Rating The Warning Process Saturday Morning

At least six tornadoes touched down in Alabama during the pre-dawn hours this past Saturday morning. Three of them were rated F1 on the Fujita intensity scale; the others were F0. One of the F1 tornadoes touched down in Shelby county, affecting the heavily populated communities of Pelham, Helena, Alabaster, and Chelsea.

The tornado touched down at 5:04 a.m. near the Cahaba River in Helena, and stayed on the ground for 11 miles. There were no injuries, but many trees and power lines were blown down, and a number of homes had major damage. How did the warning process work for that tornado?

Unfortunately, the National Weather Service did not issue a tornado warning for Shelby county, but I still say that people in a tornado-ready home should have known about the storm for these reasons:

*A severe thunderstorm warning was issued for Shelby county at 4:50 a.m. Those with a NOAA Weather Radio receiver in their home (like we have been suggesting here for years and years) would have been awakened by the alarm almost 15 minutes before the tornado first touched down.

*Those that did get the NOAA Weather Radio alarm who turned on our live severe weather coverage on ABC 33/40 (we were on the air with non-stop weather coverage beginning at 2:45 a.m.) would have clearly seen our radar showing both a high level and low level shear lock over western Shelby county, and we gave clear instructions on the air for people in Alabaster, Pelham, and Helena to go through their tornado plan even though there was no formal warning in place at the time. No, we don’t issue warnings, but we sure do reserve the right to tell people to go into action when there is no formal warning.

I am sure the NWS regrets not issuing a tornado warning for Shelby county, but in their defense we were dealing with a long squall line, and trying to identify small tornadoes within a line like that is very difficult. The severe thunderstorm warning for Shelby county was very timely and should have served the purpose of waking people up in the path of the storm.

I also need to congratulate our friends up at Baron Services in Huntsville, our vendor for radar hardware and software. Their algorithm for detecting low level rotation worked like a charm, and enabled us to give a clear warning for the small tornado to the people in the path. The shear markers were excellent.

Yep, we have heard the classic line "I never heard the siren". My response to that is simply "so what!" Outdoor warning sirens are generally not sounded for severe thunderstorm warnings, and even when they are activated they are designed to reach people OUTSIDE, not INSIDE! Do not rely on siren to let you know there is a tornado approaching your home!!!!!

If you live in the damaged areas and didn't get the warning, your homework is to go and buy a NOAA Weather Radio receiver for your home. Next time a small tornado rolls through your community you will get the alarm (even if there is only a severe thunderstorm warning). And, if you turn on ABC 33/40 you will see everything you need to know about the storm.

Once again I want to thank my associates for their work during the severe weather event this past Saturday: John Oldshue, Jason Simpson, J.B. Elliott, Brian Peters and Bill Murray all worked the long overnight shift.... their work was excellent.
Posted by yo  
on May 2, 2005, 6:39 pm
what is a trackback?

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on May 2, 2005, 6:57 pm
you guys did an awesome job early sat a.m.....
altho i wasnt watching like i should have been (in a coma finally after our 2 month old went to sleep :-) ) i was awakened just in time to get our family into a safe place in our home. i turned on the tv (in between power blinkages) just as james was specifically saying for alabaster to go to our tornado safety plan. thanks james, for all you and your team do!

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on May 2, 2005, 7:01 pm
BTW... wasn't most of alabama under a tornado watch during this time, when a tornado could form at any time during a severe thunderstorm??

Reply to this comment
Posted by Dawn  
on May 2, 2005, 7:36 pm
I have a noaa weather radio and mine did not go off and we were under a tornado warning here in st clair county.

Reply to this comment
Posted by Margie Richardson  
on May 2, 2005, 8:11 pm
Dawn, I have had the same problem here in Etowah County.... Or it would go off after the event was over...the all clear signal? Who knows!!

Reply to this comment
Posted by Dave  
on May 2, 2005, 8:20 pm
I live about a quarter mile from the path of the storm in Shelby County. The area of the storm is the same one that resulted in damage in Tuscaloosa County (I believe it was in the community of Romulas). When the shear markers showed up and James advised to go through into their safety plan, we did. We have 4 boys that were already awake and made sure they were as safe as they could be. Hopefully people will realize that in our area weather can change in a moment. Life is too short to take chances. Even if it is a bust, time has shown that eventually the odds will catch up.

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on May 2, 2005, 9:03 pm
Unfortunately, I didn't have ABC3340 where I was when the storms were coming thru (though I did listen to JB on the radio..he's always such a reassuring voice). However, I did have access to radar images and I must admit that I don't understand the NWS' reasoning on not issuing a tornado warning. I mean, they had obviously been concerned enough to issue a tornado warning for Tuscaloosa county... They got damage reports later from Tuscaloosa county... The storms already looked linear even in Tuscaloosa county. The storms merged with a cell in Tuscaloosa county and several more cells were beginning to develop in Bibb/Shelby county which also were going to merge with the main line.... Because of these cell mergers and the history of the storm in Tuscaloosa county and the fact that the main storm really didn't look any weaker as it was moving into Jeff/Shelby/Bibb...should have been enough for a tornado warning, in my opinion.

Yes, I know that people should react to severe thunderstorm warnings as if a tornado could form. In fact the only damage I've EVER been associated with came from straight line winds..and this several times in my life. Still, a tornado ocurred and I personally think the guys in Alabaster should have suspected that in this case....and issued the correct warning.

However, I used to work with those guys and I KNOW it is really easy for me to sit here and criticize. The fact is, we still have one of.. if not THE BEST NWS offices in America..and I'll always believe that.

I miss those guys.

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on May 2, 2005, 9:22 pm
Well I don't mean to bad mouth but I can't help but wonder why the tornado warnning did not come out for Shelby county. I live here in Alabaster in Najo pines close to Najo Hills. If the storm was roating that should have been good for a tornado warrning. There has been a lot of storms that where roating and we had a tornado warnning come out and nothing happened so what gives?

Reply to this comment
Posted by Mike  
on May 2, 2005, 11:54 pm
What I want to know is if the ABC 33/40 radar was showing a low level shear lock, why couldn't the NWS see the same thing? Surely their hardware and software are at least equivalent to 33/40.

Besides, don't they have a bigger staff than 33/40? So they surely can't use the excuse that they were trying to do too many things at one time...

Reply to this comment
Posted by Robert Buell  
on May 3, 2005, 1:14 am
In response to Mr. Mills' comment, understand that not all mesocyclones (quick-n-dirty definition of mesocyclone: region of rotation) produce tornadoes. Even for those meoscyclones that do produce a tornado, it is unlikely that radar would be able to resolve/differentiate the much smaller tornadic circulation from the larger mesocyclone.

Baron's software utilizes proprietary algorithms that the NWS does not have. I won't get into the debate of who runs the better algorithms as I've seen Baron's excel in instances where the NWS algorithms have choked and died a quick death...and vice versa. No matter the source of the algorithm, I think it is important to remember that their output is guidance and not gospel.

Even more important to remember is the "disclaimer" that accompanies a lot of severe thunderstorm warnings. Specifically, "...severe thunderstorms can produce tornadoes with little or no advance warning." (Pardon me if that is not an exact quote. It's late and I'm r-e-a-l-l-y pooped.)

Nite everybody!

Reply to this comment
Posted by Robert Buell  
on May 3, 2005, 1:21 am
For folks out there who may be into meteorology, check out this material from the Warning Decision Training Branch:

http://www.wdtb.noaa.gov/courses/dloc/#studentguides

Nite again. :)

Reply to this comment
Posted by Daniel  
on May 3, 2005, 3:15 am
Mike (and others),

They do have a larger staff; however, they also have a greater number of responsibilities. While ABC 33/40's primary responsibility is to inform their viewers, the NWS has a whole host of other things on their plate. There may be two to three people (or more) devoted to watching the radar and issuing warnings. Someone else is having to make sure NOAA Weather Radio is working properly with so many products going out (the National Weather Service in Birmingham maintains ten seperate broadcasts). They're also having to balance communication with emergency management, the media, storm spotters and the general public. Each time they issue a warning, it must go out to the county EMA office and the state trooper post for that county. During a really hectic event, they are receiving reports in every conceivable manner - people calling in, EMA contacting the office view 800 Mhz radio, state troopers giving reports over the NAWAS, TV and radio stations instant messaging reports they've received from viewers, reports coming in via the Internet. Each of those reports must be logged and then compiled and sent back out to the world so everyone will know what is going on. They must do all of this in a timely, organized fashion while also having to maintain routine tasks that go on when there isn't severe weather - keeping the forecast up to date, sending out routine products, making sure the radar is working and in the correct mode, weather balloon releases, etc.

Having said all of that, I think James made a fair assessment of this situation - it is difficult to pick out individual circulations in a long line of thunderstorms. They surely can't issue a Tornado Warning everytime there is a shear marker on a Baron product. If you issue a Tornado Warning for every single one, you're going to inflate your false-alarm ratio to the point that the public won't listen to your warnings. They missed a few this time; that's just the reality of the science at this day and age. I'm sure they'll conduct a event review of things they could have done better, since that's pretty common practice at the weather service.

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on May 3, 2005, 6:44 am
Well I see the last two comments after mine last night and I have to agree, But the fact is the NWS did a poor job. That storm showed roation in T county and it still showed roation in Shelby, how did they miss it?

Reply to this comment
Posted by mark  
on May 3, 2005, 9:13 am
The NWS made a call. They blew it. It happens. But I would say, dont absolve them of blowing the read by saying that a Severe Thunderstorm Warning was issued. Those warnings are issued far too often anymore to have any real meaning. If you ask 100 people would I get out of bed at 5:00 AM because the NWS issued a STW for my county, 95% wouldn't bother to get out of bed.

I lost a 90 foot oak tree in my back yard. Snapped and twisted over my neighbors fence. I dont need james or the NWS to know that it was a tornado. But I am a little insulted by people who say, you should have known to take cover because a STW was issued. That's simply crap.


Reply to this comment
Posted by jason  
on May 3, 2005, 9:47 am
let those who are perfect cast the first stone..............come on guys

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on May 3, 2005, 1:09 pm
I just received an email from James Spann stating that I should have taken shelter during a severe thunderstorm warning as I should have known that a tornado could form. I do not buy that explanation....this is why we have a national weather service and why I have a NWS radio in my home and turned on. To inform me if there is a tornado in my area. NWS dropped the ball on this one and to be more critical I often get warnings after the event is over? I am not sure why this happens, (probably the folks at NWS are so paranoind about putting out a false warning they don't if the conditions are real) As far as James Spann defending them....well I don't buy that either. He further stated I should have watched him on TV as they were running back to back coverage....well hello James! My power was gone and the only thing I had was the NWS radio which has a battery backup. James just needs to come clean and come to the understanding that the weather service dropped the ball on this and go on. I suppose that it all worked out as no one was hurt and there was only some property damage. I suppose we all have to try and justify ourselves somewhere along the way. I just hope that everyone learns from this and it does not happen again.

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on May 3, 2005, 1:17 pm
Once again, the telephone-based warning system would have worked the best. 98 pecent of Alabamians have a phone.

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on May 3, 2005, 2:10 pm
I have to side with Keith in believing that we shouldn't have to go through our tornado disaster plan in a severe t'storm warning - that just seems a bit vague and "cry-wolf-ish." I also understand it's not an exact science and that at any time it is "plausible" a tornado can form from a thunderstorm - It's also plausible one could die from a paper cut... I even saw on a television show once that a man was struck by lightning riding his bike on a sunny day! With the technology and level of understanding that's available today (though not complete), is "plausible" a sufficient defense? I really don't think so... ON THE OTHER HAND, I would like to support a comment that Mr. Spann brought up several weeks (maybe a couple of months?) ago on this very same BLOG - that is the comment about the complacency of us during watches and warnings, and the apparent ineffectiveness of the current system in making the public aware of impending danger without causing an all-out panic. Climates and weather trends change (as we've clearly seen the past several years), and so should the NWS's system. I don't know the age of the current system of watches/warnings, but maybe it shouldn't be as generic and "mutli-use" as it currently is. In general, many folks (me included) rarely pay attention to watches, and only slightly more to t'storm warnings. Even in many large companies (mine included) we don't even take action during a tornado warning unless the specified area of concern is near my office building... I'm sure that's not right, but it's a fact of life in the lifestyle WE have created for ourselves today. But maybe the NWS & SPC should revisit their watch/warning guidelines (as James brought up). Only this year have I become aware of the "PDS" statements issued by the NWS to accompany watches (is this new, or just recently elevated to a level of understanding?). Maybe by revising the warning system and better categorizing the threat level we will be better prepared in the future... I'm not bashing anyone at a weather station, nor at the NWS - Clearly they made a judgement call with the information they had available and in retrospect it wasn't the best call to make - it happens all day, everyday across the country... Time to move on... But it's important to take away the lessons learned, and I think in a situation like this one, a time to address the public with the action plan moving forward (and this takes time to design). Anyway, just a thought from a non-meteorlogical person with an interest in weather and an interest in constituent safety! Thanks for reading!

Reply to this comment