Storm chaser hit by tornado today?

[Mike Hollingshead]

Mike, I think you need to learn to play nice with others.

I didn't know I wasn't I guess, lol. Just saying what I thought on that whole topic. Maybe the "stupid sky" part made it sound worse than it was meant to be. I just think the sky is stupid at this point....not "others" posting and whatnot.

 

[Laura Duchesne]

We took a direct hit on Monday on the Pratt, KS storm. It was very brief and weak, although the windshield got chipped and sandblasted. We weren't planning on being directly hit, it just happened. We were watching an area of slight rotation and a wall cloud trying to form, but figured it wasn't doing much after watching it for a while. So we continued north. Jack pointed out a funnel cloud was right above us and then this circulation of debris came right at us. At first I thought it was RFD winds but the wind and debris quickly changed directions as it moved off into a field.

Point is, anything can happen... no matter how experienced you are or how knowledgeable you are of the storm structure itself. I would never plan to take a direct hit and I am very very glad we didn't get anything stronger than we did. It just goes to show you that you should always keep your eyes peeled on the storm around you and pay attention closely.

 

[Dan Dawson]

After having a bit of time to process the encounter (I was with Jeff in his car), I'll have to say that, while I certainly never want to repeat the incident, I'm not nearly as shaken up by it as I thought I might be. Jeff said pretty much all that needed to be said, and I won't rehash it since I completely agree with his stance. When you get right down to it, this was an accident, plain and simple, and all's well that ends well. Don't get me wrong, I'm not blowing it off, as I have certainly come away from the event with a more healthy respect for what storms can throw at you when you least expect them to. I simply wanted to make people aware that my thoughts on the issue are in line with Jeff's.

Now that the incident is over, the scientist in me is also very curious as to what data the TWISTEX crew recorded, if any. I also find it interesting that my ears definitely felt the pressure change but no one else in our car reported this.

 

[Amos Magliocco]

I'm glad to hear that Doug and his passengers, as well as Jeff, Dan, and Robin, are all okay. It's the most vulnerable feeling in the world to ride out a real tornado in a car, wondering when you're going airborne and what kind of shape you'll be in when you land. The expectation of violent trauma is as scary as the force of wind.

I think it's hard for others to read these stories without trying to assign blame to some specific motivation or decision. Eric and I were also accused of going for the "money shot." I actually wish that had been the case. It would far easier to deal with the consequences of a single, foolish choice than a vague mishmash of negligence and bad luck. With a single unwise decision, you can simply resolve not to do that again. With bad luck? Well...about the best you can do is what Jeff wrote above: acknowledge that strange and unexpected things can happen and they can come get you. But I don't think its possible to really believe in the unexpected until it happens. Total control is a necessary illusion and we don't let it go without a fight.

About ten days after Tulia, I wrote an analysis of the accident in which I tried to pin down the various mistakes and how they contributed to the accident. I posted a link on ST last May, and it's still in my reports section under April 21st. Additionally, a scientific paper is forthcoming with the full collection of data from Eric's instruments during the tornado. This paper uses our GPS data along with radar and damage survey info to chronicle our accident, as well as the actual weather observations, on a second by second basis. This will run in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and I'll post a link when it appears.

 

[cdcollura]

Good day,

I was next to the group (Doug, Jeff, Dan, etc) when they got hit. I was OK, and so was my vehicle.

Above: Picture of tornado hitting (I had camera rolling). The two headlights are the two mesonet vehicles in sand-blast.

 

[Rich Thompson]

There might be a few clowns out there that want to die in a tornado, but I don't think they're relevant. These recent close encounters stem from aggressive storm chasing strategies. I've had a close call that I have no intention of repeating, and it all came about because a road was mud instead of pavement. I put myself in a situation where nothing could go wrong, but something did go wrong.

It's inevitable that someone will be seriously injured or killed in a tornado while chasing. The more data and experience we gain, the less we feel we have to respect the storms. That attitude will get you lots of close video, but it will cost someone down the line. I'm guessing the adrenaline rush will continue to win out and more people will attempt to get closer each year. The end result will likely be a massive thread on ST, and little tangible change to chasing as a whole.

Rich T.

 

[Gene Moore]

Everyone I've met that has been in a tornadic circulation is somewhat changed by the experience. That is, chasing is never quite the same. Fear does this and it's associated with a real chemical release in our brain telling us don't do that again. I had a good discussion with two people hit by a tornado on May 22, one was slightly injured when blown under the vehicle, also the glass was completely blown out which can be very dangerous. Seems we hear of someone getting in trouble during every major outbreak where mass participation is involved.

Chasing (for many) has been reduced to one simple goal, getting close to the debris cloud and turn on the camera. I've watched people do this and it's obvious the path to this objective is the only thing on their mind, the rest of the storm be dammed. That is, deal with the consequences when and if they arise. This approach certainly works most of the time when there is one center of circulation. I can't talk to those chasers consumed with this tactic, I doubt they will listen. For the others there are solutions and ways of playing the odds, at least until the lights go out.

The art of judging the storm by its structure is being lost, replaced by in vehicle radar. Unfortunately radar is seeing rain, bad things can happen in an updraft well before the rain lights it up on radar at the surface. For me it helps to segregate storms into types, what they are and what they are becoming. By now I hope most realize the old concept of LP to HP is but a process, nothing is steady state. I try to reduce the area of concern to what I'm dealing with, linear (flanking line before occlusion), or concentric rotating storms. Attica to Anthony 2004 was mentioned, what a beautiful example of the worst kind of situation. A giant rotating complex with tornadoes throughout. May 22 along highway 23 was a great example of both. The wall cloud circulation in the flank of the tornado north of Hoxie was very "approachable," if you will. The new wall cloud (as some call it) to the north was not, that whole complex was dangerous and very different from the event only minutes before. It amazes me how the atmosphere can create two totally different situations out of pretty much the same environment. The second storm was a huge rotating mass, the whole storm was the wall cloud and these are by far the most dangerous. Going into one of these is much like going into a cave with a monster; problem is, the entrances and exits change within minutes. Most tornadoes are individual updrafts; when the whole storm rotates these updraft circulations and attending RFD's can be swept up in the circulation and around the storm perimeter. This makes path prediction very difficult. Greensburg was one of the best examples of this convective behaviour as it morfed from a flanking line storm into a mass of rotation with circulations spinning up and occluding around the outside. I'll add, if you watch the time lapse radar of the storm David Drummond tangled with it had the same characteristics. It's my wish that chasers quit depending so much on the radar presentation and go back to watching the character of the storm they are entering. Multiple flanks, whole storm rotation, new updrafts or deep occlusions are all a clue to what may later complicate your chase. With gas prices hitting new highs group chasing is making a big comeback. Try assigning people to watch certain sectors of the storm during your time under a convective base and not just the center of the circulation. This mindset of treating secondary vorticies like they are freak events is unreasonable, most major supercells do produce multiple tornadoes and we should be expecting them.

Also, trusting your well being to the location of a rotating wagon wheels (Threatnet), or the MDA's on level two displays is dangerous. These shear markers often jump around from scan to scan. Better to key on the higher shear colors within a storm if you have Level II.

http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=
10.1175%2F1520-0434(1998)013%3C0304%3ATNSSLM%3E2.0.CO%3B2&ct=1#I1520-0434-13-2-304-T14

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/topics/attach/html/ssd98-23.htm

Seems to me that TVS circulations are often displayed too far NE of the ground truth circulation. Most likely because of storm tilt with height. As for the numbers assigned to these shear markers, higher numbers don't always guarantee a tornado, but I think they make the location somewhat more dependable on Level II displays.

Gene Moore

 

[Rob Wadsworth]

Wow Gene, You were at Hoxie too?!?
I was there, as this was my first tornado of my first storm chase season. I was on the E side of the storm and followed it N along with three other chasers (don't know who they were) until the dirt (more like mud n'gravel) road ran out in Selden KS.
I was wondering if you were one of these three chasers/cars that was going down that dirt road @ 60mph+? If you were - I was in the silver Honda CR-V that gave up the lead after hitting too many muddy potholes and could hardly see any more! That circulation had to going 60mph+ to be pulling away from us that well!!

That was a beautiful storm; I never knew the color of these storm could be so unique. I remember that the rotating meso looked as if someone had emptied the contents of a blue ink pen on the underside Even for awhile, the whole storm filtered that same indigo coloring as it raced N of the Selden E-W road. Surreal...

I think that you really hit the proverbial nail on the head with your post; it spoke volumes to me.

This year, I had two incidents where I had a possible funnel almost fall on my head. The first was in Quinter #2; as I was 1 1/2 mi to the E of the wedge - just S of I-70 and Quinter itself. I looked up and saw the black clouds scallop out a rapidly rotating circulation. It was pretty close to dropping a satellite tornado - in which case I would have become an instant casualty. It happened so fast that there would have been no way to get out of its way - had it fully formed...

The second was in Moville IA - just 40 mi N of Blencoe IA where the Boy Scouts were killed - only fifty minutes after that incident occurred. It was the same series of storms that flew overhead. I just happened to look to my W of the Conoco station - where I was waiting for precip to slow down. I was talking to a trucker outside the store when I looked over his shoulder, he noticed that my eyes grew as big as saucers - that's what he said. I said "there is a tornado forming behind the store in that field!" Too close is just too close. But even Amos M said that he didn't see the twister that dropped down behind him - it really can happen to anyone if they aren't on their toes 100% of the time. Yes; storm chasing is risky - and this point should never be lost on the chaser or spotter.
Or quickly dismissed nor forgotten for a moment; it must become my priority not to become too easily distracted...

 

[Shane Adams]

It amazes me how the atmosphere can create two totally different situations out of pretty much the same environment. The second storm was a huge rotating mass, the whole storm was the wall cloud and these are by far the most dangerous. Going into one of these is much like going into a cave with a monster; problem is, the entrances and exits change within minutes. Most tornadoes are individual updrafts; when the whole storm rotates these updraft circulations and attending RFD's can be swept up in the circulation and around the storm perimeter. This makes path prediction very difficult. Greensburg was one of the best examples of this convective behaviour as it morfed from a flanking line storm into a mass of rotation with circulations spinning up and occluding around the outside. This mindset of treating secondary vorticies like they are freak events is unreasonable, most major supercells do produce multiple tornadoes and we should be expecting them.

This is exactly why I don't get in-your-face close. Close proximity chasing in a cyclic environment is simply too much work IMO. If you insist on getting up close, you have to constantly be watching the storm for the next move (not enjoying what it's doing at the time). This means not only watching the tornado, but the next occlusion, which most times will be closer to you than the ongoing tornado. You have to move a lot, you can't pick a spot and camp out (this IMO is the biggest drawback, taking away not only the experience itself but the ability to document with video).

I like to get on a storm, find a position where I can "forget about it" for a few minutes, and simply enjoy/document it (the reason I'm out there anyway). I like sitting still, tripods, and being able to watch the tornadoes with my eyes as well as through the vidcam. I like being able to appreciate the moment as it's happening, to be able to look away for a few fleeting moments, to realize how calm and 'normal' the atmosphere still is away from the immediate area of the tornado...and then swing back around to it and see how insane the atmosphere is right in front of me. I love those surreal moments.

Chasing is pretty easy, and staying out of trouble is even easier. All it takes is a bit of common sense and a little thinking ahead. Even storms like the Greensburg supercell of May 4 last year are easy and quite safe to chase, if you give them the respect they deserve. Can a person chase up close, even in the most busy/complicated of cyclic structures? Of course. But for my money (and life), I'm quite content to chase with a style that automatically eliminates the possibility of an accident: I don't set up under updrafts in cycle storms, and I give lee way to the future cycles that I don't even see yet. All you have to do is know where the next step to the process will be, and give it some room. Now, this might mean the difference between being a half mile away and 2-3 miles away, but for me, distance within five or fewer miles is moot.

I joked about it earlier this year, but now I'm almost certain that I truly will be the only chaser to never be hit by a tornado in a few more years.

 

[Lanny Dean]

Gene, with all respect...What Randy and Lisa were trying to do was deploy the probe and in doing so the tornado(s) postion shifted and caught them by surprise. Unlike what others have said, it had nothing to do with getting as close as possible at least not on the day in question.

We all know of stories of chasers being hit or being so close it made a lasting mark on them...I am no exception neither is Randy however, as most know, Randy does not have any true data... (levl3, stormlab, data) he was and does chase "old school" with nothing more than a NOAA radio and what he might be looking at out the window just as he did when were were chasing together years ago.

My point is that even with a "REAL" visual as seen looking through your window does not always allow you to see everything or anticipate what is about to happen.
I think it almost ill advised to inform people to "go back to basics" on the basis of these types of situations when infact it was while doing the "old school" way this happened to begin with.

Just my take on the situation

 

[jeremy wilson]

I hereby announce that it will be Holy Tornados sole purpose to intententionly penetrate every tornado we encounter in an attempt to obtain the most extreme video imaginable. I will cover myself in chainmail and wear protective headgear. I will also wear goggles.

 

[Gene Moore]

Gene, with all respect...What Randy and Lisa were trying to do was deploy the probe and in doing so the tornado(s) position shifted and caught them by surprise. Unlike what others have said, it had nothing to do with getting as close as possible at least not on the day in question.

My point is that even with a "REAL" visual as seen looking through your window does not always allow you to see everything or anticipate what is about to happen. I think it almost ill advised to inform people to "go back to basics" on the basis of these types of situations when in fact it was while doing the "old school" way this happened to begin with.
Just my take on the situation

Lanny...hi, I wasn't trying to be condescending with my remarks I guess I'm guilty of being too analytical about these things. Having been caught in tornadoes myself I automatically try to figure what must have gone wrong. Also, I later got the rest of the story on what they were trying to do and how it happened. Certainly most of us (all I hope) don't want to be in a tornado intentionally. And yeah, I agree....storms are full of surprises.

I'm not saying the "old school" way of doing it is better. What I was trying to say is don't forget inflow features etc etc when we're looking at the radar. I'm certainly for using everything we've got out there. As for all the near misses; seems to me spotters and LEO's do get injured or killed on occasion and chasers....well chasers seem to always escape. So far there is a message in that and I think it's good.

 

[Lanny Dean]

Gene,
Thanks for the reply...after much thought, and looking at video from the two who got hit in Iowa this year it seems to me that "we" do rely too much on the latest equipment and not enough time looking out the window. I am as guilty as the next guy no question, but...I honestly think that all "the tools" we have has certainly helped a lot of people (chasers). Can they be used to much? Of course, and again I am guilty with that as well, but I have no doubts that when I got hit on 5-29-04, had I been using some of "the tools" It may have played out a little different for me.
Lets face it, things can and do go wrong, no matter what tools you have available to you at any given time just as they did with Randy and Lisa.

Thanks for clearing that up though, and I agree as far as the spotters and LEO's....might be a good idea for another thread?