|
|
Post by shrapnel - Arnold, MO on Oct 10, 2018 15:08:52 GMT -6
Most of these vids are coming in from away from the right front, the area from mexico beach to port st joe was likely destroyed and people that remained are fighting for life rather than posting vids.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Higgins on Oct 10, 2018 15:21:07 GMT -6
Not that I'm excited about death and destruction, and maybe it's because things are slow to move to network/cable news/websites, but I'm not seeing the kind of damage I'd expect to see from a high-end Cat4 storm? And maybe that's because improvements have been made in building code, etc. Thoughts? It took many hours after Katrina for people to see how bad it was. Lets wait until tomorrow...at the very least. |
|
|
|
Post by guyatacomputer - NE St. Peters on Oct 10, 2018 15:35:59 GMT -6
What I've seen is some storm surge flooding and the canopies of gas stations blown down. Only a few trees and a few missing pieces of siding - that sort of thing. So far not nearly as bad as I expected.
But tomorrow may show a different picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by BRTNWXMAN on Oct 10, 2018 15:54:08 GMT -6
Let's keep in mind that areas hit with the extreme wind and surge are likely completely inaccessable...
|
|
|
|
Post by guyatacomputer - NE St. Peters on Oct 10, 2018 16:03:18 GMT -6
Overshadowed by the coverage of Michael - high winds causing 15-25 foot waves on Lake Superior pushing in to Duluth causing severe flooding.
|
|
|
|
Post by dschreib on Oct 10, 2018 16:06:34 GMT -6
Also, like Coz said earlier, the area that it hit was the "best" case scenario, if there is such a thing. Mexico Beach to Port St. Joe is sparsely populated, much less than if it plowed through Panama City westward. There will be plenty of tourist attraction destruction, businesses, and homes. It's still devastating for those affected. But it could have been significantly worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by mchafin on Oct 10, 2018 16:08:57 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by dschreib on Oct 10, 2018 16:09:13 GMT -6
That said, there will also be some inland destruction--more so than we're used to. It's halfway to Albany, GA, and you can still see the eye on radar. That's crazy stuff.
EDIT: Also, that's not to say that Panama City got spared, just because it wasn't the landfall location or in the RF quadrant. I'm sure there will be plenty of damage there.
|
|
|
|
Post by mchafin on Oct 10, 2018 16:10:45 GMT -6
Not that I'm excited about death and destruction, and maybe it's because things are slow to move to network/cable news/websites, but I'm not seeing the kind of damage I'd expect to see from a high-end Cat4 storm? And maybe that's because improvements have been made in building code, etc. Thoughts? It took many hours after Katrina for people to see how bad it was. Lets wait until tomorrow...at the very least. I guess in today's 24 hour news cycle, I thought it would've been sooner. And I'm thankful that most media had positioned themselves outside of the path of major destruction. Following the links above .. it's bad. |
|
|
|
Post by guyfromhecker on Oct 10, 2018 16:12:35 GMT -6
Also, like Coz said earlier, the area that it hit was the "best" case scenario, if there is such a thing. Mexico Beach to Port St. Joe is sparsely populated, much less than if it plowed through Panama City westward. There will be plenty of tourist attraction destruction, businesses, and homes. It's still devastating for those affected. But it could have been significantly worse. Exactly. I feel sorry for the people there but there are worse scenarios than this. |
|
|
|
Post by mchafin on Oct 10, 2018 16:21:29 GMT -6
Again, I wasn't WANTING to see death and destruction, but rather curious as to what kind of damage the monster did.
I heard one report that people didn't expect it to be that bad. God I wish they had access to a site like this where you all predicted the explosive strengthening.
|
|
|
|
Post by BRTNWXMAN on Oct 10, 2018 16:48:54 GMT -6
There's footage from Mexico Beach of complete structure failures and inundation up to rooftops...it's bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by mchafin on Oct 10, 2018 16:54:29 GMT -6
yeah, i'm seeing all of that now. I had surgery on my foot last Friday so I've been working from home, and had the TV turned on to the likes of CNN/FOX News/TWC before I had to leave for an appt. They were showing live shots of clocking wind speeds, but that was more the sensationalism. It wasn't until just over the last hour that I'm seeing what Michael brought with him.
It's devastating; and 1 loss of life thus far.
|
|
|
|
Post by guyfromhecker on Oct 10, 2018 16:58:40 GMT -6
That thing is you go inland but
a quarter mile and you're through Mexico Beach and there's really nothing behind it for miles. You bring that right quarter straight into Panama City and you'd be seeing Big Time news stories now
|
|
|
|
Post by jmg378s on Oct 10, 2018 17:08:43 GMT -6
The category of this storm is yet to be determined. I do not believe Andrew was called a 5 right off the bat. I believe everybody thought he was a 4 until forensics were done. That will have to be done here. I may be wrong about that, but we'll see. I know Andrew's pressure stayed above what is classically considered a category 5. Michael's pressure made it to Category 5. We'll see So I think the story with Hurricane Andrew was that at the time it was believed that the wind/altitude relationship in major hurricanes yielded a 23% reduction factor from standard flight level, 700mb or ~2900m. (They didn't have the stepped frequency microwave radiometer (SFMR) back then to make direct measurements like they do now.) In the years afterward additional research revealed a much better understanding of the vertical wind structure of major hurricanes. Some of that eventually contributing to the journal paper "GPS Dropwindsonde Wind Profiles in Hurricanes and Their Operational Implications", 2002, Franklin, et. al. showing that the reduction is more like 10% (although every storm is a little different). I believe this was the primary reason for increasing the intensity of Andrew since several recon data points just prior to landfall were showing flight level winds around 160kts. Although there was clearly anecdotal reasons for the upgrade as well...I mean well built homes getting demolished was kind of a big red flag.  |
|
|
|
Post by guyfromhecker on Oct 10, 2018 17:20:11 GMT -6
The category of this storm is yet to be determined. I do not believe Andrew was called a 5 right off the bat. I believe everybody thought he was a 4 until forensics were done. That will have to be done here. I may be wrong about that, but we'll see. I know Andrew's pressure stayed above what is classically considered a category 5. Michael's pressure made it to Category 5. We'll see So I think the story with Hurricane Andrew was that at the time it was believed that the wind/altitude relationship in major hurricanes yielded a 23% reduction factor from standard flight level, 700mb or ~2900m. (They didn't have the stepped frequency microwave radiometer (SFMR) back then to make direct measurements like they do now.) In the years afterward additional research revealed a much better understanding of the vertical wind structure of major hurricanes. Some of that eventually contributing to the journal paper "GPS Dropwindsonde Wind Profiles in Hurricanes and Their Operational Implications", 2002, Franklin, et. al. showing that the reduction is more like 10% (although every storm is a little different). I believe this was the primary reason for increasing the intensity of Andrew since several recon data points just prior to landfall were showing flight level winds around 160kts. Although there was clearly anecdotal reasons for the upgrade as well...I mean well built homes getting demolished was kind of a big red flag. Didn't some of the on ground investigation by Fujita help to verify that also? And of course they did get up 164 mile-an-hour gust reading from the hurricane center before the anemometer broke. You think it's possible with radar analysis now that they might kick it up? After all Chris did notice 214 mile-per-hour pixels at 3500 feet. That would translate to Category 5 I imagine |
|
|
|
Post by John G -west belleville on Oct 10, 2018 18:42:33 GMT -6
Lots of experienced hurricane chasers saying that it is absolutely extreme damage.
|
|
|
|
Post by dschreib on Oct 10, 2018 19:08:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by jmg378s on Oct 10, 2018 20:16:06 GMT -6
Didn't some of the on ground investigation by Fujita help to verify that also? And of course they did get up 164 mile-an-hour gust reading from the hurricane center before the anemometer broke. You think it's possible with radar analysis now that they might kick it up? After all Chris did notice 214 mile-per-hour pixels at 3500 feet. That would translate to Category 5 I imagine Yeah I think there was other secondary evidence for arriving at the final best track intensity for Andrew, which by the way was 145kts (165mph) at landfall, but I don't recall what it all was. As far as reclassifying Michael based on the NEXRAD radar velocity data I highly doubt. I saw some of those 200+mph blips as well but I was also noticing the spectrum width was high which to me indicated that the data was very noisy and gusty with hydrometers subjected to a lot turbulence. The other consideration is that advisory intensity is supposed to represent 1-minute average sustained wind speed whereas NEXRAD velocity is determined from a short dwell at a particular az/el cut. So my guess is those values, when reduced for altitude, are probably more reflective of gusts. Now I don't know if any of the university research groups like RaXPol or DOW were out there, but perhaps their data could be used in post-analysis. |
|
|
|
Post by nascarfan999 on Oct 10, 2018 21:27:04 GMT -6
Didn't some of the on ground investigation by Fujita help to verify that also? And of course they did get up 164 mile-an-hour gust reading from the hurricane center before the anemometer broke. You think it's possible with radar analysis now that they might kick it up? After all Chris did notice 214 mile-per-hour pixels at 3500 feet. That would translate to Category 5 I imagine Yeah I think there was other secondary evidence for arriving at the final best track intensity for Andrew, which by the way was 145kts (165mph) at landfall, but I don't recall what it all was. As far as reclassifying Michael based on the NEXRAD radar velocity data I highly doubt. I saw some of those 200+mph blips as well but I was also noticing the spectrum width was high which to me indicated that the data was very noisy and gusty with hydrometers subjected to a lot turbulence. The other consideration is that advisory intensity is supposed to represent 1-minute average sustained wind speed whereas NEXRAD velocity is determined from a short dwell at a particular az/el cut. So my guess is those values, when reduced for altitude, are probably more reflective of gusts. Now I don't know if any of the university research groups like RaXPol or DOW were out there, but perhaps their data could be used in post-analysis. I don't believe I ever saw it posted here, but the chasers who abandoned their car during the livestream did make it through the storm ok (as well as every chaser as far as I know). I'm not sure they will upgrade the storm, but I think it is definitely possible considering the last recon pass before landfall, the NEXRAD data, the level of damage (TBD), the pressure at landfall, and to my knowledge no anemometer survived the eye. I don't think any of them individually warrant the upgrade, but taken together it may be seen as enough evidence. They may have been east of the eye, but I'm worried that there's no word yet out of the Port St. Joe area (at least that I've seen). |
|
|
|
Post by guyfromhecker on Oct 11, 2018 4:13:26 GMT -6
Didn't some of the on ground investigation by Fujita help to verify that also? And of course they did get up 164 mile-an-hour gust reading from the hurricane center before the anemometer broke. You think it's possible with radar analysis now that they might kick it up? After all Chris did notice 214 mile-per-hour pixels at 3500 feet. That would translate to Category 5 I imagine Yeah I think there was other secondary evidence for arriving at the final best track intensity for Andrew, which by the way was 145kts (165mph) at landfall, but I don't recall what it all was. As far as reclassifying Michael based on the NEXRAD radar velocity data I highly doubt. I saw some of those 200+mph blips as well but I was also noticing the spectrum width was high which to me indicated that the data was very noisy and gusty with hydrometers subjected to a lot turbulence. The other consideration is that advisory intensity is supposed to represent 1-minute average sustained wind speed whereas NEXRAD velocity is determined from a short dwell at a particular az/el cut. So my guess is those values, when reduced for altitude, are probably more reflective of gusts. Now I don't know if any of the university research groups like RaXPol or DOW were out there, but perhaps their data could be used in post-analysis. Yeah, could have been gusts for sure. Radar probably isn't perfect either with everything going on. I read a pdf for the final track yesterday. Good read. |
|
|
|
Post by guyfromhecker on Oct 11, 2018 5:22:18 GMT -6
Thing about Andrew is that there were damaged tracks through Homestead that pretty much exceeded the strength of the storm. Caused by vortices moving in the eye wall. They even found that the side of the vortice that was going with the wind had more damage, and the side of the vortice that was against the wind actually lessened the damage. Effectively have one side looking like it was hit by a strong cat 5 and the other side looking like it was hit by a cat 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by guyfromhecker on Oct 11, 2018 5:38:33 GMT -6
Another interesting thing about Andrew was the path he took through Florida. Once he cleared the Metro areas south of Miami he emerged into an Everglades area that was more like the ocean than land. That was one of the key reasons why it managed to get into the Gulf of Mexico maintaining category 4 strength
|
|
|
|
Post by guyfromhecker on Oct 11, 2018 6:01:42 GMT -6
Yeah I think there was other secondary evidence for arriving at the final best track intensity for Andrew, which by the way was 145kts (165mph) at landfall, but I don't recall what it all was. As far as reclassifying Michael based on the NEXRAD radar velocity data I highly doubt. I saw some of those 200+mph blips as well but I was also noticing the spectrum width was high which to me indicated that the data was very noisy and gusty with hydrometers subjected to a lot turbulence. The other consideration is that advisory intensity is supposed to represent 1-minute average sustained wind speed whereas NEXRAD velocity is determined from a short dwell at a particular az/el cut. So my guess is those values, when reduced for altitude, are probably more reflective of gusts. Now I don't know if any of the university research groups like RaXPol or DOW were out there, but perhaps their data could be used in post-analysis. I don't believe I ever saw it posted here, but the chasers who abandoned their car during the livestream did make it through the storm ok (as well as every chaser as far as I know). I'm not sure they will upgrade the storm, but I think it is definitely possible considering the last recon pass before landfall, the NEXRAD data, the level of damage (TBD), the pressure at landfall, and to my knowledge no anemometer survived the eye. I don't think any of them individually warrant the upgrade, but taken together it may be seen as enough evidence. They may have been east of the eye, but I'm worried that there's no word yet out of the Port St. Joe area (at least that I've seen). If Mexico Beach was center point then they were in the right eye wall. They would have dealt with some serious surge and possibly some of the vortices with the greatest intensity because of the position if they were occurring at landfall |
|
|
|
Post by mchafin on Oct 11, 2018 7:19:40 GMT -6
It's going to take months to clean up. Wind + Water = Catastrophic damage. I pray that these people get the help they need to rebuild their lives.
|
|
|
|
Post by ComoEsJn on Oct 11, 2018 7:29:06 GMT -6
Dave just shared a forecast map showing a still-organized Michael making it potentially to southern Ireland?? Is that normal for one of these storms?
|
|
|
|
Post by guyfromhecker on Oct 11, 2018 7:58:01 GMT -6
We have three Oceanfront resorts in that general area. One of them is located at Panama City Beach and the others are located at Laguna Beach. Going to be interesting to see if there is a big difference in the damage over the 7 miles or so.
I'm guessing the one at Panama City Beach did get some eyewall action. The thing the resort has going for it is the windows are all on the Ocean Side. Being on that side of the hurricane the strongest winds would have been coming from land.
|
|
|
|
Post by BRTNWXMAN on Oct 11, 2018 8:07:19 GMT -6
Panama City sustained widespread major damage from the eyewall...trees snapped off by the thousands and many structures lost roofs or walls. Looked like 120mph+ easy.
|
|
|
|
Post by STGOutdoors on Oct 11, 2018 8:14:33 GMT -6
Mexico Beach looks to definitely be ground zero and clearly had the Cat. 4/5 winds. As has been mentioned, it is much smaller in terms of development, so it may not appear as bad. Had this come ashore just a few miles west, it would have been much much worse in terms of number of structures destroyed.
|
|
|
|
Post by shrapnel - Arnold, MO on Oct 11, 2018 9:06:41 GMT -6
|
|
