Jump to content

OceanStWx

Meteorologist
  • Posts

    20,351
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by OceanStWx

  1. 6 minutes ago, tunafish said:

    Not sure I'll experience a thunderstorm better than today's storm - at least not IMBY. 

    I've never seen wind like that, not from a t-storm.  Plus 0.96" in 13 minutes.  Legit white out at times. 

    Lots of massive oaks and pines down around town, and fortunately most were not on cars or homes.  Half were uprooted and half were just snapped off at the base.  Not sure how accurate RadarScope is with estimated velocity, but 60-65 mph smells in the ballpark.  Power out about 6 hrs.

    Some phil from local news.

    Big boy wind.

    You can see what a mess wind like this going through a forest would make when trying to figure out if it is tornadic or not.

    On the velocity front, keep in mind that it is radial velocity, so some component of that wind was not being sampled since it was not directly parallel to the radial. I would say 60 mph would be the lower bound of the estimated wind.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  2. 6 minutes ago, tunafish said:

    Surprised you thought construction...

    "Nearby thunder?  Can't be. It's more likely the sound of Stein crushing my hopes and dreams.  Back to bed."

    Hoping it makes it to the coast.  I'd take .25" at this point, as I've got 1.43" MTD but that was all back on 8/3.

    Nah it was the webbed hand of his sleep demon knocking on the door. :stein:

    Dual-pol instantaneous rates are consistently pushing 6-8"/hr with that thing though. 

    • Haha 2
  3. 2 minutes ago, vortex95 said:

    Having the Doppler radars now in Canada really helps for NNE radar coverage, esp. since CXX is practically useless ern semicircle. :fulltilt:  It still amazes me that the NWS was not allowed to put the CXX radar on a mountain top when it was installed in the late 90s.  This action thumbs its nose at protection of lives and property, and should override anything else in this case.

    Was that due to VT State Regulations about towers on mountain tops?  It wasn't always that way, right?  Mt Mansfield has communication towers.

    Well before my time, so I don't know.

    But Canadians have dual-pol as well, so TDSs are possible to observe. I'm pretty sure I've seen a couple outside my forecast area.

  4. 30 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

    I wouldn't be surprised if that areas gets more tornadoes than what's realized. Dual-pol will make this easier but I bet if we had the data there would be a secondary max (if not overall max) of severe weather instances across that part of Maine, its just it does unreported because of population density. They probably end up with an overlap of favorable ingredients more times than the remainder of the region. Far enough north to be influenced by the stronger jet dynamics/shortwaves and far enough south to tap into warmer/humid air.

    We'll see. We have yet to really see an uptick in TDS/tornado verification in our area. And our radar is well sited to capture stuff to our northwest. 

    Now if it's some moose fart north of the mountains our radar won't see that lofted debris anyway. We do catch "lost" tornadoes sometimes with satellite passes. Like sometime after 2017 a tornado track appeared in the Pemi Wilderness. No idea when it happened, but it's there.

    • Like 2
  5. 5 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

    I just can't get over the environment. 50-60 knots of bulk shear per mesoanalysis with >40 knots of effective shear. Forecast is for ~200 m2/s2 of of effective helicity with MLCAPE approaching and exceeding 2000-2500 J/KG. Forecast hodos. Based on what CAMS are spitting out its very difficult to believe we will come out of today without any significant severe. Hopefully anyone camping or out in those areas is aware and has shelter plans.

    image.png.48a2c7dee2e33fc65afabd06c5ea1c16.png

     

    The thing about this event is that even if we blow the surface based opportunity, you could still rip some elevated hailers through with golf balls or greater.

  6. 5 minutes ago, Winter Wizard said:

    In theory, wildfire smoke could be a potential fly in the ointment since it reduces surface heating and limits instability to an extent. Though the question is how much would that mix down to the surface? In this case, it probably wouldn't and I think the surface dynamics are more than enough to overcome that. 

    It has mixed down to MWN, so it's starting to get into the near boundary layer. The EML may help keep that off the surface until late though.

    • Like 1
  7. This kind of event has so much potential in New England for main reason that you rotate the entire flow pattern and create something more akin to what happens in the Midwest.

    Around here you typically have much more stable air to the southeast, the complete opposite of central CONUS severe weather. Northwest flow allows stable air to be in the right top quadrant relative to the storms. Check out the line of cumulus marking the surface based instability. Also the forecast for theta-e later today. That marks the warm front, and storm motion is parallel to this. So this is the exact orientation you need for long tracked supercellular storms.

    164c2423-52c9-4e14-9ba9-004dd5686e37.png

    0ece6e8b-2638-4400-95fc-85c43859cd3e.png

    • Like 8
  8. 7 minutes ago, wxeyeNH said:

    Looking at the sat pics this morning there are lots of fires burning in Southern Ontario.  The thick smoke plume is moving into our area.  How much is this going to affect the severe storms later for NNE?   Also the MCS is creating a lot of cloud cover especially this morning.  So we are not getting much insolation.  Maybe this will reduce convection later?

    There is mixed research on smoke and storms. In some cases the smoke layer can actually hold the cap longer and allow the instability to really build before breaking (think smoke absorbs heat and warms that layer aloft). But that really depends on the height of the smoke layer.

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...