New Richmond looks to have been very short-lived compared to the other tornadoes.Yeah, probably a few times. Tornado damage (in some cases pretty high-end) extended nearly another 50 miles beyond New Richmond, including deaths near Clear Lake, Pineville and Barron. The area was pretty sparsely populated though, which makes it a lot harder to pin down precisely where breaks occurred. That'll be my next task whenever I have time again.
I marked the three most likely areas here - I doubt it cycled in all three spots, but very likely at least one and possibly two. I'm pretty confident the Barron path is another separate tornado but I can't 100% confirm it yet. That section is pretty rough anyway - I was able to plot the path through Barron itself pretty closely and a few points on the outskirts of Cameron, but I still need to fill in areas outside of that.
I agree with you, considering the fact that the EF scale was much looser prior to 2013 or 14, this tornado probably would have gotten an EF5 rating had it occurred in that time period.I feel the Mayfield tornado was definitely at the higher end of EF4, and possibly EF5 intensity in Princeton as well. Ground scouring occurred, trees were debarked, a tractor trailer was thrown hundreds of yards (actually over 1,300 yards if it indeed originated from the parking lot of the Princeton research center) and some of the homes swept away had anchor bolts.
There was one two-story home on Dogwood Ln that I feel is an EF5 candidate, though probably not the most clear cut example of such regardless. Arguments against EF5 could be the intact shrubbery in front of the home, the large piece of debris (probably a piece of the subfloor) left right next to the foundation and the foundation type itself (CMU), though one could also argue that besides the shrubbery, the contextual damage in the Country Club area and Princeton in general was impressive, the foundation stayed intact, and the bolted subfloor was completely removed. Comparing this home in particular to the one on the NWS training manual bears an uncanny resemblance:
View attachment 14839
Ground level view of the same home:
View attachment 14840
I honestly feel this one would have gotten a 5 had it occurred in the 2007-2011 era, though CMU foundation homes have been ruled out entirely as EF5 candidates in recent years and the homes in the area with the strongest contextual damage (Bremen) were just poorly constructed, so you decide.
i feel EF5 winds are ruled out here anyways. those small trees would be gone if EF5 winds were present. but they look mostly intact...I feel the Mayfield tornado was definitely at the higher end of EF4, and possibly EF5 intensity in Princeton as well. Ground scouring occurred, trees were debarked, a tractor trailer was thrown hundreds of yards (actually over 1,300 yards if it indeed originated from the parking lot of the Princeton research center) and some of the homes swept away had anchor bolts.
There was one two-story home on Dogwood Ln that I feel is an EF5 candidate, though probably not the most clear cut example of such regardless. Arguments against EF5 could be the intact shrubbery in front of the home, the large piece of debris (probably a piece of the subfloor) left right next to the foundation and the foundation type itself (CMU), though one could also argue that besides the shrubbery, the contextual damage in the Country Club area and Princeton in general was impressive, the foundation stayed intact, and the bolted subfloor was completely removed. Comparing this home in particular to the one on the NWS training manual bears an uncanny resemblance:
View attachment 14839
Ground level view of the same home:
View attachment 14840
I honestly feel this one would have gotten a 5 had it occurred in the 2007-2011 era, though CMU foundation homes have been ruled out entirely as EF5 candidates in recent years and the homes in the area with the strongest contextual damage (Bremen) were just poorly constructed, so you decide.
One word: ViloniaI agree with you, considering the fact that the EF scale was much looser prior to 2013 or 14, this tornado probably would have gotten an EF5 rating had it occurred in that time period.
Yeah, Mayfield definitely has an argument for an EF5 rating, but Vilonia is just so much more blatantly clear cut.One word: Vilonia
(With that said I'm actually ok with the high-end EF4 designation in this particular case. Construction quality and contextual damage in Vilonia was more impressive than Mayfield).
Yeah ever since Vilonia EF5 is pretty much retired/obsolete as a rating.I agree with you, considering the fact that the EF scale was much looser prior to 2013 or 14, this tornado probably would have gotten an EF5 rating had it occurred in that time period.
I feel like horizontal vortices are an extremely common phenomenon with violent tornadoes but only due to HD video being prevalent are they easier to see on video now. Lots of crappy camcorder/ VHS tapes of tornadoes likely obscured them what with compression and all that jazz.Select frame grabs of the lone horizontal vortex that the Spencer SD F4 produced, via a capture I did of Bill Reid’s original Hi8 tape. I didn’t even realize it produced such a vortex, in other sources it was hidden by compression.
View attachment 14841View attachment 14842View attachment 14843View attachment 14844
An aerial of the factory before clean-up:Another Ground level pic of Mayfield's factory. This was pretty insane damage to a large factory tbh.Cmr mentioned It had 60-70mph speed here which was quite impressive.
View attachment 14808
Damage before entering into factory area
View attachment 14809
Not only It quickly strengthened before Mayfield but also It siginificantly weakened just after Mayfield. Damage between Mayfield Cambridge was mostly EF2-3 level.
Very slightly over 10 miles. It's always possible the break at the beginning or end of the path isn't actually a break, but both were pretty well-attested by eyewitnesses and there seems to be a clear gap in damage points in those spots. I think once I can plot the breaks for the long Deer Park -> Clear Lake -> Arland section it'll look more like what it actually was: a prolific, rapidly cycling supercell that dropped multiple (IMO) strong-violent tornadoes.New Richmond looks to have been very short-lived compared to the other tornadoes.
I think I've got like 100+ photos from Oakfield that I've never really looked through that closely. I'll check later on and post if there's anything good.Speaking of violent tornadoes in Wisconsin, today is the anniversary of the 7/18/1996 Oakfield F5 and its associated relatively localized outbreak (12 tornadoes total).
It remains the last official violent tornado in Wisconsin, and is part of the Midwest's track record of sneaky midsummer "mesoscale accident" significant tornado events (Plainfield, IL 1990, Roanoke, IL July 2004, Wisconsin August 2005). I'm a little skeptical of how extremely violent it really was, although it did some impressive damage that would probably earn it at least a low-end EF4 rating today. Detailed damage photos/accounts have become more scarce on the Internet as the years pass, but I feel like the overall meteorological setup and the lack of fatalities imply that this tornado wouldn't pass muster with today's official EF5s as well as the "shoulda-beens" like Vilonia, Goldsby, (probably) Mayfield, etc.
Btw, circling back to this briefly: I just found a report about an official who was tasked with following the path northeast out of New Richmond to record where else there was damage and how many people might need help. Unfortunately the report itself is probably gone for good, but he told the papers there were "several" fatalities, a number of others who were badly hurt and "may die," and "in the neighborhood of one hundred families" either homeless or in need of major assistance. This is in the area from roughly Stanton (a few miles NE of New Richmond) to Barron/Cameron.Yeah, probably a few times. Tornado damage (in some cases pretty high-end) extended nearly another 50 miles beyond New Richmond, including deaths near Clear Lake, Pineville and Barron. The area was pretty sparsely populated though, which makes it a lot harder to pin down precisely where breaks occurred. That'll be my next task whenever I have time again.
I marked the three most likely areas here - I doubt it cycled in all three spots, but very likely at least one and possibly two. I'm pretty confident the Barron path is another separate tornado but I can't 100% confirm it yet. That section is pretty rough anyway - I was able to plot the path through Barron itself pretty closely and a few points on the outskirts of Cameron, but I still need to fill in areas outside of that.
I’ve noticed that Grazulis can be a little overzealous about deeming a lot of damage that wasn’t seen with any kind of funnel as “downburst damage”. There’s one section of his book where he describes multiple incidences of homes that were flattened by events where no funnel was sighted, and he seems to conclude these events as being downbursts, when I suspect a good portion of them can be attributed to rain-wrapped tornadoes.Btw, circling back to this briefly: I just found a report about an official who was tasked with following the path northeast out of New Richmond to record where else there was damage and how many people might need help. Unfortunately the report itself is probably gone for good, but he told the papers there were "several" fatalities, a number of others who were badly hurt and "may die," and "in the neighborhood of one hundred families" either homeless or in need of major assistance. This is in the area from roughly Stanton (a few miles NE of New Richmond) to Barron/Cameron.
Odd that, aside from the short stretch around Deer Park/Clear Lake, the rest of this area is usually either ignored entirely or brushed off as downbursts. I'm no expert, but that seems a tad excessive for straight-line winds lol. Not to mention a couple of stores in Barron that were "blown away" (probably not super sturdy, but still) and dozens of cows and horses that were killed.