WunderBlog Archive » Category 6™

Category 6 has moved! See the latest from Dr. Jeff Masters and Bob Henson here.

Tropical Depression Rita still nasty

By: Dr. Jeff Masters, 3:20 AM GMT on September 25, 2005

Rita continues to push inland, and is now creating flooding problems in Arkansas, Texas, and Louisiana. Radar estimates of rain indicate that over a foot of rain has fallen in some areas. Expect an additional 3 - 6 inches of rain per day to fall during the next three days along Rita's path. Fortunately, Rita is no longer expected to stall, and the regions most likely to be affected are under moderate to extreme drought conditions. Major flooding is already occurring on some rivers, but it will take a long time for many other rivers to come up to flood stage. The Mississippi is over 30 feet below flood stage in some places. Flash flooding along creeks and street flooding from excessive rains will be a problem everywhere, however. The storm surge flooding near the coast will steadily receed tonight, as the winds at the coast return to normal.

Figure 1.Drought conditions exist over most of the areas affected by Hurricane Rita.

Figure 2. Estimated rainfall from Rita.

Elsewhere in the tropics
A large non-tropical low pressure system near Bermuda has changed little the past day, but has the potential to develop into a tropical depression by Monday or Tuesday. This system is now moving quickly to the northeast, and is not a threat to any land areas.

A tropical disturbance near 11N 35W, off the coast of Africa, has gotten sheared by strong winds from a upper-level low pressure system to its east. Development of this disturbance is not likey until Tuesday at the earliest, and it is more likely that the shear will completely tear the disturbance apart before then.

Jeff Masters

The views of the author are his/her own and do not necessarily represent the position of The Weather Company or its parent, IBM.

Reader Comments

I don;'t have much to say here except the waters in the Carribean Sea are really warm. I would like to hear some people opinions and forecasts for this region over the next while as these water will continue to heat up until something significant moves through that area.
Why is it that Rita is not expected to stall?
One really bad thing about this season is the death toll in the US--until Katrina, no hurricane or tropical storm had caused as many as 60 fatalities in the US since Agnes in 1972. Katrina easily killed more people than all hurricanes/tropical storm since Agnes combined, but I think it is likely that Rita will break the 60 mark, especially since the 24 killed in the bus are going to be counted on her death toll.
I saw some postings about nasty weather in the Lake Erie area. Here are some excerpts about Lake Erie's answer to a storm surge.

On Lake Erie, there have been seiche incidents in 1882, 1929, 1933 and 1947. The deadliest Lake Erie seiche hit close to home and claimed seven lives in the early morning hours of May 31, 1942.
Weather experts say a seiche can occur on the lake without warning, so boaters and shore users need to listen to National Weather Service forecasts for warnings of conditions favorable to seiche development.
Madison-on-the-Lake reportedly received the brunt of the wave, which stretched from Bay Village to Conneaut. Height of the first wave was reported at 4 to 20 feet; the second surge, which hit 15 minutes later, was 6 to 8 feet tall. Goddard?s book states that the wave hit the shore at 80 miles per hour and was up to 25 feet in height.
No seismic activity was reported that night, leading experts to believe that the waves were induced by a sudden change in atmospheric pressure over the lake.

The Pug doesnt hold much confidence in the predictions of the weather services. Seems like the more credentuled you are, the more difficulty you have predicting storm tracks. Wow did they mess this one up or what. Rita Will move up thru Arkansas and Tennesse and disapate to the north. Correolis effect, check it out.
caneguy -- I've lost all faith in these guys and the models, 24hrs ago they said stall and 25-30" rain in tx-la with a sw turn. Now the storm is moving on rather quickly to the n ne, I think you and I have as good an idea as the rest on the future. They use what I call a SWAG (scientific wild ass guess). If the computers can't figure it out what makes you think we can.
Why do americans feel that 1000 dead is such a catastrophe, I remember 100 thousand plus in bangladesh didn't seem so bad to most here in the US. Are the lives of americans who have more information and should have known to run, worth more than the lives of those that don't have the information and did not know?
ConvectPUG do you have pugs? I raise them...
well I see that Rita could go back into the gulf...I think that is just so wrong...Why is it that they just about all make a loop???
Where did you see that taco? i'd like to look.
Well I was looking at the water vapor in the gulf and the High Pressure is building back in and it looks like rita will get caught by it and go back into the gulf... That's what I see..
Here in Mobile we are getting flooded by tons of Rain from Rita and they say here that it will be like that for the rest of the week...
hey doc. posted this in the other blog but i will post it here for u again

doc the problem with me si that with the pressure what it was 930 u have to assume there are cat4 winds somewhere in the circulation. thye started using 20 percent in styead of the 10 they used since she was a cat 2. if they had used 10 she would have been 130-140 mph
I think leffty said it the best last night. Expect the worst and hope for the best...
(please excuse the non-tropical weather posts)
Jedkins - I think that wind measurement is a fairly mature technology, so I am not sure why you mark pre-1980 measurements as being non-believable. Can you point out some post-1980 technological advance that led to significantly more accurate measurements?

Also, 100+ mile winds not associated with tropical systems can and do take place over large land areas. Anyways, here is a link to info on another storm that I vividly recall. It took place over Ohio in 1969 and had 100 mph straight line winds in a squall covering a large area. We called it simply the "4th of July Storm", it was memorable in that it uprooted so many trees in the area, like around 20% of the total:


Wind damage was similar to that of a CAT 1 hurricane.
Lefty got it right "expect the worst, hope for the best." I've lived by that for most of my life. I think you call us pessimistic optimists. ;-)
Leffty is not a exact science. You go with the data you have and past data.
And you work with that. Dont worry about the recons. You were reading the data that was being provided It is a learning exsperience. You did a great job. We have 60 days to go in this season. And October might prove to most interesting
I guess maybe 10% of the country's total refinery capacity lies in the area that was hit. Excerpt from posting on another website:

"A list of coastal refineries. The refineries are much less spread out than the CNN map would suggest. Refinery capacity figures are thousand bbl per day. Percentages are of the ~17mbpd total US operable refining capacity figure used in the EIA weekly reports. (the numbers are below the fold)

Louisiana Border area 1120k(TX) 590k(LA) (10%) [Revised]
Lake Charles (LA) Calcasieu 30k
Lake Charles (LA) Citgo 324k
Westlake (LA) ConocoPhillips 239k
Beaumont ExxonMobil 349k
Port Arthur Motiva 285k
Port Arthur Premcor 255k
Port Arthur Total 234k"
For those lurkers out there that want to know what to do in these situations.

"expect the worst, hope for the best". That's the key, Prepare and Plan. If you wait, it will be too late, plan your escape and take care of your own, no one else will until it's too late. I know it sounds geeky, but get a map and plan alt routes out of your area now. You saw what it gets like in a mass ex., go for the little used routes and you'll save hours and gallons of gas.
California dont sale your Exon/Mobil stock just yet. I guess the comsumers are going to get raped again like usual.
getting a nasty thunder boomer though here right now.

I heard, correct me if I'm wrong, and I know you will:) 25% of the refinery capacity in the US is in the gulf states, specifically, TX and LA.
Lefty - Looking for information on how NHC converts flight-level wind speeds to surface wind speeds. Although this is somewhat tangential to your questions, it is interesting (full link below),

"For the first decade or so of airborne reconnaissance, surface winds were estimated mostly by visual inspection of the sea surface. Beginning in the early 1950s, radar altimeters aboard the aircraft made possible an accurate determination of the aircrafts absolute altitude. When combined with direct pressure measurements, this gives a good estimate of geopotential height at flight level. Surface pressure can then be estimated using empirical relationships between surface and flight level pressure. This technique, developed during the 1950s, was used without significant modification through the end of aircraft reconnaissance in the western North Pacific and until the advent of accurate dropwindsondes in the North Atlantic. Minimum surface pressure estimates were converted to maximum sustained surface wind using semi-empirical wind-pressure relations which, however, have evolved with time. For the North Atlantic, Landsea [3] has documented a change in that took place in 1970, leading to lower wind speed estimates."

We might infer from the above that NHC changed the formula for surface winds based on dropwindsondes data it was getting.
On a side note, if only 10% of the refinery capacity of the US was affected, why then would the price of gas jump >10%. There should be reserve capacity in the other 90% shouldn't there?
yeah guygee. it states that dropsonde data alonre would give u to weak a storm and dvorak or t-number would give u to strong a storm which is why both are used. the problem with rita was that her t-number sugested she was 145mph but i figured she was 130mph. now with that said the flight level winds were the same when she was 145 and 120. the differenc was a lower t-number and higher pressure. her pressure was 15mbs higher at 930 and her t-number was 5.7-6.0. so thats why i say she was 130 not 120. the nhc deducted 20 percent for surface winds when they were deducting 10 percent. thats why i say its all subjective.
dropsondes, dropsondes.... so what, what about the reports of ground stations? are they not relevant anymore?... everybody takes for granted the dropsondes, guess what? that's one point at one time, and an average at that. Those things are only as good as they build'em and some of those guys aren't that good, not all, but some. I know some of them that build them were tossed in the early 90's from the AF and Navy.
grd good point but ground recordings not good when storm over water lol, also they tend to give out in the 60-120 range and they are stuck to the ground so they only give you the wind sopeeds for that one spot. if the fastes winds do not travel by that spot they never get recorded
Oh wait, did I mention that those that were tossed are the supervisors, the ones that fabricate the dropsondes are trained at votech schools.
lefty got it right all the nhc info and the inland wind speed reports were all wrong he knows best so all you bad pepole stop ... now tell him how go he is and how bad max is....
Lefty - Definitely subjective. Apparently what was (is?) used is some simplistic empirical formula that no longer fits quite right due to climate change. The Chris Landsea article referred to in the above gives some more interesting information (full link below):

"A simplified but useful empirical relationship between the maximum sustained wind speeds and lowest surface pressures of Atlantic basin tropical cyclones was given by Kraft (1961).

Vmax = Sqrt(1013-Pc),

Vmax in this relation is the maximum sustained wind speed in m/s and Pc is the minimum sea level pressure in mb."

However, C. Landsea goes on to say something like this formula is biased due to changes in climate, then he goes back through the historical record to adjust for the bias for the purpose of estimating what the "correct" percentage of Major hurricanes compared to total named systems.

Here is the link to his paper in full:
Lefty, last post on other board:

Posted By: DocNDswamp at 4:34 AM GMT on September 25, 2005.

Lefty...good point. 20 percent seems indicative of lack of confidence in the samples...or the methodology. I think we will see physical proof of actual wind speeds on the ground tomorrow. My neighbor works for Chevron, early flight over W Gulf facilities/Cameron tomorrow. Let you know what I hear.
lefty that's fine, but nhc only goes with dropsondes not sat feeds unless a bird isn't out there. that leads to misinformation. The sats are better at it than sondes. They don't have enough bouys out there and they disregard ship reprorts, what gives?
here u go guys. check out this chart. it equates t-nummber with pressure and windspeed. its how t-numbers are used to equate strength. check it out and give me ur comments. also remebr i said t-number was 5.7-6.0 with pressure of 930mb. now tell me what intesity she should have been

grd, thye use a combo of t-number, pressure and dropsondes now. thats how they determine surface wind speed. look at the chart and see what intenisty she should have been

lefty -- I don't know what to think of the readings, I only know for sure how the sensors work. I do know that multiple reports put the intensity of katrina higher than official. Visisble damage is higher also, so where do you go from there. NHC and meteos in general need to take a step back and consider. Rita went all over the place, and no one knew where she was going or what she would be, they still don't.
grd thats the basis for how t-numbers are used. the nhc stated in the 5pm advisory yesterday of the t-numbers increased they would increse the intensity. it did back to 5.8-6.0 and flight level winds were around the same but they left her where she was. that chart states that a t-number higher than 5.5 and less pressure than 948 would be atlest 115kts. thats 132 cat4. thats what i was saying. 5.7-6.0 with 930 pressure should have atlest been a 115 cat 4. i did not make the t-number up. but ur right. katrina should have been atlest a 156mph cat 5
What in the world are we arguing about now?
I think i've picked up on the discussion, so I have a question.

I've seen the T-Number stuff before, but never really payed attention to it. What exactly is it, and how is it calculated or derived?

Also, im not sure what the point of all of this is - what does it matter, especially to the people who lost their homes, what the category is? Sound to me like it would be better if the strength of these storms was undervalued at landfall. If Rita was "only" a cat 3, and Katrina "only" a cat 4, it should make residents more afraid of a true cat 4 or 5, right?

lol valence just doing what they do after every storm. disect it.

ps, no where did i say i know more than nhc. winds speed is subjectuve and if u don;t know that i am sorry
lefty -- also, one night we had 2 aircraft in the storm at the same time, with different readings!!!! The Sat was saying stonger and the birds were saying weaker. What do you go with. I saw colder cloud tops all around and a closed eye. The bird reprted open SE, on DIVORAK you could see a slight opening and EWRC maybe. You said so, so I went with it. I don't think wind and pressure are so relevant without time, this year is different these things are making thier own rules, after all we have never seen a cycle like this.
Lefty - If you ignore the 930 mb pressure and just use the Dvorak number, 5.7 gives about 123 MPH. The Dvorak numbers you gave do not correspond with the pressure readings: the two don't match up in the chart, so the estimate must have gotten subjective.

Maybe they just used the low-end Dvorak number? Really I cannot figure out what they did based on the numbers you gave me and the chart...
ok here what t-numbers are valence

The Dvorak technique is a method using enhanced Infrared and/or visible satellite imagery to quantitatively estimate the intensity of a tropical system.

so basicaly its another way to look at a staelite image. like ir. now theres a couple of different techinques to do this based on the curren state of the storm and the state of the storm for 3,6,12,24 hrs. thats how u get the t-number. no i can not determine it myself so i go to the unoversity of wisconsin website where they have the 3-4 deifferent t-numbers listed. thats where i get my 5.7-6.0 range. and with the chart you can see a t-number of 5.7 or higher and a pressure of 930 she should have been set at 115kt intesnity at least
This also goes back to something I've been harping on since I've been posting on here.

I think its time to create a new scale for hurricanes. Nothing wrong with the Saf-Sim scale, its just that max suf winds are not a true measure of a hurricanes power, and therefore its total destructive force.

For example, wouldn't a hurricane with 115mph winds, but with a windfield of hurricane force winds that extend 100 miles from the center be more destructive than a 130mph storm whose winds are only 40 miles from the center?

guygee, the ignored the pressure and went wiht the recon to set ur down to 125, than estimated her down to 120 based on the t-number dropping off for abput and hour. from that point on till landfall her t-number was atleast 5/8. remebr all the deep convection. that hellped to increase her t-number. her intensity from the university of wisconsin ahd her set at t-number 6/934mb/120kts so shows you i am not alone at thinking she was stronger
exactly valence. that was my feeling as well

When you say "quantatively estimate", you mean a bunch of meterologists looking at the enhanced sat pics and estimating the intensity? That sould a whole lot more subjective than estimating the surface conditions based on whats being measured by the Recon flights.

Leffty what makes the GD difference? Move on.
grd, my biggest complain is that they were using 10 percent of flight level and than started using 20 when they down graded her, even though her lfight level winds were the same
they are subjective here the proof

this recon she was only 120 mph
URNT12 KNHC 232322Z
A. 23/2303Z
B. 28 DEG 28 MIN N
92 DEG 54 MIN W
C. 700 MB 2492 MA
F. 151 DEG 121 KT
G. 061 DEG 17 NM
H. 930 MB
I. 12 C/ 3050 M
J. 20 C/ 3061 M
K. 15 C/ NA
M. E 080-30-20
N. 12345/7
O. 1/1 NM
P. NOAA3 2318A RITA OB 31

this recon she was 145 mph
A. 22/19:22:40Z
B. 25 deg 44 min N
089 deg 15 min W
C. NA mb NA m
D. NA kt
E. NA deg nm
F. 149 deg 122 kt
G. 062 deg 012 nm
H. EXTRAP 914 mb
I. 9 C/ 3658 m
J. 17 C/ 3658 m
K. 10 C/ NA
M. C16
N. 12345/NA
O. 0.02 / 1 nm
P. AF306 WX18A RITA01 OB 02
MAX FL WIND 122 KT NE QUAD 19:19:30 Z
Lefty I was watching right along with you, so the NHC surface wind estimates did not match up with Dvorak number nor what you would expect from the pressure...

So don't we have some good doppler esimates of velocity once she got into range? That would seem to be some useful data to bring into the discussion.
The system needs to take into account the kinetic energy built up at sea, if she drops in pressure then rises, the surge may not drop. That depends on the time she was at that intensity, Katrina burst all the records except wind and pressure. Andrew only busted.... what i don't know, oh, she hit close to a major city with media coverage.
no valence. there a techiniqu using a fuilter on the sat to give u the dvorak intensity. here look here the loop of a storm using dvorak. its like ir but different.

Well Andrew did bust the bank for insurance companies...
tom we are holdong a disscussion. u move on

i don;t have any doppler that shows more than 64 kts. and have not heard of any doppler of her. but i though that. i think thats why they kept her at 120 as she made landfall and the pressure shot up. which to me seems like she was stronger

Im not sure what precipiated this whole conversation, other than some good-ol-fashioned NHC bashing, but I can think of a reason why this may be important:

NEWS FLASH - The US will, sometime in the future, be hit with another hurricane (hopefully not this year). It would seem to me that part of the reason these storms are studied so much is not just for sceintific curiosity, but to be able to judge how much destructive power resides in these cycles.

I want to know what exactly the effects are of a 115 mph storm. This way, when one is coming, I know how to prepare for it.

Remember when Katrina rolled past S FL? The residents there were shocked by its intensity, even though it was only a cat 1. And its not like they haven't been through storms recently (Frances, Jeanne). And when Dennis went throught he panhandle the residents there were shocked at how weak the storm felt, even that I belive it was still cat 3 (or strong 2).


2 comments on your recon reports (though I do still see your point)

1. The pressure on the earlier one was extrapolated (Was that when the drop missed the actual eye?) Perhaps that pressure was incorrect, and the 930 may have been a greater increase than 16mb.

2. While the diff in temp was still 8deg, the temp had cooled off, which may have indicated that the flight level winds were not making it down to the surface as fast.

Make no mistake about it, I,m not bashing the NHC, I just think they should update thier scale. The surge and wind damage are not meeting what the public expects. I know, we know, that it differs, but the general public does not know the potential.
valence the 899mb one was the one the dropsonde failed. i am not sure why that was extrapulated but the next recon had her at 913. my point was the flight level winds. not until she rose to 930 from 929 did they start to use 20 percent rather than 10. if the tenmp was there meaning than maybe. my point is the flight level winds were the same. so i feel 130 would have been a suffice intensity . but thats my take
Speaking of Andrew . . .

I've heard many of you argue that Andrew was not a true cat 5, and while i haven't completely turned around, I understand the point of view.

But Im starting to wonder about Camille and the Labor Day hurricanes. Are we sure that they were true cat 5s as well?

Does anyone have any links to sites describing those hurricanes in detial? Specifically the sceintific measurements while they were at sea, approaching land, and making landfall? The help would be appreciated.


oh yeah i am not bashing them either. more than naything i am trying to learn more. as u see i know plenty but u can learn from every storm. thats why i save the recons, thats why i plot every recvon out . i try to see what the nhc see based onmy tools. but yeah i think the nhc are the experts but when it comes to wind speeds its subjectuve and thats why we are disscussing it
valence. give me a second the nhc archive site is not working. i was going to try to find you the anylisis for those storms. will try again in a minute
easy answer. what whas the min pre. of andrew and the max sus wind speed?
Agreed Valence, I would like to know the "science" behind the NHC data that they release to the public. I am in an exposed location, but I won;t go through the hassle of evacuating for a CAT 1. For Cat 3 and above, however, I am outta here, so I want to be assured the data being released to the public is reliable, and not garbled by bureaucratic or political considerations. So Lefty's questions are legitimate: for both Katrina and Rita, the wind/pressure relationship does not match up historically with other storms. I've "considered" the possbility that the surrounding pressure environment was low, but such a statement was never made in any of the NHC discussions, and I have not checked to see if that was correct. So if there is another answer I sure would like to know, for future reference.
Enough of this talk...I just need to work for the NHC. Its only a 2 hour drive from my house anyway!
What would of happened if a million ppl didnt move?
Good Gamble? It will be cry wolf next time? Leffty think about it? Put the slide rule down. Dr. Masters will tell you this? they are all different. Every storm.
You learn. This not a football game. Were you work on the odds What team will be the winning team next week.
Its Mother Nature.
the worse part guygee is we ahve to wait till dec or later to get a good anylisis of the storm.

tom, this is a blog and we are having a very interesting discussion. we are all learning something here. what is ur problem, really? maube u don't understand what we are saying lol

I was already there, can't get the server either. Thats why I was asking if anyone else had any links. I dont think the NHC archive goes back to 35 anyway.

I guess I'll just google the bastards.

andrew was 922mb and the eatimated wind speed was 125kts or 145mph. now they upgraded him to a cat 5 so thats atleast 156mph
valence thay go back there. i was reading up on some storms awhile back. they go back i think to 1890 or somthing
sorry 1958. saw 1890 spmewhere else lol
like I told another bloger last night, better to be po'd than dead. I've got 37 days left on the coast and I'm gone, unfortunately, this is the year of the storm!!!!!! I don't know if i'll make it out before it gets me. Man that's funny, I love storms, but I've had enough!!!!!!

Thats part of the reason that this discussion we're having is so important. For whatever reason, we are now in an active cyclonic period. (And depending on who you ask, we got 10-30 years left).

Landfalling hurricanes, especially major ones, are going to become a yearly event. I dont know if we'll ever get to Monsters like Katrina and Rita in the same month, but lets hope not.

People choose to evacuate their homes based on the information that is given. The worst thing that can happen is if the public is not given the proper information (i purposely didnt use the word accurate because I dont want to imply any intentional wrongdoing). The second worst thing is if the public is given the proper info, but because of complacency or whatever else chooses to ignore it.

The public needs to be told that if storm A hits point B, this is what is going to happen (whithin a certain range). And when the storm is over, they need to know that they made the right choice to evacuate. If the public looses faith in the accuracy of the NHC, or just starts to believe that these storms are just not as powerful as they actually are, we are going to be hearing more stories like those that came of out of Katrina.

Do you think so many people would have left for Rita if Katrina hadn't happend? Or for Floyd if not for Andrew?

the archive goes back along way guys. I love history and love storms, I know a'lit about all of'em. even tonados in the southcentral us.
so true valence
Valance -- problem is, dumb SOB's will think that "they got it wrong once they'll get it wrong again". I beleive this is not a few years of bad storms, it is a concession of years. Look at the water, it's temp is at records, and this isn't even a hot year here. Not in the south anyway, I grew up here and it just keeps getting hotter. Next year a lot of people are going to die because of this year.
I am sorry I intruded. Leffty. I thought it was a open blog. I guess freedom of speach is gone here.
i don't think they got it wrong. i think u do the best u can. u can only get it soright. next thats why they do a post storm anylasis. i think they will upgrade katrina like they did andrew. and if the damage is bad on the coast rita could get pushed up to 125 or 135 mph. but probly not. we will see
tom, when we are having a peacefull conversation and u come in with gd move on, thats a little differetn. u haven't posted naything in 2-3 hrs and u come in here and tell meto move on and say gd. u come on. don;t u see u was a little out of line
Im sorry, but I seriously doubt that the Labor Day was a cat 5 at landfall There is no way that a storm could be that close to the pennisula and maintain cat 5 intensity. I never realized that it hit the UPPER keys, I always assumed it was the lower ones.

I'll give it a strong cat 4, maybe 150.

Now on to Camille....

I didn't realize its 3am!

I've got pick someone up from the airport tomorrow morning...so i've got to go!

Im sure this discussion will be continued at a later date...so I'll be there

alright boys. i am off to rub the wife and go to sleep. catch yall tomm. good convo tonight
From what I saw, Kat is a 5+, Rita is a 3 at best. Rita did get a last punch in on NO. Thank God she didn't get Houston, $6 gas is out of my budget. I think uping the category of a storm should be illegal, oh wait, the MAN sets the standards:) I'm caucausaion if you're wondereing, thats' a joke.
the labor da stripped flesh off bone, maybe that was crabs, but we'll never know, only witneses saw it. The thing is only recently we do we have so much info. How do we know what happened back then. We can't even compare gilbert to these storms realisticaly, due to the lack of data from sats and the noaa high lev. flights. and thats less than 20 years ago.
The local officials where I live are antsy, they call for mandatory evacautions very early on. I'll take my time boarding up, check the dunes, keep an eye on the storm. By the time I am sure I have to move, I move. By that time traffic has died down, and I take the backroads. Sometimes I have not had to go because the storm turned north earlier than predicted, then I have saved my self a big expensive hassle. For Bertha a few years ago there was an evacuation and we never got a cloud in the sky, so I boarded up but ended up staying. For Floyd, the NHC was emphatic that it would turn before hitting the coast, but when the turn was a little late, I flew out of here, and although all we got was TS force winds I do not regret it, it was not worth the risk.
It seems like something may be stirring around the Lesser Antilles, mear Grenada. Gonna look closer tomorrow.
good night all be cool all i no that the nhc did a lot of lol from this storm this time a round but this storm is overe it been done i no a lot of you like to no why they did not get this at a cat 4 i would like to no to but what not turn this in a big lol so night all
new orleans get ready again..as I told you when rita was forming it would be a cat 5 in the gulf...once again long rage prog.. indicates a cat 1 or 2 entering the gulf thru the yucatan channel this coming friday...this system is now forming in the se carribean..check your sattilite ......
89. IKE
Looks like if something does form and moved thru the Yucatan...it MIGHT get shunted northeastward the end of this week as a cold front is predicted to move south and into the gulf of mexico. Maybe the front doesn't make it that far south. Time will tell...but one front moves thru tomorrow...and if another moves thru Friday...it MIGHT be nearing the END of the hurricane season in the gulf. Whatever does form...if it does...might cross Southern Florida...and head out into the Atlantic...Will see..

IVAN type loop... I was hoping to get some rain in va
HEY HOOKED OLD JOES STORM IN CARRIB IS STARTING TO APPEAR ALSO the news said this winter would be a harsh one isnt that what hes been saying for 3 months hmm he also prelim trackfor carrib is track nw to wnw headed for zone 8 the 2005 hurr magnet oh well his oter one atl coast is looking a little better hey i wonder why nhc and boy wonder nver pick uponn these things forming like he does th awnser is they are model nuts and the old pros are climatological skilled forecasters and on rita a similar storm as elena that hit us in biloxi in 1985. serious but not catrsophic.
Any word from LaDobeLady in Houma? Couldn't stop thinking about them last night then was apalled that the media is considering the inconvenience of the repopulation of Houston instead of the rescues and well-being of people trapped by the storm surge. She said the water was still rising last night.

I'm in Baton Rouge and having a lot of trouble finding any information outside Houston/Galveston or New Orleans (so much for local coverage). If anyone has a live stream or something else I may be able to watch that concerns the area actually impacted (South Louisiana), please let me know. Thanks.
Bastardi is definitely a "forecaster" instead of a model interpreter. He looks at the big picture, never taking into consideration what others think.. Sometimes he is right, sometimes he is wrong.. But when he is wrong, he can fine tune future predictions..Model interpreters have to rely on other people opinion to form their idea.. That is why you have to respect him, and his ability to forecast weather..
Looks like the newest forecast is for Rita not to stall for days, but continue on it's northeast trek. Don't know if this is happen, but if it does, it sure makes the previous models look bad. A few days ago many had Rita stalling and then turning back towards the southwest. Later some had Rita curving back to the south into the Gulf. I still believe that computer models are only somewhat accurate within 48 hours unless the steering currents are very obvious and then they might be somewhat accurate within 72 hours. Five days out the models are mostly inaccurate.

95. IKE

Landfall near Galveston.....nope. It hit LA.

Then slow move up I-45 corridor.....wrong. It went north, then northeast thru Arkansas.

Backing southwestward toward Mexico to follow....nope.

Major disaster scenario may come to pass....hasn't happened yet and probably won't.

I guess he's not right all the time either.

Just got back to civilization... Mainly cosmetic damage in JeffdavisParish. My dad stayed at PPG industries in Lake Charles during the storm. He said it was the most awesome thing he had ever experienced. He said around 2am the water came up in the lake out of no where. They were fine in the control room, its blast proof and really high. I saw about 20 air boats lined up in Lacassine on hwy 101 going to Cameron Parish. The surge came inland all the way to the Cameron Calcasieu parish line according to a wildlife agent. He also said Gibbstown Bridge was as far south as they could get due to 5ft of water over hwy. Anything new in the tropics?
Interesting to compare the techniques of old-fashioned "forecasters" and modern "model-watchers". I think a good meteorologist should be both: if the models are verifying and intitializing well, then pay attention to them, but in those circumstances when the models aren't getting any traction, shift to forecaster mode. As NHC always points out, intensity is most difficult to forecast, I would like to see any "forecasters" batting average on intensity averaged over several years compared to the NHC.

For those watching the wave around 63W in the eastern Caribbean, I've heard the forecaster-types call that part of the Caribbean "Hurricane Graveyard". Also there is an old saw, "if it isn't named before it crosses the Lesser Antilles, it probably won't develop in the eastern Caribbean". Hispanolia is like a pike that impales many hurricanes, like 2000 Debby that was a helthy growing Cat 1, tried to cross Hispanolia lengthwise and ended up totally sheared, upper support heading north and lower-level swirl squirting east.

That wave currently around 63W looks to be entering a hostile environment, with that complex of upper lows to the north and west. I guess we will have to see if it can hold together.
REDSTICK, I am just a mile up the street from ladobelady,
She lives in up town houma. She did not get any water in her neighborhood. She is fine and so am I.

Question; What is the possibilities on the carribean disturbance developing and getting into the gulf and once again putting us at risk. Do not know how many times we can be spared from substaintial damage. Put
Sorry that last sentence should have ended up like "and lower-level swirl squirting WEST.

Directional dyslexia, it can be deadly.