Intersting Info from Slidell...

#41 Postby **HollynLA** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:22 am

Extreme
No, not at all, this was the type of damage seen all through our town. We stayed here so I seen it all first hand. The winds were sustained for quite a while.

Extremeweatherguy · #42 Postby **Extremeweatherguy** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:04 am

HollynLA wrote:Extreme
No, not at all, this was the type of damage seen all through our town. We stayed here so I seen it all first hand. The winds were sustained for quite a while.

Then yeah they probably got it wrong for your area, there is no way the type of damage you described was from 60'smph wind gusts. Do you live right on or near the water?

#43 Postby **HollynLA** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:14 am

Nope, not near water. Also, how could they "get it wrong" if these winds speeds were supposed to be measured with high tech instruments....... or was it a guess? I also noticed that the map showed wind speeds near 100mph near the most northern part of MS. Is that true?

Extremeweatherguy · #44 Postby **Extremeweatherguy** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:23 am

HollynLA wrote:Nope, not near water. Also, how could they "get it wrong" if these winds speeds were supposed to be measured with high tech instruments....... or was it a guess? I also noticed that the map showed wind speeds near 100mph near the most northern part of MS. Is that true?

The wind gusts near 100mph for northern MS are very possible. I remember seeing some damage pics from that area just after the storm and they looked to be in that range. There have been many storms that have carried those kind of winds well inland. Some examples are Hugo in 1989 which brough 100mph+ wind gusts well over 100 miles inland, Charley in 2004 which had 99mph gusts over 6 hours after landfall, and Hazel in 1954 which brought near 100mph wind gusts all the way into upstate NY. As for the gusts in your area, my thinking is they may have used the top recorded gust before the instruments failed. Some of the data may be in-complete. Also, right at landfall it looks like most of those gusts are estimates.

Audrey2Katrina · #45 Postby **Audrey2Katrina** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 12:18 pm

Sean in New Orleans wrote:
timNms wrote:http://www.ncddc.noaa.gov/Katrina/WindSpeedMap/

Found the map I mentioned.

This map looks about right, IMO. We clocked a gust to 141mph in the Quarter at the worst of it all, and for over 5 hours had gusts to over 100mph. This was about a block from Jackson Square. It was sustained in the Quarter around 115mph to 120mph for the peak hour.

Ohhhhhh I knew this was going to open a can of worms!! :roll:

A2K

Audrey2Katrina · #46 Postby **Audrey2Katrina** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 12:19 pm

TSmith274 wrote:
benny wrote:
TSmith274 wrote:I hate to post this, but I know that an oil rig weather station around Buras, La. charted a max wind gust of 206 for about 10 seconds. I've seen the graph, and I can only speculate that it may have been a tornado. Wind speeds in the 165-170mph range was common, however. Were the instruments malfunctioning? I don't know. Don't shoot the messenger!

what's the source of that data? i haven't seen that before. does any official agency know about it?

I'm going to get the plant manager's name and phone number. I think it would be good for one of you mets out there to contact him and get him to fax you the record. I'll be down there in a few days. I'll get his info and post it on here or PM someone about it.

TSmith: By all means post it... It would be well worth at least a look-see.

A2K

#47 Postby **MGC** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:15 pm

Yes I'd like to see it also. I am highly skeptical of the HRD windfield data.....MGC

#48 Postby **bevgo** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:17 am

Kat might as well been a cat 5. The destruction was similar.. Surg, wind...who knows! :roll:

Intersting Info from Slidell...

Who is online