2010
DOI: 10.1080/01490419.2010.487790
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Absolute Calibration of Jason-1 and Jason-2 Altimeters in Corsica during the Formation Flight Phase

Abstract: International audienceThe Corsica region of the western Mediterranean, including sites at Ajaccio-Aspretto, Cape Senetosa, and Capraia (Italy), hosts a dedicated, long-term experiment to support absolute calibration of space-borne radar altimeters. The objective of the experiment is to continuously monitor the bias and drift of the altimeter measurement systems. In addition, with complementary data from a local weather station, we have derived GPS-based wet tropospheric path delay measurements that are compare… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this framework, the use of ICESat and Cryosat-2 data was fundamental since they allow calculating relative biases between each of the missions. The calculated water level time series from each satellite are biased for two main reasons: First, there is an instrumental bias of each altimeter: This is well documented in the literature (Bonnefond et al 2010;Mertikas et al 2010). The second reason is that the geoid variations over a lake are not precisely known on a short wavelength of several kilometers, and as the tracks are not located exactly over the same region of a given lake, it adds a relative bias between each time series obtained from individual altimeter (Cretaux et al 2013a;Cheng et al 2010).…”
Section: Combination Of Multi-satellite Datamentioning
confidence: 76%
“…In this framework, the use of ICESat and Cryosat-2 data was fundamental since they allow calculating relative biases between each of the missions. The calculated water level time series from each satellite are biased for two main reasons: First, there is an instrumental bias of each altimeter: This is well documented in the literature (Bonnefond et al 2010;Mertikas et al 2010). The second reason is that the geoid variations over a lake are not precisely known on a short wavelength of several kilometers, and as the tracks are not located exactly over the same region of a given lake, it adds a relative bias between each time series obtained from individual altimeter (Cretaux et al 2013a;Cheng et al 2010).…”
Section: Combination Of Multi-satellite Datamentioning
confidence: 76%
“…The main difference in the processing in this study, compared to previous studies [1][2][3]6], is the difference in the footprint area in over which the geoid height is interpolated. In the case of LRM (low resolution mode, e.g., Jason missions), the footprint is defined as a circle using the significant wave height to define the diameter [14], while in the case of SAR (synthetic aperture radar, e.g., Sentinel-3A) the footprint is defined as a rectangle with a width of 300 m along-track and a length across-track that is also a function of SWH with the same formula as LRM (see Figure 5 or Figure 8 for an illustration).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…First, it shows that the SSH bias for SAR is very stable with a standard deviation of 24 mm. Concerning the PLRM, as expected due to data processing issues (reconstruction of pseudo LRM waveforms from original SAR measurements that make the PLRM measurements noisier than real LRM), the standard deviation of 42 mm is higher than the classical LRM missions (e.g., 38 and 37 mm for Jason-1 and Jason-2 respectively [2]). Second, the 13 mm difference in the SSH bias between SAR and PLRM comes mainly from the differences in the altimeter range.…”
Section: Radiometer-gpsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…When this empirical correction is applied to the J1 SSH measurements it effectively levels them to those from J2. Absolute calibrations show that the J2 SSH measurements are biased 84-88 mm higher than those from J1, due principally to systematic differences in the altimeter range measurements (e.g., Haines et al 2010;Bonnefond et al 2010). Meanwhile, global comparisons indicate a relative SSH bias of 75 mm (Willis 2009).…”
Section: Orbit Altitude Correction = A(t) + B(t)cos(ωt) + C(t)sin(ωt)mentioning
confidence: 97%