Welcome

Welcome to the RTMA/URMA VLab community!

The purpose of this community is to facilitate feedback and discussion on the RTMA/URMA system. 

Meeting notes are available under the Google Drive Folder linked above.

To learn more about our next upgrade, see the asset publication below.

Use the System Overview to learn more about the system in general.

Use the forum to ask questions about the system and join the discussion with other users and the development team. 

Note that there are two forums: one for precipitation issues and one for all other variables.

You can post to the precip issues forum by sending an email to qpe.rtma.urma.feedback.vlab@noaa.gov.  For all other issues, you can post by sending an email to rtma.feedback.vlab@noaa.gov.  Please note that you must have a user account to post to the forum.  If you do not have an account, please contact matthew.t.morris@noaa.gov.

We recently added the ability for NWS Regional or WFO personnel to request that stations be removed from the analysis.  To access this, click on the "Station Reject Lists and Requests" tab.

There has been recent interest in knowing exact station locations, especially those of METAR sites.  Our METAR information table is under the "METAR Location Info" tab.

Users may also be interested in the National Blend of Models VLab community.

We appreciate any feedback on how this page or community could be improved.  You can submit such feedback via the above email handle or forum.

 

What's New

December 2017 Implementation Summary

Document

Overview of upgrade scheduled for December 2017. Note that this was originally scheduled for October 2017, but has been pushed back due to technical issues.

SL
More Details
Modified Date
10/31/17

Forums

Back

Re: Fwd: [aor-rtma] URMA QPE06 clipping differences

RSS (Opens New Window)(Opens New Window)
YL
Ying Lin, modified 8 Years ago.

Re: Fwd: [aor-rtma] URMA QPE06 clipping differences

Youngling Posts: 48 Join Date: 3/27/17 Recent Posts
Hi Jeff,

 A follow-up on your email last month when you noticed that the California Channel Islands appeared to have falsely zero precip in the Stage IV/URMA.  CNRFC has confirmed that they do not provide QPE over the islands (thanks Kyle for looking into this).  I've updated my RFC coverage mask used for ConUS mosaicking to exclude the islands, and it's reflected in the hourly URMA parallel run starting today (ftp://ftp.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/precip/pcpanl.v3.0.0/20170414/). This would go in with RTMA/URMA v2.6 implementation (fall 2017) along with hourly precip URMA for ConUS and Puerto Rico.

  You can see the effect of this change more clearly in the two attached plots that zoomed in in the CA Channel Islands area.  ST4.2017041412.24h.png is from the production Stage IV/URMA run, showing the Channel Islands with zero precip.  The other plot is from the parallel run - the new bitmap masks Channel Islands as "no data coverage". 

Ying

On 03/09/2017 12:21 PM, Ying Lin wrote:

Hi Jeff,

   NWRFC and CNRFC are both land-only, no coverage offshore (more on the Channel Islands later).  Most RFCs have coverage extending beyond their domains proper, but they don't pay nearly as much attention to areas outside of their domains, so the Stage IV/URMA only uses QPE input from each RFC's domain, with the exception of the Gulf Coast and off the Atlantic Coast - keeping available QPE coverage there mostly for visual interest, in case e.g. tropical storms.  This is the RFC domain mask used for Stage IV mosaicking: ftp://ftp.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/precip/rfc.mask/rfcmask.png.

   As to the Channel Islands - good question.  I plotted the CNRFC 6h QPE - see attached, and it does have all zero off the Coast.  The RFC doesn't use a data mask (none of them seems to), and  we imposing the coverage mask (as in the above ftp site) off the west coast.  The mask includes the Channel Island as having data coverage, but that might actually not be the case.  Let me ask CNRFC.

Dear CNRFC,

   Do you provide QPE coverage over the Channel Islands?  Our RFC QPE coverage map (ftp://ftp.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/precip/rfc.mask/rfcmask.png) says so;  the original mask for the RFC domais was based on RFC bitmaps created by Office of Hydrology back in Aug 2000.  I'm attaching a plot of the bitmap for CNRFC, as well as an CNRFC QPE for the 6h ending 00Z 18 Feb 2017.  Come to think of it, you might not have gauges over the Channel Islands and run PRISM using them; if that's the case then I should modify the RFC coverage mask used for Stage IV mosaicking.

    Thanks!

Ying



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [aor-rtma] URMA QPE06 clipping differences
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:41:12 -0500
From: Jeffrey Craven - NOAA Federal <jeffrey.craven@noaa.gov>
Reply-To: Analysis of Record RTMA Discussions <aor-rtma@infolist.nws.noaa.gov>
To: Analysis of Record RTMA Discussions <aor-rtma@infolist.nws.noaa.gov>


Hello all:  As we expand our NBM V3.0 domain, I have been looking closely at a lot of variation in domains depending on model, service center, and analysis.  

I noticed during the heavy rain events in southern CA that the URMA QPE06 is clipped right at the coast.   Meanwhile, elsewhere on Gulf and East Coasts, there is data well offshore over the ocean.  

I zoomed in on an example from February 17th near Santa Barbara CA.  They received about 2" of rain in 6 hours, but the analysis goes to zero near the coast and only 0.26" is shown in grid point near KSBA airport.   Also you see the Channel Islands offshore have no data but it is listed as 0.00".

Just wondering the reasons for these differences?  See examples attached.  

JPC

Jeff Craven
Chief, Statistical Modeling Branch
National Weather Service
Meteorological Development Laboratory (MDL)
Room 10410, SSMC2
Silver Spring, MD 20910
(301) 427-9475 office
(816) 506-9783 cell/text
@jpcstorm

 



-- 
Ying Lin
NCEP/EMC/Mesoscale Modeling Branch
NCWCP Cubicle No. 2015
Ying.Lin@noaa.gov

 

Attachments:

Attachment

Attachment

Bookmarks

Info Icon Descriptive
  • Items Selected
Info Recycle Bin

Home

Folder
# of Items

3

Bookmarks

  • 2011 RTMA Paper (Weather and Forecasting)

    The most recent peer-reviewed paper on the RTMA. Published in Weather and Forecasting in 2011.
    7 Visits

  • Public RTMA/URMA Viewer

    Another viewer of the current RTMA/URMA, with an archive going back 24 hours. This version is open to the public, but does not contain information about the (many) restricted obs used.
    54 Visits

  • RAP downscaling conference preprint (23rd IIPS)

    This link is to a presentation from the (then) RUC group on how the downscaling process works. Although we now use the RAP, HRRR, and NAM, the logic of the downscaling code is mostly unchanged from this point.
    2 Visits