Atmospheric Motion Vectors (AMVs) calculated by six different institutions (Brazil Center for Weather Prediction and Climate Studies/CPTEC/INPE, European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites/EUMETSAT, Japan Meteorological Agency/JMA, Korea Meteorological Administration/KMA, Unites States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/NOAA, and the Satellite Application Facility on Support to Nowcasting and Very short range forecasting/NWCSAF) with JMA’s Himawari-8 satellite data and other common input data are here compared. The comparison is based on two different AMV input datasets, calculated with two different image triplets for 21 July 2016, and the use of a prescribed and a specific configuration. The main results of the study are summarized as follows: (1) the differences in the AMV datasets depend very much on the ‘AMV height assignment’ used and much less on the use of a prescribed or specific configuration; (2) the use of the ‘Common Quality Indicator (CQI)’ has a quantified skill in filtering collocated AMVs for an improved statistical agreement between centers; (3) Among the six AMV operational algorithms verified by this AMV Intercomparison, JMA AMV algorithm has the best overall performance considering all validation metrics, mainly due to its new height assignment method: ‘Optimal estimation method considering the observed infrared radiances, the vertical profile of the Numerical Weather Prediction wind, and the estimated brightness temperature using a radiative transfer model’.

No abstract

For more than 15 years, polar winds from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) imagery have been generated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies (CIMSS). These datasets are a NOAA National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) operational satellite product that is used at more than 10 major numerical weather prediction (NWP) centers worldwide. The MODIS polar winds product is composed of both infrared window (IR-W) and water vapor (WV) tracked features. The WV atmospheric motion vectors (AMV) yield a better spatial distribution than the IR-W since both cloud and clear-sky features can be tracked in the WV images. As the new generation polar satellite-era begins with the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (S-NPP), there is currently no WV channel on the Visible/Infrared Imager/Radiometer Suite (VIIRS), resulting in a data gap with only IR-W derived AMVs possible. This scenario presents itself as an opportunity to evaluate hyperspectral infrared moisture retrievals from consecutive overlapping satellite polar passes to extract atmospheric motion from clear-sky regions on constant (and known) pressure surfaces, i.e., estimating winds in retrieval space rather than radiance space. Perhaps most significantly, this method has the potential to provide vertical wind profiles, as opposed to the current MODIS-derived single-level AMVs. In this study, the winds technique is applied to Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) moisture retrievals from NASA’s Aqua satellite. The resulting winds are assimilated into the Goddard Earth Observing System Model, Version 5 (GEOS-5). The results are encouraging, as the AIRS retrieval polar AMVs have a similar quality as the MODIS AMVs and exhibit a positive impact in the hemispheric Day 4.5 to 6.5 forecasts for a one-month experiment in July 2012.

The assimilation of atmospheric motion vectors (AMVs) provides important wind information to conventional data-lacking oceanic regions, where tropical cyclones spend most of their lifetimes. Three new AMV types, shortwave infrared (SWIR), clear-air water vapor (CAWV), and visible (VIS), are produced hourly by NOAA/NESDIS and are assimilated in operational NWP systems. The new AMV data types are added to the hourly infrared (IR) and cloud-top water vapor (CTWV) AMV data in the 2016 operational version of the HWRF Model. In this study, we update existing quality control (QC) procedures and add new procedures specific to tropical cyclone assimilation. We assess the impact of the three new AMV types on tropical cyclone forecasts by conducting assimilation experiments for 25 Atlantic tropical cyclones from the 2015 and 2016 hurricane seasons. Forecasts are analyzed by considering all tropical cyclones as a group and classifying them into strong/weak storm vortices based on their initial model intensity. Metrics such as track error, intensity error, minimum central pressure error, and storm size are used to assess the data impact from the addition of the three new AMV types. Positive impact is obtained for these metrics, indicating that assimilating SWIR-, CAWV-, and VIS-type AMVs are beneficial for tropical cyclone forecasting. Given the results presented here, the new AMV types were accepted into NOAA/NCEP’s operational HWRF for the 2017 hurricane season.

Infrared brightness temperatures (BTs) from the Geostationary Observing Environmental Satellite‐16 Advanced Baseline Imager are used to examine the ability of several microphysics and planetary boundary layer (PBL) schemes, as well as land surface models (LSM) and surface layers, to simulate upper‐level clouds. Six parameterization configurations were evaluated. Cloud objects are identified using the Method for Object‐Based Diagnostic Evaluation (MODE) and analyzed using the object‐based threat score, mean‐error distance, and pixel‐based metrics including the mean absolute error and mean bias error (MBE) for matched objects where the displacement between objects has been removed. Objects are identified using either a fixed BT threshold of 235 K or the 6.5th percentile of BTs for each model configuration. Analysis of the MODE‐identified cloud objects shows that, compared to a configuration with the Thompson microphysics scheme, Mellor‐Yamanda‐Nakanishi‐Niino (MYNN) PBL, Global Forecasting System (GFS) surface layer, and Noah LSM, the configuration employing the National Severe Storms Laboratory microphysics produced more cloud objects with higher BTs. Changing the PBL from MYNN to Shin‐Hong or Eddy‐Diffusivity Mass‐Flux also resulted in a slightly lower accuracy, though these changes result in configurations which more accurately reproduced the number of observation cloud objects and slightly reduced the high MBE. Changing the LSM from Noah to RUC reduces forecast accuracy by producing too many cloud objects with too low BTs. As the forecast hour increases, this accuracy reduction increases at a greater rate than occurred when changing the microphysics or PBL scheme and is further enhanced when using the MYNN surface layer rather than the GFS.

Atmospheric Motion Vectors (AMVs) calculated by six different institutions (Brazil Center for Weather Prediction and Climate Studies/CPTEC/INPE, European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites/EUMETSAT, Japan Meteorological Agency/JMA, Korea Meteorological Administration/KMA, Unites States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/NOAA and the Satellite Application Facility on Support to Nowcasting/NWCSAF) with JMA’s Himawari-8 satellite data and other common input data are here compared. The comparison is based on two different AMV input datasets, calculated with two different image triplets for 21 July 2016, and the use of a prescribed and a specific configuration. The main results of the study are summarized as follows: (1) the differences in the AMV datasets depend very much on the “AMV height assignment” used and much less on the use of a prescribed or specific configuration; (2) the use of the “Common Quality Indicator (CQI)” has a quantified skill in filtering collocated AMVs for an improved statistical agreement between centers; (3) JMA AMV algorithm has the best overall performance considering all validation metrics, most likely due to its height assignment: “optimal estimation using observed radiance and NWP wind vertical profile”.

Hourly and 15 min GOES-16 and -17 atmospheric motion vectors (AMVs) are evaluated using the 2020 version of the operational HWRF to assess their impact on tropical cyclone forecasting. The evaluation includes infrared (IR), visible (VIS), shortwave (SWIR), clear air, and cloud top water vapor (CAWV and CTWV) AMVs derived from the ABI imagery. Several changes are made to optimize the assimilation of these winds. The observational error profile is inflated to avoid overweighting of the AMVs. The range of allowable AMV wind speeds entering the assimilation system is increased to include larger wind speeds observed in tropical cyclones. Two data quality checks, commonly used for rejecting AMVs, namely QI and PCT1, have been removed. These changes resulted in a 20–40% increase in the number of AMVs assimilated. One additional change, specific to infrared AMVs, is narrowing the atmospheric layer where IR AMVs are rejected from 400–800 hPa to 400–600 hPa. The AMVs’ impact on forecast skill is assessed using storms from the North Atlantic and the Eastern Pacific, respectively. Overall, GOES-16 and -17 AMVs are beneficial for improving tropical cyclone forecasting. Positive analysis and forecast impact are obtained for track error, intensity error, minimum central pressure error, and storm size.

No abstract