• 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 Weather 4/17/26

Muwx said:
What do you think about ks/ok/mo?
Click to expand...
I think it's going to be messy near the front, which will undercut a lot of things. The dryline CI is uncertain, and I'm also a bit concerned about early initiation prior to the best wind profiles. Overall, not the best setup. The trough being focused north is the primary reason for the higher threat up there.
 
My gut's saying looking at the CAMs the storms on Friday is gonna line up too fast to have a significant tornado threat, and it'll just be a big swath of damaging winds in a squall line. The latest NAM shows a line that goes from Wisconsin to Oklahoma a few scans after storms fire around 4-7pm CST. RRFS A is a bit more discrete with larger helicity tracks, but there is not much discreteness still. HRRR 18z does pop a big supercell around Cedar Rapids, IA around noon though.
 
andyhb said:
I think it's going to be messy near the front, which will undercut a lot of things. The dryline CI is uncertain, and I'm also a bit concerned about early initiation prior to the best wind profiles. Overall, not the best setup. The trough being focused north is the primary reason for the higher threat up there.
Click to expand...
It’s still early but the inability of the plains to produce a good set up is pretty crazy
 
N0mz said:
Then you haven't been looking hard enough lol
Click to expand...
The only other event that is similar to the way this is modeled right now that actually had supercellular convection moving through it is 6/20/25, and that was two supercells (also admittedly higher ceiling than this environment, but still). There’s been a couple environments like this after 5/20/19, but with no convection accompanying it, or messy crapvection, for the most part. This is a scary look and I definitely want to see downtrends going forward.
 
Last edited:
slenker said:
The only other event that is similar to the way this is modeled right now that actually had supercellular convection moving through it is 6/20/25, and that was two supercells (also admittedly higher ceiling than this environment, but still). There’s been a couple environments like this after 5/20/19, but with no convection accompanying it (or messy crapvection), for the most part. This is a scary look and I definitely want to see downtrends going forward.
Click to expand...
5/16/25, 5/18/25, 3/14/25, 4/2/25, probably a couple more. These values aren't that extreme.
 
N0mz said:
5/16/25, 5/18/25, 3/14/25, 4/2/25, probably a couple more. These values aren't that extreme.
Click to expand...
3/14/25 had very unremarkable cape so you are probably referring to 3/15, which did have extreme parameters (which itself could make a problematic comparison in environment). However, I will say 5/16/25 and 4/2/25 did not have that intense of a parameter space, with the latter notoriously believed to be an erroneous high risk at the time of the forecast being issued. Also, I think it's kind of true for 5/18 but that event had some weird technicalities to it and thus I would not compare it to Friday at all, as it would be an apples to oranges comparison.
 
Last edited:
N0mz said:
5/16/25, 5/18/25, 3/14/25, 4/2/25, probably a couple more. These values aren't that extreme.
Click to expand...
400+ SRH combined with 4000+ J/kg of CAPE isn’t an extreme environment? In April? Dude, what? The soundings from every day you just mentioned are extreme, don’t get me wrong, but they didn’t check both boxes like this one does. Like I said, there have been environments with these parameters in place, but they didn’t have supercellular convection moving through them, or they had bad storm modes. This is an intense environment.

There’s still plenty of time for this to downtrend, and we want that for sure. Don’t downplay this modeled environment until we see good reason to do so.
 
eep said:
3/14/25 had very unremarkable cape so you are probably referring to 3/15, which did have extreme parameters. However, I will say 5/16/25 and 4/2/25 did not have that intense of a parameter space, with the latter notoriously believed to be an erroneous high risk at the time of the forecast being issued. Also, I think it's kind of true for 5/18 but that event had some weird technicalities to it and thus I would not compare it to Friday at all.
Click to expand...
3/14's kinematics more than made up for it, resulting in 8+ STP, which this event probably doesn't sniff. Just checking mesonalysis archive, both 5/16 and 4/2 had 3000+ cape in the risk area, with better wind profiles than on Friday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top