Articles | Volume 12, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-51-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-51-2019
Research article
 | 
03 Jan 2019
Research article |  | 03 Jan 2019

CALIPSO lidar calibration at 1064 nm: version 4 algorithm

Mark Vaughan, Anne Garnier, Damien Josset, Melody Avery, Kam-Pui Lee, Zhaoyan Liu, William Hunt, Jacques Pelon, Yongxiang Hu, Sharon Burton, Johnathan Hair, Jason L. Tackett, Brian Getzewich, Jayanta Kar, and Sharon Rodier

Related authors

Total Column Optical Depths Retrieved from CALIPSO Lidar Ocean Surface Backscatter
Robert A. Ryan, Mark A. Vaughan, Sharon D. Rodier, Jason L. Tackett, John A. Reagan, Richard A. Ferrare, Johnathan W. Hair, and Brian J. Getzewich
Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2024-23,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2024-23, 2024
Preprint under review for AMT
Short summary
A Level 3 Monthly Gridded Ice Cloud Dataset Derived from a Decade of CALIOP Measurements
David Winker, Xia Cai, Mark Vaughan, Anne Garnier, Brian Magill, Melody Avery, and Brian Getzewich
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-373,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-373, 2023
Revised manuscript accepted for ESSD
Short summary
Aircraft Engine Dust Ingestion at Global Airports
Claire L. Ryder, Clèment Bézier, Helen F. Dacre, Rory Clarkson, Vassilis Amiridis, Eleni Marinou, Emmanouil Proestakis, Zak Kipling, Angela Benedetti, Mark Parrington, Samuel Rémy, and Mark Vaughan
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-662,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-662, 2023
Short summary
The CALIPSO version 4.5 stratospheric aerosol subtyping algorithm
Jason L. Tackett, Jayanta Kar, Mark A. Vaughan, Brian J. Getzewich, Man-Hae Kim, Jean-Paul Vernier, Ali H. Omar, Brian E. Magill, Michael C. Pitts, and David M. Winker
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 745–768, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-745-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-745-2023, 2023
Short summary
Assessment of tropospheric CALIPSO Version 4.2 aerosol types over the ocean using independent CALIPSO–SODA lidar ratios
Zhujun Li, David Painemal, Gregory Schuster, Marian Clayton, Richard Ferrare, Mark Vaughan, Damien Josset, Jayanta Kar, and Charles Trepte
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 2745–2766, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-2745-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-2745-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Clouds | Technique: Remote Sensing | Topic: Data Processing and Information Retrieval
A cloud-by-cloud approach for studying aerosol–cloud interaction in satellite observations
Fani Alexandri, Felix Müller, Goutam Choudhury, Peggy Achtert, Torsten Seelig, and Matthias Tesche
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 1739–1757, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1739-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1739-2024, 2024
Short summary
Geometrical and optical properties of cirrus clouds in Barcelona, Spain: analysis with the two-way transmittance method of 4 years of lidar measurements
Cristina Gil-Díaz, Michäel Sicard, Adolfo Comerón, Daniel Camilo Fortunato dos Santos Oliveira, Constantino Muñoz-Porcar, Alejandro Rodríguez-Gómez, Jasper R. Lewis, Ellsworth J. Welton, and Simone Lolli
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 1197–1216, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1197-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1197-2024, 2024
Short summary
Determination of the vertical distribution of in-cloud particle shape using SLDR-mode 35 GHz scanning cloud radar
Audrey Teisseire, Patric Seifert, Alexander Myagkov, Johannes Bühl, and Martin Radenz
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 999–1016, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-999-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-999-2024, 2024
Short summary
Artificial intelligence (AI)-derived 3D cloud tomography from geostationary 2D satellite data
Sarah Brüning, Stefan Niebler, and Holger Tost
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 961–978, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-961-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-961-2024, 2024
Short summary
The EarthCARE mission: science data processing chain overview
Michael Eisinger, Fabien Marnas, Kotska Wallace, Takuji Kubota, Nobuhiro Tomiyama, Yuichi Ohno, Toshiyuki Tanaka, Eichi Tomita, Tobias Wehr, and Dirk Bernaerts
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 839–862, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-839-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-839-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Ansmann, A., Bösenberg, J., Brogniez, G., Elouragini, S., Flamant, P. H., Klapheck, K., Linn, H., Menenger, L., Michaelis, W., Riebesell, M., Senff, C., Thro, P.-Y., Wandinger, U., and Weitkamp, C.: Lidar Network Observations of Cirrus Morphological and Scattering Properties during the International Cirrus Experiment 1989: The 18 October 1989 Case Study and Statistical Analysis, J. Appl. Meteorol., 32, 1608–1622, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1993)032<1608:LNOOCM>2.0.CO;2, 1993. 
Avery, M., Ryan, R., Getzewich, B., Vaughan, M., Winker, D., Hu, Y., Garnier, A., Pelon, J., Cai, X., and Verhappen, C. A.: Impact of Near-Nadir Viewing Angles on CALIOP V4.1 Cloud Thermodynamic Phase Assignments, in preparation, 2018. 
Beyerle, G., M. Gross, R., Haner, D. A., Kjome, N. T., McDermid, I. S., McGee, T. J., Rosen, J. M., Schäfer, H.-J., and Schrems, O.: A Lidar and Backscatter Sonde Measurement Campaign at Table Mountain during February–March 1997: Observations of Cirrus Clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 1275–1287, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)058<1275:ALABSM>2.0.CO;2, 2001. 
Bufton, J. L., Hoge, F. E., and Swift, R. N.: Airborne measurements of laser backscatter from the ocean surface, Appl. Opt., 22, 2603–2618, https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.22.002603, 1983. 
Burton, S. P., Ferrare, R. A., Hostetler, C. A., Hair, J. W., Kittaka, C., Vaughan, M. A., Obland, M. D., Rogers, R. R., Cook, A. L., Harper, D. B., and Remer, L. A.: Using Airborne High Spectral Resolution Lidar Data to Evaluate Combined Active Plus Passive Retrievals of Aerosol Extinction Profiles, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D00H15, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012130, 2010. 
Download
Short summary
The version 4 (V4) release of the CALIPSO data products includes substantial improvements to the calibration of the CALIOP 1064 nm channel. In this paper we review the fundamentals of 1064 nm lidar calibration, explain the motivations for the changes made to the algorithm, and describe the mechanics of the V4 calibration technique. Internal consistency checks and comparisons to collocated high spectral resolution lidar measurements show the V4 1064 nm calibration coefficients to within ~ 3 %.