{"id":16155,"date":"2019-05-07T16:07:27","date_gmt":"2019-05-07T21:07:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/?p=16155"},"modified":"2019-05-07T18:17:12","modified_gmt":"2019-05-07T23:17:12","slug":"big-bad-flash-or-bad-big-flash-update","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/2019\/05\/07\/big-bad-flash-or-bad-big-flash-update\/","title":{"rendered":"Big, Bad Flash or Bad Big Flash&#8230;Update"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Well, one piece of the puzzle was solved.\u00a0 A second large flash in the Minimum Flash Area\u00a0 product occurred between Lubbock and Amarillo, around 1500 km2.\u00a0 To see what was going on, we now take a look at the difference between GOES-16 GLM:<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-16159\" src=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G16_2034-900x663.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"900\" height=\"663\" srcset=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G16_2034-900x663.png 900w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G16_2034-768x566.png 768w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G16_2034-600x442.png 600w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G16_2034.png 1163w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 767px) 100vw, (max-width: 1200px) 60vw, 720px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>and GOES-17 GLM:<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-16161\" src=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G17_2304-900x672.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"900\" height=\"672\" srcset=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G17_2304-900x672.png 900w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G17_2304-768x573.png 768w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G17_2304-600x448.png 600w, https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2019\/05\/G17_2304.png 1164w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 767px) 100vw, (max-width: 1200px) 60vw, 720px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>After a LOT of going back and forth, we realized that the color table for Flash Extent Density had the alpha at zero for anything around 1.0 to 1.244.\u00a0 SO, the previous example that showed no FED actually DID have data associated with the large flash; it was hidden (my bad!).\u00a0 Fixing the color table to plot any data greater than zero at the darkest color blue and&#8230;voila! The large flash now does show a FED of 1.0.\u00a0 So that problem is now solved.<\/p>\n<p>However, there is still a question as to why that big area flash occurred where it did, when it did, and if it was actually as large of a flash as indicated.\u00a0 Still something to dig into further!<\/p>\n<p>-Dusty<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Well, one piece of the puzzle was solved.\u00a0 A second large flash in the Minimum Flash Area\u00a0 product occurred between Lubbock and Amarillo, around 1500 km2.\u00a0 To see what was&#8230; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/2019\/05\/07\/big-bad-flash-or-bad-big-flash-update\/\" class=\"more-link\">Read more \u00bb<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":136,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,10,16],"tags":[52],"class_list":["post-16155","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-goesr","category-live-blogs","category-total-lightning","tag-glm"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16155","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/136"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16155"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16155\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16164,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16155\/revisions\/16164"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16155"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16155"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16155"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}