• Burgess, D. W., Donaldson Jr. R. J. , and Desrochers P. R. , 1993: Tornado detection and warning by radar. The Tornado: Its Structure, Dynamics, Prediction, and Hazards, Geophys. Monogr., No. 79, Amer. Geophys. Union, 203–221.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Crum, T. D., and Alberty R. L. , 1993: The WSR-88D and the WSR-88D Operational Support Facility. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 74 , 16691687.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Doswell, C. A,I. I. I., 1982: The operational meteorology of convective weather, Volume II: Operational mesoanalysis. NOAA Tech. Memo. NWS NSSFC-5, 110 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Eilts, M. D., 1997: Overview of the Warning Decision Support System. Preprints, 28th Conf. on Radar Meteorology, Austin, TX, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 402–403.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Endsley, M. R., 1988: Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement. Proc. Human Factors Society 32d Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, CA, Human Factors Society, 97–101.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Howard, K. W., Gourley J. J. , and Maddox R. A. , 1997: Uncertainties in WSR-88D measurements and their impacts on monitoring life cycles. Wea. Forecasting, 12 , 166174.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Johns, R. H., and Doswell III C. A. , 1992: Severe local storms forecasting. Wea. Forecasting, 7 , 588612.

  • Klein, G., 1998: Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. The MIT Press, 330 pp.

  • Klein, G., . 2000: Can information technology reduce expertise? Proc. Human Performance, Situation Awareness and Automation Conf., Savannah, GA, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 226.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lemon, L. R., 1980: Severe thunderstorm radar identification techniques and warning criteria. NOAA Tech. Memo. NWS NSSFC-3, 60 pp.

  • Markowski, P. M., Straka J. M. , Rasmussen E. N. , and Blanchard D. O. , 1998: Variability of storm-relative helicity during VORTEX. Mon. Wea. Rev., 126 , 29592971.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McCarthy, D. H., 2002: The role of ground-truth reports in the warning decision-making process during the 3 May 1999 Oklahoma tornado outbreak. Wea. Forecasting, . 17 , 647649.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mitchell, E. D., 1995: An enhanced NSSL tornado detection algorithm. Preprints, 27th Conf. on Radar Meteorology, Vail, CO, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 406–408.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mitchell, E. D., Vasiloff S. V. , Stumpf G. J. , Witt A. , Eilts M. D. , Johnson J. T. , and Thomas K. W. , 1998: The National Severe Storms Laboratory Tornado Detection Algorithm. Wea. Forecasting, 13 , 352366.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Moller, A. R., Doswell III C. A. , Foster M. P. , and Woodall G. R. , 1994: The operational recognition of supercell thunderstorm environments and storm structures. Wea. Forecasting, 9 , 327347.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • NEXRAD, 1985: Next Generation Weather Radar Algorithm report. NEXRAD Joint Systems Program Office, Silver Spring, MD, Rep. R400-AR301, 1.1–1.5.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • NWS, 1999: VISION 2005, National Weather Service strategic plan for weather water, and climate services. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 24 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pliske, R., Klinger D. , Hutton R. , Crandall B. , Knight B. , and Klein G. , 1997: Understanding skilled weather forecasting: Implications for training and the design of forecasting tools. Contractor Rep. AL/HR-CR-1997-003, Material Command, Armstrong Laboratory, U.S. Air Force, 122 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Roebber, R. J., Schultz D. M. , and Romero R. , 2002: Synoptic regulation of the 3 May 1999 tornado outbreak. Wea. Forecasting, 17 , 399429.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Snellman, L. W., 1977: Operational forecasting using automated guidance. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 58 , 10361044.

  • Speheger, D. A., Doswell III C. A. , and Stumpf G. J. , 2002: The tornadoes of 3 May 1999: Event verification in central Oklahoma and related issues. Wea. Forecasting, 17 , 362381.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stumpf, G. J., Witt A. , Mitchell E. D. , Spencer P. L. , Johnson J. T. , Eilts M. D. , Thomas K. W. , and Burgess D. W. , 1998: The National Severe Storms Laboratory Mesocyclone Detection Algorithm for the WSR-88D. Wea. Forecasting, 13 , 304326.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Thompson, R. L., and Edwards R. , 2000: An overview of environmental conditions and forecast implications of the 3 May 1999 tornado outbreak. Wea. Forecasting, 15 , 682699.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 512 179 8
PDF Downloads 268 76 4

Warning Decision Making: The Relative Roles of Conceptual Models, Technology, Strategy, and Forecaster Expertise on 3 May 1999

David L. Andra Jr.NOAA/NWS Weather Forecast Office, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by David L. Andra Jr. in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Elizabeth M. QuoetoneNOAA/NWS Warning Decision Training Branch, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by Elizabeth M. Quoetone in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
William F. BuntingNOAA/NWS Weather Forecast Office, Fort Worth, Texas

Search for other papers by William F. Bunting in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

This paper examines concepts related to warning decision making for the 3 May 1999 tornado outbreak in central Oklahoma. Sixty-six tornadoes occurred during this outbreak, with 58 occurring in the Norman, Oklahoma, National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office (WFO) area of responsibility. Verification statistics for the event revealed the WFO issued 48 tornado warnings, with a median lead time of 23 min, a false-alarm rate of 0.29, and a probability of detection of 0.89. WFO Norman meteorologists utilized a warning decision-making methodology that relied upon 1) scientifically based conceptual models of storm types and their environments, 2) Doppler radar data, 3) ground-truth observations, 4) technology, 5) strategy, and 6) human expertise. This methodology was compared with the ability of radar algorithms [e.g., Weather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler (WSR-88D) Mesocyclone (MA) and Tornado Detection Algorithms (TDA)] to identify tornado threat. Although the steady-state nature of the isolated long-lived tornadic supercells presumably presented an ideal case for algorithm performance, shortcomings were identified. The most significant finding was the difference in median lead times between the WFO's subjective human tornado warning and signature detection by TDA for the first tornado associated with each supercell. The first tornado is especially significant because ground truth of the tornado is not yet available and radar signatures are less defined at this early stage. Median lead times were 2 min for TDA and 29 min for the WFO. The MA and TDA proved most useful when used as a safety net or check against the WFO warnings. The initial tornado warning for one supercell storm would have been delayed had the TDA not alerted the meteorologist to investigate the storm.

Corresponding author address: David L. Andra Jr., National Weather Service, 1200 Westheimer Dr., Room 101, Norman, OK 73069. Email: david.andra@noaa.gov

Abstract

This paper examines concepts related to warning decision making for the 3 May 1999 tornado outbreak in central Oklahoma. Sixty-six tornadoes occurred during this outbreak, with 58 occurring in the Norman, Oklahoma, National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office (WFO) area of responsibility. Verification statistics for the event revealed the WFO issued 48 tornado warnings, with a median lead time of 23 min, a false-alarm rate of 0.29, and a probability of detection of 0.89. WFO Norman meteorologists utilized a warning decision-making methodology that relied upon 1) scientifically based conceptual models of storm types and their environments, 2) Doppler radar data, 3) ground-truth observations, 4) technology, 5) strategy, and 6) human expertise. This methodology was compared with the ability of radar algorithms [e.g., Weather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler (WSR-88D) Mesocyclone (MA) and Tornado Detection Algorithms (TDA)] to identify tornado threat. Although the steady-state nature of the isolated long-lived tornadic supercells presumably presented an ideal case for algorithm performance, shortcomings were identified. The most significant finding was the difference in median lead times between the WFO's subjective human tornado warning and signature detection by TDA for the first tornado associated with each supercell. The first tornado is especially significant because ground truth of the tornado is not yet available and radar signatures are less defined at this early stage. Median lead times were 2 min for TDA and 29 min for the WFO. The MA and TDA proved most useful when used as a safety net or check against the WFO warnings. The initial tornado warning for one supercell storm would have been delayed had the TDA not alerted the meteorologist to investigate the storm.

Corresponding author address: David L. Andra Jr., National Weather Service, 1200 Westheimer Dr., Room 101, Norman, OK 73069. Email: david.andra@noaa.gov

Save