Articles | Volume 9, issue 1
The Cryosphere, 9, 269–283, 2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-269-2015
The Cryosphere, 9, 269–283, 2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-269-2015

Research article 10 Feb 2015

Research article | 10 Feb 2015

Arctic sea ice thickness loss determined using subsurface, aircraft, and satellite observations

R. Lindsay and A. Schweiger

Related subject area

Sea Ice
Surface-based Ku- and Ka-band polarimetric radar for sea ice studies
Julienne Stroeve, Vishnu Nandan, Rosemary Willatt, Rasmus Tonboe, Stefan Hendricks, Robert Ricker, James Mead, Robbie Mallett, Marcus Huntemann, Polona Itkin, Martin Schneebeli, Daniela Krampe, Gunnar Spreen, Jeremy Wilkinson, Ilkka Matero, Mario Hoppmann, and Michel Tsamados
The Cryosphere, 14, 4405–4426, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-4405-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-4405-2020, 2020
Short summary
Statistical predictability of the Arctic sea ice volume anomaly: identifying predictors and optimal sampling locations
Leandro Ponsoni, François Massonnet, David Docquier, Guillian Van Achter, and Thierry Fichefet
The Cryosphere, 14, 2409–2428, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2409-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2409-2020, 2020
Short summary
Refining the sea surface identification approach for determining freeboards in the ICESat-2 sea ice products
Ron Kwok, Alek A. Petty, Marco Bagnardi, Nathan T. Kurtz, Glenn F. Cunningham, and Alvaro Ivanoff
The Cryosphere Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2020-174,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2020-174, 2020
Revised manuscript accepted for TC
Satellite-based sea ice thickness changes in the Laptev Sea from 2002 to 2017: comparison to mooring observations
H. Jakob Belter, Thomas Krumpen, Stefan Hendricks, Jens Hoelemann, Markus A. Janout, Robert Ricker, and Christian Haas
The Cryosphere, 14, 2189–2203, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2189-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2189-2020, 2020
Short summary
Modeling the annual cycle of daily Antarctic sea ice extent
Mark S. Handcock and Marilyn N. Raphael
The Cryosphere, 14, 2159–2172, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2159-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2159-2020, 2020
Short summary

Cited articles

Haas, C. and Jochmann, P.: Continuous EM and ULS thickness profiling in support of ice force measurements, in: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering under Arctic conditions (POAC'03), 16–19 June 2003, Trondheim, Norway, edited by: Loeset, S., Bonnemaire, B., and Bjerkas, M., Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, 849–856, 2003.
Haas, C., Lobach, J., Hendricks, S., Rabenstein, L., and Pfaffling, A.: Helicopter-borne measurements of sea ice thickness, using a small and lightweight, digital EM system, J. Appl. Geophys., 67, 234–241, 2009.
Haas, C., Hendricks, S., Eicken, H., and Herber, A.: Synoptic airborne thickness surveys reveal state of Arctic sea ice cover, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L09501, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL042652, 2010.
Hansen, E., Gerland, S., Granskog, M. A., Pavlova, O., Renner, A. H. H., Haapala, J., Lyning, T. B., and Tschudi, M.: Thinning of Arctic sea ice observed in Fram Strait: 1990–2011, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 118, 5202–5221, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrc.20393, 2013.
Krishfield, R. A. and Proshutinsky, A.: BGOS ULS Data Processing Procedure. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute report, available at: http://www.whoi.edu/fileserver.do?id=85684&pt=2&p=100409 (last access: 26 April 2013), 2006.
Download
Short summary
The sea ice thickness of the Arctic Basin is estimated from sources that include upward-looking sonars, electromagnetic sensors, and lidar or radar altimeters. Good agreement is found between five of the systems while larger systematic differences are found for others. The trend in annual mean ice thickness, 2000--2013, is –0.58–/+0.07m decade–1; for the central Arctic Basin alone the annual mean ice thickness has decreased from 3.45m in 1975 to 1.11m in 2013, a 68% reduction.