Tornadoes are a fairly regular event in some places, but this one is said to be much worse than most, with 91 confirmed as dead, and fears for others.
News report
Very sad.

Shows the value of a simple shelter.
Yes odds of getting hit by one are slim, but still, I never understood why so many people in tornado prone areas just shrug their shoulders at the thought of installing one.

As you said, the odds are slim. Even in this part of the nation where tornadoes are more common, the odds of being killed in a traffic accident are greater.

Jeanette Isabelle

Later reports suggest a lower death toll than earlier suggested, though still significant and just as tragic for those affected.

This is a major tragedy and the casualties it would appear are being downplayed especially when you consider whole neighborhoods are left with just with the outline of the concrete foundations of hundreds of individual homes. And this is just one neighborhood as the area of destruction of 30-40 square miles. Casualties will most likely be in the many hundreds to thousands.

I am listening to a news report stating that the death toll has been lowered, although indeed it is expected to climb as rescue efforts continue. Oklahomans are pretty tough dudes...

Heartbreaking images and videos of the carnage.

This time of year severe thunderstorms are common and there is often little time to react from the time a tornado develops to when it hits. The Weather Channel just reported that with today's technology there is an average of 13 minutes to react. And I may start a thread on that subject - what can you do with 13 minutes?

The most remarkable photos and videos I've yet seen are at this link:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...hool-Moore.html


My thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their loved ones and everyone who has been worrying about friends and family in the affected area.

Looks like this will be another frightening day for millions in the paths of severe storms. God bless all.


.

It seems to me that the real problem is from reporters and "talking heads" speculating about the death toll and then presenting their speculations as fact.
The authorities appear to be basing their numbers on actual recovered remains. Many are missing, unaccounted for and some are probably trapped. Some percentage of those will add to the death toll, but how many must be determined one by one as the search continues. There is a lot of territory and rubble to be searched.

From what I heard, early annoucements by officials were too high because of double-counts of the same bodies by different responding agencies. Once the duplicates were sorted out, the official count was lowered this morning.

A simple above-ground shelter won't do much good when a tornado uses telephone poles as javelins. I don't know if basement shelters are practical there. Basements are possible for my family in Kansas (maybe two hours north of OKC by car).

There's video from last year of a tornado tossing 18-wheeler trailers (big cargo trailers from highway tractor/trailer rigs) high in the air near Dallas/Fort Worth. It's not the wind that a shelter needs to deal with, it's what the wind carries along.


From memory, the highest odds in the world are about one on the ground within 25 miles a given point, once per century.

It's a classic insurance problem: is it cheaper to accept infrequent losses or spend a lot on prevention?

The question is more complicated in Florida or the Gulf Coast, where an underground shelter is out of the question for hurricanes.

My prayers go out to the victims. This makes my current life problems seem trivial.

Same for me.

"Casualties will most likely be in the many hundreds to thousands." So far the death toll is 24, although that will probably climb as search efforts contine.
_________________________

This article really exasperates me. It mentions mostly the gawkers--and some "looters"--who have descended on the devastation in Moore. These folks drive in from distant places to take a look and spend an afternoon.

*sigh* But what can we expect from people who are groomed on theme parks, blockbuster Hollywood movies, Facebook, Instagram, spectacle and celebrity gossip 24/7? It really just makes me shake my head. Actually, the media's presence fuels a lot of it, too.

When I was living in Manhattan on 9/11, I felt no need to go down to Ground Zero to check out the damage. Among other things, it was too sad and macabre to lay eyes on that place, and people had a job to do down there and I didn't want to get in the way. Even on the road, I don't rubberneck at accident scenes. I just want to get through safely and past the accident.

Well this is absurd......

"Moore Mayor Glen Lewis said he will propose an ordinance in the next couple of days at the Moore City Council that would modify building codes to require the construction of reinforced shelters in every new home."

I am afraid I don't follow you. Given their tornadic history, it seems fairly reasonable. I just listened this morning to a piece on NPR, a discussion with a research meteorologist, who opined that any single piece of real estate was likely to be struck by a tornado once in 4,000 years. Your odds are therefore pretty good. Despite these odds, this gentleman paid an extra $2000 to incorporate a reinforced concrete shelter into an addition to his residence.

If I were purchasing real estate in Tornado Alley, a good shelter would be a definite plus.

Would a concrete room integrated with a concrete foundation do the trick? If so, that seems easy enough. By the way, I heard basements weren't common in this town because the land is mostly rock, or whatever, and so it's difficult (expensive) to dig a hole that big without making the house too expensive.

Using those stats, if you live there for 30 years in one house, your house has a 30 in 4,000 chance of being struck by a Tornado. With those odds, I'd definitely spend some money on a reinforced room! Plus, home insurance would probably go down.

Choosing to install a storm shelter in ones private home is reasonable (and prudent).
Being forced to do so by a bureaucrat is absurd.

Building codes "force" us to do all sort of costly things,like anchoring walls to foundations in fairly precise ways, and all kinds of things in plumbing and electrical. I would regard construction of a safe room as a reasonable requirement in that particular neck of the woods.

Technically, the mayor is probably an elected official, not a bureaucrat. If the citizens don't care for his concepts, they can send him packing.......

The rebar in the room walls needs to be tied carefully to the foundation metal, as well as the rebar in the ceiling. Wind forces and debris impacts are going to pull (tension) the shelter off the foundation otherwise.


I believe it's clay. But the bigger issue is that the water table is very high and so it's hard to get water out of the shelter.

It appears that about a quarter of the Moore victims *drowned* in a basement that flooded.


That's easy to check - does anyone have a policy that offers a discount if there's a shelter?

Not everyone can afford to protect against every eventuality, and the alternative (apartment, etc) may be no safer.


That's for any tornado. For one like this probably much longer than once in 10,00 years, maybe once in 50,000. A time scale that long exposes other risks!


Homes there are not bubble-priced. You're looking at likely a 5% price increase, and more if ADA-compliance is needed or you want it big enough to stand up in. Much more if it's supposed to protect against an EF5 with debris impacts.

$5,000 is a lot of money for some people when it is very unlikely to ever make a difference.

Roofs, walls, plumbing, electrical systems, etc are all in active use every moment a home is occupied from the moment it is built, tornados are statistically rare events with the odds of a fatal event being even greater.

The U.S. averages 80 tornado fatalities per year, while we average over 3,500 non-boating related drownings. Would you regard the government mandated wearing of life jackets within 100ft of any lake, pond, pool, hot tub, or bathtub reasonable?

Life jacket = $25
Storm shelter = $5,000-10,000+

BTW, ironically the 9 children who died at the school on Monday actually survived the tornado, they drowned when the federally mandated fire sprinkler feed main broke and flooded the basement. So in a twisted way a regulation actually caused their death. I'm not advocating the removal of sprinkler systems, just trying to impart some reality. We do not need more emotion based bureaucracy/laws in our private lives.



Technically (and by very definition), because one is elected does not negate them from being a bureaucrat.

This sort of stuff amounts to political commentary, and is not allowed under the forum rules. I take it that RedGreen is some sort of con serv ative, and he uses the language that some pundits on the right typically employs to insult government employees (e.g., "we don't want a *bureaucrat* to make our healthcare decisions!"). This is the sort of stuff that could potentially make Doug Ritter's job harder when he has to work with "bureaucrats." Finally, the whole "anti-regulation" stance is another political statement, having nothing to do with the focus of this forum.

There is no restriction on your political beliefs on this forum as long as you don't discuss them. That's what makes this a good forum.

You're the only one who mentioned pollitical affiliation/politics, projected pollitical based assertions, and thinly veiled personal attack (banned under forum rules) based on perceived pollitical affiliation. My non-pollitical comments were timely, factual, and directly related to the posted topic concerning surviving a devastating tornado.

And no, I still do not understand why more people do not choose to install a shelter in their home in these areas.

I have family & friends near there and generally there is no discount as it does not actually protect the home (what is insured) only the occupants, but some life insurance companies offer a credit for them. The most inexpensive option we used on the farm (aside from a simple earth shelter) were LPG tanks. Simply cut one in half, weld a plate to the opening, cut a hatch and hinge it, then anchor to the slab. You can make two, two adult shelters for under $1k and it only takes up about 10 sq/ft of a garage floorspace. Typical tanks are 3/8-1/2” and more than capable of withstanding an EF-5 (3/16" flat plate has been tested/rated to 250mph in above ground applications).

There is nothing "factual" about a statement like "installing a shelter should be up to the individual, not up to government bureaucrats." This is an opinion, a political opinion at that. It's about policy and the role of government in society. How is the philosophy of governance "directly related to... surviving a devastating tornado"? It's not. It's about your view of government. Claiming otherwise is dishonest. Turning my well-intentioned advice for you to something about me is hypocritical.

Here is how wikipedia defines "bureaucrat."

German sociologist Max Weber defined a bureaucratic official as the following:[1]

He is personally free and appointed to his position on the basis of conduct.
He exercises the authority delegated to him in accordance with impersonal rules, and his loyalty is enlisted on behalf of the faithful execution of his official duties.
His appointment and job placement are dependent upon his technical qualifications.
His administrative work is a full-time occupation.
His work is rewarded by a regular salary and prospects of advancement in a lifetime career.
He must exercise his judgment and his skills, but his duty is to place these at the service of a higher authority. Ultimately he is responsible only for the impartial execution of assigned tasks and must sacrifice his personal judgment if it runs counter to his official duties.
Bureaucratic control is the use of rules, regulations, and formal authority to guide performance. It includes such things as budgets, statistical reports, and performance appraisals to regulate behavior and results.


Note the key phrase "appointed to his position." This definition rings true to me, because I fit most of it during my long career with the National Park Service. During that time I worked with all sorts of bureaucrats. Some were fat, lazy, and incompetent, but far more were energetic, conscientious, and thoughtful. Some were short; some were tall. Some were intellectual; some were earthy. A few were drop dead gorgeous; most of us, regrettably, were not. Bureaucrats bear a startling resemblance to people. Some employ the term as a pejorative, but most bureaucrats are simply trying to accomplish their job. They really don't stay awake at night figuring out how to make life difficult for the rest of us.

Not that accuracy means much in a discussion such as this but today the medical examiner confirmed that the children died of mechanical asphyxiation, not drowning. Most likely they lost their lives when debris fell on them and crushed the breath from them. Not a broken sprinkler main, and not the twisted machinations of an unfeeling self-interested Weberian bureaucracy. They were in the path of a tornado, one moment alive and the next they were gone. Children. I find it sorta sad that you can join them in the same sentence with the effects of bureaucracy, when they are not even laid to rest today. Please give it a rest.

Agreed. Government can overstep itself, bit this strays dangerously close to forum boundaries. Now if the building regulations came from a neutral party, ie American Society of Civil Engineers or similar, I would be more supportive. This seems like typical knee jerk reaction.

As to basements, theyre possible, but not practical. An article on CNN a few days ago mentioned less than 1% of homes in that area had a basement. I have seen shelters dug into the slab of the garage, little more than 4' deep and 8-12 feet long, but it gives some protection.

One point worth noting in light of the total destruction of so many buildings, is that incorporation of a safe room/shelter is much easier and cheaper if it is planned into the design from the outset, rendering the additional cost fairly trivial; maybe you would have to give up granite kitchen counters in order to have a safe room and stay within budget. Some might regard that as reasonable.

I'll bet the good citizens of Moore can figure out a solution that suits them.

I posted the "drowned" claim first. That' what the news media reported at the time, and I doubt anyone at the scene realized it wasn't drowning until the medical examiner looked closely. When you find a body pinned under water drowning is the first thing that comes to mind...


Had they merely been pinned down by the debris and not killed at that point, they likely would have drowned.

The problem with a government mandate in the form of a code requirement is that it is a one-size-fits-all-solution when people definitely don't have one-size-fits-all finances. Some people might just need to put off buying a jetski, but it's a much bigger deal to most. And when you factor in that it will almost never be needed it's easy to imagine Joe Sixpack thinking that the money would be better spent on more fire-resistant materials, etc.

We seem to be discussing the value of building codes, which is germane to being equipped to survive. On one extreme, we have the situation in Bangladesh, where the absence of code, or at least their enforcement, leads to very bad situations. While I don't know of any off hand, I am sure there are examples of unduly restrictive and pedantic building codes that hinder rather than help.

Living in earthquake country, I know that one reason real estate is relatively expensive here is the code requirements for many details that relate to building survival during a shaking event. Most of these have been instituted based on experience in quakes, and in my opinion, at least, are cost effective.

It also occurs to me that I have a lot of things "that almost will never be needed" - the seat belts in my car, my 357 magnum (nearly needed it once, though), the tourniquets in my FAK. I have never needed to use my signal mirror for aid, although it has come in handy on many occasions. I just replaced both my climbing helmet and biking helmet, although I wore them out without them ever actually saving my noggin. The list goes on and on.....

Sprinkler systems for both commercial and residential properties have saved many lives and properties. The potential that some lives could have been lost due to drowning does not out weight the importance for the code requirement that structures with high life loss potential have sprinkle systems.

NFPA

USFA

Alantic City -Showed How Sprinkler Systems Can Save Lives

Fire Sprinkler Systems Credited For Saving Lives In Texas

Pete

I have encountered the statement -"No lives have ever been lost in a fire in a fully sprinkler equipped building" (presumably in the US). This statement was in print, so it must be true, or must have been true. Do you know if, in fact, this ever was the case, and if it still holds?

Sorry, I do not know if that statement is correct or if it was, remains true. What I can say, it sprinkler systems in general have been noted many times in post incident reports as having limited fire damage. Based upon those reports, it would seem prudent that building/Life-Safety Codes requiring sprinkler systems are easily defendable.

While I am not suggesting anyone here holds the opinion that Life-Safely Codes requiring sprinkler, smoke/heat detectors in all homes, businesses, etc. should be at the discretion of the owner. My belief is those who do, have never had to recover the body of a young child (or actually anybody) from the ruins of his/her bedroom because there were no working smoke detectors.

Pete

Rather than start a new thread, I thought I'd post this AP article here. It's a subsequent tornado event, where some of the fatalities might be considered "fallout" from the original tragic event. Instead of sheltering in place, many people tried to make a run for it.

"Friday night's storm formed out on the prairie west of Oklahoma City, giving residents plenty of advance notice. When told to seek shelter, many ventured out and snarled traffic across the metro area — perhaps remembering the damage from May 20.

"It was chaos. People were going southbound in the northbound lanes. Everybody was running for their lives," said Terri Black, 51, a teacher's assistant in Moore.

After seeing last month's tornado also turn homes into piles of splintered rubble, Black said she decided to try and outrun the tornado when she learned her southwest Oklahoma City home was in harm's way. She quickly regretted it.

When she realized she was a sitting duck in bumper-to-bumper traffic, Black turned around and found herself directly in the path of the most violent part of the storm. "My car was actually lifted off the road and then set back down," Black said. "The trees were leaning literally to the ground. The rain was coming down horizontally in front of my car."

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Okla...6160/story.html