3/29/10 DISC: WA

[Billy Griffin]

I realize there have been no severe 'warnings' issued, but I'm starting this thread for the unique situation setting up in western WA for today.

Already, there was an OBVIOUS couplet observed on radar, no more than 30 minutes ago. I've spoken with a friend who resides in the town north of me (Black Diamond, WA) and a large funnel cloud was observed AND CAUGHT ON VIDEO.

Yet again, although not to my surprise, I'm so let down by the local NWS office here in Seattle. Anyone who has a looping image; just take a look at the past 30 minutes at base velocities from the time the couplet formed (near Auburn, WA) and time is moved east of Black Diamond, and into the Cascades...

Nary a warning, special weather statement or anything was mentioned.
Nevertheless, it should be an interesting day out here, with an environment very supportive of short-lived tornadoes and/or funnel clouds with severe-criteria winds and small hail. And again, we've already seen one instance occur just about 30 minutes ago.

It's just a shame that our NWS office refuses to get on board.

 

[Chad Cowan]

I realize there have been no severe 'warnings' issued, but I'm starting this thread for the unique situation setting up in western WA for today.

Already, there was an OBVIOUS couplet observed on radar, no more than 30 minutes ago. I've spoken with a friend who resides in the town north of me (Black Diamond, WA) and a large funnel cloud was observed AND CAUGHT ON VIDEO.

Yet again, although not to my surprise, I'm so let down by the local NWS office here in Seattle. Anyone who has a looping image; just take a look at the past 30 minutes at base velocities from the time the couplet formed (near Auburn, WA) and time is moved east of Black Diamond, and into the Cascades...

Nary a warning, special weather statement or anything was mentioned.
Nevertheless, it should be an interesting day out here, with an environment very supportive of short-lived tornadoes and/or funnel clouds with severe-criteria winds and small hail. And again, we've already seen one instance occur just about 30 minutes ago.

It's just a shame that our NWS office refuses to get on board.

So... there was no tornado, yet you're criticizing them for not issuing a Tornado Warning?

 

[rdale]

I've spoken with a friend who resides in the town north of me (Black Diamond, WA) and a large funnel cloud was observed AND CAUGHT ON VIDEO.

Just curious - what did the NWS office say when you called them? I don't see a SpotterNetwork report either...

 

[Keith Mullen]

No Chad... His dissapointment is in the fact that the NWS-Seattle office does not believe in Severe warnings - even when danger is imminent.

There's obviously a lot of grey area when someone reports "a large funnel cloud" in conjunction with an obvious couplet on radar... as to what decision to ultimately come to in regards to warnings... but at a minimum a generic Severe-T should be given out.

I've been watching todays events here as well - unfortunately from my office and from hearing reports from those around me.

IMHO - they won't take these events seriously and start doing something until WA has another year with more TOR related deaths that the other 49.

Sorry Billy, I'm with you on this one.

 

[Jason Caster]

I've been keeping an eye on the event as well.

To be fair the NWS did specify the possibility for funnel clouds and water spouts in their early report today. The water spout notation was removed at their 2000 UTC update.

Is there a link to the video?

 

[Josh Murfield]

As some of you know I am from Nebraska, having just moved to the Seattle area a few months ago. I was excited when a coworker of mine received a call from a friend who was on the highway going through the Kent/Auburn area, reporting that there was rather large hail falling along with lots of thunder/lightning and very strong winds. Not sure if it would have met severe guidelines or not, but I was so disappointed in the lack of coverage at all by local weather folks! I brought up radar and saw a nice cell in that area, but there was no severe warning (again, not sure if it met that criteria anyway) or even any talk in the short term forecast about it at all! Only a brief mention of the chance of rain with "possible thunder".

Anyway, another thunderstorm rolled through downtown Seattle around 4:30 this afternoon- nothing severe, but it had cloud to ground strikes and heavy rain, even dropping some small hail as it passed to the east side suburbs. Even though it wasn't wild stuff like we had back on the plains, it's still cool to see happening out here.

 

[Josh Murfield]

No Chad... His dissapointment is in the fact that the NWS-Seattle office does not believe in Severe warnings - even when danger is imminent.

There's obviously a lot of grey area when someone reports "a large funnel cloud" in conjunction with an obvious couplet on radar... as to what decision to ultimately come to in regards to warnings... but at a minimum a generic Severe-T should be given out.

I've been watching todays events here as well - unfortunately from my office and from hearing reports from those around me.

IMHO - they won't take these events seriously and start doing something until WA has another year with more TOR related deaths that the other 49.

Sorry Billy, I'm with you on this one.

I am curious- I wonder if it is hard for the NWS to take reports of funnels seriously, when people here are not exposed to those events much if at all? I mean, people here definitely wouldn't know a wall cloud from scud, and often don't even know hail from sleet- so I wonder if it gets hard for them to take reports seriously when the general public is not really too well informed/educated on what to look for in regards to severe weather?

 

[Billy Griffin]

Okay, please... before you guys go attacking me, I was not complaining that they didn't issue a TORNADO WARNING.... I never said that, Chad.
But, something should have been issued... 'significant weather advisory,' 'special wx statement,' etc. etc.

One of these days, just like the close call last October, (Enumclaw tornado destoyed home while people just happened to be gone) I'm afraid something bad WILL happen and they will make the same lame-ass excuses as always... "tornadoes just don't happen up here." I've actually had NWS people tell me that, words exactly !!!!! Video has proven it, photos, eyewitness accounts, - and there are a couple of people that are current SEA NWS employees (Meteorologists) that have indeed said those very words to me.. "tornadoes just don't happen up here. It's most likely just microbursts."

Okay, back to today...

Nevertheless, I DID indeed manage to catch several funnel clouds today, encountered torrential pea-sized hail that had the 'Valley Freeway' (WA 167) completely covered during the afternoon commute, and saw a lot of wind damage to trees.

I called the funnel cloud reports in, and all I got was some young guy on the phone saying, "okay, thanks." Did not ask me for spotter ID number, didn't ask location; nothing! So that is my frustration. But, I'm just going to have to accept this is the way they play the game up here in Seattle. For some reason, they do NOT believe that convective systems can produce severe weather; they just refuse to believe it. (sigh)

I'll post a link very soon to the video clips from today.

 

[Billy Griffin]

Please go to the 'reports' section, per ST policy.
I only have time to post the video link today... heading out for an event with the kids.

Today was a great chase day here in WA and my gut feeling tells me this will be an active tornado year for the Pacific NW (granted, in terms of 'active' for this area.)

Again, see the reports thread for the link to my brief video clip(s).....

And one more thing... the 'NWS' didn't mention a thing about funnel clouds, it was SPC.
The Seattle NWS office wouldn't lift a finger to type the damn forecast if they didn't have to, IMHO.

 

[Keith Mullen]

12 - 2pm

Was fairly frustrated being chained to the desk per usual. Very cold upper air, and only low 50's at the surface - but watching the clouds above you didn't really need a hodograph to see the veering with height. It was nice to at least physically see and be aware that the potential existed.

A few good rumblers rolled just to the east of my location throughout the day - but really didn't fire up until they tracked N of Tacoma. Even in the early morning got caught in a hail squall that stopped I5 traffic.

From 12-2pm, the typical set-up appeared (typical for actual severe weather) in the east plateau area Kent>Black Diamond>East Everett. Surface Winds staying fairly Southerly/South Westerly with a strong cold low overhead.

Good catch Billy. Wish you could have been free a few hours earlier.

Tomorrow may have hope as well - provided the lower levels can keep coming from the south (and don't vent back into the updrafts). I won't be free tomorrow till 5. Good luck, and thanks for the updates.

Keith

 

[Rob Satkus]

And one more thing... the 'NWS' didn't mention a thing about funnel clouds, it was SPC.
The Seattle NWS office wouldn't lift a finger to type the damn forecast if they didn't have to, IMHO.

From the SEA NWS forecast discussion at 3:40am this morning:

[FONT=lucida sans typewriter, lucida console, courier]NAM BUFR
SOUNDINGS FOR THE SOUTH PUGET SOUND REGION TODAY HAVE HELICITY
VALUES AROUND 200 AND THE SURFACE TO 850 MB LEVEL SHOWS BOTH SPEED
SHEAR AND WEAK DIRECTIONAL SHEAR WITH S WINDS VEERING TO SW THROUGH
THE LAYER. CAPE IS NOT HUGE THOUGH AND CLOUD TOPS ARE ONLY FORECAST
TO REACH 25K FT OR SO. NEVER-THE-LESS THE HELICITY AND SHEAR FITS
THE W WA PROFILE WHERE WE SEEM TO HAVE A GREATER CHANCE OF FUNNELS
DEVELOPING. DAY SHIFT WILL NEED TO RE-EVALUATE THIS AND MONITOR
CELLS MORE CLOSELY TODAY.


The SPC outlook didn't mention funnels/waterspouts until the morning outlook came out and the area
was upgraded to SEE TEXT
[/FONT]

 

[Skip Talbot]

I managed to catch an intense convective cell, producing numerous funnel clouds and torrential pea-sized hail. The hail was so intense that the freeway was at a STOP for nearly ten minutes! Wind damage was also reported/observed widespread between Renton and Auburn, WA.

Continued frustration that the public was generally 'unaware' of the potential SVR due to NO warnings or not even a special wx statement.

Here's the link to the video, formatted into WMV file. It's 25MB to download, so plz be patient.......
http://www.billygriffin.com/video_ga...le Weather.wmv[FONT=lucida sans typewriter, lucida console, courier]
[/FONT]

I have a hard time calling the features in that video funnels. Of course I wasn't there, and its very difficult to really see what's going on due to the contrast and autofocus issues, but this looks very much like scud movement. I've seen it dozens of times on days where there is a lot of forcing and a lot of convection in a heavily sheared environment. You wind up with large chunks of cumulus fractus racing around with a lot of pointy edges that come and go. To really identify a funnel I like to see it extend a good distance out from the base, further than the other pointy wisps, and I like to see it persist. These wisps come and go in a matter of seconds. A tornadic funnel usually has some staying power to stick around for at least a half minute to a minute before it ropes out. I also like to see a parent feature that would support the funnel's development. Preferably a wall cloud or an updraft base. There's a lot of precip falling in this video, but its also difficult to make out anything I'd call a good updraft base. You could potentially see hundreds of these funnels on days like this. They happen frequently and over a large area.

I didn't see anything in these videos that warranted a warning. The hail was well below severe criteria, and even if these were funnels, they would require a blanket warning over the entire region as they'd be impossible to track. Judging from the damage reports it looks like none were needed in the end, anyway. A weather statement sounds like a better idea as it could cover the entire area and the threat is minimal.

 

[rdale]

Funnel clouds and pea-sized hail are not severe weather.

 

[Larry J. Kosch]

Tornado Averages / Storm Awareness

From a statistical point of view, the State of Washington averages about 1 tornado per year. ONE! Compared to other states in the tornado alley like Texas or Oklahoma, Washington will be like an ant on a picnic blanket with apples and oranges sitting around.

The lack of awareness that the local NWS offices have regarding severe weather of this type in Washington is patethic! At least they are pretty good about keeping track of how many inches of rain they get!

From all appearances, I would say this storm situation fits the criteria for a severe storm warning. All it really take is greater awareness of severe weather when it occurs.

It would be a disaster if a storm develops a EF-4 tornado that sweeps thru the Seattle-Tacoma with massive destruction and death. But then again, that's a storm that only comes once in 100 years??

Here in Nebraska, we have a higher awareness of severe weather than the folks in Washington. However we have no earthquakes, volcano eruptions or tsunamis to be afraid of. Same with the folks in Florida, they have no fear of earthquakes, but they have to be mindful of hurricanes.

Each area of the country have their own good and bad weather elements. And each area's NWS centers have their priority as to what weather to be concerned about.

 

[Keith Mullen]

Now, now.

The timeframe in question was two hours earlier than the videos - when there was definately enough reason and data to issue a basic statement of severe weather. Larry is correct in his Discussion points. Washington has led the nation in Tor deaths before - and at this rate - will again eventually.

Washington does get some the rare very severe events... but also has a history of mentioning the events after the fact. This isn't to knock the NWS per se, but definately bring awareness to the fact that just because all indicators and observations don't cookie-cutter meet their mandatory requirements for creating an event - does not nessicarily require total dismissive behavior.

Does this make sense?

I guess to close, if there is an event with strong reason to create concern for public safety - and the environment has already given you the data to support close monitoring - and all signs point to yes... why disregard it?

The storms were very low-topped for the most part, with pretty decent shear and movement. Radar data coverage is not very ideal here as the topography and coverage is full of black holes and grey areas... which necessitates heavier physical observations. Observations should be heavily considered.

Just my two cents on the Discussion and the days events.