2019
DOI: 10.1002/qj.3634
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The prospects for increasing the horizontal resolution of the Aeolus horizontal line‐of‐sight wind profiles

Abstract: This article evaluates the prospects for increasing the horizontal resolution of the Aeolus horizontal line‐of‐sight (HLOS) wind profiles at the expense of their accuracy. The evaluation is performed by combining a 10‐day atmosphere simulation by the ECMWF model at T3999 horizontal resolution with the CALIPSO observations of atmospheric composition as inputs to the Aeolus simulator. The validation shows that the ECMWF model represents the location and the vertical structure of the observed cloud systems well. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
(63 reference statements)
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Decreasing the horizontal averaging length of the Mie‐cloudy winds from typically 50 to 12 km on 5 March 2019 gave a factor 2–3 increase in the number of winds and only led to a small increase (∼5%) in standard deviation of O–B, which is because the cloud backscatter is sufficiently strong to not be a limiting factor in the wind errors (this agrees with pre‐launch predictions in Šavli et al . (2019)). Figure 3 shows an increase in random error occurred on 16 May 2020 associated with a processing baseline update involving the application of a new Mie calibration file to decrease systematic errors.…”
Section: Assessment Of Hlos Wind Retrieval Error Statisticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Decreasing the horizontal averaging length of the Mie‐cloudy winds from typically 50 to 12 km on 5 March 2019 gave a factor 2–3 increase in the number of winds and only led to a small increase (∼5%) in standard deviation of O–B, which is because the cloud backscatter is sufficiently strong to not be a limiting factor in the wind errors (this agrees with pre‐launch predictions in Šavli et al . (2019)). Figure 3 shows an increase in random error occurred on 16 May 2020 associated with a processing baseline update involving the application of a new Mie calibration file to decrease systematic errors.…”
Section: Assessment Of Hlos Wind Retrieval Error Statisticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The resulting HLOS wind is therefore a horizontal average over 86.4 km. For the Mie channel, the horizontal integration length of the wind measurements was decreased to approximately 10 km after 5 March 2019, taking benefit of the higher signal to noise ratio of cloud returns (Matic et al, 2019). In addition to the HLOS https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2020-404 Preprint.…”
Section: Aeolus L2b Wind Productmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rayleigh‐clear and Mie‐cloudy winds are currently the only two types of Aeolus winds that are assimilated into the ECMWF model for operational weather forecasts (Rennie et al ., 2021). Furthermore, at the accumulation length of Aeolus (∼90 km), the less‐accurate Rayleigh‐clear channel provides up to four times more observations than the Mie‐cloudy channel (Savli et al ., 2019). Based on these considerations, only Rayleigh‐clear and Mie‐cloudy winds were extracted to evaluate and apply VarQC in our study.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%