![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jim Burns" wrote in message ... Sami, you've hit upon the answer to your question, and one thing to keep in mind is that radar don't know squat about whether the rain is from a thunderstorm or not, all it sees is the "reflection" of the precip, the higher the number, the higher the bounce back. Granted, a thunderstorm that is full of rain and hail will definately produce a higher return. Additional information about the current conditions vs. forecast conditions combined with front locations, movement, direction, sigmets, and airmets should provide you with a more complete picture of what your Data Link is showing you. Over the past couple weeks, we've had two totally different low pressure systems move through Wisconsin. The first contained a leading edge of thunderstorms, high winds and heavy rain. The last contained high winds, heavy rain, but no thunderstorms. The echoes for both storms were level 2's and 3's. The difference between the two storms was the amount of lifting action available. The first storm occurred during a period of relatively hot and unstable conditions. The second occurred during cool and more stable conditions, it was much less violent but the radar returns were the same. Jim Burns Yes, the real issue is that it takes vertical motion to get the droplets to coalesce together to procduce larger drops with higher reflectivity. If you have little moisture, it takes more vertical motion to get the same radar echo, hence the rule of thumb that the storm intensity for a given reflectivity goes up with decreasing availible moisture. Radar is about probablilities-a particular echo intensity has a particular probablility of producing a given level of turbulence, hail ect. Mike MU-2 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IGC-approval levels for some types of Flight Recorders | Ian Strachan | Soaring | 42 | March 19th 05 05:42 PM |
Flight Levels?? | Chuck Dreier | Instrument Flight Rules | 6 | February 14th 05 04:34 PM |
Flight planning at the lower flight levels | Peter R. | Piloting | 2 | March 16th 04 02:39 AM |
AmeriFlight Crash | C J Campbell | Piloting | 5 | December 1st 03 02:13 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |