TAMDAR Project – April Boulder Meeting

34
Ed Szoke 1 April 12, 2005 TAMDAR Project – April Boulder Meeting Ed Szoke* NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory *Joint collaboration with the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO

description

TAMDAR Project – April Boulder Meeting. Ed Szoke* NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory *Joint collaboration with the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Assessing TAMDAR data quality Method - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of TAMDAR Project – April Boulder Meeting

Ed Szoke 1April 12, 2005

TAMDAR Project – April Boulder Meeting

Ed Szoke* NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory

*Joint collaboration with the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO

Ed Szoke 2April 12, 2005

Overview

• Assessing TAMDAR data quality• Method

• Compare TAMDAR soundings with each other• Compare to nearby ACARS soundings (for T)• Compare to a “verifying” raob sounding

• Concentrated on DTW and MSP• Also looked at MEM when CLASS soundings were

present

Ed Szoke 3April 12, 2005

Example 1: 7 March 05/1200 UTC

● A look at some TAMDAR soundings

● A large variation in quality of this sounding sample● Some from MSP, some compared to CIMMS soundings in

MEM

Ed Szoke 4April 12, 2005

Weather on 7 March: NW flow, scattered snow showersat 1100 UTC at MSP

Ed Szoke 5April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings with raob comparison at MSP-sharp inversion

While there is quite a bit of variability (possibly the time differences could account for some of this), the sharp inversion is well

captured.

Ed Szoke 6April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings with raob comparison at MSP

Raob is in green again. This set of soundings is not very good.

Ed Szoke 7April 12, 2005

Weather on 7 March at MEM: SW low-level flow, scattered showers and thunderstorms at 1400 UTC

Ed Szoke 8April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings with CLASS soundings at Memphis

One bad sounding but overall pretty good agreement especially with moisture.

Ed Szoke 9April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings with CLASS soundings at Memphis

One bad sounding again, but also more variability in this group. But in terms of RH, the general character of the moisture seems to be captured.

Ed Szoke 10April 12, 2005

Example 2: 9 March 05/1200 UTC

● A look at some ACARS soundings● Does a sample of ACARS soundings show good

agreement or is it more variable like some of the TAMDARs?

Ed Szoke 11April 12, 2005

Weather on 9 March 05/1200 UTC Area of rain near Memphis

Ed Szoke 12April 12, 2005

ACARS soundings out of Memphis

Very good agreement for this set close in time and space.

Ed Szoke 13April 12, 2005

Another set of ACARS soundings out of Memphis

Good overall agreement for this set close in time and space.

Ed Szoke 14April 12, 2005

ACARS compared to 2 TAMDAR soundings out of Memphis

Decent agreement except for the point around 820 mb for the 1346z sounding.

Ed Szoke 15April 12, 2005

Example 3: 1 April 05/1200 UTC

● Good agreement at MSP and DTW where the weather was dry ● More variability though at MEM where there was some rain in the area.

Ed Szoke 16April 12, 2005

Weather on 1 April 05/1200 UTC Wet near Memphis, dry MSP and DTW area

Ed Szoke 17April 12, 2005

ACARS and TAMDAR soundings out of MSP

The general structure of the RH below 800 mb is captured in the TAMDAR soundings. Temperature agreement though is not that great.

Ed Szoke 18April 12, 2005

ACARS and TAMDAR soundings out of MSP

Overall pretty good agreement.

Ed Szoke 19April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from DTW

All the TAMDARs do a very good job of showing the dry layer near 800 mb.

Ed Szoke 20April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from DTW

This set also resolves the dry layer.

Ed Szoke 21April 12, 2005

TAMDAR and ACARS soundings soundings at Memphis

Rain in the area could be the cause of more disagreement among the soundings, but agreement is good aob 900 mb.

Ed Szoke 22April 12, 2005

Example 4: 2 April case: more weather than the last example

Radar for DTW at 1200 UTC. Detroit at the nw edge of a major storm system to the east.

Ed Szoke 23April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from DTW

Something goes bad with the 1223z sounding, getting way too warm at 700 mb.

Ed Szoke 24April 12, 2005

ACARS soundings vs RAOB from DTW

Some temperature problems appear to also be found in this set of ACARS soundings.

Ed Szoke 25April 12, 2005

TAMDAR and ACARS soundings vs RAOB from DTW

Quite a bit of spread shown in this set.

Ed Szoke 26April 12, 2005

Example 5: 4 April 05/1200 UTC

● End on a good note with good agreement

● Fair weather at MSP and DTW

Ed Szoke 27April 12, 2005

Weather on 1 April 05/1200 UTC Wet near Memphis, dry MSP and DTW area

Ed Szoke 28April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from MSP

Excellent temperature agreement for the 1205z sounding with a distinct low level inversion.

Ed Szoke 29April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from MSP

Overall good agreement with both temperature and dew point.

Ed Szoke 30April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from MSP

Same with this set.

Ed Szoke 31April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from DTW

Good agreement with the DTW raob; key feature here is the dry layer beginning near 800 mb.

Ed Szoke 32April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from DTW

Good agreement, again the dry layer is well captured.

Ed Szoke 33April 12, 2005

TAMDAR soundings vs RAOB from DTW

Same with this set.

Ed Szoke 34April 12, 2005

Summary of TAMDAR comparisons

● From comparisons since late February…

● The number of questionable TAMDAR soundings appears to be less than in the early days of the project, likely a result of bad sensors being flagged.

● Examples demonstrated that the TAMDAR soundings are able to capture distinct dry and moist layers and sharp inversions.

● Overall, the quality appears in general to be good enough to be an important source of moisture data in the lower part of the atmosphere. Such information is very hard to get with any current sensors.