Evaluation of Arctic Sea Ice Thickness Simulated by AOMIP Models

We compare results from six AOMIP model simulations with estimates of sea ice thickness obtained from ICESat, moored and submarine-based upward looking sensors, airborne electromagnetic measurements and drill holes. Our goal is to find patterns of model performance to guide model improvement. The sa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Johnson, Mark, Proshutinsky, Andrey, Aksenov, Yevgeny, Nguyen, An T., Lindsay, Ron, Haas, Christian, Zhang, Jinlun, Diansky, Nimolay, Kwok, Ron, Maslowski, Wieslaw, Hakkinen, Sirpa, Ashik, Igor, de Cuevas, Beverly
Other Authors: Goddard Space Flight Center; Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Format: Report
Language:unknown
Published: 2011
Subjects:
SEA ICE
THICKNESS
ICE
CLOUD AND LAND ELEVATION SATELLITE
ARCTIC OCEAN
ELECTROMAGNETIC MEASUREMENT
ARCTIC REGIONS
SIMULATION
STRAITS
PERFORMANCE PREDICTION
GREENLAND
Arctic
Arctic Ocean
Greenland
Beaufort Sea
Fram Strait
Greenland Sea
laptev
Sea ice
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10945/60084
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20110012877
Description
Summary:We compare results from six AOMIP model simulations with estimates of sea ice thickness obtained from ICESat, moored and submarine-based upward looking sensors, airborne electromagnetic measurements and drill holes. Our goal is to find patterns of model performance to guide model improvement. The satellite data is pan-arctic from 2004-2008, ice-draft data is from moored instruments in Fram Strait, the Greenland Sea and the Beaufort Sea from 1992-2008 and from submarines from 1975-2000. The drill hole data are from the Laptev and East Siberian marginal seas from 1982-1986 and from coastal stations from 1998-2009. While there are important caveats when comparing modeled results with measurements from different platforms and time periods such as these, the models agree well with moored ULS data. In general, the AOMIP models underestimate the thickness of measured ice thicker than about 2 m and overestimate thickness of ice thinner than 2 m. The simulated results are poor over the fast ice and marginal seas of the Siberian shelves. Averaging over all observational data sets, the better correlations and smaller differences from observed thickness are from the ECCO2 and UW models. NSF ARC-0804180; NSF ARC-0804010; NSF ARC-0805141; NSF ARC080789; NSF ARC0908769; NSF ARC-0804010 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Similar Items