NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.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.
Let's stick to the Rapid Refresh, if everybody agrees. Tom needs to check in to let us know if that is doable with today's bandwidth, decoders, etc.
Linda On 8/31/2011 1:34 PM, Rebecca Cosgrove wrote:
Hi Linda. Now hold on a minute... we're starting to talk about different things :)When I say Rapid Refresh, I mean the one that'll be put into operations here at NCO. Developed by GSD and implemented here. It's the RUC replacement, so 13km is the best it can do.The HRRR right now is only available from GSD. There is some talk of us hosting GSD's experimental HRRR dataset, but that's in the very infant stages. And someone had asked about the FIM in an unrelated conversation and I was told that was way, way off from an NCEP perspective at least. Now if we start hosting the HRRR, who knows what that opens the door to.So what I was offering up was just the RR, which no High-Resolution. So the version of the Rapid Refresh that's on its way to being implemented hopefully in late Fall. But we could post grids from it a bit sooner than it's go-live date.Becky On 8/31/2011 3:28 PM, Linda Miller wrote:Hey Becky,I agree with the suggestion that we go forward with the Rapid Refresh. There were some on the Policy Committee who definitely wanted HRRR. They had suggested making the it available via THREDDS. They were also interested in the FIM. Do you have that, or isn't that ready yet?Linda On 8/31/2011 12:39 PM, Rebecca Cosgrove wrote:New Client Reply: Re: 20110712: CONDUIT request -- fire weather grids Tom and Linda,I think I found the information! I sent you earlier today the blurb EMCwrote up about the Fire Weather products. So that was one request you had for me. The other was what the plans were for adding data to CONDUIT in the near-term. Here's that part: From the meeting in March, I have noted that I had the okay to add NAM Fireweather grids NAM 221 grid out to 84 hrs. This is a 32km North America grid. Then we polled the community. The only responses I found in my inbox were two that came through Kevin T, and they both requested very different things. Respondent 1 said, in order: HIRESW Rapid Refresh NAEFS ensemble GFDL HWRF RTOFS Atlantic Respondent 2 said: GFS analysis/forecasts NAM analysis/forecasts Rapid Refresh analysis/forecasts RTMA So the one in common is the Rapid Refresh. I think we could work out a parallel feed once the NAM goes in in late September. I'm not surethere's a clear enough signal beyond that. I could throw in some NAEFS, but that will come during that peak time we're trying to avoid until theupgrade. What if we say we'll add the Fire weather around 9/20 and the NAM 221 shortly after that. Then we'll hold anything else new except maybe an early look at the Rapid Refresh till after the upgrade of my boxes in Nov/Dec. That way I can come out in late October and we can talk about what else we want to do post-upgrade. Do you think we could also pull out the 90 km NAM fields? My presentation says they're getting 40km and 90km and a limited set of surface fields from the 12. Hopefully they could live without the 90? Becky On 8/26/2011 10:26 AM, Unidata CONDUIT Support wrote:Hi Becky, re:There is a lot of good information in your email. Thanks for the careful analysis.I try :-) re:Can you give me an idea of the other things you were considering adding?While we had ldm2 pulled out of the pool I was goingto move on to some of the other additions I've committed to making, butI'll have to review the list in light of some of this information.re:As far as where we go from here for the fire weather, I think from a technical standpoint, we would be ready to implement this into operations.Excellent! re:Experimental vs operational is not a big issue for the Unidata community.Technically the fire weather products are still"experimental" or some such label until September 20th, but we had saidwe'd get them out as soon as we were ready.In fact, one of the standing requests from a long-time CONDUIT user is for a parallel version of RTMA grids. re:So I think the only remaining issue is your point about the potential impact to the user community of the added volume. How do you want to address that concern?I will get together with Linda to discuss this on Monday (she is out today). I think that we (Unidata) need to send a note to the CONDUITcommunity (via the address@hidden and address@hiddenemail lists) explaining a proposal to add the fire weather products to the datastream. This email needs to address: - why the products are useful/important Can you write a little blurb that covers this? - what the impact will be for those who want to continue to drink the entire firehose of data - what steps can be taken to mitigate the local impact of the additionof the data (e.g., noting that a site can request everything exceptthe fire weather products, etc.) - a target timeframe for the addition of the products if there is general approval in the community - some idea of where CONDUIT is heading What I have in mind here is information on new, beefier top level relay machines that will eventually be installed at the WOCs; perhaps a list of additional products that will be added at some time; a piece that looks down the road at things like 0.25 degree global GFS, etc. re:Do we need to poll them somehow, or just send a notificationsaying this is going to happen and will be a big volume, and here's howyou opt out?I think we need buy-in. Given that sites can chose to not receive the added data, this shouldn't be has hard as it might seem.BTW, the other impact will be on the toplevel CONDUIT relay nodes. They will be wanting to relay the data, so I will need to make sure that they understand the impacts. What I have in mind is a "personal" note to eachtoplevel IDD administrator that reviews the sorts of things I sent you and Justin yesterday. re:But as I said, from a technical point, I think we justhave to file paperwork and get approval. In theory, Justin could writeup something in time for our Tuesday COB deadline which would let us implement the week of September 5th.This may be too quick for the university community. We will know more when get some feedback from them. Again, I will meet with Linda on Monday to discuss the way forward here in Unidata. re:So let us know what you think about the customer support part of this.Will do. re:Thanks!No worries. Cheers, Tom --**************************************************************************** Unidata User Support UCAR Unidata Program (303) 497-8642 P.O. Box 3000 address@hidden Boulder, CO 80307 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------Unidata HomePage http://www.unidata.ucar.edu****************************************************************************Ticket Details =================== Ticket ID: SBB-325304 Department: Support CONDUIT Priority: Normal Status: ClosedTicket Details =================== Ticket ID: SBB-325304 Department: Support CONDUIT Priority: Normal Status: OpenLink: https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/esupport/staff/index.php?_m=tickets&_a=viewticket&ticketid=18485
-- Linda Miller - address@hidden Community Services, Unidata University Corporation for Atmospheric Research P.O. Box 3000 Boulder, CO 80307-3000 303-497-8646 fax: 303-497-8690