Some directions for MAP

Philippe Bougeault Météo-France, CNRM, Toulouse, France

As quality-checked data are now continuously flowing into the MDC, sorted and presented in an orderly fashion, and adequately commented, we are just starting to realize the value of the MAP dataset. Now is a time for return-on-investment.
It would be tedious to enumerate again all possible scientific benefits that we expect from the MAP dataset. I want to focus on three subjects were I believe we should decide actions in the coming months:

Re-analysis and quality-checking

Early research in our institute - and elsewhere - points to the large differences between simulations using the products of various operational assimilation systems. One key factor is the moisture field. There is a need to prepare a reference re-analysis of the MAP SOP, insuring an optimal and complete use of all extra data acquired by research groups, and with maximum quality control of the moisture observations. The moisture measurements by radio-soundings should be checked in the light of recent results from the TOGA-COARE project, that evidenced dry biases in many soundings, and proposed correction procedures. The available information from various satellites and radars should also be used to help produce the most reliable moisture analysis.

Numerical modeling

Preliminary results from modeling groups show some exciting indication of high predictability of convective rainfall during MAP IOPs. This is due to the control by topography and by soil moisture. Research in numerical modeling of MAP cases should intensify, make use of the best available analyses, include realistic specification of the soil moisture, and calibration of the parametrizations of cloud physics against the in-situ and remotely sensed data from the MDC. No single group has the capacity to explore all issues simultaneously. This is why one or several intercomparison projects should be started, possibly under the auspices of WGNE/COMPARE or GEWEX/GCSS, in order to cross-fertilize the progress on numerical modeling within MAP. Also, projects of coupling atmospheric and hydrological models, well started within the RAPHAEL project, should continue.

Societal impacts

One standing recommendation from the WWRP is to develop a focused program on societal impacts within MAP. I believe we should do it. To start with, the new MAP Steering Committee will include one recognized expert in this field. I believe the MAP community can develop research in at least three directions:

(i) establish better knowledge of the cost of Alpine floods to society, of the part of this cost that could be suppressed by better forecasts, and demonstrate the economic benefit of improving observing and forecasting systems;

(ii) define better tools to measure the economic value of forecasts of extreme events at one/three days lead time. The present scoring systems are not appropriate to tackle with the economic value of forecasts, as they give too much weight to moderate events and do not include the lead time as a factor. Developing better scoring systems in an economic sense should become a subject of research of our community;

(iii) use MAP-proofed numerical models as "regional weather generators" to establish better maps of natural risks in the Alpine region, such as return periods for big floods and landslides, extreme Foehn, clear air turbulence climatology, etc..

I hope the new MAP Steering Committee will have the opportunity to impulse these and other actions for the benefit of our community and the maximum valorization of MAP data.