1. Marine Climatology from Research Vessels Shawn R. Smith 1, Scott D. Woodruff 2, and Steve Worley 3 1 Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies, FSU, Tallahassee, FL USA 2 NOAA/OAR/Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, CO, USA 3 National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA MARCDAT-II, Exeter, UK Funding provided by NOAA Office of Climate Observation and the NOAA Environmental Services Data and Information Management program.

2. Overview  For decades, research vessels (RVs) have been collecting a wide array of atmospheric and ocean measurements over the global oceans. – E.g., Russian RV data (1936-2000) provided as auxiliary data in ICOADS  Recent technological advances have allowed for transmission of high volumes of marine climate observations from RVs.  Presently, RV marine reports make up only a small fraction of records in ICOADS – Bridge reports not transmitted routinely – Stewardship of science data is fragmented  Typically held by chief scientists, operating institutions, or national archives  No clear path exist to provide data to ICOADS Courtesy NOAA OCO

3. Sources of data from RVs  All vessels equipped with meteorological sensors to aid navigation – These sensors typically used for reports by bridge crew  Scientific instrument systems (e.g., IMET, NOAA SCS, Multimet) Courtesy NOAA OCO  Typically the bridge and scientific instrument systems are independent.  Insufficient metadata to determine whether marine reports in ICOADS are from bridge or science observing systems

4. Advantages of RV climate data  Operate in all parts of the ocean, including regions of extreme conditions (e.g., polar latitudes, high wind regimes).  Science systems provide – High sampling rates – Research data quality (on par with delayed mooring data) – Instruments monitored by onboard technicians – Additional measurements not provided in bridge reports (radiation, direct fluxes, etc.)  RVs provide ideal platform to develop new sensors (CO2, infrared SST) Courtesy NOAA OCO

5. RV data reaching ICOADS  Extracting RV reports from ICOADS for 1997 reveals – Wide coverage of ocean – Low observational density Courtesy NOAA OCO – ~80000 individual marine reports from 154 vessels – Highest densities around Japan and Europe – 60% of reports provided by only 12 vessels – 49% of reports from 21 vessels participating in WOCE – Polarstern alone provides ~10% of obs.

6. Problem of locating RVs  Creating plots of research vessel coverage problematic – Most common method is to search for vessel call sign  Locating call signs difficult, typically from Pub 47 or vessel operators  Change frequently – Recent addition of “kind of vessel” metadata to ICOADS helps  Only as complete as Pub 47 it is based upon  Result omits many well known vessels (e.g., Meteor)  Research vessel tracking system needed – Surprisingly hard just to find out when and where RVs are making measurements – Web resources (e.g., www.researchvessels.org) are incomplete and under-funded – J. Gould and others have proposed that JCOMM-OPS take on responsibility Courtesy NOAA OCO

7. Providing FSU data to ICOADS  FSU RV data center is working to make historical and near-real time RV data available to ICOADS.  Historical data: – Current FSU holdings contain science data from WOCE and other select cruises (1988-Present) – Additional science and bridge data from operating institutions and national archives could be acquired with additional funding  Near-real time data: – obtained through the Shipboard Automated Meteorological and Oceanographic System (SAMOS) initiative – Science data provided to FSU on daily basis – Pilot project underway with Knorr and Atlantis – Additional information in poster presentation Courtesy NOAA OCO  All FSU data have undergone scientific data quality evaluation

8. Providing FSU data to ICOADS  Most FSU marine reports must be temporally sub-sampled for ICOADS – Similar methods are currently employed by ICOADS for moored buoys Courtesy NOAA OCO – Bulk of RV records are at one- minute intervals – Desire to retain diurnal cycle – FSU producing 10-min. averages leading up to top of hour  Developing hourly sub-samples in IMMA format for ICOADS – Include average and measure of uncertainty for each value – Additional parameters beyond core ICOADS records – Format may be useful for archiving future RV and mooring reports

9. Comparing FSU to ICOADS  Number of marine reports for 22 WOCE cruises of the RV Meteor (1990 - 1997) Courtesy NOAA OCO  Reports counted over length of cruise known to FSU  12229 science data reports from FSU  6958 reports available in ICOADS

10. Comparing FSU to ICOADS  Number of marine reports for 26 WOCE cruises of the RV Knorr (1990 - 1997) Courtesy NOAA OCO  18071 science data reports from FSU  324 reports available in ICOADS  A substantial increase in records can be achieved by adding science observations to ICOADS

11. Comparing FSU to ICOADS  For the WOCE cruises of the Meteor and the Knorr, how well do reports found in ICOADS compare to sub-sampled data from FSU archive? – Note: comparisons do not take into account differing sensor depths (some metadata lacking)  ICOADS for Knorr are colder than FSU reports. Courtesy NOAA OCO

12. Comparing FSU to ICOADS  Air temperatures show similar cold bias in ICOADS reports for the Knorr (or warm bias for the FSU data). – Lower number of matches may skew results for Knorr  Meteor comparison very good without adjusting for differing thermometer heights (ICOADS: 11 m, FSU 28 m) Courtesy NOAA OCO

13. Comparing FSU to ICOADS  Biases are low for wind speed on both vessels.  Meteor shows more scatter at higher wind speeds (both measurements taken at 40 m height)  Anemometer height for Knorr not available for ICOADS reports Courtesy NOAA OCO

14. Questions to consider  Should data averaged from high-sampling rate science systems (SAMOS, moorings) be retained as independent in ICOADS (not replace existing GTS/DM reports)?  Can an effort be launched to request participation by RVs in routine VOS reporting? – Many operators seem unaware of VOS reporting  Can RV operators provide metadata regarding: – Whether and how they provide routine marine weather reports? – Whether these reports are derived from science instrument system? – Note: some effort to improve metadata can be taken up by the SAMOS initiative  What is the volume of RV science and bridge observations held by operating institutions and national archives? Courtesy NOAA OCO

15. Final Thoughts  Research vessels are presently an underutilized resource for marine climate observations  Efforts should be made to mine historical RV observations from operating institution and national archives – This effort could support ongoing plans for atmospheric and oceanic reanalyses  An expansion of near-real time transmission of science data from RVs should be encouraged – Resources and the need to improve ship-to-shore communications are primary limitations – SAMOS initiative seeks to recruit additional vessels in 2006 – 1st Joint GOSUD/SAMOS Workshop scheduled for May 2006 (interested parties should contact smith@coaps.fsu.edu) Courtesy NOAA OCO