{"id":17376,"date":"2019-05-21T14:47:20","date_gmt":"2019-05-21T19:47:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/?p=17376"},"modified":"2019-05-21T15:30:18","modified_gmt":"2019-05-21T20:30:18","slug":"17376","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/2019\/05\/21\/17376\/","title":{"rendered":"ProbTor during Tornado Warning"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The NWS office in Little Rock started issuing tornado warnings on storms along the line so I pulled up the ProbTor product to see how it performed. For the storm near Knoxville, I can&#8217;t figure out what&#8217;s going on but I&#8217;ll attempt to document it here. For each time, I plot CPTI top left, LZK SRM top right, low-level AzShear bottom left, and spectrum width bottom right.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-17389\" src=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1902.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"1872\" height=\"850\" srcset=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1902.png 1872w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1902-900x409.png 900w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1902-768x349.png 768w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1902-1800x817.png 1800w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1902-600x272.png 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 767px) 100vw, (max-width: 1200px) 60vw, 720px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>At 1902, the algorithm has a 60% ProbTor based on high LLAzShear (0.021 \/s). I don&#8217;t see any high values on the low-level AzShear product, but perhaps I&#8217;m missing something.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-17387\" src=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1904.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"1872\" height=\"850\" srcset=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1904.png 1872w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1904-900x409.png 900w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1904-768x349.png 768w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1904-1800x817.png 1800w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1904-600x272.png 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 767px) 100vw, (max-width: 1200px) 60vw, 720px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>At 1904, a bullseye of high LLAzShear pops up just east of Knoxville. ProbTor is still 60%, which now makes sense to me. This identified shear region is not in the right place for a tornado and is just convergence along the line, but the ProbTor uses what it has and seems to generate an understandable ProbTor.<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-17386\" src=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1906-1.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"1872\" height=\"850\" srcset=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1906-1.png 1872w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1906-1-900x409.png 900w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1906-1-768x349.png 768w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1906-1-1800x817.png 1800w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1906-1-600x272.png 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 767px) 100vw, (max-width: 1200px) 60vw, 720px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>At 1906 the LLAzShear bullseye east of Knoxville persists,\u00a0 but now the ProbTor drops to 19% with a LLAzShear max value of (0.009 \/s). I still sample 0.020 \/s in the bullseye. Spectrum width is not horrible (~7 kts) in the area of the AzShear bullseye. The AzShear detection is obviously misleading for a tornado, but the ProbTor product does not seem to be performing as we&#8217;d expect it.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-17381\" src=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1908.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"1872\" height=\"850\" srcset=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1908.png 1872w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1908-900x409.png 900w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1908-768x349.png 768w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1908-1800x817.png 1800w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/ProbTor1908-600x272.png 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 767px) 100vw, (max-width: 1200px) 60vw, 720px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>At 1908 the bullseye in AzShear goes away and the ProbTor drops even further to 6% (as expected). The persistence of the bullseye in AzShear with an associated significant drop in ProbTor is perplexing for this case!\u00a0-Atlanta Braves.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The NWS office in Little Rock started issuing tornado warnings on storms along the line so I pulled up the ProbTor product to see how it performed. For the storm&#8230; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/2019\/05\/21\/17376\/\" class=\"more-link\">Read more \u00bb<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":332,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[44,51,14],"tags":[54,35],"class_list":["post-17376","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-azshear","category-hwt","category-probsevere","tag-azshear","tag-probsevere"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17376","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/332"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17376"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17376\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17413,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17376\/revisions\/17413"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17376"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17376"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17376"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}