Scott Blair
EF1
Glen,
Please read my previous posts a tad more carefully. I indeed have two separate measured X2 values (as mentioned in the previous post) that are found within the “inflow region.†The data comprised of a certain percentage of sampled air per entire inflow region. However, using either one of these values as an independent representation of the BSSI would cause great misrepresentation when calculating the true state of the BSSI due to the aforementioned variables listed in the previous post. Therefore, using referenced publications that set standards for such situations, the BSSI was determined using both X2 values. If you disagree with this methodology, then you disagree with a large portion of research related to similar situations. The BSSI is an imperfect value and will remain imperfect until mobile mesonet vehicles sample 100% of an interested region. However, some standard must be implemented to examine what data is available and compromise where data is sparse. Markowski et al. (2002) set a fine standard how to accomplish this in such a situation (even when only 10-30% of regions where sampled) and that is what Eric and I accomplished for this paper. The data, methodology, and conclusions speak for itself. As for the comments regarding the LCL height, thanks for not reading carefully. As I mentioned, several variables aided in an environment more favorable than the environment found at Winfield for tornadogenesis. These variables and their role are easily accessible in the paper.
Again, I hope this clarifies any questions you may have. Best of luck to you.
Scott Blair
http://www.targetarea.net/
Please read my previous posts a tad more carefully. I indeed have two separate measured X2 values (as mentioned in the previous post) that are found within the “inflow region.†The data comprised of a certain percentage of sampled air per entire inflow region. However, using either one of these values as an independent representation of the BSSI would cause great misrepresentation when calculating the true state of the BSSI due to the aforementioned variables listed in the previous post. Therefore, using referenced publications that set standards for such situations, the BSSI was determined using both X2 values. If you disagree with this methodology, then you disagree with a large portion of research related to similar situations. The BSSI is an imperfect value and will remain imperfect until mobile mesonet vehicles sample 100% of an interested region. However, some standard must be implemented to examine what data is available and compromise where data is sparse. Markowski et al. (2002) set a fine standard how to accomplish this in such a situation (even when only 10-30% of regions where sampled) and that is what Eric and I accomplished for this paper. The data, methodology, and conclusions speak for itself. As for the comments regarding the LCL height, thanks for not reading carefully. As I mentioned, several variables aided in an environment more favorable than the environment found at Winfield for tornadogenesis. These variables and their role are easily accessible in the paper.
Again, I hope this clarifies any questions you may have. Best of luck to you.
Scott Blair
http://www.targetarea.net/
