The Impact of Data Latency on Operational Global Weather Forecasting

Sean P. F. Casey aCooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies, Miami, Florida
bNOAA/OAR/Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory, Miami, Florida

Search for other papers by Sean P. F. Casey in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
Lidia Cucurull bNOAA/OAR/Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory, Miami, Florida

Search for other papers by Lidia Cucurull in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

The impact of low data latency is assessed using observations assimilated into the NCEP Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere Global Forecast System (FV3GFS). Operationally, a full dataset is used to generate short-term (9-h) forecasts used as the background state for the next cycle, and a limited dataset with fewer observations is used for long-term (16-day) forecasts due to time constraints that exist in an operational setting. In this study, the sensitivity of the global weather forecast skill to the use of the full and limited datasets in both the short- and long-term forecasts (out to 10 days only) is evaluated. The results show that using the full dataset for long-term forecasts yields a slight improvement in forecast skill, while using the limited dataset for short-term forecasts yields a significant degradation. This degradation is primarily attributed to a decrease of in situ observations rather than remotely sensed observations, though no individual observation type captures the amount of degradation noted when all observations are limited. Furthermore, limiting individual types of in situ observations (aircraft, marine, rawinsonde) does not result in the level of degradation noted when limiting all in situ observations, demonstrating the importance of data redundancy in an operational observational system.

Significance Statement

Millions of observations are used in global models every day to understand the state of the atmosphere. These observations rely on quick transmission from observation source to weather centers for inclusion in operational models. For this study, we test how different groups of observations, which arrive at the model center at different times, impact the model forecast. We find that by not using the observations that take longer to arrive at the weather centers, the forecast is much worse, showing the importance of quick transmission of observations. Direct observations (those measured within the atmosphere) have a greater impact than remote observations (those viewed from afar, such as by satellites). However, no single observation type by itself causes a poor forecast by being limited, showing the importance of using different types of observations to capture the state of the atmosphere.

© 2022 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Sean P. F. Casey, Sean.Casey@noaa.gov

Abstract

The impact of low data latency is assessed using observations assimilated into the NCEP Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere Global Forecast System (FV3GFS). Operationally, a full dataset is used to generate short-term (9-h) forecasts used as the background state for the next cycle, and a limited dataset with fewer observations is used for long-term (16-day) forecasts due to time constraints that exist in an operational setting. In this study, the sensitivity of the global weather forecast skill to the use of the full and limited datasets in both the short- and long-term forecasts (out to 10 days only) is evaluated. The results show that using the full dataset for long-term forecasts yields a slight improvement in forecast skill, while using the limited dataset for short-term forecasts yields a significant degradation. This degradation is primarily attributed to a decrease of in situ observations rather than remotely sensed observations, though no individual observation type captures the amount of degradation noted when all observations are limited. Furthermore, limiting individual types of in situ observations (aircraft, marine, rawinsonde) does not result in the level of degradation noted when limiting all in situ observations, demonstrating the importance of data redundancy in an operational observational system.

Significance Statement

Millions of observations are used in global models every day to understand the state of the atmosphere. These observations rely on quick transmission from observation source to weather centers for inclusion in operational models. For this study, we test how different groups of observations, which arrive at the model center at different times, impact the model forecast. We find that by not using the observations that take longer to arrive at the weather centers, the forecast is much worse, showing the importance of quick transmission of observations. Direct observations (those measured within the atmosphere) have a greater impact than remote observations (those viewed from afar, such as by satellites). However, no single observation type by itself causes a poor forecast by being limited, showing the importance of using different types of observations to capture the state of the atmosphere.

© 2022 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Sean P. F. Casey, Sean.Casey@noaa.gov
Save
  • Brill, K. F., and M. D. Iredell, 1998: EMC verification database. NCEP, 8 pp., http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/papers/brill/VSDBformat.txt.

  • Cucurull, L., and R. A. Anthes, 2014: Impact of infrared, microwave and radio occultation satellite observations in operational numerical weather prediction. Mon. Wea. Rev., 142, 41644186, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-14-00101.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • ECMWF, 2022: Changes in ECMWF model. Integrated Forecasting System, ECMWF, accessed 30 March 2022, https://www.ecmwf.int/en/forecasts/documentation-and-support/changes-ecmwf-model.

  • English, S., and Coauthors, 2013: Impact of satellite data. ECMWF Tech. Memo. 711, 46 pp., https://www.ecmwf.int/sites/default/files/elibrary/2013/9301-impact-satellite-data.pdf.

  • Garrett, K., 2013: Forecast impact assessments of SNPP ATMS. JCSDA Quarterly, No. 43, Joint Center for Satellite Data Assimilation, Boulder, CO, 3–4.

  • Han, W., and M. Jochum, 2017: Latency analysis of large volume satellite data transmissions. 2017 IEEE Int. Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symp. (IGARSS 2017), Fort Worth, TX, IEEE, 384–387, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2017.8126976.

  • Haupt, S. E., P. A. Jimenez, J. A. Lee, and B. Kosovic, 2017: Principles of meteorology and numerical weather prediction. Renewable Energy Forecasting, 2017, 3–28, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100504-0.00001-9.

  • Hoffman, R. N., S.-A. Boukabara, V. K. Kumar, K. Garrett, S. P. F. Casey, and R. Atlas, 2017: An empirical cumulative density function approach to defining summary NWP forecast assessment metrics. Mon. Wea. Rev., 145, 14271435, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-16-0271.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Huang, A., and Coauthors, 2016: Community satellite processing package from direct broadcast: Providing real-time satellite data to every corner of the world. 2016 IEEE Int. Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symp. (IGARSS 2016), Beijing, China, IEEE, 5532–5535, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2016.7730443.

  • James, E. P., and S. G. Benjamin, 2017: Observation system experiments with the hourly updating Rapid Refresh model using GSI hybrid ensemble-variational data assimilation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 145, 28972918, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-16-0398.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kalnay, E., 2002: Atmospheric Modeling, Data Assimilation and Predictability. Cambridge University Press, 368 pp., https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802270.

  • Klaes, K. D., F. Montagner, and C. Larigauderie, 2013: Metop-B, the second satellite of the EUMETSAT Polar System, in orbit. Proc. SPIE, 8866, 886613, https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2022440.

  • Kleist, D., and K. Ide, 2015: An OSSE-based evaluation of hybrid variational-ensemble data assimilation for the NCEP GFS. Part II: 4DEnVar and hybrid variants. Mon. Wea. Rev., 143, 452470, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-13-00350.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lin, H., S. S. Weygandt, S. G. Benjamin, and M. Hu, 2017: Satellite radiance data assimilation within the hourly updated rapid refresh. Wea. Forecasting, 32, 12731287, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-16-0215.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • NOAA, 2015: NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC Global Climate and Weather Modeling Branch: Running Global Model Parallel Experiments. NOAA, version 6.0, 18 February 2015.

  • NOAA, 2020: FV3GFS Virtual Lab. NOAA, accessed 17 July 2020, https://vlab.noaa.gov/web/fv3gfs.

  • NOAA/NCEI, 2020: Global Forecast System (GFS) Atmospheric Model. NOAA/NCEI, https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/weather-climate-models/global-forecast.

  • Petersen, R. A., 2016: On the impact and benefits of AMDAR observations in operational forecasting—Part I: A review of the impact of automated aircraft wind and temperature reports. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 97, 585602, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00055.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Powers, J. G., and Coauthors, 2017: The Weather Research and Forecasting Model: Overview, system efforts, and future directions. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 98, 17171737, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00308.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Putman, W. M., and S.-J. Lin, 2007: Finite-volume transport on various cubed-sphere grids. J. Comput. Phys., 227, 5578, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2007.07.022.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wang, P., J. Li, and T. J. Schmit, 2020: The impact of low latency satellite sounder observations on local severe storm forecasts in regional NWP. Sensors, 20, 650, https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030650.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wang, X., and T. Lei, 2014: GSI-based four-dimensional ensemble-variational (4DEnsVar) data assimilation formulation and single-resolution experiments with real data for NCEP Global Forecast System. Mon. Wea. Rev., 142, 33033325, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-13-00303.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Weng, F., X. Zou, X. Wang, S. Yang, and M. D. Goldberg, 2012: Introduction to Suomi national polar-orbiting partnership advanced technology microwave sounder for numerical weather prediction and tropical cyclone applications. J. Geophys. Res., 117, D19112, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018144.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 235 58 0
Full Text Views 217 161 32
PDF Downloads 156 86 10