| description abstract | The dynamical simulation of the latest version of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM3) is examined, including the seasonal variation of its mean state and its interannual variability. An ensemble of integrations forced with observed monthly varying sea surface temperatures and sea ice concentrations is compared to coexisting observations. The most significant differences from the previous version of the model [Community Climate Model version 3 (CCM3)] are associated with changes to the parameterized physics package. Results show that these changes have resulted in a modest improvement in the overall simulated climate; however, CAM3 continues to share many of the same biases exhibited by CCM3. At sea level, CAM3 reproduces the basic observed patterns of the pressure field. Simulated surface pressures are higher than observed over the subtropics, however, an error consistent with an easterly bias in the simulated trade winds and low-latitude surface wind stress. The largest regional differences over the Northern Hemisphere (NH) occur where the simulated highs over the eastern Pacific and Atlantic Oceans are too strong during boreal winter, and erroneously low pressures at higher latitudes are most notable over Europe and Eurasia. Over the Southern Hemisphere (SH), the circumpolar Antarctic trough is too deep throughout the year. The zonal wind structure in CAM3 is close to that observed, although the middle-latitude westerlies are too strong in both hemispheres throughout the year, consistent with errors in the simulated pressure field and the transient momentum fluxes. The observed patterns and magnitudes of upper-level divergent outflow are also well simulated by CAM3, a finding consistent with an improved and overall realistic simulation of tropical precipitation. There is, however, a tendency for the tropical precipitation maxima to remain in the NH throughout the year, while precipitation tends to be less than indicated by satellite estimates along the equator. The CAM3 simulation of tropical intraseasonal variability is quite poor. In contrast, observed changes in tropical and subtropical precipitation and the atmospheric circulation changes associated with tropical interannual variability are well simulated. Similarly, principal modes of extratropical variability bear considerable resemblance to those observed, although biases in the mean state degrade the simulated structure of the leading mode of NH atmospheric variability. | |
