Members of the WOCE Hydrographic Project Office (WHPO) and WOCEMET met at the 13th Data Products Committee (DPC) meeting in College Station, TX to discuss reconciliation of the WOCE cruise line designators. This was done in anticipation of the future release of version 3 of the WOCE global data set, and resulted in changes to several WOCE cruise line designators.

On May 11, 2001 WOCEMET updated the data provider from S. Rintoul to N. Bindoff for the cruises SR_03_/03 and SR_03_/05.

During the DPC meeting, WOCEMET determined that the cruise lin previously desginated as PR_12_/01 will be referenced as SR_03_/02. The cruise previously designated as PR_12_/05 will be referenced as SR_03_/05. Also, the cruises previously designated as PR_12_/02 and I_08A/01 will be referenced as SR_03_/03.

WOCEMET removed the WOCE designation for the cruises S__04_/04 and SR_03_/04. The quality control information for this data has been left in this report for the user, but please note that the lines previously known as S__04_/04 and SR_03_/04 are NOT WOCE cruise lines.

The data referenced in this report were collected from the research vessel Aurora Australis (call sign: UNAA; contact: S. Rintoul) Data Logging System from each of 4 different cruises for WOCE. The original data were converted to a standard format and then preprocessed using an automated data checking program. A visual inspection was then completed by a data quality evaluator (DQE) who reviewed, modified, and added appropriate quality control flags to the data. Details of the WOCE QC can be found in Smith et al. (1996). This report summarizes flags for the Aurora Australis data including flags added by both the preprocessor and the DQE.

The data from the Aurora Australis were expected to in include observations every 15 minutes from 4 covering 11 hydrographic sections. The Cruise Track Code (CTC), the begin and end dates, the number of records, values, and flags, and the percentage of non-Z flags for each cruise are given in table 1.

Time (TIME), latitude (LAT), longitude (LON), platform heading (PL_HD), platform speed (PL_SPD), earth relative wind direction (DIR), earth relative wind speed (SPD), sea temperature (TS), atmospheric pressure (P), port dry-air temperature (T), starboard dry-air temperature (T2), port relative humidity (RH), and starboard relative humidity (RH2) were quality controlled. A total of 265265 values were checked, and 4415 flags were added resulting in 1.66 percent of the data being flagged. Table 2 summarizes the flag distribution including percentages flagged for each variable sorted by type.

Due to the high southern latitude of the vessel, interesting features occurred throughout this data set. Compared with their relative climatological mean, atmospheric pressure and air temperature were exceptionally low, and wind speed was extremely high for all the cruises. This was signified by the numerous "G", data >4 s.d. from climatological mean, and "B", data out of bounds, flags for those variables. These extreme conditions are not unexpected, however, as most of the observations were taken between Tasmania and the Antarctic coastline. This region, often called the roaring forties, is well known for strong cyclones, high winds, and hazardous navigation.

For the entire data set, the lowest atmospheric pressure was 932.5 mb at 15:07on 8/25/95 during cruise SR_03_/05. The highest wind speed was 31 m/s at 20:07 on 2/22/94 during cruise SR_03_/03. These, plus any other significantly low pressures or high wind speeds were flagged with an "I".

The only problem with the data set is that a significant portion of the data are missing. This is probably due to instrument failure after the system had been exposed to the extreme conditions detailed above for extended periods of time. Under the DAC QC system, missing data values are valid and are flagged with a "Z", good data. This may bias statistics for these files. Table 3 summarizes missing data information for each file.

These data were in excellent condition. The user should be wary of using UNAA.940226004v100.nc as over 60% of the data is missing. It is the analysts opinion that even with the missing data, no problems should occur with its use.

Smith, S.R., C. Harvey, and D.M. Legler, 1996: Handbook of Quality Control Procedures and Methods for Surface Meteorology Data. WOCE Report
No. 141/96, Report WOCEMET 96-1, Center for Ocean Atmospheric Prediction Studies, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32310.