Evaluating the GFA in the Testbed

One of the focuses this week is on evaluating the Graphical Forecasts for Aviation Tool, or the GFA.  This tool is a graphical source of weather elements that may impact general aviation (GA) flight.  The operational version covers the CONUS, and allowed the Aviation Weather Center (AWC) to retire the text-heavy Area Forecast (FA) product that was used to relay the same information. 

The GFA as viewed on the AWC website

In an effort to hopefully retire the other FAs still being issued by AWC, as well as the Met Watch Offices (MWOs) in Hawaii and Alaska, a version of the tool with an expanded domain was created and is in experimental mode for evaluation. 

In addition to the experimental version that covers the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and parts of the Atlantic, participants this week have been given the chance to interact with and provide feedback on a version with coverage over the Pacific covering both Hawaii and Alaska FA areas.  The feedback collected this week will be vital in the process of moving forward with the GFA in the future to ensure it meets the needs of users at all levels.

Turbulence forecasted over the Alaska region as seen on the internal GFA with expanded coverage

In an effort to gauge how a pilot would use the tool, participants were asked to create forecasts and/or flight plans for various routes.  Sample GA routes covered the Bahamas, Alaska, Hawaii, and CONUS.  Users were given a 3 hour window to plan the flight based on the information the tool provided, and then later in the day were able to verify how the weather evolved compared to what the tool was showing.

In Alaska, the lack of observations proves challenging for pilots and forecasters alike.  The expanded GFA coverage into this region shows promise for both.  An example below shows the updated cloud algorithm in the GFA over the Alaska domain indicating clear conditions at the airport, but clouds to the west and south at 16Z. 

This verified in the 16Z observations, with the PAOT METAR showing clear skies with cloud visible in both the satellite and webcam which looks to the Southeast.

It was also discussed that the capability of adding the webcams from Alaska to the GFA would be greatly beneficial.  The webcams provide forecasters and pilots with visual observations in areas where Automated Service Observing System (ASOS) stations are sparse.

Other feedback that has been received thus far has focused on the overall usability of the tool.  The 'Settings' tab produces a menu that allows for users to customize the map, overlays, and other aspects of the tool.  The different options can be confusing to users, and could use clarification in the description, or perhaps a short tutorial or "how-to" on what they entail.  Modifying the Settings in general to have a separate tab specific to map options, and one that pertains to the forecast and observation displays, may also be beneficial.

Feedback with concerns to inconsistency were also brought up.  The CONUS, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii regions of the GFA include output from the NDFD where available, however other areas are filled in with model derived forecasts.  This was noticed over Hawaii where the NDFD showed a chance of precipitation, but the GFA model derived cloud cover indicated clear skies.  This inconsistency could lead to confusion and distrust of the product by the user.

Overall, the feedback on the tool has been quite positive.  The vast amount of information available is extremely useful to the general aviation community.  Continued developments and improvements will allow the product to meet the needs of all users.