Application and verification of ECMWF products 2016

Similar documents
Application and verification of ECMWF products 2010

Application and verification of ECMWF products in Croatia - July 2007

Application and verification of ECMWF products in Croatia

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2016

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2008

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2015

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2017

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2009

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2018

Application and verification of ECMWF products: 2010

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2010

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2016

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2011

Application and verification of ECMWF products in Austria

Application and verification of the ECMWF products Report 2007

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2017

Application and verification of ECMWF products in Norway 2008

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2009

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2012

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2012

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2013

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2009

Application and verification of ECMWF products in Serbia

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2014

Application and verification of ECMWF products in Austria

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2009

Application and verification of ECMWF products in Austria

Model Output Statistics (MOS)

Recent ECMWF Developments

DROUGHT FORECASTING IN CROATIA USING STANDARDIZED PRECIPITATION INDEX (SPI)

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2015

Forecasting Extreme Events

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2011

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2016

METinfo Verification of Operational Weather Prediction Models December 2017 to February 2018 Mariken Homleid and Frank Thomas Tveter

Application and verification of ECMWF products at the Finnish Meteorological Institute

ECMWF products to represent, quantify and communicate forecast uncertainty

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2015

The benefits and developments in ensemble wind forecasting

STATISTICAL MODELS and VERIFICATION

Applying Statistical Tool CLIPER in Forecasting Visibility at Airports

ECMWF product development

METinfo Verification of Operational Weather Prediction Models June to August 2017 Mariken Homleid and Frank Thomas Tveter

MONITORING AND THE RESEARCH ON METEOROLOGICAL DROUGHT IN CROATIA

Downscaling of ECMWF seasonal integrations by RegCM

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2016

Assessment of sea surface temperatures provided in the coupling files from ARPEGE and IFS

Verification of ECMWF products at the Finnish Meteorological Institute

Developments towards multi-model based forecast product generation

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2016

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2015

JOINT WMO TECHNICAL PROGRESS REPORT ON THE GLOBAL DATA PROCESSING AND FORECASTING SYSTEM AND NUMERICAL WEATHER PREDICTION RESEARCH ACTIVITIES FOR 2006

The ECMWF Extended range forecasts

Strategic Radar Enhancement Project (SREP) Forecast Demonstration Project (FDP) The future is here and now

LAM-EPS activities in RC LACE

Calibration of ECMWF forecasts

Verification of ECMWF products at the Finnish Meteorological Institute

JOINT WMO TECHNICAL PROGRESS REPORT ON THE GLOBAL DATA PROCESSING AND FORECASTING SYSTEM AND NUMERICAL WEATHER PREDICTION RESEARCH ACTIVITIES FOR 2007

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2012

István Ihász, Hungarian Meteorological Service, Budapest, Hungary

Verification of ECMWF products at the Deutscher Wetterdienst (DWD)

Sea surface temperature in operational forecast (example of Adriatic Sea)

Optimal combination of NWP Model Forecasts for AutoWARN

Adaptation for global application of calibration and downscaling methods of medium range ensemble weather forecasts

METinfo Verification of Operational Weather Prediction Models September to November 2016 Mariken Homleid and Frank Thomas Tveter

Operations Portugal (second half of 2010)

HEPS. #HEPEX Quebec 2016 UPGRADED METEOROLOGICAL FORCING FOR OPERATIONAL HYDROLOGICAL ENSEMBLE PREDICTIONS: CHALLENGES, RISKS AND CHANCES

eccharts Ensemble data and recent updates Cihan Sahin, Sylvie Lamy-Thepaut, Baudouin Raoult Web development team, ECMWF

New initiatives for Severe Weather prediction at ECMWF

ALADIN forecast experience in Croatia

Seasonal Forecast for the area of the east Mediterranean, Products and Perspectives

Izdavanje prognoza i meteoroloških upozorenja i njihova uloga u svakodnevnom životu

Validation of HARMONIE 36h1.3

Regional Production, Quarterly report on the daily analyses and forecasts activities, and verification of the CHIMERE performances

ALARO 0 experience in Romania

Helen Titley and Rob Neal

The Hungarian Meteorological Service has made

WG5: Common Plot Reports

DROUGHT MONITORING BULLETIN

Understanding Weather and Climate Risk. Matthew Perry Sharing an Uncertain World Conference The Geological Society, 13 July 2017

Report on stay at ZAMG

Global Flood Awareness System GloFAS

CERA-SAT: A coupled reanalysis at higher resolution (WP1)

Severe Freezing Rain in Slovenia

Five years of limited-area ensemble activities at ARPA-SIM: the COSMO-LEPS system

Shaping future approaches to evaluating highimpact weather forecasts

Presentation of met.no s experience and expertise related to high resolution reanalysis

ECMWF 10 th workshop on Meteorological Operational Systems

István Ihász, Máté Mile and Zoltán Üveges Hungarian Meteorological Service, Budapest, Hungary

Seasonal Predictions for South Caucasus and Armenia

The skill of ECMWF cloudiness forecasts

LAMEPS activities at the Hungarian Meteorological Service. Hungarian Meteorological Service

Behind the Climate Prediction Center s Extended and Long Range Outlooks Mike Halpert, Deputy Director Climate Prediction Center / NCEP

Implementation of global surface index at the Met Office. Submitted by Marion Mittermaier. Summary and purpose of document

Seasonal Climate Watch April to August 2018

Estimation of Forecat uncertainty with graphical products. Karyne Viard, Christian Viel, François Vinit, Jacques Richon, Nicole Girardot

Severe weather warnings at the Hungarian Meteorological Service: Developments and progress

Scatterometer Wind Assimilation at the Met Office

Sub-seasonal predictions at ECMWF and links with international programmes

Experimental MOS Precipitation Type Guidance from the ECMWF Model

Transcription:

Application and verification of ECMWF products 2016 Meteorological and Hydrological Service of Croatia Lovro Kalin and Zoran Vakula 1. Summary of major highlights At Meteorological and Hydrological Service of Croatia, ECMWF products are considered as the main source in the operational forecast, particularly for the medium- and long-range forecasts. For short range, Aladin model is included also. Regular verification is still usually done by the point-to-point method, with synop data verified against nearest grid point of the model. The emphasis of the verification is on 2m-temperature and precipitation. 2. Use and application of products 2.1 Post-processing of ECMWF model output 2.1.1 Statistical adaptation 2.1.2 Physical adaptation ECMWF lateral boundary conditions are used for running a 72hr forecast with ALADIN 8km model. No major change has been detected since last year (for details see 2013 report). Still, an issue regarding SST has been detected. SST from the coupling files was compared to the values measured on stations and significant differences (up to 10K) were noticed. There are large discrepancies in model SST (from IFS LBCs) and SST from OSTIA in certain regions, suggesting IFS SST is not entirely from OSTIA but modified, at least for the Mediterranean and Adriatic Seas. Therefore, SST is operationally overwritten with the OSTIA analysis (the most recent available). More on this topic can be found on http://radar.dhz.hr/~tudor/sst/sst_coupl_files2.pdf (courtesy of Martina Tudor). 2.1.3 Derived fields 2.2 Use of ECMWF products In the operational forecast, ECMWF products are widely used, especially for the medium- and long-range forecasts. For the short range, the emphasis is put to the high resolution model (ALADIN - ALARO). This is particularly valuable for severe weather and warnings. For the long range, ECMWF forecasts are practically the only source; Service s end forecasts are based on ECMWF DMO, although some other sources (UKMO, SEECOF, IRI) are also consulted. 3. Verification of products 3.1 Objective verification Describe verification activities and show related scores. 3.1.1 Direct ECMWF model output (both HRES and ENS) In the previous Reports a certain improvement of the skill of 12-hour precipitation forecast has been presented. Latest results confirm that improvement, still with slightly worse results compared to the previous season. While skill (Hansen Kuipers skill score) remained almost the same, bias is slightly negative compared to ideal 1 value in 2014. 1

Fig. 1. Verification scores for ECMWF 12-hour precipitation forecast (larger than 0 mm) for station Zagreb Maksimir (14240). Bias and Hansen-Kuipers skill score (KSS) are displayed. For the 2m-temperature forecast, the extensive verification is provided regularly, with various scores, exhibiting typical features of the forecasting system (see previous reports). Figure 2. presents an example of such verification, with minor degradation of accuracy compared to previous years. However, when expressed in terms of skill, score for year 2015 gives somewhat better results compared to year 2014 (not shown). Fig. 2. Mean absolute error for 2m maximum temperature forecast for 2014 and 2015., for station Zagreb Maksimir (14240). 2

3.1.2 ECMWF model output compared to other NWP models In the short range, performance of ECMWF model is periodically compared to Aladin (ALARO) Croatia model. Results (not presented in this paper) usually exhibit similar level of skill performed by the two models. Another comparison of forecasts/models is delivered in real time, with daily visualisation of different forecasts compared to observations. An example of 2m maximum temperature forecast is displayed in Figure 3. Both models had substantial problems in catching daily maxima, by episodes of either severe overestimation or underestimation. This is a feature well known in typical winter stable situations. As the consequence, duty forecasters (blue line) also struggled to stay in the acceptable threshold of 2 C error. Fig. 3. Maximum 2m-temperature forecast (for the following day) for station Zagreb Maksimir (14240) in December 2015. Aladin (yellow line), ECMWF (green line), forecaster s prediction (blue line) and observed temperature (red line) are displayed. Anomalies are displayed in the lower panel Mean error (ME), mean absolute error (MAE) and root mean square error (RMSE) are calculated. Accuracy is defined as the percentage of forecasts with error smaller than 2 degrees. 3.1.3 Post-processed products Studies have been carried out to produce monthly/seasonal ensemble forecast of Standardized Precipitation Index. Results are very promising (described in last year s Report), but the SPI forecast is still not fully operational. 3.1.4 End products delivered to users Long range forecast are also monitored with special attention, since the Service s monthly and seasonal end product forecast are based on ECMWF-DMO, visualized and interpreted. Classical scores are regularly calculated, for monthly forecast exhibiting decrease of the skill with time, with marginal skill for the week 3 and 4. However, another approach provides better results, when comparing number of successful and unsuccessful forecast of positive/negative temperature/precipitation anomalies (Figure 4). Similar approach is applied for seasonal forecasts (Figure 5). 3

Fig. 4 Number of successful/unsuccessful forecasts of weakly temperature and precipitation anomaly (Monthly forecast system), for station Zagreb Maksimir (14240) Fig. 5. Percentage of successful forecasts of positive/negative 3-monthly temperature anomaly, for different lead times (station Zagreb Maksimir). ECMWF seasonal forecast is compared to layman forecast which persistently forecasts positive anomaly. 3.2 Subjective verification 3.2.1 Subjective scores (including evaluation of confidence indices when available) Major subjective comments refer to: improved wind forecast, jumpiness of the model (even for ensembles in the medium range) and excessive precipitation amounts at the end of the forecast range. Other remarks are related to some typical problems such as behaviour of 2m-temperature in situations with snow cover, inversions etc. Peculiar forecast values of CAPE over sea are also reported. 4

A survey regarding new visibility product was proposed to the forecasters in the Service s Maritime Branch (and even in the Air Traffic Weather Service), but unfortunately with no success, since most of the forecasters reported they still don t use the product intensively, while some expressed some subjective criticism of the product accuracy (particularly in fog and rain situations). 3.2.2 Case studies One of the most significant severe events in the last season was the freezing rain that occurred on Jan 5th 2016. This is so far the only such case since ECMWF precipitation type product started. Possibility of severe event was detected in ECMWF forecast even in the medium range (5 days in advance), and was consistent as the target was approaching. This all resulted in very good Service s early announcement (red warning) and final forecasts of the freezing rain, that covered most of the Croatian inland. Fortunately, no significant damage or casualties have been reported. Such forecasts are considered with great attention, since the notorious freezing rain event in 2014 in Slovenia, Croatia and Hungary. The 2016 case will be submitted in detail to the Severe Event Catalogue. 4. Feedback on ECMWF forecast user initiatives These initiatives are most welcome and highly appreciated by the forecasters. Unfortunately, no joint conclusion regarding their features has been produced. 5. References to relevant publications 5