The research here seeks to address these two questions. First, do nested CPMs have any skill in predicting convective activity out to five days? The predicted parameters include storm locations, timing, and intensity. Second, does the use of a one-way nested CPM prediction system versus a global multi-scale prediction system with regional CPM resolution alter the skill of these five day forecasts? These questions will be addressed using NCAR’s WRF-ARW and the Model for Prediction Across Scales (MPAS). During the past two years, 5-day forecasts using MPAS have been created daily during the peak central U.S. spring-convective season using 00 UTC GFS analysis initial conditions and a variable resolution mesh with a nominal mesh-spacing of 3-km over the CONUS. To answer the questions of the present study, the WRF-ARW model is used to provide nested 5 day CPM forecasts daily for May 2016. WRF-ARW is configured similarly to MPAS (i.e., both contain identical physics parameterizations configured to their respective model cores), and is initialized and driven by MPAS boundary conditions over the same CONUS region.
Using the method of producing probabilistic convective forecasts using updraft helicity as detailed by Sobash et al. (2017) we first access the overall viability and skill from both forecast models for day 1 when compared to the NCAR ensemble CPM system. We will the examine the decay of forecast skill beyond day 1 from both systems. Initial comparisons between MPAS and deterministic forecasts from the CPM members of the NCAR ensemble from day 1 suggest that MPAS is competitive with current day 1