2007
DOI: 10.1002/joc.1490
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intercomparison of global cloud cover fields over oceans from the VOS observations and NCEP/NCAR reanalysis

Abstract: Abstract:The paper inter-compares the total cloud cover over the World Ocean from marine visual observations assimilated in the International Comprehensive Ocean-Atmosphere Data Set (ICOADS) and National Centers of Environmental Prediction/National Center of Atmospheric Research (NCEP-NCAR) reanalysis. The Intercomparison covers the period from 1948 to 2002. NCEP-NCAR reanalysis shows about 10% of fractional cloud cover smaller than the visual observations do. The largest differences are observed in the mid an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
18
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This remarkable underestimation has been previously reported for other areas (e.g. Weare and Mokhov, ; Betts et al , ; Bedacht et al , ; Calbó and Sanchez‐Lorenzo, ; Wu et al , ; Naud and Booth, ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 53%
“…This remarkable underestimation has been previously reported for other areas (e.g. Weare and Mokhov, ; Betts et al , ; Bedacht et al , ; Calbó and Sanchez‐Lorenzo, ; Wu et al , ; Naud and Booth, ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 53%
“…Gulev et al (2007a) provided estimates of sampling uncertainties for radiation fluxes and thus also required the presence of cloudiness in the reports. However, the sampling density of cloudiness is quite similar to that of the other variables (see, e.g., Bedacht et al 2007), and in practice the number of reports used in this study was just 2% higher compared to that employed by Gulev et al (2007a).…”
Section: Data and Preprocessingsupporting
confidence: 54%
“…climate model evaluation (e.g., Bedacht et al, 2007;Wilkinson et al, 2008). Cloud breakdowns within our study focus on the diurnal to seasonal controls on these CF estimates.…”
Section: Arm Mobile Facility Cloud Observationsmentioning
confidence: 99%