satellite comparison 19z

Looking at a comparison of simulated and actual satellite images at 19z shows that the model is too aggressive with convection, or at least clouds in south central NE. It did not at all capture the ongoing supercell in far northern NE.

jca

EWP Operations Update – Monday 6/2 – 2:40 pm

Today, there is a moderate risk for severe storms across much of the Central Great Plains.  A warm front / outflow boundary is positioned over southern and central Nebraska, arcing to the northwest toward Wyoming.  High-resolution model guidance suggests that convective initiation will occur within the next hour over much of Nebraska, as the upper-level wave approaches.

Given the ongoing convection in N Nebraska, we have elected to choose the more quiescent environment over W/C Nebraska for operations today.  We are now operating in the North Platte and Hastings CWAs.

-Gabe Garfield

Week 4 Coordinator

Daily Summary: Week 4, Day 1 (2 June 2014)

As usual, Monday was an orientation day for the EWP.  Forecasters learned how to use the experimental products in the AWIPS2 environment, and began to develop comfort using the blog.

We monitored the potential for severe storms in the Wichita and Norman CWAs.  Severe storms never developed, in spite of early optimism from the OUN WRF.

-G. Garfield

Week 4 Coordinator

EWP – Day 1 – Initial Random Thoughts

Good overview of the products – even with little sensible weather.

First thought – will try to “enhance” a few color curves to make interrogation easier. I have spent “lots” of hours in the WFO setting enhancing color tables – and I believe these will help.  One easy change is to reduce the “noise” of the CI product – e.g. remove values below 40%.  This allows you to focus only the storms of interest.

Thought #2 is to combine/overlay the observed fields (e.g. ThetaE_NearCast) with relevant forcing.  For instance, in the image below I used the ThetaE difference with GFS40 850mb moisture convergence.  In essence, combine the observed environment with model forcing parameters.



Mike Fowle

HWT Day 1 Part Two

Am now familiar enough with running the AWIPS and am well underway in evaluating the products for this week. We did notice the overshooting top algorithm missed a rather well defined one in NE Michigan (Well outside of our forecast area but we are looking around to get a feel for the products). The prob of severe product is being looked at at we can easily see the value of the satellite imagery in computing this. The higher res. when GOES R comes along will make this much better I suspect. This product seems to me on day one to be very valuable. I work on the broadcast side of things and during major severe weather events we have to do the dual tasks of talking on camera and having a minute or two every 3-5 mins. to update situational awareness. If this product does well, it will be extremely valuable.

At 2250Z on 2 June I am looking at the image below. The boundary of theta E difference is what we are focusing on for convection. SPC has put put out an MD for the area now as well.

Dan Satterfield
WBOC Salisbury,MD

Tracking Meteogram

While this tool is fun to play with…I’m not sure it tells me anything I can’t already see. However, watching the trends of multiple storms against one another is nice. This product would be most useful for well behaved (non-deviant) mature storms where less user input in required for accurate output. Not sure how the graphs on the right work, as a new one appears each time a new meteogram is added, but there are duplicates. I suppose that if you load a product with more variables, i.e. KDP, CC, etc., there may be less duplication and more valuable information.



-KP

tracking meteogram tool

you can add multiple tracks to the same base image. I think this would be best again for SA and not necessarily the warning forecaster to keep an eye on which storms are growing/decaying.

jason anderson

overshooting tops detection

the overshooting tops detection is very good to overlay on satellite, especially at night over an IR image. I understand it’s a ‘yes/no’ algorithm, but the legend and sampling readouts are not at all useful, even a bit distracting.

jason anderosn

EDIT: The latter half of this post was a AWIPS-II feature/issue - BL

GOES-R CI is doing well with developing showers along a boundary!

Update: 30 minutes later…



The cell farthest to the south-east is growing fastest!



-KP

First impressions Day One HWT

Being from the broadcast side of things, my familiarity with AWIPS is low, but the HWT folks here have given me a quick course and I am getting quickly used to setting things up for the week ahead.

From the pre-HWTB training moduels, I am very interested in the NSSL WRF sythentic satellite imagery (GOES R PG), the Prob Severe Model and the Convec. Initiation/LAPS.

I already use synthetic imagery from a 4km model (RPM run by WSI in Boston) and have found that it is very good for quickly determining how well the model is performing on a daily bases. You can easily spot errors in convection/cloud precip etc. I have also frequently found that the model will do well but has temporal errors of up to 120 mins. Will I see the see the same thing with the NSSL WRF Simulated imagery this week?? Time will tell and I will look for it. My first impressions today are that it is very similar to my previous experience and will be quite valuable as a model diagnostic tool.

Lightning jump is another thing I will be looking at hard because I have had recent experience in seeing this (albeit only on CG data) with a tornadic super-cell in Delaware that produced an EF1.

Lastly the CIMMS theta E difference seems to have high potential to improve temporal and spatial forecasts of convection. The case studies I looked at during the pre-HWT training were impressive. Am hoping to see it in action this week. Today we are looking at some high theta e diff moving into Southern KS this Monday afternoon. Will see if the convection goes along the boundary we have id’d near Osage Cty Okla.



Dan Satterfield
WBOC TV Salisbury,MD