Lessons learned about Charley

[Derek Ortt]

1. The wind! In the last 3 cat 4 or stronger hurricanes to make landfall in the USA (Andrew, Iniki, and Charley) it has not been the storm surge that has caused the vast majority of the damage, but instead it has been the wind. Therefore, residents must begin taking better pracuations against the wind.

2. NHC. In the future, if there is any question regarding the status of a storm, they need to err on the side of caution and upgrade the storm. Yesterday, they had the chance to do this at 11, but waitied until 1. Maybe the missed the supplimentary vortex message that came out 45 minutes before the advisory that indicated that the storm was a category 3 hurricane

3. Media. Stop focusing on just the coast. Even a chimpanzee knows that the hurricane force winds spread inland in a cat 4

[Stormsfury]

2. NHC. In the future, if there is any question regarding the status of a storm, they need to err on the side of caution and upgrade the storm. Yesterday, they had the chance to do this at 11, but waitied until 1. Maybe the missed the supplimentary vortex message that came out 45 minutes before the advisory that indicated that the storm was a category 3 hurricane

On the "My rant" thread, I stated that IMHO, that NHC probably already had the 11 am advisory prepared BEFORE that last RECON message came in showing Charley was a 3 ...

SF

[LaBreeze]

Every tropical system has a lesson for us - we need to listen and learn. I agree with you, Derek, that inland areas can suffer severely as well as the coast. Never turn your back to the sea.

[KBBOCA]

Great post Derek. Who here has the connections with NHC and media to share these observations?!

[Mello1]

1. The wind! In the last 3 cat 4 or stronger hurricanes to make landfall in the USA (Andrew, Iniki, and Charley) it has not been the storm surge that has caused the vast majority of the damage, but instead it has been the wind. Therefore, residents must begin taking better pracuations against the wind.

2. NHC. In the future, if there is any question regarding the status of a storm, they need to err on the side of caution and upgrade the storm. Yesterday, they had the chance to do this at 11, but waitied until 1. Maybe the missed the supplimentary vortex message that came out 45 minutes before the advisory that indicated that the storm was a category 3 hurricane

3. Media. Stop focusing on just the coast. Even a chimpanzee knows that the hurricane force winds spread inland in a cat 4

I do recall just before leaving home yesterday (and off the computer), that folks were asking why the NHC issued reports with data that did not reflect the supplemental advisories that were clearly indicating a different trend. I think that this is a good point here. If there is something major in a supplementary report that needs to be widely known, somehow it should supercede the latest advisory. I can see the Office of Inspector General making this same observation.

[Orlando_wx]

agreed 100% derek but living here all my life in Orlando most people think because we live in Orlando which in the middle of the state think that no matter what comes a shore they think by the time it gets here it we nothing for example yesterday before the track change and it was going to Tampa everyone i talked to said the only thing we get is a 30 mph wind and as much as i told them it will be more than that they would not listen so that another problem .

John

[spaceisland]

In the future, media meteorologists will just need to say the words, "remember Charley," when they put up the probability graphics, and people will get the idea...
...and maybe it will save their lives.

[Huckster]

1. The wind! In the last 3 cat 4 or stronger hurricanes to make landfall in the USA (Andrew, Iniki, and Charley) it has not been the storm surge that has caused the vast majority of the damage, but instead it has been the wind. Therefore, residents must begin taking better pracuations against the wind.

Good point. I think some people may have the misconception, likely due to the constant emphasis by television shows and juvenile hurricane literature about storm surge, that hurricanes a really only a "serious" problem for people within just the first few miles of the water. Look at Charley. It brought +100mph wind gusts across its entire track, from the Gulf to Daytona. Hugo brought winds to near 100 mph all the way to Charlotte, which, if I remember correctly, is around 175 miles from where Hugo actually made landfall. Opal, despite weaking upon approach, brought wind damage into northeast Alabama and north Georgia. I was in Baton Rouge when Andrew hit, and we barely got any rain, but we got a lot of wind. No electricity for a week. Mountains of tree debris all over. The eye wall, or what was left of it, didn't even pass over my area. I sorta think about "minimal" hurricane force wind as just a really bad, hours long severe thunderstorm. To me, that sorta puts in a better perspective. Though the damage here was not all that serious, I don't think most people were really expecting it to be as bad as it was, and I highly doubt that most people 60 miles or more inland from where Charley made landfall were expecting the kind of wind they got.

[ncweatherwizard]

What bothers me the most is the fact that the NHC screwed up a very easy forecast (at least I thought it was). I mean, considering the angle, Tampa isn't that far from where it actually made landfall. But when the track shifted left less than 12 hours before landfall, it was incredible--personally I was shocked. Did I not say the night before--"I'd look down to Fort Myers as well"? (not that my opinion matters widescale)

What messed it up..bunch of inhuman computers. Those models were too far left for how long? Sometimes, a forecaster has just got to throw out models, and use his own common sense and knowledge.

Other than this, I believe that the NHC handled this excellently--but like anything--when you get to the clutch, you can't screw up--even if it is by only a few miles.

The solution: We need more than one official forecasting agency, that can work cooperatively, but issue separate products so the public can consider multiple situations--warning would then likely be extended across a wider area.

I'm not NHC bashing..I fully respect their work--and they have really done a commendable job in recent years--minus a few events here and there.

[Derek Ortt]

If the advisory was written early. That's OK. As long as that is only the forecast/advisory and the discussion as they start on synoptic time, in this case 12Z. Even the nwhhc discussions have an initial position and intensity based upon synoptic time, not issuance time. However, the public advisory MUST reflect conditions per the time in which it is issued and that is why the do share a <b>PART</b> of the responsibility

[Steve Cosby]

On the "My rant" thread, I stated that IMHO, that NHC probably already had the 11 am advisory prepared BEFORE that last RECON message came in showing Charley was a 3 ...

I sure hope that the 11 am advisory was NOT prepared too far in advance. That would be an impeachable offense.

[Derecho]

The solution: We need more than one official forecasting agency, that can work cooperatively, but issue separate products so the public can consider multiple situations--warning would then likely be extended across a wider area.

This quite possibly is the dumbest public policy suggestion I've ever seen in an internet forum, on any subject.

The overwhelming majority of the public will merely pick whatever solution doesn't hit them to believe.

[jlauderdal]

The solution: We need more than one official forecasting agency, that can work cooperatively, but issue separate products so the public can consider multiple situations--warning would then likely be extended across a wider area.

This quite possibly is the dumbest public policy suggestion I've ever seen in an internet forum, on any subject.

The overwhelming majority of the public will merely pick whatever solution doesn't hit them to believe.

Just what we need is another govt agency. Derecho is correct. What we need is people using a little more common sense and taking control of their situation.

[adelphi_sky]

The solution: We need more than one official forecasting agency, that can work cooperatively, but issue separate products so the public can consider multiple situations--warning would then likely be extended across a wider area.

This quite possibly is the dumbest public policy suggestion I've ever seen in an internet forum, on any subject.

The overwhelming majority of the public will merely pick whatever solution doesn't hit them to believe.

Bad idea. Think about our many intelligence agencies. Imagine the competition and witholding information in order to make yourself look good. That's why they are trying to fold all of them under one agency as we speak.

[ncweatherwizard]

The solution: We need more than one official forecasting agency, that can work cooperatively, but issue separate products so the public can consider multiple situations--warning would then likely be extended across a wider area.

This quite possibly is the dumbest public policy suggestion I've ever seen in an internet forum, on any subject.

The overwhelming majority of the public will merely pick whatever solution doesn't hit them to believe.

This is my last straw with you...learn some RESPECT for people; obnoxiousness solves nothing--let's just be straightforward. Second, let's not assume that the public is stupid--if there are multiple tracks, there's more reason to react over a larger range. Frankly and unbiased, you have a tendency to underestimate the public.

Bad idea. Think about our many intelligence agencies. Imagine the competition and witholding information in order to make yourself look good. That's why they are trying to fold all of them under one agency as we speak.

Withhold what? Most information needed is open.

Just what we need is another govt agency. Derecho is correct. What we need is people using a little more common sense and taking control of their situation.

I never said anything about a government organization.

[jlauderdal]

The solution: We need more than one official forecasting agency, that can work cooperatively, but issue separate products so the public can consider multiple situations--warning would then likely be extended across a wider area.

This quite possibly is the dumbest public policy suggestion I've ever seen in an internet forum, on any subject.

The overwhelming majority of the public will merely pick whatever solution doesn't hit them to believe.

This is my last straw with you...learn some RESPECT for people; obnoxiousness solves nothing--let's just be straightforward. Second, let's not assume that the public is stupid--if there are multiple tracks, there's more reason to react over a larger range. Frankly and unbiased, you have a tendency to underestimate the public.

Bad idea. Think about our many intelligence agencies. Imagine the competition and witholding information in order to make yourself look good. That's why they are trying to fold all of them under one agency as we speak.

Withhold what? Most information needed is open.

Just what we need is another govt agency. Derecho is correct. What we need is people using a little more common sense and taking control of their situation.

I never said anything about a government organization.

I am all for the the truth...what does this mean? "We need more than one official forecasting agency". If official doesnt mean govt which private enterprise will be inc harge?