Moderator: S2k Moderators
I say it was basically a repeat of Wilma in eastern New Orleans: mostly Category One winds, occasional and brief Category Two winds, and Category Three gusts in microbursts that did most of the damage. Based on what I've seen, heard, and read, this compromise view sounds most reasonable and prevents much further argument.
Audrey2Katrina wrote:Ummm.. those remarks are certainly no more disparaging than the rolling eyes we are incessantly given from some, and if one truly understands what a "straw man" argument is, it is quite inocuous. All it means is that you are trying to put words into another's statements. Do you like that sort of tactic? You know it's kind of sad, but up to this point this was a very civil thread with cerebral and thought provoking comment. Then came the "straw-man" comments. And that is NOT meant to offend, because that is exactly what mischaracterizing what one is trying to say amonts to being. I ask you... do you like that tactic?
A2K
Pearl River wrote:I can agree mostly. Even though it's "unofficial", Michoud had a peak one minute wind of 107 knots. CAT 3.
senorpepr wrote:Whoa... may I ask where you are getting that? I believe you are confusing gusts with sustained. Remember, "one-minute wind" is a unit of measurement. Any wind measurement is based off of a divisible unit of one-minute rather than WMO-standard ten-minute. A wind speed at any given second is based off of a one-minute measurement. That makes me believe the "107" you are quoting is actually a gust. Furthermore, the NOAA report and the Michoud data set shows a maximum sustained wind of 84KT.
CapeVerdeWave wrote:senorpepr wrote:Whoa... may I ask where you are getting that? I believe you are confusing gusts with sustained. Remember, "one-minute wind" is a unit of measurement. Any wind measurement is based off of a divisible unit of one-minute rather than WMO-standard ten-minute. A wind speed at any given second is based off of a one-minute measurement. That makes me believe the "107" you are quoting is actually a gust. Furthermore, the NOAA report and the Michoud data set shows a maximum sustained wind of 84KT.
Where is Michoud?
I say it was basically a repeat of Wilma in eastern New Orleans: mostly Category One winds, occasional and brief Category Two winds, and Category Three gusts in microbursts that did most of the damage. Based on what I've seen, heard, and read, this compromise view sounds most reasonable and prevents much further argument.
CapeVerdeWave wrote:Thanks, senorpepr! I think the Michoud area - and much of eastern New Orleans - experienced mostly these conditions...I say it was basically a repeat of Wilma in eastern New Orleans: mostly Category One winds, occasional and brief Category Two winds, and Category Three gusts in microbursts that did most of the damage. Based on what I've seen, heard, and read, this compromise view sounds most reasonable and prevents much further argument.
Do you agree?
Extremeweatherguy wrote:Yes, Camille was likely a strong 4 or weak 5 at landfall...190mph seems just a bit un-realistic. Also, back in the day...they may have mistaken some of the surge damage for wind damage. I would say that most storms before the dropsonde era are likely overestimated in terms of windspeed (unless there is sound evidence that the *winds* caused damage to that magnitude on land).
senorpepr wrote:I will agree. The thing to keep in mind is gusts (including microbursts) don't qualify as a sustained wind. According to the US-NWS and WMO guidelines... for a location to experience category three conditions... that location has to see winds at or greater than 100KT (using the one-minute unit or 88KT using the ten-minute unit) for two full minutes or longer.
senorpepr wrote:The thing to keep in mind is gusts (including microbursts) don't qualify as a sustained wind.
Lindaloo wrote:Oh I strongly disagree with this. I highly doubt that trained experts did not know the difference between wind versus surge damage. You act like adjusters are experts. lol. Sorry, could not resist.
CapeVerdeWave wrote:Lindaloo wrote:Oh I strongly disagree with this. I highly doubt that trained experts did not know the difference between wind versus surge damage. You act like adjusters are experts. lol. Sorry, could not resist.
Does that still prove Camille was 190MPH at landfall? No, it does not, especially when the magnitude of the destruction causes you to overestimate things (e.g., make the winds higher). It's part of human nature. I would not be surprised if the experts in 1969 fell victim to that human nature, too. After all, it's human nature.
Lindaloo wrote:Well then SHOW ME where you come up with the expertise in saying she wasn't a CAT5 when experts say she was.
This also goes back to the debate on Camille's landfall intensity. If Andrew was not a Category Five, then Camille's top sustained winds at landfall were likely overestimated. I'm not saying Camille was not a Category Five at landfall - I'm just saying that Camille's intensity of 190MPH is unrealistic.
With all due respect... I'm rather confused here. The way I view this, you went from talking about Camille and then transitioned into a "cat 5" Katrina.Lindaloo wrote:Well then SHOW ME where you come up with the expertise in saying she wasn't a CAT5 when experts say she was. Here is one for ya... I saw the destruction first hand and HECK even I KNEW damage was from surge and not a CAT 5 Katrina.
CapeVerdeWave wrote:Audrey2Katrina, here are my thoughts on what eastern New Orleans experienced...Scattered small pockets in southeast Louisiana probably did receive the sustained Category Three winds, but only for brief instants.
I also think eastern New Orleans received Category Two sustained winds, but only for brief times, with gusts to Category Three. That probably caused most of the damage. Who agrees?I say it was basically a repeat of Wilma in eastern New Orleans: mostly Category One winds, occasional and brief Category Two winds, and Category Three gusts in microbursts that did most of the damage. Based on what I've seen, heard, and read, this compromise view sounds most reasonable and prevents much further argument.
Do you agree?
.
Audrey2Katrina wrote:In essence, yes, I do, CVW. I also agree with your "pockets" statement. As Pearl River stated, there is a 1 minute reading of 123 mph at Michoud which could well have been one of those "pockets". It IS in Eastern New Orleans, and could well be why Dr. Mayfield made his comment... dunno, and won't presume to say with any certainty. Getting back to the original question, in overall essence, yes, it seems a very probable scenario--with those "pocket" exceptions
A2K
It is quite remarkable how there can be such a drastic change in less than a quarter mile. There was also a local school in my area that had it's cafeteria roof completely peeled off, yet another school less than a mile away recieved only minor damages.
Audrey2Katrina wrote:In essence, yes, I do, CVW. I also agree with your "pockets" statement. As Pearl River stated, there is a 1 minute reading of 123 mph at Michoud which could well have been one of those "pockets". It IS in Eastern New Orleans, and could well be why Dr. Mayfield made his comment... dunno, and won't presume to say with any certainty. Getting back to the original question, in overall essence, yes, it seems a very probable scenario--with those "pocket" exceptions
A2K
senorpepr wrote:Once again, referring back to my comments regarding this "one minute" reading... The thing to keep in mind is gusts (including microbursts) don't qualify as a sustained wind. According to the US-NWS and WMO guidelines... for a location to experience category three conditions... that location has to see winds at or greater than 100KT (using the one-minute unit or 88KT using the ten-minute unit) for two full minutes or longer.
"One-minute" is a unit of measurement. 107KT (one-minute average) can be over a one-second timeframe or a one-year timeframe.
(Not trying to put words in your mouth or anything... I just want everyone to understand this. Many confuse this in the typhoon and cyclone threads)
Users browsing this forum: jconsor, WeatherCat and 64 guests
