Mombu the Science Forum

Go Back   Mombu the Science Forum > Science > great isabel bust of 2003?
User Name
Password
REGISTER NOW! Mark Forums Read




Reply Bookmark and Share
1 26th November 16:28
rob
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?



This is what I see:

A hurricane that looks weak on satellite photos.

No CDO.

The storm is starting to move over cool waters.

Dry air is encroaching from the west.

It may be only a wobble, but the storm may want to
move more north... meaning more cold water to deal
with before landfall.

Smartly, NWS Morehead City, which is in the model's
bullseye, is forecasting only 65 mph sustained winds
with higher gusts.

Possible results?

Isabel only a tropical storm or weak hurricane at
landfall, but with a large wind field. Wind damage,
however, will be light.

The only dangers will be storm surge, inland flooding,
and damage to mobile homes.
  Reply With Quote


 


2 27th November 04:48
icebound
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?



You are right, sort of...

Here we have a "weak" hurricane, well advertised for a week... track and
landfall intensity pretty accurately forecast.... and yet we have 15
deaths (http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2003...197314-cp.html)
and a whole lot of close calls.

It may be bust as compared to category 5 at landfall, but still hardly a
"bust" for those affected.

--
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the
courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
--- Serenity Prayer
  Reply With Quote
3 27th November 04:48
mike1
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?


The question is: Why were they affected?

Fabian delivered wind gusts over 130mph to Bermuda, yet there was little
damage. Isabel's peak wind gusts ashore was barely over 100mph, yet
according to the news, 75% of the property in northeastern North
Carolina suffered "major property damage". Figuring that coastal
flooding can only represent a small portion of that, that means that
most of this was wind damage.

What we have here is not a storm problem but an idiot problem:

* Idiots who don't prune the 120ft trees on their property.
* Idiots who don't pick up their yard.
* Idiots who build elevated slap-board porches enclosed by screen mesh.
* Idiots who living in plywood houses with aluminum siding that a
cross-eyed stare could destroy.

.....so in even a weak storm, the air is filled with flying crap.

--

Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.com sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

"An election is nothing more than an advance auction of stolen goods."
-- Ambrose Bierce
  Reply With Quote
4 27th November 04:48
aberson
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?


I am not sure where you got that information. There was substantial
property damage throughout Bermuda.


Tree branches blowing into buildings, other debris, etc. Not direct wind damage.


Actually, trees have been shown to prevent property damage if properly
maintained.
--
Guns were not for girls. They were for boys. They were invented by
boys. They were invented by boys who had never gotten over their
disappointment that accompanying their own orgasm wasn't a big BOOM
sound. Lorrie Moore
  Reply With Quote
5 27th November 15:56
jackt21262
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?


Here is an armchair expert posting from the safety of his house not in the
path of the storm. Try coming to the DC area where 200,000 homes are without
power in northern VA. Where 180,000 homes are without power in DC. Where
225,0000 homes are without power in Montgomery County, MD. Where the power
companies are getting assistance from other power companies as far away as
Oklahoma and Canada. Where trees have crashed through roofs and power lines
are blocking access to and from neighborhoods. Are all of these people idiots
or just the person who posted his expert advice to trim the 120 year old trees.
  Reply With Quote
6 27th November 15:56
ralph southerland
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?


I live just east of New Bern, the eyewall was about 20-30 miles east of us.
There was less damage in New Bern than there was with Fran. The real problem
was the surge. My friends father lives in Sealevel which went through the
eye and he lives in a house built right after the 33 hurricane. The flooding
was worse than the 33 hurricane. And the 33 storm was the worst in living
memory in that area. The 33 storm created Bardens Inlet at Cape Lookout. As
a surge example: for hours before landfall the winds where NE in New Bern,
the Neuse River runs NE at the mouth and water was rushing to New Bern.
After the eye passed and the wind began to shift all that water headed back
down river which it would have done on its own but this time it was aided by
high winds. This caused extensive flooding at Adam's Creek. There was
probably a similar scenario farther down east. The wind really did not cause
that many problems on its own. By the way there is not a tree over 20 feet
on the Outer Banks. Never was, never will be.
  Reply With Quote
7 27th November 15:56
joolz
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?


I can see what the original poster is getting at.

Most folk knew Isabel was on its way, they had been warned and they had enough time to get out and stay out, even if was just to a local shelter, they could have done so till the danger has passed. Its not like they were killed or injured inside a shelter, they were not.

But was this because they were ignorant to the dangers of Isabel, or was it because Isabel was 'disappointingly (from the reporters/news teams point of view) downgraded from a cat 5 to a cat 2 storm. Therefore they were led to believe the threat was not so serious?

I also think the damage was greater because these areas have not been hit by such a strong force for quite sometime, making older trees etc more likely to fall under such pressure.

Just a thought.

Joolz
  Reply With Quote
8 27th November 15:56
mike1
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?


Did I suggest they were idiots for merely having trees?

--

Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.com sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

"An election is nothing more than an advance auction of stolen goods."
-- Ambrose Bierce
  Reply With Quote
9 28th November 05:55
mike1
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?


While commonly cited, I believe this to be "meteorological legend". When
a tree is destroyed in a storm, it happens on one of three ways: (1) It
snaps above ground, (2) the brace roots snap, and it topples, or (3) the
entire "root-ball" heaves out.

"Soupy soil" is a factor only in the last case.

Otherwise, force subjected to the tree increases by the square of its
surface resistance in the form of leaves, so double the leaves means
quadruple the strain.

--

Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.com sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

"An election is nothing more than an advance auction of stolen goods."
-- Ambrose Bierce
  Reply With Quote
10 28th November 05:55
mike1
External User
 
Posts: 1
Default great isabel bust of 2003?


Leaves grow larger when there is less sunlight than normal.


Perhaps. I've met all manner of "experts" who were nevertheless wrong.

--

Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.com sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

"An election is nothing more than an advance auction of stolen goods."
-- Ambrose Bierce
  Reply With Quote


 


Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Some other forums that might be of your interest : Anthropology, Archaeology, Astronomy, Chemistry, Evolution, Geology, Mathematics, Meteorology, Microbiology, Paleontology, Philosophy, Physics


Copyright © 2006 SmartyDevil.com - Dies Mies Jeschet Boenedoesef Douvema Enitemaus -
666