advanced microwave sounding unit
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

57
(FIVE YEARS 4)

H-INDEX

22
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (18) ◽  
pp. 2978
Author(s):  
Banghua Yan ◽  
Junye Chen ◽  
Cheng-Zhi Zou ◽  
Khalil Ahmad ◽  
Haifeng Qian ◽  
...  

This study carries out the calibration and validation of Antenna Temperature Data Record (TDR) and Brightness Temperature Sensor Data Record (SDR) data from the last National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A (AMSU-A) flown on the Meteorological Operational satellite programme (MetOp)-C satellite. The calibration comprises the selection of optimal space view positions for the instrument and the determination of coefficients in calibration equations from the Raw Data Record (RDR) to TDR and SDR. The validation covers the analyses of the instrument noise equivalent differential temperature (NEDT) performance and the TDR and SDR data quality from the launch until 15 November 2019. In particular, the Metop-C data quality is assessed by comparing to radiative transfer model simulations and observations from Metop-A/B AMSU-A, respectively. The results demonstrate that the on-orbit instrument NEDTs have been stable since launch and continue to meet the specifications at most channels except for channel 3, whose NEDT exceeds the specification after April 2019. The quality of the Metop-C AMSU-A data for all channels except channel 3 have been reliable since launch. The quality at channel 3 is degraded due to the noise exceeding the specification. Compared to its TDR data, the Metop-C AMSU-A SDR data exhibit a reduced and more symmetric scan angle-dependent bias against radiative transfer model simulations, demonstrating the great performance of the TDR to SDR conversion coefficients. Additionally, the Metop-C AMSU-A data quality agrees well with Metop-A/B AMSU-A data, with an averaged difference in the order of 0.3 K, which is confirmed based on Simultaneous Nadir Overpass (SNO) inter-sensor comparisons between Metop-A/B/C AMSU-A instruments via either NOAA-18 or NOAA-19 AMSU-A as a transfer.


2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 4005-4014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Burgdorf ◽  
Imke Hans ◽  
Marc Prange ◽  
Theresa Lang ◽  
Stefan A. Buehler

Abstract. We analyzed intrusions of the Moon in the deep space view of the Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-B on the NOAA-16 satellite and found no significant discrepancies in the signals from the different sounding channels between 2001 and 2008. However, earlier investigations had detected biases of up to 10 K, by using simultaneous nadir overpasses of NOAA-16 with other satellites. These discrepancies in the observations of Earth scenes cannot be due to non-linearity of the receiver or contamination of the deep space view without affecting the signal from the Moon as well. As neither major anomalies of the on-board calibration target nor the local oscillator were present, we consider radio frequency interference in combination with a strongly decreasing gain the most obvious reason for the degrading photometric stability. By means of the chosen example we demonstrate the usefulness of the Moon for investigations of the performance of microwave sounders in flight.


2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 507-513
Author(s):  
Z. Qin ◽  
X. Zou ◽  
F. Weng

AbstractSatellite microwave measurements can penetrate through clouds and therefore provide unique information of surface and near-surface temperatures and surface emissivity. In this study, the brightness temperatures from NOAA-15 Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A (AMSU-A) are used to analyse the surface temperature variation in the Arctic and Antarctic regions during the past 13 years from 1998–2010. The data from four AMSU-A channels sensitive to surface are analysed with wavelet and Fourier spectrum techniques. A very pronounced maximum is noticed in the period range centred around four months. Application of a statistical significance test confirms that it is a dominant mode of variability over polar regions besides the annual and semi-annual oscillations in the data. No evidence of this feature could be found in middle and low latitudes. The four-month oscillation is 90° out of phase at the Arctic and Antarctic, with the Arctic four-month oscillation reaching its maximum in the beginning of March, July and November and the Antarctic four-month oscillation in the middle of April, August and December. The intensity of the four-month oscillation varies interannually. The years with pronounced four-month oscillation were 2002–03, 2005–06 and 2008–09. The strongest year for the Arctic and Antarctic four-month oscillations occurred in 2005–06 and 2008–09, respectively. The sign of four-month oscillation is also found in the surface skin temperatures and two-metre air temperatures from ERA-Interim reanalysis, with strongest signal in 2005–06 when this oscillation is strongest in the data. It is hypothesized that the Arctic and Antarctic four-month oscillations are a combined result of unique features of solar radiative forcing and snow/sea ice formation and metamorphosis.


2011 ◽  
Vol 139 (12) ◽  
pp. 3765-3780 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vadim E. Gorin ◽  
Mikhail D. Tsyrulnikov

Abstract Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit A (AMSU-A) observation-error covariances are objectively estimated by comparing satellite radiances with radiosonde data. Channels 6–8 are examined as being weakly dependent on the surface and on the stratosphere above the radiosonde top level. Significant horizontal, interchannel, temporal, and intersatellite correlations are found. Besides, cross correlations between satellite and forecast (background) errors (largely disregarded in practical data assimilation) proved to be far from zero. The directional isotropy hypothesis is found to be valid for satellite error correlations. Dependencies on the scan position, the season, and the satellite are also checked. Bootstrap simulations demonstrate that the estimated covariances are statistically significant. The estimated correlations are shown to be caused by the satellite errors in question and not by other (nonsatellite) factors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document