2022 Typhoon WJung 배포용

Tracking and Analysis of Typhoon Center
using Weather Radar
22 June 2022
Woomi Jung , Mi-Kyung Suk,

Sun-Jin Mo, Ji-Young Gu
Weather Radar Center

Korea Meteorological Administration
2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

Contents
 Introduction
 Manual (subjective) Analysis method
 Automatic (objective) Analysis method
 Summary
June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

Introduction
 Typhoon damage reports

Introduction
 Typhoon Tracks (2010-2021)
2021(22)
Korea
Viet Nam
Philippines

Introduction
 Typhoon is one of the most devastating natural disasters and cause more loss of
human life and property than other natural disasters especially when the typhoon
makes landfall.
 The location of dangerous area depends on the location and track of typhoon center.
Thus detecting and tracking their exact locations are crucial for operational weather
forecasts.
 The radar network of KMA is useful to track the center of typhoon. Because,
- installed in coastal area and top of mountains with 240 km range.
- observe using 11 S-band and 1 C-band Doppler radars.
- have high spatial(250m) and temporal(5 minutes) resolution.
 Due to the influence of climate change, the frequency of typhoon effects on the
Korean Peninsula has increased over last 10 years.

Introduction
 How to determine the center of typhoon
- Using satellite data

: cloud patterns of visible, infrared images
→ Dvorak technique(1969~1984)
 Useful in low latitude ocean

 Not useful over/near the Korean Peninsula
- Using ground observation(AWS) data

: objectively analyzed wind, sea level pressure,
tendency of point(station) wind/pressure
 Useful inland(surrounded by obs. stations)

 Not useful on the coast entering the land

Contents
 Introduction

- Using radar site data : reflectivity, radial velocity
 Summary

Methodology – 1) subjective method
 Characteristics of Radial velocity (Wood and Brown,1992)

- Observation toward the center of typhoon :
Positive(+) value on the right side,
Negative(-) value on the left side
- The Zero-line (Vr=0)

passes through the center of typhoon
 How to determine the center of typhoon using Radar data

- Usable 1 site : spiral pattern, zero-line - Usable 2 sites : 2 zero-line
Vr zero-line(0m/s) Vr zero-line(0m/s)
Reflectivity
(center of spiral pattern) Vr zero-line(0m/s)

Method
 Using KMA radar network
1) check the location of typhoon center

2) check the nearest radar sites
3) using Radial velocity(PPI0) of each sites
: find the intersection of 2 zero-lines
● JNI
JNI GSN
GSN
4) Analyze every hour (1h-interval)
 Verification by comparing typhoon tracks

- Reference : The announced track from National Typhoon Center of KMA

Data
 Analysis Data
- Variables : site Radial velocity (NoQC PPI0), site/composite Reflectivity
- Sites : 11 sites of KMA, 5 sites of ME, 4 sites of Air force
※ Number of observable radars below 1.5 km altitude
(ME) (KMA) (Air force)

Data
 Analysis Data
- Variables : site Radial velocity (NoQC PPI0), site/composite Reflectivity
- Sites : 11 sites of KMA, 5 sites of ME, 4 sites of Air force
※ Number of observable radars below 1.5 km altitude
(KMA + ME + Air Force)

Cases
2018 #19 SOULIC 2018 #25 KONG-REY 2012 #14 TEMBIN
2018.08.23.00:00 2018.10.05.21:00 2012.08.30.00:00
– 2018.08.24.15:00 [40 hrs] – 2018.10.06.15:00 [19 hrs] – 2012.08.30.21:00 [22 hrs]
2018.08.24. 2012.08.30.
15:00 2018.10.06. 21:00
15:00
2012.08.30.00:00
2018.08.23.00:00
2018.10.05.21:00

Result - Typhoon Center Detection
 2018 #19 SOULIC
2018.08.24.15:00
enter Inland
near
the Coast
2018.08.23.00:00
South Sea

 2018 #19 SOULIC - 2018.08.23. 0000KST South Sea
SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : SSP




 2018 #19 SOULIC - 2018.08.23. 1300KST near the Coast
SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : JNI







 2018 #19 SOULIC - 2018.08.24. 0100KST enter Inland
SITE 1 : KSN SITE 2 : MHS



SITE 1 : KSN SITE 2 : JNI

SITE 1 : KSN SITE 2 : BSL

SITE 1 : KSN SITE 2 : MYN


Result - Typhoon Track
 2018 #19 SOULIC 2018.08.23.00KST - 2018.08.24.15KST
 Relative location
15 KST 24
 Biased to the West
15 KST 24
 Avg. location difference :

12 KST 24
12 KST 24 0.3° (based on Lat/Lon)
 Big difference area :

09 KST 24
09 KST 24
west sea of Jeju, East sea,

Inland mountainous area
06 KST 24
06 KST 24
 The reason for the difference

03 KST 24 03 KST 24
 No echo around the EYE
00 KST 24 00 KST 24
21 KST 23
 Complex wind distribution
18 KST 23 21 KST 23
over the mountainous area
18 KST 23
15 KST 23
 Weak rainfall and wind
15 KST 23
12 KST 23
12 KST 23 09 KST 23
06 KST 23
09 KST 23
06 KST 23 03 KST 23
 Difference in obs. altitude
03 KST 23 between 2 radars
00 KST 23
00 KST 23

 2018 #25 KONG-REY 2018.10.05.21KST - 2018.10.06.15KST
15 KST 06
15 KST 06  Biased to the North

12 KST 06 0.2° (based on Lat/Lon)
12 KST 06
 difference increase
from the east of Jeju
09 KST 06
09 KST 06
06 KST 06 06 KST 06  The reason for the difference
 The effect of the speed of typhoon propagation

03 KST 06
03 KST 06
00 KST 06
00 KST 06
21 KST 05
21 KST 05

 2012 #14 TEMBIN 2012.08.30.00KST - 2012.08.30.21KST
21 KST 30
 Biased to the North
SBS ● 21 KST 30

18 KST 30 18 KST 30
SDS ● 0.3° (based on Lat/Lon)

●
MYN
15 KST 30
15 KST 30
●
BSL
 Overall, the track is similar.
●
PSN different in East sea,
MHS ●
12 KST 30
Inland mountainous area
12 KST 30
09 KST 30 09 KST 30  The reason for the difference
06 KST 30  High observation altitude :

06 KST 30
~ 5 km / 7 km
03 KST 30
03 KST 30  Complex wind distribution

over the mountainous area
00 KST 30
00 KST 30
 Lack of inland (mountains)
observation radar in 2012
- ME 2 sites (BSL, SBS)
- Bad quality of Vr (MYN, PSN)

Result - Summary
 Difference tendency – using VR zero-line
- Similar to or biased to the left of the reference track in all cases
Mean Flow
(moving direction) + +

Result - Summary
 Difference tendency – using VR zero-line
- Similar to or biased to the left of the reference track in all cases
- Lee et al. (1999) : Cyclonic Flow(VT) + Mean Flow(VM) effect
VM = 0
WS
+ +
+
VR

Additional analysis – in 2020
 2020 #05 JANGMI 2020.08.10.10KST - 2020.08.10.17KST
27.6˚
1) avg. propagation direction : NE(27.6°)

2) avg. propagation speed : ~ 52 km/h
3) Location difference(VR-KMA) : ~ 0.28°

4) avg. difference direction(▲) : NS(-68.9°)
 The angle btw 1 & 4 : 96.4° to the left

 2020 #08 BAVI 2020.08.26.15KST - 2020.08.27.09KST
Section 3
Section 2
▲ Section 1
- avg. Location difference 0.03˚, Angle difference +55.6˚,
Section 1 - typhoon propagation speed 18 km/h,
● Section 2
- avg. Location difference 0.20˚, Angle difference -104.4˚
- typhoon propagation speed 25 km/h
● Section 3

 2020 #09 MAYSAK 2020.09.02.11KST - 2020.09.03.09KST
Section 2
Section 1
▲ Section 1
● Section 2

 2020 #10 HAISHEN 2020.09.02.11KST - 2020.09.03.09KST
Section 2
Section 1
▲ Section 1
● Section 2

Site Selection
 2020 #05 JANGMI 2012.08.30.00KST - 2012.08.30.21KST

Site Selection
 2020 #08 BAVI 2020.08.26.15KST - 2020.08.27.09KST
* 1. Radar that observes the Center : GSN

2. Radar that close to center and obs. Area : SSP

Site Selection
 2020 #08 BAVI 2020.08.26.15KST - 2020.08.27.09KST
* 1. Radar that observes the Center : GSN

2. close to center and obs. Area : SSP (not available)
3. Second closer radar : JNI (out of range → error ↑)

Site Selection
 2020 #08 BAVI 2020.08.26.15KST - 2020.08.27.09KST
1. Radar that observes the Center : GSN (enclosed EYE)

2. close to center and obs. Area : SSP (not available)
3. Second closer radar : JNI

Site Selection
 2020 #08 BAVI 2020.08.26.15KST - 2020.08.27.09KST
No echo
to the south
1. Radar that observes the Center : GSN

2. Radar that close to center and obs. Area : JNI

Site Selection
 2020 #08 BAVI 2020.08.26.15KST - 2020.08.27.09KST
+
YIT
1. Radar that observes the Center : KSN

2. Radar that close to center and obs. Area : YIT

Site Selection
 2020 #08 BAVI 2020.08.26.15KST - 2020.08.27.09KST
+
* IIA +
YIT
1. Radar that observes the Center : YIT

2. close to center and obs. Area : IIA (C-band)
(short obs. range / high quality Vr)
Site Selection
 2020 #08 BAVI 2020.08.26.15KST - 2020.08.27.09KST
1. observes the Center : GDK (invisible zero-line)

2. close to center : BRI
(close to site location → quality ↓)
Summary
 Characteristics of the manual method

- Anyone can analyze the center of typhoon easily and quickly.
- Can be used for analysis of the center of typhoon over the sea close to coast.
- This method can be affected by

 who analyzes the center of typhoon
 which radar sites the analyst selects
 Check Point for Radar sites selection

- The direction of the typhoon movement
※ The location differences may increase IF
 The radar site is located in a direction parallel to the direction of typhoon movement.
→ better to select a radar in a direction perpendicular
 The typhoon moves relatively fast.
- [optional] The altitude difference of the radar observations to use

Contents
 Introduction

- Geometric center (circular shape) : using 3-D data
- Optical flow vectors (cyclonic flow) : using 2-D image
 Summary

Introduction Auto-Method (1)
 Due to the influence of climate change, the frequency of typhoon effects on the
Korean Peninsula has increased over last 10 years.
 Typhoon can cause loss of human life and property when a typhoon makes landfall.
 Thus detecting and tracking their exact locations are crucial for operational
weather forecasts.
<Applying technique> <Improvement> <Optimization>

Based on
2018 2019 2020
Chang et al.,
2009 Reflectivity
WISSDOM
WISSDOM
(reflectivity, wind) Long-distance(480km)
Dual-Doppler wind
Reflectivity obs. reflectivity
Jung et al. (2020)
In this study,
- An objective analysis system was developed to automatically detect the center of
typhoon and calculate additional information.
- The accuracy of this system was verified for 9 typhoon cases(2019~2020).

Methodology Auto-Method (1)
 Basic technique
- Detecting geometric center of typhoon(Chang et al., 2009)
- Based on the “EYE shape” of typhoon in radar data
※ Assume that the “EYE” of typhoon is a perfect Circle
- Analyze the radius and center of EYE using radar reflectivity and vorticity
(Jung et al., 2020)
# of grid (Z > Z0)

ERE =
# of grid along the ring
Chang et al.(2009) Jung et al.(2020)

 Detection Method using Radar

- Eye center : Geometric center in area with Z  Z0, & d < R0
- Eye size : The surrounded area by the circle line with Z > Z0 and the radius of R
Characteristics of ‘EYE’ area

Reflectivity
 Weak or No echo
 Surrounded by the Ring of strong echo
→ Z0 = 10 dBZ (0.15 mm/h)
Vorticity
 Anti-cyclonic area inside the eye wall
: negative vorticity
→ Z0 = 0 m/s
 TRASCER(Typhoon
T R
tRacking A
Automatic S
System for C
Center of E
Eye using R
Radar)

 Flow chart of TRASCER
- Analysis Domain
1h-interval 10min-interval 2. TY center Detecting
1. TY Monitoring
Long-distance(480km) composite area
Create TY list (the lowest elev. Angle)
in this year Anal. area
Current alerted TY
Failed to detect
TY direction, speed
(1h-, 3h-averaged)
No reflectivity data
WRITE TY inform.
3. Calculate and display inform. WISSDOM(4km)
1. TY Monitoring : real-time(1h-interval) monitoring

2. TY center Detecting : geometric method(TCET)
3. Calculating, writing and display additional information : 1h-/3h-averaged speed, direction of TY

Tracking of typhoon center Symbols Parameter descriptions Reflectivity Vorticity
Rmin Radius minimum threshold 3 km 3 km

Environmental(parameters) setting R Extend range of radius 20 km 20 km
input Initial values : location of center, radius of Eye Rinc Increment of radius 1 km 1 km
Z0 Weak Ref./Vor. threshold 10 dBZ 0 s-1
Input Synthesized(cartesian) radar data  Enclose rate of eye 0.9 0.9
Radar Reflectivity Radar Wind min ERE minimum threshold 0.3 0.2
3D CAPPI (960×1200×40) 3D Dual-Doppler wind (249×353×11)  Convergence criterion 0.5 km 1.0 km
H 1 km / V 0.25 km H 5 km / V 0.5 km
Rring Thickness of eye ring 0.1 km 1.0 km
X0, Y0 : initial location

Find a new location & ERE R0 : initial radius of Eye
Constraints : R : Radius of eye
1) X & Y denote any point that
Calculation of new location (Xm , Ym) Rmax : R0+ R
dBZ or Vor ≤ Z0 1 1 m : number of iteration
(Reflectivity 10 dBZ, Vorticity 0 s-1)
2) ( X  X m1 )2  (Y  Y m1 ) 2  R 2
Xm 
A  XdA, Y m   YdA
A
R=R+Rinc,
from (R0R) to (R0+ R)
Check the validity
No R > Rmax, No
(Xm-Xm-1)2+(Ym-Ym-1)22
and ERE   ERE > min
Yes •
Yes
X0 , Y 0 , R0 ,
Final location : Xc=Xm, Yc=Ym and = -0.1 (X0, Y0)
Make Output
New location(lat/lon), Vmax, Location(lat/lon) of Vmax, R, ERE

Verification of TRASCER Auto-Method (1)
 Cases
- 2019(5) - 2020(4)
#5 DANAS #5 JANGMI
#8 FRANCISCO #8 BAVI
#13 LINGLING #9 MAYSAK
#17 TAPAH #10 HAISHEN
#18 MITAG
 Analysis method
- Select result (GOOD or BAD) by Location Difference
 Reference : The location of the announced track from KMA (3 or 6h-interval)
 Location Difference : between reference and TRASCER results
 Loc. Diff. < 0.4° : GOOD(valid result) / Loc. Diff. ≥ 0.4° : BAD
- Calculate Detection rate and Location difference for valid result of each cases
Result – Case study Auto-Method (1)
 2020 #10 HAISHEN

WIS_DBZ WIS_VOR 480_DBZ
Det. rate 65.6%
Loc. Diff. 0.15˚
Det. rate 53.4% Det. rate 76.7%

Loc. Diff. 0.17˚ Loc. Diff. 0.17˚
 Effect of topography(○) : WIS_DBZ > 480_DBZ  Obs. Edge region(○) : WIS_DBZ < 480_DBZ
WIS_DBZ (4km) 480_DBZ WIS_DBZ (4km) 480_DBZ

Loc. Diff. 0.18˚ Loc. Diff. 0.92˚ Failed to detect Loc. Diff. 0.26˚
 2020 #09 MAYSAK

Det. rate 37.0% Det. rate 62.2% Det. rate 31.0%

Loc. Diff. 0.31˚ Loc. Diff. 0.17˚ Loc. Diff. 0.28˚
 Biased EYE area(○)  Effect of Topography(NO eye)(○) Det. rate 6.3%↑, Loc. Diff. 0.05°↓

 2020 #08 BAVI

Det. rate 68.9%
Loc. Diff. 0.11˚
Det. rate 63.1% Det. rate 81.5%

Loc. Diff. 0.13˚ Loc. Diff. 0.18˚
 Not clear EYE(○) – Failed to detect

: No echo in the Southern half part
 Using vorticity – Succeed to detect

: can be used over weak echo region

 2019 #13 LINGLING

WIS_DBZ/VOR 480_DBZ
WIS Det. rate[%] Loc. Diff.[˚] 480 Det. rate[%] Loc. Diff.[˚]
DBZ 48.0 0.19 GOOD 40.1 0.20
VOR 63.0 0.21
Loc. Diff. TOTAL 85.7 0.41
0.20° → 0.18°
 Not clear EYE(Southern part Echo X)  Southern sea of Jeju : Det. rate ↑
 Using vorticity, det. rate > 60%, Loc. Diff ~ 0.2°  Yellow sea : increase BAD result

Summary Auto-Method (1)
 Summary
- An objective analysis system(TRASCER) was developed to automatically detect the
center of typhoon.
- The accuracy of this system was verified for 9 typhoon cases(2019~2020).

4 cases in 2020
 Maximum detection rate: 81.5%(’20 #8 ‘BAVI’, WIS_VOR), Avg. detection rate: 75.4%
 Minimum location difference: 0.11°(’20 #8 ‘BAVI‘, 480_DBZ), Avg. location difference: 0.18°
5 cases in 2019
 Maximum detection rate: 65%(’19 #13 ‘LINGLING’, WIS_VOR), Avg. detection rate: 50%
 Minimum location difference: 0.19°(’19 #13 ‘LINGLING‘, WIS_DBZ), Avg. location difference: 0.21°
- Comparison with the post-analysis ‘Best track’

: the tracks from TRASCER was more similar to ‘Best track’ than the announced track.
→ TRASCER results can be used for post-analysis ‘Best track’
 Future plan
- Optimization of the analysis altitude over the WISSDOM domain

Contents
 Introduction

- Geometric center (circular shape) : using 3-D data
- Optical flow vectors (cyclonic flow) : using 2-D image
 Summary

 Basic technique
- Image processing technique, ‘Optical flow(motion estimation)’ method
- Based on computing estimates of the motion of the image intensities
over time in a video or two image frames
- Analyze the vectors and center of typhoon using 2 radar reflectivity images
+ dt
Image 1 Image 2 Vector calculation

(x, y, t) (x+dx, y+dy, t+dt) using 2 images
 ACTION(Automatic
A C
Center detection of T
Typhoon using IImage processing based on O
Operational radar N
Network)

 Vector calculation
1. Convert to grayscale image 2. Calculate motion vectors 3. Interpolation vectors
(Farneback’s Dense Optical Flow) (only for grids between vectors)
4. Extrapolation vectors 5. Calculate relative vectors

(using Radial Basis Function) (remove Mean motion)

 Analysis of typhoon center
Assumption
- Relative vectors can form (concentric) circles
- The left normal of the cyclonic vectors will be directed at “a point”
(in the Southern hemisphere, right normal)
6. Create and Extend normal vectors 7. Create intersections of the extended 8. Calculate the maximum density point
(rotate vector 90° counterclockwise) normal vectors of the intersections

 Cases in 2019
- #8 FRANCISCO, #13 LINGLING
2019 #08 FRANCISCO Emergency 2019 #13 LINGLING Emergency

Warning Warning
Monitoring Monitoring
KMA BEST KMA BEST
Detection rate [%] Location Differences [°] Detection rate [%] Location Differences [°]
Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2 Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2 Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2 Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2
100 91.7 74.2 54.4 0.216 0.193 0.157 0.124 100 87.0 75.9 47.1 0.244 0.188 0.164 0.115

 Cases in 2019
- #18 MITAG
2019 #18 MITAG Emergency

Warning
Monitoring
KMA BEST
Effects of Shape characteristics of

typhoon (Arc)
Detection rate [%] Location Differences [°]
Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2 Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2
100 76.8 58.9 29.2 0.298 0.229 0.193 0.14

 Cases in 2020
- #8 BAVI, #10 HAISHEN
2020 #08 BAVI Emergency 2020 #10 HAISHEN Emergency

Warning Warning
Monitoring Monitoring
KMA BEST KMA BEST
Detection rate [%] Location Differences [°] Detection rate [%] Location Differences [°]
Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2 Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2 Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2 Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2
100 96.4 88.4 68.7 0.175 0.163 0.146 0.119 100 79.7 59.0 35.7 0.268 0.22 0.175 0.126

 Cases in 2020
- #9 MAYSAK
2020 #09 MAYSAK Emergency

Warning
Monitoring
KMA BEST
Effects of Shape characteristics of

typhoon (Circle)
Detection rate [%] Location Differences [°]
Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2 Total E ≤ 0.4 E ≤ 0.3 E ≤ 0.2
100 95.2 88.6 60.7 0.201 0.173 0.16 0.125

Summary Auto-Method (2)
 Advantages of ACTION
- 100% detection rate (if there are regular radar images)
- The location of typhoon center can be calculated in a short time (~10s)
 Disadvantages of ACTION
Location differences may increase
- If (at least) one site image is absent to be used for composite
- When the typhoon is located near the edge of the radar observation area
 Accuracy determinants
1. Uniform radar (site) images with a regular time interval
2. Clear shape characteristics of typhoon : Circle, Arc
3. No Topographic effects after typhoon landing

2022 Typhoon WJung 배포용

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2022 Typhoon WJung 배포용

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tracking and Analysis of Typhoon Center

using Weather Radar

Woomi Jung , Mi-Kyung Suk,

Weather Radar Center

2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

 Manual (subjective) Analysis method

 Automatic (objective) Analysis method

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

 How to determine the center of typhoon

- Using satellite data

 Useful in low latitude ocean

- Using ground observation(AWS) data

 Useful inland(surrounded by obs. stations)

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

 Manual (subjective) Analysis method

 Automatic (objective) Analysis method

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

 Characteristics of Radial velocity (Wood and Brown,1992)

- The Zero-line (Vr=0)

 How to determine the center of typhoon using Radar data

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

 Using KMA radar network

1) check the location of typhoon center

4) Analyze every hour (1h-interval)

 Verification by comparing typhoon tracks

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

- Sites : 11 sites of KMA, 5 sites of ME, 4 sites of Air force

※ Number of observable radars below 1.5 km altitude

(ME) (KMA) (Air force)

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

- Sites : 11 sites of KMA, 5 sites of ME, 4 sites of Air force

※ Number of observable radars below 1.5 km altitude

(KMA + ME + Air Force)

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : SSP

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : SSP

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : SSP

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : SSP

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : JNI

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : JNI

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : JNI

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : JNI

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : JNI

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : JNI

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : GSN SITE 2 : JNI

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : KSN SITE 2 : MHS

June 22th, 2022 2022 International Education (Weather Radar course)

SITE 1 : KSN SITE 2 : MHS