1. DOW Observations in IHOP and Analyses of CI Yvette Richardson, Nettie Arnott and Joshua Wurman

2. Outline Data Navigation Issues Summary of DOW cases Examination of two CI cases Quicklook at boundary layer cases

3. Navigation of Data Multiple Doppler analyses require synthesis of radial velocity wind fields Winds must be put on a common grid before synthesis –Requires accurate ‘navigation’ of the data –Need location of trucks (gps) and pointing angle of the radar Radar1Radar2 Data

4. Determination of Pointing Angle Possible Methods –Use clutter targets Have to have targets to use –Use reflectivity features and align Tedious Accuracy is questionable –Use the sun as a target – solar calibration Do very slow scans across the sun Sub-beam accuracy Usually Possible – not good at noon

5. Solar Calibrations

6. Find the azimuth of max average power and compare to known sun location for your time and location

7. Available for all IHOP cases where a solar calibration scan was performed http://met.psu.edu/~narnott/SolarCals.html Agree very well with other techniques

8. DOW Missions All CI 3 BLH (20 and 29 May, 7 June) –Looking for collaborators 4 QPF (16 May, 23 May, 26 May, 4 June) –Collaborating with Anagnostou Three ABLE –Collaborating with Weckwerth

9. CI Cases 10 June 19 June 24 May (collaborating with Ziegler and others)

10. 10 June Quasi-stationary cold front Great coordination Cells initiated all along the front – just outside the IOR but within overdetermined dual- Doppler coverage

16. 17.6 18 15

17. DOW2 20:55 UTC – 1.5 degree tilt N

18. DOW2 20:55 UTC – 4.4 degree tilt N

19. DOW2 20:56 UTC – 8.4 degree tilt N

20. DOW2 20:56 UTC – 12.8 degree tilt N

21. DOW3 20:57 UTC – 1.4 degree tilt N

22. DOW3 20:57 UTC – 4.3 degree tilt N

23. DOW3 20:57 UTC – 8.3 degree tilt N

24. DOW3 20:58 UTC – 12.7 degree tilt N

25. XPOL 20:57 UTC – 1.3 degree tilt N

26. XPOL 20:58 UTC – 13.4 degree tilt N

27. XPOL 21:06 UTC – 1.3 degree tilt N

28. XPOL 21:06 UTC – 7.3 degree tilt N

29. Scientific Questions What controls the difference in convective modes on either side of the boundary? Why did the growing cumulus field suddenly cease its growth? Is this related to changes in the boundary? Role of the thin line which intersected the boundary. –unable to result in initiation – why? Role of the circulations along the boundary play? Related to preferred locations for clouds even though not initiation? What caused the initiation outside the box?

30. 19 June 2002 Boundary near Colby, KS Very interesting vortices along boundary Very well coordinated CI occurred – possibly within dual-Doppler coverage

35. Satellite loop 19:08 20:0821:08 22:08 23:08

36. 14 15 18

37. IOR

38. DOW3 19:30 N

39. Dual-Doppler Analysis At 19:30 At z=0

40. Deployment #2 – 21:20+ UTC 25 14 13.5

41. 2 nd Deployment Sequence DOW2 begins moving around 21:00 And gets in position at 21:20 XPOL stays in position to provide DD with DOW3 over original triangle until 21:20 – breaks down on way to next deployment DOW3 switches to new sector at 21:20 Initiation occurs at approximately 21:22 Loop 21:33

42. DOW3 21:23 N

43. DOW2 21:22 – 8.4 degree tilt N

44. DOW2 21:25 – 14.3 degree tilt N

45. DOW2 21:25 – 2.1 degree tilt N

46. DOW3 21:30 – 3.5 degree tilt N

48. Scientific Questions What role did the misocyclones play in the initiation of convection? Was water vapor enhanced near the misocyclones? Collaboration with lidar? What determined the locations of the misocyclones (intersections?)? Did these deepen the moisture field?

49. 5/29 BLH Mission

50. 0.5 degree 1.0 degree

51. 1.4 degree 2.1 degree

53. Future Work Finish dual-Doppler analyses Combine wind analyses with water vapor measurements (lidar) Continue QPF and BLE collaborations Many thanks to all collaborators

54. My Favorite IHOP Project Completed New Year’s Eve, 2002