Hurricane Dean

Post Reply New Topic

Well, the thing about the banana crops is that it's many people's livelihood on the Yucatan. With the banana crop ruined, the farmers who own them will have nothing to export this season.

Well, it looks like Deaner won't even graze south TX, so I'm out of harm's way. Too bad, I love storms. Got some rain yesterday evening. Small consolation!

I just hope the damage in MX won't be too bad. That's a very poor part of that country at risk. They don't need more hardship.

I like to make banana smoothies with blueberries, strawberries and raspberries.

Well, as I said earlier, this storm's strength, movement, structure, and area of landfall is very similar to that of Andrew in 1992 (southern Dade County, FL where Andrew came ashore bears a similar terrain), so I think we can expect to see similar wind damage where the eye came on shore. Unfortunately the damage in southern Florida from Andrew was horrific (those of you who were old enough in 1992 should remember those scenes on the news well), so I am afraid it stands to reason the cities of Chetumal, Bacalar, and Majahual may have experienced a similar catastrophe because they were all under the eyewall as it made landfall.

Last edited by stickboy26 on 21 Aug 2007, 12:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I remember when Andrew went through Florida. My friend's husband was in the Army Guards and was sent to help. He sent back pictures where entire neighborhoods had been reduced to toothpicks. It's amazing Floridians have recovered as well as they have from that. They are a resilent bunch.

What is considered the worst hurricanes in US history? I know Hazel and Andrew are among the worse until Katrina that is. But are there stats available on such?

As far as intensity goes, it is similar to Mitch. However, Mitch was a little farther south. It stalled just north of the Honduras coast, and then drifted slowly south, weakened over land, and planted itself over Honduras for several days. It was the torrential rains and resulting floods -- not the winds -- that killed over 11,000 people in Honduras, Nicaragua, and Belize.

Dean on the other hand is a fast mover, so the heavy rains shouldn't have as much time to cause floods. Dean will be strictly a wind event since the cities affected are either several miles inland or south of the right-front (winds blowing onshore) quadrant of the storm and so they should miss out on the tidal surge.

Last edited by stickboy26 on 21 Aug 2007, 12:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

In terms of dollars, Katrina (2005) was the costliest, followed by Andrew (1992), then Charley and Ivan (both 2004).

In terms of deaths, the Galveston hurricane of 1900 is still the worst. I think Katrina may be second now, but I'm not sure.

cool

Katrina is the third deadliest. The Galveston hurricane was #1, and the Lake Okeechobee, FL hurricane of 1928 was #2.

Tim

I guess the trip to the beach is cancelled then eh?

The projected path of Dean may go across central Mexico, brushing the southern tip of Texas.
I feel very much for the people in that area, especially news media personnel riding out Dean.

As far as intensity at landfall goes, the 1935 Florida Keys hurricane was the worst, followed by Camille in 1969 and Andrew in 1991. These storms all made landfall at category 5 strength. Katrina on the other hand was only category 3 or minimal 4 when it made landfall.

Dean appeared to be similar to Andrew and Camille in terms of intensity. Luckily the most intense portion of the storm didn’t hit a densely populated as happened with Andrew. The more densely populated Chetumal happened to be on the weaker southern side of the eyewall. Still, those ports on the coast have been devastated and the tourism industry will suffer some major economic loss due to this storm. Though not densely populated, those towns are popular areas for tourists visiting the Mayan ruins.

The reason Katrina was so destructive had more to do with the amount of surge it generated than the intensity of the winds. The winds were only a strong category 3 when it made landfall, putting it well below Andrew or Camille. The problem was the shear size of the storm and the fact that it set a huge amount of water in motion while it churned offshore. This massive current of water got piled into the Mississippi coast and Lake Ponchartrain even as the storm itself weakened. I think most meteorologists knew that New Orleans was in trouble, but they tragically underestimated the size of the surge on the MS coast.

Another reason Katrina was so devastating is that it hit a very densely populated area. And yes, the sheer size of the circulation not only piled up an ungodly amount of water, but it also ensured that a very large and very populous area would be affected.

Dean's second landfall threatens to be a catastrpohic rain event because the steep mountain range along the Mexican coast is going to wring out tons of moisture as the rainbands come onshore.

It's possible. The remains hurricanes have a tendency to get "stuck" in high mountainous terrain. This often happens in the deep tropics because the low level trade winds are blocked by the terrain and the middle and upper level winds are typically too week to push the system along. The thermal trough over the elevated land can trap the moisture inland and ring out a ton of rain even when the low level circulation doesn't survive. The models aren't good at predicting this kind of event. I could see this happening if the storm decides to take an unpredicted southward jog into southern Mexico.

Hey, Thyme!
Is your avatar a Steller's Jay??

Merle