Mark, thanks for the extra notice here.
IMO, this would be a GREAT topic to discuss in a VLab forum, to better share others feedback.
I have no heartburn over the loss of the short-range compare graphics, but I wouldn't mind seeing compare graphics at later projections, but there are many sources for that already, so I get it.
I certainly like, at times, reading the PMDHMD (last time I did was probably the last time I worked a tropical event in our ROC, so it's been a while (rare); but I found value.
I'll take your word that such model compare commentary can be gained from within the other "desk" discussions, and I'll try to read those more; though I'm FAR from operational.
Maybe a MEG-like, model UFS/V&V group, could pick up some of the discussions, as we all keep abreast of the models, their changes, nuances, etc.
Maybe even a voluntary VLab forum would be a place to more openly share, rather than what some folks post on on their personal social media, which always seems odd to me. [ To me, if we're going to converse on weather, we ought to use work accounts/discussion space. ]
Lastly, I noticed the below Trends link is linked from the end of the PMDHMD. I assume it will go away too, given its focus on like short-term graphic comparisons?
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From:
Mark Klein - NOAA Federal <mark.klein@noaa.gov>Date: Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 6:27 AM
Subject: Proposed Termination of WPC Model Diagnostic Discussion
To: _NWS HQ SOO <
nws.hq.soo@noaa.gov>
Hello SOOs,
If you have any feedback, please send it to our Operations Branch Chief, Greg Carbin, at
gregory.carbin@noaa.gov, with a CC to me.
The essential point for you and your offices is that we continue to place a priority on model diagnostics, but there are more modern ways of communicating about that information now.
Here are several points that add more detail:
- Evaluation of NWP model guidance is important, and will remain a responsibility of WPC. However, the PMDHMD text product is duplicative of existing information, is not the most effective means of sharing model diagnostic information, and diverts attention away from meteorological watch duties.
- Other publicly available discussions routinely produced by WPC contain evaluations of model trends, differences, and preferences. This includes the Excessive Rainfall Outlook (QPFERD), Heavy Snow Discussion (QPFHSD), and Extended Forecast Discussion (PMDEPD), which collectively span Days 1 through 7. The PMDEPD, for instance, includes a section titled "Guidance/Predictability Assessment."
- With the use of AWIPS collaboration chat, WPC is now in continuous contact with the field and can provide unscheduled, event-driven thoughts on model guidance to support internal coordination.
- The PMDHMD discussion is produced on the WPC Met Watch desk. The desk was created in 2013 for near-term monitoring of heavy rainfall and flash flood threats across the CONUS, and this role has grown in importance to both internal and external partners in recent years. Creation of the PMDHMD diverts attention away from meteorological watch duties. Thus, by relying on other desks to provide model diagnostic information, Met Watch forecaster attention can be appropriately dedicated to continuous mesoanalysis and flash flood monitoring.
Thanks,Mark
--
Mark Klein
Science and Operations OfficerWeather Prediction Center
(301) 683-1490
--
Jack Settelmaier
Digital Techniques Meteorologist
NOAA/NWS, Southern Region HQ
Fort Worth, TX
Work: 682 703 3685
