Conditions in Galveston during Rita?

[GalvestonDuck]

So, people here are asking me and I'm afraid to say that I don't know the answer -- what were the conditions here in Galveston during Rita (wind speed mostly)?

We were so busy watching the broadcast on KHOU.com during the storm while in Lindale, but we never really got the full report. We were more concerned about damage and finding out when we could come home.

Usually I'd check the Jamaica Beach Weather Observatory website, but he checked out and headed for higher ground also and hasn't updated yet. http://members.aol.com/IslandWx/jbclimo ... t-rita.htm

Thanks.

[hicksta]

Pretty sure you can come home... I live in kemah and we were in Sunday. Also we have started school agian CCISD. Damage was small, branches down some big trees that it. Atleast for my nieghborhood. but you should be good

[jasons2k]

I went to the Galveston West End (Pirate's Beach) on Monday and damage was minimal. The worst wind damage I saw were a few shingles on the ground and blown-out billboards. The power and water had both been turned on by then.

[Derek Ortt]

the northeast end of the island may have had gusts in the 60-70 m.p.h. range

[GalvestonDuck]

the northeast end of the island may have had gusts in the 60-70 m.p.h. range

Thanks, Derek! That's the answer I was looking for.

Hicksta - I'm home now.

[GalvestonDuck]

I went to the Galveston West End (Pirate's Beach) on Monday and damage was minimal. The worst wind damage I saw were a few shingles on the ground and blown-out billboards. The power and water had both been turned on by then.

Yup, about the same here on the east end near UTMB and throughout the city. KFC's sign was blown down as were two lightpoles, McD's lost part of the Golden Arches, a convenient store on 26th and B'way lost it's roof, and there were lots of fences and palm fronds blown down.

Derek gave me the main answer everyone was wondering about though -- wind speed.

[vbhoutex]

I heard of a gust to 89 mph on the island supposedly, but I have no way of supporting that since it was on one of the TV stations. Once again on one of the TV stations I remember hearing about 69 mph sustained at the worst on the island. Again I have no way of confirming it. This is just what I remember hearing.

[jasons2k]

I heard of a gust to 89 mph on the island supposedly, but I have no way of supporting that since it was on one of the TV stations. Once again on one of the TV stations I remember hearing about 69 mph sustained at the worst on the island. Again I have no way of confirming it. This is just what I remember hearing.

I saw the same, can't remember which channel. If that's the case that would fall in line with the 50 G60-65 I had near The Woodlands.

[wxman57]

The Hurricane Research Division has published it's analyzed wind swath for Rita. Looks like eastern Galveston Island may have seen 40-45 mph sustained 1-minute winds. So just barely a TS there. It's interesting that Beaumont did not see 75+ mph winds according the the HRD analysis, and Lake Charles saw only 75-80 mph sustained. Cat 2 winds did not penetrate very far inland at all.

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Storm_page ... th_mph.pdf

[jasons2k]

Well according to that, my highest sustained winds were in the 30-35 MPH range. Judging by all the downed trees in my neighborhood that doesn't seem quite right.

During the peak 2-4 AM when all the transformers were blowing up around me, we were sustained 40-50 with gusts over 60. We had 2 or 3 convective downbursts where it gusted close to, if not, 70.

[jasons2k]

From today's Houston Chronicle - http://www.chron.com

"Bush Intercontinental Airport experienced sustained winds of 45 mph and a peak gust of 61 mph as Rita passed to the east.

Morgan's Point in the Ship Channel had sustained winds of 49 mph and a peak gust of 74 mph.

Sugar Land saw sustained winds of 38 mph with a peak gust of 51 mph."

-- Bush Airport (IAH) is about 7 miles south of me, so my estimates here seem pretty close.

[timNms]

Well according to that, my highest sustained winds were in the 30-35 MPH range. Judging by all the downed trees in my neighborhood that doesn't seem quite right.

During the peak 2-4 AM when all the transformers were blowing up around me, we were sustained 40-50 with gusts over 60. We had 2 or 3 convective downbursts where it gusted close to, if not, 70.

There seems to be a common theme in this thread (and among others) that many just can't comprehend what a true Cat. 3 hurricane can do. The numbers don't lie folks. It does not take a Cat. 4 or 5 to cause massive devastation; that's why Cat. 3s are considered MAJOR hurricanes. I think Derek with his expertise knows a thing or two about this subject.

On the flip side, someone saying Katrina was a 4 just because the damage they witnessed was horrific doesn't pass the bar either, especially if they have no basis to compare it to. After Rita, my neighborhood sure looked like a Cat. 1 or 2 hurricane ripped through with all the downed trees, but we had TS winds (60-65 mph gusts) at the most. My neighbor looking out the window and yelling "gosh it was awful, this could not have been just TS winds" hardly can be backed-up with any data.

Looks like you're doing what you accused some folks who went thru Katrina of doing. ( http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic ... c&start=20 ) Makes a difference when you go through the storm, doesn't it? Sometimes it doesn't take a genius to figure out that winds were stronger than what some claim.

[vbhoutex]

One thing I see in every thread about the winds in different hurricanes is the fact that almost everyone, and I do mean everyone, seems to miss the fact that no matter how hard we try we are never going to have a hurricane whose winds in actuality "look" like the nice round or elliptical pictures we see of wind fields. Due to the fact that the worst winds are found in the rainbands and eyewall which aren't continuous out for the center, but spiral in toward it, the worst winds are found in streaks. That is why you can have such huge differences in what the scientists may be observing with all their instruments(WHICH CAN'T COVER A VERY LARGE AREA COMPARED TO MOST HURRICANES)and what the general public and/or knowledgeable amatuers see/experience. Of course another factor is the fact of differences in perception of how strong winds are. JMHO.

[windsurfer77058]

We had a reading in Nassau Bay showing 47 mph and on Bolivar, at Siever's Cut , we had a reading of 88 mph.

[GalvestonDuck]

Thanks, everybuddy, for the obs!

[Lindaloo]

jschlitz..... so by your logic above, we should not even have a scale. Let's call them all just hurricanes.

[jasons2k]

Well according to that, my highest sustained winds were in the 30-35 MPH range. Judging by all the downed trees in my neighborhood that doesn't seem quite right.

During the peak 2-4 AM when all the transformers were blowing up around me, we were sustained 40-50 with gusts over 60. We had 2 or 3 convective downbursts where it gusted close to, if not, 70.

There seems to be a common theme in this thread (and among others) that many just can't comprehend what a true Cat. 3 hurricane can do. The numbers don't lie folks. It does not take a Cat. 4 or 5 to cause massive devastation; that's why Cat. 3s are considered MAJOR hurricanes. I think Derek with his expertise knows a thing or two about this subject.

On the flip side, someone saying Katrina was a 4 just because the damage they witnessed was horrific doesn't pass the bar either, especially if they have no basis to compare it to. After Rita, my neighborhood sure looked like a Cat. 1 or 2 hurricane ripped through with all the downed trees, but we had TS winds (60-65 mph gusts) at the most. My neighbor looking out the window and yelling "gosh it was awful, this could not have been just TS winds" hardly can be backed-up with any data.

Looks like you're doing what you accused some folks who went thru Katrina of doing. ( http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic ... c&start=20 ) Makes a difference when you go through the storm, doesn't it? Sometimes it doesn't take a genius to figure out that winds were stronger than what some claim.

If you look at the immediate post following, I have OFFICIAL data from Bush IAH to back it up. It doesn't take a genius to see that. Or the fact that the official reporting stations in Sugar Land, Hobby, or Galveston doesn't match the graphic either.

[jasons2k]

jschlitz..... so by your logic above, we should not even have a scale. Let's call them all just hurricanes.

I never said such a thing and I really don't know what you're talking about.

[jasons2k]

Well according to that, my highest sustained winds were in the 30-35 MPH range. Judging by all the downed trees in my neighborhood that doesn't seem quite right.

During the peak 2-4 AM when all the transformers were blowing up around me, we were sustained 40-50 with gusts over 60. We had 2 or 3 convective downbursts where it gusted close to, if not, 70.

There seems to be a common theme in this thread (and among others) that many just can't comprehend what a true Cat. 3 hurricane can do. The numbers don't lie folks. It does not take a Cat. 4 or 5 to cause massive devastation; that's why Cat. 3s are considered MAJOR hurricanes. I think Derek with his expertise knows a thing or two about this subject.

On the flip side, someone saying Katrina was a 4 just because the damage they witnessed was horrific doesn't pass the bar either, especially if they have no basis to compare it to. After Rita, my neighborhood sure looked like a Cat. 1 or 2 hurricane ripped through with all the downed trees, but we had TS winds (60-65 mph gusts) at the most. My neighbor looking out the window and yelling "gosh it was awful, this could not have been just TS winds" hardly can be backed-up with any data.

Looks like you're doing what you accused some folks who went thru Katrina of doing. ( http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic ... c&start=20 ) Makes a difference when you go through the storm, doesn't it? Sometimes it doesn't take a genius to figure out that winds were stronger than what some claim.

And for good measure, here's some more official data:

MONTH TO DATE CLIMATIC DATA - BUSH INTERCONTINENTAL AIRPORT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE HOUSTON/GALVESTON TX
805 AM CST FRI SEP 30 2005

PRELIMINARY LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA (WS FORM: F-6)

STATION: HOUSTON/IAH
MONTH: SEPTEMBER
YEAR: 2005
LATITUDE: 29 58 N
LONGITUDE: 95 21 W

TEMPERATURE IN F: CPN: SNOW: WIND :SUNSHINE: SKY K WND
================================================================================
1 2 3 4 5 6A 6B 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
AVG MX 2MIN
DY MAX MIN AVG DEP HDD CDD WTR SNW DPTH SPD SPD DIR MIN PSBL S-S WX SPD DR
================================================================================

23 95 75 85 8 0 20 0.17 0.0 0 19.9 44 30 M M 9 18 52 40
24 91 73 82 5 0 17 0.70 0.0 0 22.2 45 340 M M 8 18 61 340


If the formatting is off, that reads 44G52 Friday and 45G61 Saturday. And those are TWO minute windspeeds as opposed to one minute on the graphic.

Now, if you have official reporting data from Katrina that supports those claims I'll gladly change my tune. Otherwise please don't accuse me of making up data just because I happened to be in Rita. That's neither my M.O. nor motivation. I strive for nothing less than accuracy.

[jasons2k]

Galveston Scholes Field:

23 87 77 82 2 0 17 0.15 0.0 M 25.6 45 350 M M 3 18 62 360
24 92 78 85 5 0 20 M M M M M M M M M M M
25 89 75 82 3 0 17 0.00 0.0 0 18.7 52 330 M M 1 18 61 330


52MPH G62, but the 24th data, when the peak occured, is missing.