They ammended the Fujita scale, should they do the same with

[P.K.]

Only problem I can see is that the current wind average used is not a real wind average in the view of most of the world. (I know how popular this will be on here )

[Noles2006]

By that dual scale you could re-analyze other storms as well:

Charley
wind: 4
surge: 2

Ivan
wind: 3
surge: 4

Lili
wind: 1
surge: 2

Dennis
wind: 3
surge: 1

What about Floyd? A category two, but what a whopper he was! Maybe we need another scale for moisture content and rainfall potential...storms like Floyd, Frances, Allison, Danny and others...Wilma over the Yucatan, most anything approaching Haiti....

Maybe they could scale a storm by its' destructive potential in all 3 areas and give each impact zone its' own localized severity rating...

Mexican Wilma
rain: 5
wind: 4
surge: 3-4

Cuban Wilma
rain: 3
wind: 1
surge: 3

Floridian Wilma
rain: 2
wind: 3
surge: 3-4

Bahamian Wilma
rain: 1
wind: 3
surge: 2


And at this point it's getting really complicated. It's difficult to predict even one aspect of a storm, let alone multiple multiples like that...but it would be a decent idea if executed right.

Dennis' surge was higher than a "1". Along Apalachee Bay, hundreds of miles east of landfall, had a 12' storm surge.

[Typhoon Hunter]

Only problem I can see is that the current wind average used is not a real wind average in the view of most of the world. (I know how popular this will be on here )

Haha! Brave man Peter. I can't help but agree with you on that point! Would certainly life more easy in the typhoon and cyclone threads (ie people getting confused with 10 min averages.)