Re: Q for Chris, JV, and ALL
Posted by Mike Williams in Arroyo Grande on August 24, 2009 at 22:38:53:

The heights mentioned are quite possibly "run-up" heights. That would be the distance above sea-level of the highest elevation contour line the water reached.

I'm not sure how that relates to actual wave-height, but it's safe to say that there was nowhere a wave "face" of those heights (30 meters or 100 feet).

In 1946 the Scotch Cap lighthouse on Unimak Island (Aleutians) was destroyed by a tsunami with a run-up height of 35 meters. In this case, the height was determined by noting wave damage at the top of a very sheer cliff. That wave may have actually been over 100 feet high. Though, still, not with the oft-imagined sheer/concave face.

Mike Williams


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: Q for Chris, JV, and ALL - Canie  22:54:09 - 8/24/2009  (75753)  (1)
        ● Re: Q for Chris, JV, and ALL - Mike Williams in Arroyo Grande  06:59:06 - 8/25/2009  (75754)  (1)
           ● Re: Q for Chris, JV, and ALL - heartland chris  17:24:33 - 8/25/2009  (75756)  (1)
              ● Re: Q for Chris, JV, and ALL - Mike Williams in Arroyo Grande  06:52:20 - 8/26/2009  (75757)  (1)
                 ● Re: Q for Chris, JV, and ALL - PennyB  10:35:34 - 8/26/2009  (75758)  (0)