No abstract

[1] Present-day shortcomings in the representation of upper tropospheric ice clouds in general circulation models (GCMs) lead to errors in weather and climate forecasts as well as account for a source of uncertainty in climate change projections. An ongoing challenge in rectifying these shortcomings has been the availability of adequate, high-quality, global observations targeting ice clouds and related precipitating hydrometeors. In addition, the inadequacy of the modeled physics and the often disjointed nature between model representation and the characteristics of the retrieved/observed values have hampered GCM development and validation efforts from making effective use of the measurements that have been available. Thus, even though parameterizations in GCMs accounting for cloud ice processes have, in some cases, become more sophisticated in recent years, this development has largely occurred independently of the global-scale measurements. With the relatively recent addition of satellite-derived products from Aura/Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) and CloudSat, there are now considerably more resources with new and unique capabilities to evaluate GCMs. In this article, we illustrate the shortcomings evident in model representations of cloud ice through a comparison of the simulations assessed in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, briefly discuss the range of global observational resources that are available, and describe the essential components of the model parameterizations that characterize their ''cloud'' ice and related fields. Using this information as background, we (1) discuss some of the main considerations and cautions that must be taken into account in making model-data comparisons related to cloud ice, (2) illustrate present progress and uncertainties in applying satellite cloud ice (namely from MLS and CloudSat) to model diagnosis, (3) show some indications of model improvements, and finally (4) discuss a number of remaining questions and suggestions for pathways forward.

[1] Tracer variability above the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone is investigated using Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) measurements of carbon monoxide, ozone, water vapor, and temperature during Northern Hemisphere summer (June to August) of 2005. Observations show persistent maxima in carbon monoxide and minima in ozone within the anticyclone in the upper troposphere-lower stratosphere (UTLS) throughout summer, and variations in these tracers are closely related to the intensity of underlying deep convection. Temperatures in the UTLS are also closely coupled to deep convection (cold anomalies are linked with enhanced convection), and the three-dimensional temperature patterns are consistent with a dynamical response to near-equatorial convection. Upper tropospheric water vapor in the monsoon region is strongly coherent with deep convection, both spatially and temporally. However, at the altitude of the tropopause, maximum water vapor is centered within the anticyclone, distant from the deepest convection, and is also less temporally correlated with convective intensity. Because the main outflow of deep convection occurs near $12 km, well below the tropopause level ($16 km), we investigate the large-scale vertical transport within the anticyclone. The mean vertical circulation obtained from the ERA40 reanalysis data set and a free-running general circulation model is upward across the tropopause on the eastern end of the anticyclone, as part of the balanced threedimensional monsoon circulation. In addition to deep transport from the most intense convection, this large-scale circulation may help explain the transport of constituents to tropopause level.

[1] Using NASA's A-Train satellite measurements, we evaluate the accuracy of cloud water content (CWC) and water vapor mixing ratio (H 2 O) outputs from 19 climate models submitted to the Phase 5 of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5), and assess improvements relative to their counterparts for the earlier CMIP3. We find more than half of the models show improvements from CMIP3 to CMIP5 in simulating column-integrated cloud amount, while changes in water vapor simulation are insignificant. For the 19 CMIP5 models, the model spreads and their differences from the observations are larger in the upper troposphere (UT) than in the lower or middle troposphere (L/MT). The modeled mean CWCs over tropical oceans range from $3% to $15Â of the observations in the UT and 40% to 2Â of the observations in the L/MT. For modeled H 2 Os, the mean values over tropical oceans range from $1% to 2Â of the observations in the UT and within 10% of the observations in the L/MT. The spatial distributions of clouds at 215 hPa are relatively well-correlated with observations, noticeably better than those for the L/MT clouds. Although both water vapor and clouds are better simulated in the L/MT than in the UT, there is no apparent correlation between the model biases in clouds and water vapor. Numerical scores are used to compare different model performances in regards to spatial mean, variance and distribution of CWC and H 2 O over tropical oceans. Model performances at each pressure level are ranked according to the average of all the relevant scores for that level.Citation: Jiang, J. H., et al. (2012), Evaluation of cloud and water vapor simulations in CMIP5 climate models using NASA "A-Train" satellite observations,

[1] The validation of version 2.2 (v2.2) H 2 O measurements from the Earth Observing System (EOS) Microwave Limb Sounder (Aura MLS) on the Aura satellite are presented.Results from comparisons made with Aqua Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS), Vaisala radiosondes, frost point hygrometer, and WB57 aircraft hygrometers are presented. Comparisons with the Aura MLS v1.5 H 2 O, Goddard global modeling and assimilation office Earth Observing System analyses (GEOS-5) are also discussed. For H 2 O mixing ratios less than 500 ppmv, the MLS v2.2 has an accuracy better than 25% between 316 and 147 hPa. The precision is 65% at 316 hPa that reduces to 25% at 147 hPa. This performance is better than expected from MLS measurement systematic error analyses. MLS overestimates H 2 O for mixing ratios greater than 500 ppmv which is consistent with a scaling error in either the calibrated or calculated MLS radiances. The validation of the accuracy of MLS v2.2 H 2 O from 121 to 83 hPa which is expected to be better than 15% cannot be confirmed at this time because of large disagreements among the hygrometers used in the AVE campaigns. The precision of the v2.2 H 2 O from 121 to 83 hPa is 10-20%. The vertical resolution is 1.5-3.5 km depending on height. The horizontal resolution is 210 Â 7 km 2 along and perpendicular to the Aura orbit track, respectively. Relative humidity is calculated from H 2 O and temperature. The precision, accuracy, and spatial resolution are worse than for H 2 O.Citation: Read, W. G., et al. (2007), Aura Microwave Limb Sounder upper tropospheric and lower stratospheric H 2 O and relative humidity with respect to ice validation,