What is "a developing tornado"

[Mikey Gribble]

The only time I have ever used the term developing tornado was when there was extremely/extraordinary rapid rotation and vertical motion very close to the ground, to the extent that a tornado seems all but immenent. In my mind, it is a way to make a distinction between just a funnel and a situation where a tornado is extremely likely. I have only used the term once or twice though. I can't even remember if there was a funnel when I did it (it was a couple years ago), but the storm did tornado.
That was just my own personal feelings when I said it though. I have no idea why it was used in this case. I like Terry's explanation. Just because somebody says developing doesn't mean it will develop. Thought of this way it is virtually interchangeable with the typical "funnel" term used in warnings as far as content is concerned.

 

[Willie Dines]

If a spotter said "developing tornado" to anyone with weather knowledge he would immediately be asked to clarify... The same response you'd get if you said "winds are strong"

That's true and a good point of which, I agree wholeheartedly with also

Willie

 

[Dustin Wilcox]

Does it really matter? Rather its Tornado, developing tornado, midlevel rotation, Doppler radar indicated tornado, funnel cloud and what ever other terminology you want to add, people should be taking shelter and the NWS should be issuing a warning with just as much urgency. Thus debating the significance of the Term "developing Tornado" and its impact in warning the public is pretty insignificant IMO.

 

[rdale]

Dustin - apparently you missed the "Tornado Emergency" thread ;>

If the media knows you've got a tornado on the ground, we'll cover it MUCH different that if it's rotation in the cloud base. That's why we want as much detail as possible in the reports. Some offices rock at that, others -- not so good. And since (regardless of how the intial info gets out) a large majority of people get their continuous coverage from TV, it's in everyones best interest to make sure we have as much to go on as possible.

 

[beaudodson]

I would be curious what % of the public gets their warnings from television compared to NOAA Weather Radio, Car Radio, Sirens, TV Cable (which reads the warning), and so on. I guess we don't have any stats on that? I would guess in this region it could go either way. Majority prob from NOAA Weather Radio, Car Radio, and Cable (non local channels). I would say the minority get them from the local ABC, CBS, and NBC Station (which would be the on-air met). Twenty years ago most people would have gotten their warnings from the local on-air met (that was before cable was widespread). Now I am not so sure about that. Maybe someone has some stats.

Regardless I don't think most of the public cares one way or another. It is like saying "radar indicates a possible tornado" - or something similiar to that - not sure most people even care.

I would, however, say that 90% of the people interested in weather would know what a developing tornado means. Whether it is or is not proper wording. It is like saying "tornado on the ground" - well to be exact that is all a tornado can be - on the ground. If it isn't on the ground then it isn't a tornado.

 

[beaudodson]

Dustin - apparently you missed the "Tornado Emergency" thread ;>

If the media knows you've got a tornado on the ground, we'll cover it MUCH different that if it's rotation in the cloud base. That's why we want as much detail as possible in the reports. Some offices rock at that, others -- not so good. And since (regardless of how the intial info gets out) a large majority of people get their continuous coverage from TV, it's in everyones best interest to make sure we have as much to go on as possible.

Little doubt a tornado that is doing damage will get more attention around here. Wall to wall coverage. This is why it is a good idea to have specific details in warnings - updated warnings as well. The more information the better...for the public.

 

[rdale]

I would, however, say that 90% of the people interested in weather would know what a developing tornado means.

Given the rest of the thread I forgot that was my initial question ;> What does "developing tornado" mean? No tornado was reported, so while I might consider it a funnel cloud approaching the ground either it aborted development or it means something else to that spotter / NWS office.

 

[beaudodson]

On the question "what is a developing tornado" - I hear the NWS use this terminology quiet often. I always assumed that it meant there was rotation at mid-levels and now they are seeing rotation further down in the storm - so the next logical step is that there might be a developing tornado. If a spotter used these words though...that is a bit odd. heh You either have a wall cloud, rotation wall cloud, funnel cloud, or a tornado. Not sure what else you could have. If I saw a funnel cloud and it was coming down out of the clouds then I would tell the NWS that we have a funnel cloud that has almost reached the ground. They can figure the rest out for themselves.

 

[beaudodson]

Given the rest of the thread I forgot that was my initial question ;> What does "developing tornado" mean? No tornado was reported, so while I might consider it a funnel cloud approaching the ground either it aborted development or it means something else to that spotter / NWS office.

Yeah read above. If the NWS says this in a warning then, to me at least, it makes more sense than a SPOTTER saying that. Not sure why a spotter would use those words.

 

[Mikey Gribble]

First of all, I think this discussion is pretty ridiculous. What difference does it make whether the text of a tornado warning says "funnel" or "developing tornado"?

Second, not every tornado has a negligible funnel before you get circulation at the ground. Rapid vertical motion and rotation close to the ground (not just a run of the mill rotating wall cloud) should be considered just as serious as a funnel from an operational standpoint and using the term "developing tornado" conveys that when there isn't a funnel present. I have no clue why the NWS said "developing tornado", nor do I care, but that is one circumstance where I would tend to think the term "developing tornado" would be a wise choice of words. It get the publics attention more than "rotating wall cloud", which would be the other option in that hypothetical situation. IMO there is absolutely no meaningful difference between the terms developing tornado and funnel. Why is everybody being so damn picky on semantics this year? First it was vault, then mesocyclone, now we are onto warning text.

 

[rdale]

"What difference does it make whether the text of a tornado warning says "funnel" or "developing tornado"?"

Because info I'm getting now is that the spotter simply reported rotation in the cloud base, no funnel, no wall cloud, nothing. If I'm wondering about going wall-to-wall and the warning is just because a spotter saw some rotation in the storm, I'm going to make a much different determination than if a spotter see a funnel 50% down to the ground.

And why do people get so upset when questions are asked? Why does a discussion have to fit the mindset of a few or it's "ridiculous"? Seems like a lot of people are participating, so I guess a lot of us enjoy these chats.

 

[Dan Dawson]

...and the kicker is that (at least per preliminary reports) there was no tornado to come from this storm... A separate cell in the county has a law enforcement report of a touchdown but no damage.

I can confirm (as nearly as possible, at least, in the dark with only lightning for illumination) there was a tornado with this storm. The warning in question came out over the radio just as we were watching a newly-developed multiple vortex tornado in that same area SW of Lipscomb.

 

[Dick McGowan]

"What difference does it make whether the text of a tornado warning says "funnel" or "developing tornado"?"

Because info I'm getting now is that the spotter simply reported rotation in the cloud base, no funnel, no wall cloud, nothing.

I was watching this on GR3 with spotternetwork last night on my way home...and someone reported a "Wall cloud" I'm assuming it was rotating. I'm also going to bet that's how they translate it to "Developing tornado."

 

[Mikey Gribble]

Rdale, it seems like you are acting like the spotter report in the NWS text is the only thing you have to base your decision on whether or not to go "wall to wall" with coverage. You have numerous other tools at your disposure to help you decide what kind of coverage the storm deserves, so I think you are overplaying the importance of the NWS warning text as if it were the sole indicator of storm strength.
You are also jumping to the conclusion that a "developing tornado" just means "rotation in the cloud base". It could mean exactly what I said, rapid rotation and vertical motion very close to the ground, which is just as good of an indicator of a developing tornado as a funnel is. I would take the term developing tornado to mean just that, there is a tornado developing. Doesn't seem very complicated to me. I don't need an exact visual description of the updraft base to understand that.
If you are a TV met then you shouldn't have any problem calling one of the on duty meteorologists at the local NWS office and asking them what exactly the spotter saw/said if you can't figure out the storm threat for yourself. If you are basing your decision on whether or not to go "wall to wall" off a single anonamous "spotter report", then I think that is a problem in and of itself.

 

[Terry Tyler]

First of all, I think this discussion is pretty ridiculous. What difference does it make whether the text of a tornado warning says "funnel" or "developing tornado"?

Second, not every tornado has a negligible funnel before you get circulation at the ground. Rapid vertical motion and rotation close to the ground (not just a run of the mill rotating wall cloud) should be considered just as serious as a funnel from an operational standpoint and using the term "developing tornado" conveys that when there isn't a funnel present. I have no clue why the NWS said "developing tornado", nor do I care, but that is one circumstance where I would tend to think the term "developing tornado" would be a wise choice of words. It get the publics attention more than "rotating wall cloud", which would be the other option in that hypothetical situation. IMO there is absolutely no meaningful difference between the terms developing tornado and funnel. Why is everybody being so damn picky on semantics this year? First it was vault, then mesocyclone, now we are onto warning text.

i agree...ive seen alot of videos (like the manchester tornado) when the wall cloud motion is so violent...its only a matter of time before a tornado begins to form...

bottom line is...its really just a warning...theres no need to dwell on small idiosynchrasies as far as warning text is concerned...its a warning and thats that...theres a dangerous storm in the area, and its a tornado warning...

the general public doesnt care whether its a tornado emergency a developing tornado or whatever...its a tornado warning...hyped up terminology, and enhanced wording may give an imminent since of danger, but it is really up to the individual...warning or no warning...to heed or not to heed the warning...tornado or no tornado...ive been in a million tornado warnings and never saw a single tornado...

again...i dont see any need to criticize a warning...there were alot of tornado reports from the storm, but whether it was weak, producing or not producing...the general public needed to take shelter...there was a funnel, and putting yourself in the warning coordinators position...with the greensburg event in mind...issue a warning...if it doesnt make a tornado, then thank God...

again...it is a tornado warning...tornado or no tornado...which from a terminolgy stand point means "a tornado is either IMMINENT or occuring" within the warning area...a "developing tornado" or rotating wall cloud or funnel indicates the IMMINENT possibility of a tornado...reguardless of a tornado or not...

i personally think a warning is just that...a warning...