HR: 0800h
AN: C11B-0419    [Abstracts]
TI: Validating ICESat Freeboard Estimates of Arctic Sea Ice With Airborne Topographic Mapper (ATM) Observations
AU: * Connor, L N
EM: laurence.connor@noaa.gov
AF: NOAA Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry, SSMC1, E/RA31 Room 5340 1335 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226, United States
AU: Farrell, S L
EM: sinead.farrell@noaa.gov
AF: NOAA Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry, SSMC1, E/RA31 Room 5340 1335 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226, United States
AU: Krabill, W B
EM: william.b.krabill@nasa.gov
AF: Cryospheric Sciences Branch, NASA GSFC Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops Island, VA 23337, United States
AU: McAdoo, D C
EM: dave.mcadoo@noaa.gov
AF: NOAA Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry, SSMC1, E/RA31 Room 5340 1335 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226, United States
AU: Martin, C
EM: chreston_2@verizon.net
AF: EG&G Technical Services, NASA GSFC Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops Island, VA 23337, United States
AB: The Arctic Aircraft Altimeter (AAA) 2006 Campaign was carried out in Spring, 2006 as part of the effort to validate sea ice freeboard estimates derived from Envisat and ICESat altimeter data. During the AAA campaign, a NASA P- 3 aircraft underflew an ICESat track north of the Canadian Archipelago while collecting surface elevation measurements using the ATM. Here we employ airborne laser altimetry data from the AAA campaign, as well as visible imagery collected by both airplane and satellite, to validate ICESat freeboard estimates. We present a comparison of sea ice freeboard measurements gathered by the Geoscience Laser Altimeter System (GLAS) on ICESat with airborne observations from the ATM. Analysis of spatially and temporally coincident elevation profiles shows good agreement between these two independent estimates of sea ice freeboard. Comparisons with the finely detailed ATM surface mapping demonstrates the capability of ICESat to resolve small-scale sea ice features such as ridges, rubble fields, and leads. Also, a technique was developed to account for sea ice drift, enabling precise comparisons between individual ICESat echoes and topographic features captured by the airborne survey. Our analysis reveals that temporal and spatial coincidence between airborne and satellite measurements is critical for validation over sea ice. We suggest several strategies for future validation campaigns for current and planned satellite missions such as ICESat and Cryosat-II.
DE: 0700 CRYOSPHERE (4540)
DE: 0750 Sea ice (4540)
DE: 0758 Remote sensing
SC: Cryosphere [C]
MN: 2007 Fall Meeting