VAwxman

Pretty common in energy too once you get in.

How so?

Amazing image. Crazy to see how long the track of this thing was.

You are free to your opinion and I would never say otherwise, but... This is a weather board and I and I am criticized for discussing things from a meteorological perspective? I'm not the one who brought up the 1974 stuff. I only commented on it. Sorry you are offended by weather talk on a weather board.

Ha! Still Relevant... We can quibble about the exact wind speed, but the poster criticizing me misses the main point. We know by all accounts that both Xenia and Guin were hit by a large and very powerful tornado. My point was that getting a setup conducive for tornadoes of that kind at the same time so far away from each other is hard to fathom. I think that point still stands regardless of what we knew about rating tornadoes back then and what we think we know now.

Meteorologically, yesterday, to me, still does not compare to 1974. Yes I know the deaths may, which IS more impressive given the technology of today, but from a meteo perspective, while yesterday looked like the best setup I have ever tracked, it doesn't quite measure up to something that could spawn simulaneous F5s 1000 miles apart. That is something that is even harder to fathom in my view, again just from the met perspective.

I couldn't agree more. I made the comment to a buddy of mine (sarwx here on the boards) before leaving work Monday that there was a completely different feeling... not the usual anticipation / excitement, but fear. You just knew the potential was up there. It definitely looked like the most dangerous setup I personally had ever seen a couple of days out.

Throw 1965 in there as well.

Well in that case, I up CNN's grade then. It's good they didn't have him on more if he really said something stupid like that. Kudos to them.

Maybe. I sure don't know any of them. And apparently none of my friends know any either, though to be fair there is a bias since, naturally, most of my friends are into weather.

Yeah stellar job by TWC. They acted as a weather channel should act. Really was surprised by the news channels. Big "F" for them from what I saw at least, but I didn't have them on the whole time of course since TWC was a ton better.

One positive aspect was that this was pretty obvious from over a week out, from the perspective of great potential being there, no doubt.

Yes, that is just stellar coverage. Top notch. I'm VERY impressed with those guys.

Right. I imagine they'd never roll out the 60% contour until stuff was already ongoing, which is most likely in a 20Z outlook. 45% is pretty dang stout.

Wow... only second time I recall seeing that.

Well no one with any credibility forecast anything to 1974's level, so technically there can be no bust on something not forecast. And I don't think he's declaring bust on the event, but just the comparison to 1974 by a couple of posters.

I was pretty sure when I woke up I'd see a few posts questioning today just because Tuesday was perceived as an underperformer, though you guys wound up making it into a pretty good discussion. In my view, Monday did not underperform. Tuesday may have been less than expected, but the best parameters were never supposed to come together until late in the evening, which isn't the most favorable time of day, and by then enough stuff was already out there that you got more of a "mess". Today has always, to me, looked the most favorable, if we get the current convection out of the way, so we'll see what happens. Hopefully for all in its path it will underperform, but no one should let their guard down just because of yesterday (to be fair I don't think anyone here said that though).

Ugh... I think we beat this into the ground. Can we all just sit back and see what happens?

Right. Even if the setup is close to identical synoptically, so much has to work out just perfectly for the same result as far as number of tornadoes, etc. I'd also argue that, given the detection methods and spotter networks we have now, the real total in 1974 was likely easily over 148. Someday we may well see 140 in one outbreak again, due to that alone. Interesting for discussion's sake though.

I certainly see why SPC didn't want to pull the "high" trigger yet. Models do show the storms hanging around into tomorrow, but I wonder if, as happens a lot, the storms move faster than progged and clear out. Nonetheless, on a day two outlook, I see the logic in refraining for now.

Yeah I tend to ignore where model QPF is and just focus more on where the parameters look strongest. Obvioulsly 78-84 hours out, much can change though.

Oops. Forgot to mention the day... Was looking at Tuesday evening.

Not that I need to repeat what some other great severe wx posters have already mentioned here, but the setup as shown by the GFS is as alarming as any I have seen on modeling in a long time. The LLJ is well out in front of the trailing cold front, and the upper level 500 mb jet punches squarely into the warm sector as opposed to staying near / parallel to the incoming cold front. The 250 mb jet structure is also ideal, as some areas are in both the right rear quad of the departing disturbance, and the left front quad of the stronger incoming one. Also, the GFS shows capping weakening by the evening over AR into western TN, which would spell trouble given storm mode could easily be supercellular / tornadic that far ahead of the front. Will be interesting to say the least to monitor future runs and see how this trends.

Glad to see a thread on this. Obviously this far out, we cannot get concerned with pinpointing specifics like boundaries and position of low / upper level jets, but given that I think the teleconnections favor the trough ejecting out of the west with a fairly broad base (as many model runs show) and we will have widespread 60+ dews in the eastern half of the nation, that is a recipe for potential trouble, no doubt.

Someone posted an article some time ago that said the 80K or whatever was actually the median salary, not the average. The median would not allow it to be skewed by the higher paid folks on TV, high level NWS, or energy jobs, but I have a hard time believing that is actually the median salary for a met.