What Can Be Done To Stop Destructive Tornados ?

DodgeFB · May 23, 2013

Protectionist said:
Bizzare statement. Trying to save lives and property, and protect the public is "arrogant" ?

The time and money spent could be used to save lives and property. But on more realistic efforts that would show real results.

As for "arrogant", I think playing God is always arrogant. Makes no difference who does it, it just feels arrogant to me.

myp · May 23, 2013

What is and is not realistic we can only find through study. At one time ridding the world of polio might have been unrealistic- but if everyone thought that way, we might not be on the verge of ending polio today.

That being said, when it comes to geoengineering to stop natural disasters, the issue is always that of not just feasibility, but unintended consequences- side effects. But with proper study and testing, maybe one day the risks will be small enough and the costs low enough to give it a shot. Until then, we can try other methods which have already been explored and studied and shown to be effective at curbing the effects of such weather.

Protectionist · May 23, 2013

DodgeFB said:
The time and money spent could be used to save lives and property. But on more realistic efforts that would show real results.

As for "arrogant", I think playing God is always arrogant. Makes no difference who does it, it just feels arrogant to me.

Stopping a tornado by busting up the air circulation that makes it what it is, is no more playing God than rotating crops, building dams, and heating homes. Get a life.

As for "realistic", you show here some evidence (in quantitative analysis) how what I said is not realistic, and THEN, you can have some credibility to your suggestions.

tecoyah · May 24, 2013

Protectionist said:
Between the simplicity of the physics involved, the low cost, and the overwhelming political agreement (everyone wants to stop tornados), the likelihood of stopping TORNADOS (is the word, not cyclone), is near 100%.

"A tornado is a violently rotating column of air that is in contact with both the surface of the earth and a cumulonimbus cloud or, in rare cases, the base of a cumulus cloud. They are often referred to as twisters or cyclones,[1] although the word cyclone is used in meteorology, in a wider sense, to name any closed low pressure circulation."
Tornado - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But....as with the rest of your statement I suppose you know better than I do.

DodgeFB · May 24, 2013

Protectionist said:
Stopping a tornado by busting up the air circulation that makes it what it is, is no more playing God than rotating crops, building dams, and heating homes. Get a life.

As for "realistic", you show here some evidence (in quantitative analysis) how what I said is not realistic, and THEN, you can have some credibility to your suggestions.

1. I do have a life. Thank you just the same.

2,My credibility with you means absolutely nothing to me.

3. Now let's get to work on keeping that damn cold air in Canada!

4. You have a nice day too.

Protectionist · May 30, 2013

DodgeFB said:
1. I do have a life. Thank you just the same.

2,My credibility with you means absolutely nothing to me.

3. Now let's get to work on keeping that damn cold air in Canada!

4. You have a nice day too.

1. I was talking about your credibility in general, not with me.

2. I'd like to get some of that cold air in Canada right down here in Florida. The more of it we can get, the better.

Polydectes · Jun 1, 2013

Protectionist said:
Stopping a tornado by busting up the air circulation that makes it what it is, is no more playing God than rotating crops, building dams, and heating homes. Get a life.

As for "realistic", you show here some evidence (in quantitative analysis) how what I said is not realistic, and THEN, you can have some credibility to your suggestions.

This would have to be something that deploys fast. The real destructive power of the tornado is how quickly they form.

Protectionist · Jun 3, 2013

Polydectes said:
This would have to be something that deploys fast. The real destructive power of the tornado is how quickly they form.

That's true, the responders would have to be fast. But no faster than firefighters who respond to fires, and they often are successful in putting out fires, and saving lives and property.

tecoyah · Jun 4, 2013

Protectionist said:
That's true, the responders would have to be fast. But no faster than firefighters who respond to fires, and they often are successful in putting out fires, and saving lives and property.

Firefighters have a stationary target, only need to aim water at it, and as long as needed to stop it.

These 'Twister Tacklers" would be required to find an ephemeral target, track and follow it, deploy and aim multiple weapons systems, and do so in the short period of time the tornado exists.

Logistically Challenging to say the very least.

Polydectes · Jun 4, 2013

Protectionist said:
That's true, the responders would have to be fast. But no faster than firefighters who respond to fires, and they often are successful in putting out fires, and saving lives and property.

I imagine it would have to be some sort of device or machine large enough to not be tossed around by strong winds. I doubt a truck load of men with a hose can do anything about it

Protectionist · Jun 4, 2013

tecoyah said:
Firefighters have a stationary target, only need to aim water at it, and as long as needed to stop it.

These 'Twister Tacklers" would be required to find an ephemeral target, track and follow it, deploy and aim multiple weapons systems, and do so in the short period of time the tornado exists.

Logistically Challenging to say the very least.

Not exactly true. Having lived 12 years in California, where multiple fires are a daily occurance in the very dry summer, I can tell you that fires move very quickly, especially when picked up by the strong San Francisco Bay area afternoon winds. They have been known to travel 10 miles in a half hour at times.

As for what the tornado killers would have to do, as they used to say in boot camp >> "you do what you have to do" And they used to say in college >> "form follows function"

Protectionist · Jun 4, 2013

Polydectes said:
I imagine it would have to be some sort of device or machine large enough to not be tossed around by strong winds. I doubt a truck load of men with a hose can do anything about it

I suggested planes shooting rocket bombs into the tornado. The planes are more mobile than trucks on the ground, and have the speed to keep away from being affected by the tornado.

tecoyah · Jun 4, 2013

Protectionist said:
Not exactly true. Having lived 12 years in California, where multiple fires are a daily occurance in the very dry summer, I can tell you that fires move very quickly, especially when picked up by the strong San Francisco Bay area afternoon winds. They have been known to travel 10 miles in a half hour at times.

As for what the tornado killers would have to do, as they used to say in boot camp >> "you do what you have to do" And they used to say in college >> "form follows function"

Having grown up in California I am well aware of the ability of a wildfire to be influenced by everything from wind and pressure systems, to terrain and resources. This does not correspond significantly to the requirements needed to effect a tornado before forming. A wildfire may very well exist for many days before containment, whereas a tornado may last minutes. A wild fire is still stationary (though expanding), and can be confronted due to it's location being known.
What you propose is to designate where a system might create a tornado, designate a response team, move resources into place, track said system with technology beyond what we have today, figure out where to fire a missile for optimum effect, issue the appropriate warnings to those underneath the blast, hope the explosion takes place high enough to avoid damage yet low enough to manage the change in atmosphere proposed, and repeat as needed.

Unlikely at best......silly at it's worst.

David · Jun 4, 2013

tecoyah said:
Having grown up in California I am well aware of the ability of a wildfire to be influenced by everything from wind and pressure systems, to terrain and resources. This does not correspond significantly to the requirements needed to effect a tornado before forming. A wildfire may very well exist for many days before containment, whereas a tornado may last minutes. A wild fire is still stationary (though expanding), and can be confronted due to it's location being known.
What you propose is to designate where a system might create a tornado, designate a response team, move resources into place, track said system with technology beyond what we have today, figure out where to fire a missile for optimum effect, issue the appropriate warnings to those underneath the blast, hope the explosion takes place high enough to avoid damage yet low enough to manage the change in atmosphere proposed, and repeat as needed.

Unlikely at best......silly at it's worst.

Give it 15 years.

Polydectes · Jun 5, 2013

Protectionist said:
I suggested planes shooting rocket bombs into the tornado. The planes are more mobile than trucks on the ground, and have the speed to keep away from being affected by the tornado.

I figure a bomb would be far more destructive than a tornado. Not sure how a bomb could stop a tornado.

I don't think planes would be fast enough. Or every town would have to have one of these planes.

Think an automated pilotless thing would be better. Prep work and take off takes about 15 min at the quickest.

David · Jun 5, 2013

Polydectes said:
I figure a bomb would be far more destructive than a tornado. Not sure how a bomb could stop a tornado.

I don't think planes would be fast enough. Or every town would have to have one of these planes.

Think an automated pilotless thing would be better. Prep work and take off takes about 15 min at the quickest.

There actually working on tornado drones. They think they'll be ready in 2 years.

Polydectes · Jun 5, 2013

David said:
There actually working on tornado drones. They think they'll be ready in 2 years.

Do you have an article? That sounds very interesting.

a777pilot · Jun 8, 2013

Someone/something is already greatly reducing the number of tornadoes. As of the end of May there were 473 tornadoes but the average number by the end of May would have been 850.

Next.

a777pilot · Jun 8, 2013

Polydectes said:
Do you have an article? That sounds very interesting.

tornado drones - Bing

Protectionist · Jun 8, 2013

tecoyah said:
Having grown up in California I am well aware of the ability of a wildfire to be influenced by everything from wind and pressure systems, to terrain and resources. This does not correspond significantly to the requirements needed to effect a tornado before forming. A wildfire may very well exist for many days before containment, whereas a tornado may last minutes. A wild fire is still stationary (though expanding), and can be confronted due to it's location being known.
What you propose is to designate where a system might create a tornado, designate a response team, move resources into place, track said system with technology beyond what we have today, figure out where to fire a missile for optimum effect, issue the appropriate warnings to those underneath the blast, hope the explosion takes place high enough to avoid damage yet low enough to manage the change in atmosphere proposed, and repeat as needed.

Unlikely at best......silly at it's worst.

Maybe what you described is silly. Not what I describe. >> 1. A tornado is sighted. Alarms sound (like in fire stations). 2. Jet pilots roar to the tornado. 3. They shoot it with rocket bombs. 4. Hopefully its wind current is disrupted enough to dissolve it.

Understood by those being realistic - this is done only in uninhabited, undeveloped areas, unless the blasts occuring at high altitude don't have particulate fragmentation (air pressure & heat only), thereby having no effect on the ground (other then to stop the tornado).

What Can Be Done To Stop Destructive Tornados ?

Similar threads