Mid-tropospheric cut-off low (COL) pressure systems are linked to severe weather, heavy rainfall and extreme cold conditions over South Africa. They occur during all the above and often result in floods and snowfalls during the winter months, disrupting economic activities and causing extensive damage to infrastructure. This paper examines the evolution and circulation patterns associated with cases of severe COLs over South Africa. We evaluate the performance of the 4.4 km Unified Model (UM) which is currently used operationally by the South African Weather Service (SAWS) to simulate daily rainfall. Circulation variables and precipitation simulated by the UM were compared against European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecast’s (ECMWF’s) ERA Interim re-analyses and GPM precipitation at 24-hour timesteps. We present five recent severe COLs, which occurred between 2016 and 2019, that had high impact and found a higher model skill when simulating heavy precipitation during the initial stages than the dissipating stages of the systems. A key finding was that the UM simulated the precipitation differently during the different stages of development and location of the systems. This is mainly due to inaccurate placing of COL centers. Understanding the performance and limitations of the UM model in simulating COL characteristics can benefit severe weather forecasting and contribute to disaster risk reduction in South Africa.

Warnings of severe weather with a lead time longer that two hours require the use of skillful numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. In this study, we test the performance of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Conformal Cubic Atmospheric Model (CCAM) in simulating six high-impact weather events, with a focus on rainfall predictions in South Africa. The selected events are tropical cyclone Dineo (16 February 2017), the Cape storm (7 June 2017), the 2017 Kwa-Zulu Natal (KZN) floods (10 October 2017), the 2019 KZN floods (22 April 2019), the 2019 KZN tornadoes (12 November 2019) and the 2020 Johannesburg floods (5 October 2020). Three configurations of CCAM were compared: a 9 km grid length (MN9km) over southern Africa nudged within the Global Forecast System (GFS) simulations, and a 3 km grid length over South Africa (MN3km) nudged within the 9 km CCAM simulations. The last configuration is CCAM running with a grid length of 3 km over South Africa, which is nudged within the GFS (SN3km). The GFS is available with a grid length of $0.25$°, and therefore, the configurations allow us to test if there is benefit in the intermediate nudging at 9 km as well as the effects of resolution on rainfall simulations. The South African Weather Service (SAWS) station rainfall dataset is used for verification purposes. All three configurations of CCAM are generally able to capture the spatial pattern of rainfall associated with each of the events. However, the maximum rainfall associated with two of the heaviest rainfall events is underestimated by CCAM with more than 100 mm. CCAM simulations also have some shortcomings with capturing the location of heavy rainfall inland and along the northeast coast of the country. Similar shortcomings were found with other NWP models used in southern Africa for operational forecasting purposes by previous studies. CCAM generally simulates a larger rainfall area than observed, resulting in more stations reporting rainfall. Regarding the different configurations, they are more similar to one another than observations, however, with some suggestion that MN3km outperforms other configurations, in particular with capturing the most extreme events. The performance of CCAM in the convective scales is encouraging, and further studies will be conducted to identify areas of possible improvement.