Open nicholasesposito opened 1 month ago
It should be mentioned that there are definitely differences, but once most of the data where there is bad QM, too large data, missing data is filterd out with plotting scripts, they are all remarkably close.
In the UFO filters, the following will need to be done:
The following are exactly equivalent when using the above filters:
Small differences with
NOTE: Some updates may be needed in the future once it's decided if height, stationElevation and pressure should be in MetaData or ObsValue. There is no stationPressure in the GSI files but in the backend files, both stationPressure and pressure are POB. None of the variables are in ObsValue for GSI and none are assimilated, so it is my opinion that they should stay in MetaData. Of course that means we may have to change some of the scripts and source code, but It may be worth it for consistencies sake.
stationPressure is now pressure. pressure has been moved to MetaData because it is not simulated. ZOB as heightOfStation and ELV as stationElevation are now also MetaData.
There is some longitude QC (if == 180 or >180) from GSI that should be in UFO. There is some "missing POB" QC from GSI that should also be placed in UFO.
MetaData/sequenceNumber as an array of 0s has been added, similar to GSI.
Add acft_profiles prepbufr scripts to the SPOC repository.
These are the high-level scripts.
All of the comparisons are done here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CQCtbzntg2hXruLKEqqEVuKsMizE8h2DjPmAcka29eg/edit?pli=1#slide=id.g2fc02b94591_0_31
Notes: