AWESOME reading on How GOVT. DOWNGRADED Katrina!

[rtd2]

I know this is a dead horse but I stumbled on this and thought how much I agreed with it and we had a topic here shortly after the storm we people on both sides expressing their thoughts. please give this short theory a look...here's a breif sample
"National Hurricane Center Advisory 26B at 8 AM reported central pressure of 923 mb.
This is only slightly weaker than Category Five. At this time buildings along the
Mississippi coast were being demolished by near Category Five winds. These wind
speeds were validated by NWSO Slidell NEXRAD radar velocity measurements"

read
http://www.hurricanekatrina-hoax.com/page_1.html

[RL3AO]

I didn't completely read through it, but it is common for large storms that have recently undergone an eyewall replacement cycle to have low pressures compared to their wind speed. As for surge, when a storm weakens due to an ERC, the surge level doesn't magically lower. It will stay at the cat5 surge level for a while.

[Squarethecircle]

It seems that the writer has caught up with some slightly bad logic - one, that the causes were not completely considered, and two, this happened again, that same year, with Wilma, for which the NHC would have no reason to overestimate intensity.

Also, I wonder what purpose lower official wind recordings would actually serve - damage is damage.

[MGC]

Having witnessed the wind damage from a Cat-5 hurricane (Camille), a Cat-4 hurricane (Hugo, Betsy), it is my opinion that Katrina did not carry Cat-5 winds to the Mississippi Coast. Low end Cat-4 at most if at all. I did witness many new homes well inland away from the surge with complete to partial roof failure, several of the new steel road signs blown down. In all it was wide spread Cat-2 to Cat-3 along the coast. Nearly all the severe wind damage was confinded to eastern Hancock and western Harrison counties where the eyewall of Katrina hit. I saw no evidence of severe wind damage where the alleged second eyewall of Katrina hit in eastern Harrison county. Recon may have observed a second wind maxima over the ocean but I didn't observe any corresponding damage over land, thus I tend to discount the second eyewall theory......MGC

[Ed Mahmoud]

I'd be curious as to the scientific credentials Ms. Richards or Messrs. Hughes to know the post storm report was wrong.

[CrazyC83]

Having witnessed the wind damage from a Cat-5 hurricane (Camille), a Cat-4 hurricane (Hugo, Betsy), it is my opinion that Katrina did not carry Cat-5 winds to the Mississippi Coast. Low end Cat-4 at most if at all. I did witness many new homes well inland away from the surge with complete to partial roof failure, several of the new steel road signs blown down. In all it was wide spread Cat-2 to Cat-3 along the coast. Nearly all the severe wind damage was confinded to eastern Hancock and western Harrison counties where the eyewall of Katrina hit. I saw no evidence of severe wind damage where the alleged second eyewall of Katrina hit in eastern Harrison county. Recon may have observed a second wind maxima over the ocean but I didn't observe any corresponding damage over land, thus I tend to discount the second eyewall theory......MGC

After looking closely at Katrina's intensity, here are my thoughts:

Katrina hit Louisiana at 105 kt, below the NHC estimates, as the ERC was well underway at that point and satellite and dropsonde data did not support anything stronger. However, its improved satellite circulation afterward makes me think it actually strengthened slightly in terms of winds (even though the pressure rose some) in the marshes leading up to the Mississippi coast. My estimate at final landfall is 110 kt (basically a flipping of the two estimates). If 110 kt is kept at LA landfall, then 115 kt could be considered for the final landfall estimate. I believe Katrina maintained higher intensities farther inland.

At a minimum, I think Katrina held her intensity over the marshes and sounds, so 110/110 also works.

Also I believe the peak intensity of Katrina was 150 kt as the NHC estimates, but it took place earlier at 1200Z (and not in synch with the 902mb pressure at 1800Z - 145 kt is my guess at that time).

[Ixolib]

Regardless of how many articles, studies, reports, etc., are released for public consumption, Katrina was not a wind event. It was a surge event.

In other words, had the 110kt (+/-) winds been the only issue with Katrina, we would have long ago stopped talking about her. In fact, things would have most probably been back to near-normal within a just few days of landfall - again, if wind had been the issue.......

But, since surge was the issue, we will talk about Katrina for decades to come. And near-normal will probably never take place.

[TSmith274]

I don't know where I fall on this issue. Obviously, I yield to the experts to figure it out. But the wind damage in Buras, La where I have a fishing camp was unbelievable. I know I've never seen anything like it... in person or otherwise. However, some remote camps actually held together in the face of Katrina's onslaught. And many other homes that were lucky enough to be raised high enough didn't exactly suffer damage that I would think cat 5 winds would bring. Most did not suffer roof failure. Most did, however, have windows blown out and roof shingles completely blown off. Looking at the damage and trying to estimate wind speeds is something better left to an expert for sure.

[Ixolib]

I don't know where I fall on this issue. Obviously, I yield to the experts to figure it out. But the wind damage in Buras, La where I have a fishing camp was unbelievable. I know I've never seen anything like it... in person or otherwise. However, some remote camps actually held together in the face of Katrina's onslaught. And many other homes that were lucky enough to be raised high enough didn't exactly suffer damage that I would think cat 5 winds would bring. Most did not suffer roof failure. Most did, however, have windows blown out and roof shingles completely blown off. Looking at the damage and trying to estimate wind speeds is something better left to an expert for sure.

All good points on the wind damage. But those types of results are typical of just about any major cane. Some we remember pretty well, others have fallen off the radar long ago. Locally, many of those wind events brought considerable impact, but typically not long-term nor life-changing – at least not for an entire region.

Now, with Katrina, I agree that her winds brought pretty significant damage - especially in Buras. But had that been the ONLY issue, Katrina would simply have fallen in line with any of a hundred other storms and every one of us who were so extremely impacted would have long ago returned to normalcy, or at least near so.

As for me, I've not experienced "normalcy" since the wee morning hours of 8/29/05. Since then, just about everything in my life now - or missing in my life now - is an absolute and unrelenting result of Katrina's surge – not her wind.

In previous storms I've been in (i.e., wind events) - Betsy, Camille, Frederick, Elena, Georges - the wind did not present me with a complete and absolute life-changing situation. Katrina did that and more.....

[Frank P]

I don't know where I fall on this issue. Obviously, I yield to the experts to figure it out. But the wind damage in Buras, La where I have a fishing camp was unbelievable. I know I've never seen anything like it... in person or otherwise. However, some remote camps actually held together in the face of Katrina's onslaught. And many other homes that were lucky enough to be raised high enough didn't exactly suffer damage that I would think cat 5 winds would bring. Most did not suffer roof failure. Most did, however, have windows blown out and roof shingles completely blown off. Looking at the damage and trying to estimate wind speeds is something better left to an expert for sure.

All good points on the wind damage. But those types of results are typical of just about any major cane. Some we remember pretty well, others have fallen off the radar long ago. Locally, many of those wind events brought considerable impact, but typically not long-term nor life-changing – at least not for an entire region.

Now, with Katrina, I agree that her winds brought pretty significant damage - especially in Buras. But had that been the ONLY issue, Katrina would simply have fallen in line with any of a hundred other storms and every one of us who were so extremely impacted would have long ago returned to normalcy, or at least near so.

As for me, I've not experienced "normalcy" since the wee morning hours of 8/29/05. Since then, just about everything in my life now - or missing in my life now - is an absolute and unrelenting result of Katrina's surge – not her wind.

In previous storms I've been in (i.e., wind events) - Betsy, Camille, Frederick, Elena, Georges - the wind did not present me with a complete and absolute life-changing situation. Katrina did that and more.....

You and I are always in agreement on this Ixolib... From a surge perspective Katrina in my estimation was 10 fold greater than Camille...

Just take my neighborhood block of 13 homes for example..
Camille - destroyed homes = 0
damaged homes = 5 (none severely damaged either)

Katrina - destroyed homes = 12
severly damaged homes = 1
rebuilt homes to date = 1
new homes built to date = 1
empty lots = 9
homes yet to be demolished and just about to fall down = 2

And this is typical for most neighborhoods along the MS Gulf Coast....
Recovery is going to take a very very very long time...

[Ixolib]

You are sooooo right, Frank. At this time -- i.e., three years post Camille -- life for a huge part was back to normal except for those few empty lots along 90 that stayed that way for years to come anyway.

And while Camille had some "questionable" record-breakers (pressure, windspeed) she still, none-the-less, left far less damage and truly long-lasting effects than did Katrina. And, except for the Point, Camille was primarily a wind event along the eastern half of the coast. Of course, in my experience, Betsy, Frederick, Elena, and Georges were all wind events as well. And they too were relatively easy and actually quite quick in the recovery.

I've said it once, twice, a hundred times... I'll take a wind event ANYTIME over a surge event. There just ain't no comparison!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MGC]

A community can quickly recover from wind damage. I was in Port Charlotte Florida last fall, roughly 3 years post Hurricane Charley. I was amazed how well the area had recovered. There was little evidence that a Cat-4 hurricane has stuck the area. Now compare that area to the Mississippi/Louisiana coasts. The MS/LA coast still bear the scar of Katrina, both the wind and water damage. I keep wondering how long it will take the coast to recover.....MGC

[Frank P]

A community can quickly recover from wind damage. I was in Port Charlotte Florida last fall, roughly 3 years post Hurricane Charley. I was amazed how well the area had recovered. There was little evidence that a Cat-4 hurricane has stuck the area. Now compare that area to the Mississippi/Louisiana coasts. The MS/LA coast still bear the scar of Katrina, both the wind and water damage. I keep wondering how long it will take the coast to recover.....MGC

Let's see, been almost three years since Katrina, you can count on one hand the number of new businesses that have rebuilt on the beach, not much better for homes.. MGC its going to take many many years before we see the coast at pre Katrina levels... there will be empty lots for another 20 years I bet, if not longer...

[DanKellFla]

It seems that the writer has caught up with some slightly bad logic - one, that the causes were not completely considered, and two, this happened again, that same year, with Wilma, for which the NHC would have no reason to overestimate intensity.

Also, I wonder what purpose lower official wind recordings would actually serve - damage is damage.

Sounds logical to me, but the insurance industry sees it differently. If the wind speed are lower, then the insurance industry can claim that most of the damage was done by the surge and pay less money for the claims.
Now, how does the insurance industry and the NHC connect, I don't know. That gets close to nutty conspiracy theories.

[wbug1]

This was discussed on these forums before, but it was included, and looking at the several video clips of Katrina coming ashore in Gulfport, Mississipi it does look like 125 mph with some gusts to 150 mph. New Orleans was spared the worst wind as the damage is consistent with 100 mph with some gusts to 120. Of course, the surge was the most destructive element of Katrina along the coastline. and the flooding did the most damage in N.O. Still, the widespread wind field of up to 120 mph in Katrina caused a lot of wind damage, just as Wilma's winds caused a lot of damage in Florida.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Hw2Xcm ... re=related

[MGC]

No doubt there will be empty lots in 20 years. There were still a few left overs from Camille in Pass Christian. Got my flood insurance bill in the mail last week.....MGC

[CajunMama]

Got my flood insurance bill in the mail last week.....MGC

and did you pass out?

[MGC]

No, not from the flood insurance....I did for the wind insurance....wind pool....MGC

[Ptarmigan]

It is possible that the Mississippi Delta and Plaquemines Parish did experience Category 4 winds before Katrina made landfall. Katrina made landfall as a Category 3 at 110 knots and at Mississippi at 105 knots.

[Bluefrog]

being in pascagoula, mississippi .... i can verify that it will take decades to remotely get back to a familiar place of "normal" 96% of pascagoula flooded in the storm surge...i'm looking at water marks on the door and furniture as i even type this today.....

if there were 200 homes on beach blvd here ... only 12 have built back

wind storm insurance on the beach here runs about $20,000 - $40,000 per year per house