NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Follow this link to skip to the main content

BEACON eSpace at Jet Propulsion Laboratory >
JPL Technical Report Server >
JPL TRS 1992+ >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: Diagnostic comparison of meteorological analyses during the 2002 Antarctic Winter
Authors: Manney, Gloria L.
Allen, Douglas R.
Kr├╝ger, Kirstin
Naujokat, Barbara
Santee, Michelle L.
Sabutis, Joseph L.
Pawson, Steven
Swinbank, Richard
Randall, Cora E.
Simmons, Adrian J.
Long, Craig
Keywords: atmospheric waves
data assimilation
weather forecasting
Issue Date: May-2005
Publisher: American Meteorological Society
Citation: Monthly Weather Review, Vol. 133, Is. 5 pg. 1261-1278,, 2005.
Abstract: Several meteorological datasets, including U.K. Met Office (MetO), European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), and NASA's Goddard Earth Observation System (GEOS-4) analyses, are being used in studies of the 2002 Southern Hemisphere (SH) stratospheric winter and Antarctic major warming. Diagnostics are compared to assess how these studies may be affected by the meteorological data used. While the overall structure and evolution of temperatures, winds, and wave diagnostics in the different analyses provide a consistent picture of the large-scale dynamics of the SH 2002 winter, several significant differences may affect detailed studies. The NCEP-NCAR reanalysis (REAN) and NCEP-Department of Energy (DOE) reanalysis-2 (REAN-2) datasets are not recommended for detailed studies, especially those related to polar processing, because of lower-stratospheric temperature biases that result in underestimates of polar processing potential, and because their winds and wave diagnostics show increasing differences from other analyses between similar to 30 and 10 hPa (their top level). Southern Hemisphere polar stratospheric temperatures in the ECMWF 40-Yr Re-analysis (ERA-40) show unrealistic vertical structure, so this long-term reanalysis is also unsuited for quantitative studies. The NCEP/Climate Prediction Center (CPC) objective analyses give an inferior representation of the upper-stratospheric vortex. Polar vortex transport barriers are similar in all analyses, but there is large variation in the amount, patterns, and timing of mixing, even among the operational assimilated datasets (ECMWF, MetO, and GEOS-4). The higher-resolution GEOS-4 and ECMWF assimilations provide significantly better representation of filamentation and small-scale structure than the other analyses, even when fields gridded at reduced resolution are studied. The choice of which analysis to use is most critical for detailed transport studies (including polar process modeling) and studies involving synoptic evolution in the upper stratosphere. The operational assimilated datasets are better suited for most applications than the NCEP/CPC objective analyses and the reanalysis datasets
Appears in Collections:JPL TRS 1992+

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
04-1100.pdf3.22 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, but are furnished with U.S. government purpose use rights.


Privacy/Copyright Image Policy Beacon Home Contact Us
NASA Home Page + Div 27
+ JPL Space
Site last updated on December 5, 2014.
If you have any comments or suggestions for this web site, please e-mail Robert Powers.