- #1
- 8,143
- 1,761
turbo-1 said:Holy crap! If that projected track is anywhere near accurate, there is some trouble brewing. A well-formed hurricane moving from the cooler Atlantic into the warm Gulf can turn into a monster. Let's hope this doesn't come true.
Evo said:It's no longer a Cat 4 , it's been downgraded to a Cat 3 and projections (which this far off means little) is that it's headed for S Florida.
Right now it is Cat 3, there is no telling what it will end up as.Ivan Seeking said:Do you mean that it is projected to not make Cat 4? Right now the map shows it as a Cat 3. .
Evo said:Right now it is Cat 3, there is no telling what it will end up as.
thanks, Russ. We'll have to see where it ends up.russ_watters said:The "discussion" section of that nhc link is where they have all the good junk on the predictions. The intensity forecasts are touger even than the track, so we'll have to wait and see, but the projections are for it to enter the gulf as a major hurricane after a slight weakening over the next day:
FORECAST POSITIONS AND MAX WINDS
INITIAL 05/2100Z 22.9N 64.1W 100 KT
12HR VT 06/0600Z 22.6N 66.2W 95 KT
24HR VT 06/1800Z 22.2N 68.9W 95 KT
36HR VT 07/0600Z 22.1N 71.3W 100 KT
48HR VT 07/1800Z 22.2N 73.7W 110 KT
72HR VT 08/1800Z 23.0N 78.2W 115 KT
96HR VT 09/1800Z 24.5N 81.5W 115 KT
120HR VT 10/1800Z 25.5N 83.0W 115 KT
Cat 5 is > 136 kt (155 mph), Cat 4 is 115-135 kt (131 - 154 mph).
Swing easy, upper body only, and sweep through. Gentle constant application of force = club-head speed. It's true.russ_watters said:Well with Hanna here for the weekend, there won't be any temptation until next week, but I'm itching to get back to it. I suspect I'll try to hit the driving range next weekend.
russ_watters said:The "discussion" section of that nhc link is where they have all the good junk on the predictions. The intensity forecasts are touger even than the track, so we'll have to wait and see, but the projections are for it to enter the gulf as a major hurricane after ...
Astronuc said:Right now the five day projection has Ike passing along the northern coast of Cuba.
It's just that more people live in areas that will be inundated by floods and/or the housing is not built to withstand the hurricanes or tornado, or microbursts that are relatively common in some areas.If it seems like disasters are getting more common, it's because they are. But some disasters do seem to be affecting us worse - and not for the reasons you may think. Floods and storms have led to most of the excess damage. The number of flood and storm disasters has gone up by 7.4% every year in recent decades, according to the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. (Between 2000 and 2007, the growth was even faster - with an average annual rate of increase of 8.4%.) Of the total 197 million people affected by disasters in 2007, 164 million were affected by floods.
It is tempting to look at the line-up of storms in the Atlantic (Hanna, Ike, Josephine) and, in the name of everything green, blame climate change for this state of affairs. But there is another inconvenient truth out there: We are getting more vulnerable to weather mostly because of where we live, not just how we live.
In recent decades, people around the world have moved en masse to big cities near water. The population of Miami-Dade County in Florida was about 150,000 in the 1930s, a decade fraught with severe hurricanes. Since then, the population of Miami-Dade County has rocketed 1,600% to 2,400,000.
. . . .
If it happened today, the Great Miami storm would have caused $140 to $157 billion in damages. (Hurricane Katrina, the costliest storm in U.S. history, caused $100 billion in losses.) "There has been no trend in the number or intensity of storms at landfall since 1900,"says Pielke, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado. "The storms themselves haven't changed."
. . . .
And as soon as they get wiped out, they'll be demanding more taxpayer money to put them right back where they shouldn't be and then cry again when the next storm threatens. Why don't we put these areas off limits for building?Astronuc said:Here's an interesting article - Why Disasters Are Getting Worse
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080904/us_time/whydisastersaregettingworse
It's just that more people live in areas that will be inundated by floods and/or the housing is not built to withstand the hurricanes or tornado, or microbursts that are relatively common in some areas.
I think some areas are off-limits now. I've seen some maps that show some communities don't exist anymore after Katrina.Evo said:And as soon as they get wiped out, they'll be demanding more taxpayer money to put them right back where they shouldn't be and then cry again when the next storm threatens. Why don't we put these areas off limits for building?
Astronuc said:So from the table posted by Russ, the predictions indicate Ike could hit Cat 4 before the hits land - assuming it stays on the projected track.
None of those sound real good, Astronuc. When Katrina hit, a client of mine that ran a big ice business on the MS coast lost his beach-house, and his ice-plant in that area was wrecked. Sea-lions and seals from a local aquarium somehow congregated in his warehouse (nice and cool there) and he graciously allowed them to stay while their enclosures were rebuilt. The staff came over to his plant every day with buckets of fish and other supplements to feed the critters until they were ready to take them back.Astronuc said:Looks like Ike will wander along the middle of Cuba and into the Gulf. As of 8pm EDT, Ike had sustained winds of 120 mph (Cat 3), but those should decrease as the eye moves along Cuba.
The 5-day projection puts in the mid Gulf on Friday. It could pull a Katrina (NO), Rita (Houston/Beaumont) or turn west toward Corpus Cristi/Brownsville. It could restrengthen to a Cat 4 in the Gulf.