The water vapour intercomparison effort in the framework of the Convective and Orographically-induced Precipitation Study

Airborne-to-ground-based and airborne-to-airborne lidar systems

R. Bhawar, P. Di Girolamo, D. Summa, C. Flamant, D. Althausen, A. Behrendt, C. Kiemle, P. Bosser, M. Cacciani, C. Champollion, T. Di Iorio, R. Engelmann, C. Herold, D. Müller, Sandip Pal, M. Wirth, V. Wulfmeyer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

49 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

An intensive water vapour intercomparison effort, involving airborne and ground-based water vapour lidar systems, was carried out in the framework of the COPS experiment. The main objective of this paper is to provide accurate error estimates for these systems. Comparisons between the ground-based Raman lidar BASIL and the airborne CNRS DIAL (Differential Absorption Lidar) indicate a mean relative bias between the two sensors, calculated with respect to the mean value of -2.13% (-0.034 g kg-1) in the altitude region 0.5-3.5 km, while comparisons between BASIL and the airborne DLR DIAL lead to a mean relative bias of 1.87% (0.018 g kg-1) in this same altitude region. Comparisons between the ground-based UHOH DIAL and the CNRS DIAL indicate a bias of -3.2% (-0.37 × 1022 m-3) in the altitude range 1.5-4.5 km, while comparisons between the UHOH DIAL and the DLR DIAL indicate a bias of 0.83% (0.06 × 1022 m-3) in this same altitude range. Based on the available comparisons between the ground-based Raman lidar BERTHA and the CNRS DIAL, the mean relative bias is found to be -4.37% (-0.123 g kg-1) in the altitude region 0.5-4.5 km. Comparisons between the ground-based IGN Raman lidar and the CNRS DIAL indicate a bias of 3.18% (0.55 g kg-1) in the altitude range from 0.5 to 4.5 km, while comparisons between the CNRS DIAL and DLR DIAL result in a mean relative bias of 3.93% (1.1 × 1022 m-3) in the altitude interval 0.5-4.0 km. Based on the available statistics of comparisons, benefiting from the fact that the CNRS DIAL was able to be compared with all other lidar systems, and putting equal weight on the data reliability of each instrument, overall relative values for BASIL, BERTHA, IGN Raman lidar, UHOH DIAL, DLR DIAL, and CNRS DIAL, with respect to the mean value, are found to be -0.38, -2.60, 4.90, -1.43, -2.23 and 1.72%, respectively.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)325-348
Number of pages24
JournalQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society
Volume137
Issue numberSUPPL. 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2011

Fingerprint

lidar
water vapor
comparison

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Atmospheric Science

Cite this

Bhawar, R. ; Di Girolamo, P. ; Summa, D. ; Flamant, C. ; Althausen, D. ; Behrendt, A. ; Kiemle, C. ; Bosser, P. ; Cacciani, M. ; Champollion, C. ; Di Iorio, T. ; Engelmann, R. ; Herold, C. ; Müller, D. ; Pal, Sandip ; Wirth, M. ; Wulfmeyer, V. / The water vapour intercomparison effort in the framework of the Convective and Orographically-induced Precipitation Study : Airborne-to-ground-based and airborne-to-airborne lidar systems. In: Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society. 2011 ; Vol. 137, No. SUPPL. 1. pp. 325-348.
@article{538bb6b1e95148d7b050b61ae359a280,
title = "The water vapour intercomparison effort in the framework of the Convective and Orographically-induced Precipitation Study: Airborne-to-ground-based and airborne-to-airborne lidar systems",
abstract = "An intensive water vapour intercomparison effort, involving airborne and ground-based water vapour lidar systems, was carried out in the framework of the COPS experiment. The main objective of this paper is to provide accurate error estimates for these systems. Comparisons between the ground-based Raman lidar BASIL and the airborne CNRS DIAL (Differential Absorption Lidar) indicate a mean relative bias between the two sensors, calculated with respect to the mean value of -2.13{\%} (-0.034 g kg-1) in the altitude region 0.5-3.5 km, while comparisons between BASIL and the airborne DLR DIAL lead to a mean relative bias of 1.87{\%} (0.018 g kg-1) in this same altitude region. Comparisons between the ground-based UHOH DIAL and the CNRS DIAL indicate a bias of -3.2{\%} (-0.37 × 1022 m-3) in the altitude range 1.5-4.5 km, while comparisons between the UHOH DIAL and the DLR DIAL indicate a bias of 0.83{\%} (0.06 × 1022 m-3) in this same altitude range. Based on the available comparisons between the ground-based Raman lidar BERTHA and the CNRS DIAL, the mean relative bias is found to be -4.37{\%} (-0.123 g kg-1) in the altitude region 0.5-4.5 km. Comparisons between the ground-based IGN Raman lidar and the CNRS DIAL indicate a bias of 3.18{\%} (0.55 g kg-1) in the altitude range from 0.5 to 4.5 km, while comparisons between the CNRS DIAL and DLR DIAL result in a mean relative bias of 3.93{\%} (1.1 × 1022 m-3) in the altitude interval 0.5-4.0 km. Based on the available statistics of comparisons, benefiting from the fact that the CNRS DIAL was able to be compared with all other lidar systems, and putting equal weight on the data reliability of each instrument, overall relative values for BASIL, BERTHA, IGN Raman lidar, UHOH DIAL, DLR DIAL, and CNRS DIAL, with respect to the mean value, are found to be -0.38, -2.60, 4.90, -1.43, -2.23 and 1.72{\%}, respectively.",
author = "R. Bhawar and {Di Girolamo}, P. and D. Summa and C. Flamant and D. Althausen and A. Behrendt and C. Kiemle and P. Bosser and M. Cacciani and C. Champollion and {Di Iorio}, T. and R. Engelmann and C. Herold and D. M{\"u}ller and Sandip Pal and M. Wirth and V. Wulfmeyer",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/qj.697",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "137",
pages = "325--348",
journal = "Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society",
issn = "0035-9009",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "SUPPL. 1",

}

Bhawar, R, Di Girolamo, P, Summa, D, Flamant, C, Althausen, D, Behrendt, A, Kiemle, C, Bosser, P, Cacciani, M, Champollion, C, Di Iorio, T, Engelmann, R, Herold, C, Müller, D, Pal, S, Wirth, M & Wulfmeyer, V 2011, 'The water vapour intercomparison effort in the framework of the Convective and Orographically-induced Precipitation Study: Airborne-to-ground-based and airborne-to-airborne lidar systems', Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, vol. 137, no. SUPPL. 1, pp. 325-348. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.697

The water vapour intercomparison effort in the framework of the Convective and Orographically-induced Precipitation Study : Airborne-to-ground-based and airborne-to-airborne lidar systems. / Bhawar, R.; Di Girolamo, P.; Summa, D.; Flamant, C.; Althausen, D.; Behrendt, A.; Kiemle, C.; Bosser, P.; Cacciani, M.; Champollion, C.; Di Iorio, T.; Engelmann, R.; Herold, C.; Müller, D.; Pal, Sandip; Wirth, M.; Wulfmeyer, V.

In: Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, Vol. 137, No. SUPPL. 1, 01.01.2011, p. 325-348.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The water vapour intercomparison effort in the framework of the Convective and Orographically-induced Precipitation Study

T2 - Airborne-to-ground-based and airborne-to-airborne lidar systems

AU - Bhawar, R.

AU - Di Girolamo, P.

AU - Summa, D.

AU - Flamant, C.

AU - Althausen, D.

AU - Behrendt, A.

AU - Kiemle, C.

AU - Bosser, P.

AU - Cacciani, M.

AU - Champollion, C.

AU - Di Iorio, T.

AU - Engelmann, R.

AU - Herold, C.

AU - Müller, D.

AU - Pal, Sandip

AU - Wirth, M.

AU - Wulfmeyer, V.

PY - 2011/1/1

Y1 - 2011/1/1

N2 - An intensive water vapour intercomparison effort, involving airborne and ground-based water vapour lidar systems, was carried out in the framework of the COPS experiment. The main objective of this paper is to provide accurate error estimates for these systems. Comparisons between the ground-based Raman lidar BASIL and the airborne CNRS DIAL (Differential Absorption Lidar) indicate a mean relative bias between the two sensors, calculated with respect to the mean value of -2.13% (-0.034 g kg-1) in the altitude region 0.5-3.5 km, while comparisons between BASIL and the airborne DLR DIAL lead to a mean relative bias of 1.87% (0.018 g kg-1) in this same altitude region. Comparisons between the ground-based UHOH DIAL and the CNRS DIAL indicate a bias of -3.2% (-0.37 × 1022 m-3) in the altitude range 1.5-4.5 km, while comparisons between the UHOH DIAL and the DLR DIAL indicate a bias of 0.83% (0.06 × 1022 m-3) in this same altitude range. Based on the available comparisons between the ground-based Raman lidar BERTHA and the CNRS DIAL, the mean relative bias is found to be -4.37% (-0.123 g kg-1) in the altitude region 0.5-4.5 km. Comparisons between the ground-based IGN Raman lidar and the CNRS DIAL indicate a bias of 3.18% (0.55 g kg-1) in the altitude range from 0.5 to 4.5 km, while comparisons between the CNRS DIAL and DLR DIAL result in a mean relative bias of 3.93% (1.1 × 1022 m-3) in the altitude interval 0.5-4.0 km. Based on the available statistics of comparisons, benefiting from the fact that the CNRS DIAL was able to be compared with all other lidar systems, and putting equal weight on the data reliability of each instrument, overall relative values for BASIL, BERTHA, IGN Raman lidar, UHOH DIAL, DLR DIAL, and CNRS DIAL, with respect to the mean value, are found to be -0.38, -2.60, 4.90, -1.43, -2.23 and 1.72%, respectively.

AB - An intensive water vapour intercomparison effort, involving airborne and ground-based water vapour lidar systems, was carried out in the framework of the COPS experiment. The main objective of this paper is to provide accurate error estimates for these systems. Comparisons between the ground-based Raman lidar BASIL and the airborne CNRS DIAL (Differential Absorption Lidar) indicate a mean relative bias between the two sensors, calculated with respect to the mean value of -2.13% (-0.034 g kg-1) in the altitude region 0.5-3.5 km, while comparisons between BASIL and the airborne DLR DIAL lead to a mean relative bias of 1.87% (0.018 g kg-1) in this same altitude region. Comparisons between the ground-based UHOH DIAL and the CNRS DIAL indicate a bias of -3.2% (-0.37 × 1022 m-3) in the altitude range 1.5-4.5 km, while comparisons between the UHOH DIAL and the DLR DIAL indicate a bias of 0.83% (0.06 × 1022 m-3) in this same altitude range. Based on the available comparisons between the ground-based Raman lidar BERTHA and the CNRS DIAL, the mean relative bias is found to be -4.37% (-0.123 g kg-1) in the altitude region 0.5-4.5 km. Comparisons between the ground-based IGN Raman lidar and the CNRS DIAL indicate a bias of 3.18% (0.55 g kg-1) in the altitude range from 0.5 to 4.5 km, while comparisons between the CNRS DIAL and DLR DIAL result in a mean relative bias of 3.93% (1.1 × 1022 m-3) in the altitude interval 0.5-4.0 km. Based on the available statistics of comparisons, benefiting from the fact that the CNRS DIAL was able to be compared with all other lidar systems, and putting equal weight on the data reliability of each instrument, overall relative values for BASIL, BERTHA, IGN Raman lidar, UHOH DIAL, DLR DIAL, and CNRS DIAL, with respect to the mean value, are found to be -0.38, -2.60, 4.90, -1.43, -2.23 and 1.72%, respectively.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951901798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79951901798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/qj.697

DO - 10.1002/qj.697

M3 - Article

VL - 137

SP - 325

EP - 348

JO - Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society

JF - Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society

SN - 0035-9009

IS - SUPPL. 1

ER -