# Presentation: 538288

## Wx Issues Raised by NCWF

- Dale Rhoda

## Outline

- 2003 ETMS implementation of NCWF
- Appearance
- Documentation & training
- Further implementation of NCWF & NCWD
- Tim Grovac requests advice from WxApps workgroup

## Components of NCWF

- In ETMS 7.6
- Forecast polygons
- Storm motion speed & direction
- Not in ETMS 7.6
- Current storm location polygons
- Performance polygons
- Gridded four-color hazard product – NCWD
- Echo tops

## ETMS 7.6 NCWF Implementation 

## Documentation & Training

- There will not be any procedures associated with NCWF when it appears on ETMS.
- Users would benefit from information on NCWF’s strengths, weaknesses, and performance characteristics.
- Volpe will provide info in the training material, help system, and documentation.
- That information will hopefully shape the users’ expectations for the product.

## Question from AUA-700 and Tim Grovac:

- Which of the remaining NCWF components should be displayed on ETMS and how?

## Current Storm Locations – Easy Decision

- Recommendation: Allow users to display current storm location polygons
- Toggle independent of other NCWF components
- Pro:  Users see the region being tracked
- Pro:  Users can trace the polygon to create a FEA
- Con:  Confusion may result if polygon location and/or shape doesn’t match that of the storm intensity product.

## Performance Polygons – Easy Decision

- Recommendation:  Allow users to display performance polygons
- Toggle independent of other NCWF components
- Pro:  Serve as a proxy for regional scoring – helpusers assign confidence to current forecast polygons

## NCWD – Raises Several Bigger Questions

- How should storm intensity be displayed to TFMdecision makers?
- Should ETMS include more than one storm intensity product?
- What are the pros & cons of doing so?
- Should NCWD be the ONLY storm intensity product?Probably not.
- Misses stratiform precip – no winter storms.
- Would miss or under-represent new storms.
- Four color scale is unique.
- Current ETMS NOWrad product uses six colors
- WARP product uses three colors

## NCWD

- Should NCWD be displayed at all?
- Pros
- Showing 2 or more slightly differing storm intensity products might remind users that each product is an _estimate_ rather than a precise ATM measure.
- NCWD is less cluttered than NOWrad in summertime.
- Would show what the forecast polygons are based on.
- Cons
- Showing differing products might confuse some users.
- Four color scale is unique and possibly confusing.
- NCWD may overstate storm intensity due to the coarse nature of the VIL product used as an input.

## Echo Tops – Open Questions

- Should ETMS show the NCWF echo tops product?Probably not.
- ETMS already has an echo tops product.
- NCWF product doesn’t appear until the storm has a motion vector (first ~45 mins of storm life).
- How should echo tops be represented to TFM decision makers?
- Lessons from CIWS 2-d representation?

## Summary

- ETMS will display NCWF forecast polygons in Spring ’03
- The ETMS 7.6 documentation will include a brief description of the product’s strengths, weaknesses, and past performance.
- The FAA has requested recommendations from this group concerning the remaining components of NCWF.
- This raises questions that are much bigger than just NCWF.

## Backup Slides

## Slide 14