So, where are all...

[David Drummond]

...the people that were swearing we couldn't get tornadoes on the caprock with 50s dewpoints of questionable quality?

 

[Tom Tackett]

IN HIDING..................from last night's 16+ Texas Panhandle Tornadoes.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

...the people that were swearing we couldn't get tornadoes on the caprock with 50s dewpoints of questionable quality?

Who swore you couldn't get tors with 50 tds? Must have missed that.

 

[David Drummond]

Sorry, I should have said "naysayers". I forgot how nitpicky with wording people can be on here.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

...the people that were swearing we couldn't get tornadoes on the caprock with 50s dewpoints of questionable quality?

For me, I know moisture quality was a concern, but I certainly didn't think it would inhibit supercells and/or tornadoese. If I did think that, I wouldn't have driven from OUN to southwest of AMA yesterday.

On the vast, vast majority of chases, there are always some concerns. Hopefully, those concerns do not verify in the form of a null event or bust. Some folks have concerns about 30-35kts deep-layer shear being sufficient for nasty supercells on some days, but that doesn't necessarily mean they think the weak shear will lead to a bust. Personally speaking, I would have liked to have seen 60-65F dewpoints in the panhandles yesterday (like we had on 3-28), but I'm not sure that would have changed the outcome much. Just because something that was a concern before an event did not prevent the event does not mean it was not a valid concern.

Tds were in the 50s for the 2-23 event, an event that was largely a bust considering the forecasts. Moisture is only one piece of the pie, and it is a condition that is not sufficient in and of itself to lead to tornadic supercells. Some days, Tds in the 55-58F range may be too low / not sufficient for substantial destabilization and may completely prohibit an event. On other days, Tds in the 53-55F range may be perfectly fine. Saying that dewpoints in the 55-58F range are all that is needed in western Texas is like saying dewpoints in the 60-63F range are all that is needed in central Oklahoma. It's very much a case-by-case basis. Remember, the dewpoint lapse rate is usually somewhere close to 4 F / km. I think AMA is at an elevation about 1.1km ASL, and OKC is about 0.3 km ASL. So, that's means AMA is 0.8 km above OKC (relative to sea level), which means that, for a given mixing ratio, the dewpoint in AMA will be approx 3.5 F lower than that in OKC. Tds in the 55-58F range (which seemed to fit the area near I27 yesterday) are equivalent to Tds in the 58.5-61.5 F range in central Oklahoma. I know of many days during which chasers would be concerned about dewpoints only near 60 F in central Oklahoma in reference to significant tornado potential.

Just my 2 cents

 

[David Drummond]

Well I actually brought it up in jest because of all the banter in the FCST thread about how the dewpoints looked like A$$ and the skepticism about tornadoes in 50 dewpoints etc etc etc ad nausem in spite of the fact that those of us who have lived on the caprock our whole lives and chased out here many years telling them it was perfectly adequate for tornado activity out here.

I wasn't trying to upset anyone, I found it amusing. It's something to be learned from. All other parameter concerns aside, you just don't discount a tornado day on the caprock with 50 degree dewpoints of questionable character and don't place a tremendous amount of faith in the models forecast of dewpoints out here beyond more than a day, maybe 2 at most.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

Sorry, I should have said "naysayers". I forgot how nitpicky with wording people can be on here.

So everytime someone is wrong(moisture return was better than prog'd) after posting their thoughts, they get to be "asked where they are" in their own topic? If you're going to start a thread just to call out those who weren't excited, before the day even got here, on what they saw then,....you should maybe expect some "nitpicky" when saying they swore something they did not.

Ok, I was a naysayer. Here I am. Now what do you want? Want me to make some cookies and ship them to TX? I can. I can make an animated gif of a happy clown, with my head on it too, if that would work. Maybe there's an e-mailable "slug for my shoulder" you can send, "ha you were wrong". Now that at least one of us is here, we have to do something! We have our own thread! I'd love to know what now.

Signed....a naysayer that still chased yesterday, and saw junk.

Oh yeah, congrats on bagging yesterday! I probably would have just been happy enough seeing the tornadoes...

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

Well I actually brought it up in jest because of all the banter in the FCST thread about how the dewpoints looked like A$$ and the skepticism about tornadoes in 50 dewpoints etc etc etc ad nausem in spite of the fact that those of us who have lived on the caprock our whole lives and chased out here many years telling them it was perfectly adequate for tornado activity out here.

I wasn't trying to upset anyone, I found it amusing. It's something to be learned from. All other parameter concerns aside, you just don't discount a tornado day on the caprock with 50 degree dewpoints of questionable character and don't place a tremendous amount of faith in the models forecast of dewpoints out here beyond more than a day, maybe 2 at most.

It's clear to me anymore. Don't post your honest thoughts on anything before the day of. I think I'm done!

 

[David Drummond]

Sorry you got offended Mike on a post made in jest. I can't say anything else since your determined to be wronged somehow here. I thought a little lighthearted teasing about being incorrect about the dewpoint situation would be allowed but I forgot how deadly serious and without humor everything here has to be. *sigh*

We saw cows galloping from a tornado, would that amuse you? We thought it was pretty funny.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

I know David's intentions were light-hearted, so I apologize for my post if it came across as anything but an explanation of my concern. And hey, it is a good reminder for those who reside at lower elevations. Tds are important, but they are only one piece of the puzzle. Can we start arguing about Monday or Tuesday yet?

Revenge will be mine, Ma' Nature!

 

[Aaron Kennedy]

Yo yo yo my chaserz... where all da Southern Plainz h8tn' foolz at now!? Papa Nature gave his ho da axe and bringin bak all yo favorite tubez to da dirtay south!

 

[Kenny Drake]

I think the primary thing that kept Saturdays tornadic event together was the low level clouds/fog across the Panhandle that burned off during the afternoon. I was concerned about moisture mixing out too much IF there wasnt some cloud-cover during the morning hours. I would have made the drive from Norman to Amarillo if I had the money, and the Mon/Tue event was not on the horizon along with a Dynamics exam. I was about to say more but this is on the edge of a bashing thread so I will not, besides I'd be bashing myself.

 

[Darin Brunin]

Wow, a moderator started this thread? Lighthearted or not, that's pretty bold to start saying "I told you so.......etc. etc." after yesterday. Just remember to not delete the thread next time when you are wrong about something because I can't wait to see the people who you are bashing, slam you. Not everyone's right every time and this thread should have been deleted as soon as it was started by another mod because that is BS.

 

[Bob Schafer]

I'll just say this: 188 posts, 19 pages, tells me we have an SDS epidemic (after 2006).

 

[Mikey Gribble]

It sounds lik you're are getting pretty cocky David after a couple good chases this year. Lot of season left buddy.
I guess you could call me a "naysayer". I never claimed there wouldn't be any tornadoes, in fact, I said that I thought there would be a couple tornadic storms. I chimed in and said something about moisture after three pages of forecasts comparing it to 3/28 and insinuating that it was going to be a "major outbreak". I (like a lot of other people) after seeing these forecasts said that the big difference between Saturday and 3/28 was that you had td's in the 60's on 3/28.
Nobody ever said that you weren't going to get any tornadoes with td's in the 50's. A lot of people said that dewpoints in the 50's would preclude a major tornado outbreak. And as a matter of fact, there wasn't a major tornado outbreak yesterday. There were two tornadic storms, which is far from what happened on 3/28.
Why don't you drag Jim Leonard and Glen Romine into this. They said the same thing that Mike and I did.

Edit - I did get a PM from one of the caprock enthusiasts telling me about the countless tornadoes he had filmed when td's were in the 40's. I am still waiting on some dates from that.