Bugfix #2841 main_v11.1 tang_rad_winds

Expected Differences

Please review this at the same time as PR #2921, to fix this in the develop branch.

[x] Do these changes introduce new tools, command line arguments, or configuration file options? [No]
If yes, please describe:
[x] Do these changes modify the structure of existing or add new output data types (e.g. statistic line types or NetCDF variables)? [No]
If yes, please describe:

Pull Request Testing

[x] Describe testing already performed for these changes:
Confirmed that the diffs flagged for this PR are limited to 4 output files from tc_rmw, rmw_analysis, and tc_diag:
```
file1: /data/output/met_test_truth/rmw_analysis/rmw_analysis_out.nc
file1: /data/output/met_test_truth/tc_diag/tc_diag_AL092022_GFSO_2022092400_cyl_grid_parent.nc
file1: /data/output/met_test_truth/tc_rmw/tc_rmw_hwrf_gonzalo.nc
file1: /data/output/met_test_truth/tc_rmw/tc_rmw_pressure_lev_out.nc
```
This ncview comparison of TC-RMW output for TMP/P500 shows that the diffs are caused by the intended 90 degree phase shift to the right.

All of the gridded NetCDF differences show this 90 shift to the right.

I also reran the commands listed in this issue comment, using this the PR version of tc_rmw (/d1/projects/MET/MET_pull_requests/met-11.1.1/MET-bugfix_2841_main_v11.1_tang_rad_winds/bin/tc_rmw). Here's the graphics to compare:

From HAFS plotting script: IDALIA10L 2023082918 HFSA storm azimuth_wind f000

And cross-sections of VR and VT from METplotpy: tcrmw_cross_section_VR tcrmw_cross_section_VT

[x] Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:
Please find the code for testing on seneca in: /d1/projects/MET/MET_pull_requests/met-11.1.1/MET-bugfix_2841_main_v11.1_tang_rad_winds

Note that the differences flagged in this GHA run are confined to the output from TC-RMW, RMW-Analysis, and TC-Diag, as expected.

[x] Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [No] I updated the User's Guide for the MET-12.0.0 release, not this MET-11.1.1 bugfix release.
[x] Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [Yes] No additional tests are needed.
[x] Will this PR result in changes to the MET test suite? [Yes]
If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:
All output from TC-RMW and TC-Diag will be modified.
[x] Will this PR result in changes to existing METplus Use Cases? [Yes]
If yes, create a new Update Truth METplus issue to describe them. Any use cases that run TC-RMW and TC-Diag will be modified. However, METplus does NOT run tests using main_v11.1 so no diffs will be flagged.
[x] Do these changes introduce new SonarQube findings? [???]
If yes, please describe: Unknown
[x] Please complete this pull request review by [Fri 6/21/24].
This needs to be included in the MET-11.1.1 bugfix release, slated for Friday 6/21/24.

Pull Request Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

[x] Review the source issue metadata (required labels, projects, and milestone).
[x] Complete the PR definition above.
[x] Ensure the PR title matches the feature or bugfix branch name.
[x] Define the PR metadata, as permissions allow. Select: Reviewer(s) and Development issue Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes Select: Coordinated METplus-X.Y Support project for bugfix releases or MET-X.Y.Z Development project for official releases
[x] After submitting the PR, select the :gear: icon in the Development section of the right hand sidebar. Search for the issue that this PR will close and select it, if it is not already selected.
[ ] After the PR is approved, merge your changes. If permissions do not allow this, request that the reviewer do the merge.
[ ] Close the linked issue and delete your feature or bugfix branch from GitHub.

dtcenter / MET