If it looks like a hurricane it probably is
By Christopher Dickson on August 28, 2012, 11:47am
Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories.
My post yesterday explained why although Isaac is still a Tropical Storm it is still a very dangerous and potentially destructive system [http://www.wxedge.com/articles/20120827why_isnt_isaac_a_hurricane_already_]. Today I am writing an article I hoped would not need to be written.
It is the opinion of many professional and amateur meteorologists that Isaac is indeed a hurricane and the National Hurricane Center's (NHC) designation of it a a Tropical Storm is incorrect. Above is raw data from a NOAA reconnaissance mission. At sea level the NOAA recon plane (popularly known as 'hurricane hunters') measured 81mph winds. A storm is designated as a hurricane if winds exceed 74mph.
Additionally the recon planes found, on several occasions, winds in excess of 100mph at flight level. Using typical equations this would correlate to 80 or, more often, 90mph. The NHC claims that the reading (above) may actually be a gust, but there have been so many 100mph readings at flight-level it is likely Isaac is actually a hurricane.
So why is NHC so conservative in this analysis? I think they're afraid that they will cause unnecessary panic. I personally do not believe that this is a valid reason, as the main concern with Isaac is flooding (as explained in this post [http://www.wxedge.com/articles/20120827why_isnt_isaac_a_hurricane_already_]). Naming Isaac a hurricane would simply increase public awareness and preparation.
As Rick Knabb, the leader of NHC, says, "If it looks like a hurricane... it probably is," and this storm looks like a hurricane.
Rick Knabb Quote: [http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/dis/al232005.discus.002.shtml?]
Recon data: [http://tropicalatlantic.com/recon/]
Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories.
