WMOD00234 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

weather data correlation to hail and rain statistics. Whether or not a more powerful computer needs to be acquired is not really a question, the question is when should it be done. As an alternative suggestion, an investigation should begin to see whether an existing computer can be upgraded and a simultaneous purchase of a lower-cost computer might not accomplish the same goal at less cost and with no significant loss of computing power. Operationally, recommendation (3) probably may be the most important if one believes cloud seeding works. Somehow we need to corne to a closer mix of fuel-to-seeding capability in order for our planes to seed longer. The problem typically comes on big storm days when our cloud base aircraft frequently run out of seeding capability long before they run short of fuel. Flares would be needed, most likely, to solve the problem. They would be the end-burning variety, with 12 held in place in a rack mounted to the trailing edges of the wings. To conserve costs, flare usage would be limited from mid-May to mid-July in an attempt to target those few "big" hail-days when storms account for the grea"Cest amount of crop damage. The downside is: (a) Cost. Arming all four cloud base aircraft with both flares and wing generator liquid seeding solution would be expensive, although cost-beneficial. Yearly direct costs for flares for two aircraft are estimated at $10,000. Since all electrical- mechanical systems eventually need maintenance, this would require added expense. Wing racks, which were purchased in the early years of this program and now are in storage, could be re-mounted without adding significant new equipment costs. (b) Time. When turning around an aircraft after a seeding mission, spent flares would have to be removed from the rack and replaced with new ones requiring approximately another 10 minutes before being able to launch---if flares are expected to be needed on a second mission. If we were to add one more aircraft instead of adding flares, it could help in a few more instances, however, still we would have more storms than aircraft on big storm days and another plane would still have to land to resupply its seeding agent long before low fuel causes a problem, thereby wasting valuable seeding time (up to about an hour in some cases). Short of adding several more aircraft to the program, flares appear to be the best solution to a long- term problem. Budget considerations notwithstanding, flare-carrying capability on just two planes should better serve our near-term hail reduction function, other factors being equal. As a footnote of interest to the above last point: there is now a very strong effort by Northwest Kansas Groundwater Management District #4 (Colby) to develop a weather modification program with 53