2018
DOI: 10.1175/jtech-d-17-0095.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of Accuracy of Chinese AMDAR Data for 2015

Abstract: Two comparative studies have been performed to evaluate the accuracy of Chinese Aircraft Meteorological Data Relay (AMDAR) weather reports. The comparison between AMDAR reports and radiosonde observations shows that the root-mean-square differences (RMSDs) in temperature, wind speed, and wind direction are 1.068C, 1.95 m s 21 , and 228, respectively, within a spatial range of #20 km and a temporal window of #15 min. The comparison between AMDAR reports collected by different aircraft reveals that observation u… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
(28 reference statements)
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This work included also a comprehensive review of previous evaluations of AMDAR data and confirmed it to be well suited for ABL studies. Similar conclusions were obtained by Ding et al (2015) and Ding et al (2018) in studies conducted over China. Zhang et al (2020a) produced a comparative climatology of ABL heights over the U.S., discussing different methods to diagnose them and comparing the results with those from ERA5 reanalyses and short-term field campaigns.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…This work included also a comprehensive review of previous evaluations of AMDAR data and confirmed it to be well suited for ABL studies. Similar conclusions were obtained by Ding et al (2015) and Ding et al (2018) in studies conducted over China. Zhang et al (2020a) produced a comparative climatology of ABL heights over the U.S., discussing different methods to diagnose them and comparing the results with those from ERA5 reanalyses and short-term field campaigns.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…While the quality of AMDAR temperature and wind reports has been shown to be relatively high (e.g., Benjamin et al 1999;Ding et al 2018), bias correction provides an opportunity to account for measurement biases. The sign and magnitude of ABO temperature biases depends upon aircraft type, pressure altitude, and phase of flight (Drue et al 2008), but ABO generally exhibit a warm bias (Ballish and Kumar 2008) relative to rawinsonde sensors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Likewise, Mirza et al (2016) used a metrological method to compare in situ atmospheric measurements, made with research-grade instruments aboard the FAAM BAe-146, with (emulated) Mode-S EHS reports, at the same point in space and time. Figure 2 shows empirical estimates of observation uncertainty standard deviation for aircraft temperature reports from a range of studies: AMDAR versus Radiosonde (Schwartz and Benjamin, 1995;Ding et al, , 2018; AMDAR versus other nearby AMDAR reporting aircraft (Benjamin et al, 1999); Mode-S MRAR versus Radiosonde (Strajnar, 2012), Mode-S EHS versus Radiosonde (de Haan and Stoffelen, 2012).…”
Section: Empirical Estimatesmentioning
confidence: 99%