SABER Instrument Performance and Measurement Requirements

SABER Instrument In-Orbit Performance Is Excellent 75 kg, 77 watts, 77 x 104 x 63 cm, 4 kbs - SABER instrument is performing in orbit as designed -FPA temperatures are being held steady at ~ 74K by the cooler -Cooler performance excellent and stable -Scan system is performing well -Noise performance is excellent -Data collection is routine No instrument anomalies Experiment Status

SABER Instrument Focal Plane Temperature Stability

SABER Instrument Refrigerator Cold Link Efficiency Trend

SABER Instrument Refrigerator Compressor Stroke Time Trend

SABER Instrument Limb Scan Mirror Subsystem Performance Scan mirror changes usually affect < ~ 100 scans per day and cause no data loss. No time trend evident. January 2002 to January 2003January 2003 to January 2004

ChannelParameter Jan 8, 2002 * April 25, 2002 * Jan 24, 2004 * 1CO2 N CO2 W CO2 W O H2O NO CO2 (4.3  m) OH(A) OH(B) O2( 1  ) SABER Noise Performance In-Orbit is Stable * RMS Counts Gains set to noise = 3 counts. All channels met or exceeded specifications. In-orbit performance slightly better than laboratory.

Parameter Altitude Range (km) Estimated Accuracy Mean Diff. With Correlative Data Correlative Data Source Temperature10 – K, km 4.0 K, km K Lidar, NCEP, GPS, HALOE O 3 (9.6  m) 15 – %, km 30%, km 30% Lidar, HALOE O 3 (1.27  m) 50 – 9520%, km30% HALOE H2OH2O15 – 80 20%, 15 – 70 km 30%, 70 – 80 km 30% HALOE CO 2 85 – 15030%, 95 – 140 km??% TIME-GCM *, CWAS rocket SABER temperature and constituent accuracies inferred from correlative data comparisons * Qualitative comparison only

Coincidence 0.4 hour 1 o latitude 2 o longitude SABER LTE Temperature Compared With Lidar at Mauna Loa on April 19, 2002

SABER and UKMO temperatures at 10 mb (~30 km) show close agreement SABERUKMO

SABER V1.04 mapped geopotential height and derived geostrophic winds at ~65 km February 5, 2002 February 12, 2002 Geopotential HeightGeostrophic Winds

Parameter Measurement Range Estimated Accuracy Observed Accuracy Current (Potential) OH(v), 1.06  m OH(v), 2.10  m 80 – 100 km3%, km 10%, km 10%(3%) ___(20%) O 2 ( 1  )* 50 – 105 km3%, km10%(3%) O3 (9.6  m) (Night) 15 – 100 km3%, km3-7% CO 2 (15  m) 15 – 120 km3%, 90 – 120 km3-7% km CO 2 (4.3  m) (Day) 85 – 150 km3%, 95 – 140 km3-5% * Applies to daytime, nighttime and twilight SABER Energetics (Energy Loss Rate) Accuracies Based on Laboratory and In-Flight Calibration Potential -High altitudes still contaminated by “hysteresis” and off-axis scatter. Corrections expected to reduce uncertainty to “potential” values

Parameter Measurement Range Estimated Precision Observed In-Orbit Precision Temperature10 – 100 km 0.5K, km 1K, km 2K, km 1K, km 2K, km 5K, km O 3 (9.6  m) 15 – 100 km 5%, km 20%, km 5%, km 20%, km O 3 (1.27  m) 50 – 95 km 10%, km 15%, km 10%, km 5%, km H2OH2O15 – 80 km 10%, km 25% km 10%, km 25% km CO km10%, km SABER Temperature and Constituent Estimated and Observed Precisions

Parameter Measurement Range Estimated Precision Observed In-Orbit Precision OH(v), 1.06  m OH(v), 2.10  m 80 – 100 km 0.5%, km 5%, km 1.0%, km 10%, km O 2 ( 1  ) 50 – 105 km 0.05%, km 0.2%, km 1%, 80 – 90 km 0.05%, km 0.2%, km 3.0%, 80 – 90 km O 3 (9.6  m) (Night) 15 – 100 km 0.5%, km 2%, km 1.2%, km 5.0%, km CO 2 (15  m) 15 – 120 km 3%, km5.0%, km NO90 – 180 km 3%, km 5%, 150 – 170 km 1.4%, km 5.0%, 150 – 170 km CO 2 (4.3  m) (Day) 85 – 150 km 10%, km4.0%, km (Day) SABER Energetics (Energy Loss Rate) Estimated and Observed Precisions

SABER Instrument understanding near a mature stage Substantial progress made in removing known artifacts arising due to instrument effects - Made important corrections to IFC BB emissivities; T, O 3, H 2 O - Knowledge of channel vertical alignment shown to be accurate -Moon scans provided excellent knowledge of off-axis signals due to FOV side lobes and mirror scatter - Detector focal plane ice build-up due to “trapped” water vapor “in-hand” - High altitude radiance bias in short wave channels; 20 x noise up, 7 x noise down scan - Possible O 3 spectral effect remaining

SABER Focal Plane Channel Locations # 4 O  m # 5 H 2 O 6.8  m # 2 CO 2 - W 15.0  m # 6 NO 5.3  m # 1 CO 2 - N 15.2  m # 3 CO 2 - W 15.0  m# 7 CO  m # 8 OH(A) 2.07  m# 9 OH(B) 1.64  m # 10 O 2 ( 1  ) 1.28  m 1.49 o 2 60 km

Effects of off-axis scatter on high altitude Signals in the OH and O2( 1  ) channels

SABER O 3 channel Lunar scan FOV Data

SABER CO 2 W channel Lunar scan FOV Data

SABER Lunar and Laboratory derived FOV functions LunarLaboratory

Calculated water ice transmission compared to observed SABER values 1  m thick ice layer

SABER CO 2 W Responsitivity Changes Since Launch

SABER responsivity slopes are steadily decreasing after each power down Responsivity slope Time

SABER Up and Down Scan Radiance Comparison for the O 2 ( 1  ) channel Date: , Orbit Channel 10 Day

SABER O 3 channel spectral response data Wavenumber cm -1 O 3 Relative Spectral Response