PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
July 8, 2026Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres0 citations

A Lidar‐Validated Comparison of Two Multistatic Meteor Radar‐Based Wind Retrieval Methods for Spatially Resolved Horizontal Winds

View Full Paper
JZJie ZengWYWen YiGSGunter Stober

Key Points

  • This study aims to evaluate two wind retrieval methods for assessing horizontal winds in the mesosphere and lower thermosphere.
  • Utilized observations from the Eastern China Multistatic Meteor Radar Network (ECMMET).
  • Evaluated Volume Velocity Processing (VVP) and 3D variational assimilation with divergence constraint (3DVAR+DIV).
  • Compared results against simultaneous lidar observations.
  • 3DVAR+DIV shows a correlation coefficient of 0.93 with lidar observations and an RMS difference of 14.0 m/s.
  • Mean wind correlation coefficients exceed 0.9 and mean differences are within 1 m/s.
  • 3DVAR+DIV captures more detailed spatial variability compared to NDVVP, which retrieves overall wind trend better.

Abstract

Abstract The mesosphere and lower thermosphere (MLT) region plays a crucial role in the vertical coupling between the lower and upper atmosphere, but continuous regional observations of its wind field remain rare. In this study, we utilize observations from the Eastern China Multistatic Meteor Radar Network (ECMMET) to evaluate two 3‐dimensional wind retrieval methods: the newly developed Volume Velocity Processing (VVP) (NDVVP) and the 3‐dimensional variational assimilation using the divergence constraint (3DVAR+DIV). Both methods maintain stable performance at temporal resolutions as high as 10 min and yield highly consistent horizontal winds, with mean wind correlation coefficients exceeding 0.9 and wind velocity mean differences within 1 m/s. Comparisons with simultaneous lidar observations further confirm the reliability of the ECMMET‐derived winds, particularly the 3DVAR regional winds, which exhibit a correlation coefficient of 0.93 and a root‐mean‐square (RMS) difference of 14.0 m/s relative to the lidar observations at 88 km. The results showed that the 3DVAR+DIV method effectively reveals more detailed spatial variability, whereas the NDVVP performs better for retrieving the overall trend of the wind field. The non‐random discrepancies between the two retrievals originate from their inherent assumptions. NDVVP's linear wind assumption smooths higher‐order and nonlinear fluctuations, while 3DVAR+DIV captures them more effectively through spatial gridding. These findings emphasize the advantages of both methods and demonstrate ECMMET's capability to provide reliable, high‐resolution, and refined wind measurements essential for studies of MLT dynamics.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zeng et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a4de8ebd2ea289ef62836dchttps://doi.org/10.1029/2025jd046277
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper