NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.

To learn about what's going on, see About the Archive Site.

Re: [conduit] [CONDUIT #DYD-390666]: 20081022: follow-up to Unidata User's Committee CONDU IT survey

  • To: "Kevin W. Thomas" <kwthomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [conduit] [CONDUIT #DYD-390666]: 20081022: follow-up to Unidata User's Committee CONDU IT survey
  • From: Gary Lackmann <gary@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 22:37:49 -0400
Hi Kevin and Mike,
We also use the 40-km NAM 212 grid, but it does not come through the CONDUIT feed. The reason for possible elimination of this grid on CONDUIT was that it was duplicated between the feeds (NOAAPORT and CONDUIT). However, if there are differences, such as a higher top or additional fields in the CONDUIT feed, please let us know. 
Thanks,
Gary




Kevin W. Thomas wrote:


Tom and CONDUIT Community,
Am I the only one who depends on the NAM 40 KM stuff? This is the "awip3d" I believe. Most of our outreach/teaching visualization is based on this grid. In addition, I relay to the NAM212 to a downstream site, which depends on it. 

No, you aren't the only one.

I run four hourly analyses on older equipment.  It takes too long for the
software that I use to process the 12km data files, so I've had to stay
around with the 40km.

This means that I'll have to ftp the 40km data along with all the rest of the
NAM data that I use.  It looks like the CONDUIT data stream is no longer
meeting my needs.
Also, which _current_ CONDUIT grid could be used in place of the NAM212? My NAM218 (awip12) does not have the vertical levels. I guess the available NAM 12 KM grids will be expanded to include the vertical levels at the same time the NAM 40 KM is removed. My concern is bandwidth, storage, processing time.....and the fact that I do not have a chance to migrate my scripts to the new grid until it's here. Will there be an overlap period? 

I certainly hope that the vertical levels will be added.  If not, NAM data
on CONDUIT will be a waste of time with the removal of the 40km data.
Anyhow, I thought I would throw in my .02 cents in case it's not to late, or in case others have the same concerns. 

cheers,

-Mike


        Kevin W. Thomas
        Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms
        University of Oklahoma
        Norman, Oklahoma
        Email:  kwthomas@xxxxxx
  • 2008 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the conduit archives: