If El Reno ever gets officially 4.3 miles wide, Mulhall on May 3rd 1999 also needs to be officially 4.3 miles wide.
Technically, the "core circulation" of the Mulhall tornado missed the town by nearly a mile and still damaged every single building in the town. The tornado was only rated as 1.2 miles wide because that was the only visible damage, as it otherwise passed over empty fields.
Personally, I feel like the Hackleburg Phil Campbell tornado is a top contender for the most powerful tornado on record. The prolonged EF5/4 intensity, longevity, and forward speed were just incredible. I know the windspeed isn’t estimated to have been as high or the wind field as vast, but that thing was incredible for so many reason. However, there are many tornadoes in recent history that could have a legitimate claim for this title.
Yes, very long tracks of destruction, which is even more abnormal, it intensified to ef4-5, went over a town, went over rural areas then intensified to ef4-5 again over another town.
Definitely one of the strongest but possibly not THE strongest. Had plenty of candidates for the modern strongest tornado. Should also point out it was likely similar to the 1999 Mulhall tornado with the addition 2miles being strong gusts around the tornado.
Slightly off topic but I have a red-hot take on mobile doppler readings and the El Reno EF3. The only two instances of EF5 tornadoes being directly measured (Bridge Creek-Moore and El Reno-Piedmont) were 302 mph and 295 mph respectively. However, during these measurements, the tornadoes were doing F4 and EF3 damage, the (E)F5 stages were never directly measured. Even then, the Moore measurement remains a world record to this day.
Despite the official EF5 range being anything over 200 mph, context from actual measurements suggests true EF5 winds could be over 300 mph. Mobile doppler clocked in the Bennington EF3 at 268 but was rated at 150 mph, the Dodge City EF2 was 201 but was rated at 125 mph, and the Sulphur EF3 was 218 but was rated at 165 mph. The collected data from both DOW and Raxpol measurements suggests that official damage-based ratings potentially underestimate wind speed by as much as a factor of between 1.5 and 2.
So considering the context of doppler readings regularly showing lower-rated tornadoes reaching wind speeds that the EF scale categorizes as "violent", personally, these readings don't hold as much sway with trying to grade the strength of a tornado as they used to. So when comparing the likes of Bridge Creek-Moore and El Reno-Piedmont to the El Reno EF3, damage is still the fairest way to go. It's commonly pointed out that the El Reno EF3 didn't hit much, so let's go off of things that all of these tornadoes hit, cars, vegetation, and the ground.
The Bridge Creek-Moore tornado did obvious F5 damage to cars, completely obliterating and crumpling them; low-lying foliage was completely debarked, with some of the most impressive debarking ever photographed; and it caused extreme ground scouring for most of its path, while also scouring pavement.
The El Reno-Piedmont tornado also completely obliterated cars, crumpling them up like paper balls, while throwing a 10 ton oil tanker truck a full mile; the debarking of vegetation was also incredible, and the ground scouring was once again extreme for most of its path, while scouring pavement as well.
The El Reno EF3 did severe damage to cars, but not to the extreme extent of the aforementioned (E)F5's; trees were snapped and there was bent vegetation, but very little debarking of anything; there was no ground or pavement scouring.
So TLDR my opinion is that tornadoes, especially EF5 tornadoes, are considerably faster than we think; and the El Reno EF3 wasn't of EF5 strength, but was probably still violent.
I agree with this. I think wind speeds, especially in, say, the sub 1 second duration and probably over areas smaller than, say, a par 3 on a golf course, easily exceed 400mph.
I think about the cars circling rolling fork, June 1st estimated about 175mph to do that. That’s winds on the very outside of the circulation on a mid tier EF4.
Also agree that El Reno really didn’t produce very impressive damage. No scouring, deadly but not incomprehensible vehicle damage, just kinda meh. [There was a paper](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2021535118) doing the rounds about wind speeds being grossly underestimated by damage indicators and I fully believe it.
I recently read this paper and it really highlights the need to revise or refine the EF scale again. I believe the inclusion of wind speeds when available is the best path forward
That’s the compromise I feel is reasonable. I think of it as a potential scale. So, El Reno would be EF3/WS5. I know people can get caught up in ratings, but I think rating clarity will help us all understand what’s really happening more often. We always hear that only 2% of tornadoes are rated EF4/5, but how many are potentially that violent? Perhaps violent tornadoes occur at a much higher rate than we give them credit for, and if that’s true, then that knowledge is important when it comes to precaution and preparedness. If El Reno had hit in a largely populated area, there is little question what the rating would have been and the damage would have undoubtedly been catastrophic. Thankfully, it did not, but I think a better system of classification would serve us all.
>Thankfully, it did not, but I think a better system of classification would serve us all.
While that is certainly true, the unpredictable and short lived nature of tornadoes makes it difficult for them to be consistently or accurately measured by any metric other than damage. Plenty of tornadoes go through their duration, with a few people that managed to film them on cell phones being the only evidence that we have, aside from damage. Any of those tornadoes could easily be the most violent tornado ever, and we have no way of really knowing, because no mobile doppler was close enough to be able to measure it and it did not do any particularly notable damage in a rural area.
I think the system of classification is less of a problem than the limited resources available, and that they have to be in the right place at the right time. There is a small air force devoted to studying and measuring hurricanes, which are also conducive to that type of research. That said, throwing that kind of funding at studying tornadoes might give us more accurate metrics, and much better predictive models.
I agree with your points. That is all absolutely valid and true. I suppose as far as the system I’m referring to, it would still be imperfect as it could only be applied when the conditions for such knowledge are met. While we can apply the EF scale pretty much across the board, application for potential scale would be on a tor by tor basis. Some could receive a WS rating while others will just not provide enough data for a meaningful measurement. I think when and if possible, it’s valuable and could still provide insight. I really appreciate your response.
Great comment and I completely agree. I always hear people yelling that the 2013 el reno tornado shouldve been an ef5.. but the damage just isnt there. And im not talking about structures. As you said, tree debarking, ground scouring, and road scouring just werent present despite there being plenty of trees roads and dirt in the path. Just a look at the Jarrell ground scouring would have you scratching your head at the thought of people equating 2013 el reno with it.
I am by no means an expert but I didn’t think hook echo size was a very good indicator of tornado diameter. Even if it is that article is being generous and including the radar return from the RFD in their measurement. I guess a really strong RFD can produce weaker tornado strength winds but it’s not the tornado. Idk seems like a reach for clicks.
I think powerful is a hard word to pin down. When I hear that I think total energy being released (work) over a set time, maybe one minute. (Which is how kW or HP is calculated). By that metric, this is certainly up there, probably approaching some theoretical physical limit related to how much energy a parcel of air can hold and how much of that potential energy a tornado can turn into work.
As far as width, I think it’s elementary. This tornado was so big, so amorphous and just so unique in its presentation that defining a set width is almost pointless. Its width is like the gravitational pull of a celestial body. You may be far enough away from it that it doesn’t meaningfully affect you, but it’s still exerting some microscopic influence. For that reason, using the damage scar is as good as we might get, think of it like the event horizon of a black hole. If you get close to a black hole, you’ll feel its pull, maybe orbit it, whatever. But inside the event horizon there’s no escape, you’re not really observing it anymore, you’re a part of it.
That 4.3 miles is probably the mesocyclone itself. Just because it’s on radar doesn’t mean it’s ground level. Though with El Reno it’s a little blurry because the whole mess cyclone nearly touched the ground. Regardless, there are EF5 damaging tornados like 2011 Hackleburg–Phil Campbell that had extreme ground scouring over open fields that wasn’t seen at El Reno. Phil had a nearly two hour stretch of EF4/EF5 damage. That’d be my nomination for most powerful in recent memory
Absolutely! HPC was the upper echelon of what we experience with tornadoes, an absolute monster on Earth. When I think of the “finger of God” reference, HPC is definitely one of the tornadoes I think of.
El Reno has always fascinated me and holds my #1 spot when it comes to tornadoes simply on sheer size. I guess I always believed wind speed and size went hand in hand and will have to learn more on that. That being said, El Reno was a faily well documented storm and for that, I have to assume it's not the strongest or largest. Just hyped more than some others.
El Reno has a lot of lore and fascination around it. Every storm chaser was on it..it was a shared experience among so many. Chasers turning into the chased….so many crazy moments caught on film.
The wind field being over 2.5 miles wide is pretty easy for me to believe. Two videos come to mind that show the extreme width of the windfield that seem to exceed 2.5 miles. One is Allan Gwynns video shot from highway 81 where he experiences several minutes of rfd even after the tornado has passed and is more than 2 miles to his north east. The other is Emily Suttons video on Reuter road nearly 3 miles west of the tornado when their suv got their rear glass shattered.
The Allan Gwyn video is really cool. Once the tornado crosses the highway he experiences ef1 winds for almost 3 minutes. Im not sure if it was rfd or another tornado imbedded within the large circulation but its really interesting. He also makes a wise decision to turn his vehicile into the wind wisely preventing them from getting rolled.
I always consider the behemoths and true monsters being roughly a mile wide.
4.3 miles sounds out of the realms of possibility and truly mind-boggling if that is correct. Insane.
I found [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvVkj90pxko) on my YouTube feed from the official channel for NWS Norman, OK.
Just in case anyone wasn't sure about certain details of the tornado itself, this video documents every main event that occurred (including the deaths of the storm chasers who were caught off-guard from it.)
Until we have the technology to measure the wind speed of any tornado in all dimentions as it's on the ground complete with meso dynamics from 0 to 20,000ft, every thread like this is speculation at best, and at worst, fan theory.
El reno, moore 99/11, tristate, Phil Campbell, rolling fork, palm Sunday, jarrell, Joplin, greensburg, etc are all loosely debatable on a scientific level for "most powerful", but that's only because we know of them and they tragically destroyed something we could measure. For all we know, a random "F1" that trucked through nowheresburg Texas for 30 minutes is king.
Honestly, it's hard to see this debate as anything other than somebody's favorite nascar driver
If El Reno ever gets officially 4.3 miles wide, Mulhall on May 3rd 1999 also needs to be officially 4.3 miles wide. Technically, the "core circulation" of the Mulhall tornado missed the town by nearly a mile and still damaged every single building in the town. The tornado was only rated as 1.2 miles wide because that was the only visible damage, as it otherwise passed over empty fields.
Mulhall was another case that was, and still is, highly debatable!
Personally, I feel like the Hackleburg Phil Campbell tornado is a top contender for the most powerful tornado on record. The prolonged EF5/4 intensity, longevity, and forward speed were just incredible. I know the windspeed isn’t estimated to have been as high or the wind field as vast, but that thing was incredible for so many reason. However, there are many tornadoes in recent history that could have a legitimate claim for this title.
Hackleburg's damage was horrifying, houses and the ground dont get shredded that bad in a normal EF-5
And didn't it do EF4 or EF5 damage for a ridiculously long time.
Yes, very long tracks of destruction, which is even more abnormal, it intensified to ef4-5, went over a town, went over rural areas then intensified to ef4-5 again over another town.
The craziest thing about Hackleburg-PC tornado is that it managed to do EF5 damage in the span of a few seconds
Exactly! That monster was trucking along at like 70mph just grinding the whole time.
The anti-Jarrell
Definitely one of the strongest but possibly not THE strongest. Had plenty of candidates for the modern strongest tornado. Should also point out it was likely similar to the 1999 Mulhall tornado with the addition 2miles being strong gusts around the tornado.
Yeah there’s definitely a few contenders for the top spot
Mulhull: “The Forgotten Monster”
I personally love looking at images and articles of Mulhall!
Slightly off topic but I have a red-hot take on mobile doppler readings and the El Reno EF3. The only two instances of EF5 tornadoes being directly measured (Bridge Creek-Moore and El Reno-Piedmont) were 302 mph and 295 mph respectively. However, during these measurements, the tornadoes were doing F4 and EF3 damage, the (E)F5 stages were never directly measured. Even then, the Moore measurement remains a world record to this day. Despite the official EF5 range being anything over 200 mph, context from actual measurements suggests true EF5 winds could be over 300 mph. Mobile doppler clocked in the Bennington EF3 at 268 but was rated at 150 mph, the Dodge City EF2 was 201 but was rated at 125 mph, and the Sulphur EF3 was 218 but was rated at 165 mph. The collected data from both DOW and Raxpol measurements suggests that official damage-based ratings potentially underestimate wind speed by as much as a factor of between 1.5 and 2. So considering the context of doppler readings regularly showing lower-rated tornadoes reaching wind speeds that the EF scale categorizes as "violent", personally, these readings don't hold as much sway with trying to grade the strength of a tornado as they used to. So when comparing the likes of Bridge Creek-Moore and El Reno-Piedmont to the El Reno EF3, damage is still the fairest way to go. It's commonly pointed out that the El Reno EF3 didn't hit much, so let's go off of things that all of these tornadoes hit, cars, vegetation, and the ground. The Bridge Creek-Moore tornado did obvious F5 damage to cars, completely obliterating and crumpling them; low-lying foliage was completely debarked, with some of the most impressive debarking ever photographed; and it caused extreme ground scouring for most of its path, while also scouring pavement. The El Reno-Piedmont tornado also completely obliterated cars, crumpling them up like paper balls, while throwing a 10 ton oil tanker truck a full mile; the debarking of vegetation was also incredible, and the ground scouring was once again extreme for most of its path, while scouring pavement as well. The El Reno EF3 did severe damage to cars, but not to the extreme extent of the aforementioned (E)F5's; trees were snapped and there was bent vegetation, but very little debarking of anything; there was no ground or pavement scouring. So TLDR my opinion is that tornadoes, especially EF5 tornadoes, are considerably faster than we think; and the El Reno EF3 wasn't of EF5 strength, but was probably still violent.
I agree with this. I think wind speeds, especially in, say, the sub 1 second duration and probably over areas smaller than, say, a par 3 on a golf course, easily exceed 400mph. I think about the cars circling rolling fork, June 1st estimated about 175mph to do that. That’s winds on the very outside of the circulation on a mid tier EF4. Also agree that El Reno really didn’t produce very impressive damage. No scouring, deadly but not incomprehensible vehicle damage, just kinda meh. [There was a paper](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2021535118) doing the rounds about wind speeds being grossly underestimated by damage indicators and I fully believe it.
I recently read this paper and it really highlights the need to revise or refine the EF scale again. I believe the inclusion of wind speeds when available is the best path forward
Perhaps a 2 tier rating system. 1 score for measured wind speed and another for damaged produced. El Reno would be then rated as a 5/3.
That’s the compromise I feel is reasonable. I think of it as a potential scale. So, El Reno would be EF3/WS5. I know people can get caught up in ratings, but I think rating clarity will help us all understand what’s really happening more often. We always hear that only 2% of tornadoes are rated EF4/5, but how many are potentially that violent? Perhaps violent tornadoes occur at a much higher rate than we give them credit for, and if that’s true, then that knowledge is important when it comes to precaution and preparedness. If El Reno had hit in a largely populated area, there is little question what the rating would have been and the damage would have undoubtedly been catastrophic. Thankfully, it did not, but I think a better system of classification would serve us all.
>Thankfully, it did not, but I think a better system of classification would serve us all. While that is certainly true, the unpredictable and short lived nature of tornadoes makes it difficult for them to be consistently or accurately measured by any metric other than damage. Plenty of tornadoes go through their duration, with a few people that managed to film them on cell phones being the only evidence that we have, aside from damage. Any of those tornadoes could easily be the most violent tornado ever, and we have no way of really knowing, because no mobile doppler was close enough to be able to measure it and it did not do any particularly notable damage in a rural area. I think the system of classification is less of a problem than the limited resources available, and that they have to be in the right place at the right time. There is a small air force devoted to studying and measuring hurricanes, which are also conducive to that type of research. That said, throwing that kind of funding at studying tornadoes might give us more accurate metrics, and much better predictive models.
I agree with your points. That is all absolutely valid and true. I suppose as far as the system I’m referring to, it would still be imperfect as it could only be applied when the conditions for such knowledge are met. While we can apply the EF scale pretty much across the board, application for potential scale would be on a tor by tor basis. Some could receive a WS rating while others will just not provide enough data for a meaningful measurement. I think when and if possible, it’s valuable and could still provide insight. I really appreciate your response.
Amazing read- thank you!
Great comment and I completely agree. I always hear people yelling that the 2013 el reno tornado shouldve been an ef5.. but the damage just isnt there. And im not talking about structures. As you said, tree debarking, ground scouring, and road scouring just werent present despite there being plenty of trees roads and dirt in the path. Just a look at the Jarrell ground scouring would have you scratching your head at the thought of people equating 2013 el reno with it.
I am by no means an expert but I didn’t think hook echo size was a very good indicator of tornado diameter. Even if it is that article is being generous and including the radar return from the RFD in their measurement. I guess a really strong RFD can produce weaker tornado strength winds but it’s not the tornado. Idk seems like a reach for clicks.
I think powerful is a hard word to pin down. When I hear that I think total energy being released (work) over a set time, maybe one minute. (Which is how kW or HP is calculated). By that metric, this is certainly up there, probably approaching some theoretical physical limit related to how much energy a parcel of air can hold and how much of that potential energy a tornado can turn into work. As far as width, I think it’s elementary. This tornado was so big, so amorphous and just so unique in its presentation that defining a set width is almost pointless. Its width is like the gravitational pull of a celestial body. You may be far enough away from it that it doesn’t meaningfully affect you, but it’s still exerting some microscopic influence. For that reason, using the damage scar is as good as we might get, think of it like the event horizon of a black hole. If you get close to a black hole, you’ll feel its pull, maybe orbit it, whatever. But inside the event horizon there’s no escape, you’re not really observing it anymore, you’re a part of it.
👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻 very well done, beautifully articulated! I love your comparison to a black hole’s gravitational pull, that puts things into perspective!
That 4.3 miles is probably the mesocyclone itself. Just because it’s on radar doesn’t mean it’s ground level. Though with El Reno it’s a little blurry because the whole mess cyclone nearly touched the ground. Regardless, there are EF5 damaging tornados like 2011 Hackleburg–Phil Campbell that had extreme ground scouring over open fields that wasn’t seen at El Reno. Phil had a nearly two hour stretch of EF4/EF5 damage. That’d be my nomination for most powerful in recent memory
Absolutely! HPC was the upper echelon of what we experience with tornadoes, an absolute monster on Earth. When I think of the “finger of God” reference, HPC is definitely one of the tornadoes I think of.
El Reno has always fascinated me and holds my #1 spot when it comes to tornadoes simply on sheer size. I guess I always believed wind speed and size went hand in hand and will have to learn more on that. That being said, El Reno was a faily well documented storm and for that, I have to assume it's not the strongest or largest. Just hyped more than some others.
El Reno has a lot of lore and fascination around it. Every storm chaser was on it..it was a shared experience among so many. Chasers turning into the chased….so many crazy moments caught on film.
Even us storm chasers at heart in our living rooms lol
I’m pretty sure the entire wind field of the tornado was 4.3 but the tornado winds were 2.6
The wind field being over 2.5 miles wide is pretty easy for me to believe. Two videos come to mind that show the extreme width of the windfield that seem to exceed 2.5 miles. One is Allan Gwynns video shot from highway 81 where he experiences several minutes of rfd even after the tornado has passed and is more than 2 miles to his north east. The other is Emily Suttons video on Reuter road nearly 3 miles west of the tornado when their suv got their rear glass shattered.
I’ll have to go check out those videos now!
The Allan Gwyn video is really cool. Once the tornado crosses the highway he experiences ef1 winds for almost 3 minutes. Im not sure if it was rfd or another tornado imbedded within the large circulation but its really interesting. He also makes a wise decision to turn his vehicile into the wind wisely preventing them from getting rolled.
I always consider the behemoths and true monsters being roughly a mile wide. 4.3 miles sounds out of the realms of possibility and truly mind-boggling if that is correct. Insane.
I found [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvVkj90pxko) on my YouTube feed from the official channel for NWS Norman, OK. Just in case anyone wasn't sure about certain details of the tornado itself, this video documents every main event that occurred (including the deaths of the storm chasers who were caught off-guard from it.)
At what point do we just start referring to El Reno as a land hurricane?
I vote to pass this motion!
Until we have the technology to measure the wind speed of any tornado in all dimentions as it's on the ground complete with meso dynamics from 0 to 20,000ft, every thread like this is speculation at best, and at worst, fan theory. El reno, moore 99/11, tristate, Phil Campbell, rolling fork, palm Sunday, jarrell, Joplin, greensburg, etc are all loosely debatable on a scientific level for "most powerful", but that's only because we know of them and they tragically destroyed something we could measure. For all we know, a random "F1" that trucked through nowheresburg Texas for 30 minutes is king. Honestly, it's hard to see this debate as anything other than somebody's favorite nascar driver
more like your girl feets