Chickasha was a no-brainer EF5 as well but Goldsby was so freaking obvious it genuinely p*sses me off when I look at the damage photos from that tornado.
The EF scale is supposed to be scientific not subjective. Rigid but with a common sense approach.
In more recent live presentations he’s called it an EF5 though. I think he revised his opinion a bit over the years with that one, sort of like he did with the school in Greensburg.
The only way this makes sense is if the intention of NWS is to strictly preliminarily rate, take photographic evidence, examine---then turn everything over to engineers and others for peer review 6 months later for final determination. If that is the case, why not announce the practice. Got off topic, Fully agree Equus on your post, now for comparison everyone needs to compare pre-1973, 1974-2006, 2007-2013, 2014 present -with a sliding scale.
I called it the most violent school building damage he's surveyed during a power point presentation earlier this year, and called it EF5 worthy. It's somewhere on youtube.
Doubt it.
Agree, I think we are making the same point. I shouldn't have used dollars, rather the apparent appearance of the home (certainly appeared well constructed). Tornadoes occur throughout all 50 states, every state, town, and jurisdiction certainly has well built neighborhoods and others that are less so. We shouldn't have a rating system (one that is useful for significant factors other than message boards and trivia) that can only be applicable in certain neighborhoods or areas. Whatever the system it needs to incorporate solely on strength and damage. Width and track length are also factors but are already colloquially associated with any rating. I appreciate that the measurement cannot be solely radar based, thus making it tough to scientifically determine strength without analyzing damage to buildings / residences. Tree damage, ground scouring, wind rowing, water towers, etc need to be included as those DI's are found in all 50 states and in all forests / towns / etc. Whatever it should be, the current EF rating appears broken when less than 1% of geography qualifies.
