General Weather Discussion - March 2015

[Of Sound Mind]

One dead and 30+ hurt in Sand Springs trailer park.

Mobile homes should not be legal in Oklahoma.

By that logic, homes and business in Moore should not be legal. In recent Oklahoma history, more damage has been done, more people injured and more lives lost due to tornadoes in Moore than in mobile homes in the state.

To take that logic even further, motor vehicles should not be legal in Oklahoma. More damage has been done, more people injured and more lives lost as a result of motor vehicle use than the destruction wreaked by acts of nature.

[jn1780]

I am completely disappointed in the NWS. They completely dropped the ball. Seeing these tweets line up and knowing people were injured and how many could have been killed if the tornado were just a bit stronger. I'm one of the harshest TV weather critics, and one of the biggest critics of Mike Morgan and the Drama Club, and a huge supporter and proponent of the professionals at the NWS -- and I am at a loss for words when I read the following tweets. Props to Mike Morgan and his team -- we watched at work (until the power went out) and he handled the situation very well and possibly saved many lives. It was frustrating seeing live images of the tornado sweeping near my neighborhood and the NWS refusing to issue a warning.

Its probably a case where they saw it on TV, but were thinking it was going to be a brief spin up that would have dissipated right after they issued a Tornado warning and not stayed on the ground for several more minutes.

I imagine they will say something in the next day or two about how weak tornados are possible in many thunderstorms with little to no warning.

[Anonymous.]

Not trying to excuse the delayed warnings, but it was a rather unique situation of the storm altering the boundaries. We have seen this multiple times before where supercells riding along front are actually determining where and how the front is moving.


This is a text excerpt that accompanied the watch yesterday:

REMEMBER...A SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WATCH MEANS CONDITIONS ARE
FAVORABLE FOR SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS IN AND CLOSE TO THE WATCH
AREA. PERSONS IN THESE AREAS SHOULD BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR
THREATENING WEATHER CONDITIONS AND LISTEN FOR LATER STATEMENTS
AND POSSIBLE WARNINGS. SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS CAN AND OCCASIONALLY
DO PRODUCE TORNADOES.

Again, it was very situational and I am sure they will agree that they should have erred on the side of caution (especially considered it was over populated area).

[Celebrator]

I was at work in the city where LOTS of rain fell, but my wife did not think we got much rain in Edmond. Anyone have a rain total for up Edmond way during the storms yesterday?

[LocoAko]

I was at work in the city where LOTS of rain fell, but my wife did not think we got much rain in Edmond. Anyone have a rain total for up Edmond way during the storms yesterday?

The OKC North Mesonet (probably the closest station) recorded 0.43" yesterday. Don't know if that helps you.

[Of Sound Mind]

Not trying to excuse the delayed warnings, but it was a rather unique situation of the storm altering the boundaries. We have seen this multiple times before where supercells riding along front are actually determining where and how the front is moving.


This is a text excerpt that accompanied the watch yesterday:



Again, it was very situational and I am sure they will agree that they should have erred on the side of caution (especially considered it was over populated area).

I generally agree with you. It was a unique situation. But THEY are supposed to be the experts who understand that better than anyone.

Right or wrong, people perceive severe thunderstorm warnings and tornado warnings very differently. Meteorologists and serious weather enthusiasts understand that severe thunderstorms "can and occasionally do produce tornadoes"... but how many in the general public read the NWS public weather statements? They look for watches and warnings, not the details.

My fault with the NWS or perhaps their system is that when there is significant, serious rotation in the storm, I think they should err on the side of caution by issuing a tornado warning that one could drop without warning on that storm with significant rotation. I would suggest that most people hear Severe Thunderstorm Warning and think of hail, wind and heavy rainfall... most typically don't connect tornado possibility with that.

Perhaps since the NWS has modified their risk assessment scale, they should consider also modifying their tornado warning system to "tornado warning" for high risk of imminent tornado(es) with a storm and "tornado emergency" for tornado on the ground approaching populated areas. I think the NWS needs to do more in understanding public psychology. They are there to not just be scientists, but to provide practical information and warnings to the public, hopefully in understandable and usable ways for the average non-weather-enthusiast to encourage appropriate response.

[LocoAko]

Perhaps since the NWS has modified their risk assessment scale, they should consider also modifying their tornado warning system to "tornado warning" for high risk of imminent tornado(es) with a storm and "tornado emergency" for tornado on the ground approaching populated areas. I think the NWS needs to do more in understanding public psychology. They are there to not just be scientists, but to provide practical information and warnings to the public, hopefully in understandable and usable ways for the average non-weather-enthusiast to encourage appropriate response.

That is basically what the warning system we already have in place is. As for the social science side of things, I can assure you work is being done (in every-increasing amounts) in this area.

[Of Sound Mind]

Let's be truthful though, this isn't a mistake they make often. In fact, quite the opposite. While conservative, I've found NWS to be the most reliable source of actionable information.

I don't disagree. Probably the most frustrating thing about yesterday was not only their delayed response, but their proactive commentary denying/refuting what people were seeing with their eyes on their television screens whether or not you were listening to the TV mets or storm spotters. That's the most egregious of their errors yesterday. And they've been virtually silent about that since.

[John1744]

It doesn't help that for the last two years they've moved from being the behind the scenes wizards behind the curtain to being much more front facing with social media and their websites. They now talk directly to many indviduals instead of relaying info to the tv weather folks to be presented.

So people are more and more looking to the NWS to be that front facing person to turn to when things go bad.

I don't know what it would but I think definitely perhaps they should look at a new category or warning or even terminology. There definitely seems to be a use case for what happened last night where you aren't sure you have a literal tornado but conditions are still bad enough whatever it is out there should be treated like a tornado.

[okatty]

KOCO was literally saying "THERE IS NO TORNADO" - I switch channels and the helicopter guy on channel 4 is following it, seeing debris and power flashes perfectly visible along the path. I never turned to News 9.

[turnpup]

What disturbed me about yesterday was when the EAS warning took over the TV, just as we were watching the path of the developing tornado on the ground. For however long that warning box stayed on the screen (seemed like about a minute), we were unable to see or hear programming, change channels, or have any control whatsoever of the TV (we use Cox). Luckily we had the Internet up, and were relying on it primarily for our information anyway. I understand the need for that type of warning, but at the very least feel one should be able to make it go away immediately if they so choose.

[venture]

KOCO was literally saying "THERE IS NO TORNADO" - I switch channels and the helicopter guy on channel 4 is following it, seeing debris and power flashes perfectly visible along the path. I never turned to News 9.

It sounds like the coverage on KWTV and KFOR were almost identical. Val punched the core near El Reno and followed along and saw a few really good funnels in form up and these were streamed live.

Another one of KWTV's chasers had brief spin ups out by Fort Cobb I believe...but nothing has been documented in the storm reports for yesterday yet. Not sure if that is because NWS wasn't/isn't going to acknowledge the report that was on the air, or if they need the actual spotter to file a report first. Of course it isn't that unusual for media reported tornadoes to go ignored.

[catch22]

Let's be truthful though, this isn't a mistake they make often. In fact, quite the opposite. While conservative, I've found NWS to be the most reliable source of actionable information.

I completely agree with you. But as said above, to continually refute information being shown on live TV. Was incredibly dangerous. They should have tweeted:

"Local TV stations reporting tornado over SW OKC / Moore. Issuing tornado warning while we investigate/confirm. Take shelter as precaution. #okwx"

[venture]

I completely agree with you. But as said above, to continually refute information being shown on live TV. Was incredibly dangerous. They should have tweeted:

"Local TV stations reporting tornado over SW OKC / Moore. Issuing tornado warning while we investigate/confirm. Take shelter as precaution. #okwx"

I'm not disagreeing that the warning should have gone out earlier, already said as much. I just think we also need to take a step back and gain some perspective. The uproar on social media today (and tonight) is incredible. I stop to think how many times they've nailed things perfectly and how little of a reaction is got from people, they miss one call (timing wise) in a crazy setup and everyone wants their head.

Yes we had aerial coverage showing the various tornado vortices on the ground. Early reports from the damage surveys is that the tornado damage is very highly covered up in damage from RFD. Had this not been Oklahoma City, chances are it never would have been tornado warned. Mixing the situation with heavy rain, blowing dust from high winds and the RFD doing damage...many ground spotters would never see it. It would have been a situation of identifying tornado damage after the fact.

My fear from all of this is that we are now going to enter a period of tornado warnings going out too proactively when they really shouldn't. Norman's criteria tends to be a bit more specific warning wise compared to someone like Cleveland. Granted we would have been lucky to have any warning at all if this was in Cleveland's area. Seriously. A lot of other offices will pull the trigger on rotation- here they really wait until ground verification or reports verifying the signs that a tornado is very probable.

End of the call, the missed opportunity to get the warning out should have been when the first funnel was observed in the storm. I wasn't watching KFOR, but KWTV had it fairly early in Canadian County. To me this says the storm has enough organization to produce and the way it was interacting with the boundary, you pull the trigger on the warning.

One other take away from yesterday was Payne's coverage. I thought it was overall reasonable. However, I was extremely unhappy with his usage of the "tornado emergency" wording for the tornado in Moore. That is extremely strong wording reserved for a violent tornado going through a populated area. Yes, the media went ahead and did their own tornado warnings yesterday...but stop there. They are already muddying the waters ignoring the SPC risk outlooks and using their own.

[Anonymous.]

Yea I watched the video of Payne saying "tornado emergency" and cringed. A tornado emergency is reserved for those times where there is a potentially mass life-taking and damaging event.

It sounds like KFOR and KWTV (sans tornado emergency) nailed it. Instead of bashing the NWS, give props to the usual victims of bashing.


Also it was discussed briefly in chat yesterday, but OKC sometimes forgets how spoiled we are. When tuning into the news coverage with the supercell in Tulsa, it was clear as day how rookie or amateur their technology, mets, and chasers are - relative to OKC.

[SoonerBeerMan]

Also it was discussed briefly in chat yesterday, but OKC sometimes forgets how spoiled we are. When tuning into the news coverage with the supercell in Tulsa, it was clear as day how rookie or amateur their technology, mets, and chasers are - relative to OKC.

It's amazing that 90 miles can make that big of a difference. My brother lives up in Tulsa and he echoed the same thing.

I wonder how much of the misuse of the verbiage and using their own category system for risk comes from the fact that, minus Damon Lane, most of the other head mets from the local stations rarely (if ever) make appearances at training classes put on by NWS? I only see their assistant mets there. Just a thought.

[BG918]

Also it was discussed briefly in chat yesterday, but OKC sometimes forgets how spoiled we are. When tuning into the news coverage with the supercell in Tulsa, it was clear as day how rookie or amateur their technology, mets, and chasers are - relative to OKC.

DFW is the same way. OKC mets, because of their experience, have devoted the resources to enhancing their coverage during severe weather events. Tulsa and DFW do not have the same frequency of these events (though they are just as likely to occur there as in central OK) and it shows when you watch their live footage. I don't know about Wichita or Kansas City, are they any better? OKC stations are in their own class here.

Colorado gets a lot of tornadoes but the TV media practically ignores them because they are usually weak and rarely threaten populated centers i.e. the Denver metro.

[bchris02]

DFW is the same way. OKC mets, because of their experience, have devoted the resources to enhancing their coverage during severe weather events. Tulsa and DFW do not have the same frequency of these events (though they are just as likely to occur there as in central OK) and it shows when you watch their live footage. I don't know about Wichita or Kansas City, are they any better? OKC stations are in their own class here.

Correct. OKC is in a class all by itself in terms of frequency of high-end severe events. DFW and Tulsa are still at risk, but statistically the risk in those areas is significantly lower than in OKC because it isn't as frequent. This is especially true for DFW. I am not sure about Wichita but Kansas City's reporting is similar to Tulsa, DFW, Little Rock, etc, and is not near as detailed as OKC's.

[Outhunder]

I don't know. Seems nws has turned into a "nowcast" than a forecast. The last couple of years they've seemed to be very slow with updates, whether it be winter or spring.

[Of Sound Mind]

I've vented enough on NWS Norman's bad play-calling yesterday. Except I have yet to see (and I could have missed it) any kind of explanation or mea culpa about what was going on with them.

I can respect reserving "tornado emergency" for the most dire circumstances... but I would hope that NWS would give serious consideration to how to modify their criteria or their language to allow for instances like yesterday, where it was obvious that the storm was unusual and showing signs of trying to tornado, to send out some sort of warning that people need to pay special attention to that storm from a tornado standpoint. Many take different precautions and have different responses to a severe thunderstorm warning and a tornado warning. That's all I'm saying. Think about how the average person responds to it.

Venture and Anon, I highly respect your opinion, perspective, knowledge and expertise. I'm not trying to be overly critical of NWS. In fact, I've been a supporter of the local office generally. Yesterday, and specifically the arrogance on social media, really left a bad taste in my mouth and did a disservice to the public they are paid to serve.

[Motley]

Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight.com did a study on the most unpredictable weather in the US. Kansas City edged out OKC for number one, but if you look at the specifics for severe weather, Tulsa and Wichita and Dallas are very close to OKC in the ranking, differing only by one point on the scale.

Which City Has The Most Unpredictable Weather? | FiveThirtyEight

[Celebrator]

The OKC North Mesonet (probably the closest station) recorded 0.43" yesterday. Don't know if that helps you.

Yes, thanks, I too saw the Mesonet total, but I was hoping for someone's backyard rain gauge measurement. I should probably just get one then I wouldn't waste anyone's time here!

[Bobby821]

Any new updated info about the storms for next week? Just trying to start preliminary planning for the next round of severe weather.

[venture]

Any new updated info about the storms for next week? Just trying to start preliminary planning for the next round of severe weather.

Still chance for one or two days next week...nothing in stone. Stop worrying.

[okatty]

Those pics out of Sand Springs are incredible. Had no idea it was that bad up there til I saw news tonight. Kids in that dance studio very lucky. Glad it wasn't worse.