Here's the deal...

[Guest]

The system and methodology behind storm classification needs totally revamping. Why are we still using an old and outdated method of classifying storms. With all the billions of tax payers dollars spent on hurricane monitoring and such why are we still using the same ole thing. Dennis is a prime example and one of many type storms like it that are misleading in terms of its ability to do widespread damage. Dennis was blown so far out of proportion it was pathetic. Why arent we doing a better job at dispersing the information about the quality and uniqness of each storm, the same generalities are being appied to each and every storm and that it is in itself is providing misinformation about its potential impact. If its a whimp storm, call it a whimp storm, if its a kick but storm call it a kick butt storm, but if its a Dennis with no balls, dont lead me to believe certain things about the storm that are not true. I know for a fact we have the technology to do a better job.
Lets revamp, set new goals and get serious about really disecting these storms and providing up to the minute information prior to landfall. Especially dont tell me that, sorry, hurricane hunter had communications problems so we will have to wait til a new plane gets there. Bull#%&t, we have enough planes to have more than one sampling at any given time.

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

Dennis at one time was near cat5...Of course its going to be tooken seriously. In I agree we do have many a plane an the air force.

[LilNoles2005]

I expect quite a few interesting responses to this one.

The only thing I'd like to say right now is that while Dennis may not have caused as much damage as expected around the landfall area, it still caused the most extensive coastal flooding experienced in the Wakulla County/Big Bend area in a long, long time... Even though Opal and Ivan hit around the same area as Dennis, the effects we felt today are 10x worse than with those storms. Had the people around here been expecting a lesser storm to effect the Gulf Coast, I am quite sure that there would have been quite a few fatalities.

[wx247]

I am refraining myself.

[Rainband]

I am refraining myself.

dittooooooooooooooooooooo

[LilNoles2005]

I am refraining myself.

Don't refrain... he needs to see the light!

[Guest]

I expect quite a few interesting responses to this one.

The only thing I'd like to say right now is that while Dennis may not have caused as much damage as expected around the landfall area, it still caused the most extensive coastal flooding experienced in the Wakulla County/Big Bend area in a long, long time... Even though Opal and Ivan hit around the same area as Dennis, the effects we felt today are 10x worse than with those storms. Had the people around here been expecting a lesser storm to effect the Gulf Coast, I am quite sure that there would have been quite a few fatalities.

I'm questioning the idea behind continuing to use CAT 1, CAT2....etc in generalities, lets add to the system so that the public can be aware of the unique impacts that a storm is going to have on certain areas around the storm. Dennis is a prime example. I believe their was plenty of data available that hasn't been utilize to give a better idea as to how specific areas could have been impacted. Lets get more buoys out in the Gulf and quit sending expensive hardware to blow holes in meteors light years away. Come on we can do better, but if we go on year to year without exploring what can we do better to make the public informed we are just creating havoc every time. Don't get me wrong I'm not questioning anyone about there forecast or their ability to do their job. I'm merely stating lets use the technology in a smart manner and disperse more information that helps people to understand the unique characteristics of any given storm.

[LilNoles2005]

I expect quite a few interesting responses to this one.

The only thing I'd like to say right now is that while Dennis may not have caused as much damage as expected around the landfall area, it still caused the most extensive coastal flooding experienced in the Wakulla County/Big Bend area in a long, long time... Even though Opal and Ivan hit around the same area as Dennis, the effects we felt today are 10x worse than with those storms. Had the people around here been expecting a lesser storm to effect the Gulf Coast, I am quite sure that there would have been quite a few fatalities.

I'm questioning the idea behind continuing to use CAT 1, CAT2....etc in generalities, lets add to the system so that the public can be aware of the unique impacts that a storm is going to have on certain areas around the storm. Dennis is a prime example. I believe their was plenty of data available that hasn't been utilize to give a better idea as to how specific areas could have been impacted. Lets get more buoys out in the Gulf and quit sending expensive hardware to blow holes in meteors light years away. Come on we can do better, but if we go on year to year without exploring what can we do better to make the public informed we are just creating havoc every time. Don't get me wrong I'm not questioning anyone about there forecast or their ability to do their job. I'm merely stating lets use the technology in a smart manner and disperse more information that helps people to understand the unique characteristics of any given storm.

Okay, this post seems much more reasonable than your first one. I totally understand what you are saying about concentrating more efforts/resources on something that effects us all.

[Cape Verde]

I get it Frederic. You want to be one of those Monday Morning Quarterbacks who demands that every play you saw the day before be called again in hindsight.<P>I suppose you demand the same from your stockbrocker, too, correct?<P>It's not good enough to call them as you see them, you want them called as you saw them.<P>Reality bites, kiddo.

[Guest]

I would just like to see improvments to the system in place not destroy it and i know people like Max Mayfield and others spend lots of hours away from their families and they dont have control over making changes to the current system. I just hope we can come up with new approaches to making a difference in helping individuals make better informed decisions before a storm comes ashore.

[Guest]

I get it Frederic. You want to be one of those Monday Morning Quarterbacks who demands that every play you saw the day before be called again in hindsight.<P>I suppose you demand the same from your stockbrocker, too, correct?<P>It's not good enough to call them as you see them, you want them called as you saw them.<P>Reality bites, kiddo.

I'm sorry did I offend you in some way? Did you find the need to attack me?

[jeff]

The SS scale is fairly simple and yet many do not understand it. With a hurricane like Dennis (a tiny core of destrcutive winds) it is hard for those to understand where the wind damage was when they only experienced 50-70mph 40 and 50 miles from the center. Charley was a similar example. Each hurricane is different, some have hurricane force winds outward 150-200 miles and others are like Dennis and Charley.

This morning when Dennis was sustained at 145mph there was much reason to be concerned. As has been said over and over, we do not completely understand the internal processes that cause rapid changes in intensity. Why did Charley rapidly deepen through landfall where Ivan and Dennis weakened? Was it shear, dry air, SST's, something we have not discovered yet.

If there were an ob station within the eastern eyewall as Dennis moved ashore over Santa Rosa Island I would bet it would have recorded sustained 115-120mph winds.

[Guest]

The SS scale is fairly simple and yet many do not understand it. With a hurricane like Dennis (a tiny core of destrcutive winds) it is hard for those to understand where the wind damage was when they only experienced 50-70mph 40 and 50 miles from the center. Charley was a similar example. Each hurricane is different, some have hurricane force winds outward 150-200 miles and others are like Dennis and Charley.

This morning when Dennis was sustained at 145mph there was much reason to be concerned. As has been said over and over, we do not completely understand the internal processes that cause rapid changes in intensity. Why did Charley rapidly deepen through landfall where Ivan and Dennis weakened? Was it shear, dry air, SST's, something we have not discovered yet.

If there were an ob station within the eastern eyewall as Dennis moved ashore over Santa Rosa Island I would bet it would have recorded sustained 115-120mph winds.

I'm all for buffing up the Gulf with more monitoring devices, I think it would greatly improve our ability to see what potential effects are forthcoming. As you know the best way to get a handle on something and be more accurate, is to increase your sample size or take more samples.

[Wacahootaman]

Here are a couple of suggestions to explain Florida's good luck on Dennis.

He was weakening fast, for whatever reason, and because he had a fast foward speed the winds on the weak side of the eye had to be almost 40 mph slower than on the strong side of the eye.

The eye landfalled on a national seashore where there were no towns or observers and had a small wind field like Charlie. In Charlie, the weak side of the storm even relatively close to land fall had very little damage.

There will probably be more damage reports comming in from towns a lot further away from the center and along the path in Alabama.When Francis hit the Florida east coast the highest wind gust was recorded way north of landfall at Cape Kennedy and there was widespread moderate damage a long way from the eye from strong feederbands. Francis had weakened and unwound a lot, perhaps not with Dennis. I donno.

I heard a professional met on TV that weakening hurricanes often have their higher winds "lift up" so ground speed winds will be a lot lower than those recorded at higher altitudes so perhaps the recons were misleading but the NHC will allways err on the side of caution.

I donno. I am just a newbie and a rank amateur so dont take this seriously.

But seriously, it was the Black Hielocopters from Hurlburt Field in Eglin that used their top secrect hurricane dispersal rotors to weaken Dennis

[Guest]

But seriously, it was the Black Hielocopters from Hurlburt Field in Eglin that used their top secrect hurricane dispersal rotors to weaken Dennis

[Cape Verde]

I'm sorry did I offend you in some way? Did you find the need to attack me?

<P>I did take it too far in responding in a harsh way. I sincerely apologize.<P>I do think we're doing the best we can with a science we don't have a good grasp on at all. None of us hold our local weathermen to anywhere near the standard we demand of the NHC.<P>Sure, there is always room for technological improvements and perhaps they will happen. But if things don't turn out like they predict, it isn't because of a lack of skill or technology. It's a lack of being able to turn a possibility or a probability into a certainty. It can't be done today.<P>I read your post as demanding that, which it really wasn't.

[Guest]

I'm sorry did I offend you in some way? Did you find the need to attack me?

<P>I did take it too far in responding in a harsh way. I sincerely apologize.<P>I do think we're doing the best we can with a science we don't have a good grasp on at all. None of us hold our local weathermen to anywhere near the standard we demand of the NHC.<P>Sure, there is always room for technological improvements and perhaps they will happen. But if things don't turn out like they predict, it isn't because of a lack of skill or technology. It's a lack of being able to turn a possibility or a probability into a certainty. It can't be done today.<P>I read your post as demanding that, which it really wasn't.

Accepted, I should have been clear in my original post, but my thoguhts were not expressed properly. Quess I've had too much time to sit around and think. Imagine what type system we would have in place if our gov't would put the control into the hands of the people that have to run the NHC and make forecast. I bet it would be awsome.

[Mississippi Storm Magnet]

[quote="Frederic1979

I'm all for buffing up the Gulf with more monitoring devices, I think it would greatly improve our ability to see what potential effects are forthcoming. As you know the best way to get a handle on something and be more accurate, is to increase your sample size or take more samples.[/quote]

NDBC already has quite a few monitoring stations in the GOM. See:

http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/Maps/Florida.shtml

http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/Maps/WestGulf.shtml

Not sure if the added cost of putting in new/more stations would greatly increase accuracy much.

[Guest]

[quote="Frederic1979

I'm all for buffing up the Gulf with more monitoring devices, I think it would greatly improve our ability to see what potential effects are forthcoming. As you know the best way to get a handle on something and be more accurate, is to increase your sample size or take more samples.

NDBC already has quite a few monitoring stations in the GOM. See:

http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/Maps/Florida.shtml

http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/Maps/WestGulf.shtml

Not sure if the added cost of putting in new/more stations would greatly increase accuracy much.[/quote]

My friend who works for the Coast Guard USCG Cypress just deployed a new and a replacement buoy both in the BOC and Western Caribbean last year and early this year. If we increase the number of sampling points it would make a world of difference. I think it is alot more feasable than the space shuttle program.

[Guest]

http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=42056

http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=42055

These are the 2 buoys i was referring to in the previous post. The Coast Guard is used to help tow and deploy new buoys.