Methodologies and Comparisons for Lund's Two Methods for Calculating Probability of Cloud-Free Line-of-Sight

View More View Less
  • a AT&T Laboratories, IX 1H-226, Naperville, IL 60566
  • | b School of Industrial Engineering and Management, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078
  • | c Infantry Warfare Analysis Branch, Ground Warfare Division, AMSAA, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005
© Get Permissions
Restricted access

Abstract

To help in the implementation of Lund's probability of cloud-free line-of-sight (PCFLOS) calculations (method A and method B) for limited altitudes, a methodology for cumulative cloud cover calculation (required for both methods) is introduced and a methodology for cumulative cloud form determination (required for method B) is developed. To study the PCFLOS differences between the two methods, Lund's master matrices are investigated and the derived PCFLOS results of Hamburg, Germany, are compared and analyzed for variations in selected environmental parameters. Based upon numerical studies performed in this research effort, it is strongly recommended that Lund's method B should always be adopted for general purpose worldwide PCFLOS calculations.

Abstract

To help in the implementation of Lund's probability of cloud-free line-of-sight (PCFLOS) calculations (method A and method B) for limited altitudes, a methodology for cumulative cloud cover calculation (required for both methods) is introduced and a methodology for cumulative cloud form determination (required for method B) is developed. To study the PCFLOS differences between the two methods, Lund's master matrices are investigated and the derived PCFLOS results of Hamburg, Germany, are compared and analyzed for variations in selected environmental parameters. Based upon numerical studies performed in this research effort, it is strongly recommended that Lund's method B should always be adopted for general purpose worldwide PCFLOS calculations.

Save