Chaser Irresponsibility

[Darrin Rasberry]

The same happened in 99 with the Moore tornado. Many heard about the tornado on TV and escaped the town before it was hit. While I do not encourage leaving home in a severe storm I do agree to say that when a violent (eF4-eF5) tornado hit I'd rather be out of town then in my basement where having a true reinforced concrete shelter seems to be the only way to garantee safety.

I can't really blame those who try to flea as it is a typical human reaction and they do not have the full knowledge of a storm chaser.

This could be an interesting topic for a new thread. For every example of people saving their own lives by escaping a violent tornado, there are examples of violent tornadoes killing people attempting to escape. How much time is necessary to escape? Who needs to escape and who is safe enough out of the path to stay in a secure place? How big does your town need to be to ensure you're safer on the road? Certainly a small town with 10-20 minutes of warning is safe to escape from, and surely living in the path in the middle of Downtown Dallas when a storm is immediately upon you at 5 PM on a weekday is not; your chances are better indoors.

More research may shed light on advanced warning and much narrower path possibilities over longer time frames. Perhaps in the future, orderly and safe small-scale evacuations from such-and-such street to such-and-such street can be done even half an hour in advance. But we are nowhere near that technology yet, so the topic on when to escape and when to hold on and hope is a very viable one.

 

[Jesse Risley]

While I'm not speaking towards this particular incident in itself, I can assure you that people do generalize towards groups such as chasers. I'm not one to nit pick and tell people how to live their lives, but taking a totally "don't worry about anyone but yourself" attitude is not good either.

I think we just need to remember that while it's not exactly the job of the chasing community to police each and every bonehead chaser move, OUR actions will be reflected in the form of generalizations made against the entire chasing community.

The actions of a few can have negative consequences for the whole chasing community, possibly in the form of stereotyping or greater restrictions on various segments of our hobby. I'm already coming to believe that more and more law enforcement officers are taking a negative attitude towards chasers, and I don't want to see that worsen...just some food for thought.

 

[Darrin Rasberry]

Sean's one comment hit the nail on the head. Chasers, no matter how godly you think you are during severe weather, you are not above the law. Just because there is a severe storm or tornado on the gorund doesn't automatically kick you up to the level of civil defense or any other official capacity.

While this is truth that we are suddenly not deputized during severe weather, it is ad hominem to assume a chaser or spotter breaking the law believes he or she is a god. The decisions they make may be foolish for their safety and the safety of others, but assuming they believe they are acting with an air of godly self-importance is unwarranted.

Your reports via Spotter Network are good and there are those NWSFOs that utilize that data. Your streaming video...no one but the weather geeks care about it, except maybe a TV station you could be chasing for. The whole "lights going and horn honking" thing just portrays an image of a crazy weather nut...totally different than flashing red/blue and a true siren.

I can't find the post, but I believe he did that to warn people unaware at a Wal-Mart. I may be wrong, however.

A chaser at (I believe) Parkersburg warned an Amish family in a similar alarming way and it's good he did. The Amish houses I saw near the town when I went to help were damaged but not demolished, and the chaser very well could have saved their lives with his crazy weather-nut tactics.

As far as the ever-present argument of chaser image, Hollywood has already taken care of that one.

I've noticed since I started chasing in 97 on the plains the transformation of the attitude of chasers. Ten years ago, technology really wasn't there yet for everyone to have their own personal radar, laptop, and other real-time data on the road. When I started chasing with my old OU dorm roommate it was a stack of maps, the amatuer radios, our phones, and a camera if we saw anything. It is almost like as more and more toys come out, the "easier" it has become for everyone to go out an chase.

The longer a chaser debate goes on, the more likely it is that technology will be brought into the fray. While there are no doubt chasers that get a big head because of technology, I submit there are chasers with technology who are still responsible and shut their laptops and use their eyes when the time comes to it (my primary chase partner has this as a cardinal rule while we chase), and I submit there are pompous chasers who go on a chase using only an atlas and a set of keys.

More and more people are out chasing and are going all out with the features on their vehicles and equipment inside. Unfortunately, as evidence by posts in this thread, some feel they have a god given right to go above the law in situations. I'm sorry, unless you are an emergency worker for the government, you have no rights just making up what road laws you choose to follow. Most speed limits in small towns are 25-35 on any roads you'll be on

.

Instead of prattling on and on about the law, how about discussing whether the action is moral and safe to others on the road? The law isn't everything. Objective morality is.

There is no need to blow an intersection at all, since getting back up to speed isn't that big of a deal.

This is an excellent point and one that should be considered vs. safety. More than likely, power outages will take out lights, and stopping vs. blowing through will not only be the right thing to do, but it will follow the law as a side-dish.

But what about waiting at an empty intersection for three minutes for a light to change? Let's put this situation to the absolute theoretical: what if you somehow know, 100%, that the intersection you've stopped at with a long red light in front of you is totally clear? Are you still duty-bound in that theoretical case to wait at the red light? Why or why not?

And if you have a tornado coming right at you, then you failed at making sure you were in a position to always have an escape route.

So, what, we wait at the intersection and go "oh well, I screwed up, at least I'm following the law before I die!"

While I, personally, would not even enter a city at my level of experience, nor would I likely break the law even if I had experience, I would unabashedly break the law in the case of a tornado bearing down on me as long as I've ascertained the safety of others as throughly as possible, my duty to follow the law be damned. I would act safely, calmly, and without panic to get out of the path of the tornado; I won't sit at a red light at the empty intersection and just take it in the woohoo because The Law Is The Law.

Times have changed quickly for chasers in just a few years. More are running with real-time radar and are getting closer than ever. Unfortunately it seems common sense is quickly leaving those that are new(er) to the game.

It does not follow that common sense has left newer chasers because of real-time radar. When I am not with my chase partner (who started out with nothing but a NOAA radio and a cell) I have nothing but a NOAA radio, a GPS locater, a cell, and a very crude cellphone weather radar for no other purpose than to let me know if I'm not going to get trained over by another storm. Yet I still admit completely that I have a long way to go yet. It doesn't have anything to do with computers; it has everything to do with experience.

Follow the rules out there, they are to keep everyone safe. Plan your routes carefully - always have a way to get out quickly and don't chase in areas with poor options. Lastly, put the laptop down some time and actually use your eyes. Yeah it helps with pin pointing hail and main areas of interest, but just about anyone with any real education/training should be able to observe the storm without the help of radar.

The above is very excellent advice, but it seems to me that your earlier argument was to follow the rules because they are rules, and not because they keep everyone safe. And I still fail to see how radar comes into play with any of this; besides, if used rationally and responsibly (like my normal chase partner) and not as a crutch, it can help out with the safety of yourself and others - not hinder it.

 

[sean wilson]

Come on everyone, it's simple, let's use common sense in everything we do.

 

[Ben Holcomb]

Actually, a good portion of our traffic comes from the National Weather Service. We have heard from a few different WFO's (Memphis, Goodland, Aberdeen and Grand Rapids all come off the top of my head) that streaming video is very helpful in the warning decision process. The NSSL, SPC, and NWS WFO's are watching during severe weather. I know my local office (GRR) appreciates the video - They've told me so in IEMChat.

 

[Greg Stumpf]

Actually, a good portion of our traffic comes from the National Weather Service.

Yes, we are utilizing the live streaming video in the Hazardous Weather Testbed's Experimental Warning Program at NSSL. They've been very helpful at times during our experimental probabilistic warning exercises. We use a Situational Awareness Display (4 28" LCDs, one 42" plasma, one 63" plasma) that displays near-storm environment data, Google Earth WDSSII products with Spotter Network positions, local news channel live feeds, and the various live streaming chase videos to improve our visual understanding of the storms we are issuing warnings for. Several of our visiting NWS forecasters have also commented on using the live chase video streams during their local WFO warning operations (e.g., Memphis). These are extremely useful, and when mobile wireless internet becomes even "more broadly banded", we'll approach the video quality of our live OKC television news feeds. Kudos to all the chasers that are running these and sharing their feeds.

A couple of comments - be sure your dashboard is free of objects that can reflect off the glass and partially obscure the image (e.g., maps, GPS pucks, etc). Roger Hill knows about this, because we phoned him during a live chase and let him know how useful his feed was for us, and then politely asked him to remove the road maps on top of his dash.

My opinion about blowing through red lights or stop signs on a chase - if you are being closely tailed by a tornado and you think you are about to get munched, if safe to do so (slow down first and look both ways), then by all means, why not? But better yet, stop and take shelter inside a structure (which is what we tell the public to do). But if you are ignoring traffic signals to stay caught up with a tornado ahead and moving away from you, it is not cool, IMO. One suggestion would be to give yourself a wider margin of safety when coming through a city or town with traffic control devices to avoid getting caught in this situation in the first place.

 

[Brendon Lindsey]

What does being a Junior member have to do with whether or not you post a lot?
***

Well Seeing as I cannot post any reports or forecasts and thats why I signed up for this site for the most part....

 

[Gerard Jebaily]

My opinion about blowing through red lights or stop signs on a chase - if you are being closely tailed by a tornado and you think you are about to get munched, if safe to do so (slow down first and look both ways), then by all means, why not? But better yet, stop and take shelter inside a structure (which is what we tell the public to do). But if you are ignoring traffic signals to stay caught up with a tornado ahead and moving away from you, it is not cool, IMO. One suggestion would be to give yourself a wider margin of safety when coming through a city or town with traffic control devices to avoid getting caught in this situation in the first place.

My thoughts exactly, couldn't agree more.

 

[Darren Addy]

Honestly, people. The most embarrassing aspect of the Team Remora video is the way the driver of car #1 incorrectly read the storm and didn't listen to either the Baron data (when it showed the rotation was now BEHIND THEM) OR his fellow car members who noted the wall cloud now AT THEIR 5:00. Had he listened to what the data and others in the car were saying he could have been on top of some of the most significant damage in Kearney (namely the fairground's Expo building and the big damage at the airport, including the collapse of a hanger all over a corporate jet). Instead of turning right on 39th St. he continues on North for at least another couple of extra miles (at least that is where the video ends) because he "sees the tornado" where none exists.

Car #2 was in some serious danger for following this guy and if I was on "Team Remora" I'd be reevaluating who my drivers were. Top on my priority list would be finding one who would take into consideration the available data and the other eyeballs in the car.

This was a big lesson for me in reviewing his video.

 

[Dennis Sherrod]

Honestly, people. The most embarrassing aspect of the Team Remora video is the way the driver of car #1 incorrectly read the storm and didn't listen to either the Baron data (when it showed the rotation was now BEHIND THEM) OR his fellow car members who noted the wall cloud now AT THEIR 5:00.

Reading what you write Darren, if the rotation, according to Baron, is behind them and the team members say it is at their 5, maybe Greg and Team Remora were correct and it was time to get the heck out of there quickly. I think most of us have made an improper judgement or radar reading and made the wrong move, then have to move quickly to get out. I don't know that something like this would make me embarrassed as it did you, but I would take the approach that Greg and Team Remora already has done and admitted the mistake 8 days ago and have learned from it.

Had he listened to what the data and others in the car were saying he could have been on top of some of the most significant damage in Kearney (namely the fairground's Expo building and the big damage at the airport, including the collapse of a hanger all over a corporate jet).[/QUOTE]

Was this his desire to be at the airport to see this damage, whether beforehand, during, or afterwards? I think we each have our own agenda on what we choose to film or what we want to see. Also, do you know who was chosen to make the final decisions on what to do? Usually from my experience, in group situations, one person (the lead driver or navigator) has the final say and makes the decision when there are several others saying different things. Each to his own. Personally, I chose to see the storm in the wide open while it is happening and pray it does not hit anything. I can always go look at damage at some other time.

The original post on this thread was about a driver running red lights, traffic lights that were out due to a power loss, and about some speed related issues.
Your ideas and thoughts may be good for another thread dealing with your critique of how others read or misread radar data and how others need to listen to others in the car.

 

[Greg Ansel]

More stuff...

Just so it's clear, we (team remora) chase with Sean Wilson (not team remora) from time to time. He was a bit in front of us so we were in effect, car #2, I guess. There were two sets of rotation, the one we were following, and the one that came in behind us (which built up very quickly, when it passed over us there were 2 couplets of 92 & 103 mph). We weren't looking for the destruction shot, in fact we were hoping it wouldn't hit anything major, just try to report on what we saw. I drive and my wife navigates and reports. Sean had two other people in his vehicle navigating also. We headed north and then turned around and headed back south once we knew the first tornado was out of the city. We headed east on the Lincoln Highway? I think but got caught by the tornado that had developed to our west. I hope that doesn't add to the confusion, but it's easier for us to tell what happened than for people to guess what happened and why we were where we were.

 

[Matthew K. Hartman]

I apologize I'm jumping in here late, but here's my two cents, for what it's worth...

Not only were "Team Ramora" acting irresponsibly, but they were among many others that day giving false reports. My fellow chaser-friends and I were on the cell further southwest of the two that eventually hit Kearney and heard and read many reports that simply were not valid. I swear, for as often as chasers say they do it for "public safety" and "for their community," many of them desperately need to sit through an Advanced Skywarn course once or twice. I re-certify every year, even though I really don't need to.

In fact, if my mind serves me correct, Team Ramora was one of many also giving false reports of tornadoes and funnel clouds on May 26th (near and east of Greensburg, KS). There's a huge difference between a rotating wall cloud and harmless scud being pulled into an updraft. It's too bad there are so many that don't understand that difference.

I've got plenty of pictures and little video (there was nothing to video!) to likely disprove many of the reports between these two days.

At one point, we had someone drive by declaring "stop sending false reports" over an apparent PA system on his vehicle (it looked like a black Corsica). Definitely, one of the funnier moments ever in my chase career.

Anyhow, to stay more on topic, IMO, I feel that if anyone thinks they can disregard the law or "rules" just because they're a chaser - maybe they shouldn't be one. I've never understood what's so damn important about severe weather that makes people want to be right in it, or as close as possible. You don't have to be a half-mile away or a quarter-mile away from a tornado to report it by phone or HAM to the NWS. And cameras do have these things called telescoping lenses. If "up-close-and-personal" is what you're after, I'd recommend investing in one of these, rather than you're own life.

You can come up with all the excuses and justifications for ignoring the law, but what it comes down to - it doesn't matter who or what you are, you have no obligation to anyone to break the rules. Also... if you are so high up on serving your community or the public at-large, then you should follow that of which is in place for public safety... That is the purpose of red lights, stop signs, speed limits, no?

 

[David Mikulec]

I have to agree with the up close and personal comment. When I chase, I like to stay back and get the "whole picture". Watching storms develop and convection intensify, from a distance is a spectacular thing and I can't understand this constant quest for chasers to get right underneath things.

My motto: back up a bit, you just might like the view better.

 

[Shane Adams]

I have to agree with the up close and personal comment. When I chase, I like to stay back and get the "whole picture". Watching storms develop and convection intensify, from a distance is a spectacular thing and I can't understand this constant quest for chasers to get right underneath things.

My motto: back up a bit, you just might like the view better.

I say to each their own...if you wanna be in the tornadoes, more power to ya...just keeps my area (a few miles away) that much more traffic-free

 

[Scott Weberpal]

I have to agree with the up close and personal comment. When I chase, I like to stay back and get the "whole picture". Watching storms develop and convection intensify, from a distance is a spectacular thing and I can't understand this constant quest for chasers to get right underneath things.

My motto: back up a bit, you just might like the view better.

I've been in both situations and enjoy being up-close and personal much more than further back. I enjoy seeing what is going on at the ground and seeing the pure force of a tornado. It's a personal thing from chaser to chaser, there is nothing for you to understand about it.