I think that both operational forecasters and program developers benefit from the opportunity to interact with each that the EWP 2011 program provided. Forecaster participants are introduced to new tools that are becoming available. Not only do they have an opportunity to make a preliminary evaluation of each tool but also to explore how they might be incorporated into an operational setting. It was a plus having folks knowledgeable about the new tools available to answer questions and to suggest possible ways in which forecasters might use the tools. This interaction should result in a better product by the time the new tools are delivered to the entire field.

Some of the datasets explored in EWP 2011 included convective initiation schemes and storm top growth. Based on my initial impressions gained over a period of working only a few days with the data, the UAH CI product seemed to have a greater FAR with CI compared to the UW product which itself seemed to be too conservative. While a high FAR with the UAH product might at first glance seem like a poorer performance, I think it may still provide  useful information (for example, getting a sense on how the cap strength might be evolving).

In the short amount of time that I had to look at the satellite-derived theta-e/moisture fields, I saw enough to keep me interested in spending more time evaluating with these products. The opportunity to discuss possible product display methodologies with Ralph Petersen was helpful.

The 3D-VAR dataset looked very interesting and seems to have potential to provide useful information. There were some issues where the strongest updrafts appeared to be in the trailing part of the storm and it might be interesting to see if that behavior was strictly an artifact of the algorithm or a function of the variability of the updraft strength at various levels in the storm. I would also like to have more opportunity to examine some of the other fields (vorticity, etc.) in several different storms to see if there might be a signal which could provide the forecaster a heads-up regarding what kind of  short-term storm evolution might be expected.

I appreciate that some of the participating organizations continue make much of their data available on-line following the conclusion of the spring experiment. Not only does this help me not forget about the new product some 6 months later, but rather allows me to further explore how I might better include the new datasets  into my shift operations. It is possible that a further review of  a product that initially seemed to have minimal value to me in an operational sense ends up providing more utility than I originally thought.

Chris Sohl (Senior Forecaster, NWS Norman OK – EWP2011 Week 4 Participant)