NOAAs contribution

M. Shupe

Precip Sensor: Rate, PSD?

Microwave Radiometers: PWV, LWP, T

M. Shupe Sodar: Boundary layer depth

Ceilometer: Cloud base Cloud Radar: Cloud macrophysics, phase, microphysics, dynamics

Depolarization Lidars: Cloud base, phase, microphysics, orientation Radiosonde: T, RH, Winds Spectral Infrared Interferometer: Cloud phase, microphysics, LW radiation, trace gases

Generally, higher reflectivity values indicate ice clouds or precip

Ceilometer shows cloud base

Larger spectral widths indicate turbulence (to first order) Large backscatter indicates liquid layers

Large depol ratio = ice

Small depol ratio = liquid

High LWP shows lots of liquid in column

M. Shupe

Brightness Temp (K)

Ice is less opaque in the IR so the atmospheric window opens when liquid layer gone

M. Shupe

12 Z Sounding

24 Z Sounding

M. Shupe

10

15 Time (UTC)

20

24

M. Shupe

Monthly cloud fractions are important for: - Determining the energy budget In the Arctic, clouds warm the surface - Validating climate model cloud parametizations

Comparing Summit to the Rest of the Arctic

Shupe et al. (20??)

Minimums in January, February, March, or April August and September maximums Same basic pattern but varies slightly from location to location Depends on synoptic features, geography, etc.. OVERALL, THE ARCTIC IS A VERY CLOUDY PLACE!

Satellite-Based Observations Using CloudSat

CloudSat has complete spatial coverage (save north of 83o) and frequent overpasses of high latitudes

Cloud occurrence fractions were determined for all of Greenland using CloudSat and Calipso ONE WEEK OF OVERPASSES

CloudSAT June 2010 April 2011

Comparison to Other SatelliteDerived Annual Cloud Fractions

AVHRR 1982-2004 ATSR-2 1997 MODIS 2000-2005

Griggs & Bamber (2007)

Good agreement!

CloudSAT June 2010 April 2011

Comparison to Reanalysis Annual Cloud Fractions

ERA-40 1982-2001

Griggs & Bamber (2007)

NCEP-NCAR 1982-2004

Reanalysis datasets are poor over the Greenland Ice Sheet!

NCEP-DOE 1982-2004

ISCCP 1983-1999

M. Shupe

June 2010 April 2011

M. Shupe

Comparing the Cloud Radar at Summit to CloudSat

MMCR averaged over 1 minute centered on overpass time

CloudSat averaged over 15 data points centered on the closest data point to Summit

* Reflectivity values and cloud boundaries agree well

Distant Overpass, Good Agreement Close Overpass, Good Agreement

Distant Overpass, Poor Agreement Close Overpass, Poor Agreement

Exploring the Averaging Times for the Comparison

20 kmph

Is X really the best point? Or is it just a coincidence of the data averaging?

35 kmph

50 kmph

Possible explanation: The winds at cloud height may be averaging 35 km/h, But this assumes overpasses are parallel to wind vectors

Does Overpass Distance Matter?

Difference (Not Absolute) vs. Altitude

Difference vs. HAGL

Directly Comparing Individual Measurements

A direct comparison of CloudSat measured reflectivity to the corresponding MMCR measured reflectivity. There is a general agreement below -15 dBZ, but for larger reflectivities, CloudSat measures lower values (i.e. slope greater than 1)

Summit

v s. Barrow, AK

Physical Explanation of Slope

CloudSat MMCR

The different scattering regimes for given particle sizes and radiation wavelengths is shown. The wavelengths for Cloudsat and the MMCR are shown in red and blue, respectively. Notice that Cloudsat enters the Mie regime at smaller particle sizes than does the MMCR

Mostly precipitation

Petty (2006)

Mostly cloud particles

Limitations of the Comparison

Barrow Cloud Occurrence vs. HAGL

COMPARISON: Percent of time a cloud was detected TAKE-AWAYS: Fairly good agreement from 1 to 6 km CloudSat does not see the thinner high (> 6km) clouds CloudSat cannot see the low, stratiform clouds which are the most abundant clouds in the Arctic (< 1km)

Thank You

KANGERLUSSUAQ, GREENLAND

Some photos courtesy of Eric Parker and Nate Miller

OVER THE ICE SHEET

SUMMIT, GREENLAND