Were Met E Correct to Extend the Red Warning Countrywide

aidanodr

IN REPLY TO ANOTHER POSTER OVER AT: ( This thread more appropriate )

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057798209&page=50

fraxinus1 wrote: »

Just back from a lovely autumnal walk on a local hill. No storm here. No rain. Second time in a week that so called storms are meant to batter us. Seriously if this nonsense keeps up Met E will lose credibility. Ophelia.... the worst storm in 50 years? Only three southern counties got gusts over 130kmph... the rest of us got gales or a strong breeze and more hype again about Brian. It's getting silly. I suppose the schools will be closed Monday

Its all relative and depends on where you live surely?

I live near Cork City .. OPHELIA in my view totally merited a RED ALERT here. In fact I was extremely angry at business and business organisations ( by absence of informing / advising ) for not getting out message last weekend for ALL businesses in RED AREAS to not open monday morning. I mean, it was ONE DAY only and not going to be a regular event. Show duty of care to your employees.

All along the South Coast and definitely in Cork you would not have been out on your lovely autumnal walk last Monday. Just because your area is not affected does not mean its the same across the country.

AND .. on Thursday here in Cork we had serious rain and flooding, roads like rivers. BUT this, even in an area, was localized. In this case more west / south west outside the city, areas like Carrigaline, Kinsale etc.

Outside of whether Brian merits an Orange or not. It has / is dumping lots of rain down here which has big possibility of further tree falls or property damage already weakened by Ophelia. But then you may not notice this on your lovely autumnal walk where ever you may live ...

EDIT: As far as I remember, last Friday, Saturday something like 8 or 9 coastal counties were RED before whole country went red. Thats as far as it should have gone with the red maybe? Rest of country then amber/orange or yellow? However, on the other hand, on the day, who could tell how bad or not this storm would get?

BUT I still stand by my point that once an area is RED then everyone stays at home INC employees, so at minimum it keeps roads clear and does not overwhelm the emergency services if something were to happen as a result. Some directive needs to be brought in on that one I think.

aidanodr

And another reply to my reply over at that thread also:

Nettle Soup wrote: »

I have to say that at least you will argue the point rationally instead of spouting the bodycount number and telling people how irresponsible and uncaring they are.

IMHO, there is no way Storm Brian merits an Orange in Galway. It will be counterproductive because people will ignore future warnings.

I also think that emergency services should be instructed to ignore people that get into trouble when wilfully putting themselves in danger (e.g. Blackrock diving board). But at the same time, if people want to do crazy things, let them off. It's called personal responsibility.

That is all good and well BUT these are the same people who no doubt would sue those very services if they were NOT attended to if they got into trouble due to there own stupidity ( or there families would sue, if these people were killed ). Sometimes you just cant win TBH!

My point about business dereliction of duty of care by insisting staff come to work, especially in RED ALERT areas, is exactly the same as your irresponsible Blackrock Diving Board people.

Some businesses in Cork dragged staff into work early monday morning either via explicit instruction night before ( texts ) or by saying nothing leaving staff in limbo between state saying stay at home vs bosses saying or implying that they have to come to work. Some of these same businesses then went OOHHHH .. and decided to leave the staff go home around 1pm .. IN THE THICK OF OPHELIA.

One other large wholesale business decided to leave all staff go home earlier ( around 10am ) BUT insisted that the van drivers remain on duty.

charlie14

aidanodr wrote: »

And another reply to my reply over at that thread also:



That is all good and well BUT these are the same people who no doubt would sue those very services if they were NOT attended to if they got into trouble due to there own stupidity ( or there families would sue, if these people were killed ). Sometimes you just cant win TBH!

My point about business dereliction of duty of care by insisting staff come to work, especially in RED ALERT areas, is exactly the same as your irresponsible Blackrock Diving Board people.

Some businesses in Cork dragged staff into work early monday morning either via explicit instruction night before ( texts ) or by saying nothing leaving staff in limbo between state saying stay at home vs bosses saying or implying that they have to come to work. Some of these same businesses then went OOHHHH .. and decided to leave the staff go home around 1pm .. IN THE THICK OF OPHELIA.

One other large wholesale business decided to leave all staff go home earlier ( around 10am ) BUT insisted that the van drivers remain on duty.

I am not an employer and certainly would not be someone that supports employers uncritically in their treatment of staff with many shoody practices, but in this instance I would have some sympathy for them.
Telling employees not to turn up for work meant they would have to pay them for staying at home.
Surely it is up to employees to take responsibility for themselves in such situations by opting for example to have such days deducted from their holidays.


Just a footnote, but all schools being closed on Tuesday I find difficult to understand.
I can get where perhaps this was a good idea in areas that were severely affected, but for the rest of the country considering the weather we had Tuesday I just find baffling.

Caranica

charlie14 wrote: »

Just a footnote, but all schools being closed on Tuesday I find difficult to understand.
I can get where perhaps this was a good idea in areas that were severely affected, but for the rest of the country considering the weather we had Tuesday I just find baffling.

It wasn't about Tuesday's weather it was about Monday's. Loose roof tiles, trees down or dangerous, power/water cuts, damaged fences and gates etc etc etc. Schools couldn't be inspected for safety on Monday so that had to happen on Tuesday.

Nettle Soup

Caranica wrote: »

It wasn't about Tuesday's weather it was about Monday's. Loose roof tiles, trees down or dangerous, power/water cuts, damaged fences and gates etc etc etc. Schools couldn't be inspected for safety on Monday so that had to happen on Tuesday.

The local secondary school principal thought it was ludicrous.
He said there was plenty of time for a spot check and a text to go out. In Galway at least.

charlie14

Caranica wrote: »

It wasn't about Tuesday's weather it was about Monday's. Loose roof tiles, trees down or dangerous, power/water cuts, damaged fences and gates etc etc etc. Schools couldn't be inspected for safety on Monday so that had to happen on Tuesday.

As I said, I can understand that in for areas worst affected, but for the vast majority of the country I really didn`t see the need.
On any given day there could be damage to a school necessitating closure that would be unknown until the students turned up.
In the area not worst affected, the same principal could have been followed

Irish Steve

Not all teachers live in the immediate vicinity of their place of work, travelling long distances on Monday evening was not a good idea, and that's without the requirement to check that everything was OK at each site. Power, water, and accessibility all needed to be confirmed, as well as making sure there was no damage, if the power was out, that's not easy after dark.

charlie14

Irish Steve wrote: »

Not all teachers live in the immediate vicinity of their place of work, travelling long distances on Monday evening was not a good idea, and that's without the requirement to check that everything was OK at each site. Power, water, and accessibility all needed to be confirmed, as well as making sure there was no damage, if the power was out, that's not easy after dark.

On any given morning those requirements have to be checked.
My point is that other than perhaps the worst effected areas the same checked could have been applied to the rest of the schools in the country on Tuesday morning.

Irish Steve

And on those morning checks, there is no real expectation of failure, whereas on Tuesday morning, there was a very good chance that there would be issues, and if those issues were not found before school buses had started their collection runs, there was a very real chance that children would be arriving at a school that was not in a fit state (for whatever reason) to accomodate them. The bus would be unable to take them home, and at that time, there could well be no one at home to let them in.

It's very easy for us to sit here now in the comfort of our chairs to second guess the decisions that were made at the peak of a significant storm. At the time they made the decision, they made it based on the information that was coming in to the centre from all round the country, with probably one of the most significant decisions being that a massive percentage of the ESB network was out of action, so a significant number of schools were likely to be affected.

Yes, the school itself could have been checked, but (especially in rural areas), the checker would have used one route in and out again, but there was the very real likelihood that a significant number of access routes were blocked by fallen trees, which would not necessarily be removed for some time. Those two factors alone would be sufficient grounds in most cases to justify the decision that was made.

At least with the way they did it, there was no uncertainty about which schools were going to be open, and which were going to be forced to close for whatever reason, with the decision made and communicated, all involved and affected were able to make clear and specific plans for Tuesday. I suspect that there would have been many more problems if schools had been sending messages early on Tuesday morning to advise they were closed.

aidanodr

So according to Clarkeson we were all on the P*SS in the pub last monday & not much happened, especially if you choose DUBLIN, where in fairness it was not the best place to be to gauge the reality of Ophelia as it came to our shores?

https://twitter.com/DMcCaffreySKY/status/922068035091030016

Samaris

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

I admire Joanna a lot but I really wish she would stop saying it was a "hurricane". She also said the 1987 storm was a "hurricane".

I don't know about the 1987 storm, but for those of us that aren't entirely up on the technical definitions, I can't really blame her for that.

We're used to "remnants of hurricanes" coming in from the Atlantic as part of our normal autumn/winter storm season. We're not used to a hurricane transitioning to a ex-hurricane and then hitting us with most of its force still there, and I believe that the sustained wind speeds down south were hurricane-speed (Cat 1-ish?)

I think the whole issue of hurricane-transitioning-to-ex-hurricane/extratropical-storm vs hurricane-weakening-to-tropical-storm did cause a lot of confusion to ordinary people who weren't entirely sure if this meant we were getting a nasty version of what we usually get or if we were getting a whole new thing to worry about.

I may be talking out of my hat, but that's the impression I was getting from it all. It was definitely important to drill in that this was Not Usual, either in formation or strength and that confusion over transition vs tropical weakening for the similar terminology of extratropical storm and tropical storm was a bit ambiguous. Mind you, from a purely technical point of view, use the right terms and people can damn well learn what they mean :P

Elmer Blooker

This was the reality before the days of accurate forecasting, 90 years ago today. In those days people didn't have the luxury of arguing about weather warnings.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/new-book-tells-of-tragic-night-when-45-men-died-1.1053275
The island of Iniskea had to abandoned after this storm because so many men from the island drowned.

Gaoth Laidir

Samaris wrote: »

I don't know about the 1987 storm, but for those of us that aren't entirely up on the technical definitions, I can't really blame her for that.

We're used to "remnants of hurricanes" coming in from the Atlantic as part of our normal autumn/winter storm season. We're not used to a hurricane transitioning to a ex-hurricane and then hitting us with most of its force still there, and I believe that the sustained wind speeds down south were hurricane-speed (Cat 1-ish?)

I think the whole issue of hurricane-transitioning-to-ex-hurricane/extratropical-storm vs hurricane-weakening-to-tropical-storm did cause a lot of confusion to ordinary people who weren't entirely sure if this meant we were getting a nasty version of what we usually get or if we were getting a whole new thing to worry about.

I may be talking out of my hat, but that's the impression I was getting from it all. It was definitely important to drill in that this was Not Usual, either in formation or strength and that confusion over transition vs tropical weakening for the similar terminology of extratropical storm and tropical storm was a bit ambiguous. Mind you, from a purely technical point of view, use the right terms and people can damn well learn what they mean :P

On the one had she was she was using the term "ex-hurricane" and even went to the trouble of posting a broadcast explaining the difference and why we were not getting a hurricane. Next you have her on Claire Byrne talking about the hurricane...yes hurricane. In all honesty I think she was a bit alarmist on that programme, the way at the end she almost shouted "No it's not over yet at all!" She said it was still extrememly windy out there, with winds still gusting to 49 knots at Casement. 49 knots is nothing.

I think she was suffering from pure exhaustion at that stage so we'll go easy on her. She did post a tweet stating she was home and how exhausted she was with lack of sleep.

George Sunsnow

Semantics will always be a lone furrow to plough when people's lives are at risk
Quadruple the number out and about and well frankly I'm glad we don't know what would have happened to the number of dead in the storm
No one ever died from not using the word 'ex' in front of hurricane,that's for sure but it was a decision Joanna took because real politic meant it got more people to take notice and saved lives

There are no jail sentences for that only praise and that's the concensus
A constant need to semanticise after that is unhealthy
Time to close the thread perhaps,course ran ,points made etc

Gaoth Laidir

Exaggeration is also unhealthy. If, as you seem to be suggesting, deliberately using incorrect terms to make an event seem worse than it is good then I disagree. Say it as it is an no more. Next time people will be more inclined to believe you.

There's enough exaggeration and hyperbole in the media as it is.

George Sunsnow

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Exaggeration is also unhealthy. If, as you seem to be suggesting, deliberately using incorrect terms to make an event seem worse than it is good then I disagree. Say it as it is an no more. Next time people will be more inclined to believe you.

There's enough exaggeration and hyperbole in the media as it is.

Au contraire,Quite healthy for the lives saved ! as it wasn't a deliberate attempt to make something 'seem worse' as you put it
It was an attempt to impress upon people that the situation was serious
Something you don't get

Gaoth Laidir

George Sunsnow wrote: »

Au contraire,Quite healthy for the lives saved ! as it wasn't a deliberate attempt to make something 'seem worse' as you put it
It was an attempt to impress upon people that the situation was serious
Something you don't get

It was an attempt to make it seem worse. They even said so at the time. It wasn't as bad as a the red alert would suggest (and that's backed up by actual reports). If we're to stay inside any time a tree could fall then we should issue red alerts several times every winter.

This thread is about whether they were right to issue a nationwide Red Alert, not just in some areas. As a whole, it was wrong to go nationwide. Over the top. It's set a precedent that we must now follow every time we get a storm when trees are in leaf.

George Sunsnow

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

This thread is about whether they were right to issue a nationwide Red Alert, not just in some areas. As a whole, it was wrong to go nationwide. Over the top. It's set a precedent that we must now follow every time we get a storm when trees are in leaf.

No precedent set at all,a judgement call was made based on Glasnevins own guidelines as posted and ignored by you earlier in this thread
Glasnevin don’t need to rely exclusively on numerals to call a red alert
They can and in consult with the ERC did call red to save lives

This persuit by you on this occasion of numerical pedantry when responsible agencies cared more about assessing whether lives were at risk is not laudable

HeidiHeidi

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

It was an attempt to make it seem worse. They even said so at the time. It wasn't as bad as a the red alert would suggest (and that's backed up by actual reports). If we're to stay inside any time a tree could fall then we should issue red alerts several times every winter.

This thread is about whether they were right to issue a nationwide Red Alert, not just in some areas. As a whole, it was wrong to go nationwide. Over the top. It's set a precedent that we must now follow every time we get a storm when trees are in leaf.

In your opinion. Which a lot of people disagree with (including me).

Gaoth Laidir

George Sunsnow wrote: »

No precedent set at all,a judgement call was made based on Glasnevins own guidelines as posted and ignored by you earlier in this thread
Glasnevin don’t need to rely exclusively on numerals to call a red alert
They can and in consult with the ERC did call red to save lives

This persuit by you on this occasion of numerical pedantry when responsible agencies cared more about assessing whether lives were at risk is not laudable

All their warnings are based on numbers. They quoted numbers in their reasoning for the alert. How else do you decide how wind will affect things? For a part of the country, the red looked right. For a sizeable part of it, it didn't, and that's how it turned out. For a lot of the country the most that happened was some limbs down. A Red for Munster and Leinster would have sufficed. No need for Connaught and Ulster. That was unneccessary...IMO.

In future, if a storm looks like affecting some part of the country, and if their decision this time was correct, then they must issue a nationwide Red or else it makes a mockery of this one.

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

In your opinion. Which a lot of people disagree with (including me).

Of course my opinion. That's what everyone was asked for and gave. Whether people agree with me is neither here nor there. I don't agree with yours either.

George Sunsnow

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

All their warnings are based on numbers. .

Incorrect as you well know and as per the link earlier in this thread that you keep avoiding
Their red warning can be based on factors other than numbers

Gaoth Laidir

George Sunsnow wrote: »

Incorrect as you well know and as per the link earlier in this thread that you keep avoiding
Their red warning can be based on factors other than numbers

I'm not avoiding it. You're referring to this.

The philosophy underlying the issuance of Weather Warnings by National Meteorological Services has developed considerably over the past few decades. Internationally, much research has been carried out on the effects of extreme weather, and this has led to an increased focus on the “Impacts” of extreme weather rather on the statistical meteorological rarity of the extremities themselves. Thus the timing and location of the occurrence of extreme
...
Given that the thrust of the Weather Warnings service is on potential “Impacts” of weather rather than on the numerical values attained by the weather elements themselves, it may on occasion be appropriate to issue warnings at a level higher than that strictly justified by the anticipated weather elements. An example would be when heavy rain was expected which might not quite meet the “Orange Warning” criteria but which might give rise to significant flooding because of already saturated ground, or because of a combination of rain, wind and tide in a coastal location.

You seem to be focusing only on the issuance of the red and not on where it was warranted or not. At no point did much of Connaught or Ulster look like getting severe or even strong winds, trees in leaf or not, red wind criteria met or not. The parts of the country most used to strong winds were always going to get pretty weak winds, yet they were closed down too. It doesn't make sense.

RobertKK

The correct decision was made.
The only people who died were out in the storm, when for a red warning you are suppose to stay indoors.
It definitely saved lives.

George Sunsnow

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

I'm not avoiding it. You're referring to this.



You seem to be focusing only on the issuance of the red and not on where it was warranted or not. At no point did much of Connaught or Ulster look like getting severe or even strong winds, trees in leaf or not, red wind criteria met or not. The parts of the country most used to strong winds were always going to get pretty weak winds, yet they were closed down too. It doesn't make sense.

You’ve now accepted that you were wrong asserting that the warnings are numerical only
Ergo you’ve accepted the whole basis of your premises here is opinion not fact
Thank you

By the way Evelyn Cusack deputy head of forecasting can be heard stating at the press conferences that gusts in excess of 130kph could happen anywhere island wide too so even she and met Éireann were using a numbers risk assessment but predominantly in consort with the ERC a threat to lives assessment
That was her opinion and it was the opinion of Glasnevin and
You’re qualification’s versus her are what exactly?
Not enough based on your premises here to be in charge of the nations safety I would think

Gaoth Laidir

RobertKK wrote: »

The correct decision was made.
The only people who died were out in the storm, when for a red warning you are suppose to stay indoors.
It definitely saved lives.

An Orange would have sufficed in a lot of the country.

STATUS ORANGE - Weather Warning - Be Prepared

This category of ORANGE level weather warnings is for weather conditions which have the capacity to impact significantly on people in the affected areas. The issue of an Orange level weather warning implies that all recipients in the affected areas should prepare themselves in an appropriate way for the anticipated conditions.

STATUS RED - Severe Weather Warning - Take Action

The issue of RED level severe weather warnings should be a comparatively rare event and implies that recipients take action to protect themselves and/or their properties; this could be by moving their families out of the danger zone temporarily; by staying indoors; or by other specific actions aimed at mitigating the effects of the weather conditions.

Gaoth Laidir

George Sunsnow wrote: »

You’ve now accepted that you were wrong asserting that the warnings are numerical only
Ergo you’ve accepted the whole basis of your premises here is opinion not fact
Thank you

Now you're having a laugh. I've no idea where you made that up. At least be honest when making a point.

By the way Evelyn Cusack deputy head of forecasting can be heard stating at the press conferences that gusts in excess of 130kph could happen anywhere island wide too so even she and met Éireann were using a numbers risk assessment but predominantly in consort with the ERC a threat to lives assessment
That was her opinion and it was the opinion of Glasnevin and
You’re qualification’s versus her are what exactly?
Not enough based on your premises here to be in charge of the nations safety I would think

"anywhere" in the country was not anywhere. Both she and Joanna stated that they felt that some of the country would not meet the >130 kph threshold but they went red anyway because of other factors. They threw in the sting jet argument on the Sunday, however this was never likely to affect all of the country, but at that stage the wheels were in motion.

George Sunsnow

I’m wondering what should in gaoth láidir’s opinion the poor man who was killed in Louth have done ,armour plated his car as sufficient prep?
There’s no doubt in my mind or in the minds of those who took the decision to go red that quadrupling numbers on the road would have quadrupled the risk of death and injury

I don’t normally say it this way but GL your line on this thread would be laughable were it not for the fact that it’s proposterously callous towards human life in such a situation
And I’m not joking
Regardless I’m sure whatever it is motivated someone to continue with your particular narrow focus on this,it matters little as the powers that be thankfully use a thing called common sense

cute geoge

Here in north kerry it was not a patch on storm darwin which was frightening to put it mildly.Over in south kerry and west kerry got the
brunt this time but it seemed the eye of the storm passed directly over us in north kerry .The forecasters said the storm veered off course several times and it probably ran out of steam as a result .
How any one can condemn m.e. for calling a red alert is beyond me ,all we should do is thank god for our blessings that we got off so light.
Condolences to the families of the 3 tragic deaths and huge An Maith to joanne and colleagues in m.e. for a job well done!!

Gaoth Laidir

George Sunsnow wrote: »

I’m wondering what should in gaoth láidir’s opinion the poor man who was killed in Louth have done ,armour plated his car as sufficient prep?
There’s no doubt in my mind or in the minds of those who took the decision to go red that quadrupling numbers on the road would have quadrupled the risk of death and injury

I don’t normally say it this way but GL your line on this thread would be laughable were it not for the fact that it’s proposterously callous towards human life in such a situation
And I’m not joking
Regardless I’m sure whatever it is motivated someone to continue with your particular narrow focus on this,it matters little as the powers that be thankfully use a thing called common sense

Maybe you should also say the same to MT and several others who don't think a nationwide red was warranted. Always the same here, disagree with the consensus and you're an outcast. To call me callous towards someone who died says a lot about you and not me. To use someone's death to try to score points is a new low.

Gaoth Laidir

cute geoge wrote: »

Here in north kerry it was not a patch on storm darwin which was frightening to put it mildly.Over in south kerry and west kerry got the
brunt this time but it seemed the eye of the storm passed directly over us in north kerry .The forecasters said the storm veered off course several times and it probably ran out of steam as a result .
How any one can condemn m.e. for calling a red alert is beyond me ,all we should do is thank god for our blessings that we got off so light.
Condolences to the families of the 3 tragic deaths and huge An Maith to joanne and colleagues in m.e. for a job well done!!

The discussion is on wheter it should have been for the whole country.