Ice clouds are an important yet largely unvalidated component of weather forecasting and climate models, but radar offers the potential to provide the necessary data to evaluate them. First in this paper, coordinated aircraft in situ measurements and scans by a 3-GHz radar are presented, demonstrating that, for stratiform midlatitude ice clouds, radar reflectivity in the Rayleigh-scattering regime may be reliably calculated from aircraft size spectra if the “Brown and Francis” mass–size relationship is used. The comparisons spanned radar reflectivity values from −15 to +20 dBZ, ice water contents (IWCs) from 0.01 to 0.4 g m−3, and median volumetric diameters between 0.2 and 3 mm. In mixed-phase conditions the agreement is much poorer because of the higher-density ice particles present. A large midlatitude aircraft dataset is then used to derive expressions that relate radar reflectivity and temperature to ice water content and visible extinction coefficient. The analysis is an advance over previous work in several ways: the retrievals vary smoothly with both input parameters, different relationships are derived for the common radar frequencies of 3, 35, and 94 GHz, and the problem of retrieving the long-term mean and the horizontal variance of ice cloud parameters is considered separately. It is shown that the dependence on temperature arises because of the temperature dependence of the number concentration “intercept parameter” rather than mean particle size. A comparison is presented of ice water content derived from scanning 3-GHz radar with the values held in the Met Office mesoscale forecast model, for eight precipitating cases spanning 39 h over southern England. It is found that the model predicted mean IWC to within 10% of the observations at temperatures between −30° and −10°C but tended to underestimate it by around a factor of 2 at colder temperatures.

Abstract. We describe Global Atmosphere 6.0 and Global Land 6.0 (GA6.0/GL6.0): the latest science configurations of the Met Office Unified Model and JULES (Joint UK Land Environment Simulator) land surface model developed for use across all timescales. Global Atmosphere 6.0 includes the ENDGame (Even Newer Dynamics for General atmospheric modelling of the environment) dynamical core, which significantly increases mid-latitude variability improving a known model bias. Alongside developments of the model's physical parametrisations, ENDGame also increases variability in the tropics, which leads to an improved representation of tropical cyclones and other tropical phenomena. Further developments of the atmospheric and land surface parametrisations improve other aspects of model performance, including the forecasting of surface weather phenomena. We also describe GA6.1/GL6.1, which includes a small number of long-standing differences from our main trunk configurations that we continue to require for operational global weather prediction. Since July 2014, GA6.1/GL6.1 has been used by the Met Office for operational global numerical weather prediction, whilst GA6.0/GL6.0 was implemented in its remaining global prediction systems over the following year.

Abstract. In this paper we define the first Regional Atmosphere and Land (RAL) science configuration for kilometre-scale modelling using the Unified Model (UM) as the basis for the atmosphere and the Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES) for the land. RAL1 defines the science configuration of the dynamics and physics schemes of the atmosphere and land. This configuration will provide a model baseline for any future weather or climate model developments to be described against, and it is the intention that from this point forward significant changes to the system will be documented in the literature. This reproduces the process used for global configurations of the UM, which was first documented as a science configuration in 2011. While it is our goal to have a single defined configuration of the model that performs effectively in all regions, this has not yet been possible. Currently we define two sub-releases, one for mid-latitudes (RAL1-M) and one for tropical regions (RAL1-T). The differences between RAL1-M and RAL1-T are documented, and where appropriate we define how the model configuration relates to the corresponding configuration of the global forecasting model.

Abstract. We describe Global Atmosphere 6.0 and Global Land 6.0: the latest science configurations of the Met Office Unified Model and JULES land surface model developed for use across all timescales. Global Atmosphere 6.0 includes the ENDGame dynamical core, which significantly increases mid-latitude variability improving a known model bias. Alongside developments of the model’s physical parametrisations, ENDGame also increases variability in the tropics, which leads to an improved representation of tropical cyclones and other tropical phenomena. Further developments of the atmospheric and land surface parametrisations improve other aspects of model performance, including the forecasting of surface weather phenomena. We also describe Global Atmosphere 6.1 and Global Land 6.1, which include a small number of long-standing differences from our main trunk configurations that we continue to require for operational global weather prediction. Since July 2014, GA6.1/GL6.1 has been used by the Met Office for operational global NWP, whilst GA6.0/GL6.0 was implemented in its remaining global prediction systems over the following year.

The fractions skill score (FSS) was one of the measures that formed part of the Intercomparison of Spatial Forecast Verification Methods project. The FSS was used to assess a common dataset that consisted of real and perturbed Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model precipitation forecasts, as well as geometric cases. These datasets are all based on the NCEP 240 grid, which translates to approximately 4-km resolution over the contiguous United States.The geometric cases showed that the FSS can provide a truthful assessment of displacement errors and forecast skill. In addition, the FSS can be used to determine the scale at which an acceptable level of skill is reached and this usage is perhaps more helpful than interpreting the actual FSS value. This spatial-scale approach is becoming more popular for monitoring operational forecast performance.The study also shows how the FSS responds to forecast bias. A more biased forecast always gives lower FSS values at large scales and usually at smaller scales. It is possible, however, for a more biased forecast to give a higher score at smaller scales, when additional rain overlaps the observed rain. However, given a sufficiently large sample of forecasts, a more biased forecast system will score lower. The use of percentile thresholds can remove the impacts of the bias.When the proportion of the domain that is ''wet'' (the wet-area ratio) is small, subtle differences introduced through near-threshold misses can lead to large changes in FSS magnitude in individual cases (primarily because the bias is changed). Reliable statistics for small wet-area ratios require a larger sample of forecasts.Care needs to be taken in the choice of verification domain. For high-resolution models, the domain should be large enough to encompass the length scale of the typical mesoscale forcing (e.g., upper-level troughs or squall lines). If the domain is too large, the wet-area ratios will always be small. If the domain is too small, fluctuations in the wet-area ratio can be large and larger spatial errors may be missed.The FSS is a good measure of the spatial accuracy of precipitation forecasts. Different methods are needed to determine other patterns of behavior.