ICON in Climate Limited-area Mode (ICON release version 2.6.1): a new regional climate model

Pham, Trang Van; Steger, Christian; Rockel, Burkhardt; Keuler, Klaus; Kirchner, Ingo; Mertens, Mariano; Rieger, Daniel; Zängl, Günther; Früh, Barbara

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-985-2021

Articles | Volume 14, issue 2

https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-985-2021

© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-985-2021

© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 14, issue 2

Model evaluation paper

|

18 Feb 2021

Model evaluation paper |

| 18 Feb 2021

ICON in Climate Limited-area Mode (ICON release version 2.6.1): a new regional climate model

Trang Van Pham, Christian Steger, Burkhardt Rockel, Klaus Keuler, Ingo Kirchner, Mariano Mertens, Daniel Rieger, Günther Zängl, and Barbara Früh

Download

Final revised paper (published on 18 Feb 2021)
Preprint (discussion started on 07 Jul 2020)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'A descriptive but important and well designed model evaluation paper', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Aug 2020
- AC1: 'Response to reviewer comments', Trang v. Pham, 27 Nov 2020
RC2: 'First Review for the manuscript entitled « ICON in Climate Limited-area Mode (ICON Release Version 2.6.1) : a new regional climate model » by Van Pham et al.', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Sep 2020
- AC2: 'Response to reviewer comments', Trang v. Pham, 27 Nov 2020

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Trang v. Pham on behalf of the Authors (27 Nov 2020) Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (08 Dec 2020) by Paul Ullrich

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (25 Dec 2020)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

The revised version of the manuscript clearly improved on the original one, also thanks to a number of further very useful comments from the second reviewer. The new section on technical tests is indeed very helpful. Also the revised MSLP evaluation is very appropriate. My remaining comments on the original version were satisfactorily accounted for in most cases. Issues that were not worked on by the authors are to some extent a question of taste (for instance, I still believe that a table with the most important characteristics of the individual setups and simulations would be helpful) and it is acceptable to not integrate these suggestions. I agree that a final professional language editing would be helpful.

Please find below a list of minor issues with the revised version that should still be accounted for. Apart from those, I could recommend a publication of the manuscript. I'd like to congratulate the authors for their nice piece of work.
With kind regards.

REMAINING ISSUES

Page 3, line 17: "The resulting grid"

Page 3, Eq. 2: Where does this definition originate from and how does the effective grid size relate to the side lengths of the final triangles? Is it much larger? This information would be helpful.

Page 3, line 22: I guess it is Figure 2b (not 2c).

Page 11, line 22: "is especially large when"

Page 12, line 27: "can be on average in the order". Also, it might be good not cite Kotlarski et al. in this place but the original works that Kotlarski et al. refer to.

Page 14, line 1: "a fair comparison"

Page 14, line 6: "was out of the CCM-REF domain"

Page 22, Figure 2b: In the pdf version but especially in any printout the bright lines are very hard to see against the blue background. I suggest to just use a black-and-white version (black lines against white background)

Page 32, figure legend: "Data were averaged over the"

Hide

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (05 Jan 2021) by Paul Ullrich

AR by Trang v. Pham on behalf of the Authors (12 Jan 2021) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

A new regional climate model was prepared based on a weather forecast model. Slow processes of the climate system such as ocean state development and greenhouse gas emissions were implemented. A model infrastructure and evaluation tools were also prepared to facilitate long-term simulations and model evalution. The first ICON-CLM results were close to observations and comparable to those from COSMO-CLM, the recommended model being used at the Deutscher Wetterdienst and CLM Community.