All Activity

Regardless of strength (I’ve seen Andrew & Michael up close). Unless you have boots on the ground you don’t realize the amount of damage even a storm of this strength can cause. My thoughts are with the many people who are dealing with issues big or small. I can tell you the Emerald Coast got smacked by this. Glass half full thoughts, are the shear and dry air saved us from what could’ve been a monster! .

You are viewing a monthly mean, which is important considering any potential pattern change around that time...but I see some decent ridging out west.

Due to the pressure gradient between Isaias’ remnants and the wedge, along with sig. ongoing rain, together with a secondary astronomical tidal max due to the new moon, the NE winds were long and strong enough to produce moderate coastal flooding in CHS and minor S of there to Ft. Pulaski. 0842 AM COASTAL FLOOD 1 E CHARLESTON 32.78N 79.93W 10/10/2026 CHARLESTON SC OTHER FEDERAL A MAXIMUM TIDE LEVEL OF 7.76 FT MLLW (2.00 FT MHHW) WAS OBSERVED AT THE CHARLESTON HARBOR TIDE GAGE. MODERATE COASTAL FLOODING TYPICALLY BEGINS ALONG THE COASTS OF CHARLESTON AND COLLETON COUNTIES WHEN TIDE LEVELS REACH 7.5 FT MLLW (1.74 FT MHHW) IN THE CHARLESTON HARBOR.

from 4-6 inches in on the NAM To .50-.75 on the GFS LOL

Been pouring for the past hr and wind is ripping!

That what happens when I live on the north side of the mountain in a valley beside the creek.

In my area overnight, we got some beneficial rainfall from rapidly N moving scattered convection. Per Cocorahs, there was ~0.75” in the area. I’ll check my gauge later. Winds were brisk but no big deal as expected (highest gusts low 20s). Sun is peaking through. The sun will eventually lead to sig. instability, which will fuel scattered or bands of tstorms this afternoon, some of which could be severe with a couple of tornadoes possible.

Most models show some strengthening of the storm as it approaches our area

N Gulf hurricanes that come this way sometimes “wake back up” over our area like Ida which caused more deaths here than anywhere but this won’t be one of them. You can already see it’s sheared apart and won’t be a very coherent system here. Probably a general 1-2” rain like most models are showing.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/50147669/sources-ravens-held-cam-jurgens-physical-trade-eagles Expected to play next week, not this Sunday

Foliage is going fast but the views are still pretty

Yeah so ridiculous. Other models like RGEM, HRRR and GFS have our area closer to 1 inch.

41 here for the low. It uncanny how many times you are two degrees colder than I am. More times actually than I've posted.

Looks like the NW side has become the wettest side.

That band will have to overperform later for us to get the big totals. I'm only at .54 so far.

WB 12Z NBM

What are "swooping hodographs," other than a great name for a rock band according to Dave Barry?

For all the talk of wind measurements with landfalls, I agree the measurements we got from Isaias were impressive and suggest it probably was in fact a low-end cat 2 around the time of landfall. Given how quickly it was weakening at that point it wouldn’t surprise me if it did weaken slightly more than the operationally estimated 90kt at landfall, but the eyewall was impacting the coast when it was at that intensity. I agree with some points raised here - the maximum sustained winds are not something people should expect to see at their location on land, and properly communicating that (while still maintaining the proper level of urgency) is important. Even if you’re not seeing the max sustained winds on land, hazards such as wind damage and surge are very much proportional to those max sustained winds. You won’t see cat 5 sustained winds away from the coast in a cat 5 eyewall, but it would still be destructive and no one would be quibbling over it. Would also like to mention that when storms are sampled by recon, there is a wide array of instrumentation measuring winds at/near the surface and aloft, with well-researched and established reduction factors to equate low-level winds to the surface winds in these storms. The NHC is not just making up the max sustained winds. I do agree with the sentiment that NHC can be slow to operationally reduce the winds in storms that are weakening as landfall approaches, but understand why they’re cautious with that.

Over an inch so far.

Nam with it's usual bonkers run.

What if…and hear me out on this…the highest sustained winds were over water at the time of landfall?

certainly not around here. 2015 is like hold my beer