Calling out SN reports publically

[David Reimer]

This was a report from Lanny Dean at 7:50 PM CDT: "Small thin funnel observed to my north northwest at 7:50pm CDT to 7:52 CDT. Could not see full condensation to the ground. Funnel was thin and rope like and lasted approx. 2 minutes. Please note: Inflow is increasing at this time.."

This report was from Todd Thorn at 8:02 PM CDT: "There was no funnel seen from other person's report."

My question is concerning the appropriateness of filing a statement (The above is just that, a statement) downplaying another report. Does SN want chasers submitting reports confirming or not confirming another report? I ask because Mr. Thorn's report received two green RQC flags.

- David Reimer

 

[rdale]

I think it's due to the Erin incident. Probably a good idea, just need to work on implementation. It appears Lanny's yellow was due to a lack of distance, so it's possible there was confusion all around.

 

[Adam Lucio]

Yea, thats stupid. The SN overview clearly states what it wants. Things aren't always viewable from different positions. Just because someone sees a funnel that someone cant [unless theyre right next to each other and someone is clearly making a bogus report] doesn't mean its not there

I saw a couple reports in a severe warning saying that non severe winds were measured as well. People seem to forget that just because its blowing at 40mph in your location doesn't mean its not blowing at 65mph a block down from you...I mean...are we supposed to be that good on estimating wind speeds down to block level based on radar...cmon now.

If the above were the case...I should be reporting every time it storms that I don't see a funnel cloud or measure a severe wind gust. Non severe events are way more common than severe events, thus we report severe events.

 

[Shane Adams]

if people can't get the basic location from looking at (1) the chaser's icon position and (2) radar at the time of the report, they're idiots.

Anyone ever thought that maybe the lack of detail on SN reports is because a chaser doesn't have time to write his/her memoirs during severe weather? WTF is all the technology for if we still have to hear the details from the horse's mouth?

THINK ABOUT THAT

 

[rdale]

if people can't get the basic location from looking at (1) the chaser's icon position and (2) radar at the time of the report, they're idiots.

You apparently forgot about the OKC incident that started the year off... Apparently a lot of idiots in the NWS and on ST

Not one reporting service in the world would let you say "tornado" and then get off the phone/radio. Basic spotter stuff here - TEL (Time Event Location.)

I saw a couple reports in a severe warning saying that non severe winds were measured as well.

If the winds were under 50mph, they were red flagged.

 

[Dean Baron]

I saw a couple reports in a severe warning saying that non severe winds were measured as well. People seem to forget that just because its blowing at 40mph in your location doesn't mean its not blowing at 65mph a block down from you...I mean...are we supposed to be that good on estimating wind speeds down to block level based on radar...cmon now.

I made reports about non severe winds because I had been chasing the line of severe storms in southern SD yesterday for a couple hours. I made reports of measured 87 and 66 mph wind gusts and for over an hour after that 66 mph gust I did not measure a severe wind gust and the strongest I measured was 49 mph. A little while later I made another report that power poles were downed in Platte, SD. I dont know if you're talking about my reports, but for anyone who saw my reports just an FYI on why I reported what I did.

 

[Jason Foster]

Moderation, confirmations and such should be left to the owners and operators of SN, same as most sites and internet based sites (like forums).

 

[Connor McCrorey]

One question I have: Was Todd's report intended to say that Lanny's was false? Or was it to say that while Lanny's MAY have been true, Todd saw nothing to confirm it? I think it makes only a slight difference, and I'm asking out of curiousity more than anything else.

 

[Skip Talbot]

Chaser A. Is 5 miles away from the storm and see a well definied point hanging from the base of a storm. He/She reports this as a funnel.

Chaser B. Is <1 mile away from the same storm and sees non-rotating scud hanging from the base in a well defined point. He/She reports that this feature is not a funnel, but is non-rotating scud.

Is this not a valuable contradiction? Do we want to leave it up to the SN/NWS folks to determine if that first report is indeed accurate even if we have people closer that can better confirm/dismiss it?

 

[Peter Wharton]

Chaser A. Is 5 miles away from the storm and see a well definied point hanging from the base of a storm. He/She reports this as a funnel.

Chaser B. Is <1 mile away from the same storm and sees non-rotating scud hanging from the base in a well defined point. He/She reports that this feature is not a funnel, but is non-rotating scud.

Is this not a valuable contradiction? Do we want to leave it up to the SN/NWS folks to determine if that first report is indeed accurate even if we have people closer that can better confirm/dismiss it?

This is exactly the positions of the two chasers involved as reported on Spotter Network at the time - Todd's position was much closer to the storm than Lanny - and was in the same line of sight as Lanny - Lanny's observation appeared to be inaccurate from the view from the closer observation point - as tornado warnings were being issued at the time based on "trained spotter reports" clarification of what appeared to be an incorrect report seems appropriate to ensure that the public is receiving valid warnings.

 

[Graham Butler]

Chaser A. Is 5 miles away from the storm and see a well definied point hanging from the base of a storm. He/She reports this as a funnel.

Chaser B. Is <1 mile away from the same storm and sees non-rotating scud hanging from the base in a well defined point. He/She reports that this feature is not a funnel, but is non-rotating scud.

Is this not a valuable contradiction? Do we want to leave it up to the SN/NWS folks to determine if that first report is indeed accurate even if we have people closer that can better confirm/dismiss it?

Or....... Chaser B is so close that they don't see the rapidly rotating funnel directly over their head that Chaser A. just reported.

Tons of versions and none will be the same. Each case must be moderated individually...

Graham

 

[Lanny Dean]

I AM SO SICK OF ALL THIS POLITICAL BULL****! Most particularly as of late. I have been chasing for over 20 years now and I don't need someone telling me what I did or did not see or what my team did or did not see or how I need to word my report. My reports have worked for ANY local NWSFO area wide for the last 20 years. If the people from Spotter Network have issues then **** it....I will stop using it. I will simply let my video speak for itself. We have video and pics of a small needdle type funnel starting at 7:52pm and going for about 2 minutes.
It does not take a 2 year old baby to know that different angles and positions in relation to the area(s) of interest can clearly tell a different story.

Whatever.....you don't like my reports, don't read them. You don't want my reports, just let me know. This is just stupid

And just a note to the Mods: if you feel the need to change and or modify my post, please feel free to change or cancel my account. Thanks so much!

 

[rdale]

I AM SO SICK OF ALL THIS POLITICAL BULL****!

Just curious - what is so political about this? I refer you to the Erin thread if you forgot what happened there... Not picking sides, just wondering why you think people are out to get you.

 

[Lanny Dean]

Just curious - what is so political about this? I refer you to the Erin thread if you forgot what happened there... Not picking sides, just wondering why you think people are out to get you.

rdale, I did not even mention your name nor was I refering to you. And for the record, I don't think people are out to get me....as you should know already I could give a **** what others think of me. Unlike some, it is not my sole purpose to be accepted on this forum. I do not feel the need to belittle myself or my beliefs just to try and please those who happen to interact with me.

What I was refering to was the issue of the reports I gave and those who questioned said reports, most particularly those who flagged those reports. By the tone of my post I certainly didn't think it would be this hard to figure out Robdale. Hope this make it a little easier for you

 

[Jeff Bartlett]

Photo Support

I was due south of this thing by 1 mile. I got a really good view north of Stonington looking due north. First, there was rapid rotation on a lowering that was 2/3's of the way down. As I got out of the car, I felt the cold outflow hit me in the face and knew it wouldn't last long.

The first area of circulation that was cutoff by outflow is on the left.

Directly east (right) of that feature was what appeared to be an inflow tail.

However, the tip of that inflow tail would arc downwards towards the ground and persist there for several minutes.

This area in question would then take over as a new wall cloud.

I don't know where Lanny or Mr. Thorn were in relation to my position. Was it a funnel? Was it an inflow tail that was awkwardly positioned? Who the hell knows...but I can certainly see why someone would report a funnel. It was rotating (not much, and not violently). Lanny was in no way out of line for reporting this and I can see why he feels like this is a personal pimp-slap in the face.

Lot of drama floating around this year. Oh, speaking of drama, check out the last photo and see what the farmer did to his own field. After the SD incident last week, I thought it was funny.