Total destruction in Mexico from Emily

southerngale · #21 Postby **southerngale** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 2:55 pm

~Floydbuster wrote:This name is so gone. My hypothetical forecast last spring of 150 mph Hurricane Emily for Pt. Arthur, TX did not pan out, but Mexico took a bad blow.

I hate to say it because someone else got it, but selfishly, I'm glad it didn't pan out. I don't know what the population is where Emily hit, but 150mph hurricane here would be HORRIFIC!

Anyway, my prayers go out to those affected by Emily in Mexico. I watched it make landfall, creeping along and knew the damage was going to be horrible. The bands in the outer wall seemed to be getting stronger just before landfall. I hope this blob down there doesn't affect them, somehow.

#22 Postby **WeatherEmperor** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:00 pm

southerngale wrote:
~Floydbuster wrote:This name is so gone. My hypothetical forecast last spring of 150 mph Hurricane Emily for Pt. Arthur, TX did not pan out, but Mexico took a bad blow.

I hate to say it because someone else got it, but selfishly, I'm glad it didn't pan out. I don't know what the population is where Emily hit, but 150mph hurricane here would be HORRIFIC!

Anyway, my prayers go out to those affected by Emily in Mexico. I watched it make landfall, creeping along and knew the damage was going to be horrible. The bands in the outer wall seemed to be getting stronger just before landfall. I hope this blob down there doesn't affect them, somehow.

I agree with you friend. No matter where it hits, on American soil or not, everybody has to be concerned about it, not just us here so everybody has got to pitch in.

<RICKY>

southerngale · #23 Postby **southerngale** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:03 pm

man?

#24 Postby **fci** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:05 pm

msbee wrote:If it doesn't hit Florida, the media doens't cover it.
this morning TWC siad that Franklin is sterngthening but is no danger to any land.
Isn't it heading towards Bermuda?
isn't that land?
but it's not USA land so it doesn't count I guess.

I am so sorry for the people in Mexico. I can only imagine the destruction and now that blob is giving them more rain on top of what they already had.

With all due respect it is not only Florida that gets the coverage.
We just happened to get almost all of the landfalling hurricanes last year.

I agree that Mexico does not get the coverage that a landfalling storm in the US gets but there is no basis for your comment that there is a Florida bias.

TWC has always been all over a US landfalling storm.
For a while there, it was almost exclusively NC that got the storms and the media; CNN, TWC, etc... were always there!

#25 Postby **WeatherEmperor** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:07 pm

southerngale wrote:man?

it was an innocent typo. im sorry. i corrected it see?

<RICKY>

southerngale · #26 Postby **southerngale** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:25 pm

WeatherEmperor wrote:
southerngale wrote:man?

it was an innocent typo. im sorry. i corrected it see?

<RICKY>

hehe n/p

I thought it was funny.

gilbert88 · #27 Postby **gilbert88** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:43 pm

Just a taste of what Emily did in Monterrey...

More pics of Monterrey under Emily in

http://mtydigital.com/images/huracan_emily/

#28 Postby **baygirl_1** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:55 pm

gilbert88,
thanks for posting the link to the pictures. amazing pictures! question: what caused that fire? was there a gas line near that structure?

gilbert88 · #29 Postby **gilbert88** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:03 pm

baygirl_1 wrote:gilbert88,
thanks for posting the link to the pictures. amazing pictures! question: what caused that fire? was there a gas line near that structure?

Yeah, there was a gas line passing just under the bridge, which was fractured by the collapsing bridge after the currents toppled one of the columns.

That gas line should've been removed a long time ago. There was another big fire in that same bridge about 20 years ago.

The worst thing is that the bridge was actually open to the traffic. Fortunately the accident happened at 4 am... so there were no casualties from the explosion.

southerngale · #30 Postby **southerngale** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:06 pm

Yeah, thanks for posting the pictures. I feel for everyone there.

Website · #31 Postby **Brent** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:06 pm

That's what a Strong 3 did... imagine what a Strong 4 or 5 would do there???

#32 Postby **baygirl_1** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:14 pm

gilbert88 wrote:
baygirl_1 wrote:gilbert88,
thanks for posting the link to the pictures. amazing pictures! question: what caused that fire? was there a gas line near that structure?

Yeah, there was a gas line passing just under the bridge, which was fractured by the collapsing bridge after the currents toppled one of the columns.

That gas line should've been removed a long time ago. There was another big fire in that same bridge about 20 years ago.

The worst thing is that the bridge was actually open to the traffic. Fortunately the accident happened at 4 am... so there were no casualties from the explosion.

glad to hear there were no casualties because it looked like it could've been very bad. thanks again.

#33 Postby **msbee** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:54 pm

"With all due respect it is not only Florida that gets the coverage."

fci, I am sorry, I should have said USA coverage

Astro_man92 · #34 Postby **Astro_man92** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:59 pm

Derek Ortt wrote:Just happened to be flipping passed a spanish channel and saw arials from Mainland Mexico from Emily

<b>HORRIFIC DAMAGE</b> is the only way it can be stated. Entire structures near the coast swept away, much worse than the photos from Ivan and Dennis

Emily was nothing like Ivan the Terrible(or as i like to call him Ivan the Great)

chris_fit · #35 Postby **chris_fit** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:00 pm

nice pics...

owie

caribepr · #36 Postby **caribepr** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:00 pm

msbee wrote:"With all due respect it is not only Florida that gets the coverage."

fci, I am sorry, I should have said USA coverage

we that understand, understood

Matt-hurricanewatcher · #37 Postby **Matt-hurricanewatcher** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:01 pm

Emily was every bit as powerful a hurricane as Ivan was for a short time. Hrd data shows it had 136 knots which Ivan only 137 knots. So yes Emily was a very powerful hurricane.

Astro_man92 · #38 Postby **Astro_man92** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:04 pm

Matt-hurricanewatcher wrote:Emily was every bit as powerful a hurricane as Ivan was for a short time. Hrd data shows it had 136 knots which Ivan only 137 knots. So yes Emily was a very powerful hurricane.

how about in destruction, surge, waves, cost, winds at landfall, ect.

Astro_man92 · #39 Postby **Astro_man92** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:29 pm

here is are 2 links one with some photos from emily's destructiona nd the other from ivan

http://www.mthurricane.com/Hurricane_Emily.htm (Emily)

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld ... -headlines (more emily)

http://www.ctv.ca/generic/WebSpecials/h ... meset.html (still more emily)

http://www.mthurricane.com/Hurricane_Ivan.htm (Ivan from the mainland)

http://www.davidwolfephotography.com/Stk/Ivan/ (Ivan from the cayman islands)

http://www.jamaicans.com/gallery/ivan?page=3 (Ivan from Jamaca)

Derek Ortt · #40 Postby **Derek Ortt** » Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:46 pm

<i>Emily was nothing like Ivan the Terrible(or as i like to call him Ivan the Great)</i>

To be blunt, that is one of the most un-informed comments ever posted on this forum. Not only is calling the terrible storm Ivan the great assinine (maybe you have the $$ to pay for the great storm and compensate the victims), but to say that a storm of the same intensity, if not slightly more intense than the one that hit Alabama last year was nothing like Ivan shows that you really don't have a clue regarding the intensities of either storm (if you were comparing Emily to Ivan at Cayman, thats a different story, but Ivan vs Emily in the GOM equals a push at the very least)

Total destruction in Mexico from Emily

Re: Total destruction in Mexico from Emily

Who is online