Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Greg in NZ on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- arn on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Trevor on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- czechlist on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- arn on COP29 Preview
- arn on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- stewartpid on COP29 Preview
Maximum sustained winds were 80 mph (not 45 mph) at 5 pm EDT.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2012/al09/al092012.posest.08282158.shtml
That strength was supported by the most recent reconnaissance flight:
000
URNT12 KWBC 282221
VORTEX DATA MESSAGE AL092012
A. 28/21:59:55Z
B. 28 deg 46 min N
089 deg 03 min W
C. 700 mb 2917 m
D. NA
E. 301 deg 1 nm
F. 083 deg 80 kt
G. 343 deg 45 nm
H. 971 mb
I. 12 C / 3061 m
J. 17 C / 3066 m
K. 13 C / NA
L. OPEN SW
M. C40
N. 12345 / 7
O. 1 / 1 nm
P. NOAA2 3309A ISAAC OB 09
MAX OUTBOUND FL WIND AND MAX FL WIND 91 KT NE QUAD 22:10:20Z
MAX FL TEMP 17 C 56 / 7 NM FROM FL CNTR
Shock news. Winds are higher aloft
Steven:
You must have made it into High School to be able to realize that! 😉
Those higher winds are around the eye, still over the water when the leading edge of the storm hits the land. As the map here shows, the winds over the land along the coast are much smaller, well ahead of the eye, with most of the stations showing a good deal less than the 45 mph Steven Goddard is reporting here.
Holy crap Don, you are easy to rope in. Sucker!
Steve posted a map clearly showing exactly 45mph and you immediately dive in and post aircraft results. Your natural compulsive reflex is to compare apples and oranges, just like all green eco-commies. Amazing that after getting hammered here day after day you still do not look before you leap!
And don’t try to say you were just offering a different, newer, better measurement. You blew it when you clearly stated “Maximum sustained winds were 80 mph (not 45 mph) at 5 pm EDT.”, directly comparing ground and airborn measurements. (Hint: using airborn measurements changes the historical hurricane record the same way counting invisible sunspots changes the long term solar record. It means you cannot directly compare eras of different technology without adjustments.)
This is one of the main problems with you eco-nuts. You have no respect for scientific controls whatsoever. It is in your genes to reflexively skewer science!
The NHC is the arbiter when it comes to tropical cyclones. I have no reason to doubt the NHC’s assessment. Moreover, when the NHC releases its post-storm report sometime during the fall, it is unlikely that Isaac will be classified as a tropical storm at Louisiana landfall, much less one with maximum sustained winds of 45 mph.
Yeah I see!
So why does it take that long?
Hurricane Isaac made landfall with maximum sustained winds of 80 mph. From the National Hurricane Center:
000
WTNT54 KNHC 282356
TCEAT4
HURRICANE ISAAC TROPICAL CYCLONE POSITION ESTIMATE
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL AL092012
700 PM CDT TUE AUG 28 2012
…ISAAC MAKES LANDFALL IN EXTREME SOUTHEASTERN LOUISIANA…
…STRONG WINDS AND A DANGEROUS STORM SURGE OCCURRING ALONG THE
NORTHERN GULF COAST…
NOAA DOPPLER RADAR INDICATES THAT HURRICANE ISAAC MADE LANDFALL
ALONG THE COAST OF SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA IN PLAQUEMINES PARISH JUST
SOUTHWEST OF THE MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT 645 PM CDT…
2345 UTC…WITH MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS OF 80 MPH…130 KM/H.
AT 700 PM CDT…0000 UTC…THE CENTER OF HURRICANE ISAAC WAS
ESTIMATED BY NOAA DOPPLER WEATHER RADAR NEAR LATITUDE 29.0
NORTH…LONGITUDE 89.4 WEST…OR ABOUT 10 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE
MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER…AND ABOUT 90 MILES SOUTHEAST OF
NEW ORLEANS LOUISIANA.
SUSTAINED WIND OF 45 MPH WITH A GUST TO 62 MPH WAS OBSERVED WITHIN
THE PAST HOUR AT LAKEFRONT AIRPORT IN NEW ORLEANS. A WIND GUST TO
56 MPH WAS RECENTLY REPORTED AT GALLIANO LOUISIANA.
A STORM SURGE OF 8.8 FEET WAS RECENTLY REPORTED AT A NATIONAL
OCEAN SERVICE TIDE GAUGE AT SHELL BEACH LOUISIANA. A STORM SURGE
OF 5.5 FEET WAS OBSERVED AT A NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE TIDE GAUGE IN
WAVELAND MISSISSIPPI.
SUMMARY OF 700 PM CDT…0000 UTC…INFORMATION
————————————————–
LOCATION…29.0N 89.4W
ABOUT 10 MI…15 KM SW OF THE MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER
ABOUT 90 MI…140 KM SE OF NEW ORLEANS LOUISIANA
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS…80 MPH…130 KM/H
PRESENT MOVEMENT…NW OR 315 DEGREES AT 8 MPH…13 KM/H
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE…970 MB…28.64 INCHES
$$
FORECASTER BROWN/BRENNAN
Isaac is such a strong storm they have to estimate its position and wind speed because surface observations are not good enough. There is probably no Eye Wall or even a defined Eye for this low pressure system. I have seen systems blow across the desert southwest with stronger wind fields than this. It is just barely a Tropical Storm.
Mr. Sutherland, please scrutinize the official NOAA NDBC data (http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/radial_search.php?storm=at4), and point us to the official station along the coast which has a recorded sustained wind speed of hurricane strength. Look hard, Don. You won’t find any!
An oil platform is already approaching 85mph sustained. There have been many reports of 60-70mph sustained winds out of stations near the eye already.
Post a link if you expect anyone to take you seriously
There’s no point because you won’t look it up or even look at it.
But I’ll humour you:
http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=kmis
Maybe this time you’ll notice that the speeds are in knots.
Do9 you understand the difference between sustained and gusts?
That shows 80mph sustained, dumbass.
Exactly right, Toby. It showed 69 knots for sustained winds and 85 knots in gusts. Those are hurricane-force sustained winds (approximately 80 mph as you pointed out) and they are consistent with the NHC advisory concerning Isaac’s landfall).
If it is typed in CAPITAL LETTERS it must be true
They are weather prognosticators, they do not know how to use the shift Key!
They are SHOUT’N & pounding the pulpit, preach’n their CAGW religion.
LOL OldOne!
FYI, the National Hurricane Center’s products are typed in upper case letters.
OldOne,
The National Hurricane Center is not a climate research entity.
Nobody said they were a “climate research entity” (whatever that silly term is supposed to mean). Only that they believe in & promote the religion of CAGW.
Stark Dickflüssig,
Do you have a link to support your claim? FYI, the NHC actually has a paper posted on its site that suggests that it is premature to draw a connection between climate change and hurricanes (http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/05pielke.pdf).
Don’t know what all the fuss is.In NZ we would call that a breeze.I worked on a tug for 45 years,and it was not uncommon to have 65 knot winds.
Grand Isle currently reporting sustained winds of 57 mph. Not bad for a storm that allegedly made landfall with maximum sustained winds of “45 mph.”
Yer story is changing now?
Of course not. Grand Isle merely offers an example that the grossly understated description of Isaac’s making landfall with maximum sustained winds of 45 mph is incorrect. NHC still reports maximum sustained winds of 80 mph and I have little reason to doubt it.
So your spinning your story now? 😆
There’s no spin. Isaac is a hurricane and was a hurricane at landfall. I just wanted to point out that if the assertion of maximum sustained winds of 45 mph at landfall were correct–and it was not–one should not be witnessing stronger winds such as those being registered at Grand Isle.
I’m from the govt and I’m here to help you
Yep!