WORKING GROUP SUMMARIES
INDOEX Workshop in Utrecht, June 20-23, 1998

3. C-130 and Geophysica: Possible collaborative flights are envisioned during C-130 flights to and from Mauritus. About two hours coordination might be possible by diverting C-130 somewhat toward Seychelles to put it in range of Geophysica. Details to be discussed.

4. C-130 and R/V Ronald H. Brown and R/V Sagar Kanya: These two platforms will coordinate their operations so that two Radiative Closure flights can be flown in their vicinity. These will include descent profiles and 30min horizontal boundary layer legs suitable for instrument comparison. Additional closure/comparison may be considered as conditions permit.

5. C-130 and Kaashidhoo/Male: Regular descents into Male from upwind of Kaashidhoo are planned as standard operating procedure. This will allow comparison of C-130 and Male Lidars and aerosol properties in column over Kaashidhoo. Some near surface legs upwind of Kaashidhoo will also be integrated into missions as conditions permit.

Major Ship Issues:
-ship schedules and tracks; coordination with rest of INDOEX; intercomparision (between ships, with aircraft, and with islands)

-EEZ clearances

1. SHIP SCHEDULES

a. Sagar Kanya: Originally 15 February - 30 March. However, in recent Indiašs INDOEX National Steering Committee meeting, Indian meteorologists suggested earlier period of 15 January - 28 February (actualy 43 plus or minus 2 days). Dr. Mitra stated that the ship could sail for INDOEX until 2 March if necessary. Sagar Kanya will start its cruise from Goa toward Mauritius. Port call at Mauritius is certain, while Male is uncertain.

General feeling of the group was that 15 February - 30 March could be first preference and that 15 January - 28 February should be the second option.

b. Ronald H. Brown:
14 Jan 1999: Depart Charlston, NC for ACE Cruise
7 February: Arrive Cape Town
10 - 18 February: Cape Town to Mauritius

INDOEX Cruise
21 February - 1 March: Mauritius to Male
1 - 3 March: in port, Male / Kaashidhoo
3 - 13 March: Male to Indian EEZ, then along West coast of India, then south to Mauritius, then return to Male
15 March - 2 April: repeat the above

Pre-JASMIN Cruise (some INDOEX instruments continuing)
7 April - 6 May

2. COORDINATED OPERATIONS

Cruise track 1: Ship intercomparison
Early in the campaign, put the ships in close proximity to verify that they measure the same properties for the same air mass. One complete diurnal cycle would be ideal, but at least a few hours in the dark and a daylight period up to solar noon. Should include sondes. Ship separation must be carefully done to avoid contamination and interference.

Cruise track 2: To locate one ship in the Indian plume and the other to the east to give an E/W gradient, and highlight differences in and out of the plume.

Cruise track 3: Langrangian Experiment
It might be possible to position the two ships along the same trajectory but separated by 24 hr air travel time. It would be possible in this configuration to measure the daily loss or production of aerosol particles and trace gases. (Will use FFP data to determine how well the FSU forecast agreed with observed trajectories. If agreement is reasonable, then FSU forecasted trajectories will be used to guide the cruise tracks.)

3. OPERATIONS INSIDE INDIAN EEZ

Dr. Mitra indicated that in principle, clearance could be obtained for the Brown to collect atmospheric measurements inside Indian EEZ. Personnel list, cruise track and atmospheric instruments should be provided with the request. It is noted that India might request to have Indian scientist(s) participating on the Brown. Whenever the ship is inside Indian EEZ, an Indian naval officer will also be stationed onboard. To dock the Brown in Goa is a different clearance issue, much more complicated than operating inside Indian EEZ.

Saturday, 20. June 1998 Utrecht Holiday Inn.

Attendance: Lobert (Rapport), Annegarn, Devara, Flatau, Heintzenberg, Jayaraman, Majeed, Dulac, Perner, Prospero.

Represented surface stations: KCO, Mt. Abu/Ahmedabad, Pune, (GOA: one new PI)

Not represented: Trivandrum, Reunion, Mauritius, GOA

The working group discussed the following three main topics.

1) Proposed collaborations These are collaborations beyond previously announced or confirmed collaborations.

a) KCO
* Annegarn, Johannesburg proposed a continuous aerosol sampler for the KCO station, which is known as the "streaker". It's a proton-induced X-ray emission analysis of inorganic elements for PM 10 and PM 2.5. No closure, no total mass retrieval. Time resolution is 1 or 4 hours.

Another CIMEL was proposed for the KCO site to run in synch with the existing sensor.

b) Mt. Abu
Jayaraman informed us that the AERONET proposed a CIMEL sun photometer for the Mt. Abu observatory.

c) Trivandrum
Another CIMEL is proposed for the Trivandrum site.

d) GOA

e) Pune
ILDM confirmed the availability of an extensive set of aerosol, radiometric and trace gas instruments for the 99 IFP. Instruments include a LIDAR, 14 wavelength photometer, Microtops sun photometer, and others.

Action items:
a) Annegarn's participation needs to be confirmed from both sides
a), b) and c) CIMEL deployment needs to be confirmed
d) Funding needs to be granted and participation needs final confirmation

Results:
Holben of NASA/GSFC responded and confirmed the plans of CIMEL deployments to India. He mentioned that the US State Department has currently stopped NASA contact to India until further notice and that prior to any deployment to India, an MOU must be signed, which has been initiated but not proceeded for the past 4 months. Efforts will continue but may not result in a timely deployment for the IFP.

2) Intercomparison / Intercalibrations for IFP / Maldives This topic brought up a few concerns and suggestions with respect to instrument intercalibration and in-situ comparison of similar instruments on multiple platforms. This is also a cross-platform issue and needs to be discussed.

Flatau expressed the need for intercomparison of radiometric sensors across platforms at the KCO surface site during the 99 IFP.

* Any such intercomparison needs careful coordination between platforms.

One problem specific to the Maldives operation is the fact that some instruments such as the Leipzig LIDAR cannot be moved to KCO and will be operated out of Hulule, which is 78 km away from KCO and can be significantly different in terms of cloud cover and local air mass.

* examples and possible solutions were given:

* LIDAR intercomparison should be done both in Hulule, upon arrival of all instruments and/or crossing of mobile platforms. The KCO LIDAR (GSFC) could be set up for intercomparison in Hulule before final shipment to KCO.

* 2-pi radiometers should be compared at KCO due to the large amount of already installed instruments at the site.

* sun photometers could be compared in both locations (CIMEL, Microtops, German brand), see also above for CIMEL.

* All aircraft equipped with radiometric sensors should schedule fly-over maneuvers for KCO and Hulule when the ships are in the respective locations for intercomparisons.

* Another proposal was to move a subset of radiometers from KCO to Hulule for a brief intercomparison period of a few days. This subset could include one BSI GTR radiometer, possibly one pyranometer and the hand-held Microtops.

* A proposal was forwarded to Brent Holben, GSFC, to deploy the second CIMEL to Hulule instead of KCO for the 99 IFP.

* The need for the R/V Ron Brown to stop in both Hulule/Male and Kaashidhoo was expressed and the length of stay was proposed to be 1-2 days in Male and 3 days at KCO. Experience during the 98 FFP showed that 1.5 days ship stop at KCO was not sufficient for an elaborate intercomparison.

Action items:
* coordination of ship and aircraft schedules for intercomparison with Hulule and KCO sites (and possibly Trivandrum, GOA and Reunion as applicable).

3) Science Issues and Needs

a) An intercalibration issue was brought up by Heintzenberg regarding aerosol inlets: he proposed a standardization of inlets with at least a common cut-off at 10 micrometers and the use of identical or shared inlets wherever possible.

b) A field workshop was proposed before and after the IFP for radiometric device calibration.

c) Prospero suggested size segregated aerosol characterization for KCO and pointed out that chemical closure is needed.

d) Heintzenberg suggested effort on speciation of carbonaceous aerosol to distinguish sources.

* Lobert mentioned Kimberly Prather's participation with a new time-of-flight mass spectrometer, which will deliver single particle, chemical and size information.

* Annegard proposed collaboration with Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada who could provide carbon speciation in 7 fractions for PM 10 or PM 2.5 (or both with two samplers).

* Annegard also suggested single particle analysis, which could be connected to his streaker system.

Action items & results:
* Annegard contacted DRI and found that funding may be available but DRI needed scientific encouragement from C4 to participate in INDOEX IFP.

* Scheduling of soundings at KCO needs coordination with Hulule, ship and aircraft operations.

The working group on satellite issues for INDOEX examined three major points: satellite data availability, plans for satellite studies and calibration issues.

1 . Satellite data availability for the IFP of INDOEX

1.1 METEOSAT-5
Meteosat-5 data will be received in real time in MALE. The proper access formalities will be completed soon with EUMETSAT.

Meteosat-5 data for the IFP period will be transmitted by EUMETSAT to LMD, which will act as the archiving and distribution center. Jean-Louis Monge is responsible for this center, and will inform the users on how to get the data.

The data corresponding to the IFP will be formatted in NETCDF format by the LMD center.

Preliminary data (every 3 hours) will also be available in the data base from June 1998 on. They will be kept in the native format given by EUMETSAT.

1.2 Radiative budget instruments
CERES data from TRMM are accessible to several PIšs on the American and European side.

ScaRaB data (if successful launch in July 1998) will be available in LMD.

1.3 TRMM
Other instrumental data and products of TRMM (microwave radiances, rainfall products) are already accessible for TRMM PIšs. Free access is likely to be available from TSDIS at the time of the INDOEX IFP.

1.4 SEAWIFS
J. Porter, U. Hawaii, will operate a satellite receiving station with a SeaWifs decoder in Male to collect and provide real time images from the SeaWifs satellite. Via the SeaDas software, aerosol optical depth and ocean color images will be provided. He may also run his own codes to derive aerosol optical depths from SeaWifs and AVHRR satellites.

1.5 EOS-AM
This platform has been delayed to the end of the year 1998. The data availability (MODIS, CERES) for the INDOEX period is doubtful.

1.6 INSAT
The principle of availability of INSAT data is maintained by the Indians responsible, but there is doubt upon their real availability.

1.7 AVHRR
AVHRR data over the INDOEX area will be received and recorded in MALE. A back-up set will also be available from Sri-Lanka (1 km and 4 km).

The satellite working group stated also that the satellite section of the INDOEX web site had to be improved. For example, results from Sandrine Bony about cloud climatology should be included.

2. Plans for satellite studies

The satellite working group listed the intended studies by American and European researchers:

2.1 Cloud climatology
Climatology of clouds during the winter monsoon will be improved (INSAT, AVHRR, ISCCP,...)

2.2 Aerosols optical depth
Retrievals will be performed from AVHRR, SEAWIFS, METEOSAT

2.3 Cloud properties
Cloud properties (cloud optical depth, cloud top temperature, cloud sizes, cloud droplet size,...) are planned to be retrieved from AVHRR, INSAT, METEOSAT

2.4 Indirect effects
Specific multisatellite (including imagery and radiative budget instruments) and model analyses studies will be performed during the campaign.

2.5 Trajectories and Lagrangian studies
Meteosat data will allow these kinds of studies, either based on analysed trajectories or on retrieval of low cloud motions.

2.6 ITCZ studies
Studies of migrations of the ITCZ, convection variability, ITCZ structure (with the help of TRMM), assimilation in short term runs of climate models, will be performed.

2.7 Water vapour
Relationship between water vapour large scale repartition and large scale circulations will be studied using the water vapour channel of Meteosat + other satellites and instruments as IR and microwave sounders (specific inversion of TOVS data is foreseen by one team).

3. Calibration issues

3.1 AVHRR
This calibration is generally assumed good, but it has to be verified.

3.2 METEOSAT VIS
This channel is not calibrated by EUMETSAT. Possibility of intercalibration with AVHRR has to be assessed.

3.3 METEOSAT-5 IR and WV
These channels are in principle calibrated by EUMETSAT, but the quality of this calibration has to be assessed, for example by intercomparisons with METEOSAT-7.

3.4 CERES and ScaRaB
Intercomparisons of these two instruments are already planned (if they fly together.)

3.5 VIRS on TRMM
Intercomparisons with AVHRR also have to be planned.

3.6 Intercomparison with aircraft measurements
Along track flights of C-130 for calibration purposes would be desirable, specially for AVHRR, which will serve as a reference for the other satellites. Along track flights would be also useful for radiative budget instruments (CERES or ScaRaB).

These kinds of flights have to be performed from an aircraft flying as high as possible, for 10 minutes legs corresponding to the satellite passage, and preferentially in areas where large gradients can be observed.

1. ECHAM (online) and TM3 (offline using ECMWF) Utrecht and KNMI (Roelofs, Dentener, Lelieveld, Siegmund and PhD students: De Laat, Zachariasse)
-Tropospheric chemistry ("background")
-NMHCs (collaboration with MPIC-Mainz)
-Sulfur modeling
-Regional Modeling (RACMO) with KNMI (Holtslag, van Meygaard)
-aerosol chemistry dynamics modeling (Metzger)

Mainz
Regional version (RACMO) in collaboration with Utrecht (van Kuhlmann)

2. MATCH (offline)

NCAR (Rasch)
-FSU analysis data (Krishnamurti)
-SPITFIRE (new advection scheme)
-sulfate and mineral dust aerosols
-zoom version (postdoc Yiping Zhang)


MPIC-Mainz (Lawrence, Crutzen)
-Tropospheric chemistry (ŗbackground˛), this is a new version in testing phase, coding completed.
-NMHCs (esp. isoprene), together with LBA/CLAIRE (Poeschl, von Kuhlmann)
-radiative transfer: photolysis and heating rates (Landgraf)

3. OTHER MODELING EFFORTS

Aerosols
-mineral dust (Balkanski)
-sulfur (Boucher)
-black carbon and organics (Liousse)


Photochemistry
NMHCs (Kanakidou)
background (Pham at LMD)

Meteorology and Forecasting (G. Verver)
KNMI will provide back- and forward (3D) trajectories for the area. The wind, humidity and temperature fields on which these calculations are based come from the ECMWF model (1*1 degree, all model levels), and may be first guess as well as forecasted fields (up to 120 hrs). The specific location and pressure levels of the ending / starting points have yet to be determined. A set of forecasted fields (ECMWF) of cloud cover, precipitation, evaporation, temperature, humidity convergence and possibly other (derived) parameters will be sent on a daily basis to the operations center. A managable number of fields (or cross sections) still have to be defined by the forecasting staff.

A KNMI scientist will join the forecasting team during the IFP.

** Dr. Mitra has committed emissions inventories data for India to INDOEX via M. Lawrence and P. Crutzen at MPIC.

(END OF WORKING GROUP SUMMARIES)