CAPE comparison near Pendleton, OR

61_1931Z

A cu field developed in portions of the Pendleton, OR CWA shortly after 17z. The CAPE derived from GOES is underperforming compared to the RAP CAPE (up to 1800 J/kg). There is a zone where RAP CAPE is 600-1200 J/kg where the GOES estimate is zero. Just to not out-model ourselves, the GOES-derived CAPE does not match up with the cu field’s location.

A positive is that the GOES-R CI has pegged area of possible convection (in a few spots >50%) that lines up very well with where the cu field has developed. The outline of individual cloud elements that is discernible to the eye is also being picked up by the CI algorithm.

Jason Williams and MacGyver

Participants were reminded that the GOES-R CAPE values are CAPE in the layer between the LFC and EL, so to compare absolute values with (MUCAPE here), is not very 1-1. Additionally, these products use a GFS first guess, so if the GFS is way off for whatever reason, the retrievals will likely be off as well, even if they do provide some degree of bias correction – BL

Tags: None

ENI Cell Polygons: Complete Overlap Should Not Occur

The loop below depicts two ENI Cell Polygons completely overlapping  – which seems less than desirable. This overlap is depicted for a tornadic storm below and clearly the fetal polygon can be seen within the womb of the mother polygon (loop image underlay is the 0-2km Azimuthal Shear).

Also seen is the lightning ramp up in the pre-tornadic phase as the cell strengthened.

RockyILMTor_PolyOverlap

Tags: None

ENI data should prove very useful over marine zones

In areas that are poorly sampled by radar data…such as mountainous and farther offshore marine locales..the ENI data should prove to be very valuable. The ENI data could be the confidence factor in issuing or not issuing a special marine warning on a storm that looks to be marginally strong due to poor radar sampling.

Pickles

Tags: None

Utility of 17z NUCAPS sounding in MHX

The NUCAPS sounding has shown to be a realistic supplemental piece of environmental  data the last several days.

In comparison with the 12z sounding (fig 2)…the 17z NUCAPS (fig1) sounding did subtlely pick up on a weak inversion around 700 mb and 850 mb that was evident in the 12z sounding.  The NUCAPS sounding was more moist in the 400-500 mb level than the 12z sounding…which may have been due to the cirrus advecting in ahead of approaching convection. Differences between the 12z and NUCAPS soundings can give a rough and general idea of change in environment.

In comparison…with 17z SPC meso-analysis (fig3)…MU CAPE value were comparable.

So overall…I have been pleased with the utility of this sounding for re-assessing the environment each afternoon. It may be especially useful to sample a few NUCAPS points in an area of concern to get a consensus picture of the environment.

Fig 1 – 17z NUCAPS

17z NUCAPs

Fig 2 -12z MHX

 

12z MHX sounding

Fig 317z SPC meso

Pickles

Tags: None

ENI cell tracking/rate better utility than Lightning Jump in detecting tvs’s along QLCS across MHX

ENI cell/rate tracking (fig 1) was a better tool to identify and track stronger updrafts (fig 2)…within a QLCS moving to the NC coast. The lighting jump algorithm was difficult to follow one the event transitioned to a QLCS setup…because the algorithm grouped together severe cells and washed out the jump/severe signal (fig3).

Transient and weak tornadic spin-ups are noted on occasion along the NE coast with these QLCS’s in areas of interaction with discrete cells, to the north of rear inflow jets and kinks in the line.  Although both tools would likely not give much lead time on these transient spin-ups…the ENI should prove a more useful complement to radar data in these areas than the lightning jump in detecting the highest severe winds threat along the line and best potential for tornadogenesis. 

Fig 1ENI 2022z MHX

Fig 20.5 SRM MHX 2025

Fig3Lightning jump 2023z

Pickles

Tags: None