Camille not a cat-5 at Mississippi landfall???

[Derek Ortt]

Camielle was not compact based upon the recon. It was only about 20-30% smaller than Katrina, as Katrina's hurricane winds extended about 90NM and TS winds about 230NM (Camielle was 60/180)

Camielle was a fairly large storm, and the myth about it being small was in comparison to Buelah and Carla

[Ivanhater]

Camielle was not compact based upon the recon. It was only about 20-30% smaller than Katrina, as Katrina's hurricane winds extended about 90NM and TS winds about 230NM (Camielle was 60/180)

Camielle was a fairly large storm, and the myth about it being small was in comparison to Buelah and Carla

Ya, from what my parents told me, winds were howling in Pensacola that night and was very scary, though could have been worse with Pensacola being in the cross hairs just a few days before

[Derek Ortt]

I may be mistaken, but the wind reports from Pensacola seem to indicate that Katrina and Camielle brought similar conditions to Pensacola (winds close to hurricane force sustained with gusts to hurricane force)

[Opal storm]

Camielle was not compact based upon the recon. It was only about 20-30% smaller than Katrina, as Katrina's hurricane winds extended about 90NM and TS winds about 230NM (Camielle was 60/180)

Camielle was a fairly large storm, and the myth about it being small was in comparison to Buelah and Carla

Sounds like Camille was about the size of Ivan.

[Pearl River]

Opal Storm wrote

LOL sorry but Camille did NOT make landfall with 200mph sustained winds.Camille having sustained winds anything over 175mph is ridiculus IMO.Think about it,hurricanes have a difficult time keeping that kind of strength over open warm waters,there's no way it's going to keep that strength to landfall.Especially considering how unfavorable the north Gulf is for cat 4/5 hurricanes.I think Camille made landfall as a borderline cat 4/5,probably being a "weak" cat 5 while passing LA before the MS landfall.Just my opinion.

LOL. And you must be an expert on Camille then? Since a well known Prof. and the Weather Bureau have stated the facts. Camille strengthened just prior to landfall, not out in the central Gulf like the other hurricanes that weakened prior to landfall. There is no proven fact that the north Gulf was unfavorable in 1969. JMO.

[Ivanhater]

I may be mistaken, but the wind reports from Pensacola seem to indicate that Katrina and Camielle brought similar conditions to Pensacola (winds close to hurricane force sustained with gusts to hurricane force)

Ya, not a very compact storm if you ask me

[Derek Ortt]

about the size of Ivan would be correct... and we all consider Ivan to have been a large hurricane

[vbhoutex]

Camielle was not compact based upon the recon. It was only about 20-30% smaller than Katrina, as Katrina's hurricane winds extended about 90NM and TS winds about 230NM (Camielle was 60/180)

Camielle was a fairly large storm, and the myth about it being small was in comparison to Buelah and Carla

Sounds like Camille was about the size of Ivan.

I was in Gulf Breeze, FL during Camille. We had sustained winds very close to if not at hurricane force and at least several reports of gusts to 100 mph. I watched trees being bent to the ground and stripped of their leaves. I have always wondered where this "Camille was a small storm" came from. By no stretch of the imagination was Camille small, at least not in my experience. As stated above, if you compare her toCarla or Beualh, yes she was small, but not compared to most "normal" sized hurricanes.

[Ivanhater]

Camielle was not compact based upon the recon. It was only about 20-30% smaller than Katrina, as Katrina's hurricane winds extended about 90NM and TS winds about 230NM (Camielle was 60/180)

Camielle was a fairly large storm, and the myth about it being small was in comparison to Buelah and Carla

Sounds like Camille was about the size of Ivan.

I was in Gulf Breeze, FL during Camille. We had sustained winds very close to if not at hurricane force and at least several reports of gusts to 100 mph. I watched trees being bent to the ground and stripped of their leaves. I have always wondered where this "Camille was a small storm" came from. By no stretch of the imagination was Camille small, at least not in my experience. As stated above, if you compare her toCarla or Beualh, yes she was small, but not compared to most "normal" sized hurricanes.

Yep, sounds like the same experience as my parents, so I did'nt understand the "compact" storm talk either.

[Pearl River]

The Camille was a "small intense storm" comes from the NHC report on Camille. It's on the first page, paragraph 7. It doesn't compare Camille's size to any other storm. Oh and by the way, please spell Camille correctly.

[docjoe]

just an uneducated thought...perhaps in Camille there was some unknown set of circumstances not measured by technology of the time and perhaps this "unknown" set of circumstances either hasnt occurred again or we do not know to look for it....again let me reitirate...a very uneducated thought here!!!

docjoe

[Derek Ortt]

It came from the fact that in 1969, the forecasters in hindsight, really had no clue what they were doing, as much was unknown about hurricanes (35 years from now, the same thing probably will be said about today), so they probably thought all storms were the size of Carla and Buelah, and what was initially reported just stuck.

[Derek Ortt]

then the 1969 NHC report is so dead flat wrong that Great One would have done a better job of writing it.

As I said, the science was so poor back then that of course the forecasters did not know what we did today. Plus, satellite was very new then. They actually thought that the larger the size of a hurricane, the stronger it was

[Ivanhater]

It came from the fact that in 1969, the forecasters in hindsight, really had no clue what they were doing, as much was unknown about hurricanes (35 years from now, the same thing probably will be said about today), so they probably thought all storms were the size of Carla and Buelah, and what was initially reported just stuck.

Ya, if the countless reports of winds gusting around 100mph all the way to the Florida panhandle are true, I am more inclined to believe those than some crude radar images from 1969

[Hybridstorm_November2001]

All I know is that it doesn't make sense that Katrina's storm surge was so much bigger than Camille (Katrina now being the new bench mark for the Northern Gulf Coast, in terms of surge size), if Camille was indeed a 190 mph monster. I could be mistaken, but it doesn't seem logical.

[Ivanhater]

All I know is that it doesn't make sense that Katrina's storm surge was so much bigger than Camille (Katrina now being the new bench mark for the Northern Gulf Coast, in terms of surge size), if Camille was indeed a 190 mph monster. I could be mistaken, but it doesn't seem logical.

There is still so many Unknowns with Hurricanes, why some bring winds down to the surface while others keep them above the surface, Some isolated areas in hurricanes have "microbursts" where the winds are brought down to the surface....still some mysteries with these monsters.

[MGC]

Camille certainly had a much smaller eye than Katrina. Perhaps a third as big. I've read report that it was 8-10 miles in diameter. The 909mb pressure is accurate, the barometer was tested and its accuracy verified......MGC

[Pearl River]

I have just witnessed the most ridiculous statements I have ever seen, in this thread, especially from someone who cannot spell Beulah or Camille correctly.

[Opal storm]

I have just witnessed the most ridiculous statements I have ever seen, in this thread, especially from someone who cannot spell Beulah or Camille correctly.

I have seen no ridiculous statements,just a good discussion IMO.

[timNms]

All I know is that it doesn't make sense that Katrina's storm surge was so much bigger than Camille (Katrina now being the new bench mark for the Northern Gulf Coast, in terms of surge size), if Camille was indeed a 190 mph monster. I could be mistaken, but it doesn't seem logical.

I'm far from being an expert, but in my opinion, the size of the eye played a part in Katrina's surge (as well as her overall size). What was it? 30 or more miles across compared to Camille's 5-10 mile eye. Again, speculation on my part, but that would be my guess as to why there was such a difference. Remember, Camille inundated Pass Christian with at the time, a record storm surge of 20+ feet. Of course, we all know what happened to the entire MS coast, New Orlean, Mobile, and parts of the Western Panhandle with Katrina.