Re: the article on TWC did a better job
Posted by
Chris in Tampa on 9/9/2012, 1:56 am
The IKE scale is a much better indication. Unfortunately, it's just not as straight forward to understand the technical aspect. With the Saffir Simpson hurricane wind scale, you know that once it reaches a certain wind speed it is then a certain category. It's easy for anyone to understand that, even if they don't actually know the values. The IKE scale is just a number that tries to equate the surge potential but the science behind the number is less easy discuss. Would telling people simply that the scale takes into effect the size of the storm be enough? Would they really accept that and listen to a number like that without understanding the mechanics of how that number is calculated?
That is what makes surge such a complex problem. Then you would have two different scales to reference too. However, even with IKE, you still have the problem of the local surges being possibly very different. Of course that will remain a problem no matter what. I do like IKE in that it can really tell you something. You can kind of say something like, even though it's best not to relate surge to the wind scale, this is a category 1 hurricane with a surge more typical of a category 3 hurricane. I just don't know if IKE should really be something that is a well plastered scale and number or if it should remain more for the experts to get the point and then for them to really try to hammer the point into people.
The storm surge unit has a tough job.
Of course I do forget that IKE also has the wind scale aspect of it too. That is the other problem, but still relates to the size of the storm. If a few thousand people experience close to the highest winds in one storm and a million experience close to the highest winds in another storm, yet it has the same wind speed, the Saffir Simpson wind scale tells you nothing about the difference. You can have a wind field that is very large and has about the same kind of wind over a large area or a wind field where the highest winds drop off very sharply and you have a lot less people exposed to the close to highest wind. But again, changing scales or adding another scale would just be an enormous obstacle.
I think these differences between storms will always have to be highlighted by a meteorologist explaining it. The surge is higher in this storm that what you might expect. The wind field is broader. More people will experience the highest winds. At times, comparing and contrasting with other storms might be a good idea, and other times not. As for Isaac, wow how many times it was said this was not Katrina. Although, I think I did hear some also talking about how it could be like Katrina in some areas because now the storm would be closer and impact LA more directly. Definitely a lot of New Orleans focused coverage which is what I am referring to here, since for MS this was not going to be anything close to Katrina, though obviously not your typical 75-80 mph hurricane either. And, how many times did you hear that this storm was making landfall about 7 years to the day as Katrina?
For people who want to view more data on Ike:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/data_sub/wind2012.html
About it:
http://storm.aoml.noaa.gov/hwind/ike.html |
71
In this thread:
Post A Reply
This thread has been archived and can no longer receive replies.