Cloud Tops

8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

1/16

Cloud Tops

Why do they matter? The perception of "instrument flight" among many VFR pilots is that the wholepoint of getting an instrument qualification is that one can fly in the clouds.

IFR Strategy

Nothing could be further from the truth. That's just what you spend weeks doing in your instrument

training. In reality, prolonged flight in IMC is avoided at any reasonable cost. At best, there is nooutside view which makes it boring - many prospective passengers are sufficiently scared of flyingin light aircraft and one needs all the compensation one can get one's hands on. In all but the most

benign cloud there is some turbulence and this can reach severe or even dangerous levels if one fliesinto something nasty which, in the absence of radar, is quite possible during a long flight in IMC.Then there is icing: if the outside temperature (corrected for the aerodynamic temperature rise) is

below 0C then supercooled water droplets are likely to exist. In reality icing is very much a hit andmiss affair with nothing happening a lot of the time, but one is virtually certain to pick up a lot of iceif one sits in such conditions for some hours, and it can happen very much faster than that inconvective weather. Finally... it's cold in cloud! In sunlight, most light aeroplanes pick up a hugeamount of solar heat which can avoid the need for any heating even in sub-zero temperatures - just as

well since a lot of them have barely adequate heaters.

The whole "IFR strategy" therefore becomes one where you depart, climb as fast as possible throughany cloud to reach VMC, stay in VMC for the entire enroute section, and then descend in one moreor less continuous descent all the way down to landing.

If your aeroplane is fully de-iced (rubber boots, TKS, electrically heated propellers or somecombination of these) then in theory you can fly the whole route in icing conditions - but why?Flying should be enjoyable.

In Europe, cloud tops can be anywhere from below 1000ft to FL450. However, anything above

FL200 is likely to be seriously convective and then all bets are off as far as height goes. Fortunately,the top of "organised IMC" rarely exceeds FL160 and this is what enables long distance IFR flight,at Eurocontrol levels, in non-deiced unpressurised aeroplanes with oxygen. You just need an aircraftoperating ceiling of FL180 and benign conditions at the two ends of the flight through which to

Page 1 of 16Cloud Tops

18/10/2010http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/tops/

8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

2/16

climb and descend. Flying VMC on top, the horizontal visibility is usually unlimited and anythingnasty (CBs) can be avoided visually.

This strategy fits in perfectly with the Eurocontrol IFR route system. The MEAs on many routes willplace you squarely into freezing IMC much of the year, but ATC always allow a climb request "dueweather".

Some pilots say that nobody should fly IFR in anything less than a de-iced twin / King Air / jet butthis is nonsense. The capability for prolonged flight in icing conditions merely reduces the

percentage of preplanned flights that are cancelled on the day. De-icing gives you the ability to climband descend through thick layers of freezing cloud (e.g. solid IMC all the way to FL180) and theability to accept an ATC holding instruction placing you into prolonged icing conditions. However,holds are extremely rare in GA IFR flight and de-iced aeroplanes tend to also be radar equippedwhich facilitates close-in tactical CB avoidance. It would be a very different matter if one was flyinga Cessna 150 which cannot even climb to the MEA on many IFR routes...

It's worth mentioning at this point that UK pilots flying under the IMC Rating are often unable to flyVMC on top because much of the UK is covered with Class A airspace whose base is below thetypical cloud tops. For flights within the UK, this is really the key advantage of the full IR over theIMC-R and is particularly relevant in the winter when the full IR enables the enroute section to beflown out of icing conditions.

Where do clouds form?

Everybody knows that clouds form where the humidity reaches 100%. The rest needs someunderstanding of meteorology which I will largely skip over - partly because it isn't my area ofexpertise and partly because I set out to produce an easy to digest collection of practical advice for

pilots. The theory is anyway of little use without a website on which one can push buttons andactually get the data.

The cloud bases are to some degree predictable from the convergence of the reported surfacetemperature and dew point and there is even a formula which has been known to occassionally work:temperature-DP spread multiplied by 400ft, so if the surface temperature is +10C and the DP is +4Cyou might expect the bases to be around 2400ft. This works with some cloud types better thanothers.

Cloud base forecasts are widely available in TAFs and other aviation data. These tend to bereasonably accurate because they are normally produced by full-time weather professionals whohave access to a wide range of ground observations. They are also easy for the pilot to verify at thetime by looking at the relevant METARs, or simply looking upwards into the sky.

The cloud tops are much more difficult. Obviously this boundary will again occur where thehumidity falls below 100% but the conditions where this happens depend on many factors such asthe convective energy within the cloud. There is also much less data available to the meteorologist:instrumented baloons ("ascents") are launched at 0000Z and 1200Z and these return accurate data

but only for a few locations in each country. The mainland USA has a comprehensive system whichtakes in weather radar data, satellite data, and pilot reports (PIREPS) but Europe either has nothingof the sort or the Met offices keep it very close.

Weather Models

There are several weather models around the world but probably the most relevant to UK andEuropean pilots are the UK Met Office (UKMO) and the U.S.-run Global Forecasting System(GFS).



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

3/16

All UK pilots will know about the free chart products from the UKMO: 215 (UK) and 415 (nearEurope). These charts are produced about 12hrs ahead. The Mean Sea Level Pressure (MSLP) chartsrun several days ahead and they are the only free product from the UKMO which goes past 24hrswith any relevant detail.

The UKMO runs a commercial policy on everything beyond the above data. I have used numerouscommercial forecasters (those on premium rate telephone numbers, to check my own assessment ofdifficult weather conditions for a go/no-go decision) and it's obvious they have access to data whichgoes way beyond anything openly available.

This leads to GFS. This weather model is totally free. The output from it is numeric and needs to beplotted into something graphical. One of the many websites that do this isNOAA which generatesnice clear graphical data 0-84hrs, 0-180hrs, or 192-384hrs (the last one is obviously largely fiction).In fact nearly all of the free aviation weather websites use GFS data.

The SigWx form is what most commercial pilots use for an instant general briefing. This goes fromFL100 upwards and is generated about 12 hours ahead. The data for it comes from the World AreaForecast Center (WAFC) in London. In October 2007 the SigWx form was modified to no longershow fronts and cloud type - a curious move probably driven by the jet (upper airway) customer

base.

Where is the Cloud Tops data?

The UKMO forms 215 and 415 and the SigWx give cloud tops as straight numbers. The 215/415go up to FL100 only and show near-Europe only. The SigWx shows weather above FL100 and isthus the first choice for enroute conditions. However these forms are generated only up to about 12hours ahead.

If a pilot wants data further ahead than the SigWx, or wishes to cross-check the SigWx againstsomething else, this gets more complicated, and leads us to thermodynamic diagrams.

The "gold standard" for working out where there is IMC, and lots of other stuff like temperatures, isthe Tephigram; whose very similar counterpart is the Skew-T is shown below; this particularsample is real data generated by a baloon ascent:



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

4/16

This most useful chart plots the dew point and temperature (the left and right lines on the above,respectively) against altitude in millibars. Where the two get close or meet, you can expect IMC,roughly according to the following rules:

5C means clear

On the above example, it is immediately obvious where the two lines meet and one would expect thecloud bases around 3,000ft and the tops gradually dispersing around 8,000-9,000ft, and blue skiesabove that. The 0C level is around 10,000ft (the blue 0C line intercepts the temperature line at700mb) which is perfect for a climb up through the cloud without a risk of icing.

The baloon ascent data can be found at the University of Wyoming website - select Region=Europeand Type of Plot= GIF/Skew-T. It's bizzare that one has to go to a U.S. university website to getascent data from UKMO probes but much of the aviation weather scene is like that - an organisationreleases some data only to its commercial customers but at the same time has internationalobligations to release it to other parties who in turn very usefully put it on a website... If would befunny if it wasn't so important. Update: it can also be found at the Univ of Cologne.

A forecaster can work out all kinds of other things from these charts e.g. stability - the likelihood ofsignificant vertical development like CBs. A google on "tephigram" or "skew-t" comes up with anunlimited amount of reading material on the interpretation; for example here. In fact the atmosphere

has very few secrets left - at that spot and at that time - after the baloon probe has gone up through it.Forecasters generate all the well known data like TAFs and the 215/415 forms from tephigramsgenerated by the ascents and the computer models.



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

5/16

Unfortunately data for 0000Z or 1200Z (appearing on the website an hour or two later) is of limiteduse for most long flights which tend to depart in the morning. The exception is widespread stablehigh pressure air masses; the following ascent corresponds to the photograph at the top of this articleand was spot on despite being 10 hours old at the time of the flight:

The $64M question: can we get forecast tephigrams for an arbitrary time in the future? Yes -any computer model can be used to generate a tephigram, or of course any other type of chart.Unfortunately the UKMO offers this "3D" data to commercial users only. This is a shame, since theUKMO weather model is probably the most accurate for the UK and nearby areas. One known freesource of forecast tephigrams is the Swiss Meteoblue website whose development was reportedly

the PhD project of University of Basle student: and the following random example is from it:



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

6/16

This is a Tephigram which is plotted slightly differently to a Skew-T but the basic idea is the same.This one shows mostly IMC up to about 800mb (roughly 6,000ft) and clear skies above. The 0Clevel is at 700mb - excellent flying conditions and climbing up through the 2000-3000ft of cloudshould not present icing hazards.

The Meteoblue site appears to be based on GFS and a mixture of other data and enables all kinds ofcharts to be generated, including the vertical conditions along a straight line flight as in the example

below. Unfortunately the site uses client-side Java and in common with many such websites runswith varying degrees of reliability according to your operating system and other factors. Often, onegets a blank page and has to press F5 (refresh) to get it to work. It has plenty of quirks; for exampleto obtain the "Cross Section" chart shown below, one has to choose Condensate for the first plotoption and Temperature for the second; reversing the two crashes it.

Another site that delivers forecast tephigrams is the previously mentionedNOAA site, under"Soundings". This came to my attention some time after this article was written...

Comparison

Let's do a comparison of the three data sources we now have: Meteoblue, SigWx and the actualascent. The following Meteoblue forecast was done 30hrs ahead for a 1200Z flight from Shoreham(EGKA) to Ljubljana (LJLJ) across the Alps:



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

7/16

The above chart shows cloud to around 550mb (16,000 feet) at three points along the route - feasiblefor an unpressurised aircraft with oxygen and a 20,000ft ceiling. The 0C isotherm is also visible andI have placed yellow dots on it to make it more obvious. The red bits are obviously below freezingand one would not fly in them; flying below would be a problem with terrain clearance so the only

way is straight above the whole lot. Crucially there is little or no cloud around the departure andarrival which is exactly what you want for the climb and the descent.

The corresponding 1200Z SigWx (flight superimposed in yellow):



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

8/16

The SigWx shows a rather different picture to Meteoblue. Area 16 shows tops to FL160; Meteoblueshows nothing. Area 14 shows tops to FL200 (Meteoblue isn't far off there) and tells us these may beCBs. Finally, Area 10 shows tops to FL130; Meteoblue shows nothing there but this is more of atiming issue because the whole weather system is moving to the SE. Clearly, the big suprise is Area16 which appears to require a climb through a thick freezing layer. Are we being unfair to Meteox

because that was a 30 hour forecast whereas the SigWx is much closer? In fact the Meteox chartdone a few hours before the flight looks essentially the same as the previous one... Unfortunately,while the SigWx form looks attractive for this job, it does not forecast vertical cloud extent; the

vertical extents of the scalloped areas apply to the icing or turbulence only !!

On the basis of the foregoing, and putting this together with the MSLP chart showing the occludedfronts all over the place, I would have probably scrapped the flight.



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

9/16

Please note this analysis does not take into account the flight time of around 5 hours; the picture inactive weather like this would be expected to change significantly during the flight.

The actual data from the 1200Z baloon ascent is below; this was done at two points corresponding tothe highest-tops found within Area 16 and Area 14:



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

10/16

The ascent for Area 16 shows some kind of a top around 6,000ft but in fact the cloud in the areavaried widely and a lot of it was merely scattered to broken in a thin layer.

The ascent for Area 14 shows a lot of cloud to about 17,000ft. The SigWx is therefore slightlypessimistic and Meteox was closer to the mark.

Other Methods

There are various other websites that process GFS data into something from which cloud tops can beinferred. This well known U.S. Air Force site offers various graphical products including an Icingchart (under Flight Hazards). The following example again corresponds to the above flight and wasgenerated 30 hours beforehand



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

11/16

and indicates light icing from FL030 to FL140 which - give or take a few thousand feet - is a goodconfirmation of the data from Meteoblue but it shows no evidence of Area 16 in the SigWx.

Another useful tool for the IFR pilot is weather radar. In the past this was available only as apremium chargeable service and that was just for the UK. In fact the data is still tightly marketed bya consortium of European weather offices, but various websites now carry enough of it to provide auseful picture for Europe. The most interesting one is Meteox which combines several radar datafeeds and delivers it through an advertising-funded website with a delay of 30-45 minutes.

Meteox radar does not tell us the height of the tops but experience suggests that anything showingRED on Meteox is a definite no-go and contains convective cloud to at least FL250. Weathershowing as heavy white bands has been regularly observed to be at FL200 when flying to one side ofit. It would be easy enough to use the baloon ascent websites to get snapshots of weather depicted on

weather radar and do comparisons. The following radar image corresponds to the 1200Z flightdiscussed above



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

12/16

Meteox has a nasty catch: the coverage stops suddenly at non-participating country boundaries, orradar head distances, and these boundaries are not indicated on the image. In this case we have nocoverage of Italy or Austria; separate websites need to be consulted for these. Some Italian radar datacan be seen here and I have a collection of radar websites here.

Finally, there are websites that show satellite images with cloud top temperatures. If one has agood idea of the temperature/altitude profile, this should yield the approximate cloud top height. AnIR image can give temperatures directly, and the following example again covers the same flight:



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

13/16

The satellite image shows high level cloud over N France (the SigWx Area 16) with tops around -

20C which (referring to the well known Form 214/414) would be around 14,000ft but this is sowidely scattered it would not be an issue. It also shows very high cloud tops (green, around -40C) inArea 14 but again this is localised and one would have flown a little to the east of it. The aboveimage is from a Turkish site which is unfortunately updated only every 3 hours.

Which data should I use?

As the above demonstrates, there can be a wide discrepancy between the different sources, andbetween any of them and reality. The baloon ascents are of course accurate at the time and location

but are likely to be useless where there is scattered convective weather unless one goes to the nextlevel of analysis and interprets the lapse rates.

The SigWx is less reliable than one might expect because it does not forecast vertical cloud extent;



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

14/16

the vertical extents of the scalloped areas apply to the icing or turbulence only !! Also, around 2007the cloud data was "simplified"... previously, if e.g. there was a general MOD ICE and MOD TURBXXX/170 and ISOL EMBD CB XXX/290, both were presented. After the change, the ISOL EMBDCB XXX/290 replaces the stratiform cloud which was previously indicated by the MOD ICEXXX/170, and is all that is shown, so you lose the valuable info that the tops are mostly FL170.

The Meteox radar data is suprisingly good in this kind of difficult weather. On other occassions (e.g.the photograph at the start of this article) radar would show absolutely nothing, but then you don'treally care anyway because there is nothing up there of relevance.

A simple sanity check on anything coming out of the GFS model is to check it against the timing ofthe fronts shown on the UKMO MSLP chart. Forecast tephigrams should show the expecteddramatic cloud thickness and other changes at the appropriate time. It seems to me that weatherforecasting is a lot more accurate in what happens than when it happens, so fixing the timing better isalways worth doing.

The go/no-go flying decision is usually a process of checking off factors which may compromise thesafety or comfort of the flight. I have normally been conservative (due to carrying passengers whodo not want turbulence) and would normally scrap a flight which would pass through a frontalsystem, but there is little flight-safety justification for such a simple rule. Perhaps the best process isto review all the sources available and provided that any high cloud (above the aircraft ceiling) islikely to be scattered, the flight should proceed. However it is apparent that the techniques presentedin this article are likely to work well for conservative pilots but less well for those who are willing to

push the boundaries of icing and turbulence.

My personal rule is to cancel if the forecast tops are above FL160, and with an actual operatingceiling c. FL200 it has so far always worked. Forecast tops well above FL160, in N Europe, tend toindicate significant lifting activity and then all bets are off, not only regarding the actual tops but alsoregarding forecasting accuracy.

New Sources

This Spanish site shows actual cloud tops but the server is unreliable.

This most useful IR image is from the UK Met Office is updated every hour and can be found here



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

15/16

Unfortunately this does not have a temperature scale, but with a little bit of experience andcorrelating the image to areas where known very high tops will be (e.g. fronts) it is pretty obviouswhether the tops in a given area will be FL100 or FL300. For example, referring to the above image,the tops to be expected on a flight from Split in Croatia to Shoreham in the UK will be below FL150and thus flyable "VMC on top" in any reasonable IFR touring aircraft. A post-mortem examinationof the Skew-T (weather baloon ascent) data for the route shows the tops to be generally belowFL100.

The source for these IR images is EUMETSAT whose general latest-image website is here. Theimages corresponding to the above UKMO one are probably here and here. However, the UKMOimage is usually more up to date...

These IR images represent about the only "cloud tops METAR" available in Europe.

I wrote to the UKMO asking them why they don't offer a temperature scale. This is their reply:

The small satellite images that we put onto the Met Office web pages represent a compromise

between providing the public with an up-to-date picture of the cloud patterns of the UK androviding higher resolution satellite imagery in a form suitable for quantitative interpretation. Thiscompromise takes account of the variable nature of the internet connections available to the public.



8/8/2019 Cloud Tops

16/16

Whilst the infrared greyscale pictures you refer to do indeed represent the temperature of theemitting surface (cloud, land or sea) their contents can only be interpreted in relative terms (eg onearea of cloud being warmer or colder than another).

dding a temperature scale to the image is far from straightforward with such a product sincesignificant ambiguities could be introduced (for example with thin high cloud) that might lead tomisinterpretation with potentially serious consequences. It is however, possible to apply a scientificapproach to estimating the actual cloud-top temperature from the analysis of multi-spectral imagedata. The Met Office operates as a Trading Fund so this is a product we can provide on acommercial basis.

Hmmm...

The chief drawback of the IR image alone is that it doesn't distinguish between (a) 30,000ft of solidIMC (with all kinds of nasties hiding inside), and (b) a thin cloud layer at 30,000ft with not muchunderneath it. This can lead to unnecessary flight cancellations.

This is where additional data comes in. A radar image (e.g. Meteox) will show up any heavy cloud.It won't show the vertical extent of it, but it is a safe bet that if you get a strong return on the radarimage, plus IR image tops way too high to outclimb, it's a no-go. Similarly if the enrouteTAFs/METARs show +TSRA etc and the MSLP chart shows a front in the area. But a large and veryuniform-shade area on the IR image, with nothing hazardous showing on the radar or theTAFs/METARs, and with no fronts showing on the MSLP chart, is probably just thin high altitudecloud.

This page last edited 23rd July 2010.

Any feedback, reports of dead links, corrections or suggestions much appreciated:Contact details

Aviation Home


Cloud Tops

Documents

Transcript of Cloud Tops