Description of the Battlescale Forecast Model

Evaluation Study of an Operational Mesoscale Forecast Model Over Three Climatologically Different Areas

“…For all three model domains, the temperature fields of BFM initialized with (1) and (2) above are statistically better than those initialized with (3). For Colorado and Washington model domains, the BFM showed clear tendencies of forecasting dew point temperatures lower than those observed throughout the 24-h forecast period.…”

“…The second purpose is to compare the statistics of BFM forecast data to those of other models, such as the Navy Operational Global Atmospheric Prediction System (NOGAPS) and the Navy Operational Regional Atmospheric Prediction System (NORAPS). [2,3,4] …”

Different Initialization Data and the Performance by the BFM

“…Soil temperature on five subsurface levels is solved using the heat conduction equation, while long-wave and short-wave radiation within a single layer for a stratus cloud is calculated using the method of Hanson and Derr. The basic variables that are prognostically forecasted by the model are perturbation potential temperature; the total water substance mixing ratio; wind speed; wind direction; pressure; soil temperature; the turbulence kinetic energy and length scale; and the nonconvective precipitation rate (6,7).…”

“…These forecast fields are saved at 0, 3,6,9,12,15,18,21, and 24 h from the base time of the model run and placed into a Gridded Meteorological Data Base.…”

Short-Term Battlescale Forecast Model Performance Incorporating Utah Mesonet Stations

“…One of the forecast models available on the battlefield is the Battlescale Forecast Model (BFM) [1], which is fielded as an element of the Integrated Meteorological System (IMETS). It provides forecasts of pressure, temperature, humidity, and winds, as well as many derived weather parameters out to 24 h. The purpose of this study is to investigate the performance of the BFM over an area of complex terrain, comparing results of model runs incorporating surface observations from Utah mesonet stations with results of equivalent model runs made without any surface data.…”