• Welcome to TalkWeather!
    We see you lurking around TalkWeather! Take the extra step and join us today to view attachments, see less ads and maybe even join the discussion.
    CLICK TO JOIN TALKWEATHER

Enhanced Fujita Ratings Debate Thread

I wish it was guaranteed. You’re going to hate hearing this, but as others have mentioned, Tim Marshall actually rated that church EF4. I will say that’s always sat weird with me and I’ve always thought of that church as a possible EF5 candidate, but I also don’t have enough specific information on it to dispute the official rating. What I do know is that photos show severe corrosion of the church’s anchor plates and bolts. That will have some impact, but to what extent I’m not sure. I do think there’s a way to get Mayfield the EF5 rating it deserves, but it may come down to root ball displacements of calculations of objects being thrown, rather than structural damage. Heck, though maybe that one house in Bremen would be enough too at this stage if Jim LaDue’s recent video presentation means anything.


Yeah this is what I was talking about. As you can see it’s not just the bolts, it’s the actual anchor plates too, which actually appear brittle enough to have chipped during their failure. Rust has been responsible for multiple engineering disasters, like the Mianus River Bridge collapse, but with that said, that was still by all appearances a very sturdy building with very thick brick walls, and I don’t know the extent of impact the corrosion had.
Pretty much thinking the same, in order to really prove that church is a EF5 DI, we'd need plenty of information and I'm not even sure if that information is known or was considered for the building.

I think, regardless without the church, there is still a few evident areas of interest looking forward for Mayfield being a EF5
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
I wish it was guaranteed. You’re going to hate hearing this, but as others have mentioned, Tim Marshall actually rated that church EF4. I will say that’s always sat weird with me and I’ve always thought of that church as a possible EF5 candidate, but I also don’t have enough specific information on it to dispute the official rating. What I do know is that photos show severe corrosion of the church’s anchor plates and bolts. That will have some impact, but to what extent I’m not sure. I do think there’s a way to get Mayfield the EF5 rating it deserves, but it may come down to root ball displacements of calculations of objects being thrown, rather than structural damage. Heck, though maybe that one house in Bremen would be enough too at this stage if Jim LaDue’s recent video presentation means anything.


Yeah this is what I was talking about. As you can see it’s not just the bolts, it’s the actual anchor plates too, which actually appear brittle enough to have chipped during their failure. Rust has been responsible for multiple engineering disasters, like the Mianus River Bridge collapse, but with that said, that was still by all appearances a very sturdy building with very thick brick walls, and I don’t know the extent of impact the corrosion had.
To be fair the bolts had to have been connected to the attached MBS to the northwest of the main church, that was an entirely separately rated building, those don't fit anywhere on a masonry church while also being connected to a concrete slab. Also for the Marshall rating, the wording says/leads me to believe that the 170mph rating was a preliminary assessment as to what is needed at the very minimum to destroy a large church such as this, even at lower bound, instead of a flat rating of the entire building. The current CARB DI is now max DOD LB 175, close to the 170 mentioned in the paper. Newer information than the Marshall paper states clearly that this building was definitely above the threshold of 170mph.
 
It's very much worth noting the church was already observed by Tim Marshall, the ASCE, HAAG, SEI, and AMS and their consensus was 170 mph, so a re-rating would require some pretty monumental "going against the grain" by NWS Paducah.

View attachment 47201View attachment 47202View attachment 47203
Here's the full paper
I thought the church was rated 188. Also this survey seems to assume a much smaller building than actually destroyed. That church was massive, and I doubt you"re sweeping it clean with anything less than 300+ winds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
I stand corrected! Still not sure on an EF5 for that location - the pre-tornado structure at least LOOKED quite frail even if it may have been well anchored under the hood - but you've at least disproved the "flying object" bit on this one.
As I mentioned in my reply the cabin was not frail. The 190 home in Bremen also used a metal roof for the same reasons. They're cheap, durable, and very low maintenance. It does not make the building frail. The cabin was a fully furnished home with a rustic aesthetic. Thats all. We shant make assumptions on building integrity because the trope of one detail is common in out buildings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
As I mentioned in my reply the cabin was not frail. The 190 home in Bremen also used a metal roof for the same reasons. They're cheap, durable, and very low maintenance. It does not make the building frail. The cabin was a fully furnished home with a rustic aesthetic. Thats all. We shant make assumptions on building integrity because the trope of one detail is common in out buildings.
In fact I think I've seen in a couple damage training suggestions that metal roofs can often be a factor for going UB (in roof damage) and are often stronger than shingle roofs. I can't recall where I saw that exactly but will edit this if I remember,
 
In fact I think I've seen in a couple damage training suggestions that metal roofs can often be a factor for going UB (in roof damage) and are often stronger than shingle roofs. I can't recall where I saw that exactly but will edit this if I remember,
Hmmmm...

@buckeye05, does this information change things related to your opinion on the cabin?
 
As I mentioned in my reply the cabin was not frail. The 190 home in Bremen also used a metal roof for the same reasons. They're cheap, durable, and very low maintenance. It does not make the building frail. The cabin was a fully furnished home with a rustic aesthetic. Thats all. We shant make assumptions on building integrity because the trope of one detail is common in out buildings.
This might just be my own personal opinion, but now looking back, I genuinely believe the 190 EF4 DI home in Bremen could have been rated EF5. Even though it was bizarrely constructed, It was decently built and had very violent contextual damage surrounding it.

Reasonably built home + the look = EF5.
 
This might just be my own personal opinion, but now looking back, I genuinely believe the 190 EF4 DI home in Bremen could have been rated EF5. Even though it was bizarrely constructed, It was decently built and had very violent contextual damage surrounding it.

Reasonably built home + the look = EF5.
Yup. Ethan Moriarty was my moment of truth regarding that DI. For context, he has stated that he sees Rochelle and Vilonia(!!!) as having proper EF4 ratings (IIRC), and here he was explicitly calling this house a likely EF5 DI. If a guy as conservative as him was convinced, then, well...
 
This might just be my own personal opinion, but now looking back, I genuinely believe the 190 EF4 DI home in Bremen could have been rated EF5. Even though it was bizarrely constructed, It was decently built and had very violent contextual damage surrounding it.

Reasonably built home + the look = EF5.
To put the Bremen home into perspective. The house was so solidly built the concrete filled CMU parameter the slab was anchored to failed first. Entire house and its slab was ripped up in one piece, exploded, then tossed 1000 yards downwind.
 
This might just be my own personal opinion, but now looking back, I genuinely believe the 190 EF4 DI home in Bremen could have been rated EF5. Even though it was bizarrely constructed, It was decently built and had very violent contextual damage surrounding it.

Reasonably built home + the look = EF5.
IMG_0165.jpeg
Agreed. This kind of pulverizing of debris and scattering long distances is just so extreme and you really don't see it less than EF5 intensity imo, especially considering the tornado was moving at maybe 50-60mph in Bremen? Combined with the tree damage, some scouring, the shattering of concrete and asphalt scouring - I think even considering weird construction EF5 should be applied. In cases like these where context clearly supports going above EXP I don't see why not. Everyone knows it would be EF5 intensity anyway.
 
View attachment 47214
Agreed. This kind of pulverizing of debris and scattering long distances is just so extreme and you really don't see it less than EF5 intensity imo, especially considering the tornado was moving at maybe 50-60mph in Bremen? Combined with the tree damage, some scouring, the shattering of concrete and asphalt scouring - I think even considering weird construction EF5 should be applied. In cases like these where context clearly supports going above EXP I don't see why not. Everyone knows it would be EF5 intensity anyway.
That’s just unreal damage there. The ground appears to have been scoured down to literal bare soil. And the fact that the tornado was moving at around 55-60 mph in Bremen makes this even more impressive.

Also, what is that really large object at the right? I’ve never seen that in any of the pictures from Bremen.
 
That’s just unreal damage there. The ground appears to have been scoured down to literal bare soil. And the fact that the tornado was moving at around 55-60 mph in Bremen makes this even more impressive.

Also, what is that really large object at the right? I’ve never seen that in any of the pictures from Bremen.
Looks like a large propane tank (500-1000 Gallons when comparing to surroundings) to me. I have a friend in a high place and he works on a ton of these things for the company they work at. Typically they weigh anywhere from 950 lbs to 2000 lbs empty. And can weigh as much as 5000+ Lbs when full.
 
Looks like a large propane tank (500-1000 Gallons when comparing to surroundings) to me. I have a friend in a high place and he works on a ton of these things for the company they work at. Typically they weigh anywhere from 950 lbs to 2000 lbs empty. And can weigh as much as 5000+ Lbs when full.
Jeez, that’s no joke. I wonder where that large propane tank originated from.
 
If I had to guess, I'd say a large home or maybe a motel. (you really dont need 1000 gallons of propane unless you have a need for widespread heating). It definetly came from a place that needed a lot of fuel for heat.
Yeah, most likely. Either way, pretty impressive feat of damage. Would love to know how far it was thrown and the origin.
 
View attachment 47215
Some tree damage in Bremen, hard to tell, but some of those trees appear to be almost completely debarked. Gives further credence to how violent the tornado was here.
I don't know if this is a great example, usually random fully debarked trees in forests like this are dead or diseased and the other trees In this grove don't look too insane. Though I'm Bremen there were multiple examples of large leafless trees being lofted in groups of 5 or more, windrowing of small bits of wood from obliterated treelines and completely stubbed hardwood trees with some being ripped out and tossed a decent ways, not a ton of debarking in this area or in the whole path really. It seems like there's some correlate with minimal debarking and winter time because debarking isn't very prevalent in most winter vio-tors I can think of.
 
I don't know if this is a great example, usually random fully debarked trees in forests like this are dead or diseased and the other trees In this grove don't look too insane. Though I'm Bremen there were multiple examples of large leafless trees being lofted in groups of 5 or more, windrowing of small bits of wood from obliterated treelines and completely stubbed hardwood trees with some being ripped out and tossed a decent ways, not a ton of debarking in this area or in the whole path really. It seems like there's some correlate with minimal debarking and winter time because debarking isn't very prevalent in most winter vio-tors I can think of.
There was some partial debarking in the hardest hit area of Bremen if I remember correctly.
 
There is no shortage of "that look" from Bremen. I fully believe a EF5 rating is justified at this point, the contextual damage is nothing short of exceptional. The 190 mph house also may justify the rating too
 

Attachments

  • attachment-aftermath.jpg
    attachment-aftermath.jpg
    119.2 KB · Views: 0
  • EF4_Damage_-_190_MPH_in_Bremen,_Kentucky.jpg
    EF4_Damage_-_190_MPH_in_Bremen,_Kentucky.jpg
    568.6 KB · Views: 0
  • FHE0uyOXsBAQYc7.jpg_large.jpg
    FHE0uyOXsBAQYc7.jpg_large.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 0
  • 61b92610d88fe.image.jpg
    61b92610d88fe.image.jpg
    85.6 KB · Views: 0
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
Back
Top