Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSchminder, R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSalah, J. E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorClark, R. R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBurrage, M. D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKürschner, D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHagan, M. E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorVincent, R. A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, R. B.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSinger, W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorVirdi, T. S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorZhou, Q.en_US
dc.contributor.authorManson, A. H.en_US
dc.contributor.authorTsuda, T.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMeek, C. E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPalo, S. E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHoffmann, P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWard, W. E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPortnyagin, Yu. I.en_US
dc.contributor.authorNakamura, T.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMurphy, D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMcLandress, C.en_US
dc.contributor.authorFranke, S. J.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-09-11T19:28:30Z
dc.date.available2006-09-11T19:28:30Z
dc.date.issued1997-10en_US
dc.identifier.citationPalo, S. E.; Hagan, M. E.; Meek, C. E.; Vincent, R. A.; Burrage, M. D.; McLandress, C.; Franke, S. J.; Ward, W. E.; Clark, R. R.; Hoffmann, P.; Johnson, R.; Kürschner, D.; Manson, A. H.; Murphy, D.; Nakamura, T.; Portnyagin, Yu. I.; Salah, J. E.; Schminder, R.; Singer, W.; Tsuda, T.; Virdi, T. S.; Zhou, Q.; (1997). "An intercomparison between the GSWM, UARS, and ground based radar observations: a case-study in January 1993." Annales Geophysicae 15(9): 1123-1141. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/47859>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1432-0576en_US
dc.identifier.issn0992-7689en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/47859
dc.description.abstractThe Global-Scale Wave Model (GSWM) is a steady-state two-dimensional linearized model capable of simulating the solar tides and planetary waves. In an effort to understand the capabilities and limitations of the GSWM throughout the upper mesosphere and thermosphere a comparative analysis with observational data is presented. A majority of the observational data used in this study was collected during the World Day campaign which ran from 20 January to 30 January 1993. During this campaign data from 18 ground-based observational sites across the globe and two instruments located on the UARS spacecraft were analyzed. Comparisons of these data with the simulations from the GSWM indicate that the GSWM results are in reasonable agreement with the observations. However, there are a number of cases where the agreement is not particularly good. One such instance is for the semidiurnal tide in the northern hemisphere, where the GSWM estimates may exceed observations by 50%. Through a number of numerical simulations, it appears that this discrepancy may be due to the eddy diffusivity profiles used by the GSWM. Other differences relating to the diurnal tide and the quasi-two-day wave are presented and discussed. Additionally, a discussion on the biases and aliasing difficulties which may arise in the observational data is alos presented.en_US
dc.format.extent720538 bytes
dc.format.extent3115 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherSpringer-Verlag; Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelbergen_US
dc.subject.otherAstrophysicsen_US
dc.subject.otherAstronomyen_US
dc.subject.otherGeosciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherExtraterrestrial Physics, Space Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherGeophysics/Geodesyen_US
dc.titleAn intercomparison between the GSWM, UARS, and ground based radar observations: a case-study in January 1993en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPhysicsen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelAtmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Westford, MA, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherInstitute of Experimental Meteorology, Obninsk, Russiaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherYork University, Toronto, Canadaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherArecibo Observatory, Arecibo, Puerto Ricoen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canadaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherLeipzig University, Collm, Germanyen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherInstitut für Atmosphärenphysik, Kühlungsborn, Germanyen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherThe University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, UKen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherKyoto University, Kyoto, Japanen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherInstitut für Atmosphärenphysik, Kühlungsborn, Germanyen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australiaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherLeipzig University, Collm, Germanyen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherAustralian Antarctic Division, Kingston, Australiaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canadaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherKyoto University, Kyoto, Japanen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherYork University, Toronto, Canadaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampusAnn Arboren_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/47859/1/585_1997_Article_70151123.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00585-997-1123-xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceAnnales Geophysicaeen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record