Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-54qdv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T12:34:07.948Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of the Sea-ice thickness distribution in the Lincoln Sea and adjacent Arctic Ocean in 2004 and 2005

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2017

C. Haas
Affiliation:
Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Bussestrasse 24, D-27570 Bremerhaven, Germany, E-mail: chaas@awi-bremerhaven.de
S. Hendricks
Affiliation:
Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Bussestrasse 24, D-27570 Bremerhaven, Germany, E-mail: chaas@awi-bremerhaven.de
M. Doble
Affiliation:
Scottish Association for Marine Science, Dunstaffnage Marine Laboratory, Oban, Argyll PA37 1QA, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Results of helicopter-borne electromagnetic measurements of total (ice plus Snow) Sea-ice thickness performed in May 2004 and 2005 in the Lincoln Sea and adjacent Arctic Ocean up to 86˚N are presented. Thickness distributions South of 84˚N are dominated by multi-year ice with modal thicknesses of 3.9 m in 2004 and 4.2 m in 2005 (mean thicknesses 4.67 and 5.18 m, respectively). Modal and mean Snow thickness on multi-year ice amounted to 0.18 and 0.30 m in 2004, and 0.28 and 0.35 m in 2005. There are also considerable amounts of 0.9–2.2m thick first-year ice (modal thickness), mostly representing ice formed in the recurring, refrozen Lincoln Polynya. Results are in good agreement with ground-based electromagnetic thickness measurements and with ice types demarcated in Satellite Synthetic aperture radar imagery. Four drifting buoys deployed in 2004 between 86˚N and 84.5˚N Show a Similar pattern of a mean Southward drift of the ice pack of 83 ±18km between May 2004 and April 2005, towards the coast of Ellesmere Island and Nares Strait. The resulting area decrease of 26% between the buoys and the coast is larger than the observed thickness increase South of 84˚ N. This points to the importance of Shear in a narrow band along the coast, and of ice export through Nares Strait in removing ice from the Study region.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) [year] 2006 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Map of the Study region north of Ellesmere Island and in Nares Strait, Showing the location of HEM thickness profiles in May 2004 (dashed line) and 2005 (solid line), and the drift trajectories of four GPS buoys between May 2004 and May 2005 (thin lines). Stars mark buoy deployment and ground-based EM and Snow-thickness measurement Sites in 2004. Circles Show positions of Snow-thickness measurements in 2005. Data along the thick Sections of the 2004 and 2005 profiles are compared in Table 1 and Figure 5. Bottom right rectangle Shows coverage of SAR image in Figure 3.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Em field Strength (in-phase component of relative Secondary field Strength at 3.6 kHz) vs laser height measurement (13 May 2005; 83.4–84˚ N). A model curve and data over a typical ice Surface with Some leads are Shown. The model curve has been computed for a Sea-water conductivity of 2500 mSm–1. The horizontal bar illustrates how ice thickness (4 m) is obtained for a Single data point from the difference between laser measurement and the model curve for a given EM field Strength (see text).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Sar Satellite image of the Lincoln Sea and Nares Strait (courtesy ESA) with Superimposed ice-thickness data along the easternmost, triangular flight tracks in Figure 1, both acquired on 14 May 2005, at 17:47UTC and between 18:17 and 21:02 UTC, respectively. NW and SE mark the northwestern and Southeastern profiles compared in Figure 4. The SAR image has been obtained by the ESA Envisat Satellite at HH polarization with a pixel resolution of 12.5 m (IMP product). Dark pixels correspond to low radar backscatter.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Sea-ice thickness distributions of the northwestern and Southeastern profiles across the Lincoln Sea on 14 May 2005 (shown in Fig. 3).

Figure 4

Table 1. Modal and mean (±1 Standard deviation; including open water along the profiles) ice thickness and open-water fraction, fow, of all measurements performed in 2004 and of the South–north transect in 2005. The meridional profiles represent ice between 62˚W and 72˚W in 2004 and along 62˚W in 2005 (Fig. 1). The zonal transect was obtained between 84.5˚N and 85˚N in 2004 (Fig. 1)

Figure 5

Fig. 5. Sea-ice thickness distributions of the meridional profiles between Alert and 84˚N in 2004 and 2005 (thick lines in Fig. 1). The grey-shaded distribution Shows the results of the ground-based measurements in 2004 for comparison.