NHC Modifies Hurricane Warning Definition in Wake of Sandy

[phlwx]

We're getting off topic here. Is hurricane intensity measured in dollars? Is it measured by how many cities/people are in the path? I'm really confused here by what you think an intensity scale is.

I'm not using dollars as an intensity scale. I don't why you think that considering you started using dollars to discuss damage and I countered your Charley argument with two "weaker" storms that were costlier.

The crux of the problem here is that folks are conflating 1) intensity and 2) cumulative societal impact.

I know you and others who like Saffir are saying it works just fine for public consumption. For intensity, it does its job. For public...I'm not so sure of that. When you have had two hurricanes along the East Coast in the last two years in the top seven of costliest storms on record, I don't think it's unreasonable for scientists to come up with a scale that measure societal impact potential and convey it in a relatively easy way. Science around hurricanes has advanced tremendously since Saffir was developed...scientists should be able to come up with a metric that's easy-to-digest for the public and refine that metric as technology and science around hurricanes improves through time.

[HurricaneJosh]

I'm not using dollars as an intensity scale. I don't why you think that considering you started using dollars to discuss damage and I countered your Charley argument with two "weaker" storms that were costlier.

You said Isabel's "impact" was greater than Charley's. How do you measure impact?

[HurricaneJosh]

I know you and others who like Saffir are saying it works just fine for public consumption. For intensity, it does its job. For public...I'm not so sure of that. When you have had two hurricanes along the East Coast in the last two years in the top seven of costliest storms on record, I don't think it's unreasonable for scientists to come up with a scale that measure societal impact potential and convey it in a relatively easy way. Science around hurricanes has advanced tremendously since Saffir was developed...scientists should be able to come up with a metric that's easy-to-digest for the public and refine that metric as technology and science around hurricanes improves through time.

But who would find such abstract information useful?

When a hurricane is approaching the coast, a resident needs to know 1) intensity and 2) whether or not they're in the path. The width of that path (wind radii, etc.) is explicitly conveyed in advisories. They don't need to know the overall potential societal impact, because that kind of info is of no use to a single resident in a single location trying to make safety decisions. (It could be useful to federal preparedness officials who need to understand the potential scope of an event on the macro level.)

After the hurricane has passed, we already have a perfect scale for measuring the overall societal impact: the dollar damage.

[Chaser25973]

Yes, and I acknowledged it was just in that one area. But it was one of the hardest-hit areas. And as someone else pointed out, the surge deaths in NYC apparently occurred in mandatory evacuation zones, so the folks were warned. At the end of the day, we can't hold a hurricane scale or a government agency responsible for the fact that some people just won't listen, no matter what scale or what words are used. Period.

I maintain that the death toll is very low and should be viewed as a win.

Any death toll directly related to the storm, whether 1 or 100, is completely unacceptable. Our technology and resources are advanced enough that a storm like Sandy wouldn't have done much damage had our infrastructure been better. The damn thing didn't even drop that much rain!

People are dead because our government has failed to protect us.

You wouldn't be saying the death toll is low and should be viewed as a win if a member of your family was killed in this storm.

[HurricaneJosh]

The main issue, in my mind, is that the NHC needs to educate the public so they understand that while surge roughly correlates with intensity, it's not a 1-1 match-- so that severe hurricanes can have small surges (Charley), and relatively weak ones can have tremendous surges (Ike).

And advisories need to explicitly mention both factors-- i.e., "Hurricane Joan is a Category 2 on the wind scale with the potential to create catastrophic surges, approaching 20 ft, along the Louisiana coast."

I think the NHC is basically doing all this now.

[phlwx]

Any death toll directly related to the storm, whether 1 or 100, is completely unacceptable. Our technology and resources are advanced enough that a storm like Sandy wouldn't have done much damage had our infrastructure been better. The damn thing didn't even drop that much rain!

People are dead because our government has failed to protect us.

You wouldn't be saying the death toll is low and should be viewed as a win if a member of your family was killed in this storm.

Ask Cape May, Wildwood, and the Delmarva about that.

[HurricaneJosh]

Any death toll directly related to the storm, whether 1 or 100, is completely unacceptable. Our technology and resources are advanced enough that a storm like Sandy wouldn't have done much damage had our infrastructure been better. The damn thing didn't even drop that much rain!

It's unacceptable that people don't listen to explicit warnings, that they choose to stay in places that they're told to leave, and that they go outside when they're explicitly told to stay indoors.

People are dead because our government has failed to protect us.

What are you talking about?

That is not the fault of government agencies. Unless you want the government to shoot people on sight for not evacuating or shoot them for going outside when they're told not to, there will always be deaths in big storms.

The government can do so much. There's this additional factor called "personal responsibility."

You wouldn't be saying the death toll is low and should be viewed as a win if a member of your family was killed in this storm.

Wrong. I chase hurricanes and I have always been clear about this: if I ever die in a hurricane, I deserve it. Period.

[Ginx snewx]

Correct me if I am wrong but SS was developed as a damage scale initially.

[HurricaneJosh]

Correct me if I am wrong but SS was developed as a damage scale initially.

You are actually correct. But the important thing to note is that it's describing the effects of that category's wind speed on a given location. It doesn't presume to predict the overall societal impact because that can't be predicted; it's dependent on so many other factors that have nothing to do with the actual 'cane. Basically, it's saying, "If Cat-3 winds happen at a given location, this is what will happen to trees and buildings at that location."

[Ginx snewx]

You are actually correct. But the important thing to note is that it's describing the effects of that category's wind speed on a given location. It doesn't presume to predict the overall societal impact because that can't be predicted; it's dependent on so many other factors that have nothing to do with the actual 'cane. Basically, it's saying, "If Cat-3 winds happen at a given location, this is what will happen to trees and buildings at that location."

Since Saffir developed the wind scale and Simpson the surge scale technically it should now be the Saffir Scale. I totally agree Josh. Isohume here ya go

[SmokeEater]

Any death toll directly related to the storm, whether 1 or 100, is completely unacceptable. Our technology and resources are advanced enough that a storm like Sandy wouldn't have done much damage had our infrastructure been better. The damn thing didn't even drop that much rain!

People are dead because our government has failed to protect us.

You wouldn't be saying the death toll is low and should be viewed as a win if a member of your family was killed in this storm.

People died because they didn't heed MANDATORY evacuation orders. This storm hit the most populated area in this country, and killed very few people compared to the population number. A little over 100 people in an area with 10's of millions, is extremely low. To expect not one single death, out of any natural disaster is frigging stupid. Stop with the rambling on already.

[Sunny and Warm]

Any death toll directly related to the storm, whether 1 or 100, is completely unacceptable. Our technology and resources are advanced enough that a storm like Sandy wouldn't have done much damage had our infrastructure been better. The damn thing didn't even drop that much rain!

People are dead because our government has failed to protect us.

You wouldn't be saying the death toll is low and should be viewed as a win if a member of your family was killed in this storm.

Why do I feel that you are swimming in the deep end of the pool without a protective gear.

[HurricaneJosh]

People died because they didn't heed MANDATORY evacuation orders. This storm hit the most populated area in this country, and killed very few people compared to the population number. A little over 100 people in an area with 10's of millions, is extremely low. To expect not one single death, out of any natural disaster is frigging stupid. Stop with the rambling on already.

Agreed.

Why do I feel that you are swimming in the deep end of the pool without a protective gear.

[Amped]

Sorry for the late meme. I just think all the good points about Sandy have already been made.

[famartin]

Any death toll directly related to the storm, whether 1 or 100, is completely unacceptable. Our technology and resources are advanced enough that a storm like Sandy wouldn't have done much damage had our infrastructure been better. The damn thing didn't even drop that much rain!

People are dead because our government has failed to protect us.

You wouldn't be saying the death toll is low and should be viewed as a win if a member of your family was killed in this storm.

This is the most ridiculous post ever.

1) It didn't drop much rain because you were on the wind side. Period. When tropical cyclones or transitioning cyclones reach the Mid Atlantic, they virtually always are divided into two fairly distinct halves: the left side of the track, which gets the heaviest rain, and the right side, which gets the wind. Usually NYC is on the left side, or at least near the middle (where the core has been beaten up and there still isn't much wind). With Sandy making landfall in a westward path well south of NYC, this put NYC squarely in the worst part of the right (wind) side. Tell the people who live in the Delmarva who had more than 10" of rain that "oh there wasn't even that much rain".

2) People are dead because they don't listen. There is a TRUST issue with the weather forecast, has been for a long time, though certainly made worse by the Irene hype.

3) If a member of your family died, would you actually be willing to look into their decisions which led to their death? Maybe it was because they didn't listen to advice.

[isohume]

Since Saffir developed the wind scale and Simpson the surge scale technically it should now be the Saffir Scale. I totally agree Josh. Isohume here ya go

Man that's awesome. I never knew that.

Hahaha j/k Urkel, I've been lobbying hard for the "Enhanced Saffir Scale" for years now, but to no avail. Folks are getting ripped off, I believe.

[Chaser25973]

People died because they didn't heed MANDATORY evacuation orders. This storm hit the most populated area in this country, and killed very few people compared to the population number. A little over 100 people in an area with 10's of millions, is extremely low. To expect not one single death, out of any natural disaster is frigging stupid. Stop with the rambling on already.

INCORRECT. Zone B in New York City was never given a mandatory evacuation order and people were killed in Zone B *and* Zone C.

[famartin]

INCORRECT. Zone B in New York City was never given a mandatory evacuation order and people were killed in Zone B *and* Zone C.

This map may not be completely up-to-date:

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=216156988220018360943.0004cd4a2e1fa8bf18436&msa=0&ll=40.644699,-73.9785&spn=0.173233,0.402718

But the deaths outside zone A appear to have generally been from other causes than flooding. (falling trees, electrocution, etc)

[Chaser25973]

It's unacceptable that people don't listen to explicit warnings, that they choose to stay in places that they're told to leave, and that they go outside when they're explicitly told to stay indoors.

What are you talking about?

That is not the fault of government agencies. Unless you want the government to shoot people on sight for not evacuating or shoot them for going outside when they're told not to, there will always be deaths in big storms.

The government can do so much. There's this additional factor called "personal responsibility."

Wrong. I chase hurricanes and I have always been clear about this: if I ever die in a hurricane, I deserve it. Period.

Josh, it's simply not possible to blame people who did not evacuate who were not in a mandatory evacuation zone to begin with.

The government of New York City did not begin to evacuate people until Sunday - which the subways were shut down 7 hours after evacuations began. Even if you want to blame people for not evacuating who lived in Zone A when they should have when evacuations were ordered too late and the public transportation system began to shut down 7 hours after the evacuations were ordered.

Our government failed to protect us. Michael Bloomberg failed to protect us. He should have ordered evacuations on Friday when New York State declared a State of Emergency. But he went on the air, publicly, and said Monday would be a normal workday. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there wasn't anyone on here who was predicting that NYC would barely see anything out of Sandy. Where our Mayor got his information from, why he didn't take this storm more seriously, why so many people in New York City died as a result of Sandy - all of this should be the subject of an investigation.

You own your company, right Josh? If someone whose salary you pay failed to do his job and cost you money, are you going to just let it go or are you going to find out what the hell went wrong and fire the guy who didn't live up the duty he or she was being paid to do? Bloomberg's actions were borderline criminal and there are a lot of people here who agree with me on his handling of the storm. People died as a direct result of not taking this storm seriously - because they were listening to the mayor of New York City who proclaimed this storm wasn't going to be a big deal.

[HurricaneJosh]

Josh, it's simply not possible to blame people who did not evacuate who were not in a mandatory evacuation zone to begin with.

The government of New York City did not begin to evacuate people until Sunday - which the subways were shut down 7 hours after evacuations began. Even if you want to blame people for not evacuating who lived in Zone A when they should have when evacuations were ordered too late and the public transportation system began to shut down 7 hours after the evacuations were ordered.

Our government failed to protect us. Michael Bloomberg failed to protect us. He should have ordered evacuations on Friday when New York State declared a State of Emergency. But he went on the air, publicly, and said Monday would be a normal workday. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there wasn't anyone on here who was predicting that NYC would barely see anything out of Sandy. Where our Mayor got his information from, why he didn't take this storm more seriously, why so many people in New York City died as a result of Sandy - all of this should be the subject of an investigation.

You own your company, right Josh? If someone whose salary you pay failed to do his job and cost you money, are you going to just let it go or are you going to find out what the hell went wrong and fire the guy who didn't live up the duty he or she was being paid to do? Bloomberg's actions were borderline criminal and there are a lot of people here who agree with me on his handling of the storm. People died as a direct result of not taking this storm seriously - because they were listening to the mayor of New York City who proclaimed this storm wasn't going to be a big deal.

Which specific deaths were the government's fault? If you're going to make criminal accusations like this, you need to be specific.

Again-- and I'm going to keep saying it-- the fact that less than 200 people died in an event this large and destructive affecting tens of millions of people is pretty remarkable. I agree maybe Bloomberg underplayed it, but the NHC and the NWS offices were explicit Re: the threat-- and this death toll is in no way out of line with an event of this size.

You can get all idealistic and say deaths should be zeroo-- I agree-- but with tens of millions of people directly impacted, the laws of probability say there are going to be fatalities in an event of this size. Every time it rains hard in SoCal, people die during the rush hour because the roads are slippery. It happens.

[thunderman]

I do not get all the bashing that has been directed at NHC from the weather community as a whole. The hand off from NHC to local WFOs was conducted very smoothly and was done well in advance of the storm it's self. NHC made it very clear very early that they would not be issuing Tropical Watches/Warnings north of NC (and why). This is a prime example of why you will never be able to get through to the small amount of the population that will always think they can forecast better than NOAA. There is no help for people that will not listen.

Next time something like this happens, there will be people complaining because their deductible is 5k.