2025 Weather Thread

[Busguy2010]

I got around to looking back.

Officially, it was two record highs, one in January, one in March. Add to that, this record warm low. However, I noticed several days within a degree or two of record high, so that's where I got my feel. Depending on your criteria, I say it adds up to about 10 days of record, or "record territory" warmth this year.

I certainly don't like to flirt with record warmth as often as we have this year. It ain't natural.

[GetUrban]

All right. This blustery 100+ degree |expletive| is going to drive me crazy! Looking so forward to the cool down they say is on the way soon!

[Busguy2010]

Somebody I know is in Duluth Minnesota, and its mid 50's and foggy. What a dream.

Its still gonna be fairly warm even after the "cool down"; upper 80's, lower 90's. But if we can knock 10-15 degrees off this heck on earth, I will not complain.

[stormchaser]

Strong to severe storms are likely across parts of the area this afternoon and tonight with potential for heavy rain in parts of the area (though Omaha may miss out on much of it yet again - I explain below).

The primary severe weather risks are large hail and damaging wind. However, I believe there is at least some tornado threat - especially south of Omaha in an area from Fairbury, NE over to Nebraska City on south to the KS border where the low level jet will be stronger. However, hodographs from the area don't look great so the tornado risk will be very low but not impossible.

As I mentioned, Omaha may miss out yet again on much of the rain regardless of the going forecast. We'll get some rain but based on short range models, the majority of the heavy rain will pass south of Omaha. It'll all depend on where this boundary ends up thats just starting to push into the northwestern parts of the metro area now ends up later today/tonight. Chances are, it'll end up well south of Omaha and consequently, so will the storms/heavier rain.

Even if this first round misses us with the majority of the rain, thankfully there are plenty of other chances upcoming in the next several days.

Here is a simulated radar of the latest HRRR run (10z) showing what I mean:



Otherwise, here is the severe weather risk area for today (as of 7 AM):

[stormchaser]

Some heavy rain should move through much of the area tonight/overnight tonight. Then attention will turn to the severe weather risk tomorrow. However, this risk is conditional and depends on what happens with the overnight/morning storms and cloud cover - in particular, where the threat will end up.

Chances are there will be some severe weather along a boundary in the area which includes all storm modes and consequently the risk will include large hail, damaging wind, and possibly a few tornadoes. Its just a matter of figuring out exactly where this boundary will be but probably somewhere relatively close to our area.

[stormchaser]

Looks like the boundary pushed far enough north that Omaha will probably be missed by any severe weather later today/tonight with the risk mostly from around Columbus/Norfolk over to Sioux City and adjacent parts of northern IA/southern MN.

[nebugeater]

On Tuesday, around 6 PM, I dumped my Gauge in Gretna. This included the overnight rain on Monday Night and everything on Tuesday up to when I checked it. Had 2.4 inches

[BRoss]

On Tuesday, around 6 PM, I dumped my Gauge in Gretna. This included the overnight rain on Monday Night and everything on Tuesday up to when I checked it. Had 2.4 inches

Wow, I got 1.47" here this week.

[skinzfan23]

I got 1.6" just since 5 pm yesterday...2 day rain total of around 2.3" in Bellevue.

[zippy]

2.5" since Monday near Oakview

[nebugeater]

On Tuesday, around 6 PM, I dumped my Gauge in Gretna. This included the overnight rain on Monday Night and everything on Tuesday up to when I checked it. Had 2.4 inches

Another 0.5 dumped on Wed evening. Total at 2.9 now as of about 6 PM Wed.

[stormchaser]

Based on the last several runs of the HRRR, the Omaha area and/or areas just east of town will be at risk for severe weather early this afternoon.

Regardless of what the current SPC outlook shows (which has the risk area in north central/northeast IA currently), our area will be at risk for large hail, damaging wind, and at least a couple of isolated tornadoes. Of course this all depends on timing of when the storms fire and when the front pushes through. If it holds off until mid to late afternoon with storms firing, then everything will likely be east of us.

We'll see if the SPC updates the risk area here shortly when they release a new updated outlook but even if it doesn't please remain weather aware today.

[stormchaser]

Looks like they updated and still have the risk area mostly northeast of us. To clarify, I realize the risk is higher northeast of Omaha into north central/northeast IA, etc. I just think there is at least some localized threat in our area too so hopefully people keep an eye on it.

[Cermak]

I was up in Valley Nebraska last evening around 6pm. Some pretty nasty looking storm clouds to the north but nothing much happened in Valley. Some cooler air did push through giving more comfortable temps.

[nebugeater]

I was up in Valley Nebraska last evening around 6pm. Some pretty nasty looking storm clouds to the north but nothing much happened in Valley. Some cooler air did push through giving more comfortable temps.

Family and friends around Oakland NE were reporting 4" yesterday evening and overnight. They lost power for a while, too.

[stormchaser]

I was up in Valley Nebraska last evening around 6pm. Some pretty nasty looking storm clouds to the north but nothing much happened in Valley. Some cooler air did push through giving more comfortable temps.

Family and friends around Oakland NE were reporting 4" yesterday evening and overnight. They lost power for a while, too.

Yep, storms just sat in that area and kept moving over the same area over and over again. Columbus and Grand Island got a bunch of rain too (over 6 inches in some areas).

[Brad]

Family and friends around Oakland NE were reporting 4" yesterday evening and overnight. They lost power for a while, too.

Yep, storms just sat in that area and kept moving over the same area over and over again. Columbus and Grand Island got a bunch of rain too (over 6 inches in some areas).

Enough rain up north the Papio NRD is closing all the river access points on the Platte and Elkhorn.

[stormchaser]

Storms are just starting to fire in the area with a MD out for areas along and east of the MO river. Watch will likely be issued soon.

[Busguy2010]

Nice to see a couple nights of reasonable lows coming up. Into the 60's, might even be worth opening the windows.

[almighty_tuna]

This rain right now is nice and necessary, but I've got 32lbs of pork butt to get in the smoker and I can't even get the fire started because the rain storms keep redeveloping overhead!!

[Louie]

It is absolutely pouring where we are.

[Brad]

This rain right now is nice and necessary, but I've got 32lbs of pork butt to get in the smoker and I can't even get the fire started because the rain storms keep redeveloping overhead!!

LOL!! We got 4 really nice rounds in Old Mill since I got to work.

[Busguy2010]

A nice lil surprise. I watch both KETV and WOWT forecasts during any given news cast, and all the meteorologists I watched were all basically saying "eh, it ain't gonna happen". They sounded pretty confident of it. To turn up with that is quite nice.

Since the siren test just went off and the storm passed not that long ago, it had me wondering if they have a protocol about sounding the test during an actual storm. If that storm happened an hour and a half later, that really would have had people looking around. That'd have to be such a rare occurrence.

[skinzfan23]

Still to this day....I refuse to watch when I see Caitlin Harvey on KETV. About 2-3 years ago, she "guaranteed" that we weren't going to get any snow and we ended up with 4-5". I have never heard a meteorologist ever use the words "guaranteed" and add in the fact that we indeed got the exact opposite of what she predicted, I just laugh every time I see her now.

[stormchaser]

Scattered strong/severe storms will be possible today in much of NE with the main risk being west and north of Omaha. However, it's becoming increasingly likely Omaha will be impacted by some severe weather too (potentially anyway) - most likely sometime between 7 PM and 11 PM (with the most probable time around 9 PM). The main risks will be damaging wind/hail with some localized flooding issues as well.

[stormchaser]

Severe storms approaching Omaha from the northwest. Wind damage possible as they move through the area in the next hour or so…

[Busguy2010]

Wow, quite the unexpectedly vigorous and early arriving storm. I wasnt expecting this level. Its legitimately a pretty strong bow echo.

[Cermak]

Really nothing compared to the storm last July or the 2021 storm. But still somewhat impressive, I think I had some wind gust around 50 or so in my neighborhood.

[Busguy2010]

I was downtown right when it came through. It was quite the dust storm. Lots of people out walking, caught off guard. Every time I got stuck at a light down there, my vehicle was dancing around. Took Saddle Creek back. It wasnt flooded, but some considerable puddles. And between here and downtown, I saw quite a few intermediate sized branches down in the street.

I think the biggest factor of this one was the surprise.

[Brad]

I think the biggest factor of this one was the surprise.

If people were surprised, they don't pay attention to the forecast. Even the worthless weather channel got this one right.

-We were in the SPC outlook all day
-The local meteorologist I follow said between 9pm and 1am
-A Severe Thunderstorm watch for Omaha was issued almost an hour before the storms. There was a watch just to our north for several hours before Omaha's watch.

Rusty's forecast at noon yesterday

[Busguy2010]

I only heard they included us in the slight risk. I didn't get around to actually watching the news yesterday, I'm off what they were saying on Sunday. They didn't raise much concern about it, hence why I didn't feel the need to watch it yesterday, and why I was surprised.

Yesterday was one out of a hundred that I didn't check the forecast.

[swinquest]

I think some of the issues is that there are so many computer models. I think one model on the news last night said it would be a couple of hours later than another model. Trying to figure out which one to believe and/or listen to is the challenge.

[stormchaser]

I think some of the issues is that there are so many computer models. I think one model on the news last night said it would be a couple of hours later than another model. Trying to figure out which one to believe and/or listen to is the challenge.

Thats the world of forecasting though - something most people don't realize. Many seem to think a forecaster/meteorologist simply looks at a computer model (if that even) and can make a forecast that (in the public's mind anyway) "should" be 100% accurate at all times no matter what. Otherwise it's incompetence (which is ridiculous).

None of the models are 100% accurate (not even close) and some are better at certain conditions/scenarios than others. Plus they all have certain biases to be aware of.

They also have different resolutions based on what type of model you're looking at. For example, the short range models are generally high resolution and you can see a significant amount of detail as a result. However, the medium and long range models are lower resolution and you can only get a rough idea of what to expect usually and the further out you go in time, the less reliable they become since things work in a "for every action there is a reaction" sort of way when it comes to weather so if something changes or doesn't play out as expected, it will have consequences with what happens "down river" so to speak too.

To really understand what's happening when looking at these models, you need to look at the trends from run to run as well as agreement between the different models and do so on a regular/consistent basis. You also have to understand the biases and strengths/weaknesses of the models you're using. Once you see run to run consistency and good agreement between different models, "usually" you can be fairly confident in your forecast. Even then, however, we simply don't have the technology to get a realtime view of whats happening aloft in the various layers of the atmosphere. We only get short glimpses from when they do balloon launches so it isn't uncommon for something to happen/not happen (like a stronger cap than expected) that will ultimately completely change how the weather unfolds for the day.

All these things combined are only the beginning of really accurately forecasting what's going to happen. That's why it's so sad/pathetic the people out there who complain and act like weather forecasters are clueless idiots who should lose their jobs. They don't understand and they don't care to understand (usually).

[Erik]

I think some of the issues is that there are so many computer models. I think one model on the news last night said it would be a couple of hours later than another model. Trying to figure out which one to believe and/or listen to is the challenge.

Thats the world of forecasting though - something most people don't realize. Many seem to think a forecaster/meteorologist simply looks at a computer model (if that even) and can make a forecast that (in the public's mind anyway) "should" be 100% accurate at all times no matter what. Otherwise it's incompetence (which is ridiculous).

None of the models are 100% accurate (not even close) and some are better at certain conditions/scenarios than others. Plus they all have certain biases to be aware of.

They also have different resolutions based on what type of model you're looking at. For example, the short range models are generally high resolution and you can see a significant amount of detail as a result. However, the medium and long range models are lower resolution and you can only get a rough idea of what to expect usually and the further out you go in time, the less reliable they become since things work in a "for every action there is a reaction" sort of way when it comes to weather so if something changes or doesn't play out as expected, it will have consequences with what happens "down river" so to speak too.

To really understand what's happening when looking at these models, you need to look at the trends from run to run as well as agreement between the different models and do so on a regular/consistent basis. You also have to understand the biases and strengths/weaknesses of the models you're using. Once you see run to run consistency and good agreement between different models, "usually" you can be fairly confident in your forecast. Even then, however, we simply don't have the technology to get a realtime view of whats happening aloft in the various layers of the atmosphere. We only get short glimpses from when they do balloon launches so it isn't uncommon for something to happen/not happen (like a stronger cap than expected) that will ultimately completely change how the weather unfolds for the day.

All these things combined are only the beginning of really accurately forecasting what's going to happen. That's why it's so sad/pathetic the people out there who complain and act like weather forecasters are clueless idiots who should lose their jobs. They don't understand and they don't care to understand (usually).

Part of the issue is how people mistake cynicism for intelligence. Granted, using cynicism as a form of communication gives an aura of cute, confident, high-horse piousness that many cannot decipher properly.

[stormchaser]

I think some of the issues is that there are so many computer models. I think one model on the news last night said it would be a couple of hours later than another model. Trying to figure out which one to believe and/or listen to is the challenge.

Thats the world of forecasting though - something most people don't realize. Many seem to think a forecaster/meteorologist simply looks at a computer model (if that even) and can make a forecast that (in the public's mind anyway) "should" be 100% accurate at all times no matter what. Otherwise it's incompetence (which is ridiculous).

None of the models are 100% accurate (not even close) and some are better at certain conditions/scenarios than others. Plus they all have certain biases to be aware of.

They also have different resolutions based on what type of model you're looking at. For example, the short range models are generally high resolution and you can see a significant amount of detail as a result. However, the medium and long range models are lower resolution and you can only get a rough idea of what to expect usually and the further out you go in time, the less reliable they become since things work in a "for every action there is a reaction" sort of way when it comes to weather so if something changes or doesn't play out as expected, it will have consequences with what happens "down river" so to speak too.

To really understand what's happening when looking at these models, you need to look at the trends from run to run as well as agreement between the different models and do so on a regular/consistent basis. You also have to understand the biases and strengths/weaknesses of the models you're using. Once you see run to run consistency and good agreement between different models, "usually" you can be fairly confident in your forecast. Even then, however, we simply don't have the technology to get a realtime view of whats happening aloft in the various layers of the atmosphere. We only get short glimpses from when they do balloon launches so it isn't uncommon for something to happen/not happen (like a stronger cap than expected) that will ultimately completely change how the weather unfolds for the day.

All these things combined are only the beginning of really accurately forecasting what's going to happen. That's why it's so sad/pathetic the people out there who complain and act like weather forecasters are clueless idiots who should lose their jobs. They don't understand and they don't care to understand (usually).

Part of the issue is how people mistake cynicism for intelligence. Granted, using cynicism as a form of communication gives an aura of cute, confident, high-horse piousness that many cannot decipher properly.

Yep, I agree.

Also, way too many people fail to take responsibility for anything and always want to pass blame. They don't want to put any effort into ensuring they have the latest forecast information and/or checking to see if there are updates. They look once several days in advance and then get mad when what they saw didn't happen exactly as it said. Many also have no clue that the forecast on most apps doesn't actually come from a Meteorologist and is simply computer generated. While some day, this is probably how most forecasts will work, for the time being computer generated forecasts struggle with understanding biases, trends, etc (like I referenced above). Especially notifications saying the "rain will start in 2 hours" type messages - more often than not, the app can't tell the difference between ground clutter, virga, or false radar signals and actual/legit precip. Consequently, people think the "weather guy" is wrong when that happens which just isn't the case.

[Brad]

Also, way too many people fail to take responsibility for anything and always want to pass blame.

Could be said about most every issue in society these days... LOL

[stormchaser]

Also, way too many people fail to take responsibility for anything and always want to pass blame.

Could be said about most every issue in society these days... LOL

lol unfortunately

[Brad]

Back to future weather... We are in the slight risk Today and Tomorrow

Today:


Tomorrow:

[stormchaser]

Back to future weather... We are in the slight risk Today and Tomorrow

Today:


Tomorrow:

Doesn’t surprise me - night time damaging wind mostly at least our area.

Friday shows higher potential in our local area IMO but depends on timing/storm track

[stormchaser]

Damaging wind, hail and a few tornadoes will be possible today in parts of the area including the Omaha area.

Currently it looks like the most likely area to see a threat for tornadoes is northwest of Omaha around O'Neill, Norfolk, Wayne, NE down towards Columbus and over towards Missouri Valley, IA this afternoon into early this evening.

The main threat in Omaha itself will be this evening with mostly a damaging wind/hail threat though an isolated tornado can't be ruled out as the storms expected to develop in the aforementioned areas move southeast towards Omaha.

Please remain weather aware today.