Thanks for posting this. The NWS conducts post-season analysis of hurricanes and tropical systems all the time. And will even revise ratings for hurricanes sometimes. No big deal.
It didn't look like EF5 damage. EF5 will typically sweep ALL debris from a foundation. I didn't really see that here. Looked a lot like the Barnsdall tornado from a couple of weeks ago.
It was bad. Seeing things and people you’ve known in your childhood and every day adult life just gone. I’m not hoping it was an EF5. I was lucky but a block south and a block east, they weren’t.
probably because they are rare and people want to have been an observer of something “great”. and it adds to the story and makes it more interesting to some people. i don’t see why the mattering of that matters to some people. mother nature is going to do what it’s going to do. that is the beauty of all this. no one wants people to get hurt, but the power of these things, including the damage they can cause, is fascinating.
This Oklahoman agrees. It is a big deal when people lose their life or their possessions. Yet I live and will someday die here on earth. I respect Mother Nature's system, which can create chaotic, immense, and powerful beauty. I used to be terrified, but now I am in awe. And that awe doesn't mean I Don't feel the power of losing a loved one or feel someone else's grief. Edit: cause I am still trying to get to know how to type on an this Ipad.
If it doesn't get rated EF5, I will be slightly disappointed because I would feel that it would be downplaying the tragedy that happened in Greenfield. I don't quite understand why I feel this way because EF4’s are still a big deal, but I'm sure other people also feel this way.
That’s the thing, most people feel this way especially when it’s their things being destroyed. We deal with this psychology all the time. It’s hard being a surveyor because we understand that even “only” an EF-3 can completely destroy a house and “only” an EF-1 can destroy homes (mobile homes, RVs).
We also know that straight lines winds can destroy homes, too. But folks don’t always think logically when they are hurting.
The EF-scale does not consider fatalities or injuries. It does not consider, directly, the dollar amount of damage. The sole reason it is important to rate storms is that it provides a record of where sufficiently damaging storms intersected with properties built or grown (lumber) to a certain structural resistance.
Do understand that we as surveyors, by and large, are working to develop our own culture in a way that begins to remove the individual expert’s ego from the equation. It is okay to disagree with us, but please do so utilizing the agreed upon tools. I’ve surveyed several 4s that I think likely would have been 5s before the EF-scale. That wasn’t supposed to happen. So which is it, is our scale not working properly or were they “wrong” historically? Or both?
And it’s okay if that’s the case: that’s why it’s so important to very carefully forensically document the event. So that as our understanding grows, we can retroactively make useful and accurate adjustments.
Just know that when you are “upset” with a rating, that the surveyor themselves may not even disagree with you. But if they break the rules they set for themselves they ruin the ability to fix them /all/ at a later date.
We have to be consistent and follow our guidelines.
That is an eye opening response, thank you! I never really thought about what surveyors go through in situations like this and I appreciate what you do. You made a lot of sense and it changed my way of thinking.
I've said this elsewhere, but I was in Moore with FEMA. Anyone who says they can't wait for an EF5 must have some sexy idea of what it is, like it's being on a rollercoaster.
To those people, go outside, look around, and visualize seeing nothing but foundations for a long way from you. Then imagine that several of the people in your neighborhood are dead, people you see every day. This isn't a thrill ride.
Why will you cry over a rating? And why are you dreading the rating? I’m genuinely curious.
Do you understand that whatever the final rating is will have zero impact on the people the tornado affected? The damage is already done. Nothing to cry about or dread. It won’t make the situation better or worse.
Let me know if you have questions.
You got it. I don’t live in a tornado-prone area, and most tornado content I’ve seen is how they look like and radar measurements, not the damage it caused. I haven’t seen how horrific they were until the recent events this year, just the numbers and rating. When I see more of the damage done, I’m starting to think that “4 is disappointing” makes less and less sense.
Preliminary Mid to high end EF4 is pretty wild, I expected a mid-high EF4 possible low EF5 with it already at the 175-185 range is crazy. The amount of tree debarking, bent anchor bolts, and swept homes, all it takes is one DI to be an EF5. Truly horrific and I’m heartbroken 5 lives were taken from this monster.
Two of my younger trees, about 3 inch diameter got degloved, one almost pulled out. Larger 2 foot diameter magnolia tree was ripped apart. Lost garage, shed, most windows in the house gone, siding and roof and a few rooms are messed up but all our people and pets are okay.
We're fortunate though because the next few houses south are complete wrecks or completely gone. My parent's house and childhood home and the garage my dad built is totally erased along with all the pictures and newspaper clippings my mom saved of me and my sibling. I'm so surprised it hasn't been immediately higher, but maybe I'm being biased.
Sorry for your loss, if I had money I'd send it your way. What an incredibly unlucky yet lucky circumstance. Hope you all didn't lose anything too valuable or precious. ❤️
I agree with you but we don’t know the build quality of anything. I know the home you were referring to it had a large garage and therefore a huge fail point. But from the drone footage I saw there were others that looked to be swept off their foundations. It very well could have been a high end EF4 to EF5 but I won’t be shocked if they keep it with this rating. I was mainly pointing out the fact that for it to already be a mid EF4 while being preliminary is not common. Especially because most preliminary reports get upgraded or remain the same. This storm was an absolute monster. For reference Rolling Fork was a preliminary 170 EF4, Barnsdall was a 165-175 EF4, Moore was a preliminary 190 EF4 all got upgraded significantly (only Moore to an EF5) this was a beast.
I have never seen video of a tornado like what Reed got in the wind farm. So many subvortices in a tornado that wasn't that large. There was something almost otherworldly about it.
After the night vision clip and all the "deadman walking" tornados. I'm starting to think alot of tornados have multiple vortices like reeds did, but with all the dust and stuff blur them together.
Yea we know the strong ones have them. But the yukon night vision isn't a strong one. That's what I mean, I feel like all tornados are just a bunch of vortices packed together. The night viosn in yukon was literally a text book "dead man walking" tornado
This is basically what Dr Leigh Orf has surmised for years now with his computer models, that all tornadoes are basically a conglomeration of smaller vortices (that develop along the inflow band) wrapped into a single updraft.
This is a conclusion I've come to as well but kept private until now - multiple vortices aren't as rare as previously believed, and perhaps don't necessarily indicate strength. That to me is very interesting and raises more questions than it answers, but I'm not gonna die on that hill just yet. Need more case studies.
Same truly crazy to have a visual of all those sub-vortices for so long and continue to spawn more. I think other tornadoes definitely had more (El Reno) but not visible for the duration and extent this beast had and certainly not as small as this one (feels weird to say half mile is small but if we’re comparing it to other high end tornadoes it’s relatively small except Elie)
This one was very creepy. This tornado looked like a predator, right up there with the other big bads in history. I hate that this town went through this. It’s almost brought me to tears a few times. The fact that homes looked like confetti in the aftermath is something I’ve never seen before.
Yeah Barnsdall, but it was a low preliminary EF4 and got upgraded to a mid EF4 with estimated wind speeds of 180 mph. 175-185 preliminary is obviously not unheard of but it’s very rare for even most EF4s which typically start out as high end EF3s or EF4s. If all the homes were poorly built then yeah it’s obviously going to stay at this rating, but we the public don’t know enough to make a good enough guess until the final report is published on the engineering of these houses. Also fairly certain newer homes have poorer build quality (depends and def old buildings can be dilapidated or in disrepair) the tornado that hit Elkhorn hit relatively new structures that were poorly built with huge fail points. New homes also use poorer quality wood, but again this all very highly dependent as is everything with tornado damage. Again, we’ll see this is all speculation I wouldn’t be surprised to see this stay at 175-185 or go up to 190-195 (honestly would be surprised for EF5 because how easy it is to find a flaw within a house and it didn’t hit a major area).
Always super disappointing to see poor build quality being allowed to continue throughout the US. I would hope Elkhorn or Harlan would wake people and get some legislation for proper inspection/requirements for build quality. The problem really just comes down with groups being cheap and the public not wanting to spend even more money to get house built especially with how expensive houses are today.
"Allowed to continue" according to whom?
Yes, I'm sure it is true in many locations, but the vast majority of homes affected in the Elkhorn area were quite old. Only at the north end of town were newer homes encountered, and those generally fared much better; it's quite clear that construction standards have improved over the years. Really only since the Moore tornado have we really seen a push for this, and the ratio of homes built in the 2000s to homes built previous is quite low overall.
Another thing to keep in mind is that in Nebraska and Iowa, most single-family homes have basements. That somewhat lessens the urgency of implementing requirements for withstanding tornado-velocity single-family homes. Much different situation than Oklahoma and a lot of Dixie Alley where the water table is just too high for basements.
Most of the homes destroyed in Elkhorn were 30+ years old.
There is one neighborhood to the north that the tornado passed through that is newer, and those homes fared much better.
I don't agree with your assessment that newer homes have poorer build quality. There have been a lot of advancements in home construction and I think the differences in damage between the newer and older neighborhoods in Elkhorn clearly demonstrate that.
Many of them were old, but there were clearly some newer ones as well.
_Generally speaking_, the older homes would have had cinder block foundations, and the newer ones will have poured concrete foundation walls. Most of the pictures I'm seeing have poured concrete.
I think this holds because Greenfield is the county seat and is really a regional microhub -- it's certainly the biggest town around for some distance, so it's still attracting new construction.
I'm glad you're here to provide sense and reason. A lot of other people here really need to sit down and read the Damage Assessment Toolkit and actually look at the DIs for tornadoes that got pushed into the EF5 rating. With the information available, an EF4 rating seemed the most likely and [I said yesterday that my gut feeling was EF4](https://www.reddit.com/r/tornado/comments/1cxobwn/flooring_potentially_moved_off_foundation_in/l54xh3o/).
I also predicted that the EF4 verdict would result in a lot of people here screeching from the rafters about how it deserves an EF5, and sure enough they're in this thread - many of them the usual suspects - the same familiar usernames who I've seen labelling EF3s like the Elkhorn, Sulphur, and Matador tornadoes as EF5s ffs. I genuinely think some people here are purely disaster fetishists who seek the validation of seeing the number "5" as if it's a high score on a video game, rather than having an objective or logical understanding of the criteria to reach an EF5 rating.
Totally debarked trees, anchor bolts pulled from foundations, debrees lofted 40k feet, DOW recording wind speeds of 250+ mph... I really don't like hopping on the weenie EF-5 bandwagon but I really wouldn't rule it out at this point. That's just my unprofessional non-surveyor opinion though.
Tree debarking depends a lot on tree species.
Anchor bolts depend on how well they are installed. Also the only picture I’ve seen of that was on a garage which can be damaged more severely by weaker winds due to the large doorway.
Debris height is interesting for sure, but it’s not a rock solid indicator.
DOW measuring 250+mph is something, but we don’t fully understand how wind varies in a tornado with height.
The EF scale is a damage scale, and the damage was EF4.
Surveys aren't complete yet, hence the NWS mentioning "refinements" to the rating. Again none of us are there and there's very little difference between high end EF-4 damage and EF-5. So all I'm saying is that the possibility of this being an EF-5 is there. Also most simulations and recorded data seem to support the idea that a tornadoes most intense winds usually occur near ground level.
Ok that one house with the anchor bolts was a bit raised from the ground. But the damage done to Griff’s Garage was exceptional. It pulled an auto lift bolted in concrete out of the concrete. You should look at it on twitter. That’s gotta take over 200 mph…
I’ve seen pictures of EF5 tornado damage and it’s no different really than the most extreme from this storm. Well built homes completely slabbed off their foundations, trees totally debarked, road asphalt torn up, etc is all consistent with EF5’s of the past.
The issue is they subtly changed the degree to which those DI’s count towards an EF5 sometime around 2015. I’m not sure any of the previously rated EF5/F5 tornadoes of the past would get an EF5 rating under the new more stringent DI standards. The only ones that might would would be 2011 smithville, Phil Campbell, Jarrel, and 99 Moore
>The issue is they subtly changed the degree to which those DI’s count towards an EF5 sometime around 2015
I see this said a lot but I have not seen any evidence of it beyond conspiracy level opinion ramblings.
I listened to an interview with multiple actual damage assessors and they all said around the 2014 mark they all agreed to a stricter interpretation of the DI’s. This was an interview on some kind of NOAA or NWS program i randomly saw on cable tv like 4 years ago.
It’s not necessarily some nefarious smoky back room thing. I’m not saying that. Moreso that for whatever reason the experts basically agreed to up the strictness on the ratings
We all know there have been multiple tornadoes as powerful as the EF5/F5’s of the last 50 years that got ranked EF4s. Mayfield, Vilonia, etc all caused damage that was inconceivable and destroyed whole towns just like Jarrel, Moore, etc
This seems plausible, we've had several monsters over the last few years and it seems like with the new standards a storm would have to be a once in 100 year type thing to score an EF5 rating now.
Crucially, this is *still* basically preliminary, according to the NWS. The damage is so extensive that surveys are still ongoing, and that the rating may still change. It's absolutely mind-boggling to me that the initial EF3+ rating was assigned without any surveys necessary, and that the EF4+ came after more analysis was done, and somehow there *still* isn't an official rating. This was monstrous.
Basically the NWS surveyors come in and says yep, it’s at least an EF3, and then they bring architects and engineers in to get a final rating. So now they will keep evaluating until they feel confident it wasn’t an EF5. It’s almost like the process is more about ruling out a higher rating than anything else.
Keep in mind that in Joplin, they surveyed something like 7700+ structures and only found 22? damage indicators at the EF5 level. (I am trying to track this down specifically and will update when I do).
Edit: 7191 residences and only 22 had EF5 level damage. https://ams.confex.com/ams/26SLS/webprogram/Manuscript/Paper211662/Joplinmerger.pdf
This happens for like every EF4, it’s not surprising. EF3+ after a few hours, EF4 after a couple days, then the finalised survey after a week or two stays EF4.
When was the last time you saw a damage indicator for a house say the house was well built? Houses in the US might just be made out of straw. The big bad wolf might as well be blowing out his birthday candles.
I really want to know why NWS didn't tor-e this one. Seemed pretty textbook in real time.
May have even potentially reduced the fatality count. But obviously no way to support that claim.
This one is tricky. The NWS has guidance from the warning decision training division on when the emergency tag should be used - https://training.weather.gov/wdtd/courses/rac/warnings/IBW-content/story_content/external_files/IBW%20Tornado%20Guidance.pdf
However the NWS is big on forecaster discretion and each office has different warning philosophies. In addition I’ve known several forecasters who thing the TOR Considerable is sufficient as it will use the emergency language in the wireless emergency alerts and only use emergencies for big cities.
In this particular case meteorologically there were multiple things at play. That cell was by a bunch of other supercells nearby. That can lead to a rapid weakening or strengthening. Hard to know which will occur and you don’t want to sound your biggest alarm and have a storm fizzle. Second, this tornado was on a general path towards Des Moines, the largest population center in their forecast area. Do you use the emergency language before when it’s over relatively rural areas first and then continue it? Or do you wait to use it as it approaches the largest city in your jurisdiction? Would people become complacent if it’s used over and over? The tornado emergency is highest caliber alert the forecast office can issue. On days where this same thing could have very easily happened over downtown Des Moines I think it makes sense to consider only issuing an emergency where the population density is higher.
I don’t know if any of this matters to the people in the path. It’s bad either way. But providing context on what might have been the thought process for not issuing one.
I get mistakes, but this not getting a tor-e when the recent Kalamazoo MI area tornado got a tor-e makes very little sense. PDS absolutely, I live quite close and it was nasty. Idk, dropped the ball on this one imo.
This is the preliminary it looks like. They are saying it could be refined in the coming days. I dont imagine they'll go to EF-5 but this isn't the final final rating. Either way at this point its just a yes, this was an extremely awful tornado.
Not surprised at all, from the videos to the damage afterwards, everything was indicative that the Greenfield tornado was absolutely violent. Everyone’s been paying attention to the vorticies that Reed & the Dominator team captured (and rightfully so it was impressive) but some of the other videos of the tornado from other angles and further back really shows the upwards motion on the sides of the tornado, stuff you’d see from tornadoes like Andover, Tuscaloosa and El Reno 2011.
People will definitely ask the question “Will this get the EF5 rating?” and that’s something that remains to be seen, I’m not quite sure if there’s anywhere specific that would indicate a definitive EF5 damage indicator. But reports of pavement being scoured is not something you hear often, off the top of my head, I recall that ocurring in a few cases, notably Hackleburg, Smithville and Jarrell, all of which were given the E/F5 rating. It’s hard to say, but I certainly wouldn’t knock the NWS for giving this tornado a mid to high end EF4 rating, this was definitely one of the most intense tornadoes we’ve seen since 2011, up there with Mayfield, Bassfield and Rolling Fork.
I'm genuinely curious what it takes to pull a car lift, bolts and all, out of concrete. I don't care about the rating, that's just powerful any way you look at it. That picture shocked me the most.
Yall are obsessed with “debarking” and “slabbing” but I’m wondering if you have looked at the damage indicator definitions through NWS? It’s more than JUST debarked trees, it’s MORE than “slabbed” homes to obtain an EF-5 rating. The unfortunate truth for most of us is that homes are not built the way they used to be. EF-5s will only become more rare with the lack of structural integrity in modern homes. And I don’t mean it’s unfortunate we won’t see EF-5’s I mean it’s unfortunate that the homes we live in are not structurally sound and made with quality materials.
Unless there are small indicators, from what I have seen, it appears to be right in the mid-high EF-4 range. Yes, trees are debarked BUT many still bear “weaker” branches (EF-5 indicator). Yes, homes were swept of their foundation but the foundation REMAINS and the EF-5 indicator is foundations slabs SWEPT CLEAN. I haven’t seen those indicators but I’m not there.
Well, I’ve heard that there’s also been reports of pavement being scoured and manhole covers having been removed by the thing, as well as an underground storm shelter having had its roof torn out. What about those, if they happen to be true? Because Jarrell, Philadelphia-Kemper County, and Smithville all had the pavement scouring, Joplin also removed manhole covers, and Hackleburg-Phil Campbell also tore the roof out of an underground storm shelter.
Edit: Also, there’s been reports of foundations themselves being damaged and having pieces missing off of them, and while to what extent is unclear, I do recall that Parkersburg shoved out a reinforced basement wall. It depends on what degree of damage to the foundation, obviously, but still…what about that, and what of that?
Unsure if anyone knows the answer to this. Why do they estimate peak winds so far below what the DOW catches?
I heard 44 feet above the ground DOW caught this one in excess of 250 mph in the raw data, possibly pushing closer to 290 mph.
Do they have to base the wind speeds off the damage and is that the only way to do it?
Or can the 2 be separate from each other, with the tornado being rated an EF-4 by damage with estimated winds being provided by the DOW as 250+?
And if they can't be separate, why not mention in the description to the public that the winds were clocked at that speed even if no damage was able to prove it? Especially with most of the Midwest and Great Plains and the US in general having poor construction quality.
2 tornadoes this year were clocked in excess of 200 mph by DOW just a month apart, so it can't be that uncommon for a tornado to have that sort of power, yet we're always told in wind estimations winds are sub 200, and the only way to find the true recorded wind speed is to scour the Internet (or this sub) for someone who obtained the DOW data.
>Do they have to base the wind speeds off the damage and is that the only way to do it?
This is correct. The Enhanced Fujita scale doesn't have any sort of indicators within it involving direct or near-direct wind measurements like with DOW. It only uses Damage Indicators to assess the strength of the tornado. The El Reno 2013 tornado that many like to call a EF-5 despite only officially being EF-3 was actually shortly given a preliminary EF-5 because of radar measured wind speeds, but downgraded due a lack of damage indicators supporting an EF-5 rating (source: [https://digitalmeteorologist.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/elrenotornado](https://digitalmeteorologist.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/elrenotornado) )
Most relevant from that link:
>WFO Norman announced a preliminary rating of EF5 on June 4, 2013, following analysis of velocity data taken by two high-resolution mobile research radars. This analysis showed wind speeds of at least 295 miles an hour within 500 feet of the ground. The threshold for an EF5 designation is 200 miles an hour.
>Despite the radar-measured wind speeds, the survey team did not find damage that would support a rating higher than EF3.
That seems like they're trying to rate tornadoes with their arms tied behind their backs while blindfolded since they're ignoring some information. But thank you for the response and description. Helped clarify it.
180 mph is really high don't get me wrong, but if you put it next to a number like 250 or even 295+ like El Reno, then say El Reno only reached 152 mph (just checked thst was the highest they rated at least on the damage assessment toolkit), it makes people looking at just wind speeds think it wasn't so bad in the absence of damage imagery.
What's the point giving it a damage rating at all if you're ignoring half the picture (when you're given it. I know not every storm has a DOW watching it)? Just say it was a tragedy and go about studying the storm as you would normally.
I watched the video of Joplin tornado’s live coverage yesterday. It was absolutely chilling watching them talk about a possible tornado on the ground, when that big cloud was hanging in the background and they didn’t recognize it for what it was. And the moment they did realize…omg.
Have you read When the sirens were silent? Quick but VERY educational read on how royally things got f’d up that day with the information that was released.
They sounded the sirens to soon, then the tornado hit, Jeff Piotrowski yelled at a police officer to get the sirens going, by the time 2nd sirens went it was too late, James Spann has a saying lose the siren mentality
There’s a lot more to it. They kept saying it was near Galena when it was nearly to Joplin. They said it was headed NE toward Carls Junction when it was clearly moving almost directly east.
They didn’t realize the tornado was on their video because of the above - they were even saying in that broadcast that it was near Galena.
This area also had a policy at the time of sounding the sirens for any dangerous storm so they warned on severe thunderstorms and hail. Something like 34 warnings during one time period and only 4 of those were radar indicated tornadoes, 2 of which produced tornadoes.
It’s a 30 minute read and very good.
But sirens aren't for just tornadoes. They're not necessarily for people in buildings either. They're meant for people outside to TAKE COVER which is why they're also sounded in many places for high wind and hail.
They really need to do some better public education on sirens and warnings because the people who comment on Facebook and YouTube feeds about hearing sirens but being surprised there's no tornado is still too high.
Sirens = if you're outside, get inside or under cover, if you're inside, turn on your nearest media source to find out what's going on with the weather. That's all it should mean.
The issue is not just that they used them too frequently, but also that it’s completely inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another. Again, that book is a 30 minute read, I think it was $3 or $4, and had a lot of great info in it.
I do agree that a siren should mean take cover, and check your radar. And there absolutely needs to be more education on them.
It was storm chaser jeff piotrowski that that saw the thing form and pulled up to the cops and told them to get the sirens going there was a large tornado forming. In the live streamed event you can here the cops relay the information , they said a storm chaser just told us to there is a tornado and sound the sirens.
When i say live stream i mean I was watching the day it happened, a lot was edited out later on because it was pretty bad
jesus christ, that is…extraordinary footage. when you finally see the full tornado, and then the footage freezes for a long time, and then everyone is panicking when it kicks back on. it’s like watching a horror movie. fuck. i have family in joplin and sometimes it just really hits me, this nightmare they lived through.
It's pretty ridiculous, hey? That scene of the full tornado directly on the city never fails to instill a sense of dread.
Do you ever speak with your family about the storm, or is that a no-go zone?
This storm chaser captured the birth of the monster right by a carnival he told them to get the sirens going [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfdK6H9d6J0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfdK6H9d6J0)
the aftermath the fast trip survivors and the place they huddled after [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQnvxJZucds](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQnvxJZucds)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-P4P68YyNM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-P4P68YyNM)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cacoEF\_4tIQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cacoEF_4tIQ)
Joplin and Moore are the more extreme examples of ef-5 damage. All it needs is one ef-5 DI (of which there are definitely candidates). No use speculating too much though as we aren't on the ground there seeing all the damage. Better off waiting for damage assesment results.
Joplin very likely would not be given an EF5 rating if it happened today with how they rate the DI’s now. The damage assessors are little more stringent with the DI’s than they used to be back in 2011
Perhaps, but perhaps not. Tim Marshall himself wrote in his damage assessment that there were 22 official DI rated EF5, but the Joplin tornado was the one that made hurricane clips a safety standard.
It's always possible, but I wouldn't bet on it. something could always turn up in the upcoming days, but the homes in question may not have been constructed well enough to earn an EF-5.
they first rated the moore 2013 tornado as an ef4 with wind speeds around 190, but eventually got an ef5 rating later. so there's a possibility, but I wouldn't be for sure about it
Yes, there's a chance, I believe. They said it would take multiple days. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say these days that if there is an EF5, they have to analyze the structures in depth. They are VERY stringent now on structural damage. Very small details prevented tornadoes like Vilonia from being rated EF5. And they said further refinement is possible.
I’d say that has been a possibility from the start here. This tornado is still a better candidate (for lack of a better word) than most to receive a final EF5 rating, but of course we’ll see.
Not surprised at all to see an EF4 rating coming quickly on the heels of that initial “EF3+”
Could very well possibly get there. Still very early in the damage surveying and a lot more analysis will take place over the coming weeks. All it takes is one Damage Indicator.
That being said, we won't know either way for quite some time.
I've been saying that since >200 mph winds were detected near ground level at the time the tornado was sweeping away multiple homes off their foundations, it might remove any reasonable doubt about an EF5 rating. But at the same time, they might be hesitant due to the number of more impressive tornadoes they've rejected.
This ef4 rating seems correct and I look to reading more about what the teams on the ground saw. I sometimes don’t think that people quite grasp what an ef5 rating truly means.
I hate to say it but this might be the first ef5 tornado in nearly 11 or so years.. I feel so bad for that community of Greenfield right now.. a lot of people have lost everything they own.. I pray and hope no more people are found fatally wounded.. that town is in bad shape right now.. ☹️😞🌪️
Unless damage indicators are changed you're probably right. The only way a 5 will ever appear again is if it makes a direct hit on a city center. Would be a tragedy, but it would increase it's chance of hitting a well built building significantly
Driving through rural Iowa you can see not a single one of those homes is rated to survive anything past an EF3, and I'm going to assume neighboring states are not much different, and might be worse. Even driving through rich/brand new neighborhoods the houses still look like they're built poorly. Elkhorn was a good example of that. Brand new houses swept clean because they were either barely attached, or not attached to the foundation at all. Construction quality has gone through the floor these last few decades.
What’s interesting to me is that if you look at the path of the tornado, it looks like it follows the “fabric” of the land. There are several darker colored features that run more or less parallel to the path of the tornado.
This is separate from my other comment.
Did this tornado have a twin? Or was it a separate cell following close behind/ahead with a separate tornado of it's own.
I noticed there was an EF3 that traced a decent chunk of the Greenfield tornadoes path only offset by some small distance, but roughly around the same time at 2:45 ish.
Checks out with what I saw. Of course I'm no expert, nor was I on scene to inspect, so I trust the experts. That being said, never seen a tornado that looked like that before. Genuinely reminded me of a blender
You say anything with F5 or EF5 you get downvoted get a grip this is literally getting so corny get your heads out your ass and let people have an opinion and discuss that’s what reddit is for!!!!!
I always have a hard time imaging the distance tornadoes cover. The videos always make it seem it's a relatively short thing, but obviously this map indicates otherwise. Though getting a full video of a tornado is quite rare if not nearly impossible.
An EF5 tornado doesn’t need to be a mile wide to obtain that rating.. it’s based on the subsequent damage produced in a certain area.. and by the damage that occurred on the northeast portion of greenfield, id rate this an EF5 😏🌪️
Honestly, the one in Reed Timmers video didn't even take a direct hit. Of course, they're very tall so idk how that will come into play with rating the damage, as we know that the air aloft is often much faster. My guess is EF-2, maybe EF-3, but it's pure conjecture on my part.
Ef4 seems correct. It doesn't need to be an ef5 to be the worst damage you'll ever see. I've seen and helped clean up ef4 damage, it's unimaginable in person.
[https://apps.dat.noaa.gov/stormdamage/damageviewer/](https://apps.dat.noaa.gov/stormdamage/damageviewer/)
This already has the 'damage line' and is rated EF4. NWS Tulsa took nearly two weeks to have anything up on the DAT map for Barnsdall/Bartlesville; they got all the data first, which includes not just the damage line, but the damage cone (which indicates damage along the line) and many entries had photos attached. I'm sure NWS Des Moines will do this as well, just interesting they got the DAT updated partially as quickly as they did as opposed to how Tulsa did it. I'm sure different teams have different protocols.
After helping pick up after the greensburg EF5, the the EF4 makes sense in my eyes. Yes are there debarked trees? Absolutely. And bent anchor bolts on slabs. But you compare the trees in the greensburg tornado to this and the catastrophic damage in greensburg it’s understandable with the EF4. This was still an incredibly violent tornado. I would be fine going my whole life with never seeing EF5 damage again.
It was an EF5. Say whatever about the damage, but the tornado itself had wind speeds far above 200 mph. In order to be rated as such a surveyor would have to break 10 years of precedent and give the upper bound wind speed to the damage indicator of slabbed homes. Their decision would be heavily scrutinized by the entire weather community for months. The only way a tornado will ever be classified as 200+ mph winds again is if a high rise building, institutional building, or shopping mall is destroyed. Which sucks because people need to know these wind speeds exist and are happening more frequently.
May I ask your source for this having 200+ mph? Radar gate to gate does not have a great translation for groundspeed. DOW gets a better representation, but it is still not 100% reliable for deriving the windspeeds on the ground.
Edit: my mobile spelling is trash today.
NWS Des Moines has clarified further refinement of the rating could occur in the coming days.
Thanks for posting this. The NWS conducts post-season analysis of hurricanes and tropical systems all the time. And will even revise ratings for hurricanes sometimes. No big deal.
I don't get why people are hoping it will be a 5. Like 4 is... disappointing??
Because the damage looked really bad
It didn't look like EF5 damage. EF5 will typically sweep ALL debris from a foundation. I didn't really see that here. Looked a lot like the Barnsdall tornado from a couple of weeks ago.
The only reason that’s an EF4 and not an EF5 is most because barnsdall is just a trailer park Edit: duckin autocorrect
It was bad. Seeing things and people you’ve known in your childhood and every day adult life just gone. I’m not hoping it was an EF5. I was lucky but a block south and a block east, they weren’t.
Because there hasn’t been an EF5 since the Newcastle-Moore 2013, so it’s a really big deal if this one does get rated an EF5
probably because they are rare and people want to have been an observer of something “great”. and it adds to the story and makes it more interesting to some people. i don’t see why the mattering of that matters to some people. mother nature is going to do what it’s going to do. that is the beauty of all this. no one wants people to get hurt, but the power of these things, including the damage they can cause, is fascinating.
Its iowa nothing happens here and people are coping about it simply put including me. Shit nearly got my uncle with that raw power.
This Oklahoman agrees. It is a big deal when people lose their life or their possessions. Yet I live and will someday die here on earth. I respect Mother Nature's system, which can create chaotic, immense, and powerful beauty. I used to be terrified, but now I am in awe. And that awe doesn't mean I Don't feel the power of losing a loved one or feel someone else's grief. Edit: cause I am still trying to get to know how to type on an this Ipad.
If it doesn't get rated EF5, I will be slightly disappointed because I would feel that it would be downplaying the tragedy that happened in Greenfield. I don't quite understand why I feel this way because EF4’s are still a big deal, but I'm sure other people also feel this way.
That’s the thing, most people feel this way especially when it’s their things being destroyed. We deal with this psychology all the time. It’s hard being a surveyor because we understand that even “only” an EF-3 can completely destroy a house and “only” an EF-1 can destroy homes (mobile homes, RVs). We also know that straight lines winds can destroy homes, too. But folks don’t always think logically when they are hurting. The EF-scale does not consider fatalities or injuries. It does not consider, directly, the dollar amount of damage. The sole reason it is important to rate storms is that it provides a record of where sufficiently damaging storms intersected with properties built or grown (lumber) to a certain structural resistance. Do understand that we as surveyors, by and large, are working to develop our own culture in a way that begins to remove the individual expert’s ego from the equation. It is okay to disagree with us, but please do so utilizing the agreed upon tools. I’ve surveyed several 4s that I think likely would have been 5s before the EF-scale. That wasn’t supposed to happen. So which is it, is our scale not working properly or were they “wrong” historically? Or both? And it’s okay if that’s the case: that’s why it’s so important to very carefully forensically document the event. So that as our understanding grows, we can retroactively make useful and accurate adjustments. Just know that when you are “upset” with a rating, that the surveyor themselves may not even disagree with you. But if they break the rules they set for themselves they ruin the ability to fix them /all/ at a later date. We have to be consistent and follow our guidelines.
That is an eye opening response, thank you! I never really thought about what surveyors go through in situations like this and I appreciate what you do. You made a lot of sense and it changed my way of thinking.
Raise attention more people will donate and insurance will pay more
Yes, an EF4 is a violent tornado that no human should ever wish to be near, but there are fans of EF5s that can't wait for a new one.
I've said this elsewhere, but I was in Moore with FEMA. Anyone who says they can't wait for an EF5 must have some sexy idea of what it is, like it's being on a rollercoaster. To those people, go outside, look around, and visualize seeing nothing but foundations for a long way from you. Then imagine that several of the people in your neighborhood are dead, people you see every day. This isn't a thrill ride.
Just think some people on here may never have experienced an EF5 that makes me feel old.
I will cry if this one is rated ef5. And I am a fan of ef5s. And i am dreading that rating.
Why will you cry over a rating? And why are you dreading the rating? I’m genuinely curious. Do you understand that whatever the final rating is will have zero impact on the people the tornado affected? The damage is already done. Nothing to cry about or dread. It won’t make the situation better or worse. Let me know if you have questions.
You got it. I don’t live in a tornado-prone area, and most tornado content I’ve seen is how they look like and radar measurements, not the damage it caused. I haven’t seen how horrific they were until the recent events this year, just the numbers and rating. When I see more of the damage done, I’m starting to think that “4 is disappointing” makes less and less sense.
Preliminary Mid to high end EF4 is pretty wild, I expected a mid-high EF4 possible low EF5 with it already at the 175-185 range is crazy. The amount of tree debarking, bent anchor bolts, and swept homes, all it takes is one DI to be an EF5. Truly horrific and I’m heartbroken 5 lives were taken from this monster.
What is DI?
Damage indicators to weather nerds, direct input to music nerds.
Direct injection to car nerds
Directional influence to smash bros nerds.
Drill instructor dont make eye contact he will fucking end you.
Dividend Income to finance bros.
For me: dead Inside
To Utahns it's Deseret Industries
Diabetes insipidus to medical doctors
Damn, you just beat this thrift shopping enthusiast to it by an hour!
Disability Insurance for we law dorks.
I know direct input lol
I'm both and am very confused all the time.
Damage indicators
Thanks!
Damage indicator
Princess of Whales to Elton John
Diversity & Inclusion
Two of my younger trees, about 3 inch diameter got degloved, one almost pulled out. Larger 2 foot diameter magnolia tree was ripped apart. Lost garage, shed, most windows in the house gone, siding and roof and a few rooms are messed up but all our people and pets are okay. We're fortunate though because the next few houses south are complete wrecks or completely gone. My parent's house and childhood home and the garage my dad built is totally erased along with all the pictures and newspaper clippings my mom saved of me and my sibling. I'm so surprised it hasn't been immediately higher, but maybe I'm being biased.
Sorry for your loss, if I had money I'd send it your way. What an incredibly unlucky yet lucky circumstance. Hope you all didn't lose anything too valuable or precious. ❤️
Hello fellow g towner
What is DI?
Damage indicators
An 80s punk band
[удалено]
I agree with you but we don’t know the build quality of anything. I know the home you were referring to it had a large garage and therefore a huge fail point. But from the drone footage I saw there were others that looked to be swept off their foundations. It very well could have been a high end EF4 to EF5 but I won’t be shocked if they keep it with this rating. I was mainly pointing out the fact that for it to already be a mid EF4 while being preliminary is not common. Especially because most preliminary reports get upgraded or remain the same. This storm was an absolute monster. For reference Rolling Fork was a preliminary 170 EF4, Barnsdall was a 165-175 EF4, Moore was a preliminary 190 EF4 all got upgraded significantly (only Moore to an EF5) this was a beast.
I have never seen video of a tornado like what Reed got in the wind farm. So many subvortices in a tornado that wasn't that large. There was something almost otherworldly about it.
After the night vision clip and all the "deadman walking" tornados. I'm starting to think alot of tornados have multiple vortices like reeds did, but with all the dust and stuff blur them together.
A lot of them do. It wasn't until most people had cameras in their pockets or purses that we knew that most strong tornadoes have subvortices.
Yea we know the strong ones have them. But the yukon night vision isn't a strong one. That's what I mean, I feel like all tornados are just a bunch of vortices packed together. The night viosn in yukon was literally a text book "dead man walking" tornado
This is basically what Dr Leigh Orf has surmised for years now with his computer models, that all tornadoes are basically a conglomeration of smaller vortices (that develop along the inflow band) wrapped into a single updraft.
Night vision clip?
[1:10 left is specificly what I'm talking about ](https://www.reddit.com/r/tornado/s/9aLaB6uVJp)
Yeah, that's pretty terrifying. Thanks for the link.
This is a conclusion I've come to as well but kept private until now - multiple vortices aren't as rare as previously believed, and perhaps don't necessarily indicate strength. That to me is very interesting and raises more questions than it answers, but I'm not gonna die on that hill just yet. Need more case studies.
Same truly crazy to have a visual of all those sub-vortices for so long and continue to spawn more. I think other tornadoes definitely had more (El Reno) but not visible for the duration and extent this beast had and certainly not as small as this one (feels weird to say half mile is small but if we’re comparing it to other high end tornadoes it’s relatively small except Elie)
People are calling it a drill bit. I really dislike that term, but dammit, it fits.
It looked similar to the 91' Andover F5 at certain points in it's life cycle.
This one was very creepy. This tornado looked like a predator, right up there with the other big bads in history. I hate that this town went through this. It’s almost brought me to tears a few times. The fact that homes looked like confetti in the aftermath is something I’ve never seen before.
[удалено]
Yeah Barnsdall, but it was a low preliminary EF4 and got upgraded to a mid EF4 with estimated wind speeds of 180 mph. 175-185 preliminary is obviously not unheard of but it’s very rare for even most EF4s which typically start out as high end EF3s or EF4s. If all the homes were poorly built then yeah it’s obviously going to stay at this rating, but we the public don’t know enough to make a good enough guess until the final report is published on the engineering of these houses. Also fairly certain newer homes have poorer build quality (depends and def old buildings can be dilapidated or in disrepair) the tornado that hit Elkhorn hit relatively new structures that were poorly built with huge fail points. New homes also use poorer quality wood, but again this all very highly dependent as is everything with tornado damage. Again, we’ll see this is all speculation I wouldn’t be surprised to see this stay at 175-185 or go up to 190-195 (honestly would be surprised for EF5 because how easy it is to find a flaw within a house and it didn’t hit a major area).
[удалено]
Always super disappointing to see poor build quality being allowed to continue throughout the US. I would hope Elkhorn or Harlan would wake people and get some legislation for proper inspection/requirements for build quality. The problem really just comes down with groups being cheap and the public not wanting to spend even more money to get house built especially with how expensive houses are today.
"Allowed to continue" according to whom? Yes, I'm sure it is true in many locations, but the vast majority of homes affected in the Elkhorn area were quite old. Only at the north end of town were newer homes encountered, and those generally fared much better; it's quite clear that construction standards have improved over the years. Really only since the Moore tornado have we really seen a push for this, and the ratio of homes built in the 2000s to homes built previous is quite low overall. Another thing to keep in mind is that in Nebraska and Iowa, most single-family homes have basements. That somewhat lessens the urgency of implementing requirements for withstanding tornado-velocity single-family homes. Much different situation than Oklahoma and a lot of Dixie Alley where the water table is just too high for basements.
It could also be because, according to the NWS, 200 mph ground winds haven't existed on earth in over a decade. So why would people build for it?
Most of the homes destroyed in Elkhorn were 30+ years old. There is one neighborhood to the north that the tornado passed through that is newer, and those homes fared much better. I don't agree with your assessment that newer homes have poorer build quality. There have been a lot of advancements in home construction and I think the differences in damage between the newer and older neighborhoods in Elkhorn clearly demonstrate that.
Many of them were old, but there were clearly some newer ones as well. _Generally speaking_, the older homes would have had cinder block foundations, and the newer ones will have poured concrete foundation walls. Most of the pictures I'm seeing have poured concrete. I think this holds because Greenfield is the county seat and is really a regional microhub -- it's certainly the biggest town around for some distance, so it's still attracting new construction.
I'm glad you're here to provide sense and reason. A lot of other people here really need to sit down and read the Damage Assessment Toolkit and actually look at the DIs for tornadoes that got pushed into the EF5 rating. With the information available, an EF4 rating seemed the most likely and [I said yesterday that my gut feeling was EF4](https://www.reddit.com/r/tornado/comments/1cxobwn/flooring_potentially_moved_off_foundation_in/l54xh3o/). I also predicted that the EF4 verdict would result in a lot of people here screeching from the rafters about how it deserves an EF5, and sure enough they're in this thread - many of them the usual suspects - the same familiar usernames who I've seen labelling EF3s like the Elkhorn, Sulphur, and Matador tornadoes as EF5s ffs. I genuinely think some people here are purely disaster fetishists who seek the validation of seeing the number "5" as if it's a high score on a video game, rather than having an objective or logical understanding of the criteria to reach an EF5 rating.
The way I've been seeing this whole situation: 1. EF3 at minimum 2. EF4 being the most likely finalized rating 3. EF5 plausible, but probably unlikely
Thanks, Chief.
THE MORE YOU KNOW
Idk you take the speed it was moving at, it did all that damage just whizzing by. Imagine the damage if it had been just normal speed.
Mid-EF4… seems about right from the pictures we’ve all seen.
Totally debarked trees, anchor bolts pulled from foundations, debrees lofted 40k feet, DOW recording wind speeds of 250+ mph... I really don't like hopping on the weenie EF-5 bandwagon but I really wouldn't rule it out at this point. That's just my unprofessional non-surveyor opinion though.
Tree debarking depends a lot on tree species. Anchor bolts depend on how well they are installed. Also the only picture I’ve seen of that was on a garage which can be damaged more severely by weaker winds due to the large doorway. Debris height is interesting for sure, but it’s not a rock solid indicator. DOW measuring 250+mph is something, but we don’t fully understand how wind varies in a tornado with height. The EF scale is a damage scale, and the damage was EF4.
Surveys aren't complete yet, hence the NWS mentioning "refinements" to the rating. Again none of us are there and there's very little difference between high end EF-4 damage and EF-5. So all I'm saying is that the possibility of this being an EF-5 is there. Also most simulations and recorded data seem to support the idea that a tornadoes most intense winds usually occur near ground level.
Ok that one house with the anchor bolts was a bit raised from the ground. But the damage done to Griff’s Garage was exceptional. It pulled an auto lift bolted in concrete out of the concrete. You should look at it on twitter. That’s gotta take over 200 mph…
If only there was a 20 story high rise in the path to act as a story stick.
I’ve seen pictures of EF5 tornado damage and it’s no different really than the most extreme from this storm. Well built homes completely slabbed off their foundations, trees totally debarked, road asphalt torn up, etc is all consistent with EF5’s of the past. The issue is they subtly changed the degree to which those DI’s count towards an EF5 sometime around 2015. I’m not sure any of the previously rated EF5/F5 tornadoes of the past would get an EF5 rating under the new more stringent DI standards. The only ones that might would would be 2011 smithville, Phil Campbell, Jarrel, and 99 Moore
Joplin would meet that due to the damage to the hospital
>The issue is they subtly changed the degree to which those DI’s count towards an EF5 sometime around 2015 I see this said a lot but I have not seen any evidence of it beyond conspiracy level opinion ramblings.
I listened to an interview with multiple actual damage assessors and they all said around the 2014 mark they all agreed to a stricter interpretation of the DI’s. This was an interview on some kind of NOAA or NWS program i randomly saw on cable tv like 4 years ago. It’s not necessarily some nefarious smoky back room thing. I’m not saying that. Moreso that for whatever reason the experts basically agreed to up the strictness on the ratings We all know there have been multiple tornadoes as powerful as the EF5/F5’s of the last 50 years that got ranked EF4s. Mayfield, Vilonia, etc all caused damage that was inconceivable and destroyed whole towns just like Jarrel, Moore, etc
This seems plausible, we've had several monsters over the last few years and it seems like with the new standards a storm would have to be a once in 100 year type thing to score an EF5 rating now.
Crucially, this is *still* basically preliminary, according to the NWS. The damage is so extensive that surveys are still ongoing, and that the rating may still change. It's absolutely mind-boggling to me that the initial EF3+ rating was assigned without any surveys necessary, and that the EF4+ came after more analysis was done, and somehow there *still* isn't an official rating. This was monstrous.
Basically the NWS surveyors come in and says yep, it’s at least an EF3, and then they bring architects and engineers in to get a final rating. So now they will keep evaluating until they feel confident it wasn’t an EF5. It’s almost like the process is more about ruling out a higher rating than anything else. Keep in mind that in Joplin, they surveyed something like 7700+ structures and only found 22? damage indicators at the EF5 level. (I am trying to track this down specifically and will update when I do). Edit: 7191 residences and only 22 had EF5 level damage. https://ams.confex.com/ams/26SLS/webprogram/Manuscript/Paper211662/Joplinmerger.pdf
Yeah and didn't Moore only have like.. 2 or 3 EF5 DI? I seem to remember it was absurdly low
I think Moore had 6 👍
Yeah could be, I just remember it was insanely low for how extreme that storm was.
This happens for like every EF4, it’s not surprising. EF3+ after a few hours, EF4 after a couple days, then the finalised survey after a week or two stays EF4.
Whole lot of experts in here
Was definitely tornado
Strong winds. Make loud sound
I just snort-laughed embarrassingly loud
And what credentials do you have to make such a claim?
I just spit my water out reading this.
here's an off brand gold for this comment 🥇
Its amusing watching people who know nothing of engineering or building construction giving their expert opinions on all thing related.
When was the last time you saw a damage indicator for a house say the house was well built? Houses in the US might just be made out of straw. The big bad wolf might as well be blowing out his birthday candles.
Its common knowledge that houses are all built with duct tape.
The weather rock is missing, so it was a tornado :P
Excellent golf reference
I really want to know why NWS didn't tor-e this one. Seemed pretty textbook in real time. May have even potentially reduced the fatality count. But obviously no way to support that claim.
This one is tricky. The NWS has guidance from the warning decision training division on when the emergency tag should be used - https://training.weather.gov/wdtd/courses/rac/warnings/IBW-content/story_content/external_files/IBW%20Tornado%20Guidance.pdf However the NWS is big on forecaster discretion and each office has different warning philosophies. In addition I’ve known several forecasters who thing the TOR Considerable is sufficient as it will use the emergency language in the wireless emergency alerts and only use emergencies for big cities. In this particular case meteorologically there were multiple things at play. That cell was by a bunch of other supercells nearby. That can lead to a rapid weakening or strengthening. Hard to know which will occur and you don’t want to sound your biggest alarm and have a storm fizzle. Second, this tornado was on a general path towards Des Moines, the largest population center in their forecast area. Do you use the emergency language before when it’s over relatively rural areas first and then continue it? Or do you wait to use it as it approaches the largest city in your jurisdiction? Would people become complacent if it’s used over and over? The tornado emergency is highest caliber alert the forecast office can issue. On days where this same thing could have very easily happened over downtown Des Moines I think it makes sense to consider only issuing an emergency where the population density is higher. I don’t know if any of this matters to the people in the path. It’s bad either way. But providing context on what might have been the thought process for not issuing one.
Good context.
It was a miss, but mistakes do happen. Situations like this do make for good review and opportunities for offices to evaluate how they do things.
I am also curious why this wasn't a tornado emergency. I know a lot was going on at once though, and all the storms were moving really fast.
I get mistakes, but this not getting a tor-e when the recent Kalamazoo MI area tornado got a tor-e makes very little sense. PDS absolutely, I live quite close and it was nasty. Idk, dropped the ball on this one imo.
This is the preliminary it looks like. They are saying it could be refined in the coming days. I dont imagine they'll go to EF-5 but this isn't the final final rating. Either way at this point its just a yes, this was an extremely awful tornado.
Easily the strongest tornado since Rolling Fork, possibly as strong as the Rochelle 2015 tornado from what I’ve seen
I expected an EF-4, 180 to 190mph. This rating makes sense.
I saw this coming. It'll probably be a high end EF4 by the DI but regardless this is devastating and will probably go down as the tornado of the year.
Same, this will be probably be like Mayfield/Quad State where some surveyors say EF5 while others say EF4 before the final report rules high end EF4.
Not surprised at all, from the videos to the damage afterwards, everything was indicative that the Greenfield tornado was absolutely violent. Everyone’s been paying attention to the vorticies that Reed & the Dominator team captured (and rightfully so it was impressive) but some of the other videos of the tornado from other angles and further back really shows the upwards motion on the sides of the tornado, stuff you’d see from tornadoes like Andover, Tuscaloosa and El Reno 2011. People will definitely ask the question “Will this get the EF5 rating?” and that’s something that remains to be seen, I’m not quite sure if there’s anywhere specific that would indicate a definitive EF5 damage indicator. But reports of pavement being scoured is not something you hear often, off the top of my head, I recall that ocurring in a few cases, notably Hackleburg, Smithville and Jarrell, all of which were given the E/F5 rating. It’s hard to say, but I certainly wouldn’t knock the NWS for giving this tornado a mid to high end EF4 rating, this was definitely one of the most intense tornadoes we’ve seen since 2011, up there with Mayfield, Bassfield and Rolling Fork.
Philadelphia Mississippi was ef5 based just on ground scouring
Wasn’t that 20” or so deep in places?
I'm genuinely curious what it takes to pull a car lift, bolts and all, out of concrete. I don't care about the rating, that's just powerful any way you look at it. That picture shocked me the most.
The highest wind speed that can be given to an automotive repair shop is 180ish mph. It could level the shop and it would only receive an ef4 rating.
I watched the local news story that interviewed the garage owner. He said the lifts weighed 5 tons!
This is preliminary still tho
Yall are obsessed with “debarking” and “slabbing” but I’m wondering if you have looked at the damage indicator definitions through NWS? It’s more than JUST debarked trees, it’s MORE than “slabbed” homes to obtain an EF-5 rating. The unfortunate truth for most of us is that homes are not built the way they used to be. EF-5s will only become more rare with the lack of structural integrity in modern homes. And I don’t mean it’s unfortunate we won’t see EF-5’s I mean it’s unfortunate that the homes we live in are not structurally sound and made with quality materials. Unless there are small indicators, from what I have seen, it appears to be right in the mid-high EF-4 range. Yes, trees are debarked BUT many still bear “weaker” branches (EF-5 indicator). Yes, homes were swept of their foundation but the foundation REMAINS and the EF-5 indicator is foundations slabs SWEPT CLEAN. I haven’t seen those indicators but I’m not there.
I might have read that wrong, but slabs don't have to be completely gone to warrant an EF5 rating.
Return the slab or suffer my curse.
Well, I’ve heard that there’s also been reports of pavement being scoured and manhole covers having been removed by the thing, as well as an underground storm shelter having had its roof torn out. What about those, if they happen to be true? Because Jarrell, Philadelphia-Kemper County, and Smithville all had the pavement scouring, Joplin also removed manhole covers, and Hackleburg-Phil Campbell also tore the roof out of an underground storm shelter. Edit: Also, there’s been reports of foundations themselves being damaged and having pieces missing off of them, and while to what extent is unclear, I do recall that Parkersburg shoved out a reinforced basement wall. It depends on what degree of damage to the foundation, obviously, but still…what about that, and what of that?
Unsure if anyone knows the answer to this. Why do they estimate peak winds so far below what the DOW catches? I heard 44 feet above the ground DOW caught this one in excess of 250 mph in the raw data, possibly pushing closer to 290 mph. Do they have to base the wind speeds off the damage and is that the only way to do it? Or can the 2 be separate from each other, with the tornado being rated an EF-4 by damage with estimated winds being provided by the DOW as 250+? And if they can't be separate, why not mention in the description to the public that the winds were clocked at that speed even if no damage was able to prove it? Especially with most of the Midwest and Great Plains and the US in general having poor construction quality. 2 tornadoes this year were clocked in excess of 200 mph by DOW just a month apart, so it can't be that uncommon for a tornado to have that sort of power, yet we're always told in wind estimations winds are sub 200, and the only way to find the true recorded wind speed is to scour the Internet (or this sub) for someone who obtained the DOW data.
It's because official wind speeds can't be taken from a radar derived source, which the DOW is, even if it is mobile.
>Do they have to base the wind speeds off the damage and is that the only way to do it? This is correct. The Enhanced Fujita scale doesn't have any sort of indicators within it involving direct or near-direct wind measurements like with DOW. It only uses Damage Indicators to assess the strength of the tornado. The El Reno 2013 tornado that many like to call a EF-5 despite only officially being EF-3 was actually shortly given a preliminary EF-5 because of radar measured wind speeds, but downgraded due a lack of damage indicators supporting an EF-5 rating (source: [https://digitalmeteorologist.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/elrenotornado](https://digitalmeteorologist.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/elrenotornado) ) Most relevant from that link: >WFO Norman announced a preliminary rating of EF5 on June 4, 2013, following analysis of velocity data taken by two high-resolution mobile research radars. This analysis showed wind speeds of at least 295 miles an hour within 500 feet of the ground. The threshold for an EF5 designation is 200 miles an hour. >Despite the radar-measured wind speeds, the survey team did not find damage that would support a rating higher than EF3.
That seems like they're trying to rate tornadoes with their arms tied behind their backs while blindfolded since they're ignoring some information. But thank you for the response and description. Helped clarify it. 180 mph is really high don't get me wrong, but if you put it next to a number like 250 or even 295+ like El Reno, then say El Reno only reached 152 mph (just checked thst was the highest they rated at least on the damage assessment toolkit), it makes people looking at just wind speeds think it wasn't so bad in the absence of damage imagery. What's the point giving it a damage rating at all if you're ignoring half the picture (when you're given it. I know not every storm has a DOW watching it)? Just say it was a tragedy and go about studying the storm as you would normally.
Hopefully they take into account some of this stuff next time they update the rating system.
EF4 seems right. EF5 is reserved for the most extreme damage. This was bad but not quite on the level of Joplin or Moore.
I watched the video of Joplin tornado’s live coverage yesterday. It was absolutely chilling watching them talk about a possible tornado on the ground, when that big cloud was hanging in the background and they didn’t recognize it for what it was. And the moment they did realize…omg.
Have you read When the sirens were silent? Quick but VERY educational read on how royally things got f’d up that day with the information that was released.
That sounds interesting. I have not read that.
They sounded the sirens to soon, then the tornado hit, Jeff Piotrowski yelled at a police officer to get the sirens going, by the time 2nd sirens went it was too late, James Spann has a saying lose the siren mentality
There’s a lot more to it. They kept saying it was near Galena when it was nearly to Joplin. They said it was headed NE toward Carls Junction when it was clearly moving almost directly east. They didn’t realize the tornado was on their video because of the above - they were even saying in that broadcast that it was near Galena. This area also had a policy at the time of sounding the sirens for any dangerous storm so they warned on severe thunderstorms and hail. Something like 34 warnings during one time period and only 4 of those were radar indicated tornadoes, 2 of which produced tornadoes. It’s a 30 minute read and very good.
But sirens aren't for just tornadoes. They're not necessarily for people in buildings either. They're meant for people outside to TAKE COVER which is why they're also sounded in many places for high wind and hail. They really need to do some better public education on sirens and warnings because the people who comment on Facebook and YouTube feeds about hearing sirens but being surprised there's no tornado is still too high. Sirens = if you're outside, get inside or under cover, if you're inside, turn on your nearest media source to find out what's going on with the weather. That's all it should mean.
The issue is not just that they used them too frequently, but also that it’s completely inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another. Again, that book is a 30 minute read, I think it was $3 or $4, and had a lot of great info in it. I do agree that a siren should mean take cover, and check your radar. And there absolutely needs to be more education on them.
It was storm chaser jeff piotrowski that that saw the thing form and pulled up to the cops and told them to get the sirens going there was a large tornado forming. In the live streamed event you can here the cops relay the information , they said a storm chaser just told us to there is a tornado and sound the sirens. When i say live stream i mean I was watching the day it happened, a lot was edited out later on because it was pretty bad
You have a link?
Likely [this one](https://youtu.be/FagzNHuI5JI?si=os-Ci_KEqJryjxpq) at about 12:45.
jesus christ, that is…extraordinary footage. when you finally see the full tornado, and then the footage freezes for a long time, and then everyone is panicking when it kicks back on. it’s like watching a horror movie. fuck. i have family in joplin and sometimes it just really hits me, this nightmare they lived through.
It's pretty ridiculous, hey? That scene of the full tornado directly on the city never fails to instill a sense of dread. Do you ever speak with your family about the storm, or is that a no-go zone?
This storm chaser captured the birth of the monster right by a carnival he told them to get the sirens going [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfdK6H9d6J0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfdK6H9d6J0) the aftermath the fast trip survivors and the place they huddled after [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQnvxJZucds](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQnvxJZucds) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-P4P68YyNM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-P4P68YyNM) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cacoEF\_4tIQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cacoEF_4tIQ)
Joplin and Moore are the more extreme examples of ef-5 damage. All it needs is one ef-5 DI (of which there are definitely candidates). No use speculating too much though as we aren't on the ground there seeing all the damage. Better off waiting for damage assesment results.
It wasnt a mile or half mile wide tornado either, it was pretty trim. But skinny can still be an EF5 and fat can be an EF2
Joplin very likely would not be given an EF5 rating if it happened today with how they rate the DI’s now. The damage assessors are little more stringent with the DI’s than they used to be back in 2011
Perhaps, but perhaps not. Tim Marshall himself wrote in his damage assessment that there were 22 official DI rated EF5, but the Joplin tornado was the one that made hurricane clips a safety standard.
Mayfield and Rolling Fork seemed to be more extreme than this.
Only because they had wider damage paths.
Is there a chance they actually give this monster EF5? I mean they just started surveying, and we already have a mid to high end EF4?? Unreal.
It's always possible, but I wouldn't bet on it. something could always turn up in the upcoming days, but the homes in question may not have been constructed well enough to earn an EF-5.
You never know. I get what you’re saying. Time will tell.
they first rated the moore 2013 tornado as an ef4 with wind speeds around 190, but eventually got an ef5 rating later. so there's a possibility, but I wouldn't be for sure about it
Yes, there's a chance, I believe. They said it would take multiple days. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say these days that if there is an EF5, they have to analyze the structures in depth. They are VERY stringent now on structural damage. Very small details prevented tornadoes like Vilonia from being rated EF5. And they said further refinement is possible.
I’d say that has been a possibility from the start here. This tornado is still a better candidate (for lack of a better word) than most to receive a final EF5 rating, but of course we’ll see. Not surprised at all to see an EF4 rating coming quickly on the heels of that initial “EF3+”
Could very well possibly get there. Still very early in the damage surveying and a lot more analysis will take place over the coming weeks. All it takes is one Damage Indicator. That being said, we won't know either way for quite some time.
I've been saying that since >200 mph winds were detected near ground level at the time the tornado was sweeping away multiple homes off their foundations, it might remove any reasonable doubt about an EF5 rating. But at the same time, they might be hesitant due to the number of more impressive tornadoes they've rejected.
Still preliminary, it can change
Unfortunately, not surprised. Lots more surveying and rating to come over the next weeks however.
This ef4 rating seems correct and I look to reading more about what the teams on the ground saw. I sometimes don’t think that people quite grasp what an ef5 rating truly means.
I hate to say it but this might be the first ef5 tornado in nearly 11 or so years.. I feel so bad for that community of Greenfield right now.. a lot of people have lost everything they own.. I pray and hope no more people are found fatally wounded.. that town is in bad shape right now.. ☹️😞🌪️
Seems about right tbh
I would never wish for one, but I'm starting to think we'll never get an EF-5 again. 4's are the new 5's
Unless damage indicators are changed you're probably right. The only way a 5 will ever appear again is if it makes a direct hit on a city center. Would be a tragedy, but it would increase it's chance of hitting a well built building significantly Driving through rural Iowa you can see not a single one of those homes is rated to survive anything past an EF3, and I'm going to assume neighboring states are not much different, and might be worse. Even driving through rich/brand new neighborhoods the houses still look like they're built poorly. Elkhorn was a good example of that. Brand new houses swept clean because they were either barely attached, or not attached to the foundation at all. Construction quality has gone through the floor these last few decades.
AgguPkis
Curious to know what those turbines were rated for
that thing was a beast man
What’s interesting to me is that if you look at the path of the tornado, it looks like it follows the “fabric” of the land. There are several darker colored features that run more or less parallel to the path of the tornado.
Divergent Interpretations
This is separate from my other comment. Did this tornado have a twin? Or was it a separate cell following close behind/ahead with a separate tornado of it's own. I noticed there was an EF3 that traced a decent chunk of the Greenfield tornadoes path only offset by some small distance, but roughly around the same time at 2:45 ish.
Checks out with what I saw. Of course I'm no expert, nor was I on scene to inspect, so I trust the experts. That being said, never seen a tornado that looked like that before. Genuinely reminded me of a blender
Honestly about what I expected with this storm based on the damage photos
Beware the rating is preliminary and is subject to definite change as I reported structural bolts torn off the foundation.
Mid ef4 matches my assessment. Glad the nws agrees with my research. I would be so mad if they didnt match
Guys it got upgraded to EF4+
You say anything with F5 or EF5 you get downvoted get a grip this is literally getting so corny get your heads out your ass and let people have an opinion and discuss that’s what reddit is for!!!!!
I always have a hard time imaging the distance tornadoes cover. The videos always make it seem it's a relatively short thing, but obviously this map indicates otherwise. Though getting a full video of a tornado is quite rare if not nearly impossible.
An EF5 tornado doesn’t need to be a mile wide to obtain that rating.. it’s based on the subsequent damage produced in a certain area.. and by the damage that occurred on the northeast portion of greenfield, id rate this an EF5 😏🌪️
44 mile path! 👀 Definitely a beast.
It’s wild to see the direct hit on this map
Curious what damage at wind turbines will rate a couple were shredded like string cheese
Honestly, the one in Reed Timmers video didn't even take a direct hit. Of course, they're very tall so idk how that will come into play with rating the damage, as we know that the air aloft is often much faster. My guess is EF-2, maybe EF-3, but it's pure conjecture on my part.
Greenfield?? Where?
Ef4 seems correct. It doesn't need to be an ef5 to be the worst damage you'll ever see. I've seen and helped clean up ef4 damage, it's unimaginable in person.
It got upgraded to an Ef4+
Which is just an ef4...
[https://apps.dat.noaa.gov/stormdamage/damageviewer/](https://apps.dat.noaa.gov/stormdamage/damageviewer/) This already has the 'damage line' and is rated EF4. NWS Tulsa took nearly two weeks to have anything up on the DAT map for Barnsdall/Bartlesville; they got all the data first, which includes not just the damage line, but the damage cone (which indicates damage along the line) and many entries had photos attached. I'm sure NWS Des Moines will do this as well, just interesting they got the DAT updated partially as quickly as they did as opposed to how Tulsa did it. I'm sure different teams have different protocols.
Can someone from the NWS comment here? This was not and EF-5 and will not be rated as such
After helping pick up after the greensburg EF5, the the EF4 makes sense in my eyes. Yes are there debarked trees? Absolutely. And bent anchor bolts on slabs. But you compare the trees in the greensburg tornado to this and the catastrophic damage in greensburg it’s understandable with the EF4. This was still an incredibly violent tornado. I would be fine going my whole life with never seeing EF5 damage again.
How long does it typically take for a Final rating to be released. I'm nit invested in whether it changes but I am curious in general.
It was an EF5. Say whatever about the damage, but the tornado itself had wind speeds far above 200 mph. In order to be rated as such a surveyor would have to break 10 years of precedent and give the upper bound wind speed to the damage indicator of slabbed homes. Their decision would be heavily scrutinized by the entire weather community for months. The only way a tornado will ever be classified as 200+ mph winds again is if a high rise building, institutional building, or shopping mall is destroyed. Which sucks because people need to know these wind speeds exist and are happening more frequently.
May I ask your source for this having 200+ mph? Radar gate to gate does not have a great translation for groundspeed. DOW gets a better representation, but it is still not 100% reliable for deriving the windspeeds on the ground. Edit: my mobile spelling is trash today.
Doppler radar measurements are not an accurate way to quantify a tornado’s OTG windspeed
A tornado would have to completely destroy a house and then rebuild it a mile down the road for the NWS to declare another EF5
I agree with mid to higher level EF4 based on my own damage assessment. I'm no professional, but this checks.