PARAMETER	LATEST FORECASTS					PREVIOUS FORECASTS
[descriptions]	12km	12km	12km			12km	12km	12km
Thermal Parameters:
Thermal Updraft Velocity & B/S Ratio	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Thermal Updraft Velocity  (W*)	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Buoyancy/Shear Ratio	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Height of Critical Updraft Strength  (Hcrit)	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Depth of Critical Updraft Strength  (AGL Hcrit)	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
BL Top	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
BL Depth	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Thermal Height Uncertainty	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Sfc. Heating	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Sfc. Sun	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Sfc. Temperature	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Wind Parameters:
Sfc. Wind	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
BL Avg. Wind	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Wind at BL Top	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
BL Wind Shear	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
BL Max. Up/Down (Convergence)	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Cloud Parameters:
Cu Potential	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Cu Cloudbase (Sfc.LCL) [MSL]	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Cu Cloudbase where CuPotential>0	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
OD Potential	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
OD Cloudbase (BL CL) [MSL]	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
OD Cloudbase where ODpotential>0	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
BL Extensive CloudBase [Explicit CloudWater]	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
BL Cloud Cover	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Sfc. Dew Point Temperature	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
CAPE	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Wave/Upper-Level Parameters:
Vertical Velocity at 850mb	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Vertical Velocity at 700mb	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Vertical Velocity at 500mb	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Vert.Velocity Slice at Vert.Vel.Max	1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST			1100 LST	1400 LST	1700 LST
Soundings:
Worcester (Sounding 1)	1100 PST	1400 PST	1700 PST			1100 PST	1400 PST	1700 PST
Model Topography	36km	12km
Identified Locations Not yet implemented

SW SouthAfrica News:
Sept 6:  Sounding forecasts:  If a volunteer(s) provides 2 stategic locations at which model forecast soundings would be useful, either for comparing against an observed sounding or for a location remote from an sounding observations such as at an airfield, I will include such sounding forecasts in the RASP processing.  The location name, latitude, and longitude (decimal degrees please) should be posted to the RASP Forum so that others can view it and comment if necessary. 

RASP News:   (Latest 5 news items)
July 1:  Cloud composite plot change:  The "Cumulus Cloudbase for Cu Potential > 0" was often missing small regions where the Cu potential was in fact greater than zero.  That has now been altered to "raster" plotting, which will ensure that all locations with a positive Cu potential will be displayed. 
Dec 10, 2005:  Plot "frame" change:  RASP plots contain a dashed line "frame" indicating an outer zone of decreased confidence resulting from mismatches between the coarse and fine nested grids near the boundary.  A recent WRF model alteration doubled the width of the smoothed zone near the boundary so the "frame" border has been increased to reflect that change.
Nov 6:  Cloud Parameter Changes:  I've altered the cloud parameters by removing the previous "OvercastDevelopment" parameters and replacing them with forecasts for "Extensive CloudBase" and "BL Cloud Cover".  "Extensive CloudBase" is a replacement for "OvercastDevelopment", based on a model-predicted cloud water prediction.  "BL Cloud Cover" is based upon the relative humidity in the BL and while overly simplistic can still be useful. 
Nov 2:  World-wide accuracy improvement:  Finally - after beating my head against mysteries with few clues for the past three days, I figured how to to uncompress the new "GRIB2" files produced by NCEP's GFS (Global Forecast System), allowing use of GFS predictions at 0.5x0.5 degree resolution (about 50km) to initialize the non-US forecasts (I've been using GRIB1 files with 100km resolution).  So I've now changed to their use for the SW_SOUTHAFRICA and GREATBRITAIN runs, which should result in improved accuracy of larger-scale (non-terrain-generated) features such as the position/movement of fronts and upper-level clouds. 
Oct 30:  Meteorological model updated:  Today I upgraded my WRF meteorological model to the latest version available, which has several bug fixes and in particular should reduce boundary matching problems (which are occasionally apparent in the region between the domain boundary and the dashed-line "frame").  After correcting some problems I believe I now have it working properly, but will keep an closer-than-usual eye on the processing for the next day. 
View ALL recent news items here
ARCHIVE of older news items which have now lost much relevance

I only look at the webpages and maps that I use personally or that I suspect might contain an error.  If you notice a consistent problem with a webpage or map, please post a message on the RASP Forum.

Links to Further Information:
RASP UniViewer - displays BLIPMAPs for the current day at multiple times
RASP Archive Viewer - displays BLIPMAPs for the current and previous days (one time per day only)
      Parameter descriptions  
      BASIC thermal forecast parameters  - a short and simple list of the parameters most important for thermal soaring
      July 2002 SOARING magazine BLIPMAP article - a descriptive "first thing to read" for potential BLIPMAP users, giving an overview of BLIPMAP predictions
      Additional information but intended for users of my traditional RUC and ETA BLIPMAPs, not these RASP BLIPMAPs, so allowances must be made

Overview  
      These forecasts are intended to help the meteorology-minded pilot better evaluate soaring conditions.  The maps are particulalry useful to cross-country soaring pilots, since they allow evaluation of conditions away from the home field.  Utilizing the forecasts can require some self-education (though that can't be too hard since over 2000 US pilots actively use BLIPMAPs in the US) as individualized assistance is not provided.  At first glance the website can seem intimidating since so many parameters are forecast - but most are "supplemental" forecasts to be used as needed and many users normally look only at the three or four they have found to be most useful, such as the expected lift strength or the maximum (dry) thermalling height or cloud potential/height forecasts, looking at additional parameters only under special conditions. 

How are these RASP forecasts produced ?  
      Traditional RUC and ETA BLIPMAP forecasts are obtained by post-processing forecast files output from NCEP prognostic models, so horizontal and vertical resolutions are determined by those used in those models.  Here I am instead running a prognostic model myself, so am able to specify the vertical/horizontal grid (though of course subject to limits of practicality).  A WRF (Weather Research and Forecasting) model is being initialized and marched forward in time at 180 second time intervals to produce forecasts at 3 hr increments.  Initial and boundary conditions come from the larger-scale models run by NCEP, in this case from the GFS model having a resolution of around 100km.  To increase accuracy, forecasts are produced for three different grids:  a large-domain coarse-mesh grid (36 km), a 12 km grid nested inside it, and a small-scale fine-mesh 4km grid within that (but only results for the latter two are presented).  The data needed to make such runs is available globally, so such forecasts can be made for anywhere in the world !

Rationale and Accuracy  
      A high-resolution model is expected to better predict those phenomenon which are "locally forced" and influenced by terrain.  But forecasts of higher accuracy than the 20km/12km RUC/ETA BLIPMAPs are not guaranteed since: (1) all else is not equal, as the RUC/ETA model uses different algorithms which might be more correct than those used by the WRF, (2) the RUC/ETA models use more refined initialization procedures, and (3) any limited-area model is subject to "boundary condition" errors, which for a large-area model such as RUC/ETA are very far away and of little importance but here are much closer and may have a significant influence.  The question of which model forecast is more accurate may depend upon what parameter is being evaluated and can only be assessed through comparison to actual conditions.
      Of course one advantage of running a model is that one has full control over it and can change its behavior.  The WRF has many, many parameters which can be adjusted.  And one of it's claims to fame is that is is modular, allowing use of different routines, written by different people/groups, to make the calculations which determine, say, cloud formation - so alternate modules can be utilized to improve model accuracy.  But on the other hand one could spend a lifetime evaluating and changing things to improve accuracy - this is what meteorologists at weather prediction centers do, but I don't plan to do that myself!  BTW, the WRF model is considered to be the "model of the future" for many operational weather predictions centers and is a candidate to replace the ETA model at NCEP within the next few years. 

Notes and Caveats: 
()  One is not supposed to believe all the details of these forecasts, particularly since the smallest-scale structure is constantly changing yet one a few snapshots at different times are shown.  Rather, one should be looking for patterns. 
()  Forecasts for points close to the boundary will be less accurate than for those located nearer the center of the domain, due to inevitable mis-matchings between the coarse and fine grids.  In particular, predictions of max/min BL vertical velocity are very noisy and inaccurate near the boundary (particularly where boundary condition problems exist).  To remind users of this, a dotted line marks the "frame" outside of which coarse-fine boundary interaction problems are most prevalent. 
()  The "Explicit cloud water cloudbase" estimates are based on cloud water predicted from model equations and problematical since there is no simple criterion for differentiating "mist" concentrations from "cloud" concentrations.  The criterion presently used is a first guess. 
()  The "Cu Potential" and "Sfc. LCL" predictions are based on a simple formula which considers only water vapor at the surface
()  This model does not ingest as much observational data as do the institutional models such as RUC and ETA, hence some effects are not included:  for example, soil moisture is neglected
()  While many pilots are accustomed to using the 20km-RUC BL top to estimate a maximum soaring height in terrain, that likely works because 20km-RUC terrain heights are usually significantly lower than actual ones.  With better defined terrain as on a 4 and 1 km resolution grid, Hcrit is likely to become the more relevant parameter.  I suggest also looking at the BL depth and BL max/min Upward Motion parameters as indicators for where maximum lift is likely to occur. 
()  The present simulation is only a first cut, since to get things running quickly many decisions have been on the basis of whatever was easiest.  Many choices must be re-examined in light of experience gained with the present parameters.  In particular, I expect at some later time to alter the horizontal domain to reduce some obvious boundary problems and to alter the vertical grid such that a larger proportion of points occurs nearer the surface. 
()  The fact that these forecasts are only a snapshot in time of a fairly noisy field should be particularly emphasized for the 4 km resolution forecasts, as forecasts for, say, 30 minutes before or after would look different.  At this point it's difficult to figure whether they will really add anything, but one never knows til one tries. 
()  The "Vert. Velocity at 850mb" (or 700mb or 500mb) and "Vert. Velocity Slice at Vert.Vel.Max" parameters attempt to forecast mt. wave events, although strong vertical velocities resulting from deep BL convergence can also be found in the plots.  The first parameter gives a plan view of vertical velocity at the 850mb level, a height of roughly 1500 m MSL and thus often above the BL top.  The second parameter is a vertical slice taken at a point of maximum vertical velocity (as found within a horizontal box covering the middle third of the grid at a height of around 1500 m AGL) and oriented parallel to the wind at that point, as indicated by a dotted line on the plot of the first parameter (with left-right on the slice always being left-right on the plan view).  A label above the plots gives the location and magnitude of the found maximum value.  Mt. wave predictions are best made using resultions no larger than 4km,since a coarser grid generally does not resolve the waves accurately. 

The Future ? 
     If these forecasts prove useful, I would plan to make the code public so that others might produce high-resolution soaring forecasts for their own local regions.  Such a "distributed computing" concept is much more practical than trying to have a centralized computational effort (whereas the RUC/ETA BLIPMAP processing is only practical when done centrally since for them the very large "native grid" files must be downloaded, vice the much smaller files tha RASP downloads).  What is required is a DSL connection, a reasonably powerful Linux computer, and time and energy and commitment.  The forecast images could be uploaded to either a club's webpages or to a special section of the DrJack website for viewing by others. 
      However, I will be spending much time simply creating the system and can't afford to spend additional time shepherding people through the somewhat involved build procedure - so people would have understand that the code comes with no support from me other than to fix something that is found to be broken.  My present thought is that I would work with some volunteer to build a forecast for his location and in the process create detailed instructions describing the process.  There would also be the understanding that he would assist at least two others with the same process, who would in turn make the same commitment to assist two others, etc. - in this way the knowledge and work required could be spread over many.  Such users could also interact and help each other using the RASP forum.  But those are only my present thoughts and the time for such an endeavor has not yet arrived.