June 21st 2023 Matador TX Tornado Discussion

[tornado examiner]

What about the Camp Crook, SD/Capitol, MT tornado or the Pilger tornado family.

Those are all similar candidates too, nice thinking.

 

[UncleJuJu98]

What'd I walk myself into lol

 

[tornado examiner]

What'd I walk myself into lol

Random chaos with a mix of comparison discussion…

 

[JBishopwx]

My cousin acts better when she doesn't get her way, and she's 5...

 

[CheeselandSkies]

Well when it comes to that back then a high end F3 rating was measured as around 205mph winds…so that would be the equivalent of an ef5 today lol.

Not quite...as I understand it, the revisions to the EF-scale wind speeds were essentially an admission that the wind speeds associated with the original F-scale categories were too high. Thus, it's not that a "205 MPH high-end F3 would be an EF5 today," but that "That high-end F3 actually had winds of around 165 MPH, placing it as a high-end EF3." This way was supposed to be a seamless transition from one scale to the other. Unfortunately we've seen all sorts of other problems crop up, such that tornado ratings remain a much more inexact science than we'd like them to be.

 

[TH2002]

What'd I walk myself into lol

A civilized thread about the Matador tornado The OceanGate Titan

 

[Sawmaster]

I don't think you're quite understanding what I'm saying. I've seen him spamming threads on Twitter and here with aggressive, confrontational posts ever since this whole thing started. I'm not going after you when I talk about blocking people.

Really dude, go back and read this thread again from about #170 so you can understand it in context as well as see and remember what you've said. You did address some something to me (post #178) before you began unloading on the other members you mentioned. That's what I'm responding to. Sheesh...

 

[tornado examiner]

Not quite...as I understand it, the revisions to the EF-scale wind speeds were essentially an admission that the wind speeds associated with the original F-scale categories were too high. Thus, it's not that a "205 MPH high-end F3 would be an EF5 today," but that "That high-end F3 actually had winds of around 165 MPH, placing it as a high-end EF3." Thus it was supposed to be a seamless transition from one scale to the other. Unfortunately we've seen all sorts of other problems crop up, such that tornado ratings remain a much more inexact science than we'd like them to be.

Tbh I wasn’t really making that deep of a statement…hence the “lol” but okie dokie anyways then Xd

 

[andyhb]

Really dude, go back and read this thread again from about #170 so you can understand it in context as well as see and remember what you've said. You did address some something to me (post #178) before you began unloading on the other members you mentioned. That's what I'm responding to. Sheesh...

Yes and I saw that reply before getting caught up in the other nonsense.

 

[JPWX]

 

[tornado examiner]

errr

Ya know even though I love a good scrapping, it might be Kinda getting to a point where it would be wise to stop the potentially heated arguments…

I’m not trying to police or anything…im just sayin’

 

[A Guy]

 

[Sawmaster]

Not quite...as I understand it, the revisions to the EF-scale wind speeds were essentially an admission that the wind speeds associated with the original F-scale categories were too high. Thus, it's not that a "205 MPH high-end F3 would be an EF5 today," but that "That high-end F3 actually had winds of around 165 MPH, placing it as a high-end EF3." This way was supposed to be a seamless transition from one scale to the other. Unfortunately we've seen all sorts of other problems crop up, such that tornado ratings remain a much more inexact science than we'd like them to be

I like how you put this and it's pretty accurate too. Thing is that rating tornado9es has always had something of a subjective element to it which 'smoothed out the bumps' until somewhere in the mid 2000-oughts. At that point the engineerrs started griping when anyone didn't exactly follow their way of thinking and rating and it's continued to just get worse. The whole of engineering here has lost touch with the fact that this is not a test or game where you find specific things while ignoring everything else; what this is supposed to be doing is to rank tornadoes by their strength and not just whether they do specific damage or not.

The only way to fix this is to remove the engineers from the usual surveying and rating, saving them for research and testing where they can do well. They are not doing well the way things are now; in fact they're the ones causing problems by demanding that surveyors do not give a rating higher than they can prove using the engineer's scale even when the strength was very clearly higher. Matador was stronger than EF3whether there was structural; damage which could 'prove' that or not; we all know this to be true, so to restrict it's rating to something wrong and inaccurate proves cl;early that the engineer's way of doing this is wrong and needs to be changed. But as long as they're being given free reign to do whay they please this will continue, and the arguing which divides us will continue too.

Nothing good is happening- let's change that.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

I like how you put this and it's pretty accurate too. Thing is that rating tornado9es has always had something of a subjective element to it which 'smoothed out the bumps' until somewhere in the mid 2000-oughts. At that point the engineerrs started griping when anyone didn't exactly follow their way of thinking and rating and it's continued to just get worse. The whole of engineering here has lost touch with the fact that this is not a test or game where you find specific things while ignoring everything else; what this is supposed to be doing is to rank tornadoes by their strength and not just whether they do specific damage or not.

The only way to fix this is to remove the engineers from the usual surveying and rating, saving them for research and testing where they can do well. They are not doing well the way things are now; in fact they're the ones causing problems by demanding that surveyors do not give a rating higher than they can prove using the engineer's scale even when the strength was very clearly higher. Matador was stronger than EF3whether there was structural; damage which could 'prove' that or not; we all know this to be true, so to restrict it's rating to something wrong and inaccurate proves cl;early that the engineer's way of doing this is wrong and needs to be changed. But as long as they're being given free reign to do whay they please this will continue, and the arguing which divides us will continue too.

Nothing good is happening- let's change that.

One thing I remember is around 2003 or 2004 the F-SCALE seemed to be going to hell in a hand basket and F-RATINGS were abysmal when rating. This likely had something to do with the La Plata 2002 tornado for damage structures were rated way too high. It is like these NWS offices and engineers were sick of the F-SCALE. In February of 2007 the EF-SCALE comes along and for a while it seemed like everything was coming back to somewhat normal when rating tornadoes. This lasts for about 5 to 7 years then the Vilonia 2014 tornado happens and since then EF5 ratings have seemed almost impossible. Now it seems like the EF-SCALE is going to hell in a hand basket and once again NWS offices and engineers seem to be sick of it and our giving out much lower than normal than EF-RATINGS. Today is like a repeat of the early to mid 2000s but a significantly longer stretch than then.

 

[Sawmaster]

One thing I remember is around 2003 or 2004 the F-SCALE seemed to be going to hell in a hand basket and F-RATINGS were abysmal when rating. This likely had something to do with the La Plata 2002 tornado for damage structures were rated way too high. It is like these NWS offices and engineers were sick of the F-SCALE. In February of 2007 the EF-SCALE comes along and for a while it seemed like everything was coming back to somewhat normal when rating tornadoes. This lasts for about 5 to 7 years then the Vilonia 2014 tornado happens and since then EF5 ratings have seemed almost impossible. Now it seems like the EF-SCALE is going to hell in a hand basket and once again NWS offices and engineers seem to be sick of it and our giving out much lower than normal than EF-RATINGS. Today is like a repeat of the early to mid 2000s but a significantly longer stretch than then.

It was going on in 2011. NWIH were Smithville and Philadelphia, around 200MPH and plenty of other high-strength storms got under-rated then too. Everyone knows this to be true except engineers who would rather ignore things than admit their methods- and thus themselves- have failed.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

It was going on in 2011. NWIH were Smithville and Philadelphia, around 200MPH and plenty of other high-strength storms got under-rated then too. Everyone knows this to be true except engineers who would rather ignore things than admit their methods- and thus themselves- have failed.

True, but it seems to have gotten especially worse in the past 10 years.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

It was going on in 2011. NWIH were Smithville and Philadelphia, around 200MPH and plenty of other high-strength storms got under-rated then too. Everyone knows this to be true except engineers who would rather ignore things than admit their methods- and thus themselves- have failed.

Greensburg, KS 2007...205 mph
Parkersburg/New Hartford, IA 2008...205 mph
Philadelphia, MS 2011...205 mph
Smithville, MS 2011...205 mph
Phil Campbell/Hackleburg, AL 2011...210 mph
Rainsville/Sylvania, AL 2011...>200 mph
Joplin, MO 2011...>200 mph
El Reno, OK 2011...215 mph
Moore, OK 2013...210 mph

 

[ColdFront]

Greensburg, KS 2007...205 mph
Parkersburg/New Hartford, IA 2008...205 mph
Philadelphia, MS 2011...205 mph
Smithville, MS 2011...205 mph
Phil Campbell/Hackleburg, AL 2011...210 mph
Rainsville/Sylvania, AL 2011...>200 mph
Joplin, MO 2011...>200 mph
El Reno, OK 2011...215 mph
Moore, OK 2013...210 mph

Smithville being 205 and Hackleburg being 210 is a joke. While Hackleburg is in the upper echelon of upper echelon in terms of continuous ef5 damage, Smithville, IMO, may have been the strongest recorded tornado of all time taking into account its forward speed.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

Smithville being 205 and Hackleburg being 210 is a joke. While Hackleburg is in the upper echelon of upper echelon in terms of continuous ef5 damage, Smithville, IMO, may have been the strongest recorded tornado of all time taking into account its forward speed.

I would a.so say the Philadelphia, MS tornado. I also believe the Parkersburg/New Hartford, IA 2008 tornado was significantly or at least somewhat stronger than the Greensburg, KS 2007 tornado.

 

[tornado examiner]

Are there anymore photos showing the most intense damage of the matador tornado that anyone has?