SouthFLwx
Member
- Messages
- 182
- Location
- Boca Raton, Florida
I think the rating for this tornado is still preliminary.
-
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
joshoctober16
Member
- Messages
- 547
- Location
- Canada New brunswick
man , the whole thing except for the fujita part honestly seems like something nws would of say.
then again , every reason used are reasons used on other tornadoes.
Aaron Rider
Member
- Messages
- 325
- Location
- Pennsylvania
I have a question for everyone relevant to the ratings process.
Obviously we've seen that different NWS offices seem to take pretty dramatically different approaches to rating tornadoes, and that can range from competence (I remember hearing about one survey that was obviously done from a car, with pictures taken from said car) to speed of survey, ranging from thorough but prompt to hasty, to standards of surveys.
My question is, why, exactly, is it like this? Is this just something to do with how NWS is organized? I'm genuinely curious.
Obviously we've seen that different NWS offices seem to take pretty dramatically different approaches to rating tornadoes, and that can range from competence (I remember hearing about one survey that was obviously done from a car, with pictures taken from said car) to speed of survey, ranging from thorough but prompt to hasty, to standards of surveys.
My question is, why, exactly, is it like this? Is this just something to do with how NWS is organized? I'm genuinely curious.
- Messages
- 876
- Location
- Iowa
Cross posting from the severe weather event thread:
This is the Diaz slab in question. It will likely come under heavy scrutiny at the NWS because of the large tree located within the debris. Large debris is very commonly used to downgrade damage to structures during surveys. In the eyes of prominent storm surveyors, it is impossible to determine structures were destroyed by 205 MPH winds when it could've been debris impacts.
Surveyors normally don't use context like, for some examples, the severe ground scouring at the top of this pic (across the driveway); or the tipped over (potentially thrown) fully loaded dump truck; or the 9 mangled cars that were launched like missiles (gathered top right); or the severe granulation of the house debris into tiny bits; or the sheared off, and bent anchor bolts..
In one tornado they even referenced a fence still standing nearby (like the one on the left in this photo) as evidence higher winds weren't actually present. There is no wind speed officially assigned to any of these contextual indicators, and there is no consensus of what wind speeds cause them. So they assign a lower bound wind speed. This home is a textbook EF3 rating under the current precedent.
Here's where the snapped foundation is, and a closer view of it. Going to be pretty impossible to say what caused it. My fascinated inner child wants to know if it could've been the dump truck, but I know it was probably the bulldozer.
These surveyors did an excellent job analyzing and documenting the damage, and using context to eliminate any doubt the tree may have caused. I'm confident this team could be the one to announce the next EF5. Either with this storm, or a future one. I believe, they will just need to be permitted to do so.
This is the Diaz slab in question. It will likely come under heavy scrutiny at the NWS because of the large tree located within the debris. Large debris is very commonly used to downgrade damage to structures during surveys. In the eyes of prominent storm surveyors, it is impossible to determine structures were destroyed by 205 MPH winds when it could've been debris impacts.
Surveyors normally don't use context like, for some examples, the severe ground scouring at the top of this pic (across the driveway); or the tipped over (potentially thrown) fully loaded dump truck; or the 9 mangled cars that were launched like missiles (gathered top right); or the severe granulation of the house debris into tiny bits; or the sheared off, and bent anchor bolts..
In one tornado they even referenced a fence still standing nearby (like the one on the left in this photo) as evidence higher winds weren't actually present. There is no wind speed officially assigned to any of these contextual indicators, and there is no consensus of what wind speeds cause them. So they assign a lower bound wind speed. This home is a textbook EF3 rating under the current precedent.
Here's where the snapped foundation is, and a closer view of it. Going to be pretty impossible to say what caused it. My fascinated inner child wants to know if it could've been the dump truck, but I know it was probably the bulldozer.
These surveyors did an excellent job analyzing and documenting the damage, and using context to eliminate any doubt the tree may have caused. I'm confident this team could be the one to announce the next EF5. Either with this storm, or a future one. I believe, they will just need to be permitted to do so.
Last edited:
tornado examiner
Member
- Messages
- 2,221
- Location
- texas
If nws Springfield has finalized the Bakersfield survey and aren’t still working on it. Then it is hands down the single worst survey of any tornado of the decade so far.
Horrible low balled rating with inaccurate and a bunch of missing di’s. Over 3/4th’s of the likely total track is also just missing.
Also wildly off track as well.
We’ll see if they update it in the coming weeks but if not. Then…it’s that then.
Horrible low balled rating with inaccurate and a bunch of missing di’s. Over 3/4th’s of the likely total track is also just missing.
Also wildly off track as well.
We’ll see if they update it in the coming weeks but if not. Then…it’s that then.
tornado examiner
Member
- Messages
- 2,221
- Location
- texas
So. To update the list of “plausible” EF5’s since 2013 based on whatever metric you care to use.
Vilonia 2014 (the one that under no circumstances should have been rated any lower than EF5)
Rochelle 2015 (the other most solid candidate)
Chapman 2016 (the balanced candidate)
Bassfield 2020 (good job Jackson)
Mayfield 2021 (Paducah why’d you let Tim Marshall decide for you) *joke*
Rolling fork 2023 (again good job Jackson)
Matador 2023 (WTF NWS Lubbock)
Greenfield 2024 (very very EH)
And now Diaz 2025 (50/50)
All of these were very much capable of producing verifiable EF5 damage.
Vilonia 2014 (the one that under no circumstances should have been rated any lower than EF5)
Rochelle 2015 (the other most solid candidate)
Chapman 2016 (the balanced candidate)
Bassfield 2020 (good job Jackson)
Mayfield 2021 (Paducah why’d you let Tim Marshall decide for you) *joke*
Rolling fork 2023 (again good job Jackson)
Matador 2023 (WTF NWS Lubbock)
Greenfield 2024 (very very EH)
And now Diaz 2025 (50/50)
All of these were very much capable of producing verifiable EF5 damage.
Last edited:
joshoctober16
Member
- Messages
- 547
- Location
- Canada New brunswick
i think we should count the drought as starting with june 2013, i think thats when one of the joplin papers came out that made some of this mess.
i think there are 3 you can add.
2013 Washington (base on 2025 study)
2014 Pilger (base on 2025 study)
Chifeng WTS EF4 August 2017 (not USA)
- Messages
- 876
- Location
- Iowa
Here's some anchor bolt pics from Greenfield btw.
1. Bent anchors similar to the Diaz EF4 home. This is also before clean up so we know the tornado caused it.
2. Never noticed the anchors in this foundation before because most of the perimeter has been scoured away. You can see them in the bottom right corner of the first pic. One wall has the sill stripped, the other with the sill still attached.
3. More stripped and bent anchor bolts on a much more modern house. Pic is from post clean-up, which is why I never share it, but am realizing now it's still important for painting the bigger picture.
4. Hard to find anchors when the whole foundation is scoured.
5. Another slab (pre-cleanup) with anchors, multiple of which have been bent or pulled out of the ground.
6. These parking bollards were anchored. We've seen moved parking bollards, but never snapped, anchored bollards.
7. People were so impressed by the snapped Diaz foundation, but what about this snapped, car-sized chunk of foundation that was ALSO thrown?
8. The caked grass and mud on the front of this house and the snapped foundation (back right) gives some context clues into how powerful these winds were.
Each individual DI observed in a vacuum may not be enough to prove EF5 winds, but the collective evidence paints a much clearer picture. The satellite imagery of the scar through town, the snapped bollards, the bent and missing anchor bolts, and the scoured slabs and foundations are individually the most extreme contextuals of their type we've ever seen (certainly from an EF4). All the evidence points to a concise and rock solid EF5 rating, and likely even winds far higher than the 200 MPH threshold.
1. Bent anchors similar to the Diaz EF4 home. This is also before clean up so we know the tornado caused it.
2. Never noticed the anchors in this foundation before because most of the perimeter has been scoured away. You can see them in the bottom right corner of the first pic. One wall has the sill stripped, the other with the sill still attached.
3. More stripped and bent anchor bolts on a much more modern house. Pic is from post clean-up, which is why I never share it, but am realizing now it's still important for painting the bigger picture.
4. Hard to find anchors when the whole foundation is scoured.
5. Another slab (pre-cleanup) with anchors, multiple of which have been bent or pulled out of the ground.
6. These parking bollards were anchored. We've seen moved parking bollards, but never snapped, anchored bollards.
7. People were so impressed by the snapped Diaz foundation, but what about this snapped, car-sized chunk of foundation that was ALSO thrown?
8. The caked grass and mud on the front of this house and the snapped foundation (back right) gives some context clues into how powerful these winds were.
Each individual DI observed in a vacuum may not be enough to prove EF5 winds, but the collective evidence paints a much clearer picture. The satellite imagery of the scar through town, the snapped bollards, the bent and missing anchor bolts, and the scoured slabs and foundations are individually the most extreme contextuals of their type we've ever seen (certainly from an EF4). All the evidence points to a concise and rock solid EF5 rating, and likely even winds far higher than the 200 MPH threshold.
Last edited:
tornado examiner
Member
- Messages
- 2,221
- Location
- texas
Here’ my take. No NWS office should require an EF4 structure DI to rate tree damage as EF4.
This would solve the issues with tornadoes like matador and sterling city.
Hopefully the new EF-scale fixes this.
This would solve the issues with tornadoes like matador and sterling city.
Hopefully the new EF-scale fixes this.
Tomcats Forever!
Member
- Messages
- 354
- Location
- Louisville, KY
Maybe if they consult with forestry experts, not just engineers.
Hmmm... the more stuff I see from Greenfield, the more impressed I am. Still, I wouldn't exactly call the photo in number 4 a "scoured foundation" though. It's a collapsed concrete block foundation, and such instances of damage were usually rated F4 even on the original scale (Tecumseh 1946, for example).
That last photo is really intriguing though. Do you have any other photos of that home, and was it anchored?
- Messages
- 876
- Location
- Iowa
Marshall....
- Messages
- 876
- Location
- Iowa
No more photos of that home, and it doesn't appear to be anchored. Just was fascinated by the level of caked debris. Here's a closer look at another house with a similar pattern. Impressive how much the tree debris is mulched.
Both pics remind me of this house from Chapman
- Messages
- 1,786
- Location
- Norman, OK
The weenies on Twitter are so bloody annoying about this stuff, but also you have to acknowledge that until this artificial "drought" is ended, this conversation is going to happen with every high end tornado. Kind of painting ourselves into a corner here.
AJS
Member
- Messages
- 2,370
- Location
- Houston Texas.
Love the iconic British vocab word you used lol.
Anyway, 100% agreed. Any high end tornado capable of producing or looks to have produced EF5 damage that has a shot of ending the “ drought “ will bring in the weenies unfortunately. But at some point, the drought has to end.
Yeah. I’ve gotten to where I just don’t even get up in arms over the ratings anymore.
I really don’t know if the drought ends before the EF scale gets its much promised “revision”. Or if it’s a situation where a WFO doesn’t want to be the one that “ends the drought” so to speak since it’ll be extremely scrutinized.
On the other hand, it may just have to be in the right WFO where the damage is so high end and undeniable that it can’t really be nitpicked.
AJS
Member
- Messages
- 2,370
- Location
- Houston Texas.
I think some NWS offices are also quite afraid to be the one to break it. I could be wrong though.
I get the impression that Vilonia syndrome really came into play.
tornado examiner
Member
- Messages
- 2,221
- Location
- texas
Monolithic homes are the way America should go.
As far as I know the only one that’s ever been hit by a violent tornado is of course the one from Blanchard Oklahoma that tanked a direct hit from an “EF4” drillbit with only moderate external damage. The home still stands today. But I think it’s abandoned.
Those things are literally the definition of tornado resistant why aren’t they the standard? Oh right…too expensive.
This was rated as a 190mph indicator with the swept clean DOD lmfao. How confusing must this have been?
Edit: actually this home wasn’t even a monolithic reinforced home. IT WAS ON THE LOWER BOUND in terms of construction. But because it had concrete and the dome shape it survived. These concrete domes should be standard
As far as I know the only one that’s ever been hit by a violent tornado is of course the one from Blanchard Oklahoma that tanked a direct hit from an “EF4” drillbit with only moderate external damage. The home still stands today. But I think it’s abandoned.
Those things are literally the definition of tornado resistant why aren’t they the standard? Oh right…too expensive.
This was rated as a 190mph indicator with the swept clean DOD lmfao. How confusing must this have been?
Edit: actually this home wasn’t even a monolithic reinforced home. IT WAS ON THE LOWER BOUND in terms of construction. But because it had concrete and the dome shape it survived. These concrete domes should be standard
Attachments
Last edited:
Moving this over to the EF scale debate thread...
If I understand @tornado examiner's question correctly, it is this: has a home considered to have "stronger than typical resistance" - namely, that it has hurricane strapping along with anchor bolts/sill plate straps - ever been swept away (true DOD 10) by a tornado?
The answer is: not that I'm aware of. I can't discount the possibility that it's happened, but I've seen literally tens of thousands of damage photos over the years and have never seen one.
Personally, I think that wall studs being toe-nailed (as opposed to straight nailed) and/or having both exterior and interior walls bolted down should be enough for the category "stronger than typical resistance". Good luck finding a home in the Great Plains or Upper South that has hurricane strapping. Last I checked, builders in those areas hardly ever use hurricane straps because hurricanes don't make landfall in landlocked states.
Respectfully, what planet are you living on that dome homes should be the standard in America? 99.999% of dwellings in America, even in the most tornado prone locations in the country, will never be hit by a violent tornado. Even in our historic outbreaks, such as 4/27/11, the actual land impacted by a tornado was only 1-2% of the entire state.
The reason why “tornado proof” building codes haven’t caught on nation wide is exactly why I stated above. Tornados are relatively small, and violent ones will only have a narrow core of extreme damage. You don’t need to dome or “above average” anchor homes in an entire city just because of tornados lol
Not to mention the actual feasibility of living in a dome home. Those things are for a niche market, just like tiny homes.