{"id":18965,"date":"2021-06-17T10:10:33","date_gmt":"2021-06-17T15:10:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/?p=18965"},"modified":"2021-06-17T10:10:33","modified_gmt":"2021-06-17T15:10:33","slug":"glm-lightning-data-convective-insight","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/2021\/06\/17\/glm-lightning-data-convective-insight\/","title":{"rendered":"GLM Lightning Data &amp; Convective Insight"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessing the various GLM lightning products, I found the MFA and FED particularly useful in correlating the more active thunderstorm core \/ updraft areas. TOE was useful, but maybe a slight change in color scale may help to better identify those very active convective areas. (perhaps the sharper color gradient change could start at a slightly higher value than currently)<\/p>\n<figure style=\"width: 1215px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/lh6.googleusercontent.com\/q88xO0lzzw0-l3tO8svmhQtXcToRRVb9vtguswt0qZCbmW6XtGkBvAhLZsqpCy0fTH_HFlRZEaoBUaWj569QYAlE8feItenBRlFO8_ATdZnGppOQagGDmfEiAeIfr_Cz_qnPlKEX\" alt=\"\" width=\"1215\" height=\"659\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Upper Left: FED img + Flash Point + ENTLN; Upper Right: TOE img + Flash Point + ENTLN Lower Left: Radar img + ProbSev + Flash Point + ENTLN Lower Right: MFA img + Flash Point + ENTLN<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>The GLM flash point data didn\u2019t show as much \u2018clustering\u2019 as I had expected to see, as compared to other surface-based data sources (ENTLN). Is this related to a data display density or a more sensitive surface-based lightning detection? However, due to the parallax correction, the flash point data did line up with fairly well with active convection, although there were a few flash point detections well displaced from any radar reflectivities (see bottom left)&#8211;perhaps related to stratiform lightning?<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; Guillermo<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Assessing the various GLM lightning products, I found the MFA and FED particularly useful in correlating the more active thunderstorm core \/ updraft areas. TOE was useful, but maybe a&#8230; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/2021\/06\/17\/glm-lightning-data-convective-insight\/\" class=\"more-link\">Read more \u00bb<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":181,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[64],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-18965","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-glm"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18965","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\/181"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18965"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18965\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18966,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18965\/revisions\/18966"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18965"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=18965"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inside.nssl.noaa.gov\/ewp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=18965"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}