Vortex-Southeast coming in 2016

[Dave Gallaher]

I'm really pleased to see a focused research team planned for our region. In the article, they mention using the "let the storms come to us" method of intercepting rather than chasing, which has been my MO for the last 2O years or so. Also great to read that they will examine non-supercell structures that create so many of the tornadoes we have here. I hope they will encounter some of the really small specimens of supercell that we have from time to time. I have seen several examples of small cloud systems with pronounced rotation on the trailing edge---including horizontal-axis rotation. Hope they get to document some of these phenomena.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/04/huge_tornado_research_project.html

 

[Dan Robinson]

As I understand it, this project is somewhat controversial:

http://cadiiitalk.blogspot.com/2015/02/vortex-se-political-scientific.html

I think Dr. Doswell raises some valid points, though I think the previous VORTEX projects didn't adequately cover things like QLCS tornadoes and the social aspect that VORTEX SE will tackle. For that matter though, I wonder if constraining themselves to the southeast in the spring will limit their opportunities. I'd think including the Midwest would offer plenty of non-conventional (non dryline) type tornado setups such as QLCS, low-topped, MCV, warm front and cold core. I'd argue that this smorgasbord of tornado setups are more available north of an I-40 latitude than they are in the south, which likely sees more classic/HP supercell and QLCS tornadoes. That said, the population density argument is more valid in the south, but as Doswell noted, the meteorology of tornadoes is the same no matter where they occur.

 

[Dave Gallaher]

I entirely lack credentials and experience to debate Dr. Doswell - or anyone else on this forum - in regards to the methods of political funding, or the 'unvalidated hypothesis' that tornado meteorology is different in the southeast. However, as I stated above, I do think there is something to be gained -- perhaps not at the considerable outlay of funds involved here -- in the micro-scale storms that we seem to have more of here. Low-toppers and mini-supes are seen in all regions, but there may be a higher number of such small systems that actually produce severe weather here. On more than one occasion, I've witnessed what was almost a scaled-down mockup of a classic supercell -- complete with RFD split and a wall cloud -- at close range that could fit into a single frame. And I've experienced very small, quick moving clouds with classic wall clouds underneath and a tight violent circulation on the ground.

Are these worth all this effort and expense? I can't say, but I will continue to be pleased that the region is going to get some qualified attention.

 

[John Shewchuk]

I agree with the above comments ... and I question a project focus as quoted by the NSSL ... "There are people being killed by tornadoes and severe weather and so the question is why is that happening. And the answer is multifaceted." While personal safety is an important related issue, we would get more bang for our "weather-related" tax bucks if the weather service would spend more time being meteorologists versus sociologists. You can not dictate respect for a forecast -- your earn respect for your forecast abilities. I'd much rather see them spend extra effort to communicate with you (the storm chasers) who can provide invaluable assistance -- without using a single tax dime.

 

[rdale]

While personal safety is an important related issue, we would get more bang for our "weather-related" tax bucks if the weather service would spend more time being meteorologists versus sociologists.

Expand on that People are not dying in unwarned tornadoes. They die in Joplin and Tuscaloosa with well-warned events. Something socialogical is more likely the culprit than meteorological...

I'd much rather see them spend extra effort to communicate with you (the storm chasers) who can provide invaluable assistance -- without using a single tax dime.

Ehh, communicate how? What are chasers not getting from the NWS that would increase their ability to assist?

 

[Jeff Duda]

It sounds to me like they aren't going to focus on chasing at all. Rather, they'll setup a network of measuring stations, perhaps C- and/or X-band radars along with sounding sites and such to sample storms as they pass through the network. I read a specific mention of sampling QLCS/MCS tornadoes, which sounds like a plenty good deviation from the Great Plains version of the project. As long as they stick to those methods, I can see them getting some sort of data. I highly doubt they'll figure out why any one particular storm/QLCS produced any specific tornado, however. It sounds more like a chance to get high-resolution sampling of a different convective morphology.

 

[Andrew Khan]

I'm really pleased to see a focused research team planned for our region. In the article, they mention using the "let the storms come to us" method of intercepting rather than chasing, which has been my MO for the last 2O years or so. Also great to read that they will examine non-supercell structures that create so many of the tornadoes we have here. I hope they will encounter some of the really small specimens of supercell that we have from time to time. I have seen several examples of small cloud systems with pronounced rotation on the trailing edge---including horizontal-axis rotation. Hope they get to document some of these phenomena.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/04/huge_tornado_research_project.html

I think this is quite good news, seeing as real-time high resolution studies are relatively sparse in the south eastern quadrant of America. Besides, researching for better skill in forecasting in areas of varying geographical topographies should carry some imperative as well.

 

[Mike Benefield]

I entirely lack credentials and experience to debate Dr. Doswell - or anyone else on this forum - in regards to the methods of political funding, or the 'unvalidated hypothesis' that tornado meteorology is different in the southeast. However, as I stated above, I do think there is something to be gained -- perhaps not at the considerable outlay of funds involved here -- in the micro-scale storms that we seem to have more of here. Low-toppers and mini-supes are seen in all regions, but there may be a higher number of such small systems that actually produce severe weather here. On more than one occasion, I've witnessed what was almost a scaled-down mockup of a classic supercell -- complete with RFD split and a wall cloud -- at close range that could fit into a single frame. And I've experienced very small, quick moving clouds with classic wall clouds underneath and a tight violent circulation on the ground.

Are these worth all this effort and expense? I can't say, but I will continue to be pleased that the region is going to get some qualified attention.

Dave, I've read some of the negative comments about Vortex-SE, and I disagree with most. It is obvious that the Southeast has a high percentage of violent tornadoes. I even suggested that there should be one tornado alley, consisting of the plains states and the Southeast, especially Alabama and Mississippi. This suggestion was unpopular, to say the least.

I agree with you about the variations in regional micro-scale weather phenomena. It should be studied. The advocates for Plains-based scientific projects may not like the idea of conducting research in the Southeast, but it's just as important.

 

[rdale]

I think the 'tornado alley' feedback is because... it doesn't matter Where tornado alley lies depends solely on how you determine tornado alley is defined. Same thing with "outbreak" -- the term is entirely based on something someone makes up. So a debate is fruitless.

 

[Dave Gallaher]

I agree, Rob. It almost sounds like two different regions vying for tourism, and I sincerely hope we never get chase tours in the South.

One of my uneducated and unfounded theories on short-life non-supercell tornadoes is that there are micro-scale triggering devices yet to be documented that cause loose embedded rotation to become focused. Having multiple radars with quick scans on these lines may reveal 'boundarettes'.or some other phenomenon.

 

[Logan Karsten]

While severe weather in the southeast can be very pronounced, I do agree with Chuck's points in his blog. Politicians in the southeast have "pork" for a middle name, and the language used in the senate committee to justify this project are not new.

Back in December 2010, an omnibus appropriations bill was passed (HR 3288) that funded the government. Within that bill, an ear mark was slipped into NOAA appropriations that stated the following;

"Provided further, That the Secretary of Commerce is authorized to enter into a lease, at no cost to the United States Government, with the Regents of the University of Alabama for a term of not less than 55 years, with two successive options each of 5 years, for land situated on the campus of University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa to house the Cooperative Institute and Research Center for Southeast Weather and Hydrology"

This was the result of Richard Shelby trying to make a case for pumping money into his district. His justification in the senate committee reports?

"NOAA Cooperative Institute and Research Center for Southeast Weather and Hydrology.--$15,000,000 is provided for the continued construction of a research facility and weather related instrumentation and equipment. The Gulf of Mexico region lacks the infrastructure, research, and support from NOAA that other regions of the country have perpetually received. The Department of Commerce and NOAA have continued to ignore this region's vulnerability to weather-related disasters. Since 1980, the largest instances of billion dollar weather-related catastrophes have occurred in the gulf coast region. The loss of life and destruction of property from hurricanes, tropical storms, heat-waves, droughts, and flooding in this region have cost taxpayers approximately $652,000,000,000. NOAA's own research shows that the Southeast experiences more severe weather events than any other part of the country--yet, federally funded climate and weather research in the region has lagged. The Committee notes this glaring void and encourages NOAA to work with Southeastern universities in establishing the NOAA Cooperative Institute for Southeast Weather and Hydrology. This coordinated effort will provide researchers a better understanding of the dynamics of weather and hydrology in the region."

To my understanding, NOAA tried to fight this as unlike OU, UA has NO atmospheric science or hydrology program that would support this building. In addition, there are no existing offices nearby (except for the Birmingham WFO) that could easily move in. So, instead we are stuck with the "National Water Center" (http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2012/20120221_nwc.html) that is being stood up currently.

The problem here is scientific decision making is being made for political interests, not scientific interests......

 

[Dave Gallaher]

I would never deny the presence of pork in budget legislation [though it is obvious in all regions], but due to 1997 budget cuts Huntsville's NWS office was downgraded to a 'spindown' office. We had to depend on Birmingham's WFO. One of the significant aspects of this shift in responsibility was an increase in false alarms due to Birmingham's staff being understandably cautious: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB894256527525075500

It was through similar budget maneuvers that then-congressman Cramer of this district was able to not only revive our NWS station, but upgrade it into a research facility in 2OO3. So we have seen both sides of the pork platter to go with our normal serving of severe weather.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

I agree with the above comments ... and I question a project focus as quoted by the NSSL ... "There are people being killed by tornadoes and severe weather and so the question is why is that happening. And the answer is multifaceted." While personal safety is an important related issue, we would get more bang for our "weather-related" tax bucks if the weather service would spend more time being meteorologists versus sociologists. You can not dictate respect for a forecast -- your earn respect for your forecast abilities. I'd much rather see them spend extra effort to communicate with you (the storm chasers) who can provide invaluable assistance -- without using a single tax dime.

I'd actually argue the opposite. Warnings aren't perfect, but they're pretty good -- rarely does a tornado swoop in on a community without at least 7 to 10 minutes of prior warning. They're certainly accurate and timely enough to warrant listening to (though the false positive aspect could be improved). The trick is getting people to take the correct actions when the warnings sound. And that is a very tricky science -- and one that would net very real rewards, if the nut were cracked. It's not a novel issue, either, meaning that tackling it for tornadoes would bring about benefits for all kinds of warnings. In Japan, an earthquake and tsunami prone country, they have extremely high tech tsunami alerting systems, complete with text message alerts, TV break ins, and sirens that allow for a human being to speak warnings in between siren blasts. And still a significant number of people in some coastal communities did not try to find higher ground until they literally saw the water rushing in. If scientists can figure out how to motivate people to take warnings seriously, it'll be far from a waste of resources.