Star Ledger/NJ.com article focused on "warning fatigue"

[phlwx]

The Limerick tornado also damaged the Diner and the storage rental place across the street from the Hamlet development, IIRC. The tornado pretty much dropped down near the diner after traversing through Royersford and Upper Chesco as a funnel cloud if I remember the accounts from local media correctly. Even if they issued a tor war sooner an F-3 can still do enough damage to cause loss of life.

[Rainshadow]

I came in for a midnight shift that night (at 11 pm) from what I remember there were two choices, take the whole system down and wait for the part to arrive, or leave it up in the mode that was already described.

[SouthernNJ]

16 TOR issued was once the most ever in a single year at Mt. Holly (1998). Now, it is the most in one day due to

Hurricane Irene. Hopefully some of these verify. I have heard many possible reports, but have yet to see any

survey information. With KDIX and Irene's aftermath taking up a lot of space, it might take awhile for this info to

become available. I'm fairly certain Lewes-Nassau Station was a tornado, just need a rating on it. Officials

also said their may be one in Vineland, Pennsville, Arden, and in Burlington County as well.

[NickD2011]

I was afraid that since they were issuing so many tornado warnings the day Irene hit, people would be fatigued by them and ignore them.

The average person expects a tornado to hit near them if there's a tornado watch issued. When we had that tornado watch this June, people said "there's supposed to be a tornado tonight". My area didn't even get any rain that day. People think that if they predict it'll rain, it will rain. They predict it's sunny, and it will be sunny. And if they say there's a tornado watch, there will be a tornado. And when the predictions don't come true, they blame the weatherman for lying.

[johnc]

I was afraid that since they were issuing so many tornado warnings the day Irene hit, people would be fatigued by them and ignore them.

The average person expects a tornado to hit near them if there's a tornado watch issued. When we had that tornado watch this June, people said "there's supposed to be a tornado tonight". My area didn't even get any rain that day. People think that if they predict it'll rain, it will rain. They predict it's sunny, and it will be sunny. And if they say there's a tornado watch, there will be a tornado. And when the predictions don't come true, they blame the weatherman for lying.

So it's true... people are stupid.

[MGorse]

16 TOR issued was once the most ever in a single year at Mt. Holly (1998). Now, it is the most in one day due to

Hurricane Irene. Hopefully some of these verify. I have heard many possible reports, but have yet to see any

survey information. With KDIX and Irene's aftermath taking up a lot of space, it might take awhile for this info to

become available. I'm fairly certain Lewes-Nassau Station was a tornado, just need a rating on it. Officials

also said their may be one in Vineland, Pennsville, Arden, and in Burlington County as well.

It is going to be very difficult to verify the tornado warnings as the majority of the spin-ups were likely weak and did not last long. I swear one tracked right in front of me Saturday evening while driving into work. As for the Lewes, Delaware one, we are still working on the details.

[hurricaneschwartz]

As a TV met, it was extremely frustrating to be interrupting legitimate coverage of a hurricane with phantom tornado warnings. As discussed earlier, the damage that could have been caused if any of those tornadoes touched down wouldn't have been much different than the other wind damage going on. I had to interrupt our coverage about 10 different times (at least it seemed like that many). These included warnings for the city of Philadelphia. Many of our viewers were more frightened of the tornadoes than any other aspect of the hurricane. Even my girlfriend was freaking out, at home alone, about the impending tornado.

Something has to be done about this. When I was Disaster Preparedness Meteorologist for Georgia (now they are WPM's), we had a tough time getting people to take action due to the false alarms. An that was for a false alarm rate more like 30% than the 90% in this part of the country. How many people died in Georgia and other states in the big tornado outbreaks because they didn't take the warnings seriously enough? No one knows. But if more of those situations happen than people who die from EF0 and EF1's, are we really doing the public a service?

How can the questionable tornado warning for Philly, for example, be the same as the tornado warning for Birmingham, Alabama? It's the same term. Using stronger language doesn't change the crawl on TV or reading on the radio by a disc jockey who wouldn't know the difference. The idea of the "no surprise Weather Service" is a disservice to the public, not just here, but all over the country.

Glenn

[johnc]

Some of that frustration came through on the air I think. I'll admit that during the entire Irene event, I was the most anxious when those warnings were going out frequently. I had the weather radio on and it was going off repeatedly.

On the other hand... I'm stuck in a second-story condo so my "take cover" options are pretty limited. If there was a (reasonable) threat of something occurring here like what happened in Lewes, DE, I'd really want to know so I could at least make a last ditch effort to hide in a closet or something.

Maybe SVR warnings with a mention of rotation in the bulletin text?

[Big Jims Videos]

I think maybe the on-air met on the TV or Radio should warn folks in the most prone band (I.E. that outer one in IRENE) that although tornadoes are possible, typically in tropical systems they will not be what you see on tv in the midwest.

Hurricane, I was holding fort with a group of girls (and some guys) in Point Beach and we had several warnings issued for Ocean County during the event. My cell phone warning text kept going off.. I tried to calm them down and tell them that anything spawned by the hurricane will most likely be a weak tornado spin up only lasting a few seconds and maybe bringing down a few trees, but if you are in your home like you said and didn't have some weather enthusiast telling them that, you're gonna freak everytime the EBS goes off or the on-air met (they were watching fox ny while the power lasted) mentioned tornado...

When the spin up or whatever passed by us at 10:30, and what I'm going to call a weak tornado passed across the street, the girls heard the roar, saw the trees get shredded and pulled outta the ground, and the 4-5 transformers blow up all at once....they freaked and ran to the basement....I of course was taking it all in in awe, and called the spotter hotline...and then tried to explain to the girls, some of them in tears at this point, was this is typical in tropical systems...

Sure, we were getting gusts of 50, so an intense gust like that that hit 80 or so wasn't too much worse, but it did the most damage, and was the most spectacular...in that part of Point Pleasant Beach.

So I think in future landfalling tropical systems at least, in those bands that display signs of rotation, heavy convection, or just above the surface winds, the best thing is to warn your viewers/listeners that brief spin ups are possible...and will raise the winds by 30-40 mph, but they won't be what you saw on tv over the spring and summer....and folks should continue to take your standard hurricane/tropical storm procedures...

I dont know if that would work or not of course seeing some of the damage pics from the tornado in Delaware...but that's what I tried to do to the house full of guests...

[Boch23]

This is my 2 cents on it. Maybe even only worth 1 cent. But to me as long as there is an uneducated public about weather you are going to have these issues. I agree that the warnings from the weekend were getting I don't want to say annoying but tiring, however I also understood why they were issued and what the result could be. On the flip side though, for people like my mom who is still not over the storms from last June the area saw she was in a panic almost shaking because she was so afraid. I did my best to explain the situation.

Also its a damned if you do damned if you don't situation in my opinion. You don't know how strong the tornado that spins up will be. In our area sure most of the time it will be F0 or F1 but if you move to a system where you don't issue a warning thinking its gonna be a weak and its not then you have a lot bigger mess on your hands.

Personally, I have no problem with the warnings that were issued and Glen you could tell the frustration in your voice that you were not happy , and I understand that. But if that warning saves one more life then its a successful warning. And honestly its the responsibility of the individual to take warnings seriously or not. If they choose not to its not the NWS fault for issuing to many warnings. I mean we had people die in this storm because they decided to go swimming when there was plenty of warnings not to do so. Another simpler example is on the news over and over and over again they mention never drive through a flooded roadway but people still do it and end up not only risking their lives but the lives of the first responders as well.

[hurricaneschwartz]

I think maybe the on-air met on the TV or Radio should warn folks in the most prone band (I.E. that outer one in IRENE) that although tornadoes are possible, typically in tropical systems they will not be what you see on tv in the midwest.

Hurricane, I was holding fort with a group of girls (and some guys) in Point Beach and we had several warnings issued for Ocean County during the event. My cell phone warning text kept going off.. I tried to calm them down and tell them that anything spawned by the hurricane will most likely be a weak tornado spin up only lasting a few seconds and maybe bringing down a few trees, but if you are in your home like you said and didn't have some weather enthusiast telling them that, you're gonna freak everytime the EBS goes off or the on-air met (they were watching fox ny while the power lasted) mentioned tornado...

When the spin up or whatever passed by us at 10:30, and what I'm going to call a weak tornado passed across the street, the girls heard the roar, saw the trees get shredded and pulled outta the ground, and the 4-5 transformers blow up all at once....they freaked and ran to the basement....I of course was taking it all in in awe, and called the spotter hotline...and then tried to explain to the girls, some of them in tears at this point, was this is typical in tropical systems...

Sure, we were getting gusts of 50, so an intense gust like that that hit 80 or so wasn't too much worse, but it did the most damage, and was the most spectacular...in that part of Point Pleasant Beach.

So I think in future landfalling tropical systems at least, in those bands that display signs of rotation, heavy convection, or just above the surface winds, the best thing is to warn your viewers/listeners that brief spin ups are possible...and will raise the winds by 30-40 mph, but they won't be what you saw on tv over the spring and summer....and folks should continue to take your standard hurricane/tropical storm procedures...

I dont know if that would work or not of course seeing some of the damage pics from the tornado in Delaware...but that's what I tried to do to the house full of guests...

The problem is we are obligated to relay the warning ASAP, as is every other station. News management, in general, freaks out almost as much as the public does. If NWS can come up with some other term, that would help a lot. Save the tornado warning for something that might actually kill someone other than by a freak accident. It would be better if a severe weather statement went out, saying that isolated tornadoes are possible, since so many areas were affected.

Glenn

[hurricaneschwartz]

This is my 2 cents on it. Maybe even only worth 1 cent. But to me as long as there is an uneducated public about weather you are going to have these issues. I agree that the warnings from the weekend were getting I don't want to say annoying but tiring, however I also understood why they were issued and what the result could be. On the flip side though, for people like my mom who is still not over the storms from last June the area saw she was in a panic almost shaking because she was so afraid. I did my best to explain the situation.

Also its a damned if you do damned if you don't situation in my opinion. You don't know how strong the tornado that spins up will be. In our area sure most of the time it will be F0 or F1 but if you move to a system where you don't issue a warning thinking its gonna be a weak and its not then you have a lot bigger mess on your hands.

Personally, I have no problem with the warnings that were issued and Glen you could tell the frustration in your voice that you were not happy , and I understand that. But if that warning saves one more life then its a successful warning. And honestly its the responsibility of the individual to take warnings seriously or not. If they choose not to its not the NWS fault for issuing to many warnings. I mean we had people die in this storm because they decided to go swimming when there was plenty of warnings not to do so. Another simpler example is on the news over and over and over again they mention never drive through a flooded roadway but people still do it and end up not only risking their lives but the lives of the first responders as well.

I assure you that more lives will be lost in the long run with this "cry wolf" situation than saved in an EF0 or EF1 that occurs in 10% of the cases.

You sure were right that I "was not happy". I wanted to say that this was a CYA, and that because there was one confirmed tornado, every other similar rotation would result in a tornado warning, even if they were wrong 90% of the time.

And remember, I've been there, working for NWS, and issuing tornado warnings, so it's not like I'm outside the system.

Glenn

[johnc]

Damn right it's CYA, and the media in Philly is pretty brutal, especially the radio. It's likely that nbc10 would be right up there with the rest of them asking that heads roll if they found out a met knew there was rotation, didn't issue a warning and someone got killed.

A public weather service has to answer to the public; that's just one of the downsides unfortunately.

[Boch23]

I assure you that more lives will be lost in the long run with this "cry wolf" situation than saved in an EF0 or EF1 that occurs in 10% of the cases.

You sure were right that I "was not happy". I wanted to say that this was a CYA, and that because there was one confirmed tornado, every other similar rotation would result in a tornado warning, even if they were wrong 90% of the time.

And remember, I've been there, working for NWS, and issuing tornado warnings, so it's not like I'm outside the system.

Glenn

I wasn't trying to undermind you trust me and I apologize if I came off that way. I have a lot of respect for you. Was just giving my opinion from a more casual weather perspective. Like I said was just giving my 2 cents. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

I will add this even before this year and the amount of tornado warnings very few of my friends ever take any warnings seriously. Seems like everyone has the attitude of "that can't happen to me."

[hurricaneschwartz]

Damn right it's CYA, and the media in Philly is pretty brutal, especially the radio. It's likely that nbc10 would be right up there with the rest of them asking that heads roll if they found out a met knew there was rotation, didn't issue a warning and someone got killed.

A public weather service has to answer to the public; that's just one of the downsides unfortunately.

So what NWS has done (at least in this non-tornado belt) is to totally make useless the term "tornado warning". Now, even if you put out a CYA warning and someone gets killed, the warning wouldn't have made a difference anyway because no one takes action based on the warnings. So, how can I defend the NWS (which I ALWAYS DO) for a 90% FAR? I don't want someone to blame-I want the system to work better. Let's figure out how to do that together.

Glenn

[SouthernNJ]

I saw that some folks here were curious about some of the more damaging convective events that happened during the last several years

and if they had warnings or not. I have a few that I know of...

Tornadoes-Critical Hits:

May 29, 1995-Norristown F-1 Path 1.5 miles Damaged many trees...Severe damage to apt. complex. TOR 15min lead time

Nov 8, 1996-Kunkletown/Snydersville F-1 Path 10 miles skipping Damaged many trees and homes. TOR 1min lead time

Mar 9, 1998-Blandon F-1 Path 2.0 miles Damaged many trees, severe damage to couple homes. TOR 7min lead time

May 31, 1998-Lyons F-3 Path 8.3 miles 40 Structures Severe damage, 18 destroyed. TOR 23min lead time (only 7 injuries)

May 2, 2002-Rising Sun F-2 Path 4.5 miles 15 Homes damaged, 1 destroyed. TOR 16min lead time

May 13, 2002-Earlville Pair of F1's-Damaged many trees, boats, structures. TOR 19min lead time

Sept 23, 2003-Florence and Trenton F1's-Numerous structures damaged. TOR 2-7min lead time (2 injuries)

Jul 27, 2004-New Lisbon F-1 Path 3.0 miles Severe damage to trees and NLDC building. TOR 4min lead time (2 injuries)

Sept 28, 2004-Wilmington Manor F-2 Path 5.0 miles Severe damage to C-130's and Ind. Park. TOR 4min lead time (5 injuries)

Jul 29, 2010-Wantage EF-2 Path 7.0 miles Severe tree damage and Farms destroyed. TOR 38min lead time

Aug 27, 2011-Nassau Station EF-1 Path 0.75 Many homes damaged, 1 severe, TOR 16min lead time

[SouthernNJ]

Critical Tornado Misses:

Nov 8, 1996 Danielsville F-2 Path 2.0 miles Church damaged, 2 homes destroyed. (1 injury)

Jun 1, 1998 Bustleton F-2 Path 5.6 miles Severe damage to many Ind. Buildings. (SVR 5min lead time)

Jan 18, 1999 Philadelphia F-0 Gustnado Path 0.2 miles Marconi Plaza 18 injuries from trees.

Feb 12, 1999 Cherry Hill F-1 Path 0.5 miles Numerous homes and trees damaged.

Aug 20, 1999 Beach Haven F-2 Path 0.4 miles 2 homes and motel severe damage. (1 injury)

Nov 26, 1999 Honey Brook F-1 Path 1.8 miles Numerous homes damaged, 4 destroyed. (12 injuries)

May 27, 2001 Manalapan F-2 Path 1.5 miles Some homes damaged, 4 severe.

Sept 6, 2008 East Allentown F-1 Path 1.0 miles Some homes damaged, high school damaged.

Jul 29, 2009 Stroud EF-2 Path 5.0 miles Structures damaged, some severe. (2 injuries) (SVR 60min lead time-probable miscommunication on this storm)

[johnc]

So what NWS has done (at least in this non-tornado belt) is to totally make useless the term "tornado warning". Now, even if you put out a CYA warning and someone gets killed, the warning wouldn't have made a difference anyway because no one takes action based on the warnings. So, how can I defend the NWS (which I ALWAYS DO) for a 90% FAR? I don't want someone to blame-I want the system to work better. Let's figure out how to do that together.

I think you're overstating the effects of the false alarms, at least in this case. I don't think the average person in the DE Valley won't react appropriately if a tornado warning was issued tomorrow. I might be wrong, but I do think people would still take them seriously since, despite Saturday's events, they are relatively rare. I think SVR's are a different situation though and I suspect more people brush those off. If people truly don't take a TOR seriously, it might be because they have this idea that all we get around here are small EF-0's that are no big deal.

I watched you and Adam Joseph on Saturday and both you and him explained the situation perfectly so I think -- considering the rare circumstances -- people were able to digest why there were so many warnings and why this particular situation was uncommon and not like some Midwestern outbreak.

Like some of the other posters said, there is an education problem. ("We had a tornado watch and we didn't get a tornado.") But more and more often people are getting their weather information from media outlets, so the opportunity for education is better than ever.

Maybe the bulletin text can be a little more specific or, better yet, the text itself should be communicated to the public (by a scroll or NWR break-in or something). I think all but one of the TORs issued Saturday indicated that there was a storm "capable of producing a tornado" (as opposed to "a tornado is on the ground"), with the exception being the one statement that indicated that a tornado was reported in Pennsville. A lot of the statements also had that cut-and-paste text, "When a tornado warning is issued based on doppler radar..." So I think if those uncertainties in the bulletin were effectively communicated, people would understand the situation better.

And like I said earlier in the thread... people need to take responsibility for themselves. There's a lot of this "cowboy" thinking where "oh I don't need to worry about weather" and "oh those guys don't know what they're talking about" and "oh I'm going to go paragliding in a hurricane" so if people want to blame their mistakes on "fatigue" then I'm getting low on sympathy. Maybe I'm crazy but whether the tornado is sighted or it's just a doppler indication or it's an EF-0 or something bigger... if I'm in that red polygon, I'm getting my ass in the safest place I could be.

But more to your suggestion of a severe weather statement. I think that could work... but they would also have to address many of the similar problems regarding bulletin urgency: Is this an EAS bulletin? If it isn't, will anybody ever know about it? If it is, will it generate just as much apathy as a TOR? For example the SPS product... nobody knows about those. Nobody. At least nobody who isn't looking. So if they use a context similar to that... nobody will know about the danger.

I guess I'll just stifle myself and let the NWS mets weigh in.

[johnc]

So, how can I defend the NWS (which I ALWAYS DO) for a 90% FAR?

If it was me I would just say that our CWA is a lot more densely populated than many of the others out there and the types of tornadoes that are likely here tend to be hard to spot on radar and short-lived. They come down and go up and predicting where that happens is difficult to do. Considering all of those factors, the NWS for this area leans to the side of caution.

I think any reasonable person, when explained the circumstances, would understand.

[SouthernNJ]

Some of the FAR has to do with a little luck. From 2002-2004, Mt Holly verified 10 of 30 Tornado Warnings.

That is excellent, FAR of only 66.7%, well below the national average. However, from 2005-2010, only 4 of 56

verified. From 02-04, there were 18 tornadoes in the CWA. From 05-10, there were just 10. As you can see,

no logical explanation, just more tornadoes occurred during the other time period, hence more of the warnings

ended up verifying.

[phlwx]

As a TV met, it was extremely frustrating to be interrupting legitimate coverage of a hurricane with phantom tornado warnings. As discussed earlier, the damage that could have been caused if any of those tornadoes touched down wouldn't have been much different than the other wind damage going on. I had to interrupt our coverage about 10 different times (at least it seemed like that many). These included warnings for the city of Philadelphia. Many of our viewers were more frightened of the tornadoes than any other aspect of the hurricane. Even my girlfriend was freaking out, at home alone, about the impending tornado.

Something has to be done about this. When I was Disaster Preparedness Meteorologist for Georgia (now they are WPM's), we had a tough time getting people to take action due to the false alarms. An that was for a false alarm rate more like 30% than the 90% in this part of the country. How many people died in Georgia and other states in the big tornado outbreaks because they didn't take the warnings seriously enough? No one knows. But if more of those situations happen than people who die from EF0 and EF1's, are we really doing the public a service?

How can the questionable tornado warning for Philly, for example, be the same as the tornado warning for Birmingham, Alabama? It's the same term. Using stronger language doesn't change the crawl on TV or reading on the radio by a disc jockey who wouldn't know the difference. The idea of the "no surprise Weather Service" is a disservice to the public, not just here, but all over the country.

Glenn

Doppler radar, for all of its benefits, hurts the wx community with "rotating rain band that might fire up a F0" signatures that triggers a tor warn by the NWS. I for one don't blame them for firing up the warnings because if they didn't and a tornado did touch down and cause loss of life they'd never hear the end of it -- I think it needed to be done -- but I think the media could have gone to greater lengths in educating the public on how tornadoes in hurricanes work. I didn't hear much of a "simple but scientific" breakdown on this on the whole. You might have on Saturday night (I admit I don't watch 10 100% of the time) but on the whole I didn't hear much of a technical talk on this...other than the usual "right front quad" talking point that gets used a lot.

IMO a starting point is educating the public on our tornado history and that tornadoes locally are weaker than those that hit Joplin for one and two, that tornadoes can quickly pop and drop in TC's. That starts with the NWS and also includes the media in that...tornadoes here just aren't tornadoes down in MO or AL...we've only had one EF-4 within 150 miles of here since 1950 IIRC (La Plata).

I see what you are saying but unless you call the EF0/EF1 a completely different name (rotating downburst?) I'm not sure you can remove the worry/fear factor from the general public. I also don't think the NWS should lay off the warnings...if someone did die from a weak tornado that wasn't warned there would be hell to pay.

[phlwx]

So what NWS has done (at least in this non-tornado belt) is to totally make useless the term "tornado warning". Now, even if you put out a CYA warning and someone gets killed, the warning wouldn't have made a difference anyway because no one takes action based on the warnings. So, how can I defend the NWS (which I ALWAYS DO) for a 90% FAR? I don't want someone to blame-I want the system to work better. Let's figure out how to do that together.

Glenn

IMO, the blame really can be placed on the current generation of doppler radar that can see rotation inside of a t-storm or a rain band. The NWS is merely executing on what the radar is showing as a way to improve lead time IN CASE the storm dropped a tornado. In the vast majority of cases, it works great...however it does lead to more "chicken little" scenarios as the storm may very well not drop anything.

I think that a name classification change for the weaker tornadoes wouldn't be a bad idea but to pin this on the NWS as watering down the significance of a tor war isn't completely fair either.

[r-ville]

I will chime in on this particular issue:

During the severe outbreak here in C PA (5/26/11 - EF0 IMBY), there were 100+ volleyball players at a picnic grove atop my mountain (and next to a metal pavilion). At 5 p.m. I went up there and warned them of severe Wx and probably rotating storms. They told me "but we're in the middle of a game". I went home and they got stranded up there for the next 12 hours as the storm brought down 6 trees on the road and sent a piddle of a creek into a raging torrent - washing out the road where the trees weren't blocking it.

My sister (who actually was the first person I ever witnessed a tornado with up close when we were 15) drove right into the throat of the tormado - seeing St Elmos Fire lightning on a KMart parking lot, she still tried to drive home! She also saw the "green" tinted sky we had seen with the tornado as kids. She should have known better. Just as the storm ripped through her immediate area, she bailed into a nearby friend's house and was thus saved.

All in all, in each example they had "fools luck" and there were no injuries - but some very anxious moments. So given that any warnings are only as good as the listener - it's better to overwarn than under via the CYA.

I would submit that it is preferable to deal with a "miffed" general public - than to have to deal with their ambitious attorneys.

[Lady Di]

Would like to say that as frustrating as it was for the TV mets, I felt slightly better hearing the warnings from you rather than the EAS, so thank you!

In regards to "warning fatigue" as previously posted perhaps a change in the text or using SVR would serve better. Bottom line is still the same, it's about public safety.

[hurricaneschwartz]

Would like to say that as frustrating as it was for the TV mets, I felt slightly better hearing the warnings from you rather than the EAS, so thank you!

In regards to "warning fatigue" as previously posted perhaps a change in the text or using SVR would serve better. Bottom line is still the same, it's about public safety.

I love the idea of a new name. Do we really want the most alarming of all warnings to verify 4 of 56 times ANYWHERE, EVER? If our mission is to save lives, I still believe that we are doing the opposite in the long run with so many false alarms.

I'll tell you an amazing story from my days as DPM (now WCM) at NWS in Atlanta. SPC had put out a tornado watch for the northern half of Ga. There were a few tornado warnings issued, and one actual confirmation. It must have been hectic at the TV stations. So hectic that the weathercaster at one station (not a met) actually said: There are so many possible tornadoes out there that we should just change the entire Tornado Watch area into tornado warnings." We're talking about 50+ counties (Ga. has a lot of them)! The next day, my MIC and I paid a visit to that station and expressed our concerns of how the definition of a tornado warning was important. Their weathercaster, behind-the-scenes met, and the News Director were there. The ND heard our plea, and said: "We have freedom of speech; we can call it whatever we want." I replied, "Well then, please make up another term (Tornado Alert?) and don't mess with our official terminology that we try so hard to get understood."

That story illustrates how difficult it is for TV stations (especially without an experienced met on duty) to deal with multiple borderline warnings. This is not a matter of education; by having all these false alarms, NWS is "un-educating" the public about the term "tornado warning".

Glenn

[Parsley]

I love the idea of a new name. Do we really want the most alarming of all warnings to verify 4 of 56 times ANYWHERE, EVER? If our mission is to save lives, I still believe that we are doing the opposite in the long run with so many false alarms.

I'll tell you an amazing story from my days as DPM (now WCM) at NWS in Atlanta. SPC had put out a tornado watch for the northern half of Ga. There were a few tornado warnings issued, and one actual confirmation. It must have been hectic at the TV stations. So hectic that the weathercaster at one station (not a met) actually said: There are so many possible tornadoes out there that we should just change the entire Tornado Watch area into tornado warnings." We're talking about 50+ counties (Ga. has a lot of them)! The next day, my MIC and I paid a visit to that station and expressed our concerns of how the definition of a tornado warning was important. Their weathercaster, behind-the-scenes met, and the News Director were there. The ND heard our plea, and said: "We have freedom of speech; we can call it whatever we want." I replied, "Well then, please make up another term (Tornado Alert?) and don't mess with our official terminology that we try so hard to get understood."

That story illustrates how difficult it is for TV stations (especially without an experienced met on duty) to deal with multiple borderline warnings. This is not a matter of education; by having all these false alarms, NWS is "un-educating" the public about the term "tornado warning".

Glenn

"Alert" is a great word. "A signal that warns of danger or attack"

1.Tornado Watch-general area

2.Tornado Alert-county issued when threat is heightened (ex:possible tornado signatures showing on radar)

3.Tornado Warning-county issued when a tornado has been spotted on the ground

[Boch23]

"Alert" is a great word. "A signal that warns of danger or attack"

1.Tornado Watch-general area

2.Tornado Alert-county issued when threat is heightened (ex:possible tornado signatures showing on radar)

3.Tornado Warning-county issued when a tornado has been spotted on the ground

Sounds simple enough to work. I was thinking something similar last night. But wouldn't you run into the same problems only you would have the alert being overused. I mean it would make the tornado warning more meaningful but you would still get the people who wouldn't care about the first two levels.

[Parsley]

Sounds simple enough to work. I was thinking something similar last night. But wouldn't you run into the same problems only you would have the alert being overused. I mean it would make the tornado warning more meaningful but you would still get the people who wouldn't care about the first two levels.

Unfortunately, you are probably right.

If a change was ever implemented (say by adding tornado alert between tornado watch and tornado warning) it would atleast give the NWS/govt/media a chance to educate or re-educate the the poputation on the watches/warnings levels and the different implications of each. That really is the only chance we have at this point at getting through to most people who don't care.

[phlwx]

Unfortunately, you are probably right.

If a change was ever implemented (say by adding tornado alert between tornado watch and tornado warning) it would atleast give the NWS/govt/media a chance to educate or re-educate the the poputation on the watches/warnings levels and the different implications of each. That really is the only chance we have at this point at getting through to most people who don't care.

In the end, I think weak spin up downbursts that are cyclonic and thus, by definition, tornadoes need to be classified differently because they do a good bit less damage than a Joplin/La Plata. Not sure there's a way to do that cleanly though whether they are radar indicated or on the ground.

I get where you are going with the alert...just not sure that's going to make things much better in the end since it can end up becoming "chicken little" scenario rather quickly.

[johnc]

In the end, I think weak spin up downbursts that are cyclonic and thus, by definition, tornadoes need to be classified differently because they do a good bit less damage than a Joplin/La Plata. Not sure there's a way to do that cleanly though whether they are radar indicated or on the ground.

Like Mike said earlier, it can be hard to tell if you have an EF-0, 1, or 2 just based on the radar or whatever.

Then you have to worry about the public understanding all these nuances. I can see the interviews on the TV now where people claim they saw rotating, swirling winds and tree tops getting knocked off and the NWS claiming it was an EF-0 or whatever, and the people are going to say, "I don't understand... If this was a tornado, why was there no warning? Is this a tornado or not? Are we not getting tornado warnings anymore?"

And it's true that one of these small EF-0s isn't that bad, but it depends on the circumstances too. What if one hits at the race track where there are 2,000 fans? Would a SVR, Tornado Advisory, Downburst Warning, or whatever other product be sufficient to get people to take the appropriate cover?

The more I think about it, the more I prefer the current system... but I do understand and take seriously Glenn's concerns.