• 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 December 10 & 11, 2021 Severe Threat

I think Jawed Karim's quote regarding YouTube's removal of dislikes sums up the rating for the Mayfield tornado perfectly:

Is there a reason why the Mayfield tornado wasn't rated EF5? "There is a reason, but it's not a good one, and not one that will be publicly disclosed."
 
TH2002 said:
Guess nothing came of buckeye05's attempts to get NWS Paducah to check out the trenches on foot. Some of us (including me) are learning the hard way that it's pretty much a waste of time to try and point out specific damage points to an NWS office, even with the exact address or coordinates.
Click to expand...
They have a new tweet out tonight. I responded to the tweet asking if someone from their NWS office went out to see those trenches.
 
vanni9283 said:
They have a new tweet out tonight. I responded to the tweet asking if someone from their NWS office went out to see those trenches.
Click to expand...
I think it's pointless unfortunately. I thought about messaging them about the homes at 176 Kentucky Avenue in Cambridge Shores and 5264 Carbondale Rd northeast of Dawson Springs, among other damage points, but realized I'm probably wasting my time as a) most NWS don't respond to emails and b) a few damage points brought up by a weather nerd isn't likely to have any effect on the tornado's final rating.
 
TH2002 said:
I think it's pointless unfortunately. I thought about messaging them about the homes at 176 Kentucky Avenue in Cambridge Shores and 5264 Carbondale Rd northeast of Dawson Springs, among other damage points, but realized I'm probably wasting my time as a) most NWS don't respond to emails and b) a few damage points brought up by a weather nerd isn't likely to have any effect on the tornado's final rating.
Click to expand...
Well it's worth a try. Needless to say, wholesale changes need to be made in the manner in which tornadoes are rated and how the EF-scale is used.
 
I think you all need to give Paducah a break when it's likely they probably don't/didn't have final say in the ratings in the first place. I'd suspect there are some other things going on behind the scenes here.

I will add that there clearly needs to be more QC of the DIs on a system-wide basis (e.g. those ones from the Bowling Green area), in addition to whatever is going on for the Mayfield track where there seems to be only a few DIs per area affected. I'd suspect there is more review going on there.
 
Last edited:
This is heartbreaking. WLKY included some photos in their list of the victims in Kentucky whose names have been released.

Every single one of those faces seems especially beautiful right now.
 
andyhb said:
I think you all need to give Paducah a break when it's likely they probably don't/didn't have final say in the ratings in the first place. I'd suspect there are some other things going on behind the scenes here.

I will add that there clearly needs to be more QC of the DIs on a system-wide basis (e.g. those ones from the Bowling Green area), in addition to whatever is going on for the Mayfield track where there seems to be only a few DIs per area affected. I'd suspect there is more review going on there.
Click to expand...
All I did was ask them if anyone from their NWS office looked at the trenches/ground scouring in Cayce.
 
TH2002 said:
I think Jawed Karim's quote regarding YouTube's removal of dislikes sums up the rating for the Mayfield tornado perfectly:

Is there a reason why the Mayfield tornado wasn't rated EF5? "There is a reason, but it's not a good one, and not one that will be publicly disclosed."
Click to expand...
It has to be disclosed to the politicians funding the NWS, i.e., Congress. Is anyone fired up enough to talk their reps and senators into leaning on the appropriate points in the bureaucracy?

That could work, but it might require input first from academics and business sources. Know anyone who is willing to take the risk and do that?

This brouha about ratings is extraordinary, and though I don't know enough to contribute to the debate, I'm now convinced there's a problem. But the only way to permanently fix it is by working through your elected officials.
 
TH2002 said:
Guess nothing came of buckeye05's attempts to get NWS Paducah to check out the trenches on foot. Some of us (including me) are learning the hard way that it's pretty much a waste of time to try and point out specific damage points to an NWS office, even with the exact address or coordinates.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was expecting the at least see if photographed or mentioned. Nothing. Pretty disappointing.

But yeah, as frustrating as this is, bombarding them with questions and criticism will do no further good at this point, as I do think some other stuff is at play here and it might not just come down to WFO bias. I believe engineering consultation has something to do with it, but I don’t want to speculate beyond that.
 
Last edited:
So before the final rating came out(If It still not finalized) I want to make a rough EF5 candidate list based on damages we already known.

Cayce: several clean slabs, ground digging
Mayfield: Church damage, several other large commercial building damage large slab north of the town
Cambridge shore: numerous large slabs
Dawson Springs: leveled two story apartment(anchored into CMU foundation with nuts and washers but still impressive anyway)
Princeton: UK facility area, broken slab houses mentioned by simon
Earlington: large coverd hopper uphilled
Bremen: several slabs, siginificant ground scouring, scoured driveway

Literally all towns that been hit in Paducah NWS area had EF5 candidate damage. I think all we here have 0 doubt this tornado have EF5 level winds at some point and what we need is just one single EF5 point to represent its true intensity. No matter where.
 
At this point, one can safely say that this outbreak featured at least five tornadoes that were capable of producing EF4+ damage, as they almost certainly did, including at least one EF5. I looked back at past outbreaks in December and the only event that even comes remotely close to this in terms of intensity was the outbreak of 18–19 December 1957 (three F4s and one F5). Even so, this outbreak was much deadlier and appears to have been the deadliest outbreak in December on record, going back not just to 1950 but also to 1880; I scanned Thomas P. Grazulis’ “big green book” for confirmation. Furthermore, the 1957 outbreak’s tornadoes were much shorter-tracked than this outbreak’s were: not once has a previous outbreak in December featured three tornadoes with path lengths ≥ 50 mi.

As an aside, does anyone know why the NWS’s federal offices apparently pressured the WFOs to side with lower ratings in this case?
 
Casuarina Head said:
At this point, one can safely say that this outbreak featured at least five tornadoes that were capable of producing EF4+ damage, as they almost certainly did, including at least one EF5. I looked back at past outbreaks in December and the only event that even comes remotely close to this in terms of intensity was the outbreak of 18–19 December 1957 (three F4s and one F5). Even so, this outbreak was much deadlier and appears to have been the deadliest outbreak in December on record, going back not just to 1950 but also to 1880; I scanned Thomas P. Grazulis’ “big green book” for confirmation. Furthermore, the 1957 outbreak’s tornadoes were much shorter-tracked than this outbreak’s were: not once has a previous outbreak in December featured three tornadoes with path lengths ≥ 50 mi.

As an aside, does anyone know why the NWS’s federal offices apparently pressured the WFOs to side with lower ratings in this case?
Click to expand...
The three longest paths of this outbreak(Mayfield/Leachville/Dresden) combined had path near 370miles. I mean...I can only think of Super Outbreak2011 in history can rival to this(Hackleburg/Cordova/Enterprise)(Hackleburg arguablely had 103miles path according to Tornadotalk). The Mayfield tornado itself was almost godlike. No need to say several violent level tornados except "Big Three"(like BG). To have an event like this in December was way beyond insane, almost unthinkable. It will be remembered and discussed for a long time no matter what rating they have been given.
 
Last edited:
pohnpei said:
The three longest paths of this outbreak(Mayfield/Leachville/Dresden) combined had path near 370miles. I mean...I can only think of Super Outbreak2011 in history can rival to this(Hackleburg/Cordova/Enterprise)(Hackleburg arguablely had 103miles path according to Tornadotalk). Mayfield tornado itself was almost godlike. No need to say several violent level tornados except "Big Three"(like BG). To have an event like this in December was way beyond insane, almost unthinkable. It will be remembered and discussed for a long time no matter what rating they have been given.
Click to expand...
The Mayfield tornado officially tracked for ~166 mi. Per Grazulis (2001) and Rogers (2013), the 1925 Tri-State tornado most probably featured a continuous PL of ~157 mi (the most likely estimates ranged from 151 to 174 mi). So by all measures the Mayfield tornado was roughly tied with the Tri-State F5 as the longest in U.S. history, and almost certainly was just as intense as its infamous forebear. As far as single-tornado PLs are concerned, only the Yazoo City MS EF4 of 24 April 2010, with a total PL of ~149 mi, even comes close, followed by long-trackers such as those from 27 April 2011, 3 April 1974 (Guin AL), 20 April 1920 (Aberdeen MS–Waco AL), and 9 April 1947 (Glazier–Higgins TX/Woodward OK). Guin tracked for ~103 mi, Aberdeen–Waco for ~130 mi, and Glazier–Higgins/Woodward for ~98 mi, the last of which is roughly as long as the Shoal Creek–Ohatchee AL EF4 from 27 April 2011. I have probably overlooked some others as well.
 
bjdeming said:
It has to be disclosed to the politicians funding the NWS, i.e., Congress. Is anyone fired up enough to talk their reps and senators into leaning on the appropriate points in the bureaucracy?

That could work, but it might require input first from academics and business sources. Know anyone who is willing to take the risk and do that?

This brouha about ratings is extraordinary, and though I don't know enough to contribute to the debate, I'm now convinced there's a problem. But the only way to permanently fix it is by working through your elected officials.
Click to expand...
I personally would rather lose my job then be told what to rate a tornado. That is me though.
 
Shakespeare 2016 said:
I personally would rather lose my job then be told what to rate a tornado. That is me though.
Click to expand...
Oh, I don't think it's as drastic as that. Dave Barry, of all people, described what happens to most people who go to Washington to sincerely make a difference, starting at "So you go to Washington..."

Note: That link is to a borrowed book (Dave Barry Hits Below The Beltway) at the Internet Archive, page 62. You might need an account to read it and then borrow the book, but it's all free and they don't spam you; there might be some good historical weather stuff in the Archive, too.

I wouldn't take up space in this thread with this, but it really does sound like there's a problem with tornado ratings, and unless you have connections in the NWS upper levels, Washington is your best bet. Form a group (informally, probably) of concerned citizens, academics, and business people, and get in there with Barry's "Organic Weasel Breeders" and "Sprocket Polishers." Nag and nag and nag until you get results. They won't be exactly what you want because politics, but they will be a change for the better, if you want it hard enough.

I like the idea someone floated about standardizing these surveys. Technology is so much better now, compared to what was available in Dr. Fujita's day -- some objective, universally applicable scale should be doable (or is that my ignorance showing?).
 
You can standardize it all you want, but the issue is the people applying the scale are never going to fully agree.

...and then there's what has happened with these ones, which is on a whole different level...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top