Significant Tornado Events

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

I’m sure you’ve realized by now it’s like carrying water in a basket. R/Tornado (and all of reddit for that matter) is an absolute dumpster fire for any kind of discussion involving the tiniest bit of nuance. Just a complete cesspool. In between people taking photos of just average clouds and asking if it’s a funnel cloud and kids attempting to masquerade as “engineers”, it’s just a complete void of any kind of critical thinking or analysis.

Honestly, where is patience in this world anymore? The same old, arrogant people with the "IF YOU THINK IT'S A DI, GET A DEGREE!!!" The most unoriginal and snarky paper over the cracks response. That whole sub is a dumpfire and I've tried to make it better with my occasional posts when i have good content. I've dealt with a lot the past few days personally, that includes friends and any attempt to provide helpful information just ends up in a swing for the dark and people who can't get off their high horses. They think they know better! Nobody's perfect but they have a cliche of dismissing evidence way too much over there. There are some level headed people in there for the most part but it feels more like they intend to stay controversy. I try to be patient and not cross boundaries but man, the amount of ignorant responses wowed me. I used poor grammar once in a Parkersburg post and i got down voted to hell for it. It's truly amazing.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

This is basically me anytime i open a notification to the post

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

But i am taking this thread off topic, so maybe I'll restart the Mayfield convo here. Are there any other overshadowed EF5 DIs in Mayfield or any of the path for that matter. Also, @buckeye05, i think you'd be interested in another EF1 that did scouring. The Tylertown tornado a few days ago briefly scoured the ground. Further proving how inaccurate it tends to be when analysing tornadoes.

https://nitter.net/brianemfinger/status/2009720769639743772#min

 

[ColdFront]

Honestly, where is patience in this world anymore? The same old, arrogant people with the "IF YOU THINK IT'S A DI, GET A DEGREE!!!" The most unoriginal and snarky paper over the cracks response. That whole sub is a dumpfire and I've tried to make it better with my occasional posts when i have good content. I've dealt with a lot the past few days personally, that includes friends and any attempt to provide helpful information just ends up in a swing for the dark and people who can't get off their high horses. They think they know better! Nobody's perfect but they have a cliche of dismissing evidence way too much over there. There are some level headed people in there for the most part but it feels more like they intend to stay controversy. I try to be patient and not cross boundaries but man, the amount of ignorant responses wowed me. I used poor grammar once in a Parkersburg post and i got down voted to hell for it. It's truly amazing.

This isn’t me blowing smoke up your @s$, but I do lurk on r/tornado from time to time.

Your post and accompanying picture with proof on there about finding the end of the Hackleburg tornado and the picture of it roping out, to me, was by far the best findings/post I’ve seen there. The morons there didn’t seem to properly grasp the significance of that. Just as a tornado history nerd, that was an awesome find.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

This isn’t me blowing smoke up your @s$, but I do lurk on r/tornado from time to time.

Your post and accompanying picture with proof on there about finding the end of the Hackleburg tornado and the picture of it roping out, to me, was by far the best findings/post I’ve seen there. The morons there didn’t seem to properly grasp the significance of that. Just as a tornado history nerd, that was an awesome find.

Man, i appreciate it. I did feel too that it didn't really get the significant attention it deserved. That was a historic photo considering what the same funnel had did just 40 minutes earlier. TRX was amazed with it and i think that was enough for me. That sub really does have a lack of content to it.

Regarding how i somehow found that photo of Hackleburg, i believe i was searching for videos or photos of any tornado from that day i could find. There was a pattern of some listing the road they filmed it on. My expression when i realised that location matched up with the Hackleburg path was absurd. I wish if NWS Huntsville noticed my photo, and it mightve been a reason it was shortened on the DAT. I've given up on finding rare tornado media but there is something i seen on the sub a while ago that took me back. You'll need to give me a minute.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

Completely obscure video that consists of photos showing Joplin touching down. By far the most obscure media I've seen of the tornado by far, although i assisted in that video that made rounds a while back from someone's backyard but they copyright striked it. I'll have to try get back into the rhythm and hopefully uncover new media but i felt this didn't get as much attention as it deserved.

 

[ColdFront]

Completely obscure video that consists of photos showing Joplin touching down. By far the most obscure media I've seen of the tornado by far, although i assisted in that video that made rounds a while back from someone's backyard but they copyright striked it. I'll have to try get back into the rhythm and hopefully uncover new media but i felt this didn't get as much attention as it deserved.

If there is any place that will properly appreciate it, it will be this thread. Great find.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

If there is any place that will properly appreciate it, it will be this thread. Great find.

Oh, this is someone else's find. It got like 10 comments. They go by TwisterArchive on YouTube. I thought this was a wildly impressive find, given the lack of anything relating to Joplin except May 22nd in the description. I really appreciate it, this place is what inspired me to dig for historic media. There are a few other finds I have that i should dig up.

Once again, something like this not getting the attention it deserves really quirks me. We do have footage of Joplin touching down but obscure photos are just very.. intriguing to find. There's always different angles we didn't think existed of certain tornadoes. I just wish we had something that could magically identify similar photos and match together and also perfectly examine posts for the perfect keywords. Search engines being really poor to me is the reason i just burned out.

 

[Aaron Rider]

Something else that's unrelated is that for every single "YouTube documentary" on 4/27/2011 or even Garland Texas on 12/26/2015

Not one person has covered the Holly springs Mississippi supercell. The significance of that event occuring in December warrants it.

I've been off the site for over a month so I apologize if this video was already shared

 

[buckeye05]

But i am taking this thread off topic, so maybe I'll restart the Mayfield convo here. Are there any other overshadowed EF5 DIs in Mayfield or any of the path for that matter. Also, @buckeye05, i think you'd be interested in another EF1 that did scouring. The Tylertown tornado a few days ago briefly scoured the ground. Further proving how inaccurate it tends to be when analysing tornadoes.

https://nitter.net/brianemfinger/status/2009720769639743772#min

I saw that. So that isn't ground scouring at all. At first I thought it was a debris impact mark, but its not. What we are actually seeing is low-end trenching (think Philadelphia, MS). This is a phenomenon separate from ground scouring, and can occur at intensities as low as EF1 (Mauk, GA), and is not a reliable high-end indicator. However, actual grass scouring, which is when surface vegetation is blasted from the earth leaving behind a smooth path of bare soil is a reliable high-end indicator. It's a bit confusing.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

I saw that. So that isn't ground scouring at all. At first I thought it was a debris impact mark, but its not. What we are actually seeing is low-end trenching (think Philadelphia, MS). This is a phenomenon separate from ground scouring, and can occur at intensities as low as EF1 (Mauk, GA), and is not a reliable high-end indicator. However, actual grass scouring, which is when surface vegetation is blasted from the earth leaving behind a smooth path of bare soil is a reliable high-end indicator. It's a bit confusing.

My apologies for the inaccuracies. Essentially, it still goes hand in hand with trenching and isn't really a reliable high end indicator unless there is high end damage with the tornado to at least have a estimate that violent winds mightve occurred with the trenching. Yeah, i get mixed up a lot with scouring/trenching. Thanks for the insight!

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

I saw that. So that isn't ground scouring at all. At first I thought it was a debris impact mark, but its not. What we are actually seeing is low-end trenching (think Philadelphia, MS). This is a phenomenon separate from ground scouring, and can occur at intensities as low as EF1 (Mauk, GA), and is not a reliable high-end indicator. However, actual grass scouring, which is when surface vegetation is blasted from the earth leaving behind a smooth path of bare soil is a reliable high-end indicator. It's a bit confusing.

If talking grass scouring, would that mean Smithville just as a example? I believe within a few minutes of being in the ground, it did exactly what you defined grass scouring as. Multiple forests had a trek of bare soil left behind, and the grass was blasted basically.

 

[buckeye05]

If talking grass scouring, would that mean Smithville just as a example? I believe within a few minutes of being in the ground, it did exactly what you defined grass scouring as. Multiple forests had a trek of bare soil left behind, and the grass was blasted basically.

If you're talking about what happened right after it exited the forest as it rapidly intensified while it approached town, that wasn't grass scouring either because it was a foot deep and you can see the trench it left behind in that field in the aerial image. That was also trenching. Trenching has depth and creates a "trough" as it digs up it the ground. Smithville did produce grass scouring elsewhere, but it was within the town itself, where yards had their lawns scoured and soil was exposed in some areas, but the ground wasn't "dug up" there. Grass scouring usually doesn't have much depth to it, unless in some extreme cases where a few inches of topsoil gets removed.

Basically this is how to separate the two:

Trenching: Deep, chunky plowing up of the earth that is usually patchy in nature and does not follow a uniform smooth path. Can happen in lower intensity tornadoes. Creates deep trenches/troughs in the earth as the sod and grass gets peeled back in chunks. Philadelphia, MS is an example.

Grass scouring: Smooth, uniform removal of all grass and surface vegetation that follows the path of the tornado, leaving behind a uniform linear path of bare dirt. Is typically not very deep, and is not chunky or patchy looking. Only happens in high-end violent tornadoes. Bridge Creek, OK is an example.

 

[slenker]

I saw that. So that isn't ground scouring at all. At first I thought it was a debris impact mark, but its not. What we are actually seeing is low-end trenching (think Philadelphia, MS). This is a phenomenon separate from ground scouring, and can occur at intensities as low as EF1 (Mauk, GA), and is not a reliable high-end indicator. However, actual grass scouring, which is when surface vegetation is blasted from the earth leaving behind a smooth path of bare soil is a reliable high-end indicator. It's a bit confusing.

I understand that what we call "trenching" is definitely not a reliable indicator of high end intensity and whatnot, at least in general, but I am very strongly of the opinion that the specific instance of trenching we saw from Philadelphia was the result of extreme intensity and I wouldn't call it "low-end" (I know you didn't mean that Philadelphia's instance was low-end in any way, either) There's just nothing quite like Philadelphia's trenches, they're very unique in breadth and depth. Plus the image of the rootballed and debarked large tree with the trenching is also extremely impressive to me.

I imagine surrounding context to the trenching is what matters when it comes to discerning whether or not it came from extreme intensity.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

If you're talking about what happened right after it exited the forest as it rapidly intensified while it approached town, that wasn't grass scouring either because it was a foot deep and you can see the trench it left behind in that field in the aerial image. That was also trenching. Trenching has depth and creates a "trough" as it digs up it the ground. Smithville did produce grass scouring elsewhere, but it was within the town itself, where yards had their lawns scoured and soil was exposed in some areas, but the ground wasn't "dug up" there. Grass scouring usually doesn't have much depth to it, unless in some extreme cases where a few inches of topsoil gets removed.

Basically this is how to separate the two:

Trenching: Deep, chunky plowing up of the earth that is usually patchy in nature and does not follow a uniform smooth path. Can happen in lower intensity tornadoes. Creates deep trenches/troughs in the earth as the sod and grass gets peeled back in chunks. Philadelphia, MS is an example.

Grass scouring: Smooth, uniform removal of all grass and surface vegetation that follows the path of the tornado, leaving behind a uniform linear path of bare dirt. Is typically not very deep, and is not chunky or patchy looking. Only happens in high-end violent tornadoes. Bridge Creek, OK is an example.

Ah, appreciate the deep dive. I'm pretty sure I get what you mean now, I actually do remember seeing a damage photo in Bridge Creek with a long swath of smooth grass scouring. Thanks for explaining it!

 

[buckeye05]

I understand that what we call "trenching" is definitely not a reliable indicator of high end intensity and whatnot, at least in general, but I am very strongly of the opinion that the specific instance of trenching we saw from Philadelphia was the result of extreme intensity and I wouldn't call it "low-end" (I know you didn't mean that Philadelphia's instance was low-end in any way, either) There's just nothing quite like Philadelphia's trenches, they're very unique in breadth and depth. Plus the image of the rootballed and debarked large tree with the trenching is also extremely impressive to me.

I imagine surrounding context to the trenching is what matters when it comes to discerning whether or not it came from extreme intensity.

The Philadelphia tornado itself wasn't low-end, but the ground damage it caused is simply not a reliable indicator. Look up the Mauk, GA trenching photo. An EF1 did that. Now just imagine if an EF3 or EF4 went through that same field. It would have looked similar to Philadelphia. See what I mean? The root-balling that occurred is probably more conclusive than the trenching.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

I understand that what we call "trenching" is definitely not a reliable indicator of high end intensity and whatnot, at least in general, but I am very strongly of the opinion that the specific instance of trenching we saw from Philadelphia was the result of extreme intensity and I wouldn't call it "low-end" (I know you didn't mean that Philadelphia's instance was low-end in any way, either) There's just nothing quite like Philadelphia's trenches, they're very unique in breadth and depth. Plus the image of the rootballed and debarked large tree with the trenching is also extremely impressive to me.

I imagine surrounding context to the trenching is what matters when it comes to discerning whether or not it came from extreme intensity.

I mean the ground was saturated with Philadelphia, so i can't help but think that definitely aided in such deep trenching but it was still likely a violent tornado, just didn't take the extremely intense winds many think. I'm very inbetween on it being a EF5, even despite this feat because of my reason listed.

 

[slenker]

The Philadelphia tornado itself wasn't low-end, but the ground damage it caused is simply not a reliable indicator. Look up the Mauk, GA trenching photo. An EF1 did that. Now just imagine if an EF3 or EF4 went through that same field. It would have looked similar to Philadelphia. See what I mean? The root-balling that occurred is probably more conclusive than the trenching.

I overall agree with it not being a reliable indicator in general and I remember the images of Mauk. The only thing I’m saying is that Philadelphia’s example was far more violent and complete than any other example of trenching I can think of, and it was very unique in that sense. It seems like there’s a significant difference in the intensity of the trenching between Philadelphia and others. If an EF3-EF4 tornado was capable of trenching to the degree that Philadelphia did, wouldn’t it be a far more common occurrence to see trenching of that fashion for tornadoes in the south?

The only other examples of trenching I can think of that come close to what Philadelphia did happened from violent tornadoes on 4/27/11, which includes Smithville and Cordova. You could arguably say the Mayfield tornado did some intense trenching too but that one is much iffier. To me, though, that shows that trenching of that breadth and ferocity specifically may be reserved for violent tornadoes, unless there’s very good reason to doubt the quality of soil.

I mean the ground was saturated with Philadelphia, so i can't help but think that definitely aided in such deep trenching but it was still likely a violent tornado, just didn't take the extremely intense winds many think. I'm very inbetween on it being a EF5, even despite this feat because of my reason listed.

Perhaps the ground was saturated, but Philadelphia was definitely an EF5 and comfortably so in my opinion. A mobile home was launched about 300 feet? (could be 300 yards, I don’t remember) without making contact with the ground, and that led to the tornado’s three sole fatalities. Plus the large / completely debarked / rootballed tree that I’m not sure of the origin of being coincident with the imagery of the trenching.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

I overall agree with it not being a reliable indicator in general and I remember the images of Mauk. The only thing I’m saying is that Philadelphia’s example was far more violent and complete than any other example of trenching I can think of, and it was very unique in that sense. It seems like there’s a significant difference in the intensity of the trenching between Philadelphia and others. If an EF3-EF4 tornado was capable of trenching to the degree that Philadelphia did, wouldn’t it be a far more common occurrence to see trenching of that fashion for tornadoes in the south?

The only other examples of trenching I can think of that come close to what Philadelphia did happened from violent tornadoes on 4/27/11, which includes Smithville and Cordova. You could arguably say the Mayfield tornado did some intense trenching too but that one is much iffier. To me, though, that shows that trenching of that breadth and ferocity specifically may be reserved for violent tornadoes, unless there’s very good reason to doubt the quality of soil.

Perhaps the ground was saturated, but Philadelphia was definitely an EF5 and comfortably so in my opinion. A mobile home was launched about 300 feet? (could be 300 yards, I don’t remember) without making contact with the ground, and that led to the tornado’s three sole fatalities. Plus the large / completely debarked / rootballed tree that I’m not sure of the origin of being coincident with the imagery of the trenching.

The rootballing would be my candidate. In all honesty, i really haven't deep dived a whole lot on Philadelphia but rootballing is typically seen in high end tornadoes so i suppose that's a decent chance to make. If it did reach EF5 intensity, i wouldn't say it breached relatively extreme winds. Still a very violent tornado at its peak though, i personally believe the trenching is more a false alarm for its genuine intensity.

 

[WeathermanLeprechaun]

I overall agree with it not being a reliable indicator in general and I remember the images of Mauk. The only thing I’m saying is that Philadelphia’s example was far more violent and complete than any other example of trenching I can think of, and it was very unique in that sense. It seems like there’s a significant difference in the intensity of the trenching between Philadelphia and others. If an EF3-EF4 tornado was capable of trenching to the degree that Philadelphia did, wouldn’t it be a far more common occurrence to see trenching of that fashion for tornadoes in the south?

The only other examples of trenching I can think of that come close to what Philadelphia did happened from violent tornadoes on 4/27/11, which includes Smithville and Cordova. You could arguably say the Mayfield tornado did some intense trenching too but that one is much iffier. To me, though, that shows that trenching of that breadth and ferocity specifically may be reserved for violent tornadoes, unless there’s very good reason to doubt the quality of soil.

Perhaps the ground was saturated, but Philadelphia was definitely an EF5 and comfortably so in my opinion. A mobile home was launched about 300 feet? (could be 300 yards, I don’t remember) without making contact with the ground, and that led to the tornado’s three sole fatalities. Plus the large / completely debarked / rootballed tree that I’m not sure of the origin of being coincident with the imagery of the trenching.

Sorry for a second response here but Gans, OK from 1/22/1957 was similar to Philadelphia.

The Gans, Oklahoma Tornado on January 22, 1957 produced a very intense scouring swath. It would randomly dig holes in the ground at random spots, similar to what Cordova did, and Philadelphia on a smaller scale.
View attachment 5518
View attachment 5519View attachment 5520View attachment 5521
View attachment 5522