the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Evaluation of upper-tropospheric lower-stratospheric properties over the Asian monsoon region in a storm-resolving model
Abstract. The structure of the tropical upper troposphere-lower stratosphere (UTLS) affects radiative balance, stability, and regional dynamics in important ways. Lack of reliable observational baselines poses a challenge to evaluating model representation of UTLS properties. Here, we use in-situ data, primarily from the StratoClim field campaign over the Asian Monsoon area, to assess the UTLS temperature, moisture, and ice clouds in the Icosahedral Nonhydrostatic (ICON) model at storm-resolving grid spacing. We also employ superpressure balloon data and updrafts of the POSIDON and ATTREX campaigns to evaluate the UTLS convective updrafts and gravity wave activity in ICON. Our simulations show the upper troposphere is too cold, while the lower stratosphere is too warm and excessively dry relative to observations. These thermodynamic biases coincide with overestimated cloud ice in the upper troposphere and underestimated cloud ice in the lower stratosphere. The mean convective updraft is underestimated by 80 % in the model, and the power spectral density for temperature fluctuations of frequencies greater than 103 s-1 is underestimated by orders of magnitude. Too weak dynamics exacerbate a lack of ice cloud above 100 hPa. Too weak and too infrequent convective overshoots or too rapid dissipation of upper-tropospheric ice clouds in the model are two possible explanatory mechanisms for these biases.
Competing interests: Some authors are members of the editorial board of the journal ACP.
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 paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.- Preprint
(1858 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 19 Dec 2025)
- RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-4981', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Nov 2025 reply
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-4981', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Dec 2025
reply
RC2 - Comments for EGUSPHERE-2025-4981
Title: Evaluation of upper-tropospheric lower-stratospheric properties over the Asian monsoon region in a storm-resolving model.
Authors: Sylvia C. Sullivan, Aiko Voigt, Edgardo Sepúlveda Araya, Silvia Bucci, Annette Miltenberger, Meredith K. Kupinski, Christian Rolf, and Martina Krämer
Recommendation: Publish after minor revisions
General Comments
This manuscript presents a comprehensive evaluation of the ICON model at storm-resolving resolution (2.5 km) over the Asian Monsoon region. By using unique high-altitude in-situ measurements from the StratoClim campaign, along with additional datasets (ATTREX, POSIDON, Strateole-2), the authors provide a valuable assessment of the model's performance in the UTLS region. The study successfully links thermodynamic biases (cold/moist UT, warm/dry LS) to microphysical outcomes (ice cloud placement) and dynamical deficiencies (weak vertical velocities and gravity wave activity). The identification of mechanisms, specifically the underrepresentation of convective overshooting and the potential role of gravity waves, adds significant scientific value.
The manuscript is well-written and logically structured. However, I have noted a few minor typos and instances where figure captions are somewhat unclear or incomplete regarding legend definitions. I recommend publication after minor revisions to address the specific points listed below.
Specifc Comments
- Page 1, line 10: The text mentions "frequencies greater than 103 s⁻¹". This corresponds to 1000 Hz (acoustic range), which is physically impossible for atmospheric gravity waves. Section 3.3 correctly identifies the range as f > 10-3 s-1. Please correct the exponent in the abstract to 10⁻³ s⁻¹.
- Page 3, line 68: The text mentions "ICON model, version 2.6.4". Please provide the citation or reference for this model version.
- Page 3, line 86: There is a discrepancy on the latitude range of the subdomain. The text (Page 3, Line 86) states the subdomain extends from "19 to 30°N", whereas the caption of Figure 1 defines it as "20°N–30°N". Please check and ensure consistency between the text and the figure.
- Figure 1 caption: The text describes the trajectory initiation area as a "gold" box, while the Figure 1 caption refers to it as a "yellow box". Please use consistent wording to avoid confusion.
- Page 5, line 110: The text refers to the simulation setup as "2M0O", but Table 1 lists the designation as "2M0Ot". Please correct the text to match the designation in the table.
- Figure 3: The caption needs revision to match the panels. Specifically in Panel c:
- (a). It mentions "thin red lines" (which appear orange) but fails to define the solid thick red line (most likely the MLS average).
- (b). The color for the ERA-5 reanalysis (purple) is not specified, whereas other datasets are explicitly described. For consistency, this should be added.
Please change the caption for Figure 5 as well.
- Page 9, line 170: Please change "pressure" to "pressures".
- Page 14, line 253: There is a missing period (".") at the end of the sentence.
- Page 14, line 269: The text says the aircraft samples "no ice clouds" at pressures greater than 160 hPa. However, Figure 9a shows a few black stars (in-situ data) in this area, which means some ice was present. Please rephrase this to be more precise. For example, use "samples negligible ice clouds" or "samples almost no ice clouds."
- Figure 9: Please add a legend for panel (c) so the reader can understand what the lines represent.
- Page 18, line 339 & 340 &346: The initials used for the authors are not consistent. In "Author Contributions," they are written as "ESA" and "MK," but in "Acknowledgements," they are written as "EISA" and "MKK." Please use the same format in both sections.
Data sets
Postprocessed data to reproduce results of UTLS evaluation Sylvia C. Sullivan https://zenodo.org/records/17211372
Interactive computing environment
Code to reproduce figures of UTLS evaluation Sylvia C. Sullivan https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17252590
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 185 | 37 | 19 | 241 | 18 | 16 |
- HTML: 185
- PDF: 37
- XML: 19
- Total: 241
- BibTeX: 18
- EndNote: 16
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Review for “evaluation of upper-tropospheric lower-stratospheric properties over the Asian monsoon region in a storm-resolving model” by Sullivan et al.
This work compares the storm-resolving ICON model, configured with different cloud microphysics and radiation schemes, against several field-campaign observations over the upper-troposphere–lower-stratosphere (UTLS) Asian monsoon region, focusing on temperature, moisture, and cloud ice. The Asian monsoon UTLS is a key region influenced by deep convection and remains challenging for most models. Using a state-of-the-art storm-resolving model to investigate these processes is highly valuable. This work integrates a rich set of model configurations and observational data sources. The analysis is convincing, and the presentation is clear. I did not identify any major issues, only minor consistency points, so I recommend acceptance after a minor revision.