Direct comparisons of ice cloud macro- and microphysical properties simulated by the Community Atmosphere Model version 5 with HIPPO aircraft observations

Wu, Chenglai; Liu, Xiaohong; Diao, Minghui; Zhang, Kai; Gettelman, Andrew; Lu, Zheng; Penner, Joyce E.; Lin, Zhaohui

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-4731-2017

Articles | Volume 17, issue 7

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-4731-2017

© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-4731-2017

© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 17, issue 7

Research article

|

11 Apr 2017

Research article |

| 11 Apr 2017

Direct comparisons of ice cloud macro- and microphysical properties simulated by the Community Atmosphere Model version 5 with HIPPO aircraft observations

Chenglai Wu, Xiaohong Liu, Minghui Diao, Kai Zhang, Andrew Gettelman, Zheng Lu, Joyce E. Penner, and Zhaohui Lin

Download

Final revised paper (published on 11 Apr 2017)
Preprint (discussion started on 16 Jan 2017)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Review comments', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Feb 2017
- AC1: 'Respones to Referee #2 comments', Xiaohong Liu, 10 Mar 2017
RC2: 'Review of "Direct comparisons of ice cloud macro- and microphysical properties simulated by the Community Atmosphere Model version 5 with HIPPO aircraft observations"', Anonymous Referee #1, 14 Feb 2017
- AC2: 'Respones to Referee #1 comments', Xiaohong Liu, 10 Mar 2017

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Xiaohong Liu on behalf of the Authors (17 Mar 2017) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (20 Mar 2017) by Qiang Fu

Short summary

This study utilizes a novel approach to directly compare the CAM5-simulated cloud macro- and microphysics with the collocated HIPPO observations for the period of 2009 to 2011. The model cannot capture the large spatial variabilities of observed RH, which is responsible for much of the model missing low-level warm clouds. A large portion of the RH bias results from the discrepancy in water vapor. The model underestimates the observed number concentration and ice water content.