Replication Disaster Recovery! Is it the solution?

I have experienced Replication Disaster Recovery tests and it is a cost savings at the hot site as far as air fair , rooms and food expenses. And the test plan is fairly simple. There are 2 sites, site A and Site B. First you sync the data from site A to site B. Then you roll the network to point to site B. Now you do your disaster recovery testing. This method has saved tons of hours to prepare. What used to take mega hours now can be achieved in minutes. Once the testing is done. The network gets rolled back to site A. Finally resync data from site A to site B so both sites are in sync. For testing disaster recovery exercises, this is definitely a viable solution.

In a real disaster I question this as a solution. First of all, I am in Florida where the biggest disaster threat is a hurricane. The very first step of the disaster is to sync site A to site B. This requires a connection between Site A and Site B. With a hurricane and losing your data center the connection is not going to be there . So you spent so much for data replication for what? No one has given me a good answer to this scenario.

The other problem I have with disaster recovery is the company always has money to spend to get the disaster recovery team to the hot site. However , in a hurricane do you think a person is willing to go to leave his family to face the hurricane alone? This is where companies drop the ball. If they want their disaster recovery team to go , their families should be scheduled to go with them, I will put it this way. A persons mind will be more alert and productive knowing their family is safe rather than wondering how their family is surviving the hurricane. Disaster recovery is essential and I just feel management needs to be more aware and productive in coming up with viable solutions