tornadohunter Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjc0303 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Can we post a moratorium on cherry picked soundings please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indystorm Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Brownwood is 66/64 with east wind at 10 mph. Could be a cyclic supercell with the approaching storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPetrulli Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Wouldn't be surprised to see a high risk when I wake up tomorrow given recent model trends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojo762 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Can we please stop pretending that the environment tomorrow over southeast Texas wont be that impressive? Because it will. A simple look at most of the models would reveal this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJo Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 This environment is very impressive and will likely start as storms cross the border and move east, an high risk would be needed since i do think significant tornadoes are likely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indystorm Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Baseball size hail per Santa Anna Fire Dept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjc0303 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 1 minute ago, jojo762 said: Can we please stop pretending that the environment tomorrow over southeast Texas wont be that impressive? Because it will. A simple look at most of the models would reveal this. I don't think anyone is downplaying the threat. But seeing the same soundings posted isn't much for discussion or analysis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjc0303 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 EPS shows a pretty nice signal for southwest flow aloft down the line from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjc0303 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Just now, bjc0303 said: EPS shows a pretty nice signal for southwest flow aloft down the line from now. totally meant to post that in med range thread oops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetjanet998 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 00z NAM a little stronger and more NW actually has Dallas (but not FTW) in the warm sector with 3000 CAPE at 21z with the low right over them RUC has everything more a little more SE and what looks to be more stuff if the open warm sector during the day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1900hurricane Posted April 2, 2017 Author Share Posted April 2, 2017 I haven't dug into this run or earlier runs as of yet, but boy the HRRR simulated reflectivity does raise an eyebrow.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonOH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 To piggyback off BJC, if the dew point line and temperature line are at the same point, you cannot trust the hodograph on a model. For the CAMs, they are literally modeling the storm and the soundings do not represent the environment around the storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZackH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 1 hour ago, JasonOH said: It's contaminated, so It won't be that crazy. That actually is not a contaminated sounding. You'd expect saturation up the column. There's actually a pretty classic dry punch there in the mid levels. Also a simple glance at the 18z NAM shows no significant precip north of Houston at 18z. The parameter space is pretty crazy, looking at the NAM and some HiRes models verbatim. However, crazy parameter space does not always mean violent tornado outbreak. I am definitely concerned about tomorrow's ceiling, but there are still quite a few fly's in the ointment. Models do not agree on storm modes yet, and we could see a problem with cloud cover and simply too much convection. Also some disagreements on the wind profiles between the models with the VBV vertical profile which would lead to messy storm modes and keep the long track tornado threat tempered. I think the setup has a high risk ceiling, but I'm not sure it will warrant a high risk yet simply because there are still too many question marks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CGChaser Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 6 minutes ago, JasonOH said: To piggyback off BJC, if the dew point line and temperature line are at the same point, you cannot trust the hodograph on a model. For the CAMs, they are literally modeling the storm and the soundings do not represent the environment around the storm. Agreed, but even soundings pulled from locations away from closest storms are impressive, per HRRR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZackH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, JasonOH said: To piggyback off BJC, if the dew point line and temperature line are at the same point, you cannot trust the hodograph on a model. For the CAMs, they are literally modeling the storm and the soundings do not represent the environment around the storm. Not completely right... you need saturation all the way up. In a moist environment, you will always have a close T/Td near the surface at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Msalgado Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 There's SRH values of over 300 for virtually all of East Texas. There's no need to cherry pick a sounding as every one in that area will look great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonOH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 I still maintain that if the temp and dews are the same on the modeled sounding it cannot be trusted. With that thick of a layer I don't fully trust the high SRH, but I do think it is still quite high and will pose a major threat tomorrow. Edit: that HRRR sounding is really nice though. It has that sight layer but that's going to be as close to the environment as I think we will find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZackH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Just now, JasonOH said: I still maintain that if the temp and dews are the same on the modeled sounding it cannot be trusted. With that thick of a layer I don't fully trust the high SRH, but I do think it is still quite high and will pose a major threat tomorrow. With all do respect, you can maintain that all you want, but it is not correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojo762 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Just now, Msalgado said: There's SRH values of over 300 for virtually all of East Texas. There's no need to cherry pick a sounding as every one in that area will look great. Exactly... Environment over a large area is forecasted to be highly volatile... low-level winds will be very impressive tomorrow area-wide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonOH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, ZackH said: With all do respect, you can maintain that all you want, but it is not correct. I'll take your word on it though. From my understanding the CAM is modeling the cloud/storms at that location, so it is literally modeling the cloud, so it won't be the same as environment. There's also a reason you have the red name and I don't, so I have trust you are right. (I was on mobile for first post and forgot you were a met since mobile doesn't show the name) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CGChaser Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 FWIW, this is a solid post addressing contaminated soundings, etc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZackH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, JasonOH said: I'll take your word on it though. From my understanding the CAM is modeling the cloud/storms at that location, so it is literally modeling the cloud, so it won't be the same as environment. There's also a reason you have the red name and I don't, so I have trust you are right. (I was on mobile for first post and forgot you were a met since mobile doesn't show the name) I'm not trying to shut you down here, and I was honestly not trying to disrespect you. There is definitely more risk with the CAMs... but the first sounding I was referring to was the NAM at a time and a point where there was no modeled precipitation. With any CAMs in a moist atmosphere, even if the storm is close by your sounding point, you will have a little modification simply due to the fact that its a convection resolving model. However, if that point was actually where a storm was being resolved, it would be saturated all the way up the column. I would be more concerned if it was just cherry picking, but the parameter space on the CAMs and soundings just like that are basically all over the warm sector and the warm front... therefore I doubt you have much contamination. Of course, that's if the model is correct... the nice caveat EDIT: on a second glance, the first HRRR sounding may have some contamination, but the second HRRR sounding and the NAM sounding look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZackH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, CGChaser said: FWIW, this is a solid post addressing contaminated soundings, etc.. This is a great tutorial... I was actually looking for this. Thanks for finding it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonOH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, CGChaser said: FWIW, this is a solid post addressing contaminated soundings, etc.. One thing with Pivotal is that you don't have those lines on the side (I'm having a memory blank will probably remember right when I press post). Not sure about COD. And I was wrong, that's not called getting shut down. It's called learning and it's always good to get smarter. And excellent post Zach, thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZackH Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 6 minutes ago, JasonOH said: One thing with Pivotal is that you don't have those lines on the side (I'm having a memory blank will probably remember right when I press post). Not sure about COD. And I was wrong, that's not called getting shut down. It's called learning and it's always good to get smarter. And excellent post Zach, thank you! I still learn every day, sir! Thanks for understanding my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokeEater Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Anybody down that way know if there's stations that do decent live coverage around Houston? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Martin Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjc0303 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 48 minutes ago, ZackH said: Not completely right... you need saturation all the way up. In a moist environment, you will always have a close T/Td near the surface at some point. This isn't completely right either. You actually don't have to see saturation thru the column. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjc0303 Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 47 minutes ago, jojo762 said: Exactly... Environment over a large area is forecasted to be highly volatile... low-level winds will be very impressive tomorrow area-wide. storm mode and raging MCS have me tempering my expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.