Severe WX December 10 & 11, 2021 Severe Threat

[buckeye05]

What bothers me most about the Saloma tornado wasn’t that it didn’t receive an EF4 rating, which I think would be completely justifiable, but the fact that it was rated low-end EF3, max winds estimated at 145mph. Like… how??

View attachment 16157View attachment 16158

Because the NWS Louisville damage survey team is conservative to the point of total absurdity, that’s how.

 

[UK_EF4]

While we are on the topic of ratings, what are everyone's opinions of the Bowling Green EF3 rating. I remember on DAT they initially rated damage on the Eastern side of town EF4 and then quickly removed it when it got out on Twitter etc. Apart from that, I don't really think I can say much. So, what does you guys think, particularly in that subdivision and the industrial area?

Here is someone's tweet with the EF4 DI on DAT which was subsequently removed:

 

[CalebRoutt]

Because the NWS Louisville damage survey team is conservative to the point of total absurdity, that’s how.

IMO They did pretty well with Henryville 2012, and the end of the December 10th tornado in Ohio County. I will say I don’t agree with Taylor County being EF4, but I would’ve thought it was higher than 145 mph. Now Bowling Green IMO was probably lower end EF4.

 

[Dwalk-music-art-gardening]

I remember seeing a picture of the house in Vilonia, AR on E. Wicker St. on this forum or a different forum, but it’s buried and likely will never find it. It was properly bolted with exterior and interior walls bolted and the damage survey team (with Robinson as head) said that the “trees in the ditch {about 100 feet away} “near” the home were untouched.” However, I also saw pictures of the “unaffected trees in the ditch” in this forum or a different forum, and the trees were actually *completely* debarked/uprooted or thrown. This was the ONLY reason it wasn’t upgraded to EF-5. On Wikipedia it even says that this was the reason as well as “ the residence had possibly been pummeled by heavy debris from downtown Vilonia, exacerbating the level of destruction. Surveyors decided against an upgrade to EF5 as a result.” I remember also reading that this “pummeled by heavy debris” hypothesis wasn’t based on anything and was thrown out there to prevent it from being upgraded to EF-5. Can someone reply with pictures of this home and the debarked trees in the ditch? You can’t find this should-be EF-5 damage photo of the house nor the trees on the official survey of this tornado, and I think we all know too well why…

 

[Lake Martin EF4]

I remember seeing a picture of the house in Vilonia, AR on E. Wicker St. on this forum or a different forum, but it’s buried and likely will never find it. It was properly bolted with exterior and interior walls bolted and the damage survey team (with Robinson as head) said that the “trees in the ditch {about 100 feet away} “near” the home were untouched.” However, I also saw pictures of the “unaffected trees in the ditch” in this forum or a different forum, and the trees were actually *completely* debarked/uprooted or thrown. This was the ONLY reason it wasn’t upgraded to EF-5. On Wikipedia it even says that this was the reason as well as “ the residence had possibly been pummeled by heavy debris from downtown Vilonia, exacerbating the level of destruction. Surveyors decided against an upgrade to EF5 as a result.” I remember also reading that this “pummeled by heavy debris” hypothesis wasn’t based on anything and was thrown out there to prevent it from being upgraded to EF-5. Can someone reply with pictures of this home and the debarked trees in the ditch? You can’t find this should-be EF-5 damage photo of the house nor the trees on the official survey of this tornado, and I think we all know too well why…

Buckeye literally stated that the house photo could have and should have been the poster boy of modern day EF5 damage.

I think after that photo you shared, it’s undoubtedly #1 in terms of missed EF5 ratings. It could have been used as the textbook benchmark for what constitutes as true EF5 damage, and could have been used to educate future NWS survey teams. Instead, it set a terrible precedent and plunged us back into another era of bad surveying. Things were really, really good from 2007 to 2013, and it upsets me that things are no longer that way.

 

[tornado examiner]

The Monette ef4 has recently been updated on the dat along with a few other tornadoes. Like the Dresden ef3. Mostly involving adding polygons and improving the accuracy of the track lines

 

[Tennie]

The National Weather Service recently released its Service Assessment for this outbreak:

https://www.weather.gov/media/publications/assessments/NWS_Joint_Regional_Service_Assessment_Dec_10-11_2021.pdf

I highly recommend giving it a read, as it lists out the challenges and issues NWS personnel had to deal with while handling the forecasting and nowcasting of this event, as well as recommendations for how to better handle similar issues in the future.

 

[jiharris0220]

Thread bump
Today is the anniversary of the Dec 10-11 tornado outbreak. Still insane the ferocity of that day and unfortunate lives that were lost.
Of course, what’s a tornado outbreak without controversy over ratings? The tally stands at Ef3(6) Ef4(2), though back in 2011 when surveys were more competent, it would’ve been Ef3(5) Ef4(2) Ef5(1)

 

[UK_EF4]

Thread bump
Today is the anniversary of the Dec 10-11 tornado outbreak. Still insane the ferocity of that day and unfortunate lives that were lost.
Of course, what’s a tornado outbreak without controversy over ratings? The tally stands at Ef3(6) Ef4(2), though back in 2011 when surveys were more competent, it would’ve been Ef3(5) Ef4(2) Ef5(1)

You could even make an argument for 3/4 EF4s - the Defiance MO tornado and the Dresden TN tornado have a case for being EF4 though not the worst application of the scale that they recieved an EF3 rating.

Anchoring doesn't look the best so I understand why they went 165mph though I remember a photo of a better anchored home and debarking which I can't find on DAT which seemed a stronger candidate - though I may be mis rememebering.

Dresden seems like another case where worst damage doesn't appear on DAT. regardless of whether any of it warranted EF4 ratings winds were almost certainly to that strength looking at contextual evidence.




Truly believe this event (as well as 3/31 this year) are among some of the most significant outbreaks of the century so far with multiple violent tornadoes.

 

[UK_EF4]

I also think that while many of the indicators which I initially believed were EF5 candidates (water tower, UK Research Facility, many slabbed homes) had limiting factors to achieve a higher rating, I think both of the churches struck in Mayfield were genuine EF5 damage indicators. (I don't think either were officially surveyed by NWS and uploaded to DAT though I think Tim Marshall surveyed one).





Proper brick construction with connections like that is realistically the best construction you are really going to find - and the fact it was completely destroyed amazes me



This DI is hard to classify, which might be one reason it was never surveyed by the NWS "officially" (?) though damage fits the highest DOD in all of the closest matching DIs, as well as a presumably EXP-UB construction. Fairly confident this would have been rated EF5 even in Moore & Joplin era. I don't have much knowledge on the other church though I think the situation was similar. Maybe the NWS will update this when the religious building DI is added to the new EF Scale, as they mentioned in that presentation once.

Also still believe there is some case for one or two of those supposedly well built Bremen homes given contextual as well. Probably would have gotten EF5s in the same way El Reno 2011 and Philadelphia did.

The tornado was clearly without a doubt an EF5, but I'm more interested whether there were actual EF5s indicators even with a stringent standard - which I do think there were. The survey seems already rushed and half attempted as it is though I do appreciate the huge distances that needed surveying. Anyways, can't believe its over two years now.

 

[wolfywise]

Was reading thhrough the thread and noticed a comment about CMU foundations not being EF5 viable in any form.
That one large house that had a CMU foundation in Bremen was anchored with cement reinforcement throughout the perimeter. This CMU foundation was crushed into pebbles and other fine granules down to the bare dirt.
If we take a moment and flashback to Cookeville, a very very intense EF4 that slabbed several well built CMU foundation houses (anchored, concrete reinforced). Those foundations remained fairly intact following the tornado. The house in Bremen had its entire CMU foundation of similar construction near totally ceased. I'm fairly confident this can warrant an EF5 consideration.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

I also think that while many of the indicators which I initially believed were EF5 candidates (water tower, UK Research Facility, many slabbed homes) had limiting factors to achieve a higher rating, I think both of the churches struck in Mayfield were genuine EF5 damage indicators. (I don't think either were officially surveyed by NWS and uploaded to DAT though I think Tim Marshall surveyed one).



View attachment 22538

Proper brick construction with connections like that is realistically the best construction you are really going to find - and the fact it was completely destroyed amazes me

View attachment 22539

This DI is hard to classify, which might be one reason it was never surveyed by the NWS "officially" (?) though damage fits the highest DOD in all of the closest matching DIs, as well as a presumably EXP-UB construction. Fairly confident this would have been rated EF5 even in Moore & Joplin era. I don't have much knowledge on the other church though I think the situation was similar. Maybe the NWS will update this when the religious building DI is added to the new EF Scale, as they mentioned in that presentation once.

Also still believe there is some case for one or two of those supposedly well built Bremen homes given contextual as well. Probably would have gotten EF5s in the same way El Reno 2011 and Philadelphia did.

The tornado was clearly without a doubt an EF5, but I'm more interested whether there were actual EF5s indicators even with a stringent standard - which I do think there were. The survey seems already rushed and half attempted as it is though I do appreciate the huge distances that needed surveying. Anyways, can't believe its over two years now.

Wow that is really impressive. It looks to be at or close to EF5 you can get.

 

[UK_EF4]

Was reading thhrough the thread and noticed a comment about CMU foundations not being EF5 viable in any form.
That one large house that had a CMU foundation in Bremen was anchored with cement reinforcement throughout the perimeter. This CMU foundation was crushed into pebbles and other fine granules down to the bare dirt.
If we take a moment and flashback to Cookeville, a very very intense EF4 that slabbed several well built CMU foundation houses (anchored, concrete reinforced). Those foundations remained fairly intact following the tornado. The house in Bremen had its entire CMU foundation of similar construction near totally ceased. I'm fairly confident this can warrant an EF5 consideration.

Ethan Moriarty said in his latest video he doesn’t see why it couldn’t be considered for EF5, which is pretty interesting and also something I agree with.