yes it could, but the elements would need to be perfect. typically a hurricane will dramatically lose strength as it passes over any land mass
2007-01-22 18:32:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Chad 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. There is not much in the way of geography between Savannah and Altanta, or the Florida panhandle and Atlanta. That means that if you get a whopper of a hurricane crashing either coast you could get a lot of rainfall, maybe some flooding and a few torn roofs. Just research Hurricane Hugo and all the damage caused inland after it hit headlong into Charleston, SC. This was in the early 90s or late 80s so you might be able to find footage on the web.
I seriously doubt any hurricane of any force could devastate any place any worse than New Orleans. The city is below sea level for Frakks sake! There is nowhere for water to go when in a big ol' bowl like that one.
2007-01-19 01:34:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by anon 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Remember that a tropical storm can cause as much destruction as a major hurricane depending on how fast it is traveling and how much precipitation is involved. Wind is not the major cause of property damage, rain is and there have been some notable tropical storms that weakened from hurricanes that did just this:
Tropical Storm Alberto 1994:
Don't think a storm needs to be a hurricane to do immense destruction, as the people of the state of Georgia found out when Tropical Storm Alberto stalled over the state for days at the start of July, 1994. Alberto began its journey to Georgia off the coast of Africa as a tropical wave and during its journey never actually reached hurricane status. In the Virgin Islands it was little more than thunderstorms, but by the time the storm reached Cuba the National Weather Service had noticed the telltale circulation of a tropical storm. They sent out a hurricane hunter aircraft, specially equipped to measure on-site phenomena. Upon return, the National Weather Service declared the wave to be the first named storm of the 1994 hurricane season, Tropical Storm Alberto.
The storm hit the Southeastern coast of the United States in the vicinity of Destin, Florida, and slowly crossed the Florida panhandle into the state of Georgia. Here Alberto slowed its northward movement until it stalled south of the Atlanta Airport. During this period towns in west Georgia in the path of Alberto received record amounts of rainfall including Columbus, Albany, and Macon. In Americus, Georgia, north of Albany, the all-time state record for rainfall in a 24-hour period was set when the city racked up a total of 21.1 inches between July 5 and 6. A total of more than 27 inches fell on the city over the 6 days of the storm.
Georgians then had to deal with the inevitable flooding as the rivers rose to record levels. In many places the rivers crested at between 5 and 15 feet above flood stage. Some of the NWS measuring stations hit 20 feet above flood level. By the time the storm and the flooding were over a total of 33 Georgians were dead.
2007-01-19 02:01:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
charlotte nc 1989. Hurricane hugo came inland fron charleston sc. A good 400 +- away from charlotte. Did allot of damage. Trees down all over, power out for about two weeks. I can still see damge from the storm in certain places. so yes hit the east coast or the gulf coast at the right spot and i'm sure atlanta will be damaged.
2007-01-19 01:35:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by mark28269 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, but it is unlikely that a Category 3 storm would be able to exist that far inland. Hurricanes feed off of warm water. Your hurricane would have to survive for quite a while without fuel.
The storm would have likely been weakened and degraded to a lower class before it reached Atlanta.
2007-01-19 01:27:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by DT 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Due to Atlanta's inland location, the hurricane would have decreased in strength, but would still carry relatively high winds and lots of rain.
Broken tree branches and some downed power lines would be one consideration. The biggest problem Atlanta would face would be flash flooding and inadequate storm drainage.
2007-01-19 01:31:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by wheresdean 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. Chances are by the time the storm made its way to Atlanta it would already be diminished to a tropical storm, however flooding rainfall and tornadoes which always accompany these storms could cause millions in damages and even some loss of life especially if it's a slow moving storm system. Tropical storm winds could cause widespread power outages and damage to weaker structures and signs.
2007-01-19 10:56:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by pilotmikea 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
you're ideal. Compact typhoon is the basically conceivable answer. Thank goodness for that. The northern fringe of the middle ( the interior eyewall) prolonged as a lot because the Tamiami Airport and the worst devastation became southward. Downtown Miami neglected the northern fringe of Andrew's middle through about 15 miles. it would seem that with one of those small typhoon, that short distance became vast. Andrew became no take care of for any human beings in southeast Florida, even 50 miles from the interest the position i became, yet truly so for all the voters of south Miami-Dade. After Andrew, a large chew of them threw up their palms and moved north into Broward County.
2016-10-17 02:16:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sure can. Atlanta has been hit by hurricanes before. Nothing new to them.
2007-01-19 01:27:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by MrKnowItAll 6
·
0⤊
0⤋