Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Central Arctic Weather Forecasting: Confronting the ECMWF IFS with observations from the Arctic Ocean 2018 expedition
Show others and affiliations
Responsible organisation
2020 (English)In: Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, ISSN 1477-870X, Vol. 147, no 735, p. 1278-1299Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Forecasts with the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts' numerical weather prediction model are evaluated using an extensive set of observations from the Arctic Ocean 2018 expedition on the Swedish icebreaker Oden. The atmospheric model (Cy45r1) is similar to that used for the ERA5 reanalysis (Cy41r2). The evaluation covers one month, with the icebreaker moored to drifting sea ice near the north pole; a total of 125 forecasts issued four times per day were used. Standard surface observations and 6-hourly soundings were assimilated to ensure that the initial model error is small. Model errors can be divided into two groups. First, variables related to dynamics feature errors that grow with forecast length; error spread also grows with time. Initial errors are small, facilitating a robust evaluation of the second group; thermodynamic variables. These feature fast error growth for 6-12 h, after which errors saturates; error spread is roughly constant. Both surface and near-surface air temperatures are too warm in the model. During the summer both are typically above zero in spite of the ongoing melt; however, the warm bias increases as the surface freezes. The warm bias is due to a too warm atmosphere; errors in surface sensible heat flux transfers additional heat from the atmosphere to the surface. The lower troposphere temperature error has a distinct vertical structure; a substantial warm bias in the lowest few 100 meters and a large cold bias around 1 km; this structure features a significant diurnal cycle and is tightly coupled to errors in the modeled clouds. Clouds appear too often and in a too deep layer of the lower atmosphere; the lowest clouds essentially never break up. The largest error in cloud presence is aligned with the largest cold bias at around 1 km.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2020. Vol. 147, no 735, p. 1278-1299
Keywords [en]
Arctic weather prediction, Arctic climate, Arctic reanalysis, Arctic clouds, Arctic boundary layer, Surface energy budget, Model evaluation, Model error
National Category
Natural Sciences
Research subject
SWEDARCTIC 2018, Arctic Ocean 2018
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:polar:diva-8551DOI: 10.1002/qj.3971OAI: oai:DiVA.org:polar-8551DiVA, id: diva2:1517678
Available from: 2021-01-14 Created: 2021-01-14 Last updated: 2021-04-29

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full texthttps://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/qj.3971
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 33 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf