Improvement of numerical weather prediction model analysis during fog conditions through the assimilation of  ground-based microwave radiometer observations: a 1D-Var study

Martinet, Pauline; Cimini, Domenico; Burnet, Frédéric; Ménétrier, Benjamin; Michel, Yann; Unger, Vinciane

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6593-2020

Articles | Volume 13, issue 12

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6593-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Special issue:

Tropospheric profiling (ISTP11) (AMT/ACP inter-journal SI)

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6593-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 13, issue 12

Research article

|

07 Dec 2020

Research article |

| 07 Dec 2020

Improvement of numerical weather prediction model analysis during fog conditions through the assimilation of ground-based microwave radiometer observations: a 1D-Var study

Pauline Martinet, Domenico Cimini, Frédéric Burnet, Benjamin Ménétrier, Yann Michel, and Vinciane Unger

Download

Final revised paper (published on 07 Dec 2020)
Preprint (discussion started on 13 May 2020)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Review of „Improvement of numerical weather prediction model analysis durig fog conditions through the assimilation of ground-based microwave radiometer observations: a 1D-Var study by P. Martinet et al.', Anonymous Referee #1, 10 Jun 2020
- AC1: 'Answer reviewer 1', Pauline Martinet, 24 Jul 2020
- AC3: 'Manuscript with track changes', Pauline Martinet, 24 Jul 2020
RC2: 'Comments to manuscript AMT-2020-166', Anonymous Referee #2, 17 Jun 2020
- AC2: 'Answer reviewer 2', Pauline Martinet, 24 Jul 2020
- AC4: 'Manuscript with track changes', Pauline Martinet, 24 Jul 2020

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Pauline Martinet on behalf of the Authors (24 Jul 2020) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (02 Sep 2020) by E. J. O'Connor

The additions to the manuscript clarifying the use of background covariances are very welcome. There are a few technical corrections that should be made before publication.

Suggest replacing 'To that end ..' with 'To this end ..' throughout the manuscript.

Add an explanation/definition for 'innovations' in Section 2.

Citations should be modified slightly, i.e. this style '(Philip et al. (2016))' should be '(Philip et al., 2016)' and '(Bergot and Guedalia (1994), Bergot et al. (2005), Hu et al. (2014))' should be '(Bergot and Guedalia, 1994; Bergot et al., 2005; Hu et al. 2014)'.

lines 8 and 9: Spell out "resp." in the abstract to make it clear

line 15: I assume you mean the 'first' 100 m 'above the surface'?

line 33: Repetition, suggest you use 'Even if satellite data enable global coverage, they provide limited..'

line 43: Repetition, suggest you use either 'evolution of fog' or 'fog development' rather than 'evolution of fog development'.

line 54: Alter 'MWRs' to 'MWR'.

line 67: Suggest replacing '.. well corrected by the 1D-Var.' with '.. that are corrected when using the 1D-Var retrieval.'

line 81: Suggest replacing '.. (LWP). The 51 to 58 GHz range, ..' with '.. (LWP); 51 to 58 GHz range, ..' as you've used a colon to start a list earlier in the sentence.

line 107: Suggest replacing '.. weighted by corresponding uncertainty ..' with '.. weighted by their corresponding uncertainty ..'.

line 115: Suggest replacing 'Through ..' with 'Throughout ..'.

line 127: First definition of K- and V-band. Either use two footnotes, or define these on line 81.

line 197: Alter 'scenarios to 'scenarios'.

Table 3: Explain that 'BC' means 'bias correction' either in the table, table caption or in the text.

line 396: Alter 'This worked has ..' to 'This study has ..'.

Figure 4. I assume lower panel x-axis is also 'Hours UTC'?

Hide

AR by Pauline Martinet on behalf of the Authors (02 Oct 2020) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (05 Oct 2020) by E. J. O'Connor

AR by Pauline Martinet on behalf of the Authors (12 Oct 2020) Manuscript

Short summary

Each year large human and economical losses are due to fog episodes. However, fog forecasts remain quite inaccurate, partly due to a lack of observations in the atmospheric boundary layer. The benefit of ground-based microwave radiometers has been investigated and has demonstrated their capability of significantly improving the initial state of temperature and liquid water content profiles in current numerical weather prediction models, paving the way for improved fog forecasts in the future.