They ammended the Fujita scale, should they do the same with

[hurricanedude]

with the saffir simpson scale?

If so how would you like to see it changed?

[RattleMan]

Fajita scale? Is that a scale of how tasty they are?

Jokes aside, no, I believe the SSHS is fine as it is.

[Coredesat]

You do mean "Fujita scale", right?

Aside from the fact that the topic name has made me hungry, I'm not sure the SSHS needs reformatting. It hasn't had the accuracy problems that the Fujita scale has, because hurricane winds are usually easier to measure than far stronger tornado winds.

[Opal storm]

I think they should make two scales- one for wind and one for the storm surge.

[HURAKAN]

I think the SSHS fulfills its purpose but if there is a better scale, then it should be changed. So far I have not seen a better one.

The best thing to do is to educate the public on what to do in case a storm approaches.

If you live near the coast or in a flood zone, doesn't matter the storm, get out.

If you live in a trailer home, doesn't matter the storm, get out. Tornadoes can form even in depressions.

If you house is strong enough to sustain a hurricane, stay inside in a safe part of the house until the storm is over.

And many more logical tips that sometime people forget.

[HURAKAN]

I think they should make two scales- one for wind and one for the storm surge.

If you make two scales, then you confuse the public and that's a problem.

[Opal storm]

I think they should make two scales- one for wind and one for the storm surge.

If you make two scales, then you confuse the public and that's a problem.

IMO the public is already confused.

A hurricane is not just wind like a tornado is, it's also storm surge and they both need to be measured differently because the magnitude of the wind will not be the same as the surge (and vise versa).

[TheShrimper]

If the public is confused by 2 different scales, then that is thier problem.. they deserve what might ensue and maybe next time they will be more learned about what may be confronting them. You see, over here in SW Fla., it does not take much of a storm wind wise, to cause major F'n problems, water wise. A strong cat.1 or weak cat 2, though the wind would be non life threatening or damaging, the surge of a slow moving storm would, seeing that Pine Island is for the most part just a few feet above sea level. A moon tide with just a slight southerly componant of wind causes major problems pal. It's worse out on the barrier islands, as you should know. So whoever posted the idea of two scales, I wholeheartedly agree. Wind is one thing, water is completley different, and it varies differently depending on the impact area.

[TheShrimper]

I just saw that it was you Opal Storm that made the post. Good Job.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

Let's apply 2 scales...I think it might be a
good idea:
Hurricane Katrina: At Landfall
Wind: Category 3
Surge: Category 5

Hurricane Rita: At Landfall
Wind: Category 3
Surge: Category 5

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

If we were to compare the most intense hurricanes based on
total energy at a certain time or over a specified time,
Katrina would be more "Intense" than Wilma, Andrew,
Charley, Ivan, or the Labor Day Storm.

In Fact, At Landfall, Katrina Would be by far the
MOST Intense Hurricane, more intense than Andrew,
the Labor Day Storm (which were MUCH smaller in size
but still destructive)---> Based on TOTAL ENERGY AT
LANDFALL

Because it had a much larger size, much more energy was
expended.

[Chacor]

To have two scales running simultaneously for winds and surge will confuse people.

[Derek Ortt]

use the Powell method from the article I posted here, or some other index that COMBINES intensity and size (there are a couple of others besides the Powell method that are also far better than the SS scale which could also be used)

The SS scale was NOT intended to be used the way it is currently used and was origionally based upon GUSTS

[Dr. Jonah Rainwater]

By that dual scale you could re-analyze other storms as well:

Charley
wind: 4
surge: 2

Ivan
wind: 3
surge: 4

Lili
wind: 1
surge: 2

Dennis
wind: 3
surge: 1

What about Floyd? A category two, but what a whopper he was! Maybe we need another scale for moisture content and rainfall potential...storms like Floyd, Frances, Allison, Danny and others...Wilma over the Yucatan, most anything approaching Haiti....

Maybe they could scale a storm by its' destructive potential in all 3 areas and give each impact zone its' own localized severity rating...

Mexican Wilma
rain: 5
wind: 4
surge: 3-4

Cuban Wilma
rain: 3
wind: 1
surge: 3

Floridian Wilma
rain: 2
wind: 3
surge: 3-4

Bahamian Wilma
rain: 1
wind: 3
surge: 2


And at this point it's getting really complicated. It's difficult to predict even one aspect of a storm, let alone multiple multiples like that...but it would be a decent idea if executed right.

[Chacor]

use the Powell method from the article I posted here, or some other index that COMBINES intensity and size (there are a couple of others besides the Powell method that are also far better than the SS scale which could also be used)

The SS scale was NOT intended to be used the way it is currently used and was origionally based upon GUSTS

The Aussie scale is based on gusts. And that would make more sense since gusts do the real damage.

[Dr. Jonah Rainwater]

use the Powell method from the article I posted here, or some other index that COMBINES intensity and size (there are a couple of others besides the Powell method that are also far better than the SS scale which could also be used)

The SS scale was NOT intended to be used the way it is currently used and was origionally based upon GUSTS

Gusts are notoriously hard to predict...Hurricane Celia was only a category 3 but had isolated mesovorticies within the eyewall gusting above 175mph that devastated parts of Corpus Cristi. Andrew's eyewall contained the same sort of beasts which led to its reclassification as a category 5. Some storms like Celia, Andrew, and Wilma bring all the intense winds that were advertised in the NHC's pre-landfall advisories...but other storms like Katrina, Rita, Dennis, and others bring winds a good one to two categories lower than originally thought.

[HurricaneBill]

Use the SS scale operationally when a storm is active.

Have a separate scale for rating landfalls based on damage/impact.

[Typhoon Hunter]

What HurricaneBill suggests would be a good idea however more than one scale for active storms would just confuse the hell out of people. I think categorising by gusts would a good thing since they're the one's which tear apart billboards, topple walls etc.

[Extremeweatherguy]

If we were to compare the most intense hurricanes based on
total energy at a certain time or over a specified time,
Katrina would be more "Intense" than Wilma, Andrew,
Charley, Ivan, or the Labor Day Storm.

In Fact, At Landfall, Katrina Would be by far the
MOST Intense Hurricane, more intense than Andrew,
the Labor Day Storm (which were MUCH smaller in size
but still destructive)---> Based on TOTAL ENERGY AT
LANDFALL

Because it had a much larger size, much more energy was
expended.

I don't know if I agree with that. It is the wind speed and pressure that really show the true "intensity" of the storm. The storm surge from Katrina was mainly produced before landfall when she was still much stronger, but by the time she made landfall she had weakened quite a bit. At landfall, I think tighter, windier storms would be more intense since they are releasing much more energy in a smaller area. Larger storms that release less energy over a large area do not seem more intense to me than the smaller storms that release lots of energy over a small area. The Labor Day storm still is #1 in my mind.

BTW: Even if we were to use your reasoning, why would Katrina be the most intense at landfall? The damages and storm surge really had a lot to do with location, and not so much storm intensity at landfall. Katrina happened to hit a very populated and very surge-prone part of the world, thus she had a much better chance to cause death and destruction than say a similar or stronger storm hitting a less populated, less surge-prone region.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

True...perhaps what I mean is overall energy delivered from a storm
a sum of all energies across the storm.