the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Uncertainty assessment of Antarctic sea ice motion product at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC)
Abstract. The recent historic minima in Antarctic sea ice extent suggest the possibility of new thermodynamic and dynamic conditions across the Southern Ocean. In investigating these thermodynamic and dynamic sea ice behaviors, it is essential to observe sea ice drift with high quality. However, while the relatively abundant and reliable buoy data in the Arctic guarantees a robust Arctic sea ice drift observation, the Antarctic sea ice drift product merely relies on passive microwave (PMW) data due to the lack of pan-Antarctic drifting buoy data. In this study, we assess the uncertainty of the Antarctic sea ice drift product from 2015 to 2023 by using drifting buoys in the Weddell Sea and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) sea ice drift across the Southern Ocean. The comparison between PMW and buoy ice drift shows that PMW-derived sea ice drift tends to underestimate drift speed by 2–3 km d-1, particularly under low ice concentration conditions, while drift direction agrees well with a marginal bias. Based on the accurate high-resolution sea ice drift estimation from SAR imagery (-6° of angle difference and 0.1 km d-1 of speed difference with buoy ice drift), we assess the pan-Antarctic uncertainties of PMW sea ice drift. We found a widespread ∼11 km d-1 underestimation of ice drift speed across the Southern Ocean, particularly in the east Weddell Sea and west Ross Sea. Ice drift direction generally shows negligible bias across the Southern Ocean, but the east Weddell Sea shows 10–20° of clockwise bias. Such a wide underestimation is attributed to the optimal interpolation that smooths ice velocity and raises uncertainties around the marginal ice zone. Based on this understanding of PMW-derived Antarctic sea ice drift estimation, it is important to improve the sea ice velocity estimation in the Southern Ocean.
- Preprint
(14450 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1703', Anonymous Referee #1, 13 May 2026
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', YoungHyun Koo, 29 Jun 2026
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1703', Anonymous Referee #2, 27 May 2026
This paper details a methodology for use of SAR sea-ice drift vectors for validation of PMW sea-ice drift, allowing for full coverage validation of the Antarctic where in-situ data is only available in limited areas, and rigorously analyses the robustness of this methodology. In addition there is an excellent analysis of the sources of error in the NSIDC Polar Pathfinder sea-ice drift product, with recommendations for future improvement. The techniques and analysis in this paper will be a great reference to inform future development for not only the NSIDC product but for other products as well. I recommend publication of this paper with minor changes.
Major comments:
- Section 2.4. Once spatially sampled, the PMW and SAR ice drift vectors are representing the average ice drift within sub-regions of radius 25 km, whereas the buoy vectors represent point-like sub-regions. This may be worth a sentence or two of discussion, since the SAR and buoy ground truths represent different spatial scales.
- Given that most of the larger deviations of the PMW vectors from buoy vectors come from areas of low SIC, and that SAR vectors have only been compared to the buoy vectors in regions of SIC > 85% while the PMW vectors have been taken from regions of SIC > 15%, I would really appreciate seeing statistics (extra figures might inflate the paper too much) for PMW vectors where SIC > 85%, so there is a more direct comparison between the PMW-buoy and SAR-buoy validations.
Minor comments:
- A table summarising the statistical values from the different validations could be very helpful to the reader, rather than needing to find the individual values from within the text to compare.
- L50-55, Just as a point of interest, SH PMW ice drift has also been validated vs buoys in the OSI SAF validation reports for the near-real time sea-ice drift product (https://osi-saf.eumetsat.int/products/osi-405-d, doi:10.15770/EUM_SAF_OSI_NRT_2007) and sea-ice drift climate data record (https://osi-saf.eumetsat.int/products/osi-455, doi:10.15770/EUM_SAF_OSI_0012).
- L137 Please define the FT abbreviation on first use.
- L142. Is it worth explaining/justifying why you omit SAR ice vectors above 40 km d-¹ - is this dependent on your constraint that SAR data is only used for SIC > 85%?
- Figure 1 could perhaps have larger individual panels, as some of the magenta arrows do not show up well at the current resolution.
- Probably too complicated, but it would have been nice to plot figure 9a with the data from figure 5a as a background, to be able to compare easily.
- Figure 11b label should probably specify PMW_raw rather than PMW.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1703-RC2 - AC2: 'Reply on RC2', YoungHyun Koo, 29 Jun 2026
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 227 | 133 | 22 | 382 | 12 | 12 |
- HTML: 227
- PDF: 133
- XML: 22
- Total: 382
- BibTeX: 12
- EndNote: 12
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
In this manuscript, the authors assess the performance of the long-term Antarctic sea ice motion product derived from passive microwave (PMW) observations at NSIDC using buoy observations and high-resolution SAR-derived sea ice drift data. The authors show that the PMW-derived Antarctic sea ice drift generally agrees well with both SAR and buoy observations. However, they also identify a systematic underestimation of sea ice drift speed in the PMW product, particularly in regions where sea ice concentration (SIC) is lower than 50%. The authors further suggest that the optimal interpolation procedure is likely responsible for this behavior.
Overall, I found the objectives and conclusions of this manuscript clear and easy to follow. The analyses are generally solid, and the manuscript is well organized. I enjoyed reading this paper. I recommend minor revisions before the manuscript can be accepted for publication.
Major comment:
Reference: Lavergne, T. and Down, E.: A climate data record of year-round global sea-ice drift from the EUMETSAT Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility (OSI SAF), Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5807–5834, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5807-2023, 2023
Minor comment:
Figures: