|A COMPARISON OF SURFACE WINDS AND WINDS MEASURED AT 152 m DURING JOINT 11974 AND JOINT IT 1977 David W. Stuart Robert J. Goodwin Willian P. Duval, Department of Meteorology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Abstract. During the JOINT I 1974 and JOINT 11 1977 expeditions, winds were observed at the sur- face by meteorological buoys and at 152m by a research aircraft. The surface and aircraft data were screened for proximity in space and time and data paire were extracted if the aircraft flight track was within 2.8 km of the buoy location. Scatter diagrans were plotted for surface vind couponents vs. aircraft wind components. ‘4n anslysis of variance for the JOINT I data showed that a linear relation between the two levels explained about 84% of the variance for the conponent normal to shore and about 54% of the variance for the component parallel to shore. For the JOINT 11 data, about 76% of the variance was explained for the parallel component and virtually none of the variance was explained for the normal conponent . Introduetion During the JOINT I 1974 and JOINT II 1977 field observations by the Coastal Upwelling Ecosystems Analysis (CUEA) group, an instrunented aircraft was used to measure winds at 152 m. This paper examines the relationship between those winds and winds measured at the surface by an array of mete orological buoys. In earlier works, Halpern (1978, 1979) and Krishnamurts and Krishnamurti (1978) examined the relationship between low-level cloud motion vectors and surface winds over open ocean regions. This study differs in that the study areas are coastal regions subject to pro nounced crographic and diurnal effects. Data Avatlability and Reduction JOINTI 1974 was conducted off northwest Africa (Fig. 1) during February and March, 1974 while JOINTII 1977 was off Peru (Fig. 2) during March, April, and May, 1977. Both locations have pro nounced coastal upwelling. The wind field aloft for each region vas mea sured by an instrumented research aireraft flying fat a mean height of 152 m (500 £t) as determined by a radio altimeter (Sperry Rand model AA~220, overall accuracy of + 10m). The standard devia tion of the height vas 5.8 m (19 ft) and no ob- servations were used if the flight level deviated by more than 18 = (59 ft) from the mean, The flight patterns and initial data processing were described by Duval (1977) and Moody (1979). Two types of moored buoys provided surface wind measurements. Buoys Li(1974), PSS(1977), and PS(1977) had vector averaging wind recorders (WAWR) at 3 m constructed from AMF Model 610 vec~ tor averaging current meters. Their basic recor- ding interval was 7.5 min. All other buoys had Model D124’wind recorders at 2.4m, The recorders average the wind speed during the recording interval, but they yield the instan— taneous wind direction at the end of the record- ing interval. The recording interval varied fron 5 or 10 min (JOINT I) to 20 min (JOINT II). Intercomparison studies (Halpera and Smith, 1975) indicated that unfiltered winds frou the to buoy systems should be used with caution. The JOINT IL study used data mostly from the VAWR system (buoys PSS and PS) and the inclusion of data from the one Aanderaa system (buoy Pa) does not appear to have improved the result: Whenever the aircraft flight track passed within 2.8 kx (1.5 mm) of a surface buoy mooring, the aircraft and buoy wind measurements nearest in time and space were extracted as a data pair. Air- craft winds were available at I-min intervals. The buoys with VAWR had averaged data at 15- (PSS and PS) and 30-min (Lt) intervals. The buoys with Aanderaa recorders recorded winde at 20-min intervals for JOINT II (Pa, L, I), but the wind values for JOINT T (Rl, R2, Ui, U2) vere avail- able each 5 to 10 min even though they were vec- torially averaged over 20 to 30 min before being used for a data pair. Therefore, the largest interval in space and time allowed for a data pair to be used was 2.8 km and 15 min, 39= % Pig. 1. The JOINT I study ares with locations of meteorological buoys. Winds were decomposed into 2 component parallel to the coast (V-tangent or Vz) and a component. perpendicular to the coast (V-normel or Vy). For SOINT I, Vp vas positive when the tangential con ponent was blowing from the south and Vy was pos: itive when the normal component was from the west (onshore) (Pig. 1). For the JOINT II region, Vz was positive when it was from the southeast and 40 STUART ET AL. Uy was positive from the southwest (onshore) (Pig. 2). Scatter diagrams were plotted for the total wind speed, and, if possible, for Vp and Vy for each buoy. Additional scatter diagrams were plotted for the sets of buoys that reported both speed and direction. For JOINT I these were the second Rhododendron mooring (R2), both UrbiniaFig. 2. The JOINT I1 study area with locations of meteorological buoys. ‘moorings (UL, U2), and Lisa (Li). For JOINT IT they were PSS, PS, and Parodia (Pa). Buoys pro- viding only wind speed vere the first Rhododen- ron mooring (RL) from JOINT I and Ironwood (I) and Lagarta (L) from JOINT IT, A corresponding series of analysis of variance was calculated. In the following we present results from only those buoys that recorded both speed and direc~ ton. Results Figs 3 and 4 are scatter diagrams of total wind speed recorded by the buoys versus total wind speed observed by the aircraft for JOINT T and JOINT II, Figs 5 and 6 show the regression lines for total wind speed, Vz and Vy, for each expe- dition, With the exception of Wy for JOINT IT, cach scatter diagram gives sone indication of a Linear relationship between the winds at the sur- face and at 152 a, The results of the analyses of variance are given in Table 1. In addition to the slope and Intercept of the regression lines, the table gives the correlation coefficients (x), the square of the correlation coefficient (r2), the "£" ratio, end the corresponding critical values of £ at the 95% (£5) and 99% (£)) confidence levels (from Panof sky and Brier, 1968). The statistics support’ linear relationships in most cases. The linear relations between wind neasured at the surface and at 152 m explain 54% of the variance for Vp and 84% of that for Vy during JOINT T. Also, 71% of the variance in total wind speed is explained and all three cor- responding correlation coefficients are signifi- PHYSTCAL PROCESS OF UPWELLING 41