% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Kaufmann:858221,
author = {Kaufmann, Stefan and Voigt, Christiane and Heller, Romy and
Jurkat-Witschas, Tina and Krämer, Martina and Rolf,
Christian and Zöger, Martin and Giez, Andreas and Buchholz,
Bernhard and Ebert, Volker and Thornberry, Troy and
Schumann, Ulrich},
title = {{I}ntercomparison of midlatitude tropospheric and
lower-stratospheric water vapor measurements and comparison
to {ECMWF} humidity data},
journal = {Atmospheric chemistry and physics},
volume = {18},
number = {22},
issn = {1680-7324},
address = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
publisher = {EGU},
reportid = {FZJ-2018-07121},
pages = {16729 - 16745},
year = {2018},
abstract = {Accurate measurement of water vapor in the
climate-sensitive region near the tropopause is very
challenging. Unexplained systematic discrepancies between
measurements at low water vapor mixing ratios made by
different instruments on airborne platforms have limited our
ability to adequately address a number of relevant
scientific questions on the humidity distribution, cloud
formation and climate impact in that region. Therefore,
during the past decade, the scientific community has
undertaken substantial efforts to understand these
discrepancies and improve the quality of water vapor
measurements. This study presents a comprehensive
intercomparison of airborne state-of-the-art in situ
hygrometers deployed on board the DLR (German Aerospace
Center) research aircraft HALO (High Altitude and LOng Range
Research Aircraft) during the Midlatitude CIRRUS (ML-CIRRUS)
campaign conducted in 2014 over central Europe. The
instrument intercomparison shows that the hygrometer
measurements agree within their combined accuracy
$(±10 \%$ to $15 \%,$ depending on the humidity
regime); total mean values agree within $2.5 \%.$ However,
systematic differences on the order of $10 \%$ and up to a
maximum of $15 \%$ are found for mixing ratios below 10
parts per million (ppm) H2O. A comparison of relative
humidity within cirrus clouds does not indicate a systematic
instrument bias in either water vapor or temperature
measurements in the upper troposphere. Furthermore, in situ
measurements are compared to model data from the European
Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) which are
interpolated along the ML-CIRRUS flight tracks. We find a
mean agreement within $±10 \%$ throughout the troposphere
and a significant wet bias in the model on the order of
$100 \%$ to $150 \%$ in the stratosphere close to the
tropopause. Consistent with previous studies, this analysis
indicates that the model deficit is mainly caused by too
weak of a humidity gradient at the tropopause},
cin = {IEK-7},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-7-20101013},
pnm = {244 - Composition and dynamics of the upper troposphere and
middle atmosphere (POF3-244)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-244},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000451273900002},
doi = {10.5194/acp-18-16729-2018},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/858221},
}