Impact Based Tornado Warnings being tested by five WFOs

[RL3AO]

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/news/display_cm ... 2&source=0

The experiment begins today and runs though Nov. 30 for five WFOs in Kansas and Missouri.

The warning will have four areas towards the end.

The hazard - Wind/hail/tornado, ect

The source - Radar indicated/spotter/law enforcement spotted

The impact - Including life threatening situation, uprooted trees, damaged roofs ect

The tag line at the end of the warning - Extensive damage or Catastrophic damage.

[brunota2003]

Sounds interesting!

[Cyclenall]

I thought this was already in progress because the new tiered format was seen some time ago. I don't like it (formatting).

[vbhoutex]

I'm not sure what I think about it. I am reserving judgement for now. Honestly, I think most of the public will still not pay any attention to the changes UNLESS the media uses it when they are showing warnings. Even then I am not sure since we know we will have some that will be "false" warnings and lead to the cry wolf syndrome we are so familiar with when it comes to the general public.

[wxman57]

I don't see where adding 2 lines to the bottom of a tornado warning (as in the example) will make any difference. The text of the message already identifies that the tornado was observed and that this is a life-threatening situation. Putting those 2 identifies at the TOP of the warning would make more sense.

[WeatherGuesser]

I don't understand the trend towards sensationalism.

[Florida1118]

I dont understand it at all. I feel it wont have the impact they are looking for. Considering most people dont know the difference between a watch and warning, adding "harsh" words into the warning alot of people dont seem to understand anyway doesnt make sense to me. Some people rely on sirens or the media, both of which wont say much more than they do now. I guess it good they are at least trying something.