Both Camille and Andrew were small, compact hurricanes, but Andrew (at Florida landfall) was smaller in diameter. Camille paled in size comparism to Katrina near time of landfall....with 100+ mph gusts only occurring along the coast from just east of New Orleans to near Pascagoula...about 75 miles (compared to Katrina's 130 mile long wind field of 100+ mph gust extending from west of Grand Isle to Mobile Bay),

The lowest measured central pressure of hurricane Camille by USAF reconniasance aircraft was 905 mb/ 26.73", but please bear in mind ONLY three eye penetrations were made while Camille was over the Gulf of Mexico between Cuba and the Gulf coast. As we witnessed with Katrina and Rita last year, central pressure can change rapidly, especially while traversing the potent Loop Current. IMO it's likely hurricane Camille maxed out below 900 mb....and sub-890 mb isn't out of the question, at least for a short time (there was a 30 hour gap between recon eye penetrations while Camille was over the Loop Current....from evening of the 16th until early afternoon of the 17th; while over the same area where Katrina reached her peak).

In all honesty, we'll never know with certainty the exact wind force and central pressure of Camille at time of landfall. The final recon mission before landfall had to leave the hurricane after sustaining damage (lost one of the four engines), and so central pressure data was obtained as Camille approached the coast and moved inland.
The 909.3 mb/ 26.85" reading was reported by a private citizen with a barometer near the west end of the Bay St Louis bridge (IMO lowest surface pressure occurred a couple miles west of that location). As for sustained winds, an engineering report by Dr Herbert Saffir indicated wind speeds well in excess of 150 mph occurred.....IMO (based on size of the core and damage photos) Camille was in the 170 to 180 mph range sustained.....with peak gusts near 200 mph (final recon estimate of surface winds was 180 kt/ 207 mph.....but in those days, it was more guesswork than reliable data). The reason I believe firmly Camille's sustained winds were stronger than Katrina at landfall? 1) Camille's core was smaller.....thus producing a tighter wind gradient (same reason tiny hurricane Charley possessed 150 mph winds @ 941 mb), 2) central pressure was lower than Katrina's 920 mb....and 3) radar images of Camille I've seen show better organization/ less dry air intrusion....not surprising since Camille was much smaller than Katrina and Rita.

PW