The Super Tuesday Outbreak: Forecast Sensitivities to Single-Moment Microphysics Schemes

Forecast precipitation and radar characteristics are used by operational centers to guide the issuance of advisory products. As operational numerical weather prediction is performed at increasingly finer spatial resolution, convective precipitation traditionally represented by sub-grid scale parameterization schemes is now being determined explicitly through single- or multi-moment bulk water microphysics routines. Gains in forecasting skill are expected through improved simulation of clouds and their microphysical processes. High resolution model grids and advanced parameterizations are now available through steady increases in computer resources. As with any parameterization, their reliability must be measured through performance metrics, with errors noted and targeted for improvement. Furthermore, the use of these schemes within an operational framework requires an understanding of limitations and an estimate of biases so that forecasters and model development teams can be aware of potential errors. The National Severe Storms Laboratory (NSSL) Spring Experiments have produced daily, high resolution forecasts used to evaluate forecast skill among an ensemble with varied physical parameterizations and data assimilation techniques. In this research, high resolution forecasts of the 5-6 February 2008 Super Tuesday Outbreak are replicated using the NSSL configuration in order to evaluate two components of simulated convection on a large domain: sensitivities of quantitative precipitation forecasts to assumptions within a single-moment bulk water microphysics scheme, and to determine if these schemes accurately depict the reflectivity characteristics of well-simulated, organized, cold frontal convection. As radar returns are sensitive to the amount of hydrometeor mass and the distribution of mass among variably sized targets, radar comparisons may guide potential improvements to a single-moment scheme. In addition, object-based verification metrics are evaluated for their utility in gauging model performance and QPF variability.