hs3 science team meeting, moffett field, california, 9 may, 2013

The over-storm GH raises the question:Can HS3 verify conceptual models that have

been published?

OK…then which one?Here are a few that have been published!

We need to see how some of these conceptual models combine to tell a coherent story

Let’s look at the inner core features

Freely adapted from Willoughby 1988

Eyewalls and Rainbands

Hence and Houze 2012Rainband composite from TRMM PR

Stratified by environment shear

Imported

LocalLocal

Inner

Outer

Reflectivity CFADs

Hence and Houze 2012

Inner region Outer region

Reflectivity Kurtosis

Hence and Houze 2012

Didlake and Houze 2009

Upwind end of a Principal Rainband

wUpdrafts DowndraftsDowndrafts

Middle Section of a Principal RainbandBarnes et al. 1983

Powell 1990Hence and Houze 2008

Didlake and Houze 2009

Middle Section of a Principal Rainband

Didlake and Houze 2013a

>0

Didlake and Houze 2013b

Downwind Section of a Principal Rainband

>0

Enhanced stratiform

How can HS3 flights confirm or reject conceptua models based on TRMM radar and airborne Doppler observations?

• Locate major rainbands in GH data• Determine if their structures conform to the

patterns seen in TRMM data• Locate downwind stratiform zones• Look for the cross-band mesoscale over turning

in HIWRAP & other remote sensor data• Use dropsondes to determine the rainband

momentum budgets• Do the results look like the conceptual model?

Question for discussion?

• Can AV-1 flight patterns achieve the objective of understanding rainband dynamics?

End

This research is supported by NASA grant NNX12AJ82G and NSF grant ATM-0743180