AzShear in this example, highlights the areas along the RFGF where vorticity is increasing, and eventually where the new tornadic circulation forms in several minutes. Something like this may be more identifiable in a radar looped image (especially with SRM), but in a still image a radar velocity scan may not be as intuitive.  In this instance, we see the AzShear output reduced after the previous tornado dissipates through occlusion…

But in the following image (at 2343 UTC) AzShear has already increased to ~0.015…

Tornadogenesis then occurs roughly 8 minutes later  (at 2351 UTC), with an AzShear value of ~0.016. Not much of an increase from the values 8 minutes earlier when GateToGate Shear was not present at the time.

Other thoughts…

• Long Term potential… Initial values of 1-D pseudo-vorticity is useful as base information, but values can mean different things at different elevations and distances from the radar. Would there be a way to eventually incorporate this information with AzShear for Climotological Tornadic Probabilities? Could help with ProbSVR model…
• Seems to handle noise relatively well, but certainly still shows waviness in the stable regions. Curious how this might preform in messier situations with surrounding precip. Merged AzShear handles much better than the base, but lag is a downfall.
• More experienced forecasters may use it well as initial checks, but oversimplification from a 1-D perspective may not translate as well to more inexperienced users. For example,  some less experienced users may equate the color white with a definite tornado, and non-white to no tornado. IDK… probably more of a communications issue unrelated to the product value.
• Would like to see how this performs in a more marginal case. for instance, some EF-0s within a QLCS.
• Has the potential to be a dangerous in areas of sidelobes! Perhaps a filter with Reflectivity may be helpful in these situations

#ProtectAndDissipate