• 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

Grand Poo Bah said:
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.

View attachment 36727

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.
View attachment 36730View attachment 36728

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.

View attachment 36735View attachment 36737

4. Hard to find anchors when the whole foundation is scoured.


View attachment 36731

5. Another slab (pre-cleanup) with anchors, multiple of which have been bent or pulled out of the ground.

View attachment 36740

6. These parking bollards were anchored. We've seen moved parking bollards, but never snapped, anchored bollards.

View attachment 36733

7. People were so impressed by the snapped Diaz foundation, but what about this snapped, car-sized chunk of foundation that was ALSO thrown?

View attachment 36734

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.

View attachment 36738

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.
Click to expand...
Besides the partial debarking, I'm intrigued by the brown splotches in the field in the background. Notice how inconsistent it looks. So it's *most likely* not just from farming or something. Ground scouring? It's been a while since I read about this tornado- did it achieve a fair amount of ground scouring?1000007949.png
 
tornado examiner said:
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.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily agree with your tone about some of these, notably Bassfield and Rolling Fork, but even if we assume that Chapman - perhaps the last most obvious one - was genuinely the last upper echelon tornado (e.g. EF5 - that would still leave us with a nine year drought. Which, climatologically, is pretty crazy. Of the others, in my opinion, Mayfield did enough high end damage around Bremen especially to warrant the highest rating and I feel similarly about Matador.

No matter how they wanted to modify the original Fujita Scale, the way we've gotten to such obvious discrepancies and incorrect ratings, with attendant deep problems in records, is maddening.

I think there is essentially universally consensus that the "12 year drought" is absolutely ridiculous. And even a 9 year drought would be nearly as unbelievable. Prior to that, the longest drought by far was 7 years between Smithfield, Alabama '77 and Barneveld, WI '84 (I've seen some interesting arguments for Windsor Locks, CT '79 on this forum, by the way)
 
ColdFront said:
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.
Click to expand...
I still would like to see Vilonia, Rochelle, and Chapman officially revised up to EF5. Those 3 are just so insanely badly rated it is almost painful.
 
Aaron Rider said:
I don't necessarily agree with your tone about some of these, notably Bassfield and Rolling Fork, but even if we assume that Chapman - perhaps the last most obvious one - was genuinely the last upper echelon tornado (e.g. EF5 - that would still leave us with a nine year drought. Which, climatologically, is pretty crazy. Of the others, in my opinion, Mayfield did enough high end damage around Bremen especially to warrant the highest rating and I feel similarly about Matador.

No matter how they wanted to modify the original Fujita Scale, the way we've gotten to such obvious discrepancies and incorrect ratings, with attendant deep problems in records, is maddening.

I think there is essentially universally consensus that the "12 year drought" is absolutely ridiculous. And even a 9 year drought would be nearly as unbelievable. Prior to that, the longest drought by far was 7 years between Smithfield, Alabama '77 and Barneveld, WI '84 (I've seen some interesting arguments for Windsor Locks, CT '79 on this forum, by the way)
Click to expand...
When I say good job Jackson I’m saying I have no issues with their assessments of those two tornadoes and that they had great complete surveys. Xd.
 
TH2002 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Here is the Full list on the new EF scale.Framehouse Resistance.png
 
TH2002 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Does anyone know if the extremely well-built brick mansion in Oak Grove had hurricane strapping when HB-PC swept it? That's the only home I can think of with the slight possibility of containing such a thing, seeing as it was of exceptional construction and was in Alabama. Although, it was on the northern end of the state. I believe that being a requirement for being considered "stronger than typical resistance" is pretty stupid though, seeing as coastal areas are inherently less likely to face a violent tornado than an inland area.
 
How expensive would it actually be to start building new neighborhoods entirely comprised of monolithic domes? We could have a tornado resistant America but we choose not too for some reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
Aaron Rider said:
I don't necessarily agree with your tone about some of these, notably Bassfield and Rolling Fork, but even if we assume that Chapman - perhaps the last most obvious one - was genuinely the last upper echelon tornado (e.g. EF5 - that would still leave us with a nine year drought. Which, climatologically, is pretty crazy. Of the others, in my opinion, Mayfield did enough high end damage around Bremen especially to warrant the highest rating and I feel similarly about Matador.

No matter how they wanted to modify the original Fujita Scale, the way we've gotten to such obvious discrepancies and incorrect ratings, with attendant deep problems in records, is maddening.

I think there is essentially universally consensus that the "12 year drought" is absolutely ridiculous. And even a 9 year drought would be nearly as unbelievable. Prior to that, the longest drought by far was 7 years between Smithfield, Alabama '77 and Barneveld, WI '84 (I've seen some interesting arguments for Windsor Locks, CT '79 on this forum, by the way)
Click to expand...
I agree with Bassfield’s rating, but if you look into the damage that tornado did, it produced contextual damage that easily indicated it reached EF5 strength.
 
slenker said:
Does anyone know if the extremely well-built brick mansion in Oak Grove had hurricane strapping when HB-PC swept it? That's the only home I can think of with the slight possibility of containing such a thing, seeing as it was of exceptional construction and was in Alabama. Although, it was on the northern end of the state. I believe that being a requirement for being considered "stronger than typical resistance" is pretty stupid though, seeing as coastal areas are inherently less likely to face a violent tornado than an inland area.
Click to expand...
I think multiple homes in Smithville had hurricane clips.

The crazy thing about Hackleburg and PC is that it only swept away one “well anchored” residence in its entire path. I believe it was the Oak Grove mansion.

If you read the recent paper Tony Lyza put out, that combined with multiple extreme contextual damage points lead to the EF5 rating. It’s crazy to think, but if HB-PC happened in the wrong WFO today, it could be rated EF4. Same with Rainsville.

1742577186330.png


Edit: I may have misread the graphic, it seems HB-PC swept away only one well anchor bolted home in the NWS Birmingham area. There was probably more anchored structures in the NWS HUN area of the survey.
 
andyhb said:
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.
Click to expand...
sucks that we have to go through it in a case like this where they've been transparent about the process and had a pretty conclusive case for sticking with high-end EF4

but yeah they put themselves in this position with some of the ludicrous decisions in the past so there's a component of leopards eating people's faces to it. doesn't make the weenies any less annoying though.
 
slenker said:
Does anyone know if the extremely well-built brick mansion in Oak Grove had hurricane strapping when HB-PC swept it? That's the only home I can think of with the slight possibility of containing such a thing, seeing as it was of exceptional construction and was in Alabama. Although, it was on the northern end of the state. I believe that being a requirement for being considered "stronger than typical resistance" is pretty stupid though, seeing as coastal areas are inherently less likely to face a violent tornado than an inland area.
Click to expand...
Not home so can’t post photos atm, but the Oak Grove mansion was not as well constructed as is often cited - it was on a concrete block foundation and had a mix of anchor bolts and cut nails along the perimeter of the foundation. It was (appropriately, I might add) rated EF5 in 2011, but would not be eligible for that rating today.
 
TH2002 said:
Not home so can’t post photos atm, but the Oak Grove mansion was not as well constructed as is often cited - it was on a concrete block foundation and had a mix of anchor bolts and cut nails along the perimeter of the foundation. It was (appropriately, I might add) rated EF5 in 2011, but would not be eligible for that rating today.
Click to expand...
I believe that’s the same one Tim Marshall put in a presentation that it should have been rated EF4, correct?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
Aaron Rider said:
Besides the partial debarking, I'm intrigued by the brown splotches in the field in the background. Notice how inconsistent it looks. So it's *most likely* not just from farming or something. Ground scouring? It's been a while since I read about this tornado- did it achieve a fair amount of ground scouring?View attachment 36869
Click to expand...
I noticed that too!! Thought it was too far in the distance to be worth drawing attention to, but that's definitely scouring. The amount of debris in most pics makes scouring hard to find, but I honestly think the satellite image paints the clearest picture. If you zoom in the field you're referencing is on the bottom left.

1742583886462.jpeg

I challenge anyone to show me a more impressive satellite image. I'm confident there isn't one, but also curious if there is lol. It's worth noting Iowa has some of the most fertile soil in the country, and most of our native grasses and flowers have roots that extend 10-15 feet into the ground! That's not to say most yards aren't turf grass (they are), but when you see scoured fields native plants were probably present, which makes it especially impressive.

1742584186163.jpeg
 
Also, earlier in the thread someone mentioned an image of Smithville being the most impressive damage photo they've ever seen. I agreed back then, but I keep thinking about these photos from the Mayfield tornado, and the more I look at them the more impressed I am.

Take note of how easily distinguishable the tire tracks from a gator or golf cart that was driving around are. There aren't any bulldozer tracks, which means no clean up has been done in this photo.

1742584547927.jpeg

This photo is also from early in the tornado's path (Buckeye, AR).

1742585968986.jpeg

edit:
accidentally posted a photo from the Bassfield tornado. corrected now.

The debarked tree pics are from a different tornado
 

Attachments

  • 1742584596449.jpeg
    1742584596449.jpeg
    96.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
One point I will go back to on Tim Marshall. To start, I absolutely do not believe he is the “ratings” boogeyman. I do not think he uses his influence to try and get tornados downgraded.

Now, one of the original criticisms that Chuck Doswell(RIP) had of the EF scale was its ownership. Who really owns the EF scale? It’s pretty self explanatory that the original F scale was Fujita’s. Any criticism, valid or unjust, could be directed at him. The EF scale doesn’t have that at all.

Here is a great excerpt of Doswell’s comments:

It seems that the EF-scale is now just sort of floating in some sort of black void, with no one apparently responsible for anything. I suppose another ad hoc "forum" could be called and the previous process repeated more or less. But this strikes me as a pathetic substitute for someone accepting ownership of the EF-scale and maintaining a continuing process by which the scale can be reviewed and revised.


Now how does this even relate to Tim Marshall? For starters, Tim was one of the main members of the EF scale committee. He’s the current steering committee chair that is partnering with the ASCE on the EF Scale revamp. He’s also an active participant in the development of a joint ASCE/SEI/AMS standard for wind speed estimation in tornadoes and other severe wind events. To top it off, he also seems to be the sole member of the “QRT” team for damage assessments.

Tim is probably the most well known name and face that has anything to do with the EF scale creation, he’s on site at almost every violent, high end tornado, and is the person most called on by news stations to explain the EF scale.

The EF scale was a collaborative effort by multiple fields, but Tim Marshall’s visibility has sort of made him the de facto head and face of it. However Fair or unfair that is, a lot of the criticism he gets seems to be criticism aimed at the EF scale itself since no one really owns it.

Please take the time to read his essay on this. He was already laying bare big issues with the EF scale a mere two years after its adoption.

 
Last edited:
Grand Poo Bah said:
Also, earlier in the thread someone mentioned an image of Smithville being the most impressive damage photo they've ever seen. I agreed back then, but I keep thinking about these photos from the Mayfield tornado, and the more I look at them the more impressed I am.

Take note of how easily distinguishable the tire tracks from a gator or golf cart that was driving around are. There aren't any bulldozer tracks, which means no clean up has been done in this photo.

View attachment 36879

I think this photo is from around the same general area but I could be wrong. I'd have to get back on my computer to verify.

View attachment 36880
Click to expand...
That second photo is from the 2020 Bassfield, Mississippi EF4.
 
The other issue is we don’t have an outspoken Doswell-like figure anymore in the meteorological community to just call a spade a spade like he did.

For example, he absolutely lights up Texas Tech Engineers in this blog post:

I've also been disturbed for many years that the very same Texas Tech. engineers pushing a revision to the windspeeds of tornadoes at the upper end of the F-scale have consistently denied that automobiles and other motor vehicles become airborne in some tornadoes. This denial flies in the face of indisputable video evidence and so is completely unjustified, in my opinion. I've wondered why they're so adamant in disputing the clear fact that motor vehicles can become airborne in F3+ tornadoes. The only plausible explanation I can dream up for such steadfast denial of the facts is that they've been promoting a "saferoom" that would evidently not be able to withstand the impact of an airborne motor vehicle. Such a "projectile" would render useless their standard saferoom. Of course, the odds of a saferoom being hit by such would be relatively low, but it's a non-negligible possibility that perhaps they'd prefer did not exist at all. I can offer no other explanation for their consistent and persistent denial of the reality of airborne motor vehicles.


Great reading if you want:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top