|
|
Post by amstilost on Dec 20, 2021 13:45:00 GMT -6
I found this quote to be somewhat of a head scratcher....."Additionally, supercell tornadoes are shown to be much wider than damage surveys indicate."
I don't quite understand what is being said. Are the professionals who 'survey' the damage wrong? Is the paper saying we need a different way of 'surveying' damage? How can the tornado be wider than the damaged surveyed unless a change in the parameters of the survey change?
Another quote..... "Here, using mapping of low-level tornado winds in 120 tornadoes, we prove that supercell tornadoes are typically much stronger and wider than damage surveys indicate."
Someone enlighten me....what am I missing?
|
|
|
|
Post by John G -west belleville on Dec 20, 2021 14:15:09 GMT -6
I found this quote to be somewhat of a head scratcher....."Additionally, supercell tornadoes are shown to be much wider than damage surveys indicate." I don't quite understand what is being said. Are the professionals who 'survey' the damage wrong? Is the paper saying we need a different way of 'surveying' damage? How can the tornado be wider than the damaged surveyed unless a change in the parameters of the survey change? Another quote..... "Here, using mapping of low-level tornado winds in 120 tornadoes, we prove that supercell tornadoes are typically much stronger and wider than damage surveys indicate." Someone enlighten me....what am I missing? I couldn't get through the article, way too much higher level science for me, but I got the gist of it. On the first quote: The lowest wind reading from a DOW according to my interpretation of the article is 60M. Could a tornado wind field at 60m appear wider on radar than the damage indicates on the ground? Additionally, some of the highest gusts observed by the DOW lasted less than 1 second and the duration of the wind to cause damage is unknown according to Wurman. On the second quote: Dr. Wurman, in my opinion, fails to recognize bias in his own study material. His team specifically targets supercell tornadoes in the plains because it has a low population density and easy for the team to maneuver in. Therefore, there are less structures to be damaged. The EF scale is a damage survey at its core. If corn gets knocked down and a rating of EF0 is assigned, but the DOW measures 210 MPH winds, its still an EF0, no matter what the DOW measures. The most famous example of this is the El Reno tornado. |
|
|
|
Post by amstilost on Dec 20, 2021 14:28:19 GMT -6
Does the NWS under rate tornadoes that don't do any damage? Couldn't the radar be used accurately in that case to be able to get a more robust database to pull from. I would think that would be a good thing. It seems to me that part of our increase in technology/tracking ability/safe distance wind speed captures gets compared old school data/observations. Just an old/part timers' observation. Thanks for the explanation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Dec 20, 2021 14:36:08 GMT -6
I found this quote to be somewhat of a head scratcher....."Additionally, supercell tornadoes are shown to be much wider than damage surveys indicate." I don't quite understand what is being said. Are the professionals who 'survey' the damage wrong? Is the paper saying we need a different way of 'surveying' damage? How can the tornado be wider than the damaged surveyed unless a change in the parameters of the survey change? Another quote..... "Here, using mapping of low-level tornado winds in 120 tornadoes, we prove that supercell tornadoes are typically much stronger and wider than damage surveys indicate." Someone enlighten me....what am I missing? I think by “wider” it means the wind field around tornadoes could be bigger than the damage indicates. What I found interesting is this paper suggest the size of a tornado has no real indication of the strength. So a small tornado is just as likely to be “violent” as a wide tornado. Size did seem to correlate to track length and how long the tornado is on the ground. |
|
|
|
Post by John G -west belleville on Dec 20, 2021 14:40:01 GMT -6
I found this quote to be somewhat of a head scratcher....."Additionally, supercell tornadoes are shown to be much wider than damage surveys indicate." I don't quite understand what is being said. Are the professionals who 'survey' the damage wrong? Is the paper saying we need a different way of 'surveying' damage? How can the tornado be wider than the damaged surveyed unless a change in the parameters of the survey change? Another quote..... "Here, using mapping of low-level tornado winds in 120 tornadoes, we prove that supercell tornadoes are typically much stronger and wider than damage surveys indicate." Someone enlighten me....what am I missing? I think by “wider” it means the wind field around tornadoes could be bigger than the damage indicates. What I found interesting is this paper suggest the size of a tornado has no real indication of the strength. So a small tornado is just as likely to be “violent” as a wide tornado. Size did seem to correlate to track length and how long the tornado is on the ground. I've seen some pretty intense small tornadoes. I think Timmer calls them drillers. |
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Dec 20, 2021 14:56:52 GMT -6
I found this quote to be somewhat of a head scratcher....."Additionally, supercell tornadoes are shown to be much wider than damage surveys indicate." I don't quite understand what is being said. Are the professionals who 'survey' the damage wrong? Is the paper saying we need a different way of 'surveying' damage? How can the tornado be wider than the damaged surveyed unless a change in the parameters of the survey change? Another quote..... "Here, using mapping of low-level tornado winds in 120 tornadoes, we prove that supercell tornadoes are typically much stronger and wider than damage surveys indicate." Someone enlighten me....what am I missing? I think by “wider” it means the wind field around tornadoes could be bigger than the damage indicates. What I found interesting is this paper suggest the size of a tornado has no real indication of the strength. So a small tornado is just as likely to be “violent” as a wide tornado. Size did seem to correlate to track length and how long the tornado is on the ground. I should clarify that while size dosent necessarily correlate to strength, the bigger a tornado is the bigger the area of max wind and longer those max winds will last. That makes a big difference when it comes to the damage a tornado can do. |
|
|
|
Post by maddogchief on Dec 20, 2021 15:01:34 GMT -6
I must say, I am proud of this forum so far this year. We’ve had dismal, boring weather (outside of some severe) and multiple signals for cold and snowy in the extended that haven’t come true. After reading back, there haven’t been any hissy fits about the weather or hissy fits about the hissy fits. Merry, dry Christmas everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by BRTNWXMAN on Dec 20, 2021 15:15:31 GMT -6
After what we've dealt with the past 2 years, weather seems like the least of anyone's worry. Unfortunately, the past couple weeks proved that it needs to be taken very seriously...
|
|
|
|
Post by Tilawn on Dec 20, 2021 15:30:47 GMT -6
I must say, I am proud of this forum so far this year. We’ve had dismal, boring weather (outside of some severe) and multiple signals for cold and snowy in the extended that haven’t come true. After reading back, there haven’t been any hissy fits about the weather or hissy fits about the hissy fits. Merry, dry Christmas everyone. Give it “2 more weeks”......... |
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Dec 20, 2021 15:34:14 GMT -6
Starting to see some support on the analogs for colder weather across the lower 48 around New Years  |
|
|
|
Post by ajd446 on Dec 20, 2021 15:51:00 GMT -6
I think for many of us snow is the least of our worries.
We have had a wild december and start to winter, just on a severe side istead of wintry.
As much as we love snow on this board, I think a dry mild and boring week is fine by most of us for the holidays as we regroup and pray for all the families who lost loved ones from this months tornados.
We all need to be thankful for what we have, and no matter what the weather gives us we all have eachother.
It may snow eventually or it may not, but no matter what this forum deserves a very merry christmas and happy new year. And enjoy your families because as we have all witnessed this year it can change in an instant.
God bless you all and thank you Chris for this amazing forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by amstilost on Dec 20, 2021 20:53:53 GMT -6
The running average so far, what I have come up with, is an average temp of 46.95* for Dec. so far through today. I'm pretty sure it won't get down below 26* by midnight. I was surprised STL only got down to 26* this morn while I ended up at 18*. Stupid concrete jungle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Worldserieschampions (Chicago) on Dec 20, 2021 22:34:24 GMT -6
00z gfs continues to advertise big cold making it into the northwestern US and then oozing down slowly from there.
I think the Midwest is primed for a major overrunning event (ice storm) as we close out 2021.
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Dec 20, 2021 23:02:48 GMT -6
00z gfs continues to advertise big cold making it into the northwestern US and then oozing down slowly from there. I think the Midwest is primed for a major overrunning event (ice storm) as we close out 2021. That cold building over western Canada in the coming days and weeks could be some record breaking stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Dec 20, 2021 23:13:47 GMT -6
The pacific coast of Canada in particular could be in store for some very anomalous cold with the GFS advertising a 5 sigma event. Even further inland your looking at widespread 2-3 standard deviations below normal  |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Higgins on Dec 21, 2021 1:42:04 GMT -6
00z gfs continues to advertise big cold making it into the northwestern US and then oozing down slowly from there. I think the Midwest is primed for a major overrunning event (ice storm) as we close out 2021. I agree! The shallow cold will find its way south eventually and then be overrun aloft by the southwest flow. It has the early look of icy weather. |
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Dec 21, 2021 7:59:00 GMT -6
Yeah this is how Ice storms are born. Just has to be conceived first. Lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by rb1108 on Dec 21, 2021 8:19:51 GMT -6
00z gfs continues to advertise big cold making it into the northwestern US and then oozing down slowly from there. I think the Midwest is primed for a major overrunning event (ice storm) as we close out 2021. What is the timeframe looking like right now for said ice storm per current models? Before the 1st? |
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Dec 21, 2021 8:39:34 GMT -6
No model is actually showing an ice storm right now. But conceptually it is how one would develop in the future. Impossible to say when. My guess would be after New Years but difficult to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by STGOutdoors on Dec 21, 2021 8:43:18 GMT -6
Yeah this is how Ice storms are born. Just has to be conceived first. Lol. Is snowman capable of...ah, nevermind. |
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Dec 21, 2021 9:49:20 GMT -6
Yeah this is how Ice storms are born. Just has to be conceived first. Lol. Is snowman capable of...ah, nevermind. Lol |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Higgins on Dec 21, 2021 10:12:45 GMT -6
00z gfs continues to advertise big cold making it into the northwestern US and then oozing down slowly from there. I think the Midwest is primed for a major overrunning event (ice storm) as we close out 2021. What is the timeframe looking like right now for said ice storm per current models? Before the 1st? The GFS has shown some interest... off and on... with the middle of next week. |
|
|
|
Post by bdgwx on Dec 21, 2021 10:45:35 GMT -6
The record high to beat on Christmas is 71F set back in 1889.
12Z NBM is saying 68F.
|
|
|
|
Post by STGOutdoors on Dec 21, 2021 10:55:03 GMT -6
GFS says what cold.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmg378s on Dec 21, 2021 10:55:57 GMT -6
Last night's ECMWF is showing max of 73F for Christmas.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmg378s on Dec 21, 2021 10:56:53 GMT -6
Uh so, are we going to need heat advisories for Christmas Eve and Day?
|
|
|
|
Post by mchafin on Dec 21, 2021 10:58:00 GMT -6
Was just going to say that the GFS has 2-weeked us into zero cold.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmg378s on Dec 21, 2021 11:02:40 GMT -6
I mean that is a lot of cold air stuck up in western/central Canada. Eventually the dam will be break you'd think. But with our luck when it does it'll surge all the way to the Gulf coast and give the beaches an historic storm. |
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Dec 21, 2021 11:06:27 GMT -6
Right. 6 and 12 z are like a repeat of the last 6 weeks. Gets a little cooler followed by way warmer. My god. |
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Dec 21, 2021 11:14:59 GMT -6
Last night's ECMWF is showing max of 73F for Christmas. If we can time that frontal passage just right and get that compressional heating boost at mid day it could send temps soaring. |
|
