1 / 35

Convection & Wind Shear Hazards User Needs: An Air Transportation, Northwest Airlines & Human in the Loop Perspe

Convection & Wind Shear Hazards User Needs: An Air Transportation, Northwest Airlines & Human in the Loop Perspective. WMO Workshop on Nowcast & Added Value Services for ATC and TAFs Toulouse, France 9-10 September 2005. Tom Fahey, Mgr. Meteorology Northwest Airlines.

chung
Télécharger la présentation

Convection & Wind Shear Hazards User Needs: An Air Transportation, Northwest Airlines & Human in the Loop Perspe

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Convection & Wind Shear Hazards User Needs:An Air Transportation, Northwest Airlines & Human in the Loop Perspective WMO Workshop on Nowcast & Added Value Services for ATC and TAFs Toulouse, France 9-10 September 2005 Tom Fahey, Mgr. Meteorology Northwest Airlines

  2. Presentation Scope___________________________ • Industry: Air Transportation • Geographic: United States • Users: Air Traffic Managers • Air Traffic Organizations • Airline Operation Centers (AOC’s) • Information: Weather Hazards

  3. Topics

  4. Convection___________________________ • Collaborative Convective Forecast Product (CCFP) • History • Began in 1998 as a ZMP CWSU, NWS & NWA Demo • Description of the Current CCFP Product • Format • Minimum CCFP criteria • 22 June 2005 CCFP Case Study • Future Opportunities / Recommendations

  5. CCFP - Mock Up Example(Collaborative Convective Forecast Product) Actual Real-Time Forecasts: website http://aviationweather.gov/products/ccfp/

  6. CCFP Minimum Threshold CCFP Convection Area is Defined as • Polygon of at Least 3000 sq. miles that contains: Coverage • Composite reflectivity of at least 40dbZ is expected to cover at least 25% of the forecast area, and • Echo top of 25,000 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL), or greater, are expected to cover at least 25% of the forecast area, and Confidence • A confidence of at least 25% that the above 2 minimum criteria will be met.

  7. CCFP - Coverage & Confidence SOLID Sparce Fill = Coverage Color = Confidence

  8. CCFP 22 June 2005 Subjective & Quantitative Verification Tom Fahey, Mgr. Meteorology, Northwest Airlines & Jennifer Mahoney, Chief, Forecast Verification Branch, FSL, NOAA Research Prepared for Meeting: S2K+5 Location: Washington DC Date: 13 July 2005

  9. 22 June 2005 - Case Study Motivation & Questions • Air Traffic Mgrs & Air Space Users:22nd CCFP did not meet Needs. • Area of Concern: NE US (ZBW-ZNY-ZDC ARTCC’s) • Time Period of Concern: 15Z - 21Z • Would the CCFP Producer Come to the Same Conclusion? • To Answer ? : Produce a Subjective, User Perspective, Verification • Then: Compare with Current Quantified CCFP Verification Method in Use. • Are AT Mgrs & Airspace User Needs Understood by CCFP producers? • Are the User Specifications Accurately describing the needs? • CCFP not required until Convection covers 3000 sq. miles. • Is This The right threshold?

  10. Northeast Corridor Domain

  11. Summary - 22 June 2005Subjective Verification-Shape Matching • 2 Areas Fcsted in ZBW-ZNY-ZDC Airspace • North Area (Southwest ZBW - ZNY - North ZDC) • Convective Activity developed in North Area by 17Z • No CCFP issued for this area at 15Z nor at 17Z Issue Time • Did Convection Cover > 3000sq mi @ 17Z? @19Z? • North Area 1st identified by CCFP @ 19Z Issue time • 2hr Fcst(valid 21z): • CCFP Convection Location Inaccurate (CCFP too Far North) • North Area accurate @21Z Issue Time-2hr Fcst (valid 23z) • South Area (ZDC [VA & NC Coastal area] ) • South Area 1st identified @ 15Z Issue time • South Area inaccurate @ 15, 17, 19 & 21Z Issue times

  12. North Area Convection @17Z > or < 3000 sq.mi.?Green = 4km squares of Level 3 & Higher Wx Radar

  13. North AreaConvection @ 17Z > or < 3000 sq.mi.? Green=40nm diameter circles w/ Solid, Bkn or Sct coverage North Area

  14. North Area w/ No CCFP Convection @19Z > or < 3000 sq.mi.?Green = 4km squares of Level 3 & Higher Wx Radar North Area South Area

  15. North Area w/ No CCFP Convection @19Z > or < 3000 sq.mi.?Green=40nm diameter circles w/ Solid, Bkn or Sct coverage

  16. North Area Convection @ 21ZCCFP too far NorthGreen = 4km squares of Level 3 & Higher Wx Radar

  17. North Area Convection @ 21Z CCFP too far NorthGreen=40nm diameter circles w/ Solid, Bkn or Sct coverage

  18. North Area Convection @ 23ZAccurate CCFPGreen = 4km squares of Level 3 & Higher Wx Radar

  19. North Area Convection @ 23ZAccurate CCFPGreen=40nm diameter circles w/ Solid, Bkn or Sct coverage

  20. Grid-based approach Binary comparison Compare forecasts with observations Overlay forecasts and observations Test inclusion in forecast Methods consider the entire domain and sub-domains Compute coverage separately Quantitative Verification Approach YN NY YY NN

  21. Quantitative Verification • 15Z Issue Time: Coverage < 3000 Sq. Miles 1,976 Square Miles

  22. Quantitative Verification • 15Z Issue Time: Coverage > 3000 Sq. Miles 19,139 Square Miles

  23. Conclusions & Recommendations_____________________________ • Opportunity for Future User Need Definitions • Yes: Threshold of 3000 sq. miles needs User Input • 3000 sq miles of what? • Level 3 or higher Reflectivity? - 4km squares or • Traffic Impacted Areas? - 40nm diameter circles • Is 3000 sq. miles the correct threshold? • In the Aerodrome/ Airport Terminal Environment? • In the En Route Environment? • • Specific Opportunities • Further Define En Route Threshold • Develop a Terminal Environment Product

  24. Conclusions & Recommendations_____________________________ • Are There Future Verification Opportunities? • Yes: Both VALUE & ACCURACY Value Measurements of CCFP Value for Decisions by Airspace Users Accuracy Measurements of CCFP Accuracy for Producers (Meteorologists) • •Specific Opportunities • Importance of Coverage Definition • Maximum Tops Verification • Value of the CCFP for Users

  25. Wind Shear __________________________ • The Phenomenon - Meteorological Causes • Measurement Capabilities • Distribution • Terminology • Verification • NWA Perspective

  26. Wind Shear - The Phenomenon • Sources/Causes of Low Altitude Wind Shear • Convection Induced • Terrain Induced • Abrupt Temperature Change • Fronts • Inversions • Land/Sea Breeze • Gusty Winds • Convection Induced & Terrain Induced are strongest & most transitory = Most Insidious Wind Shears

  27. Wind ShearCurrent Observation Capability • Current: Human-in-the-Loop • Pilot Reports to ATC after Encountered (PIREP) • Current: Automated • U. S. Ground Based Detection • 43 Airports: Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR) • 34 of 43 Upgrading to Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS) • 40 Airports: Low Level Windshear Advisory System (LLWAS) • 34 Airports: Weather System Processor (WSP) • Aircraft Based • Doppler Radar (Predictive) • Detect Change in Aircraft Performance (Reactive)

  28. ITWS Display with Wind Shear Identified

  29. Same ITWS Display Close Up Image (5nm Range)

  30. Wind Shear Hazard Info - Distribution 2 Text Messages Displayed on ITWS for the Next 7 Minutes Avail. to Pilots & AOC’s Via TWIP Runway Specific Info Relayed By ATC to A/C Human-In-Loop Distribution Automated Distribution

  31. Wind Shear - Terminology • Aircraft Performance Definition • Air Speed Loss • Air Speed Gain • .Observed Flow by Ground Radar=Term Used Divergence = LOSS Convergence = GAIN • Hazard Timeliness Wording US ATC / ICAO Automated, Observed last 1 min: Alert / Alert ? Automated or Pirep last 20 min: Advisory / Warning ? • Hazard Intensity Wording Microburst = Divergence & 30kts or More LOSS Windshear = Divergence & less than 30kts OR any Convergence

  32. Wind ShearDetection Verification • Estimated Detection Reliability Values • ITWS, WSP, TDWR, LLWAS • Wind Shear Accuracy Values • No Storms Within 15 Nautical Miles • Opportunity: Real Time Values

  33. Final Conclusions &Future Opportunities • Convection • Air Space User Needs • Opportunity: Additional Definition of Forecasted Hazard • Geography • CCFP is a Beneficial En Route Phase of Flight Product • Cruise Altitude product (FL250 & Above) • Future Opportunity: Climb & Descent Phase Product • Departure & Arrival Product (Below FL250, vcnty airport) • Broader Coverage Than TAF: Approx. 100nm aerodrome radius • Verification • Opportunities • Additional Focus: Measurements of Meteorological Accuracy • New Effort: Measurement of CCFP Value to Air Space Users

  34. Final Conclusions &Future Opportunities • Wind Shear • Hazard Information Detection & Dissemination • Both Ground & A/C Based Detection Needed • Opportunity: Automated Distribution to Pilots & AOC’s • Terminology • Education Opportunity: LOSS & GAIN • Clarification Opportunity: Hazard Timeliness Wording ALERT & ADVISORY vs. ALERT & WARNING • Verification • Opportunities • Real Time Estimation of Measurement Accuracy for Users • Focus of Wind Shear Conditions with Little or No Convection

  35. Questions ?

More Related