• 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

Enhanced Fujita Ratings Debate Thread

Does anybody have any good pictures of EF5 potential Tuscaloosa, Cordova, and/or Cullman damage? Or just damage pics in general? How do they compare to the other EF5s of the day (04/27/2011)?

Would also be interested in recommendations for Youtube documentaries on the topic.
 
Grand Poo Bah said:
Does anybody have any good pictures of EF5 potential Tuscaloosa, Cordova, and/or Cullman damage? Or just damage pics in general? How do they compare to the other EF5s of the day (04/27/2011)?

Would also be interested in recommendations for Youtube documentaries on the topic.
Click to expand...

EF5 Home 000a.pngEF5 Home 001a.pngEF5 Home 002a.pngEF5 Home 003a.pngEF5 Home 004a.pngPossible Home EF5 003a.pngPossible Home EF5 004a.pngPossible Home EF5 007a.pngPossible Home EF5 008a.png
here is a bunch of area from the tuscaloosa Tornado
 
andyhb said:
A lot of these images are likely not EF5 damage, there's not enough "cleanliness" to the slabs for that. Now, the stuff further northeast near Holt/Peterson, that's another story.
Click to expand...
its to note that on the next EF scale that well built homes with all there walls down can be considerd EF5 damage (chapman and one moore 2013 home)
 
joshoctober16 said:
View attachment 34619View attachment 34620View attachment 34621View attachment 34623View attachment 34624View attachment 34625View attachment 34626View attachment 34627View attachment 34628
here is a bunch of area from the tuscaloosa Tornado
Click to expand...

Very interesting approach! I like the idea of using satellite to try and get a clearer picture of where particularly intense subvortices swept across the landscape, and then putting special focus on those areas with surveys on the ground.
 
Grand Poo Bah said:
Does anybody have any good pictures of EF5 potential Tuscaloosa, Cordova, and/or Cullman damage? Or just damage pics in general? How do they compare to the other EF5s of the day (04/27/2011)?

Would also be interested in recommendations for Youtube documentaries on the topic.
Click to expand...
If you go to the significant tornado events thread and search for Tuscaloosa in that thread, there has obviously been lots of discussion over the years, but if you glean it, there's a lot of strong info and arguments suggesting EF5 is appropriate
 
Aaron Rider said:
If you go to the significant tornado events thread and search for Tuscaloosa in that thread, there has obviously been lots of discussion over the years, but if you glean it, there's a lot of strong info and arguments suggesting EF5 is appropriate
Click to expand...
Here, for example, member Juliet Bravo Kilo mentions extreme damage to the Hurricane Creek railroad bridge and the rails. https://talkweather.com/threads/significant-tornado-events.1276/post-106068

I wonder: were there any photos of that?
 
Aaron Rider said:
If you go to the significant tornado events thread and search for Tuscaloosa in that thread, there has obviously been lots of discussion over the years, but if you glean it, there's a lot of strong info and arguments suggesting EF5 is appropriate
Click to expand...

Good lord, this place is an absolute gold mine. Some of you should be getting paid for this level of research.

Here's some pics I found of Tuscaloosa:


1741228351936.jpeg
1741228390718.jpeg
1741228494160.jpeg
1741228402330.jpeg
1741228530473.jpeg
1741228417263.jpeg
1741228560561.png

1741228370409.jpeg1741228581657.png

Excerpt from this article (https://extremeplanet.wordpress.com/tag/tuscaloosa-tornado-damage/) :

"Rows of homes on both sides of Alpine Street were wiped cleanly away, along with a retail store and another business to the south with steel beams twisted and bent at those locations. Vehicles were lofted long distances, wind-rowing occurred as seen in the aerial, along with extensive tree debarking and partial ground scouring.

The tornado was near peak intensity as it passed over the Chastain Manor Apartments (pictured by josh above), where two residents died. A survey team headed by the National Science Foundation considered the damage to the newly built apartment complex to be of EF5 intensity (LaDue, Marshall, 2011). Two additional survey teams, however, considered it to be “high-end” EF4 damage. The southern building’s second floor, which was at ground level on the uphill side of the complex, was swept cleanly away to its cement floor. The structural anchorage was to code, but not considered “superior” in quality.

Damage in Alberta City was more impressive than the worst damage caused by some official EF5s, such as the Greensburg, Kansas, tornado of 2007. One inherent limitation with tornado damage scales is the lack of emphasis on wind duration – a variable which, with the addition of multiple vortices and transient wind features, is nearly impossible to calculate. Considering the small size and fast movement of the Tuscaloosa tornado, it is quite likely the tornado had winds significantly higher than other large and more slow-moving EF5 tornadoes. The four tornadoes that were awarded EF5 ratings during the 2011 Super Outbreak, however, were unusually powerful and caused noticeably more intense damage than the Tuscaloosa event, so an EF4 rating may have seemed most appropriate in context."
 
Aaron Rider said:
Here, for example, member Juliet Bravo Kilo mentions extreme damage to the Hurricane Creek railroad bridge and the rails. https://talkweather.com/threads/significant-tornado-events.1276/post-106068

I wonder: were there any photos of that?
Click to expand...
You can see it in one of the satellite images @joshoctober16 shared but here's another pic I found. One of them was thrown 100 feet uphill:

1741229013815.jpeg

Pretty impressive considering they were 100 feet tall, weighed 68,000 pounds, and were anchored to concrete footers (which were damaged beyond repair)! Here's a picture of the coal train that was tossed.

1741229142608.png

"One car, which weighed 36 tons, was hurled 120 yards (visible at center). Eyewtiness statements suggest the car was thrown in one toss and not rolled (Knupp et al., 2012). This is the longest distance a railroad car has ever been moved by a tornado and possible evidence of EF5 winds."

This study by Iowa State determined it could've been done by 145 MPH winds, but I think they took some pretty huge leaps in logic to reach that conclusion.

Here's Tim Marshall and Jim Ladue's explanation on the rating for the Chastain Manor Apartments and Clubhouse:


1741229571993.png
1741229589944.png
1741229614969.png

This slide fails to mention that the building’s second floor was at ground level on the uphill side of the complex and was swept cleanly away to its cement floor. The structural anchorage was to code, but not considered “superior” in quality.

Here's the Clubhouse explanation

1741229809070.png

Three members from the National Science Foundation (NSF) rated it EF5 due to
1. Slab swept clean indicates greater than
DOD=6.
2. Nail spacing to code (6" OC)
3. Quality Southern Pine, large shearwalls
4. Similar construction to houses where a higher
DOD is available

1741230404056.jpeg

Seems pretty wild that this is considered "too much debris around", considering most of it is completely gone (maybe in the pond?), but what do I know....

Edit:

Definitely preaching to the choir on this one being underrated, but figured I should still share what I found from everyone else's research in one concise post and document it in this thread
 
Last edited:
Grand Poo Bah said:
You can see it in one of the satellite images @joshoctober16 shared but here's another pic I found. One of them was thrown 100 feet uphill:

View attachment 34650

Pretty impressive considering they were 100 feet tall, weighed 68,000 pounds, and were anchored to concrete footers (which were damaged beyond repair)! Here's a picture of the coal train that was tossed.

View attachment 34651

"One car, which weighed 36 tons, was hurled 120 yards (visible at center). Eyewtiness statements suggest the car was thrown in one toss and not rolled (Knupp et al., 2012). This is the longest distance a railroad car has ever been moved by a tornado and possible evidence of EF5 winds."

This study by Iowa State determined it could've been done by 145 MPH winds, but I think they took some pretty huge leaps in logic to reach that conclusion.

Here's Tim Marshall and Jim Ladue's explanation on the rating for the Chastain Manor Apartments and Clubhouse:


View attachment 34652
View attachment 34653
View attachment 34654

This slide fails to mention that the building’s second floor was at ground level on the uphill side of the complex and was swept cleanly away to its cement floor. The structural anchorage was to code, but not considered “superior” in quality.

Here's the Clubhouse explanation

View attachment 34655

Three members from the National Science Foundation (NSF) rated it EF5 due to
1. Slab swept clean indicates greater than
DOD=6.
2. Nail spacing to code (6" OC)
3. Quality Southern Pine, large shearwalls
4. Similar construction to houses where a higher
DOD is available

View attachment 34657

Seems pretty wild that this is considered "too much debris around", considering most of it is completely gone (maybe in the pond?), but what do I know....
Click to expand...
(too much debris around) wait what? these 2 spots were rated EF5 in moore
1741230837135.png
1741230866323.png
1741230892526.png1741230932988.png

and lets not forget about the whole tree standing 100 yards away... not swept clean.... not scoured.... and a bunch of debris likely hitting these 2 homes....
1741231058402.png
 
joshoctober16 said:
(too much debris around) wait what? these 2 spots were rated EF5 in moore
View attachment 34658
View attachment 34659
View attachment 34660View attachment 34661

and lets not forget about the whole tree standing 100 yards away... not swept clean.... not scoured.... and a bunch of debris likely hitting these 2 homes....
View attachment 34662
Click to expand...

The logical explanation for this would be every tornado is different, so it's difficult to compare different surveys and damage, but it does seem once precedent is set (especially by people as respected as Marshall and Ladue), it is (mostly) adopted across the WFOs. Lack of scouring and debarking has been used to downgrade tornadoes that were so thin and moving so fast they couldn't possibly achieve the same levels the mile wide ones they're comparing them with do. Moore was a mile wide and moving slowly, but Tuscaloosa (which was moving twice as fast and only 150 meters wide) left behind too much debris? I don't believe there's a single office that would issue an EF5 rating without Marshall, or someone of equal standing's, explicit approval. Has he ever explained the reasoning behind the adoption of impossible scrutiny he helped created, or does he always just deflect responsibility to random field offices?

I've noticed a trend where he will absolutely gush over a tornado's strength and the damage, until it's time to assign a rating and then his tone completely changes.

Just look at his posts about Matador. You'd think it was an EF5 with the way he described it, and the pictures he himself took.

1741233994487.jpg1741234012926.jpg1741234041264.jpg

1741234288026.jpg1741234312510.jpg1741234341365.jpg

1741234385733.jpg1741234422026.jpg

All this, from a survey he helped conduct. and then...


1741234529985.jpg

Can someone please explain this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
Grand Poo Bah said:
The logical explanation for this would be every tornado is different, so it's difficult to compare different surveys and damage, but it does seem once precedent is set (especially by people as respected as Marshall and Ladue), it is (mostly) adopted across the WFOs. Lack of scouring and debarking has been used to downgrade tornadoes that were so thin and moving so fast they couldn't possibly achieve the same levels the mile wide ones they're comparing them with do. Moore was a mile wide and moving slowly, but Tuscaloosa (which was moving twice as fast and only 150 meters wide) left behind too much debris? I don't believe there's a single office that would issue an EF5 rating without Marshall, or someone of equal standing's, explicit approval. Has he ever explained the reasoning behind the adoption of impossible scrutiny he helped created, or does he always just deflect responsibility to random field offices?

I've noticed a trend where he will absolutely gush over a tornado's strength and the damage, until it's time to assign a rating and then his tone completely changes.

Just look at his posts about Matador. You'd think it was an EF5 with the way he described it, and the pictures he himself took.

View attachment 34663View attachment 34664View attachment 34665

View attachment 34666View attachment 34667View attachment 34668

View attachment 34669View attachment 34670

All this, from a survey he helped conduct. and then...


View attachment 34671

Can someone please explain this?
Click to expand...
Pretty tired right now so won’t type up a huge response, but during the Matador tornado survey, from what I have heard Tim Marshall was actually really impressed with the damage he saw in Matador and was very adamant about how he thought the damage pointed to a tornado significantly stronger than EF3. The garbage survey was primarily due to the NWS Lubbock being in close proximity with TTU.
 
AJS said:
Pretty tired right now so won’t type up a huge response, but during the Matador tornado survey, from what I have heard Tim Marshall was actually really impressed with the damage he saw in Matador and was very adamant about how he thought the damage pointed to a tornado significantly stronger than EF3. The garbage survey was primarily due to the NWS Lubbock being in close proximity with TTU.
Click to expand...
and what is TTU stand for?
 
Yes, Marshall was genuinely impressed with Matador, but deferred to the lead surveyor at NWS Lubbock for the final rating of that one, as is standard. That’s just usually how it goes.

Once again, it’s another prime example showing that bad calls by NWS employees on local WFO survey teams are the driving force behind this ongoing across the board mess, and also an example of frustration misdirected at one person. Yeah you could argue that “Well Marshall should have stepped in and corrected it”. I do agree with that, but he’s not a NWS employee making the final call, and he has very little to with the joke of a rating that Matador received. That’s also the case with other rating controversies, like Vilonia. I made this same point days ago, and as I’ve said before, Tim Marshall isn’t the freaking damage survey boogeyman. It’s a collective problem, and it should be up to the survey teams to make the right call, period. If they don’t, it’s primarily on them.

At the end of the day, as mentioned above, the Texas Tech influence at NWS Lubbock is very likely the core issue behind that particular rating. Any chance of competent surveys from that specific WFO is pretty much null (which is also another greatexample of wild office-to-office EF scale application variance, which I discussed extensively). I have no faith in any future surveys from that specific office for that reason.

Matador perfectly illustrates the specific points I have been making.
 
Last edited:
joshoctober16 said:
and what is TTU stand for?
Click to expand...
Texas Tech University. Local college known for their absurdly conservative engineering-only based tornado damage surveys that do not include contextual evidence whatsoever, and they seem to have no ability to identify which certain damage hallmarks are associated with violent tornadoes. They are almost certainly responsible for ruining the Matador survey due to their influence at NWS Lubbock
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top