Jump to content

GPM Celebrates Ten Years of Observing Precipitation for Science and Society


NASA

Recommended Posts

  • Publishers
Feature Article header

40 min read

GPM Celebrates Ten Years of Observing Precipitation for Science and Society

Introduction

On February 27, 2014, the four-ton Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Core Observatory (CO) spacecraft launched aboard a Japanese H-IIA rocket from Tanegashima Space Center in southern Japan. On that day, the GPM mission, a joint Earth-observing mission between NASA and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), began its journey to provide the world with an unprecedented picture of global precipitation (i.e., rain and snow). GPM continues to observe important precipitation characteristics and gain physical insights into precipitation processes using an advanced radar and passive microwave (PMW) radiometer on the GPM–CO along with leveraging a constellation of satellites. (The Earth Observer reported on the GPM–CO launch and plans for the mission in its November–December 2013 issue – see GPM Core Observatory: Advancing Precipitation Instruments and Expanding Coverage.)

As GPM is now well into its 10th year in orbit, the time is fitting to reflect on and celebrate what this mission has accomplished and showcase its contributions to science and society. While occasionally dealing with equipment malfunction, the GPM–CO has operated nearly continuously over its lifetime and recently was put into a higher orbit to conserve station-keeping fuel. As a result, GPM remains in extended operations and continues its observations after 10 years, making significant advances in the precipitation field through improving sensor calibration, retrieval algorithms, and ground validation measurements. GPM data continues to further our understanding of the characteristics of liquid and frozen precipitation around the world and improving our scientific knowledge of Earth’s water and energy cycles. These advances have extended to numerous societal benefits related to operational weather prediction, situational awareness and prediction of extreme events, hydrological and climate model development, water resource and crop management activities, and public health alerts. Additionally, this information has informed the K–12 and post-secondary audiences, influencing the next generation of scientists. More information is available at NASA’s GPM website.

Advancing Precipitation Measurements: The Need for the GPM Mission

Precipitation is a vital component of global water and energy cycles and crucially impactful to life on Earth. The distribution, frequency, and extremes in precipitation affect everything from agriculture to the insurance industry, to travel and your weekend plans. Prior to the meteorological satellite era, precipitation observations were limited to populated areas leaving wide swaths of land and almost the entirety of the oceans (70% of Earth’s surface) unobserved. GPM builds on decades of advances in satellite precipitation observations.

Early precipitation observations from space (e.g., from the Nimbus series) used visible and infrared measurements that gave the first, approximate estimates. PMW radiometers, however, gave a next generation of more direct and improved precipitation measurement. The NASA–JAXA Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM), launched in November 1997, significantly advanced the field with the addition of a Precipitation Radar (PR) alongside a wider-swath PMW radiometer. This was groundbreaking for precipitation research and advancement of measurement techniques, but was limited to the tropics and a single satellite in low Earth orbit. To move toward the goal of a globally distributed, high-frequency, physically consistent satellite precipitation product a new mission design was conceived in GPM.

The GPM Mission: Science Requirements, Objectives, and Instruments

The GPM–CO spacecraft is an advanced successor to the TRMM spacecraft, providing additional channels on both the Dual-frequency Precipitation Radar (DPR) and the GPM Microwave Imager (GMI) to enhance capabilities to sense light rain and falling snow. The GPM–CO, another NASA–JAXA partnership, operates in an inclined, non-Sun synchronous orbit that allows the spacecraft to sample precipitation across all hours of the day, as did TRMM. However, TRMM only covered tropical and subtropical regions, while the GPM–CO also covers middle and sub-polar latitudes.

The GPM mission has several key scientific objectives, including:

  1. advancing precipitation measurements from space;
  2. improving our knowledge of precipitation systems, water cycle variability, and freshwater availability;
  3. improving climate modeling and prediction;
  4. improving weather forecasting and four-dimensional [4D – i.e., three-dimensional (3D) spatial plus temporal] reanalysis; and
  5. improving hydrological modeling and prediction.

GPM Core Observatory Instruments

The GMI and DPR instruments together provide a powerful synergistic tool to assess precipitation structure, intensity, and phase globally at relatively high (regional) spatial resolutions. The DPR’s Ku-band (13.6 GHz) and Ka-band (35.5 GHz) channels provide 3D retrievals of precipitation structure with a vertical resolution of 250 m (~820 ft) and a horizontal resolution of ~5 km (~3 mi) across a swath up to 245 km (152 mi). The GMI is a 13-channel conically scanning PMW radiometer providing observations across a wide swath [885 km (~550 mi)] to estimate precipitation estimates at resolutions as fine as 5 km – see Figure 1.

When scientists and engineers collaborated on the design of GMI, they knew it would need to meet exacting requirements so that its data could be used both to support development of precipitation retrieval algorithms and to provide a calibration standard for the partner sensors in the GPM constellation. The attention to detail has paid off. To this day, GMI is deemed to be one of the best calibrated conically scanning PMW radiometers in space.

Together, these two well-calibrated GPM–CO instruments gather scientifically advanced observations of precipitation between 68°N and 68°S – which covers where the majority of the Earth’s population falls. This coverage allows opportunities to observe both surface precipitation rates and 3D precipitation structure and allows observations of diverse weather systems, including hurricanes and typhoons (e.g., from formation to their transition from the tropics to midlatitudes), severe convection, falling snow, light rain, and frontal systems over both land and ocean.

GPM Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the GPM Core Observatory’s Dual-frequency Precipitation Radar (DPR) and GPM Microwave Imager (GMI) instruments.
Figure credit: GPM website

GPM Constellation

While the GPM–CO is a key component of the GPM mission, another fundamental component is the constellation of national and international partner satellites known as the GPM Constellation, which has numbers ~10 at any given time – with the current members listed at the link referenced above. Each GPM Constellation partner designed and operated the satellites for their own particular missions, but they agreed to share the data from their missions to enable the next-generation of unified global precipitation estimates. The combination of these partner satellites and the GPM–CO allow frequent intersections of their orbits, permitting colocated and cotemporal observations to be made, which are crucial to ensure effective intercalibration.

The GPM–CO serves as the “calibrator” to unify precipitation estimates across these different partners’ satellite sensors, ensuring that the observed microwave brightness temperatures (TB) are consistent among the sensors with expected differences after accounting for variations in the observing frequencies, bandwidths, polarizations, and view angles. The advanced calibration across the sensors is a remarkable achievement, and it allows the project to focus on the precipitation products rather than TB uncertainties. This careful calibration enables high-quality datasets that support and enable detailed investigations on the distribution of precipitation and how these patterns change over days, seasons, and years, enabling a breadth of science and societal applications at local and global scales.

Ground Validation Activities: Significant Contributions to the GPM Mission

An integral part of a successful satellite mission is a robust and active ground validation (GV) program. During the TRMM era, the TRMM PR, and/or the TRMM PMW radiometer instruments limited GV to simple comparisons of rain rates to surface measurements from radars and/or rain gauges, which is referred to as statistical validation. It soon became obvious that a more robust GV program would be needed to better aid future satellite algorithm developers to improve the physics of their algorithms rather than just justifying tweaking their outputs. As a result, unlike TRMM, GPM’s GV program has been part of the mission concept from its inception. The GPM team developed a three-tiered approach that uses:  statistical validation, as done during TRMM; physical validation, where the emphasis is on better understanding of the physics and microphysics of different precipitating systems; and hydrological validation, which emphasizes improving precipitation retrievals over large-scale areas (e.g., watersheds).

To address these goals, there have been several pre- and post-launch field campaigns conducted. In chronological order, these include the:

Each of these field campaigns were designed to provide insight into different precipitation regimes and types to improve GPM satellite observations. For example, MC3E allowed for comprehensive observations of intense convection over continental regions. The researchers deployed an extensive network of ground instruments (e.g., radars, disdrometers, rain gauges), in coordination with flights of NASA’s ER-2 and University of North Dakota’s Cessna Citation II research aircrafts, to sample varied precipitation types (e.g., severe thunderstorms, Mesoscale Convective Systems (MCS)). Data from MC3E allowed for improvement of both active (DPR) and passive (GMI) retrievals over land. GCPEx has allowed for sampling of snowing systems. During this campaign, NASA’s ER-2 flew high above the clouds in coordination with NASA’s DC-3 aircraft flying within the clouds. Here again, GCPEx participants deployed a vast network of ground instruments (e.g., snow gauges, disdrometers). The goal for GCPEx was to formulate and validate frozen/mixed precipitation retrievals from the GPM satellite. (Note that from 2011–2015, The Earth Observer published articles on five of the six GV campaigns described in this section; the reader can locate these articles on The Earth Observer Archives Page. Scroll down to the “Bibliography of Articles with Historical Context Published in The Earth Observer” listicle and look for Field Campaigns.)

While these large-scale campaigns were extremely beneficial for achieving GPM science objectives, the costs of deploying instruments and personnel in these remote regions can be substantial. In order to provide long-term measurements at reasonable costs, the GPM GV established the Precipitation Research Facility (PRF) at the Wallops Flight Facility (WFF). The goal of this facility was to provide long-term measurements from the myriad instruments that have been deployed at the various field campaigns and manage them with full-time GV personnel. The linchpin of the PRF is NASA’s S-band, Dual-Polarimetric Radar (NPOL) – see Photo 1. NPOL was deployed in a farm field about 38 km (~24 mi) northeast of WFF to provide areal estimates of surface precipitation as well as profiles of precipitating systems above other GV surface instruments (e.g., profiling radars, disdrometers, and rain gauges). To add to this effort, the PRF staff established a network of rain gauges and disdrometers, which are deployed over the eastern shore of Maryland. These data are telemetered so that an added benefit to this effort is that the GPM GV data provide valuable, near-real-time data to many of the numerous farmers on the Delmarva Peninsula. The PRF’s principal activity is to design new GV instruments, test new validation methods, and assess instrument uncertainties using the abundant infrastructure of the GPM GV validation program. This coordination between GPM GV instruments, WFF-based staff, and regional data collection, quality control, and analysis are the core components of the PRF.

GPM Photo 1
Photo 1. The NASA S-Band Dual Polarimetric Radar (NPOL) deployed in central Iowa in support of the IFloodS field campaign in Iowa during the spring of 2013. The radar, when disassembled, fits within the five, white sea-containers located around the radar in this photo; it can be transported via 18-wheelers. In addition to IFloodS, NPOL has also been deployed for field campaigns in Oklahoma (MC3E), North Carolina (IPHEx), and Washington (OLYMPEX) – all of which are mentioned in the text above.
Photo credit: David Wolff/WFF

GPM Data Products

GPM data products and services have played an important role in research, applications, and education. The Precipitation Processing System (PPS) housed at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) produces and distributes GPM products that are archived and distributed at the Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC) as well.

GES DISC is one of a dozen discipline-oriented Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs) that NASA operates for processing the terabytes of data returns from its satellites, aircraft, field campaigns, and other sources. (To learn more about Earth Science Data Operations, which includes the DAACs, see Earth Science Data Operations: Acquiring, Distributing, and Delivering NASA Data for the Benefit of Society. The Earth Observer, Mar–Apr 2017, 29:2, 4–18.  A chart listing all the DAACs appears on pp. 7–8 of this article.)

In addition to precipitation estimates, users can access variables, such as calibrated TB, radar reflectivity, latent heating, and hydrometeor profiles in GPM products. See the Table 1 below for a listing of NASA GPM data products. 

Table 1. Overview of GPM data collection.

Product Level Products and Description
Level 1 (L1)1 1A – Reconstructed, unprocessed instrument data at full resolution for GPM GMI; TRMM TMI 1B – Brightness temperatures (Tb) for GPM GMI; and TRMM TMI, PR, and VIRS1C – Calibrated Tb for GPM GMI, TRMM TMI, and a constellation of PMW radiometers.
Level 2 (L2)2 2A Radar – Single-orbit radar rainfall estimates for GPM DPR, Ka, Ku; TRMM PR2A Radiometer (GPROF & PRPS) – Single-orbit PMW rainfall estimates from GPM GMI, TRMM TMI, and constellation radiometers; 2B Combined – Single-orbit rainfall estimates from combined radar/radiometer data (e.g., GPM GMI & DPR; and TRMM TMI & PR); and 2H CSH – Single-orbit cloud (latent) heating estimates from combined radar/radiometer data (GPM GMI & DPR, TRMM TMI & PR).
Level 3 (L3)3 IMERG Early Run – Near real-time, low-latency gridded global multi-satellite precipitation estimates; IMERG Late Run – Near real-time, gridded global multi-satellite precipitation estimates with quasi-Lagrangian time interpolation; and IMERG Final Run – Research-quality, gridded global multisatellite precipitation estimates with quasi-Lagrangian time interpolation, gauge data, and climatological adjustment. 3A Radar – Gridded rainfall estimates from radar data (GPM DPR, TRMM PR). 3A Radiometer (GPROF) – Gridded rainfall estimates from GPM GMI, TRMM TMI, and constellation PMW radiometers; 3B Combined – Gridded rainfall estimates from combined radar/radiometer data (GPM GMI & DPR, TRMM TMI & PR); 3G CSH – Gridded cloud (latent) heating estimates from combined radar/radiometer data (GPM GMI & DPR, TRMM TMI & PR).
Product Definitions: 1 Level 1 (L1): L1A data are reconstructed, unprocessed instrument data at full resolution, time referenced, and annotated with ancillary information, including radiometric and geometric calibration coefficients and georeferencing parameters (i.e., platform ephemeris), computed and appended – but not applied, to Level-0 (L0) data; L1B data are radiometrically corrected and geolocated L1A data that have been processed to sensor units; and L1C data are common intercalibrated brightness temperature (Tb) products that use the GPM Microwave Imager (GMI) L1B data as a reference standard. 2Level 2 (L2) products are derived geophysical parameters at the same resolution and location as those of the L1 data. 3Level 3 (L3) products are geophysical parameters that have been spatially and/or temporally resampled from L1 or L2 data.
Black Separator Line

List of acronyms used in Table (in order of occurrence): GPM Microwave Imager (GMI); TRMM Microwave Imager (MI); TRMM Precipitation Radar (PR); Visible and Infrared Scanner (VIRS); Dual-frequency Precipitation Radar (DPR); Ku-band and Ka-band channels; GPM Profiling Algorithm (GPROF); Precipitation Retrieval and Profiling Scheme Algorithm (PRPS); Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG); Goddard Convective-Stratiform (CSH) (Latent) Heating Algorithm.

Black Separator Line

Detailed information of each product and links for data access and visualizations are available on NASA GPM Data Directory.

From the beginning, GPM was conceptualized as incorporating all available satellite data – not as a single-satellite mission. One of the key mission requirements of the PPS was to ensure that processing and reprocessing always include data from the TRMM era (starting in December 1997). Algorithm development would ensure that the same algorithm would be used to process both TRMM- and GPM-era data collected from the TRMM and GPM spacecrafts and the GPM constellation. As a result, an important part of this cross-mission processing is the intercalibration of PMW radiometers using GMI. Using data from the overlap period of GMI and TMI, TMI is intercalibrated to GMI and is then used to intercalibrate the radiometer data during the TRMM era. This intercalibration manifests itself in the intercalibrated brightness temperatures (Tc) provided in the Level 1C (L1C) product for each radiometer. The GPM Profiling Algorithm (GPROF) retrieval uses these intercalibrated L1C products and guarantees consistent mission intercalibrated precipitation retrievals. For example, the L2 product stage that converts TB into precipitation estimates applies the same GPROF to the GPM constellation of PMW radiometers.

Continued Improvement of GPM Algorithms

One important achievement of GPM is the continued improvements in GPM’s algorithms that produce the immense amount of precipitation data that are used by scientific researchers and stakeholders alike. GPM’s five algorithms – DPR-, GPROF-, Combined-, Convective-Stratiform Heating-, and Multisatellite – have all undergone version updates several times (e.g., Version 01–07), with additional updates planned for the next 1–4 years. Each update entails a tremendous amount of work behind the scenes from GPM’s algorithm developers to ensure that quality data are available to the public.

Each new version provides a complete reprocessing of the entire data record using the improved retrieval algorithms, based on validation against reliable GV data, feedback from users, new understanding of the processes, and improved techniques. This not only helps ensure a consistent data record and fair comparisons against past events but also helps refine and improve the data to capture precipitation phenomena more exactly. Just as an original photograph capturing a past event can be reanalyzed with new technology, reprocessing revisits the observed satellite instruments’ “raw” radiances and refines the process of converting them to the end product of precipitation quantities.

“We know more now about the global rain and snowfall in, say, 2010, than we did when it actually happened.” – George Huffman [GPM Project Scientist]

This process is an inverse problem that helps determine the physical quantities (e.g., precipitation rate) given the observed signal (e.g., microwave radiance). For precipitation, this retrieval process relies on complex algorithms and is by no means straightforward. This is an underconstrained problem where different combinations of physical quantities can give the same observed signal, especially for passive instruments. Thus it requires additional information or assumptions.

The aim of each version in GPM is to have “better” estimates of the precipitation variables than the previous version. However, what better means can involve trade-offs. An excellent example is a change implemented from V06 to V07 in one of GPM’s most widely-used products – the Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) algorithm – which is NASA GPM’s multisatellite product that combines information from the GPM satellite constellation to estimate precipitation over the majority of the Earth’s surface. The resulting IMERG products provide near-global precipitation data at a resolution of 10 km (~6mi), every 30 minutes covering latitudes of 60°N–60°S, and are available at different latencies (Early, Late, and Final, as defined in Table 1) to cater to a range of end-user communities for operational and research applications. IMERG is particularly valuable over areas of Earth’s surface that lack ground-based, precipitation-measuring instruments, including oceans and remote areas. Specifically, this change to IMERG V07 resulted in improvements towards the distribution of precipitation rates, allowing for a better representation of precipitation areas and extremes. However, it reduced correlation against ground reference data. Another example is the gauge adjustment process in IMERG that offers a substantial improvement at the expense of higher random error.

The result of these intricate reprocessing cycles is a family of precipitation products that improves accuracy, a longer record, and expanding coverage, all while responding to feedback and requests from users. This is especially the case for downstream products like IMERG, which is widely used for science and applications due to its completeness and regularity, and inherits the improvements in each reprocessing cycle across the family.

Meeting User Needs

The number one requirement on PPS was to provide well-curated standard reference products with carefully curated provenience. For each data product version, a complete record is kept of spacecraft maneuvers and issues, data input issues, and data formats. This makes GPM data products a standard against which others can be compared and the standard products themselves improved.

The GPM mission also requires near-real-time (NRT) products. As a research agency, NASA does not generally specify operational NRT requirements. Instead, these NRT products are usually provided on a “best effort” basis. During its core mission (the first three years), PPS did have NRT requirements. Since then, PPS continues to fulfill these as budget permits. The half-hourly 0.1 x 0.1º L3 global IMERG products are provided in NRT with latency objectives for the IMERG Early (Late) run of 4+ (14+) hours after data collection.

To facilitate data interoperability and interdisciplinary science, the PPS and the Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC) have developed value-added data services and products since the TRMM era, including data subsetting (spatial and temporal), L3 data regridding, network common data form (NetCDF) format conversion, remote data access (e.g., via Open Data Access Protocol (OPeNDAP), Grid Analysis and Display System (GrADS) Data Server [GDS]), NASA GIS translation of GPM data for various accumulation periods, GPM Applications Programming Interface (API), and data visualization tools. For example, the more technical Hierarchical Data Formats (HDF) mission IMERG products are reformatted and accumulated to GIS-friendly additions in Geographic Tagged Image File Format (geoTIFF) format for both Early and Late Run IMERG products at 30-min, 3-hour, and 1-day temporal resolution. Other value-added products include the daily products for IMERG Early, Late, and Final Runs from GES DISC. Quick visualization tools, such as the IMERG Global Viewer, are freely available to the public to access and view the latest NRT GPM IMERG global precipitation datasets at 30-minute, 1-day, and 7-day intervals, on an interactive 3D globe in a web browser. User services and tutorials (e.g., Frequently Asked Questions, How-Tos, help desk, user forum) are also available across the GPM, PPS, and GES DISC webpages.

Along with the other DAACs, GES DISC is facilitating data access and use by migrating its products and services to NASA’s Earthdata cloud. Once the migration is finished, users will be able to access all NASA’s Earth data products from the 12 DAACs in one place, which can simplify interdisciplinary science studies. Over 50% of the archived GES DISC products have been migrated to the cloud as of this writing. Users can either access them directly in the NASA Earthdata cloud environment or download data in their own computing environment. 

To broaden the GPM user community – especially for users who are either non-technical or not familiar with NASA data – GES DISC has developed an online interactive tool called Giovanni, for viewing, analyzing, and downloading multiple Earth science datasets (including GPM) from within a web browser, allowing users to circumvent downloading data and software. At present, GPM L3 precipitation products (IMERG) along with over 2000 interdisciplinary variables from other NASA missions or projects are available in Giovanni. Over 20 plot types are included in Giovanni to facilitate data exploration, product comparison, and research. Links to results and data can be shared with colleagues. Data in different formats (e.g., NetCDF, comma separated values, or CSV) can be downloaded as well. A list of referral papers utilizing Giovanni is available. 

Data services continue to evolve to meet increasing user requirements, such as the Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) guiding principles, open science, data integration, interdisciplinary science, and data democratization.

Science and Societal Application Highlights from 10 Years of Observing Precipitation with GPM

As scientists and stakeholder organizations have made use of GPM datasets for analysis and research over the past decade, myriad scientific discoveries have been made leading to the emergence of a wide variety of real-time and retrospective societal applications for GPM data. These GPM user communities continue to dig into scientific questions and provide time-critical decision support to the public. This portion of the article highlights several of the scientific and application achievements made possible since the mission launched in 2014. This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather demonstrates GPM’s unique accomplishments and what the mission offers for science and society.

Capturing Microphysical Properties and Vertical Structure Information of Precipitating Systems

GPM Figure 2
Figure 2. Seasonal average cloud latent heating at a height of 6 km (~4 mi) derived from GSFC’s Goddard Convective–Stratiform (Latent) Heating Algorithm (CSH) algorithm for the period December 2020–November 2023. Heating arises from cloud and precipitation processes making its spatial distribution highly correlated with precipitation. CSH shows deep, intense cloud heating in the tropics within the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), west Pacific Ocean, and tropical land masses. Broad areas of heating at higher latitudes are associated with midlatitude storm tracks. Seasonal shifts in heating are most prominent over land.
Image credit: Steven Lang /GSFC/Science Systems and Applications, Inc. (SSAI)

One of GPM’s main charges was to provide microphysical properties and vertical structure information of precipitating systems using passive and active remote sensing techniques. Measurements of the vertical structure of clouds are fundamentally important to improving our understanding of how they affect both local- and large-scale environments. Achieving this goal has required considerable enhancement of the NASA GPM algorithms – including the DPR, GPROF, Combined (CMB), and Convective–Stratiform (Latent) Heating (CSH) algorithms – from their original capabilities at the time of launch.

The advanced instrumentation of GPM’s dual-frequency, Ku/Ka-band radar added new capabilities beyond the TRMM PR’s single Ku band. As a result, the DPR algorithms provide vertical hydrometeor profiles at the radar range bin level [~5 km (~3 mi) horizontal, 125 m (~410 ft) vertical]. Such detailed measurements are critical for classifying precipitation events (e.g., convective or stratiform) and characterizing the dominant types of precipitation particles, precipitation characteristics, and freezing level height. Additionally, these DPR algorithms have played a significant role in retrieving parameters of the particle size distribution (PSD) in rain. All of these factors help support and elucidate the understanding of storm systems and their impacts at local and regional scales.

More recently falling snow microphysics have received increasing attention. Characterizing snow remains a challenging problem for precipitation measuring/modeling due to varying particle habits, shapes, and snow mass densities. The higher frequencies added on both the DPR and GMI instruments have enabled improved observations of ice and snow, not only revealing new insights into the intensity and microphysical composition of cold-season precipitation but enabling an increased understanding of precipitation, clouds, and climate feedbacks.

Another important parameter that is derived from GPM vertical profile information is latent heating (LH), which is so named because it measures the “hidden” energy when water changes phase but doesn’t impact its temperature. The vertical structure of LH is a key parameter for understanding the coupling of the Earth’s water and energy cycles. Although it cannot be directly observed, GPM-derived precipitation estimates, microphysical properties, and vertical structure provide critical information for inferring the vertical structure of LH – see Figure 2. Researchers can access this information using the U.S. Science Team’s CSH datasets as well as the Japanese Science Team’s Spectral Latent Heating (LSH) datasets. GPM’s sampling of higher latitudes – not available from TRMM ­– has resulted in estimates of the intensity and variability of 3D LH structures of precipitation systems beyond the tropics. The CSH algorithm has advanced during the GPM era due to improvements in numerical cloud models and higher accuracy vertical precipitation structure profiles.

Improve knowledge of Precipitation Systems, Water Cycle Variability, and Freshwater Availability

A key success of GPM – both from information from the GPM–CO and from combining with the information from the constellation satellites – is the expansion of knowledge of precipitation systems both in the tropics and at middle and high latitudes. In addition, the program contributes to water availability and variations in time and space. The radar and PMW instruments on the GPM–CO lead to the most accurate surface precipitation rate estimates and vertical structure of the systems, allowing researchers to study key features of these systems on an instantaneous basis and then compile precipitation statistics over time for accurate climatological determinations. The inclined orbit of the GPM–CO results in sampling the entire diurnal (day–night) cycle of precipitation, which is key information for validating numerical models. By combining the “best estimate” data from the GPM–CO with more frequent precipitation estimates from GPM constellation satellites results in the IMERG analyses (30-min resolution), which has allowed for the examination of fine-scale variations in all types of systems, the application of the IMERG NRT analyses for monitoring precipitation systems, and the use in a multitude of applications  (e.g., hydrology, agriculture, and health) that depend on fresh water availability information.

In the tropics, the GPM–CO data have been combined with similar data from TRMM for a 25-year total observational record to study the rainfall structure and variations of tropical cyclones, the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), and the mean rainfall climate of the tropics. Tropical mesoscale systems have been tracked with the 30-minute IMERG data to understand their life cycles and contributions to climatological rainfall. Tropical cyclone precipitation has been analyzed to understand storm initiation and variations with time over various ocean basins. Hailstorms have been studied with specifically developed hail algorithms over various continents, with particular focus on the extremely intense storms over South America.

In midlatitudes, the structure of large-scale cyclonic systems, including atmospheric rivers (ARs), have been examined, as well as their relation to moisture source regions and impact in driving heavy precipitation events. At higher latitudes, GPM’s focus on better precipitation retrievals – especially related to snow detection and estimation – has led to improved knowledge of storm systems in this important, changing environment.

Looking across the globe, extreme precipitation events – often with accompanying flood and landslide events – have also been examined and cataloged, both on a local and regional basis, but with increasing ability on a quasi-global basis as the time record extends forward.

On longer timescales, the GPM–CO (and TRMM) data have contributed to our knowledge and estimates of mean climatological precipitation providing different estimates (from different products) for intercomparison and through “best estimate” ocean climatological values using combined radar data and passive microwave information from GPM, TRMM, and CloudSat. This best estimate is used to calibrate a new, long-term Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) monthly analysis (1983–present), which has resulted in a refined estimate of the mean ocean climatological value, that fits global water and energy budget studies better – see Figure 3. The GPM IMERG analyses are also now used as a key input to the GPCP global daily analyses, enabling finer-resolution climatological studies.

GPM Figure 3
Figure 3. Example of Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) Daily Climate Data Record (CDR) for January 28, 2018. GPCP incorporates GPM–CO and IMERG information to produce maps like the one shown here.
Image credit: Bob Adler/University of Maryland, College Park, Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center (ESSIC)]

GPM Precipitation Estimates Improving Climate Models and Constraining Predictions

The multifaceted, multiscale physical processes that affect precipitation locally and globally continue to be a challenge for climate models to accurately represent. Ongoing research and analysis reveals that the process-level representation is a much stronger constraint on climate model prediction fidelity than mean state climatological skill. Though high-quality climate models, such as the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), are currently not run at the resolution of GPM observations, they are increasingly simulating cloud and thunderstorm-scale rainfall as subcomponents within their lower-resolution grid boxes. This allows for the model-simulated rain intensity over thunderstorm areas to be compared with GPM precipitation estimates that are averaged over the equivalent GPM DPR-identified convective cloud types. This evaluation inevitably involves assessing extremes, and with 10 years and counting of GPM data now avaiable, such extremes in different weather regimes will be increasingly useful to study – see Figure 4.

GPM Figure 4
Figure 4. Average rainfall patterns from 2014–2020 in January using the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies’ (GISS) – E3 climate model [top] and precipitation estimates derived from GPM’s multisatellite product, IMERG [bottom]. Climate models such as the GISS-E3 must accurately simulate seasonal cycles observed by GPM for their predictions to be more reliable. Using the GPM rainfall magnitudes as benchmarks, new model equations are being developed to improve this area of rainfall simulation and improve climate projections.
Image credit: Greg Elsaesser/GISS

Additionally, the diurnal cycle of precipitation – another challenge for climate models to simulate – remains an important focus. Recent studies have suggested that the systematic differences in cloud occurrence across the diurnal cycle are crucially important for atmospheric water vapor changes as well as cloud feedbacks and their role in climate change. This expanded understanding provides even more motivation for improving diurnal cycle representation in models. With the long GPM record, diurnal precipitation composites can be made in varying weather or climate states (e.g., El Niño/Southern Oscillation), and additional novel analyses of regime-dependent diurnal cycle composites will be important for constraining processes.

GPM Figure 5
Figure 5. Schematic of GPM observed latent heating in convective cores (i.e., thunderstorms) relative to a larger thunderstorm complex (i.e., mesoscale convective system).
Image credit: Greg Elsaesser; model is from a May 2022 paper published in Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Availability of and improvements in GPM estimated stratiform rainfall will progressively enable addressing the longstanding deficiencies in simulating mesoscale convective systems – see Figure 5. Alongside use of “process-relevant” precipitation diagnostics, new efforts seek to use machine learning techniques to ensure that numerous climatological water and energy cycle diagnostics remain in good agreement with GPM and other satellite estimates. These joint efforts that leverage both mean-state global precipitation estimates plus the process-oriented precipitation diagnostics will ensure that coarser-resolution climate models that support numerous CMIP experiments will increase in predictive capability.

GPM Applications: Continuing to Grow and Enable Communities Across Local and Global Scales

As noted above, one GPM focus is the application of satellite precipitation estimates for societal decision-making. As a result, GPM data have supported applications such as weather forecasting, water resource management, agriculture and food security monitoring, public health, animal migration, tropical cyclone location and intensity estimation, hydropower management, flood and landslide monitoring and forecasting, and land system modeling – see Figure 6.

GPM Figure 6
Figure 6. GPM Applications icon highlights six thematic and primary societal application areas supported by GPM data: ecological management, water resources and agriculture, energy, disasters monitoring and response, public health, and weather and climate modeling.
Image credit: GPM website; Mike Marosy/GSFC/Global Science and Technology Inc. (GST)

To support this focus, the GPM Applications team strives to focus on engaging users through trainings and interviews, workshops, webinars, and programs, with the objective of guiding new and existing users to integrate GPM data into their systems and processes to drive actions that positively impact society. These activities help elucidate data needs and identify data barriers faced by stakeholders. The team also helps identify opportunities and gaps to create effective engagement and outreach resources and help facilitate the use of GPM data to support decision making and improve situational awareness across different sectors. All of these efforts have helped increase the visibility of GPM and attract new users from federal and state partners, academic institutions, international agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and private and non-profit companies. A few examples of GPM Application engagement activities since launch include:

  • three GPM Mentorship Programs that bridge the gap between GPM scientists and application communities to promote operational applications;
  • seventeen GPM trainings to support new and existing users on data access and use for applications;
  • six GPM stakeholder-driven application workshops to facilitate discussions between scientists and end users of GPM data about how NASA data could be better leveraged to inform decision making for societal applications; and
  • three white papers that articulate and identify user needs and data requirements across communities.

The GPM Applications team has tabulated over 10,000+ unique users across 130 countries who have accessed or routinely access GPM data from NASA data archives. Additionally, the value of these activities can be seen in over 175 GPM case study application examples that have been publicized at NASA, featured on social media and posted at NASA GPM Applications webpage, over the last 5 years alone – see sampling of applications in Figure 7.

GPM Figure 7
Figure 7. Collage of GPM case study examples enabling societal applications, including weather forecasting, nowcasting of extremes, agricultural and drought monitoring, weather index insurance, and data management platforms.
Image credit: Andrea Portier /GSFC/ SSAI

Over the past decade of GPM observations, several themes have emerged with these efforts across the applications community. One key component of enabling GPM applications is the ability to access and download NRT data products that meet applications needs. About 40% of GPM end users rely on NRT GPM products for time-sensitive applications. Additionally, GPM’s global-gridded IMERG product plays a significant role for applications. It is used nearly 17 times more for research and applications compared to other GPM products, with ~30% of users accessing and downloading IMERG Early and Late NRT data and applying them towards operational uses. As noted earlier, the reprocessing of all TRMM precipitation-era data using the IMERG algorithm ensured a longer, continuous precipitation data record with consistent retrievals that are available from June 2000 to the present. The longer precipitation record has enabled new science research and data applications to benefit society across a diverse range of end-users, helping them to compare and contrast past and present data to support and develop more accurate climate and weather models, understand normal and anomalous extreme precipitation events, and strengthen the baseline information and situational awareness for applications, such as disasters, agriculture and food security, water resources, and energy production. Table 2 presents several broader examples of how these GPM data products are used for societal applications. The subsections that follow demonstrate the value of GPM data to facilitate research and applications even more through case studies.

Table 2. The table includes examples of user communities, by organizational sectors, that highlight how GPM data products are being used for situational awareness and decision-making. Application description includes type of GPM level products. For more information on level product definitions, see NASA Data Product Levels and GPM Data Directory.

User Community Topic Application of GPM Data
Meteorological agencies and organizations Numerical weather prediction Assimilation of Level 1 (L1) PMW TBs for initializing numerical weather prediction model runs to improve weather forecasts
Tropical cyclones Improved characterization of tropical cyclone track and intensity using GPM L1 and L2 products to improve weather forecasts and provide more accurate hurricane warnings
Subseasonal to seasonal and climate modeling Verification and validation of seasonal and climate modeling using L2 LH products and IMERG (Final) to improve understanding and predictability of climate behavior
Data-driven agriculture organizations Agricultural forecasting and food security Integration of IMERG (Early, Late) precipitation estimates within agricultural models to estimate growing season onset and crop productivity
Disaster risk management organizations Flooding Incorporation of IMERG (Early, Late) in hydrologic routing models for flood estimation
Disaster response and recovery Situational awareness of extreme precipitation using IMERG (Early, Late) in potentially affected areas to support disaster response and recovery efforts
Disaster risk management platforms Integration of IMERG (Early, Late, Final) into models to deliver real-time weather insights to customers
Energy infrastructure and management organizations Renewable energy infrastructure and management Assessment of freshwater inputs and quantification of water fluxes using IMERG (Early, Late, Final) as a precipitation data source for hydropower development, production, and flow forecasting
Reinsurance companies Parametric insurance and reinsurance modeling Definition of extreme precipitation thresholds using IMERG (Early, Late, Final) for developing multiperil index-based insurance products and improve situational awareness of rainfall to trigger policy payouts
Water resource management organizations and companies Water resources and drought Evaluation of precipitation anomalies using IMERG (Final) leveraging the extended temporal record, and assessment of freshwater input using IMERG (Early, Late) to basins and reservoirs to better quantify water fluxes
Public health Vector- and water-borne disease monitoring Tracking of precipitation variations using IMERG (Early, Late, Final) with other environmental variables to track and predict vector or water-borne diseases and issue public health alerts

Operational Numerical Weather and Hurricane Prediction

Looking towards the application of GPM L3 products, several agencies [e.g., the U.S. Air Force’s (USAF) Weather Agency (557th Weather Wing), Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology] use IMERG to support reanalysis of NWP models to conduct data assimilation and validation activities and as inputs to numerical models. For example, the USAF ingests IMERG Early into its operational weather forecasts and advisories, supporting global land surface characterization capabilities. This information is then provided routinely to decision-makers across the military, agricultural, and research sectors.

Water Resources, Agricultural Forecasting and Food Security

GMI L1 TB products are operationally assimilated into numerical weather prediction (NWP) models across the globe to improve short- to long-term weather forecast quality (by tuning and developing microphysics and convection parameterizations) and correct the track forecasts for tropical cyclones. Agencies and organizations, such as NASA’s Global Modeling Assimilation Office (GMAO), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Hurricane Center (NHC), Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), and European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ingest GMI TB data to support their operational systems. For example, the all-sky assimilation of GMI Tb over ice-free ocean surfaces helps improve initial conditions and overall forecast quality to ECMWF’s 24-hour forecasts, increasing not only the number of satellite observations assimilated but also the types of variables analyzed, such as hydrometeors (e.g., liquid cloud, ice cloud, rain, and snow).

GPM’s L2 precipitation and L3 IMERG products are used as input into hydrological and land surface models to better understand the land–atmosphere interactions and better predict and monitor water resources and agricultural output on scales ranging from days to years. For example, IMERG serves as a key component to Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) Land Data Assimilation System hydrology products that are designed to enhance agricultural monitoring in data-sparse regions and support humanitarian response initiatives. IMERG Early products are actively used as a data source for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service operations where IMERG estimates are routinely evaluated against World Meteorological Organization station data above 50˚N latitude for consensus to produce crop assessments in those regions and support extratropical agrometeorological crop monitoring. In the private sector, companies, such as Nutrien Ag Solutions, use IMERG Early precipitation estimates to capture and evaluate extreme precipitation events. This information is part of Nutrien’s daily delivery of weather content to the company and their clients, where these efforts help the clients prepare for potential disruptions across the global supply chain.

Disaster Response and Insurance

The IMERG spatial and temporal resolution – as well as the availability of the data across more than two decades – has been invaluable for examining precipitation extremes that may result in flooding, landslides, drought, and fires. These data provide key situational awareness for disaster response and recovery. Rainfall information has been developed in Web Map Service (WMS) and ArcGIS formats with Representational State Transfer (REST) endpoints so that they can be pulled into geospatial portals at Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the U.S. Army Geospatial Intelligence Unit and data management platform companies (e.g., CyStellar), and provided to the National Geospatial Agency, the State Department, and insurers. The IMERG product has also been critical to global disaster models, such as the near-global Landslide Hazard Assessment for Situational Awareness (LHASA) system, which uses NRT IMERG rainfall in a decision tree framework that issues a moderate or high landslide nowcast based on rainfall thresholds. The model is routinely updated with a latency of four hours. The LHASA versions are running routinely and used by U.S. agencies and international agencies and organizations, including the World Food Programme.

IMERG data are also being used at multiple reinsurance companies, including the Microinsurance Catastrophe Risk Organisation (MiCRO), to develop drought and rainfall indices using climatology data from IMERG.

Looking Across and Forward for Applications

Common themes that have emerged in stakeholder feedback include the need for continuity of data products, identifying uncertainty estimates, having easily accessible case study examples, and creating public trainings for data access and use. The Applications team works closely with GPM members and leadership to ensure that there are clear and open communication pathways across the GPM mission on engagement activities and to accelerate stakeholder feedback to GPM algorithm developers to aid in the improvement of GPM data products and services for the public. In addition, these insights can be used to formulate a framework for applications related to future mission planning, e.g., NASA’s Earth System Observatory missions.

Bridging the Gap Between Precipitation Measurements and the Public: A View into Outreach Efforts

Several years before the launch of GPM, the Education and Public Outreach (EPO) team was busy in the background, working to bring Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) into the classroom and taking advantage of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) that were being implemented in curriculums across the U.S. The launch of GPM offered a perfect opportunity to showcase and amplify the incredible science and technology behind the GPM mission and the myriad of potential applications that could stem from its data.

Early in the GPM mission’s development, the GPM EPO team curated existing NASA educational resources related to the themes of Earth’s water cycle, weather and climate, technology behind Earth Observing missions, and societal applications. The EPO team created a website, entitled Precipitation Education that has been wildly successful from its launch. The team also developed a Rain EnGAUGE toolkit and engaged both formal and informal educators from around the world to host “Family Science Night” programs and implement some of the interactive activities that the team developed for these events. Thus, even before the launch of GPM, the EPO effort had momentum as team members shared the incredible ways in which NASA’s Earth observation systems were helping us to better understand and protect our home planet.

After launch, the EPO Team worked annually with international teams of “GPM Master Teachers.” This process selected teachers, who participated throughout the school year and received a small stipend for their work. They helped to align the science behind the GPM mission and other NASA Earth observation systems with the Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE) program and developed many lessons and activities that were made available to educators around the globe.

The EPO team also worked with NASA’s Earth to Sky program, training National Park Service and other interpreters to understand the science behind the GPM mission, and to find ways to share this information in meaningful and relevant ways with their audiences across the U.S.

Newer activities have been developed to enable the general public to interact with open science as they follow a very easy “data recipe” to retrieve GPM precipitation observations since 2000 for their location. They are encouraged to use the GLOBE program’s app, GLOBE Observer, and take an observation of either a tree height or clouds. Contributors input the latitude and longitude from that location and find out how much precipitation fell for that location since 2000. This gives the participants the opportunity to collect data from the ground, and then look at satellite data for that same location to better understand the impact of precipitation in their local environment. GLOBE Participants can share their Tree Stories and Water Stories and compare their data with others around the world.

In addition to providing a wide suite of online resources, the GPM Outreach team attends many public events each year, ranging from large NASA-sponsored Earth Day events to local family STEM nights – see Photos 2 and 3. The GPM Outreach team has developed many hands-on activities that help the public explore the varied amounts of precipitation falling in locations around the world. By interacting with these activities and learning how NASA is helping us better understand and protect our home planet, participants walk away with a richer understanding of how NASA’s Earth science programs are improving life around the world.

A decade after the launch of GPM, the “Precipitation Education” website continues to be incredibly popular, with an average of 90,000 visits per month. GPM education and outreach resources are considered the state of the art among practitioners, and the team updates existing and adds new resources as opportunities arise.

GPM Photo 2
Photo 2. Montgomery County’s (Maryland) Georgian Forest Family Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Night. Shown here is a triptych of parents and children using “Precipitation Towers” to explore precipitation patterns measured by GPM in different locations throughout the world.
Photo credit: Dorian Janney/GSFC/ ADNET Systems Inc. (ADNET)
GPM Photo 3
Photo 3. The GPM Outreach Team engaging the public at Maryland Day 2023, hosted by the University of Maryland (UMD), College Park on Saturday, April 29, 2023. The Team represented GPM at the NASA exhibit where they interacted with hundreds of attendees and highlighted the many benefits of using GPM data for research and societal applications.
Photo credit: Dorian Janney

Conclusion

In more than 10 years of operations, the GPM mission has made incredible contributions in our understanding of global precipitation, from scientific studies to real-world, societal impacts through applications of the data products. With a robust validation program and successive algorithm improvements, our knowledge of precipitation distribution across the globe continues to advance. This has had measurable effects on global modeling and weather forecasting, real-time severe weather monitoring, education, and many other areas. With hardware continuing to function – and a recent fuel-saving orbit boost – GPM continues to add to this valuable data record. The community’s experience with GPM helps illustrate what new observations or combinations of observations will be needed in coming decades to advance precipitation science and maintain needed global monitoring. GPM’s cohort of researchers, instrument specialists, mission operators, and other key personnel across the community are providing the backbone of future mission development efforts.

Black Separator Line

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge several contributing members of the Global Precipitation Measurement Science Team who played a part in writing this anniversary article. They include: Gerald Heymsfield, Dorian Janney, Chris KiddSteven Lang, Zhong Liu, Adrian Loftus, Erich Stocker, and Jackson Tan [all at GSFC]; David Wolff [NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility (WFF)]; Gregory Elsaesser [NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)/ Columbia University]; and Robert Adler [University of Maryland].

Black Separator Line

Andrea Portier
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center/Science Systems and Applications, Inc
andrea.m.portier@nasa.gov  

Sarah Ringerud
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
sarah.e.ringerud@nasa.gov

George J. Huffman
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
george.j.huffman@nasa.gov

Share

Details

Last Updated
Oct 03, 2024

Related Terms

View the full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By NASA
      Associate Director for Mission Planning, Earth Sciences, and environmental scientist Robert J. “Bob” Swap makes a difference by putting knowledge into action.
      Name: Robert J. “Bob” Swap
      Title: Associate Director for Mission Planning, Earth Sciences
      Organization: Earth Science Division (Code 610)
      Robert Swap (right) and Karen St. Germain, NASA Earth science director (left) joined NASA’s Student Airborne Research Program, an eight-week summer internship program for rising senior undergraduates during summer 2023. Photo courtesy of Robert Swap What do you do and what is most interesting about your role here at Goddard?
      I work with our personnel to come up with the most viable mission concepts and put together the best teams to work on these concepts. I love working across the division, and with the center and the broader community, to engage with diverse competent teams and realize their potential in address pressing challenges in the earth sciences.
      Why did you become an Earth scientist?
      In the mid to late ’70s, the environment became a growing concern. I read all the Golden Guides in the elementary school library to learn about different creatures. I grew up exploring and discovering the surrounding woods, fields, and creeks, both on my own and through scouting and became drawn to nature, its connectedness, and its complexity. The time I spent fishing with my father, a military officer who also worked with meteorology, and my brother helped cement that love. I guess you could say that I became “hooked.”
      What is your educational background?
      In 1987, I got a B.A. in environmental science from the University of Virginia. While at UVA, I was a walk-on football player, an offensive lineman on UVA’s first ever post-season bowl team. This furthered my understanding of teamwork, how to work with people who were much more skilled than I was, and how to coach. I received master’s and Ph.D. degrees in environmental science from UVA in 1990 and 1996, respectively.
      As an undergraduate in environmental sciences, I learned about global biochemical cycling — meaning how carbon and nitrogen move through the living and nonliving systems — while working on research teams in the Chesapeake Bay, the Blue Ridge Mountains and the Amazon Basin.
      Before graduating I had the good fortune to participate in the NASA Amazon Boundary Layer Experiment (ABLE-2B) in the central Amazon, which I used to kick off my graduate studies. I then focused on southern African aerosol emissions, transports and depositions for my doctoral studies that ultimately led to a university research fellow postdoc at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa.
      What are some of your career highlights?
      It has been a crazy journey!
      While helping put up meteorological towers in the Amazon deep jungle, we would encounter massive squall lines. These storms were so loud as they rained down on the deep forest that you could not hear someone 10 feet away. One of the neatest things that I observed was that after the storms passed, we would see a fine red dust settling on top of our fleet of white Volkswagen rental vehicles in the middle of the rainforest.
      That observation piqued my interest and led to a paper I wrote about Saharan dust being transported to the Amazon basin and its potential implications for the Amazon, especially regarding nutrient losses from the system. Our initial work suggested there was not enough input from Northern Africa to support the system’s nutrient losses. That caused us to start looking to Sub-Saharan Africa as a potential source of these nutritive species.
      I finished my master’s during the first Persian Gulf War, and finding a job was challenging. During that phase I diversified my income stream by delivering newspapers and pizzas and also bouncing at a local nightspot so that I could focus on writing papers and proposals related to my research. One of my successes was the winning of a joint National Science Foundation proposal that funded my doctoral research to go to Namibia and examine sources of aerosol and trace gases as part of the larger NASA TRACE-Southern African Atmosphere Fire Research Initiative – 92 (SAFARI-92). We were based at Okaukuejo Rest Camp inside of Namibia’s Etosha National Park for the better part of two months. We characterized conservative chemical tracers of aerosols, their sources and long-range transport from biomass burning regions, which proved, in part, that Central Southern Africa was providing mineral and biomass burning emissions containing biogeochemically important species to far removed, downwind ecosystems thousands of kilometers away.  
      When I returned to Africa as a postdoctoral fellow, I  was able to experience other countries and cultures including Lesotho, Mozambique, and Zambia. In 1997, NASA’s AERONET project was also expanding into Africa and I helped Brent Holben and his team deploy instruments throughout Africa in preparation for vicarious validation of instrumentation aboard NASA’s Terra satellite platform.
      I returned to UVA as a research scientist to work for Chris Justice and his EOS MODIS/Terra validation team. I used this field experience and the international networks I developed, which contributed to my assuming the role of U.S. principal investigator for NASA’s Southern African Regional Science Initiative. Known as SAFARI 2000, it was an effort that involved 250 scientists from 16 different countries and lasted more than three years. When it ended, I became a research professor and began teaching environmental science and mentoring UVA students on international engagement projects.
      Around 2000, I created a regional knowledge network called Eastern/Southern Africa Virginia Network and Association (ESAVANA) that leveraged the formal and informal structures and networks that SAFARI 2000 established. I used my team building and science diplomacy skills to pull together different regional university partners, who each had unique pieces for unlocking the larger puzzle of how southern Africa acted as a regional coupled human-natural system. Each partner had something important to contribute while the larger potential was only possible by leveraging their respective strengths together as a team.
      I traveled extensively during this time and was supported in 2001 partially by a Fulbright Senior Specialist Award which allowed me to spend time at the University of Eduardo Mondlane in Maputo Mozambique to help them with hydrology ecosystem issues in the wake of massive floods. We kept the network alive by creating summer study abroad, service learning and intersession January educational programs that drew upon colleagues and their expertise from around the world that attracted new people, energy, and resources to ESAVANA. All of these efforts contributed to a “community of practice” focused on learning about the ethics and protocols of international research. The respectful exchange of committed people and their energies and ideas was key to the effort’s success. I further amplified the impact of this work by contributing my lived and learned experiences to the development of the first ever global development studies major at UVA.
      In 2004, I had a bad car accident and as a result have battled back and hip issues ever since. After falling off the research funding treadmill, I had to reconfigure myself in the teaching and program consultant sector. I grew more into a teaching role and was recognized for it by UVA’s Z-Society 2008 Professor of the Year, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching’s Virginia’s 2012 Professor of the Year, as well as my 2014 induction into UVA’s Academy of Teaching — all while technically a research professor. I was also heavily involved for almost a decade with the American Association for the Advancement of Science and its Center for Science Diplomacy and tasks related to activities such as reviewing the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research and teaching science diplomacy in short courses for the World Academy of Sciences for the Advancement of Science in Developing Countries located in Trieste, Italy, and the Academy of Science of South Africa.
      I worked in the Earth Sciences Division at NASA Headquarters from 2014 to early 2017 as a rotating program support officer as part of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA), where I supported the atmospheric composition focus area. One of my responsibilities involved serving as a United States Embassy science fellow in the summer of 2015, where I went to Namibia to support one of our Earth Venture Suborbital field campaigns. I came to Goddard in April 2017 to help revector their nascent global network of ground-based, hyperspectral ultraviolet and visible instruments known as the Pandora.
      What is your next big project?
      I am currently working with the NASA Goddard Earth Science Division front office to craft a vision for the next 20 years, which involves the alignment of people around a process to achieve a desired product. With the field of Earth System Science changing so rapidly, we need to position ourselves within this ever evolving “new space” environment of multi-sectoral partners — governmental, commercial, not-for-profit, and academic — from the U.S. and beyond to study the Earth system. This involves working with other governmental agencies, universities and industrial partners to chart a way forward. We will have a lot of new players. We will be working with partners we never imagined.
      We need people who know how to work across these different sectors. One such attempt to “grow our own timber” involves my development of an experimental version of the first NASA Student Airborne Research Program East Coast Edition (SARP and SARP-East), where student participants from a diversity of institutions of higher learning can see the power and promise of what NASA does, how we work together on big projects, and hopefully be inspired to take on the challenges of the future. In other words, I am pushing an exposure to field-based, Earth system science down earlier into their careers to expose them to what NASA does in an integrated fashion.
      What assets do you bring to the Earth Science Division front office?
      In 2020, I came to the Earth science front office to help lead the division. I make myself available across the division to help inspire, collect, suggest, and coach our rank and file into producing really cool mission concept ideas.
      Part of why the front office wanted me is because I use the skills of relationship building, community building, and science diplomacy to make things happen, to create joint ventures.  Having had to support myself for over 20 years on soft money, I learned to become an entrepreneur of sorts — to be scientifically and socially creative — and I was forced to look inward and take an asset-based approach. I look at all the forms of capital I have at hand and use those to make the best of what I have got. In Appalachia, there is an expression: use everything but the squeal from the pig.
      Lastly, I bring a quick wit with a good dose of self-deprecating humor that helps me connect with people.
      How do you use science diplomacy to make things happen?
      Two of the things that bind people together about science are the process of inquiry and utilizing the scientific method, both of which are universally accepted. As such, they allow us to transcend national and cultural divides.
      Science diplomacy works best when you start with this common foundation. Starting with this premise in collaborative science allows for conversations to take place focusing on what everyone has in common. You can have difficult conversations and respectful confrontations about larger issues.
      Scientists can then talk and build bridges in unique ways. We did this with SAFARI 2000 while working in a region that had seen two major wars and the system of Apartheid within the previous decade. We worked across borders of people who were previously at odds. We did that by looking at something apart from national identity, which was Southern Africa. We focused on how a large-scale system functions and how to make something that incorporates 10 different countries operate as a unit. We wanted to conduct studies showing how the region operated as a functional unit while dealing with transboundary issues. It took a lot of community and trust, and we began with the science community.
      What drives you?
      I want to put knowledge into action to make a difference. I realize it is not about me, it is about “we.” That is why I came to NASA, to make a difference. There is no other agency in the world where we can harness such a unique and capable group of people.
      What do you do for fun?
      I enjoy watching sports. I still enjoy hiking, fishing, and tubing down the river. My wife and I like long walks through natural settings with our rescues, Lady, our black-and-tan coonhound, and Duchess, our long-haired German Shepherd Dog. They are our living hot water bottles in the winter.
      My wife and I also like to cook together.
      Who would you like to thank?
      Without a doubt, it starts with my wife, family, and children whom without none of what I have accomplished would have been possible. I have had the good fortune to be able to bring them along on some of my international work, including to Africa.
      I am also very grateful to all those people during my school years who stepped in and who did not judge me initially by my less than stellar grades. They gave me the chance to become who I am today.
      Who inspires you?
      There is an old television show that I really liked called “Connections,” by James Burke. He would start with a topic, go through the history, and show how one action led to another action with unforeseen consequences. He would take something modern like plastics and link it back to Viking times. Extending that affinity for connections, the Resilience Alliance out of Sweden also influences me with their commitment to showing connections and cycles.
      My mentors at UVA were always open to serving as a sounding board. They treated me as a colleague, not a student, as a member of the guild even though I was still an apprentice. That left an indelible impression upon me and I always try to do the same. My doctoral mentor Mike Garstang said that he already had a job and that this job was to let me stand on his shoulders to allow me to get to the next level, which is my model.
      Another person who was very formative during my early professional career was Jerry Melillo who showed me what it was like to be an effective programmatic mentor. I worked with him as his chief staffer of an external review of the IAI and learned a lot by watching how he ran that activity program.
      With respect to NASA, a number of people come to mind: Michael King, Chris Justice, and Tim Suttles, as well as my South African Co-PI, Harold Annegarn, all of whom, at one time or another, took me under their respective wings and mentored me through the whole SAFARI 2000 process. From each of their different perspectives, they taught me how NASA works, how to engage, how to implement a program, and how to navigate office politics. And my sister and our conversations about leadership and what it means to be a servant leader. To be honest, there are scores more individuals who have contributed to my development that I don’t have the space to mention here.
      What are some of your guiding principles?
      Never lose the wonder — stay curious. “We” not “me.” Seeking to understand before being understood. We all stand on somebody’s shoulders. Humility rather than hubris. Respect. Be the change you wish to see.
      By Elizabeth M. Jarrell
      NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
      Conversations With Goddard is a collection of Q&A profiles highlighting the breadth and depth of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center’s talented and diverse workforce. The Conversations have been published twice a month on average since May 2011. Read past editions on Goddard’s “Our People” webpage.
      Share
      Details
      Last Updated Nov 19, 2024 EditorMadison OlsonContactRob Garnerrob.garner@nasa.govLocationGoddard Space Flight Center Related Terms
      People of Goddard Goddard Space Flight Center People of NASA Explore More
      6 min read Matthew Kowalewski: Aerospace Engineer and Curious About Everything
      Matthew Kowalewski describes himself as “curious about too many things,” but that curiosity comes in…
      Article 7 days ago 6 min read Inia Soto Ramos, From the Mountains of Puerto Rico to Mountains of NASA Earth Data
      Dr. Inia Soto Ramos became fascinated by the mysteries of the ocean while growing up…
      Article 7 days ago 5 min read Carissa Arillo: Testing Spacecraft, Penning the Owner’s Manuals
      Article 3 weeks ago View the full article
    • By NASA
      Anthocyanins protect seeds in space

      After exposure to space outside the International Space Station, purple-pigmented rice seeds rich in anthocyanin had higher germination rates than non-pigmented white rice seeds. This result suggests that anthocyanin, a flavonoid known to protect plants from UV irradiation, could help preserve seed viability on future space missions.

      Plants are key components for systems being designed to produce nutrients and recycle carbon for future sustained space habitation, but space has been shown to reduce seed viability. Tanpopo-3, part of a series of investigations from JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency), examined the role of anthocyanins in maintaining seed viability. Results of this and previous experiments suggest that solar light in space is more detrimental to seeds than radiation.
      Preflight image of the Tanpopo panel used to expose seeds and other samples to space. Tanpopo-3 team Low-cost, autonomous technology validated for space research

      Researchers verified a pair of devices for conducting experiments in space that have multi-step reactions and require automatic mixing of solutions. This type of low-cost, autonomous technology expands the possibilities for space-based research, including work by commercial entities.

      Ice Cubes #6- Kirara, an investigation from ESA (European Space Agency) developed by the Japan Manned Space Systems Corporation, used a temperature-controlled incubator to crystallize proteins in microgravity. The Kirara facility also enables production of polymers, including cellulose, which have different uses than protein crystals. This experiment synthesized and decomposed cellulose.
      The Kirara incubator used for experiments in microgravity. United Arab Emirates/Sultan Alneyadi Insights from observations of an X-ray binary star

      Researchers used Neutron star Interior Composition Explorer (NICER) to observe the timing of 15 X-ray bursts from 4U 1820–30, an ultracompact X-ray binary (UCXB) star. An X-ray binary is a neutron star orbiting a companion from which it takes matter. If confirmed with future observations, this result makes 4U 1820–30 the fastest-spinning neutron star known in an X-ray binary system and provides insights into the physics of neutron stars.

      NICER makes high-precision measurements of neutron stars (the ultra-dense matter created when massive stars explode as supernovas) and other phenomena to increase our understanding of the universe. NICER has monitored 4U 1820–30 since its launch in June 2017. A short orbital period indicates a relatively small binary system, and 4U 1820–30 has the shortest known orbital period among low-mass X-ray binaries.

      Animated image of a binary star system,NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center/Chris SmithView the full article
    • By NASA
      On Nov. 16, 2009, space shuttle Atlantis began its 31st trip into space, on the third Utilization and Logistics Flight (ULF3) mission to the International Space Station, the 31st shuttle flight to the orbiting lab. During the 11-day mission, the six-member STS-129 crew worked with the six-person Expedition 21 crew during seven days of docked operations. The mission’s primary objectives included delivering two external logistics carriers and their spare parts, adding nearly 15 tons of hardware to the station, and returning a long-duration crew member, the last to return on a shuttle. Three of the STS-129 astronauts conducted three spacewalks to transfer spare parts and continue assembly and maintenance of the station. As a group of 12, the joint crews celebrated the largest and most diverse Thanksgiving gathering in space.

      Left: Official photograph of the STS-129 crew of Leland D. Melvin, left, Charles O. Hobaugh, Michael J. Foreman, Robert “Bobby” L. Satcher, Barry “Butch” E. Wilmore, and Randolph “Randy” J. Bresnik. Middle: The STS-129 crew patch. Right: The ULF3 payload patch.
      The six-person STS-129 crew consisted of Commander Charles O. Hobaugh, Pilot Barry “Butch” E. Wilmore, and Mission Specialists Randolph “Randy” J. Bresnik, Michael J. Foreman, Leland D. Melvin, and Robert “Bobby” L. Satcher. Primary objectives of the mission included launch and transfer to the station of the first two EXPRESS Logistics Carriers (ELC-1 and ELC-2) and their multiple spare parts, and the return of NASA astronaut and Expedition 20 and 21 Flight Engineer Nicole P. Stott, the last astronaut to rotate on the shuttle.

      Left: In the Orbiter Processing Facility (OPF) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, workers finish processing Atlantis for STS-129. Right: Space shuttle Atlantis rolls over from the OPF to the Vehicle Assembly Building.

      Left: Atlantis rolls out to Launch Pad 39A. Right: The STS-129 crew during the Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test.
      Atlantis returned to NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) from its previous mission, STS-125, on June 2, 2009, and workers towed it to the Orbiter Processing Facility (OPF) to prepare it for STS-129. The orbiter rolled over to the Vehicle Assembly Building on Oct. 6, and after mating with its external tank and twin solid rocket boosters, rolled out to Launch Pad 39A on Oct. 14, targeting a Nov. 16 launch. Six days later, the six-member crew participated in the Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test, essentially a dress rehearsal of the actual countdown for launch, returning to Houston for final training. They returned to KSC on Nov. 13 to prepare for launch.

      Left: With Atlantis sitting on Launch Pad 39A, the Ares 1-X rocket lifts off from Launch Pad 39B. Right: The payload canister arrives at Launch Pad 39A.

      Left: The STS-129 astronauts leave crew quarters for the ride to Launch Pad 39A. Right: Liftoff of space shuttle Atlantis on STS-129.
      On Nov. 16, at 2:28 p.m. EST, space shuttle Atlantis lifted off from Launch Pad 39A to begin its 31st trip into space, carrying its six-member crew on the ULF3 space station outfitting and resupply mission. Eight and a half minutes later, Atlantis and its crew had reached orbit. The flight marked Hobaugh’s third time in space, having flown on STS-104 and STS-118, Foreman’s and Melvin’s second, having flown on STS-123 and STS-122, respectively, while Wilmore, Bresnik, and Satcher enjoyed their first taste of weightlessness.

      Left: The two EXPRESS Logistics Carriers in Atlantis’ payload bay. Middle: Leland D. Melvin participates in the inspection of Atlantis’ thermal protection system. Right: The Shuttle Remote Manipulator System grasps the Orbiter Boom Sensor System for the inspection.
      After reaching orbit, the crew opened the payload bay doors, deployed the shuttle’s radiators, and removed their bulky launch and entry suits, stowing them for the remainder of the flight. The astronauts spent six hours on their second day in space conducting a detailed inspection of Atlantis’ nose cap and wing leading edges, with Hobaugh, Wilmore, Melvin, and Bresnik taking turns operating the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS), or robotic arm, and the Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS).

      Left: The International Space Station as seen from Atlantis during the rendezvous and docking maneuver. Middle: Atlantis as seen from the space station, showing the two EXPRESS Logistics Carriers (ELC) in the payload bay. Right: View of the space station from Atlantis during the rendezvous pitch maneuver, with the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System grasping ELC-1 in preparation for transfer shortly after docking.
      On the mission’s third day, Hobaugh assisted by his crewmates brought Atlantis in for a docking with the space station. During the rendezvous, Hobaugh stopped the approach at 600 feet and completed the Rendezvous Pitch Maneuver so astronauts aboard the station could photograph Atlantis’ underside to look for any damage to the tiles. Shortly after docking, the crews opened the hatches between the two spacecraft and the six-person station crew welcomed the six-member shuttle crew. After the welcoming ceremony, Stott joined the STS-129 crew, leaving a crew of five aboard the station. Melvin and Bresnik used the SRMS to pick up ELC-1 from the payload bay and hand it off to Wilmore and Expedition 21 NASA astronaut Jeffrey N. Williams operating the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS), who then installed it on the P3 truss segment.

      Images from the first spacewalk. Left: Michael J. Foreman unstows the S-band Antenna Support Assembly prior to transferring it to the station. Middle: Robert “Bobby” L. Satcher lubricates the robotic arm’s Latching End Effector. Right: Satcher’s image reflected in a Z1 radiator panel.
      During the mission’s first of three spacewalks on flight day four, Foreman and Satcher ventured outside for six hours and 37 minutes. During the excursion, with robotic help from their fellow crew members, they transferred a spare S-band Antenna Support Assembly from the shuttle’s payload bay to the station’s Z1 truss. Satcher, an orthopedic surgeon by training, performed “surgery” on the station’s main robotic arm as well as the robotic arm on the Kibo Japanese module, by lubricating their latching end effectors. One day after joining Atlantis’ crew, Stott celebrated her 47th birthday.

      Left: Space station crew member Jeffery N. Williams assists STS-129 astronaut Leland D. Melvin in operating the space station’s robotic arm to transfer and install the second EXPRESS Logistics Carrier (ELC2) on the S3 truss. Middle: The station robotic arm installs ELC2 on the S3 truss. Right: Michael J. Foreman, left, and Randolph J. Bresnik during the mission’s second spacewalk.
      On the mission’s fifth day, the astronauts performed another focused inspection of the shuttle’s thermal protection system. The next day, through another coordinated robotic activity involving the shuttle and station arms, the astronauts transferred ELC-2 and its complement of spares from the payload bay to the station’s S3 truss. Foreman and Bresnik completed the mission’s second spacewalk. Working on the Columbus module, they installed the Grappling Adaptor to On-Orbit Railing (GATOR) fixture that includes a system used for ship identification and an antenna for Ham radio operators. They next installed a wireless video transmission system on the station’s truss. This spacewalk lasted six hours and eight minutes.

      Left: Randolph J. Bresnik during the third STS-129 spacewalk. Middle: Robert “Bobby” L. Satcher during the third spacewalk. Right: The MISSE 7 exposure experiment suitcases installed on ELC2.
      Following a crew off duty day, on flight day eight Satcher and Bresnik exited the airlock for the mission’s third and final spacewalk. Their first task involved moving an oxygen tank from the newly installed ELC-2 to the Quest airlock. They accomplished this task with robotic assistance from their fellow crew members. Bresnik retrieved the two-suitcase sized MISSE-7 experiment containers from the shuttle cargo bay and installed them on the MISSE-7 platform on ELC-2, opening them to begin their exposure time. This third spacewalk lasted five hours 42 minutes.

      Left: An early Thanksgiving meal for 12 aboard the space station. Right: After the meal, who has the dishes?
      Thanksgiving Day fell on the day after undocking, so the joint crews celebrated with a meal a few days early. The meal represented not only the largest Thanksgiving celebration in space with 12 participants, but also the most international, with four nations represented – the United States, Russia, Canada, and Belgium (representing the European Space Agency).

      Left: The 12 members of Expedition 21 and STS-129 pose for a final photograph before saying their farewells. Right: The STS-129 crew, now comprising seven members.

      A selection of STS-129 Earth observation images. Left: Maui. Middle: Los Angeles. Right: Houston.
      Despite their busy workload, as with all space crews, the STS-129 astronauts made time to look out the windows and took hundreds of photographs of their home planet.

      Left: The space station seen from Atlantis during the flyaround. Middle: Atlantis as seen from the space station during the flyaround, with a now empty payload bay. Right: Astronaut Nicole P. Stott looks back at the station, her home for three months, from the departing Atlantis.
      On flight day nine, the joint crews held a brief farewell ceremony. European Space Agency astronaut Frank De Winne, the first European to command the space station, handed over command to NASA astronaut Williams. The two crews parted company and closed the hatches between the two spacecraft. The next day, with Wilmore at the controls, Atlantis undocked from the space station, having spent seven days as a single spacecraft. Wilmore completed a flyaround of the station, with the astronauts photographing it to document its condition. A final separation burn sent Atlantis on its way.
      The astronauts used the shuttle’s arm to pick up the OBSS and perform a late inspection of Atlantis’ thermal protection system. On flight day 11, Hobaugh and Wilmore tested the orbiter’s reaction control system thrusters and flight control surfaces in preparation for the next day’s entry and landing. The entire crew busied themselves with stowing all unneeded equipment.

      Left: Atlantis about to touch down at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Middle: Atlantis touches down. Right: Atlantis deploys its drag chute as it continues down the runway.

      Left: Six of the STS-129 astronauts pose with Atlantis on the runway at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Right: The welcome home ceremony for the STS-129 crew at Ellington Field in Houston.
      On Nov. 27, the astronauts closed Atlantis’ payload bay doors, donned their launch and entry suits, and strapped themselves into their seats, a special recumbent one for Stott who had spent the last three months in weightlessness. Hobaugh fired Atlantis’ two Orbital Maneuvering System engines to bring them out of orbit and head for a landing half an orbit later. He guided Atlantis to a smooth touchdown at KSC’s Shuttle Landing Facility.
      The landing capped off a very successful STS-129 mission of 10 days, 19 hours, 16 minutes. The six astronauts orbited the planet 171 times. Stott spent 90 days, 10 hours, 45 minutes in space, completing 1,423 orbits of the Earth. After towing Atlantis to the OPF, engineers began preparing it for its next flight, STS-132 in May 2010. The astronauts returned to Houston for a welcoming ceremony at Ellington Field.
      Enjoy the crew narrate a video about the STS-129 mission.
      Explore More
      23 min read 55 Years Ago: Apollo 12 Makes a Pinpoint Landing on the Moon
      Article 4 days ago 12 min read 40 Years Ago: STS-51A – “The Ace Repo Company”
      Article 1 week ago 1 min read Oral History with Jon A. McBride, 1943 – 2024
      Article 2 weeks ago View the full article
    • By NASA
      NASA/Joel Kowsky In this photo, NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket, carrying the Orion spacecraft, lifts off the pad at Launch Complex 39B at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida at 1:47 a.m. EST on Nov. 16, 2022. Set on a path to the Moon, this officially began the Artemis I mission.
      Since the completion of Orion’s 25.5-day mission around the Moon and back, teams across NASA have been hard at work preparing for the upcoming Artemis II test flight, which will send four astronauts on a 10-day mission around the Moon, paving the way for humans to land on the Moon as part of the Artemis III mission.
      Under NASA’s Artemis campaign, the agency will establish the foundation for long-term scientific exploration at the Moon, land the first woman, first person of color, and its first international partner astronaut on the lunar surface, and prepare for human expeditions to Mars for the benefit of all.
      Image Credit: NASA/Joel Kowsky
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      NASA The Apollo 12 spacecraft launches from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida in this image from Nov. 14, 1969, with astronauts Charles Conrad Jr., Richard F. Gordon Jr., and Alan L. Bean aboard. During liftoff, the Saturn V rocket which carried the Apollo capsule was struck twice by lightning.
      On Nov. 19, 1969, the lunar module landed on the Moon. About three hours after landing, Conrad emerged from the lunar module, becoming the third person to step on the Moon. He was followed by Bean.
      Image credit: NASA
      View the full article
  • Check out these Videos

×
×
  • Create New...