Bob Schafer
EF5
WHOA!
Where was that?
I guess that is not a pic you took, Scott, based on the URL?
Bob
Where was that?
I guess that is not a pic you took, Scott, based on the URL?
Bob
It wasn't a synoptically obvious event, but you don't ignore >6000 CAPE w/ 100kt@H250, 50kt@H500, 40kt@H700 events, even if it is unidirectional. Surface winds were progged to be southwesterly but ended up being more southerly.
Reviewing the synoptic setup, I am still astounded that such a strong tornado formed. Based on the CAPS analysis from 2 pm, there really is nothing on the synoptic scale that would suggest that strong tornadic supercells would form. I think it is very likely that this event was driven by the all-too-familiar extreme CAPE/low level boundary combo. The storms moved very far to the right of the mean flow, muck like the Jarrell, Texas storm of 1997. I am sure someone will do a case study...should be interesting.
Gabe
I agree that the situation WAS very synoptically evident. SPC did a good job with the event, although they were playing it safe with their 5 % given the non-Oklahoma classic textbook setup. I didn't look at the radar data in detail, but I ask those whom were: was this storm playing along an outflow boundary from an earlier supercell? Nonetheless, the hodograph supported decent helicity, definitely contained adequate supercell shear, and the CAPE was tremendous, making this an obvious eye-opening day for the forecaster.
Here's the official damage report. -- F4 rating
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/ilx/events/jul132004/jul13.php
With the right boundary in the right place at the right time, I wouldn't have been suprised to have seen an even more historic vortex.
Chris
It wasn't 'obvious' that a 6hr discrete supercell with a violent tornado would occur synoptically, at least the night before.