Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,507
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    SnowHabit
    Newest Member
    SnowHabit
    Joined

April 24-30th Severe Potential


Chicago Storm

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

TDS and tornado warning at DeBerry, TX. This storm just developed out of a pretty average looking thunderstorm cell. This maxed out at about 99kts storm relative (175 knot delta V)

 

Sounds like an oil field got hit with injuries by this tornado.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NWS Norman, OK:

325pm- Survey team rated both the Fletcher and Ninnekah tornadoes from yesterday as EF1 tornadoes.

Nasty looking EF1s. Not a heck of a lot out there to verify with. The measured wind report that was mentioned of 100kts I thought might be used as evidence of EF2, but I guess they considered it unreliable?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nasty looking EF1s. Not a heck of a lot out there to verify with. The measured wind report that was mentioned of 100kts I thought might be used as evidence of EF2, but I guess they considered it unreliable?

 

Gabe Garfield posted:

 

"The damage was sporadic in both paths, with the worst damage high-end EF1. Some mobile homes were completely destroyed, but the context around the homes could not justify an EF2 rating (more evidence as to why you should not to be in a mobile home in a tornado!).

 

Dynamically, these tornadoes were probably of the "high swirl" variety. The circulations were wide, and there are many evidences of multiple vortex behavior. The sub-vortices were probably "low swirl", as evidenced by the tendency to take down power poles (low swirl vortices are stronger just off the surface).

 

Because of the intermittent damage, the path lengths for the event were hard to determine. The first tornado we surveyed formed just west of Elgin and dissipated in Fletcher. The second tornado we surveyed began several miles south of Cement and continued to just east of Ninnekah."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nasty looking EF1s. Not a heck of a lot out there to verify with. The measured wind report that was mentioned of 100kts I thought might be used as evidence of EF2, but I guess they considered it unreliable?

The EF rating of a tornado is supposed to be based purely on damage. Just ask OUN and what they did--were forced to do--with the 2013 El-Reno tornado, despite RaXPol measuring a 296mph wind 500 feet AGL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The EF rating of a tornado is supposed to be based purely on damage. Just ask OUN and what they did--were forced to do--with the 2013 El-Reno tornado, despite RaXPol measuring a 296mph wind 500 feet AGL.

*If* the wind report was reliable, that would be wrong to discount it imo because it's a 10m wind the EF scale is trying to estimate based off damage indicators. Slightly different situation than radar data from higher than 10m above the ground because the reduction from the speed at radar beam level to 10m/nearest to surface is only an estimate. Whereas the near surface wind ob, if determined to have been within the tornado vortex, would be a sampling of the true wind speed.

Obviously if the ob were considered unreliable then that renders the argument moot. Nevertheless, I still disagree with HQ in the decisions made on radar sampling regardless of the fact that there would be more tornadoes on the Plains rated with radar and skewing the climatology. The climatology is already skewed, so I say use any and all sources of data available to determine the maximum winds in the tornado to as high a degree of confidence as possible similar to what's done with hurricanes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...