2005 Hurricane Season starting to piece together...

Scorpion · #61 Postby **Scorpion** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 8:38 pm

On visible looked like a Cat 5 easy. IR was a different story though.

HurricaneBill · #62 Postby **HurricaneBill** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 8:44 pm

Anonymous wrote:I find that to be BS. Seems when a storm moves past 25n it weakens. Not because of SST but upper level conditions. Opal I think was the most disorganized cat4 ever. Looked like pure crap. Opal was killed by shear and dry air not SST. ivan did become less organized but was still 135 at landfall. Ivan was cause of slight sheer and dry air. Lili was because of shear also. Look at the Western Pacific. how storm weaken when they hit.

Will somebody drop a dropsonde on his head, please?

HurricaneBill · #63 Postby **HurricaneBill** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 8:45 pm

Derek Ortt wrote:no outflow at all on the SW quad

Also, the radar looked far worse than did the sat. The wind distribution was more typical of a tropical storm than a major hurricane

Actually, the entire western half looks smaller than the eastern half.

#64 Postby **Andrew92** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 10:10 pm

HurricaneBill wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I find that to be BS. Seems when a storm moves past 25n it weakens. Not because of SST but upper level conditions. Opal I think was the most disorganized cat4 ever. Looked like pure crap. Opal was killed by shear and dry air not SST. ivan did become less organized but was still 135 at landfall. Ivan was cause of slight sheer and dry air. Lili was because of shear also. Look at the Western Pacific. how storm weaken when they hit.

Will somebody drop a dropsonde on his head, please?

I can't wait to hear NECTGO's (Not-Even-Close-To-Great One) complaints in the special forum that he's not allowed to post his forecasts. :roll:

I agree that El Nino probably won't have a big impact on the season, and despite some cooler waters near the U.S., it's gonna be a wild ride. Though not like 2004, but the setup *could* be similar. Personally, I hope this season is a lot quieter than last year.

-Andrew92

#65 Postby **MGC** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 11:10 pm

Who cares if Lili was lopsided especially if you were in the RFQ experiencing Cat 4 winds. Most hurricanes are quiet asymmetrical in their wind field distribution.....MGC

#66 Postby **LSU2001** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:08 am

I have a question. If the northern gulf cannot support a cat 5 because of the water depth. How did camile maintain herself and even strengthen as she approached the northern gulf ie. pass christian miss. I read the NWS bulletins and it seems that Camile was intensifying even as she made landfall. Just a question from a true amature.
Tim

Anonymous · #67 Postby **Anonymous** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:13 am

I believe Derek has some strong points, but it's all a matter of chance. September and October have alot of North Gulf Coast Hurricanes that weaken, but August had some very historical hurricanes for the Gulf, such as a 1856 Cat 4 for Louisiana, Camille, Charley, ect.

So, it's all a matter of chance. For example, a six hour movement faster could have brought a storm to the coast at 155 mph...but it moved slower, and 20 kts of shear hit it, weakening it to 80 mph, so the storm was not that bad. But, you can't use that as an excuse that most Gulf Coast storms weaken before hitting. Carmen scraped along the coast and weakened from 150 mph to 100 mph...but, it was because it scraped the coast.

#68 Postby **LSU2001** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:18 am

I was in Pascagoula Miss. when Camile hit and I can tell you one thing, regardless of the actual winds it was a night of living hell. When you looked out of the courthouse windows, it looked like a scene from Dante's inferno, things were burning, exploding,etc. The next day my uncle had to go to Bloxi to try and find my cousin and he had to go by boat. He came back with stories of bodies in the water and the devastation that was almost incomprehensible. The impact that camile had on anyone who lived on the Miss. gulf coast is still quite evident today. My family is still haunted by memories of that Late summer night in 1969. I believe that my intrest in tropical weather stems from that experience.
Tim

Anonymous · #69 Postby **Anonymous** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:36 am

Well, Camille was definitley a Category 5 Hurricane, with winds of atleast 180 mph, although it was probably 185-190 mph.

#70 Postby **george_r_1961** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:33 pm

I was 8 years old in 1969 and Camille sparked my interest in tropical cyclones. After years of looking at damage pictures and talking in person to many survivors of Camille I beleive Camille packed sustained winds at landfall of 190 mph with gusts to about 210 espcially along the coast just right of where the center made landfall. the davastation in her path was incredible and it was total. Very little if anything in the path of the most destructive winds was left standing. What the wind didnt get the storm surge did. For those in her path who chose to ride out the storm it was a hell on earth. One of my former neighbors who was in Camille and Andrew said that while Andrew was bad Camille was much much worse.

Ixolib · #71 Postby **Ixolib** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 9:36 pm

lsu2001 wrote:My family is still haunted by memories of that Late summer night in 1969. I believe that my intrest in tropical weather stems from that experience.

Yep - I'll second that!! Without a doubt, 8/17/69 had (has) the same impact on me...

#72 Postby **vbhoutex** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 11:29 pm

Ixolib wrote:
lsu2001 wrote:My family is still haunted by memories of that Late summer night in 1969. I believe that my intrest in tropical weather stems from that experience.

Yep - I'll second that!! Without a doubt, 8/17/69 had (has) the same impact on me...

I will never forget that night and I was Gulf Breeze, FL. Camille cemented an already festering addiction with tropical weather.

2005 Hurricane Season starting to piece together...

Who is online