Enhanced Fujita Ratings Debate Thread

[locomusic01]

The 1973 Pearsall-Frio County TX F4 tore 1-inches of asphalt off an airport runway as well.

Really need to see if I can find better ones sometime, but there are crappy news clippings of it in this post. I swear I've seen the original press photos before but for the life of me I can't remember where. Definitely a high-end tornado though.

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

If we ever reach a point where a Tom Grazulis type figure is allowed to go back and re evaluate/adjust ratings I think 2004-2007 will for sure be an area of intense focus. Tornadoes are definitely currently underrated severely, but the end of the F scale era is tough to beat in terms of utter ridiculousness. F3 was basically the max rating they'd assign anything and there's multiple F5 candidates that were rated as such. Westminster is definitely the worst.

Here's a few notable tornadoes from that time period @TH2002 shared with me a while back:

Campbellsville, PA 2004: destroyed homes in "F4 fashion" - rated F3
Mulvane, KS 2004 - leveled a well-built home and hurled and mangled vehicles - rated F3
Harper, KS 2004 - swept away a well-constructed home leaving very little debris behind, tore vehicles to pieces, grass scoured to bare soil, trees completely debarked - rated F4
Westminster, TX 2006 - swept away multiple homes, grass scoured to bare soil, tore vehicles to pieces, completely debarked trees - rated high-end F3
Gallatin, TN 2006 - vehicles hurled and mangled, well-built homes leveled - rated F3

 

[TH2002]

How confident are you that Almora may have been EF5?

Sorry for the late response to this, but it’s impossible to say with any degree of confidence due to the complete lack of ground level photos from the worst affected area. It’s definitely possible the storm reached EF5 intensity though.

 

[Lake Martin EF4]

Campbellsville, PA 2004: destroyed homes in "F4 fashion" - rated F3
Mulvane, KS 2004 - leveled a well-built home and hurled and mangled vehicles - rated F3
Harper, KS 2004 - swept away a well-constructed home leaving very little debris behind, tore vehicles to pieces, grass scoured to bare soil, trees completely debarked - rated F4
Westminster, TX 2006 - swept away multiple homes, grass scoured to bare soil, tore vehicles to pieces, completely debarked trees - rated high-end F3
Gallatin, TN 2006 - vehicles hurled and mangled, well-built homes leveled - rated F3

Good picks. The Marion, ND 2004 and Newbern, TN 2006 tornadoes were also underrated: one was an F4, the second was a F3. They should have each been rated a category higher.

 

[TH2002]

Vilonia’s definitely my number one for “worst rating ever”, but this one is pretty high up. What was the justification for the F3 rating, anyways? Ground scouring takes very high winds to achieve.

Simple. Overly conservative surveying that missed or blatantly ignored structures which sustained the most intense damage.

A well-built home that was leveled and partially slabbed was given high-end F3 instead of F4 because a car that was parked inside the home's attached garage was damaged but not thrown...

Never mind the fact that at least two or three completely slabbed homes were left out of the survey entirely...

Very much on par with the NIST "study" of Jarrell that concluded it was an F3 because they completely missed all of the anchor bolted homes and only looked at the ones with cut nails...

Also, not gonna post it here but there's an old stormtrack thread that was created to discuss the survey results of the Westminster tornado. Pretty much the entire thread consisted of people saying "Tim Marshall and Gary Woodall worked on the survey so it can't possibly be wrong", backhandedly insulting anyone who dared to question the survey by calling them "conspiracy theorists", or just having the mods flat out delete any posts questioning the survey. Makes me want to pull my hair out every time I read that thread...

 

[AJS]

Been busy today so haven’t had a lot of time to look at posts, but the ground scouring produced by the Westminster tornado is without a doubt up there with some of the most intense ever documented.

 

[AJS]

Good picks. The Marion, ND 2004 and Newbern, TN 2006 tornadoes were also underrated: one was an F4, the second was a F3. They should have each been rated a category higher.

Marion, ND had one of the largest swaths of ground scouring I have ever seen.

 

[AJS]

I think a good comparison for Westminster would be Matador. Both absolute menacing Texas beasts that were very likely a lot more intense than the rating they were given.

 

[Aaron Rider]

If we ever reach a point where a Tom Grazulis type figure is allowed to go back and re evaluate/adjust ratings I think 2004-2007 will for sure be an area of intense focus. Tornadoes are definitely currently underrated severely, but the end of the F scale era is tough to beat in terms of utter ridiculousness. F3 was basically the max rating they'd assign anything and there's multiple F5 candidates that were rated as such. Westminster is definitely the worst.

Here's a few notable tornadoes from that time period @TH2002 shared with me a while back:

Campbellsville, PA 2004: destroyed homes in "F4 fashion" - rated F3
Mulvane, KS 2004 - leveled a well-built home and hurled and mangled vehicles - rated F3
Harper, KS 2004 - swept away a well-constructed home leaving very little debris behind, tore vehicles to pieces, grass scoured to bare soil, trees completely debarked - rated F4
Westminster, TX 2006 - swept away multiple homes, grass scoured to bare soil, tore vehicles to pieces, completely debarked trees - rated high-end F3
Gallatin, TN 2006 - vehicles hurled and mangled, well-built homes leveled - rated F3

*Campbelltown. Not to be nitpicky, but I'm from the region, so

Anyway, it MAY have been an F4 but it was definitely not *high-end* F4, which the others certainly were (or more, especially with Harper and Westminster). I've never seen any photos indicating much context higher than F3 or MAYBE low end F4. To me, it looks respectably violent - ESPECIALLY for central Pennsylvania!!.

Time for a Campbelltown photo dump. I could see an argument for high-end F3 or low-end F4. There is some wind-rowing. I ASSUME that first house at right was swept away, not cleaned up after the fact.







Fun fact: this tornado was just one day after the far stronger Roanoke tornado in Illinois.

the rest are, of course, absolutely obviously higher than F3. I've actually never heard of Mulvane before.

 

[Aaron Rider]

Good picks. The Marion, ND 2004 and Newbern, TN 2006 tornadoes were also underrated: one was an F4, the second was a F3. They should have each been rated a category higher.

I'd also like to see information from the tornado near Hopkinsville, KY on the same day as the Newbern twister. From Wiki:

In Christian County, 91 homes were destroyed and 171 others were damaged. Numerous garages, barns, and outbuildings were destroyed, and some vehicles were damaged or destroyed as well. Hundreds of trees were downed, snapped, or uprooted, and several metal high-tension towers were toppled, cutting off power to Hopkinsville for 6 hours. In Todd County, 2 homes were destroyed and 28 others were damaged. Close to two dozen sheds and barns were damaged or destroyed, along with at least one grain bin. Numerous trees were uprooted, and some farm machinery and vehicles were damaged or destroyed, including tractors and combines.

Ditto the tornado that struck Marmaduke, AR and Caruthersville, MO.

As for Gallatin, 5 days later, obviously F4. The pictures I've seen show very impressive wind-rowing if not F5 level.

 

[SpotlightForRareTornadoes]

We should create an unofficial Fujita Scale known as the Theoretical Fujita Scale (TF-Scale), where we can unofficially rate tornadoes based on not just damage, but by incredible feats that we find appropriate for their TF Rating, like high windspeeds, ground scouring, photogrammetry, and any indicator that factors into the appropriate rating! I've had this idea for a while, and it might help with the debate. For example, the Greenfield EF4 would be a TF5 due to its 317 mph Doppler radar recording, along with Andover in 2022 (264 on Doppler). Matador would be rated a TF4, and Vilonia would be a TF5, due to the extreme damage that was worth more than their current ratings.

 

[OH-IOan]

We should create an unofficial Fujita Scale known as the Theoretical Fujita Scale (TF-Scale), where we can unofficially rate tornadoes based on not just damage, but by incredible feats that we find appropriate for their TF Rating, like high windspeeds, ground scouring, photogrammetry, and any indicator that factors into the appropriate rating! I've had this idea for a while, and it might help with the debate. For example, the Greenfield EF4 would be a TF5 due to its 317 mph Doppler radar recording, along with Andover in 2022 (264 on Doppler). Matador would be rated a TF4, and Vilonia would be a TF5, due to the extreme damage that was worth more than their current ratings.

Ooh, this isn’t a bad idea! Here’s a few contextual ideas that directly relate to intensity but that the NWS doesn’t usually use:
1. Distance vehicles thrown
2. Depth/length of ground scouring
3. Debris granulation
4. Damage to tornado shelters (i.e. Vilonia)
5. Length and presence of cycloidal marking
6. Wind rowing
And more, I’m just spitballing.

 

[SpotlightForRareTornadoes]

Ooh, this isn’t a bad idea! Here’s a few contextual ideas that directly relate to intensity but that the NWS doesn’t usually use:
1. Distance vehicles thrown
2. Depth/length of ground scouring
3. Debris granulation
4. Damage to tornado shelters (i.e. Vilonia)
5. Length and presence of cycloidal marking
6. Wind rowing
And more, I’m just spitballing.

Perfect! Those are exactly the other factors that I'm talking about! These can help us score the tornado on the TF-Scale for its true, unofficial, and final rating!

 

[SpotlightForRareTornadoes]

Ooh, this isn’t a bad idea! Here’s a few contextual ideas that directly relate to intensity but that the NWS doesn’t usually use:
1. Distance vehicles thrown
2. Depth/length of ground scouring
3. Debris granulation
4. Damage to tornado shelters (i.e. Vilonia)
5. Length and presence of cycloidal marking
6. Wind rowing
And more, I’m just spitballing.

Yes! And also how badly those vehicles got damaged too

 

[Aaron Rider]

We should create an unofficial Fujita Scale known as the Theoretical Fujita Scale (TF-Scale), where we can unofficially rate tornadoes based on not just damage, but by incredible feats that we find appropriate for their TF Rating, like high windspeeds, ground scouring, photogrammetry, and any indicator that factors into the appropriate rating! I've had this idea for a while, and it might help with the debate. For example, the Greenfield EF4 would be a TF5 due to its 317 mph Doppler radar recording, along with Andover in 2022 (264 on Doppler). Matador would be rated a TF4, and Vilonia would be a TF5, due to the extreme damage that was worth more than their current ratings.

Valley Mills 1973 is funny because it was basically rated as a TF-5 in practice - as the basis for it was on a truck it lofted some remarkable distance.

I'd rate Greenfield TF5 - and arguably EF5 ... - not so much on the Doppler recording (I think we've seen how those aren't always perfectly connected to damage intensity) but on the parking stops it ripped out of the ground and tossed around.

Tionesta, PA 1985 might well have been a TF5 based on the apparently incredible distance it lofted a truck. Moshannon/Parker Dam, ditto.

 

[OH-IOan]

How the heck have these images not been brought up more? First example of cycloidal ground scouring I've ever seen:


These are from the Crawford County, Illinois EF3 that prompted a TORE on 3/31/23. Easily violent scouring.

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

Ooh, this isn’t a bad idea! Here’s a few contextual ideas that directly relate to intensity but that the NWS doesn’t usually use:
1. Distance vehicles thrown
2. Depth/length of ground scouring
3. Debris granulation
4. Damage to tornado shelters (i.e. Vilonia)
5. Length and presence of cycloidal marking
6. Wind rowing
And more, I’m just spitballing.

I feel like vehicle distance would be such a perfect control variable for rating tornadoes. We already know their exact weight, size, and build quality down to the last rivet. Sure, directional wind speed is important, but it's still a reliable starting point. Tractors too.

 

[AJS]

How the heck have these images not been brought up more? First example of cycloidal ground scouring I've ever seen:
View attachment 41228
View attachment 41229
These are from the Crawford County, Illinois EF3 that prompted a TORE on 3/31/23. Easily violent scouring.

Strongly convinced that tornado deserved an EF4 rating.

 

[OH-IOan]

Strongly convinced that tornado deserved an EF4 rating.

Oh, 100%, I'd even say EF4+. Check out this damage in Robinson, IL:

That house looks wiped clean (assuming it wasn't cleaned prior, although the footage was taken on April 1 so I doubt it), yet this tornado is never talked about in the Wx community.

 

[joshoctober16]

Ooh, this isn’t a bad idea! Here’s a few contextual ideas that directly relate to intensity but that the NWS doesn’t usually use:
1. Distance vehicles thrown
2. Depth/length of ground scouring
3. Debris granulation
4. Damage to tornado shelters (i.e. Vilonia)
5. Length and presence of cycloidal marking
6. Wind rowing
And more, I’m just spitballing.

oddly enough the next EF scale is going to have distance vehicles thrown , however its one of the only 3 negative parts of the next EF scale.