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

[Thunder Road]

Why not a "Rotating Thunderstorm Warning" as a sign that a tornado may develop?

Otherwise though the distinction between what's producing and what's not is a very thin line. Maybe back east you can rely on Spotter reports, but in a very rural area, or anytime there's a rain-wrapped tornado, or anytime there's a tornado at night or in terrain with low visibility, does that mean we don't issue a TOR just because nobody sees it?

Also remember that an EF1 tornado in Center City will cause a lot more damage and injury than an EF3 in Wharton State Forest. Not to mention that even WITH dual-pol technology it's nearly impossible to tell via radar the strength of a tornado, or even if it's on the ground.

I think we have to wait until we have much better technology before we can begin discriminating tornado warnings.

[Parsley]

Why not a "Rotating Thunderstorm Warning" as a sign that a tornado may develop?

Otherwise though the distinction between what's producing and what's not is a very thin line. Maybe back east you can rely on Spotter reports, but in a very rural area, or anytime there's a rain-wrapped tornado, or anytime there's a tornado at night or in terrain with low visibility, does that mean we don't issue a TOR just because nobody sees it?

Also remember that an EF1 tornado in Center City will cause a lot more damage and injury than an EF3 in Wharton State Forest. Not to mention that even WITH dual-pol technology it's nearly impossible to tell via radar the strength of a tornado, or even if it's on the ground.

I think we have to wait until we have much better technology before we can begin discriminating tornado warnings.

Us weather weenies would understand rotating thunderstorm, but my wife would think it was a thunderstorm that did circles around the same location, or something like that.

General population has limited knowledge and/or limited concern towards severe weather unless they know for sure they will be directly in the path.

[MGorse]

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

Glenn,

You are not the only one that is unhappy regarding the wealth of tornado warnings that my office issued during Hurricane Irene. I take it you have not contacted my office about your thoughts on this. Please do so as Gary is willing to chat with you. I have already talked to him about this to some extent. I think it would be beneficial if you talk with us about this, and I encourage you (and other media folks) to do so. As Severe Weather Focal Point here at the Mount Holly office, it is frustrating because we will not be verifying the other warnings that were issued. From the information I have so far, we verified the one near Lewes, Delaware and another warning had a waterspout offshore (no verification onshore). The other warnings will likely come up empty.

Regarding some other comments on here from you and some others, I do not think coming up with another name/headline is the solution to this. This will probably just add confusion for the public. I have heard that many years ago the NWS was able to issue Severe Weather Statements for events similar to this, but after policy changes and in the world of VTEC, this is no longer allowed. I do not think the NWS has made the 'tornado warning' useless. As meteorologists, we are doing our job and that is given the environment in place and what is seen on radar, the forecaster issues what they feel is needed. In this case and in general, lots of low-level shear and rotation seen on the radar and therefore the tornado warnings. The warnings contain a lot of pre-formatted text, however in many cases I would like to see the warning forecaster add some additional text to describe the situation better. However the drawback to this is it takes time to type it out and takes away time for getting the warning out. I am wondering though if it would have made a difference if our radar was working during this event. I believe nearly all the tornado warnings during Hurricane Irene were based on velocity and SRM data from the FAA terminal doppler radars. In this case, it was from PHL and EWR and at times these can run 'hot'. The verified tornado near Lewes was close to the DOX radar so that was helpful. There will likely be a service assessment regarding this tropical event.

[phlwx]

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?"

Most people think that a tornado warning means they're getting the Wizard of Oz ripping through their 'hood...and many times locally tornadoes aren't much stronger in terms of wind than that of a downburst. There isn't much difference in a good % of our tornado events between a "twister" and a downburst from a wind standpoint except that one has rotating winds and the other doesn't. I get where Glenn is going with it but I don't blame the NWS for issuing the warnings -- they're merely executing what they're supposed to be doing for the exact reasons you outlined (dropping on a sports event, etc.).

If they keep the system as is I'm fine with it...but I can see the need to tweak/revise.

[hurricaneschwartz]

Glenn,

You are not the only one that is unhappy regarding the wealth of tornado warnings that my office issued during Hurricane Irene. I take it you have not contacted my office about your thoughts on this. Please do so as Gary is willing to chat with you. I have already talked to him about this to some extent. I think it would be beneficial if you talk with us about this, and I encourage you (and other media folks) to do so. As Severe Weather Focal Point here at the Mount Holly office, it is frustrating because we will not be verifying the other warnings that were issued. From the information I have so far, we verified the one near Lewes, Delaware and another warning had a waterspout offshore (no verification onshore). The other warnings will likely come up empty.

Regarding some other comments on here from you and some others, I do not think coming up with another name/headline is the solution to this. This will probably just add confusion for the public. I have heard that many years ago the NWS was able to issue Severe Weather Statements for events similar to this, but after policy changes and in the world of VTEC, this is no longer allowed. I do not think the NWS has made the 'tornado warning' useless. As meteorologists, we are doing our job and that is given the environment in place and what is seen on radar, the forecaster issues what they feel is needed. In this case and in general, lots of low-level shear and rotation seen on the radar and therefore the tornado warnings. The warnings contain a lot of pre-formatted text, however in many cases I would like to see the warning forecaster add some additional text to describe the situation better. However the drawback to this is it takes time to type it out and takes away time for getting the warning out. I am wondering though if it would have made a difference if our radar was working during this event. I believe nearly all the tornado warnings during Hurricane Irene were based on velocity and SRM data from the FAA terminal doppler radars. In this case, it was from PHL and EWR and at times these can run 'hot'. The verified tornado near Lewes was close to the DOX radar so that was helpful. There will likely be a service assessment regarding this tropical event.

Thanks for your thoughts, Mike. I wanted to raise the subject in a forum like this so I could get some ideas from other knowledgeable people before bringing up the subject with Gary and others. Knowing that my radar was out would make me more conservative in issuing warnings.

I know this is a "no-win situation" but sometimes it's a good idea to lose less. Whatever the final outcome, the goal should be saving the most lives, and not preventing lawsuits or criticism from above.

Glenn

[MGorse]

Thanks for your thoughts, Mike. I wanted to raise the subject in a forum like this so I could get some ideas from other knowledgeable people before bringing up the subject with Gary and others. Knowing that my radar was out would make me more conservative in issuing warnings.

I know this is a "no-win situation" but sometimes it's a good idea to lose less. Whatever the final outcome, the goal should be saving the most lives, and not preventing lawsuits or criticism from above.

Glenn

Glenn, I am generally thinking the opposite as it probably would be better to discuss this with us instead of complaining about it on here. No disrespect to you or those in this thread, but since we rely on the media to help get the word out, your feedback is important. Having the radar out would not necessarily make us be more conservative in issuing warnings. We have other radars to use. Again, I encourage you and others in the media to contact us to pass along your thoughts and feedback.

[greg ralls]

I just wanted to add that I am grateful to Glenn for the way he handled the Tornado Warnings. King of Prussia was specifically mentioned in the one warning, and my wife was a little scared until you reassured us all that the threat was fairly minimal (we live in an apartment with no basement, but at least we're on the first floor). I'm not blaming the NWS or anything, but it was great to have you on downplaying the threat of strong tornadoes.

[Boch23]

Most people think that a tornado warning means they're getting the Wizard of Oz ripping through their 'hood...and many times locally tornadoes aren't much stronger in terms of wind than that of a downburst. There isn't much difference in a good % of our tornado events between a "twister" and a downburst from a wind standpoint except that one has rotating winds and the other doesn't. I get where Glenn is going with it but I don't blame the NWS for issuing the warnings -- they're merely executing what they're supposed to be doing for the exact reasons you outlined (dropping on a sports event, etc.).

If they keep the system as is I'm fine with it...but I can see the need to tweak/revise.

This is how I feel. I mean the couple people I have talked to about this said they would rather have the warning so they can at least prepare somewhat then not have it at all. I mean if you issue an alert and the storm winds up spinning up an F1 or F2 in a densely populated area then what? Nobody ever seems to talk about the people that do head the warnings. With all aspects of life its always the few that ruin it for the many.

My main argument is and will continue to be that as long as you have an uneducated public, that more likely then not has no interest in the weather other than does it affect their own personal activity, then this issue will always be around.

And really no matter what you do, add a warning type or change the name or whatever, you will run into the same issues. There will never be a perfect system and speaking from a more casual standpoint I think the current system is fine but as phlwx said there is always room for improvements if it can be done.

[famartin]

Us weather weenies would understand rotating thunderstorm, but my wife would think it was a thunderstorm that did circles around the same location, or something like that.

My mom still has it in her head that storms like to "circle"

Yeah, the public wouldn't have a clue about a "rotating thunderstorm warning". They might hear "thunderstorm" and take cover based on that, but the rotating part would likely confuse them.

[famartin]

"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

This is a nice idea... but unfortunately, many in the public still don't know the difference between a watch and a warning, so throwing another term in there will increase confusion. If we were to add another term, I would think "advisory" would be most appropriate since its already frequently in use.

[MGorse]

"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

Adding another headline/hazard would more than likley just add to confusion. Step 3 would not really work because convective warnings are issued as storm-based and not county-based, plus if the warning was issued all the time once one was spotted there would technically be no lead time. In our part of the country where tornadoes are typically weaker and short-lived, we would then basically be missing nearly all of them based on this method and the fact that most tornadoes are not seen.

[Parsley]

Thanks for yout input NWS guys.

[NJHurricane]

Adding another headline/hazard would more than likley just add to confusion. Step 3 would not really work because convective warnings are issued as storm-based and not county-based, plus if the warning was issued all the time once one was spotted there would technically be no lead time. In our part of the country where tornadoes are typically weaker and short-lived, we would then basically be missing nearly all of them based on this method and the fact that most tornadoes are not seen.

This in turn goes back to some of Glenn's points....is the point of a tornado warning to notify the presence of an actual or possible tornado no matter its strength, duration, and danger to the public relative to "normal" severe weather for our area? Or should it be reserved for a much more rare but much more dangerous situation of an F2 or higher tornado for this area?

All of this begs further questions....as you point out is altering the system worth the inevitable initial confusion? More importantly...are we confident enough in advances in radar technology to say we can now distinguish between short lived spin up potential cells and cells that could strengthen to something more?

I have to agree somewhat, that its silly from a communications point of view to issue the same kind of warning for marginal situations as we do for clearly extremely dangerous ones...storms with a history of tornado damage, or a clearly visible debris ball per radar....I don't know much about warnings for volcano eruptions, but I'm assuming they don't involve the same terminology for some steam blow off with minor ashfall from a frequently erupting volcano as for a Pinatubo style impending blast.

If it could be determined that it would be in the public's best interest to modify the warnings/criteria perhaps a "category" grading of the threat at time of issuance:

Category 1 tornado warning: radar indicating some rotation, tornado may be occuring or imminent

Category 2 tornado warning: strong rotation per radar, torndo likely occuring or imminent

Category 3 tornado warning: strong rotation per radar and ground confirmation of a tornado touchdown or damage per spotters, media, or law enforcement

Category 4 tornado warning: very strong rotation, ground confirmation and history of extensive damage

This might be completely impractical and over the heads of the general public...then again, I would say over the past 20 years more and more of the general public have at least a superficial understanding of the Saffir-Simpson scale and take note of the differences when planning for hurricanes.

[MGorse]

This in turn goes back to some of Glenn's points....is the point of a tornado warning to notify the presence of an actual or possible tornado no matter its strength, duration, and danger to the public relative to "normal" severe weather for our area? Or should it be reserved for a much more rare but much more dangerous situation of an F2 or higher tornado for this area?

All of this begs further questions....as you point out is altering the system worth the inevitable initial confusion? More importantly...are we confident enough in advances in radar technology to say we can now distinguish between short lived spin up potential cells and cells that could strengthen to something more?

I have to agree somewhat, that its silly from a communications point of view to issue the same kind of warning for marginal situations as we do for clearly extremely dangerous ones...storms with a history of tornado damage, or a clearly visible debris ball per radar....I don't know much about warnings for volcano eruptions, but I'm assuming they don't involve the same terminology for some steam blow off with minor ashfall from a frequently erupting volcano as for a Pinatubo style impending blast.

If it could be determined that it would be in the public's best interest to modify the warnings/criteria perhaps a "category" grading of the threat at time of issuance:

Category 1 tornado warning: radar indicating some rotation, tornado may be occuring or imminent

Category 2 tornado warning: strong rotation per radar, torndo likely occuring or imminent

Category 3 tornado warning: strong rotation per radar and ground confirmation of a tornado touchdown or damage per spotters, media, or law enforcement

Category 4 tornado warning: very strong rotation, ground confirmation and history of extensive damage

This might be completely impractical and over the heads of the general public...then again, I would say over the past 20 years more and more of the general public have at least a superficial understanding of the Saffir-Simpson scale and take note of the differences when planning for hurricanes.

I keep going back to the point that we do not know the strength of a tornado (EF0, EF1, etc) based solely on radar data. We can get an idea based on the convective structure, however our area typically does not see the classic supercell structures of the Plains. In our area, we deal with quick and typically weaker tornadoes therefore looking for debris ball signatures would not help. Changing how we issue warnings regarding tornadoes could end up hurting the science of meteorology, of course depending on what change would be made. I think perhaps the best solution would be to add different worded phrases within the tornado warning to convey the situation based on radar data and ground reports. This could perhaps lead to a tiered approach of phrases that can be loaded into the warning text to best describe the situation, and maybe this would make clearer the actual threat (differentiate from other warnings) within the warning.

[Scotty Lightning]

I honestly don't see an issue with the tornado warnings from Irene-I was up all night(and on-air) when the tornado warnings were issued and since DIX was down I had DOX, OKX, TPHL, TJFK, and TEWR all running(GR2, GR3 for the terminal dopplers). I kept saying that there was a rotation aloft, but not reaching the ground.....but the POTENTIAL for some rotation aloft to actually reach the ground was expected until the warning expired.

Better safe than sorry, especially when your main radar was down.

[phlwx]

I keep going back to the point that we do not know the strength of a tornado (EF0, EF1, etc) based solely on radar data. We can get an idea based on the convective structure, however our area typically does not see the classic supercell structures of the Plains. In our area, we deal with quick and typically weaker tornadoes therefore looking for debris ball signatures would not help. Changing how we issue warnings regarding tornadoes could end up hurting the science of meteorology, of course depending on what change would be made. I think perhaps the best solution would be to add different worded phrases within the tornado warning to convey the situation based on radar data and ground reports. This could perhaps lead to a tiered approach of phrases that can be loaded into the warning text to best describe the situation, and maybe this would make clearer the actual threat (differentiate from other warnings) within the warning.

This seems reasonable. S-S on the hurricane side is a clusterf*ck of a scale...I'm not sure it's helpful to have "categories" assigned to warnings when there are so many variables at work within a storm when it drops a tornado.

If you can nuance some wordsmithing into the warning it might help but many instances that's already being done (this tornado/storm has a history of doing X and Y...which many places already do in the warning).

The farther I'm removed from this, the more I think the situation with Irene was handled well overall...I really think it mainly comes down to educating the public on the differences of tornadoes between here and elsewhere...F3+ are rare around these parts. Unfortunately, you can't call tornadoes a "rotating downburst" when most of them around here are pretty much that.

[MGorse]

This seems reasonable. S-S on the hurricane side is a clusterf*ck of a scale...I'm not sure it's helpful to have "categories" assigned to warnings when there are so many variables at work within a storm when it drops a tornado.

If you can nuance some wordsmithing into the warning it might help but many instances that's already being done (this tornado/storm has a history of doing X and Y...which many places already do in the warning).

The farther I'm removed from this, the more I think the situation with Irene was handled well overall...I really think it mainly comes down to educating the public on the differences of tornadoes between here and elsewhere...F3+ are rare around these parts. Unfortunately, you can't call tornadoes a "rotating downburst" when most of them around here are pretty much that.

True. And as a side note, the NWS service assessment team was here back on September 16th regarding Hurricane Irene. I was told there was some interest by the team regarding all the tornado warnings issued.

[Scotty Lightning]

True. And as a side note, the NWS service assessment team was here back on September 16th regarding Hurricane Irene. I was told there was some interest by the team regarding all the tornado warnings issued.

Poor Tony showed the stack of papers he had to go through from Irene......he won't be done until at the least the new year.

[MGorse]

Poor Tony showed the stack of papers he had to go through from Irene......he won't be done until at the least the new year.

He is getting some help with those, which is good as there is a lot to go through. The stormdata for August is due at the end of this month, and he is good at meeting the deadlines.

[Grothar]

This in turn goes back to some of Glenn's points....is the point of a tornado warning to notify the presence of an actual or possible tornado no matter its strength, duration, and danger to the public relative to "normal" severe weather for our area? Or should it be reserved for a much more rare but much more dangerous situation of an F2 or higher tornado for this area?

All of this begs further questions....as you point out is altering the system worth the inevitable initial confusion? More importantly...are we confident enough in advances in radar technology to say we can now distinguish between short lived spin up potential cells and cells that could strengthen to something more?

I have to agree somewhat, that its silly from a communications point of view to issue the same kind of warning for marginal situations as we do for clearly extremely dangerous ones...storms with a history of tornado damage, or a clearly visible debris ball per radar....I don't know much about warnings for volcano eruptions, but I'm assuming they don't involve the same terminology for some steam blow off with minor ashfall from a frequently erupting volcano as for a Pinatubo style impending blast.

If it could be determined that it would be in the public's best interest to modify the warnings/criteria perhaps a "category" grading of the threat at time of issuance:

Category 1 tornado warning: radar indicating some rotation, tornado may be occuring or imminent

Category 2 tornado warning: strong rotation per radar, torndo likely occuring or imminent

Category 3 tornado warning: strong rotation per radar and ground confirmation of a tornado touchdown or damage per spotters, media, or law enforcement

Category 4 tornado warning: very strong rotation, ground confirmation and history of extensive damage

This might be completely impractical and over the heads of the general public...then again, I would say over the past 20 years more and more of the general public have at least a superficial understanding of the Saffir-Simpson scale and take note of the differences when planning for hurricanes.

Your ideas are going in the right direction. We need a color scheme with each Category with red indicating Category 4. The reason why tornado warnings scare citizens in our forecast area is because they virtually get the entire warning from the TV. Imagine if the tornado forms at night. How many people rely on TV solely for receiving their tornado warning dissemination at night? Very few. Honestly, this is not normal if you live in the SE or Midwest because you rely on a siren and if you hear that siren, you better get your butt in a shelter. Also many TV stations preempt all shows to track the rotating storms during the evening. If we want to stop the crying wolf syndrome we must become more serious with these tornado producing storms and be willing to preempt normal programming and install viper radars and talking sirens. The time of hiding all of our tornado detection equipment from the public is over. The public is demanding that we show the storms evolution and progress. This reduces panic and gets them educated on the formation of a tornado. If the city of Memphis can do it, so can Philly. Simply hiding in a back room, (weather center) looking at radars and receiving data from the NWS (while not wrong of course) or private weather firm or model is not the wave of the future for tv meteorologists. Glenn, its time you convince your supervisors on the importance of this new technology and the fact that many TV stations in the US are going in this direction. (Viper Radar) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_bx8tl3vAY

talking torndo sirens

for those who really want to change the publics perspective. Lets start by placing them on the Limerick sirens and work out to the volunteer fire companies

[hurricaneschwartz]

Your ideas are going in the right direction. We need a color scheme with each Category with red indicating Category 4. The reason why tornado warnings scare citizens in our forecast area is because they virtually get the entire warning from the TV. Imagine if the tornado forms at night. How many people rely on TV solely for receiving their tornado warning dissemination at night? Very few. Honestly, this is not normal if you live in the SE or Midwest because you rely on a siren and if you hear that siren, you better get your butt in a shelter. Also many TV stations preempt all shows to track the rotating storms during the evening. If we want to stop the crying wolf syndrome we must become more serious with these tornado producing storms and be willing to preempt normal programming and install viper radars and talking sirens. The time of hiding all of our tornado detection equipment from the public is over. The public is demanding that we show the storms evolution and progress. This reduces panic and gets them educated on the formation of a tornado. If the city of Memphis can do it, so can Philly. Simply hiding in a back room, (weather center) looking at radars and receiving data from the NWS (while not wrong of course) or private weather firm or model is not the wave of the future for tv meteorologists. Glenn, its time you convince your supervisors on the importance of this new technology and the fact that many TV stations in the US are going in this direction. (Viper Radar) http://www.youtube.c...h?v=i_bx8tl3vAY

talking torndo sirens

for those who really want to change the publics perspective. Lets start by placing them on the Limerick sirens and work out to the volunteer fire companies

This is a tough economy to be adding million dollar radar systems and expensive sirens. I can imagine the outcry if we had sirens in the Phila. area during Irene. If they sounded for every tornado warning, and there were no tornadoes, the NWS would lose even more credibility. We are NOT Memphis-this is not tornado country. Plus, I know one of the TV people from Memphis, and he constantly complains about the over-warning from NWS. And they get actual tornadoes there.

By the way, I was interviewed by a TV met as part of the investigation of Irene, so they got a full idea of the problem. It will be interesting to see the report. Gary S. at Mt. Holly gave them my name to interview, which shows you how frustrating this must be for NWS here (and probably in many areas of the country).

Glenn

[SmokeEater]

Your ideas are going in the right direction. We need a color scheme with each Category with red indicating Category 4. The reason why tornado warnings scare citizens in our forecast area is because they virtually get the entire warning from the TV. Imagine if the tornado forms at night. How many people rely on TV solely for receiving their tornado warning dissemination at night? Very few. Honestly, this is not normal if you live in the SE or Midwest because you rely on a siren and if you hear that siren, you better get your butt in a shelter. Also many TV stations preempt all shows to track the rotating storms during the evening. If we want to stop the crying wolf syndrome we must become more serious with these tornado producing storms and be willing to preempt normal programming and install viper radars and talking sirens. The time of hiding all of our tornado detection equipment from the public is over. The public is demanding that we show the storms evolution and progress. This reduces panic and gets them educated on the formation of a tornado. If the city of Memphis can do it, so can Philly. Simply hiding in a back room, (weather center) looking at radars and receiving data from the NWS (while not wrong of course) or private weather firm or model is not the wave of the future for tv meteorologists. Glenn, its time you convince your supervisors on the importance of this new technology and the fact that many TV stations in the US are going in this direction. (Viper Radar) http://www.youtube.c...h?v=i_bx8tl3vAY

talking torndo sirens

for those who really want to change the publics perspective. Lets start by placing them on the Limerick sirens and work out to the volunteer fire companies

When it comes to the 1st bolded statement, you say installing viper software and talking sirens to go off with every tornado warned storm. If anything, that will only make the public cry wolf even more, if there is a siren that goes off with every tornado warning in this part of the country. People are complaining about warning fatigue, which means tornado warnings, with no actual tornado. So you want MORE alerts for every warning, after the public is trying to say the NWS/SPC/local stations are overwarning? You make it sound like tornadoes are dropping everywhere in the Philly Metro, every year, with no warning. 2nd bolded statement, the Philly Metro is NOTHING like Memphis and the Midwest. You cannot by any means compare the two. And with the 3rd part, you want to sound the Limerick nuke plant sirens, for tornado warnings? Are you nuts? And where are you going to get the tens of millions of dollars, to sync all the volunteer FD's sirens to go off at every tornado warning? It's nowhere near as easy as you think it is. In this day and age, most people complain when a volly company's siren goes off for a fire call alone. Setting them to go off for tornado warnings, in a non tornado prone area of the country is not smart either. And about Glenn going to his supervisors, if you think these local Philly stations are going to spend millions, for new radar software, for something they really don't need for tornado detection around here. The reason why this thread was started, was mostly because of brief tornadoes, doing little to no damage, that weren't picked up on radar. Which happens everywhere, even in the Midwest.

[Grothar]

When it comes to the 1st bolded statement, you say installing viper software and talking sirens to go off with every tornado warned storm. If anything, that will only make the public cry wolf even more, if there is a siren that goes off with every tornado warning in this part of the country. People are complaining about warning fatigue, which means tornado warnings, with no actual tornado. So you want MORE alerts for every warning, after the public is trying to say the NWS/SPC/local stations are overwarning? You make it sound like tornadoes are dropping everywhere in the Philly Metro, every year, with no warning. 2nd bolded statement, the Philly Metro is NOTHING like Memphis and the Midwest. You cannot by any means compare the two. And with the 3rd part, you want to sound the Limerick nuke plant sirens, for tornado warnings? Are you nuts? And where are you going to get the tens of millions of dollars, to sync all the volunteer FD's sirens to go off at every tornado warning? It's nowhere near as easy as you think it is. In this day and age, most people complain when a volly company's siren goes off for a fire call alone. Setting them to go off for tornado warnings, in a non tornado prone area of the country is not smart either. And about Glenn going to his supervisors, if you think these local Philly stations are going to spend millions, for new radar software, for something they really don't need for tornado detection around here. The reason why this thread was started, was mostly because of brief tornadoes, doing little to no damage, that weren't picked up on radar. Which happens everywhere, even in the Midwest.

To respond to your concerns:

1. The public does not cry wolf down in the south and they will not cry wolf here if they are educated about tornadoes.

2. The only reason it appears the NWS are overwarning is that the public only sees the warnings scrolling along the bottom of the tv screen and then they high tail it down to the basement. They are just tired of running down to the basement for tornado warnings that are spotted on the opposite for one side of the county of where they live. This is not the fault of the NWS. The area of possible tornado formation for issuing warnings is quite small in these large storms but the warnings cannot be broken to smaller areas other than counties. I am sorry, but when businesses are affected too, people tend to get p'ode about the tornado warning interruption because they have never seen the destruction of an F-3 storm or stronger. What they see on TV of the mass destruction does not fathom in their head when they are running downstairs. All they think of is another dam interruption of my personal life or business.

3. Why not sync all the sirens, they do it in the Midwest and South. Just because we have hills, should not prevent us from having sirens. Talking sirens were placed near urban areas. Sirens around here get peoples attention

4. Limerick sirens are in various municipalities that go off at 2pm (Tuesday every week ( Parsley). I am only suggesting to test them on Saturday at noon with a different tone then the nuclear siren. This would be a good testing area because the sirens are already in place

5. I am suggesting that the first TV station in Philly to get Viper Radar will win the weather ratings war. I saw in Oklahoma City, Memphis, Tampa Viper Radar as a tool that attracted a large tv audience and helped educate this audience on severe weather. Can you envision that a lot of our members watching each storm event, including the winter storms on this radar.

[MGorse]

By the way, I was interviewed by a TV met as part of the investigation of Irene, so they got a full idea of the problem. It will be interesting to see the report. Gary S. at Mt. Holly gave them my name to interview, which shows you how frustrating this must be for NWS here (and probably in many areas of the country).

Glenn

Thanks Glenn for doing this interview.

[MGorse]

To respond to your concerns:

1. The public does not cry wolf down in the south and they will not cry wolf here if they are educated about tornadoes.

2. The only reason it appears the NWS are overwarning is that the public only sees the warnings scrolling along the bottom of the tv screen and then they high tail it down to the basement. They are just tired of running down to the basement for tornado warnings that are spotted on the opposite for one side of the county of where they live. This is not the fault of the NWS. The area of possible tornado formation for issuing warnings is quite small in these large storms but the warnings cannot be broken to smaller areas other than counties. I am sorry, but when businesses are affected too, people tend to get p'ode about the tornado warning interruption because they have never seen the destruction of an F-3 storm or stronger. What they see on TV of the mass destruction does not fathom in their head when they are running downstairs. All they think of is another dam interruption of my personal life or business.

3. Why not sync all the sirens, they do it in the Midwest and South. Just because we have hills, should not prevent us from having sirens. Talking sirens were placed near urban areas. Sirens around here get peoples attention

4. Limerick sirens are in various municipalities that go off at 2pm (Tuesday every week ( Parsley). I am only suggesting to test them on Saturday at noon with a different tone then the nuclear siren. This would be a good testing area because the sirens are already in place

5. I am suggesting that the first TV station in Philly to get Viper Radar will win the weather ratings war. I saw in Oklahoma City, Memphis, Tampa Viper Radar as a tool that attracted a large tv audience and helped educate this audience on severe weather. Can you envision that a lot of our members watching each storm event, including the winter storms on this radar.

I see your point as many times the NWS warnings scrolling on the bottom of TV screens looks to be an automated process. It states the warning but it is generalized, which plays down the point of the storm-based warnings in my opinion. It is great the warnings are being scrolled, however if they were more specific when listing the geographical area (i.e. the text in the actual warning) I think this would be better. And to add, I am pretty sure that getting the warnings via TV is not the only method for the public receiving them.

[SouthernNJ]

Can't believe I just realized this:

942 AM EDT WED SEP 28 2011

...TORNADO CONFIRMED NEAR ROBBINSVILLE IN MERCER COUNTY NEW JERSEY...

LOCATION...ROBBINSVILLE IN MERCER COUNTY NEW JERSEY

DATE...AUGUST 28, 2011

ESTIMATED TIME...300 AM EDT

MAXIMUM EF-SCALE RATING...EF-0

ESTIMATED MAXIMUM WIND SPEED...85 MPH

MAXIMUM PATH WIDTH...30 YARDS

PATH LENGTH...1 MILE

This certainly was unexpected. I figured everything was wrapped up from Irene, but I guess not.

A TOR was in effect for this at 240 AM until 315 AM. This is a nice bonus for lead time stats

and gives Mt. Holly two verified warnings for Irene.

The question I have is how a survey, either by radar review or by damage inspection, was done

for this event? Also, it seems odd that the winds were as strong as 85 mph despite only tree

and electric pole damage. There must have been a lot of them taken down.

[HM]

Can't believe I just realized this:

942 AM EDT WED SEP 28 2011

...TORNADO CONFIRMED NEAR ROBBINSVILLE IN MERCER COUNTY NEW JERSEY...

LOCATION...ROBBINSVILLE IN MERCER COUNTY NEW JERSEY

DATE...AUGUST 28, 2011

ESTIMATED TIME...300 AM EDT

MAXIMUM EF-SCALE RATING...EF-0

ESTIMATED MAXIMUM WIND SPEED...85 MPH

MAXIMUM PATH WIDTH...30 YARDS

PATH LENGTH...1 MILE

This certainly was unexpected. I figured everything was wrapped up from Irene, but I guess not.

A TOR was in effect for this at 240 AM until 315 AM. This is a nice bonus for lead time stats

and gives Mt. Holly two verified warnings for Irene.

The question I have is how a survey, either by radar review or by damage inspection, was done

for this event? Also, it seems odd that the winds were as strong as 85 mph despite only tree

and electric pole damage. There must have been a lot of them taken down.

This wasn't the only place in Mercer that had wind damage, either. There were other areas of trees down throughout the county that I didn't see show up in the LSR. Damage seemed clustered throughout many areas in S-C NJ (Ocean/Monmouth/Mercer south). I wouldn't be shocked if there were more spin-ups that occurred.

Also, I came across this on youtube:

Yes, the video is highly annoying, but these kids captured a wall cloud with at least a funnel cloud. There is also tree damage (that looks tornadic) toward the end of the video. Based on when the video was posted, this was likely the NW NJ supercell on May 15th that came through Sussex/Morris. There was a wind report out of Sussex but this event in Tranquility was never reported.

I am sure more tornadoes occurred this year than what we think...

[HM]

Thanks for your thoughts, Mike. I wanted to raise the subject in a forum like this so I could get some ideas from other knowledgeable people before bringing up the subject with Gary and others. Knowing that my radar was out would make me more conservative in issuing warnings.

I know this is a "no-win situation" but sometimes it's a good idea to lose less. Whatever the final outcome, the goal should be saving the most lives, and not preventing lawsuits or criticism from above.

Glenn

I know my response is very late, but I disagree with your assertion that being conservative was the way to go.

1. We had reports from Delaware that these storms were capable of producing tornadoes that could produce damage

2. The environment was favorable for tornadoes

3. There were several areas of rotation and there are plenty of clustered areas of damage that verified (yeah, I know a lot of it didn't make it into the LSR).

I thought the tornado warnings were warranted. Yeah, maybe a few seemed like shallower circulations, but I wouldn't call any of the circulations with Irene deep either.

[MGorse]

Can't believe I just realized this:

942 AM EDT WED SEP 28 2011

...TORNADO CONFIRMED NEAR ROBBINSVILLE IN MERCER COUNTY NEW JERSEY...

LOCATION...ROBBINSVILLE IN MERCER COUNTY NEW JERSEY

DATE...AUGUST 28, 2011

ESTIMATED TIME...300 AM EDT

MAXIMUM EF-SCALE RATING...EF-0

ESTIMATED MAXIMUM WIND SPEED...85 MPH

MAXIMUM PATH WIDTH...30 YARDS

PATH LENGTH...1 MILE

This certainly was unexpected. I figured everything was wrapped up from Irene, but I guess not.

A TOR was in effect for this at 240 AM until 315 AM. This is a nice bonus for lead time stats

and gives Mt. Holly two verified warnings for Irene.

The question I have is how a survey, either by radar review or by damage inspection, was done

for this event? Also, it seems odd that the winds were as strong as 85 mph despite only tree

and electric pole damage. There must have been a lot of them taken down.

From what I know, these damage surveys are being conducted with lots of assistance by the county emergency managers. We received some pictures of the damage and reviewed the radar data the best we can. The WCM at my office has been working hard looking at some of the damage areas and any reports and pictures that are sent our way. These tornadoes were on the weak side so it has been tough with the details. I think there is at least one more damage area that is being looked at more closely but not sure exactly where.

[SouthernNJ]

From what I remember, there was a lot of tree damage in central Burlington county, as well

as Northwest Vineland and along the Delaware River between Pennsville and Arden. These

were probably just damaging winds from the rain band that moved through, but some of

the areas had warnings on them. I saw quite a bit of roof damage in Long Branch, which

was suspicious as a Marine Warning was in effect for the adjacent waters. In any case, I

was glad to see at least one more was confirmed to show that these were not just random

warnings being issued.