There is definitely a stronger basis solely because more than one method of wind measurement was used, but then again I’ve been able to point out issues with two of the methods used already and it’s been like a day so I really don’t know. I do want to see a more in-depth treefall study done though; if Enid was EF5 anywhere it was almost certainly over that treeline.
There is definitely a stronger basis solely because more than one method of wind measurement was used, but then again I’ve been able to point out issues with two of the methods used already and it’s been like a day so I really don’t know. I do want to see a more in-depth treefall study done though; if Enid was EF5 anywhere it was almost certainly over that treeline.
I just noticed who you are lmao, your user change threw me off. Yeah, i agree. I don't see the need main basis for EF5 solely on that RV, but i see it on that treeline. Enid had very strong contextual evidence for EF5.
I didn't believe the 265 at all. People misinterpret Enderlin still, their most confident calculation was in the 220-230 range so if those calculations are to be taken face first, it's similar to the Enid math too. They're really not that far apart in nature, but as @Eoline mentions, Enderlin had a lot of assumptions to the extent of math I just learned about
I forgot to mention that lol, yea
This is precisely why, in spite of there being some oversimplifications that do likely exaggerate the final numbers' magnitudes, that Enderlin is still solidly EF5. You could have some factor not being taken into account that would reduce the windspeed by 10% (which is a very significant disparity) - but 10% of ~230+ mph does not take it below the threshold. You can run thousands of Monte Carlo simulations on the thrown object in Enderlin's case, and I would be mindblown if the number of runs yielding sub-EF5 intensity fell within three standard deviations (or sigma values - for reference, three sigmas is within 99.7%). In fact, I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if literally zero model runs displayed sub-EF5 level winds moving that object in that manner.
Agree. It's just wrong to say that Enderlin wasn't a EF5. The environment solidly correlates with a high end environment of a EF4-EF5. Sandpapered trees, the train itself. I don't think it peaked around 260 mph, but do think it was in a 210-230 range at mininum. As for Enid, i am a bit more hesitantly now and can understand the partial reasoning, maybe why not. I still think though it may deserve it
Worth also noting that Norman was not involved in anything mentioned in the report including adding the potential EF5 strength sentence and that they do not support inclusion of the paragraph to the report.
Oh, im aware. Like many have said, i think Norman tried to push as far as they could to get the rating but they got turned down. They've had experiences with such situations before (Piedmont 2011)
No, I mean they legitimately have no idea why it was added to the report as none of the studies involved them. I’m not sure they were aware a discussion about it was even going on. At least that’s what people inside are saying.
That's a twist and a half IF true. Key word is IF.
Dude, wow. This was by far the strongest Oklahoma tornado since Moore 2013. Absolutely a contextual EF5 in all the ways possible. before I created my account and I lurked on here for two years, I remember learning from people like @buckeye05 that when you see that type of reddish/just brownish landscape combined with high end damage, you know it was a upper echelon tornado. Enid ticks those boxes completely. Excellent documentation.
That’s what I thought of whenever I was there in the worst affected areas. The severity of ground scouring especially along Southgate Road where the ground was literally gouged out in multiple spots made me think of Moore ‘13. It was almost overwhelming just the violence of damage in spots, and I can’t see anyone with any sort of knowledge of tornado damage looking at that and not thinking EF5 intensity. Now with the studies to back it up with actual indicators used to determine EF5 intensity was reached, I just don’t get how you can’t rate it that.
I count this one as the 2nd (unofficial) EF5 that I watched happen live honestly. That footage Amanda Benton got WHILE the tornado was over Southgate Road was extraordinarily similar to any infamous KFOR coverage from the 1990s/2010s, and this thing was almost identical to Moore '13 in evolution too. It started off as a strong tornado, rapidly developed a debris cloud so high it enveloped the whole tornado and unleashed absolute violence on whatever it hit in its core.
the source who originally shared that is absolutely reliable, so it’s very likely true.
Interesting then. Just have to see what revolves of it then, o guess.
