ATL: IRENE - Remnants - Discussion

[bexar]

on my opinion, I think the media is quite exaggerated over the coverage of Hurricane Irene.

[brunota2003]

Looks like the primary mission of this particular flight is to find out what exactly the reduction throughout the hurricane is. 10 dropsondes released thus far, with only 2 of those in the center...after only 3 center fixes.

[Meteorcane]

This was Irene's estimated wind field at landfall as you can see the primary monitoring sites (in red) missed the strongest winds I still don't know why people try to use actual surface obs to gauge max winds in a cyclone after all they are over land at varying exposures and some are not 10m.

Also for most storms it is difficult to actually find measured sustained hurricane force winds I mean look at Dolly only one real sustained hurricane force measurement yet no one argues that was a hurricane (there are countless examples of this)

For the record, I certainly was not suggesting that Irene wasn't a hurricane at landfall. Heck, I'm not saying it's not a hurricane now. I'm just saying that nearly everyone who has been affected by Irene has not seen hurrricane-strength winds. As we've seen and as we've expected, the hurricane-strength winds are primarily (or entirely, at times) in the eastern 1/2 of the circulation, which has been largely east of the land areas (save for far eastern NC). So, for most people who may be home watching Irene batter them, they've largely only seen, at most, tropical storm force winds.

I've mentioned this several times because I don't want people to experience Irene, hear that it is/was a Cat 1 or weak Cat 2, and think to themselves "Hmm, so the winds I was seeing out the window are what 80-90 mph winds look like. This isn't too bad -- the people who evacuated or boarded up are suckers!". People have a tendency to overestimate winds based on visual obs alone, and it can be dangerous because it can lead to ill-fated decisions in subsequent situations. For example, suppose another Cat 1/2 storm comes along next month or next year -- that person's residence may actually see true 80-90 mph winds (which certainly have the potential for causing structural damage, if nothing else). If he/she experienced Irene's winds, thinking they were seeing the "maximum sustained winds of 85 mph", he/she may well stay for the next storm because, well, Irene wasn't so bad. Of course, they didn't see the real 80-90 mph winds that did affect extreme eastern NC...

Ok then, I understand your point because being from the general New Orleans area, I know people who stayed in the city during Katrina and believe they saw 125 mph sustained winds, when in reality winds in N.O. proper were "only"in the 75-85 range. I can also vouch for visually overestimating wind speeds....during Ike the winds seemed very strong so I assumed they were hurricane force, when in fact they were only in the 60 mph range, with gusts to about 80 (based on nearest obs).

[brunota2003]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We have to stop people from thinking it's "only a cat1 or TS" when they are at risk from downbursts, tornadoes and massive flooding for many more hours to come.
She's hours away from landfall again and the estimated landfall points have already been seriously floded. Then inland areas have people thinking the Wx reporters are "overreacting" when people are being killed things other than hurricane force winds.
Time to reasses the storm rating scales and criteria.

Unfortunately, I think the main thing that keeps the scale from being reorganized is that anything that considers flooding, surge, and wind would have to have multiple ratings. I don't think the general public could handle that (not saying they are stupid), because most are not weatherwise, they are otherwise.

One more chance for me to mention the IKE scale, which evaluates the entire storm and gives a Wind Damage Potential and Surge/Waves Damage Potential.
The most recent analysis (0130z) : WDP: 2.1, Surge/Waves damage potential 3.8 (scale is 0 to 6.0)

The page is here: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Storm_pages/irene2011/wind.html

This is an experimental NOAA/AOML/HRD product, which means it has a good chance to maybe be operational one day...although as Dr. Powell has said, things are very slow to change in this area.

Perhaps there is a way to combine those and the categories? I don't think most people would like looking at multiple rankings for things. Keep the SS scale (it is wind based anyway), and combine inland flooding and surge rankings, that way there are only two scales?

[Recurve]

I've mentioned this several times because I don't want people to experience Irene, hear that it is/was a Cat 1 or weak Cat 2, and think to themselves "Hmm, so the winds I was seeing out the window are what 80-90 mph winds look like. This isn't too bad -- the people who evacuated or boarded up are suckers!".

Umm....good luck with that. There is absolutely no way people in general are going to understand 1/100th of what people here understand. Ever. Max Mayfield, the Pope, Lady Gaga and Mickey Mouse could go on TV right now and say, listen folks, this is really only a tropical storm according to the most recent data...I'd say 80 percent of the public wouldn't know what the word "data" meant.

We can discuss the finer technical points about Irene here (of course!), but worrying that the public will be misled because the NHC didn't declare it a Cat 1 or a TS or a transitioning extratropical cheeseburger as soon as the data supported it is just...well, naive at least.

With all due respect cause I know everyone discussing this is smart and experienced and has the best intentions.

[Dave]

Missing hdobs 51 (will check archives in a few minutes)

744
URNT15 KNHC 280446
AF304 3409A IRENE HDOB 52 20110828
043530 3808N 07438W 6966 02847 9698 +099 //// 149057 059 042 006 01
043600 3807N 07440W 6967 02843 9691 +102 //// 147055 057 043 006 01
043630 3806N 07442W 6967 02836 9684 +102 //// 147055 055 044 005 01
043700 3804N 07443W 6967 02830 9681 +101 //// 145054 054 049 008 01
043730 3803N 07445W 6966 02829 9671 +105 //// 145054 054 050 005 01
043800 3802N 07447W 6967 02823 9666 +103 //// 146054 054 048 007 01
043830 3800N 07448W 6969 02809 9659 +100 //// 150053 053 049 006 01
043900 3759N 07450W 6966 02806 9648 +104 //// 152052 052 050 006 01
043930 3758N 07452W 6978 02784 9639 +106 //// 151051 052 051 006 05
044000 3757N 07454W 6969 02785 9622 +110 //// 149050 051 052 003 01
044030 3756N 07456W 6967 02781 9615 +108 //// 147048 049 052 009 01
044100 3755N 07457W 6969 02771 9606 +108 //// 144045 045 046 005 01
044130 3754N 07459W 6965 02762 9599 +105 //// 142042 044 058 012 01
044200 3754N 07501W 6969 02751 9586 +109 //// 134034 037 044 006 01
044230 3753N 07503W 6970 02742 9569 +118 //// 133023 025 040 005 01
044300 3751N 07505W 6965 02747 9562 +121 //// 125013 016 036 006 05
044330 3750N 07506W 6967 02739 9553 +127 //// 162004 007 031 001 05
044400 3749N 07507W 6964 02746 9552 +128 //// 285008 012 029 003 05
044430 3747N 07508W 6969 02750 9563 +129 //// 303016 020 /// /// 05
044500 3747N 07510W 6965 02757 9564 +134 +133 314020 022 /// /// 03
$$
;

[Ptarmigan]

Definitely a caveat with the size of Irene's wind field...the NHC mentioned at 11pm....not to mention haven't seen any reports of sustained hurricane force winds anywhere yet....

HURRICANE IRENE DISCUSSION NUMBER
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
1100 PM EDT SAT AUG 27 2011

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE WIND FIELD GRAPHICS BASED ON THE FOUR-QUADRANT RADII WILL DEPICT AN
UNREALISTICALLY LARGE AREA OF HURRICANE-FORCE WINDS.

That's why I average out the wind field size. For example a storm could have tropical storm force winds extending 200 miles in NE quadrant, while NW could be 100 miles and SW and SE have 20 miles each.

[Bizzles]

on my opinion, I think the media is quite exaggerated over the coverage of Hurricane Irene.

Tell that to the people who lost family members today. Thanks.

[WxGuy1]

Ok then, I understand your point because being from the general New Orleans area, I know people who stayed in the city during Katrina and believe they saw 125 mph sustained winds, when in reality winds in N.O. proper were "only"in the 75-85 range. I can also vouch for visually overestimating wind speeds....during Ike the winds seemed very strong so I assumed they were hurricane force, when in fact they were only in the 60 mph range, with gusts to about 80 (based on nearest obs).

Yeah, estimating winds when they get >60 mph can be very difficult, largely because few people have ever actually seen winds that strong. We hear a lot about "winds of 60-70 mph" on TV or the radio (from media, from the NWS, etc.) when it comes to severe thunderstorms, but, often times, those strongest winds only affect a relatively small areas (I'm not talking about derecho situations). Similarly, when the NHC sets its "maximum winds to XX mph"', those maximum winds usually are only being seen in a very small area within the storm. Obviously, if it's a large, intense hurricane, even the non-maximum winds can be very devastating!

A good example of the this is to hear people talk about Wilma when it moved over Florida. That storm very effectively maintained its strong winds across much of the state, so people who were inland and typically never see the "maximum wind speeds to XX mph" that get quoted from the NHC or media actually did get to experience those winds. As I'm sure many who experienced Wilma in Florida away from the coast can tell you, 60-80 mph sustained winds and 70-90 mph gusts look really, really strong. Part of this is because past storms have come in at that intensity but only those near the coast experienced such strong winds, with many inland areas seeing weaker winds. This isn't anyone's fault -- it's simply very difficult to "calibrate" your own wind estimates unless you happen to have a wind measurement (say, an anemometer properly located on your property or an official ob nearby). I know I have a difficult time estimating wind speeds in some situations, and I've been storm chasing since the late 90s and have taken out mobile radars to chase storms and tornadoes in the central U.S. for the past 5 years.

[Ptarmigan]

When they say maximum sustained winds, it is in a small area. For example if NHC say Ike has sustained winds of up to 100 mph, that is the maximum sustained winds, excluding gusts, which is in a small area. Likely, people will experience 60 to 80 mph winds.

[ROCK]

based on my opinion, I think the media is quite exaggerated over the coverage of Hurricane Irene.

your kidding right..... have you seen the loss of life reported? what about the millions without power?

[Dave]

[Dave]

Found hdobs 51

Code: Select all

988
URNT15 KNHC 280451
AF304 3409A IRENE              HDOB 51 20110828
042530 3833N 07406W 6968 02929 9788 +101 //// 146058 058 045 000 01
042600 3832N 07407W 6967 02928 //// +092 //// 148058 058 043 006 01
042630 3831N 07409W 6969 02918 //// +080 //// 147057 058 043 008 01
042700 3830N 07411W 6967 02918 9775 +096 //// 146059 060 044 004 01
042730 3828N 07412W 6966 02916 9763 +109 //// 145059 059 045 001 01
042800 3827N 07414W 6967 02916 9762 +107 //// 145059 059 046 001 01
042830 3826N 07416W 6967 02911 9756 +108 //// 147060 061 043 001 01
042900 3825N 07417W 6970 02903 9743 +116 +109 147060 061 043 003 00
042930 3823N 07419W 6966 02904 9735 +120 +109 150059 062 044 004 00
043000 3822N 07421W 6964 02901 9730 +119 +112 149061 062 044 004 00
043030 3821N 07422W 6969 02892 9738 +110 //// 148062 063 044 004 01
043100 3819N 07424W 6970 02886 9735 +107 //// 149065 065 043 005 01
043130 3818N 07425W 6961 02892 9741 +094 //// 149062 063 045 004 01
043200 3817N 07427W 6970 02874 //// +077 //// 148058 060 044 007 01
043230 3816N 07429W 6969 02875 //// +081 //// 151058 059 044 007 01
043300 3814N 07430W 6963 02876 9725 +099 //// 153060 060 043 005 01
043330 3813N 07432W 6966 02868 9719 +100 //// 152061 061 042 004 01
043400 3812N 07433W 6967 02863 9716 +097 //// 152061 061 042 006 01
043430 3811N 07435W 6967 02857 //// +089 //// 152060 060 043 006 01
043500 3809N 07437W 6965 02855 9704 +099 //// 151060 060 043 005 01
$$
;




[SunnyThoughts]

I was just watching TWC and they were showing a graph on how the sea level is already well above normal, even though its low tide at the battery in NY.

[jinftl]

NOAA graphic showing latest surface wind estimates - hurricane force winds (64kt) remain offshore....jersey shore into nyc and long island look like they are going to get some fierce winds at this rate...


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

[Mello1]

Dam Failure Threat in St. Mary's County | NBC Washington http://bit.ly/rpEkyc via @nbcwashington

[southerngale]

on my opinion, I think the media is quite exaggerated over the coverage of Hurricane Irene.

Perhaps you could show an ounce of sensitivity to those who have lost friends and family due to Hurricane Irene, not to mention those who have lost homes and all of the other damage. You've consistently been un-impressed all along. Maybe some things are better left unsaid!

[SouthFLTropics]

Just was looking at the Wunderground radar...Nice band of reds showing up near the eyewall near Berlin and Ocean Pines Delaware. Looks like Atlantic City is going to take this one on the chin. I wonder how the boardwalk is holding up???

SFT

[Chacor]

Washington DC has just reported its first observation of sustained tropical storm-force winds.

ob KDCA 280454Z 36036G50KT 3SM RA BKN021 BKN034 OVC055 23/20 A2915 RMK AO2 PK WND 36051/0448 P0034
At 12:54 am EDT, wind from the north at 36 kt (41 mph) gusting to 50 kt (58 mph). Pressure 29.15 inches Hg (987mb)

[Recurve]

Don't be too tough. I don't like bashing the media but I also know hours of coverage without a lot of (new) substance gets old. I'm sure the person who posted isn't downplaying the casualties.