Sub‐Mesoscale Wind‐Front Interactions: The Combined Impact of Thermal and Current Feedback.

Surface ocean temperature and velocity anomalies at meso‐ and sub‐meso‐scales induce wind stress anomalies. These wind‐front interactions, referred to as thermal (TFB) and current (CFB) feedbacks, respectively, have been studied in isolation at mesoscale, yet they have rarely been considered in tandem. Here, we assess the combined influence of TFB and CFB and their relative impact on surface wind stress derivatives. Analyses are based on output from two regions of the Southern Ocean in a coupled simulation with local ocean resolution of 2 km. Considering both TFB and CFB shows regimes of interference, which remain mostly linear down to the simulation resolution. The jointly‐generated wind stress curl anomalies approach 10−5 N m−3, ∼20 times stronger than at mesoscale. The synergy of both feedbacks improves the ability to reconstruct wind stress curl magnitude and structure from both surface vorticity and SST gradients by 12%–37% on average, compared with using either feedback alone. Plain Language Summary: Surface ocean temperature and velocity anomalies at 0.1–100 km scales imprint their signatures on the surface wind stress, which in turn supplies the ocean with momentum. This process is called wind‐front interaction and typically referred to as thermal and current feedbacks when generated by temperature gradients and velocity gradients, respectively. Previously, studies using satellite observations and regional numerical models have studied either feedback in isolation; consideration of both feedbacks in tandem remains immature. Here, we present an approach that assesses both feedbacks' combined and relative impact on the surface wind stress, using output from an air‐sea coupled simulation. This approach allows us to identify constructive and destructive patterns of how the two feedbacks interact, which remain mostly linear down to the simulation resolution. The jointly‐generated wind stress derivative anomalies are 20 times stronger than observed previously at larger scales. Considering both feedbacks, reconstructions of wind stress derivatives are viable and have 10%–40% less error on average compared with using either feedback by itself. Contributions from either feedback in modifying wind stress fields vary temporally and can be related to physical properties such as surface wind speed and air‐sea temperature difference across the studied area. Key Points: Surface temperature gradients and vorticity anomalies at scales down to O(10) km impact wind stress curl and divergence jointlyWind‐front interactions at sub‐mesoscales are at least an order of magnitude stronger than at mesoscalesReconstruction of the wind stress curl using both thermal and current feedback is 10%–40% more accurate than relying on a single feedback [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]