Ah yes, the dawning of a new day (just ignore the fact that that is a sunset shot.) Looks like an apology is in order... an apology because if I were more in my own state of mind, less adrenalin clogging my normal rational thought processor (you understand, right? It was a monumental moment, death of the Dewvoid), I would have realized that a Severe Thunderstorm Warning had been issued on the cell that I saw in Lowndes County on Tuesday, and as I have searched his log of the events that afternoon, I would have been reminded that Mike actually told me that there was a Severe Thunderstorm Warning for that specific cell... BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WARNING
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TALLAHASSEE, FL
114 PM EST TUE FEB 26 2008
THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN TALLAHASSEE HAS ISSUED A SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WARNING FOR... NORTHERN LOWNDES COUNTY IN SOUTH CENTRAL GEORGIA (among other places)...
*UNTIL 145 PM EST*
AT 110 PM EST...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE DOPPLER RADAR INDICATED A SEVERE THUNDERSTORM CAPABLE OF PRODUCING PENNY SIZE HAIL...AND DAMAGING WINDS IN EXCESS OF 60 MPH. THIS STORM WAS LOCATED 11 MILES SOUTHWEST OF HAHIRA... AND MOVING EAST AT 65 MPH.* THE SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WILL BE NEAR... HAHIRA BY 120 PM EST... MOODY AFB BY 130 PM EST...LAKELAND BY 135 PM EST...
A quick check of my dialed call history let me know that when I saw the funnel (1:30), the cell was approximately over Moody AFB, and though there was strong rotation indicated by the intense rotation of the wall cloud, the funnels were definitely not persistent, dropping only for seconds at a time. OK, so there was not "no warning issued" as I incorrectly stated. It was unfair of me to have issue with Parks. He did a great job that day. I have since had some in depth correspondence regarding my (unwarranted) frustration (yes, folks, I am eating some crow here--hey, I'm relatively new to this, so I am going to make mistakes, right?) with one of my favorite forecasters at the NWS-Tallahassee office, and actually one of the folks who has contributed to my spotter training, Kelly G. He wrote:When a spotter report is received, we take that report into consideration when evaluating the need for a warning. We'll also look at the latest radar data and compare the report to that image... A funnel cloud needs to be exhibiting strong rotation... Submitting a funnel cloud report won't necessarily prompt a tornado warning, especially if the spotter indicates that the funnel cloud is not persistent (which I did). In many cases, if the funnel cloud dissipates or is intermittent, a tornado warning will not be issued. If you continue to observe the funnel cloud and see it continue to rotate and move toward the surface, a follow up call with this information would be very helpful. The warning process is very complex and we have a lot of tools at our disposal, including reports from spotters to make our decision.
I appreciate Kelly's thorough response, and I can see where it wasn't fair to say that "no warning" was issued. That was my mistake, and it was inaccurate. There was a Severe Thunderstorm Warning issued for this cell. I see also that the one area of rotation that we popped in under should have been called in as an area of persistent rotation, but I did not. I will be certain to do that next time. I think the guys in Tallahassee do a great job with forecasts and warnings, and I plan to continue my spotter reports during severe weather events and let them take care of the rest. It's not an easy job they have being responsible for lots of lives... Don't believe me? You try it...
Cold day in south Georgia, as I woke up to temps in the mid-20's that dropped as the morning progresed in the pre-dawn hours. Brr... I'll be glad when spring gets here!
Have a great day!
~Dewdrop
Thursday, February 28, 2008
The Warning Process of the NWS...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The fact you call in reports at all is commendable. The only warning they really should have issued is the fact that the Dewvoid is dead!
ReplyDeleteSCM
Thanks, Mikey. I appreciate the encouragement. LOL! This area had better watch out... with the Dewvoid out of the way, there is really no telling what might happen.
ReplyDeleteI saw a segment this morning on the Weather Channel about a EF2-3 tornado that hit down in your area that was NOT tornado warned....nor was it "detected" by radar. It was embedded within the "comma head" of a strong squall line.
ReplyDeleteSo, I wouldn't feel bad at all calling it in. Don't let this incident cause you to pause or hesitate making a report in the future if you are convinced of what you see. And even then, at elast call it in as "suspicious". This will give the NWS guys cause to make a closer inspection of the cell on radar as they apparently did in this case. :-)
There are plenty of case stuides where the tornado appeared first and then was detected on radar minutes later....or sometimes not at all such as mini-supercells, tropical cells, or as the case I mentioned above.
Hey Steve, thanks for your encouragement. Was that the Enterprise tornado? It wasn't anything this week, was it? I can't tell you how hard it is to get to a place where you have a good view of stuff over here. Abundant with trees... it could be dropping right next to you and you might not see it, so I am not surprised that stuff might get missed.
ReplyDeleteI don't feel bad about calling it in at all. I knew what I saw, and I wanted to make sure that was shared. I promise, I will call in the future... :O) Seriously, thanks, Steve!
Part of it Dew...Happens to everyone. As for the comment of the Dewvoid being dea? Sorry. It is lurking, watching , waiting....until..
ReplyDeleteThanks, Rick. It is dead. That was the rules. Weather = no Dewvoid. Perhaps, I should take a poll...
ReplyDeleteI am of the opinion that you are being too hard on yourself.
ReplyDeleteFact is, there was no TORNADO warning.
I am no meteorologist, but a tornado does NOT have to be on the ground doing damage before a warning should be issued. That's why we have doppler radar!
1. Some warnings are issued based only on rotation detected by doppler.
2. Some warnings are issued based on #1 combined with TRAINED spotter reports such as yours, of a wall cloud or funnel.
3. Some warnings are issued when spotters/law enforcement report seeing tornadoes doing damage.
Facts about this storm:
1. Radar showed strong indications of rotation.
2. A trained spotter (you) reported a persistent wall cloud and a funnel cloud.
3. This storm produced damage that, by your description, was possibly tornado-related. Trees were down in a variety of directions and there seemed to be a discernible damage path.
Based on my observation of tornado warnings normally issued by various NWS office, most tornado warnings do not reach the threshold you provided by providing your report.
I am very surprised that a tornado warning was not issued.
Wow, Mike. Thanks for defending that position. I appreciate you standing up for me. Incidentally, I agree with you!
ReplyDelete