Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Severe Weather possible weekend of the 21st?


weatherwiz

Recommended Posts

Mid-level lapse rates are modeled to be in the 6-6.5 C/KM lapse rates and actually the latest GFS run has lapse rates now up closer to 6.5-7 C/KM.  When it comes to lapse rates I think people sort of have a misunderstanding about them, especially when it comes to EML's.  In Ekster's EML paper, according to the research he's done, only 18% of all significant severe weather events in the Northeast had EML's...that's not really a high percentage.  However, when we have EML setups with favorable lift around, they do tend to produce.  As long as mid-level lapse rates are greater than 6 C/KM, they won't be a limiting factor, especially if other ingredients are in place.  

 

If we do want to worry though, it could be having previous day's convection or if we don't have any cap in place, having crap activity develop and kill lapse rates.  

You have the link for that paper?

 

I don't necessarily think people are misunderstanding mid level lapse rates, I just think that some people view them as the one-all-be-all of severe weather/thunderstorm outbreaks, which as you, I, and many others know isn't always the case.

 

I think the majority of us think northern New England is the place to watch Friday. We'll see. I'm just glad everything has held up thus far in regards to model guidance.

 

Severe FTW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 769
  • Created
  • Last Reply

You have the link for that paper?

 

I don't necessarily think people are misunderstanding mid level lapse rates, I just think that some people view them as the one-all-be-all of severe weather/thunderstorm outbreaks, which as you, I, and many others know isn't always the case.

 

I think the majority of us think northern New England is the place to watch Friday. We'll see. I'm just glad everything has held up thus far in regards to model guidance.

 

Severe FTW.

 

But SNE FTL.

 

The problem with our "severe" events is that we end up having very low end events thanks to skinny CAPE profiles owed to weak mid level lapse rates. You can compensate that with strong synoptic forcing, but that isn't easy to come by at our latitude...hence why NNE has all the fun. I usually like to see MLCAPES of 1500J or greater around here. 6.5C/KM certainly can give you fun if dynamics are there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But SNE FTL.

 

The problem with our "severe" events is that we end up having very low end events thanks to skinny CAPE profiles owed to weak mid level lapse rates. You can compensate that with strong synoptic forcing, but that isn't easy to come by at our latitude...hence why NNE has all the fun. I usually like to see MLCAPES of 1500J or greater around here. 6.5C/KM certainly can give you fun if dynamics are there.

Well NNE gets the synoptic forcing Friday. Our turn is Saturday as that cold front extends further south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mid-level lapse rates are modeled to be in the 6-6.5 C/KM lapse rates and actually the latest GFS run has lapse rates now up closer to 6.5-7 C/KM.  When it comes to lapse rates I think people sort of have a misunderstanding about them, especially when it comes to EML's.  In Ekster's EML paper, according to the research he's done, only 18% of all significant severe weather events in the Northeast had EML's...that's not really a high percentage.  However, when we have EML setups with favorable lift around, they do tend to produce.  As long as mid-level lapse rates are greater than 6 C/KM, they won't be a limiting factor, especially if other ingredients are in place.  

 

If we do want to worry though, it could be having previous day's convection or if we don't have any cap in place, having crap activity develop and kill lapse rates.  

 

Butttttt.... that's actually somewhat misleading. While EML days are a small percentage of sig severe days they account for a HUGE percentage of fatalities/injuries. 

 

Widespread sig severe is unlikely but it's certainly possible that we'll get a really good storm out of this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have the link for that paper?

 

I don't necessarily think people are misunderstanding mid level lapse rates, I just think that some people view them as the one-all-be-all of severe weather/thunderstorm outbreaks, which as you, I, and many others know isn't always the case.

 

I think the majority of us think northern New England is the place to watch Friday. We'll see. I'm just glad everything has held up thus far in regards to model guidance.

 

Severe FTW.

 

mid-level lapse rates are certainly important, especially around here where typically we can have issues with having sufficient shear or with instability and this is where lapse rates play a bigger role.  

 

Link to the paper

 

http://www.erh.noaa.gov/btv/research/BanacosEML_waf.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mid-level lapse rates are certainly important, especially around here where typically we can have issues with having sufficient shear or with instability and this is where lapse rates play a bigger role.  

 

Link to the paper

 

http://www.erh.noaa.gov/btv/research/BanacosEML_waf.pdf

I agree.

 

Thanks for the link btw!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The premise of the paper wasn't necessarily to say you can only have severe with an EML, it was more or less that if an EML is present....look out baby. You should have a heightened sense of awareness if you are a forecaster around here when an EML is present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Butttttt.... that's actually somewhat misleading. While EML days are a small percentage of sig severe days they account for a HUGE percentage of fatalities/injuries. 

 

Widespread sig severe is unlikely but it's certainly possible that we'll get a really good storm out of this. 

 

They certainly do account for a huge percentage of the fatalities/injuries and that's also partly do to the fact that they are an important ingredient for stronger tornadoes and more long tracked tornadoes (though the later is a combination of several other factors) which are more likely to cause more in the way of significant damage.  

 

This far out, widespread significant severe is not likely, but I think we could see a cluster of widespread severe with damaging winds/hail

Link to comment
Share on other sites

has there ever been a significant northeast derecho without an EML?

 

Nobody is thinking significant derecho are they?  I don't know if we can completely rule out a "low end one" but I would probably like to at least see wind speeds in the mid levels another 10-15 knots stronger and low level winds another 10-15 knots stronger too.  Although inverted-v look on soundings could enahnce downdraft potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes with an obese cap

We're not talking about your stomach in that pic of you pushing beer in the cart.

 

Joe D agrees

THURSDAY...

MODELS KEY ON LEE TROUGH BECOMING FOCUS FOR SCATTERED AFTERNOON

CONVECTION. SURFACE-BASED CAPES REACH 1500 J/KG WITH DECENT MID

LEVEL LAPSE RATES AROUND 6C/KM... KEPT

CHANCE POPS FOR SCATTERED AFTERNOON THUNDERSTORMS WITH CONTINUED

MENTION OF HEAVY RAIN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're not talking about your stomach in that pic of you pushing beer in the cart.

 

Joe D agrees

THURSDAY...

MODELS KEY ON LEE TROUGH BECOMING FOCUS FOR SCATTERED AFTERNOON

CONVECTION. SURFACE-BASED CAPES REACH 1500 J/KG WITH DECENT MID

LEVEL LAPSE RATES AROUND 6C/KM... KEPT

CHANCE POPS FOR SCATTERED AFTERNOON THUNDERSTORMS WITH CONTINUED

MENTION OF HEAVY RAIN.

Failed to include this portion of the AFD:

 

"STILL NEED TO OVERCOME RATHER WARM MID LEVEL TEMPERATURES... SO NOT CONFIDENT THAT STORM COVERAGE WILL BE ALL THAT GREAT."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...