Quote:

---

Do you think this may be due to an overreliance on models like the GFS (which is known for not being accurate over land).

I did see some 80-100mph gusts recorded by NASA at the Cape, so I believe those are accurate. But those were from tall towers that are right on the coast. That isn't a real world analogy to a standard house.

---

Quote:

---

But, why was Andrew upgraded from a Cat 4 to a Cat 5.

---

I actually believe Andrew is what started this betting-the-over trend in wind speed reporting. Better to say its going to be worse then get caught with your pants down using a weaker forecast, basically its a CYA move. Andrew was a 5 but the NHC didn't know enough about such monsters because they were so rare, so call it a 4. Then as Andrew made landfall the instrumentation failed... wind levels were literally off the charts. Years later with better tools and reviewing the data they changed its official status. Part of the driving force behind the revisit was trying to put the damage into historical perspective and get the building codes adjusted to handle possible future storms. Many people cried foul at the Cat 4 rating due the intense damage, they even brought in tornado specialists to explain what they were seeing because the hurricane scientists had no frame of reference for the devastation.

Sources:
https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/andrew.html
https://research.noaa.gov/article/ArtMID...urricane-Andrew

Post Extras