Using Doppler radar with a simple explicit microphysics model to diagnose problems with ice sublimation depth-scales in forecast models

Several previous studies have attempted to assess the sublimation depth-scales of ice particles from clouds into clear air. Upon examining the sublimation depth-scales in the Met Office Unified Model (MetUM), it was found that the MetUM has evaporation depth-scales 2–3 times larger than radar observations. Similar results can be seen in the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), Regional Atmospheric Climate Model (RACMO) and Météo-France models. In this study, we use radar simulation (converting model variables into radar observations) and one-dimensional explicit microphysics numerical modelling to test and diagnose the cause of the deep sublimation depth-scales in the forecast model. The MetUM data and parametrization scheme are used to predict terminal velocity, which can be compared with the observed Doppler velocity. This can then be used to test the hypothesis as to why the sublimation depth-scale is too large within the MetUM. Turbulence could lead to dry air entrainment and higher evaporation rates; particle density may be wrong, particle capacitance may be too high and lead to incorrect evaporation rates or the humidity within the sublimating layer may be incorrectly represented. We show that the most likely cause of deep sublimation zones is an incorrect representation of model humidity in the layer. This is tested further by using a one-dimensional explicit microphysics model, which tests the sensitivity of ice sublimation to key atmospheric variables and is capable of including sonde and radar measurements to simulate real cases. Results suggest that the MetUM grid resolution at ice cloud altitudes is not sufficient enough to maintain the sharp drop in humidity that is observed in the sublimation zone.

Evaluation of two "integrated" polarimetric Quantitative Precipitation Estimation (QPE) algorithms at C-band

Two so-called “integrated” polarimetric rate estimation techniques, ZPHI (Testud et al., 2000) and ZZDR (Illingworth and Thompson, 2005), are evaluated using 12 episodes of the year 2005 observed by the French C-band operational Trappes radar, located near Paris. The term “integrated” means that the concentration parameter of the drop size distribution is assumed to be constant over some area and the algorithms retrieve it using the polarimetric variables in that area. The evaluation is carried out in ideal conditions (no partial beam blocking, no ground-clutter contamination, no bright band contamination, a posteriori calibration of the radar variables ZH and ZDR) using hourly rain gauges located at distances less than 60 km from the radar. Also included in the comparison, for the sake of benchmarking, is a conventional Z = 282R1.66 estimator, with and without attenuation correction and with and without adjustment by rain gauges as currently done operationally at Météo France. Under those ideal conditions, the two polarimetric algorithms, which rely solely on radar data, appear to perform as well if not better, pending on the measurements conditions (attenuation, rain rates, …), than the conventional algorithms, even when the latter take into account rain gauges through the adjustment scheme. ZZDR with attenuation correction is the best estimator for hourly rain gauge accumulations lower than 5 mm h−1 and ZPHI is the best one above that threshold. A perturbation analysis has been conducted to assess the sensitivity of the various estimators with respect to biases on ZH and ZDR, taking into account the typical accuracy and stability that can be reasonably achieved with modern operational radars these days (1 dB on ZH and 0.2 dB on ZDR). A +1 dB positive bias on ZH (radar too hot) results in a +14% overestimation of the rain rate with the conventional estimator used in this study (Z = 282R^1.66), a -19% underestimation with ZPHI and a +23% overestimation with ZZDR. Additionally, a +0.2 dB positive bias on ZDR results in a typical rain rate under- estimation of 15% by ZZDR.

Optimal estimation of sea surface temperature from split-window observations

Optimal estimation (OE) improves sea surface temperature (SST) estimated from satellite infrared imagery in the “split-window”, in comparison to SST retrieved using the usual multi-channel (MCSST) or non-linear (NLSST) estimators. This is demonstrated using three months of observations of the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) on the first Meteorological Operational satellite (Metop-A), matched in time and space to drifter SSTs collected on the global telecommunications system. There are 32,175 matches. The prior for the OE is forecast atmospheric fields from the Météo-France global numerical weather prediction system (ARPEGE), the forward model is RTTOV8.7, and a reduced state vector comprising SST and total column water vapour (TCWV) is used. Operational NLSST coefficients give mean and standard deviation (SD) of the difference between satellite and drifter SSTs of 0.00 and 0.72 K. The “best possible” NLSST and MCSST coefficients, empirically regressed on the data themselves, give zero mean difference and SDs of 0.66 K and 0.73 K respectively. Significant contributions to the global SD arise from regional systematic errors (biases) of several tenths of kelvin in the NLSST. With no bias corrections to either prior fields or forward model, the SSTs retrieved by OE minus drifter SSTs have mean and SD of − 0.16 and 0.49 K respectively. The reduction in SD below the “best possible” regression results shows that OE deals with structural limitations of the NLSST and MCSST algorithms. Using simple empirical bias corrections to improve the OE, retrieved minus drifter SSTs are obtained with mean and SD of − 0.06 and 0.44 K respectively. Regional biases are greatly reduced, such that the absolute bias is less than 0.1 K in 61% of 10°-latitude by 30°-longitude cells. OE also allows a statistic of the agreement between modelled and measured brightness temperatures to be calculated. We show that this measure is more efficient than the current system of confidence levels at identifying reliable retrievals, and that the best 75% of satellite SSTs by this measure have negligible bias and retrieval error of order 0.25 K.