Forums

Back

Station temperature data being rejected...MT

RSS (Opens New Window)(Opens New Window)
DB
David Bernhardt, modified 3 Years ago.

Station temperature data being rejected...MT

Youngling Posts: 27 Join Date: 9/24/12 Recent Posts
We see this happening again where the observations that sit in shallow valleys and develop strong cooling due to nocturnal inversions are rejected by the RTMA/URMA analysis. This is causing 10-15 degree errors in overnight lows in areas without a lot of complex terrain.

These are from 11/9/2021 ...the 07Z collection of observations. These stations are in north central Montana.




Dave Bernhardt
TFX
DB
David Bernhardt, modified 3 Years ago.

RE: Station temperature data being rejected...MT

Youngling Posts: 27 Join Date: 9/24/12 Recent Posts
The images did not attach...


On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 8:36 AM VLab Notifications <VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov> wrote:
We see this happening again where the observations that sit in shallow valleys and develop strong cooling due to nocturnal inversions are rejected by the RTMA/URMA analysis. This is causing 10-15 degree errors in overnight lows in areas without a lot of complex terrain.

These are from 11/9/2021 ...the 07Z collection of observations. These stations are in north central Montana.




Dave Bernhardt
TFX

--
David Bernhardt RTMA/URMA Discussion Group Virtual Lab Forum http://vlab.noaa.gov/web/715073/home/-/message_boards/view_message/18855706VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov

Attachments:

Attachment

Attachment

MM
Matthew Morris, modified 3 Years ago.

RE: Station temperature data being rejected...MT

Youngling Posts: 169 Join Date: 12/6/17 Recent Posts
Hi Dave,

The observations from CWOP stations C1334 and E9427 are rejected based on the quality mark encoded in the observation file.  That quality mark is based on the MADIS flags, as well as a QC check that is performed by the obs processing code using the GFS.  We could look into disabling that (internal) quality mark based QC in the future (for RTMA only) in favor of our own QC from the automated QC package that is under development for 3D-RTMA.

Thanks,
Matt

On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 11:06 AM VLab Notifications <VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov> wrote:
The images did not attach...


On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 8:36 AM VLab Notifications <VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov> wrote:
We see this happening again where the observations that sit in shallow valleys and develop strong cooling due to nocturnal inversions are rejected by the RTMA/URMA analysis. This is causing 10-15 degree errors in overnight lows in areas without a lot of complex terrain.

These are from 11/9/2021 ...the 07Z collection of observations. These stations are in north central Montana.




Dave Bernhardt
TFX

--
David Bernhardt RTMA/URMA Discussion Group Virtual Lab Forum http://vlab.noaa.gov/web/715073/home/-/message_boards/view_message/18855706VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov

--
David Bernhardt RTMA/URMA Discussion Group Virtual Lab Forum http://vlab.noaa.gov/web/715073/home/-/message_boards/view_message/18855962 VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov