Topic: Dunoon Tornado, Mini-tornado terminology and radar locations

[Jimmy Deguara]

Sorry Gambit,

What I am trying to say is that the word Mini takes the bite out of it

I have to disagree here. You are forgetting that with misuse of the word comes the vision - whatever it may be damaged houses, felled trees and so forth. I think viewers as well as those witnessing the mini-tornadoes won't be standing around smiling after the ordeal!

Now I wonder what a real tornado will do!

Regards,

Jimmy Deguara

[Gambit]

I have to disagree here. You are forgetting that with misuse of the word comes the vision - whatever it may be damaged houses, felled trees and so forth. I think viewers as well as those witnessing the mini-tornadoes won't be standing around smiling after the ordeal!

hence why the whole sentence read.

"What I am trying to say is that the word Mini takes the bite out of it ,softens it a little, not so big and dangerous and scary when in all reality if you had have been in that church or one of the houses out at Dunoon last Friday it would have been every bit "Large as life"


I am not really sure what you're saying Jimmy?

[Jimmy Deguara]

Gambit,

For those who experience severe weather and for those watching the severe weather footage and associating what they see with the for-mentioned word "mini-tornado" are not going to see it as "weaker" because the word tornado rarely gets used. It is just that the terminology has been re-issued.

For the rest of the forum...

The argument really has been taken out of context. In fact I think excessive discussion of the use of the word mini-tornado has been exhausted to such an extent that people are proably thinking of deeper and more creative reasons why it should be used! The use of proper terminology should aim at being consistent globally. That way the public are not confused. A tornado is a tornado, microburst a microburst and so forth. Mini-tornado according to the media tends to relate to phenomenom from tornadoes to microburst and possibly even strong straight line winds not associated with thunderstorms!

I am almost falling asleep here! Can we shift to possible solutions rather than the blame game here. For instance, if you really are psychologically damaged bv the misuse of terminology, perhaps it is time to be proactive and begin educating the public yourself. What ideas can we realistically put in place that will turn the tide so to speak. I am all ears - I just don't want to hear the same argument I have been hearing for more than 20 years!

Regards,

Jimmy Deguara

[Gambit]

Jimmy, it seems you may not have understood the point I was making.

I was trying to say that people should avoid using the word "mini" before tornado as it is not correct.
It creates the illusion that it is less dangerous.

Please remain on track and discuss the issue rather than misinterpretting posts.

[Gambit]

John I could not agree more.

It would be fantastic for people who have the knowledge and experience to use their media profile to educate the media and the general population. I can think of no one better.

I have been telling everyone around Lismore that I speak with who mentions the tornado that that's what it was a tornado. when you explain to people that there is no such thing as a mini tornado they understand.

Questions and statements I have received are things like, "It wasn't a real tornado like the ones they get in America, cause it was only a mini one." to which I promptly respond with "A tornado is a tornado is a tornado" it may not have been a 3/4 of a mile wide F4 but it was still a tornado.

When you take the time to explain to people what has occurred they understand. It just takes a little patience and time.

Regards

Mat

[Jimmy Deguara]

John,

Jimmy, sorry if you misinterpreted what I said above, I wasn't accusing yourself of anything of the sort: to do so would be foolish.

I didn't misinterpret at all. I took your quote as is and stated what I thought the word "mini" represented over the years. You guys have added a new dimension that had not come to mind.

Regards,

Jimmy Deguara

[Karina Roberts (slavegirl)]

My little suggestion as to what can be done to get the media journalists to actually use correct terminology.

How about offering a meteorology tafe/uni course say a 18month diploma or something where they can choose to do 18months parttime or say 9months fulltime maybe just maybe having them learn all about the weather phenomenon that not only australia has uniquely but also weather phenonmenon that we share with other countries such as tornadoes.I don't know if doing a tafe/uni course would help but it is a start as thats where you would learn all the terminology and it would make them better educated all round.

look fowards to hearing other peoples input!

I edited to cut out comments putting yourself down. All constructive comments are welcome - JD

Cheers,
Karina

[Jimmy Deguara]

Karina,

That is a good suggestion and I guess it provides an opportunity for someone to do so as well. I guess it should be part of an overall weather course for the media giveing them some insight into forecasting because on its own really a one day seminar can do it I guess.

Regards,

Jimmy Deguara

[Mike]

Well this has certainly been an interesting bunch of posts!

Education and awareness I believe are the keys here.  It must be remembered that the general public don't know diddly squat about severe weather and are influenced by media and movies (one in particular!).  With BoM forecasting what we know as supercells, but to the general public it's severe storms - there's a world of difference to the general public's interpretation and BoMs and ours and journalists are guilty of not doing their homework during or after the event.

Even here in Darwin a vast majority of people who have been through cyclones still call CAT1-2 storms 'mini' cyclones or 'small' cyclones, which really is ignorant to the fact that they have not educated themselves as there is a graft of material to read available from Govt departments and online - it's hammered into them but they resile to their own opinions and stick with it.  I'm constantly correcting workmates who say all sorts of things and really it's just plain not knowing on their part.  They know what the term severe storm is - lots of rain and lighting and strong winds - to us it's much more which they have no concept of.

Anyway it's something we as chasers, enthusiasts of severe weather can work on with the media and word of mouth.  Severe weather interests with the public is a small, almost insignificant part of peoples lives as to them what we do is a 'hobby' - to us it is not!

I've spoken to media re my photos in the paper and storm chasing and they still don't print what i said - it's too technical and perhaps they think the public don't need educating or would not really care - the average reader may want to know what all the fuss is about, but unfortunately they'd have to get off their own backsides and go on the web and search for the answers such as on this forum.

As for a TAFE course - if they got the numbers it would be viable, TAFE would want to see numbers to see if it's worthwhile longterm and money is always the issue with teaching, resources, space etc - Jimmy and other experienced chasers, would you offer your services for a fee at the local TAFE to teach if the numbers added up?

I think Jimmy is correct in saying the issue has been flogged to death.  Severe weather enthusiasts are small fish in a very large lake!

Mike

[Jimmy Deguara]

Gambit,

It creates the illusion that it is less dangerous.

It may create an illusion or maybe it doesn't. Read my post carefully as I believe that people just associate the damage they see with an incorrect term - that's it. How then does it make it less dangerous? It simply is a misuse of the term.

Regards,

Jimmy Deguara

[Michael Bath]

Just to clarify a point of view from what was discussed last night (have only just read through it now). To my reading Jimmy is saying that the incorrect use of the term 'mini' or other descriptive terms to describe a tornado in this country, does not mean the public or media think the storm is any less damaging or significant. It is simply the terminology is wrong. So we should not get too upset if they do use the wrong words.

We can educate friends, relatives and colleagues when the subject is mentioned. I have done so with the local newspaper (and SES) here. So long as you have a couple of journalists in the know, they will use the right words. But, weather articles are usually written by the juniors so you will get new people all the time writing about severe storm events... meaning the need to educate is ongoing.

MB

[Jeff Brislane]

Realistically, to get nearly complete coverage i'd say you'd need doppler at Grafton, Tamworth and Newcastle(together with Syd which is already getting). If you look at the positioning of this you would have coverage over most of the coastal region, with sufficient resolution to improve supercellular identification significantly. Grafton I suggest as the facility is already setup and only a systems upgrade would be required. If you consider the 256km extent of radar coverage(or even 128), you can see that good radar coverage for all the localities you mention is given by such a network. Unfortunately the Bureau is currently under the dollar squeeze, and not able to afford to hire people betterlone by dopplers(together with a nationwide automated forecasting service).

John you didn't really answer my question. You say Tamworth deserves a Doppler on the basis of metorological conditions being favourable in that region for destructive storms so on that basis why do you think Grafton and now also Newcastle?

We know grafton allready has a radar setup but the fact is that it is an old radar and a new doppler would likely mean a replacement on the entire facility such as has occured elsewhere.

Lastly you say that between Grafton and Newwcastle radars there is good radar coverage but in fact neither radar can see in any detail the entire area between Port Macquarrie and Coffs Harbour. The coverage in the area is woefull to say the least.

Jeff.

[Mike]

Indeedy, John.

Perhaps yourself or other members with vast experience could on day come up here and teach the uneducated a thing or two.  Lot's of walkers, but no talkers, which makes it harder to get a handle on just about everything storm related without getting into arguments!

Mike

[Gambit]

Just to clarify a point of view from what was discussed last night (have only just read through it now). To my reading Jimmy is saying that the incorrect use of the term 'mini' or other descriptive terms to describe a tornado in this country, does not mean the public or media think the storm is any less damaging or significant.
MB

Hi Michael,

If that is in fact was Jimmy is saying i could not disagree more.

That was the point that I was trying to make last night!

From my experiences in life dealing with people in my day to day work. that is that way that the large majority of average Joe Punters out there will think.

I work in a call centre in Lismore, I am nearly tempted to ask the customers I speak with tomorrow,

"what do you think would be more damaging or significant, a Mini tornado or a full blown tornado" I can almost guarantee the outcome. 


Michael I'm not having a go at you at all so please dont think I am, I am just getting quite frustrated with the fact that I am trying to make a point and I can't seem the get the essence of what I am saying through.

Best regards 

Mathew

[Mike]

Hopefully one of your callers will answer 'What's the difference, they're all in the same category aren't they?' 

It's all good people, all good.