https://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/1843639491564638453
https://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/1843642729651417387
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ryan Maue on Hurricane Hype
- Friday, January 2, 2026
What’s the problem with this? Mann is, of course, right here.
Mann is a turd
But a rich turd.
Simon, can you please contribute to the discussion rather than make silly comments? Thank you! 🙂
How is that a silly comment. Derg obviously, in an unsubtle way, is making his distaste for Mann plain. I am making the point he made a lot of money from being defamed by people who have the same views as Derg.
It is not a question of a silly comment. It is an offensive comment. But what is interesting is that (at the moment) Derg’s comment that Mann is a turd has 15 positives while Simon’s comment that Mann is a rich turd has 12 negatives. So it is fine to call someone a turd but not to call them a rich turd. The logic totally escapes me.
He made a lot of money running a con game.
He made a lot of money running a con game.
The way his head glistens in the sunlight proves it is possible to polish a turd
His head is the “clean end”.
As is any Turd sucking on the Government Teat
Govt money. So have you found that pee pee tape yet or are you finally willing to admit Russia colluuuusion was all made up?
Haha I laugh every time you say that. Just reinforces you got nothing else.
Yep, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Would you like me to list the connections Trumps team had with Russia? Just say the word. Thats without the news this week that he has been in direct contact with Putin nearly 10 times since he lost the presidency. that traitor level and could lead to prosecution. And that he sent Putin covid testing kits when he was president. I mean how do you defend that?
https://thehill.com/policy/international/4923741-trump-putin-covid-testing/
I’m more than certain that you would have the ability to Parrott the Democrat manufactured talking points as much as I myself could.
Any contact he may have had with Putin is nothing compared to the payments made to “The Big Guy” from Xi Jinping funneled through Ukraine into Hunters holdings
Hunter is not running for president and if he was I would never vote for him given he is a convicted criminal. Trump on the other hand is (and is a convicted criminal) and given he has announced he will sort the Ukraine conflict in one day…. one has to wonder what he has said to Putin, or what sort of deal he has come up with. If I were Ukrainian I would be extremely worried Trump will be trading my country away. Watch this space.
Hardly. Now, we have advanced tools to track hurricane behavior over short time frames, but the time frame is very limited in the grand scheme of things. If anything, this event just highlights the need for more studying rather than pontificating, as Mann does.
How does this affect the need for a new category?
An entirely new objective system may be necessary, but it would be unsuitable for historical comparison. It would not serve the Mann agenda.
No. This is a proposal for a straightforward extension of an existing system with very limited historical precedents.
Be careful here. You allege something that clearly has no evidence and may be defamatory legaly.
There has yet to be established a need for a new category.
Why stop at 6?
Demand 7, 8, 9 now!
I am not in a position to grant anything. I am not in a position to demand anything.
😉
Eleven comes into view as a possibility!
The alleged growth in maximum strength over a few years of study by activists leads to that force forecast 11 fantasy. Geoff S
Go with the ultimate answer to life, the universe, and everything!
42
This proposal is not something out of thin air, so your assertion is (at least) debatable (and likely downright wrong).
If it is still debatable, then nothing is established.
nyolci,
If our understanding of hurricane behavior is still developing, then so are the categories we use to classify them. The current method of categorizing hurricanes by maximum wind speed, such as the Saffir-Simpson scale, probably does not capture all the critical factors that define these storms.
For example, could the rate of intensification be a key aspect to explore when studying the processes that drive hurricane development?
A Category 5 hurricane that intensifies rapidly is likely to have different characteristics and impacts than a Category 5 hurricane that builds strength more gradually.
Exactly.
This is exactly what Mann has pointed out.
Yep, the limits of a pure wind speed based scale…
But Mann et al. should be more transparent about the uncertainty surrounding knowledge of hurricanes and avoid attributing any changes to human activity. This reflects unwarranted confidence.
Wouldn’t you agree that it’s challenging to study the effects of human activity on top of natural variability when our understanding of natural variability itself is incomplete?
No, he is as usual full of baloney since the Saffir-Simpson scale shows that Category 5 sustained winds are 157+ MPH (252 km/h) and higher thus it is already covered.
He’s not talking about the Saffir-Simpson scale. He’s talking about the proposal by [Wehner & Kosslin 2024]. I’m not saying the Wehner-Kosslin scale proposal should necessarily be adopted or that Mann isn’t full of baloney. I’m just pointing out that this isn’t strictly about the Saffir-Simpson scale. And just so nobody gets the wrong idea about my position on the matter…as I’ve said before I don’t think an intensity scale based solely on maximum wind speed regardless of whether it is Saffir-Simpson, Wehner-Kosslin, or something else is the best option anyway. A kinetic energy scale based on [Powell & Reinhold 2008] or similar has been shown to be more discriminating of a cyclone’s true destructive potential.
You have the techno-word salad down pat.
Thank you for the link, I notice it is now 17 years old yet still not adopted as the new standard for assessing Hurricane damage by the NOAA which is why for now the Saffir-Simpson scale is still the standard for measurement being used in their reports.
It’s probably going to be awhile before a new scale replaces Saffir-Simpson scale. There is precedent though. For example, the Enhanced Fujita scale replaced the Fujita for rating tornado damage.
I doubt it make that much difference because the data they get will be unchanged anyway because 99% of the time it is less than 170 mph.
I agree. I question the usefulness in extending the Saffir-Simpson scale to include a category 6 given that so few cyclones would qualify none of which were even in the Atlantic Basin. Furthermore, it doesn’t make sense to extend on a scale that has significant issues already. What the saying…you can’t polish turd? Anyway, in that regard I think Mann may be motivated more by pontification than by practicality.
It has already downgraded to Category 3 and declining rapidly before its near landfall, thus Category 6 baloney from Mann is a dud just as thought.
The size of the Major Category 3 area is now very small as most of it is now a tropical storm.
LINK
To be fair Mann was referring to the 3 hour window on October 7th in which there was a gap between recon flights at the very moment Milton peaked. We don’t know exactly how strong Milton got. All we know is that Milton had already started weakening by the time NOAA2 arrived and measured 185 mph at the surface via dropsonde. Did it hit 192 mph? Personally…I doubt it. But, it is unlikely that we will ever know for sure.
https://tropicalatlantic.com/recon/recon.cgi?basin=al&year=2024&product=sonde&storm=Milton&mission=10&agency=NOAA&ob=10-07-2219-04-931-188-161
The Cause Mann is fighting for isn’t science.
The hurricane specialists at the National Hurricane Center have long resisted replacing the S-S scale. I think they fear having to constantly engage the public trying to explain any new system. It’s just easier to keep on using the old, familiar system.
But I agree that the S-S scale is out-dated and employing IKE (Integrated Kinetic Energy) or something similar makes a lot more sense.
I agree. I think the main reasons why there wasn’t much pushback in replacing F with EF was that 1) evacuation decisions are not dependent on it 2) fewer people care it and 3) it was meant to be backward compatible with the F scale. We now know that #3 isn’t really the case and that damage that would have been easily assigned F5 is now nearly impossible to get assigned the equivalent EF5 due to the way the damage indicators work in the EF scale. But I digress. Replacing Saffir-Simpson with IKE would be huge PR effort and present technical (if not insurmountable) issues in retroactively assigning categories in the HURDAT database.
Then use the S-S for the public and the IKE for the science.
I was under the impression the Saffir-Simpson scale is not just based on wind speed but also damage from the hurricane. How does one assess the damage from a Cat 6 when no one has seen what one can do?
Originally Herb Saffir based his scale on a post-storm damage assessment. Early versions of the scale simply listed types of damage seen at each Category. Bob Simpson adopted the scale so he could more easily communicate with emergency managers and relief workers what they might expect from an approaching storm. He also added wind ranges, central pressure, and storm surge vales for each Category. But this shifted the emphasis away from damage assessment and more toward pending storm threat. The press caught on to NHC’s use of the scale and began using it in stories about threatening storms and the public liked the use of the scale to assess the threat.
Saffir thought his Cat 5 being open-ended was sufficient since at those wind speeds there is little difference in the damage that could be assessed.
Saffir-Simpson is mostly an intensity scale; at least the way it is used now. Contrast this with Enhanced Fujita which purely a damage scale. You can, of course, estimate damage from an intensity scale and vice versa though. We know what kind of wind damage a hypothetical category 6 might cause based on the Enhanced Fujita scale [*]. That doesn’t tell us much about the storm surge damage though. And that’s really the problem with the Saffir-Simpson scale in general. Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy were only category 3 and 1 respectively, but caused catastrophic damage whereas Hurricane Michael was category 5, but caused only localized damage.
[*] Caveat…tornado winds are a bit different from hurricane winds in that they have an upward component. This means the same wind speed hitting the same structure will do different kinds of damage depending on whether it is a tornado or hurricane.
So, what would replace ACE?
Bonus question. Do you have 1980-present ACE trends by tropical cyclone category? Seems that – ironically/tragically – that data is not out there now due to the last hurricane. You might or might not have watched Dr. Frank go full “Never Mind” when he boned up his evaluations of those trends in a recent post.
Finally open windows season, nice. Family obligations prevent our semi-planned Katy Trail bike camping trip. But will the colors be worth a day trip in a few weeks?
Track Integrated Cyclone Energy is an alternative to ACE. [Misra et al. 2013]
Unfortunately I don’t track ACE that closely.
I do note that storm surge estimates are regularly published and updated for the different locales believed to affected by each hurricane.
It also includes the eye pressure.
Where is the /sarc ?
If you don’t like hurricanes don’t live in Florida live in Iowa though it get pretty cold in the winter and hot in summer.
…and tornadoes in the spring.
I don’t like hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, high humidity, biting bugs and huge concentrations of people that think socialism and violence are normal and acceptable. I live in the desert away from both Left Coasts.
I live in Northwest Washington. I’m probably in a unicorn zone, because in 22 years I have yet to see a mosquito anywhere near my house, or a flea or tick on my dogs.
As for earthquakes, in that time, I’ve felt a few minor tremors, ones you wouldn’t even notice if you were driving. I know the “big one” is inevitable, but I’d rather a big one every 50 years than hurricanes every year doing just as much damage.
Tornadoes are extremely rare in Western Washington. We just don’t have the right atmospheric conditions. We don’t get real thunderstorms either. I miss them from growing up in Virginia. No high humidity here either.
So the only real bother is the lefties.
A proper on-the-scale Cat 6 hurricane is not possible on Earth. The temperature differential is too narrow to generate winds of the necessary speed. To find one you’d have to go elsewhere in the solar system. Like Neptune.
The Great Red Spot is a Cat 15,687 level anticyclonic storm on Jupiter.
With more global warming, storms like that will soon start occurring on Earth.
/sarc mode off
There is no proper “on-the-scale Cat 6”. However, [Wehner & Kosslin 2024] propose 192 mph as the threshold for a category 6 in a new scale that extends the existing Saffir-Simpson scale. 5 cyclones would qualify as a category 6 in this hypothetical scale.
Haiyan 2013
Patricia 2015
Meranti 2016
Goni 2020
Surigae 2021
Was that measurement at 10M, at landfall?
The most important question of all.
Ventusky and Nuschool Earth currently show Milton at approximately less than 60 mph at 10 metres at it’s highest wind speeds.
https://www.ventusky.com/24.375;-85.875
Right lol. Few people, even here, question why the wind speed estimates and buoy measurements are much lower than the purported wind speeds. You’d think they would at least question why in the last few years the wind damage from these storms is somehow much less than in the past.
The southern eye wall of Milton supposedly brushed the Yucatan with cat 5 winds. Yet these are the headlines out of Mexico as it hit the area with 1.2 million people – “Minor Milton damage in Mexican state of Yucatan”. A few power outages and downed trees.
Sort of like Beryl that made a direct hit on Cancun as a “cat 2” and did no damage and the storm that appeared out of no where over night a few weeks ago that supposedly hit Mexico as a cat 2.
Thanks for mentioning that. I was just looking at Nullschool. No Category 6 here;
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/orthographic=-87.51,24.79,2784/loc=-85.086,25.594
From tv images, it looks like Milton might go a little south of Tampa Bay.
My cousin has lived in Tampa Bay for many years, right on the bay, and never got flooded until Hurrican Helene came along bringing about a seven foot storm surge which got into her house and ruined all her stuff. She lost her car, too.
Hurricane Milton is projected to bring about a 12 foot storm surge, so my cousin’s house would be completely underwater, so she evacuated out of the area yesterday.
If Milton goes a little south of Tampa Bay then the storm surge will be lower depending on how far south it goes. Its winds could even start blowing water out of Tampa Bay under certain conditions.
God help the people of Florida.
Yes for 10m. No for landfall.
Was it possible(/practical) to measure speeds>192 before 1952?
This ^
Do we measure today the same way we did 10, 20, 40, 80 … years ago?
I doubt it.
In 1952 reconnaissance meteorologists measured surface winds by looking at the sea surface then consulting a book of photos taken on previous reconnaissance flights to estimate the wind.
On land, few anemometers survived minimal hurricane force winds, let alone anything that high. It’s doubtful that prior to the 1990s it would’ve been possible to detect winds in that range from any instrument.
But throughout the hurricane database there are biases against the highest winds being recorded accurately the further back in time you look. This tends to make it appear that storms are getting stronger when it is just a lack of good data back in the old days.
“On land, few anemometers survived minimal hurricane force winds, let alone anything that high.”
Years ago in Boulder, rumor had it that when NCAR’s anemometer blew down they had one of their scientists design a new one that hit over 200 before it gave up the ghost.
Only the last 10 years or so. Exactly as predicted by climate science. A few years more and the pattern (or rather “symptom”) will be so clear even deniers won’t be able to deny it.
Sure, just ignore all of the storms that breached the 192 threshold, but we didn’t have the observational capabilities we do now.
Seriously, how do you just ignore the fact that we’ve had minute by minute details on Milton, where even 30 years ago coverage was much more spotty? It’s remarkable.
I love when you deniers bs. You come up with hurricane charts that start with the early 1900s and then suddenly you claim data from the mid 90s can be problematic. So a good question: what is the cut date? I’m pretty sure your claim about the spottiness of data is unsubstantiated. Furthermore, I’m pretty sure the beginning of the so called “satellite era” is a good starting point, and that was more than 40 years ago. So we still have a kinda long record, and a partial one before that. Remember, hurricane flights started in the 50s.
So we’re in agreement – the data quality has changed over time. Sure, pick 40 years as the cutoff date. Hurricane flights may have occurred prior to that, but even then you’re just getting periodic snapshots, not full tracking of every change in pattern. And even after that 40 year start of the satellite era, you have to agree that coverage and measurement capabilities have improved drastically.
The point is before then, a hurricane like Milton would have been moving through the Gulf and we wouldn’t know the precise wind speeds at basically every moment. We would know that it made landfall as a Cat 3 storm.
You’re the one saying the most severe storms have happened in the last 10 years with no reliable data to back that up. I love when you alarmists bs.
Well, not drastically 🙂 It’s only “drastic” when it suits you deniers.
No, it’s not me. This is the record what we have.
You’re the one claiming this.
If you’re so dense as to deny that satellite weather data has improved drastically over the last 40 years, there’s just no point. We have both a significantly higher number of satellites in orbit measuring all aspects of weather, as well as greatly improved instrumentation on the satellites launched more recently. This is simply a fact. It’s only relatively recently that we can track hurricane wind speeds constantly over the course of its track.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/goes-terrestrial-weather-abi-glm
You can’t make a claim about the last 10 years and discount the data gaps in the era that preceded that time.
You’re claiming something you’ve pulled out of thin air, and I’m the one who is dense. Your link (that you must’ve found after your assertion with hard work) is very likely the best you could come up with. And it is not evidence for your assertion, 3 out of 5 historical “cat 6” storms are before 2017 so they didn’t need this advanced equipment to detect them 🙂 Well, at least we know a convenient cut date for the beginning, 1975, almost 50 years ago.
Does somebody here with more interest in schooling the un-schoolable nyolci, listing the many CliSciFi looney predictions that haven’t come true?
This list turned out to be empty.
Here are a few CliSciFi predictions that did not come true.
In December 2022 WUWT posted an article that predicted “the Modern Warm Period is over, that global warming is definitely over, dead and buried”
In July 2013 WUWT posted an article that predicted “we are in for 0.5 Cº of global cooling.”
In January 2014 WUWT posted an article that predicted 1 C of cooling through 2023.
Authors of those articles, And the comments on those articles???
Yes. WUWT includes the author and comments on those articles.
“A few years more and the pattern (or rather “symptom”) will be so clear even deniers won’t be able to deny it.”
Don’t be so sure.
A few years more…just like Fusion!
And affordable renewables!!
I have the feeling that you’re right…
Do all the alarmists reworking their guitar amps so that they can go “up to twelve” count as Green Jobs? Just asking for a friend.
Piltdown Mann strikes again.
Science free
This is kind of like arguing over how many colors we should name in between green and yellow.
Exactly!
Can we have a Cat 6 for climate alarmunists?
Perhaps a scale that goes up to 11.
A scale with 12 is now being proposed for them to use in pushing their fearmongering propaganda.
I couldn’t imagine trying to evacuate everyone from Key West through all those others evacuating from the other Keys with everyone in BEVs needing to stop twice (every 200 miles or so) from Key West to wait hours in queue lines to spend hours recharging just to get to the Florida Mainland, then to face the prospect of all those other EVs also trying to recharge to evac further north. Likely 6 rechargings just to get from Key West to the Florida Georgia state line and likely over 12 hours spent waiting in queue or plugged in added to the trip time.
Don’t forget all those E golf carts left at home getting soaked in salt water.
Yes, it will be interesting to hear the stories of those who drove their EV’s.
I know there were gasoline shortages at some service stations along the way, but Governor DeSantis was making sure they got supplies by giving the tanker trucks a police escort to the gasoline stations.
Salt water is supposed to be real bad on EV’s. I guess we’ll hear stories about that too, in the coming weeks.
Well, Helene already gave us a bright, flaming example.
I read that the Tampa mayor was urging EV owners to park their cars on the upper level of parking garages to keep them from being immersed.
Locales still allow EV parking in multi-level garages, public or private?
Or overwhelming local electrical grids with unanticipated loads.
Interesting to me that the chart only shows M, H and S. Why not show the category number?
Because there is a large uncertainty in the forecast the Category that Milton will be at each forecast time. Using a broader system reflects the uncertainty.
Tampa in danger, not only from the wind but also from the rain.
The way most people live in that part of the world just 1 metre over sea level you don’t need a 6 to flatten most houses.
Not sure if the eyes has come ashore yet but Tampa Bay Buoy is recording sustained winds of 58 knots
https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/mobile/station.php?station=mtbf1
Tampa currently forecasting 50 gusting 75kts peak winds, as are most of the other west Florida airports. Sarasota is the outlier showing 80 gusting 110kts.
The PNAS article authored by Michael Mann claims that “… a new article by Wehner and Kossin [ … ] lays out a rigorous, objective case for expanding the [ Saffir-Simpson ] scale …”.
The “Significance” section of the Wehner & Kossin (2024) paper ends with :
The end of the “Abstract”, however, states :
1) “The output of computer models 25 to 75 years in the future (2050 to 2100)” equals “speculation”, not “data”.
2) They openly admit that their goal is not “scientific”, it is principally (/ all ?) about “communication”, i.e. the “(political / activist) messaging”.
peak winds… except SS is about sustained winds
If we change how we categorize tropical storms it shouldn’t be with wind speeds but rather something more meaningful.
So there really is a Category 6 hyperbole.
Mann: hurricane 6 on a scale of 5
Spinal Tap: amplifier 11 on a scale of 10.
At least Spinal Tap was funny.
Spinal Tap was intentionally funny. Mann is also humorous, but he does not intend it.
Hurricane Milton is expanding and will cover almost all of Florida. as it has merged with the upper low (it is in a loop).
Milton is a good example of the deficiencies with the Saffir-Simpson scale. The maximum winds are decreasing thus causing a step down in the category from 5 to 4 and likely to 3 in the next few hours. However Milton’s IKE has increased from 20 TJ to 47 TJ as of 15Z. It will likely continue to increase beyond 50 TJ even as the maximum winds continue to decrease.
Another issue that I suspect will be especially evident with Milton is the stipulation that the Saffir-Simpson category is based on the band of maximum wind. I have boldened maximum here to drive home the point that hurricanes are not classified on the wind speeds at someone’s favorite buoy or land station, but where the winds are the strongest. For Milton models are forecasting that this band will move from the SE quadrant to the NW quadrant. Not only does this mean the maximum wind will be over the open ocean, but will also be an offshore flow. Despite making landfall in a densely populated area with lots of land stations it is unlikely that any of those stations will observe anything close to the maximum wind since the southern stations will be observing a weak part of the storm and northern stations will be observing friction slowed land winds.
Most people do not evacuate because of TJ.
Most people do not evacuate because of CAT 3, 4, 5.
People evacuate because of threat level assessments by government officials.
A change in scale offers no benefit to 99.99% of the population and will cause confusion and anxiety for 1-2 generations as the new scale is assimilated in the general population, which as stated, really has no use for it other than the entertainment value (aka sensationalism and fear).
Milton is heading for Tampa. Winds are reaching around 150 km/h in gusts close to the eye.
Well, if Michael Mann is for it, then…. IGNORE IT!
Will it really make less damage at 155 mph than at 192 mph?
To this ignorant reader, it seems like either would flatten most buildings, except of course, those specifically designed to withstand a nuclear blast.
Will it really make less damage at a 12 foot storm surge than a 15 foot?
This seems more about controlling the language to control the ideas…. again.
Yes. Ceteris paribus 192 mph causes more damage than 155 mph. As a point of comparison 155 mph would only result in EF3 on the Enhanced Fujita tornado damage scale. It’s important to point out that tornado winds have a substantial upward component while hurricane winds typically have a modest downward component which means tornado winds typically cause more structural damage than hurricane winds even at the same speed. So yes, a 192 mph hurricane wind would cause significantly more damage than a 155 mph wind, but would could still fall short of EF5 damage.
Yes. But the real question is would 192 mph wind cause a higher surge than a 155 mph. Not necessarily. Surge is caused by the integrated kinetic energy (IKE) of the cyclone. A 192 mph cyclone might have a lower IKE than a 155 mph cyclone depending on the breadth of their wind fields. This is why Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy at only categories 3 and 1 respectively were so destructive despite not being rated higher on the Saffir-Simpson scale.
Hurricane Sandy also had help from a Nor’easter that combined with Sandy over the northeast and this combination is why there was so much damage. Sandy was actually two huge storms meeting in the same place.
I get a little irritated when tv meteorologists talk about Hurricane Sandy and don’t mention the compounding factor of another huge storm combining with it over the northeast. You know they are aware of this fact and the significance of this fact, yet they act like it never happened. I guess it doesn’t fit the narrative.
My daughter’s house in central florida was under the eye which passed over just after midnight, yesterday afternoon they had multiple tornado warnings. Apparently the reported deaths have been due to tornados, the most tornado warnings in a single day, over 100!
You missed the point.
I was answering your questions.
According to reports, Milton peaked at 180 mph, which would keep it as a Cat 5 even with the proposed redefinition.
This seems more about Michael Mann pushing the climate change apocalypse than making a worthwhile contribution to science.
I very much liked it better when it was:
Hurricane
Big hurricane
Bad hurricane
Monster hurricane
Put your head between your knees hurricane.
It is now 3:00 pm EDT on Wednesday, 9 Oct. According to Windy.com at 2:00 Milton had winds of 113kt and pressure of 944hPa. 48 hours before that it was at 150kt and 901hPa. Today’s 2:00 readings are at the bottom of Cat 4. I assume the decrease is due to the friction and lower inflow from the land area it is approaching.
I would like to have someone with meteorological knowledge tell me whether there is an upper limit on hurricane strength imposed by the nature of the storms. The fuel that feeds the storms is the hot moist air rising off the ocean surface. It seems possible that big storms produce cloud cover and rain that cool the surface waters over which they travel, effectively acting as a negative feedback mechanism.
Milton’s maximum winds have decreased due to wind shear and dry air entrainment.
Yes. There is an upper limit. See [DeMaria & Kaplan 1994] and [Bister & Emanuel 1998] for details.
For Milton the maximum potential intensity (MPI) was about 170 mph. It is important to note that mesoscale dynamics can overshoot this value during periods of rapid intensification (RI). When RI overshoots the MPI an eyewall replacement cycle will kick it back below the MPI and more toward a steady-state value.
The following site uses the BE1998 method.
http://wxmaps.org/pix/hurpot