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

[Extremeweatherguy]

Extreem eastern New Orleans might have sustained Cat-3 winds, but not downtown where the Superdome is. Low Cat-2 there IMO.....MGC

I think low end Cat. 2 is too strong for downtown. I think downtown saw Cat. 1 winds sustained and gusts to Cat. 2. The damage there simply does not match up with Cat. 2 damage. Eastern N.O. may have seen Cat. 2 force winds though with gusts to Cat. 3, and right at the immediate coast I think there was Cat. 3 force winds. **The exception: At superdome and skyscraper height there may have been Cat. 2 force winds...but not at the "official" 30 foot level**

[Pearl River]

EWG wrote

MGC wrote:
Extreem eastern New Orleans might have sustained Cat-3 winds, but not downtown where the Superdome is. Low Cat-2 there IMO.....MGC
I think low end Cat. 2 is too strong for downtown. I think downtown saw Cat. 1 winds sustained and gusts to Cat. 2. The damage there simply does not match up with Cat. 2 damage. Eastern N.O. may have seen Cat. 2 force winds though with gusts to Cat. 3, and right at the immediate coast I think there was Cat. 3 force winds. **The exception: At superdome and skyscraper height there may have been Cat. 2 force winds...but not at the "official" 30 foot level**

I can buy that.

[ROCK]

Extreem eastern New Orleans might have sustained Cat-3 winds, but not downtown where the Superdome is. Low Cat-2 there IMO.....MGC

I think low end Cat. 2 is too strong for downtown. I think downtown saw Cat. 1 winds sustained and gusts to Cat. 2. The damage there simply does not match up with Cat. 2 damage. Eastern N.O. may have seen Cat. 2 force winds though with gusts to Cat. 3, and right at the immediate coast I think there was Cat. 3 force winds. **The exception: At superdome and skyscraper height there may have been Cat. 2 force winds...but not at the "official" 30 foot level**

Agree. Possibly cat 3 sustained at the coast as suggested with the wind chart so appropriately posted by Wxmn57.

[Opal storm]

Extreem eastern New Orleans might have sustained Cat-3 winds, but not downtown where the Superdome is. Low Cat-2 there IMO.....MGC

I think low end Cat. 2 is too strong for downtown. I think downtown saw Cat. 1 winds sustained and gusts to Cat. 2. The damage there simply does not match up with Cat. 2 damage. Eastern N.O. may have seen Cat. 2 force winds though with gusts to Cat. 3, and right at the immediate coast I think there was Cat. 3 force winds. **The exception: At superdome and skyscraper height there may have been Cat. 2 force winds...but not at the "official" 30 foot level**

I remember seeing footage of the wind in downtown N.O during the storm,it looked 65-75mph sustained.So I guess winds were borderline T.S/cat 1 sustained with cat 2 gusts downtown.The damage seems to match up with that.

[MiamiensisWx]

I say downtown New Orleans received mostly low-end to middle Category One sustained winds with Category Two (almost to Category Three) short gusts.

[skysummit]

Hmmmm....well, the wind damage is worst than when Cindy came through, and Cindy caught everyone by surprise with her punch. Cindy has been upgraded to a hurricane now. The damage is definately not Cat 3 downtown, and in "most" locations, not Cat 2, but it's definately more than a TS.

Well....let me edit this. I forgot we're talking about "downtown". So yea, I'd say Cat 1 sustained....probably 74 - 80mph.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Still find that to be a personal attack which I might add is not allowed here. Offend maybe the wrong word in this case. Condecending is more suitable. So to close, believe what you want to believe even if its an opinion back by nothing.

With all due respect, what you find it to be is irrelevant, and I'm well aware of what is and is not allowed here. Had you read the follow up all the "strawman" reference is, is a declaration that the post mischaracterized the actual statement, and calling a mischaracterization to task is not a "personal attack" especially when it can be clearly shown for just what it is--misrepresentation of what has been stated. Frankly, were I thin-skinned I might think such mischaracterizations can also be deemed as personal attack. Actually I think all this back-and-forth bickering is puerile and needs to cease so after this one, I'll let you have your say and simply stick to the topic rather than be drawn off after yet another red herring. (Again, that's NOT an attack, it IS a reference to techniques of language manipulation). I won't belabor the condescending issue any further as I've experienced it myself more times than I care to recall and would like this to be the last off-topic salvo. One could arguably present that many of your posts were in that category as well, so let's just call for a truce on any irrelevancies and eschew mischaracterizations as well. I'm good with that and hope nothing is misconstrued as an attack as none was certainly intended.

As to what I prefer to believe, I thank you that I can believe what I prefer to believe, and will exercise that option. Since I largely agree with statements made by lifelong and well respected meteorologists, I'd hardly say that would be "backed by nothing" but hey, we're all allowed our opinions in here, right?

Have a great day and PAX!

A2K

[MGC]

The New Orleans airport, a good 15 mile west of downtown NO had sustained Cat-1 winds. Downtown was midway between the Michoud observations and MSY. I don't believe the wind chart. Sorry, but you need to do a site survey before you make your comments based a few cherry picked photographs and a wind chart based on sea foam that is inaccurate within 10 kilometers of land. Basing your wind estimate on watching a few minutes of video is anything but accurate. There is a good bit of wind damage in NO East. I guess the two observation near Michoud are gusts and they were 150% of sustained right? I don't think so. I guess since the 106Kt observation, 3 hours prior to the Michoud observation in Long Beach Miss by a ham radio operator don't quality either. It seem the same crowd that is intent on calling Katrina a Cat-2 also don't think a 909mb Camille was a Cat-5. Sorry, but I don't agree with ya'll, and I've seen more hurricanes than most of you can ever dream of. Signed, a voice of experience and reason......MGC

[Audrey2Katrina]

Sorry about that folks, but felt a reply was necessary--but that said, I completely agree with Opal's request: Let's stay on topic and not be drawn off into anything not referencing the actual topic. This has been a GOOD thread, and I think we've all come a long way in understanding each other's viewpoints.

That said, I feel we have reached something of a, well, "flexible" consensus. By flexible I mean that some stretch it a little this way, others a little that way; but by-and-large, I feel most of us concur that while the downtown areas of New Orleans, some 20-30 miles west of the eyewall received sustained one (some upper, some lower--a few possibly low-end 2) with gusts at two levels certainly not beyond the probable. Travelling further east IN New Orleans, those winds increase as you draw near the center of circulation with at least the possibility that right along the easternmost areas Cat 3 winds are at least a possibility, but I doubt seriously they weren't at least sustained 2. Remember, New Orleans extends practically to within a few (very few) miles of the Mississippi border, and includes coastline areas. That's basically all I wish to ascertain.

And all that said, getting to the actual title of the thread, which is Dr. Steve Lyons, I think he was "spot on". Others obviously disagree, and that is what makes this such a great place--we can disagree!

A2K

[Opal storm]

The New Orleans airport, a good 15 mile west of downtown NO had sustained Cat-1 winds. Downtown was midway between the Michoud observations and MSY. I don't believe the wind chart. Sorry, but you need to do a site survey before you make your comments based a few cherry picked photographs and a wind chart based on sea foam that is inaccurate within 10 kilometers of land. Basing your wind estimate on watching a few minutes of video is anything but accurate. There is a good bit of wind damage in NO East. I guess the two observation near Michoud are gusts and they were 150% of sustained right? I don't think so. I guess since the 106Kt observation, 3 hours prior to the Michoud observation in Long Beach Miss by a ham radio operator don't quality either. It seem the same crowd that is intent on calling Katrina a Cat-2 also don't think a 909mb Camille was a Cat-5. Sorry, but I don't agree with ya'll, and I've seen more hurricanes than most of you can ever dream of. Signed, a voice of experience and reason......MGC

Good points.

I do agree with you about the wind chart.I think some people put too much confidence in these charts thinking they are 100% accurate.

[ROCK]

I think if two senior METs with upteen years of expirence told me the HRD wind charts are very accurate I would believe them.....

[Audrey2Katrina]

The New Orleans airport, a good 15 mile west of downtown NO had sustained Cat-1 winds. Downtown was midway between the Michoud observations and MSY. I don't believe the wind chart. Sorry, but you need to do a site survey before you make your comments based a few cherry picked photographs and a wind chart based on sea foam that is inaccurate within 10 kilometers of land. Basing your wind estimate on watching a few minutes of video is anything but accurate. There is a good bit of wind damage in NO East. I guess the two observation near Michoud are gusts and they were 150% of sustained right? I don't think so. I guess since the 106Kt observation, 3 hours prior to the Michoud observation in Long Beach Miss by a ham radio operator don't quality either. It seem the same crowd that is intent on calling Katrina a Cat-2 also don't think a 909mb Camille was a Cat-5. Sorry, but I don't agree with ya'll, and I've seen more hurricanes than most of you can ever dream of. Signed, a voice of experience and reason......MGC

Valid points, MGC. I didn't know that MSY recorded sustained one, but that wouldn't surprise me seeing what I saw here in Metairie which is between MSY and downtown. As far as the Michoud readings, there is little doubt that the 1 was cited as a 1 minute sustained. What the other is (on the Feb. 17 update) remains to be clarified; but the possibility, at least, exists it suggests the same measuring stick, and it DID cite 123 mph using exactly the same terminology used for the other guage cited in the Katrina report.

Bottom line is, you're absolutely right, people are going to believe what they want, and justify it with whatever supports their opinion--and I will be the first to concede that I fall into that category as well as anyone else. But the fact remains that there IS data/opinion/info that could be perceived to support all these viewpoints.

Ain't nature wonderful?

A2K

[wxmann_91]

The New Orleans airport, a good 15 mile west of downtown NO had sustained Cat-1 winds. Downtown was midway between the Michoud observations and MSY. I don't believe the wind chart. Sorry, but you need to do a site survey before you make your comments based a few cherry picked photographs and a wind chart based on sea foam that is inaccurate within 10 kilometers of land. Basing your wind estimate on watching a few minutes of video is anything but accurate. There is a good bit of wind damage in NO East. I guess the two observation near Michoud are gusts and they were 150% of sustained right? I don't think so. I guess since the 106Kt observation, 3 hours prior to the Michoud observation in Long Beach Miss by a ham radio operator don't quality either. It seem the same crowd that is intent on calling Katrina a Cat-2 also don't think a 909mb Camille was a Cat-5. Sorry, but I don't agree with ya'll, and I've seen more hurricanes than most of you can ever dream of. Signed, a voice of experience and reason......MGC

Nobody is saying Katrina was a Cat 2. She packed sustained Cat 1 winds in NOLA and Metairie. West of that she only gave TS force winds IMO. But to the east near Waveland, Pass Christian, Bay St. Louis, that's where she gave Cat 3 winds. Further to the east in Gulfport and Biloxi, Cat 2 winds were felt at most. All the data supports this. Camille could or could not have been a Cat 5, all we're saying is that there is almost no way she was packing 190 mph sustained winds at landfall.

[Audrey2Katrina]

I think if two senior METs with upteen years of expirence told me the HRD wind charts are very accurate I would believe them.....

And I can certainly see why you, or anyone else might. Most people seem to and that's fine; they work hard and we should all respect the fruits of their labors. Equally, I believe Dr. Lyons who is a nationally reputed meteorologist seems to take issue with that as well, and without trying to pick his brain, I'd bet dollars to doughnuts he has nothing but respect for the HRD and its findings albeit he obviously disagrees with the findings.

A2K

[Opal storm]

I think if two senior METs with upteen years of expirence told me the HRD wind charts are very accurate I would believe them.....

You don't think there's any slight possibility that maybe there were pockets of stronger winds that HRD didn't pick up?Or that maybe those winds went a little more inland than what HRD shows?

[MGC]

Case-in-point on the wind field chart. HRD has Michoud in the 70-75KT wind zone. Yet, the observations at Michoud show that actual winds were at least 84KT and if the 107KT observation is used the chart is way out of wack. HRD need to update the chart to include the newest and best data......MGC

[MGC]

I think at most Camille was a minimal Cat-5. No way were the sustained winds 190mph, 160 at best......MGC

[ROCK]

I think if two senior METs with upteen years of expirence told me the HRD wind charts are very accurate I would believe them.....

You don't think there's any slight possibility that maybe there were pockets of stronger winds that HRD didn't pick up?Or that maybe those winds went a little more inland than what HRD shows?

anything is possible.... But I would believe two METS with sound evidence against one with unofficial evidence any day...better odds...

[cheezyWXguy]

I think at most Camille was a minimal Cat-5. No way were the sustained winds 190mph, 160 at best......MGC

Either way, thats one heck of a storm...even though she was small, she packed quite a punch

[cheezyWXguy]

besides look at this archive of Camille from wunderground...theres no way a hurricane can weaken from 190 down to 60 in 3 advisories...It has to be a weak CAT 5 at best
http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/at196903.asp