Disclaimer: This material is being kept online for historical purposes. Though accurate at the time of publication, it is no longer being updated. The page may contain broken links or outdated information, and parts may not function in current web browsers. Visit https://espo.nasa.gov for information about our current projects.


In-flight validation of Aura MLS ozone with CAFS partial ozone columns

Petropavlovskikh, I., L. Froidevaux, R. E. Shetter, S. R. Hall, K. Ullmann, P. Bhartia, M. Kroon, and P. Levelt (2008), In-flight validation of Aura MLS ozone with CAFS partial ozone columns, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D16S41, doi:10.1029/2007JD008690.

A comprehensive data set of partial ozone columns was derived from the chargecoupled device (CCD) Actinic Flux Spectroradiometer (CAFS) measurements taken during the Polar 2005, Houston 2005, and Costa Rica 2006 Aura Validation Experiments (AVE). It was used to validate the colocated daytime Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) partial ozone columns along the aircraft tracks over diverse geophysical conditions. Results show that the MLS v.1.5 and CAFS ozone columns agree to better than 3% at pressure levels of 100 and 146 hPa, and to better than 5% at 215 hPa level. The partial ozone column differences between the two systems were the largest during the Polar AVE (PAVE) 2005 campaign (polar region, 250 hPa pressure level), and the smallest during the CRAVE 2006 campaign (tropics, 100 hPa pressure level). Overall, the averaged bias between the MLS and CAFS partial ozone column is about 2%, and the standard deviation of the differences is about 2%. The v.2.2 update of the MLS data tends to reduce the bias to less than 1%. In addition, the AVE 2005 campaign uncovered an altitude-dependent bias, where the MLS partial ozone columns above 100 and 146 hPa pressure levels were about 1% higher than the CAFS derived columns, while the bias increased to about 3 % in partial columns integrated above 215 hPa. However, the MLS and CAFS data track each other closely over a wide range of atmospheric conditions, and the differences lie within the combined uncertainties of the two data sets.

PDF of Publication: 
Download from publisher's website.
Research Program: 
Atmospheric Composition
Radiation Science Program (RSP)
AVE Houston 2
Polar AVE