1 Aircraft Data: Geographic Distribution, Acquisition, Quality Control, and Availability Work at NOAA/ESRL/GSD and elsewhere.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AIRCRAFT METEOROLOGICAL DATA RELAY
Advertisements

SNPP VIIRS green vegetation fraction products and application in numerical weather prediction Zhangyan Jiang 1,2, Weizhong Zheng 3,4, Junchang Ju 1,2,
© The Aerospace Corporation 2014 Observation Impact on WRF Model Forecast Accuracy over Southwest Asia Michael D. McAtee Environmental Satellite Systems.
Radiometrics Corporation 1 Fog Detection & Forecasting Using the the Radiometrics TV/WVP-3000 Temperature, Humidity & Cloud Liquid Profiling Radiometer.
Feasibility of data assimilation using documented weather record for reconstruction of historical climate Kei Yoshimura and Kinya Toride AORI, Univ Tokyo.
Dynamical Downscaling of CCSM Using WRF Yang Gao 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, Yun-Fat Lam 1, John Drake 1, Kate Evans 2 1 University of Tennessee, USA 2 Oak Ridge.
EXECUTIVE ROUNDTABLE SERIES 1 TAMDAR: Civil Aviation Benefits Bruce L. Lev, Vice Chairman AirDat LLC Real-Time Global Aircraft Tracking, Data Management,
Recent performance statistics for AMPS real-time forecasts Kevin W. Manning – National Center for Atmospheric Research NCAR Earth System Laboratory Mesoscale.
Rapid Update Cycle Model William Sachman and Steven Earle ESC452 - Spring 2006.
Friends and Partners of Aviation Weather
Validating the moisture predictions of AMPS at McMurdo using ground- based GPS measurements of precipitable water Julien P. Nicolas 1, David H. Bromwich.
Radar Animation 9:30 AM – 7:00 PM CST November 10, 2006 …Excerpt from Meteorological Overview of the November 10, 2006 Winter Storm… Illustrate value of.
TAMDAR Alaskan data compiled by Ed Szoke NOAA/CIRA/GSD 2007 cases comparing TAMDAR out of Anchorage (ANC) and other Alaska airports nearby RAOB cases Airports.
Meteorological Impacts and Benefits of AMDAR Data Lee Cronce Ralph Petersen Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies (CIMSS) Space Science.
Bryce Ford SpectraSensors
Forecasting and Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) NOWcasting Description of atmospheric models Specific Models Types of variables and how to determine.
MADIS to LITTLE_R Converter MADIS observation types MADIS to LITTE_R converter Future work.
Unit 4 Lesson 5 Weather Maps and Weather Prediction
History of the Global AMDAR Programme Frank Grooters Chairman of the WMO AMDAR Panel Mexico City AMDAR Workshop, 8-10 November 2011.
Deutscher Wetterdienst Measurement Technology Humidity Measurements by Aircraft of the E-AMDAR Fleet TECO 2008 Axel Hoff Deutscher Wetterdienst Observing.
1 AMDAR Quality Assurance Bradley Ballish NOAA/NWS/NCEP/NCO/PMB SSMC2/Silver Spring 23 March, 2009.
A Statistical Comparison of Weather Stations in Carberry, Manitoba, Canada.
Accessing and Utilizing AMDAR Data for NWP Applications David R. Helms Office of Science and Technology NOAA National Weather Service AMDAR Regional Workshop.
AMDAR Global Status, Benefits and Development Plans* WMO CBS ET Aircraft Based Observations Bryce Ford * Adapted from Presentation at WMO Congress XVII,
A Comparison of the Northern American Regional Reanalysis (NARR) to an Ensemble of Analyses Including CFSR Wesley Ebisuzaki 1, Fedor Mesinger 2, Li Zhang.
1 Mexico Regional AMDAR Workshop November 2011 Data Quality Monitoring and Control (QM / QC) Axel Hoff Convenor of WMO AMDAR Panel‘s Science and Technical.
Non-hydrostatic Numerical Model Study on Tropical Mesoscale System During SCOUT DARWIN Campaign Wuhu Feng 1 and M.P. Chipperfield 1 IAS, School of Earth.
GLFE Status Meeting April 11-12, Presentation topics Deployment status Data quality control Data distribution NCEP meeting AirDat display work Icing.
Observations From the Global AMDAR Program Presentation to WMO TECO May 2005 by Jeff Stickland Technical Coordinator, WMO AMDAR Panel.
AMS 23 rd Conference on Severe Local Storms/2006 – St. Louis Talk November 8, 2006 AN EVALUATION OF TAMDAR SOUNDINGS IN SEVERE WEATHER FORECASTING.
AMB Verification and Quality Control monitoring Efforts involving RAOB, Profiler, Mesonets, Aircraft Bill Moninger, Xue Wei, Susan Sahm, Brian Jamison.
1 Discussion of Observational Biases of Some Aircraft Types at NCEP Dr. Bradley Ballish NCEP/NCO/PMB 7 September 2006 “Where America’s Climate and Weather.
1 Short Course on Meteorological Applications of Aircraft Weather Data Introduction and Brief History January 14, 2007 David Helms
TAMDAR Workshop 2006 – Boulder, Colorado 1 April 13, 2006 UPDATE ON TAMDAR IMPACT ON RUC FORECASTS & RECENT TAMDAR/RAOB COMPARISONS Ed Szoke,* Brian Jamison*,
Verification of Global Ensemble Forecasts Fanglin Yang Yuejian Zhu, Glenn White, John Derber Environmental Modeling Center National Centers for Environmental.
1 Presentation by Earth System Research Lab / Global Systems Division - Bill Moninger 23 March 2009 Impact of the AMDAR observations to aviation weather.
1 Results from Winter Storm Reconnaissance Program 2008 Yucheng SongIMSG/EMC/NCEP Zoltan TothEMC/NCEP/NWS Sharan MajumdarUniv. of Miami Mark ShirleyNCO/NCEP/NWS.
2006(-07)TAMDAR aircraft impact experiments for RUC humidity, temperature and wind forecasts Stan Benjamin, Bill Moninger, Tracy Lorraine Smith, Brian.
1 Hyperspectral Infrared Water Vapor Radiance Assimilation James Jung Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies Lars Peter Riishojgaard.
Observations From the Global AMDAR Programme Presentation to WMO TECO December 2006 by Michael Berechree Technical Coordinator, WMO AMDAR Panel.
AFRICA | AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EUROPE | MIDDLE EAST ARINC’s Role in MDCRS MDCRS Management Team September 7, 2006.
MADIS Airlines for America Briefing Meteorological Assimilated Data Ingest System (MADIS) FPAW Briefing Steve Pritchett NWS Aircraft Based Observations.
Boulder TAMDAR Meeting - Ed Szoke 1 August 25, 2005 RUC – RAOB – TAMDAR SOUNDINGS Ed Szoke* NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory *Joint collaboration with.
Provision of AMDAR Data for the Region David R. Helms Office of Science and Technology NOAA National Weather Service AMDAR Regional Workshop Mexico City,
Boundary layer depth verification system at NCEP M. Tsidulko, C. M. Tassone, J. McQueen, G. DiMego, and M. Ek 15th International Symposium for the Advancement.
Layered Water Vapor Quick Guide by NASA / SPoRT and CIRA Why is the Layered Water Vapor Product important? Water vapor is essential for creating clouds,
Comparison of Radiosonde and Profiler Data with ACARS Data for Describing the Great Plains Low-Level Jet Ross W. Bradshaw Meteorology Program, Dept. of.
NCAR April 1 st 2003 Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Data Assimilation in AMPS Dale Barker S. Rizvi, and M. Duda MMM Division, NCAR
Analysis of Select Data Biases in North America Dr. Bradley Ballish NCEP/NCO/PMB October 2008 JAG/ODAA Meeting “Where America’s Climate and Weather Services.
1 Short Course on Meteorological Applications of Aircraft Weather Data Future Plans – Opportunities for the Private Sector January 14, 2007 Kevin Johnston.
Evaluations of AMDAR Observations using Co-Located Radiosonde and Inter-Aircraft Comparisons Lee Cronce 1, Ralph Petersen 1, Erik Olson 1, Wayne Feltz.
Assimilation of AIRS SFOV Profiles in the Rapid Refresh Rapid Refresh domain Haidao Lin Ming Hu Steve Weygandt Stan Benjamin Assimilation and Modeling.
MODIS Winds Assimilation Impact Study with the CMC Operational Forecast System Réal Sarrazin Data Assimilation and Quality Control Canadian Meteorological.
The Over Forecast Advisory Event on St. Patricks Day Weekend 2013 NOAA’s National Weather Service Ron W. Przybylinski Science and Operations Officer Fred.
Data Management System to Collect, Quality Control, Distribute, and Archive Near Real-time Marine Data Jeremy J. Rolph, Jacob T. Rettig, Mark A. Bourassa,
Comparison of LM Verification against Multi Level Aircraft Measurements (MLAs) with LM Verification against Temps Ulrich Pflüger, Deutscher Wetterdienst.
Towards Assimilation of GOES Hourly winds in the NCEP Global Forecast System (GFS) Xiujuan Su, Jaime Daniels, John Derber, Yangrong Lin, Andy Bailey, Wayne.
TAMDAR Status FPAW Forum November 11, The patented TAMDAR sensor Measures and derives: Ice presence Median and peak turbulence Winds aloft Indicated.
1 Recent AMDAR (MDCRS/ACARS) Activities at GSD New AMDAR-RUC database that helps evaluate AMDAR data quality Optimization study that suggests data can.
Unit 4 Lesson 5 Weather Maps and Weather Prediction Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.
Station lists and bias corrections Jemma Davie, Colin Parrett, Richard Renshaw, Peter Jermey © Crown Copyright 2012 Source: Met Office© Crown copyright.
Aircraft weather observations: Impacts for regional NWP models
NWS Forecast Office Assessment of GOES Sounder Atmospheric Instability
Tony Wimmers, Wayne Feltz
Naval Research Laboratory
Aircraft-based Observations:
Lidia Cucurull, NCEP/JCSDA
New Developments in Aviation Forecast Guidance from the RUC
Increasing Adoption of Weather & Turbulence Observations
Results from the THORPEX Observation Impact Inter-comparison Project
Presentation transcript:

1 Aircraft Data: Geographic Distribution, Acquisition, Quality Control, and Availability Work at NOAA/ESRL/GSD and elsewhere

2 AMDAR data -- definition AMDAR - Aircraft Meteorological DAta Relay The generic term for all automated meteorological reports from commercial aircraft GSD receives (from a variety of sources) and distributes (with restrictions) all AMDAR data Most AMDAR data are used in GSD’s, and NCEP’s weather models

3 Flavors of AMDAR data MDCRS data (to be discussed by Al) E-AMDAR (Europe and Africa) “AMDAR” (Asia and Australia) Canadian (Canada, inc. flights into U.S.) TAMDAR (U. S. experimental) Other experimental

4 MDCRS data (24 hours)

5 E-AMDAR data

6 “AMDAR” data (China, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, So. Africa)

7 Canadian data (jets and turboprops)

8 TAMDAR data (turboprops, generally below 20 Kft)

9 Experimental Turbulence (EDR) data, from UAL (above 20Kft) and TAMDAR (problematic)

10 Experimental Icing data from TAMDAR and (sometimes) Delta

11 Availability Real-time data are restricted to governments, researchers, etc.* Graphical displays are available at – Binary and text data are available from MADIS – –data > 48 h old are unrestricted –archival data back to July 2001 –many tools for subsectioning data GSD is a research, not operational organization –nonetheless, data flows have been pretty steady

12 *Data Restrictions Described at Worked out over 15 years between NOAA and the participating US airlines Generally, non-commercial research users may have access to real-time data, if their work is of potential benefit to airlines

13 AMDAR QC in the U.S. NCEP (Brad Ballish) is the official U.S. data quality center – GSD provides many research QC products based on the Rapid Update Cycle (RUC) Another U.S. center doing excellent work: Pat Pauley at the Naval Research Laboratory Many non-U.S. centers also perform AMDAR QC

14 AMDAR QC at GSD We look at differences between AMDAR observations and 1h forecasts from various versions of the RUC model

15 The Rapid Update Cycle An hourly cycle Ingests all available data each hour –AMDAR, TAMDAR, RAOBS (0 & 12 Z), Satellite, Surface, etc., etc. Covers the CONUS We run many RUC cycles For AMDAR QC, we use a 20 km cycle called “dev2”

16 RUC - AMDAR Comparisons Statistical results are available at and include: –Time series for individual aircraft –3 and 7 day interactive statistics –plan view of data and corresponding RUC values –(summary statistics are open; real-time data are restricted)

17 Plan view showing Wind- rejects for TAMDAR. Reject reason indicated. Overall statistics shown

18 Right column shows the RUC reject code for any rejected variable(s) “sp=0”: wind speeds of 0 are rejected. This information is downloaded automatically by some users.

19 7-day summary statistics (sortable). New columns show the fraction of obs rejected by the RUC, for each variable. We reject many TAMDAR winds because we don’t accept descent winds currently

20 Current AMDAR Data Quality Generally as good or better than RAOBs To check, we compare AMDAR and RAOBs with RUC 1h forecasts (RUC is not the “truth”, but, when a long time period is aggregated, can serve as a common denominator) Results to follow are from –1-31 Dec –AMDAR data from 0 UTC +/- 30 minutes observations per pressure level Canadian jets and all turboprops excluded –In the Great Lakes Region 13 RAOBs at 0 UTC

21 AMDAR - dev2 1h fcst Temperature RMS difference for obs taken near 0 UTC Red shows AMDAR ascents and en-route Blue shows AMDAR descents

22 Red shows AMDAR ascents and en-route Blue shows AMDAR descents Green shows RAOB AMDAR - dev2 1h fcst Temperature RMS difference for obs taken near 0 UTC AMDAR and RAOBs show very similar statistics

23 T bias is small (< 0.5°C) for AMDAR. (Generally AMDAR ascents are warmer than descents, but not at low levels during this winter month.) Red shows AMDAR ascents and en-route Blue shows AMDAR descents

24 T bias is small (< 0.5°C) for AMDAR and RAOBs. RUC shows a slight warm bias wrt RAOBs. Red shows AMDAR ascents and en-route Blue shows AMDAR descents Green shows RAOB

25 For RMS of the vector wind difference with the RUC… Red shows AMDAR ascents and en-route Blue shows AMDAR descents

26 For RMS of the vector wind difference with the RUC, AMDAR and RAOB show similar values at all levels. Red shows AMDAR ascents and en-route Blue shows AMDAR descents Green shows RAOB

27 Water Vapor Most AMDAR measurements don’t include vapor information WVSS-II measures it, but recent data is problematic TAMDAR measures it –In lower troposphere only (below 500 mb, 18 Kft) –In U. S. Midwest only –We’ll look at recent TAMDAR results

28 Relative Humidity RMS (wrt RUC dev2) for data taken near 0 UTC Red shows aircraft ascents and en-route Blue shows aircraft descents TAMDAR (open circles)

29 TAMDAR (open circles) RAOBs (green) TAMDAR RH differences with RUC are generally smaller than RAOB RH differences. An encouraging result. Red shows aircraft ascents and en-route Blue shows aircraft descents Relative Humidity RMS (wrt RUC dev2) for data taken near 0 UTC

30 Summary AMDAR is an extensive, accurate, and timely data source We thank the airlines for providing the data Tools at NCEP and GSD have been very helpful in evaluating –Aircraft performance –Model behavior Feedback to and from airlines, researchers, and other nations has been invaluable in improving quality.