[ Read Responses | Return to the Index ]

[ Previous | Next ]

Message: RUC2 evaluation teleconference summary

Posted by Stan Benjamin on 16 Dec 97, 17:30 MT

Summary of RUC2 evaluation teleconference - 15 Dec 97
(for the participants as well as others on the field test distribution list)

 FSL - Tom Schlatter, Stan Benjamin, John Brown
 Aviation Weather Center
   Tim Mahony
 Storm Prediction Center
   Phillip Bothwell
 NWS Western Region -
   Jon Mittelstadt - SLC
   Mary Cairns - RNO
 NWS Central Region -
   Preston Leftwich - HQ
   Karl Jungbluth, Dan Smith - DSM
   Paul Wolyn - PUB
   Pete Browning - Pleasant Hill, MO
 NWS Southern Region
   Rusty Pfost - JAN
   Rich Wynne - AMA
 NWS Eastern Region
   Paul Sisson, Will Murray - BTV
   Josh Korotky - PIT
 NCEP - Greg Karpen
 FAA HQ - Bill Eggleston
 FAA Tech. Center - Danny Sims, Tom Carty

Agenda items w/ responses

*Receiving output * Is everybody getting something out there?

NWS/WR will distribute by end of week. (Mary C.)
No f00 files for initialized fields in RUC2, only anl files for analyses.
Need to get sfc analyses out earlier (Josh K.)
- Dependent on NCEP data dumping, which takes 10-12 mins. Currently 14-15 mins later than RUC1 sfc analyses (according to OSO server), on average. Should be about 3 min faster by later this week, and another 3-5 min faster when NCEP allows RUC2 back on Cray 3 in January. Will work on further speed-ups of data dumping. - Stan B.

Some offices would like to keep 60km RUCS (hourly sfc analyses) longer for comparison. FSL will check w/ NCEP to see what their plan is. RUC1 3-h cycle will end w/ implementation of RUC2 on 11 Feb (currently scheduled date), and 80km AWIPS 211 grid data from RUC2 will be provided (not there yet).

*File sizes
* No tiling at this time. However, we recommend not grabbing the native coordinate 10 MB files, but instead using either the 5.5-6 MB 25-mb isobaric files, or the 0.3 MB surface files. Also, it is not necessary to grab output every hour; every third hour may be sufficient. We understand that Peggy Bruehl's script allows this kind of flexibility.

Some offices said they don't need 25 mb isobaric data above 500 mb.
(BTV). AWC, SPC still need it. Some other offices said that they can pare levels at region, if necessary.

Result - keep 25 mb output, but get rid of 1050 and 1025 levels. This assumes that sfc grids will be accessed independently, since they were incorporated in the 1050 and 1025 level fields.

Will also add terrain height and top-down freezing level grids for sfc file and isobaric main file.

WR may downsize RUC2 files geographically, getting rid of E. Coast data (Mary C.)

*Status of BUFR soundings

NWS offices would like to have individual time series of soundings (Rusty P., Paul S., others)

FSL will look at this with Peggy Bruehl. File sizes of BUFR soundings for all sites at a single output time are estimated to be only 200 KB, which is quite manageable. Stay tuned. But they won't be there by Wed.

*Duration of field test

Field test extended to 17 Jan.

Get information to FSL by 22 Jan (mail to Tom Schlatter, R/E/FS1, NOAA/ERL, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80303, or e-mail to Stan Benjamin (benjamin@fsl.noaa.gov)). We still need to write quickly (within a couple of days) a Technical Procedures Bulletin for the CAFTI meeting scheduled for 5 Feb 98.

The proposed implementation for 11 Feb 98 assumes that CAFTI and the evaluators (you) are generally comfortable that RUC2 is equal to or better than RUC1. So your input is important for this. We think the RUC2 is in OK shape on this score from looking at it at FSL for the last 1-2 years. Just as important, the evaluation gives us a chance to fine tune output formats, variables, and get rid of some minor errors. I hope that we at FSL can also help with the education process in how to use RUC2.

Some regions may continue an extended field test of RUC2 (e.g., WR, SPC) to examine performance in difference seasons. FSL welcomes this and continued interactions with users, including through evaluation web page.

*When can we start running 12h fcsts?

Lots of expressions of need for 12h fcsts.

[Laurie Morone at NCEP has been out the last couple of days, so we now hope for tomorrow or Thursday. We've got three significant time-saving fixes in the queue that should easily permit the restoration of the 12-h fcsts.]

*Vertical velocities
*Definitely more mesoscale in RUC2 than other models.
*What do you think?

Discussed off line with SPC and BTV. SPC problems appear to be related to GEMPAK, not to RUC2 processing. FSL is reviewing BTV observations of RUC2 VV's.

*Early impressions

Didn't talk about this much. Clear evidence of RUC2 superiority over RUC1 stated offline by SPC and BTV, but more serious evaluation just getting started.

NCEP saw good precip type forecasts for snow/rain (Greg K.), but analysis values may be reversed. FSL will check.

CAPE values over Gulf of Mexico too low in fcst (Rusty P.) FSL will check.

Thanks very much to all of you for participating.

The next teleconference will be held on Tuesday 6 Jan 1998 at 10 a.m. MST.

Stan Benjamin

p.s. another reminder to use the RUC2 evaluation web site at

Note that you can do two nice things on the web site:
subscribe - get email on postings automatically
customize view - set it up to look at most recent postings/threads first

The FSL RAP/HRRR/RUC Information Forum is maintained with a variant of WebBBS .