A violent F5 tornado develops near Kellerville, Texas on the evening of June 8, 1995. I'm joined on this chase by veteran storm chasers Bobby Prentice and Richard Thomas.
I seen a story on a man in Jarrell who wanted to build a basement. He was told there was too much limestone so he went to a store and brought a shovel and bucket and other stuff. He literally dug a hole in the living room and people thought he was crazy. When this tornado came,he, his wife and kids got in the hole and survived with minor injuries. Their neighbors didn't survive. Incredible story and cool guy for doing what he did for his family.
Wow...even though I know it's technically not possible to judge a tornado by its looks, that thing looked POWERFUL. For a while there it had the same general shape as the Red Rock F5.
Xenia caused some very intense damage (esp. @ Windsor Park/Arrowhead), but there are many others that come to mind as being considerably more intense. You could possibly make a case for Kellerville somewhere on a top 10 list. To me one of the most impressive tornadoes on record is the El Reno EF5 from 5/24/11. Knocked over a drilling rig weighing nearly 2 million pounds and rolled it several times, threw vehicles 750+ yards, and RaXPol recorded winds of ~125 m/s (280 mph).
Even the "improved" EF-scale is archaic and very limited. So many other tell-tale signs of tornado strength have been noted (tree damage, certain qualities noted on velocity radar, and to some extent -- yes I know this is controversial--but size). Although size alone is should not indicate tornado intensity, it could be part of a more inclusive equation, which would take the other signatures of intensity into account. A "well-built" home being leveled as the main criteria for EF-5 rating ? We can hopefully do better. So many unofficial EF-5 reports, but we must find a structure AND determine its integrity in order to officially rate a tornado ? I hope that we can bring our rating system into the 21st century soon. I don't mean to step on anyone's toes. I would just like to see us move forward with the advancements that we did not have in Ted Fujita's day. He was indeed a brilliant mind
Indeed, and while the Pampa tornado was an F4, was the Kellerville tornado an F5, or was it in actual reality a very high level F3 or F4, since the ratings were disputed for that tornado?
CaptainElevator42189 I'm not exactly certain, but I think that the Kellerville storm was only given an F-2 rating, mainly because of its rural locale. Nothing with structural integrity was actually hit, if Im correct, so the F-2 rating stood. However, chasers who followed it from outside of McLean (to the southwest) claim that the storm had F-5 strength, after having viewed features that the NWS does not take into account (like asphalt scoured from highways, pieces of straw driven into telephone poles, etc). Tell-take signs of F-5 (now EF-5) destruction. It's a bit medieval if you ask me, but I'm not a professional researcher.
So in a nutshell, Texas definitely had six F5 tornadoes, if not possibly seven. 1. Waco, May 11, 1953. 2. Wichita Falls, April 3, 1964. 3. Lubbock, May 11, 1970. 4. Valley Mills, May 6, 1973. 5. Brownwood, April 19, 1976. 6. Kellerville, June 8, 1995 (disputed). 7. Jarrell, May 27, 1997.
CaptainElevator42189 Well, almost but not quite. The Kellerville tornado was not an official F-5. It is one among denizens of likely F-5 tornados that have been underrated due to what they did not strike. Basically a structure with certain "well-built" criteria would have to be wiped clean, not just destroyed. The tornado that touched down near the Jordan Unit that day (just east of Pampa) from the parent cell that produced the F-4 minutes earlier in Pampa showed signs of F-5 strength. Concrete completely scoured once more. Yet, nothing much more was hit, so it received a much lesser rating. Honestly, I'm still on a learning curve as to what types of structures must be effected, and I am even more confused by the Enhanced Fujita scale. So, I stand to be corrected, but I am reasonably sure that what I have said is accurate. And way too long (NOT in a nutshell). Ha! Btw, the only acknowledged F-5 tornado to strike the panhandle was pre-1950 (the tri-state tornado)
More pavement was removed in Williamson County than in any other tornado in history, and the ground scouring was among the most intense ever surveyed. The telephone poles in the worst affected areas were snapped a few feet above the ground -an indication of extremely violent wind acceleration. Cars and heavy wreckers were ripped apart and granulated into small pieces, and many were never found. Video of the tornado also shows extremely violent rotation comparable to other F5 tornadoes.
Did you read the original study? It's Phan and Simiu (1998). The homes at Double Creek Estates certainly didn't require F5 winds to destroy them, but that doesn't mean the winds weren't of F5 intensity. There was extreme granulation of debris, the most extensive scouring ever recorded, vehicles torn apart and/or tossed long distances, trees and telephone poles snapped almost at ground level, etc. The tornado's forward speed doesn't have much bearing on those, they're mostly about wind speed.
I got ya. I think ground scouring, pavement removal and distances objects are thrown are good indicator of tornado strength. I do think the EF5 wind criteria is underrated.The Philadelphia MS tornado has been said to have ground winds of 300+ to cause the extreme trench digging it produced. It was also moving around 60 mph so it had only seconds to do it. Unbelievable. What do u think of new rating system?
Well, agree to disagree. I don't think slow forward speed can account for those things I mentioned. And while several of the homes were likely of mediocre construction, several appear to have been very well-anchored. The tornado even ripped out the sill plates in most cases. Combined with the other things I mentioned and the obviously violent motion on video, I think it's reasonable to assume that Jarrell was exceptionally intense.
I personally like the old one better. From talking to Tom Grazulis(chaser&researcher) Ted Fujita would be rolling in his grave from the new system. Lol. Yes i believe the EF-5 wind criteria is underrated. That MS tornado was sick,wow.
that tornado ripped up highway asphalt. If any you have watched twister fury on the plains the terror continues this tornado crossed the highway in front tim marshall and when it passed a section of asphalt or concrete was conpletely rpped off the highway
I personally believe the Jarrell was a low F-5 at best. However even a wide slow moving tornado with EF-3 winds can create EF-5 damage if it continue to pulverize a certain area over time esp. if it anchors on a structure for 3-5 or more.
Awesome tornado Jim. I have seen eleven tornadoes, but I still haven't heard a roar from any yet. I was close to one in Collyer KS, but it was weak, so there was no roar in that twister as it was dying out. I'm just waiting for an opportunity to be decently close to one that has some good strength so I can hear it. I'm still cautious in my storm chasing because I have only had a partial season and one whole season. So my comfort range is still to keep a good distance. That hail is a big reason.
It was an f-5,due to that house being wiped out,intense shelter belt damage unlike any other,and asphalt was peeled away as well. 31 MILES on the ground.
Damn right i'm filming! Ahh love ya Jim. Being an amateur chaser in WI, I love this video. I am glad to subscribe to you, just like to point out at 1:55 the massive cloud rotation at the rear of the storm.
Why do you say that? The old and new systems aren't all that different, except that the EF scale is actually standardized. There was far too much interpretation involved with the old scale, and I think the DIs and DODs are a fantastic start. The EF scale still needs work, but it fixes a lot of problems. The only issue I have is that survey teams are sometimes very conservative (see 5/24/11, where Chickasha and Goldsby should've been EF5 and Canton Lake should've been EF4, for example).
Well EF5 winds and EF5 damage are two completely different things. As we know it only take winds of 160 mph to completly blow away a home.Of course most home are not built securely due to time and costs.
Well what i meant to say was that the house damage in Jarrell could've happen in F-3 winds due to poor construction. I do believe that Jarrell was an F-5, however it wouldn't take winds more than F-3 to sweep a house away. Especially if the tornado is a slow-moving half-mile wide steamroller. Hence they changed to the Enhanced Fujita scale. Not without the dissatisfaction of some however.
BS! The Jarrell tornado left an unbroken swath of barren earth vacant of roads, grass, fences and the homes that once dotted the landscape. The storm completely removed trees and telephone poles in the devastated areas and pulverized the remains, leaving little for rescue workers to sift through. Surveyors also documented the disappearance of more than a dozen vehicles known to have been in the area. Pavement was removed on the OUTER edge of the tornado. Slow movement does not justify this!
That's not really correct. It depends entirely on the construction, which is factored into the EF scale much better than with the F scale. There are also more than two dozen other DIs, which helps survey crews rate tornadoes in cases where homes aren't well-built. They can also use non-traditional DIs, like the parking stops/manhole covers in Joplin, the extreme ground scouring in Philadelphia, MS and the damage I mentioned in my other comment about the El Reno tornado.
@Brefrzr12keykt -- Fujita scale...F5 is the highest. EF stands for 'enhanced' Fujita scale. I believe the new scale is for the new wind speed conditions. I hope that helps. :)
I"ve seen Jarrell. It was impressive, however it was founded that much of the damage there could've been done with F# winds. considering it was a slow moving tornado with a wide girth.
@Porygonseizureman I was 15 when this happened,and talked to several chasers,and it has since been upgraded to f-5.I have video of pavement tooken away by this thing.Besides it has now been found that the damage in jarrell cold've been done by f-3 winds,i was even watching the weather channel all day that day.
Yeah, I read about that but I couldn't find enough information to be able to include it in my blog. It was mostly vague stuff and second-hand accounts. If you happen to find more solid info on it, it'd be awesome if you could message me so I can add it to my post. That was the most staggering part to me. The survival rate above ground in the core of the tornado was zero percent. The only people to survive above ground were on the northernmost fringes of the tornado. It's hard to fathom.
Not trying to advertise, but if you'd like to see just how impressive the Jarrell tornado was, I recently wrote a blog post on it with some hard-to-find photos. I can't post links here, but Google "Jarrell Stormstalker" and it should be the first link. It's really hard to believe just how incredible the Jarrell tornado was. Although, I think you could make a case for some of the tornadoes of 2011 being similarly intense.
I believe you... I saw it too..... Its just that on the internet, I ask people to link me... just a habit I got from zealous message boards I guess LOL
If you want to see a truly monstrous EF5 tornado check out the Hackleburg/Phil Campbell tornado from 2011. That thing was otherworldly intense.
I seen a story on a man in Jarrell who wanted to build a basement. He was told there was too much limestone so he went to a store and brought a shovel and bucket and other stuff. He literally dug a hole in the living room and people thought he was crazy. When this tornado came,he, his wife and kids got in the hole and survived with minor injuries. Their neighbors didn't survive. Incredible story and cool guy for doing what he did for his family.
Wow...even though I know it's technically not possible to judge a tornado by its looks, that thing looked POWERFUL. For a while there it had the same general shape as the Red Rock F5.
Xenia caused some very intense damage (esp. @ Windsor Park/Arrowhead), but there are many others that come to mind as being considerably more intense. You could possibly make a case for Kellerville somewhere on a top 10 list. To me one of the most impressive tornadoes on record is the El Reno EF5 from 5/24/11. Knocked over a drilling rig weighing nearly 2 million pounds and rolled it several times, threw vehicles 750+ yards, and RaXPol recorded winds of ~125 m/s (280 mph).
Even the "improved" EF-scale is archaic and very limited. So many other tell-tale signs of tornado strength have been noted (tree damage, certain qualities noted on velocity radar, and to some extent -- yes I know this is controversial--but size). Although size alone is should not indicate tornado intensity, it could be part of a more inclusive equation, which would take the other signatures of intensity into account. A "well-built" home being leveled as the main criteria for EF-5 rating ? We can hopefully do better. So many unofficial EF-5 reports, but we must find a structure AND determine its integrity in order to officially rate a tornado ? I hope that we can bring our rating system into the 21st century soon. I don't mean to step on anyone's toes. I would just like to see us move forward with the advancements that we did not have in Ted Fujita's day. He was indeed a brilliant mind
Teej Backyard Coasters I personally think size and wind speed should be the MAIN criteria.
WOW...that was a classic wide cone! Those hail stones at the beginning of the clip are MONSTERS!
So if this was an F5 in Kellerville on June 8, 1995, I guess this was part of the same storm system that produced the F4 that ravaged Pampa.
CaptainElevator42189 it was. Lived in Pampa.
Indeed, and while the Pampa tornado was an F4, was the Kellerville tornado an F5, or was it in actual reality a very high level F3 or F4, since the ratings were disputed for that tornado?
CaptainElevator42189 I'm not exactly certain, but I think that the Kellerville storm was only given an F-2 rating, mainly because of its rural locale. Nothing with structural integrity was actually hit, if Im correct, so the F-2 rating stood.
However, chasers who followed it from outside of McLean (to the southwest) claim that the storm had F-5 strength, after having viewed features that the NWS does not take into account (like asphalt scoured from highways, pieces of straw driven into telephone poles, etc). Tell-take signs of F-5 (now EF-5) destruction. It's a bit medieval if you ask me, but I'm not a professional researcher.
So in a nutshell, Texas definitely had six F5 tornadoes, if not possibly seven.
1. Waco, May 11, 1953.
2. Wichita Falls, April 3, 1964.
3. Lubbock, May 11, 1970.
4. Valley Mills, May 6, 1973.
5. Brownwood, April 19, 1976.
6. Kellerville, June 8, 1995 (disputed).
7. Jarrell, May 27, 1997.
CaptainElevator42189 Well, almost but not quite. The Kellerville tornado was not an official F-5. It is one among denizens of likely F-5 tornados that have been underrated due to what they did not strike. Basically a structure with certain "well-built" criteria would have to be wiped clean, not just destroyed.
The tornado that touched down near the Jordan Unit that day (just east of Pampa) from the parent cell that produced the F-4 minutes earlier in Pampa showed signs of F-5 strength. Concrete completely scoured once more. Yet, nothing much more was hit, so it received a much lesser rating.
Honestly, I'm still on a learning curve as to what types of structures must be effected, and I am even more confused by the Enhanced Fujita scale.
So, I stand to be corrected, but I am reasonably sure that what I have said is accurate. And way too long (NOT in a nutshell). Ha!
Btw, the only acknowledged F-5 tornado to strike the panhandle was pre-1950 (the tri-state tornado)
More pavement was removed in Williamson County than in any other tornado in history, and the ground scouring was among the most intense ever surveyed. The telephone poles in the worst affected areas were snapped a few feet above the ground -an indication of extremely violent wind acceleration. Cars and heavy wreckers were ripped apart and granulated into small pieces, and many were never found. Video of the tornado also shows extremely violent rotation comparable to other F5 tornadoes.
Did you read the original study? It's Phan and Simiu (1998). The homes at Double Creek Estates certainly didn't require F5 winds to destroy them, but that doesn't mean the winds weren't of F5 intensity. There was extreme granulation of debris, the most extensive scouring ever recorded, vehicles torn apart and/or tossed long distances, trees and telephone poles snapped almost at ground level, etc. The tornado's forward speed doesn't have much bearing on those, they're mostly about wind speed.
I got ya. I think ground scouring, pavement removal and distances objects are thrown are good indicator of tornado strength. I do think the EF5 wind criteria is underrated.The Philadelphia MS tornado has been said to have ground winds of 300+ to cause the extreme trench digging it produced. It was also moving around 60 mph so it had only seconds to do it. Unbelievable. What do u think of new rating system?
Well, agree to disagree. I don't think slow forward speed can account for those things I mentioned. And while several of the homes were likely of mediocre construction, several appear to have been very well-anchored. The tornado even ripped out the sill plates in most cases. Combined with the other things I mentioned and the obviously violent motion on video, I think it's reasonable to assume that Jarrell was exceptionally intense.
I personally like the old one better. From talking to Tom Grazulis(chaser&researcher) Ted Fujita would be rolling in his grave from the new system. Lol. Yes i believe the EF-5 wind criteria is underrated. That MS tornado was sick,wow.
that tornado ripped up highway asphalt. If any you have watched twister fury on the plains the terror continues this tornado crossed the highway in front tim marshall and when it passed a section of asphalt or concrete was conpletely rpped off the highway
some good quality footage from 1995 what model cam were u using?
I personally believe the Jarrell was a low F-5 at best. However even a wide slow moving tornado with EF-3 winds can create EF-5 damage if it continue to pulverize a certain area over time esp. if it anchors on a structure for 3-5 or more.
Awesome tornado Jim. I have seen eleven tornadoes, but I still haven't heard a roar from any yet. I was close to one in Collyer KS, but it was weak, so there was no roar in that twister as it was dying out. I'm just waiting for an opportunity to be decently close to one that has some good strength so I can hear it. I'm still cautious in my storm chasing because I have only had a partial season and one whole season. So my comfort range is still to keep a good distance. That hail is a big reason.
It was an f-5,due to that house being wiped out,intense shelter belt damage unlike any other,and asphalt was peeled away as well. 31 MILES on the ground.
extremeplanet ranks this tornado right up there with the xenia and oklahoma city tornadoes (in terms of localized intensity). What do you guys think?
I have all my respect for the stormchasers.
Because of they we can see the best documentaryes on Discovery Channel or National Geographic Channel.
Damn right i'm filming! Ahh love ya Jim. Being an amateur chaser in WI, I love this video. I am glad to subscribe to you, just like to point out at 1:55 the massive cloud rotation at the rear of the storm.
I could not believe that tornado had that power to rip up highway asphalt.
@cyclonejimcom
Have any footage of Wichita-Andover storm?
Why do you say that? The old and new systems aren't all that different, except that the EF scale is actually standardized. There was far too much interpretation involved with the old scale, and I think the DIs and DODs are a fantastic start. The EF scale still needs work, but it fixes a lot of problems. The only issue I have is that survey teams are sometimes very conservative (see 5/24/11, where Chickasha and Goldsby should've been EF5 and Canton Lake should've been EF4, for example).
Thanks for the link, i love that tornado.
Well EF5 winds and EF5 damage are two completely different things. As we know it only take winds of 160 mph to completly blow away a home.Of course most home are not built securely due to time and costs.
Excellent video...thanks guys.
Well what i meant to say was that the house damage in Jarrell could've happen in F-3 winds due to poor construction. I do believe that Jarrell was an F-5, however it wouldn't take winds more than F-3 to sweep a house away. Especially if the tornado is a slow-moving half-mile wide steamroller. Hence they changed to the Enhanced Fujita scale. Not without the dissatisfaction of some however.
BS! The Jarrell tornado left an unbroken swath of barren earth vacant of roads, grass, fences and the homes that once dotted the landscape. The storm completely removed trees and telephone poles in the devastated areas and pulverized the remains, leaving little for rescue workers to sift through. Surveyors also documented the disappearance of more than a dozen vehicles known to have been in the area. Pavement was removed on the OUTER edge of the tornado. Slow movement does not justify this!
Can we talk about how this quality of footage existed in 199fucking5???
Can someone verify that this is the twister that scouered asphault? I saw that on tv a long time ago... That is Amazing
That's not really correct. It depends entirely on the construction, which is factored into the EF scale much better than with the F scale. There are also more than two dozen other DIs, which helps survey crews rate tornadoes in cases where homes aren't well-built. They can also use non-traditional DIs, like the parking stops/manhole covers in Joplin, the extreme ground scouring in Philadelphia, MS and the damage I mentioned in my other comment about the El Reno tornado.
Absolutely excellente capture, I really like this video !
it looks like rolling fog during some points , like the tri-state tornado was.
i have never heard of this tornado, was this actually f5?
@Brefrzr12keykt -- Fujita scale...F5 is the highest. EF stands for 'enhanced' Fujita scale. I believe the new scale is for the new wind speed conditions. I hope that helps. :)
What a tornado!!!!
I"ve seen Jarrell. It was impressive, however it was founded that much of the damage there could've been done with F# winds. considering it was a slow moving tornado with a wide girth.
@Porygonseizureman I was 15 when this happened,and talked to several chasers,and it has since been upgraded to f-5.I have video of pavement tooken away by this thing.Besides it has now been found that the damage in jarrell cold've been done by f-3 winds,i was even watching the weather channel all day that day.
Awesome audio, like the car at 1:55
Yeah, I read about that but I couldn't find enough information to be able to include it in my blog. It was mostly vague stuff and second-hand accounts. If you happen to find more solid info on it, it'd be awesome if you could message me so I can add it to my post.
That was the most staggering part to me. The survival rate above ground in the core of the tornado was zero percent. The only people to survive above ground were on the northernmost fringes of the tornado. It's hard to fathom.
nice RFD
f3?
wow , thats incredible
Not trying to advertise, but if you'd like to see just how impressive the Jarrell tornado was, I recently wrote a blog post on it with some hard-to-find photos. I can't post links here, but Google "Jarrell Stormstalker" and it should be the first link. It's really hard to believe just how incredible the Jarrell tornado was. Although, I think you could make a case for some of the tornadoes of 2011 being similarly intense.
can't really see it because its rain wraped
This was actually a low level f3 tornado.
holy shit thats when i was born june 8th 1995
@LetsDoIt4Johnny1
Oh...well, you learn something new every day! Thanks for the info. :D
I believe you... I saw it too..... Its just that on the internet, I ask people to link me... just a habit I got from zealous message boards I guess LOL
it was on twister fury on the plains the terror continues I did not make that up