Search

The NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Air Force Eastern Range (ER) operate an extensive suite of lightning sensors because Florida experiences the highest area density of ground strikes in the United States, with area densities approaching 16 fl/sq km/yr when accumulated in 10x10 km (100 sq km) grids. The KSC-ER use data derived from two cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning detection networks, the "Cloud-to-Ground Lightning Surveillance System" (CGLSS) and the U.S. National Lightning Detection Network (TradeMark) (NLDN) plus a 3-dimensional lightning mapping system, the Lightning Detection and Ranging (LDAR) system, to provide warnings for ground operations and to insure mission safety during space launches. For operational applications at the KSC-ER it is important to understand the performance of each lightning detection system in considerable detail. In this work we examine a specific subset of the CGLSS stroke reports that have low values of the negative inferred peak current, Ip, i.e. values between 0 and -7 kA, and were thought to produce a new ground contact (NGC). When possible, the NLDN and LDAR systems were used to validate the CGLSS classification and to determine how many of these reported strokes were first strokes, subsequent strokes in a pre-existing channel (PEC), or cloud pulses that the CGLSS misclassified as CG strokes. It is scientifically important to determine the smallest current that can reach the ground either in the form of a first stroke or by way of a subsequent stroke that creates a new ground contact. In Biagi et al (2007), 52 low amplitude, negative return strokes ([Ip] < or = 10 kA) were evaluated in southern Arizona, northern Texas, and southern Oklahoma. The authors found that 50-87% of the small NLDN reports could be classified as CG (either first or subsequent strokes) on the basis of video and waveform recordings. Low amplitude return strokes are interesting because they are usually difficult to detect, and they are thought to bypass conventional lightning protection that relies on a sufficient attractive radius to prevent "shielding failure" (Golde, 1977). They also have larger location errors compared to the larger current events. In this study, we use the estimated peak current provided by the CGLSS and the results of our classification to determine the minimum Ip for each category of CG stroke and its probability of occurrence. Where possible, these results are compared to the findings in the literature.

The NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Air Force Eastern Range (ER) are located in a region of Florida that experiences the highest area density of lightning strikes to ground in the United States, with values approaching 16 fl/km 2/yr when accumulated in 10x10 km (100 sq km) grids (see Figure 1). Consequently, the KSC-ER use data derived from two cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning detection networks to detect hazardous weather, the "Cloud-to-Ground Lightning Surveillance System" (CGLSS) that is owned and operated by the Air Force and the U.S. National Lightning Detection Network (NLDN) that is owned and operated by Vaisala, Inc. These systems are used to provide lightning warnings for ground operations and to insure mission safety during space launches at the KSC-ER. In order to protect the rocket and shuttle fleets, NASA and the Air Force follow a set of lightning safety guidelines that are called the Lightning Launch Commit Criteria (LLCC). These rules are designed to insure that vehicles are not exposed to the hazards of natural or triggered lightning that would in any way jeopardize a mission or cause harm to the shuttle astronauts. Also, if any CG lightning strikes too close to a vehicle on a launch pad, it can cause time-consuming mission delays due to the extensive retests that are often required for vehicles and/or payloads when this occurs. If any CG lightning strike is missed or mis-located by even a small amount, the result could have significant safety implications, require expensive retests, or create unnecessary delays or scrubs in launches. Therefore, it is important to understand the performance of each lightning detection system in considerable detail.