To: gobucks
I'm not a weather expert, and realize that hurricanes can quickly lose strength over land, but the areas on that map prjected to receive cat 2,3, & 4 winds seem awfully shallow for a storm that size.
390 posted on
09/01/2004 2:23:39 PM PDT by
Diddle E. Squat
("History? I love history! So sequential....")
To: All
For anyone hanging their hat on the hurricane losing strength over land, go back and look at the Charley track. Then calculate the distance between landfall on the west coast and it's exit point on the east coast. Subtract 10 miles since damage on the coast wasn't that bad. The Orlando area got POUNDED by that hurricane that "should have lost strength over land." That is a minimum of 100 miles of significant damage and it went diagonally across the state which should have maximized any land attenuation effect.
398 posted on
09/01/2004 2:37:30 PM PDT by
NonValueAdded
(Kerry was in the Senate???)
To: Diddle E. Squat
The winds stayed very strong with the recent storm and for a shorter period of time.
That map is wishful thinking. 100 mph winds in Orlando are likely at the very least......likely much much stronger.
422 posted on
09/01/2004 3:38:23 PM PDT by
rwfromkansas
(BYPASS FORCED WEB REGISTRATION! **** http://www.bugmenot.com ****)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson