rdale
EF5
Waternado is not acceptable... It makes no sense.
- Status
Brian Emfinger
EF4
Yeah, sounds like your talking about a whirlpool. and I think Dan R. made great points. The basic system we are using seems to work to me. I think the main point is just conveying to the public what danger they are in: ie is it a tornado likely to persist onto land (supercellular) or is it a waterspout which is only likely to affect the beach areas...as long as thats done then its fine.
Martin Kucera
EF2
No problems with a terms like waterspout or landspout here. I wonder how exactly would one like to drop the term "waterspout", for example. Have somebody remove it from all dictionaries, scientifical papers, etc... ? Makes no sense to me. If you live near the ocean you obviously look different at this subject. I don't think people involved in fishing, diving and other marine interests mind the term "waterspout" at all.
Just try to ask anybody from the WFO in Key West, FL whether they'd want the term "waterspout" "dropped.... And as for the supercell induced funnel or not, there is a fair weather waterspout and a tornadic waterspout. That explains it pretty well. I don't see a problem with multiple term like these. They exactly describe what you are looking at. No further explanation needed for most of us. Pretty simple. This debate is a waste of time. Should terms like "wall cloud, tail cloud, shelf cloud, roll cloud, pileus cloud, etc. be "dropped" and all of these just called clouds ???
Just try to ask anybody from the WFO in Key West, FL whether they'd want the term "waterspout" "dropped.... And as for the supercell induced funnel or not, there is a fair weather waterspout and a tornadic waterspout. That explains it pretty well. I don't see a problem with multiple term like these. They exactly describe what you are looking at. No further explanation needed for most of us. Pretty simple. This debate is a waste of time. Should terms like "wall cloud, tail cloud, shelf cloud, roll cloud, pileus cloud, etc. be "dropped" and all of these just called clouds ???
scott r currens
EF3
I agree that the terms "waterspout" and "landspout" are not going anywhere. That being said these are terms that describe a type of non-mesocyclone tornado. There is problem with calling a supercell/mesocyclone tornado over water a "tornadic waterspout". That implies that waterspouts in general are not tornadic. Waterspouts and landspouts are tornadic because they are tornadoes. You could say "supercell waterspout" or God forbid "supercell landspout"
but those are dubious terms that are the equivalent of saying a "mesocyclone non-mesocyclone tornado". That leaves us with "supercell tornado" or "mesocyclone tornado" to describe what is really happening within supercell over water or land.
but those are dubious terms that are the equivalent of saying a "mesocyclone non-mesocyclone tornado". That leaves us with "supercell tornado" or "mesocyclone tornado" to describe what is really happening within supercell over water or land.Eric Tourangeau
EF0
You don't think it's sometimes strange to look at a tornado on the ground and...ouuups! sorry, now it's a waterspout and.....oooooh wait a minute!! Ok, it's a tornado again!!! .... In a few second, it will become a waterspout ladies and gentleman...
The problem is when the term is used according to the fact that the funnel touch the ground or the water..... so, and what if it touchs a forest or a city?
David Drummond
Member
For what it's worth, for years and years, when I hear the terms here is what comes to mind:
Tornado: There is a sweet supercell somewhere going nuts.
Landspout: Some high based storm interacting with a boundary some place.
Waterspout: Some high based storm interacting with a boundry off the coast someplace, probably Florida.
Tornado: There is a sweet supercell somewhere going nuts.
Landspout: Some high based storm interacting with a boundary some place.
Waterspout: Some high based storm interacting with a boundry off the coast someplace, probably Florida.
Martin North
EF4
Yes, I'd go with that.
Calling some of those skinny tubes off the Florida Keys...tornadoes (with all due respect to them) is like calling a pony a racehorse...
Calling some of those skinny tubes off the Florida Keys...tornadoes (with all due respect to them) is like calling a pony a racehorse...
Nigel Bolton
EF0
I don't see why not. These names are given to offer an explaination. If one stands on a beach somewhere and shouts 'Tornado' I am sure that most people within earshot would turn their heads and face inland. However, if one was to shoult Waterspout, most would look out to sea.
If a tornado/waterspout travelled over different medium, i.e. if it was able to travel across a series of islands, then it would be a tornado over land, then a waterspout over the sea.
Here in Blightly, there have been several instances of waterspouts coming in off the sea during the cooler months and causing considerable damage to coastal towns. The Selsey tornado (T4), is a classic example, when a severe thunderstorm produced a tornado east of the Isle of Wight, this then crossing Selsey Bill and severely damaging around 1000 properties. Harmlessly (relatively speaking) over the oggin, it was a waterspout. However, the damage to homes over the land made it, at this time, a tornado.
Selsey has had four tornadoes in the last 25 years, these having made landfall initially as waterspouts.
N.
rdale
EF5
"If one stands on a beach somewhere and shouts 'Tornado' I am sure that most people within earshot would turn their heads and face inland. However, if one was to shoult Waterspout, most would look out to sea."
No, they'd hold up their beers and ignore you regardless...
No, they'd hold up their beers and ignore you regardless...
Martin Kucera
EF2
I think the tornado/spout/tornado/spout sequence is a bit overdramatized argument. Of course it happens but not very often. Like I said, if you lived by the ocean, perhaps you'd see things in a different light. Waterspout is and has been a perfectly acceptable term. Extensive scientifical research has been done. I like the note where above from Nigel - if you mention a waterspout, everything points toward the body of water. That's the way it works just fine for mariners, etc. It does offer a good explanation. Use the term "tornado" only and many will be confused, especially near the coast. The term "waterspout" has been used since late 1800s I believe. Also, the Earth has basically land areas and bodies of water. Thus I really like the two terms. I really like what David pointed out earlier. I think it is good for the sake of science/research to try to distinguish these events as David did above. Of course, to a point. The whole "what do we call it if a tornado travels across a corn field" line of thought is overdramatized, again. If you called every single event everywhere a tornado, I am sure that plenty of confusion and a great number of additional questions would be raised anyway...
Martin Kucera
EF2
Scott, that is a great point for this discussion.
rdale
EF5
No, we've already discussed that. Waterspouts in general are not tornadic, they are from fair weather clouds.
scott r currens
EF3
I'm not going to get into that one again. I said everything I have to say about that in the following thread.
Definition of tornado in question here.
rdale
EF5
84.68% of ST users disagree :>
Martin North
EF4
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
