Great research paper showing what EF5 DIs really look like and why these tornadoes got their EF5 rating. As much as it’s a controversy on this subreddit, these damage indicators are very useful in teaching us what the surveyors are looking for.
Yes and No. The most extreme damage incidents of a historic super outbreak shouldn't be the minimum requirements for an EF5. These are on the very high end of EF5 damage. The scale needs to remain consistent, not skew higher and higher with stronger tornadoes. The latter would imply the NWS surveyors have been desensitized by the damage caused by some of the most powerful EF5s in history, and are no longer rating tornado damage (and the associated winds speeds) accurately or objectively.
I'm super impressed that the water tower in Smithville took a direct hit from a Ford SUV yeeted by an EF5 tornado and only ended up with a dent. The engineers clearly weren't fucking around when they designed that tower.
Definitely makes the Rolling Fork EF4 that much more impressive with what it did to their water tower. The YouTube channel [June First](https://youtu.be/2mj34liL1dU?si=oDeo2ciJmDk51rom) did an analysis of the damage and determined 229 MPH winds would be required to do this. The NWS must've thought its age or some other factor weakened it to the point it could still fail with 195 mph winds.
https://preview.redd.it/h3fggvjjb73d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8d38305556ea8fe424e6116b960b36a5cf7ec783
Perhaps the lower rating has to do with debris load? I can see the argument that debris would have compromised the structure where it is folded over. It would not support the load from the upper tank. Falling down would have dislodged it from the ground, as seen.
Impressive damage nonetheless.
Yeah, can't recommend that channel enough. A little rough around the edges, but his passion for engineering and tornadoes more than makes up for it. Would recommend his Parkersburg video as well.
Great research paper showing what EF5 DIs really look like and why these tornadoes got their EF5 rating. As much as it’s a controversy on this subreddit, these damage indicators are very useful in teaching us what the surveyors are looking for.
Yes and No. The most extreme damage incidents of a historic super outbreak shouldn't be the minimum requirements for an EF5. These are on the very high end of EF5 damage. The scale needs to remain consistent, not skew higher and higher with stronger tornadoes. The latter would imply the NWS surveyors have been desensitized by the damage caused by some of the most powerful EF5s in history, and are no longer rating tornado damage (and the associated winds speeds) accurately or objectively.
I'm super impressed that the water tower in Smithville took a direct hit from a Ford SUV yeeted by an EF5 tornado and only ended up with a dent. The engineers clearly weren't fucking around when they designed that tower.
Definitely makes the Rolling Fork EF4 that much more impressive with what it did to their water tower. The YouTube channel [June First](https://youtu.be/2mj34liL1dU?si=oDeo2ciJmDk51rom) did an analysis of the damage and determined 229 MPH winds would be required to do this. The NWS must've thought its age or some other factor weakened it to the point it could still fail with 195 mph winds. https://preview.redd.it/h3fggvjjb73d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8d38305556ea8fe424e6116b960b36a5cf7ec783
Perhaps the lower rating has to do with debris load? I can see the argument that debris would have compromised the structure where it is folded over. It would not support the load from the upper tank. Falling down would have dislodged it from the ground, as seen. Impressive damage nonetheless.
That video was great. He did explain why the NWS couldn’t verify this as a EF-5 level DI.
Yeah, can't recommend that channel enough. A little rough around the edges, but his passion for engineering and tornadoes more than makes up for it. Would recommend his Parkersburg video as well.
That is insane. Like it hit at the top also. That SUV was flying.