Magazine Feature Article Draft: Typhoon Tip V.S. Hurricane Patricia; Two Types of Intensity (02/22/22)

     Super Typhoon Tip (or Warling) and Major Hurricane Patricia are two of the most insane storms to ever spin on the open seas (and both relatively recently, as well). Patricia's 215 mph and Tip's 190 mph winds make them beasts of even their intimidating nomenclature's kind, putting them well over the top of the Saffir-Simpson Wind Scale and (, in Tip's case,) the JMA scale. However, while tempestuous Tip and powerful Patricia brought winds that blow a breezy day away, a given storm's formal strength is also evaluated by another measurement.

    Though slower-moving and far more predictable than tornadoes, and therefore usually far safer to observe, one probably shouldn't try to venture into the eyewall of hurricanes - unless you're a Hurricane Hunter, that is. Military reconnaissance flights are flown to measure weather conditions from numerous parts of cyclones, including the most intense portion closest to their center (- the eyewall). 

    The eye of a storm is made by differences in pressure; with a low pressure in the center of cyclones, relatively higher pressure outside pushes its air into the less dense storm center. With a greater difference in pressure, air moves faster, and thus a cyclone's trademark winds are forged. So if cyclones' highest winds occur when their minimum pressure is lowest, why does it matter which evaluation of cyclonic strength we consider?

    Evidently, there is a difference; Hurricane Patricia had faster maximum winds by 25 mph while Typhoon Tip/Warling was 2 mb stronger. And equally evidently, that means that wind speed isn't entirely dependent on pressure. Wind speed measurements usually have to be deduced in different ways than pressure readings are when Hunters measure a more intense cyclone.

    Even though Hurricane Hunter missions measure wind speed and pressure at the same times and locations, the measurement of cyclones' minimum central pressure is more reliable and consistent than measured maximum winds are, since anemometers often fail in more intense storms. As an alternative, estimates and observations from the ground can be used to determine extreme cyclones' maximum wind speeds. Minimum pressure information is a direct measurement, so estimation is not needed to guess its value.

    Since pressure readings are more consistently accurate than those for wind speed estimates, one could argue that inHg=impact, putting Typhoon Tip at the top. Even considering wind speeds, both storms reached peak intensity over water, removing the likelihood of ground-level observations increasing the accuracy of both storms' estimated winds. However, considering Patricia's significantly faster record-breaking winds, the limits to wind-based inaccuracy for such closely-observed titans, and the idea that the force of wind causes damage (while pressure doesn't) could persuade one that Patricia packed a more prominent punch at its best.

    However, noting that both storms were judged in intensity by peak strengths occurring over water, rather than the damage they caused on land, proposes a point well-debated for decades past regarding tornadoes' intensity; if tornadoes' strengths are judged on the damage dealt, should cyclones be categorized formally after they cause damage, or should tornadoes' EF-Scale change its ways to include their strengths in moments when damage is not inflicted? Despite the obstacle of time in the midst of tornadic measurements that Hurricane Hunters needn't fear to gather accurate information for effective warnings, tornadoes share the same destructive force - of wind and pressure - and it may not be irrational to desire consistency among scales of weather phenomena, or at least both sides of the cyclonic coin for the sake of discovery rather than none.

-Anatomy of a hurricane/typhoon

-Wind-o-h-n-o-meter