Camille....for the skeptics

[f5]

Catapillar is a company that makes bulldozers.Katrina was nature's catapillar and this one is the widest yet

[Jim Cantore]

229mph

thats insane

But I did hear that the hurricane hunters got a 235mph gust in rita at ground level

[Lindaloo]

Catapillar is a company that makes bulldozers.Katrina was nature's catapillar and this one is the widest yet

They do not make only dozers. They also make motors.

[Forecaster Colby]

229mph

thats insane

But I did hear that the hurricane hunters got a 235mph gust in rita at ground level

Generally, the Hurricane Hunters are not at ground level. They might have had a dropsonde observation...thats 204kt, anyone wanna check?

[Wirbelsturm]

Using a 1.4 overland gust ratio, the gust to 229 mph would be supported by a 165 mph landfalling intensity for Camille. As has been pointed out before, Cat 5 landfalls are rare because the land interaction that occurs before landfall will weaken the storm somewhat. Small islands are most likely to get Cat 5 hits although Guam, despite its typhoon history, has never had a Cat 5 with Karen in 1962, their strongest hit, being a high end Cat 4. Okinawa, Miyako Jima and Iwo Jima have had Cat 5 hits and Japan one Cat 5 hit. The Philippines have had a few mostly on the offshore islands like Catanduanes (Land of the Howling Wind) and Polillo and Jomalig. STY Rita in 1978 hit a couple of offshore islands as a 5 and the two islands were stripped clean of everything-trees, plants, villages, villagers, etc.

Steve

Actually, Biloxi is on the coast, using a 1.4 overland gust ratio wouldn't be valid.

[Derek Ortt]

it doesnt matter if its a coastal city or not, Biloxi is on land. The friction term takes effect immediately

[Weatherfreak000]

IMO I guess the old saying is true, Size DOES matter.




While Katrina was probably weaker, it had a much larger wind field and affected a much higher area. Also, some of the barrier effects off the coast of Lousiana "barrier islands" if you'd like slowed Camille down more then Katrina because of erosion over the years.


I guess that's mostly theory but, I still believe Camille to be a Cat 5. I think natural effects and alot less coast population back in the 60's can attribute to Katrina doing more damage.

[WindRunner]

229mph

thats insane

But I did hear that the hurricane hunters got a 235mph gust in rita at ground level

It was a dropsonde, and it wasn't at ground level. I'm not sure if they deemed it accurate, but it was recorded well above the surface.

[x-y-no]

Yeah, seriously, why can't they make a windguage that doesn't fail?? Seems like every historic hurricane has it's own story of "winds were measured at XXXmph before the instruments failed"...etc...

I say someone on here designs and gets a patent on a windguage that:
1) Doesn't blow away... Thats like saying... "Wow, that storm dumped 6 inches of rain before the rainguage started leaking!" I mean, really.
2) Sits high enough to no be taken away by storm surge. Make it like 50' high, and we'll make wind speed adjustments later.

Somebody start working on it.

That's much easier said than done. Getting the windguage to hold up to that strength is quite possible, but then you run into the issue of power. How will the windguage record this data without power. Of course, a large enough battery could help there. However, you still have the issue of cost. Windguages already cost plenty, if you want it to be somewhat accurate at those speeds. To fine-tune the accuracy plus increase the strength, you'll make the cost of it even higher. As it is, there are very few credible instruments along the coasts because of this factor. Boosting the costs will only lower the amount of reporting stations.

That's only because we don't have our priorities on straight.

Let's pick a nice round price of $100,000 for building a robust coastal weather station. Can we agree it could probably be done for that?

At that price, we could build 83 of those stations for what we are spending for each and every single hour of the war in Iraq. That's not including the base cost of our forces, just the supplemental cost of the Iraq war. For one day's cost of the Iraq war - we could build 2000 of those $100,000 a pop weather stations.

But no, we can't do it because it's too expensive.

[Wirbelsturm]

it doesnt matter if its a coastal city or not, Biloxi is on land. The friction term takes effect immediately

No it doesn't, not immediately to the 1.4 ratio anyway. Prove it, find an online document explaining overland gust ratio...

[Derek Ortt]

you have made the claim, it is up to you to prove that land is not land. The basic momentum equations prove that the theory given by Asklahuna is CORRECT. Check the full GFD momentum equations and you will see that any land will cause the immediate reduction

[TSmith274]

you have made the claim, it is up to you to prove that land is not land. The basic momentum equations prove that the theory given by Asklahuna is CORRECT. Check the full GFD momentum equations and you will see that any land will cause the immediate reduction

If you're, say, 100 feet from the beach... wouldn't that reduction be negligible? And if it isn't, just put the damn thing 100 feet offshore. We put a man on the moon, people!

[Forecaster Colby]

Ummm...just a note, that wasn't land when Katrina hit.

[MGC]

I doubt the second a parcel of air reaches the beach it becomes subject to the 1.4 equation. A sand beach offers little in the way of friction compared to an area with trees and buildings. There must be a gradual increase in friction dependent of terrain.....MGC

[Derek Ortt]

its surface dependent. Sand has lower friction than a rocky surface, so the beach does not have the same reduction. However, I do not believe that the obs from Biloxi are on the beach

[Forecaster Colby]

THERE WAS NO BEACH. Before Katrina got there, the surge did, and that was shallow water, remember?

[Aslkahuna]

In their analysis of the winds associated with STY Paka, JTWC used the overland ratio for all station reports on Guam. Also important to note on the Paka analysis is that the Handar sensor at the Apra Harbor on Guam which is on a pier, recorded suatained winds of 100kt gusting to 149kt so we had a 1.49 ratio being MEASURED right close to shoreline. Carrying this to Camille a 229 mph gust is 199kt. Using a 1.49 ratio then gives you a 133kt sustained wind or 154 mph. This is a far cry from a 190 mph sustained wind at landfall. Also too, the wind driection is a factor since you would only have overwater winds directly onshore if the flow is coming in right off the water and preferably perpendicularly. For Camille to maintain maximum intensity right up to landfall would require that the storm experience no loss due to land interaction prior to landfall and no loss moving over the shallow waters offshore. While the latter might be possible, the former is very much less likely and would require that Camille be in an intensification cycle just prior to landfall like Andrew.

Steve

[Tstormwatcher]

Katrinas stormsurge was worse than Camille because Katrina was a massive storm where Camille was small like Charley. Katrina was a 175mph storm for quit a while before landfall thus it was able to build up that surge of water where Camille was intensifying just before landfall much like Andrew did thus even though it had a high surge, it would have probably been much higher if the strom had taken a few more days before landfall. Correct me if I am wrong on this. This is from my studying Camille when I first became interested in hurricanes.

[Derek Ortt]

Camielle was many times larger than Charley. I do not know where this myth of Camielle being a small hurricane started, because in reality, it was close to Ivan's size

[MGC]

Camille was way larger than Charley. Biloxi obs are from Keesler AFB which is about 1 mile from the GOM and 1/2 mile from the Back Bay. Gulfport obs are at the airport about 5 miles inland. Camille didn't weaken that much. 909mb in Bay St. Louis. Now Camille could have had a much lower pressure than the last recon reported but was never observed......MGC