Tanner
Member
DOW found winds of ~224 mph in the Harlan IA tornado on Friday.
Wow! It’s been years sincd we’vs seen something like this from DOW readings.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
DOW found winds of ~224 mph in the Harlan IA tornado on Friday.
Where did you find this?? I've been trying to find the location of the damage shown in the drone video but with no luck.View attachment 26041
Apparently this is what the house used to be. Good god, this might be an EF-5...
Where did you find this?? I've been trying to find the location of the damage shown in the drone video but with no luck.
Also calm down, we need extreme contextual damage for EF5, which I haven't seen yet, and we have no construction information, so please pump the brakes on the EF5 talk. Yeah a big house got swept away, but it takes so much more than that.
Edit: Andy said it first but my point still stands. This isn't a strong EF5 candidate.
I agree with you entirely, these are my own thoughts about the current ef scale.At this point I'm convinced that the old scale had the more accurate wind speed estimates. The discrepancy between the estimates given in damage surveys and actual readings is just worlds apart. This was an EF5 by the definition of the current scale in terms of wind speeds, but I doubt there was any damage that actually meets that criteria.
Yeah, context is the main factor per usual (when it’s acutally taken into account). I’m with you, solid EF4.Where did you find this?? I've been trying to find the location of the damage shown in the drone video but with no luck.
Also calm down, we need extreme contextual damage for EF5, which I haven't seen yet, and we have no construction information, so please pump the brakes on the EF5 talk. Yeah a big house got swept away, but it takes so much more than that.
Edit: Andy said it first but my point still stands. This isn't a strong EF5 candidate.
I actually think proximity to radar is what made people think it was gonna be more violent damage. Which again just goes back to the point of tornadoes having far higher wind speeds in reality than what they’re rated.Yeah, context is the main factor per usual (when it’s acutally taken into account). I’m with you, solid EF4.
I will say, I was surprised the damage wasn’t worse based off the radar signature in such close proximity to said radar.
A friend sent it, I'll try and confirm where it is along the path.Where did you find this?? I've been trying to find the location of the damage shown in the drone video but with no luck.
Also calm down, we need extreme contextual damage for EF5, which I haven't seen yet, and we have no construction information, so please pump the brakes on the EF5 talk. Yeah a big house got swept away, but it takes so much more than that.
Edit: Andy said it first but my point still stands. This isn't a strong EF5 candidate.
I honestly think that debris height is a much more accurate measurement of a tornadoes strength than the wind speed velocities.I actually think proximity to radar is what made people think it was gonna be more violent damage. Which again just goes back to the point of tornadoes having far higher wind speeds in reality than what they’re rated.
Amazing how narrow the path of complete destruction is. Still, a lot of houses that weren't leveled are gonna have to be razed.
Flyover of Minden IA showing that part of the town is just obliterated.
Yes, I do believe I put that caveat in there.Yeah, people tend to forget that a tornado doesn’t need to level a structure to actually destroy it. An ef1 could render even a well built structure a total loss if there’s enough water/integrity damage.