Talk:Hurricane Janet

Todo
More impact. Jdorje 20:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Also storm history, preps, and aftermath, if possible. Sources would be nice. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 03:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

- I saw this bit while researching Diane. It turns out the British Honduras government had a rebuilding program after Janet. Not sure if that's been mentioned yet. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 05:14, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Monster
Interpreting the best-track data, this was a monster storm! The 914 mbar record, already one of the strongest measurements in the basin, was from when the hurricane was at 155 mph winds. On the next visit, the hurricane hunter plane was lost. There is no way to know how strong this hurricane really was. &mdash; jdorje (talk) 19:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It probably didn't get much stronger, because on the next flight that didn't crash, it was at least 10 mph weaker. -- §  Hurricane  E  RIC  §Damages archive 23:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Assessment
Reducing to stub. There isn't much here. --Core des at talk. o_O 18:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Poor Janet
She was once the most intense on record, and she just got booted from the top ten. Mention that she was the most intense added to the article. — Verrai 06:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * She was never the most intense on record, though the MWR does make some impressive claims (tied for 3rd lowest land pressure ever recorded worldwide, behind the Labor Day storm and an unnamed Philippines tc) which I added to the article (though the MWR should not be taken as fact). The actual numbers are impressive enough: no accurate pressure measurements were ever taken at sea, the only semi-accurate measurement was the 914 mbar measurement from Chetumal (which is not actually on the coast) after landfall.  From the MWR I get the impression that none of the hurricane hunter planes were ever able to find the eye of the storm, with the possible exception of the one that was lost. — jdorje (talk) 01:49, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Tampico flood of 1955
In an effort to narrow down the number of deaths to a single number, I made a little table of deaths by region. And it don't add up. The 538 number is pretty clearly just the Barbados plus Quintana Roo deaths, ignoring elsewhere. The 681 number is a little trickier, but is pretty close to the number of deaths recorded throughout most of the storm's path - I suspect there must be another 5 or 10 deaths on one of the Caribbean islands to make this total up properly. Interestingly though neither total is even close if you include the deaths from the Veracruz landfall. Hurricanecity claims 300 deaths in Tampico (which isn't even in veracruz) from the storm, but without any primary sources given this is pretty sketchy. In fact the MWR barely makes mention of the veracruz landfall, with just a sentence claiming that the resulting flooding in Tampico was "one of the greatest natural disasters ever to occur in [Mexico]". Continuing to dig, I found this interesting little story, telling about the flood (rainy year+Gladys+Hilda+Janet) and how the entirety of Tampico was underwater; that page claims 10,000-12,000 deaths were caused by the flooding (and thus, caused by Janet, a la Hurricane Floyd or Hurricane Diane which had similar styles of cumulative rainfall). For now I continue to look...but ultimately, my question is: what do we do to this and other articles if supporting background is found that Janet did indeed cause 10-12 thousand deaths? Perhaps this would be one to email the NHC and ask them about. — jdorje (talk) 01:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The NHC storm reports online don't go back to 1955, which probably means they don't have more extensive records than what you see in HURDAT, the Monthly Weather Review article, and their Deadlist/Costliest document from 1996. You can ask NHC, they likely deserve a head's up, but they may not know any more than you do.  Thegreatdr 11:47, 30 August 2007 (UTC
 * I'm starting to think nobody knows. I found a US government document listing all disasters since 1900; it listed 0 deaths for the catastrophic tampico floods of 1955.  Meanwhile all the newspapers of the time claim that it was the worst disaster in mexico's history (Tampico, population 110,000, was completely underwater and cut off from the mainland) and that the death toll mounted "hourly" as the days progressed.  The end-of-season report by Gordon Dunn (which I haven't been able to find) is quoted in several newspapers, saying "For the second consecutive year all records were broken for hurricane destruction" and "a conservative estimate of hurricane casualties is 1518 but probably many more than that number died in Mexico alone from hurricane-induced floods."  All this lends credence to the one source giving 10-12 thousand deaths but I suspect all the authentic sources are going to be in Spanish. — jdorje (talk) 07:19, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me e-mail Eric. He maintains the costliest, most damaging document that was released this year.  I managed to get Audrey's death toll increased based upon a book published in 1997 by sending the scanned pages over to NHC.  My guess is, though, we'll need a published book source (that includes an actual list of the dead), possibly by an official Mexican government source, if the number is ever going to be changed for NHC purposes.   Thegreatdr 11:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * A mexican government source would be nice. And while you're at it, ask how the MWR adds up to 681 deaths.  By my count (reflected now in the article) it totals to 687+ even if you boil the mainland deaths down into just the "+".  Maybe 1 and 7 look very similar? — jdorje (talk) 07:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Deaths
The figure of 681 deaths for Janet is attributed to the MWR (the 538 value comes from an internal set of NHC "unpublished notes" which I choose to ignore). All values seem accurate enough except for the 500 for Quintana Roo which is an estimate. Stangely though the total does not add up to 681: it totals to 687. And either way deaths from Veracruz and Tamaulipas are not included. If anyone notices something I might have missed from the MWR (an added 5 deaths somewhere would add up, if the NHC isn't counting the 11 lost hurricane hunters in the total), please add it. — jdorje (talk) 02:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

One quick thing- I don't like how Hurricanecity is used for the deaths in Tamaulipas. The newspaper archive should probably be able to help, seeing as the MWR doesn't list everything. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 02:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Quite. Deaths in Tamaulipas and Veracruz are basically unknown from what I can see - the number 300 given by hurricanecity is suspiciously similar to the 300 that MWR gives for Hilda deaths in Tamaulipas, while hurricanecity claims 200 deaths from hilda for some reason.  The only other source I can find claims 10-12 thousand deaths, but I do not consider that reliable.  Newspapers from the time may also be unreliable, however, but at least they're primary sources.  What newspaper archive do you suggest?  Do you know of a particular online site that's freely accessible?  — jdorje (talk) 02:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You bet. Click here Hurricanehink ( talk ) 03:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Wow, that's some interesting reading. I wonder if the flooding ("the worst flood in the country's history" according to one aggrandized newspaper article) deserves a separate article.  From what I've read tampico was already largely underwater from Hilda when Janet came along...then the floods from Janet not only submerged the rest of the city but completely cut it off from the mainland.  Government and international aid came quickly with the Mexican and US military moving in within a day or three to evacuate people in boats and airdrop supplies with helicoptors.  I still see no useful information on a death toll but it will be extremely difficult to separate Hilda and Janet here.  And wherever the information goes, it should make for a very informational "aftermath" section. — jdorje (talk) 06:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

/me goes digging in ProQuest, see you in a couple days and I will have stuff from the NYT, some very useful in fact. Problem is its not publically viewable and I'm not really in the mood to add info myself. Suppose I could download and email to interested parties (I've found a dozen stories relating to Tampico area and a good deal more on Janet itself.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Image
I'd swear this page once had a great damage photo. Maybe it was deleted. I've found them again here. Unfortunately, I think they're copyrighted. But I'm almost sure they got these images from a public domain source, though. I just don't know where. We sould at least have a media section that gives a link to these photos, they are powerful. The destruction is absolute. I would be so disappointed if we can't find them in the public domain somewhere. (Other pics here, same site, need to scroll down a bit.) -- § Hurricane E  RIC  archive 01:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hurricane Janet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.barbadosadvocate.com/newsitem.asp?more=local&NewsID=12859
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203051752/http://www.emdat.be/search-details-disaster-list to http://www.emdat.be/search-details-disaster-list
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402171906/http://www.meteo.an/Include/Climate2/documents/HurricanesandTropicalStorms.pdf to http://www.meteo.an/Include/Climate2/documents/HurricanesandTropicalStorms.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:25, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hurricane Janet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110516220440/http://www.cdera.org/cunews/news/saint_lucia/article_1289.php to http://www.cdera.org/cunews/news/saint_lucia/article_1289.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)