O/T: Sandy

Most IT generators are located on tops of buildings.
But most battery backup systems are in the basement due to weight.

Do you see a problem with salt water and batteries???

I worked at AT&T years ago, the NOC had the batteries 3 floors below...
just can't see that being bad where that building was located. But put
it closer to the shore and I can't see that being smart.



On 11/4/2012 11:07 AM, Han wrote:
> Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Apparently underground utilities have their drawbacks, at least in
>> lower Manhattan!
>
> Slowly recovering from 99 hrs of blackout. We were lucky that we got
> power back Friday evening, some parts of town are still without,
> expecting to get it back tonight.
>
> Yes, underground has disadvantages, especially if (like the Manhattan
> VA) you put emergency generators and electrical substations where flood
> waters can reach them. The VA had a flood that got into the subbasement
> some 2 or 3 decades ago (East River rose up and put the cars in the
> parking lot underwater to over their hoods). That lesson wasn't heeded
> when they put the new and improved emergency generators in the
> subbasement ...
>
> I would have thought that normally underground utilities (for
> distribution) would be reasonably water proof.
>
> The fairly rapid recovery in lower Manhattan proves that underground
> utilities do work properly. Now if the expletive deleted will plan
> better for proper placement of the essential equipment ...
>

On Oct 29, 10:21=A0pm, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 9:14 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
>
> > It's 10 pm here now. So far we have had absolutely no threat of
> > flooding, which is half the reason I put in 10 hours of work preparing
> > - in a sort of reverse Murphy effect, the universe conspires to make
> > any such work pointless. It simply hasn't rained all that much. But
> > the wind sounds absolutely vicious outside. I'm sure there will be
> > trees down and sundry other problems, with any luck not too bad.
>
> The very best of staying high and dry to you and your family, Greg.
>
> --www.eWoodShop.com
> Last update: 4/15/2010
> KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

I'm happy to report that we (personally) came through almost without a
scratch. We got what at least for New York was some truly impressive
wind, but very little rain, which was our main concern. A cursory
inspection of the house reveals no obvious damage, and we have all of
our utilities too. Our electric wires run underground, so that doesn't
go out very easily, but I really have to find out what sort of strain-
reliefs the cable and phone companies use for their wires. The ones to
our house were whipping around violently for hours, but are still
working just fine. The floodlights I have in the back yard don't seem
to work, so I may be out a fixture, but otherwise everything seems
OK.

Now, as for the damage in the greater area, it could be a while before
I can get to work (in Manhattan), and then only once the power is
restored in that area. But overall, we personally dodged a bullet. For
that bit of luck I credit all the preparation I did; Nature has a
sense of humor and saw to it that all the barriers I built never even
got damp. :)

There's already snow in Ohio. Once the front goes through, those northeast=
ern folks will be contending with freezing weather, I suppose ice all over =
the place. Factor that into the mess, too. It ain't gonna be fun for them=
, no matter how bad or not bad it is.

About 20-25 yrs ago the same kind of storm went up the east coast, just not=
via the Atlantic. It went up the east side of the Appalachians, dumping r=
ecord snows all along the way.

Sonny

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 05:28:17 -0700 (PDT), Greg Guarino
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Oct 29, 10:21 pm, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 9:14 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
>>
>> > It's 10 pm here now. So far we have had absolutely no threat of
>> > flooding, which is half the reason I put in 10 hours of work preparing
>> > - in a sort of reverse Murphy effect, the universe conspires to make
>> > any such work pointless. It simply hasn't rained all that much. But
>> > the wind sounds absolutely vicious outside. I'm sure there will be
>> > trees down and sundry other problems, with any luck not too bad.
>>
>> The very best of staying high and dry to you and your family, Greg.
>
>I'm happy to report that we (personally) came through almost without a
>scratch. We got what at least for New York was some truly impressive
>wind, but very little rain, which was our main concern. A cursory

Excellent. Congrats on the luck.


>inspection of the house reveals no obvious damage, and we have all of
>our utilities too. Our electric wires run underground, so that doesn't
>go out very easily, but I really have to find out what sort of strain-
>reliefs the cable and phone companies use for their wires. The ones to
>our house were whipping around violently for hours, but are still
>working just fine.

Strain relief is usually quite good. They don't like to have to come
out to every house to repair those often.


>The floodlights I have in the back yard don't seem
>to work, so I may be out a fixture, but otherwise everything seems
>OK.

Maybe you lucked out and flying debris only took out the bulbs.


>Now, as for the damage in the greater area, it could be a while before
>I can get to work (in Manhattan), and then only once the power is
>restored in that area. But overall, we personally dodged a bullet. For
>that bit of luck I credit all the preparation I did; Nature has a
>sense of humor and saw to it that all the barriers I built never even
>got damp. :)

Preparedness is insurance. You hope you never need it, but it's there
if you do. Also, Mr. Murphy relies on it. Even if -you're- not
prepared, -he- is, and he lets you know without a doubt.

--
No greater wrong can ever be done than to put a good man at the mercy
of a bad, while telling him not to defend himself or his fellows;
in no way can the success of evil be made quicker or surer.
--Theodore Roosevelt

Swingman wrote:
>
> Keep firmly in mind, while watching the TV coverage of this natural
> event, that anyone hired based on the size of their tits, looks, or
> hair style, is, at absolute best, only competent to _report_, not
> remark or opine ... ;)

If the talent switches over to an expert for the "opinion," well, that's
okay.

I, personally, have written to Fox News twice asking them to eliminate the
"crawl" at the bottom of their newscasts. It blocks my view of the anchor's
tits.

With Manhattan under water does this mean we are going to have
to bail out wall street - again?

Just some observations and musings about this storm and reactions to it.

Most of the financial markets are being shut down for two days. This hasn't
happened since 9/11. From what I have read, there has been a lot of things
put into place that would allow the markets to continue, regardless of power
outages, etc. It boiled down to the fact that most folks who work on wall
street take the subway. And since the subway was shut down, they had no way
to get to work. And the SEC (Securities & Exchange Commission) decided the
markets should be shut down for "worker safety". Which is something that
has never been done before. (Storm Powers for the SEC?)

I suppose that it is better to be safe than sorry. And I also realize that
this particular storm is a total mutant/hybrid type of thing. And I just
wonder what the average New Yorker in an apartment type of dwelling is
actually going to do if the power goes out and transportation is not
restored soon. It seems to me telling everybody we are going to shut down
the city in the next day hardly gives anybody any time to stock up on
supplies, etc. Particularly for those folks who don't have cars and have to
depend on public transportation.

It might be a tangent, but all those greenies never talk about a world with
mass transit and bicycles having to deal with a major weather event. Can
you see trying to stock up for a big storm with only a neighborhood deli
available to your 5 story walkup apartment? I sincerely hope this thing is
not as serious as they are screaming about. Cuz there is no predicting what
could happen if New Yorkers get cooped up and cut off from basic supplies
for awhile. It could get ugly.

And the other big question, of course, how will it affect the elections?
Does major storm damage help the republicans or the democrats. Since I DO
NOT engage in political discussions, I will leave that alone. My
observation is that the major campaigns are looking at this closely and
having to react the best way they can. Also, all the incumbent governors,
mayors, president, etc will be very involved in managing this crisis. How
does THAT affect the elections? Does it help or hurt them? Active
management versus campaigning, which is more effective in the last week?

Can anybody remember a major weather event just before a national election?
Or a party convention cut short by another storm?

We live in interesting times.

"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote
> Here's hoping you have the same experience we had with Rita a few years
> back ... but without the 107 _evacuation related deaths_ and super-hyped
> evacuation hysteria whipped into a froth by ill advised government
> edicts and media sensationism (well, too late for the latter) ... we
> spent the evening Rita hit rocking on the front porch drinking a bottle
> of wine, and I had to water the yard the next morning.
>
Is that because you drank too much wine the night before? ;)

On 10/29/2012 09:20 AM, Han wrote:
> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> On 10/29/2012 10:42 AM, Leon wrote:
>>> I don't doubt that this could be pretty tough but the way it is being
>>> described from my neck of the woods is that this could very well be
>>> the end of the world as we know it.
>>
>> In my best Nailshooter/Hispanic accent: It's Butch's fault ...
>
> It is starting to blow and rain here near the extreme NE corner of NJ,
> and the center is still 100's of miles away. Irene was bad here not
> because the winds were that high, although we had pretty bad power
> outages. It was so bad because of the flooding from streams and rivers
> overflowing (and because people had built in flood plains). Here they
> expect not that much rain (still plenty for the area), but winds that
> cause power outages and the long lingering they expect that will keep
> power company crews from fixing the problems. PSEG has already said
> they don't really expect to start fixing problems until Wednesday or
> Thursday, and it may take them a week or 10 days to finish. Whether the
> prediction is to lower expectations after the twin disasters last year
> of Irene and the freak snowstorm, or a more realistic approach, I don't
> know. SO far, so good here, though.
>
> As far as fault - the US has far greater amounts of overhead power and
> other utilities than in (denser populated) Europe. Anytime there are
> winds over 30 mph, branches break and cut power lines. Apparently the
> repeated costs of fixing these things (including the need for large
> standby crews) is less than simply investing in underground wiring.
> Just one little pet peeve.
>

Apparently underground utilities have their drawbacks, at least in lower
Manhattan!


--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill

"Greg Guarino" wrote:

> I'm happy to report that we (personally) came through almost without
> a
scratch.
--------------------------------------------------------
Congratulations.

Are you anywhere close to the fire in Queens?

Lew

"Greg Guarino" wrote:

>If you mean the one in Breezy Point, no. While only maybe 8 miles as
the crow flies, it would probably take me a half hour to drive there.
Breezy Point is on the tip of the Rockaway peninsula, a very narrow
strip of sand. While technically part of Queens, you can most easily
access that area via a bridge from Brooklyn.
----------------------------------------------------------------
All we got was some video showing a high-rise on fire identifying
the building as an apartment complex in Queens.

Lew

Something I can relate to.

Lake Erie is experiencing 10'-20' waves as a result of Sandy.

I've been sailing on Erie in 6'-8' waves.

Those were big enough to tighten the old sphincter.

Lew

In article <[email protected]>,
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
> As are my wishes but my gut is telling me that this is not going to be
> the "epic" storm that the forecasters are making it out to be. The
> weather people seem to for get that hurricanes need warm water to form
> and grow. Typically once a cold front blows through the gulf coast
> hurricane season pretty much over. But, hurricane season is not
> "officially" over until the calendar says so.

Well, here in the UK our forecasters are predicting you getting a storm
surge of about 3.5m, 300mm of rain and the possibility of up to 1m of snow
following on in some areas. They also say unlike normal hurricanes this
storm could last for as much as 3 or four days

--
Stuart Winsor

Only plain text for emails
http://www.asciiribbon.org

On 10/29/2012 6:27 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 6:12 PM, Leon wrote:
> ...
>
>> I think if the ocean water was 20 degrees warmer and or maybe the timing
>> 2 months ago there would be some potential of a bad storm. If this turns
>> out to be a remembered event, it will not be because of the storm so
>> much as not being prepared for a storm.
> ...
>
> Well, that's simply nonsense. What, specifically, would you have the
> metro areas do, move?

Cant do any thing, what is done is done but by no fault of a potential
storm.

>
> Camille dumped 24-36" in only 2 days or less in a very mountainous
> region w/ nowhere for it to but down the valleys. I personally saw
> places I had known for several years that had prior to that night of
> flooding been towns and small mountains of as much as 2-300 ft that
> completely disappeared. It doesn't necessarily take wind to do a lot of
> damage altho it is obviously a different kind of damage.

And I know this rain ca do a lot of damage, Houston got it 12 years ago.

>
> Everybody who has been through a severe event or is in an area of a
> given type of disaster thinks theirs is the worst--and certainly a Cat
> >1 hurricane is an event but don't think that just because this isn't
> that high of wind it can't be serious enough or is to be disregarded as
> a non-event.

Not saying that at all, just saying that the way the storm is being
described it is most likely over emphasized. It is a storm hitting the
US and this is news, make the most of the broadcast exposure as you can.


>
> In essence, don't pretend (or worse really believe) you could sit there
> in the same conditions unscathed because you've been elsewhere.

Whaaat?

On 10/29/2012 9:14 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
> It's 10 pm here now. So far we have had absolutely no threat of
> flooding, which is half the reason I put in 10 hours of work preparing
> - in a sort of reverse Murphy effect, the universe conspires to make
> any such work pointless. It simply hasn't rained all that much. But
> the wind sounds absolutely vicious outside. I'm sure there will be
> trees down and sundry other problems, with any luck not too bad.

The very best of staying high and dry to you and your family, Greg.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 10/29/2012 10:42 AM, Leon wrote:
> I don't doubt that this could be pretty tough but the way it is being
> described from my neck of the woods is that this could very well be the
> end of the world as we know it.

In my best Nailshooter/Hispanic accent: It's Butch's fault ...

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On Oct 30, 5:38=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> =A0"Greg Guarino" wrote:
> >If you mean the one in Breezy Point, no. While only maybe 8 miles as
>
> the crow flies, it would probably take me a half hour to drive there.
> Breezy Point is on the tip of the Rockaway peninsula, a very narrow
> strip of sand. While technically part of Queens, you can most easily
> access that area via a bridge from Brooklyn.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> All we got was some video showing a high-rise on fire identifying
> the building as an apartment complex in Queens.
>
> Lew

I haven't heard about that. Queens is a pretty big place with just shy
of 2 million residents and lots of apartment complexes, so perhaps
that particular news bit got lost amid all the rest. My part of town
is almost entirely 1 and 2 family houses.

On Oct 30, 5:13=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Greg Guarino" wrote:
> > I'm happy to report that we (personally) came through almost without
> > a
>
> scratch.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Congratulations.
>
> Are you anywhere close to the fire in Queens?
>
> Lew

If you mean the one in Breezy Point, no. While only maybe 8 miles as
the crow flies, it would probably take me a half hour to drive there.
Breezy Point is on the tip of the Rockaway peninsula, a very narrow
strip of sand. While technically part of Queens, you can most easily
access that area via a bridge from Brooklyn.

Larry Jaques <[email protected]> writes:

>
>Yeah, and NOAA tells AGWK like it is, too, doesn't it? Praise be our
>Saviour, the demiGod Hanson!

Your diatribe would have been better had Hanson actually worked for
NOAA. In fact, he works for NASA GISS. I think he crossed the line
from scientist to advocate many moons ago, but he has no connection
to NOAA.

On 10/29/2012 9:35 AM, dpb wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 8:54 AM, Leon wrote:
> ...
>
>> As are my wishes but my gut is telling me that this is not going to be
>> the "epic" storm that the forecasters are making it out to be. The
>> weather people seem to for get that hurricanes need warm water to form
>> and grow. Typically once a cold front blows through the gulf coast
>> hurricane season pretty much over. But, hurricane season is not
>> "officially" over until the calendar says so.
>
> I don't the the "weather people" at NOAA forget anything at all about
> what the mechanics of hurricanes and extra-tropical storms are...Sandy
> is feeding off the Gulf Stream off the east coast and is already
> something quite out of the ordinary simply owing to the breadth for the
> location and the coincidence of the cold front it's going to run into
> has some serious potential...and given that it's going to make landfall
> at or near high tide in the generally most-populated area of the country
> means the impact will be beyond its actual measured strength. And, of
> course, even after the winds drop below hurricane or gale strength
> flooding can be a _very_bad_thing_ from excessive rainfall inland and
> combined w/ surge near coast. I wouldn't underestimate it a bit, meself...


Well simply lots of rain, and not from a hurricane, can have the same
flooding effect. Winds barely qualify this storm as a hurricane and it
slips in and out of hurricane status. IMHO the only thing that will
make this a costly event will be from dense population.

And I have never heard of a hurricane feeding off of any thing but warm
water. Perhaps the Gulf Stream is helping to steer the storm rather
than give it strength.

Frankinstorm just seems to be a bit of an over exaggeration of the
storm. Now that "every" tropical storm gets a name these days rather
than only the actual hurricanes being named, only exasperates the
excitement and fear factor.

There was a time when you only heard of storms names beginning with
a,b,c,d,e but now we routinely hear of storms names being in the far end
of the alphabet with no more land falls than 30`40`50 years ago.

I don't doubt that this could be pretty tough but the way it is being
described from my neck of the woods is that this could very well be the
end of the world as we know it.










> From NOAA hurricane center forecast discussion--
>
>> Statement as of 5:00 am EDT on October 29, 2012
>>
>> Sandy continues to maintain an area of deep convection near the
>> center...with an eye occasionally visible on satellite imagery.
>> Although the satellite presentation of the system is not very
>> impressive...SFMR measurements...flight-level winds...and dropsonde
>> data from the Air Force hurricane hunters indicate that the winds
>> have increased to near 75 kt. Since the hurricane will traverse
>> the Gulf Stream this morning...and the shear is not too strong at
>> this time...some more strengthening as a tropical cyclone is
>> possible in the next few hours. However...the main mechanism
>> for intensification later today should be baroclinic forcing. The
>> official wind speed forecast is close to the latest GFS prediction
>> as that model should be able to handle the evolution of this type
>> of system fairly well.
>>
>> Surface data indicate that a well-marked warm and cold front lie not
>> far to the north and west of the center of Sandy. As the
>> circulation interacts with these fronts...the cyclone should become
>> extratropical later today. Extratropical transition is expected to
>> be complete before the center crosses the coast. However...this
>> transformation will not diminish the overall impacts from winds to
>> hurricane strength...life-threatening storm surge...and flooding
>> rains associated with this dangerous weather system. Based on the
>> global models...the cyclone should weaken fairly rapidly after
>> landfall.
>>
>> Center fixes indicate that Sandy is now moving northward or about
>> 360/13...as it begins to rotate around a mid- to upper-level
>> cyclone over the southeastern United States. As it moves between
>> the cyclone and a highly anomalous mid-tropospheric ridge near
>> Atlantic Canada...Sandy should turn northwestward and
>> west-northwestward with some further increase in forward speed.
>> This track should result in the center making landfall in the
>> mid-Atlantic states this evening or tonight. After landfall...the
>> dynamical guidance shows a significant slowing of forward speed as
>> the system merges with the mid- to upper-level cyclone. The
>> official track forecast for this package is a bit faster than the
>> previous one...and close to the GFS and ECMWF solutions.
>>
>> Interests are reminded not to focus on the center or the exact
>> forecast track of this system...since strong winds cover an area
>> several hundred miles across...and the highest winds will not
>> necessarily be near the center.
>
> --

On 10/29/2012 9:02 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 8:38 PM, Leon wrote:
> ...
>
>> Not saying that at all, just saying that the way the storm is being
>> described it is most likely over emphasized. It is a storm hitting the
>> US and this is news, make the most of the broadcast exposure as you can.
> ...
>
> You can't know that a priori is the point. I don't think NOAA has over
> emphasized the potential severity a bit...
>
> I've agreed the 24-hr media of all ilks tends to overblow stuff, but
> that's true for everything from pop culture to politics and everything
> in between.
>
> If you yourself really mean only that instead of that you don't think
> there's a thing to see here and that there's not a possibility of some
> really serious consequences, that's something else.

Keep firmly in mind, while watching the TV coverage of this natural
event, that anyone hired based on the size of their tits, looks, or hair
style, is, at absolute best, only competent to _report_, not remark or
opine ... ;)

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 10/29/2012 9:14 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
Snip


>
> It's 10 pm here now. So far we have had absolutely no threat of
> flooding, which is half the reason I put in 10 hours of work preparing
> - in a sort of reverse Murphy effect, the universe conspires to make
> any such work pointless. It simply hasn't rained all that much. But
> the wind sounds absolutely vicious outside. I'm sure there will be
> trees down and sundry other problems, with any luck not too bad.
>


Good for you Greg, preparation is 99% of the battle in most cases.

No, in NJ...

I won't say where. Even though I don't work there any longer, they don't
like the NOC locations disclosed. Understandable especially in todays
times, and I left them in 9

On 11/4/2012 1:41 PM, Han wrote:
> tiredofspam <nospam.nospam.com> wrote in news:-
> [email protected]:
>
>> Most IT generators are located on tops of buildings.
>> But most battery backup systems are in the basement due to weight.
>>
>> Do you see a problem with salt water and batteries???
>
> Ummm, salt water would only be a problem if it formed a path between
> battery terminals or wiring. But that could indeed become a problem if the
> pumps failed ...
>
>> I worked at AT&T years ago, the NOC had the batteries 3 floors below...
>> just can't see that being bad where that building was located. But put
>> it closer to the shore and I can't see that being smart.
>
> You mean the old ATT building close to the Brooklyn bridge?
>

On 10/29/2012 2:23 PM, Lee Michaels wrote:
>
>
> "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote
>> Here's hoping you have the same experience we had with Rita a few
>> years back ... but without the 107 _evacuation related deaths_ and
>> super-hyped evacuation hysteria whipped into a froth by ill advised
>> government edicts and media sensationism (well, too late for the
>> latter) ... we spent the evening Rita hit rocking on the front porch
>> drinking a bottle of wine, and I had to water the yard the next morning.
>>
> Is that because you drank too much wine the night before? ;)
>
>


It is because even an enormous category 5 hurricane does not reek
devastation at it's edge. You typically have to be with in about 50
miles of the eye to see any serious/sustained hurricane force winds.
Add to that if you are south west of the storm you get very little wind
and rain unless you are within about 50 miles of the center. Every
storm is different but this particular storm, Sandy, is a baby
hurricane/tropical storm. If the storm stalls there will be lots of
flooding. If it continues to move as fats as it has been it will likely
be a rain event.

On 10/29/2012 9:47 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:14:25 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 10/29/2012 9:02 PM, dpb wrote:
>>> On 10/29/2012 8:38 PM, Leon wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> Not saying that at all, just saying that the way the storm is being
>>>> described it is most likely over emphasized. It is a storm hitting the
>>>> US and this is news, make the most of the broadcast exposure as you can.
>>> ...
>>>
>>> You can't know that a priori is the point. I don't think NOAA has over
>>> emphasized the potential severity a bit...
>>>
>>> I've agreed the 24-hr media of all ilks tends to overblow stuff, but
>>> that's true for everything from pop culture to politics and everything
>>> in between.
>>>
>>> If you yourself really mean only that instead of that you don't think
>>> there's a thing to see here and that there's not a possibility of some
>>> really serious consequences, that's something else.
>>
>> Keep firmly in mind, while watching the TV coverage of this natural
>> event, that anyone hired based on the size of their tits, looks, or hair
>> style, is, at absolute best, only competent to _report_, not remark or
>> opine ... ;)
>
> You're kidding, right? Competent reporting? On teevee? <chortle>

Actually, competent reporting deciphering is an acquired talent.

Your see the idiot reporter standing in the wind and rain. He/she is
blabbing harder than the winds. He/she leans into the winds with his
rain slicker flapping a bit while curious tourists walk in the back
ground tossing the foot ball.

Seriously, of the winds are as dangerous as reported the reporter would
not be out in the wind. When listing/watching storm coverage use your
eyes, not your ears, to determine how bad the storm really is.

Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On 10/29/2012 10:42 AM, Leon wrote:
>> I don't doubt that this could be pretty tough but the way it is being
>> described from my neck of the woods is that this could very well be
>> the end of the world as we know it.
>
> In my best Nailshooter/Hispanic accent: It's Butch's fault ...

It is starting to blow and rain here near the extreme NE corner of NJ,
and the center is still 100's of miles away. Irene was bad here not
because the winds were that high, although we had pretty bad power
outages. It was so bad because of the flooding from streams and rivers
overflowing (and because people had built in flood plains). Here they
expect not that much rain (still plenty for the area), but winds that
cause power outages and the long lingering they expect that will keep
power company crews from fixing the problems. PSEG has already said
they don't really expect to start fixing problems until Wednesday or
Thursday, and it may take them a week or 10 days to finish. Whether the
prediction is to lower expectations after the twin disasters last year
of Irene and the freak snowstorm, or a more realistic approach, I don't
know. SO far, so good here, though.

As far as fault - the US has far greater amounts of overhead power and
other utilities than in (denser populated) Europe. Anytime there are
winds over 30 mph, branches break and cut power lines. Apparently the
repeated costs of fixing these things (including the need for large
standby crews) is less than simply investing in underground wiring.
Just one little pet peeve.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On 10/29/2012 11:20 AM, Han wrote:
>
>> Whether the
>> prediction is to lower expectations after the twin disasters last
>> year of Irene and the freak snowstorm, or a more realistic approach,
>> I don't know. SO far, so good here, though.
>
> Here's hoping you have the same experience we had with Rita a few
> years back ... but without the 107 _evacuation related deaths_ and
> super-hyped evacuation hysteria whipped into a froth by ill advised
> government edicts and media sensationism (well, too late for the
> latter) ... we spent the evening Rita hit rocking on the front porch
> drinking a bottle of wine, and I had to water the yard the next
> morning.

So far, so good, still. Sandy is supposed to make landfall around 6PM,
an hour from now. Then it'll go inland slowly and curve around to the
north and northeast west of here and then towards Maine. The lights have
flickered a tiny bit, twice. There is a bunch of people out of power a
few miles east. There has only been about 1/2" rain, but pretty strong
wind gusts, increasing in strength. So far it is not cold at all, ~60°F.
The hullabaloo is about the expected huge storm surge on top of the
bimonthy spring tide (full moon tonight). That's why the subways shut
down, as well as some tunnels. A number of bridges are also shutting
down, including the George Washington and Tappan Zee bridges, major east
west crossings of the Hudson river.

We could go to the Dutch House for diner (it's walking distance), but we
have been eating too much lately, and there is plenty of food in the
fridge.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam* at comcast dot net> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Just some observations and musings about this storm and reactions to
> it.
>
> Most of the financial markets are being shut down for two days. This
> hasn't happened since 9/11. From what I have read, there has been a
> lot of things put into place that would allow the markets to continue,
> regardless of power outages, etc. It boiled down to the fact that
> most folks who work on wall street take the subway. And since the
> subway was shut down, they had no way to get to work. And the SEC
> (Securities & Exchange Commission) decided the markets should be shut
> down for "worker safety". Which is something that has never been done
> before. (Storm Powers for the SEC?)

Much of Wall Street isn't physically on Wall Street anymore. But some of
it are in other precarious places (from the point of view of flooding) in
New Jersey etc. In addition, the physical floor trading is still on Wall
Street and acts (I think ...) like a sort of reality check.

> I suppose that it is better to be safe than sorry. And I also realize
> that this particular storm is a total mutant/hybrid type of thing.
> And I just wonder what the average New Yorker in an apartment type of
> dwelling is actually going to do if the power goes out and
> transportation is not restored soon. It seems to me telling everybody
> we are going to shut down the city in the next day hardly gives
> anybody any time to stock up on supplies, etc. Particularly for those
> folks who don't have cars and have to depend on public transportation.

It is a whole set of unlikely things to happen at once (as I said
somewhere before). Again, the flooding is the big problem. For
instance, they had to evacuate the 18-story Manhattan VA because it is in
Zone A at 23rd and First.

> It might be a tangent, but all those greenies never talk about a world
> with mass transit and bicycles having to deal with a major weather
> event. Can you see trying to stock up for a big storm with only a
> neighborhood deli available to your 5 story walkup apartment? I
> sincerely hope this thing is not as serious as they are screaming
> about. Cuz there is no predicting what could happen if New Yorkers
> get cooped up and cut off from basic supplies for awhile. It could
> get ugly.

Apparently bad things happened during a blackout years ago. Then during
another blackout everything was hunkydori. Better policing and
experience?

> And the other big question, of course, how will it affect the
> elections? Does major storm damage help the republicans or the
> democrats. Since I DO NOT engage in political discussions, I will
> leave that alone. My observation is that the major campaigns are
> looking at this closely and having to react the best way they can.
> Also, all the incumbent governors, mayors, president, etc will be very
> involved in managing this crisis. How does THAT affect the elections?
> Does it help or hurt them? Active management versus campaigning,
> which is more effective in the last week?
>
> Can anybody remember a major weather event just before a national
> election? Or a party convention cut short by another storm?
>
> We live in interesting times.

We will find out, and then it will take the pundits 4 years of fighting
to settle it.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Apparently underground utilities have their drawbacks, at least in
> lower Manhattan!

Slowly recovering from 99 hrs of blackout. We were lucky that we got
power back Friday evening, some parts of town are still without,
expecting to get it back tonight.

Yes, underground has disadvantages, especially if (like the Manhattan
VA) you put emergency generators and electrical substations where flood
waters can reach them. The VA had a flood that got into the subbasement
some 2 or 3 decades ago (East River rose up and put the cars in the
parking lot underwater to over their hoods). That lesson wasn't heeded
when they put the new and improved emergency generators in the
subbasement ...

I would have thought that normally underground utilities (for
distribution) would be reasonably water proof.

The fairly rapid recovery in lower Manhattan proves that underground
utilities do work properly. Now if the expletive deleted will plan
better for proper placement of the essential equipment ...

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

tiredofspam <nospam.nospam.com> wrote in news:-
[email protected]:

> Most IT generators are located on tops of buildings.
> But most battery backup systems are in the basement due to weight.
>
> Do you see a problem with salt water and batteries???

Ummm, salt water would only be a problem if it formed a path between
battery terminals or wiring. But that could indeed become a problem if the
pumps failed ...

> I worked at AT&T years ago, the NOC had the batteries 3 floors below...
> just can't see that being bad where that building was located. But put
> it closer to the shore and I can't see that being smart.

You mean the old ATT building close to the Brooklyn bridge?

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

tiredofspam <nospam.nospam.com> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> No, in NJ...
>
> I won't say where. Even though I don't work there any longer, they don't
> like the NOC locations disclosed. Understandable especially in todays
> times, and I left them in 9

Way back when Floyd hit us, an ATT station near Rochelle Park got flooded
and put out almost all phones in NE NJ ...

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:14:25 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 10/29/2012 9:02 PM, dpb wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 8:38 PM, Leon wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> Not saying that at all, just saying that the way the storm is being
>>> described it is most likely over emphasized. It is a storm hitting the
>>> US and this is news, make the most of the broadcast exposure as you can.
>> ...
>>
>> You can't know that a priori is the point. I don't think NOAA has over
>> emphasized the potential severity a bit...
>>
>> I've agreed the 24-hr media of all ilks tends to overblow stuff, but
>> that's true for everything from pop culture to politics and everything
>> in between.
>>
>> If you yourself really mean only that instead of that you don't think
>> there's a thing to see here and that there's not a possibility of some
>> really serious consequences, that's something else.
>
>Keep firmly in mind, while watching the TV coverage of this natural
>event, that anyone hired based on the size of their tits, looks, or hair
>style, is, at absolute best, only competent to _report_, not remark or
>opine ... ;)

You're kidding, right? Competent reporting? On teevee? <chortle>

--
No greater wrong can ever be done than to put a good man at the mercy
of a bad, while telling him not to defend himself or his fellows;
in no way can the success of evil be made quicker or surer.
--Theodore Roosevelt

On 10/28/2012 8:23 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> For all you folks getting ready to crawl into a "huricane hole" and
> wait Sandy out,
> my thoughts are with you.
>
> Best of luck.
>
>
> Lew
>
>
>

As are my wishes but my gut is telling me that this is not going to be
the "epic" storm that the forecasters are making it out to be. The
weather people seem to for get that hurricanes need warm water to form
and grow. Typically once a cold front blows through the gulf coast
hurricane season pretty much over. But, hurricane season is not
"officially" over until the calendar says so.

On Oct 28, 9:23=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> For all you folks getting ready to crawl into a "huricane hole" and
> wait Sandy out,
> my thoughts are with you.
>
> Best of luck.
>
> Lew

We live in NY City, in the Borough of Queens. Queens is part of Long
Island, which is 10-15 miles wide. We're a good 5-6 miles from the
water, so the storm surge won't affect us. But we do get what they
refer to as "localized" flooding, as our house is at the bottom of a
hill in pretty much every direction. Compared with real disasters, we
have had flooding that is more of an annoyance; maybe an inch at the
deepest inside the house in the two times it's happened.

So I spent most of Saturday battening down the hatches against such a
rain buildup. [it is positively howling outside as I type this, by the
way - glad I live in a brick house] I made some plywood barriers for
the doors and garage door, so that even if the water did reach the
house, it shouldn't be able to get in (very much). We have no
basement; the house is built on a slab. I've never seen the water get
higher than 8" outside , so I made the barriers comfortably higher.

Here's the Wreck angle:

It's funny the things you learn in a lifetime, and how they can be
applied in varying circumstances. I wanted the barriers to make a good
fit against the concrete at the bottom and the door frames at the
sides. Yes, especially on the sides I used furring strips to mount the
barriers and made liberal use of closed-cell weatherstripping, but I
still wanted a close fit. The barriers might need to "hold" for twenty
minutes or more until the local sewers can carry away the water.

Until quite recently I'm sure I'd have puzzled long and hard about how
to accomplish that, and still ended up with a clumsy method and a poor
job. But partially due to my occasional visits here, I have made the
acquaintance of hand planes in the last year or two. A small block
plane made short work of it, taking off just enough, just where I
needed it, and with none of the errors that I would undoubtedly made
with a saw; the kind of errors that require a "wood-stretcher" to
fix.

Planing the edge of 3/4" ply (an old beat-up piece that I've been
using as an auxiliary work surface on sawhorses) was no picnic at
first, but I tweaked the plane a little in my usual blundering way. I
made the mouth wider and the cut a little deeper; too wide and too
deep at first, of course. But eventually it felt about right.

At the bottom of the garage barrier, I could see daylight under a part
of it. I decided to graft on a piece of 1x3 on the back side, a little
lower down than the main piece. At first I figured to let the rubber
strip conform to the slight dip in the concrete, but the plane was
still on the bench. A few strokes later I had planed the board into a
slight curve, which fit the floor nicely.

I learned a year or two ago that planes could be useful, but in a
(trying-to-be) "fine woodworking" setting. This incident reminded me
that carpenters probably used planes for all manner of less "fine"
tasks as well; I can too apparently.

I used some more of my overstock of Kreg screws to put things
together, where I would certainly have used drywall screws before. I
may yet run through what seemed like a large excess when I first
ordered them. They don't "start" quite as easily, I find, but they
feel nice and secure, and they don't split the wood.

It's 10 pm here now. So far we have had absolutely no threat of
flooding, which is half the reason I put in 10 hours of work preparing
- in a sort of reverse Murphy effect, the universe conspires to make
any such work pointless. It simply hasn't rained all that much. But
the wind sounds absolutely vicious outside. I'm sure there will be
trees down and sundry other problems, with any luck not too bad.

On Oct 28, 8:23=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> For all you folks getting ready to crawl into a "huricane hole" and
> wait Sandy out,
> my thoughts are with you.
>
> Best of luck.
>
> Lew

We went to a Hallowe'en party of sorts last night, which was planned
well before the storm. The hosts asked that we transform the party
into a donation event for some colleagues that lived in the Rockaways
( a barrier peninsula). Apparently their houses survived, but the
contents were badly damaged and there is a tremendous amount of clean-
up to do. We were asked to bring cleaning supplies, canned goods,
etc.

My wife went this morning to help cart the donated items. As she was
leaving I tossed in a hand saw and a hammer, figuring they might come
in handy in a place likely to be out of electricity for a while. As a
novice woodworker, I don't really have the skill to use more than
three hammers at a time anyway.

On 10/29/2012 6:12 PM, Leon wrote:

> Allison was a rain event that lasted 10+ days with in excess of 36" of
> rain in one week. I do not recall there being any wind at all.

And a life changing event for damned sure ... this house I built shortly
after is purposely 36" above grade as a direct result of Allison ... be
damned if I ever have to go through that again if can help it.


--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 10/29/2012 2:21 PM, Lee Michaels wrote:
> Just some observations and musings about this storm and reactions to it.
>
> Most of the financial markets are being shut down for two days. This
> hasn't happened since 9/11. From what I have read, there has been a lot
> of things put into place that would allow the markets to continue,
> regardless of power outages, etc. It boiled down to the fact that most
> folks who work on wall street take the subway. And since the subway was
> shut down, they had no way to get to work. And the SEC (Securities &
> Exchange Commission) decided the markets should be shut down for "worker
> safety". Which is something that has never been done before. (Storm
> Powers for the SEC?)

Actually the markets are not being shut down but as you said the human
traders will not be there.

>
> I suppose that it is better to be safe than sorry. And I also realize
> that this particular storm is a total mutant/hybrid type of thing.

No I don't thinks so, simply a late season storm. It has rain and wind
just like any other storm. No odd elements added.


And
> I just wonder what the average New Yorker in an apartment type of
> dwelling is actually going to do if the power goes out and
> transportation is not restored soon.

New York has seen far worse than this, remember 911? And they have had
multi hour black outs in the past



It seems to me telling everybody
> we are going to shut down the city in the next day hardly gives anybody
> any time to stock up on supplies, etc. Particularly for those folks who
> don't have cars and have to depend on public transportation.

I suppose you have never been in a situation like this. You DO NOT tell
the public to go stock up last minute. If you are not already ready, it
is too late to stock up now. That would make this storm tragic. There
would be countless deaths from the panic. Take a look at Houston in
Sept 2005 when the idiot forecasters added their scary adjectives and
half of Houston was stuck on the highway and the storm was a nonevent
for Houston.


>
> It might be a tangent, but all those greenies never talk about a world
> with mass transit and bicycles having to deal with a major weather
> event. Can you see trying to stock up for a big storm with only a
> neighborhood deli available to your 5 story walkup apartment? I
> sincerely hope this thing is not as serious as they are screaming
> about. Cuz there is no predicting what could happen if New Yorkers get
> cooped up and cut off from basic supplies for awhile. It could get ugly.

Again, you don't stick up last minute, you prepare months in advance and
stay prepared.


>
> And the other big question, of course, how will it affect the elections?

Not at all, the winner has already been decided.



> Does major storm damage help the republicans or the democrats. Since I
> DO NOT engage in political discussions, I will leave that alone. My
> observation is that the major campaigns are looking at this closely and
> having to react the best way they can. Also, all the incumbent
> governors, mayors, president, etc will be very involved in managing this
> crisis.

What crisis, nothing has happened yet.



How does THAT affect the elections? Does it help or hurt
> them? Active management versus campaigning, which is more effective in
> the last week?
>
> Can anybody remember a major weather event just before a national
> election? Or a party convention cut short by another storm?

Umm remember the republican convention in Florida a few weeks ago with a
hurricane headed that way?

>
> We live in interesting times.

All times are interesting times.

On 10/29/2012 8:54 AM, Leon wrote:
...

> As are my wishes but my gut is telling me that this is not going to be
> the "epic" storm that the forecasters are making it out to be. The
> weather people seem to for get that hurricanes need warm water to form
> and grow. Typically once a cold front blows through the gulf coast
> hurricane season pretty much over. But, hurricane season is not
> "officially" over until the calendar says so.

I don't the the "weather people" at NOAA forget anything at all about
what the mechanics of hurricanes and extra-tropical storms are...Sandy
is feeding off the Gulf Stream off the east coast and is already
something quite out of the ordinary simply owing to the breadth for the
location and the coincidence of the cold front it's going to run into
has some serious potential...and given that it's going to make landfall
at or near high tide in the generally most-populated area of the country
means the impact will be beyond its actual measured strength. And, of
course, even after the winds drop below hurricane or gale strength
flooding can be a _very_bad_thing_ from excessive rainfall inland and
combined w/ surge near coast. I wouldn't underestimate it a bit, meself...

From NOAA hurricane center forecast discussion--

> Statement as of 5:00 am EDT on October 29, 2012
>
> Sandy continues to maintain an area of deep convection near the
> center...with an eye occasionally visible on satellite imagery.
> Although the satellite presentation of the system is not very
> impressive...SFMR measurements...flight-level winds...and dropsonde
> data from the Air Force hurricane hunters indicate that the winds
> have increased to near 75 kt. Since the hurricane will traverse
> the Gulf Stream this morning...and the shear is not too strong at
> this time...some more strengthening as a tropical cyclone is
> possible in the next few hours. However...the main mechanism
> for intensification later today should be baroclinic forcing. The
> official wind speed forecast is close to the latest GFS prediction
> as that model should be able to handle the evolution of this type
> of system fairly well.
>
> Surface data indicate that a well-marked warm and cold front lie not
> far to the north and west of the center of Sandy. As the
> circulation interacts with these fronts...the cyclone should become
> extratropical later today. Extratropical transition is expected to
> be complete before the center crosses the coast. However...this
> transformation will not diminish the overall impacts from winds to
> hurricane strength...life-threatening storm surge...and flooding
> rains associated with this dangerous weather system. Based on the
> global models...the cyclone should weaken fairly rapidly after
> landfall.
>
> Center fixes indicate that Sandy is now moving northward or about
> 360/13...as it begins to rotate around a mid- to upper-level
> cyclone over the southeastern United States. As it moves between
> the cyclone and a highly anomalous mid-tropospheric ridge near
> Atlantic Canada...Sandy should turn northwestward and
> west-northwestward with some further increase in forward speed.
> This track should result in the center making landfall in the
> mid-Atlantic states this evening or tonight. After landfall...the
> dynamical guidance shows a significant slowing of forward speed as
> the system merges with the mid- to upper-level cyclone. The
> official track forecast for this package is a bit faster than the
> previous one...and close to the GFS and ECMWF solutions.
>
> Interests are reminded not to focus on the center or the exact
> forecast track of this system...since strong winds cover an area
> several hundred miles across...and the highest winds will not
> necessarily be near the center.

--

On 10/29/2012 10:42 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 9:35 AM, dpb wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 8:54 AM, Leon wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> As are my wishes but my gut is telling me that this is not going to be
>>> the "epic" storm that the forecasters are making it out to be. The
>>> weather people seem to for get that hurricanes need warm water to form
>>> and grow. Typically once a cold front blows through the gulf coast
>>> hurricane season pretty much over. But, hurricane season is not
>>> "officially" over until the calendar says so.
>>
>> I don't the the "weather people" at NOAA forget anything at all about
>> what the mechanics of hurricanes and extra-tropical storms are...Sandy
>> is feeding off the Gulf Stream off the east coast and is already
>> something quite out of the ordinary ...
>> flooding can be a _very_bad_thing_ from excessive rainfall inland and
>> combined w/ surge near coast. I wouldn't underestimate it a bit,
>> meself...
>
>
> Well simply lots of rain, and not from a hurricane, can have the same
> flooding effect. Winds barely qualify this storm as a hurricane and it
> slips in and out of hurricane status. IMHO the only thing that will make
> this a costly event will be from dense population.

>
> And I have never heard of a hurricane feeding off of any thing but warm
> water. Perhaps the Gulf Stream is helping to steer the storm rather than
> give it strength.

Well, duh! That's what the Gulf Stream is--a current of warm water
running up along the east coast...

As for the flooding potential, much of the damage potential is
wind-driven storm surge combined w/ excessive rainfall potential. The
unique thing of Sandy is the conjunction w/ the other strong front
onshore that has serious potential on its own. I takes the source of
oceanic moisture in such copious quantities as Sandy will provide to
have the precipitable water potential that exists as a result in this
storm system.

Having been thru the results of Camille in SW/Piedmont VA in '69 and on
rescue/recovery of the aftermath, these events are nothing to sneer at.

That the cable weather folks need air-time filling content is a pity,
agreed but there's where any fault lies, not in official NOAA
forecasting. If the masses were of any help in taking care of
themselves in very high percentages, then the government efforts to try
to get people to take precautions en masse could be less, granted.
Given the propensity of folks to not do so unless coerced almost
mandates extreme action on their part. That plus it's a given that
nobody has complete prescience on what actual consequences are going to
be a priori means one in a position of responsibility _must_ err if
anything on the side of excessive caution as opposed to the alternative
course of lack of action/warning.

--

On 10/29/2012 8:54 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 10/28/2012 8:23 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> For all you folks getting ready to crawl into a "huricane hole" and
>> wait Sandy out,
>> my thoughts are with you.
>>
>> Best of luck.
>>
>>
>> Lew
>>
>>
>>
>
> As are my wishes but my gut is telling me that this is not going to be
> the "epic" storm that the forecasters are making it out to be. The
> weather people seem to for get that hurricanes need warm water to form
> and grow. Typically once a cold front blows through the gulf coast
> hurricane season pretty much over. But, hurricane season is not
> "officially" over until the calendar says so.
With all the other preparedness, just remember a text message has a
greater chance of going through to let everyone know you survived than
does a voice call. Would suspect a lot of phone lines and power lines
will be down before it is all over with. Good luck !

On 10/29/2012 6:12 PM, Leon wrote:
...

> I think if the ocean water was 20 degrees warmer and or maybe the timing
> 2 months ago there would be some potential of a bad storm. If this turns
> out to be a remembered event, it will not be because of the storm so
> much as not being prepared for a storm.
...

Well, that's simply nonsense. What, specifically, would you have the
metro areas do, move?

Camille dumped 24-36" in only 2 days or less in a very mountainous
region w/ nowhere for it to but down the valleys. I personally saw
places I had known for several years that had prior to that night of
flooding been towns and small mountains of as much as 2-300 ft that
completely disappeared. It doesn't necessarily take wind to do a lot of
damage altho it is obviously a different kind of damage.

Everybody who has been through a severe event or is in an area of a
given type of disaster thinks theirs is the worst--and certainly a Cat
>1 hurricane is an event but don't think that just because this isn't
that high of wind it can't be serious enough or is to be disregarded as
a non-event.

In essence, don't pretend (or worse really believe) you could sit there
in the same conditions unscathed because you've been elsewhere.

--

On 10/29/2012 5:48 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 2:21 PM, Lee Michaels wrote:
...

>> I suppose that it is better to be safe than sorry. And I also realize
>> that this particular storm is a total mutant/hybrid type of thing.
>
> No I don't thinks so, simply a late season storm. It has rain and wind
> just like any other storm. No odd elements added.
...

Well, as I posted from the NOAA discussion this morning it _does_ have
some rare coincidences of being both a very large tropical cyclone that
is approaching and going to merge w/ a strong warm/cold front almost
directly at the time of landfall. That is, indeed, while not unheard
of, a rare event and has potential for some serious consequences.

As of 5PM EDT, the discussion behind the scenes is that the transition
from tropical hurricane to extra-tropical cyclone has occurred but
there's still plenty to be concerned over regarding the flood
conditions. I didn't look up surge heights altho heard on one news
report that a fair amount of damage has occurred along the Atlantic City
boardwalk area...

> Statement as of 5:00 PM EDT on October 29, 2012
>
> the convective structure of Sandy has deteriorated today...even as
> the central pressure has continued to slowly fall...suggesting that
> the convection is no longer driving the bus. The intensification
> observed this morning was associated with strong winds occurring to
> the southwest of the center...outside of the central core...and was
> almost certainly due to baroclinic forcing. In addition...aircraft
> data indicate that there are strong temperature contrasts very near
> a modest residual warm core. Water vapor imagery indicates that
> Sandy is becoming absorbed within a large mid-latitude cyclonic
> circulation. All of these considerations lead US to conclude that
> the most appropriate classification at advisory time is
> extratropical. However...for continuity of service NHC will
> continue to issue advisories through landfall. A Post-storm
> analysis will re-examine the timing of extratropical transition.
>
...
> There has been no significant change to the Post-landfall track or
> intensity forecast. Despite the rapid forward motion today...Sandy
> is expected to stall inland tomorrow. This...coupled with the very
> large size of the system...will mean that conditions will be slow
> to improve in the affected areas. Strong winds will persist along
> the coast and spread farther inland through at least Tuesday. Of
> particular concern are the upper floors of high-rise buildings...as
> reconnaissance data indicate that winds just a few hundred feet in
> altitude are very much stronger than those near the surface. Even
> as Sandy weakens...heavy rains will persist over a large
> area...posing a very significant inland flood risk.

Just because it _could_ have been a Cat 1 or 2 and had more wind
associated doesn't mean it still isn't a major event.

It does appear from what I can see that the real cold may be just far
enough behind to avoid a really serious snow event in the northern
sections simultaneous altho I was watching the NC coast warnings earlier
since elder son is in Raleigh area and noticed they're expecting
snowfalls in the multi-feet range in the mountains...

--

On 10/29/2012 8:38 PM, Leon wrote:
...

> Not saying that at all, just saying that the way the storm is being
> described it is most likely over emphasized. It is a storm hitting the
> US and this is news, make the most of the broadcast exposure as you can.
...

You can't know that a priori is the point. I don't think NOAA has over
emphasized the potential severity a bit...

I've agreed the 24-hr media of all ilks tends to overblow stuff, but
that's true for everything from pop culture to politics and everything
in between.

If you yourself really mean only that instead of that you don't think
there's a thing to see here and that there's not a possibility of some
really serious consequences, that's something else.

--

On 10/29/12 7:31 PM, Swingman wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 6:12 PM, Leon wrote:
>
>> Allison was a rain event that lasted 10+ days with in excess of 36" of
>> rain in one week. I do not recall there being any wind at all.
>
> And a life changing event for damned sure ... this house I built shortly
> after is purposely 36" above grade as a direct result of Allison ... be
> damned if I ever have to go through that again if can help it.
>

In May 2010, we got 19 inches in 36 hours in a 1000yr flood that was
ignored by most of the media... mostly because Tennesseans were too busy
out helping their neighbors and rescuing friends to be pointing their
fingers and waiting for uncle sam to come get them off their roofs.

This was all from a regular old line of thunderstorms that just happened
to be moving very slowly and in an exact northeasterly path centered
right at middle TN. Most of those long diagonal lines of storms move
east much faster than north. This one was moving the same speed in both
directions, so every storm in the line hit us over a 2 days period.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 10/30/12 8:55 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 10/30/2012 1:27 AM, Richard wrote:
>> With Manhattan under water does this mean we are going to have
>> to bail out wall street - again?
>
>
> No, It will soon drain all on its own.

I think we need another bailout of Wall Street.

thank you... thank you... I'm here all week. Tip your waitress.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 10/30/12 10:43 AM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 10/30/12 8:55 AM, Leon wrote:
>> On 10/30/2012 1:27 AM, Richard wrote:
>>> With Manhattan under water does this mean we are going to have
>>> to bail out wall street - again?
>>
>>
>> No, It will soon drain all on its own.
>
> I think we need another bailout of Wall Street.
>
> thank you... thank you... I'm here all week. Tip your waitress.
>

It's better when you add the pizza parlor/comedy club ambiance. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 10/31/2012 5:38 AM, HeyBub wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>>
>> Keep firmly in mind, while watching the TV coverage of this natural
>> event, that anyone hired based on the size of their tits, looks, or
>> hair style, is, at absolute best, only competent to _report_, not
>> remark or opine ... ;)
>
> If the talent switches over to an expert for the "opinion," well, that's
> okay.
>
> I, personally, have written to Fox News twice asking them to eliminate the
> "crawl" at the bottom of their newscasts. It blocks my view of the anchor's
> tits.

+1

--
Free bad advice available here.
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

In article <[email protected]>,
Han <[email protected]> wrote:
<...snipped...>
>Ummm, salt water would only be a problem if it formed a path between
>battery terminals or wiring. But that could indeed become a problem if the
>pumps failed ...

There are some types of lead-acid storage batteries that are sealed,
however, most are vented in some fashion.


--
Often wrong, never in doubt.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

On 10/29/2012 9:02 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 8:38 PM, Leon wrote:
> ...
>
>> Not saying that at all, just saying that the way the storm is being
>> described it is most likely over emphasized. It is a storm hitting the
>> US and this is news, make the most of the broadcast exposure as you can.
> ...
>
> You can't know that a priori is the point. I don't think NOAA has over
> emphasized the potential severity a bit...

I have never brought up NOAA. I am strictly talking national commercial
news. I bet nowhere has NOAA described this storm as a "Monster" and or
"Frankenstorm", and or storm of the century.

NOAA tells it like it is, the media does not.

The NOAA reports did not seem like any thing out of the ordinary for a
relatively minor tropical storm.

For all pratical purposes, a simple tropical depression that lingered
for 7~10 days would do far worse damage.

On 10/30/2012 1:27 AM, Richard wrote:
> With Manhattan under water does this mean we are going to have
> to bail out wall street - again?


No, It will soon drain all on its own.

On 10/29/2012 10:04 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 10/29/12 7:31 PM, Swingman wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 6:12 PM, Leon wrote:
>>
>>> Allison was a rain event that lasted 10+ days with in excess of 36" of
>>> rain in one week. I do not recall there being any wind at all.
>>
>> And a life changing event for damned sure ... this house I built shortly
>> after is purposely 36" above grade as a direct result of Allison ... be
>> damned if I ever have to go through that again if can help it.
>>
>
> In May 2010, we got 19 inches in 36 hours in a 1000yr flood that was
> ignored by most of the media... mostly because Tennesseans were too busy
> out helping their neighbors and rescuing friends to be pointing their
> fingers and waiting for uncle sam to come get them off their roofs.
>
> This was all from a regular old line of thunderstorms that just happened
> to be moving very slowly and in an exact northeasterly path centered
> right at middle TN. Most of those long diagonal lines of storms move
> east much faster than north. This one was moving the same speed in both
> directions, so every storm in the line hit us over a 2 days period.
>
>


Exactly! The storm you described probably would have been deemed the
Frankenstorm, storm of the century, mighty morphin power ranger, oh wait
that is another story, had the media had a bigger audience. The more
populated the area the worse the description of the storm.

On 10/29/2012 11:20 AM, Han wrote:

> Whether the
> prediction is to lower expectations after the twin disasters last year
> of Irene and the freak snowstorm, or a more realistic approach, I don't
> know. SO far, so good here, though.

Here's hoping you have the same experience we had with Rita a few years
back ... but without the 107 _evacuation related deaths_ and super-hyped
evacuation hysteria whipped into a froth by ill advised government
edicts and media sensationism (well, too late for the latter) ... we
spent the evening Rita hit rocking on the front porch drinking a bottle
of wine, and I had to water the yard the next morning.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:44:30 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:

>On 10/29/2012 9:02 PM, dpb wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 8:38 PM, Leon wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> Not saying that at all, just saying that the way the storm is being
>>> described it is most likely over emphasized. It is a storm hitting the
>>> US and this is news, make the most of the broadcast exposure as you can.
>> ...
>>
>> You can't know that a priori is the point. I don't think NOAA has over
>> emphasized the potential severity a bit...
>
>I have never brought up NOAA. I am strictly talking national commercial
>news. I bet nowhere has NOAA described this storm as a "Monster" and or
>"Frankenstorm", and or storm of the century.
>
>NOAA tells it like it is, the media does not.
>
>The NOAA reports did not seem like any thing out of the ordinary for a
>relatively minor tropical storm.
>
>For all pratical purposes, a simple tropical depression that lingered
>for 7~10 days would do far worse damage.

Yeah, and NOAA tells AGWK like it is, too, doesn't it? Praise be our
Saviour, the demiGod Hanson!

--
No greater wrong can ever be done than to put a good man at the mercy
of a bad, while telling him not to defend himself or his fellows;
in no way can the success of evil be made quicker or surer.
--Theodore Roosevelt

On 10/29/2012 2:05 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 10:42 AM, Leon wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 9:35 AM, dpb wrote:
>>> On 10/29/2012 8:54 AM, Leon wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> As are my wishes but my gut is telling me that this is not going to be
>>>> the "epic" storm that the forecasters are making it out to be. The
>>>> weather people seem to for get that hurricanes need warm water to form
>>>> and grow. Typically once a cold front blows through the gulf coast
>>>> hurricane season pretty much over. But, hurricane season is not
>>>> "officially" over until the calendar says so.
>>>
>>> I don't the the "weather people" at NOAA forget anything at all about
>>> what the mechanics of hurricanes and extra-tropical storms are...Sandy
>>> is feeding off the Gulf Stream off the east coast and is already
>>> something quite out of the ordinary ...
>>> flooding can be a _very_bad_thing_ from excessive rainfall inland and
>>> combined w/ surge near coast. I wouldn't underestimate it a bit,
>>> meself...
>>
>>
>> Well simply lots of rain, and not from a hurricane, can have the same
>> flooding effect. Winds barely qualify this storm as a hurricane and it
>> slips in and out of hurricane status. IMHO the only thing that will make
>> this a costly event will be from dense population.
>
>>
>> And I have never heard of a hurricane feeding off of any thing but warm
>> water. Perhaps the Gulf Stream is helping to steer the storm rather than
>> give it strength.
>
> Well, duh! That's what the Gulf Stream is--a current of warm water
> running up along the east coast...

LOL yeah DUH. I forgot that the gulf stream was a water current, not
wind current. Gulf Stream is an airplane however. ;~)

>
> As for the flooding potential, much of the damage potential is
> wind-driven storm surge combined w/ excessive rainfall potential. The
> unique thing of Sandy is the conjunction w/ the other strong front
> onshore that has serious potential on its own. I takes the source of
> oceanic moisture in such copious quantities as Sandy will provide to
> have the precipitable water potential that exists as a result in this
> storm system.

I think if the ocean water was 20 degrees warmer and or maybe the timing
2 months ago there would be some potential of a bad storm. If this
turns out to be a remembered event, it will not be because of the storm
so much as not being prepared for a storm.

>
> Having been thru the results of Camille in SW/Piedmont VA in '69 and on
> rescue/recovery of the aftermath, these events are nothing to sneer at.

Agreed, but we along the coast think in terms of wind damage. This
storm is not a strong one. And if we are counting personal experience
storms, I call Carla 1961, Beulah 1967, Celia 1970, Alicia 1983, Ike
2008, and numerous tropical storms including Allison in 2001 that was
particularity devastating to many and a non event for many others.
Allison was a rain event that lasted 10+ days with in excess of 36" of
rain in one week. I do not recall there being any wind at all.

>
> That the cable weather folks need air-time filling content is a pity,
> agreed but there's where any fault lies, not in official NOAA
> forecasting. If the masses were of any help in taking care of
> themselves in very high percentages, then the government efforts to try
> to get people to take precautions en masse could be less, granted. Given
> the propensity of folks to not do so unless coerced almost mandates
> extreme action on their part. That plus it's a given that nobody has
> complete prescience on what actual consequences are going to be a priori
> means one in a position of responsibility _must_ err if anything on the
> side of excessive caution as opposed to the alternative course of lack
> of action/warning.
>
> --