Landfall Cat 5s

[quandary]

We haven't had a landfalling Cat 5 since Andrew in 1992. Katrina made landfall with Cat 5 pressure, but only Cat 3ish winds, maybe Cat 4 as per the current official note.

In terms of Atlantic Basin and global Cat 5 landfalls, what is the frequency? I know Gilbert hit as a Cat 5 in 1988. Don't anybody bring up Mitch, which hit as a Cat 1 or TS in 1998. How often to do Cat 5s make landfall in the world?

[quandary]

Also, I would like to note that Ivan's eye cross land, although it did not make landfall, in Cuba last year as a Cat 5 with pressure of 916mb. That's even lower than Katrina's, which is pretty impressive. Strangely, even in this year of 3 strong Cat 5s, there hasn't been a Cat 5 landfall.

[Forecaster Colby]

That's primarily because each of them was created by a RIC in an unstable eye, and they quickly underwent replacements. Luckily for Katrina/Rita victims, they were both hit by shear during such a cycle, disrupting re-intensification. Cozumel was not so lucky.

[wxmann_91]

If you heard me say that WPAC landfalling Cat 5's are rare, you'd realize that having a Cat 5 making landfall is nearly impossible.

Camille IMHO did not make landfall as a 5. The Loop Current CANNOT go all the way up Mississippi, it curves west well before that. Camille may have ridden relatively deep, warm water all the way to the coast, but nothing like the Loop Current. It is nearly impossible for a Cat 5 to make landfall above 30N.

[quandary]

But weren't Camille's winds estimated at around 190mph. Likewise, her pressure was 909mb at landfall and she was a small storm. Wouldn't this make it very likely, even with small standard of deviation errors, for Camille to be a Cat 5? Were there any land reports of extremely high winds justifying or denying Camille as a Cat 5? Surge cannot be compared to Ivan or Katrina because they were very large storms.

[wxmann_91]

But weren't Camille's winds estimated at around 190mph. Likewise, her pressure was 909mb at landfall and she was a small storm. Wouldn't this make it very likely, even with small standard of deviation errors, for Camille to be a Cat 5? Were there any land reports of extremely high winds justifying or denying Camille as a Cat 5? Surge cannot be compared to Ivan or Katrina because they were very large storms.

Katrina was 918 mb and a weak Cat 4. Wilma was <900 mb and Cat 4 at one time, and remember that Wilma had a very small windfield. It depends if the obs during Camille were gusts or sustained winds. 190 mph gusts correlate to Cat 4 sustained winds.

[Recurve]

Interesting topic. No matter what records are broken as to pressure/max winds, it seems much less significant if it happens in the open ocean or Gulf away from land.
What's truly frightening/terrible is when a storm makes landfall at its peak intensity. AFAIK, only Labor Day and Andrew, (maybe Galveston 1900 and Camille?), did that.
Katrina will be be in the record books for years, but Labor Day for me is still the record Atlantic storm, because its extraordinary winds/pressure was at landfall.
Would very much like to see a list of Atlantic basin storm that made landfall at Cat 5, if anybody can post that.

[JamesFromMaine2]

Not Named 140 kt 9/13/1928 Puerto Rico
Not Named 140 kt 9/5/1932 Bahamas
Not Named 140 kt 9/3/1935 US/FL Keys
Not Named 140 kt 9/16/1947 Bahamas
Janet 150 kt 9/28/1955 Mexico
Camille 165 kt 8/17/1969 US/MS
Edith 140 kt 9/9/1971 Nicaragua
Gilbert 160 kt 9/14/1988 Mexico
Andrew 143 kt 8/23/1992 Florida

[Recurve]

THANKS James.
Just shows that so many of these records are nearly meaningless in terms of human impacts. From a geek point of view, it's neat to know the lowest pressure than any storm ever achieved, but the ones that impacted land at Cat 5 intensity are all that matter IMHO.

One note -- shouldn't the date on the Great Labor Day Hurricane (FL Keys 1935) be 9/2, not 9/3, and Andrew should be 8/24. Those are the dates stuck in my memory. (It's not that the list uses GMT, because that would be later, not earlier in the case of Andrew, so I'm confused.)

[JamesFromMaine2]

heres the site where I got it from: http://www.weathermatrix.net/tropical/cat5storms.htm Also I don't if all of those really made landfall as a cat 5 or if they are ones that at one point before making land fall were cat 5 because the list also has Katrina and Wilma as making landfall as cat 5! lol Katrina was a 3 maybe a 4 at land fall and I am pretty sure Wilma had already gone down to cat 4 before she made landfall.

[Dr. Jonah Rainwater]

Did Gilbert strike Mexico at peak intensity?

[JamesFromMaine2]

Did Gilbert strike Mexico at peak intensity?

Gilbert emerged off the western coastline of Jamaica and began a period of extraordinarily rapid intensification. The ferocious hurricane strengthened to Category 4 status as its northern eyewall pounded Grand Cayman Island with 155 mph wind gusts early on September 13th. Gilbert’s remarkable intensification trend continued as the cyclone reached Category 5 status on the afternoon of the 13th and eventually reached peak winds of 185 mph. The minimum central pressure of the cyclone plummeted to 888 millibars, which represented a 70-millibar drop in only a 24-hour period. This minimum central pressure recorded by NOAA aircraft remains the lowest pressure ever recorded in the western hemisphere. Gilbert crossed the northeast coast of Mexico’s Yucatan peninsula on September 14th, becoming the first Category 5 hurricane in the Atlantic basin to strike land since Camille in 1969. http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/HAW2/english/hi ... ml#gilbert

I don't know if it was its full 185mph winds when it hit mexico but It was a cat 5 when it made landfall.

[timNms]

But weren't Camille's winds estimated at around 190mph. Likewise, her pressure was 909mb at landfall and she was a small storm. Wouldn't this make it very likely, even with small standard of deviation errors, for Camille to be a Cat 5? Were there any land reports of extremely high winds justifying or denying Camille as a Cat 5? Surge cannot be compared to Ivan or Katrina because they were very large storms.

Katrina was 918 mb and a weak Cat 4. Wilma was <900 mb and Cat 4 at one time, and remember that Wilma had a very small windfield. It depends if the obs during Camille were gusts or sustained winds. 190 mph gusts correlate to Cat 4 sustained winds.

I find this interesting. Camille was a cat 5 at landfall. There's no doubt. I think when the NHC revisits the data, they'll put this issue to rest. I also found something today on the Jackson NWS site that I thought was interesting. While looking for a radar pic of Camille at landfall about a month or two ago, I emailed the NHC and they referred me to the NWS. TOday I was checking out some links on the NWS site and came across the following info. Camille made landfall at Pass Christian, MS which is about 20 miles or so west of Biloxi, yet a wind gust of 229 MPH was recorded at Biloxi ( http://www.srh.weather.gov/jan/climate2.html ) So that blows your theory of 190mph gusts, wouldn't you say? Keep in mind, Biloxi was NOT the site of landfall. Imagine what the winds were at Pass Christian! I would not be surprised if they were sustained at 190 with gusts well over 200.

[senorpepr]

But weren't Camille's winds estimated at around 190mph. Likewise, her pressure was 909mb at landfall and she was a small storm. Wouldn't this make it very likely, even with small standard of deviation errors, for Camille to be a Cat 5? Were there any land reports of extremely high winds justifying or denying Camille as a Cat 5? Surge cannot be compared to Ivan or Katrina because they were very large storms.

Katrina was 918 mb and a weak Cat 4. Wilma was <900 mb and Cat 4 at one time, and remember that Wilma had a very small windfield. It depends if the obs during Camille were gusts or sustained winds. 190 mph gusts correlate to Cat 4 sustained winds.

I find this interesting. Camille was a cat 5 at landfall. There's no doubt. I think when the NHC revisits the data, they'll put this issue to rest. I also found something today on the Jackson NWS site that I thought was interesting. While looking for a radar pic of Camille at landfall about a month or two ago, I emailed the NHC and they referred me to the NWS. TOday I was checking out some links on the NWS site and came across the following info. Camille made landfall at Pass Christian, MS which is about 20 miles or so west of Biloxi, yet a wind gust of 229 MPH was recorded at Biloxi ( http://www.srh.weather.gov/jan/climate2.html ) So that blows your theory of 190mph gusts, wouldn't you say? Keep in mind, Biloxi was NOT the site of landfall. Imagine what the winds were at Pass Christian! I would not be surprised if they were sustained at 190 with gusts well over 200.

I would sort of doubt that Pass Christian received anything above what Biloxi saw. Biloxi was in a stronger part of the eyewall and was in the eyewall for much longer than Pass Christian was. Not that it helped matters any...

[Forecaster Colby]

229mph gusts?!?!

[Derek Ortt]

what type of anamometer was used to regiester the 229 m.p.h. gust. Was it by chance the same type that recorded the 172 m.p.h. gust during Georges. I am having trouble finding info regarding this

[timNms]

But weren't Camille's winds estimated at around 190mph. Likewise, her pressure was 909mb at landfall and she was a small storm. Wouldn't this make it very likely, even with small standard of deviation errors, for Camille to be a Cat 5? Were there any land reports of extremely high winds justifying or denying Camille as a Cat 5? Surge cannot be compared to Ivan or Katrina because they were very large storms.

Katrina was 918 mb and a weak Cat 4. Wilma was <900 mb and Cat 4 at one time, and remember that Wilma had a very small windfield. It depends if the obs during Camille were gusts or sustained winds. 190 mph gusts correlate to Cat 4 sustained winds.

I find this interesting. Camille was a cat 5 at landfall. There's no doubt. I think when the NHC revisits the data, they'll put this issue to rest. I also found something today on the Jackson NWS site that I thought was interesting. While looking for a radar pic of Camille at landfall about a month or two ago, I emailed the NHC and they referred me to the NWS. TOday I was checking out some links on the NWS site and came across the following info. Camille made landfall at Pass Christian, MS which is about 20 miles or so west of Biloxi, yet a wind gust of 229 MPH was recorded at Biloxi ( http://www.srh.weather.gov/jan/climate2.html ) So that blows your theory of 190mph gusts, wouldn't you say? Keep in mind, Biloxi was NOT the site of landfall. Imagine what the winds were at Pass Christian! I would not be surprised if they were sustained at 190 with gusts well over 200.

I would sort of doubt that Pass Christian received anything above what Biloxi saw. Biloxi was in a stronger part of the eyewall and was in the eyewall for much longer than Pass Christian was. Not that it helped matters any...

With Camille's eyewall being small and tight, I wonder if Biloxi was in the worst part of the eyewall or was it farther west say around Gulfport. either way, it was quite breezy there lol.

[f5]

what strange is Katrina was worst then Andrew,Camille.the 1935 labor day hurricane was lucky enough to hit a chain of islands while strengthing.Camille may have had 230 mph wind gust but Katrina's storm surge makes the damage looks like an F-5 tornado went through there.

[wxmann_91]

Did Gilbert strike Mexico at peak intensity?

Gilbert emerged off the western coastline of Jamaica and began a period of extraordinarily rapid intensification. The ferocious hurricane strengthened to Category 4 status as its northern eyewall pounded Grand Cayman Island with 155 mph wind gusts early on September 13th. Gilbert’s remarkable intensification trend continued as the cyclone reached Category 5 status on the afternoon of the 13th and eventually reached peak winds of 185 mph. The minimum central pressure of the cyclone plummeted to 888 millibars, which represented a 70-millibar drop in only a 24-hour period. This minimum central pressure recorded by NOAA aircraft remains the lowest pressure ever recorded in the western hemisphere. Gilbert crossed the northeast coast of Mexico’s Yucatan peninsula on September 14th, becoming the first Category 5 hurricane in the Atlantic basin to strike land since Camille in 1969. http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/HAW2/english/hi ... ml#gilbert

I don't know if it was its full 185mph winds when it hit mexico but It was a cat 5 when it made landfall.

It hit Mexico as it was going through an ERC, so no, Gilbert did not make landfall at peak intensity.

[f5]

a hit at peak intensity is impossable no matter how perfect the enviroment.Charley and Andrew were strengthing upon landfall but they could of been stronger for example Charley could of went into Tampa bay at 170 mph sustained winds if he had more time Andrew could of been 175 to 180 mph sustained if it weren't for the Bahamas in his way