June 21st 2023 Matador TX Tornado Discussion

[Shakespeare 2016]

There's not quite enough for EF5 in terms of house damage. The 190 - 195 MPH range is appropriate IMO.

A 200 mph EF4 would be fine too.

 

[Sawmaster]

There's not quite enough for EF5 in terms of house damage. The 190 - 195 MPH range is appropriate IMO.

While I wouldn'ty disagree with those speeds, I do need to protest that this is not about damage to houses- the point here is determining as best we can the windspeed beyond the DI's used here which are obviously inadequate.

 

[UK_EF4]

Even if the tornado was upgraded to EF4/170mph, that would be a lot better in my opinion, since the tornado would still be classed as violent for future climatology, damage analysis etc.

The worse thing about the rating is that a blatantly obviously violent tornado was rated below the violent threshold. Even with HE EF3 structural damage, the context should have been used to upgrade it to at least LE EF4. Its important to get this right, for climatology purposes, future ratings, building & construction etc.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

Even if the tornado was upgraded to EF4/170mph, that would be a lot better in my opinion, since the tornado would still be classed as violent for future climatology, damage analysis etc.

The worse thing about the rating is that a blatantly obviously violent tornado was rated below the violent threshold. Even with HE EF3 structural damage, the context should have been used to upgrade it to at least LE EF4. It’s important to get this right, for climatology purposes, future ratings, building & construction etc.

Maybe, but that still sounds too low to me. LE EF4, yes would be considered violent but still it was much more intense than HE EF3 OR LE EF4.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

I was blocked by NWS in Lubbock. Do you think I really care. They deliberately underrate tornadoes to make people like us mad. Yes, that is what is going on. They are top #1 on my s**t list of nws offices. Most of these nws office cmployees shouldn't even have the privilege to rate tornadoes. Us people on this site are much more competent to rate tornado damage.

 

[tornado examiner]

I was blocked by NWS in Lubbock. Do you think I really care. They deliberately underrate tornadoes to make people like us mad. Yes, that is what is going on. They are top #1 on my s**t list of nws offices. Most of these nws office cmployees shouldn't even have the privilege to rate tornadoes. Us people on this site are much more competent to rate tornado damage.

Someone sounds rightfully upset..
Can’t say I feel much different on the matter

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

Someone sounds rightfully upset..
Can’t say I feel much different on the matter

I am 43 years old and if people want to accuse me of acting like a child go ahead and do so. These NWS offices that pull this crap deserves everyone's defiance on this site.

 

[tornado examiner]

I am 43 years old and if people want to accuse me of acting like a child go ahead and do so. These NWS offices that pull this crap deserves everyone's defiance on this site.

Oh no I’m not complaining about you…one might say I’m complaining with you…

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

Oh no I’m not complaining about you…one might say I’m complaining with you…

I have gotten to the point where I am beginning to ask myself what is an EF5 tornado? Hypothetically if a tornado digs 5 feet into feet into the ground, throws vehicles for tens of miles, strips every piece of bark from a tree, but doesn't hit a well-built house BS, it could be rated as low as an EF3.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

I believe NWS Jackson, on of the best damage surveyors in the country may have rated the Matador tornado an EF5. A high-end EF4 for sure. Absolutely no consistency between offices.

 

[tornado examiner]

I have gotten to the point where I am beginning to ask myself what is an EF5 tornado? Hypothetically if a tornado digs 5 feet into feet into the ground, throws vehicles for tens of miles, straps every piece of bark from a tree, but doesn't hit a well-built house BS, it could be rated as low as an EF3.

It has to slab a skyscraper. every conservative nws office: “AHAH! BUT LOOK AT THIS! Rusty decades old bolts! Cracks everywhere! And to top it off!!…..don’t you know that a skyscraper can be collapsed by a low end tornado due to how tall they are? Every heard of the lever? Helloooo… High end ef3!”

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

It has to slab a skyscraper. every conservative nws office: “AHAH! BUT LOOK AT THIS! Rusty decades old bolts! Cracks everywhere! And to top it off!!…..don’t you know that a skyscraper can be collapsed by a low end tornado due to how tall they are? Every heard of the lever? Helloooo… High end ef3!”

You can thank Tim Marshall for this well-built house crap that a lot of NWS offices are obsessed with and pays no attention to high-end non DI'S.

 

[Shakespeare 2016]

It has to slab a skyscraper. every conservative nws office: “AHAH! BUT LOOK AT THIS! Rusty decades old bolts! Cracks everywhere! And to top it off!!…..don’t you know that a skyscraper can be collapsed by a low end tornado due to how tall they are? Every heard of the lever? Helloooo… High end ef3!”

Remember the Camp Crook, SD/Capitol, MT tornado. When you think about it my hypothetical tornado doesn't seem too far from this.

 

[CheeselandSkies]

You can thank Tim Marshall for this well-built house crap that a lot of NWS offices are obsessed with and pays no attention to high-end non DI'S.

I'd be fine with it if when well-built, bolted foundation houses were swept away they were being rated EF5. The problem is they're not.

 

[Sawmaster]

I have gotten to the point where I am beginning to ask myself what is an EF5 tornado? Hypothetically if a tornado digs 5 feet into feet into the ground, throws vehicles for tens of miles, strips every piece of bark from a tree, but doesn't hit a well-built house BS, it could be rated as low as an EF3.

This exactly us why I'm PO'ed, which is close to what we saw in Matador.

And we have these "professional" people who want the world to believe they are highly educated doing everything possible to justify their stupidly low ratings.

 

[andyhb]

That Alberta tornado survey compared to this is absolute proof that the issue here isn’t necessarily the scale itself, it is how it is applied by differing survey teams that is the crux of the problem.

 

[tornado examiner]

That Alberta tornado survey compared to this is absolute proof that the issue here isn’t necessarily the scale itself, it is how it is applied by differing survey teams that is the crux of the problem.

A singular home just leveled with pretty average violent contextual damage gets the ef4 rating, while straight Moore type damage gets slapped with an ef3 rating

 

[TH2002]

That Alberta tornado survey compared to this is absolute proof that the issue here isn’t necessarily the scale itself, it is how it is applied by differing survey teams that is the crux of the problem.

The EF scale is flawed in the sense that, when surveying following DI limitations, construction quality can prevent a more appropriate rating regardless of context. On the other hand, for more absurd cases like Cisco 2015 and Matador, the scale isn't to blame.

 

[andyhb]

If the scale was applied with anything other than a crazy degree of conservatism in some cases, more thorough surveying with help from neighboring NWS offices, and/or consistently using the whole scene/context and not just affected structures, we'd probably have at least 2-3 EF5s in the Moore 2013 to present period (Vilonia, Rochelle, Chapman, Mayfield), in addition to several more EF4s. A couple of EF4s probably should be downgraded as well (Newnan GA, Moville IA 2013).

This probably carries through "further down" the scale (Capitol MT in 2018 comes to mind).

 

[andyhb]

I'd be fine with it if when well-built, bolted foundation houses were swept away they were being rated EF5. The problem is they're not.

EXP bound DOD 10 for 1-2 FR on the scale should be 201 mph, zero doubt. The choice to set that at 200 mph is significant because it changes the mindset from "ok, let's prove this was an EF5" from the surrounding scene to "ok, let's prove this was anything but an EF5" from the surrounding scene (Vilonia being the best example of this).