Cross validating ocean prediction and monitoring systems

Mooers, Christopher N. K.; Meinin, C. S.; Baringer, Molly O.; Bang, Inkweon; Rhodes, Robert C.; Barron, Charlie N.; Bub, Frank L.

doi:10.1029/2005eo290002

Cited by 20 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the Wind experiment, the Yucatan outflow Q y increases to 9.2 Sv and the inflow Q also increases to 33.2 Sv. We will shortly explain why; for now, Sheinbaum et al's (2002) observations (see also Candela et al 2002;Hamilton et al 2005) but are lower than those reported by and Mooers et al (2005). To estimate Q eddy , we first define the edge of an eddy as the SSH 5 0.1 m. The depth of the eddy is then set to 78C isotherm, which closely coincides with speeds under the core of the eddy of about 0.05 m s 21 .…”

Section: Eddy-propagation Tracks and Mass Balance In The Gulfmentioning

confidence: 85%

Why Can Wind Delay the Shedding of Loop Current Eddies?

Chang

Oey

2010

Journal of Physical Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is first shown that wind in the Gulf of Mexico can delay the shedding of Loop Current eddies. A timedependent, three-dimensional numerical experiment forced by a spatially and temporally constant westward wind stress within the Gulf is analyzed and then is compared with an otherwise identical no-wind run, and the result is confirmed with reduced-gravity experiments. It is shown that the wind produces westward transports over the northern and southern shelves of the Gulf, convergence in the west, and a returned (i.e., eastward) upper-layer flow over the deep central basin toward the Loop Current. The theory from T. Pichevin and D. Nof is then used to explain that the returned flow constitutes a zonal momentum flux that delays eddy shedding. Mass-balance analysis shows that wind also forces larger Loop Current and rings (because the delayed shedding allows more mass to be accumulated in them) and produces more efficient mass exchange between the Gulf and the Caribbean Sea. It is shown that eddies alone (without wind stress curl) can force a boundary current and downward flow in the western Gulf and a corresponding deep flow from the western Gulf to the eastern Gulf.

show abstract

Section: Eddy-propagation Tracks and Mass Balance In The Gulfmentioning

confidence: 85%

Why Can Wind Delay the Shedding of Loop Current Eddies?

Chang

Oey

2010

Journal of Physical Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Florida Current itself varies over fairly short time scales, at times as much as 10 Sv over as short a period as 3 days (e.g., Mooers et al 2005). This will be a larger issue for the LADCP sections than for the dropsonde sections for the simple reason that the LADCP sections take roughly twice as long to occupy (12-14 vs 6 h).…”

Section: Transport Accuracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Florida Current Volume Transport Measurements at 27°N Using Multiple Observational Techniques

García

Meinen

2014

Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more than 30 years, the volume transport of the Florida Current at 278N has been regularly estimated both via voltage measurements on a submarine cable and using ship-based measurements of horizontal velocity at nine historical stations across the Florida Straits. A comparison of three different observational systems is presented, including a detailed evaluation of observational accuracy and precision. The three systems examined are dropsonde (free-falling float), lowered acoustic Doppler current profiler (LADCP), and submarine cable. The accuracy of the Florida Current transport calculation from dropsonde sections, which can be determined from first principles with existing data, is shown to be 0.8 Sv (1 Sv [ 10 6 m 3 s 21 ). Side-by-side comparisons between dropsonde and LADCP measurements are used to show that the LADCP-based transport estimates are accurate to within 1.3 Sv. Dropsonde data are often used to set the absolute mean cable transport estimate, so some care is required in establishing the absolute accuracy of the cable measurements. Used together, the dropsonde and LADCP sections can be used to evaluate the absolute accuracy and precision of the cable measurements. These comparisons suggest the daily cable observations are accurate to within 1.7 Sv, and analysis of the decorrelation time scales for the errors suggests that annual transport averages from the cable are accurate to within 0.3 Sv. The implications of these accuracy estimates for long-term observation of the Florida Current are discussed in the context of maintaining this key climate record.

show abstract

“…3.19): three anomalously low (outside of 2-3 standard deviations of the daily averaged values) transport events during 4-6 January, 7 April-17 May, and 24-29 September, with values as low as about 20 Sv, and an unusually high transport 10-31 December, with values as high as about 42 Sv. Because these events were relatively short lived, it is likely they are local responses to upstream atmospheric forcing and coastally trapped wave processes and are not particularly indicative of a climatically important shift (e.g., Mooers et al 2005). Interannual fluctuations in the Florida Current show a negative correlation (r ~ 0.6) with the NAO during the 1982-98 time period (Baringer and Larsen 2001); however, while the NAO has been tending to decrease over the past 20 years, the Florida Current transport shows no corresponding long-term trend through (Meinen et al 2009, manuscript submitted to J. Geophys.…”

Section: ) Long-term Changes In Surface Currentsmentioning

confidence: 99%