Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 763

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Alleviation of a systematic westerly bias in general circulation and numerical weather prediction models through an orographic gravity wave drag parametrization

Palmer, T. N., Shutts, G. J., Swinbank, R.·1986·Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society

Abstract

Systematic westerly biases in the northern hemisphere wintertime flow of the Meteorological Office 15‐layer operational model and 11‐layer general circulation model are described. Evidence that the failure to parametrize subgrid‐scale orographic gravity wave drag may account for such biases is presented. This evidence is taken from aircraft studies, surface pressure drag measurements, and studies of the zonally averaged momentum budget. A parametrization scheme is described in which the surface stress is proportional to the near‐surface wind speed and static stability, and to the variance of subgrid‐scale orography. The stress is absorbed in the vertical by considering the influence of such gravity wave activity on static stability and vertical wind shear. A Richardson‐number‐dependent wave breaking formulation is devised, and the vertical stress profile determined by a saturation hypothesis whereby the breaking waves are maintained at marginal stability. It is shown that wave breaking preferentially occurs in the boundary layer and in the lower stratosphere. Results from a simple zonally symmetric model show how the adjustment to thermal wind balance with a wave drag in the stratosphere, warms polar regions by adiabatic descent, and decelerates the mean westerlies in the troposphere. The influence of the parametrization scheme on integrations of the 11‐layer model is described, and found to be generally beneficial. In a discussion of the reasons why this problem has only recently emerged, it is suggested that the satisfactory northern hemisphere winter circulations of previous, coarser general circulation models were due to a compensation implied by underestimating both the surface drag, and the horizontal flux of momentum by explicitly resolved large‐scale eddies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/qj.49711247406

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 763

Metadata

Authors
Palmer, T. N., Shutts, G. J., & Swinbank, R.
Venue
Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1986-10
Volume
112
Issue
474
Pages
1001-1039
ISSN
  • 0035-9009 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-870X
OpenAlex
W2057507785
Cited by
763
References
0
FWCI
15.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Alleviation of a systematic westerly bias in general circulation and numerical weather prediction models through an orographic gravity wave drag parametrization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/qj.49711247406
The paper
Palmer, T. N., Shutts, G. J., & Swinbank, R. (1986). Alleviation of a systematic westerly bias in general circulation and numerical weather prediction models through an orographic gravity wave drag parametrization. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49711247406

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.