MOD06 Cloud Top Properties Richard Frey Paul Menzel Bryan Baum University of Wisconsin - Madison.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Steve Ackerman, Bryan A. Baum, Éva E. Borbás, Rich Frey, Liam Gumley, Andrew Heidinger, Robert Holz, Anikó Kern, W. Paul Menzel, Brent Maddux, Chris Moeller,
Advertisements

 nm)  nm) PurposeSpatial Resolution (km) Ozone, SO 2, UV8 3251Ozone8 3403Aerosols, UV, and Volcanic Ash8 3883Aerosols, Clouds, UV and Volcanic.
Daytime Cloud Shadow Detection With MODIS Denis Grljusic Philipps University Marburg, Germany Kathy Strabala, Liam Gumley CIMSS Paul Menzel NOAA / NESDIS.
MODIS/AIRS Workshop MODIS Level 2 Cloud Product 6 April 2006 Kathleen Strabala Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies University of.
1 An initial CALIPSO cloud climatology ISCCP Anniversary, July 2008, New York Dave Winker NASA LaRC.
Validation of CrIMSS sounding products of Cloud contamination and angle dependency Zhenglong Li, Jun Li, and Yue Li University of Wisconsin -
Cloud Masking and Cloud Products MODIS Operational Algorithm MOD35 Paul Menzel, Steve Ackerman, Richard Frey, Kathy Strabala, Chris Moeller, Liam Gumley,
Geoscience Australia Md Anisul Islam Geoscience Australia Evaluation of IMAPP Cloud Cover Mapping Algorithm for Local application. Australian Government.
WP 3000 Macroscopic Parameter Retrieval Jane Hurley, Anu Dudhia, Don Grainger University of Oxford.
Retrieval of Macrophysical Cloud Parameters. Aim to retrieve most obvious macrophysical cloud properties: Cloud Top Height CTH (relative to instrument.
MODIS Regional and Global Cloud Variability Brent C. Maddux 1,2 Steve Platnick 3, Steven A. Ackerman 1,2, Paul Menzel 1, Kathy Strabala 1, Richard Frey.
Cloud Top Height Retrieval From MIPAS Jane Hurley, Anu Dudhia, Graham Ewen, Don Grainger Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, University of Oxford.
Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies University of Wisconsin - Madison E. Eva Borbas, Zhenglong Li and W. Paul Menzel Cooperative.
Ten Years of Cloud Optical/Microphysical Measurements from MODIS M. D. King 1, S. Platnick 2, and the entire MOD06 Team 1 Laboratory for Atmospheric and.
Cloud algorithms and applications for TEMPO Joanna Joiner, Alexander Vasilkov, Nick Krotkov, Sergey Marchenko, Eun-Su Yang, Sunny Choi (NASA GSFC)
Extending HIRS High Cloud Trends with MODIS Donald P. Wylie Richard Frey Hong Zhang W. Paul Menzel 12 year trends Effects of orbit drift and ancillary.
HIRS Observations of Clouds since 1978 Donald P. Wylie & W. Paul Menzel Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies NOAA/NESDIS University.
Applications and Limitations of Satellite Data Professor Ming-Dah Chou January 3, 2005 Department of Atmospheric Sciences National Taiwan University.
Diagnosing Climate Change from Satellite Sounding Measurements – From Filter Radiometers to Spectrometers William L. Smith Sr 1,2., Elisabeth Weisz 1,
Orbit Characteristics and View Angle Effects on the Global Cloud Field
New Products from combined MODIS/AIRS Jun Li, Chian-Yi Liu, Allen Huang, Xuebao Wu, and Liam Gumley Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite.
AGU 2002 Fall Meeting NASA Langley Research Center / Atmospheric Sciences Validation of GOES-8 Derived Cloud Properties Over the Southeastern Pacific J.
CloudSat/VIIRS CBH Validation Activities at CIRA Curtis Seaman, Yoo-Jeong Noh, Steve Miller, Dan Lindsey 10 September 2012.
An Estimate of Contrail Coverage over the Contiguous United States David Duda, Konstantin Khlopenkov, Thad Chee SSAI, Hampton, VA Patrick Minnis NASA LaRC,
Estimation of Cloud and Precipitation From Warm Clouds in Support of the ABI: A Pre-launch Study with A-Train Zhanqing Li, R. Chen, R. Kuligowski, R. Ferraro,
Cloud Top Properties Bryan A. Baum NASA Langley Research Center Paul Menzel NOAA Richard Frey, Hong Zhang CIMSS University of Wisconsin-Madison MODIS Science.
1 Optimal Channel Selection. 2 Redundancy “Information Content” vs. “On the diagnosis of the strength of the measurements in an observing system through.
March 18, 2003 MODIS Atmosphere, St. Michaels MD Infrared Retrieval of Temperature, Moisture, Ozone, and Total Precipitable Water: Recent Update and Status.
USE OF AIRS/AMSU DATA FOR WEATHER AND CLIMATE RESEARCH Joel Susskind University of Maryland May 12, 2005.
Andrew Heidinger and Michael Pavolonis
Status of improving the use of MODIS, AVHRR, and VIIRS polar winds in the GDAS/GFS David Santek, Brett Hoover, Sharon Nebuda, James Jung Cooperative Institute.
Hyperspectral Infrared Alone Cloudy Sounding Algorithm Development Objective and Summary To prepare for the synergistic use of data from the high-temporal.
Testing LW fingerprinting with simulated spectra using MERRA Seiji Kato 1, Fred G. Rose 2, Xu Liu 1, Martin Mlynczak 1, and Bruce A. Wielicki 1 1 NASA.
Retrieval of Methane Distributions from IASI
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Using CALIPSO to Explore the Sensitivity to Cirrus Height in the Infrared.
Jinlong Li 1, Jun Li 1, Christopher C. Schmidt 1, Timothy J. Schmit 2, and W. Paul Menzel 2 1 Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies.
CBH statistics for the Provisional Review Curtis Seaman, Yoo-Jeong Noh, Steve Miller and Dan Lindsey CIRA/Colorado State University 12/27/2013.
Using Ship Tracks to Characterize the Effects of Haze on Cloud Properties Matthew W. Christensen, James A. Coakley, Jr., Matthew S. Segrin, William R.
Cloud Mask: Results, Frequency, Bit Mapping, and Validation UW Cloud Mask Working Group.
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office Goddard Space Flight Center National Aeronautics and Space Administration Recent Advances towards the Assimilation.
Cloud optical properties: modeling and sensitivity study Ping Yang Texas A&M University May 28,2003 Madison, Wisconsin.
Cloud Products and Applications: moving from POES to NPOESS (A VIIRS/NOAA-biased perspective) Andrew Heidinger, Fuzhong Weng NOAA/NESDIS Office of Research.
Using MODIS and AIRS for cloud property characterization Jun W. Paul Menzel #, Steve Chian-Yi and Institute.
X X X Cloud Variables Top pressure Cloud type Effective radius
Bryan A. Baum, Richard Frey, Robert Holz Space Science and Engineering Center University of Wisconsin-Madison Paul Menzel NOAA Many other colleagues MODIS.
Initial Analysis of the Pixel-Level Uncertainties in Global MODIS Cloud Optical Thickness and Effective Particle Size Retrievals Steven Platnick 1, Robert.
MODIS Preprocessing (before L1B) Changes over the Last Year (and looking forward) Chris Moeller and others CIMSS; Univ. Wisconsin July 13, 2004 Thanks.
Visible optical depth,  Optically thicker clouds correlate with colder tops Ship tracks Note, retrievals done on cloudy pixels which are spatially uniform.
Validation of Satellite-derived Clear-sky Atmospheric Temperature Inversions in the Arctic Yinghui Liu 1, Jeffrey R. Key 2, Axel Schweiger 3, Jennifer.
Cloud property retrieval from hyperspectral IR measurements Jun Li, Peng Zhang, Chian-Yi Liu, Xuebao Wu and CIMSS colleagues Cooperative Institute for.
S. Platnick 1, M. D. King 1, J. Riedi 2, T. Arnold 1,3, B. Wind 1,3, G. Wind 1,3, P. Hubanks 1,3 and S. Ackerman 4, R. Frey 4, B. Baum 4, P. Menzel 4,5,
Ozone PEATE 2/20/20161 OMPS LP Release 2 - Status Matt DeLand (for the PEATE team) SSAI 5 December 2013.
Retrieval of cloud parameters from the new sensor generation satellite multispectral measurement F. ROMANO and V. CUOMO ITSC-XII Lorne, Victoria, Australia.
Developing a Dust Retrieval Algorithm Jeff Massey aka “El Jeffe”
UCLA Vector Radiative Transfer Models for Application to Satellite Data Assimilation K. N. Liou, S. C. Ou, Y. Takano and Q. Yue Department of Atmospheric.
Collect 5 Calibration Issues Chris Moeller and others Univ. Wisconsin March 22, 2005 Presented at MCST Calibration breakout meeting, March 22, 2005.
Satellite Data Assimilation Activities at CIMSS for FY2003 Robert M. Aune Advanced Satellite Products Team NOAA/NESDIS/ORA/ARAD Cooperative Institute for.
MODIS, AIRS, and Midlevel Cloud Phase Shaima Nasiri CIMSS/SSEC, UW-Madison Brian Kahn Jet Propulsion Laboratory MURI Hyperspectral Workshop 7-9 June, 2005.
Early Results from the MODIS Cloud Algorithms cloud detection optical, microphysical, and cloud top properties S. Platnick 5,2, S. A. Ackerman 1, M. D.
© 2014 RAL Space Study for the joint use of IASI, AMSU and MHS for OEM retrievals of temperature, humidity and ozone D. Gerber 1, R. Siddans 1, T. Hultberg.
Early MODIS Atmospheric Science Products: Radiances, Cloud Detection, Cloud Properties, and Atmospheric Profiles Steven A. Ackerman, Richard A. Frey, Liam.
Shaima Nasiri University of Wisconsin-Madison Bryan Baum NASA - Langley Research Center Detection of Overlapping Clouds with MODIS: TX-2002 MODIS Atmospheres.
AIRS – MODIS TEB Global Comparisons Chris Moeller Dave Tobin Univ. Wisconsin May 13, 2008 MODIS Calibration Mtg.
NASA, CGMS-44, 7 June 2016 Coordination Group for Meteorological Satellites - CGMS LIMB CORRECTION OF POLAR- ORBITING IMAGERY FOR THE IMPROVED INTERPRETATION.
MODIS Infrared Atmospheric Profiles and Water Vapor: Updates for Collection 5 Suzanne Seemann, Eva Borbas, Jun Li, Liam Gumley Cooperative Institute for.
1. Титульный..
Winds in the Polar Regions from MODIS: Atmospheric Considerations
AIRS Sounding and Cloud Property Study
HIRS Observations of a Decline in High Clouds since 1995 February 2002
Global training database for hyperspectral and multi-spectral atmospheric retrievals Suzanne Wetzel Seemann, Eva Borbas Allen Huang, Jun Li, Paul Menzel.
Presentation transcript:

MOD06 Cloud Top Properties Richard Frey Paul Menzel Bryan Baum University of Wisconsin - Madison

Different ratios reveal cloud properties at different levels hi /13.9 mid /13.6 low /13.3 Meas Calc p c (I 1 -I 1 clr )  1   1 dB 1 p s = p c (I 2 -I 2 clr )  2   2 dB 2 p s if (I clr - I ) < Δ then IRW is used CTPs using CO2 Slicing

MODIS Algorithm Improvements before Collect 6 Collect 3. night-time cloud phase introduced Collect 4. destriping started, instrument IR calibration improved Collect 5. cloud mask improved (deserts, poles, night), radiance bias adjustment for measured versus calculated introduced

MODIS Algorithm Adjustments for Collect 6 A: Implement Band 34, 35, 36 spectral shifts suggested by Tobin et al. (2005) for Aqua. B: Use "top-down” channel pairs 36/35, 35/34, 34/33 in that order to select CTP. C: Lower "noise" thresholds (clear minus cloudy radiances required to indicate cloud presence in bands 33 to 36) to force more CO2 slicing solutions for high thin clouds. D: Restrict CO2 channel pair solutions to appropriate portion of troposphere (determined by weighting functions – 36/35 < 450 hPa, 35/34 < 550 hPa, and 34/33 < 650 hPa). E: Adjust ozone profile between 10 and 100 hPa to GDAS values instead of using climatology (so that CO2 radiances influenced by O3 profiles are calculated correctly). F: Use CO2 = [mx+a*sin(2πx/365)]+b where m = 1.5 ppmv / 365, b = ppmv, a = 3 ppmv, and x = # days since 1 Jan 1980 to accommodate CO2 increase. G: Prohibit CO2 slicing solutions for water clouds; use only IRW solution. Avoid IRW solutions for ice clouds; use CO2 slicing whenever possible. H: Add marine stratus improvement where a constant lapse rate is assumed in low level inversions – lapse rate is adjusted according to latitude region. I. Add stratospheric cloud flag responding to BT13.9>BT

AIRS–MODIS for MODIS Band 35 (13.8 microns)

AIRS–MODIS for MODIS Band 35 shifted by 0.8 cm -1

MODIS Algorithm Adjustments for Collect 6 A: Implement Band 34, 35, 36 spectral shifts suggested by Tobin et al. (2005) for Aqua. B: Use "top-down” channel pairs 36/35, 35/34, 34/33 in that order to select CTP. C: Lower "noise" thresholds (clear minus cloudy radiances required to indicate cloud presence in bands 33 to 36) to force more CO2 slicing solutions for high thin clouds. D: Restrict CO2 channel pair solutions to appropriate portion of troposphere (determined by weighting functions – 36/35 < 450 hPa, 35/34 < 550 hPa, and 34/33 < 650 hPa). E: Adjust ozone profile between 10 and 100 hPa to GDAS values instead of using climatology (so that CO2 radiances influenced by O3 profiles are calculated correctly). F: Use CO2 = [mx+a*sin(2πx/365)]+b where m = 1.5 ppmv / 365, b = ppmv, a = 3 ppmv, and x = # days since 1 Jan 1980 to accommodate CO2 increase. G: Prohibit CO2 slicing solutions for water clouds; use only IRW solution. Avoid IRW solutions for ice clouds; use CO2 slicing whenever possible. H: Add marine stratus improvement where a constant lapse rate is assumed in low level inversions – lapse rate is adjusted according to latitude region. I. Add stratospheric cloud flag responding to BT13.9>BT

Collect 5

Top down

Lower cloud detection threshold

Tobin spectral shift

August 2006 MODIS and CALIOP Cloud Properties Comparison high thin clouds placed low by IRW marine strat too high

Collect 5 Single Level CO2 Slicing CTHs

Collect 5 Impact of Multilevel Clouds

MODIS Algorithm Adjustments for Collect 6 A: Implement Band 34, 35, 36 spectral shifts suggested by Tobin et al. (2005) for Aqua. B: Use "top-down” channel pairs 36/35, 35/34, 34/33 in that order to select CTP. C: Lower "noise" thresholds (clear minus cloudy radiances required to indicate cloud presence in bands 33 to 36) to force more CO2 slicing solutions for high thin clouds. D: Restrict CO2 channel pair solutions to appropriate portion of troposphere (determined by weighting functions – 36/35 < 450 hPa, 35/34 < 550 hPa, and 34/33 < 650 hPa). E: Adjust ozone profile between 10 and 100 hPa to GDAS values instead of using climatology (so that CO2 radiances influenced by O3 profiles are calculated correctly). F: Use CO2 = [mx+a*sin(2πx/365)]+b where m = 1.5 ppmv / 365, b = ppmv, a = 3 ppmv, and x = # days since 1 Jan 1980 to accommodate CO2 increase. G: Prohibit CO2 slicing solutions for water clouds; use only IRW solution. Avoid IRW solutions for ice clouds; use CO2 slicing whenever possible. H: Add marine stratus improvement where a constant lapse rate is assumed in low level inversions – lapse rate is adjusted according to latitude region. I. Add stratospheric cloud flag responding to BT13.9>BT

O3 affects CO2 bands

Mauna Loa Parameterization MODIS C6: CO 2 changes over time

MODIS Algorithm Adjustments for Collect 6 A: Implement Band 34, 35, 36 spectral shifts suggested by Tobin et al. (2005) for Aqua. B: Use "top-down” channel pairs 36/35, 35/34, 34/33 in that order to select CTP. C: Lower "noise" thresholds (clear minus cloudy radiances required to indicate cloud presence in bands 33 to 36) to force more CO2 slicing solutions for high thin clouds. D: Restrict CO2 channel pair solutions to appropriate portion of troposphere (determined by weighting functions – 36/35 < 450 hPa, 35/34 < 550 hPa, and 34/33 < 650 hPa). E: Adjust ozone profile between 10 and 100 hPa to GDAS values instead of using climatology (so that CO2 radiances influenced by O3 profiles are calculated correctly). F: Use CO2 = [mx+a*sin(2πx/365)]+b where m = 1.5 ppmv / 365, b = ppmv, a = 3 ppmv, and x = # days since 1 Jan 1980 to accommodate CO2 increase. G: Prohibit CO2 slicing solutions for water clouds; use only IRW solution. Avoid IRW solutions for ice clouds; use CO2 slicing whenever possible. H: Add marine stratus improvement where a constant lapse rate is assumed in low level inversions – lapse rate is adjusted according to latitude region. I. Add stratospheric cloud flag responding to BT13.9>BT

Avoid IRW solutions for ice clouds 1 IRW CTHs are too low for ice clouds CTH MODIS - CALIOP Number for Aug 2006

Avoid CO2 slicing solutions for water clouds CTH MODIS - CALIOP Number for Aug 2006 Number for Aug 2006

Determine C6 Cloud Phase with Beta Ratio Tests Collection 5: Based on 8.5/11-µm brightness temperatures (BT) and their differences (BTD) Collection 6: Supplement BT & BTD tests with emissivity ratios ( b ratio) b ratios are based on 7.3, 8.5, 11, 12-µm bands (more on another slide) 8.5/11: has the most sensitivity to cloud phase 11/12: sensitive to cloud opacity; implementation of this pair helps with optically thin clouds (improves phase discrimination for thin cirrus) 7.3/11: sensitive to high versus low clouds; helps with low clouds (one of the issues was a tendency for low-level water clouds to be ringed with ice clouds as the cloud thinned out near the edges) Use of b ratio mitigates influence of the surface Approach imposes new requirements: - clear-sky radiances, which implies knowledge of… - atmospheric profiles, surface emissivity, and a fast RT model

A cloud emissivity profile for a single band: e (p) = (I-I clr ) ––––––––––––––––––––––––––– [I ac (p) + T ac (p)I bb (p) – I clr )] where I clr = clear-sky radiance I ac (p) = above cloud emission at pressure p I bb (p) = TOA radiance for opaque cloud at pressure p T ac (p)= above cloud transmission b x,y (p) = ln[1- e c,y (p)] –––––––––––––– ln[1- e c,x (p)] where x and y are two channels used to compute the ratio The Beta ratio is based on cloud emissivity profiles

False color image Red: 0.65 m m; Green: 2.1 m m; Blue: 11 m m Thin cirrus: blue Opaque ice clouds: pink Water clouds: white/yellow Snow/ice: magenta (Southern tip of Greenland) Ocean: dark blue Land: green MODIS IR Phase for a granule on 28 August, 2006 at 1630 UTC Over N. Atlantic Ocean between Newfoundland and Greenland Collection 5 algorithm but with uncertain and mixed phase pixels combined into “uncertain” category

False color image Red: 0.65 m m; Green: 2.1 m m; Blue: 11 m m Collection 6 algorithm: Propose 3 categories, deleting mixed phase since there is no justification for this category MODIS IR Phase for a granule on 28 August, 2006 at 1630 UTC Over N. Atlantic Ocean between Newfoundland and Greenland

For C5, most of the uncertain phase pixels occurred in the storm tracks, i.e., at high latitudes For C6, there are many less uncertain phase retrievals now that cirrus is more likely to be identified as ice phase clouds

MODIS Algorithm Adjustments for Collect 6 A: Implement Band 34, 35, 36 spectral shifts suggested by Tobin et al. (2005) for Aqua. B: Use "top-down” channel pairs 36/35, 35/34, 34/33 in that order to select CTP. C: Lower "noise" thresholds (clear minus cloudy radiances required to indicate cloud presence in bands 33 to 36) to force more CO2 slicing solutions for high thin clouds. D: Restrict CO2 channel pair solutions to appropriate portion of troposphere (determined by weighting functions – 36/35 < 450 hPa, 35/34 < 550 hPa, and 34/33 < 650 hPa). E: Adjust ozone profile between 10 and 100 hPa to GDAS values instead of using climatology (so that CO2 radiances influenced by O3 profiles are calculated correctly). F: Use CO2 = [mx+a*sin(2πx/365)]+b where m = 1.5 ppmv / 365, b = ppmv, a = 3 ppmv, and x = # days since 1 Jan 1980 to accommodate CO2 increase. G: Prohibit CO2 slicing solutions for water clouds; use only IRW solution. Avoid IRW solutions for ice clouds; use CO2 slicing whenever possible. H: Add marine stratus improvement where a constant lapse rate is assumed in low level inversions – lapse rate is adjusted according to latitude region. I. Add stratospheric cloud flag responding to BT13.9>BT

Marine Stratus CTH Over-Estimated MODIS CTH CALIOP CTH

31 Current Modified (Minnis 1992) Marine Stratus Correction for Low Level Inversion

The apparent lapse rates are based on 11-micron differences between clear-sky and measured cloud radiances. Regression coefficients are based on latitude, using curve fitting for three different segments as shown above. Coefficients are provided for each month.

MODIS Algorithm Adjustments for Collect 6 A: Implement Band 34, 35, 36 spectral shifts suggested by Tobin et al. (2005) for Aqua. B: Use "top-down” channel pairs 36/35, 35/34, 34/33 in that order to select CTP. C: Lower "noise" thresholds (clear minus cloudy radiances required to indicate cloud presence in bands 33 to 36) to force more CO2 slicing solutions for high thin clouds. D: Restrict CO2 channel pair solutions to appropriate portion of troposphere (determined by weighting functions – 36/35 < 450 hPa, 35/34 < 550 hPa, and 34/33 < 650 hPa). E: Adjust ozone profile between 10 and 100 hPa to GDAS values instead of using climatology (so that CO2 radiances influenced by O3 profiles are calculated correctly). F: Use CO2 = [mx+a*sin(2πx/365)]+b where m = 1.5 ppmv / 365, b = ppmv, a = 3 ppmv, and x = # days since 1 Jan 1980 to accommodate CO2 increase. G: Prohibit CO2 slicing solutions for water clouds; use only IRW solution. Avoid IRW solutions for ice clouds; use CO2 slicing whenever possible. H: Add marine stratus improvement where a constant lapse rate is assumed in low level inversions – lapse rate is adjusted according to latitude region. I. Add stratospheric cloud flag responding to BT13.9>BT

Stratospheric clouds are identified when a more opaque band is found to be warmer than a less opaque band indicating detection of a positive lapse rate above an opaque cloud; thus when BT13.9 > BT K a yellow flag is indicated in the image on the right. Stratospheric Cloud Test

MODIS Algorithm Adjustments for Collect 6 A: Implement Band 34, 35, 36 spectral shifts suggested by Tobin et al. (2005) for Aqua. B: Use "top-down” channel pairs 36/35, 35/34, 34/33 in that order to select CTP. C: Lower "noise" thresholds (clear minus cloudy radiances required to indicate cloud presence in bands 33 to 36) to force more CO2 slicing solutions for high thin clouds. D: Restrict CO2 channel pair solutions to appropriate portion of troposphere (determined by weighting functions – 36/35 < 450 hPa, 35/34 < 550 hPa, and 34/33 < 650 hPa). E: Adjust ozone profile between 10 and 100 hPa to GDAS values instead of using climatology (so that CO2 radiances influenced by O3 profiles are calculated correctly). F: Use CO2 = [mx+a*sin(2πx/365)]+b where m = 1.5 ppmv / 365, b = ppmv, a = 3 ppmv, and x = # days since 1 Jan 1980 to accommodate CO2 increase. G: Prohibit CO2 slicing solutions for water clouds; use only IRW solution. Avoid IRW solutions for ice clouds; use CO2 slicing whenever possible. H: Add marine stratus improvement where a constant lapse rate is assumed in low level inversions – lapse rate is adjusted according to latitude region. I.Add stratospheric cloud flag responding to BT13.9>BT MODIS Collect 6 improvements over Collect 5 measured by CALIOP for August 2006

(MODIS–CALIOP) for All Clouds; August 2006 Based on Collection 5 MODIS 5-km CTH and Version 3 CALIOP 5-km CTH (MODIS–CALIOP) for All Clouds for August 2006 Based on Collection 6 MODIS 5-km CTH and Version 3 CALIOP 5-km CTH MODIS-CALIOP (km)

The largest cloud height differences results from not using CO2 slicing (>15 km) Reducing the cloud detection threshold produced more high thin cloud retrievals, but also produced erroneously high CO2 CTH retrievals for low water clouds in the southern Pacific CO2 slicing (IRW) heights should be avoided for water (ice) clouds A high bias in marine stratus was identified in the MODIS retrievals; CTH algorithm problems in inversions will be mitigated assuming a wet lapse rate Adjusting the spectral response of the CO2 bands reduced CTH errors Selecting the spectral radiance ratio using a top down criteria improved high cloud detection Making multiple passes through large data sets was necessary Using CALIOP as a reference was invaluable Collect 6 Cloud Products should be the ten year reference Conclusions on CTP Algorithm Adjustments

Remaining Actions (1) Spectral shifts have been implemented for Aqua MODIS. Are spectral shifts necessary for Terra MODIS? Intercomparisons with IASI are beginning to indicate answers. (2) Flag multi-layer cloud situations.

CO2 slicing spectral bands show similar behavior

Cloud Phase spectral band does not show similar behavior