190 likes | 206 Views
A summary of the GroundWinds demonstration campaign in 2000, showcasing the measurement of Line-of-Sight winds and new technologies' effectiveness. Includes participant information, goals, instrumentation, data collection, analysis, and updates on data re-processing. Explore the impact of clouds on wind sensing capabilities and signal level improvements when sufficient.
E N D
GroundWinds Demonstration Campaign Analysis Update MK RAMA VARMA RAJA, CIRA & ORA rama.mundakkara@noaa.gov Jim Yoe, NOAA/NESDIS/ORA James.G.Yoe@noaa.gov
Many Key Demo Campaign Participants • University of New Hampshire (UNH) • B. Moore, J.Ryan, S.Turco, L.Rosentrater, M.Vosbury, P.Dunphy • Michigan Aerospace Corporation (MAC) • C. Nardell, P. Hays, K. Moncur, J. Pavlik, M. Dehring • Mount Washington Observatory • M. Day, K. Rancourt • NASA/GSFC • B. Gentry, H. Chen • NOAA/NESDIS • J. Ellickson, R. Mundakkara, J. Pereira, J. Yoe • NOAA/OAR • M.Hardesty, A. Brewer, B. Rye
Campaign Summary • Goals • Demonstrate ability to measure LOS winds • Demonstrate effectiveness of new technologies • Science as “target of opportunity” • Duration • September 19 – 28, 2000 (Sep 25-28 prime) • Instrumentation • Three DWL – GW, GLOW, mini-MOPA • Locally-launched GPS radiosondes • Assorted surface instruments
Campaign Summary (con’d) • Operations and Data Collection • Subject to FAA restrictions as well as weather • Common orientation (AZ/ELEV) for DWL’s • Attempted clear/cloudy, calm/active, day/night • Data Processing and Posting • DWL LOS posted at 1-min, 1-km (or 250m) • Analysis • Project LOS to LOS Horizontal, average as appropriate • Project Radiosonde wind to LOS H
Status as of July 01 (con’d) • Relationship between photon counts and std dev of mean LOS velocity appeared consistent for both GLOW and GroundWinds • Same relationship was consistent with model performance for DD DWL • GW photon counts lower than expected
Status as of July, 2001 • General Agreement between corresponding pairs of wind measurements • Lidar-radiosonde differences often large • Especially at upper heights • Attributable to sampling differences? • Other teams had detected DWL retrieval biases, discussed plans to correct them • GLOW T dependence, for example • GW Correction entailed decoupling Aerosol, molecular retrievals
Spatial Sampling Dependence? Note: GW velocities NOT re-processed
Spatial Sampling Dependence? Re-processed GW velocities
Clear sky, no jet 0.5 – 11 km “Good Signal” Reprocessed GroundWinds
Jet Stream, Clouds • 0.5 –10 km • Re-processed • GroundWinds
SUMMARY • GroundWinds Data re-processing shows improved agreement w/radiosondes when GW signal level is sufficient • Clouds impact wind sensing capability of both GW and GLOW • Shift in re-processed GW Signal levels needs to be understood (conversion from electrons on detector to photons?)