A preliminary assessment of the value and impact of multiple configurations of constellations of EON-MW, a proposed 12U microwave sounder CubeSat for global NWP

Abstract

Observing system assessments were made for the Earth Observing Nanosatellite-Microwave (EON-MW), a 12U CubeSat analog of the Advanced Technology Microwave Sounder (ATMS). Since the EON-MW channels and sensor specifications closely follow those of ATMS, the sensor characteristics and geophysical capabilities assessments indicate that the value of information for humidity (temperature) of EON-MW observations will be similar (very similar) to that of ATMS. Eight global observing system simulation experiments (OSSEs) were carried out to evaluate several different EON-MW constellations for data gap mitigation and/or replacement of existing sensors. In these OSSEs, adding 2 EON-MW sensors in different orbits, compared to adding a single EON-MW sensor, improves forecasts generally, and improves the analysis of at least wind and humidity. In terms of the overall OSSE impacts in the scenarios considered, a single EON-MW sensor is a close substitute for ATMS and two EON-MW sensors are a close substitute for the Special Sensor Microwave Imager Sounder (SSMIS). The analysis and forecast impacts indicate that EON-MW provides improved humidity profiles compared to SSMIS and ATMS.

Keywords:

• Cube Satellite (CubeSat)
• data assimilation
• meteorological satellites
• observing system simulation experiment (OSSE)
• Earth Observing Nanosatellite-Microwave (EON-MW)

Acknowledgments

Many colleagues and collaborators contributed to this study: The authors’ leading mentor for OSSE research is R. Atlas (AOML). Scientific contributions to this study were made S. Casey (AOML/CIMAS), and K. Kumar (RTi). Many scientists developed the CRTM and CGOP, including scientists at NOAA NESDIS STAR, AOML/CIMAS and CIMSS/SSEC, and at other institutions, including in particular at NASA GMAO where the G5NR was produced. The authors thank W. Blackwell (MIT/LL) for helpful comments and for sharing details of the design of EON-MW. The journal reviewers and editor provided invaluable suggestions that improved this paper. The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of NOAA or the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Notes

1 All acronyms are defined in the Appendix.

2 The 6 are the baseline experiments and the experiments adding EON-MW sensors.

Additional information

Funding

Grateful acknowledgement is made to the funding provided by NOAA and particularly by the NOAA NESDIS OPPA and by several NOAA grants. This study was partially supported by the NOAA grant NA14NES4320003 for CICS at the University of Maryland/ESSIC.