Wilma was ONLY a Category One...
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.
Wilma was ONLY a Category One...
Yeah, right. This is what you DON'T here that much from the media - both local and mainstream.
Link
Ten months and STILL no repairs, despite serious damage?! You also have the insurance and contract issues.
This is why I get incensed when people try to call Category One sustained winds "minor" or "only" Category One. Yes, I know Wilma wasn't a Katrina or Rita on the Gulf coast, but still, it was NOT "weak". It caused significant damage from Category One sustained winds and microbursts, and look what we're reaping ten months later: many lingering tarps; few repaired roofs (yes, despite that we're already nearly a year from October 2005 and are approaching the peak of the 2006 season in AUGUST); still signs of heavy damage to trees in the area from last year lingering; insurance claims difficult to get for many; and many other unresolved issues.
Sorry, I know this issue has been beaten like a dead horse, and I know many on the Gulf coast have gone through far worse with Katrina and Rita, but the damage Wilma did - as well as other storms - was anything but "minor" in southwest, south-central, southeast, and east-central Florida. That, along with dealing with the stress many months later, makes me incensed when people tell me Wilma wasn't a "big one". I know it can always be worse (larger and equally major storm coming in from east-southeast on Miami/Fort Lauderdale), but such sayings only reinforce the notion that Category One sustained winds, top with higher gusts, are weak. As I have seen and known, it is anything BUT the case.
Rant over... like many, I just partly wanted to say this and get it off my chest while providing true, scientific, and personal insights.
Link
Ten months and STILL no repairs, despite serious damage?! You also have the insurance and contract issues.
This is why I get incensed when people try to call Category One sustained winds "minor" or "only" Category One. Yes, I know Wilma wasn't a Katrina or Rita on the Gulf coast, but still, it was NOT "weak". It caused significant damage from Category One sustained winds and microbursts, and look what we're reaping ten months later: many lingering tarps; few repaired roofs (yes, despite that we're already nearly a year from October 2005 and are approaching the peak of the 2006 season in AUGUST); still signs of heavy damage to trees in the area from last year lingering; insurance claims difficult to get for many; and many other unresolved issues.
Sorry, I know this issue has been beaten like a dead horse, and I know many on the Gulf coast have gone through far worse with Katrina and Rita, but the damage Wilma did - as well as other storms - was anything but "minor" in southwest, south-central, southeast, and east-central Florida. That, along with dealing with the stress many months later, makes me incensed when people tell me Wilma wasn't a "big one". I know it can always be worse (larger and equally major storm coming in from east-southeast on Miami/Fort Lauderdale), but such sayings only reinforce the notion that Category One sustained winds, top with higher gusts, are weak. As I have seen and known, it is anything BUT the case.
Rant over... like many, I just partly wanted to say this and get it off my chest while providing true, scientific, and personal insights.
1 likes
Hurricane Floyd wrote:Cat 1? Yea ok, and Katrina was a tropical storm, the damage tells the story. No cat 1 is going to cause $16.8 Billion in damage without a surge or flooding, especially moving as quickly as Wilma was.
I believe the NHC's number of 120mph.
Your first sentence is exactly the point of this topic that I just wanted to honestly say and get off my chest. Tropical storms, depressions, and Category One/Category Two storms/sustained winds and gusts need to be taken much more seriously.
1 likes
- wxman57
- Moderator-Pro Met
- Posts: 23019
- Age: 67
- Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:06 pm
- Location: Houston, TX (southwest)
Hurricane Floyd wrote:Cat 1? Yea ok, and Katrina was a tropical storm, the damage tells the story. No cat 1 is going to cause $16.8 Billion in damage without a surge or flooding, especially moving as quickly as Wilma was.
I believe the NHC's number of 120mph.
You need to read the post a little more closely. It's not claiming that Wilma's SS rating was a Cat 1 at landfall but that Wilma produced sustained Cat 1 winds across a large section of south Florida. Big difference. It takes a strong/large Cat 2 or a Cat 3 to produce a significant area of Cat 1 sustained winds inland for any distance.
1 likes
- x-y-no
- Category 5
- Posts: 8359
- Age: 65
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:14 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Perhaps Derek can set this straight, but I was pretty sure that Wilma made landfall as a Cat 3, and left Florida as a Cat 2.
That said, I agree with the basic point of this post. A Cat 1 is nothing to sneeze at. I was quite impressed at the level of damage Katrina caused in Coral Gables and South Miami as a very newly formed Cat 1 hurricane. Lots of very large trees down, lots of very serious roof damage.
And of course much of South Florida only saw Cat 1 winds from Wilma.
That said, I agree with the basic point of this post. A Cat 1 is nothing to sneeze at. I was quite impressed at the level of damage Katrina caused in Coral Gables and South Miami as a very newly formed Cat 1 hurricane. Lots of very large trees down, lots of very serious roof damage.
And of course much of South Florida only saw Cat 1 winds from Wilma.
Last edited by x-y-no on Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
1 likes
wxman57 wrote:You need to read the post a little more closely. It's not claiming that Wilma's SS rating was a Cat 1 at landfall but that Wilma produced sustained Cat 1 winds across a large section of south Florida. Big difference. It takes a strong/large Cat 2 or a Cat 3 to produce a significant area of Cat 1 sustained winds inland for any distance.
That's exactly my point that Wilma produced mostly Category One sustained winds across southeast and east-central Florida (hence the thread title). It was a solid Category Three at southwest Florida landfall and a Category Two crossing the state.
1 likes
x-y-no wrote:Perhaps Derek can set this straight, but I was pretty sure that Wilma made landfall as a Cat 3, and left Florida as a Cat 2.
That said, I agree with the basic point of this post. A Cat 1 is nothing to sneeze at. I was quite impressed at the level of damage Katrina caused in Coral Gables and South Miami as a very newly formed Cat 1 hurricane. Lots of very large trees down, lots of very serious roof damage.
And of course much of South Florida only saw Cat 1 winds from Wilma.
Jan, the thread title eludes to the fact that Wilma mostly produced Category One sustained winds across southeast and east-central Florida due to land friction. I never was saying it was not a major at southwest Florida landfall and was a Category One crossing the state... I was just stating that, due to land friction, although Wilma was a major at southwest Florida landfall (120MPH to 125MPH sustained) and a solid Category Two across the state, most areas in southeast and east-central Florida received Category One sustained winds with brief much higher gusts and microbursts. Just wanted to clarify what I meant.
I completely agree with your second (middle) and last sentence. Your second and last sentences exactly reflects my sentiments I'm trying to get across with this thread/post.
0 likes
- beachbum_al
- Category 5
- Posts: 2163
- Age: 55
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:23 pm
- Location: South Alabama Coast
- Contact:
Look at what Hurricane Danny did to Alabama in 1997. I think it was a Cat 1 hurricane. It sat over this area for days and flooded the place. Homeowners along Fish River, Weeks Bay, etc lost everything. So it doesn't take a Cat 3 or higher to do major damage. Just have one that sits over you for a extended period of time and you have major damage.
0 likes
Yes, Wilma hit a bunch of salt water crocs as a cat 3, brought upper 1/lower cat 2 winds to Naples and Marco Island, and left the coast as a cat 2, maybe slightly weaker than the NHC BT of 95KT. The cat 2 winds unfortunately struck the center of Lauderdale and we saw just how bad that was, with cat 1 winds elsewhere from Key West (5 miles further south, they get the 125 m.p.h. winds and a surge of 15-20 feet, which likely would have resulted in a repeat of the Galveston Hurricane thanks to the worst evac in US history) to the Stuart area
0 likes
- Extremeweatherguy
- Category 5
- Posts: 11095
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:13 pm
- Location: Florida
Katrina was actually the first most expensive hurricane with a damage total over 80 billion, and Andrew was second with a total over 20 billion. Wilma was 3rd or 4th (depending on what source you use) with a total somewhere between 13-17 billion.Derek Ortt wrote:and one other thing
Wilma is the first most expensive hurricane in US history with a damage toll of 16.8 billion
0 likes
Extremeweatherguy wrote:Katrina was actually the first most expensive hurricane with a damage total over 80 billion, and Andrew was second with a total over 20 billion. Wilma was 3rd or 4th (depending on what source you use) with a total somewhere between 13-17 billion.Derek Ortt wrote:and one other thing
Wilma is the first most expensive hurricane in US history with a damage toll of 16.8 billion
If you put inflation into the mix, Andrew's 20 million in 92 will go over Katrina's 80 billion 05 dollars.
0 likes
- cheezyWXguy
- Category 5
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Dallas, TX
tgenius wrote:Extremeweatherguy wrote:Katrina was actually the first most expensive hurricane with a damage total over 80 billion, and Andrew was second with a total over 20 billion. Wilma was 3rd or 4th (depending on what source you use) with a total somewhere between 13-17 billion.Derek Ortt wrote:and one other thing
Wilma is the first most expensive hurricane in US history with a damage toll of 16.8 billion
If you put inflation into the mix, Andrew's 20 million in 92 will go over Katrina's 80 billion 05 dollars.
How do you figure?
You better explain that one to the experts that are saying and writing that Katrina is the worst and costliest natural disaster to ever hit the United States.
0 likes
-
- Category 5
- Posts: 1131
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:53 pm
- bvigal
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 2276
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: British Virgin Islands
- Contact:
I get your point, CapeVerdeWave. In the past, we'd hear about big hurricanes and that they were, say, Cat 3 at landfall. We didn't hear so much about what "category level" the winds were measured over land, if measured at all, as the storm moved inland. We just knew they did a lot of damage. They may have fallen into Cat 1 measuring range in all but a small area, but it was essentially a Cat 3 hurricane striking land.
Now, with all the media hype and public scutiny, folks hear that winds were measured in the Cat 1 range and think, "Oh, it was ONLY Cat 1, not the strong Cat 3 we heard." When in reality, it was the same winds and damage a major striking land has always caused.
Now, with all the media hype and public scutiny, folks hear that winds were measured in the Cat 1 range and think, "Oh, it was ONLY Cat 1, not the strong Cat 3 we heard." When in reality, it was the same winds and damage a major striking land has always caused.
0 likes
Extremeweatherguy wrote:Katrina was actually the first most expensive hurricane with a damage total over 80 billion, and Andrew was second with a total over 20 billion. Wilma was 3rd or 4th (depending on what source you use) with a total somewhere between 13-17 billion.Derek Ortt wrote:and one other thing
Wilma is the first most expensive hurricane in US history with a damage toll of 16.8 billion
1. Katrina $81.2 Billion
2. Andrew $26.5 Billion
3. Wilma $16.8 Billion
You need to read the post a little more closely. It's not claiming that Wilma's SS rating was a Cat 1 at landfall but that Wilma produced sustained Cat 1 winds across a large section of south Florida. Big difference. It takes a strong/large Cat 2 or a Cat 3 to produce a significant area of Cat 1 sustained winds inland for any distance.
and to answer that, your right I should have, if I would have I would have likely mentioned that
look at the post storm report, 70-80 sustained with 90+ gusts were widespread.
0 likes
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Cpv17, gib, Google Adsense [Bot], Hurricaneman, islandgirl45, Killjoy12, MarioProtVI, Miami Storm Tracker, NingNing and 44 guests