• 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 April 1-2 (overnight) Severe Weather Event

TH2002 said:
Honestly, the main things that convince me Holly Springs was an EF5 (or at least reached that intensity) are the homes along Lamar Road and a few other rural ones that were slabbed. The damage to the racetrack was definitely violent, but I don't even think that's where it reached its peak intensity tbh.
Click to expand...
You have shown me the damage from the Holly Springs tornado on several occasions and I would rate it as high-end EF4 at the very least. I have no doubt tt reached EF5 intensity.
 
It’s things like this that make me say what I said earlier on the other thread. I will see too it that no home built by me will ever be labeled as anything other than “stronger than typical resistance.”
That way there won’t be any debate.
Bolt’s
Brackets
Braces
Built it tough and never cheapen out.
My moto as a future carpenter.
 
TH2002 said:
Start on page 179 and make sure to click that "Show ignored content" button at the bottom of the page. Then you'll realize it's already unfolded lol
Click to expand...
Have been very busy with work recently. Like buckeye says, we should not be able to predict when a questionable/bad rating is going to come based on the NWS office doing the survey. That's a sign that things are broken.
 
I’m honestly ok with Selmer. That leasing office didn’t appear to be bolted based on what I saw, and the remaining homes appeared to be CMU foundation construction. Lake City’s rating is inexcusable though. I don’t know if it’s one specific person or multiple people, but the MEG survey team needs an overhaul like what happened at LZK and FFC. Currently, it’s a total clown show and has been for a long time.

Also sorry for being overly dismissive about Holly Springs. I thought we were all referring to the motor sports park damage. I forgot that MEG missed multiple slabbed homes. Does any body know if they were anchor bolted or if there was extreme contextual damage near them?
 
buckeye05 said:
I’m honestly ok with Selmer. That leasing office didn’t appear to be bolted based on what I saw, and the remaining homes appeared to be CMU foundation construction. Lake City’s rating is inexcusable though. I don’t know if it’s one specific person or multiple people, but the MEG survey team needs an overhaul like what happened at LZK and FFC. Currently, it’s a total clown show and has been for a long time.

Also sorry for being overly dismissive about Holly Springs. I thought we were all referring to the motor sports park damage. I forgot that MEG missed multiple slabbed homes. Does any body know if they were anchor bolted or if there was extreme contextual damage near them?
Click to expand...
-A home swept away near Ashland was bolted to its foundation
-Extensive ground and pavement scouring along with extreme vehicle damage occurred in the Lamar Road vicinity
-Trees were debarked and homes were swept away in the Country Church Road vicinity
 
NickKrasz_Wx said:
One issue I notice here is that several of the anchor bolts were installed too close to the edge of the sill plate. Additionally, large portions of the home—walls, floor system, etc.—remained on the foundation. With a typical DoD-9 damage indicator, we’d expect near-total destruction of the structure and the large portions, but with most of the debris still present on or near the foundation, this was an issue we saw with Newnan (and why it should not have gotten EF4).

When anchor bolts are placed too close to the edge of the sill plate, even without visible splitting, it weakens the continuous load path. There’s less surrounding wood for the bolt to grip, which reduces its ability to resist uplift and lateral forces. This weakens the connection to the foundation and increases the likelihood of failure under tornado loads. 160 mph EF3 seems to be the right call here—I also discussed this with one of the NWS meteorologists from a different office who contributed to the survey. Also, the 150 mph DI for the home is supposed to say 160 mph, they just forgot to adjust the wind speed up after the preliminary survey.

As for the Senatobia home discussed here—using cut nails as the primary connection is a major weakness. That shouldn’t be rated at 160 mph EF3. Based on DoD-9, I’d say more in the 140–145 mph range (lower-bound).
Click to expand...

This is a whole lot of justification for an egregiously low rating in a system that is completely broken.

Over 50% of tornadoes are underrated. 30% are underrated by two EF scale ratings or more. This is coming from NOAA themselves! How much higher of an authority do surveyors need to get them to understand they're doing their jobs poorly?

1744355193478.jpeg

Just look at these graphs

1744355325730.png1744355338815.png
1744355353717.png1744355370932.png

1744355392505.jpeg

We're just supposed to accept this climatology? Tornadoes with winds exceeding 165 mph just fell off a cliff after 2013? They're now the weakest they've ever been? If you want to make that argument I'm all ears.

However, maybe the more logical conclusion would be that the centering of the anchor bolts really doesn't matter all that much, and incredible winds are still required to sweep this house nearly clean off its foundation. This constant lockstep between all the surveyors for being blatantly wrong about tornado wind speeds has gone from irritating to astounding. You're arguing the semantics of rating 10 mph higher here, and 20 mph lower there, while ignoring the fact your ratings are wrong by 40 mph ON AVERAGE. Theoretically, your ratings are correct and justified and there's a perfect little formula that says this house could be destroyed with 150 mph winds, but the reality is conclusively and irrefutably a different story. It couldn't be more clear if it was slapping you in the face.
 
Last edited:
Grand Poo Bah said:
This is a whole lot of justification for an egregiously low rating in a system that is completely broken.

Over 50% of tornadoes are underrated. 30% are underrated by two EF scale ratings or more. This is coming from NOAA themselves! How much higher of an authority do surveyors need to get them to understand they're doing their jobs poorly?

View attachment 39634

Just look at these graphs

View attachment 39635View attachment 39636
View attachment 39637View attachment 39638

View attachment 39639

We're just supposed to accept this climatology? Tornadoes with winds exceeding 165 mph just fell off a cliff after 2013? They're now the weakest they've ever been? If you want to make that argument I'm all ears.

However, maybe the more logical conclusion would be that the centering of the anchor bolts really doesn't matter all that much, and incredible winds are still required to sweep this house nearly clean off its foundation. This constant lockstep between all the surveyors for being blatantly wrong about tornado wind speeds has gone from irritating to astounding. You're arguing the semantics of rating 10 mph higher here, and 20 mph lower there, while ignoring the fact your ratings are wrong by 40 mph ON AVERAGE. Theoretically, your ratings are correct and justified and there's a perfect little formula that says this house could be destroyed with 150 mph winds, but the reality is conclusively and irrefutably a different story. It couldn't be more clear if it was slapping you in the face.
Click to expand...
To be honest I feel like more tornadoes in the EF3 category are rated more at the higher end than the lower end. I could be wrong but I am at a loss how many tornadoes get rated 165 mph EF3'S when the tornado deserved a higher rating.
 
Shakespeare 2016 said:
To be honest I feel like more tornadoes in the EF3 category are rated more at the higher end than the lower end. I could be wrong but I am at a loss how many tornadoes get rated 165 mph EF3'S when the tornado deserved a higher rating.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't doubt a huge chunk of tornadoes in the "two EF ratings or more" underrating category are 165 mph EF3s. Some of the most incredible contextual damage I've seen was done by infamous 165ers lol.
 
NickKrasz_Wx said:
One issue I notice here is that several of the anchor bolts were installed too close to the edge of the sill plate. Additionally, large portions of the home—walls, floor system, etc.—remained on the foundation. With a typical DoD-9 damage indicator, we’d expect near-total destruction of the structure and the large portions, but with most of the debris still present on or near the foundation, this was an issue we saw with Newnan (and why it should not have gotten EF4).

When anchor bolts are placed too close to the edge of the sill plate, even without visible splitting, it weakens the continuous load path. There’s less surrounding wood for the bolt to grip, which reduces its ability to resist uplift and lateral forces. This weakens the connection to the foundation and increases the likelihood of failure under tornado loads. 160 mph EF3 seems to be the right call here—I also discussed this with one of the NWS meteorologists from a different office who contributed to the survey. Also, the 150 mph DI for the home is supposed to say 160 mph, they just forgot to adjust the wind speed up after the preliminary survey.

As for the Senatobia home discussed here—using cut nails as the primary connection is a major weakness. That shouldn’t be rated at 160 mph EF3. Based on DoD-9, I’d say more in the 140–145 mph range (lower-bound).
Click to expand...

And before you even THINK about saying "the right structures just haven't been hit", I'll remind you that every single EF5 rating ever given within the scale has been from houses and houses alone. No other official DI has ever been given an EF5 rating. Which is actually pretty hilarious considering how often the "right structure" argument has been used by authorities on surveying.

IMG_2079.jpeg
 
I know we have gotten a good look at the damage from the Selmar, TN tornado and the Lake City, AR tornado, but has anything been posted from the Slayden, MS area? I have not been able to find much from that area.
 
AJS said:
I know we have gotten a good look at the damage from the Selmar, TN tornado and the Lake City, AR tornado, but has anything been posted from the Slayden, MS area? I have not been able to find much from that area.
Click to expand...
Besides the damage line in the DAT (which is actively being updated), I haven't seen much. Even looking up "slayden ms tornado" in Google just shows a bunch of stock photos of tornadoes. They'll add the damage points eventually; the Senatobia EF3 has points attached.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top