LocoAko

Meteorologist
  • Content Count

    4,954
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LocoAko

  1. Pretty impressive ZDR arc on the storm near Freehold a few scans ago. About as good as you'll typically see in NJ. Separated from the KDP maximum as well implying ingested SRH.
  2. So glad I was preoccupied and feeling lazy and decided to sit this one out in Norman. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
  3. Some of you may be interested in this paper by Jeff Snyder about the use of mobile radar data in assigning damage ratings. http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/WAF-D-14-00026.1
  4. Cool brief scud/spin-up of some sort on the Thunderbird cell with downtown OKC in the background.
  5. Was watching the Thunderbird cell from the observation deck here at NWC until it got too hazy to see the base clearly. Had a long, thin funnel go overhead as it first started developing. Gorgeous structure. Should've gone out...
  6. Yeah really. Almost looked like CGI at some points. Man.
  7. Also looks like some towers going up around Duncan, OK.
  8. I don't want to beat a dead horse or regress, but in no way was Brett implying that hi-res NWP will/should replace forecasters. Not sure where you got that from. He was acknowledging how well CAMs seem to be performing this season, and that ignoring their consensus should be done at one's own peril (e.g., dewpoints in the 60s yesterday, characteristics of UH swaths from the past few threats, etc). Of course epic fails will still occur given the extremely nonlinear nature of convective initiation and the occasional failure of parameterization schemes to capture things like surface fluxes during droughts, etc. Observations are still crucial and nothing can really be substituted for forecaster intuition and experience, but IMO we are beginning to enter a time where hi-res stuff offers insight that you can't get otherwise. Once a model is spun-up and the physics adjust and balance, it's totally reasonable to expect these models to have represent extremely small scale features that models with lower grid spacings and especially our current network of observations can't capture. Of course if all models are showing a certain UH swath that comes to verify it can be a bit of a black box problem to determine what exactly they all honed in on to cause that. But given the relatively low density of our observing networks, and assuming proper analysis and quality control of the data fed in, I think one has to at least strongly consider the immense value that a model data assimilation system (that is, the optimal combination of both the observation networks and the model's physical constraints, carrying information from past assimilation cycles forward, and having a complete suite of physics (i.e. a soil model for surface fluxes, etc)) can offer as a forecasting tool.
  9. Definitely geeking out over how textbook the axisymmetric ZDR arcs are on these splits. Awesome.
  10. Cool opposite, axisymmetric ZDR arcs on both splits of the Frederick supercell. Clear sign of size sorting and SRH being ingested. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
  11. Right. I think what you're saying essentially agrees with Brett -- that the obs are combined with the background field in a statistically optimal way for that model. In other words, the goal for the model is not to look exactly like the obs, but to form a dynamically balanced analysis to get the best forecast. I greatly enjoyed that class, too. Fantastic post.
  12. Oh boy. Circulation should go south of me, but I'm expecting some potentially huge hail at least. Preliminary kudos to all of the CAMs that pinpointed this supercell sliding up I-44. Impressive.
  13. Preliminary data from a friend's 18Z sounding launch across the Red River from Burkburnett, TX. https://twitter.com/RumblinMatt/status/726112873903063040
  14. It's from the 12Z SPC WRF: http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mpyle/spcprod/12/ (So IMHO, yes. )
  15. Both the latest runs of the HRRR and the 12Z 4-km NAM indicate at least one supercell traveling up the I-44 corridor just barely reaching the metro by 00Z tonight, fwiw (probably not much, given the agreement between CAMs up until this point ). Still a more solid UH signal in the CAMs than we ever saw with Tuesday's event, though. 12Z 4-km NAM: Last three HRRR runs:
  16. Some interesting signals/storms on some of the convection-allowing guidance this morning, though still plenty of disagreement about warm sector clearance and initiation. I should know better than to read too much into these runs, though, as I suspect Brett will be right about all of his concerns. Meanwhile, the 12Z SPC WRF has widespread rain/storms throughout the day and little/no discrete convection.
  17. So far there's been a (preliminary) confirmed EF0 in Mustang, EF1 in Luther, and EF1 in Tulsa, with further investigations ongoing.
  18. One could argue that it is both, really... wind fields dictate storm mode and the orthogonality of the shear vector to the initiating boundary, but instability plays a role in how quickly storms may grow (in a given amount of time before propagating off the boundary) as well as how many storms initiate/break the cap for a given amount of forcing. It all works together and can have many contributing factors from both thermodynamics and kinematics.
  19. One could argue that the HRRR and HRRRX did quite well with this evening. Got the far west initiation, widespread coverage, linear transition, limited significant UH streaks (correctly in SW OK) and the localized damaging wind threat in OKC all pretty much spot on. Given the complexity of the setup, I have to say I'm pretty impressed.
  20. Yep. Had a debris signature in all of the dual-pol variables and everything. Pretty impressive for a QLCS. Circulation passed right by me in OKC but luckily wasn't too tight at the time. Edit: Still looks to be on the ground in latest KTLX scan.
  21. Yeah. This shear profile isn't doing these storms any favors... https://twitter.com/akracki/status/725083143514906624
  22. Hm.... weird. It does also show up in the VAD profile below, though definitely to me seems to be weakening in the 7-10 kft range over the duration of the plot (though we are missing data above 15 kft). I wonder why a discrepancy like that would exist. From: https://twitter.com/TornadoTitans/status/725027929667698688
  23. Preliminary 18Z sounding out of OUN looks to suffer from much less VBV issues than I would have expected based on NAM, GFS, etc. Though of course surface winds would ideally back more, but that should improve via the isallobaric wind later this afternoon.
  24. It also hasn't been run since 05Z this morning, lol.