Comparison of Observation Impacts in Two Forecast Systems using Adjoint Methods

An experiment is being conducted to compare directly the impact of all assimilated observations on short-range forecast errors in different operational forecast systems. We use the adjoint-based method developed by Langland and Baker (2004), which allows these impacts to be efficiently calculated. This presentation describes preliminary results for a "baseline" set of observations, including both satellite radiances and conventional observations, used by the Navy/NOGAPS and NASA/GEOS-5 forecast systems for the month of January 2007. In each system, about 65% of the total reduction in 24-h forecast error is provided by satellite observations, although the impact of rawinsonde, aircraft, land, and ship-based observations remains significant. Only a small majority (50- 55%) of all observations assimilated improves the forecast, while the rest degrade it. It is found that most of the total forecast error reduction comes from observations with moderate-size innovations providing small to moderate impacts, not from outliers with very large positive or negative innovations. In a global context, the relative impacts of the major observation types are fairly similar in each system, although regional differences in observation impact can be significant. Of particular interest is the fact that while satellite radiances have a large positive impact overall, they degrade the forecast in certain locations common to both systems, especially over land and ice surfaces. Ongoing comparisons of this type, with results expected from other operational centers, should lead to more robust conclusions about the impacts of the various components of the observing system as well as about the strengths and weaknesses of the methodologies used to assimilate them.