• 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

Severe Weather 3/4 - 3/8

Kds86z said:
I don’t have a busy life, so I just weather nerd out. I know a lot of people are busy and I don’t want people to have to dig through dozens of pages to catch up when perhaps they have limited time. This came across my mind before it was brought to my attention that maybe the posts are too much. I was just trying to help as I know one user told me over DM they didn’t have X so they like seeing my posts etc. So i thought maybe for those who don’t have it, it is nice to see updates. And yeah instead of saying “oh wow” to a tornado video or post, one can do the wow emoji. HOWEVER, I think a tornado like union city video when it was tearing homes up, it’s totally justified for a few dramatic one word responses and that does not bug me.

Anywho! Thanks for your patience and going forward things will be different.
Click to expand...
I agree, we all have this hobby that brings us together and as long as we're posting stuff that contributes to the community, that's what makes this site a great place to be a part of. I don't use X either, so I don't mind it, but I can also see how it could be overbearing to some. Also, Union City was probably a bad example there because that was an extreme/anomalous event, but generally speaking tornadoes are usually pretty bad for those impacted even if they are EF0-EF1.

Before I step off my soapbox tonight, ideally people learn or get info from the threads through forecasting and nowcasting of the events, either through original discussion on TalkWeather or through shared outside discussion+links. We're all weather nerds to some extent if we post here, so I'd love to see more analysis and commentary like "this cell near ABC, Texas may have the potential to produce tornadoes as the LLJ ramps up" vs. quick reactions like "this is a bust" or "Broyles is wrong on day 4". Even those comments can be changed to analysis pretty quickly by changing them to "Broyles is wrong on day 4 because the trough is trending to be more meridional". Obviously I'm not a met or I'd have a red tag on my profile, but if anyone wants to learn more about meteorology I'm always happy to share what I know through event threads or DMs and I'm sure many others here would as well.
 
buckeye05 said:
Surprised that nobody has mentioned that they’ve dropped the high-end EF3 estimate for Union City. Down to 150 MPH mid range EF3 now.
Click to expand...
I wonder if that's a datakeeping thing they're doing on the DAT or something? I think 165 MPH is fair if they don't want to go EF4, but 150 just doesn't seem accurate
 
buckeye05 said:
Surprised that nobody has mentioned that they’ve dropped the high-end EF3 estimate for Union City. Down to 150 MPH mid range EF3 now.
Click to expand...
I could see a drop to 160 MPH making sense if NWS Northern Indiana opts to go with EF3 instead of EF4... because yeah, EF3 itself isn't egregious, but 150 mph definitely seems a bit too low.
 
TH2002 said:
I could see a drop to 160 MPH making sense if NWS Northern Indiana opts to go with EF3 instead of EF4... because yeah, EF3 itself isn't egregious, but 150 mph definitely seems a bit too low.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree 150 feels low. To play devils advocate, I saw some discussion elsewhere from Union City locals saying that the houses along the lake were basically old cottages, and that they weren’t surprised that they were totally obliterated. But then again, one of the DAT points mentions bolt spacing at one of them being around 4 feet, which actually pretty dang solid anchoring wise. Not saying this was an EF5 of course, but it shows that not all of these cottages were barely anchored sliders.

Could be a case of strong anchoring made useless due to frail structural integrity.
 
Ok I figured it out. Here’s the cottage/home with “bolts every four feet”. While that is technically true, it comes with a huge caveat. The foundation has two sections: a smaller actual concrete foundation section (right side of image), and a larger wooden floor platform section with subflooring (center of image). The bolts are only present on the smaller concrete portion of the foundation, while none are present on the larger subfloor portion. Basically, while there are some closely spaced bolts, they are only present within a relatively small portion of the house. The NWS needs to do better and be more detailed when writing comments within the DAT. This is the kind of thing that makes uninformed EF geeks flip out and results in unnecessary ratings drama and misinformation on social media, and it can be avoided if just a little more detail and rationale is provided by the surveyors. “Bolts about every four feet” makes it sound like the whole house has been bolted down that way, when it clearly wasn’t.
IMG_1473.jpeg
 
buckeye05 said:
Ok I figured it out. Here’s the cottage/home with “bolts every four feet”. While that is technically true, it comes with a huge caveat. The foundation has two sections: a smaller actual concrete foundation section (right side of image), and a larger wooden floor platform section with subflooring (center of image). The bolts are only present on the smaller concrete portion of the foundation, while none are present on the larger subfloor portion. Basically, while there are some closely spaced bolts, they are only present within a relatively small portion of the house. The NWS needs to do better and be more detailed when writing comments within the DAT. This is the kind of thing that makes uninformed EF geeks flip out and results in unnecessary ratings drama and misinformation on social media, and it can be avoided if just a little more detail and rationale is provided by the surveyors. “Bolts about every four feet” makes it sound like the whole house has been bolted down that way, when it clearly wasn’t.
View attachment 51166
Click to expand...
Really appreciate that. Thank you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top