WVU

The only way to support my arguments is for you to call Rick Smith or Mark Fox. Or contact Tim Marshall. They will tell you what I'm saying is right. Or ask to go on some surveys (during this time of Covid that probably won't happen right now). Looking at it from the outside as a research meteorologist is alot different than actually doing surveys. There is really no other way for me to support what I am saying. How else do you want me to support my argument? Just call and ask them. Or call Roger Edwards...he is right there. He does a boatload of chasing and is definitely an expert. For the tornado in KY it was an EF4 based on the survey and the review. Sure...you can disagree with it but until you have the experience it's tough for you to say otherwise. Unless they review it again it will remain an EF4.

Yeah...but you know exactly what I meant. It's not like I have the list of 28 DI's in front of me to reference. Hopefully you got my point.

I have been paying attention. Very closely. And I know most of the WCM's and the expert (with 39 years of experience and a graduate of OU) that I quoted who is asked often to review surveys. They have been quite consistent. You are a grad research student at OU. An excellent university for meteorology...especially in the field of severe weather. Probably one of the top research universities for severe weather research. I'm guessing you haven't been out on many if any surveys. Talk with Rick Smith and ask him his opinion. He has probably done the most surveys inside the NWS. Or talk with Mark Fox the former WCM at the Fort Worth office (he is the MIC at Amarillo now I believe).

Would the scale be better if radar estimated 275 mph winds yet the tornado only went thru the forest and was rated an EF0. Sure...that would be great. But the inconsistencies would be enormous...how many tornado wind speeds have been caught in the lowest slice near an 88D? Very few. There isn't a real good answer at this time. Whether anyone likes the EF scale (which was jointly developed by meteorologists and wind engineers) or not this is what we have to work with at this time...as frustrating as that is. I understand the frustration. I get it. I wish there was something better.

Have any extra popcorn? You might need it!

Most of the subjectivity is taken out of surveys using the DAT. I can't say all the subjectivity but as much as possible. Every office has to use the DAT (okay...maybe not Monterey, CA where they gat one tornado every five years. But even they are required). All offices and WCM's have been trained the same. If there is a question an expert is asked to review the survey. I really have not seen any inconsistencies.

How it's applied is the same regardless where you are (or when). The DAT was updated around 2020 but has been used almost since 2010. Every office has to use the DAT which does take most of the subjectivity away from the ratings.

That wasn't the case nor is it nonsense. The NWS office did the survey as required. The NWS office contacted an engineer/meteorologist with nearly four decades of experience to review the survey. I asked him why it wasn't an EF5 and that was what he told me. You're an meteorologist based on your profile. However I doubt you have done much in the way of tornado surveying. This person is an expert in this field having done it for so long. The NWS has the final say of the rating by law.

This survey wasn't handled any differently. The NWS office did the survey (as required) and an engineer (with nearly four decades of experience) was asked by the NWS office to review the findings. I asked him and this is what he said..."Two main reasons it wasn’t EF-5 imo: fast moving tornado struck a building with high winds that lasted only seconds, an poor building practices limited the number of high end DIs." He has more experience doing this than anyone I know and is frequently asked for his opinion.

Here is the reason why it was not an EF5..."Two main reasons it wasn’t EF-5 imo: fast moving tornado struck a building with high winds that lasted only seconds, an poor building practices limited the number of high end DIs." I asked the question why it wasn't an EF5 and the reviewer (asked by the NWS to review the findings...and he has almost four decades of experience) of the storm survey told me why.

What makes you think it is nonsense? Do you have experience surveying tornadoes? You weren't part of the survey team.

The EF scale does not change each year. It's been the same since 2007. Here is an article from Yale...https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/05/its-been-a-record-long-time-since-the-last-ef5-tornado-what-does-that-mean/

The EF scale was developed by a team of meteorologists and wind engineers.

I might of answered this earlier if so I apologize. The biggest single issue/question for us focused on Obion County, TN...was there a break in the path, or was it in fact a single continuous track that would have broken the record? Alas, as of now it appears enough of a break to go with separate tracks.

Two main reasons it wasn’t EF-5 imo: fast moving tornado struck a building with high winds that lasted only seconds, an poor building practices limited the number of high end DIs.

This might be the answer you are looking for...The biggest single issue/question for us focused on Obion County, TN...was there a break in the path, or was it in fact a single continuous track that would have broken the record? Alas, as of now it appears enough of a break to go with separate tracks.

Who are the pedantic nerds?

Why is it bogus? Have you done official surveys and coordinated with the NWS?

That is 100% wrong. The NWS has never nor does it now outsource surveys to anyone. The NWS does the surveys. They might get opinions and ask for an engineer like Tim Marshall to review the findings but the last word is the NWS. The NWS is the only legal entity that can determine the rating. No one else.