On this web page, we're made a lot of recommendations about what not to do when assessing MSI, but ultimately, we can't claim to have all the answers. The kind of research that's been done up to the present hasn't really provided a lot of insight into how slantwise convection initiates and how we can alter our forecasts when we believe slantwise convection will be present. Typically, case studies present the standard M-theta-e cross section and show near-neutral conditions, thereby, justifying their claim that CSI led to heavier than usual precipitation amounts. This kind of research isn't helping us understand the mechanisms of slantwise convection any better. New approaches from fresh perspectives are drastically needed. Here are some suggestions.

• assessing MSI: While we have recommended certain approaches to assessing MSI, we have not performed any operational testing of such approaches. Further examination of what parameters are critical for forecasting the onset of MSI is essential.
• nature of the banding: Studies that bridge the gap between observational and theoretical work on banding needs to be performed.
• slantwise-convective parameterizations: Early research on this topic showed much promise, yet seems to have been forgotten. It's time to reinvestigate this topic.
• general nature of convection: The concept of convection in general should be reconsidered to include not only upright convection, but also slantwise convection and convection associated with the release of inertial instability. Convective-symmetric instability is one such example of the direction we should be headed.