Wilma

[sponger]

Sponger,

what can I say? The wind readings are not good enough for you I take it because they don't agree with you; thus, they have to be BS

They are BS based on damage. To say a 75 mph hurricane had gusts to 120 is a little far fetched. I agree Dade saw 75 mph sustained. But those that took the eyewall in NW Broward would have seen higher sustained. I am not saying Cat 3, but I believe the final number will be 90-95 with gusts to 110-120.

I called Andrew a 5 based on damage, and many mets I discussed with said absolutely no way. If reanalysis confirms in a year 75, I'll eat crow. Until then wait for more concrete data.

[brunota2003]

Sponger,

what can I say? The wind readings are not good enough for you I take it because they don't agree with you; thus, they have to be BS

They are BS based on damage. To say a 75 mph hurricane had gusts to 120 is a little far fetched. I agree Dade saw 75 mph sustained. But those that took the eyewall in NW Broward would have seen higher sustained. I am not saying Cat 3, but I believe the final number will be 90-95 with gusts to 110-120.

I called Andrew a 5 based on damage, and many mets I discussed with said absolutely no way. If reanalysis confirms in a year 75, I'll eat crow. Until then wait for more concrete data.

No, its not BS, you have to remember that the winds die down due to friction over land, but the gusts either:
A. Stay the same, or
B. In some cases actually increase...

[brunota2003]

Here's proof, straight from the NHC's FAQ's:

Gusts are a few seconds (3-5 s) wind peak. Typically, in a hurricane environment the value for a peak gust is about 20-25% higher than a 1 min sustained wind. After a tropical cyclone makes landfall, the sustained winds tend to weaken rather quickly because of increase roughness over land. However, the gusts can be an even higher percentage of these weakened sustained winds due to increased turbulence.