- Thread starter
- #821
-
Welcome to TalkWeather! We see you lurking around TalkWeather! Take the extra step and join us today to view attachments, see less ads and maybe even join the discussion. CLICK TO JOIN TALKWEATHER
Severe WX Severe Weather Threat June 6-14
- Thread starter Kds86z
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #822
Kds86z
Member
- Thread starter
- #823
Kds86z
Member
- Thread starter
- #824
Kds86z
Member
SUPERCELLS THAT HAVE DEVELOPED ALONG AN OUTFLOW BOUNDARY
EARLY THIS EVENING SHOULD POSE SOME THREAT FOR LARGE TO VERY LARGE
HAIL UP TO 2.5 INCHES IN DIAMETER, ALONG WITH OCCASIONAL
SEVERE/DAMAGING WINDS. A NARROW SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL WINDOW WILL
ALSO EXIST FOR A FEW TORNADOES WITH ANY SUPERCELLS THAT CAN REMAIN
ANCHORED ALONG/NEAR THE OUTFLOW BOUNDARY THIS EVENING AS LOW-LEVEL
SHEAR STRENGTHENS. A STRONG TORNADO IS POSSIBLE.
- Thread starter
- #825
Kds86z
Member
Does anyone have any survey info from the Unionville/Kirksville, MO area tornadoes? They looked significant but it’s like NWS Kansas City has released zero information on them. I’m confused as to why because it’s been days and still, nothing.
- Thread starter
- #827
Kds86z
Member
Northern OK wants back:
- Thread starter
- #828
Kds86z
Member
Did you see the tweet @buckeye05 of that destroyed house? That’s all I’ve seen and I am impatient too.
Yeah I saw. Looks like an obliterated mobile home so easily EF2 unless it was not anchored. I’m just wondering why there is zero survey info at all.
- Thread starter
- #831
Kds86z
Member
i tagged the NWS in the tweet.
Also just to clarify, I’m not saying that there’s no way that the Kouts tornado is going to be rated EF4. It’s still possible, and I personally probably would given the thrown transmission tower. I’d really love to see the precedent set by Bowdle 2010 combined with the proposed 170 MPH DOD seal the deal here. But speaking from the typical approach of the NWS, there’s ample reason for NWS Chicago to call it EF3. Also, I’m not even sure if the surveyors are even aware that transmission towers are technically eligible for EF4 when they’re thrown from their footings like that. It’s going to come down to how forward thinking the survey team is.
I wonder if it would be worthwhile to email the Chicago WFO about the Bowdle tornado.
Eh maybe. I hear you but I don’t really want to be “that guy”. I’d like to think they’re already aware given how thorough the Kankakee survey was, and given how long afterwards they kept updating DIs.
What we lacked for tornadoes this year we are making up in big time wind bag events
jiharris0220
Member
Here’s the sounding for the Streator Tornado.
First off, LLLR over 6c/km, sufficient for tornadoes. (Even if they were lower, which they were for the later tornadoes that touched down, when you have forcing as strong as it was, it negates the meager laspe rates)
High shear, High CAPE environment.
As expected, upper level winds were a bit neutered, but still enough for proper ventilation.
Surface winds are particularly veered in this location, obviously due to the thermo boundary laid out by the earlier MCS.
Very nicely mixed in the PBL, 5 degree dew point spread at the surface and 100% saturation at 850mb, which would place the LFC at the same level. This explains why the cloud bases were quite high despite the deceivingly moist air.
What I didn’t expect to see is the fact that there was an inversion layer present, just above the PBL, quite a stout one too.
I explained away the surprisingly discrete nature of the OWS convection despite the “lack” of an inversion and the presence of very strong forcing as a result of the skinny CAPE profiles and surface mixing. Knowing in hindsight, this still shouldn’t have prevented a messy storm mode, but now we truly know why; very sneaky.
Vertical profile is very saturated, PWAT is 2.12, which would lead one to expect a HP supercell environment.
However, this day served as a lesson that updraft size is by far the most important factor when trying to forecast HP vs LP supercells. (The smaller the updraft, the easier it is for deep layer sheer to tilt the rain producing portion of it away from its associated mesocyclone)
First off, LLLR over 6c/km, sufficient for tornadoes. (Even if they were lower, which they were for the later tornadoes that touched down, when you have forcing as strong as it was, it negates the meager laspe rates)
High shear, High CAPE environment.
As expected, upper level winds were a bit neutered, but still enough for proper ventilation.
Surface winds are particularly veered in this location, obviously due to the thermo boundary laid out by the earlier MCS.
Very nicely mixed in the PBL, 5 degree dew point spread at the surface and 100% saturation at 850mb, which would place the LFC at the same level. This explains why the cloud bases were quite high despite the deceivingly moist air.
What I didn’t expect to see is the fact that there was an inversion layer present, just above the PBL, quite a stout one too.
I explained away the surprisingly discrete nature of the OWS convection despite the “lack” of an inversion and the presence of very strong forcing as a result of the skinny CAPE profiles and surface mixing. Knowing in hindsight, this still shouldn’t have prevented a messy storm mode, but now we truly know why; very sneaky.
Vertical profile is very saturated, PWAT is 2.12, which would lead one to expect a HP supercell environment.
However, this day served as a lesson that updraft size is by far the most important factor when trying to forecast HP vs LP supercells. (The smaller the updraft, the easier it is for deep layer sheer to tilt the rain producing portion of it away from its associated mesocyclone)
Last edited:
Not sure how many of these events could be classified as derechos but I feel like we've had multiple contenders. One in the dakotas, one (and maybe now 2?) in Kansas, and the one that might be confirmed as a derecho following the midwest tornado outbreak a day or two ago.
- Thread starter
- #840