Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Evaluation of a Mesoscale Short-Range Ensemble Forecast System over the Northeast United States

Evaluation of a Mesoscale Short-Range Ensemble Forecast System over the Northeast United States A short-range ensemble forecast system was constructed over the northeast United States down to 12-km grid spacing using 18 members from the fifth-generation Pennsylvania State University–National Center for Atmospheric Research Mesoscale Model (MM5). The ensemble consisted of 12 physics members with varying planetary boundary layer schemes and convective parameterizations as well as seven different initial conditions (ICs) five National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Eta-bred members at 2100 UTC and the 0000 UTC NCEP Global Forecast System (GFS) and Eta runs. The full 18-member ensemble (ALL) was verified at the surface for the warm (May–September 2003) and cool (October 2003–March 2004) seasons. A randomly chosen subset of seven physics (PHS) members at each forecast hour was used to quantitatively compare with the seven IC members. During the warm season, the PHS ensemble predictions for surface temperature and wind speed had more skill than the IC ensemble and a control (shared PHS and IC member) run initialized 12 h later (CTL12). During the cool and warm seasons, a 14-day running-mean bias calibration applied to the ALL ensemble (ALLBC) added 10%–30% more skill for temperature, wind speed, and sea level pressure, with the ALLBC far outperforming the CTL12. For the 24-h precipitation, the PHS ensemble had comparable probabilistic skill to the IC ensemble during the warm season, while the IC subensemble was more skillful during the cool season. All ensemble members had large diurnal surface biases, with ensemble variance approximating ensemble uncertainty only for wind direction. Selection of ICs was also important, because during the cool season the NCEP-bred members introduced large errors into the IC ensemble for sea level pressure, while none of the subensembles (PHS, IC, or ALL) outperformed the GFS–MM5 for sea level pressure. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Weather and Forecasting American Meteorological Society

Evaluation of a Mesoscale Short-Range Ensemble Forecast System over the Northeast United States

Download PDF
20 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-meteorological-society/evaluation-of-a-mesoscale-short-range-ensemble-forecast-system-over-VHscqlasqE

References (38)

Publisher
American Meteorological Society
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 American Meteorological Society
ISSN
1520-0434
DOI
10.1175/WAF973.1
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

A short-range ensemble forecast system was constructed over the northeast United States down to 12-km grid spacing using 18 members from the fifth-generation Pennsylvania State University–National Center for Atmospheric Research Mesoscale Model (MM5). The ensemble consisted of 12 physics members with varying planetary boundary layer schemes and convective parameterizations as well as seven different initial conditions (ICs) five National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Eta-bred members at 2100 UTC and the 0000 UTC NCEP Global Forecast System (GFS) and Eta runs. The full 18-member ensemble (ALL) was verified at the surface for the warm (May–September 2003) and cool (October 2003–March 2004) seasons. A randomly chosen subset of seven physics (PHS) members at each forecast hour was used to quantitatively compare with the seven IC members. During the warm season, the PHS ensemble predictions for surface temperature and wind speed had more skill than the IC ensemble and a control (shared PHS and IC member) run initialized 12 h later (CTL12). During the cool and warm seasons, a 14-day running-mean bias calibration applied to the ALL ensemble (ALLBC) added 10%–30% more skill for temperature, wind speed, and sea level pressure, with the ALLBC far outperforming the CTL12. For the 24-h precipitation, the PHS ensemble had comparable probabilistic skill to the IC ensemble during the warm season, while the IC subensemble was more skillful during the cool season. All ensemble members had large diurnal surface biases, with ensemble variance approximating ensemble uncertainty only for wind direction. Selection of ICs was also important, because during the cool season the NCEP-bred members introduced large errors into the IC ensemble for sea level pressure, while none of the subensembles (PHS, IC, or ALL) outperformed the GFS–MM5 for sea level pressure.

Journal

Weather and Forecasting – American Meteorological Society

Published: Mar 2, 2006

There are no references for this article.