New England Severe weather thread number ...I think XI ?

[CoastalWx]

Well a spotter estimated 100 mph. The BOX surveyor went to his house, and came up with

85-100. So much for ragging on the spotter or the report.

As for the TOR warning, Look at the damn radar!!! If you don't see tornado potential in that

radar signature, then you need to learn about velocity. OKX put out TOR warnings for the

south coast of LI and Suffolk cty before the MCV hit Conn. There was GTG numbers off

the charts. If you ask anyone under that thing in CT if they feel the TOR was a "cry wolf", they

will certainly tell you NO!! The voices of the people reporting it say it all. I may or may not agree with

many of the things that BOX does, but issuing a TOR with a storm like that is a no brainer.

So if they didn't issue one you would have taken offense? I think it could have gone 50/50. The couplet was actually tighter down in srn CT and there wasn't a warning. I disagree with the no brainer.

[HoarfrostHubb]

If they put Landphoon Warning people might take it more seriously

[Baroclinic Zone]

http://www.tauntongazette.com/news/x442234663/Taunton-residents-clean-up-damages-from-microburst

[CT Rain]

Well a spotter estimated 100 mph. The BOX surveyor went to his house, and came up with

85-100. So much for ragging on the spotter or the report.

As for the TOR warning, Look at the damn radar!!! If you don't see tornado potential in that

radar signature, then you need to learn about velocity. OKX put out TOR warnings for the

south coast of LI and Suffolk cty before the MCV hit Conn. There was GTG numbers off

the charts. If you ask anyone under that thing in CT if they feel the TOR was a "cry wolf", they

will certainly tell you NO!! The voices of the people reporting it say it all. I may or may not agree with

many of the things that BOX does, but issuing a TOR with a storm like that is a no brainer.

Obviously you weren't listening to what people were saying. The couplet was tighter in southern CT when there was no warning. After it had weakened and crossed into BOX's cwa they issued the warning. I don't have a problem with the tornado warning but I thought odds were there was to touchdown. Once again though little office to office consistency.

[weather01089]

So if they didn't issue one you would have taken offense? I think it could have gone 50/50. The couplet was actually tighter down in srn CT and there wasn't a warning. I disagree with the no brainer.

Probably not. Really was too busy listening to reports from people with terror in their voices to worry about that.. But the first TOR was issued with a pretty good signature present.

The history from NY I guess contributed to TOR. In this case though, other than a verification statistic,

the public really isnt going to care if their trees blow down from a tornado or from a microburst.

The wind numbers clearly showed there were going to be issues.

Its very common to get TOR's in the comma head of those as well. Princeton, MA for example.

Do you wait or do you warn? With the wind present, I would error on the side of a warning. Especially

if its 50/50 like you stated. You can get great gtg and signatures in New England, but yet only 50%

of those will produce a tornado. So you dont warn them? Error on the side of safety. Most of these

will at least produce wind damage.

With all the damage being reported, its clear they had to continue the TOR north after the first.

[OceanStWx]

Probably not. Really was too busy listening to reports from people with terror in their voices to worry about that.. But the first TOR was issued with a pretty good signature present.

The history from NY I guess contributed to TOR. In this case though, other than a verification statistic,

the public really isnt going to care if their trees blow down from a tornado or from a microburst.

The wind numbers clearly showed there were going to be issues.

Its very common to get TOR's in the comma head of those as well. Princeton, MA for example.

Do you wait or do you warn? With the wind present, I would error on the side of a warning. Especially

if its 50/50 like you stated. You can get great gtg and signatures in New England, but yet only 50%

of those will produce a tornado. So you dont warn them? Error on the side of safety. Most of these

will at least produce wind damage.

With all the damage being reported, its clear they had to continue the TOR north after the first.

Absolutely agree with the first statement. Straight line winds can produce just as much, and sometimes more widespread, damage as rotating winds. However, calling it a tornado (by issuing a TOR) can send mixed messages and cause confusion. That leads into the second statement, because the number is far less than 50% of mesos produce tornadoes. This is a reason TOR false alarm rates are so high. And issuing more TORs, even for very strong wind, just reinforces public opinion that TORs are not something that should be cause for immediate life saving action.

[Dsnowx53]

Obviously you weren't listening to what people were saying. The couplet was tighter in southern CT when there was no warning. After it had weakened and crossed into BOX's cwa they issued the warning. I don't have a problem with the tornado warning but I thought odds were there was to touchdown. Once again though little office to office consistency.

As you were saying before, I think a tornado warning could/should have been issued for the Guilford area when the rotation was tighter and the gate to gate shear was impressive. The rotation was broad further north.

And that Block Island couplet was insane, too; didn't that have 97 knots of gate to gate shear at one point? Just interesting to me that those two locations did not receive tornado warnings, yet the Glastonbury area did. Little office to office consistency for sure, IMO.

[weatherwiz]

When it comes to tornadoes/microbursts that can become a very delicate situaton, especially for the person issuing wanrings. In many cases microbursts/macrobursts can be just as deadly and dangerous as tornadoes and produce just as much damage, if not more.

In the case of Friday where perhaps in CT the g2g numbers weren't as impressive or the couplet wasn't as tight if it was apparent that this was going to produce major wind issuing a TOR probably isn't all that bad.

Also, what was the g2g velocity? Remember, after 6/1 BOX changed their criteria for issuing TOR's...I believe it's now around 25 knots or so, down from 50 which is what the criteria used to be.

[CoastalWx]

Probably not. Really was too busy listening to reports from people with terror in their voices to worry about that.. But the first TOR was issued with a pretty good signature present.

The history from NY I guess contributed to TOR. In this case though, other than a verification statistic,

the public really isnt going to care if their trees blow down from a tornado or from a microburst.

The wind numbers clearly showed there were going to be issues.

Its very common to get TOR's in the comma head of those as well. Princeton, MA for example.

Do you wait or do you warn? With the wind present, I would error on the side of a warning. Especially

if its 50/50 like you stated. You can get great gtg and signatures in New England, but yet only 50%

of those will produce a tornado. So you dont warn them? Error on the side of safety. Most of these

will at least produce wind damage.

With all the damage being reported, its clear they had to continue the TOR north after the first.

What I meant was that I don't think I would have felt strongly either way. I wasn't trying to say it produces tornadoes 50% of the time. IOW, I don't think it would be a problem to have warned or not warned....but I was not an NWS met on the radar. I think most of us felt it was probably straight line winds based on the velocity signal in the area.

[weather01089]

Absolutely agree with the first statement. Straight line winds can produce just as much, and sometimes more widespread, damage as rotating winds. However, calling it a tornado (by issuing a TOR) can send mixed messages and cause confusion. That leads into the second statement, because the number is far less than 50% of mesos produce tornadoes. This is a reason TOR false alarm rates are so high. And issuing more TORs, even for very strong wind, just reinforces public opinion that TORs are not something that should be cause for immediate life saving action.

Have to agree with this. There are proposals for different catagories of TOR and SVR warnings,

and that is being tested in the midwest. I can tell you from talking to witnesses though after events,

that they take TOR's very seriously. Several I have talked to clearly had their lives saved by the warning going out, heightening their awareness, then taking cover fast when the storm approached.

Its not a perfect system, but you have to error on the side of public safety. You arent going to have

a problem in most cases at least up here in Western Massachusetts with people taking the warnings seriously trust me. But a catagory of "destructive life threatening" for a warning sure would help.

[OceanStWx]

When it comes to tornadoes/microbursts that can become a very delicate situaton, especially for the person issuing wanrings. In many cases microbursts/macrobursts can be just as deadly and dangerous as tornadoes and produce just as much damage, if not more.

In the case of Friday where perhaps in CT the g2g numbers weren't as impressive or the couplet wasn't as tight if it was apparent that this was going to produce major wind issuing a TOR probably isn't all that bad.

Also, what was the g2g velocity? Remember, after 6/1 BOX changed their criteria for issuing TOR's...I believe it's now around 25 knots or so, down from 50 which is what the criteria used to be.

Also don't forget that in the era of super res data, that gate to gate doesn't technically apply anymore. Some tornadic velocity couplets can now be resolved at better than a true gate to gate sense. In other words, "gate to gate" isn't necessarily immediately adjacent radials.

[weatherwiz]

Also don't forget that in the era of super res data, that gate to gate doesn't technically apply anymore. Some tornadic velocity couplets can now be resolved at better than a true gate to gate sense. In other words, "gate to gate" isn't necessarily immediately adjacent radials.

Yes...great point. Didn't even think of that.

[OceanStWx]

Have to agree with this. There are proposals for different catagories of TOR and SVR warnings,

and that is being tested in the midwest. I can tell you from talking to witnesses though after events,

that they take TOR's very seriously. Several I have talked to clearly had their lives saved by the warning going out, heightening their awareness, then taking cover fast when the storm approached.

Its not a perfect system, but you have to error on the side of public safety. You arent going to have

a problem in most cases at least up here in Western Massachusetts with people taking the warnings seriously trust me. But a catagory of "destructive life threatening" for a warning sure would help.

The unfortunate truth is that it usually takes an event or close call to make people serious about taking action for the next warning. I do like to hear that there were people who clearly received and responded to the warnings properly, but I believe that might be a minority in reality.

It's certainly not a perfect system (dissemination can be a mess some times with county based systems but storm based warnings), but the public safety aspect cuts both ways. You want to warn to be on the safe side, but too many warnings and the public becomes desensitized to them.

[weatherwiz]

The unfortunate truth is that it usually takes an event or close call to make people serious about taking action for the next warning. I do like to hear that there were people who clearly received and responded to the warnings properly, but I believe that might be a minority in reality.

It's certainly not a perfect system (dissemination can be a mess some times with county based systems but storm based warnings), but the public safety aspect cuts both ways. You want to warn to be on the safe side, but too many warnings and the public becomes desensitized to them.

The unfortunate part is the system will never be perfect and the public as a whole is never going to fully understand the wanring system and you'll never get everyone to take warnings seriously.

People just don't understand that just b/c they are in a warning doesn't mean they are going to receive damage or experience something such as a tornado or extreme winds. I hear people say so many times, they are in warnings but never get anything and b/c of this they completely let their guard down.

The only thing forecasters can do is just issue the warnings when it's warranted and relay as much info as possible in a timely manner to the public...if the forecaster does this they have done their job. After this it's up to the person how they want to interpret the information and what measures to take.

I also agree, it does take something major for people to actually take things seriously. After 6/1 last year I know many people who went out to purchase weather radios.

[OceanStWx]

What I meant was that I don't think I would have felt strongly either way. I wasn't trying to say it produces tornadoes 50% of the time. IOW, I don't think it would be a problem to have warned or not warned....but I was not an NWS met on the radar. I think most of us felt it was probably straight line winds based on the velocity signal in the area.

I was out of the house all day that day, so I didn't get a first hand look at the data. I'm downloading the level II data now to take a peek, and have the archived mesoanalysis up over at SPC.

First look at mesosanalysis without radar tells me that the environment was mostly on the poor side for tornadoes. Great effective helicity and low LCL heights, but shear was marginal to adequate and there was very little instability. I think I would be more excited about a tornado threat with a more traditional high shear/low CAPE look. Basically, what I'm seeing is a very compact low pressure system, that had dynamically driven intense winds to the surface (say similar to how a RFD forms).

[weatherwiz]

Obviously some questions regarding instability but late week looks rather interesting. Pretty impressive system being modeled with a very good amount of shear along with a pretty strong cold front. Maybe we can muster up at least a low-topped squall line with potential for damaging winds given the shear aloft?

[dryslot]

75/70 pretty uncomfortable

[weather01089]

I was out of the house all day that day, so I didn't get a first hand look at the data. I'm downloading the level II data now to take a peek, and have the archived mesoanalysis up over at SPC.

First look at mesosanalysis without radar tells me that the environment was mostly on the poor side for tornadoes. Great effective helicity and low LCL heights, but shear was marginal to adequate and there was very little instability. I think I would be more excited about a tornado threat with a more traditional high shear/low CAPE look. Basically, what I'm seeing is a very compact low pressure system, that had dynamically driven intense winds to the surface (say similar to how a RFD forms).

The GTG was pretty high at one point, like 60kts plus if I recall, but it wasnt a classic tornadic signature by any means. But the wind numbers in general in it were up there. There certainly was rotation, but you could at some points argue it was broad. They made the decision, and I think it was right since it got the attention of people at least. Also keep in mind this is preliminary. There may be some kind of tornado path out in the woods that will be found over the coming weeks. That has happened before as well.

[OceanStWx]

The GTG was pretty high at one point, like 60kts plus if I recall, but it wasnt a classic tornadic signature by any means. But the wind numbers in general in it were up there. There certainly was rotation, but you could at some points argue it was broad. They made the decision, and I think it was right since it got the attention of people at least. Also keep in mind this is preliminary. There may be some kind of tornado path out in the woods that will be found over the coming weeks. That has happened before as well.

The best I see it via KBOX is around 70 kts, separated by a radial. This is also about the time that BOX went with the TOR (2040z volume scan). Before and after that it was mostly broad in the BOX CWA, definitely more impressive near the OKX border as well.

If you look at this trace from HFD, you can see that the strongest winds occur with the pressure rise as the meso-low passed. Very much like our isallobaric wind events in the cool season.

Compare it to HYA on December 9, 2005. The strongest winds occur as the pressure rises immediately following the closest approach of low pressure.

Obviously, the case from a couple days ago occurred on a much smaller scale, in both time and space. Equally strong winds though.

[HoarfrostHubb]

Wow, Monson, MA received around 5.8" of rain this morning

http://boston.com/metrodesk/2012/08/12/monson-declares-state-emergency-after-heavy-rains-cause-flooding/kpnG9iyJZfs65QWewc0bvK/story.html

[ChrisM]

Wow, Monson, MA received around 5.8" of rain this morning

http://boston.com/metrodesk/2012/08/12/monson-declares-state-emergency-after-heavy-rains-cause-flooding/kpnG9iyJZfs65QWewc0bvK/story.html

That place has been a magnet lately. They got the June 1 tornado incredibly bad, Irene got them pretty good, Octobomb didn't spare them and the heavy rain today. Weenie paradise but not in a good way.

[weatherwiz]

My friend just texted me this pic from NH...pretty awesome. Sorry it's sideways...don't know how to fix it

[kdxken]

My friend just texted me this pic from NH...pretty awesome. Sorry it's sideways...don't know how to fix it

Here's a couple from Brighton...nice evening!

[dryslot]

My friend just texted me this pic from NH...pretty awesome. Sorry it's sideways...don't know how to fix it

My neck cracked as i tried to see that ...lol

[weatherwiz]

Here's a couple from Brighton...nice evening!

Nice pics!

My neck cracked as i tried to see that ...lol

Whenever my friend texts me pics they end up being sideways. I just saved the image to my phone and uploaded via photobucket. I probably could have just emailed the picture to myself and then used my desktop and opened the pic up in paint and rotated it.

[dryslot]

Nice pics!

Whenever my friend texts me pics they end up being sideways. I just saved the image to my phone and uploaded via photobucket. I probably could have just emailed the picture to myself and then used my desktop and opened the pic up in paint and rotated it.

I think you can rotate it in photobucket as well

[weatherwiz]

I think you can rotate it in photobucket as well

Oh sweet...I'll remember this for next time.

[free_man]

Nice clouds today..pics taken from Danvers, Andover and Nashua.

[Ice Warrior commander]

+SHRA at 2.30PM

+TSRA 3:40PM OCL LTG.

0.85"

CFROPA 8PM.

[Ice Warrior commander]

Departing CB at 4PM.