<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AMT</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Measurement Techniques</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AMT</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Meas. Tech.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1867-8548</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/amt-13-4589-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>Characteristics and performance of wind profiles as observed by the radar wind profiler network of China</article-title><alt-title>Wind profiles as observed by the radar wind profiler network of China</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Wind profiles as observed by the radar wind profiler network of China}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{B.~Liu et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" equal-contrib="yes" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Boming</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" equal-contrib="yes" corresp="yes" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Guo</surname><given-names>Jianping</given-names></name>
          <email>jpguocams@gmail.com</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8530-8976</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Gong</surname><given-names>Wei</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Shi</surname><given-names>Lijuan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Yong</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Ma</surname><given-names>Yingying</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>State Key Laboratory of Information Engineering in Surveying,
Mapping and Remote Sensing (LIESMARS),<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Wuhan University, Wuhan, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>The State Key Laboratory of Severe Weather, Chinese Academy of
Meteorological Sciences, Beijing 100081, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Meteorological observation Centre, Chinese Meteorological
Administration, Beijing 100081, China</institution>
        </aff><author-comment content-type="econtrib"><p>These authors contributed equally to this work.</p></author-comment>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Jianping Guo (jpguocams@gmail.com)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>25</day><month>August</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>13</volume>
      <issue>8</issue>
      <fpage>4589</fpage><lpage>4600</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>4</day><month>March</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>6</day><month>March</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>3</day><month>July</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>16</day><month>July</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 Boming Liu et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020.html">This article is available from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e143">Wind profiles are fundamental to the research and
applications in boundary layer meteorology, air quality and numerical
weather prediction. Large-scale wind profile data have been previously
documented from network observations in several countries, such as Japan,
the USA, various European countries and Australia, but nationwide wind
profiles observations are poorly understood in China. In this study, the
salient characteristics and performance of wind profiles as observed by the
radar wind profiler network of China are investigated. This network consists
of more than 100 stations instrumented with 1290 MHz Doppler radar designed
primarily for measuring vertically resolved winds at various altitudes but
mainly in the boundary layer. It has good spatial coverage, with much denser
sites in eastern China. The wind profiles observed by this network can
provide the horizontal wind direction, horizontal wind speed and vertical
wind speed for every 120 m interval within the height of 0 to 3 km. The
availability of the radar wind profiler network has been investigated in
terms of effective detection height, data acquisition rate, data confidence and data accuracy. Further comparison analyses with reanalysis data indicate
that the observation data at 89 stations are recommended and 17 stations
are not recommended. The boundary layer wind profiles from China can provide
useful input to numerical weather prediction systems at regional scales.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e155">It is increasingly recognised that atmospheric wind profiles and vertical
wind shear are crucial to better understanding the more frequent extreme
rainfall events (Huuskonen et al., 2014; Nash and Oakley, 2001; Weber et
al., 1990), the intensification of clear-air turbulence associated with aircraft
safety (Williams and Joshi, 2013), complicated aerosol–cloud–precipitation
interaction (Fan et al., 2009; Guo et al., 2016a, 2019; Lee et al., 2016) and
persistent particulate-pollution episodes (Yang et al., 2019; Zhang et al.,
2020). For the wind speed in the planetary boundary layer (PBL), the most
striking feature is that the turning of winds with height dominates the
whole PBL and beyond, which can be explained in terms of force vectors
(drag, pressure gradient force, Coriolis force) at the surface and the top
of the PBL (pressure gradient force and Coriolis force) (LeMone et al.,
2018). Under the influence of large-scale dynamic forcing and land surface
processes, wind speed and direction will dramatically vary (Michelson and
Bao, 2008), which poses a great challenge for models to simulate or forecast
the variation in wind very well, especially in the PBL (Constantinescu et
al., 2009; Guo et al., 2016b; Liu et al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e158">Radar wind profilers (RWPs), which are generally a Doppler radar that operates in
either the VHF (30–300 MHz) or UHF (300-1000 MHz) bands, have been
widely applied to atmospheric wind field research (Dolman et al., 2018;
Molod et al., 2015; Ishihara et al., 2006; Schlatter and Zbar, 1994). To date,
a large spectrum of field campaigns<?pagebreak page4590?> involving the RWP-observed wind
profiles, especially over the regions with intensive anthropogenic and
industrialised activities, have been conducted and their archived dataset
has been increasingly receiving attention (Liu et al.,
2019, 2020; Kottayil et al., 2016; Singh et al., 2016; LeMone et al., 2013; Bianco
et al., 2008; Le et al., 1998); most of these are based on ground-based
remotely sensed measurements. The earliest space-borne wind products generally
referred to the atmospheric motion vectors that are derived by tracking clouds
or areas of water vapour through consecutive infrared remote-sensing images
(Schmetz et al., 1993; Velden et al., 2005). Later on, the vector winds over
the ocean surface were measured by the spaceborne microwave instruments
such as SeaWinds onboard QuikSCAT (Bentamy et al., 1999; Draper and Long,
2002). Since 2018, new satellite-based wind observational era has set in with
the launch of the European Space Agency (ESA)'s Aeolus wind satellite on which
the direct-detection Doppler wind lidar ALADIN is accommodated, which
provides line-of-sight winds along the satellite track (Reitebuch et al.,
2009; Reitebuch, 2012). To ensure the quality of Aeolus wind products, the
ALADIN team conducted several airborne wind measurement experiments for the
validation of the Aeolus satellite winds product, which were based on
Doppler wind lidar on research aircraft (Lux et al., 2018, 2020; Zhai et
al., 2020). Meanwhile, the Aeolus experts from different organisations
worked together in the Data Innovation and Science Cluster team and
ultimately optimised the data processing and bias correction methods.
Starting on 12 May 2020, the Aeolus data went public after the bias
correction of the winds has been adequately made and are now being
distributed publicly to forecasting services and scientific users within less
than 3 h of the measurements being made from space
(<uri>https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/Aeolus/Aeolus_goes_public</uri>, last access: 19 August 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e164">To gain a panoramic picture of regional-scale wind fields, a number of RWP
networks have been set up across the world. As early as 1990s, the
demonstration wind profile network is deployed and maintained by the
National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is also termed
NOAA profiler network (NPN) and operated at a frequency of 404 MHz
(Schlatter and Zbar, 1994; van de Kamp, 1993; Weber at al., 1990). The second
type of profiler is the 915 MHz boundary-layer profiler that is much
smaller, transportable, commercially available but lacks height coverage
compared with the 404 MHz wind profiler and thus is mainly used for NOAA
research and outside agencies. Nevertheless, probably due to the fact that
the RWPs reached the end of their useful lives, the NPN largely ceased to
operate in 2014 and the last stations closed in 2017. As an alternative data
source, the high-density airborne wind and temperature profiles from the civil-aviation industry have gradually taken over the role of the RWP since then
(<uri>https://madis.ncep.noaa.gov/madis_npn.shtml</uri>, last access: 22 May 2020). To combine the
best sampling attributes of the abovementioned two types of wind profiler, a
third type of profiler operated at 449 MHz. Later on (in 1996),
the European Cooperation in Science and Technology framework (COST)
initiated the project Wind Initiative Network Demonstration in Europe
(CWINDE). The European RWP network named
E-PROFILE was constructed within the framework of CWINDE as part of the EUMETNET Composite Observing System (EUCOS), providing the monitoring of vertical profiles of wind across
Europe (Dibbern et al., 2001; Oakley et al., 2000; Nash and Oakley, 2001).
Moreover, the Japan Meteorological Agency developed the operational wind
profiler network in Japan in 2011, which is a nationwide network of 33 wind profilers currently in operation. The wind data have significant influence
on improving numerical weather prediction (Ishihara et al., 2006; Rennie
and Isaksen, 2020). The Australian Bureau of Meteorology completed the
installation of the Australian wind profiler network of 19 wind profilers in
2017 that runs in the 55 MHz frequency band, which produces wind data of
sufficient accuracy for the presentation to forecasters and ingestion into
global numerical weather prediction models (Dolman et al., 2018). The
aforementioned networks have provided vertical profiles of wind for model
assimilation through the Global Telecommunication System at a regional or
national scale (e.g. Benjamin et al., 2004; Chipilski et al., 2019), which
was found to significantly improve the forecast of rainfall onset and
atmospheric pollution episodes (Liu et al., 2018, 2019; Singh et
al., 2016; LeMone et al., 2013; Du et al., 2012; Bianco et al., 2008;
Angevine et al., 1994).</p>
      <p id="d1e170">Given the considerable advantages over conventional ground-based in situ or
remote-sensing observations, wind profiler measurements have been applied well in a variety of applications in China, including air quality and
weather forecast (Sun, 1994; Hu and Li, 2010; Dong et al., 2011; Miao et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2020). Nevertheless, the RWP is generally deployed either in specific regions or for short time periods. Recent model simulation work
by assimilating wind measurements from a regional wind profiler network in
north China indicated the network observation significantly improved the
convective forecasting (Wang et al., 2020). Meanwhile, extreme
precipitation is continuously intensified under global warming and atmospheric pollution is increasing, especially in Eastern Asian countries
such as China and India (Zhang et al., 2006; Pfahl et al., 2017; Guo et al.,
2019, 2020; Li et al., 2020). However, the characteristics and performance
of the nationwide profiler network in China have never been revealed, and the
assessment of systematic observation performance and data accuracy is still
lacking, to the best of our knowledge. This motivates us to evaluate the
performance and accuracy of the RWP network of China, ultimately in an attempt
to present wind profile data as a new data source for numerical weather
prediction or climate-related studies. The remainder of this paper is
organised as follows. The RWP network of China is briefly introduced in
Sect. 2. The performance and accuracy are evaluated in Sect. 3. Section 4<?pagebreak page4591?> will discuss the detailed application of wind profile data. A summary of
results is presented in Sect. 5.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Description of the RWP network</title>
      <p id="d1e181">This network began to be constructed in 2008, when there were five sites having wind profiling measurements transmitted to the headquarter of the China Meteorological Administration (CMA). The number of RWP sites
continuously increased to 92 by the end of 2017, all of which operate in the 405 MHz frequency band. The RWP network of China was comprised of 106
stations by March 2019 and is designed primarily for measuring winds
at various altitudes. Afterwards, the working frequency band changed to the L band (1290 MHz), and the number increased to 128 in February 2020 (personal
communication with Ruiyi Li from the CMA, 22 May 2020). The Meteorological Observation
Center (MOC) of the CMA is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the
nationwide wind profiler network. Table 1 shows the instrument information
for RWPs used in this study; there are three types of RWP: high-troposphere, low-troposphere and boundary layer RWPs. It can be seen that
the majority of the radars are boundary layer RWPs operating in the L band (101
sites), and a few of the sites are instrumented with tropospheric RWPs operating
in the P band (five sites). Figure 1 shows the spatial distribution of the wind
profiler network in China, which exhibits a large spatial domain extending
from the northernmost site located at Wulumuqi to the southernmost one at
Nanhai and from the westernmost site also located at Wulumuqi to the
easternmost one in Shenyang. Detailed information on the RWP network of
China is shown in Table S1 in the Supplement.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e187">Instrument information of the radar wind profiler network of
China.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Height</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">No. of</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Type of RWP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Identifier</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">max detection</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Frequency</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">sites</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Manufacturer</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">High troposphere (CFL-16)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">PA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8–10 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">440–450 MHz</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">CASIC</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Low troposphere (CFL-08)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">PB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6–8 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">440–450 MHz</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">CASIC</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Boundary layer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">LC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3–5 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1290 MHz</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">101</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">CASIC/CETC/CHG</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e190">CASIC: China Aerospace Science &amp; Industry Corp.<?xmltex \hack{\\}?>CETC: China Electronics Technology Group Corp.<?xmltex \hack{\\}?>CHG: China Huayun Meteorological Technology Group Corp.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e329">The site distribution of the radar wind profiler network of
China. Colour bar means the elevation.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=207.705118pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e339">The MOC (CMA) is responsible for the maintenance and collection of wind
measurements from the wind profiler network, as shown in Fig. 2.
Specifically, the data transfer from radar sites to MOC (CMA) is mainly done
using internet connections. The data centre of the CMA was established to
efficiently process the data collected via the internet. There are two main types
of data collected from the wind profiler network: raw data and product
data. The former data include the power spectrum data files (indicated by
FFT) and radial data files (indicated by RAD). The power spectrum data file
is composed of file identification, basic parameters of the station,
performance parameters, observation parameters and observation data. The
power spectrum data file is dynamically generated in real time according to
demand. The radial data files are of two kinds: one is reference information,
such as the basic parameters of the station, radar performance parameters and observation parameters; the other is the observation data of each beam
at each sampling height, including sample height, velocity spectrum width,
signal-to-noise ratio and radial velocity. As for the product data, three
main wind profile products are produced by the data centre of the CMA:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e344">The real-time sampling data file (at 6 min intervals), mainly including the
sampling height, horizontal wind direction, horizontal wind speed, vertical
wind speed, horizontal credibility, vertical credibility and refractive
index structure parameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). An individual file will be produced
for every 6 min detection and is marked as ROBS.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e361">The half-hour data file (at
30 min intervals), which is broadly consistent with the ROBS file in terms of
both data content and format, except for the file produced for every half
hour (48 files per day), and the file is marked as HOBS.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e365">The 1 h
observation sampling data file (at 60 min intervals) with 24 files per day,
which is marked as OOBS.</p></list-item></list></p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e370">Data transmission framework of the radar wind profiler
network of China. The RWP network is maintained by the Meteorological
Observation Center (MOC), China Meteorological Administration (CMA).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e379">These wind profile products are generated for each observation site. The
vertical resolution of wind profile data at most sites is 120 m. However, a
few sites use a low-level detection mode with a high sampling rate; these
provide a vertical resolution of 60 m. Examples of the wind profile product are
shown in Fig. 3. Seven different heights (150, 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, 2500 and 3000 m) are selected to show the atmospheric vertical wind field (Fig. 3e). It can provide the vertical profiles of horizontal wind direction,
horizontal wind speed and vertical wind speed. These products are available
for official duty use and for research and education. The observation data
from November 2018 to March 2019 are used to evaluate the performance of the
RWP network of China. Due to the fact that the measurements from the China
RWP network have to be further assessed, data sharing via the Global
Telecommunications System is expected to occur in the next several years,
which depends greatly on the process of data quality assessment.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e384">Spatial distribution of average wind field at
different heights: <bold>(a)</bold> 500 m, <bold>(b)</bold> 1000 m, <bold>(c)</bold> 1500 m and <bold>(d)</bold> 2500 m above
ground level (a.g.l.). Also shown is <bold>(e)</bold> the three-dimensional atmospheric wind
field observed by the radar wind profiler network of China.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f03.png"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Performance of the RWP network</title>
      <p id="d1e416">The RWP network of China includes a variety of types of RWPs, including high-troposphere, low-troposphere and boundary layer RWPs. Because the algorithms
and setting<?pagebreak page4592?> parameters of different instruments are inconsistent, the system
performance index and data accuracy are inhomogeneous. Therefore, it is
necessary to evaluate the system performance index and data accuracy of the
radars in the RWP network. This is a major step forward in the harmonisation
of the product generation and data quality of the RWP network of China.
Three system performance indicators on data application are investigated: effective detection height, data acquisition rate and data
confidence. In order to estimate the data accuracy, the wind profiles from the RWP are compared with hourly wind measurements in a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> latitude–longitude grid from the fifth-generation European Centre for
Medium-range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) atmospheric reanalysis of the global
climate (ERA5; Hoffmann et al., 2019; Hersbach et al., 2020).</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>System performance index</title>
      <p id="d1e450">The operation mode of the RWP network includes high-, medium- and low-detection modes, which can detect wind field information at different
altitudes. The high mode is generally used to detect the wind fields at a height
of 5–10 km above ground level (a.g.l.). The medium and low modes are used to
detect wind fields at a height of 0–5 km above the ground. We here define
“effective detection height” as the effective detection height up to where
wind measurements are available. Figure 4a–b show the mean effective height
detected by each RWP during the period from November 2018 to March 2019.
There are 90 stations with an average height greater than 3 km; 10 of them
can even reach more than 7 km. As for the acquisition rate, it refers to the
ratio of the actual acquisition time to the total theoretical acquisition
time, which is used to evaluate the normal operation of the wind profile
radar. Figure 4c–d represent the data acquisition rate of wind measurement
in the RWP network during the period from November 2018 to March 2019. The data
collection rate of most sites is greater than 90 %, while the data
collection rate of four sites is less than 50 %. Figure 4e–f represent the
average confidence of wind measurement in the RWP network. Confidence is a
credible parameter set by the system for the wind speed information at each
sampling point, which is used to evaluate the credibility of the wind field
information retrieved at each altitude position. The results indicate that
there are 100 sites with more than 90 % confidence, but six sites have less
than 90 % confidence.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e455">Spatial distribution of <bold>(a)</bold> mean effective detection
height, <bold>(c)</bold> mean data acquisition rate and <bold>(e)</bold> mean data confidence at each
station during November 2018 to March 2019; <bold>(b)</bold>, <bold>(d)</bold> and <bold>(f)</bold> correspond to
the histograms for <bold>(a)</bold>, <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(e)</bold>, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e492">In order to make the criteria of the RWP network data consistent, we have to set
corresponding screening criteria<?pagebreak page4593?> for each system index, which to some
degrees reflects the needs of future applications. For instance, the RWP
network data are expected to be used to derive boundary layer parameters,
such as boundary layer height (Liu et al., 2019) and wind shear that are
closely related to atmospheric pollution (Zhang et al., 2020). Therefore, it
would be better for the effective detection height of the RWP to reach 3 km,
with the acquisition rate being above 60 %. In addition, according to the
user manual of the RWP, only those wind profile data with a 100 % confidence
level are recommended. According to these criteria, the wind profile data at
each site are screened, and the screening results are shown in Fig. 5.
Figure 5a shows the results of screening for effective detection height. The
results show that the effective height detected by the RWPs of 102 stations meets
this standard, and four stations do not meet the standard. The substandard
sites are 54752, 58365, 58474 and 58730 (five-digit numeric weather station
codes). Figure 5b shows the screening results of the data acquisition rate.
The results show that the data acquisition rate of 100 sites is
satisfactory, and six sites do not meet the standard. These substandard sites
are 16078, 58158, 58460, 58927, 58933 and 59431. Figure 5c illustrates the
results of the confidence level screening. We can see that 100 sites meet the standard and six sites are substandard. The substandard sites are 54727,
54736, 54857, 57494, 58365 and 58460. Overall, 92 sites of the RWP network
have a good system performance.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e498">Recommended (red dots) and non-recommended sites (blue
dots) of the radar wind profiler network by different performance metrics:
<bold>(a)</bold> effective height detected by RWP, <bold>(c)</bold> data acquisition rate and <bold>(e)</bold>
data confidence. The horizontal grey lines indicate their corresponding
acceptable threshold levels.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Data accuracy</title>
      <p id="d1e524">The echo signal from RWPs can be processed to provide the wind profile at RWP
sites. However, it should be noted that the accuracy of wind profile data is
also closely related to the processing algorithm. Therefore, work to
check the accuracy of the data is necessary before using these observations.
The comparison statistics against the wind profile data from the ERA5 numerical
model is an important monitoring tool (Huuskonen et al., 2014). Figure 6
shows the comparison results between wind profiles from RWPs and those from
ERA5 at six stations. The vertical validation range is from 0 to 3 km. The
mean speed difference (MSD) and root-mean-square difference (RMSD) of
horizontal wind speed between RWPs and ERA5 (RWP–ERA5) are calculated at
each height. The red and blue lines represent the MSD and RMSD at
different heights, respectively. The vertical distribution of MSD at
different sites is different, but most MSDs are less than 5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. It is
clear that a discrepancy does not automatically imply that the wind profile
is in error, but in general a gross deviation from the model results can be
regarded as an indication of a radar error. Ishihara et al. (2006)
evaluated the wind accuracy of the Japanese RWP network by comparisons<?pagebreak page4594?> with the
numerical weather prediction model profiles, and the RMSDs are around 3 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Huuskonen et al. (2014) compared the wind profiles observed by EUMETNET with
the ERA5 model profiles and set a 5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> RMSD as a target for acceptable wind
observations.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e565">Comparison results between RWPs and ERA5 at six RWP
stations: <bold>(a)</bold> Beijing (40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 116<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), <bold>(b)</bold> Wulumuqi
(43<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 87<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), <bold>(c)</bold> Chongqing (30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 106<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), <bold>(d)</bold> Shanghai (31<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 121<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), <bold>(e)</bold>
Zigui (31<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 111<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) and <bold>(f)</bold> Haikou (20<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 110<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E). The grey, red and blue lines represent the
reference line, mean speed difference and root-mean-square difference
(RMSD), respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e703">Here, the horizontal wind speed measurements at all levels ranging from 0 to
3 km are used to calculate the MSD and RMSD at each site. Moreover, the
magnitude of mean speed difference (MMSD) and RMSD are set to be 4 and 6 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, which serves as a target for an acceptable criterion. Figure 7
shows the MMSD and mean RMSD from 0 to 3 km for all RWPs, calculated by comparing them with ERA5 wind data. It is seen that most RWPs consistently meet the
acceptance criterion of a 4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> MMSD and a 6 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> RMSD, while a few radars also
show larger differences. Moreover, the MMSD and RMSD of the RWP network have a
certain spatial difference. According to the average difference in latitude
bands (histograms in Fig. 7), the RWPs at 28–32<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N have a relatively large difference, where the zonal MMSD is larger than 2 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and
zonal mean RMSD is larger than 5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The sites with an MMSD greater than 4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
are 54857, 57494 and 59046; and the sites with an RMSD greater than 6 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
are 52889, 57494, 58448 and 59046. The wind data at these sites have
large difference and are not recommended. The large difference may be caused
by either hardware or configuration problems, such as the ageing of
components. Therefore, it is important to conduct regular maintenance and
replacement of aged components. In addition, there are 11 RWP sites
which are equipped with radiosonde (i.e. 51463, 54342, 54511, 54727, 54857,
57494, 57516, 58238, 59758, 59948 and 59981).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e803">Spatial distribution of <bold>(a)</bold> the magnitude of the mean speed
difference (MMSD) and <bold>(b)</bold> the root-mean-square difference (RMSD) at each station
during November 2018 to March 2019; the corresponding histogram represents
the average difference in zonal direction; <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(d)</bold> are corresponding
recommended (red dots) and non-recommended (blue dots) sites for <bold>(a)</bold> and
<bold>(b)</bold>, respectively. The MMSD and REMD at each station were derived from the
measurements over all levels from 0 to 3 km.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e831">Overall, the availability of the RWP network of China can be evaluated by
combining the system performance index and data accuracy. Figure 8 shows the
spatial distribution and number of recommended and non-recommended sites.
The availability of the RWP network of China is 84 %, and 89 stations are
recommended and 17 stations are not recommended. These non-recommended
sites include: 16078, 52889, 54752, 54727, 54736, 54857, 57494, 58158,
58365, 58448, 58460, 58474, 58730, 58927, 58933, 59046 and 59431. For the
sites with low height coverage or a low data acquisition rate, the data
availability can be improved by changing the radar observation modes and
increasing radar runtime. But for the sites with a low confidence level or low
data accuracy, which is caused by the inversion algorithm or the instrument
system, one needs to choose the appropriate optimisation method for specific
problems. Some methods on data quality control have been given in previous studies
(Holleman, 2005).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e836">Recommended and non-recommended sites of the radar wind
profiler network of China. The blue dots represent the 89 recommended sites
and red dots the 17 non-recommended sites.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Applications of the RWP network</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Daily maximum winds</title>
      <p id="d1e861">The wind profile data can be used to monitor the diurnal cycle. Figure 9
presents the spatial distribution of diurnal phase and amplitude of wind
speed averaged during the period from November 2018 to March 2019 according
to mean<?pagebreak page4595?> maximum hourly wind speed within 24 h. The occurrence time of
maximum hourly wind speed is marked as early morning (00:00–06:00 China standard time, CST: UTC+8), morning (06:00–12:00 CST), afternoon (12:00–18:00 CST) and evening (18:00–24:00 CST). To highlight the vertical
detection capabilities of wind radar, the mean maximum wind speeds at four
different heights above ground level (500, 1000, 1500 and 2500 m) are
investigated. As shown in Fig. 9a (at 500 m), among the 106 observational
sites, the mean maximum wind speed occurs in the morning at 76 sites (about
71.9 %), followed by 12 sites (11.3 %) with peaks in the early morning.
On the other hand, only 6 sites (5.5 %) have an afternoon peak, whereas 12
sites (11.3 %) have an evening peak. The story with respect to the diurnal
phase and amplitude of the mean maximum wind speed at other heights is almost
the same (Fig. 9b–d). In terms of vertical direction, the occurrence timing
of the mean maximum wind speed at most stations is consistent, but some stations in northwest China (Wulumuqi, Lanzhou and Qinghai) show a different pattern.
Moreover, the amplitude of the mean maximum wind speed at 2500 m height is 2
or 3 times than that at other heights, indicating that the maximum wind
speed increases with height. In terms of the spatial pattern, the mean
maximum wind speed generally occurs in the morning in the coastal region of
eastern China, with a magnitude generally lower than 10 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. By comparison,
both early morning and afternoon peaks contribute almost equally to the
diurnal cycle in the inland region.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e878">Diurnal phase and amplitude of mean maximum wind speed
over the period from November 2018 to March 2019 at <bold>(a)</bold> 500 m, <bold>(b)</bold> 1000 m,
<bold>(c)</bold> 1500 m and <bold>(d)</bold> 2500 m above ground level (a.g.l.). The direction in
which an arrow points denotes the China standard time (CST) when the maximum occurs
(shown on the clock dial in the bottom left corner of each panel) and the
arrow length represents magnitudes of mean maximum wind speed. The arrow
colour denotes varying diurnal phases: blue (00:00–06:00 CST), green
(06:00–12:00 CST), red (12:00–18:00 CST) and black (18:00–24:00 CST).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Regional wind field analysis</title>
      <p id="d1e907">The wind profile data can also be used to investigate the regional wind
field. As shown in Fig. 10, there are a total of 11 regions of interest
(ROIs) selected for further analysis on the regional wind characteristics
according to the spatial distribution of RWP stations as well as land cover
(Table 2). The land cover type data are obtained from the
Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS). The MODIS Land Cover
product is derived through a supervised decision-tree classification method.
The land cover types are divided into 17 classes: 11 natural
vegetation classes, 3 human-altered classes and 3 non-vegetated
classes (Friedl et al., 2019). Figure 10 shows the atmospheric wind field
variation in each ROI at 500 m above ground level during the study period.
From the perspective of wind direction, the North China Plain mainly experiences a southwest wind during the study period; the southwest wind at ROIs 3 and<?pagebreak page4596?> 4
accounted for 40.3 % and 48 %, respectively. The south China area is
mainly dominated by a northeast wind, such as in ROIs 8, 9, 10 and 11. The
distribution of wind direction over central China is more uniform. Western
China is dominated by a northwest wind, and the percentage of northwest wind
at ROI 1 is 45.8 %. In terms of the spatial pattern wind speed, the wind
speed in western China is relatively low. The percentages of wind speed less
than 4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at ROIs 1, 5 and 7 are 76.2 %, 78.7 % and 83.2 %,
respectively. Moreover, the land cover type of ROIs 1, 5 and 7 is grassland.
By contrast, the wind speed in the central and eastern regions is
significantly large, and 60 % of the wind speed in most ROIs can reach 6 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Especially in coastal areas, such as in ROIs 4 and 9, 30 % of wind speed
is larger than 8 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the whole study period.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e948">Spatial distribution of the statistical results of
atmospheric wind fields at 500 m above ground level (a.g.l.) for 11 regions of
interest (ROIs). The wind rose plots over the 11 ROIs are calculated from
hourly observations of wind direction and wind speed from November 2018 to
March 2019. The land cover types 0–16 represent water, evergreen
needleleaf forest, evergreen broadleaf forest, deciduous needleleaf forest,
deciduous broadleaf forest, mixed forest, closed shrublands, open
shrublands, woody savannas, savannas, grasslands, permanent croplands, urban
and built-up areas, cropland/natural vegetation mosaic, snow and ice, and barren or sparsely vegetated areas, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/13/4589/2020/amt-13-4589-2020-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e960">Statistics of the number of sites and land cover types for
the 11 regions of interest (ROIs) in Fig. 10.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Region of</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Number of</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Land cover types</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">interest</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">sites</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Grassland</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Cropland and forest</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Urban</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Cropland</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Grassland</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Cropland</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Grassland</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Urban</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Cropland and forest</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Urban</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Urban and forest</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1137">In the long run, the accumulation of more wind profile measurements across
China, especially in the lowest part of the PBL, will provide a valuable
benchmark database for the assessment of wind power potentials and will be useful for
numerical weather prediction (Ishihara et al., 2006; Yim et al., 2007). The
policymakers will determine whether the wind turbines (60–100 m above ground
level) will be installed or not, aided by high-resolution model simulation
analyses. Moreover, the real-time wind field data can be used to predict
typhoon and sandstorm paths (Ishihara et al., 2006; Huuskonen et al., 2014).
The RWP network of China can provide powerful data support for disaster
warning and air pollution prevention.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Concluding remarks</title>
      <p id="d1e1150">The wind profiles are of great importance to the accuracy of numerical
weather prediction models, the prediction of precipitation, the diffusion of
air pollution, research on regional climate change and site selection for
wind power plants. For<?pagebreak page4597?> the first time, to the best of our knowledge, we
reported the height-resolved winds starting from ground surface to as
high as 3–10 km, based on the RWP network of China, which consists of more
than 100 RWP stations. It can provide the vertical profiles of horizontal
wind direction and horizontal wind speed. Then, the availability of the RWP
network was investigated regarding the system performance index and data accuracy. The
evaluation criteria are that the effective detection height reaches 3 km,
the data acquisition rate exceeds 60 % and the data confidence is
100 %. In addition, in terms of data accuracy, the MMSD is better less
than 4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and the RMSD is less than 6 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Under this criterion, the
availability of the RWP network of China is 84 %, and 89 stations are
recommended and 17 stations are not recommended. Finally, the wind profile
data have a wide range of applications, such as daily maximum wind detection
and regional atmospheric wind field research. This RWP network would serve
as a key data source on the spatiotemporal distribution of atmospheric wind
field in support of scientific research related to renewable energy,
severe weather, climate and climate change in the future.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e1181">The radar wind profiler data used in this paper can be provided for
non-commercial research purposes upon motivated request (Jianping Guo,
Email: jpguocams@gmail.com). The ECWMF dataset can be downloaded from
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.24381/cds.bd0915c6</ext-link> (ECWMF, 2018).
Instructions for use and data download methods can be found on the official
website.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e1187">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-4589-2020-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-4589-2020-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e1196">The study was completed with close cooperation between all authors. JG
and BL designed the idea for assessing the radar wind profiler data in
China; JG and BL conducted the data<?pagebreak page4598?> analyses and co-wrote the
paper; LS, YZ, YM and WG discussed the experimental
results, and all coauthors helped reviewing the paper and the
revisions.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e1202">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e1208">We are very grateful to the China Meteorological Administration for
instalment and maintenance of the radar wind profiler observational
network.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e1213">This research has been supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (grant nos. 2017YFC0212600 and 2017YFC1501401) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China  (grant nos. 41771399, 41401498, and 41627804).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1219">This paper was edited by Ad Stoffelen and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Angevine, W. M., White, A. B., and Avery, S. K.: Boundary-layer depth and
entrainment zone characterization with a boundary-layer profiler,
Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 68, 375–385,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00706797" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/BF00706797</ext-link>, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Benjamin, S. G., Schwartz, B. E., Szoke, E. J., and Koch, S. E.: The value of
wind profiler data in US weather forecasting,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 85, 1871–1886. 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bentamy, A., Queffeulou, P., Quilfen, Y., and Katsaros, K.: Ocean surface wind fields estimated from satellite active and passive microwave instruments, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 37, 2469–2486, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/36.789643" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/36.789643</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bianco, L., Wilczak, J. M., and White, A. B.: Convective boundary layer
depth estimation from wind profilers: Statistical comparison between an
automated algorithm and expert estimations,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 25, 1397–1413,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008jtecha981.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2008jtecha981.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chipilski, H. G., Wang, X., and Parsons, D. B.: Impact of Assimilating PECAN
Profilers on the Prediction of Bore-Driven Nocturnal Convection: A
Multi-Scale Forecast Evaluation for the 6 July 2015 Case Study, Mon.
Weather Rev., 148, 1147–1175, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-19-0171.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/MWR-D-19-0171.1</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Constantinescu, E. M., Zavala, V. M., Rocklin, M., Lee, S., and Anitescu,
M.: Unit commitment with wind power generation: integrating wind forecast
uncertainty and stochastic programming (No. ANL/MCS-TM-309), Argonne
National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL, United States, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dibbern, J., Monna, W., Nash, J., and Peters, G.: COST Action 76-final report.
Development of VHF/UHF wind profilers and vertical sounders for use in
European observing systems, European Commission, 350 pp., 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dolman, B. K., Reid, I. M., and Tingwell, C.: Stratospheric tropospheric
wind profiling radars in the Australian network, Earth Planet. Space,
70, 170, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-018-0944-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1186/s40623-018-0944-z</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dong, B. J., Zhang, Y., Xu, A. L., and Fu, Z. J.: Comparative analysis on
wind data from radar wind profiler and balloon sounding, Journal of Yunnan
University, 1, 18–25, 2011 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Draper, D. W. and Long, D. G. An assessment of SeaWinds on QuikSCAT wind retrieval, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 107, 3212, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JC001330" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JC001330</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Du, Y., Zhang, Q., Ying, Y., and Yang, Y.: Characteristics of low-level jets
in Shanghai during the 2008–2009 warm seasons as inferred from radar wind
profiler data, J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan. Ser. II,
90, 891–903, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>ECWMF: ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1979 to present, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.24381/cds.bd0915c6</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fan, J., Yuan, T., Comstock, J. M., Ghan, S., Khain, A., Leung, L. R., Li, Z.,
Martins, V. J., and Ovchinnikov, M.: Dominant role by vertical wind shear in
regulating aerosol effects on deep convective clouds, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 114,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012352" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD012352</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Friedl, M., Gray, J., and Sulla-Menashe, D.: MCD12Q2 MODIS/Terra<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>Aqua Land
Cover Dynamics Yearly L3 Global 500m SIN Grid V006 [Data set], NASA EOSDIS
Land Processes DAAC,  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD12Q2.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/MODIS/MCD12Q2.006</ext-link>,
2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guo, J., Deng, M., Lee, S. S., Wang, F., Li, Z., Zhai, P., Liu, H., Lv, W., Yao, W.,
and Li, X.: Delaying precipitation and lightning by air pollution over the
Pearl River Delta. Part I: Observational analyses, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 121, 6472–6488, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023257" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD023257</ext-link>, 2016a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guo, J., He, J., Liu, H., Miao, Y, Liu, H., and Zhai, P.: Impact of various
emission control schemes on air quality using WRF-Chem during APEC China
2014, Atmos. Environ., 140, 311–319,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.046" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.046</ext-link>, 2016b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guo, J., Su, T., Chen, D., Wang, J., Li, Z., Lv, Y., Guo, X., Liu, H., Cribb, M.,
and Zhai, P.: Declining summertime local-scale precipitation frequency over
China and the United States, 1981–2012: The disparate roles of aerosols,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 13281–13289, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085442" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GL085442</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guo, J., Yan, Y., Chen, D., Lv, Y., Han, Y., Guo, X., Liu, L., Miao, Y.,
Chen, T., Nie, J., and Zhai, P.: The response of warm-season precipitation
extremes in China to global warming: an observational perspective from
radiosonde measurements, Clim. Dynam., 54, 3977–3989, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05216-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-020-05216-3</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz‐Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu,  R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., De Chiara,  G., Dahlgren,  P., Dee, D., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A., Haimberger, L., Healy,  S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm,  E., Janisková, M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., de Rosnay, P.,  Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume,  S., and Thépaut, J.‐N.: The ERA5 global reanalysis,
Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 146, 1999–2049,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/qj.3803</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoffmann, L., Günther, G., Li, D., Stein, O., Wu, X., Griessbach, S., Heng, Y., Konopka, P., Müller, R., Vogel, B., an<?pagebreak page4599?>d Wright, J. S.: From ERA-Interim to ERA5: the considerable impact of ECMWF's next-generation reanalysis on Lagrangian transport simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 3097–3124, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3097-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-3097-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Holleman, I.: Quality control and verification of weather radar wind
profiles. J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 22, 1541–1550, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hu, M. and Li, M.: The development and technologic status of wind profiling
radar, Scientia Meteorologica Sinica, 30, 724–729, 2010 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Huuskonen, A., Saltikoff, E., and Holleman, I.: The operational weather
radar network in Europe, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
95, 897–907, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ishihara, M., Kato, Y., Abo, T., Kobayashi, K., and Izumikawa, Y.:
Characteristics and performance of the operational wind profiler network of
the Japan Meteorological Agency, J. Meteorol. Soc.
Japan. Ser. II, 84, 1085–1096, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kottayil, A., Mohanakumar, K., Samson, T., Rebello, R., Manoj, M. G.,
Varadarajan, R., Santosh, K. R., Mohanan, P.,  and Vasudevan, K.: Validation of 205 MHz radar wind
profiler located at Cochin, India, using radiosonde wind measurements, Radio
Sci., 51, 106–117, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lee, S.-S., Guo, J., and Li, Z.: Delaying precipitation by air pollution
over Pearl River Delta. Part 2: model simulations,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 11739–11760, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024362" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD024362</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>LeMone, M. A., Tewari, M., Chen, F., and Dudhia, J.: Objectively determined
fair-weather CBL depths in the ARW-WRF model and their comparison to
CASES-97 observations, Mon. Weather Rev., 141, 30–54, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>LeMone, M. A., Angevine, W. M., Bretherton, C. S., Chen, F., Dudhia, J.,
Fedorovich, E., Katsaros, K. B., Lenschow, D. H., Mahrt, L., Patton, E. G., Sun, J.,
Tjernström, M., and Weil, J.: 100 Years of Progress in Boundary Layer
Meteorology, Meteorol.
Monogr., 59, 9.1–9.85, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-18-0013.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-18-0013.1</ext-link>,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, Z., Wang, Y., Guo, J., Zhao, C., Cribb, M. C., Dong, X., Fan, J., Gong, D.,
Huang, J., Jiang, M., Jiang, Y., Lee, S.-S., Li, H., Li, J., Liu, J., Qian, Y.,
Rosenfeld, D., Shan, S., Sun, Y., Wang, H., Xin, J., Yan, X., Yang, X., Yang, X.,
Zhang, F., and Zheng, Y.: East Asian study of tropospheric aerosols and their
impact on regional clouds, precipitation, and climate (EAST-AIRCPC), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 13026–13054,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030758" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019JD030758</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Liu, B., Ma, Y., Gong, W., Zhang, M., and Yang, J.: Study of continuous air
pollution in winter over Wuhan based on ground-based and satellite
observations, Atmos. Poll. Res., 9, 156–165, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, B., Ma, Y., Guo, J., Gong, W., Zhang, Y., Mao, F., Li, J., Guo, X., and
Shi, Y.: Boundary layer heights as derived from ground-based Radar wind
profiler in Beijing, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 57, 8095–8104,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2019.2918301" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/TGRS.2019.2918301</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, B., Guo, J., Gong, W., Shi, Y., and Jin, S.: Boundary Layer Height as
Estimated from Radar Wind Profilers in Four Cities in China: Relative
Contributions from Aerosols and Surface Features, Remote Sens., 12,
1657, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101657" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs12101657</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, H., He, J., Guo, J., Miao, Y., Yin, J., Wang, Y., Xu, H., Liu, H., Yan, Y.,
Li, Y., and Zhai, P.: The blue skies in Beijing during APEC 2014: A quantitative
assessment of emission control efficiency and meteorological influence,
Atmos. Environ., 167, 235–244, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.08.032" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.08.032</ext-link>,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lux, O., Lemmerz, C., Weiler, F., Marksteiner, U., Witschas, B., Rahm, S., Schäfler, A., and Reitebuch, O.: Airborne wind lidar observations over the North Atlantic in 2016 for the pre-launch validation of the satellite mission Aeolus, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 3297–3322, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3297-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-3297-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lux, O., Lemmerz, C., Weiler, F., Marksteiner, U., Witschas, B., Rahm, S., Geiß, A., and Reitebuch, O.: Intercomparison of wind observations from the European Space Agency's Aeolus satellite mission and the ALADIN Airborne Demonstrator, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 2075–2097, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-2075-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-13-2075-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Miao, Y., Guo, J., Liu, S., Wei, W., Zhang, G., Lin, Y., and Zhai, P.: The
climatology of low level jet in Beijing and Guangzhou, China, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 123, 2816–2830, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027321" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017JD027321</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Michelson, S. A. and Bao, J. W.: Sensitivity of low-level winds simulated by
the WRF model in California's Central Valley to uncertainties in the
large-scale forcing and soil initializatio,
J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol., 47, 3131–3149, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Molod, A., Salmun, H., and Dempsey, M.: Estimating planetary boundary layer
heights from NOAA profiler network wind profiler data, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 32, 1545–1561, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Nash, J. and Oakley, T. J.: Development of COST 76 wind profiler network in
Europe, Phys. Chem. Earth B, 3, 193–199, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Oakley, T., Nash, J., and Turp, M.: CWINDE project office networking European
profilers 1997–2000, Proc. of the MST9 and COST76 Workshop, 525–528, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Pfahl, S., O'Gorman, P. A., and Fischer, E. M.: Understanding the regional
pattern of projected future changes in extreme precipitation, Nature Clim.
Change, 7, 423–427, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Reitebuch, O.: The spaceborne wind lidar mission ADM-Aeolus,  Atmospheric
Physics, pp. 815–827, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Reitebuch, O., Lemmerz, C., Nagel, E., Paffrath, U., Durand, Y., Endemann,
M., Fabre, F., and Chaloupy, M.: The airborne demonstrator for the
direct-detection Doppler wind lidar ALADIN on ADM-Aeolus. Part I: Instrument
design and comparison to satellite instrument, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 26, 2501–2515, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rennie, M. and Isaksen, L.: The NWP impact of Aeolus Level-2B winds at ECMWF,
ECMWF Technical Memo 864, Shinfield Park, Reading, UK, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.21957/alift7mhr" ext-link-type="DOI">10.21957/alift7mhr</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schlatter, T. W. and Zbar, F. S. (Eds.): Wind Profiler Assessment Report and Recommendations for Future Use,
NOAA, Silver Spring, Maryland, 141 pp., 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Singh, N., Solanki, R., Ojha, N., Janssen, R. H. H., Pozzer, A., and Dhaka, S. K.: Boundary layer evolution over the central Himalayas from radio wind profiler and model simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10559–10572, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10559-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-10559-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schmetz, J., Holmlund, K., Hoffman, J., Strauss, B., Mason, B., Gaertner, V., and Van De Berg, L.: Operational cloud-motion winds from Meteosat infrared images, J. Appl. Meteorol., 32, 1206–1225, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1993)032&lt;1206:OCMWFM&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0450(1993)032&lt;1206:OCMWFM&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page4600?><ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sun, X. Z.: Atmosphere Remote-Sensing Sounding System-Radar wind profiler,
Modern Radar, 1, 1–14, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
van de Kamp, D. W.: Current status and recent improvements to the Wind
Profiler Demonstration Network. Preprints, 26th Int. Conf. on Radar
Meteorology, Norman, OK, 24–28 May 1993, Amer. Meteorol. Soc., Boston,
552–554, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Velden, C., Daniels, J., Stettner, D., Santek, D., Key, J., Dunion, J., Holmlund, K., Dengel, G., Breskand, W., and Menzel, P.: Recent innovations in deriving tropospheric winds from meteorological satellites, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 86, 205–224, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, C., Chen, Y., Chen, M., and Shen, J.: Data assimilation of a dense
wind profiler network and its impact on convective forecasting, Atmos.
Res., 238, 104880, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.104880" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.104880</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Weber, B. L., Wuertz, D. B., Strauch, R. G., Merritt, D. A., Moran, K. P., Law, D. C.,
van de Kamp, D. W., Chadwick, R. B., Ackley, M. H., Barth, M. F., Abshire, N. L.,
Miller, P. A., and Schlatter, T. W.: Preliminary evaluation of the first NOAA
demonstration network profiler, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 7, 909–918,
1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Williams, P. D. and Joshi, M. M.: Intensification of winter transatlantic
aviation turbulence in response to climate change, Nature Clim. Change, 3,
644–648, 2013.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Yang, Y., Yim, S. H., Haywood, J., Osborne, M., Chan, J. C., Zeng, Z., and
Cheng, J. C.: Characteristics of heavy particulate matter pollution events
over Hong Kong and their relationships with vertical wind profiles using
high-time-resolution Doppler lidar measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 9609–9623, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yim, S. H., Fung, J. C., Lau, A. K., and Kot, S. C.: Developing a
high-resolution wind map for a complex terrain with a coupled MM5/CALMET
system, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007752" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD007752</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhai, X., Marksteiner, U., Weiler, F., Lemmerz, C., Lux, O., Witschas, B., and Reitebuch, O.: Rayleigh wind retrieval for the ALADIN airborne demonstrator of the Aeolus mission using simulated response calibration, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 445–465, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-445-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-13-445-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, Y., Xu, Y., Dong, W., Cao, L., and Sparrow, M.: A future climate
scenario of regional changes in extreme climate events over China using the
PRECIS climate model, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL027229" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006GL027229</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, Y., Guo, J., Yang, Y., Wang, Y., and Yim, S. H. L.: Vertical wind shear
modulates particulate matter pollutions: A perspective from Radar wind
profiler observations in Beijing, China, Remote Sens., 12, 546,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12030546" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs12030546</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Characteristics and performance of wind profiles as observed by the radar wind profiler network of China</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Wind profiles are fundamental to the research and
applications in boundary layer meteorology, air quality and numerical
weather prediction. Large-scale wind profile data have been previously
documented from network observations in several countries, such as Japan,
the USA, various European countries and Australia, but nationwide wind
profiles observations are poorly understood in China. In this study, the
salient characteristics and performance of wind profiles as observed by the
radar wind profiler network of China are investigated. This network consists
of more than 100 stations instrumented with 1290&thinsp;MHz Doppler radar designed
primarily for measuring vertically resolved winds at various altitudes but
mainly in the boundary layer. It has good spatial coverage, with much denser
sites in eastern China. The wind profiles observed by this network can
provide the horizontal wind direction, horizontal wind speed and vertical
wind speed for every 120&thinsp;m interval within the height of 0 to 3&thinsp;km. The
availability of the radar wind profiler network has been investigated in
terms of effective detection height, data acquisition rate, data confidence and data accuracy. Further comparison analyses with reanalysis data indicate
that the observation data at 89 stations are recommended and 17 stations
are not recommended. The boundary layer wind profiles from China can provide
useful input to numerical weather prediction systems at regional scales.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Angevine, W. M., White, A. B., and Avery, S. K.: Boundary-layer depth and
entrainment zone characterization with a boundary-layer profiler,
Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 68, 375–385,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00706797" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00706797</a>, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Benjamin, S. G., Schwartz, B. E., Szoke, E. J., and Koch, S. E.: The value of
wind profiler data in US weather forecasting,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 85, 1871–1886. 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Bentamy, A., Queffeulou, P., Quilfen, Y., and Katsaros, K.: Ocean surface wind fields estimated from satellite active and passive microwave instruments, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 37, 2469–2486, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/36.789643" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/36.789643</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bianco, L., Wilczak, J. M., and White, A. B.: Convective boundary layer
depth estimation from wind profilers: Statistical comparison between an
automated algorithm and expert estimations,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 25, 1397–1413,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008jtecha981.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2008jtecha981.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Chipilski, H. G., Wang, X., and Parsons, D. B.: Impact of Assimilating PECAN
Profilers on the Prediction of Bore-Driven Nocturnal Convection: A
Multi-Scale Forecast Evaluation for the 6 July 2015 Case Study, Mon.
Weather Rev., 148, 1147–1175, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-19-0171.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-19-0171.1</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Constantinescu, E. M., Zavala, V. M., Rocklin, M., Lee, S., and Anitescu,
M.: Unit commitment with wind power generation: integrating wind forecast
uncertainty and stochastic programming (No. ANL/MCS-TM-309), Argonne
National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL, United States, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Dibbern, J., Monna, W., Nash, J., and Peters, G.: COST Action 76-final report.
Development of VHF/UHF wind profilers and vertical sounders for use in
European observing systems, European Commission, 350 pp., 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Dolman, B. K., Reid, I. M., and Tingwell, C.: Stratospheric tropospheric
wind profiling radars in the Australian network, Earth Planet. Space,
70, 170, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-018-0944-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-018-0944-z</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Dong, B. J., Zhang, Y., Xu, A. L., and Fu, Z. J.: Comparative analysis on
wind data from radar wind profiler and balloon sounding, Journal of Yunnan
University, 1, 18–25, 2011 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Draper, D. W. and Long, D. G. An assessment of SeaWinds on QuikSCAT wind retrieval, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 107, 3212, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JC001330" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JC001330</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Du, Y., Zhang, Q., Ying, Y., and Yang, Y.: Characteristics of low-level jets
in Shanghai during the 2008–2009 warm seasons as inferred from radar wind
profiler data, J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan. Ser. II,
90, 891–903, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
ECWMF: ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1979 to present, <a href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Fan, J., Yuan, T., Comstock, J. M., Ghan, S., Khain, A., Leung, L. R., Li, Z.,
Martins, V. J., and Ovchinnikov, M.: Dominant role by vertical wind shear in
regulating aerosol effects on deep convective clouds, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 114,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012352" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012352</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Friedl, M., Gray, J., and Sulla-Menashe, D.: MCD12Q2 MODIS/Terra+Aqua Land
Cover Dynamics Yearly L3 Global 500m SIN Grid V006 [Data set], NASA EOSDIS
Land Processes DAAC,  <a href="https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD12Q2.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD12Q2.006</a>,
2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Guo, J., Deng, M., Lee, S. S., Wang, F., Li, Z., Zhai, P., Liu, H., Lv, W., Yao, W.,
and Li, X.: Delaying precipitation and lightning by air pollution over the
Pearl River Delta. Part I: Observational analyses, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 121, 6472–6488, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023257" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023257</a>, 2016a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Guo, J., He, J., Liu, H., Miao, Y, Liu, H., and Zhai, P.: Impact of various
emission control schemes on air quality using WRF-Chem during APEC China
2014, Atmos. Environ., 140, 311–319,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.046" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.046</a>, 2016b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Guo, J., Su, T., Chen, D., Wang, J., Li, Z., Lv, Y., Guo, X., Liu, H., Cribb, M.,
and Zhai, P.: Declining summertime local-scale precipitation frequency over
China and the United States, 1981–2012: The disparate roles of aerosols,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 13281–13289, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085442" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085442</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Guo, J., Yan, Y., Chen, D., Lv, Y., Han, Y., Guo, X., Liu, L., Miao, Y.,
Chen, T., Nie, J., and Zhai, P.: The response of warm-season precipitation
extremes in China to global warming: an observational perspective from
radiosonde measurements, Clim. Dynam., 54, 3977–3989, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05216-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05216-3</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz‐Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu,  R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., De Chiara,  G., Dahlgren,  P., Dee, D., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A., Haimberger, L., Healy,  S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm,  E., Janisková, M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., de Rosnay, P.,  Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume,  S., and Thépaut, J.‐N.: The ERA5 global reanalysis,
Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 146, 1999–2049,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Hoffmann, L., Günther, G., Li, D., Stein, O., Wu, X., Griessbach, S., Heng, Y., Konopka, P., Müller, R., Vogel, B., and Wright, J. S.: From ERA-Interim to ERA5: the considerable impact of ECMWF's next-generation reanalysis on Lagrangian transport simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 3097–3124, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3097-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3097-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Holleman, I.: Quality control and verification of weather radar wind
profiles. J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 22, 1541–1550, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Hu, M. and Li, M.: The development and technologic status of wind profiling
radar, Scientia Meteorologica Sinica, 30, 724–729, 2010 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Huuskonen, A., Saltikoff, E., and Holleman, I.: The operational weather
radar network in Europe, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
95, 897–907, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Ishihara, M., Kato, Y., Abo, T., Kobayashi, K., and Izumikawa, Y.:
Characteristics and performance of the operational wind profiler network of
the Japan Meteorological Agency, J. Meteorol. Soc.
Japan. Ser. II, 84, 1085–1096, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Kottayil, A., Mohanakumar, K., Samson, T., Rebello, R., Manoj, M. G.,
Varadarajan, R., Santosh, K. R., Mohanan, P.,  and Vasudevan, K.: Validation of 205&thinsp;MHz radar wind
profiler located at Cochin, India, using radiosonde wind measurements, Radio
Sci., 51, 106–117, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, S.-S., Guo, J., and Li, Z.: Delaying precipitation by air pollution
over Pearl River Delta. Part 2: model simulations,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 11739–11760, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024362" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024362</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>LeMone, M. A., Tewari, M., Chen, F., and Dudhia, J.: Objectively determined
fair-weather CBL depths in the ARW-WRF model and their comparison to
CASES-97 observations, Mon. Weather Rev., 141, 30–54, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
LeMone, M. A., Angevine, W. M., Bretherton, C. S., Chen, F., Dudhia, J.,
Fedorovich, E., Katsaros, K. B., Lenschow, D. H., Mahrt, L., Patton, E. G., Sun, J.,
Tjernström, M., and Weil, J.: 100 Years of Progress in Boundary Layer
Meteorology, Meteorol.
Monogr., 59, 9.1–9.85, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-18-0013.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-18-0013.1</a>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Li, Z., Wang, Y., Guo, J., Zhao, C., Cribb, M. C., Dong, X., Fan, J., Gong, D.,
Huang, J., Jiang, M., Jiang, Y., Lee, S.-S., Li, H., Li, J., Liu, J., Qian, Y.,
Rosenfeld, D., Shan, S., Sun, Y., Wang, H., Xin, J., Yan, X., Yang, X., Yang, X.,
Zhang, F., and Zheng, Y.: East Asian study of tropospheric aerosols and their
impact on regional clouds, precipitation, and climate (EAST-AIRCPC), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 13026–13054,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030758" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030758</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, B., Ma, Y., Gong, W., Zhang, M., and Yang, J.: Study of continuous air
pollution in winter over Wuhan based on ground-based and satellite
observations, Atmos. Poll. Res., 9, 156–165, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, B., Ma, Y., Guo, J., Gong, W., Zhang, Y., Mao, F., Li, J., Guo, X., and
Shi, Y.: Boundary layer heights as derived from ground-based Radar wind
profiler in Beijing, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 57, 8095–8104,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2019.2918301" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2019.2918301</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, B., Guo, J., Gong, W., Shi, Y., and Jin, S.: Boundary Layer Height as
Estimated from Radar Wind Profilers in Four Cities in China: Relative
Contributions from Aerosols and Surface Features, Remote Sens., 12,
1657, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101657" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101657</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, H., He, J., Guo, J., Miao, Y., Yin, J., Wang, Y., Xu, H., Liu, H., Yan, Y.,
Li, Y., and Zhai, P.: The blue skies in Beijing during APEC 2014: A quantitative
assessment of emission control efficiency and meteorological influence,
Atmos. Environ., 167, 235–244, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.08.032" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.08.032</a>,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Lux, O., Lemmerz, C., Weiler, F., Marksteiner, U., Witschas, B., Rahm, S., Schäfler, A., and Reitebuch, O.: Airborne wind lidar observations over the North Atlantic in 2016 for the pre-launch validation of the satellite mission Aeolus, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 3297–3322, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3297-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3297-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Lux, O., Lemmerz, C., Weiler, F., Marksteiner, U., Witschas, B., Rahm, S., Geiß, A., and Reitebuch, O.: Intercomparison of wind observations from the European Space Agency's Aeolus satellite mission and the ALADIN Airborne Demonstrator, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 2075–2097, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-2075-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-2075-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Miao, Y., Guo, J., Liu, S., Wei, W., Zhang, G., Lin, Y., and Zhai, P.: The
climatology of low level jet in Beijing and Guangzhou, China, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 123, 2816–2830, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027321" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027321</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Michelson, S. A. and Bao, J. W.: Sensitivity of low-level winds simulated by
the WRF model in California's Central Valley to uncertainties in the
large-scale forcing and soil initializatio,
J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol., 47, 3131–3149, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Molod, A., Salmun, H., and Dempsey, M.: Estimating planetary boundary layer
heights from NOAA profiler network wind profiler data, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 32, 1545–1561, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Nash, J. and Oakley, T. J.: Development of COST 76 wind profiler network in
Europe, Phys. Chem. Earth B, 3, 193–199, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Oakley, T., Nash, J., and Turp, M.: CWINDE project office networking European
profilers 1997–2000, Proc. of the MST9 and COST76 Workshop, 525–528, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Pfahl, S., O'Gorman, P. A., and Fischer, E. M.: Understanding the regional
pattern of projected future changes in extreme precipitation, Nature Clim.
Change, 7, 423–427, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Reitebuch, O.: The spaceborne wind lidar mission ADM-Aeolus,  Atmospheric
Physics, pp. 815–827, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Reitebuch, O., Lemmerz, C., Nagel, E., Paffrath, U., Durand, Y., Endemann,
M., Fabre, F., and Chaloupy, M.: The airborne demonstrator for the
direct-detection Doppler wind lidar ALADIN on ADM-Aeolus. Part I: Instrument
design and comparison to satellite instrument, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 26, 2501–2515, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Rennie, M. and Isaksen, L.: The NWP impact of Aeolus Level-2B winds at ECMWF,
ECMWF Technical Memo 864, Shinfield Park, Reading, UK, <a href="https://doi.org/10.21957/alift7mhr" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.21957/alift7mhr</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Schlatter, T. W. and Zbar, F. S. (Eds.): Wind Profiler Assessment Report and Recommendations for Future Use,
NOAA, Silver Spring, Maryland, 141 pp., 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Singh, N., Solanki, R., Ojha, N., Janssen, R. H. H., Pozzer, A., and Dhaka, S. K.: Boundary layer evolution over the central Himalayas from radio wind profiler and model simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10559–10572, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10559-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10559-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Schmetz, J., Holmlund, K., Hoffman, J., Strauss, B., Mason, B., Gaertner, V., and Van De Berg, L.: Operational cloud-motion winds from Meteosat infrared images, J. Appl. Meteorol., 32, 1206–1225, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1993)032&lt;1206:OCMWFM&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1993)032&lt;1206:OCMWFM&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Sun, X. Z.: Atmosphere Remote-Sensing Sounding System-Radar wind profiler,
Modern Radar, 1, 1–14, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
van de Kamp, D. W.: Current status and recent improvements to the Wind
Profiler Demonstration Network. Preprints, 26th Int. Conf. on Radar
Meteorology, Norman, OK, 24–28 May 1993, Amer. Meteorol. Soc., Boston,
552–554, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Velden, C., Daniels, J., Stettner, D., Santek, D., Key, J., Dunion, J., Holmlund, K., Dengel, G., Breskand, W., and Menzel, P.: Recent innovations in deriving tropospheric winds from meteorological satellites, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 86, 205–224, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, C., Chen, Y., Chen, M., and Shen, J.: Data assimilation of a dense
wind profiler network and its impact on convective forecasting, Atmos.
Res., 238, 104880, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.104880" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.104880</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Weber, B. L., Wuertz, D. B., Strauch, R. G., Merritt, D. A., Moran, K. P., Law, D. C.,
van de Kamp, D. W., Chadwick, R. B., Ackley, M. H., Barth, M. F., Abshire, N. L.,
Miller, P. A., and Schlatter, T. W.: Preliminary evaluation of the first NOAA
demonstration network profiler, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 7, 909–918,
1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Williams, P. D. and Joshi, M. M.: Intensification of winter transatlantic
aviation turbulence in response to climate change, Nature Clim. Change, 3,
644–648, 2013.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, Y., Yim, S. H., Haywood, J., Osborne, M., Chan, J. C., Zeng, Z., and
Cheng, J. C.: Characteristics of heavy particulate matter pollution events
over Hong Kong and their relationships with vertical wind profiles using
high-time-resolution Doppler lidar measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 9609–9623, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Yim, S. H., Fung, J. C., Lau, A. K., and Kot, S. C.: Developing a
high-resolution wind map for a complex terrain with a coupled MM5/CALMET
system, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007752" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007752</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Zhai, X., Marksteiner, U., Weiler, F., Lemmerz, C., Lux, O., Witschas, B., and Reitebuch, O.: Rayleigh wind retrieval for the ALADIN airborne demonstrator of the Aeolus mission using simulated response calibration, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 445–465, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-445-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-445-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Xu, Y., Dong, W., Cao, L., and Sparrow, M.: A future climate
scenario of regional changes in extreme climate events over China using the
PRECIS climate model, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL027229" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL027229</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Guo, J., Yang, Y., Wang, Y., and Yim, S. H. L.: Vertical wind shear
modulates particulate matter pollutions: A perspective from Radar wind
profiler observations in Beijing, China, Remote Sens., 12, 546,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12030546" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12030546</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
