• 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

February 14-15th severe WX

If I'm being honest, even for a HSLC setup, this seems pretty poor. I have a feeling WAA advection will take place leading to multiple confluence attempts given heavily saturated profiles that would promote storm growth/perhaps mergers but how much CAPE we really get from this setup is the question. It's not a particularly extreme HSLC setup with around just 270 0-1km SRH. Any confluence band would heavily struggle. A lot of models seem to be struggling on timing imo though. If the QLCS moves thru this parameter space in W LA by 00z-03z, it's honestly the same chance lol as any confluence band in that environment. SPC doesn't seem too interested in this, but i imagine some slight uptrend in CAPE awaits us but we are getting in a pretty tight window. By heavily saturated profiles, that also may mean too much WAA advection over the vicinity resulting in showers limiting destabilization as the SPC says here.

"Furthermore, given the neutral to positive-tilt
trough and deep-layer flow parallel to the surface boundary,
training precipitation could further limit destabilization."

Plenty of failure modes for already a rather poor setup.
 
WeathermanLeprechaun said:
If I'm being honest, even for a HSLC setup, this seems pretty poor. I have a feeling WAA advection will take place leading to multiple confluence attempts given heavily saturated profiles that would promote storm growth/perhaps mergers but how much CAPE we really get from this setup is the question. It's not a particularly extreme HSLC setup with around just 270 0-1km SRH. Any confluence band would heavily struggle. A lot of models seem to be struggling on timing imo though. If the QLCS moves thru this parameter space in W LA by 00z-03z, it's honestly the same chance lol as any confluence band in that environment. SPC doesn't seem too interested in this, but i imagine some slight uptrend in CAPE awaits us but we are getting in a pretty tight window. By heavily saturated profiles, that also may mean too much WAA advection over the vicinity resulting in showers limiting destabilization as the SPC says here.

"Furthermore, given the neutral to positive-tilt
trough and deep-layer flow parallel to the surface boundary,
training precipitation could further limit destabilization."

Plenty of failure modes for already a rather poor setup.
Click to expand...
I don’t want destruction or death but man I am ready to track some hooks..
 
WeathermanLeprechaun said:
The GFS suggests a strong warm nose aloft, iffy mid level lapse rates, and alright low level shear. This doesn't seem like a setup to be properly concerned about at least imo. Just seems pretty run of the mill if I'm being honest for the Gulf Coast. Maybe 1k SBCAPE, linear mode and maybe confluence band attempts. Nothing showing major concerns to me though.
Click to expand...
Dixie Alley: "Less is more"

hahahaha
 
KevinH said:
Right… and I hate having to wait to see what is going to happen.
Click to expand...
right now, it doesn't seem like a particularly impactful threat to me. A weak tornado threat does exist however, tornadoes are still on the cards with this setup.

I'll say one thing though: those mid level lapse rates have saved us a awful lot in the past few months. So many events that could've been better, more instability if we had better mid levels. HOPEFULLY nothing impactful will take place
 
UncleJuJu98 said:
Give this event a few tweaks which are plausible on the CAMS and I think it could surprise some people. But it's to early right now to know some things
Click to expand...
Oh, of course. I mentioned a method a while ago I've been experimenting with that has been very accurate the majority of the time on events. I don't feel a need to keep using it or mentioning it publicly or roll it out to the public because it really is just a little experimental method I've created to determine potential tornado intensity and right now, it's at 70.
 
WeathermanLeprechaun said:
Oh, of course. I mentioned a method a while ago I've been experimenting with that has been very accurate the majority of the time on events. I don't feel a need to keep using it or mentioning it publicly or roll it out to the public because it really is just a little experimental method I've created to determine potential tornado intensity and right now, it's at 70.
Click to expand...
What's the method your talking about?
 
UncleJuJu98 said:
What's the method your talking about?
Click to expand...
It was in last year's svr thread but it's mine that I'm using, it's derived from soundings and i use a few things to get the general values. I have accounted for storm mode, less than 1k SBCAPE and a few other factors. It continues to peak at 70-80ish for the majority of soundings I've took. But it's not anything to really base off, like i said, I'm just gonna keep it more reserved
 
Kds86z said:
Click to expand...

That moderate half underperformed for the supposed derecho but we still got a intense windbag in Iowa and of course, a likely violent tornado near Bonesteel, SD plus the photogenic drillbit near Dixon. Very underrated chase day in my opinion and that Bonesteel cell, i really felt it was going to drop some Coleridge 2014 the way chasers were hyping it up. The environment was very supportive for significant tornadoes, just needed a mechanism
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top