Category 6 Hurricanes?

[Weather.St]

I recently wrote an article on the implications of a category 6 rank being added to the hurican scale. I wanted to get more input, however. Please vote on my poll and leave any comments here or on the website.

 

http://weather.st/blog/category-6-hurricane-the-argument-is-real/

[ncforecaster89]

I voted "no" since there wasn't an "absolutely not" option. You pretty much touched on the main reasons it's both unnecessary and unwise. Very well written article!

[wxeyeNH]

I vote definitely  no because of public perception.  I could just see it now.  A incoming Cat 5.  The weather channel with a graph of Cat's 1 thru 6.  People seeing that the approaching storm, while near the top is not in  the top category. Can only add to complacency.  Such rare events at this point in time.  Perhaps 25 or 50 years from now things might be different.

[donsutherland1]

The Saffir-Simpson scale was created to deal with property damage. The property damage for Category 5 is:

 

Catastrophic damage will occur: A high percentage of framed homes will be destroyed, with total roof failure and wall collapse. Fallen trees and power poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last for weeks to possibly months. Most of the area will be uninhabitable for weeks or months.

 

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshws.php

 

One can measure a hurricane's strength (wind speed, barometric pressure, etc.) independently of the Saffir-Simpson scale, making it possible to differentiate between storms on a meteorological basis without being constrained by the Saffir-Simpson scale. Therefore, I don't believe there is a compelling need for the scale to be expanded.

[Juliancolton]

The Saffir-Simpson scale was created to deal with property damage. The property damage for Category 5 is:

 

Catastrophic damage will occur: A high percentage of framed homes will be destroyed, with total roof failure and wall collapse. Fallen trees and power poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last for weeks to possibly months. Most of the area will be uninhabitable for weeks or months.

 

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshws.php

 

One can measure a hurricane's strength (wind speed, barometric pressure, etc.) independently of the Saffir-Simpson scale, making it possible to differentiate between storms on a meteorological basis without being constrained by the Saffir-Simpson scale. Therefore, I don't believe there is a compelling need for the scale to be expanded.

 

This is how one responds to a good-faith, but potentially misguided, proposal.

 

 ah I see ....  well   every month    - every week -the following topics  also keep coming  up 

 cat 7  Hurricanes  ...  the govt  controlling  our   weather  and  chemtrails...  

so    if I follow you reasoning  weenie     simply because  the  topic  keeps coming  up I should     keep an open mind ? 

 

Its  clear you  dont have any idea  how SCIENCE  actually  do you weenie? 

 

This is not.

[Amped]

I think Category 5s  are elite enough, since only 3 of them made US landfall in the last 130 years. 

[masomenos]

I think we have too many categories as it is...at least in terms of wind damage. At the end of the day 175 mph winds to your average structure is going to have a similar impact as 125 mph winds--as far as life and monetary losses are concerned. That said, I think the saffir simpson scale is pretty useless when we have so many other measurable data points to consider when forecasting potential storm impacts. Good tool for public outreach and warnings? Yes. Scientifically valuable or significant? No.

[Weather.St]

I think we have too many categories as it is...at least in terms of wind damage. At the end of the day 175 mph winds to your average structure is going to have a similar impact as 125 mph winds--as far as life and monetary losses are concerned. That said, I think the saffir simpson scale is pretty useless when we have so many other measurable data points to consider when forecasting potential storm impacts. Good tool for public outreach and warnings? Yes. Scientifically valuable or significant? No.

A very good point. I would tend to agree here. Viable changes would include the factors that cause the most damage/loss of life, like flooding and surge.