Abstract
Consistency between national wave buoy networks is extremely important for wave climate studies and verification of global operational wave forecasting systems; however, it is insufficiently investigated. The validation of altimeter significant wave heights (SWHs) with the wave buoy networks of China, Europe and the National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) show significant divergence in assessments. This reveals a negative bias and larger root mean square error and scatter index from the Chinese buoy network than from the European and NDBC buoy networks. A remote cross-calibration method is presented using the collocations between altimeters and buoys to match the buoy observations from different networks. The Chinese buoys are found to yield a negative bias of −0.127 m compared to European/NDBC buoy networks. The cross-calibration equation is achieved by regression of the SWHs between the Chinese and European/NDBC buoy networks. The use of this remote cross-calibration significantly reduces the inconsistency between the Chinese and European/NDBC buoys in the validation of SWH from altimeter HY2B.
Highlights
Obtaining accurate wave conditions is a crucial issue for both marine activities and geographic science, such as the ocean climate
Wave observations are widely used in the validation/calibration phase of wave remote sensing missions to improve the retrieval algorithm [1], and buoy data are used as reliable references to validate and improve the physical processes, parametric schemes or model settings implemented in wave models [2,3,4]
We present how we use multi-mission altimeter significant wave heights (SWHs) to perform remote cross-calibration of buoys belonging to different networks
Summary
Obtaining accurate wave conditions is a crucial issue for both marine activities and geographic science, such as the ocean climate. TThhee wwaavvee oobbsseerrvvaattiioonnss ooff tthhee bbuuooyyss ffrroomm tthhee NNDDBBCC,, EEuurrooppeeaann aanndd CChhiinneessee nneettwwoorrkkss aarree ccoollllooccaatteedd wwiitthh aallttiimmeetteerrss. We clearly see that the positive bias from the validation against the Chinese network was observed for all SWH ranges, while the bias distributions from the European and NDBC buoys were close to each other. A possible explanation for the large difference in the altimeter validations
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
