MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER 1289

An Improved Modeling Scheme for Freezing Precipitation Forecasts

ANDRÉ TREMBLAY AND ANNA GLAZER
Cloud Physics Research Division, Atmospheric Environment Service, Dorval, Quebec, Canada

(Manuscript received 15 October 1998, in final form 28 July 1999)

ABSTRACT
To improve forecasts of various weather elements (snow, rain, and freezing precipitation) in numerical weather
prediction models, a new mixed-phase cloud scheme has been developed. The scheme is based on a single
prognostic equation for total water content and includes parameterization of key cloud microphysical processes.
The three-dimensional forecasts of solid particles, liquid, and supercooled cloud droplets and different precip-
itation types are typical outputs of the cloud scheme. It is shown that the scheme compares reasonably well
with available meteorological observations. A novel aspect embodied in the scheme is the explicit inclusion of
physical processes for the formation of supercooled liquid water. Thus, it is possible to model freezing precip-
itation and supercooled cloud droplets in the absence of the melting ice mechanism. The inclusion of the
supercooled liquid water mechanism increased significantly the probability of detection of freezing precipitation
and improved the bias score over the melting ice algorithm alone.

1. Introduction example, possible links between the occurrence of su-

Freezing precipitation1 (rain and drizzle) poses a se-
rious public safety problem and is a significant threat
for virtually all forms of transportation. Ice storms are
often winter’s worst hazards. In Canada, these storms
are especially common in densely populated regions of
Ontario and Quebec. The ice storm of January 1998 was
the worst natural disaster to hit Canada in recent mem-
ory. Starting from 5 until 10 January 1998, precipitation,
comprising mostly freezing rain and ice pellets, ex-
ceeded 100 mm in southeastern Ontario and south-
western Quebec. This catastrophe left behind at least 25
deaths, and freezing rain brought down millions of trees,
120 000 km of power lines and telephone cables, and
an impressive number of major transmission towers and
wooden utility poles.
A less spectacular but very important phenomenon is
the formation of supercooled large cloud droplets. They
cause icing on airframes, reduce the ascending force of
aircraft, and create severe risks to flight operations. For
1
In this paper, we use the term precipitation because the cloud
scheme described herein cannot distinguish rain and drizzle. A liquid
precipitation event occurs when there is a vertical mass flux of liquid
water at the surface. The situation is identical for freezing precipi-
tation at temperatures colder than 08C.
Corresponding author address: Dr. André Tremblay, Cloud Physics
Research Division, Atmospheric Environment Service, 2121 Trans
Canada Highway, Dorval, PQ H9P 1J3, Canada.
E-mail: andre.tremblay@ec.gc.ca
percooled large cloud droplets and the fatal accident of
an ATR-72 near Roselawn, Indiana, in the fall of 1994
have been suggested (Marwitz et al. 1997).
Because accurate predictions of these natural hazards
are of primary importance, many operational forecast
algorithms currently need to be improved. For example,
statistically tuned icing algorithms (Thompson et al.
1997) result in overforecasting icing threats. On the oth-
er hand, a physically based Canadian operational
scheme proposed by Tremblay et al. (1995) reduces ic-
ing threats but it provides only binary yes–no forecasts
for icing events and does not give any information about
icing intensity. Actual freezing precipitation forecast
techniques address only the melting ice mechanism (ne-
cessitating the presence of a warm layer aloft) although
the formation of freezing rain or drizzle in the absence
of a warm layer is commonly observed (Strapp et al.
1996).
In an attempt to improve icing and freezing precip-
itation forecasts, a new mixed-phase cloud scheme has
been developed (Tremblay et al. 1996b). This scheme
has the advantage of being computationally fast and
easy to implement and has an operational potential. The
scheme has been tested by simulating virtually all ice
storms during the 1996/97 winter season. The scheme
has also been run in a quasi-operational mode for the
whole 1997/98 winter season to provide forecasts and
guidance for research aircraft flight trajectories during
the Third Canadian Freezing Drizzle Experiment (Isaac
et al. 1998). Finally, the scheme was used as real-time
guidance for the Canadian Convair research aircraft mis-

q 2000 American Meteorological Society

1290 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW VOLUME 128

sions over the Arctic Sea during the Canadian phase of
the First International Clould Climatology Project Re-
gional Experiment Arctic Cloud Experiment (6 April–
1 May 1998) (Glazer et al. 1999).
A brief description of the scheme will first be pre-
sented. Illustrative results from the 1996/97 winter sim-
ulations will then be discussed to show typical forecast
products. Quantitative icing and freezing precipitation
forecasts are possible with the new scheme and several
examples will be given. Furthermore, both qualitative
on the rhs 5 C 2 E). Within this framework, M L rep-
resents the mass content of both cloud and rain particles.
Assuming that precipitation-sized liquid water droplets
are distributed in size according to a Marshall–Palmer
distribution, and using an empirical relationship for the
terminal fall speed of droplets as a function of their
diameter, Ogura and Takahashi (1971) obtained the fol-
lowing formula for the effective mass-weighted average
fall speed for M L :

12
r0
1/2
and quantitative comparisons between simulated and
VL 5 cMLd , (2)
commonly observed meteorological parameters will be r
done. Finally, it will be demonstrated that the inclusion
of a mixed-phase mechanism in the forecast algorithm where c 5 231.2 3 1026d g2d m113d s21 and d 5 0.125
improves both the detection and the bias score for freez- are empirical constants, r is the density of air, and r 0
ing precipitation. These results suggest that the scheme 5 1 kg m23 is the reference air density. The sedimen-
is potentially a useful tool for the prediction of super- tation term F L is calculated in terms of the vertical
cooled large droplets. divergence of the mass flux:

2. Cloud scheme description
For this study, the mixed-phase cloud scheme devel-
2 ]
FL 5  ]z

[c(ML 2 k L ) 11d 3 12
r0
r
1/2

] for ML . k L

for ML # k L ,
oped by Tremblay et al. (1996b) is adapted to forecast 0
freezing precipitation episodes. The scheme is compu- (3)
tationally fast and easy to implement in mesoscale or
where k L 5 0.2 g m23 is a threshold to model the onset
large-scale atmospheric models. Because it minimizes
of precipitation. Within this framework k L is analogous
computer resources, the mixed-phase scheme allows
to the autoconversion threshold of Kessler (1969). How-
simulations that would have been otherwise impossible
ever because we have only one prognostic equation the
with more elaborate cloud microphysics schemes. The
relaxation time of the autoconversion process is zero.
scheme considers the total water content (TWC) M as
In Kessler’s original parameterization the relaxation
a basic prognostic variable. Clearly, M encompasses the
time is roughly 15 min.
continuum constituted by all solid (M S ) and liquid (M L )
The condensation (evaporation) of cloud is obtained
particles that compose the mass of the condensate. A
from Asai (1965):
prognostic equation for M is obtained by adding all
continuity equations representing various hydrometeor (qy 2 qvs )/Dt
categories commonly considered in bulk-parameterized C5 , (4)
L 2y rs
cloud models (e.g., Dudhia 1989; Lin et al. 1983; Rut- 11
ledge and Hobbs 1984): cp R y T 2

dM where qvs (r s ) is the saturation vapor content (mixing

5 C 1 D 1 N 2 E 1 F 2 M= · V. (1)
dt
The derivative operator has its usual meaning, and
the first four terms in the rhs of (1) account for the mass
transfer of water vapor to the condensate. The processes
of condensation and evaporation of liquid droplets (C),
deposition of water vapor on ice particles and subli-
mation (D), initiation of ice particles due to the acti-
vation of ice freezing nuclei at subfreezing temperature
(N), and evaporation of raindrops (E) are taken into
account. The sedimentation process is symbolized by
F, and the last term accounts for the compressibility of
the air, since the problem is formulated in terms of den-
sity units rather than mixing ratios.
a. Liquid phase
Equation (1) is easily solved for warm clouds (T .
08C, M 5 M L , F 5 F L , and microphysical processes
ratio) with respect to water. The evaporation of rain is
taken as in Kessler (1969):
E 5 k E (qvs 2 q y ) 3 (M L 2 k L ) 0.65 , (5)
where the parameter k E 5 5.53 3 1024 g20.65 m1.95 s21 .
b. Solid phase
For totally glaciated clouds, (1) can also be solved,
since for T , 08C, M 5 M S , F 5 F S , and microphysical
processes on the rhs 5 N 1 D.
The formulation of ice microphysical processes in
cloud models generally consists of an accurate descrip-
tion of various source and sink terms in a set of con-
tinuity equations representing the conservation of the
multiphase cloud properties. Typically, the microphys-
ical processes are formulated using a simple inverse
exponential law as in Marshall and Palmer (1948) for
the size distribution of solid-phase particles such as
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER 1291

snow or graupel. In the present work, all microphysical The effective mass-weighted average fall speed of
ice-related processes are formulated in terms of the var- solid phase precipitation is
ious moments of an arbitrary particle size distribution

E
function. This approach provides more flexibility to ex- `
plore different size distributions and allows aircraft mea- y (DS )m(DS )n(DS ) dDS
surements to be incorporated in the model, such as in
12
r I(3 1 b)
1/2

E
0
the work of Zawadzki et al. (1993). VS 5 5a 0 ·
The third moment of the particle size distribution is
`
r I(3)
m(DS )n(DS ) dDS
of particular importance because it is proportional to the 0
ice water content (M S ). This is why the functions a(x)
and b(x), which relate the xth moment of the particle
12
r0
1/2

size distribution I(x) to its third moment I(3), will be 5a a(3 1 b)[C3 MS ] b (31b)21 , (7)
r
used. They are defined as follows:

I(x) [ E
0
`

DSx n(DS ) dDS 5 a(x)I(3) b (x) , (6)

where n(D S ) is the number concentration of particles of
diameter D S . For the third moment we have I(3) 5 C 3 M S
with C 3 5 1.9 3 1025 m 3 g21 .
where y (D S ) 5 aD bS (r 0 /r)1/2 is the fall speed of a particle
of diameter D S [a 5 2147 cm12b s21 5 25.1 m12b s21 ,
b 5 0.27; see Locatelli and Hobbs (1974)] and mass
m(D S ) 5 pr s D S3 /6 (r s 5 100 kg m23 is the density of
snow).
The solid phase sedimentation term is written as


2 ]
FS 5  ]z

[aa(3 1 b)(C3 ) b (31b)21 (MS 2 k S ) b (31b) 3 12
r0
r ]
1/2

for MS . k S

for MS # k S ,
(8)
0

where k S 5 0.02 g m23 is a threshold to model the onset Following Rutledge and Hobbs (1984) and references
of solid precipitation, similar to k L . therein, the initiation of M at subfreezing temperature
Table 1 contains selected values of a and b for several due to nucleation of ice forming nuclei is calculated
size distributions used by other investigators. In the from
present study, the distribution suggested by Lin et al. 
m n (q 2 qvsi )/Dt
N 5 min  0 n , y
(1983) was selected for model simulations. It was found,
(9)
by testing a number of cases outside the present dataset,  Dt L 2s rsi 
that the Lin et al. (1983) distribution gives the best  11 
cp R y T 2 

scores for the accumulation of precipitation at the sur-
face. In Table 1, x 5 1 is related to vapor deposition where q y is the water vapor content, qvsi and rsi are the
on ice crystals, x 5 2 1 b is associated with riming of saturation vapor content and mixing ratio with respect
supercooled droplets by ice particles, and x 5 3 1 b is to ice, and m 0 5 1029 g is the initial mass of an ice
used for the mass-weighted average fall speed. From crystal after activation of the freezing nuclei. The min
Table 1, it is seen that the first moment coefficients (x function accounts for undershooting of water vapor un-
5 1) are particularly sensitive to the assumed particle der saturation with respect to ice. Following Meyers et
size distribution. On the other hand, the coefficients for al. (1992), the number of activated freezing and depo-
the mass-weighted average fall speed (x 5 3 1 b) are sition nuclei per unit volume is
weakly affected by this choice. This implies that the
n n 5 n 0 exp{20.639 1 0.1296[100(S i 2 1)]}, (10)
parameterization of solid precipitation flux is robust.
The present formulation allows for easy implemen- where n 0 5 10 3 m23 and S i is the saturation ratio with
tation of any type of size distribution such as the general respect to ice.
three parameter gamma distribution widely used to ac- The mass transfer between vapor and ice particles is
count for ice particle spectra in cloud models (see Walko calculated from (Zawadzki et al. 1993)
et al. 1995; Mitchell 1991, 1994). The functions a(x) 2p (Si 2 1) f y a(1)C3b (1) M b (1)
and b(x) can be directly calculated for this distribution D5 . (11)
L 2s Ry T
and incorporated in the computer code, emphasizing the 1
flexibility of the present approach. KR y T 2 esi D
1292 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW VOLUME 128

TABLE 1. Mass–moments relationship coefficients for parameterization of ice-phase microphysical processes.

Size distribution of a (1) a(2 1 b) a(31 b)

ice particles (m22 ) (mb21 ) (mb ) b(1) b(2 1 b) b(3 1 b)
Sekhon and Srivastava (1970) 1.00 0.824 1.118 1 0.622 1.14
Exponential:
No 5 3 3 106, n 5 0;
Lin et al. (1983) —
present investigation 707.11 9.15 0.46 0.5 0.82 1.07
Exponential:
No 5 2 3 10 7, n 5 0;
Dudhia (1989) 1.83 3 10 3 12.93 0.4 0.5 0.82 1.07
Empirical:
Zawadzki et al. (1993) 9.20 3 10 3 6.88 0.54 0.58 0.79 1.08

This formula accounts for vapor deposition when the cR M b (21b) f b (21b) (1 2 f ) 1 cD M b (1)21 f b (1)
air is supersaturated with respect to ice. The same for-
mula is also applied in subsaturated conditions with re- wG
2 f [1 1 (1 2 f )j ] 5 0, (14)
spect to ice to calculate the sublimation of ice particles. M
In (11), K 5 0.0236 J21 m21 s21 K21 is the coefficient where
of thermal conductivity of the air, D 5 2.11 3 1025 m 2
s21 is the coefficient of diffusion of water vapor in the 2p [si (T ) 2 1] f y a(1)C3b (1)
cD (T ) 5 , (15)
air, f y 5 1 is the ventilation coefficient, and esi is the L 2s Ry T
saturation vapor pressure over ice. In (11) the second- 1
KR y T 2 esi (T )D
order term involving the Schmidt number has been ne-
glected because it has little influence on the value of D
12
p r
1/2

and provides computational efficiency. cR (T, p) 5 E SC 0 aC3b (21b)a(2 1 b), (16)

c. Mixed phase
For mixed-phase clouds, both liquid and ice micro-
physics processes are operating, and the technique de-
rived by Tremblay et al. (1996b) can be used to infer
the amount of solid and liquid phases within the cloud.
This procedure avoids the use of multiple equations to
represent the multiphase cloud system. Assuming that
the mixed-phase clouds are saturated with respect to
water implies an equilibrium in which supersaturation
production is balanced by condensation on droplets and
vapor deposition on ice crystals. This reflects an ele-
mentary cloud physics knowledge, and detailed cloud
microphysics simulations (Tremblay et al. 1995) have
shown that this assumption is valid with a high degree
of accuracy under most circumstances. Under this as-
sumption, Tremblay et al. (1996b) proposed a procedure
to describe mixed-phase clouds.
Let the ratio of ice water content M S to the TWC M
be defined by
M S 5 fM.
Therefore,
M L 5 (1 2 f )M,
where M L represents the amount of supercooled liquid
water content. It was shown by Tremblay et al. (1996b)
that the solution of the evolution equation for f quickly
reaches equilibrium compared with typical time scales
involved in large-scale processes. This allows consid-
eration of the following diagnostic equation for f :
4 r
FL 2 FS
j5 , (17)
wG
1R T G 2
Ly g
G(T, p) 5 rrs w 2 , (18)
y
2
Rd T
s i is the ratio of the saturation vapor pressure over water
and ice, w . 0 the resolved-scale vertical velocity, ESC
5 1 the collection efficiency of water droplets by solid
particles, G w the wet-adiabatic lapse rate, and g the ac-
celeration of gravity.
In (14) the first term represents a sink of supercooled
liquid water (SLW), and f increases due to the scav-
enging of liquid water droplets by ice particles. The
second term accounts for the deposition of water vapor
onto ice crystals. This promotes the evaporation of liq-
uid droplets and the subsequent deposition on ice crys-
tals. The net effect is a reduction of the amount of SLW
within the cloud. The first component of the last term
represents the increase in saturation ratio due to adia-
batic cooling resulting from moist-adiabatic ascent,
(12)
which contributes positively to the amount of SLW
within a cloud volume. The second component of the
last term is the contribution of the differential sedi-
(13)
mentation of the solid and liquid phases. The difference
in fall speeds between solid and liquid particles locally
changes the partition between SLW and solid particles.
Depending on the sign of the vertical gradient of M L
and M S this term can act as a source or sink of SLW.
Except for unrealistically high values of the vertical
gradient of M S and M L , the sedimentation term j is
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER
FIG. 1. Cloud microphysical processes in the scheme.
always confined to values |j| , 1. Considering the weak
dependence of f on j within this range (Tremblay et al.
1996b), the current implementation of the scheme is for
j 5 0. This simplification avoids useless calculation.
The presence of vertical velocity in (14) implies an
explicit forcing of microphysical processes by model
dynamics. From the discussion given in Tremblay et al.
(1996b) a necessary condition for the existence of SLW
is w . w1 , where
cD (T )M b (1)
w1 (M, T, p) 5 . (19)
G(T, p)
For w # w1 , f 5 1 and the cloud is glaciated. For w
. w1 , mixed phase is present and (14) is used to cal-
culate the proportion of ice within the cloud.
The ratio f strongly depends on M, T, and w, and
weakly on p and j, and trying to parameterize f in terms
of T only may be questionable (Tremblay et al. 1994).
This may be of potential interest for large-scale cloud
parameterization that use empirical functions of tem-
perature to model f (Smith 1990; Sundqvist 1993), as
well as for the interpretation of aircraft measurements
for cloud parameterization development (Moss and
Johnson 1994).
Knowing f and M, one can calculate M S , M L , and F
5 F S 1 F L . This is sufficient to determine the appro-
priate mass transfer processes listed above in order to
solve (1), giving a complete description of liquid, solid,
and mixed-phase precipitating (or nonprecipitating)
clouds.
The prognostic variable of the scheme, the TWC, and
its diagnostic partition is shown in Fig. 1. The various
microphysical processes considered by the scheme are
also indicated.
d. Freezing precipitation
The mixed-phase cloud scheme (MPCS) can forecast
the proportion of SLW and ice at any point within the
cloud volume. For SLW situations in which the precip-
itation is produced [according to Eqs. (3) and (8)], freez-
1293
ing precipitation (FP) can be inferred. Thus, the MPCS
has a potential as a predictor of FP in situations in which
the melting ice model cannot be applied. One of the
objectives of this paper is to estimate the accuracy of
this algorithm using surface observations. The present
algorithm requires an interaction between the MPCS and
the model dynamics (sustained saturated updraft) to sup-
port a significant amount of SLW coexisting with ice
in order to forecast an FP event. This mechanism is
different from the supercooled warm rain process
(SWRP) discussed in Huffman and Norman (1988) and
observed by Cober et al. (1996). The SWRP is a col-
lision–coalescence mechanism occurring in an ice-free
supercooled precipitating cloud and is not included in
the present formulation.
To complete the FP forecast algorithm, the melting
ice model discussed in Brooks (1920), Penn (1957),
Bocchieri (1980), and also in Huffman and Norman
(1988) was implemented in the scheme. The FP occurs
in the presence of a layer warmer than 08C above a layer
colder than 08C near the surface. In the present scheme,
an FP forecast is issued (when M . 0) by setting f 5
0 in the cold layer. The reader should note that this
process requires that cloud tops straddle the upper-level
08C isotherm (FP type I) to form FP. However, it is
possible to have a situation where the cloud is totally
embedded in the warm layer and precipitation (formed
by a collision–coalescence mechanism) falling into the
cold air adjacent to the surface results in freezing pre-
cipitation (FP type II). Because it is not necessary to
make a distinction between these two FP types to issue
an FP forecast in the presence of a warm layer, these
two situations will be referred to as classical in the
remainder of this paper. A visual inspection of the pres-
ent simulations set has not revealed the presence of type-
II FP, due to large vertical extent of simulated cloud
systems. It should be mentioned that a physically based
algorithm (Czys et al. 1996) was recently suggested as
an alternative to the empirical procedures discussed
above, but it still remains to be evaluated within the
present context.
e. Thermodynamic and water vapor equations
The scheme formulation must be completed with the
addition of thermodynamic and water vapor equations:
dT L L Lf
1 wGd 5 y (C 2 E ) 1 s (D 1 N ) 2 x (20)
dt cp cp cp
and
dqy
5 2(C 1 D 1 N ) 1 E 2 qy = · V. (21)
dt
The first equation accounts for the heat transfer due
to various microphysical processes and the second de-
scribes the conservation of water vapor. The symbol x
represents the cooling of the air due to the melting of
1294 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
ice particles falling through the 08C isotherm. Because
it appears to give good results on the mesoscale, the
melting of ice particles is parameterized following the
procedure of Zhang (1989). In this procedure, it is as-
sumed that solid particles that cross the 08C isotherm
melt instantly within the model layer underneath.
3. Simulation setup and cases simulated
To provide an example of the behavior of the present
cloud scheme on the mesoscale and of its potential in
an operational application, a number of numerical sim-
ulations were performed. The fully compressible, three-
dimensional, nonhydrostatic, semi-implicit, semi-La-
grangian (SISL), Mesoscale Compressible Community
(MC2) model was used as the basic framework for a
first implementation of the mixed-phase cloud scheme.
The MC2 model originated from a regional hydrostatic
model (Robert et al. 1985). It was generalized to the
Euler system by Tanguay et al. (1990) and successfully
applied to synoptic storm simulations. Subsequently, the
same model was used at finescale by Robert (1993) for
bubble convection experiments and Tremblay (1994) for
squall-line simulations that emphasizes the universal na-
ture of this dynamical framework. Some characteristics
of MC2 include variable vertical resolution, modified
Gal-Chen terrain-following scaled-height vertical co-
ordinate, a limited-area one-way nesting strategy, and a
complete physics package (Benoit et al. 1997). Its main
asset among existing nonhydrostatic models is its novel
SISL formulation (Laprise 1995).
To provide a verification framework for FP forecasts
produced by the MPCS, meteorological surface obser-
vations (METARS), recorded during the winter 1996/
97 period (1 December 1996–1 March 1997), were ex-
amined. The significant FP episodes within a window
covering most of the continental United States and Can-
ada (308N, 1208W–558N, 658W) were identified. During
these 3 months, FP was reported almost each day within
the area. Twenty four days grouped in 11 episodes have
been selected for simulation and analysis.
Table 2 depicts the 11 FP episodes selected for model
verification. All cases listed in Table 2 represent intense
and well-organized FP episodes. Different synoptic sit-
uations occurred within distinct episodes. As shown in
Table 2, six events were associated with well-defined
synoptic storms (A, B, C, E, G, and K) and five events
formed near a major synoptic trough (D, F, H, I, J). Low
pressure systems developing over the Great Lakes most
commonly produce FP storms. However, the only East
Coast storm observed during this period produced the
most intense FP episode (1641 reports).
In general, FP episodes have well-organized spatial
structures. The structures remain coherent for long pe-
riods of time and move with synoptic perturbations. As
an example, Fig. 2 displays locations of surface stations
that reported FP during episode A. These maps show
an FP area initially (8 January 1997) over northern Tex-
VOLUME 128
as that developed and propagated along a northeast tra-
jectory to reach the New England states and Canadian
Maritimes on 10 January. Most of the episodes studied
in this paper have such coherent structures.
For each day of the verification period, the MC2 was
initialized at 0000 UTC and simulations were performed
on a 186 3 126 grid covering most of North America
at a resolution of 35 km (Fig. 13 below). In the vertical,
33 levels were used to obtain a resolution of 250 m in
the first 5 km. Above 5 km, the resolution was gradually
decreased to the model top (25 km).
4. Simulations results
a. Qualitative forecasts comparisons with
observations
Since the MPCS is a bulk cloud physics package, not
only a simple FP algorithm, it is suitable to have some
indications of its ability to reproduce observed features
of clouds and precipitation distribution. A quantitative
verification and the comparison of the MPCS with other
existing schemes is beyond the scope of this paper and
only a few illustrative examples of selected forecast
products will be given. Figure 3 shows the forecasted
surface precipitation rate (both solid and liquid com-
bined; for 0000 UTC 9 January 1997) compared with
the nearest available Next-Generation Radar (NEX-
RAD) composite radar reflectivity maps (1.5-km con-
stant altitude plan-position indicator; for 23 UTC 8 Jan-
uary 1997).
On 9 January a weak low moved from the Gulf of
Mexico to the coast of Louisiana and a wide area of
precipitation over the southeastern United States was
observed. Figures 3a and 3b show reasonable agreement
between the predicted and the observed localization,
structure, and extent of the precipitation area. On the
radar map of Fig. 3a, a banded structure in the precip-
itation field is apparent. In particular, there are four well-
defined precipitation bands labeled B1, B2, B3, and B4,
extending roughly from the southwest to the northeast.
Within these bands there are cells that exceed the 40-
dBZ reflectivity level. These mesoscale precipitation
bands have a major axis dimension that reaches several
thousand kilometers (B1 covers a region from northern
Texas to north of Illinois). East of band B4, the precip-
itation has a cluster structure and there are two distinct
centers labeled C1 and C2 localized over Georgia and
over the South Carolina coast. Figure 3b shows that the
model was able to successfully forecast precipitation
bands B2, B3, B4, and cluster C1. However, the C2
zone, the precipitation area over Georgia, and the band
B1 were missed by the model forecast.
The radar–model comparison discussed in Fig. 3 al-
lows only an instantaneous and qualitative identification
of the major structures of the precipitation field. The
comparison between surface observations and model
time-integrated precipitation presented in Fig. 4 permits
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER 1295

TABLE 2. Freezing precipitation episodes selected for model verification.

No. of FP
Case Period
A 8–10 Jan 1997
B 4–6 Jan 1997
C 24–25 Jan 1997
D 14–16 Jan 1997
E 22 Jan 1997
F 27 Jan 1997
G 4–5 Feb 1997
H 14 Feb 1997
I 11–13 Dec 1996
J 22–24 Dec 1996
K 28–29 Dec 1996
Total
reports Description
1641 A huge freezing rain episode associated with the warm
front of a major synoptic storm; during the 3-day peri-
od it moved from Texas to New England
958 During the 3-day period of a low pressure system moved
from Colorado to the Canadian east coast; an important
band of freezing rain formed ahead of the warm front
and moved from the Dakotas to Nova Scotia during
the period
756 A weak low initially over Oklahoma moved northeast to-
ward the Great Lakes and intensified; an important
zone of freezing precipitation affected the Midwest
states up to southern Quebec during the period
1002 A synoptic trough gradually slid from the north from the
Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico and pushed an in-
tense high pressure system over the Atlantic Ocean; a
band of freezing precipitation formed over the southern
states and moved to eastern Canada during the period
503 A low pressure system developed over the Great Lakes
and moved quickly to Newfoundland; a freezing pre-
cipitation zone extending from northwest of Ontario to
the Ottawa region moved to the Gaspe Peninsula dur-
ing the day
277 A weak rough southwest of Lake Michigan pushed on a
high pressure system over the Great Lakes; freezing
rain was reported on all day over the Midwest states
771 A low pressure system developed over the Great Lakes;
freezing precipitation was reported within the area by
many stations during the period
841 A major synoptic trough extending from Baffin Island to
the Gulf of Mexico moved slowly; a huge zone of
freezing rain from southern Ontario to the Carolinas
was reported during the period
605 A planetary trough initially extending from the Gulf of
Alaska to Kansas propagated slowly eastward to reach
Hudson Bay by the end of the period; freezing rain
was reported over the Canadian prairies, Midwest
states, Ontario, Quebec, and New England States dur-
ing the period
757 A major synoptic trough moved slowly eastward. On 24
Dec a low pressure system developed over the Great
Lakes; freezing rain was reported over the Midwest,
the Great Lakes region, and Quebec; on the last day
with the low pressure system a well-organized band
moved from the Great Lakes to the St. Lawrence Val-
ley
550 A weak low moved over the Great Lakes to James Bay
and freezing rain was reported over the area
8661

a more comprehensive analysis. For example, Figs. 4a
and 4b show that the predicted precipitation accumu-
lation field agrees fairly well with observations. In par-
ticular, the forecast of the localization of the north
boundary of precipitation (1 mm) is good. Also, the
regions with a 24-h precipitation accumulation of more
than 10 mm were reasonably identified by the forecast.
However, the intense rainfall region observed near the
north shore of the Gulf of Mexico was not accurately
predicted suggesting that improvements to the actual
convection scheme may be needed. As discussed above,
the forecast of Fig. 4b fails to predict the precipitation
over Georgia. The comparison of other forecasts dis-
cussed in this paper with respective radar maps and
surface observations has a quality level equivalent to
that of Figs. 3 and 4.
A different point of view is presented in Fig. 5 with
a comparison of the Geostationary Operational Envi-
1296 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
FIG. 2. Surface reports of FP during the episode of 8–10 Jan 1997.
ronmental Satellite-8 GOES-8 IR image (valid at 1200
UTC 9 January 1997) with the 12-h forecast of model-
computed outgoing long wave radiation (OLR) valid at
that time. Since Fig. 5a depicts the brightness temper-
ature and Fig. 5b the OLR, a quantitative comparison
is impossible. However, these two quantities are cor-
related and a qualitative comparison as in Fig. 3 is mean-
ingful. Comparing Figs. 5a and 5b, a resemblance be-
tween the two patterns can be noted. In particular, the
VOLUME 128
FIG. 3. Comparison between the 24-h forecast (valid at 0000 UTC
9 Jan 1997) of surface precipitation rates (shaded at 0.01, 0.05, 0.10,
0.50, 1.00, 2.00, and 4.00 mm h21 ) with NEXRAD mosaic reflectivity
maps (valid at 2300 UTC 8 Jan 1997) for the episode of 8–10 Jan
1997. The tones of gray on the radar map correspond to reflectivity
thresholds 5, 20, and 40 dBZ (increasing with tint). The radar map
is obtained from the National Climatic Data Center (http://
www.ncdc.noaa.gov).
three cloud bands B1, B2, B3 and the two clusters C1
and C2 are relatively well simulated. Also, the locali-
zation of the northern boundary of the cloud shield is
reasonably well predicted. An apparent deficiency in the
forecast is the too limited extent of band B3 over the
Gulf of Mexico. This is likely due to a timing problem
because the model developed an intense precipitation
system with a well-defined anvil over this region by
0000 UTC 10 January (not shown).
b. Three-dimensional cloud structure and phases
The MPCS permits a relatively detailed bulk descrip-
tion of microphysical properties of cloud and precipi-
tation. The formulation encompasses solid and liquid
cloud and precipitation particles. The three-dimensional
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER
FIG. 4. Comparison between forecast and observations of the 24-h
precipitation accumulation (mm) valid at 0000 UTC 9 Jan 1997.
forecasts of cloud water/ice, rain/snow, supercooled
clouds, and FP can be obtained within the scheme. How-
ever, since there is no three-dimensional observations
of cloud variables available for verification, only an
academic discussion based on conceptual models of
midlatitude cyclonic cloud patterns (Carlson 1980) is
possible.
Figure 6a shows a 12-h forecast of the TWC at an
altitude of 1 km, superimposed with a frontal analysis
valid on 1200 UTC 9 January. In the figure, the large
cloud system over the eastern part of the continent ex-
hibits the well-known comma structure generally ob-
served within midlatitude cyclones. The structure re-
veals cold-frontal clouds over the Gulf of Mexico, warm
conveyor belt clouds ahead of the warm front, and com-
ma head clouds associated with the cold conveyor belt.
Figure 6b depicts a vertical cross section (denoted by
line AB in Fig. 6a) through the warm front of the TWC
superimposed with temperature. Again, classical struc-
ture often presented in conceptual cyclone models can
be noted. For example, starting in the cold air (at point
B) and moving southward (to point A), it is possible to
observe the transition from high-level clouds to surface
precipitation near the warm front to low-level boundary
layer clouds in the warm sector. The TWC field shows
1297
FIG. 5. (a) Cloud-top temperature (K) from GOES-8 IR channel,
valid at 1200 UTC 9 Jan 1997. The low pressure center track is also
indicated. (b) MC2 12-h forecast of outgoing longwave radiation flux
(W m22 ) at the top of the atmosphere, valid at 1200 UTC 9 Jan 1997.
a layer structure at several locations and maxima are
associated with the warm-frontal zone. The high gra-
dient in the TWC near the 08C isotherm is explained
by the difference between the terminal fall speed of
liquid and solid particles. The structure of temperature
isotherms reveals a warmer than freezing layer in alti-
tude at the warm front and FP was forecast in this region.
As an example of a mixed-phase forecast, Figs. 6c
and 6d show the liquid water content and ice water
content superimposed with temperature at an altitude z
5 3.5 km. These meteorological variables have been
obtained by diagnostically splitting the TWC with the
parameter f [Eq. (14)]. Figure 6c shows the existence
of a large zone of SLW ahead of the warm front within
a temperature range of 08 to 2168C. Regions of SLW
are fundamental for aircraft icing forecasts and are ex-
plicitly calculated by the scheme. Thus, the present
scheme offers an alternative to empirical schemes based
on temperature and humidity (Schultz and Politovich
1992; Appleman 1954). Figure 6c illustrates that the
mixed-phase scheme represents an alternative to the
simple categorical (yes–no) forecast algorithm proposed
1298 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW VOLUME 128

FIG. 6. (a) The 12-h forecast of the total water content at an altitude of 1 km. The arrow indicates the position of the cross section presented
in Fig. 6b. (b) Vertical cross section of forecast total water content superimposed with isotherms along the line AB, (c) 12-h forecast of
supercooled liquid water content superimposed with isotherms at z 5 3.5 km, and (d) 12-h forecast of ice water content superimposed with
isotherms at z 5 3.5 km. The shading is for 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 g kg 21 .

by Tremblay et al. (1996a) since the amount of SLW is
explicitly predicted. This new knowledge could be used
to develop algorithms to forecast icing intensity (not
only occurrence). Finally, Figs. 6c and 6d indicate that
the subfreezing (below 08C) cloud was mixed and dom-
inated by solid phase particles.
Because the phases of water substance are explicitly
calculated by the MPCS, maps of clouds and precipi-
tation types can be easily produced at any time. The
forecast presented in Fig. 7a shows rain, snow, and
freezing precipitation areas at the surface at 1200 UTC
9 January 1997. At this time, the FP zone forecast just
ahead of the warm front occurred in the presence of a
warm layer aloft. The FP area at the rain–snow boundary
(west of Tennessee) was generated by the nonclassical
FP mechanism included in the cloud scheme. The three-
dimensional distribution of the cloud phases can be vi-
sualized in the vertical cross section (along line segment
AB) presented in Fig. 7b. Starting at the surface in the
cold air (point B) and moving south (point A) one notes
the transition from snow, to FP, to rain. Glaciated clouds
can be seen ahead of the warm front at high altitudes.
The location of mixed-phase clouds is strongly corre-
lated with the warm frontal surface. In this region, the
TWC reaches high values, and there is a potential for
severe icing.
c. Freezing precipitation predictor
Because the evaluation of the accuracy of the MPCS
as an FP forecast tool is the primary objective of this
work, it is imperative to have an adequate methodology
for model verification. A suitable framework for com-
parisons between forecasts and observations must first
be selected. For example, surface maps such as in Fig.
7a are useful to depict the state of the forecast precip-
itation field at a given time, but they only give a snapshot
and are difficult to use for model verification. Due to
the high spatial variability of freezing rain and its highly
transient nature, the number of observations at an instant
of time is far too limited to be useful for verification
purposes. Also, NWP models have likely not reached a
sufficient temporal and spatial accuracy to allow mean-
ingful point-by-point comparisons. For these reasons,
in the remainder of this paper, the various statistical
scores used to compare the model with observations will
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER
FIG. 7. (a) MC2 12-h forecast of precipitation types at the surface
showing rain, freezing precipitation, and snow valid at 1200 UTC 9
Jan 1997. (b) Vertical cross section showing the spatial distribution
of ice, mixed, and liquid phases as well as rain, freezing precipitation,
and snow along the line AB.
be presented for 6-h time intervals. Clearly, an FP event
will be inferred at a given location and time, provided
an observation was made within the last 6-h time in-
terval. Forecasts at the same location and within the
same time interval are obtained from a calculation of
FP occurrence during the model integration. More spe-
cifically, an FP forecast is issued at a given point and
for a specific verification time, provided SLW was di-
agnosed at the surface by the MPCS anytime during the
previous 6-h period. The selection of a period of 6 h as
the maximum temporal accuracy seems adequate for
typical public forecast requirements (e.g., ‘‘freezing pre-
cipitation tomorrow morning changing to rain in the
afternoon’’).
As an example, Fig. 8a depicts an MPCS surface map
giving the duration of forecast FP for the time interval
0600–1200 UTC 9 January 1997. The map shows a
large region where the duration of FP for this time pe-
riod exceeded 30 min. Within this area, there is an im-
portant embedded zone where FP was predicted during
most of the period (.5 h). In such zones, the model
gives a stronger indication for FP occurrence and this
information can be used to design probabilistic fore-
casts. However, such an avenue will not be explored in
1299
the present investigation, and a forecast of FP will be
issued in the presence of a signal within the time ver-
ification window regardless of its duration. Figure 8b
displays the localization of stations that reported FP
during the same time interval. A comparison between
the two maps of Fig. 8 suggests good agreement between
forecasts and observations.
d. Freezing precipitation episode
Because an innovative aspect of the MPCS is the
nonclassical FP algorithm, it is useful to illustrate the
importance of this mechanism in FP forecasts with a
specific example.
The case of 25 January 1997 is very interesting be-
cause the MPCS forecasts indicate a situation dominated
by the nonclassical FP mechanism. Upper-air soundings
at stations within the observed FP area support model
results.
During the day of 25 January 1997, a low pressure
system centered over Chicago at 0000 UTC quickly
moved to a region north of Quebec City. During this
period, the low intensified (a deepening of about 8 mb)
and FP was reported at several locations in southern
Ontario, along the St. Lawrence Valley and in the New
England states (Fig. 9). In general, the forecasts pre-
sented in Fig. 9 agree relatively well with the obser-
vations displayed in the same figure. In particular, one
notes that during the 18-h period, the observed FP area
tends to move northeastward. This motion and the extent
of the FP zone is well predicted only if both nonclassical
and classical mechanisms are included in the forecasts.
The forecasts based on the classical mechanism (black
shading) alone early underpredict the extent of the FP
area. The predicted classical FP zones are mostly limited
to the New England states and most of the reporting
stations are not matched by the forecasts. On the other
hand, inclusion of the nonclassical algorithm tends to
improve the accuracy of the forecast. For example, the
FP zones over the Great Lakes region and over the east
coast of New England missed by the classical algorithm
are captured by the nonclassical algorithm. Thus, the
inclusion of the nonclassical mechanism has improved
the forecast obtained with the classical mechanism.
The MPCS nonclassical FP mechanism explicitly
uses the resolved-scale vertical velocity. This implies a
coupling between the model dynamics and the cloud
scheme. Thus, the MPCS takes into consideration details
of the low-level circulation and boundary layer pro-
cesses. To understand the nature of this coupling, Fig.
10 displays the vertical velocity and the associated sur-
face horizontal wind field superimposed with topogra-
phy (1200 UTC 25 January 1997). Figures 10a and 10b
suggest that the pattern of the vertical velocity field
originates from the interaction between the topography
and the surface wind. A low pressure system centered
near Georgian Bay caused a southeast circulation over
the northeastern United States. This airflow has pro-
1300 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
FIG. 8. (a) Duration of forecasted freezing precipitation at the sur-
face during the 6-h period between 0600 and 1200 UTC 9 Jan 1997.
The MC2 forecast was initialized at 0000 UTC 9 Jan. (b) Surface
stations that have reported freezing rain or drizzle during the same
interval of time.
duced, by topographic lifting, two well-defined bands
of vertical velocity. One is on the south side of the
Appalachian range and the other on the north shore of
the St. Lawrence River. Between these two bands, the
air descended into the St. Lawrence Valley to generate
a subsidence zone. Assuming that the situation depicted
in Fig. 10a is representative of the six preceding hours,
the positive correlation between patterns of Figs. 10a
VOLUME 128
and 9c suggests that the structure of the vertical velocity
field has caused the two nonclassical FP bands of Fig.
9c. Between these two nonclassical FP bands, there is
a zone of classical FP located in the subsidence region
on the north side of the Appalachian range.
Figure 11 depicts atmospheric soundings for Mani-
waki, Buffalo, and Albany for 25 January. The sound-
ings of Maniwaki and Buffalo show no warm layer for
the 0000 UTC 25 January–0000 UTC 26 January pe-
riod, although many stations in that area have reported
FP. It is illustrative to note that the MPCS has success-
fully predicted these events. On the other hand, the Al-
bany sounding shows the formation of a well-defined
warm layer aloft during the day. This is consistent with
the model forecasts of classical FP near this region (Fig.
9). This emphasizes the presence of the two FP forming
mechanisms in the corresponding areas, both in fore-
casts and observations.
5. Verification statistics
Statistical verification techniques for meteorological
model verification have been discussed in a number of
papers (Stanski et al. 1989; Murphy and Winkler 1987;
Brown 1996). From a knowledge of the joint distribution
of forecasts and observations a number of statistical
estimators can be calculated (Doswell et al. 1990). In
particular, for binary yes–no forecasts such as the FP
occurrence discussed in the present investigation, a fore-
cast accuracy is inferred from the probability of detec-
tion (POD). POD is defined as the intersection of yes-
forecasts and yes-observations sets normalized by the
total number of yes observations. To complete the ver-
ification procedure, the probability of correct null fore-
cast (POCN) must also be calculated. The POCN is
analogous to the POD and it is defined as the intersection
of no-forecasts and no-observations sets normalized by
the total number of no observations. The complement
of the POCN is called the probability of false detection
(POFD 5 1 2 POCN). Within this framework, a perfect
forecast has a POD 5 1 and a POFD 5 0. Another
statistic of interest is the bias defined as the ratio of the
number of yes forecasts to the number of yes obser-
vations. This parameter indicates whether a FP area is
overforecast (bias . 1) or underforecast (bias , 1).
The direct application of these statistics to two-di-
mensional weather forecasts maps may lead to incorrect
forecast evaluation as discussed in Tremblay et al.
(1996a). For example, it is possible to have a situation
in which a very bad forecast (a false alarm region lo-
cated far from the observed region) achieves the same
verification score as a more reasonable forecast (a fore-
cast that slightly offsets the observed region). Another
aspect that may deserve improvements is the point-to-
point correspondence needed for a successful verifica-
tion. For example, a small shift in a forecast will in-
validate the verification, although such a prediction may
indeed be very useful. This aspect is linked to the fact
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER 1301

F IG . 9. Maps showing the forecasted (initialized at 0000 UTC) and observed freezing precipitation episode between
0000 and 1800 UTC on 25 Jan 1997. Both classical and nonclassical freezing precipitation were predicted and
observed.
1302 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
FIG. 10. (a) MC2 12-h forecast of the vertical velocity field w (cm
s21 ) valid at 1200 UTC 25 Jan 1997. (b) MC2 12-h forecast of the
surface wind superimposed with topography valid at 1200 UTC 25
Jan 1997.
that both forecasts and observations are discrete but
represent phenomena that are continuous in space. A
gridpoint forecast is representative of a grid surface,
and a given station may be representative of some area
that depends on the density of the surface observation
network. Thus, it can be assumed than an observation
and a forecast are coincident if their representative areas
overlap. The embedded diagram in Fig. 12 illustrates
the concept of representing both observation and fore-
VOLUME 128
cast by some areas. Let r o and r f be the effective radii
of influence of an observation and a forecast, respec-
tively. The circular areas representing prediction F1 and
observation O overlap and consequently F1 is consid-
ered a successful prediction. Because a circular area
representing prediction F 2 does not intersect the circular
area representing observation O, this is considered a
missed prediction. For this example a successful pre-
diction will be inferred if the distance x between the
observation and the forecast is x , r o 1 r f 5 dmax .
In an attempt to solve the problems mentioned above,
Tremblay et al. (1996a) suggested a verification frame-
work in which the verification statistics were estimated
in terms of the distance from an observation to the clos-
est matching forecast. A given station may report either
an FP event or no event. For each possibility, the dis-
tance x between the observation localization and the
nearest corresponding forecast is calculated. Let N1 (x)
and N 0 (x) be the distributions of the distances for events
and no events, respectively, as illustrated schematically
in Fig. 12. From these two distributions a standard con-
tingency table can be constructed for a given forecast
verification distance d (a forecast is verified if x # d).
The stratification of data set into categories is indicated
in Fig. 12 (e.g., F 5 y, O 5 n means yes forecasts and
no observations, etc.). The selection of d is arbitrary
and may depend on the density of observations (r o ),
model resolution (r f ), and the nature of the physical
event or any other practical consideration. For example,
if both r o and r f are known, dmax can be selected to
delineate successful and unsuccessful forecasts.
In the procedure proposed by Tremblay et al. (1996a),
the skill of forecasts is discussed in terms of the cu-
mulative frequency functions of these distributions:
O N (x) 1
O N (x) and
f 1 (d) 5
x#d
(22)
1
O N (x)
x
f (d) 5
O N (x) ,
x#d
0 (23)
0
x
where f 1 (d) can be interpreted as the POD(d) within a
circle of radius d of an event. Similarly, f 0 (d) is an
analog of the POCN(d) within the same verification
circle. In the discussion below the function B(d) that
measures the bias will be also used:
O N (x) 1 O N (x)
1 0
B(d) 5
O N (x) .
x#d x.d
(24)
x
1
This function expresses the overforecasting [B(d) .
1] or the underforecasting [B(d) , 1]. Any other ver-
ification parameter can be related to N1 and N 0 and the
statistics can be presented in terms of d. This formu-
lation allows taking into consideration the spatial struc-
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER 1303

FIG. 11. Observed soundings for Maniwaki, Buffalo, and Albany covering the period from 0000 UTC 25 Jan to 0000 UTC 26 Jan 1997.

ture of forecasts and observations, and allows a quan-
titative estimation of the accuracy of a model.
The surface stations used to calculate the verification
statistics for FP forecasts are displayed in Fig. 13. This
set includes all available stations within the verification
window from the standard synoptic surface observation
network. The surface reports (METARS) for each sta-
tion were analyzed to identify FP events for each 6-h
period for the days tabulated in Table 2. For the entire
verification period, 8661 FP reports were emitted (Table
2) and have been classified into 6-h intervals (ending
at 0600, 1200, 1800, and 0000 UTC). The data was
subsequently used to construct 96 verification maps such
as displayed in Figs. 8 and 9. Since multiple FP reports
at a given station and for a given 6-h time interval are
not relevant, the dataset is reduced to 1388 yes obser-
vations. The number of no observations in the entire
dataset is 87 279, emphasizing the exceptional nature
of FP events. For each day, a 24-h model simulation
was started at 0000 UTC and forecasts with 6-, 12-, 18-,
and 24-h projection times were compared with the cor-
responding observed FP period.
Figure 14a depicts the distribution N1 of the distances
to the nearest matching forecast for all FP reporting
stations during the verification time interval. The cu-
mulative frequency f 1 of this distribution is also given
in the same diagram. Figure 14a shows that the majority
of forecasts (52%) score a perfect coincidence with ob-
servations (d , 35 km, or 1Dx). This score increases
quickly with distance to reach 75% for d , 105 km.
Considering the number of stations, the area of the ver-
ification window (Fig. 13) and model resolution, one
1304 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW VOLUME 128

FIG. 14. The distributions N1 (x) and N 0 (x) (bars) with the relative
cumulative frequencies f 1 (d) and f 0 (d ) for the entire verification
dataset.

can estimate dmax ø 100 km and, in other words, 75%

FIG. 12. Diagram illustrating the statistical verification technique.
of the forecasts are verified at the finest resolution al-
lowed by the actual model–observations combination.
Forecasts that fall within the next two bins (x between
105 and 175 km) have slightly missed the target defined
by dmax , but may be nevertheless useful. One should

FIG. 13. Map showing the model domain and the surface stations used for model verification.
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER
FIG. 15. The cumulative frequencies f 1 (d) and f 0 (d ) stratified with
forecast projection times.
also note that N1 has a well-defined hump in the tail for
large x . 175 km. Those predictions (16% of total num-
ber of forecasts) are absolutely missed by the scheme
and cannot be used for a practical application. Figure
14b indicates that the cumulative frequency function f 1
is close to 1 emphasizing that the probability of false
detection is negligible with this particular scheme, re-
gardless of the verification distance. The different scales
of Figs. 14a and 14b should be also be noted, and the
relatively weak false alarm ratio (the intersection of yes
forecasts and no observations normalized by the total
number of yes forecasts) of 6% (for 105 km) is indic-
ative of the quality of the FP forecast scheme.
Figures 15a and 15b depict the cumulative frequency
function f 1 and the cumulative frequency function f 0 ,
respectively, for each forecast projection time used for
model verification. In principle, due to model spinup or
the degradation of the accuracy of forecasts with time,
the verification statistics may be a function of projection
time. However, the curves presented in Fig. 15 suggest
that this dependence is very weak (only small differ-
ences of few percents can be noted) for the forecasts
considered in the present investigation. Thus, the ver-
ification statistics discussed in Fig. 14 do not depend
on the forecast projection time and can be used to de-
scribe the forecast system accuracy for FP predictions.
1305
FIG. 16. The cumulative frequency function f 1 (d ) and the bias
function bias(d ) for the complete algorithm (circles) and for the clas-
sical melting ice algorithm only (triangles).
The reader should note that the present study is limited
to 24-h projection times. An increase of this range would
likely lead to a degradation of the scores.
One innovative aspect of the MPCS is the inclusion
of a nonclassical FP mechanism. The data presented
above (Fig. 9) suggest that taking into consideration this
mechanism improves the forecast system. To get a quan-
titative estimate of this impact, Fig. 16a compares the
cumulative frequency function f 1 for the entire forecasts
set, obtained with the classical melting ice mechanism
alone and with both classical and nonclassical mecha-
nisms. Figure 16a demonstrates that the inclusion of the
nonclassical FP forecast algorithm has a strong positive
effect on the forecast quality. The value of the cumu-
lative frequency function f 1 increases roughly by 15%
for all distances, which is an important gain. This im-
provement is due to the reduction of the underprediction
as shown in Fig. 16b. Thus, the inclusion of the non-
classical FP algorithm in the MPCS tends to reduce the
underprediction of the extent of FP episodes. In general,
classical algorithms underpredict the extent of FP epi-
sodes with a B(d) value around 0.7 (for d between 35
and 70 km). With the inclusion of the nonclassical mech-
anism, the FP is still underpredicted, but the value of
1306 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
the B(d) increases to 0.85, emphasizing the better qual-
ity of these forecasts.
6. Summary and concluding remarks
To improve the prediction of various weather ele-
ments, a highly parameterized mixed-phase cloud
scheme was developed. The total water content is used
as a prognostic variable and various constituents that
compose the mass of atmospheric condensate are ac-
cessed from a detailed parameterization. The MPCS can
be used to forecast the spatial distribution of bulk solid,
liquid, and supercooled cloud water and precipitation
types. A novel aspect of this cloud scheme is the explicit
inclusion of physical processes describing the formation
of supercooled liquid water. Thus, even in the absence
of the classical melting ice mechanism it is possible to
model freezing precipitation. The occurrence of non-
classical FP is an indication of the existence of super-
cooled large cloud droplets (SLDs), in the atmosphere.
Successfully predicted SLDs indicate that the scheme
can improve forecast algorithms for in-flight aircraft ic-
ing.
The MPCS considers the three-dimensional distri-
bution of the total water content and all its constituents.
Sedimentation is calculated explicitly within the
scheme, following techniques used in cloud-resolving
models. These properties are expected to provide a re-
alistic representation of clouds on the mesoscale and a
physically based release of latent heat through conden-
sation–evaporation and melting processes. This feature
is considered as an improvement in comparison to other
existing operational cloud schemes, in which only the
suspended cloud water content is calculated (Sundqvist
et al. 1989; Tiedtke 1993; Smith 1990; Zhao et al. 1997)
and precipitation is removed instantly from the atmo-
sphere.
To provide a verification framework, the MPCS was
implemented into the Canadian MC2 model (Benoit et
al. 1997). In the current implementation, the MPCS is
fully connected with the detailed model physics inter-
face, and feedback with radiation, convection, and
boundary layer processes are active. Its computational
efficiency, its interface with the Canadian Meteorolog-
ical Center physics package, and its detailed parame-
terization of key microphysical processes suggest that
the MPCS is an interesting candidate as a next-gener-
ation operational cloud scheme.
To estimate the accuracy of the MPCS forecast prod-
ucts, a number of MC2 simulations were performed.
During the December 1996 to March 1997 period, 24
days were selected for simulation. These days represent
11 well-structured FP episodes, associated with major
synoptic-scale winter storms and provide a good dataset
for model verification.
Using NEXRAD radar reflectivity maps, recorded ac-
cumulation of precipitation at surface stations and me-
teorological satellite images, a qualitative forecast ver-
VOLUME 128
ification was accomplished. It was found that the MPCS
reproduced fairly well the mesoscale structure of cloud
and precipitation fields. Quantitative comparisons be-
tween forecasts and observations have revealed a rea-
sonable agreement for 24-h precipitation accumulations
at the surface. A detailed analysis of the three-dimen-
sional MPCS cloud structure associated with a mature
winter storm has shown a remarkable similarity with
conceptual models of midlatitude cyclonic cloud pat-
terns. The warm frontal transition from snow to freezing
rain to rain was successfully modeled in many instances.
Supercooled liquid water was also present in warm fron-
tal mixed-phase clouds further suggesting that the
MPCS may be helpful as a forecast tool for in-flight
aircraft icing.
The MPCS includes two different FP mechanisms.
The classical model predicts FP when a cold layer (with
T , 08C) is underneath a warmer layer (with T . 08C).
The second mechanism built into the MPCS allows for
detection of the presence of FP based on an interaction
between the model dynamics and cloud microphysics.
The supercooled liquid water regions are inferred di-
agnostically using vertical velocity, temperature, pres-
sure, and total water content. For those regions an FP
forecast can be issued. Analyses of selected situations
where FP was observed in the absence of a warm layer
aloft have demonstrated that the MPCS can successfully
forecast a significant portion of those events. These anal-
yses have also shown that the occurrence of nonclassical
forecast FP regions near the surface was highly corre-
lated with the vertical velocity and low-level conver-
gence. The structure of the synoptic airflow and its in-
teraction with topography were critical for the prediction
of simulated nonclassical FP events. However, to assess
the generality of this conclusion further investigation is
necessary.
To obtain a quantitative estimate of the accuracy of
the MPCS FP forecasts, the verification technique pro-
posed by Tremblay et al. (1996b) was selected. The
procedure expresses the various statistical scores in
terms of the distance between observations and fore-
casts. This allows for distinguishing between false
alarms located far from observations and forecasts that
only slightly offset the observed region. Both the geo-
metrical structure and the discrete nature of observations
and forecasts are incorporated into the verification pro-
cedure. The statistics calculated for the entire verifica-
tion period indicate that 75% of the MPCS FP forecasts
are verified at the finest resolution (ø100 km) allowed
by the model–observation combination. Outside this tar-
get, there are a significant number of forecasts that could
be potentially useful, since an additional 10% of the
forecasts are within the immediate neighborhood of the
verification distance. It was also demonstrated that the
nonclassical FP mechanism has a strong positive impact
on the verification scores. The inclusion of the non-
classical FP algorithm led to an increase of 15% in the
probability of detection over the classical melting ice
MAY 2000 TREMBLAY AND GLAZER
algorithm alone. This improvement was due to the ame-
lioration of the bias score. It has been found that the
addition of the nonclassical FP algorithm to the classical
melting ice model raises the bias score from 0.7 to 0.85,
emphasizing the better quality of these forecasts.
In conclusion, the MPCS has most of the ingredients
to generate useful forecasts of weather elements. The
three-dimensional distribution of clouds and precipita-
tion, explicitly calculated by the scheme, gives a real-
istic organization of clouds on the mesoscale. Various
phases of the condensate are explicitly calculated from
physically based cloud microphysics parameterizations.
This allows improved forecast of freezing precipitation
events. The MPCS can be used in mesoscale or large-
scale atmospheric models since it is computationally fast
and easy to implement. This allows simulations that
would have been otherwise impossible with more elab-
orate cloud microphysics schemes because of excessive
computational load.
Acknowledgments. The authors are grateful to the Na-
tional Search and Rescue Secretariat of Canada for fi-
nancial assistance. The authors would like to acknowl-
edge Dr. Paul Vaillancourt for his comments on the man-
uscript.
REFERENCES
Appleman, H., 1954: Design of a cloud-phase chart. Bull. Amer.
Meteor. Soc., 35, 223–225.
Asai, T., 1965: A numerical study of air-mass transformation over
the Japan sea in winter. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 43, 1–15.
Benoit, R., M. Desgagne, P. Pellerin, S. Pellerin, Y. Chartier, and S.
Desjardins, 1997: The Canadian MC2: A semi-Lagrangian, semi-
implicit wideband atmospheric model suited for finescale process
studies and simulation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 125, 2382–2415.
Bocchieri, J. R., 1980: The objective use of upper air sounding to
specify precipitation type. Mon. Wea. Rev., 108, 596–603
Brooks, C. F., 1920: The nature of sleet and how it is formed. Mon.
Wea. Rev., 48, 69–73.
Brown, B. G., 1996: Verification of in-flight icing forecasts: Methods
and issues. Proc. FAA Int. Conf. on In-Flight Aircraft Icing,
Springfield, VA, Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation
Administration, 319–330.
Carlson, T. N., 1980: Airflow through midlatitude cyclones and the
comma cloud pattern. Mon. Wea. Rev., 108, 1498–1509.
Cober, S. G., J. W. Strapp, and G. A. Isaac, 1996: An example of
supercooled drizzle drop formed through a collision-coalescence
process. J. Appl. Meteor., 35, 2250–2260.
Czys, R. R., R. W. Scott, K. C. Tang, R. W. Przybylinski, and M. E.
Sabones, 1996: A physically based, non-dimensional parameter
for discriminating between locations of freezing rain and ice
pellets. Wea. Forecasting, 11, 591–598.
Doswell, C. A., R. Davies-Jones, and D. L. Keller, 1990: On summary
measures of skill in rare event forecasting based on contingency
tables. Wea. Forecasting, 5, 576–585.
Dudhia, J., 1989: Numerical study of convection observed during the
winter monsoon using a mesoscale two-dimensional model. J.
Atmos. Sci., 46, 3077–3107.
Glazer, A., A. Tremblay, J. Mailhot, B. Bilodeau, S. Belair, and G.
Isaac, 1999: Mesoscale modeling during FIRE.ACE: 2. Modeled
arctic clouds and aircraft observations. Preprints, Fifth Conf. on
Polar Meteorology and Oceanography, Dallas, TX, Amer. Me-
teor. Soc., 180–185.
1307
Huffman, G. J., and G. A. Norman, 1988: The supercooled warm
rain process and the specification of freezing precipitation. Mon.
Wea. Rev., 116, 2172–2182.
Isaac, G. A., S. G. Cober, A. V. Korolev, J. W. Strapp, A. Tremblay,
and D. L. Marcotte, 1998: Overview of the Canadian Freezing
Drizzle Experiments I, II, and III. Preprints, Conf. on Cloud
Physics, Everett, WA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 447–450.
Kessler, E., 1969: On the Distribution and Continuity of Water Sub-
stance in Atmospheric Circulations. Meteor. Monogr., No. 32,
Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84 pp.
Laprise, R., 1995: The formulation of Andre Robert MC2 (Mesoscale
Compressible Community) model. Atmos.–Ocean, 35, 195–200.
Lin, Y. L., R. D. Farley, and H. D. Orville, 1983: Bulk parameteri-
zation of the snow field in a cloud model. J. Climate Appl.
Meteor., 22, 1065–1092.
Locatelli, J. D., and P. V. Hobbs, 1974: Fall speeds and masses of
solid precipitation particles. J. Geophys. Res., 79, 2185–2197.
Marshall, J. S., and W. McK. Palmer, 1948: The distribution of rain-
drops with size. J. Meteor., 5, 165–166.
Marwitz J., M. Politovich, B. Bernstein, F. Ralph, P. Neiman, R.
Ashenden, and J. Bresch, 1997: Meteorological conditions as-
sociated with the ATR72 aircraft accident near Roselawn, In-
diana, on 31 October 1994. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 78, 41–
52.
Meyers, M. P., P. J. DeMott, and W. R. Cotton, 1992: New primary
ice-nucleation parameterizations in an explicit cloud model. J.
Appl. Meteor., 31, 708–721.
Mitchell, D. L., 1991: Evolution of snow-size spectra in cyclonic
storms. Part II: Deviation of the exponential form. J. Atmos. Sci.,
48, 1885–1898.
, 1994: A model predicting the evolution of ice particle size
spectra and radiative properties of cirrus clouds. Part I: Micro-
physics. J. Atmos. Sci., 51, 797–816.
Moss, S. J., and D. W. Johnson, 1994: Aircraft measurements to
validate and improve numerical model parameterizations of ice
to water ratios in clouds. Atmos. Res., 34, 1–25.
Murphy, A. H., and R. L. Winkler, 1987: A general framework for
forecast verification. Mon. Wea. Rev., 115, 1330–1338.
Ogura, Y., and T. Takahashi, 1971: Numerical simulation of the life
cycle of a thunderstorm cell. Mon. Wea. Rev., 99, 895–911.
Penn, S., 1957: The prediction of snow vs. rain. Forecasting Guide
No. 2, U.S. Weather Bureau, 29 pp.
Robert, A., 1993: Bubble convection experiments with a semi-implicit
formulation of the Euler equations. J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 1865–
1873.
, T. L. Yee, and H. Ritchie, 1985: A semi-Lagrangian and semi-
implicit numerical integration scheme for multilevel atmospheric
models. Mon. Wea. Rev., 113, 388–394.
Rutledge, S. A., and P. V. Hobbs, 1984: The mesoscale and microscale
structure and organization of clouds and precipitation in mid-
latitude cyclones. XII: A diagnostic modeling study of precip-
itation development in narrow cold-frontal rainbands. J. Atmos.
Sci., 41, 2949–2972.
Schultz, P., and M. K. Politovich, 1992: Toward the improvement of
aircraft-icing forecasts for the continental United States. Wea.
Forecasting, 7, 491–500.
Sekhon, R. S., and R. C. Srivastava, 1970: Snow size spectra and
radar reflectivity. J. Atmos. Sci., 27, 299–307.
Smith, R. N. B., 1990: A scheme for predicting layer clouds and their
water content in a general circulation model. Quart. J. Roy.
Meteor. Soc., 116, 435–460.
Stanski, H. R., L. J. Wilson, and W. R. Burrows, 1989: Survey of
common verification methods in meteorology. World Weather
Watch Tech. Rep. 8, WMO/TD 358, 113 pp.
Strapp, J. W., R. A. Stuart, and G. A. Isaac, 1996: A Canadian cli-
matology of freezing precipitation and a detailed study using
data from St. John’s, Newfoundland. Proceedings of the FAA
International Conference on In-flight Aircraft Icing, Vol. II,
DOT/FAA/AR-96/81, II, 45–56.
Sundqvist, H., 1993: Inclusion of ice phase of hydrometeors in cloud
1308 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
parameterization for mesoscale and large-scale models. Beitr.
Phys. Atmos., 66, 137–147.
, E. Berge, and J. E. Kristjansson, 1989: Condensation and cloud
parameterization studies with a mesoscale numerical weather
prediction model. Mon. Wea. Rev., 117, 1641–1657.
Tanguay, M., A. Robert, and R. Laprise, 1990: A semi-implicit semi-
Lagrangian fully compressible regional forecast model. Mon.
Wea. Rev., 118, 1970–1980.
Thompson, G., R. T. Bruintjes, B. G. Brown, and F. Hage, 1997:
Intercomparison of in-flight icing algorithms. Part I: WISP94
real-time icing prediction and evaluation program. Wea. Fore-
casting, 12, 878–889.
Tiedtke, M., 1993: Representation of clouds in large-scale models.
Mon. Wea. Rev., 121, 3040–3061.
Tremblay, A., 1994: Simulations of the 14 July 1987 squall line using
a fully compressible model. Atmos.–Ocean, 32, 567–603.
, A. Glazer, W. Szyrmer, and W. Yu, 1994: Mesoscale simulations
of cloud microphysics within a winter storm: some implications
for large-scale ice phase schemes. ECMWF/GCSS Workshop on
Modeling and Assimilation of Clouds, Reading, United King-
dom, ECMWF, 337–346.
VOLUME 128
, , , G. Isaac, and I. Zawadzki, 1995: Forecasting of
supercooled clouds. Mon. Wea. Rev., 123, 2098–2113.
, S. G. Cober, A. Glazer, and G. Isaac, 1996a: An intercomparison
of mesoscale forecasts of aircraft icing using SSM/I retrievals.
Wea. Forecasting, 11, 66–77.
, A. Glazer, W. Yu, and R. Benoit, 1996b: An explicit cloud
scheme based on a single prognostic equation. Tellus, 18A, 483–
500.
Walko, R. L., W. R. Cotton, M. P. Meyers, and J. Y. Harrington, 1995:
New RAMS cloud microphysics parameterization. Part I: The
single-moment scheme. Atmos. Res., 38, 29–62.
Zawadzki, I., L. Ostiguy, and R. Laprise, 1993: Retrieval of the mi-
crophysical properties in a CASP storm by numerical integration
of a numerical kinematic model. Atmos.–Ocean, 31, 201–233.
Zhang, D. L., 1989: The effect of parameterized ice microphysics on
the simulation of vortex circulation with a mesoscale hydrostatic
model. Tellus, 41A, 132–147.
Zhao, Q., L. B. Black, and M. E. Baldwin, 1997: Implementation of
the cloud prediction scheme in the eta model at NCEP. Wea.
Forecasting, 12, 697–712.