Tornado Emergencies

[rdale]

Kinda sad after months of bickering because we're all bored and storm-starved, the main thread result from the first event of the year is more bickering.

Maybe some posts were deleted, because all I see here is discussion.

No tirades, no whining, no personal attacks -- just the sort of thread that SHOULD take place here.

 

[Terry Tyler]

This topic comes up every time. My opinion is it should be used when there is a threat of a strong tornado entering a large city

i agree, and assume thats what they use it for...

i dont think that the size of the city should matter though, like mooreville is a very small community with not many people...but it does have a small downtown area with a highschool, country store, bar and grill and things like that...

i think if a town is fixin to catch a direct hit by a CONFIRMED tornado, then they should issue the tornado emergency...it just shouldent apply to major metropolitan areas...

i also agree with the false alarm ratio thing, because when somebody says "tornado emergency" it should really mean a "tornado emergency"...

 

[Patrick Marsh]

This may be a little nit-picky, but it should help keep the discussion focused. TORNADO EMERGENCY is NOT an advisory. It is "enhanced wording" added to a Special Weather Statement.

You can think of it like this: Imagine that PDS Tornado Watches were not an official product and an SPC lead forecaster thought that there was going to be a severe tornado event that day. What does the Lead Forecaster do when he (or she) issues their first watch? He (or she) drops in a line stating that this particular watch could be a "Particularly Dangerous Situation". Now, the watch is still just a "plain" tornado watch, but has enhanced warning. The same with Tornado Emergencies, the Tornado Warning is the original product, but the Tornado Emergency is the "enhanced wording". In this analogy, the SPC couldn't actually verify a PDS Tornado Watch...just as the NWS can't verify a Tornado Emergency.

Now, I understand there are some differences in the analogy. Also, I'm not using this analogy as a means of justifying the Tornado Emergency. (I can argue both sides of this argument.) I'm simply trying to put the discussion into some sort of context.

 

[Chad Cowan]

IMHO- the Tornado Emergency is a life-saving tool for those situations requiring more urgency and stronger wording than a Tor warning. There needs to be some type of differentiation sent to the public between a situation where 1) radar detects a t-storm capable of producing a tornado over a field and 2) there is a destructive tornado headed towards a populated area. As Patrick Marsh stated above, as per NWS directives, a Tornado Warning is issued in both cases but (officially) nothing more. Maybe we should ask some of the Greensburg residents how they feel about the use of TE's?

SGF did a wonderful job last night in an extremely dangerous and long-lasting situation. We can sit here on a bulletin board all day and debate whether or not they should have issued the TE. But the fact of the matter is, they are only as good as the data they receive and the report came in saying that a trained spotter was tracking a large, damaging tornado into a city of 150,000. They reacted, and for better or worse, decided a Tornado Warning would not sufficiently convey the danger of the situation.

The main problem with TEs is John Q Public's perception of them and the ensuing confusion. 'Does this mean I don't have to pay attention to tornado warnings?' 'We don't have to go to the cellar yet, it's not an emergency.' Like Jeff said, if there is one false alarm TE, (like there possibly was last night) it undermines the whole concept of a TE.

Another problem with deciding to issue a TE is that the WCM has to essentially put a numeric value on a life and weigh the issuance's impact on public perception of the TE. Here's a hypothetical, all things equal: there are two confirmed, destructive tornadoes heading at two different towns... the first town's population is 12,000 and the second town's population is 120. Do you issue a TE for either? Both? Neither? Why?

 

[Bill Tabor]

Here is some interesting info on Tornado Emergencies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tornado_emergency

You can wiki just about anything nowadays.

TE Saves Lives:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/314777_storm08.html

 

[Shane Adams]

Maybe some posts were deleted, because all I see here is discussion.

No tirades, no whining (someone posted a smart-aleck comment on WX-Chase about the Wisc storms because he thought no chasers were on them), no personal attacks -- just the sort of thread that SHOULD take place here.

Just not a fan of politics, especially with weather discussions. I'd rather see discussion about the event itself instead of the political agenda for handling it. And my post to WX-CHASE was extremely valid, unless "maybe some posts were deleted" between 2002 and now.

 

[Patrick Marsh]

I just want to state, that I did not intend for this to turn into a "should SGF have issued the Tornado Emergency". It happened, it's in the past, and I wasn't in the room with them. I have no clue what their exact reasoning was. This is meant to be a discussion on why Tornado Emergencies are used, in what context are they used, and should they be used IN THE FUTURE.

As rdale mentioned above, I feel this is an extremely important discussion to be having and I feel here on ST is a valid place to hold said dicussion. The airing of both sides will help everyone see things from all points of view and will enable us as a community to better respond to any future "surveys" the NWS may (or may not) decide to conduct in regards to Tornado Emergencies.

(I understand that in order to have this "conversation" references to past events will need to be made, but this was not intended to turn into a blame game.)

 

[Craig Maire II]

Just because a large tornado did not destroy parts of Springfield doesn't mean that a Tornado Emergency statement wasn't warranted in my opinion. The large tornado that was reported heading towards portions of Springfield could have easily weakened or dissipatted while entering the City but the folks at the NWS there probably didn't have the luxury of time to second guess what was happening. It's easy to criticise the NWS folks that issued that statement now that we know the final outcome of last night's storms.Keep in mind the Greensburg tornado could have dissipated, weakened or missed the town all together and then some folks on here would probably be calling foul on that statement...

 

[Chad Cowan]

Whatever Rdale I guess you know more than me sorry.. If I get an infraction for this so what I think it's stupid how some people can (the next day) say that the statement wasn't needed because alot of people weren't killed and the world didn't end. THE NWS CAN ISSUE THESE STATEMENTS AT THEIR OWN DISCRETION. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIAL WARNING PRODUCTS AND A LARGE TORNADO WAS REPORTED ON THE GROUND BY TRAINED STORM SPOTTERS! IF A LARGE TORNADO HEADING INTO A POPULATED AREA IS NOT A TORNADO EMERGENCY THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS...

We're trying to have a civil discussion here. Try to state your point using words instead of boldface, underlining, caps and smileys

 

[JIM SELLARS]

You guys are killin me!!!......How do I navigate to get to the CBM vs Broadcast meteorologist GED certificate thread...(To viewers they are both "METEOROLOGISTS")...Seriously...I see "TORNADO EMERGENCY" as discretionary enhanced wording...Nothing more..Nothing less...

 

[Craig Maire II]

Well maybe we'll get lucky next time a Tornado Emergency is issued and have another town destroyed so that way it verified and everyone is happy.

...THIS IS A TORNADO EMERGENCY FOR THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD...

...A TORNADO WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 800 PM CST FOR GREENE
COUNTY...

AT 718 PM CST...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE DOPPLER RADAR AND STORM
SPOTTERS CONTINUED TO TRACK A LARGE AND EXTREMELY DANGEROUS TORNADO
NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF JAMES RIVER AND WEST BYPASS...MOVING NORTHEAST AT
45 MPH.


THE TORNADO WILL BE NEAR...
STRAFFORD BY 735 PM CST.
8 MILES SOUTHEAST OF FAIR GROVE BY 740 PM CST.

THE TOWNS OF TURNERS AND BASSVILLE ARE IN THE PATH OF THIS TORNADO.

IN ADDITION TO A TORNADO...THIS STORM IS CAPABLE OF PRODUCING LARGE
DAMAGING HAIL UP TO GOLF BALL SIZE.

 

[Brandon Sullivan]

I'm not taking sides.. And I don't want to get into a heated debate.

We need to remember though, that meteorologists are highly trained, and they must remember the consequences of issuing such products that hundreds of people will read, and react upon. Whether or not they issue these warnings and other products is their discresion, and they have the best equipment, and knoweledge, and training, and it really should not be our place to judge. Many of us (except those who are in the business themselves) do not know the stress that comes with these scenarios (including myself)

Again, I'm not pertaining to just this scenario, and not bashing any person. Meteorologists, in any warning decision process need to protect people, and need to take the appropriate action to do so.

 

[Mike Smith]

Well maybe we'll get lucky next time a Tornado Emergency is issued and have another town destroyed so that way it verified and everyone is happy.

You may be missing the point of this discussion. I don't believe the "TE" for Greensburg was a good idea even though it verified. This is for several reasons that I will again state:

1. One human life is just as valuable as another. The discussions that this should be done when a tornado is approaching a "large city" implies that those lives are more valuable than rural or small town lives (think about it before you reply to this contention). As a former TV meteorologist, I heard this from rural viewers all the time. This would only reinforce that belief and, in a way, it would be true if the TE is reserved only for 'large cities.'

2. Once the expectation is set that a "tornado emergency" will be issued when the 'real thing' is approaching a city, then people will begin to ignore tornado warnings.

3. We don't have the meteorological skill to do this consistently well as last night demonstrates. My concern is not that SGF issued a TE that didn't work out -- I don't think any TE's should be issued.

4. To build on #3,

You can think of it like this: Imagine that PDS Tornado Watches were not an official product and an SPC lead forecaster thought that there was going to be a severe tornado event that day.

The fact is that the tornado watch for Greensburg was not a PDS. That is not a criticism of SPC, it is evidence that we do not have have the skill to do these (PDS and TE) consistently well with nearly zero FAR.

5. The point I made in post #29,

SO DO NOT WAIT. TAKE COVER NOW!

Here is one of the "non-emergency" (????) tornado warnings from last night. Since the NWS is telling people in the warning area, "So do not wait. Take cover now!" and giving safety rules, what, exactly, do the proponents of the tornado "emergency" message want people to do differently to save their lives?

If the sirens are already going off (they were), if the TV and radio are in full-out coverage (they were), and if we are not instructing people to do anything different, why issue the TE and run the risk of watering down the effectiveness of tornado warnings?

 

[Craig Maire II]

Maybe instead of issuing tornado emergencies the NWS should give continuous updates stating that a tornado is on the ground and it's current progress as they hear about it from spotters and tack it on radar? Sort of go live on the air? (instead of having the robot talk about it and giving statements that are 10 or 20 minutes old not that I'm criticising the covereage that night on Noaa) I'm sure a situation like Greensburg warrants this, I mean it's a tornado that's over a mile wide heading for a town! Drop everything and cover that live and you won't need a tornado emergency statement! Many people are so accustomed to nothing happening during a "regular" tornado warning that they just keep going about their regular business. Some situations just deserve more attention than others and the warning process needs to be adapted for this. Most people need a confirmation that something bad is happening or will be happening to get their attention and to take cover. If you hear that the neighbors house a mile or 2 away is being hit (just for an example) you are much more likely to take cover than if it's only "radar indicated".

 

[Chad Cowan]

Good points, Mike. I wholeheartedly agree with you on #1, but about points #2 and 5 in last night's event...

2. Once the expectation is set that a "tornado emergency" will be issued when the 'real thing' is approaching a city, then people will begin to ignore tornado warnings.

5. If the sirens are already going off (they were), if the TV and radio are in full-out coverage (they were), and if we are not instructing people to do anything different, why issue the TE and run the risk of watering down the effectiveness of tornado warnings?

Valid points, but something that you might not realize and that I believe contributed to the issuance of the TE was the fact that SGF was under several Tornado Warnings for an extended period of time. With 2 more coming around 3am, I believe the final count came to 6 tornado warnings for 6 different storms. You say that we risk watering down the effectiveness of tornado warnings by issuing a TE, but when a city of 150,000 should be taking cover for hours on end (not likely) and the vast majority of them are unaffected, there needs to be a call to action when there is an enhanced threat.