I'd like to learn, but some of the concepts are outside of my realm of understanding, and my ability to process math. The furthest I successfully completed math in high school (mid-1990's) was 9th grade-level Algebra and 10th-grade level Geometry, failed Algebra II, failed Intro to Trig, and in a record attempt, failed Algebra II a second time in college. My high school also didn't put a huge focus on sciences, and my last sciences class was Basic Earth Sciences in 1996.
Kind of sucks to say it. I do the best I can, but this is one subject that I could use massive improvement on. Problem is, I have no idea how to get around this issue. For having been in the field for 20 years, as of today all I am qualified to do is read the forecast discussions.
It has been three and a half years since I posted the original sticky. Back then I was one of the moderators; today I'm just a civilian, and Stormtrack has fallen into a new, forward-looking ownership with a fine administrative team. Because I chase far less than I'd like to anymore, I've become something of a rarity on this forum. So I'm surprised, and rather gratified, to see that my post still has some traction. Having just reviewed it, I think the reason why is because the points I expressed remain relevant. I also think that while members who've been on this forum five or more years grasp the reasoning behind those points, my original post also remains prone to being misunderstood by some readers.
B. Dean Berry, I want to offer you a word of encouragement about learning forecasting. You don't have to be a math head to become adept at identifying chaseworthy setups and choosing a target area. My math skills stink like a cadaver fart, but that's not what it's about. You don't need to know calculus, physics, and a host of bewildering equations and such--not unless you plan to pursue a meteorology degree and move into the deeper end of things. To be sure, there are folks here who, since I first joined ST years ago, have done just that and acquired knowledge that easily eclipses mine. But I understand the basics, and I keep adding to them. All it takes is a desire to learn. I won't say it's easy, but it's not as hard as you think. Not if you stick with it and ask questions.
There are three ingredients necessary for thunderstorms: moisture, instability, and lift. For severe storms, including supercells, add a fourth ingredient: vertical wind shear. For tornadoes, add a fifth: low-level helicity. That's it. No math involved, just an understanding of how those things work together and of how the different forecasting tools--surface charts, satellite, upper air maps, the skew-T, etc.--can help you piece together a picture of what's happening and what to expect.
Learning that stuff is fun and rewarding, and there are all kinds of resources to assist you. If you simply don't care to do so and you're content to fly by the SPC forecasts, that's fine. If all you want to do is see tornadoes, doing so is much easier today than it used to be. But there's a certain satisfaction in making your own forecasts, and there's knowledge to be gained that can make the difference between boom and bust even on the "big" days.
I'll leave it at that and wish you well in your pursuit of convective magnificence.
