Significant Tornado Events

[TH2002]

im of the opinion that the new wren mississippi tornado may have been the most under-rated tornado of april 27 2011. it produced clear and textbook EF5 damage

I can't upload the photos right now because my internet has been UNBELIEVABLY bad lately (0.07mb/s on one speed test, literally worse than the dial-up connection I had for a bit back in 2017) but Cordova and the Sawyerville-Eoline "EF3" were nothing to scoff at either. The latter should have been rated EF4 for the debarking alone and I have to wonder if it caused any EF5-worthy damage along its path.

 

[tornado examiner]

if only i could download tornado talk ef-scale contour maps for google earth. they make really good ones but they're impossible to look at closely

 

[Western_KS_Wx]

mind showing the EF0 contour?

Yeah I can make a kmz file for it. Turns out a chunk of it also got erased too but it’s not as big an issue as the others. Probably get it done tonight…the EF0 contour that is.

 

[tornado examiner]

Yeah I can make a kmz file for it. Turns out a chunk of it also got erased too but it’s not as big an issue as the others. Probably get it done tonight…the EF0 contour that is.

yeeeeee! your work is excellent!

 

[Western_KS_Wx]

Alright finally got finished with the EF0 contour for Tuscaloosa-Birmingham, took a bit longer than I expected it to. One thing I will say is tornadotalk and NWS Birmingham have the track continuing slightly longer past the Fultondale area than I do, however I looked meticulously at the before and after images and found no evidence of tornado damage, I.e trees uprooted/missing or roof damage. Other than that that’s about it, if anyone has any questions or comments feel free to let me know!

 

[Western_KS_Wx]

yeeeeee! your work is excellent!

I appreciate the kind words, it means a lot!

 

[tornado examiner]

keep up the good work my guy!

 

[tornado examiner]

I appreciate the kind words, it means a lot!

how long did it take you to do the full thing originally? and will it take a similar or different amount of time to redo it?

 

[Sawmaster]

I can't upload the photos right now because my internet has been UNBELIEVABLY bad lately (0.07mb/s on one speed test, literally worse than the dial-up connection I had for a bit back in 2017)

For temporary issues, just set your phone up as a hotspot. Watch your data limits; some providers bill hotspot use differently than normal data. Programs like "Fox.fi" can usually 'trick' the system into thinking your hotspot use is data to circumvent limited hotspot issues. If you don't use it much it's easy to forget hotspot exists

Due to a move and finances I had dial-up until 2002, and I got to "enjoy" it again for a short time a couple years ago when I spent some time waaaay up in the hills where there was no cable or DSL. You can tell how young someone is by playing the sounds of a dial-up modem at work and asking them what it is but us old folks know it well!

Phil

 

[Western_KS_Wx]

how long did it take you to do the full thing originally? and will it take a similar or different amount of time to redo it?

Around 5-6 days, I’d imagine it’ll take a similar amount of time maybe a little less. The damage path is very complex and there were strength fluctuations almost constantly, it’s also just such a large area to look at. I’ve also got some other maps I made last year that I might remake, I know Vilonia was one of them along with Moore and Joplin. Probably put those on hold for a later time if I were to remake them.

 

[Juliett Bravo Kilo]

5/3/99 is an infamous day, but the Mulhall tornado was one that was overlooked by non-researchers. The circulation was quantifiably measured at 4.3 miles wide by the DOW with an entire mile between peak velocities inside the circulation, with suction vorticies showing windspeeds in excess of 260 mph. Many of the same areas were hit again only a couple hours later by the crescent F3.

Does anybody have any information on the Mulhall tornado that isn't already available?

Well obviously this dude's blog lol:

May 3, 1999 — The Bridge Creek–Moore Tornado

“If you haven’t gone to the cellar, you really need to go now. This is a huge circulation. There are vortices everywhere. This is extremely dangerous, so you folks in the path of this tornado…

stormstalker.wordpress.com

Dug up a lot of pictures that aren't available anywhere else, that's for sure.

 

[tornado examiner]

Around 5-6 days, I’d imagine it’ll take a similar amount of time maybe a little less. The damage path is very complex and there were strength fluctuations almost constantly, it’s also just such a large area to look at. I’ve also got some other maps I made last year that I might remake, I know Vilonia was one of them along with Moore and Joplin. Probably put those on hold for a later time if I were to remake them.

ok

 

[locomusic01]

5/3/99 is an infamous day, but the Mulhall tornado was one that was overlooked by non-researchers. The circulation was quantifiably measured at 4.3 miles wide by the DOW with an entire mile between peak velocities inside the circulation, with suction vorticies showing windspeeds in excess of 260 mph. Many of the same areas were hit again only a couple hours later by the crescent F3.

Does anybody have any information on the Mulhall tornado that isn't already available?

Well obviously this dude's blog lol:

[link]

Dug up a lot of pictures that aren't available anywhere else, that's for sure.

Mulhall reminds me so much of El Reno '13. Pretty much everyone who saw it agreed that it was likely extremely violent, and the radar presentation (both NEXRAD and mobile) was super impressive, but the actual damage on the ground didn't always match up. Obviously a big part of that is just traversing sparse terrain, but the complex structure in both cases probably played a role as well. You might record insane velocities on radar, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're reaching the ground - or at least not in such a way as to cause the kind of damage you'd expect.

That being said, the Mulhall tornado obviously still produced some pretty high-end damage (the worst of which I described in the article), but I couldn't find many photos outside of Mulhall itself. From what I understand, it debarked trees in some places (down near Crescent and then again near where it killed Alan McClure northeast of Mulhall) and I got conflicting reports on whether or not it produced ground scouring. For the most part, the swath of clearly identifiable damage didn't exceed a mile to a mile and a half, but it may have been around two miles at times.

If I'm remembering right (I really should check my notes), Gene Moore said that he drove across part of the damage path afterward and there was significant tree damage spanning well over three miles, but that was down around the Crescent area and probably included both the F4 and the subsequent F3.

Anyway, Mulhall was no doubt an exceptional and historic event, but I personally think some of the narratives around it (like the popular assertion that it was "just as strong as Bridge Creek, if not stronger") are a bit much.

 

[xJownage]

Mulhall reminds me so much of El Reno '13. Pretty much everyone who saw it agreed that it was likely extremely violent, and the radar presentation (both NEXRAD and mobile) was super impressive, but the actual damage on the ground didn't always match up. Obviously a big part of that is just traversing sparse terrain, but the complex structure in both cases probably played a role as well. You might record insane velocities on radar, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're reaching the ground - or at least not in such a way as to cause the kind of damage you'd expect.

That being said, the Mulhall tornado obviously still produced some pretty high-end damage (the worst of which I described in the article), but I couldn't find many photos outside of Mulhall itself. From what I understand, it debarked trees in some places (down near Crescent and then again near where it killed Alan McClure northeast of Mulhall) and I got conflicting reports on whether or not it produced ground scouring. For the most part, the swath of clearly identifiable damage didn't exceed a mile to a mile and a half, but it may have been around two miles at times.

If I'm remembering right (I really should check my notes), Gene Moore said that he drove across part of the damage path afterward and there was significant tree damage spanning well over three miles, but that was down around the Crescent area and probably included both the F4 and the subsequent F3.

Anyway, Mulhall was no doubt an exceptional and historic event, but I personally think some of the narratives around it (like the popular assertion that it was "just as strong as Bridge Creek, if not stronger") are a bit much.

I think that comparing Bridge Creek to El Reno is not a very fair comparison outside of the fact that they were tornadoes. It seems like there's a comparison to be made between Mulhall and El Reno 13, which is actually insane to think about. Everybody was focused on Storm A, but another historic tornado, for different reasons, occurred that day and went borderline unnoticed by non-hardcore weather enthusiasts.

Another comparison you didn't make - this tornado was measured at 4.3 miles wide via the wind field. Oklahoma University actually came out with their own study on El Reno '13 adjusting the speed and width, and the size was also measured to be 4.3 miles wide. Seems like Mulhall may have been the El Reno of 1999.

 

[locomusic01]

I think that comparing Bridge Creek to El Reno is not a very fair comparison outside of the fact that they were tornadoes. It seems like there's a comparison to be made between Mulhall and El Reno 13, which is actually insane to think about. Everybody was focused on Storm A, but another historic tornado, for different reasons, occurred that day and went borderline unnoticed by non-hardcore weather enthusiasts.

Another comparison you didn't make - this tornado was measured at 4.3 miles wide via the wind field. Oklahoma University actually came out with their own study on El Reno '13 adjusting the speed and width, and the size was also measured to be 4.3 miles wide. Seems like Mulhall may have been the El Reno of 1999.

I'm not sure you read the post you're replying to lol. That's exactly the comparison I was making; I only mentioned Bridge Creek in the context that it's not a sensible comparison, even though it's sort of become part of the mythos over the years. I think Mulhall is often "unnoticed" because, well.. there's not that much to notice. Wurman's paper is endlessly fascinating (and worth a read for anyone who hasn't yet!), but outside of that there's not a whole lot to go on. I included everything of interest that I could find in my article but it still only amounted to like 1,200 words and maybe a dozen photos.

 

[xJownage]

I'm not sure you read the post you're replying to lol. That's exactly the comparison I was making; I only mentioned Bridge Creek in the context that it's not a sensible comparison, even though it's sort of become part of the mythos over the years. I think Mulhall is often "unnoticed" because, well.. there's not that much to notice. Wurman's paper is endlessly fascinating (and worth a read for anyone who hasn't yet!), but outside of that there's not a whole lot to go on. I included everything of interest that I could find in my article but it still only amounted to like 1,200 words and maybe a dozen photos.

I think I miscommunicated, I meant that you didn't make the comparison of measured width. Seems like similar situations of a meso reaching the ground. As for the other stuff, I was agreeing with you, just tried to add something else

 

[locomusic01]

I think I miscommunicated, I meant that you didn't make the comparison of measured width. Seems like similar situations of a meso reaching the ground. As for the other stuff, I was agreeing with you, just tried to add something else

It's all good. It's a really, really good thing that Mulhall (or El Reno '13 for that matter) traveled over mostly open, sparsely populated areas, but it's a bit frustrating from a WX nerd standpoint that there are so many unknowns. Would've been really interesting to see either of them track through forested land. I mean, we saw something sort of like that with the 5/31/85 Moshannon F4, but that tornado was also moving a lot faster through much more rugged terrain, which heavily influenced its structure, path, damage pattern, etc. At least based on the mobile radar data, Mulhall and El Reno had pretty unique internal structures.

Actually, one other thing just popped into my mind re: Moshannon. Based on the damage patterns he saw in his survey, Dr. Forbes described what he called "inflow vortices" - the idea being that the extremely intense inflow into the storm (probably aided by shear + turbulence from the rough terrain) was effectively spinning up something close to satellite tornadoes, which spiraled around and were ingested into the main vortex. I don't think I have the paper saved, but I recall reading a study involving Mulhall while I was working on 5/3/99 that seemed to describe a pretty similar phenomenon. I was a bit out of my depth on the math, but it caught my attention. I guess I never fully made the connection w/Moshannon until now. Shame we don't have mobile radar data for that event as well.

 

[tornado examiner]

imagine what the morton texas wedge may have done if it wasn't sat over open fields.

 

[Juliett Bravo Kilo]

Mulhall reminds me so much of El Reno '13. Pretty much everyone who saw it agreed that it was likely extremely violent, and the radar presentation (both NEXRAD and mobile) was super impressive, but the actual damage on the ground didn't always match up. Obviously a big part of that is just traversing sparse terrain, but the complex structure in both cases probably played a role as well. You might record insane velocities on radar, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're reaching the ground - or at least not in such a way as to cause the kind of damage you'd expect.

That being said, the Mulhall tornado obviously still produced some pretty high-end damage (the worst of which I described in the article), but I couldn't find many photos outside of Mulhall itself. From what I understand, it debarked trees in some places (down near Crescent and then again near where it killed Alan McClure northeast of Mulhall) and I got conflicting reports on whether or not it produced ground scouring. For the most part, the swath of clearly identifiable damage didn't exceed a mile to a mile and a half, but it may have been around two miles at times.

If I'm remembering right (I really should check my notes), Gene Moore said that he drove across part of the damage path afterward and there was significant tree damage spanning well over three miles, but that was down around the Crescent area and probably included both the F4 and the subsequent F3.

Anyway, Mulhall was no doubt an exceptional and historic event, but I personally think some of the narratives around it (like the popular assertion that it was "just as strong as Bridge Creek, if not stronger") are a bit much.

These 2 pictures from Mulhall wind damaged grass is clearly visible. The pic on the right, I wonder if some ground scouring occurred just out of frame. Perhaps it did do ground scouring but it just wasn't well documented.

 

[tornado examiner]

my goodness. the Tuscaloosa damage path is an absolute mess! its so all over the place. the more i look at it on google earth the more chaotic it seems