I've lived a bit outside Denver most of my life. Also never seen/heard anything of them on the local channels (but I also don't always watch the news)Jeff Duda said:As a resident of the Denver metro area for a little bit of time now, I can say I have never seen Roger Hill nor heard a mention of SLT on any of the local news broadcasts I have ever watched.
So you could probably skip Ch 7 then, but that still leaves all the others.John Farley said:SLT used to have a pretty close relationship with Channel 7 in Denver. Not sure whether that is the case or not any more.
They had a pretty good relationship through the early 2010s, but I think they've parted ways a bit since then. I know Channel 7 was a big sponsor for the NSSC, but they stopped within the last few years. Obviously not having been in Denver since 2012, I cannot say what's become of the 7News/SLT relationship, but it was definitely on the decline when I left 7. Not sure it was anything more than just drifting apart, so don't think animosity was an issue.SLT used to have a pretty close relationship with Channel 7 in Denver. Not sure whether that is the case or not any more.
Welcome to Colorado Jeff!As a resident of the Denver metro area for a little bit of time now, I can say I have never seen Roger Hill nor heard a mention of SLT on any of the local news broadcasts I have ever watched. Granted, I don't watch a ton of local news, but I have seen dozens of weather segments, including those during spring severe season.
Just incredibly busy with family and work, but I am very much still working on this. Even though it's been over three months, additional information and material is emerging regularly. Just yesterday I received another video from one of SLT's guests showing the most critical decision making moment in the chase. The amount of material in and length of this project has really ballooned beyond what I anticipated, but I felt it was important to cover every relevant angle and precisely, even if it meant taking considerably longer to complete. I have pretty much all the material assembled and hope to have this posted in the next week or two.
Totally agree.SLT was to the NE of the meso early on with eyes back toward the SW. This is good positioning .... Then they drive east as the storm gets closer
This is where both their chase starts to go bad, and where our understanding of this storm diverges. One of the points I'm going to try to convey is that, what appears to be the center of broad rotation on velocity, is not actually where the storm's low level mesocyclone is located. The area to the north is the inflow and RFD surge that kicked off tornadogenesis, and these surges are not located where tornadogenesis would eventually occur.and a new area of broad rotation and convergence takes shape to the N of the previous velocity couplet, which seems to be weakening.
The visual structure indicates the impacting EF2 was colocated with the primary/mature mesocyclone cycle. The visual structure indicates this is where you'd expect the main tornado to be, not a satellite. It's a misinterpretation of the radar to think of it as a satellite at that point. That evolution came afterwards because, again, the area to the north was not the location of the next cycle, it was mainly the winds converging into the next cycle. This will make more sense with some visuals I hope.how was SLT to know they were not hit by a satellite at the time?
Both the NWS and broadcast media had a really solid handle on the couplet that produced the EF2. I don't fault chasers for not following every second of the radio and matching it down to the street. But the tornado warning absolutely pegged this tornado. The media had the location down to a T. Both with ample lead time. I'd hope chasers are following one of those sources at least. This tornado was not a surprise.Seems no one knew the ef2 existed until they were either impacted or nearly impacted.
You're totally right that the EF4 came from a new cycle. You often see that new cycle displaced to the north. But it wasn't on this storm. That cycle occurred in the immediate vicinity of the old one. That's probably why the EF2 acted like a satellite. There simply wasn't enough spacing as the storm cycled and it got entrained. I have a really good analog for this too (Pilger/Wakefield). For whatever reason, maybe shear vectors keeping the cycles on the same line, the new meso developed on the same track as the old one.Generally new tornadoes come from new areas of the updraft. If the EF2 was basically spinning itself out, then I don't see that meso causing the EF4. A new area is what SLT would have been trying to get into position to see. And an area to watch for new development, based on velocity data, was to the North.
I was really surprised to see how well the RFD core and RFD gust front were defined on this storm. Looking at the reflectivity initially, I'd have imagined SLT drove into steadily increasing rain with 0 structure and a tornado somewhere in the middle of that. But instead the visuals show really well defined Bear's Cage structure. I think this is simply a limitation of the reflectivity at that range. The beam is hitting a few thousand feet up into the storm, where there is no doubt a ton of precipitation loading. If the 88D was closer, you'd probably see a much tighter ball at the end of a hook. There was pretty decent precip falling ahead of the RFD gust front too, however, so it wouldn't have looked totally clean.Another thing I have trouble with is that radar shows Quincy to be inside the bounds of rain produced by the storm rfd, but his video at the identical time seems to contradict that and shows what appears to be HP structure to the W.
One might be mislead into thinking so looking at the velocity. The visuals, however, showed the new area forming basically on their heads.The new area, whatever you want to call it appears to be around a mile to a mile and one half N at the time of the incident. SLT claimed 2 miles. That is a reasonable misjudgement.
Yes.So is all of this occurring behind the rfd gust front and heavier rain
Yes, thank you. These discussion have helped tremendously in highlighting the areas that most need our attention. Hopefully a video presentation with such focus can do some real good in advancing chaser safety, rather than simply describing how a colossal screw-up happened.If nothing else, questions can help with knowing what even needs to be addressed.
Quincy said legal action is being taken against him for his analysis and statements about the incident, so I assume the charges are along the lines of slander/libel and probably has nothing to do with agreements/waivers between SLT and its tour guests (although I get what you are saying, if SLT did have rights over post-trip communications, this could be about Quincy sharing those communications).I wasn't aware a person could sue on the grounds another person contacted another person. Is there some language in the waiver that gives SLT rights over all guests' future communications?
@Warren Faidley Very good question. The verbiage indicated he was contacted, but I’d only be assuming as to the degree. I agree totally with waiting until ALL relevant facts are in. Hence my original post hinting at such. Your post made me question if any additional surveys or analysis could be construed as admissible? IDK.So I'm confused as someone with a journalism background. Has Quincy been served with an actual civil action or was he told to "cease and desist" regarding comments related to this event? A person cannot be pursued for comments or opinions, unless (basically) such comments are known to be false in nature and intended to harm. The bar is actually quite high and you would also have to prove damages. If a law firm is concerned about comments, it might be best for them to issue some kind of blanket statement if they are concerned about false or misleading information being distributed to avoid further damages. As I said before, I would suggest everyone wait until all the facts about this accident are known before making "factual" comments or reconstructing events in a detailed presentation.
and decide for yourself if this seems to coincide with what happened leading up to and during the time of the incident.We will NEVER stop in close proximity to a tornado unless there is a proper escape route. We do not take unneeded risks around a storm and view them from safe distances and safe vantage points.
I have never met the Hills, or you, or as far as I know anyone actually involved in this situation, but I gotta say that "what has transpired" leads me to believe that you are wrong. If you want to stick your neck out for your friends, you might consider reaching out to them and suggest they start doing the right thing as opposed to, oh, I don't know, literally everything they have done since the afternoon of May 28.What I do know is that Roger and Caryn are good people despite what has transpired.
It sounds like intimidation, a Hail Mary effort to muzzle a credible critic. They seek to regulate who you can talk to. That's fishy. A lawyer once told me, "You can sue anyone for anything, but that doesn't mean you'll win." I haven't read your analysis because, frankly, I would not understand. You'd have better luck teaching a dog to use a can opener. But you seem mature enough to refrain from libelous and slanderous statements like, "SLT deliberately put people's lives at risk." That *would* invite a lawsuit.I have been served with several legal documents, including a “notice of intent to commence legal action and demand for preservation of all evidence,” which relates back to posts in this thread not being deleted (unless they violate Terms of Service).
I would rather refrain from getting into every detail, but I will say that the Cease and Desist letter is very curious. It says that I must immediately cease all communication with all past tour guests of said company, but there is no legal standing for that. This is especially true when those parties have either initiated contact with me, engaged in comments on my YouTube video and/or posted replies in this thread regarding my analysis. The letter also makes detailed, but often inaccurate (or misleading) implications about me, the storm and even National Weather Service tornado warnings prior to and during the event in question.
I have remained civil, forthcoming and transparent with my posting. I’ve kept posting to a minimum because Ive had nothing of value to add and because I did not want my views or replies to be misconstrued as personal attacks ad -hock or the like. I would ask the same of you, Spencer.I have never met the Hills, or you, or as far as I know anyone actually involved in this situation, but I gotta say that "what has transpired" leads me to believe that you are wrong. If you want to stick your neck out for your friends, you might consider reaching out to them and suggest they start doing the right thing as opposed to, oh, I don't know, literally everything they have done since the afternoon of May 28.