the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
The EarthCARE Mission: Science Data Processing Chain Overview
Michael Eisinger
Fabien Marnas
Kotska Wallace
Takuji Kubota
Nobuhiro Tomiyama
Yuichi Ohno
Toshiyuki Tanaka
Eichi Tomita
Tobias Wehr
Dirk Bernaerts
Abstract. The Earth Cloud Aerosol and Radiation Explorer (EarthCARE) is a satellite mission implemented by the European Space Agency (ESA) in cooperation with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) to measure global profiles of aerosols, clouds and precipitation properties together with radiative fluxes and derived heating rates. The data will be used in particular to evaluate the representation of clouds, aerosols, precipitation and associated radiative fluxes in weather forecasting and climate models.
The science data acquired by the four satellite instruments are processed on ground. Calibrated instrument data – level 1 data products – and retrieved geophysical data products – level 2 data products – are produced in the ESA and JAXA ground segments. This paper provides an overview of the data processing chains of ESA and JAXA and explains the instrument level 1 data products and main aspects of the calibration algorithms. Furthermore, an overview of the level 2 data products, with references to the respective dedicated papers, is provided.
- Preprint
(1185 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Michael Eisinger et al.
Status: open (until 21 Oct 2023)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1998', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Sep 2023
reply
General comments:
This manuscript contains an excellent overview of the EarthCARE L1 and L2 data products and processing steps, at a sufficiently high level showing the complexity and coherence of the EarthCARE satellite data system. The EarthCARE data processing system is so complex, because it has four scientific instruments which by synergy are aimed to describe the vertical structure of clouds, aerosol layers and the radiation field inside the atmosphere. For the future users of EarthCARE data - and for the further development as well - such an overview is necessary. The paper is thus of great importance to the EarthCARE mission.
Although data processing is a very technical process which usually better fits in a technical report than in a science paper, it is appreciated that this paper is striking the balance between giving an overview of the processing of the four EarthCARE instruments and their interrelations, and describing the most important processing steps without going too much in detail. Those details belong in the separate (per instrument and per product) papers which are appearing in the EarthCARE special issue.
The manuscript has a clear structure. The style of the manuscript is mostly consistent for all three European instruments, but it seems that the text on the CPR instrument from Japan is deviating. Please carefully check the text and try to write a more explicit description of the CPR data processing steps.
The paper can be accepted after addressing the suggestions and textual corrections below.
Specific comments:
- Although it is understandable, this manuscript is filled with acronyms. It can be tiring to search where an acronym is introduced. Please add an appendix with the list of acronyms.
- At an early place in the manuscript, e.g. in Sect. 2, please discuss the data distribution and timeliness of EarthCARE data: NRT, OFFL, direct broadcast? Which are the delivery means to users?
- 46: “…. which make use of meteorological data from ECMWF”: does that also hold for the JAXA products?
- 2: It is unclear how the two processing chains of ESA and JAXA are aligned in time.
- Figure 1:
- The small font is poorly readable.
- Please mention the version, date etc. in the caption instead of in the top right corner. Is this diagram still up to date more than 5 years later?
- Please mention the meaning of X-JSG and X-MET in the caption.
- Are all the acronyms explained somewhere in this paper?
- Figure 2: It would be clearer to use the same instrument colour codes in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. Is there a version/date of this JAXA flow diagram?
- 4.2: Please provide a figure with an example of the X-JSG grid.
Technical points:
- Often text is put between brackets, but this is not always needed or allowed, and it hampers the readability. Please provide good running sentences instead.
- l. 2: global profiles? you probably mean: vertical profiles
- l. 6: please mention the four instruments; this information belongs in the abstract
- l. 20: Explorer > Earth Explorer
- l. 83: Fig. (Figure) should be written in full if it is the first word in the sentence. The same holds for other words like Tab. and Sect.
- l. 95: “The differences in the Standard Product and the Research Products …” > “The differences between the Standard Products and the Research Products…” . Also at other places in Sect. 2.2 the English text and especially the singular/plural should be checked.
- L. 98 / l. 103: in > of
- L. 100: indentation is missing
- Sect. 3.1: what do you mean with: particles' signature, and molecules' signature? Please clarify.
- L. 127: What about the effects of the instrument optics?
- The entire paragraph from l. 125 to l. 130 about the signals and the optical chain is unclear. Please avoid using text between brackets, and reformulate the text with clear sentences. It could help to add an equation to explain the ATLID signal and its data processing.
- L. 139: ECGP: meaning?
- L. 145: singular: detector?
- L. 151: Is the A-NOM product already calibrated using the information from the three calibration modes/products mentioned below?
- L. 163: invalid raw data: you probably mean valid? the validity of invalid data is a contradiction.
- L. 168: gives
- L. 170: please use a space between number and unit (km). This occurs at more places.
- L. 185: detection raw data > the raw data
- L. 186: slow > slowly
- L. 199: please remove the brackets around “and the profile…” because this is important information.
- L. 206: processing
- L. 249ff: In the CPR … . Please check the use of articles in Sect. 3.2. Please check the syntax of the CPR text by a native English speaker. Often articles are missing and singular/plural is incorrect.
- L. 249: Are all of these CPR products a function of height?
- L. 258 ff: Is Pr a symbol or an acronym? Symbols (like Z) should be in italics, in equations and in text. Acronyms should be in upright font, in equations and in text.
- L. 266: ….by surface estimation program written…: unclear
- L. 269: delete: speeds
- L. 270: what is IQ?
- L. 271-274: please reformulate
- L. 274: subscript sat in upright font
- L. 289: ; > :
- L. 293: Have the calibration products M-DRK etc. mentioned below already been used in the processing of the Nominal L1B data product?
- L. 394: Why NB? Is this a footnote? A short sentence in the main text is preferable.
- L. 397: NEdT: please explain
- L. 402: is LW = TW - SW?
- L. 407: folding mirror's
- L. 413: This product BM-RAD is not described below. Why is it called unfiltered whereas it should be a corrected product?
- L. 430: Please explain directly below what you mean with marshalling.
- L. 459: blackbody
- L. 464: explain BB
- L. 468-469: product names B-LIN and B-SOL should be in bold, I guess.
- L. 472: this
- L. 475: barycentres
- L. 476 ff: too much text between brackets - check if this is needed.
- L. 524: … two, two-dimensional (2D) grids > ... two 2-dimensional (2D) grids
- Next line: three dimensional > 3-dimensional
- L. 528: The MSI grid: is this a 1 km x 1 km grid? is the fixed grid rectangular in lat/lon ?
- L. 566: Tab. > Tables. Please do not use an abbreviation as the first word in a sentence
- L. 576-578: unclear sentence.
- Sect. 5.1.2. and Sect. 5.2.2: please order these L2 products according to their instruments. Now they are mixed.
- L. 599: reformulate
- Table 1: This does not look like a logical ordering of products. Same comment for the other tables.
- Tables 1-4: Please put the table caption above the table. Please mention in the caption: single instrument L2 products or multi-instrument synergy products.
- L. 629: CPR-ATLID > the combination of CPR and ATLID
- L. 632: ACM_CLP > AC_CLP
- L. 632: CPR-ATLID-MSI > the combination of the three instruments …
- L. 636: what is 2D ice?
- L. 647: the same
- L. 665: EarthCARE production model
- L. 684 ff: please give references for these software tools
- L. 727: delete: (4)
- L. 754: plural: parameterisations, uncertaintiesCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1998-RC1
Michael Eisinger et al.
Michael Eisinger et al.
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 174 | 65 | 10 | 249 | 6 | 5 |
- HTML: 174
- PDF: 65
- XML: 10
- Total: 249
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
