Articles | Volume 19, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-19-4141-2026
© Author(s) 2026. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-19-4141-2026
© Author(s) 2026. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Assessment of the RFI environment in key passive microwave bands for Earth observation
ZenithalBlue Technologies S.L.U., Barcelona, Spain
Roger Oliva
ZenithalBlue Technologies S.L.U., Barcelona, Spain
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), Reading, United Kingdom
Niels Bormann
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), Reading, United Kingdom
Jose Barbosa
Research and Development for Aerospace S.L.U., Zürich, Switzerland
Ioannis Nestoras
Research and Development for Aerospace S.L.U., Zürich, Switzerland
Adriano Jordão
Research and Development for Aerospace S.L.U., Zürich, Switzerland
Flavio Jorge
European Space Agency, ESTEC, 2201 Noordwijk, the Netherlands
Juliette Challot
European Space Agency, ESTEC, 2201 Noordwijk, the Netherlands
Yan Soldo
European Space Agency, ESTEC, 2201 Noordwijk, the Netherlands
Related authors
No articles found.
David I. Duncan, Niels Bormann, Marijana Crepulja, Mohamed Dahoui, Alan J. Geer, Christophe Accadia, Sabatino Di Michele, Tim J. Hewison, and Ville Kangas
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 19, 3581–3599, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-19-3581-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-19-3581-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite data used in weather forecast models needs to be of a very high quality. Previously, this has been delivered by bus-sized satellites. The new Arctic Weather Satellite shifts this paradigm, delivering high quality observations from a small satellite. Here we analyse the performance and test its impact with a state-of-the-art weather forecast model. It compares well to heritage instruments and has a positive impact on forecast skill.
Simon Pfreundschuh, Stuart Fox, Patrick Eriksson, David Duncan, Stefan A. Buehler, Manfred Brath, Richard Cotton, and Florian Ewald
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-677-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-677-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We test a novel method to remotely measure ice particles in clouds. This is important because such measurements are required to improve climate and weather models. The method combines a radar with newly developed sensors measuring microwave radiation at very short wavelengths. We use observations made from aircraft flying above the cloud and compare them to real measurements from inside the cloud. This works well given that one can model the ice particles in the cloud sufficiently well.
Sebastien Massart, Niels Bormann, Massimo Bonavita, and Cristina Lupu
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5467–5485, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5467-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5467-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Numerical weather predictions combine data from satellites with atmospheric forecasts. Some satellites measure the radiance emitted by the Earth's surface. To use this data, one must have knowledge of the surface properties, like the temperature of the thin layer above the surface. Error in this temperature leads to a misuse of the satellite data and affects the quality of the weather forecast. We updated our approach to better estimate this temperature, which should help improve the forecast.
Cited articles
Auligné, T., McNally, A., and Dee, D.: Adaptive bias correction for satellite data in a numerical weather prediction system, Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 133, 631–642, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.56, 2007. a
Benazzouz, A., Mordane, S., Orbi, A., Chagdali, M., Hilmi, K., Atillah, A., Lluís Pelegrí, J., and Hervé, D.: An improved coastal upwelling index from sea surface temperature using satellite-based approach – The case of the Canary Current upwelling system, Continental Shelf Research, 81, 38–54, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2014.03.012, 2014. a
Bringer, A., Daehn, M., Johnson, J. T., Soldo, Y., Le Vine, D. M., de Matthaeis, P., Piepmeier, J. R., and Mohammed, P.: SMAP Mission: Changes in the RFI Environment, IEEE, 3754–3757, https://doi.org/10.1109/igarss.2018.8519067, 2018. a
Brown, S. and Morris, M.: Compact Ocean Wind Vector Radiometer (COWVR) Environmental Data Record (EDR) Quick-start User's Guide, Jet Propoulsion Laboratory (JPL) from California Institute of Technology (CALTECH), Pasadena, CA, version 1.02, https://archive.podaac.earthdata.nasa.gov/podaac-ops-cumulus-docs/cowvr-tempest/open/docs/STP_H8_COWVR_User-Guide_v6.pdf (last access: 22 June 2026), 2024. a, b, c
Capone, D. G. and Hutchins, D. A.: Microbial biogeochemistry of coastal upwelling regimes in a changing ocean, Nat. Geosci., 6, 711–717, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1916, 2013. a
Casey, A., Gagnon, N., Bedard, J., Beaulne, A., Shahabadi, M. B., and Aparicio, J.: Potential impact of RFI on NWP: a Canadian perspective, in: RFI, ECMWF, https://events.ecmwf.int/event/258/contributions/2884/attachments/1564/2803/RFI2022_Casey_Beaulne.pdf (last access: 24 April 2024), 2022. a
Cavalieri, D. J., Gloersen, P., and Campbell, W. J.: Determination of sea ice parameters with the NIMBUS 7 SMMR, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 89, 5355–5369, https://doi.org/10.1029/JD089iD04p05355, 1984. a
CIA: World Data Bank II: North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR08376.V1, 1985. a
Draper, D. W.: Report on GMI Special Study #15: Radio Frequency Interference, Technical Report 20160003316, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, USA, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160003316/downloads/20160003316.pdf (last access: 22 June 2026), 2016a. a
Draper, D. W.: Terrestrial and space-based RFI observed by the GPM microwave imager (GMI) within NTIA semi-protected passive earth exploration bands at 10.65 and 18.7 GHz, in: 2016 Radio Frequency Interference (RFI), 26–30, https://doi.org/10.1109/RFINT.2016.7833526, 2016b. a
Duncan, D. and Bormann, N.: Assessing RFI flags at passive microwave bands with an NWP model, Tech. rep., ESA Contract Report, Reading, https://doi.org/10.21957/eefd6f0954, 2024. a, b
Duncan, D. I., Geer, A., Bormann, N., and Dahoui, M.: Vicarious calibration monitoring of MWI and ICI using NWP fields, Tech. rep., EUMETSAT Contract Report, https://doi.org/10.21957/7c2d18d2e1, 2024. a
English, S., Duncan, D., and Turner, E.: Assessment of Value of Provision of Spectral Response Functions from CGMS Agencies, in: CGMS-48 WG II, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351358361_Assessment_of_Value_of_Provision_of_Spectral_Response_Functions_from_CGMS_Agencies (last access: 22 June 2026), 2020. a
ERMIT: ESA RFI Monitoring & Information Tool, https://rfi.smos.eo.esa.int/rfimanager/publicindex.jsp, (last access: 15 April 2025), 2025. a
EUMETSAT for Copernicus: Advanced Microwave Radiometer (AMR-C) Level 2 Products (baseline version G01) – Sentinel-6 – Reprocessed, V. G01, EUMETSAT [data set], https://doi.org/10.15770/EUM_SEC_CLM_0116, 2025. a
Farrar, S. and Jones, L.: Corruption of the TRMM microwave imager cold sky mirror due to RFI, in: 2016 14th Specialist Meeting on Microwave Radiometry and Remote Sensing of the Environment (MicroRad), 76–81, https://doi.org/10.1109/MICRORAD.2016.7530508, 2016. a
Geer, A. J., Bauer, P., Lonitz, K., Barlakas, V., Eriksson, P., Mendrok, J., Doherty, A., Hocking, J., and Chambon, P.: Bulk hydrometeor optical properties for microwave and sub-millimetre radiative transfer in RTTOV-SCATT v13.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7497–7526, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7497-2021, 2021. a
Geer, A. J., Lonitz, K., Duncan, D. I., and Bormann, N.: Improved Surface Treatment for All-sky Microwave Observations, Tech. Rep. 894, ECMWF Tech. Memo., Shinfield Park, Reading, https://doi.org/10.21957/zi7q6hau, 2022. a
Gómez-Ocampo, E., Gaxiola-Castro, G., Durazo, R., and Beier, E.: Effects of the 2013-2016 warm anomalies on the California Current phytoplankton, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. II, 151, 64–76, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr2.2017.01.005, 2018. a
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA): GCOM-W/AMSR2 L1B Brightness Temperature, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency [data set], https://doi.org/10.57746/EO.01GS73ANS548QGHAKNZDJYXD2H, 2012. a
Jorge, F., Pedro, L., and Mendonça, S.: Emerging prospects for Earth observation in addressing sustainable development goals, ITU News Magazine, 5, 50–54, 2023. a
Kazumori, M., Geer, A. J., and English, S. J.: Effects of all-sky assimilation of GCOM-W/AMSR2 radiances in the ECMWF numerical weather prediction system, Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2669, 2016. a, b
Kern, S., Lavergne, T., Notz, D., Pedersen, L. T., Tonboe, R. T., Saldo, R., and Sørensen, A. M.: Satellite passive microwave sea-ice concentration data set intercomparison: closed ice and ship-based observations, The Cryosphere, 13, 3261–3307, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-3261-2019, 2019. a, b
Leys, C., Ley, C., Klein, O., Bernard, P., and Licata, L.: Detecting outliers: Do not use standard deviation around the mean, use absolute deviation around the median, J. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 49, 764–766, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.03.013, 2013. a
Li, L., Njoku, E., Im, E., Chang, P., and Germain, K.: A preliminary survey of radio-frequency interference over the U.S. in Aqua AMSR-E data, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 42, 380–390, https://doi.org/10.1109/tgrs.2003.817195, 2004. a
Maiwald, F., Brown, S. T., Koch, T., Milligan, L., Kangaslahti, P., Schlecht, E., Skalare, A., Bloom, M., Torossian, V., Kanis, J., Statham, S., Kang, S., and Vaze, P.: Completion of the AMR-C Instrument for Sentinel-6, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl., 13, 1811–1818, https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2020.2991175, 2020. a
Mo, T.: Prelaunch calibration of the advanced microwave sounding unit-A for NOAA-K, IEEE T. Microw. Theory, 44, 1460–1469, https://doi.org/10.1109/22.536029, 1996. a
Norwegian Offshore Directorate (NOD): Maps of the Norweigean Continental Shelf, https://www.sodir.no/en/whats-new/publications/Maps-of-the-ncs (last access: 14 March 2025), 2024. a
Oliva, R., Daganzo, E., Richaume, P., Kerr, Y., Cabot, F., Soldo, Y., Anterrieu, E., Reul, N., Gutierrez, A., Barbosa, J., and Lopes, G.: Status of Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) in the 1400–1427 MHz passive band based on six years of SMOS mission, Remote Sens. Environ., 180, 64–75, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.01.013, 2016. a, b
Oliva, R., Onrubia, R., Martellucci, A., Daganzo-Eusebio, E., Jorge, F., Soldo, Y., English, S., De Rosnay, P., Weston, P., Barbosa, J., and Nestoras, I.: Results from the Ground RFI Detection System for Passive Microwave Earth Observation Data, in: 2021 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), IEEE, 1827–1830, https://doi.org/10.1109/igarss47720.2021.9553636, 2021. a
Onrubia, R. and Oliva, R.: Threshold Generation Coefficients for the EORFIScan Software, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19727331, 2026. a
Ookla: 5G in asia pacific: Deployment momentum continues, GSMA (GSM Association), https://www.gsma.com/get-involved/gsma-membership/gsma_resources/5g-in-asia-pacific-deployment-momentum-continues (last access: 22 June 2026), 2023. a
Parde, M., Zribi, M., Fanise, P., and Dechambre, M.: Analysis of RFI Issue Using the CAROLS L-Band Experiment, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 49, 1063–1070, https://doi.org/10.1109/tgrs.2010.2069101, 2011. a
Pedro, L., Sá, M., Fernandes, R., Jorge, F., and Mendonça, S.: Protection of Earth Observation Satellites From Radio-Frequency Interference: Policies and Practices [Perspectives], IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine, 10, 278–288, https://doi.org/10.1109/MGRS.2022.3221824, 2022. a, b
Piepmeier, J. R., Johnson, J. T., Mohammed, P. N., Bradley, D., Ruf, C., Aksoy, M., Garcia, R., Hudson, D., Miles, L., and Wong, M.: Radio-Frequency Interference Mitigation for the Soil Moisture Active Passive Microwave Radiometer, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 52, 761–775, https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2013.2281266, 2014. a
Quartly, G. D., Nencioli, F., Raynal, M., Bonnefond, P., Nilo Garcia, P., Garcia-Mondéjar, A., Flores de la Cruz, A., Crétaux, J.-F., Taburet, N., Frery, M.-L., Cancet, M., Muir, A., Brockley, D., McMillan, M., Abdalla, S., Fleury, S., Cadier, E., Gao, Q., Escorihuela, M. J., Roca, M., Bergé-Nguyen, M., Laurain, O., Bruniquel, J., Féménias, P., and Lucas, B.: The Roles of the S3MPC: Monitoring, Validation and Evolution of Sentinel-3 Altimetry Observations, Remote Sens., 12, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12111763, 2020. a, b
Querol, J., Onrubia, R., Alonso-Arroyo, A., Pascual, D., Park, H., and Camps, A.: Performance Assessment of Time–Frequency RFI Mitigation Techniques in Microwave Radiometry, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl., 10, 3096–3106, https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2017.2654541, 2017. a, b
Scanlon, T., Geer, A. J., Bormann, N., and Duncan, D. I.: Using 6.9 and 10.65 GHz From the AMSR2 and GMI Microwave Imagers in the ECMWF NWP System (IFS), IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 63, 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1109/tgrs.2025.3627448, 2025. a, b
SFCG: Report 32-1R2: Passive Sensor Filter Characteristics, Tech. rep., Space Frequency Coordination Group, https://sfcgonline.org/resources/reports/ (last access: 22 June 2026), 2014. a
Spreen, G., Kaleschke, L., and Heygster, G.: Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89-GHz channels, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 113, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JC003384, 2008. a
Wentz, F., Meissner, T., Gentemann, C., Hilburn, K., and Scott, J.: RSS/AMSR-2 Data Images/Daily, Remote Sensing Systems, https://images.remss.com/amsr/amsr2_data_daily.html (last access: 23 April 2026), 2021. a
World Meteorological Organization (WMO): List of all Instruments, observing Systems Capability Analysis and Review Tool (OSCAR), https://space.oscar.wmo.int/instruments (last access: 22 June 2026), 2025. a
Wu, Y., Qian, B., Bao, Y., Li, M., Petropoulos, G. P., Liu, X., and Li, L.: Detection and Analysis of C-Band Radio Frequency Interference in AMSR2 Data over Land, Remote Sens., 11, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11101228, 2019. a
Wu, Y., Li, M., Bao, Y., and Petropoulos, G. P.: Cross-Validation of Radio-Frequency-Interference Signature in Satellite Microwave Radiometer Observations over the Ocean, Remote Sensing, 12, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12203433, 2020. a, b
Xian, D., Zhang, P., Gao, L., Sun, R., Zhang, H., and Jia, X.: Fengyun Meteorological Satellite Products for Earth System Science Applications, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 38, 1267–1284, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-021-0425-3, 2021. a
Zhang, S., Li, J., Wang, Z., Wang, H., Sun, M., Jiang, J., and He, J.: Design of the second generation microwave humidity sounder (MWHS-II) for Chinese meteorological satellite FY-3, in: 2012 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, 4672–4675, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2012.6350423, 2012. a
Zou, C.-Z., Wang, W., and NOAA CDR Program: NOAA Fundamental Climate Data Record (FCDR) of AMSU-A Level 1c Brightness Temperature, Version 1.0, NOAA National Climatic Data Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.7289/V5X63JT2, 2013. a
Short summary
We studied how common unwanted man-made radio frequency interferes affect Earth observation (EO) satellites used for weather and climate studies. We scanned frequencies from 6 to 200 GHz in 2022. We found strong interference at lower ranges, including first signs at 23.8 and 36.5 gigahertz, while higher ranges were mostly clean. These results highlight the need for real-time monitoring, stronger protection from authorities, and on-board and on-ground mitigation systems in EO missions.
We studied how common unwanted man-made radio frequency interferes affect Earth observation (EO)...