{"Bibliographic":{"Title":"The widespread November 21-23, 1992, tornado outbreak : Houston to Raleigh and Gulf Coast to Ohio Valley","Authors":"","Publication date":"1993","Publisher":""},"Administrative":{"Date created":"08-16-2023","Language":"English","Rights":"CC 0","Size":"0000268571"},"Pages":["QC\nOF\n955.5\n.U6\n₩54\n1993\nSTATES\nNatural Disaster Survey Report\nThe Widespread November 21-23, 1992,\nTornado Outbreak:\nHouston to Raleigh and\nGulf Coast to Ohio Valley\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE\nNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\nNational Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland","ATMOSPHERIC\nAND\nDESCRIBED\nNOAA\nDEPARTMENT\nOF\nCover: Mute tribute to four victims. American flags mark a homesite in\nBrandon, Mississippi where a tornado killed four people. National Weather\nService photograph.","QC\n955.5\nbetter AND NOAA ATMOSPHERIC\n46\nw54\n1993\nOF\nNatural Disaster Survey Report\nThe Widespread November 21-23, 1992,\nTornado Outbreak:\nHouston to Raleigh and\nGulf Coast to Ohio Valley\nNovember 1993\nJUL 26 1996\nN.O.A.A.\nU.S. DEPT. OF COMMERCE\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE\nRonald H. Brown, Secretary\nNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\nD. James Baker, Administrator\nNational Weather Service\nDr. Elbert W. Friday, Jr., Assistant Administrator","PREFACE\nThe tremendous destructive force of tornadoes was unfortunately demonstrated once\nagain during the widespread outbreak of severe convective weather over the\nSoutheastern United States in November 1992. To view the devastation after the fact is\ndistressing and difficult; to experience such a tragedy must be the ultimate nightmare.\nPainful as the experience may be, we at the National Weather Service and in the\nhazards community must examine these disasters to fully assess our warning procedures\nand capabilities. To learn nothing from the past is undeniably foolish. To learn from\nthe past to improve the future is wise.\nI thank the members of the Disaster Survey Team, and all those who assisted them in\ntheir work, for accepting this important assignment and for undertaking the extra effort\nit entailed.\nElbert W. Friday, Jr.\nAssistant Administrator\nfor Weather Services\nNovember 1993\nii","FOREWORD\nThe principal mission of the National Weather Service (NWS) is to forecast, and\nwarn the public of, impending meteorological and hydrological events that pose a\nthreat to life and property. To perform this mission, a system has evolved over\nmany years which spans the activities of all components of the Service and which\nextends into communities through ties with the media, public service groups, and\nemergency management agencies.\nNo form of natural disaster challenges the NWS watch and warning system more\nthan a widespread tornadic event. Tragic as such events are, they do provide an\nopportunity for the NWS to see how well its units have performed their functions--\nto see what may have gone wrong, what went right, and what improvements are\nneeded. The widespread outbreak of tornadoes that occurred over the\nSoutheastern United States during the three-day period from November 21-23,\n1992, provided an especially severe test of the NWS system.\nAt the request of the Assistant Administrator, National Weather Service, a\nDisaster Survey Team was formed and charged to examine the performance of the\nNWS during this outbreak. Many offices in the very large area extending from\nEast Texas to Atlantic Coastal states and from the Gulf Coast to the Ohio River\nvalley were involved. Because all affected sites and involved offices could not be\ncovered, the attention of the Team members was directed to those areas where the\nmost severe damage and fatalities had occurred.\nThe Team assembled at the National Severe Storms Forecast Center in Kansas\nCity to receive an overview of the storm and also to review the performance of the\nSevere Local Storms unit, which had issued watches throughout the period of the\nstorm events. The team then divided into two groups: one visited affected areas\nnear Jackson, Mississippi, and Atlanta, Georgia; the other travelled to Houston,\nTexas, Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina, and areas near Cincinnati, Ohio. At\neach location, contacts were made with NWS personnel, civil emergency managers,\npublic services units, the media and with members of the general public.\nThis document has been produced from information gathered by the Team\nmembers in the course of the survey. It provides an assessment of the\nperformance and effectiveness of NWS units involved in this stressful and tragic\nseries of events; it is not intended to be a comprehensive chronicle of those events.\nA number of findings and related recommendations based on the Team's work are\npresented with the expectation that, from this experience, more effective warning\nand forecasting procedures might result.\nThe Disaster Survey Team\niii","TABLE OF CONTENTS\nPAGE\nii\nPreface\niii\nForeword\nU\nExecutive Summary\nviii\nDisaster Survey Team Members\nix\nAcronyms and Abbreviations\nFindings and Recommendations\nx\n1\nDescription and Impact of Event\nChapter 1\n25\nMeteorological Analysis\nChapter 2\n45\nWarnings, Forecasts and Guidance\nChapter 3\n57\nRadar Evaluation\nChapter 4\n83\nPreparedness\nChapter 5\n93\nDissemination and Communications\nChapter 6\n111\nUser Response\nChapter 7\nA-1\nFujita Tornado Intensity Scale\nAppendix A\nB-1\nOverall Performance Statistics\nAppendix B\nC-1\nChronology of Selected Products\nAppendix C\niv","EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\nBy a very great margin, tornadoes occur more frequently in the United States\nthan anywhere else on Earth. Tropical air unimpeded by significant geographical\nbarriers, under appropriate conditions, sweeps up from the Gulf of Mexico and the\nwestern Atlantic to blanket much of the country east of the Rockies. When colder\nand drier air moves from the west against this warm moisture-laden air,\nenormous instabilities are produced along the boundary of the air masses.\nWidespread thunderstorms are triggered, some of which may spawn tornadoes.\nSuch an event occurred in November 1992 when moisture-rich tropical air covered\nthe Southeastern states from Texas eastward to Georgia and northward to the\nOhio River Valley. Tremendous energy was released in this unseasonably warm\nand unstable air mass as a low pressure center entered Texas from the west.\nSevere weather first developed over southeastern Texas early on Saturday\nafternoon, November 21. During the next 48 hours, the storms spread eastward\nand northward and spawned a destructive and deadly outbreak of tornadoes that\naffected 13 states before finally dissipating in the mid-Atlantic region. A total of\n94 tornado tracks were identified during this widespread episode which was\nunusually intense for November. Twenty-six fatalities and 641 injuries are\ndirectly attributable to this episode, and damages to property have been estimated\nat more than $291 million.\nTornadoes first formed in eastern Texas in the early afternoon of Saturday,\nNovember 21, causing great damage in the area but no fatalities. Clusters of\nthunderstorms moved through Louisiana and spawned ten tornadoes that caused\ndamage and injuries during that evening. The first deaths and the largest\nnumber attributable to this episode were in Rankin County, Mississippi. Shortly\nbefore midnight, an F4 tornado devastated a mobile home park in Brandon where\nsix people were killed; it then moved on to level a two-story brick home in its path,\nclaiming another four lives. Before exiting the state in the early morning hours of\nNovember 22, killer tornadoes caused 15 fatalities in Mississippi.\nThe storms continued to move eastward and northward into Georgia, Tennessee,\nKentucky and the Carolinas where lives were lost in killer tornadoes in each of\nthose states. The last of the fatalities was associated with an F3 tornado that\ntouched down in Hillsborough, North Carolina, in the early morning of November\n23. Tornadoes tracked as far north as Indiana and Ohio in the afternoon and\nevening of November 22, and four touched down in Virginia and Maryland during\nthe early morning hours of November 23.\nV","The advance of the low center through the Southwest and the kinematic and\nthermodynamic conditions within the contending air masses were well depicted in\nthe model-based forecast guidance provided by the National Meteorological Center.\nBoth synoptic and mesoscale weather patterns were suggestive of very severe\nweather and served to alert forecasters of the National Severe Storms Forecast\nCenter (NSSFC) and in NWS field offices of the potential for severe thunderstorm\nand tornadoes over much of the Southeastern United States.\nThe NSSFC provided excellent support throughout the episode, correctly\nidentifying the threat of tornadoes more than 24 hours in advance of the first\nevent in southeast Texas. The NSSFC Severe Weather Outlooks and the 16\nwatches issued during the course of the episode were timely and accurate. NWS\nfield forecasters have credited the NSSFC products as being vital to their ability\nto recognize the magnitude of the event and to the issuance of their own timely\nforecasts, statements and warnings.\nThe consensus among members of the Disaster Survey Team was that NWS\npersonnel involved in this episode, both in the National Centers and in field offices\nthe team visited, recognized the deadly seriousness of this situation and made\neffective use of the available guidance and tools at their disposal. Without\nexception, all behaved responsibly and with dedication. In particular, the\nperformance at the Weather Service Office (WSO) Houston was exemplary and the\nvalue and capabilities of the recently installed WSR-88D radar there were clearly\ndemonstrated. The Houston office issued warnings for 15 of the 17 tornado events\nthat occurred in its area of responsibility, with an average lead time of 25\nminutes.\nUnfortunately, the big killer tornado in Mississippi set down without Rankin\ncounty having been warned. Two thunderstorm systems moved through central\nand southeastern Mississippi on essentially parallel tracks during late evening of\nNovember 21 and early morning of November 22. The Weather Service Forecast\nOffice (WSFO) Jackson was well prepared as these systems approached their area\nof responsibility and had issued a timely Tornado Warning well before a tornado\nassociated with the westernmost cell touched down just before midnight in Copiah\nCounty. The storm seemed to be weakening as it moved northward and, in the\ntotal absence of ground-truth reports, the warning was not continued in Rankin\nCounty; attention instead was focused on the growing supercell to the southeast.\nThe decision not to warn was a professionally responsible one given the\nobservations available at the time.\nThe offices at Atlanta, Cincinnati and Raleigh-Durham were also well prepared for\nthe unseasonable incursion of tornadic activity into their areas of responsibility\nwhere the severe weather developed rapidly but not unexpectedly. Appropriate\nwarning service was provided in almost all instances from these offices.\nvi","The members of the Disaster Survey Team were gratified to note that other facets\nof the NWS watch and warning systems also worked well. Although not perfect,\nrapport with emergency managers was excellent and indicative of long and hard\nwork on both sides. The media in the areas visited were very supportive and well\naware of their own commitment to the public for disseminating watches and\nwarnings prepared by the NWS. The importance of spotter networks and\ncooperation with amateur radio operators cannot be over-emphasized. It was clear\nthat much effort had gone into preparing and presenting programs designed to\neducate the public regarding severe weather events. It was also clear that much\nmore must be done to prepare the public to assume more responsibility for their\nown protection when in harm's way from such events.\nThe levels of accuracy and timeliness of severe weather alerts, watches and\nwarnings during this episode were high. This, coupled with the responsiveness of\nthe emergency and civil managers, the media and a generally aware public,\nwithout doubt saved lives. Overall, the public was well served.\nvii","DISASTER SURVEY TEAM MEMBERS\nThe Natural Disaster Survey Team for the November 21-23, 1992 tornado\noutbreak is listed below. To more effectively investigate the outbreak, the group\nwas split in two. One group, Team 1, consisting of Howcroft, Bocchieri, Andra,\nWhite, and Littin visited Mississippi and Georgia. The other group, Team 2,\nconsisting of Dean (Group Leader), Schurr, Cooper, and Heidelberger visited\nTexas, North Carolina, and Kentucky. Additional information on damage in the\nother states affected by the outbreak was provided by local offices and Southern\nand Eastern Region Headquarters of the NWS.\nSpecial recognition is due to Paul Polger, Barry Goldsmith, Bill Lerner,\nand Bob Krebs, all of the Services Evaluation Branch, Office of\nMeteorology/NWS, for their significant contribution to this report,\nespecially Chapter 3 and Appendices B and C.\nTeam Members\nTeam Leader, James G. Howcroft, Deputy Director, National Meteorological\nCenter, NWS.\nTechnical Leader, Joseph Bocchieri, Chief, Services Evaluation Branch, Office of\nMeteorology, NWS.\nCoordinator/Editor, Ann Jiles, Program Assistant, Services Evaluation Branch,\nOffice of Meteorology, NWS.\nNancy Dean, Team 2 Group Leader, Meteorologist-in-Charge, NWS Office,\nEureka, California.\nBasil \"Bud\" Littin, Public Affairs Officer, NWS.\nSteven Cooper, Assistant Chief, Meteorological Services Division, Southern\nRegion Headquarters, NWS.\nMax White, Public Service/Dissemination Meteorologist, Southern Region\nHeadquarters, NWS.\nDavid L. Andra, Jr., Meteorologist, Operations Training Branch, Operational\nSupport Facility, Norman, Oklahoma, NWS.\nEdwin Heidelberger, Regional Public Service Meteorologist, Eastern Region\nHeadquarters, NWS.\nSteve Schurr, Meteorologist-in-Charge, NWS Office, Hastings, Nebraska.\nviii","ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS\nADAP\nAFOS Data Analysis Program\nAWIPS\nAdvanced Weather Interactive Processing System\nBWER\nBounded Weak Echo Region\nC\nDegrees Celsius\nCAPE\nConvectively Available Potential Energy\nCentimeter\ncm\nCWA\nCounty Warning Area\nDST\nDisaster Survey Team\nEBS\nEmergency Broadcast System\nEMA\nEmergency Management Agency\nEOC\nEmergency Operations Center\nF\nDegrees Fahrenheit\nGEMA\nGeorgia Emergency Management Agency\nGeopotential meters\ngpm\nHAM\nLicensed amateur radio operator\nJ/kg\nJoules/Kilogram\nkm\nKilometer\nkts\nKnots\nLETS\nLaw Enforcement Teletype System\nM\nMillion dollars\nmb\nMillibar\nMEMA\nMississippi Emergency Management Agency\nm/s\nMeters per second\nMSL\nMean Sea Level\nNAWAS\nNational Warning System\nNCDC\nNational Climatic Data Center\nNEXRAD\nNext Generation Radar\nNGM\nNested Grid Model\nNautical Mile\nnm\nNMC\nNational Meteorological Center\nNSSFC\nNational Severe Storms Forecast Center\nNWR\nNOAA Weather Radio\nNWSO\nNEXRAD Weather Service Office\nNWWS\nNOAA Weather Wire Service\nPPI\nPlan Position Indicator\nPUP\nPrinciple User Processor\nPWO\nPublic Severe Weather Outlook\nRAOB\nRawinsonde observation\nSDM\nStation Duty Manual\nSHARP\nSkew T/Hodograph Analysis and Research Program\nSOO\nScience and Operations Officer\nSPS\nSpecial Weather Statement\nSRM\nWSR-88D Storm Relative Map product\nUTC\nCoordinated Universal Time\nVAD\nVelocity Azimuth Display\nWCM\nWarning Coordination Meteorologist\nWPM\nWarning Preparedness Meteorologist\nWRSAME\nWeather Radio Specific-Area Message Encoder\nWSFO\nWeather Service Forecast Office\nWSO\nWeather Service Office\nWSR-57\nWeather Surveillance Radar-1957\nWSR-74C\nWeather Surveillance Radar-1974 C-band\nWSR-88D\nWeather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler\nix","FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nDESCRIPTION AND IMPACT OF THE EVENT (CHAPTER 1)\nFinding 1.1: The deadly and destructive tornado outbreak which struck the\nUnited States November 21-23, 1992, was unusually intense and one of the most\nwidespread for November (94 tornadoes). The 26 fatalities associated with the\nstorms were the most since the Plainfield, IL, tornadoes in 1990 in which 29\npeople died.\nFinding 1.2: Fourteen of the tornado deaths, or 54 percent, occurred in mobile\nhomes.\nRecommendation 1.2: Continued emphasis is needed to stress the\nimportance of the availability of shelters in mobile home parks and the actions to\nbe taken by those in harms way.\nMETEOROLOGICAL ANALYSIS (CHAPTER 2)\nFinding 2.1: Storm relative helicity proved especially useful for identifying the\npotential for mesocyclones and tornadoes. Strong vertically veering wind fields in\nthe warm sector resulted in large values of storm relative helicity (at times\nexceeding 500 m²/s2 in the lowest 3 km). Parameters such as Lifted Index and\nCAPE indicated convection was possible, but values for these quantities were\nmodest and not sufficient to discriminate between severe and non-severe\nconvection.\nFinding 2.2: National Weather Service Offices effectively utilized excellent,\navailable guidance and tools, including SHARP and ADAP, to anticipate and\nmonitor mesoscale meteorological developments. Forecasters in Houston also used\nVAD wind data from the WSR-88D radar to modify early morning helicity\ncalculations and identify the increased tornado threat.\nRecommendation 2.2a: Continue education, training and research in the area\nof mesoscale meteorology.\nRecommendation 2.2b: Ensure the NWS Advanced Weather Interactive\nProcessing System (AWIPS) provides a complete set of mesoscale analysis tools.\nThese tools must be interactive, allowing modification of data and effective\nassessment of critical quantities like CAPE and helicity quickly.\nX","WARNINGS, FORECASTS, AND GUIDANCE (CHAPTER 3)\nFinding 3.1: The NSSFC provided excellent guidance and watch products to\nWSFOs, WSOs and the public throughout the outbreak. NSSFC correctly\nidentified the threat of tornadoes and severe storms more than 24 hours in\nadvance of the episode. NSSFC also accurately forecast relatively rare late season\ntornadoes in the Ohio Valley. Field forecasters interviewed by the DST\nbelieved NSSFC's watches and guidance products were vital to their ability to\nanticipate the magnitude of the event and to issue timely forecasts, statements,\nand warnings.\nFinding 3.2: The performance of WSO Houston was exemplary. Several\ntornadoes struck in the Houston metropolitan area, producing the vast majority of\nthe damage in Texas. Despite the numbers and strength of the storms there were\nno fatalities.\nFinding 3.3: The single greatest number of deaths associated with one tornado\nwas 12 in Mississippi. Ten of these deaths were in Rankin County, which is in\nWSFO Jackson's CWA. When the tornado that killed 10 in Rankin County first\ntouched down in Copiah County a Tornado Warning for Copiah County had been\nin effect. However, no Tornado Warning was in effect in Simpson County or\nRankin County as the storm moved from Copiah County through those counties.\nFinding 3.4: One of the factors in the decision not to issue a warning for Rankin\nCounty, Mississippi, where 10 people were killed, was that no ground truth\nreports were received from spotters, the public, police, or HAMs. Ground truth\nsevere weather reports are often critical in the NWS warning process.\nRecommendation 3.4: The NWS should continue to help establish and train\nnew spotter groups plus provide refresher training to the existing spotter\nnetworks. The emphasis for continued feedback of severe weather information\nfrom spotter networks, Emergency Management Agency officials, and law\nenforcement personnel must be continued and strengthened.\nRADAR EVALUATION (CHAPTER 4)\nFinding 4.1: WSR-88D radar at WSO Houston provided useful information.\nVelocity data (particularly the storm relative data) proved extremely valuable in\nevaluating tornadic potential. WSR-88D products were clearly superior to\nconventional WSR-57 and WSR-74C products available at other locations.\nFinding 4.2: Multiple elevation angle displays (four-panels) of reflectivity and\nvelocity data proved extremely valuable to the Houston Office during this episode.\nThe data, and other products provided by the WSR-88D, required intense analysis\nxi","by a highly skilled radar interpreter to accurately determine the likelihood that a\ntornado would develop. Proper interpretation of WSR-88D data during active\nevents requires dedication of at least one staff member to that task.\nRecommendation 4.2: At least one skilled radar interpreter should be\ndedicated to the radar, whether it is a WSR-88D, WSR-74 or WSR-57 any time\nsevere weather threatens (including times when severe weather watches are in\neffect) and thunderstorms are present.\nFinding 4.3: Meteorologists who interpreted the Houston WSR-88D felt training\nthey received at the Norman, Oklahoma WSR-88D OSF Training Branch provided\na strong base upon which to build their skills. The value of that training was\nmeasured in the effective warnings issued November 21, 1992.\nFinding 4.4: No warnings were in effect for the fatality-producing tornadoes in\nRankin, Choctaw, and Webster counties in Mississippi. The no-warning decision\nwas, in part, due to radar indications the storm was decreasing in intensity. The\ndecreased reflectivity of the storm as it tracked into Rankin then Attala counties\nsuggests the storm updraft weakened briefly as the mesocyclone occluded in each\ncase. Such an evolution is consistent with tornadic supercell thunderstorms.\nRecommendation 4.4a: The NWS should continue to improve instruction on\nsevere storm evolution and radar structure. Although such instruction may be\nperformed on-site by the SOO, the instruction should be in addition to the resident\nWSR-88D course, with content formulated by subject matter experts.\nRecommendation 4.4b: The NWS should ensure that future radar display\nsystems (e.g. WSR-88D PUP, AWIPS) provide the tools necessary to quickly and\neasily assess three-dimensional storm structure and evolution.\nFinding 4.5: Despite using conventional radar that did not always identify\ncharacteristics normally associated with tornadoes, the Cincinnati WSO issued\neffective warnings. They used an intensive mesoanalysis effort that helped to\nidentify the area where the tornado developed. The mesoanalysis directly\ncontributed to the effectiveness of the Tornado Warning they issued.\nRecommendation 4.5: All radar-related training should emphasize mesoscale\nanalysis as an important aspect of radar data interpretation.\nxii","PREPAREDNESS (CHAPTER 5)\nFinding 5.1: Overall, a vigorous Warning and Preparedness program existed in\nthe areas visited. However, in Rankin County, Mississippi, (WSFO Jackson's\nresponsibility) the Emergency Management Agency was just getting organized.\nThe County's storm spotter network needed to be reorganized and trained. Also,\nspotter training in WSFO Raleigh's area of responsibility was limited due to\nminimum staffing, and the spotter network for WSO Houston's CWA was sporadic\nin some locations.\nRecommendation 5.1: To allow the WPM/WCM more time to perform his/her\npreparedness duties, efforts should be increased to limit shift work by the\nWPM/WCM to no more than 25 percent of the time. Spotter training and\norganization is an indispensable part of each NWS Office's program and must be\ngiven a high priority, even in times of limited staffing. Staffing should be brought\nup to full complement where insufficient staffing has a negative effect on\nWPM/WCM duties.\nFinding 5.2: WSFO Raleigh placed a low priority on logging information during\nthe event. Many telephone calls and conversations were recorded after the event\nfrom the memory of individuals working the event. WSFO Raleigh has since\ninstituted procedures to enhance their real-time logging of events during severe\nweather episodes including the addition of a voice-activated recording device.\nRecommendation 5.2: A greater importance should be placed on logging events,\nparticularly severe weather information.\nFinding 5.3: The preparedness effort was, in general, well rewarded during this\noutbreak. Interviews and individual accounts indicated people were generally\naware of the threat, the warnings, and of the proper safety measures to take.\nRecommendation 5.3: The NWS, along with the entire hazards community,\nneeds to continue and enhance preparedness and educational activities to\nminimize loss of life.\nFinding 5.4: NWS offices often have a HAM base station in the operations area.\nHAM radio operators provide some of the most timely and accurate storm\ninformation. WSFO's Jackson and Atlanta were in temporary quarters with\nlimited space, and no HAM base station was in service. Both offices plan space for\na HAM station at their new facilities.\nRecommendation 5.4: NWS offices should make every effort to provide space\nfor HAM radio, even while occupying temporary quarters.\nxiii","DISSEMINATION AND COMMUNICATIONS (CHAPTER 6)\nFinding 6.1: GTE/Contel performed 20 minutes of maintenance on the weather\nwire system at 3:00 a.m., November 21. Advance notice of this 20 minutes of\ndown time was supplied to users, but no procedure was established to assure there\nwas no weather threat before taking the system down. This shut-down occurred\nbefore the start of the outbreak and did not affect dissemination of critical NWS\nproducts, but it could have been dangerous if the maintenance had occurred on\nNovember 22.\nRecommendation 6.1: Routine NWWS maintenance must not be performed\nwhen severe weather threatens. NWS must establish a procedure with\nGTE/Contel to avoid routine outage during critical weather situations.\nFinding 6.2: Only manual or semi-automated systems for relay of NWS data to\nlaw enforcement officials were in operation in Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, and\nNorth Carolina. In North Carolina distribution was accomplished by manually\ntyping products received from NWWS.\nRecommendation 6.2: The NWS should encourage state agencies to incorporate\nautomatic relay of NWWS information on LETS so that minutes and possibly lives\nmay be saved.\nFinding 6.3: Many people were aware of NWR, but the majority of citizens do\nnot own an NWR receiver.\nRecommendation 6.3: The NWS, emergency management officials,\nthe media, etc., should cooperate in promoting NWR. The NWS should increase\npublic education about the NWR system.\nFinding 6.4: The North Carolina Division of Emergency Management in Raleigh\nnoted the coverage of NWR in western North Carolina is poor and additional\ntransmitters are needed.\nRecommendation 6.4: Investigate NWR coverage in western North Carolina\nand determine the need and feasibility of installing additional transmitters. Also,\ninvestigate coverage nationwide to determine unserviced areas with significant\nneed.\nFinding 6.5: WSO Cincinnati received positive feedback with their NWR \"Quick\nWarn\" program. Many users stated they believed issuing the warnings with the\nquick format saved lives.\nxiv","Recommendation 6.5: Continue using the \"Quick Warn\" format. Other offices\nwith adequate NWR coverage should consider using this type of broadcast.\nFinding 6.6: None of the media in the areas visited utilize WR-SAME (Weather\nRadio Specific Area Message Encoder) for the automatic \"override\" of their audio\nto transmit warnings from NWR.\nRecommendation 6.6: Increase efforts to make the media (especially automated\nradio stations), emergency management agencies, schools, law enforcement\nofficials, etc., aware of WR-SAME and the benefits it provides.\nFinding 6.7: The EBS serving the Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, and North\nCarolina areas appears to have performed well.\nFinding 6.8: Television stations commonly used either text crawls or \"live\"\nbroadcasts to alert the public to impending severe weather. In many instances,\nthe crawls were produced manually resulting in delayed dissemination to the\npublic.\nRecommendation 6.8: The NWS should encourage TV stations to increase the\nuse of the automatic production of text crawls.\nFinding 6.9: Leading radio news people in two states stated that because of a\nbudget squeeze many radio stations forego NWWS and rely on the Associated\nPress (AP) for weather and other news. They observed that AP gives priority to\nhard news stories and scheduled daily summaries, and weather alerts are apt to\nbe held up.\nRecommendation 6.9: At national, regional and state capitol levels, NWS\nshould discuss this assertion with AP leaders.\nFinding 6.10: The media often does not break into certain programming even\nfor urgent weather messages. Television stations may limit the time a crawl can\nbe broadcast. Automation of radio stations leave limited personnel available to\nbroadcast critical weather information.\nRecommendation 6.10: The NWS should point out the importance of the\nmedia's role in delivering warnings and stress the need to avoid limiting times\nthat information can be broadcast. The NWS should also promote use of new\ntechniques like WR-SAME and electronic switching systems that help deliver\ncritical messages in seconds.\nXV","USER RESPONSE (CHAPTER 7 7)\nFinding 7.1: In general, people were aware of and responded properly to the\nthreat of inclement weather in their area. Most first utilized the media to obtain\nweather information. Then, personal, visual confirmation verified the absence or\npresence of actual danger before safety measures were taken. These factors\nworked less effectively where there were no warnings, people were asleep, or were\nprimarily in mobile homes. In those areas where an actual warning may not have\nbeen in effect, forecasts, watches, and warnings for nearby areas usually indicated\nthe threat of severe weather.\nFinding 7.2: In Houston, the users felt that the short format (several lines)\nsevere weather and special weather statements were extremely helpful to update\nthe situation.\nRecommendation 7.2: Continue using these types of statements to update the\nevent and encourage other NWS offices to act similarly.\nFinding 7.3: Some users felt that more emphasis should be given to warning\nmessages for situations that are particularly certain and dangerous (e.g. confirmed\ntornado in highly populated area).\nRecommendation 7.3: The NWS should explore ways to more effectively convey\nthe urgency and serious nature of the warning message during especially high\nthreat situations.\nxvi","CHAPTER 1\nDESCRIPTION AND IMPACT OF THE EVENT\nThe outbreak of 94 tornadoes from Texas to the Central Atlantic Seaboard\nNovember 21-23, 1992, was unusually widespread and intense for so late in the\nseason. These storms were responsible for the most fatalities (26) since the\nPlainfield, Illinois, tornado in August 1990 in which 29 died. This was one of the\nlargest November tornado outbreaks on record. Records show, however, that\ntornadoes occur with good frequency across the southern states in November, and\nwidespread outbreaks are not unprecedented.\nNational Severe Storms Forecast Center (NSSFC) and National Climatic Data\nCenter (NCDC) records show November as the month with the greatest number of\ntornado fatalities (83) for the 6 years from 1987 through 1992. Nearly all those\nfatalities have occurred in the southern and eastern states.\nBeginning in the early afternoon of Saturday, November 21, severe weather\ndeveloped over southeastern Texas. For the next 48 hours, the storms moved\nnortheast before finally dissipating in the northeast United States Monday\nmorning, November 23. Left behind were paths of destruction resulting in 26\ndeaths, 641 injuries, and damages estimated at over $291 million covering 13\nstates. Table 1 shows the details of the fatalities. Table 2 presents a summary of\nthe deaths, injuries and damage estimates in each state.\nTornado watches were in effect where 91 of the 94 tornadoes were reported.\nTwenty-five of the 26 fatalities occurred in valid tornado watches. Fourteen of the\n26 deaths (or 54 percent) occurred in mobile homes. Severe storm warnings were\nin effect for 12 of the 26 deaths.\nThe focus of this report will be on the states that were visited by the Disaster\nSurvey Team (DST), that is, Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, Kentucky, and North\nCarolina. Highlights of the storm activity and impact in other states affected by\nthis outbreak are also summarized in this Chapter.\nSummary of Events in States Visited by the DST\nTexas\nWidespread tornadoes devastated portions of southeast Texas during Saturday\nafternoon, November 21. Several tornadoes struck the Houston metropolitan area,\nproducing the vast majority of the damage. Amazingly, all who endured these\nstorms survived, even though the storms were some of the strongest in recent\nmemory.\n1","TABLE 1\nSummary of Deaths Including Age, Gender, and Location\nLocation\nDwelling\nSex\nAge\nRankin Co., MS\nmobile home\nFemale\n4\n1.\nRankin Co., MS\nhouse\nMale\n7\n2.\nRankin Co., MS\nhouse\nMale\n7\n3.\nRankin Co., MS\nhouse\nMale\n10\n4.\nRankin Co., MS\nmobile home\nFemale\n30\n5.\nRankin Co., MS\nmobile home\nFemale\n31\n6.\nRankin Co., MS\nmobile home\nFemale\n39\n7.\nRankin Co., MS\nhouse\nMale\n42\n8.\nRankin Co., MS\nmobile home\nMale\n50\n9.\nRankin Co., MS\nmobile home\nFemale\n68\n10.\nLeake Co., MS\nmobile home\nFemale\n58\n11.\nChoctaw Co., MS\nmobile home\nMale\n5\n12.\nWebster Co., MS\nhouse\nMale\n67\n13.\nWebster Co., MS\nhouse\nFemale\n75\n14.\nKemper Co., MS\nhouse\nFemale\n91\n15.\nHardeman Co., TN\nmobile home\nMale\n11\n16.\nLumpkin Co., GA\noffice bldg\nFemale\n43\n17.\nPutnam Co., GA\nmobile home\nMale\n31\n18.\nPutnam Co., GA\nmobile home\nMale\n52\n19.\nPutnam Co., GA\nhouse\nFemale\n59\n20.\nPutnam Co., GA\nhouse\nMale\n63\n21.\nGreene Co., GA\nmobile home\nFemale\n61\n22.\nCarroll, Co., KY\nmobile home\nFemale\n62\n23.\nSaluda Co., SC\nhouse\nMale\n81\n24.\nOrange Co., NC\nhouse\nMale\n2\n25.\nOrange Co., NC\nmobile home\nMale\n53\n26.\nSummary of Totals:\n14\nMales\nGender:\n12\nFemales\n14\nMobile homes\nLocations:\n11\nHouses\n1\nOffice Building\n641 people injured\n2","TABLE 2\nSummary of Death / Damage by State\nState\nDead\nInjuries\nDamage\n($ Millions)\nTexas\n0\n34\n105\nLouisiana\n0\n28\n3\nMississippi\n15\n269\n60\nTennessee\n1\n4\n0.03\nAlabama\n0\n43\n18\nGeorgia\n6\n144\n70\nSouth Carolina\n1\n9\n5\nNorth Carolina\n2\n74\n9.3\nKentucky\n1\n9\n2.5\nOhio\n0\n21\n5\nIndiana\n0\n6\n12\nVirginia\n0\n0\n0.5\nMaryland\n0\n0\n1.5\nTOTAL\n26\n641\n291+\n3","In all, 14 tornadoes occurred statewide injuring 34 persons and damaging nearly\n3000 residences, businesses, and aircraft. Between 1:30 and 4:30 p.m. 1 on\nSaturday, November 21, 12 tornadoes struck six counties in the Weather Service\nOffice (WSO) Houston County Warning Area (CWA). The counties affected were\nWharton, Fort Bend, Brazoria, Harris, Polk, and Liberty. At one time in Harris\nCounty, four tornadoes were likely producing damage. The tornado in eastern\nHarris County was rated an F4 (see Appendix A for definition of Fujita Tornado\nIntensity Scale).\nMiraculously, even though some of the tornadoes moved through the highly\npopulated Houston area, there were no deaths (see Fig. 1 for tornado tracks).\nDamage, however, was extensive, especially in the Channelview area in the\neastern suburbs of Houston. Overall in the Houston CWA, more than 2000 homes\nwere destroyed or damaged, and insured losses were estimated at $105 million.\nThe onset of the outbreak was marked by three separate tornadoes, two F1s and\none F2, that occurred in Wharton County between 1:30 p.m. and 2:45 p.m. Three\ntornadoes also touched down in Fort Bend County. The strongest was an F2\ntornado, which touched down near Fulshear around 2:20 p.m. This tornado then\nmoved into Harris County near Katy at 2:28 p.m. The tornado caused\nconsiderable damage to West Side Airport, a major general aviation facility. Two\nother F1 tornadoes touched down in Fort Bend County.\nThe most devastating tornadoes struck central and eastern Harris County,\nincluding the Houston metropolitan area, between 3:12 and 4:15 p.m. The most\nviolent of the tornadoes touched down at 3:27 p.m. in the Channelview area. In\nthis vicinity, 15 persons were injured and more than 1200 homes and businesses\nsustained damage. About a mile north of the touchdown, the tornado intensity\nincreased to F4. After about a mile, the tornado diminished to an F2 and stayed\nthat way into Liberty County.\nAt approximately the same time, an F2 tornado touched down 2 miles southwest\nof downtown Houston, on the southeast edge of Hermann Park, and moved\nnortheast across heavily travelled highways. There were six minor injuries and\nover 500 residences and 100 commercial buildings were damaged.\nA total of three tornadoes also struck Liberty County. The longest tornado, an F3\nwith a 32-mile track, started about 3:20 p.m., moving from Harris County to\nLiberty County. The tornado injured one person in Liberty County and damaged\nresidential property in Tarkington before completing its track just east of\nRomayor.\nSuperscript(1)All times in this report are Local Standard Time unless otherwise noted.\n4","Walker\nPolk\nBrazos\nF1\nSan Jacinto\nGrimes\neson\nMontgomery\nF3\nWashington\nLiberty\nWaller\nF 1\nF2\nF 4\nAustin\nHarris\nF2\nHouston\nC\nF1\nColorado\nF1\nFort Bend\nF\n1\nF1\nF1\nGalveston\nF2\nGalvestor\nWharton\nBrazoria\nson\nTEXAS\nMatagorda\nFigure 1. Tornado tracks in Texas, November 21, 1992.\n5","Photograph of damage inflicted on a home near Katy, Texas, on the border of Harris and Fort Bend Counties. Photograph\ncourtesy of the Houston Chronicle.\nA tornado which struck the Houston, Texas, area left this scene at a street intersection of Channelview, a community east of\nthe city. Photograph courtesy of the Houston Chronicle.\n6","Photograph of damage inflicted on a home in the Kelliwood subdivision in Western\nHarris County, Texas. Photograph courtesy of the Houston Chronicle.\n7","Mississippi\nMississippi, which leads the nation in tornado fatalities, was dealt the hardest\nblow during this tornadic outbreak. There were 15 fatalities (10 in Rankin\nCounty, 1 in Leake, 1 in Choctaw, 2 in Webster, and 1 in Kemper County). There\nwere 269 injuries. Damages were estimated at $60 million. Nearly 300 homes\nwere destroyed and over 700 damaged. Twenty-one counties were declared\ndisaster areas.\nAt least 60 mobile homes were destroyed. Six of the 10 people who died in the\nBrandon, Mississippi area (Rankin County) and two who died elsewhere in\nMississippi were in mobile homes. Few states, including Mississippi, have mobile\nhome tie-down laws. Even where they may exist, enforcement is very difficult.\nThere is no Mississippi law that requires mobile homes parks to have shelters.\nNearly all of the damage in the state occurred with two storm cells. Fifteen\ntornadoes, associated with the two storm cells, touched down in Mississippi late\nSaturday and early Sunday, November 21 and 22. The tornado tracks are shown\nin Fig. 2. At 9:30 p.m. Saturday, Mississippi's first tornado (F1) began in\nWilkinson County in the southwest corner of the state. The last tornado struck 9\nmiles east of Meridian at 3:20 a.m. Sunday. The more significant tornadoes are\nsummarized below.\nAt 11:27 p.m. a tornado touched down in northeast Copiah County, 1 mile north of\nHopewell, beginning a path that was to extend for 128 miles through Simpson,\nRankin, Scott, Leake, and Attala Counties, and finally dissipating 4 miles\nsouthwest of Mathiston at 2:01 a.m. in Choctaw County. The tornado left 12\npeople dead and 122 injured. At 11:37 p.m. this tornado moved into Rankin\nCounty, where most of the fatalities occurred, passing 1 mile southeast of\nFlorence. It then moved through the southwest city limits of Brandon at 11:53\np.m. and continued northeast exiting the county 7 miles east of Sandhill at 12:19\na.m. The tornado killed two people in a mobile home park in the south side of\nFlorence. The tornado then moved toward Brandon. It struck another mobile\nhome park where it destroyed 30 mobile homes, killed four people and injured\nmany more. As the tornado moved through the south and east sides of Brandon it\ndamaged or destroyed many more houses and mobile homes. It completely leveled\na large, well built, brick home in the East Haven subdivision and killed four\npeople. In Rankin County, a total of 60 homes were destroyed, over 500 homes\nwere damaged, 10 people were killed, and 98 were injured. One death occurred in\nLeake County in a mobile home in the Pine Tree Community, west of Carthage.\nIn Attala County 36 homes were destroyed or severely damaged. Twelve people\nwere injured. In Choctaw County, 101 homes were damaged or destroyed. One\nperson was killed in a mobile home in Weir and twelve others were injured. The\ntornado appeared to reach its maximum strength in Brandon where it was rated\nF4, but it had much F3 damage all along the path.\n8","Benton\nAlcorn\nDe Soto\nMarshall\nTippah\nTishomingo\nFunica\nTate\nPrentiss\nUnion\nPanola\nLafayette\nQuitman\nLee\nItawamba\nPontotoc\nCoahoma\nYalobusha\nF 1\nCalhoun\nTallahatchie\nChickasaw\nF\n0\nMonroe\nBolivar\nGrenada\nF\nClay\nSunflower\nWebster\nLeflore\nMontgomery\nColumbus\nF 3\nOktibbeha\nCarroll\nLowndes\nGreenville\nChoctaw\nWashington\nF2\nHumphreys Holmes\nWinston\nNoxubee\nAttala\nF 3\nF2\nSharkey\nF\n1\nYazoo\neake\nNeshoba\nKempe\nIssaquena\nF2\nMadison\nF1\nF\n3\nLauderdale\nScott\nNewton\nF 4\nMeridian\nWarren\nRankin\nHinds\nF 3\nJackson\nF O\n.\nF 4\nClarke\n3\nJasper\nClaiborne\nSmith\nSimpson\nCopia\nF\n4\n1\nJefferson\nF1\nJefferson\navis\nJones\nWayne\nCovington\nLincoln\nF 3\nAdams\nFranklin\nF\nHattiesburg\n2\nLawrence\nMarion\nGreene\nLamar\nPerry\nWilkinson\nPike\nAmite\nForrest\nF 1\nWalthall\nGeorge\nStone\nPearl River\nMISSISSIPPI\nJackson\nHarrison\nBiloxi\nHancock\nFigure 2. Tornado tracks in Mississippi, November 21-22, 1992.\n9","Tree damage helps gauge force of storm in Rankin County, Mississippi. Photograph courtesy of the\nNational Weather Service.\n10","Brandon, Mississippi, resident catches a double view of the wreckage at the mobile home park as he\nretrieves from the wreckage a large mirror, surprisingly unbroken. Photograph courtesy of Jackson Clarion\nLedger.\nYoung victim of tornado wipes away tears as she removes belongings from a trash pile that once was her\nhome at a Brandon Mississippi, mobile home park. Photograph courtesy of Clarion-Ledger.\n11","Aerial view of Easthaven, a suburban development of homes near Jackson, Mississippi, show\nthe storm's force. Lower three homes were demolished. On bottom right, only a driveway\nremained from a home where four people were killed (see cover photo). Photograph courtesy\nof Clarion Ledger.\n12","Later, the weakening supercell which produced the above-described tornado\nspawned an F1 tornado in extreme northeast Webster County at 2:14 a.m. Two\nelderly people were killed when the tornado destroyed the small wood-frame home\nin which they lived.\nThe second major storm/tornado (F3) system to affect the state began at 11:23\np.m. in Jefferson Davis County and ended in Kemper County along the Alabama\nborder at 3:20 a.m. The initial tornado started its 27-mile long path 8 miles\nsouthwest of Carson in Jefferson Davis County. The tornado then moved into\nCovington County and began to turn more northeasterly. It continued through the\ntown of Mount Olive and lifted 2 miles northwest of town at 12:05 a.m. Within\nJefferson Davis County, 14 homes were destroyed and numerous trees downed.\nFive people were injured. In the Mount Olive community 32 homes were\ndestroyed and 55 others were damaged with over 100 people injured.\nThe supercell spawned another intense tornado (F4) about 10 minutes later. The\nstorm, which lasted 1 hour, cut a 40-mile path through Smith, Jasper, and\nNewton Counties. The storm initially touched down at 12:14 a.m., 2 miles\nsoutheast of Mize in Smith County, and lifted on the southern city limits of\nNewton in Newton County at 1:14 a.m. This was an extremely large and intense\ntornado that fortunately moved through mainly uninhabited areas. In Smith\nCounty, 15 people were injured in Sylvarena. Over 90 homes were destroyed and\none large church was demolished. Within Jasper County, three houses and four\nmobile homes were destroyed, and 21 houses and two mobile homes were\ndamaged. In Newton County, six homes were damaged, and one mobile home and\none commercial building were destroyed.\nAt 2:15 a.m. an F2 tornado with a path length of 27 miles associated with the\nsupercell began in central Kemper County and moved into Noxubee County. One\nhouse and several mobile homes were damaged. One person was killed and one\ninjured in a wood frame home just west of Wahalak in Kemper County.\nGeorgia\nSevere storms moved across mainly the northern half of Georgia between 7:00\na.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Sunday, November 22. Six people were killed and 144\ninjured. Damage was estimated at $70 million. Five counties were declared\nfederal disaster areas and 20 were declared disaster areas by the State. In\naddition to the storms that produced microbursts, there were 11 tornado tracks, as\nshown in Fig. 3.\n13","Fannin\nTowns\nCatoosa\nRabun\nUnion\nDade\nWhitfield\nWalker\nMurray\nGEORGIA\nGilmer\nWhite\nF3\nHabersham\nLumpkia\nF1\nStephens\nGordon\nDawson\nPickens\nChattooga\nUS\nFranklin\nBanks\nHart\nFloyd\nHall\nBartow\nCherokee\nRome\nForsyth\nF4\nJackson\nMadison\nElbert\nBarrow\nPolk\nAthens\nGwinnett\nS\nPaulding\nCobb\nClarke\nOglethorpe\nWilkes\nDe Kalb\nOconee\nLincoln\nAtlanta\nHaralson\nF2\nWalton\nFulton\nDouglas\nRockdale\nCarroll\nMorgan\nTaliaferro\nNewton\nGreene\nColumbia\nClayton\nMcDuffle\nHenry\n4\nWarren\nAugusta\nFayette\nCoweta\nF2\nJasper\nPutnam\nRichmond\nButts\nHeard\nSpalding\nHancock\nGlascock\nF2\nPike\nLamar\nBaldwin\nTroup\nBurke\nMeriwethe\nJefferson\nMonroe\nJones\nWashington\nF O\nMacon\nUpson\nBibb\nWilkinson\nJenkins\nSc\nHarris\nTalbot\nCrawford\nTwiggs\nJohnson\n1\nPeach\nEmanuel\nTaylor\nMuscogee\nHouston\nBleckley\nLaurens\nCandler\nTreutlen\nBulloc\nFigure 3. Tornado tracks in Georgia, November 22, 1992.\n14","Homes on a peninsula of Georgia's Lake Oconee were leveled and surrounding wooded area was shredded as a\ntornado whipped through the neighborhood. Photograph courtesy of Macon Telegraph.\n15","","Residents search wreckage of a home on the shore of Lake Oconee, near Macon, Georgia, destroyed by the\nNovember 1992 tornado outbreak. Photograph courtesy of Macon Telegraph.\nThe Hill Dairy farm 10 miles northeast of Eatonton, Georgia, was churned by the November 1992 tornado\noutbreak. Photograph courtesy of Macon Telegraph.\n17","One of the most destructive tornadoes (F4) of the day developed in western Cobb\nCounty at 11:44 a.m. starting a path that would last for 20 miles and leave 46\npeople injured. The tornado began north of Powder Springs, then travelled\nnortheast to Kennesaw before entering Cherokee County just south of Woodstock,\nand then dissipated at Hickory Flats around 12:35 p.m. The tornado damaged or\ndestroyed over 325 residences and businesses in Kennesaw (Cobb County).\nTractor-trailers were overturned on Interstate 75. Several subdivisions suffered\nmajor damage when the tornado moved into the Woodstock area in southern\nCherokee County. At least 200 homes in Cherokee County had varying degrees of\ndamage. About 800 buildings were damaged to some extent. Of the injuries, 34\noccurred in Cobb County and 12 in Cherokee County.\nThe first killer tornado (F3) struck in Lumpkin County at 1:10 p.m. Its 10-mile\npath began north of Dahlonega. The storm moved northeast through Yahoola\nValley and then struck a resort ranch before dissipating at Cedar Mountain. The\nmajority of the damage occurred at the ranch where 40 structures were damaged\nor destroyed. Two employees in a two-story building were carried about 65 yards\nby the tornado (one person died), while another employee in another building was\ncarried 300 yards.\nGeorgia's deadliest tornado (F4) left a 32-mile path from 10 miles south-southwest\nof Eatonton in Putnam County, through Meda, ending at White Plains in Greene\nCounty between 4:45 p.m. and 5:20 p.m. Five people died and 86 were injured.\nThe violent tornado developed near the Putnam-Jones County line and travelled\nnortheast for 20 miles before going another 12 miles through Greene County.\nPower outages were widespread. In Putnam County, several residential areas\nwere struck leaving extensive damage. Putnam County's dairy industry, the\nstate's leader, suffered $18 million in damages (four dairies were lost, five heavily\ndamaged, and about 300 cattle were lost). Around 68 homes were destroyed with\nanother 109 damaged. Three deaths occurred at Lake Oconee when a house and a\ntrailer were swept into the lake. The other death occurred in a mobile home near\nU.S. Highway 441. In Greene County, the tornado demolished most of the town of\nWhite Plains, population 800. At least 66 homes and five businesses were\ndestroyed. One woman died in a mobile home.\nKentucky\nFour tornadoes touched down in extreme northern Kentucky (see Fig. 4) during\nthe late afternoon of November 22 resulting in one death and nine injuries. Dollar\ndamage was estimated at $2.5 million.\nThe killer tornado touched down at about 4:52 p.m. in southern Carroll County\nwest of Worthville and then moved northeast crossing the Ohio River east of\nGhent into Switzerland County, Indiana. It then crossed the winding Ohio River\n18","Flem\nBat\nClinton\nMason\nBrown\nOHIO\nNicholas\nRobertson\nBracken\nClermont\nWarren\nBourbon\nHarrison\nPendleton\nCampbell\nLexington\nKenton\nHamilton\nKENTUCKY\nCincinnati\nScott\nButler\nGrant\nBoone\nF O\nGallatin\nOwen\nFranklin\nF2\nF1\nF 4\nSwitzerland\nDearborn\nOhio\nFranklin\nF 1\nHenry\nCarroll\nF O\nShelby\nRipley\nF O\nTrimble\nINDIANA\nJefferson\nOldham\nDecatur\nJennings\nJefferson\nLouisville\nClark\nScott\nthe\nBartholomew\nFloyd\ngton\nson","a second time into Boone County, Kentucky, finally lifting and dissipating around\n5:27 p.m. about 10 miles southwest of the Cincinnati Airport. It was on the\nground for 22 miles. The tornado strength was generally F1-F2 except when it\nwas briefly F4 in Carroll County. A 62-year-old woman died in her mobile home\nin Carroll County after she refused to leave and join others in a shelter. Her\nmobile home was destroyed by the F4 tornado. Ten others were injured along the\ntornado's path and numerous residences were destroyed.\nNorth Carolina\nFive tornadoes crossed North Carolina Sunday night, November 22 and early\nMonday morning, November 23 (see Fig. 5). Two persons were killed and 74\ninjured. One-hundred-ten homes and seven businesses were destroyed. In\naddition, nearly 600 homes and two businesses were damaged resulting in an\nestimated loss of $9.3 million.\nAt 2:20 a.m. Monday, November 23, an isolated F3 tornado touched down in\nOrange County. This tornado resulted in the two reported deaths and 10 injuries\nin a subdivision near Hillsborough.\nA supercell formed over Harnett County at 4:10 a.m. and produced an F3 tornado\nwhich remained on the ground for 3 hours and 15 minutes, travelling 160 miles to\nthe northeast. The tornado injured 49 people. It passed through Johnston,\nWilson, Edgecombe, Martin, Bertie, Chowan, Perquimans, and Pasquotank\nCounties. Nearly half (22) of the injuries occurred at the onset, in Harnett and\nJohnston Counties. Twenty-one were hurt when a school bus was damaged near\nElizabeth City (Pasquotank County), North Carolina at 7:24 a.m. Monday\nmorning.\nSummary of Events in Other States\nLouisiana\nSeveral clusters of severe thunderstorms developed rapidly over western and east-\ncentral parts of Louisiana Saturday evening, November 21, and produced 10\ntornadoes. Twenty eight people were injured, and nearly $3 million damage was\ncaused by these storms.\nThe tornado with the longest track (38 miles) in Louisiana began at 9:55 p.m. in\nextreme northeast Catahoula Parish and tracked across the northern part of\nTensas Parish before dissipating in eastern Madison Parish. Eleven, or about one-\nthird of the 28 injuries in Louisiana, occurred with this storm. It also destroyed\n15 mobile homes, a church, three barns, and damaged 10 homes.\n20","Qurrituck\nDare\nPasquetank\nTyrrelf\nPerquimans\nCamden\nHyde\nWashington\nChowan\nCarteret\nPamlico\nGates\nBeaufort\nBertie\nHertford\nMartin\nF3\nCraven\nNorthampton\nOnslow\nJones\nPitt\nEdgecombe\nNew Hanover\nHalifax\nGreene\nLenoir\nPender\nWilson\nDuplin\nNORTH CAROLINA\nNash\nWayne\nWarren\nBrunswick\nFranklin\nJohnston\nSampson\nVance\nBladen\nGranville\nWake\nColumbus\nRaleigh\nCumberland\nDurham\nHarnett\nPerson\nOrange\nRobeson\nChatham\nF 3\nLee\nHoke\nCaswell\nAlamance\nMoore\nScotland\nGreensboro\nRockingham\nRichmond\nGuilford\nRandolph\nMontgomery\nAnson\nForsyth\nDavidson\nStokes\nWinston Salem\nStanly\nCabarrus\nRowan\nDavie\nUnion\nF\nYadkin\nMecklenburg\nSurry\nCharlotté\nedell\n1\nAlleghany\nF\nGaston\nWilkes\nAlexander,\nCatawba\nLincoln\nCleveland\nCaldwell\nAshe\nVatauga\nBurke\n0\nF\nd","At 9:45 p.m., an F3 tornado with a 3-mile-long path in Concordia Parish caused\nsix injuries.\nAlabama\nMuch of the state experienced severe weather between 3:30 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. on\nSunday, November 22. There were nine confirmed tornadoes, 43 injuries, and\nseveral hundred buildings destroyed or damaged.\nThe first tornado (F2) hit around 3:30 a.m. in Sumter County leaving a 6-mile\npath from 2 miles north of Geigor to Panola. Also, about 3:30 a.m., an F2 tornado\nwith only a 2-mile path south of Ethelsville in Pickens County destroyed six\nmobile homes injuring seven people.\nFive separate tornadoes affected De Kalb County between 8:00 a.m. and 8:50 a.m.\nThree of the storms were strong (F2). One of the strong tornadoes touched down\nnear Sardis City in northern Etowah County at 8:15 a.m. and tracked northeast\ninto De Kalb County. Combined, the storms produced 25 injuries, destroyed 17\nhomes, and damaged 133 others.\nAn F1 tornado swept across northeast Tallapoosa County into extreme southwest\nRandolph County. The narrow track extended 17 miles from the Horseshoe Bend\nNational Military Park to the Wadley vicinity. Most of the damage occurred in\nWadley in Randolph County where mobile home damage left five injuries. Three\nhomes were destroyed and 40 damaged. Also, 29 businesses were destroyed or\ndamaged.\nTennessee\nAn F1 scale tornado (path 15 miles long) first touched down north of Van Buren in\nHardeman County around 3:50 a.m. Sunday, November 22. It lifted but touched\ndown two more times (just northwest of Bolivar around 4:00 a.m. and near Toone\nat 4:15 a.m.). Near Toone, the storm overturned a mobile home, pinning and\nsmothering an 11-year-old boy under a waterbed. Some 30 homes were damaged\nor destroyed. There were four injuries.\nIndiana\nFifteen tornadoes made a path through Indiana on November 22, the largest\nNovember tornado outbreak on record. Six injuries and about $12 million damage\noccurred.\nThe largest tornado started in Putnam County at 2:50 p.m. and moved north-\nnortheast into Montgomery County before lifting about 3:20 p.m. The tornado was\n22","close to 1/2 mile wide in northern Putnam County and was on the ground for\nabout 12 miles. Numerous homes were damaged and two mobile homes were\ndestroyed. There was one injury and $2 million in damage. The greatest damage\noccurred in eastern Indianapolis (Marion County) between 3:45 p.m. and 4:04 p.m.\nAn F3 tornado destroyed 20 homes and damaged several hundred more inside the\nbeltway. Property damage was estimated at $4 million. The tornado was on the\nground for 9 miles.\nThe killer tornado from Kentucky briefly crossed into Switzerland County,\nIndiana, at 5:05 p.m., injuring one person and damaging more than 40 residences\nbefore moving back into Kentucky.\nThe longest tornado in Indiana started in Union County about 5:35 p.m. before\nmoving into Wayne County and then into the state of Ohio at 6:00 p.m. This F2\ntornado destroyed several barns and blew the roofs off numerous houses. This\ntornado tracked for 12 miles in Indiana, and then 21 miles in Ohio.\nOhio\nTwo tornadoes occurred in Ohio. There were no deaths; however, 21 were injured\nwhen a strong tornado struck western Ohio.\nIn Preble and Darke Counties, a tornado with a 20-mile path touched down about\n6:00 p.m.; this tornado started in Wayne County, Indiana. The strong (F2/F3)\nstorm, which lasted 28 minutes, destroyed a house and caused 21 injuries and $5\nmillion in property damage. More than 150 homes and businesses suffered\nvarying degrees of damage.\nSouth Carolina\nFour tornadoes crossed South Carolina during the early night hours of Sunday\nNov. 22. One person was killed and nine injured. Damage estimates totalled\n$5 million.\nTwo of the tornadoes moved across Saluda County resulting in the one death and\neight injuries. Nine mobile homes, 14 residences and five businesses were\ndestroyed.\nVirginia/Maryland\nFour tornadoes touched down during the early morning hours of November 23 in\nVirginia and Maryland, producing an estimated $2 million in damage.\nThree Virginia counties suffered tornado damage during the early hours of\nMonday, November 23. There were no deaths or injuries.\nIn Maryland, at 3:00 a.m. November 23, a brief F1 tornado did $1.5 million\ndamage to the Smithsonian's Garber facility for the Air and Space Museum\n23","located in Silver Hill, 5 miles east of the District of Columbia, in Prince Georges\nCounty.\nFINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nFinding 1.1: The deadly and destructive tornado outbreak which struck the\nUnited States November 21-23, 1992, was unusually intense and one of the most\nwidespread for November (94 tornadoes). The 26 fatalities associated with the\nstorms were the most since the Plainfield, IL, tornadoes in 1990 in which 29\npeople died.\nFinding 1.2: Fourteen of the tornado deaths, or 54 percent, occurred in mobile\nhomes.\nRecommendation 1.2: Continued emphasis is needed to stress the importance of\nthe availability of shelters in mobile home parks and the actions to be taken by\nthose in harms way.\n24","CHAPTER 2\nMETEOROLOGICAL ANALYSIS\nSynoptic Scale Meteorological Analysis\nThe synoptic (large-scale) meteorological environment across much of the southern\nand eastern United States during November 21-23, 1992, was characterized by\nthermodynamic and wind profiles suggestive of severe thunderstorms and\ntornadoes. Strong, southerly, low-level flow transported unseasonably warm and\nmoist air northward in advance of a strong upper-air low center that tracked from\nthe southern Great Plains on the 21st into the Ohio Valley on the 23rd. The\nwarm moist air served to lower stability and increase Convectively Available\nPotential Energy (CAPE) values throughout the warm sector of the associated\nsurface system. A strong veering wind profile was also prevalent throughout the\nwarm sector resulting in high values of storm relative helicity and an environment\nfavorable for supercell thunderstorms.\nInitial Conditions\nExamination of the 500 mb (millibar) analysis at 1200 UTC November 21, 1992\n(Fig. 6) found a strong closed low centered over southeast New Mexico.\nTemperatures were extremely cold, with -31C (degrees Celsius) observed at El\nPaso (ELP). A jet (wind maximum) greater than 80 knots was present to the\nsouthwest of the low, curving from western Arizona across northern Mexico into\nsouthern Texas. The 300 mb jet (not shown) associated with the low was nearly\n100 kts.\nIn the lower levels of the atmosphere, the 850 mb analysis (Fig. 7) indicated a\ndeveloping low center over west Texas. Southerly flow east of the 850 mb low was\nadvecting warm, moist air from the Gulf of Mexico northward into the southern\nand eastern United States. The moisture was initially deepest east of the\nMississippi River, but a low level jet (50 kts at Brownsville, Texas) was acting to\nincrease moisture values along the Texas Gulf Coast as well.\nThe 1200 UTC surface analysis (Fig. 8) depicted a complex pattern of low pressure\nover west Texas. A weak, developing cold front from San Angelo south into\nMexico separated moist air in central and east Texas from much drier air across\nsouthwest Texas and New Mexico. Warm, moist air with dewpoint temperatures\nin the upper 60sF (degrees Fahrenheit) was spreading north along the Gulf Coast.\n25","000\n546\n-27,544\n325\n525\n-33.533\n552\n534\n543\n-07\n557\n530\n558\n2*+04\n562\n-26,539\n-18,552\n0264\n€20\n-29.5430\n541540\n$19,567\n119-02\n®\nTo\n-20.537\n-23 541\n$570\n26 - 10\n920\n1-08\n15.564mg\n17.572\n548\n69+02\n546\n5'6'4\n12.22.544\n515\nCSD5\n-29.550\n12.573\n122.550\n582\n5215\nW15.563\n1532\nx of\n-13.582\n159+02\n570\n40\n575\n190\n-23.553\n15.566\n10'\n-18.560\n24-554\n\\\n1-1-01\n11 704\n-13 570\n-26,554\n576\nFILS\n559\n-23.555\n12,586\n16.565\n13°-06)\n19901\n18\"+00\n-24,553\n5°+08\n12 582\n3+02\nXI+01\n+06\n587\n-21,556\n5,563\n582\n-16.574\n16 568\n+12\n-24-555\n22+01\n139-(-13,572\n1\n*+08\n-02\n-24_554\n19.561\n,170\n552825\n14566\n-13.576\n-19,558\n12.576\n22 552\n-25.548\n8+01\n3 +03\n588\n10.575\n10-580\n-11.584\nX1+00\n-13,566\n12.+00\nEINO\n-19.558\nC10\n210\n®\n121558\n2.58209.9\n89+03\n50 00\n559\n920\n12Z21\n-10'586\nLFM.\n587\n558\n11/+01\n588\n515\n564\n570\n2110\n510\n576\n01+07\n7.5865\nDATA CUT OFF\n100\n120\nUTIQ 579\n500MB 200TFAX NH2002 582\n-07.583\n11/21/92\n1118\nGUESS USED-FINL CODE 1\n-08.584\nUS DEPT_OF COMMERCE\nA\n500MB ANALYSIS HEIGHTS/TEMPERAURE 12Z SAT 21 NOV 92\nNOAA/NWS/NMC WASHINGTON\nV437\nFigure 6. 500 mb analysis valid 1200 UTC, November 21, 1992.\nTV\nTHAT\n+0\n147\n40+00\n5\n147\n455\n29-0)\n-11_457\nP10\n9-04-\n150\n905\n1240\n153\n04_390\n06-531\n-05-391\n144\n-06-441\n-01 200\n-107-03-44\n-03-560\n®\nGOOL\n400\n09.392\nFOIS\n0 - 04\n122\n433\npous.487\n102.562\n2/-07\n03\n005\n1417\n10\n04.585\n400\n09/561 168-01\n¥05\n-02-475\n187\nDIO\n69-04\n-01-489\n10 +02\n11.521\n135\n144\n457\nUPA\n14-05\n1-09\n-07\\40'9\n06.357\n+02\n40\n593\n1-01\n162\n1747\n10'517\n02.489\n-03_518\n03.492\n.030\n16 +00\n11+04\n115'O\n-01.513\n479\nCHIO\n+05\n07-420\n-03\n532\n1434\n5 +00\n153\n-05/468\n9+04\n-03/515\n@\n11+05\n4 +05 150\n9.578\n29-02\n081522\n5-89-536\n02_495\n021426\n+05\n*00\n09 469\n159\n1156\n1,401,492\n147\n-03.443\n06.437\n1-02_5221\n07.507\n446\n051415\n+04\n46488881\n12_499\n90.\n413\n50+\n12.536\n2403\nR\n11+01\n10*\n+05\n115%\n57\n482\n13-523\ni+03\n07\n5/+00\n14,551\n07.406\n0 +00\n01.462\n2 +00\n429\n98+01\n144139406\nXXJ\n14 455\n65%\nX-+0\n139\n85 00\n16_392\n1012221\nCHO\nCIAS\n-02\nLFM..\n16,537\n6'01\n421\n030\n030\n10\n030\n153\n10\n10\n4385\n20.40\n147\n153\n01+07\n100\nDATA CUT\nOFF\n6,5145\n120\nD20\n121483\n030\n10\nQHS\n11/21/92 12Z 850MB 2DOTFAX NH2002\n490\nCLOCK\nTIME\nGUESS USED-FINL CODE 1\n15.503\n850MB ANALYSIS HEIGHTS/TEMPERATYURE 12Z SAT 21 NOV 92\nUS DEPT OF COMMERCE\nV435\nV\nNOAA/NWS/NMC WASHINGTON\nFigure 7. 850 mb analysis valid 1200 UTC, November 21, 1992.\n26","30\n23069\n23\n25\n28\n20\n215\n20\n**208\n20\n29.189\n18.11\n2207\n23\n16270311)\n712 18 20\n203\n17014\\\n286280\n30\n299183\n2015\n095\n20020\n29.195.\n20171\n20101\n1902\n22,\n30 200\n21\n20%\n27\n24144\n213\n***\n25.192\n22\n38\n206\n051\n(75)\n2820\n010\n086\n12807\n27\n330\n24219\n30\n29 215\n176\n2302\\\n45-089\n28VT\n134\n228\n29\n010\n(325)\nDOA\n010\n078\n31\n38\n234\n1292\n-180305\n298\n33010036\n295\n26\n29186\n991)\n3-53-181\n40\n217\n32.7\n32/225\n33188\n29\n*) &\n28.12>\n235\n29.211\n235\n270\n08\n28\n008\n20\n215\n57127\n201\n(19)\n265\n30\n188\n*10206\n125\n59\n5225900-\n.01\n24\n57/250\n125\n172\n100\n34190\n28\nA50\n27-\n25177\n***185\n153\n68\n32\n30\n380122\n12\n42137\n0\n125\n689\n270176\n40 147\n5317\n9122)\n39\n32\n280161\n34\n4302\n') 113\n530\n485\n130\n38118\n50\n26\nF0186\n56100\n50\n+012\n36\n181\n60\n30\n1131\n57100\n34088\n58\n175\nENT\n=0107\n180\n6803\n34\n41\n60\n60.9156\n3028)\n103\n5807\n64\n'joi's\n38\n63.10.\n625\n02\n090\n1464-156\n082\n126\n50 035\n61.123\n59101\n44\n69\n660\n210127\n58\n56089\n64108\n40.044\n30\n716158\n60\n70\n57\n590099\n62\n153\n33\n70\n24\nPHY\n56064\n59502\n60\n78\nHe\n740\n1060\n6700360\n017)\n65\n198031\n039\n(0804\n021\n75\n029\n71019\n12Z SAT 21 NOV 1992\nDATA+34 RW2\nFigure 8. Surface analysis valid 1200 UTC, November 21, 1992.\n27","Synoptic Evolution of the Event\nThe system lifted northeastward over the following 48 hours producing a large\narea favorable for the formation of severe thunderstorms and tornadoes. The\nprimary factors contributing to the widespread and intense nature of the outbreak\nincluded:\n1. Strong vertically veering wind fields in the warm sector\nresulting in large values of storm relative helicity (at\ntimes exceeding 500 m²/s2 in the lowest 3 km). Values of\n150 m²/s2 or more are considered sufficient for mesocyclone\nformation.\n2. Advection of temperature and moisture in association\nwith the synoptic-scale system increased CAPE and created a\nthermodynamic profile capable of supporting convection.\n3. The presence of mesoscale boundaries (e.g. cold front, warm\nfront, outflow boundaries) which aided in convective\ninitiation.\nThe closed 500 mb low tracked northeast from west Texas at 0000 UTC on the\n22nd (Fig. 9) to the eastern Great Lakes at 1200 UTC on the 23rd (Fig. 10).\nThe low remained closed with a minimum height of 5450 gpm (geopotential\nmeters) until it opened into a trough by 1200 UTC on the 23rd.\nThe corresponding 850 mb low followed a similar track (Figs. 11, 12). The\nmajority of the severe weather occurred near the 850 mb jet which shifted from\nthe Texas Gulf Coast into Louisiana and Mississippi by 0000 UTC on the 22nd.\nMaximum wind speeds of 50 kts or more were associated with the jet. The jet\ncontinued its eastward progression to extend from Georgia to Ohio at\n0000 UTC on the 23rd, then along the Atlantic Coast from South Carolina to\nMassachusetts at 1200 UTC on the 23rd.\nThe surface system (Figs. 13, 14, 15) increased in strength as it too tracked\nnortheast. Surface dew points greater than 65F were advected by southeast winds\nfrom the Gulf into the warm sector east of the surface low and cold front. A\nweaker system that passed through the Great Lakes Region on the 21st left a\nweak frontal boundary in its wake. This front extended from north Texas into\nMichigan at 0000 UTC on the 22nd, then shifted northward as a warm front after\n1200 UTC. The majority of the severe weather occurred with thunderstorms that\ndeveloped in the warm sector of the surface system. Numerous tornadoes were\nassociated with isolated supercell thunderstorms which formed in advance of the\nrapidly moving frontal squall line.\n28","35 528\n10\n-30.534\n®\n80\n117-09\n-23 540\n538\n-20-54\n1120-04\n552\n564\n534\n-23.537\n-16,568\n1540\n9.536\n190\n920\n570\n.539\n520\n530\n-16.556\n-15.571\n546\n-515\n145576\n3.700\n576\n550\n++00\nN-20 551\n16,569\n122.548\n00\nSTATES\n-23.553\n-13 5793812\n582\n16,562\n148.559\n11-01\n558\n13°+00\n-17.55\n139+01\n-20_558\n-18_562\n^180\n16.562\n-23 556\n-13.574\n-13.584\n12 +03\n10.160\n157-02\n-13.581\n588\n588\nY-16,571\n-17 561 12 +05\n15 570\n-13.573\n-21_558\n17,570\n-16.562\n-11_580 -11,583\n-18.573\n-19.556\n-14.567\n21 554\n-22.560\n69-02\n11,579\n-11_582\n14 +1'3\n3°+0\n18++33\n15.575\n310\n111++01\n10-582\n12 574\n-11.585\n1664\n-11,568\n@-23-547\n-22.552\n179-11\n- 99 585 08 555\n588\n/128717\n10 (004)\n18.00.69-01\n50 00\n910\n00222\nLFM..\n10.586\n520\n16 +00\nF115\n-10.578\n16 +00\n576\ne10\n100\nDATA,CUT OFF 01+14\n120\n11/22/92 00Z 500MB 200TFAX NH2002 582\nCLOCK\nTIME\nGUESS USED-FINL CODE 1\n587\n-08-585\n38 +01\n583\nV037 500MB ANALYSIS HEIGHTS/TEMPEFATURE 007 SUN 22 NOV 92\nUS DEPT COMMERCE\nFigure 9. 500 mb analysis valid at 0000 UTC, November 22.\nVoo\n30.535\n20\n8,\n10 +07\n1.531,\n30.537\n28.558\n540\n+01-\nE30\n-261554\n546\n9°+10\n21.546\n-32.542\n-26_539\n90709\n14,562\n4-21-560\n10 +09\n421.548\n4 - 02\n552\n89+02\n25\n-26_553\n14.56134\n2,567\n558\n19,550\n29-05\n15\n-31.545\n541\n11°+05\n-31-5410-8 +00\n564\n-20.551\n553\n570\n-21.558\n-21_544\n-19.551\n++66\n2/-01\n-18.553\nXI+O.\n6 +00\n570\n59-08\n-19.550\n551\n201560\n1544\n-22.545\n5'+00\n++02\n576\n576\n9.542\n-17.554\n261550\n-16,554\nX +10\n-15.561/\nx of\n2.579\n-19_548\n'129+04\n311541\n18°-03\n3°-05\n11.573,\n-32.544\n-24_545\n-16.555\n582\n540\n37-07\n582\nx++3\n-14 562\n\"10\n-19.552\n16_560\n-09 581\n-26,551\n6-06\n-10,575\n4-+05\n19901\n20\n-15/565\n546\n-19.556\n.11 +01\n17.551\n20-04\n-12.573\n-09.58\n-22.550\n16 +03\n12-02\n588\n10\n-16,566\n12,578\n-10-580\ni°+03\nXP-02.\n552\n-16 566\n-07.584\nWitoo\n-18,560\nx-02\n20_555\n-17_559\n-08\n-18.557\n129700\n+07 584 08 586\n4-03\n-13.573\n17-01-8401\n588\n12-+00\n558\n50 00\n-17.569\n12Z23\n116th-05\nLFM..\n-06.585\n-20,564\n80-02\n10-04\n564\n-13.574\n9-04\n-15\n570\nDATA CUT OFF 01+11\n100\n120\n58\nF05\nENTO:\n576\n11/23/92\n12Z 500MB 200TFAX NH2002\n-\n09.577\nCLOCK TIME 1328\n14°\nGUESS USED-FINL CODE\n-08,582\n60-01\nUS DEPT_OF COMMERCE\n500MB ANALYSIS HEIGHTS/TEMPERATURE 12Z MON 23 NOV 92\nV437\nNOAA/NWS/NMC WASHINGTON\nFigure 10. 500 mb analysis valid at 1200 UTC, November 23.\n29","110\n152\n11:107\n-10\n-11.369\n386\n409\n08-388\n-09-418\n1144\n1-05\nDOO\n0374441417\n294\n06\n4.292\n100\n-07-4020\n-02.342\n0109\n02.233\n1-09\nLands\n11\n.030-\n-11,393\n00\n1336\n00500\n09/00\n22\n06-5063\n0000\n125\n03.315\n138\n030\nWOO.299\n1030\n400\n22*LV\nF07.425\n22\n10.03.3905\n405\n3 +03\n030\n436\n38711\nM0003\n005\n12/09\n-07-450\n030\nULOS 343\n-04-443\n4-01-4141\n-01\n-09\n10.562\n170+03\n11-+06\n1862\n144\n9-03\n030\n09\n504\n07.471\n04.458\n030\nO100\n477\n19+02\n030\n-06\n08.490\n06 472\n04\n05_462\n-02.461\n01\n10.504\n484\n4 +04\n65.580\n19+03\n-051482\n559\n1030\n1 +01\n030\n19-02\n22\n22\n00.514\n0450\n-01-498\n030\n07.520\n030\n4827\n+00\n900\n94011,493\n030\n05.466\n+00\n030\n451\n12_521 12_559\n22'\n04,515\n030\n19-01\n101513\n13.439\n030\n1030\n-06\n04.39\n179-0\n22'\n14.498\n15.526\n1456\n081498\n04/450\n05.489.\n11+00\n19-01\n22\n15°+0.\n030\n0408\n141472\n08.512\n4-519\n11-01\n10 477\n1900\n15.548\nxxt02\n-1.400\n03 385\n2115\n06.484\n-031445\n831-02\n6.53614.53\n16°LV\n06.500\n59-07\n1*+05\n148+07\n15435\n29-02\n85 00\n2015-08-444\n00Z22\n15\"532\n188+05\nLFM..\n1-01\n13_434\n14 +01\nKINO\n030\n030\n151450\n030\nDTIS\n22\n(030\n++02\n030\n0185\n22\n120\n01+14\nCUT DFF\nDATA\n100\n030\n030\n030\n120\n22\n22\n025\n148\n030\n+20\n1/22/92 00Z 850MB 200TFAX NH2002\n030\nCLOCK\nTIME\n129\n22\nGUESS USED-FINL CODE 1\n466\n17,496\nUS DEPT COMMERCE\nFigure 11. 850 mb analysis valid at 0000 UTC, November 22.\n123\n-07 372\n<10\nTO\n-11.403\n126\n481\n9401\n-09-385\n-05\n-13.425\n(41\n129\n+03\n-10\nCO\n132\n-08-491\n141\n00\n005\n407\n-08-408\n08_459\n-09-4221\n04.494\n180+101\n15°+05\n135\n143\n061404\n1\n-07.419\n[10\n40\n07-04\n16150\n401\n\"10\n500\n01'380\n09-391\n138\n1149\n05-409\n01.384.\n141\n-04.467\n144\n404,\n5x+08\n-10 4714\n010\n.\n02_490\n+00\n.363,\n144\n150\n60+\n144\n41+03\n-01_399\n-02.382\n+0\n18 +02\n147\n05\n-03-488\n-021438\n-01.379\n04.378\n2-++02\n-04-386\n12702\n/147\n+05\n01403\n00\n150\n+07\n01 483\n-01_372\n00.389\n++66\n00-401\n021414\nX++02\n495\n00049+00\n1,+02\n21-03\n015\n14.445\n04:470\n01 440\n01.362\n02.389\n169+00\n1+01\n02.384\n153\nW+03\n00 407\n71+01\n01335\n02.450\n04_413\n-03\n15.505\n14/04\n®\n18.+04\n08.44\n-01\n105.446\n06.428\n-06-395\n1339\n6 +06\n05.388\n129+00\n11.452\n15\n13.492\n80-04\nR-03\n20 +02\n05/438\n10-453\n3--02\n08 439\n15_524\n141\n08.422\n99,\n422\n14\"+02\n017h39\n,11-01\n411-\n115 51416 524\n12 460\n015\n85.00\n12.426\n12223\n177-02\n14409\n433\nLFM..\n16.521\n10,448\n1-0\nC/P\n153\n99-02\n11.457\n79-02\n015\n100\nDATA CUT OFF 01+11\nD15\n147\n1:50\n11/23/92 12Z 850MB 200TFAX NH2002\n020\nCLOCK\nTIME\n483\nGUESS USED-FINL CODE 1\n479\n9+03\nV435\n850MB ANALYSIS HEIGHTS/TEMPERATURE 127 MON 23 NOV 92\nv\nUS DEPT OF COMMERCE\nFigure 12. 850 mb analysis valid at 1200 UTC, November 23.\n30","24\n188\n29\n166\n28,018\nXX000\n164\n35-983\n3016\n391048\n30\n25172\n19170\nXX44\n998\n21\n000\n160.\n167\n**181\nQ13\\\n2009/\n133\n42\n32 166\n20030\n18\n23180\n070\n28\n163\n260180\n***20\n18\n109\n(085)\n186\n28\n30\n27-186\n189\n27\n-01\n26\n076\n197\n201\n28\n**\n149\n210\n192\n173\n33\n35\n30\n16\n197\n166\n208\n10603\n33\n33\n25\n29210\n240\n61\n87.10\n30\n(079)\n215\n35 216\n210\n12/\n51.2008\n33.3^\n302\n29-202\n31223\n52015\n30\n50\n25.15\n194\n58\n200\n33\n204\n25\n22\n193\n206\n10904\n20\n34.0%\n166\n24\n524156\n30208 29\n38\n10 174\n53208\n5900\n223\n50\n188\n34\n185\n6160\n-29\n33 210\n40\n180\n391111\n625\n60144\n70\n4401\n36181\n60\n203\n10\n30186\n280215\n59\n27\n-01\n11)\n21 2213\n16\n30\n6302\n113\n11-0-\n30\n61\n28176\n32161\n-01\nXXO7A\n0094\n167\n08-55-081\n61.072\n109\n58\n670\n65125\n67/156\n6105\n20\n29252\n35\n34\nXX 14\n160\n630081\n29068\n29\n50\n28\n59102\n33\n0091\n339\n04\n161\n***128\n30\n10\\\n66\n1340\n071\n70\n6903\n2070\n059\n37176\n68\n70\nC048\n162\n2020\n72\n57030\n691155\n0130\n2107\n33080\n290\n72081\n051\n680101\n140\n38\n109\n-01\n53066\n05\n142\n35\nQ96\n63.0.1\n450\n100\n10702\n0804\n73\n080\n58\n68.062\n00Z SUN 22 NOV 1992\n015\n33\nOAR\nDATA+34 RW2\n-089\n95\n06.\nFigure 13. Surface analysis valid at 0000 UTC, November 22.\n61024\n60 055\n31","18~1\n074\n28\n121\n40\n25\n21169\n200\n41 004\n099\n400:03\n2800\n133\n20026\n29001\n250119\n158\n21\n055\n25\n197\n093\n195\n41130\n45128\n⑉9042\n27131\n26178\n34.17\n29\n27.151\n40\n159\n26438\n230\n490\n18\n2403\n168\n094\n3160\n016\n21\n360\n36\n32\n10903\n5001\n32\n32\n32\nTROOTA\n29.\n3305\n29\n10169\n150\n120 30 1991\n280\n10\\\n30\n26029 >22\n26.072\n49\n059\n29\n22 110\n166)\n19\n085\n180301\n46095\n14027\n39\n49\n29\n31\n11\n18093\n120\n087\n160m\n29.36^\n097\n68204\n122\n16\n43\nE-1199\n181\n60\n48\n03060\n101\n580z\n64621\n29/134\n706180\n57\n050\n13\n10 116\n34\n2\n400\n27/12\n100142\n33 090\n\"\n38000\n2941\n182\n315\n160133\n27\n972\n021\n4515\n131\n123\nE\n600080\n10\n137\n32\n35\n143\n130\n70\n59\n680080\n@20)\n140\n66605\n47.17\n63083\n133\n39\n43014\n054\n(68)\n64\n073\n08\n52 076\n110\n43.094\n59\n3001230149\n4208\n137\n@\n14\n420093\n506\n'63\n020\n71\n450)\n155\n133\n78\n017\n10604\n10502\n46019\n10\n10602\n10705\n16\n10604\n36\n122 SUN 22 NOV 1992\n81 139\nDATA+33 RW2\nFigure 14. Surface analysis valid at 1200 UTC, November 22.\n16\n92\n100\n32","105\nI\n29\n173\n28\n3009\n35\n3301\n30\n27169\n38\n49)\n18\n16\n35\n20\n33\n25\n106\n12\n390\n097\n33\n336\n28\n35075\n31\n28.089\n024\n30.08\n018\n600378\n065\n29\n083\n30\n3200\n082\n,015\n6600V\n9062\n69-6\n0405\n083\n8600\n63\n066\n500200\n53-61\n630\n037\n68\n48.070\n107\n408\n49\n36.105\n6803\n202\n(11)\n50022\n113\n160-00\n12v\n109\n082\n10602\n12\n10802\n420\n60\n00Z MON 23\nFigure 15. Surface analysis valid 33 at 0000 UTC, November\n34\nNOV\n1992\nDATA+37\nRW2\n615141\n95\n23.","Mesoscale Analysis by Surveyed Location\nTexas\nInitially, low-level moisture appeared to be a possible limiting factor for severe\nconvection with 1200 UTC rawinsonde observations (RAOB) at Corpus Christi,\nTexas (CRP) and Lake Charles, Louisiana (LCH) indicating relatively dry air at\n850 mb and surface dew points in the upper 50sF. The CRP RAOB (Fig. 16a)\nshowed moisture present just below 850 mb, and the 50 kt 850 mb wind at\nBrownsville, Texas, indicated substantial moisture advection was occurring.\nAn examination of the CRP RAOB using the SHARP (Skew-T/Hodograph Analysis\nand Research Program) found a highly sheared environment (east winds at the\nsurface turned toward the southwest and increased in speed). Storm relative\nhelicity (Fig. 16b), a measure of low-level wind shear and mesocyclone potential,\nwas 455 m²/s2 below 3 km. Storm relative helicity values greater than 450 m²/s2\nare often associated with strong or violent tornadoes.\nOther measures of severe weather potential were less favorable. The CRP CAPE\nof 1058 J/kg (Joules per kilogram) and Lifted Index of -3C were modest, and both\nwere below values commonly associated with severe weather.\nWSO Houston forecasters correctly anticipated that sufficient moisture would be\navailable by the time the surface front over central Texas arrived during the early\nafternoon. They also expected the strong shear over Corpus Christi at 1200 UTC\nwould also be present at Houston. Because of the effective anticipation of the\nthreat, the staff at Houston was increased well ahead of the event. Identification\nof the potential threat also allowed the issuance of statements highlighting the\ndanger hours before it occurred.\nHouston forecasters continued to monitor the evolving mesoscale environment into\nthe afternoon. Moisture increased rapidly with the surface dew point at Palacios\n(PSX), Texas, rising to 70F at 1800 UTC. ADAP (AFOS Data Analysis and\nPrograms) products were examined and indicated rapidly increasing moisture\nconvergence along the frontal boundary. The 1200 UTC CRP RAOB was modified\nwith SHARP using surface data at Houston and low-level winds from the Houston\nWSR-88D (Weather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler) VAD (Velocity Azimuth\nDisplay) wind profile (note that the location of the WSR-88D associated with the\nHouston office is referred to with call letters HGX). By 2200 UTC (toward the end\nof the event) the modified storm relative helicity analysis (Fig. 17b) indicated a\nvalue of 446 m²/s².\n34","10\nCRP / 11/21/92\n/\n122\nLI\n-3\nOBSERVED\nTT\n39\nTEI\n21.2\nK\n-3\nSMEAT\n305\nCAP\n4.5\n86\nCURSOR DATA\n994ab\n72m\n236'\n0=294 Is= 68F\n20\n15.7\nWC\n20.70\n69F\n86\nRAOB DATA\nP\n1000\n30\nI\n19.6\nTd\n18.6\n72\nTdd\n1.0\nWind\n115/11\n40\n59-\nPARCEL DATA\n(a)\n50\nB+\n1058\n43\nB\n151\nLPL\n977ab\n32\nEL\n39600ft\nMPI 46700ft\n70\n32\nLCL.\n1437ft\n46\nFZL\n13455ft\n85\nWBZ.\n8538ft\n32\n100\n10\nPM\n1.02in\n105\n-20\n-10\n0\n10\n20\n30\n40\n50\nRIGHT BUTTON\nLEFT-EDIT LEVEL\nRIGHT-RE-DRAN CHART\nFOR MENU\nCRP / 11/21/92 / 122\nMean Wind\nOBSERVED\n180\n0-3km.. 179/30\n0-6km.. 203/300\n090\n270\nPositive Shear\n64\n360\n0-2km 8.3\n0-3km.. 5.2\nSR Helicity\n0-2km\n448\n0-3km. 455\n48\nStore Motion\n233/ 23+\nCURSOR DATA\n233/ 23kts\n0-3km\n(b)\nSR Helicity\n32\n455(M/S)\nHELICITY\nPOS\nneg\n0-1km\n372\n0\n0-2km\n448\n0\n16\n0-3km. 455\nSHEAR\nPOS\nneg\n0-1km. 28.5\n0.0\n0-2km. 8.3\n0.0\n0-3km. 5.2\n0.0\n16\n16\n32\n48\n64\n80\nSTREAM VORTICITY\n0-1km\n226.8\nSFC - 7000 A\n0-2km\n21.4\n0-3km\n12.1\nLEFT - EDIT MOTION\nRIGHT - RE-DRAW\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENU\nFigure 16. The Corpus Christi (CRP), Texas, RAOB (a) and storm relative helicity\n(b) produced by the SHARP program and valid at 1200 UTC, November 21, 1992.\n35","HGX / 11/21/92\n/\n222\n10\nMODIFIED\nLI\n-3\nII\n39\nTEI\n21.2\nK\n-3\nSMEAT\n298\n86\nCAP\n4.8\nCURSOR DATA\n986ab\n140m\n459'\n0=294\nIs=\n69F\n20\n15.3\nW=\n20.10\n68F\n86\nRAOB DATA\nP\n1000\n30\n19.6\nT\n72\n18.6\nTd\nTdd\n1.0\n104/17\nWind\n40\n59\n(a)\nPARCEL DATA\n50\n64\nB+\n850\nB\n174\n59\nLPL 950ab\nEL. 38900ft\n51\nMPL. 45500ft\n70\n31\nLCL. 2099ft\nFZL.. 13455ft\n85\n22\nMBZ.. 8538ft\n16\n100\nPW... 1.02in\n105\n50\n30\n40\n10\n20\n-20\n-10\n0\nRIGHT-RE-DRAM CHART\nLEFT-EDIT LEVEL\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENU\nHGX / 11/21/92 / 222\n180\nMODIFIED\nMean Wind\n0-3km. 172/31\n090\n270\n0-6ka.. 201/380\n360\nPositive Shear\n64\n0-2km.. 18.4\n0-3km.. 11.5\nSR Helicity\n0-2km. 290\n0-3km. 446\n48\nStore Motion\n203/ 26e\nCURSOR DATA\no\n202/ 26kts\n(b)\n0-3km\n32\nSR Helicity\n443(M/S)*\nHELICITY\npos neg\n0-1km\n116\n0\n0-2km. 290\n16\n0-3km. 446\nSHEAR\nPOS\nneg\n0-1km.12.6\n0.0\n0-2km.18.4\n0.0\n0-3km.11.5\n0.0\n64\n80\n16\n32\n48\n16\nSTREAM VORTICITY\nSFC - 7000 A\n0-1km\n56.5\n0-2km\n186.8\n0-3km\n73.5\nRIGHT - RE-DRAM\nLEFT - EDIT MOTION\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENU\nFigure 17. The same as Fig. 16 except for Houston (HGX), Texas, valid at 2200 UTC,\nNovember 21.\n36","When the storms affected the Houston metropolitan area, the surface wind\nremained from the east and enhanced storm relative helicity values and the\npotential for mesocyclones in the Houston area.\nActive mesoanalysis prior to the tornado episode contributed greatly to the overall\nreadiness of the Houston staff. It also primed the staff for expected developments\nconfirmed by the WSR-88D radar.\nMississippi\nBy 0000 UTC on November 22nd, an intense squall line had become well-\nestablished in the warm sector across the lower Mississippi Valley. Supercell\nthunderstorms were present in advance of the squall line with several reports of\ntornadoes in Louisiana during the evening. Reports of tornadoes and other severe\nweather continued as the squall line advanced to Mississippi during the late\nevening.\nForecasters at WSFO Jackson (JAN) examined a variety of meteorological data\nthroughout the day and evening shifts on the 21st. In addition to hand analyses\nof upper-air and hourly surface analyses, ADAP, SHARP, numerical model\nguidance, and satellite imagery were utilized to support forecast and warning\noperations. Forecasters correctly interpreted the available data to conclude that\nsevere thunderstorms, including tornadoes, were likely during the late night and\nearly morning hours of the 21st and 22nd.\nAnalysis of the Jackson, Mississippi, November 22, 0000 UTC RAOB (Fig. 18)\nusing SHARP revealed a storm relative helicity value of 160 m²/s2 and a CAPE of\n602 J/kg. Although CAPE values were not impressive, storm relative helicity\nvalues were sufficient to support mesocyclone formation.\nHowever, CAPE values increased dramatically by late evening as strong,\nsoutheast, low-level winds advected increasingly moist air into Mississippi. Post-\nevent analysis of the JAN sounding, modified to reflect an increase in surface\ndewpoints to better represent the storm environment near the time of the\nstrongest tornadoes, indicated an increase in CAPE to nearly 1900 J/kg by 0600\nUTC. Although no profiler or RAOB data were available at 0600 UTC across\ncentral or southern Mississippi, it is likely that helicity values increased also as\nthe low-level jet intensified east of the approaching squall line.\nGeorgia\nSupercell thunderstorms persisted in advance of the frontal squall line as it\ntracked rapidly eastward during the morning hours on November 23rd.\n37","JAN / 11/22/92\n/\n00Z\n10\nMODIFIED\n-1\nLI\n47\nTT\nSWI\n-1\n31\nK\nSWEAT\n341\n2.2\nCAP\nCURSOR DATA\n1002mb\n-999M\n-999ft\n20\n18\n4 0=296\nU=\n23.4C\n74F\nRAOB DATA\n998\n30\nP\n23.2\nTd\n17.2\n52\n6,0\nTdd\nWind 140/05\n40\n43\nBUOYANCY\n50\n(a)\n602\nB\n+\n42\nB\n0\n34\nPMAX. 998\n37100ft\nEL\n34\nMPL . 44700ft\n70\n22\nLCL. 2486ft\nFZL .12812ft\n85\n5\nUB2. .10417ft\n100\n50\nPW... 1.33in\n105\n40\n30\n20\n10\n-20\n-10\n0\nRIGHT-RE-DRAU - CHART\nLEFT-EDIT LEVEL\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENU\nJAN / 11/22/92 / 80Z\n180\nMODIFIED\nMean Wind\n270\n090\n0-3km. 180/25\n0-6km.. 195/29\n360\n48\nPositive Shear\n0-2km.. 7.8\n0-3km.. 5.0\nSR Helicity\n0-2km.. 163\n0-3km. 160\nR\nStorm Motion\n210/ 40\n(b)\nCURSOR DATA\n210/ 40kts\n24\n0-3km\nSR Helicity\n158(M/S)2\nINFLOW\nDir/kt\nAGL(m)\n12\n37/\n38\n0\n55/29\n400\n64/\n26\n900\n76/18\n1400\n91/\n14\n1900\n96/ 17\n2400\n60\n48\n93/ 19\n36\n24\n2900\n12\n12\nMean Inflow\nSFC - 6000 In\n0-2km 58/ 24\n65/ 22\n0-3km\nStreamwise\n58/ 18\n0-2km\nRIGHT - RE-DRAW\n0-3km 65/\n8\nLEFT - EDIT MOTION\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENU\nFigure 18. The same as Fig. 16 except for Jackson (JAN), Mississippi, valid at 0000\nUTC, November 22.\n38","Low-level moisture increased rapidly in advance of the squall line during the\nmorning hours of the 22nd. At 0600 UTC surface dewpoint temperatures ranged\nfrom the middle 50sF across northern sections of Georgia to near 70F across the\nsouth. As the morning progressed, low-level southerly winds strengthened in\nresponse to the approaching squall line and synoptic-scale system allowing the\nmoisture to spread northward and CAPE values to increase. Dewpoint\ntemperatures by 1800 UTC were in the upper 60sF to lower 70sF throughout\nGeorgia. The 1200 UTC Athens, Georgia (AHN) RAOB, modified to reflect surface\nwinds, temperatures and dewpoints east of the squall line at midday, indicated\nstorm relative helicity values of 153 m²/s2 and CAPE values of 2259 J/kg (Fig. 19).\nMidnight-shift forecasters at WSFO Atlanta (ATL) utilized satellite and radar\nimagery to monitor the progress of the severe storms as they marched across\nAlabama early on the 22nd. Forecasters also examined numerical model guidance,\nADAP, SHARP, surface, and upper-air data to assess the severe weather threat.\nBased upon these data and National Severe Storms Forecast Center (NSSFC)\nguidance, WSFO ATL issued statements and forecasts highlighting the severe\nweather threat several hours in advance of the tornado events. The thorough\nanalyses by WSFO ATL forecasters also contributed to their ability to anticipate\nstaffing needs and sensitize them to the potential for tornadoes.\nKentucky\nA second area of severe thunderstorms and tornadoes occurred over the Ohio\nValley in the vicinity of the stationary front across Indiana, Kentucky and Ohio on\nNovember 22nd during the day.\nThe Cincinnati WSO (CVG) was well prepared for the episode. The staff had\nanalyzed the November 22, 1200 UTC Nashville (BNA), Tennessee RAOB using\nSHARP (Fig. 20). Although contaminated by convection, it revealed a CAPE and\nLifted Index similar to those observed by RAOBs at Houston and Jackson. Wind\nshear continued to be the major concern with storm relative helicity from surface\nto 3 km greater than 500 m²/s². They correctly expected a similar wind profile\nover their area of concern by afternoon.\nA warm front was located south of Cincinnati across Kentucky during the\nmorning. The staff expected it to lift north with low level moisture spreading back\nacross their warning area.\nADAP was viewed frequently and in depth, concentrating on moisture convergence\nand Theta-E (Equivalent Potential Temperature) advection fields. The Theta-E\nadvection field, with a ridge extending along the Ohio River from southern\nIndiana to southern Ohio, alerted the staff to anticipate development there. As\nthe moisture convergence maximum shifted from southern Indiana toward\n39","AHN / 11/22/92\n182\n10\nMODIFIED\nLI\n-5\n45\nTT\nSWI\n2\nK\n28\nSWEAT\n286\nCAP\n0.2\nCURSOR DATA\n994\n-999M\n-999ft\n20\n18.8\ne-297\n23.5C\n74F\nRAOB DATA\nP\n984\n30\n22.9\n20.3\nTd\nTdd\n2.6\n54\nWind 150/10\n40\nBUOYANCY\n43\n50\n(a)\nB+\n2259\nB\n0\n-\n37\nPMAX. 984mb\n31\nEL\n42200ft\nMPL.\n-999ft\n70\n32\nLCL..\n1089ft\n31\nF2L. .11336ft\n85\n10\nUBZ . 9781ft\n100\nPU. 1.22in\n105\n50\n20\n30\n40\n0\n10\n-20\n-10\nRIGHT-RE-DRAW CHART\nLEFT-EDIT LEVEL\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENI\nAHN / 11/22/92 / 18%\n180\nMODIFIED\nMean Wind\n0-3km. 195/26\n090\n270\n0-6km.. 203/31\n:\n360\n48\nPositive Shear\n0-2km. 5.2\n0-3km.. 5.5\nSR Helicity\n0-2km.. 150\n0-3km.. 153\n36\nStorm Motion\n230/ 40.\nCURSOR DATA\n238, 40kts\n(b)\n24\n0-3km\nSR Helicity\n153(M/S)2\nINFLOW\n12\nAGL(m)\nDir/kt\n65/ 40\n0\n253\n81/ 30\n753\n101/ 23\n111/ 20\n1253\n1753\n103/ 21\n97/ 21\n2253\n60\n36\n48\n2753\n99/ 18\n24\n12\n12\n24\nMean Inflow\n0-2km.. 87/ 26\nSFC - 6000 M\n0-3km 89/ 24\nStreamwise\n12\n0-2km 87/ 10\n0-3km 89/ 12\nRIGHT - RE-DRAW\nLEFT - EDIT MOTION\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENU\nFigure 19. The same as Fig. 16 except for Athens (AHN), Georgia, valid at\n1800 UTC, November 22.\n40","10\nBNA / 11/22/92\n/\n12Z\nLI\n-2\nOBSERVED\nII\n41\nTE)\n10.4\nK\n28\nSMEAT\n329\nCAP\n1.4\nCURSOR DATA\n986ab\n-999m -999'\n0=292 Is= 6ZF 20\n12.8\nWF\n17.4C\n63F\nRAOB DATA\nP\n983\n30\n76\nT\n17.0\nId\n16.3\nTdd\n0.7\nWind\n140/.0\n75\n40\n(a)\nPARCEL DATA\n50\n75\nB+\n-999\nB\n-999\n64\nLPL.\n912ab\nEL..\n-999ft\n62\nMPL..\n-999ft\n70\n54\nLCL. 2512ft\nFZL\n10506ft\n85\n47\nMBZ..\n9932ft\n18\n100\nPW...\n1.39in\n105\n-20\n-10\n0\n10\n26\n30\n40\n50\nRIGHT BUTTON\nLEFT-EDIT LEVEL\nRIGHT-RE-DRAN CHART\nFOR MENU\nBNA / 11/22/92 / 12Z\nMean Wind\nOBSERVED\n180\n0-3km. 177/45\n0-6km.. 189/520\n090\n270\nPositive Shear\n360\n0-2km.. 14.0\n72\n0-3km. 9.0\nSR Helicity\n0-2km.. 538\n0-3km. 582\nStore Motion\n54\n219/ 39.\nCURSOR DATA\n220/ 39kts\n0-3km\n(b)\nSR Helicity\n36\n583(M/S)\nHELICITY\nPOS neg\n0-1km\n446\n0\n0-2km\n538\n0\n0-3km\n582\n0\n18\nSHEAR\npos\nneg\n0-1km.24.1\n0.0\n0-2km.14.0\n0.0\n0-3km. 9.0\n0.0\nSTREAM VORTICITY\n36\n18\n18\n36\n54\n72\n90\n0-1km\n37.2\nSFC - 7000 A\n0-2km\n20.6\n0-3km\n12.1\nLEFT - EDIT MOTION\nRIGHT - RE-DRAW\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENU\nFigure 20. The same as Fig. 16 except for Nashville (BNA), Tennessee valid at 1200\nUTC, November 22.\n41","Cincinnati, the WSO staff determined severe weather would likely develop into\ntheir area. This analysis helped them take a rather subtle radar indication and\ndetermine the need to issue a tornado warning, with lead time, for the storm that\nresulted in a fatality.\nNorth Carolina\nThe highly sheared environment continued ahead of the squall line into the\nCarolinas, where tornadoes again struck in the warm sector of the surface system\njust east of the frontal squall line. WSFO Raleigh examined the November 23,\n0000 UTC Greensboro, North Carolina (GSO) RAOB using SHARP (Fig. 21) and\nfound storm relative helicity in the lower 3 km at 442 m²/s2. An examination of\nADAP found moisture convergence along the squall line and front but nothing to\nhighlight a particular area for development.\nFINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nFinding 2.1: Storm relative helicity proved especially useful for identifying the\npotential for mesocyclones and tornadoes. Strong vertically veering wind fields in\nthe warm sector resulted in large values of storm relative helicity (at times\nexceeding 500 m²/s2 in the lowest 3 km). Parameters such as Lifted Index and\nCAPE indicated convection was possible, but values for these quantities were\nmodest and not sufficient to discriminate between severe and non-severe\nconvection.\nFinding 2.2: National Weather Service Offices effectively utilized excellent,\navailable guidance and tools, including SHARP and ADAP, to anticipate and\nmonitor mesoscale meteorological developments. Forecasters in Houston also used\nVAD wind data from the WSR-88D radar to modify early morning helicity\ncalculations and identify the increased tornado threat.\nRecommendation 2.2a: Continue education, training and research in the area\nof mesoscale meteorology.\nRecommendation 2.2b: Ensure the NWS Advanced Weather Interactive\nProcessing System (AWIPS) provides a complete set of mesoscale analysis tools.\nThese tools must be interactive, allowing modification of data and effective\nassessment of critical quantities like CAPE and helicity quickly.\n42","10\nGSO / 11/23/92 / 00Z\nLI\n-3\nOBSERVED\nII\n47\nTEI\n9.4\nK\n28\nSMEAT\n368\nCAP\n0.9\n67\nCURSOR DATA\n971ab\n55m\n180'\n61\n0=295\nTs=\n68F\n20\nV= 15.2\n19.70\n68F\nRAOB DATA\nP\n950\n30\n48\nT\n18.5\nTd\n7.8\nTdd\n0.7\nWind 180/29\n57\n40\n(a)\nPARCEL DATA\n50\n61\nB\n1084\nB\n15\n67\nLPL. 978ab\nEL\n39600ft\n56\nMPL . 48100ft\n70\n45\nLCL\n626ft\nFZL\n12110ft\n85\n39\nMBZ. 10499ft\n18\n100\nPW...\n1.52in\n105\n-20\n-10\n0\n10\n20\n30\n40\n50\nRIGHT BUTTON\nLEFT-EDIT LEVEL\nRIGHT-RE-DRAW CHART\nFOR MEMU\nGSO / 11/23/92 / 00Z\nMean Wind\nOBSERVED\n180\n0-3km 208/37\n0-6km.. 219/470\n090\n270\nPositive Shear\n360\n0-2ka.. 9.5\n64\n0-3km.. 7.1\nSR Helicity\n0-2km. 373\n0-3km. 442\n48\nStore Motion\n249/ 35e\nCURSOR DATA\n250/ 35kts\n9-3km\n(b)\nSR Helicity\n32\n447(M/S)2\nHELICITY\nPOS\nneg\n0-1ka..\n263\n0-2km.. 373\n16\n0-3km.. 442\n0\nSHEAR\npos\nneg\n0-1km.15.9\n0.0\n0-2km. 9.5\n0.0\n0-3km. 7.1\n1.7\n16\n32\n48\n64\n80\nSTREAM VORTICITY\n0-1km\n23.6\nSFC\n- 7000 #\n0-2km\n14.7\n0-3km\n11.7\nLEFT - EDIT MOTION\nRIGHT - RE-DRAW\nRIGHT BUTTON\nFOR MENU\nFigure 21. The same as Fig. 16 except for Greensboro (GSO), North Carolina, valid\nat 0000 UTC, November 23.\n43","","CHAPTER 3\nWARNINGS, FORECASTS, AND GUIDANCE\nCurrent NWS forecast procedures begin with centrally produced computer\nguidance at the National Meteorological Center (NMC) in Camp Springs,\nMaryland. National severe weather guidance is prepared at the NSSFC using the\ncomputer guidance. WSFOs, in turn, refine the guidance, issue detailed state\nforecasts, and along with WSOs are responsible for issuing local forecasts,\nstatements, and short-fused warnings.\nThe warning and forecast process of the NWS worked exceptionally well during\nthe November 21 through 23 outbreak of tornadoes. Computer guidance from\nNMC, national outlook and watch products by NSSFC, state products and\nforecasts issued by WSFOs and WSOs all highlighted the potentially dangerous\nweather situation.\nDetails of the warning process based on radar indications are presented in\nChapter 4. Verification statistics for the warnings issued from WSOs and WSFOs\nare presented in Appendix B. A chronology of selected WSFO and WSO products\nis presented in Appendix C.\nNMC\nThe primary short-range (through 48 hours) operational model used by the NWS\nforecasters is the Nested Grid Model (NGM). The NGM 24-hour forecast valid\n1200 UTC, Saturday, November 21 indicated conditions conducive to severe\nweather from the eastern border of Texas to the western border of Georgia and\nnorthward to southern Illinois. Fig. 22 a,b show the forecast position of the\nsurface low and middle level (500 mb) trough, respectively.\nThe 24-hour forecast valid 1200 UTC, Sunday, November 22 (surface and 500 mb\n[Fig. 23 a,b]) were excellent in terms of position and system development. The\noverall pattern was favorable for the development of strong thunderstorms,\nincluding the possibility of tornadoes, in those areas where the severe weather\nactivity subsequently occurred. Numerical models are not expected to predict the\nexact location of thunderstorm development.\nNSSFC\nThis major tornado outbreak began in the early afternoon of November 21, 1992\nand ended nearly 48 hours later. Eighty-nine of the 94 tornadoes touched down in\nvalid Tornado Watches, plus two that were partially in watch areas (that is,\ntouched down outside the watch area but moved into it). Twenty-five of the 26\n45","OF\nH\n(a)\n120\n-\nH\nY1450 24HR FCST SFC/1999 500 THICKNESS\nF\n(b)\nis\nto\ntwo\nV1451. 24HR FCST 500MB HEIGHTS/FORTICITY VALID 12Z SAT 21 NOV 92\n&\nmS\nFigure 22. The 24-hr NGM forecast valid for 1200 UTC, November 21, 1992, for a)\nsurface pressure/1000-500 mb thickness, and b) 500 mb height/vorticity.\n46","F\nMM\nexis\n(a)\nyear\n$10\n533\n963\n.\nS\n24\n12222\n5240\n010\nNGN\n100\nI\n3\n010\n018\n.\non\n010\n907\nV1450 24HR FCST SFC/1000 500 THICKNESS VALID 123 SUN_ NOV_92 s\n(b)\nH\nMAN Counciles\nV1451. 24HR FCST 500MB HEIGHTS/VORTICITY VALID 12Z SUN 22 NOV 92\nS\nPARKINGTON\nFigure 23. The same as Fig. 22 except valid for 1200 UTC, November 22.\n47","fatalities, and 623 of the 641 injuries occurred in valid Tornado Watches. Not only\nwere these watches accurate and timely, but they were made under atypical\ncircumstances, i.e., not a normal springtime scenario.\nAs early as Friday morning (2:00 a.m.) the potential for severe weather\ndevelopment was anticipated for Saturday afternoon over eastern Texas and\nwestern Arkansas. Throughout the outbreak, the severe weather guidance\ncontinued to stress the severity, location, and timing of the series of storms that\nraked the area.\nIt is also significant that two of the watches (914 and 916) contained the seldom-\nused, enhanced wording, \"THIS IS A PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS\nSITUATION WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF VERY DAMAGING TORNADOES,\"\nreserved for situations in which the NSSFC forecaster feels significant,\nlife-threatening tornadoes are a distinct possibility.\nTornado Watch 914 captured all the killer tornadoes in Mississippi, including the\none that killed 10 in Brandon. Tornado Watch 916 was issued over 5 hours before\nthe tornado that killed one in Dahlonega, Georgia. The watch lead time is defined\nas the period between the watch issuance and the occurrence of the event. The\nlead time of the tornadoes in watch 914 ranged from 1 hour and 5 minutes to 5\nhours and 58 minutes. The average watch lead time of all killer tornadoes was 3\nhours and 53 minutes during this outbreak, an extraordinary time. A summary of\nthe killer tornado events and watch lead time is given in Table 3.\nTable 4 shows the watch lead time for the first tornado in the watches, the last\ntornado in the watches, and average lead time for all tornado events in the\nwatches. All watches issued during this outbreak were tornado watches.\nTexas\nExcellent service was provided by NSSFC and the local offices well in advance of\nthe event. NSSFC had placed much of southeast Texas in a moderate risk of\nsevere weather in a Public Severe Weather Outlook (PWO) issued at 6:19 a.m. on\nthe 21st. As the situation began to develop, Tornado Watch No. 912 was issued\nshortly after noon. WSO Houston also monitored the meteorological situation\neffectively prior to the onset of tornadoes. Using the morning atmospheric\nsounding data, forecasters anticipated that tornadoes may occur during the\nafternoon. A Special Weather Statement (SPS) was issued at 10:13 a.m.\nhighlighting the threat of severe weather and was updated twice before Tornado\nWatch No. 912 was issued. Chapter 4 includes a detailed description of the use of\nthe WSR-88D by the WSO Houston staff in the warning process.\nThe first tornado warning issued by WSO Houston was based on a spotter report.\nAll subsequent warnings were based on WSR-88D radar data interpretation and\nconfirmed by spotter reports.\n48","Table 3. Killer tornado events of Nov. 21-23, 1992.\nDate/Time\nLocation\nDeaths\nWatch\nIssued\nLead Time\n21/1137pm\nBrandon MS\n10\n914*\n825pm\n3 hr 12 min\n22/1227am\nCarthage MS\n1\n914*\n825pm\n4 hr 2 min\n22/0125am\nWeir MS\n1\n914*\n825pm\n5 hr\n22/0214am\nClarkson MS\n2\n914*\n825pm\n5 hr 49 min\n22/0215am\nDe Kalb MS\n1\n914*\n825pm\n5 hr 50 min\n22/0350am\nVan Buren TN\n1\nNone\n22/0110pm\nDahlonega GA\n1\n916*\n629am\n5 hr 41 min\n22/0445pm\nEatonton GA\n4\n918\n122pm\n3 hr 23 min\n22/0452pm\nWorthville KY\n1\n920\n232pm\n2 hr 20 min\n22/0507pm\nWhite Plains GA\n1\n918\n122pm\n3 hr 45 min\n22/0654pm\nSaluda City SC\n1\n918\n122pm\n5 hr 32 min\n23/0220am\nHillsborough NC\n2\n925\n1219am\n2 hr 1 min\n*Watches using the enhanced wording \"THIS IS A PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS SITUATION\nWITH THE POSSIBILITY OF VERY DAMAGING TORNADOES.\"\nTable 4. Lead times by watch number.\nWatch\nFirst Event\nLast Event\nAverage\n912\n1 hr 6 min\n5 hr 36 min\n2 hr 55 min\n913\n3 hr 30 min\n6 hr 36 min\n5 hr 29 min\n914\n1 hr 5 min\n5 hr 58 min\n3 hr 40 min\n915\n1 hr 2 min\n7 hr 09 min\n4 hr 16 min\n916\n2 hr 21 min\n5 hr 41 min\n3 hr 28 min\n917\n3 hr 28 min\n4 hr 17 min\n3 hr 59 min\n918\n52 min\n6 hr 10 min\n4 hr 6 min\n919\n1 hr 3 min\n1 hr 38 min\n1 hr 16 min\n920\n34 min\n3 hr 25 min\n2 hr 5 min\n921\n48 min\n2 hr 3 min\n1 hr 12 min\n922\n1 hr 35 min\n4 hr 36 min\n3 hr 11 min\n923\nno reported events\n924\n47 min\n47 min\n47 min\n925\n46 min\n4 hr 42 min\n2 hr 40 min\n926\nno reported events\n927\n23 min\n2 hr 3 min\n1 hr 17 min\n49","In Harris County, a tornado warning saturated the area for almost 3 hours. The\nfirst warning was issued at 2:20 p.m. with expiration at 3:15 p.m. At 3:11 p.m.,\nthe warning was extended until 4:15 p.m. The warning extension's wording left\ndoubt regarding the dangerous situation: \"...Numerous tornadic\nthunderstorms\nno\nwere moving rapidly northeast out of Fort Bend County...\" The final extension\noccurred at 4:12 p.m. for eastern Harris County and lasted until 5:00 p.m.\nSix separate tornadoes affected Harris County, and each was within the valid\nwarning period. The first tornado started in northwest Fort Bend County and\ncrossed into Harris County near Katy at 2:28 p.m. This was 8 minutes after the\ninitial warning. The next tornado moved in from Brazoria County and crossed\ninto Harris County at 3:12 p.m. Lead time was 52 minutes based on the initial\nwarning. The most destructive tornado touched down near Channelview, in the\neastern suburbs of Houston at 3:27 p.m. Lead time for the storm was 16 minutes,\nbased on the warning extension (3:11 p.m.) and a Severe Weather Statement that\nmentioned, \"Tornado on the ground near Almeada-Genoa Road and I-45 moving\nnortheast at 25-30 miles per hour...\", the distance being approximately 15 miles\nfrom Channelview. At approximately the same time (3:20 p.m.), two other\ntornadoes touched down, one on the northeast shore of Lake Houston, the second\nin the immediate downtown Houston area. Lead time on these storms, taken from\nthe 3:11 extension, was 9 minutes. The last Harris County tornado touched down\nin the extreme eastern edge of the county at 4:15 p.m., 3 minutes after the final\nextension (4:12 p.m.).\nTimely warnings were also issued for the surrounding counties. The lead time\nfor the Fort Bend County storm was 20 minutes. The original warning, issued for\nneighboring Wharton County, was based on WSR-88D radar data interpretation.\nThe two tornadoes that began near Houston in eastern Harris County continued\neastward into Liberty County. One tornado, which earlier had produced\nwidespread damage in Channelview, entered Liberty County near Dayton around\n3:49 p.m., and swept across 10 miles of rural area. The second tornado, which\noriginated on the northeast shore of Lake Houston, crossed into Liberty County\nnear Cleveland and traveled 28 miles northeast before ending near Romayor. The\nhistory of the Fort Bend County and Harris County storms facilitated warning\nissuance for Liberty County. Lead time for the Dayton storm was 31 minutes,\nwhile lead time on the Cleveland/Romayor storm ranged from 9 minutes near\nCleveland to 57 minutes near Romayor.\nMississippi\nForecasts and guidance highlighted the severe weather threat. NSSFC made\nMississippi the focus for extremely dangerous thunderstorm activity, with the\npotential for damaging tornadoes, for the overnight period. The Severe Weather\nOutlook from NSSFC issued at 1:00 p.m. November 21 placed central and\nsouthern Mississippi in a moderate risk of severe thunderstorms. At 8:25 p.m.,\nTornado Watch No. 914 was issued for all but extreme northern Mississippi.\n50","The watch included the seldom used wording ...THIS IS A PARTICULARLY\nDANGEROUS SITUATION WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF VERY DAMAGING\nTORNADOES to highlight the life-threatening significance of the event.\nForecasters at WSFO Jackson were well prepared long before the event began.\nPublic forecasts issued early on November 21 used the wording \"...some may be\nsevere... in the \"TONIGHT\" section of all forecasts. SPSs issued during the\ndaytime hours highlighted the coming severe weather threat.\nWhen the tornado that killed 10 in Rankin County first touched down in Copiah\nCounty at 11:27 p.m., a Tornado Warning had been in effect for 31 minutes.\nHowever, the storm seemed to be weakening as it entered Rankin County and into\nthe Jackson WSR-57 radar's ground clutter. Also, no ground-truth reports were\nreceived from spotters, the public, police, or HAMs. Therefore, the focus shifted\nfrom the central Mississippi storm to an intensifying supercell in southeast\nMississippi. The combination of these factors resulted in no warning being issued\nfor Rankin County (see Chapter 4, \"Radar Analysis,\" for a thorough discussion of\nthe factors in the warning decisions).\nAs spotter reports of damage to Brandon in Rankin County trickled in shortly\nafter midnight, a Severe Thunderstorm Warning was issued for northern Rankin\nCounty. When the tornado crossed into Scott County, the severe thunderstorm\nwarning had been in effect 7 minutes. Shortly after the parent thunderstorm\nexited the Jackson radar's ground clutter, a hook echo (suggestive of a low-level\nmesocyclone) was indicated. At this time, 12:24 a.m., a Tornado Warning was\nissued for Leake County. Lead times for this warning ranged from 3 minutes near\nLudlow, to 32 minutes north of Barnes. As the storm continued tracking\nnortheast, another Tornado Warning was issued, based on radar, for southern\nAttala County, at 12:58 a.m. Lead times ranged from near zero when the tornado\nentered the county, to 27 minutes at McCool. The Tornado Warning for Attala\nCounty was allowed to expire because the storm appeared to be weakening on the\nJackson radar; therefore, warnings were not in effect for Choctaw County, where\nthe tornado finally dissipated.\nThe same storm cell spawned weaker tornadoes farther north, in Webster and\nChickasaw Counties. Although these storms were less potent (FO and F1) and\nshort-lived, two people were killed when one tornado destroyed a small wood\nframe home in extreme northeast Webster County at 2:14 a.m. Warnings were\nnot in effect for any events in Webster or Chickasaw Counties (see Chapter 4 for a\ndiscussion of factors in the warning decision process).\nWhile one supercell was causing death and destruction near Brandon, another was\nintensifying in southeast Mississippi. This storm spawned two impressive\ntornadoes that varied from strong (F3) to violent (F4). Tornado Warnings were in\neffect for all counties affected by this storm. Radar, satellite, and a favorable\natmospheric environment indicated that the supercell would maintain strength as\nit moved northeast. The initial warnings were issued, based on radar observations\n51","of the intensifying supercell, for Pike and Walthall Counties around 10:30 p.m. At\n11:13 p.m., a tornado warning was issued for Jefferson Davis County. Ten\nminutes later, touchdown occurred near Carson. Based on radar observations and\nstorm history, Tornado Warnings were issued in succession, for each county,\nduring the remainder of the storm. The warning for Covington County verified\nwith lead times ranging from near zero to 20 minutes; warnings for Smith County\nverified with a maximum lead time of 29 minutes. The storm then crossed into\nWSO Meridian's CWA. WSO Meridian issued radar-based warnings for Jasper\nand Newton Counties. Lead times in Jasper County ranged from 13 minutes near\nTed to 32 minutes northwest of Baxter. In Newton County, lead times ranged\nfrom 20 to 31 minutes.\nRemnants of this supercell later spawned a strong (F2) tornado at 2:15 a.m. which\nbegan in central Kemper County and moved into Noxubee County. One person\nwas killed and another injured in Kemper County. A Tornado Warning had been\nin effect since 1:35 a.m., at least 40 minutes prior to the tornado strike near\nDeKalb in Kemper County; no warning was in effect for Noxubee County.\nGeorgia\nSevere storms, producing widespread microburst and tornado activity, moved\nacross large portions of Georgia between 7:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. on Sunday,\nNovember 22.\nThe Georgia State and Zone Forecasts at 5:00 a.m. on Sunday indicated the\npossibility of severe thunderstorms. At 5:00 a.m., NSSFC issued a PWO which\nheadlined SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS EXPECTED TODAY AND TONIGHT\nOVER MUCH OF THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES.. The PWO was\nretransmitted by WSFO Atlanta around 5:15 a.m. as a SPS. The WSFO Atlanta\nstatement indicated that tornado watches would likely be issued for portions of\nGeorgia during the day, and urged residents to review safety rules, and monitor\nradio, television, and NOAA Weather Radio (NWR) closely. An updated SPS\nissued by the WSFO at 8:00 a.m. indicated tornado watch No. 916 had been issued\nfor a large part of western and northern Georgia, effective from 7:30 a.m. until\n2:00 p.m. The NSSFC issued another PWO at 9:48 a.m., reemphasizing the severe\nweather threat over the lower Ohio Valley and the southeastern United States.\nGiven this high level of alert, the Atlanta WSFO and surrounding WSOs were\nwell-prepared to handle the onslaught of severe weather. In all, 41 severe\nthunderstorm and tornado warnings were issued for the state, of which 15\nverified. The most potent storms occurred within three offices' areas of\nresponsibility: WSFO Atlanta, and WSOs Macon and Athens.\nThe most destructive tornado in WSFO Atlanta's area of responsibility developed\nshortly before noon near Powder Springs in the northwestern suburbs of Atlanta,\nin central Cobb County. The storm then raced northeastward into southern\nCherokee County before dissipating shortly after 12:30 p.m. Based on damage\n52","surveys, the storm was rated F4 as it passed through both counties. Accurate and\ntimely warnings resulted in no deaths, but 46 persons were injured (34 in Cobb\nCounty) by the storm. Both counties were covered by appropriate warnings. A\nTornado Warning, based on sheriff reports from neighboring Douglas County, had\nbeen in effect for Cobb County since 11:44 a.m. Lead times in Cobb County\nranged from near zero near Powder Springs to 30 minutes in Kennesaw, where\nthe majority of property damage occurred. Based on the radar indications and the\nstorm history, a Tornado Warning was issued for neighboring Cherokee County at\n12:14 p.m. Lead times ranged from 3 minutes at Woodstock to 24 minutes near\nHickory Flats.\nAn offspring of the tornado family that devastated Cobb and Cherokee Counties\naffected the northwest portion of WSO Athens' area of responsibility. An F3\ntornado developed at 1:10 p.m. north of Dahlonega in central Lumpkin County and\nmoved northeast 10 miles, virtually destroying a resort ranch before dissipating\naround 1:25 p.m. One person was killed and seven injured at the ranch. A Severe\nThunderstorm Warning had been in effect since 12:44 p.m., at least 26 minutes\nprior to the tornado strike at the ranch.\nGeorgia's deadliest and costliest tornado began at 4:45 p.m. near the\nPutnam/Jones county line, and continued northeastward through Putnam County\nand into Greene County before dissipating. Five people were killed and 86 others\ninjured along the F4-rated storm's 32-mile path. Appropriate warnings were in\neffect well in advance of the storm. The local warning radar at WSO Macon\nclearly indicated a hook echo over Jones County at approximately 4:03 p.m. A\nTornado Warning was issued for Putnam County at 4:16 p.m. based on the radar\nsignature and spotter reports of funnel clouds. A warning lead time of 29 minutes\nwas realized at Eatonton. Shortly thereafter, the Macon radar was becoming\ninoperative. WSO Macon alerted WSFO Atlanta about the possible radar failure.\nAtlanta then relayed this information to WSO Athens (which has responsibility for\nGreene County) to assist in backup radar coverage for WSO Macon. Atlanta also\nadvised Athens about the tornadic storm in Putnam County. Since the network\nradar at WSO Athens did not indicate a tornado, a Severe Thunderstorm Warning\nwas issued for Greene County. A lead time of 59 minutes occurred at White\nPlains in southeast Greene County.\nKentucky\nAn area of severe weather developed rapidly in the western Ohio Valley during\nthe early afternoon on Sunday, November 22. The threat of severe weather was\nindicated well in advance; the region was under a moderate risk outlook for\nsevere weather, outlined by NSSFC, as early as 10:00 a.m. Tornado Watches Nos.\n920 and 921 were in effect when the most dangerous storms struck.\nFour tornadoes touched down in Kentucky between 4:20 p.m. and 5:25 p.m. Three\nwere weak storms (FO or F1) and caused minor damage but no injuries. The other\nwas a killer tornado which developed in southern Carroll County west of\n53","Worthville and moved northeast crossing the Ohio River east of Ghent. For a 2-\nmile stretch near Easterday, Kentucky, F4 damage was noted, and it was in this\narea that an elderly woman was killed, nine other persons were injured, and\nnumerous residences were destroyed.\nInitial warnings for the parent thunderstorm associated with the above killer\ntornado were issued by WSFO Louisville when the storm first developed in\nwestern Henry County. An FO intensity tornado was reported in extreme\nnorthern Henry County at 4:40 p.m., 30 minutes after a Severe Thunderstorm\nWarning was issued. WSO Cincinnati, which had warning responsibility for\nCarroll County, issued a Tornado Warning at 4:47 p.m. Lead times ranged from 5\nminutes in southwestern Carroll County to 18 minutes near Ghent. Lead time\nwas estimated to be 11 minutes near Easterday. The killer tornado crossed the\nOhio River into Switzerland County in extreme southeastern Indiana at 5:05 p.m.\nAfter traversing nearly 10 miles, the storm crossed back into Kentucky, not far\nfrom the Cincinnati/Covington airport. A Tornado Warning was issued at 4:59\np.m. by WSO Cincinnati, giving a lead time of 6 minutes.\nNorth Carolina\nSevere weather swept northeast up the southern Atlantic coast during the late\nevening of November 22 through the early morning of November 23. NSSFC\ncontinued disseminating excellent guidance to affected NWS offices and the public.\nTornado Watches Nos. 922, 924, 925, 926, and 927 covered nearly all events that\noccurred between 6:00 p.m. November 22 and 7:00 a.m. November 23.\nFurthermore, WSFOs Raleigh/Durham, North Carolina, and Columbia, South\nCarolina issued several statements early on Sunday, November 22, emphasizing\nthe severe weather threat. For example, WSFO Raleigh indicated the potential for\nsevere thunderstorms for later Sunday and Sunday night in their early morning\nzone package issued at 3:50 a.m. Sunday morning. Also, a Special Weather\nStatement emphasizing a potentially dangerous weather situation and the threat\nof \"strong damaging tornadoes\" was issued at 6:20 a.m. Sunday morning.\nFive tornadoes struck North Carolina between 10:15 p.m., November 22 and 7:25\na.m., November 23. The storms killed two persons and injured 74 others. Most of\nthe tornadoes tracked northeast through the western Piedmont before midnight on\nthe 22nd; however, the last tornado began shortly after 4:00 a.m. and traveled 160\nmiles east-northeast, from the Sandhills region to just north of the Albemarle\nSound before lifting. Warning services were provided by WSOs Greensboro and\nCharlotte during the pre-midnight hours. WSFO Raleigh provided warning\nservice for the 2:20 a.m. killer tornado in Orange County, as well as for much of\nthe last, pre-dawn tornado.\nThe one killer tornado occurred in the extreme northwest portion of WSFO\nRaleigh's CWA, in Orange County, at 2:20 a.m. Although it lasted for only 10\nminutes and traveled only 5.5 miles, this strong (F3) storm ravaged a subdivision\nin Hillsborough, about 15 miles west of Durham. Two persons died, and 10 more\n54","were injured. A Severe Thunderstorm Warning had been in effect 17 minutes\nprior to tornado touchdown. The cell that produced this short-lived but powerful\ntornado had no history of severe weather and never demonstrated any radar\nsignatures indicative of a tornado. The decision to issue the Severe Thunderstorm\nWarning was based on a vigorous analysis of storm structure. The warning\nclearly indicated the storm would move across Hillsborough by 2:30 a.m., strongly\nconveyed the fact that a tornado could develop without warning, and included a\nstrong call-to-action statement.\nThis outbreak delivered its final blow in the form of a North Carolina-record, 160\nmile-long tornado. The tornado, which varied in intensity, injured 49 people. The\ncontinuous path affected nine counties, including six in WSFO Raleigh/Durham's\nCWA. Nearly half (22) of the injuries occurred at the onset, in Harnett and\nJohnston Counties, where the tornado reached F3 intensity. News footage,\nhowever, focused on the Elizabeth City (Pasquotank County) area, where a school\nbus was hurled 75 yards, injuring 21 people. Shortly thereafter, the tornado\ndissipated while crossing the Pasquotank River.\nNo warnings were in effect when the tornado first began in Harnett County;\nhowever, a string of Tornado Warnings was issued for each affected county\nthereafter. The first warning was posted for Johnson County at 4:34 a.m. When\nthe tornado reached Wilson's Mills in central Johnston County, the warning had\nbeen in effect for 6 minutes. The warnings continued (all lead times estimated\nfrom selected locations): at 4:46 a.m. for Wilson County (lead time near Wilson:\n19 minutes); at 5:20 a.m. for Edgecombe County (lead time: 5 minutes); at 5:36\na.m. for Martin County (lead time: 4 minutes); and at 5:56 a.m. for Bertie County\n(lead time at Windsor: 29 minutes). At this point, WSO Cape Hatteras took over,\nissuing tornado warnings for Chowan, Perquimans, and Pasquotank Counties, all\neffective at 6:48 a.m. The warning had been in effect approximately 36 minutes\nwhen Elizabeth City was struck.\nFINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nFinding 3.1: The NSSFC provided excellent guidance and watch products to\nWSFOs, WSOs and the public throughout the outbreak. NSSFC correctly\nidentified the threat of tornadoes and severe storms more than 24 hours in\nadvance of the episode. NSSFC also accurately forecast relatively rare, late-\nseason tornadoes in the Ohio Valley. Field forecasters interviewed by the DST\nbelieved NSSFC's watches and guidance products were vital to their ability to\nanticipate the magnitude of the event and to issue timely forecasts, statements,\nand warnings.\nFinding 3.2: The performance of WSO Houston was exemplary. Several\ntornadoes struck in the Houston metropolitan area, producing the vast majority of\nthe damage in Texas. Despite the numbers and strength of the storms there were\nno fatalities.\n55","Finding 3.3: The single greatest number of deaths associated with one tornado\nwas 12 in Mississippi. Ten of these deaths were in Rankin County, which is in\nWSFO Jackson's CWA. When the tornado that killed 10 in Rankin County first\ntouched down in Copiah County a Tornado Warning for Copiah County had been\nin effect. However, no Tornado Warning was in effect in Simpson County or\nRankin County as the storm moved from Copiah County through those counties.\nFinding 3.4: One of the factors in the decision not to issue a warning for Rankin\nCounty, Mississippi, where 10 people were killed, was that no ground truth\nreports were received from spotters, the public, police, or HAMs. Ground truth\nsevere weather reports are often critical in the NWS warning process.\nRecommendation 3.4: The NWS should continue to help establish and train\nnew spotter groups plus provide refresher training to the existing spotter\nnetworks. The emphasis for continued feedback of severe weather information\nfrom spotter networks, Emergency Management Agency officials, and law\nenforcement personnel must be continued and strengthened.\n56","CHAPTER 4\nRADAR EVALUATION\nNWS forecasters rely on radar and ground truth reports (from spotters, law\nenforcement officials, the public, etc.) to evaluate the potential for thunderstorms\nto produce tornadoes and other forms of severe weather. The widespread nature\nof the November 21-23, 1992, outbreak resulted in the use of nearly every\nvariation of weather radar currently in use in the NWS.\nThe new WSR-88D, 10-cm wavelength radar proved invaluable to forecasters at\nWSO Houston as they issued warnings for rapidly moving tornadic thunderstorms\nin the Houston metropolitan area. The WSR-88D's narrow 0.95 degree, half-power\nbeam width and volumetric scanning technique allowed forecasters to examine the\nthree-dimensional structure of storms in more detail than was available from the\n2-degree beam width WSR-57 at nearby WSO Galveston. Radial velocity data (a\nmeasure of speed and direction of movement of raindrops and other particles),\nwhich are not available from conventional radars, allowed forecasters to identify\nmesocyclone signatures when conventional reflectivity signatures were absent or\nambiguous. The WSR-88D also provided many other products and enhancements\nnot available from conventional NWS WSR-74C and WSR-57 radars.\nElsewhere, the NWS radar network is primarily composed of WSR-57 10-cm\nwavelength radars installed in the 1960s. The WSR-57 has a half-power beam\nwidth of 2.0 degrees and provides only reflectivity information. This evaluation\nincludes information obtained from WSR-57s at Jackson, Mississippi; Athens,\nGeorgia; Cincinnati, Ohio; Volens, Virginia; and Wilmington, North Carolina.\nThe NWS also employs an array of Local Warning Radars across the country.\nThese WSR-74C, 5-cm radars have a half-power beam width of 1.6 degrees and\nprovide only reflectivity data. This evaluation includes information from WSR-\n74Cs at Meridian, Mississippi; Atlanta, Georgia; and Raleigh, North Carolina.\nRadar camera film and Plan Position Indicator (PPI) overlay tracings were not\navailable in all instances, and portions of this evaluation were based upon\ninformation received from WSI NOWrad radar imagery. NOWrad is a composite\nradar product derived from the NWS network of conventional radars.\nIn order to simplify this evaluation of radar applications, each NWS location\nsurveyed is examined separately.\nTexas\nSupercell thunderstorms that developed about 30 miles ahead of the frontal squall\nline spawned 12 tornadoes across the Houston area the afternoon of November 21,\n1992, between 1:30 pm and 4:30 p.m. Despite the high population density and the\n57","strength of the tornadoes (up to F4), no fatalities resulted and injuries were\nlimited to less than 40. In the opinion of the DST, effective warnings based\nlargely upon interpretation of the WSR-88D radar helped to minimize injuries in\nthe Houston area.\nThe Houston WSO staff realized the potential for danger hours before the\ntornadoes occurred. The volume of data available from the WSR-88D required\ndedication of one meteorologist to the interpretation of the radar data. At times,\nthe meteorologist was assisted by another staff member.\nRadial velocity data available from the WSR-88D proved essential for the\ndetection of mesocyclones and their potential to produce tornadoes. Reflectivity\ndata (all that is available from conventional radars) alone would in many cases\nnot have been enough to issue effective warnings. Tornado Warnings issued by\nthe Houston WSO were more timely and accurate as a result of effective\ninterpretation of the WSR-88D.\nThe WSR-88D Storm Relative Map (SRM) product proved to be the most effective\ntool in identifying tornadoes. The SRM is a display of mean radial velocities with\nstorm motion subtracted and is especially useful when storms are moving rapidly,\nas was the case in this episode. SRM velocity couplets (regions of adjacent\ninbound and outbound velocities indicating rotation) with gate-to-gate rotational\nvelocities greater than 50 knots appeared with most of the tornadoes. SRM data\noften identified mesocyclonic rotation prior to the appearance of the characteristic\n\"hook echo\" in reflectivity fields. The mesocyclones associated with most of the\nlarger tornadoes exhibited SRM velocity couplets more than 18 minutes (3 volume\nscans) prior to tornado touchdown. The data showed no couplet with the first\ntornado of the episode, a small, short tornado (F1) track near Wharton. A few\nother tornadoes also occurred when velocity couplets were present less than 12\nminutes before touchdown.\nThe primary WSR-88D products and displays used were the SRM and a time-lapse\nanimation of base reflectivity. The SRM was especially effective when viewed as a\n\"four-panel\" display of the four lowest elevation angle scans. By viewing multiple\nelevation angles at the Principal User Processor (PUP), the radar interpreter was\nable to quantitatively assess three-dimensional storm structure and mesocyclone\nrotational velocities. A corresponding \"four-panel\" reflectivity was often used to\nsupplement the velocity data and provide additional insight into storm intensity\nand structure. The PUP time lapse feature provided valuable information\nregarding movement of the storms and their temporal evolution.\nA detailed examination using Houston WSR-88D data (Figs. 24 through 30) of\nthree storms that hit Houston and caused the majority of the damage follows.\nThis examination uses many of the products and techniques employed by the\nHouston staff. It is an examination of a small part of the total episode, however.\n58","54 NM RES\nRDA:KHGX 29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\n23NM\nMAG=2X FL= 5 COM=1\nR\nRPS\n19 R\nUNIT 1 READ DONE\nHARDCOPY REQUEST\n13/1649 ARCHIVE\n11/21/92 21:03\n0.5 DEG\n05/13/93 16:51\n21\nPROD RCVD : CR\nKHGX 1642 54\nND DBZ\nMAPS U/A CN\n1642\n313DEG\nMAX= 58 DBZ\nBASE REF\n10\n15\nHARDCOPY\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\n45\n50\n55\n60\n65\nACCEPTED\n70\n75\n115 FT\n5\n124 NM\nMODE A\nELEV=\nQ15 U\nCNTR\nJS\nE\nH. I\n42035\n+\nLIB\nGLS\nLIV\nCON\nFRPT\nHOU\nHUNI\nCLL\nCLMBS","RDA KHGX 29/28/19N\n115 FT 95/04/40W\n95/04/40W\nRDA KHGX 29/28/19N\nRDA KHGX 29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\n29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\nMAG=8X\n11/1716 HARDCOPY\nHARDCOPY REQUEST\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nRIBBON USED UP\n12/11/92 22:10\n21\n21\n21\n21\nMAX= 59 DBZ\nQUEUE EMPTY\nMAX= 56 DBZ\nMAX= 57 DBZ\nMAX= 60 DBZ\nA/R (RDA)\nHARDCOPY\nACCEPTED\nMODE A /\nRDA KHGX\nMODE A /\n115 FT\n115 FT\n115 FT\nQUAD 4\nMODE A\nQUAD 2\nQUAD 3\nMODE A\nQUAD 1\n54 NM RES\n15NM\n54 NM RES\n15NM\n45\n4\nND\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\n50\n55\n60\n65\n70\n75\n45\n50\n55\n60\n65\n70\n75\n2\nND\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\nSEABROOK\nSEABROOK\nCITY\nLEAGUE CITY\nBAYTOWN\nBAYTOWN\nL\nCNTR 333DEG\nCNTR 333DEG\nLEAGUE\n124 NM\n124 NM\n19 R\n19 R\nHOU\nthat\n11/21/92 21:09\nELEV= 6.0 DEG\n21:09\n4 DEG\nHOUSTON\n2\nBASE REF\nBASE REF\n11/21/92\nHARRIS\nELEV=\n54 NM RES\n15NM\n54 NM RES\n15NM\n3\nND\n5\n50\n55\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\n45\n60\n65\nSEABROOK 70\n75\nND\n5\n45\n50\n55\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\n60\n65\n70\n75\n1\n4\nROOK\nCITY\nTOUR\nBAYTOWN\nCNTR 333DEG\nCNTR 333DEG\nLEAGUE\n124 NM\n124 NM\n19 R\n19 R\n2\n21:09\n0.5 DEG\n11/21/92 21:09\n4.3 DEG\nBASE REF\nBASE REF\n11/21/92\nELEV=\nELEV=","RDA : KHGX 29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\n82 KT\n29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\nKT 102 KT\nRDA : KHGX 29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\nMAX=-103 KT 79 KT\nRDA : KHGX 29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\n69 KT\nDEG\n16 NM\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\n11/1716 HARDCOPY\nHARDCOPY REQUEST\n12/11/92 22:11\nA/R (RDA) 334\nRIBBON USED UP\n21\n21\n21\n21\nMAX=-107 KT\nMAX=-112 KT\nQUEUE EMPTY\n/\nRDA KHGX\nMODE A /\n-82\nHARDCOPY\nACCEPTED\n115 FT\n115 FT\n115 FT\n115 FT\n10561FT\nMODE A\nQUAD 1\nQUAD 2\nQUAD 3\nMODE A\nQUAD 4\nMODE A\nOVL: M\nMAX=\n2\nND\n50\n40\n30\n22\n10\n-5\n0\n54 NM\n-1\n5\n10\n22\n30\n40\n50\nRF\n16NM\n4\nND\n-50\n-40\n-30\n-22\n-10\n-5\n54 NM\n-1\n0\n5\n10\n16NM\n22\n30\n40\n50\nRF\n39 KT\nSRM : 217DEG 39 KT\nSEABROOK\nLEAGUE CITY\n334DEG\nBAYTOW\n334DEG\n217DEG\nNM\n54 NM REL VEL MAP 56 SRM 124 NM\nREL VEL MAP 56 SRM 124\nCNTR\nCNTR\nSRM\n11/21/92 21 09\nELEV= 2.4 DEG\n11/21/92 21:09\nELEV= 6.0 DEG\nHOUSTON\nIAH\nHARRIS\nR4\nRFI\n54 NM\n1\nND\n50\n40\n30\n22\n10\n-5\n0\n16NM\n5\n10\n22\n-1\n30\n40\n50\n3\nND\n50\n40\n30\n-22\n10\n-5\n0\n-1\n5\n16NM\n10\n22\n30\n40\n50\nRF\n39 KT\n39 KT\nRx\nCITY\nTOHN\nCNTR 334DEG\nCNTR 334DEG\nSRM : 217DEG\nSRM : 217DEG\nREL VEL MAP 56 SRM 124 NM\nREL VEL MAP 56 SRM 124 NM\n11/21/92 21:09\nELEV= 0.5 DEG\n11/21/92 21 : 09\n4.3 DEG\nELEV=\n61","RDA : KHGX 29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\nRDA KHGX 29/28/19N\n115 FT 95/04/40W\nRDA : KHGX 29/28/19N\n115 FT 95/04/40W\nRDA : KHGX 29/28/19N\n115 FT 95/04/40W\n11/1716 HARDCOPY\nHARDCOPY REQUEST\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nRIBBON USED UP\n12/11/92 22:14\n21\n21\n21\n21\nMAX= 59 DBZ\nMAX= 60 DBZ\nQUEUE EMPTY\nMAX= 54 DBZ\nMAX= 58 DBZ\nA/R (RDA)\nHARDCOPY\nACCEPTED\n/\n/\nMODE A /\n115 FT\nMODE A\nQUAD 3\nMODE A\nQUAD 4\nQUAD 2\nMODE A\nQUAD 1\nRES\n15NM\n54 NM RES\n15NM\n50\n55\n60\n65\n70\n75\n4\nND\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\n45\n40\n45\n50\n55\n60\n65\nSEABROOK 70\n75\n2\nND\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\nSEABROOK\nNM\nLEAGUE CITY\nCITY\nBAYTOWN\nBAYTON\nCNTR 333DEG\n54\nCNTR 333DEG\nLEAGUE\n124 NM\n124 NM\n19 R\n19 R\nHOU\n2.4 DEG\nELEV= 6.0 DEG\n11/21/92 21:21\n11/21/92 21:21\nHOUSTON\nBASE REF\nBASE REF\nHARRIS\nELEV=\nHAN\n54 NM RES\n15NM\n54 NM RES\n15NM\n55\n60\n65\n70\n75\n3\nND\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\n45\n50\nND\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\n45\n50\n55\n60\n65\n70\n75\n1\nSEABROOK\nROOK\nLEAGUE CITY\nBAYTOWN\nCNTR 333DEG\nCNTR 333DEG\nBAY\n124 NM\n124 NM\n19 R\n19 R\n4.3 DEG\n0.5 DEG\n11/21/92 21:21\n21:21\nDa.\nBASE REF\nBASE REF\n11/21/92\nELEV=\nELEV=\nHARR","RDA KHGX 29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\nMAX=-121 KT 122 KT\n29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\nMAX=-123 KT 121 KT\nRDA KHGX 29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\nMAX=-113 KT 102 KT\n29/28/19N\n95/04/40W\nMAX= -58 KT 85 KT\nA/R (RDA) 313 DEG\n21 NM\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\nMAG=8X\n11/1716 HARDCOPY\nHARDCOPY REQUEST\n12 /11/92 22:18\nRIBBON USED UP\n21\n21\n21\n21\nQUEUE EMPTY\nMODE A /\nRDA : KHGX\n/\nRDA KHGX\nHARDCOPY\nACCEPTED\n115 FT\n115 FT\n115 FT\n115 FT\n13667FT\nQUAD 1\nQUAD 2\nMODE A\nQUAD 3\nMODE A\nQUAD 4\nMODE A\nOVL M\n2\nND\n50\n-40\n-30\n-22\n10\n-5\n0\n5\n54 NM\n-1\n10\n22\n30\n16NM\n40\n50\nRF\n4\nND\n-50\n40\n-30\n-22\n-10\n-5\n0\n54 NM\n16NM\n5\n-1\n10\n22\n30\n40\n50\nRF\n42 KT\n42 KT\nK\nSEABROOK\nLEAGUE CITY\nBAYTOWN\nCNTR 334DEG\nCNTR 334DEG\nSRM 220DEG\nSRM : 220DEG\nNM\n54 NM REL VEL MAP 56 SRM 124 NM\nREL VEL MAP 56 SRM 124\n76\nHOU\nELEV= 2. 4 DEG\n11/21/92 21:21\n11/21/92 21:2 21\n6.0 DEG\nHOUSTON\nIHH\n6\nHARRIS\nELEV=\n#33\n-50\n1\nND\n40\n30\n22\n10\n-5\n54 NM\n16NM\n-1\n0\n5\n10\n22\n30\n40\n50\nRF\n3\nND\n50\n40\n30\n22\n10\n-5\n16NM\n-1\n0\n5\n10\n22\n30\n40\nRF\n50\n42 KT\n42 KT\nROUR\nCITY\nCNTR 334DEG\nCNTR 334DEG\nSRM : 220DEG\nSRM 220DEG\nREL VEL MAP 56 SRM 124 NM\nREL VEL MAP 56 SRM 124 NM\n11/21/92 21:21\n0.5 DEG\n11/21/92 21:21\nELEV= 4.3 DEG\nELEV=\nHARE\nI\n)\n:\n.\nto\n+\n+\nfloot\nI\nTO","MAG=2X FL= 5 COM=1\nRDA KHGX 29/28/19N\n115 FT 95/04/40W\n33NM\n124 NM 54 NM RES\n11/1716 HARDCOPY\nHARDCOPY REQUEST\n19 R\nRIBBON USED UP\nELEV= 0.5 DEG\n12/11 92 22:38\n11/21/92 21:33\nMODE A 21\nMAPS U/A CN\nND DBZ\nQUEUE EMPTY\n349DEG\nMAX= 62 DBZ\nA/R (RDA\nHARDCOPY\nACCEPTED\n75\nBASE REF\n45\n50\n55\n60\n65\n70\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\n5\nOVL AN\nCNTR\nBPT\nJAE\nWIN\nc\n7\nLFK\nLIB\nGLS\nLIV\nHOU\nTHA\nCON\nHUN\nMAD\nROY.\nWHAR\nCLL\nBREN\nCLMBS","REL VEL MAP 56 SRM\n54 NM\nRDA : KHGX 29/28/19N\n115 FT 95/04/40W\n22NM\nMAX= -92 KT 101 KT\nMAG=2X FL= 1 COM=1\nSRM 224DEG 41 KT\n11/1716 HARDCOPY\nHARDCOPY REQUEST\n11/21/92 21:33\nELEV= 2.4 DEG\n12/11/92 22:41\nRIBBON USED UP\nMODE A / 21\nMAPS U/A: CN\nCNTR 342DEG\n-50 KT\nQUEUE EMPTY\nND\n-40\n-30\n-22\n-10\n10\n22\n30\n40\nHARDCOPY\n50\nACCEPTED\nRF\n124 NM\n-5\n-1\n0\n5\nBP1\nWIN\nLIB\nGLS\nCON\nRUN\nMAD\nBAY\nWHAR\n1\nCLL\nBREN\nCLMBS\nStorm","Fig. 24, the 3:03 p.m., 124nm Base Reflectivity, shows the general areas of storms\nin the Houston area. The F4 Channelview Tornado struck at 3:27 p.m., and the\nF2 Downtown Tornado touched down at 3:20 p.m.\nThe 3:09 p.m., four-panel, magnified eight times, Base Reflectivity is shown in Fig.\n25. At 0.5 degree (upper left), the subtle hook echo just south of Houston (HOU in\nthis Fig.) (compare to 6.0 degree display) suggests the presence of a low-level\nmesocyclone. A Bounded Weak Echo Region (BWER), indicating the presence of\nan intense updraft and possibly a mesocyclone, was indicated by lower reflectivity\n(green) inside higher levels (yellow) at 4.3 degrees. Even using conventional\nreflectivity interpretation techniques, the WSR-88D with its greater resolution and\nconvenient display features proved a more effective warning tool than conventional\nradars.\nFig. 26 presents the 3:09 p.m., four-panel, magnified eight times, Storm Relative\nVelocity. A velocity couplet often identifies a mesocyclone (small scale rotation\nwithin a thunderstorm) and a point where tornadoes frequently form.\nCorresponding velocity couplets at more than one elevation scan indicate an\norganized circulation, and a greater chance for tornadic development. No\norganized couplet was indicated at 0.5 degrees elevation, but a velocity couplet\n(note the region of red next to the green, with red indicating particles moving\naway from the radar at 50+ kts and green showing particles moving toward the\nradar at about 30 kts) was apparent almost directly over HOU at 2.4 and 4.3\ndegrees. Note also the circle over Houston where the WSR-88D algorithm has\nidentified a likely location of a mesocyclone. This mesocyclone was associated\nwith the F4 Channelview Tornado some 18 minutes later. Note also the velocity\ncouplet on the left edge of the 2.4 degree display. This mesocyclone spawned the\nDowntown Tornado 11 minutes later.\nThe Channelview Storm north of Houston (Fig. 27, the 3:21 p.m., four-panel,\nmagnified eight times, Base Reflectivity) exhibited a pronounced hook shape in the\nreflectivity field at low-levels, and a high reflectivity extension (overhang) on the\nsoutheast (inflow) side at higher elevation angles. A BWER is also noted in the\nsmall green dot (lower reflectivity) inside the yellow at 2.4 degrees, and also in a\nyellow area inside the red at 4.3 degrees. These radar signatures are indicative of\na supercell with a low-level mesocyclone and possibly a tornado. Note also the\nlack of any similar defining reflectivity feature in the storm southwest of Houston.\nThe Downtown Tornado had just touched down at the time of this display.\nThe Channelview Storm's velocity couplet is easily identified at all three levels in\nFig. 28 (the 3:21 p.m., four-panel, magnified eight times, Storm Relative Velocity).\nThis display preceded touchdown by 6 minutes. The purple area identifies a\nregion where the radar was unable to assign velocity measurements due to range\nfolding.\nAnother velocity couplet was apparent with the storm immediately southwest of\nHouston. The couplet was evident at 2.4 and 4.3 degrees, and even at 0.5 but on a\n66","somewhat broader scale. The Downtown Tornado was associated with this\nsignature. Both couplets showed vertical continuity and the algorithm identified\nlikely mesocyclones (ring in lower left display) with both storms.\nAt 3:33 p.m. (Fig. 29, Base Reflectivity), the Channelview and Downtown\nTornadoes were on the ground as was another tornado in Liberty County. Well-\ndefined hook echoes are associated with the Liberty County (west-northwest of\nLIB) and Channelview (north-northeast of HOU) storms. An inflow notch of lower\nreflectivity was indicated with the Downtown Tornado, northwest of Houston, but\nno definite hook.\nVelocity couplets were evident even on the unzoomed, full-scale Storm Relative\nVelocity product at 3:33 p.m. (Fig. 30). Note areas of red (outbound 50+ kts) next\nto areas of green (30 kts inbound) west-northwest of LIB, north-northeast of\nHouston, and northwest of Houston. Each of these velocity couplets identified\nmesocyclones producing tornadoes at the time of the SRM product. Although a\nweak mesocyclone was also apparent west of Houston, no tornadoes were\noccurring with this signature.\nThe WSR-57 Galveston, Texas (GLS) radar detected occasional hook echoes, as\nwell. The Galveston Official-In-Charge (OIC), who was on duty that day, was\ninterviewed. In the opinion of the OIC, warnings issued during the episode would\nnot have been nearly as accurate or timely if they had been issued from the GLS\nWSR-57 alone. A few hook echoes were noted, but tornadoes were already on the\nground in most cases by the time the hooks appeared. The first hook echoes were\nrecorded on the GLS Radar Form (MF7-60) at 3:24 p.m.\nA photo of the 3:30 p.m., GLS WSR-57 display (Fig. 31) shows the Liberty County\nand Channelview hook echoes. They did not appear nearly as distinctly as they\ndid on the Houston WSR-88D.\nMississippi\nDuring the late evening of November 21 and the early morning of November 22\ntwo supercell thunderstorms tracked across southern and eastern Mississippi\nproducing several tornadoes. The westernmost supercell (Cell 1) was responsible\nfor the violent F4 tornado which struck Brandon, Mississippi, shortly before\nmidnight on the evening of the 21st.\nThe first Severe Thunderstorm Warning of the evening was issued for Amite and\nFranklin counties at 10:21 p.m. for a thunderstorm crossing into Mississippi from\nsouthern Louisiana. Shortly thereafter, at 10:24 p.m. and 10:29 p.m., tornado\nwarnings were issued for a second storm (Cell 2) moving through Pike and\nWalthall counties, respectively. The WSR-57 radar at Jackson (JAN) provided the\nbasis for both warnings. The warning for Cell 1 was based on the vertical extent\nof the DVIP 5 core; while the warning for Cell 2 was based upon a hook echo (JAN\nform MF 7-60) which suggested the presence of a low-level mesocyclone. Both\n67","10\nAKO\nFigure 31. The 3:30 p.m., Galveston, Texas, WSR-57 display.\n68","storms moved along parallel paths from approximately 210 degrees at 40-50 knots\nover the next few hours.\nReports of a possible tornado were received from Summit in Pike County (Cell 2)\nat 10:43 p.m. Although no reports of severe weather had been received from Cell\n1, a Severe Thunderstorm Warning was issued at 10:49 p.m. for Copiah and\nLincoln Counties in advance of the storm based upon information from the\nJackson WSR-57. At 10:50 p.m., reports of tree damage and a possible tornado\nwere received from 3 miles west of Brookhaven in Lincoln County (Cell 1). A hook\necho (JAN form MF 7-60) and BWER were observed with Cell 1 at 10:50 p.m., and\nat 10:56 p.m. the warning for Lincoln and Copiah Counties was upgraded to a\nTornado Warning. Additional delayed reports of damage were received along the\npath of Cell 1 between and 11:00 p.m. and 11:30 p.m. A Tornado Warning was\nextended into Jefferson Davis and Lawrence Counties at 11:13 p.m. for radar\nsignatures associated with Cell 2.\nAs Cell 1 approached Rankin County at 11:30 p.m., no additional warnings were\nissued for Cell 1 since the echo top had lowered and reflectivity values on the JAN\nradar had fallen from DVIP 6 at 11:04 p.m. to DVIP 4 at 11:30 p.m. A\ncoordination call received from WSO Meridian (MEI) at 11:29 p.m. notified\nJackson forecasters that Cell 1 was still DVIP 5 through 23,000 feet MSL from the\nMEI WSR-74C radar. The storm was again examined with elevated scans as it\nentered the ground clutter pattern of the JAN radar and again reflectivity values\nwere DVIP 4 with no signatures associated with severe storms discernible. A\nfollow-up coordination call from JAN to MEI at 11:35 p.m. indicated that Cell 1\nwas now DVIP 4 on the MEI radar and attention was focused on Cell 2.\nPost-event examination of the JAN WSR-57 radar camera film was difficult since\nthe camera range was set at 250 nm and the film was over-exposed. However,\nexamination of NOWrad data2 by the DST indicated Cell 1 was DVIP 5 as it\nentered Rankin County at 11:30 p.m. (Fig. 32a), but that reflectivity values\ndecreased rapidly to DVIP 3 as the storm passed over Brandon (Fig. 32b).\nAdditional Tornado Warnings were issued for Cell 2 at 11:45 p.m. based upon\nstorm structure on the JAN WSR-57.\nAt 11:27 p.m., a tornado associated with Cell 1 touched down 1 mile north of\nHopewell in northern Copiah County. The tornado continued into Rankin County\nnear Florence, eventually striking Brandon at 11:53 p.m. Unfortunately, no\nreports of damage were received at WSFO Jackson until 12:00-12:10 a.m. when\nseveral calls were received from NWS employees living in Brandon of possible\ntornado damage. Based upon these reports, a Severe Thunderstorm Warning was\nissued for northern Rankin, Leake and Scott Counties at 12:12 a.m. Additional\nreports of injuries were received from Brandon at 12:20 a.m., and a Tornado\nNoWrad data courtesy of Weather Services International.\n69","BNA\nC6\nTHE\nCHIPAN\nABT\nNM\nCLT?\nHEM\nCHA\nGREEP\nHsw\nFREE\nTOP\nBHNC\nCAE\nOFF\nPART\nBEHN\nTGP\nAGS\nTCD\nCKL\nCHS\nMCN\nCSG\nJANE\nMEI\nMGM\nABM\nAMG\nMO\nAYS\nCRU\nNSE\nMOB\nFURS\nGET\nJANK\nNPA\nTEAL\nNLP\nPAM\nAQQ\nAND\nIN\nCTY\n1\n(a)\nTXWK\nEEI\nDEEFF\nSHU\nSHM\nABUR\nTYPE\nG&G\nSEP\nJAM\nM\nThe\nAGAI\nLAKE\nHEX\nGRK\nPOE\nCLIN\nJCT\nBER\nHUS\nGERT\nLETT\nSIL\nLCHE\nLARH\nBEAT-\n22\nSANT.\nHDO.\nGES\nUCT\nBSX.\nNIR\nALI CRP\nLRED\n(b)\nFigure 32. NOWrad composite radar imagery valid at a) 11:30 p.m., and\nb) 12:00 a.m.\n70","Warning was issued for Leake County (Cell 1) at 12:24 a.m. A special radar\nobservation (JAN form MF 7-60) was taken at 12:35 a.m. for hook echoes with\nboth Cell 1 and Cell 2 suggesting low-level mesocyclones were present with both\nstorms. PPI overlay tracings from the JAN WSR-57 for Cell 1 and Cell 2 are\nshown in Fig. 33. Well-defined hook echoes are clearly visible with both storms.\nA Tornado Warning was issued for southern Attala County at 12:58 a.m. based\nupon the JAN WSR-57 radar. Reflectivity values for Cell 1 again appeared to\ndecrease slightly as it moved through Attala County, and warnings for the storm\nwere not continued as it tracked into Choctaw and Webster Counties. The PPI\noverlay tracing at 1:25 a.m. (Fig. 34) indicated a diminished DVIP 5 core with an\napparent inflow notch and weak echo region on the southeast flank of Cell 1 as it\ntracked into Choctaw County. This reflectivity configuration is frequently\nassociated with severe storms and suggests a low-level mesocyclone was present.\nNOWrad data again confirmed the decreased reflectivity values (as low as DVIP 3)\nas the storm moved across Choctaw and Webster Counties, but, because the data\nare composite, meaningful storm-scale structures could not be discerned. Damage\nreports received from Attala and Choctaw Counties were delayed and were not\nuseful for warning decisions.\nTornado Warnings were issued in advance of Cell 2 as it entered the Meridian\nCWA based upon the MEI WSR-74C and the storm's previous history. All of these\nwarnings verified with damage. One fatality was associated with Cell 2 in\nKemper County before the storm crossed into Alabama.\nPaper overlay tracings of the JAN WSR-57 PPI were made intermittently through\nthe evening and early morning hours. Such tracings are important to the\nevaluation of three-dimensional storm structure and determination of storm type\nor severity. Examination of these overlays by the DST indicated detailed\nevaluations were made of three-dimensional storm structure for Cell 2 throughout\nits lifetime in the Jackson CWA. However, detailed tracings of three-dimensional\nstorm structure were not performed for Cell 1 while the storm was within 25 nm\nof the JAN radar.\nGeorgia\nDuring the morning and afternoon of November 22, 1992, four supercell\nthunderstorms tracked across central and northern Georgia spawning 11\ntornadoes which resulted in six fatalities (see Fig. 3 for storm tracks).\nThe WSR-74C radar at Atlanta and reports from spotters and law enforcement\nofficials provided the primary basis for warnings issued by WSFO Atlanta (ATL).\nForecasters also considered the history of each storm to decide on the potential for\ntornado production and SHARP products from regional morning soundings, which\nindicated high values of storm relative helicity.\n71","Louisville\nLexington\nMocon\nDurant\nHasciusko\nPickens\nity\nSc\nEdinburg\nto\nPhiladelphia\nDekalb\nBacthage\nSTOCK\nHnut Grove\nUrion\nCanton\nora\nLa\nMadison -90°\n-89°\nNMM\nForest\nMeridian\nJAN\nNewton\nMeeticn\nPelohatchie\nMorton\nME\n.\nion\nBrandon\nBasic City\nStonewoll\nRoleighi\nPechuta\nQuitmc\nD'Lo\nBoy Springs\nsville\n(a)\nMadison -90°\nForest\nJAN\nords\nNewton\nN\nHKS\nPetchatchie\nMorton\n.\nRaymond\nJackson\nBrandon\nFlorence\n102\nRoad\nCrysto\nSp\nDLo\n32\nBay Springs\nGatesville\nHazlehuest Georgetown Pinola\nMagee\nStringe\nIZO\n0\n4\nTaylor\nSc\nNew\nHebron\nSoso\nWes!\nOmo\nLaure\nCollins\nWanilla\nEllisville\nBrookhaven\nPrentiss\nSilver Cre\nMonticello\nBassfield\nOvert\n0\nMoselle\nPIB\nBogue Chitto\nEastabuchie\nGoss\nSumrall Hattiesburg\nMcComb\nColumbia\n(b)\nFigure 33. PPI overlay tracings from the Jackson, Mississippi, WSR-57 valid at\na) 12:30 a.m. centered on the Leake County storm, and b) 12:25 a.m. centered on the\nSmith County storm.\n72","COMI\n50°\nWest Poin\nMilbort\nMoben\nEupora\nGreenwood\nColumbus\nWinona\nMathiston\n88°\nand\nGTR\nGWO\nStarkville\nMayhew\nReld\nArtesia\n&\nAckerraan\nR\nd\nAliceville\nLouisville\ntexington\noucon\nDuran\nKosciusko\n33\n23°\nPickens\nQ\nYO City\nScooba\nE\nGoinesville\nEdinburg\nDekalb\nElectric\nPhiladelphia\nE\nMills\nCarthage\nthee\nBlock\nR.\njingston\nWalnut Grove\nUrion\nFloro\nCanton\nComo\nLauderdale\nYork\n88\nAMM\nModison -90\n5\nMeridian\nForest\nJAN\nS\nNewlof\ne\nman\nPelahatchie\nMbrton\nME\na\nJackson\nBrandon\nBasic City\nChoct\nFlorence\nIAN\nStonewall\nButler\nPachuta Quitma\nRolera\nD'Lo\nCrandall\nBay Springs\nGatesville\nGilbertown\nHeidelberg\nGeorgetown Pinola\nMagee\nStringe\nShubuta\nMize\nTaylor sville\nSandersville\nSilos\nMLCOME\nNew\nHebron\nSoco\nOma\nin\nLours\nWaynesboro\nMyrick\no\nMifry\nCollin\nWanilla\nEllisville\nFrente\nSilver Creek\nBucatunio\nlonticello\nBuss\nold\nOver\n90°\nMoselle\nState Line\nChatom\nPIB\nFigure 34. Same as Fig. 33 except valid at 1:25 a.m. for the Atalla County\nstorm.\n73","Radar at 9:30 a.m. indicated a broken line of thunderstorms, some with\nreflectivity values in excess of 50 dBZ (DVIP 5), moving into western Georgia\n(Fig. 35). Observations recorded by the radar operator at Atlanta indicated the\nindividual storm cells were moving rapidly from 230 degrees at 40 knots.\nThe first, fatality-producing supercell (Cell 1) crossed into Carroll County from\nAlabama and tracked across portions of Douglas, Haralson, Paulding, Cobb,\nCherokee, Forsythe, Dawson, Lumpkin, Union and Towns Counties. A Severe\nThunderstorm Warning was issued for the storm as it entered Carroll County\nwhere apparent macroburst wind damage occurred. A report of a tornado in\nwestern Douglas County from the Douglas County Sheriff's Department prompted\nan upgrade to Tornado Warning for Douglas, Cobb, and Paulding Counties at\n11:44 a.m. The tornado was briefly rated F4 as it passed through Kennesaw in\nCobb County.\nA Severe Thunderstorm Warning was issued for Dawson and Lumpkin Counties\nby WSO Athens, Georgia (AHN) at 12:44 p.m. as Cell 1 entered the AHN CWA.\nThe warning was based upon a DVIP 4 reflectivity from the AHN WSR-57 radar,\nan echo top to 43,000 ft MSL and a \"hail indication\" (likely side-lobe echo).\nPersonnel at WSO AHN had not received any reports of damage in neighboring\nsections of Cherokee County but were aware of the previous tornado in Cobb\nCounty. Based in part upon this history, law enforcement authorities in Dawson\nand Lumpkin Counties were contacted and severe weather reports were solicited.\nNo reports were received until 1:20 p.m. when the Lumpkin County Sheriff's\nDepartment relayed a report of a tornado in northern Lumpkin County. The\nSevere Thunderstorm Warning was upgraded to Tornado Warning for Towns,\nUnion, and White Counties upon receipt of the report.\nAlthough elevated scanning techniques were used by Atlanta to assess the three-\ndimensional structure of Cell 1, no signatures indicative of a mesocyclone were\nevident until the storm reached Cobb County where a hook echo was observed at\n12:08 p.m. (ATL form MF 7-60).\nA second intense supercell thunderstorm (Cell 2) tracked from Alabama across\ncentral Georgia then into South Carolina. Several tornadoes accompanied Cell 2,\nthe most notable being an F4 tornado in Putnam and Greene Counties which\nkilled five people.\nA Severe Thunderstorm Warning issued for Monroe County by WSO Macon,\nGeorgia (MCN) at 3:25 p.m. was upgraded to Tornado Warning at 3:37 p.m. based\nupon reflectivity signatures on the MCN WSR-74C radar.\nAt 4:03 p.m. a hook echo was observed with Cell 2 from the ATL WSR-74C radar\n(ATL form MF 7-60). WSO Macon, Georgia (MCN) was notified of the hook echo\nby ATL, and the Tornado Warning was extended into Jasper and Jones Counties.\nThis warning included a report of damage near Smarr, Georgia. A third Tornado\nWarning based on radar signatures and spotter reports of a funnel was issued by\nMCN at 4:16 p.m. as the storm entered Putnam County.\n74","BNA\nCHIPH\nMMSC\nARE\nNK\nCLTP\nCHA\nPOP\nGREPT\nFA\nHSU\nTUP\nx\nAHNL\nCAE\nAFL\nBEHI\nGHD\nTGB\nRU\nAGS\nTOU\nCK\nCHS\nMCN\nNMM\nCSG\nNBC\nJANK\nMEIG\nNG\nAMG\nAYS\nUAU\nCRU\nNSE\nMOB\nPIRS\nGRU\nEAH\nNPA\nNLP\nPA\nAQQ\nGMO\nCTY\nFigure 35. NOWrad composite radar image at 9:30 a.m., November 22.","A Severe Thunderstorm Warning was issued by WSO AHN for Cell 2 as it\napproached Greene County at 4:21 p.m. The decision to issue a Severe\nThunderstorm instead of Tornado Warning was based upon a DVIP 5 maximum\nstorm reflectivity, no discernible hook echo from the AHN radar, and an echo top\nof 53,000 ft MSL.\nThe MCN WSR-74C radar failed at 4:25 p.m., and WSFO ATL continued to relay\ncritical radar information for MCN warning operations. At 4:25 p.m. the ATL\nradar indicated (ATL form MF 7-60) both a hook echo and BWER associated with\nCell 2. The presence of the hook echo and BWER suggests a well developed\nmesocyclone and intense updraft were present.\nWSO AHN was advised by ATL of the MCN radar failure at 4:30 p.m. AHN was\nalso advised that the ATL radar indicated tornadic cells were approaching the\nAHN CWA (ATL activity log).\nNo reports of damage had been received and no hook echo was apparent from the\nAHN radar at 4:58 p.m., thus the Severe Thunderstorm Warning was continued\ninto Taliferro County by WSO AHN.\nAnalysis of a time lapse image of the WSO AHN WSR-57 radar by the DST\nindicates Cell 2 was characterized by DVIP 5 reflectivities, a very sharp gradient\nof reflectivity on the southeast (inflow) flank, and a large weak echo region. These\ncharacteristics, in combination with the previous storm history and ATL radar\nobservations, are consistent with accepted conceptual models of supercell\nthunderstorm evolution.\nThe F4, Putnam-Greene County tornado occurred between 4:45 p.m. and 5:20 p.m.\nover a path length of 32 miles. Four fatalities occurred in Putnam County. One\nwoman was killed and extensive damage was done as the tornado struck the small\ntown of White Plains in Greene County.\nKentucky\nIn addition to the tornadoes that affected the southern United States, a secondary\narea of tornadoes developed over Indiana, northern Kentucky, and southwest Ohio\nthe afternoon of November 22. The Cincinnati Weather Service Office (WSO\nCVG) anticipated the threat quite well (see Chapter 2) with diligent mesoanalysis.\nThe Cincinnati staff utilized ADAP to identify the most likely area within their\nCWA for tornadoes to form. When the storm developed ahead of the squall line in\nthe area they had identified, they acted quickly.\nWith regard to the tornado that killed a person in Carrol County, Kentucky, the\nCincinnati area WSR-57 radar image (Fig. 36) indicated a subtle hook echo, a\nmaximum echo top of just 31,000 feet, and 50 dBZ (equivalent reflectivity)\n76","90\n001\n80\n260\n082\nOLZ\nFigure 36. Photograph of Cincinnati, Ohio network WSR-57 radar display at\n4:45 p.m., November 22, 1992.\n77","vertically only to 14,000 ft. A Tornado Warning was issued based upon the radar\ncharacteristics in combination with knowledge of the mesoscale environment.\nWSO CVG continued to monitor the cell on radar issuing advance warnings\ndownstream along the storm's path (see Fig. 4). The tornado was sighted visually\nfrom the WSO 7 minutes after the initial warning was issued, and it continued in\nsight until it lifted at 5:27 p.m.\nNorth Carolina\nTornadoes touched down in central and eastern sections of North Carolina during\nthe early morning hours of November 23rd (see Fig. 5).\nThe Raleigh WSFO (RDU) utilized its WSR-74C conventional local warning radar\nto support warning operations. They also assisted Charlotte and Greensboro\nWSOs earlier in the evening when a series of F0 and F1 tornadoes struck the\nwestern section of the state. Although storm reflectivities had diminished\nbetween 12:00 a.m. and 1:00 a.m., a Tornado Watch was expanded into the north\ncentral section of the state including part of the Raleigh CWA about 1:30 a.m.\nAs the line of storms crossed Virginia and northcentral North Carolina a strong\ncell developed on the southern end of the line. The south end of a convective line\nis recognized as a favorable area for severe weather development.\nRaleigh radar did not show any hook echoes or overhang with the storm that\nproduced the F3 Hillsborough tornado at 2:20 a.m. However, a DVIP 5 reflectivity\nwas observed vertically to a height of 22,000 ft MSL, the strongest signature of\nany storm that night. Severe Thunderstorm Warnings were in effect for Chatham,\nDurham and Orange (Hillsborough's County) Counties between 12:13 a.m. and\n3:00 a.m.\nRadar reports (MF 7-60) from Volens, Virginia (VQN) indicated the Hillsborough\nstorm had a top of 45,000 feet with intensities increasing between 1:30 a.m. and\n2:30 a.m. The 2:20 a.m. photograph of the Volens radar display (Fig. 37) indicated\nthe storm (located south-southwest of the radar) had a maximum reflectivity of\nDVIP 5, but no characteristic hook echo was discernible.\nThe storm that produced the long-track (160 miles) across eastern North Carolina\nfrom 4:10 a.m. until approximately 6:25 a.m. also failed to show radar\ncharacteristics normally associated with supercell thunderstorms and tornadoes.\nThe initial Tornado Warning (Johnston County) for the eastern North Carolina\nstorm was issued in response to reports of damage in Harnett and Johnston\nCounties. From that point, warnings were issued in advance of the storm cell.\nThe radar showed the cell as a large mass of DVIP 2-3 intensity at 4:30 a.m.; the\ncell became slightly stronger by 5:30 a.m. A faint indication of a hook echo was\nobserved over Wilson County about 5:00 a.m.\n78","260\nFigure 37. Photograph of Volens, Virginia, WSR-57 radar display at 2:20 a.m.,\nNovember 23, 1992.\n79","The Wilmington, North Carolina, network WSR-57 radar also failed to show\nreflectivity signatures typically associated with severe thunderstorms as the cell\npassed northwest of the radar (Fig. 38). It was the most intense cell within range\nat the time, and the radar report (MF 7-60) indicated an echo top of 40,000 ft\nMSL. Subsequent, hourly radar reports showed the cell maintained an intensity\nof between DVIP 3 and 5 and tops at or above 40,000 ft MSL from 4:30 a.m. until\n7:30 a.m.\nFINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nFinding 4.1: WSR-88D radar at WSO Houston performed well. Velocity data\n(particularly the storm relative data) proved extremely valuable in evaluating\ntornadic potential. The WSR-88D was clearly superior to conventional WSR-57\nand WSR-74C radars in use at other locations.\nFinding 4.2: Multiple elevation angle displays (four-panels) of reflectivity and\nvelocity data proved extremely valuable to the Houston Office during this episode.\nThe data, and other products provided by the WSR-88D, required intense analysis\nby a highly skilled radar interpreter to accurately determine the likelihood that a\ntornado would develop. Proper interpretation of WSR-88D data during active\nevents requires dedication of at least one staff member to that task.\nRecommendation 4.2: At least one skilled radar interpreter should be\ndedicated to the radar, whether it is a WSR-88D, WSR-74 or WSR-57 any time\nsevere weather threatens (including times when severe weather watches are in\neffect) and thunderstorms are present.\nFinding 4.3: Meteorologists who interpreted the Houston WSR-88D felt training\nthey received at the Norman, Oklahoma WSR-88D OSF Training Branch provided\na strong base upon which to build their skills. The value of that training was\nmeasured in the effective warnings issued November 21, 1992.\nFinding 4.4: No warnings were in effect for the fatality-producing tornadoes in\nRankin, Choctaw, and Webster Counties in Mississippi. The no-warning decision\nwas, in part, due to radar indications the storm was decreasing in intensity. The\ndecreased reflectivity of the storm as it tracked into Rankin then Attala Counties\nsuggests the storm updraft weakened briefly as the mesocyclone occluded in each\ncase. Such an evolution is consistent with tornadic supercell thunderstorms.\nRecommendation 4.4a: The NWS should continue to improve instruction on\nsevere storm evolution and radar structure. Although such instruction may be\nperformed on-site by the SOO, the instruction should be in addition to the\nresident WSR-88D course, with content formulated by subject matter experts.\nRecommendation 4.4b: The NWS should ensure that future radar display\nsystems (e.g. WSR-88D PUP, AWIPS) provide the tools necessary to quickly and\neasily assess three-dimensional storm structure and evolution.\n80","Figure 38. Photograph of Wilmington, North Carolina network WSR-57 display at\n4:11 p.m., November 23, 1992.\n81","Finding 4.5: Despite using conventional radar that did not always identify\ncharacteristics normally associated with tornadoes, the Cincinnati WSO issued\neffective warnings. They used an intensive mesoanalysis effort that helped to\nidentify the area where the tornado developed. The mesoanalysis directly\ncontributed to the effectiveness of the Tornado Warning they issued.\nRecommendation 4.5: All radar-related training should emphasize mesoscale\nanalysis as an important aspect of radar data interpretation.\n82","CHAPTER 5\nPREPAREDNESS\nThe primary mission of the NWS is the issuance of watches and warnings to\nprotect life and property. It is not sufficient to simply issue warnings to the\npublic; citizens must know what to do once the warning has been issued. The\nNWS is only one member of the hazards community, which consists of all\norganizations involved in the warning process. These organizations include\nFederal, state, and local agencies; emergency managers; elected officials; the\nmedia; volunteer groups; and private sector meteorologists. Educating the public\nto the hazards of severe weather is a vital part of the lifesaving mission of the\nNWS.\nThe NWS recognizes the need to educate the public and the hazards community\nand performs this service through preparedness. Preparedness activities include\nrecommending safety actions to be taken during severe weather events and\nmanaging extensive spotter training and preparedness programs to educate\nemergency management officials and the public to the hazards of severe weather.\nTexas\nWSO Houston's internal preparedness activities included a severe local storm drill\nin March, 1992 and an update of the Station Duty Manual (SDM) in July, 1992.\nThe SDM clearly lays out the need and process to augment the regular shift staff\nduring severe weather operations and the job assignments of each position.\nThe NWR is tested weekly between 11:00 a.m and noon, weather permitting.\nThough backup power was not used during this tornado event, it is tested every 2\nweeks.\nDue to the hurricane threat, a Warning Preparedness Meteorologist (WPM) had\nbeen on station for many years. That person now has the title of Warning\nCoordination Meteorologist (WCM) as the office transitions into the modernized\nNWS. Preparedness activities with the state and County emergency managers\nincluded the development, coordination and initiation of a unique new Community\nSevere Weather Involvement Plan. This Community Weather Plan (CWP) directly\ninvolves the County emergency management coordinators in Houston's CWA.\nEach County has its own local emergency plan which includes severe weather and\ninteraction with WSO Houston.\nFort Bend and Harris Counties have their own spotter network. Fifty eight\nspotters from Fort Bend County received NWS training earlier in the year.\nA 2-meter amateur radio is located at WSO Houston. The local Amateur Radio\norganization has established a pool of operators who are available to serve as a\n83","communications liaison between the NWS and the spotter groups within range of\nthe Houston repeater. The HAM spotter network is well organized in Harris\nCounty which includes the city of Houston, with various types of networks in the\nother four Counties. Houston area repeaters can be accessed by amateur radio\nspotters in at least nine surrounding Counties. These vary from various law\nenforcement agencies to other less organized HAM groups. A greater emphasis by\nlocal management at WSO Houston has begun to assist surrounding Counties in\nestablishing and organizing additional spotter groups. Spotter training had been\noffered to all Counties; however, none had been performed during the past 2 years\nother than for Fort Bend County. Most other spotter groups from the surrounding\nareas relay information to their centralized law enforcement agency. The\ninformation is then forwarded via telephone to the NWS. The Houston area HAM\ncoordinator was contacted between 10:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m., Saturday,\nNovember 21. The network was established by 1:00 p.m.\nOf the seven media (radio and television) outlets questioned, all stated they did\nnot participate in NWS annual severe weather preparedness week activities. Five\nhave had contact with the local NWS office. WSO Houston staged a 4-day,\ncoordination and liaison meeting in September 1992 with the local emergency\nmanagers, the media, and private sector meteorologists. These meetings stressed\nthe importance of the WSR-88D, ground truth information for verification, and the\nrole of the media. Approximately 100 attended with interviews given to radio,\ntelevision and newspaper representatives.\nOnly a couple of the media have their own spotter networks, which consist mainly\nof rainfall observers. The other media contacts stated they did not have the time\nor budget to initiate a spotter network. Of the media groups contacted, five\nreceive their weather information via GTE Contel NWWS, three through NWR,\nthree through Weather Services International, three through Associated Press, one\nthrough Universal, one through Accu-Weather, one through Kavouras, and one\nstated they rely on the Emergency Broadcast System (EBS) station.\nOther external activities included awareness and preparedness training to the\ngeneral public or targeted groups. These activities are conducted by the WCM and\nMIC. Over 100,000 people were exposed to severe weather awareness information\nat the January 1992 Houston Boat Sport and Travel Show. WSO Houston also\nprepares a local publication \"Storm Signals\" which is mailed quarterly to over 900\nindividuals and organizations. Numerous industries and businesses then reprint\nthem, making them available to their employees. Monthly, weekly, and sometimes\nmajor daily newspapers and magazines print the feature article contained in each\nnewsletter. That accounts for at least a 30,000 circulation. Apparently the word\nis getting out; all those interviewed at the damage area knew what proper actions\nto take when the tornado approached.\n84","Mississippi\nNot only does Mississippi lead the nation in the total number of tornado deaths,\nbut the state frequently experiences flooding and hurricanes. All these factors\nhave created a heightened awareness of weather for citizens of Mississippi.\nTo meet the need and challenge to better educate residents and train storm\nspotters, an active preparedness program has existed at WSFO Jackson since\n1974. A dedicated WPM position has been on station for the past 18 years.\nWSFO Jackson is responsible for severe weather warnings, weather preparedness,\nand warning coordination for 42 Counties. In addition, the MIC and the WPM\nassist in the preparedness activities, as needed, for WSOs Meridian and Tupelo.\nThe level of preparedness activities fluctuates depending on the staffing level at\nthe WSFO. Ideally, the WPM should work operational shifts about 25 percent of\nthe time, but often this figure may be closer to 75 percent or higher.\nWSFO Jackson's internal preparedness activities included a severe weather\n\"roundtable discussion\" (station meeting) in February 1992. At this meeting, all\nsevere weather operational procedures were reviewed. A severe weather drill was\nconducted in early March 1992, and the severe weather section of the SDM was\nupdated in March and again in November, 1992.\nOperational policies and procedures were also reviewed in at least four memos\nfrom local management in March and April 1992. Tours of the Hinds County\nEmergency Operations Center (EOC) were also arranged for all WSFO Jackson\nstaff members in February and early March 1992 in order to familiarize the\nWSFO staff with EOC operations and to enhance coordination between the two\nunits.\nThere are also external preparedness activities. Annually, WSFO Jackson, in\nconjunction with the Mississippi Emergency Management Agency (MEMA)\nconducts a Severe Weather Awareness Week. This is normally held in February.\nA different weather topic is highlighted each day. During these weeks, people are\nencouraged to become familiar with severe weather safety rules. (In Rankin\nCounty, where 10 deaths occurred, the schools do participate in Mississippi Severe\nWeather Awareness Week activities.) WSFO Jackson mails out around 1300\ninformation packages to Emergency Management Agencies (EMAs), news media\noutlets, and schools across the state. These packages provide information on\nsevere weather and severe weather safety. Included in preparedness activities is\na\nstatewide practice tornado watch and warning drill (usually conducted jointly with\nWSFO Birmingham and Alabama). WSFOs Jackson and Birmingham hold joint\nAwareness Weeks for Mississippi and Alabama.\nSevere storm spotter training is a major aspect of Jackson's preparedness\nprogram. Four hours of weather spotter training are given to trainees at the\nMississippi Highway Patrol Headquarters in Jackson. Training sessions had been\n85","conducted in each of the Counties which experienced fatalities. The date the\ntraining was given and the group receiving the training were:\nNumber Organization\nDate\nCounty\nMultcraft, Inc.\nRankin County: 12/91\n8\nFire Academy\n11/90\n43\nHamRadio Club (Advanced Spotter\n2/90\n42\nTraining)\nHam Radio Club\n2/89\n19\nMississippi State Fire Academy\n11/88\n21\nEMA and interested citizens\nLeake\n2/88\n23\nNostalgia Amateur Radio Club\n1/90\n16\nChoctaw\nHam Radio Club\n4/89\n25\nHam Radio Club\n1/89\n22\nNE Ham Radio Club (Advanced\n22\nWebster\n9/90\nSpotter Training)\nVolunteer Fire Dept. (De Kalb)\nKemper\n2/87\n36\nRankin County's part-time Emergency Management Director,\nMr. Charlie Wilkinson, was in the process of establishing an EMA office in Rankin\nCounty. The EOC had no communications system (no CD radio) or staff. There\nwas no room for a HAM base station. A warning system and spotter network for\nRankin County were not yet centralized or organized.\nIf an active and well organized amateur radio group exists, room is normally made\navailable for the organization in an NWS office. During this event, WSFO\nJackson was in temporary quarters while the old office was being refurbished into\ntheir new Weather Forecast Office (WFO). Originally, there was space in the\ntemporary quarters for the HAM base, but it was lost to communications needs for\nthe phone company and radar users. Another factor contributing to the absence of\na HAM group at the WSFO was the fact that the local club had become\ndisorganized (changeover in officers, etc.).\nGeorgia\nAs in Mississippi, WSFO Atlanta has a dedicated WPM position to focus on\npreparedness functions within the WSFO's County warning area and to assist\nWSO MICs/OICs as necessary. Likewise, annual Severe Weather Awareness\nWeeks are conducted.\nWSFO Atlanta conducts regular drills designed to refresh the staff on procedures\nand basic information that would be needed or applicable during severe weather\nevents. The drills are conducted each spring. Besides drills for the WSFO, each\nWSO in Georgia participates in drills.\n86","The warning alarm tone for all NOAA Weather Radios serving Georgia are\nroutinely tested each Wednesday at midday (weather permitting).\nA copy of the SDM for all Georgia WSOs is on file at WSFO Atlanta. Numerous\nChapters of the WSFO SDM pertaining to severe weather have been updated in\nthe past 3 years.\nThe majority of the storm spotters in Georgia are HAMS; however, the network\nalso includes law enforcement officials, fire officials, forestry personnel, private\ncitizens, Civil Air Patrol, and others.\nRecent Georgia \"Awareness Week\" dates have been:\n1989 February 20 - 24\n1990 February 26 - March 2\n1991 February 25 - March 1\n1992 February 24 - 28; and for\n1993 February 22 - 26; targeted groups were\nall Georgia Amateur Radio Clubs\nall registered hospitals/medical centers\nGeorgia Extension Offices\nSevere Weather Awareness Week campaigns have been very successful over the\npast several years. Each year the goal has been to reach more of Georgia's\nresidents and to provide concise information for use in weather emergencies.\nFor Severe Weather Awareness Week 1992 the emphasis was changed slightly in\nthat a new format was developed, and the information layout was changed to\nachieve greater readership and understanding of the facts and safety rules\npresented. The new format was well received, but the added cost permitted only\n1,000 packets to be printed. Data were requested for all of Georgia's agricultural\nextension offices, amateur radio clubs, and hospitals.\nFeedback from the packets showed that tornado watch and warning drills were\nconducted efficiently and successfully throughout the state. Only five schools\ncomplained of not receiving the warning portion of the drill. The clipping service\nforwarded 98 articles in February and early March related to the information\npackets/drills. Articles published during the spring and summer months often\nused the data verbatim.\nThe NWS in Atlanta has maintained a close and beneficial working relationship\nwith many Georgia Amateur Radio Operators (HAMS) over the years. Over 440\nspotters are registered at the WSFO, and HAM participation has increased. The\nAtlanta Radio Club owns the equipment presently in the WSFO. The equipment\nwas originally installed at the Forecast Office at the previous permanent site. The\nsystem remained operable until early 1992 when the office was moved to the\npresent temporary quarters. Dialogue was initiated with Club members about re-\n87","installing the unit at the temporary WSFO quarters. The Club desired to update\ntheir equipment with computers which required equipment not available at the\nWSFO. In early November 1992, the group advised the WSFO that they planned\nto utilize their equipment at a north Atlanta school.\nAs a result of earlier discussions with the Atlanta Radio Club, along with an IBM\ngroup, and a Gwinnett County packet radio group, plans were underway to have a\npacket system installed in the Forecast Office by early spring 1993. This system\nwill allow HAM operators from several areas of north and central Georgia to relay\ninformation, by computer, to a printer located in the WSFO.\nThe fact that HAM radio was not installed at the WSFO did not hamper the\nSKYWARN network. Spotters have been activated during almost every severe\nweather event and have efficiently provided pertinent and timely weather data.\nDuring the severe weather outbreak on November 22, 1992, four SKYWARN\nspotters called WSFO Atlanta. The station log also indicates that several\ngovernmental groups (police, etc.) contributed to the warning effort. From\nstatements and warnings issued by the NWS in Georgia, it appears that spotters\nparticipated actively across the state during this outbreak.\nThe information below pertinent to preparedness was received from visits made by\nthe DST members to various officials in Georgia.\nLarry White, Assistant to the Chief of the Cobb County EOC, was interviewed.\nThe County Emergency Management Agency has a good community outreach\nprogram to inform the public about warnings from sirens and actions public\nshould take. The Cobb County Emergency Management Agency has very good\nrelations with the NWS, and Mr. White indicated the NWS provided great service\nduring this event.\nSurvey Team members talked with Mr. James Gregory, Director, Putnam County\nEmergency Medical Services (EMS) and Mr. Troy Reynolds, Fire Chief, Putnam\nCounty Fire Department. Both Mr. Gregory and Mr. Reyonlds would like the\nWPM/WSFO Atlanta to contact them about a new/upgraded Spotter Training\nSession. This request was passed-on to the MIC/WPM at WSFO Atlanta.\nKentucky\nPreparedness activities, both internal and external, are comprehensive at WSO\nCincinnati. Internal written drills covering many subjects including severe\nweather procedures are conducted each month. The last monthly drill before the\ntornado event was completed in October 1992. The SDM was updated earlier in\nthe year clearly spelling out the severe weather operating procedures.\nThe NWR is tested weekly between 11:00 a.m. and noon on Wednesdays. There\nare two levels of backup power, and the NWS generator is scheduled for testing 10\nor 20 minutes each month. Backup power was not used during this event.\n88","Through the concerted, coordinated effort of the entire staff at WSO Cincinnati all\nCounties in their CWA were visited during the spring of 1992. This entailed\nvisiting County emergency managers in 22 Counties covering the three states of\nOhio, Indiana, and Kentucky. In a statewide effort, the WSO participated in the\n1992 Ohio Tornado Safety Awareness Week which was held March 22-28, 1992.\nPublic participation was on March 25th. A comprehensive awareness package was\nprepared for the week's activities. The staff of the WSO prepared test warning\nmessages during the drill.\nAggressive SKYWARN training during the late winter and spring months resulted\nin 1,185 individuals being reached. This training was provided by seven different\nmembers of the WSO Cincinnati staff during 41 meetings. Due to this training, a\ncomprehensive, trained spotter network was in place in all 22 Counties. The WSO\nhas an exceptionally well equipped amateur radio station in its own separate room\nin the office. It has multi-band capabilities including a packet station. This\nsystem is called the Weather Amateur Radio Network (W.A.R.N). They also have\na drop on the radar so the radio operator can see significant echoes and request\nspotter information in areas of significant radar activity. Amateur radio personnel\nare called in during weather emergencies. Additionally, weekly weather training\nsessions for the amateur radio community are held via the radio network. These\nsessions are taught by the staff of the WSO. The SKYWARN network was\nactivated at 2:55 p.m., Sunday, about 2 hours before the first tornado touched\ndown. Two amateur radio operators came in and staffed the WSO SKYWARN\namateur radio station during the episode.\nThe media also participated in the Ohio Tornado Safety Awareness Week\nactivities. Just 3 days prior to the tornado event, Erik Pytlak, a meteorologist\nintern, made the semi-annual visit to all news radio and television stations in\nCincinnati, as well as two Cincinnati newspapers.\nNorth Carolina\nExternal coordination, especially on the state level is excellent. The Governor\ndeclared February 24-29 Severe Weather Awareness Week. In conjunction with\nthe North Carolina Division of Emergency Management and Department of Public\nInstructions, the NWS conducted a statewide tornado drill on Wednesday,\nFebruary 28, 1992. The test watch and warning messages were carried on NWR,\nNWWS and via the EBS in addition to the Associated Press, and United Press\nInternational. The media participated in the awareness week.\nAt the County level, the coordination is more variable. The DST visited Johnston\nCounty and were informed the County did not participate in the NWS drills\nearlier in the year. They don't have NAWAS and don't use public alerting sirens.\nA meeting was held with the Johnston County HAMS in April 1992 to discuss\nsevere weather and reporting.\n89","The NWR tone alert is tested every Wednesday at noon, while the backup power is\nactually used two to three times a week at WSFO Raleigh, especially when\nthunderstorms are around.\nWSFO Raleigh has a relatively dense HAM radio spotter network within about 50\nmiles of the office. Once staffing at WSFO Raleigh was up to the full level, a push\nfor additional spotters was started in October 1992. Spotter training is provided\nthrough a 3-hour mini course. During 1992, 283 people completed this course. A\nSKYWARN newsletter was started in February 1992 and is jointly written by Rod\nGonski, WSFO Raleigh's WPM, and the amateur radio operators. It is issued\nthree times per year. The first issue targeted the spring severe weather season.\nDuring the event, the HAM radio coordinator, Mr. Jerry Stuckle, was briefed more\nthan 24 hours in advance of the possibility of severe weather occurring in the\narea. The SKYWARN amateur radio net was run from Mr. Stuckle's home who\nthen telephoned significant spotter reports to WSFO Raleigh. Other spotters\nrelayed their information to local law enforcement agencies. At 5:00 a.m. Monday\nmorning, HAMS were performing outstandingly in relaying tornado information\ndownstream and to WSFO Raleigh.\nFINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nFinding 5.1: Overall, a vigorous Warning and Preparedness program existed in\nthe areas visited. However, in Rankin County, Mississippi, (WSFO Jackson's\nresponsibility) the Emergency Management Agency was just getting organized.\nThe County's storm spotter network needed to be reorganized and trained. Also,\nspotter training in WSFO Raleigh's area of responsibility was limited due to\nminimum staffing, and the spotter network for WSO Houston's CWA was sporadic\nin some locations.\nRecommendation 5.1: To allow the WPM/WCM more time to perform his/her\npreparedness duties, efforts should be increased to limit shift work by the\nWPM/WCM to no more than 25 percent of the time. Spotter training and\norganization is an indispensable part of each NWS Office's program and must be\ngiven a high priority, even in times of limited staffing. Staffing should be brought\nup to full complement where insufficient staffing has a negative effect on\nWPM/WCM duties.\nFinding 5.2: WSFO Raleigh placed a low priority on logging information during\nthe event. Many telephone calls and conversations were recorded after the event\nfrom the memory of individuals working the event. WSFO Raleigh has since\ninstituted procedures to enhance their real-time logging of events during severe\nweather episodes including the addition of a voice-activated recording device.\nRecommendation 5.2: A greater importance should be placed on logging events,\nparticularly severe weather information.\n90","Finding 5.3: The preparedness effort was, in general, well rewarded during this\noutbreak. Interviews and individual accounts indicated people were generally\naware of the threat, the warnings, and of the proper safety measures to take.\nRecommendation 5.3: The NWS, along with the entire hazards community,\nneeds to continue and enhance preparedness and educational activities to\nminimize loss of life.\nFinding 5.4: NWS offices often have a HAM base station in the operations area.\nHAM radio operators provide some of the most timely and accurate storm\ninformation. WSFO's Jackson and Atlanta were in temporary quarters with\nlimited space, and no HAM base station was in service. Both offices plan space for\na HAM station at their new facilities.\nRecommendation 5.4: NWS offices should make every effort to provide space\nfor HAM radio, even while occupying temporary quarters.\n91","","CHAPTER 6\nDISSEMINATION AND COMMUNICATIONS\nThe following sections discuss the various dissemination and communication\nsystems and services utilized in association with the tornado outbreak. Due to the\nvast areas affected by the storms, all dissemination aspects of this disaster could\nnot be covered or evaluated in depth.\nNOAA Weather Wire Service (NWWS)\nThe old, landline, Weather Wire was discontinued in the late 1980's. It was\nreplaced by a new satellite delivery system which makes NWWS available almost\nanywhere. The receiving equipment may be leased or purchased and is operated\nby GTE/Contel in Chantilly, Virginia. Forecasts, statements, watches, and\nwarnings are transmitted via the AFOS network to selected NWS offices (normally\nWSFOs) where they are uplinked to the NWWS.\nThere are about 1300 NWWS subscribers. The NWS provided a \"gift\" NWWS to\neach state. This unit normally went to the state Highway Patrol or Emergency\nManagement Agency (EMA) which could fan-out the data to other emergency\nmanagement, law enforcement, or government agencies which could effectively\nutilize the information.\nPeriodically, it is necessary for GTE/Contel to briefly shut-down NWWS to perform\nessential maintenance. Messages are sent to subscribers in advance notifying\nthem of the time the outage will occur. The NWWS was stopped for maintenance\nfrom 3:00-5:00 a.m. EST on Saturday, November 21. It was about 12 hours later\nthat the tornadic storms struck southeast Texas. If the planned outage had\noccurred about 24 hours later, NWWS would have been out of service when\ntornadoes were in progress in eastern Mississippi and Alabama. To ensure that\nscheduled NWWS maintenance does not occur when severe weather is forecast or\nin progress, procedures are needed whereby contacts are made between\nGTE/Contel and the NWS before the system is turned off.\nTexas\nThere are 128 NWWS subscribers in Texas (32 in Houston's CWA). The EBS\nstation in Houston (KTRH) is on the NWWS. The system operated with\nacceptable performance. The Harris County Emergency Coordinator noted there\nappeared to be a few minutes delay between the reception of the warnings on their\nNWWS and the receipt on another circuit. This comment was not noted at the\nother GTE/Contel subscribers contacted in Houston, but it was mentioned in\nRaleigh, North Carolina. NWS Headquarters was made aware of the comment.\n93","Mississippi\nMississippi has 46 subscribers (14 in the Jackson, Choctaw, Webster, Leake,\nMeridian-Kemper area). The EBS lead station in Jackson (WJDS) is on NWWS.\nThe warnings received on NWWS \"beep\" plus a video scroll arrangement is in\nplace for the staff to see the warning text. The DST was not made aware of any\nproblems with NWWS in Mississippi.\nGeorgia\nThere are 33 subscribers in Georgia (9 in the Atlanta and Macon area). While no\nproblems were noted with the GTE/Contel system during this event, the GEMA\nperiodically experiences a problem with NWWS. When the alarm goes off and the\nreset button is pressed, occasionally the whole system shuts-down. Despite the\naddition of another rug to reduce static electricity, and efforts by the local\nGTE/Contel maintenance personnel, the problem persists. NWS Headquarters has\nbeen made aware of the problem and will advise GTE/Contel Headquarters in\nWashington. Elsewhere, newspaper articles indicate that Georgia residents were\nappraised of the inclement weather as it developed from NWWS and other\nsources.\nKentucky\nThe GTE/Contel NWWS has 25 customers in Kentucky. No problems were noted.\nTornado Warnings were issued on NWWS.\nNorth Carolina\nThe GTE/Contel NWWS has 27 listed customers in North Carolina. The system\noperated with acceptable performance. The TV station at Durham, WTVD, stated\nthey received the warnings 3 to 4 minutes sooner on Associated Press compared to\ntheir stand-alone GTE/Contel NWWS.\nNOAA Weather Radio (NWR)\nThere are 386 NWR stations capable of reaching about 90 percent of the people in\nthe United States. Severe weather watches and warnings are preceded by a\nwarning alarm tone. While many EMAs, law enforcement agencies, utilities,\nschools, and large industries frequently are aware of and utilize NWR, probably\nless than 25 percent of the general public know of NWR or have a home receiver.\nNevertheless, NWR often reaches many people as a voice override on a radar\npicture on a CATV channel, or other secondary communications systems, including\nlive or taped relay on commercial radio/tv stations.\n94","The Allanta Journal\nTHE ATLANTA CONSTITUTION\nDoppler system\nMr. Garza commended his\nforecasting staff Friday as a\nmight have given\nweather service disaster team\nheld a news conference after\nmore warning\ncompleting a survey of several\nareas of Georgia damaged by tor-\nnadoes Nov. 22. They will evalu-\nBy Charles Salter\n3000AM\nate the effectiveness of forecast-\nSTAFF WRITER\ning services, broadcast warn-\nThe state-of-the-art Doppler\nings, and public responses.\nradar would have allowed fore-\nThe team also visited storm-\ncasters to issue warnings of ap-\ndamaged areas of Texas, North\nproaching deadly storms had\nCarolina, Kentucky and Missis-\nthey been in place when torna-\nsippi.\ndoes struck Georgia last month,\nWhile tornadoes killed six\nan Atlanta meteorologist said\npeople in Georgia Nov. 22., tor-\nFriday.\nnadoes and flash floods claimed\n\"The Doppler radar would\n26 lives and injured more than\ngive us an additional 10 to 15 or\n250 people in five states Nov. 21-\neven 30 minutes of warning time\n23.\nas compared to what we are us-\nJoseph R. Bocchieri of Silver\ning today,\" said Carlos Garza,\nSpring, Md., disaster team coor-\nhead of the National Weather\ndinator, said the warning system\nService (NWS) forecasting office\n\"was accomplished quite well\nhere. \"That certainly would help\nhere in Atlanta.\"\nto save lives due to the fact you\nHe said, \"I think the warn-\nhave more lead time to get the\nings put out from this office had\nwarning out to the public.\"\nample lead time\ncivil defense\nThe NWS office in Atlanta\npeople reacted appropriately,\nwill replace its 1974 radar sys-\nand TV and radio stations did\ntem with the Doppler radar by\nhave time to get the word out.\"\nApril 1994.\nNews Media played key role.\n95","Texas\nThe WSO Houston NWR station covers eight Counties: Brazoria, Chambers, Fort\nBend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller. There are gaps in the\ncoverage due to the high-rise buildings in the downtown Houston area. Watches\nand warnings are taped and played on NWR with the tone alert activated. A\n\"Quick Warn\" format is not used. The tapes are played until the valid time on the\nwatch/warning expires or until superseded by a Special Weather or Severe\nWeather Statement or another warning. All indications show that warnings were\nissued in a timely manner. The WSO keeps a NWR log for the time products were\nbroadcast.\nMississippi\nRankin County is served by the NWR transmitter located in Hinds County\n(Jackson). Programming originates from WSFO Jackson. The Rankin County\nEMA Director has an NWR receiver from which he knew of the forecast for severe\nweather, the Tornado Watch, and the Tornado Warning until 11:30 p.m. for the\nCounty adjacent to and southwest of Rankin County. In addition to NWR, he\nreceives weather information via calls from the Sheriff's Office, or MEMA. The\nBrandon Police Department, some schools, and Fire Departments in the County\nhave NWR. The Rankin County EMA Director \"preaches\" NWR whenever he gets\na chance and wishes more people had a receiver. NWR and radio/TV are the only\ndirect source of weather warnings. A resident in northeast Brandon, next door to\nthe home in which four people died, had NWR, but the unit was not \"on\" the night\nof the storm.\nWJDS, the Emergency Broadcast Station serving the Jackson area, utilizes NWR.\nThe station Director heard the NWR alarm tone for the tornado warning for\nCopiah County at his home south of Jackson and decided to come to the office.\nMany of the NWR antennae in the state are located on Mississippi Educational\nTelevision (ETV) network towers. ETV has an FM radio service which covers a\nlarge portion of the state from their towers. MEMA and ETV are talking with the\nNWS about the possibility of having NWR \"override\" the ETV FM programming\nanytime the NWR alarm tone is sounded.\nLeake County is served by the Jackson NWR programmed by WSFO Jackson.\nWebster and Choctaw are served by the Ackerman NWR programmed by WSO\nMeridian. Kemper County is served by the Meridian NWR programmed by WSO\nMeridian.\nNWR in Mississippi functioned normally. NWR logs were kept. WSFO Jackson\nnormally gives an abbreviated \"Quick Warn\" on NWR first (type of warning,\nCounty, time of expiration), stating additional details will follow soon. These are\nusually first broadcast live. Once the hard-copy of the warning is available, the\n\"long\" version of the warning is recorded.\n96","Georgia\nThe GEMA does not have NWR in its communication room; however, there is a\nunit in the Chief of Operations' Office. The Communications Office is able to\nmonitor NWR through the cable system installed in GEMA's communications\nsections.\nAll warnings issued by WSFO Atlanta, and WSOs Macon and Athens were\ndisseminated immediately on NWR. WSO Athens kept a log of NWR issuances.\nGenerally, NWS offices kept a severe weather log and attempted to log NWR\nissuances.\nCobb, Cherokee, and Carroll Counties are served by the Atlanta NWR\nprogrammed by WSFO Atlanta. In Cobb County, NWR is one of the main sources\nof information along with The Weather Channel and GEMA. One citizen\ninterviewed said the radio and TV were off and the house was insulated too well\nto hear any sirens. He intends to purchase an NWR receiver. During the day of\nthe severe weather, Meteorologist Glenn Burns of TV-2, WSB in Atlanta, held up\nan NWR receiver and told his audience to \"get one.\" Lumpkin County is not in\nthe service area of any Georgia NWRs.\nPutnam County is served by the Macon NWR programmed by WSO Macon. The\nEatonton Police Department does not have NWR, yet all the police cars (except 4\nolder models) have the frequency on their radios. Patrol cars with the Sheriff's\nOffice also have NWR on their scanner. The Eatonton Police Chief, who was out\ndeer hunting, learned of the storm on his scanner with the NWR frequency. The\nEmergency Medical Services in Eatonton has NWR on their scanner.\nGreene County is in the service area of the Athens NWR programmed by WSO\nAthens. The Athens NWR is monitored by the Sheriff's Office.\nKentucky\nThe Cincinnati Weather Service Office (WSO CVG) is located in Covington,\nKentucky. WSO CVG has one NWR console. The NWR transmitter and antenna\nare located on a hill in the southern outskirts of Covington with a slightly higher\nhill to the west somewhat dampening the signals going into southeast Indiana.\nDuring this episode the staff used a \"Quick Warn\" method for getting the\nwarnings out. As soon as the decision is made to issue a warning, a staff member\npresses the alarm and broadcasts live, \"A Tornado Warning has been issued for\nCounty. Details to follow!\" At the same time another staff member using\nSRWARN composes the warning on a personal computer (PC). Then the alarm is\nsounded again on the NWR with the completed warning read over the NWR. This\nhas allowed the media to cut their lead time by as much as 2 minutes, because\nthey are able to react faster when hard copies of warnings are received via the\nNWWS. The local radio and TV personnel all commended the WSO CVG staff for\nthis innovation and the extra lead time it generated.\n97","During the past year, WSO CVG completed a very comprehensive study which\nlead to improving the NWR broadcast based upon user-expressed needs.\nImprovements include broadcasting radar and surface reports every 15 minutes\nand updating damage reports from severe weather and tornadoes during severe\nweather episodes. These changes have been appreciated by the media and public.\nNorth Carolina\nAll warnings were issued in a timely manner on NWR from WSOs Greensboro,\nCharlotte, Asheville, Cape Hatteras, and from WSFO Raleigh. Logs of warning\nissuances were kept at the WSOs, but not at WSFO Raleigh.\nThe NWR is an integral part of the public warning system in the Greensboro -\nWinston Salem area. The Emergency Broadcast System (EBS) is activated for\nTornado Watches on request by the NWS. The NWS also telephones the EBS\nstations and advises them of possible future warnings. The CPCS-1 (Common\nProgram Control Station-1) radio stations and commercial TV stations turn on\ntheir NWR receivers and set the tone alert feature. When subsequent Tornado\nWarnings are issued over the NWR with the \"A-burst\" (1050 Hz) tone alert signal,\nthe radio and TV stations then record the warnings and activate the EBS system\nfor their listening areas.\nWSO Greensboro's County Warning Area has 16 Counties with four CPCS-1 EBS\nradio stations. The warnings issued over NWR by WSO Charlotte were heard in\nFallston, Cleveland County, according to a HAM radio operator. The warnings\nwere also heard over the SKYWARN network in Cleveland County.\nMr. Chip Paterson, Chief of Operations, North Carolina Division of Emergency\nManagement in Raleigh indicated a need for NWR in western North Carolina.\nNational Warning System (NAWAS)\nNAWAS is a voice warning dissemination system operated by the Federal\nEmergency Management Agency (FEMA). Operational procedures vary from state\nto state. Because of early warnings in most cases, the 2-day time period over\nwhich this outbreak took place, and the availability of NWWS, NWR, EBS, etc.,\nNAWAS did not appear to have been a major or critical factor in the dissemination\nof weather information during this outbreak.\nTexas\nIn Texas, warnings are rarely read on NAWAS due to the size of the state, the\nnumber of NWS offices which could utilize the system, and the traffic it would\nproduce. There is one NAWAS drop in Texas; within that, 60 TEWAS (Texas\nWarning System) drops are located primarily at Department of Public Safety\noffices, NWS offices, and (to a lessor extent) at various County offices. WSO\n98","Houston has a drop but it is used infrequently. Very few users have drops on the\nsystem, and those that do usually receive the information by some other means.\nMississippi\nIn Mississippi, watches and warnings are usually read on NAWAS by the NWS.\nThere are 79 NAWAS drops in the state; however, there is not a NAWAS in the\nRankin County Sheriff's office or the Rankin County EOC. NAWAS was utilized\nin its prescribed manner during the tornado event.\nGeorgia\nThere are 47 NAWAS drops in Georgia (this includes nine NWS offices that have\nwarning responsibility in Georgia). NAWAS was not available in any of the\nCounties in which fatalities occurred.\nNAWAS is always utilized during hazardous weather events. No problems were\nregistered with any of the equipment used by GEMA during the severe weather\nepisode of November 22.\nThe GEMA Communications Office is usually staffed with at least two people\nduring inclement weather. Weather information received from the NWS is faxed\nby GEMA to the Georgia State Patrol and simultaneously broadcast on NAWAS.\nState Patrol rebroadcasts the information over the National Crime Institute\nComputer (NCIC GCIC for Georgia) to all GSP posts, County sheriffs, and police\noffices on the system.\nKentucky\nWSO CVG has three NAWAS lines (Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio) which were\nused extensively during this outbreak. At 4:42 p.m., the Kentucky State Police in\nLa Grange reported a tornado in Trimble County, Kentucky to the WSFO\nLouisville, Kentucky; this report was heard by WSO CVG. AT 4:45 p.m., WSO\nCVG issued a Tornado Warning for Carroll County, Kentucky. Additional calls\nwere made for ensuing tornadoes. The calls on the Indiana NAWAS went to the\nState Police in Versailles, Indiana. Calls on the Ohio NAWAS went to the Ohio\nState Police at Wilmington, Ohio for the Highland County, Ohio Tornado Warning.\nNorth Carolina\nNorth Carolina uses NAWAS at 41 locations for verbal notification. The North\nCarolina NAWAS system gives the North Carolina Division of Emergency\nManagement a \"heads up\" on the tornado warnings and is followed by additional\ndetails on the NWWS. NAWAS was used for this tornado outbreak. Calls were\nmade for all WSOs and WSFO Raleigh's warnings to the NAWAS State Warning\nPoint (SWP) for North Carolina over the NAWAS hot line, advising them to get\nhard copies of the warnings from their NWWS receiver printers. The SWP then\n99","relayed the warnings back to the warned Counties via the Division of Criminal\nInformation (DCI) network. The relaying of warnings from the NWWS of the\nNorth Carolina SWP back to the Counties being warned is a manual operation\nand may delay delivery of warnings by 15 or 20 minutes.\nEmergency Broadcast System (EBS)\nEBS activation is normally requested by the NWS for Tornado and Flash Flood\nWarnings. Evidence indicates that EBS worked as planned during this outbreak,\nbut did not play a major role.\nTexas\nThe EBS station in Houston is KTRH; the EBS was activated for this severe\nweather event. No problems were noted. The news director for KTRH was very\npleased with the coordination and information received from WSO Houston.\nMississippi\nThere are three EBS stations serving the Jackson area (WJDS - AM along with\nWJDX - FM and WMSI). The News Director of WJDS (Jackson's lead EBS\nstation) said the weekend programming tendency to include more music and less\nnews could result in less advance \"build-up\" about coming severe weather. Any\n\"outlook\" and \"watch\" information is given with the forecast. WJDS utilizes\nNWWS and NWR. The warnings received on NWWS \"beep\" plus a video scroll\narrangement is in place for the staff to see the warning text. WJDS always\nactivates EBS when requested by the NWS.\nTo the DST's knowledge, EBS elsewhere in Mississippi functioned as designed.\nGeorgia\nIn years past, Georgia has expressed and demonstrated, perhaps, a conservative\ntrend regarding activation of EBS to avoid \"over use\" and the \"cry wolf\" syndrome.\nThe EBS station serving the Atlanta area is WSB. There was no indication that\nWSB activated EBS during this severe weather event. WMAZ radio in Macon is\nthe EBS station for Putnam County. A visit was not made to WMAZ, but other\ninformation indicates WMAZ does activate EBS when requested. Green County is\nserved by WGAU in Athens. No visit was made to Athens.\nKentucky\nIn WSO CVG's CWA, there are two EBS stations, WCKY-AM and WLW. WCKY-\nAM was first called at 4:46 p.m. to activate EBS for the Carroll County, Kentucky\n100","Tornado Warning. According to Brian Combs, of WLW, the EBS from WLW was\nused two to three times during the tornado outbreak.\nNorth Carolina\nIn North Carolina, EBS was used. WSFO Raleigh notified various CPCS-1\nstations via telephone. The North Carolina Division of Emergency Management\nsaid it worked well.\nLaw Enforcement Teletype System (LETS)\nTo encourage all states to utilize LETS for relay of weather information to other\ngovernmental agencies, the NWS arranged to provide one agency per state with a\nfree NWWS. To a large degree, this works well, with the understanding that\nHighway Patrol or Emergency Management business, naturally, has first priority.\nIn return for the NWWS, the NWS receives valuable information such as road\nconditions, flood information, and damage reports.\nTexas\nIn Texas, the gift NWWS went to the Texas Department of Public Safety in\nAustin. The information on the NWWS is transferred to the Texas Law\nEnforcement Teletype System (TLETS) for statewide distribution. All the affected\nCounties in this event received information via TLETS.\nMississippi\nThe Mississippi Highway Patrol (MHP) Headquarters in Jackson was the recipient\nof the free NWWS. This has proven very beneficial in relaying NWS warnings\nand other weather information to decision makers. Via the Mississippi LETS,\nweather warnings are distributed to each County on the state NCIC (National\nCrime Institute Computer) thus reaching all Sheriffs' Offices and most Police\nDepartments. The MHP also disseminates a general weather briefing early each\nmorning on LETS. Weather data are not automatically relayed to the Mississippi\nLETS. It must be retyped. Nevertheless, this system and service has proven to\nbe very beneficial by delivering needed information to Mississippi decision makers.\nThe system performed as designed during this tornado event.\nGeorgia\nThe gift NWWS in Georgia went to the GEMA. NWWS data are disseminated by\nGEMA on the Georgia NAWAS. Passing the data on to other dissemination\ncircuits would require that the information be retyped. At this time there are no\nplans to automate the relay of the data from NWWS.\nThe Georgia Highway Patrol obtains its weather information by facsimile or the\nGEMA radio network. It is then passed on to Sheriff's Offices via the GA Crime\n101","Institute Computer (GCIC). GEMA hopes to become a drop on GCIC and will\nthen be able to enter data.\nThe Sheriff in Greene County said a GCIC message (in addition to word over the\nstatewide EMA radio band) advised them of the Tornado Watch and Severe\nThunderstorm Warning for Greene County. Another way his office knew of the\ntornado in the area was from 911 calls to his office from nearby Putnam County\nresidents.\nThere were no known problems associated with the Georgia LETS during this\nsevere weather episode.\nKentucky\nIn Kentucky, the Department of Emergency Services and Sheriffs receive their\nweather warning information via NWR, NAWAS and telephone. The Department\nof Emergency Service's Officers in each County are then contacted by telephone.\nThere is no LETS.\nNorth Carolina\nThe North Carolina Division of Emergency Management (the state designated\nweather distribution point) has NWWS, but must manually retype warnings into\nthe State Bureau of Investigation's Division of Criminal Information Circuit.\nMany law enforcement officials depend on this circuit for receiving weather\ninformation. Minutes are lost with this manual transfer of information.\nTelevision/Radio\nA survey of more than two dozen weathercasters and news directors in the states\nhardest hit in the November 21-23 tornado outbreak indicated the broadcast\nmedia, including The Weather Channel, and, to an extent, local cable TV\noperators, generally did a good job alerting the public to the threat posed by the\nwidespread severe storm activity. However, as discussed below, there were some\nproblems.\nStarting with dissemination early Saturday, November 21, of severe weather\nadvisories for a multi-state area from NSSFC, the broadcast media kept reminding\ntheir viewers-listeners that severe weather was in the area, with the possibility of\ntornadoes. NWS Tornado Watches and Warnings were broadcast quickly.\nA dissemination problem cited by a number of TV broadcasters is that when\nsevere storms occur on weekends or after midnight their viewing audience is\nsmall. Radio stations more often stay on late at night, but their night and\nweekend staffs are dwindling as they become more automated.\n102","Many of the TV broadcasters run \"crawl\" messages across their screens during\nregular programming whenever a severe storm watch is issued, as was the case\nNovember 21-23. These generally take 5 to 15 minutes to produce and are\nrepeated every 15 minutes.\nMost broadcasters rely on NWWS for emergency weather information more than\nany other service. About two-thirds retain commercial weather services, such as\nKavouras. A private weather service in Jackson, Mississippi area uses satellite\nuplinks to service up to 200 broadcast and other clients.\nMost TV and radio broadcasters rely on the Associated Press as a backup\ninformation service to NWWS or NWR. Some claimed that weather tends to have\nlower priority than news dispatches on the wire service, resulting in delays for\nsevere weather messages.\nMany of the radio-TV stations canvased have backup power in case of area power\nfailure.\nMore detailed information for individual states follows.\nTexas\nOf the media interviewed, five receive their weather information through\nGE/Contel NWWS; three from NWR; three from Weather Services International;\nthree from Associated Press; one from Universal; one from Accu-Weather; one\nfrom Kavouras; and one stated they rely on the EBS station.\nAll of the five TV stations contacted placed a crawl across their programming;\nhowever, they noted that all warnings may not have been placed on the screen\nduring this event. The preempting is selective; some stations are not allowed to\nrun crawls during commercials or certain newscasts.\nNeil Frank, meteorologist for KHOU TV, has completed a survey of average time\ndelays between the reception of warnings from the NWS and the dissemination via\nlive transmissions and crawls among the three network stations in Houston.\nCrawls were used most with an average delay of 15 minutes. The delay in live\ntransmissions was 14 minutes. There are now at least three companies which\noffer a solution. An incoming warning signal is diverted through a small computer\nwhich automatically generates a crawl. The crawl can be sent directly to air, or be\nstored and monitored before airing. KHOU purchased one of these systems and\nreduced their delay in transmission to a little over 2 minutes. There have been\ncases when they were on the air in 30 seconds.\nThree radio stations in addition to the EBS station were questioned. The first\nstated they broke into their programming, a second stated they read weather\ninformation once per hour, and the third said they had to call someone in to read\nthe warnings as the D.J. had no time to read them.\n103","Mississippi\nThe EMA Director in Rankin County stated that there were three Cable TV\nsystems (CATV) serving the area: Rankin County CATV, Capitol CATV in Jackson\n(Hinds County), and American CATV (no scroll at the bottom of the screen for\nwarnings; but, American CATV does broadcast NWR on Channel 12, 24-hours a\nday). All the CATV systems carry The Weather Channel. The Hinds County EOC\ncan override some CATV programming in the metro area.\nMississippi ETV (general hours of 9:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m.) with broadcasts covering\nmost of the state will interrupt regular programming and pass on NWS warnings.\nMany radio stations are daytime only. Others reduce power at sunset. Some\noperate in an \"automated or canned\" non-staffed fashion. The EBS stations\nmaintain their normal schedules. The Mississippi ETV radio service which covers\nmuch of the state will interrupt regular programming to announce NWS warnings.\nGeorgia\nSeveral people interviewed in Putnam and Greene Counties in Georgia\nacknowledged learning about the severe weather warnings for their area from\nwatching WMAZ TV Channel 13 in Macon. In Putnam County, TV Channels 2-5-\n11 in Atlanta and Channels 24 and 41 in Macon also serve the area. The Weather\nChannel is also available in Putnam County on Southern CATV. The Sheriff in\nGreene County said his office normally watches WAGA Channel 5 in Atlanta.\nAlthough no count or exact survey is available, radio broadcasts of the severe\nweather were heard on some stations. Many radio stations in metropolitan\nAtlanta and other parts of the state utilize NWR. A few have NWWS. The\nmajority depend on the Associated Press wire service for NWS weather messages.\nOthers utilize information from WGST Radio, an NWWS subscriber, in Atlanta.\nWDEN - AM from Macon serves Putnam County. People buried in their mobile\nhome ruble on River Oaks Drive heard the warning via radio.\nUpon its departure from Atlanta, the DST conducted a news briefing which was\nwell attended by television, radio, newspaper, and wire service reporters. Most\npapers reported a job well done by the NWS, albeit under difficult circumstances\nwith obsolete equipment.\nKentucky\nThree TV stations in the Cincinnati area were contacted. All receive their\nweather information from WSI, NWWS, and NWR with a tone alert. In addition,\nWLWT-TV uses NOWrad and AP, while WKRC-TV has its own doppler radar.\nDuring Tornado Warnings, WKRC and WCPO-TV will break into programming\nand go live. The \"Quick-Warn\" format used by WSO Cincinnati on NWR has\n104","enabled the TV stations to reduce their lead time by as much as 2 minutes\nbecause they are able to react faster when warning hard copies are received via\nthe NWWS.\nRadio broadcasts of the Tornado Warnings were heard on some stations. One\nstation in particular, WLW-AM, provided live briefings from the WSO in\nCincinnati.\nNorth Carolina\nTV Channel 2 - WFMY (a CBS affiliate in Greensboro) uses STORM ALERT,\nwhich is an automated system triggered by NWS warnings. The warnings for this\ntornado event were shown on TV as a crawl. STORM ALERT also prepared a\nmap, which was displayed on TV, showing the Counties affected by the warnings.\nGreensboro viewers watching Channel 2 saw the crawl and map display. WSO\nGreensboro's other two commercial TV stations (Channel 8 - WGHD, an ABC\naffiliate; and Channel 12 - WXII, an NBC affiliate) do not have automated STORM\nALERT, but can prepare crawls manually if personnel are available.\nIn the Charlotte area, TV Channel 3 - WBTV, Channel 9 - WSOC, and Channel 36\n- WCNC all use manually prepared crawls for warnings. WSO Charlotte has the\ncapability of overriding all CATV channels through telephone voice\nannouncements of tornado warnings in the Charlotte area.\nIn the Raleigh area, TV Channel 11 - WTVD (ABC), Durham's Channel 5 - WRAL\n(CBS), and Channel 22 - FOX 22 (independent) all have manually prepared crawls\nand a beeper. In addition, Channel 22 can be activated by NWR tone alert, after\nwhich the entire screen displays an emergency message with the voice of WSFO\nRaleigh's NWR explaining the situation. FOX-22 went off the air at 1:30 a.m.\nbefore the Orange County and Johnston County tornadoes.\nIn all areas serviced by CATV with The Weather Channel, the warnings were\ndisplayed by The Weather Channel.\nSpecial Cases\nTexas\nPublic Information Emergency System (PIES) is an official supplemental\ncommunication system to the Houston Area EBS. It is comprised of emergency\nmanagers and media outlets (21 total). Each location can activate the system with\na tone alert, much like that used with NWR. It can be activated for weather\nevents, explosions, toxic spills, or other disasters. WSO Houston uses this for a\nbackup only and did not use it for this event.\n105","Mississippi/Georgia\nBoth the MEMA and the GEMA have statewide low-band frequency radio\nnetworks reaching County EMAs and many law enforcement offices.\nMEMA radio is available to about 75 percent of Mississippi EMA offices. This\nsystem functioned as designed during the tornado event. MEMA is also\ndeveloping a state RACES (Radio Amateur Civil Emergency System) high-\nfrequency network which should be in use soon with the goal of having a RACES\noffice in every County.\nThe GEMA Radio Network consists of six transmitters providing service areas\ncovering 120 Counties. EMA's and law enforcement agencies within range of the\nsignal can receive weather data from this source. The Putnam County Police\nDepartment monitors the GEMA radio. Overall, the warning system was efficient\nand effective. Warnings were disseminated in time for preparedness actions to be\ntaken, as confirmed by the DST and newspaper accounts. Additionally, the media\nprovided good coverage to developing weather events, as well as to those events\nthat were imminently dangerous.\nBoth MEMA and GEMA have monitors for The Weather Channel and a Kavouras\ndrop showing the Jackson and Atlanta (respectively) NWS radar display.\nKentucky\nWSO Cincinnati has a local drop on the Kentucky Emergency Warning System\n(KEWS). This is a microwave based communication system that is utilized in\nwarning situations. Included on the network are the Kentucky State Police,\nDepartment of Military Affairs-Division of Disaster and Emergency Services,\nKentucky Educational Television stations, Department of Transportation, National\nWeather Service, and several other state agencies.\nThe WSO also has an extensive HAM radio network, Weather Amateur Radio\nNetwork (WARN) that not only covers their CWA, but extends out into other\nareas.\nNorth Carolina\nIn North Carolina, watches and warnings are coded by County and are distributed\non the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation's Division of Criminal\nInformation (DCI) network. Most of the law enforcement agencies have a drop.\nThe watches and warnings are first received by the North Carolina Department of\nEmergency Management via the NWWS. They must then be manually retyped on\nthe DCI.\n106","Sirens\nThere are arguments for and against the effectiveness of sirens as a modern day\nmethod of warning people of an emergency situation.\nThey are not always the best or most feasible warning system. Some of the cons\nare the high expense (around $15K minimum; 50 percent matching funds from the\nGovernment no longer available), maintenance, limited range, and the ability to\nhear sirens in today's highly insulated houses with the heating/air-conditioning\nsystems and other appliances in operation.\nIf one is outside, or inside with the TV/radio turned off, sirens offer a means to\nbecome aware of something unusual happening, and one is encouraged to turn on\nthe radio, TV, or NWR for additional information.\nTexas\nIn general, warning sirens are not activated for weather events in the Houston\narea, and WSO Houston is not aware of any activation for this event.\nMississippi\nThere are five municipalities in Rankin County with outdoor sirens (Florence,\nPearl, Richland, Flowood, and Brandon). There are three sirens in Brandon which\nare activated by the Police Department. The Duncan Mobile Home Park was\nabout 3 miles from the nearest sirens (one woman interviewed by the DST and\nwhose son and family lived there stated the siren could be heard when tested the\nfirst day of each month). No central agency has control of the sirens County-wide.\nSince there was no early warning for southern and central Rankin County, sirens\nin those sections of the County were not sounded prior to the tornado.\nGeorgia\nThere are 48 sirens in place and used in Cobb County near Atlanta. In addition to\nhearing the warning on radio/TV, one person interviewed by the DST stated the\nsirens were heard 35-40 minutes before the tornado hit. He was well prepared\nand had high praise for the warning service. Another person did not receive the\nwarning because the radio/TV was off and the house too well insulated to hear\nsirens.\nThere is a siren system in Eatonton, Georgia, (Putnam County). It is activated by\nthe Police Department. However, on Sunday (the day the tornado struck), no one\nwas in the office as all officers were on patrol.\n107","Kentucky\nThe Cincinnati Airport sirens were sounded at 5:21 p.m. as a tornado approached\nthe airport. Fortunately, the tornado lifted as it passed over the airport.\nNorth Carolina\nThere is no longer a working siren system in the Greensboro-Winston Salem area.\nAfter testing in the 1980s, 90 percent of the sirens were found to be defective.\nBecause the sirens were located in the now relatively deserted center part of\nGreensboro, and because of lack of adequate funding, the siren warning system\nwas abandoned in the late 1980s.\nFire sirens were sounded for the tornado in Fallston, Cleveland County. Sirens\nwere also activated in Claremont, Catawba County. There was no siren activation\nfor the Hillsborough, Orange County tornado. In Johnson County, sirens were not\nused.\nNews Wire Services\nThe NWS relies heavily on the news wire services and mass media to disseminate\nour products to their viewers and listeners. Many radio and TV stations must\ndepend on Associated Press (AP)/United Press International (UPI), etc., for their\nweather information if they cannot afford both the wire service and NWWS. With\nadvance forecasts, public severe weather outlooks, statements, and watches,\navailable to and disseminated by the wire services, information on the severe\nweather outbreak should have been available to people before they encountered\ninclement weather.\nTexas\nOf the eight electronic media polled in the Houston area, three responded that\nthey receive their warning and statement information via AP. No problems were\nnoted.\nKentucky\nRadio and TV stations in the Cincinnati area use AP and/or WSI. UPI is\ncontacted in Cleveland when the first warning is issued. No problems were\nmentioned.\nNorth Carolina\nThe North Carolina Division of Emergency Management has a continuous WSI\ndisplay in the emergency operations center showing all the latest information.\nMost of the news stations receive their information via AP, GTE/Contel, or\nKavouras.\n108","FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nFinding 6.1: GTE/Contel performed 20 minutes of maintenance on the weather\nwire system at 3:00 a.m., November 21. Advance notice of this 20 minutes of\ndown time was supplied to users, but no procedure was established to assure there\nwas no weather threat before taking the system down. This shut-down occurred\nbefore the start of the outbreak and did not affect dissemination of critical NWS\nproducts, but it could have been dangerous if the maintenance had occurred on\nNovember 22.\nRecommendation 6.1: Routine NWWS maintenance must not be performed\nwhen severe weather threatens. NWS must establish a procedure with\nGTE/Contel to avoid routine outage during critical weather situations.\nFinding 6.2: Only manual or semi-automated systems for relay of NWS data to\nlaw enforcement officials were in operation in Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, and\nNorth Carolina. In North Carolina distribution was accomplished by manually\ntyping products received from NWWS.\nRecommendation 6.2: The NWS should encourage state agencies to incorporate\nautomatic relay of NWWS information on LETS so that minutes and possibly lives\nmay be saved.\nFinding 6.3: Many people were aware of NWR, but the majority of citizens do\nnot own an NWR receiver.\nRecommendation 6.3: The NWS, emergency management officials,\nthe media, etc., should cooperate in promoting NWR. The NWS should increase\npublic education about the NWR system.\nFinding 6.4: The North Carolina Division of Emergency Management in Raleigh\nnoted the coverage of NWR in western North Carolina is poor and additional\ntransmitters are needed.\nRecommendation 6.4: Investigate NWR coverage in western North Carolina\nand determine the need and feasibility of installing additional transmitters. Also,\ninvestigate coverage nationwide to determine unserviced areas with significant\nneed.\nFinding 6.5: WSO Cincinnati received positive feedback with their NWR \"Quick\nWarn\" program. Many users stated they believed issuing the warnings with the\nquick format saved lives.\nRecommendation 6.5: Continue using the \"Quick Warn\" format. Other offices\nwith adequate NWR coverage should consider using this type of broadcast.\n109","Finding 6.6: None of the media in the areas visited utilize WR-SAME (Weather\nRadio Specific Area Message Encoder) for the automatic \"override\" of their audio\nto transmit warnings from NWR.\nRecommendation 6.6: Increase efforts to make the media (especially automated\nradio stations), emergency management agencies, schools, law enforcement\nofficials, etc., aware of WR-SAME and the benefits it provides.\nFinding 6.7: The EBS serving the Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, and North\nCarolina areas appears to have performed well.\nFinding 6.8: Television stations commonly used either text crawls or \"live\"\nbroadcasts to alert the public to impending severe weather. In many instances,\nthe crawls were produced manually resulting in delayed dissemination to the\npublic.\nRecommendation 6.8: The NWS should encourage TV stations to increase the\nuse of the automatic production of text crawls.\nFinding 6.9: Leading radio news people in two states stated that because of a\nbudget squeeze many radio stations forego NWWS and rely on the Associated\nPress (AP) for weather and other news. They observed that AP gives priority to\nhard news stories and scheduled daily summaries and weather alerts are apt to be\nheld up.\nRecommendation 6.9: At national, regional and state capitol levels, NWS\nshould discuss this assertion with AP leaders.\nFinding 6.10: The media often does not break into certain programming even\nfor urgent weather messages. Television stations may limit the time a crawl can\nbe broadcast. Automation of radio stations leave limited personnel available to\nbroadcast critical weather information.\nRecommendation 6.10: The NWS should point out the importance of the\nmedia's role in delivering warnings, and stress the need to avoid limiting times\nthat information can be broadcast. The NWS should also promote use of new\ntechniques like WR-SAME and electronic switching systems that help deliver\ncritical messages in seconds.\n110","CHAPTER 7\nUSER RESPONSE\nThe DST conducted a number of interviews with people involved in the tornadic\noutbreak. These included the general public who were in the storms' paths, media\npersonnel, and emergency management and law enforcement officials.\nMost of those interviewed were aware of the forecast, watches, and/or warnings for\nsevere weather in their area. Television and radio were the primary sources for\nweather information while sirens and NWR also played a role. Even without the\npresence of a warning in some instances, many people responded appropriately to\nthe dangerous storms (by seeking shelter on lower floors or interior rooms such as\na bathroom). In areas where the stormy weather occurred during daylight hours,\nthose in harms way could better assess the degree of danger in order to take\nsafety actions. However, where tornadoes struck at night (in Mississippi, for\nexample where tornadoes struck between 11:30 p.m.-3:30 a.m.), it was difficult for\npeople to recognize the danger.\nComments from those interviewed by the DST are presented below.\nEmergency Managers\nTexas\nA consensus of the emergency managers questioned were happy with the\ninformation they received. They stated that they received \"plenty of warning\" and\n\"good information.\" They felt the short format (several lines) severe weather and\nspecial weather statements were extremely helpful to update the situation.\nHarris, Brazoria, and Ft. Bend Counties increased staffing as a result of the\nwatches/warnings associated with this tornado event. It is standard procedure for\nthe Counties to augment staffing.\nMississippi\nThe DST interviewed the new, part-time Emergency Management Director of\nRankin County, Mr. Charlie Wilkinson. Mr Wilkinson was in the process of\nestablishing an EMA office in Rankin County. The EOC had no communications\nsystem (no CD radio) or staff. Emergency information generally comes from the\nHinds County EOC, Jackson media, contacts with WSFO Jackson, CATV, and The\nWeather Channel. Ultimately, the Rankin County EOC wants to improve the\nCounty's ability to feedback severe weather reports to WSFO Jackson.\n111","Mr. Wilkinson receives warnings by listening to the Jackson NWR, or gets a call\nfrom the Rankin County Sheriff's Office or MEMA. He was aware of the Tornado\nWarning valid 11:30 p.m. for Copiah County which borders on the southwest\ncorner of Rankin County. He placed no blame on the NWS for the lack of a\nspecific warning for Rankin County. He acknowledged that there had been a\nforecast of severe thunderstorms all day and that a tornado watch was in effect for\nthe area. He feels services will be improved once the EOC is staffed and has\ncommunications, and the NWS WSR-88D is operational.\nThe next visit was with Mr. Leon Schaffer, Deputy Director of MEMA\nheadquartered in Jackson. Mr. Schaffer stated that from an operational\nperspective he understands the NWS system and knows what our equipment\ncapabilities are. He is trying to establish a statewide warning system for MEMA\nand the NWS, instead of relying as much on local governments for this function.\nMississippi has 82 Counties, and resources vary in each (38 of the 42 Counties in\nWSFO Jackson's County Warning Area lack resources, like Rankin County).\nMississippi ETV may help in the statewide warning capability, using their\nstatewide FM radio network. Mr. Schaffer stated storm spotter networks are\ninvaluable.\nThe Duty Officer at MEMA called WSFO Jackson around 4:00 p.m., Saturday,\nNovember 21 for the forecast and weather status (severe storms forecast with a\ntornado watch likely later in the evening). MEMA contacted their Deputy\nDirector around 8:15 p.m. as the stormy weather began. MEMA opened their\noffice at 8:50 p.m.\nGeorgia\nIn a visit to Putnam County, Police Chief Kent Lawrence was interviewed. Chief\nLawrence had been out deer hunting but heard of the storm on his scanner, which\npicks up NWR, in his personal car. All police cars, except the older models, have\nthe ability to pick up NWR. His office does not have an NWR receiver (they are\nserved by the Macon NWR). They do monitor the GEMA radio frequency. He did\nnot have NAWAS. The Weather Channel is available on Southern CATV along\nwith statements from WSO Macon. He said Eatonton has a siren system. It is\nactivated by his office, but, on Sundays (the day the storm struck), no one is in the\noffice. All are out on patrol. The area monitors/receives TV-13 (WMAZ from\nMacon).\nIn Greene County, DST members stopped by the Sheriff's office in Greensboro,\nGeorgia. Sheriff J. Finch stated they monitor the Athens NWR and usually watch\nTV-5 in Atlanta for their weather. A GCIC (Georgia Crime Information Center)\nmessage advised them of the Tornado Warning in effect for their area. He also\nheard the warning over the statewide Sheriff's Office's band. Numerous 911 calls\nwere also received from Putnam County residents. Nevertheless, he stated the\nstorm hit quick.\n112","In a visit to the GEMA, DST members spoke to Mr. Gary McConnel, Executive\nDirector, and with Mr. Bob Miles and Mr. Lawrence Thompson. Mr. Thompson\nsaid he spoke with many media during and after the day of the tornado and\nindicated EBS worked well. He feels that the effectiveness of sirens vary (common\nsentiment). Mr. McConnel stated the NWS did well during this severe weather\noutbreak. WSFO Atlanta alerted GEMA officials around 7:00 a.m., Sunday,\nNovember 22, that severe weather was likely over Georgia during the day. Based\non this information, GEMA called-in an extra person to work. The\ncommunications center is open 24-hours per day and is normally staffed with two\npeople.\nIn a visit to the Cobb County EOC, DST members interviewed Mr. Larry White,\nAssistant to the Chief, who indicated the NWS provided great service in this\nevent. The County has 48 sirens, which were sounded about 30 minutes before\nthe event. The County EMA has a good community outreach program to inform\npublic about warnings from sirens and actions public should take. The EOC has a\nNWR, which is the main means of getting NWS warnings. Information is also\nreceived from GEMA and The Weather Channel. The EMA has a very good\nworking relationship with WSFO Atlanta.\nKentucky\nDuring a storm survey conducted by staff at WSO Cincinnati, Gary Wentworth,\nDirector of Emergency Services (DES) of Switzerland County, Indiana was\ncontacted. Mr. Wentworth recalled seeing the tornado many miles away. \"It\nlooked like two or three tornadoes wrapping around each other at first.\" The\nNWS investigation later concluded by the damage in Carroll County that this was\nindeed a multi-vortex tornado. He also noted there was little warning before the\ntouchdown, but he heard over the radio Tornado Warnings were in effect for\nCarroll County, and then Switzerland County. He noted that the tornado crossed\nthe Ohio River just after 5:00 p.m. and seemed to slow down as it moved through\nthe County. Switzerland County Sheriff Deputies noted that it crossed the Ohio\nRiver a second time near the Ohio-Switzerland County border into Boone County.\nBary Lusby, Director of Emergency Services of Owen County, was interviewed\nover the phone regarding damage in southern Owen County. He noted none of the\npeople in the field ever saw the second tornado in southern Owen County. \"We\nwere all looking at the huge tornado over Carroll County. It was absolutely\ntextbook-rotating wall cloud on the southwest side of the storm, no rain near the\ntornado, and wind rushing into the tornado from our backs.\" He received the call\nabout the second tornado around 6:00 p.m. and also about the damage on the\nOwen-Henry County line. County Sheriffs proceeded to both sites and found only\nvery light damage in southern Owen County. There was no evidence of a tornado\nnear Gratz Kentucky. \"I was hoping we didn't get what we kept hearing out of\nCarroll County on the police radio.\" He also mentioned that he appreciated the\neffort the NWS put forth during the event.\n113","North Carolina\nThe Orange County Emergency Manager was happy with the warning. He\nbelieved the NWS did all it could. He commented that the NWS has been more\nproactive since 1984.\nThe HAM radio coordinator was very pleased with NWS cooperation.\nAs a part of the survey, two DST members visited the North Carolina Division of\nEmergency Management in Raleigh. Interviewed were Joe Myers, Director of\nState Division of Emergency Management and Chip Patterson, Chief of\nOperations. Both individuals were happy with the NWS support. They had been\nin contact with the WSFO early in the day and were prepared for the event.\nTwo DST members also visited the EOC in Johnson County, North Carolina where\nthey met with Dewayne West. He knew about the Tornado Watch from the\nNWWS. He had been called at 4:30 a.m. after a tornado had touched down near\nhis sister's home, and he was already preparing to respond.\nMedia\nWeather reporters and news directors were generally complimentary of the\ninformation received from NWS offices.\nBroadcasters generally lauded NWR. They recommended that NWS conduct a\nnational public awareness campaign to encourage people to own NWRs, especially\nresidents of trailer parks. Several volunteered to help NWS with such an effort.\nAn often-reported recommendation by the media was the need for more public\neducation on severe storms. Watches should be emphasized more than they are.\nPeople should be taught to start planning their moves as soon as a watch is\nissued, not wait for a warning. A number volunteered to help with such an effort.\nThis idea was discussed in two states, coupled with promotion of NWR ownership.\nOne radio news director, Randy Bell of WJDS, Jackson, Mississippi, suggested the\nneed for signing up more radio stations on the NWWS because many of them\nopted for news wire services, which are much slower than NWWS, as their prime\nalert. His station serves as the EBS outlet for 14 Counties. He would appreciate\ninterim statements from NWS, between warnings, on the storm's changing\npositions. He suggests that in the southern states ice storms are, for individuals\non the move, next most dangerous to tornadoes in deaths and injuries.\nTexas\nThe news director at KTRH, the CPCS-1 station, was very pleased with the\ncoordination and information received from WSO Houston.\n114","Mississippi\nIn Mississippi, the media were generally very positive and supportive of NWS\nperformance. David Hampton, the Editorial Director of the Clarion-Ledger in\nJackson spent 45 minutes with DST members offering to do a special on the\ncoming WSR-88D. Mr. Burt Case, WBLT TV-3 News Director, offered help in\npromoting the NWR, while expressing concern for the lack of County HAM and\nspotter organizations.\nChannel 3, in its special report, featured an Emergency Management Official in\nsupport of the NWS performance.\nMr. Randy Bell, Director of the Jackson area EBS station WJDS-AM/WJDX-FM,\nspoke with DST members. They have NWWS (alarm beeps on warnings plus a\nvideo scroll arrangement is in place to see the warning text). EBS is also\nactivated on WMSI Radio (three stations total). NWR is in the WJDS newsroom\nas backup. He heard the NWR alarm tone for the tornado in Copiah County and\ncame in to the office.\nBoth print and broadcast media in Mississippi, including the Associated Press\nwhose release was carried nationally, reported that Jackson suffered with a 35-\nyear-old radar, but that a new Doppler radar is about to be erected there.\nGeorgia\nAt WSFO Atlanta, the DST conducted a news briefing which was well attended by\ntelevision, radio, newspaper and wire services reporters. Most papers reported a\njob well done by the NWS, albeit under difficult circumstances with obsolete\nequipment.\nKentucky\nThe media seemed very pleased with changes made in the past 2 years. The MIC\nhas been on station about 2 years and has apparently established an excellent\nrapport with the media. Several media contacted indicated they had noticed a\nmarked improvement in services since the MIC's arrival.\nNorth Carolina\nOf the three local television stations in the Raleigh-Durham area, only the\nweathercaster at WTVD stayed on the air through the night. He felt there was\ngood information flow and the products were timely and concise. They broke into\nprogramming with statements and warnings. He believed the watches brought\nawareness to the area. The feedback he received was all positive. Many people\nremembered the 1988 event, i.e., it \"felt\" like it did prior to the tornado event in\nthe Raleigh area in 1988. He received one telephone call where the caller stated\nhe believed the warnings saved his family's lives. Unfortunately, the other TV\n115","stations in the Raleigh area were not on the air. They terminated their normal\nbroadcast before the Orange County tornado occurred.\nPublic Response\nTexas\nSeveral citizens in the Channelview section of Houston, Texas where an F4\ntornado had devastated a multi-block area were interviewed. Most had been\naware of the possibility of tornadoes from their own knowledge of local weather or\nfrom the radio and TV forecasts. Those who were listening to radio or television\nheard the Tornado Warnings. Those who were busy with outside activities or\nshopping did not hear the warnings. However, those in the vicinity of the tornado\nall described its intense blackness, the roaring sounds of freight trains and the\ndebris funnel. The tornado was clearly visible. Many Houston citizens have been\ntrained since third grade on the correct actions to take during tornadoes, and, in\nall cases, they saved their own lives. The most dramatic story was from a mother\nwho went shopping 30 minutes before the tornado hit leaving her five children in\nthe house. The oldest upon realizing the tornado was headed their way sent three\nyoungsters under the bed, and two hid in the closet. Although the house was\nbadly damaged they escaped unscathed.\nMississippi\nIn a visit to Duncan Mobile Home Park near Brandon, DST members talked with\nMrs. Maxine Roberts. Her son's tied-down mobile home was destroyed. It was so\nhot that she and others realized bad weather was coming. Her son, his wife, and\ntheir child were not at home. He has an NWR which she gave them. Mrs.\nRoberts was listening to radio (WMSI 103 FM) and never heard a Tornado\nWarning for Rankin County. She felt that if there had been a warning people\ncould have taken some lifesaving action. She stated they could hear the Whitfield,\nMississippi, siren when it is tested the 1st day of each month.\nThere was one house destroyed at the Duncan Trailer Park. The 22-year-old\nwoman who lived there had a storm cellar less than 50 ft from her bedroom, but\nshe never got to the cellar. She was thrown by the storm to a lake about 1/4 mile\naway.\nThe next location visited was the Easthaven area in northeast Brandon north of I-\n20 where four people died in a two-story brick home. DST members spoke with\nMr. Nick Nickalson the next door neighbor. His microwave clock stopped at 11:52\np.m. He had an NWR receiver but it was turned off. He was unaware of the bad\nweather, but he knew it was abnormally hot for this time of the year. He had to\nhold on to the rug to keep from being blown away. He heard Ann his next door\nneighbor screaming for help. She lost her husband, son, and two of his young\nfriends who were spending the night (all Cub Scouts a campout had been\n116","cancelled due to the weather). They were all upstairs coming downstairs. Mr.\nNickalson said the sirens in Brandon can be heard \"if the wind is blowing right.\"\nGeorgia\nDamage was surveyed along River Oaks Drive near Eatonton. In one area where\nthere was extensive damage, some of the residents were interviewed. Mr. and\nMrs. Joe Faulk were buried under the rubble of their \"tied-down\" mobile home.\nThere was not much rubble left of the \"not-tied-down\" mobile home next to their's.\nThey heard of the tornado sighting in Putnam County on WDEN - AM radio in\nMacon. They did not see the tornado which lasted about 30 seconds. There are no\nshelters in their area.\nMrs. Martha Smith and Mrs. Darlene Roberts (both with the Georgia State Social\nServices who were talking to the Faulks) also spoke with DST members. Mrs.\nSmith said she listened to the Macon NWR on a scanner. Mrs. Roberts had gone\nshopping. Her husband and daughter heard the warning, accompanied by a beep-\ntone, for Putnam County on TV and went to their hallway for protection. Both\nladies acknowledged that if people had been watching the Atlanta media or a\nstation via satellite dish they would not likely have gotten the warning for\nPutnam County. CATV presents a mixed bag in their view in terms of getting\nweather data.\nMr. James Gregory, Director, Putnam County Emergency Medical Services (EMS)\nand Mr. Troy Reynolds, Fire Chief, Putnam County Fire Department spoke with\nmembers of the DST. Mr. Gregory said he saw the tornado and heard a never-\nending loud roar like thunder. He lives about 1/2 mile from the tornado path near\nLake Oconee. Both Mr. Gregory and Mr. Reynolds would like the WSFO Atlanta\nto contact them about a new/upgraded spotter training session. This request was\npassed on to the WSFO Atlanta.\nThe DST then travelled to the Sheriff's Office and spoke with Mrs. Cherry\nBatchlor and Mrs. Dianne Pharm. Mrs. Pharm said she had just come in from\nshopping and saw the tornado. She had developed a safety plan and put it into\naction. She and her daughter left their home (which she did not trust in a major\nstorm) and sought shelter in the ditch by the railroad track. She said she learned\nabout safety rules in school and from watching TV.\nIn a visit to Cobb County, northwest of Atlanta, DST members spoke to two\nresidents in Kennesaw. One resident indicated the tornado hit about 12:10 p.m.\nTrees went down around his home. He felt pressure on his house and in his ears\nbut did not actually see the tornado. He heard of the Tornado Warning on radio\nand television. Also, the sirens sounded 35 to 40 minutes before the tornado hit.\nHe was well prepared and had high praise for warnings.\nThe other resident did not see the tornado but saw a wall of water. He did not\nhave radio or TV on and did not hear the sirens (his house was well sealed). He\n117","was not aware of warnings, but the weather just didn't feel right. He did not have\na NWR but will buy one.\nKentucky\nThe only fatality in Kentucky was a woman, who despite the urging of five friends\nand relatives, decided to remain in her mobile home rather than seek shelter. She\nwas killed, but the others survived. They all knew about the Tornado Warning 5\nminutes before it struck and had time to find adequate shelter.\nSeveral people were interviewed who live in a cluster of four mobile homes which\nsustained a direct hit in Posey Township. One of the residents had just finished\nbuilding an underground shed and tornado shelter this past summer. One woman\ncommented that she was on the phone with her sister when the Tornado Warning\nwas issued. She told us, \"I'm gone!\" and went to the other mobile homes to get\neveryone else out. \"It was so scary. You could see it coming right for us! We\nwent into the shelter and closed the door. About 4 or 5 minutes later, we heard\nthe freight train sound. It was all over so fast!\" When they came out of the\nshelter, one mobile home was completely destroyed, and another was heavily\ndamaged.\nNorth Carolina\nIn the Hillsborough area of Orange County, where two fatalities occurred, a\nresident, Mr. Bob Rabil, heard the Severe Thunderstorm Warning on NWR about\n2:00 a.m. He awakened his wife, and they rushed to a crawl space beneath his\nhome for shelter. Later they heard the roar of the tornado as it passed by. Mr.\nRabil is an avid NWR listener and an amateur weather forecaster. He was\nextremely complementary of the job that WSFO Raleigh did during the event. He\ncommented that the NOVA program (about tornadoes) which aired several weeks\nprior to the event help him recognize the \"signs\" of possible severe weather.\nThere were several others interviewed at the Hillsborough damage site. The\ngeneral response was that they did not know a tornado was coming. They knew\nthere was a watch in effect and there was the potential for tornadoes, but they\nhad also heard the Tornado Watch was due to expire at 1:00 a.m. So, they went\nto bed. The watch was extended at 12:19 a.m. and expanded eastward. The event\noccurred about 2:20 a.m.\nFINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nFinding 7.1: In general, people were aware of and responded properly to the\nthreat of inclement weather in their area. Most first utilized the media to obtain\nweather information. Then, personal, visual confirmation verified the absence or\npresence of actual danger before safety measures were taken. These factors\nworked less effectively where there were no warnings, people were asleep, or were\n118","primarily in mobile homes. In those areas where an actual warning may not have\nbeen in effect, forecasts, watches, and warnings for nearby areas usually indicated\nthe threat of severe weather.\nFinding 7.2: In Houston, the users felt that the short format (several lines)\nsevere weather and special weather statements were extremely helpful to update\nthe situation.\nRecommendation 7.2: Continue using these types of statements to update the\nevent and encourage other NWS offices to act similarly.\nFinding 7.3: Some users felt that more emphasis should be given to warning\nmessages for situations that are particularly certain and dangerous (e.g. confirmed\ntornado in highly populated area).\nRecommendation 7.3: The NWS should explore ways to more effectively convey\nthe urgency and serious nature of the warning message during especially high\nthreat situations.\n119","APPENDIX A\nFUJITA TORNADO INTENSITY SCALE\nCategory\nDefinition--Effect\n(F0)\nGale tornado (40-72 mph): Light damage. Some damage\nto chimneys; break branches off trees; push over shallow-\nrooted trees; damage sign boards.\n(F1)\nModerate tornado (73-112 mph): Moderate damage. The\nlower limit is the beginning of hurricane wind speed; peel\nsurface off roofs; mobile homes pushed off foundations or\noverturned; moving autos pushed off the roads.\n(F2)\nSignificant tornado (113-157 mph): Considerable damage.\nRoofs torn off frame houses; mobile homes demolished;\nboxcars pushed over; large trees snapped or uprooted;\nlight-object missiles generated.\n(F3)\nSevere tornado (158-206 mph): Severe damage. Roofs and\nsome walls torn off well-constructed houses; trains\noverturned; most trees in forest uprooted; heavy cars lifted\noff ground and thrown.\n(F4)\nDevastating tornado (207-260 mph): Devastating damage.\nWell-constructed houses leveled; structure with weak\nfoundation blown off some distance; cars thrown and large\nmissiles generated.\n(F5)\nIncredible tornado (261-318 mph): Incredible damage.\nStrong frame houses lifted off foundations and carried\nconsiderable distance to disintegrate; automobile sized\nmissiles fly through the air in excess of 100 yards; trees\ndebarked; incredible phenomena will occur.\nA-1","APPENDIX B\nOVERALL PERFORMANCE STATISTICS\nThe statistical analysis is based on the standard procedures of the NWS. The\nnational warning verification program uses a \"generic concept\" to verify warnings.\nIn the case of severe local storms, this means tornado or severe thunderstorm\nwarnings are verified by either tornado or severe thunderstorm events. Likewise,\ntornado or severe thunderstorm events are covered by either tornado or severe\nthunderstorm warnings. In addition, separate tornado and severe thunderstorm\nstatistics are presented to further delineate the NWS's ability to distinguish\nbetween the two types of warnings.\nThe basic unit of warning for tornadoes and severe thunderstorms is the County.\nIn the statistical analysis, a warning that covers three Counties is counted as\nthree \"warned areas.\" At least one severe event occurring during the valid period\nof a warning in a warned County produces a \"verified warning.\"\nThe statistical measures applied to severe local storm warnings are warning\naccuracy, false alarm rate, and lead time. Warning accuracy is the percent of\nCounties that had a severe local storm while a warning was in effect. The false\nalarm rate is the percent of Counties warned that did not have severe weather.\nThe lead time is the time from the issuance of a warning until the beginning time\nof a severe weather event. A tornado or severe thunderstorm that occurred\nwithout warning is assigned a lead time of zero.\nThe outbreak produced 254 severe weather events: 151 tornado, 27 hail, and 76\nthunderstorm wind. There were 12 killer events, 65 that produced injuries, and\n58 that caused at least $500,000 in damage, virtually all the result of tornadoes.\nIn fact only three of the 103 severe thunderstorm (hail and wind) events resulted\nin injuries and none in deaths or significant damage. The data are summarized in\nTable B1.\nTable B1. Shows the number of events covered by either a tornado or severe thunderstorm warning.\nThe percentage of total events in a warning is in parentheses.\nSevere\nEvents\nTornado\nTotal\nThunderstorm\nAll Events\n113 (75)\n85 (83)\n198 (78)\nKiller Events\n9 (75)\n-- (--)\n9 (75)\nInjury Events\n49 (82)\n5 (80)\n54 (83)\nDamage Events\n49 (84)\n-- (--)\n49 (84)\nOf the 254 severe weather events, 198 were in a severe weather warning, for a\nwarning accuracy of 78 percent. The average lead time for these events was 20\nminutes. For those events that caused deaths, injuries, and significant damage,\nthe warning accuracy was 75, 83, and 84 percent, respectively. Table B2 shows\nresults when the two types of warnings are separated.\nB-1","Table B2. Shows the number of events covered by the proper warning (i.e., tornado event covered by a\ntornado warning and severe thunderstorm event covered by a severe thunderstorm warning). The\npercentage of total events are in parentheses.\nSevere\nTotal\nTornado\nThunderstorm\nEvents\n134 (53)\n60 (58)\n74 (49)\nAll Events\n4 (33)\n-- (--)\n4 (33)\nKiller Events\n33 (51)\n3 (60)\n30 (50)\nInjury Events\n31 (53)\n-- (--)\n31 (53)\nDamage Events\nOverall, the results shown in Tables B1 and B2 were better than the average\nbased on severe weather statistical data from the three previous years.\nThe outbreak provided a chance to compare performance at a weather office\nequipped with a NEXRAD radar with stations using conventional radar data.\nWSO Houston, Texas, had its WSR-88D operating at the time of outbreak. The\nperformance statistics for Houston were the best among all those office involved in\nthe outbreak. The numbers are more dramatic considering the performance of the\nother offices was already better than average and Houston did not have the\nadvantage of being downstream from where the activity began. The numbers are\nsummarized in Table B3. In addition, average lead time for warned events\nimproved to 25 minutes.\nTable B3. Same as Table B2, except for WSO Houston only.\nSevere\nTotal\nTornado\nThunderstorm\nEvents\n16 (89)\n1 (100)\n15 (88)\nAll Events\n(--)\n-- (--)\n-- (--)\nKiller Events\n6 (100)\n-- (--)\n6 (100)\nInjury Events\n7 (100)\n-- (--)\n7 (100)\nDamage Events\nStatistics on watches separated by type of event are given in Table B4.\nTable B4. Shows the number of events covered by watches. The percentage of total events is in\nparentheses.\nSevere\nTotal\nTornado\nThunderstorm\nEvents\n243 (96)\n97 (94)\n146 (97)\nAll Events\n11 (92)\n-- (--)\n11 (92)\nKiller Events\n61 (94)\n5 (100)\n56 (93)\nInjury Events\n56 (97)\n-- (--)\n56 (97)\nDamage Events\nB-2","APPENDIX C\nChronology of Selected Products\nI.\nWATCHES\nNNNN>##<A\n<ZCZC MKCSEL4\nE:292.0913 341.0911 341.0881 292.083:WWUS9 KMKC 220225\nMKC WW 220225\nLAZ000-MSZ000-ARZ000-220900-\nBULLETIN - IMMEDIATE BROADCAST REQUESTED\nTORNADO WATCH NUMBER 914\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE KANSAS CITY MO\n825 PM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\nA. THE NATIONAL SEVERE STORMS FORECAST CENTER HAS ISSUED A TORNADO WATCH\nFOR\nPORTIONS OF SOUTHEAST LOUSIANA\nA LARGE PART OF MISSISSIPPI AND\nPORTIONS OF SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS\nAND ADJACENT COASTAL WATERS\nEFFECTIVE THIS SATURDAY NIGHT AND SUNDAY MORNING UNTIL 300 AM CST.\nTHIS IS A PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS SITUATION WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF VERY\nDAMAGING TORNADOES. ALSO LARGE HAIL. DANGEROUS LIGHTNING AND DAMAGING\nTHUNDERSTORM WINDS CAN BE EXPECTED.\nTHE TORNADO WATCH AREA IS ALONG AND 85 STATUTE MILES EAST AND WEST OF A LINE\nFROM 40 MILES EAST SOUTHEAST OF HOUMA LOUISIANA TO 55 MILES NORTH NORTHEAST\nOF GREENWOOD MISSISSIPPI.\nREMEMBER A TORNADO WATCH MEANS CONDITIONS ARE FAVORABLE FOR TORNADOES\nAND SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS IN AND CLOSE TO THE WATCH AREA. PERSONS IN THESE\nAREAS SHOULD BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR THREATENING WEATHER CONDITIONS AND\nLISTEN FOR LATER STATEMENTS AND POSSIBLE WARNINGS.\n$$\nC. TORNADOES AND A FEW SVR TSTMS WITH HAIL SFC AND ALF TO 2 IN. EXTRM TURBC\nAND SFC WND GUSTS TO 70 KNOTS. A FEW CBS WITH MAX TOPS TO 560. MEAN WIND\nVECTOR 23035.\nD... STG/SVR TSTMS TO CONT TO DVLP AND MOVE RPDLY NEWD AHD OF CDFNT AND\nASSOCD VIGOROUS UPR TROF. 85KT PROGD MID LVL WND FIELD COUPLED WITH 40/50 KT\nSELY LOWER LVL WND FIELD WL PROVD FVRBL SPD/DIR SHEAR TO SUPPORT ISOLD\nTORNADIC ACTVTY OVER NIGHT. STG SFC PRESSURE FALL/RISE COUPLET TRKG ENEWD\nTWD CNTRL MS. NEW ERL PROGS SUG ACTVTY WL CONT SVR MOST OF NIGHT.\nE OTR TSTMS CONT WW 913.\nANTHONY\nC-1","NNNN>##<A\n<ZCZC MKCSEL6\nE:305,0862 363,0854 363,0830 305,0834:WWUS9 KMKC 221229\nMKC WW 221229\nTNZ000-ALZ000-NCZ000-GAZ000-221900-\nBULLETIN - IMMEDIATE BROADCAST REQUESTED\nTORNADO WATCH NUMBER 916\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE KANSAS CITY MO\n729 AM EST SUN NOV 22 1992\n.A.. THE NATIONAL SEVERE STORMS FORECAST CENTER HAS ISSUED A\nTORNADO WATCH FOR\nPORTIONS OF EASTERN ALABAMA\nA LARGE PART OF WESTERN AND NORTHERN GEORGIA\nPORTIONS OF MIDDLE AND EASTERN TENNESSEE\nAND A SMALL PART OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA\nFROM 830 AM UNTIL 200 PM EST EST THIS SUNDAY MORNING AND\nAFTERNOON.\nTHIS IS A PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS SITUATION WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF VERY\nDAMAGING TORNADOES. ALSO. LARGE HAIL. DANGEROUS LIGHTNING AND DAMAGING\nTHUNDERSTORM WINDS CAN BE EXPECTED.\nTHE TORNADO WATCH AREA IS ALONG AND 75 STATUTE MILES EAST AND WEST\nOF A LINE FROM 35 MILES SOUTHEAST OF DOTHAN ALABAMA TO 55 MILES\nNORTH NORTHWEST OF KNOXVILLE TENNESSEE.\nREMEMBER A TORNADO WATCH MEANS CONDITIONS ARE FAVORABLE FOR TORNADOES\nAND SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS IN AND CLOSE TO THE WATCH AREA. PERSONS IN THESE\nAREAS SHOULD BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR THREATENING WEATHER CONDITIONS AND\nLISTEN FOR LATER STATEMENTS AND POSSIBLE WARNINGS.\n$$\nC. .TORNADOES AND A FEW SVR TSTMS WITH HAIL SFC AND ALF TO 1 IN. EXTRM TURBC\nAND SFC WND GUSTS TO 70 KNOTS. A FEW CBS WITH MAX TOPS TO 450. MEAN WIND\nVECTOR 23035.\nD... BAND OVR SVR TSTMS PRODUCING DMG WINDS AND TORNADOES IS EXPCD\nTO CONT INTENSE AS IT MOVS EWD AND BUILDS NWD. WRM FNT IS MOVG N\nOF ATL AND AHN AND IS LKLY TO MOV NWD INTO TN AND NC WITH TIME.\nWIND FIELDS ON 12Z RAOBS ARE EXTRMLY STG ENHANCING THE SHEAR NECESSARY FOR\nSUPERCELL DVLPMT. CHC OF DMGG TORNADOES WITH STGR CELLS.\nE .OTR TSTMS. CONT VALID PTN OF WW NR 915.\nJOHNS\nC-2","II.\nCOUNTY REDEFINING STATEMENTS\nA. Mississippi\n-- KJAN 220237\nAREAL OUTLINE FOR TORNADO WATCH NUMBER 914\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE JACKSON MS\n832 PM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\nIN MISSISSIPPI\nTHIS WATCH INCLUDES 72 COUNTIES\nMSC011-013-015-017-019-025-027-043-057-071-081-083-087-095-097-\n105-107-115-119-133-135-151-155-161-220900-\nIN NORTH MISSISSIPPI\n24 COUNTIES\nBOLIVAR\nCALHOUN\nCARROLL\nCHICKASAW\nCHOCTAW\nCLAY\nCOAHOMA\nGRENADA\nITAWAMBA\nLAFAYETTE\nLEE\nLEFLORE\nLOWNDES\nMONROE\nMONTGOMERY\nOKTIBBEHA\nPANOLA\nPONTOTOC\nQUITMAN\nSUNFLOWER\nTALLAHATCHIE\nWASHINGTON\nWEBSTER\nYALOBUSHA\n$$\nMSC007-021-023-029-049-051-053-055-061-063-069-075-079-089-099-\n01-103-121-123-125-127-129-149-159-163-220900-\nIN CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI\n25 COUNTIES\nATTALA\nCLAIBORNE\nCLARKE\nCOPIAH\nHINDS\nHOLMES\nHUMPHREYS\nISSAQUENA\nJASPER\nJEFFERSON\nKEMPER\nLAUDERDALE\nLEAKE\nMADISON\nNESHOBA\nNEWTON\nNOXUBEE\nRANKIN\nSCOTT\nSHARKEY\nSIMPSON\nSMITH\nWARREN\nWINSTON\nYAZOO\n$$\nMSC001-005-031-035-037-039-041-045-047-059-065-067-073-077-085-\n091-109-111-113-131-147-153-157-220900-\nIN SOUTH MISSISSIPPI\n23 COUNTIES\nADAMS\nAMITE\nCOVINGTON\nFORREST\nFRANKLIN\nGEORGE\nGREENE\nHANCOCK\nHARRISON\nJACKSON\nJEFFERSON DAVIS\nJONES\nLAMAR\nLAWRENCE\nLINCOLN\nMARION\nPEARL RIVER\nPERRY\nPIKE\nSTONE\nWALTHALL\nWAYNE\nWILKINSON\nAND ADJOINING COASTAL WATERS OF THE FOLLOWING COUNTIES:-\nHANCOCK\nHARRISON\nJACKSON\n$$\nC-3","B. Georgia\nETTAA00 KATL 221251\nAREAL OUTLINE FOR TORNADO WATCH NUMBER 916\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE ATLANTA GA\n830 AM EST SUN NOV 22 1992\nIN GEORGIA\nTHIS WATCH INCLUDES 99 COUNTIES\nGAC015-045-047-055-057-063-067-077-083-085-089-097-111>117-121\n123-129-135-143-149-151-213-223-227-233-247-255-295-313-221900-\n31 COUNTIES\nIN NORTHWEST GEORGIA\nCHATTOOGA\nCATOOSA\nCARROLL\nBARTOW\nCOWETA\nCOBB\nCLAYTON\nCHEROKEE\nDOUGLAS\nDEKALB\nDAWSON\nDADE\nFORSYTH\nFLOYD\nFAYETTE\nFANNIN\nGWINNETT\nGORDON\nGILMER\nFULTON\nMURRAY\nHENRY\nHEARD\nHARALSON\nROCKDALE\nPOLK\nPICKENS\nPAULDING\nWHITFIELD\nWALKER\nSPALDING\n$$\nGAC053-145-171-193-197-199-215-231-249-259>263-269-285-293-307-\n221900-\n16 COUNTIES\nIN WEST CENTRAL GEORGIA\nMACON\nLAMAR\nCHATTAHOOCHEE HARRIS\nMUSCOGEE\nPIKE\nMERIWETHER\nMARION\nTALBOT\nSUMTER\nSTEWART\nSCHLEY\nWEBSTER\nUPSON\nTROUP\nTAYLOR\n$$\nGAC007-037-061-087-095-099-131-177-201-205-239-243-253-273-221900\n14 COUNTIES.\nIN SOUTHWEST GEORGIA\nDOUGHERTY\nCLAY\nCALHOUN\nBAKER\nLEE\nGRADY\nEARLY\nDECATUR\nRANDOLPH\nQUITMAN\nMITCHELL\nMILLER\nTERRELL\nSEMINOLE\n$$\nGAC027-071-275-277-287-321-221900-\n6 COUNTIES..\nIN SOUTH CENTRAL GEORGIA\nTHOMAS\nTIFT\nCOLQUITT\nBROOKS\nWORTH\nTURNER\n$$\nGAC021-079-081-093-153-169-207-225-235-289-315-221900-\n11 COUNTIES\nIN CENTRAL GEORGIA\nDOOLY\nCRISP\nCRAWFORD\nBIBB\nPEACH\nMONROE\nJONES\nHOUSTON\nWILCOX\nTWIGGS\nPULASKI\n$$\nC-4","GAC011-013-035-059-119-137-139-157-159-187-195-211-217-219-237-\n41-257-281-291-297-311-221900-\nIN NORTHEAST GEORGIA\n21 COUNTIES\nBANKS\nBARROW\nBUTTS\nCLARKE\nFRANKLIN\nHABERSHAM\nHALL\nJACKSON\nJASPER\nLUMPKIN\nMADISON\nMORGAN\nNEWTON\nOCONEE\nPUTNAM\nRABUN\nSTEPHENS\nTOWNS\nUNION\nWALTON\nWHITE\n$$\nTHIS WATCH INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING CITIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS\nATLANTA ROME COLUMBUS ATHENS MACON AND ALBANY\nAMATEUR RADIO AND OTHER SPOTTERS ARE REQUESTED TO MONITOR\nTHIS WEATHER SITUATION AND RELAY REPORTS PROMPTLY TO THE\nNEAREST NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE OFFICE.\n$$\nC-5","STATEMENTS AND WARNINGS\nIII.\nA. Houston, TX\nNNNNZCZC SATSPSHOU\nETTAA00 KHOU 211613\nTXZ032-037-045>047-049-211800\nSPECIAL WEATHER STATEMENT\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE HOUSTON TX\n1013 AM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\nSTRONG DAMAGING WINDS HAIL AND TORNADOES ARE POSSIBLE LATER THIS\nAFTERNOON OVER SOUTHEAST TEXAS\nAT 10 AM A FAST MOVING COLD FRONT WAS MOVING INTO CENTRAL TEXAS AND WAS\nPRODUCING A LINE OF SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS STRETCHING FROM WACO TO\nAUSTIN. AS THIS LINE OF SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS MOVES INTO SOUTHEAST\nTEXAS LATER TODAY SOME OF THESE THUNDERSTORMS COULD BECOME SEVERE\nPRODUCING STRONG DAMAGING WINDS HAIL AND POSSIBLE TORNADOES.\nYOU SHOULD BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR THREATENING WEATHER AND STAY TUNED TO\nNOAA WEATHER RADIO TELEVISION AND OTHER NEWS SOURCES FOR THE LATEST\nUPDATES. LOCAL EMERGENCY MANAGERS AND SKYWARN BE PREPARED FOR\nACTIVATION.\nZCZC SATTORHOU ALL 212215\nTTAA00 KHOU DDHHMM\nTXC201-212215-\nBULLETIN - EBS ACTIVATION REQUESTED\nTORNADO WARNING\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE HOUSTON TX\n311 PM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\nTHE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN HOUSTON HAS EXTENDED THE\nTORNADO WARNING UNTIL 415 PM CST\nFOR PEOPLE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATION\nIN SOUTHEAST TEXAS\nHARRIS COUNTY\nTHE TORNADO WARNING FOR HARRIS COUNTY HAS BEEN EXTENDED UNTIL 415 PM.\nNUMEROUS TORNADIC THUNDERSTORMS WERE MOVING RAPIDLY NORTHEAST OUT OF\nFORT BEND COUNTY.\nIF YOU ARE IN THE PATH OF A TORNADO THE SAFEST PLACE IS A BASEMENT. GET\nUNDER A WORKBENCH OR PIECE OF STURDY FURNITURE. IF NO BASEMENT IS\nAVAILABLE SEEK SHELTER IN AN INTERIOR ROOM SUCH AS A CLOSET ON THE LOWEST\nFLOOR. USE BLANKETS PILLOWS OR CUSHIONS TO COVER YOUR BODY. AVOID\nWINDOWS.\nC-6","<ZCZC SATSVSHOU\nETTAA00 KHOU 212115\nTXZ047-212100-\nSEVERE WEATHER STATEMENT\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE HOUSTON TX\n315 PM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\nTORNADO WARNING FOR HARRIS COUNTY IN EFFECT UNTIL 415PM\n.TORNADO WATCH REMAINS IN EFFECT FOR SOUTHEAST TEXAS UNTIL 8PM\nA TORNADO WAS REPORTED ON THE GROUND NEAR ALMEDA GENOA ROAD AND I-45. THIS\nTORNADO WAS MOVING NORTHEAST AT 25 TO 30 MPH. PERSONS IN THIS VICINITY\nSHOULD TAKE COVER IMMEDIATELY.\n<ZCZC SATSVSHOU\nETTAA00 KHOU 212142\nTXZ047-212100-\nSEVERE WEATHER STATEMENT\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE HOUSTON TX\n340 PM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\n.TORNADO WATCH REMAINS IN EFFECT FOR SOUTHEAST TEXAS UNTIL 8PM\n.TORNADO WARNING IN EFFECT UNTIL 415 PM FOR HARRIS COUNTY.\nAT 340 PM THERE WAS A TORNADO ON THE GROUND AT WOOD FOREST AND BELTWAY 8.\nTHIS TORNADO WAS MOVING NORTHEAST AT 25 MPH. PERSONS IN THE COMMUNITIES\nALONG HIGHWAY 90 SOUTH OF LAKE HOUSTON TAKE COVER.\n<ZCZC SATSVSHOU\nETTAA00 KHOU 212145 COR\nTXZ047-212230-\nSEVERE WEATHER STATEMENT\nHEADER TIME CORRECTED\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE HOUSTON TX\n340 PM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\nTORNADO WATCH REMAINS IN EFFECT FOR SOUTHEAST TEXAS UNTIL 8PM\nTORNADO WARNING IN EFFECT UNTIL 415 PM FOR HARRIS COUNTY\nAT 340 PM. THERE WAS A TORNADO ON THE GROUND AT WOOD FOREST AND BELTWAY 8.\nTHIS TORNADO WAS MOVING NORTHEAST AT 25 MPH. PERSONS IN THE COMMUNITIES\nALONG HIGHWAY 90 SOUTH OF LAKE HOUSTON TAKE COVER.\nC-7","B. Jackson/Meridian, MS\nNNNNJANSPSJAN\nTTAA00 KJAN 211931\nMSZALL-220000-\nSPECIAL WEATHER STATEMENT\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE JACKSON MS\n130 PM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\nSEVERE WEATHER POSSIBLE FOR MISSISSIPPI TONIGHT..\nTHE STAGE IS BEING SET FOR STRONG AND POTENTIALLY SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS\nTONIGHT. ALTHOUGH THERE IS A THREAT FOR SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS STATEWIDE\nTHE MAIN FOCUS WILL BE IN THE CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN COUNTIES OF THE STATE.\nA DEVELOPING AREA OF LOW PRESSURE LOCATED BETWEEN CORPUS CHRISTI AND\nVICTORIA TEXAS DURING THE NOON HOUR WILL INTENSIFY AND MOVE\nNORTHEAST INTO WESTERN LOUISIANA AND ARKANSAS LATER TONIGHT.\nTHUNDERSTORMS WERE ALREADY FIRING UP ALONG A LINE ACROSS EAST TEXAS.\nTHESE THUNDERSTORMS WILL CONTINUE TO DEVELOP AND MOVE EAST TONIGHT.\nMOVING INTO WESTERN LOUISIANA LATE THIS AFTERNOON AND TOWARD THE\nMISSISSIPPI RIVER AROUND 9PM THIS EVENING.\nIF YOU LIVE IN THE SOUTHWEST AND WEST CENTRAL COUNTIES OF MISSISSIPPI.. THEN\nYOU MAY WANT TO STAY TUNED TO YOUR FAVORITE COMMERCIAL TELEVISION AND\nRADIO STATION. AS WELL AS NOAA WEATHER RADIO LATER THIS AFTERNOON.\nTHUNDERSTORMS COULD LIKELY BECOME SEVERE ESPECIALLY AFTER 9PM THIS\nEVENING. STRONG WINDS DAMAGING HAIL FREQUENT LIGHTNING AND BRIEF HEAVY\nRAINFALL AS WELL AS THE POSSIBLITY FOR TORNADOES ARE POSSIBLE WITH THE\nTHUNDER STORMS TONIGHT.\nTHE THUNDERSTORMS WILL LIKELY TRACK TO THE EAST AND NORTHEAST HOWEVER\nBASED ON CURRENT WEATHER DATA AND PROJECTED MOVEMENT OF THE SYSTEM THE\nSTONGEST STORMS SHOULD MOVE INTO THE EASTERN COUNTIES AFTER MIDNIGHT.\nJANTORJAN\nNNNN\nETTAA00 KJAN 220546\nMSC129-031-220615-\nBULLETIN - EBS ACTIVATION REQUESTED\nTORNADO WARNING\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE JACKSON MS\n1145 PM CST SAT NOV 21 1992\nTHE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN JACKSON HAS ISSUED A\nTORNADO WARNING EFFECTIVE UNTIL 1215 AM CST\nFOR PEOPLE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS..\nIN CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI\nSMITH COUNTY\nC-8","IN SOUTH CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI\nCOVINGTON COUNTY\nAT 1144 PM CST JACKSON RADAR STILL INDICATED A POSSIBLE TORNADO ALONG\nTHE JEFFERSON DAVIS/COVINGTON COUNTY LINE MOVING NORTH NORTHEAST AT 35\nMILES AN HOUR. THIS MOVEMENT WILL TAKE THE STORM TOWARDS THE TOWNS OF\nMOUNT OLIVE AND MIZE.\nIF YOU ARE IN THE PATH OF A TORNADO THE SAFEST PLACE IS IN AN INTERIOR ROOM\nON THE LOWEST FLOOR. GET UNDER STURDY FURNITURE. USE PILLOWS OR CUSHIONS TO\nCOVER YOUR HEAD.\nNNNN\nNNNN\nJANSVRJAN\n#TTAA00 KJAN 220613\nMSC079-121-123-220645\nBULLETIN - IMMEDIATE BROADCAST REQUESTED\nSEVERE THUNDERSTORM WARNING\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE JACKSON MS\n1212 AM CST SUN NOV 22 1992\nTHE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN JACKSON HAS ISSUED A\nSEVERE THUNDERSTORM WARNING EFFECTIVE UNTIL 1245 AM CST\nFOR PEOPLE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS..\nIN CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI\nLEAKE COUNTY NORTHERN RANKIN COUNTY SCOTT COUNTY\nAT 1212 AM CST WEATHER RADAR INDICATED A SEVERE THUNDERSTORM IN NORTHERN\nRANKIN COUNTY MOVING NORTHEAST AT 40 TO 45 MILES AN HOUR. THIS STORM HAS\nCAUSED SOME DAMAGE AROUND THE BRANDON AREA.\nA TORNADO WATCH IS ALSO IN EFFECT. REMEMBER SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS\nCAN PRODUCE TORNADOES WITH LITTLE OR NO ADVANCE WARNING. REMAIN\nCALM BUT BE ALERT TO RAPIDLY CHANGING WEATHER CONDITIONS.\nJANTORMEI\nTTAAOO KMEI 220633\nMSC061-220730-\nBULLETIN - EBS ACTIVATION REQUESTED\nTORNADO WARNING\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MERIDIAN MS\n1231 AM CST SUN NOV 22 1992\nTHE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN MERIDIAN HAS ISSUED A\nTORNADO WARNING EFFECTIVE UNTIL 130 AM CST\nFOR PEOPLE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATION\nIN EAST CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI\nJASPER COUNTY\nC-9","AT 1230 AM CDT MERIDIAN RADAR INDICATED A POSSIBLE TORNADO 7\nMILES NORTHWEST OF BAY SPRINGS MISSISSIPPI. MOVEMENT WAS NORTHEAST\nAT 45 MPH.\nIF YOU ARE IN THE PATH OF A TORNADO THE SAFEST PLACE IS A\nBASEMENT. GET UNDER A WORKBENCH OR PIECE OF STURDY FURNITURE.\nIF NO BASEMENT IS AVAILABLE SEEK SHELTER IN AN INTERIOR ROOM\nSUCH AS A CLOSET ON THE LOWEST FLOOR. USE BLANKETS PILLOWS...\nOR CUSHIONS TO COVER YOUR BODY. AVOID WINDOWS.\nC. AtlantalMacon/Athens, GA\nATLSPSATL\nETTAA00 KATL 221011\nGAZALL-221500-\nSPECIAL WEATHER STATEMENT\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE ATLANTA GEORGIA\n515 AM EST SUN NOV 22 1992\nSEVERE THUNDERSTORMS EXPECTED TODAY AND TONIGHT OVER MUCH OF THE\nSOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES..\nTHE NATIONAL SEVERE STORMS FORECAST CENTER IN KANSAS CITY MISSOURI IS\nFORECASTING SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS AND POSSIBLE TORNADOES TODAY INTO\nTONIGHT OVER MUCH OF THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES.\nTHE STATES WHICH ARE MOST LIKELY TO EXPERIENCE THE BRUNT OF THE SEVERE\nTHUNDERSTORM ACTIVITY INCLUDE GEORGIA EXTREME NORTHWEST\nFLORIDA CENTRAL AND EASTERN ALABAMA AND EASTERN TENNESSEE.\nA STRONG LOW PRESSURE SYSTEM CONTINUES TO INTENSIFY THIS MORNING OVER THE\nMIDDLE AND LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY. SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS OCCASIONALLY\nPRODUCING TORNADOES HAVE BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH THIS STORM SYSTEM\nOVERNIGHT AND THESE STRONG STORMS ARE CONTINUING EARLY THIS MORNING AHEAD\nOF A COLD FRONT EXTENDING FROM NORTHERN MISSISSIPPI SOUTHWARD INTO THE\nGULF OF MEXICO.\nTHE LEADING EDGE OF THE SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS HAD MOVED INTO EXTREME\nWESTERN ALABAMA AROUND 4 AM AND A TORNADO WATCH WAS IN EFFECT FOR MUCH\nOF ALABAMA UNTIL 10 EST. AS THESE STORMS MOVE EASTWARD IT IS LIKELY THAT A\nTORNADO WATCH WILL BE ISSUED FOR WESTERN SECTIONS OF GEORGIA THIS\nMORNING AND EASTERN GEORGIA BY EARLY AFTERNOON.\nRESIDENTS ARE URGED TO REVIEW SAFETY RULES AND LISTEN TO\nRADIO TELEVISION OR NOAA WEATHER RADIO FOR LATER STATEMENTS AND POSSIBLE\nWATCHES OR WARNINGS. THIS IS A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS WEATHER SITUATION AND\nSHOULD BE MONITORED CLOSELY.\n#TTAA00 KATL 221646\nGAC067-097-223-221730-\nBULLETIN - EBS ACTIVATION REQUESTED\nTORNADO WARNING\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE ATLANTA GA\n1144 AM EST SUN NOV 22 1992\nC-10","THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN ATLANTA HAS ISSUED A\nTORNADO WARNING EFFECTIVE UNTIL 1230 PM EST\nFOR PEOPLE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS.\nIN NORTHWEST GEORGIA\nCOBB COUNTY DOUGLAS COUNTY PAULDING COUNTY\nAT 1143 AM EST DOULAS COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT REPORTED A TORNADO ON THE\nGROUND AT POOL ROAD IN WESTERN DOUGLAS COUNTY. THIS TORNADO IS MOVING\nNORTHEAST AT 45 MPH. PERSONS IN DOULGASVILLE.. HIRAM AND AUSTELL SHOULD\nTAKE COVER NOW.\nATLTORATL\n#TTAA00 KATL 221714\nGAC057-121-221800-\nBULLETIN - EBS ACTIVATION REQUESTED\nTORNADO WARNING\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE ATLANTA GA\n1211 PM EST SUN NOV 22 1992\nTHE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN ATLANTA HAS ISSUED A\nTORNADO WARNING EFFECTIVE UNTIL 100 PM EST\nFOR PEOPLE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS\nIN NORTHWEST GEORGIA\nCHEROKEE COUNTY NORTHWESTERN FULTON COUNTY\nAT 1210 PM EST WEATHER SERVICE RADAR INDICATED A POSSIBLE TORNADO IN COBB\nCOUNTY. THE STORM IS MOVING NORTHEAST AT 45 MPH AND SHOULD MOVE INTO\nCHEROKEE AND NORTH FULTON COUNTIES WITHIN THE NEXT 15 MINUTES. PLEASE TAKE\nCOVER NOW.\nTHIS IS A DANGEROUS STORM SITUATION. ACT QUICKLY. IF YOU ARE\nIN THE PATH OF THIS TORNADO MOVE TO A SHELTER BELOW GROUND IF\nAVAILABLE. OTHERWISE GO TO A SMALL INTERIOR ROOM ON THE LOWEST\nFLOOR POSSIBLE. AVOID WINDOWS. ABANDON CARS AND MOBILE HOMES\nFOR A REINFORCED BUILDING OR GET INTO A DITCH OR CULVERT.\nENNNNATLTORATL\nATLTORMCN\n#TTAA00 KMCN 222117\nGAC237-222215-\nBULLETIN - EBS ACTIVATION REQUESTED\nTORNADO WARNING\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MACON GA\n416 PM EST SUN NOV 22 1992\nTHE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN MACON GA HAS ISSUED A\nTORNADO WARNING EFFECTIVE UNTIL 515 PM EST\nFOR PEOPLE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS..\nC-11","IN NORTHEAST GEORGIA\nPUTNAM COUNTY\nAT 415 PM MACON RADAR INDICATED A POSSIBLE TORNADO NORTH OF GRAY\nMOVING TOWARD EATONTON. RADIO SPOTTERS REPORTED SEEING A FUNNEL\nCLOUD WEST OF GRAY DURING THE PAST HALF HOUR. PEOPLE IN THE PATH\nOF THIS STORM SHOULD GO TO A SAFE PLACE IMMEDIATELY. MOVEMENT\nOF THIS STORM WAS NORTHEAST AT 45 MILES AN HOUR.\nIF YOU LIVE IN A HOME OR APARTMENT SEEK SHELTER IN THE\nINNERMOST PORTION OF THE BUILDING ON THE LOWEST FLOOR. GET TO\nA BASEMENT IF ONE IS AVAILABLE. AVOID WINDOWS AND PROTECT YOUR\nBODY FROM FLYING DEBRIS WITH CUSHIONS BLANKETS OR PILLOWS.\nATLSVRAHN\n#TTAA00 KAHN 222124\nGAC133-222230-\nBULLETIN - IMMEDIATE BROADCAST REQUESTED\nSEVERE THUNDERSTORM WARNING\nNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE ATHENS GA\n421 PM EST SUN NOV 22 1992\nTHE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN ATHENS HAS ISSUED A\nSEVERE THUNDERSTORM WARNING EFFECTIVE UNTIL 530 PM EST\nFOR PEOPLE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS\nIN NORTHEAST GEORGIA\nGREENE COUNTY\nAT 415 PM RADAR INDICATED A SEVERE THUNDERSTORM NEAR EATONTON GEORGIA\nMOVING NORTHEAST AT 50 MILES AN HOUR. PERSONS IN GREENE COUNTY SHOULD\nPREPARE NOW FOR THREATNING WEATHER.\nA TORNADO WATCH IS ALSO IN EFFECT FOR THE WARNED AREA. REMEMBER\nSEVERE THUNDERSTORMS CAN AND OCCASIONALLY DO PRODUCE TORNADOES\nWITH LITTLE OR NO ADVANCE WARNING. REMAIN CALM BUT BE ALERT TO\nRAPIDLY CHANGING WEATHER CONDITIONS.\nC-12"]}