Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2021
12 Jul 2024
 | 12 Jul 2024
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Measurement Techniques (AMT).

Evaluating spectral cloud effective radius retrievals from the Enhanced MODIS Airborne Simulator (eMAS) during ORACLES

Kerry Meyer, Steven Platnick, G. Thomas Arnold, Nandana Amarasinghe, Daniel Miller, Jennifer Small-Griswold, Mikael Witte, Brian Cairns, Siddhant Gupta, Greg McFarquhar, and Joseph O'Brien

Abstract. Satellite remote sensing retrievals of cloud effective radius (CER) are widely used for studies of aerosol/cloud interactions. Such retrievals, however, rely on forward radiative transfer (RT) calculations using simplified assumptions that can lead to retrieval errors when the real atmosphere deviates from the forward model. Here, coincident airborne remote sensing and in situ observations obtained during NASA’s ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS (ORACLES) field campaign are used to evaluate retrievals of CER for marine boundary layer stratocumulus clouds and to explore impacts of forward RT model assumptions and other confounding factors. Specifically, spectral CER retrievals from the Enhanced MODIS Airborne Simulator (eMAS) and the Research Scanning Polarimeter (RSP) are compared with polarimetric retrievals from RSP and with CER derived from droplet size distributions (DSDs) observed by the Phase Doppler Interferometer (PDI) and a combination of the Cloud and Aerosol Spectrometer (CAS) and two dimensional Stereo probe (2D-S). The sensitivities of the eMAS and RSP spectral retrievals to assumptions on the DSD effective variance (CEV) and liquid water complex index of refraction are explored. CER and CEV inferred from eMAS spectral reflectance observations of the backscatter glory provide additional context for the spectral CER retrievals. The spectral and polarimetric CER retrieval agreement is case dependent, and updating the retrieval RT assumptions, including using RSP polarimetric CEV retrievals as a constraint, yields mixed results that are tied to differing sensitivities to vertical heterogeneity. Moreover, the in situ cloud probes, often used as the benchmark for remote sensing CER retrieval assessments, themselves do not agree, with PDI DSDs yielding CER 1.3–1.6 µm larger than CAS and CEV roughly 50–60 % smaller than CAS. Implications for the interpretation of spectral and polarimetric CER retrievals and their agreement are discussed.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Kerry Meyer, Steven Platnick, G. Thomas Arnold, Nandana Amarasinghe, Daniel Miller, Jennifer Small-Griswold, Mikael Witte, Brian Cairns, Siddhant Gupta, Greg McFarquhar, and Joseph O'Brien

Status: open (until 17 Aug 2024)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Kerry Meyer, Steven Platnick, G. Thomas Arnold, Nandana Amarasinghe, Daniel Miller, Jennifer Small-Griswold, Mikael Witte, Brian Cairns, Siddhant Gupta, Greg McFarquhar, and Joseph O'Brien
Kerry Meyer, Steven Platnick, G. Thomas Arnold, Nandana Amarasinghe, Daniel Miller, Jennifer Small-Griswold, Mikael Witte, Brian Cairns, Siddhant Gupta, Greg McFarquhar, and Joseph O'Brien

Viewed

Total article views: 72 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
56 13 3 72 0 1
  • HTML: 56
  • PDF: 13
  • XML: 3
  • Total: 72
  • BibTeX: 0
  • EndNote: 1
Views and downloads (calculated since 12 Jul 2024)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 12 Jul 2024)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 71 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 71 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 15 Jul 2024
Download
Short summary
Satellite remote sensing retrievals of cloud droplet size are used to understand clouds and their interactions with aerosols and radiation but require many simplifying assumptions. Evaluation of these retrievals typically is done by comparing against direct measurements of droplets from airborne cloud probes. This paper details an evaluation of proxy airborne remote sensing droplet size retrievals against several cloud probes and explores the impact of key assumptions on retrieval agreement.