Comparison of macroscopic cloud data from ground-based measurements using VIS/NIR and IR instruments at Lindenberg, Germany

• Published in: Atmospheric research 2010-05, Vol.96 (2), p.395-407
• Main Authors: Feister, Uwe, Möller, Hans, Sattler, Theo, Shields, Janet, Görsdorf, Ulrich, Güldner, Jürgen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Air traffic control; Climatology; Cloud cover; Cloud instruments; Cloud-base height; Clouds; Contrails; Earth, ocean, space; Exact sciences and technology; External geophysics; Macroscopic cloud parameters; Meteorology; Observers; Radar; Sky imaging; Sky scanning; Troposphere; Weather
• ISSN: 0169-8095; 1873-2895
• DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.01.012

A comparison between different types of ground-based sensors has been carried out to derive macroscopic cloud data such as cloud cover and cloud-base heights. The instruments compared in the campaign at the Meteorological Observatory Lindenberg in the period May to September 2006 include an infrared (IR) sky scanner called Nubiscope, a Daylight VIS/NIR Whole Sky Imager (WSI), a ceilometer LD-40 measuring in the near infrared region (NIR) and a Ka band cloud radar measuring in the micro wave band (extremely high frequency or EHF) region. In addition, our data analysis included regular hourly cloud observations by weather observers, and vertical profiles of temperature, humidity and winds taken from six-hourly radio soundings at the site. The comparison has been focused on performance and features of the Nubiscope as a prototype instrument for automatic cloud observations. Cloud cover (CC) derived from the Nubiscope cloud algorithm compares quite well with CC derived from both WSI and from observations. CC differences are within ± 2 Okta in 67% of cases between Nubiscope and observations, and in 90% of cases between Nubiscope and WSI. The cloud detection capability as derived from the zenith signals of Nubiscope and WSI shows coincidence in about 90% of cases. For cloud-base heights (CBHs) from Nubiscope data and ceilometer as well as from radar reflectivity, the comparison showed a general good correspondence in the lower and middle troposphere up to heights of about 6 km with some systematic difference due to the different detection methods. For the upper troposphere above 6 km the differences become widespread and more random. Cloud detection capabilities of the instruments are also illustrated by a case study of moving clouds with patterns similar to contrails that were erroneously classified as such by the weather observer mainly due to lack of height information that the ceilometer did not provide. By combined information from WSI, radio sonde humidity and radar, they were shown not to be contrails, but most likely low-level water clouds either of natural origin or built from aircraft at their ascent or descent flight close to the airport.