• Login
    View Item 
    •   DSpace Home
    • AMS
    • Weather and Forecasting
    • View Item
    •   DSpace Home
    • AMS
    • Weather and Forecasting
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Evaluation of Cool-Season Extratropical Cyclones in a Multimodel Ensemble for Eastern North America and the Western Atlantic Ocean

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    waf-d-17-0036.1.pdf (3.389Mb)
    Date
    2017
    Author
    Korfe, Nathan G.
    Colle, Brian A.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    AbstractThis paper evaluates the extratropical cyclones within three operational global ensembles [the 20-member Canadian Meteorological Centre (CMC), 20-member National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), and 50-member European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)]. The day-0?6 forecasts were evaluated over the eastern United States and western Atlantic for the 2007?15 cool seasons (October?March) using the ECMWF?s ERA-Interim dataset as the verifying analysis. The Hodges cyclone-tracking scheme was used to track cyclones using 6-h mean sea level pressure (MSLP) data. For lead times less than 72 h, the NCEP and ECMWF ensembles have comparable mean absolute errors in cyclone intensity and track, while the CMC errors are larger. For days 4?6 ECMWF has 12?18 and 24?30 h more accuracy for cyclone intensity than NCEP and CMC, respectively. All ensembles underpredict relatively deep cyclones in the medium range, with one area near the Gulf Stream. CMC, NCEP, and ECMWF all have a slow along-track bias that is significant from 24 to 90 h, and they have a left-of-track bias from 120 to 144 h. ECMWF has greater probabilistic skill for intensity and track than CMC and NCEP, while the 90-member multimodel ensemble (NCEP + CMC + ECMWF) has more probabilistic skill than any single ensemble. During the medium range, the ECMWF + NCEP + CMC multimodel ensemble has the fewest cases (1.9%, 1.8%, and 1.0%) outside the envelope compared to ECMWF (5.6%, 5.2%, and 4.1%) and NCEP (13.7%, 10.6%, and 11.0%) for cyclone intensity and along- and cross-track positions.
    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4261351
    Collections
    • Weather and Forecasting

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    @mire NV
     

     

    Browse

    All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    @mire NV