• While Stormtrack has discontinued its hosting of SpotterNetwork support on the forums, keep in mind that support for SpotterNetwork issues is available by emailing [email protected].

4/21/07 FCST: OK / KS / TX / NE

  • Thread starter Thread starter Billy Griffin
  • Start date Start date
I dont know if I'm missing something that others are seeing, but moisture is the last of my worries. This year so far, tornadoes have formed when dewpoints have been in the mid 50s, and the tornadoes have been large.....Throw the dryline in the whole mess and it looks to be a very interesting day on SAT.

Brandon,

The problem is that, although we are seeing southeasterly flow in western TX now, the surface ridge on the eastern US is north enough that there is easterly flow across most of the central and norther Gulf. In essence, the position of the high is leading to the recirculation of drier continental air from the southeastern US, across the Gulf, then up into the Plains. So, we may be seeing low-mid 50s across areas of western TX now, but models continue to indicate that, despite southeasterly flow across much of the risk area, better Gulf moisture is unlikely to make it into the Plains by Saturday evening.

The 00z BRO and CRP soundings look pretty bad in terms of low-level moisture. Buoy 42002 east of CRP is observing a northly wind at ~20mph, with a Td of 66.6F (likely quite shallow). 00z soundings from Mexican locales in the southwestern Gulf (e.g. MMVR --> http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/upper/mmvr.gif ) show relatively deep northerly and northeasterly flow in the low-levels, another strike.

Pattern recognition indicates that confluent, mid-level flow associated with mid-level ridging over the Gulf and a deep trough off the southeastern US coast is often not favorable for the advection of rich Gulf moisture into the Plains. I'd much rather see the mid-level trough off the coast slide east faster, which would allow more ridging on southeast coast, and may allow for more favorable trajectories.

Per the latest 00z NAM, it looks like the trough will come through quite a way farther south and later than previous models outlined. Jeez, looking at the surface progs, some chasers may even target Tucumcari NM for Saturday. Of course, a slower solution shouldn't really surprise anyone, given the tendency for the NCEP models to be too fast / too far east with many of the dryline days this year so far (prime example being 2-28). With the slowdown, timing has now become an issue. Ah well, we certainly can't expect 72+ hour forecasts to verify perfectly within 50-75 miles and 1-3 hours.

EDIT: All this is NOT to say that Tds won't reach 60F in spots. There is the possibility that tds will verify higher than models are currently forecasting, and there's no way we can know for sure at this time. All that said, I think there is a better than 50% probability that we'll see widespread mid-50s Tds across western KS and areas northward, with widespread upper50s farther south. I've be pleasantly surprised, but surprised nonetheless, to see low-60F Tds widespread in the warm sector, with the way it currently looks. I hope I'm wrong, and I'll be the first to admit it if I am. Ah, the unpredictability of the atmosphere.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well as the models come into agreement they are now bringing the dryline well back close to the Tx/NM border and the latest NAM and GFS breaks out the storms in that area. Like I said in previous posts the dryline hasnt mixed east yet this year and looks to stay well west again. I expect the best storms to be the central panhandle as they mature. Not sold on tornados in NM. And I agree with Jeff about the slower resolution. This year the GFS has been constantly too fast until the last 48-72 hrs or so where it has been slowing it down.

Now that the 72hr models are out I am anxious to see what the SPC is thinking for day3. Will they pull it back that far west also?? Do they expect moisture to be sufficient? etc..

I expect a good chase day. I wouldnt be surprised to see a moderate by day2 on for saturday. Maybe as late as the 1730z. Doubt they will go mod until then. Just a huge slight risk area.
 
Well I'm not gonna jump into the battle but I'd like to point out one fact...and one observation...

Observation: The models have consistently slowed down and deepened the short-wave trough from run to run...meaning this event will likely be much later in the day, further west, and over higher terrain...possibly upslope flow in eastern NM, CO.

Fact: Surface based air parcels are composed of moisture that is a mixture of the entire boundary layer. Good surface moisture will mean nothing beneath an airmass with continental origin. The moisture fetch just off the surface is off the Mexican plateau leading up to the event...yes it's southerly flow, but it's not Gulf of Mexico southerly flow until late fri/early sat. So our surface based parcels will have low moisture content once the boundary layer does mix out.

Another thing...shallow moisture along the dryline and the lack of eastward progression shows how strong the southeasterly flow and convergence will be, coupled with significant upper level forcing, shouldn't' have a problem breaking the cap (all models break out convection).
 
I'm glad to see the NAM coming into agreement with the GFS and ECMWF which have been consistently agreeing with each other. Td's still a question mark with progged trajectories leading to the source region of the advected air mass being the east coast. The air mass progged to be over the east coast at the time of the LLJ initiation on Friday is still being advected southwards across the east coast at this time. If the source region turns out to be the east coast air then the real question would become the exact trajectory the air mass will take as its forced westwards. I'd say the more southerly route it takes the better. Latest GFS run (00Z) is encouraging in that it pushed the trajectories much farther south, into the heart of the Gulf. If this verifies, the next question is how much moisture can be evaporated into the air mass before it reaches the coast of Texas. Air mass modification during advection is quite complicated but the warmer and faster the air moves the higher evaporation rate over warmer water (very basic.) The moving air will help mix out the moisture and the lowered temps near the water surface due to evaporational cooling. Higher temps will increase the water load capacity.
As a final note, its important to answer these questions when forecasting moisture: where is the air coming from? what is its characteristics at its source location? What are the characteristics of the land/water its being advected over? What is the speed of advection (will determine the time for modification)? At this point in my forecasting career I have to rely on models to make this forecast for me, as I haven't seen enough weather for lack of a better word in my days to have that knowledgeable instinct on just how this air mass may modify with regards to moisture content (if it comes from the east coast).

I know I'm a skeptic, but I'd rather be surprised than disappointed. I also hope that I'm wrong as Jeff stated, because Saturday is about the best possible chase day of the week for me and probably the majority of people here.

Now, I'm fairly sure that there will be convection on Saturday, and there will be some supercells... and chasing to me isn't about catching a tornado every day. This will definitely be a fairly long drive for us from Norman though. Norman to Amarillo: 277 miles. Given the dryline location progged by ECMWF/GFS/NAM: about 300 miles. That is a straight shot, add in the return trip and the jogging around this could be an 800 mile day easy. Making my trip from Norman to Minneapolis, MN is about 870 miles which is about 13 hours of driving including very limited stops traveling I-35 the entire way.
 
For those worrying about moisture only being in the 50s... High Plains + 50s TDs = pretty good results....

Two targets for Saturday; Burlington, Colorado or Dalhart, TX
 
The GFS is showing very low dewpoints across the texas panhandle for saturday now, dewpoints in the upper 40's!!!!!!!! Most of the deep moisture will be in the eastern panhandle and Oklahoma points north. Evidently the model is showing some massive amounts of mixing taking place, which I think if this accurs then the dryline should mix further east, closer the the moist axis. Also the model is showing a very nice setup for SW Oklahoma down into Texas for next tuesday. Look at the low level wind feild setting up in that area, nearly DUE EASTERLY FLOW!!!!!!!!! This should make for some large curved hodographs.
 

That's already been posted...might read previous posts. Guessing works just fine 99.9% of the time(since it's generally always the same time that it updates). Not like I need some second by second update.

And so this post has meteorological value. Looks like TDs should be above 20 along the dryline, so anythings possible! I mean the dryline is getting very close to the mountains now, so that should do.
 
I'm glad to see the NAM coming into agreement with the GFS and ECMWF which have been consistently agreeing with each other. Td's still a question mark with progged trajectories leading to the source region of the advected air mass being the east coast. The air mass progged to be over the east coast at the time of the LLJ initiation on Friday is still being advected southwards across the east coast at this time. If the source region turns out to be the east coast air then the real question would become the exact trajectory the air mass will take as its forced westwards. I'd say the more southerly route it takes the better. Latest GFS run (00Z) is encouraging in that it pushed the trajectories much farther south, into the heart of the Gulf. If this verifies, the next question is how much moisture can be evaporated into the air mass before it reaches the coast of Texas. Air mass modification during advection is quite complicated but the warmer and faster the air moves the higher evaporation rate over warmer water (very basic.) The moving air will help mix out the moisture and the lowered temps near the water surface due to evaporational cooling. Higher temps will increase the water load capacity.
As a final note, its important to answer these questions when forecasting moisture: where is the air coming from? what is its characteristics at its source location? What are the characteristics of the land/water its being advected over? What is the speed of advection (will determine the time for modification)? At this point in my forecasting career I have to rely on models to make this forecast for me, as I haven't seen enough weather for lack of a better word in my days to have that knowledgeable instinct on just how this air mass may modify with regards to moisture content (if it comes from the east coast).

I know I'm a skeptic, but I'd rather be surprised than disappointed. I also hope that I'm wrong as Jeff stated, because Saturday is about the best possible chase day of the week for me and probably the majority of people here.

Now, I'm fairly sure that there will be convection on Saturday, and there will be some supercells... and chasing to me isn't about catching a tornado every day. This will definitely be a fairly long drive for us from Norman though. Norman to Amarillo: 277 miles. Given the dryline location progged by ECMWF/GFS/NAM: about 300 miles. That is a straight shot, add in the return trip and the jogging around this could be an 800 mile day easy. Making my trip from Norman to Minneapolis, MN is about 870 miles which is about 13 hours of driving including very limited stops traveling I-35 the entire way.

Kenny,

You've touched on one important aspect of moisture return forecasts - the "source" region and the underlying ocean conditions. Another critical component is the vertical structure of the air mass being modified. Most chasers fear cold frontal intrusions into the Gulf, but they're not all bad. The depth (as in vertical extent) of the cold intrusion and the sea-air temp difference drives sensible and latent heat fluxes (heating and moistening) in the boundary layer. If the cold air is really deep (say up to 700 mb), your moisture return can end up looking like a deep moist layer with relatively mediocre dewpoints. A very shallow cold intrusion results in a shallow moisture return.

The worst case scenario is sort of what's happened over the past few days. Not only are trajectories questionable (emanating from sern US ridge with short over-water paths, much of which isn't the warmer ocean), the sea-air temp differences are also quite small. The frontal intrusion this time was more of the mild and dry variety, which limits the potential for sensible heat flux over the water (which in turn drives boundary layer depth). The net result is a very shallow marine boundary layer that is very susceptible to vertical mixing over land. If you loop through the NAM dewpoint forecasts, or even forecast soundings, you see the moisture "mix out" each day across TX, for a few days in a row. These moisture "holes" then spread nwd/nwwd on the prevailing flow. The whole situation won't improve much until the background trajectories change and we bring in either an air mass from farther NE that has had more time to modify and consists of a deeper boundary layer, or we simply draw the previous maritime tropical air mass back northward. The low-level wind forecasts and persistence of the big trough/low off the SE Atlantic coast makes the latter scenario less probable.

With all of this in mind, mid 50s Tds aren't too bad with surface temps in the low-mid 70s at 3500 ft. Perhaps the situation will end up looking more like the NAM with the Kain-Fritsch scheme (upper 50s), instead of the operational NAM with the Betts-Miller-Janic convective scheme (low-mid 50s), or the GFS and its 48-50 F Tds. I'm pretty sure we'll have it figured out by about 21z Saturday :)

Rich T.
 
Kenny,

I'm pretty sure we'll have it figured out by about 21z Saturday :)

Rich T.

Rich, hope the NAMs convective scenario doesn't play out, or we'll know by 18Z Sat :eek: Namely, a roaring linear mess. Not to say there wont be embedded sups, but if that verifies might have some thinking they should have braved the high-risk of bust on friday!
 
Rich, hope the NAMs convective scenario doesn't play out, or we'll know by 18Z Sat :eek: Namely, a roaring linear mess. Not to say there wont be embedded sups, but if that verifies might have some thinking they should have braved the high-risk of bust on friday!

Stan,

Strong linear forcing and the potential for cold pool formation could lead to squall line development. However, wind profiles still appear quite favorable for supercells with plenty of cross-boundary flow and shear. Again, we'll know by 21-00Z ;)

Rich T.

p.s. This Saturday system looks vaguely similar to 6 April 2001, with more cross-boundary flow and (perhaps) and little weaker instability. The outcome of that event was a rapid transition to a squall line, with lots of wind damage and ridiculous storm motions. See
http://www.spc.nssl.noaa.gov/exper/archive/events/010406/index.html
 
I don't know- based on the new NAM the really strong forcing from the primary vort max does not really get cranking until 00Z or after- one thing I do notice is that the main threat really seems to have shifted well back into extreme eastern NM and near the TX border by 00Z-If this scenario unfolds as forecast by the NAM then there looks to be a decent chance of a few supercells from CVS to HOB before the squall line sets in?
 
One interesting thing to note about April 6, 2001, is that the 300mb jet core was on the east side of the trough, extending from the TX panhandle through western KS/NE. Now I may be comletely off-base on this, but it seems as though having the strongest winds on the east side of the trough may tend to lead to more squall lines and fewer supercells, at least in the Plains. FWIW (probably nothing), Saturday doesn't have this configuration of 300mb flow.

That said, I would like to see more moisture available Saturday, and though 53-55 in eastern NM is not terrible, I'd rather see 56-58. Also, if this thing slows down any more, we'll be chasing above the treeline. ;)
 
Rich T.

p.s. This Saturday system looks vaguely similar to 6 April 2001, with more cross-boundary flow and (perhaps) and little weaker instability. The outcome of that event was a rapid transition to a squall line, with lots of wind damage and ridiculous storm motions. See
http://www.spc.nssl.noaa.gov/exper/archive/events/010406/index.html

Rich -

That's a pretty good match! How exactly do you go about finding analagous events - do you guys have a good database or is it just a keen memory? I'd just say the only obvious difference at first glance is that the surface low in the 4/6/01 case was much deeper, by ~10 mb.

Otherwise -

The dryline keeps getting pushed further west. If you're going to chase this on Saturday and had originally planned on going to the TX Panhandle you may need to head close to the NM border. I'm still debating on whether or not to head out and a lot depends on whether or not I can ride along with someone.

Still, plenty of shear spilling past the dryline. Despite moderate instability the strong shear favors supercells. Still difficult to tell how quickly it will go linear. The 12z NAM does have a little pocket of 150-200 m2/s2 0-1km SRH in the C TX Panhandle in the mid-late afternoon. Winds are out of the southeast so good veering on wind profiles. I wouldn't rule out a few tornadoes. I think that the volume of hail and to a lesser extent wind reports will probably dictate a mod risk somewhere unless a lot changes between now and Saturday. Don't give up the hope on isolated tornadoes yet though! Shouldn't be a tornado outbreak but a decent severe weather outbreak.

AJL
 
AMA recorded 700mb wind speed of 140kts at 00Z 010407?? Is that to be believed? I assume that's RAOB data? I will say I was trying to keep ahead of the line on US60 at about Panhandle TX, exceeding the 70mph limit, and the line was STILL overtaking me. Of course, that's not news to anyone who chased that day.
 
Back
Top