• 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.

    An NWP Model Intercomparison of Surface Weather Parameters in the European Arctic during the Year of Polar Prediction Special Observing Period Northern Hemisphere 1

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    WAF-D-19-0003.1.pdf (6.169Mb)
    Date
    2019
    Author
    Køltzow, Morten
    Casati, Barbara
    Bazile, Eric
    Haiden, Thomas
    Valkonen, Teresa
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    AbstractIncreased human activity in the Arctic calls for accurate and reliable weather predictions. This study presents an intercomparison of operational and/or high-resolution models in an attempt to establish a baseline for present-day Arctic short-range forecast capabilities for near-surface weather (pressure, wind speed, temperature, precipitation, and total cloud cover) during winter. One global model [the high-resolution version of the ECMWF Integrated Forecasting System (IFS-HRES)], and three high-resolution, limited-area models [Applications of Research to Operations at Mesoscale (AROME)-Arctic, Canadian Arctic Prediction System (CAPS), and AROME with Météo-France setup (MF-AROME)] are evaluated. As part of the model intercomparison, several aspects of the impact of observation errors and representativeness on the verification are discussed. The results show how the forecasts differ in their spatial details and how forecast accuracy varies with region, parameter, lead time, weather, and forecast system, and they confirm many findings from mid- or lower latitudes. While some weaknesses are unique or more pronounced in some of the systems, several common model deficiencies are found, such as forecasting temperature during cloud-free, calm weather; a cold bias in windy conditions; the distinction between freezing and melting conditions; underestimation of solid precipitation; less skillful wind speed forecasts over land than over ocean; and difficulties with small-scale spatial variability. The added value of high-resolution limited area models is most pronounced for wind speed and temperature in regions with complex terrain and coastlines. However, forecast errors grow faster in the high-resolution models. This study also shows that observation errors and representativeness can account for a substantial part of the difference between forecast and observations in standard verification.
    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4263313
    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