Dan Robinson
EF5
The current paradigm in meteorology is to assume that all observed funnels are not tornadoes unless there is evidence to the contrary (a visible ground circulation/condensed subvortices/debris cloud or damage after the fact). To my knowledge, there is no evidence or research behind this paradigm, it's just always been an accepted part of severe storms meteorology and storm spotting.
I believe there is enough evidence that this paradigm is false in these specific, but very common, categories of funnels:
A. Funnels under the rotating cloud bases of a supercell mesocyclone. By the time a funnel appears in these scenarios, a damage-capable ground circulation has long since been in progress in some form.
B. Persistent vertical to near-vertical funnels extending more than 1/3 of the way to the ground from updraft bases. These are mostly nonsupercell phenomena associated from the stretching of near-surface vorticity from boundaries in environments with sufficient low-level CAPE. This category would include "cold air funnels" that our current operational paradigm states "rarely reach the surface". In the known cases where a chaser or other observer is directly under such a feature, there has been an observable (damage-capable) ground circulation present.
Proposed research methodology: Assemble a data set of funnel events in the scenarios A and B (outlined above) observed from close range where the ground underneath the funnel is clearly visible, in other words, where the presence or lack of a ground circulation can be conclusively determined. From this data set, calculate the likelihood of a funnel being a tornado (having a damage-capable ground circulation) to either confirm or challenge the current paradigm of assuming most funnels in these scenarios are not tornadoes.
Types of funnels not considered in this research:
Shear funnels: Midlevel vortices or horseshoe vortices.
Transient low-level vortices: Short-lived vortices under updraft bases, advancing gust front shelf clouds or other features.
Could this rise to the level to qualify for a formal published paper? As an outsider to the science community, I'd be interested to hear from qualified individuals if this is possible and the best way to approach it to make it a useful endeavor.
Examples:
Nonsupercell (cold air) funnel near Tuttle, Oklahoma on June 13, 2021:
Ground circulation from close observer:
www.facebook.com
Mesocyclone funnel at Bluffs, Illinois on December 1, 2018:
Close-range ground circulation debris:
I believe there is enough evidence that this paradigm is false in these specific, but very common, categories of funnels:
A. Funnels under the rotating cloud bases of a supercell mesocyclone. By the time a funnel appears in these scenarios, a damage-capable ground circulation has long since been in progress in some form.
B. Persistent vertical to near-vertical funnels extending more than 1/3 of the way to the ground from updraft bases. These are mostly nonsupercell phenomena associated from the stretching of near-surface vorticity from boundaries in environments with sufficient low-level CAPE. This category would include "cold air funnels" that our current operational paradigm states "rarely reach the surface". In the known cases where a chaser or other observer is directly under such a feature, there has been an observable (damage-capable) ground circulation present.
Proposed research methodology: Assemble a data set of funnel events in the scenarios A and B (outlined above) observed from close range where the ground underneath the funnel is clearly visible, in other words, where the presence or lack of a ground circulation can be conclusively determined. From this data set, calculate the likelihood of a funnel being a tornado (having a damage-capable ground circulation) to either confirm or challenge the current paradigm of assuming most funnels in these scenarios are not tornadoes.
Types of funnels not considered in this research:
Shear funnels: Midlevel vortices or horseshoe vortices.
Transient low-level vortices: Short-lived vortices under updraft bases, advancing gust front shelf clouds or other features.
Could this rise to the level to qualify for a formal published paper? As an outsider to the science community, I'd be interested to hear from qualified individuals if this is possible and the best way to approach it to make it a useful endeavor.
Examples:
Nonsupercell (cold air) funnel near Tuttle, Oklahoma on June 13, 2021:
Ground circulation from close observer:
169.034 Aufrufe · 2.048 Reaktionen | Landspout Tornado Tuttle, Oklahoma Funnel Cloud from Plane Glider Ground View | WOW!!! Remember that "Tuttle, Oklahoma Funnel Cloud Video from a Plane Glider" we shared yesterday that happened this past Sunday? ☁️
WOW!!! Remember that "Tuttle, Oklahoma Funnel Cloud Video from a Plane Glider" we shared yesterday that happened this past Sunday? ☁️☁️🌪️🛩️☁️☁️🤳 It...
www.facebook.com
Mesocyclone funnel at Bluffs, Illinois on December 1, 2018:
Close-range ground circulation debris:
Last edited:
