Impact of FGGE on diagnoses of the general circulation

Several studies have pointed out that a number of significant differences exist in circulation fields derived from the various Level IIIb analyses. For example, differences in the strength of the January Hadley cell between the GFDL and ECMWF analyses are as large as 35 percent, and there are some locations over the Northern Hemisphere where the 200 mb zonal wind in January differs by 10 m/s between these two analyses. Calculations of the global energy cycle based on the GFDL and ECMWF analyses are significantly different as well. In addition, the uncertain quality of some of the FGGE IIIb moisture and vertical motion fields raises doubts about whether new insights into the role of these fields in the general circulation will be gained from the FGGE data. Overall, therefore, a sense of disappointment emerges that the FGGE analyses have thus far failed to live up to the expectation that they would yield more definitive general circulation statistics. The shortcomings in the Level IIIb analyses need to be rectified before full confidence can be placed in results pertaining to the general circulation that are based on such modern data assimilation approaches.