Thursday, July 27, 2023 Severe Weather Potential

[WxWatcher007]

33 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Yeah so nobody should have been expecting high-end severe or a region-wide outbreak. 

It’s an imby game. Always. And weenies (myself included) have trouble separating the fantasy from reality.

We could literally have a category 5 hurricane run straight through New England and we’ll have folks call it a bust as its track shifts up the coast with trochoidal motions, meh it as an outer rain band misses their house, shrug it off as a non-event if their house receives minor damage, and downplay it if the highest recorded gust was “only” 140 mph rather than the 165 gusts the NHC had in the advisory before landfall. 

It’s just what we do. 

[STILL N OF PIKE]

We may need to add to the fraud 5

E ma severe occurs about as frequent as backlash snows 

[Cyclone-68]

How is Saturday looking re: severe?

[weatherwiz]

4 minutes ago, Cyclone-68 said:

How is Saturday looking re: severe?

Should be fairly similar to yesterday I think. 

So let's just get this out of the way now...No this will not be a significant severe event or high end severe event. There will be widespread thunderstorms with probably one swath of wind damage in a similar fashion to yesterday. 

[WinterWolf]

43 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Should be fairly similar to yesterday I think. 

So let's just get this out of the way now...No this will not be a significant severe event or high end severe event. There will be widespread thunderstorms with probably one swath of wind damage in a similar fashion to yesterday. 

Even the high end ones, aren’t that high end here most times. I had a rumble or two of thunder yesterday, zero lightening, and some heavy rain.  It won’t take much for Saturday to be better than yesterday here. Tuesday was better than yesterday here. In fact yesterday was probably the weakest storm(s) this year.  
 

So Saturday I’m betting will be better here, because it wont take much at all for that to happen.,

[WxWatcher007]

9 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Even the high end ones, aren’t that high end here most times. I had a rumble or two of thunder yesterday, zero lightening, and some heavy rain.  It won’t take much for Saturday to be better than yesterday here. Tuesday was better than yesterday here. In fact yesterday was probably the weakest storm(s) this year.  
 

So Saturday I’m betting will be better here, because it wont take much at all for that to happen.,

Isn’t it relative though? We’re not built to have derechos with cat 2 winds like Iowa or giant hail like Texas. We can’t get cat 5s like Florida or heat like Phoenix or cold like Minnesota. Hell we barely do region wide KUs now. Our climate has versatility—we can do a lot of things if the stars align, but I’m not sure we can do anything particularly high end frequently like other regions. 

[weatherwiz]

14 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Even the high end ones, aren’t that high end here most times. I had a rumble or two of thunder yesterday, zero lightening, and some heavy rain.  It won’t take much for Saturday to be better than yesterday here. Tuesday was better than yesterday here. In fact yesterday was probably the weakest storm(s) this year.  
 

So Saturday I’m betting will be better here, because it wont take much at all for that to happen.,

I mean it all really depends on a definition one is going to use to quantify "high end". While there really is no agreed upon criteria or criteria specific to a region, what's widely accepted as a high-end significant severe weather event really only needs a handful of significant severe weather reports. IIRC correctly, Ekster and Banacos defined a significant severe weather day in the Northeast as only needing 1 or 2 significant severe weather reports. 

But what you're saying about yesterday, how it was pretty meh for you, that is the nature of convective events and anywhere in the country. Even out in the Midwest on big severe days or during active periods, there are probably plenty of people who got thunderstorms that were pretty general. 

We could have a massive setup with an EML which results in widespread severe weather here and some towns get absolutely nothing or maybe just get some rain and thunder. We could have a pretty meh setup two days later and those same towns that got nothing or just some thunder...well maybe they got one of the bigger storms that day and had hail/wind damage. 

 

[WinterWolf]

5 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Isn’t it relative though? We’re not built to have derechos with cat 2 winds like Iowa or giant hail like Texas. We can’t get cat 5s like Florida or heat like Phoenix or cold like Minnesota. Hell we barely do region wide KUs now. Our climate has versatility—we can do a lot of things if the stars align, but I’m not sure we can do anything particularly high end frequently like other regions. 

Very true Don.  Agree.
 

That’s why this is really a safe and good place to live for most folks…the weather is mostly benign here which make it a safe place to settle.  Sure, extreme things can happen as you pointed out, if everything comes together right, but that’s the rare event.  

[weatherwiz]

6 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Isn’t it relative though? We’re not built to have derechos with cat 2 winds like Iowa or giant hail like Texas. We can’t get cat 5s like Florida or heat like Phoenix or cold like Minnesota. Hell we barely do region wide KUs now. Our climate has versatility—we can do a lot of things if the stars align, but I’m not sure we can do anything particularly high end frequently like other regions. 

One other thing to add to the severe too is our geographical spatial coverage is much smaller compared to that of the Plains. Our region encompasses much less land - we're smaller. This has some degree of impact to our the overall extent of our events. I think this has been brought up before. It's also one reason why it is extremely difficult to get a high risk into here (even in the most perfect setup). Majority of high risks tied into derecho-producing events...it is very difficult to get that extent of damage needed to verify b/c we're just smaller compared to the midwest. 

[WinterWolf]

2 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

I mean it all really depends on a definition one is going to use to quantify "high end". While there really is no agreed upon criteria or criteria specific to a region, what's widely accepted as a high-end significant severe weather event really only needs a handful of significant severe weather reports. IIRC correctly, Ekster and Banacos defined a significant severe weather day in the Northeast as only needing 1 or 2 significant severe weather reports. 

But what you're saying about yesterday, how it was pretty meh for you, that is the nature of convective events and anywhere in the country. Even out in the Midwest on big severe days or during active periods, there are probably plenty of people who got thunderstorms that were pretty general. 

We could have a massive setup with an EML which results in widespread severe weather here and some towns get absolutely nothing or maybe just get some rain and thunder. We could have a pretty meh setup two days later and those same towns that got nothing or just some thunder...well maybe they got one of the bigger storms that day and had hail/wind damage. 

 

This is true too.  Very good points. 
 

Maybe I more mean…that storms many times weaken as they come in here.  And I’m further west and they weaken many times as they come through.  And we had good sun yesterday and heating. I know there is more to it than just that, but maybe that is more my focus. 

[WinterWolf]

2 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

One other thing to add to the severe too is our geographical spatial coverage is much smaller compared to that of the Plains. Our region encompasses much less land - we're smaller. This has some degree of impact to our the overall extent of our events. I think this has been brought up before. It's also one reason why it is extremely difficult to get a high risk into here (even in the most perfect setup). Majority of high risks tied into derecho-producing events...it is very difficult to get that extent of damage needed to verify b/c we're just smaller compared to the midwest. 

And not flat and wide open where those events can roll in unimpeded for dozens of miles..very hilly and mountainous here..flat like a board there. 

[weatherwiz]

Just now, WinterWolf said:

This is true too.  Very good points. 
 

Maybe I more mean…that storms many times weaken as they come in here.  And I’m further west and they weaken many times as they come through.  And we had good sun yesterday and heating. I know there is more to it than just that, but maybe that is more my focus. 

Totally get what you're saying. 

It is super frustrating when you think things looks good and then stuff weakens as it approaches

This killed me as a kid growing up in West Hartford. It seemed to happen almost all the time with squall lines. This is actually a huge reason why I wanted to pursue studying thunderstorms and severe weather because I wanted to know why this happened. People used to tell me it was because of the hills  

All in all I think a big part of it is due to forcing. More times then not, the better forcing (shortwave forcing) happens to be too far north. So while we may have better instability then they do farther north, they can cash in better because they're being compensated with stronger forcing. 

[WinterWolf]

8 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Totally get what you're saying. 

It is super frustrating when you think things looks good and then stuff weakens as it approaches

This killed me as a kid growing up in West Hartford. It seemed to happen almost all the time with squall lines. This is actually a huge reason why I wanted to pursue studying thunderstorms and severe weather because I wanted to know why this happened. People used to tell me it was because of the hills  

All in all I think a big part of it is due to forcing. More times then not, the better forcing (shortwave forcing) happens to be too far north. So while we may have better instability then they do farther north, they can cash in better because they're being compensated with stronger forcing. 

Thanks Wiz…very enlightening info for non MET folks like me. 

[Typhoon Tip]

15 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Totally get what you're saying. 

It is super frustrating when you think things looks good and then stuff weakens as it approaches

This killed me as a kid growing up in West Hartford. It seemed to happen almost all the time with squall lines. This is actually a huge reason why I wanted to pursue studying thunderstorms and severe weather because I wanted to know why this happened. People used to tell me it was because of the hills  

All in all I think a big part of it is due to forcing. More times then not, the better forcing (shortwave forcing) happens to be too far north. So while we may have better instability then they do farther north, they can cash in better because they're being compensated with stronger forcing. 

You probably don't remember this but some 15 years ago ... you and I had a discussion about this phenomenon of weakening along a particular/repeatable axis (geographic). 

I remember offering the hypothesis at the time ... I'd noticed ( first of all) the same thing.  The axis actually exists along a line from NYC-PWM...  And it's not a hard wall or anything like that.  Obviously the Worcester/1953 event ...or 1987 derecho down Rt 2 up my way ...or pick a severe event, all demonstrate that it's a 'tendency' we're talking about - not a hard stop.

So, that said, the hypothesis is that with SW flow BL...even though the CU field generates in streets about 10 or 15 mi N of the south coast, and the air temperature and DP get rich ... (they may even match ALB by the time you get to the Pike), there still seems to be some sort of geophysical sensitivity in play that is ill-defined. It may be that the depth of integrated CAPE between the surface and the top of the BL is still lower than ALB, despite the tarmacs and garden measurements indicating the same T and DP spreads.   That may or may not be the cause..?  But there is definitely a marine intoxication hang-over to air masses that have spent any time over the Bite Waters/ Long Island Sound, which at times more coherently modulates ( negative) convection when crossing that ~ line above. 

 

[weatherwiz]

2 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

You probably don't remember this but some 15 years ago ... you and I had a discussion about this phenomenon of weakening along a particular/repeatable axis (geographic). 

I remember offering the hypothesis at the time ... I'd noticed ( first of all) the same thing.  The axis actually exists along a line from NYC-PWM...  And it's not a hard wall or anything like that.  Obviously the Worcester/1953 event ...or 1987 derecho down Rt 2 up my way ...or pick a severe event, all demonstrate that it's a 'tendency' we're talking about - not a hard stop.

So, that said, the hypothesis is that with SW flow BL...even though the CU field generates in streets about 10 or 15 mi N of the south coast, and the air temperature and DP get rich ... (they may even match ALB by the time you get to the Pike), there still seems to be some sort of geophysical sensitivity in play that is ill-defined. It may be that the depth of integrate CAPE between the surface and the top of the BL is still lower than ALB, despite the tarmacs and garden measurements indicating the same T and DP spreads.   That may or may not be the cause..?  But there is definitely a marine intoxication hang-over to air masses that have spent any time over the Bite Waters/ Long Island Sound, which at times more coherently modulates ( negative) convection when crossing that ~ line above. 

Sea-breeze, or marine air, certainly has been a big killer as well, especially with early season events. What's interesting though is with waters running so much warmer than average I wonder if this has become less of a negating factor? 

I do remember some posts from you in the earlier years regarding this axis. It makes a ton of sense meteorologically. This would be a super fun research study (I actually wanted to do something like this for senior research, but it was just too in depth and I didn't have the time to do such a study). 

Ultimately, we can expect shortwaves to track:

1) North of the border across Quebec, in which the convective/severe potential is more far northern New England. 

2) Right along the US/Canadian border, in which convective/severe potential is more northern New England 

3) Just south of the border, in which the potential is northern and central New England 

4) Right across northern or central New England in which the focus in central and portions of southern New England

But we want these shortwaves to either be de-amplifying or remaining steady state - not de-amplifying like yesterday. If yesterday's shortwave was not de-amplifying we probably would have seen better lapse rates as one product of an amplifying wave is to cool the mlvls. 

 

[Cyclone-68]

I suppose there’s a reason why we remember the big severe days so well. It’s because we get so few of them.

[tamarack]

1 hour ago, WinterWolf said:

Very true Don.  Agree.
 

That’s why this is really a safe and good place to live for most folks…the weather is mostly benign here which make it a safe place to settle.  Sure, extreme things can happen as you pointed out, if everything comes together right, but that’s the rare event.  

As I've said before, little 'quakes, little 'canes, little tornados, big snowstorms - a combo I can live with.  

[HoarfrostHubb]

EF-1 confirmed by NWS in Dublin NH

https://forecast.weather.gov/product.php?site=gyx&issuedby=GYX&product=PNS

Public Information Statement
National Weather Service Gray ME
1235 PM EDT Fri Jul 28 2023

...NWS Meteorologists Confirm Tornado Damage in Dublin in
Cheshire County New Hampshire...

A storm survey team from the National Weather Service office in
Gray, Maine has confirmed that a tornado touched down in Dublin,
New Hampshire during the afternoon on July 27 2023. The damage
observed by the team to this point is consistent with an EF 1
tornado with maximum winds of 90-95 mph.

The survey team is investigating additional damage and a final
assessment including all results of the survey are expected to be
completed and transmitted via a Public Information Statement
sometime this evening.

The storm survey information will also be available on our
website at http://www.weather.gov

[WxWatcher007]

1 hour ago, tamarack said:

As I've said before, little 'quakes, little 'canes, little tornados, big snowstorms - a combo I can live with.  

Must be nice not worrying about taint  

Its a great climate here in New England. Plenty of variety, including quiet and nice periods. 

[WinterWolf]

1 hour ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Must be nice not worrying about taint  

Its a great climate here in New England. Plenty of variety, including quiet and nice periods. 

 

2 hours ago, tamarack said:

As I've said before, little 'quakes, little 'canes, little tornados, big snowstorms - a combo I can live with.  

Both of these posts are well said gentlemen..Well said.  And I agree with both of these ideas very much so. 

[tamarack]

1 hour ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Must be nice not worrying about taint  

Its a great climate here in New England. Plenty of variety, including quiet and nice periods. 

Well, less worry than at your locale, but prior to last winter the previous 3 had lots of taint.  (Including "Give it up.  'Taint gonna snow.)

[WxWatcher007]

20 minutes ago, tamarack said:

Well, less worry than at your locale, but prior to last winter the previous 3 had lots of taint.  (Including "Give it up.  'Taint gonna snow.)

That’s how bad the last decade has been. You taint while it’s 50° rain here lol.

[tamarack]

2 hours ago, WxWatcher007 said:

That’s how bad the last decade has been. You taint while it’s 50° rain here lol.

BDL has had lousy snowfall totals the most recent 5 winters.  The previous 5 averaged AN despite having 2015-16 in its midst.  However, most recent 10 were only 89% of average while those winters ran a couple inches AN here.

[WxWatcher007]

12 minutes ago, tamarack said:

BDL has had lousy snowfall totals the most recent 5 winters.  The previous 5 averaged AN despite having 2015-16 in its midst.  However, most recent 10 were only 89% of average while those winters ran a couple inches AN here.

Yeah I should have noted that prior to this recent 5 year period in CT, I lived in DC. Winters have been unpleasant to say the least for me.

[Hoth]

7 hours ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Isn’t it relative though? We’re not built to have derechos with cat 2 winds like Iowa or giant hail like Texas. We can’t get cat 5s like Florida or heat like Phoenix or cold like Minnesota. Hell we barely do region wide KUs now. Our climate has versatility—we can do a lot of things if the stars align, but I’m not sure we can do anything particularly high end frequently like other regions. 

We do 33 degree rain with the very best of them.

[CoastalWx]

Tomorrow has a better chance than yesterday.