Messages
473
Reaction score
144
Location
texas
So far from almost hours of digging through the very depths of the internet I haven’t found any photos or videos from the 2008 Trousdale wedge, it occurred at night and was probably rainwrapped and huge like the Clark State Lake megawedge from the same family. Buttermilk would’ve been almost impossible to chase or photograph because it literally occurred in the middle of no where lol. While on the topic of the Buttermilk EF3, I’ve got to say I was really impressed by the damage it left behind, there was pretty clear ground scouring visible on aerial imagery even a month after the tornado. The tree and vehicle damage descriptions are on par with Quinter as well. I’d say Quinter, Clark State Lake, and Buttermilk were probably the top 3 most intense on May 23.
personally if your Greensburg tracks only needs some tweaking i'd say finish and release it first and then do the rest of tuscaloosa. but thats just me.
 

TH2002

Member
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
1,982
Location
California, United States
Special Affiliations
  1. SKYWARN® Volunteer
The January 24, 1997 tornado that hit Barfield, TN was one of two F4/EF4 tornadoes to directly impact the Murfreesboro area (the other being the infamous 2009 tornado). F4 intensity was attained in the Southridge subdivision of Barfield, where 44 homes were completely destroyed. Five homes were swept away along with their block foundations, and 18 people were injured. It was part of a localized January tornado outbreak, including an F2 tornado that killed one person in Tuscaloosa.
Barfield-F4-damage-homes.JPG
59d27fe303599.image.jpg
 
Messages
473
Reaction score
144
Location
texas
The January 24, 1997 tornado that hit Barfield, TN was one of two F4/EF4 tornadoes to directly impact the Murfreesboro area (the other being the infamous 2009 tornado). F4 intensity was attained in the Southridge subdivision of Barfield, where 44 homes were completely destroyed. Five homes were swept away along with their block foundations, and 18 people were injured. It was part of a localized January tornado outbreak, including an F2 tornado that killed one person in Tuscaloosa.
View attachment 14989
59d27fe303599.image.jpg
question. what tornado is depicted in your pfp?
 
Messages
1,699
Reaction score
2,060
Location
Missouri
Tipton, OK 11/7/2011:
Chris_Spannagle_Manitou4.jpg



And might as well mention that I honestly feel this tornado would have gotten an F5/EF5 rating had it occurred in any other pre-2014 year... of course it kinda got lost in the grand scheme of 2011 though.
If it wasn't for 4/27/11, Joplin and 5/24/11 this would've been rated EF5. Probably the most violent November tornado on record (at least for the Plains).
 

TH2002

Member
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
1,982
Location
California, United States
Special Affiliations
  1. SKYWARN® Volunteer
I was digging through some earlier posts in this thread and came across this PDF about the 2000 Tuscaloosa tornado that pohnpei previously posted the link to, and I must say I'm appalled.

This is what happens when you let people with ZERO prior knowledge of the F or EF scale conduct damage surveys. It's essentially on the same level as the ASCE's "engineering study" of Joplin where they found "no evidence of EF5 winds"... just with a different tornado and equally a load of crap.

The entire argument is basically that this tornado was actually an F2, rather than an F4. While I suppose I wouldn't be surprised if it got an EF3 rating these days, what really set me off is where they include a photo of a slab-built, brick veneer home completely leveled, and say it's F2 damage because some neighboring homes visible in the background were left standing. In what world does this make sense? There is never, NEVER an excuse where a site built home leveled or swept away should EVER be rated lower than EF3 (doing so breaks the constraints of the EF scale) UNLESS it is an unanchored, unreinforced block foundation home, which this house clearly wasn't.

Here's the photo of the home they said was "F2 damage"
Tuscaloosa-F4-damage-home.JPG

Stuff like this is what sets horrible precedents for future damage surveys, along with cases like La Plata and Vilonia.
 
Messages
473
Reaction score
144
Location
texas
I was digging through some earlier posts in this thread and came across this PDF about the 2000 Tuscaloosa tornado that pohnpei previously posted the link to, and I must say I'm appalled.

This is what happens when you let people with ZERO prior knowledge of the F or EF scale conduct damage surveys. It's essentially on the same level as the ASCE's "engineering study" of Joplin where they found "no evidence of EF5 winds"... just with a different tornado and equally a load of crap.

The entire argument is basically that this tornado was actually an F2, rather than an F4. While I suppose I wouldn't be surprised if it got an EF3 rating these days, what really set me off is where they include a photo of a slab-built, brick veneer home completely leveled, and say it's F2 damage because some neighboring homes visible in the background were left standing. In what world does this make sense? There is never, NEVER an excuse where a site built home leveled or swept away should EVER be rated lower than EF3 (doing so breaks the constraints of the EF scale) UNLESS it is an unanchored, unreinforced block foundation home, which this house clearly wasn't.

Here's the photo of the home they said was "F2 damage"
View attachment 14990

Stuff like this is what sets horrible precedents for future damage surveys, along with cases like La Plata and Vilonia.
dont forget bowling-green. EF2 rated SLABBED ANCHORED DUPLEX
 
Messages
473
Reaction score
144
Location
texas
this is like saying that the black creek tornado shouldn't have been rated mid range EF4 because there were almost entirely intact homes right next to a slabbed one on both sides.
 
Messages
473
Reaction score
144
Location
texas
Let's not forget the "EF2 damage" from Granger as well...
12878_a61fd9650b6a0c9144cf57770f97d098.jpg
im not a fan of the scale breaking but even to me i don't think EF3 winds occurred here. all of the trees and vegetation appear to be completely intact. the debris impact argument has some merit for granger because of contextual damage. its also possible the home was very poorly constructed....
 
Messages
473
Reaction score
144
Location
texas
im not a fan of the scale breaking but even to me i don't think EF3 winds occurred here. all of the trees and vegetation appear to be completely intact. the debris impact argument has some merit for granger because of contextual damage. its also possible the home was very poorly constructed....
i could definitely be wrong though. im just used to seeing heavy vegetation damage with all EF3+ strength tornadoes.
 
Messages
1,699
Reaction score
2,060
Location
Missouri
Let's not forget the "EF2 damage" from Granger as well...
12878_a61fd9650b6a0c9144cf57770f97d098.jpg
Don't forget Belmont, SD:

 

TH2002

Member
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
1,982
Location
California, United States
Special Affiliations
  1. SKYWARN® Volunteer
im not a fan of the scale breaking but even to me i don't think EF3 winds occurred here. all of the trees and vegetation appear to be completely intact. the debris impact argument has some merit for granger because of contextual damage. its also possible the home was very poorly constructed....
Even though the contextual damage definitely isn't indicative of a violent tornado, it's nothing that should negate an EF3 rating. I'm pretty confident that this house took a direct hit from the tornado's inner core or a subvortex, note the sheet metal bent around the tree to the left pointing towards the center of the tornado.

View attachment 14991
in fact im pretty sure i see the culprit.....i don't think that originated from the home site....
Just saying "oh, there's some objects on the slab I don't immediately recognize, the EF2 rating was appropriate" isn't a good way to approach damage surveying in my opinion. There has to be overwhelming evidence of an impact from large farm machinery, a vehicle or something else heavy enough to significantly compromise the structural integrity of the house, like the one home in Pilger.
 
Messages
473
Reaction score
144
Location
texas
Even though the contextual damage definitely isn't indicative of a violent tornado, it's nothing that should negate an EF3 rating. I'm pretty confident that this house took a direct hit from the tornado's inner core or a subvortex, note the sheet metal bent around the tree to the left pointing towards the center of the tornado.


Just saying "oh, there's some objects on the slab I don't immediately recognize, the EF2 rating was appropriate" isn't a good way to approach damage surveying in my opinion. There has to be overwhelming evidence of an impact from large farm machinery, a vehicle or something else heavy enough to significantly compromise the structural integrity of the house, like the one home in Pilger.
this is such a strange occurrence i checked it on the DAT and remembered it had anchor bolts and there's shattered concrete. i've seen weird tornado patterns but i've never seen something like this before....parts of the roof were deposited on one side of the homes foundation while the rest of it seemed to have been blown into a pile rather than scattered long distances. how did this happen??? its so weird.....
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • tornado examiner
Top