• 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 didn't explicitly state this, I believe another user did. I'm pretty sure the lofting feat technically requires higher windspeeds (that's the >266 MPH calc), but the tipping of the full cars still requires >230 MPH winds to accomplish. AKA, it's an EF5 regardless, and the only thing that this rolling may end up changing is the NWS's unofficial >266 MPH estimate for the winds.

I suppose I find it particularly hard to believe that the train was rolled when we can clearly see the drag marks that the other cars impacted the landscape with. If it was really rolled, there would be large dents in the surface that indicate it was making multiple impacts with the ground. That isn't there, there's no drag marks from wheels either, and due to the geometry of this thing I feel like a "smooth roll" is simply not possible. I'm guessing they also checked the car to see if there was caked up mud on it from rolling - seems like a natural thing to look for. I suppose that's something I'd like to see confirmation on but I haven't seen close up imagery of the thrown train car.

EDIT: There seems to be some impact marks actually, didn't look into the tweet until now. Interesting. I still believe the final stretch indicates lofting though.
Edwards has to be mistaken in that he thinks the tanker lofting was the sole EF5 indicator. He stated in his tweet “EF5 may still be valid.” Being retired from the SPC, he may have not read the PNS in its entirety, or he’s purposely being controversial/contrarian to just debate online.

In true Twitter fashion, it’s turned into a sh*tshow. Yes, he got some ridiculous replies, but You can’t say “show me evidence” and then immediately start dismissing most responses when people do. I read the thread, and while there were a few idiots, most of the responses were sound and in good faith.
 
Edwards has to be mistaken in that he thinks the tanker lofting was the sole EF5 indicator. He stated in his tweet “EF5 may still be valid.” Being retired from the SPC, he may have not read the PNS in its entirety, or he’s purposely being controversial/contrarian to just debate online.
The entire image indicates a large EF5 windfield with an extremely violent core well into the EF5 category. That's my interpretation.
 
Re: the Enderlin debate, I'm also going to need to see more evidence closer to the point where the train derailment occurred to indicate that the car was rolled or lofted the entire way there. Occam's Razor to me suggests that it's a combination of both.
 
Edwards has to be mistaken in that he thinks the tanker lofting was the sole EF5 indicator. He stated in his tweet “EF5 may still be valid.” Being retired from the SPC, he may have not read the PNS in its entirety, or he’s purposely being controversial/contrarian to just debate online.

In true Twitter fashion, it’s turned into a sh*tshow. Yes, he got some ridiculous replies, but You can’t say “show me evidence” and then immediately start dismissing most responses when people do. I read the thread, and while there were a few idiots, most of the responses were sound and in good faith.
I don't know anything about this because I stay off Twitter - I think the content of his argument seemed fine though, I just simply don't agree with the fact that it wasn't lofted once. I will rescind my statement on there not being any marks though, admittedly I stated this before looking at the tweet. Initially I took those markings to be ground scouring, but I can definitely see what they're talking about now, it does seem to follow the path that the car took.

Not surprised that people are getting this emotional over it though. It's just weenie nature at that point. There's nothing wrong with challenging the scientific consensus as long as its done in a rational way.
 
Last edited:
Someone essentially asks Roger in that thread about that and he basically says "yeah there isn't enough evidence to refute either hypothesis for the middle part of the trajectory".
 
I don't know anything about this because I stay off Twitter - I think the content of his argument seemed fine though, I just simply don't agree with the fact that it wasn't lofted once. I will rescind my statement on there not being any marks though, admittedly I stated this before looking at the tweet.

Not surprised that people are getting this emotional over it though. It's just weenie nature at that point. There's nothing wrong with challenging the scientific consensus as long as it’s done in a rational way.
Same. I was able to just view it without making an account. EF5 discourse featuring a former SPC forecaster though is enough for me to take a peek lol.
 
No matter what though there is zero evidence that disputes an EF5 rating. If there was it wouldn’t have been rated as such after 3 months of analysis
It also annihilated shrubs and vegatation and bent railroad tracks, albiet via pushing the train cars violently.
IMG_1475.jpegIMG_1473.jpegIMG_1476.jpeg
On the topic of the tanker, heres the path I could find:
IMG_1474.jpegstrips=bounces btw
 
Last edited:
There's a decent chance this happened when the train derailed and may have been caused by said derailment. Thus it is not as impressive as Chapman, which did bend a railroad track without the aid of a derailment.

Enderlin was 100% an EF5, though.
This. The bending is colocated with the tipped, filled grain train cars. They absolutely imparted some sort of moment on the track that caused the bending. Definitely wasn't from the wind. Again, it still takes EF5 winds to do this in the first place though.

EDIT: In further support of the wind not causing the bending directly, the track directly to the right that didn't have any train cars isn't bent.
 
Last edited:
Roger Edwards did present evidence to make his case, and got presented with evidence that challenges it. Some of the replies he's gotten have been cringeworthy and unconstructive, sure. But using ONLY those unconstructive replies to default to the "if you don't have a degree then your opinion isn't valid" mentality speaks volumes.

Also, he himself states in his replies that "There’s very little evidence to strongly favor any of the transport hypotheses in that middle ground. Hard to make a firm claim one way or the other there" referring to the first half of the distance the train car traveled. Someone also pointed out the photo he used only showed a small part of the train car's path, and it wasn't enough to indicate rolling the entire way. Roger says "True but a straw man. I claim rolling only for the part you can see."

Uhhh... he literally made the claim that "The empty asphalt car wasn’t lifted to its position. It rolled there." So him saying "I only claimed rolling for a small part" seems like defaulting on his claim in a way that absolves him of having to admit he could be wrong here.

Just my two cents.

edit: And to add... I'm not saying Roger is right or wrong. My main criticism here is the way he's been conducting himself, and seemingly moving the goalposts and subsequently digging his heels in after his viewpoint got challenged. I so badly want to tell him "Dude, you posted your opinion on a public website - what did you expect?" but I don't have a twitter account.
 
Last edited:
Greensburg IIRC ANNIHILATED a semi truck and threw heavy tanks upwards of 7 goddamn miles, and that's just in a straight line so they were likely in the air for longer. Among others. And apparently, that wasn't even at peak!

@Western_KS_Wx has more info - he's been working on a Greensburg article for like two or three years lmao

I’m not sure if I’d say it was stronger than Smithville, but comparing EF5’s is kind of futile since each caused extreme damage in their own right. But yeah, there was a Frito Lay semi-truck that was dropped in a residential area and it was pretty much unrecognizable. The only thing left was the metal frame, a few tires, and a giant Doritos sign on someone’s property. No idea where the truck originated from. Greensburg also caused significant damage to and even bent railroad tracks in one location.

There was another tornado from that night that swept away a well-built home and threw a vehicle for over a mile and it was left completely unrecognizable. It may have been the Macksville tormado.

Edit...The Trousdale tornado from that night may have also been similar in intensity to the Greensburg tornado.
That was from the Hopewell tornado, which interestingly had a DI labeled as EF4 at one location. The vehicle was a Chevy Blazer that genuinely was crushed into a mangled mess no more than a foot or two in diameter. The only identifiable piece was the steering wheel. That one also caused some extraordinary damage to vegetation, vehicles and implements.

As for Trousdale, photos are scarce of the most violent damage, but significant ground scouring did occur. Tim Marshall actually replied to an email of mine with this, definitely intriguing.
IMG_0176.jpeg
That one like Hopewell interestingly had a few DI’s labeled as EF3+ as well.
 
The vehicle was a Chevy Blazer that genuinely was crushed into a mangled mess no more than a foot or two in diameter. The only identifiable piece was the steering wheel.
Ah yes. I am told it basically got compacted into a U-ish cube? I saw a B&W pic of it - yikes!

The police car Macksville picked up didn't fare too well either by the looks of it.
 
Ah yes. I am told it basically got compacted into a U-ish cube? I saw a B&W pic of it - yikes!

The police car Macksville picked up didn't fare too well either by the looks of it.
Yeah, pretty much a U or sideways C shaped crumpled metal mass. I got sent a higher quality photo of it from a retired NWS DDC Met, and it’s definitely some of the most complete and extreme damage to a vehicle I’ve ever seen, right up there with the Stratton, NE tornado.
 
I’m not sure if I’d say it was stronger than Smithville, but comparing EF5’s is kind of futile since each caused extreme damage in their own right. But yeah, there was a Frito Lay semi-truck that was dropped in a residential area and it was pretty much unrecognizable. The only thing left was the metal frame, a few tires, and a giant Doritos sign on someone’s property. No idea where the truck originated from. Greensburg also caused significant damage to and even bent railroad tracks in one location.
I must say that I have a strong, strong feeling that the size and speed of a tornado matters heavily in how far it can throw objects. I'm not trying to discredit Greensburg at all, the 7+ mile throw is a ludicrous feat. But, intuition tells me that the insanely large size of Greensburg as well as its modest forward pace aided greatly in its ability to chuck objects as far as possible, to me it is the perfect tornado for doing this.

If a violent tornado is moving too slow, then objects can still be thrown far, but they're at the mercy of the forward translation speed of the tornado itself at that point. It can only stay in the vortex for so long before the balance between centrifugal forces and aerodynamic forces is broken, and since the tornado hasn't moved much, the throwing distance may seem smaller than expected in comparison to faster tornadoes. However, if a violent tornado is moving too quickly, then the objects may be lofted quickly, but the forces imparted upon the objects are far more volatile in their magnitude and direction and therefore I imagine it's more difficult for them to hit that steady-state of being in the air for longer simply because of that fact.

This also tracks with the faster moving (>55 mph) Dixie wedges throwing cars shorter distances than what you would expect of them to compared to slower moving Great Plains wedges i.e. Hackleburg tossing vehicles ""only"" 200 yards in the EF5 core (Smithville and New Wren were freaks of nature in this sense to me), Bassfield tossing trucks 300 yards, Rolling Fork tossing vehicles 150+ yards, etc. despite their extreme structural and tree damage feats. To me, it just seems rarer for Southern tornadoes to loft vehicles further, or smaller objects for that matter.

It certainly feels like the Great Plains tornadoes are more prone to doing extreme damage to vehicles specifically than Southern tornadoes are, and this may be attributed to the fact that they typically travel at more modest forward paces. El Reno 2011 tossed a 20,000 lb oil tanker a mile and it moved at ~35 mph at most, Chickasha absolutely launched cars 600+ yards and IIRC one car over a mile, pretty sure Parkersburg also contained some ludicrous throwing feats although I can't recall it off the top of my head, and then you have Moore 2013 throwing giant tanks miles - these were all wide, most people agree that outside of El Reno 2011, Smithville and Hackleburg were probably stronger than most I listed here - yet they tended to throw objects further. I believe it may have something to do with both size and speed, and again, that may be why Greensburg was so good at launching things. Not because it was stronger per se, but probably because it was just bigger and moved a little slower than an average stronger tornado would. That probably allows objects to reach a steady-state of circulating around the tornado more easily than if it were moving very slowly or very quickly, or if it were a drillbit.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, pretty much a U or sideways C shaped crumpled metal mass. I got sent a higher quality photo of it from a retired NWS DDC Met, and it’s definitely some of the most complete and extreme damage to a vehicle I’ve ever seen, right up there with the Stratton, NE tornado.
Do you have that photo? Yeah, the Culbertson, NE 1990 tornado did some of the most extreme vehicle damage and farm equipment damage ever documented. Hell, it even tore up a cast iron skillet. It is a tornado that should be upgraded to F5 on the original Fujita Scale.
 
Do you have that photo? Yeah, the Culbertson, NE 1990 tornado did some of the most extreme vehicle damage and farm equipment damage ever documented. Hell, it even tore up a cast iron skillet. It is a tornado that should be upgraded to F5 on the original Fujita Scale.
Oops, yeah forgot to attach it to the original post, here it is. Like I said, there really is no identifiable part other than the steering wheel.
IMG_0177.jpeg
 
Back
Top