Ginx snewx Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 https://fbcdn-video-a.akamaihd.net/cfs-ak-snc6/213453/981/2043635247529_15777.mp4?oh=a900e7384b291d795aaa63eea5ec07bb&oe=4DB63100&__gda__=1303785728_9cd819aba2984b10048031f5ad4a99a8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackjack123 Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 Hi everyone, please allow me to introduce myself. This my first posting. My name is Mike Smith. I am CEO of WeatherData Services, Inc. of Wichita, which is part of AccuWeather. I'm a board certified consulting meteorologist and a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society. I have written a book, Warnings: The True Story of How Science Tamed the Weather which (written like a mystery novel) tells how weather science has helped eliminate microburst crashes, cut the tornado death rate from tornadoes by 95%, and saved tens of thousands in hurricanes. Why am I telling you this? The book tells of a major gap in the weather warning system: The F.A.A.'s refusal to allow NWS tornado warnings to be furnished to control towers and ATC personnel. There was a near-miss at KDAB on Christmas Day 2006 when a Delta Express flight nearly landed in a tornado. The plane went around and when it landed, the pilots asked, "what happened?!" when they saw all of the damage. The tornado was very well-warned. When DAB put a weather radio in the tower, the FAA made them take it out. This entire story is told in the book. Last night was the real thing and people could have been killed. For reasons I have never understood, the FAA seems to see a difference between "weather warnings" and "aviation weather warnings." Tornado warnings are not part of the latter data stream, thus they are not provided. It would be very easy to solve this problem but the FAA doesn't see it as a priority. I have a blog and I have talked about this: http://meteorologica...s.blogspot.com/ I also welcome questions via email ([email protected]). Thank you for allowing me to comment. Happy Easter, everyone! Mike Yeah arent you with stormtrack as well. I think you did extended research on the Greensburg, Kansas EF5 tornado. Nice to have you aboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csnavywx Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 Hi everyone, please allow me to introduce myself. This my first posting. My name is Mike Smith. I am CEO of WeatherData Services, Inc. of Wichita, which is part of AccuWeather. I'm a board certified consulting meteorologist and a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society. I have written a book, Warnings: The True Story of How Science Tamed the Weather which (written like a mystery novel) tells how weather science has helped eliminate microburst crashes, cut the tornado death rate from tornadoes by 95%, and saved tens of thousands in hurricanes. Why am I telling you this? The book tells of a major gap in the weather warning system: The F.A.A.'s refusal to allow NWS tornado warnings to be furnished to control towers and ATC personnel. There was a near-miss at KDAB on Christmas Day 2006 when a Delta Express flight nearly landed in a tornado. The plane went around and when it landed, the pilots asked, "what happened?!" when they saw all of the damage. The tornado was very well-warned. When DAB put a weather radio in the tower, the FAA made them take it out. This entire story is told in the book. Last night was the real thing and people could have been killed. For reasons I have never understood, the FAA seems to see a difference between "weather warnings" and "aviation weather warnings." Tornado warnings are not part of the latter data stream, thus they are not provided. It would be very easy to solve this problem but the FAA doesn't see it as a priority. I have a blog and I have talked about this: http://meteorologica...s.blogspot.com/ I also welcome questions via email ([email protected]). Thank you for allowing me to comment. Happy Easter, everyone! Mike Absolutely insane. We are very lucky that the plane that was on the tarmac didn't suffer more damage and was (apparently) on the outer portion of the circulation, or we might have been talking about a lot more fatalities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQPublic Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 https://fbcdn-video-a.akamaihd.net/cfs-ak-snc6/213453/981/2043635247529_15777.mp4?oh=a900e7384b291d795aaa63eea5ec07bb&oe=4DB63100&__gda__=1303785728_9cd819aba2984b10048031f5ad4a99a8 Wow! Amazing how many people there were further back by the terminal gates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcwxguy Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 During the evening of Friday April 22, an intense supercell thunderstorm produced a long-track tornado which tore a path of destruction from west to east across the St. Louis Metropolitan Area. The tornado reached a maximum intensity of EF4 on the Enhanced Fujita Scale as it tracked through the community of Bridgeton, just west of Lambert St. Louis International Airport. The total path length was 22 miles, with a width of up to 0.4 miles. much much more athttp://www.crh.noaa....x/?n=04_22_2011 just imagine what it would have been like if it tracked just a little farther south..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnweather Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 Hi everyone, please allow me to introduce myself. This my first posting. My name is Mike Smith. I am CEO of WeatherData Services, Inc. of Wichita, which is part of AccuWeather. I'm a board certified consulting meteorologist and a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society. I have written a book, Warnings: The True Story of How Science Tamed the Weather which (written like a mystery novel) tells how weather science has helped eliminate microburst crashes, cut the tornado death rate from tornadoes by 95%, and saved tens of thousands in hurricanes. Why am I telling you this? The book tells of a major gap in the weather warning system: The F.A.A.'s refusal to allow NWS tornado warnings to be furnished to control towers and ATC personnel. There was a near-miss at KDAB on Christmas Day 2006 when a Delta Express flight nearly landed in a tornado. The plane went around and when it landed, the pilots asked, "what happened?!" when they saw all of the damage. The tornado was very well-warned. When DAB put a weather radio in the tower, the FAA made them take it out. This entire story is told in the book. Last night was the real thing and people could have been killed. For reasons I have never understood, the FAA seems to see a difference between "weather warnings" and "aviation weather warnings." Tornado warnings are not part of the latter data stream, thus they are not provided. It would be very easy to solve this problem but the FAA doesn't see it as a priority. I have a blog and I have talked about this: http://meteorologica...s.blogspot.com/ I also welcome questions via email ([email protected]). Thank you for allowing me to comment. Happy Easter, everyone! Mike lol. The FAA probably does tell ATC. ATC was probably just sleeping up in the tower again and couldn't let the pilot know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICEHOCEY77 Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 lol. The FAA probably does tell ATC. ATC was probably just sleeping up in the tower again and couldn't let the pilot know. Or taking shelter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellinwood Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 lol. The FAA probably does tell ATC. ATC was probably just sleeping up in the tower again and couldn't let the pilot know. This may be a joke post, but please don't dismiss the issue as it is rather serious and its consequences are life-threatening on occasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnweather Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 This may be a joke post, but please don't dismiss the issue as it is rather serious and its consequences are life-threatening on occasion. Lighten up. I never dismissed it at all. A joke does not mean it is dismissed. ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Lighten up. I never dismissed it at all. A joke does not mean it is dismissed. ok. Tbh this isn't really a subject to joke about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormchaser21 Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Here's video that a friend and me got of the tornado that hit the bridgeton, MO area just west of lambert St. Louis airport friday night. Had been chasing the storm for about 4 hours since southwest of columbia, MO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clifford Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I knew these storms were strong and had possible Tornadic signatures. I was IN THE COCKPIT at gate A4 when this happened. We felt the gusts and saw the rapid pressure drop on the altimeter. Plane moved around a bit, but no more than other times ive been in gusty winds on the ground. Our concourse is about 400 feet away from concourse C which sustained significant damage. What is bothering me is the fact that neither I nor the airline agents knew there was a Tornado warning for the area. Im pretty sure this storm was warned and im going to investigate why as Captain I did not know and how we might possibly have had better information in this event AND better warning in the future. My question is why the airlines allow the planes to be sitting on the ground during the severe weather. I suppose there are enough false alarms that one can't treat every weather forecast as an emergency. But, it was almost exactly a decade ago that TWA had about two dozen airplanes damaged by hail at Lambert International. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvaspartan Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I will say that the NWS does send Warning data to the FAA. What the FAA does with it after that I am not sure. I can tell you that I have seen the data and the fact that it was sent to the FAA WMSCR location in leesburg (Their routing mechanism for data products). What they do with it after that I am not sure nor do I have that information. I just have to say NWS does its part to get FAA the information they need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clifford Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I doubt that the air traffic controllers had planes taking off and landing during the tornado. When the first tornado hit west of St. Louis at about 7:30, I have no doubt that the air traffic controllers were scrambling to deal with the planes in the sky. I would guess that around 8:00 they would have shut off take-offs and landings. When the storm hit Bridgeton at 8:10... they probably abandoned the tower. At least I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable riding out a tornado in an air traffic control tower. After the tornado, the call to re-route planes to KS City and Chicago should have been done very quickly as they would have had to at least physically check the runways before any additional landings. Anyway, I would anticipate that the air traffic controllers had their hands full dealing with the planes in the air. Perhaps they should have had better communication with the planes on the ground, but perhaps it is up to the airlines to communicate with their own staff members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormchaser21 Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Here's an expanded version of our video that me and a friend caught of the tornado in the St Louis area friday night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnweather Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Tbh this isn't really a subject to joke about. w/e Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaPilot Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 I am pretty sure that as things got very close to the storm hitting the airport the guys in the tower were leaving the cab. I tried to contact ground control twice just as the gusts came in to ask if there was something more serious than just a T-storm going on and they did not answer. I would bet they were already running downstairs. We were lucky, but truthfully the aircraft is a pretty safe place to be. Damage might happen, but the plane weighs north of 140K and unless its a VERY strong AND large cicrulation we are probably going to be fairly safe inside the aircraft. I was surprised that our aircraft had no damage being so close, and apparently no debris damage either. American just behind us was not so lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdwx Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 what are you assuming happened to the bus? it looks like it only had to be picked up a couple feet to get onto that perch....impressive but I don't know if that means EF3...especially since the stuff around it doesn't look to be damaged by EF3 winds. those buses are pretty light compared to their surface area. Stick to what you do best, talk out your ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaoPos Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 I am pretty sure that as things got very close to the storm hitting the airport the guys in the tower were leaving the cab. I tried to contact ground control twice just as the gusts came in to ask if there was something more serious than just a T-storm going on and they did not answer. I would bet they were already running downstairs. We were lucky, but truthfully the aircraft is a pretty safe place to be. Damage might happen, but the plane weighs north of 140K and unless its a VERY strong AND large cicrulation we are probably going to be fairly safe inside the aircraft. I was surprised that our aircraft had no damage being so close, and apparently no debris damage either. American just behind us was not so lucky. I'm no airplane engineer, or have no specific knowledge of weather and aircraft affects. However, just some questions concerns. I'm sure the bigger problems with a tornado and plane on the ground scenario would be with debris. What's the thickness of the aluminum on the aircraft within the passenger compartment? I mean, a sheared off branch or other misc. Building Debris traveling @ 100-160mph impacting the aircraft, could it withstand the impact? With the passengers being in such a concentrated space, that surely has to be a concern? Broken glass? Surely, anydanger danger to either the passengers or crew would be a priority/ priority message? I'm still boggled as to why you guys where allowed to land in such extreme conditions? Again, no expert here, just some questions you could possibly help with. The other question would be this. I'm sure the plane is heavy enough to not be blown away. However, what about the lift in the wings with a Stronger tornado, and not just your average gusts of 60-80mph, but in a stronger Ef-2+ tornado. Would it be enough to lift or roll the plane to 1 side? Just some questions maybe you could answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaPilot Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 We had been on the ground for over an hour and we waiting for the lightning to dissipate. Ramp workers were not allowed to come outside to push us off the gate due to lightning proximity. I believe we could have beaten the storms arrival by a good 20 minutes or so, had that not been the case. Lightning was mostly Cloud to cloud during the interim timeframe the few weaker cells had passed prior to the Tornadic one. We had some large breaks in the radar to get out between in my judgment. We really have no choice when someone else is making the call on the lightning like that. Debris is a problem but I do not think in a general sense that unless we were inside the rotation of the funnel would anything penetrate the fuselage. American had a 757 which i believe was on the very edge of the funnel have a piece of aluminum/tin cladding get impaled into their vertical stabilizer. The winds inside the funnel of an EF-2 or larger MIGHT be fast enough to create enough lift to allow the aircraft to become airborne, but it would only be for a few moments as the funnel speeds by. Its also more in a gust sense, so other than momentarily being lifted a very small amount off the ground i doubt you could do anything other than move the plane a few feet. Bad? yeah bad enough to NOT be on the aircraft If i'd known about it...but probably nothing more than a scary event with little injury if it did happen. A fluke piece of debris coming through the fuselage is another concern, but the odds of that are slim IMHO. Broken glass? Not the windows on the jet, they are VERY thick and made to withstand some impact and high differential pressures. Glass from outside? nothing close by really in this event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k*** Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 Stick to what you do best, talk out your ass. did i miss something about Lambert getting EF3 winds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadotony Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 Stick to what you do best, talk out your ass. Except he's completely right. Damage at Lambert was EF2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 The Washington Post's Capital Weather Gang has an excellent two-part series on this event: Part one: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/despite-warning-st-louis-tornado-caught-airport-passengers-off-guard/2011/05/13/AFYkhX2G_blog.html Part two: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/in-st-louis-pilot-was-unaware-of-approaching-tornado/2011/05/16/AFSFT14G_blog.html#pagebreak Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhamps10 Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 The Washington Post's Capital Weather Gang has an excellent two-part series on this event: Part one: http://www.washingto...khX2G_blog.html Part two: http://www.washingto....html#pagebreak Mike Mike does an AMAZING job of explaining on how the FAA flat out dropped the ball with the Lambert tornado on this week's "Extra Edition" public affairs show on KMOV channel 4 out of St Louis, for those outside STL here's the video segment where he talks about Lambert.. http://www.kmov.com/video/featured-videos/Extra-Edition-Does-the-FAA-warn-pilots-about-tornados-122770894.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.