have been spared the brunt of storm surge which is one of the most destructive forces on coastal areas.

3. The speed at which Emily went through the area. While not a sprinter Emily was moving at a fairly quick pace as she crossed Cozumel thus minimizing the 'time on target" so to speak.

While I appreciate your position of authority on this board, I'll not have people applying meaning to my words when no meaning in fact exists. I will instead clarify meanings to prevent the issue from snowballing. Interestingly, you state that you took my "tone" regarding the use of the name "Bubba" to be condescending and derogatory. The fact of the matter is, "tone" does not exist in a two-dimensional forum. That's one of the barriers to communication which exists in this type of community. I would think that, absent some convincing evidence to the contrary, the benefit of the doubt should always be given to the poster. And considering that I have already clarified my meaning, all doubt should be removed altogether.


Where I come from, respect isn't given or taken away based upon a man's name, but upon his values and actions.

[Stephanie]

Let's lighten up the tone folks. And for the record, the use of "bubba" in your post sure did sound condescending and in a derogatory tone to me.

Let's also keep in mind that the damage is far from documented yet. There are several thing I see that may have aided Cozumel:

1. The storm was small as therefore the worst of the high damage zone would have been fairly confined.

2. Most of the pictures so far I've seen have been from the western side of Cozumal (tourist area). This area would have been spared the brunt of storm surge which is one of the most destructive forces on coastal areas.

3. The speed at which Emily went through the area. While not a sprinter Emily was moving at a fairly quick pace as she crossed Cozumel thus minimizing the 'time on target" so to speak.

While I appreciate your position of authority on this board, I'll not have people applying meaning to my words when no meaning in fact exists. I will instead clarify meanings to prevent the issue from snowballing. Interestingly, you state that you took my "tone" regarding the use of the name "Bubba" to be condescending and derogatory. The fact of the matter is, "tone" does not exist in a two-dimensional forum. That's one of the barriers to communication which exists in this type of community. I would think that, absent some convincing evidence to the contrary, the benefit of the doubt should always be given to the poster. And considering that I have already clarified my meaning, all doubt should be removed altogether.


Where I come from, respect isn't given or taken away based upon a man's name, but upon his values and actions.

Respect is earned - and Marshall has earned it.

We've had posters on this board before that have had a knack for selecting the wrong word to get a rise out of people only to explain that they didn't mean it that way. At anyrate, YOU may not have thought it was offensive, but the majority here has - including myself. I think that the term "John Q. Public" or "average citizen" would've sufficed.

[drudd1]

[mahicks]

While I appreciate your position of authority on this board, I'll not have people applying meaning to my words when no meaning in fact exists. I will instead clarify meanings to prevent the issue from snowballing. Interestingly, you state that you took my "tone" regarding the use of the name "Bubba" to be condescending and derogatory. The fact of the matter is, "tone" does not exist in a two-dimensional forum. That's one of the barriers to communication which exists in this type of community. I would think that, absent some convincing evidence to the contrary, the benefit of the doubt should always be given to the poster. And considering that I have already clarified my meaning, all doubt should be removed altogether.


Where I come from, respect isn't given or taken away based upon a man's name, but upon his values and actions.

A supervisor once told me Perception is EVERYTHING....In a real world, what people perceive is what it is...Regardless of what you were trying to imply, what ever this "two dimensional" audience took it as, is well, what it is...It's not what you think you said, it's what everyone else thinks you said....

This will be my last post in this thread...Anything else should be in IM. I think we have gotten way off topic and we both have tried too hard to make our points, all at the expense of the rest of forum..I apologize to all.

Good Day,
Michael

[Mac]

Let's lighten up the tone folks. And for the record, the use of "bubba" in your post sure did sound condescending and in a derogatory tone to me.

Let's also keep in mind that the damage is far from documented yet. There are several thing I see that may have aided Cozumel:

1. The storm was small as therefore the worst of the high damage zone would have been fairly confined.

2. Most of the pictures so far I've seen have been from the western side of Cozumal (tourist area). This area would have been spared the brunt of storm surge which is one of the most destructive forces on coastal areas.

3. The speed at which Emily went through the area. While not a sprinter Emily was moving at a fairly quick pace as she crossed Cozumel thus minimizing the 'time on target" so to speak.

While I appreciate your position of authority on this board, I'll not have people applying meaning to my words when no meaning in fact exists. I will instead clarify meanings to prevent the issue from snowballing. Interestingly, you state that you took my "tone" regarding the use of the name "Bubba" to be condescending and derogatory. The fact of the matter is, "tone" does not exist in a two-dimensional forum. That's one of the barriers to communication which exists in this type of community. I would think that, absent some convincing evidence to the contrary, the benefit of the doubt should always be given to the poster. And considering that I have already clarified my meaning, all doubt should be removed altogether.


Where I come from, respect isn't given or taken away based upon a man's name, but upon his values and actions.

Respect is earned - and Marshall has earned it.

We've had posters on this board before that have had a knack for selecting the wrong word to get a rise out of people only to explain that they didn't mean it that way. At anyrate, YOU may not have thought it was offensive, but the majority here has - including myself. I think that the term "John Q. Public" or "average citizen" would've sufficed.

I'm sorry, but I think you and Marshall are both wrong on this matter. If you look at my original post--as well as subsequent posts--I have repeatedly attempted to clarify my meaning so as to avoid any misunderstanding. It's not as though I used some racial slur or profanity, and I explained my meaning contained no malice whatsoever. It seems that this board has become increasingly hostile. Case and point:

well, I almost hate to say this, but, this board is getting out of hand with the hostility I am seeing....you shouldnt have to feel that way about your post, its your opinion and it should be respected without any bashing or harsh words.

I agree with your take there, 1000%. Folks should always feel ok with presenting any new ideas/comments/questions without fear of getting hammered....that is the reason this board is here...send me or any other mod a PM if you observe that happening. I dont read every post...as that is almost impossible...so personally I don't see everything...but let us know. There is no place for that kind of bashing...

As far as the stall...hard to tell that if you are just looking at IR satellite imagery...I don't think the center is stalling so much as the convection is building westward after weakening considerably on that side earlier... hence causing problems if you follow the envelope itself...but the actual center is still moving WNW at a good clip based on recon data.

MW

I agree Mike and before I saw your reply, I was going to comment on Galvestongirl's post as well. It shouldn't be like that and we're going to do everything we can for it NOT to be. Everyone should feel free to post their opinions and if others don't like it, they can just ignore it. I'm not liking the tone on a lot of posts I see. I realize that some of it gets repetitious, but just let it go for the spirit of the board. We don't want anyone afraid to post. That's why this board was created in the first place.....to get away from the hostility and flames found at other boards. We're about to drop the hammer so I suggest everyone lighten up.

There was never any malice in my posts. People just read what they wanted to read into it. This board should not make members feel reluctant to make posts for fear of reprisal. But that's what it's becoming. And I am obviously not the only person to feel that way.

[frederic79]

Simply put, absent all stereotypical metaphors, intended or unintended, the public in general can, perhaps, become desensitized to valid warnings if time after time, those warnings begin to appear overdone. I say it's better to overwarn than to underestimate and the NHC does a fantastic job.