• 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
  • Current Tropical Systems
    Melissa

Enhanced Fujita Ratings Debate Thread

Hurricane Melissa currently has wind gusts exceeding 215 mph. Praying for everyone currently in the path. It's going to be devestating.

If it makes landfall at this strength who thinks the wind damage will resemble an EF5 tornado? Will entire forests be flattened and debarked? Cars and trains tossed? Ground scouring/trenching? There will certainly be a vertical wind component in the mountains too.
Now that we have witnessed the extensive and staggering devastation caused by Hurricane Melissa, to be honest, for such an intense hurricane, the peak wind gusts in many coastal and mountainous areas were likely far beyond 215 mph, possibly much higher. Dropsondes even recorded a wind speed of 252 mph at an altitude of 250 meters. Considering the low sampling rate of dropsondes, the probability of capturing the absolute peak gust is negligible. In the cases of Michael and Dorian, some still argue that very few areas actually experienced wind gusts exceeding 200 mph. Now, with an even stronger hurricane making landfall at peak intensity (likely 165+ knots), and with 200m+ mountains located near the landfall site well within the boundary layer, I simply see no justification for continuing to debate whether these areas experienced EF5-level gusts.

Yet, we did not observe EF5-level structural damage. In my opinion, the strongest destruction I’ve seen from this hurricane roughly falls within the high-end EF3 to low-end EF4 range, a result that was entirely expected. In reality, you’ll find that wind damage from 140-kt and 170-kt tropical cyclones is often difficult to distinguish in the field.

While hurricanes and tornadoes are fundamentally different, this once again highlights the shortcomings of relying solely on wind speed to gauge tornado intensity. From a vortex dynamics perspective, hurricanes generally have a very large swirl ratio, making it reasonable to apply the same wind speed standards uniformly.

However, in reality, some tornadoes can also have a very large swirl similar to hurricanes like Mulhall tornado 1999, while others can be extremely small like most rope type tornados. Additionally, tornadoes exhibit a much wider variability in diameter and translational speed compared to hurricanes, all of which add complexity to intensity assessment.

Currently, we cannot obtain precise wind speed measurements for every tornado. But if we could, we would quickly realize that relying purely on wind speed to determine intensity poses significant problems. In fact, mobile Doppler radar observations have already demonstrated this issue.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
Again, while I don’t trust every single claim posted on Tornado Talk (especially some of the Smithville stuff), gathering detailed publicly available information and developing a reasonably clear idea of a tornado’s intensity based on that information is not something experts are only privy to. Like I said earlier, it’s not this insanely convoluted process of analysis that only a select few can objectively understand. There’s healthy skepticism, and then there’s being unreasonably dismissive of anything that isn’t backed by the NWS.

The facts are that the MEG survey of New Wren tornado missed miles of damage path, and that missed segment contained incredibly intense EF5 candidate damage. That isn’t really up for debate.
You could make an argument that based on what they found, New Wren really wasn’t far behind some of the EF5s from that day.
 
There’s healthy skepticism, and then there’s being unreasonably dismissive of anything that isn’t backed by the NWS.
I never said I was dismissive of anything not backed by the NWS. My issue with TornadoTalk specifically is that they have a history of using objectively non-reliable sources in their papers, and sometimes don’t even cite their sources at all. Match that with the things above (including the paywall), and I just have a hard time taking them seriously.

Are there any particularly intense damage photos from New Wren? I haven't seen much but I also haven't looked deep.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top