vortex95
-
Posts
1,465 -
Joined
About vortex95
Recent Profile Visitors
-
I am not versed in the exact physics of the processes, but I can say this. "Fat" CAPE on a sounding plot is not the same as "skinny" CAPE. "Fat" CAPE promotes more rapid updraft acceleration (image 1), and "skinny" CAPE promotes less rapid updraft acceleration (image 2). If you want svr wx, "fat" CAPE is more conducive to produce it. "Skinny" CAPE is better for heavy rainfall and flash flooding potential.
- 1,453 replies
-
- 2
-
-
-
- severe
- thunderstorms
- (and 7 more)
-
Are these things ever going to end today? TORs issued this late in the evening for an approaching cold front are not common these parts, but we are dealing w/ a rather strong 500 trof for summer and a decent 250 speed max in the area. And that's not something borderline either! Small but quite intense mesocyclone.
- 1,453 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- severe
- thunderstorms
- (and 7 more)
-
It not easy b/c it depends on the CAPE distribution in the vertical column. In other words, you can't apply one updraft value at all levels of the atmosphere where there is CAPE b/c the amount of CAPE can vary a lot depending on the level you are at. Total CAPE does not necessarily tell the entire story as to full updraft potential. Yes, generally more the CAPE the better, but it does not always mean the same type of svr wx or even things like lightning frequency or most efficient rainfall rates. And CAPE (hence updraft potential) is almost never realized fully by a storm, b/c of 1) dry air entrainment and 2) precip loading. And it goes one step further. Updraft strength is also dependent on pressure perturbations induced by a mesocyclone. For instance, mesocyclones are typically strongest at mid-levels. So you actually have lowest pressure here. This results in dynamic uplift b/c of the pressure deficit aloft. Now, this is superimposed on CAPE that is present. A mesocyclone present can effectively double the updraft strength that would exist just from CAPE alone, which is why supercell updrafts are so intense. More CAPE down at low-levels is better for tornadogenesis b/c you increase updraft acceleration potential where it matters most (stretching of a vortex). That's why we look at how much CAPE exists 0-3 km for one ingredient for tornado potential. I'm just scratching the sfc here, but you get the idea. It's hard to set nice, neat values in a given atmosphere due to so many factors.
- 1,453 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- severe
- thunderstorms
- (and 7 more)
-
Wikipedia, believe it or not, has good objective wx definitions, and then you can look at all it references at the bottom, and go from there.
- 1,453 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- severe
- thunderstorms
- (and 7 more)
-
One way of thinking of it is as an "integrated lifted index." If you know what lifted index is, CAPE is just a more advanced version of it, quantifying instability better in the atmosphere.
- 1,453 replies
-
- 2
-
-
-
- severe
- thunderstorms
- (and 7 more)
-
RRFS FTW!
-
But the HRRR supported it! LOL.
-
Thanks. That's the challenge, is there systemic bias in either direction enough to make it statistically significant, or does it all work out in the end? And then we have the notion that precision always equals accuracy! One line I will always recall, "we have very good models today that can give very precise-looking output that can be precisely wrong!" I saw Fox Brook in the HYDCAR text product. They don't give any more info for stations in the decode format at least.
-
One thing today to the W in WV into wrn VA, lots of intense cells and tornadic signatures embedded well into larger precip areas, something you see more in a strongly-forced, dynamical set ups, which we do have today w/ the strong 500 trough and a solid 250 jet max moving into the region now. Not something you see in the summer that often.
- 1,453 replies
-
- 5
-
-
- severe
- thunderstorms
- (and 7 more)
-
Thanks. I do worry at times my posts (rants) go overboard. I like to delve into deeper issues within the profession, like how we calculate and measure it all. Sometimes we can take that for granted, or get so deep into debate/discussion, we forget the basics or to take a step back and look at the big pix! I also enjoy the social aspects of meteorology, as that explains a lot as to how we and the general public react and perceive things. As I think I have said before, the fcst science is not really an issue/problem as much given all its advances, it is sorting it all out, interpreting it, and communicating it that is an immense challenge. And social media, for all its positives has it share of negative. I like forums like this -- "old SKEWL social media!" Post can be short or long form, and stay specific w/ solid moderation and not be at the whims of large sosicl media company.
-
Would you prefer the NAM? Can't have it both ways!
-
FWIW, overall the CG counts has not been that crazy so far. So in that regard, not much to "miss!" Cells themselves have not been that impressive structurally as a whole as well. Misery loves company! Maybe we can pull it off later as stronger forcing comes in.
-
Ugh. What a waste of awesome CAPE if it can't be realized. I do not like the mid-level anvil precip to our W. How often do sig storms fire when that is already in place?
-
The storm is more sheared today than ydy, yet it is stronger, likely b/c the LLCC is larger, more coherent/tight. Ydy, it appeared we had more than one LLCC. The winds in sheared systems can be tricky, and I wonder how strong NHC would have Bertha if it was far at set and no recon. Probably no more than 40 kt. Just from empirical obs alone, I think sheared systems in the absence of recon are often underestimated Given the large LLCC, it may well stay intact all the way to GLS. However, look at the 06z ECMWF 925 vs. 500 RH/streamlines fcst hr 60. Quite a disconnect from NE shear! Probably just a low-level swirl w/ small bursts of convection.
-
Yes, I do not like to see a big cluster of storms S of an area of interest. It seems more often than not, that means the area to the N is ripped off!
