ERA5 Reanalysis nailed the Worcester Tornado Environment. Having that much stretching in an instability profile, combined with strong shear (ERA5 has a tendency to under-do kinematics sometimes), is going to result in a major disaster. Add all of that streamwise vorticity, and man, this is going to be a classic semi-northwest flow tornado event. It's evident that ERA5 underdid the kinematics somewhat, as it shows a textbook high-precipitation supercell setup, as seen from the SR Wind with height graph. However, by all photographic evidence, the Worcester Tornado appeared to be quite visible (correct me if I'm wrong.) This is evidence that the shear was strong enough to vent the updraft free of precipitation, which tells me that the actual hodograph would have been larger, and the wind shear values higher.
View attachment 8200
On the note of ERA5 biases, here's a paper that details an analysis of the ERA5's biases (which should be kept in mind when using the data from it):
Comparison of Convective Parameters Derived from ERA5 and MERRA-2 with Rawinsonde Data over Europe and North America
Abstract In this study we compared 3.7 million rawinsonde observations from 232 stations over Europe and North America with proximal vertical profiles from ERA5 and MERRA-2 to examine how well reanalysis depicts observed convective parameters. Larger differences between soundings and reanalysis...
journals.ametsoc.org