<p>Atmospheric transport and dispersion models are used by Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAACs) to provide timely information on volcanic ash clouds to mitigate the risk of aircraft encounters. Inaccuracies in dispersion model forecasts can occur due to the uncertainties associated with source terms, meteorological data and model parametrizations. Real-time validation of model forecasts against observations is therefore essential to ensure their reliability. Forecasts can also benefit from comparison to model output from other groups; through understanding how different modelling approaches, variations in model setups, model physics, and driving meteorological data, impact the predicted extent and concentration of ash. The Met Office, the National Centre for Atmospheric Science (NCAS) and the British Geological Survey (BGS) are working together to consider how we might compare data (both qualitatively and quantitatively) from the atmospheric dispersion models NAME, FALL3D and HYSPLIT, using meteorological data from the Met Office Unified Model and the NOAA Global Forecast System (providing an effective multi-model ensemble). Results from the model inter-comparison will be used to provide advice to the London VAAC to aid forecasting decisions in near real time during a volcanic ash cloud event. In order to facilitate this comparison, we developed a Python package (ash-model-plotting) to read outputs from the different models into a consistent structure. Here we present our framework for generating comparable plots across the different partners, with a focus on total column mass loading products. These are directly comparable to satellite data retrievals and therefore important for model validation. We also present outcomes from a recent modelling exercise and discuss next steps for further improving our forecast validation.</p>
Volcanic ash cloud detection from space: a comparison between the RSTASHtechnique and the water vapour corrected BTD procedure
