Houston Metro Severe Weather Threat May 6, 2025.

[AJS]

81.0°F/75.0°F in your area. I know that feels really miserable.

It feels like a summer day here right now. It’s awful.

 

[AJS]

That storm in Brookshire is really getting its act together.

 

[AJS]

 

[AJS]

I’m not positive, but is that a V Notch forming?

 

[UncleJuJu98]

I'm thinking the messy storm mode and poor LL lapse rates did this event in. Not seeing anything impressive at the moment

 

[AJS]

Yeah, I think the Metro really dodged a bullet with this one.

 

[AJS]

But, the overnight should always be monitored because well… we know what happens overnight.

 

[AJS]

 

[AJS]

 

[Kds86z]

I'm thinking the messy storm mode and poor LL lapse rates did this event in. Not seeing anything impressive at the moment

And so it continue..

 

[Tanner]

Yeah, once I saw meso analysis on the SPC website and keyed in on low level lapse rates, I knew that our big issue was going to be that. Just rare that you see days like this perform (dixie-ing) to their expectations because open warm sector development usually isn’t sustainable. You typically want to see 6.5C/km in order to see sustained updrafts and associated supercells. Today just didn’t have that anywhere.

 

[AJS]

Another chasing day that sadly didn’t go how I planned. I’m sure i’ll have a worthy chase day soon.

 

[Tanner]

Yeah, once I saw meso analysis on the SPC website and keyed in on low level lapse rates, I knew that our big issue was going to be that. Just rare that you see days like this perform (dixie-ing) to their expectations because open warm sector development usually isn’t sustainable. You typically want to see 6.5C/km in order to see sustained updrafts and associated supercells. Today just didn’t have that anywhere. View attachment 41032

The lapse rates for 3/14-15 for instance were anywhere from 6.5-8C/km, and we saw what those back to back days entailed. I would say December 10 2021 also had relatively high out of season lapse rates, which helped aid in the long-track updrafts and cells that night. Typically in May, surface temps are warmer at the surface for longer durations (sun out longer) which strengthens adiabatic lapse rates (temperature change rate as you go up in the sky).

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

Yeah, once I saw meso analysis on the SPC website and keyed in on low level lapse rates, I knew that our big issue was going to be that. Just rare that you see days like this perform (dixie-ing) to their expectations because open warm sector development usually isn’t sustainable. You typically want to see 6.5C/km in order to see sustained updrafts and associated supercells. Today just didn’t have that anywhere. View attachment 41032

Thank you for this explanation!

 

[Kds86z]

The lapse rates for 3/14-15 for instance were anywhere from 6.5-8C/km, and we saw what those back to back days entailed. I would say December 10 2021 also had relatively high out of season lapse rates, which helped aid in the long-track updrafts and cells that night. Typically in May, surface temps are warmer at the surface for longer durations (sun out longer) which strengthens adiabatic lapse rates (temperature change rate as you go up in the sky).

So why the strong tornado language from SPC?

 

[joshoctober16]

Thank you for this explanation!

again a situation were we would need a cap version of the VTP along with RH to show a Forecasted Convective Amplification Deficiency situation like this, it was easy to see the too much wetness situation of today.

edit (for some strange reason parts of my text keeps changing however i think its still good enough to get the point of what im trying to say)

 

[JPWX]

So why the strong tornado language from SPC?

Two reasons. 1. You had a stationary warm front and 2. Plenty of moisture off Gulf. It's reasonable to believe that SPC thought one of these storms could ride along the frontal boundary. However, the main factor that killed today's tornado threat were cloud cover and ongoing precipitation. In fact, SPC made hints of this in MCD 723: "Limited surface base instability amid mid 60s dewpoints and
preceding rainfall should keep the tornado threat somewhat limited,
but enough surface based or near surface based instability is
present for some tornado threat near the apex of this bow,
particularly where any cell interactions occur."

 

[Kds86z]

Two reasons. 1. You had a stationary warm front and 2. Plenty of moisture off Gulf. It's reasonable to believe that SPC thought one of these storms could ride along the frontal boundary. However, the main factor that killed today's cloud cover and ongoing precipitation. In fact, SPC made hints of this in MCD 723: "Limited surface base instability amid mid 60s dewpoints and
preceding rainfall should keep the tornado threat somewhat limited,
but enough surface based or near surface based instability is
present for some tornado threat near the apex of this bow,
particularly where any cell interactions occur."

I mean i feel like we have been striking out over and over last couple weeks. Think we need a better pattern..

 

[Kds86z]

Two reasons. 1. You had a stationary warm front and 2. Plenty of moisture off Gulf. It's reasonable to believe that SPC thought one of these storms could ride along the frontal boundary. However, the main factor that killed today's tornado threat were cloud cover and ongoing precipitation. In fact, SPC made hints of this in MCD 723: "Limited surface base instability amid mid 60s dewpoints and
preceding rainfall should keep the tornado threat somewhat limited,
but enough surface based or near surface based instability is
present for some tornado threat near the apex of this bow,
particularly where any cell interactions occur."

Honestly deep down I had this feeling things weren’t going down..

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

Two reasons. 1. You had a stationary warm front and 2. Plenty of moisture off Gulf. It's reasonable to believe that SPC thought one of these storms could ride along the frontal boundary. However, the main factor that killed today's tornado threat were cloud cover and ongoing precipitation. In fact, SPC made hints of this in MCD 723: "Limited surface base instability amid mid 60s dewpoints and
preceding rainfall should keep the tornado threat somewhat limited,
but enough surface based or near surface based instability is
present for some tornado threat near the apex of this bow,
particularly where any cell interactions occur."

Wow the tornado of the day formed in this exact spot and produced this damage.



When you get into the details, the forecast verified almost exactly. I'm sure the proximity of the risk to Houston and Austin was a factor in upgrading to a hatched risk. Based on the other damage photos, and the weak metal roofing present on this building, i'd guess this'll be rated EF1. However, It probably would've been much worse if it ended up dropping a little earlier (where tornadic conditions were strongest). Instead it finally got its act together and dropped right as it was exiting that prime meso real estate.