YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Weather and Forecasting
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Weather and Forecasting
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Forecast Errors and Uncertainties in Atmospheric Rivers

    Source: Weather and Forecasting:;2020:;volume( 35 ):;issue: 004::page 1447
    Author:
    Lavers, David A.;Ingleby, N. Bruce;Subramanian, Aneesh C.;Richardson, David S.;Ralph, F. Martin;Doyle, James D.;Reynolds, Carolyn A.;Torn, Ryan D.;Rodwell, Mark J.;Tallapragada, Vijay;Pappenberger, Florian
    DOI: 10.1175/WAF-D-20-0049.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: A key aim of observational campaigns is to sample atmosphere–ocean phenomena to improve understanding of these phenomena, and in turn, numerical weather prediction. In early 2018 and 2019, the Atmospheric River Reconnaissance (AR Recon) campaign released dropsondes and radiosondes into atmospheric rivers (ARs) over the northeast Pacific Ocean to collect unique observations of temperature, winds, and moisture in ARs. These narrow regions of water vapor transport in the atmosphere—like rivers in the sky—can be associated with extreme precipitation and flooding events in the midlatitudes. This study uses the dropsonde observations collected during the AR Recon campaign and the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Integrated Forecasting System (IFS) to evaluate forecasts of ARs. Results show that ECMWF IFS forecasts 1) were colder than observations by up to 0.6 K throughout the troposphere; 2) have a dry bias in the lower troposphere, which along with weaker winds below 950 hPa, resulted in weaker horizontal water vapor fluxes in the 950–1000-hPa layer; and 3) exhibit an underdispersiveness in the water vapor flux that largely arises from model representativeness errors associated with dropsondes. Four U.S. West Coast radiosonde sites confirm the IFS cold bias throughout winter. These issues are likely to affect the model’s hydrological cycle and hence precipitation forecasts.
    • Download: (2.306Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Forecast Errors and Uncertainties in Atmospheric Rivers

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4264637
    Collections
    • Weather and Forecasting

    Show full item record

    contributor authorLavers, David A.;Ingleby, N. Bruce;Subramanian, Aneesh C.;Richardson, David S.;Ralph, F. Martin;Doyle, James D.;Reynolds, Carolyn A.;Torn, Ryan D.;Rodwell, Mark J.;Tallapragada, Vijay;Pappenberger, Florian
    date accessioned2022-01-30T18:11:28Z
    date available2022-01-30T18:11:28Z
    date copyright7/1/2020 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2020
    identifier issn0882-8156
    identifier otherwafd200049.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4264637
    description abstractA key aim of observational campaigns is to sample atmosphere–ocean phenomena to improve understanding of these phenomena, and in turn, numerical weather prediction. In early 2018 and 2019, the Atmospheric River Reconnaissance (AR Recon) campaign released dropsondes and radiosondes into atmospheric rivers (ARs) over the northeast Pacific Ocean to collect unique observations of temperature, winds, and moisture in ARs. These narrow regions of water vapor transport in the atmosphere—like rivers in the sky—can be associated with extreme precipitation and flooding events in the midlatitudes. This study uses the dropsonde observations collected during the AR Recon campaign and the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Integrated Forecasting System (IFS) to evaluate forecasts of ARs. Results show that ECMWF IFS forecasts 1) were colder than observations by up to 0.6 K throughout the troposphere; 2) have a dry bias in the lower troposphere, which along with weaker winds below 950 hPa, resulted in weaker horizontal water vapor fluxes in the 950–1000-hPa layer; and 3) exhibit an underdispersiveness in the water vapor flux that largely arises from model representativeness errors associated with dropsondes. Four U.S. West Coast radiosonde sites confirm the IFS cold bias throughout winter. These issues are likely to affect the model’s hydrological cycle and hence precipitation forecasts.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleForecast Errors and Uncertainties in Atmospheric Rivers
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume35
    journal issue4
    journal titleWeather and Forecasting
    identifier doi10.1175/WAF-D-20-0049.1
    journal fristpage1447
    journal lastpage1458
    treeWeather and Forecasting:;2020:;volume( 35 ):;issue: 004
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian