There is an Open Access version for this licensed article that can be read free of charge and without license restrictions. The content of the Open Access version may differ from that of the licensed version.
Pricing information
Please choose your delivery country and your customer group
Deterministic weather models are limited by the fact that they depict one of many plausible forecasts of the atmosphere. Weather models will always be prone to error, especially since sparse observations make it impossible to represent the true initial state of the atmosphere. Ensemble weather models that represent multiple plausible forecasts are the next progression of numerical weather prediction and need further operational testing. Ensembles provide estimates of the probability of certain weather forecast outcomes, which are especially valuable to decision makers who apply risk management to operational decisions. The Ensemble Prediction Suite (EPS) used at the 557th Weather Wing (557 WW) provides probability based forecasts for thousands of worldwide locations. These Point Ensemble Probability (PEP) bulletins are tailored speci#12;cally to the United States military and its criteria for operationally signi#12;cant weather thresholds. During April to October 2013, a validation study by Clements was performed on the PEP bulletins from 557 WW's Global EPS, as well as the 20 km and 4 km resolution Mesoscale EPS across 10 geographically diverse locations. The study found that the PEP products over forecast lightning, while precipitation and wind forecasts improved with increased horizontal EPS resolution. Since then, signi#12;cant changes have been made to how the EPSs generate products. This study assesses additional weather parameters and compares 557 WW global and mesoscale EPS at 17 Continental United States (CONUS) locations. The PEP bulletins will be compared to climatology, METARs, and Earth Networks Total Lightning Network (ENTLN) data to generate reliability diagrams and Brier Skill Scores (BSS). Results from April to October of 2015 show that each EPS is underforecasting ceilings and visibility for most forecast hours at several locations. The underforecasting of ceilings is most severe at Vandenberg AFB, an area prone to frequent marine layer fog and stratus. The MEPS 4 km also shows signi#12;cantly better lightning forecast skill compared to the other EPS grid scales. However, each EPS is susceptible to overforecasting lighting at night. Finally, in areas with complex terrain, wind forecasts are degraded with decreasing model resolution.