Jump to content
  • Welcome to American Weather

    Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Windspeed

Michael Banter Thread

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, jburns said:

Since you brought it up, you still owe me the public apology you agreed to when I let you back.  You remember. You ran to Randy and it was part of the negotiated settlement when he told me whatever I wanted to do he would be ok with it.  If you can't bring yourself to honor the agreement that's fine. Just be careful to not give me another chance. :)

I never agreed to a public apology and you can still diaf. :)

And I have the reciepts to prove it.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Near the time of landfall there was a 35 mb pressure difference between the two reporting buoys at Panama City and Panama Beach, located maybe 10 miles apart. 

Tyndall AFB was reporting 924 mb when the station went off-line (with northeast winds gusting to 119 knots). If the usual ratio of RFQ to back side prevailed, Mexico Beach or some location a bit closer to Panama City possibly would have been 1.3 to 1.5 times that with the same pressure. (1.3 x 120 = 156 knots, about 175 mph right?). But I suspect the ratio may have been more like 1.1 in this storm due to unequal radar signatures indicating squallier conditions on the normally weaker side, so perhaps 132 knots instead. I don't think we will ever know except from secondary evidence and that will include damage that might have been partially due to wind and partially due to storm surge. In any case, the 918 mb pressure tells most of the story. 

Did you see the pics in the main thread of possible trees debarked and boxcars overturned (presumably along 231 in northeast PC) ?

 

I think you'll find that very much in support of what you're saying.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody made a serious typo here.

There is no possible way are getting 2+ feet of rain.

What's funny is they edited it in the last few hours, it was 71.5 cm, and forgot to move the decimal point.

3368716_Screenshot_20181010-233212_StormRadar.thumb.jpg.90c17add942248fa48c76422e2f76b7d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, the ghost of leroy said:

I never agreed to a public apology and you can still diaf. :)

And I have the reciepts to prove it.

 

 

 

Whatever you say. It only affects my opinion of you. Not a problem for me. I have 2 pms from Randy saying you would apoloogize if I shortened the timeout. I did. I can get his permission to post them if you want. Or, we can just go on and I will wait for you to hang yourself. Or, you can simply say, my bad and be done with it. I'm not asking for you to grovel.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This discussion about the real wind speeds (on land) is pointless because (a) instruments failed before those might have been recorded at some locations, and (default_cool.png we have yet to see any documented evidence of actual wind speeds near Mexico Beach. There may be none available. 

Sometimes an assertion can be true for unexpected reasons too. If there's a 12-15 foot storm surge with waves added, the maximum winds will be dislocated higher by at least 12-15 feet. Look at the readings from any ocean buoy in a passing eyewall situation. They rarely get anywhere near the dropsonde measured wind speeds within 50 feet of the mean sea surface, partly because of the low exposure altitudes and partly because of the wave environment. It's hard to get a 145 mph wind between two 30' waves. 

This was no cat-2 but a sustained cat-3 will do considerable damage, a lot of the outcome depends on duration rather than peak gusts. I was living near a tornado path about thirty years ago and watched very brief gusts hit trees near my home that seemed to be EF-2 (like the tornado itself) but they only lasted a few seconds and the trees were not destroyed as they would have been if the gusts had continued for 2-3 minutes.

Michael had sub 940 mb pressure readings for nearly 8 hours prior to landfall. Think about that. Before anyone should have to defend the official intensity statements, it would seem to me someone would need to explain their hypothesis against the meteorological fact above as to how in the hell maximum sustained winds never exceeded C2 at landfall. I don't care that we've yet to have an official or unofficial anemometer reading analyzed. There are way more logical explanations for the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

If this was even a "Cat 4 or even a Cat 3",, THIS is what We would be looking at..

I'm not seeing it here.. As far as Michael.. 

 

 

thMMYRJY6X.jpg

cat4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If this was even a "Cat 4 or even a Cat 3",, THIS is what We would be looking at.. I'm not seeing it here.. As far as Michael..   

 

thMMYRJY6X.jpg.bc7f02a3fb15ef98fc5f654b0d6d83b6.jpg

cat4.jpg.d63b083f76fcf204cfad8d6d1aeadfc9.jpg

Neither has anyone else. Usually helicopter survey flights occur the next day or days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks might want too imply..

Well look at the "roofs" flying off blah blah.... [/I]

I have a answer too this..

Where "Michael" made "landfall"  was in fact Historic ..

NO Landfall from a "major" much less a Cat 1 or 2 in about 30 years..

Building codes were not in effect for those older homes, they lacked Hurricane straps.. Grandfathered in..

Plenty of Old Mobile Home parks, (For seniors) are/were still there..

Just my 2 cents..

Again this was no stronger than a cat 2, ..

 I Have a team put together this evening to prove it so..

Based on DATA.. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Windspeed said:

Neither has anyone else. Usually helicopter survey flights occur the next day or days.

I see, Slabs Will we on a over flight? I doubt it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Windspeed said:

Neither has anyone else. Usually helicopter survey flights occur the next day or days.

Do you know what you are even looking at? ( I think you are in your  younger TEENS Myself)   you  have a lot to learn My friend.. These  picture are  about 17 years old.. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you know what you are even looking at? ( I think you are in your  younger 20's Myself)   you  have a lot to learn My friend.. 

 

Like grammar? Perhaps the ability to engage in a mature debate? You of all people are telling me I must be young and have a lot to learn. Grow up.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be a grammar Nazi.. as long as I get my point across.. well,,  your a youngin,, I can tell. ALL you youngins, that's what you do, attack, old school Folks..

guess it's the new way of thinking & ciphering I assume,, 

Anyway, you cannot give Me a answer.. those pics ARE from a Cat 3 & 4.. 

We'll  NOT see that tomorrow, via *Ariel's*  because WE ONLY got a strong Cat, 2..

That's it..

NHC isn't *GOD*.. They been "politized" .. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

These  picture are  about 17 years old..

Your reading comprehension skills also need improvement. You completely missed the point. There have yet to be damage survey flights for Michael over the swath of landfall shoreline. Yet you use older ones as a comparison example to argue intensity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Windspeed said:

Michael had sub 940 mb pressure readings for nearly 8 hours prior to landfall. Think about that. Before anyone should have to defend the official intensity statements, it would seem to me someone would need to explain their hypothesis against the meteorological fact above as to how in the hell maximum sustained winds never exceeded C2 at landfall. I don't care that we've yet to have an official or unofficial anemometer reading analyzed. There are way more logical explanations for the latter.

What’s interesting is that there’s 2 camps to the argument here. 1 camp is arguing that a C5 was justifiable based on the recon data just prior to landfall and the other is saying Michael was only a C2. The only plausible reason I can think of that would allow these ideas to coexist can only  be summed up as “humanity.”

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Windspeed said:


 

 


Your reading comprehension skills also need improvement. You completely missed the point. There have yet to be damage survey flights for Michael over the swath of landfall shoreline. Yet you use older ones as an example.

 

NO your "reading  comprehension" skills are less than Steller.. 

I SAID you will not SEE DAMAGE, as portrayed in those pictures above.. For the "current" landfall

se habla español.. 

A Cat  2 made landfall..

NOT a "Cat 4 or 5"..

I explained Why you _______..  

8 & bait.. 

OBX Bound..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hlcater said:

What’s interesting is that there’s 2 camps to the argument here. 1 camp is arguing that a C5 was justifiable based on the recon data just prior to landfall and the other is saying Michael was only a C2. The only plausible reason I can think of that would allow these ideas to coexist can only  be summed up as “humanity.”

I don't see two camps. I see many reasonable people with a troll in their midst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Keelala said:

I don't see two camps. I see many reasonable people with a troll in their midst.

I’m talking in the grand scheme of things. There’s definitely 2 camps on Twitter.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hlcater said:

I’m talking in the grand scheme of things. There’s definitely 2 camps on Twitter.

I see. I do not twitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I wish We could get @LakeEffectKing & @donsutherland1 to chime in  their thoughts here..

I trust those 2 guys to give very UN~Biased, &   honest answers.. 

(No guys I don't wanna have too drag ya'll into this debate)..

Though..

that said..

What I seen & monitored via the Sea buoys Data sets , (NOT what the NHC said) discarding those..

Actual Marine conditions.. 

The "actual video(s) from "landfall" ..

AND based on My own experience,,

This was a Strong Cat 2.. 

Hurricane watcher & survivor on SENC Coast since 1969.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Recently reported wind gusts include:

Tyndall Air Force Base: 119 mph (191 km/h)
Florida State University Panama City Campus: 116 mph (187 km/h)
University of Florida/Weatherflow Mexico Beach: 104 mph (167 km/h)”

The differences make sense, since Tyndall is right in the firing line, however in the summary:

“MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS…150 MPH”

I guess that must be historical, somewhere out where it would affect only boats and seagulls. Incidentally the original link:

https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/met.html?id=8729210

Now reads maximum gusts of 76kn and sustained of a “terrifying” 42kn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been an impressive increase in the continual wind and the gusts just in the last 10 minutes.  FFC radar shows western Douglas/east Carroll County as getting some sharp wind changes, which is about what I'd expect.

So far it's just lots of rain, and wind well below SVR criteria.  No damage at my place (yet) although the line of strongest winds hasn't yet hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, the ghost of leroy said:

main thread is always garbo, which is why you gotta hang out here, the mid atlantic thread, and over at the tropical thread on american politics

dont send them to the MA thread. its nice over there. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×