Laserfiche WebLink
<br />100 <br /> <br />u <br />~ <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br /> <br />(!) <br />z <br />o <br />IJJ <br />IJJ <br />U <br />X <br />IJJ <br /> <br />0.1 <br /> <br />~ <br />o <br /> <br />0.01 - <br /> <br />0.001 <br />o <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />LWC (g/m3) <br /> <br />Fig. 2.11: ,The percentage of the JW measurements of liquid water <br />content vtlich exceeded various values. The areas were: (SM) stmmertime, <br />Montana HIPLEX; (SF) summertime, Florida, (SK) springtime, Kansas; <br />(W:A) wintertime, Cali fornia; (SI) summertime, I1Unois; (WU) <br />wintertime, Utah; and (WGL) wintertime, Great Lakes. <br /> <br />Fig. 2.12 shows the percentage of regions in which the liquid <br /> <br />water content, when averaged over the indicated distance, exceeded the <br /> <br />indicated values. These results were influenced by the flight patterns, <br /> <br />which tended to pass repeatedly through the same clouds, and so at <br /> <br />sizes larger than about 15 kIn are biased; <br /> <br />however, they show the <br /> <br />highest liquid water contents to be concentrated in small regions, as <br /> <br />expected for cumulus clouds. The limit of 0.001% represents the lowest <br /> <br />percentage that could be determined from this data set, and so <br /> <br /> <br />indicates that liquid water contents averaging more than 2 g/m3 were <br /> <br />never found over distances of more than about 3 kIn. <br /> <br />As a guide to the frequency with which various flight concH tions <br /> <br />may be expected during an operation such as we have conducted, we have <br /> <br />also plotted the probabilities of encountering various average liquid <br /> <br />19 <br />