respective codes had largely been tailored towards mode structures expected by linear anal- ysis. Restriction to single-fluid MHD equations including two-fluid correction terms allows computations of large to mesoscale dynamics in realistically shaped 2D tokamak equilibria including X-point geometry crossing the separatrix, due to the lack of a need to use field- aligned coordinates. Recent MHD simulations are able to reproduce spatio-temporal mode structures, divertor footprints and other characteristics with good agreement to experimen- tal diagnostics, in particular for the growth and immediate blowout phase of the finger-like instability [40]. However, as soon as the dynamics becomes nonlinear, the spectrum broadens to include scales normally associated with drift wave dynamics. This turbulence is basically of a drift- Alfv´ en type with strong edge ITG character (see Ref. [39] for the signatures of the various mode structure types), made more powerful than otherwise by the energetic access to the long-wavelength MHD component. The ITG character results from the steeper logarithmic gradients in both temperature profiles, and the lack of involvement of ion temperature fluctuations in the parallel nonadiabatic response of the electrons. Although edge turbulence of this type (cf. [19]) is strongly suppressed in the H-mode phase and is not initially involved in the instability phase, the experience of edge turbulence becomes relevant as these physical components become involved in all the nonlinear phases of the blowout. The saturation and aftermath of the blowout, which in an experiment carries a large part of the actual transport losses that lead to a degradation of the pedestal, should be expected to involve physics not contained in the MHD model. Ion temperature gradient (ITG) driven modes and ideal ballooning modes are both essen- tially caused by the gradient and curvature driven interchange instability and show similar character in their initial linear growth phases. Instability is achieved above their respective critical gradients, determined by the ratio η$_{i}$ = L$_{n}$/L$_{Ti}$ > η$_{c}$ between density gradient to ion temperature gradient scale lengths for ITG, and by the ideal MHD ballooning parameter α$_{M}$ = qR ∇ β > ˆ s for IBM, where ˆ s is the magnetic shear parameter and η$_{c}$ is a critical threshold which depends on beta, collisionality, and toroidicity. The principal difference between these modes is the relative role of the parallel Alfv´ en responses which tend towards enforcement of an adiabatic response in the electrons (parallel force balance, with the elec- tron pressure gradient). This is nonexistent in an MHD model and subdominant generally for an MHD instabililty. But it constrains the electrons if the α$_{M}$ parameter is below thresh- 13