Comparing Gridded NUCAPS data to model fields

February 24th, 2020 |

NUCAPS fields of 850-mb dewpoint Temperature toggled with NAM40 and RAP40 estimates at approximately the same time, ~1800 UTC on 24 February 2020 (Click to enlarge)

Gridded NUCAPS fields include 850-mb dewpoint temperature fields, and this blog post compares the NUCAPS fields to model fields, and this is part of an ongoing series of blog posts on these horizontal fields.  The imagery above compares NUCAPS fields at 850 mb with NAM40 and RAP40 data over the southeastern part of the United States.  Very dry air is indicated over the western Atlantic Ocean north and west of the Gulf Stream.  There is generally good agreement between the NUCAPS and model fields. Model fields appear dryer (or NUCAPS fields are more moist).  Model fields show a pronounced gradient over the upper midwest that, at this scan time, were too far west to be viewed by NUCAPS.  (Click here to view the NUCAPS points — green, yellow and red — for this time, to show something about the data that has been input into the gridded fields).

However, the following pass from NOAA-20 (click here to view NOAA-20 orbit paths) included midwestern data.  Again, the general good agreement is obvious, especially with regard to the placement of the gradient. Is the atmosphere as dry as the model suggests at 850 mb? That’s a hard question to answer given 1200 UTC Soundings at Omaha, Minneapolis/Chanhassen, and Green Bay.  Note that NAM12 and RAP13 data are being shown in this example;  they gave mostly the same answer as NAM40/RAP40 used above.

NUCAPS fields of 850-mb dewpoint Temperature toggled with NAM12 and RAP13 estimates at approximately the same time, ~1900 UTC on 24 February 2020 (Click to enlarge)

Gridded NUCAPS over the southeast United States

February 21st, 2020 |

Analyzed snow depth at 0600 UTC on 21 February 2020 from the NOHRSC (Click to enlarge)

Snow fell over the southeastern United States, principally North and South Carolina, late on 20 February/early on 21 February 2020. This blog post, one in a series, investigates how gridded NUCAPS thermal fields perform in analyzing the rain/snow line. The snow totals are shown above, an image that was taken from this website at the National Operational Hydrologic Remote Sensing Center (NOHRSC).

NOAA-20 overflew the Carolinas shortly after 0700 UTC on 21 February, and gridded values of 950-mb, 900-mb and 850-mb Temperatures are shown below. (Note how the 950-mb field intersects the ground at the western edge of the Piedmont).  The 0º C isotherm at 850 and 900 mb is close to the coast;  it is sub-freezing over most of the land at those levels.  The analysis from 950-mb shows cold air stretching southwestward from southeastern Virginia, and that region is also where the accumulating snow was focused.  This is an argument in favor of the temperature fields in NUCAPS giving useful information about the rain/snow line.

850-mb, 900-mb, and 950-mb analyses of temperature derived from NUCAPS vertical profiles of temperature, 0723 UTC on 21 February 2020. The same color enhancement is used for each level, spanning -40º C to 30º C; 0º C is highlighted by the black line (Click to enlarge)

One of the gridded NUCAPS fields available in AWIPS via the Product Browser (there are many!) is the binary probability of a temperature occurring.  The 850-mb binary probability of 0º C is close to the coast, at 900-mb, just slightly inland.  The 950-mb values also suggest cold air is more likely over the region where snow fell.  There are also some embedded cold pockets at 950 mb over interior North/South Carolina.

Conditional Probability of 0 C at 850, 900 and 950 mb, 0723 UTC on 21 February 2020 (Click to enlarge)

Note that gridded NUCAPS fields include data from infrared retrievals, microwave-only retrievals, and from retrievals that do not converge. The gridding can mask behavior in the vertical profiles that might not necessarily engender confidence in a meteorological analyst. The plot below shows NUCAPS points (Green points are infrared retrievals that successfully converged, yellow points are microwave-only retrievals, and red points occur where the microwave-only and infrared retrievals failed to converge; this is typically where precipitation is falling) plotted on top of the 850-mb temperature analysis.  Note, however, that values do show up everywhere!  Users of the gridded data should keep in mind the quality of the data that goes into the analysis when they use it.  Two vertical soundings from which gridded data are derived are shown at bottom.  Users can decide if they would use those vertical soundings in isolation.

850-mb Temperatures with NUCAPS Sounding points superimposed, 0711 UTC, 21 February 2020 (Click to enlarge)

850-mb Temperatures with NUCAPS Sounding points superimposed, 0711 UTC, 21 February 2020. Two soundings are also shown, from a green point and from a yellow point.  Note that the plot also shows the binary probability of a temperature at 0º C (Click to enlarge)

Gridded NUCAPS fields over the Pacific Ocean

February 6th, 2020 |

Band 13 ABI (10.3 µm) Imagery, and ‘Night Fog’ Brightness Temperature Difference (10.3 µm – 3.9 µm) at 1205 UTC on 6 February 2020 (Click to enlarge)

GOES-17 ABI Imagery on 6 February suggests the presence of a cold front over the Pacific Ocean northeast of Hawaii. The Clean Window imagery shows a flat region between 30º N and 40º N around 140º W. The Night Fog Brightness temperature difference shows a signal — cyan — in that region consistent with low stratus. The Night Microphysics RGB (shown here in a toggle with Night Fog Brightness Temperature) shows a strong signal there as well (with some noise that can be attributed to Loop Heat Pipe issues with the GOES-17 ABI).

NOAA-20 overflew this region around 1200 UTC on 6 February (Click this link to see all NOAA-20 orbit paths).  The Gridded NUCAPS field of the 900-700 mb Lapse Rate shows small values (around 2º for a temperature change, the darker cyan color in the enhancement), as might be expected over the stratus deck.  Note also how the air mass is less stable in the cold air behind the front (yellow and orange in the enhancement to the west west of the front, green to the east of the front).  Gridded NUCAPS data are created with all vertical retrievals.  The toggle with NUCAPS Vertical sounding points (here), shows how the profiles that failed to converge (i.e., red and yellow points) can affect the gridded fields.

Gridded Lapse Rate, 900-700 mb, 1205 UTC on 6 February 2020 (Click to enlarge)


MIRS Ice Concentration Products over the Great Lakes

January 20th, 2020 |

MIRS Lake Ice Concentration (as a percentage) from NOAA-20 ATMS at 0735 UTC on 19 January 2020 (Click to enlarge)

CIMSS is now providing via LDM MIRS Lake Ice Products over the Great Lakes. These data are created using the Community Satellite Processing Package (CSPP) Software and NOAA-20/Suomi-NPP ATMS data downlinked at the Direct Broadcast Antennas in Madison WI. Imagery is shown above from 0735 UTC on 19 January 2020; the image below is from 0717 UTC on 20 January 2020, from NOAA-20, about 24 hours later, and then from 0808 UTC on 20 January 2020, from Suomi NPP (although it is labeled as NOAA-20). A great benefit of these microwave products is that they are not affected by persistent cloud cover that is common over the Great Lakes in winter.

MIRS Lake Ice Concentration (as a percentage) from NOAA-20 ATMS at 0717 UTC on 20 January 2020 (Click to enlarge)

MIRS Lake Ice Concentration (as a percentage) from NOAA-20 ATMS at 0806 UTC on 20 January 2020 (Click to enlarge)

Ice concentration estimates from microwave are very strongly influenced by view angle. Make certain in your comparisons (if you are trying to ascertain changes in lake ice coverage during Lake-Effect Snow events, for example) that you understand this! If the footprint sizes are similar, a comparison to different passes is valid; if the footprint sizes differ, the effects of view angle must be considered. Orbital paths can be viewed here (NOAA-20 it passed right over Lake Erie at 0722 UTC on 20 January; Suomi-NPP passed over Duluth at 0812 UTC on 20 January). In the two examples above, note how ice cover estimates differ over Lake Ontario. In the later example, from ATMS on Suomi-NPP, Lake Ontario is far closer to the limb; the ATMS footprint is much larger and the estimate of lake ice concentration is affected. This toggle compares the VIIRS Day Night band image to the ATMS observations; Lake Ontario is close to the limb for NPP’s pass over western Lake Superior at this time.

For instructions on how to access these data, please contact the blogpost author. Many thanks to Kathy Strabala and Lee Cronce, CIMSS, for their work in making these data available. Click here for short video explaining MIRS Ice Concentration).

Added: A consequence of the relatively poor resolution of ATMS (compared to, say, AMSR-2 on GCOM) is that a footprint in the Great Lakes will often not be over only water or over only land. A mixed surface (land and water within the ATMS footprint) means that the ice concentration algorithm will struggle to interpret the signal and reach the right solution. Best resolution from ATMS occurs near the sub-satellite point (from 15-50 km, depending on the frequency), and that’s where this product give the best information. (Thanks to Chris Grassotti, NOAA/CISESS for this information)