Premium
Evaluation of a cloud system life‐cycle simulated by the Meso‐NH model during FASTEX using METEOSAT radiances and TOVS‐3I cloud retrievals
Author(s) -
Chaboureau JeanPierre,
Cammas JeanPierre,
Mascart Patrick,
Pinty JeanPierre,
Claud Chantal,
Roca Remy,
Morcrette JeanJacques
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
quarterly journal of the royal meteorological society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.744
H-Index - 143
eISSN - 1477-870X
pISSN - 0035-9009
DOI - 10.1002/qj.49712656609
Subject(s) - environmental science , parametrization (atmospheric modeling) , meteorology , cloud cover , atmospheric radiative transfer codes , cloud height , cloud computing , radiative transfer , cloud top , satellite , remote sensing , mesoscale meteorology , atmospheric sciences , brightness temperature , brightness , computer science , geology , physics , optics , quantum mechanics , astronomy , operating system
The evaluation of a simulation over the life‐cycle of a cloud system during the Fronts and Atlantic Storm‐Track EXperiment is made by comparing synthetic and METEOSAT observed radiances. The usefulness of a ‘model‐to‐satellite’ approach, combining an explicit cloud scheme implemented in a mesoscale model (the Meso‐NH model) with a detailed radiative‐transfer code, is shown. In clear sky, accuracy in the brightness‐temperature simulations are, respectively, about 4.5 K for the infrared channel and 2 K for the water‐vapour channel. In cloudy areas, comparison with the TOVS‐3I cloud parameters shows that these errors become twice as large. The occurrence of key patterns in the simulated infrared images confirms the good quality of the model forecast and the accuracy of the radiative code. On the other hand, the discrepancies identified by the approach show that the model overestimates the upper‐level cloud cover. It is suggested that this overestimation might result either from a too large water detrainment or from an overestimated water residence time in the upper atmosphere. Finally, using an ice‐phase parametrization in the cloud scheme significantly improves the simulated cloud cover, although this more advanced scheme does not correct the overestimation of upper‐level cloud cover.