By Topic

Observation of Sea-Ice Thickness Using ENVISAT Data From LÜtzow-Holm Bay, East Antarctica

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

5 Author(s)
Nakamura, K. ; Geogrid Res. Group, Nat. Inst. of Adv. Ind. Sci. & Technol., Tsukuba ; Wakabayashi, H. ; Uto, S. ; Ushio, S.
more authors

To investigate the suitability of synthetic aperture radar (SAR) polarization data to estimate the sea-ice thickness in early summer in Lutzow-Holm Bay, Antarctica, we compared in situ ice thicknesses with the corresponding backscattering co-efficient for each polarization and the VV-to-HH backscattering ratio. The VV-to-HH backscattering ratio was derived from data acquired by ENVISAT Advanced SAR (ASAR). This ratio is related to the near-surface dielectric constant of the sea ice, which is, in turn, related to the developing process of ice and, thus, its thickness via changes in the near-surface sea-ice salinity. The sea ice encountered in the study area is close first-year pack ice and fast ice. For these old and relatively rough sea-ice types, the VV-to-HH backscattering ratio can be expected to depend on salinity-driven changes in the near-surface dielectric constant rather than changes of the surface roughness. We applied the empirical relationships between the ice thickness and the VV-to-HH backscattering ratio with the linear and logarithm fits to ASAR data. The linear fit gave the reliable result, with an rms error being 0.08 m and a correlation coefficient being 0.91, when compared to in situ fast-ice thickness.

Published in:

Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, IEEE  (Volume:6 ,  Issue: 2 )