National Geographic -- Twisted Sunday

[Scott A. Kampas]

I haven't seen any discussion of this, at least recently, so here's a reminder.

Another (well two actually) National Geographic tornado program (http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/twistedsunday/) is coming up this Sunday, the 18th of December.

National Geographic Channel's Twisted Sunday is about to hit with two high-velocity world premiere programs. Explore the world of tornado hunters on Twister Chasers and climb aboard a homemade tank to experience a spinning vortex from the inside on Tornado Intercept. See how Mother Nature reacts when people fail to flee a tornado more than two miles wide. And find out whether or not an armor-plated Ford pickup can withstand a direct hit from what some call, \"the finger of God.\"

[Joe Zemek]

Awww, the "finger of God"?? Must we endure non-humorous Twister references? C'mon, Nat'l Geo. I mean, really.

I suppose I'll watch anyway.

[Mike Gauldin]

Originally posted by Scott A. Kampas
And find out whether or not an armor-plated Ford pickup can withstand a direct hit from what some call, \"the finger of God.\"

If that's referring to an F-5, I think we all know the answer to that :)

[Mike Hollingshead]

Bump.


Reminding myself and anyone else that means to record this.

[Andrew Khan]

How long is it, since it has multiple programs on it.

[Verne Carlson]

I looked ahead on my Dish Network DVR. Looks like if you start at 8pm eastern for 3 hours of recording you'll get it all.

1st hour - TIV Intercept (new)
2nd hour - Twister Chasers (new)
3rd hour - Secrets of the Tornado (old)

[Mike Peregrine]

oh man - I'm laughing my butt off because the Outlaw Chasers made it into this program ... my brother and I met them one day, and coincidentally - so did my mother in a completely different location on the same day. We have quite a story but I don't want to post it online. Seeing them on here is just too funny.

Seeing that tailgate brings our entire conversation back now - - -

[Verne Carlson]

Maybe I'm over analyzing these shows - but I just hate it when they don't stay true to the date and event and show chasers on one day and then cut to video of a tornado or event on a completely different day or year!

[Robert Edmonds]

I guess we should call our selves twister chasers instead of storm chasers now :wink: .

[Andy Wehrle]

Maybe I'm over analyzing these shows - but I just hate it when they don't stay true to the date and event and show chasers on one day and then cut to video of a tornado or event on a completely different day or year!

Me too-and how they showed the June 12th footage before the June 9th footage and made it sound as if the 12th happened before the 9th (referring to the 2nd hour). At least it was a good chance to finally see some 2005 chase season footage on my TV screen instead of just little .wmv clips online.

[Andrew Khan]

oh man - I'm laughing my butt off because the Outlaw Chasers made it into this program ... my brother and I met them one day, and coincidentally - so did my mother in a completely different location on the same day. We have quite a story but I don't want to post it online. Seeing them on here is just too funny.

Seeing that tailgate brings our entire conversation back now - - -


Who are the outlaw chasers?

[HAltschule]

OK, OK....don't bite my head off just because I felt like commenting and giving my opinions on the show. I just watched the 1st two hours of the programming and I have a few comments.

Firstly, who is the "yahoo" from California that thinks driving into tornadoes in his vehicle will be safe because of a little armor. Sorry folks, but just because Josh Wurman says it's OK to go in front of a tornado doesn't mean it's safe and/or won't flip your vehicle. Tractor trailers and boxcars in tornadoes get thrown around like matchbox toys all of the time and he is lucky he did not get into a powerful enough tornado or he would have some problems. When I was chasing this Spring, I was behind the TIV for several storms. I'm glad I did not follow him. From what I saw on the show, it does not seem that he is that experienced or educated in this field (I thought he would have been an experienced, veteran chaser or part of a University research team). Nope. And this is no place for someone who is not experienced or educated on severe storms. Nat. Geo. must never have had a Met. check the terminology before giving the go ahead to running the show. The TIV guy was telling us that this tornado could be an "HP Tornado". "HP Tornadoes are common out here". HUH. I know what he is trying to teach the audience but what's an "HP tornado" Meteorologically speaking? No such definition. It does not exist.

Second, Josh Wurman being featured was nicely done and he seems like a good guy. Well qualified and probably a pleasure to chase with.

Thirdly, the "Twister Sisters" came across as smart, safe chasers. I've read there bios before and on this show they seemed to know a lot about severe storms. I liked the decisions they made and the respect they have for the storms intensity. The one thing that made me cringe was when those people hopped within inches of the power lines. Man, one little brush or vapor flash and they would have been DOA. Next time, wait for the power to be cut or drive the 5 miles to go home the other way. Whoa.

So, 2 out of the 3 groups were very good to watch. Hopefully the TIV Guys will stay safe and think of a safer way to document tornadoes.

Go ahead...start chiming in but be nice to me.

[Shane Adams]

Since I became a storm chaser I've been less and less interested in watching TV programs about them. Weird.

[Jeff Snyder]

Go ahead...start chiming in but be nice to me.

Even without seeing the shows, I can say pretty confidently that your opinions likely are shared by many others.

[David Schuttler]

Is TIV any more stupider( :roll: ) than a chaser going 80 MPH on a back road just to get footage?

I admire the guy for being able to pursue his passion and still set limits.

[Karen Politte]

Ya you gotta watch out for those white stovetop tornadoes!!!!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

KR

[HAltschule]

LOL. I can see it on next year's documentary. TIV guy stating "Stainless Steel Stove Tops" are nothing to mess with. The tornado starts at the ground and build skyward as the positive and negative charges repel. Gee thanks for educating the public incorrectly TIV guy.

[Mike Peregrine]

Actually, I felt like this was a pretty entertaining way to spend my Sunday night ... I'd rather watch fresh footage of this year's tornadoes than Desperate Housewives any day.

As for the TIV guy, this was the first time I'd seen how he and Dr. Wurman interract during the chase and their system was pretty interesting. Yes - dangerous work there - but if you have a live doppler a few hundred yards from the tornado telling you when it is too dangerous to make a go of it, I think it's a much better scenario than some of the other projects we see out there these days ... the section concerning wind speed at the ground vs. wind speed higher up in the tube was particularly interesting, and I'm sure that they would like the chance to test that a little more. I guess what I'm saying is that if someone just has to get inside a tornado, that would be about the best case scenario for getting it done. I just thought it was interesting, I guess.

Good to see Dave Ewoldt's Hiawatha clips thrown in there too ...

Like I said - pretty fun way to spend a cold, snowy Sunday night in Kansas City, all in all. I've learned that these shows just can't seem to hit 100% accuracy ... or be able to convey everything that every individual chaser would like to see, but feel like they did a decent job of getting a lot of good points across ... like the fact that a lot of serious chasers are also serious about reporting what they see. It was also good to see some of the skill involved in doing this conveyed for once, rather than the program just making it seem like a bunch of folks hop in their cars and go find the closest tornado. Tim M's coverage of Ft. Worth was one of the more interesting perspectives I'd seen on that event. Anyway - that's my review, I guess.

[Melissa Moon]

Well, since I am a moderator, I will not dish out much of my opinion..

My favorite show was the third one they had on where they featured Tim S. I really enjoyed all of that :-).

[Dick McGowan]

Since I do not have the national geographic channel, I can't comment on it. :(

[Mike Hollingshead]

Well I enjoyed the first one on the TIV the most. The TIV folks seem like fun people and I'm glad they do what they want. The support vehicle seemed to intercept the tornado more than the TIV.

I too was was less than thrilled with how they put alot of it together. How hard is it to cooridinate and make sure you are saying things right?

I caught one interesting blurb on the one. Roger has a pending tornado in a year record of 52? Anyone know what year this was? If you didn't get it on video then I don't think you'd even try counting it for a guiness book entry. I wouldn't think it'd need to 'pend' that long if it is on video. Maybe it is from this year though, I'm not sure. I have all his videos and it has me interested.

[Gabe Garfield]

I was struck by how close we came to seeing our first storm chaser death caused directly by a tornado. The Nat'l Geographic cameramen came as close to death as I've ever seen...that big barrel that was flying around at speeds >100 mph would've certainly done them in. Nevertheless, it was stunning video.

Gabe

[Darin Brunin]

Personally, I enjoyed all three shows that were on tonight. As Mike P. said earlier it is a lot better than watching Desperate Housewives on a Sunday night. I can't complain.

I was a little skeptical about the TIV show but it was interesting to learn more about the TIV and it's purposes. Although, when Sean Casey admitted he didn't care about the meteorological aspect of it I shuttered. It was funny when he talked about getting mad when people refer to the TIV as "Dumb and Dumber Without Fur" It almost seemed the purpose of the show was to show that Casey had no clue what he was talking but his reasons for doing what he's doing are valid because of his association with Wurman and the DOWs. All in all the plot tried to tie in Casey as a family man that has personal values while at the same time still pursuing storms for the fascination of it. This was a good part IMO because usually shows like this try to portray chasers as crazy adrenaline happy people who don't care about the well being of others and I think all three of these shows did a good job of that.

The second show was all about the footage and I think if anything good came out of these shows tonight it was that there was a more positive image towards chasers and our overall responsibility on the roads. The thing that really got me about this show was that there was a lot of video used from days that had nothing to do with that particular event. June 9th was a perfect example with footage used from June 7th in South Dakota to describe what I believe the were trying to portray as the Trego Co. storm to the southwest of Hill City.

The third show was great to watch as well. It was fun to see Tim Samaras' video again. I was curious though if they said Tim's Storm Lake, IA video was shot in 2004 or 2005. It seemed to me that they tried to imply that it took place in 2005. Which, obviously wouldn't be correct. Also, Tim Marshall's segment on the Fort Worth tornado was very interesting.

It was cool to see the June 9 Damar-Palco tornadoes from all the different angles on the three shows. Truly an amazing day.

[Mike Gauldin]

Wow, there's another crazy person out there other than myself chasing in an 87-95 Pathfinder. With all of that equipment on top, makes me wonder how he's got it crammed inside.

I think the TIV is just a first of it's kind and there will be bigger and better ones down the road. It's amazing that someone actually took the time to build something like that. Maybe the next one won't leak. I think it's just paving the road and opening the doors to show people that "Hey, I'm crazy enough to build something like this" and they'll realize it's okay.

I'm wondering if you could design a vehicle using air-ride suspension (for those that aren't familiar with it, it's popular on show cars (lowriders), semi's, , and ambulances that allows the vehicle's suspension to be adjusted and raise or lower the vehicle anywhere from a few inches to a foot) and the body of those little orange camera probes that use the wind to put down force on them and then park this thing "in front" of a weak tornado, drop it to the ground so air cannot get under it, and see what happens. Good idea? Bad idea? Mike you're stupid idea?

Just a thought. Only problem would be width restrictions on roads while driving, but if you can use the wind to hold it down, it wouldn't have to be large. Like a Geo Metro with a 4.3L V-6, a couple seats, all-wheel drive, and a fuel cell. It could happen :) Who wants to finance me?

[Mike Peregrine]

Wow, there's another crazy person out there other than myself chasing in an 87-95 Pathfinder.

BTW - anyone else notice the quick pan of a red sport utility with lots of gear on top in Texas? Billy G flashed through my head (I'll have to go back and see if it was a satellite dish or not, but seemed like it could have been). To have BG and the outlaws in the same show is just too much fun for one night.

[Dave Ewoldt]

Got to see the first show and part of the second. I saw the TIV out on the road several times last year....and while I always questioned what they were trying to do.... I now can understand it a bit more and like the fact that they were "teaming" with the DOW's to "keep out of the big one".

I would like to get close up vid of a tornado. How nice it would be to have a million dollar doppler a mile away telling me second by second what the wind speeds were in a tornado.

The 50 gallon drum flying by the support vehicle still gives me chills. 10 feet to the left and we would still be remembering those guys.

All in all... it wasn't a bad job by the production company who prob knows as much about tornadoes as my parents do (not much). I always expect the events/time seq to be out of order and fit what they need to be the most interesting for the common folk.

On a side note...I'm really starting to question the money, time and effort that is being put forth to get close up vid of tornadoes. Whether it be the TIV or "The Outlaws" or whoever. I really don't see any chance of seeing 'clear' vid from a camera in a tornado. I'll settle for just getting nearby and letting the zoom do the rest. Even from a data standpoint... Tim S's Manchester, SD probes were cool....but they really didn't tell us much more than we already knew. Pressures are low and wind speeds are high. I think that the multi-DOW data that shows how supercells evolve into tornado producing storms is about as good as it can get... and about all that we need. The rest just makes good Tee Vee viewing I guess....

[Andrew Khan]

HP Tornado...LOL. I hate it when they show just numerous 'clips' of other tornadoes/storms during the beginning and ending of each commercial break, when they have no connection with the show what so ever. I do not like the Casey guy.....all he cares about is disrespecting nature, and killing himself.

[Glen Romine]

Even from a data standpoint... Tim S's Manchester, SD probes were cool....but they really didn't tell us much more than we already knew. Pressures are low and wind speeds are high. I think that the multi-DOW data that shows how supercells evolve into tornado producing storms is about as good as it can get... and about all that we need. The rest just makes good Tee Vee viewing I guess....

While I respect your opinion, I really can't agree with it as I think the knowledge we will gain from measurements of tornadic winds at ground level will be extremely valuable in better understanding their behavior. Radars are great tools, but are no susbstitute for actual measurements, and have a number of limitations in the interpretation of radar derived winds (ranging from centrifuging particles, beam spreading, side lobes, only measuring the radial wind component (requires assumptions then of the wind at a right angle to the radar beam), etc...). The experts still don't agree on what the tornado force balances are (particularly right near the ground where surface drag significantly complicates the flow), and direct measurements will likely be needed to settle the debate. As for the best way to collect that data, I personally think something in between Tim's turtle probes and the TIV's (something unmanned, but remotely moveable) will be the premier tool. The value of the video may, as you suggested, simply serve as a tool to fund the instrument measurements, as I agree there may be limited knowledge gained from video up close and personal (but Tim S. will probably prove us wrong on that too).

Glen

[Karen Politte]

On a side note...I'm really starting to question the money, time and effort that is being put forth to get close up vid of tornadoes. Whether it be the TIV or "The Outlaws" or whoever. I really don't see any chance of seeing 'clear' vid from a camera in a tornado. I'll settle for just getting nearby and letting the zoom do the rest. Even from a data standpoint... Tim S's Manchester, SD probes were cool....but they really didn't tell us much more than we already knew. Pressures are low and wind speeds are high. I think that the multi-DOW data that shows how supercells evolve into tornado producing storms is about as good as it can get... and about all that we need. The rest just makes good Tee Vee viewing I guess....

Great comment and points here, Dave. I agree with you entirely and I can't really add anything to what you said - you put it concisely and understandably. Although measurements obtained from a probe within a tornado are interesting and great to pour over........they are, I feel, not unexpected or revolutionary. Like you said - low pressures and high winds.

From an educational and advancement perspective, I turn to the work of the dual-DOW experiments every time. Seeing what is going on in such high resolution on such a small scale.......now THAT'S what interests ME!!

KR

[Tim Samaras]

Karen, you wrote:

Great comment and points here, Dave. I agree with you entirely and I can't really add anything to what you said - you put it concisely and understandably. Although measurements obtained from a probe within a tornado are interesting and great to pour over........they are, I feel, not unexpected or revolutionary. Like you said - low pressures and high winds.

Hmmm....you and Dave certainly have strong opinions about this issue. It is felt within the scientific community that there is still much to learn with in-situ observations. I understand completely that your comments are your opinions only, but not the same with everyone.

Certainly I feel different, and Glen did a great job describing the need. There were three main foci for VORTEX-II (Source: Scientific Program Overview submitted to NSF last January):

*Tornado Genesis
*Near-ground wind field in tornadoes
*Relationships between tornadic storms and their environments

Only three topics, and certainly the second one applies. Here is text lifted from the Experimental Design Overview:


The second VORTEX2 focus, on near-ground winds in tornadoes, concerns profiles of radial, tangential, and vertical motion in a variety of tornadoes (strong vs. weak, wide vs. narrow, single-vortex vs. multiple-vortex) and relationships between damage and wind speed, acceleration, and duration. The challenge of obtaining wind measurements in the lowest few tens of m AGL will be met through “targets of opportunity”, in which tornadoes cross or pass near roads where narrow-beam and rapidly-scanning radars, tornado in situ probes, and photogrammetry cameras are deployed. When tornadoes are well observed by these instruments, detailed ground and aerial damage surveys will be conducted soon after tornado occurrence.

Anyways, in reference to the show, I found Sean Casey VERY entertaining, and the show fun to watch.

On Thursday, the days will be getting longer...should be a chaser holiday.

Happy Holidays!
Tim

[Dave Ewoldt]

Thanks for that info Tim. I figured I was over simplifying my views to a degree there. I hope there will be rewards for the efforts.

Ah, Yule - bring back the sun!

[Karen Politte]

Hey Tim,

Good to see you in on this thread. I'd figured you would be! :wink:

I hope you didn't get me wrong......I wasn't meaning to say that I'm disinterested in your work or the immense effort you put into placing probes in tornadoes. What you are doing these days as far as in-situ probe placement is certainly one of the most important advances of our time as far as finding out just what goes on in there!

That said.......I guess it's also down to what you (or I, or anyone) personally find important as far as advancing our studies of tornadoes and tornadogenesis. I know a smidgeon of what tornadogenesis involves, and even less about the intricate dynamics of tornadoes themselves, and I certainly can't lock horns with most on here when you get down to the "technical stuff".

I myself feel that perhaps the most important thing we are doing to understand tornadoes and tornadogenesis is the dual-doppler data being collected from the DOWs and Wurman, et. al.
I guess I need to be explained to. I mean - getting a probe into a tornado is no mean feat and it is mind-blowing to think that we can measure many of the variables that exist within these vortices. However - what does that REALLY tell us?? Again - we're getting back to my lack of understanding, I guess. I don't understand how to extrapolate wind speed from a pressure reading, etc. etc. But - even if I did - what does measuring the actual environment inside a tornado tell us about these beasts that's new? I'd really like to know - truthfully. How does it help us understand how they FORM? I'm not really that bothered whether the wind speeds are 102mph or 402mph. The tornado's there and it has already formed. The storm has already spawned it.

And that gets me to what *I'm* interested in - how tornadoes form in the first place and can we possibly predict to any degree with accuracy how violent a tornado any particular storm may form. This has repercussions for the warning system, forecasting, emergency management, and a whole host of other involved parties. Obviously - when I have these interests - it's easy to see why I gravitate towards the DOW research that is being done. I simply can't get enough of seeing the high-res, dual-doppler renditions of tornadic supercells that Wurman or Bluestein come home with.

But then.........I also can't get enough of the stupendous video that you came home with from Iowa in 2004, for instance. I think I'm torn! :?

Interesting discussion. I just wanted to apease and re-assess my stance before frowns started to appear.....
:lol:

KR

[Andrew Khan]

More than likely, the view from a sterotypical tornado's base upward will not be clear, and will be quite distorted. And thus result in a horrible picture, after risking your life. IF you get a completely erect tornado with a perfectly equal base and funnel, then perhaps you will have some success.

[Jayson Prentice]

I enjoyed all of the shows last night, it was the first time I was able to see Tim's show on tv. Tim your segment I believe was by far the most scientific and it left a lot of questions that still need to be answered, especially from the viewpoint of the ISU tornado simulator and what that can be used for in the engineering of structures. I think the show leaving those questions was a good thing, it shows everybody that there still is A LOT of research left to do in all aspects of the tornado. I know some of the posts said talked about how they were interested in how the tornado forms, not just once it is on the ground. But, I think even knowing more of what is occuring while the tornado is already formed will give way to a lot of information on what to look for in signs of 'tornadogenisis'. And it is hard enough already to get on a storm that is tornadic and to get setup with the DOWS and other research vehicles, I think the pressure of choosing a storm that hasn't already produced a tornado and getting information as it does would add on tremedously to the work that has to be done. I know that I'm not great on all of the aspects of this, but that is my opinion on it.

As for some of the others, the TIV was something that is interesting in several ways. First off, the way I interpreted it was that he went ahead and built this thing, not even truely 'engineering' it to withstand a certain amount of wind speed or anything else of the sorts. To add on to it, they showed his welding skills and that is a lil' scary becuase those welds do not look good at all. I'm sure they are good enough to hold it together and as he said you can go over them again, but if you are talking about a life threatening project wouldn't you want some top notch engineering on it. I guess I'm also surprised that he would have funding through the government and help from other governement research people without being a true scientist in the sense of what the others are. Nothing at all against the government projects as all of those are great projects and are going to prove to be extremely helpful in all senses of tornado research. I was just surprised that an 'film producer' and self proclaimed 'storm enthusiast' would be able to go out and get that sort of help. Maybe it was different in the way it went, that is just what I interpreted from the show.

Overall it was a good night of tv for me and I'm glad I finally got to see Tim's show. I love the video from the Webb, IA tornado beings that is my good ol' territory up here in northwest Iowa.

[Tim Samaras]

Karen, you wrote:


However - what does that REALLY tell us?? Again - we're getting back to my lack of understanding, I guess. I don't understand how to extrapolate wind speed from a pressure reading, etc. etc. But - even if I did - what does measuring the actual environment inside a tornado tell us about these beasts that's new? I'd really like to know - truthfully. How does it help us understand how they FORM? I'm not really that bothered whether the wind speeds are 102mph or 402mph. The tornado's there and it has already formed. The storm has already spawned it.


Yikes! Well, to start with, the things that turtles measure will NOT tell us much about how a torando forms(yea..you gotta watch those torandos!). Indeed, I can probably dig up some publication that could link tornado dynamics with genesis, but that's not my interests.

There are several websites that describe the pressure to windspeed conversion, i.e. cyclostrophic balance, etc..

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Scienc...clostrophic.htm (http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Sciences/EarthScience/Hydrology/Meteorology/BalancedAtmospheric/Cyclostrophic/Cyclostrophic.htm)

There's a bunch of others, but I'm too lazy.

Certainly you may not be bothered if its 102 mph or 402 mph, but there are quite a few scientists who are very interested. Why?

*Relationship between observed winds and structural damage.

*Is the standard conceptual model of tornado structure correct? What is the depth of the tornado inflow layer? Does the structure of the tornado depend as predicted on the swirl ratio? What dynamical and thermodynamical structures affect the swirl ration? Does the behavior of any multiple vortices conform to predictions?

(Source--again the Scientific Program Overview document for VORTEX-II)

In a nutshell, there is considerable interest from a wind engineering perspective. If we can help validate models with actual data, then some good engineering can be applied to the construction of buildings, etc.

Yes, indeed we know there is a pressure drop and a bunch of wind in tornadoes, but to have accurate data--better yet---with time corrolated mobile radar would be invaluable.

Mobile radars have extreme difficulty capturing data near the ground..the lowest 10 meters. This is where the biggest mystery is. As Glen described, we don't know a whole lot how ground friction complicates the flow(a few things we may never know).

This is not to detract from tornado genesis. Its a fun and challenging problem. The turtles won't solve it.



A fellow co-worker brought in his new toy. It's some sort of "MaxTrax" thingie...a four-wheel drive electric jeep toy that REALLY moves along...

It's giving me an idea........

Thanks, all for the kind comments from folks!


Tim

[Glen Romine]

Yeah Tim, you just need to be able to have wheels pop out of the bottom of your turtles and an ability to get a live view from one of the cameras back to a computer where you could drive it from - then make those last second adjustments before 'sitting' down the probe.

As far as the tornadogensis information coming from the DOW's, while I wouldn't try to detract from the value of the data they offer, there are potentially better techniques to using that data than the dual Doppler methods now popularly employed (only a small portion of the storm is typically encased within the dual Doppler lobe, and a number of questionable assumptions must be used within the lobe that are probably not always appropriate), and new techniques combining other types of data with the DOW observations could substantially advance our understanding of the storm-scale processes that lead to tornadogenesis. Probably ~3-5 years from now before you'll see much on it publicly, but it's more a question of when than if given current progress.

Glen