Powerball

And look at who's getting slammed yet again...

DFW looks to get a few more shots at severe weather tomorrow through Tuesday, although again highly conditional depending on both frontal placement and the timing of subtle MCVs riding the ridge. So the odds of a complete shut out this entire period seems low, but nothing shocks me about the weather any more. Temps could also get tricky as well on Monday with a potential late-season CAD setup.

She got a new breath of wind, and actually has a little bit of *OOMPH!!!* with it now...

Well, we finally got a little engine that could doing the best it can to break through the stable layer along the Denton/Cooke County line... EDIT: Annnd she's dead...

The Mansfield - DeSoto area always seems to get the goods (probably benefitting from a bit of an orographic boost via. Cedar Hill). But otherwise, yeah...

5% tornado risk has been added for eastern parts of DFW on the latest Day 1 outlook. Otherwise, no changes.

Very messy setup for DFW today, even including first 100*F potential for the year. And the CAMs, as usual, are of no help. Huge bom/bust potential either way.

Your experience in YBY is good and all, but to be clear, I was referring to a damaging drought affecting the Midwest as a whole causing tens of billions in damage, a ton of wildfires and causing extreme water restrictions, not an extended dry spell in a localized area for a few months with brown grass.

1988 and 2012 were definitely both on another level in terms of coverage, duration and impact for the Midwest as a whole... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988–1990_North_American_drought https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012–2013_North_American_drought

I'm referring to a widespread severe/long-term drought akin to 1988, 2012, etc.

It's been a while since you all have had a legit drought, so you're finally.paying your dues.

@hardypalmguy water bill is gonna be through the roof trying to keep his palms hydrated...

Overachieving today, as the convective debris has finally relented. DFW is currently at 90*F

Ewww, and we know what came of the 1992 Summer...

Although we've been dealing with persistent convective debris the past week or so, temps have been solidly in the 80s. Seeing what's happening out east in the Carolinas and TN/OH Valley, it could be so much worse...

A massive hail core tracked through the Collin County suburbs of DFW late yesterday (right on the tail end of rush hour) with numerous reports of Golf Ball to Tennis Ball-sized hail. It kind of popped up out of nowhere. It was somewhat similar to the hailstorm that slammed my location several weeks ago, except the path yesterday was a few miles to the north.

I'll repeat myself one more time, because (with all due respect) now you're just talking in circles. The discussion was about why areas in this subforum (but now you're trying to move the goal post by comparing some place like Oklahoma) outside of MI see severe weather more frequently. The answer is because: 1. They live in an area where don't have to deal with the stabilizing effects from cool bodies of water, thus t'storm downdrafts have a much easier time mixing down to the surface to produce damage and a t'storm's updraft doesn't get cut off as easily. 2. They live in an area where the moisture content that contributes to the levels of instability/precip-loading is notably higher due to having an extensive coverage of corn fields, which empirically hold/transpire water much more efficiently than other vegetation. T'storms, by their nature, tend to develop more easily and propagate towards regions where the combined instability/moisture levels are highest. It has little to do with droughts, pressure bars, frontal timing (which is mainly just bad luck), nor whatever other theory has been concocted. Also, I'm not sure what's your point about Spring vs. Summer convection. The ingredients required for convection and severe weather are the same regardles of the time of year and location. It's just that in some places and during some seasons, these ingredients come together more frequently than others. I can't make it any clearer than I already have. And if the answer (despite being reality, which you know good & well it is if you're a Met) isn't satisfying, that's too bad. My suggestion is if you're frustrated with severe weather climo in Michigan, you should move to a favorable region like I did.

Disgusting...

It's a pretty "meh" setup, with the nebulous forcing/moisture and veered flow. That said, could see some decent downburst winds in areas that do get hit.

Please keep all that smoke up there. Thanks!

Statistically, that's incorrect. 1. Michigan is only responsible for 2% of the country's corn production, versus double digit numbers in IL / MN / NE / IA respectfully (and 7% in IN). And just about all of this 2% is concentrated in an extremely small portion of MI (Saginaw Valley and along the immediate MI/OH/IN border) 2. While a large oak tree for example can transpire maybe 40,000 gallons of water per year (which true, Michigan has plenty of), corn can transpire 4,000 gallons of water *PER DAY*. So the difference is a lot greater than "negligible." I get the frustration about the lack of severe weather or even t'storm activity in Michigan. But it has far less to do with synoptic patterns than you guys want to attribute. It's a combination of bad luck, the influence of vegetations/bodies of waters and also remembering the past in a much better light than what really happened.

To say their climo would be similar is a big leap, but yes, their severe weather frequency would still be relatively higher than Michigan's even without the corn because, again, they don't have massive bodies of cool water surrounding them.

The bolded is definitely luck of the draw.