Auusr 1965 WILLIAM M. GRAY Calculations of Cumulus Vertical Draft Velocities in Hurricanes from Aircraft Observations Waa M. Gray Colorado State University, Fort Collins (Manuscript received 24 December 196, in revised form 10 June 1965) ABSTRACT. In cumulus convective atmospheres the most significant length scale of vertical motion is of cumulus draft ‘ize—of horizontal lengths two to four orders of magnitude less than the synoptic scale and of magnitude fone to three orders greater. This draft motion on seales between the gust and synoptic motion has been least investigated. The purpose ofthis paper isto propose a new method of calculating draft velocities from aircraft and present results of calculations with this method in hurricanes. "An aircraft Doppler radio navigation instrument which s capable of meseuring horizontal wind variations to-a space resolution ofa fraction of a nautical mile ean be employed with other instruments to measure an aleraft's piteh angle changes. From this determination, along with other standard aircraft measurements suchas radar and pressure altitude, power setting, etc, itis possible to make determinations of average ver- tical air motion to space reslutions of 0.4 to 0.7 nautial mile, Calculations of vertical motion are performed along a number of radial leg aight tracks flowa by the National Hurricane Research Project B-80 aireraft during the 1058 season with the above method. Typical draft velocity was 5-15 knots andl draft widths 1-3 nautical miles. Maximum derived gust velocities within ‘the drafts were typically inthe range of §-15 knots, Comparison of results with those of the Thunderstorm ‘Project is made. Vertical accelerometer data are also presented 463 1, Background and purpose Most_ meteorologists have realized that in cumulus ‘convective atmospheres the most significant length scale of vertical motion is of cumulus draft size. Due to the lack of proper instruments for accurate measurements, this scale of vertical motion has been least investigated. But from the meteorological point of view this scale of vertical motion may be most responsible for the im- Portant vertical mass, energy, and momentum trans- Ports occurring in the convective atmosphere (Riehl and Malkus, 1958; Rich], 1961; Malkus, 1961). ‘The Thunderstorm Project’ (Byers and Braham, 1949) has been the only systematic investigation of draft scale vertical motion. Vertical draft velocities ‘were approximated from aircraft altitude changes under specific fight conditions, Few direct measurements or calculations of vertical motion have been made over ‘oceans or in storm systems such as the hurricane; yet the importance of cumulus convection in the hurricane far surpasses that of any other synopticscale storm system, Beginning in 1935, the U. S. Weather Bureau began instrumentation of two Air Force B-50 and one B47 air- craft to investigate the meteorological parameters of the hurricane, Recent instrument developments such as the Doppler radio navigation system make this the first systematic investigation of the meso- and micro- scales of motion in which accurate detailed wind ob- servations are obtainable. The hurricane radial leg penetrations which were flown (Fig. 1 is typical) by the National Hurricane Research Project during the 1957-38 seasons were mostly executed at constant LEO 18 AUS 560 mb kc . ‘Fc. 1. Typical hurricane fight track.464 JOURNAL OF APPL power setting and heading, Recordings of rpm and mani- fold pressure of each B-50 engine are available from photopanel data recorded every two to five seconds (usually every two seconds near the storm center). ‘These recordings give the power changes. Aircraft heading and indicated airspeed (LAS) were also re- corded at the same_time intervals on the photopanel Engincer’s Hight logs of fuel burnoft are available every” hour, Wind velocities were computed and recorded by an reforence line _ 1ED METEOROLOGY Voir & ASN.6 analogue computer and a General Precision ‘Laboratory AN/APN-82 radio navigation system which ‘employed the Doppler shift principle. Radar Altitude (RA) and Pressure Altitude (PA) were also recorded, As observations are taken over water, accurate RA ‘measurements aire possible—unhindered by irregular ‘topogtaphic variations experienced over land, National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Velocity, Gravity, Height (VGH) continuous recordings (Rich- ardson, 1951) of IAS, PA, and aircraft vertical accelera- 30} _Indicated Air Speed 0: = : z Nea acres 30, a Tine i 92 Pressure Aifiude 93 Ftc, 2. Typical VGH recording. aa Tae — clean) — : 1 tone Fj eens) ewe ach Teceee uno CBE ew ee) ‘uo wares ou yor = | vO TT a Fic, 3. Data available ‘on most radial fight legs.Avcrse 1968 WILLTAM tion were also taken on most of these flights (Fig. 2). ‘The University of Chicago Cloud Physics Group corded continuous values of liquid water by paper tape tnd hot wire over a large portion of the middle tropo- spheric radial flight legs (Ackerman, 1962). Fig. 3 is a plotted portrayal of the typical data available on a majority of the middle tropospheric fight iegs. Never before have so many meteorological observa tions been so systematically collected on a selective class of storm systems, ‘These observations are unique in that wind variations and accurate RA values are for the first time simultaneously available in large numbers ‘on the meso~ and microscules of motion. These measure ments offer a means of calculating average vertical air motion to resolutions (0.4-0.7 n mi) not. previously attainable. The purpose of this study is to describe this ‘method and present results of vertical motion computa~ tions within hurricane cumulus and cumulonimbus dlouds. Statement of problem. To measure vertical air motion from an aircraft, two determinations must be made: (1) the vertical motion of the aireraft relative to the round, and 2) the vertical motion of the air relative to the aireraft, ‘The sum of these two measurements gives the vertical air motion relative to the ground, 2, Computational method The vertical motion of the aircraft relative to the ground is obtained from time differentiation of the pressure altimeter, modified by the absolute (or radar) altimeter, when the horizontal pressure gradient was significantly large. To describe the method of calculat- {ng the vertical motion of the air relative to the aircraft, 1 short discussion of the aerodynamic theory must be given. Aerodynamic theory. From the aerodynamic theory of aircraft fight (Duncan, 1952), the lift (L) and drag (D) acceleration of an aircraft, when the aireraft is con- AIRFOIL aT EQUILIBRIUM NO VERTICAL NOTION M. GRAY 465 sidered from the particle dynamic point of view is /2pVESCryary a D=1/2pV ?SCopy @ where L=lift acceleration, D=drag acceleration, p=air density, Smeffective wing area of aircraft, C1= coefficient of lift, Co=coefficient of drag, ‘M-=mass of aircraft at time equations are applied, V = true airspeed of aircraft. Equilibrium values of lift (L.) equal to gravity (@) (= 1/2pV #5Czjae= g] and drag (Da) equal to thrust (1) (D=1/2pV ¢SCoju=T] acceleration can be de- fined at the places where the B-50 flew with constant values of power setting, Vi, heading, and altitude, ‘The observed values of V at these places are similarly defined as equilibrium values of true airspeed (V,). ‘The pitch angle (9) of the aircraft is defined as the inclination of its longitudinal axis to the horizontal the angle of attack (a) as the inclination of the aircraft's longitudinal axis to the relative wind blowing into the aircraft. Over short periods of 8-10 minutes of flight ‘at constant power setting and plane heading, equilibrium conditions of @ and a (Fig. 4) may be considered locally due to the slow percentage fuel burnoff rates. ibrium conditions will be denoted 8%, and a Equilibrium conditions are not present when the plane enters areas where vertical motion is occurring. Here the actual pitch (@,) and actual angle of attack (@.) differ from the equilibrium values by deviational amounts 0, and az (Fig, 3). Deviational values of 8, a, and V; are then defined as 4, 8 @) ag=0e—Oe, @ Vua= Veo Vw 6) AIRFOIL IN AN UPDRAFT ‘Fie, 4, Airfoil at equlibriamno vertial motion, Fo 5. Aifel in an upaialt466 At places of equilibrium, 84, a, and Va=0; and 8,=6., a4=a1, Via Vee Over short periods of time, changes of actual values equal changes of deviational values—due to the constancy of the equilibrium values. No vertical air motion is occurring when equilibrium con exist, By defining deviations from thei ‘values, phugoidal effects are eliminated. Incremental deviations of lift (AL) and drag (AD) acceleration from the equilibrium values of L and D can then be expressed (Duncan, 1952) as Sy dcr a= VE (vi ant? Vea), 6) rare pS, dCo apa v( vi act VC) ” Mw da where aC1/da=change of coefficient of Lift with change of angle of attack (=5.1), dCy/da= change of coeficient of Drag with change of angle of attack (~0.4), and other symbols as previously defined, Vertical motion equation. If the deviations of aircraft pitch and angle of attack from their equilibrium values an be obtained, then by geometry (Fig. 5) the vertical ‘motion of the air relative to the aircraft is given by the expression Vs(as=6a). The vertical ait motion relative to the sea’s surface for small angles is thus w(air)= Vilas 0.4 W's, @) where W,=the vertical motion of the aircraft. Meas ‘urement of ag and 6, were not made. The problem then becomes one of calculating these values, Determination of ex, and 04. When the aircraft flies at. constant power setting and heading, and equilibrium values have been determined, then’ the vertical and horizontal equations of motion for the aircraft are sgiven by 4 ave ale HL, O) MP 5p ene-wo, (10) a at _ where \N'= vertical acceleration of aircraft measured at its center of gravity, dg/dt=rate of change of aircraft's deviational pitch angle, vertical acceleration from rising or falling yuid water striking aircraft. Positive for rising liquid water, WD=drag acceleration from liquid water striking aircraft, wi JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY Vou 4 4V ufdt=rate of change of deviational true airspeed! dU {dt rate of change of wind component on plane's nose. Positive backward, incremental Lift and Drag as defined in (6) and (7), AL, AD=' Ackerman’s (1962) paper tape liquid water measure- ments along the same radial legs here studied give ‘maximum one second values of 8-9 gm m-? and maxi- mum 5-10 second average values of 4-5 gm m-¥, The ‘accelerations produced on the over 10%1b aircraft by these liquid concentrations are of insignificant magn tude compared with the other terms of (9) and (10). Distegarding WL and WD and expanding AL and AD in the form of (6) and (7) the two above equations become ay. i (verctart 2¥-0¥ 0) ve an we (ve act VCiVu) Ve, \—g0a. (12) dp (vee taut VCs) WN a All quantities of (11) and (12) are measurable from the aircraft's recorded observations or known independently from its flight tested characteristics, except aw and @y. ‘These equations can each be solved for aa, and a new differential equation set up in the one unknown 8. Thus, 8, dV dU Sten 6 Raa KV), (as) a a dt where dC1/da dofda VidCo/do dCifda dCi /da pSV (CudCo/de cn) VaCr/da ( ailda or (a4) where Due to the AN/APN-82 instrument response time, it is necessary to evaluate dU/dt over selected time intervals of at least 5-10 seconds (see Appendix). Thi limits the time resolution to which (13) can be applied. Over 5-10 second intervals the four é-coetficients in (13) can be considered constant within a few per cent. ‘These coefficients were evaluated from Boeing aircraft recorded B-50 instrumental flight test characteristics. ‘The aieais ovontal momentum inhibits from in; stantancously adjusting is airspeed to large and rapid horizontal ‘Wind speed changes.Avoust 1965 WILLIAM ‘The gust scale turbulent nature of the atmosphere (450-300 m wavelength) in convective areas indicates hat values of AW, (20/2, (@Va/A), Vag often vary y an order of magnitude and change their sign over S10 second intervle The magnitude of A thus shows large fluctuations over these intervals and is of the general character shown in Fig. 6. time ( see.) Fo, stating typical variations of A parameter ove the ine Intervals and mean values of (denoted), ‘These gust-scale wind gradient values could not be measured. The response of the airspeed meter and AN/APN-82 is such as to give only average values of (aU dt) and (@V fat) over 5-10 second intervals, AX values tend to cancel themselves over this interval. ‘The KaVia term does not significantly affect A. The primary contributors to A are the measured average values of (4U/di) and (dV.u/di). When these average values of A over 5-10 second intervals have been de- termined from the instrument recordings, (14) may bbe solved for the mean value of Oy over this interval Genoted &,), thus [a+ (e0- ime of interval under consideration in seconds, 1 value of Os at the beginning of the time interval when =0, Fig. 7 portrays the typical variation relationships be- tween 8, Ba. 8s, and A over time intervals of 5, 8 and. 10 seconds. For most airspeeds flown, Ky was nearly 1. Vale *The term A is itself # function of time and cannot explicitly ‘be constant in evaluation of 8,, However, if the value of 4 over the $-10 second interval under consideration possesses the char- acteristic Huctuations shown in Fig. 6, then the above evaluation [is & satisfactory approximation of @y to within a few per ceat. M. GRAY 467 ues of (1—e*1)/1 att values of $ and 10 seconds are ap- proximately 0.2 and 0.1. The [0is— (4/Ks) ](—-**/1) term is significant in the computations only when 82e and A are of opposite sign or of quite different magni- tudes. It usually contributed Jess than 10-15 per cent. to the average value of @s. 01 approaches A with in- creasing time interval (Fig. 7) ‘Substitution for draft scale vertical motion. Once mean values of @y over the 5-10 second intervals have been determined, they can be substituted in (12) and mean values of ag determined over the similar interval, These values may in turn be substituted into (8) and together with the earlier determination of Wy, the mean vertical air velocity over flight time interval of 5-10 seconds (0.40.7 n mi) obtained. The aircraft traveled at ap- proximately 250 knots, Values of & were always within +£0.22, while values of dz ranged up to -£3-4°, To a close «pprosimation then, w(air)=— Vt Wp, (16) where the — (bar) signifies mean value over the 5-10 second interval. Since draft velocities possess charac teristic widths of 1-3» mi, a resolution to 0.4-0.7 n mi should describe a major portion of the vertical draft. Acceleration measurements, Vertical gust velocities with characteristic widths of a hundred meters may be approximated with respect to the environmental draft motion with the derived gust velocity formula (Pratt and Walker, 1954) developed by NACA Gust Loads Section (now NASA Structural Dynamics Branch). ‘This formula defines the derived gust as 2aNM poSdCr/daViK, ‘This has been astamed inthe evaluation of value of 4 over the 3-10 second time inter acter of delta function, would the evaluation of By by (15) be significantly in error, Nutnerieal averaging of 4. over 5-10 second intervals under assumed, widely vanable variations of Pa, U [AN have verted the above assumption of near constancy of 4. Mae pete eat tated 0,7, Portrayal o ype vals of a Ou Aya os ieee selected ébmputation timc inSrvais468 JOURNAL OF APPL where Ky is the gust factor (=0.72), Vr=Indicated airspeed ‘and the other symbols are as in previous equations. “The vertical component of the measured gust is primarily responsible for the vertical acceleration of the aircraft and the value of ger. The vertical acceleration ‘may also be effected by the gust’s horizontal component, but this can only account for about a quarter of the observed vertical acceleration, Pilot maneuver has a Gifferent characteristic frequency and can usually be eliminated from the calculations. Once these gusts have been approximated by the derived gust formula, they might be superimposed on ‘the draft scale vertical motion already computed. This will give an approximate comparison of the two scales of motion, even though the derived gust may not be closely equivalent to the atmospheric gust. Fig. 8 portrays typical calculated values of vertical draft motion before and after derived gusts have been superimposed. Determination of time interval over which axerage IED METEOROLOGY Vous 4 rertical motion is obtained. The rapidity of response of the AN/APN-82 system to wind changes was the prin- cipal factor in determining the 5 to 10 second time interval over which the individual average vertical motion computation was made. The AN/APN-82 sys- tem responds at a rate of approximately 1 to 2 knots/ sec and one degree/sec for wind fluctuations of ap- proximately 10 knots. For larger fluctuations. the response time is more rapid. From a study of the AN/APN-82 system and large samples of its gathered winds, it was determined that ‘measured wind changes on the nose—i.e., dU/di—over periods between 3 and 10 seconds are representative ‘of the actual wind changes—if the boundaries of these time intervals are taken at places where the derivative of the wind component on the nose changes sign, changes to or from zero, or does not change at all. Such derivative ‘changes usually occurred once very 5 to 10 seconds and. account for the variable time interval used. Fig. 9 illustrates a typical profile of the observed variation of VERTICAL, VELOCITY Fors. REET SoALE wr SUPERIMPOSED GUSTS Fig, 8. Mustrating the portrayal of vertical motion across the eye wall of a radial Right leg. ‘Top diagram—rectangular ‘curve showing average vertical velocity aver varying time intervals of 5-12 seconds. Smooth curve with dots representing ‘overlapping smoothing interval of 5 seconds, Bottom diagram? —smeoth curve ol Lop diagram with superimposed derived gustAcoust 1965 10,9, Mustrating selection of time intervals over which aver- age vertical motion computations are made. Boundary of time Intervals chosen at places where AN/APN-S? wind shows abrupt changes. the wind component on the plane’s nose. The veritical lines bracket the time intervals over which the equa- tions are applied. Between these places the mean deriva- tive of U approaches the derivative of actual wind. Tf the derivative of the AN/APN-82 wind changes sign at two successive places, then the actual wind must have also changed sign at these places, The AN/APN-82 responds instantaneously to changes in the actual wind, but lags only in time adjustment to the actual wind, Fig. 10 illustrates this idea for hypothetical actual and measured wind variations. The U measured by the AN/APN-82 is lagging in time response to the actual ind. When the actual wind component rises, the WILLIAM M. GRAY Fic. 10. Tustrating how hypothesized actual sind and hy- pothesizd AN/ADN.82 measured wind could be diffrent due to apid fluctuation of actual wind and lay of AN/APN.82 Ume sponse. Als illustrates. how hypothesized actual and AN/ ‘APN-82 wind changes between vertical lines would be equal. AN/APN-82 measured U also rises and continues rising until it approaches the actual wind, or until the actual wind decreases to become less than the measured wind. At this precise point, the actual and measured winds ate identical, and the derivatives of the measured and actual winds approach equality. The average time in- terval and distance equivalent was 8.7 seconds or =0.6 n mi, In no case was the time interval less than 5 seconds (~0.4 n mi) or greater than 13 seconds (~0.9n mi). Fo. 11, Example of data recordings and computations along a radial fight leg toward the south from the center of Hurricane Cleo. ‘Top smoothed and rectangular curves those of computed average vertical motion with superimposed gust velocities (kn)—sinilar to Fig. 8, io. 12, Example of data ceordings and computations along a fight log at 570 mb towacd the southeast into the ‘center of Hurricane Helene, Data portrayal the same as Fig. 1470 MAXIMUM VELOCITY of DRAFTS (Kn) 80 — 6o- No.of DRAFTS é 1 SEL oe wolno OE £222 2/22 2s8 2220 mmo oO § DOWNORAFTS UPDRAFTS Fig, 13, Histogram of maximum vertical draft velocities. COMBINED UPORAFT AND DOWNDRAFT WIDTH 80 - 60- 40- No. of DRAFTS 20- Fio, 14, Histogram of draft widths, 3. Results? Calculations of vertical draft velocity with super- imposed derived gust velocity have been made on four middle tropospheric flight levels in three hurricanes in which National Hurricane Research Project aircraft flew radial leg missions during the 1958 season. Plight information is given in Table 1. Typical vertical draft velocities with superimposed derived gust velocity along. ‘ovo radial legs are illustrated in Figs. 11 and 12, Sum- rmarizing all calculations, it was found that downdraft 2 For & more complete description and discussion of the com- putational method and results, the reader is referred to the Na- Uonal Hurricane Research Project eprint manuscript, On the ‘Scales of Motion and Tnternal Stress Characteristics of the HUrr- cane, Distribution from Miami, Fa, JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY Vousme 4 MAXIMUM GUST 160} VELOCITY ON UP AND DOWNDRAFTS 1204 ® 80-4 | % \ 5 I 2 1 404 | | Io pi Peet H®@ aR 2222338 -¢% Qn 2 DS Kn ic. 15, Histogram of individual derived gust velocities which were ‘superimposed on individual drafts at midale tropospheric levels ‘Tape Information on four National Hurricane Research ‘Project fights used in velocity calculations. Mini- press Max. Flight legs of nmi of Sure, wind, level, compu eorapit- Storm Date ‘mb’ “kn mb’ ‘tation tations TAug 970 & Aug 9065 27 Aug 910120 25Sept. 950110 and updrafts were approximately equal in number and magnitude, Draft widths averaged approximately 1.4 n mi and average maximum draft velocities were 7-8 ‘knots. Histogram distributions of the draft magnitudes and widths are portrayed in Figs. 13 and 14, The maxi- mum derived gust velocities averaged approximately half the maximum draft velocities. Derived gust velocities. The VGH accelerometer traces showed distinct areas of predominant turbulent air along the radial fight legs. The characteristic period of the derived gusts varied between 1.5 to 2.5 seconds (200 to 300 meters) or 0.75 to 1.25 seconds (~100 to 150 meters) between maximum and minimum values. Fig. 2 illustrates a typical turbulent area. Along the 22 radial legs of accelerometer dat (all Detween radit 10 to 60 n mi) studied—approximately 1100 n mi of flight—there were 84 separate areas (totaling approximately 280 n mi—or one-quarter of “hie sompstson should nt be vewelna tisk quantitative sens for infinany instances undoubtedly only the edge of U Sa see ehooumerel. vonyAvcust 1965 WILLIAM the flight distance) of concentrated turbulent motion. ‘These turbulent areas averaged 3.5 n mi in width and ‘were always within or closely adjacent to the computed draft areas, Outside the hurricane—when the aircraft were going to or from the storms—similar turbulent areas were seldom encountered. ‘The derived gust velocities in the 84 turbulent areas averaged approximately 4 knots (40.15) in magnitude and had average half wavelengths (or widths) of 130 meters. Thus, in the average turbulent area the aircraft was sustaining vertical acceleration variations of -£03 g within periods of approximately ‘one second or in 130 meters fight distance. The average maximum derived gust per turbulent area was 28.5, knots (~:i0.35 g). There were 38 recorded derived gusts greater than 12 knots (=E0.5 g) or 38 places where the vertical acceleration of the aircraft would have changed by 1.0 g or more in one second, A gust ‘occurred on an average of one every 1.8 sec meters) in the turbulent areas. ‘The turbulent areas were usually, but not always, concentrated within the drafts and had a tendency to be stronger when the drafts were more intense. How- ever, much variation to this general pattern was, evident. Fig. 15 is a histogram of the individual maxi- mum derived gusts which were superimposed on each up- and downdraft. In general, accelerations were less ‘than those often experienced and expected within Great Plains severe weather, but in accord with those observed by the Thunderstorm Project. Association of liguid water with drafts ond gusts. Paper-tape liquid-water measurements (Ackerman, 1962) were usually well correlated with the calculated drafts, The highest values from the paper tape usually corresponded to the higher magnitude drafts (Figs. 11 and 12). Temperature departures within drafts. A comparison of vortex-thermometer observations (Hilleary and M. GRAY any Christensen, 1957; Hawkins ef al, 1962), outside and within the computed drafts were also made.* Only on & statistical basis were bouyancy requirements being met, In some updrafts temperature was slightly lower than that of environment; the reverse was true ina number of the downdrafts. Some drafts had no temperature differ- ences. Fig. 16 portrays the scatter of maximum up- and downdraft temperature departures from sur- roundings (surrounding temperatures defined as the ‘mean temperature over a 5 n mi distance straddling the draft) vs. draft velocity. Draft velocity must have been 6 knots or more to have been considered. The peak value of the temperature within the draft was taken, Sometimes it occurred on the inner-sides of the draft; at other times near the middle. ‘The same scatter of cloud temperatures was also shown by the tempera- ture recordings of the Thunderstorm Project (Figs 22-28, p. 31 of that report). ‘No attempt will be made to explain the discrepancy of some of these observations from bouyancy concepts. ‘The vortex-thermometer measurement is probably the most suspect, but other considerations need also to be examined. Such considerations are beyond the intended scope of this study 4. Comparison of results with thunderstorm project ‘The ‘Thunderstorm Project is the only similar study with which comparisons of present computations can be made. A statistical comparison of the Thunderstorm Project fights at 15 and 16 thousand feet in Florida and "The virtual temperature corection was not made. ‘The viconmnt relative humidity surrounding th draft asso high That the mato enretion erence always les than 0.2 vortecthemometer tenpersturs wece adja to 4 con: ase presae ght with ented laps tate of the mean topical Simosphers. Height changes within tho drafig weve pot enough {ovemine mice than O2C aiderence between the mein ane na oud poe ne ‘TEMPERATURE DEVIATION vs. DRAFT VELOGITY TEVPERATURE*C DOWNDRAFT (kn) ue. 16, Seater diagram of the maximum temperature deviation within y pared with that of the surrounding temperature (surtounding temperature del perature over a 5 n mi distance straddling the draft) versus up- and downdra ka or greater were considered. UPORAFT (Ka) and downdraits com- ned. a8 the mean tem ‘velocity. Only drafts472 Ohio with present hurricane computations at 13, 15 and 16 thousand feet (620 and 560 mb) is made. ‘Thunderstorm Project tables 7-13 (pp. 40-45 of that report) tabulate draft velocities, draft widths, and effective gust velocities between selective velocity and width intervals (ie, 0-59, 60-118 knots, etc., and 0-0.17, 0.18-34 n mi, etc.). By assuming that all values in each range interval would average out at the middle (.e,, all values in range interval 6,011.8 would average 8.9) a statistical comparison of the overall Thunder- storm Project results with those of the hurricane may be made, Because the statistical results of the Florida and Ohio data were nearly identical, they were averaged. “Together they will be referred to as the Thunderstorm data. Draft comparison. Table 2 portrays average values of Graft velocity and draft width for each study. The distribution range of draft velocity and widths is also similar if comparison is made of Figs. 13-14 of this text with Thunderstorm Project tables 7-8 and 10-11 (pp. 40-42 of that text), There is close comparison between statistical averages. Gust comparison. ‘The maximum derived gusts in the turbulent areas of the hurricane were similar to those ‘of the thunderstorm. The average maximum derived gust velocity per 10 seconds of flight in the Chio thunderstorms at 15 thousand feet was 8.0 knots. The average maximum derived gust velocity per 0.5m mi traverse through the Florida thunderstorms was 8.3 nots. These- values may be compared with the 8.5 nots average maximum gust per turbulent area (avg, 3.5 n mi) encountered in the hurricane. Average derived gust width in the Thunderstorm Project was approximately 100 meters, and in the hurricane, ap- proximately 130 meters. Discussion. The Thunderstorm Project attempted to fiy its aircraft at constant power setting and airspeed. ‘This was thought to eliminate any vertical air motion relative to the aircraft. Draft velocities would then be directly given from changes of aircraft altitude. No *The Thunderstorm Project computed elective gust velocities from vertical acceleration records. Folefon (1936) has converted Thunderstorm fete gusts to deed gusts, “Ax devel gist velocities were éompated in the hurricane stud, ‘Tlefson's gust ‘elocities are seed for comparison JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY Vou 4 evaluation of vertical motion was made when large airspeed changes were observed in the cumulonimbus because pitch angle changes and consequent vertical motion relative to the aircraft were thought to be present. However, constancy of airspeed at constant Power setting does not strictly imply pitch angle constancy if horizontal wind changes are accompanying the draft. An increase of the horizontal wind component on the nose would be reflected by an increase of airspeed ‘at constant pitch angle. This and other recent studies hhave indicated large horizontal wind changes in con- veetive clouds (Gentry, 1963; Fujita, 1962; Newton, 1963; Steiner and Rhyne, 1962; and McLean, 1961). The problem is vastly more complex if one attempts to measure directly vertical motion to gust-scale resolu- tion. One must measure exactly the gust-scale pitch, angle of attack, and vertical displacement of the air- craft, Instrument requirements become quite critical, and voluminous data reduction is necessary. Holling and Malkus (in Jones, 1955), Bunker (1955), and ‘Tel- ford and Warner (1962) discuss the severe instrumental requirements needed for such measurements. Not attempt has been made with the method here presented to obtain similar direct vertical-motion meas- ‘urement to gust-scale resolution, Instrumental capa ties would not allow this. The derived gust velocities are presented only to show the magnitude and scale ‘of the accelerations experienced and the approximate association of the gusts with the drafts, ‘This computational method is unique in that the horizontal wind changes, as measured by the AN/APN- 82 Doppler wind instrument, are directly used to measure pitch angle variation Pilot pitch-angle maneuver is allowed for, and computational require- ments are not excessive. ‘The average width of the up- and downdrafts were approximately 14 n mi. There can be no doubt that the most significant scale of vertical motion in the hurricane is the cumulus draft scale. This is not to say that an overall mass circulation through the storm system is not taking place and is not highly significant. ‘This need average only a small fraction of @ knot over the large inflow areas, This broader mass circulation through the storm system is most likely to manifest "Tate 2. Comparison of hurricane and thunderstorm project cumulonimbi Hurricane fights ‘Thunderstorm fights ae nea a ee ee a ee a a er cSSess he ee Se B FB ns These computations should only be vis viously mentioned, only ince a ver ved in a qualitative sense as the draft resolutions were only (0 0.4 100.7 m misandaspre- lhe edge of many drafts may have been encountered. ‘velocity of but three knots vas neoded for consideration as a draft, a number of the draft values undoubtedly came from non-cumulonimbus clouds, his mus be considered in comparison of data with Thunderstorm Flights.Aucust 1965 itself in a slightly greater number and/or strength of upirafis to downdrafts. The present computations are incapable of resolving this smaller magnitude and larger space scale circulation. Acknowledgments. The auithor expresses his gratitude to Professor Herbert Riehl, Head of the Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, for his advice and encouragement in this investigation. ‘This research has been financially sponsored by the National Hurricane Research Project of the U. S. Weather Bureau, Appreciation is extended to the National Hurricane Research Project personnel for their friendlly assistance and cooperation in obtaining and interpreting the data here used. The author would like to acknowledge helpitt discussions of the data used or subject matter with Professor Horace Byers and Miss Bernice Ackerman ‘of the University of Chicago, Dr. Robert Simpson of the U, S. Weather Bureau, Dr. R. Cecil Gentry, Direc- tor of the National Hurricane Research Project; Dr. Pat Squires of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Mr. U. Oscar Lappe of the New York Uni- versity, Dr. Michio Yanai of the Japan Meteorolo Research Institute, and Mr. Andrew Bunker of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. “The author appreciates loan of the Velocity-Gravity- Height (VGH) records from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Structural Dynamics Branch and of the liquid-water oscillograph recordings from the Cloud Physics Group of the University of Chicago. APPENDIX Representativeness and Accuracy of Data Sample ‘The above calculations are felt to be closely repre- sentative of the vertical motion occurring at middle tropospheric levels and at radii between 10 and 60 1 mi in the moderate hurricane. There is, however, a bias to the data sample in eliminating a number of the ‘most intense vertical drafts. This is due to two effects: 1) In ten places where it was obvious from the changes of radar altitude, indicated airspeed, and liquid water concentrations that high vertical velocity was occurring, the AN/APN-82 failed to function properly. Along one radial flight leg, the AN/APN-82 system did not function properly. for a major portion of the fight leg. In such places no vertical motion computation was. possible, ‘There was a tendency for the AN/APN-82 to ‘malfunction selectively in the strongest convee- tive areas, Although pilots were instructed to hold their ‘course at all times—commensurate with safety, in some cases there was circumnvigation of radar echoes. Q WILLIAM M. GRAY 413 Hilleary and Christensen (1957) and Hawkins et al, (1962) have discussed the accuracy of the instrumenta~ tion used in this study. ‘The measitrement whose accuracy might significantly alter the results is the wind speed ‘measurement by the AN/APN-82, No thorough testing as to the precise accuracy and response characteristics of the AN/APN-82 under all conditions has been con- ducted, This would be necessary before definite confi- dence limits could be placed’ on results. Previous experience has shown that the AN/APN-82 winds are ‘most likely to be in error when 1) the winds are very light; 2) when the aircraft is in turns or is changing altitude; 3) when the ocean surface is nearly flat due to calm surface wind conditions; 4) when there is a sustained ocean current under the aircraft [this would cause the AN/APN-82 radar energy to be reflected from a moving rather than stationary surface. ‘The winds would thus be ‘uniformly in error by the amount of the water motion (Grocott, 1963)]; 5) in occasional heavy rain or thick cloud areas when the AN/APN-82 may lock onto and reflect from these sources rather than the ocean surface. Conditions one through three were not encountered in this study. Wind-speeds were always greater than 30 knots. Calculations were never made while the air- ‘raft was in turns or changing altitude, Sea conditions were always unstable. Condition four should not noticeably affect these results as the computations required only the mensurement of the change of wind and not the wind’s absolute value, errors due to condition five were occasionally present. There were ten obvious places (usually of 10 to 15 seconds duration) where the AN/APN-82 did not function properly and wind speeds appeared unrepre- sentatively light. In most of these cases very large and almost discontinuous decreases occurred. In other instances the AN/APN-82 was unable to record any wind at all and reverted to a memory mode, None of these areas of unrepresentative wind were used in the computations. Cloud and rain particles travel around the storm at velocities close to that of the winds. These speeds are ‘much larger than the ocean speed. If reflection is coming from the rain or cloud sources, the computed winds would take on a very different speed character. Wind changes of but 5 to 15 knots could not be due to inter- ception of the more rapidly moving cloud particles. ‘NHRP instrument engineers believe that nearly total interception of radar energy by rain or coud was responsible for these few unrepresentative measure- ments (i.e., condition five). The AN/APN-82 will ealcu- late the wind from the strongest return signal. It does not integrate the total energy return, Unless the returnama from the ocean surface was less than that from another source, the wind measurement is always based on the return from ocean source alone, Partial or weak inter- ception of rain, cloud, or spray by the AN/APN-82 would not significantly affect the wind determination if the computation is based on the strongest return only. ‘Thus in most cases the AN/APN-82 correctly measures the wind despite the presence of rain and cloudines ‘There is evidence which points to the basic reliability of the AN/APN-82, In all but the few cases cited above, the computed winds appear to be very reasonable. The ‘magnitude and characteristics of the wind fluctuations tre much like those of the airspeed changes. Navigation corrections after many hours of fight with AN/APN-82 svinds were usually within a few n mi. The wind changes experienced in the clouds were not observed outside the convective areas. The calculated vertical velocities of this study appear to be reasonable in magnitude and width with observations from radar, the Thunderstorm Project, and previous theoretical speculation, ‘Any doubt about the accuracy of the present AN/ APN-82 wind measurement does not invalidate the ‘method presented. Future vertical motion calculations ‘with a more completely tested and accepted fine resolu- tion wind-measuring device can be accomplished.” "This discussion of the accuracy of the AN/APN-82 is meant to refer only fo the winds measured from the NURP B-50 virraft Guring the 1058 hurricane fights. The reliability. of the AN/ ‘APN82 winds which were measured from the Research Plight Faciity (RFP) DC-6 during and after 1960 and for the Na- tional Severe Storms Project has not been investigated by the futhor, The above discussion ie intended to apply only to data Of the fight levels here studied. REFERENCES ‘Ackerman, B,, 1962: Hurricane cloud physics research. Final Ree ‘port, Contract Cwb 9720, 68 pp. (Available from Dept. of Geophysical Sei, Univ. of Chicago.) Boring Airplane Company’: Various technical papers on B-50 aircraft flight ‘characteristics, (Available from Witchita, Kansas, Office) Braham, R. R., 1960: Hurricane cloud physics research, Final ‘Report, Contract Cwb 9175 and Cwh 9484, 152 pp. (Avail. able from Dept. of Geophysical Sc., Univ. of Chicago.) Bunker, A. F, 1955: Turbulence and shearing stresses measured cover the North Adantic Ocean by an sirplane-aceleration technique. J. Meteor, 12, 445-455, Byers, H. and RR. Braham, 1949: The Thunderstorm. U. S Govt. Printing Office, 287 pp , 1961: On the structure of Hurticane Daisy (1958). "Report No, 48, 102 pp. (Availabe from U.S, Weather Bureau, Mian, Fla.) Donely, P., 1949: Summary of information relating to gust loads ‘on aisplanes. NACA Technical Note 1976, 145 pp. (Available from NASA, Washington, D.C.) Duncan, W. J, 1952: The Principles ofthe Coniral and Stabitty of “Aircraft. London, Cambridge Univ. Press, 384 pp. Durand, W. F,, 1985! Aerodynamic Theory. Val. I and V., Ber- lin, J. Springer, 867 and 347 pp. Fujita, 7, 1962: A review of research on analytical mesometeor- logy” 114 pp. (Available from Dept. of Geophysical Sc, Univ. of Chicago.) General Pression Laboratory (GPL), 1955: Doppler Ait-Naviga- tion Technical Series. Section Tand 1, Volumes 1, 2,3, 6,7, 10, 150 pp. (Available from GPL, Pleasantville, JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY Voure 4 Gentry, R. Cy 1963: A study of hurricane rainbands, Nat, Hur, Res, Proj. Report No, 69, 75 pp. (Available from U. Weather Bureau, Miami, Fla.) Gray, W. M,, 1962: On the balance of forces and radial accelera~ tons in hurricanes. Quart. J. R. Meter. Soe, 88, 30-458, 1965: On the scales of mation and internal stress character- Istics of the hurricane. Nat. Hur. Res. Proj. Report, (Avail- able ftom U. 8. Weather Bureas, Miami, Fa.) Grocott, D. F.H., 1963: Doppler correction for surface movement J. inst, Nasigation, 16, 51-63. Hawkins, H. F, a ol, 1962: Inventory, use and availability of ‘Nat. Hur, Res. Proj. data gathered by aircraft. Nat. Hur Res, Proj, Report No. 52, 240 pp. (Available from U. S. ‘Weather Bureau, Miami, Fla.) Hilleary, D. T., and F. F. Christensen, 1957: Instrumentation of Nat. Hur. Res, Proj. aircraft. Nat. Hur. Res, Proj. Report No. 11, 71 pp. (Available from U. S, Weather Bureau, ‘Miami, Fl) Jones, R. F:, 1954: Five fights through a thunderstorm belt, Quart. IR. Meteor. Soe, 80, 877-381. —, 1985: Discussion of five lights through a thunderstorm belt (Quart. FR, Meteor. Soc, 81, 122-124. ‘Malkus, J.S., 1960: Recent developments in the study of penetra- ‘ive convection and as application to hurricane cumulonim- bbas towers. Cumulus Dynamics, New York, Pergamon Press, 65-84, —, a al, 1961: Cloud patterns in Hurricane Daisy. Tellus, 12, ‘ean ‘McLean, G. S,, 1961: Observation of severe convection activity in ‘a squall ine, Bull. Amer. Meteor. Sec, 42, 252-264. Newton, C. W,, 1963: Dynamics of severe’ convective storms. ‘Medeor. Monogr, Boston, Amet. Meteor. Soc, 5, No. 27, 33-58, Pratt, KG, and W. G. Walker, 1954: A revised gustoad formula and a re-evaluation of V-G data taken on civil trane- port aieplanes from 1983 to 1950, NACA Report No, 1206, 5'pp. (Available from NASA, Washington, D.C.) Richardson, N. R,, 1951: NACA VGH recorder. NACA Technical ‘Note 2265, 16 pp. (Availabe from NASA, Washington, D. C.) Rich, H., 1950'On the role ofthe tropics in the general circulation of the atmosphere. Talus, 2, 117. —, 1954: Tropical Meteorlogy. New Vork, McGraw-Hill Book o,, 394 pp. — and J. S""Matkus, 1958: On the heat balance in the equa- {orialirough zone. Geophysice, 6 903-538, —,, 1961: Some aspects of Hurricane Day, 1958. Tellus, 13, 181-213, _ 1968: Some relations between the wind and thermal struc: ture of steady state hurricanes, J. Atmor. Se, 20, 276-287 pp. Senn, H. V., and E. F. Low, 1989: Studies of the evolution and motion of radar echoes’ from hurricanes. Unpublished Re- search Report of the Marine Laboratory and the Radar Re- search Laboratory of the Univ, of Miami, 109 pp, (ASTTA AD-227258.) —; and H. Hier, 1959: On the Origin of hursicane spiral rain- bands. JMeter, 16, 419-126, —; thal, 1962: Radar hurricane research 1 July 1961 to 30 June 4962, ‘Unpublished Research Report of the Marine Labora- tory and Radar Research Laboratory ofthe Univ. of Miami, 109 pp. (ASTIA AD-268058,) Steiner, k., and R. H. Rhyne, 1962: Some characteristics of severe storm turbulence. Nat. Severe Storms Project Report No. 10, ULS. Weather Bureau, Dept. of Commerce, 17 pp. (Available from U. 8. Weather Bureau, Washington, D.C) ‘Tatfor, J. W., and J. Wamer, 1962: On the measurement from an aircraft of bouyancy and vertical air velocity in cloud. J. Atmos. Sc, 19, $1523. ‘Tolelson, HL, B., 1956: Summary of derived gust velocities ob- tained feom measurements. within thunderstorms. NACA Report No. 1285, 7 pp. (Available from NASA, Washington, D.C)