NWS Hastings County Warning Area, have not had a confirmed tornado from Jan-Jun

[mikegeukes]

First time since 1950 that all of the 30 counties served by the National Weather Service office in Hastings, Nebraska have not had a confirmed tornado during the first six months of the year.
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/crnews/display_sto...d=2928&source=0

Map of the County Warning Area: NWS Hastings NE
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/gid/Local_Informat...arning_Area.php

Mike
http://mgweather-nebraska.blogspot.com/

 

[Scott Olson]

Has MPX seen any tornadoes at all this year? A look at the preliminary map looks like it may have not even gotten a preliminary report (and we all know how ambigious those can be.) FSD has only been able to confirm one tornado this year, though Laura D, Roger Edwards and myself witnessed at least two or more but they couldn't find any damage.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

The odd thing is that the 2006 tornado count is still above the 10-year average. From a national standpoint, this has been an above-average year! While the plains have been quite, the early season outbreaks have resulted in very, very high tornado counts for areas in MO, IL, KY, TN, and nearby states. So, there have been many tornadoes, just primarily east of the plains and occurring early in the year, when storm motions were 50-60mph. Oh how deceptive stats can be...

For stats on the year-to-date preliminary tornado count, see http://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/torn/monthlytornstats.html

 

[Scott Olson]

Just look at how Mar-Apr dominate the tornado rankings:

Just glancing back and forth between SPC's prelim satistics and storm data, I don't see a period in recent history with such a spread between preliminary and actual entered tornado reports. There are more than 50% more preliminary reports between 01/01/06-4/30/06 than actually entered into Storm Data. For other years the final reports are actually greater or at least within a reasonable marigin.

So based on actual storm data reports the number of tornadoes for the early season wasn't so expectional:
Entered Reports for 1/01-04/30
295- 2006
251- 2005
202- 2004

FYI- if you removed the preliminary reports that were not verified (since the number was releatively close in previous years) and added the preliminary reports for May- June (and treated them as if they were verified, which is very generous). You would get 597 tornado reports for Jan-June 2006, which would be below the 30 year average which looks to be 650-680 reports by that time. Keeping in mind im only using that formula to provide a different perspective because of the obvious double-reports/un-verifiable reports of 2006 and the better consistentcy between prelim & verifiable in the previous 3 years.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

Scott,

I don't think all April Storm Data has been submitted... I don't see any April Storm Data from OUN, TSA, and a few other CWAs. There are April entries for 8 states, but I think April is still rather incomplete. Don't the NWSFOs have 90 days to submit Storm Data? Or is it only 60? Of course, this would mean that there will be more tornado county segments for April, once all are submitted. On the other hand, Storm Data entries are for county segments, so there are several entries for some tornadoes (meaning the actual tornado count is even lower).

Missouri rules the Jan-Apr period this year, though (again, seems April is incomplete for some NWSFOs).

 

[mikegeukes]

Storm Data is officially out to Feb 2006.

Mike

 

[Scott Olson]

Scott,

I don't think all April Storm Data has been submitted... I don't see any April Storm Data from OUN, TSA, and a few other CWAs. There are April entries for 8 states, but I think April is still rather incomplete. Don't the NWSFOs have 90 days to submit Storm Data? Or is it only 60? Of course, this would mean that there will be more tornado county segments for April, once all are submitted. On the other hand, Storm Data entries are for county segments, so there are several entries for some tornadoes (meaning the actual tornado count is even lower).

Missouri rules the Jan-Apr period this year, though (again, seems April is incomplete for some NWSFOs).
[/b]

Why would OUN have data for April? LOL.. It does look like data is missing from April but I think you get the idea. Definately right about the county segments espically with events like 3/12 and 4/02 where several counties were involved. Therefore the actual number of tornadoes is lower then quoted Storm Data, which will probably make up for the CWA's missing from April (which doesn't seem like to many). March alone still has considerably high ratio of prelim- to entered entries. So while I think we certainly had an exceptional early season in states like Missouri. I think there is some indication that the preliminary numbers are much more anomalously high then recent years.

 

[Rob Satkus]

Why would OUN have data for April? LOL.. [/b]

There were 4 confirmed tornadoes in the OUN area and 4 in the TUL area for April...and I managed to miss them all!

Rob

 

[John Wetter]

Has MPX seen any tornadoes at all this year? A look at the preliminary map looks like it may have not even gotten a preliminary report (and we all know how ambigious those can be.) FSD has only been able to confirm one tornado this year, though Laura D, Roger Edwards and myself witnessed at least two or more but they couldn't find any damage.
[/b]

Nope, no TOR's in the MPX CWA yet. Not even a mention yet... Only three in the state of MN so far, and all three were in FGF's CWA.

FSD's only one was one Andrew Revering got near Badger, SD on May 2nd.

-John

 

[Joe Nield]

Don't the NWSFOs have 90 days to submit Storm Data? Or is it only 60?[/b]

We have 60 days from the end of the month in question to submit the data to HQ. April took FOREVER to enter for IND. There were 15 pages of reports, which is the most I've seen for a single month since I took over S.D. back in mid-2004.

 

[Mike Smith]

It must be Global Warming.