the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Reanalysis representation of low-level winds in the Antarctic near-coastal region
Abstract. Low-level easterly winds encircling Antarctica help drive coastal currents which modify transport of circumpolar deep water to ice shelves, as well as the formation and distribution of sea ice. Reanalysis datasets are especially important at high southern latitudes where observations are few. Here, we investigate the representation of the mean state and short-term variability of coastal easterlies in three recent reanalyses, ERA5, MERRA-2 and JRA-55. Reanalysed winds are compared with summertime marine surface wind observations from the ASCAT scatterometer and surface and upper air measurements from coastal stations. Reanalysis coastal easterlies correlate highly with ASCAT (r=0.91, 0.89 and 0.85 for ERA5, MERRA-2 and JRA-55 respectively) but notable wind speed biases are found close to the coastal margins, especially near complex orography and at high wind speeds. To characterise short-term variability, 12-hourly reanalysis and coastal station winds are composited using self-organising maps (SOMs), which cluster timesteps under similar synoptic and mesoscale influences. Reanalysis performance is sensitive to the flow configuration at stations near steep coastal slopes, where they fail to capture the magnitude of surface wind speed variability when synoptic forcing is weak and conditions favour katabatic forcing. ERA5 exhibits the best overall performance, has more realistic orography and a more realistic jet structure and temperature profile. These results demonstrate the regime behaviour of Antarctica’s coastal winds and indicate important features of the coastal winds which are not well characterised by reanalysis datasets.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(23027 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(23027 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
- RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-693', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Sep 2022
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-693', Anonymous Referee #2, 16 Sep 2022
Review of
Reanalysis representation of low-level winds in the Antarctic near-coastal region
by Thomas Caton Harrison co-workers.
Summary
This paper assesses how well Antarctic coastal (predominantly easterly) winds are represented in three contemporary reanalyses products. The authors use self-organizing maps to assess under which synoptic settings these products perform best/worst. The topic of this paper is original and important, as Antarctic coastal winds are pivotal for the interaction between the ocean and ice sheet (melt) underneath ice shelves. The paper is well written albeit somewhat long. The figures could be clarified here and there, please see suggestions below. All in all, these comments should be addressable with minor revisions.Major comments
l. 48: Important to make clear from the outset how ‘synoptic’ and ‘katabatic’ forcing are defined, and what the other processes (advection, thermal wind) entail. “…but its offshore extent is a source of uncertainty”. By its definition, katabatic winds become zero over flat terrain (as confirmed in Figure 6); the resulting winds are either driven by momentum advection or thermal wind effects.l. 87: Why was the neutral wind product used, and how large is the difference with the non-neutral product? Stability effects can be significant in polar regions. In l. 100 u* is used to calculate the neutral winds, but usually, u* already has the stability correction applied, please confirm/comment.
l. 122: As the authors acknowledge, ASCAT is assimilated into all three products. This is then the place to comment on how suitable such a product is to assess the quality of the reanalyses. What causes any remaining differences anyway?
Minor and textual commentsl. 23: “Coastal winds also modify sea ice concentrations” Of course they do, but winds over Ross ice shelf are forced differently (barrier winds) and are predominantly south-north, rather than east-west. So perhaps not the best example for this particular study.
”
Figure 1: Include in the caption that arrows represent vector average wind speed, and so go to zero length in regions with zero directional constancy.Figure 2: per row please include the name of the station.
Fig. 3a and b: Please include a color legend in the graph.
l. 252: surface -> near-surface (throughout for wind)
l. 260: “although the effects of atmospheric stability are accounted for in our analysis.” Unclear, do you use neutral wind speeds?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-693-RC2 - AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-693', Thomas Caton Harrison, 20 Oct 2022
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
- RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-693', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Sep 2022
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-693', Anonymous Referee #2, 16 Sep 2022
Review of
Reanalysis representation of low-level winds in the Antarctic near-coastal region
by Thomas Caton Harrison co-workers.
Summary
This paper assesses how well Antarctic coastal (predominantly easterly) winds are represented in three contemporary reanalyses products. The authors use self-organizing maps to assess under which synoptic settings these products perform best/worst. The topic of this paper is original and important, as Antarctic coastal winds are pivotal for the interaction between the ocean and ice sheet (melt) underneath ice shelves. The paper is well written albeit somewhat long. The figures could be clarified here and there, please see suggestions below. All in all, these comments should be addressable with minor revisions.Major comments
l. 48: Important to make clear from the outset how ‘synoptic’ and ‘katabatic’ forcing are defined, and what the other processes (advection, thermal wind) entail. “…but its offshore extent is a source of uncertainty”. By its definition, katabatic winds become zero over flat terrain (as confirmed in Figure 6); the resulting winds are either driven by momentum advection or thermal wind effects.l. 87: Why was the neutral wind product used, and how large is the difference with the non-neutral product? Stability effects can be significant in polar regions. In l. 100 u* is used to calculate the neutral winds, but usually, u* already has the stability correction applied, please confirm/comment.
l. 122: As the authors acknowledge, ASCAT is assimilated into all three products. This is then the place to comment on how suitable such a product is to assess the quality of the reanalyses. What causes any remaining differences anyway?
Minor and textual commentsl. 23: “Coastal winds also modify sea ice concentrations” Of course they do, but winds over Ross ice shelf are forced differently (barrier winds) and are predominantly south-north, rather than east-west. So perhaps not the best example for this particular study.
”
Figure 1: Include in the caption that arrows represent vector average wind speed, and so go to zero length in regions with zero directional constancy.Figure 2: per row please include the name of the station.
Fig. 3a and b: Please include a color legend in the graph.
l. 252: surface -> near-surface (throughout for wind)
l. 260: “although the effects of atmospheric stability are accounted for in our analysis.” Unclear, do you use neutral wind speeds?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-693-RC2 - AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-693', Thomas Caton Harrison, 20 Oct 2022
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
290 | 112 | 13 | 415 | 4 | 4 |
- HTML: 290
- PDF: 112
- XML: 13
- Total: 415
- BibTeX: 4
- EndNote: 4
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Stavroula Biri
Thomas J. Bracegirdle
John C. King
Elizabeth C. Kent
Étienne Vignon
John Turner
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(23027 KB) - Metadata XML