Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

AMS 92nd Annual Meeting


Recommended Posts

Hey now! I don't have internet... Dont talk about mme behind my back (pun for you, Trix!). Id love to meet everyone from the board since I feel weird hahing people spot me from behind (though I do stand out). And yes, 5'6" is short... It happens. Lol.

Sad I slept through tthe storms this morning by only a half hour. Hope everyone enenjoyed the banquet last night!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always a treat to listen to Lance Bosart. You Albany folks are lucky.

Lance Bozart is amazing. He was an advisor to one of my professors, so we learn a lot of his synoptic ideas.

His talks are also always delivered so well.

By the way, I was the one who asked about the influence of extratropical bombs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conference was pretty cool. Was very disappointed in the career fair. Didn't realize going to college was a career as all of the tables set up were for different college programs. Did anyone else sit in on Tim Marshall's talk about his structural damage analysis of the Joplin tornado? Interesting stuff he put out there. About how the tornado was more than likely and EF-2 to EF-3 and not an EF-5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conference was pretty cool. Was very disappointed in the career fair. Didn't realize going to college was a career as all of the tables set up were for different college programs. Did anyone else sit in on Tim Marshall's talk about his structural damage analysis of the Joplin tornado? Interesting stuff he put out there. About how the tornado was more than likely and EF-2 to EF-3 and not an EF-5.

That's not what he said. He was only talking about those specific building ratings, not the whole tornado.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what he said. He was only talking about those specific building ratings, not the whole tornado.

Unless I am misunderstanding how the whole EF scale works.....wasn't it enhanced to better adjust to a tornadoes actual wind speed. Which when he used the different damage charts that he had showed that the wind it took to destroy the structures was somewhere in the region of 130-160 mph. And on the last slide that he showed it said that the same exact damage he witnessed could have been done by a tornado of lesser intensity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conference was pretty cool. Was very disappointed in the career fair. Didn't realize going to college was a career as all of the tables set up were for different college programs. Did anyone else sit in on Tim Marshall's talk about his structural damage analysis of the Joplin tornado? Interesting stuff he put out there. About how the tornado was more than likely and EF-2 to EF-3 and not an EF-5.

There were plenty of non-college tables, but yes, going to grad school is in some respects a job/career. No need for your sarcasm. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless I am misunderstanding how the whole EF scale works.....wasn't it enhanced to better adjust to a tornadoes actual wind speed. Which when he used the different damage charts that he had showed that the wind it took to destroy the structures was somewhere in the region of 130-160 mph. And on the last slide that he showed it said that the same exact damage he witnessed could have been done by a tornado of lesser intensity.

You are way misunderstanding. He was simply showing the failure modes for concrete masonry units in the path and how their destruction may not take as much wind as some think. He made no overarching statement about the overall strength of the tornado.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are way misunderstanding. He was simply showing the failure modes for concrete masonry units in the path and how their destruction may not take as much wind as some think. He made no overarching statement about the overall strength of the tornado.

Yes, I sat in that talk also (packed room!) and took away the same. The talk was narrowly focused on a certain type of building from an engineering perspective. The rebar/hinge aspects were very interesting.

Also in that session, the guy who got up and complained to the social sciences woman about the initial warning path was very off-putting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I sat in that talk also (packed room!) and took away the same. The talk was narrowly focused on a certain type of building from an engineering perspective. The rebar/hinge aspects were very interesting.

Also in that session, the guy who got up and complained to the social sciences woman about the initial warning path was very off-putting.

Yes! (Are you talking about the Joplin session, or the one before it? I attended the late-morning tornado session and remember someone being very off-putting towards the social sciences woman... just can't remember specifics).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes! (Are you talking about the Joplin session, or the one before it? I attended the late-morning tornado session and remember someone being very off-putting towards the social sciences woman... just can't remember specifics).

Yes, I sat in that talk also (packed room!) and took away the same. The talk was narrowly focused on a certain type of building from an engineering perspective. The rebar/hinge aspects were very interesting.

Also in that session, the guy who got up and complained to the social sciences woman about the initial warning path was very off-putting.

I was there for most of those talks as well (sorry, I did a bad job trying to seek people out via the board...too tied up w/ work in the AMs). I know (not personally) the guy who complained about the Joplin warnings...his point might have been mistimed (don't attack the social science lady...all things considered, I thought she did a good job...I know it's a science conference, but some people really do forget that there's a human element to all this), but I felt it was a necessary point and one that people do tend to sugarcoat or gloss over a bit. The day of Joplin was done well, but it wasn't perfect...and the logistics involved with the sirens and people's reaction to them is somewhat disconcerting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was there for most of those talks as well (sorry, I did a bad job trying to seek people out via the board...too tied up w/ work in the AMs). I know (not personally) the guy who complained about the Joplin warnings...his point might have been mistimed (don't attack the social science lady...all things considered, I thought she did a good job...I know it's a science conference, but some people really do forget that there's a human element to all this), but I felt it was a necessary point and one that people do tend to sugarcoat or gloss over a bit. The day of Joplin was done well, but it wasn't perfect...and the logistics involved with the sirens and people's reaction to them is somewhat disconcerting.

Anyone who makes that ruthless attack on anybody about that question is incredibly ignorant to what actually happened that day. The Joplin storm formed out of a cell merger of two other supercells, one of which was headed ENE for the north side of Joplin. That's why the warning was for the north side of the city and for a storm moving NE originally. Quite frankly, I think it's a miracle that the SGF people identified the new cell development and TORed it as soon as they did, given how fast it spun up and how deviant the storm motion was compared to the other warned cell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who makes that ruthless attack on anybody about that question is incredibly ignorant to what actually happened that day. The Joplin storm formed out of a cell merger of two other supercells, one of which was headed ENE for the north side of Joplin. That's why the warning was for the north side of the city and for a storm moving NE originally. Quite frankly, I think it's a miracle that the SGF people identified the new cell development and TORed it as soon as they did, given how fast it spun up and how deviant the storm motion was compared to the other warned cell.

I don't think anyone disputes that they did God's work that day given what was thrown at them. I'm saying that I think some discussions that might seem taboo about the process and the chain of events are certainly fair to have.

I am told by the City of Joplin that Joplin's siren policy is under review.

Will the AMS have these sessions on their website available for download in any form?

They will to view...not sure what the usual timeframe is, but I'd give it 1-2 weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...