Abstract/Summary

The sensitivity of the UK Universities Global Atmospheric Modelling Programme (UGAMP) General Circulation Model (UGCM) to two very different approaches to convective parametrization is described. Comparison is made between a Kuo scheme, which is constrained by large-scale moisture convergence, and a convective-adjustment scheme, which relaxes to observed thermodynamic states. Results from 360-day integrations with perpetual January conditions are used to describe the model's tropical time-mean climate and its variability. Both convection schemes give reasonable simulations of the time-mean climate, but the representation of the main modes of tropical variability is markedly different. The Kuo scheme has much weaker variance, confined to synoptic frequencies near 4 days, and a poor simulation of intraseasonal variability. In contrast, the convective-adjustment scheme has much more transient activity at all time-scales. The various aspects of the two schemes which might explain this difference are discussed. The particular closure on moisture convergence used in this version of the Kuo scheme is identified as being inappropriate.