Journal cover Journal topic
The Cryosphere An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 4.524 IF 4.524
  • IF 5-year value: 5.558 IF 5-year
    5.558
  • CiteScore value: 4.84 CiteScore
    4.84
  • SNIP value: 1.425 SNIP 1.425
  • SJR value: 3.034 SJR 3.034
  • IPP value: 4.65 IPP 4.65
  • h5-index value: 52 h5-index 52
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 55 Scimago H
    index 55
Volume 8, issue 2
The Cryosphere, 8, 345-357, 2014
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-345-2014
© Author(s) 2014. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
The Cryosphere, 8, 345-357, 2014
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-345-2014
© Author(s) 2014. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 03 Mar 2014

Research article | 03 Mar 2014

A range correction for ICESat and its potential impact on ice-sheet mass balance studies

A. A. Borsa1, G. Moholdt1, H. A. Fricker1, and K. M. Brunt2,3 A. A. Borsa et al.
  • 1Scripps Institution of Oceanography, San Diego, California, USA
  • 2Morgan State University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  • 3GESTAR, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA

Abstract. We report on a previously undocumented range error in NASA's Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) that degrades elevation precision and introduces a small but significant elevation trend over the ICESat mission period. This range error (the Gaussian-Centroid or "G-C" offset) varies on a shot-to-shot basis and exhibits increasing scatter when laser transmit energies fall below 20 mJ. Although the G-C offset is uncorrelated over periods ≤ 1 day, it evolves over the life of each of ICESat's three lasers in a series of ramps and jumps that give rise to spurious elevation trends of −0.92 to −1.90 cm yr−1, depending on the time period considered. Using ICESat data over the Ross and Filchner–Ronne ice shelves we show that (1) the G-C offset introduces significant biases in ice-shelf mass balance estimates, and (2) the mass balance bias can vary between regions because of different temporal samplings of ICESat. We can reproduce the effect of the G-C offset over these two ice shelves by fitting trends to sample-weighted mean G-C offsets for each campaign, suggesting that it may not be necessary to fully repeat earlier ICESat studies to determine the impact of the G-C offset on ice-sheet mass balance estimates.

Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation
Share