Enhanced Fujita Ratings Debate Thread

[TH2002]

Also sorry to bombard you with questions, but what kept the single slab foundation home in the Cherokee Valley area at 175 MPH? It had a stronger foundation type than the others, and I have heard it was well-anchored. Is this untrue? Genuinely curious because I’ve heard both claims at this stage. Also what happened in Apison that was more impressive than the Cherokee Valley damage?
.

Oh well never mind then! The writeup made me think this was a masonry foundation. That’s genuinely impressive.

I think where TornadoTalk got confused is that there were CMU columns in the crawlspace to add additional support for the floor joists. While this construction technique is often used on homes where the foundation perimeter is also CMU, it's sometimes used on homes with poured concrete foundations as well (think 96 Kentucky Avenue in Cambridge Shores).

In short, it's just a way to keep the subfloor from sagging.

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

It wasn't. Poured concrete with brick veneer like the home in Chapman, albeit with a crawlspace instead of a basement:

I also think the fact the hurricane straps were snapped in half is indicative of a continuous load path, so I don't think the foundation was an issue.

Also sorry to bombard you with questions, but what kept the single slab foundation home in the Cherokee Valley area at 175 MPH? It had a stronger foundation type than the others, and I have heard it was well-anchored. Is this untrue? Genuinely curious because I’ve heard claims it was “poorly anchored” and “well anchored” at this stage. Also what happened in Apison that was more impressive than the Cherokee Valley damage? I can’t find specifics on that area for the life of me.
.

Oh well never mind then! The writeup made me think this was a masonry foundation. That’s more impressive construction wise than I thought. I will say the tree and grass damage here isn’t even close in intensity to the pics @Grand Poo Bah posted. I was under the impression that the crazy vegetation damage happened within the immediate vicinity of this house. Some of those trees aren’t even defoliated. Contextually not quite as impressive as I was thinking a moment ago.

They were in the immediate vicinity. At least, on the same property. There were some small and extremely intense subvortices in play with this one. For me, no level of tree damage changes the 5 hurricane clips that were snapped in half, but the debarking is top tier nonetheless.

 

[buckeye05]

I’m taking a closer look at this pic, and while this is definitely still some crazy tree damage, I’m not too sure the scouring really is scouring. Since this was a wooded area, it’s not too likely there was a thick layer of grass to begin with. Grass typically doesn’t grow under tree cover. When you take a walk through the woods and look down at the ground you rarely see a bunch of grass. It’s almost always just dirt + leaves or pine needles. It’s very possible that the tornado just swept away the layer of detritus and leaf litter and exposed the dirt, rather than it scouring away a layer of rooted surface vegetation. There’s grass in the exposed area in the foreground, which stops right around the tree line, which is consistent with what I’m getting at. I may have jumped the gun in terms of putting Barnesville into the “maybe” category for EF5. Still absolutely a high-end EF4 candidate for sure though.

I also think the fact the hurricane straps were snapped in half is indicative of a continuous load path.


They were in the immediate vicinity. At least, on the same property. There were some small and extremely intense subvortices in play with this one. For me, no level of tree damage changes the 5 hurricane clips that were snapped in half, but the debarking is top tier nonetheless.

Right, but the trees immediately behind the actual house in question aren’t mowed down and debarked like you’d see behind a real deal EF5 candidate house. Some still even have their leaves. As someone who is big on using context to both upgrade and downgrade, I just can’t ignore that. If there was more direct overlap between the high-end contextual damage and the house itself I’d be more convinced.

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

I’m taking a closer look at this pic, and while this is definitely still some crazy tree damage, I’m not too sure the scouring really is scouring. Since this was a wooded area, it’s not too likely there was a thick layer of grass to begin with. Grass typically doesn’t grow under tree cover. When you take a walk through the woods and look down at the ground you rarely see a bunch of grass. It’s almost always just dirt + leaves or pine needles. It’s very possible that the tornado just swept away the layer of detritus and leaf litter and exposed the dirt, rather than it scouring away a layer of rooted surface vegetation. I may have jumped the gun in terms of putting Barnesville into the “maybe” category for EF5. Still absolutely an EF4 candidate for sure though.
View attachment 49660


Right, but the trees immediately behind the actual house in question aren’t mowed down and debarked like you’d see behind a real deal EF5 candidate house. Some still even have their leaves. As someone who is big on using context to both upgrade and downgrade, I just can’t ignore that. If there was more direct overlap between the high-end contextual damage and the house itself I’d be more convinced.

In the context of how tornadoes are rated currently your assessment is probably correct. Barnesville very likely wouldn't recieve an EF5 rating if it happened today. I concede there.

From a policy standpoint, I don't think it's appropriate to go below the expected wind value for DOD 10 on a home that is built far above typical construction. Even excluding there being entirely debarked trees on the same property. I don't think reasonable ratings should have impossible standards. And I believe we mostly agree on that point.

 

[buckeye05]

In the context of how tornadoes are rated currently your assessment is probably correct. Barnesville very likely wouldn't recieve an EF5 rating if it happened today. I concede there.

From a policy standpoint, I don't think it's appropriate to go below the expected wind value for DOD 10 on a home that is built far above typical construction. Even excluding there being entirely debarked trees on the same property. I don't think reasonable ratings should have impossible standards. And I believe we mostly agree on that point.

I’m unclear as to what specific kind of straps were actually present at the Barnesville home. You mentioned the LaDue diagram, but that actually showed stud anchoring straps, which are installed near the wall to foundation connection and are different from hurricane straps. Hurricane straps are installed at the roof to wall connection. So that raises the question, if these were indeed hurricane straps, what anchoring mechanism was used for that house’s foundation? Were there anchor bolts or some other kind of sufficient anchoring mechanisms present? If the construction crew hurricane strapped the roof, but didn’t anchor the house well, we’d have a major continuous load path problem that would pretty much render the hurricane straps useless. Essentially, saying “there were straps” could mean several different things of varying degrees of significance. It could indicate above standard sturdiness, but not necessarily.

I’m hoping @NorthGaWeather can provide further details regarding that house’s construction, how it was anchored, and what the survey team found there overall.

I do agree with your overall sentiments though, and I’m more approaching this from a “how surveys are currently done, and which 4/27 tornadoes would make the cut today” standpoint, since that’s the big topic of conversation right now. Strapping aside, a big issue with the Barnesville house is how it’s displaced from the most intense swath of contextual damage, indicating that it was removed from its foundation despite not being directly cored by the tornado. Also, aerial imagery (below) shows a significant gap between the foundation and the start of the debris scatter path. This kind of debris pattern indicates a house being thrown from its foundation while intact, which usually suggests anchoring problems. In terms of current surveying practices, these factors would disqualify it from EF5. But in terms of actual intensity, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe that 200+ winds could have occurred somewhere in that decimated wooded area. Overall though, I saw a pic of some straps, got too excited, and prematurely called it a possible EF5 candidate without considering the caveats and variables. Regardless, I think we can all agree that EF3 is too low for Barnesville given the violent tree damage.

 

[Central Ohio Wx]

So smithville would be the strongest EF5 of 4/27 ?

Definitely.

 

[TH2002]

I'm just gonna leave these here. Two different extremes...

This specific tornado has been prone to the most exaggerative and sensationalized stuff imaginable making it seem stronger than it looks or the strongest tornado of all time(Jarrel, Parkersburg and El Reno-Piedmont are the ones that are true candidates for that) yet it's damage is nothing compared to Jarrel's which left nothing in it's wake, with the only damage that could match that being the funeral home; yet it wasn't even at all well built and not truly anchored - allowing the tornado to pulverise or granulate it to that scale.

The denting to the water tower specifically from the ford explorer is also not that much of a truly impressive feat(considering not only did the core or windfield NOT directly affect the Water Tower, the damage was again only a dent.) when you see rolling fork and/or mayfield in comparison and how either destroyed or toppled their respective town's water towers. not to mention Smithville's scouring wasn't all that impressive too with Philly having done worse scouring in relative comparison as well.

And again it was moving at 60 MPH, the same speed that Mayfield was going, YET mayfield's were significantly more destructive and devastating, especially the tree damage MF did.(Which leads me to believe MF or WK was way stronger than Smithville in general.)

So as a result and from looking at this, Smithville should've been rated respectfully, a HE-EF4 compared to other EF5s of that day besides Rainsville.

I'm i the only one who thinks Smithville 2011 is the closest a tornado has ever come to being a ef6 figure it ripped storm setters out of the ground.

Don't snort Pixy Stix, fellas.

 

[Central Ohio Wx]

I'm just gonna leave these here. Two different extremes...




Don't snort Pixy Stix, fellas.

While both are incorrect, there are genuine points to the former post that I do agree with, specifically the funeral home not being as well-constructed as thought and that the water tower dent isn’t really that impressive.

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

While both are incorrect, there are genuine points to the former post that I do agree with, specifically the funeral home not being as well-constructed as thought and that the water tower dent isn’t really that impressive.

What kind of unit of measurement is "impressive"? Is that metric or imperial?

 

[VultureDirge89]

While both are incorrect, there are genuine points to the former post that I do agree with, specifically the funeral home not being as well-constructed as thought and that the water tower dent isn’t really that impressive.

For what it's worth, I think that's the same person who admitted that they're biased against giving Dixie tornadoes high-end ratings. While it's true that construction quality in the area doesn't tend to be great, I don't think it's as a rule worse than in Plains states in general.

 

[Central Ohio Wx]

What kind of unit of measurement is "impressive"? Is that metric or imperial?

Pardon? I'm saying that the water tower and funeral homes aren't as impressive as generally believed (ie that the funeral home is an upper-echelon indicator, and that the water tower dent is indicative on it's own of extreme strength). I'm not saying the tornado wasn't a high-end EF5, just that the points they did make are at the very least genuine.

For the water tower specifically, my held reasoning as to why it's not an indicator of extreme strength is that any object thrown into another thin-walled (asterisk for this as we don't have construction details) and hollow object at high velocity will cause a dent/go directly through it; if I threw a baseball at the same water tower at, say, 100 miles-per-hour, then it would still possibly inflict a mark. The Ford Explorer just-so-happened to be in the path of the water tower (we do have evidence that it did indeed hit the tower, including debris from both that and another truck in the rungs) and the fact that it caused a dent isn't super impressive on it's own. The same thing could've happened in Greensburg (that one I know was thin-walled) and pretty much every other violent tornado that both lofted a car and had a water tower in it's outer windfield but didn't as the odds for the truck to directly hit the tower are low.

The funeral home has been discussed at length and given last time it turned into you-know-what, I really don't see the point in having an argument about it. Atd. Feel free to refute any of my points, as I'm open to learning.

 

[VultureDirge89]

Well, here it is. I'm planning on making a series of posts explaining the tornadoes that I would have rated differently, but this is my first draft of my list of violent tornadoes during the EF5 drought, between May 21, 2013 and June 20, 2025 (and I also found a lot of EF2s which I think should have been rated EF3). I'm open to feedback, and in fact I'd really like to hear people's opinions on the tornadoes that I'm still undecided on in particular, but feedback on any of them would be much appreciated. Obviously subject to change.

Italicized = I'm still undecided on what rating I would give the tornado.
Asterisk = I consider it to be a very marginal/low-end violent tornado.

List:

El Reno, Oklahoma - May 31, 2013 (EF4)
Belmond, Iowa - June 12, 2013 (EF4)*
Wayne, Nebraska - October 4, 2013 (EF4)
Pierson, Iowa - October 4, 2013 (EF4)*
Washington, Illinois - November 17, 2013 (EF4)
New Minden, Illinois - November 17, 2013 (EF4)

Vilonia, Arkansas - April 27, 2014 (EF5)
Tupelo, Mississippi - April 28, 2014 (EF4)
Louisville, Mississippi - April 28, 2014 (EF4)
Stanton, Nebraska - June 16, 2014 (EF5)
Pilger, Nebraska - June 16, 2014 (EF4)
E Pilger, Nebraska - June 16, 2014 (EF4)
Wakefield, Nebraska - June 16, 2014 (EF4)
Coleridge, Nebraska - June 17, 2014 (EF4)
Alpena, South Dakota - June 18, 2014 (EF4)
Columbia, Mississippi - December 23, 2014 (EF4)

Rochelle, Illinois - April 9, 2015 (EF5)
Cisco, Texas - May 9, 2015 (EF4)
Coal City, Illinois - June 22, 2015 (EF3 or EF4)
Clarksdale, Mississippi - December 23, 2015 (EF4)
Holly Springs, Mississippi - December 23, 2015 (EF4 or EF5)
Rowlett, Texas - December 26, 2015 (EF4)

Katie, Oklahoma - May 9, 2016 (EF4)
Sulphur, Oklahoma - May 9, 2016 (EF3 or EF4) (Possible EF4 based on vehicle damage.)
Connerville, Oklahoma - May 9, 2016 (EF3 or EF4) (Same as Sulphur.)
Chapman, Kansas - May 25, 2016 (EF5)

Perryville, Missouri - February 28, 2017 (EF4)
W Canton, Texas - April 29, 2017 (EF4)
E Canton, Texas - April 29, 2017 (EF4)
Great Bend, Kansas - May 16, 2017 (EF4)*

Laramie, Wyoming - June 6, 2018 (EF4) (Based on ground scouring.)
Camp Crook, South Dakota - June 28, 2018 (EF5)
Douglas, Wyoming - July 28, 2018 (EF4 or EF5)
Alonsa, Manitoba - August 3, 2018 (EF4)

Beauregard, Alabama - March 3, 2019 (EF4)
Greenwood Springs, Mississippi - April 13, 2019 (EF4)
Laverne, Oklahoma - May 23, 2019 (EF4)
Dayton, Ohio - May 27, 2019 (EF4)*
Linwood, Kansas - May 28, 2019 (EF4)

Mount Juliet, Tennessee - March 3, 2020 (EF4) (Mostly based on damage to elementary schools in Mount Juliet. Couldn't find explanation for why official NWS rating was lower bound.)
Cookeville, Tennessee - March 3, 2020 (EF4)
Sartinville, Mississippi - April 12, 2020 (EF4)
Bassfield, Mississippi - April 12, 2020 (EF4 or EF5)
Nixville, South Carolina - April 13, 2020 (EF4)
Hurricane Creek, Mississippi - April 19, 2020 (EF4)
Dalton, Minnesota - July 8, 2020 (EF4)

Boscobel, Wisconsin - August 7, 2021 (EF4)
Monette, Arkansas - December 10, 2021 (EF4)
Mayfield, Kentucky - December 10, 2021 (EF5)
Dresden, Tennessee - December 10, 2021 (EF3 or EF4)
Bowling Green, Kentucky - December 10, 2021 (EF4)
Saloma, Kentucky - December 11, 2021 (EF4)

Winterset, Iowa - March 5, 2022 (EF4)
Black Creek, Georgia - April 5, 2022 (EF4) (Borderline EF5, but the contextual concerns are valid imho.)
Ulmer, South Carolina - April 5, 2022 (EF4)
Andover, Kansas - April 29, 2022 (EF4)*
Caviness, Texas - November 4, 2022 (EF4)* (I frankly think the EF4 rating is a bit questionable, but if it had been rated EF3 I'd probably be arguing for an EF4 rating.
VERY borderline.)
Clarksville, Texas - November 4, 2022 (EF4)

Rolling Fork, Mississippi - March 24, 2023 (EF5)
Keota, Iowa - March 31, 2023 (EF4)
Robinson, Illinois - March 31, 2023 (EF4)
Covington, Tennessee - March 31, 2023 (EF3 or EF4)
Bethel Springs, Tennessee - March 31, 2023 (EF3 or EF4)
Matador, Texas - June 21, 2023 (EF5)
Didsbury, Alberta - July 1, 2023 (EF4)

Elkhorn, Nebraska - April 26, 2024 (EF4)
Marietta, Oklahoma - April 27, 2024 (EF4)* (Same as Caviness.)
Hawkley, Texas - May 2, 2024 (EF4)*
Barnsdall, Oklahoma - May 6, 2024 (EF4)
Greenfield, Iowa - May 21, 2024 (EF4)
Charleston, Kentucky - May 26, 2024 (EF3 or EF4)
Whitman, Nebraska - June 25, 2024 (EF3 or EF4)

Bakersfield, Missouri - March 14, 2025 (EF4)
Fremont, Missouri - March 14, 2025 (EF3 or EF4)
Larkin, Arkansas - March 14, 2025 (EF4)
Diaz, Arkansas - March 14, 2025 (EF4)
Tylertown, Mississippi - March 15, 2025 (EF4)
Lake City, Arkansas - April 2, 2025 (EF4)
Marion, Illinois - May 16, 2025 (EF4)*
London, Kentucky - May 16, 2025 (EF4 or EF5) (House damage is low-mid EF4. Extreme tree and vehicle damage seem close to EF5 level).
Grinnell, Kansas - May 18, 2025 (EF4)
Preston, Kansas - May 18, 2025 (EF4)
Enderlin, North Dakota - June 20, 2025 (EF5)
Gary, South Dakota - June 28, 2025 (EF4)

Edit: forgot Lake City.
Edit 2: Ulmer, SC, not GA.

A couple of updates:

- I'm no longer convinced that Belmond was an EF4, although I'd still consider it a candidate EF4.
- 4/28/14: I now consider Louisville an EF5 and Flintville a candidate EF4
- Holly Springs and Bassfield are most likely EF5
- Alonsa is a candidate EF5
- 4/25/21: Centreville/Greensboro, AL is a candidate EF4

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

Pardon? I'm saying that the water tower and funeral homes aren't as impressive as generally believed (ie that the funeral home is an upper-echelon indicator, and that the water tower dent is indicative on it's own of extreme strength). I'm not saying the tornado wasn't a high-end EF5, just that the points they did make are at the very least genuine.

Right, and I'm asking what "impressiveness" has to do with anything? Personal sentiments aren't a unit of measurement. Did someone do some math or a study that disproves EF5 winds are required to throw a truck with the velocity to dent reinforced steel 40 feet in the air? Or are we passing off "vibes" as legitimate science now?

 

[Central Ohio Wx]

Right, and I'm asking what "impressiveness" has to do with anything? Personal sentiments aren't a unit of measurement. Did someone do some math or a study that disproves EF5 winds are required to throw a truck with the velocity to dent reinforced steel 40 feet in the air? Or are we passing off "vibes" as legitimate science now?

I'm not saying it has anything to do with science? You're misconstruing what I'm saying; I'm refuting commonly-held sentiments about these structures that I've seen (simply agreeing with the Reddit post that a few (notice how I'm only agreeing with the funeral home and water tower) aspects of damage from that tornado are indeed not as impressive as commonly believed in my own opinion). EF5 winds were never proven to have been needed to dent the tower (iirc) regardless, and it was in the outer windfield at the time the impact was made.

If you want a hypothetical metric, I'd say "impressive" in this case is that a specific point of damage points to upper-echelon (220-266+ based off current understanding) winds. "Not as impressive" is simply saying that those points of damage are not indicative of those windspeeds. It doesn't tie in perfectly with what I've said above but oh well. Both points are often argued as being indicators that the tornado was one of the most powerful ever recorded, and while I'm not refuting that (in the U.S. it's probably top 5), neither point proves that. Some of the worst damage was to homes earlier on in the track, and those are iirc more solid points to argue off.

Hopefully this could stay civil? It's 9:00 am and I'm really hoping this thread can move on from whatever happened a few days ago.

 

[Tomcats Forever!]

A couple of updates:

- I'm no longer convinced that Belmond was an EF4, although I'd still consider it a candidate EF4.
- 4/28/14: I now consider Louisville an EF5 and Flintville a candidate EF4
- Holly Springs and Bassfield are most likely EF5
- Alonsa is a candidate EF5
- 4/25/21: Centreville/Greensboro, AL is a candidate EF4

When was Alonsa? I don't remember that one.

 

[ColdFront]

This may be ignorance here on my part, but I was always under the impression that the water tower dent wasn’t notable due to the actual dent. It was notable because the vehicle itself traveled half a mile, hit the water tower, then was picked up again and later completely mangled.

I’m not saying it is or isn’t impressive, but that was my assumption on why it’s mentioned so much.

 

[slenker]

This may be ignorance here on my part, but I was always under the impression that the water tower dent wasn’t notable due to the actual dent. It was notable because the vehicle itself traveled half a mile, hit the water tower, then was picked up again and later completely mangled.

I’m not saying it is or isn’t impressive, but that was my assumption on why it’s mentioned so much.

I’d argue that this is exactly why it’s so notable. Also the funeral home may not have been excellently built, but the degree of granulation is why that building is talked about, not because it simply slabbed it.

The EF6 post on Reddit was clearly made by someone who is on the younger side, so I don’t think it’s fair to completely blast it. The high end EF4 one seems like it’s almost trying to make people get upset? Zero mention of structural flaws to homes or discussion the damage required to achieve an EF5 rating - just blankly stating “it’s mythological and overhyped and I'm not very impressed with what I saw from the car or the scouring so it’s not an EF5” is not a valid argument.

I want to know why this viewpoint is even a thing? I feel quite strongly that Smithville’s contextual damage was clearly above other rated EF5s, and it makes an argument for the most intense we’ve seen in the EF scale era. The fact that it’s even in the conversation with El Reno 2011 or BCM 1999 immediately gives credence to the idea that it’s an EF5. It feels like people just want to be contrarians for the sake of playing devil’s advocate at this point.

 

[Central Ohio Wx]

This may be ignorance here on my part, but I was always under the impression that the water tower dent wasn’t notable due to the actual dent. It was notable because the vehicle itself traveled half a mile, hit the water tower, then was picked up again and later completely mangled.

I’m not saying it is or isn’t impressive, but that was my assumption on why it’s mentioned so much.

I'm moreso referring to the "it slammed into the water tower so hard that it caused a dent" argument I see often, especially on Reddit and YouTube documentaries. There's always a focus-in on the "dent" part. I don't have any comments on the Explorer itself as I haven't seen any photos of it, but do know it traveled 0.9-1.2 miles (can't remember the exact number) from southwest to northeast of the water tower.

 

[slenker]

I'm moreso referring to the "it slammed into the water tower so hard that it caused a dent" argument I see often, especially on Reddit and YouTube documentaries. There's always a focus-in on the "dent" part. I don't have any comments on the Explorer itself as I haven't seen any photos of it, but do know it traveled 0.9-1.2 miles (can't remember the exact number) from southwest to northeast of the water tower.

I’d argue that the dent is likely still very impressive in its own right, but it’s difficult to quantify how. The Smithville water tower was well outside the EF5 core. For the car to impact the water tower at the velocity required to dent it, probably a mangled mess at the point that it did with much of its original mass missing, and still be dragged back in by inflow to be thrown another quarter mile, all whilst being thrown that far away from the core during the impact is really incredible. There’s a reason it is a very unique DI in that regard. Most people I know are in awe of throwing the car a mile in the first place, but I’m more interested in the fact that the car imparted its momentum into the tower and still got thrown even further. That’s scary to think about.

 

[Grand Poo Bah]

I’d argue that the dent is likely still very impressive in its own right, but it’s difficult to quantify how. The Smithville water tower was well outside the EF5 core. For the car to impact the water tower at the velocity required to dent it, probably a mangled mess at the point that it did with much of its original mass missing, and still be dragged back in by inflow to be thrown another quarter mile, all whilst being thrown that far away from the core during the impact is really incredible. There’s a reason it is a very unique DI in that regard. Most people I know are in awe of throwing the car a mile in the first place, but I’m more interested in the fact that the car imparted its momentum into the tower and still got thrown even further. That’s scary to think about.

Exactly, and if you aren't amazed when you consider that feat it's a you problem. Not only this, but some of the most experienced and seasoned weather scientists were "impressed" by it, so what does it matter if some edgy kids in a Discord server aren't? It's a completely meaningless argument, and a level of self importance that is laughable.

I'll take it a step further and say my unpopular opinion is that I don't really care how seasoned of a professional it is, if they say something a tornado did was "not impressive" they immediately lose credibility to me. Why would you openly advertise such a lack of objectivity?

How many people were impressed by the grain cars in Enderlin? Almost none. Yet that feat required 260 mph winds. How many people have discounted the safe that was thrown in Rainsville for years, yet a recently released compact objects study proved winds FAR exceeding 200 mph were required to do that. It's so wild to me that surveying tornado damage has basically become a vibe check, and it's such a commonly accepted practice. At least TRY to be scientific!

Anyways, sorry for the sassiness. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk. Rant over.