Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,507
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    SnowHabit
    Newest Member
    SnowHabit
    Joined

Tropical Season 2017

40/70 Benchmark

By 40/70 Benchmark,
in New England

Recommended Posts

Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Also, Turks and Caicos FTL....too bad, they are absolutely stunning islands with some of the best water in the Caribbean.

 

But not sure how they get avoided a massive hit...maybe hope the brunt of the northern eyewall just misses to their south if this can turn a little more left.

 

SAT_CAR_IR4ENH_ANI.gif

Yeah ...I was geeking over Google Earth at lunch a while ago ... there's a small island or cay that looks like it's all of 10 feet above the ocean surface. I couldn't get the app to label the Island but is said "Cockburn Town" ? ... heh  Close up it looks like it even has neighborhood sprawl - the thing is like 5 by 2 mi. Right now, ruler on the radar method has the n eye wall blithely fire hosing them for hours later on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

I'm not sure whether NE having more winter storms than Florida does hurricanes is really irrelevant honestly? 

I get that "A" hurricane is at a point more dangerous than the average run of the mill winter storm... Although, I don't like his original comparison to "blizzard" in that. Blizzards are just flat out deadly, period. That shows a lack of respect for what 15 F cold in 55 mph wind gusts and 3+" snow rates can do to civility.  

That aside, the number of NE storms in a season is the NE winter season - we cannot logically disconnect the two because it's "not fair" that Florida averages like .2 hurricane per year.   

 

 

Well my reason for comparing the frequency was just to clarify the difference between absolute numbers and on a "per event" number. Winter storms are deadly events...though they may not be more deadly on a per event basis than hurricanes. But they definitely kill more people because they are more frequent overall.

 

Either way, as weather enthusiasts....I don't bother engaging in the whole morals debate of "rooting" for a certain type of weather...as if we should even waste the time pretending what we root for has any effect on the outcome. On top of that, most weather event deaths are entirely avoidable with some good self-preparation and common sense. I'm sure you'd probably agree on both counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Yeah ...I was geeking over Google Earth at lunch a while ago ... there's a small island or cay that looks like it's all of 10 feet above the ocean surface. I couldn't get the app to label the Island but is said "Cockburn Town" ? ... heh  Close up it looks like it even has neighborhood sprawl - the thing is like 5 by 2 mi. Right now, ruler on the radar method has the n eye wall blithely fire hosing them for hours later on.

That's Grand Turk Island...and just south of them is probably even more screwed...Salt Cay. Grand Turk at least has a decent ridgeline about 50-70 feet above sea level running N-S down the east side of the island...that would probably protect the central region where most people live from huge storm surge. The folks south of them on Salt Cay will not be so lucky. Hardly any of the island gets over 15 feet ASL...I would fear for most of the 300-400 people who live there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Well my reason for comparing the frequency was just to clarify the difference between absolute numbers and on a "per event" number. Winter storms are deadly events...though they may not be more deadly on a per event basis than hurricanes. But they definitely kill more people because they are more frequent overall.

 

Either way, as weather enthusiasts....I don't bother engaging in the whole morals debate of "rooting" for a certain type of weather...as if we should even waste the time pretending what we root for has any effect on the outcome. On top of that, most weather event deaths are entirely avoidable with some good self-preparation and common sense. I'm sure you'd probably agree on both counts.

I think the "rooting" debate is moot - I'll leave it at that...  

But I miss-spoke up there; I mean to say, I think the fact that NE has more frequency than FL does IS irrelevant.   That's like saying it is not fair their baseball team beat us because their batters have better numbers.   Winters up here are inherently more dangers than hurricane seasons are, down there.  And I'll leave it at that again -

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

That's Grand Turk Island...and just south of them is probably even more screwed...Salt Cay. Grand Turk at least has a decent ridgeline about 50-70 feet above sea level running N-S down the east side of the island...that would probably protect the central region where most people live from huge storm surge. The folks south of them on Salt Cay will not be so lucky. Hardly any of the island gets over 15 feet ASL...I would fear for most of the 300-400 people who live there.

Heh... if we want to get into the morality of anything ...

why t f are there people "living" there?  f you!

oh, boy - here comes the tsunamis of rationalizations.. None of which hold water (pun intended...)

But I'm a bit of an extremist (admittedly) when it comes to things like this.  I think the entire city of New Orleans isn't worthy of sympathy, for example. I don't.  It's complacency and disrespect (and entitled resolve in a weird disconnected way) beyond comprehension and quite deserving to me actually...  Sorry, and good bye!

I almost don't have much sympathy for those Houston neighborhoods and urban sprawls that reclaimed Wetlands that were established there by normal geological processes spanning many hundreds of Millennia.  Lesson:  Wetlands are the ecological sponges of nature. They can take, massive massive quantities of water.  Build pack soils, street tops, and parking lots, that's only going to exacerbate the egregious scenario of feet of rain.  I mean sure...that's going to flood anyway, but the humanity should not have been there in the first place.   But, in the end, I do extend my condolences because those that are multi-generational in that region have no idea what they've inherited.  

There are probably 20 or 30 places around our country's favored geographical regions where examples of caution thrown to the wind is a time bomb for a huge public expenditure when inevitability comes a-callin' and I think that pisses me off. sorry

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, snowdazed said:

I'm fully aware that it's highly premature, but I figure you folks would know if anyone does.

What are the odds of Jose having a moderate effect on SNE?  I've read some posts that suggest Irma's track will pull Jose closer to the East Coast

:)  

I'd have to say there is a 100% chance that there is 0% chance of knowing - sorry.  

Sarcasm aside...okay, you could more 'probably' say that it won't have any affect here at all - that really is the only thing that can be said.  Just look at the behavior of Irma when it was beyond D 5... Oh man -  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
78Blizzard

78Blizzard

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Ah, no - I don't really engage in petty 'have to be right' bullschit that goes in here.  Like it sounds actually like you are engaging in... you've managed (actually) to derail and skew your entire original point (or memory of your own sentiment) and are arguing about the digression(s) that have arisen since. 

Here is what you said: "This is one of those times when New Englanders who decided to escape the rigors of the seasons here by moving to Florida now get their wake up call.  At least when we get a blizzard there is minimal property damage and little loss of life.  The snow eventually melts."

I admitted to mentioning winter storms, but I also made it clear ... I was speaking to your point there.  

That's what you said - sorry you said it ma-man.  

Even if we want to keep it as just winter storms per se, they are in fact responsible for more deaths on average over the last 10 years than tropical cyclones... It's only when expanding to the 30 year that it the numbers switch lead, and not by a lot.  Aside, we'd have to get into how NWS defines a winter-related fatality, which we can't from here (least I can't) and those 30 year numbers are close enough to assume some statistical bias/error can and probably does exist there.  Also, those totals don't reflect spot outlier tragedies; those skew the data sets and don't reflect the "baseline risk" - this is more than mere numbers?  

There's no 'agenda' here to 'make a case'  - I offered originally that you might find it surprising (the context was -) that

 

 

I never said you were. "... you're trying too hard in continuing to make your case."  doesn't equate to  "I don't really engage in petty 'have to be right' bullschit that goes in here.

Since you quoted my original post again, I'll just say that I stand by what I said in it.  You said there were free sites available that would prove your point about fatalities from hurricanes vs winter storms.  I gave you one from a reputable source, NOAA/NWS, and in multiple posts you have proceeded to denigrate their numbers.  I'm done here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, 78Blizzard said:

I never said you were. "... you're trying too hard in continuing to make your case." doesn't equate to "I don't really engage in petty 'have to be right' bullschit that goes in here.

Since you quoted my original post again, I'll just say that I stand by what I said in it.  You said there were free sites available that would prove your point about fatalities from hurricanes vs winter storms.  I gave you one from a reputable source, NOAA/NWS, and in multiple posts you have proceeded to denigrate their numbers.  I'm done here.

 

You are wrong.  And, I proved that logically as well.  Stand by whatever you want..

Winter threats up here are more significant than hurricane threats down there.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JC-CT

JC-CT

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, 78Blizzard said:

I found this final sentence in that article revealing, as stated by Stu Ostro of the Weather Channel:

"And those stats indicate that even more people lose their lives when roads are just wet than when snowy or icy."

Yes, but roads are wet a lot more than they are snowy or icy, and most often not from hurricanes. So on a per event basis...

It doesn't take much common sense to know that snowy roads cause more accidents than wet roads, if you've ever been driving during both conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tamarack

tamarack

Posted
Posted

From one of Tip's earlier posts:
Heh... if we want to get into the morality of anything ...

why t f are there people "living" there?  f you!

This could logically be applied to about half of the Netherlands.  Of course, people/government there bit the bullet and developed/implemented their world-class dike system.  Naso much here - I think "American optimism" is mostly a good thing, but not in the context of disaster prep.

Returning to the question, what were the choices?  (Rhetorical question only)  Last month I had the privilege of visiting Norway's western fjord county, and one of the most impressive things we saw were the "cliffhanger farms", buildings and modest-size fields perched 500-1000 vertical feet above the water, amid precipitous terrain, taking advantage where slopes were "only" 100% or so.  Why were they built?  Because, to rework Sherlock Holmes' "exclusionary evidence" principle:  When all the desirable land has long been spoken for, less desirable land is the only option.
Before the middle of the last century. most of those foot-of-fjord settlements had only water access, and probably few/no watercraft seaworthy in winter storms.  Low-slope land was/is exceedingly limited, so anything on which a sheep could graze without pitching over the cliff (too frequently) came into use, even to the point that hay had to be lowered by rope and taken to the winter barns by rowboat.  With road/rail access established, those farms are all abandoned now, though many are being maintained by historical societies.

I'm sure none of us know whether those at-risk low island dwellers began living there by pleasure or by lack of realistic choices.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
78Blizzard

78Blizzard

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, tamarack said:

From one of Tip's earlier posts:
Heh... if we want to get into the morality of anything ...

why t f are there people "living" there?  f you!

This could logically be applied to about half of the Netherlands.  Of course, people/government there bit the bullet and developed/implemented their world-class dike system.  Naso much here - I think "American optimism" is mostly a good thing, but not in the context of disaster prep.

Returning to the question, what were the choices?  (Rhetorical question only)  Last month I had the privilege of visiting Norway's western fjord county, and one of the most impressive things we saw were the "cliffhanger farms", buildings and modest-size fields perched 500-1000 vertical feet above the water, amid precipitous terrain, taking advantage where slopes were "only" 100% or so.  Why were they built?  Because, to rework Sherlock Holmes' "exclusionary evidence" principle:  When all the desirable land has long been spoken for, less desirable land is the only option.
Before the middle of the last century. most of those foot-of-fjord settlements had only water access, and probably few/no watercraft seaworthy in winter storms.  Low-slope land was/is exceedingly limited, so anything on which a sheep could graze without pitching over the cliff (too frequently) came into use, even to the point that hay had to be lowered by rope and taken to the winter barns by rowboat.  With road/rail access established, those farms are all abandoned now, though many are being maintained by historical societies.

I'm sure none of us know whether those at-risk low island dwellers began living there by pleasure or by lack of realistic choices.

 

You're right. 

I saw a Weather Channel report last week with the reporter in a suburb of Houston that was under 4 feet of water at its highest, but which had then receded. He showed a house that took the proper measures after other recent flooding in that area. He raised his house on a 4 foot above ground concrete foundation, with only the attached garage at level ground. So when Harvey hit, his house was dry and only the sheetrock in the garage up to about 5-6 feet had to be replaced. Meanwhile, all other residents were dumping their belongings at the curb, with major reconstruction yet ahead. That kind of action should be mandatory for receiving federal funds for reconstruction in flood-prone areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tamarack

tamarack

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, 78Blizzard said:

You're right. 

I saw a Weather Channel report last week with the reporter in a suburb of Houston that was under 4 feet of water at its highest, but which had then receded. He showed a house that took the proper measures after other recent flooding in that area. He raised his house on a 4 foot above ground concrete foundation, with only the attached garage at level ground. So when Harvey hit, his house was dry and only the sheetrock in the garage up to about 5-6 feet had to be replaced. Meanwhile, all other residents were dumping their belongings at the curb, with major reconstruction yet ahead. That kind of action should be mandatory for receiving federal funds for reconstruction in flood-prone areas.

My brother-in-law lives on Oahu, North Shore, and when he built about 20 years back, code required all living space to be above the 100-year tsunami.  A big one would ruin all his basement-level ham radio gear, but bedrooms/kitchen and such would be safe.  It's not impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dryslot

dryslot

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, dryslot said:

I mean where would you go? There is no getting away from it, Except hope for the best when the eye tracks right over you.

 

8 hours ago, Hazey said:

Downside of living in paradise I guess. And not pour salt on the wound but Jose is forecast to take a very close pass to those same islands as a another strong major hurricane.

 

8 hours ago, dryslot said:

They know the consequences of living in these locations.

 

37 minutes ago, mahofan said:

Kind of a dick comment to make. You expect native West Indians to up and move where, Topeka?

When you cherry pick one comment and only read what you want to read it would seem like that now wouldn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, JC-CT said:

Jose, Jose, where are you Jose

Ha... saw that. 

slams into the area from the SE of all directions, which I pretty sure has never happened with a full bird hurricane -at least that i'm aware.  Maybe something pre -Colonial or something.

but the totality of it's track in that run is absurd looking, with that many curvi-linear perturbations it seems highly unlikely the model has that right - but we know that..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JC-CT

JC-CT

Posted
Posted
Ha... saw that. 

slams into the area from the SE of all directions, which I pretty sure has never happened with a full bird hurricane -at least that i'm aware.  Maybe something pre -Colonial or something.

but the totality of it's track in that run is absurd looking, with that many curvi-linear perturbations it seems highly unlikely the model has that right - but we know that..

The thing has been so all over the place, even for long lead times. It's been interesting to watch.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...