• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ZackH

  • Birthday 05/31/1981

Profile Information

  • Four Letter Airport Code For Weather Obs (Such as KDCA)
  • Gender
  • Location:
    Bismarck, ND

Recent Profile Visitors

905 profile views
  1. Don't know about warnings issued, but I believe Ivan produced 117 tornadoes... so I doubt this is anywhere close to a record for warnings issued.
  2. Well, no matter what you would do (which would be not smart), the advice the official gave is 150% correct.
  3. And get swept away and die in the current?
  4. That's not stupid at all. If your life is not in danger, then you are wasting resources and time for those who's lives actually are in danger. If you have water coming in your house, it is not a life threatening situation yet. Rescue personnel only need to focus on those in life threatening situation at this point.
  5. She's going to be able to get a job wherever she wants after this.
  6. There has likely been at least 1 sig tor based on TDS height and VROT values alone, and probably a couple others. There have been a handful of other tornadoes just based on TDS signatures. This high risk has easily verified.
  7. Honestly 1 significant tornado and a handful of others would easily verify a high risk of this size...
  8. Not so much a delay, but I can speak from experience... when you're busy throwing out tons of tornado warnings and follow up statements, writing down reports... getting an actual LSR on the computer out in the middle of the outbreak is the least of your concern. The local offices likely have a ton of LSRs they haven't submitted and will not submit until everything dies down. Its simply not as important as actually warning people about the ongoing threat.
  9. There were most certainly significant tornadoes today. If you weren't following the situation and aren't bothering to read the last few pages, no reason to comment like that.
  10. Northern AL had comparable values, this was 4/27/2011 at 20z
  11. I still learn every day, sir! Thanks for understanding my post.
  12. This is a great tutorial... I was actually looking for this. Thanks for finding it.
  13. I'm not trying to shut you down here, and I was honestly not trying to disrespect you. There is definitely more risk with the CAMs... but the first sounding I was referring to was the NAM at a time and a point where there was no modeled precipitation. With any CAMs in a moist atmosphere, even if the storm is close by your sounding point, you will have a little modification simply due to the fact that its a convection resolving model. However, if that point was actually where a storm was being resolved, it would be saturated all the way up the column. I would be more concerned if it was just cherry picking, but the parameter space on the CAMs and soundings just like that are basically all over the warm sector and the warm front... therefore I doubt you have much contamination. Of course, that's if the model is correct... the nice caveat EDIT: on a second glance, the first HRRR sounding may have some contamination, but the second HRRR sounding and the NAM sounding look good.
  14. With all do respect, you can maintain that all you want, but it is not correct.
  15. Not completely right... you need saturation all the way up. In a moist environment, you will always have a close T/Td near the surface at some point.