Equus
Member
256 storm reports today. Extremely impressive.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
2216 UNK 4 S AKRON SUMMIT OH 4103 8153 2 CARS FLIPPED ... LIGHTING TORN DOWN OFF BUILDING ROOF ... MINOR BUILDING DAMAGE TO BURGER KING AND ACME MARKET ... DAMAGE TO ONE GAS PUMP. (CLE)
2233 UNK 1 SW TWINSBURG SUMMIT OH 4131 8147 DAMAGE REPORTED TO A BUILDING AT SR 82 AND CHAMBERLIN ROAD. (CLE)
/QUOTE]
Great observations. We don’t tend to associate that region with serious severe weather of any frequency. So, it can be somewhat ignored (unless you live there).I didn't thoroughly analyze the parameters for NC/VA so I didn't put much weight on todays threat potential. In hindsight even looking at just the sim reflectivity there was signs of a lively supercell/tornado threat. GFS showed simulated streaks of high decibal return in this area for days.
Text from Wiki:A few homes in this area were leveled, though they were poorly anchored and overall context was not indicative of a tornado stronger than EF2 in intensity.Elon/Amherst tornado has been rated high-end EF2. I really need to hear some rationale behind that decision, because otherwise I'm baffled. The frequency of which WFOs are assigning EF2 ratings to completely destroyed frame-built homes this year is honestly starting p*ss me off a little. It sets a bad precedent for future surveys too. If the construction is really that horrid, just go with 138 MPH EF3, but applying EF2 to leveled frame homes essentially changes the definition of EF2 damage, and sends us further back into the "La Plata Syndrome" years. That is my concern.
I just watched it.This guy is either drunk,high or the dumbest human being on the planet.Totally agree, but I was actually referring to the other video where the idiot filming thought his possible impending death was hilarious.
Yeah, I don't understand what they think they are gaining by deliberately lowballing as many ratings as possible. I haven't looked too closely at damage on these particular tornadoes so I will withhold judgement on them for now, but the habit of defaulting to the lowest possible estimate on the DoD (as Equus so well put it) , as if slightly overrating by a category was a far worse sin than underrating, has been a longstanding gripe of mine.
My hunch, and it's only a hunch, is that this practice is being advocated by wind engineering types such as Tim Marshall (whom I greatly respect as a veteran chaser and severe weather researcher). I think they might be of the opinion that, by creating the impression through this damage survey "data" that houses are built so poorly that it only takes a "mere" EF2 tornado to level them, they can encourage better construction practices.
Now I'm all for improving construction standards in the name of safety, but in my opinion the intent of damage surveys should be purely meteorological. It should aim to answer the question "How strong was this tornado, to the best of our ability based on the damage it left behind?" Nothing more, nothing less.