Re: CIMSS / SSEC Weather Briefing 10/23/2015 Patricia
Posted by
Chris in Tampa on 10/28/2015, 7:44 am
I hadn't heard that. It would be very interesting if it couldn't even sense that high. I don't know why it would put out such crazy readings. I don't know where the raw data is, but one theory I was thinking about was if the wind recorded some astronomically high value it might code something by default, like 999, or something would make it default due to something like that due to an error. A poorly coded system might take those bad values and average them with real values. That might have explained some of the significant differences in the sustained wind and gusts. Not having the gusts recorded with the high sustained wind at the same time was really weird anyway. You can calculated a 1 minute average but not a 3 second gust?
I was kind of curious how they would verify the readings anyway. Take it down and put it in a wind tunnel? The values seemed way too high for that section of the storm, but I was curious about other possible causes for a real value.
I am curious if an instrument had the opportunity to sense an extreme wind somewhat not associated with the eye itself, like a small scale feature, if it would be counted as the entire storm's official wind speed. I guess it would simply be so rare for a station to happen to be in the path, be in an extremely powerful storm, be designed to handle the powerful winds and also survive. I am curious if something like this ever happens at the surface in an eyewall in extreme storms. There could have been past storms where a small scale feature did destructive damage that did not exist in the larger region of the eyewall. If it was possible it would add a greater level of unpredictability to some stronger storms. Thankfully, they don't make landfall often. |
118
In this thread:
Post A Reply
This thread has been archived and can no longer receive replies.