(Edited/updated) From NHC:
…EYE OF CATEGORY 4 HARVEY MAKES LANDFALL BETWEEN PORT ARANSAS AND
PORT O’CONNOR TEXAS…
…CATASTROPHIC FLOODING EXPECTED DUE TO HEAVY RAINFALL AND STORM
SURGE..
DISCUSSION AND 48-HOUR OUTLOOK
——————————
At 1000 PM CDT (0300 UTC), the center of Hurricane Harvey was
located near latitude 28.0 North, longitude 97.0 West. Harvey has
just made landfall on the Texas coast over the northern end of San
Jose Island about 4 miles (6 km) east of Rockport. Harvey is
moving toward the northwest near 7 mph (11 km/h). The hurricane is
expected to slow its forward motion and move slowly over
southeastern Texas during the next couple of days.
Maximum sustained winds are near 130 mph (215 km/h) with higher
gusts. Harvey is a category 4 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson
Hurricane Wind Scale. Weakening is forecast during the next 48
hours while the center of Harvey is over southeastern Texas.
Hurricane-force winds extend outward up to 40 miles (65 km) from the
center and tropical-storm-force winds extend outward up to 140 miles
(220 km). A Texas Coastal Ocean Observing Network station at
Aransas Pass recently reported sustained winds of 111 mph (178 km/h)
and a wind gust of 131 mph (211 km/h).
The minimum central pressure just reported by an Air Force Reserve
Hurricane Hunter aircraft is 938 mb (27.70 inches).
Harvey made landfall as a Category 4 ending the “major hurricane drought” we have been experiencing in the USA.
#GOES16 captured this geocolor imagery of #Harvey as it nears landfall on the Texas coast. Get the latest info @ https://t.co/cSGOfrM0lG pic.twitter.com/u0O9ChtJeP
— NOAA Satellites (@NOAASatellites) August 26, 2017
#GOES16 captured this geocolor imagery of #Harvey2017 – now a category 3 storm – this afternoon. Latest info @ https://t.co/cSGOfrM0lG pic.twitter.com/hGD22NpNTG
— NOAA Satellites (@NOAASatellites) August 25, 2017
It is now 4324 days since Category 3 Hurricane Wilma made landfall in Florida on October 24th, 2005.
https://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/900740028665671680
I have a friend who was very concerned because her parents live in Papalote, Texas (a few miles northwest of Corpus Christi). They were unable to evacuate and forecasts called for as much as 40 inches of rain to fall during the storm period.
When I awoke this morning about 6:00, the first thing I did was check the NOAA accumulated radar. It appears that the worst has passed them and they had a total of…..drum roll……2 inches of rain!!!!
It is sometimes difficult to accurately forecast weather events which are only a few hours away.
It is always difficult to forecast the climate100 years from now, especially if you use the wrong assumptions.
But somehow, it is always “worse than we thought” when it comes to catastrophic anthropologic climate change.
When it comes to catastrophic anthropologic climate change, the science is simply not there, but the agendas are.
For the mass media and its susceptibles, a catastrophic forecast is better than an even minded reality.
The Corpus Christi metro area was on the weak dry side of the storm.
And it appears that the intense part of the storm is quite small.
Those rainfall forecasts are for the next 4 days, predicated on the storm stalling.
However large exaggerations would not surprise me in the least.
Hey this is a good wake up call for New Orleans. They should get prepared because someday they might get hit by a hurricane too!
‘It’s over – 4324 day major hurricane drought ends as Harvey makes landfall at Cat 4’
SEE! SEE! PROOF OF GLOBAL WARMING!!!
CAT 4 just before landfall, CAT 1 just after landfall. Is there something we don’t know about hurricanes?
I am at a loss to understand how this Storm was ranked as a Category 4 Hurricane at landfall. I downloaded the data overnight from stations up the coast from Corpus Christi, and there were only 4 values for sustained windspeed at 90kts or above. The highest, 1 instance, was 96. The next 3 descending were 93, 91 and 90. It looks like the height of it was between 8:24p and 9:00.
I am very interested to know where the higher readings came from. The claim that the Hurricane-force winds extended out 30 miles from the Eye seems spurious to me, as well.
Copanos Bay readings are very near landfall http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=cpnt2
Steve, hurricane folks use a 1-minute average as their definition of sustained wind. However, observing sites use a 2-minute average in reporting sustained wind. Thus, it’s nearly an apples to oranges comparison, and looking at the actual surface observations will always be lower than the hurricane category reported.
This raises more questions.
Does the dropsonde from the aircraft spend a minute at an altitude of 30 feet ? If not can it be used to establish true wind speed ?
Also if you have 20 weather stations in close proximity, and only 2 show hurricane wind forces and the rest are well below that threshold it seems data averaging should come into play. Or can 1 station along be used to justify determining the category of a storm?
DrMOS, if we’re talking about sustained winds why should a one minute average be different from a two minute average? The storm isn’t moving that fast. Is that because a gust, which shouldn’t be part of the sustained calculation, makes a bigger error in the one minute average?
ScarletMacaw … A very strong wind (say 130 mph) has a better chance of sustaining itself over a 1-minute time interval than over a two minute time interval, much in the same way a gust to 150mph has a better chance of surviving a 10-second interval than a 1-minute interval. So when looking to find the highest sustained wind among many stations over time to justify a hurricane category, there’s simply a better chance of finding a higher 1-minute sustained wind somewhere than a 2-minute sustained wind. That’s why they can’t really be compared, though I’ve seen estimates that would suggest a peak 1-minute wind would be about 15% higher than a peak 2-minute wind. If all the 1-minute & 2-minute sustained winds were to be averaged over time and at many stations they would likely come out to be the same, but the 1-minute winds would have a higher variance.
The forecaster made a real time call on other data. 3 different sources.
none of them at 10 meters.
I wouldnt blame him
Perhaps someone needs to ask NHC formally for an explanation of the disconnect between their rating as CAT 4 and land based wind speed measurements. The divergence seems to be much more than it should be.
My condo is on the beach in padre island corpus christi….im receiving reports of minimal damage with no flooding. This was about 10 miles south of the eyewall. I’m counting my blessings right now….however they are predicting major rainfall and flooding. ..this report seems contrary to a cat 4 hurricane. Storm surge was predicted to be 5 to 7 feet above grade…..
Flooding is on account of slow movement, not high wind speed.
Copanos Bay link http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=cpnt2
That isn’t even a Cat 1 wind!
And so many global warming enthusiasts are trying so very hard not to claim this hurricane was caused by global warming. But the way they talk around it makes it quite clear. In their hearts they blame global warming, but they know how stupid it would be to make the claim. It’s very funny.
And yet, they won’t be able to help themselves. Once one starts, then comes the deluge of inanities, as each tries to outdo the others in their Alarmism. So, who’s first I wonder? Gore would be a good candidate.
Drudge has been running a headline predicting 40 inches of rain. I realize that is over a period of days and we will not know the results until sometime next week. But right now I’m not seeing it. Looking on radar it appears Harvey has moved further inland and faster than expected. This will lower accumulated rainfalls, spreading it out over a larger area.
Both for the sake of those in Harvey’s path, and because I’d love to see the hype deflated in the end, I hope these dire predictions do not come to pass.
Any advice on the best way to monitor rainfall totals going forward? There’s this, which I think only gets updated every 24 hours:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/obsmaps/obsprecip.php
This may get updated more frequently:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/metwatch/metwatch_mpd_multi.php
Harris County rainfall – recent 24 hours-
https://www.harriscountyfws.org/
Hurricane Harvey is now downgraded from Cat4 to Cat1. Is it normal to go from Cat4 to Cat 1, or was the Cat4 rating somewhat exaggerated?
If Harvey stalls, much flooding will result – many cities in Texas are so flat that flooding is a common occurrence.
When I lived in Houston, we had several floods in the year, just from normal seasonal rainstorms. The news reports described 800-pound women being rescued when they deliberately drove their cars into flooded underpasses. The rescuers had to remove the tops of the cars to extract these behemoths.
Anything for 15 minutes of fame…
“Is it normal to go from Cat4 to Cat 1”
Not only normal but universal. All storms die and go from higher to lower categories as they do so.
seaice – that was not my question.
Is it normal for storms to go directly and quickly from Cat4 to Cat11, or was it never Cat4 on the ground to begin with?
Just a while ago on the weather channel I saw a weather lady reporting from a site of flooding in Texas .explaining how the river seen in the background was out of its banks. But wait , out of this scene of disaster emerged a lone woman jogging comfortably along the river walk . Immediately the camera was shifted to exclude the jogger from view. before she could be recorded traversing the area , Clearly the camera man knew what was necessary to “accurately” report the weather.
There was a guy reporter leaning at a 45 degrees angle…..with sea gulls flying around him
A swamp indeed.
Just think…12 short years ago I could actually trust all weather and climate data coming from the Federal Government of the United States of America…sigh, the good ‘ol days.
My friend in Houston (just 50mi inland) reporting “it’s not that bad –
Overhyped in the meeja.” And he has no reason to understate it.
Weather app saying 29km/h wind in Houston with rain.
It is bad. It is terrible. It was just never a Cat3, and was barely a cat2.
Hypicane Harvey?
The eye, while not a pinhole, was pretty small (20-25 miles), so the maximum winds only covered a relatively narrow line. The beginnings of a concentric eyewall didn’t initially reduce wind speeds as per HH reports, but may have by landfall, which would’ve made Harvey Cat3 at landfall. However, air pressure in the eye had dropped to 938MB from 941MB. No way was this lower than Cat3, but Cat4 winds may not have mixed their way down to the surface by landfall. Further recordings collated after the event may confirm one way or the other, but either way, this was a major at landfall.
Fortunately, there wasn’t time for the eyewall replacement to complete by landfall, as this would’ve broadened the path of maximum winds greatly and allowed for strengthening. That’s not the ongoing problem though…
More fortune is needed to propel Harvey away, but it’s almost slowed to a stop now, with a painfully slow counterclockwise loop looking likely. Those currently on the west of Harvey, e.g. Corpus Christi, haven’t escaped the rains. Even if Harvey goes far enough inland for its winds to weaken, and half an hour ago it was just holding onto hurricane status (small eyes spin up quickly and can spin down just as quickly, never mind when over land), all that rain still has to go somewhere.
If you’re in the area, now would be the time to get out of your basement shelters and, depending on the topography where you live, take your prized possessions upstairs.
Keith: there is a definition for cat2, cat3. Your note has nothing to do wit the actual definitions.
Windfinder shows the Copano Bay airport, where Harvey came ashore, readings topped out with gusts to 110mph with sustained at 74mph. All the nearby airports are in the same neighborhood. Once again NOT a Cat 3-4.
https://www.windfinder.com/report/copano_bay_causeway
indfinder shows the Copano Bay airport, where Harvey came ashore, readings topped out with gusts to 110mph with sustained at 74mph. All the nearby airports are in the same neighborhood. Once again NOT a Cat 3-4.
https://www.windfinder.com/report/copano_bay_causeway
thank you, Gonzo
Confirmed by NDBC station CPNT2 at Copano Bay at 0224 on August 26. Maximum sustained winds recorded as the Harvey eye wall passed over the anemometer recorded 37.1 meters per second (72 knots)
That’s Category 1.
Photos of surface damage over most areas are consistent with a Category 1 storm. Recorded time plots of the data from this station clearly show the response of the wind speeds as the eye passed directly over this station.
There is one NDBC station (ANPT2 at Aransas Pass) with anemometer height of 14 meters above sea level that shows winds at Category 2.
Sustained wind speeds were over 40 meters per second for several hours with maximum of 49.4 meters per second at 0142. This station data is unusual in that no other NDBC stations show anything similar during the storm. There may have been a single storm band that did satisfy Category 2 criteria. So far I am unable to confirm any photos of surface damage near this station.
At any rate, there is no surface wind data or land based damage photos that support the claims of Harvey being anything more than a very small Cat 2 hurricane. Widespread real time videos at the time of the storm show palm tree flagging consistent with Category 1 winds. Obviously, some photos of damaged structures are cherry picked to give the impression that there was wider damage from sustained winds.
History should show that the media hype and NHC models claiming Category 4 status are not verified by authentic surface data and observations.
Hurricane Harvey of 2017 was certainly NOT a major hurricane at landfall.
Extreme damage in Rockport and Fulton Texas. Every building impacted in some way if not total loss.
Youtube has lots of videos from stormchasers
.
Let me guess that those pictures are of all those beach houses on Key Allegro. The way they are built and located it would be a positive miracle if they weren’t destroyed.
“It’s over” These are also the words of a Houston area NPR reporter this morning wrt the worst of the storm from Harvey. This was definitely NOT the message “Weekend Edition” host Scott Simon wanted to hear. So he kept fishing.
When, exactly, was Harvey downgraded from “3” to “1”? If before landfall, the “drought” is not over, right? (Don’t want to minimize the flooding threat, but…) isn’t the massive flooding primarily a result of the storm surge which keeps the inland rains from draining out to sea? Last report of winds were 80 mph and fading.
Harvey was small, compared to Carla, who hit Texas in 1961. As I recall Carla sprawled over such a vast area the entire Texas coast (and its a long coast) got hurricane force gusts.
The real danger of Harvey will be the rains. Call back in three days. Especially dangerous would be the scenario of Harvey looping back down over the Gulf and restrengthening.
Hurricanes are like rattlesnakes. Don’t laugh at them until they are all the way dead.
Hey there is a guy that looks just like u over at Sunrise’s Swansong 😉
http://weather.gc.ca/data/hurricane_images/track.png
http://image5.flhurricane.com/images/2017/storm9//plot20170826-2011.gif
http://derecho.math.uwm.edu/models/al092017_analogs.png
Let Mosher speak!
Steven Mosher August 25, 2017 at 11:48 pm:
“BUT NOAA IS LYING… Phil says so”
10 Minutes later!
Steven Mosher August 25, 2017 at 11:58 pm:
“In the end they may revise and call it a Cat3 based on 10 meter measurements…”
The forecaster made a call based on three measuement systems you neglected.
Its not a LIE to say : I base my call on radar.
its not too much to allow people to do their job in real time and not accuse them of lying as you did.
Of course after the dust settles they can look at all the records and revise their estimate.
dont be a clown just because you didnt check the same data the forecaster beven did
Actually he never disputed the altitude readings. Phil was just going by the official definition of a cat 4 requiring ground based readings.
For instance The top three ground based wind gust readings for Carla, also a cat 4, were about 45 mph higher then Harvey. Think about it!
There is a big difference between questioning the characterization or rating of a storm and accusing someone outright of lying. The first is an academic/scientific disagreement – at worst. The latter is an attack on someone’s character. It is a falsehood to state my comments as an attack on anyone’s character. That is your, inaccurate, characterization. Then, when I juxtapose your apparently contradictory comments, you engage in an ad hominem attack by intentionally insulting me. The academic/scientific issue of the classification of a storm has now become a test of manhood, apparently, on your part.
Your first unjustified accusation that “noaa lies” was in response to an innocuous comment I made on August 25, 2017 at 8:00 pm in which I was merely reporting the data from station ANPT2 as the hurricane was making landfall. What started as an academic exercise, you quickly turned into a personal attack.
I won’t go any further, due to the severity of the storm. I will repeat, however, what I said before: I am not pretending to minimize the danger or harm that a Hurricane like Harvey can/will cause to human beings and/or property. Let’s just leave it at that.
I closely followed Irene and Sandy on the east coast. Wind speeds (not predictions) reported were waay higher than anything I could find from NWS stations and independent stations yet there was a lot of chatter claiming I was wrong. I just followed the data/readings. Seemed I was all alone in simply looking at the recorded readings at the 10 meter standard level and 1 minute time criteria. Nice to see many others doing what I was doing. I haven’t had time to follow Harvey but would not be surprised to see the same thing happen.
Rain/flooding is a major issue with these big storms and the topography of the areas effected. In a flat region like E. Texas everyone will get some basically static flooding, a real pain in the ass. But in a more hilly region those in the lower areas get higher water levels with the associated destruction of the velocity pressure of the flowing water and pile driving debris. The areas effected are not proportionally clobbered. Texas does not discriminate with regards to its water distribution! (Please don’t hop on the flooding wagon with regards to Katrina unless you first justify a submarine with screen doors and windows.)
Anyway, I doubt that any of the buildings with a hip roof suffered a collapse from wind. With the possible hyping of a Cat 4 storm and if the final observations in the direct hit of the eye shows relatively little wind damage I doubt that many will be very concerned with the next approach of a Cat 4 or less. If that occurs and it is a true Cat 4 with Andrew-like destruction, then it would suggest that hype kills. An honest assessment of the storms rating and the proven flooding would show a storms potential for damage at a lower classification. Leave the hype out. We have enough of that in other areas of reporting.
Checkout Rockport Texas for wind damage.
?quality=85&strip=all&w=770
http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170826112915-13-hurricane-harvey-0826-rockport-exlarge-169.jpg
I’ve done that much with a Budweiser [pruned]!
Cherry picked photos of weak structures do not make Harvey a major hurricane. There was a narrow band of sustained winds in the area of Aransas that were at Category 2 for about 4 hours. Many real time videos at different places around the storm show palm tree flagging generally consistent with Category 1 winds
It would be appropriate if WUWT have the official criterior for a Cat 4, and then compared some older, day 40 yo 60 year ago Cat 4 landfall hurricanes to Harvey.
By compare I mean compare the top 5 to 10 land based wind readings, and the kind of wind damage.
Flood damage is different. One Texas TS dropped over 40 inches in 24 hours.
Argh… auto incorrect…
and then compared some older, SAY 40 yo 60 years ago Cat 4 landfall hurricanes to Harvey.
It amazes me that people in the hurricane and tornado areas of the USA continue to build with wood-frame construction, which is so easily destroyed by high winds and flooding.
In the mid-1990’s, I designed and patented an Insulating Concrete Form (ICF) System called Advantage Wallsystems. http://www.advantageicf.com/
I no longer have any interest, financial or otherwise, in this product or company, but want to point out the advantages of ICF Systems. An ICF structure can be built with concrete floor and ceiling decks and steel shutters to survive most natural disasters. The polystyrene foam is closed-cell, so it will also survive a flood – interior finishing materials such as drywall must of course be replaced. Moving valued possessions to the second floor should preserve them in most flood situations – if your second floor floods, you are building in the wrong location.
The primary benefit of this particular ICF system is that it is stronger and can sustain much higher concrete pour heights than most other ICF products – it also has features than enable ease of use.
When Texas rebuilds, will they simply use stick-built construction that will be destroyed by the next natural disaster, or will they employ ICF construction that can survive floods, hurricanes and tornadoes?
Regards, Allan