Dynamic NearCasting of Severe Convection using Sequences of GOES Moisture Products - Applicability to NASA Aviation Program? - Ralph Petersen 1 and Robert.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Chapter 13 – Weather Analysis and Forecasting
Advertisements

Regional Modelling Prepared by C. Tubbs, P. Davies, Met Office UK Revised, delivered by P. Chen, WMO Secretariat SWFDP-Eastern Africa Training Workshop.
Introduction to data assimilation in meteorology Pierre Brousseau, Ludovic Auger ATMO 08,Alghero, september 2008.
The Utility of GOES-R and LEO Soundings for Hurricane Data Assimilation and Forecasting Jun Timothy J. Schmit #, Hui Liu &, Jinlong and Jing.
Aspects of 6 June 2007: A Null “Moderate Risk” of Severe Weather Jonathan Kurtz Department of Geosciences University of Nebraska at Lincoln NOAA/NWS Omaha/Valley,
A n Objective Nowcasting Tool that Optimizes the Impact of Frequent Observations in Short-Range Forecasts a.k.a. “Stopping Short-Range Gap-osis” Ralph.
Transitioning unique NASA data and research technologies to the NWS 1 AIRS Products for the National Weather Service Brad Zavodsky SPoRT Science Advisory.
Danielle M. Kozlowski NASA USRP Intern. Background Motivation Forecasting convective weather is a challenge for operational forecasters Current numerical.
1 GOES Users’ Conference October 1, 2002 GOES Users’ Conference October 1, 2002 John (Jack) J. Kelly, Jr. National Weather Service Infusion of Satellite.
UW-CIMSS/UAH MSG SEVIRI Convection Diagnostic and Nowcasting Products Wayne F. Feltz 1, Kristopher M. Bedka 1, and John R. Mecikalski 2 1 Cooperative Institute.
A tale of two severe weather surprises – The isolated event of 16 July 2010 and the severe weather outbreak of 17 July 2010 Neil A. Stuart NOAA/NWS Albany,
1 High impact weather nowcasting and short- range forecasting with advanced IR soundings Jun Tim Schmit &, Hui Liu #, Jinlong Jing
Improving Severe Weather Forecasting: Hyperspectral IR Data and Low-level Inversions Justin M. Sieglaff Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite.
GOES-R Proving Ground NOAA’s Hazardous Weather Testbed Chris Siewert GOES-R Proving Ground Liaison OU-CIMMS / Storm Prediction Center.
Rapid Update Cycle Model William Sachman and Steven Earle ESC452 - Spring 2006.
Characteristics of Isolated Convective Storms Meteorology 515/815 Spring 2006 Christopher Meherin.
Chapter 13 – Weather Analysis and Forecasting. The National Weather Service The National Weather Service (NWS) is responsible for forecasts several times.
Recent Progress on High Impact Weather Forecast with GOES ‐ R and Advanced IR Soundings Jun Li 1, Jinlong Li 1, Jing Zheng 1, Tim Schmit 2, and Hui Liu.
Roll or Arcus Cloud Supercell Thunderstorms.
Determining Favorable Days for Summertime Severe Convection in the Deep South Chad Entremont NWS Jackson, MS.
Introduction and Methodology Daniel T. Lindsey*, NOAA/NESDIS/STAR/RAMMB Louie Grasso, Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere
Challenges in Urban Meteorology: A Forum for Users and Providers OFCM Panel Summaries Bob Dumont Senior Staff Meteorologist OFCM.
NCEP’s Seamless Suite of Products  Covers events from Climate to Weather to Oceans  Spans ranges of time from Seasons to Weeks to Days to Hours in the.
Forecasting and Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) NOWcasting Description of atmospheric models Specific Models Types of variables and how to determine.
Chapter 9: Weather Forecasting
Short Course on Satellite Meteorology 11 January 1998 Phoenix, Arizona Applications and Interpretation: Part 3 - Sounder Products and Applications Donald.
Poorly Forecast Convection During the Evening of 20 July 2008 in Southern North Dakota Justin Turcotte Meteorologist Meridian Environmental Technology.
Overshooting Convective Cloud Top Detection A GOES-R Future Capability Product GOES-East (-8/-12/-13) OT Detections at Full Spatial and Temporal.
1 CIMSS Participation in the Development of a GOES-R Proving Ground Timothy J. Schmit NOAA/NESDIS/Satellite Applications and Research Advanced Satellite.
GOES-R ABI PROXY DATA SET GENERATION AT CIMSS Mathew M. Gunshor, Justin Sieglaff, Erik Olson, Thomas Greenwald, Jason Otkin, and Allen Huang Cooperative.
Thanks also to… Tom Wrublewski, NOAA Liaison Office Steve Kirkner, GOES Program Office Scott Bachmeier, CIMSS Ed Miller, NOAA Liaison Office Eric Chipman,
Objective Nowcasting Development What is our goal? Forecasters now use GOES imagery and Derived Product Imagery (DPI) to monitor weather – and make subjective.
LAPS __________________________________________ Analysis and nowcasting system for Finland/Scandinavia Finnish Meteorological Institute Erik Gregow.
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Image: MODIS Land Group, NASA GSFC March 2000 Nearcasting Severe Convection.
Accounting for Uncertainties in NWPs using the Ensemble Approach for Inputs to ATD Models Dave Stauffer The Pennsylvania State University Office of the.
Modern Era Retrospective-analysis for Research and Applications: Introduction to NASA’s Modern Era Retrospective-analysis for Research and Applications:
The Benefit of Improved GOES Products in the NWS Forecast Offices Greg Mandt National Weather Service Director of the Office of Climate, Water, and Weather.
The Need for an Advanced Sounder on GOES The Numerical Weather Prediction Perspective Robert M. Aune Center for Satellite Applications and Research, NESDIS.
1 Using water vapor measurements from hyperspectral advanced IR sounder (AIRS) for tropical cyclone forecast Jun Hui Liu #, Jinlong and Tim.
Hyperspectral Infrared Alone Cloudy Sounding Algorithm Development Objective and Summary To prepare for the synergistic use of data from the high-temporal.
Transitioning unique NASA data and research technologies to the NWS AIRS Profile Assimilation - Case Study results Shih-Hung Chou, Brad Zavodsky Gary Jedlovec,
High impact weather studies with advanced IR sounder data Jun Li Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies (CIMSS),
INFRARED-DERIVED ATMOSPHERIC PROPERTY VALIDATION W. Feltz, T. Schmit, J. Nelson, S. Wetzel-Seeman, J. Mecikalski and J. Hawkinson 3 rd Annual MURI Workshop.
Convective Storm Forecasting 1-6 Hours Prior to Initiation Dan Lindsey and Louie Grasso NOAA/NESDIS/STAR/RAMMB and CIRA, Fort Collins, CO John Mecikalski,
Studies of Advanced Baseline Sounder (ABS) for Future GOES Jun Li + Timothy J. Allen Huang+ W. +CIMSS, UW-Madison.
NOAA-MDL Seminar 7 May 2008 Bob Rabin NOAA/National Severe Storms Lab Norman. OK CIMSS University of Wisconsin-Madison Challenges in Remote Sensing to.
Extending Geostationary Satellite Retrievals from Observations into Forecasts Using GOES Sounder Products to Improve Regional Hazardous Weather Forecasts.
Satellite based instability indices for very short range forecasting of convection Estelle de Coning South African Weather Service Contributions from Marianne.
GII to RII to CII in South Africa Estelle de Coning South African Weather Service Senior Scientist.
A Satellite-Based Objective Analysis Scheme for Nowcasting Applications Robert M. Aune Advanced Satellite Products Team NOAA/NESDIS/ORA/ARADand Ralph Petersen.
GOES Sounder Hyper-spectral Environmental Suite (HES) Data from the HES will revolutionize short-term weather forecasting Impact on short-term weather.
NearCasting Severe Convection using Objective Techniques that Optimize the Impact of Sequences of GOES Moisture Products Ralph Petersen 1 and Robert M.
Conditions for Convection The Ingredients Method.
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Image: MODIS Land Group, NASA GSFC March 2000 Nearcasting Severe Convection.
VISITview Teletraining Nearcasting Convection using GOES Sounder Data 1 ROBERT M. AUNE AND RALPH PETERSEN NOAA/ASPB/STAR JORDAN GERTH AND SCOTT LINDSTROM.
Satellite Data Assimilation Activities at CIMSS for FY2003 Robert M. Aune Advanced Satellite Products Team NOAA/NESDIS/ORA/ARAD Cooperative Institute for.
Météo-France / CNRM – T. Bergot 1) Methodology 2) The assimilation procedures at local scale 3) Results for the winter season Improved Site-Specific.
Cirrus anvil cumulonimbus T (skewed) LCL (Lifting Condensation Level) LFC (Level of Free Convection) EL (Equilibrium level) p overshooting CAPE Sounding.
Matthew Lagor Remote Sensing Stability Indices and Derived Product Imagery from the GOES Sounder
High impact weather nowcasting and short-range forecasting using advanced IR soundings Jun Li Cooperative Institute for Meteorological.
PRELIMINARY VALIDATION OF IAPP MOISTURE RETRIEVALS USING DOE ARM MEASUREMENTS Wayne Feltz, Thomas Achtor, Jun Li and Harold Woolf Cooperative Institute.
2004 Developments in Aviation Forecast Guidance from the RUC Stan Benjamin Steve Weygandt NOAA / Forecast Systems Lab NY Courtesy:
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Combining GOES Observations with Other Data to Improve Severe Weather Forecasts.
Case Study: March 1, 2007 The WxIDS approach to predicting areas of high probability for severe weather incorporates various meteorological variables (e.g.
Extending Geostationary Satellite Retrievals from
GOES-R Risk Reduction Research on Satellite-Derived Overshooting Tops
NWS Forecast Office Assessment of GOES Sounder Atmospheric Instability
Yuanfu Xie, Steve Albers, Hongli Jiang Paul Schultz and ZoltanToth
WMO NWP Wokshop: Blending Breakout
Rita Roberts and Jim Wilson National Center for Atmospheric Research
Presentation transcript:

Dynamic NearCasting of Severe Convection using Sequences of GOES Moisture Products - Applicability to NASA Aviation Program? - Ralph Petersen 1 and Robert M Aune 2 1 Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies (CIMSS), University of Wisconsin – Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 2 NOAA/NESDIS/ORA, Advanced Satellite Products Team, Madison, Wisconsin, Improving the utility of GOES products in operational forecasting

What are we trying to improve? Short-range forecasts of timing and locations of severe thunderstorms - especially hard-to-forecast, isolated summer-time convection What are we trying to correct? - Poor precipitation forecast accuracy in very-short-range NWP - Lack of ANY satellite moisture data in NWP over land in US -Excessive smoothing of mesoscale moisture patterns in NWP data assimilation - Smoothing of upper-level dynamics and dryness -Dominance of parameterizations over observations in increasingly complex short-range NWP - Time delay in getting updated NWP guidance to forecasters How? Provide objective tools that preserves GOES observations and help forecasters identify pre-convective environments 1-6 hours in advance

NearCasting Models Should:  Fill the 1-6 hr “Guidance Gap”  Update/Enhance NWP guidance:  Be Fast and updated very frequently  Use ALL available data - quickly: “Draw closely” to good data  Avoid ‘analysis smoothing’ / ‘super-ob-ing’ issues of longer-range NWP  Help anticipate rapidly developing weather events: “Perishable” guidance products – need rapid delivery  Run Locally? – Few resources needed beyond comms, users easily trained  Improve Situational Awareness Initial Focus on detecting the “Pre-Storm Environment” - Increase Lead Time / Probability of Detection (POD) - Increase Lead Time / Probability of Detection (POD) and Reduce False Alarm Rate (FAR) and Reduce False Alarm Rate (FAR) Goals: Provide objective tools that allow forecasters to expand the usefulness of proven GOES Observations in very-short range predictions hours Fill the Gap Between Nowcasting & NWP

A Specific Objective: Expand the benefits of valuable Moisture Information contained in GOES Sounder Derived Product Images (DPI) GOES hPa PW - 20 July 2005 Improvement of GOES DPI over NWP guess 0700 UTC GOES Sounder products images already are available to forecasters Products currently available include: - Total column Precipitable Water (TPW) - Stability Indices,... (Similar to GII) - 3-layers Precipitable Water (PW)... Build upon GOES’ Strengths + Derived Product Images (DPI) of soundings speeds comprehension of information, and + Data Improve upon Model First Guess,

A Specific Objective: Expand the benefits of valuable Moisture Information contained in GOES Sounder Derived Product Images (DPI) GOES hPa PW - 20 July 2005 Improvement of GOES DPI over NWP guess 1800 UTC GOES Sounder products images already are available to forecasters Products currently available include: - Total column Precipitable Water (TPW) - Stability Indices,... (Similar to GII) - 3-layers Precipitable Water (PW)... Build upon GOES’ Strengths + Derived Product Images (DPI) of soundings speeds comprehension of information, and + Data Improve upon Model First Guess, BUT ( Address some operational realities ) DPIs used primarily as observations - No predictive component - 3-layer DPIs not used in current NWP models - DPIs often obscured when needed most - Correctly anticipated cloud developments obscure subsequent IR observations Need to add a DPI predictive capability to close these information gaps

- Uses Observations Directly - No ‘analysis smoothing’ - Retains observed maxima and minima and extreme gradients - GOES data can be projected forward at full resolution - Spatial resolution adjusts to available data density - Moves mid-/low-level features into areas where clouds form - Provides information even after IR obs are obscured by cirrus  Stability Indices derived from projected Temp/Humidity ‘data’ - New data are added at time observed – not binned / averaged - Data can be included (aged) from multiple observation times Why use a Lagrangian approach for NearCasting? Extending a proven diagnostic approach to prediction - Quick - (10-15 minute time steps) and minimal resources needed - Can be used ‘stand-alone’ or to ‘update’ other NWP guidance DATA DRIVEN – Observation ‘tracked’ into the future Moving Observations to Forecasts

Dry Moist 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast Lagrangian NearCast How it works: Start with a DPI image,

Dry Moist 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast Lagrangian NearCast How it works: Start with a DPI image, interpolate wind data to each of the moisture obs,

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour Ob Locations Lagrangian NearCast How it works: Start with a DPI image, interpolate wind data to each of the moisture obs, then move the 10 km data to new locations

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 1 Hour NearCast Obs Lagrangian NearCast How it works: Start with a DPI image, interpolate wind data to each of the moisture obs, then move the 10 km data to new locations ( use ‘long’ (10 minute) time steps and dynamically change wind fields ),

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 2 Hour NearCast Obs Lagrangian NearCast How it works: Start with a DPI image, interpolate wind data to each of the moisture obs, then move the 10 km data to new locations ( use ‘long’ ( 10 minute ) time steps and dynamically change wind fields ),

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 3 Hour NearCast Obs Lagrangian NearCast How it works: Start with a DPI image, interpolate wind data to each of the moisture obs, then move the 10 km data to new locations ( use ‘long’ ( 10 minute ) time steps and dynamically change wind fields ),

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 3 Hour NearCast Dry Moist 10 km data, 10 minute time steps Lagrangian NearCast How it works: Start with a DPI image, interpolate wind data to each of the moisture obs, then move the 10 km data to new locations ( use ‘long’ ( 10 minute ) time steps and dynamically change wind fields ), and finally. transfer the “projected” moisture ‘obs’ back to a regular grid,

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 3 Hour NearCast Image Dry Moist 10 km data, 10 minute time steps Lagrangian NearCast How it works: Start with a DPI image, interpolate wind data to each of the moisture obs, then moves the 10 km data to new locations ( use ‘long’ ( 10 minute ) time steps and dynamically change wind fields ), and finally. transfer the “projected” moisture ‘obs’ back to a regular grid, but only to create images of the DPI NearCasts.

Proof of Concept: Identify areas with large vertical moisture gradients RAPID convection development often observed under and along edges of mid-level dry bands as they move over localized low-level moisture maxima Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts What are we looking for? Use what GOES observes well !

A Example: Hail storm event of 13 April 2006 that caused record property damage across southern Wisconsin The important questions are both Where and When severe convection will develop, and Where convection will NOT occur - even after cirrus blow-off obscures IR observations? NWP models placed precipitation too far south and west - in area of large-scale moisture convergence 10 cm Hail 24 Hr Precip

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 2115 UTC Sat Imagery NAM 03h Forecast of hPa and hPa PW valid 2100 UTC Initial Conditions 0 Hour Moisture for 2100UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Initial GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC NWP has: Moisture in wrong locations Gradients too weak by factor of 4-8 NWP Analysis Comparison Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Comparison with integrated NWP Moisture fields Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 2115 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 0 Hour Projection for 2100UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Low-Level Moistening Low-Level Moistening 0 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Low-level Moisture Motion Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 2 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 2 Hour NearCast 2315 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 2 Hour Projection for 2300UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Low-Level Moistening 2 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2300 UTC Low-level Moisture Motion Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 4 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 4 Hour NearCast 0115 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 4 Hour Projection for 0100UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Low-Level Moistening 4 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 0100 UTC Low-level Moisture Motion Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 0315 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 6Hour Projection for 0300UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Low-Level Moistening 6 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 0300 UTC Low-level Moisture Motion Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 2115 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 0 Hour Projection for 2100UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Mid-Level Drying Mid-Level Drying 0 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Mid-level Dryness Motion Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 2 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 2 Hour NearCast 2315 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 2 Hour Projection for 2300UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Mid-Level Drying 2 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2300 UTC Low-level Dryness Motion Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 4 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 4 Hour NearCast 0115 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 4 Hour Projection for 0100UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Mid-Level Drying 4 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 0100 UTC Low-level Dryness Motion Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 0315 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 6Hour Projection for 0300UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Mid-Level Drying 6 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 0300 UTC Low-level Dryness Motion Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 0315 UTC Sat Imagery NearCasts 6Hour Projection for 0300UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  Mid-Level Drying 6 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 0300 UTC Rapid moisture changes NearCasted in NE Iowa validated by GPS TPW GOES NearCast PW = = 13 GPS TPW = 16  13 Validation of Local NE Iowa moisture maximum with GPS TPW data     Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path  Are these Moisture Changes Real ? VALIDATION with GPS TPW

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast Vertical Moisture Gradient ( hPa GOES PW hPa GOES PW) 0 Hour NearCast for 2100UTC From 13 April UTC 2115 UTC Sat Imagery 0 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Differential Moisture Transport Creates Vertical Moisture Gradients Formation of Convective Instability Differential Moisture Transport Creates Convective Instability in hours Vertical Moisture Difference. Observed Instability Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Hail-Storm Path 

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 2 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 2 Hour NearCast 2315 UTC Sat Imagery Vertical Moisture Gradient ( hPa GOES PW hPa GOES PW) 2 Hour NearCast for 2300UTC From 13 April UTC 2 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Formation of Convective Instability Differential Moisture Transport Creates Vertical Moisture Gradients Vertical Moisture Difference. Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts NearCast Instability

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 4 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 4 Hour NearCast 0115 UTC Sat Imagery Vertical Moisture Gradient ( hPa GOES PW hPa GOES PW) 4 Hour NearCast for 0100UTC From 13 April UTC 4 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Formation of Convective Instability Differential Moisture Transport Creates Vertical Moisture Gradients Vertical Moisture Difference. Moving from Observations to ForecastsMoving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts NearCast Instability

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 0315 UTC Sat Imagery Vertical Moisture Gradient ( hPa GOES PW hPa GOES PW) 6 Hour NearCast for 0300UTC From 13 April UTC 0315 UTC Sat Imagery 6 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Formation of Convective Instability Differential Moisture Transport Creates Vertical Moisture Gradients Vertical Moisture Difference. Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts NearCast Instability

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 6 Hour NearCast 0315 UTC Sat Imagery 6 hr Lagrangian NearCasts of GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Formation of Convective Instability Differential moisture transports into cloudy regions produces small instability areas Vertical Moisture Difference Information Added by NearCasts. Critical Information about Timing and Location of Mesoscale Destabilzation LOST without NearCast Vertical Moisture Gradient ( hPa GOES PW hPa GOES PW) 6 Hour NearCast for 0300UTC From 13 April UTC Moving GOES data from Observations to Forecasts Mid-Level Drying Low-Level Moistening

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast Initial Conditions 0 Hour Moisture for 2100UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  2115 UTC Sat Imagery Initial GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Examples like this show that: - The GOES DPI moisture products provide good data (if available) - The Lagrangian NearCasts produce useful and frequently updates about the FUTURE stability of the atmosphere A number of additional modifications have been made to Make the image products more useful in operations: Added Data Obscuration ‘Flags’ (no-info areas on images) Decreased specificity (detail) with time Increased Temporal Consistency (Incorporated information from 5 previous hourly NearCasts into display image)

Run Time > 18 UTC 19 UTC 20 UTC 21 UTC Valid 18UTC 19UTC 20 UTC 21 UTC 22 UTC 23 UTC 00 UTC 01 UTC 02 UTC 03 UTC Convectively Stable Convectively Unstable  19Z New Data  No Data  20Z New Data  21Z New Data  Derived Vertical Moisture Difference Gray areas added to indicate regions without data in NearCasts from last 6 hrs – “Clouds” Verifying Radar

Areal influence of each predicted trajectory point expands with NearCast length to show less detail and to reflect increased uncertainly at longer forecast range Run Time > 18 UTC 19 UTC 20 UTC 21 UTC Valid 18UTC 19UTC 20 UTC 21 UTC 22 UTC 23 UTC 00 UTC 01 UTC 02 UTC 03 UTC Convectively Stable Convectively Unstable  19Z New Data  No Data  20Z New Data  21Z New Data  Derived Vertical Moisture Difference Verifying Radar

Run Time > 18 UTC 19 UTC 20 UTC 21 UTC Valid 18UTC 19UTC 20 UTC 21 UTC 22 UTC 23 UTC 00 UTC 01 UTC 02 UTC 03 UTC Convectively Stable Convectively Unstable  19Z New Data  No Data  20Z New Data  21Z New Data  Derived Vertical Moisture Difference Verifying Radar Repeated insertion of hourly GOES data improves and revalidates previous NearCasts

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast Initial Conditions 0 Hour Moisture for 2100UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  2115 UTC Sat Imagery Initial GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Examples like this show that: - The GOES DPI moisture products provide good data (if available) - The Lagrangian NearCasts produce useful and frequently updates about the FUTURE stability of the atmosphere What next?  24/7 Real-Time runs underway - Output in GRIB-II  Will include more GOES derived hazardous weather forecasting parameters – θ e, LI, Cape,...

Choosing which additional parameters (indices) to use is critical Indices MUST be derived from parameters that GOES observes well!!! For GOES sounder and GOES-R ABI, this means: - ~2-3 layers of Moisture (q) and ~5-6 layers of Temperature (T) Information -  Build upon GII experiences:  Candidate Indices will be derived from T/q NearCasts at each observing layer  Lifted Index – Simple – T&Q at 2 layers only - Compares temperature of parcel lifted form boundary layer to 500 hPa temperature (Modify and Re-scale/Calibrate for GOES obs. layers)  Total Index – Simple – T&Q at 2 layers only – Compares 850 hPa T/Q with 500 hPa T and hPa lapse rate info. (Modify and Re-scale/Calibrate for GOES layers)  Convective Instability – Combines T&Q – Compares Equivalent Potential Temperature (θe - Total Thermal Energy) between low- and mid-tropospheric layers – (In-storm buoyancy realized after convection begins– Need to modify and Re-scale/Calibrate for GOES layers)  Convective Available Potential Energy – Uses low-level T&Q with upper-level T profiles - Compare temperature of parcel lifted form boundary layer through ALL levels to tropopause – (Total buoyancy – Modify and Re-scale/Calibrate for GOES layers)  Convective Inhibition – T only - Compares of low/mid-level Temperature – (Total buoyancy – Modify and Re-scale/Calibrate for GOES layers)  K Index – Combines low/mid level T & Q – (Useful for tropical convection – (Modify and Re- scale/Calibrate for GOES layers)  Multiple Index Ensembles - May require tuning for different areas/conditions

13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast 13 April 2006 – 2100 UTC hPa GOES PW 0 Hour NearCast Initial Conditions 0 Hour Moisture for 2100UTC From 13 April UTC GOES Derived Product Images hPa PW  PW  2115 UTC Sat Imagery Initial GOES DPIs Valid 2100 UTC Examples like this show that: - The GOES DPI moisture products provide good data (if available) - The Lagrangian NearCasts produce useful and frequently updates about the FUTURE stability of the atmosphere What next? - 24/7 Real-Time runs underway - Output in GRIB-II  Will include more GOES derived hazardous weather forecasting parameters – θ e, LI, Cape,...  WFO evaluation:Is this a useful forecasting tool? - If so, when and when not? - What additional tuning/parameters are needed? How should it be tested? - Web-based initially - then directly to AWIPS  Testing scheduled at NWS Central region WFOs, AWC, NSSL,...  Planning tests with METEOSAT data as a GOES-R ABI Risk Reduction

- Data can be inserted (combined) directly retaining resolution and extremes - NearCasts retain useful maxima and minima – image cycling preserves old data Forecast Images agree with storm formations and provide accurate/timely guidance Summary – An Objective Lagrangian NearCasting Model - Quick and minimal resources needed - Can be used ‘stand-alone’ or to ‘update’ other NWP guidance DATA DRIVEN at the MESOSCALE Goals met:  Provides objective tool to increase the length of time that forecasters can make good use of detailed GOES moisture data in their short range forecasts (augment smoother NWP output)  Expands value of GOES moisture products from observations to short-range forecasting tools  Evaluations in NWS offices  Options for METEOSAT tests Stable  Unstable Dry  Moist Differential Moisture Transport Creates Convective Instability Questions ? Can this useful for any of the NASA Aviation efforts?  Extend Convective Initiation Nowcasts?  Help with Oceanic Weather, especially Convection and  Convectively Induced Turbulence? (Could use AIRS/IASI products here!)  Other Areas?