5-minute CONUS Sector GOES-16 (GOES-East) “Red” Visible (0.64 µm) images (above) included an overlay of the Fire Mask derived product (a component of the GOES Fire Detection and Characterization Algorithm FDCA) — which showed the smoke plumes and thermal signatures associated with prescribed burns in the Florida Panhandle on 22 April 2024.

Once the smoke plumes extended about 20-30 miles offshore, their signature became apparent in the GOES-16 Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) derived product (below) — AOD values exceeded 1.0 (darker red pixels) within the easternmost smoke plume.

GOES-16 True Color RGB images from the CSPP GeoSphere site (below) provided a clearer view of the 2 dominant smoke plumes (along with a few other less-pronounced smoke plumes from smaller fires).

View only this post Read Less

There are several satellites that routinely image the Sun, to support Space Weather. Due to the recent total solar eclipse, there has been much interest in the Sun.

SUVI

The GOES-R series also has a number of space weather instruments, including the SUVI (Solar UV Imager).

The above images are via the UW/SSEC ingest of NOAA’s GOES-16 SUVI data via the GOES Re-Broadcast (GRB).

SDO

There are many (incorrectly) reporting that a #SolarFlare was visible during the #TotalSolarEclipse. This is sadly untrue, and the bright feature seen by millions was actually a prominence (shown below)! These are longer-lived plasma structures, and not explosive like flares. pic.twitter.com/jtiqB8CuvF

— Dr. Ryan French (@RyanJFrench) April 9, 2024

Images from NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO).

A similar loop, including RGB composites. “Courtesy of NASA/SDO and the AIA, EVE, and HMI science teams.” More SDO images.

LASCO

The Large Angle and Spectrometric COronagraph (LASCO) is on instrument on the joint NASA/ESA SOHO (Solar and Heliospheric Observatory) spacecraft.

“Courtesy of SOHO/LASCO consortium. SOHO is a project of international cooperation between ESA and NASA.” This image was obtained here.

GOES-U will fly a compact coronagraph.

H/T

Thanks to many for this post, including Rick Kohrs (UW/SSEC) and Dr. Ryan French. T. Schmit works for NOAA/NESDIS/STAR and is stationed in Madison, WI.

View only this post Read Less

NOAA-20 overflew the Great Lakes early on 22 April 2024 (Earth Day) and the lack of cloud cover (except over northeastern Lake Superior) allowed a determination of Lake Surface Temperatures over most of the Great Lakes. As is usually the case, Lake Erie is the warmest lake, with temperatures near 50^oF over the western part of the lake (values are closer to 41-42^oF just north of Erie PA). How might Erie’s temperatures change in the near future? That’s estimated at this link from GLERL. Temperatures over Erie are warmer than normal — but not so warm as during April of 2012 — as shown here; values for other Great Lakes are here. Temperatures are also near 50^oF are in Saginaw Bay, and along the south shore of Lake Michigan. Most of northern Lake Michigan, and all of Lake Huron, have temperatures near 40^oF, and Lake Superior shows temperatures in the mid-30s.

---

AWIPS-ready JPSS Tiles are created from data downloaded at the Direct Broadcast antenna at CIMSS (processed by CSPP software) and are available from an LDM feed at CIMSS. Data are also available as imagery at this ftp site, and here.

View only this post Read Less

The Storm Prediction Center storm reports for 18 April, below, show severe weather clustered over Missouri and Illinois within the 2000 UTC Enhanced Risk polygon for that day. SPC’s Mesoscale Discussions Numbers 486 — at 2148 UTC — and 488 — at 2312 UTC — discussed these storms. How did the Fusion modeling system, i.e., a modeling system that includes assimilated data that has been modified by the inclusion of thermodynamic observations from Polar-Orbiting satellites, perform on this day?

PHS model output at the website includes 4-km WRF output modified by Polar Hyperspectral Sounding input during a 3-h assimilation cycle and 3-km HRRR data that does not include any direct influence from moisture information from the Polar Hyperspectral Soundings. Consider the Surface Analysis toggle below; the forecast office in St Louis is highlighted — that CWA mapping is from here. There are several differences between these two model simulations. There are stronger northerly surface winds to the west of the convection. The character of the convection is also different: in the WRF simulation with PHS thermodynamics, convection shows up as discrete supercellular-like features vs. the less intense convection spread over a region in the HRRR model without PHS information.

Differences, especially wind differences, at 700 h-Pa are obvious in the slider shown below. There are much stronger 700-hPa winds within the area of convection in the simulation that benefits from the extra thermodynamic information delivered by Polar Hyperspectral Soundings (PHS model data with WRF, in contrast to HRRR without).

The stronger 700-mb winds are reflected the low-level Bulk Wind Shear, the low-level Helicity and the Significant Hail parameter as shown in individual toggles below. All tell the same story: inclusion of Polar Hyperspectral Sounding data into the model is leading to a simulation that more accurately includes the development of supercellular storms that can drop hail or tornadoes, and the 5-h forecast shows this development close to regions where severe weather was observed.

---

PHS model data are being demonstrated this year at the Hazardous Weather Testbed held in May/June at SPC.

View only this post Read Less