Katrina H-Wind Analysis, marginal 3 at landfall

[f5]

if you want to see total destruction then just stay here during the tribulation period and then afterwards say well it could of been worse.as the old saying goes be careful for what you wish for beacuse you just mught get it

[Scorpion]

Ortt you say that Katrina was 100 kts at landfall in Louisiana? And you go by the HRD. However, the HRD also said that Katrina's max intensity was only 135 kts, not even Cat 5. So why should we expect to believe them at landfall too?

[Derek Ortt]

Again, dropsondes, which I HAVE looked at and you probably have not, and doppler radar indicates the same thing

That map has both the analyzed and OBSERVED maximum winds, and the maximum observed wind from dropsonde was 101KT

sorry if some are upset that they did not go through or witness a cat 4 Katrina

[Weatherfreak000]

I think what is happening is that people do not want to accept the fact that it could have been far worse and want to believe that they went through the worst. We went through this very thing during the Ivan intensity debate last year

Dennis may have had the highest wind speed of all of the Gulf Coast hurricanes this year and had it have been larger, it almost certainly would have reached the coast as a 4. However, the core of Dennis was very small and the hurricane winds did not affect nearly as many as they did for Katrina. From Grand Isle to the mouth of Mobile Bay, the entire region experienced at least sustained cat 2 winds

I'm not even trying to say that, and you know what i'm starting to believe you guys won't face facts here.


I've watched hurricanes for a long time, and not a single hurricane to ever make landfall in the United States even comes close to this damage.




THERE IS NO INTENSITY DEBATE HERE.



You guys argued about this for Ivan and nobody cared and news flash, nobody is gonna care this time. No matter what you tell me if this hurricane hits anywhere else in the continental U.S. this type of damage can not be duplicated.


You can write that off and take it to the bank.


Now, no question here I admit the damage would have been probably way more severe. The newspaper in New Orleans recognized this fact with their "Dodging the Bullet" headline unfortnately before the levee collapse. There is no question in the damage results here everybody has looked at Bay St. Louis.



But guess what, coastal Miss. has survived alot of intense hurricanes, especially those casinos. And I can tell you without a doubt no person who got their house wiped out down there would ever believe this was a Category 3 hurricane. Ever.



If damage ratio were a reason for intensity forecast like Andrew, this should be a damn CATEGORY 5.



As far as the levee comment from oneness I believe, I don't agree. New Orleans is very well capable of building a monster wall to protect it. The Japanese and Galveston have systems of the same nature that work perfectly well and despite Galveston's hype they would have probably not sustained "catastrophic" damage from Rita.


So that's how it is, I can't agree with these damage results being anything less then a Breaking point Cat 3/high end Cat 4.



And I reiterate, an intensity change proves nothing.

[dhweather]

I think what is happening is that people do not want to accept the fact that it could have been far worse and want to believe that they went through the worst. We went through this very thing during the Ivan intensity debate last year

Dennis may have had the highest wind speed of all of the Gulf Coast hurricanes this year and had it have been larger, it almost certainly would have reached the coast as a 4. However, the core of Dennis was very small and the hurricane winds did not affect nearly as many as they did for Katrina. From Grand Isle to the mouth of Mobile Bay, the entire region experienced at least sustained cat 2 winds

1,200 people dead and it could have been far worse?

Hurricane warnings were out, over one million evacuated, the total bill
for Katrina will likely run close to half of a trillion dollars. Communities were wiped off of the map. Hundreds of thousands are homeless.

Yeah, I guess it could have been worse, but to what degree?

[Ivanhater]

i wasnt a member on this forum during ivan, but i was shocked to see that some here didnt think it was that bad...i guess they didnt see all the damage of communities totally gone like grand lagoon and tiger point, or homes tossed around like toys on pcola beach, or thousands of huge trees down, but now i know that wasnt the reason because i know these people saw the damage of katrina....so for the people who keep saying some on here are just mad because they didnt go through a major, well i have been through 3 majors and i know what its like....dh i totally agree......maybe some are mad that THEY didnt go through a major, sounds ridiculous, almost as ridiculous as the statement some are mad they didnt go trough the worst

[dhweather]

Again, dropsondes, which I HAVE looked at and you probably have not, and doppler radar indicates the same thing

That map has both the analyzed and OBSERVED maximum winds, and the maximum observed wind from dropsonde was 101KT

sorry if some are upset that they did not go through or witness a cat 4 Katrina

From this thread:
http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=76367


Dropwindsondes, released from hurricane hunter planes to peer inside
the depths of storms, fail at least half the time in strong winds -- the very
thing they are supposed to measure. With dropwindsondes costing
$600 apiece, the government has been losing an estimated $180,000 on
bad ones every hurricane season even though the technology to fix the
problem has been available for years.



What would a logical person believe - equipment that fails more than half
of the time in strong winds, or witness destruction that left more than half
of Mississippi without electricity for over a week and damaged 1/3 of all the homes in Mississippi?

"A picture is worth a thousand words, but they do not do it justice until
you see what Katrina did here in person" - George H.W. Bush, Saturday,
October 8, 2005, as he toured Waveland and Bay St. Louis Mississippi, WLOX TV.

From the Sun Herald

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/12855910.htm

[senorpepr]

i wasnt a member on this forum during ivan, but i was shocked to see that some here didnt think it was that bad...i guess they didnt see all the damage of communities totally gone like grand lagoon and tiger point, or homes tossed around like toys on pcola beach, or thousands of huge trees down, but now i know that wasnt the reason because i know these people saw the damage of katrina....so for the people who keep saying some on here are just mad because they didnt go through a major, well i have been through 3 majors and i know what its like....dh i totally agree......maybe some are mad that THEY didnt go through a major, sounds ridiculous, almost as ridiculous as the statement some are mad they didnt go trough the worst

It's not the fact they didn't go through a major... it's the fact that people think they went through a "stronger" storm than they actually had.

With Ivan... no one disputed the damage associated with it. It was purely the fact that people were set on having survived a category four hurricane. However, the scientific evidence proved that Ivan was not a 4, but barely a 3. The problem arises when people say, "Oh... I survived Ivan... he was a 4... so I can survive this upcoming cat 4." Derek and others are trying to say, "Hey... this was only a three. See the damage a three produces?! It's a serious threat." That way, people aren't surprised when the actually do get hit with a 4 or 5.

Same thing goes with Katrina. No one is disputing the astronomical damage and death she caused. However, unfortunately, you'll have idiots (and yes, "idiots") that will say the next time a monster like Kartina or stronger comes along (which will happen), "Oh, I survived Katrina... I can survive this storm."

Don't believe me? How many people in southern Mississippi said, "Oh, I survived Camille... I can survive Katrina."

Once again, the point is not to detract from the deaths or damages or the heartaches Katrina has caused. This isn't about: "Oh darn... I didn't get to go through Katrina." This is about educating thoughs folks who will overestimate Katrina, accept it as "survivable" (which people will do), and be surprised when a real category 4 strikes producing even more damage than Katrina created (which is very possible).

[Derek Ortt]

if you think that Katrina was a 4, you should then stay when the next 3 comes through since it will be so many times better than was Katrina. But dont come crying to me when you are fighting for your life. You've had your warning as to what a 3 will do

[Derek Ortt]

Had it have come in as a real cat 4 in Mississippi, it would not have really mattered if there was a tidal surge or not as the winds themselves would have leveled everything, as they did with Charley. The swath of total devastation would have reached about 10 miles inland where the eye crossed the coast

[Ivanhater]

i wasnt a member on this forum during ivan, but i was shocked to see that some here didnt think it was that bad...i guess they didnt see all the damage of communities totally gone like grand lagoon and tiger point, or homes tossed around like toys on pcola beach, or thousands of huge trees down, but now i know that wasnt the reason because i know these people saw the damage of katrina....so for the people who keep saying some on here are just mad because they didnt go through a major, well i have been through 3 majors and i know what its like....dh i totally agree......maybe some are mad that THEY didnt go through a major, sounds ridiculous, almost as ridiculous as the statement some are mad they didnt go trough the worst

It's not the fact they didn't go through a major... it's the fact that people think they went through a "stronger" storm than they actually had.

With Ivan... no one disputed the damage associated with it. It was purely the fact that people were set on having survived a category four hurricane. However, the scientific evidence proved that Ivan was not a 4, but barely a 3. The problem arises when people say, "Oh... I survived Ivan... he was a 4... so I can survive this upcoming cat 4." Derek and others are trying to say, "Hey... this was only a three. See the damage a three produces?! It's a serious threat." That way, people aren't surprised when the actually do get hit with a 4 or 5.

Same thing goes with Katrina. No one is disputing the astronomical damage and death she caused. However, unfortunately, you'll have idiots (and yes, "idiots") that will say the next time a monster like Kartina or stronger comes along (which will happen), "Oh, I survived Katrina... I can survive this storm."

Don't believe me? How many people in southern Mississippi said, "Oh, I survived Camille... I can survive Katrina."

Once again, the point is not to detract from the deaths or damages or the heartaches Katrina has caused. This isn't about: "Oh darn... I didn't get to go through Katrina." This is about educating thoughs folks who will overestimate Katrina, accept it as "survivable" (which people will do), and be surprised when a real category 4 strikes producing even more damage than Katrina created (which is very possible).

i understand the point of telling people that a 3 can be horrific, but you have to look at the fact that the scientific data is relatively limited, i was talking to Dr. Bill williams at usa...and there was not a lot of data available to them because most of the equipment broke and that ivan was actually getting better orgainized on radar before landfall, reforming the eyewall and he said that the winds were coming down to the surface as he did a cross section of the radar images... and the fact that ivan was almost a 2? ive experienced a 2 with erin and erin doesnt come close to ivan, and opal was a weak 3 and opal was not as bad as ivan, dennis was bad and has taken out what was left of most of my familys homes on pcola beach...so i know what hurricanes are like, and ivan was not almost a 2, i know what that is like, again, the data is very limited, and some like to take it as gospel...

[Derek Ortt]

Pensacola did not go through a 3 in Opal. The hurricane force widns were all east of the center. What you went through was likely a very strong tropical storm in the Pensacola area and for Erin, the cat 2 winds were confined to Ft Walton, NOT Pensacola. You went through a cat 1 in Pensacola from Erin.

This is how people's perception gets distorted. They think that ebcause a hurricane of a certain category came close to them, that they went through its worst, when they did not. Ivan, while far worse for Pensacola than was Opal, did not bring cat 3 winds into Pensacola, as has been very well documented, even by the NHC

[Scorpion]

100 kts at 918-920 mb doesn't fly.

[Derek Ortt]

you do not even know why that would be possible, Scorpion, so why make an unenlightened, 5 word comment?

[Ivanhater]

Pensacola did not go through a 3 in Opal. The hurricane force widns were all east of the center. What you went through was likely a very strong tropical storm in the Pensacola area and for Erin, the cat 2 winds were confined to Ft Walton, NOT Pensacola. You went through a cat 1 in Pensacola from Erin.

This is how people's perception gets distorted. They think that ebcause a hurricane of a certain category came close to them, that they went through its worst, when they did not. Ivan, while far worse for Pensacola than was Opal, did not bring cat 3 winds into Pensacola, as has been very well documented, even by the NHC

so what were the highest winds in pensacola?

[aOl]

Pensacola did not go through a 3 in Opal. The hurricane force widns were all east of the center. What you went through was likely a very strong tropical storm in the Pensacola area and for Erin, the cat 2 winds were confined to Ft Walton, NOT Pensacola. You went through a cat 1 in Pensacola from Erin.

This is how people's perception gets distorted. They think that ebcause a hurricane of a certain category came close to them, that they went through its worst, when they did not. Ivan, while far worse for Pensacola than was Opal, did not bring cat 3 winds into Pensacola, as has been very well documented, even by the NHC

Then please tell me where the cat 3 winds actually were? Also, in the USA meterology coastal research center, they did a cross section on the radar and satillite imagery and found that there was a big flare up just after landfall over northern and central Pensacola, and these areas easily experienced cat3 winds in fact bordering on cat4.

[Derek Ortt]

The cat 3 winds wer enear the Florida/Alabama Border, near Pierdido Key. No surprise, the island was leveled.

In the actual city of Pensacola, the highest readings and a damage survey indicated SUSTAINED cat 1 conditions, though GUSTS likely did reach the cat 3 level

[aOl]

The cat 3 winds wer enear the Florida/Alabama Border, near Pierdido Key. No surprise, the island was leveled.

In the actual city of Pensacola, the highest readings and a damage survey indicated SUSTAINED cat 1 conditions, though GUSTS likely did reach the cat 3 level

Oh, so now you're saying it was cat 1 conditions. Well from my exstensive research of Andrew, Homestead only received tropical storm force conditions.

[Ivanhater]

The cat 3 winds wer enear the Florida/Alabama Border, near Pierdido Key. No surprise, the island was leveled.

In the actual city of Pensacola, the highest readings and a damage survey indicated SUSTAINED cat 1 conditions, though GUSTS likely did reach the cat 3 level

ok, so now we only got a cat 1...wow

[Ivanhater]

im just trying to figure out how your data and Dr. bill and usa's data is so far off from each other, they have been and are still doing a study on ivan and they said that pcola had SUSTAINED cat 3 and gusts to cat 4 from radar cross sections and they said that the ground data that was their was very limited and that the strongest winds came down to the surface in the pensacola area....i just dont know how yall can be that far off