c
 p

 










A tornado near Anadarko, Oklahoma. The funnel itself is the thin tube reaching from the
cloud to the ground. The lower part of this tornado is surrounded by a translucent dust
cloud, kicked up by the tornado's strong winds at the surface. Note that the actual wind
of the tornado has a much wider radius than the funnel.

A m
 (often referred to as a m
m
or, erroneously, a  ) is a violent,

dangerous, rotating column of air that is in contact with both the surface of the earth and
a cumulonimbus cloud or, in rare cases, the base of a cumulus cloud. Tornadoes come
in many shapes and sizes, but are typically in the form of a visible condensation funnel,
whose narrow end touches the earth and is often encircled by a cloud of debris and
dust. Most tornadoes have wind speeds less than 110 miles per hour (177 km/h), are
approximately 250 feet (80 m) across, and travel a few miles (several kilometers) before
dissipating. The most extreme can attain wind speeds of more than 300 mph
(480 km/h), stretch more than two miles (3 km) across, and stay on the ground for
dozens of miles (more than 100 km).[1][2][3]

Various types of tornadoes include the landspout, multiple vortex tornado, and
waterspout. Waterspouts are characterized by a spiraling funnel-shaped wind current,
connecting to a large cumulus or cumulonimbus cloud. They are generally classified as
non-supercellular tornadoes that develop over bodies of water.[4] These spiraling
columns of air frequently develop in tropical areas close to the equator, and are less
common at high latitudes.[5] Other tornado-like phenomena that exist in nature include
the gustnado, dust devil, fire whirls, and steam devil.

Tornadoes have been observed on every continent except Antarctica. However, the
vast majority of tornadoes in the world occur in the Tornado Alley region of the United
States, although they can occur nearly anywhere in North America.[6] They also
occasionally occur in south-central and eastern Asia, the Philippines, northern and east-
central South America, Southern Africa, northwestern and southeast Europe, western
and southeastern Australia, and New Zealand.[7] Tornadoes can be detected before or
as they occur through the use of Pulse-Doppler radar by recognizing patterns in velocity
and reflectivity data, such as hook echoes, as well as by the efforts of storm spotters.
There are several different scales for rating the strength of tornadoes. The Fujita scale
rates tornadoes by damage caused, and has been replaced in some countries by the
updated Enhanced Fujita Scale. An F0 or EF0 tornado, the weakest category, damages
trees, but not substantial structures. An F5 or EF5 tornado, the strongest category, rips
buildings off their foundations and can deform large skyscrapers. The similar TORRO
scale ranges from a T0 for extremely weak tornadoes to T11 for the most powerful
known tornadoes.[8] Doppler radar data, photogrammetry, and ground swirl patterns
(cycloidal marks) may also be analyzed to determine intensity and assign a rating.[9]

Dm 


The word 



is an altered form of the Spanish word 


, which means
"thunderstorm". This in turn was taken from the Latin 

, meaning "to thunder". It
most likely reached its present form through a combination of the Spanish 


and


 ("to turn"); however, this may be a folk etymology.[10][11] A tornado is also
commonly referred to as a "twister", and is also sometimes referred to by the old-
fashioned colloquial term 
.[12][13] The term "cyclone" is used as a synonym for
"tornado" in the often-aired 1939 film, 

. The term "twister" is also used
in that film, along with being the title of the 1996 tornado-related film .

r

m


A tornado near Seymour, Texas

A tornado is "a violently rotating column of air, in contact with the ground, either pendant
from a cumuliform cloud or underneath a cumuliform cloud, and often (but not always)
visible as a funnel cloud".[14] For a vortex to be classified as a tornado, it must be in
contact with both the ground and the cloud base. Scientists have not yet created a
complete definition of the word; for example, there is disagreement as to whether
separate touchdowns of the same funnel constitute separate tornadoes.[3] 



refers to the vortex of wind, not the condensation cloud.[15][16]

 
V  

x
 
  


This tornado has no funnel cloud; however, the rotating dust cloud indicates that strong
winds are occurring at the surface, and thus it is a true tornado.

A tornado is not necessarily visible; however, the intense low pressure causing the high
wind speeds (as described by Bernoulli's principle) and rapid rotation (due to
cyclostrophic balance) usually causes water vapor in the air to become visible as a
funnel cloud or condensation funnel.[17]

There is some disagreement over the definition of funnel cloud and condensation
funnel. According to the m


 x


, a funnel cloud is any rotating cloud
pendant from a cumulus or cumulonimbus, and thus most tornadoes are included under
this definition.[18] Among many meteorologists, the funnel cloud term is strictly defined
as a rotating cloud which is not associated with strong winds at the surface, and
condensation funnel is a broad term for any rotating cloud below a cumuliform cloud.[3]

Tornadoes often begin as funnel clouds with no associated strong winds at the surface,
although not all evolve into a tornado. However, many tornadoes are preceded by a
funnel cloud. Most tornadoes produce strong winds at the surface while the visible
funnel is still above the ground, so it is difficult to discern the difference between a
funnel cloud and a tornado from a distance.[3]

 m




x
 




 




 





 

Occasionally, a single storm will produce more than one tornado, either simultaneously
or in succession. Multiple tornadoes produced by the same storm cell are referred to as
a "tornado family".[19] Several tornadoes are sometimes spawned from the same large-
scale storm system. If there is no break in activity, this is considered a tornado
outbreak, although there are various definitions. A period of several successive days
with tornado outbreaks in the same general area (spawned by multiple weather
systems) is a tornado outbreak sequence, occasionally called an extended tornado
outbreak.[14][20][21]


m

m



  

A wedge tornado, nearly a mile wide. This tornado hit Binger, Oklahoma.

Most tornadoes take on the appearance of a narrow funnel, a few hundred yards
(meters) across, with a small cloud of debris near the ground. Tornadoes may be
obscured completely by rain or dust. These tornadoes are especially dangerous, as
even experienced meteorologists might not see them.[22] Tornadoes can appear in many
shapes and sizes.

Small, relatively weak landspouts may be visible only as a small swirl of dust on the
ground. Although the condensation funnel may not extend all the way to the ground, if
associated surface winds are greater than 40 mph (64 km/h), the circulation is
considered a tornado.[15] A tornado with a nearly cylindrical profile and relative low
height is sometimes referred to as a "stovepipe" tornado. Large single-vortex tornadoes
can look like large wedges stuck into the ground, and so are known as "wedge
tornadoes" or "wedges". The "stovepipe" classification is also used for this type of
tornado, if it otherwise fits that profile. A wedge can be so wide that it appears to be a
block of dark clouds, wider than the distance from the cloud base to the ground. Even
experienced storm observers may not be able to tell the difference between a low-
hanging cloud and a wedge tornado from a distance. Many, but not all major tornadoes
are wedges.[23]
A rope tornado in its dissipating stage. Tecumseh, OK

Tornadoes in the dissipating stage can resemble narrow tubes or ropes, and often curl
or twist into complex shapes. These tornadoes are said to be "roping out", or becoming
a "rope tornado". When they rope out, the length of their funnel increases, which forces
the winds within the funnel to weaken due to conservation of angular momentum.[24]
Multiple-vortex tornadoes can appear as a family of swirls circling a common center, or
may be completely obscured by condensation, dust, and debris, appearing to be a
single funnel.[25]

In the United States, tornadoes are around 500 feet (150 m) across on average and
stay on the ground for 5 miles (8 km).[22] Yet, there is a wide range of tornado sizes.
Weak tornadoes, or strong yet dissipating tornadoes, can be exceedingly narrow,
sometimes only a few feet or couple meters across. One tornado was reported to have
a damage path only 7 feet (2 m) long.[22] On the other end of the spectrum, wedge
tornadoes can have a damage path a mile (1.6 km) wide or more. A tornado that
affected Hallam, Nebraska on May 22, 2004, was up to 2.5 miles (4 km) wide at the
ground.[2]

In terms of path length, the Tri-State Tornado, which affected parts of Missouri, Illinois,
and Indiana on March 18, 1925, was on the ground continuously for 219 miles (352 km).
Many tornadoes which appear to have path lengths of 100 miles (160 km) or longer are
composed of a family of tornadoes which have formed in quick succession; however,
there is no substantial evidence that this occurred in the case of the Tri-State
Tornado.[20] Modern reanalysis of the path suggests that the tornado may have begun
15 miles (24 km) further west than previously thought, lengthening its track.[26]

 
ñ 


Tornadoes can have a wide range of colors, depending on the environment in which
they form. Those which form in a dry environment can be nearly invisible, marked only
by swirling debris at the base of the funnel. Condensation funnels which pick up little or
no debris can be gray to white. While traveling over a body of water as a waterspout,
they can turn very white or even blue. Funnels which move slowly, ingesting a lot of
debris and dirt, are usually darker, taking on the color of debris. Tornadoes in the Great
Plains can turn red because of the reddish tint of the soil, and tornadoes in mountainous
areas can travel over snow-covered ground, turning white.[22]

Photographs of the Waurika, Oklahoma tornado of May 30, 1976, taken at nearly the
same time by two photographers. In the top picture, the tornado is lit with the sunlight
focused from behind the camera, thus the funnel appears bluish. In the lower image,
where the camera is facing the opposite direction, the sun is behind the tornado, giving
it a dark appearance.[27]

Lighting conditions are a major factor in the appearance of a tornado. A tornado which
is "back-lit" (viewed with the sun behind it) appears very dark. The same tornado,
viewed with the sun at the observer's back, may appear gray or brilliant white.
Tornadoes which occur near the time of sunset can be many different colors, appearing
in hues of yellow, orange, and pink.[12][28]

Dust kicked up by the winds of the parent thunderstorm, heavy rain and hail, and the
darkness of night are all factors which can reduce the visibility of tornadoes. Tornadoes
occurring in these conditions are especially dangerous, since only weather radar
observations, or possibly the sound of an approaching tornado, serve as any warning to
those in the storm's path. Most significant tornadoes form under the storm's  


, which is rain-free,[29] making them visible.[30] Also, most tornadoes occur in the
late afternoon, when the bright sun can penetrate even the thickest clouds.[20] Night-time
tornadoes are often illuminated by frequent lightning.

There is mounting evidence, including Doppler On Wheels mobile radar images and
eyewitness accounts, that most tornadoes have a clear, calm center with extremely low
pressure, akin to the eye of tropical cyclones. This area would be clear (possibly full of
dust), have relatively light winds, and be very dark, since the light would be blocked by
swirling debris on the outside of the tornado. Lightning is said to be the source of
illumination for those who claim to have seen the interior of a tornado.[31][32][33]

‰ mm


Tornadoes normally rotate cyclonically in direction (counterclockwise in the northern

hemisphere, clockwise in the southern). While large-scale storms always rotate
cyclonically due to the Coriolis effect, thunderstorms and tornadoes are so small that
the direct influence of the Coriolis effect is unimportant, as indicated by their large
Rossby numbers. Supercells and tornadoes rotate cyclonically in numerical simulations
even when the Coriolis effect is neglected.[34][35] Low-level mesocyclones and tornadoes
owe their rotation to complex processes within the supercell and ambient
environment.[36]

Approximately 1 percent of tornadoes rotate in an anticyclonic direction in the northern

hemisphere. Typically, systems as weak as landspouts and gustnadoes can rotate
anticyclonically, and usually only those which form on the anticyclonic shear side of the
descending rear flank downdraft in a cyclonic supercell.[37] On rare occasions,
anticyclonic tornadoes form in association with the mesoanticyclone of an anticyclonic
supercell, in the same manner as the typical cyclonic tornado, or as a companion
tornado either as a satellite tornado or associated with anticyclonic eddies within a
supercell.[38]

 
 


Tornadoes emit widely on the acoustics spectrum and the sounds are caused by
multiple mechanisms. Various sounds of tornadoes have been reported throughout
time, mostly related to familiar sounds for the witness and generally some variation of a
whooshing roar. Popularly reported sounds include a freight train, rushing rapids or
waterfall, a nearby jet engine, or combinations of these. Many tornadoes are not audible
from much distance; the nature and propagation distance of the audible sound depends
on atmospheric conditions and topography.

The winds of the tornado vortex and of constituent turbulent eddies, as well as airflow
interaction with the surface and debris, contribute to the sounds. Funnel clouds also
produce sounds. Funnel clouds and small tornadoes are reported as whistling, whining,
humming, or the buzzing of innumerable bees or electricity, or more or less harmonic,
whereas many tornadoes are reported as a continuous, deep rumbling, or an irregular
sound of "noise".[39]

Since many tornadoes are audible only when very near, sound is not reliable warning of
a tornado. And, any strong, damaging wind, even a severe hail volley or continuous
thunder in a thunderstorm may produce a roaring sound.[40]

An illustration of generation of infrasound in tornadoes by the Earth System Research

Laboratory's Infrasound Program

Tornadoes also produce identifiable inaudible infrasonic signatures.[41]

Unlike audible signatures, tornadic signatures have been isolated; due to the long
distance propagation of low-frequency sound, efforts are ongoing to develop tornado
prediction and detection devices with additional value in understanding tornado
morphology, dynamics, and creation.[42] Tornadoes also produce a detectable seismic
signature, and research continues on isolating it and understanding the process.[43]

Dm

m


m

 m 
m

Tornadoes emit on the electromagnetic spectrum, with sferics and E-field effects
detected.[42][44][45] There are observed correlations between tornadoes and patterns of
lightning. Tornadic storms do not contain more lightning than other storms and some
tornadic cells never produce lightning. More often than not, overall cloud-to-ground (CG)
lightning activity decreases as a tornado reaches the surface and returns to the baseline
level when the tornado lifts. In many cases, intense tornadoes and thunderstorms
exhibit an increased and anomalous dominance of positive polarity CG discharges.[46]
Electromagnetics and lightning have little or nothing to do directly with what drives
tornadoes (tornadoes are basically a thermodynamic phenomenon), although there are
likely connections with the storm and environment affecting both phenomena.

Luminosity has been reported in the past and is probably due to misidentification of
external light sources such as lightning, city lights, and power flashes from broken lines,
as internal sources are now uncommonly reported and are not known to ever have been
recorded. In addition to winds, tornadoes also exhibit changes in atmospheric variables
such as temperature, moisture, and pressure. For example, on June 24, 2003 near
Manchester, South Dakota, a probe measured a 100 mbar (hPa) (2.95 inHg) pressure
decrease. The pressure dropped gradually as the vortex approached then dropped
extremely rapidly to 850 mbar (hPa) (25.10 inHg) in the core of the violent tornado
before rising rapidly as the vortex moved away, resulting in a V-shape pressure trace.
Temperature tends to decrease and moisture content to increase in the immediate
vicinity of a tornado.[47]

Î


A sequence of images showing the birth of a tornado. First, the rotating cloud base
lowers. This lowering becomes a funnel, which continues descending while winds build
near the surface, kicking up dust and other debris. Finally, the visible funnel extends to
the ground, and the tornado begins causing major damage. This tornado, near Dimmitt,
Texas, was one of the best-observed violent tornadoes in history.
 





 

 

m


ÿ

ÿ 

Tornadoes often develop from a class of thunderstorms known as supercells.

Supercells contain mesocyclones, an area of organized rotation a few miles up in the
atmosphere, usually 1±6 miles (2±10 km) across. Most intense tornadoes (EF3 to EF5
on the Enhanced Fujita Scale) develop from supercells. In addition to tornadoes, very
heavy rain, frequent lightning, strong wind gusts, and hail are common in such storms.

Most tornadoes from supercells follow a recognizable life cycle. That begins when
increasing rainfall drags with it an area of quickly descending air known as the rear flank
downdraft (RFD). This downdraft accelerates as it approaches the ground, and drags
the supercell's rotating mesocyclone towards the ground with it.[15]

V
m


As the mesocyclone approaches the ground, a visible condensation funnel appears to

descend from the base of the storm, often from a rotating wall cloud. As the funnel
descends, the RFD also reaches the ground, creating a gust front that can cause
damage a good distance from the tornado. Usually, the funnel cloud becomes a tornado
within minutes of the RFD reaching the ground.[15]

m

m

Initially, the tornado has a good source of warm, moist inflow to power it, so it grows
until it reaches the "mature stage". This can last anywhere from a few minutes to more
than an hour, and during that time a tornado often causes the most damage, and in rare
cases can be more than one mile (1.6 km) across. Meanwhile, the RFD, now an area of
cool surface winds, begins to wrap around the tornado, cutting off the inflow of warm air
which feeds the tornado.[15]

r


As the RFD completely wraps around and chokes off the tornado's air supply, the vortex
begins to weaken, and become thin and rope-like. This is the "dissipating stage"; often
lasting no more than a few minutes, after which the tornado fizzles. During this stage
the shape of the tornado becomes highly influenced by the winds of the parent storm,
and can be blown into fantastic patterns.[20][27][28] Even though the tornado is dissipating,
it is still capable of causing damage. The storm is contracting into a rope-like tube and,
like the ice skater who pulls her arms in to spin faster, winds can increase at this
point.[24]

As the tornado enters the dissipating stage, its associated mesocyclone often weakens
as well, as the rear flank downdraft cuts off the inflow powering it. In particular, intense
supercells tornadoes can develop cyclically. As the first mesocyclone and associated
tornado dissipate, the storm's inflow may be concentrated into a new area closer to the
center of the storm. If a new mesocyclone develops, the cycle may start again,
producing one or more new tornadoes. Occasionally, the old (occluded) mesocyclone
and the new mesocyclone produce a tornado at the same time.

Although this is a widely accepted theory for how most tornadoes form, live, and die, it
does not explain the formation of smaller tornadoes, such as landspouts, long-lived
tornadoes, or tornadoes with multiple vortices. These each have different mechanisms
which influence their development²however, most tornadoes follow a pattern similar to
this one.[48]

c 

 m

m

x
 
 !
"




A multiple-vortex tornado outside Dallas, Texas on April 2, 1957.

A  #!
"


is a type of tornado in which two or more columns of spinning
air rotate around a common center. Multivortex structure can occur in almost any
circulation, but is very often observed in intense tornadoes. These vortices often create
small areas of heavier damage along the main tornado path.[3][15] This is a distinct
phenomenon from a satellite tornado, which is a weaker tornado which forms very near
a large, strong tornado contained within the same mesocyclone. The satellite tornado
may appear to "orbit" the larger tornado (hence the name), giving the appearance of
one, large multi-vortex tornado. However, a satellite tornado is a distinct circulation, and
is much smaller than the main funnel.[3]

um
 m

x
 



A waterspout near the Florida Keys.

A 

 is defined by the National Weather Service as a tornado over water.
However, researchers typically distinguish "fair weather" waterspouts from tornadic
waterspouts. Fair weather waterspouts are less severe but far more common, and are
similar to dust devils and landspouts. They form at the bases of cumulus congestus
clouds over tropical and subtropical waters. They have relatively weak winds, smooth
laminar walls, and typically travel very slowly. They occur most commonly in the Florida
Keys and in the northern Adriatic Sea.[49][50][51] In contrast, tornadic waterspouts are
stronger tornadoes over water. They form over water similarly to mesocyclonic
tornadoes, or are stronger tornadoes which cross over water. Since they form from
severe thunderstorms and can be far more intense, faster, and longer-lived than fair
weather waterspouts, they are more dangerous.[52]

Î m

x
 




A 

, or #


, is a tornado not associated with a mesocyclone. The
name stems from their characterization as a "fair weather waterspout on land".
Waterspouts and landspouts share many defining characteristics, including relative
weakness, short lifespan, and a small, smooth condensation funnel which often does
not reach the surface. Landspouts also create a distinctively laminar cloud of dust when
they make contact with the ground, due to their differing mechanics from true mesoform
tornadoes. Though usually weaker than classic tornadoes, they can produce strong
winds which could cause serious damage.[3][15]






 m


 m 

x
 



A dust devil in Nevada

A 

, or 



, is a small, vertical swirl associated with a gust front or
downburst. Because they are not connected with a cloud base, there is some debate as
to whether or not gustnadoes are tornadoes. They are formed when fast moving cold,
dry outflow air from a thunderstorm is blown through a mass of stationary, warm, moist
air near the outflow boundary, resulting in a "rolling" effect (often exemplified through a
roll cloud). If low level wind shear is strong enough, the rotation can be turned vertically
or diagonally and make contact with the ground. The result is a gustnado.[3][53] They
usually cause small areas of heavier rotational wind damage among areas of straight-
line wind damage.

r m


x
 
!

A ! resembles a tornado in that it is a vertical swirling column of air. However,

they form under clear skies and are no stronger than the weakest tornadoes. They form
when a strong convective updraft is formed near the ground on a hot day. If there is
enough low level wind shear, the column of hot, rising air can develop a small cyclonic
motion that can be seen near the ground. They are not considered tornadoes because
they form during fair weather and are not associated with any clouds. However, they
can, on occasion, result in major damage in arid areas.[22][54]

V



m 


x
 


!

Small-scale, tornado-like circulations can occur near any intense surface heat source.
Those that occur near intense wildfires are called  . They are not considered
tornadoes, except in the rare case where they connect to a pyrocumulus or other
cumuliform cloud above. Fire whirls usually are not as strong as tornadoes associated
with thunderstorms. They can, however, produce significant damage.[20] A 
! is
a rotating updraft that involves steam or smoke. Steam devils are very rare. They most
often form from smoke issuing from a power plant smokestack. Hot springs and deserts
may also be suitable locations for a steam devil to form. The phenomenon can occur
over water, when cold arctic air passes over relatively warm water.[22]

åm
m 


x
 



  



ÿ

$ 
 %

  %

 
&&


An example of EF1 damage. Here, the roof has been substantially damaged, and the
garage door blown outwards, but the walls and supporting structures are still intact.

The Fujita scale and the Enhanced Fujita Scale rate tornadoes by damage caused. The
Enhanced Fujita (EF) Scale was an upgrade to the older Fujita scale, by expert
elicitation, using engineered wind estimates and better damage descriptions. The EF
Scale was designed so that a tornado rated on the Fujita scale would receive the same
numerical rating, and was implemented starting in the United States in 2007. An EF0
tornado will probably damage trees but not substantial structures, whereas an EF5
tornado can rip buildings off their foundations leaving them bare and even deform large
skyscrapers. The similar TORRO scale ranges from a T0 for extremely weak tornadoes
to T11 for the most powerful known tornadoes. Doppler radar data, photogrammetry,
and ground swirl patterns (cycloidal marks) may also be analyzed to determine intensity
and award a rating.[3][55][56] Tornadoes vary in intensity regardless of shape, size, and
location, though strong tornadoes are typically larger than weak tornadoes. The
association with track length and duration also varies, although longer track tornadoes
tend to be stronger.[57] In the case of violent tornadoes, only a small portion of the path
is of violent intensity, most of the higher intensity from subvortices.[20]

In the United States, 80% of tornadoes are EF0 and EF1 (T0 through T3) tornadoes.
The rate of occurrence drops off quickly with increasing strength²less than 1% are
violent tornadoes (EF4, T8 or stronger).[58] Outside Tornado Alley, and North America in
general, violent tornadoes are extremely rare. This is apparently mostly due to the
lesser number of tornadoes overall, as research shows that tornado intensity
distributions are fairly similar worldwide. A few significant tornadoes occur annually in
Europe, Asia, southern Africa, and southeastern South America, respectively.[59]


m 


x
 








Areas worldwide where tornadoes are most likely, indicated by orange shading

The United States has the most tornadoes of any country, nearly four times more than
estimated in all of Europe, excluding waterspouts.[60] This is mostly due to the unique
geography of the continent. North America is a large continent that extends from the
tropics north into arctic areas, and has no major east-west mountain range to block air
flow between these two areas. In the middle latitudes, where most tornadoes of the
world occur, the Rocky Mountains block moisture and buckle the atmospheric flow,
forcing drier air at mid-levels of the troposphere due to downsloped winds, and causing
the formation of a low pressure area downwind to the east of the mountains. Increased
westerly flow off the Rockies force the formation of a dry line when the flow aloft is
strong,[61] while the Gulf of Mexico fuels abundant low-level moisture in the southerly
flow to its east. This unique topography allows for frequent collisions of warm and cold
air, the conditions that breed strong, long-lived storms throughout the year. A large
portion of these tornadoes form in an area of the central United States known as
Tornado Alley.[6] This area extends into Canada, particularly Ontario and the Prairie
Provinces, although southeast Quebec, interior British Columbia, and western New
Brunswick are also tornado-prone.[62] Tornadoes also occur across northeastern
Mexico.[3]

The United States averages about 1,200 tornadoes per year. The Netherlands has the
highest average number of recorded tornadoes per area of any country (more than 20,
or 0.0013 per sq mi (0.00048 per km2), annually), followed by the UK (around 33, or
0.00035 per sq mi (0.00013 per km2), per year),[63][64] but most are small and cause
minor damage. In absolute number of events, ignoring area, the UK experiences more
tornadoes than any other European country, excluding waterspouts.[60]
Intense tornado activity in the United States. The darker-colored areas denote the area
commonly referred to as Tornado Alley.

Tornadoes kill an average of 179 people per year in Bangladesh, the most in the world.
This is due to high population density, poor quality of construction and lack of tornado
safety knowledge, as well as other factors.[65][66] Other areas of the world that have
frequent tornadoes include South Africa, parts of Argentina, Paraguay, and southern
Brazil, as well as portions of Europe, Australia and New Zealand, and far eastern
Asia.[7][67]

Tornadoes are most common in spring and least common in winter.[20] Spring and fall
experience peaks of activity as those are the seasons when stronger winds, wind shear,
and atmospheric instability are present.[68] Tornadoes are focused in the right front
quadrant of landfalling tropical cyclones, which tend to occur in the late summer and
autumn. Tornadoes can also be spawned as a result of eyewall mesovortices, which
persist until landfall.[69] Favorable conditions can occur any time of the year.

Tornado occurrence is highly dependent on the time of day, because of solar heating.[70]
Worldwide, most tornadoes occur in the late afternoon, between 3 pm and 7 pm local
time, with a peak near 5 pm.[71][72][73][74][75] Destructive tornadoes can occur at any time
of day. The Gainesville Tornado of 1936, one of the deadliest tornadoes in history,
occurred at 8:30 am local time.[20]

ñ 
m

m 
m
m 



Associations to various climate and environmental trends exist. For example, an

increase in the sea surface temperature of a source region (e.g. Gulf of Mexico and
Mediterranean Sea) increases atmospheric moisture content. Increased moisture can
fuel an increase in severe weather and tornado activity, particularly in the cool
season.[76]

Some evidence does suggest that the Southern Oscillation is weakly correlated with
changes in tornado activity, which vary by season and region, as well as whether the
ENSO phase is that of El Niño or La Niña.[77]
Climatic shifts may affect tornadoes via teleconnections in shifting the jet stream and
the larger weather patterns. The climate-tornado link is confounded by the forces
affecting larger patterns and by the local, nuanced nature of tornadoes. Although it is
reasonable that global warming may affect trends in tornado activity,[78] any such effect
is not yet identifiable due to the complexity, local nature of the storms, and database
quality issues. Any effect would vary by region.[79]

rmm


x
 
'
!!



Rigorous attempts to warn of tornadoes began in the United States in the mid-20th
century. Before the 1950s, the only method of detecting a tornado was by someone
seeing it on the ground. Often, news of a tornado would reach a local weather office
after the storm. However, with the advent of weather radar, areas near a local office
could get advance warning of severe weather. The first public tornado warnings were
issued in 1950 and the first tornado watches and convective outlooks in 1952. In 1953 it
was confirmed that hook echoes are associated with tornadoes.[80] By recognizing these
radar signatures, meteorologists could detect thunderstorms probably producing
tornadoes from dozens of miles away.[81]

‰


ÿ

(#)








Today, most developed countries have a network of weather radars, which remains the
main method of detecting signatures probably associated with tornadoes. In the United
States and a few other countries, Doppler weather radar stations are used. These
devices measure the velocity and radial direction (towards or away from the radar) of
the winds in a storm, and so can spot evidence of rotation in storms from more than a
hundred miles (160 km) away. When storms are distant from a radar, only areas high
within the storm are observed and the important areas below are not sampled.[82] Data
resolution also decreases with distance from the radar. Some meteorological situations
leading to tornadogenesis are not readily detectable by radar and on occasion tornado
development may occur more quickly than radar can complete a scan and send the
batch of data. Also, most populated areas on Earth are now visible from the
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES), which aid in the
nowcasting of tornadic storms.[83]
A Doppler on Wheels radar loop of a hook echo and associated mesocyclone in
Goshen County, Wyoming on June 5, 2009. Strong mesocyclones show up as adjacent
areas of yellow and blue (on other radars, bright red and bright green), and usually
indicate an imminent or occurring tornado.

m
 mm



In the mid-1970s, the U.S. National Weather Service (NWS) increased its efforts to train
storm spotters to spot key features of storms which indicate severe hail, damaging
winds, and tornadoes, as well as damage itself and flash flooding. The program was
called Skywarn, and the spotters were local sheriff's deputies, state troopers,
firefighters, ambulance drivers, amateur radio operators, civil defense (now emergency
management) spotters, storm chasers, and ordinary citizens. When severe weather is
anticipated, local weather service offices request that these spotters look out for severe
weather, and report any tornadoes immediately, so that the office can warn of the
hazard.

Usually spotters are trained by the NWS on behalf of their respective organizations, and
report to them. The organizations activate public warning systems such as sirens and
the Emergency Alert System, and forward the report to the NWS.[84] There are more
than 230,000 trained Skywarn weather spotters across the United States.[85]

In Canada, a similar network of volunteer weather watchers, called Canwarn, helps spot
severe weather, with more than 1,000 volunteers.[83] In Europe, several nations are
organizing spotter networks under the auspices of Skywarn Europe[86] and the Tornado
and Storm Research Organisation (TORRO) has maintained a network of spotters in
the United Kingdom since 1974.[87]
Storm spotters are needed because radar systems such as NEXRAD do not detect a
tornado; merely signatures which hint at the presence of tornadoes.[88] Radar may give
a warning before there is any visual evidence of a tornado or imminent tornado, but
ground truth from an observer can either verify the threat or determine that a tornado is
not imminent.[89] The spotter's ability to see what radar cannot is especially important as
distance from the radar site increases, because the radar beam becomes progressively
higher in altitude further away from the radar, chiefly due to curvature of Earth, and the
beam also spreads out.[82]

^
 


A rotating wall cloud with rear flank downdraft clear slot evident to its left rear

Storm spotters are trained to discern whether a storm seen from a distance is a
supercell. They typically look to its rear, the main region of updraft and inflow. Under the
updraft is a rain-free base, and the next step of tornadogenesis is the formation of a
rotating wall cloud. The vast majority of intense tornadoes occur with a wall cloud on the
backside of a supercell.[58]

Evidence of a supercell comes from the storm's shape and structure, and cloud tower
features such as a hard and vigorous updraft tower, a persistent, large overshooting
top, a hard anvil (especially when backsheared against strong upper level winds), and a
corkscrew look or striations. Under the storm and closer to where most tornadoes are
found, evidence of a supercell and likelihood of a tornado includes inflow bands
(particularly when curved) such as a "beaver tail", and other clues such as strength of
inflow, warmth and moistness of inflow air, how outflow- or inflow-dominant a storm
appears, and how far is the front flank precipitation core from the wall cloud.
Tornadogenesis is most likely at the interface of the updraft and rear flank downdraft,
and requires a balance between the outflow and inflow.[15]

Only wall clouds that rotate spawn tornadoes, and usually precede the tornado by five
to thirty minutes. Rotating wall clouds are the visual manifestation of a mesocyclone.
Barring a low-level boundary, tornadogenesis is highly unlikely unless a rear flank
downdraft occurs, which is usually visibly evidenced by evaporation of cloud adjacent to
a corner of a wall cloud. A tornado often occurs as this happens or shortly after; first, a
funnel cloud dips and in nearly all cases by the time it reaches halfway down, a surface
swirl has already developed, signifying a tornado is on the ground before condensation
connects the surface circulation to the storm. Tornadoes may also occur without wall
clouds, under flanking lines, and on the leading edge. Spotters watch all areas of a
storm, and the cloud base and surface.[90]

Dm
 

x
 






A map of the tornado paths in the Super Outbreak

The most extreme tornado in recorded history was the Tri-State Tornado, which roared
through parts of Missouri, Illinois, and Indiana on March 18, 1925. It was likely an F5,
though tornadoes were not ranked on any scale in that era. It holds records for longest
path length (219 miles, 352 km), longest duration (about 3.5 hours), and fastest forward
speed for a significant tornado (73 mph, 117 km/h) anywhere on Earth. In addition, it is
the deadliest single tornado in United States history (695 dead).[20] The tornado was
also the second costliest tornado in history at the time, but in the years since has been
surpassed by several others if population changes over time are not considered. When
costs are normalized for wealth and inflation, it ranks third today.[91] The deadliest
tornado in world history was the Daultipur-Salturia Tornado in Bangladesh on April 26,
1989, which killed approximately 1300 people.[65] Bangladesh has had at least 19
tornadoes in its history kill more than 100 people, almost half of the total in the rest of
the world.

The most extensive tornado outbreak on record was the Super Outbreak, which
affected a large area of the central United States and extreme southern Ontario in
Canada on April 3 and 4, 1974. Not only did this outbreak feature 148 tornadoes in 18
hours, but many were violent; six were of F5 intensity, and twenty-four peaked at F4
strength. This outbreak had sixteen tornadoes on the ground at the same time during its
peak. More than 300 people, possibly as many as 330, were killed by tornadoes during
this outbreak.[92]

While it is nearly impossible to directly measure the most violent tornado wind speeds
(conventional anemometers would be destroyed by the intense winds), some tornadoes
have been scanned by mobile Doppler radar units, which can provide a good estimate
of the tornado's winds. The highest wind speed ever measured in a tornado, which is
also the highest wind speed ever recorded on the planet, is 301 20 mph
(484 32 km/h) in the F5 Bridge Creek-Moore, Oklahoma tornado which killed 36
people[93]. Though the reading was taken about 100 feet (30 m) above the ground, this
is a testament to the power of the strongest tornadoes.[1]

Storms that produce tornadoes can feature intense updrafts, sometimes exceeding
150 mph (240 km/h). Debris from a tornado can be lofted into the parent storm and
carried a very long distance. A tornado which affected Great Bend, Kansas in
November 1915, was an extreme case, where a "rain of debris" occurred 80 miles
(130 km) from the town, a sack of flour was found 110 miles (177 km) away, and a
cancelled check from the Great Bend bank was found in a field outside of Palmyra,
Nebraska, 305 miles (491 km) to the northeast.[94] Waterspouts and tornadoes have
been advanced as an explanation for instances of raining fish and other animals.[95]

m

Though tornadoes can strike in an instant, there are precautions and preventative
measures that people can take to increase the chances of surviving a tornado.
Authorities such as the Storm Prediction Center advise having a pre-determined plan
should a tornado warning be issued. When a warning is issued, going to a basement or
an interior first-floor room of a sturdy building greatly increases chances of survival.[96] In
tornado-prone areas, many buildings have storm cellars on the property. These
underground refuges have saved thousands of lives.[97]

Some countries have meteorological agencies which distribute tornado forecasts and
increase levels of alert of a possible tornado (such as tornado watches and warnings in
the United States and Canada). Weather radios provide an alarm when a severe
weather advisory is issued for the local area, though these are mainly available only in
the United States. Unless the tornado is far away and highly visible, meteorologists
advise that drivers park their vehicles far to the side of the road (so as not to block
emergency traffic), and find a sturdy shelter. If no sturdy shelter is nearby, getting low in
a ditch is the next best option. Highway overpasses are one of the worst places to take
shelter during tornadoes, as they are believed to create a venturi effect, increasing the
danger from the tornado by increasing the wind speed and funneling debris underneath
the overpass.[98]

m 
  m


x
 




Salt Lake City Tornado, August 11, 1999. This tornado disproved several
misconceptions, including the idea that tornadoes cannot occur in areas like Utah or in
cities.

Folklore often identifies a green sky with tornadoes, and though the phenomenon may
be associated with severe weather, there is no evidence linking it specifically with
tornadoes.[1] It is often thought that opening windows will lessen the damage caused by
the tornado. While there is a large drop in atmospheric pressure inside a strong tornado,
it is unlikely that the pressure drop would be enough to cause the house to explode.
Some research indicates that opening windows may actually increase the severity of the
tornado's damage. A violent tornado can destroy a house whether its windows are open
or closed.[99][100]

Another commonly held belief is that highway overpasses provide adequate shelter
from tornadoes. On the contrary, a highway overpass is a dangerous place during a
tornado. In the 1999 Oklahoma tornado outbreak of May 3, 1999, three highway
overpasses were directly struck by tornadoes, and at all three locations there was a
fatality, along with many life-threatening injuries. The small area under the overpasses
is believed to cause a venturi effect.[101] By comparison, during the same tornado
outbreak, more than 2000 homes were completely destroyed, with another 7000
damaged, and yet only a few dozen people died in their homes.[98]

An old belief is that the southwest corner of a basement provides the most protection
during a tornado. The safest place is the side or corner of an underground room
opposite the tornado's direction of approach (usually the northeast corner), or the
central-most room on the lowest floor. Taking shelter in a basement, under a staircase,
or under a sturdy piece of furniture such as a workbench further increases chances of
survival.[99][100]

Finally, there are areas which people believe to be protected from tornadoes, whether
by being in a city, near a major river, hill, or mountain, or even protected by supernatural
forces.[102] Tornadoes have been known to cross major rivers, climb mountains,[103]
affect valleys, and have damaged several city centers. As a general rule, no area is
"safe" from tornadoes, though some areas are more susceptible than others.[22][99][100]





 

A Doppler On Wheels unit observing a tornado near Attica, Kansas

Meteorology is a relatively young science and the study of tornadoes is newer still.
Although researched for about 140 years and intensively for around 60 years, there are
still aspects of tornadoes which remain a mystery.[104] Scientists have a fairly good
understanding of the development of thunderstorms and mesocyclones,[105][106] and the
meteorological conditions conducive to their formation. However, the step from
supercell (or other respective formative processes) to tornadogenesis and predicting
tornadic vs. non-tornadic mesocyclones is not yet well known and is the focus of much
research.[68]

Also under study are the low-level mesocyclone and the stretching of low-level vorticity
which tightens into a tornado,[68] namely, what are the processes and what is the
relationship of the environment and the convective storm. Intense tornadoes have been
observed forming simultaneously with a mesocyclone aloft (rather than succeeding
mesocyclogenesis) and some intense tornadoes have occurred without a mid-level
mesocyclone. In particular, the role of downdrafts, particularly the rear-flank downdraft,
and the role of baroclinic boundaries, are intense areas of study.[107]

Reliably predicting tornado intensity and longevity remains a problem, as do details

affecting characteristics of a tornado during its life cycle and tornadolysis. Other rich
areas of research are tornadoes associated with mesovortices within linear
thunderstorm structures and within tropical cyclones.[108]

Scientists still do not know the exact mechanisms by which most tornadoes form, and
occasional tornadoes still strike without a tornado warning being issued.[109] Analysis of
observations including both stationary and mobile (surface and aerial) in-situ and
remote sensing (passive and active) instruments generates new ideas and refines
existing notions. Numerical modeling also provides new insights as observations and
new discoveries are integrated into our physical understanding and then tested in
computer simulations which validate new notions as well as produce entirely new
theoretical findings, many of which are otherwise unattainable. Importantly,
development of new observation technologies and installation of finer spatial and
temporal resolution observation networks have aided increased understanding and
better predictions.[110]

Research programs, including field projects such as VORTEX (Verification of the

Origins of Rotation in Tornadoes Experiment), deployment of TOTO (the TOtable
Tornado Observatory), Doppler On Wheels (DOW), and dozens of other programs,
hope to solve many questions that still plague meteorologists.[42] Universities,
government agencies such as the National Severe Storms Laboratory, private-sector
meteorologists, and the National Center for Atmospheric Research are some of the
organizations very active in research; with various sources of funding, both private and
public, a chief entity being the National Science Foundation.[88][111]

MY DISCUSSION ON IT

 c
 

A tornado is not the same as a cyclone, and the reference following this claim mentions
nothing of the sort. Why is this statement on the page? ²Preceding unsigned comment
added by 114.75.135.44 (talk) 11:24, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
(T‡C‡G)
Take a look at the definition of cyclone. m 20:23, 22 February 2010
(UTC)




mm


I would've thought that freezing rain and hail would be the same thing? And I've never
heard of snow during a tornado. If there ever is any snow, I would've thought it would be
classified as 'sleet'. Hang on, that should be a category under precipitation..?!
Destroyer000 (talk) 12:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

You are mixing apples and oranges. Freezing rain and sleet are stratiform type of
precipitations where snow falling into a warm layer of air aloft melts and
refreezes near or at the ground. Hail is associated with convective clouds and is
formed in the updraft of a cumulonimbus when dropplet of supercool rain freeze,
on their way up, and then increase in size by collision with others with
coalescence, by Bergeron process and by condensation of ambiant water vapor.
As for a tornado and precipitations, these are two different phenomenon
associated with thunderstorm and usually encountered in a different part of the
cloud. The tornado is the concentration near the surface of a mesocyclonic
rotation present in the cloud. On the other hand the precipitation type is
dependant on the temperature structure and it is possible to have a snow
thunderstorm (see lake effect snow) and a weak tornado or more likely a winter
waterspout. Pierre cb (talk) 17:04, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

cåc
 åå
m


I'm wondering if we could add details about the tornado index indicator which are used
in most live radars which are a scale of 1 to 10, the highest the number is, the most
likehood there is a tornado on the ground. --ëV

m 17:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Given the tornado article is more general, that's probably too specific. Radar aspects in
general and the TVS and other algorithms aren't discussed in any detail (if at all), so I
don't see privileging a proprietary thing (which I guess you mean is used by most
television weather broadcasters [in the US] although I haven't found that to be the
case). In interest of science and transparency, I'd also want to know more about where
it comes from; specifically how it developed and what goes into the calculation. That
information is guarded for obvious reasons.

It could conceivably fit into an article detailing tornado prediction/detection or

radar analysis (perhaps in weather radar, but again, this is probably too specific
an example for inclusion there). The closest to that right now probably is
convective storm detection which isn't yet ready for primetime. Evolauxia (talk)
02:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
VIPIR is also a possibility. Evolauxia (talk) 02:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I've added a section on the BTI to the VIPIR page, I've tried to find who was the
first station to use the index, even though this video showing coverage from the
Super Tuesday Outbreak indicated that WMC-TV was the first to use the product
or at least those circle indicators.--ëV

m 16:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

 m


 m
 

April 26, 1989: Shaturia, Bangladesh, 1,300 people died and 500 were left homeless in
what is often called the world's deadliest tornado. Can anyone confirm this and add if
appropriate? Alpheus (talk) 10:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Already in there (Tornado#Extremes), and has its own separate article

(Daultipur-Salturia Tornado) although admittedly it is a pretty pitiful article for
being the deadliest tornado in world history, I hope to improve it sometime this
summer. -‰ 



 01:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

 mm
 

The article (2008-05-17) states "Although tornadoes have been observed on every
continent except Antarctica, most occur in the United States." with a reference. Yet QI
stated that this was a fallacy and that the UK had the most tornados - they just weren't
very intense. Anyone know which is correct? -- SGBailey (talk) 22:50, 17 May 2008
(UTC)

What is QI's source? Baseball Bugs 

* )
+ 22:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
This bit of trivia has been mentioned time and again and it annoys me. Britain
rarely has a tornado stronger than T3 (high-end F1) intensity; European
 windstorms tend to create very short-lived, weak tornadoes, and so  


Britain has more tornadoes than the US. This is subject to debate, due to
Britain's much higher population density (and therefore higher rate of tornadoes
being reported). However, Britain does not even have the highest tornado-per-
unit-area, the Netherlands does! (see Tornado#Climatology, second paragraph).
So I don't know where QI was getting their info, but it was wrong. -
‰ 



 01:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Would it be (more) proper to refer to these as so-called gustnadoes? I didn't
know the UK and Netherlands have the same type of geography and
meteorology which allows classic supercell storm development (and attendant
high F-scale tornado damage). 68Kustom (talk) 06:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
As far as I know no official weather service keeps track of the number of
tornadoes designated "gustnadoes" (in fact, in damage surveys it is impossible to
tell which type of tornado occurred), but I suspect that many of the tornadoes in
Britain are. In the Netherlands, I believe, a majority of reported tornadoes are
landspouts or waterspouts moving onshore. Don't quote me on it though. -
‰ 



 09:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The Netherlands has the most tornadoes per area, higher than Oklahoma or
Florida in the US. (see [1]) Most, but not all, are weak (as is the case
everywhere, though look for groundbreaking new findings coming from a
preliminary climatology of wind speeds based on mobile doppler radar
observations in the US). Nearly all recorded tornadoes are weak in the UK;
although it's a mix of landspout type tornadoes and gustnadoes, I'm not sure of
the exact breakdown but many are not mere gustnadoes but also rarely are there
supercellular tornadoes. A large number of Netherlands tornadoes are
waterspouts moving ashore, but supercellular tornadoes do occur. The main
missing ingredient for Europe restricting supercellular tornadoes is strong
instability.[2]
The intensity distribution is similar to the US and other (studied) countries,
excluding the UK. (see [3] and [4]) No agency formally differentiates gustnado vs
landspout vs mesocyclone tornado, however, in the US at least, gustnadoes are
generally not recorded as tornadoes. There must be a connection to rotation at
cloud base for it to meet the definition of a tornado, otherwise it's a shallow
surface eddy. TORRO's standards are more relaxed. Evolauxia (talk) 00:40, 14
July 2008 (UTC)

Also, the article states, "Bangladesh and surrounding areas of eastern India suffer from
tornadoes of equal severity to those in the US, and occurring more frequently than
anywhere else in the world, but such events are under-reported due to the scarcity of
media coverage in third-world countries." This seems to contradict the 'US has the most'
statement above. I'm also not convinced an editorial comment about 3rd-world news
coverage is really needed in a tornado article. Agnosticaphid (talk) 17:25, 6 July 2008
(UTC)
 its hard to know, before home video you could count the # of filmed twisters on
your fingers, and theres still all those twisters out in the feild that only 1 or 2
people see but dont report. --Jakezing (talk) 18:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
The wording should be tweaked. It may have been changed in subsequent edits
or slipped through the cracks when the article originally passed FA review.
The news coverage issue is important in the sense of number of tornadoes is
strongly related to the reporting network. It's a valid statement but also could use
refinement. Evolauxia (talk) 00:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Of course you all are right about the news coverage, I didn't really think about it
that way. The way it was previously phrased just, to me, came off as more
editorial than factual comment. At any rate, it sounds spiffy now! Agnosticaphid
(talk) 16:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I love how Italy seems to be included in everything these days. This article
includes regions in the world where tornadoes occur, and then lists Italy. Give me
a break. There are hardly any tornadoes in Italy compared to other countries in
Europe. Whoever added the word "Italy" to an article about tornadoes should be
slapped. Ceejus (talk) 15:54, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Italian tornadoes are well-documented. See [5] for a recent discussion of their
climatological distribution. The earliest well-documented event that I'm aware of
was in 1456. Hebrooks87 (talk) 20:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, the only point I'm trying to make is that Italy seems to have had no more
tornadoes than any other country in Europe, as is evident by another Wikipedia
page listing tornado outbreaks in Europe. That page can be seen here [6]. So if
this article is going to list basic regions where tornadoes have occured, it should
list either certain overall regions in Europe or simply Europe as a whole rather
than listing regions in Europe, then listing the country of Italy seperately as if its
more significant. Ceejus (talk) 08:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Maybe the specific term "Italy" is included in the article only because one might
think that it would not have many tornadoes when it actually does. I agree,
though, that Italy is not signifigantly more important than the other European
countries. Even though they do have better pizza. ²Preceding unsigned
comment added by Telemacusroxmysox (talk ‡ contribs) 02:31, 20 March 2009
(UTC)

c

Vm
ñ
m
‰
 

This article has changed


 since it became a Featured Article. I still believe it meets
the criteria for an FA, but I believe it needs a review by the community to be sure.
Unless there is significant objection to this, I'll post it myself.-‰ 



 22:39,
18 May 2008 (UTC)

I submitted the article for Peer Review instead, since FAR seems to be for
articles with genuine delisting concerns. -‰ 



 09:44, 23 May 2008
(UTC)
 I concur that it should be reviewed. I know there are things requiring cleanup that
I haven't had a chance to review and fix yet. Evolauxia (talk) 00:46, 14 July 2008
(UTC)

u

While watching the news, I heard a tornado was in 

 area. 65.173.104.93 (talk)
01:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

c
 m 




Are Tornado and Hurricanes the same thing but different sizes? What exactly is the
distinction? Gavin Scott (talk) 01:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

A hurricane is a large cyclonic storm that forms over water. A tornado is a

rotational cloud that forms from a thunderstorm. Read the articles, you will learn
a lot. Baseball Bugs 
* )
+ 02:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
They are fundamentally different phenomena, forming in different areas, different
ways, and under different conditions. Additionally, tornadoes are much smaller,
but more destructive and much harder to predict.-‰ 



 02:48, 1
September 2008 (UTC)
Not to mention, tornadoes are devastatingly more powerful than hurricanes. The
reason it's such a debate is because of the size of hurricanes compared to the
size of tornadoes. Hurricanes, since they're more spread out, tend to unleash
their strength over a widespread area, therefore not doing much on a smaller
range. Tornadoes, on the other hand, focus their power on a concentrated area
to maximize their damage. --Commander Lightning Never mess with the Galactic
Empire!! ²Preceding undated comment was added at 00:23, 7 September 2008
(UTC)

c
 
D


I found this article from BBC asserting UK and Netherlands are the european countries
most visited by tornados. FYI.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3059663.stm
--TheDRaKKaR (talk) 21:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

The article covers that (see the climatology section). It's based on this paper
which is also the source for the BBC story. Evolauxia (talk) 00:59, 1 November
2008 (UTC)

Yes, Ive heard this. It is true that America has the most tornadoes per year at up to
1000. However, the UK and The Netherlands have more tornadoes per square km than
any other country. Saying this, they are infrequent (both having only 30 per year on
average) and usally small and weak (EF0 and EF1) although they can go higher, see
List of European tornadoes and tornado outbreaks and the 2005 Birmingham Tornado
(UK). Regards. Andy (talk) 10:39, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I feel the need to interject a word of caution when quoting these statistics: Just
because they have the highest concentration over the whole country does not
mean that they contain the area with the highest concentration of tornadoes. For
instance, Oklahoma is smaller than Great Britain, with a much more rural
population (and thus presumably lower tornado-reporting rate), and yet records
52 tornadoes per year; many of which are of EF2 or greater intensity. The
Netherlands has the most tornadoes in the world per square mile, though I
suspect with better reporting Oklahoma would easily take the title. -
‰ 



 16:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Definately, Oklahoma or Kansas wold easily take the the regional title but for the whole
country, states like California, have very little tornadic activity while the netherlands as a
whole does not really have specific regions of activity or inactivity. Andy (talk) 18:36, 3
November 2008 (UTC)

Reporting networks, population density, and tornado counts

Although caution is advised, the presumption the there is a lower reporting rate in the
United States and/or that it is substantially affecting the results is not robust. Oklahoma
is more rural, but the United States, and Oklahoma in particular, have a much more
advanced reporting system than does Europe. Outside the UK, in fact, formal reporting
networks are only now being set up. Organized records of tornado occurrences were
not kept, nor were there spotter networks, nor verification efforts (with often a lack
weather radar) or much severe weather knowledge or attention (even among
meteorologists). Pointing to a lack of awareness more generally, the European media
tends to refer to tornadoes, even relatively large, long-track, damaging, and obviously
strong supercellular tornadoes as "mini-tornadoes", as if actual tornadoes do not
happen there.

This is not to say that the Netherlands or UK do have more a higher density of
tornadoes. The population density is a real issue. The difference in reporting networks,
however, does seem to counter the higher population density. So the caution stems
from lack of data and no assurance can be made either way at this point, other than
from the confirmed tornado numbers with which we have to work. It's safe to say that a
large majority of strong tornadoes in the U.S. are counted and in Europe the events may
be known but it's not clear until recently that all the events make it into any database.

There is some effort in Dotzek 2003 to account for the lack of reporting with an
educated guess (by authorities in respective countries) as to actual (rather than
observed) amounts of tornadoes. Although those expected actual numbers are probably
relatively close to the actual numbers, the current situation doesn't permit us to know. In
the United States, there is also an undercounting, with perhaps an ultimate total of
1500-2000 tornadoes per annum. That's a wide range, however, the majority of these
tornadoes are small and ephemeral, just as is the tornado intensity distribution for most
countries. In fact, other than the UK, European intensity distributions are similar to the
US and even to Oklahoma/Tornado Alley. See: Brooks and Doswell, 2001; Brooks;
Dotzek et al, 2003, Feuerstein et al, 2005, Dotzek et al, 2005. The rise in tornado
numbers in the US in recent decades does not extend to significant tornadoes and it's
unlikely that enough of such events are being missed to appreciably affect the statistics.
The data:

Estonia . 45,227 km .... 29/km .... 10 tor ... .00022 tor/km

UK ...... 244,820 km ... 246/km ... 33 tor ... .00013 tor/km
US ...... 9,826,630 km . 31/km .... 1200 tor . .00012 tor/km
OK ...... 181,196 km ... 20/km .... 57 tor ... .00031 tor/km
FL ...... 170,304 km ... 131/km ... 55 tor ... .00032 tor/km
NL ...... 41,526 km .... 396/km ... 20 tor ... .00048 tor/km

(Source for OK/FL (1953-2004): NCDC)

The concentration of tornadoes in the UK is similar to even the US taken as a whole

and is smaller than for Estonia. The Netherlands though does take a clear lead and,
given the differences in reporting networks, it's not clear that Oklahoma or Florida would
have a higher concentration if not for lack of population density. Both are undercounts.

A couple caveats. One, the dataset I used for OK/FL runs from 1953-2004 and the
numbers are dependent on the period utilized. Two, although the reporting network
counteracts population density for the number of tornadoes counted and these are
almost entirely of small tornadoes, soon to be published findings of a mobile Doppler
radar observations constructed climatology suggest that the baseline intensity for
mesocyclonic tornadoes may be of winds in the EF2 range, thus population density
matters even more for rating their intensity than previously thought. Evolauxia (talk)
23:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that although Florida is thought to be highly populated and indeed has
a large population and population density, that most of the population is
concentrated on the coasts and in metropolitan areas. There is much land and
swamp where there is little to no population. Miles and miles where one will not
see any humans or structures. Some of these areas have a high number of
minisupercells which are very likely producing an unknown number of tornadoes
that are never seen or counted. Evolauxia (talk) 06:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

ë m m


This is a question that has been bugging me for a while. Scientists can still cannot
accuratley predict tornadoes but is there an average warning time for people to get to
shelter. Andy (talk) 19:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
So what's your question? Baseball Bugs 
*   )
+ 01:37, 14 November 2008
(UTC)
Sorry I didn't make it clear. :-). The question is; What is the amount of warning
before a tornado strikes? Hope that helps! Andy (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2008
(UTC)
Tornado warnings can be issues a half hour before the tornado strikes an area. ±
Juliancolton cropical yclone 18:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response, thats 1 problem solved! Andy (talk) 18:56, 18
November 2008 (UTC)
Speaking for the US, although tornado warning lead time is sometimes 30
minutes, that is an exception. The average is about 13 minutes. Occasionally
there is no lead time and sometimes there is lead time of 45 minutes or more.
Tornado warnings are for observed or incipient tornadoes as indicated by
witnesses or radar. They can be thought of as a very short term forecast but are
based on what is currently happening.
Conditions favorable to tornadoes, without being specific to exact location or
time, are predicted hours in advance for the vast majority of tornadoes (e.g.
tornado watch or convective outlook). Evolauxia (talk) 06:12, 19 November 2008
(UTC)
Mmm, very true over there. Over here in the UK, usally we will get warnings of
storms but not anything in particular like a tornado. I remember when the 2005
birmingham tornado came, there was no warning at all, thankfully there were no
fatalities. Andy (talk) 19:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
In fact, very few contries have a weather warning program for convective storms.
Because of the prevalence of severe thunderstorms in the Great Plains, the US
have developped expertise in this domain and have been the only coutry to do so
for a long time. Canada has followed because of similar situation and neighborly
influence. Other countries are more focussed on synoptic and tropical cyclone
problems, as tornadoes are less of a concern. The usual meso-scale problems
outside of North-America are hail and downpours so a few european and asian
countries have lately developped a convective warning program mostly aimed at
those. Pierre cb (talk) 20:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
As a side note, last I knew, the NWS guidelines were that the minimum
acceptable lead time on a tornado warning was ten minutes, and the
recommended 
" lead time was 30-40 minutes, on the theory that issuing
a tornado warning further with more lead time than that tends to result in people
taking cover, then thinking it was a false alarm and coming out just in time to get
hit by the storm. However, the last time I heard these standards was at least five
years ago, so I'm not sure if they've changed. (Failure to issue early enough to
provide the minimum ten minute lead time usually results in an investigation as to
why, and, if there's not a damn good reason, can lead to disciplinary action for
not issuing soon enough, so you get a fairly high percentage of false alarms
nationwide, particularly in areas that get just enough tornado activity to see them
regularly, but not enough to get adequate practice in interpreting the NEXRAD
imagery to identify when to issue.)
 I don't know the details of the weather radar networks in Europe, but without a
Doppler-based wind velocity-measuring radar system like the U.S. NEXRAD
system, it's going to be extremely difficult to get a lead time for tornado warnings
greater than five minutes, maximum, since the only ways to forecast one would
be either spotting a hook echo on the radar, or a spotter reporting a funnel cloud
descending. rdfox 76 (talk) 23:25, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Also, remember that most tornado warnings do not verify: Tornado warnings are
false alarms 78% of the time [7]. Granted, almost all tornado warnings are
followed by severe weather of some kind, so you should ALWAYS seek shelter
when one is issued. Also, I found a cool graphic for tornado warnings vs. tornado
events: [8] Apparently a significant number of tornadoes still occur with no
tornado warning! -‰ 



 17:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Although too many events are missed, the statements and map cited are
misleading. The probability of detection for US tornado warnings is about 80%
and almost all the missed events are small, weak tornadoes. Very few significant
tornadoes, the ones which incur fatalities and substantial damage are missed.
Now the false alarm rate is very high, it's 75%-80%, but given the nature of
weather and resources currently available, it's very difficult to reduce that much
further without reducing the probability of detection. Evolauxia (talk) 00:03, 22
November 2008 (UTC)

 

Several dictionaries I've checked have attribute the root of 'tornado' to the Spanish word
"tronada" (thunderstorm), but doesn't "tornados" in Spanish mean 'to turn; turner'? --
IronMaidenRocks (talk) 21:02, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

The article's Etymology section contains a discussion on this matter. -

‰ 



 19:20, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

rm 

How is it that this article doen't discuss how many people are killed by tornadoes? The
only mentions are in reference to specific instances quoted as examples, no mention of
average death rates, etc. Rmhermen (talk) 16:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Good point, just as a point, around 100 people are killed per year, but there are
more tornadoes on average, with the deaths are coming down (forecasting and
warnings are a lot better.) Take a look here: [9] for the stats for 1950-1999. Andy
(talk)
These statistics are for the US. The world is bigger than that and not as
sphisticated for the prevention, warning and reporting. Pierre cb (talk) 18:42, 17
December 2008 (UTC)
 Ah, I did not see that, sorry people! You also raise another good points about
other warning systems. I remember the Daltipur-Salturia Tornado in Bangladesh
(which killed 1300 people and injured 12000) , although large, larger have
occured elsewhere, with a much smaller number of deaths and injuries. Andy
(talk) 18:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately, Bangladesh is so overcrowded and vulnerable that just leaky
faucets have been known to wipe out villages. Baseball Bugs

* )
+
00:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Don't hate on Bangledesh. Leaky faucets? A bit of an exageration, if you ask me.
Telemacusroxmysox

<make love not war>!





c 

   m

  



m

"Although it is reasonable that the climate change phenomenon of global warming may
affect tornado activity ..."

So, that's 'climate change' caused by a, er, 'changing climate'?

Try this: "there exists no tangible evidence of a link between alleged global warming
and/or climate change and the development and/or severity of tornadoes, which are
subject to local conditions as much as they are to synoptic weather patterns."

Regarding the tornado-'climate change' link, the word 'shrug' is yet more applicable, but
I'm not going to fight currently fashionable opinion. 68Kustom (talk) 14:04, 21 January
2009 (UTC)

I wonder where the citation is for that quoted editorial comment. Maybe it's from
the same place as the pronouncement, "Future events such as this will affect you
in the future." Baseball Bugs 
* )
+ 15:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have changed around the wording; I agree, as it was, it was pretty awful.-
‰ 



 17:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Look at the climate change article that was wikilinked. To what the term refers is
straightforward. It's a generic term for changes in climate, of which, global
warming (anthropogenic or not), can be one aspect. There are now several
studies which show evidence of a link of global warming and tornado activity (and
this stands to reason since tornadoes are products of their atmospheric
environment; which is why certain areas and times of year have more tornadoes
than others), one of which is cited. For a variety of reasons, the details of such a
link are not known, and the article reflects this. The article is/was clear in stating
that not much is known about the effect climate change may have on tornado
activity. This is important for a Wikipedia article of this size and quality, in
 tempering any wild claims there may be from the media, or for those seeking
information in general.
However, since people may confuse the terms climate change and global
warming, and conflate the two, the wording change is fine. Evolauxia (talk) 04:54,
30 January 2009 (UTC)

c‰ ñrD

Tornadoes are destructive whirling wind storms that can happen any where at
any time. They mosly accur in spring. Tornadoes are formed b hot air and cold
air meeting each other. They start to pick up speed and begin to form a funnel
that looks like an elephants trunk. I t keeps heading to the ground. Its basicly like
a game of tag in circles. Once the funnel hits its touchdown layers of dirt and dust
start fill the air around a tornado. Thunderstorms, lightning and hail are commen
warnings that a tornado is about to be born any second. Tornadoes are most
likely i flat places. A tornado wouldnt be able to go over mountains. Once the
tornado hit them it would slowly fade away. Tornadoes are very dangerous. They
are like a giant vaccume that will destroy anything in its way. For safety go to a
room closest to ground or a small tight room with no big things or glass. Cover
your head with your hands and crouch down against a wall. Cover your neck so
no pieces of glass or other dangerous things can hurt it. Wait and wait until its
finally over. Try do avoid tornadoes. Talk:JonasStar 10:42 p.mp, January
29,2009 ²Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.190.195.43 (talk) 03:43,
30 January 2009 (UTC)

V

mD
c
  m

 

A book I have from 2005 says the first tornado photograph was taken by AA Adams in
1884. Another photograph taken in 1879 (that I haven't been able to find) claims to be
the first as well, which one is the true first or is the issue still up for debate? 68.51.41.46
(talk) 06:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe you are referring to the photograph at right versus an older one. Tom
Grazulis, probably the ultimate authority on historical tornadoes, talks about it in
his book "Significant Tornadoes 1680±1991". He says that the AA Adams
photograph has questionable authenticity: it has at least been significantly
retouched, and may be a complete fabrication. However, in his research he
 discovered an apparently genuine tornado photograph from 1879. Since the
copyright on that photo has expired, I'll see if I can upload it later today, with a
little more explanatory text.-‰ 



 17:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
This photograph's authenticity was denied at the time. It's not taken by A A
Adams, but by F N Robinson. In the Significant Tornadoes book, Grazulis shows
a photograph from A A Adams, a professional photographer, of a tornado near
Garnett, Kansas on 26 April 1884, which predates the Robinson South Dakota
picture anyway. From a letter about the Robinson photograph to the editor of
ÿ  on 13 March 1885, "c  m

    r m m
 . A
photograph of the Dakota tornado, a woodcut of which appeared in No. 107,
Science, was submitted to me last November, when the question of admitting it in
the New-Orleans exposition free of charge for space, was under discussion. The
sharpness of outline, and the fact that it was claimed that the photograph was
taken at a distance of twenty-six miles, made me doubt its genuineness so much,
that I submitted it to two of the best out-door photographers connected with the
government surveys. Both pronounced it a manufactured photograph, most
probably taken from a crayon-drawing. J. W. GORE." Grazulis isn't always 100%
on in his assessment of photos. For instance, he doubts the 1890 St. Paul
photograph (p. 653 in the book), stating that a similar picture without the tornado
is in the Minnesota historical archives. Comparison of the two show that the
"with" tornado picture simply had a strip in the middle exposed longer in the
printing process (the buildings and trees in a strip even with the tornado are
darker as well, looking like a standard darkroom technique of exposing sections
of a print more than others was used). Hebrooks87 (talk) 20:29, 16 February
2009 (UTC)
Yeah it turns out I'm a liar: I read the passage again, and the photo I was thinking
of was also taken in 1884, but earlier in the year. The Garnett Kansas one was
the one I was thinking of, Hebrooks87 is completely right. Sorry, from now on I'll
actually have the book in front of me when I answer questions.-
‰ 



 18:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I looked at my book wrong, it didn't say A.A. Adams took the first one, but that it was
believed he did. Anyways, I appreciate the time you two put into your posts and the
picture provided. This helps my research!

(Just from a personal standpoint, the tornado picture above looks a little fake, with the
two mini tornadoes seemingly popping out of each side)

Anyways, thanks again guys! 68.51.41.46 (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

c
   

m

 m 
mm

The definitions of tornado, condensation funnel and funnel cloud in this article are
confusing and at odds with each other. Similar inconsistencies were found in the AMS
Glossary of Meteorology and have recently been fixed in the latest online version of the
Glossary (amsglossary.allenpress.com).
Here's the problem. The definition of tornado given in this Wikipedia article states that a
tornado is "often (but not always) visible as a funnel cloud". Yet the same article has a
definition of funnel cloud that says that "A funnel cloud is a visible condensation funnel
with no associated strong winds at the surface" and that "Not all funnel clouds evolve
into a tornado". Clearly, the definitions are at odds - this was the same problem found in
the original AMS definitions.

The waters get further muddied by the introduction of the term "condensation funnel". In
effect, what is described here is really a "funnel cloud". Note that the AMS Glossary of
Meteorology does not recognize the term "condensation funnel".

Have a look at the AMS definition of tornado and and the new, consistent AMS
definition of funnel cloud:

Tornado: "A violently rotating column of air, in contact with the ground, either pendant
from a cumuliform cloud or underneath a cumuliform cloud, and often (but not always)
visible as a funnel cloud."

Funnel Cloud: "A condensation cloud, typically funnel-shaped and extending outward
from a cumuliform cloud, associated with a rotating column of air (a vortex) that may or
may not be in contact with the ground. If the rotation is violent and in contact with the
ground, the vortex is a tornado."

The main difference in the funnel cloud definition is that the AMS definition now
correctly recognizes that a funnel cloud is in fact a cloud and not a wind process, and
that a funnel cloud very often accompanies a tornado. Saying that a funnel cloud is "no
[sic] associated with strong winds at the surface" is often not true in the case of
tornadoes.

The incorrect usage of the term "funnel cloud" is widespread and it will be difficult to
remedy that situation. However, correcting the definitions in this Wikipedia article will
certainly help. I suggest revising the tornado and funnel cloud definitions to reflect the
definitions in the AMS Glossary, and removing the definition for the term "condensation
funnel".

Sundog22 (talk) 15:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I have attempted to reconcile the conflicting definitions. Let me know if there are
any other issues.-‰ 



 21:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I think it is now worse than before. It makes it look like 'many
meteorologists' aren't very good with logic.

The given tornado definition says it is a "violently rotating column of air, in contact with
the ground, ... and often ... visible as a funnel cloud". Then just below that it says that
many meteorologists strictly define a funnel cloud as "a rotating cloud which is NOT
associated with strong winds at the surface" (emphasis mine). Clearly, it has to be one
way or the other. As I said before, the AMS Glossary definition of funnel cloud had to be
revised in order to correct this glaring problem with consistency. The same should be
done here.

Sundog22 (talk) 23:25, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

IMO, the AMS has only complicated things by making a definition at odds with
the common nomenclature. Unfortunately I won't be around for a couple weeks,
so unless someone wants to fix it in the meantime, it'll have to wait.-
‰ 



 00:06, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

The AMS didn't have a lot of choice, really. Their old definition used the 'common
nomenclature' to which you refer, and that is why their funnel cloud definition was not
consistent with their tornado definition. That is, the 'common nomenclature' is the
problem - unfortunately *
.

I've spoken with Roger Edwards whose SPC 'Tornado FAQ' you cite in your references,
and he says he will soon be updating his FAQ to reflect the new funnel cloud definition.
So, hopefully, the 'common nomenclature' won't be so common in the near future.
Thanks in advance for updating this.

As an aside, I still think that we need a scientific term to describe a vortex that is in
contact with the parent cloud but not the ground, since this does occur and is
sometimes accompanied by a funnel cloud. So far, the best term I can come up with is
'non-tornadic vortex' or NTV. Who knows...maybe this will be adopted and widely used
someday. Sundog22 (talk) 16:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

m
mm
 

I redirected Satellite tornado to Tornado#Satellite_tornado as the current article on

satellite tornado is nothing more than a dictionary definition, and adds no new
information than that provided in this article. I was reverted, and am seeking other
opinions. -Atmoz (talk) 23:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

That was me. I was mainly concerned that you did it without explanation.
However, I also believe it could be made into an article at least a few paragraphs
long. I'll put it on my to-do list...if I can't find enough info to make a substantial
article, I'll restore your redirect.-‰ 



 00:20, 26 February 2009
(UTC)
I support the merge, on the basis stated by Atmoz. The satellite tornado article is
a simple definition of actions of a regular tornado. This is unlike phenomena like
a waterspout which can be non-tornadic in nature. Alastairward (talk) 23:15, 4
March 2009 (UTC)
I also support the merge (i will do so shortly), as I can't really find any more
substantial info on them.-‰ 



 00:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Dm 


The word "tornado" does NOT come from "tronada" but from the expression "viento
tornado" or twisting wind. ²Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.14.164.72
(talk) 14:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

If you can provide a source for that assertion I'd be very grateful; as the article
states, the etymology is unclear in this case. -‰ 



 17:12, 11 May
2009 (UTC)

The term cyclone is not used in 


. The character Zeke exclaims: "It's a
twister! It's a twister!" Please fix this ²Preceding unsigned comment added by
209.114.131.34 (talk) 19:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

And near the end, when the Wizard asks Dorothy how she got to Oz, she replies,
"By cyclone." How is this relevant to this three-months-stale discussion? Or, put
more simply... what's your point? rdfox 76 (talk) 22:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Also, when the tornado first takes Dorothy away, she exclaims "We must be up
inside the cyclone!" -‰ 



m 04:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)



mm


This was put on in august of last year. is it perhaps time to review the protection status?
Destroyer000 (talk) 07:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree; I was somewhat surprised to find the article semi-protected. Clearly Tornados
are highly controversial. Anyway, if someone could change "affect" to "effect" in the final
paragraph of the "Myths and Misconceptions" section I'd appreciate it. ²Preceding
unsigned comment added by 92.233.110.1 (talk) 03:21, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Two points: Firstly, the article was unprotected for most of June, but high levels
of vandalism forced re-protection. Secondly, the use of "affect" as it appears
there is correct; see this helpful tutorial on "affect" versus "effect". -
‰ 



m 04:49, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
There is no accounting for what trolls and vandals will latch onto. The Penguin
article gets vandalized frequently also. Baseball Bugs 
*   )
+ carrots 04:55,
23 July 2009 (UTC)

‰


It seems odd to add this section to a Featured article, but there are several
paragraphs/sections which are unreferenced. If this is not resolved soon, we'll need to
submit the article to FAR, delist it, and drop it down to C class, because this referencing
issue wouldn't pass GA status either. I'll wait a month before pursuing FAR to give
editors a chance to fix this issue, since I did help out this article a bit during its pre GA
status, and even post-FA status, 2-3 years ago. Thegreatdr (talk) 09:20, 24 August
2009 (UTC)

Î
m 

mm
 
m

The article 1948_Tinker_Air_Force_Base_tornadoes is flagged orphan and I figured a

link to it would be appropriate in this article, but I cannot edit due to the semi-protect. I
figure something in section 8.4 along the lines of "Historically, the first tornado forecast
was made in 1948 at Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma" with a link to the article. ²
Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.252.135.29 (talk) 09:09, 6 September 2009
(UTC)

Done! Weatherstar4000 (talk) 16:08, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Tornadele

Condiţiile tpropice pentru formarea tornadelor apar atunci când un curent de aer rece
întâlneşte o masă umedă de aer cald, dând naştere unor enormi nori negri (numiţi
cumulonimbus). Aceşti nori generează o furtună cu tunete, în care urcă aerul mai cald,
creând un curent puternic. În partea superioară a furtunii, vânturi puternice încep să se
învârtă tot mai rapid, formând un vârtej. Vârtejul se roteşte în spirale din ce în ce mai
strânse, mărindu-şi viteza şi înăltânduse spre nori. Apoi tornada coboară din nori şi
atinge pământul cu o mare violenţă.

Vânturile distrug aprope tot ce le stă în cale. Ridică în aer, până la mari înălţimi, o dată
cu praful, care face tornada vizibilă, şi maşini, trenuri, acoperişuri şi oameni. Le Äaspiră´
în vârtej şi le transformă în proiectile mortale atunci când le aruncă înapoi. Drumul
tornadei poate fi detectat după distrugerile pe care le lasă în urma ei. O tornadă ţine, de
obicei, câteva minute, dar cele puternice pot să dureze mai mult de o oră. O furtună
care durează mai multe ore poate genera mai multe tornade pe o arie extinsă.

Viteza vantului este cuprinsa intre 60 si 300 - 400 km/h. In situatii exceptionale au fost
inregistrate, cu ajutorul unor masuratori din satelit, viteze ale vantului de 500 km/h care
au avut efecte devastatoare. Tornadele sunt coloane de aer ce se rotesc repede,
asociate cu puternice furtuni. O singura furtuna poate cauza mai multe tornade si o
tornada poate avea mai multe vortexuri. Vantul este principala amenintare in cazul unei
tornade. Aceste vanturi puternice pot distruge rapid cladiri si, in unele cazuri, intregi
comunitati. Grindina este si ea asociata cu furtunile tornadice si este de asemenea
capabila sa cauzeze pagube enorme in scurt timp. Majoritatea tornadelor apar intre
orele 16.00 si 18.00 cand atmosfera joasa este cea mai instabila.
Diametrul spiralei unei tornade este cuprins intre cateva zeci si cateva sute de metri,
uneori insa inregistrandu-se si tornade de dimensiuni mult mai mari(pana la 200 - 300
km). Fenomenele similare care se produc deasupra oceanelor poarta numele de
trombe, masa de aer in rotatie fiind incarcata cu picaturi aspirate de curentii turbionari
ascendenti. In cadrul tornadelor, miscarea de rotire se produce un sensul acelor de
ceasornic in emisfera sudica si in sens invers in emisfera nordica.

Loc de manifestare:

Cele mai numeroase tornade se formeaza in partea centrala a SUA si in Australia.

Tornadele se pot produce si in Japonia, in Africa de Sud si in Europa. In SUA, anual se
produc intre 800 si 1200 tornade, dar numai cateva sunt periculoase(31%). Recordul a
fost inregistrat in anul 1974, cand s-au format 150 de tornade violente care au provocat
moartea a 392 persoane si pagube de 1 miliard de dolari. In anul 1925, o singura
tornada a produs moartea a 695 de persoane si pagube de 40 milioane de dolari.

Combatere:

Tornadele se desfasoara pe arii mai restranse, dar sunt extrem de periculoase datorita
fortei deosebite a vantului. Desi tehnicile actuale, bazate pe inregistrari satelitare, permit
stabilirea traiectoriilor tornadelor si alertarea populatiei, pagubele se mentin ridicate.
Alarmarea populatiei s-a imbunatatit mult in ultimele decenii, in special, progreselor
realizate in dotarea satelitilor meteorologici, in constrirea unor radare
performante(radare Doppler) si in realizarea unor modele tot mai precise, care permit
stabilirea cu exactitate a traseelor urmate de catre aceste furtuni. Astfel, in prezent
alarma in cazul tornadelor se da cu cateva ore inainte de producerea fenomenului. ²
Preceding unsigned comment added by Dessyrre (talk ‡ contribs) 13:02, 14 October
2009 (UTC)

r

m
 m
 


I just came across this in Gentleman's Magazine and Historical Chronicle, Volume 31,
October 1761 p. 477 and I thought this might be good source material if anyone wants
to add a "History" section to this article.

At a quarter paƒ four in the afternoon, a moƒ aƒ oniſhing phÈnomen was ſeen at m

x
! , in 
ƒ ,, and parts adjacent. It had the appearance of a volcano,
and was attended with a noiſe as if 100 forges had been at work at once ; it filled the air
with a nausſeous ſulpherous ſmell ; it roſe from the mountains in the form of a prodigious
thick ſmoak, and proceeded to the valleys, where it roſe and fell ſeveral times ; and at
length it ſub¿ded in a turnep-field, where the leaves of the turneps, leaves of the trees,
dirt, ƒ icks, &c. filled the air and flew higher than the higheƒ hills. It was preceded with
the moƒ dreadful ƒ orm of thunder and lightning ever heard in the memory of man, and
spead an univerſal conƒ ernation, wherever it was ſeen or heard.

-- truthious Randersnatch 19:57, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

 Where did this event occur? It might be worthy of its own article if sourcing could
be found, and if not, it would go well in one of the lists at List of tornadoes and
tornado outbreaks. m (T‡C‡G) 20:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I guess I'll give it a little stub page and link it into that list. I'm pretty sure
that's a London magazine, which would make it Great Malvern in England.
European tornadoes seem rare enough for it to be notable. -- truthious
Randersnatch 20:34, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Here's the stub: Great Malvern Tornado of 1761 -- truthious Randersnatch
22:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
I rated it stub, but I will leave it up to a more experienced member of the project
to rate its importance. The stub looks good. I will list it on the project's new
articles list. m (T‡C‡G) 22:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Î 


 ñ m

m
 m 


The page can be found here; mm 







m 
 
c
 .
Thank you!

ñ


m

(T‡C‡G) 08:04, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

V
m

Do tornados develop rather in forest areas or in areas without much forest? ²

Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.82.143.78 (talk) 04:30, 3 February 2010
(UTC)

There is no real correlation that I know of (I could not find any papers on the topic). The
worst tornadoes often in treeless areas of the American great plains, but this is mainly
due to the favorable geography. Also, tornadoes in forested areas are more likely to be
reported since they leave a damage path. -‰ 



m 19:29, 3 February
2010 (UTC)

While the tracks might be easier to spot, if no one is there to report one or there
was no ongoing search via plane or helicopter for its path after the fact, how
would anyone know? Thegreatdr (talk) 01:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

 m m


It was written in the myths section that hiding under a table will increase the chances of
survival. This is incorrect. laying along side an object like a couch is safer. This has
been proving on many occasions, it has to do with the falling objects. If part of the
ceiling falls on the so called table, the table will collapse and fall on the person under it.
If an object falls on the couch while the person is laying next to it the object is more
likely to make a triangle around the person. I hope I explained that well. April 2010
148.61.237.253 (talk) 20:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC) Jason

rmm
 c
  


‰V‰
V
 

It is my firm belief that tornadoes can be detected using RF (Radio Frequency) emitted
during the formation and life cycle of a tornado. Please see my theory and notes for
inclusion to the Tornado Wiki article. Full Document: RF (Radio Frequency) detection of
Tornadoes

In addition to the above document I am finalizing a few other documents for research on
the same subject. ²Preceding unsigned comment added by FJSchrankJr (talk ‡
contribs)

Please see this page, which details some research done on detecting tornadoes
through sferics. It states, in part, "The scientific debate was completely put to rest
by analyses of newly developed Doppler radar and electrical measurements from
the Union City, OK tornado of 24 May 1973. The Union City measurements
showed conclusively that the enhanced lightning activity originated with the
parent storm as a whole, not with the tornado itself." and "Up to the current time,
unique signatures for tornadoes have not been found in lightning data." When
and if such a connection is found, and it is discovered that tornadoes can be
detected through sferics, it will be included in the article. m (T‡C‡G) 18:30, 30
April 2010 (UTC)

In Response:

I try to refrain from using the term sferics because it generally implies the lower
frequencies such as ELF/VLF.

In regards to research conducted in the 70s their spectrum analysis equipment was far
less detailed or accurate as today¶s. While there may have been no positive results at
that time, it could indicate that it requires further amplification and digital pre-processing
that were not as readily available then. I am quite certain there is more research to
perform and strongly believe there is RF energy being transmitted from the tornado
itself but again the RF power of which, I am uncertain.

I hope NWS and independent researchers look into it further. --FJSchrankJr (talk)
19:47, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I believe they are with the VORTEX2 project, but I'm not for sure. A better place
for this whole conversation would probably be the Meteorology WikiProject's talk
page, as it would attract more people into the discussion who can give an opinion
on this. m (T‡C‡G) 21:02, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Tornadoes are already detected using RF energy. The system is called NEXRAD.
(Snark mode OFF.) More seriously, the discussion probably doesn't belong on
Wikipedia at all; it should be done in a meteorology forum, instead, as Wiki talkpages
are for discussing ways to improve the *article*, not to discuss the topic of the article
itself. rdfox 76 (talk) 01:16, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: NEXRAD is a RADAR and yes of course it is based on RF. However it uses RF
energy in the microwave spectrum and like any RADAR only receives the band it
transmits that reflects back. What I have proposed differs from RADAR as I believe the
tornado itself acts as a source of RF and it only needs to be received.

As a side note, RADAR is terrific and has come quite far but when the safety of people
is at stake wouldn¶t you like the redundancy and additional warning? This technology
could be as common and inexpensive as a smoke detector.--F.J. Schrank 12:29, 1 May
2010 (UTC)

This is all well and good, but, as I said, this really isn't the venue to discuss it.
This page is intended for discussions about improving the article itself. While I
don't really know where an appropriate place to do so would be, perhaps
contacting Josh Wurman or Howie Bluestein through their workplaces (both of
them have links to their professional websites on the articles) would be a good
place to start; even if they wouldn't necessarily be directly involved in such
research, I expect that politely asking them for information on where discussion
of such research occurs would get a helpful response. (Though it might not be for
a month or two--both of them are, presumably, rather busy with VORTEX2 right
now.)
This isn't meant as an attempt to shoot your idea down, mind--it's interesting, and
I certainly wouldn't mind something new to help with tornado detection, but it's
just that this isn't the right venue. rdfox 76 (talk) 22:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I will look in to that.--F.J. Schrank 23:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd have to agree with Rdfox 76. Wikipedia is quite clear on this. Since it is
an encyclopedia, only settled matters can be written about on here. If what you
are proposing is published via peer review in some meteorological or scientific
journal, then we can include it into this article. Otherwise, it's just an interesting
note about something which may be published about in the future, which in my
opinion, could be included in the article talk page as a "head's up", but that's it.
Thegreatdr (talk) 03:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

There is a section titled "Electromagnetic, lightning, and other effects" and does cover
what I am explaining. There are a few other details that could be added but I think it is
good. Most notably the decrease of lightning during a tornado which could clearly
indicate the release of some accumulated electrical potential within the thunderstorm as
the condensation funnel reaches the ground.

In certain cases of stronger storms, I also believe the luminosity reports could also be
contributed to by the electrical discharges that I spoke of.
There is research supporting this theory such as that of Reference 43 by John R
Leeman and E.D. Schmitter.

Despite all of the findings on this research, there is yet no project to gather data.
Hopefully this will speed it up: T.E.D.D. --F.J. Schrank 16:05, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

c
  m
   

What is this, then, nature's vacuum cleaner?

It still has not been conclusively proven that tornadoes exist. Shouldn't there be a
section about the possibility that it is just a cultural belief, like fan death in South Korea
or something? Nick (talk) 01:13, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure? Tornadoes definitely exist, unlike ball lightning and such. ±
ë 
 m  | 
 01:25, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Where do you live, Ncurses? --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure how seriously I should take this; what do you mean by "conclusively
proven"?-‰ 



m 15:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
(T‡C‡G)
If tornadoes don't exist, then what is that in the picture at right. m
15:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

 D
m m


 m 


Although tornadoes have been observed on every continent except Antarctica, 75% of
them occur[1] in the United States.[2] The remaining tornadoes occur within regions at
mid-latitude where warm and cool air fronts collide.[3] These regions include: southern
Canada, south-central and eastern Asia, the Philippines, east-central South America,
Southern Africa, northwestern and southeast Europe, western and southeastern
Australia, and New Zealand.[4]
The first explanation states that for tornadoes to begin to develop, two conditions must
be first satisfied.[5] One, an invisible horizontal spinning effect must be first formed upon
the Earth's surface. This is usually formed by sudden changes occurred in winds
direction, known as wind shear. Second, a thundercloud, or occasionally a cumulus
cloud, must be present. During a thunderstorm, the updrafts presented are occasionally
powerful enough to lift the horizontal spinning row of air upwards, turning it into a
vertical air column. This vertical air column then becomes the basic structure for the
tornado. Tornadoes that forms in this way are often classified as weak tornadoes that
generally last for less than 1±10 minutes.[5]

The second method of formation occurs during the occurrence of a supercell

thunderstorm. This type of tornado forms by the updrafts present in the supercell
thunderstorm. When winds occurring during this phenomenon increase and intensify,
the force released can cause the updrafts to rotate. This rotating updraft is known as a
mesocyclone.[6] For a tornado to form in this manner, a downdraft called the rear-flank
downdraft enters the center of the tornado from the back. Cold air, being denser than
warm air is able to penetrate through the updraft. The combination of the updraft and
downdraft completes the development of a tornado. Tornadoes that form in this method
are often classified as violent and are capable of lasting for more than one hour.[5]

This information was removed during CE and may be more appropriate to your article.
Respectfully Bullock Å 20:26, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

V
mm







I just noticed that a forecasting section is missing with this article while expanding the
cold-core low article. FYI. Thegreatdr (talk) 02:51, 29 May 2010 (UTC)



 


This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the
Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles
listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending
changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely

semi-protected articles.
Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and
consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to
the article.

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just
posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, &

, 00:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC).

0
mm 
  m
D  


 

The first paragraph under "Myths and misconceptions" states: "While there is a large
drop in atmospheric pressure inside a strong tornado, it is unlikely that the pressure
drop would be enough to cause the house to explode." Consider this: the roof of a
house in Southern Kansas (a place that commonly sees tornadoes) should be designed
to withstand a snow load of approximately 30 lbs/sq-ft. That is approximately .21 lbs/sq-
in. The section of the entry describing "Electromagnetic, lightning, and other effects"
mentions a recorded pressure drop inside an F4 funnel of 100 mbar (approximately 1.45
psi). That means that, if the roof could sustain as much uplift as it could snow load, it
would need to be designed with a factor of safety of approximately 7 to keep from
disintegrating. That seems questionable to me, especially since a house is designed
primarily for a downward load. Coastal homes in hurricane-prone areas must be
designed with tie straps so the roofs will stay on in areas where the winds are not
expected to exceed 120 mph (http://web.dcp.ufl.edu/stroh/FloridaBuildingCode.pdf).
The Manchester tornado had wind-speeds estimated to be as high as 260 mph.

Second, go to www.youtube.com and view the National Geographic clip on tornadoes

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43VoMesUd2Q). Pay particular attention to the
segment between 0:50 and 0:60. Notice that the house begins to fragment, lifts
vertically off it's foundation, and disintegrates. For that to happen, the outside pressure
would have had to drop rapidly enough the the internal pressure blew the house off its
foundation before it could reach equilibrium with the outside air pressure.

For these reasons, the statement in the main article regarding exploding houses should
be removed. (Imarocktscientst (talk) 04:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC))

No, it should not be removed based on your original research, per Wikipedia
policy. Secondly, if you read the tornado myths article linked from that section,
you'll see the explanation of why it was believed that houses could explode in a
tornado; the short version is that houses have enough natural air leaks to allow
pressure to equalize sufficiently to avoid exploding, and even if they didn't, the
hole that the pickup truck would leave when it goes through the wall will solve
that issue nicely. The house in that clip was not lifted by internal pressure
blowing it off its foundation; it was lifted by wind getting in under it and lifting it off
the foundation. rdfox 76 (talk) 03:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)