May 15th-16th Severe Events

[blackjack123]

Elmer tornado preliminary EF2 per NWS Norman on Twitter. They say they still have a lot to look at. This was at 2:30 pm.

[LocoAko]

I saw the Elmer tornado as well, but only glimpses of it. No chase partner yesterday, so I played things very conservatively. There was only one bridge over the North Fork Red River (which I think was the bridge seen in Brett's video), so I made sure to get east of that very early to avoid any bottlenecks there. I could see the left edge of it briefly from where I was sitting for a while S of Tipton (where I actually met Sam Lillo/forum member OKpowdah), but after that I was constantly driving so I didn't get a chance to get any good pictures or video of it. Good chase overall for me, but it could have been even better.

 

Oh, hey. I was the redhead with Sam who took the group shot of y'all. Did you follow us westward after that? We were finally able to see it (sorta...) when we got a bit closer. Contrast was extremely poor. Here's what I was able to tease out while still maintaining some normalcy to the photo (I almost feel foolish posting this right after Brett's stunning footage, lol -- amazing stuff!):

 

 

 

Still waiting for my non-HP, non-hazy isolated supercell with a tornado against a clear sky. I'm starting to think I might be waiting for a while.

[Msalgado]

Loco, My friend Geoff was with you guys I think.  This community is ridiculously small.

[LocoAko]

Loco, My friend Geoff was with you guys I think.  This community is ridiculously small.

 

Yep, he was with us too and stayed at my house. And my friend Rebecca goes to school with you.

 

That's part of what is so cool about chasing... you run into so many people. I ran into the post-doc from my group, other NWC scientists, and other friends of mine randomly at some gas station in the middle of no where, while another friend drove one of his radars by. Funny how you all congregate in such random places doing this stuff, ha. 

[brettjrob]

As always, nice to come back and see so many angles on the events you witnessed! It's odd being out in the field and staying hyper-focused on your immediate surroundings, often oblivious to the bigger picture of an event you've been analyzing for days leading up. Also to echo what Jake said - it never ceases to be amusing when you run into friends and acquaintances half a dozen times driving around fields 3+ hours from home.

 

Quincy's mention of data problems right as the sig tor was crossing US-283 reminded me: we experienced the same, and I think it may have been an issue with the NOAA public L3 data feed getting overwhelmed at the worst possible time, which is unfortunately common. My chase partner had Radarscope (with the separate, proprietary SuperRes feed) open and continued to get timely updates. Was a good reminder that it's time to turn on my AllisonHouse subscription through the end of June.

[Hvward]

That's not a TDS...that's either some dust/dirt in the inflow region or perhaps (since it is under some reflectivity) some errant hail stones being tossed out of the E edge of the hail core. The lower CC values are not under the rotation.

 

Does not line up with the circulation at the posted time above (1933z)...thus not a TDS.

 

AMA.png

 

 

This isn't really a debatable subject.  That low rho-hv is from the sharp SNR gradient due to the very high reflectivity in the hail core/FFD, as well as inflow into the storm, not due to tornado debris.

 

 

 

[andyhb]

Uh, they are providing scientific evidence of why that is not the case. Just because there was damage doesn't mean that it was a TDS on radar.

[Thundersnow12]

Some pictures from yesterday..

 

 

 

[jojo762]

Uh, they are providing scientific evidence of why that is not the case. Just because there was damage doesn't mean that it was a TDS on radar.

It does work in his favor significantly though, he was just providing FACTS that there was a tornado that caused significant damage (which could definitely cause a TDS). It's irrelevant really either way. As it is, the lower CC values could've been caused by all three hail contamination, dirt from inflow, and tornado debris. We will never really know, so it's irrelevant/subjective.

[andyhb]

It does work in his favor significantly though, he was just providing FACTS that there was a tornado that caused significant damage (which could definitely cause a TDS). It's irrelevant really either way. As it is, the lower CC values could've been caused by all three hail contamination, dirt from inflow, and tornado debris. We will never really know, so it's irrelevant/subjective.

 

Not in the radar images he posted, this isn't a case where it could be, it is a case where it isn't.

[Hvward]

It does work in his favor significantly though, he was just providing FACTS that there was a tornado that caused significant damage (which could definitely cause a TDS). It's irrelevant really either way. As it is, the lower CC values could've been caused by all three hail contamination, dirt from inflow, and tornado debris. We will never really know, so it's irrelevant/subjective.

 

 

Not in the radar images he posted, this isn't a case where it could be, it is a case where it isn't.

 

 

 

Honestly I posted because I didn't appreciate getting attacked when I posted that.  True, it may not have been a TDS but there was a tornado reported in that area and what I thought I saw could have been that barn being destroyed.  It could have also been hail contamination and I have read the links others have posted regarding that and I appreciate the education (even though it was backhanded).  There was mention of another certain TDS near Cleo Springs, OK by a few on this board, but I found no reports of tornado's, just wind damage.  I got jumped on for posting an image of CC that actually produced damage and a tornado, but others say similar things about other cells that end up not being true and no one says anything.  I am well aware of what hail contamination can do to CC now as I have read up on it for 5-6 hrs now..  I should have my class that teaches me about correlation coefficient next semester. 

 

Nope looks like it was a forming TDS per the following scan.. Also line up well with circulation.

 

 

Andy this is the second image I posted.  A tornado was reported and damage was reported 5 miles N of Hedley.  It was also at the exact same time(1933z) that the tornado report was received.  True they provided scientific evidence to support their ideas.  Now I am providing concrete evidence to support mine.

 

It is water under the bridge now.  I just didn't appreciate being attacked when I wanted to debate something that I was told wasn't debatable.  Sorry if I ruffled any feather, that wasn't my intention.  

[jpeters3]

Elmer - Tipton tornado assigned preliminary EF-2 rating

 

 

 

000
NOUS44 KOUN 180234
PNSOUN
OKZ006-011-021-023-030-035>038-044-TXZ085-181445-

PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NORMAN OK
934 PM CDT SUN MAY 17 2015

...NWS DAMAGE SURVEY FOR 5/16/15 TORNADO EVENT

.ELMER-ODELL-TIPTON-SNYDER TORNADO...

RATING:                 EF-2
ESTIMATED PEAK WIND:    125 MPH
PATH LENGTH /STATUTE/:  35 MILES
PATH WIDTH /MAXIMUM/:   TO BE DETERMINED
FATALITIES:             0
INJURIES:               0 KNOWN

START DATE:             MAY 16 2015
START TIME:             APPROX 535 PM CDT
START LOCATION:         6 SW ELMER / JACKSON COUNTY / OK
START LAT/LON:          34.42 / -99.42

END DATE:               MAY 16 2015
END TIME:               APPROX 645 PM CDT
END LOCATION:           APPROX 3 E SNYDER / KIOWA COUNTY / OK
END LAT/LON:            34.66 / -98.90

SURVEY_SUMMARY: INFORMATION ABOUT THIS TORNADO IS STILL VERY
PRELIMINARY. A LARGE MULTIPLE VORTEX TORNADO DEVELOPED IN
SOUTHERN JACKSON COUNTY OKLAHOMA SOUTHWEST OF ELMER OKLAHOMA AND
NORTH OF ODELL TEXAS... AND MOVED NORTHEAST THROUGH THE FAR
NORTHERN PORTION OF WILBARGER COUNTY TEXAS... THEN BACK INTO
JACKSON COUNTY OKLAHOMA SOUTHEAST OF ELMER. THE TORNADO CONTINUED
NORTHEAST MOVING THROUGH TILLMAN COUNTY FROM WEST OF TIPTON TO
SOUTHWEST OF SNYDER... THEN CONTINUED IN KIOWA COUNTY FROM SOUTHWEST
OF SNYDER TO EAST OF SNYDER. THE DISSIPATION POINT OF THE TORNADO
HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED YET. THE MOST INTENSE DAMAGE FOUND SO FAR
IS CONSISTENT WITH AN EF2 TORNADO.

.CLEO SPRINGS TORNADO...

RATING:                 EF-1
ESTIMATED PEAK WIND:    105 MPH
PATH LENGTH /STATUTE/:  12 MILES
PATH WIDTH /MAXIMUM/:   50 YARDS
FATALITIES:             0
INJURIES:               0 KNOWN

START DATE:             MAY 16 2015
START TIME:             622 PM CDT
START LOCATION:         5.5 NW FAIRVIEW / MAJOR COUNTY / OK
START LAT/LON:          36.32 / -98.56

END DATE:               MAY 16 2015
END TIME:               642 PM CDT
END LOCATION:           4 NNE CLEO SPRINGS / MAJOR COUNTY / OK
END LAT/LON:            36.46 / -98.42

*SURVEY_SUMMARY: A TORNADO DEVELOPED ABOUT 5.5 MILES NORTHWEST
OF FAIRVIEW IN MAJOR COUNTY AND MOVED NORTHEAST TO 4 MILES NORTH-
NORTHEAST OF CLEO SPRINGS JUST EAST OF HIGHWAY 8 AND SOUTH OF THE
ALFALFA COUNTY LINE. THE TORNADO PASSED ACROSS THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF CLEO SPRINGS WITH ADDITIONAL DAMAGE IN CLEO SPRINGS
CAUSED BY ADJACENT THUNDERSTORM WINDS. THUNDERSTORM WIND DAMAGE
CONTINUED NORTHEAST FROM WHERE THE TORNADO DISSIPATED TO AREAS
NEAR AND SOUTHWEST OF HELENA IN ALFALFA COUNTY.

EF SCALE: THE ENHANCED FUJITA SCALE CLASSIFIES
TORNADOES INTO THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES.

EF0...WEAK......65 TO 85 MPH
EF1...WEAK......86 TO 110 MPH
EF2...STRONG....111 TO 135 MPH
EF3...STRONG....136 TO 165 MPH
EF4...VIOLENT...166 TO 200 MPH
EF5...VIOLENT...>200 MPH

NOTE:
THE INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO
CHANGE PENDING FINAL REVIEW OF THE EVENTS AND PUBLICATION IN
NWS STORM DATA.
 

[nrgjeff]

First of all like to compliment Quincy on a great intercept, flying solo, and with data problems. Photo is beyond gorgeous. Wow nice work!

 

Yeah, sorry - as I say I'm not meaning to step on any toes or whatever, I just figured that the pattern for the next real big severe chase with a huge chase day and MDT/Highs (which to me, signify a day worth following). As you say semantics, but that's just how I hold setups in regard. I'm not a novice by all means, so you guys telling me when I'm wrong is only going to help down the line. 

 

I'll go back to the charts now and take a look at Tuesday for Texas and see if/what I was missing...Thanks!

 

Next UK is absolutely right that midweek was never a travel chase set-up. It is a local set-up and/or if you are already out there on a chase trip. One could even add midweek if already planning on the weekend. However, midweek is not and never was a travel set-up all by itself.

 

I hate to get involved, but after 24 hours to cool off I still must. You all who jumped on UK were way out of line. You'd never see that in Tenn Valley or Southeast subforums, and certainly not on Stormtrack. Disgusting crap like that is why they call us ugly Americans.

 

Even the weekend will not be a high risk due to meso/microscale details. However it should be chasable with good forecasting, exceptional nowcasting, and properly planning road options. Look for MDT one or two days, otherwise ENH 3 days of the holiday weekend Friday inclusive.

[RIsnow]

"I hate to get involved, but after 24 hours to cool off I still must. You all who jumped on UK were way out of line. You'd never see that in Tenn Valley or Southeast subforums, and certainly not on Stormtrack. Disgusting crap like that is why they call us ugly Americans."

 

 

Agreed. Usually just read on here but there is a lot of jumping down people's throats. 

Twice on this page alone. 

 

[JoMo]

Yeah thankfully nothing happened to me where I was at. Did you see downtown BA?

I believe so, I don't think this tornado was as bad as that storm chaser who panicked made it out to be.

I know there was a tornado all the way to Inola through to locusts grove. Wouldn't shock me if a tornado did reach Missouri.

 

Downtown BA after this storm or the 2013 one? 

 

This storm did put down another tornado near Seneca to Neosho, MO. It was rated an EF-1.

 

4 other tornadoes reported in SW MO as well, resulting from spinups. 3 EF-0's and an EF-1. 

 

http://www.weather.gov/sgf/events_2015may17

[andyhb]

I hate to get involved, but after 24 hours to cool off I still must. You all who jumped on UK were way out of line. You'd never see that in Tenn Valley or Southeast subforums, and certainly not on Stormtrack. Disgusting crap like that is why they call us ugly Americans.

 

Wait, so because people are correcting him about the dry midweek comment, this somehow is an example of "ugly Americans"? Alrighty then. I might add that particularly on the SE board, some people are hesitant to post there because it is often saturated with folks only caring about their backyards.

[JoMo]

Broken Arrow (EF-2) and Inola (EF-1) Tornadoes prelim survey up/in progress:

 

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/?n=weather-event_2015may16

[huronicane]

We've, unfortunately, entered a new age in severe weather discussion, with social media (and social mediarologists) and the popularity of storm chasing (storm traffic jamming?) brought on by Reed Timmer, The Discovery Channel, and to a lesser extent, The Weather Channel (and yes, I'm pointing fingers). 

 

When you have scenes like this:

 

 

made up significantly of folks that passed an easy test on Spotter Network, with access to high res Doppler radar and SPC/NWS information, unfortunately, some of those folks will start trying to have discussions on boards like this, on Facebook, and on Twitter.

 

As much as many of us would long for the simpler time of before 2007, I don't think it's coming back. Those with less knowledge of severe weather and meteorology should follow the decorum that has been in message board guidelines since they first came to be -- spend some time reading and learning about how the community behaves and has conversations. 

 

Especially for here, and especially during severe weather events, don't argue with the red taggers or more senior members when they are trying to explain something and don't post if your post doesn't have substance.

[brettjrob]

I already posted a rant about "SN shaming" on Stormtrack a few weeks ago, so I don't have the energy to go all out again, but I'll say this: it's almost always ridiculous to judge the safety of someone's chasing using their SN icon on your smartphone. If I'd had my position updating at that time, I would've been within or very near your circle. In my opinion, as a meteorologist and chaser of nine years, I was never in a position that was unsafe beyond the reasonable margins inherent to the activity.

 

Frankly, the freakout over SN positions on big tornadoes has grown tiresome and boring, beyond all else. It was annoying to me when the fad started 3-4 years ago, but at least it was original and controversial then. Now it happens 10x a year, and often originates from someone who has an agenda -- be it anti-chasing in general, or simply anti-Reed, anti-TIV, anti-whomever. I'm not saying that necessarily applies to you, huronicane, but I've seen a lot of that from sources I know it to be true of. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, of course. Mine is that non-chasers and armchair weenies should STFU unless there's hard evidence of reckless behavior that genuinely endangers lives other than the person taking the risk (e.g., passing a line of cars uphill on a two-lane road). As for fellow chasers: I can at least take their opinions seriously, but I really think the "cautious"/"casual"/etc. contingent of chasers need to find better things to worry about in 90% of cases.

 

EDIT: that being said, I realize I honed in on something that was only a tangent to the main point you were making, so this isn't so much an attack on you as general venting. I agree that it would be preferable for noobs and the less informed to read more and post less, in most cases -- although honestly, with how inactive this subforum is, the occasional "banter" doesn't really bother me that much. If our severe threads were like something in the New England subforum during a January 1996 repeat, I'd probably be more supportive of a big crackdown.

[huronicane]

I wasn't using the image as a way of shaming, more to illustrate a point that there are a large number of new chasers out there after social media and this new mentality that extreme-storm-chasing-is-the-best-adrenaline-rush-out-there really took off. 

 

This has brought a lot of new found weather weenies to these outlets and they may not have the background to really be getting into serious discussions about how a storm is evolving or why the forecast is behaving as such or why Elmer was only rated EF2 (I saw some angry Facebook comments on NWS Norman's post about Elmer). 

 

My whole point about the SN online test is that these people now think that they have the knowledge and certification to have in depth meteorological discussions about severe convective and other mesoscale meteorology, when really, many just need to sit back and read more and post less.

[brettjrob]

I wasn't using the image as a way of shaming, more to illustrate a point that there are a large number of new chasers out there after social media and this new mentality that extreme-storm-chasing-is-the-best-adrenaline-rush-out-there really took off. 

 

This has brought a lot of new found weather weenies to these outlets and they may not have the background to really be getting into serious discussions about how a storm is evolving or why the forecast is behaving as such or why Elmer was only rated EF2 (I saw some angry Facebook comments on NWS Norman's post about Elmer). 

 

My whole point about the SN online test is that these people now think that they have the knowledge and certification to have in depth meteorological discussions about severe convective and other mesoscale meteorology, when really, many just need to sit back and read more and post less.

 

Gotcha -- totally agree re: your second paragraph. The EF2 meltdowns on social media today were fairly embarrassing, especially being that some of it that I saw came from semi-experienced chasers. Of course, that opens the whole El Reno can of worms, since several mobile radars did sample Elmer/Tipton from close range and will ultimately have wind estimates (which in all likelihood will be above the minimum EF3 threshold).

 

And yeah, I also see what you're saying about chasers/spotters, those who pass the SN test, etc. failing to understand their limits within the realm of "real" meteorology. While a degree is not required to be a good severe storms forecaster and understand these events as they evolve, a lot of learning is required, and too many of these types put little to no effort in on that front.

[blackjack123]

Gotcha -- totally agree re: your second paragraph. The EF2 meltdowns on social media today were fairly embarrassing, especially being that some of it that I saw came from semi-experienced chasers. Of course, that opens the whole El Reno can of worms, since several mobile radars did sample Elmer/Tipton from close range and will ultimately have wind estimates (which in all likelihood will be above the minimum EF3 threshold).

 

And yeah, I also see what you're saying about chasers/spotters, those who pass the SN test, etc. failing to understand their limits within the realm of "real" meteorology. While a degree is not required to be a good severe storms forecaster and understand these events as they evolve, a lot of learning is required, and too many of these types put little to no effort in on that front.

Do you believe there is enough evidence to rate the Elmer tornado above EF2 besides measured wind speeds? I believe it is too hard to say for sure.

[andyhb]

Do you believe there is enough evidence to rate the Elmer tornado above EF2 besides measured wind speeds? I believe it is too hard to say for sure.

 

The complaints/controversy about the radar measurements not being grounds for upgrade go up higher than the individual WFOs (still a load of silliness if you ask me).

[Ian]

Sounded like it was pretty much a directive from HQ or at least the big U. I can understand their thinking as its a can of worms and wouldn't grade all tornadoes as equal as possible. But... It's also kinda dumb to ignore advancing science if you have it. The tornado database is fairly lol anyway.. Getting the 2+ rating is good enough for that purpose really. It may not have been stronger most of its life. It only looked truly violent in vid at a point or two imo.. Mostly in the stovepipe/cone stage. But I'm not telemetry expert.

[jameswx]

Sounded like it was pretty much a directive from HQ or at least the big U. I can understand their thinking as its a can of worms and wouldn't grade all tornadoes as equal as possible. But... It's also kinda dumb to ignore advancing science if you have it. The tornado database is fairly lol anyway.. Getting the 2+ rating is good enough for that purpose really. It may not have been stronger most of its life. It only looked truly violent in vid at a point or two imo.. Mostly in the stovepipe/cone stage. But I'm not telemetry expert.

Does the STP data set not differentiate between an EF2 and an EF5?

[jojo762]

Does the STP data set not differentiate between an EF2 and an EF5?

nope, it just states that they're "sigtors"... If it did, there would be STP's for each individual rating category (EF2-5) http://www.spc.noaa.gov/publications/thompson/stp_scp.pdf

[blackjack123]

The complaints/controversy about the radar measurements not being grounds for upgrade go up higher than the individual WFOs (still a load of silliness if you ask me).

Agreed. Is it because the most intense vortices stay up in the tornado and fail to make actual ground contact or something like that?

[andyhb]

Agreed. Is it because the most intense vortices stay up in the tornado and fail to make actual ground contact or something like that?

 

No, the enhanced damage seen in localized areas from multiple vortex tornadoes is enough to disprove that.

[blackjack123]

No, the enhanced damage seen in localized areas from multiple vortex tornadoes is enough to disprove that.

Do you know exactly what happened in the El Reno 2013 as to why it failed to leave any kind of contextual that would have proved it was an EF5. Like extremely severe ground/vegetation scouring.

[nrgjeff]

It is a damage scale. Am I on the Weather side or at the Political Roundtable?