Comparisons of MIPAS/ENVISAT and GPS-RO/CHAMP Temperatures

Wang, Ding Yi; Wickert, Jens; Stiller, G. P.; Clarmann, T. von; Beyerle, G.; Schmidt, T.; López‐Puertas, M.; Funke, B.; Gil-López, S.; Glatthor, N.; Grabowski, U.; Höpfner, Michael; Kellmann, S.; Kiefer, Michael; Linden, A.; Tsidu, Gizaw Mengistu; Milz, M.; Steck, T.; Fischer, H.

doi:10.1007/3-540-26800-6_90

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The other days show similar features and are not displayed here. Similar comparisons results for the MIPAS IMK and GPS‐RO/CHAMP GFZ data can be found in Wang et al [2004a].…”

Section: Comparison Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Of long‐term and strategic importance, this will establish basic conditions for their use in operational meteorology. The MIPAS IMK temperatures have previously been compared with the GPS‐RO/CHAMP GFZ data [ Wang et al , 2004a] and the GPS‐RO/SAC‐C measurements [ Jiang et al , 2004a], as well as with a number of other satellite observations [ Wang et al , 2004b]. They found that the MIPAS IMK temperatures showed good consistency with those of the GPS‐RO/CHAMP GFZ and SAC‐C data during the stratospheric major sudden warming in the southern hemisphere winter of 2002, with the overall mean differences and standard deviations estimated at ∼1 K and ∼5 K, respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cross‐validation of MIPAS/ENVISAT and GPS‐RO/CHAMP temperature profiles

et al. 2004

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] The Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding (MIPAS) on board the ENVISAT and the Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver on the Challenging Mini-Satellite Payload (CHAMP) provide temperature profiles by limb-viewing midinfrared emission and radio occultation (RO) measurements, respectively. The MIPAS temperatures retrieved at the Institut für Meteorologie und Klimaforschung (IMK) are compared with the GPS-RO/CHAMP observations derived at Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and GeoForschungsZentrum (GFZ) Potsdam. The three data sets show generally good agreement. The global mean differences averaged between 8 and 30 km in 14 days of September/October 2002 are À0.44 ± 0.02 K and 0.07 ± 0.02 K for MIPAS/GPS-RO JPL and GFZ comparisons, respectively. The MIPAS global mean temperatures below 25 km are slightly lower than those of GPS-RO JPL and GFZ by less than 1 K and 0.2 K, respectively. Above 25 km, the MIPAS temperatures are higher than the JPL and GFZ data, in particular near both poles and the equator, with maxima of 1 K for JPL and 1.5 K for GFZ at 30 km. The standard deviations are $2-4 K. Possible explanations for the observed differences include (1) effect of spatial and temporal mismatch between the correlative measurements on the observed standard deviations, in particular in regions and episodes of enhanced wave activity; (2) a negative bias in GPS-RO/CHAMP temperatures in regions of increased humidity; (3) a mapping of initialization temperature profiles on GPS-RO/CHAMP retrievals at altitudes where low refraction contains no information on air density; and (4) measurement errors of both instruments, particularly the errors due to insufficient knowledge of the instrument line shape and spectroscopy in current MIPAS retrievals.

show abstract

“…The other days show similar features and are not displayed here. Similar comparisons results for the MIPAS IMK and GPS‐RO/CHAMP GFZ data can be found in Wang et al [2004a].…”

Section: Comparison Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross‐validation of MIPAS/ENVISAT and GPS‐RO/CHAMP temperature profiles

et al. 2004

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The processor and its robustness are discussed by Von Clarmann et al (2003a,b,c). The temperatures retrieved by the IMK-IAA processor are validated against a number of satellite observations and assimilation analyses and show good consistency with the other data sets (Wang et al, 2004a(Wang et al, ,b,c, 2005. The derived temperature and observation geometry are used to retrieve profiles of ozone and other species.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Comparisons of MIPAS/ENVISAT ozone profiles with SMR/ODIN and HALOE/UARS observations

Wang

Stiller

Clarmann

et al. 2005

Advances in Space Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The MIPAS IMK‐IAA temperatures have been compared with a number of other satellite measurements. The preliminary results show good agreement [ Wang et al , 2004a, 2004b, 2004c; Jiang et al , 2004; Dethof et al , 2004].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…A total of ∼15,000 profiles are used for this analysis (see Table 1). They are taken from 14 days in September/October of 2002 (version V1_T + LOS‐H_1, previously referred to as version 1.0 by Wang et al [2004a, 2004b, 2004c]) and 20 days in October/November of 2003 (version V2_T+LOS‐H_3), and will be referred to as periods I and II, respectively. The MIPAS observations provide global coverage with 14.4 orbits per day.…”

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of stratospheric temperatures measured by Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding (MIPAS) on Envisat

Wang¹

2005

J. Geophys. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding (MIPAS) onboard the Envisat satellite provides temperature and various gas profiles from limb‐viewing midinfrared emission measurements. The stratospheric temperatures retrieved at the Institut für Meteorologie und Klimaforschung (IMK) for September/October 2002 and October/November 2003 are compared with a number of reference data sets, including global radiosonde (RS) observations, radio occultation (RO) measurements of Global Positioning System (GPS) on German Challenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) and Argentinean Satelite de Aplicaciones Cientificas‐C (SAC‐C) satellite, Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE) on the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS), and the analyses of European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) and Met Office (METO), United Kingdom. The data sets show a good general agreement. Between 10 and 30 km altitude the mean differences are within ±0.5 K for the averages over the height interval and within ±(1–1.5) K at individual levels for comparisons with RS, GPS‐RO/CHAMP, and SAC‐C, ECMWF, and METO. Between 30 and 45 km the MIPAS mean temperatures, averaged over the height region, are higher than ECMWF but lower than METO by ∼1.5 K, while they differ by ±0.5 K with respect to HALOE, with maximum discrepancies of ∼2.5 K peaking around 35 km. Between 45 and 50 km, MIPAS temperatures show a low bias compared to HALOE, ECMWF, and METO with mean differences of −1 to −3 K and with a better agreement with HALOE. The large discrepancies between MIPAS and the analyses above 30 km likely suggest deficiency in the underlying general circulation models. The standard deviations vary between 2.5 and 3.5 K for individual data sets, with more than 70% being contributed from the expected variability of the atmosphere. Retrieved temperatures with accuracy of ∼0.5–1 K after removing the atmospheric variability provide highly accurate knowledge to characterize our environment.

show abstract

Comparisons of MIPAS/ENVISAT and GPS-RO/CHAMP Temperatures

Cited by 4 publications

References 7 publications

Cross‐validation of MIPAS/ENVISAT and GPS‐RO/CHAMP temperature profiles

Cross‐validation of MIPAS/ENVISAT and GPS‐RO/CHAMP temperature profiles

Comparisons of MIPAS/ENVISAT ozone profiles with SMR/ODIN and HALOE/UARS observations

Validation of stratospheric temperatures measured by Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding (MIPAS) on Envisat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About