Norwegian Cyclone Model Review Vilhelm and Jacob Bjerknes; Halvor Solberg Bergen Geophysical Institute ~1920

Before Bjerknes, maps had no fronts. There were Highs and Lows and even isobars. So the big breakthrough of the Norwegian Model was fronts. How did they come up with that idea?

In war, up to the 20 th century armies were small and wandered around the countryside looking for enemies to fight.

The battle of Gettysburg was a good example. The Confederate Army was moving through southern Pennsylvania near Washington D.C. When they spotted the Union army, they attacked from the north!

Fronts were a military concept during World War I when armies grew large enough to occupy whole regions This is the western front. All troops on the German side are alike. Notice how the allies also group together. The big changes occur across the front.

French infantry The German uniform of WWI Trenches at the front

Building on his father’s concepts, Jacob Bjerknes and his co-worker Halvor Solverg proposed a structure. The storm doesn’t look precisely the way we draw them now but the main features are there.

This is how we plot the features of a typical cyclone. Station data is exaggerated to show the contrasts. Air mass types and the approximate extent of the region of overcast skies are also shown.

Question for the class: They had maps in They had weather observers. They had telegraphs and could get data from across the country. Why was the development of the Norwegian model of an extratropical cyclone such an important breakthrough for meteorologists? (It was so good, we still use the model today)

Bjerknes and Solberg also proposed that the cyclones went through a common evolution of stages. In the next slide, a loop of surface maps shows a storm going through those stages. Watch the Low which starts in western Kansas. You should also check the temperatures in the air masses. Maybe the schematic wasn’t so exaggerated after all.

Stages of the typical Extratropical Cyclone

The President’s Day Storm of 2003 Rutgers U Times Square The White House Philadephia

NYO 8.5

Surface Map Loop for Feb 15-18, 2003 To watch for: Developing waves in Arkansas Mature cyclone New Low forms offshore by Carolinas Arctic air mass with High over New England

Developing Waves Mature Cyclone Coastal Low forms

So the storm was in Arkansas but stalled. A new low formed off the east coast near North Carolina and became an intense storm. Why did it do that? Specifically, we often see storms travel north along the coast. We call them “Coastal Storms” (yup). What possible reasons for that behavior can you think of?

Satellite Loop Bjerknes didn’t have one. If he had, he would have seen some characteristic features which show what kind of weather is occurring. To watch for: The cloud shield of the warm front is spread out The cold front has a narrow strip of cloud Development of “Dry Tongue” behind system. Backlash means clouds behind the system

Warm front cloud shield Cold front cloud shield Dry Tongue Backlash

Upper Air This is another asset that didn’t exist in the early 20 th century. Watch the following loop of 300 mb maps. The solid lines are height lines (like isobars) The blue shading shows the wind speeds How does this loop help us to forecast the track of the surface storm?

Radar Loop In the Radar loop you can identify more characteristic features of the Norwegian Model. What is this?

Cold front or pressure trough? Cold air mass with a pressure trough Class: Identify two features from the 03Z Radar:

T-Storms in warm sector in a squall line - ● ● - Precip in High pressure ridge Here are two more. Identify This symbol means squall line Precip in NJ is closer to the High than to either Low. Look at the weather! (not just the fronts) Overrunning What is important about those features?

Old, dying Low has very little precipitation Coastal Low, strong echoes Backlash is just SW- One more frame:

Bjerknes’ cyclone model was intended to make forecasts. He had no radar, no satellite, no upper air. So, using the surface map only, what does the Norwegian Cyclone model say will happen to the storm near the Gulf of Mexico?

That was a very similar situation to the Feb 2003 storm. Here’s what it did. (Is this storm evolving as Bjerknes said it would?)

Upper air (300 hPa or mb) in Feb, 2004:

In 2004, the initial storm stayed strong and the coastal storm formed farther north, over New Jersey. Bjerknes’ model worked but not the same way as in What was the difference? Possibilities (pick one or more): 1. The atmosphere can have a big reaction to a small difference in initial conditions. 2. The air mass difference was more pronounced in The jet stream was different. 4. The upper air trough was different. 5. In 2003 the High was much more powerful. Answer: ALL of these contribute to differences in the development and tracks of storms.

So, what do these cases tell us about the Norwegian Model? Every extratropical cyclone in the U.S. has certain features in common (besides the obvious): Fronts: stratiform precipitation shield with warm front cumuloform precipitation with cold front Cyclone goes through life cycle from wave on front to dissipating Every extratropical cyclone is different in some way You must forecast each on a case-by-case basis Use as many data sources (maps, numbers, etc.) as you can. Next we examine the fronts themselves in more detail