Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Katrina Versus Camille

  1. #1
    Member Bill Tabor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Austin, Tx
    Posts
    1,592

    Default Katrina Versus Camille

    I'd like to compare these two hurricanes. I've been hearing that Katrina has done more damage than Camille (not counting busted levees and flooding in NO). I've heard several times people mention that a structure that survived Camille was wiped out by Katrina. This doesnt' seem to jive with the lower windspeeds of supposedly Cat 4 Katrina to Cat 5 Camille. How similar are their sizes and landfall tracks? How could Katrina 'shred' so much of Biloxi and Gulfport by winds alone if winds were so low as stated in other threads?

  2. #2
    Member Kevin Bowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    415

    Default

    the surge was higher than camille

    the weather channel had some awesome video of the storm surge in mississippi on tonight

  3. #3
    Member Jason A.C. Brock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Wichita Falls Texas
    Posts
    328

    Default

    I think there is alot of misconceptions that the majority of the damage in Biloxi etc. is from winds. Isnt it actually from storm surge from what is basically a 30 ft wave? I mean the Tsunami last December was 35 ft and this storm surge was 30 ft! Water is jsut jaw droppingly powerful.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,740

    Default

    Originally posted by Jason A.C. Brock
    I think there is alot of misconceptions that the majority of the damage in Biloxi etc. is from winds. Isnt it actually from storm surge from what is basically a 30 ft wave? I mean the Tsunami last December was 35 ft and this storm surge was 30 ft! Water is jsut jaw droppingly powerful.
    There is no doubt the storm surge came in very fast, but it was no tsunami.
    Bill Ozanne
    Twitter

  5. #5
    Member Joel Wright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Erie IL
    Posts
    1,365

    Default

    As far as the winds, since Katrina was so much larger, the winds stayed strong longer than Camille's did.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,740

    Default

    I believe Camille was also a much more compact storm.
    Bill Ozanne
    Twitter

  7. #7

    Default Camille Vs Katrina

    Katrina was huge compared to Camille - roughly 4-5 times as wide in terms of destructive winds.

    It was also just about as low as low in terms of land-fall pressure measurements.

    The combination allowed it to gather a storm surge that was as high as Camille's, covering a larger area, moving inland farther and staying inland longer.

    By that measure, it was far worse than Camille.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Wellston, Oklahoma
    Posts
    723

    Default

    Man..talk about disappointment...I was expecting this thread to be about an epic battle...kinda like Godzilla vs Mothra....

    Anyway...

    The windfield was spread out over a much larger area than Camille, as was the storm surge. Just look at the damage in Mobile...the Battleship has an eight degree list to dockside...that takes some power folks. Also, the Gulf Coast is built up tons more, so there were alot more structures to involve.

    Now...this is a theory of mine...the barrier islands have been eroded quite substantially since Camille hit. The offshore area has become much more shallow (probably due to sediment from the barrier islands eroding). Also, the beachfront areas in many locations that were devistated by Camille were actually lower than before (they didn't build the sand/soil levels back up to compensate for the material eroded from Camille's surge), and areas all along the Gulf that were not affected by Camille had a higher land level between them and the Gulf before Camille, but the erosion left the area from the dunes back lower. Would this combination not allow, or even enhance (as the case of the shallower offshore areas) the tidal surge, both in height and intensity when it came ashore, thus allowing for more damage? For those of you not familiar with the area, there are (or were) places that you could wade out more than a mile on the sand, because of the sediment buildup over the years.
    Chris Sokol/KD5ILI, Wellston, Oklahoma
    Sokol Photography
    Oklahoma County Emergency Management| |Southwest Lincoln County Fire/Rescue

  9. #9

    Default

    there is some truth to that Chris, I know for a fact that dredging avtivities in the Mobile Bay Ship Channel have caused daphin island to lose its supply of replenishing sand. the west end has since slowly been eroding. This island helps to protect Bayou LaBatre (BubbaGump Shrimp anyone?)

    As far as teh windfield, yes it was super wide. the damage here in mobile is incredible for a storm that made landfall some 80 miles to the west.
    Blake Michaleski
    Meteorologist
    KD5MWK

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •