Severe WX December 10 & 11, 2021 Severe Threat

TH2002

Member
Sustaining Member
Messages
3,470
Reaction score
5,555
Location
California, United States
Special Affiliations
  1. SKYWARN® Volunteer
NWS Paducah Logic 101

EF1 damage = EF3 damage
1603911


EF4/EF5 damage = EF3 damage
Princeton-EF5-damage-facility.JPG
 
Messages
795
Reaction score
710
Location
Augusta, Kansas
It gets worse. One of the EF4 damage points in Cayce appears to have been a slabbed pole barn. So just summarize, we have EF4 damage to a farm outbuilding, and EF3 damage to a well-built institutional building that sustained at least one area of structural collapse. This is insanity.
This is becoming comical. Did anybody bring popcorn and snacks?
 
Last edited:

TH2002

Member
Sustaining Member
Messages
3,470
Reaction score
5,555
Location
California, United States
Special Affiliations
  1. SKYWARN® Volunteer
Why does this house STILL have no DI? Did they just forget it existed?
Carbondale-EF5-damage-home.JPG

And how the [bleep] is this supposed to be EF4 damage? Unless the rest of the structure was not bolted to the foundation, this is clearly EF5 damage.
Bremen-EF5-damage-home2.JPG
Bremen-EF5-damage-anchor-bolts.JPG
 

MNTornadoGuy

Member
Messages
1,625
Reaction score
2,599
Location
Apple Valley, MN

andyhb

Member
Meteorologist
Messages
1,215
Reaction score
3,566
Location
Norman, OK
Meanwhile, there are still zero DIs in the vicinity of Princeton Golf Club. That entire area around Princeton is just such an absolute mess.
 

buckeye05

Member
Messages
3,351
Reaction score
5,205
Location
Colorado
Why does this house STILL have no DI? Did they just forget it existed?
View attachment 11266

And how the [bleep] is this supposed to be EF4 damage? Unless the rest of the structure was not bolted to the foundation, this is clearly EF5 damage.
View attachment 11267
View attachment 11268
That second one was in Bremen, and most of the foundation appears to have been CMU, while a small part was a poured slab, so it wouldn’t meet the EF5 criteria for construction. With that said, part of the aforementioned slab was torn away, the ground was pretty much scoured down to bare soil, and significant debris granulation occurred, so there’s no doubt in my mind EF5 winds occurred there.
 

andyhb

Member
Meteorologist
Messages
1,215
Reaction score
3,566
Location
Norman, OK
That second one was in Bremen, and most of the foundation appears to have been CMU, while a small part was a poured slab, so it wouldn’t meet the EF5 criteria for construction. With that said, part of the aforementioned slab was torn away, the ground was pretty much scoured down to bare soil, and significant debris granulation occurred, so there’s no doubt in my mind EF5 winds occurred there.
If that's the one that has 190 mph, that foundation wasn't CMU.
 

TH2002

Member
Sustaining Member
Messages
3,470
Reaction score
5,555
Location
California, United States
Special Affiliations
  1. SKYWARN® Volunteer
Not only was a nonexistent gas station given an EF4 rating, but my home made of paper and glued with Elmers glue to cardboard sill plates was swept off its foundation. I think it deserves an EF5 rating. Somebody call NWS Paducah!
 

buckeye05

Member
Messages
3,351
Reaction score
5,205
Location
Colorado
If that's the one that has 190 mph, that foundation wasn't CMU.
It’s not a traditional poured slab home either though, as other angles show that the foundation perimeter, where the anchors would be, was indeed CMU. The rest of the foundation appears to have been a thin concrete slab resting on top of a gravel fill that was poured within the space of the CMU foundation. Definitely weird construction, and I wouldn’t assume that it would perform the same way as a typical slab foundation that is actually poured and set in the ground.

ECFB59D7-8421-49F0-9CE2-EE15F672DEE4.jpeg3EC09C78-07DD-4027-BA01-237191D8647F.jpeg
 

MNTornadoGuy

Member
Messages
1,625
Reaction score
2,599
Location
Apple Valley, MN
It’s not a traditional poured slab home either though, as other angles show that the foundation perimeter, where the anchors would be, was indeed CMU. The rest of the foundation appears to have been a thin concrete slab resting on top of a gravel fill that was poured within the space of the CMU foundation. Definitely weird construction, and I wouldn’t assume that it would perform the same way as a typical slab foundation that is actually poured and set in the ground.

View attachment 11272View attachment 11273
The part of the slab that was broken also appears to have been rather thin and seems to have not had rebar in it.
268272713_473747634118770_3239704088034388798_n.jpg
 
Logo 468x120
Back
Top