Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author or Editor: Steven F. Williams x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search
Richard H. Johnson, Steven F. Williams, and Paul E. Ciesielski

No abstract available.

Full access
Paul E. Ciesielski, Hungjui Yu, Richard H. Johnson, Kunio Yoneyama, Masaki Katsumata, Charles N. Long, Junhong Wang, Scot M. Loehrer, Kathryn Young, Steven F. Williams, William Brown, John Braun, and Teresa Van Hove

Abstract

The upper-air sounding network for Dynamics of the Madden–Julian Oscillation (DYNAMO) has provided an unprecedented set of observations for studying the MJO over the Indian Ocean, where coupling of this oscillation with deep convection first occurs. With 72 rawinsonde sites and dropsonde data from 13 aircraft missions, the sounding network covers the tropics from eastern Africa to the western Pacific. In total nearly 26 000 soundings were collected from this network during the experiment’s 6-month extended observing period (from October 2011 to March 2012). Slightly more than half of the soundings, collected from 33 sites, are at high vertical resolution. Rigorous post–field phase processing of the sonde data included several levels of quality checks and a variety of corrections that address a number of issues (e.g., daytime dry bias, baseline surface data errors, ship deck heating effects, and artificial dry spikes in slow-ascent soundings).

Because of the importance of an accurate description of the moisture field in meeting the scientific goals of the experiment, particular attention is given to humidity correction and its validation. The humidity corrections, though small relative to some previous field campaigns, produced high-fidelity moisture analyses in which sonde precipitable water compared well with independent estimates. An assessment of operational model moisture analyses using corrected sonde data shows an overall good agreement with the exception at upper levels, where model moisture and clouds are more abundant than the sonde data would indicate.

Full access
Steven C. Hardiman, Ian A. Boutle, Andrew C. Bushell, Neal Butchart, Mike J. P. Cullen, Paul R. Field, Kalli Furtado, James C. Manners, Sean F. Milton, Cyril Morcrette, Fiona M. O’Connor, Ben J. Shipway, Chris Smith, David N. Walters, Martin R. Willett, Keith D. Williams, Nigel Wood, N. Luke Abraham, James Keeble, Amanda C. Maycock, John Thuburn, and Matthew T. Woodhouse

Abstract

A warm bias in tropical tropopause temperature is found in the Met Office Unified Model (MetUM), in common with most models from phase 5 of CMIP (CMIP5). Key dynamical, microphysical, and radiative processes influencing the tropical tropopause temperature and lower-stratospheric water vapor concentrations in climate models are investigated using the MetUM. A series of sensitivity experiments are run to separate the effects of vertical advection, ice optical and microphysical properties, convection, cirrus clouds, and atmospheric composition on simulated tropopause temperature and lower-stratospheric water vapor concentrations in the tropics. The numerical accuracy of the vertical advection, determined in the MetUM by the choice of interpolation and conservation schemes used, is found to be particularly important. Microphysical and radiative processes are found to influence stratospheric water vapor both through modifying the tropical tropopause temperature and through modifying upper-tropospheric water vapor concentrations, allowing more water vapor to be advected into the stratosphere. The representation of any of the processes discussed can act to significantly reduce biases in tropical tropopause temperature and stratospheric water vapor in a physical way, thereby improving climate simulations.

Full access
David C. Fritts, Ronald B. Smith, Michael J. Taylor, James D. Doyle, Stephen D. Eckermann, Andreas Dörnbrack, Markus Rapp, Bifford P. Williams, P.-Dominique Pautet, Katrina Bossert, Neal R. Criddle, Carolyn A. Reynolds, P. Alex Reinecke, Michael Uddstrom, Michael J. Revell, Richard Turner, Bernd Kaifler, Johannes S. Wagner, Tyler Mixa, Christopher G. Kruse, Alison D. Nugent, Campbell D. Watson, Sonja Gisinger, Steven M. Smith, Ruth S. Lieberman, Brian Laughman, James J. Moore, William O. Brown, Julie A. Haggerty, Alison Rockwell, Gregory J. Stossmeister, Steven F. Williams, Gonzalo Hernandez, Damian J. Murphy, Andrew R. Klekociuk, Iain M. Reid, and Jun Ma

Abstract

The Deep Propagating Gravity Wave Experiment (DEEPWAVE) was designed to quantify gravity wave (GW) dynamics and effects from orographic and other sources to regions of dissipation at high altitudes. The core DEEPWAVE field phase took place from May through July 2014 using a comprehensive suite of airborne and ground-based instruments providing measurements from Earth’s surface to ∼100 km. Austral winter was chosen to observe deep GW propagation to high altitudes. DEEPWAVE was based on South Island, New Zealand, to provide access to the New Zealand and Tasmanian “hotspots” of GW activity and additional GW sources over the Southern Ocean and Tasman Sea. To observe GWs up to ∼100 km, DEEPWAVE utilized three new instruments built specifically for the National Science Foundation (NSF)/National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Gulfstream V (GV): a Rayleigh lidar, a sodium resonance lidar, and an advanced mesosphere temperature mapper. These measurements were supplemented by in situ probes, dropsondes, and a microwave temperature profiler on the GV and by in situ probes and a Doppler lidar aboard the German DLR Falcon. Extensive ground-based instrumentation and radiosondes were deployed on South Island, Tasmania, and Southern Ocean islands. Deep orographic GWs were a primary target but multiple flights also observed deep GWs arising from deep convection, jet streams, and frontal systems. Highlights include the following: 1) strong orographic GW forcing accompanying strong cross-mountain flows, 2) strong high-altitude responses even when orographic forcing was weak, 3) large-scale GWs at high altitudes arising from jet stream sources, and 4) significant flight-level energy fluxes and often very large momentum fluxes at high altitudes.

Full access