brettjrob

By 48 hours from now, the drought across most of OK and N TX will have been beaten into submission to the point that minor to moderate long-term hydrological impacts are all that remains. Even farther W into the Panhandles, this drenching should probably ensure average-or-better evapotranspiration for awhile. Bring on May, and good riddance to this active but underwhelming April.

Yeah, there's certainly some potential on multiple days; didn't mean to dismiss it entirely. And if the downstream troughing trends weaker on subsequent runs, there could end up being a higher-end day after all.

The past 10 days have been among the best we've seen in years for drought relief in the most dire areas, as long as you're not in the western Panhandles or SW KS. The active STJ looks to continue unabated into next week. If not for the substantial Great Lakes/Northeast troughing, there'd probably be one or more major severe weather days on the southern Plains next week. It's been way too long since the southern branch has been remotely active like this, with energetic waves translating across N Mexico and the Desert SW. If this can continue into early-mid May (big "if"), this would most likely be the best southern Plains season in several years, particularly out west.

Yeah, I don't know if I could've jinxed it better if I tried. Moisture return will in fact be a problem tomorrow, and then the STJ closed low starts filling to the point where shear over the warm sector is unremarkable by Sun-Mon. The much-advertised big trough next week is now but a whimper, and another positive-tilt one at that, most likely. With shortening wavelengths and multiple attempts at cutoffs, who knows what the medium range will bring... but with the raging +PDO showing no signs of abating, it's hard not to panic when you see that Pac ridge even try to start settling in. But if recent GFS QPF over TX/OK between now and Tuesday verifies, I guess I can wait a bit. #payitforward

The 8-9 April event notwithstanding, the medium range (D6-15) currently looks remarkably active on the guidance. Pretty much a parade of significant disturbances crashing onto the west coast and translating across the CONUS without any crazy amplification east of the Plains to scour moisture out of the Gulf. The interval between systems and associated moisture return to areas well north of the Gulf could potentially be an issue, but otherwise, this is shaping up to be the most active April for this subregion since 2012 -- as of now, anyway. If this pattern materializes despite the continued record +PDO, I'll be mighty impressed.

https://discoveringdifferent.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/and-its-gone.jpg At least there's something to watch early-mid next week. If that turns into 3-4 days of a sloshing dryline as the trough junks out too far west, though, full ragemode may commence.

Cautiously optimistic that at least some changes are afoot for the medium range. It seems unlikely that the months-old Hudson Bay vortex will break down anytime soon, and most (maybe all?) of the guidance agrees on that point. That might put somewhat of a cap on just how favorable the pattern can become, particularly being that it's still early in the season, when higher-amplitude troughs tend to be preferred for substantial Plains events. Any progress is welcome, though.

The H5 pattern somewhat resembles each of those. The important thing to keep in mind is that moisture was unseasonably rich for both events, particularly 1998. Unless we can manage widespread 65-70 F Tds along the dryline and avoid mixing issues, the usual mid-level thermal issues of autumn will likely be a limiting factor.

This is the biggest reason why I hate the second season. So many wasted setups over the past decade I can recall due to this problem.

Environment for Wednesday 8/20 in the mid-Missouri Valley should be very impressive for August. I haven't delved into the guidance enough to assess the likelihood and possible timing of CI, but the parameters certainly grabbed my attention.

Interesting -- I'll check that out, and be on the lookout for any publications from his work. I've driven through the Hackleburg-Harvest damage path where it crossed US-72A near Trinity a few times already. Impressive. (Actually, when I visit my parents in HSV next, my trip will be bookended by that and the Moore/Shawnee paths on I-35/40 -- three incredibly impressive swaths across major highways).

That doesn't make much sense to me, from a practical standpoint. A vet's "sacrifice," in general, does not correlate with forecasting aptitude or even the potential for development of such aptitude. (Granted, if the veteran was a forecaster in the military, that is valuable experience and should be treated as such). A graduate student or private forecaster, while arguably not "sacrificing" as much, has gained additional experience and knowledge relevant to the job. I'm not trying to minimize yours and other vets' sacrifice (any more than you were trying to minimize those of us in academia), but I do think that with such a surplus of applicants to most NWS positions, MIC's should be selecting from among the most-qualified. That will include some vets and some non-vets, of course.

It is somewhere in the neighborhood of 75%.

Limestone/Madison Co. tornado (W HSV area) rated EF-4 with upgrade to EF-5 possible: http://forecast.weather.gov/product.php?site=HUN&issuedby=HUN&product=PNS&format=CI&version=2&glossary=0 Video of the wedge approaching I-65 near Athens/Tanner:

I was focused heavily on the HSV-area storms yesterday, since I have family there, and I agree to an extent. It appeared to me that the outflow boundary from the MCS may have been draped across the northern row of counties in AL for several hours during the height of the outbreak. One storm in particular, which initially produced the catastrophic Hackleburg/Phil Campbell tornado, seemed to weaken a bit as it moved northeast from that area. Then, it suddenly went crazy upon reaching the Tennessee River, producing the Limestone Co. wedge near Tanner/Athens with visibly much-lower LCL's than the southern storms. For the rest of the afternoon, supercells trained over this general corridor and would each develop strong low-level rotation as they entered the Dectaur/Huntsville metro area. On the other hand, it still seems that the most prolific, violent tornado-producers were over the open warm sector, south of any clearly-defined boundaries from early convection. So, while I don't believe the MCS is what "made" this outbreak by any means, it may have at minimum not reduced its overall severity.

RIDICULOUS debris ball over Hackleburg

Cullman tower cam video will go down as one of the top tornado clips of all time, IMO.

I can think of counterexamples from personal experience. I can think of counterexamples from personal experience. Not saying those aren't good rules of thumb, but you have to remember that like any other situation involving human discretion, the acceptance/hiring/promotion process in this field has its flaws.

Here's something else anyone looking into meteorology should know, particularly if they're already considering the possibility of a graduate degree: Graduate students in this field are almost universally paid employees of the university they work for, and their tuition is waived by the department (for TA's) or their advisor's grant (for RA's). So not only will you pay little or no tuition in graduate school; you'll also be paid a stipend that's comparable to an entry-level job in forecasting. And if you're fortunate enough to get a fellowship, you might well make more as a graduate student than your peers make in the private sector for their first year or two. I guess my point is that graduate school for meteorology should not be seen as a financial burden. Unlike some other fields, where doing your M.S. is a short-term financial investment for long-term financial gain, this is usually a wash even during the years you're in school. (Of course, that speaks as much to the horrid job market for B.S. grads as to the relatively cushy situation grad students enjoy, lol). Just throwing that out there since I didn't realize it until I was at least midway through my undergrad degree.

Exactly. And it's getting exponentially worse. The OP probably exaggerated some claims, and he clearly has a personal bias, but I think the same applies to a lot of the happy working meteorologists who are still encouraging people into the field. The truth is somewhere in between. Unfortunately, given the extreme negativity of the OP and the cautious wording from even the most gung-ho optimists, that middle ground is not too pretty. Here's something every prospective met student needs to understand: hard work and good grades do not guarantee you a whole lot these days. The only thing that's a guaranteed pass to success is knowing and being cozy with the right people. In many cases, that trumps everything else. Also, I think it's worth noting that this discussion seems very forecasting-centric. I went into school thinking forecasting was my calling, but now I'm working with numerical modeling as a grad student, and I've become more open to a career in research or model development. Even research and academia are very competitive in this field, since -- as others have noted -- the number of M.S. graduates is exploding now (vicious cycle: more kids can't get jobs after graduation, so they go to grad school as a last resort, deflating the value of an M.S.). But at least employment in research and modeling should continue to grow, whereas manual forecasting seems less certain, especially in the long-term. So if you're open to using numerical modeling or research as an outlet for your passion rather than just forecasting, the outlook is at least marginally better -- but it will, of course, require several more years in school.