Phantom tornado? Emergency was declared but a tornado never materialized

Residents of northeastern Arkansas were directed to seek shelter ahead of a "large and destructive" tornado on Friday, April 15, as the National Weather Service (NWS) declared a tornado emergency -- a warning reserved for dire situations.

However, a storm survey team from the NWS office in Little Rock, Arkansas, investigated the damage across the region, and couldn't confirm a tornado had touched down.

So, what happened? It's complicated.

The agency is now investigating whether the reports were from mistaken storm spotters or malicious reports for the second time in less than a week, a spokesperson for the NWS told AccuWeather.

Radar that night had detected strong rotation in the storm, and it had been tornado-warned prior to the emergencies, according to a report from the NWS.

"Several Tornado Warnings were issued, and Tornado Emergencies were declared given damage reports and sightings of funnels reaching the ground," the report said. However, the damage was later attributed to straight-line winds and hail.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FREE ACCUWEATHER APP

The emergency had first been issued after 7:30 p.m. CDT for Hardy, Highland and Williford in Sharp County, with hail "larger than baseballs" reported in the area. Earlier in the hour, a report had been sent in about 4-inch hail breaking automobile windshields as a result of the tornado-warned storm.

The tornado emergency was later extended eastward into parts of Lawrence County, and by 8:15 p.m. CDT, cars were reportedly flipped on Highway 67 at Walnut Ridge in Lawrence County. It was later ruled that this was from straight-line winds rather than a tornado.

Tornado emergencies are usually reserved for scenarios that meet the following criteria: there is a severe threat to human life that is imminent or ongoing, catastrophic damage is imminent or ongoing, and a tornado is confirmed visually and/or by radar.

The NWS claimed that the third criterion applied in both cases, and the first two also did, based on reports of destruction of property that had been attributed to the potential tornado.

Videos of the storm "show what appears to be a large tornado on the ground, but on closer inspection, especially of the timelapse security video, I believe that it was a benign 'tube cloud,' but only a very experienced storm spotter would know the difference," AccuWeather Meteorologist and Senior Weather Editor Jesse Ferrell said.

"Even so," Ferrell added, a seasoned storm spotter "might report it, just in case, especially if it was after dark and only illuminated by lightning. Add to that extreme hail damage to homes, plus cars that flipped as a result of a traffic accident caused by hail-slicked roads and I could understand why people would jump to the conclusion that a tornado was there that night."

Video of the funnel cloud that dipped down from the clouds in Arkansas on April 15, 2022. (Storyful/Victoria Heinzman)

The NWS is currently investigating events on both April 15 and April 11, since both days featured spotter reports of a tornado and the issuance of a tornado emergency, only to find no evidence of said twisters in the storm surveys.

"We are investigating the possibility that some reports of tornado sightings and damage may have been intentionally false, given that the damage survey found no evidence of a tornado in Northeast Arkansas," NWS director of public affairs Susan Buchanan said of the reports on April 15, though she confirmed the reports from April 11 were also included in the investigation "because of the similarities" with potentially fake spotter reports.

"The survey did confirm damage from wind-driven large hail. When issuing warnings, our forecasters consider all available data, including radar, satellites, reports from storm spotters and local public officials, and sometimes the general public through direct reports or social media," she said. "Forecasters usually have only seconds to assess a large volume of data and make decisions."

On the instance of April 15, John Wetter, president of the "Spotter Network," said over Twitter that "there does not appear to have been malicious intent and there were not 'fake' reports with this event." Ferrell agrees with this assessment.

The Spotter Network is an interface that allows trained and/or registered spotters to submit storm reports to the NWS. It was previously referenced as a platform where potentially falsified reports had been submitted during the April 11 severe weather from an entirely different state. (AccuWeather entered into a data partnership with the Spotter Network in 2009 and still shared data with the network as recently as 2020.)

Wetter added that there was only a single report submitted via the Spotter Network during the April 15 storms, which had been verified to have been of good intent.

On Thursday, the Spotter Network took the measure of prohibiting users from filing manual weather and position reports going forward.

"Originally a feature to help be more exact when placing reports only to be abused by a very very select few. This is why we can't have nice things," Wetter said on Twitter.

He responded to a commenter that the purpose of the feature had been to allow spotters to more precisely locate a report while staying at a safe distance.

"Spotter reports are an important source of additional observations to be helpful to meteorologists in the government, weather media and in America's weather industry," AccuWeather Chief Meteorologist Jonathan Porter said. He added that while the vast majority of spotter reports are provided in good faith, there are false reports provided at times.

"I am glad to see such an investigation in this case as the potential for false or fabricated storm reports being provided to the NWS is a serious matter and should be thoroughly reviewed," he said.

Extreme Meteorologist Reed Timmer had been reporting live at the time of the severe weather, warning people in the storm's path. Indeed, there was plenty of dangerous weather moving through the region that night.

"On radar, the storm just didn't seem supportive of tornadoes at all, even with it being in a radar hole," Timmer said, referring to areas that are so far from a radar site that the beams emitted by the radar read higher up in the atmosphere rather than where weather closer to Earth's surface is occurring.

"It's very difficult to kind of scan the lower portions of the storm and to actually see if it's a tornado in progress using dual-pol radar and tornado debris signature, for example, and a really tight couplet," Timmer said. "It's just really hard to see a low-level mesocyclone and a developing tornado when something's in a radar hole like that."

Timmer said that he believed at least the tornado warnings were justified for both storms, especially on April 15, since there was an area of broad rotation within the storm. However, the factors involved with the storm didn't seem to align to create conditions for a tornado.

"It was north of the warm front, so it seems highly unlikely that a storm like that would produce a tornado at all, much less a destructive tornado based on the environment that it's in," Timmer explained.

He added that while the storm had a broad rotation, it appeared more like a "classic large hail producer," with the straight-line winds reports, as they were coming in, "clearly removed from where the area of rotation" had been.

"I think you just have to trust the meteorology in those cases," Timmer said, "but hopefully this will at least encourage conversations about it, and maybe we need to have a better real-time vetting process for reports."

For the latest weather news, check back on AccuWeather.com. Watch the AccuWeather Network on DIRECTV, Frontier, Spectrum, fuboTV, Philo and Verizon Fios. AccuWeather Now is now available on your preferred streaming platform.