Comparison of LM Verification against Multi Level Aircraft Measurements (MLAs) with LM Verification against Temps Ulrich Pflüger, Deutscher Wetterdienst.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Slide 1ECMWF forecast products users meeting – Reading, June 2005 Verification of weather parameters Anna Ghelli, ECMWF.
Advertisements

Mei Xu, Jamie Wolff and Michelle Harrold National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Research Applications Laboratory (RAL) and Developmental Testbed.
COSMO Workpackage No First Results on Verification of LMK Test Runs Basing on SYNOP Data Lenz, Claus-Jürgen; Damrath, Ulrich
April 23, 2009 Geography 414 Group 3 1 Boone, NC Laura Beth Adams- Average Temperature Alec Hoffman – Daily Temperature Range Jill Simmerman- Maximum Temperature.
Evidence of Climate Change in Orlando, Florida Josh Gray, Andrew Chin, Philip Womble, Sean Weyrich, Holly Padgett 04/21/2009.
Recent performance statistics for AMPS real-time forecasts Kevin W. Manning – National Center for Atmospheric Research NCAR Earth System Laboratory Mesoscale.
Verification of DWD Ulrich Damrath & Ulrich Pflüger.
Fly - Fight - Win 25 th Operational Weather Squadron University of Arizona 1.8km WRF Verification 2Lt Erik Neemann Weather Operations Officer 30 Apr 08.
David Ing CSE 3, Average Temperature over 10 years First interpretation: This tread line goes from December of 2001 to May While it may seem.
COSMO General Meeting Zurich, 2005 Institute of Meteorology and Water Management Warsaw, Poland- 1 - Verification of the LM at IMGW Katarzyna Starosta,
COSMO General Meeting – Moscow Sept 2010 Some results from operational verification in Italy Angela Celozzi - Federico Grazzini Massimo Milelli -
Introduction A new methodology is developed for integrating complementary ground-based data sources to provide consistent ozone vertical distribution time.
1 Aircraft Data: Geographic Distribution, Acquisition, Quality Control, and Availability Work at NOAA/ESRL/GSD and elsewhere.
Deutscher Wetterdienst Measurement Technology Humidity Measurements by Aircraft of the E-AMDAR Fleet TECO 2008 Axel Hoff Deutscher Wetterdienst Observing.
Introducing the Lokal-Modell LME at the German Weather Service Jan-Peter Schulz Deutscher Wetterdienst 27 th EWGLAM and 12 th SRNWP Meeting 2005.
On Improving GFS Forecast Skills in the Southern Hemisphere: Ideas and Preliminary Results Fanglin Yang Andrew Collard, Russ Treadon, John Derber NCEP-EMC.
Verification methods - towards a user oriented verification WG5.
COSMO General Meeting, Offenbach, 7 – 11 Sept Dependance of bias on initial time of forecasts 1 WG1 Overview
3 Main Climate Zones 17.2 and 17.3.
Lesson 01 Atmospheric Structure n Composition, Extent & Vertical Division.
AMB Verification and Quality Control monitoring Efforts involving RAOB, Profiler, Mesonets, Aircraft Bill Moninger, Xue Wei, Susan Sahm, Brian Jamison.
Latest results in verification over Poland Katarzyna Starosta, Joanna Linkowska Institute of Meteorology and Water Management, Warsaw 9th COSMO General.
The latest results of verification over Poland Katarzyna Starosta Joanna Linkowska COSMO General Meeting, Cracow September 2008 Institute of Meteorology.
The climate and climate variability of the wind power resource in the Great Lakes region of the United States Sharon Zhong 1 *, Xiuping Li 1, Xindi Bian.
Sensitivity experiments with the Runge Kutta time integration scheme Lucio TORRISI CNMCA – Pratica di Mare (Rome)
Nudging Radial Velocity, OPERA, LHN for COSMO-EU COSMO GM, Sibiu, 2 September Recent developments at DWD
Verification Verification with SYNOP, TEMP, and GPS data P. Kaufmann, M. Arpagaus, MeteoSwiss P. Emiliani., E. Veccia., A. Galliani., UGM U. Pflüger, DWD.
GPS GPS derived integrated water vapor in aLMo: impact study with COST 716 near real time data Jean-Marie Bettems, MeteoSwiss Guergana Guerova, IAP, University.
Evaluation of 2002 Annual 12km MM5 Surface Parameters for OTC Modeling Shan He and Gary Kleiman NESCAUM And Winston Hao NYDEC Review of Application and.
Airborne Measurement of Horizontal Wind and Moisture Transport Using Co-deployed Doppler and DIAL lidars Mike Hardesty, Alan Brewer, Brandi McCarty, Christoph.
Deutscher Wetterdienst Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE Ulrich Damrath (with contributions by Ulrich Pflüger) COSMO GM Rome 2011.
Temperature Adjustment of UK Energy Statistics Iain MacLeay.
Henning Gisselø Danish Meteorological Institute in Copenhagen Operational forecaster for 17 years.
Statistical Post Processing - Using Reforecast to Improve GEFS Forecast Yuejian Zhu Hong Guan and Bo Cui ECM/NCEP/NWS Dec. 3 rd 2013 Acknowledgements:
General Meeting Moscow, 6-10 September 2010 High-Resolution verification for Temperature ( in northern Italy) Maria Stefania Tesini COSMO General Meeting.
NWP models. Strengths and weaknesses. Morten Køltzow, met.no NOMEK
NCAR April 1 st 2003 Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Data Assimilation in AMPS Dale Barker S. Rizvi, and M. Duda MMM Division, NCAR
Overview of WG5 activities and Conditional Verification Project Adriano Raspanti - WG5 Bucharest, September 2006.
VERIFICATION Highligths by WG5. 2 Outlook Some focus on Temperature with common plots and Conditional Verification Some Fuzzy verification Long trends.
MODIS Winds Assimilation Impact Study with the CMC Operational Forecast System Réal Sarrazin Data Assimilation and Quality Control Canadian Meteorological.
10th COSMO General Meeting, Cracow, Poland Verification of COSMOGR Over Greece 10 th COSMO General Meeting Cracow, Poland.
Shear statistics in the lower troposphere and impacts on DWL data interpretation G. D. Emmitt and S. Greco Simpson Weather Associates WG on Space-Based.
Verification methods - towards a user oriented verification The verification group.
The presence of sea ice on the ocean’s surface has a significant impact on the air-sea interactions. Compared to an open water surface the sea ice completely.
Deutscher Wetterdienst FE VERSUS 2 Priority Project Meeting Langen Use of Feedback Files for Verification at DWD Ulrich Pflüger Deutscher.
Federal Department of Home Affairs FDHA Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology MeteoSwiss Experiments at MeteoSwiss : TERRA / aerosols Flake Jean-Marie.
ALADIN 3DVAR at the Hungarian Meteorological Service 1 _____________________________________________________________________________________ 27th EWGLAM.
OSEs with HIRLAM and HARMONIE for EUCOS Nils Gustafsson, SMHI Sigurdur Thorsteinsson, IMO John de Vries, KNMI Roger Randriamampianina, met.no.
HIRLAM coupled to the ocean wave model WAM. Verification and improvements in forecast skill. Morten Ødegaard Køltzow, Øyvind Sætra and Ana Carrasco. The.
Station lists and bias corrections Jemma Davie, Colin Parrett, Richard Renshaw, Peter Jermey © Crown Copyright 2012 Source: Met Office© Crown copyright.
Indirect impact of ozone assimilation using Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) data assimilation system for regional applications Kathryn Newman1,2,
Introducing the Lokal-Modell LME at the German Weather Service
Seasonal outlook for summer 2017 over Japan
Current verification results for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE at DWD
Tuning the horizontal diffusion in the COSMO model
Verification of LAMI: QPF over northern Italy and vertical profiles
Impact of the vertical resolution on Climate Simulation using CESM
WG5-Report from Switzerland: Verification of aLMo in the year 2005
Predictability of 2-m temperature
3 Main Climate Zones 17.2 and 17.3.
3 Main Climate Zones 17.2 and 17.3.
COSMO General Meeting 2009 WG5 Parallel Session 7 September 2009
Lidia Cucurull, NCEP/JCSDA
Item Taking into account radiosonde position in verification
Aaron Kennedy, Xiquan Dong, and Baike Xi University of North Dakota
3 Main Climate Zones 17.2 and 17.3.
2007 Mei-yu season Chien and Kuo (2009), GPS Solutions
Some Verification Highlights and Issues in Precipitation Verification
Ulrich Pflüger & Ulrich Damrath
3 Main Climate Zones 17.2 and 17.3.
Presentation transcript:

Comparison of LM Verification against Multi Level Aircraft Measurements (MLAs) with LM Verification against Temps Ulrich Pflüger, Deutscher Wetterdienst

Comparison of LM Verification against Multi Level Aircraft Measurements (MLAs) with LM Verification against Temps by means of Time Series (June 2001 until May 2003) of monthly average of –bias and rmse of 00h, 24h, 48h Forecasts based on all MLAs/Temps in LM area –Variables are temperature wind velocity wind direction

Multi Level Aircraft Measurements are Several (not less than 4) single Aircraft Measurements during the climb or descent flight which are piecewise combined –beginning with the lowest –next < 20 km horizontal distance of the first –vertical distance < 55 hPa –etc. and then used like a Temp Measurement

LM Area All MLAs at 12 UTC 2003/05/ /05/19

LM Area All Temps Stations 12 UTC 2003/05/ /05/19

Bias of LM-Temperature against MLA Temps 00 UTC

Analysis 24 h Forecast 48 h Forecast small bias, similar structures in both cases Forecasts have annual cycle, in upper and middle troposphere positive bias in Summer, negative in Winter, near ground predominantly negativ bias

RMSE of LM-Temperature against MLA Temps 00 UTC

similar structures in both cases 0.8 similar structures in both cases, rmse(Temps) overall about 0.2 K greater than rmse(MLA)

Bias of LM-Temperature against MLA Temps 12 UTC

Negative bias > -0.3 K positiv bias < 0.4 K below 800 hPA predominantly negativ, below 800 hPA predominantly negativ below 800 hPA Summer negativ, Winter positiv below 800 hPA Summer negativ, Winter positiv

RMSE of LM-Temperature against MLA Temps 12 UTC

Same as 00 UTC

Differences at Temperature Verification Relative few differences between Verification based on MLAs and Temps When bias is small there is predominantly a negative bias against MLAs and a positive bias against Temps Overall rmse of 24/48 h Forecast is about 0.2 K greater in Verification based on Temps

Bias of LM-Wind Velocity against MLA Temps 00 UTC

Below 800 hPa, annual cycle, in winter strong positive bias Max.: 1.4 m/s Below 800 hPa, annual cycle, in winter strong positive bias Max.: 1.8 m/s Below 900 hPa predominantly negative bias Min.: -1.1 m/s, Winter less Below 900 hPa predominantly negative bias Min.: -0.8 m/s, Winter partly positive Max 0.2 m/s Below 900 hPa predominantly negative bias Min.: -0.8 m/s, Winter partly positiv Max 0.2 m/s

RMSE of LM-Wind Velocity against MLA Temps 00 UTC

Overall rmse(MLA) is about m/s greater than rmse(Temps) Overall rmse(MLA) is equal to rmse(Temps) Above 400 hPa rmse(Temps) is greater than rmse(MLA)

Bias of LM-Wind Velocity against MLA Temps 12 UTC

Below 800 hPa, annual cycle, in winter strong positive bias, Max.: 1.9 m/s Below 800 hPa, annual cycle, in winter strong positive bias, Max.: 2.4 m/s Below 800 hPa, annual cycle, in winter strong positive bias, Max.: 2.3 m/s Below 900 hPa predominantly negative bias Min.: -1.1 m/s, Winter partly positive, Max.: 0.2 m/s Below 800 hPa Summer negative bias Min.: -0.6 m/s, Winter positive, Max 0.7 m/s Below 800 hPa Summer predominantly negative bias Min.: -0.6 m/s, Winter predominantly positive, Max 0.8 m/s

RMSE of LM-Wind Velocity against MLA Temps 12 UTC

Same as 00 UTC

Differences at Wind Velocity Verification bias with annual cycle – below 800 hPa positive against MLA negativ(Winter) to slight positive(Summer) 00 UTC negativ(Winter) to positive(Summer) 12 UTC rmse with annual cycle –at Analysis overall m/s higher against MLA (wind is nudged to Temps) –at Forecasts higher rmse against Temps above 400 hPa

Bias of LM-Wind Direction against MLA Temps 00 UTC

Below 800 hPa, strong positive bias Max.: 7.4 degree, smaller in spring and autumn Below 800 hPa, strong positive bias Max.: 10.3 degree Below 800 hPa, strong positive bias Max.: 13.5 degree Below 900 hPa negative bias Min.: -4.9 degree, Winter less Below 900 hPa predominantly negative bias Min.: -7 degrees, Winter partly positive Max.: 6 degrees Below 900 hPa predominantly negative bias Min.: -10 degrees, Winter partly positiv Max 6 degrees

RMSE of LM-Wind Direction against MLA Temps 00 UTC

Overall rmse(MLA) is about 5-10 degrees greater than rmse(Temps) Overall rmse(MLA) is equal to rmse(Temps), except Summer Above 400 hPa rmse(Temps) is partly greater than rmse(MLA)

Bias of LM-Wind Direction against MLA Temps 12 UTC

Below 800 hPa, strong positive bias Max.: 6.1 degree, smaller as 00 UTC Below 800 hPa, strong positive bias Max.: 10.1 degree Below 800 hPa, strong positive bias Max.: 10.6 degree, smaller than 00 UTC Below 900 hPa Winter negative bias Min.: -4.1 degree, Summer positive Below 900 hPa predominantly positive Max.: 8 degrees, Winter smaller or negative Below 900 hPa predominantly positive, Max.: 9 degrees, single months in winter positive

RMSE of LM-Wind Direction against MLA Temps 12 UTC

Overall rmse(MLA) is about 5-10 degrees greater than rmse(Temps) Below 400 hPa rmse(MLA) is equal to rmse(Temps) except Summer Above 400 hPa rmse(Temps) is partly greater than rmse(MLA)

Differences at Wind Direction Verification bias with annual cycle – below 800 hPa Analysis and Forecast against MLAS strong positive Analysis against Temps slight negative below 900 hPa, slight positve above against Temps Forecasts against Temps partly slight negativ(Winter) to slight positive(Summer) 12 UTC rmse with annual cycle –at Analysis overall degrees higher against MLA (wind is nudged to Temps) –at Forecasts higher rmse against Temps above 400 hPa –at Forecasts higher rmse against MLA in Summer

Summary Temperature Verification shows only few differences between the two measuring systems Wind Verification shows below 800 hPa great differences between the two measuring systems Regarding the Wind Verification results up to now (Synop, Temp) LM is more likely to underestimate wind velocity Regarding the verification against aircraft measurements it seems that aircraft measurements below 800 hPa underestimate wind velocity (up to 2 m/s in the boundary layer).