Abstract. A new global high-resolution coupled climate model, EC-Earth3P-HR has been developed by the EC-Earth consortium, with a resolution of approximately 40 km for the atmosphere and 0.25∘ for the ocean, alongside with a standard-resolution version of the model, EC-Earth3P (80 km atmosphere, 1.0∘ ocean). The model forcing and simulations follow the High Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP) protocol. According to this protocol, all simulations are made with both high and standard resolutions. The model has been optimized with respect to scalability, performance, data storage and post-processing. In accordance with the HighResMIP protocol, no specific tuning for the high-resolution version has been applied. Increasing horizontal resolution does not result in a general reduction of biases and overall improvement of the variability, and deteriorating impacts can be detected for specific regions and phenomena such as some Euro-Atlantic weather regimes, whereas others such as the El Niño–Southern Oscillation show a clear improvement in their spatial structure. The omission of specific tuning might be responsible for this. The shortness of the spin-up, as prescribed by the HighResMIP protocol, prevented the model from reaching equilibrium. The trend in the control and historical simulations, however, appeared to be similar, resulting in a warming trend, obtained by subtracting the control from the historical simulation, close to the observational one.

Sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) are characterized by a pronounced increase of the stratospheric polar temperature during the winter season. Different definitions have been used in the literature to diagnose the occurrence of SSWs, yielding discrepancies in the detected events. The aim of this paper is to compare the SSW climatologies obtained by different methods using reanalysis data. The occurrences of Northern Hemisphere SSWs during the extended-winter season and the 1958–2014 period have been identified for a suite of eight representative definitions and three different reanalyses. Overall, and despite the differences in the number and exact dates of occurrence of SSWs, the main climatological signatures of SSWs are not sensitive to the considered reanalysis. The mean frequency of SSWs is 6.7 events decade−1, but it ranges from 4 to 10 events, depending on the method. The seasonal cycle of events is statistically indistinguishable across definitions, with a common peak in January. However, the multidecadal variability is method dependent, with only two definitions displaying minimum frequencies in the 1990s. An analysis of the mean signatures of SSWs in the stratosphere revealed negligible differences among methods compared to the large case-to-case variability within a given definition. The stronger and more coherent tropospheric signals before and after SSWs are associated with major events, which are detected by most methods. The tropospheric signals of minor SSWs are less robust, representing the largest source of discrepancy across definitions. Therefore, to obtain robust results, future studies on stratosphere–troposphere coupling should aim to minimize the detection of minor warmings.

The predictability of the Northern Hemisphere stratosphere and its underlying dynamics are investigated in five state-of-the-art seasonal prediction systems from the Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) multi-model database. Special attention is devoted to the connection between the stratospheric polar vortex (SPV) and lower-stratosphere wave activity (LSWA). We find that in winter (December to February) dynamical forecasts initialised on the first of November are considerably more skilful than empirical forecasts based on October anomalies. Moreover, the coupling of the SPV with mid-latitude LSWA (i.e., meridional eddy heat flux) is generally well reproduced by the forecast systems, allowing for the identification of a robust link between the predictability of wave activity above the tropopause and the SPV skill. Our results highlight the importance of November-to-February LSWA, in particular in the Eurasian sector, for forecasts of the winter stratosphere. Finally, the role of potential sources of seasonal stratospheric predictability is considered: we find that the C3S multi-model overestimates the stratospheric response to El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and underestimates the influence of the Quasi–Biennial Oscillation (QBO).

Abstract. Major sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) represent one of the most abrupt phenomena of the boreal wintertime stratospheric variability, and constitute the clearest example of coupling between the stratosphere and the troposphere. A good representation of SSWs in climate models is required to reduce their biases and uncertainties in future projections of stratospheric variability. The ability of models to reproduce these phenomena is usually assessed with just one reanalysis. However, the number of reanalyses has increased in the last decade and their own biases may affect the model evaluation. Here we compare the representation of the main aspects of SSWs across reanalyses. The examination of their main characteristics in the pre- and post-satellite periods reveals that reanalyses behave very similarly in both periods. However, discrepancies are larger in the pre-satellite period compared to afterwards, particularly for the NCEP-NCAR reanalysis. All datasets reproduce similarly the specific features of wavenumber-1 and wavenumber-2 SSWs. A good agreement among reanalyses is also found for triggering mechanisms, tropospheric precursors, and surface response. In particular, differences in blocking precursor activity of SSWs across reanalyses are much smaller than between blocking definitions.