Beachwalker
Member
Well that event verified! End of story
-
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
Severe WX Severe Weather Threat June 6-14
- Thread starter Kds86z
- Start date
I’m not a particularly nice guy. That’s a trait I have, and it’s probably my biggest flaw. But the key thing here is, it only comes out when there’s a pattern of behavior from another individual that is indicative of ignorance or incessantly irritating behavior. So when it comes to a rebuttal that boils down to “Yeah well you’re a d**k who goes off on people”…yeah I know, and I don’t care because if someone is on the receiving end of it, they did something to bring it forth. I simply do not believe in unconditional respect, nor that everyone’s opinions or statements are valid and deserving a kind approach no matter what. The way I treat others is entirely dependent on how they behave and what they say.
Plus, don’t for a second try to claim that just because I’m not waving a bunch of papers, academic journals, and links to studies all over the forum is indicative of some kind of lesser credibility. The main reason I don’t do that, is because myself, and many others here have already delved into and read much of that stuff before it even gets posted here, so there’s no point in posting it over and over. As a tornado intensity estimation nerd, you bet I’m going to read/watch anything that gets put out related to that topic, so almost everything I say has external basis. The only real “original research” that I claim is related to contextual stuff like grass scouring. So your implication that I operate on a “because I said so” basis is completely false. Besides, posting more papers and links does not automatically equate to having a better grasp on things like construction, the science behind surveying, and the relationship between tornado intensity and damage. It’s a flashy false equivalency, and at the end of the day, my username isn’t one of the go-to’s on this forum for EF scale/damage surveying questions for no reason. That’s something you earn over time via real life examples and discussions, not just by waving links and studies around.
The bottom line is I’ll play nice until you give me a reason not to…and when I don’t, don’t expect that pointing out that I’m being a jerk will be some personal revelation for me, because trust me, I already know that.
This is fair.
I just want you to know, when the research comes out proving everything I've been saying the last two years is correct, I won't say I told you so. I'll be super humble and chill about it.
TH2002
Member
- Messages
- 4,969
- Reaction score
- 11,101
- Location
- California, United States
- Special Affiliations
- SKYWARN® Volunteer
I'm not dipping my toes in this today.
Also related to the topic of surveys and ratings, I’m seeing the first possible caveat here for an EF4 rating for the Kouts tornado. It looks like the entire floor platform slid off of the basement intact, which could be indicative of a weak connection between the foundation and floor. In addition, there’s a lack of debarking, but that could be attributed to the tree species or a lack of debris loading. However, truly violent tornadoes can debark trees in rural areas no problem. So this one probably isn’t a slam dunk, but EF4 is still definitely on the table. Keep in mind though, it also could come down to the transmission tower rather than the house. Bowdle 2010 does set a precedent that shouldn’t be ignored.
The thing is, I don’t actually disagree with the crux of many of your points at this stage. There’s a good chance you won’t have to tell me anything because I’m probably already in agreement. My only issue is that you seem to have a mindset that seeks any opportunity to criticize the rating process, the people involved, and the NWS when it comes to surveying procedures. It’s a clear pessimistic bias, and that is more what I was getting at.
Central Ohio Wx
Member
EF3. All I'm going to say without getting dogged.
That’s probably the likely outcome given the factors I mentioned. But at the same time I wouldn’t jump to that conclusion with full confidence just yet. Enid’s highest rated damage point was a largely unanchored farmhouse, and we have the transmission tower to consider, which would meet the 170 MPH criteria under the proposed scale update and was the primary EF4 damage point for Bowdle.
Last edited:
Significant debarking (especially rurally) is an EF5 DI, not an EF4 one. We gotta try to remember that, even with all the bad precedent around it. Contextually, this level of de nuding is enough to support a low-end EF4 rating when paired with the damage presentation of the house. When you add the mangled trailer, and cycloidal marks, it becomes practically a slam dunk low-end EF4.
170 mph would even be acceptable as a compromise for uncertainty, but I personally think the winds required to cause this damage are in the 185 range (that's an unpopular opinion, I know).
When you compare this house to the one in Kankakee it becomes clearer. Notice how the tree next to the house barely lost any branches, and how large the pieces of the house are. Plus the absence of any soil disturbances or cycloidal marks in the vicinity.
Here's another angle of the Washburn house. Much more granulated. And the thrown objects.
Here's another angle of the Washburn house. Much more granulated. And the thrown objects.
warneagle
Member
didn't get as hard as we did last night but it's a second severe thunderstorm in a row here that will probably verify the SLT for wind. as long the wind damage isn't too bad, I'll take the rain.
warneagle
Member
great look at the same storm coming into DC from the Washington Monument. you can see the grass getting kind of brown, so we need the rain. the previous video was taken from the very very very far left edge of this photo.
- Thread starter
- #792
Kds86z
Member
KakashiHatake2000
Member
- Thread starter
- #794
Kds86z
Member
Wow? I don’t even see a severe thunderstorm warning lol and looks like a tornado, not landspout.
KakashiHatake2000
Member
Yeah
I didn’t either saw it on my Facebook feed but agreed- Thread starter
- #796
Kds86z
Member
This is one of the best tornado videos I have ever seen (hopefully followed later by a long format video) from Andrew Pritchard of yesterday's outbreak. Tornadoes of all shapes, sizes, and colors.
- Thread starter
- #798
Kds86z
Member
"Landspout" on a tornado under a wall cloud, lmao.
But I’m talking about the current/proposed, real life application of the scale here, which means EF4 is possible but it’s absolutely not a slam dunk. First off, you mentioned total debarking in rural areas being an EF5 indicator, and while it might be true when it comes to our opinions, it simply isn’t true when it comes to real life application of the scale. The proposed updated EF scale essentially defines EF5 tree damage as en masse root balling, not extreme debarking in rural areas. Neither of these two phenomenon occurred with the Kouts tornado. Not really relevant here since it’s an EF4 candidate, not an EF5 candidate, but still.
Secondly, while it can be in some circumstances, tree stubbing alone is absolutely not an automatic EF4 indicator, and it absolutely can and does happen in the EF3 range. When looking at real life examples, almost every single recent instance of EF4 tree damage (Dayton, Bassfield, Rolling Fork, London, Enderlin, Enid, and probably a couple others I’m forgetting) involved at least some degree of debarking and/or root balling. You used Kankakee as a cherry picked example of what you think EF3 tree damage “should” look like, but you’re ignoring countless examples of trees being stubbed and defoliated, but not debarked within the vicinity of EF3 damage to homes. MANY, and I do mean many EF3 tornadoes defoliate and denude trees, and in some instances can even produce low-end debarking. For example, the EF3 that hit my home town in 2019 stubbed trees within the immediate vicinity of homes that still had walls standing, and I observed this very clearly in person. Plus if you want a VERY recent example, as you can see above, this exact degree of tree damage (with even a little bit of debarking too) from the Washburn tornado was rated EF3. That’s just two examples, and I could give many, many, many more. In the Kouts tornado, the tree damage is not at all consistent with the type of tree damage that typically gets rated EF4 in real life, and is therefore not a strong contextual boost for the home. As shown by my previous examples, in real life, EF4 is only really applied to tree damage when considerable debarking or root balling occurs along with the stubbing. So your claim that the extent of damage to the trees surrounding the Kouts home is representative of typical tree damage from an EF4 event is demonstrably untrue from multiple angles. Bottom line; EF4s typically produce significant debarking, period, regardless of rural or populated settings.
Now on to the home itself. We have a floor platform that has slid off its basement foundation. That is automatically a tell of a weak floor to foundation connection. Now you might say, “But the highest rated DI from Enid was a dubiously anchored farmhouse with a subfloor that slid off”. That is true, but the difference is in Enid, there was grass scouring, incredible root ball displacements, severe debarking, and long distance lofting of heavy metal storage tanks. In Kouts, all we really have contextually near the home is cycloidal crop scouring and a lofted flatbed trailer. While there’s a chance these provide JUST enough for a context based EF4, it’s a stretch and far from a slam dunk, and nowhere near the contextual damage surrounding the Enid farmhouse.
Now the transmission tower is probably the best shot at EF4, especially given the precedent from Bowdle and the 170 MPH DOD for displaced transmission towers in the proposed scale update. Given we haven’t seen this happen since Bowdle though, it’s far from certain.
Conclusion: Given the current and proposed confines and applications of the EF scale, this is a possible, but not a slam dunk EF4 by any means. While we could maybe see an EF4 rating depending on how forward thinking the survey team is, high-end EF3 is every bit as likely, if not more so.
Last edited: