The Greensburg Wedge - What's The Rating Going To Be??

[Willie Dines]

Ok, the rating is an EF5, and yes, I feel that there are good points to both sides of the discussion as reguards the new and old scale, but don't forget, we are still only learning about tornadoes and there is much more to be learned, and so whatever scales are devised, etc, they are all part of trial and error of learning , the sad thing is, whilst some people are learning, people are dying and I for 1, would rather be out there in the field, learning more about tornadoes, than to spend alot of time going over the same things, time and again

Come on people, too many people are being killed by tornadoes and other severe weather and it's about time that every single one of us, all put our heads together, and use our knowledge and experience, that we have gathered over the years, to be able to forcast, to chase, to warn, to teach and to help save lives, much better and more knowledgably tomorrow, than we are already doing today

Willie

 

[rdale]

Willie - not sure what I'm missing here... How is the discussion about the EF scale taking away from our tornado warning methodology? This tornado was well warned, the only glitch was when DDC dropped the warning at midnight but I think it was clear with all the media coverage that it was still a massive beast. So this one did NOT hit 'without warning.'

And as scientists we need to be able to rank tornadoes. So we need a scale to rank them with. And if we don't discuss it, we'll end up with something worse than what we already have! The EF scale is supposedly going to be able to be fine tuned every year (first note - remove the low end of the EF0 scale because you can have a tornado with weaker winds.)

 

[Carrie Halliday]

The following post is from Texanstalk.com, Texans Asylum (and his wife Mrs TA) are from Greensburg and are the folks who had the family there that I talked about in my original post. I am posting the infomation he provided on getting help to the people of the stricken town, not spam but there if you feel you want to donate. Bob is good people, as is Laura. Phone #s there to verify to make sure it is legit.

Laura(Mrs TA) and myself are involved in getting things together for the victims of the tornado that hit Greensburg last Friday. My church is getting involved as well to help get much needed items to the people that need them--i.e. clothes, towels, sheets, shoes, dishes, etc.

Here's the simple fact. Those items need to be transported and stored, and that takes money. My church has agreed to be an intermediary for any financial help people might want to give. The name and address of my church is...

Plains Christian Church
408 West C
Plains, Kansas 67869
1-620-563-6165
1-888-213-4753

That financial support can go to purchasing items needed as well. Come on folks...get your help started and let God bless yourselves while He's helping bless others. Lets get together and help where we can help. You can also PM me with any questions you might have and I'll respond as quickly as I get them.

Thanks again
Bob

 

[Eric Flescher]

The rating on KMBZ in Kansas City said EF5 this morning Monday.
Don't you think the public will get confused about EF ratings (and F ratings) ?
Has anyone heard of a posting of both EF andF rating on the news?
Isn't the public getting confused?

 

[B Ozanne]

The rating on KMBZ in Kansas City said EF5 this morning Monday.
Don't you think the public will get confused about EF ratings (and F ratings) ?
Has anyone heard of a posting of both EF andF rating on the news?
Isn't the public getting confused?

Trust me, the public is already confused. Either way, the results on Greensburg were the same.

 

[Kiel Ortega]

The rating on KMBZ in Kansas City said EF5 this morning Monday.
Don't you think the public will get confused about EF ratings (and F ratings) ?
Has anyone heard of a posting of both EF andF rating on the news?
Isn't the public getting confused?

I've seen the media trying to show the new scale and explain it...though many are screwing it up. One news program said that May 3 99 was stronger than Greensburg because the estimated wind speeds for the F5 are higher than the EF 5. So the only way the public gets confused is if the media can't follow along with what has been explained. IMO, I don't think it really matters if the public misunderstands the rating system (I doubt the public even understands the old system considering the media can't figure out that it's a damage scale and the WINDS are estimated---so sick of saying that)...the public only needs to understand the warning system.

 

[Jayson Prentice]

I'm fairly certain that late last night when I was watching a story on it that the weather channel folks, including the severe weather expert, messed up in describing the changes between the two scales! I don't know what is so hard to understand about it, the scale was always based on damage, not on wind speeds... The new scale just states how the new research found that it doesn't take as high of wind speeds to destroy certain structures as previously thought, that doesn't mean that the tornado rated F4 was stronger than the EF-4; the previous F4 probably didn't have as high of winds as that scale indicated.

Anyways, definitely thought the Greensburg was going to be a strong EF-4 rating at first glance; but as mentioned, the water tower going down is definitely a big sign of how strong those winds were. Not only that it brough it down, but how it wrapped that metal up...

 

[B Ozanne]

What kind of water tower was it? Those things seem like easy marks for the wind, but maybe they are stronger than I thought. Any photos?

What about the concrete grain elevators? Those all seemed to survive. Does anybody know what kind of winds are needed to bring down one of those?

 

[Zac Flamig]

Here are some photos of the high school and another house that I believed took the EF-5 damage.

The high school was at one point three stories tall and in one photo you can see that part of it has been reduced to rubble. The house was blown clean...

Photos taken by Andrea Dittman.

 

[mike scantlin]

This is entirely plausible. Larry Ruthi, the MIC from DDC, was interviewed by TWC earlier and said the Greensburg tornado ended 3mi N of Greensburg. A new meso formed just east of Greensburg as the original tornado entered Greensburg and quickly became extremely intense as it moved northeast.

i totally disagree. it didnt form a new tube. i was right there, it did seem to cycle on radar, but that tornado stayed on the ground for at least 30 minutes after it hit greensburg. its odd, but it cycled while the tornado was still on the ground. i was also keeping an eye on the new meso to the west or soutwest of the beast. it funneled for a minute, but it never did anything. we stayed about 3 miles south of town and watched it roar on, and until we decided to leave about 45 minutes later, it was still visible. never at any time did it lift or look weak. in fact, after it hit the town, it got bigger.

 

[Willie Dines]

Willie - not sure what I'm missing here... How is the discussion about the EF scale taking away from our tornado warning methodology? This tornado was well warned, the only glitch was when DDC dropped the warning at midnight but I think it was clear with all the media coverage that it was still a massive beast. So this one did NOT hit 'without warning.'

And as scientists we need to be able to rank tornadoes. So we need a scale to rank them with. And if we don't discuss it, we'll end up with something worse than what we already have! The EF scale is supposedly going to be able to be fine tuned every year (first note - remove the low end of the EF0 scale because you can have a tornado with weaker winds.)

Hey rdale

I didn't even so much as hint or say that it was and I have no problems with discussing methodology, as it is all part of gaining more knowledge on tornadoes, in the hope and search for better understanding

I agree wholeheartedly, about the fine tuning of the EF scale, on a annual basis, which is why I mentioned that the development of the EF scale is with trial and error, meaning, the more that we can learn as scientists and researchers, the better chance that we have of educating the public even better, hence helping to save as many lives as we possibly can

I also agree that the warning time was excellent, I believe it was in around 20 minutes warning time, which is a credit to the chasers/spotters, who are out on the road each year, and the NWS, who did a great job in sending the warnings out in good time

Willie

 

[Tony Lyza]

i totally disagree. it didnt form a new tube. i was right there, it did seem to cycle on radar, but that tornado stayed on the ground for at least 30 minutes after it hit greensburg. its odd, but it cycled while the tornado was still on the ground. i was also keeping an eye on the new meso to the west or soutwest of the beast. it funneled for a minute, but it never did anything. we stayed about 3 miles south of town and watched it roar on, and until we decided to leave about 45 minutes later, it was still visible. never at any time did it lift or look weak. in fact, after it hit the town, it got bigger.

 

[Willie Dines]

There is one thing that is quite an eerie reminder of 5/3/99, (I'm sorry for making this comparison once again) looking at how the path of the Greensburg monster wedge, the way at the tornado hooks round to move NW, after tavelling a considerable distance moving NE, is the same thing that the Moore F5 did, it had also hooked round to travel NW, as it was decaying, and so, how many other strong tornadoes have made a path like this?

Thank you for posting this Tony

Willie

 

[rdale]

Many tornadoes take a left jog as they occlude, it's not at all a feature limited to violent ones...

 

[beaudodson]

Many tornadoes take a left jog as they occlude, it's not at all a feature limited to violent ones...

Robert

Have you found that the tornado reaches its peak right before or during the occlusion?

Thanks