Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,601
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

April 14-17th Severe Weather (Day 3 Mod)


Chicago Storm

Recommended Posts

I'm just astonished at the current low and mid level helicity on the SPC page over such a wide swath of the central and southern plains, ranging from up to 500 at low levels and up to 750 at mid levels....higher presently in Rockies.   SW OK on ne will really be rocking tomorrow if moisture and CAPE get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 633
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Mike Smith isn't someone I would really trust for data. He's more of a politician for AccuWeather today versus a meteorologist. I've heard his Joplin talk several times and it uses flawed data and poor reasoning. He lost much of his credibility in my eyes. Just my personal opinion. 

I actually think all his meteorology in that discussion is somewhat valid to some degree (at least some of the concerns), but I agree, everything else about him stinks of Accuwx elitism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Smith isn't someone I would really trust for data. He's more of a politician for AccuWeather today versus a meteorologist. I've heard his Joplin talk several times and it uses flawed data and poor reasoning. He lost much of his credibility in my eyes. Just my personal opinion. 

 

I'm in agreement with this. 

 

00z NAM is running now. Through 12z  tomorrow when compared to the 18z NAM, the front jumped farther NW in OK/TX. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Smith isn't someone I would really trust for data. He's more of a politician for AccuWeather today versus a meteorologist. I've heard his Joplin talk several times and it uses flawed data and poor reasoning. He lost much of his credibility in my eyes. Just my personal opinion. 

yea also with the amount of forcing and diffluence overspreading the region I am pretty sure you will see very active severe weather before evening hours

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

 

McAlester is in SE OK, near the Ouachitas. The Wichitas are entirely separate, near Lawton (I know this is what you meant).

 

Looks like the 00z NAM is much more aggressive in lifting the front overnight into the morning, but then develops widespread convection by late morning that stalls "progress" and thereby ends up with a similar sfc map by 21-00z to what earlier runs had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McAlester is in SE OK, near the Ouchitas. The Wichitas are entirely separate, near Lawton (I know this is what you meant).

 

Looks like the 00z NAM is much more aggressive in lifting the front overnight into the morning, but then develops widespread convection by late morning that stalls "progress" and thereby ends up with a similar sfc map by 21-00z to what earlier runs had.

 

does anyone think NAM may be overdoing precip?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McAlester is in SE OK, near the Ouchitas. The Wichitas are entirely separate, near Lawton (I know this is what you meant).

 

Looks like the 00z NAM is much more aggressive in lifting the front overnight into the morning, but then develops widespread convection by late morning that stalls "progress" and thereby ends up with a similar sfc map by 21-00z to what earlier runs had.

 

Yeah I almost corrected myself, but didn't, thanks. :hug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still skeptical of the NAM. Trying to figure out why it develops due northerly winds over the Panhandle in the face of no CAA and weakening surface ridging and increasing lee cyclogenesis. 

 

Through about 13-15z it appears to be caving toward the consensus solution. That is swaying me more toward the side of riding the SREF/ECMWF and giving the NAM minimal weighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you gotta take each run of HRRR with a grain of salt but it is starting to show more morning convection now. That has been my biggest worry all along with this. Only time can tell. If that boundary can keep moving far enough north hopefully the convective outflow wont shunt it too far to the south again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodness, the LLJ and resultant hodographs by 03z are astronomical from SW to C OK, and CINH remains minimal taking the NAM literally. The sole caveat I can find is a relative weakness in the flow around H7, but it remains to be seen whether that is real or a side effect of convective parameterization. Take away that weakness/kink, though, and the OKC metro area may be in a world of hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodness, the LLJ and resultant hodographs by 03z are astronomical from SW to C OK, and CINH remains minimal taking the NAM literally. The sole caveat I can find is a relative weakness in the flow around H7, but it remains to be seen whether that is real or a side effect of convective parameterization. Take away that weakness/kink, though, and the OKC metro area may be in a world of hurt.

 

Holy cow, you're not joking. 

 

NAM_218_2013041700_F27_35.0000N_98.0000W

 

NAM_218_2013041700_F27_35.0000N_98.0000W

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I sit here and watch the weather on the local news and I've since watched the 6pm broadcasts from OKC they're basically all saying the tornado threat is in SW OK with the exception of one news cast out of OKC.  

 

Otherwise they're saying basically South of I40 and West of I35.  Pretty interesting that the rest of the probabilities are really being downplayed.  Makes me think they data they have access to that I don't must be saying something.  I'll do my final eval tomorrow morning about 8 or 9am but at this point I'm sitting it out :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I sit here and watch the weather on the local news and I've since watched the 6pm broadcasts from OKC they're basically all saying the tornado threat is in SW OK with the exception of one news cast out of OKC.  

 

Otherwise they're saying basically South of I40 and West of I35.  Pretty interesting that the rest of the probabilities are really being downplayed.  Makes me think they data they have access to that I don't must be saying something.  I'll do my final eval tomorrow morning about 8 or 9am but at this point I'm sitting it out :(

Broadcast mets have a tightrope they constantly must walk. All too often they are accused of "crying wolf" in situations where most of us on this forum understand didn't verify due to any number of meteorological factors. The general public, however, isn't as forgiving. I would imagine, based upon the data that continues to pour in this evening, that the tune may change somewhat on the morning programs with the arrival of the more detailed day one outlook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I sit here and watch the weather on the local news and I've since watched the 6pm broadcasts from OKC they're basically all saying the tornado threat is in SW OK with the exception of one news cast out of OKC.  

 

Otherwise they're saying basically South of I40 and West of I35.  Pretty interesting that the rest of the probabilities are really being downplayed.  Makes me think they data they have access to that I don't must be saying something.  I'll do my final eval tomorrow morning about 8 or 9am but at this point I'm sitting it out :(

 

I don't think that's an accurate assessment of the overall threat, but for daytime chase opportunities, I would heavily favor SW OK and adjacent NW TX. Are you constrained on time of departure? As long as you can leave TUL by ~1-2pm, and can return as late as ~11pm, I'd go for it if you have an interest in chasing.

 

Incredible sounding there Jake.

 

Also, GFS not budging through 12-15, already has a well developed sfc low in the TX Panhandle.

 

It's already becoming clear that the GFS solution is diverging from sfc obs. I'd be even more surprised by the GFS scenario of lifting the warm sector close to I-70 than the straight NAM scenario, really.

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...