Search for: All records

Abstract During November 2018–April 2019, an 11-station very high frequency (VHF) Lightning Mapping Array (LMA) was deployed to Córdoba Province, Argentina. The purpose of the LMA was validation of the Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM), but the deployment was coordinated with two field campaigns. The LMA observed 2.9 million flashes (≥ five sources) during 163 days, and level-1 (VHF locations), level-2 (flashes classified), and level-3 (gridded products) datasets have been made public. The network’s performance allows scientifically useful analysis within 100 km when at least seven stations were active. Careful analysis beyond 100 km is also possible. The LMA dataset includes many examples of intense storms with extremely high flash rates (>1 s−1), electrical discharges in overshooting tops (OTs), as well as anomalously charged thunderstorms with low-altitude lightning. The modal flash altitude was 10 km, but many flashes occurred at very high altitude (15–20 km). There were also anomalous and stratiform flashes near 5–7 km in altitude. Most flashes were small (<50 km2 area). Comparisons with GLM on 14 and 20 December 2018 indicated that GLM most successfully detected larger flashes (i.e., more than 100 VHF sources), with detection efficiency (DE) up to 90%. However, GLM DE was reduced for flashes that were smaller or that occurred lower in the cloud (e.g., near 6-km altitude). GLM DE also was reduced during a period of OT electrical discharges. Overall, GLM DE was a strong function of thunderstorm evolution and the dominant characteristics of the lightning it produced. 

Abstract The Córdoba Argentina Marx Meter Array (CAMMA), consisting of 10 second‐generation Huntsville Alabama Marx Meter Array (HAMMA 2) sensors, operated at Córdoba, Argentina, during the Remote sensing of Electrification, Lightning, And Mesoscale/microscale Processes with Adaptive Ground Observations (RELAMPAGO) field campaign in late 2018. Initial results obtained from the campaign demonstrate that the new sensor is able to provide a significantly more detailed depiction of various lightning processes than its first generation. The lightning flashes mapped by the CAMMA and a colocated Lightning Mapping Array (LMA) were compared. The overall flash structures mapped by the CAMMA and the LMA look similar for most of the flashes. However, comparisons at smaller time scale show that the majority of CAMMA and LMA sources are not concurrent, indicating that unmatched sources were possibly due to different physical processes in leader propagation dominating different frequencies and differences in data processing and location techniques.