What?! Not Enough Time???!!!!!!

This is the general tropical discussion area. Anyone can take their shot at predicting a storms path.

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.

Help Support Storm2K
Message
Author
GalvestonDuck
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 15941
Age: 57
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2002 8:11 am
Location: Galveston, oh Galveston (And yeah, it's a barrier island. Wanna make something of it?)

#21 Postby GalvestonDuck » Thu Jul 17, 2003 8:53 am

"Mother Nature has proven over and over that she does not intend for man to permanently inhabit the barrier islands..."

Or the California fault line or the flood plains or tornado alley???

I'll copy part of a post that I wrote last week in another forum (the rest of it doesn't apply because it was a vent about idiots, and VB and Houstonia are not idiots :) :

"Why stay somewhere you know for sure there will be a disaster?" Well, duh. We DON'T know. Are we all supposed to move from the coast just because a hurricane MIGHT hit there? That would move everyone from Maine down to Florida along the eastern seaboard, all those of us in the Gulf from western Florida on over here to Texas, and then all the folks from Washington state down to California (yeah, I know...not the same impact on west coast...but still, nothing's impossible). And how about how far inland many major storms travel, causing flooding? We'd all be packing into the heartland. But then, we can't live there cuz there might be a tornado. Let's all move north. No, wait...they have blizzards and their roofs cave in! Earthquakes, mudslides, forest fires, sinkholes, cave-ins, ice storms. It would be hard to find one "safe" location where you would NEVER have to worry about a natural disaster. And then, if we did all move to that safe spot (as if it would be feasible), we'd have overcrowding, disease, and crime. And one heck of a perfect target for Osama or Saddam. Talk about disaster.

I'll keep my happy, hurricane-watching butt right here on this island.

Houstonia, I read about him some time ago at the Galveston Museum. Lots of stuff there about the Indians who inhabitated the island long before we did, De Vaca's shipwreck, Lafitte and his pirate crew, the 1900 storm, and the Texas City disaster.
0 likes   

User avatar
wx247
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 14279
Age: 41
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 10:35 pm
Location: Monett, Missouri
Contact:

#22 Postby wx247 » Thu Jul 17, 2003 9:12 am

Houstonia...excellent post.

The problem stems from lack of education about storms.

I also have a problem with people like Dr. Steve Lyons who says that wind effects will be low... he is only reinforcing the thoughts that the hurricane won't do much. Instead, I propose that they show what can happen at each wind bracket. If people saw that they might be more inclined to pay attention. People on satellite only have a Wx. Radio and TWC for weather information.
0 likes   
Personal Forecast Disclaimer:
The posts in this forum are NOT official forecast 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.org. For official information, please refer to the NHC and NWS products.

User avatar
Portastorm
Storm2k Moderator
Storm2k Moderator
Posts: 9914
Age: 63
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2003 9:16 am
Location: Round Rock, TX
Contact:

#23 Postby Portastorm » Thu Jul 17, 2003 9:34 am

Have to agree with most of y'all about these knuckleheads on the Texas coast who are griping about "not enough time, not enough warning." The warnings were out in plenty of time and NHC shouldn't be criticized for that.

However, I'm fascinated by the reports I have read on this board that indicate the middle and upper Tx coast media folks were not up to speed on landfalling information. As a former media person, I know that reporters and editors can sometimes be behind the 8-ball when it comes to weather knowledge. Unless a newspaper or TV/radio outlet has a staffer with some weather interest/knowledge (I didn't see this too often during my time in journalism), these folks only go by what they are told by NWS and other "authorities."

Perhaps the local forecast offices in south Texas need to redouble their efforts in educating the media on the importance of REAL TIME information in crisis situations like this. I know NWS works hard every year on trying to educate media types ... but clearly, someone dropped the ball with Claudette given the excessive number of "we didn't know this was coming so soon" quotes I have heard this week.
0 likes   

User avatar
vbhoutex
Storm2k Executive
Storm2k Executive
Posts: 29112
Age: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 11:31 pm
Location: Cypress, TX
Contact:

#24 Postby vbhoutex » Thu Jul 17, 2003 3:33 pm

Very good post Duck!! Point well taken. We can run but we can't hide, but why openly court disaster(at least material)? However I must argue just a little here. There is a big difference between living on a barrier island that gets no higher than 12'msl and living on a coast you can easily evacuate from, a coast that does rise as you go away from the water. BTW, I fully support your choice to stay put. Given the odds, you shouldn't lose everything more than once or twice in a lifetime, if you ever do. It is all material-life is what matters!!!(THIS IS NOT MEANT AS A PUTDOWN AT ALL!!! I MEAN WHAT I SAY-NOTHING HIDDEN!!) My problem of course lies not with the choice to live there, but with the "why didn't anyone tell me my stuff would all be washed away?" "Why is my insurance so high?" I think you get my drift. To me it makes no sense to build million dollar houses on the water as well as the infrastructure to support them, just for it to be washed away over and over. Once should be enough, if there is a once allowed, which I personally don't think it should be when we are talking barrier islands. All one needs to do to understand my position is grow up on an unspoiled coast as I did in Gulf Breeze, FL and watch it all be replaced by shiny condo's etc. that are washed away periodically and replaced by my tax dollars and my higher insurance premiums. Likewise take a trip to S Padre Island and go into the unspoiled areas of Padre Isalnd National Seashore. The dunes there are 30+ feet high in many places with much vegetation helping hold them and the beauty is beyond compare. Those dunes will stop waves that could devastate the coast(I saw it during Camille in Gulf Breeze on the unspoiled ares of Santa Rosa Island)while what is left on the west end of Galveston island as far as dunes go is now gone again. Enough of my rant-I've said my piece.
0 likes   
Skywarn, C.E.R.T.
Please click below to donate to STORM2K to help with the expenses of keeping the site going:
Image

User avatar
Lindaloo
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 22658
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pascagoula, MS

#25 Postby Lindaloo » Thu Jul 17, 2003 3:55 pm

We have barrier islands that are supposed to protect us, but they can do little in a CAT 5 storm or even a CAT 3.

If you have been through Biloxi lately David you will see how much that coast has grown since Elena!! Those casinos are in the wrong place. if we ever get another storm like Camille there will be no more casinos standing. They suffered damage during Georges and it was a minimal cane. Two of them closed for about 2 months. One was severely damaged during Izzy. Hmmmmm....
0 likes   

User avatar
GulfBreezer
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2230
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 8:58 pm
Location: Gulf Breeze Fl
Contact:

#26 Postby GulfBreezer » Thu Jul 17, 2003 4:17 pm

David, as you know, I have lived in Gulf Breeze Fl for 30+ years now and I too remember the unspoiled island. With the tropical weather that has occurred over the years here, there are virtually no dunes left and we are desperatley still trying to refill the sand lost during Erin and Opal of 95. While trying to rebuild the dunes and regrow the sea oats that hold them together, what most peopl don't realize is that this is a very, very long process. It will take 10,15 or more years to just put back a fraction of what has been lost. The majority of all the homes that have been lost on the beach are indeed only replaced by larger homes once the insurance sends out the check. These homes have no chance in h*** to survive a hurricane of much force and they will start the cycle all over again. It is truly a very sad and frustrating situation............. :x
0 likes   

User avatar
vbhoutex
Storm2k Executive
Storm2k Executive
Posts: 29112
Age: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 11:31 pm
Location: Cypress, TX
Contact:

#27 Postby vbhoutex » Thu Jul 17, 2003 4:20 pm

Lindaloo wrote:We have barrier islands that are supposed to protect us, but they can do little in a CAT 5 storm or even a CAT 3.

If you have been through Biloxi lately David you will see how much that coast has grown since Elena!! Those casinos are in the wrong place. if we ever get another storm like Camille there will be no more casinos standing. They suffered damage during Georges and it was a minimal cane. Two of them closed for about 2 months. One was severely damaged during Izzy. Hmmmmm....


Actually, I drove just north of Biloxi on July 6th-didn't you see me waving from the brdige as I went through on I-10 near Pascagoula? I have not been back to that coast since 1969, 1 month after Camille came through. THAT IS A SIGHT I NEVER WANT TO SEE AGAIN!!!!!
Thanks for making my point at least in an indirect way. You are right-THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN PROTECT US COMPLETELY ALONG THE COAST FROM A CAT5!!! A CAT3 might have a little bit of a problem with unspoiled areas of a barrier island as I described above, but not much. If Camille had hit Gulf Breeze head on when I was there, my house, which sat 17 ft above msl would have been under 10 feet of water!! All you can do is RUN from that!!!
0 likes   
Skywarn, C.E.R.T.
Please click below to donate to STORM2K to help with the expenses of keeping the site going:
Image

jj
Tropical Low
Tropical Low
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 11:39 pm
Location: Houston, TX USA

#28 Postby jj » Thu Jul 17, 2003 6:04 pm

No one "deserves" to have their roof torn off or their home burn down or whatever damage happens to them. I agree they are ignorant for ignoring the meaning of hurricane watch and warning statements, but they still do not deserve disaster for being stupid.
0 likes   

User avatar
wxman57
Moderator-Pro Met
Moderator-Pro Met
Posts: 22978
Age: 67
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:06 pm
Location: Houston, TX (southwest)

Re: NPR

#29 Postby wxman57 » Thu Jul 17, 2003 6:14 pm

vbhoutex wrote:
wxman57 wrote:Even as late as 10am CDT yeserday morning, I heard NPR mention that Claudette would be making landfall on Tuesday EVENING. On KTRK, CH 13 in Houston, the local "met" (at 8am) said landfall would be late in the day. This was as the center was moving ashore.

It appeared they were reading reports from 24 hours ago before Claudette sped up.

Also, I was measuring a steady 15kt movement from 3 to 5 hours prior to landfall, while the NHC kept listing (and forecasting) only 9kts movement. As late as 4pm yesterday, their 12Z this morning position hadn't passed San Antonio!


Chris I find it interesting and disturbing that the NHC would hold onto something like this much of a difference in speed. I know they have a lot of parameters they have to meet which may restrict their information output, but I sure wonder why this big a difference was not noted and announced to the public. Do you have any ideas on this? Let me finish this paragraph by saying that overall I think NHC did a excellent job with this storm considering the many anomalies she presented.


I think that perhaps the NHC was using a 12-hour speed for the current speed instead of adjusting it hour-by-hour. In any case, their track was VERY slow - almost half the speed that the storm was traveling.
0 likes   

CajunMama
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Posts: 10791
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: 30.22N, 92.05W Lafayette, LA

#30 Postby CajunMama » Thu Jul 17, 2003 8:21 pm

In the words of Homer Simpson "D'OH".

How in the world can you choose to live on the coast and not be knowlegable about a storm in the gulf? No matter what the mets and models say they can't tell a definate landfall.
0 likes   

Rainband

Re: NPR

#31 Postby Rainband » Thu Jul 17, 2003 8:27 pm

wxman57 wrote:
vbhoutex wrote:
wxman57 wrote:Even as late as 10am CDT yeserday morning, I heard NPR mention that Claudette would be making landfall on Tuesday EVENING. On KTRK, CH 13 in Houston, the local "met" (at 8am) said landfall would be late in the day. This was as the center was moving ashore.

It appeared they were reading reports from 24 hours ago before Claudette sped up.

Also, I was measuring a steady 15kt movement from 3 to 5 hours prior to landfall, while the NHC kept listing (and forecasting) only 9kts movement. As late as 4pm yesterday, their 12Z this morning position hadn't passed San Antonio!


Chris I find it interesting and disturbing that the NHC would hold onto something like this much of a difference in speed. I know they have a lot of parameters they have to meet which may restrict their information output, but I sure wonder why this big a difference was not noted and announced to the public. Do you have any ideas on this? Let me finish this paragraph by saying that overall I think NHC did a excellent job with this storm considering the many anomalies she presented.


I think that perhaps the NHC was using a 12-hour speed for the current speed instead of adjusting it hour-by-hour. In any case, their track was VERY slow - almost half the speed that the storm was traveling.
THEY did a great job!!! Plain and simple..don't second guess the experts..They are doing the best anyone can IMHO :wink: They have their jobs for a reason!! :D
0 likes   

User avatar
isobar
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2002
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:05 am
Location: Louisville, KY

#32 Postby isobar » Thu Jul 17, 2003 9:01 pm

1. I agree NHC did a fine job here.

2. I agree also that TWC and others placing the wind impact as low is misleading. However it's all relative, as they are comparing it to other more powerful canes on the spectrum. Fact is ... the general public needs stuff spelled out for them in black/white. There WILL be wind damage in a cat 1.

3. Anyone living on the Gulf Coast or Eastern Seaboard should be hurricane prepared June 1, IMHO.

4. As coastal population increases, evacuation time will only increase. Not a pleasant situation.
0 likes   

User avatar
Lindaloo
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 22658
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pascagoula, MS

#33 Postby Lindaloo » Thu Jul 17, 2003 10:14 pm

While getting my hair cut this afternoon the topic of hurricanes came up. EVERYBODY in there had a story to tell and yes some about Camille. I mean the whole salon was buzzing. I BY MISTAKE, mentioned that some say they do not have enough warning to prepare. MISTAKE BIG MISTAKE. lol. Heard alot of horrific stories though while I kept MY BIG FAT MOUTH SHUT!!

All of them told me that when a storm enters the gulf they get prepared right then no matter what. Some even said they stock up on hurricane items on June 1st. Some said they have a special cabinet that stays stocked and is never touched all year long. ALL of them said that when we are under a hurricane watch they are out before the warning is issued.
0 likes   


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], jgh, NotSparta, Sciencerocks, Stratton23 and 26 guests