Comprehensive evaluation on atmospheric motion vectors from Fengyun-4B geostationary satellite and their application in the South China Sea monsoon onset

The South China Sea (SCS) summer monsoon onset has been regarded as the beginning of the East Asian summer monsoon. In this study, we investigated the impacts of the SCS monsoon onset on the transition from the spring persistent rainfall to the summer Meiyu in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River basin (MLYZB). It is found that rainfall in the MLYZB reduces after the SCS monsoon onset. This reduction in rainfall persists until the onset of the Meiyu and is accompanied by a weakening of southwesterlies to the south of the MLYZB. These features exist in both climatology and interannual variability. Rainfall increases significantly over the SCS and the subtropical western North Pacific after the SCS monsoon onset. The latent heating of the increased rainfall can excite an anomalous cyclone over the western North Pacific, which weakens the mean southwesterlies to the south of the MLYZB and decreases water vapor entering the MLYZB. It also generates descending motion over southeastern China. Thus, the SCS monsoon onset could suppress rainfall over the MLYZB by the latent heating induced changes in circulation. Compared to increased rainfall over the SCS, the latent heating of increase rainfall over the subtropical western North Pacific plays a more important role in the reduction of rainfall over the MLYZB. As the SCS monsoon onset affects the timing of the reduction of rainfall in the MLYZB, an early SCS monsoon onset is accompanied by below-normal May rainfall in the MLYZB, while a late SCS monsoon onset is accompanied by above-normal May rainfall.

An Analysis of the Characteristics of Monsoon Onset over the Bay of Bengal and the South China Sea in 2010

<p>This presentation provides an overview of the different upper-air wind data records available at EUMETSAT for usage in global and regional reanalysis. The assimilation of Atmospheric Motion Vectors (AMV) is recognised to be important to reduce the forecast errors in NWP model runs. In support of the Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S), EUMETSAT produced several AMV Climate Data Records (CDR) from geostationary and low-earth orbit satellites for assimilation into ECMWF’s next global reanalysis ERA6.</p><p>Since the launch of its first generation of geostationary satellites, EUMETSAT has developed its own unique algorithms to derive atmospheric motion vectors (AMVs). These algorithms are used to provide real time AMVs using images acquired from instruments on-board both polar and geostationary satellites. These AMVs are routinely assimilated into weather forecast models. EUMETSAT archived all image data from its instruments (MVIRI and SEVIRI) in geostationary orbit and the global record of Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data back to the late 1970s providing a suitable data source for climate research allowing the production of consistent AMV CDRs over the entire period.</p><p>Two long AMV data records are available now from the geostationary sensors on Meteosat-2 to Meteosat-10 covering 1981-2017 over Africa and Europe and from AVHRR Global Area Coverage (GAC) data from 16 AVHRR instruments starting with the TIROS-N satellite and covering polar AMVs over the Northern and Southern hemisphere from 1978-2019. In addition, full resolution AVHRR images (Local Area Coverage (LAC)) from the AVHRR aboard the polar orbiting Metop-A and -B satellites were used to generate a CDR containing polar AMVs from single satellite retrievals and global AMVs from the combined Metop-A/B dual satellite retrieval starting in 2007 and 2013, respectively.</p><p>For all data records, the EUMETSAT AMV algorithm adapted for climate purposes was used and extensive validation of the data records were performed. It shows that the CDR are homogeneous and very stable over the period. They are suitable for usage in model reanalysis and climate analysis. The CDR are in agreement with ground based radiosonde and model data. For the polar AMVs, a remarkable agreement with MODIS AMVs has been found.</p><p>To better serve closer to real time needs for reanalysis, EUMETSAT is experimenting with the continuous production of an Interim Climate Data Record (ICDR) with a timeliness close to real-time. With a still not completely operational low-cost approach, a timeliness of 83% within 18 hours at similar quality was achieved.</p><p>In addition to the existing data records the presentation provides the plan for future improvements and new CDR releases for AMV data records in the coming years. In particular, the use of better information on multi-layer cloud objects in AMV retrievals is a central part for the improvements of the AMVs from geostationary orbit.  </p>

Because conventional observations over the oceans are not available, especially during tropical cyclones, multi-spectral atmospheric motion vectors (AMVs) estimated from geostationary satellites are routinely assimilated in the numerical weather prediction models at different operational centres across the globe. The derived AMVs are generally validated with radiosonde observations available over land at synoptic hours; however, over the ocean there is a limited scope to assess the quality of AMVs. Over ocean, AMVs can be validated with radiosonde data available from opportunistic ships or using dropsonde data available from aircrafts. In this study, the accuracy of the AMVs derived from the geostationary satellites Kalpana-1 and Meteosat-7 is evaluated over the oceanic region. Radiosonde data available from a ship cruise held in the Bay of Bengal during the period 09 July–08 August 2012 and from the Cal/Val site situated at Kavaratti Island (72.62°E, 10.57°N) in the southern Indian Ocean are used to assess the AMV accuracy. In this study, 83 radiosonde profiles are used to validate the Kalpana-1 AMVs, to allow a better understanding of AMV errors over the Indian Ocean. The RMSVD of Kalpana-1 AMVs for the high-, mid- and low-levels are found to be 7.9, 9.4 and 5.3 m s−1, respectively, while the corresponding RMSVD for Meteosat-7 AMVs are 9.1, 5.5 and 3.7 m s−1. A similar accuracy is observed when the AMVs are validated against the NCEP analyses collocated with the nearest radiosonde locations. The high RMSVD and bias for Kalpana-1 AMVs at the mid-level and Meteosat-7 AMVs at the high-level are associated with the limitation of satellite winds to resolve the upper-level easterly jet in conjunction with errors in the height assignment. This study could help the numerical modellers to assign appropriate observation error over this region during the assimilation of AMVs into the NWP models.

Validation of Kalpana-1 atmospheric motion vectors (AMVs) against upper air radiosonde (RS) winds and numerical model-derived winds (National Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting's (NCMRWF's) T382L64 first guess) during the monsoon season of 2011 was attempted in this study. This was the first attempt to compare Kalpana-1 AMVs with model-derived winds. An AMV validation against RS winds showed that the mean AMV speed is always higher than that of the mean RS speed, except in high-level cloud motion vectors (CMVs). In the southwest monsoon season of 2011, the maximum speed bias in Kalpana-1 AMV with respect to RS winds was observed in the middle level (∼5 m s−1). The root mean square vector difference (RMSVD) of Kalpana-1 AMV with respect to the collocated RS winds (∼5–7 m s−1) has been found to be in the same range as those of other geostationary satellites, especially over the northern hemisphere and the tropics. The validation of Kalpana-1 AMVs against first guess revealed more erroneous low-level and middle-level AMVs, but the vector difference in the high-level winds was found to be smaller than the same in the low- and middle-level winds. The uncertainty in the empirical genetic algorithm (GA) used to derive the Kalpana-1 AMVs, which does not use model background fields, may be the reason for the high RMSVD of Kalpana-1 AMVs with respect to RS winds and high bias with respect to first guess. The mean observed AMV clearly depicted monsoonal features such as low-level westerly jet (LLWJ) and tropical easterly jet (TEJ). The speed bias density plots of Kalpana-1 high-level CMVs (400–100 hPa) and water vapour channel winds (WVWs) (above ∼500 hPa) with respect to first guess showed that the bias was higher for WVWs; however, the standard deviations of high-level CMVs and WVWs are comparable.

The need for highly accurate atmospheric wind observations is a high priority in the science community, and in particular numerical weather prediction (NWP). To address this requirement, this study leverages Aeolus wind LIDAR Level-2B data provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) to better characterize atmospheric motion vector (AMV) bias and uncertainty, with the eventual goal of potentially improving AMV algorithms. AMV products from geostationary (GEO) and low-Earth polar orbiting (LEO) satellites are compared with reprocessed Aeolus horizontal line-of-sight (HLOS) global winds observed in August and September 2019. Winds from two of the four Aeolus observing modes are utilized for comparison with AMVs: Rayleigh-clear (derived from the molecular scattering signal) and Mie-cloudy (derived from particle scattering). For the most direct comparison, quality controlled (QC’d) Aeolus winds are collocated with quality controlled AMVs in space and time, and the AMVs are projected onto the Aeolus HLOS direction. Mean collocation differences (MCD) and standard deviation (SD) of those differences (SDCD) are determined from comparisons based on a number of conditions, and their relation to known AMV bias and uncertainty estimates is discussed. GOES-16 and LEO AMV characterizations based on Aeolus winds are described in more detail. Overall, QC’d AMVs correspond well with QC’d Aeolus HLOS wind velocities (HLOSV) for both Rayleigh-clear and Mie-cloudy observing modes, despite remaining biases in Aeolus winds after reprocessing. Comparisons with Aeolus HLOSV are consistent with known AMV bias and uncertainty in the tropics, NH extratropics, and in the Arctic, and at mid- to upper-levels in both clear and cloudy scenes. SH comparisons generally exhibit larger than expected SDCD, which could be attributed to height assignment errors in regions of high winds and enhanced vertical wind shear. GOES-16 water vapor clear-sky AMVs perform best relative to Rayleigh-clear winds, with small MCD (-0.6 m s-1 to 0.1 m s-1) and SDCD (5.4–5.6 m s-1) in the NH and tropics that fall within the accepted range of AMV error values relative to radiosonde winds. Compared to Mie-cloudy winds, AMVs exhibit similar MCD and smaller SDCD (~4.4–4.8 m s-1) throughout the troposphere. In polar regions, Mie-cloudy comparisons have smaller SDCD (5.2 m s-1 in the Arctic, 6.7 m s-1 in the Antarctic) relative to Rayleigh-clear comparisons, which are larger by 1–2 m s-1. The level of agreement between AMVs and Aeolus winds varies per combination of conditions including the Aeolus observing mode coupled with AMV derivation method, geographic region, and height of the collocated winds. It is advised that these stratifications be considered in future comparison studies and impact assessments involving 3D winds. Additional bias corrections to the Aeolus dataset are anticipated to further refine the results.

The need for highly accurate atmospheric wind observations is a high priority in the science community, and in particular numerical weather prediction (NWP). To address this requirement, this study leverages Aeolus wind LIDAR Level-2B data provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) to better characterize atmospheric motion vector (AMV) bias and uncertainty, with the eventual goal of potentially improving AMV algorithms. AMV products from geostationary (GEO) and low-Earth polar orbiting (LEO) satellites are compared with reprocessed Aeolus horizontal line-of-sight (HLOS) global winds observed in August and September 2019. Winds from two of the four Aeolus observing modes are utilized for comparison with AMVs: Rayleigh-clear (derived from the molecular scattering signal) and Mie-cloudy (derived from particle scattering). For the most direct comparison, quality controlled (QC’d) Aeolus winds are collocated with quality controlled AMVs in space and time, and the AMVs are projected onto the Aeolus HLOS direction. Mean collocation differences (MCD) and standard deviation (SD) of those differences (SDCD) are determined from comparisons based on a number of conditions, and their relation to known AMV bias and uncertainty estimates is discussed. GOES-16 and LEO AMV characterizations based on Aeolus winds are described in more detail. Overall, QC’d AMVs correspond well with QC’d Aeolus HLOS wind velocities (HLOSV) for both Rayleigh-clear and Mie-cloudy observing modes, despite remaining biases in Aeolus winds after reprocessing. Comparisons with Aeolus HLOSV are consistent with known AMV bias and uncertainty in the tropics, NH extratropics, and in the Arctic, and at mid- to upper-levels in both clear and cloudy scenes. SH comparisons generally exhibit larger than expected SDCD, which could be attributed to height assignment errors in regions of high winds and enhanced vertical wind shear. GOES-16 water vapor clear-sky AMVs perform best relative to Rayleigh-clear winds, with small MCD (-0.6 m s-1 to 0.1 m s-1) and SDCD (5.4–5.6 m s-1) in the NH and tropics that fall within the accepted range of AMV error values relative to radiosonde winds. Compared to Mie-cloudy winds, AMVs exhibit similar MCD and smaller SDCD (~4.4–4.8 m s-1) throughout the troposphere. In polar regions, Mie-cloudy comparisons have smaller SDCD (5.2 m s-1 in the Arctic, 6.7 m s-1 in the Antarctic) relative to Rayleigh-clear comparisons, which are larger by 1–2 m s-1. The level of agreement between AMVs and Aeolus winds varies per combination of conditions including the Aeolus observing mode coupled with AMV derivation method, geographic region, and height of the collocated winds. It is advised that these stratifications be considered in future comparison studies and impact assessments involving 3D winds. Additional bias corrections to the Aeolus dataset are anticipated to further refine the results.

The need for highly accurate atmospheric wind observations is a high priority in the science community, and in particular numerical weather prediction (NWP). To address this requirement, this study leverages Aeolus wind LIDAR Level-2B data provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) to better characterize atmospheric motion vector (AMV) bias and uncertainty, with the eventual goal of potentially improving AMV algorithms. AMV products from geostationary (GEO) and low-Earth polar orbiting (LEO) satellites are compared with reprocessed Aeolus horizontal line-of-sight (HLOS) global winds observed in August and September 2019. Winds from two of the four Aeolus observing modes are utilized for comparison with AMVs: Rayleigh-clear (derived from the molecular scattering signal) and Mie-cloudy (derived from particle scattering). For the most direct comparison, quality controlled (QC’d) Aeolus winds are collocated with quality controlled AMVs in space and time, and the AMVs are projected onto the Aeolus HLOS direction. Mean collocation differences (MCD) and standard deviation (SD) of those differences (SDCD) are determined from comparisons based on a number of conditions, and their relation to known AMV bias and uncertainty estimates is discussed. GOES-16 and LEO AMV characterizations based on Aeolus winds are described in more detail. Overall, QC’d AMVs correspond well with QC’d Aeolus HLOS wind velocities (HLOSV) for both Rayleigh-clear and Mie-cloudy observing modes, despite remaining biases in Aeolus winds after reprocessing. Comparisons with Aeolus HLOSV are consistent with known AMV bias and uncertainty in the tropics, NH extratropics, and in the Arctic, and at mid- to upper-levels in both clear and cloudy scenes. SH comparisons generally exhibit larger than expected SDCD, which could be attributed to height assignment errors in regions of high winds and enhanced vertical wind shear. GOES-16 water vapor clear-sky AMVs perform best relative to Rayleigh-clear winds, with small MCD (-0.6 m s-1 to 0.1 m s-1) and SDCD (5.4–5.6 m s-1) in the NH and tropics that fall within the accepted range of AMV error values relative to radiosonde winds. Compared to Mie-cloudy winds, AMVs exhibit similar MCD and smaller SDCD (~4.4–4.8 m s-1) throughout the troposphere. In polar regions, Mie-cloudy comparisons have smaller SDCD (5.2 m s-1 in the Arctic, 6.7 m s-1 in the Antarctic) relative to Rayleigh-clear comparisons, which are larger by 1–2 m s-1. The level of agreement between AMVs and Aeolus winds varies per combination of conditions including the Aeolus observing mode coupled with AMV derivation method, geographic region, and height of the collocated winds. It is advised that these stratifications be considered in future comparison studies and impact assessments involving 3D winds. Additional bias corrections to the Aeolus dataset are anticipated to further refine the results.

<strong class="journal-contentHeaderColor">Abstract.</strong> The need for highly accurate atmospheric wind observations is a high priority in the science community, particularly for numerical weather prediction (NWP). To address this need, this study leverages Aeolus wind lidar level-2B data provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) as a potential comparison standard to better characterize atmospheric motion vector (AMV) bias and uncertainty. AMV products from geostationary (GEO) and low Earth orbiting (LEO) satellites are compared with reprocessed Aeolus horizontal line-of-sight (HLOS) global winds observed in August–September 2019. Winds from two Aeolus observing modes are compared with AMVs, namely Rayleigh-clear (RAY; derived from the molecular scattering signal) and Mie-cloudy (MIE; derived from the particle scattering signal). Quality-controlled (QC'd) Aeolus winds are co-located with QC'd AMVs in space and time, and the AMVs are projected onto the Aeolus HLOS direction. Mean co-location differences (MCDs) and the standard deviation (SD) of those differences (SDCDs) are determined and analyzed. As shown in other comparison studies, the level of agreement between AMV and Aeolus wind velocities (HLOSVs) varies with the AMV type, geographic region, and height of the co-located winds, as well as with the Aeolus observing mode. In terms of global statistics, QC'd AMVs and QC'd Aeolus HLOSVs are highly correlated for both observing modes. Aeolus MIE winds are shown to have great potential value as a comparison standard to characterize AMVs, as MIE co-locations generally exhibit smaller biases and uncertainties compared to RAY co-locations. Aeolus RAY winds contribute a substantial fraction of the total SDCDs in the presence of clouds where co-location/representativeness errors are also large. Stratified comparisons with Aeolus HLOSVs are consistent with known AMV bias and uncertainty in the tropics, NH extratropics, the Arctic, and at mid- to upper-levels in clear and cloudy scenes. AMVs in the SH/Antarctic generally exhibit larger-than-expected MCDs and SDCDs, most probably due to larger AMV height assignment errors and co-location/representativeness errors in the presence of high wind speeds and strong vertical wind shear, particularly for RAY comparisons.

<strong class="journal-contentHeaderColor">Abstract.</strong> The need for highly accurate atmospheric wind observations is a high priority in the science community, particularly for numerical weather prediction (NWP). To address this need, this study leverages Aeolus wind lidar level-2B data provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) as a potential comparison standard to better characterize atmospheric motion vector (AMV) bias and uncertainty. AMV products from geostationary (GEO) and low Earth orbiting (LEO) satellites are compared with reprocessed Aeolus horizontal line-of-sight (HLOS) global winds observed in August–September 2019. Winds from two Aeolus observing modes are compared with AMVs, namely Rayleigh-clear (RAY; derived from the molecular scattering signal) and Mie-cloudy (MIE; derived from the particle scattering signal). Quality-controlled (QC'd) Aeolus winds are co-located with QC'd AMVs in space and time, and the AMVs are projected onto the Aeolus HLOS direction. Mean co-location differences (MCDs) and the standard deviation (SD) of those differences (SDCDs) are determined and analyzed. As shown in other comparison studies, the level of agreement between AMV and Aeolus wind velocities (HLOSVs) varies with the AMV type, geographic region, and height of the co-located winds, as well as with the Aeolus observing mode. In terms of global statistics, QC'd AMVs and QC'd Aeolus HLOSVs are highly correlated for both observing modes. Aeolus MIE winds are shown to have great potential value as a comparison standard to characterize AMVs, as MIE co-locations generally exhibit smaller biases and uncertainties compared to RAY co-locations. Aeolus RAY winds contribute a substantial fraction of the total SDCDs in the presence of clouds where co-location/representativeness errors are also large. Stratified comparisons with Aeolus HLOSVs are consistent with known AMV bias and uncertainty in the tropics, NH extratropics, the Arctic, and at mid- to upper-levels in clear and cloudy scenes. AMVs in the SH/Antarctic generally exhibit larger-than-expected MCDs and SDCDs, most probably due to larger AMV height assignment errors and co-location/representativeness errors in the presence of high wind speeds and strong vertical wind shear, particularly for RAY comparisons.

The need for highly accurate atmospheric wind observations is a high priority in the science community, and in particular numerical weather prediction (NWP). To address this requirement, this study leverages Aeolus wind LIDAR Level-2B data provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) to better characterize atmospheric motion vector (AMV) bias and uncertainty, with the eventual goal of potentially improving AMV algorithms. AMV products from geostationary (GEO) and low-Earth polar orbiting (LEO) satellites are compared with reprocessed Aeolus horizontal line-of-sight (HLOS) global winds observed in August and September 2019. Winds from two of the four Aeolus observing modes are utilized for comparison with AMVs: Rayleigh-clear (derived from the molecular scattering signal) and Mie-cloudy (derived from particle scattering). For the most direct comparison, quality controlled (QC’d) Aeolus winds are collocated with quality controlled AMVs in space and time, and the AMVs are projected onto the Aeolus HLOS direction. Mean collocation differences (MCD) and standard deviation (SD) of those differences (SDCD) are determined from comparisons based on a number of conditions, and their relation to known AMV bias and uncertainty estimates is discussed. GOES-16 and LEO AMV characterizations based on Aeolus winds are described in more detail. Overall, QC’d AMVs correspond well with QC’d Aeolus HLOS wind velocities (HLOSV) for both Rayleigh-clear and Mie-cloudy observing modes, despite remaining biases in Aeolus winds after reprocessing. Comparisons with Aeolus HLOSV are consistent with known AMV bias and uncertainty in the tropics, NH extratropics, and in the Arctic, and at mid- to upper-levels in both clear and cloudy scenes. SH comparisons generally exhibit larger than expected SDCD, which could be attributed to height assignment errors in regions of high winds and enhanced vertical wind shear. GOES-16 water vapor clear-sky AMVs perform best relative to Rayleigh-clear winds, with small MCD (-0.6 m s-1 to 0.1 m s-1) and SDCD (5.4–5.6 m s-1) in the NH and tropics that fall within the accepted range of AMV error values relative to radiosonde winds. Compared to Mie-cloudy winds, AMVs exhibit similar MCD and smaller SDCD (~4.4–4.8 m s-1) throughout the troposphere. In polar regions, Mie-cloudy comparisons have smaller SDCD (5.2 m s-1 in the Arctic, 6.7 m s-1 in the Antarctic) relative to Rayleigh-clear comparisons, which are larger by 1–2 m s-1. The level of agreement between AMVs and Aeolus winds varies per combination of conditions including the Aeolus observing mode coupled with AMV derivation method, geographic region, and height of the collocated winds. It is advised that these stratifications be considered in future comparison studies and impact assessments involving 3D winds. Additional bias corrections to the Aeolus dataset are anticipated to further refine the results.

The thermal characteristics during the South China Sea (SCS) summer monsoon onset period near the Indo-China Peninsula are analyzed by using the South China Sea Monsoon Experiment (SCSMEX) reanalysis data from 1 May to 31 August 1998 and the NCEP/ NCAR pentad-mean reanalysis data from January 1980 to December 1995. The possible relationships between the anomaly of thermal features near the Indo-China Peninsula and the SCS monsoon onset are investigated, and the mechanism causing the SCS summer monsoon onset is also discussed. Results from the 1998 SCSMEX reanalysis data show that there exists a strong persistent surface sensible heating near the Indo-China Peninsula prior to the SCS monsoon onset, which has apparent low frequency oscillation features. This sensible healing leads lo a warmer center in the lower atmosphere near the Indo-China Peninsula and strong local horizontal temperature and geopotential height gradients which are favorable to strengthening the southwest wind over the Indo-China Peninsula. It is also found that stronger convergent winds at lower levels and stronger divergent winds at high levels appear, which provide a favorable configuration for the development of vertical motion, enhancement of precipitation, and onset of the SCS monsoon. These results can be verified by analysis of the multi-year mean data. Additionally, it is found that the temperature at 850 hPa increases more rapidly over the Indo-China Peninsula than the South China Sea prior to the SCS monsoon onset, which leads to a strengthening of the temperature difference between the Indo-China Peninsula and the South China Sea. Moreover, results from the analysis of the longitudinal temperature and geopotential height differences show that the eastern retreat of the subtropical high over the Indo-China Peninsula during the period of SCS monsoon onset is associated with the temperature increase over the Indo-China Peninsula and the eastern extension of low trough over the Bay of Bengal.

The atmospheric motion vectors (AMVs) retrieved from geostationary satellites are recognized as one of the important inputs for numerical weather prediction models to improve the tropical cyclone (TC) forecast. In this study, the weather research and forecasting (WRF) model, WRF three-dimensional variational (3D-Var) data assimilation system and WRF tangent linear and adjoint model are used to investigate the impact of multispectral Kalpana-1 AMVs on the simulation of Mahasen tropical cyclone (now known as cyclonic storm Viyaru) over the Indian Ocean. Three different sets of experiments are performed to evaluate the impact of Kalpana-1 AMVs. First, the impacts of Kalpana-1 AMVs are evaluated for different forecast lengths. The assimilation of Kalpana-1 AMVs improves the cyclone track prediction compared to control experiment. However, all the experiments are unable to capture the deep re-curvature of the TC. The next set of experiments is performed to evaluate the impact of Kalpana-1 AMVs derived from different multispectral channels (viz. visible, infrared and water vapor channels). More improvement is observed in TC track forecast when AMVs from water vapor channel are used for assimilation compared to infrared channel. Results also show degradation in short-range forecast when less-strict quality control is used for AMVs assimilation, but a considerable improvement is observed in long-range forecasts. Finally, the WRF tangent linear and adjoint model is used to compute the forecast sensitivity to Kalpana-1 AMVs observations. Upper- and lower-level circulation information provided by the Kalpana-1 AMVs influences the TC steering flow, and a positive impact on the track prediction is observed.

Abstract. The need for highly accurate atmospheric wind observations is a high priority in the science community, particularly for numerical weather prediction (NWP). To address this need, this study leverages Aeolus wind lidar level-2B data provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) as a potential comparison standard to better characterize atmospheric motion vector (AMV) bias and uncertainty. AMV products from geostationary (GEO) and low Earth orbiting (LEO) satellites are compared with reprocessed Aeolus horizontal line-of-sight (HLOS) global winds observed in August–September 2019. Winds from two Aeolus observing modes are compared with AMVs, namely Rayleigh-clear (RAY; derived from the molecular scattering signal) and Mie-cloudy (MIE; derived from the particle scattering signal). Quality-controlled (QC'd) Aeolus winds are co-located with QC'd AMVs in space and time, and the AMVs are projected onto the Aeolus HLOS direction. Mean co-location differences (MCDs) and the standard deviation (SD) of those differences (SDCDs) are determined and analyzed. As shown in other comparison studies, the level of agreement between AMV and Aeolus wind velocities (HLOSVs) varies with the AMV type, geographic region, and height of the co-located winds, as well as with the Aeolus observing mode. In terms of global statistics, QC'd AMVs and QC'd Aeolus HLOSVs are highly correlated for both observing modes. Aeolus MIE winds are shown to have great potential value as a comparison standard to characterize AMVs, as MIE co-locations generally exhibit smaller biases and uncertainties compared to RAY co-locations. Aeolus RAY winds contribute a substantial fraction of the total SDCDs in the presence of clouds where co-location/representativeness errors are also large. Stratified comparisons with Aeolus HLOSVs are consistent with known AMV bias and uncertainty in the tropics, NH extratropics, the Arctic, and at mid- to upper-levels in clear and cloudy scenes. AMVs in the SH/Antarctic generally exhibit larger-than-expected MCDs and SDCDs, most probably due to larger AMV height assignment errors and co-location/representativeness errors in the presence of high wind speeds and strong vertical wind shear, particularly for RAY comparisons.

<strong class="journal-contentHeaderColor">Abstract.</strong> The need for highly accurate atmospheric wind observations is a high priority in the science community, particularly for numerical weather prediction (NWP). To address this need, this study leverages Aeolus wind lidar level-2B data provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) as a potential comparison standard to better characterize atmospheric motion vector (AMV) bias and uncertainty. AMV products from geostationary (GEO) and low Earth orbiting (LEO) satellites are compared with reprocessed Aeolus horizontal line-of-sight (HLOS) global winds observed in August–September 2019. Winds from two Aeolus observing modes are compared with AMVs, namely Rayleigh-clear (RAY; derived from the molecular scattering signal) and Mie-cloudy (MIE; derived from the particle scattering signal). Quality-controlled (QC'd) Aeolus winds are co-located with QC'd AMVs in space and time, and the AMVs are projected onto the Aeolus HLOS direction. Mean co-location differences (MCDs) and the standard deviation (SD) of those differences (SDCDs) are determined and analyzed. As shown in other comparison studies, the level of agreement between AMV and Aeolus wind velocities (HLOSVs) varies with the AMV type, geographic region, and height of the co-located winds, as well as with the Aeolus observing mode. In terms of global statistics, QC'd AMVs and QC'd Aeolus HLOSVs are highly correlated for both observing modes. Aeolus MIE winds are shown to have great potential value as a comparison standard to characterize AMVs, as MIE co-locations generally exhibit smaller biases and uncertainties compared to RAY co-locations. Aeolus RAY winds contribute a substantial fraction of the total SDCDs in the presence of clouds where co-location/representativeness errors are also large. Stratified comparisons with Aeolus HLOSVs are consistent with known AMV bias and uncertainty in the tropics, NH extratropics, the Arctic, and at mid- to upper-levels in clear and cloudy scenes. AMVs in the SH/Antarctic generally exhibit larger-than-expected MCDs and SDCDs, most probably due to larger AMV height assignment errors and co-location/representativeness errors in the presence of high wind speeds and strong vertical wind shear, particularly for RAY comparisons.