Silver Lining Tours vans rolled in Kansas

Status
Not open for further replies.
It absolutely can happen to anybody, but I agree most chasers won't be in that position. But you can't say that saying "it could happen to anybody" is wrong.

I gotta split the agreement here... there is nothing wrong with saying "it can happen to anyone", but to use that as an excuse to sweep it under the rug is also not correct.

It's not easy to get hit with a tornado... in fact, one could argue NOT getting hit by a tornado is one of the easiest part of storm chasing. Many of us, including myself, can spin stories of times we have been hit in some form or another. So yes, it CAN happen to anyone, and it has before. And mine encounter in 2008 was part of a research mission and that involved me and my occupants getting closer than we would on our own. But even still, it's not easy to get hit by a tornado.

But here is the issue... we understand, all of us do, that there is an inherent risk in what we do. We interact with severe weather, meaning we will increase our risks of being hit by tornadoes, struck by lightning, clobbered by hail, etc. It's part of it. And when there are a couple people (or only you) in a car, and those people fully understand the risk, you may take the occasional bigger risk than you would, say having a van full of people, most of whom do not fully understand the inherent risks.

The issue at matter, in my opinion, is that they had vans full of paying customers. And two of those vehicles were hit by a tornado because they were in an area of higher risk of being hit by tornadoes. Who cares whether it was a satellite, the EF-4, whatever. Satellites are nothing new, and yes, highly unpredictable. But why would you be in that situation to begin with when you have four vanloads of people. This isn't a question of them being accidentally hit. Of course they were... but what were they doing there?

Look, in similar situations in the past, I have made judgements as to how to approach similar storms, and it's often just me, or myself and a partner. We understand the risks, and in a few cases, opted not to take them because of the danger. When you have people in the vehicle with no experience or little knowledge of severe weather, you're making that decision on their behalf. And this was clearly the wrong decision. Sure, it could happen to anyone, but it happened to them. And the question is why? Because they took a risk to be in an area of the storm that posed this kind of danger.

I am not going to play the what-ifs and ask where would they be had people been killed, seriously injured, etc. The fact of the matter is that these people were taken into a dangerous area of the storm and they got hit. A risk which should not have been taken under the circumstances. Lack of predictability of satellites, unforeseen changes paths, etc, are not excuses. Because we DO know those things happen, and they can happen in those areas of storms, and low and behold, they were hit. Radar presentation indicated something significant going on, and they elected to proceed into a low visibility area with an ongoing strong circulation cleared evident on radar.

I am happy to know that the injuries were minor, and that things worked out the way they did in that manner. And I hope that the outcome of this is nothing too serious for those involved. But I just wrote a lengthy article regarding risk-taking in storm chasing, and this to me, for any group carrying multiple people whom they are responsible for, was a bad decision and an unnecessary risk and they ultimately got lucky.

Whatever legal action comes from this is moot... it's not our concern. We were not involved, and whatever transpires with that will happen as it will. And I hope it favors SLT as best as possible. The issue here, and in my opinion, is the biggest concern, is what were they doing in a region of the storm where something like this can happen with a group of inexperienced people who ultimately did not sign up to be tossed off the road. You on your own or with a couple of your chase partners, have at it. But would you as a chaser with your wife and kids, take a risk like this?

I don't care what their track record was prior... they certainly can't say that now. And six years ago today, three very experienced friends of mine with a very lengthy track record had it happen once. Only once, folks... that's all it takes. It's my hope we would've learned something from that by now.
 
Last edited:
.... However, it seems that a tornado (probably not visible) was already in progress to their southwest which went on to merge with the circulation to the north.

I can confirm the rotation at this location as we drove in this exact spot on 56 highway and had winds shift around us from south then to north. I told the people in the vehicle that we had just drove through a weak tornado.
 
I surveyed the area today. I am not passing judgement or trying to get anyone in trouble. Mistakes happen. However, I felt compelled to find out what happened from a scientific perspective. This is a case that all chasers can learn from, and perhaps it could result in more caution being exercised.

The following images indicate what I think occurred. It is likely that a wall cloud was visible to the northwest of the tour group. However, it seems that a tornado (probably not visible) was already in progress to their southwest which went on to merge with the circulation to the north. The messy nature and volatile evolution of this storm was something probably more common to Dixie Alley. We see lots of small tornado signatures like the one observed in this case.
After reading this and reviewing other posts, due to my location with respect to this storm, this has me taking a step back and deeply pondering this situation.

The vans that I saw were the vans in the tour group. Based on time and location, there's no denying that.

What Matt said about the wall cloud to the northwest and a possible ongoing tornado to the southwest is key. I was just north of Globe, KS, which as a reference point, is only a short distance southwest of Lone Star Park, around or shortly before 6:00 p.m.

I saw a muddled wall cloud to the northwest, but I soon realized that I needed to get east and away from this rapidly organizing storm. It was a few minutes before the tornado started that I was already being rained on and wind was picking up. I realized this by probably about 6:00-6:02 p.m. Based on another post I made and video evidence, I was driving through the road that curves around the south side of Lone Star Park at 6:05 p.m. This was only a few blocks away from where the incident happened and likely within 1 to at most 2 minutes as well. Way too close to this storm, but what Matt said makes sense. I am not justifying my own location, but originally I thought that a tornado was close to forming to my west/northwest, when in reality, one may have already been forming to my immediate southwest. It's easy to see why something like this could happen, as well as with the Tim Samaras case. As a storm chaser, you want to be close, but you arguably need a buffer of at least 1/2 to 1 mile to truly avoid satellite tornadoes/new spin-ups/debris, etc, when there is limited or poor visibility.

With that said, I still think it's hard to make a case for a tour group being that close to a tornado or potential tornado that is rain-wrapped. Storm motions were quick (meaning not a 10 mph drift) and visibility was poor. This is not a situation like Dodge City, where you have a slow moving storm over open land with crisp visibility. I was being more aggressive than usual with this storm chase, but if I had others in the vehicle with me, there was no way I would be that close. As I was driving through the park, I knew in the back of my mind that I was very close to a tornado. Too close. I admit that and this event will have me being more careful and aware in the future.

So, I am mixed on this situation, but if I'm being honest, I think a tour group has to be more careful. It is very hard, if not impossible, to justify being as close to a tornado as they were in this particular scenario. I was essentially right there with them, but I chose to bail east and narrowly avoided the path of the tornado myself.

I'm not sure it matters, but if I have time later, I will backtrack and plot my exact locations with times, as it may be relevant to this situation. Luckily there were no serious injuries and hopefully we can all look at this objectively and learn from the situation. I wasn't even as close as them, but I will think twice about being that close again in the future.
 
Via Facebook:






A van is visible in NWS Topeka's damage photos from the survey. Here's a map of the location:

View attachment 18507

Not drawing any conclusions here, but either NWS Topeka or the above accounts are in error, misunderstanding something, or incomplete in information.

The damage survey sure makes it look like they were hit by the main tornado, but I've seen significant errors in surveys before. But even so, the impact location is in line with the latter part of the track, so I'm struggling to come up with a scenario that jives with the above accounts.

:\

I'm not pointing fingers or trying to tear people down. People I like and consider friends are involved here. I worked hard on the El Reno Survey with lots of other folks because I didn't want to see any more friends killed by tornadoes, so that we could learn and better ourselves.

They got hit by a tornado that actually formed just south of 56 highway that we also drove through (See Matt's radar and damage report above). At the time we drove through it had just started and was weak. We watched as we drove along that winds were coming from the north then a few seconds later to the south meaning rotation. They probably did the same thing yet it was a bit later and more NE and at that time the tornado has strengthened to a dangerous point. My opinion only is that it was not a satellite and was the actually the early stage of the wedge.
 
For those referencing radar images in this thread: keep in mind the potential spatial and temporal resolution of the features being discussed and the spatial and temporal resolution, beam height, and potential data issues of the radar at the exact point of interest. What you see in the data is not always what you get at the surface and vice versa. This could be a potential player in these types of incidents, which is why if you don't have good visibility on what is going on, it's probably best to hang back.
 
It’s now in the mainstream media.


For those without a "subscription" and who are out of WP views for the month: Outline

The article links back to this very thread here on ST.

Same author - Matthew Cappucci - that wrote the article posted in this other thread:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It’s now in the mainstream media.


The article links back to this very thread here on ST.

Same author - Matthew Cappucci - that wrote the article posted in this other thread:


Of all the titles that could have been used, I think this one fairly forgiving and will likely not have a big impact on the news cycle. Today is also the anniversary of the 2013 El Reno tornado, which might occupy more attention from TWC if this makes it over there.
 
I gotta split the agreement here... there is nothing wrong with saying "it can happen to anyone", but to use that as an excuse to sweep it under the rug is also not correct.

I think people are putting too much thought into what I said and taking it out of context. By no means am I brushing the incident off and using that as an excuse to sweep it under the rug, that was never what I meant. I was just simply stating that anyone in that position, that close to the meso, that it could happen to them. It's all dependent on how the person chases. Personally I keep a good distance between myself and the tornado, and I keep aware of the environment around me so the chances of me being in that position is slim to none. If I did end up in said position, that's me being irresponsible and putting myself in a situation that could have been avoided.
 
0528_lawrence2.jpg
Not exactly sure when the van flipped with respect to the rotation tracks (vorticity) above. It was stated they were 2mi SE of the parent circulation. It most definitely happened during the earlier stages of production. The rotation track can show the approx position of the meso/tornado. The scaling is tricky. If you were to use the ruler on GE, you would get measurements between 1.15 to around 2 miles between the objective point of damage and the subjective point of the meso. Notice how the damage path more closely aligns the rotation track as the vorticity ramps up to over .023/s (in my limited experience with MRMS, I believe these values can be a decent amount lower with tornadoes. There is no threshold/correlation between RT's and tornado paths that I know of).
 
I honestly don't remember. I scoured twitter last night and I was sure I saw them, but I'm starting to wonder if I was duped because I couldn't find them anywhere. I thought it was Connor or Gage that posted it, but I don't find it anywhere on either of their twitters.
 
It’s now in the mainstream media.


For those without a "subscription" and who are out of WP views for the month: Outline

The article links back to this very thread here on ST.

Same author - Matthew Cappucci - that wrote the article posted in this other thread:


If you can access the WP version, read the comments. Of course there are the usual people hating on storm chasers, saying we are fools, social Darwinism at work, etc. Ignorant people claiming tornados are worse today than in the past. Pisses me off, wish I had a subscription so I could respond. I recommend whoever has a subscription should leave a comment of their own. Anyway, there are several comments of the following nature, which I have to admit are hard to argue with. This is the type of thing I do worry could prompt some sort of action against our activities, although I confess to not knowing what that could really be as a practical matter. Comment below from a “Kristine Matlock.” In addition to this, she later has a comment accusing Roger Hill of deleting negative comments from his FB page.

“What this article isn’t telling you is that 23 first responders were tied up with these damn “tourists” while residents of Lawrence needed help. 4 ambulances were needed & it took 3 hours to clear this. If you want to experience tornados, move to tornado alley. This was the 5th tornado I’ve been through in 5 decades living in Kansas, so your chances are good if you move here. Some areas were totally devastated, but jerks think it’s fun to come watch tornadoes & the destruction they cause. Some of these jerk storm chasers had drones flying into people’s damaged homes right after the storm, while people were accessing the damage & trying to pack up what was salvageable. Nice to know others hardships is entertaining to these jerks & that they have no respect for first responders that put their lives in peril.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top