Jeanne likely actually landfalling as cat 2...per NHC
Moderator: S2k Moderators
Forum rules
The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.
- southerngale
- Retired Staff

- Posts: 27418
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 1:27 am
- Location: Southeast Texas (Beaumont area)
-
SouthernWx
senorpepr wrote:
However, that one report of 112kt is not confirmed as a sustained wind.
No...but this data tells me Jeanne is a major hurricane...likely 115-120 mph with gusts over 140 mph (which the KMLB doppler radial velocity data indicates), and there will be major damage in the north eyewall region from St Lucie county into southern Brevard county....
0 likes
-
Chilly_Water
- Tropical Storm

- Posts: 191
- Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:59 pm
- Location: Charleston, SC
Ok. I'm actually stealing this idea from a fellow S2K member(who doesn't post that much): They should drop the Saffir-Simpson scale altogether and just report the barometric pressure and give some reports of winds in every quadrant of the afflicted area.
Why?
Firstly, it'll end all this bickering on "how powerful the storm was."
Secondly, every aspect of the storm is different in every quadrant; hurricanes, and meteorology altogether, are completely fluid. Every square inch is different and putting such a broad "judgement" on such an entity is worthless....
just my opinion
Why?
Firstly, it'll end all this bickering on "how powerful the storm was."
Secondly, every aspect of the storm is different in every quadrant; hurricanes, and meteorology altogether, are completely fluid. Every square inch is different and putting such a broad "judgement" on such an entity is worthless....
just my opinion
Last edited by Chilly_Water on Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 likes
-
NorthGaWeather
Lockhart wrote:Tri-State_1925 wrote:Nobody was yelling at people about the dry air. The fact was the storm was weakening, but not as much as people were saying at the time.
I don't know what kind of prizes you guys want for being right...
You must have missed those discussions. I saw several in which people who mentioned the storm looking ragged because of running into huge areas of dry air were ridiculed and even called trolls. Your attitude is perfectly symptomatic of the problem. I posted to point out that rude people had been wrong and to note that maybe in the future, they'd be less obnoxious in telling other people they think they're wrong. Considering that those other people just turned out to be right, that should be obvious. Instead of considering that a perfectly reasonable and civil comment/request, you say I'm suggesting people want "prizes" for being right.
People just don't want other people calling them names--especially when they're right and the other people are wrong.
Are you saying the dry air weakened Jeanne and the people who said that are right?
0 likes
-
NorthGaWeather
- yoda
- Category 5

- Posts: 7874
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
- Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
- Contact:
NorthGaWeather wrote:Lockhart wrote:Tri-State_1925 wrote:Nobody was yelling at people about the dry air. The fact was the storm was weakening, but not as much as people were saying at the time.
I don't know what kind of prizes you guys want for being right...
You must have missed those discussions. I saw several in which people who mentioned the storm looking ragged because of running into huge areas of dry air were ridiculed and even called trolls. Your attitude is perfectly symptomatic of the problem. I posted to point out that rude people had been wrong and to note that maybe in the future, they'd be less obnoxious in telling other people they think they're wrong. Considering that those other people just turned out to be right, that should be obvious. Instead of considering that a perfectly reasonable and civil comment/request, you say I'm suggesting people want "prizes" for being right.
People just don't want other people calling them names--especially when they're right and the other people are wrong.
Are you saying the dry air weakened Jeanne and the people who said that are right?
Well... it did some.. it was able to contain Jeanne enough so that she didn't strengthen alot.
0 likes
- Sean in New Orleans
- Category 5

- Posts: 1794
- Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 7:26 pm
- Location: New Orleans, LA 30.0N 90.0W
- Contact:
All of this discussion and bickering about wind reports is irrelevent. The hurricane's category will also be determined by damage reports, as well, coming in during the next few days. A hurricanes category is also determined by the damage. Nobody seems to really consider this, IMO. There are numerous winds and gusts that go unreported and damage assessments reveal these to the proper people who categorize hurricanes.
0 likes
-
Guest
This was more then 115 at landfall I think. As for Ivan it was a cat4 at landfall. I really think someone at nhc needs their head examined Avila is one. Frances was 115 at landfall and this is stronger. I do think the Bahamas played a role in Jeanne not becoming stronger. If she would have gone 40 miles south and missed the islands she would have been stronger.
0 likes
southerngale wrote:The advisory says it cat. 3 and Max Mayfield just said it is cat. 3 - why are ya'll still arguing about it?
Just friendly discussion (I hope) of the comment in the discussion: "SFMR AND FLIGHT LEVEL WIND OBSERVATIONS AT THIS POINT DO NOT QUITE SUPPORT THE 100 KT INTENSITY ESTIMATE". As 100 kts is almost the absolute minimum for Category 3, if it isn't 100 kts, it might not be Category 3.
If I had to make a guess, I'd bet it will end up being considered category 3--but just barely.
0 likes
- yoda
- Category 5

- Posts: 7874
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
- Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
- Contact:
NorthGaWeather wrote:yoda wrote:southerngale wrote:The advisory says it cat. 3 and Max Mayfield just said it is cat. 3 - why are ya'll still arguing about it?
Because the 11 PM discussion SUGGESTS otherwise...
The 11 PM discussion was written beofre the data came in.
Huh? How so? What data are we talking about here? All data was in for the 11 PM. It does say that the plane is not done yet.. but all info from the plane to that point was included in the 11 PM advisory.
0 likes
-
Guest
the dry air people didnt really even talk about weakening, just maintaining and that it saved florida from a cat4/5 because every other condition for strengthening was in place and she didnt significantly strengthen.
this cat2/cat3 1mph difference arguing is pretty irrelevant...what isnt is that a very minimal cat 3 vs a cat 4 would have been monumently different when it comes to damage and destruction.
the only real saving grace was the very dry air environment in which she worked.
this cat2/cat3 1mph difference arguing is pretty irrelevant...what isnt is that a very minimal cat 3 vs a cat 4 would have been monumently different when it comes to damage and destruction.
the only real saving grace was the very dry air environment in which she worked.
0 likes
-
NorthGaWeather
yoda wrote:NorthGaWeather wrote:yoda wrote:southerngale wrote:The advisory says it cat. 3 and Max Mayfield just said it is cat. 3 - why are ya'll still arguing about it?
Because the 11 PM discussion SUGGESTS otherwise...
The 11 PM discussion was written beofre the data came in.
Huh? How so? What data are we talking about here? All data was in for the 11 PM. It does say that the plane is not done yet.. but all info from the plane to that point was included in the 11 PM advisory.
Exactly the entire storm was not sampled. The SFRM measured the NE quad surface winds of greater than 115 mph.
0 likes
- yoda
- Category 5

- Posts: 7874
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
- Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
- Contact:
NorthGaWeather wrote:yoda wrote:NorthGaWeather wrote:yoda wrote:southerngale wrote:The advisory says it cat. 3 and Max Mayfield just said it is cat. 3 - why are ya'll still arguing about it?
Because the 11 PM discussion SUGGESTS otherwise...
The 11 PM discussion was written beofre the data came in.
Huh? How so? What data are we talking about here? All data was in for the 11 PM. It does say that the plane is not done yet.. but all info from the plane to that point was included in the 11 PM advisory.
Exactly the entire storm was not sampled. The SFRM measured the NE quad surface winds of greater than 115 mph.
IN FACT...SFMR AND FLIGHT LEVEL
WIND OBSERVATIONS AT THIS POINT DO NOT QUITE SUPPORT THE 100 KT
INTENSITY ESTIMATE...
0 likes
-
Guest
Charleycat4 wrote:This was more then 115 at landfall I think. As for Ivan it was a cat4 at landfall. I really think someone at nhc needs their head examined Avila is one. Frances was 115 at landfall and this is stronger. I do think the Bahamas played a role in Jeanne not becoming stronger. If she would have gone 40 miles south and missed the islands she would have been stronger.
0 likes
-
NorthGaWeather
-
Guest
-
DoctorHurricane2003
This sounds like trolling to me....very very similar to the Ivan is a Cat 2 thread.....we want proof....etc. etc.
The NHC Set Maximum Surface Winds at 100 KT.
100 KT is a category 3.
There is proof through the dropsondes.
There is proof through surface reports.
Gusts don't have to be 20 MPH over a sustained wind....they can be as little as 1 MPH.
Jeanne is a category 3....end of discussion.
I suggest moderators to lock this topic before this becomes even more like the "Ivan is a Cat 2" thread.
The NHC Set Maximum Surface Winds at 100 KT.
100 KT is a category 3.
There is proof through the dropsondes.
There is proof through surface reports.
Gusts don't have to be 20 MPH over a sustained wind....they can be as little as 1 MPH.
Jeanne is a category 3....end of discussion.
I suggest moderators to lock this topic before this becomes even more like the "Ivan is a Cat 2" thread.
0 likes
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: DESTRUCTION5, HurricaneFan, wwizard and 83 guests

