• 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

buckeye05 said:
Just FYI, Nick K is now in agreement that Lake City, AR deserves an EF4 rating and is publicly questioning MEGs surveying practices. Regardless of our personal opinions of him, we could have hashed it out in a civilized, articulate manner here and potentially had a new contributor to the forum who has some solid connections and influence, instead of sweeping him away in a tsunami of unadulterated unhinged weenie rage.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, the Nick K incident. Truly Talkweather's whatever the opposite of a finest hour is.

Off topic - we know Harper and Marion 2004 were likely F5, but does the Roanoke, IL tornado from that year fall into the same category or was F4 appropriate there?
 
Lake Martin EF4 said:
Ah yes, the Nick K incident. Truly Talkweather's whatever the opposite of a finest hour is.

Off topic - we know Harper and Marion 2004 were likely F5, but does the Roanoke, IL tornado from that year fall into the same category or was F4 appropriate there?
Click to expand...
The contextual damage was quite extreme at the farmstead that was obliterated and at the Parsons plant, but no structures were cleanly swept away in true F5 fashion, including the farmhouse that took a direct hit. High-end F4 feels like an appropriate rating.
 
buckeye05 said:
The contextual damage was quite extreme at the farmstead that was obliterated and at the Parsons plant, but no structures were cleanly swept away in true F5 fashion, including the farmhouse that took a direct hit. High-end F4 feels like an appropriate rating.
Click to expand...
If my memory is right, the Parsons facility was a very well-built manufacturing facility where parts of the foundation slab(s) were cracked. Failure modes of such buildings are also, obviously, different from something like a wood-frame (even a well-anchored one). More bending, crumpling, collapsing, and, in this case (again, if memory serves me right - I feel like I saw pictures of that foundation on this forum), even compromises to the foundation. A clean sweep likely couldn't happen there - again, from my understanding. I'm not sure I agree a tornado has to leave a postcard-perfect slab to be F (not EF)5, especially when it's doing what that tornado did to that facility. I'll acknowledge I don't recall the farmhouse in question.

Also, we talk about the "look." Roanoke definitely had that, in my opinion.

My final thought: Back in the day, it's obvious there was essentially a sort of area for "low-end F5." This was only 2 years after the La Plata debacle and everything I've seen and read suggests Roanoke was quite a bit stronger. I agree that it was not as strong as Harper or Marion. But I think it has a respectable case and while I'm open to other arguments, obviously I lean F5.

As for these pictures: LOL I can't even tell if that stripped and snapped tree is debarked - although I don't think it is - because there's too much massive metal twisted around it like foil around a smoked brisket.

Roanoke2.jpg

Roanoke1.jpg


Roanoke3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Aaron Rider said:
If my memory is right, the Parsons facility was a very well-built manufacturing facility where parts of the foundation slab(s) were cracked. Failure modes of such buildings are also, obviously, different from something like a wood-frame (even a well-anchored one). More bending, crumpling, collapsing, and, in this case (again, if memory serves me right - I feel like I saw pictures of that foundation on this forum), even compromises to the foundation. A clean sweep likely couldn't happen there - again, from my understanding. I'm not sure I agree a tornado has to leave a postcard-perfect slab to be F (not EF)5, especially when it's doing what that tornado did to that facility. I'll acknowledge I don't recall the farmhouse in question.

Also, we talk about the "look." Roanoke definitely had that, in my opinion.

My final thought: Back in the day, it's obvious there was essentially a sort of area for "low-end F5." This was only 2 years after the La Plata debacle and everything I've seen and read suggests Roanoke was quite a bit stronger. I agree that it was not as strong as Harper or Marion. But I think it has a respectable case and while I'm open to other arguments, obviously I lean F5.

As for these pictures: LOL I can't even tell if that stripped and snapped tree is debarked - although I don't think it is - because there's too much massive metal twisted around it like foil around a smoked brisket.

View attachment 43933

View attachment 43932


View attachment 43934
Click to expand...
My reference to a lack of a clean sweep was in reference to the farmhouse rather than the plant. A tornado cleanly sweeping away an entire factory isn’t realistic and just isn’t something I would expect to see at any intensity level.

However, it is entirely possible that what happened at the Parsons plant is indicative of F5 winds. But I’m just not knowledgeable enough about the specific construction methods used at that particular building to confidently say it seems like F5 damage, so I’m erring on the side of caution. In general, it’s tough to draw conclusions from photos when dealing with large, structurally complex buildings such as factories or institutional buildings. What may look impressive at first glance may not be upon deeper analysis. The destruction of UK grain research facility in Princeton, KY (especially the annex) was by all indications extremely impressive at first glance, and it appeared to be very well built and reinforced based on the rebar in the rubble, and the blueprints.

Turns out the construction crew installed the rebar, but didn’t attach it to the foundation. That’s a detail you can’t ascertain from photographs. So without extensive detailed information regarding the construction of the Parsons plant, I’m not comfortable calling it an F5 candidate, but do acknowledge the possibility.
 
Aaron Rider said:
If my memory is right, the Parsons facility was a very well-built manufacturing facility where parts of the foundation slab(s) were cracked. Failure modes of such buildings are also, obviously, different from something like a wood-frame (even a well-anchored one). More bending, crumpling, collapsing, and, in this case (again, if memory serves me right - I feel like I saw pictures of that foundation on this forum), even compromises to the foundation. A clean sweep likely couldn't happen there - again, from my understanding. I'm not sure I agree a tornado has to leave a postcard-perfect slab to be F (not EF)5, especially when it's doing what that tornado did to that facility. I'll acknowledge I don't recall the farmhouse in question.

Also, we talk about the "look." Roanoke definitely had that, in my opinion.

My final thought: Back in the day, it's obvious there was essentially a sort of area for "low-end F5." This was only 2 years after the La Plata debacle and everything I've seen and read suggests Roanoke was quite a bit stronger. I agree that it was not as strong as Harper or Marion. But I think it has a respectable case and while I'm open to other arguments, obviously I lean F5.

As for these pictures: LOL I can't even tell if that stripped and snapped tree is debarked - although I don't think it is - because there's too much massive metal twisted around it like foil around a smoked brisket.

View attachment 43933

View attachment 43932


View attachment 43934
Click to expand...
I have always been uncertain of the rating for this tornado. The vehicle damage is extremely violent but not a definite indication of F5 winds.
 
buckeye05 said:
My reference to a lack of a clean sweep was in reference to the farmhouse rather than the plant. A tornado cleanly sweeping away an entire factory isn’t realistic and just isn’t something I would expect to see at any intensity level.

However, it is entirely possible that what happened at the Parsons plant is indicative of F5 winds. But I’m just not knowledgeable enough about the specific construction methods used at that particular building to confidently say it seems like F5 damage, so I’m erring on the side of caution. In general, it’s tough to draw conclusions from photos when dealing with large, structurally complex buildings such as factories or institutional buildings. What may look impressive at first glance may not be upon deeper analysis. The destruction of UK grain research facility in Princeton, KY (especially the annex) was by all indications extremely impressive at first glance, and it appeared to be very well built and reinforced based on the rebar in the rubble, and the blueprints.

Turns out the construction crew installed the rebar, but didn’t attach it to the foundation. That’s a detail you can’t ascertain from photographs. So without extensive detailed information regarding the construction of the Parsons plant, I’m not comfortable calling it an F5 candidate, but do acknowledge the possibility.
Click to expand...
I don't mind erring on the side of what I guess I'd call, liberality, in that era simply because of what we know about the innate, head-scratching conservatism of that era. Of course, I don't know what the culture was like in NWS Lincoln (I assume Roanoke is in the area of said office).

To be honest, I think ratings right now are being done, overall, better than they were in the immediate aftermath of La Plata. You err on the side of reasonable caution, and I respect that. They were generally erring on the side of aggressive caution. A very strange time.

But obviously I don't disagree with your logic, and I certainly don't claim it was obviously an F5 (whereas I feel Harper and, probably, Marion were, together with probably a few others from the early to mid aughts) - I just openly lean that way. Do we have any central Illinois posters here who can do some research on the Parsons plant? :)

One thing I've said before about Roanoke: it was an incredibly photogenic tornado during its lifespan.
 
buckeye05 said:
Just FYI, Nick K is now in agreement that Lake City, AR deserves an EF4 rating and is publicly questioning MEGs surveying practices. Regardless of our personal opinions of him, we could have hashed it out in a civilized, articulate manner here and potentially had a new contributor to the forum who has some solid connections and influence, instead of sweeping him away in a tsunami of unadulterated unhinged weenie rage.
Click to expand...
I thought what happened was very unseemly even though I'll generally defend the right of people to post what they want so long as it's civil (a line that probably was crossed). I haven't seen any other forum moderation strategy work successfully. But I also thought he could have made a gentler introduction himself. He's a nineteen year old who while obviously well read isn't so accepting of uncertainty or differing reasoning.

It was interesting to see this exchange (abridged) on the Marion tornado with Jim LaDue, who's one of the EF scale update committee chairs.

Screen Shot 2025-06-12 at 9.45.34 pm.png
Screen Shot 2025-06-12 at 9.45.41 pm.png
Screen Shot 2025-06-12 at 9.46.03 pm.png
Screen Shot 2025-06-12 at 9.46.38 pm.png

Note that even though they're close in opinion, Jim's is more guarded. (Also applying DoD 10 in the manner he's suggesting would create an even sharper inconsistency with F-scale era ratings - something they were supposed to avoid).
 
Last edited:
Maybe Nick K coming around to Lake City being an EF4 was because of the clash in here, rather than in spite of it! What about that? lol jk.

In all seriousness, If he actually lurked this site for a long time before posting (like he said he did) he knows this forum is usually filled with high quality discussion and debate. I'd imagine he's still lurking because once you find this place WX Twitter/Reddit just doesn't hit the same. If he is still here, I'd definitely like to formally apologize for my role in the clash (which was also a low point for me) and promise to be respectful and open minded if he decides to participate again in the future. I'd just ask that he keeps conversation here, instead of blasting it to his followers on X, and potentially attracting the type of low effort, rage-bait posters here that X is plagued with.

I also think there are a lot more influential people in here than some realize, who keep lower profiles, and aren't active on social media. I personally know of at least one highly influential weather scientist (like top 10 most influential) who lurks in here from time to time. This is the best weather forum on the internet, and in terms of the quality of discussion, I'm not sure it's even close.
 
In reference to earlier discussion, I found this diagram showing tornado vortex structures. Turns out the structure is correlated to the tornadoes "swirl ratio". Swirl Ratio is "a dimensionless parameter used to quantify the strength of swirling flow, which is the rotational motion of a fluid around a central axis. It's essentially a ratio that compares the angular momentum to the radial momentum of the flow. In essence, it measures how much a fluid is swirling compared to its overall movement." Turns out multi vortex tornadoes have the most rotation.

1749787476255.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJS
Grand Poo Bah said:
In reference to earlier discussion, I found this diagram showing tornado vortex structures. Turns out the structure is correlated to the tornadoes "swirl ratio". Swirl Ratio is "a dimensionless parameter used to quantify the strength of swirling flow, which is the rotational motion of a fluid around a central axis. It's essentially a ratio that compares the angular momentum to the radial momentum of the flow. In essence, it measures how much a fluid is swirling compared to its overall movement." Turns out multi vortex tornadoes have the most rotation.

View attachment 43954
Click to expand...
To put it more comprehensively, multi-vortex tornadoes or those with a high swirl ratio have rotation that is disproportionately strong compared to the radial inflow intensity. However, this actually makes it harder for high-swirl-ratio tornadoes to produce extreme damage. Instead, their most intense destruction is usually caused by subvortices, unlike tornadoes with moderate or low vortex ratios, where the main vortex itself is capable of generating devastating damage. In fact, the vast majority of tornadoes capable of extreme destruction have low or moderate swirl ratios which is a result of the balance among various parameters.
Screenshot_2025-05-20-15-09-09-538_com.tencent.mobileqq-edit.jpg
 
Nice lil' Wikipedia article to read regarding tornado intensity disputes:
en.wikipedia.org

Disagreements on the intensity of tornadoes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Tornadoes listed and the rating changes argued in each section:
  • Lublin 1931 (F4 -> F5}
  • Dallas 1957 (F3 -> F5)
  • Sunnyside 1965 (F4 -> F5)
  • Lebanon-Sheridan 1965 (F4 -> F5)
  • Pittsfield-Strongsville 1965 (F4 -> F5)
  • Lubbock 1970 (F5 -> F6)
  • Gosser Ridge 1971 (F4 -> F5)
  • Xenia 1974 (F5 -> F6)
  • Broadview 1974 (F4 -> F5)
  • Cheyenne 1979 (F3 -> F4)
  • Ivanovo 1984 (F4 -> F5)
  • Bakersfield Valley 1990 (F4 -> F5)
  • Pampa 1995 (F4 -> F6)
  • Hoover 1995 (F2 -> F5)
  • Kellerville 1995 (F4 -> F5)
  • Allison 1995 (F4 -> F5)
  • Birmingham 2005 (F2 -> IF3)
  • Elie 2007 (F5 -> F4)
  • New Wren 2011 (EF3 -> EF5)
  • Philadelphia 2011 (EF5 -> EF4)
  • Hackleburg-Phil Campbell 2011 (EF5 -> EF4. This is #11 on my strongest of all time list, btw)
  • Tuscaloosa-Birmingham 2011 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Rainsville 2011 (EF5 -> EF4)
  • Joplin 2011 (EF5 -> EF4)
  • Piedmont 2011 (EF5 -> EF4. This is #1 on my strongest of all time list)
  • Henryville 2012 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Moore 2013 (EF5 -> EF4)
  • El Reno 2013 (EF3 -> EF5)
  • Vilonia 2014 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Pilger 2014 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Rochelle 2015 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Greenwood Springs 2019 (EF2 -> EF4-5)
  • Bassfield 2020 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Scarth 2020 (EF3 -> EF5)
  • Mayfield 2021 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Andover 2022 (EF3 -> EF4/IF5)
  • Rolling Fork 2023 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Matador 2023 (EF3 -> EF4. This is #4 on my strongest of all time list)
  • Didsbury 2023 (EF4 -> EF5)
  • Greenfield 2024 (EF4 -> EF5)
Real odd list we have here. Especially its picks for 5/24/11. You missed the 2 most obvious missed EF5s of the entire pre-Vilonia EF era....but you posit a downgrade of the strongest tornado of all time?!
 
Lake Martin EF4 asked me this in the Significant Tornado Thread.

EDIT: @Aaron Rider, what is your list btw? (Post it in EF Scale Debates, to be safe.)
Click to expand...

I'm going to limit this somewhat to tornadoes in my lifetime or close to it. I have bolded the tornadoes I feel pretty strongly about and italicized ones about which I have a few comments.

One note: I'm not interested in saying "these were all specifically EF5-warranted tornadoes." They weren't all. What I'm saying is, by the very, very reasonable standards of the Fujita Scale in the late 20th century, these are highest grade tornadoes.

Greenfield, IA - 5/21/2024
Matador, TX - 6/21/2023
Rolling Fork, MS - 3/24/2023
Mayfield-Bremen, KY - 12/10/2021
Monette, AR - 12/10/2021
Bassfield, MS - 4/12/2020
Chapman, KS - 5/25/2016
Holly Springs, MS - 12/23/2015
Cisco, TX - 5/9/2015
Rochelle-Fairdale, IL - 4/9/2015
Alpena, SD - 6/18/2014
Pilger (west), NE - 6/16/2014
Pilger (east), NE - 6/16/2014
Stanton, NE - 6/16/2014
Louisville, MS - 4/28/2014
Vilonia, AR - 4/27/2014
Washington, IL - 11/17/2013
Moore, OK - 5/20/2013
Shawnee, OK - 5/19/2013
Berlin, ND - 7/17/2011
Goldsby, OK - 5/24/2011
Chickasha, OK - 5/24/2011
El Reno-Piedmont, OK - 5/24/2011
Joplin, MO - 5/22/2011
Rainsville, AL - 4/27/2011
Hackleburg-Phil Campbell, AL - 4/27/2011
Tuscaloosa-Birmingham, AL - 4/27/2011
Smithville, MS - 4/27/2011
Philadelphia, MS - 4/27/2011
New Wren, MS - 4/27/2011
Parkersburg, IA - 5/25/2008
Picher, OK - Neosho, MO - 5/10/2008
Elie, Manitoba, CAN - 6/22/2007
Greensburg, KS - 5/4/2007
Westminster, TX - 5/9/2006
Marion, ND - 7/18/2004
Roanoke, IL - 7/13/2004
Harper, KS - 5/12/2004
Van Wert, OH - 11/10/2002
Loyal Valley, TX - 5/11/1999
Bridge Creek, OK - 5/3/1999
Deerfield (Lawrenceburg), TN - 4/16/1998
Martins Mills, TN - 4/16/1998
Birmingham, AL - 4/8/1998
Jarrell, TX - 5/27/1997
Oakfield, WI - 7/18/1996
Kellerville, TX - 6/8/1995
Pampa, TX - 6/8/1995
Chandler, MN - 6/16/1992
Red Rock, OK - 4/26/1991
Winfield, KS - 4/26/1991
Andover, KS - 4/26/1991
Plainfield, IL - 8/28/1990
Stratton, NE - 6/15/1990
Bakersfield Valley, TX - 6/1/1990
Goessel, KS - 3/13/1990
Hesston, KS - 3/13/1990

Greenfield was not necessarily the strongest tornado we've seen recently in terms of damage, but it had enough instances of contextual damage, plus that crazy concrete parking stop damage, to impress me. Rolling Fork is similar.

I agree with posts by buckeye elsewhere suggesting that Matador simply couldn't be rated EF5 in the modern use of the scale. But I also feel very, very strongly that that ain't the tornado's fault that the scale is being used without any reference at all to context.

Mayfield-Bremen is THE perfect tornado for representing all or most of the problems with the current implementation of rating tornadoes. I just think it is crazy to suggest context - including blitheringly obvious context - doesn't matter. Mayfield was NOT an EF5. But it WAS an F5 and it SHOULD have been ... look, you get the point. IF you have a tornado scale with a slot for "highest", Mayfield should be in it.

Monette ... I could be talked one way or the other on this, but as someone just posted elsewhere, the tree damage was incredibly strong. Bassfield's contextual damage was so monstrous that, to me, it's just obvious it was an F5 tornado.

Louisville utterly annihilated a fairly impressive apartment building.

Washington had some debarking, very high end windrowing, etc. Not a high end F5, but probably good enough. Some of it reminds me of Xenia back in the day.

I'll be honest: I don't remember why I had Shawnee 2013 on this list. Anyone who can remind me why is welcome to.

Roanoke and Van Wert are sorta in the same category of "well, they definitely had the LOOK if nothing else." Seriously, if you look at pictures of the damage from both, it just looks .... I hate to be so brief and clcihed, but I'm tired ... it looks nasty. Mud spattered everywhere, trees ravaged, industrial facilities crumpled and destroyed, vehicles rendered into ruined piles of unintelligible metal. By contrast, Bridge Creek does even more than that: Bridge Creek does damage that the eyes can't even comprehend. That's a HIGH END F5. But Roanoke and Van Wert were in that zone where the context just really suggests the highest rating is warranted. In my opinion, anyway.

With Martins Mills, the tornado that preceded the main "Forgotten F5", I have never seen photos, but have read various things suggesting it was extremely violent.

I've never been super familiar with the 1998 Birmingham tornado - I know some have suggested it wasn't an F5 at all.

Recent pictures of Kellerville definitely suggest extraordinary intensity.

I think people forget that corn damage wasn't the only accomplishment of the Plainfield F5.

I have absolutely no clue how Stratton wasn't rated F5.

I unironically believe the following: if you don't think Vilonia was both an F5 and an EF5, then you shouldn't be allowed to discuss tornadoes until you correct your mind.

I may discuss some earlier tornadoes I think were underrated (or even overrated!) but that'll do for now. Although one thing I will say is, I like to think logically about implications: that is, if I rate one tornado this way, shouldn't I rate a very similar tornado the same way? And one example is, Moshannon State Forest 1985. Based on tree damage, kinda hard to rate Bassfield EF5 (or F5), and not Moshannon, eh? Edit: or probably Tionesta for that matter. Well, we all know how crazy 5/31/85 was.

By the way, I have no idea if the Franklin, KS tornado of 2003 was an F5 or not.

I don't pretend to be as educated as some of you, but I do think my list is reasonable. There's a few others I haven't made up my mind about, like Camp Crook or one or both of the Canton, TX tornadoes from 2017.
 
tornado examiner said:
The colors confuse me.
Click to expand...
Another valuable, high-effort contribution from the examiner. :rolleyes:

Maybe a key/legend would be helpful @Lake Martin EF4? This might actually be a really valuable tool for grading offices!

Might be a few days before I can get to it but I'll overlay this onto a map of each office's "jurisdictions".

Edit: I've also been scouring this site for pics of the EF5s from your list to verify that I agree with them and am planning to make more collages like the ones I posted a few pages ago.
 
Last edited:
Grand Poo Bah said:
Another valuable, high-effort contribution from the examiner. :rolleyes:

Maybe a key/legend would be helpful @Lake Martin EF4? This might actually be a really valuable tool for grading offices!

Might be a few days before I can get to it but I'll overlay this onto a map of each office's "jurisdictions".

Edit: I've also been scouring this site for pics of the EF5s from your list to verify that I agree with them and am planning to make more collages like the ones I posted a few pages ago.
Click to expand...
I’ll leave. Bye.
 
As said in the other thread, a lot of us have our own EF5 list. But I also have a few "major question marks" that had a chance to have been as strong as some of the bolded ones above (based on visual cues, strength of other tornadoes in the outbreak, in the same cell...), but which it is difficult to honestly put on an EF5 list due to not tracking over much at all, not having DOW measurements, etc. I have six on the list, all relatively recent:
Hoover Jun 8 95
Mulhall May 3 99 (there was an excellent article on here a few weeks ago on why this one likely wasn't even nearly as strong as Bridge Creek, but that's still a high bar!)
Trousdale and the rest of the Greensburg family May 4 07
Lake Martin Apr 27 11
Canton Lake May 24 11
Camp Crook Jun 28 18 (although this one has a bit more evidence than the rest)

I'd be interested in knowing some more examples of mystery strong tornadoes like those, recent or much older too. Of course a lot of tornadoes on Apr 27 might have that status, but I feel the list of potential candidates has been narrowed down to a few convincing candidates (Tuscaloosa, Cullman, Pisgah/Flat Rock, New Wren, Barnesville, New Harmony, Cordova, Ringgold) whereas Lake Martin is truly impossible to decide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top