Verifying operational forecasts of land–sea-breeze and boundary layer mixing processes

Abstract

Forecasters working for Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) produce a 7-day forecast in two key steps: first they choose a model guidance dataset to base the forecast on, and then they use graphical software to manually edit these data. Two types of edits are commonly made to the wind fields that aim to improve how the influences of boundary layer mixing and land–sea-breeze processes are represented in the forecast. In this study the diurnally varying component of the BoM’s official wind forecast is compared with that of station observations and unedited model guidance datasets. Coastal locations across Australia over June, July, and August 2018 are considered, with data aggregated over three spatial scales. The edited forecast produces a lower mean absolute error than model guidance at the coarsest spatial scale (over 50 000 km2 ), and achieves lower seasonal biases over all spatial scales. However, the edited forecast only reduces errors or biases at particular times and locations, and rarely produces lower errors or biases than all model guidance products simultaneously. To better understand physical reasons for biases in the mean diurnal wind cycles, modified ellipses are fitted to the seasonally averaged diurnal wind temporal hodographs. Biases in the official forecast diurnal cycle vary with location for multiple reasons, including biases in the directions that sea breezes approach coastlines, amplitude biases, and disagreement in the relative contribution of sea-breeze and boundary layer mixing processes to the mean diurnal cycle.