Clinch Leatherwood Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 My best storm by far was not forecasted or warned severe until if got behind me. Rain now tonight was nice. Get the Tuna smell out of the car? I can't tell I've treated it with so many different things it's either gone, my nose has lost the sense of smell or I'm covering it. Hoping to add some additional stinkage in the morning. The bonus to the forecast being off with these storms is also that the wind forecast was high. Only blowing 10-15 in the sound right now when it was forecast to be quite a bit worse. Those storms the other night were reminscent of when I was a kid. Haven't seen that type of CTC lightning in a long time and the CTG strokes were intense too. Those too dudded out though and we just didn't get the heart of them like I'd thought. Either way cool that we have so many threats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 My best storm by far was not forecasted or warned severe until if got behind me. Rain now tonight was nice. Get the Tuna smell out of the car? Misplace your lunch?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 And I'll add that there are at least two ways to counteract weak mid level lapse rates. 1) very high sfc dewpoints 2) great upper level support. we didn't have #2 today. I worked a somewhat impressive severe weather event here on July 4th with absolutely putrid mid level lapse rates around 5.5 c/km which is about as bad as it gets. However, the upper support in the form of a strong jet streak approaching from the NW was very strong. Yeah if you're 95/73 with upper level support you're in good shape. Had the s/w over the Great Lakes not hung back and ejected east (like models were showing over the weekend) we could have had a more sizable event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Sometimes "low EMLs" are just the top of a remnant surface-based mixed layer from the previous day that kinda gets advected above slightly weaker low level lapse rates. I guess by definition these can technically be considered EML's too since they are elevated above the surface. Sorry if I misunderstood what you were getting at. However, when we talk about a good ol fashioned EML event, we are talking about very steep lapse rates usually centered in the 700-500mb layer. The main reason why high end severe weather events are rare in the northeast is because of weak lapse rates in the mid levels. The list of limiting factors can be rather large, but that one is at the top of the heap. I was just looking at the 6/1 event from last year and its amazing to see the difference...with ML lapse rates over 7C/km and even 8C/km at times. Combine that with the really impressive deep layer moisture below 850mb and the LL shear components and it was classic for things to go nuclear. Probably the only thing that could have been slightly better was the sfc heating a touch more, but obviously that didn't stop a wedge from ripping through southern MA. I still love that youtube video of the guy filming it...swearing non-stop when there is wedge on the other side of the hill, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I was just looking at the 6/1 event from last year and its amazing to see the difference...with ML lapse rates over 7C/km and even 8C/km at times. Combine that with the really impressive deep layer moisture below 850mb and the LL shear components and it was classic for things to go nuclear. Probably the only thing that could have been slightly better was the sfc heating a touch more, but obviously that didn't stop a wedge from ripping through southern MA. I still love that youtube video of the guy filming it...swearing non-stop when there is wedge on the other side of the hill, lol. That video is chilling, every time I watch it. The statistic continues from Mike's work about no EML event between 7/23-8/14 or something like that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Misplace your lunch?? Ask Scott about a 55 lb bleeding Tuna, a leaky cooler and a backseat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Ask Scott about a 55 lb bleeding Tuna, a leaky cooler and a backseat. Trifecta, All those are bad, I would trade in the car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold214 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I was just looking at the 6/1 event from last year and its amazing to see the difference...with ML lapse rates over 7C/km and even 8C/km at times. Combine that with the really impressive deep layer moisture below 850mb and the LL shear components and it was classic for things to go nuclear. Probably the only thing that could have been slightly better was the sfc heating a touch more, but obviously that didn't stop a wedge from ripping through southern MA. I still love that youtube video of the guy filming it...swearing non-stop when there is wedge on the other side of the hill, lol. This video? I still laugh hysterically when I see it. The guy had to have been baked. He goes upstairs to find a bonafide wedge outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ct_yankee Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I suspect the majority of the moderate risk will actually verify according to SPC's own criteria, I mean just look at the storm reports... Really only the far north and east of the mod risk area busted. That and the hatched area, not sure that worked out so well... But really all in all they got it much more right than wrong. Our little corner of the mod risk didn't pan out, but we're just a small part of the whole. I mean, look at Wisconsin, they were in a slight risk today, and I see just one single lonely wind report - now that's more like a real bust. The fact that the severe weather didn't quite reach as far north and east as we expected today doesn't really make the mod risk a busted forecast, IMO. We knew there were potential problems for the MA area, and no doubt so did SPC, but the potential was there so they made the call. I can't really fault them for it. For me the really interesting possibilities disappeared this morning, when it became apparent that discrete cells were increasingly unlikely. Very different from how things looked a few days ago, but that's how it goes around here. We should be used to it by now. Great discussion, BTW. I'm really starting to truly appreciate this board... I don't know anywhere else online where one can find the kind of detailed discussion and analysis of local events that I see here on a regular basis, posted by such knowledgeable people. It's impressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Deja vu Aug 4-6? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I definitely did think se ny would do a little better given the ML CAPE. That warm layer near 500mb may have been part of the problem as well as other factors previously mentioned. I was talking the other night in the NYC forum about how I wasn't in love with the look on the NAM at 500mb. The NAM had been showing a small height rise in the mid levels here around 21-00z tonight for a few runs. Lo and behold, it reared its ugly head tonight. When you couple in the not-so-perfect EML/lapse rates (really the reason why SPC didn't go High Risk at 20z) you can begin to understand why the MCS didnt go to town like some thought it might over SE NY and NJ. That being said, the structure here was still very impressive. We had a nice updraft go up just west of here..the cloud formation was insane. The TEWR radar spiked to near 70 DBZ just a mile or so west of here and we had some very strong gusts and crazy CG's. Can't complain...but on a broad scale, especially after taking a look at things around 18z, I would've expected better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxsniss Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 epic. flash flood watch going to be a bust too. great storms the other night, not even getting a sprinkle so far tonight. Messenger... awol, you've been missed here! FFW: 3-4 drops on my windshield tonight. At least 2 storms that surprised for the upside this year: - the 1am cell that gave Ray hail (March?) - the 7/18/12 cell the moved down the coast and intensified when it interacted with the seabreeze boundary, giving spectacular shelf-cloud photos for Boston metro and the coast Today's event wanted to be like all the other derechos except it got to the coastal plain and said, "WTF is this sh-t." Hilarious. To this point, multiple posts throughout SNE this morning about how surprisingly comfortable it felt. Not hot, not humid. Great discussion, BTW. I'm really starting to truly appreciate this board... I don't know anywhere else online where one can find the kind of detailed discussion and analysis of local events that I see here on a regular basis, posted by such knowledgeable people. It's impressive. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Yeah if you're 95/73 with upper level support you're in good shape. Had the s/w over the Great Lakes not hung back and ejected east (like models were showing over the weekend) we could have had a more sizable event. I know it's simple for everyone who likes to look at 300 parameters on 15 different models every 3 hours but 500mb tells a bigger story than most of those things ever will until you actually get storms to work with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 This video? I still laugh hysterically when I see it. The guy had to have been baked. He goes upstairs to find a bonafide wedge outside. That video is hilarious. Laughing at the chirps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's Always Sunny Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Deja vu Aug 4-6? I'm on board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I was talking the other night in the NYC forum about how I wasn't in love with the look on the NAM at 500mb. The NAM had been showing a small height rise in the mid levels here around 21-00z tonight for a few runs. Lo and behold, it reared its ugly head tonight. When you couple in the not-so-perfect EML/lapse rates (really the reason why SPC didn't go High Risk at 20z) you can begin to understand why the MCS didnt go to town like some thought it might over SE NY and NJ. That being said, the structure here was still very impressive. We had a nice updraft go up just west of here..the cloud formation was insane. The TEWR radar spiked to near 70 DBZ just a mile or so west of here and we had some very strong gusts and crazy CG's. Can't complain...but on a broad scale, especially after taking a look at things around 18z, I would've expected better. I got excited when the 0z NAM last night seemed to delay the squall line until after 00z in the NYC area...I even remember some data having it barely through NYC at 3z. That would have been preferable because there might have actually been some height falls (or at least, no height rises), and the best instability could have actually caught up and been out ahead of the squall at our longitude. Oh well. However, a later arrival would have rendered it more difficult to see the insane structure. I was very pleased with these storms based on structure alone. It was stunning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I know it's simple for everyone who likes to look at 300 parameters on 15 different models every 3 hours but 500mb tells a bigger story than most of those things ever will until you actually get storms to work with. This is something that I think I've learned tremendously well from this event and will certainly keep in mind from here on out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I know it's simple for everyone who likes to look at 300 parameters on 15 different models every 3 hours but 500mb tells a bigger story than most of those things ever will until you actually get storms to work with. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I know it's simple for everyone who likes to look at 300 parameters on 15 different models every 3 hours but 500mb tells a bigger story than most of those things ever will until you actually get storms to work with. This is why when you see a 100+ kt H5 jet streak punching into a warm sector like we did on 3/2 this year and 4/27 last year, you know something bad in all likelihood is going to happen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 This is something that I think I've learned tremendously well from this event and will certainly keep in mind from here on out. I just study old events etc. You'll find that most tornado events have a similar pattern etc. I agree with Ryan that this event initially looked much better from range at least tornadowise with the trough considerably further east. A warm front in itself is often not enough of a trigger particularly if it's relatively diffuse etc. I think sometimes we get too wrapped up in what sigtor says etc. It happens to everyone who's into this stuff though I'm sure. On days like this you are just thankful you did not drive 6-8 hours to find out that those numbers are meaningless in themselves (see Nebraska May 26 for me and chase group). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chumpson Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Just catching up with this thread after sleeping all afternoon/evening. I've seen some of the radar data, and reviewed the severe reports. To me, it looks like a reasonably widespread wind event (esp. OH-PA), with not much "sig" severe. The observing sites bore that our with lots of 40-50 kt gusts, which typically take down trees in the East. A few observations: 1. Lots of EML discussion on this thread, but I don't recall any mention of the lapse rate profiles as a "positive" for this event. Deep convection is fairly complicated and we use a bunch of assumptions in parcel theory to *estimate* how strong updrafts will be with storms. However, stuff like entrainment, water loading, phase change from water to ice, etc., are ignored and often play a crucial role in how the storms look in reality. To get this part right, you must know *everything* 2. I tend to agree with the questions about timing. A few more hours of surface heating, either due to fewer clouds earlier or a later arrival of the squall line, likely would have helped maintain storm intensity farther to the east and longer into the evening. The problem with this aspect of the forecast is non-linearity: like the first point, you really have to know everything about how an event will evolve to get everything correct on the downstream (eastern) end. Once again, the only way to put out a consistently good forecast for everywhere is to always be right for the right reasons. I doubt there would be this discussion board if meteorology had advanced to that point. 3. The synoptic-scale influences mattered, but today also illustrates how difficult this game is to win. Thursday certainly had a more identifiable synoptic influence (the Great Lakes trough) than 6/29, and the occurrence of deep convection was much more probable today compared to 6/29. Low-midlevel winds were noticeably stronger over a broader area today compared to 6/29, but the thermodynamic environment was much more impressive in terms of surface heat and midlevel lapse rates back on 6/29. So, in a basic sense, you've got one day (6/29) where it's really unstable, flow is modest, and it's difficult to find a focus for storm development; Thursday it was easier to predict storm development in a stronger flow environment, but buoyancy/lapse rates were more of a question. The non-linear aspects of 6/29 focused on the storm scale, whereas Thursday it was both synoptic and storm scale. My point in this rambling is that no forecast is ever as clear cut as some folks what to claim, and few forecasts are ever as much of a "total bust" as claimed. It's always fun to go over forecasts after the fact and compare the actual event to your expectations. The constant grumbling about "busts", etc., make for post-event entertainment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Warrior commander Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 -SHRA here at 7:30PM. That Vid was hilarious! I slept this afternoon as well as to be awake for the more SVR when or If it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
free_man Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 -SHRA here at 7:30PM. That Vid was hilarious! I slept this afternoon as well as to be awake for the more SVR when or If it happened. Yikes. At least you were well rested for the disaster. Was watching radar at work and feeling a little better every scan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 .07 of rain ..for a total of .11 for the week. Today looked promising..Now it looks awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I just study old events etc. You'll find that most tornado events have a similar pattern etc. I agree with Ryan that this event initially looked much better from range at least tornadowise with the trough considerably further east. A warm front in itself is often not enough of a trigger particularly if it's relatively diffuse etc. I think sometimes we get too wrapped up in what sigtor says etc. It happens to everyone who's into this stuff though I'm sure. On days like this you are just thankful you did not drive 6-8 hours to find out that those numbers are meaningless in themselves (see Nebraska May 26 for me and chase group). Prior to looking at parameters I think we pretty much all did a great job in observing the synoptic pattern and such and did our best with what models showed...obviously in the end there turned out to be major differences but there really isn't much we can do about this. As we got closer and started looking into parameters more and saw how impressive they looked, some of us (certainly myself) started to get heavily influenced by what the numbers were showing. I remember yesterday morning when waking up and looking at the 0z WRF and not seeing much convection out this way I thought that was a bit odd and made a post about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Just catching up with this thread after sleeping all afternoon/evening. I've seen some of the radar data, and reviewed the severe reports. To me, it looks like a reasonably widespread wind event (esp. OH-PA), with not much "sig" severe. The observing sites bore that our with lots of 40-50 kt gusts, which typically take down trees in the East. A few observations: 1. Lots of EML discussion on this thread, but I don't recall any mention of the lapse rate profiles as a "positive" for this event. Deep convection is fairly complicated and we use a bunch of assumptions in parcel theory to *estimate* how strong updrafts will be with storms. However, stuff like entrainment, water loading, phase change from water to ice, etc., are ignored and often play a crucial role in how the storms look in reality. To get this part right, you must know *everything* 2. I tend to agree with the questions about timing. A few more hours of surface heating, either due to fewer clouds earlier or a later arrival of the squall line, likely would have helped maintain storm intensity farther to the east and longer into the evening. The problem with this aspect of the forecast is non-linearity: like the first point, you really have to know everything about how an event will evolve to get everything correct on the downstream (eastern) end. Once again, the only way to put out a consistently good forecast for everywhere is to always be right for the right reasons. I doubt there would be this discussion board if meteorology had advanced to that point. 3. The synoptic-scale influences mattered, but today also illustrates how difficult this game is to win. Thursday certainly had a more identifiable synoptic influence (the Great Lakes trough) than 6/29, and the occurrence of deep convection was much more probable today compared to 6/29. Low-midlevel winds were noticeably stronger over a broader area today compared to 6/29, but the thermodynamic environment was much more impressive in terms of surface heat and midlevel lapse rates back on 6/29. So, in a basic sense, you've got one day (6/29) where it's really unstable, flow is modest, and it's difficult to find a focus for storm development; Thursday it was easier to predict storm development in a stronger flow environment, but buoyancy/lapse rates were more of a question. The non-linear aspects of 6/29 focused on the storm scale, whereas Thursday it was both synoptic and storm scale. My point in this rambling is that no forecast is ever as clear cut as some folks what to claim, and few forecasts are ever as much of a "total bust" as claimed. It's always fun to go over forecasts after the fact and compare the actual event to your expectations. The constant grumbling about "busts", etc., make for post-event entertainment Great post! Timing really killed us no doubt. The warm front taking forever to lift through and not getting sufficient clearing to almost 4 PM just really screwed us. This just wasn't enough time to get those juicy instability numbers they had to our west. Our atmosphere just wasn't as buoyant. For the lack of SIG svr reports out in that area I wonder why that was. Cape in that area was on the borderline extreme levels with as much as 4000-6000 J/KG of SBcape with 2000-3000 J/KG of MLcape and LI values near -8C or even lower. The mid-level lapse rates there were fairly awful and this may have been a factor in preventing more in the way of significant severe wx reports in that area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Well I think I saw a brief 15min rain shower overnight. Time to open a new thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Looks like the doubting of the heavier rain yesterday aftn turned out more right then wrong. It's been raining all night up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's Always Sunny Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Only 0.01 of rainfall here. Some light drizzle though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N. OF PIKE Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Is there gonna be any clearing today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.