B MAPPER

[[email protected]]

B Mapper is not working for us in Florida, It's having trouble receiving data and wants us to try again. with todays date 3/3
Any ideas??
Thanks
Glen

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 3, 2014 7:36:27 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> B Mapper is not working for us in Florida, It's having trouble receiving data and wants us to try again. with todays date 3/3
>
> Any ideas??
>
> Thanks
>
> Glen

It's back on :-)

[WaltWX[_2_]]

What happened was the change from the RAP version 1 to RAP version 2 occurred on Feb 25th. Gridded data (GRIB files) that Dr Jack downloads contain many parameters. But, when a major revision occurs, the order of parameters that Dr Jack must use for calculations changes. So, his decoders broke at that point. Noticed that he got things working again by Mar 5th.

Something similar happened when NOAA changed from the RUC to the RAP. I worked with him a bit to find out what changed, looked at the code, and gave up trying to figure out how to modify it. Dr Jack figured it out and got the RAP working fairly quickly. This time, it only took him a day or two to make the necessary changes.

NOAA NWS announced the change in the RAP in a technical note around Jan 25th. They point out that GRIB decoding should not depend on the order of the parameters. It would take a tremendous amount of work for Dr Jack to modify his code... something that's not likely to happen. Fortunately, major changes to these models doesn't occur that often.

Walt Rogers WX

[WaltWX[_2_]]

BTW,

There are lots of changes and improvements to RAP v2. In particular, the planetary boundary layer (PBL) formulation is completed changed and improved. So, likely, you should see better more accurate soaring forecasts.

Walt WX

[[email protected]]

>
> There are lots of changes and improvements to RAP v2. In particular, the planetary boundary layer (PBL) formulation is completed changed and improved. So, likely, you should see better more accurate soaring forecasts.
>
> Walt WX

Walt: While we've got your attention...

My experience was that the NAM was way better than the RAP on cumulus forecasting and also cloud cover. The RAP seemed to be persistently far too dry, and the NAM about right in Northern Illinois. I presume this is about handling soil moisture and corn transpiration. Do you sense the new RAP will be better?

John Cochrane

[WaltWX[_2_]]

Yes, RAP v2 should be much better at handling the planetary boundary layer (PBL - Thermal Layer) and soil moisture. There is a completely new Land Surface Model (LSM) with nine vertical and a new PBL forumulation (MYNN). All the reports I've seen show that it should be more accurate with temp/humidity at the lowest levels. Actually, RAP v2 has been running experimentally at the NOAA rapidrefresh.noaa.gov site for at least 5 years. Only recently (Feb 25th) did it go operational on the NCEP servers.

Here's a technical presentation that shows all the changes:

http://rapidrefresh.noaa.gov

and a Webinar:

http://ruc.noaa.gov/pdf/RAPv2-NWSwebinar-18feb2014-FINAL.pdf

The people at NOAA GSD in Boulder are interested in how v2 RAP PBL is working in the "real world" especially w.r.t the NAM. Dr Stan Benjamin is the lead guy chief scientist. He is very much aware of soaring's unique needs for gliding forecasts. I recently replied to him with info on Gordon Boettger's flight. Dr John Brown is his lead parametrization guy for the RAP and HRRR. You can post your observations and comments to their forum:

http://ruc.noaa.gov/forum/eval/

Walt Rogers WX



On Thursday, March 6, 2014 8:31:38 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> >
>
> > There are lots of changes and improvements to RAP v2. In particular, the planetary boundary layer (PBL) formulation is completed changed and improved. So, likely, you should see better more accurate soaring forecasts.
>
> >
>
> > Walt WX
>
>
>
> Walt: While we've got your attention...
>
>
>
> My experience was that the NAM was way better than the RAP on cumulus forecasting and also cloud cover. The RAP seemed to be persistently far too dry, and the NAM about right in Northern Illinois. I presume this is about handling soil moisture and corn transpiration. Do you sense the new RAP will be better?
>
>
>
> John Cochrane