# Presentation: 551509

## Comparison of the operational GFS and Pry-New May9-Jun20

- Xingren Wu and Glenn White

- Pry-new Hybrid coordinate in forecast, not analysis
- 	   Glacial ice
- 	   Correct new orography

## Own analysis

## Consensus analysis

## Own analyses

- Consensus

## Own analysis

- Consensus

## Own analysis

## Consensus analysis

## Own analyses

- Consensus

## Own analysis

- Consensus

## Own analysis

- Consensus

- Consensus

## 500 hPa anomaly correlation

| NH Day 5 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Own analysis | .822 | .823 |
| Consensus | .824 | .823 |

- May9-June20

| SH Day5 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Own analysis | .795 | .791 |
| Consensus | .799 | .794 |

- 500 hPa rms error height

| NH Day 5 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Own analysis | 46.29 | 46.27 |
| Consensus | 46.42 | 46.59 |

| SH Day 5 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Own analysis | 71.29 | 71.77 |
| Consensus | 70.81 | 71.48 |

## RMS wind vector error 20S-20N

| 200 day3 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Own analysis | 7.30 | 7.38 |
| Consensus | 6.78 | 6.88 |

| 850 day 3 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Own analysis | 3.465 | 3.462 |
| Consensus | 3.34 | 3.36 |

- RMS wind error day 250 hPa day 3

| NH  | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Own analysis | 9.18 | 9.19 |
| Consensus | 9.02 | 9.07 |

| SH | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Own analysis | 10.57 | 10.73 |
| Consensus | 10.33 | 10.49 |

## 500 hPa anomaly correlation

| Day 5 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| NH | .880 | .872 |
| SH | .861 | .852 |

- 16 Dec-2 Jan.

- 500 hPa rms error height

| Day 5 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| NH | 50.91 | 52.93 |
| SH | 46.44 | 48.22 |

- RMS Wind vector error 20S-20N

| Day 3 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 200 | 8.03 | 8.05 |
| 850 | 3.50 | 3.52 |

- RMS Wind Vector Error 250 HPA

| Day 3 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| NH | 9.51 | 9.57 |
| SH | 8.96 | 8.9 |

## 500 hPa anomaly correlation

| Day 5 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| NH | .777 | .776 |
| SH | .795 | .793 |

- Hurricane cases

- 500 hPa rms error height

| Day 5 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| NH | 48.40 | 48.73 |
| SH | 69.92 | 70.31 |

- RMS Wind vector error 20S-20N

| Day 3 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 200 | 7.99 | 7.98 |
| 850 | 3.77 | 3.79 |

- RMS Wind Vector Error 250 HPA

| Day 3 | opr | Pry-new |
| --- | --- | --- |
| NH | 8.87 | 8.89 |
| SH | 10.03 | 10.07 |

## Slide 15

## Slide 16

## Slide 17

## Slide 18

## Slide 19

## Slide 20

## Slide 21

## Slide 22

## Slide 23

## Slide 24

## Slide 25

## Slide 26

## Slide 27

## Slide 28

## Slide 29

## Slide 30

## Slide 31

## Slide 32

## Slide 33

## Slide 34

## Slide 35

## Precipitation slightly weaker in the pry in the tropical ITCZ in first 24 hours

## Standard deviation of daily-mean precipitation less in pry than in operational

## Standard deviation of day 1 precip

## Non-hybrid analyses in pry have funny over Andes at 1 hPa, hybrid forecasts do not—Kevin Trenberth should be happy

## Time-mean difference in forecasts 

- Time-mean difference in forecasts
- develops over Himalayas and spreads downstream

## --Are fields being compared really equivalent or are interpolation methods and smoothing different?

***--What is consensus analysis?  Does it include both operational and pry?***
***--Vertical coordinates of pry analyses and forecasts different.***

***--spinup in vertical velocity reduced in pry***
***--less day to day variability in precip in tropics in pry***