Wmi Alhap Final Report 2005

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report
Page: 2
ALBERTA HAIL SUPPRESSION PROJECT FINAL REPORT 2005

Terry W. Krauss
krausst@telusplanet.net
Editor
A Program for Seeding Convective Clouds with Glaciogenic Nuclei to Mitigate Urban Hail Damage in the Province of Alberta, Canada
By Weather Modification Inc. 3802 - 20th Street North Fargo, North Dakota U.S.A. 58102 www.weathermod.com For Alberta Severe Weather Management Society Calgary, Alberta Canada October 2005
Weather Modification Inc.
October 2005
Page: 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report summarizes the activities and data collected during the 2005 field operations of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project. This was the tenth year of operations by Weather Modification Inc. (WMI) of Fargo, North Dakota under contract with the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society of Calgary, Alberta. The program continues to be funded entirely by private insurance companies in Alberta with the sole intent to mitigate the damage to urban property caused by hail. This cloud-seeding project started a second five-year term in 2001 because the insurance losses due to hail were approximately 50% less than expected for the first five-year project 1996-2000. The project design has remained the same throughout the period. The project area covers the region from High River in the south to Lacombe in the north, with priority given to the two largest cities of Calgary and Red Deer. The program was operational from June 1st to September 15th, 2005. Hail fell within the project area on 31 days. Larger than golf ball size hail fell early on the morning of July 16th near Vulcan, and on the afternoon of July 20th near Beiseker. Golf ball size hail was reported on two days (July 28th near Bergen, and July 29th near Spruce View). Walnut size hail was reported on one day (July 19th) in south Calgary producing some damage over a small area. The cities and towns within the project area were almost completely free of damaging hail, and the preliminary estimates of property insurance claims for the project area this summer are once again much lower than the previous 10-year non-seeded average. The most damaging storm of the year in terms of property damage occurred in Medicine Hat on June 17th when golf ball size hail caused extensive damage. Province wide, 2005 was an above-average year for the number of hail days but below average for the number of severe hail days. For the entire Province of Alberta, the Alberta Agriculture Financial Services Corporation reported hail damage to crops on 71 days (3 days in May, 21 days in June, 23 days in July, 16 days in August, and 8 days in September). Golf ball size hail was reported on 5 days (June 17th and 21st, July 16th and 20th, and September 3rd) this summer in Alberta. Preliminary data from crop insurance claims indicates that crop damage was approximately 48% below average this year. During this season, there were 80 aircraft flights totaling 157.9 hrs on 36 operational days. There were two days with only test flights. A total of 70 storms were seeded during 60 seeding flights (131 hrs) on 27 days on which seeding took place. There were 14 patrol flights (21.9 hrs) and 6 test flights (5 hrs). The amount of silver-iodide nucleating agent dispensed during the 2005 field season totaled 159.1 kg: consisting of 3770 ejectable (cloud-top) flares (75.4 kg seeding agent), 515 end-burning (cloud-base) flares (77.25 kg seeding agent), and 94.2 gallons of AgI-acetone solution (6.46 kg seeding agent). The notable weather story this summer for our area was the heavy rainfall, flood conditions, and cooler conditions across southern Alberta. The Pacific Ocean sea surface temperature anomalies were slightly positive and can be classified as weak El Nino or neutral. For some unexplained reason, numerous cut-off, cold upper Low pressure systems formed regularly in the Gulf of Alaska and then slowly tracked across BC and Alberta, bringing heavy rainfall events to southern Alberta. Four such systems occurred during June alone, saturating the soil and causing flooding in High River, Okotoks, Calgary, Sundre, and Red Deer. There were frequent rainfall events at Calgary and Red Deer throughout the summer and the accumulated rainfall was greater than the normal value throughout the summer in Calgary (131.7 mm above average), and most of the summer in Red Deer (52.4 mm above average). Calgary set a new record for the most rain in a single month. The average June rainfall is 79 mm and the previous record rainfall in June was 224 mm. During June 2005, Calgary received 246 mm; the previous record for rainfall in one month (July year unknown) was 245 mm. For the prairies, the summer (June 1 to August 31) ranked as the second wettest (45% above average) and the 13th coolest (-0.5 C cooler than average) when compared with the 58-year period 1948 to 2005. The procedures used in 2005 remained the same as for the previous nine years. Three specially equipped cloud seeding aircraft were dedicated to the project. One Piper Cheyenne II was based in Calgary and a second Cheyenne II was based in Red Deer. A C340 was also based in Calgary. The Calgary office and aircraft were located at the ESSO Avitat Flight Center at the Calgary International Airport. A WMI Red Deer office was set up in the AvTech Flight Center that houses Hillman Air at the
Weather Modification Inc. October 2005
Page: 4
Red Deer Regional Airport. The operations center and ground weather radar was housed at the OldDidsbury Airport. The aircraft and crews provided 24-hr service, seven days a week throughout the period. Nine pilots and four meteorologists were assigned to the project this year, allowing everyone to follow a work schedule and receive scheduled time-off during the summer. There were no changes to the staff during the summer. Overall, the personnel and equipment performed exceptionally well and there were no interruptions or missed opportunities in the service. The TITAN radar images were sent to the WMI web server at 5-min intervals, although there were often missing images in the web archive which were blamed on computer problems and interruptions in the microwave internet connection at the radar. A more reliable radar file transfer routine will be investigated for the future. The radar performed very well and there was only one interruption between the evening of August 30 and the morning of September 2 when the high voltage power supply failed and its replacement had to be shipped from Fargo. Fortunately, no thunderstorms occurred during this period and there was no impact on our operations. High speed Internet was once again installed for the pilots in Calgary and Red Deer so that they could closely monitor the storm evolution and motion. This gave the pilots better knowledge of the storm situation they were going to encounter when they were launched. Several public relations activities occurred this year. On June 16th, Gerald Pilger, Editor for Country Guide magazine interviewed Jim Renick and Terry Krauss for an article that appeared in the magazine later in the summer. On June 19th a film crew from CBC for the Nature of Things visited the radar to record some film to support a story on the radiosonde releases conducted during the previous two summers in support of GPS water vapor research conducted by the University of Calgary. On July 22nd CKFM radio from Olds interviewed Terry Krauss. On July 29th the Olds Gazette interviewed Terry Krauss. On July 30th the Red Deer Advocate ran a front-page story about the hail suppression project which was very favorable. All of the publicity was positive this year. Agricultural crop damage statistics are available back to 1938. The full historical record was analyzed to see if there were statistical differences between 1938 to 1995, compared with the WMI seeding period from 1996 to 2005. Eight of the last ten years have loss-to-risk values below the historical trend line. The 2005 hail season had the third lowest loss-to-risk ratio in the last 28 years. There is a positive association between the WMI cloud seeding period and a reduction in the Provincial hail damage. The reduction in the 1996-2005 average compared with the previous ten years (1986-1995) is 19.6%. Assuming annual crop losses of $100 million due to the historical trend of losses, the reduction of hail damage corresponds to an estimated accumulated benefit of $196 million to agriculture in the last ten years. In Alberta, property and casualty insurance companies paid out more than $1 Billion over the period 1987 to 1995, averaging $113.2 Million per year. For the 7-year period 1996 to 2002, insurance companies paid approximately $452.6 Million, for an annual average of $64.7 Million, 43% less than the previous 9-year average. This represents an average annual savings of $48.5 Million, totaling $485 Million over 10 years. These averages will likely change slightly due to the severe hailstorm and flooding that struck Edmonton in 2004 (estimated damage $170 Million) and the severe storm that struck Medicine Hat on June 17th, 2005. The total estimated savings would likely be closer to $400 Million after all the data is included up to 2005. These data do not represent statistical proof that the seeding works, however, there is an association between the cloud seeding and a reduction in property damage due to severe storms in Alberta. All of the projects radar data, meteorological data, and reports have been recorded onto CD-ROM for the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society. These data include the daily reports, radar maps, aircraft flight tracks, as well as meteorological charts for each day. These data can be made available for outside research purposes through a special request to the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society.
October 2005
Page: 5
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
WMI wishes to acknowledge the kind support of Robin Seacombe (President), Jim Renick (Project Director), Catherine Janssen (Chief Financial Officer), and the entire Board of Directors of the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society (ASWMS). The continued understanding, support, and cooperation of the ASWMS are greatly appreciated. A number of agencies and people deserve recognition and thanks. The cooperation of Mark McCrae and John Exley of the Air Traffic Control (ATC) Nav-Canada facilities at Calgary and Edmonton is gratefully acknowledged. The excellent cooperation by the ATC once again, played a very important role in allowing the project pilots to treat the threatening storms in an efficient and timely manner as required, often directly over the city of Calgary. Dr. Sid Selirio, Senior Manager with the Agriculture Financial Services Corp. in Lacombe is thanked for providing the crop insurance information. Once again, special thanks also goes to Bob Jackson for sharing his office and hangar at the Olds-Didsbury airport, used for the radar and communications control center. The cooperation of all these people helped make the project a success and much more enjoyable. WMI wishes to acknowledge the contributions of the staff who served the project during the summer of 2005: meteorologists (Jason Goehring, Bill Shaw, Dr. Andre Sinkevich), electronics technicians (Barry and Jeff Robinson), pilots in command (Ben Hiebert, Porter Janovsky, Gavin Lange, Mac McQuarrie, and Rex Watson); the co-pilots (Mark Friel, Craig Lee, Joel Zimmer, and Trevor Edwards), and the aircraft maintenance engineers (Gary Hillman and Dale Campbell). The staff performed exceptionally well as a team. The support of Patrick and James Sweeney, Randy Jenson, Hans Ahlness, Bruce Boe, Dennis Afseth, Adam Lund, Cindy Dobbs, Deanne Dostal, Erin Fischer, and Vance Emerson in the Fargo head office is also gratefully acknowledged. As always, the author wishes to thank Jim Renick for his continued dedication, cooperation, support, and guidance during the field operations as well as his contributions to this final report.
October 2005
Page: 6
Figure 1: Robin Seacombe (President ASWMS) and Jim Renick (Project Director).
Figure 2: Catherine Jenssen (CFO ASWMS) and Jim Sweeney (WMI Vice President).
October 2005
Page: 7
Figure 3: Bruce Boe (WMI Director of Meteorology) and Dr. Terry Krauss (WMI VP Meteorology and Project Manager).
Figure 4: Meteorologists Bill Shaw and Dr. Andre Sinkevich.
October 2005
Page: 8
Figure 5: Jason Goehring (Meteorologist) and Jeff Robinson (Electronics Tech).
Figure 6: Gavin Lange (Chief Pilot) Gary Hillman (Aircraft Engineer).
October 2005
Page: 9
Figure 7: Pilots: Mac McQuarrie and Porter Janovsky.
Figure 8: Pilots: Rex Watson and Ben Hiebert.
October 2005
Page: 10
Figure 9: Pilots: Joel Zimmer and Craig Lee.
Figure 10: Pilots: Mark Friel and Trevor Edwards.
October 2005
Page: 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................................................3 LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................................................13 LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................15 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................16 THE 2005 FIELD PROGRAM .....................................................................................................................17 PRIORITIES................................................................................................................................................19 CONCEPTUAL HAIL MODEL ....................................................................................................................20 HAIL SUPPRESSION HYPOTHESIS ...............................................................................................................20 PRECIPITATION EFFICIENCY .......................................................................................................................22 CLARIFICATION OF CLOUD SEEDING GUIDELINES ............................................................................23 ONSET OF SEEDING ...................................................................................................................................23 IDENTIFICATION OF HAIL PRODUCING STORMS ............................................................................................23 CLOUD SEEDING METHODOLOGY ...............................................................................................................24 NIGHT TIME SEEDING ................................................................................................................................25 STOPPING SEEDING ...................................................................................................................................25 SEEDING RATES ........................................................................................................................................25 SEEDING MATERIALS .................................................................................................................................26 FLARE EFFECTIVENESS TESTS ...................................................................................................................27 Summary of CSU Tests ......................................................................................................................29 PROGRAM ELEMENTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE..................................................................................30 GROUND SCHOOL ....................................................................................................................................31 PUBLIC RELATIONS .................................................................................................................................31 FLIGHT OPERATIONS...............................................................................................................................31 AIR-TRAFFIC CONTROL ..............................................................................................................................31 CLOUD SEEDING AIRCRAFT ........................................................................................................................32 Piper Cheyenne II ...............................................................................................................................32 C340A Aircraft.....................................................................................................................................34 Meteorological Aircraft Instrumentation ..............................................................................................34 RADAR CONTROL AND COMMUNICATIONS CENTER.........................................................................35 RADAR........................................................................................................................................................37 RADAR CALIBRATION CHECKS ....................................................................................................................38 AIRCRAFT TRACKING GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) ..........................................................40 SUMMARY OF SEEDING OPERATIONS..................................................................................................41 AIRCRAFT FLIGHTS AND AMOUNT OF SEEDING ............................................................................................41 COMPARISON OF 2005 WITH PREVIOUS YEARS ...........................................................................................43 STORM TRACK MAPS ..............................................................................................................................46 WEATHER FORECASTING .......................................................................................................................47 CONVECTIVE DAY CATEGORY (CDC) .........................................................................................................48 COORDINATED UNIVERSAL TIME .................................................................................................................49
Page: 12
DAILY BRIEFINGS .......................................................................................................................................49 METEOROLOGICAL STATISTICS ...................................................................................................................49 FORECASTING PERFORMANCE ...................................................................................................................51 THE HAILCAST MODEL ...............................................................................................................................53 OBLAKO-2 RUSSIAN CLOUD MODEL (BY DR. ANDRE SINKEVICH) .................................................................54 Model Input and Evaluation Data .......................................................................................................55 Model Output Data..............................................................................................................................55 Assessment of Cloud Top Height Forecasts ......................................................................................57 Assessment of Maximum Temperature Forecasts.............................................................................58 Assessment of Dew Point Temperature Forecasts ............................................................................60 Assessment of Thunderstorm Forecasts by Oblako-2 .......................................................................61 Assessment of Hail forecasts by Oblako-2.........................................................................................61 JULY 19TH, 2005: THE CALGARY STORM...............................................................................................62 METEOROLOGICAL SITUATION ....................................................................................................................62 SEEDING OPERATIONS ...............................................................................................................................67 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE MEDICINE HAT SEVERE HAILSTORM OF JUNE 17, 2005 AND THE FLOODING IN SUNDRE ON JUNE 18, 2005 ...........................................................................69 HURRICANE KATRINA..............................................................................................................................77 CLIMATE PERSPECTIVES ........................................................................................................................80 PRECIPITATION AT CALGARY AND RED DEER DURING THE SUMMER OF 2005 ................................................82 PRECIPITATION AND TEMPERATURE ANOMALIES IN CANADA DURING THE SUMMER OF 2005 ..........................84 PROVINCIAL CROP HAIL INSURANCE RESULTS .................................................................................85 INSURANCE BUREAU OF CANADA PROPERTY DAMAGE..................................................................88 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................................................89 REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDED READING ...................................................................................90 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................................94 A. ORGANIZATION CHART ..................................................................................................................95 B. DAILY WEATHER AND ACTIVITIES SUMMARY TABLE .................................................................96 C. AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS FLIGHT SUMMARY 2005.....................................................................127 D. FLIGHT SUMMARY TABLE 2005....................................................................................................129 E. FORMS ............................................................................................................................................132 F. SPECIFICATIONS FOR PIPER CHEYENNE II AIRCRAFT.............................................................136 G. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CESSNA C-340 AIRCRAFT .....................................................................137 H. GROUND SCHOOL AGENDA.........................................................................................................138 I. DAILY METEOROLOGICAL FORECAST STATISTICS 2005 ..........................................................139 J. PROJECT PERSONNEL AND TELEPHONE LIST ..........................................................................143
October 2005
Page: 13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Robin Seacombe (President ASWMS) and Jim Renick (Project Director)................................................6 Figure 2: Catherine Jenssen (CFO ASWMS) and Jim Sweeney (WMI Vice President)............................................6 Figure 3: Bruce Boe (WMI Director of Meteorology) and Dr. Terry Krauss (WMI VP Meteorology and Project Manager). ...................................................................................................................................................................7 Figure 4: Meteorologists Bill Shaw and Dr. Andre Sinkevich. .................................................................................7 Figure 5: Jason Goehring (Meteorologist) and Jeff Robinson (Electronics Tech). ..................................................8 Figure 6: Gavin Lange (Chief Pilot) Gary Hillman (Aircraft Engineer). .................................................................8 Figure 7: Pilots: Mac McQuarrie and Porter Janovsky. ..........................................................................................9 Figure 8: Pilots: Rex Watson and Ben Hiebert. ........................................................................................................9 Figure 9: Pilots: Joel Zimmer and Craig Lee. ........................................................................................................10 Figure 10: Pilots: Mark Friel and Trevor Edwards................................................................................................10 Figure 11: The average number of hail days per year, based on the 19511980 climate normals of Environment Canada (1987) and taken from Etkin and Brun (1999)............................................................................................16 Figure 12: Map of southern Alberta showing the project area and the radar location at the Olds-Didsbury airport. Figure courtesy Steve Fick, Canadian Geographic (Shermata, 1998). .....................................................18 Figure 13: The conceptual model of hailstone formation and hail mitigation processes for Alberta (adapted from WMO, 1995). This schematic figure shows the cloud seeding methodology at cloud-top and cloud-base for a mature hailstorm.......................................................................................................................................................21 Figure 14: A three-dimensional schematic figure of an Alberta hailstorm, showing the cloud seeding methodology within the new growth zone.................................................................................................................22 Figure 15: Precipitation efficiency for High Plains convective storms. Known supercell hailstorms are labeled S. Storms that produced rain only are labeled R (Browning, 1977). ...........................................................................23 Figure 16: A photo of a cloud seeding plane dropping ejectable flares during a cloud seeding penetration (photo courtesy John Ulan)..................................................................................................................................................25 Figure 17: Pilots Craig Lee and Rex Watson attaching the ejectable flare racks on the belly of a Cheyenne seeding aircraft.........................................................................................................................................................27 Figure 18: Hail Stop 2, C340 aircraft shown seeding with Acetone Solution burners and Burn-In-Place (BIP) flares. ........................................................................................................................................................................27 Figure 19: Yield of ice crystals (corrected) per gram of pyrotechnic versus cloud supercooling temperature (T<0C). Open diamond symbols are for experiments with cloud LWC (liquid water content) of 1.5 g m-3, while the filled symbols are for experiments with LWC equal to 0.5 g m-3. .......................................................................28 Figure 20: Times for 63% (diamond symbols) and 90% (square symbols) ice formation versus supercooling (T<0C) for the ICE pyrotechnic aerosols. Open and filled symbols are for cloud LWC (liquid water content) of 1.5 and 0.5 g m-3, respectively. .................................................................................................................................29 Figure 21: A schematic of the operational elements of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project. ..............................30 Figure 22: Schematic figure showing aircraft cloud seeding block altitudes required for Air Traffic Control (ATC). .......................................................................................................................................................................32 Figure 23: Piper Cheyenne II aircraft (N234K) designated as Hail-Stop 1 shown at the Calgary Airport. ..........33 Figure 24: Piper Cheyenne II aircraft (N232PS) designated as Hail-Stop 3 shown at the Red Deer Regional Airport. .....................................................................................................................................................................34 Figure 25: C340A aircraft (N123KK) designated as Hail-Stop 2 and configured to seed with droppable flares, end-burning flares, and AgI acetone burners...........................................................................................................35 Figure 26: Jason Goehring in the communications control room, showing the CIDD, TITAN, and Meteo/Airlink computers. ................................................................................................................................................................36 Figure 27: TITAN dual-display showing the various radar pictures and satellite photo available to the radar controller on 28-July-2005.......................................................................................................................................36 Figure 28: WMI-NCAR CIDD display showing radar reflectivity data, topography, aircraft tracks and the simultaneous display of satellite and synoptic data..................................................................................................37 Figure 29: WMI C-band radar at the Olds-Didsbury airport. ................................................................................38 Figure 30: Radar calibration of RDAS digital counts to equivalent radar reflectivity power (dBZ) for the WMI radar at Olds-Didsbury during the 2005 field season..............................................................................................40 Figure 31: Aircraft Global Positioning System (GPS) flight tracks, and real-time information via the AIRLINK telemetry system on July 28, 2005. ...........................................................................................................................41 Figure 32: The frequency of occurrence and cumulative distributions of aircraft take-off and landing times for all flights as a function on time during 2005. ................................................................................................................42
October 2005
Page: 14
Figure 33: The frequency of occurrence and cumulative distributions of aircraft take-off and landing times for all flights from 2000 to 2005..........................................................................................................................................42 Figure 34: Amount of AgI dispensed per operational day in 2005. ........................................................................43 Figure 35: Map of all hailstorm tracks during 2005 (courtesy of Jim Renick). ......................................................46 Figure 36: Map of all hailstorm tracks during the five-year period 2001-2005 (courtesy of Jim Renick). ............47 Figure 37: The frequency distribution of the difference of cloud top height predicted by the model and observed by the radar. .............................................................................................................................................................57 Figure 38: The frequency distribution of the difference of Observed Maximum Temperature in Calgary and the Forecast Max Temperature. .....................................................................................................................................58 Figure 39: The frequency distribution of the difference of Observed Maximum Temperature in Red Deer and the Forecast Max Temperature. .....................................................................................................................................59 Figure 40: The frequency distribution of the difference of Observed Maximum Dew Point Temperature in Calgary and the Forecast Max Dew Point Temperature. ........................................................................................60 Figure 41: The frequency distribution of the difference of Observed Maximum Dew Point Temperature in Red Deer and the Forecast Max Dew Point Temperature...............................................................................................61 Figure 42: Maximum Reflectivity map for the storms on 19-July-2005..................................................................63 Figure 43: Aircraft tracks for Hailstop 1, 2, and 3 on 19-July-2005. .....................................................................63 Figure 44: GEM model 12 hr forecast of 500 mb heights and vorticity at 6 pm 19-July-2005 (00Z, 20 July 2005). ..................................................................................................................................................................................64 Figure 45: Jet stream analysis at 7 pm 19-July-2005 (01Z, 20 July 2005).............................................................64 Figure 46: Surface analysis at 6 pm (00Z) with IR satellite image at 7:44 pm (0144Z 20 July 2005). ..................65 Figure 47: ETA 12 hr forecast atmospheric sounding for Calgary at 6 pm (00UTC) on July 19th 2005. Also shown is the trace for a lifted parcel with Temperature 19C and Dew Point 13C as reported in Calgary at 5 pm.65 Figure 48: Map of surface 3-hr pressure changes and wind vectors at 3 pm (21Z) on July 19th, 2005. ...............66 Figure 49: Map of surface streamlines and equivalent potential temperature (Theta-E) at 3 pm (21Z) on July 19th, 2005. ................................................................................................................................................................66 Figure 50: Surface moisture-flux divergence and wind gust map at 21Z (3 pm) on July 19th, 2005. ....................67 Figure 51: The radar composite image at 6:31pm (0031Z) on July 19th, 2005 showing storms along the foothills and one storm north of Cochrane moving towards Calgary. The radar echo over Calgary was reported to be a moderate rain shower at the time. The track of HS1 (green) is shown. The cell top heights (km) are indicated...68 Figure 52: The radar composite image at 6:45 pm (0045Z) on July 19th, 2005 showing two storms along the foothills north of Cochrane moving towards Calgary. HS2 was launched to seed these storms. The radar echo over Calgary had developed quickly into a hailstorm and the seeding track of HS1 (green) is shown. The cell top heights (km) are indicated. .......................................................................................................................................68 Figure 53: GEM 4-panel weather chart valid for 6 pm Friday 17-June-2005 (00UTC 18-June-2005).................69 Figure 54: GEM 4-panel weather chart valid for 6 pm Saturday, 18-June-2005 (00UTC 19-June-2005). ...........70 Figure 55: 250 mb (10.4 km altitude) chart valid for 6 pm, Friday 17-June-2005.................................................71 Figure 56: 500 mb (5.5 km altitude) chart valid for 6 pm, Friday 17-June-2005...................................................71 Figure 57: The surface streamlines and equivalent potential temperature chart at 4 pm (22 UTC), 17 June 2005. ..................................................................................................................................................................................72 Figure 58: The radar display at 2:30 pm (2030 UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar located at Schuler, Alberta....................................................................................................................................................73 Figure 59: The radar display at 3:00 pm (2100 UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar at Schuler, Alberta. .......................................................................................................................................................73 Figure 60: The radar display at 5:40 pm (2340UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar located at Schuler, Alberta. At this time there was a severe thunderstorm just east of Medicine Hat.................................74 Figure 61: The visible satellite photo at 4:15 pm (2215 UTC) on 17 June 2005....................................................75 Figure 62: Current surface weather and dew point chart at 9 pm 17 June 2005 (03 UTC 18 June). ....................76 Figure 63: Current surface weather and dew point chart at 8 am 18 June 2005 (14 UTC). ..................................76 Figure 64: The track of Hurricane Katrina between August 23rd and 30th, 2005. ................................................78 Figure 65: A IR satellite image of hurricane Katrina at the time of landfall (12 UTC, 29-Aug-2005)...................78 Figure 66: Composite IR satellite image and surface analysis at 2230Z on 28-August-2005. ...............................79 Figure 67: ETA model 24 hr forecasted 500 mb chart valid at 12Z on 29-August-2005........................................79 Figure 68: Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures and temperature anomalies for the period August 2002 to July 2005. .................................................................................................................................................................81 Figure 69: SST temperature anomalies for the 4 Nino regions of the equatorial tropical Pacific over the period 1986 to 2005. ............................................................................................................................................................82 Figure 70: Daily and accumulated rainfall for Calgary from June 1 to August 31, 2005......................................83
Page: 15
Figure 71: Daily and accumulated rainfall for Red Deer from June 1 to August 31, 2005....................................83 Figure 72: Departures from normal Precipitation during the summer of 2005 in Canada....................................84 Figure 73: Departures from normal Temperature during the summer of 2005 in Canada. ...................................85 Figure 74: Alberta Agriculture Financial Services Corp hail insurance loss-to-risk and claims statistics from 1978 to 2004. ............................................................................................................................................................86 Figure 75: Statistical summary of loss-to-risk values from 1938 to 1995...............................................................87 Figure 76: Statistical summary of loss-to-risk values from 1996 to 2005...............................................................87 Figure 77: Property damage due to natural disasters in Alberta and for the all of Canada (Insurance Bureau of Canada Facts Book, 2004). ......................................................................................................................................88
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Census figures for the towns and cities in the project area. .....................................................................19 Table 2: Yield results of ICE flares. ........................................................................................................................28 Table 3: Rate Data (LWC = 1.5 g m-3 points are average values).........................................................................29 Table 4: Radar parameter calibration values for the ALBERTA-WMI WR100. .....................................................39 Table 5: Radar transmitted power calibration values measured during the 2005 season. .....................................39 Table 6: Operational Statistics for 1996 to 2005. ...................................................................................................44 Table 7: Cloud seeding flare usage comparison by aircraft. ..................................................................................45 Table 8: Description of Convective Day Category (CDC) Index ............................................................................48 Table 9: Summary of daily atmospheric parameters used as inputs for the daily forecast the CDC during 2005. 49 Table 10: Summary of daily forecast atmospheric parameters on hail days during 2005......................................50 Table 11: Table of the Observed versus Forecast days with Hail and No-Hail for the summer of 2005................52 Table 12: Table of Forecast versus Observed CDC daily values 2005...................................................................52 Table 13: Annual Summary of Convective Day Categories (CDC). .......................................................................53 Table 14: Table of Forecast versus Observed CDC daily values using HAILSCAST during the summer of 2005.54 Table 15: Probability of detection (POD), false alarm ratio (FAR), and critical success index (CSI) performance of HAILCAST and WMI from 2002 to 2005. ............................................................................................................54 Table 16: Statistical summary of the difference between cloud top height predicted by the Obloko-2 model Htopm (km) and observed by the radar Htopr (km). ............................................................................................................58 Table 17: Statistical summary of the difference between T-measured max temperature in Calgary and Tprforecasted max temperature. ....................................................................................................................................59 Table 18: Statistical summary of the difference between T-measured max temperature in Red Deer and Tpr forecast max temperature. ........................................................................................................................................59 Table 19: Statistical summary of the difference between the measured max dew point temperature in Calgary and the forecasted max dew point temperature. ..............................................................................................................60 Table 20: Statistical summary of the difference between the measured max dew point temperature in Red Deer and the forecasted max dew point temperature. .......................................................................................................61
October 2005
Page: 16
INTRODUCTION
Hailstorms pose a serious threat to property and crops in the province of Alberta. Historically, claims for agricultural hail damage are received on an average of 50 days each year between 1 June and 10 September (Summers and Wojtiw, 1971). The most recent climatology of hail in Canada was published by Etkin and Brun (1999) in the International Journal of Climatology. The average number of hail days per year, based on the 19511980 climate normals (Environment Canada, 1987) is shown in Figure 11. The contours were hand drawn, based primarily upon about 350 weather stations. The highest frequency of hail in Canada occurs in Alberta between the North Saskatchewan River and the Bow River, immediately downwind of the Rocky Mountain foothills. This region is often referred to as hail alley.
Figure 11: The average number of hail days per year, based on the 19511980 climate normals of Environment Canada (1987) and taken from Etkin and Brun (1999).
Etkin and Brun (1999) point out that the period 19771993 was associated with substantial increases in hail-observing stations. As the 19511980 hail climatology was mostly based on pre-1977 data, it had a relatively coarse resolution in comparison. An updated Alberta hail climatology for 19771993 has since been completed. It has a greater resolution than the national climatology, and shows the
Page: 17
importance of some topographical features, such as the Rocky Mountains. The influence of local topographical features on mesoscale hail frequency is a major control. After 1982, hail frequencies in Alberta showed a significant increase. The City of Calgary is in a region that normally gets between 3 and 4 hailstorms each year. By overlaying the hail frequency map with the population density map, the region of greatest financial risk to insurance companies covers the area from Calgary to Red Deer and Rocky Mountain House. For this reason, this is the region that was selected as the target area for the hail suppression program. Insurance claims due to hailstorms in urban areas worldwide have generally escalated over the past 10 years. Denver Colorado was pounded by golf-ball to tennis-ball sized hail on July 11, 1990, and damages reached a record (for the U.S.A. at that time) $625 million. In Canada, the damages associated with the severe hailstorm that struck Calgary on September 7, 1991 exceeded $416 million (Insurance Bureau of Canada, 2004). Insured claims from the hailstorm that struck Sydney Australia on April 14, 1999 were approximately $1.5 billion, making it the most damaging event in Australian insurance history. A study by Herzog (2002) compiled and summarized the hailstorm damages in the USA for the period 1994-2000 for the Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS). Verified hail losses amounted to $2.5 Billion per year, with the actual amount possibly being 50% higher. Personal building losses totalled $11.5 Billion (66%), commercial building losses totalled $2.7B (15%), and vehicles accounted for $3.3B (19%). And recently, the most damaging hailstorm ever recorded in the USA moved from eastern Kansas to southern Illinois on 10 April 2001, depositing 2.5- to 7.5-cmdiameter hailstones along a 585-km path, over portions of the St. Louis and Kansas City urban areas collectively created $1.9 billion in damage claims from a 2-day period, becoming the ninth most costly weather catastrophe in the United States since property insurance records began in 1949 (Changnon and Burroughs, 2003). Estimates of the average annual crop loss to hail have also continued to increase with time, from $50 million annually in 1975 (Renick, 1975) to more than $150 million annually during the period 1980 1985 (Alberta Research Council, 1986). Actual insured crop losses are typically in the $80M range annually. The new Alberta Hail Suppression Project was initiated in 1996 as a result of the increased frequency of damaging hailstorms in Alberta, compounded by an increasing population inside an area of high storm frequency. It is the first project of its kind in the World to be entirely funded by private insurance companies with the sole objective of reducing the damage to property by hail. At this time, Alberta Crop Insurance and the Provincial and Federal Governments do not contribute financially to the project, although they stand to benefit from the seeding. Weather Modification Inc. (WMI) has been a leader in the field of hail suppression since the early 1960's. With extensive knowledge and experience in the cloud seeding industry, WMI is best known for its successful hail suppression operations in the northern great plains and other cloud modification services around the world, most recently and notably in Argentina. WMI was awarded the first contract to conduct the Alberta Hail Suppression Project in April 1996 by the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society. The project was made an ongoing program of the Alberta insurance industry in 2001 because of the drop in hail damage costs in Alberta, counter to the trend in the rest of the country and the World. The contract calls for the provision of all personnel and equipment for a turnkey system of cloud seeding and related services for the purpose of reducing hail damage to property in south-central (Calgary to Red Deer) Alberta. The organization chart of the project is shown in Appendix A.
THE 2005 FIELD PROGRAM

In 2005, WMI conducted the operational cloud-seeding program from June 1st to September 15th. The project is based upon the techniques, methods, and results of the long-term hail research project conducted by the Alberta Research Council from the late 1960s through 1985 (Alberta Research Council, 1986) and by WMI in North Dakota (Smith et al, 1997). The present program utilizes the latest cloud seeding technology available, incorporating several notable improvements over previous projects in the province. These improvements include:
October 2005
Page: 18
New fast-acting, high-yield mixtures for the silver-iodide flares and acetone solution. The flares are manufactured by Ice Crystal Engineering (ICE) of North Dakota. The new generation ICE pyrotechnics produce >1011 ice nuclei per gram of AgI at -4C, and produce between 1013 and 1014 ice nuclei per gram of pyrotechnic between -6C and -10C. CSU isothermal cloud chamber tests indicate that at a temperature of -6.3C, 63% of the nuclei are active in <1 min, and 90% active in 1.12 minutes. This high yield and fast acting agent is important for hail suppression since the timewindow of opportunity for successful intervention of the hail growth process is often less than 10 minutes. Use of the latest GPS tracking and advanced TITAN (Thunderstorm Identification Tracking Analysis and Nowcasting) computer software to accurately display the aircraft locations on the radar displays to improve the controlling of aircraft and facilitate the direction of seeding operations to the most critical regions of the storms. Injection of the seeding material directly into the developing cloud turrets as the most frequent seeding method. Use of experienced meteorological and aviation staff to direct the seeding aircraft as well as to accurately identify the proper regions of storms for seeding;
The target or "protected" area is shown in Figure 12 and focuses on the area from Lacombe in the north, to High River in the south, with priority given to the cities of Calgary and Red Deer. Three aircraft specially equipped to dispense silver iodide were used. Two aircraft (one Piper Cheyenne II and one C340) were based in Calgary and one Piper Cheyenne II based in Red Deer. The radar was located at the Olds-Didsbury airport. The radar coordinates are 51.71 N Latitude, 114.11 W Longitude, with a station elevation of 1024 m above sea level. The WMO station identifier is no. 71359 and the ICAO identifier is CEA3. The project area dimension is approximately 220 km (N-S) by 120 km (E-W) or 26,000 sq km.
Figure 12: Map of southern Alberta showing the project area and the radar location at the Olds-Didsbury airport. Figure courtesy Steve Fick, Canadian Geographic (Shermata, 1998).
October 2005
Page: 19
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The project has two main objectives: Conduct cloud seeding using 3 aircraft with experienced crews to suppress hail for the purpose of reducing damage to property; Operate a C-band weather radar and collect weather information by skilled professional meteorologists and engineers for purposes of storm identification, accurate storm tracking, optimal direction of aircraft to conduct cloud seeding for hail suppression purposes, and the collection of a data archive that may be used for the scientific assessment of the program's effectiveness.
Priorities
Table 1 lists the recent census figures obtained via the internet for the cities and towns within the project area. Priority is given according to population, which is related to the risk of property damage. This list was posted in the radar control room as a constant reminder to the meteorologists of the priority when allocating resources to storms on any given day. The biggest increase in population recently has occurred in Cochrane, Airdrie, Sylvan Lake, and Okotoks. Project meteorologists made special note of the fact that the combined population of Turner Valley and Black Diamond is almost as large as Blackfalds or Didsbury. Storms that do not threaten a town or city are not likely to be seeded. Also, most storms are no longer seeded after they cross Highway 2, except for storms east of Airdrie and Calgary that might threaten Strathmore.
Table 1: Census figures for the towns and cities in the project area.
Rank
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
POPULATION
Calgary Metropolitan Area Calgary Red Deer Airdrie Cochrane Okotoks Lacombe High River Strathmore Sylvan Lake Innisfail Olds Rocky Mountain House Didsbury Blackfalds Turner Valley/Black Diamond Crossfield Sundre Carstairs Penhold Bowden Irricana Eckville Caroline Cremona
1996
821,628 768,000 60,000 15,900 7,400 8,510 7,400 5,200 6,100 5,800 5,800 3,600
2001
951,395 879,277 67,707 20,382 11,798 11,664 9,384 9,345 7,621 7,884 6,954 6,607 6,208 3,932 3,042 2,389 2,267 2,254 1,729 1,038
2003+
953,000 933,495 72,691 23,680 12,074 11,664 9,946 9,345 8,640 7,493 6,958 6,607 6,208 3,932 3,812 3,474 2,288 2,267 2,254 1,729 1,174 1,043 1,019 556 415
Increase%
16% 22% 21% 49% 63% 37% 6% 26% 13% 44% 14% 14% 7% 9% 25% 20% 13% 19% 6% 17% 27% 13% 18% 9%
1,900 2,000 1,900 1,625 1,000 820 900 470 380
October 2005
Page: 20
CONCEPTUAL HAIL MODEL

The hail suppression conceptual model is based on the experience of WMI in the USA, Canada, Argentina, and Greece. It involves the use of silver-iodide reagents to seed the developing feeder clouds near the -10C level in the upshear, new growth propagation region of hailstorms. The silveriodide reagents initiate a condensation-freezing process and produce enhanced concentrations of ice crystals that compete for the available, super-cooled liquid water in a storm and help prevent the growth of large damaging hail. The seeding also initiates the precipitation process earlier in a cloud (cell) to speed up the growth of cloud hydrometeors via an ice-phase (graupel) to rain mechanism instead of continuing to grow to damaging hail.
Hail Suppression Hypothesis

The cloud seeding hypothesis is based on the cloud microphysical concept of "beneficial competition". Beneficial competition is based upon the documented deficiency of natural ice nuclei in the environment and that the injection of silver iodide (AgI) will result in the production of a significant number of "artificial" ice nuclei. The natural and artificial ice crystals "compete" for the available super-cooled liquid cloud water within the storm. Hence, the hailstones that are formed within the seeded cloud volumes will be smaller and produce less damage if they should survive the fall to the surface. If sufficient nuclei are introduced into the new growth region of the storm, then the hailstones will be small enough to melt completely before reaching the ground. Cloud seeding alters the microphysics of the treated clouds, assuming that the present precipitation process is inefficient due to a deficiency of natural ice nuclei. This deficiency of natural ice has been documented in the new growth zone of Alberta storms (Krauss, 1981). Cloud seeding does not attempt to compete directly with the energy and dynamics of the storm. Any alteration of the storm dynamics occurs as a consequence of the increased ice crystal concentration and initiation of riming and precipitation sized ice particles earlier in the clouds lifetime. The cloud seeding is based on the conceptual model of Alberta hailstorms which evolved from the experiments and studies of Chisholm (1970), Chisholm and Renick (1972), Marwitz (1972a,b,c), Barge and Bergwall (1976), Krauss and Marwitz (1984), and English (1986). Direct observational evidence from the instrumented aircraft penetrations of Colorado and Alberta storms in the 1970's and early 1980s indicates that hail embryos grow within the time evolving "main" updraft of single cell storms and within the updrafts of developing "feeder clouds" or cumulus towers that flank mature "multi-cell" and "super-cell" storms (see e.g. Foote, 1984; Krauss and Marwitz, 1984). The computation of hail growth trajectories within the context of measured storm wind fields provided a powerful new tool for integrating certain parts of hail growth theories, and illustrated a striking complexity in the hail growth process. Some of this complexity is reviewed in the paper of Foote (1985) that classifies a broad spectrum of storm types according to both dynamical and microphysical processes thought to be critical to hail production. Hail embryo sources identified by Foote (1985) include the following: Embryos from first-ice in a time-developing updraft Embryos from first-ice in the core of a long-lived updraft Embryos from flanking cumulus congestus Embryos from a merging mature cell Embryos from a mature cell positioned upwind Embryos from the edges of the main updraft Embryos created by melting and shedding Embryos from entrainment of stratiform cloud Embryos from embedded small-scale updrafts and downdrafts Recirculation of embryos that have made a first pass through the updraft core
The growth to large hail is hypothesized to occur primarily along the edges of the main storm updraft where the merging feeder clouds interact with the main storm updraft (WMO, 1995). The mature hailstorm may consist of complicated airflow patterns and particle trajectories; therefore, the cloudseeding cannot hope to affect all embryo sources but attempts to modify the primary hail formation process. In other words, the cloud seeding cannot attempt to eliminate all of the hail, but can reduce the size and amount of hail.
Page: 21
Studies of the internal structure of large hailstones in Alberta and elsewhere have shown that hailstones can have either a graupel hail embryo or a frozen drop hail embryo. The different hail embryos indicate different growth histories and trajectories and illustrate the complexity within a single hailstorm. The present seeding methodology attempts to compete with the graupel embryo process. Drop hail embryos are thought to originate from secondary sources (shedding from large existing hail stones, or via a recirculation process at the edge of the main updraft). The seeding can only reduce the hail with drop embryos if the liquid water can be reduced to limit their growth, or if the dynamics of the storm can be affected to eliminate the recirculation processes that formed the drop embryo in the first place. A schematic diagram of the conceptual storm model showing the hail origin and growth processes within a severe Alberta hailstorm is shown in Figure 13. A three-dimensional schematic figure of an Alberta hailstorm is shown in Figure 14, showing the cloud seeding methodology in the new growth zone.
Figure 13: The conceptual model of hailstone formation and hail mitigation processes for Alberta (adapted from WMO, 1995). This schematic figure shows the cloud seeding methodology at cloud-top and cloudbase for a mature hailstorm.
October 2005
Page: 22
Figure 14: A three-dimensional schematic figure of an Alberta hailstorm, showing the cloud seeding methodology within the new growth zone.
As mentioned previously, cloud seeding cannot prevent or completely eliminate the occurrence of damaging hail. We presently do not have the ability to predict with any certainty exactly the amount and size of hail that would occur if cloud seeding did not take place. Therefore, we do not have the ability to predict with certainty the net effect of the seeding. Our purpose is to seed the new growth zone of hailstorms and observe the amount and type of precipitation at the surface, as well as the radar reflectivity characteristics of the storm before, during, and after seeding. We expect that the successful application of the technology will yield a decrease of damaging hail by approximately 50% of the amount that would have occurred if seeding had not taken place. This goal is consistent with the results reported in North Dakota (Smith et al, 1997) and in Greece (Rudolph et al, 1994). The decrease in hail can only be measured as an average over time (e.g. 5 years) and over an area and then compared with the historical values for the same areas. Because of these uncertainties, the evaluation of any hail mitigation program requires a statistical analysis. Both seeded storms and unseeded storms have variability and populations of seeded and unseeded storms overlap in all measurements of their characteristics.
Precipitation Efficiency
A common question about cloud seeding concerns the effect on the rainfall. There is a general (yet false) assumption by the public and some scientists that thunderstorms operate at near 100% efficiency in producing rainfall, therefore, any modification of the hail, or causing the rainfall to start earlier, may limit the amount of precipitation that can fall later in a storms lifetime, down wind of the project area. There have been numerous studies of the fluxes of air and water vapor through convective clouds and these are summarized in Figure 15. Precipitation efficiencies can vary widely from as little as 2% for storms studied by Marwitz (1972) and Dennis et al. (1970) to near 100%. Marwitz (1972) and Foote and Fankhauser (1973) show that in the case of High Plains storms there is an inverse relation between the precipitation efficiency and the environmental wind shear in the cloud-bearing layer. The least efficient storms tend to be supercell hailstorms; the highly efficient storms tend not to produce hail. The average wind shear on hail days in Alberta is approximately 2.5 x 10-3 sec-1. This shear value corresponds to precipitation efficiency near 50%.
October 2005
Page: 23
It is logical that the production of large, damaging hail is a result of the natural inefficiency of the storm to produce rain. Therefore, the introduction of more precipitation embryos earlier in a clouds lifetime is highly advantageous to the initiation of precipitation earlier, making the cloud more efficient as a rain producer, and in the process reducing the amount and size of the hail. Increasing the rainfall from a hailstorm by 20% due to the seeding is a very achievable goal, and means that less water is lost either via the entrainment of dry environmental air through the sides and top of the cloud, or water lost to ice crystals that are exhausted out of the anvil at the top of the troposphere and which eventually sublimate back to the vapor phase at high altitudes.
Figure 15: Precipitation efficiency for High Plains convective storms. Known supercell hailstorms are labeled S. Storms that produced rain only are labeled R (Browning, 1977).
CLARIFICATION OF CLOUD SEEDING GUIDELINES

The following guidelines represent the current state of the science of hail suppression operations being applied by Weather Modification Inc.
Onset of Seeding
In order for cloud seeding to be successful, it is the goal of the program to seed (inject ice nucleating agents) the developing "new growth" cloud towers of a hail producing storm, at least 20 minutes before the damaging hail falls over a town or city within the target zone. For the Alberta project, the principle targets are the towns and cities within the project area. Since 20 min is the minimum time reasonably expected for the seeding material to nucleate, and have the seeded ice crystals grow to sufficient size to compete for the available super-cooled liquid water in order to yield positive results, a 30 min lead time is generally thought to be advisable.
Identification of Hail Producing Storms

The height of the 45 dBZ contour was a criterion tested in the Swiss hail suppression program. The Swiss research indicated that all hailstorms had 45 dBZ contours that exceeded the 5C temperature level (Waldvogel, Federer, and Grimm, 1979). There was a False Alarm Rate (FAR) of 50%, largely because some strong rainstorms also met the criterion. However, it is preferable to make an error and assume that a heavy rainstorm is going to produce hail than to mistakenly believe that a hailstorm is only going to produce heavy rain. Studies of Alberta hailstorms also indicated that 50% of all Alberta
Page: 24
hail storms had a maximum radar reflectivity greater than 45 dBZ, higher than the -5C level (Humphries, English, and Renick, 1987). The Russian criteria for hail identification stated that the height of the 45 dBZ contour had to exceed the height of the 0C isotherm by more than 2 km (Abshaev, 1999). Similarly, the criteria used by the National Hail Research Experiment in the USA 1972-1974 for a declared hail day was defined by radar maximum reflectivity greater than 45 dBZ above the -5C level (Foote and Knight, 1979). Our experience suggests that the Swiss/Alberta/Russian/USA criterion is reasonable (Makitov, 1999). The physical reasoning behind it is simply that high radar reflectivity implies that significant supercooled liquid water exists at temperatures cold enough for large hail growth. In Alberta, the TITAN cell identification program was set in 2005 to track any cell having >10 km3 of 40 dBZ reflectivity, extending above 3 km altitude (MSL). Each cell tracked by TITAN was then considered to be a potential hail threat; therefore, this represents our seeding criteria. A storm is a seeding candidate if the storm cell (as defined by TITAN) is moving towards, and is expected to reach, a town or city within the target area in less than 30 min.
Cloud Seeding Methodology

Radar meteorologists are responsible for making the "seed" decision and directing the cloud seeding missions, incorporating the visual observations of the pilots into their decisions. Patrol flights are often launched before clouds within the target area meet the radar reflectivity seeding criteria, especially over the cities of Calgary and Red Deer. These patrol flights provide a quicker response to developing cells. In general, a patrol is launched in the event of visual reports of vigorous towering cumulus clouds or when radar cell tops exceed 25 kft height over the higher terrain along the western border on days when the forecast calls for thunderstorms with large hail potential. Launches of more than one aircraft are determined by the number of storms, the lead time required for a seeder aircraft to reach the proper location and altitude, and projected overlap of coverage and on-station time for multiple aircraft missions. In general, only one aircraft can work safely at cloud top and one aircraft at cloud base for a single storm. The operation of three aircraft is used to provide uninterrupted seeding coverage at either cloud-base or cloud-top and/or to seed three storms simultaneously if required. Factors that determine cloud top or cloud base seeding are: storm structure, visibility, cloud base height, or time available for aircraft to reach seeding altitude. Cloud base seeding is conducted by flying at cloud base within the main inflow of single cell storms, or the inflow associated with the new growth zone (shelf cloud) located on the upshear side of multi-cell storms. Cloud top seeding can be conducted between -8C and -15C. The 20 g pencil flares fall approximately 1.5 km (approximately 10C) during their 35-40 s burn time. Figure 16 shows a cloud seeding plane dropping flares. The seeding aircraft penetrate the up-shear edges of single convective cells meeting the seed criteria. For multi-cell storms, or storms with feeder clouds, the seeding aircraft penetrate the tops of the developing cumulus towers on the upshear sides of convective cells, as they grow up through the -10C flight level.
October 2005
Page: 25
Figure 16: A photo of a cloud seeding plane dropping ejectable flares during a cloud seeding penetration (photo courtesy John Ulan).
Night Time Seeding

Occasionally, with embedded cells or convective complexes at night, there are no clearly defined feeder turrets visible to the flight crews or on radar. In these instances, a seeding aircraft will penetrate the storm edge at an altitude between -5C and -10C, on the upshear side (region of tight radar reflectivity gradient) and seed by igniting an end-burner flare and injecting droppable pencil flares when updrafts are encountered. If visibility is good below cloud base, nighttime seeding at base is also performed. Lightning can often help provide illumination at the cloud base.
Stopping Seeding
Strictly speaking, if the radar reflectivity criteria are met, seeding of all cells is to be continued. However, seeding is effective only within cloud updrafts and in the presence of super-cooled cloud water, i.e. the developing, and mature stages in the evolution of the classic thunderstorm conceptual model. The dissipating stages of a storm should be seeded only if the maximum reflectivity is particularly severe and there is evidence (visual cloud growth, or tight reflectivity gradients) indicating the possible presence of embedded updrafts. Storm cells being tracked by TITAN may not be seeded if there are no other indications of updraft or super-cooled liquid water, or if the storm does not threaten a town or city.
Seeding Rates
A seeding rate of one 20 g flare every 5 sec is typically used during cloud penetration. A higher rate is used (e.g. 1 flare every 2 to 3 sec) if updrafts are very strong (e.g. greater than 2000 ft/min) and the storm is particularly intense. A cloud seeding pass is repeated immediately if there are visual signs of new cloud growth or if radar reflectivity gradients remain tight (indicative of persistent updrafts). If not, a 5 to 10 min waiting period may be used, to allow for the seeding material to take effect and the storm to dissipate, or for visual signs of glaciation to appear or radar reflectivity values to decrease and gradients to weaken. This waiting period precludes the waste of seeding material and assures its optimum usage. Calculations show that the seeding rate of one flare every 5 sec will produce >1300 ice crystals
Page: 26
per litre averaged over the plume within 2.5 min. This is more than sufficient to deplete the liquid water content produced by updrafts up to 10 m/s (2000 ft/min), thereby preventing the growth of hailstones within the seeded cloud volumes (Cooper and Marwitz, 1980). For effective hail suppression, sufficient dispersion of the particles is required for the AgI plume from consecutive flares to overlap by the time the cloud particles reach hail size. The work by Grandia et al. (1979) based on turbulence measurements within Alberta feeder clouds indicated that the time for the diameter of the diffusing line of AgI to reach the integral length scale (200 m) in the inertial subrange size scales of mixing, is 140 seconds. This is insufficient time for ice particles to grow to hail size, therefore, dropping flares at 5 sec (assuming a true-airspeed of 80 m/s) intervals should provide sufficient nuclei and allow adequate dispersion to effectively deplete the super-cooled liquid water and prevent the growth of hail particles. The use of the 20 gm flares and a frequent drop rate provides better seeding coverage than using larger flares with a greater time/distance spacing between flare drops. In fact, the above calculations are conservative when one considers that the center of the ice crystal plume will have a greater concentration of ice crystals. For cloud base seeding, a seeding rate using two acetone generators or one end-burner flare is typically used, dependent on the updraft velocity at the cloud base. For an updraft >500 ft/min, generators and consecutive flares per seeding run are typically used. Cloud seeding runs are repeated until no further inflow is found. Acetone burners are used to provide continuous silver iodide seeding if extensive regions of weak updraft are found at cloud base and in the shelf cloud region. Base seeding is not conducted if downdrafts only are encountered at cloud base, since this would waste seeding material.
Seeding Materials
WMI exclusively uses silver-iodide formulation flares manufactured by Ice Crystal Engineering (ICE) of Davenport, ND. The ejectable flares contain 20 gm of seeding material and burn for approximately 37 sec and fall approximately 4000 ft. The end-burning flares (BIP) contain 150 gm of seeding material, and burn for approximately 6 minutes. Silver-iodide is dispensed using droppable/ejectable (shown in Figure 17) and/or end-burning pyrotechnics and/or acetone burners (shown in Figure 18). In 2005 the WMI acetone generators performed very well and the level of required maintenance decreased significantly. Crews still kept a close watch of igniter rods, valves, nozzles, and seals in order that the generators operated reliably. Details of the silver-iodide acetone solution recipe used in 2005 are given in the Operations Manual. Arrangements were once again made with Solution Blend Services, a Calgary chemical company to pre-mix the acetone seeding solution. All required handling, mixing, storage, and labelling requirements were satisfied.
October 2005
Page: 27
Figure 17: Pilots Craig Lee and Rex Watson attaching the ejectable flare racks on the belly of a Cheyenne seeding aircraft.
Figure 18: Hail Stop 2, C340 aircraft shown seeding with Acetone Solution burners and Burn-In-Place (BIP) flares.
Flare Effectiveness Tests

The Cloud Simulation and Aerosol Laboratory at Colorado State University has performed routine testing of the ice nucleating ability of aerosols produced from cloud seeding flares for many years (Garvey, 1975). Note: The CSU laboratory has now stopped this service and a new testing facility to conduct these standardized tests is desperately needed for the cloud seeding industry. The new ICE pyrotechnics were tested at CSU in 1999 and the results are reported in DeMott (1999). Aerosols were collected and tested at nominal temperatures of -4, -6 and -10C. At least two tests at were done at each temperature, with greater emphasis placed on warmer temperatures. Liquid water content (LWC)
Page: 28
was 1.5 g m-3 in most tests, but was altered to 0.5 g m-3 in a few other experiments. In this way, information concerning the rate-dependence on cloud droplet concentration was obtained. The primary product of the laboratory characterization is the "effectiveness plot" for the ice nucleant which gives the number of ice crystals formed per gram of nucleant as a function of cloud temperature. Yield results for the ICE flares at various sets of conditions are shown in Figure 19 and are tabulated in Table 2.
ICE Pyro July 1999
1.00E+15
1.00E+14
Yield (# g-1 pyro)
1.00E+13
1.00E+12
1.00E+11
___________ ___________
1.00E+10 0 5 10 15
Supercooling (C)
Figure 19: Yield of ice crystals (corrected) per gram of pyrotechnic versus cloud supercooling temperature -3 (T<0C). Open diamond symbols are for experiments with cloud LWC (liquid water content) of 1.5 g m , -3 while the filled symbols are for experiments with LWC equal to 0.5 g m .
Table 2: Yield results of ICE flares.
Pyro type ICE
Temp (C) -3.8 -4.0 -4.2 -4.3 -6.1 -6.3 -6.4 -10.5 -10.5 -4.2 -6.0 -10.5
LWC (g m-3) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Raw Yield (g-1 AgI) 3.72x1011 9.42x1011 1.66x1012 2.15x1012 6.01x1013 5.44x1013 6.22x1013 2.81x1014 2.34x1014 1.41x1012 7.42x1013 2.38x1014
Corr. Yield (g-1 AgI) 3.87x1011 9.63x1011 1.70x1012 2.21x1012 6.13x1013 5.56x1013 6.34x1013 2.85x1014 2.37x1014 1.45x1012 7.73x1013 2.41x1014
Raw Yield (g-1 pyro) 4.01x1010 1.02x1011 1.80x1011 2.32x1011 6.49x1012 5.87x1012 6.72x1012 3.03x1013 2.87x1013 1.53x1011 8.01x1012 2.91x1013
Corr. Yield (g-1 pyro) 4.18x1010 1.04x1011 1.84x1011 2.39x1011 6.62x1012 6.00x1012 6.85x1012 3.07x1013 2.91x1013 1.57x1011 8.34x1012 2.96x1013
Yield (per pyro) 8.36x1011 2.08x1012 3.67x1012 4.77x1012 1.32x1014 1.20x1014 1.37x1014 6.15x1014 5.81x1014 3.14x1012 1.67x1014 5.92x1014
Tests were also performed using the method of DeMott et al., (1983) to determine the characteristic times for effective ice nuclei depletion, and these are summarized in Figure 20 and Table 3.
October 2005
Page: 29
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 2
y = 4.723x 2 R = 0.8552 63%
-1.1862
_________ _________ y = 57.483x 2 R = 0.8298 90%

-1.9653
Time (minutes)
Supercooling (C)
10
12
Figure 20: Times for 63% (diamond symbols) and 90% (square symbols) ice formation versus supercooling (T<0C) for the ICE pyrotechnic aerosols. Open and filled symbols are for cloud LWC (liquid water content) -3 of 1.5 and 0.5 g m , respectively.
Table 3: Rate Data (LWC = 1.5 g m-3 points are average values)
Pyro type WMI
Temp (C) -4.0 -4.2 -6.3 -6.0 -10.5 -10.5
LWC (g m-3) 1.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.5 0.5
k (min-1) 1.093 0.713 1.775 0.724 3.200 2.488
kdil (min-1) 0.023 0.019 0.038 0.028 0.045 0.040
kact (min-1) 0.935 0.694 1.737 0.696 3.155 2.448
T1/e (min) 0.94 1.44 0.48 1.43 0.32 0.41
t90% (min) 4.32 5.71 1.12 5.21 0.73 0.94
Yield Corr. 1.023 1.028 1.020 1.041 1.014 1.016
Summary of CSU Tests

The primary results obtained in this series of tests of new ICE flares may be summarized as follows (DeMott, 1999):
1. The aerosol particles produced by the new ICE pyrotechnics were highly efficient ice
nucleating aerosols. Yield values were approximately 1x1012, 5x1013 and 3x1014 ice crystals per gram pyrotechnic at -4, -6 and -10C in 1.5 g m-3 clouds in the CSU isothermal cloud chamber. Improvement compared to the previous pyrotechnic formulation used by ICE was modest at -6C, but most significant (factor of 3 increase in Yield) at -4C. 2. The ICE pyrotechnics burned with a fine smoke and a highly consistent burn time of ~37 s. 3. Rates of ice crystal formation were very fast, suggestive of a rapid condensation freezing process. The balance of observations showed no significant difference in the rate data obtained at varied cloud densities, supporting a conclusion that particles activate ice formation by condensation freezing.
October 2005
Page: 30
The CSU isothermal cloud chamber tests indicate that, on a per gram basis of pyrotechnic, these values are comparable to the best product available worldwide in the pyrotechnic format. High yield and fast acting agents are important for hail suppression since the time-window of opportunity for successful intervention of the hail growth process is often less than 10 minutes. More information about the ICE flares can be found on the internet at www.iceflares.com.
PROGRAM ELEMENTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE

A schematic diagram of the operational elements for the hail suppression project is shown in Figure 21. Details of the individual elements are described in more detail in the following sections. The radiosonde (weather balloon) depicted in Figure 21 was part of the system on a limited during 2003 and 2004. From those experiments we learned that the ETA/NAM model from the USA does an excellent job in predicting the main features of the atmospheric profile for Calgary and Red Deer. Although subtle details of inversion layers and moisture layers may not be resolved, the meteorologists have generally sufficient information about the instability of the atmosphere to construct a good forecast. One of the greatest gaps in our knowledge and data concerns the presence, absence, or timing of trigger mechanisms for the onset of convection. The increasing availability of near real time surface and satellite images via the internet is improving this situation. All meteorological information was received via the internet. WMI no longer needed a commercial agreement with Environment Canada. In addition, temperature measurements from the aircraft cloud physics data system supplied real time environmental data for the project meteorologists in some cases.
Figure 21: A schematic of the operational elements of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project.
October 2005
Page: 31
GROUND SCHOOL
A ground school was conducted for all project personnel on May 30th, 2005 in the training room at Royal-Sun Alliance Insurance in Calgary prior to the commencement of the project field operations. Operational procedures, general conduct, and reporting requirements were presented and reviewed at the ground school. Two representatives of NAV Canada in Calgary and Edmonton participated in the ground school. Copies of the Ground School Program, as well as copies of the Flight Log and Radar Log forms are included in the Appendices. The ground school training topics included: i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix. x. xi. xii. xiii. xiv. program overview and design, project area, target areas, and priorities overview of operations and procedures cloud seeding hypotheses for hail suppression cloud seeding theory and techniques aviation weather problems and special procedures aircraft controlling techniques and procedures seeding aircraft equipment and characteristics weather radar equipment and basic principles basic meteorological concepts and severe weather forecasting weather phenomena, fronts, and storms daily routines and procedures communications procedures computers, documentation, and reporting procedures safety, security precautions and procedures
PUBLIC RELATIONS
Several public relations activities occurred this year. On June 16th, Gerald Pilger, Editor for Country Guide magazine interviewed Jim Renick and Terry Krauss for an article that appeared in the magazine later in the summer. On June 19th a film crew from CBC for the Nature of Things visited the radar to record some film to support a story on the radiosonde releases conducted during the previous two summers in support of GPS water vapor research conducted by the University of Calgary. On July 22nd CKFM radio from Olds interviewed Terry Krauss. On July 29th the Olds Gazette interviewed Terry Krauss. On July 30th the Red Deer Advocate ran a front-page story about the hail suppression project, which was very favorable. All of the publicity was positive this year.
FLIGHT OPERATIONS
Three specially equipped cloud seeding aircraft were dedicated to the project. The aircraft and crews provided 24 hr coverage, seven days a week throughout the period. Two aircraft were stationed in Calgary and one aircraft in Red Deer. This permitted close proximity to storms and fast response to launch decisions. Delays in launching from Calgary were minimized thanks to the co-operation of NavCanada air traffic control in Calgary. When convective clouds were detected by radar, the seeding aircraft were placed on standby status. Aircraft on standby status are able to launch and reach a target cloud within 60 min after the request to launch has been made by the controlling meteorologist. When seedable clouds are imminent, the seeding aircraft are placed on alert status. Aircraft on alert status are able to launch and reach a target cloud within 25 min after the request to launch. Aircraft were available and prepared to commence a seeding mission at any time and the seeding of a storm often continued after darkness with due regard to safety.
Air-Traffic Control
Prior to the start of field operations, arrangements were made with NAV Canada managers of Air Traffic Services in Calgary and Edmonton to coordinate the cloud seeding aircraft operations. Permission was granted to file pre-defined flight plans for the project aircraft, with special designations and fixed transponder codes. The designated aircraft were as follows: Hail-Stop 1 for the Cheyenne II airplane (N234K) based in Calgary, Hail-Stop 2 for the C340 aircraft (N123KK) based in Calgary, and Hail-Stop 3 for the Cheyenne II aircraft (N232PS) stationed in Red Deer.
Page: 32
Direct-line telephone numbers were used to notify air traffic controllers of cloud seeding launches. Aircraft were launched to a specific location identified by VOR and DME coordinates, or town. Distinct air traffic clearance was given to project aircraft within a 10 nautical mile radius of the specified storm location. Cloud top aircraft were given 2,000 ft clearances above their altitude and 7,000 ft below their altitude. Cloud base aircraft were given a +/- 1,000 ft altitude clearance. This procedure worked very well in general. On a few occasions, seeding aircraft were asked to climb to a higher altitude over the city of Calgary or to suspend seeding for a few minutes (<10 minutes) to allow other commercial aircraft to pass below them. The ATC clearances and codes are shown in Figure 22.
Figure 22: Schematic figure showing aircraft cloud seeding block altitudes required for Air Traffic Control (ATC).
Cloud Seeding Aircraft Piper Cheyenne II

The Cheyenne II is a high performance twin-engine turboprop aircraft that has proven itself during single-pilot operations. The Cheyenne II stationed in Calgary, Hail Stop 1 (N234K), is shown in Figure 23. The Cheyenne II stationed in Red Deer, Hail Stop 3 (N232PS), is shown in Figure 24. In Alberta, two pilots are used at all times for improved communications and safety. Standard equipment includes
Page: 33
full dual VFR/IFR instrumentation, pressurized cabin, and emergency oxygen. The Cheyenne II has full de-ice equipment and is particularly well suited for flying in icing conditions for extended periods of time. These conditions are common at seeding altitudes within the thunderstorms of Alberta. The longer mission times of this aircraft can provide coverage of the entire project area if required, allowing significant savings in aircraft, fuel and personnel costs. The added performance of the Cheyenne II means that it has sufficient power to climb safely above the dangerous icing zone (-10C to -15C) if required, or descend to lower and warmer altitudes to de-ice and quickly climb back up to cloud-top seeding altitude. It can also provide accurate measurements of cloud conditions and cloud temperature. A third seat was provided for training or observing purposes. The major advantages of the Cheyenne II are as follows: 4 hour duration or more for longer seeding missions and better seeding coverage; lower Jet fuel price per liter; reserve power for severe icing conditions; exceptional speed for rapid response or ferry between target areas; and higher margin of safety; The specifications of the Cheyenne II are given in an Appendix. All three aircraft were equipped with flare racks carrying 306 droppable flares containing 20 grams of AgI and also 28 end-burning flares containing 150 grams of AgI for seeding at cloud base. The Cheyenne II was also equipped with GPS navigation system, onboard weather avoidance radar, and a VHF radio system for direct contact with operational personnel at the communications and control center.
Figure 23: Piper Cheyenne II aircraft (N234K) designated as Hail-Stop 1 shown at the Calgary Airport.
October 2005
Page: 34
Figure 24: Piper Cheyenne II aircraft (N232PS) designated as Hail-Stop 3 shown at the Red Deer Regional Airport.
C340A Aircraft
Cloud seeding was also conducted using one Cessna 340A aircraft equipped with ejectable flare belly racks, wing mounted flare racks, and acetone burners. The aircraft registered as N123KK was designated as Hail-Stop 2 (shown in Figure 25). The C340A aircraft is a pressurized, twin-engine, six cylinder, turbocharged and fuel-injected all weather aircraft. The C340 aircraft also has a weather avoidance radar and GPS navigation system. Complete specifications for the C340 are given in an Appendix. The C340 aircraft carried 306 20-g pencil flares and 24 150-g end-burning flares and two 7 US gallon acetone burners. Although the C340 can seed at cloud top, its performance is rather limited in known icing conditions. Therefore, the C340 is used primarily as a cloud-base seeder. During 2005, the C340 was used exclusively as a cloud-base seeder and did not conduct any seeding at cloud top.
Meteorological Aircraft Instrumentation

Each of the cloud seeding aircraft had a temperature and liquid water sensor to help assure that the cloud penetration seeding runs were conducted at known temperature levels and to document the presence of supercooled liquid cloud water. A radio telemetry system was used to transmit the aircraft data to the radar communications and control center where it was displayed in real time and recorded at 1 sec intervals. These measurements, combined with the recorded radar data, helped assure that the project is conducted on a sound scientific basis. All three aircraft performed very reliably with no seeding opportunities were missed due to maintenance issues.
October 2005
Page: 35
Figure 25: C340A aircraft (N123KK) designated as Hail-Stop 2 and configured to seed with droppable flares, end-burning flares, and AgI acetone burners.
RADAR CONTROL AND COMMUNICATIONS CENTER

The projects radar control room consists of the Airlink computer with radio telemetry modem for GPS tracking information, as well as the TITAN computer and display, and the meteorological data acquisition (Compaq) computer. Controllers communicated with the seeding aircraft using a VHF radio at 122.95 MHz frequency. The controlling duties were shared by Terry Krauss, Bill Shaw, Andre Sinkevich, and Jason Goehring (shown in Figure 26). An upgraded TITAN radar display and analysis computer system was installed last year (shown in Figure 27). The new TITAN was able to display several new hail parameters that gave the meteorologists additional information to improve identification of hailstorms and improved the direction of the aircraft to the most important hail growth regions of the storm. The TITAN radar images were sent to the WMI web server at 5-min intervals, although there were often missing images in the web archive which were blamed on computer problems and interruptions in the microwave internet connection at the radar. A more reliable radar file transfer routine will be investigated for the future. High speed Internet was installed for the pilots in Calgary and Red Deer so that the pilots could closely monitor the storm evolution and motion. This gave the pilots better knowledge of the storm situation they were going to encounter when they were launched.
October 2005
Page: 36
Figure 26: Jason Goehring in the communications control room, showing the CIDD, TITAN, and Meteo/Airlink computers.
Figure 27: TITAN dual-display showing the various radar pictures and satellite photo available to the radar controller on 28-July-2005.
A new Configurable Interactive Data Display (CIDD) computer system was installed last year. The new CIDD system was routinely set to display an animated 1-hour movie loop of the higher resolution polar radar data, super-imposed on a terrain map background. An example of the WMI-NCAR CIDD (Configurable Interactive Data Display) system used this year is shown in Figure 28.
October 2005
Page: 37
Figure 28: WMI-NCAR CIDD display showing radar reflectivity data, topography, aircraft tracks and the simultaneous display of satellite and synoptic data.
RADAR
The WMI C-band weather radar is located at the Olds-Didsbury Airport Hangar #4 (Jackson hangar). The radar coordinates are 51.71 N Latitude, 114.11 W Longitude, with a station elevation of 1024 m above sea level. The WMO station identifier is no. 71359 and the ICAO airport identifier is CEA3. An upgraded C-band weather radar was installed in 2003. The new radar was very reliable and more sensitive than the previous, older unit, and was able to detect clouds earlier in their development cycle. The radar performed very well and there was only one interruption between the evening of August 30 and the morning of September 2 when the high voltage power supply failed and its replacement had to be shipped from Fargo. Fortunately, no thunderstorms occurred during this period and there was no impact on operations. The radar is an Enterprise Electronics Corporation WR-100, C-band radar with an 8-ft antenna. A picture of the radar is shown in Figure 29. The WMI C-band (5 cm wavelength) radar is tower mounted and enclosed in a radome to provide safe, all weather operation. The nominal specifications of the C-band radar are: peak power = 250 kw, minimum detectable signal = -107 dBm, circular beam width = 1.65 deg. The minimum detectable signal corresponds to approximately 10 dBZ at 100 km range. A complete list of specifications for the C-band radar is given in the following section. An uninterruptible power supply (UPS) is used to assure there were no losses of service in the event of a power surge or drop. A gas-powered generator was used to provide emergency back-up power in the case of a power failure. Line power was very reliable at the airport during the summer and there were only a few momentary lapses in line-power during particularly bad lightning storms. The UPS and emergency generator worked very well. On September 16th the radar was shut off for the season; however, the tower and radar transmitter and display equipment have remained in place until next year.
October 2005
Page: 38
The radar antenna was raised 8 ft in 2001 in order to provide more clearance above nearby buildings that had been constructed at the Olds-Didsbury Airport. The base elevation radar scan was set to 0.8 degrees elevation in order reduce the amount of ground clutter, yet still provide a good viewing angle of the low-level precipitation at far ranges, especially over Calgary and Red Deer. The radar transmitter is located inside a shed built directly under the radar tower (shown in Figure 29). The radar shed is insulated and air-conditioned. As a result of these improvements, the radar worked very well for the entire season.
Figure 29: WMI C-band radar at the Olds-Didsbury airport.
The radar data acquisition computer RDAS is programmed to control the radar antenna such that a complete volume scan of 18 elevation steps, up to 45 elevation, was performed about every 4.8 min. The RDAS computer sends the polar coordinate radar data to the TITAN computer via a local area network and the TITAN computer performs the Cartesian transformation and records a permanent archive of all of the scans. The polar data were stored and displayed on the CIDD computer. All of the TITAN volume-scan radar data collected during 2005 have been recorded on CD-ROM. The GIF PPI picture files created every 5 min have been archived onto CD-ROM.
Radar Calibration Checks

The quantitative use of radar requires that various parameters of the system be measured and calibrated. The WMI WR100 C-band radar located at the Olds-Didsbury Airport is used to direct seeding aircraft in the Alberta Hail Suppression Project. As such, it needs to provide accurate values of radar reflectivity along with range, azimuth and elevation.
October 2005
Page: 39
Assuming that all the terms relating to the electrical components and propagation of the radar beam are constants and if we always assume we are looking at water, a simplified radar equation takes the form (Rinehart, 1997):
z = C pr r2
Thus, calculating radar reflectivity factor z is simply a matter of getting the power from a target of known range (times a constant). The WR100 parameters and calibration values are shown in Table 4. The RDAS radar acquisition software performs digital signal processing to simulate a quadratic response of the receiver output (Terblanche, 1996) and uses a reference range of 100 km.
Table 4: Radar parameter calibration values for the ALBERTA-WMI WR100.
value Pulse 0.000003 PRF 260 Freq 5.64E+09 Duty cycle = Pulse * PRF Minimum detectable signal = Nominal Radar Constant for range in nmi (in the RDAS-TITAN convention)
Log -5.522879 2.4149733 9.7512791
Db -55.22879 24.149733 97.512791 -31.079 -107 -159.96
Units Sec Sec-1 Sec-1 DB DB
The radar was found to be stable from day to day and the radar transmitted power varied by no more than 1 dB over the operational period from June 1 to September 15. The WR100 transmitted power values measured during the summer are shown in Table 5.
Table 5: Radar transmitted power calibration values measured during the 2005 season.
Duty Date PAD Coupler Cycle Scale 25-May-05 20 31 31.1 0 14-Jun-05 20 31 31.1 5 23-Jun-05 20 31 31.1 5 27-Jun-05 20 31 31.1 0 05-Jul-05 20 31 31.1 0 18-Jul-05 20 31 31.1 0 26-Jul-05 20 31 31.1 0 03-Aug-05 20 31 31.1 0 15-Aug-05 20 31 31.1 0 26-Aug-05 20 31 31.1 0 31-Aug-05 High voltage power supply fails. 02-Sep-05 03-Sep-05 05-Sep-05 20 20 20 31 31 31 31.1 31.1 31.1 0 0 0
Meter Power (dB) (dBm) 1.4 83.5 -3.5 83.6 -3.4 83.7 1.8 83.9 2.2 84.3 2.1 84.2 2.2 84.3 2.2 84.3 2 84.1 2 84.1
Power (kw) 223.9 229.1 234.4 245.5 269.2 263.0 269.2 269.2 257.0 257.0 Replaced power 257.0 supply. 257.0 204.2
2 2 1
84.1 84.1 83.1
October 2005
Page: 40
Figure 30: Radar calibration of RDAS digital counts to equivalent radar reflectivity power (dBZ) for the WMI radar at Olds-Didsbury during the 2005 field season.
When a radar is modified or repaired, it is important to check and/or recalibrate the RDAS computer which converts the raw radar video signal into a digital value (i.e.; number of RDAS counts) representing a known power (i.e.; equivalent dBZ value at 100 km range). The output power of the transmitter was measured regularly. The RDAS calibration curve was checked for accuracy at the start, mid-season, and again at the end of the season. The calibration tests measured during the summer of 2005 are shown in Figure 30. The calibrations show a change of approximately 1 dB during the season. The final calibration check for a radar system is a measurement of the pointing accuracy of the antenna. To check the antenna alignment and accuracy, the dish is pointed at the sun and its position coordinates in azimuth and elevation are cross-referenced to the accurate, known position of the sun at that exact time of day. The exact position of the sun can be determined using a computer program designed for that specific purpose. A solar calibration was performed at the beginning of the season. The pointing accuracy of the system was also verified numerous times by confirming the position of the aircraft relative to the position of an isolated echo.
AIRCRAFT TRACKING GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS)

The WMI weather radar control and communications center was equipped to receive and record data from the aircraft GPS position telemetry system. The GPS system displays the exact position of the aircraft superimposed on the radar PPI display to enable the controller to accurately direct the seeding aircraft to optimum seeding locations within the storm system. The color coded aircraft position on the PPI display enabled radar controllers to discriminate between each project aircraft. The Airlink tracking system had its own PC as a dedicated aircraft tracking system. The real-time aircraft Global Positioning System (GPS) flight track display of AIRLINK on July 28th, 2005 is shown in Figure 31.
October 2005
Page: 41
Figure 31: Aircraft Global Positioning System (GPS) flight tracks, and real-time information via the AIRLINK telemetry system on July 28, 2005.
Airlink also displays when seeding events take place, but the locations of flare drops and location of the acetone generator usage are not displayed on the track in Figure 31 to reduce clutter in the figure. In addition, Airlink displays the available in-situ measurements that are also sent via the telemetry for display to the controller. This allowed the controller to monitor the temperature and concentration of supercooled liquid water encountered by the seeding aircraft during cloud penetrations.
SUMMARY OF SEEDING OPERATIONS

A brief summary of each day indicating the weather and operational activities is given in Appendix B. Further details regarding flight times, and the amount of seeding are given in the Flights and Operations Summary tables in the Appendices.
Aircraft Flights and Amount of Seeding

During the season, 80 aircraft flights totaling 157.9 hrs took place on 36 operational days. There were two days with only test flights. A total of 70 storms were seeded during 60 seeding flights (131 hrs) on 27 days on which seeding took place. There were 14 patrol flights (21.9 hrs) and 6 test flights (5 hrs). The amount of silver-iodide nucleating agent dispensed during the 2005 field season totaled 159.1 kg: consisting of 3770 ejectable (cloud-top) flares (75.4 kg seeding agent), 515 end-burning (cloud-base) flares (77.25 kg seeding agent), and 94.2 gallons of AgI-acetone solution (6.46 kg seeding agent). The distribution of take-off and landing times as a function of time of day is shown in Figure 32. Most of the flights were between 1 pm and 9 pm. The distribution of take-off and landing times as a function of time of day for all 608 flights during the last 6 years (2000 to 2005) is shown in Figure 33. The 50% percentile for take-offs is 3 pm and the 50% percentile for landings is approximately 5 pm. The
Page: 42
convective storms in Alberta have a strong diurnal cycle associated with the period of daily maximum temperature. In Alberta, the temperature usually cools off sufficiently when the sun goes down to prevent continued deep convection. Occasionally, however, a passing cold-front or upper-level disturbance is strong enough to kick-off evening convection; therefore, nocturnal storms cannot be ruled out. This is in contrast to the storms and experiences of WMI in Mendoza, Argentina where half the storms occur after sunset.
Figure 32: The frequency of occurrence and cumulative distributions of aircraft take-off and landing times for all flights as a function on time during 2005.
Figure 33: The frequency of occurrence and cumulative distributions of aircraft take-off and landing times for all flights from 2000 to 2005.
October 2005
Page: 43
Seeding Amounts
The amount of AgI dispensed on each day of operations in 2005 is shown in Figure 34. There were 6 days on which >10 kg of seeding material was dispensed. In comparison, there were 6 days during 2003, and 16 days >10 kg during 2004 on which >10 kg was dispensed. The six greatest seed days in 2005 were: July 28th (28.8 kg), July 13th (17.9 kg), July 20th (17.0 kg), July 29th (15.3 kg), July 19th (13.2 kg), and June 21st (10.5 kg). There were only 2 days with seeding during August, which had not happened previously during the last 10 years.
Figure 34: Amount of AgI dispensed per operational day in 2005.
Comparison of 2005 with Previous Years

Table 6 gives a list of the operational statistics for the past ten years of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project. These statistics can be useful for planning purposes. This summer was not as busy with below average number of storm days, flight hours, and seeding. It was very unusual that there were almost no storms within the project area during August. The most severe storms were in July. The average amount of seeding material dispensed per hour (1.0 kg/hr), and average amount of seeding material dispensed per storm (2.3 kg/storm) was slightly greater than the 10-year average amount, therefore, the aircraft still maintained their aggressive seeding methodology when called into action. A summary of the flare usage according to aircraft during the past 10 years is given in Table 7. The Cessna 340 (Hailstop 2) has been primarily used as a cloud base seeding aircraft due to its limited performance, mostly due to its wing-tip, acetone generators that add to its drag and are not recommended for prolonged cloud-top seeding within known icing conditions. Nevertheless, Hailstop 2 serves a very useful purpose seeding for long periods, continuously at cloud base using a combination of BIP flares and acetone generators. Hailstop 1 in Calgary has been a Piper Cheyenne II for all 10 years, and Hailstop 2 in Calgary has been a Cessna 340A for all 10 years. Hailstop 3 in Red Deer was a C340 for 4 years (1996-99), a Cheyenne II from 2000 to 2003, a Beach King Air C90 in 2004, and a Cheyenne II in 2005. The best seeding coverage is thought to consist of seeding the developing feeder clouds along the upwind side of a mature storm simultaneously at cloud base and cloud top. The two Cheyenne II aircraft have proven themselves as the aircraft of choice as cloud-top seeders. The seeding strategy has been to stagger the launch of the seeding aircraft, and assure that two aircraft are available to seed at cloud base and top when the storm is traversing the highest priority areas.
October 2005
Page: 44
Table 6: Operational Statistics for 1996 to 2005.
ALBERTA
Storm Days with Seeding Aircraft Missions Total Flight Time (hrs) Number of Storms Seeded Total Seeding Material (kg) AgI/day AgI/hour AgI/Storm Eject Flares BIP flares Acetone (gal)
2005 27 80 157.9 70 159.1 5.9 1.0 2.3 3770 515 94.2
2004 29 105 227.5 90 270.9 9.3 1.2 3.0 6513 877.0 132.7
2003 26 92 163.6 79 173.4 6.7 1.1 2.2 4465 518.0 92.6
2002 27 92 157.4 54 124.2 4.6 0.8 2.3 3108 377.0 80.3
2001 36 109 208.3 98 195.0 5.4 0.9 2.0 5225 533.0 140.8
2000 33 130 265.2 136 343.8 10.4 1.3 2.5 9653 940.0 141.3
1999 39 118 251.3 162 212.7 5.5 0.8 1.3 4439 690.0 297.5
1998 31 96 189.9 153 111.1 3.6 0.6 0.7 2023 496.0 193.8
1997* 38 92 188.1 108 110.8 2.9 0.6 1.0 2376 356.0 144.3
1996* 29 71 159.1 75 163.3 5.6 1.0 2.2 3817 542.0 80.5
Total 315 985 1968 1025 1864
Average 31.5 98.5 196.8 102.5 186.4 6.0 0.9 2.0
45389 5844 1398
4539 584 140
* June 15th to September 15th during 1996 and 1997.
October 2005
Page: 45
Table 7: Cloud seeding flare usage comparison by aircraft.
Year
Hailstop 1 Calgary Cheyenne II

FLIGHT hrs FLARES
Hailstop 2 Calgary C340

FLIGHT hrs FLARES ACETONE
Hailstop 3 Red Deer Cheyenne II, C90, or C340

FLIGHT hrs FLARES and ACETONE
2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999
49.1 2750 top, 169 base 83.2 5574 top, 359 base 63.9 3598 top, 250 base 57.1 1994 top, 163 base 62.4 3174 top, 216 base 89.5 4755 top, 379 base 91.3 3795 top, 313 base 62.2 1880 top, 107 base 70.2 1828 top, 62 base 61.6 2128 top, 143 base
44.8 0 top, 121 base, 37.7 hr 62.2 0 top, 196 base, 53.1 hr 54.2 0 top, 130 base, 37.1 hr 49.3 2 top, 73 base, 32.1 hr 74.8 4 top, 215 base, 56.3 hr 77.4 164 top, 193 base, 56.5 hr 81.4 244 top, 197 base, 59.6 hr 68.4 134 top, 199 base, 29.2 hr 58.0 264 top, 128 base, 25.9hr 45.8 895 top, 192 base, 9.4 hr
63.9 1020 top, 225 base Cheyenne II 82.1 939 top, 322 base C90 King Air 45.5 867 top, 138 base Cheyenne II 51.0 1112 top, 141 base Cheyenne II 68.1 2093 top, 102 base Cheyenne II 97.4 4734 top, 368 base Cheyenne II 78.6 400 top, 180 base, 59.4 hr C340 59.4 9 top, 190 base, 48.3 hr C340 60.0 284 top, 166 base, 31.8 hr C340 51.7 794 top, 207 base, 22.8 hr C340
1998
1997
1996
October 2005
Page: 46
STORM TRACK MAPS

A map of all hailstorm tracks during 2005 is shown in Figure 35. June and July were the busiest months and there were a number of long-lived storms or super cells during July. There were four severe storms that tracked across or within the city of Calgary, and several others were near misses. A map of all hailstorm tracks over the 5-year period 2001 to 2005 is shown in Figure 36. The entire project area is covered with storm tracks, showing quite dramatically that the threat of hail remains high for the area.
Figure 35: Map of all hailstorm tracks during 2005 (courtesy of Jim Renick).
October 2005
Page: 47
Figure 36: Map of all hailstorm tracks during the five-year period 2001-2005 (courtesy of Jim Renick).
WEATHER FORECASTING
The daily forecast for the hail project was routinely prepared each morning by one of the meteorologists at the Radar, and presented at the weather briefing telephone conference call at 12 noon. The forecast time period for verification was considered to be 24 hrs, spanning the period from 9am to 9 am. The primary input data used for the forecast included the following: Regional analyses at 250 mb, 500 mb, 700 mb. Upper air sounding data from Edmonton or Kelowna ETA model forecast soundings for Calgary, Red Deer, Sundre, and Rocky Mtn. House Public and Aviation Forecasts Severe weather charts Numerical model forecasts (GEM, ETA/NAM)
October 2005
Page: 48
Satellite pictures Radar pictures from Environment Canada facilities at Strathmore and Carvel.
All of the meteorological data downloaded via the internet during the field season have been stored on CD-ROM for future reference purposes.
Convective Day Category (CDC)

After the weather forecast is produced, a Convective Day Category (CDC) is selected that best describes the conditions that are expected for the day. The CDC (Strong, 1979) is an index that gives the potential for hailstorm activity and seeding operations. A description of the weather conditions for each CDC is given in Table 8. The distinction between the -2 and -1 category is sometimes difficult, since overcast or prolonged rain eventually breaks up into scattered showers. The maximum VIL pixel values were used for forecast verification purposes of hail size in the absence of surface hail reports. Radar VIL values were used within the project area or buffer zones on the north, east, and south sides (not including the western buffer zone). This may have increased the number of hail days from the early years, which relied on a human report of hail fall at the surface; however, it is believed to be a more realistic measure of hail. There were a few days when pea size hail was reported and the VIL was < 10 kg/m2. These cases were classified as +1 days, and surface reports supersede the radar criterion. The +1 category minimum hail size was assumed to be 5 mm since this is a common minimum size for hail used by numerical modelers. Smaller ice particles < 5mm diameter are generally called snow pellets or graupel particles.
Table 8: Description of Convective Day Category (CDC) Index
CDC -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 +5
Strategy No Seed No Seed No Seed Patrol flights and potential seeding. Seed Seed Seed Seed Seed
Description Clear skies, fair weather cumulus, or stratus (with no rain). No deep convection. Towering cumulus, alto-cumulus, alto-stratus, or nimbostratus producing rain for several hours or weak echoes (e.g. virga). Scattered convective rain showers but no threat of hail. No reports of lightning. Convective echoes < 40 dBZ. Thunderstorms (at least one) but no hail. VIL < 10 kg/m2 within the project area or buffer zones on north, east, and south sides. Thunderstorms with pea or shot sized hail (0.5 to 1.2 cm diameter). 10 kg/m2 < VIL < 20 kg/m2 Thunderstorms with grape sized hail (1.3 to 2.0 cm diameter). 20 kg/m2 < VIL < 50 kg/m2 Thunderstorms with walnut sized hail (2.1 to 3.2 cm diameter). 50 kg/m2 < VIL < 100 kg/m2 Thunderstorms with golfball sized hail (3.3 to 5.2 cm diameter). VIL > 100 kg/m2 Thunderstorms with greater than golfball sized hail (>5.2 cm diameter).
Various meteorological parameters are also forecast in addition to the CDC. These parameters are used in developing a seeding strategy and are passed on to pilots during the weather briefing. The
Page: 49
meteorological parameters are recorded each day and archived for future analysis. A summary of the daily meteorological parameters is given in a later section and the full table of parameters is given in an Appendix.
Coordinated Universal Time

The standard reference time chosen for the project field operations is coordinated universal time (UTC). This time was formerly called Greenwich Mean Time (GMT or Zulu time) and is the accepted international standard of time for general aviation and meteorological observations, reporting, and communication. In Alberta, UTC is 6 hrs ahead of local Mountain Daylight time. For example, 12 noon local is equal to 1800 UTC, and 6 pm local is equal to 2400 or 00 UTC. This causes some confusion since many of the thunderstorms occurred late in the day and span the 6 pm local time which is midnight or 00 hrs UTC. The standard convention incorporated by the Alberta project is to report all aircraft, radar, and meteorological times in UTC, however, for convenience the summary tables are all organized according to the local calendar storm day with respect to Mountain Daylight Time.
Daily Briefings
All project staff and the ASWMS Director participated in a telephone conference briefing session each day at 12 noon sharp. Teamwork depends on good communications, and all staff was required to attend the daily noon briefing. This briefing session included a debriefing summary of the previous days operations (if any), discussion of the weather situation, presentation of the weather forecast and operational meteorological statistics, predicted hail threat, cloud base heights and temperatures, upper level winds, storm motion, equipment status reports, and operational plans for the day. After the briefing, crews were put on telephone stand-by or asked to remain at the airport on stand-by. All staff were equipped with cell telephones or pagers to allow quick access and constant communications day or night.
Meteorological Statistics
A complete listing of the daily meteorological statistics is given in Appendix I. A summary of the important daily atmospheric parameters used as inputs for the daily forecast of the CDC and threat of hail is given in Table 9.
Table 9: Summary of daily atmospheric parameters used as inputs for the daily forecast the CDC during 2005.
Parameter
FCST CDC Precip. Water (in) 0C Level (kft) -5C Level (kft) -10C Level (kft) Cloud Base Height (kft) Cloud Base Temp (C) Maximum Cloud Top Height (kft) Temp. Maximum (C) Dew Point (C) Conv Temp (C) CAPE (J/kg) Total Totals Lifted Index Showalter Cell Direction (deg) Cell Speed (knots)
Average
-0.41 0.70 10.93 13.36 16.02 8.95 5.16 25 20 9 19 419 52.7 -1.51 -0.88 260 25
All Days (107) StdDev Max Value

1.54 0.14 1.72 1.71 1.78 1.96 5.65 7.23 5.11 2.23 5.7 379 4.2 2.48 2.48 70 9 3 1.17 14.7 17.2 19.6 14.0 42.0 39.0 30.0 14.0 32.0 1968 61.8 6.9 8.3 360 46
Min Value
-3 0.37 7.0 9.5 12.1 3.9 -3.4 9.4 10.0 4.0 7.0 0 37.8 -8.1 -7.0 20 6
October 2005
Page: 50
Storm Direction (deg) Storm Speed (knots) Low Level Wind Direction (deg) Low Level Wind Speed (knots) Mid Level Wind Direction (deg) Mid Level Wind Speed (knots) High Level Wind Direction (deg) High Level Wind Speed (knots) Observed CDC
260 17 249 18 256 32 251 53 -0.29
96 6 79 8 69 11 68 21 1.75
356 32 355 70 357 57 360 100 5
5 2 1 5 1 4 5 15 -3
Hail fell within the project area on 31 days. Larger than golf ball size hail fell early on the morning of July 16th near Vulcan, and on the afternoon of July 20th near Beiseker. Golf ball size hail was reported on two days (July 28th near Bergen, and July 29th near Spruce View). Walnut size hail was reported on one day (July 19th) in south Calgary producing some damage over a small area. The cities and towns within the project area were almost completely free of damaging hail, and the preliminary estimates of property insurance claims for the project area this summer are once again lower than the previous 10year non-seeded average. A summary of the important daily forecast atmospheric parameters on the 31 days on which hail was reported is given in Table 10. These values represent typical conditions for hail days in Alberta. These statistics help put the Alberta project clouds in context with other hail suppression projects around the world. Furthermore, these values can be used to initialize numerical models for research purposes.
Table 10: Summary of daily forecast atmospheric parameters on hail days during 2005.
Parameter
FCST CDC Precip. Water (in) 0C Level (kft) -5C Level (kft) -10C Level (kft) Cloud Base Height (kft) Cloud Base Temp (C) Maximum Cloud Top Height (kft) Temp. Maximum (C) Dew Point (C) Conv Temp (C) CAPE (J/kg) Total Totals Lifted Index Showalter Cell Direction (deg) Cell Speed (knots) Storm Direction (deg) Storm Speed (knots) Low Level Wind Direction (deg)
Average
0.61 0.67 11.00 13.08 15.43 9.43 3.81 29 21 9 19 640 55.7 -3.12 -2.51 263 26 288 18 264
Hail Days (31) StdDev Max Value

1.36 0.10 1.34 1.34 1.48 1.61 2.82 4.65 3.82 2.11 4.6 362 2.9 1.81 1.81 53 9 53 7 53 3 0.93 14.0 16.2 18.4 13.0 8.3 35.0 27.2 13.0 28.0 1865 60.2 0.5 1.4 327 46 350 32 331
Min Value
-3 0.41 8.6 10.8 13.0 6.1 -3.4 19.1 11.0 4.0 10.0 55 49.5 -6.4 -6.4 20 7 50 3 10
October 2005
Page: 51
Low Level Wind Speed (knots) 19 11 70 5 Mid Level Wind Direction (deg) 256 53 320 25 Mid Level Wind Speed (knots) 33 13 53 4 High Level Wind Direction (deg) 249 45 320 90 High Level Wind Speed (knots) 60 23 100 15 Observed CDC 1.81 1.19 5 1 For the entire Province of Alberta, the Alberta Agriculture Financial Services Corporation reported hail damage to crops on 71 days (3 days in May, 21 days in June, 23 days in July, 16 days in August, and 8 days in September). Golf ball size hail was reported on 5 days (June 17th and 21st, July 16th and 20th, and September 3rd) this summer in Alberta. The most damaging storm of the year in terms of property damage occurred in Medicine Hat on June 17th when golf ball size hail caused extensive damage. Province wide, 2005 was an above-average year for the number of hail days but below average for the number of severe hail days. The big weather story for this summer was the heavy rainfall events that caused severe flooding in High River, Calgary, Sundre and Red Deer. The weather in the project area this summer was generally cool and wet.
Forecasting Performance
The following tables indicate the forecasting performance for the summer season with respect to the forecast and observed weather conditions as defined by the Convective Day Category or CDC within the project area. A CDC greater than zero indicates hail. The forecasts were verified by the weather observations as reported by Environment Canada, crop insurance reports received from the Agriculture Financial Services Corp. in Lacombe, and also by public reports of hail in the press, radio, and television, as well as by the reports from project personnel. The Vertical Integrated Liquid (VIL) radar parameter was also used as a verification tool, but secondary to actual hail reports. Referring to Table 11: Hail fell within the project area on 31 of 107 days (29%), leaving 76 days without hail (71%). The forecast was correct in forecasting no-hail on 62 of 76 observed no-hail days (82%) and correctly forecast hail days on 19 of 31 days (61%). The forecast failed to correctly forecast hail on 12 of 31 days (39%) and incorrectly forecast hail (false alarm) on 14 of the 33 days when forecasting hail (42%). The Heidke Skill Score (HSS) for WMI this past year (from Table 11) is 0.42. The HSS varies from 1 for no skill to +1 for perfect forecasts. The skill is considered significant if HSS>0.4. The forecasting of hail seemed to be more difficult this year due to the abundant surface moisture that persisted throughout the summer because of the above average rainfall during the spring and summer. Although the HSS for the WMI forecasters indicated some skill, this was the lowest HSS for the last 5 years. The Critical Success Index (CSI) is the ratio of the successful hail forecasts divided by the sum of all hail forecasts plus the busts. The CSI does not incorporate the null event (no-hail forecast and no-hail observed), and is also a popular measure of the skill of forecasts. The CSI for WMI this past year was 0.42, also the lowest over the last few years. Referring to Table 12, the exact forecast weather type (CDC) was observed on 52 of 107 days or 49% of the time. The forecast was correct to within one CDC category on 84 days or 79% of the time. Unfortunately, there were four days when grape sized hail fell and hail was not forecast, and one day with walnut size hail, and one day when greater than golf-ball size hail fell and no hail was forecast. Damaging hail days had not been missed during some previous years. The poorer performance of forecasting this year was partly due to the relative inexperience with Alberta weather. The bust forecasts didnt impact the operations since the daily forecast is used only as a general guide and all the crews and equipment were at the ready to conduct operations on each of the hail days. The only real surprise was the large hail that fell near Vulcan around 7 am on the morning of July 16th. Luckily this hail fell outside the project area and no urban areas were affected. After this event, the forecasters paid more attention to the instability of soundings forecast for 6 am the following morning.
Page: 52
Table 11: Table of the Observed versus Forecast days with Hail and No-Hail for the summer of 2005.
Observed Days No Hail Hail FCST Days No Hail FCST Days Hail Totals 62 [82%] 14 [18%] 76 [71%] 12 [39%] 19 [61%] 31 [29%]
Totals 74 [69%] 33 [31%] 107
Table 12: Table of Forecast versus Observed CDC daily values 2005.
Observed Convective Day Category (CDC) Weather 2004 -3 -3 -2 -1 0

Forecast
-2 1 6 2
-1
0 1
2 1
5 14 1 13 20
11
5 9 5 3
1 5 13 6 2 2 4 10 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1
1 3
27 24 7 1 2 0
CDC
1 2 3 4 5 13
13
22
28
17
0 107
Percent correct exact CDC category = 52/107 = 49% Percent correct within one CDC category = 84/107 = 79% Number of times no-hail observed when no-hail was forecast = 62/76 (82%) Number of times hail observed when hail forecast = 19/31 Percentage Correct for Hail & No Hail forecasts = 81/107 (76%) Bust forecast: i.e. hail observed when no hail was forecast = 12/31 (39%) False alarm: i.e. hail forecast and none observed = 14/33 (42%) (61%)
October 2005
Page: 53
A table showing the break down of CDC values for each of the previous 10 seasons is shown in Table 13. This year had below average number of grape size and larger hail days, and above average number of thunderstorm and shower days. There also was a below average number of sunny, warm, and clear (CDC=-3) days.
Table 13: Annual Summary of Convective Day Categories (CDC).
-3 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Totals Average Max Min 27 7 14 21 13 20 27 24 11 13 177 17.7 27 7
-2 21 19 24 18 21 4 8 7 4 13 139 13.9 24 4
-1 12 6 2 8 8 19 20 20 28 22 145 14.5 28 2
Observed CDC 0 1 2 11 28 29 24 26 18 16 28 29 28 237 23.7 29 11 5 19 23 22 18 19 15 8 15 17 161 16.1 23 5 12 11 8 10 9 18 17 12 11 9 117 11.7 18 8
3 3 3 2 2 2 5 3 2 3 1 26 2.6 5 1
4 1 0 4 1 9 4 1 5 5 2 32 3.2 9 0
5 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 8 0.8 2 0
Totals 93 93 107 107 107 107 107 107 107
1042
The Hailcast Model

The HAILCAST model (Brimelow, 1999) was again used this summer to objectively forecast the maximum hail size over the project area. HAILCAST consists of two components, namely a steadystate one-dimensional cloud model and a 1-dimensional, time dependent hail model with microphysics. The reader is referred to Brimelow (1999) for a detailed explanation of the model. ETA forecast soundings for Red Deer and Calgary were downloaded daily from the Storm Machine website. A decision tree scheme was used to determine whether or not the soundings should be used to initialize the model. The decision tree is based on the work of Mills and Colquhoun (1998). The decision tree logic was described in detail in the 2003 final report. Basically, the Hailcast model was not supposed to be run if the atmospheric profile showed significant inhibition at 700 mb (approximately 10 kft) or warming aloft during the day. Table 14 shows the Hailcast Forecast versus Observed table of Daily CDC values for the period June 1st to September 15th 2005.
October 2005
Page: 54
Table 14: Table of Forecast versus Observed CDC daily values using HAILSCAST during the summer of 2005.
Hailcast CDC -3 No Run or No Hail +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 13 0 0 0 0 0 13 -2 9 1 2 1 0 0 13
Observed CDC -1 0 +1 14 2 5 1 0 0 22 6 10 5 5 2 0 28 1 4 6 6 0 0 17
+2 3 2 1 3 0 0 9
+3 +4 +5 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 47 20 19 18 3 0 107
The probability of detection (POD), false alarm ratio (FAR), Heidke Skill Score (HSS), and Critical Success Index (CSI) performance of HAILCAST and WMI from 2002 to 2005 are shown in Table 15.
Table 15: Probability of detection (POD), false alarm ratio (FAR), and critical success index (CSI) performance of HAILCAST and WMI from 2002 to 2005.
POD - HAILCAST POD WMI FAR - HAILCAST FAR WMI HSS - HAILCAST HSS - WMI CSI - HAILCAST CSI - WMI
2002 0.81 0.83 0.34 0.33 0.56 0.59 0.57 0.59
2003 0.76 0.86 0.56 0.16 0.33 0.63 0.39 0.59
2004 .91 .60 .47 .30 .39 .51 .51 .49
2005 .84 .61 .45 .18 .31 .42 .40 .42
The performance of the HAILCAST model in 2005 was good but not great. The probability of detection of hail events was 0.84 which was very good, and better than the WMI forecaster. However, the false alarm ratio of HAILCAST in 2005 was 0.45 indicating that hail was forecast on 34 of 60 days when hail was not reported. Perhaps the hail fell only in the foothills and not within the project area, however, the reliability of the Hailcast forecast suffered since it seemed that it wanted to predict hail almost every day during June and July. Hailcast missed one golf-ball size day, and three grape size hail days. The HSS for Hailcast was only 0.31 due to the many false-alarms, which is just below the value of 0.4 which is generally considered to be the threshold level of skill. The CSI for Hailcast was slightly less than the CSI for the WMI forecaster. These results demonstrate that while HAILCAST is a useful tool it has weakness similar to many models and the results need to be interpreted within the context of the overall meteorological situation, taking into consideration other synoptic, meso-scale, or dynamical aspects that are not included in the one-dimensional model.
Oblako-2 Russian Cloud Model (by Dr. Andre Sinkevich)

A numerical cloud model called Oblako-2 (Dept. of Cloud Physics, A.I. Voeikov Main Geophysical Observatory, St. Petersburg, Russia) is a program developed in Russia to predict cloud characteristics in support of aviation. It is a time dependent 1.5 dimensional model with parameterized microphysics. Input data to the model is an atmospheric sounding and predicted maximum surface temperature and dew point temperature. The model outputs main characteristics of the cloud in text form. It is also possible to get different cloud characteristics for selected heights and to obtain their dependence with time in the form of graphs or numerically. Significant statistical data has been used for the calculation of cloud parameters and characteristics of dangerous meteorological phenomena. These data are based on the results of experimental investigations and they are valid for clouds forming over the North-Western part of Russia. Using the present program for other regions can result in significant mistakes; however, it was tested during the summer of 2005 in Alberta, and produced some useful results.
Page: 55
Model Input and Evaluation Data

Input data for the model was taken from the Storm Machine ETA forecasted soundings for Calgary and Red Deer. The representative maximum surface temperature and dew point temperature were forecasted by WMI staff. Radar data was used to measure cloud tops for verification purposes. Lightning data was taken from the Alberta Forestry and Meteorological Service of Canada (electromagnetic emission was measured to locate lightning strikes).
Model Output Data

An example of the model output on June 6, 2005 is presented below. FORECAST OF CONVECTIVE CLOUDS DEVELOPMENT AND DANGEROUS PHENOMENA ASSOCIATED WITH THEM Date: 24.06.2005 Time: 11:36 VERTICAL TEMPERATURE AND DEW POINT PROFILE IN BACKGROUND ATMOSPHERE p, mb 875.0 850.0 800.0 750.0 700.0 650.0 600.0 550.0 500.0 450.0 400.0 350.0 300.0 250.0 Isotherm of 0C is at the height 1.8 km. Isotherm of 22.5C is at the height 5.0 km. T, C 18.0 13.8 9.9 5.0 -0.2 -4.9 -9.3 -13.3 -18.0 -23.3 -29.0 -36.3 -44.8 -52.9 Td, C 7.5 3.5 1.5 -2.2 -5.2 -8.2 -11.2 -14.8 -19.8 -25.6 -31.9 -39.7 -48.6 -58.3
PARAMETERS OF CLOUDS AND PRECIPITATIONS Maximum upper cloud height is equal to 7.2 km. Maximum vertical cloud height is equal to 5.8 km. Maximum of updraft velocity is observed at height 3.2 km and is equal to 14.8 m/s. Maximum of LWC of cloud drops is observed at height 4.2 km and is equal to 1.5 g/m3. Maximum of LWC of precipitation drops is observed at height 0.8 km and is equal to 1.9 g/m3. Maximum of sum LWC is observed at height 0.8 km and is equal to 1.9 g/m3. Maximum of sum ice content is observed 3.2 km and is equal to 2.9 g/m3. Maximum of water supply is equal to 37207.0 g/m2. Maximum rain intensity near the Earth is equal to 14.8 mm/h. Maximum hail intensity near the Earth is equal to 11.0 mm/h. Precipitation duration near the Earth is equal to 10.7 min.
October 2005
Page: 56
DANGER OF AIRCRAFT STRIKE BY LIGHTNING Aircrafts Il-76, Il-86, A-300 Danger is very high. Aircrafts Il-62, Tu-154, Yak-42, Yak-40, Tu-134 Danger is very high.
INTENSITY OF MAXIMUM TURBULENCE Turbulence is high. Layer of maximum turbulence is 2.7 ... 3.7 km. Intensity of turbulence in atmospheric layer z = 0...1 km z, km 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Turbulence weak moderate moderate moderate moderate moderate
VISIBILITY IN CLOUD AND PRECIPITATIONS Minimum horizontal visibility in cloud is equal to 17 m. Precipitation in layer 0...1 km are observed. Minimum visibility in precipitation: z, km 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Visibility, m less then 1000 m less then 1000 m less then 1000 m less then 1000 m less then 1000 m less then 1000 m ICING DANGER Height of Aircraft Minimum Maximum maximum velocity, height of height of icing m/s icing, km icing, km intensity, km 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 3.0 3.4 4.0 4.6 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6
October 2005
Page: 57
Icing is high. LIGHTNING DANGER Thunderstorms are predicted. DANGER OF SQUALL Squall is not predicted. DANGER OF HAIL Appearance of hailstones of dangerous sizes is possible in the following layer: 0.0...7.0 km Appearance of hailstones of very dangerous sizes is possible in the following layer: 0.0...6.6 km
Assessment of Cloud Top Height Forecasts

The predicted cloud top height was compared with the observed cloud top height as measured by the radar. The frequency distribution of the difference between the predicted and observed cloud top height for 74 days is shown in Figure 37.
Histogram (Data_analyze 30v*103c) Htopm -Htopr = 74*1*normal(x, -0.9486, 1.8111) 22 20 18 16 14 No of obs 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -7 0% -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 Htopm -Htopr
Figure 37: The frequency distribution of the difference of cloud top height predicted by the model and observed by the radar.
27%
22%
15%
15%
7% 4% 3%
7%
1% 0% 0 1 2 3 4 0% 5
A Statistical summary of the difference between the cloud top height predicted by the Obloko-2 model
Htopm (km) versus observed by the radar Htopr (km) is given in Table 16. The radar cloud tops were on average 0.9 km higher than predicted by the model. The tendency was for the model to underestimate the cloud top height, but the results were quite good.
October 2005
Page: 58
Table 16: Statistical summary of the difference between cloud top height predicted by the Obloko-2 model Htopm (km) and observed by the radar Htopr (km). Valid N Mean Median Mode Minimum Maximum Std.Dev.
Htopm-Htopr
74
-0.94
-0.60
-.80
-5.30
4.00
1.81
One must keep in mind that the forecasted surface temperature and dew point temperature were used as input data into the model. Therefore, any differences in the predicted cloud top height were dependent on the accuracy of the temperature forecasts.
Assessment of Maximum Temperature Forecasts

The maximum temperature was forecasted for all the area. In this section, we compare the WMI forecast with the station observations at Calgary and Red Deer. The frequency distribution of the difference between the predicted and observed maximum temperature in Calgary for 74 days is shown in Figure 37.
Histogram (Data_analyze 30v*103c) dT_T-Tpr(Calg)= 92*1*normal(x, -0.2707, 1.8899) 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 No of obs 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -9 0% 1% -7 1% 2% 0% -5 -3 -1 dT_T-Tpr(Calg)
Figure 38: The frequency distribution of the difference of Observed Maximum Temperature in Calgary and the Forecast Max Temperature.
29% 26%
14%
13%
4% 2%
3%
2%
1% 5
0%
The statistical summary of the differences dT=T-Tpr for Calgary are presented in Table 17. average difference was 0.27 C.
The
October 2005
Page: 59
Table 17: Statistical summary of the difference between T-measured max temperature in Calgary and Tprforecasted max temperature.
Valid N dT_T-Tpr(Calgary) 92
Mean -0.27
Median -0.05
Mode .30
Minimum -7.40
Maximum 4.30
Std.Dev. 1.88
The frequency distribution of the difference between the predicted and observed maximum temperature in Red Deer for 74 days is shown in Figure 39.
Histogram (Data_analyze 30v*103c) 24 22 20 18 16 No of obs 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -9 0% -7 2% 1% 0% -5 -3 -1 dT_T-Tpr(RDeer)
Figure 39: The frequency distribution of the difference of Observed Maximum Temperature in Red Deer and the Forecast Max Temperature.
25%
22%
13% 12%
8% 7% 5% 3% 1% 1 3 1% 0% 5 0% 7
The statistical summary of the differences dT=T-Tpr for Red Deer are presented in Table 18. The average difference was 0.46 C
Table 18: Statistical summary of the difference between T-measured max temperature in Red Deer and Tpr forecast max temperature.
Valid N dT_T-Tpr (Red Deer) 92
Mean -0.46
Median -0.30
Mode Multiple
Minimum -7.50
Maximum 5.00
Std.Dev. 2.05
October 2005
Page: 60
Assessment of Dew Point Temperature Forecasts

The representative dew point temperature was forecasted for all the area. In this section, we compare the WMI forecast with the station observations at Calgary and Red Deer. The frequency distribution of the difference between the predicted and observed maximum dew point temperature in Calgary for 92 days is shown in Figure 40.
Histogram (Data_analyze 30v*103c) dT_T-Tpr(Calg)= 92*1*normal(x, -0.2707, 1.8899) 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 No of obs 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -9 0% 1% -7 1% 2% 0% -5 -3 -1 dT_T-Tpr(Calg)
Figure 40: The frequency distribution of the difference of Observed Maximum Dew Point Temperature in Calgary and the Forecast Max Dew Point Temperature.
29% 26%
14%
13%
4% 2%
3%
2%
1% 5
0%
The statistical summary of the differences between forecast and observed dew point temperatures for Calgary are presented in Table 19.
Table 19: Statistical summary of the difference between the measured max dew point temperature in Calgary and the forecasted max dew point temperature.
Valid N Tdcal-Td 92
Mean 0.98
Median 1.00
Mode 1.000
Minimum -4.00
Maximum 7.00
Std.Dev. 2.10
The frequency distribution of the difference between the predicted and observed maximum dew point temperature in Red Deer for 92 days is shown in Figure 41.
October 2005
Page: 61
Histogram (Data_analyze 30v*103c) TdRDeer-Td= 92*2*normal(x, 0.9859, 2.3396) 40 35 30 28% 25 No of obs 20 15 10 7% 5 1% 0 -10 -8 2% 0% -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 0% 8 8% 16% 38%
TdRDeer-Td
Figure 41: The frequency distribution of the difference of Observed Maximum Dew Point Temperature in Red Deer and the Forecast Max Dew Point Temperature.
The statistical summary of the differences between forecast and observed dew point temperatures for Red Deer are presented in Table 20.
Table 20: Statistical summary of the difference between the measured max dew point temperature in Red Deer and the forecasted max dew point temperature.
Valid N TdRDeer-Td 92
Mean 0.99
Median 1.00
Mode 1.00
Minimum -8.00
Maximum 6.00
Std.Dev. 2.346
Assessment of Thunderstorm Forecasts by Oblako-2

Forecasts of thunderstorms were made for 92 days (June1 August 31). The correct forecast was made in 77 cases, that is 83%. There were 53 days with thunderstorms, Oblako-2 predicted thunderstorm in 45 cases that is 45/53 =85%. There were 39 days without thunderstorms, it was not predicted in 31 cases, that is 31/39=80%. One should keep in mind that the ETA prognostic sounding and forecasted surface temperature and dew point temperature were used as input data into the model.
Assessment of Hail forecasts by Oblako-2

Forecasts of hail were made for 92 days (June1 August 31). The right forecast was made in 70 cases, that is 70/92=76%. Hail was registered during 26 days. The correct forecast was made for 17 cases that is 17/26= 65%. Again, one should keep in mind that the ETA prognostic sounding and forecasted surface temperature and dew point temperature were used as input data into the model.
October 2005
Page: 62
JULY 19th, 2005: THE CALGARY STORM

The most damaging storm for the city of Calgary during the 2005 season occurred on the afternoon of July 19th, 2005. This was a day on which a rather ordinary meteorological situation spawned several severe storms that had the potential of damaging hail fall for Calgary. The important features of this day are presented here. As well, the operations on this day exemplify the many decisions that are required on any given day regarding the timing and allocation of aircraft and seeding material. The Maximum Reflectivity map for the storms on July 19th, 2005 is shown in Figure 42. Seven storms developed throughout the day with seeding of all seven storms. Storm #1 developed west of Sundre around 3:20 pm. It moved to the southeast and diminished south of Didsbury around 5:20pm. Storm #2 developed west of Okotoks around 4 pm and moved to the southeast over High River and out of the project at 5:30 pm. Storm #3 developed northwest of Cochrane around 5:37 pm and moved southeast over north Calgary and out of the project at 8 pm. Storm #4 developed around 6:35 pm over south Calgary and moved southeast and out of the project at 8:10 pm. Pea, marble, and at least one report of walnut size hail causing some damage was reported in south Calgary. Storm #5 developed at 6:54 pm west of Calgary and proceeded to move towards the southeast. Storm #5 passed over southwest Calgary at 7:30 pm and across Okotoks at 8:10 pm. It moved out of the project at 9:04 pm. Storm #6 developed west of storm #3, northwest of Cochrane at 6:13 pm, and then moved southeast over Cochrane at 7:16 pm and then across north Calgary before diminishing at 08:20 pm. Storm #7 developed west of Bragg Creek at 7:57 pm. It moved east with new development to the south, and passed over Okotoks at 9:36 pm and then diminished at 10 pm. The aircraft tracks on July 19th for Hailstop 1, 2, and 3 are shown in Figure 43. Hailstop 1 seeded the Calgary storms extensively at cloud-top and Hailstop 2 seeded at cloud-base for the full duration of their tracks across Calgary. One thing we have learned is that it is very important to seed continuously at top and base while the storm is over the City. The maximum reflectivity map indicates that the storms were more severe before and after Calgary. Although one case study does not constitute scientific proof that seeding reduces hail intensity, this represents one more case that is consistent with our seeding objectives to support the economic results.
Meteorological Situation
The GEM model 12 hr forecast for the 500 mb level at 6 pm, 19 July 2005 is shown in Figure 44. A Low-pressure center was located north of Vancouver Island and there was westerly flow over central Alberta with a small short-wave disturbance forecast to be over Calgary at 00Z. The corresponding 250 mb jet stream map at 7 pm on 19 July 2005 is shown in Figure 45. The Surface analysis at 6 pm (00Z) with corresponding IR satellite image at 7:44 pm (0144Z on 20 July 2005) is shown in Figure 46. A weak cold front had passed across the project area during the day. The cold front did not initially trigger any deep convection. The maximum temperature in Calgary reached 19.7 C between 4 and 6 pm. The low-level moisture was quite high and Calgary recorded a dew point of 13 C during this period of maximum temperature. Although the atmospheric dynamics were relatively weak, the thermodynamic instability was quite strong. The ETA 12 hr forecast atmospheric sounding for Calgary at 6 pm (00UTC) on 19 July 2005 is shown in Figure 47. The observed maximum temperature and surface dew point were input into the sounding and the corresponding convective atmospheric potential energy (CAPE) was an impressive 1809 J/kg using a temperature of 19C and dew point 13C, and lifting from the surface. The conditions were sufficient for super-cell storms to develop according to the RAOB program. The map of surface 3-hr pressure changes and wind vectors at 21Z on July 19th is shown in Figure 48. Pressures were rising slightly, indicative of post-frontal conditions. The important features are the easterly winds near Calgary. These easterly winds created convergence and lifting along the foothills, sufficient to trigger thunderstorms. The map of surface streamlines and equivalent potential temperature (Theta-E) at 3 pm (21Z) on July 19th is shown in Figure 49. The streamline map shows the convergence near Calgary and a slight tongue of higher energy (Theta-E) air in southern Alberta. The warm-moist air was pushing up against the foothills and causing convergence along the foothills. The corresponding surface moisture-flux divergence and wind gust map at 3 pm (21Z) on July 19th is
October 2005
Page: 63
shown in Figure 50. A region of strong convergence was centered over Calgary, and thunderstorms developed within this region at this time.
Figure 42: Maximum Reflectivity map for the storms on 19-July-2005.
Figure 43: Aircraft tracks for Hailstop 1, 2, and 3 on 19-July-2005.
October 2005
Page: 64
Figure 44: GEM model 12 hr forecast of 500 mb heights and vorticity at 6 pm 19-July-2005 (00Z, 20 July 2005).
Figure 45: Jet stream analysis at 7 pm 19-July-2005 (01Z, 20 July 2005).

Page: 65
Figure 46: Surface analysis at 6 pm (00Z) with IR satellite image at 7:44 pm (0144Z 20 July 2005).
Figure 47: ETA 12 hr forecast atmospheric sounding for Calgary at 6 pm (00UTC) on July 19th 2005. Also shown is the trace for a lifted parcel with Temperature 19C and Dew Point 13C as reported in Calgary at 5 pm.
Page: 66
Figure 48: Map of surface 3-hr pressure changes and wind vectors at 3 pm (21Z) on July 19th, 2005.
Figure 49: Map of surface streamlines and equivalent potential temperature (Theta-E) at 3 pm (21Z) on July 19th, 2005.
October 2005
Page: 67
Figure 50: Surface moisture-flux divergence and wind gust map at 21Z (3 pm) on July 19th, 2005.
Seeding Operations
HS3 was launched at 2056Z to Sundre. HS3 was airborne at 2113Z. HS3 started seeding Storm #1 at 2149Z south west of Sundre and stopped seeding at 2202Z as there were no towns in the path of the storm. HS3 started seeding Storm #2 at 2234Z south west of Okotoks and stopped seeding at 2314Z as it has diminished. HS3 returned to Red Deer at 2347Z. HS1 was launched at 2355Z to Cochrane. HS1 was airborne at 0006Z. HS1 started seeding Storm #3 at 0021Z north west of Cochrane and stopped seeding at 0030Z. HS1 initially reported the clouds over Calgary as non-threatening. HS1 was then directed towards storm #4 west of Calgary and started seeding at 0031Z but quickly moved to seed the storm over south Calgary. The radar image at 0031Z is shown in Figure 51. The storm over Calgary intensified quickly over the next 15 minutes. The radar image at 0045Z is shown in Figure 52. The rapid intensification of Storm #4 within the debris region of the previous rain showers likely caused the damaging hail to form. The seeding of HS1 was unable to compete with the natural hail embryos during the first 15-20 min of rapid intensification. HS1 stopped seeding at 0121Z as the storm cleared Calgary, and then HS1 was directed towards storm #5 developing near the southwest part of Calgary. He started seeding storm #5 at 0125Z. HS1 stopped seeding storm #5 at 0220Z after passing over Okotoks. HS1 returned to Calgary at 0220Z. HS2 was launched at 0054Z to the north of Calgary. HS2 was airborne at 0104Z. HS2 started seeding Storm #3 at 0107Z north of Calgary. HS2 stopped seeding storm #3 at 0134Z as it had cleared Calgary. HS2 was then directed towards storm #6 over NW Calgary and started seeding at 0141Z. HS2 stopped seeding at 0217Z as the storm had diminished over NE Calgary. HS2 was then directed to storm #7 near Bragg Creek. HS2 started seeding storm #7 at 0255Z. HS2 stopped seeding storm #7 at 0355Z as the storm had diminished N of Okotoks. HS2 then patrolled W of Calgary and returned to Calgary at 0423Z as the threat of hailstorms had ended.
October 2005
Page: 68
Figure 51: The radar composite image at 6:31pm (0031Z) on July 19th, 2005 showing storms along the foothills and one storm north of Cochrane moving towards Calgary. The radar echo over Calgary was reported to be a moderate rain shower at the time. The track of HS1 (green) is shown. The cell top heights (km) are indicated.
Figure 52: The radar composite image at 6:45 pm (0045Z) on July 19th, 2005 showing two storms along the foothills north of Cochrane moving towards Calgary. HS2 was launched to seed these storms. The radar echo over Calgary had developed quickly into a hailstorm and the seeding track of HS1 (green) is shown. The cell top heights (km) are indicated.
Page: 69
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE MEDICINE HAT SEVERE HAILSTORM OF JUNE 17, 2005 AND THE FLOODING IN SUNDRE ON JUNE 18, 2005
The purpose of this section is to describe the meteorological conditions that occurred on June 17th and June 18th, 2005. Severe hailstorms affected SE Alberta on June 17th causing significant damage in Medicine Hat. Heavy rainfall on June 17th and June 18th along the foothills caused severe flooding in the town of Sundre on June 18th. The relationship between these two events is discussed. Weather charts valid for 6 pm Friday, 17-June-2005 (00UTC 18-June-2005) are shown in Figure 53. The 500 mb (5.5 km altitude) chart (top-left) shows an intense upper Low-pressure system over the Oregon coast. The surface chart (top right) shows a surface Low near the Alberta-SaskatchewanMontana border. Heavy precipitation was forecast for southern Alberta (bottom-right). At the synoptic scale (defined as dimensions typically >1000 km, and time scales > 1 day), all the weather in southern Alberta on June 17 and 18 was a result of this Low-pressure system. Weather charts valid for 6 pm Saturday, 18-June-2005 (00UTC 19-June-2005) are shown in Figure 54. The 500 mb (5.5 km altitude) chart (top-left) shows the same Low pressure system still centered over the Oregon coast. The surface chart (top right) still shows a surface Low near the AlbertaSaskatchewan-Montana border. Heavy precipitation was forecast for central Alberta (bottom-right), with a local maximum forecast for the Sundre area.
Figure 53: GEM 4-panel weather chart valid for 6 pm Friday 17-June-2005 (00UTC 18-June-2005).
Counter-clockwise flow around the surface Low centered near the Alberta-Saskatchewan-Montana border caused persistent easterly winds in the Calgary to Red Deer area. These easterly winds caused an upslope condition, pushing relatively warm, moist air up against the foothills and mountains, causing persistent, heavy rainfall in the Sundre region. This heavy, persistent rain over a prolonged period of time (>24 hrs) resulted in the flooding in Sundre.
October 2005
Page: 70
Figure 54: GEM 4-panel weather chart valid for 6 pm Saturday, 18-June-2005 (00UTC 19-June-2005).
The 250 mb (10.4 km altitude) chart valid for 6 pm, Friday 17-June-2005 is shown in Figure 55. A strong Jet Stream is shown curving around the Low, across the NW USA with its nose pointing at the Alberta-Saskatchewan-Montana border. This Jet Stream provided the upper level dynamics in the form of upper-level divergence for both the upslope and thunderstorm activity.
October 2005
Page: 71
Figure 55: 250 mb (10.4 km altitude) chart valid for 6 pm, Friday 17-June-2005.
Figure 56: 500 mb (5.5 km altitude) chart valid for 6 pm, Friday 17-June-2005.
The 500 mb (5.5 km altitude) chart valid for 6 pm, Friday 17-June-2005 is shown in Figure 56. Two centers of strong vertical-velocity are shown; one in the Sundre area and the other in SW Saskatchewan. The strong vertical velocity in the Sundre area contributed to the heavy rainfalls. The strong vertical velocity in SW Saskatchewan contributed to the severe thunderstorms that caused damage in Medicine Hat.
Page: 72
The two areas of strong vertical velocity are on the meso-scale. The meso-alpha scale is defined as weather occurring with dimensions of approximately 100 to 1000 km (typical time scales 6 hrs to 1 or 2 days). The heavy rainfall event over Sundre and along the foothills of west-central Alberta occurred on the meso-alpha scale, consisting of upslope conditions over 1 to 2 days. The meso-beta scale is defined as weather occurring with dimensions of approximately 10 to 100 km (typical time scales of 1 to 6 hrs). The outbreak of severe thunderstorms over SE Alberta on 17-June2005 occurred at the meso-beta scale. The meso-gamma scale is defined as weather occurring with dimensions of 1 to 10 km (individual thunderstorm cells with time scales < 1 hr). The single thunderstorm that caused the hail damage in Medicine Hat occurred at the meso-gamma scale.
Figure 57: The surface streamlines and equivalent potential temperature chart at 4 pm (22 UTC), 17 June 2005.
The surface streamlines and equivalent potential temperature chart at 4 pm (22 UTC), 17 June 2005 is shown in Figure 57. The zone of easterly winds blowing directly against the mountains along the central-western border of Alberta are indicated. The easterly winds caused the upslope, heavy rainfall, and flooding in Sundre. The converging flow into a Low pressure center over SE Alberta is also shown in Figure 57. The hailstorm in Medicine Hat occurred with the converging flow. Both of these flow features are on the meso-scale. At this time, continuous rain was falling in the Calgary to Sundre region, and thunderstorms were forming over southern Alberta.
October 2005
Page: 73
Figure 58: The radar display at 2:30 pm (2030 UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar located at Schuler, Alberta.
The radar display at 2:30 pm (2030 UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar located at Schuler, Alberta is shown in Figure 58. At this time there were some weak showers south of Taber and southeast of Medicine Hat.
Figure 59: The radar display at 3:00 pm (2100 UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar at Schuler, Alberta.
October 2005
Page: 74
The radar display at 3:00 pm (2100 UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar located at Schuler, Alberta is shown in Figure 59. At this time there was a thunderstorm over Taber and some new thunderstorms forming SW of Medicine Hat.
Figure 60: The radar display at 5:40 pm (2340UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar located at Schuler, Alberta. At this time there was a severe thunderstorm just east of Medicine Hat.
The radar display at 5:40 pm (2340 UTC) 17 June 2005 from the Environment Canada radar located at Schuler, Alberta is shown in Figure 60. At this time a severe thunderstorm that caused the hail damage in Medicine Hat was located just east of the city. There were numerous thunderstorms over SE Alberta and SW Saskatchewan at this time. The storm that caused the hail damage occurred on the meso-gama scale. The central core of the storm was about 10 km long (north-south) and 5 km wide (east-west).
October 2005
Page: 75
Figure 61: The visible satellite photo at 4:15 pm (2215 UTC) on 17 June 2005.
The visible satellite photo at 4:15 pm (2215 UTC) on 17 June 2005 is shown in Figure 61. The severe thunderstorms are visible over SE Alberta and Montana and SW Saskatchewan, and can be distinguished from the solid layer of lower, convective and layer clouds over central Alberta. The current surface weather and dew point chart at 9 pm 17 June 2005 (03 UTC 18 June) is shown in Figure 62. By 9 pm, the thunderstorms that caused the damage in SE Alberta had ended and moved into Saskatchewan. Rain is indicated in the foothills near Sundre. The current surface weather and dew point chart at 8 am 18 June 2005 (14 UTC) is shown in Figure 63. Rain continued to fall in the Sundre area.
October 2005
Page: 76
Figure 62: Current surface weather and dew point chart at 9 pm 17 June 2005 (03 UTC 18 June).
Figure 63: Current surface weather and dew point chart at 8 am 18 June 2005 (14 UTC).
October 2005
Page: 77
The severe hailstorm that hit Medicine Hat on the afternoon of June 17th, 2005 was related to the flooding that occurred in Sundre on June 18th, 2005 at the synoptic scale of meteorology. Both events were caused by an intense Low pressure system centered over the NW USA. However, the flooding and the hail damage were not caused by the same storm. The severe hailstorm in Medicine Hat occurred at the meso-gamma scale and lasted for only about 1 hour. The heavy rainfall in Sundre occurred due to continuous, upslope conditions that caused persistent rain for more than a 24-hour period (meso-alpha scale). Although related, the two events occurred due to different atmospheric processes and over different distance and time scales.
HURRICANE KATRINA
Reference: http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/katrina.html Hurricane Katrina devastated portions of the central Gulf of Mexico U.S. coast from southeast Louisiana to Alabama on August 29th 2005. Although not directly related to the weather and operations of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project, there is a meteorological connection. Firstly, the atmospheric conditions that favored the formation of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico was related to a quasistationary area of high pressure across the mid-western USA, which extended northward into the Canadian Prairies. This high-pressure system helped reduce the severe thunderstorm activity in southern Alberta during the month of August. The project meteorologists watched with extreme interest as the meteorological situation unfolded as hurricane Katrina intensified and then moved onto land near New Orleans. The weather maps routinely downloaded by the project meteorologists for forecast purposes documented the event. Secondly, the damage caused by hurricane Katrina will undoubtedly go into the record books as the greatest single most costly natural disaster in USA history. The insurance industry around the World will be impacted by these losses. Estimates for insured damages for Hurricane Katrina are still extremely preliminary at the time of this report and properly assessing losses will take weeks or months. However, the cost of Katrina will certainly be billions of dollars and might exceed losses from Hurricane Andrew. Andrew caused $15.5 billion in insured damage in 1992. Adjusted for inflation, Andrew resulted in more than $25 billion in insured damage. Hurricane Katrina was one of the strongest storms to impact the coast of the United States during the last 100 years. With sustained winds during landfall of 140 mph (a strong category 4 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson scale) and minimum central pressure the third lowest on record at landfall (920 mb), Katrina caused widespread devastation along the central Gulf Coast states of the US. Cities such as New Orleans, LA, Mobile, AL, and Gulfport, MS bore the brunt of Katrina's force. Although Katrina weakened before landfall, the Category 4 hurricane's fierce winds and near-record storm surge were still able to cause widespread destruction and loss of life. The track of Hurricane Katrina between August 23rd and 30th, 2005 is shown in Figure 64. Hurricane Katrina developed initially as a tropical depression (TD #12 of the season) in the southeastern Bahamas on August 23rd. This tropical depression strengthened into Tropical Storm Katrina the next day. It then moved slowly along a northwesterly then westerly track through the Bahamas, increasing in strength during this time. A few hours before landfall in south Florida at around 6.30 EDT on August 25th, Katrina strengthened to become a category 1 (windspeeds of 75mph or greater) hurricane. Landfall occurred between Hallandale Beach and North Miami Beach, Florida, with windspeeds of approximately 80 mph. Gusts > 90 mph were measured as Katrina came ashore. As the storm moved southwest across the tip of the Florida peninsula, Katrina's winds decreased slightly before regaining hurricane strength in the Gulf of Mexico. Given that Katrina spent only seven hours over land, its strength was not significantly diminished and it quickly re-intensified shortly after moving over the warm waters of the Gulf. Katrina moved almost due westward after entering the Gulf of Mexico. A mid-level ridge centered over Texas weakened and moved westward allowing Katrina to gradually turn to the northwest and then north into the weakness in the ridging over the days that followed. Atmospheric and sea-surface conditions (an upper level anticyclone over the Gulf and warm SSTs) were conducive to the cyclone's rapid intensification, which lead to Katrina attaining 'major hurricane' status on the afternoon of the 26th.
October 2005
Page: 78
Figure 64: The track of Hurricane Katrina between August 23rd and 30th, 2005.
Continuing to strengthen and move northwards during the next 48 hours, Katrina reached maximum wind speeds on the morning of Sunday August 28th of 150 kts (category 5), and its minimum central pressure dropped that afternoon to 902 mb - the 4th lowest on record for an Atlantic storm. Although Katrina, at its peak strength was comparable to Camille's intensity, it was a significantly larger storm and impacted a broader area of the Gulf coast. Although tropical cyclones of category 5 strength are rarely sustained for long durations (due to internal dynamics), Katrina remained a strong category 4 strength hurricane despite the entrainment of dryer air and an opening of the eyewall to the south and southwest before landfall on the morning of the 29th. An IR satellite image near the time of landfall (12UTC, 29-August-2005) is shown in Figure 65. Windspeeds at Grand Isle, LA at landfall were approximately 140 mph with a central pressure of 920mb - the 3rd lowest on record for a landfalling Atlantic storm in the US. The full extent of the hurricane can be seen in the composite IR satellite image and surface analysis at 2230Z on 28-August-2005 (Figure 66). The numerical weather prediction models did a pretty good job in forecasting the positions and strength of hurricane Katrina. The ETA model 24 hr forecasted 500 mb chart valid at 12Z on 29August-2005 is shown in Figure 67.
Figure 65: A IR satellite image of hurricane Katrina at the time of landfall (12 UTC, 29-Aug-2005).
October 2005
Page: 79
Figure 66: Composite IR satellite image and surface analysis at 2230Z on 28-August-2005.
Figure 67: ETA model 24 hr forecasted 500 mb chart valid at 12Z on 29-August-2005.
October 2005
Page: 80
Other storms have had stronger sustained winds when they made landfall including the following: The Labor Day Hurricane, Florida Keys, September 2, 1935, Category 5, 892 mb, Approaching 200 mph Hurricane Camille, Mississippi, August 17, 1969, Category 5, 909 mb, Approaching 190 mph Hurricane Andrew, Southeast Florida, August 24, 1992, Category 5, 922 mb, 165 mph Hurricane Charley, Punta Gorda, Florida, August 13, 2004, Category 4, 941 mb, 150 mph
The most deadly hurricane to strike the U.S. made landfall in Galveston, Texas on September 8, 1900. This was also the greatest natural disaster to ever strike the U.S., claiming more than 8000 lives when the storm surge caught the residents of this island city by surprise. Tropical cyclone activity in the Atlantic basin has been above normal since 1995. This has been largely in response to the active phase of the multi-decadal signal. The average number of named storms since 1995 has been 13, compared to 8.6 during the preceding 25 years during which time the multidecadal signal was in an inactive phase. An average of 7.7 hurricanes and 3.6 major hurricanes since 1995 compares to 5 hurricanes and 1.5 major hurricanes from 1970-1994. Characteristics of an active multi-decadal signal in the Atlantic include: warmer sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the tropical Atlantic region, an amplified sub-tropical ridge at upper levels across the central and eastern North Atlantic, reduced vertical wind shear in the deep tropics over the central North Atlantic, and an African Easterly Jet (AEJ) that is favorable for promoting the development and intensification of tropical disturbances moving westward off the coast of Africa. Recent studies also indicate that in addition to this multi-decadal oscillation the destructive power of hurricanes has generally increased since the mid-1970s, when the period of the most rapid increase in global ocean and land temperatures began. However, it is important to note that increased tropical cyclone activity does not necessarily translate into an increase in the number of landfalling tropical storms or hurricanes. Six of the past 11 years have had one or fewer landfalling hurricanes along the Gulf Coast, and there is no long-term trend in the number of landfalling hurricanes since 1900.
CLIMATE PERSPECTIVES
The big weather story this summer was the heavy rainfall, flood conditions, and cooler conditions for our area. The sea surface temperatures and anomalies in the equatorial Pacific Ocean for the period August 2002 to July 2005 are shown in Figure 68. The Pacific Ocean sea surface temperature anomalies were slightly positive during the summer of 2005 and can be classified as weak El Nino or neutral. For reasons not fully understood, numerous cut-off, cold upper Low pressure systems formed regularly in the Gulf of Alaska and then slowly tracked across BC and Alberta, bringing heavy rainfall events to southern Alberta. Four such systems occurred during June alone, saturating the soil and causing flooding in High River, Calgary, Sundre, and Red Deer.
October 2005
Page: 81
Figure 68: Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures and temperature anomalies for the period August 2002 to July 2005.
In monitoring the equatorial tropical Pacific for the phases of the ENSO cycle, the area has been divided into 4 sections: Nio 1+2 (0o-10o South) (90o West-80o West) Nio 3 (5 North-5 South) (150 West-90 West) Nio 4 (5 North-5 South) (160 East-150 West) Nio 3.4 (5 North-5 South) (170-120 West)
October 2005
Page: 82
Figure 69: SST temperature anomalies for the 4 Nino regions of the equatorial tropical Pacific over the period 1986 to 2005.
The reason for this is that major atmospheric circulation impacts are related to changes in the pattern of convection in these regions. The Nio 3.4 and Nio 4 regions encompass the area where slight increases or decreases in SSTs can have a big impact on where convection is found in the western and central Pacific and are the key areas for monitoring and predicting ENSO events. The SST temperature anomalies for the 4 Nino regions of the equatorial tropical Pacific over the period 1986 to 2005 is shown in Figure 69. The past 10 years of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project have seen both El Nino and La Nina events. There is no clear association between the summer weather in southern Alberta and sea surface temperature anomalies in the Pacific Ocean. The strong El Nino (warm SST) event in 1998 was associated with hot and dry conditions with above average hail. The year 2000 was a La Nina (cold SST) event and was associated with cool, wet conditions with many severe thunderstorms, high agricultural crop damage due to hail, and the Pine Lake tornado. The severe hail storms in Calgary during 1996 was a La Nina event that had above average fair weather days, but also many severe hail days. The transitional years or neutral SST anomaly years were generally associated with below average hail.
Precipitation at Calgary and Red Deer during the summer of 2005

The daily and accumulated rainfall for Calgary and Red Deer from June 1 to August 31, 2005 are shown in Figures 70 and 71 respectively. There were frequent rainfall events at Calgary and Red Deer throughout the summer and the accumulated rainfall was greater than the normal value throughout the
Page: 83
summer in Calgary (131.7 mm above average), and most of the summer in Red Deer (52.4 mm above average). Calgary set a new record for the most rain in a single month. The average June rainfall is 79 mm and the previous record rainfall in June was 224 mm. During June 2005, Calgary received 246 mm; the previous record for rainfall in one month (July year unknown) was 245 mm.
Figure 70: Daily and accumulated rainfall for Calgary from June 1 to August 31, 2005.
Figure 71: Daily and accumulated rainfall for Red Deer from June 1 to August 31, 2005.
October 2005
Page: 84
Precipitation and Temperature Anomalies in Canada during the summer of 2005

Regions with departures from normal precipitation during the summer of 2005 are shown in Figure 72. Regions with departures from normal temperature during the summer of 2005 are shown in Figure 73. British Columbia had near normal temperatures and slightly above average precipitation. The prairie region was generally cool and wet. The eastern part of Canada was generally hot and dry. Southern Ontario set several records for heat, humidity, and smog (poor air quality). For the prairies, the summer (June 1 to August 31) ranked as the second wettest (45% above average) and the 13th coolest (-0.5 C cooler than average) when compared with the 58-year period 1948 to 2005. For the Canadian Prairies as a whole, 1996, 1997, 2000, 2001, and 2003 were below average precipitation years. 1998, 1999, 2002, 2004, and 2005 were all above average years. Therefore, the past 10 years can be considered a representative sample of the previous climate, covering both extremes and average conditions. The agricultural crop damage Loss-to-Risk ratios were 8.2% greater during the dry years, compared to the wet years.
Figure 72: Departures from normal Precipitation during the summer of 2005 in Canada.
October 2005
Page: 85
Figure 73: Departures from normal Temperature during the summer of 2005 in Canada.
PROVINCIAL CROP HAIL INSURANCE RESULTS

Figure 74 shows the annual Loss-to-Risk ratios, percentage of claims, difference between premiums collected and damage claims paid (losses up to and including the latest report dated 22-September2005), as well as the linear trend line fitted to the loss-to-risk ratio for the period before seeding. These results are preliminary estimations or projections at this time due to some possible outstanding claims and reports from adjusters for a few storms during September.
October 2005
Page: 86
Figure 74: Alberta Agriculture Financial Services Corp hail insurance loss-to-risk and claims statistics from 1978 to 2004.
Eight of the last ten years have loss-to-risk values below the historical trend line. The 2005 hail season had the third lowest loss-to-risk ratio in the last 28 years. There is a positive association between the WMI cloud seeding period and a reduction in the Provincial hail damage. The reduction in the 19962005 average over the previous ten years (1986-1995) is 19.6%. Assuming annual crop losses of $100 million due to the historical trend of losses, the reduction of hail damage corresponds to an estimated accumulated benefit of $196 million to agriculture in the last ten years. Agricultural crop damage statistics are available back to 1938. The full historical record was analyzed to see if there were statistical differences between 1938 to 1995, compared with the WMI seeding period from 1996 to 2005. The statistical summary for the period 1938 to 1995 is shown in Figure 75. The distribution of historical loss-to-risk values is approximately normal with a mean of 4.79% and median of 4.35%. The statistical summary for the period 1996 to 2005 is shown in Figure 76. The distribution of loss-torisk values is skewed by the high, outlier values in 2000 and 2004, and is approximately log-normal with a mean of 3.32% and median of 2.61%.
October 2005
Page: 87
Figure 75: Statistical summary of loss-to-risk values from 1938 to 1995.
Figure 76: Statistical summary of loss-to-risk values from 1996 to 2005.
October 2005
Page: 88
The mean of the seeded period is 31% less than the historical period. The median of the seeded period is 40% less than the historical period. These differences are not statistically significant at the generally accepted 95% level of confidence, however, the probability that the difference is purely related to chance is <15%, i.e.; there is an >85% probability that the difference could be due to the seeding. The seeding period is clearly associated with a reduction in hail damage. The crop insurance data are for the entire province and are only a partial indicator of the hail inside the project area. However, these data are the only consistent source of financial information related to hail that is readily available and the hail within the project area, historically referred to as hail alley, heavily influences these data. Our goal is to obtain comparable statistics for property damage in the Province.
INSURANCE BUREAU OF CANADA PROPERTY DAMAGE

The most recent published data regarding property damage in Canada is available through the Insurance Bureau of Canada Facts Book (2004). This book contains damage statistics up to and including 2002. The property damage due to all natural disasters in Canada from 1987 to 2002 is shown in Figure 77. Traditionally Alberta has been near the top of all Canadian natural disasters because of severe thunderstorm damage due to wind and hail. Since 1996, the trend in Alberta has been decreasing, while the insured losses for all of Canada are increasing. In Alberta, insurance companies paid out more than $1billion over the period 1987 to 1995, averaging $113.2 Million per year. For the 7-year period 1996 to 2002, insurance companies paid approximately $452.6 Million, for an annual average of $64.7 Million, 43% less than the previous 9-year average. This represents an average annual savings of $48.5 Million, totaling $485 Million over 10 years. These averages will likely change slightly due to the severe hailstorm and flooding that struck Edmonton in 2004 (estimated damage $170 Million) and the severe hailstorm that struck Medicine Hat on June 17th, 2005. The total estimated savings would likely be closer to $400 Million after all the data are included up to 2005. These data do not represent statistical proof that the seeding has reduced damage; however, there is an association between the cloud seeding and a reduction in property damage due to severe storms in Alberta.
Figure 77: Property damage due to natural disasters in Alberta and for the all of Canada (Insurance Bureau of Canada Facts Book, 2004).
October 2005
Page: 89
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A formal evaluation of the hail suppression program is still not possible without receiving more comprehensive property insurance claim data. Preliminary assessments using the available, published data show a reduction in urban and agricultural losses after ten years and there is no doubt that the program has been a financial success. The evidence is consistently positive, and the lack of scientific proof is largely a measurement problem, since accurate temporal and spatial measurement of hail and hail-damage is difficult to obtain. The bottom-line financial indicators are all positive. This summer was cool and wet, compared with the dry conditions of the previous few years and so there were no complaints about drought. There are no reasons to change the scientific seeding hypotheses, methodologies, or design of the program based on our experiences and results of the past 10 years. The Alberta Hail Suppression Project continues to be a model operational program, using cloud seeding as a viable technology for reducing the economic impact of hailstorms. Over the last 10 years, WMI has consistently tried to maintain a strong scientific basis to the program. WMI was the first company to implement the research-derived TITAN radar analysis and display system to improve operations and seeding assessments. WMI has supported research projects at the University of Calgary, University of Alberta, and McGill University towards the development of technology and numerical models to improved our understanding and forecasting of hailstorms. Research is also ongoing for the development of improved radar parameters that are more closely related to hail at the ground, so that the radar may be used as an evaluation tool. Many more opportunities now exist for future collaboration and co-operation with universities and research organizations. The 2005 field operations ran very smoothly and, once again, there are no major recommendations for program improvements or upgrades. Every program must continue to strive for excellence, therefore, the following few recommendations are presented for consideration by the ASWMS and WMI senior management next year. The TITAN computer system should be upgraded in an attempt to improve the network file transfers and reduce the number of missing radar images sent to the Fargo web server. The Alberta program has experienced meteorologists and pilots, and a well-established project design and methodology. Therefore, this is a good opportunity to use Alberta as a training facility for new WMI staff so that they can be trained to work on other projects in the future. There continues to be a need for more detailed property damage insurance data. The Insurance Bureau of Canada should be contacted again in an attempt to gather the most recent and detailed property damage data so that detailed evaluations about the financial effectiveness of the program can be conducted in the future.
T. W. Krauss October 31, 2005
October 2005
Page: 90
REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDED READING

Abshaev, M. T., 1999: Evolution of seeded and non seeded hailstorms. Proc. Seventh WMO Scientific Conf. On Wea. Modification. WMP Report No. 31, World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, 407-410. Alberta Research Council, 1985: Atmospheric Sciences - Field Program 1985. R. Deibert (editor), Alberta Research Council, Edmonton, 70pp. Alberta Research Council, 1986: Weather Modification in Alberta: Research and Operations 1980-85. ARC report, Edmonton. 18pp. Amburn S. and P. Wolf, 1997: VIL Density as a Hail Indicator. Weather and Forecasting, 12, 473-478. Barge, B.L., and F. Bergwall, 1976: Fine scale structure of convective storms associated with hail production. Rep. 76-2 (2 Vols.), Atmos. Sci. Div., Alberta Research Council, Edmonton. Battan, L. J., 1973: Radar Observation of the Atmosphere. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 324 pp. [Reprinted by: TechBooks, 2600 Seskey Glen Court, Herndon, VA 22071] Bennett, S.P., 1990: A Summary of Weather Modification Activities Reported in the United States During 1989. US Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, Silver Spring, MD, 23 pp. Benoit, R., J M. Desgagn, P. Pellerin, S. Pellerin, Y. Chartier, and S. Desjardins, 1997: The Canadian MC2: A semi-Lagrangian, semi-implicit wideband atmospheric model suited for finescale process studies and simulation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 125, 2382-2415. Breidenbach, J.P., D.H. Kitzmiller, and R.E. Saffle, 1993: Joint relationships between severe local storms occurrence and radar-derived and environmental variables. Preprints, 13th Conference on Weather Analysis and Forecasting, Vienna, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 588-591. Brimelow, J., 1999: The HAILCAST model in Alberta. M.Sc. Thesis, Univ. Alberta, Edmonton. Brimelow, J.C., and G.W. Reuter, 2001: A radar-based methodology for preparing a severe weather climatology in central Alberta. University of Alberta, 17 pp. Browning, K. A., 1977: The structure and mechanisms of hailstorms. Hail: A Review of Hail Science and Hail Suppression. Meteor. Monograph., 16, 38, 1-43. Charak, M.T., 1978: Preliminary Analysis of Reported Weather Modification Activities in the US for 1976 and 1977. J. Weather Modification, 10, 165. Charlton, R. B., B. M. Kachman, and L. Wojtiw, 1995: Urban hailstorms: A view from Alberta. Natural Hazards, 12, 29-75. Chisholm, A. J., 1970: Alberta hailstorms: A radar study and model. Ph.D. Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, 287pp. Chisholm, A. J., and J. H. Renick, 1972: The kinematics of multicell and supercell Alberta hailstorms, Alberta Hail Studies, 1972. Research Council of Alberta Rep. 72-2, 24-31. Cohard, J.-M. and J.-P. Pinty, 2000a: A comprehensive two-moment warm microphysical bulk scheme. I: Description and tests. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 126, 1815-1842. Cooper, W. A., and J. Marwitz, 1980: Winter storms over the San Juan mountains. Part III: Seeding potential. J. Appl. Met., 19, 942-949. DeMott, P.J., W.G. Finnegan and L.O. Grant, 1983: An application of chemical kinetic theory and methodology to characterize the ice nucleating properties of aerosols used in weather modification. J. Clim. Appl. Meteor., 22, 1190-1203. DeMott, P.J., 1987: Report to the Weather Modification Group on tests of the ice nucleating ability of aerosols produced from the TB-1 formulation AgI pyrotechnic. Dept. Atmos. Sci., Colorado State Univ., Report, Fort Collins, Co.11pp. DeMott, P.J., 1990: Report to INTERA Technologies Ltd. on Tests of the Ice Nucleating Ability of WMG TB-1 Formulation Pyrotechnics. Dept. Atmos. Sci., Colorado State Univ., Report, Fort Collins, Co. DeMott, P.J., 1995: Report to the Weather Modification Group on tests of the ice nucleating ability of aerosols produced from the WMG-1 formulation AgI pyrotechnic. Dept. Atmos. Sci., Colorado State Univ., Report, Fort Collins, Co.11pp. DeMott, P.J., 1999: Report to the Weather Modification Incorporated on tests of the ice nucleating ability of aerosols produced by new formulation pyrotechnics March 1999. Dept. Atmos. Sci., Colorado State Univ., Report, Fort Collins, Co.10pp. Dennis, A.S., 1980: Weather Modification by Cloud Seeding. Academic Press, New York. 267 pp. Dennis, A.S., C.A. Schock, and A. Koscielski, 1970: Characteristics of hailstorms of Western South Dakota. J. Appl. Meteor., 9, 127-135. Dixon, Michael, and Gerry Wiener, 1993: TITAN: Thunderstorm Identification, Tracking, Analysis, and Nowcasting - A Radar-based Methodology. J. Atmos. and Oceanic Technol., 10, 6, 785-797.
Page: 91
English, M., 1986: The testing of hail suppression hypotheses by the Alberta Hail Project. Preprints, 10th Conf. Weather Modification, Arlington, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 72-76. English, M., and T.W. Krauss, 1986: Results from an Alberta hailstorm seeding experiment. Presented 1st Intl. Cloud Modeling Workshop/Conf., Isree, FRG, July 1985, 79-84. Environment Canada 1987. Climate Atlas of Canada, Map Series 3, Pressure, Humidity, Cloud, Visibility, and Days with Thunderstorms, Hail, Smoke and Haze, Fog, Freezing Precipitation, Blowing Snow, Frost, Snow on the Ground, Ministry of Supply and Services, Cat. No. EN5663:3-1986. Environment Canada El Nino website - http://www.msc-smc.ec.gc.ca/education/elnino/index_e.cfm Etkin, D., and S. E. Brun, 1999: A note on Canadas hail climatology: 1977-1993. Int. J. Climatol. 19: 13571373. Ferrier, B.S., 1994: A two-moment multiple-phase four-class bulk ice scheme. Part I: Description. J. Atmos. Sci., 51, 249-280. Ferrier, B.S., W.-K. Tau and J. Simpson, 1995: A double-moment multiple-phase four-class bulk ice scheme. Part II: Simulations of convective storms in different large-scale environments and comparisons with other bulk parameterizations. J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 1001-1033. Foote, G. B., and C. A. Knight, 1979: Results of a randomized hail suppression experiment in northeast Colorado. Part I. Design and conduct of the experiment. J. Appl. Meteor., 18, 1526-1537. Foote, G.B., 1984: The study of hail growth utilizing observed storm conditions. J. Climate. Appl. Meteor.,23,84-101. Foote, G.B., 1985: Aspects of cumulonimbus classification relevant to the hail problem. J. Rech. Atmos., 19, 61--74. Foote, G.B., and J.C. Fankhauser, 1973: Airflow and moisture budget beneath a northeast Colorado hailstorm. J. Appl. Meteor., 12, 1330-1353. Foote, G.B., T.W. Krauss, and V. Makitov, 2005: Hail metrics using conventional radar. Proceedings: 16th Conf. On Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, Amer. Meteor. Soc., Boston. Garvey, D.M., 1975: Testing of cloud seeding materials at the Cloud Simulation and Aerosol Laboratory, 1971-1973. J. Appl. Meteor., 14,883-890. Glossary of Meteorology, American Meteorological Society, Boston, Massachusetts, 1959. Grandia, K.L., D.S. Davison and J.H. Renick, 1979: On the dispersion of silver iodide in Alberta hailstorms. Proceedings: 7th Conf. on inadvertent and planned weather modification, Amer. Meteor. Soc., Banff.56-57. Harris, E.R., 1981: Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, 196 pp. Howell, W.E., 1977: Environmental impacts of precipitation management: Results and inferences from Project Skywater. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., Vol. 58, 488-501. Humphries, R.G., M. English, and J. Renick, 1987: Weather Modification in Alberta., J. Weather Modification, 19, 13-24. Insurance Bureau of Canada, 2001: Facts of the General Insurance Industry of Canada. Insurance Bureau of Canada, Toronto. 44 pp. Kain, J.S., and J.M. Fritsch, 1993: Convective parameterization for mesoscale models: The Kain-Fritsch scheme. The Representation of Cumulus Convection in Numerical Models, Meteo. Monogr., No. 46, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 165-170. Kitzmiller, D. H., and J. P. Breidenbach, 1995: Detection of Severe Local Storm Phenomena by Automated Interpretation of Radar and Storm Environment, Techniques Development Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD, NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS TDL 82. (33 pages) Kitzmiller, D.H., W.E. McGovern, and R.E Saffle, 1995: The WSR-88D severe weather algorithm. Wea. Forecasting, 10, 141-159. Kong, F. and M.K. Yau, 1997: An explicit approach to microphysics in MC2. Atm. Ocean. 33, 257-291. Krauss, T.W. 1981. Precipitation Processes in the New Growth Zone of Alberta Hailstorms Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Wyoming, Laramie, 296 pp. Krauss, T.W., 1989: An assessment of seeding rate. Greek National Hail Suppression Program 1988 Annual Report. Edited by Rudolph et al., INTERA Report M88-490, Calgary, 5.2 to 5.4. Krauss, T.W., 1998: Radar responses to seeding of hailstorms in Alberta. 14th Conf. Wea. Mod., AMS, Everett, WA, 632-635. Krauss, T.W., and J.D. Marwitz, 1984: Precipitation processes within an Alberta supercell hailstorm. J. Atmos. Sci., 41, 1025-1034. Krauss, T.W. and V. Makitov, 2001: An overview of the Mendoza hail suppression program 2000. Proceedings, 15th Conf. Inadvertent and Planned Weather Modification, Amer. Meteor. Soc., Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Page: 92
Krauss, T.W., R.E. Rinehart, J.L. Kollegger, and S.A. Kozak, 1998: VIL as a predictor for hail in Alberta. Preprints, 14th Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, Everett, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 589-592. Landscheidt, T., 1999: Solar activity a dominant factor in climate dynamics, http://www.vision.net.au/~daly/solar/solar.htm Landscheidt, T. 1999:Trends in pacific decadal oscillation subjected to solar forcing, http://www.vision.net.au/~daly/theodor/pdotrend.htm Landscheidt, T. 1999: Solar activity controls El Nino and La Nina, http://www.vision.net.au/~daly/sunenso/sun-enso.htm Makitov, V., 1999: Organization and main results of the hail suppression program in the northern area of the province of Mendoza, Argentina. J. Weather Modification, 31, 76-86. Marwitz, J.D., 1972a: The structure and motion of severe hailstorms. Part I: Supercell storms. J. Appl. Meteor., 11, 166-179. Marwitz, J.D., 1972b: The structure and motion of severe hailstorms. Part II: Multicell storms. J. Appl. Meteor., 11, 180-188. Marwitz, J.D., 1972c: The structure and motion of severe hailstorms. Part III: Severely sheared storms. J. Appl. Meteor., 11, 166-179. Marwitz, J.D., 1972d: Precipitation efficiency of thunderstorms on the High Plains. J. Rech. Atmos., 6, 367-370. Mather, G. K., M. J. Dixon, J. M. DeJager, 1996: Assessing the potential for rain augmentation The Nelspruit randomized convective cloud seeding experiment. J. Appl. Meteor., 35, 1465-1482. Meyers, M.P., R.L. Walko, J.Y. Harrington and W.R. Cotton, 1997: New RAMS cloud microphysics. Part II: The two-moment scheme. Atmos. Res., 45, 3-39. Milbrandt, J.A. and M.K. Yau, 2003: Analysis of the role of the shape parameter in bulk microphysics parameterizations and a proposed triple-moment approach. Submitted to J. Atmos. Sci. Miller, R., 1972: Notes on Analysis and Severe-Storm Forecasting Procedures of the Air Force Global Weather Central. Air Weather Service Technical Report 200 (Rev), United States Air Force, Chapters 5 and 7. Mullayarov, V. A., V.I. Kozlov, and R.R. Karimov, 2001.:Relation of thunderstorm activity to cosmic ray variations. In: ISCS 2001 Abstracts. Solar Variability, Climate and Space Weather. NOAA PDO website - http://ww2.wrh.noaa.gov/climate_info/PDO_page.htm Ramanathan, V., B.R. Barkstrom, and E.F. Harrison, 1989: Climate and the earths radiation budge. Physics Today, 22. Rasmussen, E.N., and D. O. Blanchard, 1998: A baseline climatology of sounding-derived supercell and tornado forecast parameters. Weather and Forecasting, 13, 1148-1164. Renick, J., 1975: The Alberta Hail Project: Update 1975. J. of Weather Mod., 7, no. 2, 1-6. Rinehart, R. E., 1997: Radar for Meteorologists. 3rd Edition, Rinehart Publications, P.O. Box 6124, Grand Forks, ND. 58206-6124. 428 pp. Ross, C., and P. Woloshyn, 1986: Effect of Hail and Drought on Major Crops in Alberta. Alberta Agriculture Report. Edmonton. 34pp. Rudolph, R., and C. Ganniaris-Papageorgiou, 1991: Effects of cloud seeding on hail insurance statistics in northern Greece. Paper presented at the 2nd Conf. on Hail Suppression. Yugoslavia. Rudolph, R.C., C.M. Sachiw, and G.T. riley, 1994: Statistical evaluation of the 1984-88 seeding experiment in northern Greece. J. Weather Modification, 26, 53-60. Schnur, R., T. W. Krauss, F. Joe Eley, and D. Lettenmaier, 1997: Spatiotemporal analysis of radarestimated precipitation during the BOREAS Summer 1994 Field Campaigns. J. of Geophysical Research, vol. 102, D24, 29,417-29,427. Shabbar, A., 1997: El Nino. Environment Canadas web page. Downsview, Ont. Sheremata, D, 1998: Hail Busters: Shooting for the clouds. Canadian Geographic, Vol. 118, No. 5, 6670. Smith, P.L., L.R. Johnson, D.L. Priegnitz, B.A. Boe, and P.W. Mielke Jr., 1997: An exploratory analysis of crop hail insurance data for evidence of cloud seeding effects in North Dakota. J. Applied Meteor., 36, 463-473. Smith, P. L., and L. R. Lemon, 1997, Characteristics of Radar Echoes from Hailstorms. 31st CMOS Congress, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada, pp 66. Stanley-Jones, M., 1996: Radar systems, Theoretical & Practical Measurement Procedures, unpublished manuscript, 112 pp. Strong, G. S., 1979: A convective forecast index as an aid in hail suppression evaluation. Proceedings, 7th Conf. Inadvertent and Planned Weather Modification, Amer. Meteor. Soc., Banff, 2pp.
Page: 93
Strong, G. S., and W. D. Wilson, 1983: The Synoptic Index of Convection, Part I: Evaluation of the Single-Valued Index, 1978-82. 17th Annual CMOS Congress, Banff. Atmos. Sci. Dept., Alberta Research Council, Red Deer. 29-37. Summers, P. W., and L. Wojtiw, 1971: The economic impact of hail damage in Alberta, Canada and its dependence on various hailfall parameters. Preprints, Seventh Conf. of Severe Local Storms, Kansas City, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 158-163. Svensmark, H. & Friis-Christensen, E.: Variation of cosmic ray flux and global cloud coverage a missing link in solarclimate relationships. J. Atm. Sol.Terr. Phys. 59 (1997), 1225. Terblanche, D. E., 1996: A simple digital signal processing method to simulate linear and quadratic responses from a radars logarithmic receiver. J. Atmos. And Oceanic Tech., 13, 533-538. University of Washington PDO website - http://tao.atmos.washington.edu/pdo/ Waldvogel, A., B. Federer, and P. Grimm, 1979: Criteria for the detection of hail cells. J. Appl. Meteor., 25, 1521-1525. Winston H. A., and L. J. Ruthi, 1986: Evaluation of RADAPII Severe Storm Detection Algorithms. AMS Bulletin, VOL 67, 145-150. Ziegler, C.L., 1985: Retrieval of thermal and microphysical variables in observed convective storms. Part 1: Model development and preliminary testing. J. Atmos. Sci., 42, 1497-1509.
October 2005
Page: 94
APPENDICES
A. B. C. D. E. Organization Chart Daily Weather and Activities Summary Table Aircraft Operations Summary Table Flight Summary Table Forms Weather Forecast Worksheet WMI Radar Observer Log WMI Seeding Aircraft Flight Log Specifications for Piper Cheyenne II Aircraft Specifications for Cessna C-340 Aircraft Ground School Agenda Daily Meteorological Forecast Statistics Project Personnel and Telephone List
F. G. H. I. J.
October 2005
Page: 95
A. ORGANIZATION CHART
October 2005
Page: 96
B. DAILY WEATHER AND ACTIVITIES SUMMARY TABLE

ALBERTA HAIL SUPPRESSION PROJECT 2005 DAILY SUMMARY REPORTS Weather Activities Summary HS1 was launched at 2028Z towards Sundre and Cold, closed Low pressure system in southern SK. Jet Rocky on a test flight. At 2128Z HS1 successfully core off OR coast and across WY. This closed Low is fired an EJT flare. At 2129Z HS1 fired a BIP flare undercutting a long wave ridge over northern AB. and two flares lit. HS1 was RTB at 2139Z. Easterly flow at all levels. The airmass over the project is cold with medium moisture. The danger zone for HS2 was launched at 2054Z towards Olds on a test strong convection is in eastern MT, ND and southern flight at cloud base. At 2135Z HS2 successfully fired SK and MB. a BIP flare. At 2138Z HS2 fired the acetone generator for 4 min. HS2 was RTB at 2142Z. Overcast, cloudy, and cool with bands of showers that moved across the project area from east to west. An HS3 was launched around 2245Z towards RM on a early morning thundershower over north Calgary test flight. HS3 was airborne at 2253Z and produced reports of small hail around 7am local time. successfully fired a BIP flare at 2305Z and an EJT Several weak thundershowers occurred across the flare at 2307Z. HS3 was RTB at 2313Z. All systems project area. No significant hail was reported. were operational. Tmax YC = 15.4 C with 8.2 mm rain. HS1: 2055-2203 UTC: 1 EJECT, 2 BIP: Test Flight Tmax QF = 16.6 C with 5.0 mm rain. HS2: 2121-2155 UTC: 0 EJECT, 1 BIP, 4 min Generator: Test Flight HS3: 2252-2334 UTC: 1 EJECT, 1 BIP: Test Flight HS2 was launched at 2050Z to patrol north of Airdrie. Cold, closed Low in southern SK with associated HS3 was launched to patrol cells around Red Deer at surface Low over Regina. Project area in northerly, 2102Z. HS2 was airborne at 2113Z and reported wrap-around flow around the Low. Another significant cloud bases around 6 kft. At 2117Z Barry Robinson Low off BC coast. Ridge of high pressure near called the radar to report that pea size hail had fallen Yellowknife in NWT. Jet cores off BC coast and in the at Innisfail from the cells south of Red Deer. HS3 USA across WYO and ND. The airmass over the was airborne at 2123Z and reported weak, mushy project area is cold and unstable. cells in the vicinity. Early morning weak thunderstorm over north Calgary HS2 started seeding Storm #1 at 2129Z over Airdrie produced some public reports of small hail. Skies were at cloud base. The line of cells was moving quickly mostly cloudy, with two convective rain bands that moved across the project area during the day. One cell towards the south and southwest. HS2 continued to seed along the western flank of the approaching line produced pea size hail in Innisfail. There were of cells, continuing to seed over Calgary. scattered thundershowers over Airdrie, Calgary, and Red Deer. HS3 proceeded south to seed Storm #1 over Calgary. HS3 started seeding W of Airdrie at 2143Z. Tmax YC = 18.1 C with 18.6 mm rain. HS3 made several seeding passes over Calgary at Tmax QF = 19.6 C with 7.0 mm rain. cloud top, finally stopping seeding #1 at 2219Z as there was no further vigorous development over Calgary. HS2 stopped seeding #1 at 2221Z and patrolled near Springbank for a while and then was RTB at 2227Z. HS3 patrolled northward towards Sundre and then RM and finally was RTB at 2235Z. HS2: 2110-2253 UTC: 4 BIP, 108 min Generator: Seed storm #1 over Airdrie and YC at cloud base. HS3: 2121-2308 UTC: 58 EJECT, 5 BIP: Seed storm #1 over Calgary at cloud top. HS1 was launched at 1948Z to patrol near Carstairs as a line of showers approached from the north. Thunder and heavy rain occurred at the radar at 2015Z. HS1 was airborne at 2017Z and patrolled north of YC. HS1 started seeding at 2105Z over YC as a precaution when radar showed reflectivity of 47 dBZ and tops near 8 kjm. Titan registered a cell with 3.5 km tops and 39 dBZ. The high reflectivities were all at the very low levels in the clouds. HS1 stopped seeding at 2120Z and then patrolled near Cochrane.
October 2005
Date June 1, Wednesday
June 2, Thursday
June 3, Friday
Closed Low in southern SK, undercutting ridge extending north into the NWT. Small vorticity disturbances pin-wheeling around Low causing bands of TSRA over the project area. Some short-lived showers produced lightning and thunder and graupel particles (snow pellets). Tmax YC = 14.8 C and 14.8 mm rain Tmax QF = 17.0 C and 3.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 13.1 C and 17.0 mm rain.
Page: 97
HS1 RTB at 2222Z when no further hard growth was observed. HS1: 2012-2243 UTC: 2 EJECT, 3 BIP: seed over Calgary. HS2 was launched at 2054Z to patrol north and west of Calgary. They were airborne at 2111Z and proceeded to cloud base (6-6.2 kft). Although they reported showers over Calgary there were no firm bases and cloud tops were generally observed to be below 20kft. HS2 RTB at 2252Z when convection in the area was subsiding. HS2: 2108 2301Z; patrol near Calgary. No seeding.
June 4, Saturday
Cold, closed Low remains over south SK. Intense Low system digging off BC coast over VR island with good Jet support. Weak ridge over project area, but atmosphere is cold, moist, and unstable. Scattered rain showers and some TSRA existed over the project area all day. Small cold core funnel clouds were reported just before noon near Breton and Airdrie; afternoon funnel clouds were reported near Calgary, Edmonton, Red Deer, Strathmore, and Wetaskiwin. The most intense cell during the day occurred east of Strathmore, registering 51 dBZ and 8.5 Km cell tops. Max VIL was 12.1 kg/m2 east of High River, indicative of pea size hail. Tmax YC = 16.4 C with 5.6 mm rain Tmax QF = 17.8 C with 15.2 mm rain Tmax Radar = 16.7 C with 0.3 mm rain Intense upper level Low over VR Island with good jet cores around Low. Ridging and warming aloft over AB ahead of Low. Vorticity disturbances moving north from MT state. Atmosphere is moist and unstable, but there exists only weak dynamics. Similar situation to Saturday with reports of a few cold core funnel clouds. Light rain from NW to SE including Calgary, early. Later rain over S and W of project area. No titan cells, tops 6 km with 36 dBz max. Tmax YC = 14.7 C with 36.6 mm rain Tmax QF = 17.5 C with 0.2 mm rain Tmax Radar = 15.1 C with 0.0 mm rain Intense upper level Low remains over NW United States. Temperature aloft will remain cold over the project area. Vorticity disturbances continue to spin northward from MT along with low thick clouds. Atmosphere continues to be moist, but very little instability and forcing. Widespread rain showers spread from South to North, covering the southern half of the project area by evening. No titan cells, tops around 6 km with 30 dBz max. Tmax YC = 12.3 C with 18 mm rain Tmax QF = 17.0 C with trace of rain Tmax Radar = 14.3 C with 2.5 mm rain Upper level Low continues to slide east with main jet core south of low. Overnight lee side cyclo-genesis formed a surface Low in western MT. This Low will move NW over southern project area, bringing vorticity across the area. Atmosphere is still moist, but very little instability with cool temperatures. Widespread rain showers across the southern of the project area. No titan cells. Tops around 5.5 km with 36 dBz max. Clearing from SE by 23 UTC. Total rainfall amounts from this system exceeded 300 mm SW of Calgary, a record amount. Flood warnings were in effect for the area around High River, including the city of Calgary.
June 5, Sunday
No aircraft operations.
June 6, Monday
June 7, Tuesday
October 2005
Page: 98
June 8, Wednesday
Tmax YC = 8.7 C with 46.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 10.8 C with 8.4 rain Tmax Radar = 9.4 C with 71.4 mm rain (39 mm in wedge guage) Upper level Low is now near MT/ID border. Main jet is ahead of Low and will cause the Low to weaken over the next 36 hours. A surface Low extending up to 500 mb exists along SK/US border. Rising motion over southern AB, with sinking air over north half of the project area. Increasing temperatures aloft. Atmosphere is beginning to dry out after 3 days of rain. Few scattered rain showers moved across the southern project area. No titan cells. Tops around 6 km with 41 dBz max. Tmax YC = 13.3 C with 10.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 13.7 C with 0.0 rain Tmax Radar = 13.8 C with 0.0 rain Low pressure system over southern SK, bringing easterly upper level winds over the project area, with northerly low level and surface winds. Slight mid level rising motion. Atmosphere is mostly dry, except at mid levels due to persistent cloud cover. Few scattered light rain showers across the project area. Lightning strikes detected on the North and South ends of the area. Tmax YC = 15.9 C with trace rain Tmax QF = 18.2 C with trace rain Tmax Radar = 17.2 C with 0.0 rain Two Low pressure systems affecting the flow over the project area. First Low north of AB and the other system in central SK. A stationary front exists across central AB and SK. Very little forcing mechanisms present, so thunderstorm activity will be due to daytime heating. Atmosphere has dried but is not very unstable. Towering cumulus formed along the foothills in the early afternoon and moved across the project area as a line of showers throughout the afternoon. A later wave of showers, around 02z formed north of Calgary, but weakened before crossing highway 2. The max cell top was 9.5 km and max reflectivity was 52 dBz. Max VIL in project area was 15.1 kg/m2 east of Airdrie. Radar returns suggest pea size hail from several scattered TRW-. Tmax YC = 19.2 C with 4.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 21.3 C with 1.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 19.8 C with 1.3 mm rain
June 9, Thursday
June 10, Friday
HS2 was launched at 1856Z in order to patrol the shower development west of Calgary. HS2 was airborne at 1923Z and began to patrol SW of YC at 7 kft, but developed radio problems at 2001Z and had to RTB. HS3 was launched at 1943Z to patrol west of Red Deer towards RM because several cells west of RM were observed to have VIL indicative of small hail (>10 kg/m2). HS1 was launched at 1956Z to patrol near Turner Valley-Black Diamond (TV-BD) at cloud top. HS3 was airborne at 2005Z and headed west of RD. HS1 was airborne at 2015Z and reported cloud bases at 7500 ft over YC. HS1 patrolled west of Okotoks as weak showers moved across YC. HS1 started seeding Storm #1 over the city of Calgary at 2046Z. One cell had 46 dBZ and tops of 8.5 km over SW Calgary while HS1 was seeding. HS1 stopped seeding at 2121Z after all cells over YC had decayed to weak RW- and HS1 reported all ice and no liquid water within the clouds. HS1 continued to patrol west of Calgary until 2213Z and then RTB. HS3 patrolled along the leading edge of the advancing line of TRW- west of Red Deer. After no cells threatened Red Deer, HS3 was RTB at 2213Z. HS3 did not seed on this flight. At 0158Z, secondary development of cells north of Cochrane reached tops of 8.5 km and 52 dBZ. HS1 was launched at 0213Z to patrol this new development NW of YC. HS1 was airborne at 0233Z and investigated the cells NW of YC; however, the
October 2005
Page: 99
cells began to dissipate to RW-. HS1 was RTB at 0347Z after reporting no new development and weak updrafts with no liquid water. No seeding was conducted by HS1 on this flight. HS2: 1920-2007 UTC: patrol SW YC HS3: 2005-2312 UTC: patrol W RD HS1: 2012-2233 UTC: 23 EJECT, 2 BIP YC HS1: 0230-0355 UTC: patrol NW YC HS1 was launched at 1933Z to patrol SW of Calgary. HS1 was airborne at 1955Z and patrolled near the southern buffer zone, climbing to 18 kft for better visibility. Around 2026Z, ATC received the funnel cloud report W of YC, just as a titan cell registered 8.5 km tops and 47 dBZ near Balzac. HS1 was instructed to seed the developing cells over S Calgary and including the Balzac cell. HS1 started seeding Storm #1 over YC at 2038Z. HS1 made several north-south seeding passes over YC, seeding multiple cells which were part of the same storm complex. HS1 stopped seeding #1 at 2112Z, after the decaying cells had moved east of YC. HS1 patrolled until 2146Z and then RTB. HS3 was launched at 2114Z to investigate cell development W of Olds. HS3 was airborne at 21123Z and began patrolling the advancing band of embedded TRW- west of Hwy 2. HS3 patrolled until 2315Z the region from Olds to Lacombe and was RTB without seeding after no cells threatened any town or city. HS1: 1955-2158 UTC: 44 Eject, 4 BIP. Storm #1 over S Calgary to Airdrie. HS3: 2005-2312 UTC: patrol W of Hwy 2 from Olds to Lacombe. HS1 was launched at 2035Z to investigate the embedded cells SW of YC. HS1 was airborne at 2054Z and proceeded to patrol in the clear along N-S tracks along the eastern boundary of Calgary City limits. HS1 reported no significant growth to the short-lived thunder showers, and was RTB at 2205Z. No seeding was done. HS1: 2052-2223 UTC: patrol YC
June 11, Saturday
Similar situation to Friday with upper level low north of SK, jet streak over northwest US, and a stationary front through central AB. A surface low and trough exists along the AB/SK border. Still no major forcing mechanisms, but daytime heating will create enough instability to produce thunderstorms. Showers along foothills at mid-day and a band of TRW moving across the project from SW to NE, crossing over the radar at noon with thunder. Local heavy rainfall amounts reported at Olds and from various other intensive, short-lived cells that were embedded in the band. A funnel cloud was reported by a pilot to ATC near Hidden Valley (W of YC airport). Max cell tops in the project were 8.5 km, 53 dBZ, and max VIL of 14.9 kg/m2 indicative of pea size hail. Pea size hail was observed on Hwy 2 near Balzac, and reported from south Calgary. Tmax YC = 197.0 C with 1.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 18.3 C with trace rain Tmax Radar = 16.2 C with 10.4 mm rain
June 12, Sunday
Trof of low pressure over project area with surface Low over southern Alberta. Project mostly under the influence of post-frontal, cold airmass with moderate instability. A quasi-stationary convergence zone or weak front persisted over the southern part of Calgary, and numerous short-lived cells produced thunder and lightning and heavy rainfall in small areas, most notably SW Calgary districts of Woodbine and Bridlewood. Max cell top heights over Calgary were only 4.5 km, but 7.5 km tops were observed SE of YC. A funnel cloud was reported by Env Canada at 1855Z SW of YC. The YC airport received very little rain. Pea size hail was reported at Spruce Meadows. Tmax YC = 14.2 C with 1.6 mm rain Tmax QF = 12.9 C with no rain Tmax Radar = 12.0 C with no rain Trof remained over the area with a surface low in SW Saskatchewan. There was some U/A divergence in SE Alberta and surface convergence indicated NE of Red Deer. A line of cells had developed between Calgary and Rocky Mountain House by 1935Z. This line moved to the NE and was generally E of the project area by 0045Z. A second line of cells had formed between Rocky Mountain House and Sundre by 2255Z. By 2350Z this line eventually stretched to Calgary. The largest cell of the day developed in this line. It had Titan tops of 9.5km and 49 dBz at 0147Z about 10nm SW of Threehills. This second line also moved to the NE and had cleared the project are by 0700Z.
June 13, Monday
HS1 was launched at 1926Z in response to the report of small hail from the weak cells approaching S of YC. HS1 was airborne at 1943Z and started seeding (cloud top) Storm #1 at 1947Z over S Calgary. Titan had registered a cell track at 1944Z of only 4.5 km tops and 44 dBZ, but it was seeded as a precaution, considering the reports of small hail. HS1 stopped seeding at 2004Z after reporting no significant updrafts or liquid water. HS1 continued to patrol W of YC until 2119Z and then RTB. HS3 was launched at 2009Z to patrol the advancing band of embedded thundershowers. HS3 was
October 2005
Page: 100
Pea size hail reported at Spruce Meadows about 1924Z and pea size hail reported in SE Calgary about 1951Z. Thunder, lightning and heavy rain at the radar at 2018Z but no hail. A funnel cloud was reported NW of Calgary by a pilot at 2345Z, prompting Tornado watches from EC. The internet at the radar was down from about 0030Z to 0200Z. Tmax YC = 18.4C with 2.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 18C with 5.4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 16.6C with 13.4 mm rain
airborne at 2028Z and began patrolling at cloud base the region from Innisfail to Sylvan Lake. The rain band crossed over Red Deer without any significant weather, so HS3 was RTB at 2231Z. HS3 did not seed. HS2 was launched at 2333Z to patrol a second wave of cells that formed near the foothills and was tracking E across the project. HS2 was airborne on VHF at 2352Z and had to reboot their computer before their a/c track came on at 0001Z. HS2 patrolled new development W of Carstairs at 0010Z and then headed to new development W of Innisfail. HS2 started seeding Storm #2 (at cloud base) at 0023Z W of Innisfail and also spotted a funnel cloud from a cell W of Red Deer. HS2 headed N to seed the cell W of Red Deer. The funnel cloud had disappeared by 0027Z, and HS2 continued to seed #2 W of Red Deer. HS2 stopped seeding #2 at 0052Z and patrolled towards Calgary along the E side of Hwy 2. HS2 was RTB at 0115Z; however the line of cells continued to track towards Three Hills and Drumheller. HS1: 1942-2132 UTC: 35 Ejt, 2 BIP; Storm #1 over Calgary. HS3: 2025-2238 UTC: patrol Innisfail, Sylvan Lake, and Red Deer. HS2: 2347-0127 UTC: 0 EJT, 2 BIP, 60 min acetone; Storm #2 Red Deer No aircraft operations.
June 14, Tuesday
A trof was still over central Alberta with a surface low in the NE of the province. A jet core was over the southern portion of the project area. Weak convection developed in the NW and N buffer zone in the early afternoon. Subsequently, a thick ci layer moved over the area from the south accompanied by warming aloft. This suppressed any further convection in the area. Tmax YC = 18.3C with no rain Tmax QF = 18.3C with no rain Tmax Radar + 16.8C with no rain A trof remained over NE Alberta with a slight ridge over the mountains in the SW. The jet core was over the project area. Both the YC and QF soundings had dried significantly due to westerly flow. Neither sounding appeared to support convection above about 25kft. Thundershowers developed in the NW quadrant of the project shortly after noon and tracked towards the east. A line of cells tracked from Caroline to Red Deer. Max tops were 8.5 km and 46 dBZ. Max VIL 6.5 kg/m2. Tmax YC = 18.5C with no rain Tmax QF = 17.1C with 1mm rain Tmax Radar + 17.5C with no rain Low approaching SW Saskatchewan from the westcentral USA. Slight ridging over the project area. The soundings had warmed significantly throughout their depth and were only slightly unstable to about 20kft. Winds aloft had backed to the SW and surface winds were generally from the SE. A heavy band of mid-level AS, AC passed across the project from south to north in the afternoon. No deep convection occurred in the project area. Widespread rain moved into the area from the south after midnight.
June 15, Wednesday
HS3 was launched at 1913Z to patrol the line of thundershowers west of Red Deer. HS3 was airborne at 1935Z and started seeding Storm #1 at 1945Z approximately 18 mi W of QF. The storm developed into a line of cells, extending from Spruce View towards Red Deer. Max cell tops were typically 6.5 km and max reflectivity around 44 dBZ. HS3 continued to seed the storm, including several runs over Red Deer until the cells passed the City. HS3 stopped seeding at 2034Z and RTB at 2101Z. HS3: 1935-2107 UTC: 10 BIP. Storm #1 Spruce View to Red Deer. No aircraft operations. Public Relations: Gerald Pilger (Contributing Editor to the Country Guide Magazine) visited the radar site to interview J. Renick and T. Krauss for an updated story about the hail project. Mr. Pilger did a story on the project in 1999 and has followed the program (and our radar images via the Web) with interest ever since.
June 16, Thursday
October 2005
Page: 101
June 17, Friday
Tmax YC = 19.2C with trace of rain Tmax QF = 18.9C with no rain Tmax Radar + 18.6C with no rain Deep, cold Low centered off OR coast with a trough extending north across BC into Northern AB. Strong Jet core across MT with nose of Jet approaching SE AB. Surface Low moving into NE MT, bringing warm, moist air into SE AB. Cold, moist airmass over the project area and upslope conditions produce significant rainfalls and a heavy rainfall advisory for most of the project area, especially the western portions and foothills. A severe hailstorm struck Medicine Hat around 5 pm (23Z) producing golfball and larger hail and significant damage. The severe storm complex moved into SK producing hail and some reports of tornados. Tmax YC = 12.1C, 25 mm rain Tmax QF = 14.1C, 20.8 mm rain Tmax Radar = 12.9C, 17.5 mm rain (tipping bucket gauge at radar underestimates rainfall with strong NE winds due to shielding from the radar dome). Deep upper Low over OR-CA border, with broad trof extending NE across AB. Surface Low centered in SE AB keeps the project area in upslope conditions producing a heavy rainfall situation. Atmosphere continues to be cold and moist over the project area. Continuous rain fell during most of the day. A few convective embedded showers produced lightning strikes in the eastern buffer zone, north of Strathmore around 6 pm. 60 mm rain was emptied from the radars wedge rain gauge at 17Z. By 2130Z, the wedge gauge had received 22 mm more rainfall plus another 6.5 mm in the evening. Springbank reported 150 mm rain over the Friday-Saturday period. Flooding occurred along most rivers across the project from High River to Red Deer. Half of Sundre was evacuated due to flooding. The City of Calgary declared a state of emergency due to flooding along the Elbow and Bow Rivers. Tmax QF = 12.0C, 42.7 mm rain Tmax YC = 9.3C, 25.6 mm rain Tmax Radar = 11.0C, 34.8 mm rain Deep cut-off Low remains off the west coast of OR. Surface Low moves into northern SK. Surface High building over southern AB-SK. Jet stream located south of project area across northern USA. A weak cold front associated with a Low located in northern BC causes some weak showers north of our area. Atmosphere was weakly unstable, but starting to dry. Echo from layer type clouds with embedded Cu was observed across the north buffer zone. Max tops registered by radar were 4.0 km and 41 dBZ. As, Ac. Ci, embedded Cu were observed. In general it was a beautiful day, sunny and warm. Tmax YC = 21.5C with no rain Tmax QF = 21.9C with 0.2mm rain Tmax Radar = 21.6C with 0.3mm rain Deep Low remains off the west coast of US. Low also is located to the north west of the state. Surface High was located east of the project area. Jet stream located south of project area across northern USA. Atmosphere was unstable, but it was dry. No echoes were observed during the day. Ci fib, Cs, As op, Cu
June 18, Saturday
No aircraft operations. Public Relations: Jane and Neil Olsen (local area farmers) brought a group of agriculturists (from the 1964 Graduating class in Agriculture from the Univ. of Alberta) to visit the radar site to learn about the hail suppression project and about the WMI experiences in Mendoza, Argentina. The group is planning a tour to Argentina next November. J. Renick, T. Krauss, and J. Goehring spent approximately 1 hr with the group.
June 19, Sunday
No aircraft operations. Public Relations: A film crew led by Daniel Zuckersbrot, producer of CBCs The Nature of Things, shot film at the radar of a radiosonde balloon launch and some interior control room shots. The program will be about the GPS water vapor retrieval study conducted by the Univ. of Calgary Geomatics Dept that was conducted during 2003 and 2004 and which used radiosonde data collected at Olds as part of their study.
June 20, Monday
October 2005
Page: 102
cong were observed. In general it was a beautiful day, sunny and warm. Tmax YC = 20.7C with no rain Tmax QF = 21.3C with no rain Tmax Radar = 20.2C with no rain Deep Low remains off the west coast of US. Low also is located to the north west of the state. Surface High is located to the east of the state. Jet stream located south of project area across northern USA and nosing into S Alberta to act as a trigger. A weak warm front associated with a Low located in northern Alberta. Atmosphere was very unstable if the cap could be penetrated. The day was very sunny, hot, and clear. In the afternoon a severe storm formed west of Lethbridge producing golf ball size hail and a tornado. This storm split into a severe left moving cell and a severe right moving cell. The right cell produced a large tornado between Taber and Vauxhall and soft ball size hail. The left moving cell triggered golf ball hail near Claresholm and spawned several cells that passed near Vulcan. As the evening progressed, a severe cell formed quickly over Springbank producing 1 cm size hail. After midnight, cells crossed the Rockies, forming into a large line of severe cells that tracked across the northern half of the project area, bringing terrific lightning to Red Deer around 2 to 3 am. Golfball size hail was reported SW of Rocky Mtn House between 1 and 2 am. Tmax YC = 27.2C with no rain Tmax QF = 27.7C with no rain Tmax Radar = 26.4C with no rain
June 21, Tuesday
HS1 was launched at 0119Z to patrol the approaching cells in the south buffer zone. HS1 was airborne at 0140Z and started seeding a fast moving cell east of High River (Storm #1) at 0148Z. The cell cut across the SE corner of the buffer zone and did not pose a threat to the target area, therefore, HS1 stopped seeding Storm #1 at 0211Z. HS1 patrolled S and then W of YC until 0334Z and then started to seed rapid development over Springbank (Storm #2). HS2 was launched at 0413Z towards NW YC. The Airlink tracking system on HS1 failed at 0420Z, but HS1 continued seeding NW of YC. HS1 stopped seeding #2 at 0508Z and RTB as the storm had decayed significantly. HS2 was airborne at 0426Z and started seeding Storm #2 NW of YC at cloud base at 0433Z and stopped seeding #2 at 0503Z near Carstairs. HS2 was then sent to investigate a new cell approaching High River, but the cell decayed and HS2 was RTB at 0556Z. HS3 was launched at 0703Z to an approaching line of severe cells W of RM. HS3 was airborne at 0727Z and headed west at cloud base. HS2 started seeding Storm #3 near RM at 0741Z. HS1 was launched at 0757Z towards Red Deer, since the line of cells was very intense and large. HS3 stopped seeding #3 at 0813Z and was diverted to seed new growth over Red Deer (Storm #4). HS3 started seeding #4 at 0818Z over Red Deer. HS1 was airborne at 0813Z, heading north. HS1 started seeding Storm #5 at 0836Z, 7 mi NE of Sundre. Once again, the a/c track of HS1 failed. HS1 continued seeding the storm as it quickly moved towards Red Deer, stopping seeding at 0908Z and then RTB. At this time HS3 was still seeding the line of cells at cloud base. HS3 continued seeding over Red Deer as the approaching line (Storm #3) merged with Storm #4 over Red Deer. HS3 stopped seeding at 0938Z and then RTB at 0946Z, with all cells east of Red Deer. HS1: 0138-0520 UTC: 222 Ejt, 9 BIP; Storm #1 E of High River, #2 over NW Calgary. HS2: 0423-0604 UTC: 80 min acetone; Storm #2 NW YC to Carstairs. HS3: 0725-1005 UTC: 22 BIP. Storm #3 Rocky to Red Deer, #4 over Red Deer. HS1: 0818-0941 UTC: 21 Ejt, 5 BIP; Storm #5 Sundre to Red Deer. HS3 was launched to RM at 0043Z. They were airborne at 0102Z and began cloud top seeding at 0117Z about 10nm south of RM (Storm #1). They stopped seeding and descended to de-ice at 0128Z. At this time there were no further suitable targets so HS3 began patrolling SW of QF. They continued patrolling until 0304Z and RTB.
October 2005
June 22, Wednesday
Two surface Lows were observed in AB. First was located to the north-east of Edmonton, the second Low was at the east of the project area, with associated trough to the west. Jet and vorticity were at the project area. Upper Low was moving in from BC. It brought cooler and moist air aloft.
Page: 103
The only significant convection of the day developed at 0030Z SW of Rocky Mountain House. There was a NE SW line line W of Rocky Mountain House propagating to the SE. TITAN tops grew to 9.5km and the max VIL was 32.4 kg/m**2. Tmax YC = 27.9C with a Tr of rain Tmax QF = 23.9C with 0.8mm of rain Tmax Radar = 24.7C with 0.1mm of rain Surface Low was located to the east of AB and associated cold front at the south-eastern part of the state. U/A Low was located at the north-western part of the state. Jet was at the southern part of the state, direction is north-east. Light PVA was located to the north of the project area. Yc and Qf soundings were unstable. A cell had developed 20nm NW of Sundre by 1815Z. Cell motion was to the SE and this cell eventually passed over Didsbury, where there were reports of some soft pea sized hail (grauple?). Another complex of cells began developing 15nm NW of Airdrie around 1900Z and later pea sized hail was reported in Airdrie. All significant convection in the project area had ceased by 2200Z. Tmax YC = 18.1C with 1.2 mm of rain Tmax QF = 17.1C with 2.0 mm of rain Tmax Radar = 15.8C with 6.9 mm of rain High pressure situated near AB/SK border, will slide off to east throughout the day. Jet is located off BC coast, with a trough along the west US and Canadian coast. Small PVA centers located in SE AB and NW of project. Soundings were not very unstable. A few weak thundershowers developed along the foothills between RM and Sundrie in the late afternoon. An isolated cell also developed SW of YC. None of the cells were hail threats to the protected area. Max tops = 7.5km. Max dBz = 46. Tmax YC = 17.3C with a trace of rain Tmax QF = 17.4C with no rain Tmax Radar = 17.2C with no rain Upper level tough along AB/BC border. Jet streaks off western US coast and across SK/MB border. Upper level low just west of AB border, bringing some vorticity disturbances into southern project area. Soundings were more unstable than previous days. Skies were generally overcast in the morning with widespread rain north of YC. By 2015Z several cells had developed in the foothills west of YC. Most of the cells dissipated as they drifted east off the foothills. One cell managed to persist, passing south of Okotoks but dissipated near Highriver. No deep convection was observed in the protected area after 2315Z. HS1 reported that the ground was white with hail west of Cochrane at 2027Z. The most intense cell had tops of 9.5 km, 53 dBZ, and max VIL of 16 kg/m2 at 2215Z. Pea size hail is assumed to have fallen west of Okotoks. Tmax YC = 15.5C with 0.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 13.6C with 12.6 mm rain
HS3: 0101 0320Z; 29 EJT, 2 BIP; #1 S of Rocky Mountain House.
June 23, Thursday
HS3 was launched to the area 30nm W of Innisfail at 1824Z. They were airborne at 1842Z and initially patrolled in the area of the radar site. Then they proceeded to the area NW of Airdrie where they began cloud top seeding at 1918Z (Storm #1). They stopped seeding this Storm #1 at 2032Z and headed to QF where they patrolled until 2102Z when they RTB. HS1 was launched at 2037Z. They were airborne at 2100Z and began to patrol feom Yc to west of QF. No suitable targets were found so they RTB at 2138Z. HS3: 1842 2111Z; 76 EJT & 2 BIP; #1 NW of Airdrie. HS1: 2053 2210Z; Patrol YC to W of QF.
June 24, Friday
June 25, Saturday
HS1 was launched to the west of YC at 2000Z. They were airborne at 2018Z. HS1 began cloud top seeding at 2027Z about 10nm west of YC (Storm #1, Bragg Creek). They continued seeding until 2055Z and then began to patrol west of YC. At 2129Z HS1 began cloud top seeding a second cell (Storm #2, Springbank). HS1 finished seeding at 2135Z and RTB. HS2 was launched at 2135Z and they were airborne at 2148Z. They were directed towards a cell that was approaching Okotoks from the west. They began cloud base seeding on this storm at 2207Z (Storm #3, Okotoks). They continued operations until the cell had dissipated at 2205Z. They patrolled until 2316Z and then RTB. HS1: 2015 2145Z; 97 EJT, 7 BIP; #1 Bragg Creek, #2 Springbank. HS2: 2145 2322Z; 9 BIP, 112 min acetone; #3 Okotoks
October 2005
Page: 104
June 26, Sunday
Tmax Radar = 13.1C with 5.3 mm rain Upper Jets off US/CA coast and across SK/MB. Upper Low over BC with trough extending through NW US. Short wave moving through western MT and southern AB, with vorticity along foothills. More helicity than previous day will allow storms to be more organized. Daytime surface heating will produce moderate instability. Funnel cloud reported east of Innisfail in late morning. Light rain showers in the north by 17z. Scattered rain throughout the western parts of the project area throughout the day. Two more funnel clouds, S of QF and east of Olds in the afternoon. Tmax YC = 17C with trace rain Tmax QF = 16.2C with 1.4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 15.9C with 0.0 mm rain Upper level jet continues off US/CA coast. Upper level low over southern BC continues to dig southward and will move over south AB over next 36 hours. Some vorticity in SE AB, with strong vertical velocities later in the evening in the S and west of project area. Atmosphere is slightly unstable, and more helicity than yesterday. Broken line of rain showers in the morning and early afternoon along foothills. Scattered convective clouds in the afternoon. Max reflectivity of 46 dbz, and max top of 7.5 km. Tmax YC = 17.1C with 1.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 19.5C with 1.4 trace rain Tmax Radar = 17.2C with 0.0 mm rain Upper low over southern AB, with weak jet across MT. New low moving S from Alaska. Ridge building over AB over next 24 hours. Only slight instability. Widespread rain over much of the project area. Northern most edge was from Innisfail to Rocky Mountain House. With this rain, Calgary broke the record for most rain in one month. Average June rain is 79 mm and record rain in June was 224 mm. This year during June, Calgary received 246 mm, the previous record for rain in one month (July year unknown) was 245 mm. Tmax YC = 11.8C with 27.4 mm rain Tmax QF = 16.2C with trace rain Tmax Radar = 12.8C with 0.8 mm rain Two upper level lows: one over ND/MB moving east, the other west of AK coast moving south. Upper level ridge over the area. Weak dynamics and with no major forcing mechanisms. Warm atmosphere giving only moderate instability. Some little areas of positive vertical velocities late evening. Isolated convection occurred in the foothills west and north of Sundrie in the late afternoon and early evening. There was no hail threat but Olds and the radar received some rainfall after midnight local time. Max vil was 10.5kg/m3. Max cloud tops were 9.5km. Tmax YC = 19.6C with no rain Tmax QF = 21.1C with no rain Tmax Radar = 17.5C with 4.1 mm rain
June 27, Monday
June 28, Tuesday
June 29, Wednesday
October 2005
Page: 105
June 30, Thursday
Upper Ridge axis now east of AB. Upper Low off central BC coast. Weak jet core in southern BC. Some PVA in the north in the evening. Sounding quite unstable. Severe thunderstorms formed in the north half of the project area in the afternoon, tracking almost due eastward. Golfball size hail reported to EC but location unknown. Radar returns indicate at least grape size hail fell west of Caroline. Pea size hail reported in SE Red Deer in the early evening. Cell Max Top 12.5 km, 52 dBZ, 19.9 VIL west of Caroline. Cell Max Top 10.5 km, 60 dBZ, 31.2 VIL 10 mi E. of Innisfail. Tmax YC = 24.3C with trace of rain Tmax QF = 23.7C with 12.6 mm rain Tmax Radar = 22.8C with 4.6 mm rain
HS3 was launched at 2105Z towards Caroline. HS3 was airborne at 2122Z and started seeding Storm #1 west of Caroline at cloud top at 2143Z and stopped seeding Storm#1 at 2155Z as there were no towns on the way of the storm. HS3 restarted seeding Storm #1 as it approached Red Deer at 2228Z. He stopped seeding and RTB at 2247Z as storm has diminished. HS2 was launched at 2203Z to the south west of Red Deer. HS2 was airborne at 2218Z and started base seeding of Storm #2 west of Innisfail at 2318. HS2 stopped seeding at 2350Z as there were no towns on the way of the storm. He patrolled and RTB at 0120Z. HS1 was launched at 0156Z towards Sundre. HS1 was airborne at 0211Z and started cloud top seeding of Storm #3 west of Sundre at 0231Z. HS1 stopped seeding at 0301Z as Storm #3 has diminished. HS1 started base seeding of Storm #4 west of Innisfail at 0335Z. He stopped seeding at 0418 as there were no towns on the way of the storm. He patrolled and RTB at 0445Z. HS3: 2122-2247: 65 EJT. Storm #1 Caroline HS2: 2218-0120: 5 BIP, 46 min acetone. Storm #2 Innisfail. HS1: 0211-0445: 86 EJT, 13 BIP. Storm #3 Sundre, #4 Innisfail to Red Deer. HS2 was launched at 19.19Z towards Sundre. HS2 was airborne at 1932Z and started seeding Storm #1 South-east of Sundre at cloud base at 1947Z and stopped seeding #1 at 20.18Z near Carstairs. He restart seeding Storm #1 at 20.32z at cloud base and stopped seeding #1 at 21.18Z near Carstairs when the storm had crossed highway 2 and decayed. He RTB at 2132Z. HS1 was launched at 20.53Z towards Carstairs. HS1 was airborne at 2100Z and started seeding Storm #1 south-west of Carstairs at cloud top at 2108Z and stopped seeding #1 at 2116Z near Carstairs when the storm had crossed highway 2 and decayed. He patrolled and RTB at 2257Z. HS2 1932-2132 UTC: 71 min acetone, 14 BIP; Storm #1 Sundre - Carstairs HS1 2100-2257 UTC: Ejt 15, BIP- 2; Storm #1 Carstairs. HS1 was launched at 17.21Z towards Airdrie. HS1 was airborne at 17.31Z and started seeding Storm #1 south-west of Airdrie at cloud top at 17.35Z and stopped seeding #1 at 18.06Z as the storm had diminished. He patrolled up to 18.24Z. HS1 started seeding Storm #2 18 miles south-west of Calgary at cloud top at 18.24Z and stopped seeding #2 at 18.52Z as there was storm over Calgary. HS1 started seeding Srorm #3 over Calgary at 19.01Z and stopped seeding #3 at 19.04Z as the storm had diminished. HS1 has restarted seeding Storm#2 at 19.05Z west of Okotoks and stopped seeding #2 at 2008Z as
July 1, Friday
Upper Low has moved into central BC. Jet core across southern BC, nosing into AB. Weak cold front passing project area. Isolated, severe storms formed in the foothills NW of Sundre and tracked to the SE in the afternoon. Pea size hail reported W of Sundre. The most intense cell tracked from Sundre SE and hit Carstairs around 21Z, giving mostly pea size but some stones reported as large marble at the golf course. Max cell tops near 9.5 km and 54 dBZ. Max VIL 20.8 kg/m2. Tmax YC = 22.4C with trace of rain Tmax QF = 23.7C with 12.6 mm rain Tmax Radar = 22.8C with 4.6 mm rain
July 2, Saturday
Trough passing across AB. Jet core across S-BC, extending into MT. Atmosphere cold aloft and unstable. Embedded convection had produced a few isolated Titan cells in the Olds area by mid morning. Some cells were threatening Airdrie by 1650Z. Significant convection remained a threat in the YC area until about 0230Z. Max cloud tops = 9.5km. Max VIL = 14.2 kg / cu m. Tmax YC = 16.5C with 1mm of rain Tmax QF = 18.7C with no rain Tmax Radar = 14.2C with 0.2mm rain
October 2005
Page: 106
there were no towns on the way of the storm. He RTB at 2014Z. HS2 was launched at 1858Z towards Okotoks. HS2 was airborne at 19.06Z and started seeding Storm #2 at cloud base at 1915Z and stopped seeding #2 at 20.08Z east of HighRiver as there were no towns on the way of the storm. He patrolled and RTB at 21.13Z. HS1 17.31-20.14 UTC: Ejt 298, BIP- 15; Storm #1 Airdrie, Storm #2 Okotoks, Storm #3 - Calgary HS2 19.06- 21.13 UTC: 52 min acetone, 8 BIP; Storm #2, Okotoks, HighRiver. No aircraft operations.
July 3, Sunday
Upper level ridge with subsidence over area. Jet core to SW. Calgary and Red Deer soundings both show subsidence inversions at 9 kft to 11 kft. Air mass has become drier and more stable. Several isolated convective showers developed from Sundre north. Weak echoes for most of the life cycle. Max reflectivity of 48 dBz. Tmax YC = 20.9C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 21C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 23C with 0.0 mm rain Weak Jet core over northern BC. Weak 500 mb ridge over area. Atmosphere is more moist throughout depth. No precipitation and no radar echoes. TCU reported by Springbank at 20, 21 and 22 Z. Tmax YC = 24.3C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 24.8C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 24.4C with 0.0 mm rain Upper level ridge axis to the east of project. Jet core pushing into W BC. Soundings show subsidence inversion at 700 mb. As and Ac in the evening. No significant convection developed. TCU reported by Springbank at 00 Z. Tmax YC = 25.8C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 27.0C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 27.7C with 0.0 mm rain Surface Low north of the project area. Associated trough and cold front were over the area. Both soundings were unstable though dry layer at 5 km should limit convection. Line of severe storms NW of project (Drayton Valley to Whitecourt). Iso storm W of Innisfail around 00Z. Stroms developed W and S of Rocky after 0530Z. RA at YC at 06Z. +TSRA at radar at 0720Z. +TSRA at QF at 0837Z. Golf ball sized hail was reported 25 km west of Edmonton. Funnel cloud and hail reported at Sherwood Park. Soft pea size hail at Terrys house around 08Z. Tmax YC = 27.2C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 27.8C with 0.4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 25.7C with 0.0 mm rain Low north of AB. Jet across project. Cold front has moved east through central SK. Light PVA in project.
July 4, Monday
July 5, Tuesday
July 6, Wednesday
HS3 was launched on patrol at 1956Z towards Sundre. HS3 was airborne at 2016Z. HS3 patrolled between Sundre and Caroline. No storms developed and RTB at 2130Z. HS3: 2016-2141: patrol only
July 7, Thursday
HS3 was launched at 19Z W of Sylvan. HS3 was airborne at 1917Z and started seeding Storm #1 at
October 2005
Page: 107
ATM is slightly unstable. Isolated TS developed SE Rocky at 1843Z. Storm moved east across project just S of Red Deer at 21Z. Max reflectivity 51 dBz and max VIL 11.6. Another Iso cell over Strathmore at 2041Z. Grape size hail at Hillman ranch west of Sylvan with some crop damage. Tmax YC = 22.3C with 1.8 mm rain Tmax QF = 20.3C with 8.8 mm rain Tmax Radar = 22.4C with 3.0 mm rain Low north-east of AB. Jet across central AB. Light PVA in the north of the project. QF sounding is slightly unstable. No precipitation and no radar echoes. TCU reported by Springbank at 04Z. Tmax YC = 27.3C with 00 mm rain Tmax QF = 26.8C with 00 mm rain Tmax Radar = 25.1C with 0.0 mm rain Lows north of AB and east of AB. Jet across the project area. Light PVA in the project area. QF and YC soundings are unstable. Isolated thunderstorms developed in the afternoon between Rocky Mountain House and Red Deer. There was a report of pea size hail near Rocky Mountain House. Max tops were 8.5km and the max VIL was 11.9. Tmax YC = 20.7C with 00 mm rain Tmax QF = 21.6C with 1.6 mm rain Tmax Radar = 20.7C with 0.0 mm rain July 10, Sunday Low north of AB and High west of AB. Jet across south of AB. Light PVA in the project area. YC sounding is unstable, QF sounding is slightly unstable. Two isolated cells developed in the NW of the project area during the late afternoon and early evening. Although they produced some lightning, they were never a hail threat and moved out of the project to the north. Ma tops = 7km. Max Vil = 5. Tmax YC = 20.5C with 00 mm rain Tmax QF = 21.6C with 00 mm rain Tmax Radar = 20.1C with 0.0 mm rain Surface H to west and south of AB. Jet over project area. Light PVA in N project. Soundings are slightly unstable. Few cells developed from SW Caroline to SW Sundre and moved to the NE before 20Z. At 2030Z new development behind that line. Lightning was detected from these smaller storms. Max tops= 6.5 km. Max VIL= 3.5. Max dBz= 46. Tmax YC = 23.6C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 23.4C with 0.8 mm rain Tmax Radar = 22.4C with 0.0 mm rain Upper low over N central BC. Jet across southern BC with nose pushing into western project, with PVA in NW project to Edmonton. Slight ridging to E. Warm ATM with subsidence inversion at 550 mb.
1923Z SW of Sylvan at cloud base. HS3 continued seeding until 2051Z after storm moved past Red Deer, then patrol W of QF. HS3 RTB at 2138Z as storm moved out of project with no new development. HS3: 1917-2145: 18 BIP. Strom #1 Sylvan to Red Deer.
July 8, Friday
July 9, Saturday
HS3 was launched at 2230Z to a development 30nm west of QF. They began cloud top seeding at 2257Z on Storm #1 (Sylvan Lake). They stopped seeding at 2342Z and patrolled the area until 0032Z when they RTB. HS3 was launched on a second flight at 0211Z. They were airborne at 0226Z and began cloud base seeding in the vicinity of Red Deer at 0228Z (\Storm #2, Red Deer). Seeding was terminated at 0302Z and HS3 patrolled the area until 0342Z HS3: 2249 0044Z; 96 EJT, 9 BIP; Storm #1Sylvan Lake. HS3: 0224 0354Z; 7 BIP; Storm #2 Red Deer. HS2 was launched on patrol at 1936Z NW YC. HS2 was airborne at 1954Z. HS2 patrolled between YC and Sundre. No storms developed and RTB at 2026Z. HS2: 1954-2050: patrol only
July 11, Monday
July 12, Tuesday
HS3 was launched at 0212Z W Sylvan. HS3 was airborne at 0226Z. HS3 patrolled north of Sylvan. Storms didnt get big enough for seeding and RTB at 0328Z.
October 2005
Page: 108
TS developed at 0154Z S of Eckville and moved NE. Lightning detected and reported by QF from this storm. Max tops= 7.0 km. Max VIL= 3.9. Max dBz= 47. Tmax YC = 28.3C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 26.7C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 26.2C with 0.0 mm rain Jet over SE AB to central SK, and another small one off BC coast. Upper low in N AB with trough to the south across project in US. PVA moving into project in afternoon from S. Backing winds cooling the middle ATM, producing good instability. Seven storms developed throughout the day with seeding operations on all seven. #1 developed at 1700Z to the SW of Sundre. It moved to the east over the radar with grape size hail. It continued east of the project with up to golf ball size hail. #2 developed at 1900Z to the SW of Didsbury and moved over Carstairs. #3 developed around 1900Z to the W of Caroline and moved N of Sylvan. #4 developed W of Crossfield at 2038Z. At 2056Z storm #5 developed near Cochrane. This was part of a line from W of Didsbury to Cochrane. At 2123Z this line extended farther S with some tall cells over Calgary at 2213Z with this line moving east. Only pea size hail was reported in Calgary. #6 developed N of Rocky around 2254Z and moved SE over Rocky. #7 developed N of Sundre south of storm #6. #7 moved E and diminished near Olds. Max tops= 10.5 km. Max VIL= 17.1. Max dBz= 56. Tmax YC = 24.3C with 2.6 mm rain Tmax QF = 20.2C with 3.6 mm rain Tmax Radar = 20.7C with 9.1 mm rain
HS3: 0226-0335: patrol only
July 13, Wednesday
HS2 was launched at 1740Z to an area 15nm W of the radar. They were airborne at 1803Z. HS2 began cloud base seeding Storm #1 (Radar) 15nm SW of the radar at 1814Z. They stopped seeding Storm #1 at 1903Z when it moved E of hi-way 2. HS2 then proceeded to Storm #2 (Carstairs) and began cloud base seeding at 1913Z. They continued to work in the Carstairs area until 1950Z. Then they patrolled to the SW before they began cloud base seeding Storm #4 (Crossfield) 19nm W of Crossfield at 2053Z. They also seeded on Storm #5 (Cochrane-YC) over Calgary but stopped seeding at 2155Z when they were low on fuel and RTB. HS1 was launched at 2046Z and was airborne at 2059Z. They began cloud top seeding on Storm #5 over Cochrane at 2106Z. They eventually were seeding on the leading edges of both Storms 4 & 5 until 2315Z when the storms had passed to the east of the protected areas. Then HS1 RTB. In the north HS3 was launched at 1910Z and was airborne at 1927Z. They began cloud base seeding Storm # 3 (Caroline Sylvan) about 22nm W of the QF airport at 1940Z. HS3 continued seeding until 2037Z when the storm passed into the buffer zone W of Lacombe. HS3 then patrolled the Innsfail area until 2101Z when they RTB. HS3 was launched on a second flight at 2257Z. They were airborne at 2310Z and proceeded to 5nm SE of RMH where they began cloud top seeding Storm # 6 (Rocky) at 2322Z. They stopped seeding at 2332 when the storm began to dissipate. Then they patrolled the area before initiating seeding on Storm # 7 (Sundre Olds) near Sundre at 0024Z. They stopped seeding storm # 7 near Olds at 0051Z as it was diminishing rapidly. HS3 RTB at 0110Z. Flight Summary HS1: 2058 2340Z; 300 EJT, 24 BIP; Storms 4 & 5, Cochrane - Calgary Strathmore. HS2: 1800 2230Z; 16 BIP, L & R Gen 144 min. each (288 min. total); Storms 1 Radar, Storm 2 Carstairs, Storm 4 Crossfield, Storm 5 Calgary. HS3: 1922 2110Z; 13 BIP; Storm 3 Caroline Sylvan HS3: 2307 0119Z; 105 EJT, 7 BIP; storm 6 Rocky Mountain House, Storm 7 Sundre Olds. No aircraft operations.
July 14, Thursday
Jet is to the east, over southern SK and MB. Upper lows to the NE and NW, with a High north of AB. Ridge building over western BC and moving through the project overnight. Strong subsidence inversion over project, less to the west.
October 2005
Page: 109
Scattered clouds in the afternoon. Light rain/ drizzle developed along foothills overnight. Mostly virga, little reaching the ground. Tmax YC = 23.8C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 22.6C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 23.2C with 0.0 mm rain Jet over project from SE BC to central AB with second jet off BC coast. Upper low off BC coast. Ridge has moved through area and is over SK. PVA over southern project. Middle ATM subsidence inversion remains with little instability. Cloudy with widespread light radar echoes, little rain reached the ground. Higher reflectivity to the NE of YC at 02Z. At 12Z, convective cell formed W of Okotoks and moved east along southern edge of project. Became strongest in the SE corner of project. Max tops= 12.5 km, Max dBz= 57, Max VIL= 34.6 Tmax YC = 23.0C with 0.4 mm rain Tmax QF = 21.0C with 0.2 mm rain Tmax Radar = 19.0C with 0.0 mm rain Elongated jet max extending from N BC to E MT. Upper low along central AB/SK border, surface low over central SK with warm and cold front to the S into the US. ATM is slightly unstable. Scattered light showers. Embedded Cu and TCU. Few lightning strikes detected. Max tops= 6 km, Max dBz= 40, Max VIL= 2.5 Tmax YC = 17.4C with 0.6 mm rain Tmax QF = 18.8C with 0.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 17.4C with 0.0 mm rain Jet pushing into central BC. Upper low over southern MB and another near AK. Ridge building to our W will move through project overnight. Stable layer from 600 to 500 mb. ATM is unstable below that layer. Sunny and warm. No precipitation and no radar echoes. TCU reported by Springbank at 17Z. Tmax YC = 24.0C with no rain Tmax QF = 23.3C with no rain Tmax Radar = 22.7C with no rain Low in NE AB with cold front entering area early evening. Jet core over north of project indicating max vertical velocities to NE of project. ATM is unstable. Sunny over Calgary. Sharp temperature drop after 22Z (10C in 2 hrs) with light rain after 07Z. Warm in Red Deer until temperature drop after 20Z then cloudy and cool rest of day with intermittent showers. One light thunderstorm developed west of Innisfail around 1930Z. Tmax YC = 28C with rain amount NA Tmax QF = 25C with rain amount NA Tmax Radar = 25.9C with 3.6 mm rain Cold front passed through project previous day in afternoon. Soundings moderately unstable. Jet core over S project. Trough axis to E. Easterly flow around High in SK kept the moisture high over Calgary region and moisture flux convergence along the foothills, sufficient to trigger the late afternoon storms.
July 15, Friday
July 16, Saturday
July 17, Sunday
No aircraft operations
July 18, Monday
HS3 was launched at 1958Z to Innisfail. HS3 was airborne at 2013Z. HS3 seeded starting at 2016 over Innisfail until 2037 after storm diminished. HS3 RTB at 2103Z. HS3: 2010-2108: 0 EJT, 4 BIP; Storm over Innisfail.
July 19, Tuesday
HS3 was launched at 2056Z to Sundre. HS3 was airborne at 2113Z. HS3 started seeding Storm #1 at 2149 south west of Sundre and stopped seeding at 2202Z as there were no towns on the way of the storm. HS3 started seeding Storm #2 at 2234Z south west of Okotoks and stopped seeding at 2314Z as it has diminished. HS3 RTB at 2347Z.
October 2005
Page: 110
Seven storms developed throughout the day with seeding of all seven storms. #1 developed W of Sundre around 2120Z. It moved to the SE and diminished S of Didsbury around 2320Z. #2 developed W Okotoks around 22Z and moved to the SE over High River and out of the project at 2330Z. #3 developed NW of Cochrane around 2337Z and moved SE over north Calgary and out of the project at 0210Z. #4 developed around 0035Z over south Calgary and moved SE and out of the project at 0210Z. Pea, marble, and unconfirmed reports of walnut size hail in south Calgary. #5 developed at 0054Z west of Calgary and proceeded to move SE. #5 passed over SW Calgary at 0130Z over Okotoks at 0210Z. It moved out of the project at 0304Z. #6 developed west of storm #3, NW of Cochrane at 0013Z. #6 moved SE over Cochrane 0116Z and then through N Calgary. It diminished at 0220Z. #7 developed W of Bragg Creek at 0157Z. It moved east with new development to the south, which passed through Okotoks at 0336Z and then diminished at 04Z. Max tops= 10.5 km. Max VIL= 27.0. Max dBZ= 57.5 Tmax YC = 19.7C with 3.4 mm rain Tmax QF = 20.6C with 1.0 mm rain Tmax Radar = 19.6C with 7.1 mm rain
HS1 was launched at 2355Z to Cochrane. HS1 was airborne at 0006Z. HS1 started seeding Storm #3 at 0021Z north west of Cochrane and stopped seeding at 0302Z. HS1 was directed towards storm #4 west of Calgary. He started seeding at 0031Z and stopped seeding at 0121 as he was directed towards storm #5 at the southern part of Calgary. He started seeding storm #5 at 0125Z. HS1 stopped seeding storm #5 at 0220Z after passing through Okotoks. HS1 RTB at 0220Z. HS2 was launched at 0054Z north of Calgary. HS2 was airborne at 0104Z. HS2 started seeding Storm #3 at 0107Z north of Calgary. HS2 stopped seeding storm #3 at 0134Z as it had cleared Calgary. HS2 was directed towards storm #6 over NW Calgary and started seeding at 0141Z. HS2 stopped seeding at 0217Z as the storm has diminished over NE Calgary. HS2 was directed to storm #7 near Bragg Creek. HS2 started seeding storm #7 at 0255Z. HS2 stopped seeding storm #7 at 0355Z as the storm had diminished N of Okotoks. HS2 then patrolled W of Calgary and RTB at 0423Z as no more storms developed. Flight Summary HS3: 2113-2347: 150 EJT, 1 BIP; Storms over Sundre, Okotoks. HS1: 0006-0227: 289 EJT, 19 BIP; Storms NW Cochrane, S Calgary, SW Calgary to Okotoks. HS2: 0104-0431: 6 BIP, 195 min acetone generator time; Storms N Calgary, NW Calgary, Bragg Creek to Okotoks. HS3 was launched at 2031Z to a storm west of Sundre. HS3 was airborne at 2054Z and was in position to start seeding Storm #1 at 2103Z. The storm dissipated west of Olds and HS3 stopped seeding at 2122Z. HS3 then patrolled west of Olds at cloud top. HS3 was directed to patrol near Caroline at 2224Z since development W of RM was beginning to move off the foothills. HS3 stayed close to the storm as it moved away from the foothills, and started seeding Storm #3 23 mi W of Sylvan Lake at 2300Z. HS3 continued to seed #3 as it approached Penhold, and then descended to seed at cloud base at 2350Z. HS3 stopped seeding #3 at 0023Z as the storm crossed the QEII east of Innisfail, and then RTB. HS2 was launched at 2105Z to the Olds area. HS2 was airborne at 2121Z and went to patrol at cloud base west of Olds. HS2 reported 2500 fpm updrafts below some innocuous cumulus at 2232Z 14 mi W of Carstairs, so started seeding as a precaution. This cloud quickly developed into a Supercell (Storm #2) and the most severe storm of the day. HS2 stopped seeding #2 at 2358Z as the storm had passed E of the QEII. HS2 then went to patrol near Cremona. HS2 started seeding Storm #4 near Cremona at 0001Z. HS2 stopped seeding #4 at 0009Z and then was directed to RTB to refuel and reflare, in case there would be storms that threatened Calgary later.
July 20, Wednesday
Large upper Low in gulf of Alaska. Smaller Low off OR coast and a strong low-pressure disturbance over the BC-AB border with associated trof crossing central AB during the afternoon. SE surface flow increasing moisture over project. Main Jet over Red Deer. Good dynamics to support severe storms, and atmosphere very unstable. Calgary reported 23 C and dew pt 14 C at 00Z. Showers formed West of Edmonton around noon, and then West of RM in the afternoon. The storms moved off the foothills in the mid afternoon and several Supercell storms developed and tracked across the project area. Storm #1 formed west of Sundre and tracked east, but died before reaching Olds. Storm #2 formed west of Carstairs and crossed the QEII between Carstairs and Crossfield, producing >golf ball hail over the highway and significant crop damage near Beiseker and then reports of baseball size hail east of Strathmore. Storm #3 formed west of RM and tracked east towards Sylvan Lake and then spawned new growth that produced walnut and golf ball size hail and flooding in Innisfail. Storm #4 formed near Cremona and tracked towards Airdrie crossing the highway 5 mi north of Airdrie. Storm #5 formed west of Sylvan Lake and tracked across Sylvan and Red Deer producing pea and some
October 2005
Page: 111
marble size hail. Tmax YC = 23.2C with no rain Tmax QF = 20.7C with 1.4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 20.2C with trace of rain
HS1 was launched at 2307Z to Storm #2 west of Carstairs. HS1 was airborne at 2319Z and started seeding #2 at 2327Z at cloud top. HS1 stopped seeding #2 at 2346Z when it became clear that the storm would pass between Carstairs and Crossfield. Then HS1 went to help seed storm #3 W of Innisfail. HS1 started seeding #3 at 2356Z, at exactly the time when the storm spawned a new cell on its right front flank. HS1 was seeding at top, and HS3 was seeding at base Storm #3 when it produced the large hail and flooding in Innisfail. HS1 stopped seeding #3 at 0021Z and then headed for Cremona and started seeding Storm #4 at 0032Z, 13 mi NW of Airdrie. HS1 stopped seeding #4 at 0100Z, east of the QEII and then RTB. HS3 was launched at 0319Z to Sylvan Lake. HS3 was airborne at 0333 Z. HS3 started seeding Storm #5 at 0337 north west of Red Deer and stopped seeding at 0414Z after the storm had passed east of Red Deer. HS3 RTB at 0428Z Flight Summary HS3: 2048-0035: 176 EJT, 18 BIP; Storms over Sundre, Sylan Lake to Innisfail. HS2: 2118-0019: 16 BIP, 182 min generator time; Storms Carstairs, Cremona to Airdrie. HS1: 2317-0112: 245 EJT, 11 BIP; Storms Carstairs, Penhold-Innisfail, Airdrie.
July 21, Thursday
Short wave ridge passing over the project area today, with considerable warming aloft. Airmass at surface relatively cool with max temps near 20 C. This makes for a stable airmass. Main jet stream in SK and MB. A weak short wave approaching Alberta from southern BC overnight. Skies mostly sunny during the day. Mid level cloud moved into the area overnight producing weak showers and virga early Friday. Tmax YC = 20.4C with no rain Tmax QF = 21.9C with 1.2 mm rain (early AM) Tmax Radar = 20.2C with no rain Short wave passing through project in evening. ATM is very unstable with high precipitable water. Jet core approaching from the SW. Light rain band developed across southern project in early afternoon, from Strathmore to the SW through Okotoks. Some light rain developed over Calgary in the afternoon as well. Another rain band developed north of Calgary after 01Z and moved north. Little precipitation, mostly virga. A few big cells over the Rockies by Nordegg after 00Z. Some cells developed in buffer west of Caroline after 02Z. One cell moved into project west of Caroline and dissipated over Caroline around 0430Z. Tmax YC = 22.2C with trace of rain Tmax QF = 22.6C with no rain Tmax Radar = 20.4C with no rain Low is well into SK in afternoon. Small jet core over
HS3: 0333-0428: 9 BIP, Storm over Red Deer. No aircraft operations.
July 22, Friday
No aircraft operations. Public Relations: Interview with Terry Krauss by CKFM radio Olds.
July 23,
HS3 was launched at 2228Z to storm #2 near Sylvan.

October 2005
Page: 112
Saturday
AB. Soundings indicate subsidence inversions strengthening at 700 mb during afternoon. Dew pts fell in the south but remained relatively high in the north. Max temperatures and moisture were sufficient to break the capping inversion in the north. Two TS developed in afternoon with seeding of the second storm. #1 developed W of Innisfail at 21Z along a boundary moving S. #1 moved ESE. After 22Z in the east project it increased in size and out of project at 2230Z. #2 developed NE of Rocky at 22Z. It moved ESE and was over Sylvan Lake at 2250Z. Ed Veraik reported pea size hail with a few larger at 2255Z. #2 moved over QF airport and out of project at 2340Z. Few SHRA developed in northern project after 23Z from NW Rocky to Lacombe. A small cell developed east of the Radar at 0030Z from the collision of two boundaries. Rain band developed after 01Z NW of Sundre and moved through Red Deer by 0430Z. An isolated cell developed around 0330Z; moved over Rocky by 05Z and diminished by 0530Z due to strong subsidence inversion. Light showers developed overnight, covering most of the project with some rain. Tmax YC = 24.4C with no rain Tmax QF = 23.1C with 4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 23.4C with 0.3 mm rain Low east of AB with cold front also east of AB. High off the southern BC coast. Main Jet south across northwest US. Slight PVA through the project. Atmosphere (ATM) is cold and unstable. Light rain across most of the project in the morning. First cell developed NW of Rocky around 22Z. It followed the edge of the mountains to the SE and diminished around 01Z near Caroline. A second cell developed around 23Z NW of Limestone, moved SE and diminished S of Sundre around 0130z. A third cell developed around 00Z west of Cremonia, moved SE and diminished around 0130Z north of Cochrane. Max tops= 8.5 km, dBz= 55, VIL= 14.2 Tmax YC = 15.7C with 5.4 mm rain Tmax QF = 15.7C with 9.2 mm rain Tmax Radar = 15.1C with 10.2 mm rain Weak surface high over the project. Low off the BC coast with jet core across northern US. Cold air aloft producing instability with surface warming. Line of thundershowers developed along the foothills moved through the northern project in afternoon. A secondary wave of activity developed in western project after 01Z. This secondary wave moved SE and became marginally strong after 04Z as it approached Calgary. It moved across northern Calgary and diminished around 06Z east of Calgary. Max tops= 8.5 km, dBZ= 54, VIL= 8.7 Tmax YC = 19.4C with 2.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 20.0C with 0.8 mm rain Tmax Radar = 19.1C with 0.3 mm rain Surface high over southern AB. Cold front over N AB expected to slide off to the east throughout the day. Jet over central AB. Light PVA in the area. ATM continues to be cold and moist, with moderate instability.
HS3 started cloud base seeding at 2252Z and continued until 2317Z after the storm was past QF. HS3 patrolled W of Sylvan and RTB at 0009Z with no new development. Flight Summary HS3: 2244-0020: 7 BIP; Storm Sylan Lake to QF.
July 24, Sunday
HS3 was launched at 0057Z to patrol south of Sundre. HS3 patrolled south of Cremonia and RTB at 0230Z with no significant thunderstorm development. Flight Summary HS3: 0110-0251: patrol only.
July 25, Monday
HS1 was launched at 0502Z to west Calgary. HS1 started seeding at 0521Z and continued seeding over northern Calgary until 0557Z as the storm had diminished. HS1 patrolled over western Calgary and RTB at 0625Z with no more significant development. Flight Summary HS1: 0512-0645: 76 EJT, 7 BIP, storm over N Calgary.
July 26, Tuesday
October 2005
Page: 113
Weak scattered showers over the northern part of the project area. The most intense cell formed east of Red Deer with Max tops= 8.5 km, max dBZ= 51, VIL= 7.2 Tmax YC = 21.6C with 1.8 mm rain Tmax QF = 20.7C with 0.2 mm rain Tmax Radar = 20.3C with 0.8 mm rain. Surface H over the area. Cold front north-east of the area. Jet is over the area. Atmosphere is still moist. Calgary and Red Deer soundings are unstable but no trigger for convection. Ac and TCU were observed, no significant development Tmax YC = 22.1C with no rain Tmax QF = 21.6 with 0.8 mm rain Tmax Radar = 20.7C with 0.0 mm rain Surface High east of the province and surface Low south-west of the province. Warm front is over the area. Jet over the project area, and easterly winds created a zone of moisture convergence along the foothills. Both soundings unstable with a slight cap at 700 mb which was overcome by the storms. Severe thunderstorms formed W of RM in the afternoon, and then multiple storms formed along the foothills and crossed the project area with hail up to 4.5 cm. Julian Brimelow reported 3 cm mushy hail and 2 cm hard hail near Caroline. Golfball hail reported near Bergen. Loonie and marble hail reported in South Calgary from Storm #2. 2.5 cm hail fell at the radar from Storm #5 (flat, raspberry shapes). 2.6 cm hail fell at the radar from Storm #7 (mostly conical). Ed Verkaik reported 6 deep small hail on Highway 791 east of Didsbury, and 1.25 inch hail reported E of Hwy 791 in the early evening. Pubic Relations: CKFM interviewed Terry Krauss at 10:15 pm for a storm summary that was played Friday morning on the news. Tmax YC = 25.2C with trace of rain Tmax QF = 22.5C with 8.8 mm rain Tmax Radar = 23C with 3.3 mm rain
July 27, Wednesday
July 28, Thursday
HS3 was launched to RM at 2043Z. They were airborne at 2102Z and began cloud base seeding 20nm NW of RM at 2126Z (Storm #1, RM). They finished seeding 5nm SW of RM at 2222Z and proceeded to patrol the Sylvan Lake area. HS3 resumed seeding Storm #1, 10nm SE of RM at 2236Z. They stopped seeding at 2300Z, 20nm SE of RM and proceeded to the Red Deer area. HS3 then began seeding Storm #3 (Red Deer) over the Red Deer airport at 2310Z. They finished seeding at 2320Z when the cell moved away from Red Deer to the E and RTB. HS2 was launched to the Bragg Creek area at 2207Z to some explosive growth. HS1 was launched to the same storm 4 minutes later. HS2 was airborne at 2223Z and began cloud base seeding at 2231Z, 20nm SW of the YC airport. (Storm #2, Bragg Cr YC). HS1 was airborne at 2231Z and began cloud top seeding on Storm #2, 15nm SW of the YC airport at 2233Z. HS1 stopped seeding at 0004Z, 5nm SE of the YC airport when Storm #2 had passed to the E of Calgary. HS1 then RTB to re-flare. HS2 also finished seeding at 0010Z over south Calgary and began to patrol W of Calgary. HS2 RTB at 0045Z. HS3 was launched to the Caroline area at 0008Z. They were airborne at 0023Z and began cloud base seeding at 5nm SW of Caroline at 0034Z (Storm #4, Caroline). At 0053Z, HS3 switched seeding to the explosive new development over Sundre (Storm #5). HS3 continued to seed storms #4 and #5 as they moved east towards Olds. HS3 stopped seeding the complex at 0213Z near Innisfail, and then RTB. HS1 was launched at 0059Z to the severe storms near Sundre. HS1 was airborne at 0116Z HS1 started seeding #5 at 0125Z and seeded until 0218Z when the storm crossed the QEII, and then RTB. HS2 was launched at 0145Z to West of Didsbury. HS2 was airborne at 0200Z and started seeding #5 at base at 0205Z. HS2 stopped seeding #5 at 0225Z after the storm crossed the QEII. HS2 then proceeded to a new cell near Sundre and began cloud base seeding Storm #6 at 0246Z, 5nm S of Sundre. HS2 stopped seeding Storm #6 at 0347Z after it crossed the QEII and RTB. HS1 was launched to Storm #6 at 0304Z and was
October 2005
Page: 114
airborne at 0314Z. HS1 began clod top seeding at 0326Z, 5nm SW of the radar. They stopped seeding at 0348Z after the storm had crossed QEII and then patrolled over YC. There were no further targets so they RTB at 0422Z. HS3 was launched at 0302Z and were airborne at 0314Z. They began cloud base seeding Storm #7 near the QF airport at 0322Z. They continued seeding until 0440Z. Then they moved to the Innisfail area where they began seeding Storm #8 at 0454Z. They continued seeding until the cell collapsed at 0510Z and RTB. Flight Summary: HS3: 2059 2326Z; 16 BIP; Storm #1 RM, Storm #3 Red Deer. HS2: 2223 0058Z; 11 BIP, 167min Gen; Storm #2 Bragg Creek YC. HS1: 2226 0016Z; 285 EJT, 13 BIP; Storm#2 Bragg Creek YC. HS3: 0020 0222Z; 20 BIP; Storm #4 Caroline, Storm#5 Sundre Olds. HS1: 0114 0227Z; 291 EJT, 9 BIP; Storm #5 Sundre Didsbury. HS2: 0155 0411Z; 11BIP, 162 min Gen; Storm #5 Didsbury, Storm #6 Sundre Olds. HS3: 0315 0516Z; 19 BIP; Storm #7 Red Deer, Storm #8 Innisfail. HS1: 0314 0432Z; 59 EJT, 2 BIP; Storm #6 Sundre Olds. HS3 was launched to RM at 2019Z and was airborne at 2040Z. They began cloud top seeding 15nm W of RM (Storm #1, RM). After two passes they descended to deice and resumed seeding at cloud base at 2120Z. They stopped cloud base seeding at 2202Z and climbed to altitude where they resumed cloud top seeding at 2215Z. They continued until 2258Z and then RTB to refuel and re-flare. HS2 was also launched to RM at 2156Z. They were airborne at 2208Z and began cloud base seeding on Storm #1, 12nm W of Sylvan Lake at 2236Z. They continued seeding until 0012Z when they broke off to head south and patrol the YC area. They RTB at 0034Z. HS1 was launched to Storm #1 at 2311Z and were airborne at 2325Z. They began cloud top seeding 15nm NNW of the radar at 2341Z. They continued to seed until 0033Z when they had to descend to deice. HS1 patrolled W of Olds until 0135Z when they began cloud top seeding 10nm NW of the radar (Storm #3, W Olds). They continued seeding this storm until 0157Z when they were out of flares and RTB. HS3 was re-launched at 2334Z to Storm #1 that was now approaching Innisfail. They were airborne at 2347Z and began cloud base seeding SE of the QF airport. They stopped seeding the storm at 0041Z when it crossed to the E of QEII. HS3 then moved to Storm #2 (Eckville) and began cloud base seeding 15nm SW of Eckville at 0100Z. They continued seeding until 0157Z and then RTB to re-flare.
July 29, Friday
Surface Low north and south of the province. PVA in the area. Atmosphere is moist. Jet is over the area. Both soundings are unstable. Two lines of severe thunderstorms moved through northern project. First line developed around 20z. Second line developed around 0030z. A few isolated severe thunderstorms formed behind the second line. Funnel cloud reported at Spruce View. Also golf ball size hail at Spruce View. 2 cm hail in Olds at 0330z. Max tops= 14.5 km, max dBZ= 58.5, max VIL= 47.4 Public Relations: Olds Gazette interviewed Terry Krauss regarding the Thursday hail storms. Red Deer Advocate interviewed Terry Krauss and Jim Renick regarding the recent hail storms and seeding operations. Tmax YC = 26.3C with no rain Tmax QF = 25.2C with 26.6 mm rain Tmax Radar = 25.6C with 0.5 mm rain
Page: 115
HS2 was launched for a second flight at 0130Z. They were airborne at 0152Z and proceeded to the Olds area. They began cloud base seeding Storm #4 (Sundre to Olds) 12nm SW of the radar at 0205Z. They continued seeding until 0318Z and stopped when the storm passed to the E of QEII. They patrolled for 20minutes and then RTB. Flight Summary: HS3: 2037 2312Z; 114 EJT, 8 BIP; Storm #1 RM to Sylvan Lk. HS2: 2205 0041Z; 7 BIP, 190 min Gen; Storm #1 W Sylvan Lake to Innisfail. HS1: 2322 0220Z; 263 EJT, 6 BIP; Storm #1 W Innisfail, Storm #3 W Olds. HS3: 2349 0158Z; 23 BIP; Storm #1 Innisville, Storm #2 Eckville. HS2: 0149 0355Z; 1 BIP, 156 min Gen; Storm #4 S Sundre to Olds No aircraft operations. Public Relations: Red Deer Advocate front page photo of Rex Watson reflaring N233PS and story Battling Wicked Storms.
July 30, Saturday
Jet core across northern BC/AB/SK. Upper low off BC/AK coast, with nearly zonal flow across project. Slight PVA into N project. Cyclogenesis north of project early afternoon, with warm front to the E and cold front to W. Warm temps and high dewpoints producing moderate instability. Sunny and warm. No precipitation and no radar echoes. TCU reported by Red Deer at 15 and 16Z. Tmax YC = 29.5C with no rain Tmax QF = 25C with no rain Tmax Radar = 27.4C with no rain Jet core across northern BC/AB. Upper low along AK/BC coast. Ridge building to east with main axis over west SK. Negative pva pushing into project. Surface low and cold front to the east of project. ATM is mostly stable with strong CAP and CIN. Sunny and hot with mostly clear skies. No precipitation or radar echoes. No TCU reported. First 3 CDC day of season. Tmax YC = 30.6C with No rain Tmax QF = 25.2C with No rain Tmax Radar = 29.1C with No rain Main jet core to NE with secondary, weaker jet over project. Secondary jet will slide off to east. Upper low along northern BC/AB border. Ridge to E and trough to W. Surface low in north AB with cold front to south across project. PVA associated with cold front. Vast cooling aloft, giving good instability. Cells developed along the eastern buffer zone in the mid-afternoon, and tracked NE. A few cells popped up in the northern buffer zone, associated with the approaching cold front, but they did not threaten the area. Scattered thundershowers formed in the postfrontal, cooler unstable airmass in the evening and early Tuesday morning, but did not pose a hail threat. Hottest day of the year. Frontal passage at the radar at 0113Z. Tmax YC = 32.3C with No rain Tmax QF = 31.3C with No rain
July 31, Sunday
August 1, Monday
HS3 was launched at 0010Z in response to a 10.5 km top cell that popped up in the northern buffer zone. HS3 was airborne at 0028Z and climbed north of Sylvan Lake to investigate and patrol any new development. The cells were short lived, and the northern project area cleared out quickly. HS3 RTB at 0113Z. No seeding was conducted. HS3: 0025-0124: Patrol W of Red Deer.
October 2005
Page: 116
August 2, Tuesday
Tmax Radar = 30.3C with No rain Little weak jet across southern AB/ w SK. Upper Low over N AB with trough to S along AB/SK border. PVA moving through project in late morning/early afternoon. ATM is moderately unstable, but drying in late afternoon becoming more stable. First isolated cell developed N of Cochrane at 17Z. It moved east and developed into a line extending S through Calgary by 18Z. The strongest cell was N and E of Airdrie. The line passed through Strathmore by 20Z. A few scattered thundershowers developed in the N project between 18 and 20Z. Pea size hail reported in SE Calgary. Funnel cloud reported 4 miles NE Airdrie. Max tops= 9.5 km, dBz= 56, VIL= 22.4. Tmax YC = 22.9C with 4.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 21.2C with No rain Tmax Radar = 20.6C with No rain Jet and upper low well off to east over eastern MB. Ridge building to W and moving over project for next 2 days. PVA streak in eastern AB. Negative vertical velocities over project. ATM is warming aloft, 5.4C from 12Z to 00Z. ATM is dry and stable. Sunny and warm clear skies. No precipitation or radar echoes. No TCU reported. Tmax YC = 21.9C with trace rain before 9 am Tmax QF = 21.6C with No rain Tmax Radar = 20.6C with No rain Jet nose approaching BC coast. Ridge axis passing over project in afternoon and along AB/SK border by 00Z. No major forcing mechanisms. ATM is mostly stable with a strong CAP. Sunny and warm. A thick layer of Ac and Ci kept temperatures from going higher. A few Cu reported, otherwise no convection. Tmax YC = 27.1C with no rain Tmax QF = 24.7C with no rain Tmax Radar = 24.9C with no rain Ridge and surface High starting to weaken. Zonal Jet across N AB. Weak short-wave passing to the north, but ridge dominates over project area, capping all convection. Hot temperatures and SW chinook type winds caused dew points to drop in the afternoon preventing any convection. Some AC and Ci, but mostly a sunny, hot day, perfect for the BBQ at the Renicks in the evening. Tmax YC = 30.0C with no rain Tmax QF = 29.6C with no rain Tmax Radar = 29.6C with no rain Upper ridge and surface High slowly move to the east over SK. Jet across N AB. Weak short-wave and cold front crossing in the north in the late afternoon and evening. ATM is cooling aloft and moisture is increasing causing more instability, but ATM still capped at the lower levels over the project area. Thunderstorms formed along the quasi-stationary front, just north of the project. Pea and marble size hail reported by Ed Verkaik near Drayton Valley. Thunderstorms continued across central AB throughout the night. Project remained mostly sunny and hot, with only Ac, and Ci clouds during the day. Weak thundershowers crossed the N buffer zone early
HS3 was launched at 1800Z, when cells W of Airdrie developed quickly. HS2 was airborne at 1816Z and started seeding new development over Calgary at 1850Z (Storm #1). HS2 seeded at cloud base #1 until it passed Strathmore, and stopped seeding at 2008Z. HS2 patrolled over SW Calgary until RTB at 2037Z, with no new development. HS3: 1815-2045: 123 min acetone.
August 3, Wednesday
August 4, Thursday
August 5, Friday
August 6, Saturday
October 2005
Page: 117
Sunday morning. Tmax YC = 27.0C with no rain Tmax QF = 26.9C with no rain Tmax Radar = 26.5C with no rain Upper Low off BC coast continues to send short-waves across BC and the prairies. Zonal flow across AB with Jet core over YED. Quasi-stationary front across N AB and a second cold front across S AB, associated with the surface Low in S SK. Cooling at all levels. More moisture and slightly warmer temps in the S cause some instability, mostly along foothills. Scattered light rain showers developed after 04Z and continued overnight through the morning. Strongest reflectivity was in the northern half of the project with a few lightning strikes detected. Tmax YC = 21.9C with trace of rain Tmax QF = 20.9C with no rain Tmax Radar = 18.7C with no rain Tail end of jet leaving project by late afternoon and across southern SK/MB. Upper low N of SK with trough extending south through project and across S BC. Slight PVA in project in early afternoon. Positive vertical velocities in S project along mountains and N to NE winds producing upslope flow. ATM is slightly unstable. Rain showers in the morning. Stronger rain developed along the mountains after 18Z and moved E. Titan cells in the W buffer, first around 1930Z and second from 22-23Z. Few lightning strikes detected in project. Max Tops= 6.5 km, dBZ= 46, VIL= 6.5 Tmax YC = 19.1C with 4.8 mm rain Tmax QF = 18.1C with 2.8 mm rain Tmax Radar = 18.1C with no rain Weak Jet across central SK/MB. Weak secondary low over N MB, main low over N Hudson Bay, with zonal flow across E AB/SK/MB. Weak PVA streak across N project with some moderate vertical velocities. NE winds. ATM is unstable with surface heating. Morning rain showers in N project. First cell developed at 1830Z W of Olds. By 1930Z there were cells just to the N and S of the Olds cell. These slowly moved east. After 20Z some higher reflectivity cells developed along the foothills NW of Cochrane and moved east forming an E-W line. Rain showers developed to the W of Calgary after 22Z. Widespread rain moved through the project overnight. A funnel cloud was observed just W of Olds around 1850Z. Max Tops= 7.5 km, dBZ= 56, VIL= 13.2 Tmax YC = 19.2C with 6.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 19.6C with no rain Tmax Radar = 20.0C with 9.9 mm rain Jet pushing into AB from the N. Northerly upper level flow over N AB and easterly in S AB/SK/MB. Strong PVA streak along a weak trough line through N project, but only minimal vertical velocities. Slight cooling of ATM. Subsidence inversion at 700 mb and stable above 10 Kft. Ns, rains were observed throughout the day, some
August 7, Sunday
August 8, Monday
August 9, Tuesday
HS3 was launched to Olds at 1918Z. HS3 was airborne at 1939Z. HS3 patrolled between Olds and N of Cochrane. HS3 started seeding Storm #1 near Crossfield at 2139Z and stopped seeding at 2142Z. HS3 RTB at 2142Z as clouds were glaciating with no significant development. Flight summary HS3: 1937-2159: 7 EJT Crossfield.
August 10, Wednesday
Page: 118
lightning was reported outside the project area. Tmax YC = 9.6C with 4.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 11.9C with 6.2 mm rain Tmax Radar = 10.6C with 10.4 mm rain Surface H in the area. Cold front crossing the area. Jet is over the northern part of the province. North-west winds. Both soundings are slightly unstable. Ns, Sc, As, Cb at buffer zone, rains were observed. No significant development of convective clouds in the area. Tmax YC = 18.4C with no rain Tmax QF = 19.1C with 2.2 mm rain Tmax Radar = 17.3C with 0.3 mm rain August 12, Friday Surface H in the area. Cold front had passed the area and is located to the south. Jet is over the northern part of the province. Northwest winds. PVA is forecasted at the south of the area. Red Deer sounding is stable. Calgary sounding is slightly unstable with inversion at 3.5 km. Ac, Sc, Cu cong were observed throughout the day. No significant development of convective clouds in the area. Tmax YC = 14.5C with 0.4 mm rain Tmax QF = 14.6C with 0.4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 12.8oC with 2.5 mm rain Surface H shifts to the south of the area. Large upper Low pressure system centered in N SK, with spiral arms of vorticity pin-wheeling around it. A weak cold front approaching from the north in the evening, causing showers in the north. Jet is north of the area. Winds at all levels from the northwest. Red Deer and Calgary sounding are slightly unstable. Fair weather throughout the day. Ns, embedded Cu, light rain showers during night. Tmax YC = 21.1C with no rain Tmax QF = 21.2C with 0.6 mm rain Tmax Radar = 21.1oC with no mm rain Low is north-east of the province. Cold front is in the area. Second cold front is north of the area. Jet is north of the area. Wind is north-west. Red Deer sounding is slightly unstable. Calgary sounding is unstable. As-Cs, embeded Cu were observed throughout the day. Cb developed late afternoon in the south of the area. Thunderstorm was registered. Tmax YC = 18.8 0 C with 4mm of rain Tmax QF = 15.4C with 5 mm of rain Tmax Radar = 14.9oC with 1.8 mm of rain Low is north-east of the province. Surface Low is to the west of the area. Jet is north of the area. Warm front has passed the area. Both soundings are stable assuming layer clouds to prevail in the area. Ns, rains throughout the day. Tmax YC = 13.4 0 C with 4mm of rain
August 11, Thursday
August 13, Saturday
August 14, Sunday
HS1 was launched to the foothills W of YC at 2358Z and were airborne at 0019Z. They patrolled to the W and SW of YC but all significant cells remained to the S & SW of the project area. HS1 RTB at 0141Z. Flight Summary: HS1: 0015 0156Z; Patrol W & SW of YC.
August 15, Monday
Page: 119
August 16, Tuesday
Tmax QF = 11.9C with 7 mm of rain Tmax Radar = 10.9oC with 1.3 mm of rain Surface High north of the province. Two surface Lows south-west and south-east of the province. Cold front at the south of the province. Light PVA at the south of the area. Red Deer sounding is stable. Calgary sounding is unstable with low level inversion. Fog in the morning. Rain showers across project in afternoon. Thunderstorms in W buffer from 21Z to 00Z. Thundershowers across S project from 00Z to 04Z. Widespread rain moved in after 07Z. Lightning detected and thunder reported in YC by Ben at 0050Z. Tmax YC = 11.5oC with 13.2 mm of rain Tmax QF = 10.5oC with 5.2 mm of rain Tmax Radar = 9.7oC with 2.5 mm of rain Small weak jet across S AB/N MT. Upper low digging S and over central AB in afternoon, will move SE overnight. PVA streak across S project in evening, with strong PVA associated with low overnight, but very little VV. ATM is warm above 700 mb and cold below. All instability is capped below 14,000 ft. Widespread rain in morning and afternoon ending around 22Z. Few scattered iso SHRA after widespread rain moved out until 03Z. Tmax YC = 10.0oC with 19.8 mm of rain Tmax QF = 11.8oC with 11.6 mm of rain Tmax Radar = 9.3oC with 9.9 mm of rain Weak N-S jet to W of project. Upper low along central AB/SK border continuing to dig to SE. Ridge building over BC will be over project in 36hrs. PVA streak along SK/AB/US border. Slight instability below 15,000 ft. Cool, mostly cloudy. Rain showers in the morning in the N project, and continuing through evening in the N and E. Automated station at Sundre showed a low of -1oC at 12Z on the 18th. Tmax YC = 13.5oC with No rain Tmax QF = 10.7oC with 2.8 mm of rain Tmax Radar = 11.1oC with 0.3 mm of rain Jet over BC coast. Upper low now over S MB. Strong ridge over project for the next 2 days. Slight low-level positive vertical velocities over MTS from upslope flow, but subsidence over project. Little instability below midlevel ridge. Sunny and warm with mostly clear skies, AC and CU. No precipitation or radar echoes. No TCU reported. Tmax YC = 21.9oC with No rain Tmax QF = 21.1oC with No rain Tmax Radar = 20.3oC with No rain Strong jet over BC coast. Two upper lows: one to east over central ON, other off AK coast. Ridge in-between the two lows, with main ridge axis now through project and along AB/SK border. Neg PVA over project area. Surface low over N AB border with stationary front dropping S through AB to east of project. ATM is mostly stable. Warm and partly sunny. AC cloud bank along foothills
August 18, Thursday
August 19, Friday
August 20, Saturday
October 2005
Page: 120
in afternoon with mid level radar echoes and no rain reaching the ground. Tmax YC = 26.3oC with No rain Tmax QF = 25.7oC with No rain Tmax Radar = 26.6oC with No rain Jet across N AB. Weak upper low off AK coast will dissipate over evening. Ridge axis titling to NE across S SK and N MB. Some mid level positive vertical velocities over mountains. Sfc low N of AB with cold front dropping south through AB. New low forming during afternoon near Edmonton. ATM has some instability. Sunny and hot during afternoon and evening. Ci, Ac, and Cu over mountains. Heavy Ac layer after 13Z producing some radar echoes from virga. Cold front passed through Olds at 0530Z, QF at 06Z and YC at 08Z, no weather was associated with the passing cold front, just gusty winds. Sundre reported 30oC for 5 hours from 21Z until 01Z. Tmax YC = 29.3oC with No rain Tmax QF = 29.4oC with No rain Tmax Radar = 28.3oC with No rain Weak jet across E AB/central SK/N MB, and strong jet pushing S off BC coast and will slide E. Ridge over W ON and trough forming over BC and will strengthen overnight. Small PVA streak across project. Strongest forcing over MTs, then over project in morning. ATM is stable from low level parcel, but slightly unstable at mid levels. Ac, embedded Cu cong were observed late afternoon, heavy rain and thunderclouds occurred during night hours, Ns moved into the area. Tmax YC = 18oC with trace rain Tmax QF = 18.7oC with 1mm rain Tmax Radar = 17.2oC with No rain A cold-core, closed Low is centered over the southern border of the province and British Columbia. Surface Low south of the area. PVA in the area. Stationary front at the south of the area. Calgary sounding is more unstable. An upslope rain situation develops over the project area producing widespread, continuous rain across most of the project area. Ns, embedded Cu, some lightning associated with convective bands early in the day, local heavy rains. 33.6 mm rain reported at Sundre. Tmax YC = 10.0oC with 6.6 mm rain Tmax QF = 11.6oC with 23.4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 10.9oC with 16.3 mm rain (34 mm rain emptied from the wedge gauge at 17Z (11 am) Wed morning. The cold-core, deep, closed Low now located in southern SK. Jet stream wraps around the Low, running across the N USA. Project area dominated by cold, moist, wrap-around northerly flow around the Low. Atmosphere has low-level instability, but stable above 15 kft. Gusty northerly winds and continuous rain during most of the day. Nimbo-stratus clouds (Ns), heavy rains were observed throughout the area. Tmax YC = 10.6oC with 26.8 mm rain
August 21, Sunday
August 22, Monday
August 23, Tuesday
Page: 121
August 25, Thursday
Tmax QF = 12.5oC with 34.2 mm rain Tmax Radar = 11.9oC with 22.1 mm rain Low is over Saskatchewan. Surface H west and south of the area. Jet is south of the province. Red Deer sounding is stable. Calgary sounding is unstable with dry layer at 4 km, which should limit convection. Sunny with clear skies. Few Cu and Ci. No precipitation and no radar echoes. Hurricane Katrina develops quickly off the E coast of Florida and hits Miami. Tmax YC = 20.2oC with No rain Tmax QF = 20.5oC with No rain Tmax Radar = 19.0oC with No rain Upper ridge over AB. Cold low gulf of Alaska with jet approaching W coast of BC. No fronts over project. ATM is warm and dry above 8 kft. Ridge should cap all convection. Warm, nice day. No deep convection reported just Ci and Ac. No precipitation and no radar echoes. Hurricane Katrina moves into Gulf of Mexico and intensifies. Tmax YC = 25.8oC with No rain Tmax QF = 24.8oC with No rain Tmax Radar = 25.2oC with No rain Upper low off AK coast with jet wrapping around to S and E across BC. Ridge axis just east of project and tilting to NE over N SK. ATM is slightly unstable, but CAP will limit development. Skies mostly sunny with warm temperatures during the day, and cool temps during the night. Hurricane Katrina in Gulf of Mexico becomes category 5 with max wind speeds near 300 kph and its path is forecast to pass directly over New Orleans. Tmax YC = 24.7oC max, 5.4oC min, with No rain Tmax QF = 25.7oC max, 6.5oC min, with No rain Tmax Radar = 25.2oC max, 6.8oC min, with No rain
August 26, Friday
August 27, Saturday
Test flight of all three aircraft after noon briefing, because all aircraft had not flown for almost two weeks. HS1 airborne at 1842Z, and patrol S Sundre. HS1 RTB at 1914Z. Flight track did not appear until after aircraft computer was rebooted for the 3rd time. HS2 airborne at 1846Z. HS2 completed 4 touch and go landings at Olds/Didsbury airport. HS2 RTB at 1926Z. HS3 airborne at 1850Z, and patrol near Rocky. HS3 RTB at 1918Z. Test Flight summary: HS1: 1841-1928Z; patrol S Sundre HS2: 1842-1940Z; patrol Olds HS3: 1848-1939Z; patrol Rocky No aircraft operations.
August 28, Sunday
Ridge axis over SK. Deep, cold trof over BC with strong Jet support. Trof will move into AB over the next 24 hrs. Atmosphere is hot and dry today, becoming cold and wet on Monday. Skies mostly sunny and hot with a few CU, AC, and some Ci clouds. Hurricane Katrina in Gulf of Mexico becomes category 5 with max wind speeds near 175 mph and its path is forecast to pass directly over New Orleans. All people in New Orleans are advised to evacuate and emergency shelters are set up, preparing for a potential catastrophe. Tmax YC = 27.2oC with No rain Tmax QF = 28.6oC with No rain Tmax Radar = 27.2oC with No rain Upper L in British Columbia. Surface L south west of the area and north of the province. Jet is in the area. PVA is in the area. Cold front moving towards the area. Soundings are very unstable.
August 29, Monday
October 2005
Page: 122
Cloudy and cooler. Widespread rain across project after 23Z. Some embedded convection producing a few lightning strikes, mostly in W buffer. Hurricane Katrina goes ashore at 6 am EDT at SE Louisiana as a category 4 storm with winds of 140 mph. New Orleans experiences heavy flooding. At 11 am EDT wind speeds were 125 mph as the storm moved quickly inland. Massive destruction ensues over Mississippi, Louisiana and parts of Alabama. Tmax YC = 17.6oC with 0.8 mm rain Tmax QF = 15.0oC with trace of rain Tmax Radar = 14.3oC with 0.5 mm rain Cold front has passed through province and is along AB/SK border. Jet streak and PVA are east of project. ATM is unstable below 18 kft. Short wave across project in evening hours. Mostly clear skies in afternoon over project. Few scattered light showers after 20Z, highest echoes in N buffer between 2330Z and 00Z. Tmax YC = 18.8oC with no rain Tmax QF = 18.5oC with no rain Tmax Radar =17.9 oC with no rain Surface H in the north of SK. Jet in the north west of the province. Trough in the north of the province. Low instability of the atmosphere with inversion and dry layer near 4.5 km. Cc, Ac, Cu cong were observed during the day. Some light echoes in N project between 02Z and 06Z, with QF reporting SHRA at 05Z. Tmax YC = 20.7oC with no rain Tmax QF = 20oC with trace of rain Tmax Radar =19.2 oC with no rain Surface Low in the area. Light PVA in the area. Jet north of the area. Both soundings are unstable. Thunderstorm is possible if surface temperature will increase up to 21-22 oC. Ci, Ac, Cu cong were observed during the day. Some light echoes in N of project area. Tmax YC = 21.8oC with no rain Tmax QF = 21.9oC with no rain Tmax Radar =21.2 oC with no rain Surface Low north of the area. PVA in the area. Jet in the area. Cold front will pass the area. Calgary sounding is unstable. Hail is forecasted by the models. Cb, thunderstorms, pea size hail was registered. Storms formed over the mountains and foothills and moved into the area late in the afternoon. Pea size hail was reported W of Sundre and at the radar. Storm #1 (Sundre) had 56 dBZ max Z, 8.5 km tops, and 15.7 kg/m2 max cell VIL (9.7 kg/m2 pixel VIL). Storm #2 Sundre: 53 dBZ, 11.5 km tops, 23.7 max VIL. Storm #3 Caroline: 52 dBZ, 9.5 km tops, 12.2 max VIL.
August 30, Tuesday
Radar failed at 0210Z. Replacement part being shipped overnight from Fargo. No aircraft operations.
September 1, Thursday
Radar not operational. New high voltage power supply arrives in Calgary at 6 pm. No aircraft operations.
September 2, Friday
Radar fixed with first image at 1654Z. HS3 was launched at 2035Z to investigate a developing cell west of Sundre. HS3 was airborne at 2049Z and started seeding Storm #1 at cloud top at 2102Z. Pea size hail was reported 3 mi west of Sundre. The cell moved quickly towards the NE and diminished in intensity. HS3 stopped seeding at 2114Z. HS3 patrolled the northern area until 2211Z and then RTB. HS2 was launched at 2231Z to investigate a second wave of convection NW of YC. HS2 was airborne at 2253Z and patrolled NW of Cochrane. Cells intensified over the foothills W of Sundre and HS2 started seeding Storm #2 at 2341Z. HS2 continued
October 2005
Page: 123
Storm #4 N Cochrane: 50 dBZ, 10.5 km tops, 8.4 max VIL. Tmax YC = 24.1oC with no rain Tmax QF = 22.8oC with 8.4 mm rain Tmax Radar =22.7 oC with 5.8 mm rain
seeding as Storm #2 formed into a line, crossing Sundre. HS3 proceeded to the north end of the line and started seeding a new cell (Storm #3) W of Caroline at 0023Z. HS2 stopped seeding #3 at 0052Z W of Sylvan Lake, as the cell diminished into a thundershower, no longer tracking on TITAN. HS2 RTB at 0120Z as the line moved past highway 2. HS1 was launched at 0215Z to a third wave of development S of Sundre. HS1 was airborne at 0228Z and proceeded to S Sundre. Sundre cell was diminishing and HS1 was sent to a cell NW of Cochrane. HS1 started seeding at 0248Z 13mi N Cochrane. HS1 stopped seeding at 0320Z as the cell had dissipated. HS1 RTB at 0335Z. Flight summary: HS3: 2047-2222Z: 21 EJT, 1 BIP; Storm #1 Sundre HS2: 2251-0139: 6 BIP, 142 Gen; Storm #2 Sundre, storm #3 Caroline HS1: 0227-0347: 8 BIP; Storm #4 N Cochrane HS3 was launched at 2147Z to new development along the foothills near Caroline. HS3 was airborne at 2203Z and patrolled the foothills for >1.5 hrs before a cell grew rapidly SW of Sylvan Lake. HS3 started seeding Storm #1 (Sylvan Lake) at 2345Z and stopped seeding at 0029Z, as the cell passed Hwy 2A. HS3 RTB at 0104Z. HS1 was launched at 0104Z to a line NE of Sundre. HS1 was airborne at 0119Z and started seeding storm #2 at 0134Z 3 mi W of Bowden. HS1 stopped seeding at 0203Z as storm was past the QE 2. HS1 patrolled E Sundre and RTB at 0240Z as storms were dissipating. Flight summary: HS3: 2159-0112Z: 122 EJT; Storm #1 Sylvan Lake HS1: 0117-0301Z: 98 EJT, 6 BIP; Storm #2 W Innisfail No aircraft operations.
September 3, Saturday
Low north-west of the area. PVA in the area. Jet in the area. Occluded front north of the area. Red Deer sounding is more unstable. Hail is forecasted by the models. Thunderstorms formed along the foothills and the northern half of the project area in the afternoon and tracked towards the NE, across the project. Quarter to golf ball size hail was reported north of the project area. Storm #1 near Sylvan Lake had 50 dBZ, 8.5 km tops, and 10.2 max VIL. Storm #2 NE Sundre to Innisfail. 49.5 dBz max, 7.5 km tops, 7.0 max VIL. Tmax YC = 25.2oC with No rain Tmax QF = 22.2oC with 1.2 mm rain Tmax Radar =23.7oC with 0.8 mm rain Weak elongated jet across project/SK/N MB. Upper Low N of SK, trough in E BC/WA will move through project overnight, ridge building along BC/AK coast. PVA across project all afternoon and overnight. Sfc Low in S AB. ATM is slightly unstable. Showers with lightning developed in afternoon by 20Z along foothills. After 00Z just scattered SHRA ending by 12Z. Max cell tops 8.5 km in E buffer, 6.5 to 7.5 km in project, 54.5 dBz max, 6.5 max VIL Tmax YC = 20.0oC with trace rain Tmax QF = 15.1oC with 1.4 mm rain Tmax Radar =16.3oC with 0.3 mm rain Upper low N of MB with trough extending S along AB/SK border. Jet on E side of trough. Ridge over BC will weaken as it approaches project in 36 hours. No major PVA streaks in project. ATM is cold and slightly unstable. Few scattered SHRA from 18Z to 01Z. Titan cell in N buffer, 7.5 km tops, 45 dbz max, 5.3 max VIL. Few lightning strikes detected.
September 4, Sunday
September 5, Monday
October 2005
Page: 124
September 6, Tuesday
Tmax YC = 16.4oC with trace rain Tmax QF = 16.7oC with No rain Tmax Radar =16.1oC with 0.5 mm rain Jet off BC coast. Ridge over N AB with weak influence over project. Subsidence over project. ATM is stable with a strong stable layer at 650 mb. Sunny nice day. Very few clouds. No precip and no radar echoes. Cold morning, Sundre low 1.4 oC. Tmax YC = 18.4oC with No rain Tmax QF = 18.8oC with No rain Tmax Radar =18.1oC with No rain Jet across central BC, with nose into AB. Nearly zonal flow across project with ridge to E along SK/MB border. Small PVA streak to E of project. Negative vertical velocities. ATM is stable. Warm nice day. Party sunny to partly cloudy. No precip and no radar echoes. Rocky Mtn House low 2.0 C, Sundre low 1.1 C. Tmax YC = 21.3oC with No rain Tmax QF = 20.6oC with No rain Tmax Radar =19.3oC with No rain Strong Jet off BC coast, weaker jet across project into central SK. Intense upper low north of AB with trough to SW through BC, will dig SW overnight bringing cooler temp aloft. Stronger PVA and positive VV in evening hours. Surface low in N AB with cold front moving through project in late afternoon. ATM has some instability. Timing of cold front is critical. Warm and nice in S project before rain began. Multiple rain bands moved through project after 20Z, beginning in the N. More continues rain after 04Z. Tmax YC = 23.3oC with 1.8 mm rain Tmax QF = 18.3oC with 1.6 mm rain Tmax Radar =18.4oC with 1.0 mm rain Strong N-S Jet along BC coast in NW US. Intense upper Low along BC/WA border, spinning PVA up into project. ATM is stable above 13 Kft. Widespread rainshowers turning to continuous rain overnight. 15 mm rain in radar wedge gauge at 15Z and 30 mm further accumulated by 1540Z Sat morning. Temperatures remained cool all day. Tmax YC = 9.7oC with 18.2 mm rain Tmax QF = 10.2oC with 14.6 mm rain Tmax Radar =9.7oC with 11.9 mm rain Upper closed, cold Low centered in WA state. Sfc Low in S-SK. Cold, wet wrap-around flow associated with sfc Low puts the project area in a cold, wet upslope rainy situation. Strong Jet stream wrapping around upper Low provides good upper support to the system. Multiple short-wave disturbances, pin-wheeling around the upper Low causing some convective rain bands embedded in the continuous rain area. Some warm air advection aloft will stabilize the atmosphere above 15 kft by late afternoon. Generally, cold, wet conditions prevail all day with gusty north winds. Some graupel reported from the convective rain bands over Calgary in the early afternoon, but no lightning. Otherwise, continuous rain reported over the entire project area all day and most of the night. 32 mm of rain emptied from the radar wedge gauge at 1550Z Sunday morning.
September 7, Wednesday
September 8, Thursday
September 9, Friday
September 10, Saturday
October 2005
Page: 125
Heavy rainfall warning and high-stream flow warnings across the project area. Tmax YC = 7.9oC with 64.8 mm rain Tmax QF = 9.2oC with 18.2 mm rain Tmax Radar =8.2oC with 42.2 mm rain Upper level cold-closed Low now centered in SK. Main jet stream extends from MT across SK into MB. Project area in the trof and cold post frontal condition. Atmos is cold, dry and relatively stable. Cloudy, cold with drizzle in the morning becoming SC, CU cloudy in the afternoon, with some clearing and sunny breaks. Cool northerly flow at all levels. Showers moved into the area overnight and early Monday morning. Tmax YC = 11.1oC with 3.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 10.8oC with 0.8 mm rain Trough axis along AB/SK border. Sfc low in N SK with cold front extending S across S AB into MT. Main jet into MB and second jet from Yukon into BC. Big high building off BC coast but project influenced more by trough and disturbances embedded in the northerly flow. Light RA band in morning in central regions moving S during early afternoon. Scattered showers between 18Z and 22Z. Tmax YC = 11.2oC with 1.0 mm rain Tmax QF = 12.7oC with 1.4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 10.3oC with No rain Small weak jet along AK/BC coast will zip into central AB overnight. Upper low N of MB with trough axis to S thru MB and into Dakotas. Small PVA over project in afternoon, strongest forcing will be N of project associated with a short wave overnight. Sfc low in N AB with warm front to SE. ATM is stable above 15 kft. Two light rain bands moved through project from W to E, first from 22Z to 01Z, second from 00Z to 05Z. Rain was mostly in N from AC, SC, and NS. QF had a frosty low of 0.3oC. Tmax YC = 18.2oC with No rain Tmax QF = 18.6oC with 0.4 mm rain Tmax Radar = 17.4oC with 0.8 mm rain Weak jet across project. Upper low in N Hudson Bay and slight ridge off AK coast, giving nearly zonal flow across project. Strongest forcing is E of project and overnight through Thursday. Sfc low in central SK with cold front to W, sliding through project during evening hrs. ATM is slightly unstable with peak heating. Iso SHRAs beginning in morning thru afternoon. Strongest convection in W buffer, titan cell from 1830Z to 2030Z, producing some lightning in project W of Caroline. Pea size hail reported near Cremona and Strathmore. Less convective RA after 00Z and scattered RA overnight. 6.1 mm in wedge gauge. Tmax YC = 14.8oC with trace rain Tmax QF = 15.0oC with 2.6 mm rain Tmax Radar = 13.6oC with 0.3 mm rain Weak jet across S AB/SK and stronger one along AK/BC coast. Upper low forming along the BC/WA
September 11, Sunday
September 12, Monday
September 13, Tuesday
September 14, Wednesday
September 15,
October 2005
Page: 126
Thursday
coast and mostly zonal flow across project. Small PVA disturbances moving thru project and positive VV over most of project. ATM is mostly stable with cooler temps. Calgary and Okotoks had max temps near 10 C, but High River reached 15.4 C and thunderstorms developed along the southern project border and southern AB. Funnel cloud sighted SW of Calgary. Grape size hail covering the ground reported near Champion (S of Vulcan, outside the project area). Pea size hail near High River, and radar returns indicating grape hail in the southern buffer zone. Light RA over most of project. TSRA in S buffer from 20Z to 01Z. 11.5 km tops, 54 dBz max, 26.5 max VIL. Tmax YC = 10.3oC with 0.8 mm rain Tmax QF = 8.0oC with 3.8 mm rain Tmax Radar = 7.6oC with 2.0 mm rain END OF SEASON.
September 16, Friday
YEAR END PARTY.
October 2005
Page: 127
C. AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS FLIGHT SUMMARY 2005

Grand Total flight hrs.= ALBERTA AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS FLIGHT SUMMARY 2005 Storm days= 37
TOTALS June sub-totals July sub-total Aug. sub-total Sept. sub-total DATE (MDT) Calender Storm_Day
49:06 23:04 20:30 2:28 3:04

HS1
2750 531 2121 0 98

N234K
169 47 108 0 14
44:50 12:57 25:37 3:28 2:48

HS2
Grand Total top flares= Grand Total base flares= Grand Total acetone= 0 121 2261 0 0 0 0
N123KK EB FLARES
157:52 hrs:min 3770 flares 515 flares 2261 min. 63:56 1020 20:02 34:54 4:12 4:48
HS3
total AgI(gm)
gallons 94.2 225 45 179 0 1
75400 77250 6462 159112

STORMS = 70
25 90 0 6
410 1586 123 142

min ACETONE
229 641 7 143

N232PS
21 41 2 6 total AgI(gm)
159112
FLT TIME EJ FLARES EB FLARES
FLT TIME EJ FLARES
FLT TIME EJ FLARES EB FLARES
storms 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 1 1 3 4 1 3 0 1 2 0 0 7 1 7
Daily AgI (gm)
sum
01-Jun-05 02-Jun-05 03-Jun-05 04-Jun-05 10-Jun-05 11-Jun-05 12-Jun-05 13-Jun-05 15-Jun-05 21-Jun-05 22-Jun-05 23-Jun-05 25-Jun-05 30-Jun-05 01-Jul-05 02-Jul-05 06-Jul-05 07-Jul-05 09-Jul-05 10-Jul-05 12-Jul-05 13-Jul-05 18-Jul-05 19-Jul-05
01:08 02:31 03:35 02:03 01:31 01:50 05:05 01:17 01:30 02:34 01:57 02:43
1 2 23 44 35 243
2 3 2 4 2 14
00:34 01:43 01:53 00:47
0 0 0 0
1 8 0 0
4 108 0 0
00:42 01:47
1 58
1 5
03:07 01:48 02:13 01:32 02:40 02:19 02:29 01:25
01:40 01:41
0 0
2 0
60 80
0 0 29 76 65
10 22 2 5 0
97 86 15 298
7 13 2 15
01:37 03:02 02:00 02:07
0 0 0 0
9 5 14 8
112 46 142 104
01:25 02:28 03:25 00:56 02:42 02:21 300 289 24 19 04:33 03:27 0 0 0 0 16 6 0 288 195
October 2005
0 0 96
0 18 16
01:09 04:00 00:58 02:34
105 0 150
20 4 1
651 3419 490 0 760 1480 0 1471 1500 10489 880 2270 4660 5851 3106 9707 0 2700 4320 0 0 17923 600 13237
651 4070 4560 4560 5320 6800 6800 8272 9772 20260 21140 23410 28070 33922 37028 46735 46735 49435 53755 53755 53755 71678 72278 85515
Page: 128
20-Jul-05 23-Jul-05 24-Jul-05 25-Jul-05 28-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 01-Aug-05 02-Aug-05 09-Aug-05 14-Aug-05 27-Aug-05 02-Sep-05 03-Sep-05
01:55
245
11
03:01
16
182
04:42 01:18 01:41 06:30 04:44 00:59 02:22
176 0 0 0 114
27 7 0 55 31
01:33 04:21 02:58
76 635 263
7 24 6
04:51 04:42 02:30
0 0 0
22 8 0
329 346 123
01:41 00:47 01:20 01:44
0 98
8 6
00:58 02:48
142
00:51 01:35 03:13
21 122
1 0
5 1 0 1 8 4 0 1 1 0 0 4 2
17040 1050 0 2570 28790 15279 0 352 140 0 0 3076 5300
102555 103605 103605 106175 134966 150245 150245 150596 150736 150736 150736 153812 159112
October 2005
Page: 129
D. FLIGHT SUMMARY TABLE 2005

ALBERTA HAIL SUPPRESSION PROJECT 2005 Stock:
4046
352
51.8
37
23
26
15
28 159112 gms Seed seed Amt. Seed amt # storms per flight Accum. per day 70 320 320 651 0 161 481 0 170 651 0 1509 2160 3419 1 1910 4070 inc 490 4560 490 1 0 4560 0 0 4560 760 0 0 4560 0 760 5320 1 0 5320 0 1480 6800 1480 1 0 6800 0 0 6800 0 1000 7800 1471 1 0 7800 0 471 8272 1 1500 9772 1500 1 5790 15562 10489 2 229 15790 inc 3300 19090 2 1170 20260 1 880 21140 880 1 2270 23410 2270 1 0 23410 0 2990 26400 4660 2 1670 28070 1
Operations Flights UTC UTC hr:mm No. No. minutes gallons hr:mm flights TOTALS = 80 157:52 3770 515 2261 94.2 Storm-Day Sub-totals Aircraf endDate (UTC) t Take-off Landing Duration eject burn acetone Type 157:52 3770 515 01-Jun-05 HS1 20:55 22:03 01:08 1 2 test 02:24 2 4 01-Jun-05 HS2 21:21 21:55 00:34 0 1 4 test 01-Jun-05 HS3 22:52 23:34 00:42 1 1 test 02-Jun-05 HS2 21:10 22:53 01:43 0 8 108 seed 03:30 58 13 02-Jun-05 HS3 21:21 23:08 01:47 58 5 seed 03-Jun-05 HS1 20:12 22:43 02:31 2 3 seed 02:31 2 3 04-Jun-05 HS2 21:08 23:01 01:53 0 0 0 patrol 01:53 10-Jun-05 HS2 19:20 20:07 00:47 0 0 0 patrol 07:29 23 2 10-Jun-05 HS3 20:05 23:12 03:07 0 0 patrol 10-Jun-05 HS1 20:12 22:22 02:10 23 2 seed 11-Jun-05 HS1 02:30 03:55 01:25 0 0 patrol 11-Jun-05 HS1 19:55 21:58 02:03 44 4 seed 03:51 44 4 11-Jun-05 HS3 21:34 23:22 01:48 0 0 patrol 12-Jun-05 HS1 20:52 22:23 01:31 0 0 patrol 01:31 13-Jun-05 HS1 19:42 21:32 01:50 35 2 seed 05:43 35 4 13-Jun-05 HS3 20:25 22:38 02:13 0 0 0 patrol 13-Jun-05 HS2 23:47 01:27 01:40 0 2 60 seed 15-Jun-05 HS3 19:35 21:07 01:32 0 10 seed 01:32 10 22-Jun-05 HS1 01:38 05:20 03:42 222 9 seed 09:26 243 36 22-Jun-05 HS2 04:23 06:04 01:41 0 0 80 seed 22-Jun-05 HS3 07:25 10:05 02:40 0 22 seed 22-Jun-05 HS1 08:18 09:41 01:23 21 5 seed 23-Jun-05 HS3 01:01 03:20 02:19 29 2 seed 02:19 29 2 23-Jun-05 HS3 18:42 21:11 02:29 76 5 seed 03:46 76 5 23-Jun-05 HS1 20:53 22:10 01:17 0 0 patrol 25-Jun-05 HS1 20:15 21:45 01:30 97 7 seed 03:07 97 16 25-Jun-05 HS2 21:45 23:22 01:37 0 9 112 seed
94.2 2261 4
108
60
80
112
Page: 130
30-Jun-05 30-Jun-05 01-Jul-05 01-Jul-05 01-Jul-05 02-Jul-05 02-Jul-05 06-Jul-05 07-Jul-05 09-Jul-05 09-Jul-05 10-Jul-05 13-Jul-05 13-Jul-05 13-Jul-05 13-Jul-05 13-Jul-05 18-Jul-05 19-Jul-05 20-Jul-05 20-Jul-05 20-Jul-05 20-Jul-05 20-Jul-05 21-Jul-05 23-Jul-05 25-Jul-05 26-Jul-05 28-Jul-05 28-Jul-05 28-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 29-Jul-05
HS3 HS2 HS1 HS2 HS1 HS1 HS2 HS3 HS3 HS3 HS3 HS2 HS3 HS2 HS3 HS1 HS3 HS3 HS3 HS1 HS2 HS3 HS2 HS1 HS3 HS3 HS3 HS1 HS3 HS2 HS1 HS3 HS1 HS2 HS3 HS1 HS3
21:22 22:18 02:11 19:32 21:00 17:31 19:06 20:16 19:17 22:49 02:24 19:54 02:26 18:00 19:22 20:58 23:07 20:10 21:13 00:06 01:04 20:48 21:18 23:17 03:33 22:44 01:10 05:12 20:59 22:23 22:26 00:20 01:14 01:55 03:15 03:14 20:37
22:47 01:20 04:45 21:32 22:57 20:14 21:13 21:41 21:45 00:44 03:54 20:50 03:35 22:33 21:10 23:40 01:19 21:08 23:47 02:27 04:31 00:35 00:19 01:12 04:28 00:02 02:51 06:45 23:26 00:58 00:16 02:22 02:27 04:11 05:16 04:32 23:12
01:25 03:02 02:34 02:00 01:57 02:43 02:07 01:25 02:28 01:55 01:30 00:56 01:09 04:33 01:48 02:42 02:12 00:58 02:34 02:21 03:27 03:47 03:01 01:55 00:55 01:18 01:41 01:33 02:27 02:35 01:50 02:02 01:13 02:16 02:01 01:18 02:35
65 0 86 0 15 298 0 0 0 96 0 0 0 0 0 300 105 0 150 289 0 176 0 245 0 0 0 76 0 0 285 0 291 0 0 59 114
0 5 13 14 2 15 8 0 18 9 7 0 0 16 13 24 7 4 1 19 6 18 16 11 9 7 0 7 16 11 13 20 9 11 19 2 8
46 142
104 0 0 0 0 0 0 288 0 0 0
195 182
167
162
seed seed seed seed seed seed seed patrol seed seed seed patrol patrol seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed patrol seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed
07:01
151
18
46
03:57 04:50 01:25 02:28 03:25 00:56 01:09 11:15
15 298
16 23
142 104
96
18 16
405
60
288
00:58 08:22
439
4 26
195
09:38
421
54
182
01:18 01:41 01:33 15:42
7 76 635 7 101
329
12:24
October 2005
377
45
346
1300 881 3670 2506 600 8210 1497 0 2700 3270 1050 0 0 3223 1950 9600 3150 600 3150 8630 1457 6220 2920 6550 1350 1050 0 2570 2400 2127 7650 3000 7170 2113 2850 1480 3480
29370 30252 33922 36428 37028 45238 46735 46735 49435 52705 53755 53755 53755 56978 58928 68528 71678 72278 75428 84058 85515 91735 94655 101205 102555 103605 103605 106175 108575 110703 118353 121353 128523 130636 133486 134966 138446
5851
3106 inc 9707
1 1 2 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 inc 1 1 0 1 2 1 inc 2 inc 1 2 inc
2700 4320
17923
600 13237
17040
1050 2570 28790
15279
Page: 131
29-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 30-Jul-05 02-Aug-05 02-Aug-05 09-Aug-05 14-Aug-05 27-Aug-05 27-Aug-05 27-Aug-05 02-Sep-05 02-Sep-05 03-Sep-05 03-Sep-05 04-Sep-05
HS2 HS1 HS3 HS2 HS3 HS2 HS3 HS1 HS1 HS2 HS3 HS3 HS2 HS1 HS3 HS1
22:05 23:22 23:49 01:49 00:25 18:15 19:37 00:15 18:41 18:42 18:48 20:47 22:51 02:27 21:59 01:17
00:41 02:20 01:58 03:55 01:24 20:45 21:59 01:56 19:28 19:40 19:39 22:22 01:39 03:47 01:12 03:01
02:36 02:58 02:09 02:06 00:59 02:30 02:22 01:41 00:47 00:58 00:51 01:35 02:48 01:20 03:13 01:44
0 263 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 122 98
7 6 23 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 8 0 6
190
156 123
0 0 0 142
seed seed seed seed patrol seed seed patrol test test test seed seed seed seed seed
00:59 02:30 02:22 01:41 02:36
123 7
05:43
21
15
142
04:57
220
1593 6160 3450 596 0 352 140 0 0 0 0 570 1306 1200 2440 2860
140039 146199 149649 150245 150245 150596 150736 150736 150736 150736 150736 151306 152612 153812 156252 159112
inc 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 1
352 140
3076
5300
October 2005
Page: 132
E. FORMS
October 2005
Page: 133
SATELLITE & MAP INTERPRETATION
DATE Forecaster SYNOPSIS
OPERATIONAL INFORMATION FORECAST: FCST CDC: Freezing Level: -5 C: -10 C: Max Cloud Top Height: Tmax: Dew Pt: Tconv:
FORECAST
HAILCAST MODEL FCST Hail Dia (cm): ACTUAL WX OBSERVED
CDC
CDC
Cloud Base Height/Temp: Cell Motion: Storm Motion: Outlook CDC: SOUNDINGS: LI: SI: TOTAL TOTALS: Precip. Water (in): CAPE (J/kg):
SKC FEW SCT BKN OVC CLR CAVOK Summation coverage nil cloud < 2/8 3/8 to 4/8 5/8 to 7/8 8/8 nil cloud < 10,000 (auto) > 6 sm, no CB, no sig wx, nil cld < 5000 or below highest min sector altitude MI BC PR DR BL SH TS FZ VC FC +FC Weather nature Shallow (FG) Patches (FG) Partial (FG) Drifting Blowing Showers Thunder Freezing Vicinity Funnel cld Tornado/ Waterspout
jet PVA short wave trof
latent instability loaded gun chinook cloud cover gusty winds wind shear Dry Slot or Line NE moisture advection other:
Obscuration type Mist (> 5/8 sm) Fog (< 5/8 sm) Smoke (< 6sm) Volcanic ash (any vsby) Dust (< 6sm) Sand (< 6sm) Haze (< 6sm) Dust whirls Squalls Sandstorm (< 5/8 sm) Sandstorm (< 5/16 sm) Duststorm (< 5/8 sm) Duststorm (< 5/16 sm)
WINDS
250 mb
thickness advection insolation upslope flow frontal lift night radiation cooling morning fog morning ACC or cloud street
500 mb 600 mb 700 mb 850 mb Sfc

DZ RA SN SG IC PL GR GS UP
Precipitation type Drizzle Rain Snow Snow grains (never showery) Ice crystals (< 6sm) Ice pellets (frozen rain) Hail Snow pellets (showery) Unknown (auto) GRADU >1/2hr TEMPO <1 hr RAPID <1/2hr INTER <<1hr
BR FG FU VA DU SA HZ PO SQ SS +SS DS +DS
Alberta_Final_Report_2005.doc
October 2005
Page: 134
WMI Radar Observer Log
October 2005
Page: 135
WMI Seeding Aircraft Flight Log
October 2005
Page: 136
F. SPECIFICATIONS FOR PIPER CHEYENNE II AIRCRAFT Full deicing capabilities Power Type, Turboprop twin engine PT6A-28 engines 9000 lbs gross weight 5018 lbs empty weight 3982 lbs useful load 620 hp per engine 283 kts max speed 269 kts recommended cruise 75 kts stall dirty 382 gals fuel capacity 31,600 feet all engine service ceiling 14,600 feet single engine service ceiling 2,710 feet per minute all engine rate of climb 660 feet per minute single engine rate of climb 1980 feet for take off over 50 foot obstruction 1410 feet for take off ground roll 2480 feet land over 50 foot obstruction 1430 foot land ground roll 34 ft. 8 in. length 12 ft. 9 in. height 42 ft. 8 in. wingspan
October 2005
Page: 137
G. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CESSNA C-340 AIRCRAFT Power Type, Turbocharged piston twin engine 6290 lbs gross weight 4184 lbs empty weight 1802 lbs useful load 310 hp per engine 280 mph max speed 263 mph rec. cruise 82 mph stall dirty 183 - 203 gals fuel capacity 29,800 feet all engine service ceiling 15,800 feet single engine service ceiling 1650 feet per minute all engine rate of climb 315 feet per minute single engine rate of climb 2175 feet for take off over 50 foot obstruction 1615 feet for take off ground roll 1850 feet land over 50 foot obstruction 770 foot land ground roll 34 ft. 4 in. length 12 ft. 7 in. height 38 ft. 1 in. wingspan
October 2005
Page: 138
H. GROUND SCHOOL AGENDA
ALBERTA HAIL DAMAGE MITIGATION PROJECT 2005

Royal - Sun Alliance Insurance 2nd Floor, 326 - 11th Ave SW Calgary, AB
Monday, May 30th , 2005 8:30 Assembly of personnel and coffee in the Training Room on 2nd Floor. 8.45 Terry Krauss (Project Manager) - Welcome and staff introductions Robin Seacombe, President of Alberta Severe Weather Management Society Jim Sweeney (Vice-President, WMI) 9:00 Jim Renick (Project Director) - Program overview 9:30 Bruce Boe The Hail Problem and Status of Hail suppression
10:00 Break
10:30
Terry Krauss: Summary of 1996-2004 Operations Meteorological data sources and severe weather forecasting Storm tracking and directing cloud seeding aircraft from the radar Discussion session of seeding rates etc.
Lunch Break
12:00
1:30 2:00 2:30

3:00
ATC controlling procedures - Nav-Canada Mark McCrea Unit Operations Specialist Calgary Tower James Krause Edmonton control center Aviation weather and special procedures Gavin Lange and Rex Watson Cloud seeding aircraft and equipment Aircraft maintenance procedures - Gary Hillman
Break
3:30
5:00
6:30
Duties and responsibilities- Terry Krauss and Bruce Boe Daily routines and procedures Communication and reporting Meteorological Data Aircraft Flight Forms Cloud Seeding Chemical Inventory Daily Storm Summaries Weekly and Monthly Summaries Safety and emergency response Teamwork Discussions Bruce Boe End of Day 1 ground school
Evening social "ice-breaker" - Catherine Tagg
Saltlik Restaurant Calgary, 101-8th Ave SW, Calgary Tuesday, 31 May 2005 10:00 Afternoon: Visit & Set up WMI-Calgary airport office at ESSO AVITAT 575 Palmer Road, NE Calgary Set up Calgary, Olds-Didsbury, and Red Deer offices.
October 2005
Page: 139
I. DAILY METEOROLOGICAL FORECAST STATISTICS 2005

Date 2005 FCS Preci 0C -5C -10C Cloud Cloud Maxi Temp. Dew Conv CAPE Total Lifted Show Cell Cell Storm Storm Low Low Mid Mid High T p. Level Level Level Base Base mum Maxi Point Temp (J/kg) Totals Index alter Direct Speed Direct Speed Level Level Level Level Level CDC Water (kft) (kft) (kft) Heigh Temp Cloud mum (C) (C) ion knots ion knots Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind (in) t (kft) (C) Top (C) (deg) (deg) Direct Speed Direct Speed Direct Heigh ion knots ion knots ion t (kft) (deg) (deg) (deg) -1 0.70 9.3 11.9 14.7 7.7 4.2 22 15 7 14.0 184 53.3 -0.8 -0.8 73 15 100 12 40 14 84 22 93 1 0.72 10.1 12.6 15.2 8.4 5.1 32 18.5 9 14.0 673 56.6 -3.1 -3.2 20 27 50 19 10 28 25 26 90 0 0.71 9.8 12.5 15.2 6.5 6.8 26 14 9.4 13.0 193 52.9 -0.9 -1.2 360 20 25 13 355 15 345 22 360 1 0.72 10.4 12.8 15.2 8.1 6 34.2 18 9.5 15.0 898 57.4 -3.6 -3.8 316 14 345 7 325 9 315 10 320 1 0.69 10 12.8 15.4 7.5 6.6 34.4 17 10 15.4 912 56.8 -3.3 -3.6 240 7 245 4 130 6 250 10 230 -2 0.76 8.5 11.7 15 5.5 8.3 22.5 13 9 14.0 360 50.6 -0.3 0.3 90 18 126 13 64 18 107 19 146 -1 0.65 7.5 10.4 14 5 7.6 17 10 8 10.0 256 50.8 0.4 0.6 80 24 110 18 70 19 85 28 89 -2 0.50 9.1 12 15.1 7.3 5.3 27.9 15 7 15.0 424 55.0 -2.3 -1.7 55 10 75 9 320 13 55 22 155 -1 0.66 9.7 11.9 14.6 8.1 4.8 25.8 17 8.5 16.0 466 56.8 -3 -3.1 355 12 40 7 1 9 1 11 68 1 0.65 10.4 12.6 15.1 8.9 4.5 32.8 20 9 16.0 869 58.6 -4.1 -4.2 290 7 317 3 275 8 290 4 270 0 0.62 10.4 12.1 14.5 9.6 2.6 31.5 19 8 16.0 826 58.9 -4 -3.9 235 11 240 8 240 8 210 14 180 0 0.68 9.9 12.2 14.7 8 5 30 17 9 12.0 428 54.0 -1.8 -1.2 192 7 213 7 282 5 166 21 194 1 0.53 9.7 11.4 13.3 8.2 4.4 30 17 8 14.0 860 60.0 -4.7 -4.4 251 19 268 17 262 22 233 29 213 1 0.60 9.5 11.2 13.4 9.9 -1.4 30 19 7 18.8 433 54.0 -2.2 -0.6 213 18 242 17 158 13 230 42 228 0 0.40 10.1 11.8 13.5 11.7 -2.6 24 18 5 13.8 311 57.0 -2.3 -1.4 271 27 306 18 270 19 264 41 267 -2 0.76 10.4 13.1 16.4 8.9 3.8 20 21 6 16.0 107 50.0 0 0.4 241 22 254 14 211 14 240 29 224 -2 1.05 11.2 14.1 17.3 5.4 10.8 18 13 12 14.5 103 47.0 0.2 -0.1 123 25 149 14 104 27 152 19 153 0 0.63 8.7 11.4 14.2 12 38 20.7 13.1 7 13.0 80 53.0 -0.2 -0.4 268 20 305 11 273 14 270 15 228 0 0.54 10.6 12.7 15.1 10.3 0.5 20.4 18.9 9 18.5 124 57.6 -0.3 0.1 294 14 325 9 240 13 260 37 248 -1 0.56 12.2 14.3 17 9.5 8.8 31 22 8.4 23.2 582 52.8 -3 -1.2 261 24 279 16 240 13 260 31 248 -3 0.82 14 16.2 18 10.6 8.3 35 27 13 28.0 1865 60.2 -6.4 -6.4 236 24 254 20 207 19 231 39 233 2 0.76 11.9 13.6 15.6 10.2 4.8 33 26 11 24.0 859 56.4 -6.1 -4.5 245 25 275 22 255 17 240 38 230 0 0.41 9.3 10.8 13 10.5 -3.4 19.1 17 7 17.0 745 51.2 -0.3 1.4 302 30 325 25 294 17 298 44 279 0 0.64 10 12 14.5 9.2 2.5 27 18 7.5 17.0 372 55.7 -2.3 -2 260 23 280 15 220 13 265 25 255 0 0.65 9.7 12.3 14.8 7.1 6.6 28.2 16 10 13.0 656 57.6 -3.7 -3.8 265 12 280 11 275 14 230 17 230 1 0.69 10.4 12.6 15.3 8.7 5 30.7 19 9 14.0 600 56.4 -3.2 -3.1 265 12 265 8 180 6 255 18 245 0 0.79 10.7 13.3 15.8 7.3 7.1 27.3 17 10.5 16.0 370 53.7 -2.2 -1.9 175 11 205 8 155 15 200 11 215 -2 0.83 9.9 12.8 15.6 6.5 6.8 18.7 17 10 13.0 120 50.5 0 0.2 345 10 5 7 10 9 325 14 240 1 0.75 11.1 13.7 16.6 9.3 4.3 33.5 23 10 18.0 449 53.0 -1.5 -1.3 320 25 350 12 320 17 320 22 315 1 0.70 12.2 13.9 16.5 11.4 2.5 35 24 7 22.5 666 57.0 -3.4 -3.3 270 20 309 16 279 14 276 27 292 High Obser Level ved Wind CDC Speed knots 39 20 24 18 28 46 50 32 26 17 41 58 33 66 93 41 51 15 52 52 72 100 64 61 57 30 38 17 33 52 0 1 0 1 -1 -2 -1 -1 0 1 1 1 1 -1 0 -2 0 0 -1 -2 2 2 2 0 1 0 -1 -2 1 2
1-Jun 2-Jun 3-Jun 4-Jun 5-Jun 6-Jun 7-Jun 8-Jun 9-Jun 10-Jun 11-Jun 12-Jun 13-Jun 14-Jun 15-Jun 16-Jun 17-Jun 18-Jun 19-Jun 20-Jun 21-Jun 22-Jun 23-Jun 24-Jun 25-Jun 26-Jun 27-Jun 28-Jun 29-Jun 30-Jun
October 2005
Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report Date 2005
Page: 140 High Obser Level ved Wind CDC Speed knots 57 15 54 36 33 76 84 76 94 48 90 92 68 63 79 22 61 88 82 95 84 65 54 74 45 60 66 52 66 56 38 2 1 0 -2 -2 1 2 -1 1 0 0 0 2 -2 5 0 -2 0 3 5 -1 0 1 1 0 0 -1 4 4 -2 -3
1-Jul 2-Jul 3-Jul 4-Jul 5-Jul 6-Jul 7-Jul 8-Jul 9-Jul 10-Jul 11-Jul 12-Jul 13-Jul 14-Jul 15-Jul 16-Jul 17-Jul 18-Jul 19-Jul 20-Jul 21-Jul 22-Jul 23-Jul 24-Jul 25-Jul 26-Jul 27-Jul 28-Jul 29-Jul 30-Jul 31-Jul
FCS Preci 0C -5C -10C Cloud Cloud Maxi Temp. Dew Conv CAPE Total Lifted Show Cell Cell Storm Storm Low Low Mid Mid High T p. Level Level Level Base Base mum Maxi Point Temp (J/kg) Totals Index alter Direct Speed Direct Speed Level Level Level Level Level CDC Water (kft) (kft) (kft) Heigh Temp Cloud mum (C) (C) ion knots ion knots Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind (in) t (kft) (C) Top (C) (deg) (deg) Direct Speed Direct Speed Direct Heigh ion knots ion knots ion t (kft) (deg) (deg) (deg) 2 0.67 10.7 12.7 15 8.7 4.6 35 21 10 20.0 752 54.0 -3.4 -1.3 267 27 300 18 272 19 267 34 265 2 0.64 9.6 11.7 14.1 8.6 2.5 35 19 7 19.0 636 57.0 -3.1 -2.3 327 18 339 10 331 20 284 14 178 -3 0.56 10.5 12.2 14.8 10.4 0.1 23 22 5 18.0 237 55.0 -1.7 -1.5 303 23 338 18 307 26 300 25 315 1 0.87 12.1 14 16.9 11.6 1.9 35 27 7 26.0 632 54.0 -2.1 -1.8 268 21 305 15 274 19 274 23 310 1 0.70 13.4 15.9 18.7 12 3.2 38 28 10 26.0 540 53.0 -2.3 -2.1 261 20 285 14 253 16 258 24 276 1 0.66 12.9 14.6 17.9 12 0.8 26 26.5 8 26.0 342 53.0 -1.3 -1.2 251 40 278 32 263 22 240 51 233 -1 0.67 11.3 13.3 16.5 10.9 1.1 26 22 8 21.5 104 49.5 0.5 0.8 268 36 295 26 265 16 265 50 268 0 0.84 12.6 15.7 18.7 10.6 5.3 17 27.2 12 27.1 285 49.0 -1.2 0.5 239 43 263 28 236 16 230 57 233 1 0.61 9.8 11.9 13.2 9 2.4 24 20 10 20.2 523 56.0 -4.4 -1.6 259 26 280 18 251 70 255 32 216 1 0.61 11.2 12.9 14.9 11.5 -1.2 27 21.2 6 21.0 299 55.0 -2.2 -1.6 250 16 276 15 222 10 255 28 259 0 0.71 10.8 13.2 15.2 10.4 1.8 23 23.2 9 23.0 216 53.0 -1.9 -0.6 269 23 297 17 253 12 265 33 275 1 0.83 13.4 15.8 19.3 11.2 5.7 30 28 8.5 24.0 442 52.1 -2 -1.7 245 36 276 28 235 22 250 53 250 1 0.65 12.1 13.8 15.5 12.1 0 28.5 24 7 21.0 641 57.8 -4.2 -3.3 255 20 287 15 280 15 245 30 245 -1 0.70 10.9 13.5 18 10.4 1.5 16 23 8 20.0 48 43.1 3.2 4.3 290 31 317 20 275 21 290 40 285 -2 0.93 12.7 15.5 18.4 9.5 6.7 25 23 10 24.0 211 51.7 -1.4 -1.6 255 46 281 28 250 24 250 53 242 0 0.70 10.5 13.1 15.8 7.8 5.7 28 17 9 16.0 353 53.5 -1.6 -1.5 345 27 15 16 345 27 350 21 340 -2 0.83 11.6 14.2 18.2 8.8 6.9 20 23.5 10 17.0 215 48.5 0 0.4 310 25 345 14 310 22 315 25 320 1 0.87 11.3 13.6 16.1 8.5 7.2 35 27 10 25.0 973 55.6 -4.8 -2.8 268 42 308 28 278 27 270 50 276 0 0.62 9.9 11.9 14.1 9 3.2 28 20 5.5 17.0 530 58.0 -4 -3.5 293 35 330 21 300 26 294 32 281 3 0.82 11.5 13.5 15.8 9 6.4 31 24 10 18.0 963 58.5 -5.1 -4.5 260 31 295 23 250 19 270 47 275 -1 0.84 12 16 18.6 7.5 9.1 16 22 11 20.0 75 49.0 -0.3 -0.6 280 37 300 19 250 18 275 44 275 2 1.17 13.8 16.5 19.2 9.7 9.7 35 26 13 28.0 1394 56.0 -4.9 -5.1 227 33 259 22 224 19 235 43 231 -1 0.54 11.7 13.5 16.1 13 -3 20 23 4 20.0 55 50.0 0.2 0.6 289 39 310 27 280 22 278 47 265 1 0.70 10.2 12.4 14.6 7.6 5.2 27 17 12 16.6 358 55.1 -2.9 -1.4 283 28 312 18 293 13 279 34 275 1 0.63 10.9 12.9 14.8 9.8 3.2 30 27 7 20.9 1051 58.5 -4.2 -3.7 307 23 338 13 301 8 312 27 338 0 0.77 11.5 13.3 16 10 42 27 22.2 9 22.0 619 53.1 -2.9 -1.1 309 22 329 22 291 24 300 37 298 0 0.91 12.3 14.6 17.4 9 7.6 27 22.5 11 22.3 715 53.3 -3.1 -2.2 304 30 329 21 285 20 309 40 297 2 0.75 13.2 15.2 17.4 11 5.7 31 27.2 11 27.0 1253 59.1 -5.9 -4.9 275 31 299 21 261 20 274 39 280 3 0.73 13.3 15.2 17.6 11 5.5 33 26.6 13 26.4 690 54.1 -3.8 -1.9 275 28 301 20 269 16 274 35 264 1 0.85 13.1 15.7 18.8 11 5.9 39 28 12 24.0 770 51.7 -2.9 -1 270 36 293 23 245 20 270 45 270 -3 0.56 14.7 17.2 19.4 14 0.7 33 30 13 31.0 205 49.0 -0.7 0.7 260 40 285 23 245 16 255 46 240
October 2005
Page: 141 High Obser Level ved Wind CDC Speed knots 62 70 52 44 45 52 65 66 54 22 35 37 40 41 51 58 38 57 42 44 46 69 57 32 27 27 28 50 83 31 58 0 2 -3 -3 -3 -1 0 0 1 -1 0 -2 -1 0 -1 0 -1 -1 -3 -3 -3 0 0 -2 -3 -3 -3 -3 0 -1 -1
1-Aug 2-Aug 3-Aug 4-Aug 5-Aug 6-Aug 7-Aug 8-Aug 9-Aug 10-Aug 11-Aug 12-Aug 13-Aug 14-Aug 15-Aug 16-Aug 17-Aug 18-Aug 19-Aug 20-Aug 21-Aug 22-Aug 23-Aug 24-Aug 25-Aug 26-Aug 27-Aug 28-Aug 29-Aug 30-Aug 31-Aug
FCS Preci 0C -5C -10C Cloud Cloud Maxi Temp. Dew Conv CAPE Total Lifted Show Cell Cell Storm Storm Low Low Mid Mid High T p. Level Level Level Base Base mum Maxi Point Temp (J/kg) Totals Index alter Direct Speed Direct Speed Level Level Level Level Level CDC Water (kft) (kft) (kft) Heigh Temp Cloud mum (C) (C) ion knots ion knots Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind (in) t (kft) (C) Top (C) (deg) (deg) Direct Speed Direct Speed Direct Heigh ion knots ion knots ion t (kft) (deg) (deg) (deg) 2 0.91 13.1 15.1 17.4 10 6.4 36 28 11 28.0 1047 55.8 -5.3 -2.9 230 23 266 19 240 14 235 44 225 2 0.56 11 12.8 14.9 10 1.8 28 21 7 18.0 655 58.3 -4.3 -3.4 280 25 312 19 280 16 285 34 255 -3 0.51 11.4 14.6 17.5 10 3.8 30 23 8 18.0 245 49.5 -0.6 0.7 325 26 356 17 305 13 330 35 325 -3 0.51 14 16.5 18.7 11 4.7 30 29 12 31.0 183 48.4 -0.8 1 275 23 296 15 275 13 265 31 265 0 0.75 13.3 15.9 18.7 10.5 4.7 25 29 12 28.0 102 49.7 -0.3 0 285 32 315 18 275 19 285 36 300 1 0.99 13.1 15.4 17.9 8.6 9.2 36 27 10 26.0 1052 55.2 -4.2 -3.7 265 25 290 16 260 13 270 36 265 0 0.96 12.9 15.3 18 8.3 7.3 25 21 10 24.0 72 49.5 -0.6 -0.2 265 29 300 19 255 16 270 39 275 0 0.77 11.2 13.8 16.3 8.4 5.5 26 19 10 18.0 232 53.4 -1.6 -1.6 285 30 319 19 315 9 285 41 275 1 0.80 11.7 14.1 16.4 7.8 7.3 31 19 11 16.0 424 55.0 -2.6 -3.1 280 29 311 18 275 11 280 39 270 -1 0.72 9 12.7 15.4 5.5 5.9 9.4 13 9 12.0 31 44.4 3 5 285 18 315 13 310 12 280 29 295 0 0.79 11 13.3 15.8 7.6 6.6 19 18.2 10 18.1 204 52.0 -1.5 -1.1 313 30 348 20 319 23 313 35 320 -2 0.52 9.1 12.6 15.6 7.6 4.4 15 15 10 14.9 98 48.9 0.9 1.8 346 20 13 16 331 20 351 25 345 -1 0.61 11.2 13.4 16.3 10.7 1.9 17 22 7 21.3 113 50.8 -0.2 0.1 338 24 354 16 328 17 326 29 329 0 0.80 11.9 14 16.9 8.2 6.8 27 21 9.7 20.8 320 52.9 -1.8 -1.7 302 29 334 18 300 21 305 32 309 -1 0.90 11.9 14.1 16.6 5.6 9.8 20 15 13 18.2 99 50.0 -1.1 -0.2 281 28 311 16 285 13 278 33 289 -1 0.84 12 14 16.5 7.4 8.1 27 18 12 23.3 304 53.3 -2.3 -2.1 278 24 306 16 268 17 276 31 278 -2 0.65 7.1 11.7 15.6 5.5 4.5 10 10 8 7.0 62 42.0 6.1 6 295 17 331 12 320 11 295 20 250 -1 0.62 7.2 9.6 12.5 6 2.9 13 14 6 10.0 79 46.9 3.4 4.2 335 34 11 26 325 36 350 41 5 -3 0.87 11.6 16.2 19 8.9 6.5 14 21 11 20.0 80 46.6 1.1 1.3 335 23 353 15 315 19 325 27 320 -3 0.87 14.2 16.5 19.3 9.7 7.1 22 28 12 30.0 79 48.7 -0.8 0.2 270 29 307 20 290 18 280 46 280 -3 0.64 14.6 17.2 19.6 11 5.6 35 29 14 32.0 326 47.9 -0.6 0.9 265 34 281 20 260 18 250 37 235 -1 0.81 12.5 14.9 17.2 8.2 5.7 22 17 9 21.0 12 50.3 -0.3 0 240 28 267 19 235 15 250 39 235 0 0.71 7.9 11.2 14.6 5.8 5.8 25 11.2 9 11.0 119 49.3 1.6 1.6 32 6 35 2 26 24 208 9 199 -2 0.69 7.8 10.9 14.3 6.3 4.3 13 12 8 9.5 83 44.9 4.2 4.3 20 38 45 26 5 40 20 33 25 -3 0.50 11.2 14.5 17.5 9.8 4.1 14 21.5 10 21.0 113 49.7 -0.2 0.4 343 29 14 18 318 24 357 31 356 -3 0.69 14.1 16.6 19.2 11.3 4.8 14 26.5 10 28.0 651 51.4 -1.4 -1.1 290 12 310 10 295 11 280 20 275 -3 0.72 12.7 16.1 18.8 10 5.9 20 25 14 26.0 226 49.8 -1.3 -0.2 270 16 298 13 265 16 275 20 305 0 0.67 13.1 15.9 18.9 11.1 3.2 16 28 12 28.8 11 47.9 0.5 1.1 245 24 260 18 230 16 235 36 330 1 0.75 11.8 13.6 16 8.5 9.4 26 18 12 17.0 1968 61.8 -8.1 -7 225 30 244 26 245 25 206 47 205 -2 0.66 10 11.7 14.4 8.8 3.7 18 18.5 8 17.9 339 52.6 -0.9 -0.6 307 29 326 18 278 19 300 35 288 -2 0.62 9.7 12 15.6 8.7 1.9 17 19 7 18.8 32 49.8 1.1 1.4 283 32 315 18 279 18 234 35 295
October 2005
Page: 142 High Obser Level ved Wind CDC Speed knots 57 63 76 73 37 34 56 90 68 44 15 38 61 71 79 -2 1 1 0 0 -3 -3 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -2 1 2 -0.29 1.75 5.00 -3.00
1-Sep 2-Sep 3-Sep 4-Sep 5-Sep 6-Sep 7-Sep 8-Sep 9-Sep 10-Sep 11-Sep 12-Sep 13-Sep 14-Sep 15-Sep Average StdDev Max Min
FCS Preci 0C -5C -10C Cloud Cloud Maxi Temp. Dew Conv CAPE Total Lifted Show Cell Cell Storm Storm Low Low Mid Mid High T p. Level Level Level Base Base mum Maxi Point Temp (J/kg) Totals Index alter Direct Speed Direct Speed Level Level Level Level Level CDC Water (kft) (kft) (kft) Heigh Temp Cloud mum (C) (C) ion knots ion knots Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind (in) t (kft) (C) Top (C) (deg) (deg) Direct Speed Direct Speed Direct Heigh ion knots ion knots ion t (kft) (deg) (deg) (deg) 0 0.68 10.4 12.4 15 9.2 3.1 20 21.5 9 21.0 341 53.4 -2.3 -0.8 271 22 300 15 271 17 273 27 274 0 0.65 11.6 14 16.3 10.7 2.2 30 22.5 10 22.3 600 54.6 -2.4 -1.9 264 37 285 22 248 19 259 37 246 1 0.66 10.6 12.7 15 7.5 8.1 32 21.5 11 21.3 938 57.3 -4.5 -3.3 256 29 278 21 252 18 244 49 242 0 0.62 9.9 12.1 14.6 8.8 3.2 20 18 8 14.0 355 56.1 -2.4 -2.4 250 28 273 23 230 17 245 42 235 -1 0.46 8.8 10.5 12.3 9.3 -1.5 22 17 5 14.0 311 57.2 -1.9 -1.6 305 28 346 16 325 17 315 27 305 -3 0.37 10.9 13.8 16.3 11 -2.6 14 21 4 18.0 0 48.3 1.3 2 275 18 305 10 280 11 275 19 265 -3 0.67 10.6 12.9 16 9.8 1.2 14 21 7 22.0 22 47.1 1.9 2.5 285 25 315 17 290 11 280 35 310 0 0.78 10.3 12.6 15.1 7 6.7 22 21 9 20.0 280 51.4 -1.7 0.2 265 34 286 23 240 16 260 50 250 -1 0.69 8.9 12.6 15.1 5.2 6.3 13 10 9 9.0 30 47.9 2.5 2.2 215 27 240 19 175 9 220 39 200 -1 0.87 8.5 13.2 16.7 3.9 7.8 15 10 8 8.0 29 37.8 6.9 8.3 65 39 85 26 55 43 70 35 140 -2 0.41 8.8 11.3 14.2 7.6 2.4 14 13 5 14.0 34 50.2 1.7 1.3 345 20 10 15 330 27 350 23 30 -1 0.52 7 9.5 12.1 4.8 4.7 16 10 5 8.0 116 51.7 0.7 2.1 320 23 350 16 345 22 300 24 350 -3 0.78 9.2 11.4 15.5 8.1 3.2 15 18 7 13.0 109 47.2 1.7 2.6 305 32 331 22 295 30 305 35 300 -1 0.56 9.4 11.3 13.4 8.6 2.3 22 17 7 15.0 294 54.1 -1.1 -1 300 26 324 21 275 17 295 41 290 -1 0.60 8.6 11.2 13.6 6.1 4.5 20 11 7 10.0 72 53.9 -0.4 -0.3 280 20 300 17 275 13 275 30 270 -0.41 1.54 3.00 -3.00 0.70 10.93 13.36 16.02 8.95 5.16 24.82 20.25 9.06 0.14 1.72 1.71 1.78 1.96 5.65 7.23 5.11 2.23 1.17 14.70 17.20 19.60 14.00 42.00 39.00 30.00 14.00 0.37 7.00 9.50 12.10 3.90 -3.40 9.40 10.00 4.00 19.0 418.7 5.7 379.1 32.0 1968. 7.0 0.00 52.7 4.2 61.8 37.8 -1.51 2.48 6.90 -8.10 -0.88 2.48 8.30 -7.00
260.3 24.95 259.7 17.12 249.0 17.92 256.4 31.81 250.8 52.75 69.83 8.51 96.43 5.81 79.23 8.24 68.54 11.19 68.42 20.81 360.0 46.00 356.0 32.00 355.0 70.00 357.0 57.00 360.0 100.0 20.00 6.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 15.00
October 2005
Page: 143
J. PROJECT PERSONNEL AND TELEPHONE LIST
October 2005

Wmi Alhap Final Report 2005

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Wmi Alhap Final Report 2005

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

ALBERTA HAIL SUPPRESSION PROJECT FINAL REPORT 2005

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Figure 4: Meteorologists Bill Shaw and Dr. Andre Sinkevich.

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Figure 5: Jason Goehring (Meteorologist) and Jeff Robinson (Electronics Tech).

Figure 6: Gavin Lange (Chief Pilot) Gary Hillman (Aircraft Engineer).

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Figure 7: Pilots: Mac McQuarrie and Porter Janovsky.

Figure 8: Pilots: Rex Watson and Ben Hiebert.

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Figure 9: Pilots: Joel Zimmer and Craig Lee.

Figure 10: Pilots: Mark Friel and Trevor Edwards.

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

THE 2005 FIELD PROGRAM

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

1,900 2,000 1,900 1,625 1,000 820 900 470 380

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

CONCEPTUAL HAIL MODEL

Hail Suppression Hypothesis

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

CLARIFICATION OF CLOUD SEEDING GUIDELINES

Identification of Hail Producing Storms

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Cloud Seeding Methodology

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Night Time Seeding

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Weather Modification Inc.

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Flare Effectiveness Tests

Alberta Hail Suppression Project 2005 Field Program Final Report

Yield (# g-1 pyro)

_ _ y = 57.483x 2 R = 0.8298 90%