STORM2K

Too bad they basically had to wait for the Spring semester to end. But next season will probably be busier than this season.


I understand chasing in the Plains, as far as few trees and mountains to obstruct the view, but are they certain the mini-tornado alley in Kentuckiana works the same way as the Plains? I wonder how applicable their work would be outside of the Plains.

They got burned big time by the fact the second half of May was quite tranquil (at least compared to many other years such as last year).

There will be plenty next year....2010. So don't fret....I'm sure there is still plenty of data to riffle though for now.

Yes, I agree with the three comments - incidentially, yesterday was pretty frustrating for them, with the TWC camerman spending what seemed forever with a closeup of - a stratus cloud...

My own sister lives only 40 miles west of yesterday's TWC/V2 field site, and I know for a fact that that area just does not see very many tornadoes - hail, yes, but tornadoes, per the rest of Colorado, are a somewhat rare event...

Ironic, too was the fact that the one tornado encounter was in another unlikely spot - Wyoming, so, proof again that Hollywood and real life are always two different things (no flying cows this time)...

Frank

I think V2 was very much worth it. They got to collect data sets from one entire life of a tornado...as well as a lot of other supercells. Now they will be able to differentiate what conditions turned those supercells into a tornado.

I would agree that it was worth the effort - even though they only got to analyze one tornado, there were plenty of other rotating supercells that they probed, including yesterday evening's one in Colorado. Even an intense mesocyclone producing a wall cloud but not a tornado can provide a decent amount of data on the wind schematics involved in tornado formation. Although, if they do deploy Vortex 3 next year, hopefully there will be a little more activity so more data can be collected.

To echo the above, it's just as important to get data on storms that DON'T produce tornadoes but should as it is to get data on the ones that do. Also Vortex is funded by a grant from the NSF not NWS.

Steve

If I recall correctly, during Vortex1, wasn't the 1994 season a complete bust as well as much of the 1995 season, until the "wedge-fest" in Texas?

1. the project for 2010 is not called Vortex3. Its phase 2 of Vortex2 (just like Vortex was a two year study).

2. I think it was definitely worth it. The coverage provided by media outlets (including and namley TWC) was invaluable. It provided a lot of information to those that are storm chasers and scientists. It may well result in donations and better coverage for next year's phase 2.

3. Null cases are just as important as tornado cases. They have to know why they DON'T form as well. I would love to have a larger dataset but it is what it is. We can't diminish its worth in hindsight. They still have one more day which includes a moderate risk in a high CAPE, high shear environment fairly close to home so they may get another one yet.

Area centered on Wichita Falls is in a 5% tornado risk (and hatched hail and wind), maybe they get lucky their last day. They'd be near I-44 for the trip back to Norman, at any rate.


Awesome instability, but less than exciting low level winds, probably explain the difference between tornado and hail probs.




I'm waiting for regional 3 hour NAM to become available on the PSU web page.

AccuWeather EHI is highest at 4pm and 7 pm over the Panhandles. Best CAPE centered across the Red River in Texas and Oklahoma.

Amarillo would also be near an interstate heading to Norman.

Aslkahuna wrote:To echo the above, it's just as important to get data on storms that DON'T produce tornadoes but should as it is to get data on the ones that do.

Sometimes the best science is done when ANY answer is interesting. Hopefully this point won't go overlooked in the media.

The media as a general rule doesn't handle science well-heck they can't even get the facts straight half the time. Yes, 1994 was a total bust for Vortex 1 as was most of 1995. I remember that on June 1st 1994 we were on the same line of storms as they were but further south-neither we nor Vortex had anything really tornadic but we did get a decent storm with high winds and hail.

Steve

Ironically (or not so) TWC mentioned yesterday that the same V2 area is now very busy, with 6-8 tornadoes reported (by spotters or radar) in Kansas from Sunday afternoon through yesterday...

This morning TWC showed a video of yesterday's very large wedge-tornado in Nebraska - in the very same area that V2 travelled just two weeks ago...

In fact, since the field program ended, there have been at least 10 tornadoes in the entire V2 area - the same areas they drove over the 5 weeks without seeing one ('cept the modest one they encountered in southeast Wyoming)...

I found it very interesting that others here mentioned that they had the same set of circumstances during the initial Vortex field program of the mid-1990's...

Poor Dr. Howie Bluestein must be wondering what's going on - still, back when we knew him, he was very successful in the field during his smaller field programs of the 1980's and earlier, though as others here mentioned, they did also want data from "negative" days as well as from active ones, though I'm sure they were hoping for more activity than they encountered...

Still, the timing is interesting to note - the entire 5 weeks fell between two fairly active periods (now, if it were 5 days that'd be another matter, but 5 weeks is a long time)...

Frank2

Frank2 wrote:This morning TWC showed a video of yesterday's very large wedge-tornado in Nebraska - in the very same area that V2 travelled just two weeks ago...

In fact, since the field program ended, there have been at least 10 tornadoes in the entire V2 area - the same areas they drove over the 5 weeks without seeing one ('cept the modest one they encountered in southeast Wyoming)...

I found it very interesting that others here mentioned that they had the same set of circumstances during the initial Vortex field program of the mid-1990's...

Poor Dr. Howie Bluestein must be wondering what's going on - still, back when we knew him, he was very successful in the field during his smaller field programs of the 1980's and earlier, though as others here mentioned, they did also want data from "negative" days as well as from active ones, though I'm sure they were hoping for more activity than they encountered...

Still, the timing is interesting to note - the entire 5 weeks fell between two fairly active periods (now, if it were 5 days that'd be another matter, but 5 weeks is a long time)...

Frank2

If the mere presence of a Vortex field research program is able to prevent tornado formation, then I'd say it's worth the expense to keep them around all year-long!

That's funny - they might have discovered the ultimate weather control!!!

Those poor graduate students - I'll bet some were grumbling that they wasted 5 weeks of vacation time camped out in the parking lot of the La Quinta (though at least they did get credit for it)...

How does this compare with the amount of time that that the TVN and TIV teams stay out? Reed seems to grab a bunch of footage each year, but then again he lives in T-Alley

Reed also did not have to coordinate with 40+ additional vehicles like the V2 armada.

wall_cloud wrote:Reed also did not have to coordinate with 40+ additional vehicles like the V2 armada.

Very true... I could have swore that the TIV and ROTATE teams only had about 4 or 5 cars with them on their chases.... TIV + Doghouse DOW + Scout

I guess that changed immensly when V2 started