1 / 63

RUC – RAOB – TAMDAR SOUNDINGS

This study examines the consistency and potential usefulness of TAMDAR soundings by comparing them to RAOBs and analyzing their impact on RUC forecasts. The results show improved consistency and a potential forecast value of TAMDAR soundings.

tatumj
Download Presentation

RUC – RAOB – TAMDAR SOUNDINGS

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. RUC – RAOB – TAMDAR SOUNDINGS Ed Szoke* NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory *Joint collaboration with the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO

  2. At the time of the last meeting... Found lots of variability in the TAMDAR soundings Often soundings close in time were not consistent Now... Much less variability Soundings tend to show good consistency And generally compare better to nearby raobs TAMDAR soundings vs RAOBs – some observations

  3. Assessing TAMDAR data quality...quick review Compare TAMDAR soundings with each other Compare to a “verifying” raob sounding Concentrated on DTW and MSP and PIA Examining impact of TAMDAR on RUC forecasts Look at RUC forecast soundings with and without TAMDAR and compare to raobs Also compare RUC analyses Potential forecast value of TAMDAR soundings Consistency and potential usefulness of TAMDAR soundings...a brief case Overview

  4. TAMDAR soundings vs RAOBs – Weather at 1200 UTC 19 August 05

  5. TAMDAR soundings vs 1200 UTC 19 August 05 DTW RAOB – flights to ENE

  6. TAMDAR soundings vs 1200 UTC 19 August 05 DTW RAOB – flights to ENE

  7. TAMDAR soundings vs 1200 UTC 19 August 05 DTW RAOB – flights to ENE Agreement is not as good but note TAMDARS are heading NW and the raob would have headed to the ene.

  8. TAMDAR soundings vs RAOBs – DTW 1200 UTC 22 August 05 Quite a bit of lower level moisture over the Upper Midwest.

  9. TAMDAR soundings vs DTW RAOB – flights to the SE

  10. TAMDAR soundings vs DTW RAOB – flights to the ENE

  11. TAMDAR soundings vs DTW RAOB – flights to the NW Note that the raob heads to the ESE

  12. TAMDAR soundings vs MSP RAOB – flights to the E Note the good consistency between TAMDARs 2 min apart.

  13. TAMDAR soundings vs MSP RAOB – flights to the E-ENE Not sure about the 1231 UTC TAMDAR flight...

  14. TAMDAR soundings vs MSP RAOB – flights to the S Excellent agreement on the height of the inversion base.

  15. Next we will look at impact of TAMDAR on the RUC - Examine RUC with (“dev2”) and without (“dev”) TAMDAR - Using mainly DTW and MSP locations - Look first at RUC analyses and compare to raobs - Then see if impact is seen in the forecasts by looking at mainly 3 and 6 h forecasts and comparing to raobs.

  16. RUC analysis soundings vs RAOBs – 18 August 2005 Surface map with radar for 1200 UTC.

  17. RUC analysis soundings vs DTW RAOB – 18 August 2005 Comparison of RUC analyses for 1200 UTC with (dev2) and without (dev) TAMDAR. Appears to be a better match to the sounding when the TAMDAR data was included.

  18. RUC analysis soundings vs MSP RAOB – 1200 UTC 18 August 05 The same type of example from MSP; could argue that dev2 is a slightly better match to the raob.

  19. RUC forecast soundings vs RAOBs – 0000 UTC 19 Aug Comparison of RUC forecast soundings for Detroit at 0000 UTC – 3 h forecasts. -soundings are different, but dev1 (w/o TAMDAR) may be closer match to raob.

  20. RUC forecast soundings vs RAOBs – 0000 UTC 19 Aug Comparison of RUC forecast soundings for Detroit at 0000 UTC – 6 h forecasts.

  21. RUC forecast soundings vs RAOBs – 0000 UTC 19 Aug Comparison of RUC forecast soundings for Detroit at 0000 UTC – 9 h forecasts. -9 h is rather far into the forecast but note differences do appear between the forecasts...not clear which one is better for this case.

  22. RUC forecast soundings vs RAOBs – 0000 UTC 19 Aug Comparison of RUC forecast soundings for Detroit at 0000 UTC – 12 h forecasts.

  23. RUC forecast soundings vs RAOBs – 0000 UTC 23 Aug 05 Quite a bit of low level moisture MI-MN with extensive low clouds over MI.

  24. RUC forecast soundings vs RAOBs – 0000 UTC 23 Aug 05 TAMDAR data available for 2300-0100 UTC, approximating what was available for the RUC 0000 UTC runs.

  25. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 23 Aug Comparison with the Detroit 0000 UTC raob. RH differences exist between the RUC analyses but dev2 (with TAMDAR) does not look as good as dev1 (RUC analysis without TAMDAR) for this site.

  26. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 23 Aug Comparison with the Minneapolis 0000 UTC raob. This time dev2 (with TAMDAR) looks better at lower levels.

  27. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 23 Aug Comparison with the Davenport Iowa 0000 UTC raob. Dev2 (with TAMDAR) temperature looks better at and above 850 mb.

  28. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 23 Aug Comparison with the Peoria Illinois 0000 UTC raob. No improvement seen for this site, but there are much fewer flights into PIA.

  29. RUC 6h forecasts with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 23 Aug Comparison of 6h RUC forecasts with the Detroit 0000 UTC raob. Mixed results, down low dev (w/o TAMDAR) looks best with T, but above ~850 mb dev2 (with TAMDAR) closely matches the raob in T and Td.

  30. RUC 6h forecasts with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 23 Aug Comparison with the MSP 0000 UTC raob. Less differences in the forecasts.

  31. RUC 6h forecasts with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 23 Aug Comparison with the Green Bay 0000 UTC raob. Mixed...T better, RH not, for dev2 (with TAMDAR).

  32. RUC 6h forecasts with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 23 Aug Comparison with the Peoria 0000 UTC raob. Little difference between the 2 forecasts aob 800 mb, but better RH with dev2 above this level.

  33. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 1200 UTC 23 Aug Quiet weather aloft but still lots of low level moisture, especially eastern WI through MI.

  34. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 1200 UTC 23 Aug TAMDAR flights before 1200 UTC.

  35. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 1200 UTC 23 Aug For Detroit. Not much difference down low, but aob 750 mb dev2 RH better.

  36. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 1200 UTC 23 Aug MSP shown here...much better temperature for dev2 in the lowest 100 mb.

  37. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 1200 UTC 23 Aug Not true though at PIA, but again less TAMDAR here.

  38. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 24 Aug

  39. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 24 Aug The same type of example for 12z from MSP; could argue that dev2 is a better analysis.

  40. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 24 Aug Analyses for Detroit.

  41. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 24 Aug Analyses for MSP

  42. RUC forecasts without TAMDAR for Detroit for 0000 UTC 24 Aug 3 and 6 h forecasts for Detroit. Improvement with time around 800 mb but not lower down.

  43. RUC forecasts with TAMDAR for Detroit for 0000 UTC 24 Aug Dev2 forecasts more consistent.

  44. RUC forecasts without TAMDAR for MSP at 0000 UTC 24 Aug

  45. RUC forecasts with TAMDAR for MSP valid at 0000 UTC 24 Aug

  46. RUC forecasts with and without TAMDAR for 0000 UTC 24 Aug Comparing the two 3-h forecasts. Note the great match from dev2 for lower level T but dev is better for Td.

  47. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 1200 UTC 24 Aug Still lots of lower level moisture around.

  48. ~TAMDAR availability for the 1200 UTC 24 Aug RUC

  49. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 1200 UTC 24 Aug Analyses for Detroit. Much better moisture down low with TAMDAR.

  50. RUC analyses with and without TAMDAR for 1200 UTC 24 Aug Analyses for MSP. Dev2 with TAMDAR captures the low level inversion better.

More Related