2000
DOI: 10.1029/2000jd900062
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

No evidence for solar absorption anomaly by marine water clouds through collocated aircraft radiation measurements

Abstract: Abstract.No In this study, for the first time, we present direct observational evidence that clearly shows no existence of anomalous solar absorption for this particular case of maritime water clouds. Solar radiation budget has been precisely measured by using two stacked aircraft for wintertime stratiform clouds over an area in the southern part of the East China Sea in the Japanese Cloud-Climate Study (JACCS) program, which is a 14,761

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2007
2007

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Considering that model calculations of the situation on this day give values on the order of 185 W m À2 , these results represented a very large deviation from existing theory, which led to the suggestion that some completely unknown absorber or physical process must be at work in the atmosphere. However, subsequent aircraft experiments by the British [Francis et al, 1997] and the Japanese [Asano et al, 2000] showed no deviation of measured from calculated absorption that exceeded more than about 10%. The situation was further complicated by the fact that later analyses of the ARESE data indicated that the fluxes measured by the downward-looking total solar broadband radiometer on the Egrett on the single overcast day (30 October) were not consistent with GOES satellite data [Valero et al, 2000] or data from a short-wave spectrometer that was also downward looking from the Egrett aircraft [Li et al, 1999;O'Hirok et al, 2000].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Considering that model calculations of the situation on this day give values on the order of 185 W m À2 , these results represented a very large deviation from existing theory, which led to the suggestion that some completely unknown absorber or physical process must be at work in the atmosphere. However, subsequent aircraft experiments by the British [Francis et al, 1997] and the Japanese [Asano et al, 2000] showed no deviation of measured from calculated absorption that exceeded more than about 10%. The situation was further complicated by the fact that later analyses of the ARESE data indicated that the fluxes measured by the downward-looking total solar broadband radiometer on the Egrett on the single overcast day (30 October) were not consistent with GOES satellite data [Valero et al, 2000] or data from a short-wave spectrometer that was also downward looking from the Egrett aircraft [Li et al, 1999;O'Hirok et al, 2000].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The Twin Otter aircraft flew a daisy pattern (Figure 1) over the central facility at maximum altitude (about 7 km) and then typically flew a few legs at low altitude (limited to about 0.4 km) on each day of the experiment. The Twin Otter carried three different aircraft sets of upward and downward-looking solar radiometers: (1) the Total Shortwave Broadband Radiometer [TSBR; Valero et al, 2003], (2) the CM21 instruments of the Meteorological Institute (MRI) of Japan [Asano et al, 2000], and (3) the CM22 instruments of Sandia National Laboratory. The CM21 and CM22 are commercial instruments manufactured by Kipp and Zonen.…”
Section: The Arese II Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The flight pattern strategy used in the field experiment was the same as that previously described in details by Asano et al [2000]. At the start of the experiment, the B200 performed in situ measurements of cloud microphysical structures at several flight levels in the cloudy layer.…”
Section: Microphysical and Optical Properties Of Two Cases Of Boundarmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, although Francis et al (1997) reported aircraft experiments that showed measured cloud absorptions greater than values predicted by models, the discrepancies were much smaller than those suggested in previous studies. Asano et al (2000) analysed collocated aircraft measurements of marine stratocumulus and radiative fluxes made in 1998 over the Sea of Japan and found no evidence of excess solar absorption from clouds. One limitation of all of these field studies is that they are restricted to low-level water clouds, whereas the empirical studies that were suggesting strong excess solar absorption Pilewski and Valero, 1995;Ramanathan et al, 1995) included low as well as mid-level and high clouds.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%