Skip to main content
Log in

Mesoscale model forecast verification during monsoon 2008

  • Published:
Journal of Earth System Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There have been very few mesoscale modelling studies of the Indian monsoon, with focus on the verification and intercomparison of the operational real time forecasts. With the exception of Das et al (2008), most of the studies in the literature are either the case studies of tropical cyclones and thunderstorms or the sensitivity studies involving physical parameterization or climate simulation studies. Almost all the studies are based on either National Center for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), USA, final analysis fields (NCEP FNL) or the reanalysis data used as initial and lateral boundary conditions for driving the mesoscale model.

Here we present a mesoscale model forecast verification and intercomparison study over India involving three mesoscale models: (i) the Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model developed at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), USA, (ii) the MM5 model developed by NCAR, and (iii) the Eta model of the NCEP, USA. The analysis is carried out for the monsoon season, June to September 2008. This study is unique since it is based entirely on the real time global model forecasts of the National Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (NCMRWF) T254 global analysis and forecast system. Based on the evaluation and intercomparison of the mesoscale model forecasts, we recommend the best model for operational real-time forecasts over the Indian region.

Although the forecast mean 850 hPa circulation shows realistic monsoon flow and the monsoon trough, the systematic errors over the Arabian Sea indicate an easterly bias to the north (of mean flow) and westerly bias to the south (of mean flow). This suggests that the forecasts feature a southward shift in the monsoon current. The systematic error in the 850 hPa temperature indicates that largely the WRF model forecasts feature warm bias and the MM5 model forecasts feature cold bias. Features common to all the three models include warm bias over northwest India and cold bias over southeast peninsula. The 850 hPa specific humidity forecast errors clearly show that the Eta model features dry bias mostly over the sea, while MM5 features moist bias over large part of domain. The RMSE computed at different levels clearly establish that WRF model forecasts feature least errors in the predicted free atmospheric fields. Detailed rainfall forecast verification further establishes that the WRF model forecast rainfall skill remains more or less same in day-2 and day-3 as in day-1, while the forecast skill in the MM5 and Eta models, deteriorates in day-2 and day-3 forecasts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ashrit R G, Das Gupta M and Bohra A K 2006 MM5 simulation of the 1999 Orissa Super Cyclone: Impact of bogus vortex on track and intensity prediction; Mausam 57 129–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskaran B, Jones R G, Murphy J M and Noguer M 1996 Simulations of the Indian summer monsoon using a nested climate model: Domain size experiments; Clim. Dyn. 12 573–587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar Rao D V, Ashok K and Yamagata T 2004 A numerical simulation study of the Indian summer monsoon of 1994 using NCAR MM5; J. Meteor. Soc. Japan 82(6) 1755–1775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar Rao D V and Hari Prasad D 2006 Numerical prediction of Orissa Supercyclone (1999): Sensitivity to the parameterization of convection, boundary layer and explicit moisture processes; Mausam 57 61–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Das S, Ashrit R and Moncrieff M W 2006 Simulation of a Himalayan Cloudburst event; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 115(3) 299–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Das S, Ashrit R, Moncrieff M W, Das Gupta M, Dudhia J, Liu C and Kalsi S R 2007 Simulation of intense organized convective precipitation observed during the Arabian Sea Monsoon Experiment (ARMEX); J. Geophys. Res. 112 D20117, doi:10.1029/2006JD007627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Das S, Ashrit R, Gopal R Iyengar, Saji Mohandas, Das Gupta M, John P George, Rajagopal E N and Surya Kanti Dutta 2008 Skills of different mesoscale models over Indian region during monsoon season: Forecast errors; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 117(5) 603–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dash S K, Shekhar M S and Singh G P 2006 Simulation of Indian summer monsoon circulation and rainfall using RegCM3; Theor. Appl. Climatol. 86 161–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Findlater J 1969 A major low level air current near the Indian ocean during the northern summer; Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc. 95 362–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grell G A, Kuo Y-H and Pasch R 1991 Semi-prognostic tests of cumulus parameterization schemes in the middle latitudes; Mon. Wea. Rev. 119 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janjic Z I 1994 The step-mountain Eta coordinate model: Further developments of the convection, viscous sublayer and turbulence closure schemes; Mon. Wea. Rev. 122 927–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janjic Z I 2000 Comments on “Development and Evaluation of a Convection Scheme for Use in Climate Models”; J. Atmos. Sci. 57 3686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ji Y and Vernekar A D 1997 Simulation of the Asian summer monsoons of 1987 and 1988 with a regional model nested in a global GCM; J. Climate 10 1965–1979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kain J S and Fritsch J M 1990 A one-dimensional entraining/ detraining plume model and its application in convective parameterization; J. Atmos. Sci. 47 2784–2802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kain J S and Fritsch J M 1993 Convective parameterization for mesoscale models: The Kain-Fritcsh scheme, the representation of cumulus convection in numerical models, (eds) Emanuel K A and Raymond D J, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 246 pp.

  • Litta A J and Mohanty U C 2008 Simulation of a severe thunderstorm event during the field experiment of STORM of 2006, using WRF-NMM model; Curr. Sci. 95(2) 204–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandal M and Mohanty U C 2006 Numerical experiments for improvement in the mesoscale simulation of Orissa super cyclone; Mausam 57 79–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohanty U C, Mandal M and Raman S 2004 Simulation of Orissa supercyclone (1999) using PSU/NCAR mesoscale model; Natural Hazards 31 373–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan H-L and Wu W-S 1995 Implementing a mass flux convection parameterization package for the NMC Medium-Range Forecast Model; NMC Office Note, No. 409, 40pp.

  • Pant G B and Rupa Kumar K 1997 Climates of South Asia (Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons) 344pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patra P K, Santhanam M S, Potty K V J, Tewari M and Rao P L S 2000 Simulation of tropical cyclones using regional weather prediction models; Curr. Sci. 79(1) 70–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattanayak S and Mohanty U C 2008 A comparative study on performance of MM5 and WRF models in simulation of tropical cyclones over Indian seas; Curr. Sci. 95(7) 23–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattanayik D R and Rama Rao Y V 2009 Track prediction of very severe cyclone ‘Nargis’ using high resolution weather research forecasting (WRF) model; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 118(4) 309–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajeevan M, Bhate J, Kale J D and Lal B 2005 Development of a high resolution daily gridded rainfall data for the Indian region (Met Monograph Climatology, 22/2005, 26 pp, available from India Meteorological Department, Pune, India).

  • Rajeevan M and Jyoti Bhate 2008 A high resolution daily gridded rainfall data set (1971–2005) for mesoscale meteorological studies; NCC (9) Research Report. India Meteorological Department, Pune.

  • Rajagopal E N and Iyengar G R 2002 Implementation of Mesoscale ETA model at NCMRWF; NCMRWF Research Report No. NMRF/RR/4/2002.

  • Rajagopal E N and Iyengar G R 2005 Mesoscale forecasts with Eta model over Indian region; Curr. Sci. 88(6) 906–912.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajagopal E N, Das Gupta M, Mohandas S, Prasad V S, George J P, Iyengar G R and Preveen Kumar D 2007 Implementation of the T254L64 Global Forecast System at NCMRWF. NMRF/TR/1/2007. NCMRWF, A-50, Sector-62, Noida (UP)-201307, India.

  • Rakesh V, Singh R, Pal P K and Joshi P C 2007 Sensitivity of mesoscale model forecast during a satellite launch to different cumulus parameterization schemes in MM5; Pure Appl. Geophys. 164 1617–1637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratnam J V and Kumar K K 2005 Sensitivity of the simulated monsoons of 1987 and 1988 to convective parameterization schemes in MM5; J. Climate 18 2724–2743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh R, Pal P K, Kishtawal C M and Joshi P C 2005 Impact of bogus vortex on track and intensity prediction of tropical cyclone; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 114 427–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trivedi D K, Mukhopadhyay P and Vaidya S S 2006 Impact of physical parameterization schemes on the numerical simulation of Orissa super cyclone (1999); Mausam 57 97–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • WWRP 2009-1 2009 Recommendations from the verification and intercomparison of QPFs and PQPFs from the operational NWP models. WMO TD No. 1485, p37.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ashrit, R., Mohandas, S. Mesoscale model forecast verification during monsoon 2008. J Earth Syst Sci 119, 417–446 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-010-0030-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-010-0030-9

Keywords

Navigation