Misaligment modelingMean Pitch offset: -23 mdeg, corresponds to about 1.5 – 1.6 km TH offset Subsolar pitch offset value: -19 mdeg, about 1.3 km TRUE vs. 1.6, L1 vs – 1.7 km TH offset corresponding to a pitch offset of about 25 mdeg at tropical latitudes O 3 validation, Ghassan Taha IFE 1.62, L1 vs. 5.04, no pointing correction IFE 1.63, L1 vs. 5.04, TRUE pointing correction SAGE II and III: 1.7 – 1.8 km TH shift (little latitudinal variation) About 0.5 km TH shift, weak latitudinal varation with zero additional shift at high northern latitudes. O 3 validation, Coralie de Clercq OL 3.0, L1 vs. 6.0x At paramaribo about 1 km additional TH offset O 3 validation, Anne van Gijsel OL 3.0, IFE 1.63, L1 vs. 6.0x 1 km (not apparently dependent on latitude, but with large scatter) O 3 validation, Astrid Bracher L1 vs. 6.0x HALOE: tropics: SCIA O 3 peak perhaps 0.5 – 1 km too high, GOMOS: tropics: SCIA O 3 peak too high by 0.5 – 1 km Tropical latitudes All results consistent with with an additional 600 m – 800 m TH correction in the tropics

Misaligment modelingMean Pitch offset: -23 mdeg, corresponds to about 1.5 – 1.6 km TH offset Solar occultation pitch: -27 mdeg, about 1.8 km TRUE vs. 1.6, L1 vs – 1.5 km TH offset corresponding to a pitch offset of about 15 – 20 mdeg, but results questionable O 3 validation, Ghassan Taha IFE 1.63, L1 vs. 5.04, TRUE pointing correction SAGE II and III: zero additional shift at high northern latitudes, i.e. 1 km correction of L1 vs. 6.0x seems sufficient O 3 validation, Coralie de Clercq OL 3.0, L1 vs. 6.0x Basically no correction required at mid and high northern latitudes O 3 validation, Anne van Gijsel OL 3.0, IFE 1.63, L1 vs. 6.0x 1 km (not apparently dependent on latitude, but with large scatter, particularly at higher northern latitudes) O 3 validation, Astrid Bracher L1 vs. 6.0x HALOE: SCIA O 3 peak 0.5 – 1 km too low GOMOS: SCIA O 3 peak 0.5 – 1 km too low Extra-tropical latitudes NH No consistent picture

Misaligment modelingMean Pitch offset: -23 mdeg, corresponds to about 1.5 – 1.6 km TH offset No data available for SH TRUE vs. 1.6, L1 vs – 1.5 km TH offset, but results questionable O 3 validation, Ghassan Taha IFE 1.63, L1 vs. 5.04, TRUE pointing correction SAGE II and III: About 1 km additional offset on top of L1 vs. 6.0x correction O 3 validation, Coralie de Clercq OL 3.0, L1 vs. 6.0x ? O 3 validation, Anne van Gijsel OL 3.0, IFE 1.63, L1 vs. 6.0x At Lauder about 1 km additional offset on top of L1 vs. 6.0x O 3 validation, Astrid Bracher L1 vs. 6.0x HALOE: Inconclusive GOMOS: Inconclusive Extra-tropical latitudes SH No consistent picture

State 47 elevation jumps Stefan Noel Elevation jumps about mdeg, leading to about 23 mdeg pitch offset Solar occultation TH offset mdeg, leading to about 23 mdeg pitch offset (with roll misalignment of M. Gottwald) TRUE vs – 1.7 km TH offset corresponding to a pitch offset of about 25 mdeg at tropical latitudes O3 validation, Ghassan Taha IFE 1.62, L1 vs. 5.04, no pointing correction IFE 1.63, L1 vs. 5.04, TRUE pointing correction SAGE II and III: 1.7 – 1.8 km TH shift About 0.5 km TH shift, weak latitudinal varation with zero additional shift at high northern latitudes. O3 validation, Coralie de Clercq OL 3.0, L1 vs. 6.0x Only paramaribo sticks out, about 1 km additional TH offset, other stations O3 validation, Anne van Gijsel OL 3.0, IFE 1.63, 1 km (not apparently dependent on latitude, but with large scatter) O3 validation, Astrid Bracher L1 vs. 6.0x HALOE comparison: tropics: SCIA O3 peak perhaps 0.5 – 1 km too high, mid-lat in SH: no shift, high NH: SCIA O3 preak 0.5 – 1 km too low GOMOS: tropics: SCIA O3 peak too high by 0.5 – 1 km, mid-lat south: no apparent shift: high NH: SCIA profile shifted down