Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,530
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    e46ds1x
    Newest Member
    e46ds1x
    Joined

5/29 Severe Threat


CT Rain

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 652
  • Created
  • Last Reply

That one is a head scratcher for me. I think I know the case you're referring to. I have to think that there was a circulation on the ground lofting leaf litter, but just produced no discernible damage for a survey to find.

 

Yeah I heard it mentioned twice on one of the WDTB courses but I did a search of literature and couldn't come up with anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those courses are great too. I'm glad they have those on the Internet.

 

I'm actually woefully far behind on those storm of the month seminars. I'm the dual-pol focal point at GYX, so I'm trying to keep up on the latest. I'm hoping I get some time tonight to write something up for the staff on the ENX TDSs from today. The more people see how useful dual-pol can be, the more likely they are to use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually woefully far behind on those storm of the month seminars. I'm the dual-pol focal point at GYX, so I'm trying to keep up on the latest. I'm hoping I get some time tonight to write something up for the staff on the ENX TDSs from today. The more people see how useful dual-pol can be, the more likely they are to use it.

I've been extremely busy myself and haven't seen those storm of the month seminars as well, but I think the whole program in general is great. Such good stuff on there and it's broken down into an

operational approach which is ideal. So many times I see these online courses and it just doesn't quite get into the operational use of whatever it is I'm watching. Jim Moore who used to teach at University at St Louis was the master at this. Because of him, I had an understanding of how CSI actually worked.

As far as dual pol goes, I'm trying to bring our group up to date on this stuff as well. We clearly don't have the use for it like the NWS does, but hail detection is becoming important. Throw some golf balls at a 757 and you are looking at 10s of millions of dollars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 2013 AWOC tornado warning guidance is good. Interesting that they're giving guidance on how to estimate that strength of a tornado in real time. I guess they have to now that they're pushing more impact based warnings.

 

I haven't done that yet myself, but I know there were experiments going on in Central Region last year to test out this idea.

 

The idea being that social scientists are telling us that our warnings lack the desired impact from time to time. And telling people it's a big one is more likely to spur action. Of course that opens up a can of worms about whether that diminishes other warning products at the same time.

 

But when you have no new tools to increase lead time, you have to focus on actions resulting from your warnings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been extremely busy myself and haven't seen those storm of the month seminars as well, but I think the whole program in general is great. Such good stuff on there and it's broken down into an

operational approach which is ideal. So many times I see these online courses and it just doesn't quite get into the operational use of whatever it is I'm watching. Jim Moore who used to teach at University at St Louis was the master at this. Because of him, I had an understanding of how CSI actually worked.

As far as dual pol goes, I'm trying to bring our group up to date on this stuff as well. We clearly don't have the use for it like the NWS does, but hail detection is becoming important. Throw some golf balls at a 757 and you are looking at 10s of millions of dollars.

 

I think they're pretty awesome too. It's kind of a way for us operational types to share information gathered in the field outside of the traditional conference get together events. It's probably the way the NWS is headed in the future, but it's making the most of a bad situation. These seminars are very interactive, and the Q&A portion is most often better than the presentation itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure it was FFC that had that issue. They had a TDS, went to the neighborhood to survey, and found nothing.

Yes, Peachtree City had a supercell during the March 2, 2012 outbreak move

through Cobb and Fulton counties from Marietta to Alpharetta with what was

thought to be a noticeable TDS in multiple locations there, but only a brief

EF-1 was found.  Not sure of what thread it was in, but I believe you showed

a few scans of it labeling why it was a false positive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't done that yet myself, but I know there were experiments going on in Central Region last year to test out this idea.

The idea being that social scientists are telling us that our warnings lack the desired impact from time to time. And telling people it's a big one is more likely to spur action. Of course that opens up a can of worms about whether that diminishes other warning products at the same time.

But when you have no new tools to increase lead time, you have to focus on actions resulting from your warnings.

Yeah it seemed like the horse was in front of the cart when tornado emergencies started and then the impact based tornado warnings. Until this year there didn't seem to be any uniform NWS training/best practices for tornado strength estimation yet it was required to issue the tornado emergency or impact based "large and violent tornado" etc.

What is discouraging is the research by Patrick marsh that showed more than half of tornado emergencies have been false alarms. Maybe we aren't quite there yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it seemed like the horse was in front of the cart when tornado emergencies started and then the impact based tornado warnings. Until this year there didn't seem to be any uniform NWS training/best practices for tornado strength estimation yet it was required to issue the tornado emergency or impact based "large and violent tornado" etc.

What is discouraging is the research by Patrick marsh that showed more than half of tornado emergencies have been false alarms. Maybe we aren't quite there yet?

 

I definitely think the tornado emergency "program" is haphazard at best. There really is no guidance on it, and each WFO has it's own standards of what is a large enough city for an emergency, or what is a large enough to tornado to prompt one.

 

The issue really stems from forecasters wanting people to heed the warning. So they drop a "tornado emergency" in there to get action, when we don't really know what's happening on the ground. I would rather they be reserved for large tornadoes that are being tracked by spotters at the same time.

 

Then again the Midwest/Plains many of these towns we would consider small are the only populations centers for a whole county. Not like our urban centers that sprawl into the suburbs. A tornado passing north of Greensburg tears up open field, a tornado passing north of Hartford is a different story. So where would BOX draw the line on a tornado emergency, versus DDC. Such a murky subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'm interested in seeing down the line is false alarm TDS. I saw that it is possible for a TDS to occur without a tornado... though it's very rare. I imagine we'll learn more as all the offices start identifying more and more cases.

 

 

Regarding the case of the false-positive TDS, I knew I'd recently read something about this somewhere, but I couldn't think where I'd seen it... It was bugging me that I couldn't remember, so I kept looking and eventually I found what I was looking for on Stormtrack. I think you might be referring to the Roswell - Alpharetta event of 3/2/12, here's a link to the relevant post on ST that I was thinking of:

 

Stormtrack forum post

 

 

Sorry if this is a bit OT, but I figured I might as well post the reference once I ran it down. Hope that's the one you meant.

 

 

EDIT: Dammit, somebody beat me to it. Ah well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Regarding the case of the false-positive TDS, I knew I'd recently read something about this somewhere, but I couldn't think where I'd seen it... It was bugging me that I couldn't remember, so I kept looking and eventually I found what I was looking for on Stormtrack. I think you might be referring to the Roswell - Alpharetta event of 3/2/12, here's a link to the relevant post on ST that I was thinking of:

 

Stormtrack forum post

 

 

Sorry if this is a bit OT, but I figured I might as well post the reference once I ran it down. Hope that's the one you meant.

 

 

EDIT: Dammit, somebody beat me to it. Ah well...

 

I definitely posted something about this back shortly after it happened. Mainly that FFC had the right idea to use dual-pol in their warnings, but applied it wrong in this case of inflow. There is also a separate case that Ryan and I are referring to in which a true TDS was present yet the survey team found no damage in order to rate the suspected tornado on the EF scale. Hence a "false alarm" TDS.

 

I hypothesize that it may have just lofted leaf litter, dust, etc, rather than broken tree limbs or shingles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's really fascinating about yesterday now that I'm going back and looking more closely at the level 2 data is that the tornado near Rotterdam in Schenectady County was more of a classic supercell that was taken over by a strengthening squall line and developed into a powerful bow echo. Very odd evolution but it appears the tornado was from the storm when it was discrete ahead of the line.

 

The Schoharie County tornado (that was unwarned - and for good reason - radar had next to nothing) developed from an existing QLCS. By the time the inflow notch/velocity couplet appeared it was already lofting debris. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also of note is that there was a complex supercell/QLCS merger during or just after tornadogenesis. So a lot went into that Rotterdam tornado. 

 

Yeah that tornadic cell was separate and then just got overtaken by the line of storms...but still had the rotation. That later became the MCV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...