1 / 21

Gary P. Ellrod NOAA/NESDIS (Retired) Granby, CT Andrew Bailey

Gary P. Ellrod NOAA/NESDIS (Retired) Granby, CT Andrew Bailey Raytheon Information Technology and Scientific Services (ITSS) Landover, MD. Aircraft Icing Risk and Maximum Icing Altitude Estimates from GOES: Verification of the Experimental Product. Outline.

andie
Download Presentation

Gary P. Ellrod NOAA/NESDIS (Retired) Granby, CT Andrew Bailey

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Gary P. Ellrod NOAA/NESDIS (Retired) Granby, CT Andrew Bailey Raytheon Information Technology and Scientific Services (ITSS) Landover, MD Aircraft Icing Risk and Maximum Icing Altitude Estimates from GOES: Verification of the Experimental Product NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006

  2. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Outline • Early development of the NESDIS icing product • Recent improvements • GOES Imager icing detection algorithm • Incorporation of Sounder cloud top height data • Verification results • Summary

  3. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Early Work on NESDIS Icing Product • First experimental NESDIS icing product developed using GOES-8 data in mid-1990's • Threshold techniques using GOES Imager data in three IR (3.9, 10.7, 12.0 um) and visible bands • Comparable in quality to other satellite methods (Thompson et al. 1997) • Main deficiencies: • No detection when obscured by cirrus • Poor detection near sunrise/sunset • No cloud height information

  4. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Recent Improvements • Better detection in low light and broken cloud cover aided by two-hour running composite • Better icing detection algorithm • Makes use of new 13.3 um IR band (GOES-M and beyond) for cirrus screening • Normalized visible channel data • Inclusion of operational cloud top heights from Sounder

  5. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Upgraded Icing ProductIcing Enhanced Cloud-top Altitude Product (ICECAP) ICECAP Imager Icing Cloud top Heights

  6. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Northeast Regional Example Product URL: http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/smcd/opdb/aviation/icg.html

  7. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Verification of the Product • Imager Icing Potential • Using NOAA/MSL's Real-Time Verification System (RTVS) beginning summer 2003 • Comparisons with Current Icing Potential (CIP) • GOES 4km product reduced to 40km to conform to Rapid Update Cycle II (RUC) grid box • Sounder Cloud-top heights • Comparison with ground-based lidar (Hawkinson et al. 2005) • Comparison with icing altitudes in PIREPs (2005)

  8. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Probability of Detection (PODy) July 2003 through April 2005; All time periods CIP = 0.45

  9. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 POD – No Icing (PODn) CIP = 0.45

  10. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 True Skill Statistic (TSS) TSS = PODy + PODn - 1 CIP = 0.45

  11. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Relative Operating Characteristics (ROC)

  12. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Diurnal Characteristics • Performs best during daytime (15Z – 21Z) when CH1 visible is available • PODy = 0.55 to 0.70; TSS = 0.15 to 0.25 • Skill scores for sunrise/sunset transition periods similar to those at night • PODy = 0.45 to 0.50; TSS = 0.10 to 0.15

  13. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 GOES Cloud Top HeightsHawkinson (UW-CIMSS) et al. 2003

  14. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Summary and Conclusions • GOES icing potential / cloud top product • Provides a good estimate of icing extent and cloud top height: • Operational CIP better during cooler months • GOES performs better than CIP during summer (except 2006) • Skill of GOES product best during daylight hours • Does not provide severity information • ICECAP could be most valuable in remote areas where no PIREPs available

  15. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Acknowledgements • Jennifer Mahoney and NOAA/MSL staff for implementation of GOES icing in RTVS • Jim Nelson (UW-CIMSS) wrote the original GOES-8 icing software • Work partially supported by GOES Improved Product Assurance Plan (GIMPAP) • URL for GOES ICECAP on the Web: • http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/smcd/opdb/aviation/icg.html • Results to appear in upcoming issue of AMS Weather and Forecasting

  16. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Backup Slides

  17. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Icing Risk Flow Diagram

  18. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 ICECAP Processing

  19. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Daytime Supercooled Cloud Determination

  20. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 Reduction of Thin Cirrus Using IR Data

  21. NWA Annual Meeting 16-19 October 2006 ICECAP Heights vs PIREPS

More Related