Articles | Volume 10, issue 3
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1401–1402, 2010
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1401-2010
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1401–1402, 2010
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1401-2010

  08 Feb 2010

08 Feb 2010

Comment on "Reinterpreting aircraft measurement in anisotropic scaling turbulence" by Lovejoy et al. (2009)

E. Lindborg1, K. K. Tung2, G. D. Nastrom3, J. Y. N. Cho4, and K. S. Gage5 E. Lindborg et al.
  • 1Linné Flow Centre, KTH Mechanics, 10044 Stockholm, Sweden
  • 2Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
  • 3St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota, USA
  • 4MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington, Massachusetts, USA
  • 5Cooperative Institute for the Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA

Abstract. Recently, Lovejoy et al. (2009) argued that the steep ~k−3 atmospheric kinetic energy spectrum at synoptic scales (≥1000 km) observed by aircraft is a spurious artefact of aircraft following isobars instead of isoheights. Without taking into account the earth's rotation they hypothesise that the horizontal atmospheric energy spectrum should scale as k−5/3 at all scales. We point out that the approximate k−3-spectrum at synoptic scales has been observed by a number of non-aircraft means since the 1960s and that general circulation models and other current models have successfully produced this spectrum. We also argue that the vertical movements of the aircraft are far too small to cause any strong effect on the measured spectrum at synoptic scales.

Download
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint