Strengths and weaknesses of MOS, running-mean bias removal, and Kalman filter techniques for improving model forecasts over the western United States

Despite improvements in numerical weather prediction, model errors, particularly near the surface, are unavoidable due to imperfect model physics, initial conditions, and boundary conditions. Here, three techniques for improving the accuracy of 2-m temperature, 2-m dewpoint, and 10-m wind forecasts by the Eta/North American Meso (NAM) Model are evaluated: (i) traditional model output statistics (ETAMOS), requiring a relatively long training period; (ii) the Kalman filter (ETAKF), requiring a relatively short initial training period (similar to 4-5 days); and (iii) 7-day running mean bias removal (ETA7DBR), requiring a 7-day training period. Forecasts based on the ETAKF and ETA7DBR methods were produced for more than 2000 MesoWest observing sites in the western United States. However, the evaluation presented in this study was based on subjective forecaster assessments and objective verification at 145 ETAMOS stations during summer 2004 and winter 2004/05. For the 145-site sample, ETAMOS produces the most accurate cumulative temperature, dewpoint, and wind speed and direction forecasts, followed by ETAKF and ETA7DBR, which have similar accuracy. Selected case studies illustrate that ETAMOS produces superior forecasts when model biases change dramatically, such as during large-scale pattern changes, but that ETAKF and ETA7DBR produce superior forecasts during quiescent cool season patterns when persistent valley and basin cold pools exist. During quiescent warm season patterns, the accuracy of all three methods is similar. Although the improved ETAKF cold pool forecasts are noteworthy, particularly since the Kalman filter can help better define cold pool structure by producing forecasts for locations without long-term records, alternative approaches are needed to improve forecasts during periods when model biases change dramatically.