Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

May 15-20 Severe Weather Obs/Discussion (Part 2)

SmokeEater

By SmokeEater,
in Central/Western States

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
yoda

yoda

Posted
Posted

Sounds like Clay County KS got hit hard with wind damage per reports I am seeing coming out

 

Here are two of them I have seen:

 

1/2 mile north of 25th and Frontier Road, Clay County, KS machine shed destroyed

Between 23 rd and 24th road on Frontier Road, Clay County, power poles down and irrigation equipment blocking the roads

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CUmet

CUmet

Posted
Posted

The 00z GFS has major tornado outbreak written all over it for SE KS to central-northern OK, with its continued depiction of a secondary low backing the surface winds ahead of the dryline.  The sharp difference between the GFS and to some extent the ECMWF vs. the NAM (which has a more veered surface flow without the secondary low) still has me a bit uneasy though, and that secondary low is crucial for backing the surface winds and ramping up the low-level wind fields to enhance the helicity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OUGrad05

OUGrad05

Posted
Posted

The 00z GFS has major tornado outbreak written all over it for SE KS to central-northern OK, with its continued depiction of a secondary low backing the surface winds ahead of the dryline.  The sharp difference between the GFS and to some extent the ECMWF vs. the NAM (which has a more veered surface flow without the secondary low) still has me a bit uneasy though, and that secondary low is crucial for backing the surface winds and ramping up the low-level wind fields to enhance the helicity.

I have to be honest, I'm beginning to get a bit concerned about tomorrow.  Mostly because 24 hours out we have material differences between the models.  That bothers me.  I don't want to spend 10 hrs for a bust tomorrow but I am not likely to go Monday due to work.  

 

Overall though, it seems to me the system is pretty potent.  The ingredients are there and finding a system that is textbook in everyway is unlikely...I'll never forget May 3rd 1999, started as a slight risk day...not that I'm making that comparison to this system but I'm saying that this system is pretty impressive and I'm hoping to catch some good photo's/video's tomorrow, not only that the dynamics seem to be in place...

 

I hope I don't wake up tomorrow with it having fallen apart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
L.B. LaForce

L.B. LaForce

Posted
Posted

Interesting. Well for tomorrow I had initially though a SW IA, St. Joe, MO area, but after looking at the latest 00Z suite, and the 12Z runs earlier, I have changed my mind, and like the southern target better down near SE KS and NE OK. Further north has too much of a meridional component in the mid levels and give you a veer/back/veer pattern in the wind field. On the other hand, further south has slightly higher LCL's. Both NAM and GFS have the dryline to I-35 with the dryline bulge in north central, OK. Should be interesting tomorrow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Marusak

Jim Marusak

Posted
Posted

Just took a look at the gfs and the canadian regional out to 42 hrs. and all I can say is tomorrow morning's surface and UA analysis will be crucial. If we have a double-low scenario develop near 12-15z, then the NAM is how you go and areas north of I-90 aren't as favored and south of 90 from NE to IA, MO, IL, WI, and KS go dynamically nuts before it ropes out. if the secondary low doesn't form like the GFS and especially the canadian regional, then the meso-dynamics don't go as nuts and we end up with a squall-line starting from AXN to OMA and OKC that just rips east across most of the mississippi valley south of i-94.

 

The one difference between the GFS/Can-reg camp and the NAM camp is that the NAM still has some of the convection in KS and OK (esp KS), which I am assuming the model is thinking that the left-over boundaries from that convection help with a double-low structure; while the Can-Reg/GFS camp doesn't have much if any of that convection indicated in the t+06 and t+12hr panels, which is allowing for the more traditional boundaries to set up, and hence it's look.

 

I might want the NAM for right now, if for no other reason as it has some semblance of the convection at the initalization and might have a better meso-synoptic starting point to work with.

 

but that's just my 2 cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ian

Ian

Posted
Posted

Great shots, Ian. Very photogenic. Hope you continue to have opportunities in the oncoming days.

Thanks. Nice way to start the trip. Tho might be hard to top. Got a lot of nice shots.. Should keep me busy processing for a while when I get the chance. Had some beautiful post storm light at sunset with a rainbow and lightning .. Was so calm and peaceful. Type of day that makes the weather obsession worth it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tornadotony

tornadotony

Posted
Posted

I'm glad I don't have to work an SPC shift for this one.  For me, it's hard to judge which scenario is going to be right: GFS/Euro vs. NAM.  A very subtle difference I notice between the 00z GFS and the 00z NAM is that the GFS has what appears to be a subtle shortwave feature/jetlet over the warm sector by 00z tomorrow that would place SE KS/ern OK that would place that area in the right-entrance region, supportive of backed flow and secondary sfc cyclogenesis.  Looking at the 00z UA charts, it does appear that there is a minor enhancement in the flow magnitude at 250 hPa and 500 hPa over the 4-corners region, which could be a signal of this dual disturbance.  These obs, in turn with the agreement between the GFS and Euro, make me slightly lean toward that solution.  Keep in mind that the NAM verbatim is still a pretty significant severe wx threat, so trying to draw these major battle lines in the models, though a fun exercise, may have limited practical benefit.  If the GFS verifies nearly verbatim, then we're probably talking about a major tornado outbreak, but either way, especially with the NAM's issues with sfc flow and estimating SRH, I foresee a serious threat tomorrow.

 

Also, as I was typing this, the SPC WRF completed its run.  Suffice to say if you look at it, it's got all its eggs in the GFS basket and is just a bad, bad scenario from US 183 eastward in srn/ern KS and nrn/cntl OK.

 

http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mpyle/spcprod/00/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KSWx

KSWx

Posted
Posted

I'm glad I don't have to work an SPC shift for this one.  For me, it's hard to judge which scenario is going to be right: GFS/Euro vs. NAM.  A very subtle difference I notice between the 00z GFS and the 00z NAM is that the GFS has what appears to be a subtle shortwave feature/jetlet over the warm sector by 00z tomorrow that would place SE KS/ern OK that would place that area in the right-entrance region, supportive of backed flow and secondary sfc cyclogenesis.  Looking at the 00z UA charts, it does appear that there is a minor enhancement in the flow magnitude at 250 hPa and 500 hPa over the 4-corners region, which could be a signal of this dual disturbance.  These obs, in turn with the agreement between the GFS and Euro, make me slightly lean toward that solution.  Keep in mind that the NAM verbatim is still a pretty significant severe wx threat, so trying to draw these major battle lines in the models, though a fun exercise, may have limited practical benefit.  If the GFS verifies nearly verbatim, then we're probably talking about a major tornado outbreak, but either way, especially with the NAM's issues with sfc flow and estimating SRH, I foresee a serious threat tomorrow.

 

Also, as I was typing this, the SPC WRF completed its run.  Suffice to say if you look at it, it's got all its eggs in the GFS basket and is just a bad, bad scenario from US 183 eastward in srn/ern KS and nrn/cntl OK.

 

http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mpyle/spcprod/00/

 

 

What about NE KS? Local guys seem to be saying it's primarily a hail threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CUmet

CUmet

Posted
Posted

I'm glad I don't have to work an SPC shift for this one.  For me, it's hard to judge which scenario is going to be right: GFS/Euro vs. NAM.  A very subtle difference I notice between the 00z GFS and the 00z NAM is that the GFS has what appears to be a subtle shortwave feature/jetlet over the warm sector by 00z tomorrow that would place SE KS/ern OK that would place that area in the right-entrance region, supportive of backed flow and secondary sfc cyclogenesis.  Looking at the 00z UA charts, it does appear that there is a minor enhancement in the flow magnitude at 250 hPa and 500 hPa over the 4-corners region, which could be a signal of this dual disturbance.  These obs, in turn with the agreement between the GFS and Euro, make me slightly lean toward that solution.  Keep in mind that the NAM verbatim is still a pretty significant severe wx threat, so trying to draw these major battle lines in the models, though a fun exercise, may have limited practical benefit.  If the GFS verifies nearly verbatim, then we're probably talking about a major tornado outbreak, but either way, especially with the NAM's issues with sfc flow and estimating SRH, I foresee a serious threat tomorrow.

 

Also, as I was typing this, the SPC WRF completed its run.  Suffice to say if you look at it, it's got all its eggs in the GFS basket and is just a bad, bad scenario from US 183 eastward in srn/ern KS and nrn/cntl OK.

 

http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mpyle/spcprod/00/

 

Yep, look at how much surface wind backing occurs between 19-00z in particular, very similar to the GFS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tornadotony

tornadotony

Posted
Posted

Yep, look at how much surface wind backing occurs between 19-00z in particular, very similar to the GFS. 

I've seen runs of this magnitude before in terms of having many cells w/very high updraft helicity, but even this one is a lot of them and in a pretty concentrated area.  Given that last night's 00z run did pretty well with today, and that it's in concert with the consistent GFS, this is concerning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andyhb

andyhb

Posted
Posted

I've seen runs of this magnitude before in terms of having many cells w/very high updraft helicity, but even this one is a lot of them and in a pretty concentrated area.  Given that last night's 00z run did pretty well with today, and that it's in concert with the consistent GFS, this is concerning.

 

One thing that really jumps out at me there is that long-tracked supercell that moves just north of the OKC area that initiates around 22z.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...