Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,589
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Mar. 27-31 Severe Threats


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 397
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Well, alrighty then. Any difference in the timing between that and the NAM? 

 

 

Timing is pretty close.  Sometimes there's a bit of a slow bias with this model so it's possible the timing could move up.

 

Another image...one hour precip and winds:

 

post-14-0-82177000-1459397465_thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3z HRRR has SBCAPE up to 2000 all the way to Lake Michigan at 18z. Temps don't look all that unreasonable but it has low 60s dewpoints there which may be a bit aggressive.

I do know that dewpoints have rapidly risen here in the last couple hours. It is now pretty muggy outside.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Low level clouds are screaming north in Dekalb. Definitely impressive moisture transport.
I think purduewx summed it up nicely that unless you get locally backed winds or a right turning (that happens to be discrete) cell that turns right, you won't get much low level helicity to work with for a solid tor threat. And bulk shear vectors not being orthogonal to the initiating boundary and hodographs with quite the crosswise vorticity, lots of splitting, it'll get messy quite quick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might wait til morning but I wouldn't be shocked.

 

 

Yeah maybe.  I think you could argue for a 50+ mile northward expansion but we'll see. 

 

Directional shear issues/questions aside, some of these forecast soundings are fairly impressive...you don't see that much CAPE and 100 kts at 500 mb on the same sounding all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah maybe.  I think you could argue for a 50+ mile northward expansion but we'll see. 

 

Directional shear issues/questions aside, some of these forecast soundings are fairly impressive...you don't see that much CAPE and 100 kts at 500 mb on the same sounding all the time.

I would argue expansion eastward a bit as well. Models seem to be keying in on whatever formed congealing into a line into the evening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think about why it was downgraded, it's a little bit puzzling.  I don't really think anything got markedly worse in terms of severe chances compared to earlier in the day when the day 2 outlook was issued, and they didn't mention anything about why it was downgraded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think about why it was downgraded, it's a little bit puzzling. I don't really think anything got markedly worse in terms of severe chances compared to earlier in the day when the day 2 outlook was issued, and they didn't mention anything about why it was downgraded.

If anything some of the short range models were more alarming, if the squall line they are picturing develops then a widespread threat would appear.

Worst of all is we can't see there reasoning, if someone from one of our local CWAs does something, we can ask as they post here. The inner thinking of the SPC always alludes us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the 10% tornado zone on this outlook in MS, AL, and TN could really get a lot of severe weather reports tomorrow. Unfortunately this part of the south got hit hard on Dec. 23rd. Also, night-time tornadoes are always worse, because people aren't ready.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think while not specifically mentioning it, the primary reasoning was concern for things getting too messy with no capping and storm mergers/interference, as well as poor directional shear. This is basically what did in the Kansas potential today. With such impressive speed shear/kinematics you can't rule out a more substantial event, but for the LOT CWA specifically I wouldn't be shocked if there were only a few severe reports.

We're in St. Louis for the night and have to decide whether to gamble over IL/IN that something will produce or head south to where the better potential appears to 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...