Camile not as bad as I thought!!!!

[donsutherland1]

Dave,

Be assured, that if the meteorological community were asked whether Dr. Simpson and Mr. Saffir did about the best job that they could in making an estimate of Camille's strength given the technology and circumstances and whether their estimates are credible, there's little doubt about the outcome. There is no great clamor to diminish Camille's strength. To put it bluntly, the arguments raised to claim a much weaker storm are speculative at best. The reanalysis didn't downgrade Camille and that reflects the best opinion of those in the strongest position to make such judgments.

[Derek Ortt]

I dont believe HRD has reanalysed Camielle yet, though I will check

[dhweather]

One major fundamental error in the analysis going on here: you're using structural damage to determine intensity. <b>THIS IS A BIG NO-NO</b>

Structural damage is based upon building codes as well as duration of the winds. Since Sfla had a much stronger code and a much shorter duration of maximum winds, the damage shold be worse from Camielle

One thing that strikes me from those photos, why in the world are those trees remaining standing? Thise damage photos shown there are very similar to those from Ivan west of Pensacola near the Blue Lagoon area (not sure if those are out of the eye wall or not)

Derek - I can vouch for the trees - most of the ones that lived though Camille are Live Oaks, which most are well over 200 years old. They are
extremely strong trees. Many down here are over 300 years old, and have survived Camille and many many many other storms.

I have great admiration for the Live Oaks - if those tress could talk, what stories they could tell. They could talk about the European explorers in the 1700's and much more.

[dhweather]

Mobilebay,

Without doubt Camille and Andrew were both catastrophic hurricanes. FWIW, the rankings of the three Category 5 hurricanes that made U.S. landfall are:

1. Hurricane #2 (1935) "The Labor Day Hurricane"
2. Hurricane Camille (1969)
3. Hurricane Andrew (1992)

For the most part, I believe the discussion concerns whether or not Camille was a strong Category 5 storm at landfall. Most of the evidence says that she was:

• Radar near landfall
• Barometric pressure
• Structural damage
• Storm surge
• Expert assessments from Dr. Simpson (NHC director) and Mr. Simpson (one of the world's leading experts on wind damage)
• Trajectory of storm as it came onshore/SSTs along her track
• On reanalysis, Camille's strength was reaffirmed

The case for a borderline Category 5 storm is weak.

• Small size limited area of wind damage: compact size has nothing to do with intensity
• Hypothesis of weakening rests on the fact that very few measurements were taken (sampling error would be too great for confidence in such a hypothesis) or lack of wind instrumentation (destroyed or inoperable due to the strength of the storm and thus this has little bearing)
• Standing trees: storm surge prevents a full blow-down, as the surge arrives ahead of the highest winds associated with the eye wall

Don, I once read that the Labor Day Hurricane's pressure was recorded
by a man that had a "pocket instrument" - is that correct?

Again, its unfortunate that there was not well established technology
to record the exact strength of that storm as well.

[Stormcenter]

Never thought I'd see the day when Camille would be considered anything less than a category 5.

You are absolutely correct. I can't believe we are actually discussing this.
Camille was a monster. The destruction she left behind speaks for itself. If you have any doubt of that then please talk to the people who survived her destruction and had to start over from nothing. My brother said they received wind gusts of 80 mph in downtown New Orleans when she made landfall. That was on her "weak" western side.

[donsutherland1]

Derek,

I could be mistaken and will also check into it.

[donsutherland1]

Mobilebay,

Here's a fairly detailed account of the Labor Day Hurricane:

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Storm_page ... ticle.html

[Frank P]

Boy, I don’t know how any reasonable person could doubt that Camille was a legitimate Category 5. Speaking of oaks I have two massive live oaks in my front yard best guess is that they are in the 350 – 400 year old range… they are massive…and I’m sure would have some great storm stories to tell if they could speak… If either one was to fall they would completely destroy my house, which is my biggest fear living on the front beach in Biloxi.…. My house could probably handle the winds of another Cat 5 storm and surge up to 22 feet as it did in Camille, but NOT the oaks if they we to fall... a plethora of hurricane straps and inch thick plywood would have absolutely no affect on a falling oak... except for making hauling off the debris a real pain...

Would like to comment that most of the damage I witnessed first hand from Camille was directly related to storm surge, especially along the coast in Biloxi…. Hey, I was 17 years old, and had nothing else to do for weeks except to explore all the damage ... I remembering having to climb a debris stack on Oak street on the point of at least 20-25 feet high just to gain access to the beach the day after the storm… it was utterly incredible

[dhweather]

Mobilebay,

Here's a fairly detailed account of the Labor Day Hurricane:

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Storm_page ... ticle.html

That's an amazing writeup - knocked unconscious 20 feet in the air after the water subsided - wow.

[HurryKane]

Live Oaks are tremendously strong--the hull of Old Ironsides was made from the wood of Live Oaks (the Live Oak frame was layered over and under with white oak). The dried wood of a Live Oak weighs around 55 lbs per cubic foot.

Those bad boys won't go down for almost nuthin'. And they're phenomenally beautiful trees, too. For some examples of these stately trees:

http://www.arcytech.org/java/population ... ories.html

http://www.americanforests.org/resource ... lpaper.php (top tree)


As for Camille--my parents showed me pictures of a gas station that had been destroyed, almost swept clean from the foundation...in Jackson, MS.

[MGC]

I doubt a tornado could take down a live oak. They have to be one of the strongest trees in the world. Many of the large homes in Pass Christian made it through Camille because they are built on a bluff that saved them from the surge. These homes were also able to withstand Camille's winds because of the wood they were built with. Heart of pine and cypress were used to build these fine old homes. Not the cheap pine used in today's construction. South Florida may have had building codes before Andrew but from what I heard many structures were build by crooked builders that were not up to code. ......MGC

[Frank P]

MCG excellent point about the construction of homes on the coast...

My original house that withstood Camille was framed with the heart of pine stuff, the original house was all wood, with 1X8 lap board siding on the walls, the framing is so hard you can't drive a 16d nail in it.. it must be drilled first... hard as steel..... now all of that is covered with 1/2" plywood and Alcoa siding rated for 190 mph winds....

and at the time of Camille it did not have one hurricane strap on it, anywhere... all that was added by me during remodeling... yet it was basically undamaged from Camille's winds, except the shingles were all blown off, and I am right on the beach on hwy 90..... roof decking is 1X6 tongue and groove pine... you don't get that on homes these days...

[Wpwxguy]

My wifes dad was a fireman at Stennis Space Center in Picayune, MS. He told me that when the sun came up that morning that they were at a loss. They could not believe what their eyes were seeing. They were sent to Bay St. Louis/Pass Christian areas to help with recovery/rescue efforts. It took them many hours to make the 30 minute trip down to the coast. They had to cut their way in to the area. Tree after tree after tree. They felt so helpless and they were the helpers. What a feeling that must have been. Nothing was recognizable to them, things that were apparent the day before........gone! He will tell you that she was a real....MONSTER......!
I was not around at that time, but do know that where I lived in Washington Parish, LA. received winds in excess of 135 mph and we are some 70- 80 miles from the coast. Our area suffered extensive damage, some areas were well over a week getting power restored. She was horrible, yet to all of us and those who lived through her she has a since of majesty. So powerful . No one wants to do it again, but no one wants to down play her power.

[dhweather]

There is no doubt that homes built in the 40/50/60's are of much better
materials and quality than the 70/80's. The construction industry started
using "new" materials - OSB sheeting, far from premium quality 2x4's.

[Wpwxguy]

People think that because we're so advanced, that our homes are built of better materials and are more structurally sound. NOT TRUE....... Materials are far less sound than they were 30-40 years ago. Building codes mean nothing if the materials required are garbage. Its all about money and the less quality, the more money they make on their material. Sure, some things may be better but overall homes are less sturdy today.

[dhweather]

Exactly!


The house I grew up in was built in the 50's, and the quality of construction and the materials grossly exceed todays standards. Much better than what you see today, even with the codes.

[cajungal]

I don't see how anybody could say that any hurricane that killed 250 people, not bad. Camille was a monster. True, Camille happed several years before I was born, and of course, did not witness it. But, since I am only a 2 and half hour drive from the MS Gulf Coast, I visit often. I bought the book with the pictures. Long Beach, Gulfport and Pass Christian looked like a bomb had been dropped. Camille was horrible and I have no doubt in my mind that people in that area experienced 200 mph wind gusts. And I hope nobody ever has to live through that horror ever again.

[donsutherland1]

Derek,

You're correct. The reanalysis project has not yet gotten to Camille. It is scheduled to reach the 1960s in 2006 per Dr. Landsea.

[Agua]

Derek,

You're correct. The reanalysis project has not yet gotten to Camille. It is scheduled to reach the 1960s in 2006 per Dr. Landsea.

Why are these reanalyses being performed?

[HurricaneBill]

Derek,

You're correct. The reanalysis project has not yet gotten to Camille. It is scheduled to reach the 1960s in 2006 per Dr. Landsea.

Why are these reanalyses being performed?

To use all available information to get a more accurate picture on past hurricanes.