I'M INSIDE THE TORNADO!!!

[Michael Nicolaou]

Also, since the biggest interest in tornado research nowadays is getting data in the lowest 30 m or so, video from that area can be greatly valuable to determine how exactly the winds are interacting with the ground, and how much horizontal/vertical motion is occurring at/near the ground.

Exactly.....and just like the military has determined the use of drones is beneficial in both surveilance and tactical operations to maintain troop safety, probes can provide the same valuable data in storm research.....without the horrible audio of saying goodbye to loved ones, cursing, or screams of joy.

 

[Scott Weberpal]

You can always see the results of the low level interaction post storm, but you only get one chance to the view/record environmental factors impacting the storm itself which leads to the interaction on the ground as it is happening. After that; "poof" it's gone.

I dont care about the post storm results, I couldn't care less if I see damage or not. I want to see interaction with the ground AS its happening.

 

[Shane Adams]

I have to disagree, I would much rather see an up close video to a tornado violently interacting at ground level than a mile or more away video showing the entire column and you can't see much of what is going on at ground level.

You can have both from a mile away...it's called "zoom"

 

[Shane Adams]

By no means do I advocate driving into a tornado, but I believe there is great scientific value from getting video in/near a tornado. There is a lot going on inside vorticies of that scale that we don't know about. Modeling studies suggest tornadoes can be single celled, double celled, or multicelled, but that's very difficult (if not impossible) to determine by looking at the tornado from a mile away. Also, since the biggest interest in tornado research nowadays is getting data in the lowest 30 m or so, video from that area can be greatly valuable to determine how exactly the winds are interacting with the ground, and how much horizontal/vertical motion is occurring at/near the ground.

I think a focused, still video would be good scientific material....but bouncy, out of focus shots showing the chasers (for reactional drama, a staple of great television) pretty much eliminate the detail of the tornado itself. Up close is about the escape, not the science.

 

[Melissa Jablonski]

I agree with you Shane.
Melissa

 

[Lanny Dean]

Remember the term "yahoo"?

When seasoned chasers choose to interiorize themselves in a tornado, as far as I'm concerned, they've gone through the paces, experienced many a previous tornado, know the risks, and can make the choice knowing what they're getting into. My concern has been that a bunch of wannabes watching Discovery Channel are going to get the idea that punching a tornado isn't that big a deal. Seems to me that in a similar thread a while back, Warren Faidley mentioned that he'd gotten a number of messages from kids inquiring where the best place would be for them to go in order to drive into a tornado. Something's wrong with that picture.

I had not planned to chime into this thread but.....

Bob's quote above is dead on. It takes a certain amount of time (called paying your dues so to speak) and experiencing many different events/tornadoes before you can make split second choices that could, ultimately, end your life.Those kinds of choices are not fun, despite the fact that the last few years of the Discovery show and many others, including the shows I was in portray it in a glamorous light.
Of course, as has been mentioned already, then there are the "I am in a tornado" when actually the person crying like a little girl is no where near being in the tornado. I see this more and more and even from a few named chasers. We all know why....it's for nothing other than the "fame".

One could look back as little as two years ago and could pull up a thread from this forum where members here were bashing a named chaser for getting close. Now, those same members are praising the star of the Discovery Channel. What gives??

Getting close to a tornado takes absolutely no skill, despite what others lead you to believe. The skill is in trying to stay close to the tornado while making those split second choices like: filming, driving, looking at data, keeping an eye on the storm, using the phone, taking pictures ect, ect....

Having been in a few tornadoes myself (literally) that not only left mental scars, but also physical, I can certainly tell you all that it is no fun. It is not what those few named chasers are trying to feed everyone.
It is scary as hell......while laying in the hospital bed getting stitches in my leg and my head after being hit by the by the Folwer KS F-2, I began to realize that getting close and actually being in the tornado is not what it has been hyped up to be.

As far as getting close or being in a tornado....hey, to each his own.
The only man that I know that does it repeatedly and has truly been in many tornadoes (for a reason) is my old chase partner, The Outlaw, Randy Hicks. Randy has certainly been inside of a tornado more than anyone I know including that famed chaser from Discovery. However, Randy does not do this for fame and never has. For Randy, it is a lifestyle and a job and has nothing to do with fame.

As far as the video..... to each his own I guess. I actually enjoy that kind of video.

Will I "ever get back inside a tornado"? Maybe. but if I do, it certainly will not be for the fame.

 

[Scott Weberpal]

Getting close to a tornado takes absolutely no skill, despite what others lead you to believe. The skill is in trying to stay close to the tornado while making those split second choices like: filming, driving, looking at data, keeping an eye on the storm, using the phone, taking pictures ect, ect....

I agree 100%. Couldn't have said it better! My Kirksville video makes this point perfectly. I'm trying to film with one hand, take stills with the other hand, trying to see if there are any roads that go N or S from Hwy 6, meanwhile trying to submit a report on Spotter Network while allowing the tornado to approach and pass roughly 1/8 mile in front of me along a hilly, tree filled stretch of highway. Not exactly the picture perfect setting, but it worked well!

 

[Jason Foster]

Of course, now that so many people have so-called been in a tornado...I think now it's likely to become..."been there, done that" and wonder what the next thing will be....parachuting into one, getting out of the car and running into one with a TIS (Tornado Intercept Suit)....like with fashion....gotta be on the cutting edge, right?

 

[Shane Adams]

Of course, now that so many people have so-called been in a tornado...I think now it's likely to become..."been there, done that" and wonder what the next thing will be....parachuting into one, getting out of the car and running into one with a TIS (Tornado Intercept Suit)....like with fashion....gotta be on the cutting edge, right?

How about everyone gets over it all, and goes on to the next dumbed-down "Mountain Dew" extreme activity? Chasing is a lot more cerebral and a lot less cock-n-balls then most people realize...at least to those who are truly passionate about it.

 

[Jason Foster]

How about everyone gets over it all, and goes on to the next dumbed-down "Mountain Dew" extreme activity? Chasing is a lot more cerebral and a lot less cock-n-balls then most people realize...at least to those who are truly passionate about it.

I like that Shane....BTW...welcome back...forgot to mention that.

 

[Mark Sudduth]

What I would like to see, and I am serious about this, is video taken inside/next to/through a tornado with a high speed camera. 1000 FPS would be great! Perhaps 5000 FPS. Imagine what you could see with that kind of time resolution. I am all about time lapse- but slowing down a tornado to its basic elements would be incredible. The ONLY way to do it would be to drive the vehicle with the high speed camera in to the tornado. Putting a probe down and running out of the way is far less accurate.

And as for the whole "insane" thing about doing this- what is the difference between tornado researchers doing what they do and NASA astronauts doing their jobs? How many Reed Timmers have we lost in the line of duty? How many Josh Wurmans? The list could go on and on. But NASA astronauts- we have lost many with the most recent being 7 in 2003, of course. Are they crazy for getting on top of a mega explosion hoping it will get them in to orbit? What about coming back? That was the problem in 2003. I think it is far more dangerous to be an astronaut or a police officer or a teacher even. Anyway, I would love to see someone drive a high speed camera in to a tornado. That would be epic if it worked.

 

[John Hudson]

You really have to wonder what will come next after just being in the tornado isn't enough. I can picture a few possibilities:

1.) Getting into the tornado while naked and strapped to the mesonet while throwing handfuls of sheet metal screws into the air.
2.) Getting into the tornado while naked and strapped to the mesonet while juggling running chainsaws.
3.) Paragliding into thunderstorm updrafts (already done in Australia, but not deliberately).
4.) Skydiving through thunderstorms in a flying squirrel outfit bristling with lightning rods.

And this year's Darwin Award goes to ___________.

Guess I'm just not that much of an adrenaline junkie. I'm totally comfortable allowing Tim's probes to get video samples of the corner flow region.

Sorry, just wanted to have fun with it!


John
VE4 JTH

 

[Danny Neal]

You really have to wonder what will come next after just being in the tornado isn't enough. I can picture a few possibilities:

1.) Getting into the tornado while naked and strapped to the mesonet while throwing handfuls of sheet metal screws into the air.
2.) Getting into the tornado while naked and strapped to the mesonet while juggling running chainsaws.
3.) Paragliding into thunderstorm updrafts (already done in Australia, but not deliberately).
4.) Skydiving through thunderstorms in a flying squirrel outfit bristling with lightning rods.

And this year's Darwin Award goes to ___________.

Guess I'm just not that much of an adrenaline junkie. I'm totally comfortable allowing Tim's probes to get video samples of the corner flow region.

Sorry, just wanted to have fun with it!


John
VE4 JTH

I don't know about anyone else but I am really on board with #4

 

[Tyler Burg]

What I would like to see, and I am serious about this, is video taken inside/next to/through a tornado with a high speed camera. 1000 FPS would be great! Perhaps 5000 FPS. Imagine what you could see with that kind of time resolution. I am all about time lapse- but slowing down a tornado to its basic elements would be incredible. The ONLY way to do it would be to drive the vehicle with the high speed camera in to the tornado. Putting a probe down and running out of the way is far less accurate.

I agree, I have yet to see a cool video out of a probe that got intercepted, just doesn't work when you've got rain on the glass/plastic in front of the camera. Those videos are just a bore, get you all excited only to be let down.

The footage I like to see is stuff like Reed Timmers April 26th chase this year with that first tornado, IMO they were at a perfect distance to get some incredible video of the ground circulation. Seeing how it tears up the trees is very cool. And valuable to science I'm sure.

 

[Ric Burney]

...
4.) Skydiving through thunderstorms in a flying squirrel outfit bristling with lightning rods.

"Oh Bullwinkle, that trick never works."