HurricaneJosh Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 It's not like Tony was that far off, anyway. He was off by 6 mph, but he was completely correct in calling a large, intense tornado. The distinction between high-end EF3 and low-end EF4 is significant to me personally and many here-- but in terms of danger level and warning needs, the call was operationally valuable-- and I would even say "correct". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Humble? Humble about what? I was wrong. I conveyed the likelihood of an EF4-EF5 on the ground, and it was only a high-end EF3. My bad. It's not likely I went through here eliciting compliments on my commentary from the June 1st outbreak, or any other outbreak for that matter. What should I say? "Ah, nah, I suck?" That's more self-hatred than humility. Fact is, I'm not going to deprecate myself when I have a clue what's going on, just to seem "humble." If I think I'm aware of what's going on, I'm going to share my thoughts. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and it's a lesson learned. If I'm right, great, fantastic. I really don't understand your need for passive-aggressiveness. Besides that one comment I think I've been totally upfront. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 It's not like Tony was that far off, anyway. He was off by 6 mph, but he was completely correct in calling a large, intense tornado. The distinction between high-end EF3 and low-end EF4 is significant to me personally and many here-- but in terms of danger level and warning needs, the call was operationally valuable-- and I would even say "correct". It's a stupid debate (at least mine and tony's).. a destroyed home is a destroyed home. When I think 4/5 I think, somewhere in the middle... not 6 mph off. But again dead people are dead people. Either way it sucks when it's not in the middle of nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 It's a stupid debate.. a destroyed home is a destroyed home. When I think 4/5 I think, somewhere in the middle... not 6 mph off. But again dead people are dead people. Either way it sucks when it's not in the middle of nowhere. Agreed-- but my only point is that he correctly read the signs and called a large, intense tornado in the heat of the moment. Operationally and in the heat of the moment, even the most seasoned experts are going to sometimes err-- for example, the NHC calling Katrina a Cat 4 at landfall (and in postanalysis adjusting it down to Cat 3) or calling Andrew a Cat 4 at landfall (and in postanalysis adjusting it up to Cat 5). They made the best calls they could at those times, and of course no one should ask them for apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Just to be clear, my root in this is more that based on everything else I see/hear about ratings, it's IMO unneeded/bordering on irresponsible to talk about the rating while a storm is ongoing. It's just a guess. Sure, you can get an idea that something is not your ordinary tornado, but seemingly not a whole ton more. Shoot, Attica was acting like there was a state secret involved with the rating of the El Reno tornado a week after it happened. If the NWS does not spit out ratings in their warning texts then I don't see the point in amateurs doing so... it just causes tons of speculation and leads to people like CT Blizz pissed that something wasn't rated a 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewxmann Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 It's a stupid debate (at least mine and tony's).. a destroyed home is a destroyed home. When I think 4/5 I think, somewhere in the middle... not 6 mph off. But again dead people are dead people. Either way it sucks when it's not in the middle of nowhere. You know, you don't have to bring it up again and again that Tony was wrong with saying it was an EF4/5. Once is enough. You did the same thing to me too - we understand we were wrong, okay? Point is and was, New England saw its strongest tornado in 13 years. Tony saw a signature that supported that idea, and so expressed the dire nature of the threat to the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Agreed-- but my only point is that he correctly read the signs and called a large, intense tornado in the heat of the moment. Operationally and in the heat of the moment, even the most seasoned experts are going to sometimes err-- for example, the NHC calling Katrina a Cat 4 at landfall (and in postanalysis adjusting it down to Cat 3) or calling Andrew a Cat 4 at landfall (and in postanalysis adjusting it up to Cat 5). They made the best calls they could at those times, and of course no one should ask them for apologies. I agree.. as did many others, as did the SPC in realizing it was a potential in the area. I have repeatedly referred to tony as part of the "smart young group". I'm not sure how I could be much kinder there other than removing the qualifier, which perhaps he might define as passive aggressive. But I see that as more descriptive, maybe because I feel like I've recently left it myself -- the young part at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 You know, you don't have to bring it up again and again that Tony was wrong with saying it was an EF4/5. Once is enough. You did the same thing to me too - we understand we were wrong, okay? Point is and was, New England saw its strongest tornado in 13 years. Tony saw a signature that supported that idea, and so expressed the dire nature of the threat to the forum. I already sent you a personal PM apologizing for coming off harsh... but I think some of these posts (not just from me) speak clearly for themselves. These are not major affronts to anyone... no need for such easily bruised egos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewxmann Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 I already sent you a personal PM apologizing for coming off harsh... but I think some of these posts (not just from me) speak clearly for themselves. These are not major affronts to anyone... no need for such easily bruised egos. Yeah, and I expressed thanks for your doing so. But sometimes I think you just "come out of the blue" so to speak days after the event with sarcastic comments about how we were making incorrect statements. I know you are against hype - and I respect that - but this your second comment deriding Tony about his statement since the event... shouldn't it be time to give it a rest? Especially since he wasn't that far off and four people were killed... it's not like he says "EF4/5" and an EF1 comes along and bends a few trees. JMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Yeah, and I expressed thanks for your doing so. But sometimes I think you just "come out of the blue" so to speak days after the event with sarcastic comments about how we were making incorrect statements. I know you are against hype - and I respect that - but this your second comment deriding Tony about his statement since the event... shouldn't it be time to give it a rest? Especially since he wasn't that far off and four people were killed... it's not like he says "EF4/5" and an EF1 comes along and bends a few trees. JMO. I was out of town for 2 days.. just wandered back to read the threads. In retrospect it was not worth the comment--I'd take it back if I could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ski MRG Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 I was out of town for 2 days.. just wandered back to read the threads. In retrospect it was not worth the comment--I'd take it back if I could. Perhaps you should take the hint and cease and desist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Perhaps you should take the hint and cease and desist. i already did.. but thanks for you .02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ski MRG Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 i already did.. but thanks for you .02. No problem. Anytime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocoAko Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Yes yes yes. Having been on three damage surveys now (one I conducted myself on behalf of LOT when they needed some assistance because of ongoing severe weather), it's very clear how one's greatest enemy to the process is time. I recently completed a survey of a relatively minor outbreak of tornadoes in this area from 5/25. What I thought was going to be a rather short survey turned into a process where it took about 8 hours to survey 5 relatively short-tracked tornadoes, most 2 miles or so in length (one being 6.3 miles long), and only having a maximum of EF2 damage, and that was only hitting about half of the areas that actually received damage! It is an arduous, time-consuming, and emotionally draining process, and I can't even imagine doing it for a long-tracked maxi tornado. It's hard enough to survey what EF2 winds can do to people's property and to meet with those people and hear their stories. I feel some expect surveys to be as easy as going down, taking pictures, and putting a rating to the damage. What many don't realize is that there's relatively little idea when a survey begins what damage is going to be found often, or where it starts, and where it ends, and finding those start/end points can be challenging. For instance, that 6.3mi track of damage I surveyed started with ONE report of damage. It was in meeting with the ESDA director and having him lead me to other sites that I got a handle on what exactly happened. I do not envy you or anyone else at BOX that had to go through this process. Yeah, I too was shocked at how long it took. Finding the starting and ending points was definitely the hardest part of the process, then zig-zagging down every available road along the perceived damage swath. Our tornado was 10 miles long and it took us the entire day just to survey that length. I'm actually surprised the damage survey for this tornado was even done as quickly as it was - very cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 let's not let facts get in the way of a good story... You seem to be a very level headed person and your weather post are often informative. That being said you have been acting like a child "crying over spilt milk". You seem to openly say that you busted on how severe the cells would be in sne(granted I did not read ur opions, as it prob got buried in the thread) but you did take some shots at hoosier and also tornadotony that day. Idk if this is spill over from the mid-west forum or just bitterness. I have never really seen you act this way on the weather side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 You seem to be a very level headed person and your weather post are often informative. That being said you have been acting like a child "crying over spilt milk". You seem to openly say that you busted on how severe the cells would be in sne(granted I did not read ur opions, as it prob got buried in the thread) but you did take some shots at hoosier and also tornadotony that day. Idk if this is spill over from the mid-west forum or just bitterness. I have never really seen you act this way on the weather side. this is all blown way out of proportion. i didnt 'act' any way... i dont even know what you mean about a mid-west forum or bitterness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 I wonder if the very thick New England forest enhanced the debris ball versus a storm in the plains. So an EF3 might look like a Joplin tornado on the reflectivity. I think someone already sort of mentioned that in passing, but I think its a good point to wonder out loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtticaFanatica Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 I wonder if the very thick New England forest enhanced the debris ball versus a storm in the plains. So an EF3 might look like a Joplin tornado on the reflectivity. I think someone already sort of mentioned that in passing, but I think its a good point to wonder out loud. Probably. Also wish we had the dual-Pol upgrade for all of these strong/violent tornadoes in populated areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocoAko Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Probably. Also wish we had the dual-Pol upgrade for all of these strong/violent tornadoes in populated areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewxmann Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Probably. Also wish we had the dual-Pol upgrade for all of these strong/violent tornadoes in populated areas. likely an ignorant/dumb question - but will dual-pol distinguish between the types of debris in a tornado? EDIT: I mean between the types of debris detected in a debris ball... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadotony Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 I wonder if the very thick New England forest enhanced the debris ball versus a storm in the plains. So an EF3 might look like a Joplin tornado on the reflectivity. I think someone already sort of mentioned that in passing, but I think its a good point to wonder out loud. That is very possible, but I'm not sure how much denser the forest is in MA vs. say AL. I'm also not honestly sure how much easier or harder it is to loft a substantial amount of tree debris vs. a substantial amount of structural debris. I think those are specifics we just won't know for some time. My thinking is that dual-pol is a step toward being able to answer these questions, though. It definitely won't be the final step, but it should be a small step that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtticaFanatica Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 likely an ignorant/dumb question - but will dual-pol distinguish between the types of debris in a tornado? Probably not, I'd guess you'd probably need really fine spatial resolution to attempt that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadotony Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Probably not, I'd guess you'd probably need really fine spatial resolution to attempt that. Yeah, you'd probably pretty much need like a dual-pol CASA network of sorts, and even that probably wouldn't be quite enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvna Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I wonder if the very thick New England forest enhanced the debris ball versus a storm in the plains. So an EF3 might look like a Joplin tornado on the reflectivity. I think someone already sort of mentioned that in passing, but I think its a good point to wonder out loud. Thinking from a strength point, you could also look at it from a standpoint of lots of foliage and low level obstructions inhibiting the LLC a bit. I'm sure a study has been done on that. I have to say, I drove into Brimfield today and God bless all of the people involved. Absolute devastation when you get to the point where it crossed rt.20. Even further into Brimfield, my wife noticed one home completely ripped from the foundation deposited somewhere in the pond behind the house, or on the hill up above. I think the thing that astonishes me the most, is the continuous track. Up and down over hillsides....unabated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvna Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 That is very possible, but I'm not sure how much denser the forest is in MA vs. say AL. I'm also not honestly sure how much easier or harder it is to loft a substantial amount of tree debris vs. a substantial amount of structural debris. I think those are specifics we just won't know for some time. My thinking is that dual-pol is a step toward being able to answer these questions, though. It definitely won't be the final step, but it should be a small step that way. Granted, this was a significant tornado for SNE standards, but watching the video of the Tuscaloosa tornado still haunts me. It looked like Medusa at times and I could only imagine the power. I happened to get caught in the 2nd tornado that came through North Brimfield, and I have to say that it being much weaker than the first, I was impressed with the amount of inflow and strength of inflow winds....which came out of nowhere. So, looking up the hill where all the damage was from the first tornado, I still can't fathom the strength of that beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvna Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 The house that was completely ripped from its foundation was on rt. 19. I swear, you look at the Google maps of foliage and what I saw today....mind boggling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hailstoned Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I think the thing that astonishes me the most, is the continuous track. Up and down over hillsides....unabated. Yes-- the track is a very rough draft of of a 10 lane expressway from the Connecticut river to Sturbridge, hacked out without the benefits of an engineer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#NoPoles Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 The house that was completely ripped from its foundation was on rt. 19. I swear, you look at the Google maps of foliage and what I saw today....mind boggling. i believe there was one in Monson as well...I took pics in Monson on Fri...and then did a walking tour of Monson on Sat, and drove Rt 19 through Brimfield on Sat as well...along rt 19, I also noticed there was one house that sat just up hill from the water, and all that was left was the foundation...i couldn't see any debris...i know they couldn't have cleaned up that quickly...my thought was maybe that house got obliterated and the debris dropped in the water...or it is possible it got knocked bacward the the house went down the hill...but either way, it was just a clean foundation...bizzarre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvna Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 i believe there was one in Monson as well...I took pics in Monson on Fri...and then did a walking tour of Monson on Sat, and drove Rt 19 through Brimfield on Sat as well...along rt 19, I also noticed there was one house that sat just up hill from the water, and all that was left was the foundation...i couldn't see any debris...i know they couldn't have cleaned up that quickly...my thought was maybe that house got obliterated and the debris dropped in the water...or it is possible it got knocked bacward the the house went down the hill...but either way, it was just a clean foundation...bizzarre Yeah...there was a big stuffed animal sitting where the house was....along with other things. 139 Wales Road is the address as I look it up on Google maps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavisStraight Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Granted, this was a significant tornado for SNE standards, but watching the video of the Tuscaloosa tornado still haunts me. It looked like Medusa at times and I could only imagine the power. I happened to get caught in the 2nd tornado that came through North Brimfield, and I have to say that it being much weaker than the first, I was impressed with the amount of inflow and strength of inflow winds....which came out of nowhere. So, looking up the hill where all the damage was from the first tornado, I still can't fathom the strength of that beast. Did you drive through Southbridge Today Guv? Charlton street was open for traffic, lots of people walking through looking at the damage. I looked east driving up Charlton Street and you can see what appears to be the end of the damage. Crews, tree service and national guard are working around the clock clearing the debris and trees. Ill try and get the pics up later. Looks like the damage was much less severe but still lots of people homeless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.