A Sensitivity Study of Hodograph-Based Methods for Estimating Supercell Motion

Abstract

Four supercell motion forecast algorithms are investigated with respect to their hodograph-analysis parameters. Another method derived from the data presented herein, the so-called offset method, is used to develop a baseline standard for the aforementioned schemes, using the observed storm motions and the mean wind. It is not a forecast scheme, as it is based on knowing the observed storm motions. This work explores the sensitivity of these algorithms to their arbitrary parameters by systematically varying those parameters, using a dataset of 394 right-moving supercells, and associated proximity soundings. The parameters used in these algorithms to define the layer depths for advection and/or propagation of supercells have not been shown to be optimum for this purpose. These arbitrary parameters compose the top and bottom levels of the mean wind layer, and a deviation vector from the mean wind defined through that layer. Two of the most recently developed algorithms have also implemented the vertical wind shear vector over an arbitrary layer depth. It has been found that, among other results, the scheme using both mean wind and vertical wind shear is more sensitive to the depth of the mean wind layer than it is to the depth of the vertical wind shear layer. It has also been shown that, when using the simplest schemes, the most accurate forecasts, on average, are obtained by using deep mean wind layers (i.e., greater than 0–10 km). Indeed, all the forecast schemes show a strong tendency for the u component of the predicted storm motion to be regulated by the depth of the mean wind layer. The υ component of the prediction storm motion, on the other hand, appears to be controlled by the deviation vector from the layer-mean wind. Although the schemes using vertical shear are shown to perform somewhat better on average than schemes based on the mean wind alone, there are times in which they also result in large forecast errors. The results demonstrate the inherent difficulty in using an observed hodograph to predict supercell motion.