1 Rolf Langland Naval Research Laboratory – Monterey, CA Uncertainty in Operational Atmospheric Analyses.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Introduction to data assimilation in meteorology Pierre Brousseau, Ludovic Auger ATMO 08,Alghero, september 2008.
Advertisements

© The Aerospace Corporation 2014 Observation Impact on WRF Model Forecast Accuracy over Southwest Asia Michael D. McAtee Environmental Satellite Systems.
The impact of targeted observations from 2011 Winter Storms Reconnaissance on deterministic forecast accuracy Tom Hamill NOAA Earth System Research Lab,
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
94th American Meteorological Society Annual Meeting
Design and Validation of Observing System Simulation Experiments (OSSEs) Ronald Errico Goddard Earth Sciences Technology and Research Center at Morgan.
My Agenda for CFS Diagnostics Ancient Chinese proverb: “ Even a 9-month forecast begins with a single time step.” --Hua-Lu Pan.
NCEP Model Comparisons over the East and West Coast of the US Lynn McMurdie Garrett Wedam Cliff Mass May 27, 2009 Wedam, McMurdie and Mass, 2009: Comparison.
Performance Characteristics of a Pseudo-operational Ensemble Kalman Filter April 2006, EnKF Wildflower Meeting Greg Hakim & Ryan Torn University of Washington.
Brian Ancell, Cliff Mass, Gregory J. Hakim University of Washington
Huang et al: MTG-IRS OSSEMMT, June MTG-IRS OSSE on regional scales Xiang-Yu Huang, Hongli Wang, Yongsheng Chen and Xin Zhang National Center.
Supplemental Topic Weather Analysis and Forecasting.
1 THE WINTER STORM RECONNESSAINCE PROGRAM OF THE US NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE Zoltan Toth GSD/ESRL/OAR/NOAA Formerly at EMC/NCEP/NWS/NOAA Acknowledgements:
Bill Campbell and Liz Satterfield Naval Research Laboratory, Monterey CA Presented at the AMS Annual Meeting 4-8 January 2015 Phoenix, AZ Accounting for.
Introduction to Numerical Weather Prediction and Ensemble Weather Forecasting Tom Hamill NOAA-CIRES Climate Diagnostics Center Boulder, Colorado USA.
Ensemble Post-Processing and it’s Potential Benefits for the Operational Forecaster Michael Erickson and Brian A. Colle School of Marine and Atmospheric.
Slide 1 Evaluation of observation impact and observation error covariance retuning Cristina Lupu, Carla Cardinali, Tony McNally ECMWF, Reading, UK WWOSC.
Comparison of hybrid ensemble/4D- Var and 4D-Var within the NAVDAS- AR data assimilation framework The 6th EnKF Workshop May 18th-22nd1 Presenter: David.
Impact of Infrared, Microwave and Radio Occultation Satellite Observations on Operational Numerical Weather Prediction Lidia Cucurull (1) and Richard A.
ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 1 Forecast sensitivity to Observation Carla Cardinali.
Forecast Skill and Major Forecast Failures over the Northeastern Pacific and Western North America Lynn McMurdie and Cliff Mass University of Washington.
Observing Strategy and Observation Targeting for Tropical Cyclones Using Ensemble-Based Sensitivity Analysis and Data Assimilation Chen, Deng-Shun 3 Dec,
Kick-Off-Treffen SPP, Bonn October 2006 Improved Water Vapour and Wind Initialisation for Precipitation Forecasts: Impact Studies with the ECMWF.
ISDA 2014, Feb 24 – 28, Munich 1 Impact of ensemble perturbations provided by convective-scale ensemble data assimilation in the COSMO-DE model Florian.
Impact study with observations assimilated over North America and the North Pacific Ocean at MSC Stéphane Laroche and Réal Sarrazin Environment Canada.
On Improving GFS Forecast Skills in the Southern Hemisphere: Ideas and Preliminary Results Fanglin Yang Andrew Collard, Russ Treadon, John Derber NCEP-EMC.
A Comparison of the Northern American Regional Reanalysis (NARR) to an Ensemble of Analyses Including CFSR Wesley Ebisuzaki 1, Fedor Mesinger 2, Li Zhang.
Data assimilation and observing systems strategies Pierre Gauthier Data Assimilation and Satellite Meteorology Division Meteorological Service of Canada.
Perspectives on Targeting Sharanya J. Majumdar (RSMAS/U. Miami) Session 3.1, THORPEX/DAOS WG Fourth Meeting June 2011.
Reanalysis: When observations meet models
Slide 1 Wind Lidar working group February 2010 Slide 1 Spaceborne Doppler Wind Lidars - Scientific motivation and impact studies for ADM/Aeolus Erland.
Verification of Global Ensemble Forecasts Fanglin Yang Yuejian Zhu, Glenn White, John Derber Environmental Modeling Center National Centers for Environmental.
Short-Range Ensemble Prediction System at INM José A. García-Moya SMNT – INM 27th EWGLAM & 12th SRNWP Meetings Ljubljana, October 2005.
1 Rolf H. Langland Naval Research Laboratory – Monterey, Ca. USA Gary G. Love, Nancy L. Baker Adjoint-based observation impact monitoring at NRL-Monterey.
1 The Assessment of the DAOS WG on Observation Targeting Talk presented by Rolf Langland (NRL-Monterey) DAOS Working Group THIRD THORPEX International.
1 A Pacific Predictability Experiment - Targeted Observing Issues and Strategies Rolf Langland Pacific Predictability Meeting Seattle, WA June 6, 2005.
1 Results from Winter Storm Reconnaissance Program 2008 Yucheng SongIMSG/EMC/NCEP Zoltan TothEMC/NCEP/NWS Sharan MajumdarUniv. of Miami Mark ShirleyNCO/NCEP/NWS.
1 Results from Winter Storm Reconnaissance Program 2007 Yucheng SongIMSG/EMC/NCEP Zoltan TothEMC/NCEP/NWS Sharan MajumdarUniv. of Miami Mark ShirleyNCO/NCEP/NWS.
Update on Dropout Team Work and Related COPC Action Items Presented by Dr. Bradley Ballish Co-Chair JAG/ODAA and Member of Dropout Team 5 May 2010 COPC.
AIRS Radiance and Geophysical Products: Methodology and Validation Mitch Goldberg, Larry McMillin NOAA/NESDIS Walter Wolf, Lihang Zhou, Yanni Qu and M.
Yucheng Song & Zoltan Toth 1 Yucheng Song and Zoltan Toth EMC/NCEP/NWS/NOAA Update on the Winter Storm Reconnaissance Program Meeting of the working group.
The Application of Observation Adjoint Sensitivity to Satellite Assimilation Problems Nancy L. Baker Naval Research Laboratory Monterey, CA.
Munehiko Yamaguchi, Sharanya J. Majumdar (RSMAS/U. Miami) and multiple collaborators 3 rd THORPEX International Science Symposium 14 Sep Coordinated.
F. Prates/Grazzini, Data Assimilation Training Course March Error Tracking F. Prates/ F. Grazzini.
Local Predictability of the Performance of an Ensemble Forecast System Liz Satterfield and Istvan Szunyogh Texas A&M University, College Station, TX Third.
1 Developing Assimilation Techniques For Atmospheric Motion Vectors Derived via a New Nested Tracking Algorithm Derived for the GOES-R Advanced Baseline.
AMS Annual Meeting - January NRL Global Model Adaptive Observing During TPARC/TCS-08 Carolyn Reynolds Naval Research Laboratory, Monterey, CA OUTLINE:
I 5.11 Validation of the GMAO OSSE Prototype Runhua Yang 1,2 and Ronald Errico 1,3 1 Global Modeling and Assimilation office, GSFC, NASA 2 Science Systems.
The Infrastructure, Design and Applications of Observing System Simulation Experiments at NASA's Global Modeling and Assimilation Office By Ronald M. Errico.
The Impact of the Reduced Radiosonde Observation in Russia on GRAPES Global Model Weihong Tian, Ruichun Wang, Shiwei Tao, Xiaomin Wan Numerical Prediction.
This study compares the Climate System Forecast Reanalysis (CFSR) tropospheric analyses to two ensembles of analyses. The first ensemble consists of 12.
Exploring Multi-Model Ensemble Performance in Extratropical Cyclones over Eastern North America and the Western Atlantic Ocean Nathan Korfe and Brian A.
Nathalie Voisin 1, Florian Pappenberger 2, Dennis Lettenmaier 1, Roberto Buizza 2, and John Schaake 3 1 University of Washington 2 ECMWF 3 National Weather.
Guidance for Targeted Observations during N-AMMA and data impact results: 3 studies 1. Sharanya Majumdar (RSMAS/U.Miami) 2. Jason Dunion & Sim Aberson.
Impact of Blended MW-IR SST Analyses on NAVY Numerical Weather Prediction and Atmospheric Data Assimilation James Cummings, James Goerss, Nancy Baker Naval.
Discussion on Observation Targeting TTISS, Monterey, September, 2009.
NCEP Dropout Team Briefing JAG/ODAA Meeting OFCM October 2008 “Where America’s Climate, Weather and Ocean Prediction Services Begin” Jordan Alpert, Bradley.
Update on Dropout Team Work and Related COPC Action Items Bradley Ballish NOAA/NWS/NCEP/PMB Co-Chair JAG/ODAA April 2009 CSAB Meeting.
High impact weather nowcasting and short-range forecasting using advanced IR soundings Jun Li Cooperative Institute for Meteorological.
OSEs with HIRLAM and HARMONIE for EUCOS Nils Gustafsson, SMHI Sigurdur Thorsteinsson, IMO John de Vries, KNMI Roger Randriamampianina, met.no.
Roger A. Stocker 1 Jason E. Nachamkin 2 An overview of operational FNMOC mesoscale cloud forecast support 1 FNMOC: Fleet Numerical Meteorology & Oceanography.
A Fear-Inspiring Intercomparison of Monthly Averaged Surface Forcing
Assessing the Impact of Aircraft Observations on Model Forecasts
Use of TIGGE Data: Cyclone NARGIS
Stéphane Laroche Judy St-James Iriola Mati Réal Sarrazin
Naval Research Laboratory
Challenge: High resolution models need high resolution observations
Impact of aircraft data in the MSC forecast systems
MODIS Polar Winds Forecast Impact (3DVAR) Northern Hemisphere
Results from the THORPEX Observation Impact Inter-comparison Project
Presentation transcript:

1 Rolf Langland Naval Research Laboratory – Monterey, CA Uncertainty in Operational Atmospheric Analyses

2 Objectives 1.Quantify the uncertainty (differences) in current operational analyses of the atmosphere – height, temperature, winds 2.Consider implications of analysis uncertainty for NWP and plans for the future global observing network Analysis differences are a proxy for actual analysis error, which cannot be precisely quantified

3 Significance of Analysis Uncertainty/Error Quality of NWP forecasts from short to medium-range Extended-range NWP? Short-range climate forecasts? Quality of forecast verification Accuracy of climate monitoring

4 Causes of Analysis Differences and Error Gaps/deficiencies in global observing network Errors /bias in observation data Choices in observation selection Observation quality control decisions Different and imperfect data assimilation techniques Errors in background forecast

5 Methodology Use multi-year, multi-model archive of operational analyses and forecasts, developed at NRL for research and diagnostic studies Quantify and examine differences in atmospheric analyses, trends over time … Examine systematic (monthly/seasonal) patterns

6 Surprisingly sparse literature on the topic of atmospheric analysis uncertainty and error Langland, Maue, Bishop, 2008: Tellus “Analysis differences and error variance estimates from multi-centre analysis data,” 2010: M. Wei, Z. Toth, Y. Zhu, Aust. Met. and Ocean Journal. Dec 2011 – WGNE presentation by Tom Hamill “Some aspects of the improvement in skill of numerical weather prediction, 2002: A.J. Simmons and A. Hollingsworth, QJRMS.

7 Wei et al. (2010) Analyses from NCEP, ECWMF, UKMO, CMC, FNMOC 00UTC: 1Feb 2008 to 30Apr 2008 Time-averaged spread over the average anomaly In general, smaller analysis spread in locations with in-situ observations (esp. raodiosondes, aircraft)

8 Indication that assimilation of high-quality in-situ observations (radiosondes, aircraft data) reduces analysis uncertainty more than assimilation of satellite observations (radiances and feature-track or scatterometer winds) Radiosonde observation count 500mb Temperature Analyses Root Mean Square Difference (CMC / AVN) [RMS difference, K] [proxy for analysis uncertainty] [Number of observations in 2° x 2° boxes] Analyses from NCEP, CMC, FNMOC 00UTC, 12UTC: 1Jan 2007 to 1Jun 2007 Langland et al. (2008)

9 NOGAPS / AVN NOGAPS / CMC Smaller analysis uncertainty (<1K) where radiosonde data are provided Larger uncertainty (1-2K) between analyses where satellite data predominates 500mb Temperature Analyses Root Mean Square Difference 1 Jan – 1 Jun 2007 UNCERTAINTY BETWEEN ANALYSES CAN BE LARGER THAN SHORT-RANGE “FORECAST ERROR” !! [RMS difference, K] Langland et al. (2008)

: same pattern still in place! [Many new radiance data have been added during ] Root-Mean Square of Analysis Differences: 500mb Temperature K Langland and Maue 2011 EUCOS

11 Analyses from NCEP, ECWMF, UKMO, CMC, CMA 00UTC: 1OCT 2010 to 30Sep 2011 Hamill (WGNE, Dec 2011) “Analyses, assumed to be unbiased, do exhibit substantial bias Implications for ensemble perturbations (may be too small)” 500 hPa height 250 hPa u-wind Time-average of daily spread (sample standard deviation) of analyses about their daily mean ms -1

12 300mb Wind Speed (2010) GFS / ECMWF Root-Mean Square of Analysis Differences: 300mb Wind Speed Note the very significant effect of in-situ wind observations: Radiosondes and Commercial Aircraft ms Langland and Maue 2011

13 GFS | ECMWF Root mean square difference of analyzed 300mb wind speed: July 2009 – June Unicertainty in atmospheric upper-tropospheric wind analyses is substantially lower in locations where radiosonde data is provided. The blue-shaded areas are locations where raobs provide soundings twice-daily (00z and 12z). Station provides data only at 12z, so the associated reduction in analysis error at that location is mitigated, but still significant. Radiosonde stations on the budget chopping block Example: Eareckson Air Station (Shemya) March 2012: NRL received a message from NUOPC (National Unified Operational Prediction Capability), that NOAA was trying to convince USAF not to end soundings at station Previously in 2008, soundings were reduced to one per-day (12UTC). This station is in top 10% world- wide for error reduction (NRL study). ms -1 Shemya Island Langland and Maue 2011

14

15

16 Question Why is analysis uncertainty over oceanic regions still much larger than over North America and Europe, despite the addition of massive amounts of radiance data? [Now as much as 90% of all assimilated data.] Basic patterns of analysis differences and analysis uncertainty in 2012 remain similar to those reported in 2002

17 Summary Assimilation of radiosonde and aircraft data substantially reduces uncertainty in upper-air analyses of temperature and wind Analysis uncertainty is larger where analyses relies primarily on radiance observations What new observing instruments and variables are most-needed to reduce analysis uncertainty? Where is the greatest need to reduce the current magnitude of analysis uncertainty? Polar regions? Oceanic storm tracks? Targeted improvements to observing system and data assimilation procedures?

18

19

20 About 19 million observations assimilated in global domain each day in NAVDAS-AR [4d-Var] 28 Apr 2012 [00, 06, 12, 18 UTC] Data count in 2° x 2° lat/lon bins HIGH OBSERVATION DENSITY DOES NOT GAURANTEE ANALYSIS QUALITY !!

21 28 Apr 2012 [00, 06, 12, 18 UTC] Data count in 2° x 2° lat/lon bins Count of observations assimilated by NAVDAS-AR The largest density of observations is due to in-situ data [radiosondes, aircraft, land-surface and ocean-surface observations]