2022
DOI: 10.1029/2022jd037063
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of Polar Winter Mesopause Wind in WACCMX+DART

Abstract: This work evaluates zonal winds in both hemispheres near the polar winter mesopause in the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (WACCM) with thermosphere‐ionosphere eXtension combined with data assimilation using the Data Assimilation Research Testbed (DART) (WACCMX+DART). We compare 14 years (2006–2019) of WACCMX+DART zonal mean zonal winds near 90 km to zonal mean zonal winds derived from Sounding of the Atmosphere using Broadband Emission Radiometry (SABER) geopotential height measurements during Arctic… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
13
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

5
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 101 publications
5
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As a consequence, the higher-order GWs generated from the dissipation of the secondary GWs will have larger amplitudes for a stronger polar vortex. This interpretation is consistent with recent results of Harvey et al (2022) who argued that the effects from secondary GWs (which are neglected in models with GW parameterization) are less significant when the polar vortex is weak and perturbed. It is furthermore consistent with a recent comparison of mean winds in the MLT from radar observations and community models with parameterized GWs by Stober and Kuchar, et al (2021), who found larger model deficiencies in the southern than northern winter MLT.…”
Section: Summary and Concluding Remarkssupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As a consequence, the higher-order GWs generated from the dissipation of the secondary GWs will have larger amplitudes for a stronger polar vortex. This interpretation is consistent with recent results of Harvey et al (2022) who argued that the effects from secondary GWs (which are neglected in models with GW parameterization) are less significant when the polar vortex is weak and perturbed. It is furthermore consistent with a recent comparison of mean winds in the MLT from radar observations and community models with parameterized GWs by Stober and Kuchar, et al (2021), who found larger model deficiencies in the southern than northern winter MLT.…”
Section: Summary and Concluding Remarkssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…MSVC is essential to understand the GW activity in the winter middle and upper atmosphere (Becker & Vadas, 2018, 2020; Harvey et al., 2022; Vadas & Becker, 2018, 2019; Vadas et al., 2018, 2019). Since no GW parameterization exists to date that includes MSVC, a GW‐resolving whole‐atmosphere GCM is required to simulate this coupling.…”
Section: Summary and Concluding Remarksmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unfortunately, representation of the polar vortex in the upper mesosphere is generally not accurate in state-of-the-art global models. In fact, in many models the zonal winds blow in the wrong direction in the polar winter upper mesosphere (Harvey et al, 2022 and references therein) compared to observations. Important impacts of this easterly (westward) wind bias are 1) a reduction in the vertical extent of the MPV (Harvey et al, 2019), 2) an increase in the vertical wind shear, which alters the spectrum of GWs and PWs (e.g., Chandran et al, 2013), 3) persistent negative meridional potential vorticity gradients at mid-to-high latitudes, which can generate PWs via baroclinic or barotropic instability (e.g., Charney and Stern, 1962), and 4) a reduction in the amplitude of the migrating wavenumber two semidiurnal tide (SW2) in Arctic winter (Zhang et al, 2021).…”
Section: The Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This limits the use of such models to study the role of the MPV in constituent transport, wave-mean flow interactions, and vertical coupling mechanisms in the atmosphere-ionosphere system. An interesting aspect of the model easterly wind bias is that it varies as a function of time and is most egregious when the vortex is strong (Harvey et al, 2022). Figure 2 illustrates the relevant zonal wind and GW filtering processes during strong (left) and weak (right) polar vortices.…”
Section: The Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation