2018-12-01 EVENT: MO/IL/IA

Jesse Risley

Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
2,266
Location
Macomb, IL
Today looks to be what was initially more of a sleeper day for the mid-Mississippi valley. A seasonably potent low pressure system will be situated over NC MO by mid-afternoon as an associated mid-level jet streak moves over the mid-Mississippi valley. A warm front presently situated over SC IL in C MO will gyrate northward today, though models may be slightly overdoing the northward extent of its progression due to lingering snow cover from last Monday's blizzard that could impact overall baroclinicity of the lower troposphere (you can see the change in snow pack on vis sat loops even this morning). Fairly modest cooling aloft should help usher in steeper lapse rates as the boundary layer destabilizes through early afternoon, though models have been consistently showing ample 0-3 km MLCAPE through large parts of the warm sector where favorable low-level shear will be juxtapose itself with a narrow corridor of said instability.

CAMs have been honing in on several areas of interest. First, C and SC IL in EC MO will have the most favorable instability parameters if present forecast models come to fruition, where a pre-frontal trough looks to possibly trigger convection INVO of STL and points ENE this afternoon; surface winds have been slowly backing here this morning, particularly favoring a region from STL-SPI-PPQ and perhaps slightly east and NE of that area. This would be a primary, synoptically favorable region for supercells with these types of setups. However, the region closer to the triple point across NE MO, WC IL and extreme SE IA will also be on the northern fringe of the instability axis in a region with otherwise favorable low-level shear parameters more proximal to the actual surface frontal boundary, and CAMs have been indicating deeper convection in this region, consistently, for the last 36 hours of model runs. If storms can remain in a favorable environment and orient themselves favorable to the surface boundary, this area bears watching closely too, as does the entire warm sector. Historically speaking, these 0-3 km MLCAPE profiles when juxtaposed with favorable low-level shear and a late fall or early spring cyclone have consistently yielded low-top supercell tornadoes on what might initially appear to be a fairly marginal setup.
 
Verified nicely. I think the back piece of energy really closed the deal for Illinois.

I punted Dixie based on a Gulf Coast MCS. Sure enough Dixie did not do much. Regret not looking harder at Illinois, which was clearly decoupled from Dixie. Illinois had its own drivers. Back short wave, favorable shear, and 0-3 km instability increasing is pretty obvious in hindsight. IDK probably would not have made the trip, but it was a weekend.

Congratulations to all who scored, and even those who just had fun getting out there. Thanks for sharing in the Reports thread!
 
ILX has made this official as the biggest December outbreak in Illinois history:

https://www.weather.gov/ilx/ILTornadoOutbreaksinDecember

I'm still a little fuzzy on tornado counts for this event. The St. Louis survey mapped 4 tornadoes from Pleasant Hill to Valley City:

https://www.facebook.com/NWSStLouis/posts/2232640793434386

I believe that these could have been one continuous tornado, or at least one circulation that periodically strengthened and weakened. They definitely were all from the same long-track tornado cyclone. There was only one area of circulation/RFD cut present during this time, I had a good visual on it from Pleasant Hill to just before it crossed I-72.

The Detroit and Meredosia tornadoes I (and others) saw have not been logged yet. This particular storm had a circulation on the ground for much of its life, most of the time only visible at close range.

I finished a Google map showing my GPS track (blue) as well as tornado tracks (red) that I was close enough to observe directly:

http://stormhighway.com/december12018/gpslog.php
 
The Detroit and Meredosia tornadoes I (and others) saw have not been logged yet. This particular storm had a circulation on the ground for much of its life, most of the time only visible at close range.

Judging by a quick view of satellite imagery from Google Maps, both tracks seem to have occurred in terrain that was nearly void of objects/structures to hit. This hampers the tornado identification/rating process post-event, and is obviously a huge limitation of the tornado rating process. Some NWS offices will use satellite imagery post-event to identify tracks that were harder to find during ground surveys; though, I would imagine that's going to be fairly difficult to do for this event due to the lack of vegetation this time of year. Additionally, some offices will identify a tornado that did not cause reported/noticeable damage through video and radar data (it would receive an EF0 rating). This is much more difficult to do due to issues with radar beam height and data resolution, in addition to videos and other footage not showing the tornado from start to end. This is not necessarily saying your footage is insufficient, but to merely point out the difficulties of identifying tornadoes that did not cause any damage, if that was the case. The methods in which this is handled also can vary office to office.
 
Judging by a quick view of satellite imagery from Google Maps, both tracks seem to have occurred in terrain that was nearly void of objects/structures to hit. This hampers the tornado identification/rating process post-event, and is obviously a huge limitation of the tornado rating process. Some NWS offices will use satellite imagery post-event to identify tracks that were harder to find during ground surveys; though, I would imagine that's going to be fairly difficult to do for this event due to the lack of vegetation this time of year. Additionally, some offices will identify a tornado that did not cause reported/noticeable damage through video and radar data (it would receive an EF0 rating). This is much more difficult to do due to issues with radar beam height and data resolution, in addition to videos and other footage not showing the tornado from start to end. This is not necessarily saying your footage is insufficient, but to merely point out the difficulties of identifying tornadoes that did not cause any damage, if that was the case. The methods in which this is handled also can vary office to office.
Yeah, this is pretty close to my backyard, and it's really remote and difficult terrain that isn't easily accessible to a damage survey team. Much of it is wooded areas proximal to alluvial plains or part of the larger Illinois River valley.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
ILX has added the additional tornadoes using chaser reports:

https://www.weather.gov/ilx/01dec18-outbreak

If anyone saw something that wasn't logged, definitely put a little "evidence pack" together with your location and video and send it to ILX or STL offices. I think this event is getting more thorough attention due to its historic implications.
 
Back
Top