andyhb Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, jojo762 said: Kept waiting for them to walk back the high risk... But it never happened. One of the most caveat-filled High Risks i've ever seen. We got the storms we needed/wanted for sig tors, something just held them back, not quite sure what it was yet. 00Z OUN sounding might help some in figuring that out. Storms didn't develop explosively or maintain/strengthen quite like you'd expect with 3000-5000 CAPE. Lack of a stronger low level jet at that time and meridional 700 mb flow are my bets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokeEater Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 That's my mistake, didn't know he came on multiple severe forums to say so. Nothing impressive right now, just storm interactions and discrete cells with no impressive elements. That's my reason for calling a under verified high risk/bust.No worries man, just saying. The trend is on downward, just saying it's not completely dead yet.Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfgmfg Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 I'm seeing a 104mph wind gust reported in the last hour at the Walters, OK Mesonet site - is that accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quincy Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Bottom line regarding the HRRR: It outperformed the NCAR/SSEO suite that showed classic high-end outbreak type intense UH swaths up and down KS/OK. It outperformed the NSSL-ARW that showed only one lone cell over SW KS and most of the more intense storms over southern OK. It had fair agreement from the 12z 3km NAM that had a decent grasp on the general evolution by that 12z run Did it nail today? That depends on your perspective. Considering a very complex setup with multiple areas of discrete cells and storm clusters with cell mergers and interactions, it gave us the generally right idea all along (starting with the 12z WED HRRRX), from my analysis: Discrete/semi-discrete storms transitioning relatively quickly to clusters and bows by 22z with a few supercell structures remaining into early evening. Not many intense UH tracks and only slight time error (when considering model bias, I don't even consider it a big error) with initial storm development. If one had hugged any other model/ensemble and disregarded the HRRR, the forecast would have simply been less accurate than the general HRRR depiction. We're talking about model guidance. It guides us to a possible outcome or set of outcomes. The HRRR led us in generally the right direction, unless you want to argue about 1 hour time differences or slight model bias with respect to somewhat overdone convective elements (OKC "bow). You can't simply say 60kts deep layer shear + 3500 J/kg CAPE = numerous long-track, significant tornadoes I personally expected a 10% hatched outlook at 06z with probable increases to 15% as mesoscale details became more clear. I have no problem with erring on the side of caution, but I cannot see how one can argue that the HRRR didn't guide us in generally the right direction with the scope of this event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojo762 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, andyhb said: Lack of a stronger low level jet at that time and meridional 700 mb flow are my bets. Yeah that stupid amount of meridional flow above ~6-7KFT hurt this a lot it would seem, despite impressive speeds in the 7-13KFT AGL profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKStorm Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 6 minutes ago, Chinook said: Where is that? North and west of Seiling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKStorm Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 7 minutes ago, jojo762 said: Kept waiting for them to walk back the high risk... But it never happened. One of the most caveat-filled High Risks i've ever seen. We got the storms we needed/wanted for sig tors, something just held them back, not quite sure what it was yet. 00Z OUN sounding might help some in figuring that out. Storms didn't develop explosively or maintain/strengthen quite like you'd expect with 3000-5000 CAPE. Low level shear is barely adequate, mid level flow not much better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa Clause Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 6 minutes ago, SmokeEater said: No worries man, just saying. The trend is on downward, just saying it's not completely dead yet. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Brief warnings and small trackers still possible, but there's little doubt window for high end is closing/ closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zinski1990 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 well I was right again, another bust of a high risk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokeEater Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Strong G2G couplet north of Salina.Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokeEater Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 well I was right again, another bust of a high riskAnd he just proved my point... Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokeEater Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Wind gusted to 75 in Salina.Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SluggerWx Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, SmokeEater said: Strong G2G couplet north of Salina. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk KSC041-143-190015- /O.CON.KTOP.TO.W.0011.000000T0000Z-170519T0015Z/ Dickinson-Ottawa- 633 PM CDT THU MAY 18 2017 ...A TORNADO WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 715 PM CDT FOR NORTHWESTERN DICKINSON AND SOUTHEASTERN OTTAWA COUNTIES... At 633 PM CDT, a confirmed tornado was located near New Cambria, moving northeast at 35 mph. HAZARD...Damaging tornado and golf ball size hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Another confirmed tornado east of the Salina storm near Junction City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckeye05 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 minute ago, SmokeEater said: And he just proved my point... Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk I've said it before and I'll say it again. Is he being mature and constructive? No way. Is he wrong though? Nope, even if he has little basis science wise. It's honestly kind of amusing watching the thread go into a tailspin just because one guy is not so tactful about the reality of the current situation. Personally, I find "OMG Huge couplet!!!11!" And "TVS!!!" type posts over weak little transient areas of rotation way more annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Buckeye05 said: I've said it before and I'll say it again. Is he being mature and constructive? No way. Is he wrong though? Nope, even if he has little basis science wise. It's honestly kind of amusing watching the thread go into a tailspin just because one guy is not so tactful about the reality of the current situation. Personally, I find "OMG Huge couplet!!!11!" And "TVS!!!" type posts over weak little transient areas of rotation way more annoying. The dude came in mid event and acted like he called a bust days beforehand, he is a troll and it isn't really worth discussing more. Just label him for what he is and move along. Already been far too many posts wasted on a useless poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokeEater Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 I've said it before and I'll say it again. Is he being mature and constructive? No way. Is he wrong though? Nope, even if he has little basis science wise. It's honestly kind of amusing watching the thread go into a tailspin just because one guy is not so tactful about the reality of the current situation. Personally, I find "OMG Huge couplet!!!11!" And "TVS!!!" type posts over weak little transient areas of rotation way more annoying. Lol ok, you mean he has no basis at all science wise. And who is flipping out in here over weak rotation? But I'm not gonna beat a dead horse, he already got his wish to be talked about. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 minute ago, SmokeEater said: Lol ok, you mean he has no basis at all science wise. And who is flipping out in here over weak rotation? Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Yeah not sure about that second part... Everything I saw today was on the up and up in the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iowahawkeyedave Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 20 minutes ago, zinski1990 said: well I was right again, another bust of a high risk Congrats, you called a bust at 3pm, you want a cookie for being right even though most of the tornado warnings came after that? You just proved everyone else's point. Calling a bust early in an event is never a wise thing to do, so it's no surprise that people are going to jump on your case about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPetrulli Posted May 18, 2017 Author Share Posted May 18, 2017 Honestly, the upgrade to a high risk at 06z was a little irresponsible. Broyles should have kept it at a 15% where there were obvious concerns for messiness. Instead, we were stuck with a situation where a downgrade to the high risk at 13z then another upgrade at 1630z or 20z if warranted would have been confusing to the public. Didn't think it was going to verify from the start of the day, as messiness was becoming more evident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quincy Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Another consideration, storms were too close together, for the most part, as by 21z, there was environmental overturning, cell interactions, increasing CINH and warm front storms both merging AND interacting with cool air to the north of the front. this, plus a lack of early afternoon low-level shear, are probably the two biggest red flags I can see. The initial storms were nice and discrete, but likely just a bit too early to capitalize on a priming environment. Recall forecast discussions mentioning initially elevated activity and how some posters commented on seemingly high cloud bases at first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amped Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Everyone chill out and wait for the damage reports Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckeye05 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 4 minutes ago, SmokeEater said: Lol ok, you mean he has no basis at all science wise. And who is flipping out in here over weak rotation? Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk Yeah? It has no substance, yet it just doesn't get my blood boiling like it does for others. All I'm saying. And nobody. I never said that happened today but thanks for putting words in my mouth. That was more something I saw a lot of on Jan 23 and April 5 though. Moving on.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zinski1990 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Honestly, I'm not trying to sound like a complete troll to you guys. I never even commented on this thread until about 2 hours or so after the cap broke and storms began firing. I could easily tell by the storm structures and how quickly most of them congealed into each other. It was kind of obvious this day wasn't going to be as big as thought. I'm just a straight forward guy and say it how it is. Look back in the comments and you'll not find anything from me. Sorry guys. Kind of crazy how you all get worked up so quick over a couple simple comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quincy Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Why are we giving a troll so much attention that they want in the first place? Let's move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojo762 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 With 15+ tornadoes now, this will classify as a regional "outbreak," just didn't get the type of higher-end tornadoes that were expected/possible, for a variety of reasons. Area VWPs while storms were discrete/semi-discrete (for example the initial intense supercell near Hobart) were meager and unimpressive. As of now, VWPs at OUN and KFD are fairly impressive depicting good veering with height, but VNX and ICT are much less favorable, depicting a high amount of low/mid level meridional flow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Buckeye05 said: Yeah? It has no substance, yet it just doesn't get my blood boiling like it does for others. All I'm saying. And nobody. I never said that happened today but thanks for putting words in my mouth. That was more something I saw a lot of on Jan 23 and April 5 though. Moving on.. No offense but you brought up something that didn't even happen, I get why SmokeEater is calling you out on it. As for those events I don't remember it happening then outside of a couple non regular severe posters. You get randoms that come along but the rest of us don't do that nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa Clause Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Back tracking things, I'm still seeing very favorable conditions in parts of risk region, what seems to be keeping things from second cells taking off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zinski1990 Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 4 minutes ago, Buckeye05 said: Yeah? It has no substance, yet it just doesn't get my blood boiling like it does for others. All I'm saying. And nobody. I never said that happened today but thanks for putting words in my mouth. That was more something I saw a lot of on Jan 23 and April 5 though. Moving on.. Me and you think differently Buckeye. I like that. You are right though I've seen some comments about violent looking circulation when it literally lasted one scan. I never get worked up about that either. You never know but come on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojo762 Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Wmsptwx said: Back tracking things, I'm still seeing very favorable conditions in parts of risk region, what seems to be keeping things from second cells taking off? Environment is worked over at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.