Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 3.248 IF 3.248
  • IF 5-year value: 3.650 IF 5-year 3.650
  • CiteScore value: 3.37 CiteScore 3.37
  • SNIP value: 1.253 SNIP 1.253
  • SJR value: 1.869 SJR 1.869
  • IPP value: 3.29 IPP 3.29
  • h5-index value: 47 h5-index 47
  • Scimago H index value: 60 Scimago H index 60
Volume 2, issue 2 | Copyright
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 2, 379-399, 2009
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2-379-2009
© Author(s) 2009. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

  27 Jul 2009

27 Jul 2009

Validation of water vapour profiles (version 13) retrieved by the IMK/IAA scientific retrieval processor based on full resolution spectra measured by MIPAS on board Envisat

M. Milz1, T. v. Clarmann2, P. Bernath3,4, C. Boone4, S. A. Buehler1, S. Chauhan2, B. Deuber5, D. G. Feist6, B. Funke7, N. Glatthor2, U. Grabowski2, A. Griesfeller8, A. Haefele5, M. Höpfner2, N. Kämpfer5, S. Kellmann2, A. Linden2, S. Müller5,*, H. Nakajima9, H. Oelhaf2, E. Remsberg10, S. Rohs11, J. M. Russell III15, C. Schiller11, G. P. Stiller2, T. Sugita9, T. Tanaka9, H. Vömel12,**, K. Walker4,13, G. Wetzel2, T. Yokota9, V. Yushkov14, and G. Zhang2,*** M. Milz et al.
  • 1Luleå Technical University, Dept. of Space Science, Kiruna, Sweden
  • 2Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe and Universität Karlsruhe, Institut für Meteorologie und Klimaforschung, Karlsruhe, Germany
  • 3Department of Chemistry, University of York, York, UK
  • 4Department of Chemistry, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  • 5Institute of Applied Physics, Atmospheric Physics Group, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
  • 6Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, Germany
  • 7Instituto de Astrofísica de Andalucía, CSIC, Granada, Spain
  • 8Laboratoire Atmosphères, Milieux, Observations Spatiales (LATMOS), UVSQ, CNRS, Verrières-le-Buisson, France
  • 9National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba, Japan
  • 10Science Directorate, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, USA
  • 11Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Jülich, Germany
  • 12Cooperative Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, USA
  • 13Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • 14Central Aerological Observatory, Dolgoprudny, Russia
  • 15Department of Physics, Hampton University, Hampton, USA
  • *now at: METEOTEST, Bern, Switzerland
  • **now at: Deutscher Wetterdienst, Meteorologisches Observatorium Lindenberg, Lindenberg, Germany
  • ***now at: Dept. of Physics and Information Engineering,Shangqiu Normal University, Shangqiu, China

Abstract. Vertical profiles of stratospheric water vapour measured by the Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding (MIPAS) with the full resolution mode between September 2002 and March 2004 and retrieved with the IMK/IAA scientific retrieval processor were compared to a number of independent measurements in order to estimate the bias and to validate the existing precision estimates of the MIPAS data. The estimated precision for MIPAS is 5 to 10% in the stratosphere, depending on altitude, latitude, and season. The independent instruments were: the Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE), the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment Fourier Transform Spectrometer (ACE-FTS), the Improved Limb Atmospheric Spectrometer-II (ILAS-II), the Polar Ozone and Aerosol Measurement (POAM III) instrument, the Middle Atmospheric Water Vapour Radiometer (MIAWARA), the Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding, balloon-borne version (MIPAS-B), the Airborne Microwave Stratospheric Observing System (AMSOS), the Fluorescent Stratospheric Hygrometer for Balloon (FLASH-B), the NOAA frostpoint hygrometer, and the Fast In Situ Hygrometer (FISH). For the in-situ measurements and the ground based, air- and balloon borne remote sensing instruments, the measurements are restricted to central and northern Europe. The comparisons to satellite-borne instruments are predominantly at mid- to high latitudes on both hemispheres. In the stratosphere there is no clear indication of a bias in MIPAS data, because the independent measurements in some cases are drier and in some cases are moister than the MIPAS measurements. Compared to the infrared measurements of MIPAS, measurements in the ultraviolet and visible have a tendency to be high, whereas microwave measurements have a tendency to be low. The results of χ2-based precision validation are somewhat controversial among the comparison estimates. However, for comparison instruments whose error budget also includes errors due to uncertainties in spectrally interfering species and where good coincidences were found, the χ2 values found are in the expected range or even below. This suggests that there is no evidence of systematically underestimated MIPAS random errors.

Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation
Share