Re: [conduit] Removal of 500 and 1000 hPa height anomaly fields from GFS

  • To: Greg Thompson <gthompsn@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [conduit] Removal of 500 and 1000 hPa height anomaly fields from GFS
  • From: Justin Cooke - NOAA Federal <justin.cooke@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 16:35:15 -0500
Kevin, Greg,

Several months ago a user evaluating the parallel output from the GFS had
the same concerns as you about this parameter no longer being available. We
reached out to NCEP EMC's Mark Iredell and he gave this reasoning for the
parameters removal:

"the climatology that had been used to compute geopotential height
anomalies for the GFS was very old, representing a fairly short timeframe
from forty years ago or so and had some known biases. Your approach of
using reanalysis data is a far superior solution. Reanalysis climatology
would not only have known provenance, it is higher resolution in space and
longer averaging in time."

As you can tell, his recommendation is to use reanalysis data, just like
you mentioned Greg.

Sorry for the inconvenience the removal of this parameter is causing.

Justin Cooke
NCEP Central Operations


On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Greg Thompson <gthompsn@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> Yes, this is a bit disappointing because I've had that product showing for
> years also.  It can always be re-created from opening some reanalysis
> product that is an average, but the ease of plotting a single 2D field,
> which hardly added any real volume to the files, was made it so attractive.
>
> --Greg Thompson,  NCAR-RAL
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Tyle, Kevin R <ktyle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>  Hi everyone,
>>
>>
>>
>> With todayâs implementation of the GFS upgrades, the 500 and 1000 hPa
>> height anomaly grids are no longer part of the output.  This was advertised
>> in the NWS Technical Implementation Notice, so it is not a surprise â but
>> up till now, we made use of these grids in our web products.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone know of another quick-and-easy online source of either
>> anomaly or mean grids for these two height levels?  I can put something
>> together via the CFSR, but that will take a wee bit of time â
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>>
>> _____________________________________________
>>
>> Kevin Tyle, Systems Administrator
>>
>> Dept. of Atmospheric & Environmental Sciences
>>
>> University at Albany
>>
>> Earth Science 235, 1400 Washington Avenue
>>
>> Albany, NY 12222
>>
>> Email: ktyle@xxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> Phone: 518-442-4578
>>
>> _____________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> conduit mailing list
>> conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
>> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> conduit mailing list
> conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
>