Camille /1935 Labor day

[f5]

Camille winds were 200 mph with 905 pressure the 1935 labor day hurricane was 200 mph with 892 mb they were both small compact charley size with same wind speed but why the big difference in pressure?

[audioslave8]

Camille winds were 200 mph with 905 pressure the 1935 labor day hurricane was 200 mph with 892 mb they were both small compact charley size with same wind speed but why the big difference in pressure?

It is strange. Look at Rita for instance. She had a low pressure of 897mbs and her strongest winds were 165 for only a short time. Katrina had a low pressure of 902mbs and her winds were at one point for only a short time were close to 180 and she was a much more bigger and stronger Hurricane than Rita even when she peaked at 897mbs. Anybody can see that comparison even on satellite. It is a great question that could use some more research. I guess we will never really be able to find out and be able to find out info like this along with getting better intensity and landfall forecasts down as well. Our government is too sorry to spend the $ on research and development. They sure will spend it on sending people back to the moon. Sorry just does not make sense to me. Getting a better forecast for intensity and a more pinpoint landfall could save more lives and cause less headaches with evacuations which also seems to kill these days as well. A little less stress for everyone would make a difference for all even FEMA,RED CROSS,etc. We might be in another 40 years of this NOAA says.

[senorpepr]

Camille winds were 200 mph with 905 pressure the 1935 labor day hurricane was 200 mph with 892 mb they were both small compact charley size with same wind speed but why the big difference in pressure?

Well... A) Camille wasn't 200 mph. She was a bit lower than that. The same goes for the 35 Labor Day Hurricane. B) Both storms weren't nearly as strong as Charley, who was an upper-end category four. C) Camille and '35 were windier and stronger than Charley because Charley, while compact, had a much weaker pressure gradient than those two.

[senorpepr]

It is strange. Look at Rita for instance. She had a low pressure of 897mbs and her strongest winds were 165 for only a short time. Katrina had a low pressure of 902mbs and her winds were at one point for only a short time were close to 180 and she was a much more bigger and stronger Hurricane than Rita even when she peaked at 897mbs.

Both Katrina and Rita had maximum winds of 175 mph.

[Scorpion]

Camille winds were 200 mph with 905 pressure the 1935 labor day hurricane was 200 mph with 892 mb they were both small compact charley size with same wind speed but why the big difference in pressure?

Camilles winds werent close to 200 mph. Maybe 175-180 at most.

[Ixolib]

Camilles winds werent close to 200 mph. Maybe 175-180 at most.

And the saga continues and continues and continues and....

[bombarderoazul]

I think Camille had 190 MPH, Hurricane Allen also had winds at 190 MPH, it seems a lower pressure does not necessarily mean highet speeds. Gilbert had the lowest pressure ever in the Atlantic basin, but the maximum sustained speeds were 185.

[Anonymous]

The Labor Day Hurricane re-anaylsis has it at 185 mph/892 mb at Craig Key, FL

[Innotech]

I think past 175 mph the pressure REALLY doesnt matter that much.

[Recurve]

Isn't it the gradient that really matters -- central pressure can be anything, but wind speeds depend on the overall size of the windfield and the change in pressure across a given distance? Andrew and Labor Day hurricanes were extremely small storms, so had a larger gradient over a smaller distance, while Gilbert was huge, and Rita and Katrina were pretty large too.

Wind speeds are almost never known for sure for lack of accurate ground-level measurements during Cat 4-5 landfall, but barometric pressure has been recorded reliably for the historic storms.

Correlating pressure and windspeed may be as difficult as correlating pressure/windspeed and storm surge -- because surge is dependent on many other factors.

[senorpepr]

Isn't it the gradient that really matters -- central pressure can be anything, but wind speeds depend on the overall size of the windfield and the change in pressure across a given distance?

Bingo.

[vbhoutex]

I know we now have SFMR and doppler to help measure winds, but I do not understand why with this technology and other technologies we have we can't have high flying "radar" planes that constantly fly around a TC and record the winds and whatever else we can without danger. I am not talking about flying through it like the Hurricane Hunters. IMO, we should have technology that negates the need for those dangerous flights, even though I would love to fly into a Hurricane on one.

[Recurve]

Hey VB -- isn't one of the problems with doing what you say is that there are very few planes that can fly over a hurricane -- only the GV-IV can cruise at 45-50k feet and do that. I heard Mayfield the other night say they might just need another plane. I think he was taking a small opportunity to lobby for another Gulfstream, and after this season, if Congress can't come up with a few million for at least one more research/operational plane (and crew), then our priorities are really messed up.
Of course, there may be a host of technology problems with accurately getting WS readings just by flying over a hurricane. GIS Dropwindsondes seem to be the best answer. Did you see the article about the RAINEX project, how they're using military surplus sensors, and they're about to run out of them?

[WindRunner]

Camille winds were 200 mph with 905 pressure the 1935 labor day hurricane was 200 mph with 892 mb they were both small compact charley size with same wind speed but why the big difference in pressure?

While we're talking about inaccuracies, 1935 maxed out *officially* at 140kts, 160 mph. For one "adviosry" it was a five.

[arkess7]

well im sure camille and the 1935 hurricanes both had gusts of 200 or over

[f5]

Katrina was like Fat Camille was muscle .For example you have 2 people who weigh 200 lbs one person has all fat the other person weighs 200 mph except he has all muscle but he looks like he weighs 150 lbs why beacuse muscle weighs more than fat its also very lean.just like the pressure gradient in a hurricane Katrina was Fat while Camille was Lean

[Charles-KD5ZSM]

Camille winds were 200 mph with 905 pressure the 1935 labor day hurricane was 200 mph with 892 mb they were both small compact charley size with same wind speed but why the big difference in pressure?

Well... A) Camille wasn't 200 mph. She was a bit lower than that. The same goes for the 35 Labor Day Hurricane. B) Both storms weren't nearly as strong as Charley, who was an upper-end category four. C) Camille and '35 were windier and stronger than Charley because Charley, while compact, had a much weaker pressure gradient than those two.

Camille was a 190mph Cat 5 with gusts probably over 220mph. The hurricane broke the anemometer at 220, so we don't really know how fast the hurricane actually was here on the MS gulf coast.

[f5]

then the 1935 labor day Hurricane probably had max sustanied winds at 225 mph with gust to 250 beacuse the pressure was lower than Camille's even though they were the same size

[Stratosphere747]

then the 1935 labor day Hurricane probably had max sustanied winds at 225 mph with gust to 250 beacuse the pressure was lower than Camille's even though they were the same size

The pressure is not the only factor...Read some of the above posts...

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

The 1935 hurricane was likely smaller then Charley. Also I heard from some one awhile back that John hope believed it was over 200 mph. But we will never know.