111 nws soo-nasa sport workshop 11-13, july, 2006 earth science division national aeronautics and...
TRANSCRIPT
1 1 1
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationAdvancements in Lightning-
Severe Storm Forecasts and Warnings: Results from the Southern Thunder Alliance
Photo, David BlankenshipGuntersville, Alabama
Steve Goodman
NASA Marshall Space Flight CenterEarth Science Office
Huntsville, Alabama, USA
NWS SRH SOO-NASA SPoRT Joint Workshop11-13 July, 2006
Huntsville Alabama
2 2 2
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Outline of Presentation
• Motivation and Background
• Science and Technology Infusion– GOES-R Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM)– VHF Lightning Mapping– Nowcasting-Warning Decision Making– WRF Forecasts of Thunderstorm Initiation and
Lightning Threat
• Current Plans and the Way Forward
3 3 3
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Background and Motivation
• NASA and NOAA working together to save lives– Tornado lead time -12 min national average
– Lightning strikes responsible for >500 injuries per year, 90% of victims suffer permanent disabilities and long term health problems, chiefly neurological in nature
– Lightning responsible for 80 deaths per year (second leading source after flooding)
– Aviation weather- airport operations, enroute savings $25M/yr
– In-cloud lightning lead time of impending ground strikes, often 10 min or more
– … forest fire initiation, utility crew deployment, NEXRAD coverage gaps, improved precipitation estimates, hail/wind/flood detection, …
Continuous GEO Total Lightning will identify severe storm potential
Process physics understood
Vortex Spins-up
Updraft Intensifies
Ice flux drives lightning
Lightning jump precedes severe weather Lightning improves storm predictability
Demonstrated in LEO with
OTD & LIS
Storm-scale model for decision support system
Physical basis for improved forecasts
IC flash rate controlled by graupel (ice mass) production (and vertical velocity)
GLM GOES E View
5 5 5
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
0 oC
Flash Rate Coupled to Mass in the Mixed Phase RegionCecil et al., Mon. Wea. Rev. 2005 (from TRMM Observations)
Mapping storm initiation, growth, decay
•TRMM provides us a huge database of paired lightning, radar, IR and passive microwave observations (training / validation)
•Over entire tropics & subtropics (generalization)
•Total lightning increases as storm intensifies – can increase lead time for warning of severe and tornadic storms
TRMM LIS-Lightning: May 1999 Stroud, OK Tornado
GOES-R GLM Perspective
7 7 7
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
GOES-R Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM)
GLM on GOESDual imager concept
July 2006 Status-• 3 on-going industry led GLM formulation studies• NESDIS sponsored risk reduction- NSSTC lead
8 8 8
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA-NOAA-University-Industry Partners• SPoRT Center (NASA MSFC/NSSTC)• New Mexico Tech and other universities• OU/NSSL• Vaisala, Inc.• WFOs – Huntsville (HUN), Nashville (OHX), Birmingham (BMX), Fort
Worth (FDW), Melbourne (MLB), Norman (OUN), Sterling (LWX)• NWS/MDL
LMA systems located in NWS Southern Region• North Alabama• OU/NSSL• New Mexico Tech Langmuir Laboratory• White Sands Missile Range• KSC/CCAFS (LDAR II)• TAMU (LDAR II)• Dallas/Fort Worth (Vaisala LDAR II)
Southern Thunder AllianceA collaboration among LMA owner-operators and end users
9 9 9
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
North Alabama LMA CoverageNWSFO HUN CWA
Tennessee
Alabama
10 10 10
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
North Alabama Lightning Mapping Array (LMA)
• Network of 10 detectors centered about HSV (NMT heritage)
• Computes 4-D location of all electrical discharges (“flashes”) within LMA (CG…and IC, CC, CA)
• Flash location overlaid on radar
and satellite imagery and updated every minute
• Trend information for individual storms
• Validation for TRMM LIS– NASA Senior Review to extend
mission approved through 2009
11 11 11
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Ingest into AWIPS
NASA
SRHFTP
Server
LDAD DS1
Forecaster
AWIPS Workstation
12 12 12
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
0-17 km
7 km
5 km
10 km
0-17 km
7 km
5 km
10 km
LMA Imagery in AWIPS
• 17 height levels
• Lowest level is composite
• Auto-loads 2 min grids
• Grids 1 km x 1 km, or 2 km x 2 km horizontal, 1 km vertical
• Future Algorithm- use first VHF pulse to identify flash, ratio IC:CG grid for more rapid storm tendency insight
•Can dither image with NEXRAD reflectivity and velocity, satellite, or any other fields
CompositeCompositedBZdBZ
NLDN NLDN 5-min5-min
LMALMA2-min2-min
VILVIL
SVR Upgraded to TOR
13 13 13
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
A
B
A
B
Drizzle
Lt. Rain
Mod. Rain
Heavy Rain
Hail
Hail/Rain
Small Hail
Rain/Sm. Hail
Dry Snow
Wet Snow
Cloud
Ice Crys.
PID Z hv
ZDR KDP DP
PID Z hv
ZDR KDP DP
Drizzle
Lt. Rain
Mod. Rain
Heavy Rain
Hail
Hail/Rain
Small Hail
Rain/Sm. Hail
Dry Snow
Wet Snow
Cloud
Ice Crys.
Drizzle
Lt. Rain
Mod. Rain
Heavy Rain
Hail
Hail/Rain
Small Hail
Rain/Sm. Hail
Dry Snow
Wet Snow
Cloud
Ice Crys.
PID Z hv
ZDR KDP DP
PID Z hv
ZDR KDP DP
HID dBZ
ZDR KDP
ARMOR: 04-07-05 Winds and HID
ARMOR-88D WINDS OPERATIONAL: 88D, LMA AND GOES
RESEARCH: ARMOR HID
OPERATIONAL:ARMOR HID
Courtesy Walt Petersen
14 14 14
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Total Lightning Impacts Decision Making….
o Has directly contributed to several correct severe warning decisions at HUN and BMX
– “…the LMA density map gives you a great overall view of where storms with intensifying updrafts are located. So it gives you a good map of where to concentrate attention.”
– “I believe the flash density rates were the primary factor in holding off on a warning.”
o Used in Warning Event Simulator (WES) for office training
May 6, 2003 Case
Ill-defined Rotational
Couplet
1.5º SRM
0.5 º SRM
0.5 º Refl LMA
Source Density
1236 UTC
May 6, 2003 Case
Broad Rotational
Couplet
Lightning Jump
1.5º SRM
0.5 º SRM
0.5 º Refl LMA
Source Density
1246 UTC
Lightning 'hole' and convective surge 'C' in tornadic storm, 0629 STEPS 2000
Convective surge
Lightning hole (WER)
LMA Benchmarking: Interim Results 2003-2005
Warning Variable Rankings on Scale of 1-10
Warning Variable All SurveysLMA+ impact=9/19
Severe Storms80 warnings, 13 surveys
Tornado41 Warnings, 6
surveys
Reflectivity Signatures 9.1 8.7 9.7
LMA Total Lightning 6.7 7.0 6.2
Near storm Environment 5.8 5.2 6.8
Eyewitness Report 5.2 4.1 7.7
Strong Rotation 5.2 3.2 9.3
Boundaries 3.8 3.4 4.5
NLDN CGs 3.7 3.7 4.0
TVS 2.3 1.5 3.8
Previous SVR WX 1.5 0.2 4.5
19 19 19
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Southern Thunder Workshop #2Fort Worth, Texas 25-27, 2005
One of the Workshop Recommendations:
Due to cancellation of VORTEX-II Experiment in 2007, pursue newly available opportunity to deploy, evaluate, and assess the scientific and technological merits of total lightning mapping with the NMT portable LMA in an additional operational setting.
Why DC Metro Area:• Transitional climatic regime, yet still many severe storms• Coverage of 3 major heavily used airports• Complex terrain to west, urban environment• Sterling WFO history of supporting new technology assessments
– Leverage with on-going TDWR evaluations• Proximity of MDL developers to WFO forecasters• Access to students, faculty for system operations/maintenance• Local interest (broadcast community, researchers, forecasters)
DC Lightning Mapping Array – Strawman Topology
Circles: 150 km radius (approx. 3D coverage) 250 km radius (approx. max range)
1"
68 km
1"
25 km
Strawman DC Metro Lightning Mapping Network
Major Airports
(Oklahoma LMA as template)
Mapping Stations
Current Date/Time 11:55 PM Tue 4 July 2006
Subject: Tornado(S)/Severe Thunderstorm(S) /Floods/ High Wind Etc.
Severe Thunderstorms Impact National 4th of July Festivities at District of Columbia (D.C.) Mall
Event: Description/Time Of Triggering Event For FTR (E.G., Deaths, Injuries, And Damage Occurred)
A cluster of severe thunderstorms moved through the D.C. as 80,000 people were gathering on the Mall to attend 4th of July activities. MIC Jim Lee and SOO Steve Zubrick staffed the multi-agency D.C. Command Center to support the national Fourth of July Celebration on the Mall. WFO Sterling provided information to the Command Center and DC emergency management via phone and NAWAS while Jim and Steve provided on-site briefings and support. The 80,000 attendees were evacuated from the Mall in advance of the storm. The evacuation took about 15 minutes, and was a direct result of numerous NWS briefings. The storm blew down trees and tents in and around the mall.
Location: District of Columbia
Damage: (Include Dollar Estimates, If Possible) Large elm trees and tents were blown down on the Mall. Airborne debris was noted at the height of storm. A peak wind gust of 47 mph was observed at National Airport in associate with this storm.
Outlooks: (e.g., SPC and/or HWO), if appropriate The potential for severe thunderstorms was noted in the Hazardous Weather Outlook issued at 3:55 AM on July 1; the D.C. areas was included in the Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3 outlooks; SPC placed the D.C. area in a Slight Risk of Severe Weather on July 3; the severe thunderstorm potential was highlighted in the LWX Area Forecast Discussion (AFD) at 3:00 PM July 3.
Watches In Effect?Type And Number/ Valid Time
Severe Thunderstorm Watch #582 issued at 12:40 PM, valid until 9:00 PM.
Warnings In Effect? Type And Time Issued/ Valid Time
Severe Thunderstorm Warning for D.C. issued at 4:45 PM, in effect until 6:00 PM.
Verification: (Time Severe Weather/Flooding, etc. was first reported in affected County/Area); Lead Time
Large elm trees were reported down at 5:15 PM; reported by National Park Service via Jim Lee at the Command Center…warning lead time 30 minutes.
Service: (Significant Briefing, etc.) Numerous briefings were conducted both on-site at the Command Center and via phone/NAWAS by WFo Sterling. During the warning valid period, additional NAWAS briefings were conducted to give D.C. area officials time of arrival and threat information specifically for the Mall areas.
Systems: (Issues With AWIPS, WSR-88D, NWR, ASOS, etc.)
None.
Staffing Issues: None. After evaluating potential threat, WFO Sterling had 5 forecasters and 2 HMT on station for the event, along with MIC Jim Lee and SOO Steve Zubrick providing on-site support at the D.C. Command Center.
Media Attention: Unknown at this time.
User Response: WFO Sterling received praise from the D.C. Command Center and Smithsonian Folklife Festival immediately following the event for the excellent and timely flow of information and weather support provided by the office.
DC Severe Thunderstorms 4 July 2006
“I used the DC-LMA web site to view updates on lightning activity during my shift at the command center (through about 3:45 PM). It was VERY useful, since I had no other "real-time" lightning data available. I used various links to NWS forecasts, radar, and satellite data via the Internet to conduct weather briefings to the command center staff. In addition, our WFO staff kept an eye on the DC area via all of the data available in AWIPS.
… the DC-LMA data were VERY useful in monitoring storm activity. I was able to show the center staff where the lightning was occurring. In addition, I monitored changes in lightning coverage/intensity as a rough gauge of thunderstorm changes in intensity.”
Steve ZubrickWFO Sterling (LWX)
DC Severe Thunderstorms 4 July 2006
24 24 24
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
DC Metro LMA Demo Network9 July 2006 at 2300 UTC
5-station LMA source density NEXRAD Reflectivity
25 25 25
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Enhanced Thunder19 July 2005
2000Z – 2012Z
NCEP SPC/Schaefer
SPC Experimental Product
F15 SREF 3-hr COMBINEDF15 SREF 3-hr COMBINEDPROBABILITY OF LIGHTNINGPROBABILITY OF LIGHTNING
- Pr (CPTP) >= 1 x Pr (PCPN) >= .01”
Uncalibrated probabilityof lightning
SPC Experimental Product
27 27 27
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
1 hr
2 hrs
3 hrs
4 hrs
Warn-on-forecast(warnings out to 4 hoursbased upon observations
+ short term model forecasts)
Warn on Forecast Concept
Courtesy Kevin Kelleher, SDR Grand Challenges
28 28 28
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Thunderstorm Premises and Objectives
WRF: Weather Research and Forecast ModelCRM: Cloud Resolving ModelAdditional Forecast Interests
CI - convective initiationTi - First lightning (35 dBZ at -15C, glaciation)Tp - Peak flash rate VIL (Mass)Tf - Final lightning
Given:1. Precipitating ice aloft is correlated with LTG rates2. Mesoscale CRMs are being used to forecast convection3. CRMs can represent many ice hydrometeors (crudely)
Goals:1. See if WRF can forecast LTG threat, based on ice flux in layers near -15 C.
29 29 29
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Thunderstorm and Lightning Forecasts:
Methodology
1. Use high-resolution (2-4 km) WRF simulations to prognose convection2. Develop diagnostics from model output fields to serve as a proxy for LTG3. Create 0-6 h forecasts of LTG threat based on WRF data4. Compare WRF forecasts with actual reflectivity and LTG and other observations using HSV area assets5. Subjectively and objectively evaluate WRF capabilities for forecasting LTG
30 30 30
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Thunderstorm and Lightning Forecasts:
10 December 2004
31 31 31
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Configuration10 December 2004 Case Study
• 4km horizontal resolution• 37 vertical levels• Dynamics and physics
– Eulerian mass core– Dudhia SW radiation– RRTM LW radiation– YSU PBL scheme– Noah LSM– WSM 6-class microphysics
scheme– Explicit convection
• 24h forecast initialized at 00 UTC 10 December 2004 with AWIP212 NCEP EDAS analysis
• Eta 3-h forecasts used for LBC’s
Cloud cover18h forecast valid at 18 UTC 10 Dec 2004
32 32 32
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF vs Eta Surface-based CAPE18h fcst valid 18 UTC Dec 10
33 33 33
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Sounding ~ 800 J/kg CAPE
34 34 34
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
MIPS Sounding ~ 761 J/kg CAPE
• Low level lapse rates and low freezing level efficient for converting CAPE to kinetic energy
• Surface: T=15C, Td=10C
• Similar CAPE to MIPS, but for different reasons
• High-res RAMS storm: Max w = 19 m/s
UAH MIPS, Kevin Knupp
35 35 35
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF vs Eta 3h Regional Precip.21h fcst valid 21 UTC 10 Dec 2004
36 36 36
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF vs Eta 3h Local Precip.21h fcst valid 21 UTC 10 Dec 2004
Question: Any lightning, when was it,What was WRF reflectivity at -15 C?
37 37 37
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
x1
x2
WRF Reflectivity (dBZ)at -15 C (4.0 km)
1200 UTC forecast valid at 18:50 UTC 10 Dec 2004
38 38 38
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
x1: Reflectivity (dBZ), Temperature (°C), and Pressure (hPa)
1200 UTC forecast valid at 18:50 UTC 10 Dec 2004
Max dBZ< 40 dBZ
39 39 39
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
x2: Reflectivity (dBZ), Temperature (°C), and Pressure (hPa)
6h 50m forecast valid at 18:50 UTC 10 Dec 2004
Max dBZ~50 dBZ; wmax only 4 m/s;But no hail reaches the surface
40 40 40
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Ground-truth Report of Dime-Size Hail
Owens Crossroads, AL, 10 Dec 2004
-1.8 -0.9 0.1 1.0 1.9 2.9 3.6 -15 - 5 5 15 25 35 45
dBZ ZDR
ARMOR: 12/10/04 17:55:06 EL=1.3o
Rain
55+ dBZ
Hail
55+ dBZ
Rain
2 to 3.5 dB
Hail
-1 to 0.5 dB
Hail
-1.5 to 0.5 dB
Rain/Hail
-0.5 to 2 dB Rain/Hail
40-55 dBZ
Hail
50-55 dBZ
At 17:55 IC fl. rate ~ 3/minute in southern cell
No IC’s in northern cell at 17:55
No CG’s in either cell for 20 minutes centered on 17:55
Only 3 CG’s detected for duration of storms
LMA S. Cell 17:52:30 – 17:57:30
42 42 42
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
LMA Observed Flashes Precede Hail Report
43 43 43
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
High-res RAMS “Validation” Run
• 500 m horizontal resolution• Heightz is variable, from 250 m at
bottom to 750 m at 20 km height• Domain 75 km x 75 km x 24.5 km• Time, t = 4 s, five acoustic steps
between• Smagorinsky subgrid mixing scheme• 5-class precipitating hydrometeors:
– Rain, snow, aggregates, graupel, hail• Initialized with 3K warm bubble,
radius=12 km at z=0• 120 min simulation, initiation effects
dominate until t=60 min
Reflectivity
Note: wmax reaches 19 m/s
44 44 44
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
RAMS Graupel Cross-Section
• 500 m horizontal resolution• Heightz is variable, from 250 m at
bottom to 750 m at 20 km height• Domain 75 km x 75 km x 24.5 km• Time, t = 4 s, five acoustic steps
between• Smagorinsky subgrid mixing scheme• 5-class precipitating hydrometeors:
– Rain, snow, aggregates, graupel, hail• Initialized with 3K warm bubble,
radius=12 km at z=0• 120 min simulation, initiation effects
dominate until t=60 min
Graupel
45 45 45
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
RAMS Hail Cross-Section
• 500 m horizontal resolution• Heightz is variable, from 250 m at
bottom to 750 m at 20 km height• Domain 75 km x 75 km x 24.5 km• Time, t = 4 s, five acoustic steps
between• Smagorinsky subgrid mixing scheme• 5-class precipitating hydrometeors:
– Rain, snow, aggregates, graupel, hail• Initialized with 3K warm bubble,
radius=12 km at z=0• 120 min simulation, initiation effects
dominate until t=60 min
Hail
Note: some hail reaches surface
46 46 46
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Thunderstorm and Lightning Forecasts:
22 April 2005
47 47 47
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Reflectivity at -15C:
22 April 2005
48 48 48
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Graupel Flux at -15C:
22 April 2005
49 49 49
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
LMA Flash Extent Density:
22 April 2005
50 50 50
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Thunderstorm and Lightning Forecasts:
30 March 2002
51 51 51
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Reflectivity at -15C:
30 March 2002
52 52 52
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
WRF Graupel Flux at -15C:
30 March 2002
53 53 53
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
LMA Flash Extent Density:
30 March 2002
54 54 54
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Conclusions:
1. WRF forecasts of deep convection are useful, but of variable quality
- Timing and intensity of convection are depicted fairly well- Location and morphology of storm systems sometimes wrong
2. WRF convection is deep enough, with sufficient reflectivity, to suggest lightning3. WRF updraft strengths on 2-4 km grids often too weak, relative to observed weather and high-res RAMS simulations4. WRF microphysics still too simple; need more ice categories5. Finer model mesh may improve updraft representation, and hydrometeor amounts6. Biggest limitation is likely errors in initial mesoscale fields
55 55 55
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Future Work:
1. Expand catalog of simulation cases to obtain robust statistics2. Develop quantitative metrics for LTG forecasts
- Need link between graupel flux and lightning probabilities, rates
3. Compare LTG threat parameter against environmental variables- CAPE, LI, etc.4. Enhance accuracy of WRF forecasts5. Hot start WRF applied to archived North Alabama WES cases
56 56 56
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
2006 Nowcasting and Assessment Plans1. Thunderstorm Forecasts/Lightning Threat
Analysis of SPoRT WRF 2 km simulations Analysis of 22 April 2005 Alabama event with OU 2 km WRF Complete 10 December 2004 North Alabama Case study Complete P. Gatlin M.S. thesis Develop AWIPS lightning threat product and assessment
(LMA+NLDN) North Alabama (additional) WES Cases
• Develop more extensive training case for other WFOs based on the 6 May 2003 outbreak
• Quantitative analysis of archived WES severe event cases NCEP SPC 2007 Spring Program participation/collaboration Hazardous Weather Test bed- NASA-UAH/SPC-NSSL Collaboration
2. LMA Extensions DC LMA Demo- NWS OST, Eastern Region GTRI Extension of NALMA to Atlanta (+2 stations) NCAR Autonowcaster/4DWX at RTTC (LMA + ARMOR) GOES-N Science Test, November 2006 GOES R nowcasting experiment- NY area
57 57 57
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Shared interest to improve forecasts by infusing new technology and applying emerging research techniques
Identify goals and objectives of collaboration
• Improve warning decision making• Increased confidence and situational awareness• Increase lead time, reduce false alarms• Lightning hazard forecast and warning
Need to have advocates in the WFOs
Key Elements to Successful Transition
58 58 58
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
LMA Web Calendar
59 59 59
NWS SOO-NASA SPoRT Workshop 11-13, July, 2006
Earth Science DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
Web Sites
http://weather.msfc.nasa.gov (SPoRT, Workshops) http://branch.nsstc.nasa.gov (North AL, DC Metro LMA) http://lightning.nmt.edu (OK LMA)