Response to Question 1
The height in meters above Sea Level at the Point of observation is 960 meters
MSL equivalent pressure
MSL equivalent pressure also abbreviated as pMSL
pMSL = pobs + pgzobs
It is important to acknowledge that p is the density of air at the point of observation and g is the acceleration due to gravitational force and z is the height at the point of observation.
In this case, p (density of air at the point of observation) = 1.2041 kg/m3; while g (acceleration due to gravity) = 9.81m/s2. The height in meters (z) at the observation point is 196 meters.
Taking these figures into consideration, pMSL will be attained as indicated below;
pMSL = 1.2041 + (9.81× 1.2041× 196); therefore
pMSL = 2316.399416hPa; this is the Mean Sea Level equivalent pressure.
Comparison of the results of the above calculations with the EMOS reported value for MSL air pressure in figure 1
It is imperative to acknowledge that the similarity between the Mean Sea Level equivalent pressure at the station and the calculation above is that the observations were made at a height of 196 meters. However, there is a difference in the MSL equivalent pressure for the calculation and in the MSL equivalent pressure. That is, while the MSL equivalent pressure was at 2316.399416, the MSL equivalent pressure at the station was at 994.0 hPa.
Calculation of the density EMOS by using IDEAL Gas Law
It is imperative to acknowledge that the formula of the EMOS using the IDEAL Gas Law is; ρ OBS = p OBS / RT OBS.
pOBS = 994.0 hPa, while T (air temperature) is 24.2 Co at a height of 2m above the ground. On the other hand, R is equal to 287.058 J.
Taking the above figures into consideration, the density EMOS using the IDEAL Gas Law will be achieved as follows;
pOBS = 994.0 ÷ (287.058/24.2); thus, the pOBS = 11790.73 hPa.
Re-calculation of the value of the PMSL using the improved value of the density determined in (d) above
pMSL = pobs + pgzobs
Improved density (pobs) = 11790.73 hPa
p= 994 hPa
z= 196 meters
g= 9.81 m/s2
Therefore; pMSL = 11790.73 + (994 × 196× 9.81) = 1923014.17 hPa
Comparison of the calculations and the results indicated at the EMOS data
It is imperative to take into account that the PMSL for both calculations varies to a great extent. However, both calculations were based on similar improved densities as well as similar gravitational force measurements.
Significance of pressure and temperature adjusted density in the calculation of the PMSL
Adjusted density in the calculation of the PMSL has an important effect on the overall value of the PMSL. In an event that the density is adjusted on a positive dimension, there is a high likelihood that the value of the PMSL will also increase significantly and vice-versa. Regarding temperature adjustment, its application in the calculation of the density at the observation point, also affects the value of PMSL in two ways. That is, a higher value of the temperature leads to a relatively lower level of air density. The use of a relatively lower value of air density in the calculation of the PMSL provides a lower value compared to an event where a higher value of air density is used.
Response with Respect to Station X
.
b) Response to Questions
i) Pressure-Gradient Force- The direction of the pressure gradient-force is North-West
ii) Coriolis force- The coriolis force moves towards the West
iii) Frictional force- There is no frictional force
iv) Resulting Wind- The resulting wind moves in the same direction as pressure-gradient force, which is North-West
Is the trajectory (path) of System X consistent with the prediction captured by The Weather Network’s Systems map for Monday (July 18, 2016)? Does your answer validate or invalidate the case for surface-aloft interactions in weather systems like System X?
Yes. The trajectory path of System X is consistent with the prediction or the projection that was made by Weather Network’s System Map for Monday 18th July, 2016. System X has shown a constant progression in the same direction that was predicted by the Weather Network Systems Map; however, it is imperative to acknowledge that there has been significant variation of pressure and density of System X as it moves from one location to another. My answer validates the case for surface-loft interactions in whether systems as in the case of System X.
Predict the appearance of System X at 00Z on July 19, 2016. Be sure to illustrate and justify your prediction. In addition to grounding your justification through the observables captured via your responses to 2(a) above, be sure to state any relevant assumptions.
The appearances of System X at 00z on July the 19th of 2016 will possible assume a trajectory path of a bullet in motion. This trajectory path is characterized by relatively low velocity during the beginning of the motion, high velocity during the middle of the motion and relatively lower velocity as it approaches its destination. One of the key assumptions in the prediction of the trajectory path of System X is that it begins at lower speed during the initiation stages or the Genesis stage. Its velocity increases and reaches its peak during the middle stage and a reduced speed as it approaches its death. The reduced speed at the end of the life cycle of System X could be attributed to changing air temperature, density and other obstacles, particularly, moving materials in the air. During the middle stages, System X is characterized by existence of low pressure and relatively high temperatures.
