mikeosborne38

4 minutes ago, METALSTORM said:

4 and 9 have turned into a clown show since 2013. 

I like watching Damon Lane. Not sure which station but he stays calm and gives you just the facts without hyperbole.

I just heard an OKC met look at the cone tornado and then announced it was an EF-2 just by eyeballing it. I thought that was odd.

11 minutes ago, vman722 said:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1130856609847005184

Some good reading if you're interested in some theory/explanation of the failure modes that led to a lack of a historic outbreak yesterday. Edwards is one of the forecasters that did the 13z outlook so definitely some valuable insight. 

Found this through a page on the Target Area of Storm Track if anyone is interested in exploring the topic further. Some very interesting points from Jeff Duda discussing the event, one thing that stuck out to me was his discussion of the very deep nearly saturated inflow layer and its impacts along with general severe weather enthusiasts (such as myself) over reliance on the HRRR and the importance of utilizing various tools and diffrent CAM's. Defintiely a thread worth a read. 

https://stormtrack.org/community/threads/2019-05-20-event-tx-ok-ks.30833/page-2

Good read thanks for sharing. Just shows you can have all the parameters in place you want; but the mesoscale factors ultimately make or break tornado potential.

15 minutes ago, CryHavoc said:

Thanks for the response.  It's important to note that an event "trending downward" doesn't necessarily precipitate a bust call, however.  Events like 4/27 are once in a decade or even once a generation, but a storm system does not need to spawn 100 tornadoes+ to resolve as a high risk, nor does an event that looks to be tapering mean it won't surge as the day wears on.

Regarding everyday citizens, it's unfortunate but often the only way to get people to take notice of high risk days is to use strongly worded language.  We have a double edged sword in that regard -- either use language that can be construed as hyping an event (perhaps unnecessarily), or being more conservative with watches and warnings and hope that people still take the situation seriously.

I think the very fact that people are not educated about storms in general means they need to be given an even greater berth of the situations unfolding.  I have a friend who lives in Texas and I told him not to be out yesterday, explained to him why, and his wife still got caught in 80mph winds in her car.  In my experience, people are just unable to be bothered from disrupting the convenience of their lives unless the most dire language is used.  That is why no matter how much lead time a tornado has, you see dozens of people caught in Home Depots, gas stations, and Walmarts when a tornado arrives.

Good points. I will admit that as someone who lived through 4/27, I compare every higher risk event to that day, which I now realize is unrealistic. April 3, 1974, and April 27, 2011 belong in categories totally by themselves. It's easy to forget you can have bad days like Super Tuesday, etc. that don't rise to that level but are still pretty bad. Truth is, like you said those super outbreaks are once in a generation and there's a good chance I wont see a day like 4/27 in my lifetime. Unfortunately also I think some people just won't take responsibility for their own safety, regardless of the wording used sadly.

57 minutes ago, CryHavoc said:

Well articulated.

What I'd like to know for future threads like this is the rationale people have on these threads of saying "bust" before 5pm on a high risk day.

What is to be gained?  Why is it necessary to immediately jump all over a "bust" call?  Most of us reading the threads are scientists or have at least an active interest in the science of weather.  We can openly acknowledge difficult/problematic forecasts when the event is over -- by coming to consensus based on the parameters merited.

This isn't a sporting event.  It's a scientific pursuit of knowledge.  Saying an event "busts" isn't even a scientific statement -- it contains absolutely no furthering of information or exchange of curiosity.  It's just a token word designed to... I don't know, make the person saying it feel cool because they're calling out the SPC as an authority?

Furthermore, bust calls tend to kill conservation about the actual events taking place.  At the very least it never promotes healthy discussion in these threads.  Rushing to bust calls, in my humble opinion, serves absolutely no one.

Additionally, I am extremely concerned about the pressure this kind of thing can put on forecasters to be less aggressive in these calls.  Protection of lives must remain a priority.

I'll answer for myself. I have family in Midwest City and I only mentioned a bust because I was happy it was trending that way. I lived through 4/27 and don't wish that on anyone.  Like Dr Shepherd mentions in the article the current 24/7 news cycle along with social media and the search for likes and clicks contribute to some accusations of sensationalism.  Also, a good question posed in that article is are words like "dangerous"and "catastrophic"being over used?  In hindsight maybe mentioning 4/27 was a mistake as that day stands in a category by itself, even among high risk outbreak days.  People were expecting multiple violent tornadoes down at the same time like 4/27. Most lay person's don't read forecast discussions, etc to know possible limiting factors.

It looks like OKC is transitioning to mainly a flooding threat with maybe some embedded tornadoes in the line later tonight.

What's frustrating is many Oklahoman residents will be pissed that this event was hyped and to then nothing happened while schools and businesses we're closed. We weather geeks know mesoscale things can make or break an event. However the average person will become complacent and point to events like this to not take potential dangerous weather seriously.

8 minutes ago, Natester said:

This.  Not to mention that they often report that towns hit by tornadoes had no warning when in reality they had plenty of warning.  Me thinks they do it just for ratings.

So true. Someone earlier this morning posted a radar shot from the supercells from 4/27 and lined it up below a simulated HRRR radar shot showing multiple supercells. News stations and other people only communicate the risk but not the limiting factors that could mitigate the risk. I know the chief meteorologist for KOCO (Payne I believe) spoke about things that could temper the risk.

1 minute ago, CryHavoc said:

Sure, if you're comparing today directly to 4/27 as a measure of a "bust" scenario.

If we're literally talking about the largest outbreak in history as the bar today needed to clear -- that's flatly ridiculous.  It is not time for people to relax or let their guard down.  Only takes one big cell to send death tolls skyrocketing.

Sorry I was the person that made that statement about 4/27. I made it out of relief as I lived through that day and was worried for Oklahoma when people compared today directly to 4/27. Hopefully everything trends away from what was shown this morning.

Today proves how extremely rare days like April 27 2011 really are. Most outbreak days have some limiting factors unlike that day. Good news for the immediate OKC area.