Was it me or does it seem that the news stations "doppler," "Moar", "some fancy new name," just look like the old atari game graffics? I kept switching between channels 5 and 9, and it just seemed as if i was playing some atari game back in the 80's. "You see this red square is where the tornado is, or wait is it the green square." Then you turn to channel 9 and there are so many spinning circles it looks like olympic symbol. I was just finding some humor in the "death from above," last night

good one!

They all want to sensationalize the weather just like the news writers want each story to be bigger than it really is. Go back 10 years and we don't stop the whole planet for hail and then tell people they're gonna die....they do that now.

Mr. England should have been slapped numerouse times for saying, "I don't see how you're goingto survive if you aren't underground". Yes he said that on My 3rd.

Ever since then, and especially in the last 3 years, it seems that the weather guys have stopped being meteorologists and are tv personalities with more interest in catching ratings than doing their job well. All this crap with one radar and another, my toy, his toy, who gives a rat's ass.

I say, cut the crap and go back to being real scientists and stop being media. The NWS is the one with the real data anyway, and they're who tells the news about watches/warnings. Media is just a middle man with a camera.

Which brings me to another point. Does anyone remember a time when a Tornado Warning meant there was actually a tornado on the ground and not just the possibility of one? These days they drop the warning bomb like it's an old-school watch. If there's a cloud in the sky, we get a tornado watch, and then if ANYTHING happens, BAM tornado warning whether there's even a funnel cloud or not.

One thing NWS Norman does is not put out BS tornado warnings. We have such a spotter/chaser rich state, that there are plenty of eyes on it all. Yes was a case of 2-3 supercells that had amazing structure and very strong rotation. No it never did drop a tornado, but this is the game we are in.

You say remember when a warning actually meant it was on the ground, so where is the lead time? There is none. Your method therefore puts people in danger of a tornado dropping on them with little to no advanced warning. The NWS puts out a warning on a cell once it crosses the threshold to where it just needs something to push the circulation from the mid levels or the lower level of the storm. Sometimes we are lucky and it doesn't happen - like yesterday.

So we are in a position to where we have well advanced warnings, most of the time, before anything happens. There are times when I've seen a tornado drop down for about a minute and lift back up. It destroyed a structure or two and stopped. No warning on it. Since more tornadoes are short lived, so we continue with a situation like that - going by your logic? Or do we create thresholds and once a storm goes past them, we sound the alarm and get people ready for the strong possiblity that the storm can produce one any minute.

The new refined warning areas should also allow people to be better alerted. NWS no longer issues (svr or tor) warnings based only on county lines - or for the whole county regardless. They simple outline an area where the severe weather will occure and warn on that. Unfortunately a lot of the TV stations haven't adopted to this new method yet and light the entire counties still.

To Chef...
The color tables are pretty bad on some of those radars. The application that I use, GRLevel2AE, blows a lot of those away. Plus you can customize the color tables to make them look better and also incorporate a method of "smoothing" that calculates what the actual cells look like...versus just the pixels you see or do a blatent smoothing of colors with no scientific reasoning. Plus the 3D rendering of the storms aren't half bad either. ;) NWS is increasing resolution on the radars across the county this year, so we'll see if any of the stations pick up that data feed.

Saw an Edmond area home this am on the news. If they were home last night, and i hope they were not, I suspect advanced warning was not seen as overkill. the nature of the beast ... ahouse either way, no serious looking damage, the helio shot though was the house with a large chunk of roof either down in the house or gone elsewhere

Yeah...looks like a few homes got some decent tornado damage. Probably around an EF1 from the looks of it...maybe some EF2 damage in there.

I thought News 9's radar, Moar or whatever this year's newest thing is was a lot better than the attack of the killer pixels on Channels 4 and 5.

It also kills me that they've turned tornado into a verb. Mike Morgan started that back in the early 90s.

kevinpate, that was my Dentist's house! We did a renovation on his new office and became patients.. I recognized his wife's name and turns out, it was his house. What a small world!

Weather Skeptics....

Just wait till hail busts out your car windshield, rain floods your home, or a tornado rips off your roof....

Then we'll see what you have to say about "sensationalized" weather coverage...

Speaking of how news stations sensationalize the weather in order to scare us into watching, check out this clip from The Daily Show. It points out the absurdity in this ad for Gary England. I found it to be hilarious.
YouTube - KWTV and Gary England Respond to Stewart Spoof (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pf3rcT-gu-Y)

lol... that is so funny!

Old news about the KWTV ad...and we all agree it was over the top. However, people are bitching about warnings going out to much and that has NOTHING to do with the TV folks.

However, people are bitching about warnings going out to much and that has NOTHING to do with the TV folks.

Eh? Constant interruptions to warn us of thunderstorms does have to do with TV folks because they are the ones doing the interruptions.

Eh? Constant interruptions to warn us of thunderstorms does have to do with TV folks because they are the ones doing the interruptions.


He was talking about the tornado warnings given out by the NWS.

I thought News 9's radar, Moar or whatever this year's newest thing is was a lot better than the attack of the killer pixels on Channels 4 and 5.

It also kills me that they've turned tornado into a verb. Mike Morgan started that back in the early 90s.
Our radar at Channel 5 is the upgrade the national weather service will be going to when they update their radar in a few more years. (by the way the NWS' radar is called WSR-88d... that 88 stands for 1988, yeah 1988 technology) Ask them, theyll tell you the same. And on the warning thing... I don't want be the guy to start this war, but Im tired of hearing about this, We have a RESPONSIBILITY to the public to alert them to storms, the FCC gave us the airwaves for free, in response, we are expected to deliver timely accurate information, you all can believe whatever you want to, believe we do it for ratings or whatever, it is NOT the case, We do it to save lives, we do it because we want to make sure you know the second that a storm produces a tornado, that you will have as much lead time as you possibly can to get to shelter, I am a chaser at one of the TV stations here in okc, and we dont go out and say "OH Lets see if we can stay on the air and cover up desperate whore wives" We are out there to relate information, and make sure we give you the information you need to protect your families. I work in a TV newsroom, i know this is our philosophy, believe what you will but this is our SOP! I wasn't at work until 6am because I like to stay on the air, and get ratings, I was at work because we knew there was a threat, and we didn't want another Greensburgh KS. We wanted to make sure that people knew what was going on and If the storm did produce another tornado we could give them the warning they needed. And the whole "the NWS is better than TV" Guess what, I am in constant contact with the NWS during all of the events, giving them the exact same information I give the TV station. We really are just trying to save lives, its not about the ratings, its not about show boating, its about protecting your family and mine.

There is an entire collaboration of effort that happens when storms come rolling in. The whole point of advancement in radar and other such technologies if to give a lead time for families and individuals to be aware of approaching danger, mainly tornados. Imagine having ten minutes to scramble for cover rather than just two minutes. TV weather-casters [as if that's a word] are simple a medium to information given to them by several different sources. They don't just guess and throw stuff together from what they interpret from radar, they are being given real time readings from monitors across the city/state, the National Weather Service [the people who actually issue the tornado warnings/watch], storm chasers, area wide cameras/ reporters, and of course, their own instruments in house.

Put yourself in the Meteorologists shoes, you're in a studio, talking into a camera, trying to warn people about approaching danger, if any, and hoping people are aware of what's happening, as well as worrying about your own families safety.

Oklahoma weather... you can't make this sh!t up.

I don't have a problem with warnings, I have a problem with them not being as defined as they once were. Perhaps it's time to create a middle warning level that better fits the situation.

Watch - conditions where a tornado MIGHT develop
??? - something that tells us that there is a chance a tornado may come down some time soon, but there isn't one...ie conditions are ripe.
Warning - one is confirmed in existence, by radar or eyes or whatever...not just a rotating cloud (ie channel 9's olympic rings of amazing spinningness...ever noticed how more often than not those rings don't mean crap).

This is where I get pissed. We see warnings fly much more than we used to. I understand our technology has allowed us to see things more acurately, and I'm glad. However, I think we still need to learn how to differentiate between what is a possibility and a reality. Sounding a horn when there isn't one is as dangerous as not sounding it.

Freaking MustanG blew a tornado siren more than 45 minutes before the storm was even near the town! Credit to the channel 5 guys for handling that one well. You could tell he was thinking "why?" but instead he said, ok it's not going to be there for a while but you can go ahead and get prepared now. Kept it calm. This is why i watch channel 5 pretty much exclusively for weather these days. They are calm and don't run around like retards...Mr England.

Tsunami folks deal with the same thing, you cry wolf and there isn't one and people get complacent. I'm not saying that will happen here cause everytime I see a warning near me, I crap my pants. And I'm not trying to say that the other day wasn't warranted...i'm talking longer term coverage in the past.

For some reason we've decided that weather is a way to sell tv. If you don't think it's ratings, then why are you marketing the new radars and selling the face of the meteorologists at chats/appearances, etc? They are TV personalities and the stations want them to be known like the anchors and "reporters".

I don't think they act any different than most media. Everyone over blows the story to make it sound more amazing than it really is....it sells.

Our radar at Channel 5 is the upgrade the national weather service will be going to when they update their radar in a few more years. (by the way the NWS' radar is called WSR-88d... that 88 stands for 1988, yeah 1988 technology) Ask them, theyll tell you the same.
One day of the Iraq war and those NWS radars would be state of the art.

I think that the news channels handle winter weather the worst . At least in a thunderstorm that is tornadic things can change in a instant, but the snow ? they stay on all day to tell you that its still snowing

weather people have become the biggest joke on tv

Again, talk to NWS, they control the warnings/watches, but then again, NWS is behind in technology by twenty years, what do they know.

Our radar at Channel 5 is the upgrade the national weather service will be going to when they update their radar in a few more years.

I thought the NWS is going to phased-array radar, a la the AN/SPY-1 AEGIS system. KOCO is just a faster doppler, to my understanding.

I thought the NWS is going to phased-array radar, a la the AN/SPY-1 AEGIS system. KOCO is just a faster doppler, to my understanding.

They are. Also there is an upgrade going out now to all WSR-88D sites to upgrade the detail quality of the Level 2 radar data. Norman was a test bed for it, and still is, but the Twin Lakes radar (which is normally viewed by the public) won't be upgraded until late May. Also...all radars will have this upgrade done win in the next few months - not years.

I'll respond to the other items after work.

I saw a bit that Lewis Black did about weathermen-
It was something like "lets just get a monkey to throw darts at a dart board and he can predict the weather." When he is wrong we can all say," you stupid "f*ckin monkey!!!" It was something like that, I laughed so hard i think i cried.

I agree weather reporting here is sensationalized, it has to be. I mean look at how wrong they are when it comes to predicting snow. Tornados are the weathermen/womens last hope.

Also, is there any truth that I could be looking at a tornado, call the tv station, tell them i'm staring right at it, and they can't report there is a tornado unless the NWS says they see one?

I think that last comment is more closely related to the idea that news media generally won't create a warning until they are told by the NWS. However, if they know for a fact that something is there, they will often say it. It depends on the person on TV. Some media weather folk will go ahead and say that they are going to put out the "warning" but others say they find that "irresponsible". It's just a matter of opinion...I personally want to know if there's a tornado, but don't really care if there's an "official" warning or not.

That's the world of storm chasers, to say that there's a tornado visually confirmed out there. Radar may not have had a chance to see it develop because takes so freaking long to make a good complete pass at all levels...what like 3 minutes or something...ie the life of some tornados. Hence the appeal of the pulse radars instead of the typical spinners.

Amazing how some people think they know all there is to know about weather forecasting (and meteorology in general) and then think the weather forecasters do it for ratings... simply amazing.

Watch - conditions where a tornado MIGHT develop
??? - something that tells us that there is a chance a tornado may come down some time soon, but there isn't one...ie conditions are ripe.
Warning - one is confirmed in existence, by radar or eyes or whatever...not just a rotating cloud (ie channel 9's olympic rings of amazing spinningness...ever noticed how more often than not those rings don't mean crap).

A lot of people are not really liking the addition of a third level tornado advisory, but it is there. Back on May 3rd, NWS Norman issued a "Tornado Emergency" over a Special Weather Statement regarding the urgent nature of the massive wedge tornado coming into a highly populated area. The same Emergency has been used again by other NWSFO's, including the one covering the massive tornado in Kansas last year that wiped the town off the map.

The current criteria is pretty clear. Watch means conditions are ripe if/when storms develop for them to rotate and potentially produce tornadoes. Warnings mean that one is observed on the ground or observed to be forming by spotter or radar (low level rotation increasing). The rings on KWTV's Vipir radar system is nothing more than showing various areas of rotation in the storm. Unfortunately not many can read a velocity image and understand it.


This is where I get pissed. We see warnings fly much more than we used to. I understand our technology has allowed us to see things more acurately, and I'm glad. However, I think we still need to learn how to differentiate between what is a possibility and a reality. Sounding a horn when there isn't one is as dangerous as not sounding it.

Tornadoes can form quickly. I've seen a storm go from a simple cloud to tornadic in about 10 minutes before. Tornadoes can also drop and last only a few seconds. The lead time in those situations if we stayed with you philosophy of only warning on sighted tornadoes would mean about the vast majority of tornadoes would have no advance warning.


Freaking MustanG blew a tornado siren more than 45 minutes before the storm was even near the town! Credit to the channel 5 guys for handling that one well. You could tell he was thinking "why?" but instead he said, ok it's not going to be there for a while but you can go ahead and get prepared now. Kept it calm. This is why i watch channel 5 pretty much exclusively for weather these days. They are calm and don't run around like retards...Mr England.

May 3rd had roughly an hour lead time as well...if a tornado has rapid rotation, I think most people would want some advance notification. ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT WHEN PEOPLE ARE SLEEPING.


Tsunami folks deal with the same thing, you cry wolf and there isn't one and people get complacent. I'm not saying that will happen here cause everytime I see a warning near me, I crap my pants. And I'm not trying to say that the other day wasn't warranted...i'm talking longer term coverage in the past.

Tsunami forecast is so complicated, I suggest you educate yourself before you even begin to touch this one.

Again, talk to NWS, they control the warnings/watches, but then again, NWS is behind in technology by twenty years, what do they know.

So behind the times. I mean...nothing has advanced in the last few years. Hell they still use 8086s in that nice new National Weather Center. :-P

Radar upgrade schedule:
RPG SW BUILD 10.0 - INCLUDES REPORTING FOR SW 41 RDA (http://www.roc.noaa.gov/ssb/cm/csw_notes/Completion.aspx?ID=2689)

Venture - the tsunami thing was meant as a metaphor, obviously tsunami's aren't similar to tornados. I'm very familiar with how immensely difficult it is to accurately predict a tsunami and how it's almost impossible....my point was crying wolf. Many Japanese cities have created this problem with their citizens because their local detection networks have created too many false alarms with 1" waves. So many people completely ignore all of the alarms now.

This is a nice topic to hop in. So, I'm writing this as I read the posts.

I remember seeing channel 5 being first with the spinning circle representing circulation, then channel 4 to follow and channel 9 is last.

Gary England was right when he said, "I don't see how you're going to survive if you are not underground." Everyone is shocked at the death toll being a few. That day, thousands of us was protected as most would say, guardian angels.

Right, the NWS has the data first, but not always. NWS pass info onto these weathermen to pass onto us. NWS isn't first everytime. There has been many cases of local news stations' storm chaser teams spotting tornadoes on the ground way before NWS.

I remember there were actually a tornado on the ground and I believe it was David Payne reporting that he was seeing a violent tornado on the ground. What happened with NWS? Nothing for several minutes. I remember Mike saying, "There need to be a tornado warning for *name* county right now."

Mike, Rick, and Gary do not issue tornado warnings, but when NWS is slow (maybe potty break), these men will tell you there is a tornado on the ground, despite the late-issued official tornado warning.

Short-lived tornadoes or not, it is still important to issue a tornado warning, to be safe! NWS waits until the very last minute to issue a tornado warning. This is a bad idea! People need time to prepare, so early warning is a must.

I'm going have to say that channel 4 has the best graphic view on radars and everything else. Channel 5 is second. Channel 9 is horrible, in my eyes, it seem so cheap.

That weather video is hilliarious! Gary being so calmed while the family freaks out. LoL

I'm an active poster on the channel 5's online weather blog. Pretty much, most people agree that Mike is dramatic (which is a good thing to scare people into listening), Rick is the calm one (which is both good and bad - not to scare the public - but gives false sense of security), and Gary being the sleepy one (seem no feelings into his work).

bombermwc, that may be a good idea to have a middle warning, but... A warning is still a must, because a strong circulation could suddenly shoot out a funnel. Additionally, just because you don't see a funnel, doesn't mean a tornado isn't there. Some funnels can be so clear (no clouds) at the start.

If anyone see a tornado, they can call the station to report it. Whoever is speaking on tv will say a tornado was called in by a viewer.

I remember a story was aired about a new radar having 10 beams to go around, but I have not seen that radar actually being developed.

There is a new radar, heavily promoted by channel 4, and it beams out much further and goes around quicker. Channel 4 blends multiple radars into one graphic view, constantly updating the view of the radars quicker than the other stations.

.....

About the early tornado warning is a must. To be clear, why I feel that tornado warning should be posted before the tornado is on the ground is because... What if there was a house right under it? If the NWS waits until a funnel start to dip out, then post a tornado warning, then the house right under it have no warning! Think about that.

I remember the day of the May 3rd, 1999 tornado, all the national news stations went live with our local newscasts. Either Fox or CNN picked up Channel 9. I remember when Gary England fired up his main system, with swirling tornado circles, 3-D z-axis depictions, and estimated track arrows and arrival times, the national media went nuts. They were freaking out, saying they had never seen anything like that before. I always thought that was cool.

Right, the NWS has the data first, but not always. NWS pass info onto these weathermen to pass onto us. NWS isn't first everytime. There has been many cases of local news stations' storm chaser teams spotting tornadoes on the ground way before NWS.

I remember there were actually a tornado on the ground and I believe it was David Payne reporting that he was seeing a violent tornado on the ground. What happened with NWS? Nothing for several minutes. I remember Mike saying, "There need to be a tornado warning for *name* county right now."

My response to this is that in Oklahoma there are hundreds of chasers and spotters. The problem is, especially with the media chasers, they do NOT relay this information back to NWS in Norman right away. It usually comes down to Norman having to watch the stations themselvs, for one of their spotters to notice the tornado/rotation, or for it to show up on radar. There are COUNTLESS tornadoes the TV chasers have seen, but never an LSR on them (local storm report). Why? The stations are not doing their civic duty reporting these in like they should be doing.


Mike, Rick, and Gary do not issue tornado warnings, but when NWS is slow (maybe potty break), these men will tell you there is a tornado on the ground, despite the late-issued official tornado warning.

Short-lived tornadoes or not, it is still important to issue a tornado warning, to be safe! NWS waits until the very last minute to issue a tornado warning. This is a bad idea! People need time to prepare, so early warning is a must.

Perfect example of how you know absolutely nothing on what goes down at the NWC. The warning is going to be issued if a spotter reports it in, reports strong lower level rotation, or the radar picks up similar. Sometimes these smaller tornadoes will not get picked up by radar...this usually means they will be quick spin ups that won't last very long. The only way these get reported is from chasers doing their duty calling it in. The NWS does NOT wait to the last minute to issue a warning. Majority of the warnings put out over the last month or so have all been pre-emptive before anything touched down. A lot of the time, the strong lower level rotation fell apart and nothign developed. It may be easy to sit there from behind your desk thinking those guys don't know what they are doing or are slow...but all it shows it just have uninformed you are on the process. May I suggest attending the severe weather workshop next March?


I'm going have to say that channel 4 has the best graphic view on radars and everything else. Channel 5 is second. Channel 9 is horrible, in my eyes, it seem so cheap.

The radars are nothing special. The Baron's Stormtrac crap that all 3 are terrible in resolution. The VIPIR system is also pretty low quality on resolution, but better than KWTV's 9000XL, KFOR's "North Doppler", etc...which are all the same thing. KOCO's Advantage system and KWTV's MOAR are pretty close where we are going as far as resolution. The others should catch up as the NWS upgrades the WSR-88D unit at Twin Lakes to use the higher resolution image that most are putting out now. The difference is night and day.

I actually use the program at home called GRLevel2 Analyst Edition...and the detail you can see with the higher resolution and quality data is wonderful. Should also point how that KWTV has shown this product a few times during their severe weather coverage. It is the radar with the all black background - though that can be changed if they took 2 seconds to put in a background map. :) The radar though is amazing and provides a ton of information inside the storm with its 3D storm rendering it is able to do.


I'm an active poster on the channel 5's online weather blog. Pretty much, most people agree that Mike is dramatic (which is a good thing to scare people into listening), Rick is the calm one (which is both good and bad - not to scare the public - but gives false sense of security), and Gary being the sleepy one (seem no feelings into his work).

Mike Morgan is worthless. He is pure ratings. David Payne is much better. Morgan has no problem preaching the end of the world when its really not going to happen. Rick Mitchel I enjoy...and he is down to earth. Gary...has been slowing down in his age. Every now and then he does get pretty pumped up. Jed and Michael though are really good on their team coverage on overnight events. The FOX team...ehhh Greg is the only good one there. Jeff George needs to get out of the market. I remember him from Toledo, and he totally sucks on severe weather coverage and in OKC you must be at the top of your game.


bombermwc, that may be a good idea to have a middle warning, but... A warning is still a must, because a strong circulation could suddenly shoot out a funnel. Additionally, just because you don't see a funnel, doesn't mean a tornado isn't there. Some funnels can be so clear (no clouds) at the start.

Correct, tornadoes never need to have a solid condensation funnel to the ground. If you have strong rotation at the base of the storm and dust being kicked up, good chance you have something on the ground. Middle warning...not needed. NWS made an effort this year to eliminate a ton of non-needed advisories. If the situation is dire, NWS will issue a tornado emergency.


If anyone see a tornado, they can call the station to report it. Whoever is speaking on tv will say a tornado was called in by a viewer.

Again this is TOTALLY FALSE. You should NOT call the TV station. You need to be calling local authorities or the National Weather Service. Otherwise this will delay the official warning process even more.


I remember a story was aired about a new radar having 10 beams to go around, but I have not seen that radar actually being developed.

The test radar is at Westheimer Airport in Norman. It has been there for a few years now. It will not be rolled out for a few more years as they do more testing on it. Here is the current test product: WDSS-II: NWRT Phased Array Radar (http://wdssii.nssl.noaa.gov/web/wdss2/products/radar/nwrtbase.shtml)


There is a new radar, heavily promoted by channel 4, and it beams out much further and goes around quicker. Channel 4 blends multiple radars into one graphic view, constantly updating the view of the radars quicker than the other stations.

Their "South Doppler" is nothing new or exciting. It is a marketing ploy. I believe it is the same model as KWTV's MOAR. I'll have to check into it. As far as blending radar images...all stations do that. Nothing new or impressive.


About the early tornado warning is a must. To be clear, why I feel that tornado warning should be posted before the tornado is on the ground is because... What if there was a house right under it? If the NWS waits until a funnel start to dip out, then post a tornado warning, then the house right under it have no warning! Think about that.

Umm...most warnings are put out well in advance of an actual tornado being produced. Your inability to understand this just points out your lack of experience in this field. The NWS will issue the warning as soon low level rotation gets to a certain point or a rotating wall cloud is observed by a spotter or chaser. I'm done now...since I'll just keep repeating myself and I believe I've adequately pointed out the flaws in this argument.

My response to this is that in Oklahoma there are hundreds of chasers and spotters. The problem is, especially with the media chasers, they do NOT relay this information back to NWS in Norman right away. It usually comes down to Norman having to watch the stations themselvs, for one of their spotters to notice the tornado/rotation, or for it to show up on radar. There are COUNTLESS tornadoes the TV chasers have seen, but never an LSR on them (local storm report). Why? The stations are not doing their civic duty reporting these in like they should be doing.

Well not only that, but as a storm chaser, I can tell you that many of the tornadoes reported by OKC TV station spotters/chasers are bogus, and I suspect the NWS knows it. I can think of 4 specific cases in the last year where very experienced spotters and chasers (including myself) have been in the immediate vicinity of tornadoes reported by OKC TV chasers and had to call the NWS to de-bunk the report. In all 4 cases no video could be produced and no damage was ever found. This explains, I think, why the NWS waits for secondary reports and sometimes passes on a TV chaser report.

Ch. 4 is by far the worst with this, particularly David Payne's ridiculous hyper screaming over harmless leaves blowing around the last couple of years, egged on by Mike "end of the world" Morgan. They've gotten much worse in the last few years. What will these guys do when there's an actual serious tornado event?


The radars are nothing special. The Baron's Stormtrac crap that all 3 are terrible in resolution. The VIPIR system is also pretty low quality on resolution, but better than KWTV's 9000XL, KFOR's "North Doppler", etc...which are all the same thing. KOCO's Advantage system and KWTV's MOAR are pretty close where we are going as far as resolution. The others should catch up as the NWS upgrades the WSR-88D unit at Twin Lakes to use the higher resolution image that most are putting out now. The difference is night and day.

9's MOAR and 5's Advantage are pretty top-of-the-line. 4's south doppler emits 1 MW power as opposed to 700 kW for the NWS radar, but that makes for a trivial difference in terms of seeing features in thunderstorms. Keep in mind the NWS also makes heavy use of the FAA's terminal doppler radar near Will Rogers Airport, which is very similar to MOAR and Advantage.


The NWS will issue the warning as soon low level rotation gets to a certain point or a rotating wall cloud is observed by a spotter or chaser.

There's also a lot of environmental analysis done that goes into the decision. For example, even if there's rotation on radar and spotters also see a wall cloud, the storm might be in a cold environment that's unfavorable for tornadoes so no tornado warning would be issued.

Well not only that, but as a storm chaser, I can tell you that many of the tornadoes reported by OKC TV station spotters/chasers are bogus, and I suspect the NWS knows it. I can think of 4 specific cases in the last year where very experienced spotters and chasers (including myself) have been in the immediate vicinity of tornadoes reported by OKC TV chasers and had to call the NWS to de-bunk the report. In all 4 cases no video could be produced and no damage was ever found. This explains, I think, why the NWS waits for secondary reports and sometimes passes on a TV chaser report.

Ch. 4 is by far the worst with this, particularly David Payne's ridiculous hyper screaming over harmless leaves blowing around the last couple of years, egged on by Mike "end of the world" Morgan. They've gotten much worse in the last few years. What will these guys do when there's an actual serious tornado event?

KFOR is definitely the highest in false tornado reports. KWTV's crew is typically on the ball...and help explain the differences in the spin ups. Unfortunately it is not just TV chasers that are the problem. The huge influx of new chasers the last few years has really hurt things. I've been doing it for about 12 years now, and I've never seen more false reporting since I've been out there. One the various chasing websites it is really evident that even these educated chasers have problems seeing the differences. So many pictures and videos claiming to be tornadoes, yet they leave out the big hill that is between them and the "tornado". Payne is insane for as close as he gets...and we've started to see other chasers get careless and get closer and closer. Some are big names too...and a few have been hit already. Only a matter of time until one finally gets killed.



There's also a lot of environmental analysis done that goes into the decision. For example, even if there's rotation on radar and spotters also see a wall cloud, the storm might be in a cold environment that's unfavorable for tornadoes so no tornado warning would be issued.

The warning decision process is so complex, if we went into specifics here...everyone would fall asleep. LOL I don't think a "cold" environment is really a negative for tornadic storms. We've seem them produce when the actual air temperature is pretty low (40s)...and the class cold core systems that produce the weaker "cold air funnels" that sometimes touch down and do EF0 or EF1 damage. But there are so many factors it just depends.

Okay, for years, we've always say F and now people are starting to say EF. I know they did modificiations to the scale, but why is it necessary to say EF when it is enough to say F. I don't say EF, still.

The E in the digital age sounds like Electronic. LoL There is an *electronic* F3 tornado on the ground. LoL

Enhance Fujita scale is totally different than the Fujita Scale. Therefore EF refers to the new measuring system, and F refers to the old. Any reference to the old is just inaccurate. Not to mention, no one in authority will ever refer to a specific "rating" being on the ground since, as you know as a chaser, the scale rating isn't determined until after damage has been done.

Some reading you should probably do: Storm Prediction Center Enhanced Fujita Scale (EF Scale) (http://www.spc.noaa.gov/efscale/)

Yeah, I'll never understand why they determine the EF of a tornado base on the amount of damage. That is a disgrace to the tornadoes.

It is sad when a tornado develops to be extremely violent with over a mile wide base out in the country with no major populations to be officially rated EF0 or EF1, even those the size is of EF5.

Yeah, I'll never understand why they determine the EF of a tornado base on the amount of damage. That is a disgrace to the tornadoes.

It is sad when a tornado develops to be extremely violent with over a mile wide base out in the country with no major populations to be officially rated EF0 or EF1, even those the size is of EF5.

The EF scale is a much better system for rating tornadoes. It not only takes into account damage to structures (especially those well-built) but also damage to large trees and areas of vegetation.

Then again, any experienced chaser or meteorologst knows that you can't come to a conclusion of a tornado's strength simply based on how large it looks or the degree of motion it has. At best you can say it's a large tornado. But a large tornado can be an EF 2 as well, so size is not always a good indicator of how strong a tornado might be.

Some of you seem to know a lot about the weather...

Can someone tell me why the tornado sirens are going off right now, 2:30 AM in northwest okc? I see there is bad weather 2 counties away from us.. but come on. I thought sirens were supposed to mean... seek shelter ASAP!

If my math is right.. the storm won't hit where I am at until 3:30 am (assuming it doesn't die), so thank you for the hour lead time on what might be a tornado?

EDIT: I was close... 3:25 when the rain first hit. No tornado warning.

You sure you were hearing OKC's sirens? I know Canadian county had a warning but I never heard OKC sirens going. You may have heard Canadian county sirens.... Not sure.

Or else I am deaf - which isn't far fetched.

Tornado warning was issued for Northern Canadian county early this morning. There was a pretty strong area of rotation that developed on the storm that was moving through there, and they went ahead and tornado warned it. Apparently further west near Fairview, they took quite a bit of damage when one of these areas appeared on radar - Sherrif said possible tornado but won't know until after the damage assessment.

As far as Oklahoma County goes...I only remember seeing the severe tstm warning for the line up last night - nothing tornado warned.

I guess those were Canadian county sirens, make sense. I have really good hearing and my room is not well insulated from outside noise.

I live just west of Hefner lake on Rockwell, which is very much Oklahoma City, but still very close to Canadian county.

It was funny of the way NWS worked last night. They issued no Tornado Watch, but felt the need to issue several Tornado Warnings. After the first several warnings, they issued a T-Storm Watch, but not Tornado Watch. LoL

It was funny of the way NWS worked last night. They issued no Tornado Watch, but felt the need to issue several Tornado Warnings. After the first several warnings, they issued a T-Storm Watch, but not Tornado Watch. LoL

Hum...i'm going with Troll more than storm chaser at this point. The events main setup indicated that damaging winds and hail would be the primary hazards - this was accurate. The tornado threat was very slim and isolated.

Storm Prediction Center 20080608's Storm Reports (http://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/080608_rpts.html)

No official reports came through the LSRs for any tornadoes in Oklahoma. The watches were also put up well in advance of any warnings going out.

Needless to say, I think I've said enough on these replies. Thunder, for the benefit of your image on these forums, I would stop until you make yourself look even worse.

All this is fascinating. I had no idea there were storm chaser blogs and message boards. Actually, I just never thought about it because if I had, it would have been obvious. I've enjoyed this thread.

I certainly see the need to keep the public informed of threatening weather, but what frustrates the fire out of me is the abuse of that discretion by so many in the local media. Mike Morgan seems to be the worst/chronic offender these days, but I assure you Gary England broke that ground 30 years ago.

Just as it is still illegal to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater, there ought to be some sort of sane limitations on yelling "TORNADO" to a state of storm-fatigued citizens. I also wish I were smart enough to know where that line should be drawn. Right now, I think it is drawn too often in favor of news outlets whose primary motive is to sell their media product by engendering fear and dependency rather than information, and rationalized under the banner of providing a public service.

I think the migration toward dedicated local news and weather channels may be how the market resolves this issue on its own. If I want to get current info, I have two choices for continuous weather coverage, and if other stations want to create the same product, power to 'em. That guarantees me that I can get the information I want at the time I deem it necessary, and I'll never gritch about interrupting my favorite program :)

I also see the opportunities with digital broadcasting to create more split-screen efforts that continue showing a regular broadcast in addition to a radar loop/feed and warning crawl.

Bottom line, I like alternatives and choices. And I understand the media has to make a living. I just wish it didn't have to be done by marketing fear.

ECO...there are tons of resources out there to check out.

Stormtrack (http://www.stormtrack.org/) <- one of the major sites for the chaser community
SevereStudios.com | The World's Eyes & Ears For Severe Weather (http://www.severestudios.com/) <- New site streaming video from chasers
WX Line - MediaLine's Open Line Forum (http://openline.medialine.com/forumdisplay.php?f=10) <- Weather forum visited by quite a few in the media.

Dave,

I'm with you on the fear tactics lately. Especially KWTV's ads. I am very interested to see how things transition with digital signals for everyone. Would be great if they had their own station only for weather that everyone can get, that they would refer people too. I'm not all too sure if the moves next year means everyone will pick up the digital signals or not for the additional channels the local stations run.

Thanks, Venture. Very cool. Husband is in the aviation field and I will mention flytol to him (he is probably already aware of it but maybe not).

I'm perfectly fine with expressing my opinions. I see what I see.

Many times, I've seen Tornado Watch being posted with no confirmed tornado.

Many times, I've seen no Tornado Watch being posted with confirmed tornado.

Right, the threat was very slim and isolated, but still, a Tornado Watch would keep people alert, They called out several Tornado Warnings, because they were very concerned here and there. You understand what I'm saying? There are people out there that is getting confused with mixed messages from NWS and news stations.

For example, a friend was asking why is there a Tornado Warning and there is no Tornado Watch. This will catch people totally offguard if that slim chance ever develops a weak tornado.

FYI, damaging winds can have the strength of a tornado/hurricane.

I'm perfectly fine with expressing my opinions. I see what I see.

Many times, I've seen Tornado Watch being posted with no confirmed tornado.

Many times, I've seen no Tornado Watch being posted with confirmed tornado.

Right, the threat was very slim and isolated, but still, a Tornado Watch would keep people alert, They called out several Tornado Warnings, because they were very concerned here and there. You understand what I'm saying? There are people out there that is getting confused with mixed messages from NWS and news stations.

For example, a friend was asking why is there a Tornado Warning and there is no Tornado Watch. This will catch people totally offguard if that slim chance ever develops a weak tornado.

FYI, damaging winds can have the strength of a tornado/hurricane.

With your logic, there's no point of a severe thunderstorm watch. The NWS issues tornado watches when conditions are prime for tornados. They issue severe thunderstorm watches when conditions are favorable for wind/hail but there isn't a huge tornado threat. Yes, 1 or 2 can always spin up from a severe thunderstorm watch, but the chances are usually slim.

I think a good way to put it is seeing a tornado watch as an "upgrade" to a severe thunderstorm watch. If the NWS is expecting tornados, hail and wind are basically a given. Most storms with a tornado also have huge hail and high winds (not with the tornado itself).

^To add to that, if the conditions warrant it, the NWS always includes the statement "Severe thunderstorms can and do produce tornadoes with little or no warning. Seek shelter... if a tornado is sighted!" in its own text warnings and also on the NOAA weather radio messages.

The flaw in Thunder's logic...if they are red (tornado) boxing every situation where a spin up might occur, people will grow to ignore tornado watches. Right now, there are risks of that happening when marginal, even high-end, severe weather events are in the realm of happening...but the cap holds. How many times do we want a situation where a watch is put up and nothing happens, or that specific type of weather doesn't happen.

Let's do some examples. When the Storm Prediction Center here in Norman puts out the watch boxes for the nation, there is criteria associated with them. Not everyone sees these text products, but they are available.

Tornado Watch example from tonight:


TORNADO WATCH PROBABILITIES FOR WT 0512
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0949 PM CDT WED JUN 11 2008

WT 0512
PROBABILITY TABLE:
PROB OF 2 OR MORE TORNADOES : 40%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE STRONG /F2-F5/ TORNADOES : 20%
PROB OF 10 OR MORE SEVERE WIND EVENTS : 60%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE WIND EVENTS >= 65 KNOTS : 30%
PROB OF 10 OR MORE SEVERE HAIL EVENTS : 60%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE HAIL EVENTS >= 2 INCHES : 30%
PROB OF 6 OR MORE COMBINED SEVERE HAIL/WIND EVENTS : 90%

&&
ATTRIBUTE TABLE:
MAX HAIL /INCHES/ : 2.0
MAX WIND GUSTS SURFACE /KNOTS/ : 60
MAX TOPS /X 100 FEET/ : 500
MEAN STORM MOTION VECTOR /DEGREES AND KNOTS/ : 24035
PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS SITUATION : NO

This essentially goes over what SPC is expecting to happen in this watch box area. The 40% risk of seeing a couple tornadoes, they are going to go with a tornado watch. Now let's look at the Severe Thunderstorm Watch...


SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WATCH PROBABILITIES FOR WS 0508 NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0519 AM CDT WED JUN 11 2008

WS 0508
PROBABILITY TABLE:
PROB OF 2 OR MORE TORNADOES : 10%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE STRONG /F2-F5/ TORNADOES : <02%
PROB OF 10 OR MORE SEVERE WIND EVENTS : 40%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE WIND EVENTS >= 65 KNOTS : 30%
PROB OF 10 OR MORE SEVERE HAIL EVENTS : 60%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE HAIL EVENTS >= 2 INCHES : 50%
PROB OF 6 OR MORE COMBINED SEVERE HAIL/WIND EVENTS : 80%

&&
ATTRIBUTE TABLE:
MAX HAIL /INCHES/ : 2.0
MAX WIND GUSTS SURFACE /KNOTS/ : 60
MAX TOPS /X 100 FEET/ : 500
MEAN STORM MOTION VECTOR /DEGREES AND KNOTS/ : 26030
PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS SITUATION : NO


You'll notice on this one that the tornado probability is still listed, in this case about 10% for one to spawn. Not a huge chance, but it is still there. However, the main risk is hail, some pretty large, with wind being secondary.

I have seen it practiced that the Tornado Watch is used as an upgrade for a Severe Thunderstorm Watch. I would also point out the last line of the Probability list - Particularly Dangerious Situation. This is the additional level of watch boxes used. We have seen in Oklahoma a few times this year the PDS Tornado Watch. This is essentially where the high end tornadoes, EF2 and higher, are expected in a fairly decent number across the area. The media really doesn't relay this TYPE of watch out very much, but when these go out - everyone is pretty much ready for a pretty bad day. However, these events run a higher risk of being capped and bust - since the day usually has amazing potential, if the cap holds long enough, but breaks at the right time. If it breaks too early, you guy a ton of convection and popcorn crap storms, if it goes to late - you'll end up with nothing most of the time.

There is also a PDS Severe Thunderstorm watch. These are EXTREMELY rare. I think maybe 1 or 2 get issued in any given year. These are for widespread Derecho/wind damage events. We last had one here in Oklahoma a couple years ago in June with storms producing 100mph winds over a large area. These typically happen in our "MCS" (storm complex) season which looks like will get under way next week. By this I'm talking about the storms that form in Kansas and Colorado, form into a massive complex of storms - normally in the large "bow" shape and race southeast across Oklahoma late evening and overnight.

Okay I need to wrap it up. Either way...if you really want to debate this, you need to dive into the meat of the watches and criteria behind them when they get issued. One last point. Recently, local Forecast Offices have used the ability to extend watches in the area they cover and the time period should they see fit. This is another way that they are modifying the advisement of SPC to help keep residents aware of what is coming.

That was posted for last night? Where? Or is it for today? Tomorrow?