Laserfiche WebLink
<br />\ ..- <br /> <br />~~) <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />field can often occur on a 0.5-l hr time scale corresponding to a <br /> <br />"..~.... <br /> <br />mesoscale spatial scale of 25-50 km. <br /> <br />Such maxima were found in almost <br /> <br />a.-"."'~s. 'j.~.."'.' . - <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~lll the STORMS. In a few STORMS the supercooled liquid water varied on <br /> <br />. .J <br /> <br />.....- "--- <br /> <br />~l larger 4-5 hr scale. <br /> <br />On average the supercooled liquid water was <br /> <br />greater to the west of the radiometer than to the east. This appeared <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />to be a consequence of 1) the formation of supercooled liquid water in <br /> <br />updrafts to the west induced by the initial r~se of the Tushar Mtns and <br /> <br />2:) the consumption of this water in passing from west-to-east at a rate <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />greater than that of any condensation. The supercooled liquid water was <br /> <br />often located at fairly low and warm levels in the clouds, often below <br /> <br />the height of the crest of the Tushar Mtns and at temperatures warmer <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />than -lOCo The flux of supercooled liquid water across the Tushar Mtns <br /> <br />varied amongst and within STORMS. <br /> <br />It was found that 80 percent of the <br /> <br />total flux in the two month fie ld season occurred in.!!- t~tal of, only 30 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />hr of time. <br /> <br />This points to the importance from the standpoint of <br /> <br />precipitation augmentation of being able to identify those times when <br /> <br />large amounts of supercooled liquid water are present. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Precipitation. <br /> <br />The analysis of data from the eight precipitation <br /> <br />gages yie lded both expected and unexpected results. <br /> <br />Expec ted was the <br /> <br />increase in precipitation amounts at gages higher on the mountain slopes <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />dluring the more orographic parts of STORMS. This was due to a longer <br /> <br />dluration of precipitation at the higher locations. <br /> <br />Unexpected was the <br /> <br />tILax~mum amount of precipitation observed in non-orographic parts of <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />STORMS at gages part way up the mountain slopes. <br /> <br />There was less <br /> <br />precipitation at <br /> <br />lower gages because of a shorter duration of <br /> <br />precipitation. There was less precipitation at higher gages because of <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />81 reduced precipitation rate. <br /> <br />A physical explanation for this result <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-xx~v- <br />