WM 1 Alh 4 P Fin 4 L Report 2010

A Program for the Seeding of Convective Clouds
to Mitigate Urban Hail Damage in the

Province of Alberta, Canada
For the
Alberta Severe Weather Management Society
Calgary, Alberta
Canada
By
Weather Modification, Inc.
3802 20
th
Street North
Fargo, North Dakota
USA 58102
Phone (701) 235.5500
Fax (701) 235.9717
www.weathermodification.com
January 2011
Alberta Severe Weather Management Society 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS....................................................................................................................................................7
SECTION 1......................................................................................................................................................................8
OVERVIEW.....................................................................................................................................................................8
SECTION 2....................................................................................................................................................................11
PROGRAM BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................................11
2.1 Historical Overview....................................................................................................................................11
The Formation of Hail ..........................................................................................................................................12
Hail Suppression Concepts ..................................................................................................................................13
Effects of Hail Suppression Efforts on Rainfall.....................................................................................................15
SECTION 3....................................................................................................................................................................17
PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES ...............................................................................................................17
3.1 Infrastructure .............................................................................................................................................17
3.2 The Operations Centre...............................................................................................................................17
Digital Weather Radar .........................................................................................................................................19
Aircraft Tracking ..................................................................................................................................................23
3.3 Cloud Seeding Aircraft................................................................................................................................23
Piper Cheyenne II.................................................................................................................................................24
Beech King Air C90...............................................................................................................................................25
Cessna 340A.........................................................................................................................................................26
Real-time Communications .................................................................................................................................27
Internet Access ....................................................................................................................................................27
Use of E-mail and Text Messages ........................................................................................................................27
Weather Radios ...................................................................................................................................................27
SECTION 4....................................................................................................................................................................28
OPERATIONS................................................................................................................................................................28
4.1 Forecasting.................................................................................................................................................28
Coordinated Universal Time ................................................................................................................................28
Purpose................................................................................................................................................................28
Process and Dissemination..................................................................................................................................29
Daily Briefings ......................................................................................................................................................33
The Convective Day Category (CDC) ....................................................................................................................33
Forecast Verification............................................................................................................................................34
4.2 Operational Protocols ................................................................................................................................35
Aircraft Standby and Launch................................................................................................................................35
Meteorological Recordkeeping............................................................................................................................36
Radar Staffing Schedules .....................................................................................................................................36
4.3 Opportunity Recognition............................................................................................................................37
Identification of Hail Producing Storms...............................................................................................................37
Onset of Seeding..................................................................................................................................................37
4.3 Priorities .....................................................................................................................................................38
4.5 Seeding Procedures....................................................................................................................................38
Cloud Seeding Methodology ...............................................................................................................................38
Cessation of Seeding............................................................................................................................................42
Seeding Rates ......................................................................................................................................................42
4.6 Seeding Agents...........................................................................................................................................43
Flare Effectiveness...............................................................................................................................................43
4.7 The 2010 Project Season............................................................................................................................46
4.8 Changes and Recommendations for Future Operations............................................................................49
Changes ...............................................................................................................................................................49
Recommendations...............................................................................................................................................50
SECTION 5....................................................................................................................................................................52
NOTIFICATIONS AND REPORTING................................................................................................................................52
5.1 Notice of Intent to Modify Precipitation....................................................................................................52
5.2 Logs and Spreadsheets...............................................................................................................................52
Flight Logs ............................................................................................................................................................52
Radar and Weather Logs .....................................................................................................................................53
Weather Spreadsheets ........................................................................................................................................53
Flight Operations Summary .................................................................................................................................53
5.3 Reporting to the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society ..............................................................53
5.4 Weekly Operations Summaries..................................................................................................................53
5.5 Public and Media Inquiries.........................................................................................................................54
SECTION 6....................................................................................................................................................................55
PROJECT SAFETY ..........................................................................................................................................................55
6.1 Weather .....................................................................................................................................................55
Lightning ..............................................................................................................................................................55
Strong Winds .......................................................................................................................................................56
Hail .......................................................................................................................................................................56
6.2 Aircraft Operations.....................................................................................................................................56
Lightning ..............................................................................................................................................................56
Wind Shear ..........................................................................................................................................................57
Hail .......................................................................................................................................................................57
6.3 Radar ..........................................................................................................................................................58
6.4 Handling of Seeding Agents .......................................................................................................................58
Seeding Solution..................................................................................................................................................58
Pyrotechnics ........................................................................................................................................................58
Storage.................................................................................................................................................................59
SECTION 7....................................................................................................................................................................60
GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS.......................................................................................................................60
SECTION 8....................................................................................................................................................................66
REFERENCES AND REFERENCE MATERIAL ...................................................................................................................66
APPENDIX A .................................................................................................................................................................69
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND SPECIFICATIONS...............................................................................................69
A.1 Project Contacts List...................................................................................................................................69
A.2. Aircraft Specifications ................................................................................................................................70
A. Piper Cheyenne II........................................................................................................................................70
B. Beechcraft King Air C90..............................................................................................................................71
C. Cessna C-340 ..............................................................................................................................................71
A.3 Radar Specifications ...................................................................................................................................72
Radar Hardware ..................................................................................................................................................72
Radar Software....................................................................................................................................................72
Calibrations..........................................................................................................................................................73
A.4 Project Operations Forms ..........................................................................................................................74
Understanding Project Forms ..............................................................................................................................74
Aircraft Operations Forms ...................................................................................................................................74
Meteorologists Forms .........................................................................................................................................74
A.5 Stability Indices ..........................................................................................................................................88
APPENDIX B .................................................................................................................................................................90
DAILY OPERATIONS SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................90
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. The thunderstorm tracks recorded by the operations radar (at the red star) during the 2010 project are shown, color-
coded by month. August and September storms are combined. Storms over or approaching the cities and towns within the
central green-shaded area are seeded; others are not. The adjacent yellow buffer zone around the protected area defines the
area over which storms approaching the protected area can be seeded, but for effect within the protected area only. The radar
range rings are 50 km apart. (WMI graphic by Matthew Ham.)8
FIGURE 2. A thunderstorm is seen from HAILSTOP 4 on 9 July 2010, as it was seeded from below cloud base. (WMI photograph
by Joel Zimmer.)11
FIGURE 3. Small hail covers the grass after the passage of an intense supercell thunderstorm at the Operations Centre on 25
July 2010. (WMI photograph by Daniel Gilbert.)..13
FIGURE 4. The conceptual model of hailstone formation and hail mitigation processes for Alberta, adapted from WMO (1995).
This schematic shows generalized cloud seeding flight paths at feeder-cloud tops and below cloud-base, typically employed for
mature thunderstorms. .15
FIGURE 5. Precipitation efficiency for High Plains convective storms. Known supercell hailstorms are labeled S. Storms that
produced rain only are labeled R. Figure from Browning (1977), copyright American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA, used
by permission. ..16
FIGURE 6. Though program objectives and directives originate with the project sponsor, the Alberta Severe Weather
Management Society (ASWMS), the majority of project communications occur among the meteorologists (Operations Centre),
pilots (Calgary and Red Deer), and the various maintenance providers. The approximate frequencies of these interactions are
also shown. 17
FIGURE 7. The current protected area is outlined in green; the extent of the operations area in yellow. The region between the
yellow and green boundaries is termed the buffer zone, as seeding can occur in this area to affect storms moving into the
protected (green-bounded) area. The location of the Operations Centre is shown by the red star. Radar range rings depict 50
km intervals. .18
FIGURE 8. The operational elements of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project around the Operations Centre are illustrated.
Position and seeding data from each of the four aircraft are telemetered in real-time, ingested, and displayed. Positions are
plotted directly on the radar display to optimize pilot-meteorologist interactions. Updated radar images are sent to the
Internet every five minutes, and are thus available to any flight crews not yet airborne. The only regular upper air sounding in
Alberta is released from Edmonton, well north of the target area, so model-derived soundings are used for operational
forecasting. .19
FIGURE 9. The WMI project Operations Centre is located at the Olds-Didsbury Airport, about 70 km (44 miles) north of the
Calgary Airport, roughly halfway between the projects most important cities: Calgary and Red Deer. The radar antenna is
housed within the dome, and the transmitter and receiver in the shed at the tower base. Operations are conducted from
within the meteorological office housed within the adjacent hangar. In this image from 25 July 2010, a supercell thunderstorm
towers to the east, an hour after passing the radar and Operations Centre. (WMI photograph by Bradley Waller.)20
FIGURE 10. The operations room is equipped with a variety of equipment, essential to an efficient program. This includes (A)
reference manuals, (B) TITAN RVIEW display, (C) CIDD, (D) VHF radio for communications with aircraft, (E) radar log, (F) Internet
display #1, (G) Internet display #2, (H), AirLink display, (I),SharePoint/e-mail display #1, (J) SharePoint/e-mail display #2, and (K)
licenses for the radar, radio, and data telemetry systems. Telephones (L) are seen at the far left. ..22
FIGURE 11. An example of the variety of data displayed in real-time on the operations rooms primary monitors (four). The
TITAN dual-monitor display typically shows the main TITAN RVIEW window (A), a vertical cross-section through a storm of
interest (B), a collection of various cell histories (C) that include the parameters listed in Table 1, and a second TITAN RVIEW
window that is not used for operations, but to send consistently-formatted images to the internet. Visible and infrared
wavelength satellite images (D and E), lightning flash data (F), and often data from one of the two Environment Canada radars
in the province (G) are among the images commonly displayed on the other two monitors. The CIDD display (H) is configured to
continuously loop a dozen or so of the most recent TITAN scans as a short movie. All data shown are for 02:00 UTC on 12 July
2010, or 8:00 PM MDT on 11 July 2010. (WMI graphic montage by Matthew Ham.)22
FIGURE 12. The TITAN RVIEW window (left) and the CIDD display (right) are shown side-by-side for 00:34 and 00:36 UTC on 10
August 2010 (6:34 and 6:36 PM MDT, 9 August 2010). The same basic storm reflectivity structure is revealed in both; however
there are some subtle differences that give each some unique advantages over the other. The TITAN display, by virtue of its
Cartesian coordinate system, is much better suited to extrapolation of echo positions (cell movement forecasts) and the
calculation of storm-specific characteristics as shown in the three adjacent, smaller windows immediately to the right.
However, the CIDD polar-coordinate data can be quickly plotted and looped, providing movies of storm motion. In addition,
the local terrain throughout the region is shown as a colored background for the CIDD display, from the green hues of the plains
(upper right, or NE), to the golds of the foothills and light tans of the Rocky Mountains (lower left, SW). Since CIDDs polar
coordinates are the native coordinates (not derived, as are the TITAN Cartesian coordinates) for weather radar, more storm
detail is also often afforded. (WMI graphic by Matthew Ham.)23
FIGURE 13. Aircraft flight tracks for all four seeding aircraft and real-time seeding information available from the AirLink
telemetry system are shown for the flights of 22 June 2010. In both plots, the HAILSTOP 1 track is green, HAILSTOP 2 is orange,
HAILSTOP 3 is cyan (blue), and HAILSTOP 4 is magenta. The plot on the left shows AirLink position telemetry data only, for all
flights and all aircraft, for all of 22 June 2010 (local time). Because this was a tour day, when insurance company employees
visited the Operations Centre, two of the aircraft (HAILSTOP 1 and HAILSTOP 4) made initial (morning) flights to the Olds-
Didsbury airport, and later began their seeding missions from that airport. The TITAN RVIEW image on the right shows what
the operations director saw at 20:50 UTC (2:50 PM MDT), with ten-minute segments of the flight tracks of those aircraft
airborne at the time superimposed. The most recent position of the aircraft is indicated by the flight track end having the
dot, most easily discernable on the south (lower) end of the green HAILSTOP 1 track. Note that the map scales are not the
same. (WMI graphic by Matthew Ham.)24
FIGURE 14. HAILSTOP 1, the Calgary-based Piper Cheyenne II aircraft taxies in from the runway during a visit to the operations
centre at the Olds-Didsbury Airport. The cloud seeding pyrotechnics on the trailing edge of the near wing are clearly visible, as
are the racks used for ejectable flares, mounted on the aircraft belly. (WMI photograph by Bradley Waller.).25
FIGURE 15. HAILSTOP 3, a Beech King Air C90 aircraft is shown at the Red Deer Regional Airport, after an active day of flight
operations. (WMI photograph by Marcus Stevenson.)26
FIGURE 16. A Cessna 340A seeding aircraft is shown as it taxies to the runway for departure at the Olds-Didsbury Airport. Most
notable on the aircraft (and absent from the turboprop aircraft) are the wing-tip ice nucleus generators, the silver torpedo-like
appurtenances below the wing-tip fuel tanks. (WMI photograph by Bradley Waller.).26
FIGURE 17. Atmospheric instability is manifest in the form of rapid convective growth on 30 June 2010. (WMI photograph by
Daniel Gilbert.)..28
FIGURE 18. Meteorologist Brad Waller adds to the daily project meteorological statistics during the first week of June, 2010.
(WMI photograph by Bruce Boe.).29
FIGURE 19. Meteorologist Dr. Viktor Makitov analyzes the atmospheric stability as part of his morning forecast preparation.
(WMI photograph by Bradley Waller.).31
FIGURE 20. The decision tree used to determine whether or not the Hailcast hail size prediction model is run on any given
project day is shown. Definitions of the terms used can be found in the glossary. ..32
FIGURE 21. The forecast and observed Convective Day Categories (CDCs) for the 2010 season are compared in matrix form.
Numbers within each gray square denote forecasts that were exactly correct, i.e., +1 forecast and +1 observed. Numbers above
and to the right indicate days when the CDC was under-forecast, i.e., +1 forecast, but +2 observed; numbers below and to the
left indicate days when the CDC was over-forecast, i.e. +2 forecast, but +1 observed. The 15-season average CDCs are shown
below the 2010 Observed row, and below that, the minimum and maximum for each CDC category for all 15 seasons. Records
were established in three categories in 2010, as shown by the colored entries. .35
FIGURE 22. A schematic illustration of the seeding altitudes and separations necessary for safe operations at cloud base and at
cloud top. (WMI graphic by Bruce Boe.).40
FIGURE 23. When seeding nocturnal thunderstorms, lightning is a friend. It illuminates, if only sporadically and all too briefly,
many cloud details that otherwise would go unseen. The single lightning flash here has revealed the rain-free cloud base (near
which base seeding aircraft would operate), smaller, developing turrets that might be seedable (if cold enough), larger,
maturing cloud cells that are no doubt too cold and ice-laden (and close to being detectable by radar), and the mature
thunderstorm (behind) that has produced the lightning. (WMI photograph/graphic by Bruce Boe.)41
FIGURE 24. Yield of ice crystals (corrected) per gram of pyrotechnic burned, shown as a function of cloud supercooling
temperature (T < 0C). Open diamond symbols are for tests 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
. The lack of any dependence upon cloud liquid water content
indicates that the nuclei thus produced function by the condensation-freezing mechanism. (Figure from DeMott 1999.).43
FIGURE 25. 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.
(DeMott 1999.)..45
FIGURE 26. The diurnal distribution of project takeoffs and landings during the 2010 season reflect the usual norm: peak storm
activity during the afternoon and evening hours, with very little action in the wee hours, until about late morning. .46
FIGURE 27. Seeding activities for the first fifteen seasons are summarized. A new record for the number of days (42) during
which seeding was conducted was established, surpassing the previous record of 39 days, set during 2000, which overall
remains the most active season in project history. The average amount of seeding agent (silver iodide, AgI) used per seeding
day and also per each storm complex, is also shown. ..47
FIGURE 28. The number of storms seeded, total seeding agent used, and total flight time were all significantly above the
project average, and sharply higher from 2009. The total number of missions flown was also dramatically increased from 2009,
but more typical of the long-term project average. A new record maximum was established for total flight hours flown, but this
very likely would not have been the case had a fourth aircraft not been added (in 2008), as all four aircraft were used on a five
busy days during the 2010 season. 47
FIGURE 29. The total amount of seeding agent used each project day is shown. Each season typically has several days
exceeding 10 kg (10,000 grams); 2010 had ten such days. 48
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
WMI wishes to acknowledge the continuing, kind support of Todd Klapak (President) and Catherine
Janssen (Chief Financial Officer) and the entire Board of Directors of the Alberta Severe Weather
Management Society (ASWMS). The understanding, support, and cooperation of the ASWMS are
greatly appreciated.
A number of organizations and people deserve recognition and thanks. The cooperation of these people
and agencies are very important to make the project a success and much more enjoyable.
The cooperation of NAV Canada is greatly appreciated and acknowledged. Several persons
deserve special recognition: James Krause of YEG (Edmonton) ACC Calgary Terminal; Scott
Young, and Brent Lopushinsky of the Calgary Terminal Air Operations. 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.
Rob Adamchuk of Transport Canada helped us dot all the is and cross all the ts in completing
the requisite paperwork.
For the fifteenth year, special thanks go to Bob Jackson for sharing his office and hangar at the
Olds-Didsbury airport, used for the radar and communications operations centre.
WMI wishes to acknowledge the contributions of the staff who served on the project during the summer
of 2010: program manager Tom Walton; meteorologists Dan Gilbert, Brad Waller, and Dr. Viktor
Makitov; electronics-radar technician Barry Robinson; pilots-in-command Robert Gorman, Jeff Allen, Joel
Zimmer, Marcus Stevenson, and Mark Friel; co-pilots Ryan Young, Matt Laramee, and Treena King; and
the aircraft maintenance coordinator (John Kelly). The staff performed very well as a team. The support
of the WMI corporate head office in Fargo, North Dakota, is acknowledged, specifically: Patrick
Sweeney, James Sweeney, Randy Jenson, Hans Ahlness, Jody Fischer, Bruce Boe, Dennis Afseth, Cindy
Dobbs, Mark Grove, Erin Fischer, and Mike Clancy are gratefully acknowledged.
FIGURE 1. The thunderstorm tracks recorded by the operations radar (at the red
star) during the 2010 project are shown, color-coded by month. August and
September storms are combined. Storms over or approaching the cities and towns
within the central green-shaded area are seeded; others are not. The adjacent
yellow buffer zone around the protected area defines the area over which storms
approaching the protected area can be seeded, but for effect within the protected
area only. The radar range rings are 50 km apart. (WMI graphic by Matthew Ham.)
SECTION 1
OVERVIEW
The 2010 season marked the fifteenth summer of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project. The season was
one of the most active since the project began in 1996. There were 42 storm days with seeding, the
most ever, topping the previous record of 39 days (1999). During the 107-day project period from June
1 through September 15, the four project aircraft flew 91 missions totaling 271 hours, used 5,837
ejectable flares, 851 burn-in-place flares, and burned 227 gallons of seeding solution while seeding 118
storm complexes. Thus the 2010 season tied for the second-busiest ever (with 2004). Only the 2000
project season was more active.
The 2010 project was again
operated with four seeding
aircraft: two twin-engine
turboprop aircraft for cloud-top
seeding operations, and two
turbo-charged twin-engine
aircraft for treatment of storms
from cloud base. One aircraft
of each type was based in
Calgary (CYYC) and Red Deer
(CYQF). All project operations
were supervised and directed
from the radar equipped
Operations Centre at the Olds-
Didsbury Airport (CEA3),
located approximately
equidistant between the two
aircraft bases.
When ranked with the previous
14 seasons, 2010 ranked tied
for second- and third-busiest of
the fifteen seasons to date, and
certainly was among the most
active. This conclusion is
independently corroborated by
the fact that new records were
established for the numbers of
days in one season having
observed convective day
categories (CDCs) of +2 (27
days) and +3 (8 days). A CDC
of +1 or greater indicates that
hail occurred; the larger the
number, the larger the hail. (Details are provided in Section 4.7.)
In 2009, there were no days during which 10 kilograms (10,000 grams) or more of seeding agent was
used; typically this will occur 2-3 times per season. By comparison, the 2010 season had ten days during
which at least 10 kg of seeding agent were used (see Section 4.7). Of these ten days, three saw more
than 15 kg used; two of these (August 8 and August 9) exceeded 20 kg. This usage of seeding agent does
not reflect a few storms that were treated at exceptionally high seeding rates, for the average per storm
was 2.2 kg, very much the long-term project norm. This is yet another indication that the season was
exceptionally active.
The primary axis of each 2010 storm track is plotted in Fig. 1. To qualify as a storm and have a track the
radar must have detected an echo of at least 40 dBZ intensity for at least two consecutive radar volume
scans, which is about ten minutes. Though shown as lines, the storms of course all had significant width
and so could each be plotted as an area. Doing so, however, makes it difficult to see storms that had
similar paths, so in viewing the figure remember that each storm core actually extended at least 5-10
km on either side of the axes (arrows) shown. Plots for each month are provided later in this report.
As suggested by Fig. 1, storms can and do develop in any part of the protected area, buffer zone, and
beyond. However, the buffer zone just west of the protected area is the foothills of the Rockies, and an
area favored for convergence and storm genesis. Many storms originate here, but few develop further
west. The two largest metropolitan areas are of course Calgary and Red Deer. While Red Deer is at least
100 km east of the foothills and western buffer zone, Calgary lies far closer; only a few tens of
kilometers separate the city from the foothills and potential severe storms. For this reason there can
often be far less lead time when dealing with storms that develop in the southern end of the western
buffer zone and then move eastas they usually do. This is brought to the readers attention because
the potential for surprise storms is very real, and herein we offer some ideas as to how that very
threat might be better managed in future seasons (see Section 4.8, Recommendations).
Enhancements to the 2010 project included:
A full-time on-site project manager and logistic coordinator who assisted all the project staff
with day-to-day matters, facilitated communications, supplies (to ensure inventories) and
repairs, and was liaison between project personnel and the media.
Alarm-equipped weather radios were deployed at all three sites (Calgary, Red Deer, and Olds) to
ensure real-time notification of all weather warnings issued by Environment Canada.
Supplemental data recording was initiated by project meteorological staff when off-site (away
from the operations centre) to better document odd-hour observations.
Monitoring of real-time long-range regional lightning data provided increased long-range
awareness of convective activity beyond radar range and upwind of the protected area.
Overhaul of the auxiliary power supply system at the operations centre, including replacement
of the backup generator with a new unit.
Addition of a second radar-processing (TITAN) computer provided immediate backup in the
event of a computer crash.
Replacement/Upgrade of the meteorologists forecasting and Internet access computer at the
operations centre.
Overall the season ran smoothly, though not without some bumps. Early in June some significant
interference with the radar developed from a new communications tower south of the radar. Though
slight, it was sufficient to trigger undesirable returns (echoes) along the radial toward Calgary, and so
was investigated. The problem was ultimately solved by fine-tuning the radar receiver, which alleviated
the interference while maximizing the radar sensitivity.
In early July the radars new TITAN computer failed very unexpectedly. Fortunately, a back-up was
available, and so was quickly swapped out to provide uninterrupted radar service. There was a problem,
however, in that the aircraft flight tracks could not be superimposed on the radar screen. The tracks
were still available, displayed on the AirLink computer right there in the operations room, but AirLink
displays only the tracks, not radar data. This meant that the meteorologists had to monitor two
displays, TITAN for the radar data, and AirLink for the flight tracks. Solution to this problem proved very
elusive. The crashed TITAN computer was ultimately rebuilt and returned to service, and along with it,
the flight tracks were restored. Some weeks later the cause of the aircraft track interface issue was
finally found to result from differences between how the two versions of TITAN view data. The older
version used coordinates relative to the radars location, while the newer version uses latitude and
longitude. The solution was simple once the cause was identified. When the newer TITAN CPU failed
again in early September, the swap was easy, and operations continued, with flight tracks on the TITAN
RVIEW display, without interruption.
During the course of the summer, staff from participating insurance companies visited the Operations
Centre at the Olds-Didsbury airport on eight days, in June, July, and August. Those visiting were given a
presentation on the project as well as tours of the radar and communications centre, and also got to see
some of the project aircraft flown from either Calgary or Red Deer for the purpose. Feedback from
those persons attending was overwhelmingly favorable, and the Weather Modification, Inc. (WMI) staff
participating enjoyed providing the tours. All total 118 persons employed by the project sponsors took
part.
The following sections of this report provide complete details of the 2010 season. More general project
information, include equipment specifications and a daily summary of weather and operations, are
provided in the appendix.
FIGURE 2. A thunderstorm is seen from HAILSTOP 4 on 9 July 2010, as
it was seeded from below cloud base. (WMI photograph by Joel
Zimmer.)
SECTION 2
PROGRAM BACKGROUND
2.1 Historical Overview
Hail has long been a problem for both agriculture and municipalities in the Province of Alberta. In 1956,
under the aegis of the Alberta Research Council, a research program was undertaken that sought to
develop and evaluate the effectiveness of cloud seeding from aircraft to mitigate crop-hail damage.
Though never operational, the program continued to research the hail problem and ways to reduce
the hail impact on agriculture until 1985, when it was discontinued.
The hail problem did not end with the
hail research program, and in 1991 a
severe hailstorm caused several hundred
million dollars damage in the City of
Calgary and adjacent metropolitan
areas. This storm, though by no means
the first of its kind, was of sufficient
magnitude to rekindle interest in hail
damage mitigation through cloud
seeding.
A consortium of underwriters of
property and casualty insurance in
Alberta was formed in the wake of the
1991 Calgary storm, and named itself
the Alberta Severe Weather
Management Society (ASWMS). From
its formation, the ASWMS was focused
on establishing a renewed Alberta Hail
Suppression Program through cloud seeding, but this time, the focus was to be on protecting
municipalities, not crops. The necessity for such a program was presented to the Insurance Bureau of
Canada (IBC), and though the IBC was encouraging it offered no financial support. The Province of
Alberta was itself approached for funding of the program. Though the need was acknowledged by the
provincial leaders funding was not forthcoming.
In 1995 the ASWMS developed a protocol through which its members would pay into a common project
fund, amount proportional with market share, and the current Alberta Hail Suppression Project finally
became possible. An international tender was issued, and Weather Modification, Inc. (WMI) was
awarded a five-year contract to conduct operations from June 15 through September 15 each summer,
beginning in 1996.
The goal of the project from the beginning has been the protection from the ravages of hailstorms of
property concentrated in urban areas, to the maximum extent technology and safety will allow. The
two largest such areas within the project target area are Calgary and Red Deer, but there are dozens of
additional cities and towns that also warrant attention. To do this, the project established a weather
radar and operations centre at the Olds-Didsbury Airport, approximately halfway between the two
largest metropolitan areas. Two aircraft were based in Calgary, a third in Red Deer.
At the conclusion of the initial five-year period the contract between the ASWMS and WMI was renewed
for a second 5-year period (2001-2005), and later for a third (2006-2010), just concluding.
Three significant changes were made to the project scope during the first fifteen seasons. Early on
(season 2) it was recognized that the hail problem begins earlier in the year than June 15, so since 1998,
the project has begun each season on June 1.
Beginning in the 2006 season the protected area was expanded somewhat to the east, to include the
town of Strathmore and the bedroom communities east of Calgary.
The third change did not occur until the 13
th
season, 2008. The unrelenting expansion of the
metropolitan areas within the project area meant increasing risk, and a fourth cloud seeding aircraft was
added to the project. This aircraft is based in Red Deer.
2.2 The Scientific Basis for Hail Suppression
Hail is formed when small ice particles known as hail embryos are held aloft by strong thunderstorm
updrafts within regions of unfrozen supercooled cloud water. This supercooled cloud water is collected
by the hail embryos and freezes to them, resulting in growth to hail (greater than 5 mm diameter) sizes.
Growth continues until (1) the supporting updraft weakens, (2) the in-storm motion of the growing
hailstone moves it to the updraft side from whence it can fall, or (3) the hailstone grows so large that
the updraft can no longer support it.
In most situations the subcloud layer is relatively warm (much warmer than 0
o
C) so hailstones begin to
melt during the final portion of their plummet to earth, but in many cases the hailstones are too large
for melting to be complete, and hail reaches the ground.
The Formation of Hail
Understanding of the development of hail includes knowledge gained from work by Chisholm (1970),
Chisholm and Renick (1972), Marwitz (1972a, b, and 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 1970s and early 1980s indicates that hail embryos grow within the
evolving main updraft of single cell storms and within the updrafts of developing feeder clouds (the
cumulus towers) that flank mature multi-cell and supercell 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 dynamic and microphysical processes thought to be critical to hail
production. Small precipitation embryos that eventually grow into hailstones are called hail embryos.
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
FIGURE 3. Small hail covers the grass after the passage of an
intense supercell thunderstorm at the Operations Centre on 25 July
2010. (WMI photograph by Daniel Gilbert.)
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
Hail embryos grow into hailstones by
collecting unfrozen, supercooled liquid water
through collisions. This water freezes to the
already-frozen embryo, increasing the size,
weight, and fall speed, and also the potential
for damage at the surface. This growth to
large hail is theorized to occur primarily along
the edges of the main storm updraft where
the merging feeder clouds interact with the
main storm updraft (WMO 1995). However,
the mature hailstorm most certainly consists
of complicated airflow patterns and particle
trajectories.
Studies of the internal structure of large
hailstones in Alberta and elsewhere have
shown that hailstones can have either a
graupel (snow pellet) embryo or a frozen drop embryo. The different hail embryos indicate different
growth histories and trajectories and illustrate the complexity within a single hailstorm.
Hail Suppression Concepts
The hail suppression conceptual model utilized in the Alberta Hail Suppression Project is based on the
results of the former research program of the Alberta Research Council and the experiences of WMI in
the USA, Canada, Argentina, and Greece. It involves the use of glaciogenic reagents to seed the
developing feeder clouds near the -10C level in the upshear, new growth propagation region of
hailstorms. The glaciogenic reagents initiate the rapid development of small ice particles through the
condensation-freezing nucleation process, and thus produce enhanced concentrations of ice crystals
that compete for the available, supercooled liquid water in storms. This helps prevent the growth of
large, damaging hail. The seeding also stimulates the precipitation process by speeding the growth of
ice-phase hydrometeors, initially into snow pellets (also called graupel) which fall from the cloud earlier,
melt, and reach the ground as rain, instead of continuing to grow into large ice particles that reach the
ground as damaging hail.
The present seeding methodology modifies the graupel embryo hail development process. Frozen drop
hail embryos are thought to originate from secondary sources (shedding from large existing hailstones,
or via a recirculation process at the edge of the main updraft). Cloud seeding can only reduce the hail
that grows from frozen drop embryos if the available 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. Both are extremely complex, and are not the focus of the Alberta
project.
The governing premise of the Alberta cloud seeding operations is the cloud microphysical concept called
beneficial competition. The premise of beneficial competition is that the well-documented natural
deficiency of ice nuclei (ice-forming particles) in the atmosphere can be corrected by the release of
additional ice nuclei (glaciogenic seeding material) into developing storm clouds. This is done by the
combustion of small amounts of reagent and/or solutions containing silver iodide (AgI), either as
pyrotechnics (flares) or from wing-borne solution-burning ice nucleus generators. With either method,
from 10
13
to 10
14
(or from 10,000,000,000,000 to 100,000,000,000,000) ice nuclei are produced for each
gram of silver iodide burned, e.g., see Fig. 24, Section 4.6. This potentially increases greatly the number
of precipitation embryos in the cloud.
These natural and human-made ice crystals, many of which become precipitation, then compete for
the available supercooled liquid cloud water within the storm. Because the total amount of supercooled
liquid remains essentially unchanged, that same mass is divided among the increased number of
embryos, meaning the final maximum size of each individual ice particle is significantly decreased.
Hence, the hailstones that form within seeded clouds will be smaller and produce less damage if they
should survive the fall to the surface. If they are sufficiently small they will melt completely in the
warmer subcloud layer, and reach the ground as rain.
Cloud seeding alters the microphysics of the treated clouds, assuming that the existing precipitation
process is inefficient due to a lack 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 alter
directly the energy or dynamics of the storm. Any alteration of the storm dynamics that does occur
results as a consequence of the increased ice crystal concentrations and the development of additional
precipitation-sized ice particles earlier in the clouds lifetime.
Because the mature hailstorm consists of complex airflows and precipitation trajectories cloud seeding
does not affect all hail embryo sources. It does, however, modify the primary hail formation process. In
other words; the cloud seeding cannot eliminate all of the hail, but can reduce the size and amount of
hail.
A schematic diagram of the conceptual storm model showing the hail origins and growth processes
within a hailstorm is shown in Fig. 4. The cloud seeding methodology applied to the new growth zone of
the storm is illustrated.
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 amounts
and sizes 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. The new growth zones of potential
hailstorms are seeded, and the amounts and types of precipitation at the surface are observed, as well
as the radar reflectivity characteristics of the storm before, during, and after seeding. It is anticipated
that the successful application of the technology will yield a decrease of damaging hail by approximately
50% from what would have occurred if seeding had not taken place. This expectation 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 or more) within the
operations area, and then compared with the historical values for the same area. Because of these
uncertainties, the evaluation of any hail mitigation program requires a statistical analysis. The
characteristics of both seeded and unseeded storms vary considerably, such that any storm trait can be
found in either category.
FIGURE 4. The conceptual model of hailstone formation and hail mitigation processes for Alberta, adapted from WMO
(1995). This schematic shows generalized cloud seeding flight paths at feeder-cloud tops and below cloud-base, typically
employed for mature thunderstorms.
A meaningful evaluation of the project might be feasible if insurance loss data for hailstorms was made
available. However, such data are considered proprietary and have not to date been forthcoming. An
additional complicating factor is that hail, by itself, is not always differentiated as the cause of the
insured damage, e.g., a window might be broken by hail, high winds, or by surface-based debris borne
by the high winds, and to the insurance adjuster it makes little difference; storm damage has occurred.
Effects of Hail Suppression Efforts on Rainfall
A common question about cloud seeding concerns the effect on the rainfall. The effects of seeding to
mitigate hail damage on storm rainfall are not dramatic, but slightly positive. The target area
specifically, and Alberta as a whole, lack the high density time-resolved precipitation measurements
necessary to provide a scientifically-meaningful rainfall analysis. However, evaluation of another long-
term hail suppression program in neighboring North Dakota that does have such a precipitation network
found that rainfall is increased about 5 to 10 percent compared to that from similar unseeded clouds
(Johnson 1985). Since methodology, seasons, and seeding agents are the same, and since the storms
themselves are very similar, it is reasonable to believe that effects in rainfall in Alberta are similar. All
this is wholly consistent with the concept that the number of precipitation embryos is increased by
glaciogenic seeding.
There is a common (yet quite false) belief by much of the public and even a few scientists that
thunderstorms operate at near 100% efficiency in producing rainfall. This is not logical, for 100%
efficiency would require that all moisture processed by a storm would fall to the ground; no cloud, even,
could remain. This is far from the case. There have been numerous studies of the fluxes of air and
water vapor through convective clouds; these are summarized in Fig. 5.
Precipitation efficiencies can vary widely from as little as 2% for storms studied by Marwitz (1972) and
Dennis et al. (1970) to near 100% for a select few. Marwitz (1972d) 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. [Wind shear is the change in
wind speed and direction at various altitudes.] The least efficient storms tend to be supercell
hailstorms; the highly efficient storms tend not to produce hail at all. The average wind shear on hail
days in Alberta is approximately 2.5 x 10
-3
sec
-1
. This average shear value corresponds to an average
precipitation efficiency of approximately 50% (see again Fig. 5).
For reasons previously stated, it logically follows that the production of large, damaging hail is largely a
result of natural storm inefficiency. The introduction of more precipitation embryos, through seeding,
earlier in a clouds lifetime is highly advantageous, making the cloud more efficient as a rain producer,
and in the process reducing the amount and size of any hail.
FIGURE 5. Precipitation efficiency for High Plains convective storms. Known supercell hailstorms are labeled S. Storms that
produced rain only are labeled R. Figure from Browning (1977), copyright American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA,
used by permission.
SECTION 3
PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES
3.1 Infrastructure
The flow of information within the project is illustrated in block diagram form in Fig. 6. The focal point
of the project is the Operations Centre, located at the Olds-Didsbury Airport, approximately halfway
between the two largest metropolitan areas, Calgary and Red Deer.
FIGURE 6. Though program objectives and directives originate with the project sponsor, the Alberta Severe Weather
Management Society (ASWMS), the majority of project communications occur among the meteorologists (Operations
Centre), pilots (Calgary and Red Deer), and the various maintenance providers. The approximate frequencies of these
interactions are also shown.
The ASWMS Board is comprised of individual insurance industry employees nominated by their
respective companies. The ASWMS President serves as the primary liaison between the Board and
Weather Modification, Inc. (WMI), though all Board members receive the project summary reports
compiled and disseminated weekly by WMI during the operational period, which is June 1 through
September 15, annually.
The project operations area is illustrated in Fig. 7. The boundaries of flight operations (actual seeding)
are indicated by the broad yellow line, which actually includes the foothills of the Rocky Mountains,
west of the protected area. This is very important, for the foothills are an important zone for storm
genesis. The broad green line denotes the boundary of the protected area, i.e., storms threatening any
of the communities within this area will be seeded, as resources allow.
3.2 The Operations Centre
Environment Canada operates two weather radars in Alberta, one in Carvel, near Edmonton, and the
other at Strathmore, east of Calgary. While good for surveillance of the province, neither provides the
detail and flexibility needed for hail suppression operations in the target area. Thus, radar support for
the project required that a third radar be installed. Since the projects inception in 1996 the Operations
Centre and radar have been based at the Olds-Didsbury Airport, centrally located in the target area.
FIGURE 7. The current protected area is outlined in green; the extent of the operations area in yellow. The region
between the yellow and green boundaries is termed the buffer zone, as seeding can occur in this area to affect
storms moving into the protected (green-bounded) area. The location of the Operations Centre is shown by the red
star. Radar range rings depict 50 km intervals.
An illustrated schematic diagram (Fig. 8) of project activities occurring at and around the Operations
Centre provides more detail about the origins and flow of data critical for operations. More detailed
information about each of these systems is provided in the latter portions of Section 3. Technical
specifications of all project-operated facilities and equipment are given in the appendix of this report.
FIGURE 8. The operational elements of the Alberta Hail Suppression Project around the Operations Centre are illustrated.
Position and seeding data from each of the four aircraft are telemetered in real-time, ingested, and displayed. Positions are
plotted directly on the radar display to optimize pilot-meteorologist interactions. Updated radar images are sent to the
Internet every five minutes, and are thus available to any flight crews not yet airborne. The only regular upper air sounding
in Alberta is released from Edmonton, well north of the target area, so model-derived soundings are used for operational
forecasting.
All project operations are directed and monitored from the WMI radar installation at the Olds-Didsbury
Airport (official airport identifier: CEA3). Project offices for radar operation and monitoring, weather
forecasting, recordkeeping, and overall administration are located on the airfield just south of the main
ramp. Immediately adjacent to the operations centre offices is the easily recognizable radar tower and
radome (Fig. 9).
The project control room contains the following: radar displays and processing computers, the AirLink
flight telemetry system, a computer with Internet connectivity for access to external weather data, VHF
radios for direct communication with project aircraft, and telephone.
Digital Weather Radar
The primary radar display and control is achieved through the Thunderstorm Identification, Tracking,
Analysis, and Nowcasting (TITAN) acquisition and processing software (Figs. 10 and 11). The TITAN
software processes and displays the full-sky volume scan radar data, producing a variety of graphical
images that are useful in real-time as operations are conducted, and also in post-analysis. [Note: the
term volume scan refers to radar data collected during a complete set of 360
o
, full-azimuth scans, each
at progressively higher antenna elevation angles. About five minutes are required for the radar to
complete each volume scan.]
FIGURE 9. The WMI project
Operations Centre is
located at the Olds-
Didsbury Airport, about 70
km (44 miles) north of the
Calgary Airport, roughly
halfway between the
projects most important
cities: Calgary and Red
Deer. The radar antenna is
housed within the dome,
and the transmitter and
receiver in the shed at the
tower base. Operations
are conducted from within
the meteorological office
housed within the adjacent
hangar. In this image from
25 July 2010, a supercell
thunderstorm towers to the
east, an hour after passing
the radar and Operations
Centre. (WMI photograph
by Bradley Waller.)
The TITAN software helps the meteorologists identify potential hailstorms and, with the flight tracks of
project aircraft superimposed, improves the guidance of aircraft to the hail-growth regions of active
thunderstorms. The primary (and largest) TITAN display window is referred to as the RVIEW window.
The operator can select the RVIEW window to display any of a number of TITAN parameters either as
observed for specific constant altitude plan views (called CAPPIs), or as a composite view, that shows the
maximum value observed at each coordinate anywhere above the surface. The various parameters
available from TITAN, and the ways in which each is displayed are summarized in Table 1. Composite
reflectivity TITAN images are sent to the WMI web server after the completion of each volume scan, at
approximately 5 minute intervals.
Operating in tandem with TITAN is the Configurable Interactive Data Display (CIDD) radar processing
system (see C in Fig. 10, and Fig. 12). The CIDD is similar to TITAN in function, but whereas TITAN
converts all radar data to Cartesian (x, y, z) coordinates, CIDD processes and displays the radar data in its
native polar coordinates (direction, range, and elevation angle). There are advantages to both systems,
so WMI uses both. The CIDD is typically set up to run a continuous animated 1-hour movie loop of the
higher resolution polar coordinate radar data, superimposed on a map of project area terrain.
Both TITAN and CIDD are available in the operations room on dedicated displays, that is, flat-panel
monitors dedicated full-time to those purposes. In addition, a supplemental TITAN RVIEW window is
not used interactively, but used to port (send) TITAN data to the web upon the completion of each
complete volume scan made by the radar. This is done so that the web image always has the same
information and appearance for all scans.
TABLE 1. Summary of TITAN Software Functionality
Function / Data Type
RVIEW CAPPI DISPLAYS Units Description Origin
Radar Reflectivity dBZ precipitation intensity observed
Maximum Reflectivity dBZ maximum precipitation intensity for the last 24 hours observed
Accumulated Precipitation mm
radar-estimated rainfall accumulated in the last hour
or for the last 24 hours
calculated
Vertically-Integrated Liquid
(VIL)
kg m
-2
Vertically integrated liquid (actually, mass) within a
storm cell
calculated
RVIEW CELL ANNOTATIONS Units Description Origin
Storm Speed km h
-1
the speed that each storm is moving calculated
Maximum Reflectivity dBZ
the maximum radar reflectivity contained anywhere
within each cell exceeding the minimum cell
threshold
Maximum Cloud Top Height km maximum height of storm cell measured observed
Cell Number
(assigned by TITAN)
N/A
cell numbers and complex numbers are assigned to
significant storm cells and complexes. This are in
turn used to produce cell histories.
observed,
assigned
(VIL)
kg m
-2
maximum VIL within each TITAN cell calculated
FOKR Category N/A The Foote-Krauss (FOKR) storm category number
1
calculated
CELL HISTORY DISPLAYS Units Description Origin
cell volume km
3
history of the user-selected cell volume calculated
cell area km
2
history of the user-selected cell area observed
precipitation flux m
3
s
-1
history of precipitation rate for the user-selected cell calculated
cell mass ktons history of estimated cloud mass for the selected cell calculated
(VIL)
kg m
-2
history of the VIL for the selected cell calculated
height of max reflectivity km
History of the height (within cloud) of the strongest
reflectivity in that storm cell
observed
1
For details regarding the formulation and interpretation of the FOKR storm scale, see Foote et al. (2005).
Collectively, the parameters and displays listed in Table 1 make TITAN the most powerful real-time
decision-making tool available for weather radar analysis today.
FIGURE 10. The operations room is equipped with a variety of equipment, essential to an efficient program. This includes (A)
reference manuals, (B) TITAN RVIEW display, (C) CIDD, (D) VHF radio for communications with aircraft, (E) radar log, (F)
Internet display #1, (G) Internet display #2, (H), AirLink display, (I),SharePoint/e-mail display #1, (J) SharePoint/e-mail display
#2, and (K) licenses for the radar, radio, and data telemetry systems. Telephones (L) are seen at the far left.
The operations room is configured to place all the needed resources within easy reach of the operations
director (Fig. 10). Project reference and equipment manuals are shelved on the upper left. Telephones
(two lines) are available, with remote handsets. The desk top provides the space needed for data
recording (logs) and data entry (keyboard/mouse). The VHF radio needed for ground-to-air
communication is placed directly in front of the operations director. To the immediate right is a third
computer with dual monitors (Fig. 10, I, J), for continuous, dedicated access to Internet weather data
from other sources. There is ample room for a second meteorologist in the operations room when
needed to assistance with radio communications, data entry, or general weather surveillance.
FIGURE 11. An example of the variety of data displayed in real-time on the operations rooms primary monitors (four). The
TITAN dual-monitor display typically shows the main TITAN RVIEW window (A), a vertical cross-section through a storm of
interest (B), a collection of various cell histories (C) that include the parameters listed in Table 1, and a second TITAN RVIEW
window that is not used for operations, but to send consistently-formatted images to the internet. Visible and infrared
wavelength satellite images (D and E), lightning flash data (F), and often data from one of the two Environment Canada
radars in the province (G) are among the images commonly displayed on the other two monitors. The CIDD display (H) is
configured to continuously loop a dozen or so of the most recent TITAN scans as a short movie. All data shown are for 02:00
UTC on 12 July 2010, or 8:00 PM MDT on 11 July 2010. (WMI graphic montage by Matthew Ham.)
FIGURE 12. The TITAN RVIEW window (left) and the CIDD display (right) are shown side-by-side for 00:34 and 00:36 UTC on
10 August 2010 (6:34 and 6:36 PM MDT, 9 August 2010). The same basic storm reflectivity structure is revealed in both;
however there are some subtle differences that give each some unique advantages over the other. The TITAN display, by
virtue of its Cartesian coordinate system, is much better suited to extrapolation of echo positions (cell movement forecasts)
and the calculation of storm-specific characteristics as shown in the three adjacent, smaller windows immediately to the
right. However, the CIDD polar-coordinate data can be quickly plotted and looped, providing movies of storm motion. In
addition, the local terrain throughout the region is shown as a colored background for the CIDD display, from the green hues
of the plains (upper right, or NE), to the golds of the foothills and light tans of the Rocky Mountains (lower left, SW). Since
CIDDs polar coordinates are the native coordinates (not derived, as are the TITAN Cartesian coordinates) for weather radar,
more storm detail is also often afforded. (WMI graphic by Matthew Ham.)
Aircraft Tracking
The project Operations Centre was equipped to receive and record data from all project aircraft, using
data radio and WMIs AirLink tracking system. These GPS-based systems provided the exact positions of
the aircraft, allowing them to be superimposed on the TITAN RVIEW display. This allowed the
meteorologist(s) controlling flight operations to accurately direct the aircraft to optimum seeding
positions relative to each storm system. Each aircraft track was displayed in a different color, allowing
unambiguous identification. An example of the raw AirLink data flight tracks, as well as 10-minute track
segments superimposed on the TITAN RVIEW window are shown in Fig. 13. AirLink also displays where
the seeding events took place, but these were not displayed on the tracks in the TITAN RVIEW (as shown
in Fig. 13) because doing so adds excessive clutter to the already busy image.
In addition to being telemetered to the Operations Centre, the position and seeding event data are
recorded on board the aircraft, and thus are not lost if the telemetry between aircraft and radar is
interrupted.
3.3 Cloud Seeding Aircraft
Three different models of twin-engine aircraft were utilized on the project. HAILSTOP 1, the cloud-top
seeding aircraft based in Calgary, was a Piper Cheyenne II, a turboprop (also commonly called a prop-
jet). HAILSTOP 3, the cloud-top seeding aircraft based in Red Deer, was a Beech King Air C-90, also a
turboprop. Both cloud-base seeding aircraft (HAILSTOPs 2 and 4) were Cessna model 340A. All four
aircraft were each equipped with fuselage-mounted flare racks carrying ejectable flares, and also wing
racks for burn-in-place flares.
FIGURE 13. Aircraft flight tracks for all four seeding aircraft and real-time seeding information available from the AirLink
telemetry system are shown for the flights of 22 June 2010. In both plots, the HAILSTOP 1 track is green, HAILSTOP 2 is
orange, HAILSTOP 3 is cyan (blue), and HAILSTOP 4 is magenta. The plot on the left shows AirLink position telemetry data
only, for all flights and all aircraft, for all of 22 June 2010 (local time). Because this was a tour day, when insurance
company employees visited the Operations Centre, two of the aircraft (HAILSTOP 1 and HAILSTOP 4) made initial (morning)
flights to the Olds-Didsbury airport, and later began their seeding missions from that airport. The TITAN RVIEW image on the
right shows what the operations director saw at 20:50 UTC (2:50 PM MDT), with ten-minute segments of the flight tracks of
those aircraft airborne at the time superimposed. The most recent position of the aircraft is indicated by the flight track
end having the dot, most easily discernable on the south (lower) end of the green HAILSTOP 1 track. Note that the map
scales are not the same. (WMI graphic by Matthew Ham.)
Piper Cheyenne II
The Cheyenne II is a high performance twin-engine turboprop aircraft (Fig. 14) that has proven itself
during seeding operations. In Alberta, two pilots are used at all times for improved communications and
operational safety. Standard equipment includes 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 for extended periods in icing conditions such as the supercooled cumulus clouds typically
encountered while seeding.
The endurance of the aircraft makes longer missions possible, providing coverage of the entire project
area when required. This results in significant savings in aircraft, fuel and personnel costs. The added
performance of the Cheyenne II provides sufficient power to climb safely above the dangerous icing
zone (-10C to -15C) when needed, or to descend to lower and warmer altitudes to deice and quickly
climb back up to feeder cloud-top seeding altitude. It can also provide accurate measurements of cloud
conditions and cloud temperature when so instrumented. In 2010 a third seat was provided in the
aircraft for training or observing purposes, but for use by project personnel only. The complete
specifications of the Cheyenne II are given in the Appendix.
The major advantages of the Cheyenne II are as follows:
The four+ hour mission duration allows longer seeding missions and better seeding coverage,
lower fuel price per litre (Jet A compared to avgas),
reserve power for severe icing conditions,
higher speed for rapid response or ferry between target areas, and
greater margin of safety due to increased speed and power.
FIGURE 14. HAILSTOP 1, the Calgary-
based Piper Cheyenne II aircraft
taxies in from the runway during a
visit to the operations centre at the
Olds-Didsbury Airport. The cloud
seeding pyrotechnics on the trailing
edge of the near wing are clearly
visible, as are the racks used for
ejectable flares, mounted on the
aircraft belly. (WMI photograph by
Bradley Waller.)
The Cheyenne II is equipped with GPS navigation system, on-board, contouring weather-avoidance
radar, and a VHF radio system for direct contact with operational personnel at the communications and
the Operations Centre. Seeding equipment includes three 102-position (306 total) fuselage-mounted
racks for 20-gram ejectable glaciogenic pyrotechnics (flares), and two 12-position wing racks for 150-
gram burn-in-place glaciogenic pyrotechnics.
Beech King Air C90
A photo of the Beechcraft King Air C90 (HAILSTOP 3) is shown in Fig. 15. Complete aircraft specifications
are given in the Appendix. The King Air is equipped with the same complement of seeding equipment as
the Cheyenne II. Like the Cheyenne II, the King Air C90 is also a high-performance twin-engine
turboprop aircraft that has been proven repeatedly in seeding operations.
The two turboprop seeding aircraft (HAILSTOP 1, Calgary, and HAILSTOP 3, Red Deer) are used primarily
for seeding at cloud top by direct penetration of growing cloud turrets, most often those flanking large
storm complexes, as shown previously in Fig. 4. Such turrets are precipitation-free at the time of
seeding, and consequently (radar) echo-free as well. This means that those monitoring operations will
often see the flight tracks of properly positioned aircraft near the echoing storm complexes, but not
necessarily in them.
This direct targeting makes very effective use of these aircraft, which function most efficiently at higher
altitudes.
FIGURE 15. HAILSTOP 3, a
Beech King Air C90 aircraft is
shown at the Red Deer Regional
Airport, after an active day of
flight operations. (WMI
photograph by Marcus
Stevenson.)
Cessna 340A
The two other seeding aircraft, HAILSTOP 2 (Calgary) and HAILSTOP 4 (Red Deer) are Cessna 340A
aircraft whose primary role is seeding the growing cloud turrets while within updrafts at cloud bases.
The Cessna 340s are pressurized, twin-engine, six cylinder, turbocharged and fuel-injected all weather
aircraft, equipped with weather avoidance radar and GPS navigation system (Fig. 16). Complete
specifications for the C340 are given in the Appendix.
FIGURE 16. A Cessna 340A
seeding aircraft is shown as it
taxies to the runway for
departure at the Olds-Didsbury
Airport. Most notable on the
aircraft (and absent from the
turboprop aircraft) are the wing-
tip ice nucleus generators, the
silver torpedo-like appurtenances
below the wing-tip fuel tanks.
(WMI photograph by Bradley
Waller.)
The C340 aircraft both carry a 102-position belly rack for 20-gram ejectable flares (used in cloud top
seeding, which they also can do very effectively), and wing racks for at least 24 150-gram burn-in-place
flares, as well as two wing-tip ice nucleus generators that burn silver iodide seeding solution. Each
generator has a capacity of 26.5 litres (7.0 U.S. gallons), sufficient for continuous seeding for about 2.5
hours.
Although the C340 can seed effectively at cloud top, even in known icing conditions, these aircraft are
not as fast or powerful as the turboprop aircraft and so are most efficient and cost-effective when
utilized in cloud-base seeding operations, their primary role in Alberta.
3.4 Communications
Reliable communications for all project personnel and managers is essential for smooth and effective
operations. These communications take place on a number of levels, with mixed urgencies. Real-time
information-sharing and operational decision-making require immediate receipt of messages so
appropriate actions can be taken. Time is of the essence. Routine daily activities such as completion of
project paperwork and reports manifest less urgency, but still require due short-term attention. There
are also project matters of importance on a weekly (or longer) time frame; these can be handled still
more casually.
Real-time Communications
In the current age of widespread cellular telephone usage and coverage, the cell (or mobile) telephone
has proven to be the most dependable means for project communications. Other real-time, project-
essential communications occur between the Operations Centre and project aircraft; these are
accomplished by voice radio transmissions. Aircraft positions and seeding actions are communicated to
the Operations Centre via data radio.
For intra-project communications, all project personnel have cellular telephones. Pilots, who are on-call
and have flexible hours, always carry their mobile phones, and keep them well-charged and turned on.
Meteorological staff do likewise, but because of their more structured hours and location (primarily the
Operations Centre) may be more reliably contacted there via land (telephone) lines. The Operations
Centre has two; one in the operations room itself, and another in the larger office.
Internet Access
Each season high-speed Internet access is established at the airport offices for the flight crews based in
Calgary and Red Deer. Such access ensures real-time awareness of storm evolution and motion prior to
launches, which gives the pilots better knowledge of the storm situation they will encounter when they
are launched.
Use of E-mail and Text Messages
Electronic mail (e-mail) and text messaging are discouraged when immediate receipt of information is
essential, because the sender does not know with certainty if/when the recipient has received or will
receive the message. Both are acceptable for non-urgent situations; however e-mail is preferred
whenever any record of the message content and/or timeliness is needed.
The on-site program manager routinely sends blanket text message notifications of aircraft launches to
all project field personnel, so everybody knows when operations commence and which aircraft was the
first to fly.
Weather Radios
To heighten the awareness of thunderstorms within the province as a whole, this season WMI added
alarm-equipped weather radios at the residences of project personnel in Calgary, Red Deer, and Olds.
These radios sound an alert tone whenever Environment Canada issues a warning. The radios were
added as a precautionary measure to further ensure awareness of such warnings when personnel were
not at their duty stations (respective airports of the radar). We are pleased to report, however, that the
first alarm actually heard by any of the project personnel because one of the radios sounded an alert
while they were home occurred in early September, for a frost warning! When storms were about,
nobody was home, it seems.
FIGURE 17. Atmospheric instability is manifest in the form of rapid
convective growth on 30 June 2010. (WMI photograph by Daniel
Gilbert.)
SECTION 4
OPERATIONS
4.1 Forecasting
A project forecast was prepared each
operational day throughout the project
period by the assigned project
meteorologist. In addition to the real-
time information available from the
project radar at the Olds-Didsbury
Airport, the forecasting meteorologist
used local weather observations as well
as a vast array of data available on the
Internet.
Coordinated Universal Time
The standard reference time chosen for
the project field operations is universal
time coordinates (UTC), also known as
coordinated universal time (CUT), or
Greenwich Mean Time (GMT). This is
the accepted international standard of
time for general aviation and
meteorological observations, reporting, and communication. In Alberta, UTC is 6 hours ahead of local
Mountain Daylight time. For example, 12:00 noon local Alberta time is equal to 18:00 UTC, and 6:00 PM
local is equal to 24:00 or 00:00 UTC. This causes some confusion, especially with non-project personnel,
since many of the thunderstorms occurred late in the day and continue beyond 6:00 PM local time,
which is midnight or 00:00 hours UTC. The standard convention incorporated by the Alberta project is
to report all aircraft, radar, and meteorological times in UTC; however, the summary tables are all
organized according to the local calendar storm day with respect to Mountain Daylight Time for
convenience.
Purpose
The primary function of the daily forecast is to impart to project personnel a general understanding of
that days meteorological situation, particularly as it relates to the potential for hail-producing storms.
In this role it is useful, but because the data in hand are limited in temporal and spatial resolution, and
because the forecasters themselves are human and thus fallible, the forecast can never be taken as the
final word as to whether activity will or will not develop.
Forecasts of no or limited convective activity do not relieve any project personnel of their hail-fighting
responsibilities, and should not reduce vigilance or readiness of meteorological staff or flight crews.
In theory, the project could function effectively without project forecasts.
In reality, the forecasts are useful for a number of reasons:
Elective maintenance of project-critical facilities (radar and aircraft) can be conducted on days
when the probability of workable storms is less.
FIGURE 18. Meteorologist Brad Waller adds to the
daily project meteorological statistics during the first
week of June, 2010. (WMI photograph by Bruce Boe.)
Forecasts offer insight regarding the time at which convection is likely to initiate, thus allowing
some intelligence in handling decisions about aircraft standby times.
Preferred areas, e.g. northern, central, or southern portions of the protected area that are more
prone to see action are identified in the forecasts, providing the logical basis for assignment of
which aircraft are initially placed on standby.
Forecasts attempt to quantify the available atmospheric instability, and thus the likelihood of
explosive cloud/storm development. Days having high potential for rapid cloud growth require
more immediate action.
Post-hoc forecast verification conducted by the meteorologists is a helpful tool in learning more
about our understanding of Alberta thunderstorms, especially the atmospheric indicators
(precursors) in the pre-storm environment. As this knowledge improves, so will our ability to
anticipate and react to the initial deep convection.
So, while in theory the forecasts are not needed, they are useful and probably essential. The ultimate
defense against the unexpected, unforecast, explosively-developing severe storm would be to always
have aircraft airborne, patrolling the skies, scanning for the first sign of intense vertical cloud growth.
More realistically, one might have flight crews constantly waiting, ready to scramble. The funding
available for the project does not allow either of these, however, so the forecast becomes the primary
tool through with the available resources can be allocated in the most effective manner.
It is also worth noting that even when equipment and personnel worth together efficiently, as a well-
oiled, smooth-running machine, hail damage can still occur. A typical thunderstorm releases as much
energy in its lifetime as an atomic bomb. Cloud seeding can affect the microphysical (precipitation)
processes, but we do not yet have the knowledge or tools to affect the energy released. Nature, in the
end, sometimes offers more than can be handled.
Process and Dissemination
Project forecasts were valid from 9:00 AM through 9:00
AM the next day, and also included a day-two outlook.
The daily forecast preparation began with an assessment
of the current weather conditions. The latest METARs,
weather station data, radar and satellite imagery were
noted and saved. The latest surface and upper air
analysis maps were printed and saved. All data were
saved with file names that utilize the proper WMI file
naming procedures, with YYYYMMDD at the beginning of
the file name. Once the forecaster has a grasp of the
current conditions, outside agency forecasts were
examined in order to give a first-best-guess of the days
probable events. Occasionally project personnel
requested a pre-forecast before the official forecast
was ready. NAV Canada resources, Environment
Canada forecasts and BUFKIT soundings were useful for
that purpose.
The forecaster then looked through the various operational prognostic model output. Typically, the
WRF was the most up to date in the early morning. Each forecaster had their own preference for
operational models, but some of the choices available included the WRF/NAM, GFS, ECMWF, SREF and
the Canadian models. Model data were archived daily (but not printed) for the 250 mb, 500 mb, 700
mb, and pressure surfaces. Saved maps included the most current map (usually 12Z) through hour 48.
Certain features were of interest at certain levels, for the reasons set forth below:
The 250 mb best reflects the location of the upper jet stream winds, around 35,000 feet. This
map should be analyzed for the general wave pattern (ridge/trough), upper level diffluence, and
jet streaks. The right entrance and left exit quadrants of an upper jet streak are considered
favorable regions for enhanced upward motions. Storm days with upper support tend to
produce more vigorous convection than days without.
The 500 mb level reflects the middle of the atmosphere (about half the mass lies below that
level, and half above) and is found at around 18,000 feet. It is generally the boundary between
upper and lower level weather features (aka: the level of non-divergence). The 500 mb charts
are examined for temperatures, humidity, wave pattern, and especially vorticity (spin).
Advection of 500 mb vorticity from broad scale troughs, lows, or shortwaves tends to force air
parcels to rise. This can be a trigger to help break through low level inversions, or just simply
enhance the amount of vertical motion in the atmosphere. Cold, dry conditions at this level are
conducive to an unstable atmosphere. Many convective stability indices utilize temperature and
dew point at the surface and 500 mb. Some of the worst hail storms in recent history occurred
on days with only moderate instability but with strong 500 mb vorticity advection and upper jet
support.
The 700 mb level reflects conditions in the lower to mid-level of the atmosphere at around
10,000 feet, often near the convective cloud base altitude. The 700 mb charts are most typically
used to determine the amount of low level moisture over a region. Large amounts of 700 mb
moisture are conducive to an unstable atmosphere. Relative Humidity, theta-E (equivalent
potential temperature), and vertical velocity charts are all useful tools at this level. Shortwave
troughs are sometimes evident on 700 mb vertical velocity charts when they are not easily
identified at 500 mb. The presence of a theta-E ridge at or below 700 mb should be a red flag
that nocturnal convection is possible. 700 mb charts should also be analyzed for the presence of
an inversion or cap that inhibits surface based convection, although this is usually more easily
identified on a sounding than on a map.
Surface prognostic (forecast) charts (a.k.a. progs) are analyzed for the presence of lifting
mechanisms such as troughs, lows, fronts, and dry lines. Such lifting mechanisms are triggers for
thunderstorms when the atmosphere is unstable. Moist, warm surface conditions are indicative
of an unstable atmosphere. After sunset however, the lowest levels of the atmosphere tend to
decouple from the upper and middle atmosphere as the air mass cools from the bottom up.
This means that surface temperature and moisture are most important during the daytime and
evening hours and can have less impact at night. It is a good idea to consult multiple sources for
surface prog charts, as some of the analyses may omit important features. There can be major
differences from one source to the next when it comes to surface analysis and timing. In
general, surface dew points greater than 9
o
C are considered sufficient for large hail storms in
Alberta. Thunderstorm development becomes unlikely with dew points less than 5
o
C. Surface
charts may also be utilized to determine areas with upslope flow. Low-level easterly winds
flowing up the eastern slopes of the mountains are frequently the cause for storm initiation for
the project.
FIGURE 19. Meteorologist Dr. Viktor Makitov analyzes the atmospheric stability
as part of his morning forecast preparation. (WMI photograph by Bradley
Waller.)
After all model charts have been saved, the forecaster created the daily meteorogram. This is a one-
page tool that includes multiple strip charts of the forecasters choosing. Typical parameters for the
meteorogram include temperature and dew point, cloud cover, wind direction/speed, CAPE, Lifted
Index, Convective Inhibition, etc. The meteorogram is typically created for both Calgary and Red Deer
every morning, but other locations can be utilized depending on where the forecaster thinks the best
chance for deep convection (thunderstorms) will occur on that day. The meteorogram was printed and
saved in the archives. The strip charts were valid through at least three days and were helpful for
establishing the extended outlooks.
The next step was to create a daily
sounding, or Skew-T diagram.
Unfortunately, the closest actual
upper air sounding site (weather
balloon) is Edmonton, which is too
far away to use for forecasting in
the project area. Forecast
soundings from the numerical
models are thus preferred, which
can be generated through a host
of different internet sources.
The 12Z and 00Z WRF/NAM
soundings were archived for both
Red Deer and Calgary on a daily
basis. These data were also
utilized for running the HAILCAST
model when necessary. At this
point in the process, the
forecaster chose a location and
valid time for the daily forecast
sounding. This will be the time and place with the worst-case scenario for the highest CDC
(Convective Day Category) through the next 24 hours. Typically, this was either Red Deer or Calgary.
Most forecasts were made for 00Z because the atmosphere was usually most unstable in the late
afternoon.
However this was sometimes a little sooner or later depending on the timing of the arrival of surface
features, e.g. fronts, etc. Once the place and time were decided, the selected forecast sounding was
opened with the RAOB software and modified as deemed physically plausible, to provide a worst-case
scenario (most intense convection possible). This involved increasing or lowering the surface
temperature to best represent the expected maximum temperature for the day. The amount of surface
moisture could be modified as well, but this was done with care, so as not to overdo it. (This has a large
effect and can be the cause of busted forecasts.) Once the sounding was properly modified, all
convective parameters were recorded on the daily metstats sheet, and the sounding then printed. A
graphical image of the sounding was also saved, and later e-mailed with the rest of the forecast prior to
the noon weather briefing.
The forecaster then began preparation of the daily forecast sheet. The map interpretation was drawn
by hand, and included the following for the chosen valid time: 500 mb height analysis, surface analysis
(including fronts, lows, highs, troughs, and dry lines), position of upper jet streaks, and position of any
shortwaves or vorticity maxima/lobes. The synopsis section always included a brief written explanation
of the features that are most relevant to the forecast. The forecast box contained a concise description
of the expected weather for the entire 24 hour period through the next morning at 9:00 AM. The rest of
the forecast parameters and winds were taken directly from the modified sounding, and reflected the
forecast sounding that was printed out. The forecast sheet also included a checklist, to help ensure that
the forecaster does not inadvertently overlook or forget any important weather features.
Before making the final decision
about the likelihood of hail, the
forecaster may have needed to run
the HAILCAST model (Brimelow et
al., 2006). To determine whether or
not to run the model, a decision
tree is provided (Fig. 9). Research
has shown that the model works
well with some conditions, but has
been found lacking under other
scenarios, so the decision tree is
meant to weed out situations
where the model is not helpful.
When the model was to be run, the
forecast sounding data were placed
in the required HAILCAST sounding
format and saved as text files in the
appropriate folder. Then the model
was run with the expected
maximum temperature and dew
point for the day. The average
output from the model runs was
included on the forecast sheet.
Finally, the Convective Day
Category (CDC) was determined.
This was the last decision before
the forecast was sent out to project
personnel. The CDC was indicated
on the forecast sheet, and the
sheet then scanned and saved
according to WMI file naming
procedures. It was e-mailed to the
list of project forecast recipients
through the company e-mail server
from the Operations Centre. The
forecaster attached the scanned
forecast sheet and daily sounding image to the e-mail and sent it at 11:30 local time to allow time for
the recipients to study it prior to the noon briefing.
FIGURE 20. The decision tree used to determine whether or not the Hailcast
hail size prediction model is run on any given project day is shown.
Definitions of the terms used can be found in the glossary.
Daily Briefings
All project staff participated in the telephone conference call weather briefing each day at 12:00 noon
(local time). Teamwork depends on good communications, and all personnel were required to
participate in the briefing. This briefing included a debriefing and 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 placed on telephone standby or asked to remain at the airport on standby when
weather was likely in the near future. All personnel were equipped with cellular telephones to allow
quick access and constant communications, day or night.
When no seeding was expected within the next few hours after briefing (i.e. clear skies), crews were
placed on telephone standby. If operations were likely within the next few hours or actively growing
cumulus were already present, crews are put on airport standby immediately following the briefing.
During briefing one crew at each site was always designated as first up or the first aircraft to be called
if needed. Weather conditions and aircraft maintenance can dictate which crews will be first up on any
given day. If ceilings are very low (thus low cloud bases and reduced visibilities), it was recommended
that top seeders (HAILSTOP 1, HAILSTOP 3) be designated as first up. If an aircraft was receiving
maintenance, however routine, then it was not first up since it significant delays in launch time might
result. Though some pilot input is helpful, ultimately the meteorologists decide which aircraft and crews
are to be used first. When not on airport standby, crews are on telephone standby (maximum 60
minutes from airport) at any time unless previously arrange through consult with the Operations Centre.
The Convective Day Category (CDC)
As in all previous seasons, the daily weather forecast established the Convective Day Category (CDC) that
described the conditions that were expected for each day. The CDC (Strong 1979) is an index that gives
the potential for hailstorm activity and thus seeding operations. Each of the nine different CDCs is
defined in Table 2. The distinction between the -2 and -1 categories is sometimes difficult because
overcast or prolonged rains eventually break up into scattered showers. The maximum vertically-
integrated liquid (VIL) recorded by TITAN is used for forecast verification of hail size in the absence of
surface hail reports. Radar VIL values are used within the project area or buffer zones on the north,
east, and south sides (not including the mountains or foothills of the western buffer zone). This may
have increased the number of declared hail days from the early project 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.
The +1 category minimum hail size is assumed to be 5 mm since this is the recognized minimum size for
hail, and commonly used by numerical modelers. Smaller ice particles, those less than 5 mm diameter,
are generally called sleet, ice pellets, or graupel.
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
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.
Post-hoc forecast verification conducted by the meteorologists is a helpful tool in learning more about
our understanding of Alberta thunderstorms, especially the atmospheric indicators (precursors) in the
pre-storm environment. As this knowledge improves, so will our ability to anticipate and react to the
initial deep convection.
TABLE 2. The Convective Day Category Definitions
CDC Strategy Description
-3 No Seeding
Clear skies, fair weather cumulus, or stratus (with no rain). No deep
convection.
-2 No Seeding
Towering cumulus, alto-cumulus, alto-stratus, or nimbostratus
producing rain for several hours or weak echoes (e.g. virga).
-1 No Seeding
Scattered convective rain showers but no threat of hail. No reports of
lightning. Convective echoes < 40 dBZ.
0
Patrol flights and
potential seeding
Thunderstorms (at least one) but no hail. VIL < 10 kg/m
2
within the
project area or buffer zones on north, east, and south sides.
+1 Seeding
Thunderstorms with pea or shot-sized hail (0.5 to 1.2 cm diameter).
10 kg/m
2
< VIL < 20 kg/m
2
+2 Seeding
Thunderstorms with grape sized hail (1.3 to 2.0 cm diameter).
20 kg/m
2
< VIL < 50 kg/m
2
+3 Seeding
Thunderstorms with walnut sized hail (2.1 to 3.2 cm diameter).
50 kg/m
2
< VIL < 100 kg/m
2
+4 Seeding
Thunderstorms with golf ball sized hail (3.3 to 5.2 cm diameter).
VIL > 100 kg/m
2
+5 Seeding Thunderstorms with greater than golf ball sized hail (>5.2 cm diameter).
Forecast Verification
The actual, observed CDC was verified the following day through the specific procedures defined in
the Project Operations Manual, determined according to the CDC definitions in Table 2. For days when
the radar shows any vertically-integrated liquid (VIL), the CDC will always verify as at least 0. When
actual hail reports and VIL values coincide with different CDCs, the greater CDC is always used. For
example, if there is a pea sized hail report (+1 CDC) but VIL was 35 kg/m
2
(by definition a +2 CDC) then
the greater +2 CDC is used for the verification, with the assumption that larger hail probably fell but was
not reported. Likewise, if the hail report is a higher CDC category than the VIL, then the hail report is
used. Note that to verify +5 CDC, an actual hail report must be obtained.
For days with no VIL and no hail reports, lightning data are examined to determine if a strike occurred
within the verification zone during the period. If so then the CDC was 0 (it only takes one strike to make
a thunderstorm). If there were any convective showers with a maximum reflectivity greater than 40
dBZ, then CDC was 0. If there were convective showers with no lightning and echoes below 40 dBZ, then
the CDC was -1. To verify a -2 CDC, reports of towering cumulus clouds are obtained from pilots and
other crew, or when stratiform rain showers were observed. This verification is supplemented by the
aviation weather reports (METARS). When there was no rain and no towering cumulus clouds the CDC
verifies as a -3.
A comparison of the forecast and observed CDCs for the 2010 season is provided in matrix form in Fig.
21. Of the 107 project days, 48 saw at least minimum-sized hail (CDC of +1 or greater). By comparison,
the average for the 15 project seasons is 35, 13 fewer hail days than recorded in 2010. Records were set
for new maxima in number of +2 CDC days (27, old record was 18, established in 2001), and in number
of +3 CDC days (8, previous record was 6, in 2006). A new record was also established for the minimum
number of -3 CDC (only 3 days); the previous record was 7 (1997). The number of no-seed days (-3
through -1 CDC) in 2010 was only 22, the average is 43. The remaining 37 days had CDCs of zero, patrol
flights possible, but no seeding.
4.2 Operational Protocols
Aircraft Standby and Launch
The following project rules govern the procedures through which aircraft are assigned to standby, and
are launched to patrol and/or seed:
1. All aircraft are on GENERAL (TELEPHONE) STANDBY at all times, day or night, regardless of
weather. The crews must be no further than 60 minutes travel time from their aircraft. Heavy
traffic, especially during peak traffic periods, must be anticipated by the flight crews and
included in this time. In the event a crew member will by necessity be more than 60 minutes
from launch, the meteorologists must be advised in advance, and notified when that crew
member once again is within 60 min from being able to launch.
2. At least one aircraft must be on AIRPORT STANDBY whenever actively growing towering
cumulus clouds are observed within the target area, even in the absence of radar echoes.
FIGURE 21. The forecast and observed Convective Day Categories (CDCs) for the 2010 season are compared in matrix
form. Numbers within each gray square denote forecasts that were exactly correct, i.e., +1 forecast and +1 observed.
Numbers above and to the right indicate days when the CDC was under-forecast, i.e., +1 forecast, but +2 observed;
numbers below and to the left indicate days when the CDC was over-forecast, i.e. +2 forecast, but +1 observed. The 15-
season average CDCs are shown below the 2010 Observed row, and below that, the minimum and maximum for each
CDC category for all 15 seasons. Records were established in three categories in 2010, as shown by the colored entries.
3. At least one aircraft will be launched whenever the duty meteorologist determines that a launch
is appropriate, OR, when any convective radar echo develops over or within 90 min distance
upwind of any protected town or city, whichever is earlier. This should be sufficient time to the
aircraft directed to launch to complete final preparations, taxi, takeoff, and fly to the cloud
complex of interest and (if appropriate) initiate seeding at least 30 min before the complex
reaches the protected metropolitan area. (The effects of seeding are not immediate, and so
seeding needs to start well upwind.)
4. Whenever an aircraft is launched, even if only for patrol purposes, another aircraft is placed on
AIRPORT STANDBY (ALERT). It is the operational meteorologists discretion as to whether the
next aircraft placed on airport standby is based in Calgary or Red Deer. This protocol continues
as additional aircraft are launched, so that there is always another aircraft ready on AIRPORT
STANDBY unless all four are already flying.
Meteorological Recordkeeping
The meteorological records (logs) kept for the project include at a minimum, all of the following:
1. The Weather Observation Log is used to record weather observations not made at the radar.
These external logs provide formal recordkeeping by personnel when not at the Olds-Didsbury
Radar. The form includes notes of what the Olds radar shows, and if the Olds radar is echo-free,
then also what the Environment Canada radars at Carvel and Strathmore radars show. These
logs are to be kept for all periods when convection is present or possible, when the radar is not
staffed. Additional visual and/or internet-based observations are also recorded.
2. The Radar Log is the formal project record of observations made by meteorological stall while at
the Olds radar. The radar logs include not only the basic radar cell information, but also ALL
DECISIONS regarding the assignment of aircraft standby and stand-down, the issuance of
directives to launch, and the times HAILSTOP aircraft report to the radar that they have taken
off. Decisions to begin and end seeding are also to be kept, as well as decision to reposition or
recall aircraft.
3. The external Weather Observation Logs are archived at the Olds-Didsbury radar to create a
comprehensive project record of all observations and operational decisions.
4. All original logs are retained and made part of the permanent project record.
5. All directives placing aircraft on and off TELEPHONE STANDBY and AIRPORT STANDY (ALERT) are
recorded in the appropriate log, whether the directive is issued from the radar or away from it.
This includes the initial daily assignment(s) made during the noon weather briefing.
6. Actual times of aircraft TAKEOFF are recorded in the Radar Log.
7. All directives LAUNCHING or RECALLING aircraft are recorded in the appropriate log, whether
from the radar or away from it.
8. Actual times of aircraft LANDING, or last radio communication prior to LANDING (when the
crew is leaving company frequency) are recorded in the radar log.
Radar Staffing Schedules
When convective clouds are forecast or present in or upwind of the target area as indicated by any
regional radar (Olds-Didsbury, Carvel, or Strathmore) or by visual observation, the radar is staffed,
regardless of time of day or night. When the Olds-Didsbury radar shows no convective echoes (but
Carvel and/or Strathmore do), and the designated weather-watching meteorologist so chooses, they
may elect to do their observations from their residence, provided: (1) they have reliable internet access
at that location, and (2) they log all observations on the off-site Weather Observation Log provided for
this purpose.
Meteorologist #1 is responsible for morning weather monitoring and forecasting from 9:00 AM local
time through the daily weather briefing.
Meteorologist #2 covers weather monitoring and operations through the afternoon and into the
evening. If operations occur, Meteorologist #1 will return to the operations centre to assist.
Meteorologist #2 is responsible for coordinating overnight weather watch plans with the other
meteorologists.
Meteorologist #3 will assist with evening/nighttime operations, and will be available to monitor
weather during the nighttime hours as needed.
AT ALL TIMES one of the three meteorologists is responsible for general weather watch.
By mutual agreement, and with notification and approval of the project site manager, alternate shifts
and assignments may be occasionally arranged.
4.3 Opportunity Recognition
Identification of Hail Producing Storms
The height of the 45 dBZ contour (a radar echo-intensity level) was a criterion tested in the Swiss hail
suppression program. The Swiss research found that all hailstorms had 45 dBZ contours above the
altitude of the 5C temperature level (Waldvogel et al. 1979). There was a False Alarm Rate (FAR) of
50%, largely because some strong rainstorms also met the criterion. However, it is much 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 hail storms had a maximum radar reflectivity greater than 45 dBZ, higher than the -5C
level (Humphries et al. 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 radar reflectivity (45 dBZ) implies that significant
supercooled liquid water exists at temperatures cold enough for large hail growth.
In Alberta, the TITAN cell identification program is set to track any cell having more than 10 km
3
of 40
dBZ reflectivity, extending above 3 km altitude (MSL). Each such cell tracked by TITAN is then
considered to be a potential hail cell; therefore, this represents our seeding criterion. A storm is a
candidate for immediate seeding 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.
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 potential hail-producing storms at least 20
minutes before the storm cell moves over a town or city within the target zone. For the Alberta project,
the principal targets are the towns and cities within the project area (Table 3). Since 20 minutes 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 supercooled liquid water (and yield positive
results), the 30 minute lead time is generally thought to be advisable.
4.3 Priorities
Cities and towns are protected according to priority, which is determined by the population of each. By
far the largest are Calgary and Red Deer, respectively. A map showing the protected area and adjacent
buffer zones in which seeding is allowed (for effect in the protected area) is Fig. 7, in Section 2.
TABLE 3. List of Protected Cities, By Priority (Population)
Priority City/Town Name
Population
2009/2006
Latitude North
DD.dd
Longitude West
Dd.dd
1 Calgary 1,065,455 51.045 114.063
2 Red Deer 89,891 52.268 113.809
3 Airdrie 28,927 51.288 114.013
4 Okotoks 21,500 50.726 113.975
5 Cochrane 14,653 51.191 114.468
6 Sylvan Lake 11,115 52.311 114.094
7 Lacombe 10,742 52.463 113.737
8 High River 10,716 50.578 113.859
9 Strathmore 10,225 51.041 113.400
10 Chestermere 9,564 51.052 113.816
11 Innisfail 7,316 52.027 113.949
12 Olds 7,248 51.792 114.111
13 Rocky Mountain House 7,231 52.377 114.931
14 Blackfalds 5,610 52.380 113.790
15 Didsbury 4,275 51.666 114.141
16 Turner Valley & Black Diamond 3,808 50.675 114.279
17 Carstairs 2,656 51.562 114.096
18 Crossfield 2,648 51.430 114.027
19 Sundre 2,518 51.797 114.641
20 Penhold 1,961 52.136 113.873
21 Vulcan 1,940 50.397 113.258
22 Irricana 1,243 51.325 113.591
23 Bowden 1,236 51.939 114.030
24 Bentley 1,132 52.465 114.046
25 Eckville 951 52.359 114.362
26 Beiseker 804 51.387 113.523
27 Linden 660 51.595 113.498
28 Acme 656 51.495 113.508
29 Caroline 515 52.094 114.741
30 Cremona 463 51.546 114.495
4.5 Seeding Procedures
Cloud Seeding Methodology
Radar meteorologists are responsible for initiating cloud seeding and patrol flights, alerting air crews of
the presence of developing weather sufficiently in advance that aircraft will be ready for immediate
flight when that time comes, in accordance with Section 4.2, Operational Protocols. The meteorologists
advise the HAILSTOP aircraft when to takeoff, and guide them to the storms of concern. Patrol flights
are often launched before clouds within the target area meet the radar reflectivity seeding criteria,
especially over or near the cities of Calgary and Red Deer. These patrol flights ensure a quicker response
to developing cells. In general, a patrol flight is launched in the event of visual reports of vigorous
towering cumulus clouds, or when radar cell tops exceed 25 kft (7.6 km) height over the higher terrain in
the western part of the operations area, especially on those days when the forecast calls for
thunderstorms.
Launches of additional aircraft are determined by the number and spacing of storms and the flight time
required for each seeding aircraft to reach the desired location and altitude. Overlap of coverage
(airspace) and on-station time are also considered. In general, only one aircraft can work safely at cloud
top for each active thunderstorm complex to avoid collisions, and for air traffic control (ATC)
considerations. If, when multiple storms develop they are sufficiently spaced, more than one aircraft
can work at cloud top simultaneously, but horizontal separation must be enough to ensure there is no
chance of either aircraft impinging on the others assigned airspace. [Cloud top seeding is always done
under instrument flight rules (IFR), so separation is required by regulation as well as for safety.]
When the storm clouds of interest are relatively small (especially common when storms first develop),
there is often room only for one seeding aircraft to operate beneath the rain free cloud base as well.
However, when storms are larger and visibility is good, multiple aircraft can often be used safely at
cloud base on the same complex. This is possible because flight operations below cloud base are usually
conducted under visual flight rules (VFR) and out of cloud, so separation of aircraft can be ensured
visually. To accomplish this all cloud base seeding aircraft must be constantly aware of each others
locations. In addition, a landing light may be turned on for added visibility. Responsibility for safe
separation of aircraft is not a responsibility of the project meteorologists, though they can usually
monitor the relative positions in real-time through the AirLink tracking system. Rather, the flight crews
have this responsibility. Multiple aircraft are most often used on the same storm when the storms
assume a linear structure and develop new growth (towering cumulus) along the leading edge of the
line. The project utilizes four aircraft to provide uninterrupted seeding coverage (at either cloud-base or
cloud-top) and/or to seed up to four storms simultaneously, if required.
Factors that determine which seeding strategy is used (cloud top or cloud base seeding) include: storm
structure, visibility, cloud base height, and/or time necessary for HAILSTOP aircraft to reach seeding
altitude. Cloud base seeding is conducted by flying just below the cloud base within the developing
inflow of growing cumulus congestus (towering cumulus) clouds, or the inflow associated with the new
growth zone in advance of the shelf cloud located on the upshear side of linear multi-cell storms (squall
lines). Care is taken not to seed the strong updrafts of mature storms, for such clouds are too advanced
in their development and hail development, if it has occurred, is too far advanced to be averted.
Cloud top seeding is usually conducted at altitudes where cloud temperatures are between the -5C and
-15C and closer to the former when possible, typically at altitudes of about 18,000 to 20,000 feet msl.
Cloud top seeding is done primarily with small pyrotechnics, comprised of 20 grams of silver iodide
seeding agent, which are ejected into the supercooled updrafts of the developing cloud towers. Each
flare burns for ~37 seconds, while falling about 3,000 ft (0.9 km). Nevertheless, a minimum 5,000 ft
vertical separation (~1.5 km) is always maintained between cloud top and cloud base seeding aircraft
(Fig. 22).
FIGURE 22. A schematic illustration of the seeding altitudes and separations necessary for safe operations at cloud base and
at cloud top. (WMI graphic by Bruce Boe.)
The cloud top seeding aircraft penetrate or skim the tops of developing, supercooled, largely ice-free
(and therefore free of radar echo), cumulus congestus cells as they mature. When multicell storms are
present or when more isolated storms have feeder clouds, the seeding aircraft penetrate or skim the
tops of the developing cumulus towers as they grow up through the -10C flight level. The direction of
flight is determined by the location of any more mature, adjacent cells, which cannot be safely
penetrated.
When the growing cells of interest are embedded within surrounding cloud, and also with most
convective complexes at night, there are no clearly defined feeder turrets visible to the flight crews.
Seeding aircraft can use their on-board weather radars to help position themselves in these cases;
however, aircraft radars are designed for weather avoidance, not for the detection of non-precipitating
clouds, and so see only mature cells - those beyond the growth stage where seeding can be effective.
In these instances, seeding aircraft will skim the storm edge at altitudes between -5C and -10C, near
the region of tightest radar reflectivity gradient.
Seeding is done primarily by ejecting multiple 20-gram flares into cloud elements when updrafts and
liquid water are encountered. A burn-in-place flare may be ignited also, especially when turrets are
closely spaced and seedable cloud volumes are frequently encountered. Nocturnal seeding may also be
performed from below the cloud base altitude when visibility is sufficient.
An idea of what night seeding is like is provided by Fig. 23. Lightning can often help provide illumination
at the cloud base and at cloud top, but such illumination is irregular, very brief, and by nature, flat,
meaning that human eyes struggle to perceive much depth and distance perception. Nevertheless,
lightning does help in conducting nocturnal operations. On occasion, additional illumination may be
provided by moonlight, especially if the upper reaches of the storm anvil do not shadow the developing
turrets. In any case, the seedable clouds are those that have not yet produced precipitation, and
therefore those devoid of radar echoes. For safety reasons flight operations require aircraft to avoid
heavily electrified regions, and also close proximity to known hail and hail aloft, as indicated by the
project radar. Wind shear and terrain clearance pose additional hazards. Though operations after dark
are infrequent in Alberta because of the long summer days and lingering twilight hours, seeding
operations are conducted whenever storms develop, even in the wee hours of the morning. Typically,
this happens only a few times each season.
FIGURE 23. When seeding nocturnal thunderstorms, lightning is a friend. It illuminates, if only sporadically and all too
briefly, many cloud details that otherwise would go unseen. The single lightning flash here has revealed the rain-free cloud
base (near which base seeding aircraft would operate), smaller, developing turrets that might be seedable (if cold enough),
larger, maturing cloud cells that are no doubt too cold and ice-laden (and close to being detectable by radar), and the mature
thunderstorm (behind) that has produced the lightning. (WMI photograph/graphic by Bruce Boe.)
Cessation of Seeding
If the radar reflectivity criteria continue to be met, seeding of all cells still in a position to threaten
damage to towns or cities is to be continued. However, seeding is effective only within cloud updrafts
and in the presence of supercooled cloud water, i.e. the developing stage in the evolution of the
thunderstorm. The mature and dissipating stages of a storm cannot be effectively seeded because
seeding only works by enhancing ice development in clouds that are primarily ice-free, characteristics
which only are manifest in developing cloud turrets. Storm complexes having no new development are
destined for decay. While a few storms simply develop, mature, and decay without initiating secondary
development, those that have the potential to produce hail almost always produce cool outflows that
initiate more new growth adjacent to the mature and dissipating portions of the storm. This new
growth extends storm life and is seedable, so aircraft must operate in some proximity to mature,
electrified clouds and dangerous wind shears, which include violent up- and downdrafts. Safety thus
becomes of paramount importance. The history of aviation is filled with accounts of aircraft destroyed
by thunderstorms, and the potential today is just as real as ever.
Safety of project aircraft and crews is ensured by strict adherence to flight policies that are designed to
keep aircraft from ever entering mature portions of the storms, and from flying into extreme winds, hail,
and lightning.
Strong radar reflectivities can only persist when new cloud development continues; when it doesnt,
decay is inevitable. Thus, when storms maintain their intensities, developing cloud regions must exist,
even though it is sometimes if hard to find them. Such mature storm complexes are seedable only when
the developing clouds are accessible to the seeding aircraft. If they are embedded within the mature
clouds, hidden by decaying clouds, and cannot be approached from below (cloud base), seeding cannot
safely occur. Storm cells being tracked by radar are not seeded if there are no indications of developing
updraft or supercooled liquid water, or when the storm does not threaten a town or city.
Seeding Rates
Silver iodide is dispensed in three ways: (1) a seeding solution can be burned from wing-tip-borne ice
nucleus generators, (2) pyrotechnics can be burned in place, while held to special racks affixed to the
trailing edges of the aircraft wings, and (3) small pyrotechnics can be ignited and ejected into cloud tops
from racks mounted on the aircraft fuselage.
A seeding rate of one 20 gram flare every 5 sec while in supercooled updraft is typically used during
cloud penetrations. 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) or if the storm is particularly intense. Cloud seeding passes in the same region
are immediately warranted if there are visual signs of continued new cloud growth or if the radar
reflectivity gradient of the parent cell remains tight (indicative of continued growth and persistent
updrafts). If not, a 5 to 10 min waiting period may be used between penetrations, to allow the seeding
to take effect and for visual signs of glaciation to appear, or for radar reflectivities to decrease and
gradients to weaken. Such waiting reduces the amount of seeding material used. Calculations show
that the seeding rate of one flare every 5 sec will produce >1300 ice crystals 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
-1
(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
-1
) intervals should provide sufficient nuclei and allow adequate dispersion to effectively deplete
the supercooled liquid water and reduce the growth of hail particles. The use of the 20 gram flares and
a frequent drop rate provides better seeding coverage than using larger flares with greater
time/distance spacing between flare drops. In fact, the above calculations are conservative when one
considers that the centre of the ice crystal plume will have a greater concentration of ice crystals.
For cloud base seeding a seeding rate using two solution-burning generators or one burn-in-place flare is
typically used, dependent on the updraft speed at the cloud base. For an updraft >500 ft min
-1
,
generators and consecutive flares per seeding run are typically used. Cloud seeding runs are repeated
until inflow (updraft area) has diminished or until the storm of concern has passed all urban areas.
Solution-burning ice nucleus generators are used to provide continuous silver iodide seeding if extensive
regions of light or moderate updraft are found at cloud base in advance of the shelf cloud region. Base
seeding is not conducted if only downdrafts are encountered at cloud base, since this would waste
seeding material.
4.6 Seeding Agents
The cloud seeding pyrotechnics used by WMI are exclusively silver iodide formulation flares
manufactured by Ice Crystal Engineering (ICE) of Kindred, North Dakota. The ejectable flares contain 20
grams of seeding material and burn for approximately 37 sec and fall approximately 3000 ft before
burning up. The burn-in-place (BIP) flares contain 150 grams of seeding material, and burn for
approximately 4 min.
Flare Effectiveness
The Cloud Simulation and Aerosol Laboratory (SimLab) at Colorado State University (CSU) has tested the
ice nucleating ability of aerosols produced from cloud seeding flares and solutions for many years
(Garvey 1975, DeMott 1999). [Note: The SimLab is now closed and no longer performs such tests; a new
testing facility to conduct these standardized tests is not yet available.]
FIGURE 24. Yield of ice crystals (corrected) per gram of pyrotechnic
burned, shown as a function of cloud supercooling temperature (T <
0C). Open diamond symbols are for tests 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
. The lack of any
dependence upon cloud liquid water content indicates that the
nuclei thus produced function by the condensation-freezing
mechanism. (Figure from DeMott 1999.)
Arrangements were made with Solution Blend Services, a Calgary-based company, to pre-mix all seeding
solution from reagent grade raw materials provided by WMI. All handling, mixing, storage, and labelling
requirements established by law and regulation were fully satisfied.
The current ICE pyrotechnics were tested at CSU in 1999 as reported by DeMott (1999). Aerosols were
collected and tested at nominal temperatures of -4, -6 and -10C. At least two tests were done at each
temperature, with greater emphasis placed on warmer temperatures. The cloud chamber liquid water
content (LWC) was 1.5 g m
-3
for most tests, but 0.5 g m
-3
for some, enough to confirm the dependence
of nucleation rate upon cloud droplet concentration. 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 Fig. 24 and are tabulated in Table 4.
TABLE 4. Yield (per gram) of the ICE Glaciogenic Pyrotechnic (from DeMott 1999).
Temp
(C)
LWC
(g m
-3
)
Raw Yield (g
-1
AgI)
Corr. Yield (g
-
1
AgI)
Raw Yield (g
-
1
pyro)
Corr. Yield
(g
-1
pyro)
Yield
(per pyro)
-3.8 1.5 3.72x10
11
3.87x10
11
4.01x10
10
4.18x10
10
8.36x10
11
-4.0 1.5 9.42x10
11
9.63x10
11
1.02x10
11
1.04x10
11
2.08x10
12
-4.2 1.5 1.66x10
12
1.70x10
12
1.80x10
11
1.84x10
11
3.67x10
12
-4.3 1.5 2.15x10
12
2.21x10
12
2.32x10
11
2.39x10
11
4.77x10
12
-6.1 1.5 6.01x10
13
6.13x10
13
6.49x10
12
6.62x10
12
1.32x10
14
-6.3 1.5 5.44x10
13
5.56x10
13
5.87x10
12
6.00x10
12
1.20x10
14
-6.4 1.5 6.22x10
13
6.34x10
13
6.72x10
12
6.85x10
12
1.37x10
14
-10.5 1.5 2.81x10
14
2.85x10
14
3.03x10
13
3.07x10
13
6.15x10
14
-10.5 1.5 2.34x10
14
2.37x10
14
2.87x10
13
2.91x10
13
5.81x10
14
-4.2 0.5 1.41x10
12
1.45x10
12
1.53x10
11
1.57x10
11
3.14x10
12
-6.0 0.5 7.42x10
13
7.73x10
13
8.01x10
12
8.34x10
12
1.67x10
14
-10.5 0.5 2.38x10
14
2.41x10
14
2.91x10
13
2.96x10
13
5.92x10
14
Tests were also performed using the method of DeMott et al. (1983) to determine the characteristic
times for effective ice nuclei activation; these are summarized in Fig. 25 and Table 5.
TABLE 5. Activation Rate of Nuclei Produced by ICE Pyrotechnic (from DeMott 1999)
Temp
(C)
LWC
(g m
-3
)
k
(min
-1
)
k
dil
(min
-1
)
k
act
(min
-1
)
T
1/e
(min)
T
90%
(min)
Yield
Correction
-4.0 1.5 1.093 0.023 0.935 0.94 4.32 1.023
-4.2 0.5 0.713 0.019 0.694 1.44 5.71 1.028
-6.3 1.5 1.775 0.038 1.737 0.48 1.12 1.020
-6.0 0.5 0.724 0.028 0.696 1.43 5.21 1.041
-10.5 1.5 3.200 0.045 3.155 0.32 0.73 1.014
-10.5 0.5 2.488 0.040 2.448 0.41 0.94 1.016
FIGURE 25. 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.
(DeMott 1999.)
The primary results of the CSU SimLab tests of the glaciogenic cloud seeding pyrotechnics manufactured
by ICE are summarized as follows (from DeMott 1999):
1. The aerosol particles produced by the new ICE pyrotechnics were highly efficient ice nucleating
aerosols. Yield values were approximately 1x10
12
, 5x10
13
and 3x10
14
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.
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
glaciogenic pyrotechnics can be found on the internet at www.iceflares.com.
4.7 The 2010 Project Season
The 2010 seasonal statistics are tabulated along with all other seasons in Table 6. Each season was
ranked in each of the eleven categories (Days with Seeding, Aircraft Missions, etc.) and then an overall
rank was assigned to each season. These statistics are a bit skewed because the first two seasons were
14 days shorter, beginning on 15 June rather than 1 June, and to a lesser degree because a fourth
aircraft was added to the project in 2008.
TABLE 6. Totals for Each Season in Eleven Project Categories.
Nevertheless, 2010, ranked tied for second- and third-busiest of the fifteen seasons to date, and
certainly was among the most active. This conclusion is independently corroborated by Fig. 21, which
shows new records being established for the numbers of days in one season having observed convective
day categories of +2 (27 days) and +3 (8 days).
The diurnal late-day peak of convective storms in 2010 was little different than in previous seasons (Fig.
26); only the numbers of flights at each hour were different (much increased from the norm). Only
twice did aircraft fly before noon, and just twice more after midnight.
FIGURE 26. The diurnal
distribution of project
takeoffs and landings
during the 2010 season
reflect the usual norm:
peak storm activity
during the afternoon
and evening hours,
with very little action in
the wee hours, until
about late morning.
FIGURE 27. Seeding activities for the first fifteen seasons are summarized. A new record for the number of days (42) during
which seeding was conducted was established, surpassing the previous record of 39 days, set during 2000, which overall
remains the most active season in project history. The average amount of seeding agent (silver iodide, AgI) used per seeding
day and also per each storm complex, is also shown.
FIGURE 28. The number of storms
seeded, total seeding agent used,
and total flight time were all
significantly above the project
average, and sharply higher from
2009. The total number of
missions flown was also
dramatically increased from 2009,
but more typical of the long-term
project average. A new record
maximum was established for
total flight hours flown, but this
very likely would not have been
the case had a fourth aircraft not
been added (in 2008), as all four
aircraft were used on a five busy
days during the 2010 season.
Another revealing statistic is the amount of seeding agent used on a daily basis. In 2009, there were no
days during which 10 kilograms (10,000 grams) or more of seeding agent was used; typically this will
occur 2-3 times per season. By comparison, the 2010 season had ten days during which at least 10 kg of
seeding agent were used (Fig 29). Of these ten days, three saw more than 15 kg used; two of these
(August 8 and August 9) exceeded 20 kg. This usage of seeding agent does not reflect a few storms that
were treated at exceptionally high seeding rates, for the average per storm was 2.2 kg, very much the
long-term project norm (see again Table 6.). This is yet another indication that the season was
exceptionally active. (The distribution of storm tracks by month is shown in Fig. 1 in Section 1.)
FIGURE 29. The total amount of seeding agent used each project day is shown. Each season typically has several days
exceeding 10 kg (10,000 grams); 2010 had ten such days.
Equipment functioned well in 2010, but the season was not without some problems. Perhaps the most
notable of these occurred on 26 June, when the new TITAN computer just configured in 2010 crashed,
seemingly without warning. This was quickly resolved as WMI (for the first season ever) had an older
CPU (as a backup TITAN computer) on hand, and the swap was simple. The system was back up and
running later that same day. However, one part of the TITAN system that could not immediately be
made to function with the older CPU was the overlay of aircraft tracks (obtained through AirLink) on the
TITAN radar display. The track data were available in real-time as always, plotted on the AirLink
computer display in the operations room, just not on TITAN. Operations continued normally, but the
operations director had to refer to two displays, not one, to obtain track information. This was
eventually resolved; it turned out that the new TITAN system does aircraft track positioning based on
aircraft latitude and longitude, whereas the older TITAN software used in previous seasons used position
calculated relative to the radars location. This was changed in the newer TITAN data ingestion process
at season start, but when the new unit failed and the older unit was placed back in service, the change
had not been made in the older system. When this was identified as the source of the problem, the
older CPU was then reconfigured to handle the aircraft positions. The older system was proven when,
on September 2, the newer TITAN CPU again crashed. This time, however, the swap created no
difficulties; the aircraft tracks were available on TITAN, and no problems resulted. Both systems were
completely rebuilt after the conclusion of the 2010 season.
Another difficulty of sorts occurred in early June, when an unusual amount of noise developed in the
radar signal, between the radar and Calgary, to the south. This was not because of a change in the
radar, but rather due to the erection of a new cellular telephone tower near Didsbury. The issue was
resolved by tweaking the radar receiver frequency (not the transmitter) very slightly, which reduced the
interference to background levels.
The final radar issue occurred on the last day of the project, 15 September. The radar itself
malfunctioned in the morning hours on that date, and became inoperative. Diagnosis of the problem
revealed that the ceramic base for a high-voltage tube had cracked, compromising the voltage supplied
to the tube. As no significant weather was forecast for the day and replacement of the base would have
required a part to be expressed from the U.S., the radar was not repaired, and remained inoperative for
the last 14 hours of the project, pending major upgrades prior to the 2011 season.
4.8 Changes and Recommendations for Future Operations
Changes
A number of changes were made prior to and during the 2010 season. These are summarized below.
Weather Alert Radios
To provide another layer of storm detect and awareness, two alarm-equipped weather radios were
purchased, and given to key project personnel. One radio was installed at a crew residence in Red Deer,
and the other in Calgary. A third was owned and operated at the apartment of one of the
meteorologists in Olds. This was done to ensure that no Environment Canada warning would go
unnoticed. However, in spite of the extremely active summer, the first warning actually heard by any
project personnel from any of these radios occurred in September, for a frost warning. There were
many other warnings during the course of the summer, but when the radios sounded their alarms,
personnel were already alerted, and not home. They will be used again in 2011, however.
Lightning Detection
Early in the course of the 2010 season a web site was found that displayed real-time lightning data for
Alberta. This was found to be helpful, for electrification occurs only when cloud updrafts sufficient to
produce separation of charges have developed. The technology used by the site is not state-of-the-
science in terms of precise location of the detected flashes, but the fact that flashes have occurred is
important, and their location at least sufficient to allow us to associate them with the responsible radar
echo, at least when close to the protected area (the Olds radar).
Auxiliary Power
WMI has always maintained a back-up generator to supply power at the operations centre in the event
of commercial power outages. In 2010, the aging generator was replaced by a brand-new unit with
greater output. In so doing, WMI discovered and corrected some deficiencies in the wiring at the
operations centre, which is leased, not owned by WMI. These changes greatly enhanced the ability to
operate without commercial power, and though not needed in 2010, will be at the ready for future
seasons.
Staffing
In 2010, WMI added a full-time on-site project manager to coordinate all aspects of the project and
handle logistical issues. In previous seasons these duties had been handled by one of the project
meteorologists. Having a dedicated manager who was not also responsible for forecasting and/or
operations allowed the meteorological staff to focus on their mission-critical duties, and freed them
from other responsibilities.
Recommendations
Weather Radar
The project weather radar has always been and continues to be a reliable scientific instrument.
However, in the fifteen years since the projects inception technology has improved markedly in many
regards, and the set currently sited in Olds can no longer be considered the best available.
WMI recommends that the radar be upgraded prior to the 2011 season. New radar receivers are
significantly more sensitive, allowing the earlier detection of developing clouds, and in some cases even
non-precipitating clouds. This is not possible with the current set. Improving the sensitivity is just the
first step, however. At only slightly greater cost a Doppler radar can be deployed, which would provide
radial velocity data. This allows the operator to discern motions within the storms, revealing the
unambiguous locations of cloud updrafts and downdrafts, outflow boundaries (which are frequently
responsible for storm genesis), and of course, storm rotation, an indicator of severity, including hail
potential.
Calgary Webcam
Perhaps the weakest link of the entire program is the early detection of storms upwind (to the west) of
Calgary.
The current project weather radar, and indeed, those operated by Environment Canada at Carvel and
Strathmore, and C-band sets capable of detecting only precipitating clouds. Developing convective
(cumulus) clouds are typically visible for perhaps 30 minutes to an hour before the onset of
precipitation, and for at least half of that time exhibit visual indications of organization and growth, e.g.
sharply defined cloud tops (often resembling cauliflower), and flat, dark bases. Coincidentally, such new
clouds are initially small as well, and thus readily detectable by satellite imagery, either.
Though project staff is sited in Calgary (two flight crews), those persons responsibility is being ready to
fly when needed. When not flying, they must be well-rested, for once operations begin they may
continue for many hours. Sky observations from the crews are always welcomed, but are not assured.
There are several webcams in the Calgary area, but few show the sky to the west of the city, and those
that do are not in fixed positions. Thus, WMI believes the project could benefit from the deployment of
a new webcam, dedicated to the full-time surveillance of the foothills immediately west of Calgary, and
displayed full-time at the operations centre. Cost would not be a significant part of the project budget,
but establishing a site with an unobstructed view and power is the challenge. WMI intends to explore
this prior to the 2011 season. If any ASWMS member companies have ideas as to where such a webcam
could be sited, WMI would be pleased to hear from them.
Evaluation
The need for a scientific project evaluation remains. The lack of such an evaluation is an impediment to
the project, as efficacy will remain in doubt to many until an evaluation is completed. The need for
industry-wide loss data would provide very helpful in this regard; however, most companies consider
their data to be propriety, and storm data tend to be lumped together (wind, hail, and water damage).
Dissemination of Project Information
When the project first began (1996), an informational open house was conducted at the operations
centre in Olds. It is time for this to be done again, either at the operations centre, or at another venue
more accessible to the industry; perhaps Calgary.
It is recommended that additional project information seminars be given (perhaps for continuing
education units) as part of the Alberta Insurance Council accreditation program. Such a training course
would be to inform the broader insurance industry about the background, organization, and
methodology of the cloud seeding project, and also about hail itself, so that support for the program can
continue based on current and accurate information. In April 2010 WMI conducted three-hour seminars
in Edmonton, Calgary, Red Deer, and Lethbridge. While well attended, no ASWMS board members were
able to participate.
SECTION 5
NOTIFICATIONS AND REPORTING
5.1 Notice of Intent to Modify Precipitation
Prior to the 2010 season, a formal Notice of Intent to Modify Precipitation was prepared and submitted
to Environment Canada. This notification was submitted in late May to the Science and Technology
Branch offices in Toronto, as indicated below.
Dr. Stewart Cober
Chief, Cloud Physics and Severe Weather Research Section
Science and Technology Branch
Environment Canada
4905 Dufferin Street
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3H 5T4
Stewart.Cober@ec.gc.ca
(416) 739-4618
The content and the format of the notice have been established by Environment Canada.
Initial submittal was made electronically (by e-mail) to Dr. Cober at the address shown above. At ground
school, the chair of the ASWMS Board signed the notice, and a hard copy was subsequently sent via Post
Canada to Dr. Cober.
The most recent copy of the Notice of Intent is incorporated in the project operations manual, and
appears there as an appendix.
After the conclusion of each program, a summary spreadsheet containing the dates of all project
seeding missions, aircraft takeoff and landing times, actual air time (for each aircraft), the flight purpose
(test, patrol, public relations, maintenance, training, or seeding), amount of seeding agent released
(grams), and the number of storms seeded is also sent to Environment Canada.
5.2 Logs and Spreadsheets
A variety of project logs and spreadsheets were also kept, as described in detail in the operations plan.
The primary purpose of these forms and sheets is to document the project activities. When questions
arise, they provide a means through which the decisions, actions, and weather were readily reviewed.
Flight Logs
Pilots kept logs of all flight activities which record when and where the aircraft flew, seeding events, and
of course, the nature of the weather encountered. The flight logs were actually completed (written)
while the flight was ongoing, and then transcribed into an electronic form (an Excel
TM
spreadsheet file)
that was immediately uploaded to the WMI internal project (project personnel access only) web site
where it was reviewed, and accessed by those preparing ongoing weekly project summaries.
Radar and Weather Logs
The project meteorologists kept running logs at the radar operations centre at the olds-Didsbury Airport,
and also when they were away from the operations centre but conducting project business, e.g.,
watching the weather. These logs contain summaries of radar observations, visual observations of the
sky, observations reported by off-site project staff (via telephone and text messaging), and all
operational decisions, from when flight crews were alerted to their launch, direction, recall, and landing.
Weather Spreadsheets
In the course of daily forecast preparation, a variety of atmospheric indices and parameters were noted,
and many of these monitored throughout the day. These included stability indices, temperature and
dew point, winds, sky condition, and so on. A running spreadsheet of daily meteorological statistics was
kept for the entire project, and as such was useful in the preparation of this report, and in seasonal post-
analysis.
Flight Operations Summary
A comprehensive summary spreadsheet was kept by Fargo staff that recorded all flights (for all
purposes), all seeding activities, and the amounts of seeding agent expended. This sheet was included
in the weekly project updates, and also provided the running total for the season.
5.3 Reporting to the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society
After the project concluded, this final annual (seasonal) project report was prepared that contains all of
the information from the weekly summaries, placed in the broader, seasonal perspective. This final
report is prepared in two forms: an executive summary that provides a quick project overview in just a
few pages, and a complete report that summarizes all the project details. This year, the executive
summary is truly a summary. The reader interested in greater detail is therein referred to this full final
report, which highlights successes and identifies areas where improvements can be made, and also
provides complete statistics for the season.
While the board receives a number of hard copies of this report, the primary mode of distribution to the
Society and its members is through downloads, in PDF format, from the secure WMI web site.
5.4 Weekly Operations Summaries
Early each week the ASWMS Board of Directors received via e-mail from WMI a summary for the
preceding week (Sunday through Saturday) that included:
The Alberta Flight Summary Table (spreadsheet, season totals)
Written project summary of activities for each day of the preceding week
For the interested board member, the weekly summaries provide detailed information about all project
programmatic aspects. WMI answered all questions that arose.
5.5 Public and Media Inquiries
While polite inquiries from interested persons within the public as a whole are generally answered by
project managers as time allows, the project is not funded with public monies, and any response is not
mandated. Most often inquiries are borne of curiosity and/or concern, and straightforward answers are
sufficient to satisfy the inquirer. Project field personnel receiving such inquiries do not attempt to
answer them personally, but instead defer them to the project manager, who responds to them as
needed.
Inquiries received via the WMI web site were handled by corporate headquarters in Fargo.
All media (press, radio, television, etc.) inquiries were directed to the program manager in Olds, who in
turn answered them or redirected them to the appropriate person(s) within the company.
The public reporting of the program is accomplished through the post-project summary provided to
Environment Canada offices in Toronto.
SECTION 6
PROJECT SAFETY
6.1 Weather
The nature of the project requires that personnel frequently find themselves in and near convective
storms. By their nature such storms, even those that are not considered severe, are frequently
accompanied by lightning and strong winds. It is therefore worthwhile to remind personnel of these
hazards, and to establish appropriate guidelines. This section appears in the project operations manual
in essentially the same form, and is provided here to underscore to the reader the importance of safety.
Lightning
More weather-related deaths occur from lightning each year than from any other weather
phenomenon, including tornadoes and hurricanes (typhoons). Most persons are not aware of this,
perhaps because lightning generally claims its victims only one or two at a time, and frequently results in
little or no collateral damage that is newsworthy. By contrast, tornadoes and hurricanes leave
considerable debris behind that remind passers-by of the event weeks or months later.
If you are close enough to a thunderstorm to hear thunder, even distant rumbling, you are close enough
to be struck by lightning.
GENERAL LIGHTNING SAFETY RULES
1. PLAN in advance your evacuation and safety measures. When you first see lightning or
hear thunder, activate your emergency plan. Now is the time to go to a building or a
vehicle. Lightning often precedes rain, so don't wait for the rain to begin before suspending
activities.
2. IF OUTDOORS... Avoid water. Avoid the high ground. Avoid open spaces. Avoid all metal
objects including electric wires, fences, machinery, motors, power tools, etc. Unsafe places
include underneath canopies, small picnic or rain shelters, or near trees. Where possible,
find shelter in a substantial building or in a fully enclosed metal vehicle such as a car, truck
or a van with the windows completely shut. If lightning is striking nearby when you are
outside, you should:
A. Crouch down. Put feet together. Place hands over ears to minimize hearing damage
from thunder. Do not lie down.
B. Avoid proximity (minimum of 15 ft.) to other people. If you are with a group of
people, spread out. While this actually slightly increases the chance that someone
might get struck, it tends to prevent multiple casualties, and increases the chances
that someone could help if a person is struck.
3. IF INDOORS... Avoid water; Water pipes conduct electricity. Dont take a bath or shower
or use other plumbing during a storm. Stay away from doors and windows. If you hear
thunder, dont use a corded phone except in an emergency. Cordless phones and cell
phones are safe to use. Take off headsets. Turn off, unplug, and stay away from appliances,
computers, power tools, & TV sets. Lightning may strike exterior electric and phone lines,
inducing dangerous electrical charges to indoor equipment.
4. INJURED PERSONS do not carry an electrical charge and can be handled safely. Apply
First Aid procedures to a lightning victim if you are qualified to do so. Call 911 or send for
help immediately. When someone is struck by lightning, get emergency medical help as
soon as possible. If more than one person is struck by lightning, treat those who are
unconscious first. They are at greatest risk of dying. A person struck by lightning may
appear dead, with no pulse or breath. Often the person can be revived with
cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). There is no danger to anyone helping a person who
has been struck by lightning - no electric charge remains. CPR should be attempted
immediately. Treat those who are injured but conscious next. Common injuries from being
struck by lightning are burns, wounds and fractures.
5. KNOW YOUR EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERS.
Strong Winds
There are normally strong visual clues that a thunderstorm gust front is about to strike, so secure items
that might become airborne before the outflow reaches you. Such winds also tend to move unsecured
equipment such as might be used on the airport ramp, which may damage the equipment or nearby
aircraft. Close windows and doors.
Thunderstorms frequently produce strong, gusty surface winds that can pose a serious hazard to
vehicles, making driving difficult, especially when coupled with blowing dust or heavy precipitation. If
driving, reduce speed. When necessary, pull over while the strongest winds pass.
Hail
If you are driving and encounter large hail, injury may be averted by getting off the roadway, turning the
vehicle into the direction from which the hail seems to be falling, and stopping. Doing so reduces the
impact velocity of the falling stones, significantly reducing the potential for damage. Also, windshields
are two-ply, with a layer of plastic between, and so tend to crack but not shatter, while side and rear
windows are safety glass which does not crack but instead shatters into tiny fragments.
If you are indoors, stay away from windows that might be struck by hail or subjected to strong winds;
they may shatter without warning.
6.2 Aircraft Operations
Significant effort is expended on a continuing basis to ensure that project pilots are well-acquainted with
all hazards related to operations, exceptional (storms) and routine, of their aircraft. This section does
not supplant these efforts but serves to make others aware of the hazards that the pilots are prepared
to deal with.
Lightning
When airborne, lightning is a hazard when the aircraft is near any convective storm that has produced
ice crystals, and is thus capable of generating electric chargeslightning. Lightning strikes to airborne
aircraft are not unusual or particularly dangerous. Recent estimates suggest that aircraft that fly
regularly may be struck perhaps once each year, seldom with any serious damage, though marks may be
left on the aircraft at the entry and exit points of the electrical charge as the lightning passes through.
Since air aircraft fuselage is metal and surrounds the persons inside, it is essentially a Faraday cage,
protecting the passengers and crew the same as does an automobile. (The notion that rubber tires on
automobiles offer significant protection is a myth.) Lightning bolts usually enter the aircraft at one point
and travel through the metal frame, exiting at another. Occasionally an electrical problem may result,
but typically this is popped circuit breakers which can readily be reset. Only rarely does more serious
damage result.
The potential for lightning damage is real, however. Strikes to propellers can result in serious damage to
aircraft engines, and so are to be avoided. Immediate failure of engines suffering propeller strikes is not
common, but post-flight inspections are warranted and in some cases mandated.
In general, aircraft flying at cloud top to seed the developing cloud turrets are at risk from lightning
traveling to the ground from the overhanging cloud anvil above, never from the turret being seeded, as
the growing turrets have not yet produced ice, and so are not yet electrified.
Seeding aircraft operating at cloud base fly near or below the rain-free cloud bases, while most cloud-to-
ground (CG) lightning occurs nearer the rain shafts. Nevertheless, CG lightning does occur from non-
precipitating clouds (that have developed ice/precipitation aloft), and so strikes to aircraft do occur to
base-seeding aircraft.
Lightning is undoubtedly a greater hazard to personnel that may be outside an aircraft on the ramp
before or after a flight, when convective storms are in the area. Major airports have established criteria
for cessation of ramp activities when lightning becomes a hazard, in which cases a ground stop is
declared, and all ramp activities cease, including refueling and baggage handling. Smaller airports have
no such provisions, so project flight crews must exercise caution as indicated in Section 6.1, above.
Wind Shear
The primary danger of wind shear on aircraft occurs during the two most dangerous phases of flight
operations: takeoff and landing. Project pilots are trained to recognize such hazards personally, and not
to rely on others (air traffic controllers, for example) to avoid hazardous wind shear situations.
During flight wind shears pose less danger, and are primarily manifested simply as turbulence. Vertical
shears as top-seeding aircraft fly from updraft to downdraft are expected and routine.
Hail
Hail poses a significant hazard to project aircraft, for by design flight occurs near mature, hail-bearing
storms. Small hail abrades paint. Slightly larger stones can damage softer exposed aircraft surfaces such
as fiberglass radomes on aircraft noses. Larger hail can dent leading edges on the wings and tail, and
very large hail can break windscreens, occasionally penetrating the cockpit!
Because large hail can be ejected from mature cells adjacent to those being seeded, encounters with
damaging hail do sometimes occur, and are probably unavoidable. The greatest hazard exists at cloud
base, where flight operations below the rain-free are near the zone where the largest hail (if it exists)
will fall, along the flank of the very strong updraft of the mesocyclone. It is the nature of very large hail
(the size that can inflict serious aircraft damage) to be rather disperse, i.e., few in number but large in
size, and so such hail is not visible to pilots until it is encountered. The best avoidance comes from
avoiding the strong updraft of the storm mesocyclone.
6.3 Radar
Safety around the project weather radar is largely the concern of the radar technician and the
meteorological staff who work with the technician when maintenance and calibrations are conducted.
Though the peak power transmitted by the weather radar is 250 kilowatts, the duty cycle (the length of
time this power is actually sent) is so short that the average power is only about 40 watts, equivalent to
a modest light bulb. Thus, the radar itself poses no radiation hazard to the public, for being on a tall
tower in a sparsely-populated area, the only way to get close enough to experience a hazard is to be
inside the radome itself.
To ensure that the radar is never turned on when servicing of the pedestal is being conducted, the
transmission is turned off, and the RADIATE button in the transmitter cabinet, located beneath the
pedestal and radome, is covered with a sign that indicates that service is ongoing. Since the transmitter
cannot be turned on from within the operations centre, only at the cabinet, this lock-out, tag-out
procedure ensures the safety of those up in the radome.
The only other hazard of note associated with the radar is the high voltage power supply within the
radar itself, and that also is not accessible to project personnel, only the radar technician.
6.4 Handling of Seeding Agents
Seeding Solution
The seeding solution contains silver iodide, ammonium iodide, sodium perchlorate, paradichloro-
benzene, and acetone. Material safety data sheets for each of these are found in Appendix H-5, as well
instructions for their safe handling. Since the solution is mixed for the project by Solution Blend Services
of Calgary, project personnel need not concern themselves with this process, which is the only step
where one might be exposed to each of the ingredients in their pure state. However, a few words about
the solution itself are warranted.
Because it is acetone-based, it is highly volatile. Fumes present a significant ignition hazard, and so
solution should never be pumped or poured in poorly ventilated environs. The solution is also of very
low viscosity, which means that it splashes exceptionally easily. Splash protection for the eyes and
gloves for the hands are provided, and should be worn whenever working with the solution.
Pyrotechnics
Though classified as explosives, the cloud seeding pyrotechnics (flares) used on the project are not likely
to explode. They are carefully designed and manufactured to burn evenly and consistently. In more
than a decades experience with the product, no explosions have been reported. That being the case,
one must note that the ejectable, 20-gram cartridges used at cloud top are dispensed when an electrical
primer is energized and explodes, simultaneously igniting a match on the end of the flare which in turn
ignites the flare while propelling it downward from its aluminum casing, clear of the aircraft and into the
target cloud. Thus, some of the flares do have an explosive component.
The pyrotechnics are entirely safe to handle, even with bare hands. Though it has been suggested that
excessive static charge could cause flares to fire/ignite on the ground, this has not ever occurred. In
fact, there is no indication that this has ever happened in flight, either, even near electrically-active
storms.
In the extremely unlikely event that a flare should fire/ignite while the aircraft is on the ground, do not
panic. The flares, even when alight, are not explosive. They are, however, a potential source of ignition
for other materials, and so have no place near an aircraft or any flammable materials either in a hangar
or on a ramp.
A flare that fires from a belly rack while on the ground can be safely and gently pushed away from the
aircraft with the toe of a boot or any other non-flammable device (such as the handle of a broom).
Because the flares contain oxidizers they cannot be readily extinguished, and so it is easiest and safest to
allow the flare to burn to termination away from anything flammable. Once cool, any remains can be
disposed of in a normal fashion.
A flare that is accidentally fired while on a wing rack can be detached from the rack and safely removed
after detaching the lead wires and snipping the zip ties that hold it in place. The mounting tube provides
a handle adequate for this purpose.
In both cases, the silver iodide aerosol produced by the combustion is non-toxic and presents no health
risks.
Storage
All flares and seeding agent, with the exception of what is aboard each aircraft, should be stored in the
designated locations at the airports, or in the storage locker maintained for that purpose in Calgary.
SECTION 7
GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS
Definitions are from the Glossary of Meteorology (AMS 2000), where applicable. Glossary entries
related to other entries are shown in italic type.
ABthe province of Alberta, Canada.
accumulation zonehypothetical, relatively small regions within mature updrafts of hailstorms where
supercooled liquid water drops have accumulated, creating a region well-suited to the rapid
development of large hail. Although such zones have been encountered by research aircraft on rare
occasions, their true role, if any, in hail development is uncertain.
AgIsee silver iodide.
AMSAmerican Meteorological Society, 45 Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02108-3693.
anvilthe anvil-shaped cloud that comprises the upper portion of mature cumulonimbus clouds.
ARCAlberta Research Council, http://www.arc.ab.ca/home.asp.
ASWMSAlberta Severe Weather Management Society, the sponsoring entity of the Alberta Hail
Suppression Program.
attenuationin physics, any process in which the flux density (or power, amplitude, intensity,
illuminance, etc.) of a parallel beam of energy decreases with increasing distance from the energy
source; for example, attenuation in the atmosphere, often due mostly to precipitation, reduces the
intensity of the electromagnetic wave (radar signal) along its path from and back to the radar.
Attenuation thus lessens the ability of radar to sense all clouds and precipitation, such that the
depicted information becomes inaccurate or incomplete.
AZused to indicate azimuth, especially in radar manuals. See also elevation (EL).
BIPsee burn-in-place flare.
buffer zonethe area surrounding the protected area in which operations are allowed for affect within
the protected area. See also, operational area.
burn-in-place flarea pyrotechnic device burned in a fixed position, such as the trailing edge of an air-
craft wing. Also BIP. Compare ejectable flare.
CAPPIconstant-altitude PPI, a computer-generated cross section of radar data at a constant altitude.
C-band radara radar system operating at a wavelength of approximately 5 cm.
CCNcloud condensation nuclei. The tiny particles, either liquid or solid, upon which condensation of
water vapor first begins in the atmosphere; necessary for the formation of cloud droplets.
cella convective element (cloud) that, in its life cycle, develops, matures, and dissipates, usually in
about 30 min.
cloud dropleta particle of liquid water from a few micrometers to tens of micrometers in diameter,
formed by condensation of atmospheric water vapor, and suspended in the atmosphere with other
droplets to form a cloud. These liquid water droplets are too small to precipitate.
cloud modelphysical description of cloud processes programmed into a computer to simulate cloud
development and evolution. Useful in understanding the relative importance of the many factors
that influence cloud development, and the only way in which exactly the same cloud can be both
seeded and unseeded.
coalescencein cloud physics, the merging of two water drops into a single larger drop. This occurs
through the collision of two drops, which then unite.
conceptual modela theoretical model, for example of storm and hail development, based upon
current knowledge and scientific concepts. See also cloud model.
cumulonimbusA principal cloud type (genus), exceptionally dense and vertically developed, occurring
either as isolated clouds or as a line or wall of clouds with separated upper portions. These clouds
appear as mountains or huge towers, at least part of the upper portions of which is usually smooth,
fibrous, or striated, and almost flattened as it approached the tropopause. This part often spreads
out into the cloud anvil as a vast plume.
CEA3Official aviation identifier of the Olds-Didsbury Airport, sometimes indicated only as EA3. The
project operations centre is located at the Olds-Didsbury Airport, roughly equidistant between
Calgary and Red Deer.
CIDDconfigurable interactive data display. A companion data display to TITAN that displays the radar
data in its native polar coordinate system, i.e., elevation angle, range, and azimuth.
CYQFOfficial aviation identifier of the Red Deer Regional Airport, sometimes indicated only as YQF.
CYYCOfficial aviation identifier of the Calgary International Airport, sometimes indicated only as YYC.
downdraftsmall scale downward moving air current in a cumulonimbus cloud.
droplet spectrumthe number concentrations and sizes of the droplets within the cloud volume of
interest.
dry growthgrowth of a hailstone or hail embryo in supercooled cloud having a relatively low liquid
water content, such that supercooled cloud droplets or raindrops freeze upon impact, resulting in
accretion that is opaque and porous.
EA3See CEA3.
ECEnvironment Canada, see http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/canada_e.html.
ejectable flarespyrotechnic devices that are ignited and released (ejected) from aircraft. Compare
burn-in-place flare.
EL used to indicate elevation, especially in radar manuals. See also azimuth (AZ).
embryosee hail embryo.
FAAFederal Aviation Administration. The government entity that regulates aircraft operations, safety,
and use of airways in the United States. Analogous entities also exist in most other nations.
flanking linedeveloping convective cells on the flank (side) of a mature thunderstorm.
glaciogenic seedingtreatment of clouds with materials intended to increase and/or initiate the
formation of ice crystals.
GOESGeostationary Operational Environmental Satellite. These are the latest NOAA weather satel-
lites, currently operational over the continental United States.
GPSGlobal Positioning System. A global, multiple-satellite-based navigation positioning system that
provides consistently accurate positions.
graupelwhite, opaque, approximately round (sometimes conical) ice particles having a snow-like
structure, and typically about 2 to 5 mm (0.08 to 0.20 in.) in diameter. Also known as snow pellets,
they form in convective clouds when supercooled water droplets freeze to ice particles upon impact.
hailprecipitation in the form of balls or irregular lumps of ice, always produced by convective clouds,
nearly always by cumulonimbus. By convention, hail has a diameter of 5 mm (0.20 in.) or more.
hail embryosmall ice particles, often graupel or frozen raindrops that, when resident in an updraft of
sufficient supercooled liquid water content, grow into hailstones.
hail pada device made of a relatively soft but non-resilient material, such as Styrofoam, that deforms
when impacted by hailstones. The size and depth of the deformations are used to estimate the
kinetic energy and size of the hailstones. See also UV.
hailstonean individual unit of hail.
hail streaka deposit of hail on the ground. Sometimes used interchangeably with hail swath, a hail
streak also may be a region of greater damage within a hail swath, presumably due to greater sizes
or numbers of hailstones.
HAILSTOPthe identifier accorded Alberta Hail Suppression Project aircraft by NAV Canada air traffic
control.
hail swaththe surface path of hail at the surface. See also hail streak.
hydrometeorany product of condensation or deposition, or condensation and freezing, in the
atmosphere. This includes cloud water or ice of any size, either suspended in the air or
precipitating.
IBCInsurance Bureau of Canada, http://www.ibc.ca/en/index.asp.
ice nucleus (IN)any particle that serves as a nucleus for the formation of ice crystals in the
atmosphere.
IFRInstrument Flight Rules. The FAA regulations pertaining to flight at altitudes of 18,000 ft (5.5 km)
above mean sea level or higher over U.S. airspace, or in any meteorological conditions necessitating
the use of aircraft instrumentation for safe navigation.
INsee ice nucleus.
in situ measurementmeasurements made in place, as within the cloud of interest. Compare remote
sensing.
latent heatthe heat released or absorbed per unit mass by a system in a reversible, isobaric-
isothermal change of phase. More simply, the heat released when water vapor condenses (latent
heat of condensation), or when liquid water drops freeze (latent heat of fusion). In the case of
water droplets freezing upon contact with hail, the latent heat elevates the surface temperature of
the growing hailstone.
loss-cost ratioin insurance, the ratio of loss to the liability, multiplied by 100. For example, a $20 loss
on a policy having an insured liability of $40 would be a loss-cost of 50%.
multicella convective storm system usually composed of a cluster of ordinary convective cells at
various stages in their life cycles.
NaClsee sodium chloride.
NCARNational Center for Atmospheric Research, P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO, 80307-3000.
NEXRADsee WSR-88D.
NOAANational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. The parent
organization of the U.S. National Weather Service, and the federal agency to which all U.S. weather
modification activities must be reported.
nowcastingvery short-term forecasting, from the present to about two hours.
NWSNational Weather Service, the United States public weather forecasting agency. The NWS is a
division of NOAA.
operational areathe area over or within which seeding operations are actually conducted, including
the protected area and usually adjacent areas (buffer zones) beyond the boundaries of the
protected area, where seeding is conducted with the intent of affecting clouds over the target.
PPIplan position indicator, a somewhat antiquated term for the display of radar data obtained by an
approximately horizontal scan of a radar beam at a fixed antenna elevation angle.
protected areathe area for which cloud seeding operations are targeted. See also, operational area,
and buffer zone. Cities for which hail suppression operations are conducted lie within the protected
area.
raindropa drop of water of diameter greater than 0.5 mm (0.20 in.) falling through the atmosphere. In
careful usage, falling drops with diameters lying in the interval 0.2 to 0.5 mm (0.08 to 0.20 in.) are
called drizzle drops rather than raindrops, although this is frequently overlooked.
rawinsonde (or radiosonde)an instrument package that senses and transmits weather information
such as pressure, temperature, and humidity (and designated rawinsonde if tracked electronically to
derive wind data). Rawinsondes are carried aloft by weather balloons twice daily from numerous
sites all over the world; also can be employed by projects to bolster local forecasting efforts.
remote sensingthe remote measurement of properties of interest, as with radar and satellite. Com-
pare in situ measurement.
response timethe time that elapses from identification of a seeding opportunity until the release of
seeding agent actually begins.
seeding agentsagents dispensed by any means in or near a cloud volume that are intended to modify
(seed) the cloud characteristics.
silver iodideAgI, a common glaciogenic seeding agent.
supercellthunderstorms characterized by an intense, quasisteady-state mature updraft. Such storms
account for a large fraction of all tornadoes, and much of the large hail.
supercooled waterwater, still in liquid state, at temperatures lower than 0C (32F). Under ideal
conditions in the free atmosphere, water may exist in a supercooled state to temperatures as low as
-40C (-40F).
terminal velocitythe particular falling speed, for any given object moving through a fluid of specified
physical properties, at which the drag forces and buoyant forces exerted by the fluid on the object
just equal the gravitational force acting on the object. For hydrometeors, it is the greatest fall speed
relative to the surrounding air that a hydrometeor will attain, as determined by the mass of the
particle and frictional drag of the air through which it is falling.
thermala relatively small-scale, rising current of air produced when the atmosphere is heated enough
locally by the earths surface to produce absolute instability in the lowest layers.
TITANThunderstorm Identification, Tracking, Analysis, and Nowcasting. Software for the display and
analysis of weather radar data widely used in operational convective cloud seeding programs.
tropopausethe boundary between the troposphere and the stratosphere, usually characterized by an
abrupt change in lapse rate. Because of the change in lapse rate, the tropopause height limits the
maximum vertical growth of deep moist convection (thunderstorms).
updraftsmall scale upward moving buoyant air current in a cumulonimbus cloud, usually driven by
release of the latent heat of condensation or freezing (fusion).
VILvertically integrated liquid. A radar estimate of the cloud liquid water, from the lowest angle
sampled through cloud top. Used as an indicator of storm intensity or the presence of hail.
wet growthgrowth of a hailstone or hail embryo in supercooled cloud having a liquid water content
such that the release of latent heat of freezing by accreted liquid warms the surface to near 0C
(32F), so that not all of the accreted supercooled liquid immediately freezes upon impact. This
results in ice growth that is often transparent and nearly solid.
wing-tip generatorice nucleus generator mounted at the tips of aircraft wings, or sometimes below
the wings, also usually near the ends.
WMAWeather Modification Association, P.O. Box 26926, Fresno, CA 93729-6926.
WMIWeather Modification, Inc., Fargo, ND. http://www.weathermodification.com.
WMOWorld Meteorological Organization, 7 bis, Avenue de la Paix, CH 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland.
WSR-88D (NEXRAD)the 1988 vintage Doppler weather radar network deployed in the United States
by the National Weather Service during the 1990s.
YQFSee CYQF.
YYCSee CYYC.
SECTION 8
REFERENCES AND REFERENCE MATERIAL
Abshaev, M. T., 1999: Evolution of seeded and non-seeded hailstorms. Proceedings, Seventh WMO
Scientific Conference on Weather Modification. WMP Report No. 31, World Meteorological
Organization, Geneva, 407-410.
Barge, B.L., and F. Bergwall, 1976: Fine scale structure of convective storms associated with hail
production. Proceedings, 2
nd
WMO Scientific Conference on Weather Modification, Boulder, CO,
341-348.
Brimelow, J.C, G.W. Reuter, R. Goodson, and T.W. Krauss, 2006: Spatial Forecasts of Maximum Hail Size
using Prognostic Model Soundings and HAILCAST, Weather and Forecasting, 21, No. 2, 206-219.
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.
Chisholm, A.J., 1970: Alberta hailstorms: A radar study and model. Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University,
Montreal, QC. 287 p.
Chisholm, A.J., and J.H. Renick, 1972: The kinematics of multicell and supercell Alberta hailstorms.
Alberta Hail Studies, 1972, Alberta Research Council Report 72-2. 24-31.
Cooper, W. A., and J. Marwitz, 1980: Winter storms over the San Juan Mountains. Part III: Seeding
potential. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 19, 942-949.
Dennis, A.S., M.A. Schock, A. Koscielski, 1970: Characteristics of hailstorms of Western South Dakota. J.
Applied Meteorology, 9, 127-135.
DeMott, P.J., 1999: Report to the Weather Modification, Incorporated on tests of the ice nucleating
ability of aerosols produced by new formulation pyrotechnics. Department of Atmospheric
Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 10 p.
English, M., 1986: The testing of hail suppression hypotheses by the Alberta Hail Project. Preprints, 10
th
Conf. on Weather Modification, American Meteorological Society. Arlington, VA. 72-76.
Foote, G.B., 1984: The study of hail growth utilizing observed storm conditions. J. Climate Applied
Meteorology, 23, 84-101.
Foote, G.B., 1985: Aspects of cumulonimbus classification relevant to the hail problem. J. Atmospheric
Research, 19, 61-74.
Foote, G.B., and J.C. Fankhauser, 1973: Airflow and moisture budget beneath a northeast Colorado
hailstorm. J. Applied Meteorology, 12, 1330-1353.
Foote, G.B., T.W. Krauss, and V. Makitov, 2005: Hail metrics using conventional radar. Proceedings, 16
th
Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, American Meteorological Society,
Boston, MA.
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. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 18,
1526-1537.
Garvey, D.M., 1975: Testing of cloud seeding materials at the Cloud Simulation and Aerosol Laboratory,
1971-1973. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 14, 883-890.
Grandia, K.L., D.S. Davison and J.H. Renick, 1979: On the dispersion of silver iodide in Alberta hailstorms.
Proceedings: 7th Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, Banff, Alberta,
Canada. American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA. 56-57.
Humphries, R.G., M. English, and J. Renick, 1987: Weather Modification in Alberta. Journal of Weather
Modification, 19, 13-24.
Krauss, T.W., 1981: Precipitation Processes in the New Growth Zone of Alberta Hailstorms. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY. 296 p.
Krauss, T.W., and J.D. Marwitz, 1984: Precipitation processes within an Alberta supercell hailstorm. J.
Atmospheric Sciences, 41, 1025-1034.
Makitov, V., 1999: Organization and main results of the hail suppression program in the northern area
of the province of Mendoza, Argentina. Journal of Weather Modification, 31, 76-86.
Marshall, J.S., and W. McK. Palmer, 1948: The distribution of raindrops with size. J. Meteorology, 5, 165-
166.
Marwitz, J.D., 1972a: The structure and motion of severe hailstorms, Part I: Supercell storms. J. Applied
Marwitz, J.D., 1972b: The structure and motion of severe hailstorms, Part II: Multicell storms. J. Applied
Marwitz, J.D., 1972c: The structure and motion of severe hailstorms, Part III: Severely sheared storms. J.
Applied Meteorology, 11, 189-201.
Marwitz, J.D., 1972d: Precipitation efficiencies of thunderstorms on the High Plains. J. Atmospheric
Research, 6, 367-370.
Rinehart, R.E., 1997: Radar for Meteorologists, 2
nd
Ed. Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University
of North Dakota, Grand Forks. 334 p.
Rudolph, R.C., C.M. Sachiw, and G.T. Riley, 1994: Statistical evaluation of the 1984-1988 seeding
experiment in northern Greece. J. Weather Modification, 26, 53-60.
Smith, P.L., L.R. Johnson, D.L. Priegnitz, B.A. Boe, and P.W. Mielke, 1997: An exploratory analysis of crop-
hail insurance data for evidence of cloud-seeding effects in North Dakota. Journal of Applied
Strong, G.S., 1979: A convective forecast index as an aid in hail suppression evaluation. Proc., 7th
Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, Banff, AB. American
Meteorological Society, Boston, MA. 2pp.
Waldvogel, A., B. Federer, and P. Grimm, 1979: Criteria for the detection of hail cells. Journal of Applied
World Meteorological Organization, 1995: WMO meeting of experts to review the present status of hail
suppression. Golden Gate National Park, South Africa, 6-10 November. WMP Report No. 26,
WMO Technical Document No. 764, R. List, Editor. 39 p.
APPENDIX A
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND SPECIFICATIONS
A.1 Project Contacts List
A.2. Aircraft Specifications
Several types of aircraft are presently utilized on the project. Though all are twin-engine, the engine
type and other performance characteristics make each significantly different from the others. Of the
four HAILSTOP aircraft presently used on the project, two are turboprop (prop-jet) aircraft, and the
other two are powered by turbocharged, reciprocating piston engines. While the turboprop aircraft are
faster and more powerful, they are also more expensive to operate, so the two piston-engine aircraft
are used to operate where less performance is neededat cloud base.
A. Piper Cheyenne II
Primary mission: cloud top seeding
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 takeoff over 50 foot obstruction
1410 feet for takeoff 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
B. Beechcraft King Air C90
Primary mission: cloud-top seeding
Full deicing capabilities
Power Type, Turboprop twin engine PT6A-21 engines
550 hp per engine
208 kts max speed
185 kts recommended cruise
74 kts dirty stall
384 gals fuel capacity
14,200 single engine service ceiling
1500 feet per minute all engine rate of climb
3100 for takeoff over a 50 foot obstruction
2250 feet takeoff roll
1730 feet for landing over 50 foot obstacle
800 foot landing roll
35 ft 6 in length
14 ft 3 in height
50 ft 3 in wingspan
C. Cessna C-340
Primary mission: cloud base seeding
Power Type, Turbocharged piston twin engine
310 hp per engine
280 mph max speed
263 mph rec. cruise
82 mph stall dirty
183 - 203 gals fuel capacity
15,800 feet single engine service ceiling
1650 feet per minute all engine rate of climb
2175 feet for takeoff over 50 foot obstruction
1615 feet for takeoff 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
A.3 Radar Specifications
Radar Hardware
The project weather radar is a C-band (5.4 cm wavelength) set. It is located at the Olds-Didsbury
Airport, at an elevation of 1024 m above sea level. The WMO station identifier is 71359, and the ICAO
airport identifier is CEA3. This set was installed in 2003. This radar is very reliable and performs well. A
copy of the operating license is provided in Appendix H6.
The unit was originally manufactured by Enterprise Electronics Corporation as a WSR-74C model, and
has since been modified to improve performance and provide for digitization and recording of the
measurements. The C-band radar is equipped with a 2.44 m (8.0 ft) diameter circular-parabolic
antenna, which yields a beamwidth of 1.6 degrees. A picture of the radar tower and radome is shown in
Sec. B. The antenna is tower-mounted, and enclosed in a radome to provide safe, all-weather
operation. The radar transmitter is located inside an insulated and air conditioned shed built directly
under the radar tower.
The nominal specifications of the C-band radar are given in Table H12-1. The minimum detectable
signal corresponds to a reflectivity of approximately 10 dBZ at 100 km range, which corresponds to a
rainfall rate
2
of about 0.15 mm h
-1
(~0.01 in h
-1
). An uninterruptable power supply (UPS) is used to
ensure there are no losses of service in the event of a surge or outage in commercial electrical power. A
gasoline-powered generator is used to provide emergency back-up power in the case of a power failure,
and is normally started as a precaution whenever heavy weather threatens. Line power is usually quite
reliable at the airport during the summer, but the generator is started as a precaution when heavy
weather threatens.
The entire auxiliary power supply system, including external generator and wiring, was overhauled
during the summer of 2010. This was done without interference with or interruption of operations.
Radar Software
The radar is controlled by computer, and programmed to scan the full sky repeatedly through a
procedure known as a volume scan. A volume scan is a complete set of full, 360-degree rotations of the
radar antenna, done each at a progressively higher elevation angle. In a series of 18 steps, the radar is
able to scan the atmosphere from the surface all the way up to the tops of all but thunderstorms that
are located directly overhead. Each complete volume requires approximately five minutes.
The base (lowest) elevation scan is set to 0.8 degrees elevation in order reduce the amount of ground
clutter (unwanted reflections from surface objects, not weather), yet still provides a good view of the
low-level precipitation at more distant ranges, especially over Calgary and Red Deer.
The data acquisition computer sends the radar data, still in polar coordinates (azimuth, elevation, and
range) to the TITAN computer via a local area network, where the data are transformed to Cartesian
coordinates (x, east-west; y, north-south; and z, altitude) by the TITAN computer, which records a
permanent archive of all of the scans.
2
Assuming a relationship between radar reflectivity, Z, and rainfall rate, R, of Z = 200 R
1.6
, as reported by Marshall
and Palmer (1948).
The primary radar display and control is achieved through the Thunderstorm Identification, Tracking,
Analysis, and Nowcasting (TITAN) acquisition and processing software. The TITAN software displays
number of storm and hail parameters that aid in hailstorm identification, and improve the guidance of
aircraft to hail growth regions of storms. Plan view TITAN images are sent to the WMI web server at
approximately 5 minute intervals. Operating in tandem with TITAN was the Configurable Interactive
Data Display (CIDD) radar processing system, set to display a continuous animated 1-hour movie loop of
the higher resolution polar coordinate radar data, superimposed on a map of project area terrain.
Examples of the TITAN and CIDD displays are given in Sec. B.
The polar data are stored and displayed on the CIDD computer. All of the TITAN volume-scan radar data
are backed up and hard-drive and archived off-site. Composite reflectivity image files in gif-format were
created in real-time for each volume scan (one every five minutes), and posted to the internet. These
were also archived.
Calibrations
The quantitative use of weather radar requires that various parameters of the system be regularly
measured, and the set itself, 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. To ensure accurate
radar reflectivities and correct antenna alignment (range, azimuth and elevation), calibration and
alignment checks are regularly performed.
Table H12-1. C-Band Radar Specifications
PARAMETER VALUE UNITS
Pulse Width 0.000003 sec
Pulse Repetition Frequency (PRF) 256 sec
-1
Frequency 5.55
MHz (10
9
cycles
per sec)
Wavelength = Speed of Light / Frequency 5.41 cm (C-band)
Nominal Beam Width 1.6 degrees
Duty cycle = Pulse Width * PRF -31.15 dimensionless
Minimum detectable signal -107 dB
Nominal Radar Constant for range (in nmi,
RDAS-TITAN convention)
-160.96 dB
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 p
r
r
2
where z is the equivalent radar reflectivity factor, C a constant that describes the characteristics of each
specific radar set, p
r
the power received (echoed back) from the clouds and precipitation, and r the
range of the target from the radar.
Thus, calculating radar reflectivity factor z is simply a matter of getting the power from a target of
known range (times a constant). The WR-100 parameters and standard calibration values are shown in
Table H12-1, above.
The output power of the transmitter is measured regularly. The RDAS calibration curve is checked for
accuracy at the start, mid-season, and again at the end of the season. The calibrations typically show a
change of less than 1 dB between the early calibration and the calibration at the end of season, for the
radar reflectivity range between 20 and 50 dBZ. Such minor changes are expected, and do not affect the
identification and tracking of hail-producing storms.
Antenna alignment is also checked by pointing the antenna at the sun. The position is then cross-
referenced to the known position of the sun at that exact time. The pointing accuracy of the system is
also verified numerous times by confirming the position of the project aircraft relative to the positions
of isolated echoing storms.
A.4 Project Operations Forms
Understanding Project Forms
A variety of forms are used in the course of daily project operations. In general, these either pertain to
meteorology or aviation. This appendix contains examples of each of these forms, which for the most
part are self-explanatory, with the possible exception of acronyms and an occasional technical terms
(which can be found in the Glossary of Terms and Acronyms).
To aid the lay-person in their understanding, each form is herein accompanied by a brief explanation of
the forms content and meaning.
Aircraft Operations Forms
Flight Forms (logs) are completed whenever a project aircraft flies any project mission, even to
test equipment, regardless of whether any seeding was conducted.
Hobbs Sheets contain a running summary of each aircrafts flight operations for each season.
Seeding Agent Inventories are completed weekly to track the expenditure of seeding agents.
Aircraft Maintenance Authorization to be completed prior to all maintenance work by non-WMI
personnel.
Meteorologists Forms
Radar Logs are completed more-or-less continuously, whenever meteorological observations
are recorded at the radar operations centre. The project decision record (when aircraft are
placed on standby, launched, begin and stop seeding, and recalled) is contained on these forms.
Off-Site Weather Observation Logs are used by project meteorologists when they are not at the
Operations Centre, to allow off-site observations to be made a part of the project record.
The Daily Forecast Sheet is completed each morning by the forecasting meteorologist, and is
distributed electronically to all project field and management personnel prior to the daily
weather briefing. The forecast thus provided provides the first idea of what kind of weather
should be expected each day.
The Daily Meteorological Parameters Form is really just a running seasonal tabulation of various
significant meteorological parameters, but provides an overview of each seasons
meteorological character.
WMI Cloud Seeding Flight Log (preceding page)
Explanation
Time and date are given in UTC, Universal Time Coordinates. In the summer, in Alberta, this is six hours
ahead of local daylight saving time. Thus, to convert to local time it is necessary to subtract six hours.
Position of the aircraft is given in terms of aircraft latitude and longitude, as determined by GPS (global
positioning system) equipment.
Altitude is given in feet above mean sea level.
Generators indicates the times that wing-tip borne, solution-burning, ice nuclei are turned either ON or
OFF.
TOTAL Generator Time (lower left corner) is the combined Generator total time, i.e. left generator +
right generator burn times. If only one generator burner was used during the flight, then only that time
is recorded as TOTAL Time.
Ejectable Flares are ignited and dropped from the aircraft when seeding developing cloud turrets from
above. Each ejectable contains 20 grams of seeding agent, and burns for about 37 seconds while
falling no more than 4,000 feet (in the absence of updraft, less when updraft is present). In the example
form shown the aircraft was seeding at cloud base, and therefore did not use any ejectable flares.
BIP Flares are flares that are Burned In Place, while affixed in racks mounted to the trailing edge of each
wing. Each BIP contains 150 grams of seeding agent, and once lit (at the time indicated on the form)
burns for about four minutes.
Hobbs ON and OFF times indicates the Air Frame/Engine hours (hh.hh) from takeoff to landing. Hobbs
meter readings must be recorded prior to take off and after landing. The Hobbs time is used for time
critical Aircraft maintenance items.
The Remarks and Observations column contains the flight crews notes and observations throughout
each flight. Such remarks typically pertain to storm development or movement, seeding conditions, or
aircraft performance.
A block at the lower right-hand corner of the form contains a mission summary, written immediately
after the completion of each flight. This is not a technical description of the operations, but an overview
of what actions were taken during the flight.
Flare counts and all recorded A/C hour readings must match exactly between the various Project forms,
Hobbs sheet, Flight Logs and Met Logs.
Alberta Hail Suppression Project Hobbs Sheet (preceding page)
Explanation
Time and date is given in UTC, Universal Time Coordinates. In the summer, in Alberta, this is six hours
Departure and destination codes are (most commonly): YQF Red Deer, EA3 Olds/Didsbury Airport,
YYC Calgary, and FAR Fargo, North Dakota.
The flight categories and flight type are:
SEED Seeding of convective clouds having the potential to produce hail was conducted.
PAT Patrol flights, initiated because developing clouds were thought to have the potential to
produce hail. On patrol flights, the clouds of interest did not develop to the point where hail
was thought possible, so no seeding was conducted.
MX Maintenance flights, conducted to check the performance of the aircraft or of seeding
equipment. These flights are conducted at WMI expense.
FER There are ferry flights to relocate the aircraft from one airport to another. Such flights
typically occur at the beginning of the season when the aircraft are initially positioned at their
base of operations, or during the season when the project meteorologists feel that a heightened
risk of severe weather in one portion of the target area warrants the concentration of aircraft in
the north (Red Deer) or south (Calgary) end of the target.
PR Public relations or publicity flights, mostly done to temporarily move project aircraft to
the Olds-Didsbury Airport when participating insurance companies have scheduled tours of the
operations centre and aircraft for groups of their employees.
CUR Flights made to maintain currency of the pilots, required by regulations. Such flights
are occasionally conducted when extended periods inactive weather have resulted in a lack of
flight operations.
TR - Training flights, conducted for the purpose of training staff in Cloud Seeding techniques or
Aircraft specific training.
Crew indicates the initials of the flight crew of the specified aircraft for each particular flight.
BIP Flares are flares that are Burned In Place, while affixed in racks mounted to the trailing edge of each
wing. Each BIP contains 150 grams of seeding agent.
Ejectable Flares are ignited and dropped from the aircraft when seeding developing cloud turrets from
above. Each ejectable contains 20 grams of seeding agent.
Solution Used indicates how many gallons of seeding solution were burned in the wing-tip ice nucleus
generators on each flight. Only the Cessna 340 aircraft are so equipped, so for the top seeding
turboprop aircraft (King Air C-90 and Cheyenne II) this column will be blank. One gallon equals 3.7854
litres.
WMI Chemical Inventory Sheet (preceding page)
Explanation
AgI Burn-in-place 150g refers to the BIP flares, which contain 150 grams of seeding agent.
Ejectable 20 g refers to the ejectable flares used for top-seeding, each of which contains 20 grams of
seeding agent.
The formulations of the Ejectable and BIP flares are identical, only the use differs.
Duds refers to any flares on hand (in the inventory) that are known to be unusable.
Locations shown are as follows: CYQF Red Deer, CYYC Calgary.
The amount of mixed acetone refers to the seeding solution used in the wing-tip ice nucleus generators,
and is given in gallons. One gallon = 3.7854 litres.
The name of the person preparing the inventory and date appear on the form, to indicate to those
monitoring the availability of seeding agent for the project where any questions should be directed.
This form is completed at least weekly (SUNDAY to SATURDAY) throughout the project period.
The purpose of this sheet is to show the weekly Flares / Chemical usage, Transfer of Flares/Chemical
between locations and the Restocking of Flares/Chemical. The Sheet needs to track ALL Flare/Chemical
activity thru the Sunday to Saturday time period.
WMI Radar Log (preceding page)
Explanation
Time and date are given in UTC, Universal Time Coordinates. In the summer, in Alberta, this is six hours
Complex Number and Cell Number are identifiers assigned to specific storm complexes and individual
cells by the TITAN radar-processing and display software.
AZ is the azimuth, in degrees magnetic, of the observed radar echo from the radar.
RANGE is the distance, in nautical miles, of the observed radar echo from the radar. One nautical mile
equals 1.85 km.
Z
max
is the maximum observed radar reflectivity, in units of dBZ, of the observed radar echo. It is
important to note that dBZ = 10 log Z, where Z is the radar reflectivity in units of mm
6
m
-3
. This means
that interpreting the intensity of radar echoes, one must understand that for each increase of 10 dBZ,
the echo is ten times stronger. Therefore, a 20 dBZ echo is ten times stronger than a 10 dBZ echo, and a
30 dBZ echo is ten times stronger than a 20 dBZ echo. This means that a 30 dBZ echo is ten times ten
(100) times stronger than a 10 dBZ echo, and so it goes. Thus, thunderstorm echoes, which tend to be in
the 40 to 60 dBZ range, are far more intense than rain showers, but themselves vary greatly in intensity.
HEIGHT Z
max
is the height in kilometers of the maximum reflectivity, above mean sea level. In general,
the higher the maximum reflectivity, the greater the possibility of hail.
TOP HEIGHT is the altitude of the radar-observed cloud top, in km, above mean seas level. The higher
the observed cloud top, the more intense the storm.
SPEED is simply the radar-deduced speed of the echo relative to the ground, in kilometers per hour.
Maximum VIL is the radar-observed maximum value of vertically-integrated liquid (VIL) within the cell.
The Remarks, Action, Decision column contains additional meteorological notes as well as project
operations decisions, e.g., when aircraft are placed on standby, launched, begin or stop seeding, etc.
The Carvel Radar and Strathmore Radar columns are used only when the project radar is echo-free
(often noted as PPINE, which stands for Plan Position Indicator: No Echoes). When there are no
convective radar echoes present on the project radar, the Environment Canada radars sited at Carvel
and Strathmore, well north and south of the project radar, respectively, are monitored for the presence
of more distant storms.
The Seed? column is used simply to indicate whether or not the radar echo observed (on that line of
the form) has been seeded.
WMI Weather Observation Log, Offsite Use (preceding page)
Explanation
This form is used to record observations made by project meteorologists when they are not at the
operations centre. Such observations may include a visual record of clouds from the location specified,
data from the internet, information from telephone conversations, and any other useful information
that the observer feels is worthwhile to report.
Time and date are again given in UTC, Universal Time Coordinates. In the summer, in Alberta, this is six
hours ahead of local daylight saving time. Thus, to convert to local time it is necessary to subtract six
hours.
The Location from which observation was made specifies the observers vantage point; especially
important for visual sky observations.
The Visual and/or Internet observation column contains the meat of the observation itself.
The Olds Radar, Carvel Radar, and Strathmore Radar columns may contain short notations about any
echoes observed (via the Internet) by these radars.
These forms are regularly collected at the operations centre and comprise a part of the formal project
observational record.
Alberta Hail Suppression Project Daily Forecast (preceding page)
Explanation
This form is used each day to convey the meteorologists impressions of the current weather pattern
and the likelihood of deep convection, e.g. thunderstorms and hail. Any times are given in UTC,
Universal Time Coordinates. In the summer, in Alberta, this is six hours ahead of local daylight saving
time. Forecasts are issued daily at around 11:30 AM, local time. A telephone conference call then
follows at noon.
The SATELLITE MAP AND INTERPRETATION panel contains a hand-drawn composite map of the various
factors thought relevant to that days weather. Positions of fronts, highs and lows, jet stream winds,
and vorticity maxima, are typically depicted.
The OPERATIONAL INFORMATION FORECAST panel contains key parameters (that also get incorporated
into the daily meteorological statistics. The CDC is the Convective Day Category, explained in detail in
Section C, Operations. The lower the number, the smaller is the probability of operations. Large
positive number (CDC of +2 or greater) usually prove to be the days with stronger thunderstorms, and
therefore hail potential. Other parameters in this panel are largely self-explanatory. The T
conv
is the
convective temperature, that is, the surface temperature at which convective cloud development will
begin. Temperatures are given in degrees centigrade. Forecast cell and storm motions are given as
direction (0 through 360 degrees, 0 = north, 90 = east, 180 = south, 270 = west), and speed, in nautical
miles per hour (knots). One knot equals 1.85 km per hour. Thus, 260/15 means motion from 260
(slightly south of west) toward the east, or just slightly north of east, at a speed of 15 knots (28 km per
hour).
The SOUNDINGS panel contains information upper atmosphere information from recent numerical
model runs. The various stability indices and CAPE cited are defined in Appendix H4. Wind barbs are
drawn to illustrate wind speed and direction aloft at various pressure levels. Approximate heights of the
pressure levels are as follows: 850 mb (millibars or hectopascals) is about 5,000 ft msl (mean sea level),
700 mb about 10,000 ft, 500 mb about 18,000 feet, and 250 mb about 32,000 ft. Speeds are denoted by
summing barbs and flags; a flag denotes 50 knots, a full barb 10 knots, and a half barb 5 knots.
The SYNOPSIS and FORECAST panels contain a worded version of the situation and expected weather,
written by the duty forecaster, who begins their analysis effort early each morning.
The ACTUAL WX OBSERVED panel is reserved for completion the following day, for forecast verification
purposes. Forecasts that do not verify (the ones that are not exactly right) are later examined to
identify, if possible, ways in which they might be improved. The two panels below this panel contain
lists of weather features that are either checked (if present) or crossed off (if absent), to aid the
forecaster in their thinking about days activity.
The bottom of the form lists the official abbreviations for sky conditions and weather observations
endorsed by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and commonly used in North America.
Such abbreviations commonly appear in the SYNOPSIS and FORECAST panels.
A.5 Stability Indices
Stability and Moisture
Meteorologists employ a variety of indices to aid in the assessment of atmospheric instability, which is
determined by the vertical temperature and humidity profiles. Those that appear on the daily forecast
sheet are explained below. In these indices, altitude is defined by the heights of certain standard
pressure levels, usually expressed in millibars (mb) or hecto-Pascals (hPa). [Note: 1 mb = 1 hPa.] The
standard atmospheric pressure at sea level is 1013.25 mb (or hPa). The 850 mb level is typically about
5,000 ft (1.5 km) above mean sea level, and the 500 mb level somewhere around 18,000 ft (5.5 km).
SHOWALTER INDEX
SI = T
500
- Tp
500
T
500
is the temperature at the 500 mb level, and Tp
500
is the temperature of an air parcel lifted dry-
adiabatically from the 850 mb level to its condensation level, and then moist-adiabatically to 500 mb.
The Showalter Index is not influenced by surface conditions and is, therefore, a useful index for
predicting elevated nocturnal convection. Showalter Index values less than +3 indicate possible showers
or thunderstorms, while values less than -2 indicate possible severe convective activity. Thunderstorms
are unlikely with the SI greater than 3.
LIFTED INDEX
LI = T
500
- Tp
500
Similar to the Showalter Index, but lifting of the surface parcel begins from the intersection of the mean
mixing ratio of the lowest 3000 ft (900 m) and the dry adiabat associated with the predicted afternoon
high temperature. The lower the value, the better the chance for thunderstorms and the greater the
threat for severe weather. Lifted Index values greater than +1 indicate a stable atmosphere. Note that
the Lifted Index differs from the Showalter Index by the initial location of the lifted parcel. The Lifted
Index is influenced by surface conditions, and is, therefore, less useful when the boundary layer is
decoupled from the upper atmosphere.
TOTAL TOTALS INDEX
TT = T
850
+ Td
850
- 2T
500
The Total Totals Index is actually a combination of the vertical totals, VT = T
850
- T
500
, and the cross totals,
CT = Td
850
- T
500
, so that the sum of the two products is the Total Totals. TT values less than 50 typically
indicate weak thunderstorm activity while values above 55 typically correspond with severe
thunderstorm development. [Note: Td
850
is the dew point temperature at the 850 mb level.]
CAPE
CONVECTIVE AVAILABLE POTENTIAL ENERGY
The CAPE is the maximum energy available to an ascending parcel, according to parcel theory. On a
Skew-T (thermodynamic) diagram this is called positive area, and can be seen as the region between the
lifted parcel process curve and the environmental sounding, from the parcel's level of free convection to
its level of neutral buoyancy. CAPE values less than 500 J/Kg are generally considered weak instability.
Values from 500-1000J/Kg are moderate instability, while values greater than 1000 J/Kg are generally
very unstable and often result in severe weather.
PRECIPITABLE WATER
The total atmospheric water vapor contained in a vertical column of unit cross-sectional area extending
between any two specified levels, commonly expressed in terms of the height to which that water
substance would stand if completely condensed and collected in a vessel of the same unit cross section.
In actual rainstorms, particularly thunderstorms, amounts of rain very often exceed the total
precipitable water vapor of the overlying atmosphere. This results from the action of convergence that
brings into the rainstorm the water vapor from a surrounding area that is often quite large.
Nevertheless, there is general correlation between precipitation amounts in given storms and the
precipitable water vapor of the air masses involved in those storms.
APPENDIX B
DAILY OPERATIONS SUMMARY
ALBERTA HAIL SUPPRESSION PROJECT 2010
DAILY SUMMARY REPORTS
Date 2010 Weather Activities Summary
June 01,
Tuesday
Main upper level jet streak well to the south of the project
area. A ridge axis to the NE of the project area with a
trough undercutting the ridge in central AB. The
atmosphere was slightly unstable along the foothills and
the southern project area.
Weak thundershowers developed over the foothills during
the afternoon. One thundershower moved into the SW
corner of the project area in the late afternoon before
diminishing.
37 max dBZ.
Tmax YC = 13.0C and no rain.
Tmax QF = 15.0C and no rain.
Tmax Radar = 13.2C and no rain.
HS2 performed a training flight during the
afternoon and test fired 1 BIP.
HS4 flew two training flights during the late
evening around QF.
Flight Summary
HS2: 2255Z (06/01)-0015Z (06/02); 1 BIP.
HS4: 0400-0451Z (06/02); no seeding.
HS4: 0452-0528Z (06/02); no seeding.
June 02,
Wednesday
Upper jet well to the south of the area. Moderate
moisture advection late in the day. Multiple weak short
waves during the afternoon and then a stronger vortmax
after dawn. Weak afternoon instability. Surface low
developing during the late night hours over northern AB.
Weak, shallow convection occurred in the afternoon/
evening hours. There were no hail threats. More
widespread stratiform rain developed after dawn.
42 max dBZ
Tmax QF =20.4 C and no rain.
HS2 performed a test flight to the Cremona
area.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1835-1919Z; 1 EJ.
June 03,
Thursday
Upper level jet far south of the area. A mid-level low
pressure system was along the AB and SK border, with a
lobe of vorticity associated with the low. At the surface, a
low existed below the upper level low. A surface trof
extended across AB and SK. The atmosphere was
stable.
Stratus rain occurred all morning. During the late
afternoon hours the rain became more convective in
nature. There was no hail threat, and the skies were
quiet overnight.
40 max dBZ
Tmax YC = 16.4C and 4mm.
Tmax QF = 16.3C and 3mm.
Tmax Radar = 15.6C and 2.8mm.
No aircraft operations.
June 04,
Friday
Upper jet well to the south again. Dry low levels with dew
points near 1C. Weak low level instability, but warm and
stable upper levels. Surface low near Idaho helped to
push moisture up into the region during the evening and
overnight. Weak overnight vorticity advection as well.
HS 3 performed a maintenance flight west of
Red Deer and burned 1 BIP and 1 EJ.
Flight Summary
HS3: 1844-1923Z; 1BIP and 1EJ.
Afternoon fair weather cumulus with overcast and broken
thin midlevel stratus clouds until evening. No convective
cells on radar. Virga and light rain showers were present
in the late evening and overnight hours.
20 max dBZ
Tmax QF = 16.7C and no rain
Tmax Radar = 15.7C and a trace of rain.
June 05,
Saturday
Unperturbed jet well to the south and weak ridging at
500mb. A fair amount of surface moisture occurred all
day with dew points around 5-6C during the morning.
The 400-600mb level cooled the previous night, which
allowed for a deeper level of convection. Terrible shear
existed, so none of the cells were organized. Lightning
was observed during the morning and afternoon hours.
Thunderstorms with moderate rain were observed during
the late afternoon hours. These storms produced quite a
bit of lightning, but there were no hail threats. The
thunderstorms were limited to pop up convection because
of the poor shear, and the skies cleared around 00z.
42 max dBZ
Tmax YC = 17.8C and 1.2mm.
HS 1 flew a patrol flight west-northwest of
Calgary and burned 1 BIP.
Flight Summary
HS1: 1752-2002Z; 1 BIP.
June 06,
Sunday
Upper jet to the south. High pressure and weak ridge
over southern half of the target area. Weak instability
below 25kft with no cap. Surface temperatures were
higher than previous day.
The area saw light isolated convective showers in the
afternoon, mostly virga. After dawn, there were stratus
rain showers with no lightning.
32 Max dBZ
HS1 performed a maintenance flight during the
early afternoon hours.
Flight Summary
HS1: 1828-1915Z; 1EJ.
June 07,
Monday
Stratiform rain and overcast conditions over the northern
half of the target area. A vorticity lobe over the
northeastern portion of the target area. Cold air aloft
allowed for tops to reach ~30kft.
Stratiform rain showers occurred north of Calgary. The
Calgary area and areas to the south saw short-lived
thunderstorms. Thunderstorm development ended
around 00z.
47 Max dBZ
Tmax YC = 16.2C and a trace of rain.
Tmax QF = 16.2C and 23.0mm.
HS2 was launched at 19:24Z to patrol an area
SW of Calgary. HS2 was airborne at 19:42Z.
At 21:35Z HS2 started seeding a developing
cell S of Cochrane. At 22:14Z HS2 stopped
seeding and was redirected to a new target S
of Calgary. At 22:27Z HS2 started seeding the
Southern cell of the line orientated from the N
to the S. HS2 stopped seeding at 22:59Z and
RTB.
HS1 was launched at 22:36Z to patrol the area
S of Calgary. HS1 started patrolling the area
over High River at 23:12Z. At 23:35Z HSI was
redirected to Cochrane area. At 23:57Z HS1
stopped patrolling and RTB.
Flight Summary
HS2: 19272316Z; 11 BIP, 50 min acetone
generator time; #1 S of Cochrane, #2 W of
Okotoks.
HS1: 2243Z (06/07)0023Z (06/08); no
seeding, patrol S and W of Calgary.
June 08,
Tuesday
Jet continued to be over the northern US. Upper levels
cooled slightly throughout the day providing weak
instability. No short waves passed over the area. At the
surface, a stationary front was over the northern part of
the project area.
Thunderstorms began to build over the mountains during
the afternoon hours. Some of these cells moved over the
project area. The project area north of the radar saw rain
showers. The HS2 pilots reported that one cell west of
Didsbury produced hail. The nighttime hours saw light
rain showers.
52 Max dBZ
HS2 was launched at 22:44Z to patrol area SW
of Calgary. HS2 was airborne at 22:53Z. At
23:03Z HS2 started patrolling area NW of
Okotoks. At 23:56Z HS2 was redirected N of
Cochrane. HS2 RTB 00:18Z(06/09).
HS2 was launched a second time at 01:48Z
(06/09) to patrol area W of Didsbury. At 02:06Z
HS2 was airborne. At 02:18Z HS2 started
seeding a storm SW of Didsbury. At 03:09Z
HS2 stopped seeding and RTB.
Flight Summary
HS2: 2246Z (06/08)0030Z(06/09), no seeding.
HS2: 0153Z (06/09)0336Z(06/09), 8 BIP, 100
min acetone generator time.
June 09,
Wednesday
An upper level jet existed over the southern AB border. A
mid-level low made its way over the project area. Lobes
of vorticity moved through the region. The atmosphere
was convectively stable.
Stratiform rain showers fell across the project area for
most of the day. The rain showers were strongest during
the late afternoon and evening hours. The heaviest rain
fell around the Red Deer area.
37 Max dBZ
June 10,
Thursday
Upper level jet moved east out of the region, and a mid-
level low continued to influence the target area. Weak
vorticity flowed around the low. A surface high pressure
system formed over southern Alberta during the evening
and nighttime hours.
The area continued to see stratiform rain showers during
the morning and afternoon hours. The rain showers
became more scattered during the evening and overnight.
35 Max dBZ
June 11,
Friday
A weak upper level jet was present over the
Alberta/Saskatchewan border. At the mid-levels, a short
wave trough moved southeastward along the Rocky
Mountains. At the surface, a trough was in place along
the Rocky Mountains.
Scattered, convective SHRA occurred during the
afternoon hours. The skies then were mostly clear from
evening through morning.
HS2 performed a maintenance flight during the
afternoon hours.
Flight Summary
HS2: 2146-2220Z; no seeding.
36 Max dBZ
June 12,
Saturday
A weak north-south oriented jet was in place over
Saskatchewan. The main feature of the day was an
upper level ridge over Alberta. No short waves moved
over the area. The atmosphere remained very stable
throughout the day.
Skies were clear with a few evening cirrus clouds
observed.
Tmax YC = 22C and no rain.
June 13,
Sunday
High-pressure ridge moving to the East with axis located
over SK. Low-pressure trough approached the AB
province from the West. Surface Low-pressure center
had formed over the project area. Cold front approached
the project area from the NW. The atmosphere was
unstable and humid.
Convective clouds developed over the project area during
the night and early in the morning. Isolated rain showers
were observed over the Rock Mountain (RM) and Olds
areas. Some lightning strikes were indicated NE of RM.
26 Max dBZ
Tmax YC = 26.1 C and no rain.
Tmax QF = 26.6 C and no rain.
Tmax Radar = 25.9 C and trace of rain.
June 14,
Monday
Low-pressure trough approached AB from the West with
axis located over BC. Surface Low-pressure center was
located over the Southern border of AB. Warm front was
located over the project area. The atmosphere was
slightly unstable and humid.
Widespread stratus rain moved through the central
project area in the afternoon through overnight hours with
a few weak shallow embedded convective cells that
contained lightning. Overnight, bases dropped to below
1kft AGL.
37 Max dBZ
Tmax QF = 16.4 C and 2.4 mm of rain.
Tmax Radar = 16.7 C and 11mm of rain.
June 15,
Tuesday
A high level Low-pressure center formed over the
Southern border of BC. A low-pressure trough
approached AB from the west. Surface Low-pressure
center was located S of SK. Jet core crossed the project
area from the SW to the NE. The atmosphere was
Stratus rain showers moved eastward into the target area
around 00z with a few embedded lightning strikes
detected. All activity in the target area had low tops and
weak reflectivity. Some slightly deeper convection was
observed south of the target area in the late evening.
Light rain gradually diminished overnight.
38 Max dBZ
Tmax YC = 13.3 C and 2.2 mm of rain.
Tmax Radar = 10.7 C and 0.8 mm of rain.
June 16,
Wednesday
Low-pressure trough was located SW of AB province.
Surface High-pressure center formed N of the project
area. Jet PVA core was crossing the Northern part of AB
province from the SW to the NE. The atmosphere was
Light rain showers occurred over most of the target area.
The southern part of the project saw lightning strikes.
38 Max dBZ
Tmax Radar = 12.8 C and trace of rain.
HS4 performed a maintenance flight over the
Sylvan Lake area.
Flight Summary
HS4: 1839-1916Z; 2EJ, 1BIP, Mx flight over
Sylvan Lake.
June 17,
Thursday
High level High-pressure center formed over the Northern
part of AB province. Surface Low-pressure center was
located over the SW part of BC province. Jet core was
located S of AB and SK provinces. The atmosphere was
Light rain continued to fall through the evening hours.
More rain fell along the southern portion of the project
area than the northern half.
37 Max dBZ
Tmax QF = 15.4 C and a trace of rain.
HS4 performed a maintenance flight south of
the Sylvan Lake area.
Flight Summary
HS4: 1900-1931Z; no seeding, Mx flight south
of Sylvan Lake.
June 18,
Friday
High level Low-pressure center was located over the
Southern part of BC coast. Surface High-pressure center
has formed SW of the project area. Cold front was
crossing the Northern part of AB, SK and MB from the W
to the E. The atmosphere was slightly unstable and
humid.
Scattered rain showers were present off and on through
the evening hours. Some embedded convection was
present but no lightning strikes were reported.
Max titan cell= 6 km, 49 max dBZ, 4.3 max VIL.
Tmax YC = 17.8C and trace of rain.
HS2 performed a maintenance flight near the
Airdrie area.
HS3 flew a maintenance flight west of Red
Deer.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1822-1908Z; no seeding, Mx flight near
Airdrie.
HS3: 1849-1923Z; no seeding, Mx flight west of
Red Deer.
June 19,
Saturday
Weak jet well to S and to the NE. Upper low near
Oregon. Weak vorticity max over TA during early
morning hours had moved out to the E by late morning.
Stalled cold front stayed to the N. There was weak shear
with no trigger mechanisms but enough instability for
deep convection and hail.
HS3 was launched at 2006Z to patrol NW of
Red Deer. At 2052Z HS3 was airborne. HS3
started patrolling near Rocky Mountain House
at 2134Z. At 2218Z, HS3 RTB.
HS1 was launched at 2024Z to patrol NW of
Calgary. HS1 became airborne at 2040Z. At
Cells with deep convection began to form around 18z in
the western buffer zone. These cells mainly tracked
towards the SSE. A few of the cells tracked into the TA
but quickly fell apart. Little to no TS activity occurred from
the evening through the morning.
Max titan cell=8.5 km, 51.5 max dBZ, 12.3 max VIL.
2052Z, HS1 began patrolling W of Cochrane
and then south to near Okotoks. HS1 RTB at
2235Z.
Flight Summary
HS1: 2035-2305Z; no seeding, patrol near
Okotoks.
HS3: 2042-2247Z; no seeding, patrol near RM.
June 20,
Sunday
There was no upper jet over the area. A mid-level low to
SW moved into southern Alberta during the nighttime
hours. A surface low pressure trough moved through
during the evening hours. Vorticity moved into the project
area during the nighttime hours. The atmosphere was
moderately unstable during the afternoon hours.
Elevated instability was present through midnight.
Weak echoes appeared over the mountains starting
around 18z. These echoes would move a short distance
and then dissipate. During the afternoon hours,
moderately strong cells formed north and northwest of
Rocky MH but dissipated before reaching the project
area. During the early evening hours, a cell formed north
of Sylvan Lake. The cell tracked eastward, well north of
the buffer zone, and eventually dissipated.
Max titan cell=6.5km, 41 max dBZ, 4.1 max VIL
HS4 preformed a patrol flight northwest of Red
Deer near Rocky MH. This aircraft was
launched at 2242Z and became airborne at
2306Z. At 2332Z HS4 reported nothing but
dissipating rain showers near Rocky MH. HS4
RTB at 2342Z.
Flight Summary
HS4: 2300Z (06/20)-0000Z (06/21) ; no
seeding, patrol Rocky MH.
June 21,
Monday
A weak upper jet was positioned south of the project
area. A mid-level low was present over the S AB border
with easterly flow over the S target area. Moisture flowed
into the region at low and mid-levels throughout the day
and overnight. The atmosphere was moderately
unstable, but there were no triggers for convection and
the wind shear profile was unfavorable for anything other
than single cells. A surface low over Edmonton shifted
SE into SK by the late evening hours.
Shallow convection moved from E to W over the SE
portion of the project area during the afternoon hours with
no hail threats. Deeper convection formed in the
afternoon near Rocky MH with some marginal hail
threats, but the cells were short-lived due to the weak
shear environment. Shallow thundershowers occurred
during the late night hours, but these storms were not a
threat for hail.
HS3 was launched at 1933Z. HS3 was
airborne at 2006Z and started seeding storm
#1, northeast of Rocky MH, at 2021Z. HS3
stopped seeding storm #1 at 2030Z and went
back on patrol in the buffer zone northwest of
Rocky MH. At 2118Z, HS3 started seeding
storm #2 northeast of Rocky MH. The seeding
ended at 2130Z. HS3 then RTB at 2147Z.
HS4 was launched at 0225Z (06/22). HS4
became airborne at 0254Z and started seeding
storm #3, west-southwest of Sylvan Lake, at
0303Z. The seeding then ended at 0312Z.
HS4 then started seeding storm #3 again, at
0325Z, once better inflow was found. The
seeding was stopped at 0339Z and HS4 RTB
at 0339Z.
Flight Summary
HS3: 1955-2208Z; 25 EJ, #1 NE of Rocky MH,
#2 NE of Rocky MH.
HS4: 0245Z (06/22)-0347Z (06/22); 4 BIP 42
min acetone generator time, #3 WSW of Sylvan
Lake.
June 22,
Tuesday
A weak upper jet was positioned over N SK. Weak
ridging was occurring at mid-levels. The atmosphere was
moderately unstable with a high amount of low level
moisture. There were multiple short wave impulses
Public Relations: HS1 (from YC) and HS4
(from QF) flew to the Olds-Didsbury airport for
the radar tour. A group of 20 insurance
industry representatives visited the radar.
moving through the area during the day and overnight
along with a quasi-stationary front over central AB which
sagged south into the target area overnight. The shear
environment was favorable for multicellular storms during
the day. Shallow elevated instability was present
overnight.
During the early afternoon radar tour, deep convection
developed SW of Sundre and NW of Olds eventually
forming over most of the project area. All aircraft were
utilized for patrol and seeding throughout the afternoon
with numerous hail threats present. Activity weakened by
late afternoon with only showers present in the evening
through overnight.
Max titan cell=11.5km, 62.5 max dBZ, 44.3 max VIL
Tmax YC = 20.1C and 13.2 mm of rain.
Tmax Radar = 19.1C and 1.2 mm of rain.
HS2 was launched at 1859Z to patrol area SW
of Didsbury. At 1922Z HS2 was airborne. At
1931Z, HS2 started patrolling N of Cochrane.
At 2026Z, HS2 started seeding Storm #2 over
the Northern part of Calgary. At 2108Z, HS2
stopped seeding and started patrolling in the
same area. At 2115Z HS2 RTB.
HS4 was launched from Olds at 1904Z to patrol
area NW of Olds. At 1916Z HS4 was airborne.
At 1927Z HS4 started cloud base seeding
Storm #1 NW of Sundre. At 2045Z HS4
stopped seeding and RTB.
HS3 was launched at 1940Z for cloud top
seeding Storm #1 N of Sundre. At 2003Z HS3
was airborne. At 2018Z HS3 started cloud top
seeding Storm #1 NE of Sundre. At 2104Z
HS3 stopped seeding Storm #1 and was
redirected to RMH area. At 2129 HS3 started
seeding Storm #4 E of RMH. At 2146Z HS3
same area. At 2156Z HS3 started seeding
Storm #6 W of Red Deer. At 2218Z HS3
stopped seeding this storm SE of Red Deer. At
the same time HS3 was redirected to Storm #7
NW of Red Deer. At 2222Z HS3 started
seeding Storm #7. At 2232Z HS3 stopped
seeding and started patrolling N of Red Deer.
At 2241Z HS3 RTB.
HS1 was launched from Olds at 2027Z to patrol
area over Calgary. At 2036Z HS1 was
airborne. At 2118Z HS1 started seeding Storm
#3 NE of Airdrie. At 2132Z HS1 was redirected
to the area SW of Calgary. At 2148Z HS1
started seeding Storm #5 over the North part of
Calgary. At 2232Z HS1 stopped seeding and
RTB.
Flight Summary
HS1: 1700-1740Z; no seeding, YYC to Olds.
HS4: 1720-1745Z: no seeding, YQF to Olds.
HS2: 1911-2130Z; 11 BIP, 1 hr 6 min acetone
generator time; Storm #2 over Calgary.
HS4: 19:08-21:08Z; 18 BIP, 2 hr 50 min
acetone generator time; Storm #1 W and N of
Sundre.
HS3: 1954-2313Z; 177 EJ, 10 BIP, Storm #1 N
of Sundre, Storm #4 E of RMH, Storm #6 SE of
Red Deer, Storm #7 NW of Red Deer.
HS1: 2130Z (06/22)-0000Z (06/23); no EJ due
to technical problems.
June 23,
Wednesday
Very unstable atmosphere with high surface dew points.
Several weak shortwaves were progged to move through
the project area during the afternoon and overnight.
Upslope flow was forecast along the range. The
strongest instability was present over the northern half of
the target area where cloud tops were expected to reach
above 40kft. Widespread multicellular thunderstorms
were forecast during the afternoon and evening with
of Sundre. At 2010Z HS3 was airborne. At
2054Z HS3 started seeding Storm #1 S of
Sundre. At 2100Z HS3 stopped seeding Storm
#1. At 2154Z HS3 started seeding Storm #2 W
of Olds. At 2220Z HS3 stopped seeding and it
was redirected to RMH area. At 2313Z HS3
started seeding Storm # 4 W of Lacombe. At
possible large hail. Stable, partly cloudy conditions were
expected overnight.
Widespread strong thunderstorms occurred during the
early afternoon through evening with multiple cells
indicating hail threats on radar. Severe storms continued
into the early evening before weakening below hail
criteria shortly before dusk. After sunset, the atmosphere
stabilized and all convective activity ended.
Tmax YC = 22.7C and 3.8 mm of rain.
Tmax QF = 23.6C and 8 mm of rain.
Tmax Radar = 22.1C and 13.5 mm of rain.
2350Z HS3 stopped seeding and RTB.
HS1 was launched at 2116Z to patrol area over
Calgary. At 2136Z HS1 was airborne. At
2141Z HS3 started patrolling area SW of
Cochrane. At 2154Z HS1 started seeding
Storm #3 over Calgary. At 2217Z HS1 stopped
seeding and started patrolling over the same
area. At 2259Z HS1 was redirected NE of
Calgary. At 2310Z HS1 started seeding Storm
#5 SE of Airdrie. At 2359Z HS1 stopped
seeding and started patrolling over the
Cochrane area. At 0013Z (06/24) HS1 RTB.
HS4 was launched at 2331Z to patrol area SE
of Red Deer. At 2355Z HS4 was airborne. At
0003Z HS4 started seeding Storm #6 SE of
Red Deer. At 0038Z (06/24) HS4 stopped
seeding Storm #6 and it was redirected to
Storm #7 W of Olds. At 0052Z HS4 started
seeding Storm #7. At 0200Z HS4 stopped
seeding Storm #7. At 0212Z HS4 started
seeding Storm #11 E of Innisfail. HS4 stopped
seeding at 0224Z and RTB.
HS2 was launched at 0032Z to patrol area S of
Cochrane. At 0055Z HS2 was airborne. At
0109Z HS2 started seeding Storm #8 SW of
Calgary. At 0242Z HS2 stopped seeding and
RTB.
HS3 was launched the second time at 0050Z to
patrol area W of Olds. At 0109Z HS3 was
airborne. At 0130Z HS3 started seeding Storm
#9 SW of Airdrie. At 0154Z HS3 stopped
seeding Storm #9 and it was redirected SW of
Didsbury. At 0201Z HS3 started seeding Storm
#10 SW of Didsbury. At 0255Z HS3 stopped
seeding Storm #10 and started patrolling over
Red Deer area. At 0309Z HS3 started seeding
Storm #12 S of Red Deer. At 0318Z HS3
stopped seeding and started patrolling NW of
Red Deer. At 0346Z HS3 RTB.
Flight Summary
HS3: 2001Z (06/23)-0002Z (06/24); 116 EJ,
Storm #1 SW of Sundre, Storm #2 W of Olds,
Storm #4 E of Lacombe, Storm # 6 SE of Red
Deer.
HS1: 2122Z (06/23)-0037Z (06/24); 79 EJ, 6
BIP, Storm #3 over Calgary, Storm #5 SE of
Airdrie.
HS4: 2345Z (06/23)-0238Z (06/24); 20 BIP, 4
hr 18 min acetone generator time; Storm #6 SE
of Red Deer, Storm #7 W of Olds, Storm #11 E
of Innisfail.
HS2: 0050Z (06/24)-0310Z (06/24); 16 BIP, 1
hr 29 min acetone generator time; Storm #8
over Calgary.
HS3: 0103Z (06/24)-0423Z (06/24); 267 EJ, 16
BIP, Storm #9 SW of Airdrie, Storm #10 SW of
Didsbury, Storm #12 S of Red Deer.
June 24,
Thursday
Mid-level trough over BC ejected short wave energy into
AB. As trough approached AB, a surface low developed
over the northern project area. There was moderate
instability during the afternoon hours. The speed shear
was favorable for long lived convection, but there was
poor directional shear making organized updrafts unlikely.
A moderately strong short wave moved west to east
along the northern buffer zone. Over the Calgary area,
convective rain showers occurred. The rest of the project
area was relatively quiet.
Max titan cell=11.5km, 56.5 max dBZ, 25 max VIL
Public Relations: HS2 (from YC) and HS3
(from QF) flew to the Olds-Didsbury airport for
the radar tour. A group of 8 insurance industry
representatives visited the radar. After the
radar tour was over, both aircraft returned their
home bases.
HS3 was launched at 0156Z (06/25) to patrol
area W of Ponoka. At 0214Z HS3 was
airborne. At 02:23Z HS3 started seeding Storm
#1 S of Ponoka. At 0242Z HS3 stopped
seeding Storm # 1 and started patrolling. At
0258Z HS3 RTB.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1708-1742Z; no seeding, YYC to Olds.
HS3: 1830-1858Z; no seeding, YQF to Olds.
HS2: 2100-2140Z; no seeding, Olds to YYC.
HS3: 2115-2136Z; no seeding, Olds to YQF.
HS3: 0208Z (06/25)-0309Z (06/25); 56 EJ, 3
BIP, Storm #1 S of Ponoka.
June 25,
Friday
A mid-level trough was over the BC/AB border. Several
short waves passed over the project area during the
afternoon and evening hours. At the surface, a low was
present over western SK. The main triggers were surface
heating and positive vorticity advection. Wind shear was
marginal, but strong enough for multicellular storms.
Thunderstorms moved through the project area during the
afternoon and evening hours. These storms resulted
from a short wave slowly moving west to east across the
project area. Storm #1 first formed southeast of RMH
and propagated toward Red Deer. Storm #2 first formed
over southern Calgary producing rain showers. Later on
Storm #2 propagated towards Drumheller.
Graupel was reported in Olds.
Max titan cell=11.5km, 56.5 max dBZ, 25 max VIL
Tmax YC = 22.4C and 1.0mm of rain.
Tmax QF = 23.5C and 2.8mm of rain.
HS2 performed a maintenance flight over the
Cremona area.
HS4 was launched at 2025Z to patrol area over
RMH. At 2055Z HS4 was airborne. At 22:00Z
HS4 started seeding the Southern cell of the
cluster SE of RMH (Storm #1). At 2323Z HS4
stopped seeding Storm#1 and RTB.
HS1 was launched at 2237Z to patrol area S of
Calgary. At 2246Z HS1 was airborne. At 2305
HS1 was directed to Strathmore area. At
2335Z HS1 started seeding Storm #2 N of
Strathmore. At 2354Z HS1 stopped seeding
and started patrolling area over Airdrie. At
0019Z HS1 RTB.
HS3 was launched at 2242Z to patrol area W of
Sylvan Lake. At 2309Z HS3 was airborne. At
2322Z HS4 started seeding Storm#1. At 0019Z
HS3 stopped seeding Storm#1 and started
patrolling area W of Red Deer. At 2350Z, HS3
RTB.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1857-2006Z; no seeding, Mx flight near
Cremona.
HS4: 2040-2331Z; 15 BIP, 2hr 40min acetone
generator time, #1 SE of RMH.
HS1: 2241Z (06/25)-0035Z (06/26); 40 EJ, 3
BIP, #2 N of Strathmore.
HS3: 2300Z (06/25)-0108Z (06/26); 138 EJ, 2
BIP, #1 W of Red Deer.
June 26,
Saturday
Weak upper level ridge over the area. No vorticity
passed over the project area. At the surface, a stationary
front was in place over northern AB. The atmosphere
became stable.
Thunderstorms with rain were seen over the northeast
part of the buffer zone. These storms occurred during the
early afternoon hours and produced lightning.
The radar was inoperable for most of the day due to a
failure of the TITAN computer. The backup TITAN
system was up and running in the early evening.
June 27,
Sunday
Upper level jet located over the Vancouver area.
Diffluence aloft aided in rising motion. The diffluence also
aided in the development of a surface low over eastern
AB. The speed and directional shear favored longer lived
cells.
A few weak cells made their way across the project area.
These cells produced light rain showers and a few
lightning strikes.
Max titan cell= 7.5km, 50 max dBZ, 8.3 max VIL
Tmax Radar = 24.0C and 1.0mm of rain.
June 28,
Monday
Upper level ridge axis moved eastward out of AB. A jet
streak remained over the Vancouver area. Only a small
amount of vorticity passed over the project area. No
short waves flowed over southern AB. At the surface, a
lee trough formed east of the Rocky Mountains.
A few weak thunderstorm cells formed over the northern
buffer zone, close to RMH. These storms produced light
rain showers and a few lightning strikes.
40 Max dBZ
June 29,
Tuesday
Upper jet nosed its way into AB. Upper level winds were
around 80 knots. The mid-level ridge continued to slowly
move to the east, and the ridge axis was over the SK/MB
border. Vorticity advection was minimal. A surface low
developed just east of Calgary. The atmosphere was
moderately unstable with wind profiles favoring organized
convection with supercells.
During the mid-afternoon hours, towering cumulus clouds
began to build over the Calgary area. These clouds
would only build for a short time before dissipating.
During this same time period, explosive growth occurred
southwest of the Rocky MH area. One of these cells
would eventually grow into a super cell. Another cell
grew to the north of this particular cell but was not as
strong. The cells tracked to the N out of the project area.
A rotating wall cloud was observed in the supercell.
During the late afternoon hours, a new line of
thunderstorms began to form SW of the Red Deer area.
These storms eventually contained strong cells that
tracked towards Red Deer. In the meantime, cells also
HS4 flew to Olds for a PR flight at 1711Z. HS4
was later launched from Olds for seeding.
HS1 also flew to Olds for the PR flight at
1711Z. After the radar visit, HS1 returned to
Calgary at 2236Z.
HS2 was launched at 2127Z to near Calgary for
new towering cumulus and began patrol at
2150Z. At 2229Z, HS2 returned to base in
Calgary after all activity dissipated in that area.
No seeding was done. HS2 called and
reported an aircraft problem at 2322Z and
would be inop for the rest of the night due to an
oil temp issue.
HS3 was launched at 2210Z for a right turning
cell SW of Rocky MH. HS3 was airborne by
2234Z and reported explosive growth in the far
NW corner of the PA. HS3 began seeding runs
near Rocky MH at 2250Z. Both HS3 and HS4
worked the same area south of Rocky MH until
formed near the Airdrie area. One of the cells, once it
tracked NE of Airdrie, developed into a severe storm.
0.8 cm hail reported in Red Deer
Tmax Radar = 26.4C and trace.
the activity moved out of the area to the N.
HS3 then RTB to Red Deer at 2335Z.
HS4 was also launched (from Olds) to the
developing supercell near Rocky MH at 2215.
HS4 began seeding SW of Rocky MH at 2246Z
and reported a rotating wall cloud. This
information was relayed to Environment
Canada storm spotter hotline. HS4 worked the
area near Rocky MH until all inflow was too far
north and then RTB at 2345Z.
As HS3 and HS4 were refueling in Red Deer,
more activity developed W of Innisfail at 0024Z
(30th) heading toward the Red Deer area. Both
aircraft were re-launched for this new growth to
take off as soon as they were done refueling
and reflaring. HS3 was airborne at 0041Z
(30th) and began seeding near Innisfail at
0047Z (30th) with abundant seedable targets
and impressive rapid growth between Red Deer
and Innisfail. By 0227(30th), HS3 was getting
low on flares with only half a rack left. New
growth was observed again near Airdrie. Since
HS1 had plenty of chemical, they were
repositioned to the storm near Airdrie while
HS3 took over seeding what remained near
Sylvan where HS1 had been working. At
0307(30th) activity near Sylvan moved off to
the N and HS3 was nearly out of flares. HS3
returned to base at 0307Z (30th).
HS4 launched as soon as they had chemical
and fuel and would be airborne by 0109Z
(30th). They started seeding near Red Deer at
0118Z (30th). HS4 continued to work the
flanking line near Innisfail. Storms began to
weaken and dissipate shortly after 0300Z and
the storms cleared the Red Deer area. HS4
RTB at 0335Z (30th).
HS1 was launched from Calgary to the Airdrie
growth area at 0113Z (30th). HS1 was
airborne and began seeding at 0141Z (30th).
HS1 worked this area of new growth until it
moved too far to the NE to be a hail damage
threat. HS1 was then redirected to more new
growth just NW of Olds radar where they found
more seedable activity and began seeding that
area at 0210Z (30th) working further and further
N toward Sylvan. HS3 then took over for HS1
near Sylvan while HS1 headed back toward the
Airdrie area for even more new cell
development. This activity began to diminish
shortly after they reached it. HS1 was the last
plane to RTB at 0340(30th) as all activity was
dissipating and moving out of the area.
Flight Summary
HS4: 1711-1740Z; no seeding, PR flight to
Olds.
Olds.
HS2: 2140-2253Z; no seeding, patrol W of
YYC.
HS3: 2225-2351Z; 85 EJ, 8 BIP, #1 SW of
RMH.
HS4: 2221Z (06/29)-0008Z (06/30); 9 BIP, 108
min acetone generator time; #1 Rocky, patrol
Caroline.
HS1: 2236-2310Z; no seeding, PR return flight
Olds to YYC.
HS3: 0034Z (06/30)-0320Z (06/30); 201 EJ, 6
BIP, #2 Innisfail.
HS4: 0103Z (06/30)-0347Z (06/30); 13 BIP,
280 min acetone generator time, #2 QF.
HS1: 0127Z (06/30)-0409Z (6/30); 74 EJ, 11
BIP, #3 Airdrie.
June 30,
Wednesday
Upper level low moved across northern AB. Moderately
strong vorticity advection occurred across the northern
part of the project area. At the surface, the low pressure
system that was over the area the previous day began to
fall apart. The atmosphere was most unstable during the
afternoon hours.
Weak cells produced rain showers during the late
morning hours southwest of Rocky MH. These cells
intensified during the early afternoon. The cells then
quickly dissipated once they reached the Rocky MH area.
During the mid-afternoon, the line of cells pulsed up again
and extended from west of Sylvan Lake down to west of
Didsbury. This line intensified as it slowly progressed
northeastward. A couple of the cells moved through the
Red Deer area. The rest of the day was stable across the
project area.
0.5cm hail reported in Red Deer
Weak activity near Rocky MH intensified and
HS3 was launched to the area at 1824Z. Upon
reaching the area, HS3 reported dissipating
storms, no liquid water, and low tops. They
RTB at 1904Z after a short patrol S of Rocky.
At 2011Z, activity pulsed up again west of
Sylvan headed toward Red Deer and Lacombe.
HS4 launched to the area at 2011Z and began
seeding at 2053Z with excellent inflow to the
SW of Red Deer. At 2133Z, HS4 was getting
boxed in by rain showers and lost inflow, so
they repositioned to an area of new growth N of
Olds where they continued seeding. As the
storm moved off to the east of Innisfail, there
was nothing left to seed in the project area and
HS4 RTB at 2150Z.
HS3 was also launched for new development
near the Sylvan area at 2032Z. They climbed
to top and began seeding an exploding cell just
N of Olds at 2140Z. They worked the area of
growth until it was no longer threatening any
towns. Once the storm moved east of Innisfail,
HS3 RTB to Red Deer at 2150Z.
Flight Summary
HS3: 1841-1928Z; no seeding, patrol near
Rocky MH.
HS4: 2038-2205Z; 8 BIP, 120 min acetone.
generator time, #1 Sylvan, #2 Innisfail.
HS3: 2059-2211Z; 110 EJ; #2 Innisfail.
July 01,
Thursday
Low-pressure trough was approaching the AB province
from the West. Surface high-pressure center was located
over the project area. Jet PVA core was crossing the
southern part of the province from the SW to the NE. The
atmosphere was slightly unstable and humid.
A few weak thundershowers developed in the afternoon
with very low tops. Strong upper level winds sheared
apart any cumulus that developed. A few lightning strikes
were detected in the afternoon. Conditions became
stable in the evening and skies were clear throughout the
nighttime hours.
Tmax Radar = 18.0 C and no rain.
July 02,
Friday
Low-pressure trough was located over AB province.
Surface low-pressure center had formed over the
southern border of BC province. Jet PVA core remained
located over the project area. The atmosphere was
unstable and humid.
Mid afternoon thundershowers moved off the foothills with
a few marginal hail threats south of YC and near Rocky
MH. Activity weakened substantially in the late afternoon
with just light rain by evening. Conditions were stable
during the overnight hours.
HS1 was launched for patrol at 2250Z. They
patrolled weak thundershowers west of
Okotoks finding no seedable activity. At 2328Z,
HS1 was redirected north toward Cochrane to
check for activity approaching the Calgary area.
Finding no new development anywhere,
HS1RTB at 2337Z.
Flight Summary
HS1: 2250-2359Z; no seeding, patrol west of
Okotoks and near Cochrane.
July 03,
Saturday
Low-pressure trough passed AB province with axis
located over SK. High-pressure ridge was forming over
BC province. Jet PVA core crossed the southern part of
AB and SK from the SW to the NE. The atmosphere was
unstable and humid.
A few isolated and very weak single cell convective
showers developed around the project area in the buffer
zone with just light rain and virga. In the late evening, a
weak shower developed near QF with a lightning strike
detected. There were no hail threats.
July 04,
Sunday
Low-pressure trough had formed over AB province.
Surface High-pressure center was located S of SK. Cold
front was crossing AB province from the SW to the NE.
Jet PVA core was located SW of the project area. The
atmosphere was unstable and humid.
Light rain began to fall over the project area during the
morning hours. This rain lasted through the late evening
hours. During the afternoon and early evening hours,
embedded convection was observed which resulted in
moderately heavy rain showers over parts of the project
area.
Max cell top= 5.5 km, 45 max dBZ, 4.8 max VIL
July 05,
Monday
Low-pressure trough passed AB province and its axis
was located over SK province. High-pressure ridge was
approaching AB from the west. Jet PVA core was located
SW of the project area. The atmosphere was slightly
unstable and humid.
Over the northern portion of the project area, light rain
began to fall during the late morning hours. The light
stratus rain eventually spread over the entire project area,
lasting through the early evening hours. Additionally,
weak convection occurred southwest of Calgary during
the early afternoon hours. Isolated convective rain
showers were observed during the late evening and
nighttime hours.
Tmax YC = 15.7 C and trace of rain.
July 06,
Tuesday
High-pressure ridge was approaching AB province from
the west. The ridge axis was located over the central part
of BC province. Surface high-pressure center was
located over the border between BC and AB. Jet PVA
core was crossing the project area from the N to the S.
The atmosphere was slightly unstable and humid.
During the late morning hours, bands of light rain showers
moved south-southeastward along the western perimeter
of the project area. During the mid-afternoon hours, a
few cells began to grow upstream of Calgary. These cells
slowly grew and dissipated, causing light to moderate rain
showers as they moved over the Calgary metropolitan
area. The atmosphere stabilized during the evening and
nighttime hours.
HS4 flew a ferry flight from Red Deer to
Calgary for maintenance.
HS3 flew a public relations flight to the Olds-
Didsbury airport for a radar tour. At the tour,
there were 18 insurance personnel. A CBC
television network reporter and cameraman
also joined the tour. The reporter and
cameraman also observed and taped the
operations for the day. After the tour was done,
HS3 returned to Red Deer.
HS1 preformed a patrol flight over the
northwestern part Calgary. The flight was
airborne at 2243Z. HS1 reported that the
clouds were glaciated and continued patrolling
until the cells moved southeast of Calgary. At
2333Z, HS1 RTB.
Flight Summary
HS4: 1355-1445Z; no seeding, ferry flight from
YQF to YYC for Mx.
Olds.
HS1: 2236-2359Z; no seeding, patrol NW of
YYC.
HS3: 2304-2341Z; no seeding, PR flight back
to YQF.
July 07,
Wednesday
Upper jet was north of AB. An upper ridge was building in
from the west. The atmosphere was moderately unstable
with no obvious triggers for convection. Wind shear was
unfavorable for severe storms. Surface high pressure
was in place over the region.
During the early afternoon hours, a cell began to grow
between Rocky MH and Sylvan Lake. This cell slowly
moved toward the SE. Throughout the rest of the
afternoon and early evening cells continued to grow W of
Sylvan Lake and move towards the Innisfail area. Cells
were also present over the Rock MH and Sundre areas
during the afternoon and evening hours. Isolated rain
showers then occurred over the northern portion of the
project area through the early nighttime hours.
Max cell top=11.5 km, 58 max dBZ, 31.3 max VIL
HS1 and HS4 flew a public relations flight to the
Olds-Didsbury airport for a radar tour. Both
HS1 and HS4 flew from the YYC airport. At the
tour, there were 15 insurance personnel. After
the tour was done, HS1 returned to YYC and
HS4 flew to YQF.
HS3 was launched at 1932Z to NW of Innisfail.
The flight became airborne at 2006Z and was
redirected to near Sylvan Lake. HS3 started
seeding at 2020Z. The northwest side of the
storm was seeded as it moved towards
Innisfail. HS3 stopped seeding storm #1 at
2057Z. The flight was then redirected to
southwest of Sylvan Lake. At 2112Z, seeding
started on storm #2, west of Sylvan Lake. The
seeding ended on storm #2 at 2135Z. HS3
was then redirected to a developing storm east
of Rocky MH. Seeding was started on storm
#3 at 2152Z and ended at 2210Z. HS3 RTB at
2213Z.
HS4 was launched at 2252Z and airborne at
2308Z for patrol over the Caroline area. HS4
found minimal inflow along the storms south of
the Rocky MH area. HS4 RTB at 2347Z.
Flight Summary
Olds.
Olds.
HS3: 2001-2232Z; 132 EJ, #1 NW of Innisfail,
#2 W of Sylvan Lake, #3 E of RMH.
to YQF.
to YYC.
HS4: 2302Z (07/07)-0007Z (07/08); no seeding,
patrol S of RMH.
July 08,
Thursday
The atmosphere was unstable, but capped. The only
trigger for convection was the ample afternoon surface
heating. There was much more instability over the
northern half of the project area than in the south. Wind
shear was marginal, and not enough for organized
convection.
Convective rain showers started occurring in the
mountains and foothills, along the western buffer zone,
during the mid-afternoon hours. During the late
afternoon, a few of these cells made their way into the
western project area. The largest cell of the day (storm
#1) tracked from north of Sundre to southeast of Innisfail.
The atmosphere then stabilized during the mid-evening
hours and there was little activity the rest of the night.
HS2 flew a maintenance flight over the
Beiseker area, northeast of Calgary.
HS4 was launched at 2337Z (07/08) for the
developing storms west of Innisfail. At 2355Z
HS4 became airborne and started patrolling
west of Innisfail. At 0008Z (07/09), they found
proper inflow and seeding was started. HS4
stopped seeding at 0027Z (07/09) and was
redirected to patrol near Sylvan Lake. At
0040Z (07/09), HS4 RTB after finding little new
growth over the Sylvan Lake area.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1915-1951Z; no seeding, Mx flight over
the Beiseker area.
HS4: 2345Z (07/08)-0100Z (07/09); 3 BIP, 40
min acetone generator time, #1 W of Innisfail.
July 09,
Friday
The atmosphere was very unstable and moderately
capped. The upper ridge flattened out giving the region
northwesterly flow. A surface low pressure trof was
forming in the lee of the Rockies, and a cold front was
slowly sagging southward from the Edmonton area. A
vorticity lobe was progged to move through in the late
afternoon hours. Wind shear was sufficient for severe
long lived storms, but not super cells. Hail storms were
expected in the late afternoon and evening hours.
In the late afternoon hours, discrete cells developed and
moved through during the early evening. The first cell
was near the Sylvan Lake area. This storm was seeded
as it moved toward Red Deer. Small (<1cm) hail was
reported from this storm in Red Deer. A second stronger
storm developed in the foothills and headed through
Sundre and Olds. The storm was seeded with multiple
aircraft. Only heavy rain and high winds were reported in
Olds with this storm. Weak thundershowers moved
through during the late night hours, and then stratus rain
and overcast skies moved in by dawn moving from north
to south. A power surge caused some minor damage to
HS4 was launched at 2119Z to an embedded
cell west of Sylvan Lake. They were airborne
at 2140Z and tracking on AirLink but not
TITAN. Seeding began at 2150Z with good
inflow on the SE side of the cell near Sylvan.
At 2208Z, all inflow was lost and the cell
showed weakening on radar. HS4 turned off
burners and repositioned to a new cell near
Sundre. Seeding began on the Sundre storm
at 2230Z with very good inflow and lots of new
growth. HS4 worked the storm as it moved
east from Sundre toward Olds until they were
out of flares and were replaced by HS2. HS4
RTB to Red Deer at 2354Z.
HS1 was launched to an intensifying cell
moving east from Sundre toward Olds. A
media crew from the CBC television network
was onboard the aircraft for filming. They were
to seed the same cell with HS4. They were
filed to top seed at 18kft. HS1 was airborne at
2257Z and was tracking on AirLink but not
the radar during the afternoon, and the radar was
inoperable for most of the storm period.
TITAN. At 2322Z, HS1 began seeding west of
Olds. New growth was observed on the NE
side of the cell, and seeding was focused on
this area. At 0011Z (07/10), the storm moved
too far east, and seeding ended. HS1 then
patrolled west of Olds and near Cochrane for a
short time before RTB to YYC at 0033Z
(07/10).
HS2 was launched at 2330Z to take over
seeding for HS4 on a cell west of Olds. HS2
was airborne at 2350Z. They coordinated with
HS4 to take over the same spot when HS4
RTB. Seeding began at 2354Z. They seeded
the SE to NE sides of the cell as it approached
Olds. As the cell moved over Olds and too far
east to be a threat, seeding was stopped. HS2
shut down burners and RTB to YYC at 0012Z
(07/10).
HS3 was launched at 0237Z (07/10) for patrol
of the northern buffer zone NW of YQF. The
radar was inoperable at the time, so no cell
data was available. HS3 was airborne at
0313Z (07/10). They patrolled near Lacombe,
but found no seedable activity reporting only ice
crystals and no new growth. The radar then
came back online and it was obvious that there
was no hail threat. HS3 RTB to YQF at 0342Z
(07/10).
Flight Summary
HS4: 2137Z (07/09)-0007Z (07/10); 11 BIP,
200 min acetone generator time; #1 Sylvan, #2
Sundre to Olds.
HS1: 2245Z (07/09)-0053Z (07/10); 1 BIP, 4
EJ; #2 Sundre to Olds, then patrol Olds and
Cochrane areas.
HS2: 2345Z (07/09)-0045Z (07/10); no seeding;
patrol Olds.
HS3: 0304Z (07/10)-0356Z (07/10); no seeding;
patrol NW of Lacombe.
July 10,
Saturday
Weak instability was present over the basin with very high
dew points. A weak ridge had formed over northern AB.
A cold front and stratus deck were moving through during
the day from north to south. Ceilings were expected to
drop below 2000 feet at times. Widespread stratus rain
was falling at forecast time and throughout the day.
Embedded weak convection was expected throughout the
day into the evening with tops below 30kft. The
atmosphere was stable overnight.
Stratus rain moved from north to south over the project
area all day with a few embedded convective cells in the
afternoon. One cell developed in the foothills west of
Okotoks with some taller tops. HS1 was launched to
patrol the area, but nothing seedable was found. The cell
weakened as it moved into the project area. No seeding
was done. Skies cleared around sunset and fog
developed overnight in the northern half of the target
area.
HS1 was launched at 2130Z to patrol area W of
Okotoks. At 2150Z HS1 was airborne. At
2205Z HS1 started patrolling area NW and W
of Okotoks. HS1 RTB at 2231Z.
Flight Summary
HS1: 2143-2300Z; no seeding; patrol NW and
W of Okotoks.
July 11,
Sunday
The upper jet core was along the west coast of BC. A
weak ridge was located over the northern AB/SK border,
and an upper low was well to the northwest. The
atmosphere was very unstable. At the surface, a frontal
boundary was draped from N to S over central AB. The
wind shear profile was favorable for severe organized
convection including possible supercells during the
afternoon and evening. The atmosphere was stabilizing
in the late evening and overnight hours.
Severe multicellular thunderstorms developed in the
afternoon south of Rocky MH. The most intense storm
occurred west of Sundre moving east, eventually
dropping 25mm hail in the town of Sundre. This severe
hailstorm was seeded from both top and base with
multiple aircraft until it finally moved east of the Didsbury
area and was no longer a threat. Hail storms also
developed SW of Cochrane moving into the YC area.
These storms were seeded from both top and base as
well. By 2200Z, all activity had moved too far east and/or
weakened enough that there were no longer seedable
hail threats. All aircraft returned to their bases, and the
weather was quiet overnight.
Max titan cell top= 14.5 km, 62 max dBZ, 78.8 max VIL
HS3 was launched at 2214Z to patrol the area
S of RMH. At 22:38Z HS3 was airborne. HS3
started cloud top seeding Storm #1 NW of
Sundre at 2307Z. At 0043Z (12th) HS3
same area. At 0049Z HS3 started seeding the
new feeder clouds in the same storm. At
0156Z (12th) HS3 stopped seeding Storm #1
and RTB.
HS4 was launched at 2301Z to patrol an area
NW of Sundre. At 2325Z HS4 was airborne.
At 2335Z HS4 started cloud base seeding the
northern cell of the Storm #1. At 2340Z HS4
was redirected to the southern cell of the Storm
#1. At 0132Z (12th) HS4 stopped seeding and
RTB.
HS2 was launched at 0031Z (12th) to patrol the
area W of Calgary. At 0054Z HS2 was
airborne. At 0055Z HS2 was directed to start
cloud base seeding Storm #2 W of Calgary. At
0156Z HS2 stopped seeding Storm #2 and
started patrolling in the same area. At 0206Z
HS2 was redirected to the area N of Airdrie. At
0224Z HS2 started cloud base seeding Storm
#3 N of Airdrie. At 0332Z HS2 stopped seeding
Storm #3 and RTB.
HS1 was launched at 0041Z (12th) to patrol
area W of Calgary. HS1 was airborne at 0054Z
(12th). At 0102Z HS1 started cloud top
seeding Storm #2 W of Calgary. HS1 stopped
seeding Storm #2 at 0156Z and started
patrolling the area NW of High River. At 0222Z
(12th) HS1 RTB.
Flight Summary
HS3: 2230Z (07/11)-0212Z (07/12); 207 EJ, 8
BIPs; Storm #1 NW of Sundre to Didsbury.
HS4: 2312Z (07/11)-0155Z (07/12); 22 BIPs,
240 min acetone generator time. Storm #1 NW
of Sundre to Didsbury.
HS2: 0046Z (07/12)-0400Z (07/12); 17 BIPs,
262 min acetone generator time; Storm #2 W
and over Calgary, Storm #3 N and NE of
Airdrie.
HS1: 0048Z (07/12)-0236Z (07/12); 53EJ, 6
BIPs; Storm #2 W and over Calgary.
July 12,
Monday
A strong upper jet was SW of the project area along the
US border. The atmosphere was destabilizing in the late
morning and early afternoon. A powerful upper low was
moving into the region with ample vorticity progged to
move through the project area during the day. Model
soundings indicated weak shear profiles with moderate
over Sundre. At 1733Z HS2 was airborne. No
seedable activity was found near Sundre. At
1824Z HS2 was redirected to patrol over the
Cochrane area. At 1842Z HS2 started cloud
base seeding Storm #1 SW of Cochrane in the
instability. A stable air mass was progged to move in
during the late afternoon and early evening on the back
side of the low.
Weak convective cells began developing in the foothills
near Sundre around 1700Z. Tops were low with this
activity, and it posed no threat for hail. Aircraft patrolled
this area in the foothills for over an hour as activity
gradually intensified southward near Cochrane.
Seedable convection finally formed west of YYC in the
buffer zone moving due east toward the YYC metro area.
This storm was seeded from both top and bottom with two
aircraft. The hail storm then pulsed down for a short
period of time east of YYC before strengthening again
near Strathmore. Two intense cells moved through just
north of Strathmore, and a tornado was reported by the
public. Numerous hail reports were received from the
YYC area. Max hail size reported was 50mm. Stratus
rain and high winds were observed in the evening through
overnight hours.
buffer zone. HS2 continued seeding the hail
storm as it moved through YYC toward
Strathmore. At 21:02Z HS2 stopped seeding
Storm #1 over Strathmore as it moved out of
the project area. They RTB to YYC at that
time.
HS1 was launched at 1846Z to a developing
storm SW of Calgary. At 1904Z HS1 was
airborne. HS1 dragged BIP flares on the east
side of the developing hail storm while climbing
to top seeding altitude. At 1925Z HS1 started
cloud top seeding Storm #1 W of Calgary on
the same storm with HS2. All areas of new
feeders were on the N and NW sides of the hail
storm. At 2007Z HS1 stopped seeding Storm
#1 E of Calgary and was redirected SW of
Calgary for new development. At 2031Z HS1
started seeding Storm #2 SW of Calgary, but
this activity was much weaker. At 2038Z HS1
stopped seeding Storm #2 and started
patrolling over the same area near YYC. At
2115Z HS1 RTB as all activity had moved out
of the area.
of embedded convection NW of Sundre. At
2056Z HS3 was airborne. Activity near Sundre
dissipated. At 2110Z HS3 started patrolling W
of Red Deer. Nothing seedable was reported,
and activity diminished on radar. At 2124Z
HS3 RTB.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1727-2139Z; 12 BIPs, 129 min acetone
generator time; Storm #1 W of Calgary to
Strathmore.
HS1: 1854-2138Z; 53 EJ, 8 BIPs; Storm #1
over Calgary, Storm #2 SW of Calgary.
HS3: 2048-2158Z; no seeding, patrol W of Red
Deer.
July 13,
Tuesday
A mid and upper level low was over the AB/SK border.
Over southern SK, a jet streak was present at the upper
levels. A surface low pressure system was in place along
the AB/SK border. The atmosphere was mainly stable.
Moderate rain showers fell over much of the project area
for most of the day. The northeastern part of the project
area saw some convective rain showers that produced a
few lightning strikes.
Public Relations: The Global and CTV
television networks visited the radar during the
late morning and early afternoon hours. The
project meteorologists and project manager,
Tom Walton, were taped and interviewed
regarding the recent storm activity over the
Calgary area. Additionally, Tom Walton
participated in phone interviews conducted by
the CBC and CHQR radio stations.
HS3 flew a ferry flight from Red Deer to
Calgary.
Flight Summary
HS3: 1411-1513Z; no seeding, ferry flight from
YQF to YYC.
July 14,
Wednesday
The upper level low continued to move eastward and was
over MB during the evening hours. No positive vorticity
advection passed over the area, but the project area was
moderately unstable. No surface features influenced the
area. Latent instability was best during the late afternoon
and early evening hours.
Convective activity was mainly concentrated over the
mountains and foothills during the afternoon hours.
During the late afternoon, some of this convective activity
made its way off of the mountains. Light rain showers
occurred south of Sundre. Then just before dusk, a cell
developed north of Sundre and tracked eastward a short
distance before dissipating.
Tmax Radar = 21.9C and trace of rain.
July 15,
Thursday
An open wave, upper trof was positioned over
northwestern AB. A weak jet streak passed over the
northern part of the project area. A cold front also
influenced the very northern portion of the project area.
The atmosphere was fairly unstable, but very capped.
A supercell developed over the area west of Ponoka and
tracked toward the east-southeast. A funnel cloud was
observed beneath the base of this storm. The strongest
portion of the storm passed through the buffer zone
between the towns of Ponoka and Lacombe.
Public Relations: HS2 and HS3 flew from
Calgary to the Olds-Didsbury airport for a radar
tour. HS3 had just received maintenance in
YYC. At the tour, there were 13 insurance
visitors. After the tour was done, HS2 returned
to Calgary and HS3 flew to Red Deer.
West of Ponoka. At 2345Z HS3 was airborne.
At 2358Z HS3 started cloud top seeding Storm
#1 W of Ponoka. At 0113Z (16th) HS3 stopped
seeding Storm #1 and started patrolling W of
Red Deer. At 0131Z HS3 RTB.
HS4 was launched at 0013Z (16th) to patrol
area NW of Lacombe. At 0030Z HS4 was
airborne. At 0041Z HS4 started cloud base
seeding Storm #1 N of Lacombe. HS4 stopped
seeding and started patrolling the area W of
Red Deer at 0104Z. At 0132Z HS4 RTB.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1704-1740Z; no seeding, PR flight from
YYC to Olds.
YYC to Olds.
Olds to YYC.
Olds to YQF.
HS3: 2334Z (07/15)-0146Z (07/16); 150 EJ;
Storm #1 W to SE of Ponoka.
HS4: 0022Z (07/16)-0147Z (07/16); 8 BIPs, 68
min acetone generator time; Storm #1 near
Ponoka.
July 16,
Friday
Upper level low over northern AB with a trof extending
south through the project area. Also, at the upper levels,
a jet was located over southern AB. The surface low that
formed over the area the previous day began to track to
the south and was over southern AB during the evening
hours. A cold front extended westward from the low and
moved southeastward through the project area during the
afternoon hours. Broad vorticity advection influenced the
area during the evening. The atmosphere was
moderately unstable through the early overnight hours.
Public Relations: Tom Walton participated in a
morning phone interview with Macleans
Publishing.
HS2 was launched for top seeding at 2035Z to
developing cells around YYC and south of
Cochrane. HS2 was airborne at 2052Z. No
seedable clouds were observed upwind of
YYC, so HS2 moved east and seeded storm #1
with EJs and burners west of Strathmore. At
2135Z, HS2 then repositioned west of Airdrie
Light to moderate rain showers started to fall over the
northern part of the area during the late morning hours,
and an overcast cloud layer formed. The early afternoon
saw deeper convection near the Red Deer area which
produced heavy rain showers. At around 20Z, a storm
quickly grew east of Okotoks before moving into the
buffer zone. At the same time, a weaker cell formed over
the Calgary area and quickly propagated to the NE. At
21Z, the cloud cover over the northern part of the project
area began to dissipate which caused a line of cells to
form. This convective activity was short lived.
The evening hours saw more organized convective
development. A new line of cells moved through the
Rocky MH area and continued towards the SE. This line
eventually passed through the entire project area.
and began top seeding storm #2 at 2150Z.
Storm #2 weakened as it approached Airdrie,
but another cell (#3) developed NW of
Cochrane. HS2 began base seeding storm #3
at 2223Z while HS3 arrived at the same storm
at top. Convective activity then began to
diminish, and HS2 RTB to YYC at 2233Z
leaving HS3 to patrol the area alone.
HS3 was launched at 2138Z for top seeding
west of the YYC area. The aircraft was
airborne by 2208Z, and reached the Cochrane
area by 2228Z. HS3 patrolled from Cochrane
to YYC with nothing seedable as activity had
diminished. They were then repositioned to
west of Rocky MH at 2259Z where new cells
were approaching the outer buffer zone. Top
seeding began on storm #4 NW of Rocky MH
at 2335Z with ample liquid water and rapid
cumulus development. Seeding continued as
the storm moved through Rocky MH until it
dissipated west of YQF. HS3 then RTB to YQF
at 0136Z (17th) and prepared for another flight.
HS4 was launched at 0057Z(17th) for base
seeding with another round of activity upwind of
Rocky MH in the buffer zone. HS4 had an inop
radar and ADAS computer. No flight tracking
was available throughout the mission. HS4
was airborne by 0110Z (17th) and began base
seeding storm #5 west of Rocky MH at 0135Z.
HS4 continued to seed this storm as it moved
through Rocky and Innisfail. The aircraft was
then repositioned to west of Olds for a short
time, but bases dropped to unsafe altitudes,
and HS4 RTB to YQF at 0333Z(17th) to be
replaced by HS2 who had radar.
HS3 was re-launched at 0226Z (17th) to the
same cell with HS4 (storm #5) near Rocky MH.
HS3 was airborne at 0234Z. Both HS3 and
HS4 worked the same storm as it headed to
Innisfail. As storm #5 moved off to the east,
HS3 was repositioned at 0316Z to seed storm
#6 west of Olds. As storms continued to
propagate southward, HS3 was repositioned
once again to WNW of YYC and began seeding
storm #7 at 0425Z. Seeding ended NE of YYC
when HS3 ran out of flares. They RTB to YQF
at 0508Z (17th).
HS2 was re-launched at 0309Z (17th) to seed
storm #6 with HS3 west of Didsbury. HS2 was
airborne at 0327Z. Base seeding began at
0339Z. Bases were quite low, so HS2 got IFR
clearance and climbed to between layers. At
0413Z the layers closed in on them, and they
were forced to RTB due to the low cloud bases.
Flight Summary
HS2: 2044-2251Z; 64 EJ, 74 min acetone
generator time; patrol S of Cochrane, #1 W of
Strathmore, #2 W of Airdrie, #3 NW of
Cochrane.
HS3: 2156Z (07/16)-0150Z (07/17); 141 EJ, 3
BIP; patrol NW Cochrane, #4 NW Rocky MH to
YQF.
HS4: 0104Z (07/17)-0358Z (07/17); 20 BIP,
240 min acetone generator time; #5 W of
Rocky MH to Innisfail.
HS3: 0226Z (07/17)-0543Z (07/17); 147 EJ, 13
BIP; #5 E of Rocky MH, #6 W of Didsbury, #7
NW of YYC to NE of YYC.
HS2: 0316Z (07/17)-0435Z (07/17); 78 min
acetone generator time; #6 W of Didsbury.
July 17,
Saturday
An upper level low moved from northern AB to eastern
SK. A jet streak was also over the southern AB border.
At the surface, a low followed behind the upper level low.
Positive vorticity advection was almost nonexistent. A
weak cap existed at the mid-levels which prevented deep
convection. The atmosphere was slightly unstable.
Mostly clear sky cover was seen during the afternoon and
evening hours. At around 09z, some convection
developed right over Red Deer and to the east of
Okotoks. These storms produced rain showers as they
moved eastward out of the project area.
July 18,
Sunday
An upper level trof began to move into the project area
during the evening hours. There was moderately strong
vorticity associated with this trof. During the nighttime
hours, the trof became a low over central AB. The
atmosphere was moderately unstable with a small
amount of speed shear.
Unorganized slow growing storms developed in the early
afternoon mostly over the northern half of the project
area. The storms were only a marginal hail threat and
clouds were mostly glaciated by the time they reached
the -10C level. As the upper trof moved in during the
evening, an intense line of convection developed N and
W of Rocky MH and over the YQF area. The line moved
through the northern part of the project area toward the
east. Hail storms ended around 06Z. Widespread weak
convection then persisted throughout most of the night
becoming widespread stratus rain by morning.
Tmax YC = 21.5 C and a trace of rain.
HS2 was launched at 1900Z to cloud top. HS2
was airborne at 1917Z and began patrol west
of Okotoks over the foothills. All activity was
glaciated in that area, so HS2 was repositioned
to near Cochrane. Seeding began on storm #1
near Cochrane at 2051Z. Activity quickly
diminished and became embedded. HS2
dropped to cloud base at 2113Z, but found
nothing seedable. They RTB to YYC at 2137Z.
HS4 was launched to cloud base at 2146Z to
intercept cells approaching Rocky MH. HS4
was airborne by 2207Z. Upon reaching the
activity near Rocky MH, nothing seedable was
found so HS4 was redirected to a slowly
growing cell near Innisfail. They patrolled the
area west of Innisfail, but no seedable bases
were found. They RTB to YQF at 2304Z.
Shortly after HS4 RTB, the storm near Innisfail
began to look better visually from the radar
office. HS4 was immediately re-launched to
the area at 2323Z and was airborne at 2327Z.
This time, some marginal inflow was found, and
seeding began west of Innisfail (#2) at 2336Z.
Inflow dropped off at 0000Z (19th) near the
Innisfail cell, so HS4 was redirected to patrol
west of Caroline. Nothing seedable was found
in the area, so HS4 RTB to YQF at 0013Z
(19th).
An intense line of storms developed in the
northern buffer near Rocky MH. HS4 was
launched at 0141Z (19th) to seed ahead of the
line west of Rocky MH as it moved SE into the
project area. Seeding began on storm #3 at
0214Z. At 0338Z HS4 was redirected to
development over YQF. Seeding began on
storm #5 over YQF at 0343Z. At 0412Z (19th)
HS4 RTB to YQF.
HS3 was launched at 0128Z (19th) to intercept
the line of convection approaching from the
NW. They were airborne at 0206Z after having
some trouble with a cargo door. Seeding
began on storm #4 west of Lacombe at 0218Z.
New activity then developed directly over YQF
and HS3 was redirected to that area. Seeding
resumed over YQF (#5) at 0326Z and
continued until all activity moved east of the
project area. HS3 RTB to YQF at 0410Z.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1907-2200Z; 9 EJ; #1 NW of Cochrane.
HS4: 2152-2325Z; no seeding; patrol Rocky
and Innisfail.
HS4: 2325Z (07/18)-0038Z (07/19); 10 BIP, 80
min acetone generator time; #2 W of Innisfail.
HS4: 0153Z (07/19)-0430Z (07/19); 21 BIP,
240 min acetone generator time; #3 W of
Rocky, #5 over Red Deer.
HS3: 0159Z (07/19)-0425Z (07/19); 164 EJ, 12
BIP; #4 W of Lacombe, #5 Red Deer.
July 19,
Monday
Low-pressure trough was located over AB province.
Surface low-pressure center was located S of BC
province. Surface high-pressure center was formed over
the border between BC and AB provinces. Jet PVA core
was crossing the area S of Canadian border from the W
to the E. The atmosphere was slightly unstable and
humid.
Light stratiform showers lingered over the project area
throughout the day. A few shallow embedded convective
cells were observed over the YYC area around 00Z, but
there were no hail threats. Showers continued through
the evening, and then the project area cleared out around
09Z, remaining clear through morning.
July 20,
Tuesday
Low-pressure trough approached AB from the W. The
trough axis was located over the Western part of BC
province. Surface high-pressure center remained over
the border between BC and AB. Jet PVA core was
crossing the area S of Canadian border from the W to the
E. The atmosphere is unstable and humid.
Weak, pulse-type thunderstorms developed during the
HS4 performed a maintenance flight at 1845Z.
They tested the newly installed ADAS
computer, and AirLink tracking worked fine.
HS2 was launched at 2023Z for a slowly
developing cell in the Cochrane area that was
heading toward the YYC metro. HS2 was
airborne at 2041Z. Upon reaching the cell near
afternoon. Cells remained nearly stationary. A few radar
scans indicated marginal hail threats with possible small
hail near Cochrane around 21Z. A somewhat stronger
cell developed over the YYC metro around 01Z. Both of
these weak storms were seeded. Activity diminished
around 03Z, and the project area was clear during the
overnight hours.
Cochrane, HS2 reported up to 1,000fpm of
inflow. Seeding began on storm #1 at 2056Z.
Inflow diminished and seeding ended at 2137Z.
HS2 patrolled the area for another 20min, but
found nothing else to seed. They RTB at
2157Z.
HS2 was launched at 0125Z (21st) for a
second flight as a cell developed directly over
the YYC area. HS2 was airborne at 0131Z.
The cell remained nearly stationary, but
eventually propagated southward toward
Okotoks. HS2 began seeding over YYC at
0138Z. Seeding continued as the cell
developed toward the south. At 0236Z all
activity weakened below hail threat criteria and
HS2 RTB to YYC.
Flight Summary
HS4: 1845-1911Z; no seeding; Mx flight to
check new ADAS system.
HS2: 2030-2214Z; 4 BIP, 82 min acetone
generator time; #1 NW Cochrane.
HS2: 0129Z (07/21)-0254Z (07/21); 11 BIP,
114 min acetone generator time; #2 YYC to
Okotoks.
July 21,
Wednesday
Low-pressure trough was located over the Southern part
of AB province. Surface high-pressure center was
located over the border between AB and SK. Cold front
was approaching to the project area from the W. Jet PVA
core was located SE of AB province. The atmosphere is
unstable and humid.
Mid-afternoon convection occurred over the foothills, but
nearly all cells dissipated as they approached the western
project boundary. One cell finally moved across the
project boundary SW of Sundre, and a patrol flight was
launched. A stronger pulse-type storm approached the
Rocky MH area from the northwest. A patrol flight was
launched to that area as well. Seeding occurred briefly,
but the cell quickly weakened below hail threat criteria
with little new growth so seeding was halted. All activity
dissipated by early evening, and the project area was
clear overnight.
HS3 performed a recurrency flight in the
morning before briefing time. The aircraft was
airborne over YQF at 1735Z and returned to
YQF 20 minutes later.
HS3 was launched for top seeding at 2301Z to
a cell NW of Rocky MH. HS3 was airborne at
2334Z. Upon reaching the storm at 2352Z,
HS3 found several seedable towers and began
seeding for a short time. The cell quickly
weakened, and only weak growth was reported.
Seeding was halted, and HS3 monitored the
cell for redevelopment until it cleared the Rocky
MH area. HS3 then RTB to YQF at 0010Z
(22nd).
HS2 was launched at 2318Z for patrol S of
Sundre as a weak cell moved off the foothills
toward Cremona. HS2 was airborne at 2034Z.
As HS2 reached the area near Cremona, the
cell dissipated on radar. HS2 reported no new
growth, just lots of anvil. They RTB to YYC at
2352Z.
Flight Summary
HS3: 1725-1755Z; no seeding; recurrency
flight.
HS3: 2322Z (07/21)-0033Z (07/22); 2 BIP; #1
Rocky MH
HS2: 2323Z (07/21)-0016Z (07/22); no seeding;
patrol S of Sundre.
July 22,
Thursday
Low-pressure trough remained located over AB province.
Surface low pressure center had formed over the project
area. Cold front was approaching the project area from
HS4 was launched at 2031Z due to a
developing storm over the Olds area. HS4
became airborne at 2039Z and patrolled an
the W. Jet PVA core was located SW and S of AB
province. The atmosphere is unstable and humid.
The early afternoon hours saw a band of rain showers
which swept from west to east across the project area.
Once the band of showers reached south of Didsbury, the
first storm of the day grew but quickly dissipated. At 21Z,
the next series of cells formed east of the Rocky MH and
Caroline areas. These cells eventually merged into an
elongated north to south storm. This elongated storm
was quasi-stationary and eventually became embedded
after an hour.
At around 22Z, a band of convection slowly marched its
way towards the Calgary area from the mountains. By
23Z, this convection became embedded as it passed over
the western project area border. After a half an hour, the
strongest cells were NW of Cochrane and were slowly
moving towards the NW. Then at around 2330Z,
convection began to form over the Calgary area. The
strongest storm formed over northern Calgary and
tracked towards Airdrie. In the meantime, another line
formed SE of Calgary and tracked towards Strathmore.
At around 2345Z, a north-south oriented line of cells
began to form over the Red Deer area. This line was also
quasi-stationary and lasted for around three hours before
dissipating. Pea sized hail was reported NE of Red Deer
near the town of Blackfalds. The rest of the night saw
rain showers over much of the project area. These rain
showers eventually became scattered by morning.
area NE of Olds. At 2107Z, the flight was
redirected towards an area to the S of Rocky
MH. At 2147Z, HS4 began seeding Storm #1
with burners SW of Sylvan Lake. The seeding
continued until 2250Z, when the inflow was lost
and the storm became embedded.
HS2 was launched at 2222Z for developing
convection over the foothills to the west of
Calgary. At 2236Z, HS2 became airborne. At
2245Z, they found good inflow and started
seeding Storm #2 S of Cochrane with burners
and BIPs. The seeding continued until 2331Z
when the pilots lost all inflow. HS2 then flew
towards the developing cell over southern
Calgary. They started seeding Storm #3 (over
southern Calgary) at 2357Z. At 0010Z (23rd),
HS2 continued to seed as it moved towards
Storm #5 near Airdrie. At 0029Z, HS2 stopped
seeding and was redirected towards developing
convection near Strathmore. At 0050Z, HS2
began seeding Storm #6 SW of Strathmore.
HS2 stopped seeding at 0110Z (23rd) and RTB
to Calgary.
HS4 was launched at 2353Z because of cell
development north of Red Deer. At 0010Z
(23rd), HS4 became airborne. Seeding began
on Storm #4 over Red Deer at 0015Z. The
seeding was stopped for Storm #4 at 0058Z
after the storms inflow diminished. HS4 then
patrolled SE of Red Deer. At 0137Z, the pilots
found inflow again and started seeding Storm
#7 E of Innisfail. HS4 stopped seeding at
0250Z (23rd) after the storm began to
dissipate. HS4 then RTB back to Red Deer.
Flight Summary
HS4: 2023-2303Z; 120 min acetone generator
time; patrol NE of Olds, #1 SW of Sylvan Lake.
HS2: 2224Z (07/22)-0127Z (07/23); 9 BIP, 188
min acetone generator time; #2 W of YYC, #3
over YYC, #5 over Airdrie, #6 SW of
Strathmore.
HS4: 0004Z (07/23)-0302Z (07/23); 7 BIP, 216
min acetone generator time; #4 over YQF,
patrol SE of YQF, #7 E of Innisfail.
July 23,
Friday
High-pressure ridge was forming W of the project area.
The ridge axis was located over the border between BC
and AB provinces. Surface high-pressure center was
located S of BC. Jet PVA core was crossing the northern
part of BC from the SW to the NE. The atmosphere was
Convective rain showers occurred during the morning
hours. The rest of the day saw mostly clear skies directly
over the project area. The mountains experienced light
rain showers during the afternoon hours.
Max titan cell top= 5.5 km, 37 max dBZ
July 24,
Saturday
High-pressure ridge had passed AB province and its axis
was located over the central part of SK. Low-pressure
trough was approaching the project area from the W.
Surface high-pressure center was located over the border
between BC and AB. Cold front was approaching the
project area from the NW. Jet PVA core was located N of
the project area. The atmosphere was unstable and
capped at low levels.
Mostly clear skies occurred over the project area for most
of the afternoon. A cold front began to pass through the
northern part of the project area during the late afternoon
hours. At around 2330Z, this cold front produced one
moderately strong storm over the northern buffer zone.
The storm passed between Ponoka and Lacombe before
dissipating.
HS3 was launched to NW of Red Deer at
2358Z. At 0020Z (25th), the flight became
airborne. HS3 started seeding the main cell of
Storm #1 at 0036Z. At 0058Z, the flight was
redirected towards the western cell of the storm
and seeding continued. HS3 would briefly stop
seeding while outside of the northern border of
the buffer zone. At 0122Z, the pilots stopped
seeding after finding no new growth. HS3 RTB
to Red Deer at 0129Z.
Flight Summary
HS3: 0010Z (07/25)-0143Z (07/25); 102 EJ; #1
NW of Lacombe.
July 25,
Sunday
The atmosphere was very unstable and capped during
the late afternoon and evening hours. Over the Calgary
area, there was strong convective inhibition throughout
the day. A weaker cap existed over the Red Deer area.
The main triggers were upslope flow and a dryline along
the range. The overall scenario was a loaded gun
situation. The wind shear supported long lived
thunderstorms.
Only a few cumulus clouds were seen during the
afternoon hours. At 00Z (26th), towering cumulus began
to develop W of Sundre. These clouds quickly formed
into a convective cell which started to track to the east-
northeast. Once the convection developed into an
impressive supercell, the storm turned into a right turner
and tracked toward the SE. The storm passed over Olds,
the radar, and Didsbury. Heavy precipitation was
observed in Olds. At the radar, marble sized (20mm) hail
fell and partially covered the ground. A few quarter-sized
(25mm) pieces of hail were also observed at the radar.
The hail fell at the radar for around 10 to 15 minutes.
After passing over the radar, the supercell continued to
track to the SE eventually passing over the town of Acme
before exiting the project area at 0330Z (26th).
At 0430Z (26th), weak cells began to build over the Red
Deer area. The growth process was slow and only lasted
until around 05Z. In the meantime, strong cellular
development with frequent lightning was observed north
of Rocky MH and Ponoka by HS3. This line slowly crept
toward the northern buffer zone as it moved eastward. At
around 0745Z, the line finally moved through the Ponoka
area from the NW producing moderate to heavy rain
showers. These convective rain showers lingered over
this area (NE of YQF) until the early morning.
HS4 was launched at 0039Z (26th) to a rapidly
growing storm over the town of Sundre. The
flight became airborne at 0051Zand flew
towards Storm #1. HS4 found inflow on the
south side and started seeding at 0115Z. HS4
continued seeding until Storm #1 was NE of
Airdrie. HS4 stopped seeding at 0256Z (26th)
and RTB to YQF.
HS3 was launched at 0039Z (26th) to the same
storm (#1) as HS4. The flight became airborne
at 0113Z. HS3 started top seeding Storm #1 at
0123Z. The flight started by seeding SW flank
cell and eventually moved on to the main cell.
HS3 continued seeding Storm #1 until it was
out of the project area. At 0321Z (26th), the
flight stopped seeding and RTB to Springbank.
Red Deer was out of Jet A fuel, so the aircraft
refueled in Springbank.
HS2 was launched to storm #1 NE of Airdrie at
0228Z (26th), after hearing HS4 was starting to
get low on flares. The aircraft became airborne
at 0240Z. At 0247Z, HS2 took over for HS4
and started base seeding Storm #1. At 0321Z
(26th), the flight stopped seeding and RTB to
YYC.
HS3 became airborne at 0428Z (26th) after
refueling with Jet A at the Springbank airport.
The flight initially was going to be a ferry flight
from Springbank to YQF. At 0437Z, HS3 was
redirected to Storm #2 over YQF. The flight
started seeding at 0454Z after finding new
growth. At 0502Z, HS3 stopped seeding and
went back to patrolling over the YQF area. The
flight RTB to YQF at 0527Z (26th), after finding
no new growth.
Flight Summary
HS4: 0046Z (07/26)-0316Z (07/26); 20BIP, 202
min acetone generator time; #1 E of Sundre.
HS3: 0105Z (07/26)-0342Z (07/26); 190EJ,
16BIP; #1 E of Sundre.
HS2: 0231Z (07/26)-0339Z (07/26); 5BIP, 54
min acetone generator time; #1 NE of Airdrie.
HS3: 0422Z (07/26)-0545Z (07/26); 21EJ; #2
over YQF.
July 26,
Monday
An upper trough was in place over northern AB with a
weak jet over the project area. A stationary front was in
place over the US/AB border. There was weak instability
throughout the afternoon and evening hours. Wind shear
was weak and backed with height. Positive vorticity
advection occurred over the southern half of the project
area during the evening hours.
Most of the afternoon saw fair weather cumulus. At
around 2245Z, convection started to develop in the
foothills NW of Cochrane. This convection eventually
formed a cell and tracked towards Cochrane. While
Storm #1 was over Cochrane, it diminished for a brief
time. As Storm #1 moved over the western metropolitan
area of Calgary, it intensified again. Storm #1 tracked SE
through Calgary. In the meantime, another storm (#2)
tracked behind Storm #1. Once Storm #2 was over the
Cochrane area, it developed into a supercell and
continued to track to the SE. Overall, Storm #2s track
was more southerly than Storm #1s track. At 0206Z,
HS2 relayed that another aircraft saw a tornado N of
Okotoks. As the supercell was moving through the
Calgary area, embedded convection developed W of
Okotoks over the foothills. These cells (Storm #3) also
tracked to the SE eventually combining into one cell
which went through High River.
Golf ball sized hail was reported over SW Calgary.
HS2 was launched W of the Cochrane area at
2326Z. The flight became airborne at 2352Z
and was directed to patrol over the
northwestern part of YYC. At 0006Z (27th),
HS2 reported that the bases were well formed
and there was good inflow. As a result, HS2
started seeding Storm #1 at 0007Z. The flight
continued to seed this storm until it was just
outside the metropolitan limits. HS3 stopped
seeding Storm #1 at 0103Z and was redirected
towards a strong cell over the Cochrane area.
HS2 started seeding Storm #2 at 0109. HS2
continued to seed the supercell until it was well
SE of the YYC area. HS2 stopped seeding at
0235Z (27th) and RTB to YYC.
HS3 was launched to over the Cochrane area
at 0015Z (27th). The flight became airborne at
0043Z. At 0110Z, HS3 started seeding Storm
#2 over the Cochrane area. The flight
continued to seed this supercell until it moved
well past the YYC area. HS3 stopped seeding
Storm #2 at 0229Z. The flight was then
redirected to WNW of High River. HS3 started
seeding Storm #3 at 0246Z. HS3 continued
seeding the cell until it passed over the
southern border of the project area. At 0315Z
(27th), the crew stopped seeding and RTB to
YQF.
Flight Summary
HS2: 2345Z (07/26)-0258Z (07/27); 25BIP, 280
min acetone generator time; #1 over YYC, #2
over Cochrane.
HS3: 0036Z (07/27)-0355Z (07/27); 228EJ; #2
over Cochrane, #3 WNW of High River.
July 27,
Tuesday
Upper level ridging occurred over the project area. The
atmosphere was stable over the Red Deer area, and only
very weak instability was present over the Calgary area.
Convective inhibition was very strong over the entire
region. A weak shortwave was progged to move through
the area during the overnight hours creating a few
showers, but no hail storms.
Relatively clear weather occurred during the daytime and
evening hours. The nighttime hours saw weak stratus
rain with one convective rain shower near Sundre. No
lightning was detected within the convective shower.
Public Relations: Project Site Manager, Tom
Walton participated in two phone interviews.
The first interview was with the Red Deer
Advocate and the other was with the Mountain
View Gazette.
HS1 performed a maintenance flight.
Flight Summary
HS1: 1724-1811Z; no seeding; Mx flight.
July 28,
Wednesday
An upper ridge over the area was beginning to move off
to the east as a weak upper trough moved into BC.
Surface dew points were in the high teens over the
project area. The atmosphere was extremely unstable
with near 2000 CAPE. Two weak short wave troughs
were progged to move through the area during the
afternoon and evening. The wind profile was unfavorable
for organized updrafts over QF, but slightly better shear
was present along the far southern part of the target area.
Stable conditions were expected in the late evening and
overnight hours.
Stratus clouds passed over the project area during the
early afternoon. The first convective cells formed SW of
Calgary and S of Rocky MH. The main convective
activity was located over the mountains W of the project
area. Some severe hail storms developed over the
western border of the project area during the afternoon
and evening. The most severe hailstorm was crossing
the area W of High River from the NW to the SE. The
max reflectivity of that storm reached 66 dBZ W of the
project area.
SW of Calgary. HS2 was airborne at 1943Z
and started patrolling the area S of Cochrane.
At 2042Z HS2 was redirected W of Cochrane.
At 2126Z HS2 started patrolling SW of Calgary.
HS2 RTB at 2253Z.
HS3 was launched at 2010Z and was airborne
at 2042Z to patrol the area NW of Sundre. HS3
started seeding Storm #1 W of Sundre at
2114Z. At 2220Z, HS3 stopped seeding the
main cell of Storm #1. HS3 started seeding the
western cell of Storm #1 at 2226Z. At 2240Z
HS3 stopped seeding Storm #1 and started
patrolling N of Sundre. 2253Z - HS3 RTB.
SW of Calgary. At 2359Z HS1 was airborne. At
0017Z (29th) HS1 started patrolling N of
Cochrane area. At 0121Z, HS1 started
patrolling S of Airdrie. Due to a lack of targets
HS1 RTB at 0206Z (29th).
Flight Summary
HS2: 19332318Z; no seeding. Patrol S of
Cochrane and SW of Calgary.
HS3: 2034Z (07/28)0011Z (07/29); 154 EJ, 7
BIPs; Storm #1 W and SW of Sundre.
HS1: 2351Z (07/28)0222Z (07/29); No
seeding; Patrol N of Cochrane and S of Airdrie.
July 29,
Thursday
A low amplitude upper trough was approaching AB from
the west. A potent shortwave trough was moving through
the S half of the project area during the afternoon. The
atmosphere was very unstable again with near 2000
CAPE. Wind shear profiles were weak. Surface dew
points were in the low teens with high temperatures
expected to reach nearly 30C. The atmosphere looked to
stabilize in the evening and overnight hours.
The first convective clouds formed SW of Calgary late in
the morning and around noon. Numerous TITAN cells
developed W and SW of Calgary early in the afternoon.
Large clusters of titan cells approached the Cochrane and
Sundre areas from the W and dissipated over the western
border of the project area. Some severe thunderstorms
developed over the eastern and the northern buffer zones
during the evening and overnight.
Tmax YC = 25.9 C and a trace of rain.
W of Okotoks. At 1737Z HS2 was airborne. At
1915Z HS2 started cloud base seeding Storm
#1 NW of Cochrane. At 2016Z HS2 stopped
seeding Storm #1 and started patrolling over
the same area. HS2 RTB at 2033Z.
NW of Sundre. At 2005Z HS4 was airborne.
At 2025Z HS4 started patrolling area SW of
Sundre. HS4 RTB at 2204Z.
Flight Summary
HS2: 17282049Z; 12 BIPs, 122 min acetone
generator time; Storm #1 NW of Cochrane.
HS4: 20002220Z; no seeding; Patrol SW and
SE of Sundre.
July 30,
Friday
A weak upper level trough was moving into western AB
from the west bringing several lobes of vorticity through
the region. The atmosphere remained very unstable with
HS4 was launched at 2001Z to patrol area NW
of Sundre. HS4 was airborne at 2022Z. HS4
started patrolling the area NW of Sundre at
dew points in the low teens. A cold front was moving
through from the north in the late afternoon while a
vorticity lobe moved through the YYC area in the early
evening. Wind shear was favorable for organized
convection including possible supercells. Elevated
instability was expected through much of the overnight
hours.
The first convective clouds started forming SW of RMH
early in the afternoon. Two big clusters of TITAN cells
developed S of Rocky MH and SW of Sundre. Some
cells formed W and SW of Calgary later. A supercell
formed SW of Sundre in the early evening and crossed
the project area from the NW to the SE. A tornado was
reported NW of Sundre. Pea sized hail was reported on
HW2 near Crossfield. Another cluster of TITAN cells
developed SW and S of Red Deer during the night.
Tmax QF = 25.5C and a trace of rain.
2037Z. At 2105Z HS4 reported a tornado NW
of Sundre. At 2110Z HS4 started cloud base
seeding Storm #1 NW of Sundre and stopped
seeding Storm #1 at 2202Z, then was
redirected NW of Airdrie. At 2215Z HS4 started
seeding Storm#3 NW of Airdrie and stopped
seeding the western cell of Storm #3 N of
Cochrane at 2311Z then RTB.
of Didsbury and was airborne at 2120Z. At
2136Z HS1 started seeding Storm #2 SW of
Cochrane and stopped seeding at 2253Z to be
redirected to Storm #3 NW of Airdrie. At 2335Z
HS1 started seeding Storm#3 N of Cochrane.
HS1 reported some mechanical problems with
their third EJ rack at 2352Z and they were also
out of BIPs. At 0016Z (31th) HS1 RTB.
S of Cochrane and was airborne at 2231Z. At
2239Z HS2 started seeding Storm #2 W of
Calgary. HS2 stopped seeding Storm #2 at
2254Z to start patrolling over the same area.
At 2317Z HS2 started seeding Storm #3 N of
Cochrane. At 0057Z (31st) HS2 stopped
seeding and RTB.
HS3 was launched 2345Z to patrol area N of
Cochrane and was airborne at 0011Z (31st).
HS3 started seeding Storm #3 W of Airdrie at
0030Z. At 0140Z, HS3 stopped seeding Storm
#3 NE of Calgary and was redirected W of
Airdrie. HS3 started seeding Storm #4 W of
Airdrie at 0148Z and stopped at 0233Z. HS3
stopped seeding Storm #4 to start patrolling
over the same area. At 0252Z (31st) HS3 RTB.
HS3 was launched the second time at 0512Z
(31st) to patrol area SW of Red Deer. At
0540Z HS3 was airborne. At 0600Z, HS3
started seeding Storm #5 W of Innisfail. At
0628Z, HS3 continued seeding the W side of
cells N of Sundre. At 0713Z (31st) HS3
stopped seeding because of a broken wind
screen - RTB Calgary.
Flight Summary
HS4: 20162348Z; 22 BIPs, 240 min acetone
generator time; Storm #1 NW of Sundre, Storm
#3 NW of Airdrie.
HS1: 2115Z (07/30)0037Z (07/31); 150 EJ, 21
BIPs; Storm #2 W of Calgary, Storm #3 N of
Cochrane.
HS2: 2224Z (07/30)-0110Z (07/31); 26 BIPs,
224 min acetone generator time; #2 W of YYC,
#3 N of Cochrane.
HS3: 0003Z (07/31)0317Z (07/31); 221 EJ, 13
BIPs; #3 W of Airdrie to E of Calgary, #4 W of
Airdrie.
HS3: 0528Z (07/31)0750Z (07/31); 201 EJ, 10
BIPs; #5 W of Innisfail.
July 31,
Saturday
The upper jet was positioned along the US and Canada
border. An open wave, mid-level trough was over the BC
and Washington border. The trough moved eastward and
began to influence southern AB during the evening and
nighttime hours. Vorticity advection was minimal during
the afternoon and early evening hours. The atmosphere
was moderately unstable and only slightly capped.
Mostly cloudy conditions occurred over the southern part
of AB during the day. Convective clouds developed over
the mountains late in the afternoon. Three big clusters of
titan cells developed SW of Calgary, SW of Sundre and
WSW of Rocky MH. All the cells were located W of the
project area. Stratiform precipitation covered the central
part of the project area in the evening. A second wave of
convective development started late in the evening over
the SE corner of the project area. The biggest cluster of
the weak titan cells approached the Calgary area during
the night. Thunder showers were reported over the
southern part of the project area including the city of
Calgary.
Tmax QF = 23.5C and a trace of rain.
August 01,
Sunday
The upper jet remained over the Canadian and US
border. The open wave, mid-level low continued to slowly
move eastward over southern AB. Vorticity was
abundant close to the low. A surface low remained over
the BC and Washington border. A cold front was over
northern AB and moved slowly towards Edmonton.
During the morning hours, there was cloudy weather with
some sunny periods over most of the project area.
Convective clouds started developing SW of Calgary
early in the afternoon. The biggest cluster of TITAN cells
was over the southern part of the project area from the W
to the E, late in the afternoon. Another big cluster of cells
developed NW and SW of Sundre early in the evening.
Numerous weak cells formed W and NW of RMH during
the night.
SW of Okotoks. HS1 was airborne at 2103Z
and started patrolling an area W of Okotoks by
2131Z. At 2128Z, HS1 started seeding Storm
#1 W of High River. HS1 stopped seeding
Storm #1 at 2145Z and started patrolling S of
Okotoks. HS1 started seeding Storm #2 over
High River at 2200Z. HS1 stopped seeding
Storm #2 NE of High River at 2314Z and
started patrolling over the same area. At
2326Z HS1 RTB.
Flight Summary
HS1: 2056-2350Z; 80 EJ, 15 BIPs; Storm #1 W
of High River, Storm #2 over and NE of High
River.
August 02,
Monday
The upper jet continued to remain over the SK and ND
border. An upper level low made its way through the
central part of AB. At the surface, a high pressure system
was over the Rocky Mountains. A cold front slowly
moved southward through the project area. The
atmosphere was unstable and the main trigger
mechanism was the cold front.
Conditions were mostly cloudy over the project area in
the morning and early in the afternoon. Convective cloud
development started W of Sundre in the afternoon. The
big line of TITAN cells, orientated from the SW to the NE,
HS2 was launched at 0029Z (3rd) to patrol area
NW of Calgary and was airborne at 0047Z.
HS2 started seeding Storm #1 over the NW
part of Calgary at 0049Z. HS2 continued
seeding the southern cell of the same cluster at
0106Z. HS2 stopped seeding at 0129Z and
started patrolling SE of Calgary. At 0152Z (3rd)
HS2 RTB.
Flight Summary
HS2: 0038Z (08/03)-0236Z (08/03); 8 BIPs, 80
min acetone generator time; Storm #1 over
formed over the central part of the project area late in the
afternoon. This line crossed the project area from the
NW to the SE. Thundershowers were observed over
Calgary in the evening.
Calgary.
August 03,
Tuesday
The upper level jet moved to the east and was over the
MB and ND border. At the mid-levels, a high amplitude
ridge built over the project area. The ridge axis was over
the province of British Columbia. The upper level low that
was just north of the project area the previous day
morphed into a trof. This trof was over western SK. A
surface high pressure system was in place over the
project area. The atmosphere was slightly unstable.
A few weak convective showers moved through from
north to south during the afternoon with several lightning
strikes detected along the eastern project border. There
were no hail threats. Activity cleared out in the late
evening, and the project area was clear overnight.
August 04,
Wednesday
There was no jet influence over the area. An upper level
ridge continued to remain over western Canada. The
ridge axis was located over BC. Weak vorticity advection
occurred during the afternoon and evening hours. A
surface high pressure system was still in place over the
project area, and a cold front slowly crept towards
southern AB. The atmosphere was slightly unstable.
This cold front did not pass through the project area. No
radar echoes were observed throughout the day or
overnight. Only a few towering cumulus were present
over the foothills during the afternoon.
Public Relations: A tour of the radar facility
occurred during the early afternoon. HS1 flew
a PR flight to the Olds-Didsbury airport to be
part of the event. They returned to YYC at the
end of the tour.
HS2 also attempted to fly to the radar for the
tour, but had a mechanical problem with the
aircraft and returned to YYC before reaching
Olds-Didsbury airport.
Flight Summary
HS1: 1835-1908Z; no seeding; PR flight to
radar.
HS2: 1848-1927Z: no seeding: PR/Mx flight
HS1: 2003-2029Z; no seeding; PR flight
returning to YYC.
August 05,
Thursday
The upper level ridge axis was over AB for most of the
day. This ridge axis eventually moved to the east during
the nighttime hours. No vorticity advection occurred. At
the surface, high pressure was in place for most of the
day before a stationary front moved over the project area
during the late evening hours. The atmosphere became
slightly unstable and the only trigger was surface heating.
The region was clear throughout the afternoon and most
of the overnight hours. One weak convective shower
moved through the southern buffer area around 10Z in
the morning with a lightning strike. The cell was not a hail
threat.
August 06,
Friday
A low-pressure trough was located over the project area.
The trough axis was orientated from the N to the S. A
surface low-pressure center formed S of BC. The jet PVA
core was located over the western part of BC. The
atmosphere was very unstable and humid.
Weak echoes formed west of YYC in the afternoon, but
dissipated as they moved off the mountains. There were
no hail threats in the southern part of the project area. By
late afternoon, stronger echoes developed west of Rocky
MH. Storms moved eastward along the northern project
border. Inflow was very difficult to find as the embedded
storms passed through Rocky, but then a front feeding
line developed as it moved toward Red Deer. The line
became broken into individual cells again in the eastern
part of the project area, and a strong discrete cell passed
through the Pine Lake area. A moderately strong cell
also passed over the Red Deer Airport dropping pea-size
hail. Activity weakened around sunset and all operations
ended. The project area was clear overnight.
Tmax QF = 26.3 C and 11.0mm of rain.
cluster of cells west of Rocky MH in the buffer
zone. HS4 was airborne at 2138Z. When they
initially reached the storms, no inflow was
found. HS4 patrolled all sides of the
developing activity near Rocky, but found no
seedable bases until 2330Z. Seeding began at
that time in front of a N/S line west of Sylvan
Lake. Seeding continued until the storms were
over the Red Deer area. HS4 RTB to YQF at
0056Z (7th) as they were getting low on fuel.
HS2 performed a maintenance flight to check
manifold pressure issues. They returned to
YYC with no problems.
HS1 was launched at 2330Z to seed the line of
activity west of Red Deer near Sylvan Lake.
The flight was airborne at 2355Z. Seeding
began at 0016Z (7th) just west of Sylvan Lake.
Pilots reported excellent icing conditions,
descending multiple times to shed ice. They
worked the activity until it reached the YQF
area. As activity weakened, they RTB to YYC
at 0101Z (7th).
HS3 was launched from YYC for base seeding
at 2349Z. They had just received a new
windscreen, and were instructed to stay at base
seeding altitudes to prevent undue stress on
the new windscreen adhesive. HS3 was
airborne at 0020 (7th) and began base seeding
with BIPs at 0046 west of YQF. They
continued working cells near the Red Deer area
as they moved toward Pine Lake. Three
different storms were seeding in this area from
west of YQF to Pine Lake. HS3 ran out of
flares as the last storm was moving out of the
project area. They RTB to YQF at 0307Z (7th).
Flight Summary
HS4: 2132Z (08/6)-0106Z (08/07): 17 BIP, 174
min acetone generator time; #1 NW Sylvan to
YQF.
HS2:2135-2219Z; no seeding; Mx Flight.
HS1: 2350Z (08/06)-0129Z (08/07): 99 EJ, 5
BIP; #1 W of Sylvan to YQF.
HS3: 0000Z (08/07)-0315Z (08/07): 30BIP; #1
W of YQF to Pine Lake, #2 S of YQF, #3 W of
YQF to Pine Lake again.
August 07,
Saturday
A low-pressure trough was approaching AB from the
west. A cold front was located over the project area.
Surface low-pressure was located SW of AB. The
atmosphere was very unstable and humid.
As the trough axis passed through the project area in the
HS3 was launched at 2130Z for development
west of Rocky MH. HS3 was airborne at
2157Z. Seeding began on Storm #1 at 2216Z.
HS3 repositioned to west of Sundre and began
seeding Storm #2 at 2338Z. HS3 began
seeding Storm #3 west of Sundre at 0017Z
midafternoon, cells developed near Rocky MH. New cells
continued to propagate southward forming a broken line
as the N-S oriented axis moved eastward through the
project area. One cluster of cells developed just west of
Calgary and passed through the metro area; there were
no hail reports. A solid squall line formed by the late
evening over the far eastern part of the project area, but it
weakened becoming only rain showers around dusk and
all operations were halted.
Tmax YC = 25.4 C and 0.6mm of rain.
Tmax Radar = 25.3 C and 2.6mm of rain.
(8th). They then reported new growth near
Springbank and began seeding Storm #4 at
0100Z west of YYC. At 0132Z (8th), HS3 was
low on fuel and RTB to YQF.
HS2 was launched at 0058Z (8th) for
development near Springbank. The flight was
airborne at 0107Z. Seeding began on Storm
#4 over Springbank at 0108Z. Seeding
continued on the line of cells as it moved
eastward toward Strathmore. When the cells
weakened below hail criteria, HS2 RTB at
0220Z (8th).
HS4 was launched at 0055Z (8th) to a cluster
of hail storms west of Innisfail. The flight was
airborne at 0110Z. Seeding began on Storm
#3 NW of Olds at 0120Z. The cluster became
part of a N to S line of cells, and they continued
working the north end of the line that was
headed toward Three Hills. The line weakened
to just rain showers east of Olds, and HS4 RTB
at 0219Z (8th).
HS1 was launched at 0127Z (8th) to take over
seeding for HS3 near Springbank. The flight
was airborne at 0143Z and began seeding
Storm #5 over northern YYC at 0153Z.
Seeding continued over Airdrie and to the east
as a line of storms pushed toward
Linden/Acme. The line eventually weakened
below hail threat criteria. HS1 patrolled for a
short time before RTB to YYC at 0243Z (8th).
Flight Summary
HS3: 2147Z (08/07)-0204Z (08/08); 190 EJ; #1
SW Rocky MH, #2 W of Sundre, #3 W of
Sundre again, #4 Springbank to Airdrie.
HS2: 0058Z (08/08)-0248Z (08/08); 13 BIP,
138 min acetone generator time; #4 Springbank
to Strathmore.
HS4: 0105Z (08/08)-0245Z (08/08); 9 BIP, 110
min acetone generator time; #3 NW Olds to
Three Hills.
HS1: 0138Z (08/08)-0305Z (08/08); 112 EJ, 6
BIP; #5 W of Airdrie to Acme/Linden.
August 08,
Sunday
west. A weak short wave trough was located over the
project area. A surface Low-pressure center remained
SW of AB. A cold front was located over SK. The
atmosphere was unstable and humid.
A long lived hailstorm developed west of Rocky MH
during the midafternoon. Cell motion was very slow,
nearly stationary at times. Cells near Rocky moved
toward the east and propagated to the south. The storm
passed through Rocky MH, Caroline, Sundre and then
shifted east to Olds. Several inches of small hail were
observed near Caroline. A weak cell was also seeded
west of YYC, but it rapidly dissipated and was only
seeded for a brief time. Activity ended in the late
cell NW of Rocky MH. HS3 was airborne at
2226Z. Top seeding began on storm #1 at
2248Z. They continued to seed the same
storm as it developed toward the Caroline and
Sundre areas. They RTB at 0050Z (9th) as
HS4 took over for them.
HS1 was launched at 2305Z toward activity
near High River. They were airborne at 2344Z
and began top seeding storm #2 west of YYC
at 2356Z. At 0035(9th), seeding was halted,
and HS1 patrolled near Black Diamond. They
were then repositioned to the north and began
seeding storm #1 near Caroline at 0112Z. At
evening. The project radar was clear overnight.
Tmax QF = 21.7 C and trace of rain.
0221Z (9th), HS1 was out of EJs and RTB to
YYC.
HS4 was launched at 0020Z (9th) toward storm
#1 near Rocky. They were airborne at
0035Z(9th), and began base seeding at 0050Z.
Seeding continued as the storm moved through
Caroline to near Sundre. At 0250Z(9th), HS4
was replaced by HS2 over Sundre, and HS4
RTB.
HS2 was launched at 0215Z (9th) toward storm
#1 near Caroline. They were airborne at
0228Z. They took over base seeding near
Sundre at 0250Z. Base seeding continued as
the storm moved through Sundre and Olds. At
0402Z, convective activity diminished, inflow
was lost and HS2 began patrol near Olds.
Some weak inflow redeveloped, and seeding
resumed for a short time at 0420Z, but then the
cell dissipated. HS2 RTB to YYC at 0440Z
(9th).
HS3 was launched for their second flight of the
day at 0218Z (9th). They were airborne at
0235Z. They began top seeding storm #1 near
Sundre at 0256Z. Seeding continued until
0340Z (9th). HS3 then RTB to YQF at that time
as convective activity was diminishing.
Flight Summary
HS3: 2213Z (08/08)-0107Z (08/09); 250 EJ, 19
BIP; #1 Rocky MH.
HS1: 2335Z (08/08)-0245Z (08/09); 274 EJ, 7
BIP; #2 W of YYC, #1 Caroline.
HS4: 0030Z (08/09)-0313Z (08/09); 24 BIP,
236 min acetone generator time; #1 Caroline.
HS2: 0220Z (08/09)-0501Z (08/09); 9 BIP, 186
min acetone generator time; #1 Sundre.
HS3: 0227Z (08/09)-0403Z (08/09); 107 EJ, #1
Sundre.
August 09,
Monday
A low-pressure trough was located W of AB. The trough
axis was orientated from the N to S. Mid-level low-
pressure formed over the northern part of the border
between BC and AB. Surface high-pressure was located
W of the project area. The jet PVA core was crossing BC
from the north to the south. The atmosphere was very
unstable and humid.
Convective clouds began to erupt west of the Rocky MH
area at around 1930Z. The storms eventually grew larger
and started to move towards the east. These storms
were associated with a short wave trough which extended
south-southeastward along the Rocky Mountains. The
short wave moved eastward and a series of cells popped
up west of Calgary. This storm eventually tracked right
through Calgary. Calgary airport reported 0.4cm snow
pellets. Once this storm was through Calgary, another
storm developed SW of High River. This storm tracked
northward through Okotoks and eastern Calgary. During
this same time two storms developed. One storm was
HS2 was launched at 2116Z to several
developing cells W of the Cochrane area. The
flight became airborne at 2134Z and flew
towards a line of developing cells west of the
Cochrane area. The aircraft started seeding
Storm #1 at 2143Z. HS2 stopped seeding
storm #1 at 0026Z (10th) and was redirected
towards a new storm (#2), southwest of the
High River area. HS2 started seeding Storm
#5 (S of Okotoks) at 0036Z (10th). Pilots
continued to seed storm #5 as it propagated
northward through western Calgary. At 0137Z
(10th), HS2 stopped seeding and RTB to
Calgary.
HS1 was launched to west of the Calgary area
at 2146Z. The flight became airborne at
2203Z. HS1 started seeding Storm #1 (W of
Calgary) at 2209Z. The flight continued to seed
this storm as it moved eastward through the
NW of Calgary and the other was north-northwest of
Calgary. These two storms travelled northeastward and
merged before dissipating.
Tmax YC = 24.5 C and 26.8 mm rain.
Calgary metropolitan area. At 0019Z (10th),
stopped seeding and RTB to Calgary after
finding little new growth.
HS3 was launched SW of the Rock MH area at
2151Z. The aircraft became airborne at 2218Z
and was redirected towards a developing storm
NW of Sundre. The flight started seeding this
storm (#2) at 2247Z. At 2301Z, HS3 moved
over to Storm #3 SW of Rocky MH and started
seeding. Then at 2317Z, HS3 stopped seeding
Storm #3. At 2328Z, the flight found new
development near Storm #4 (S of Caroline) and
started seeding. HS3 stopped seeding and
RTB to Red Deer at 0024Z (10th).
HS4 was launched at 2337Z to a growing storm
near SW of Rocky MH. The aircraft became
airborne at 2351Z. At 0009Z (10th), HS4
started seeding both Storm #3 and Storm #4,
SE of Rocky MH. Then at 0045Z (10th) storm
#5, S of Okotoks, became a large storm, so the
flight was redirected towards this storm. HS4
started seeding storm #5, S of Calgary, at
0116Z. This storm eventually lost all inflow at
0147Z(10th), and HS4 stopped seeding. At the
same time the flight was redirected towards
new development N and W of Calgary. The
flight started seeding storms #6 and #7 at
0210Z (10th). At 0251Z, HS4 reported that the
two storms were dissipating. The flight stopped
seeding and RTB at 0251Z (10th).
Flight Summary
HS2: 2125Z (08/09)-0148Z (08/10); 16 BIP,
397 min acetone generator time; #1 W of YYC,
#5 S of Okotoks.
HS1: 2155Z (08/09)-0045Z (08/10); 12 BIP,
228 EJ; #1 W of YYC.
HS3: 2206Z (08/09)-0048Z (08/10); 98 EJ; #2
NW of Sundre, #3 SW of Rocky MH, #4 S of
Caroline.
HS4: 2345Z (08/09)-0310Z (08/10); 4 BIP, 264
min acetone generator time ; #3 and #4 SE of
Rocky MH, #5 S of YYC, #6 and #7 W of
Airdrie.
August 10,
Tuesday
A low-pressure trough was located over AB. The trough
axis was orientated from the north to the south and
located W of the project area. Middle level low-pressure
formed over the southern part of BC province. The jet
PVA core remained located over the eastern part of BC.
The atmosphere was unstable and humid.
A cold front moved off the mountains during the early
afternoon. This front triggered a few storms as it moved
northeastward across the project area. Storm #1 formed
in the foothills SW of Calgary and propagated towards the
Cochrane area. This storm dissipated just before
reaching Cochrane. Storm #2 formed northwest of
Calgary and moved towards the NE. This storm became
an elongated cell before dissipating. The second storm of
HS2 was launched at 1837Z to developing
storm (#1) SW of Cochrane. The flight became
airborne at 1855Z. At 1906Z, HS2 found
decent inflow along Storm #1 and started
seeding. The aircraft continued to seed this
storm as it moved northeastward towards
Cochrane. The cell began to dissipate at
2027Z and the flight stopped seeding. The
flight then began patrolling S of Cochrane.
Next, at 2156Z, HS2 was redirected towards a
new developing cell just northwest of Calgary.
HS2 began seeding Storm #2 at 2201Z. The
flight continued to seed this storm as it
intensified and moved towards the towns of
Crossfield and Airdrie. At 2228Z, the aircraft
the day did not impact any towns. Storm #3 grew west-
southwest of Okotoks. The cell only grew for a short
period of time before dissipating. The evening and
nighttime hours were relatively quiet.
stopped seeding Storm#2 and was redirected
towards a new storm west of Okotoks. HS2
started seeding Storm #3 at 2248Z. Then at
2258Z, the flight stopped seeding and RTB to
Calgary.
HS4 performed at patrol flight over the Sundre
area. HS4 reported no inflow along the line of
weak thunderstorms. These weak
thunderstorms were entirely glaciated.
HS1 flew a patrol flight over the foothills west of
Okotoks. The flight found glaciated clouds with
no new growth.
Flight Summary
generator time; #1 SW of Cochrane, #2
Cochrane to Airdrie, #3 W of Okotoks.
HS4: 2236Z (08/10)-0008Z (08/11); no seeding;
patrol Sundre.
HS1: 2240Z (08/10)-0015Z (08/11); no seeding;
patrol W of Okotoks.
August 11,
Wednesday
A low-pressure trough was located over AB. A mid-level,
low pressure center remained over the southern part of
BC. A cold front was approaching the project area from
the N. Surface low-pressure was centered over the
southern border of AB. The jet PVA core was crossing
BC and the western part of AB from the NW to the SE.
The atmosphere was unstable and humid.
Weak echoes began to develop in the buffer zone SW of
Calgary at around 20Z. These echoes eventually grew
into storms that initially tracked eastward. Once the
storms matured, they tracked southward and dissipated.
At around 22Z, a surface trough began to move eastward
off the foothills. This trough spawned several cells near
Rocky MH all the way down to Calgary. A few of these
cells grew into seedable storms. Another line of cells
developed between Didsbury and Calgary, and the line
propagated south-southeastward before dissipating over
northern Calgary.
HS1 was launched at 2045Z to a cell SW of
Calgary. The aircraft became airborne at
2110Z and reported that the storm was raining
out. At 2130Z, HS1 started seeding Storm #1
W of Okotoks. The flight found that the storm
had become glaciated at 2139Z and stopped
seeding. The flight then patrolled SW of
Calgary. At 2155Z, HS1 started seeding Storm
#1 again. The flight eventually found no new
growth and started patrolling at 2221Z. HS1
RTB to Calgary at 2321Z.
HS3 was launched at 2219Z to several
developing cells just W of the Sundre area.
The aircraft became airborne at 2238Z. Then
at 2254Z HS3 started patrolling over the
Sundre area. The flight was redirected to patrol
NW of Rocky MH at 2321Z. HS3 found only
weak growth and glaciated convection near
Rocky MH. At 0007Z (12th), the flight was
redirected towards a developing cell W of
Didsbury. The crew started seeding this storm
(#2) at 0026Z (12th). HS3 eventually found no
new growth and stopped seeding Storm #2 at
0039Z. At 0040Z, the aircraft was repositioned
over the area north of Calgary. The flight
quickly found new growth and started seeding
Storm #3 at 0057Z. HS3 also found another
growing cell and started seeding Storm #4 W of
Airdrie. The two storms were seeded at the
same time. At 0214Z (12th), HS3 stopped
seeding Storm #3 and #4 and RTB to YQF.
HS2 was launched N of the Calgary
metropolitan area at 0136Z (12th). The flight
became airborne at 0203Z and started seeding
Storm #4 at 0214Z. At 0302Z, HS2 stopped
seeding and patrolled NE of Calgary. The flight
stopped patrolling and RTB to Calgary at
0347Z (12th).
Flight Summary
HS1: 2100-2343Z; 23 EJ, 4 BIP; #1 W of
Okotoks.
HS3: 2227Z (08/11)-0242Z (08/12); 160 EJ, 5
BIP; #2 W of Didsbury, #3 W of Airdrie, #4 N of
Calgary.
HS2: 0156Z (08/12)-0409Z (08/12); 72 min
acetone generator time; #4 N of Calgary.
August 12,
Thursday
An upper level low pressure system was moving through
AB from NW to SE. A large amount of midlevel vorticity
was moving through, and the region was also affected by
the left exit quadrant of the upper jet. A cold front passed
through during the early morning hours bringing cool air
into the project area along with dense cloud cover. A
weak amount of instability was expected during the
afternoon which would combine with the strong upper
level forcing to form weak hailstorms. Wind shear was
unfavorable for organized convection. Gusty
northwesterly winds were expected through early
evening. Stable conditions were expected after 00Z.
The morning hours saw convective rain showers over the
northern half of the project area. At 19Z, a line of storms
formed north of Calgary. The line extended from the
west-southwest to the east-northeast across the project
area. This line of cells intensified as it moved southward
through the project area. Once the line was through the
project area, scattered convective rain showers fell during
the rest of the afternoon and evening.
Tmax YC = 19.1 C and 6 mm of rain.
HS1 was launched at 1836Z to a growing storm
near the Airdrie area. HS1 became airborne at
1856Z. The flight quickly found new growth
and started seeding Storm #1 N of Calgary at
1911Z. At 1947Z, HS1 stopped seeding Storm
#1 and started seeding Storm #2 W of
Springbank. Then at 2053Z the flight stopped
seeding Storm #2 and started patrolling near
Okotoks. HS1 stopped patrolling and RTB to
Calgary at 2100Z.
at 1859Z. The flight started seeding Storm #2,
W of Springbank at 1926Z. At 2045Z, Storm #2
was dissipating and HS2 was losing inflow, so
the flight RTB to Calgary.
at 2010Z. At 2025Z, HS3 reported that the
aircraft radar was not operating. Since the
radar wasnt working and the thunderstorms
were very embedded, the flight RTB to Red
Deer at 2025Z.
Flight Summary
HS1: 1850-2133Z; 99EJ, 14BIP; #1 N of YYC,
#2 W of Springbank.
generator time; #2 W of Springbank to Okotoks.
HS3: 1959-2052Z; no seeding; patrol S of
Didsbury.
August 13,
Friday
An upper low weakened into an open wave trough as it
pushed through southern AB. All vorticity had moved too
far S and E to affect the project area by forecast time.
The region saw northerly flow with an upper jet nosing
into the northern part of the province. Surface
temperatures were well below normal with overcast skies.
Low level moisture was ample for stratiform precipitation.
The atmosphere was only slightly unstable during the
afternoon with 200-300 CAPE at maximum. Otherwise,
stable conditions were expected. Gusty northwesterly
winds were also expected.
Rain showers fell from the morning hours through the
nighttime hours. The afternoon hours saw scattered,
weak convection over the eastern part of the project area.
The showers were lighter during the evening and
nighttime hours.
August 14,
Saturday
An upper jet streak was nosing into northeastern AB from
the north. The northwesterly flow was mainly
unperturbed with no vorticity advection over the project
area. An upper ridge was in place over BC. The
atmosphere was slightly unstable during the early
afternoon with around 200 J/Kg CAPE. The shear profile
was weak with stacked NW winds. The atmosphere was
progged to stabilize by the evening and remain stable
through the overnight hours.
A few weak convective showers formed over the far
eastern part of the project area and in the buffer zone
during the late morning and early afternoon. Showers
moved off to the east by midafternoon with just fair
weather cumulus for the remainder of the afternoon.
Skies cleared in the evening and remained clear
overnight.
August 15,
Sunday
The upper jet was located over northeastern AB. An
upper ridge was in place over BC. Weak afternoon
instability was expected with no significant triggers other
than insolation. The convective temperature was 22.5C
with an expected afternoon high of 24C. Weak air mass
thunderstorms were possible around peak heating. The
shear profile was favorable for long lived convection.
Mostly sunny weather with some cloudy periods during
the day. Some clusters of weak echoes crossed the NE
corner of the target area during the night and early in the
morning of August 16th.
August 16,
Monday
The upper jet remained over northeastern AB with NW
flow over the project area. Low level moisture was
streaming into the region raising surface dew points into
the mid-teens. The atmosphere was very unstable
through after midnight with near 2000 CAPE, but there
were no significant triggers for convection during the day.
Some very weak upslope flow was present, and a lee trof
was forming, but mainly to the south where there was
less CAPE. There was less moisture and instability over
the YYC area. A quasi-stationary cold front was progged
to move in from the north late in the forecast period.
Speed shear favored organized convection, but
directional shear was poor.
Mostly sunny conditions prevailed with some brief cloudy
periods during the day. TITAN cells approached the
HS3 was launched at 0441Z (17th) to patrol an
area NW of Sundre. HS3 was airborne at
0511Z. HS3 reported problems with their
weather radar at 0517Z and at 0521Z (17th)
HS3 decided to RTB as the storm was
dissipating.
Flight Summary
HS3: 0455Z (08/17) 0528Z (08/17); no
seeding; Mx flight.
northern part of the project area late in the evening and
during the night. The big line of the cells orientated from
the west to the east, formed over the project area and
moved slowly to the south. Intense lightning and heavy
rains associated with this line were observed over the
northern and western parts of the target area. Early in
the morning of August 17th, all the cells diminished and
TITAN stopped tracking the cells over the project area.
August 17,
Tuesday
The upper jet still remained over northeastern AB with
NW flow over the project area. A cold front had passed
through in the early morning and was positioned up along
the eastern side of the Rockies. Very weak instability
was progged in the midafternoon, but there were no
triggers, and a strong 700mb cap. CIN values were near
100 J/Kg. Dense low cloud cover was blanketing the
region, expected to clear out during the overnight hours.
Mostly cloudy weather occurred with some light rain
showers over the northern and the central part of the
project area during the morning. The atmosphere cleared
during the afternoon. A line of weak cells formed west of
Red Deer during the night. Intense lightning and rain
showers were associated with this line. The cells were
observed over the northern and north-eastern parts of the
target area.
August 18,
Wednesday
The upper jet PVA was concentrated W and E of the AB
area. A weak, mid-level ridge was over the area until the
early evening hours. The ridge then moved to the east of
the project area. At the surface, a stationary front
extended north to south over central AB. The shear
profile suggested that longer lived cells were possible,
and the atmosphere was unstable.
Sunny and dry weather occurred during the day through
the first part of the night. Weak convective echoes
crossed the NW corner of the project area early in the
morning of August 19th.
27 Max dBZ
Public Relations: A tour of the radar facility
occurred during the morning. HS2 and HS3
flew a PR flight to the Olds-Didsbury airport to
be part of the event. They returned to YYC and
YQF at the end of the tour.
Flight Summary
radar.
radar.
returning to YQF.
returning to YYC.
August 19,
Thursday
The left exit region of an upper level jet moved over the
project area during the late evening hours. A mid-level
ridge was over the province of SK. The project area saw
no vorticity during the day, but a weak lobe of vorticity
passed over southern AB during the late nighttime hours.
A surface cold front moved southward over the project
area during the afternoon and early evening. The
No aircraft operations were possible due to the
low visibility over the project area from the
smoke and haze.
atmosphere was unstable.
Sunny and dry weather with heavy smoke over most of
the project area during the day (fires in BC). Visibility
over Red Deer airport diminished to 0.5 statute miles.
Two clusters of TITAN cells formed over Red Deer and
Calgary late in the evening. Lightning and heavy rains
were observed over the Red Deer and Calgary areas late
in the evening and during the night. Thunder showers
were observed over the Calgary area early in the morning
of August 20th. Pea sized hail fell over southern Calgary,
Olds, and Red Deer.
August 20,
Friday
Another weak upper jet streak moved over the area
during the evening and nighttime hours. A mid-level low
formed over northern AB. Weak vorticity passed over the
project area during the nighttime hours. A surface low
formed over southern AB, and a couple of inverted
troughs rotated counter-clockwise around the low. The
temperature and dew point were lower than the previous
day. The atmosphere was slightly unstable.
Sunny and dry weather with smoke over most of the
project area during the day. Convective clouds
developed over Rocky MH and W and SE of Red Deer
late in the evening and during the night. Thunder
showers were observed over Rocky MH area and N of
Red Deer.
August 21,
Saturday
Upper level jet streaks existed just N and S of the project
area. A mid-level trough moved over British Columbia
during the evening and nighttime hours. A series of
vorticity lobes passed over the project area throughout
the day. At the surface, a trough was in place over the
Rocky Mountains. The atmosphere was moderately
unstable with a CAPE value of 900J/kg. The main trigger
mechanism was vorticity.
The mountains saw convective rain showers during the
afternoon. A storm formed west-southwest of Rocky MH.
This cell intensified and moved towards the Rocky MH
area. The storm then dissipated before reaching the
Rocky MH area. The rest of the night saw weak
convective rain showers, but no hail.
HS2 flew a recurrency flight near the Calgary
area.
HS4 was launched at 0043Z (22nd) to a
developing storm W of Rocky MH. The flight
became airborne at 0111Z. The aircraft then
began patrolling S of the Rocky MH area. At
0128Z (22nd), HS4 RTB to YQF. No seeding
occurred.
Flight Summary
HS2: 1450-1612Z; no seeding; recurrency flight
near YYC.
HS4: 0100Z (08/22)-0154Z (08/22); no seeding;
patrol S of Rocky MH.
August 22,
Sunday
A moderately strong upper level jet was over the southern
part of AB. A mid-level trough continued to creep over
HS3 was launched at 1931Z for new growth
SW of Sundre. They were airborne at 1951Z.
BC. Lobes of vorticity passed over the project area
during the afternoon and evening hours. A surface lee
trough developed over central AB. The atmosphere was
moderately unstable with CAPE values approaching
800J/kg.
An eastward moving line of thunderstorms developed
from Rocky MH to Banff in the early to mid-afternoon. As
activity moved through the project area, parts of the line
intensified into severe hailstorms over YYC and over
Didsbury. All activity was extremely embedded, making
targeting difficult. Ceilings in YYC were dangerously low
at 1kft AGL as the cells approached YYC. The low
ceilings precluded base seeding operations throughout
most of the afternoon. Once the storm moved through
YYC, bases improved slightly allowing for a brief base
seeding opportunity. 28mm hail was observed in
southern YYC with small hail covering the ground. Pea
sized hail was observed at the radar with very heavy rain.
As they were reaching the Sundre area, new
cells developed upwind of YYC. HS3 was
directed to the new echoes west of YYC. They
patrolled that area until 2034Z and then headed
north toward Didsbury in order to allow HS1 to
take over near YYC. New crisp development
was found near Didsbury, and top seeding
began on storm #1 at 2045Z. Seeding
continued as the storm moved through
Didsbury toward Acme. At 2216Z, HS3
descended to base and repositioned to seed
activity over southeastern YYC. Base seeding
began on storm #2 at 2238Z. At 2310Z, activity
moved well east of YYC and was no longer a
threat. HS3 RTB at that time.
HS1 was launched for top seeding west of YYC
to replace HS3, who had repositioned to
another target. The flight was airborne at
2035Z. Pilots began patrol west of YYC at
2051Z and reported shallow convection with
nothing seedable. Activity rapidly intensified
and seeding began on storm #3 west of YYC at
2108Z. HS1 continued seeding the south side
of severe hailstorms as they moved through
southern YYC toward the east. Conditions
were very embedded, and targeting of
individual feeder clouds was very difficult.
Some of the seeding was conducted by
dragging BIP flares along the southern flank of
the storm when precise targeting was
impossible. Activity finally moved too far east
and HS1 RTB at 2310Z.
Flight Summary
HS3: 1940-2356Z; 113 EJ, 18 BIP; #1
Didsbury, #2 YYC.
HS1: 2025-2340Z: 223 EJ, 12 BIP; #2 YYC.
August 23,
Monday
Upper level ridging was occurring. Strong northwesterly
flow was in place over the region with high winds at the
surface as well. A dry air mass was in place with surface
dew points less than 5C and precipitable water around
only a half of an inch. CAPE values of 100-200J/Kg were
expected during the morning and afternoon, and there
was no significant upper level forcing. Only weak
showers were expected during the morning and early
afternoon. There was abundant speed shear. High
winds were expected through the evening. Stable
conditions were forecast during the overnight hours.
Weak thundershowers moved through the southern half
of the target area during the early afternoon. There were
no hail threats. Skies cleared by late afternoon, and the
project area remained clear through the evening and
overnight hours. There were no TITAN cells.
Max echo top= 6.0 km, 46 max dBZ, 7.1 max VIL
August 24,
Tuesday
A high-pressure ridge was in place over Alberta. The
ridge axis was located over the project area. Surface
high-pressure was centered over the border between BC
and AB provinces. Jet PVA core was crossing the central
part of BC province from the W to the E. The atmosphere
was stable and dry.
Skies were mostly clear throughout the forecast period.
No radar echoes were observed, and no towering
cumulus clouds developed.
Flight Summary
HS4: 1843-1925Z; no seeding; maintenance
flight.
August 25,
Wednesday
High-pressure ridge was moving slowly to the E. The
ridge axis was located over the border between AB and
SK provinces. Surface high-pressure center remained
over the border between BC and AB. Jet PVA core was
crossing the central part of AB from the W toward the E.
The atmosphere was unstable with a strong inversion cap
at low levels.
The project area saw no precipitation and partly cloudy
skies. There were no radar echoes.
Flight Summary
flight.
August 26,
Thursday
High-pressure ridge continued to move to the E. The
ridge axis was located over the SK province. Low-
pressure trough was approaching AB from the W.
Surface low-pressure center was located over the project
area. Strong positive vorticity max was crossing the
project area from the SW to the NE late in the afternoon
and during the evening. Jet PVA core was located over
the northern part of the project area. The atmosphere
was unstable, but relatively dry.
A line of convective showers oriented from NE to SW
crept through the project area from afternoon through late
night. The strongest cells developed in the NE corner of
the buffer zone. There were no significant hail storms
that made it inside the project boundaries. The project
area saw mostly widespread rain showers with lightning
and no hail.
HS2 was launched at 0502Z (27th) west of
Cochrane for a marginal hail threat developing
in the buffer zone. The flight was airborne at
0521Z and began base seeding with both
acetone generators at 0528Z finding weak
inflow. The cells weakened to below hail
criteria after 30 minutes, and seeding was
halted. The storm was no longer a hail threat
once it made it into the project area. Seeding
ended at 0527Z (27th) as the aircraft RTB to
YYC.
Flight Summary
HS2: 0509Z (08/27)-0613Z (08/27); 60 min
acetone generator time; #1 W of Cochrane.
August 27,
Friday
Low-pressure trough was located over the project area.
High level low-pressure center was located over the
northern part of the border between AB and SK
provinces. Surface low-pressure center formed over BC
province. Jet PVA core was crossing the southern part of
AB and the central part of SK from the SW to the NE.
The atmosphere was unstable but relatively dry.
The northern half of the project area saw weak
thunderstorms with light rain showers during the
afternoon. The evening hours saw mostly Ci and Ac
clouds. During the late nighttime and early morning
hours, weak convective rain showers began to move over
central AB again.
August 28,
Saturday
Low-pressure trough formed over the eastern part of BC
and AB province. High level low-pressure center was
located over the northern part of SK province. Jet PVA
core was crossing the southern part of AB and the central
part of SK from the SW to the NE. The atmosphere was
slightly unstable but relatively dry.
Scattered convective rain showers fell during the morning
and afternoon hours. There were no hail threats or
TITAN cells.
Max echo tops= 6.0 km, 42 max dBZ, 0.0 max VIL
Tmax YC = 16.1 C and trace of rain.
August 29,
Sunday
Low-pressure trough remained over the western part of
Canada. The trough axis was oriented from the N to S
and it was located over eastern part of BC province. High
level low-pressure formed over the border between BC
and AB provinces. Surface high-pressure was located
over the project area. The atmosphere was stable.
Stratiform rain showers fell over most of the project area.
The duration of these showers was from the morning
through the evening. No rain showers occurred during
the nighttime hours.
Tmax Radar = 9.8 C and 3mm of rain.
August 30,
Monday
A deep upper trough was positioned over the project area
with axis from western AB through Idaho. Low levels
were dry with dew points near 5C. The atmosphere was
slightly unstable in the afternoon hours. A surface low
was in place over west-central AB. Overcast sky
conditions were expected to keep surface heating to a
minimum.
Convective rain showers fell over the mountains W of
Rocky MH. The rain showers eventually made their way
into the western and far northern part of the project area.
A few lightning strikes were observed, but no hail.
Tmax Radar = 14.5 C and a trace of rain.
August 31,
Tuesday
The upper trough axis was shifting east of the project
area. A strong shortwave was progged to move through
overnight through the next morning. Dew points
remained low with only a slight amount of afternoon
instability. Skies were mostly clear at forecast time, but
expected to gradually become overcast by the nighttime
hours. At the surface, a trough of low pressure was in
place over southern AB.
A trough passed over the area during the afternoon
hours. The north-south oriented trough triggered a line of
weak convection. This line made its way eastward across
the project area producing light rain and lightning.
September
01,
Wednesday
A strong upper jet was making its way eastward toward
the project area as the back side of the upper trough
finally moved east of the area. Decent midlevel vorticity
was expected to move through from the northwest during
the afternoon. Low levels remained fairly dry, but some
cooling aloft allowed for some weak to moderate CAPE
values. The shear profile was weak, favoring short-lived
popup convection. An upper level ridge was expected to
begin forming overnight.
Convective rain showers began during the morning
across the northern part of the project area, and the
convection moved southeastward through the project
area. At around 18Z, two convective cells started to form,
one just E of Red Deer and the other NE of Innisfail. The
storms quickly dissipated, but several new cells formed
along the eastern border and buffer (N of Strathmore).
These relatively weak storms quickly became embedded
as they propagated southeastward out of the project area.
HS1 performed a recurrency flight over the
Calgary area.
Flight Summary
HS1: 1500-1600Z; no seeding; recurrency
flight.
September
02,
Thursday
A strong upper ridge was building over the region. The
atmosphere was very stable with dry low levels. No
convection was expected. Mostly clear skies were
forecast.
Sunny and dry weather over the project area and stable
overnight as well. No radar echoes.
September
03, Friday
A strong upper ridge remained over the project area. A
shortwave trough was moving through in the late morning
and early afternoon creating broken clouds, but the
atmosphere was stable. No convection was expected.
Stable conditions were forecast overnight as well.
Mostly sunny and dry weather with some stratus
cloudiness over the southern part of the project area
during the morning and afternoon. Clouds cleared by the
evening. Weak radar echoes were observed over
Calgary area and SW of RMH in the afternoon (virga).
September
04,
Saturday
A cold front pushed through the project area early in the
morning. Low levels were cold with rising dew points. A
cold upper low pressure system was moving in
throughout the day. Moderate afternoon instability was
expected with decent speed shear. The upper low was
pushing several lobes of vorticity through the project area
during the day and overnight. Widespread rain showers
were likely throughout the day/night with some afternoon
and evening hail expected.
Mostly cloudy weather with some sunny periods over the
project area in the morning. Scattered rain showers were
observed early in the afternoon over the central and
southern parts of the project area. The line of weak radar
echoes orientated from the SW to the NE was formed
over the project area in the afternoon and it moved to the
E slowly. Some weak TITAN cells were observed over
Calgary and High River during the late afternoon and in
the evening. Pea sized hail was reported west of High
River.
Tmax Radar = 15.3 C and 4.0mm of rain.
September
05, Sunday
The upper jet was W of the project area. A mid-level low
was in place over most of the province of AB, and lobes
of vorticity rotated counter-clockwise around the low. A
surface trough passed over the project area during the
afternoon and evening. The atmosphere was slightly
unstable with a couple of trigger mechanisms (i.e. vorticity
and a surface trough).
Skies were mostly cloudy with light rain showers in the
morning. Several stratus echoes were observed over the
central and southern parts of the project area. The
echoes then moved to the SE slowly. Isolated convective
clouds started developing SW of RMH during the
afternoon and evening. Some weak convective echoes
then crossed the Calgary area from the NW to the SE
during the night.
September
06, Monday
Upper Jet PVA was concentrated south of British
Columbia. A mid-level low remained over central AB.
The low continued to bring vorticity over the project area.
At the surface, a weak low developed in the lee of the
Rockies. The atmosphere was slightly unstable.
Skies were sunny with some cloudy periods over most of
the project area in the morning. A line of convective
echoes, orientated from the NW to the SE, formed over
the western border of the project area around noon. A
few weak TITAN cells were observed W and SW of
Calgary in the afternoon and again NW of Cochrane later
the evening.
September
07, Tuesday
Weak jet streaks were in place over SE British Columbia
and southern Saskatchewan. The mid-level low that was
over Alberta the previous day became weaker and turned
into a trough. No surface features influenced the project
area, but there was upslope flow. The atmosphere
remained slightly unstable with weak wind shear.
Mainly cloudy weather was observed over most of the
project area in the morning with some embedded
convection over the northern part of the project area.
Weak stratus echoes formed W of High River early in the
afternoon. A cluster of the weak echoes approached the
southern part of the project area late in the evening. Light
and moderate rain showers were observed over Calgary
and High River during the night.
HS4 performed a maintenance flight SW of Red
Deer.
Flight Summary
flight SW of YQF.
September
08,
Wednesday
The upper jet was located over northern Montana, and a
mid-level low was over southern British Columbia. There
was also a surface low over southeastern British
Columbia. The project area experienced upslope flow
throughout much of the day. Vorticity advection was
weak and the atmosphere was mostly stable.
Widespread, light stratiform rain lingered over the project
area throughout the forecast period. Skies remained
overcast throughout the day and overnight. No
convection was observed, and there were no TITAN cells.
September
09,
Thursday
No upper level jet PVA was expected over the area. At
the mid-levels, a trough was in place over AB. At the
surface, an inverted trough extended from Montana up
into central AB. The atmosphere was mostly stable, but
weak vorticity advection occurred. Wind shear was weak.
Weak stratus rain moved through the project area with
embedded thundershowers during the morning. A few
lightning strikes were detected, but there were no hail
threats.
September
10, Friday
No upper level jet influence occurred over AB. A weak
mid-level ridge built over the area during the day. The
ridge weakened during the nighttime hours as it moved
eastward towards southern Saskatchewan. A stationary
front formed over central AB during the evening and
nighttime hours. The atmosphere was slightly unstable
with weak vorticity advection, and only weak wind shear
was expected.
A few isolated thundershowers developed in the
afternoon and evening, but there were no hail threats.
The project radar was mainly clear overnight.
HS2 performed a maintenance flight E of YYC.
Flight Summary
flight.
September
11,
Saturday
High level low-pressure was approaching AB from the W.
The warm sector of the stationary front was located NE of
the project area. The jet PVA core was crossing the
southern parts of BC, AB and SK from the west to the
south. The atmosphere was unstable.
Shallow thundershowers moved through the project area
from the NW. A few lightning strikes were detected, and
one weak TITAN cell was observed south of Cochrane.
There were no hail threats. Activity diminished in the
early evening. A few weak echoes lingered over the
project area throughout the overnight hours, but they
were only virga and weak rain.
September
12, Sunday
west. Surface high-pressure was located over the border
between BC and AB. Jet PVA crossed the central part of
AB from the west to the east. The atmosphere was
Cold stratiform rain showers occurred throughout the
forecast period. Ceilings remained low with overcast
skies. There were no convective echoes or hail threats.
September
13, Monday
A low-pressure trough was located over the border
between BC and AB provinces. Surface high-pressure
had formed over the NW part of AB. A stationary front
was located over the mountains. A jet PVA core was
crossing the central parts of BC and AB from the west
toward the east. The atmosphere was stable.
Stratiform rain remained over the project throughout the
period. Skies were overcast with low ceilings. No
convection was observed. There were no hail threats.
September
14, Tuesday
A low-pressure trough was located over the southern part
of AB and over Montana. A stationary front remained
along the border between BC and AB. Surface high-
pressure moved eastward into SK. A jet PVA core was
crossing the southern parts of SK and MB from west to
east. The atmosphere was stable with a moderate low-
level cap.
Scattered rain showers fell over the mountains west of
the project area during the afternoon and evening. The
radar went down around 02Z. The Strathmore radar
showed little activity during the late evening and nighttime
hours. There were no hail threats.
September
15,
Wednesday
A stationary front remained over the border between BC
and AB. A cold front was approaching to the project area
from the N. Jet PVA was crossing the eastern part of AB
and the central part of SK from the W to the E. The
atmosphere was slightly unstable and humid.
Weak thunderstorms formed during the afternoon and
evening hours. These showers were mainly concentrated
over the southern half of the project area. A few lightning
strikes were observed W of Calgary and over the Red
Deer area.

WM 1 Alh 4 P Fin 4 L Report 2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

WM 1 Alh 4 P Fin 4 L Report 2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Program for the Seeding of Convective Clouds

to Mitigate Urban Hail Damage in the

You might also like