Laserfiche WebLink
<br />826 <br /> <br />JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY <br /> <br />VOLUME 27 <br /> <br />(- -50C). It also shows crystals from the center of <br />the 10 dBZ region probably initiated around 2.8 <br />km (-9.50C). <br />At the point of echo formation (4 dBZ), the predicted <br />crystal was a 554 ILm column with a fallspeed of 0.55 <br />m S-I. At the point where a 10 dBZ echo was first <br />observed (to + 19) the predicted crystal was a rimed <br />column with a major axis of 1 004 ~m and a fallspeed <br />of 1.1 m S-I. The slope of the 10 dBZ echo contour <br />implied a particle fallspeed of 1.25 m s- I. The final <br />calculated crystal fallspeed was 1.13 m S-I. <br />The speed of the radar echo was measured at 10.2 <br />m S-I between 2055 and 2111 UTe. At the point where <br />the 10 dBZ contour reached the surface, the echo was <br />20.8 km downwind of the seeding location. By com- <br />parison the calculated trajectory terminated 16 km <br />downwind of the SLCP. The crystal moved at an av- <br />erage speed of 8.1 m s- I. An x-z plot of radar echo <br />and the calculated crystal trajectory illustrate this dif- <br />ference in Fig. II. Points of equivalent times of the <br />radar echo path and crystal trajectory are shown. <br />In general, there was good agreement between radar <br />echo evolution and predictions for fallout time of a <br />crystal originating at the SLCP at -70e. The crystal <br />was predicted to fall out in 33 min, nearly identical to <br />the radar results. However, the downwind distance <br />traveled differed by 5 km. This may have been due to <br />errors in the calculated wind field (see sec. 4a), since <br />mean echo motion was observed to be approximately <br />2 m S-l faster than the mean predicted crystal hori- <br />zontal velocity. <br /> <br />6. Summary and conclusions <br /> <br />The diagnostic method for targeting during airborne <br />seeding experiments of the Sierra Cooperative Pilot <br />Project was described in this paper. During aircraft <br />seeding operations, this technique was used operation- <br />ally to direct aircraft to the appropriate seeding location <br />in the cloud in order to target effects to a specific ground <br />location. The area of effect on the ground was also <br />estimated. The methods used were data-interactive, so <br /> <br />5.0 <br /> <br />4.0 <br /> <br />E <br />~ 3.0 <br />I- <br />:I: <br />c> 2.0 <br />W <br />:I: <br /> <br />+2 <br />. <br /> <br />+6 <br />. <br /> <br />+10 <br />. . <br /> <br />1.0 Terro;n _ <br /> <br />0.0 <br />o <br /> <br />that the latest possible information concerning the local <br />wind fields and cloud liquid water content could be <br />incorporated into the targeting calculations. The pa- <br />rameterizations were simple, designed for operational <br />expediency. The total time required to perform the <br />targeting calculations and direct the aircraft to the <br />seeding location was usually under 3 min. <br />Three evaluations of the targeting technique were <br />presented. These studies include comparisons of I) <br />predicted wind fields with those measured by aircraft; <br />2) ice particle growth rates within seeded cloud regions <br />with predicted growth rates; and 3) radar echo evolution <br />within seeded cloud regions with predicted particle tra- <br />jectories. <br />The diagnosed wind fields over the Sierra Nevada <br />were found to generally correspond to aircraft mea- <br />surements of wind speed and direction within the lower <br />atmosphere (<5000 m) upwind of the crestline. Errors <br />in the u- and v-components of the wind were generally <br /><4 m S-l over the 100 km domain upwind of the crest. <br />Exceptions were noted in regions of strong vertical <br />shear and/or when the barrier jet core extended far <br />into the foothills. In these cases, narrow regions of more <br />significant errors (4-10 m S-I) were observed. These <br />regions of large error were generally above (shear) or <br />west (barrier jet) of the primary region where seeding <br />was conducted. The displacement of predicted fallout <br />locations due to misrepresentation of the wind fields <br />within the region affected by seeding was less than 10 <br />km from the target in nearly all cases, and often less <br />than 5 km. <br />Comparison of predicted ice particle habits and <br />growth rates with those measured within seeded regions <br />of storms were made during 11 storm systems. Ice par- <br />ticles were sampled by aircraft 4-81 min after seeding. <br />Particle habits and growth rates used in the targeting <br />parameterization generally agreed with measurements <br />taken in the temperature range -80 to -l30e. At <br />warmer temperatures, particle growth rates were gen- <br />erally overestimated. Habits were typically thick col- <br />umns, plates or rimed particles rather than the expected <br />needle. The reason for the discrepancy appeared to be <br /> <br />+20 <br />+14 [) +:~_...~-l +26 <br />· · · . +2V~ y~ <br />+24 _ <br />_-- ---+2S~ <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />10 15 <br />DISTANCE ALONG ECHO PATH (km) <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br />Seeding <br />Location <br /> <br />FIG. II. Comparison of calculated crystal trajectory and radar echo development in the X-Z <br />plane. Dots connect calculated crystal position and echo at equivalent times. The radar echo <br />contour represents 5 dBZ. Vertical dashed line represents seeding curtain. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />',. <br /> <br />