Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,609
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Enhanced SVR/TOR Products This Spring


OceanStWx

Recommended Posts

http://products.weather.gov/PDD/PDD_CR_IBW_011012.pdf

I haven't seen any mention of this on here, but thought it was an interesting initiative.

This gist of it is two fold. One being to include tags (a la HAIL...X.XX, WIND...XX(X)) to include tornado and damage information, and two being to include enhanced wording within the warning text regarding hazard and damage. There will be two tiered SVRs (baseline and > 2.75" hail and/or > 80 mph winds) and three tiered TORs (baseline, sig. tor, and tornado emergency).

We know there is an issue with the public taking the appropriate response to our warnings in many situations, and I love that this is an attempt to fix that. I do think that the science allows for the capacity to differentiate these respective threats. I do have some concern that these tiers might allow for some complacency when it comes to "baseline" threats. Our goal is to elicit immediate action when we issue a warning, and I could see the public taking the mentality that it is just a run of the mill SVR for instance.

Theoretically it should cut down on the time it takes to issue a warning. Whereas in the past these threats would need to be hand typed into a warning, now there will be selectable additions via the Warngen GUI.

Communication should be more effecitve, with those who need the information. The media members and EMs will now see which storms are the greatest threats quickly. I think effective communication with those partners will go a long way to addressing my concerns above. If the media and EM communities aren't glossing over the "baseline" threats, hopefully the public won't either. At the very least if we can maintain current reaction to baseline threats, and create a more widespread response to enhanced wording threats we will have accomplished something good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beau did post this in the main forum:

http://www.americanw...arnings-coming/

That would figure, considering the link I provided was from almost a month ago. I thought someone must've been on top of it, but I rarely hit the main forum. Since it was a CR thing I just assumed it would mostly applied to this sub-forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would figure, considering the link I provided was from almost a month ago. I thought someone must've been on top of it, but I rarely hit the main forum. Since it was a CR thing I just assumed it would mostly applied to this sub-forum.

Thanks for posting this. As the Skywarn director for our Emergency Management, this info is important to me. I do not visit the main board enough. With limited time, I usually just hit this subforum. This just applies to the Central Region?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this. As the Skywarn director for our Emergency Management, this info is important to me. I do not visit the main board enough. With limited time, I usually just hit this subforum. This just applies to the Central Region?

Initial test WFOs will include TOP, EAX, SGF, LSX and ICT

After the usual feedback period this spring through fall, it seems like there is no reason this won't apply to all of CR by next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Initial test WFOs will include TOP, EAX, SGF, LSX and ICT

After the usual feedback period this spring through fall, it seems like there is no reason this won't apply to all of CR by next year.

Thanks. It will be interesting to see how this works out for those offices and get a gauge on public reaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://products.weat..._IBW_011012.pdf

I haven't seen any mention of this on here, but thought it was an interesting initiative.

This gist of it is two fold. One being to include tags (a la HAIL...X.XX, WIND...XX(X)) to include tornado and damage information, and two being to include enhanced wording within the warning text regarding hazard and damage. There will be two tiered SVRs (baseline and > 2.75" hail and/or > 80 mph winds) and three tiered TORs (baseline, sig. tor, and tornado emergency).

We know there is an issue with the public taking the appropriate response to our warnings in many situations, and I love that this is an attempt to fix that. I do think that the science allows for the capacity to differentiate these respective threats. I do have some concern that these tiers might allow for some complacency when it comes to "baseline" threats. Our goal is to elicit immediate action when we issue a warning, and I could see the public taking the mentality that it is just a run of the mill SVR for instance.

Theoretically it should cut down on the time it takes to issue a warning. Whereas in the past these threats would need to be hand typed into a warning, now there will be selectable additions via the Warngen GUI.

Communication should be more effecitve, with those who need the information. The media members and EMs will now see which storms are the greatest threats quickly. I think effective communication with those partners will go a long way to addressing my concerns above. If the media and EM communities aren't glossing over the "baseline" threats, hopefully the public won't either. At the very least if we can maintain current reaction to baseline threats, and create a more widespread response to enhanced wording threats we will have accomplished something good.

I do have one concern with this and it has to do with the tiered tornado warnings, even with the new radars that are in place I am concerned that signifying strength or urgency with respect to tornado warnings might cause more issues than solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do have one concern with this and it has to do with the tiered tornado warnings, even with the new radars that are in place I am concerned that signifying strength or urgency with respect to tornado warnings might cause more issues than solutions.

It's possible, but I do think the state of the science allows us to differentiate the "big" tornado days fairly accurately. From the wording suggested, it is nice that they are only allowing the addition of "significant" damage wording. Meaning we won't be stating EF2, EF4, etc, but rather that there is the potential for significant damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SVSs will have the capacity for all the types of enhanced wording as well.

I know. What I meant was that I hope people don't eventually become accustomed to only watching out for the dire/higher end warnings and ignore the lower end stuff. Cells/couplets can strengthen rapidly. We saw how quickly the Joplin tornado ramped up. If I understand this correctly, Joplin may well have started out with a baseline tornado warning and not been "upgraded" basically until the tornado was entering town. If someone waits for the enhanced wording before taking action, it may not leave them much time in certain situations. I'm not trying to be a debbie downer...I think it is a good move but I see where there is at least the potential for some issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably a positive step. What happens if something ramps up really quickly though?

I suppose it wouldn't be too different than what is already in place having "radar indicated a storm capable of producing a tornado", then updating the warning to a tornado emergency because "spotters reported a large and extremely dangerous tornado".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know. What I meant was that I hope people don't eventually become accustomed to only watching out for the dire/higher end warnings and ignore the lower end stuff. Cells/couplets can strengthen rapidly. We saw how quickly the Joplin tornado ramped up. If I understand this correctly, Joplin may well have started out with a baseline tornado warning and not been "upgraded" basically until the tornado was entering town. If someone waits for the enhanced wording before taking action, it may not leave them much time in certain situations. I'm not trying to be a debbie downer...I think it is a good move but I see where there is at least the potential for some issues.

I see what you mean now. That is my concern as well, that the baseline threats become excuses for inaction. All warnings are supposed to prompt immediate action, and that shouldn't change with this expirement. However, I see the possibility that it could.

I very much like the idea of warnings increasing tiers as the threat becomes clear or confirmed (sort of like positive reinforcement to head to shelter). In the case of Joplin, it increased in threat so close to town that I'm not sure how much could have been enhanced. Though I believe the idea behind the tags are so that warnings can be quickly stripped down to the purest form. You can have equipment search for the word "catastrophic" after the && and that could eventually get a special TV scroll, or prompt a live cut in, etc.

As much as the social science tells us that the public looks for us to tell them exactly what to do, it also tells us that they will look for any excuse for inaction. And that is my biggest worry about minimizing any part of a TOR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's possible, but I do think the state of the science allows us to differentiate the "big" tornado days fairly accurately. From the wording suggested, it is nice that they are only allowing the addition of "significant" damage wording. Meaning we won't be stating EF2, EF4, etc, but rather that there is the potential for significant damage.

Yeah I think this will help out substantially on big outbreak days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to know how many in the public, read the text of a warning, opposed to a text message saying "TORNADO WARNING FOR MADISON COUNTY UNTIL 9PM"

Thinking in those terms, this will be useful to the EM/PS community.

I agree.

I think that with tiered warnings, it will be more critical for folks in the media to accurately portray the severity of their threat to their viewers. The public will need to understand that 60MPH winds are still dangerous, but that if a warning explicitly states that 75MPH winds are likely that more drastic action is needed to protect life in property. That EF1 tornado is still dangerous, but that confirmed large tornado doing damage is life threatening. It will be critical for the public to understand this so if a "baseline" warning is issued there isn't complacency because their is still danger and as Hoosier mentioned the threat of a storm stregnthening after the initial warning is issued is always present.

I almost hope that warning disemination services such as text alerts/TV crawls stay baseline (except perhaps for Tornado Emergancies) should these tiered warnings become operational next year and let the media/EMs interpret and then convey the exact nature of the threat, as this would perhaps mitigate any complacency to the baseline warnings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that with tiered warnings, it will be more critical for folks in the media to accurately portray the severity of their threat to their viewers. The public will need to understand that 60MPH winds are still dangerous, but that if a warning explicitly states that 75MPH winds are likely that more drastic action is needed to protect life in property.

I can see this being very beneficial for those rural radio stations with a DJ only, or EAS only (not like radio is live anymore... but I digress).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see this being very beneficial for those rural radio stations with a DJ only, or EAS only (not like radio is live anymore... but I digress).

Usually the warning text is read over EAS, so yes that could be useful for those listening to the radio and otherwise oblivious to what's going on with the weather.

Overall I like the idea, but I can see how it gets confusing to the general public who usually don't see the warning text, which is where TV/radio mets become a big factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know. What I meant was that I hope people don't eventually become accustomed to only watching out for the dire/higher end warnings and ignore the lower end stuff. Cells/couplets can strengthen rapidly. We saw how quickly the Joplin tornado ramped up. If I understand this correctly, Joplin may well have started out with a baseline tornado warning and not been "upgraded" basically until the tornado was entering town. If someone waits for the enhanced wording before taking action, it may not leave them much time in certain situations. I'm not trying to be a debbie downer...I think it is a good move but I see where there is at least the potential for some issues.

Agree with this... though I'm glad they have a middle tier now (which has been sorely needed as TE's are issued way too often nowadays).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The public awareness campaign will be important too. When a SVR/TOR is issued it is expected that people take immediate live saving action. Now whether it is a baseline SVR/TOR or enhanced, we still expect people to take immediate life saving action. While the idea is that we get some sort of more widespread response to enhanced warnings, we can't do so at the expense of downplaying baseline threats.

It's a very tricky situation. Our message should be to take immediate action when a warning is issued, but how do we explain what kind of reaction we want from enhanced wording without maginalizing baseline threats?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The public awareness campaign will be important too. When a SVR/TOR is issued it is expected that people take immediate live saving action. Now whether it is a baseline SVR/TOR or enhanced, we still expect people to take immediate life saving action. While the idea is that we get some sort of more widespread response to enhanced warnings, we can't do so at the expense of downplaying baseline threats.

It's a very tricky situation. Our message should be to take immediate action when a warning is issued, but how do we explain what kind of reaction we want from enhanced wording without maginalizing baseline threats?

In 'overwarned' areas, or areas that get a lot of warnings where 'nothing happens', people don't take the warnings as seriously as they should. I will almost guarantee that for the next few years everyone in Joplin will be taking warnings seriously but as time goes on and people get used to the tornado warnings, and they will become complacent once again.

Having the tiered system will still make the people that always take shelter during a tornado warning probably still take shelter, but on top of that you now have a system that can more correctly identify and personalize the threat.

Remember the "dread" warning that came when Katrina was about to hit New Orleans that described in great detail what people would be facing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The public will need to understand that 60MPH winds are still dangerous, but that if a warning explicitly states that 75MPH winds are likely that more drastic action is needed to protect life in property.

Now whether it is a baseline SVR/TOR or enhanced, we still expect people to take immediate life saving action. While the idea is that we get some sort of more widespread response to enhanced warnings, we can't do so at the expense of downplaying baseline threats.

This issue will be of key importance in getting the users on board with the tiered concept. CR is really going to have to sell people on this being an "upward enhancement" of the current system, rather than just a delineation of low-end threats from the rare high-end events. The "low end" warnings on the new system are equal to the warnings being issued now, but the ability to highlight extreme situations is much clearer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having the tiered system will still make the people that always take shelter during a tornado warning probably still take shelter, but on top of that you now have a system that can more correctly identify and personalize the threat.

This is my hope. That public reaction remains the same for all warnings, and for the significant threats the enhanced wording prompts those that otherwise would not take action to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ocean,

Any word how well this function was executed during the last storms? I know it's early in its trial phase, but wanted to see if there was any intial help from this product. I haven't had any access to a computer for the last few days, as I'm in CO and only have my phone on me with spotty coverage.

Thanks.

The feedback period doesn't begin until April, so we won't know anything until at least then. More likely we'll have to wait unitl next November to see what if any impact these warnings have made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The feedback period doesn't begin until April, so we won't know anything until at least then. More likely we'll have to wait unitl next November to see what if any impact these warnings have made.

Thanks for the response. That's what I thought, but wanted to see if I was overlooking something where the data would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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