Severe Weather 2025

[slenker]

This is not high-end scouring, period. The issue here is that you’re misconstruing what this photo really shows, and it’s significance. The discoloration is not what matters here, or in general. The brown color is from loose tilled dirt being kicked up by the tornado and plastered against surrounding crops. Farm field soil is generally loose, and is not compacted underneath a dense layer of surface vegetation, such as grass. As a result, it doesn’t take much to make it go airborne and cause a streak of discoloration. What matters is the actual removal of surface vegetation, and there’s very little of that here. The worst damage is actually represented by the light green patches where the crops are flattened, but not fully scoured from the earth. There’s nothing here that could be called grass scouring either. This is comparable to crop damage produced by your average EF2 or EF3.

The Dominator scouring is indeed more impressive. Why? More removal of surface vegetation. There’s actually bare soil showing in several areas. There’s no bare soil showing in the Gary scouring.

Been doing this long enough to discern what significant scouring looks like, and in general, crops are not something that need a super violent tornado to be scoured (and “but Plainfield tho” is not a valid rebuttal to that, though I don’t want to open that can of worms). In general, grass scouring is the only kind that is automatically significant.

That certainly makes sense. I’m confused on why it physically looked so violent then. I fully expected this thing to inflict violent damage when I was watching it, perhaps it was a bit of confirmation bias on my part.

I’m interested to hear your opinion on Grinnell’s gnarly scouring then, at least at its most intense period. Looked pretty high-end to me.

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

The Dominator scouring is indeed more impressive. Why? More removal of surface vegetation. There’s actually bare soil showing in several areas. There’s no bare soil showing in the Gary scouring.

You're talking about Reed Timmer's video of the tornado right? I thought the same thing when I saw it. It looks like it's straight up tearing up the earth there.

Also, what do you think of the original F scale's description of F4 damage as "structures with weak foundations blown off some distance"? I remember this being the practice with (E)F4s pretty much up to 2011 (2004-2007 excluded), and this tornado certainly fits the description. It also tracks with the way the EF scale is written, as the lower bound for DOD 10 is right at the EF4 threshold. Do you think WFOs should "stick to the script" in this regard and use the scale as it is written?

 

[KakashiHatake2000]

 

[Kds86z]

 

[Kds86z]

 

[Kds86z]

 

[Kds86z]

 

[Kds86z]

 

[KakashiHatake2000]

 

[Kds86z]

Golly @KakashiHatake2000 about as perfect you can get for a tornado image with the green and flat land and all…

 

[buckeye05]

That certainly makes sense. I’m confused on why it physically looked so violent then. I fully expected this thing to inflict violent damage when I was watching it, perhaps it was a bit of confirmation bias on my part.

I’m interested to hear your opinion on Grinnell’s gnarly scouring then, at least at its most intense period. Looked pretty high-end to me.

That relates to the point I made a few pages ago. This tornado got hyped up sooo much by chasers and on social media well before the first clear damage photos were released. Everyone was amped up and fully expecting textbook violent damage. When the damage photos were released, they were seen through a lense of aiming to verify that pre-conceived notion, rather than being given an objective look. Confirmation bias 101.

Regarding the Grinnell scouring, quite impressive and violent. The grass wasn’t quite scoured down to totally bare soil, but there were at least a few spots where bare soil was partially exposed, and the remaining grass was torn up and shredded to a notable degree, and torn up in clumps in some areas. It’s grass, not crops, which automatically makes it more impressive.

 

[buckeye05]

You're talking about Reed Timmer's video of the tornado right? I thought the same thing when I saw it. It looks like it's straight up tearing up the earth there.

Also, what do you think of the original F scale's description of F4 damage as "structures with weak foundations blown off some distance"? I remember this being the practice with (E)F4s pretty much up to 2011 (2004-2007 excluded), and this tornado certainly fits the description. It also tracks with the way the EF scale is written, as the lower bound for DOD 10 is right at the EF4 threshold. Do you think WFOs should "stick to the script" in this regard and use the scale as it is written?

Yeah I’m referring to the EF2 that hit Reed Timmer/The Dominator in northern Alabama. The vortices pretty much scoured nearby farm fields to bare soil.

Regarding your second question, it depends. If it’s a relatively newer home on say a slab or poured concrete basement and is anchored with lots of nails but no bolts, or is a CMU foundation with bolts, sure go F4/EF4. But if we’re talking an old farmhouse from the early 1900s that has been exposed to the elements for many decades, and is sitting basically unanchored on an old block or stone foundation essentially via gravity alone to the point where it slides off and crumbles into a heap, then EF3 is more appropriate. Fujita himself sometimes rated sliders F3. The second scenario is by all indications what happened in Gary, and is why I’m ok with the rating.

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

Yeah I’m referring to the EF2 that hit Reed Timmer/The Dominator in northern Alabama. The vortices pretty much scoured nearby farm fields to bare soil.

Regarding your second question, it depends. If it’s a relatively newer home on say a slab or poured concrete basement and is anchored with lots of nails but no bolts, or is a CMU foundation with bolts, sure go F4/EF4. But if we’re talking an old farmhouse from the early 1900s that has been exposed to the elements for decades, and is sitting basically unanchored on an old block or stone foundation essentially via gravity alone to the point where it slides off and crumbles into a heap, then EF3 is more appropriate. Fujita himself sometimes rated sliders F3. The second scenario is by all indications what happened in Gary, and is why I’m ok with the rating.

I partially agree. Sliders coming off their foundation can be done by even EF2 winds, but with lower winds, usually the house is either entirely intact, or broken into large chunks. The granulation of the home is the impressive part. There was a pile of granulated debris along the closest treeline, but outside of that most of the home was carried away in tiny pieces.

A lot of those old farm houses were built with much stronger frames than most homes today. The lumber, plywood, nails, plaster/lath, windows, doors, etc. were all so much sturdier and denser than what we use now. Unless there were significant leaks or termites there's no reason to believe the wood could've become significantly rotted or brittle all on its own. The lack of anchoring is a MAJOR shortfall though, so I half agree with you, but I don't think the potential rigidity and strength of the homes frame should be underestimated.

 

[buckeye05]

I partially agree. Sliders coming off their foundation can be done by even EF2 winds, but with lower winds, usually the house is either entirely intact, or broken into large chunks. The granulation of the home is the impressive part. There was a pile of granulated debris along the closest treeline, but outside of that most of the home was carried away in tiny pieces.

A lot of those old farm houses were built with much stronger frames than most homes today. The lumber, plywood, nails, plaster/lath, windows, doors, etc. were all so much sturdier and denser than what we use now. Unless there were significant leaks or termites there's no reason to believe the wood could've become significantly rotted or brittle all on its own. The lack of anchoring is a MAJOR shortfall though, so I half agree with you, but I don't think the potential rigidity and strength of the homes frame should be underestimated.

In response to your first bolded point, what you are describing is how slider homes typically respond in the EF2 range. EF3s typically flatten the walls, floors, and roof of slider homes after the house separates from the foundation, and the wind sends the lighter/smaller debris downwind, while the main parts of the house end up in a pile nearby. This is exactly what happened in Gary.

Regarding the second bolded point, what you’re describing isn’t really what happened. A majority of the home was not carried away in tiny pieces or genuinely granulated. The main structural components of the home, which are what matter the most rating-wise, were left in a heap next to the foundation with a clear space in between. That’s what that heap is in the aerial photo. Yes other debris was carried downwind, but this was smaller and lighter debris. This is consistent with what I described in paragraph one above. You’re essentially trying to say that an unimpressive, textbook slider debris pattern is an impressive debris pattern, when it just isn’t. Any time there is a significant pile of debris separated from the foundation, it’s not an impressive debris pattern, regardless of additional small debris scattered farther away. In fact, I’d go as far as saying that Gary could be used as the textbook case study of what the EF3 slider debris pattern looks like.

My next point is related the third and fourth bolded sections, regarding the potential structural integrity of home. You’re saying “well unless these environmental things happened” as if these things are unlikely. They aren’t unlikely. In fact, these things are essentially an inevitability when dealing with a historic wood frame house of this age. And that’s not all. There’s also dry rot, which happens slowly and pretty much inevitably over time regardless of any termites or moisture. There’s also the structure’s gravity-related weakening, warping and settling over time. Drive through any old Southern of Appalachian town with old wood frame buildings. You will see some of them are visually off-kilter or askew from this phenomenon. In fact, I remember eating breakfast at an old wood-frame historic inn in North Carolina where the second floor dining room noticeably sloped downward from the front of the room to the back. If you set a ball down, it would roll. It was quite sketchy. Basically, you’re insinuating that old historic wooden farm homes should be assumed as sturdy, when the opposite is true. Even if they were in 1900, they certainly aren’t in 2025, and that’s because of the inevitable wear and tear of the elements and plain old time. Old wood frame homes are usually frail, bottom line.

That brings me to my final point, it’s still a slider. That literally renders everything else null. You can talk about the hypothetical structural integrity of the house itself all you want, but when all that house is in the process of sliding and tumbling off a foundation, the structural integrity is no longer relevant. You say “Yeah it’s pretty much unanchored, BUT…” What you’re not understanding is once that’s established, there are no buts. When it’s unanchored/a slider and the main structural debris is left nearby in a heap, you can throw your EF4 rating out the window, period.

I give you credit for arguing some counterpoints, but it just doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. There’s simply far more going against an EF4 rating than there is to support it. As I said, Gary is a straight-up textbook example of how slider homes respond to an F3/EF3 tornado. I’d even go as far as saying that if a large, modern, well-built home was sitting there instead of an old farm house, we’d likely see some intact interior walls left behind.

 

[buckeye05]

You may be asking “Well, then what does it look like when a genuine F4/EF4 hits a slider home?” The answer is a total, utter wipeout. No debris pile, just a streak of shredded debris extending away from the foundation.

Unfortunately, even when this happens, it’s rarely rated EF4. I do believe there was at least one EF4-rated slider home on the outskirts of Pilger. However, there was essentially no recoverable debris left anywhere near the foundation in that case. Back in 2017, there was also an EF4 rated slider near Christopher, IL from the Perryville tornado after it crossed the state line into Illinois. Same thing there; next to no recoverable debris. Unfortunately the survey team later chickened out and downgraded the Christopher home down to high-end EF3.

 

[Aaron Rider]

You may be asking “Well, then what does it look like when a genuine F4/EF4 hits a slider home?” The answer is a total, utter wipeout. No debris pile, just a streak of shredded debris extending away from the foundation.

Unfortunately, even when this happens, it’s rarely rated EF4. I do believe there was at least one EF4-rated slider home on the outskirts of Pilger. However, there was essentially no recoverable debris left anywhere near the foundation in that case. Back in 2017, there was also an EF4 rated slider near Christopher, IL from the Perryville tornado after it crossed the state line into Illinois. Same thing there; next to no recoverable debris. Unfortunately the survey team later chickened out and downgraded the Christopher home down to high-end EF3.

Buckeye, I love your posts, but it made me nearly spit some coffee when I read the bolded part. Just the sheer absurdity of it all, presented so matter of factly, made me laugh somehow.

 

[Central Ohio Wx]

Whattttt… how did I not see that?? Wasn’t visible from Columbus, then.

 

[MichelleH]

In case anyone was wondering why the National Severe Storms Laboratory and the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory are being shut down, this is the explicit explanation from the current administration. I highlighted these two agencies because this is the Severe Weather Thread and this news is absolutely relevant and important.

Severe weather labs are being shut down because of climate change denial. Oh, and one single workshop that involved transgender women. Over 500 workers and 12 agencies are now gone because of "disagreeable" scientific research and an inclusion workshop.... It's absolutely barbaric and idiotic.

Even the Vortex project (Doppler on Wheels tornado research) is being shut down. I have extremely strong feelings about this, and anyone who calls themselves a weather enthusiast should understand the consequences of these actions. This is a monumental moment in weather history. We're the richest country in the world. It's ok to have a few nice things for fvcks sake.. And science is important.

View attachment 44720

Please repost this here - https://talkweather.com/threads/noaa-nws-budget-cuts.2359/ We aren't starting this discussion in this thread again.

 

[MichelleH]

I apologize if this has already been posted. I've been busy with work lately and haven't been on here much. Found out this morning that Matt Laubhan of WTVA in Mississippi has let his contract expire.

 

[Clancy]

I apologize if this has already been posted. I've been busy with work lately and haven't been on here much. Found out this morning that Matt Laubhan of WTVA in Mississippi has let his contract expire.

Aww really? He does an absolutely fantastic job at WTVA.