Property Insurance Coverage Law Blog : Florida Insurance Lawyer & Attorney : Merlin Law Group Law Firm : Tampa, Houston, Coral Gables, Gulfport

Rocco Calaci has taken time to write as a guest meteorologist on this blog. He has a web page listing sites and even tips for policyholders. Here are the sites he suggests for hurricane meteorology:

• National Weather Service
• National Hurricane Center
• Weather Underground Tropical page
• Gulf of Mexico Buoy Data
• Hurricane Tracking

The buoy data can be very revealing when a major storm is accompanied with storm surge. I was on the phone with Doug Branham of Colonial Claims before Katrina hit. He alerted me to the huge wall of water that eventually washed away parts of Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama based on this information.

Jeff Masters WeatherUnderground Blog and Hurricane Terrapin are the two quick sites I watch. I strongly suggest that the Discussion made by the National Hurricane Center be read to better understand how the professional meteorologists are viewing the accuracy of their predictions and expectations. The Discussions are on either of these two sites.

Finally, for some off the wall fun, I have long kept bookmarked BobbiStorm's Hurricane Harbor blog. For instance, this is how she concluded last night's post:

Either she intensifies or gets downgraded... that's my guess. And, expect to see that track pulled back to the north a bit more as Bonnie is being pulled more to the north around the flow of the Upper Level Low and it's an interesting storm... that's all I'll say. Each in it's own way is interesting.

Miami is amazing. Breakfast at Bayside this morning and hunkered down for a Hurricane Party tonight... low key party, no liquor... lots of cherries and designer water ;)

Sweet Tropical Dreams... Bobbi

Speaking of a party, the weekend is almost here and this nostalgia should help get you in the mood:

Why do some meteorologists believe they can perform an accurate analysis of what occurred at a specific location from hundreds of miles away using only available data? Aren’t such things as local topography, microscale effects, elevation, and other environmental aspects as important as the macroscale situation in determining what happened at a specific address?

Why do trees blow down with winds between 50 to 55 miles per hour with the Beaufort Wind Scale, yet aren’t affected by wind until 104 miles per hour in the Saffir-Simpson Scale? Are trees stronger in hurricane-prone areas?

Why do we use statistics to determine what occurred at a specific address? Aren’t statistics a bit over-blown?

Why did Dr. Robert Simpson (yes, he is that Dr. Simpson) state that the release of the Saffir-Simpson Scale was “premature” during a radio interview in 1991?

Why does the public continually blame the National Weather Service and the National Hurricane Center for “missed forecasts”, yet deny these same agencies the funds and manpower to do the job? If you want better weather information, write to your congress person and demand more funding for the National Weather Service and National Hurricane Center.

Why aren’t realistic wind flows and characteristics used in evaluating hurricane damage? Each situation is different, so each evaluation must be different.

Why do we make something simple into such a complicated process?

Many people have heard of Dr. Theodore Fujita, the developer of the renowned Fujita Scale used to categorize tornadoes by intensity. The first Fujita Scale was presented in 1971, two years after the Saffir-Simpson Scale was released to the public. One of Dr. Fujita’s goals was to make the Fujita Scale a smooth transition from the Beaufort Wind Scale. Fujita explained explicitly that "F-scale winds are estimated from structural and/or tree damage, the estimated wind speed applies to the height of the apparent damage above the ground."

This means that the Fujita Scale only applies at the height of damage, whether it is 8 feet above the ground or 40 feet above the ground. There is nothing in Dr. Fujita’s definition that states the winds have to be measured precisely at 33 feet above the ground, yet some experts use wind measurements from many miles away recorded at 33 feet to substantiate their “opinions.”

Anyone who thinks that wind speeds measured at one location can be applied to other locations doesn’t understand the atmosphere. The atmosphere is made up of wind bands that flow up and down easily, causing wind speed increases and decreases that are not seen or measured, but we know they exist by observing how these winds affect objects around us.

I am constantly amazed by those who assert that we MUST use wind speeds recorded at some location 30 miles away because that is the only location where official measurements are made. That is pure bunk.

Using that logic is like telling a police officer the reason you were doing 70 miles per hour on a back road is because the speed limit is 70 miles per hour 30 miles away. Would a police officer buy that excuse? It never worked for me.

Let’s all use realistic scenarios; not studies that were performed many years ago in another part of the country. Let’s compare apples to apples.

With that being said, Dr. Fujita devised his scale based upon a 3 second gust; not the sustained 1 minute wind speed. The Enhanced Fujita Scale is based on the same 3 second gust principle.

To me, this means that Dr. Fujita clearly understood the force of wind and the impact of wind force. If a 3 second gust can cause all types of damage in one occurrence, how much damage can be experienced if there are multiple gusts?

According to Dr. Fujita’s Enhanced F Scale Damage Indicators, the “expected wind speed” to cause the uplifting of a roof deck, loss of more than 20% of roof covering material, the collapse of a chimney at a 1 or 2 story residence is only 97 miles per hour. The lowest boundary for this type of damage is only 81 miles per hour. If a 3 second gust can cause this level of damage, what happens in a hurricane with continuous gusts? What happens with hurricanes that have continuous wind speeds at or above the “expected wind speed” for any type of structure?

The following is taken from the Storm Prediction Center website for The Enhanced Fujita Scale:

Over the years, the F-Scale has revealed the following weaknesses:

• It is subjective based solely on the damage caused by a tornado
• No recognition in difference in construction
• Difficult to apply with no damage indicators
• if the 3/4-mile wide tornado does not hit any structures, what F-scale should be assigned?
• Subject to bias
• Based on the worst damage (even if it is one building or house)
• Overestimates wind speeds greater than F3

And the F-Scale has had its misuses over the years:

• Too much reliance on the estimated wind speeds
• Oversimplification of the damage description
• Judge the F-scale by the appearance of the tornado cloud
• Unrecognizing weak structures
• mobile homes
• modified homes

The meteorological and engineering communities recognized these weaknesses and took steps to improve the original Fujita Scale. In 2006, a panel of selected experts devised an Enhanced Fujita Scale, which was accepted by the National Weather Service.

The new EF Scale lowered the wind speed ranges necessary to cause damage to a variety of structures and added a more refining step to the evaluation process by breaking out each type of structure with degrees of damage (DOD). I believe this addition is great because it is more realistic. One of the main weaknesses of the original Fujita Scale was that it thought of all structures as equal. The EF Scale, with its’ DOD indicators, is a wonderful improvement to the Fujita Scale.

I question why some of the panel members of the Enhanced Fujita Scale project ignore their own recommendations when assessing damages from a hurricane?

How can anyone apply guidelines from the Great Plains to hurricanes along the Gulf Coast? This is comparing apples to elephants.

For both Hurricane Katrina (2005) and Hurricane Ike (2008), some experts state emphatically that there were no tornadoes along the coastline. Published studies from the National Weather Service and National Hurricane Center clearly state that there are tornadoes in each and every land-falling hurricane, including the coastline. Why the disconnect?

Just because a person has a lot of knowledge about tornadoes in Canada, is he an expert about tornadoes anywhere in the world? Does this mean that everything that applies to Canadian storms also applies equally to the Gulf Coast? I don’t think so.

That is like someone from Canada coming to the Gulf Coast and trying to “shovel” all our rain…it doesn’t work.

Many people will emphatically argue that the EF Scale and the original scale pertain only to tornadoes. Yes, tornadoes are a complete vortex with tremendous upward vertical motion which embellishes the interior wind speeds of a tornado. People tell me that it is the constant rotation and rate of change in shear and wind speed of a tornado that is so critical in causing damage.

The wind field of a hurricane is inherently rotational. The rate of change in wind speed and shear of a tornado can be found within several weather elements of a hurricane. The National Center for Atmospheric Research and NOAA state “hurricane tornadoes are more frequent than classic Midwest tornadoes because there is more rotation in the hurricane environment to draw upon.”

A tornado is a relatively short-lived phenomenon when compared to most other weather elements. The majority of time when tornadoes occur, they contain the highest wind speeds of the surrounding atmospheric environment on the surface. The rate of change of wind speed and rotation (shear) between the surrounding atmospheric environment and the tornado is tremendous, yet Dr. Fujita never mentioned that a specific rate of change in wind speed and shear were necessary to cause the listed damages. All Dr. Fujita listed were wind speeds.

With the Enhanced Fujita Scale, the panel members gave specific speed ranges to a variety of structures, each with 10 separate degrees of damage. The EF Scale is very detailed and thorough.

My question is if Dr. Fujita and the members of the Enhanced Fujita Scale project believe that a 3 second gust of 97 miles an hour will cause considerable damage to a 2 story residence, why can’t hours and hours of wind gusts equal to 95 miles an hour result in more damage?

It seems that people miss the point that structures are enduring hours and hours of punishing wind speeds and associated elements. If a 3 second gust can collapse a chimney, why wouldn’t the winds that enter the house after this specific damage be considered factors in the damage?

If a 97 mile s per hour gust can cause the uplifting of a roof deck, what happens when that 97 miles per hour gust occurs repeatedly for several hours? A gust of only 121 miles per hour will shift a 1 or 2 story residence off its foundation. What if gusts this high occur numerous times over several hours along with high winds in between each gust to 121 miles per hour? If wind gusts to 96 miles per hour cause glass breakage in windows and doors, why don’t we consider what happens once the winds enter the house and cause damage on the inside?

We need to stop focusing only on the maximum 3 second gust. We should be looking at how continuous hours of wind pummeling affects any structure. A good heavyweight boxer can knock you out with one punch, but a good lightweight boxer can do more damage to you after hours of punching. Either way, you lose the fight.

So I ask, why do we focus on the highest wind gust and surge depth, when lesser winds can cause as much or more damage? Maybe we should be using a different ruler.

-Rocco Calaci

Please note how the outflowing winds create what appears to be a horizontal tornado-like vortex. This phenomena is extremely dangerous and destructive. Microbursts are a major cause of airplane accidents every year.

It is not the responsibility of the National Weather Service (NWS) or National Hurricane Center (NHC) to pinpoint every small scale feature hidden within a hurricane. The NWS and NHC do their job extremely well, but if individuals want to know what occurred at their specific address, then it is the responsibility of the property owner to acquire the expertise of a professional meteorologist. You have the responsibility to hire a meteorologist that can make a detailed analysis of the meteorological situation and determine what weather elements (if any) were present on your property. It’s your property and your responsibility.

Based on my experience as a forensic meteorologist, a homeowner needs three experts on the team in order to reach an honest and factual determination of what occurred at a specific address during a hurricane. These experts are:

1. A meteorologist – this person should be able to give you a detailed and site specific report on meteorological elements that affected your property. Be advised that this also means a meteorologist can reach a conclusion that you don’t want to hear, but facts are facts.
2. An engineer – if it is determined that high wind speeds affected your property, an engineer can calculate if the weather elements at your location were strong enough to cause the damage you experienced.
3. An experienced lawyer – if you need legal counsel, make sure you have someone that knows and understands this specific area of law. I have seen too many examples where inexperienced lawyers (inexperienced in handling weather-related cases) have moved too slowly or in the wrong direction because they are learning as they try to handle your case.

In summary, there were numerous mesocyclones, microbursts and other meteorological phenomena that occurred within Hurricane Ike with many areas widely affected by these elements. These weather events are capable of causing damage levels from minor to total destruction. Just because high wind speeds may not have been present in your area, it doesn’t mean other destructive forms of weather were not there.

Please understand that the people in the NWS and NHC are doing a great job. If you want to know what happened at your specific address, that is your responsibility.

In order to determine what caused damages which may be covered at your location, you need a team of experts; a meteorologist, an engineer and an experienced hurricane lawyer.

As a note, I am not affiliated with either the NWS or NHC in any way. My opinion is formed after being an operational meteorologist for 20 years in the military and 19 years in the commercial industry and watching these organizations perform over this span of time.

- Rocco Calaci

Everyone talks about the maximum wind speed, the highest wind gust, the storm surge and how all of it fits together as part of Hurricane Ike. What puzzles me is why aren’t more people focusing on many of the other weather elements found within Hurricane Ike (and other hurricanes) that routinely cause ground damage, most of the time hours before a storm surge hits the coastline.

Hurricanes are more than just high winds and water. Hurricanes also spawn tornadoes, microbursts, straight line winds, extreme ground turbulence and phenomena that have the definite capacity to destroy houses, rip off roofs, uproot trees and do lots of damage. There are also induced dangers such as funneling winds and wind maxima areas (an area where two wind bands converge together to form a small area of increased wind speeds). These meteorological elements occur during hurricanes, yet everyone focuses on the highest wind speeds and storm surge heights.

Some of these mentioned elements can be detected and measured by the latest weather technology, but most of what I mentioned can not be measured. That doesn’t mean that the phenomena do not occur or can not be proven. I’ll start with mesocyclones.

As defined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Weather Service (NOAA/NWS), a mesocyclone is a storm-scale region of rotation, typically around 2-6 miles in diameter and often found in the right rear flank of a supercell. The circulation of a mesocyclone covers an area much larger than the tornado that may develop within it. In other words, mesocyclones have the capacity to spawn tornadoes.

Another specific point about mesocyclones as defined by NOAA/NWS - Properly used, mesocyclone is a radar term; it is defined as a rotation signature appearing on Doppler radar that meets specific criteria for magnitude, vertical depth, and duration.

This means that if all the physical characteristics of a mesocyclone are present, but it doesn’t meet ALL the specific criteria based on magnitude, vertical depth and duration, this phenomena will not be detected by NEXRAD. This is why some people state that NEXRAD may miss as many mesocyclones as it detects. The same goes for NEXRAD detected tornadoes. If NEXRAD doesn’t detect it, the meteorological event can still happen.

For example, the NEXRAD Doppler weather radar located in Houston and operated by the National Weather Service (NWS) detected numerous mesocyclones moving across Bolivar peninsula, the Sabine Pass area, northwest Houston, and along Galveston Bay. If you apply simple statistical data, 30% to 50% of all mesocyclones develop tornadoes. If there were 60 mesocyclones, they would spawn 18 to 30 tornadoes.

Just because there were no “confirmed” tornadoes doesn’t mean there were not any tornadoes. You have to understand the limitations of the NEXRAD radar, the rules, guidance and responsibilities pertaining to the National Weather Service and what you should do in the event you spot a tornado during a hurricane (or any other time). This is another subject for a later blog.

Please accept that no technology is perfect. The NEXRAD radar is a great upgrade from what meteorologists had before as the dedicated meteorological radar. NEXRAD provides all types of data and information used at all times by the NWS and National Hurricane Center (NHC), but it is not perfect. NEXRAD products are the visual results of algorithms. There is no algorithm for any meteorological event that can cover all possible scenarios. Even algorithms have limitations. Due to these limitations, NEXRAD can not detect each and every meteorological element that occurs.

Some people think the workers at NWS/NHC should be responsible for providing weather data for all people at all times. The NWS/NHC workers are already overworked, undermanned and unfunded and to have the inferred responsibility of having to provide weather information that applies to each person at any chosen time is unrealistic. This is impossible!

As for the rules and responsibilities of the NWS and NHC; these are dictated by people at high levels of government that really don’t have a clue as how a real weather situation creates more work than anyone could possibly expect. We expect miracles from the NWS/NHC and complain when miracles don’t occur.

From what I see as an impartial observer, The NWS and NHC are doing exactly what is mandated by higher headquarters and the government. Their job is to protect and warn the public, not determine the winds specifically at 123 ABC Street in Anywhere Texas.

(For further explanation of the damage caused by Ike, apart from the hurricane winds and water, please read Part Two of Rocco Calaci’s guest blog tomorrow.)