The SPC...

[Brett Adair]

I hope they GET A GRIP! Two busts in my region within a week. They are -removed- across Central AL it seems. When you see a warm frontal position south of the region with weak moisture/WAA/Theta-E advection you can pretty much rule out sig tornadoes. They have issued 8 PDS Tornado watches over the course of the last week and one has verified in southern GA. This event was supposed to be worse than Tuesday....hah...only two tornadoes in two days. There are three reports from the Montgomery area, but it was one tornado that I watched from WTOK in MGM. Had it live on towercam. Anyway, the forecasters need to get there definition of Moderate and Particularily Dangerous Situation correct.

[CajunMama]

I would guess many people would rather the watches and have the forecast bust instead of having potentially dangerous tornados that can bring death and destruction. A watch is just a watch...conditions are favorable. Doesn't mean that a tornado will form.

I have to say in defense of the forecasters that they are forecasting with what the models are showing them. These forecasters are doing the best they can. Variables in weather are changing constantly and even the best forecaster will not be able to forecast 100% all the time.

[WXBUFFJIM]

With it being a holiday weekend and the fact that there was more hail than there were tornadoes, definitely it was better safe than sorry. Tornadoes are bad enough. But baseball to softball sized hail like we saw this weekend can also prove fatal if it hits you in the head. Luckily I did not hear of anyone being hurt this holiday, which makes me feel good.

Jim

[wlfpack81]

Uh oh another one of these thread. Damned if you don't forecast an event and damned if you forecast it and it doesn't verify. Better to be safe than sorry IMO. The forecasters at the SPC are very experienced and work hard at what they do. As we all know forecasting is sill a science in progress and at least for the forseable future we will never get it 100% right and there will be busts from time to time. However, all things considering forecasters at NWS offices do a pretty damn good job when it comes to weather and trying to protect the public.

[Brett Adair]

I agree with all of the things that you have said in the above posts, this is mainly not coming from my perspective. What I am saying is, we have to figure something out because all of these busts are going to start to kill credibility and then when we do have a sig severe event the public is going to go deaf so to speak. Getting most of that info from the locals...

[Rainband]

i agree, better safe than sorry

[Stormsfury]

The tornado threat was definitely a bit overplayed, BUT in fairness, mesoanalysis did indicate the threat was there, and SPC must outline these possibilities.

The upper/SFC low tandem never really congealed until late and with that, all the factors just didn't quite come together ... almost. Very large hail reports coming out of NC this morning including 4" diameter hail near Raleigh, NC.

SF

[jeff]

Tornado science is not exact. It is still not well understood what causes tornadoes to form. We have discovered many of the factors that can caused tornadoes, but cannot still answer the question of why one supercell will produce and one 15 miles away will not.

Many of the factors for large and damaging tornadoes were in place this past weekend as they were earlier last week. Any time you have multiple factors in place to produce tornadoes both a mod risk and potentially a PDS watch is needed.

It would have only taken one or two F3 or F4 tornadoes hitting any little town to have made this a very bad outbreak in the eyes of the public. Then we would have somebody complaining they were not warned

[CYCLONE MIKE]

What about the fact that in a good bit of south Louisiana there were quite a few reports of no rain. It did not rain at my house at all Sat. But all the weather guys kept saying heavy and severe storms throughout the day. Just wondering?

[jeff]

What about the fact that in a good bit of south Louisiana there were quite a few reports of no rain. It did not rain at my house at all Sat. But all the weather guys kept saying heavy and severe storms throughout the day. Just wondering?

CYCLONE MIKE wrote:
Jeff, what are your thoughts about when and how severe the weather could get tomorrow for the SE part of LA. The Baton Rouge/ New Orleans areas specifically? Thanks.


I think the mod risk is a good bet for SE LA (New Orleans). This area should be closer to the better dynamics and track of the surface low. Areas across SC LA will have a large cap to overcome, although it probably will be broken by late afternoon or early evening. Overall coverage should increase from the coast inland as better dynamics and moisture will be found in those locations.





The capping inversion was too strong to overcome. However, had the cap been broken severe weather would have been likely. Many times it is questionable is the inversion will break, however SPC must assume that given the reight setup the cap might break and release the built up energy. Hence, the mod risk was needed for any storms that were able to develop, however in the end the cap was not able to be broken. Area around SE LA near New Orleans did see severe weather and this is the northern edge of where the capping inversion weakened enough to allow development.

[george_r_1961]

Until we can saturate every cubic inch of the atmosphere with instruments 24/7 forecasts will bust. I would rather see them err on the side of caution than forecast no severe weather and have an unexpected outbreak. The public is reminded that forecasting is not an exact science nor will it ever be. Remember all the many times they were right rather than the few times they were wrong.

[Guest]

I have seen situations (Jul 1 1997) where my area had a HIGH risk of severe weather (the whole shabang). I heard the then called Severe Weather Outlook (on the local level) talk about a large outbreak. I was like "oh, oh, have not been in this sort of situation for a long time" (in fact, I believe it had been several years since a HIGH risk was hoisted for my area).

Well, on the NWR I heard the ZFP mention ONLY a 30 % chance of thunderstorms (some being severe). I was surprised with the weak POP. Gosh, all this HIGH risk hype and ONLY a 30 POP? I figured out later in the day on a live NWR briefing that the capping inversion may hold.

They "taught" me and the public who was listening a very important rule: a HIGH risk means any storms that FORM will likely be severe. The storms have to form in the first place! Well, the cap held, and Minnesota wound up with the outbreak.

[ALhurricane]

I must admit I am a bit annoyed with all of these type of posts on all the weather message boards.

I do not fault the SPC one bit for their forecasts this past weekend. I would of made the same forecast even in hindsight. Am I saying this because I am a NWS employee? No. I am saying this as a meteorologist. The threat was certainly there and they did the right thing.

If one or two "busts" is going to damage credibility, then we have a LONG way to go in getting the general public educated. I do not think this is the case. I know for a fact, that in our NE MS counties, the emergency managers were THANKFUL we gave them a heads up, especially since it was a holiday weekend. Did the event happen? No it did not, but in this case, being extra cautious was the right course of action.

I may get yelled out, but there are really too many armchair quaterbacks out there. Now if somebody can give me a meteorological reason why the SPC was wrong, then I will listen.

[Rainband]

Excellent post Al. I agree

[JuliannaMKH]

I agree with erring on the side of caution. I'd rather see them issue the watch & it bust than have people unaware that there is any danger and get blown away during the family Easter egg hunt.

[jeff]

I must admit I am a bit annoyed with all of these type of posts on all the weather message boards.

I do not fault the SPC one bit for their forecasts this past weekend. I would of made the same forecast even in hindsight. Am I saying this because I am a NWS employee? No. I am saying this as a meteorologist. The threat was certainly there and they did the right thing.

If one or two "busts" is going to damage credibility, then we have a LONG way to go in getting the general public educated. I do not think this is the case. I know for a fact, that in our NE MS counties, the emergency managers were THANKFUL we gave them a heads up, especially since it was a holiday weekend. Did the event happen? No it did not, but in this case, being extra cautious was the right course of action.

I may get yelled out, but there are really too many armchair quaterbacks out there. Now if somebody can give me a meteorological reason why the SPC was wrong, then I will listen.

Very well said, maybe some on here will listen now.

[vbhoutex]

I must admit I am a bit annoyed with all of these type of posts on all the weather message boards.

I do not fault the SPC one bit for their forecasts this past weekend. I would of made the same forecast even in hindsight. Am I saying this because I am a NWS employee? No. I am saying this as a meteorologist. The threat was certainly there and they did the right thing.

If one or two "busts" is going to damage credibility, then we have a LONG way to go in getting the general public educated. I do not think this is the case. I know for a fact, that in our NE MS counties, the emergency managers were THANKFUL we gave them a heads up, especially since it was a holiday weekend. Did the event happen? No it did not, but in this case, being extra cautious was the right course of action.

I may get yelled out, but there are really too many armchair quaterbacks out there. Now if somebody can give me a meteorological reason why the SPC was wrong, then I will listen.

Very well said, maybe some on here will listen now.

We can always hope Jeff!!

We have tried everything we know to stop the "bashing" of met agencies etc., including some bans. Discussion of why one feels they were wrong is one thing-saying they were wrong and need to learn their business is another thing!!!! I always want them to err on the side of caution!!!! I would much rather they bust one or two forecasts as opposed to not putting one out because they are concerned about the publics perception if they do bust.

[Lindaloo]

Excellent post AlHurricane!!!

[jeff]

I must admit I am a bit annoyed with all of these type of posts on all the weather message boards.

I do not fault the SPC one bit for their forecasts this past weekend. I would of made the same forecast even in hindsight. Am I saying this because I am a NWS employee? No. I am saying this as a meteorologist. The threat was certainly there and they did the right thing.

If one or two "busts" is going to damage credibility, then we have a LONG way to go in getting the general public educated. I do not think this is the case. I know for a fact, that in our NE MS counties, the emergency managers were THANKFUL we gave them a heads up, especially since it was a holiday weekend. Did the event happen? No it did not, but in this case, being extra cautious was the right course of action.

I may get yelled out, but there are really too many armchair quaterbacks out there. Now if somebody can give me a meteorological reason why the SPC was wrong, then I will listen.

Very well said, maybe some on here will listen now.

We can always hope Jeff!!

We have tried everything we know to stop the "bashing" of met agencies etc., including some bans. Discussion of why one feels they were wrong is one thing-saying they were wrong and need to learn their business is another thing!!!! I always want them to err on the side of caution!!!! I would much rather they bust one or two forecasts as opposed to not putting one out because they are concerned about the publics perception if they do bust.

Well it is a slap in the face to those including myself who spent the entire day nowcasting and forecasting for the area and trying to convey the threat. In some cases if people would completely read the entire discussion and not take ind. sentences out of context you will find a more meaningful description of what is expected. Many see an SPC disccusion say the POTENTIAL for a FEW large damaging tornadoes and somehow determine that it is going to be one of the top 10 outbreaks of the year. How some go from that discussion to that conclusion is beyond me.

When the ingredients are in place you forecast what they are pointing to, some people want an F5 or cat 5 hurricane to pass through their subdivision for some reason. There have been numerous other cases across AL and MS where deadly tornadoes did happen with similar set ups. Many times forecasters do not know many important answers until they are happening such as if the cap will break....hence the reason for convective outlooks outlining the overall reasoning and then the watches when it becomes clear what is really going to happen.

[wlfpack81]

Excellent post AlHurricane!!!

I 2nd that opinion!!! I too hope the bashing of the NWS, NHC and othet met agencies stops. W/o these services many more would die from weather related events.