Factors Influencing Skill Improvements in the ECMWF Forecasting System

AbstractDuring the past 30 years the skill in ECMWF numerical forecasts has steadily improved. There are three major contributing factors: 1) improvements in the forecast model, 2) improvements in the data assimilation, and 3) the increased number of available observations. In this study the authors are investigating the relative contribution from these three components by using the simple error growth model introduced in a previous study by Lorenz and extended in another study by Dalcher and Kalnay, together with the results from the ECMWF Re-Analysis Interim (ERA-Interim) forecasts where the improvement is only due to an increased number of observations. The authors are also applying the growth model on “lagged” forecast differences in order to investigate the usefulness of the forecast jumpiness as a diagnostic tool for improvements in the forecasts. The main finding is that the main contribution to the reduced forecast error comes from significant initial condition error reductions between 1996 and 20...

[1]  Martin Köhler,et al.  The ECMWF model climate: recent progress through improved physical parametrizations , 2010 .

[2]  E. Kalnay,et al.  Separating fast and slow modes in coupled chaotic systems , 2004 .

[3]  T. Haiden,et al.  A new equitable score suitable for verifying precipitation in numerical weather prediction , 2010 .

[4]  E. Lorenz.  Deterministic nonperiodic flow , 1963 .

[5]  L. Isaksen,et al.  THE ATMOSPHERIC DYNAMICS MISSION FOR GLOBAL WIND FIELD MEASUREMENT , 2005 .

[6]  J. Shukla,et al.  Predictability in the midst of chaos: A scientific basis for climate forecasting , 1998, Science.

[7]  J. Thepaut,et al.  The ERA‐Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system , 2011 .

[8]  J. Royer,et al.  Comparison of different error growth formulas and predictability estimation in numerical extended-range forecasts , 1993 .

[9]  Lisa Bengtsson,et al.  Independent Estimations of the Asymptotic Variability in an Ensemble Forecast System , 2008 .

[10]  Martin Köhler,et al.  Advances in simulating atmospheric variability with the ECMWF model: From synoptic to decadal time‐scales , 2008 .

[11]  A. Hollingsworth,et al.  Some aspects of the improvement in skill of numerical weather prediction , 2002 .

[12]  M. Rodwell,et al.  Characteristics of occasional poor medium-range weather forecasts for Europe , 2013 .

[13]  A. Dalcher,et al.  Error growth and predictability in operational ECMWF forecasts , 1987 .

[14]  Roberto Buizza,et al.  Comparison of a 51-Member Low-Resolution (TL399L62) Ensemble with a 6-Member High-Resolution (TL799L91) Lagged-Forecast Ensemble , 2008 .

[15]  Brian J. Hoskins,et al.  The potential for skill across the range of the seamless weather‐climate prediction problem: a stimulus for our science , 2013 .

[16]  T. Palmer,et al.  Stochastic parametrization and model uncertainty , 2009 .

[17]  E. Lorenz.  Atmospheric predictability experiments with a large numerical model , 1982 .

[18]  Franco Molteni,et al.  Simulation of the Madden– Julian Oscillation and its teleconnections in the ECMWF forecast system , 2010 .

[19]  T. Petroliagis,et al.  Error growth and estimates of predictability from the ECMWF forecasting system , 1995 .

[20]  Hannu Savijärvi,et al.  Error Growth in a Large Numerical Forecast System , 1995 .