AVAPS F LIGHT S UMMARY HS NOAA ESRL G ARY W ICK R YAN S PACKMAN D ARREN J ACKSON D AVE C OSTA NCAR T ERRY H OCK D EAN L AURITSEN C HARLIE M ARTIN X UANYONG X U NOAA AOML M ICHAEL B LACK J ASON D UNION

D ROPSONDE O BSERVATIONS FlightTargetSondesComments 5-6 Sep 2012Leslie30Transit, Limited Ku SepNadine34System fault -– parachute cap anomaly; RF noise issue emerges in flight SepNadine70RFI continues SepNadine76RFI continues SepNadine58RFI continues SepNadine75RFI improves Total Sondes343

D ROPSONDE O BSERVATIONS

D ROPSONDE A CHIEVEMENTS First operations with Ku communications: Download raw D-files from AV-6 in flight Real-time ASPEN processing Near real-time posting of skew-T plot to MTS Near real-time transmission to GTS Reference to HS3 sonde data in NHC forecast discussions for Nadine Plans for parallel GFS model runs Dropsonde deployment flexibility in various Atlantic FIRs (e.g., box module insertion in real time)

AVAPS L ESSONS L EARNED Flight Ops 1 – Two AVAPS team members required in the PMOF: Dedicated drop operator necessary because of intensive comms AVAPS science seat coordinates drop pattern and any changes with mission scientists and shuttles data to processing team 2 – Additional team required for real-time processing Instrument Issues 1 - Parachute cap manufacturing anomaly being addressed 2 – RF noise interference issue is under investigation

S CIENCE D IRECTIONS Tropical-extratropical transition: trough interactions Aerosol-cloud-precipitation interactions: Role of SAL HS3 science investigations: Build collaborations with investigator teams that are using the dropsonde data Courtesy of G. Wick, NOAA

Sep 26 Nadine Mission Dry, stable SAL Dry, stable continental air Moist core How could Nadine survive and even flourish in such a dry, stable environment? Is the core within a “protected pouch”? How does convection overcome the stable low-level environment and inversion? Are differences in SST and surface air temperature important to enhance surface fluxes? Courtesy of M. Black, NOAA

NASA Global Hawk – HS AVAPS 400 MHz Telemetry Noise Problem Data Playback Screen Captures of: 1)AVAPS 400 MHz Receiver Data (R-file) 2)AVAPS 400 MHz Spectrum Analyzer 3)NASA Global Hawk IWG1 Aircraft Data

Dropsonde RF Signal Strength vs Time for First 6 drops HS3 2012: Case 1 – Science Flight #1 (transit) Normal AVAPS ‘no signal’ noise floor

Dropsonde RF Signal Strength vs Time for First 6 drops HS : Case 2 – Science Flight #2 Why has the ‘no signal’ noise floor increased on Drops 2 through 6 (shown here) and all subsequent drops? Drop 1, the ‘Bermuda’ drop

HS3 2012: Case 1 – Science Flight #1 (transit) Two AVAPS 400 MHz Spectrum Analyzer data frames prior to takeoff Note average noise floor jump from ~ -110 dBm to ~ -102 dBm These plots are 6 seconds apart in time UTC Time - 20:16:00 UTC Time - 20:16:06 approx mean: -110 dBm approx mean: -102 dBm

HS3 2012: Case 1 – Science Flight #1 (transit) GH IWG1 data prior to takeoff UTC Time of cursor 20:16:06 (same UTC time as 2 nd AVAPS Spectrum Analyzer plot) GH Takeoff ^ GH Pressure Altitude GH Aircraft Heading 20:16:06 Z ground taxi begins 

HS3 2012: Case 1 – Science Flight #1 (transit) Zoomed-in detail of previous IWG1 aircraft data slide UTC Time = 20:16:06 GH Aircraft Heading 20:16:06 Z ground taxi begins 