• 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 Threat 5/25-5/26, 2024

May 19th: 403 severe reports
May 20th: 248 severe reports
May 21st: 621 severe reports
May 22nd: 377 severe reports
May 23rd: 515 severe reports
May 24th: 265 severe reports
May 25th: 450 severe reports
May 26th: 1,123 severe reports

Now this is like the May stretches I remember when I was a young weather nerd (2003, '04, '07, '08).
 
CheeselandSkies said:
May 19th: 403 severe reports
May 20th: 248 severe reports
May 21st: 621 severe reports
May 22nd: 377 severe reports
May 23rd: 515 severe reports
May 24th: 265 severe reports
May 25th: 450 severe reports
May 26th: 1,123 severe reports

Now this is like the May stretches I remember when I was a young weather nerd (2003, '04, '07, '08).
Click to expand...
Right?? lol 90s kid here
 
Not to downplay any of the lives lost or property destroyed but I thought SPC was spot on with how they called those events of the 25th and 26th. The moderate outlook with more localized PDS's seemed to be the most appropriate way of communicating threat levels to the media and emergency managers with further dissemination to the public as a whole. I know this community does not have to be as measured as the SPC and there were many calls to raise the outlook to high on the 26th but what eventually transpired lined up with what a moderate outlook could and did produce. The opposite happened on the 26th, with many being pessimistic about SPC raising the outlook to moderate, but again, what ended up transpiring was right in line with what the guidance model of a moderate outlook could and did produce.

My only critique was the flip flopping from moderate the day before to enhanced the day of, only to be increased back to moderate for the 25 and the fairly large changes to the enhanced areas on the 26th. Nobody, especially the general public likes mixed messaging due to it seeming like "They can't make up their minds" "They don't know what they're doing". I am confident this is not the case and is likely a result of the wide flexibility the SPC gives to its forecasters to call things how they think is most appropriate. That said, that leads to two different mind sets, one being that an enhanced can always be upgraded to a moderate, if need be, the other being the ingredients and models have enough agreement that a moderate is appropriate outlook so there is no benefit to waiting to upgrade. Both mind sets have their own pros and cons, but my only concern is public perception as a whole.

I apologize for making you listen to my ramblings, maybe I should start a blog instead, lol.
 
Last edited:
Jellyroll said:
Not to downplay any of the lives lost or property destroyed but I thought SPC was spot on with how they called those events of the 25th and 26th. The moderate outlook with more localized PDS's seemed to be the most appropriate way of communicating threat levels to the media and emergency managers with further dissemination to the public as a whole. I know this community does not have to be as measured as the SPC and there were many calls to raise the outlook to high on the 26th but what eventually transpired lined up with what a moderate outlook could and did produce. The opposite happened on the 26th, with many being pessimistic about SPC raising the outlook to moderate, but again, what ended up transpiring was right in line with what the guidance model of a moderate outlook could and did produce.

My only critique was the flip flopping from moderate the day before to enhanced the day of, only to be increased back to moderate both days. Nobody, especially the general public likes mixed messaging due to it seeming like "They can't make up their minds" "They don't know what they're doing". I am confident this is not the case and is likely a result of the wide flexibility the SPC gives to its forecasters to call things how they think is most appropriate. That said, that leads to two different mind sets, one being that an enhanced can always be upgraded to a moderate, if need be, the other being the ingredients and models have enough agreement that a moderate is appropriate outlook so there is no benefit to waiting to upgrade. Both mind sets have their own pros and cons, but my only concern is public perception as a whole.

I apologize for making you listen to my ramblings, maybe I should start a blog instead, lol.
Click to expand...

That didn't happen...the 26th was enhanced on both Day 2 outlooks, and all the way up until the 20Z Day 1 upgrade to moderate.

The 25th was one of the toughest and most bizarre forecasts I've ever seen. In one outlook cycle, the big uncertainty precluding a high risk went from a cap Forecasted Convective Amplification Deficiency/lack of storm coverage; to excessive storm interactions/outflow. Then when it became apparent the moisture was outperforming the models, it looked like it might go huge (in daylight) after all, only for that left split to come flying through and take out not one, but TWO supercells (the one near Mutual, OK, and the one in south-central Kansas) just as they were on the cusp of producing what would otherwise have almost certainly been long-lived, intense tornadoes.
 
CheeselandSkies said:
May 19th: 403 severe reports
May 20th: 248 severe reports
May 21st: 621 severe reports
May 22nd: 377 severe reports
May 23rd: 515 severe reports
May 24th: 265 severe reports
May 25th: 450 severe reports
May 26th: 1,123 severe reports

Now this is like the May stretches I remember when I was a young weather nerd (2003, '04, '07, '08).
Click to expand...
A few more correctly timed shortwaves and we could’ve had something like May 2003. The plains had so many good synoptic set ups this year.
 
CheeselandSkies said:
That didn't happen...the 26th was enhanced on both Day 2 outlooks, and all the way up until the 20Z Day 1 upgrade to moderate.

The 25th was one of the toughest and most bizarre forecasts I've ever seen. In one outlook cycle, the big uncertainty precluding a high risk went from a cap Forecasted Convective Amplification Deficiency/lack of storm coverage; to excessive storm interactions/outflow. Then when it became apparent the moisture was outperforming the models, it looked like it might go huge (in daylight) after all, only for that left split to come flying through and take out not one, but TWO supercells (the one near Mutual, OK, and the one in south-central Kansas) just as they were on the cusp of producing what would otherwise have almost certainly been long-lived, intense tornadoes.
Click to expand...
Thank you for pointing that out. I have edited my post and I fully agree with your thoughts on the 25th.
 
CheeselandSkies said:
May 19th: 403 severe reports
May 20th: 248 severe reports
May 21st: 621 severe reports
May 22nd: 377 severe reports
May 23rd: 515 severe reports
May 24th: 265 severe reports
May 25th: 450 severe reports
May 26th: 1,123 severe reports

Now this is like the May stretches I remember when I was a young weather nerd (2003, '04, '07, '08).
Click to expand...
It’ll be interesting to see in coming years if we are entering a new “traditional” more Plains focused period of time, or if this is just a fluke and winter/early spring Dixie events will take the spotlight again. Way too early to tell, of course, just interesting to ponder.
 
Embedded supercell NE of Columbus, GA. Was TOR-warned for a bit earlier.
1716828734568.png
 
Jellyroll said:
Not to downplay any of the lives lost or property destroyed but I thought SPC was spot on with how they called those events of the 25th and 26th. The moderate outlook with more localized PDS's seemed to be the most appropriate way of communicating threat levels to the media and emergency managers with further dissemination to the public as a whole. I know this community does not have to be as measured as the SPC and there were many calls to raise the outlook to high on the 26th but what eventually transpired lined up with what a moderate outlook could and did produce. The opposite happened on the 26th, with many being pessimistic about SPC raising the outlook to moderate, but again, what ended up transpiring was right in line with what the guidance model of a moderate outlook could and did produce.

My only critique was the flip flopping from moderate the day before to enhanced the day of, only to be increased back to moderate for the 25 and the fairly large changes to the enhanced areas on the 26th. Nobody, especially the general public likes mixed messaging due to it seeming like "They can't make up their minds" "They don't know what they're doing". I am confident this is not the case and is likely a result of the wide flexibility the SPC gives to its forecasters to call things how they think is most appropriate. That said, that leads to two different mind sets, one being that an enhanced can always be upgraded to a moderate, if need be, the other being the ingredients and models have enough agreement that a moderate is appropriate outlook so there is no benefit to waiting to upgrade. Both mind sets have their own pros and cons, but my only concern is public perception as a whole.

I apologize for making you listen to my ramblings, maybe I should start a blog instead, lol.
Click to expand...
The 25th was pretty rough and the SPC got some things wrong in the forecast, but for how chaotic the situation was and how difficult it was to forecast, they did their damn best.
The 26th was absolutely spot on aside from some areas being downgraded too much before the 2000z update; some areas went from MRGL to MDT. Still, they did absolutely phenomenal yesterday.
 
I noticed this yesterday but did not post about it due to how active things got once the storms started to pop and I did not want to get too geeky but I thought it was neat to see the lifting mechanism that interacted with the warm front that initiated the storms.
 

Attachments

  • vis_20240526_1400.gif
    vis_20240526_1400.gif
    48.9 KB · Views: 0
  • vis_20240526_1500.gif
    vis_20240526_1500.gif
    375.4 KB · Views: 0
  • vis_20240526_1900.gif
    vis_20240526_1900.gif
    427.7 KB · Views: 0
  • vis_20240526_2100.gif
    vis_20240526_2100.gif
    424.3 KB · Views: 0
CheeselandSkies said:
That didn't happen...the 26th was enhanced on both Day 2 outlooks, and all the way up until the 20Z Day 1 upgrade to moderate.

The 25th was one of the toughest and most bizarre forecasts I've ever seen. In one outlook cycle, the big uncertainty precluding a high risk went from a cap Forecasted Convective Amplification Deficiency/lack of storm coverage; to excessive storm interactions/outflow. Then when it became apparent the moisture was outperforming the models, it looked like it might go huge (in daylight) after all, only for that left split to come flying through and take out not one, but TWO supercells (the one near Mutual, OK, and the one in south-central Kansas) just as they were on the cusp of producing what would otherwise have almost certainly been long-lived, intense tornadoes.
Click to expand...
As bad as it has been, it could have been so much worse at the same time. May 25th very well could have been even more violent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top