;.,. :,,.i..Jl.3n U. S. Department of Transportation United States Coast Guard Years of Service Report of the International Ice Patrol in the j^ North Atlantic LIBRARY ^''^ ^^N24 mi i.- ; .iu.juOn ,' HC-130A1RCRAF 25 years of Ice Patrol Service 1988 Season Bulletin No. 74 CG- 188-43 52° N 50° N - - 48° N 46° N 44° N 42° N -- 40° N Flemish Pass ( Flemish 58° W 54° W 50° W Figure 1 . Bathymetry of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. 46° w U.S. Department of Transportation United States Coast Guard Commandant United States Coast Guard MAILING ADDRESS: 2100 2nd St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20593 (202 )267-1 450 JUL 2 3 1990 Bulletin No . 74 REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC [ iVarine Biological labora-ti I LIBRARY SEASON OF 1988 CG-1 88-43 FOREWORD JAN 2 4 1991 Vyoods Hole, Mass. Forwarded herewith is bulletin No. 74 of the International Ice Patrol, describing the Patrol's services, ice observations and conditions during the 1988 season. j:w^^c^(jj(^ad/ rlaVi^ J. W. LOCKWOOD Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Acting Chief, Office of Navigation Safety and Waterway Services i DISTRIBUTION— SDL No. a b c d e f g h i i k 1 m n 0 P q r s t u V w X y z A B *3 *1 *1 I 1 2 2 1 C *1 *1 D 60 E F G H NON-STANDARD DISTRIBUTION: B: a G-NIO only, B:b LANTAREA (5), PACAREA (1), B:c First, Fifth Districts only, C:a CGAS Cape Cod, Elizabeth City only, C:q LANTAREA only, SML CG-4 INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL 1988 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS 5 INTRODUCTION 7 SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS 1 1 ICEBERG RECONNAISSANCE AND COMMUNICATIONS 13 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, 1988 SEASON 25 ICE CONDITIONS, 1988 SEASON 49 DISCUSSION OF ICE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 50 REFERENCES 51 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS APPENDICES 53 A. List of Participating Vessels, 1988 61 B. 1988 International Ice Patrol Drifting Buoy Program 81 C. Upgrade of Environmental Inputs to Iceberg Forecasting Models 87 D. Use of Air-Deployed Bathythermogaphs (AXBTs) during tfie 1988 IIP Season 101 E. HP's Side-Lool / yjK>' / \ A r^ "^^ 5M;^^ Ox"' C^^g rr \ A Y^ ^-b- -— Irx" V/ r3 ■^^^^^sX^-ir'''' ^^\ \ i) t^)-. . ^),(ynQv|T~~-4--y ^-SM) \f ! - ^ ^T.^ i p 1 ^ 1004 )qP J J 7)5 \ 1 1006 / ^ y\}^ 2 // '' '^ ^ / X/ ^^^^ / 1 f2 ri V a / ^ i ? Ia >^ x/ / Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) July 1988 Figure 8. July 1988 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989) 21 Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) August 1988 22 Figure 9. August 1988 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989) W^MOU / -^"^xvCr W " ~y\ K^ ^ --UWlI'll // 1 w ioo7 v V/' Sx '' lift- / ^/tt — K u H u>ii / - ^Zr^^ '/] s X X V ^ / ^ V ---i- H77 vTl , srV ^-^-.^/f""**"^^ — \\1 \. v 1 nL ■? ^ :^- Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) September 1988 Figure 10. September 1988 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989) 23 24 Ice Conditions 1 988 Season The following discussion summa- rizes the sea ice and iceberg conditions along the Labrador and Newfoundland coasts and on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland for the 1988 ice year. The sea ice information used in this discussion came from the Thirty Day Ice Forecast for Northern Canadian Waters published monthly by the Atmospheric Environment Service (AES) of Canada and the South- ern Ice Limit published twice- monthly by the U.S. Navy-NOAA Joint Ice Center. Information on the mean sea ice extent was obtained from Naval Oceanogra- phy Command, 1986. October 1987: No sea ice was seen south of 65' N in October (Figure 11), which is normally the case (Naval Oceanographic Command, 1986). There were six icebergs reported south of 52' N in October, but none of these were south of 48° N. November 1987: In mid-Novem- ber, sea ice began to form in Davis Strait and Frobisher Bay (Figure 12). The mean extent of sea ice in November was confined to the southern tip of Baffin Island with the maximum sea ice extent covering Hudson Strait, and Ungava Bay (Naval Oceano- graphic Command, 1986). The ice edge in November 1987 did not extend as far south as the mean. There was only one iceberg reported south of 52° N in Novem- ber, and none reported south of 48° N. December 1987: The sea ice edge extended to the northern tip of Labrador by mid-December (Figure 13). The mean extent of sea ice along the Labrador coast in December is usually as far south as Lake Melville. Mild temperatures in Labrador and Newfoundland during the first half of December (AES, 1988), pre- vented the sea ice from extending as far south as the mean. There were no icebergs reported south of 52° N in December. January 1988: Cold tempera- tures during the last half of De- cember and into January (AES, 1988) enhanced sea ice growth. As a result, by mid-January, the sea ice conditions were nearly normal for this time of year (Figure 14). There were no icebergs reported south of 52° N in Janu- ary. February 1988: Below normal temperatures continued into February. Labrador and northern Newfoundland reported tempera- tures about 5° to 7° C below normal while central and southern Newfoundland were about 2° to 4° C below normal (AES, 1988). In addition, the average winds had more of an offshore component than normal. As a result, the sea ice was thicker than normal (AES, 1988), and extended farther east than normal (Figure 15). The ice edge extended south along Newfoundland to the Avalon Peninsula. The ice conditions in mid-February were similar to that normally expected for the end of Febmary, so the ice conditions had developed two weeks earlier than normal (AES, 1988). There were 67 icebergs observed south of 52" N in February; but none were reported south of 48" N. March 1988: The sea ice edge was farther north in mid-March than it was in mid-February (Figure 16). Temperatures for the last two weeks of February were 1° to 2° C above normal over the waters east of Newfoundland (AES, 1988). As a result, the sea ice edge did not extend as far south as it normally does. The winds continued to have an offshore component (AES, 1988), keeping the eastern sea ice edge near normal. There were 35 icebergs reported south of 52° N, and 8 reported south of 48° N. April 1988: The sea ice edge continued to retreat northward in April, but at a rate faster than normal (Figure 17). By mid-April, the sea ice edge was confined to very close to the Newfoundland coast north of Cape Freels and along the Labrador coast north of the Strait of Belle Isle. Northeast- erly winds pushed the ice edge to the west, and above normal temperatures over Labrador (AES, 1988) increased sea ice deteriora- tion. The 1988 International Ice Patrol Season opened on April 13, 1988. Figure 23 depicts the initial iceberg distribution. The icebergs were widely scattered over the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. None of the icebergs south of 52° N at the start of the season appear to be in the Labrador Current. 25 (Figure 33 inside the back cover depicts the mean position of the Labrador Current.) Figure 24 shows the iceberg distribution a few days into the season. Most of the icebergs reported were on the Grand Banks with some now coming down the Avalon Channel east of Newfoundland. A few icebergs appeared to be drifting with the Labrador Current along the eastern edge of the Grand Banks. By the end of April (Figure 25), the icebergs were widely scattered, with most still being reported on the Grand Banks. There were 1 1 4 icebergs on plot the end of April. There were 151 icebergs reported south of 52° N, and 95 reported south of 48° N in April. May 1988: Some sea ice contin- ued to linger in Notre Dame Bay, but the main pack of sea ice continued to retreat northward along the Labrador coast in May (Figure 18). The sea ice edge was again farther north than the mean. The icebergs were not as scattered in mid-May as they were in the end of April (Figure 26). Most of the icebergs were either along the Newfoundland coast or on the Grand Banks. By the end of May, large numbers of icebergs began to enter MP's operations area from the north (Figure 27). Few of these icebergs crossed 48° N by the end of May. There were 177 icebergs on plot the end of May. There were 223 new icebergs south of 52° N, but only 33 of these were south of 48° N, in May. June 1988: The sea ice edge continued to move northward in June (Figure 19). The southerly extent of sea ice was near normal for June, but the sea ice edge did not extend as far east as normal. In mid-June, there were still large numbers of icebergs east of Newfoundland (Figure 28), but not many of these icebergs were making their way south through Flemish Pass. Most of the ice- bergs were moving south along the Newfoundland coast through the Avalon Channel. On June 24, the southern most iceberg of the 1988 IIP season was sighted in position 42°1 3' N,46°59'W. By the end of June, most of the icebergs were distributed to the north and east of the Grand Banks and Flemish Cap., with very few to the south (Figure 29). There were 356 icebergs on plot the end of June. There were 300 new icebergs south of 52° N in May, and only 20 of these were south of 48° N. July 1988: By mid-July, the sea ice had retreated to a tongue off the northern tip of Labrador (Figure 20). This tongue of sea ice extended farther to the south than normal. On July 7, the easternmost iceberg of the 1988 IIP season was reported in position 51 °1 9' N,42°55'W. By mid-July, the IIP estimated limit of all known ice was also moving northward (Figure 30). The icebergs were predominantly distributed north and east of the Grand Banks and Flemish Cap. The iceberg distribution remained essentially the same to the end of July (Figure 31). There were 80 icebergs on plot the end of July. There were 327 new icebergs south of 52° N in July. Only 19 of these were south of 48° N. August 1988: Only a very little sea ice off of Baffin Island re- mained south of 65° N in August (Figure 21). Normally, there is no sea ice south of 65° N in August. The 1988 IIP season closed August 2, 1988. Figure 32 depicts the iceberg distribution at the end of the IIP season. There were 225 icebergs south of 52° N in August, and only 1 0 of these were south of 48° N. September 1988: There was no sea ice south of 65° N in Septem- ber, which is normally the case (Figure 22). There were 15 new icebergs south of 52° N in Sep- tember, and two of these were south of 48° N. 26 Figure 11. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 6SN — 60N — 55N — SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 45W 27 Figure 12. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 6SN — 60N — SSN — SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 4SW 28 Figure 13. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 65N — 60N — SSN — SON 60W S5W SOW — 4SN 4SW 29 Figure 14. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 6SN — 60N — SSN SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 4SW 30 Figure 15. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 65N — 60N — S5N — SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 4SW 31 Figure 16. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 65N 60N 60N 55N SON SSN 60W SSW SOW 32 Figure 17. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 6SN 60N — S5N SON 60W 55W SOW — 4SN 45W 33 Figure 18. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 65N 60N 55N SON 3/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Joint Ice Center, 1988) 1 972—82 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Naval Oceanography Command, 1986) 60W SSW SOW 34 Figure 19. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 65N 60N — SSN SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 4SW 35 Figure 20. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 65N — 60N — SSN SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 45W 36 Figure 21. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 65N 60N 55N SON 60W SSW SOW 37 Figure 22. 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 6SN — 60N — SSN SON 4SN 60W 5SW SOW 45W 38 Figure 23. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 13 APR 88 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° J'^ I I I I I I 1^ I_ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I ] (-00 38° 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 38° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg Estimated limit of all known ice N A Growler Estimated limit of sea ice N X Radar Target /Contact 200 Meter bathymetric contour Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle 39 Figure 24. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15 APR 88 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39' gp^ I I I I I I IN I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ill II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I j-po 38° 51° 50° 49° 48° E47° 46° :45° E44° = 43° 42° 41° E40° E39° Mill i MM I lllllli Mill ill!! lill II li nil II Mil llllllli lllll I I IIIIM I II II I I I III i 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I M I I I 1 1 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N £L Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all knowrn ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric contour Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle 40 Figure 25. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30 APR 88 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° )" 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I H I I I I I I I II I I ) I ] I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I i I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39'= N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The NuiTiber Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric contour 41 Figure 26. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15 MAY 88 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39= 52°: "Minn I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 52= E51° E50° 49° :48° E47° :46° J45° :44° E43° 42° :41° :40° 39° 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 38° N ▲ Berg N Jk. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric contour Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle 42 Figure 27. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30 MA Y 88 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° J" I Ill II I I I III III I) I iiiii| I I II I I II III I I I III I) mill 14Ai5A P^'tTiA' 5A saU/ :52° E51° 50° 49° E48° E47° E46° E45° E44° 43° :42° \AV E40° E39° ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I oO 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric contour 43 Figure 28. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15 JUN 88 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° )" I I III IIJII I II llllll llllll llllll I Mil II I III I I Mill I I III I I II Ill ll_ I I I III I lllll I Mil II nil I I II II I 52= E51° E50° 49° 48° 47° 1:46° 45° :44° zA3° 42° E41° 40° :39° I llllll llll II llllllllllll MM M Mini llllll IIIIIIMIIIIIIII II llllll llll I lllllll llllllllllll lllllllllilllllll 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39 38° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric contour 44 Figure 29. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30 JUN 88 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 3 O" IIIMM III II IIIIIIIIIIII nil 1 1 1 1 MM 1 1 mil II MM lllllll IIMI 9° 52 - 51 °E 50°E 49°E 48 °E 47°E 46°E 45°E A A 0 Nev\ q/ i 6A ; 6A Jo '■ . , ^ 26a|1^| i 1 -A > * * 1 : - 52° E51° E50° E49° " /1Q° / O : / : 5A 10A O^^^A /foundland~P : ; i i i 1 i i JTa 8A : i 7A i31Ail8Ai ^ AA^ ^ 1 f^Ai i 1 1 t 1 i 8A : ^ ; M^rt^ t i >'i? 1" ( /]\ ■> X -f ""■{ ; .>r--.. 1 _ 4o - A~7° \ xU /x i i i i 1/ j j ■;.-••■ IX i i i i" 1 i 1 1 : 4/ E46° E45° E44° E43° E42° = 41° E40° Z or\o \*^ i aI a ^"■"^f-ji'^ i ;a ; j 1 Ai| 44 - 43°E 42°E 41°: 40°E 39°E QQ°~ : ' i . ; : ,' 1 I • H I 1 ; • "■■■': i X I ! j i 1 1 1 i i : ; 1 i 1 i j i i i 1 : 11 I ': ■• \ ill: I : 39 - '?ft° OO i 5 II II 1 II 1 1 1 1 III!! Mill 1 7° 56° 55° 54° 5 1 1 1 II 1 II II 1 1 II II II 1 II 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 III! 1 1 II iiM 1 1 II 1 III! II HUM 1 M 3° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 3 OO 9° IN ^ Derg N A Growler [zauiiiciLeu lllllll. ui an r\iiuvvM iv^c Estimated limit of sea ice IN A Whe Ta naaar i arg re "N" Is The N rgets In A One et / uontact Jumber Of Designated Degree Rectangle ^UU M6l6r uaLi lyiM CLi lu owi in-;ui 45 Figure 30. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15 JUL 88 Based On Obsen/ed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° ?" I I I I I I 1^1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I j I I I I I ) I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ) I I I j I I I 51° E50° 49° E48° :47° E46° 45° 44° E43° :42° E41° I 40° - E39° 38°1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 r 38° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N A Berg N .A. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric contour 46 Figure 31. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30 JUL 88 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° J" I I II I I I I Ml I inn nil i ii i| i iiii| i i i ii iiii | i it :39= 38° 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 II II 1 1 1! 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 II i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 11 II II II i II II 1 1 II I II i 1 1 II I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i II M I i 1 1 M I f 38° = 52° E51° :50° E49° 48° :47° 146° = 45° E44° . 430 : 42° =41° :40= 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric contour 47 Figure 32. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 02 AUG 88 Based On Obsen/ed And Forecast Conditions 5 C O0-1 7° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° IIMIIIMIIinillllllllll IIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIMIIIIMIIIII Illllllllllll IIIIMIMIMIIIIIIMII 52 - 51 °E 50°= 49°E 48°= 47°: 46°E 45°= 44°E 43°E 42°: 41 °E 40°E 39°E Jf^ h5A:33A ...C J.■ ^I^A^ / r- : -: - 17 r-:^-fe^ H : \ ■ \ \\ \ '■ \ '. i A--. \ ^ .........,...^ ....^ .............^ „^... ..^ ^ ....„ „ _^ ,. ___ \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 -C- :'< •> ■ i 1 1 i j \ \ \ L „„1 L - I \ - ..-] -~.*-- -X - - - — ' ! : : ; \ \ \ \ \ '■ : \ 1 ^ ^ 1 i 1 ^ ■ " ^ CO -\ 5 liiiii 1 irnTmiiniiiii 7° 56° 55° 54° 5 mrrn t r 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ii 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 3 IN m. derg N A Growler Estimated limit of sea ice N A i-iaaar i arc Where "N" Is The h Targets In A One et / Contact 3/10) so that wind-driven movement of the sea ice will not contaminate the drifter data. Second, in many cases buoys deployed from 50 - 52°N move eastward to the north of Flemish Cap, and hence do not enter the region south of Flemish Pass. Because Ice Patrol requires drift data in this area, it is fre- quently necessary to deploy buoys directly in the pass to ensure that the buoy will move to the south. In this case the buoys are deployed at 47°N between 46-30°W and 47- 30°W. The study recommends against releasing a buoy beside a particu- lar iceberg because, in a period of a few days, the buoy and the iceberg are likely to be separated by distances larger than the typical eddy scales. This is a sound rec- ommendation. Ice Patrol deploys buoys near drifting icebergs only for specific iceberg drift studies, not for operations. Finally, the study recommends a thorough review of the Ice Patrol mean current file and the inclusion of data on the variability of the current. Ice Patrol has begun such a review and is using drift tracks collected since the begin- ning of the buoy program (1976) to improve the mean current data. AIRCRAFT DEPLOYMENTS Ice Patrol has deployed satellite- tracked buoys from HC-130's since 1979. The buoy is strapped into an air-deployment package and launched out the rear door of an HC-130 flying at an altitude of 500 feet (150 m) at 150 knots (77 m/s). The air-deployment pack- age consists of a wooden pallet and a parachute, both of which separate from the buoy after it enters the water. The parachute riser is cut by a cable-cutter that is activated by a battery that ener- gizes when immersed in salt water. The pallet separates when salt tablets dissolve and release straps holding the buoy to the pallet. The buoy then floats free and the drogue falls free and unfurls. 62 The air-deployment package failed inhalf (3of 6)ofthe1988 launches. The failures were similar in that the wooden pallet that holds the buoy and drogue together broke apart when it entered the HC-130's airstream. In all cases the parachute oper- ated properly and the buoys descended to the surface at a normal speed. Two of the buoys (4563 and 4566) transmitted normally, but one (4564) failed to transmit after its deployment. It is not certain that the buoy failure was due solely to the failure of the drop package. In most cases the buoy survives and the most serious result is that the parachute remains attached to the buoy hull. When this happens the parachute can act as a near-surface drogue until it collapses and entangles with the buoy hull or drogue tether. DATA PROCESSING Although the raw position and temperature data are relatively noise free, all records are scanned before processing to ensure quality control. First, duplicate positions and positions with time separations of 30 minutes or less are deleted. Then, positions < 700 m from adjacent positions are deleted, unless the deletion results in a time separation of four or more hours. The error-free position data are then fitted to a cubic spline curve to arrive at an evenly-spaced record with an interval of three hours. This process results in a slight reduction in the number of fixes per day (from 10 to 8). Next, the position records are filtered using a low-pass cosine filter with a cut-off of 1 . 1 6 X 1 0-5 Hz (one cycle per day). This filter removes most tidal and inertial effects. Finally, the buoy drift speeds are calculated at three-hour intervals using a two-point backward differ- encing scheme. f^ost of the trajectory plots pre- sented in this report are from the filtered records. Also presented for each buoy is a plot of the time history of the U (east is positive) and V (north is positive) compo- nents of velocity from the filtered records. Finally, a time history of the raw sea surface temperature data is plotted for each buoy. The dates used in all of the plots are year-dates, which are numbered sequentially starting at 1 on January 1 . In the text, the year- dates are included parenthetically. BUOY TRAJECTORIES In the following sections each buoy trajectory is discussed separately, presented in chrono- logical order by buoy deployment date. Only the operational buoys are discussed. The intent of the following discus- sions is to summarize each buoy's performance and the data that it contributed to Ice Patrol opera- tions. It is not intended to be an exhaustive data analysis. The buoy data from the area east of 39°W, the eastern boundary of the Ice Patrol operations area, are not presented. All of the data from the IIP drifting buoy program are archived at the IIP office in Groton, Connecticut. 63 Buoy 4530 Buoy 4530 (Figure B-1) was deployed at 1622Z on 15 April (106)at51-59N. 52-OOW. It provided uninterrupted data until its recovery by USCGC NORTH- WIND (WAGB 282) on 16 June (168), a span of 63 days. During ttie first four days following 4530's deployment, the drogue sensor re- ported drogue detachment. It's likely that there was some type of tangle of the tether which eventu- ally freed itself. Thereafter, the drogue sensor showed the drogue was attached for the entire drift period. The movement of 4530 during the first twenty days after its deploy- ment was characterized by a sluggish (<20 cnn/s) southwest- ward drift. On 8 May (129) it started a persistent, but still slow, northeastward movement to the vicinity of the 1000 m isobath. The remainder (after 29 May, 150) of the trajectory was southward, approximately parallel to the 1000 m isobath at about 20-30 cm/s. During its entire drift, the sea surface temperature recorded by 4530 was less than 3°C. (J (U a. r u a: a: 18 16 14 12 - 10 - 8 G 4 2 0 -2 BLJOY 4 5 30 1388 01 \ z: o o u I =3 10 80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 (- 'llllllllllll lllllllMIII llMllI Illlllii 123 138 153 168 YEHR-DRY -80. \ r u Q. z: o u I > 108 80 60 40 20 (- 0 -20 I- -40 -60 -80 mill I II I nil II M I I III I I I il I I I I M I I I ri I M In I ill] I I 123 138 153 168 YEHR-DRY 1 1 1 08 II I III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 II I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 123 138 153 168 YERR-DRY Figure B-1 a. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4530. 64 ,^^ N BUOY 4530 1988 42 N + TAIL OF THE BANK 40 N + 55 W + 51 W + 47 W FLEMISH CAP + 43 W Figure B-lb. Trajectory for 4530. 65 Buoy 4540 Buoy 4540 (Figure B-2) was deployed at 1532Z on 15 April (106) at 49-59N, 50-30W. It was recovered by NORTH WIND 64 days later (17 June, 169). The drogue sensor data indicated that the drogue was attached during the entire drift period. During the first 31 days of drift (106-137), 4540 moved southeast- ward and then eastward, approxi- mately parallel to the 1000 m isobath. Its speed along this path varied substantially, from 2 to 40 cm/s. As shown in Figure B-2b, the period of this variability is roughly three days. On 16 May (137), 4540 started a southward movement through Flemish Pass, again following the 1000 m isobath. Again the variability of the speed along the path was substantial (4-30 cm/s). On 31 May (152), 4540 reversed its direction and moved northward following the 1000 m isobath on the eastern side (Flemish Cap side) of the Pass. Again there were wide variations in the speed (1-22 cm/s). On 14 June (166) there was another reversal in the direction in movement, with the buoy again moving southward. There was no evidence in the 4540's temperature to suggest involvement with any significant thermal features. The tempera- ture increased slowly from -1 °C to 6°C over the first 42 days (0.2°/ day) and remained stable thereaf- ter. 66 B LjOY 45 1 S 8 B Q o 0) CL Id cr 18 IB 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 \m^ 108 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I II M I II 1 1 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 11 1 1 123 138 153 YEAR-DRY 168 80 80 01 \ o Q. o u I -40 -60 -80 108 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 123 38 153 YERR-DRY 168 80 60 -60 - -80 108 1 1 I 1 1 I I M Ill Ill 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 n 123 138 153 YERR-DRY 168 Figure B-2a. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4540. Figure B-2b. Trajectory for 4540. 67 Buoy 4558 Buoy 4558 (Figure B-3) was deployed at 1551Z on 30 April (121) at 46-59N, 47-19W. On 21 June (173), after 53 days of drift, it was recovered by NORTHWIND. The drogue sensor accurately reported that the drogue was attached for the entire drift period. During the first 28 days (until 28 May, 149) following 4558's deployment, it moved persistently southward toward the Tail of the Bank following the 1000 m isobath at speeds of about 25 cm/s. Near 44-30N peak buoy speeds of 50- 60 cm/s were observed over short intervals (<6 hours). Over most of this 28 day period the surface temperature increased slowly from 1 to 4°C (0.2°C/day). On 22 May (143) the temperature increased rapidly (0.2°C/hr) from 4-9°C. On 28 May (149) 4558 turned northwestward, following the 200 m contour. On 10 June (162) it began a persistent southward, off- slope motion. The temperature which had remained in the 8-1 1°C range since the rapid increase on 22 May, increased from 1 1 to 14°C over a four day period starting on 17 June (169). BUOY 4558 1988 u CL 3: CE 18 16 14 12 10 8 B 4 2 0 -2 in \ u CL o o I Z) 123 80 60 - 40 - 20 - 0 — , -20 -40 -S0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 138 153 168 YERR-DRY -80 I I I \ z: u Q. o (J I > 123 80 p 60 - 40 - 20 - 0 — -20 -'" -40 - -60 - I I I M I I ] I I I I M I I I M ] I I ] I I ] I M I I ] ] I I ] I I J I I I I I I I ] I 138 153 168 YERR-DRY -80 J_l 123 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I J I I I I I I I ] I I I I I I I I 138 153 168 YERR-DRY Figure B-3a. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4558. 68 _5>4 N 40 N + 55 W BUOY 4558 1988 169 149 + 51 W + 47 W + 43 W Figure B-3b. Trajectory for 4558. 69 Buoy 4563 Buoy 4563 (Figure B-4) was deployed at 1719Z on 19 May (140) at 53-OON, 52-05W. It was recovered by NORTHWIND on 16 June (168), 29 days after its deployment. The drogue sensor accurately reported ttiat drogue was attached for the entire drift period. The first eight days of 4563's drift were marked by vigorous (40-50 cm/s) southward motion along the 1000 m isobath. On 27 May (148) it moved southwestward into shallower water, whereupon four days later, its motion slowed substantially (<20 cm/s). The remainder of its drift was charac- terized by sluggish movement in the vicinity of 50N, 51-30W. The temperature record from 4563 is unremarkable, with a slow increase in temperature from 0- 3°C over the 29 day drift (0.1 °C/ day). BLJOY 4 56 3 1988 en u -0 Q. U 12 18 16 14 12 10 e s 4 2 0 -2 142 157 YERR-DRY I I I I I I I I I I 80r [4 2 I I I I I 157 YERR-DRY I I I I I I en \ 21 U o o I > 80 60 40- 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -8 [42 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 157 YERR-DRY Figure B-4a. Time history of sea surface temperture, U, and V veiocity components (filtered) for 4563. 70 ^^ N 42 N + BUO 48 N + + + + 55 W 51 W 47 W Figure B-4b. Trajectory for 4563. 71 Buoy 4566 Buoy 4566 (Figure B-5) was deployed at 1351Z on 1 August (214)at59-01N, 61-27W. After89 days of drift, 4566 was recovered by SIR JOHN FRANKLIN on 27 October (301). The drogue sensor indicated several short periods when the drogue appeared to be detached. These periods oc- curred when the buoy was in relatively shallow water (<100 m). It is likely that the drogue was resting on the bottom during these periods. Most of the drogue sensor data accurately showed the drogue was attached for the entire drift period. Buoy 4566 was deployed at the same time and location as a mini- drifter that was provided by AES (Buoy 3435). The intent of the concurrent deployment was to compare the performance and drift of the two buoy types. Unfortu- nately, the mini-drifter failed after about twelve hours in the water. The movement of 4566 during its 88 day drift was generally south- eastward. It is complicated for two reasons. The first is the complex flow along the Labrador Coast due to the convoluted bottom topogra- phy. Second, the standard buoy configuration has a 50 m drogue tether, which means that the bottom of the drogue extends to a depth of over 60 m. Several of the banl-^ ^ ■> V<-^¥>. ^ 1 Rn . .^ ^^$^ ^ P>' ~<35' -i^' T^%^'^ J^ ^■0 ^ ' y^ ^n - ^^ 0-0 0 ^ ;^^ t-' 0- Figure C-1b. 50 )00 150 % melt (V,) 200 250 % melt (V, 250 200 150 100 50 ^#^ ^ ^ ^ \^s> < ^ ^^ 'h ' f> ^'■' 0 o« ^ b^^ W 0 ^i^ ^.^ r^ ^^ ^^ <-" Figure C-1c. 50 100 150 % melt (V,) 200 250 Figure C-1. Comparative Effects of FLENUMOCEANCEN GSOWM Products on IIP Iceberg Deletion Criteria. These scatter diagrams show the "percent of melt" at the time a random series of icebergs of like size were deleted from the IIP database. The abscissa represents the "percent of melt" calculated using significant wave height and primary wave period as inputs to the IIP deterioration model. The ordinate represents the "percent of melt" calculated using sea height and sea period as inputs. The dashed line represents a 1 :1 relationship. The solid line is the linear regression fit. The observation period is June/July 1988. Figure C-1 a depicts the melt comparison for 58 large (213m long) icebergsl; Figure C-lb is for 102 medium (102m long) icebergs; and Figure C-lc is for 71 small (60m long) icebergs. The large concentration of data points in Figures C-1 b and C-1 c in the right hand portion of the graph is due to the large number of small and medium icebergs that were deleted after exceeding 175 percent of predicted melt. 84 In 1989, IIP intends to make two procedural changes to refine its ability to predict iceberg deteriora- tion. The deterioration model will reset the iceberg size to the maximum waterline length for the reported size every time the iceberg is sighted. This will be a more conservative method in handling the ever-increasing quantity of iceberg data. Sec- ondly, IIP will reduce the percent melt at which icebergs can be deleted from the database. For all icebergs, except those setting the "limits of all known ice", 125% will be the deletion criteria; for limit- setting icebergs 150%. These new deletion criteria were based on several interdependent factors: the improved estimate of iceberg deterioration provided by the new environmental inputs; the more conservative method in handling iceberg resights; and the planned improvements in iceberg drift predictions. SUMMARY IIP took a proactive approach to better the predictive skill of its iceberg drift and deterioration models in 1988. By concentrating on improvements to the environ- mental inputs, IIP reduced errors in its deterioration predictions. As an informed FLENUMOCEANCEN user, IIP was able to recognize ways in which it could enhance the quality of its environmental inputs by expanding its remote oceano- graphic data collection capabili- ties. Because technological advances have facilitated rapid advances in environmental modelling, IIP expects that the next significant improvements to its input will occur by 1993. 85 References Alfultis, M. A., 1988. Use Of Air- Deployed Expendable Bathythermogra phs during the 1988 IIP Season. Report of The International Ice Patrol in The North Atlantic Ocean, Season of 1988, (CG-188- 43), pp Anderson, I., 1983. Iceberg Deterioration Model. Report of The Inter- national Ice Patrol in The North Atlantic Ocean, Season of 1983, (CG-188-38),pp 67-73. Clancy, R. M., 1987. Real-Time Applied Oceanography at The Navy's Global Center. Marine Technology Society Journal, Vol 21 , No. 4, December 1987, pp 33-46. Clancy, R. M., J. E. Kaitala, and L. F. Zambresky, 1986. The Fleet Numerical Oceanography Center Global Spectral Ocean Wave Model. Bulletin of The American Meteorological Society, Vol 67, No. 5, May 1986, pp 498-512. Hanson, W. E., 1987. Operational Forecasting Concerns Regarding Iceberg Deterioration. Report of The International Ice Patrol in The North Atlantic Ocean, Season of 1987. (CG-1 88-42), pp 109-128. Hawkins, J. D., J. M. Harding, J. R. Chase, R. M. Clancy, and B. L. Samuels, 1986. The Impact of Satellite Infrared Sea Surface Temperatures on FNOC Ocean Thermal Analyses, Naval Ocean Research and Development Activity Report 142, June 1986. Mountain, D. G., 1980. On Predicting Iceberg Drift. Cold Regions Science and Technology. Vol I (3/4), pp 273-282. Numerical Environmental Products Manual, Vol II, August 1986. Pre- pared under the authority of Commander, Naval Oceanography Command, NSTL, Mississippi 39525. Thayer, N. B. and D. L. Murphy, 1988. SLAR Observations of Ocean Fronts East of The Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Proceed- ings, 1 1th Annual Canadian Conference on Remote Sensing, Waterloo University, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. White, F. M., M. L. Spaulding, and L. Gominho, 1980. Theoretical Estimates of The Various Mechanisms Involved in Iceberg Deterioration in The Open Ocean Environment. Report CG-D- 62-80, U. S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center, Groton, Connecticut 06340-6096. 86 Appendix D Use of Air-deployed Expendable Bathythermographs during the 1988 IIP Season Lt M. A. Alfultis, USCG Introduction The International Ice Patrol's (IIP) primary mission is to determine the southern, southeastern, and southwestern limits of all known ice in the vicinity of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. This service is provided to transatlantic shipping by the U.S. Coast Guard, as required by international treaty and U.S. law, in response to the tragic sinking of the RMS TI- TANIC. The IIP uses U.S. Coast Guard HC-130 and HU-25 aircraft operating out of Newfoundland every other week to provide iceberg reconnaissance. In addition to the aerial iceberg reconnaissance, IIP uses a computer model to predict iceberg drift and deterioration in support of its primary mission. Ocean temperatures are an important parameter to the iceberg deterio- ration computer program, and are an indication of water mass boundaries from which flow can be inferred. However, there is only a limited amount of temperature data collected in MP's operating area. IIP sought a system to gather ocean temperature data from Coast Guard aircraft which would require no extensive airframe modifications, was portable, inexpensive, and easy to operate. The use of Air-deployed expend- able BathyThermograph (AXBT) probes to collect ocean tempera- ture data from aircraft is well established in the U.S. Navy. The U.S. Navy equips dedicated aircraft (P-3's and LAMPS Heli- copters) for AXBT operations. The U.S. Coast Guard aircraft, however, have several missions to support which makes this ap- proach unsuitable. Since the Coast Guard aircraft are multi- mission, the AXBT system must be portable, so that any available aircraft could be used. The AXBT system would have to be inexpen- sive to procure, operate, and maintain. Because of these factors, IIP tested and procured an AXBT system using commercially available components. This paper summarizes the results of MP's evaluation and operational use of this AXBT system. Description of AXBT System The AXBT system consists of the AN/SSQ-36 AXBT, which is deployed from the aircraft, and the receiving/recording equipment and Sippican MK-9 Data Acquisition System on the aircraft. The AN/ SSQ-36 AXBT has been used for many years by the U. S. Navy for collecting subsurface temperature data from both fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. It consists of a standard sonobuoy size cannister (12 cm in diameter, 91 cm long), a parachute, a 1-watt VHP transmit- ter, a monopole antenna, signal conditioning electronics, a seawa- ter battery, and temperature measuring probe (Figure D-1). Two types of AXBT's are avail- able: the standard AN/SSQ-36 AXBT with a probe depth of 300 meters and the "deep" AXBT's with a depth of 760 meters. The performance of the AXBT is documented in Boyd (1987), and Bane and Session (1984). After deployment from the aircraft (Figure D-2), a wind flap separates from the AXBT cannister, pulling out a parachute which stabilizes the AXBT and ensures it enters the water correctly. Once in the water, the package containing the transmitter, antenna, electronics, battery, and temperature probe separates from the outer cannis- ter. A dead-air space in this package provides flotation to bring it back to the surface. The sea water battery activates, the transmitter turns on, and an unmodulated RF signal is trans- mitted to the aircraft on one of three possible VHF carrier fre- quencies: 170.5, 172.0, or 173.5 MHz. Thirty to forty seconds later, the temperature probe is released. 87 1. Parachute 12. 2. Windflap 13. 3. Decelerator Housing 14. 4. Windflap Retaining Strip 15. 5. Buoy Housing 16. 6. Tipover Foam 17. 7. Bulkhead 18. 8. Shock Pad 19. 9. Antenna 20. 10. Float Housing 21. 11. Float Base 22. Probe Release Cable Transmitter Board Seawater Battery Probe Afterbody Probe Spool Probe Electronics Probe Nose Deployment Weight Release Plate Nose Clamp Ring Support Ring Figure D- 1. Sippican AN/SSQ-36 AXBT. 88 Aircraft-Launched Expendable Bathythermograph (AXBT) Figure D-2. Deployment of AXBT from Aircraft. 89 Changes in water temperature as the probe descends cause a corresponding change in the resistance of the probe's thermis- tor. The temperature information is converted into an audio range frequency. This frequency is transmitted up the hard wire link to the surface electronics package, where it is used to frequency modulate the transmitted carrier signal. It takes approximately 3.3 minutes for the probe to complete its 300 meter descent (approxi- mately 8.5 minutes for the "deep" probe). About 1 minute later, the surface package scuttles itself. The radio frequency (RF) signal from the AXBT is received on the aircraft via the aircraft's VHF-FM antenna. The audio signal from the receiver can either be ana- lyzed in real-time using the Sippican MK-9 Data Acquisition/ Processing System, or recorded on audio tapes for later playback and analysis. The MK-9 Data Acquisition/Processing System consists of a Sippican MK-9 Digital Interface and a Hewlett-Packard desktop computer. The MK-9 Digital Data Interface requires an AXBT PC board containing an RF demodulator in order to convert the AXBT's audio frequency signal. Once the MK-9 interface is modified, the AXBT data are analyzed in the same fashion as ship-deployed XBT data. A typical AXBT 300 meter raw data file contains approximately 2,000 depth/temperature points. By selecting only those significant points which are required to reproduce the temperature profile, the number of data points is reduced to 20-30. To prevent interference between AXBT's using the same transmis- sion frequency, 4-5 minutes should elapse between AXBT deployments. If a finer data sampling resolution is required, AXBT's using different transmis- sion frequencies will have to be deployed. IIP has not yet fully developed a multi-channel AXBT system, and multi-channel AXBT operations will not be addressed here. Test Results and Discussion The AXBT system was tested on three Coast Guard aircraft: the HH-3F helicopter; and the HC- 130H (a four-engine turboprop) and HU-25A (a twin engine jet) fixed wing aircraft. The AXBT system was first tested from the HH-3F to gain experience with the equipment before testing it on the fixed wing aircraft. The primary testing was from the HC-130H, since it is HP's primary aircraft for iceberg reconnaissance. Since the HU-25 is MP's planned backup for the HC-130H, testing was also performed from the HU-25. The receiving and recording equipment used for the test were loaned to International Ice Patrol by Sippican, Inc. The receiver was a single channel VHF wide band receiver. Sippican also provided sixteen AXBT's for the testing and evaluation. Sippican's support and helpful advice are gratefully acknowledged. The AXBT data for all tests were recorded on audio cassettes for later playback and analysis. The Hewlett-Packard (HP) 85 desktop computer was used to process the AXBT data. The audio AXBT data had to be played back through the MK-9 to the HP-85 computer to be processed and analyzed. Sippican's AXBT program for the HP-85 computer was used to process the data. The time required to play back the audio recording of each AXBT drop through the MK-9, to process the data on the HP-85 computer, and to analyze the temperature profile was approximately 30 minutes per AXBT drop. 90 Tabit )D-1. HH-3F Deployment Data. Deployment # Position A/C Speed Drop Altitude 1 2 34-07.9 N 74-44.4 W 34-58.9 N 75-33.2 W 100-120 Knots 100-120 Knots 2500 Feet 2500 Feet Table D-2. HC-130H Deployment Data. Date Deployment # Position A/C Spped Drop Altitude Nov 18 '87 Nov 18 '87 Jan 7 '88 Jan 7 '88 Jan 7 '88 Jan 7 '88 42-28,9 N 47-56,7 W 42-07,0 N 48-10,0 W 35-44,8 N 73-58.1 W 36-14.8 N 74-00.4 W 37-16,3 N 74-14.8 W 36-49.8 N 74-05,1 W 145 knots 147 knots 155-160 knots 155-160 knots 150 knots 150 knots 2600 feet (descending) 3000 feet (ascending) 8000 feet (level) 8000 feet (level) 4500 feet (level) 8000 feet (right turn) HH-3F Tests Two AXBT's were deployed from an HH-3F on 16 November 1987 (Table D-1). The AXBT tests from ttie HH-3F were successful. A strong, clear signal was received from both AXBTs. Both AXBT's transmitted for a period of time equivalent to a complete 300 m drop. The temperature profile for the second drop was isothermal, probably because it was dropped in waters less than 300 meters, and the temperature probe simply measured the bottom temperature for the remainder of the 3.3 minute drop time. HC-130H Tests AXBT tests were conducted from the HC-130H on two dates, 18 November 1987 and 7 January 1988. Table D-2 summarizes the deployment information for the two dates. On 18 November, two AXBT's were deployed near Newfoundland, Canada. On the second test date, four more AXBT's were deployed oft North Carolina. 91 The 18 November deployments from low altitudes while maneuver- ing were only partially successful. A clear signal was initially received from each AXBT, but static noise soon began to interrupt the AXBT signal. This interference eventu- ally caused a premature signal loss. As a result, neither tempera- ture profile could be read after GO- SO m. There are four possible causes of the observed signal loss: (1) premature scuttling of the AXBT surface transmitter; (2) high sea state; (3) loss of line-of-sight between the AXBT transmitter and the aircraft receiver; and (4) wire break. Since the aircraft was maneuvering at low altitudes and numerous white caps could be observed on the sea surface, any one of these could have caused the signal loss on 18 November. The second HC-130H test (7 January) sought to determine the cause of the premature signal loss. Before the actual testing, avionics technicians from Coast Guard Air Station Elizabeth City, North Carolina, conducted bench testing of the VHF receiver and cassette recorder. The results showed that the receiver was sensitive enough to receive the AXBT signal; the receiver and the aircraft VHF-FM antenna were compatible; and the receiver's audio output was large enough for the for the audio signal to be recorded on tape. In short, the bench testing on the ground indicated the AXBT receiver and recorder should work on the HC- 130. On 7 January, four AXBT's were deployed over a three hour period during an operational Coast Guard flight. Ail four deployments were successful. Good signals were received from all four AXBT's. All AXBT's transmitted for a period of time equivalent to a complete 300 meter drop. The data from deployment 2 had some interfer- ence towards the end of the drop. Deployments 1 and 2 were both done from 8000 feet, but the aircraft increased speed to 250 knots after the AXBT was de- ployed on deployment 2. At this speed, the aircraft was 5 nm farther from the AXBT than at 1 50 knots after three minutes. At first, this does not sound like a signifi- cant difference. Relatively speak- ing, however, the aircraft was 40 percent farther from the AXBT at 250 knots than at 150 knots after three minutes. Deployments 3 and 4 occurred over 2 hours after deployments 1 and 2. The entire data record from deployments 3 (at 4500 feet) and 4 (at 8000 feet) was noisier than either of the previous deploy- ments from 8000 feet. The increase in noise in the tempera- ture profile from these two deploy- ments might have been caused by increased sea state from a coastal storm which was moving into the drop area. HU-25 Testing Tests were conducted from the HU-25 on 22 December and 21 January 1988. Four AXBT's were deployed on 22 December. Due to a problem with the cassette recorder recording the AXBT data, the data from this test were not recoverable for later playback and analysis. It was later learned that the cassette recorder was tem- perature sensitive. Changes in temperature caused the recorder's tape speed to change. Without a frequency standard introduced at the time of recording, the recorded data were not recoverable. 92 Table D-3. HU-25 Deployment Data. Date Deployment # Position A/C Speed Drop Altitude Jan 21 '88 Jan 21 '88 Jan 21 "88 42-57 N 69-51 W 43-00.2 N 69-34.6 W 43-12.4 N 69-32.5 W 140 Knots 140 Knots 140 Knots 8000 feet (level flight) 5000 feet (level flight) 8000 feet (right turn) Three AXBT's were successfully deployed on 21 January (Table D- 3). All three AXBT's transmitted for a period of time equivalent to a complete 300 meter drop. All three AXBT's were deployed in waters less than 300 meters, and the temperature probe again simply measured the bottom temperature for the remainder of the 3.3 minute drop time. How- ever, the goal of the test was to determine the ability to receive data on the airdrop, not to meas- ure the temperature. Operational Use of AXBT's during the 1988 IIP Season Based on the results of the testing, the International Ice Patrol pur- chased and assembled its own AXBT system. It consisted of three single frequency VHP wide band receivers, a Sippican MK-9 Digital Data Interface with the RF demodulator board for AXBT operations, audio cassette record- ers, and an HP-85 desktop computer. The AXBT data would be recorded on audio cassettes on the aircraft for later playback and analysis on the ground. Twelve AXBT's (Table D-4) were deployed from IIP HC-130's in May and June 1988 on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland during ice reconnaissance flights. After each flight, the audio recording of each AXBT drop was played back through the MK-9 and processed using the I-1P-85 computer. Sippican's AXBT computer program was again used to process the data. After process- ing, the digital AXBT data were recorded on magnetic tape. From the digital recording, a series of expanded temperature plots were obtained. IIP personnel manually determined the significant (inflec- tion) points from the AXBT paper trace. Again, it took about 30 minutes to playback, process, and analyze each AXBT. The signifi- cant point analysis was finally telecopied from Newfoundland to the IIP Operations Center in Groton, Connecticut, where a JJXX Bathythermograph message was prepared and transmitted to the Meteorological and Oceano- graphic Center (METOC) in Halifax, Canada; the Naval Eastern Oceanographic Center (NEOC) in Norfolk, Virginia; and the Fleet Numerical Oceanogra- phy Center (FNOC) in Monterey, California. Figure D-3 is a graphic depiction of the data flow. 93 Table D-4. HC- 130H AXBT Deployments during 1988 IIP Season. Date Deployment # May 3 1 May 3 2 May 3 3 May 18 1 May 18 2 May 18 3 Jun4 1 Jun4 2 Jun4 Jun4 Jun4 Jun4 Position 46-15 N 46-05 W 46-15 N 46-35 W 46-15 N 47-00 W 43-00 N 49-41 W 43-00 N 48-30 W 43-00 N 47-29 W 42-15 N 47-00 W 42-15 N 47-40 W 42-15 N 48-20 W 42-15 N 49-00 W 42-15 N 50-00 W 42-15 N 50-59 W A/C Speed Altitude 150 knots 8000 feet 150 knots 8000 feet 150 knots 8000 feet 150 knots 2000-2500 feet (level flight) 150 knots 2000-2500 feet (level flight) 150 knots 2000-2500 feet (left turn) 150 knots 8000 feet 150 knots 8000 feet 150 knots 8000 feet 150 knots 8000 feet 150 knots 8000 feet 150 knots 8000 feet 94 1 AXBT RF Signal r Audio Cassette Recorder ▼ VHF Receiver AXBT Audio Cinnol AXBT Signal 7 MK-9 Audio Cassette Recorder 1 AXBT Digital 'f Data f Ready for Next AXBT HP-85 Computer Depio; /ment Significant Point Analysis and JJXX Message I AXBT Temperature Profile Telecopier IIPOPCEN Groton, CT I FNOC NEOC 1 METOC Figure D-3. AXBT Data Flow. 95 Typical temperature protiles from the deployments are shown in Figures D-4 through D-7. There is a great variation in the quality of the temperature profiles from the twelve AXBT's. The profiles from the three AXBT's deployed on 3 May 1988 were of the best quality (Figure D-4). All three tempera- ture profiles had some spikes in the profile, and the frequency of spikes increased with depth (time). There were many white caps observed on the sea surface when the AXBT's were deployed. The quality of the temperature profiles from the three AXBT's deployed on 18 May 1988 was very poor (Figure D-5). These AXBT's were deployed from a relatively low altitude (2000-2500 feet). The temperature profiles were, overall, much noisier than the temperature profiles from 3 May, despite the fact that the sea conditions were much calmer on 18 May than 3 May. Static noise interference made the temperature profiles unreadable after 170-250 meters. The temperature profile which was readable down to 250 meters (deployment 3) was from an AXBT deployed at the end of a search leg and shortly before a turn. The six AXBT's deployed on 4 June exhibited a wide variation in quality of performance, although the deployment altitude and sea conditions were constant through- out (Figures D-6 and D-7). All six temperature profiles were in general noisier than the tempera- ture profiles of the AXBT's de- ployed on 3 May, which were also deployed from 8000 feet, although the sea conditions were much calmer on 4 June than on 3 May. Conclusions • AXBT's are an excellent means of gathering ocean temperature information at a relatively low cost to the U. S. Coast Guard and IIP. • AXBT data can successfully be collected using a portable, low cost, easy to operate, commer- cially available system such as the one presented here. • IIP can conduct AXBT opera- tions from either the HC-1 30 or HU-25 without airframe modifica- tions. • Optimum AXBT drop conditions are 4000-8000 feet and 150 knots. The aircraft should maintain 150 knots for the entire 3.3 minute drop time. • If local weather conditions dictate dropping at other than optimum conditions, the following guidelines should be used in making a drop decision: a. As altitude decreases or aircraft speed increases, the quality of the AXBT temperature profile decreases, particularly towards the end of the profile. b. A drop from 3000 feet, at 150 knots, and on a steady heading will be unreadable after 150 meters. If the aircraft turns or circles around the drop site after a drop from 3000 feet, the tempera- ture profile will be readable to 200- 250 meters, or the amount of data gathered is essentially doubled. • The quality of the temperature profile decreases with increasing sea state. • The quality of the temperature profile decreases with time (depth) because the distance between the aircraft and AXBT increases. • The loss of quality at low altitudes and at distance from the AXBT is due to poor transmission angle. A loss of line of sight occurs more frequently at low transmission angles due to wave and swell action, particularly in high sea states. This causes interference of the AXBT signal and spiking in the temperature profile. 96 Temperature (*>C) Figure D-4. HC-130 Deployment 1 May 3. 1988. Temperature ("C) | 50 B jp M IS iQe E=- 150 1^-^ ?■ jJS^=— ■ f- ^ 1 <1> 208 k=J o J- 1 250 I^bJ 308 '^siBHi^^^^l ^B F/gure D-5. HC- 730 Deployment 2 May 18, 1988. Temperature (*C) 50 ^Ifc <9 ■ 1 00 ^ g £ 150 f 200 ¥ 1 250 1 ,^ja4_ F/gure D-6. HC- 130 Deployment 1 June 4, 1988. Figure D-7. HC- 130 Deployment 6 June 4, 1988. 97 • Some of the interference or poor signal reception may be due to antenna location on thie HC-130. The AXBT signal may be getting interfered with too easily by having the antenna on the far right side of the aircraft fuselage. • The data analysis method of recording the AXBT data on audio cassettes for later playback and analysis might have worked for testing of the AXBT system, but will not be adequate for routine AXBT operations. The present method is too cumbersome and it takes too long. There is a risk of losing data due to cassette recorder malfunction, as hap- pened during the first HU-25 test. Temperature changes or power fluctuations can affect the reliabil- ity of the cassette recorder, which in turn can affect the data. • Recording the audio AXBT data on audio cassettes also adversely affects the quality of the tempera- ture profile. Recording the audio signal introduces high frequency noise which results in the tem- perature trace being 0.5-1° C wide. Recording the AXBT in digital form would eliminate this high frequency noise, and improve the quality of the temperature profile. Future Plans For the 1989 International Ice Patrol Season, IIP plans the following: • Developing an AXBT system which processes the data real- time, and records the digital data on computer floppy disk with an audio tape recorder back-up. • Developing a program to recall the recorded AXBT data, display it on the computer screen, and manually determine the significant points from the AXBT trace displayed on the screen. • Since the AXBT information is useful to other U.S. and Canadian users, pursuing cooperative funding from these users. IIP would provide the airframe with an AXBT system, the user would provide the AXBT's, and IIP and the users would share the data. 98 Bibliography Bane, J.M., and M. H. Sessions, A Field Performance Test of the SIPPICAN Deep Aircraft-Deployed Expendable Bathythermograph, ^ Geophvs. Res.. 89(C3), 3615-3621, 1984. Boyd, J. D. , Improved Depth and Temperature Equations for SIPPICAN AXBTs. J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech.. 4(3^ MFi-F,F,^, 1987. 99 100 Appendix E International Ice Patrol's Side-Looking Airborne Radar Experiment (SLAREX) 1988 Lt M. A. Alfultis, USCG CDR S. R. Osmer, USCG Abstract During the period 7 through 16 June 1988, the international Ice Patrol conducted an evaluation of the AN/APS-131 Side-Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR). This SLAR, installed as part of the multi-sensor surveillance AIREYE system onboard the U. S. Coast Guard HU-25B medium endur- ance aircraft, was evaluated for its ability to detect icebergs. The data collection occurred in an iceberg infested area off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada. The fundamental goal of this research was to provide guidance on the ability of the AIREYE- equipped HU-25B to perform the iceberg detection mission of the International Ice Patrol. Specifi- cally, there were two objectives: 1 . Determine the optimum altitude for iceberg reconnais- sance, and predict the probability of detection as a function of sea state, lateral range, and iceberg size. 2. Compare the iceberg detection capability of the AN/ APS-131 SLAR with the AN/APS- 135 SLAR currently used on the International Ice Patrol's HC-130 long range reconnaissance aircraft. Ground truth (i.e. iceberg dimen- sions and positions, and environ- mental conditions) were collected by the U. S. Coast Guard ice- breaker NORTHWiND (WAGB 282). The HU-25 and HC-130 aircraft flew a box pattern around the iceberg search area. Several different altitudes were used. The Ice Branch of the Atmospheric Environment Service of Canada also had two of its SLAR-equipped ice reconnaissance aircraft (an Electra and a Dash-7) participate in the experiment. Results indicate the AN/APS-131, while not having the azimuth resolution of the AN/APS-135, is capable of performing the iceberg reconnaissance mission. These preliminary results indicate an altitude of 4000 to 6000 feet is best for the AN/APS-1 31 for this mission. Current plans for the 1989 iceberg season are for the HU-25B to complement the HC-130H recon- naissance aircraft. Due to its limited endurance, the HU-25B aircraft will not be able to replace the longer-range HC-130. How- ever, during certain times of the year and in certain light ice years, the HU-25B should be able to conduct the International Ice Patrol mission. Introduction After the sinking of the RMS TITANIC on April 14-15, 1912, an International Ice Patrol Service was created to monitor the pres- ence of icebergs near the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, and to warn mariners of these hazards. The International Ice Patrol (IIP), a unit of the U. S. Coast Guard, has provided this service since its initiation in 1914. From 1914 to 1945, IIP used visual reconnais- sance from ships to monitor the icebergs. After World War II, and up to 1983, IIP used aircraft visual reconnaissance as its primary method of iceberg detection. Since 1983, IIP has utilized a Motorola AN/APS-135 Side- Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR) onboard HC-130H Hercules long- range aircraft as its primary method of iceberg reconnais- sance. In 1983, the U. S. Coast Guard installed the Motorola AN/APS- 131 SLAR as part of the airborne multi-sensor surveillance AIREYE system on its HU-25B Falcon medium- range aircraft. The AN/ APS-131 SLAR is very similar to the AN/APS-135 SLAR on the HC- 130, except that the antenna length of the APS-1 31 is half that of the APS-135. This results in the APS-131 having a lower azimuth resolution than the APS- 135. Although the iceberg detec- tion ability of the APS-135 SLAR has been previously evaluated, no evaluation of the iceberg detection ability of the APS-131 SLAR has been made. The AIREYE system on the HU- 25B contains other sensors in addition to the SLAR, and are all connected by a computerized multipurpose display system. The AIREYE system has a dry film processor, as does the HC-130H. This film was the object of evalu- ation. 101 This report presents the results of an evaluation of the AN/APS-131 SLAR to detect icebergs. This evaluation was conducted by IIP from 7 to 1 6 June 1 988 in the North Atlantic Ocean off New- foundland, Canada. The funda- mental goal of this research was to provide guidance on the ability of the AIREYE-equipped HU-25B to perform the iceberg detection mission of the International Ice Patrol. Specifically, there were two objectives: 1 . Determine the best altitude for iceberg searches, and predict the probability of iceberg detection as a function of sea state, lateral range, and iceberg size. 2. Compare the iceberg detection capability of the APS- 131 SLAR with the APS-1 35 SLAR. This report will also compare the results of this evaluation with the results of two previous SLAR iceberg detection evaluations. Background Previous SLAR Studies Two previous SLAR studies have been conducted to evaluate the ability of the AN/APS-135 SLAR to detect icebergs. During April 1984, BERGSEARCH '84 was conducted to evaluate the ability of three SLARs and two Synthetic Aperture Radars (SAR) to detect small icebergs and growlers. The M/V POLARIS provided surface truth data. Results of the data analysis reported in Rossiter et al (1985) show greater detectability is obtained with lower sea states, at lower altitudes within the operating envelope of each system, and when viewing targets across rather than up or down wind and sea. BERGSEARCH "84 data also demonstrated that ships and iceberg targets generally do not have different SLAR signa- tures. The 1985 SLAR Detection Experi- ment was designed to determine SLAR's ability to detect various search and rescue and iceberg targets at all ranges out to 27 nm (50 km). The iceberg detection results reported in Robe et al (1985) indicate medium icebergs are detectable nearly 100% of the time in up to 2 m seas, small icebergs are easier to detect at lower altitudes and with a smaller swath width, and growlers are detectable more than 90% of the time in seas less than 1 m. Also, Table E-1. Aircraft Operatirig Characteristics. both growlers and small icebergs in seas less than 1 m appear to be just as detectable at lateral ranges between 25 and 50 km as they are at ranges less than 25 km. Fi- nally, they noted similar iceberg detection performance of the AN/ APS-135 SLAR in this experiment and in BERGSEARCH '84. Description of Aircraft A Coast Guard HC-130H and HU- 25B were the two U.S. aircraft used in the experiment. The HC- 130H is a long-range four engine turboprop reconnaissance aircraft, whereas the HU-25B is a medium- range twin engine fan jet aircraft. CG-1503 from Coast Guard Air Station Elizabeth City, North Carolina, was the HC-130H aircraft in the experiment, and CG- 21 03 from Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod, Massachusetts, was the HU-25B. Table E-1 lists the operating characteristics of the two aircraft. Aircraft HC-130H HU-25B Patrol Altitude 4-10,000 ft 4-1 0,000 ft Patrol Speed 1 80-250 kt 1 80-250 kt Endurance =7.5 hr =3hr Navigation INS (LTN-72) AIRNAV (INS & LORAN) Drop Capable Yes (IncI TOD) Yes (IncI mini-TOD) 102 Description of AN/APS- 135 and AN/APS-131 SLAR Significant system parameters of each SLAR are presented in Table E-2. The major difference be- tween the two systems is the antenna length of each. The APS- 135 has a 4.8 m long antenna, while the APS-131's antenna is 2.4 m long. This results in the APS-131 having one-half the azimuth resolution of the APS- 135. Description of Targets The USCGC NORTHWIND was the only surface vessel used as a SLAR target during the evaluation. The NORTHWIND is a U.S. Coast Guard wind-class icebreaker, and is 81 m long and 19 m wide. IIP classifies icebergs into five size categories: growler, small, medium, large, and very large. Table E-3 lists HP's length and height parameters for each size category. A total of 44 icebergs were used as targets during the evaluation, consisting of 13 small, 27 medium, and 4 large icebergs. No growlers or very large icebergs were used. Table E-2. SLAR Operating Parameters. Aircraft HC-130H HU-25B SLAR (Real Aperture) Motorola Motorola AN/APS- 135 AN/APS-131 Frequency X-Band (9250 MHz) X-Band (9250 MHz) Peak Power 200 Kw 200 Kw Pulse Width P& Mfc Antenna Characteristics Length 4.8 m 2.4 m Polarization VV VV Elevation Coverage -1.5 to-45deg -1.5 to -45 deg Depression Angle 1.5 deg 1.5 deg Azimuth Resolution 0.47 deg O.Sdeg ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^_ . Range Resolution 30 m 30 m Receiver Bandwidth 6 MHz 6 MHz Swath Widths 25,50.100,150 km 25,50.100,150 km Look Direction L&R L&R Data Format Negative Film Negative Film VHS video tape Table E-3. IIP Iceberg Size Categories. Descriptive Name Height (m) Length (m) Growler <5 <15 Small Iceberg 5-15 16-60 Medium Iceberg 16-45 46-75 61-122 123-213 Large Iceberg Very Large Iceberg >75 >213 103 Table E-4. Range of Parameters. Aircraft Target Lateral Search Significant Wind Speed Range Scales Range Altitudes Wave (m/sec) (nm) (nm) (ft) Height (m) Norlhwind 2-27 4,000 6,000 8,000 1-2.7 7.2-17.5 27 HC-130H {APS-135) 10,000 Icebergs 2-27 4,000 1-2.7 7.2-17.5 27 6,000 8,000 10,000 Northwind 2-50 4,000 5,000 6,000 8,000 0.3-2.7 3.1-17.5 27 54 HU-25B (APS-131) 10,000 Icebergs 2-50 4,000 0.3-2.7 3.1-17.5 27 5,000 54 6,000 8,000 10,000 Description of Environmental Conditions Seas were 1-2 meters during most of the experiment. Table E-4 lists the range of environmental and operating parameters observed and used during the experiment. Data Collection Procedures General Data for this evaluation were collectedon7-16 June 1988. The exact location of data collection varied with ice movement within a box bounded by 51° N to 52° N and 52°30' W to 53°30' W (Figure E-1). Each evening, IIP personnel on USCGC NORTHWIND were responsible for selecting the next day's area of study around a group of iceberg targets, and passing the study area coordi- nates to the aircraft using VHP radio prior to the aircraft's depar- ture. The next morning, the aircraft would confirm the location of NORTHWIND, and the study area, after takeoff. During the data collection runs, the IIP crew on NORTHWIND monitored the positions of each iceberg in the study group, and recorded surface environmental data. 104 -*An° 1 1 \ \ -55° -50° -45" 4 < > S£._ »• * * ^ -^^ o > l^f \ yd::^- « /4^ ^ ^ ;^^'2;1 ^ i NEWFOUNDL^ vA' /• u — ■7^ T ^" »^ C \^ ^^ A J-—/ ^^ ''^^i'- ^ z^ v;a ^ 1 t^ /*^ 60* S5« 60" F/gure E- ?. Cross-Hatched Area Depicts SLAREX "89 Study Area 105 Figure E-2. TYPE 1 Search Pattern. CSP is Commerce Searcii Point. Search Patterns Two search patterns were used by the aircraft during the evaluation. Most of the searches were an area (type 1) search consisting of a square with 54 nm (100 km) sides (Figure E-2). Both the HU-25B and HC-130H flew this pattern at four altitudes: 4000, 6000, 8000, and 10,000 feet. All these searches were conducted using the 27 nm (50 km) range scale on the SLAR. 106 Only the HU-25B flew the second search pattern. It was a parallel line (type 2) search (Figure E-3). This pattern was flown at 4000 and 8000 feet. The track spacing was 6 nm (11 km) for the first three legs, and 12 nm (22 km) for the last two legs. Both the 27 nm (50 km) and 54 nm (100 km) range scale on the SLAR were used on this pattern. Because of the limited amount of data col- lected with the 54 nm scale, no discussion on the use of this scale for ice reconnaissance will be made in this report. T 1 1 \ 1 1 25 nm 1 1 1 1 50nm Scale 27 nm 27 nm 0^ -5> Scale Scale 1 1 i j Winil 1 J 1 \^_y w 1 ■ 4 8 3 __l 6 24 18 12 6 0 nm Figure E-3. Type 2 Search Pattern. 107 Table E-5 lists the pattern and altitude each aircraft flew for each day of the experiment. SLAR Data Format The output analog imagery from both the APS-131 and APS-135 SLAR was recorded on 23 cm wide dry-process film. The HU- 25B also used a video recorder to record the analog imagery on VHS tape format. Two logs were maintained on the aircraft to aid the data analysis. The SLAR Search Run Summary Sheets recorded the start and stop time of each leg; aircraft speed, altitude, and heading; and SLAR settings. The second was a SLAR Target Log to record latitude, longitude, and time of each SLAR target observed by the SLAR operator, as well as the SLAR operator's interpretation of the SLAR target (ship or iceberg, and iceberg size). The SLAR operator also circled the target on the SLAR film, and annotated the film with the target number from the SLAR Target Log. Table E-5. Aircraft Search Pattern. Date 8 June 9 June 10 June 11 June 12 June 13 June 15 June Aircraft HC-130 HU-25 HC-130 HC-130 HC-130 HU-25 HU-25 HU-25 HU-25 HU-25 HU-25 HU-25 HC-130 HC-130 HC-130 HC-130 HU-25 HU-25 HU-25 HU-25 HU-25 Search Pattern 2 2 1 1 1 Altitude (ft) 8000 6000 4000 6000 10,000 6000 8000 4000 10,000 8000 4000 5000 4000 6000 8000 10,000 8000 4000 6000 8000 10,000 Number of Sorties 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 1 108 Table E-6. Total Detection Opportunities (Type 1 and Type 2 Searches, 27 and 54 nm Scales) HU-25B HC-130H (APS-131) (APS-135) s 133 48 M 230 132 L 45 17 Northwind 76 31 Total 484 228 Surface Truth Data Every 15 minutes, IIP personnel on USCGC NORTHWIND re- corded NORTHWIND's position and, bearing and range to every visible ice target in the SLAR Target Position Record. Position data were obtained from a GPS/ LORAN C receiver. The bearing and range data were obtained from NORTHWIND's surface search radar. Every 30 minutes, IIP personnel recorded surface environmental conditions, includ- ing wind speed/direction, cloud cover, visibility, sea state, humid- ity, and air and water temperature. Post-Analysis Following the experiment, IIP personnel used the SLAR film, SLAR Search Run Summary Sheets, SLAR Target Logs, and SLAR Target Position Records to reconstruct and describe each target detection opportunity. The IIP analysts correlated the SLAR Target Position Records with the SLAR film to determine which of the documented targets were discernible on the film. Results and Discussion Table E-6 summarizes the total number of detection opportunities for each SLAR. Table E-7 shows the distribution of the detection opportunities with altitude and lateral range for each SLAR. For the APS-135, the detection opportunities were distributed evenly between the four altitudes 4,000, 6,000, 8,000, and 10,000 feet and in the mid to far-range (5 to27nm). For the APS-131. most of the detection opportunities were at 4,000 and 8,000 feet and in the far range (15-27 nm). 109 Table E-7. Total Detection Opportunities as a Function of Alititude and Lateral Range. HC-130H (APS-135) Total Detection Opportunities 1 (Type 1 Searches) Range (nm) 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-27 Total Altitude (ft) 4.000 1 15 14 7 18 55 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,000 0 14 12 14 20 60 8,000 0 13 8 15 17 53 10,000 0 13 13 15 19 60 12,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1 55 47 51 74 228 HU-25B (APS-131) Total Detection Opportunities (Type 1 and Type 2 Searches) Range (nm) 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-27 27-50* Total Altitude (ft) 4,000 16 27 19 31 29 0 122 5,000 0 9 2 11 11 0 33 6,000 2 16 10 17 17 0 62 8,000 8 37 39 38 52 28 202 10,000 3 1 5 10 22 0 41 12,000 0 0 0 6 0 18 24 Total 29 90 75 113 131 46 484 *27-50 nm ranges for Type 2 Searches only. 110 Table t-6. Probability of Detection as a Function of Iceberg Size (Type 1 and Type 2 Searches. 27 nm Scale) Detections/Opportunities (POD) HU-25B HC-130H APS-131 APS-135 ™ .Small 114/1 16 (.98) 47/48 (.98) Medium 200/203 (.98) 132/132 (1 .00) Large 36/36 (1.00) 17/17 (1.00) Total 350/355 (.99) 196/197 (.99) Northwind 53/53 (1.00) 31/31 (1.00) Table E-8 lists the number of SLAR detections over the number of detection opportunities, and the probability of detection (POD), for each SLAR as a function of iceberg size (and for the NORTH- WIND). The two SLARs have a very similar iceberg detection capability. The iceberg POD (for small, medium, and large ice- bergs) for each SLAR is 99 percent. Table E-9 lists the iceberg POD as a function of lateral range and altitude. Again, both SLARs have a similar iceberg detection capabil- ity at all altitudes and lateral ranges. There is no significant variation in iceberg POD with lateral range or altitude. There is a small decrease in iceberg POD at 8,000 and 1 0,000 feet for the APS-131 SLAR, however. These results are similar to the results obtained during BERGSEARCH ■84 and the 1985 SLAR Detection Experiment, for the given type of targets and sea conditions. 111 Table E-9. Iceberg POD as a Function of Lateral Range and Altitude (Type 1 and 2 Searches, 27 nm Scale) HC-130H HU-25B Range (nm) APS-135 APS-131 0-4 1/1 (1.00) 24/24(1.00) 5-9 53/53(1.00) 82/83 (.99) 10-14 42/42(1.00) 62/63 (.98) 15-19 43/43(1.00) 85/88 (.97) 20-27 57/58 (.98) 97/97(1.00) HC-130H HU-25B Altitude (ft) APS-135 APS-131 4,000 47/47(1.00) 105/105(1.00) 5.000 - 29/29(1.00) 6,000 52/52(1.00) 52/52(1.00) 8,000 46/46(1.00) 130/134 (.97) 10,000 51/52 (.98) 31/32 (.97) 12,000 - 3/3(1.00) 112 Table E-10. Number of SLAR Targets Missed by SLAR Observers over Total Number of SLAR Targets. HC-130H (APS-135) Operator Misses Altitude (ft) 4,000 5,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 s 0/12 0/12 1/12 1/11 M 2/31 2/36 7/29 2/36 L 0/4 0/4 1/5 0/4 Total 2/47 2/52 9/46 3/51 Northwind 0/8 0/8 0/7 0/8 HU-25B (APS-131) Operator Misses Altitude (ft) 4,000 5,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 S 0/35 1/8 3/15 0/44 0/11 M 0/58 1/17 3/30 1/74 0/20 L 0/12 0/4 0/7 0/12 0/0 Total 0/105 2/29 6/52 1/130 0/31 Northwind 0/17 0/4 1/10 0/27 0/9 ^ Table E-1 0 shows the distribution of the number of SLAR targets missed by the HC-130H and HU- 25B SLAR observers over the total number of targets detected by the SLAR with altitude. Table E-1 1 shows the distribution of HC-130H and HU-25B SLAR operator misses with lateral range. Although there is not enough data to draw any clear conclusions, some broad tendencies can be drawn from the data in Tables E- IOandE-11. Forthe HC-130H, there is an indication in Table E-10 that the SLAR observer is more likely to miss a target on the SLAR film at altitudes 8000 feet and greater than at altitudes less than 8000 feet. Forthe HU-25B observers, there is no clear indication at which altitude the SLAR observers are most likely to miss targets. The greatest percentage of misses was at 6000 feet, while the least percentage of misses was at 8000 feet. Table E- 1 1 indicates that the HC-130H and HU-25B SLAR obsen/ers are more likely to miss targets at lateral ranges greater than 15 nm than at lateral ranges less than 15 nm. 113 Table E-1 1. Number of SLAR Targets Missed by SLAR Observers over Total Number of SLAR Targets. HC-130H(APS- 135) Operator Misses Range (nm) 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-27 ^■'■■:. S.-:::::::::: 0/0 0/0 0/17 2/8 0/22 M 0/1 3/37 0/24 3/35 7/35 L 0/0 1/16 0/1 0/0 0/0 Total 0/1 4/53 0/42 5/43 7/57 Northwind 0/0 : 0/2 ,,.;:, 0/5 0/8 0/16 HU-25B (APS- 131) Operator Misses Range (nm) 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-27 B S 0/12 1/20 0/19 2/28 1/35 M 1/10 1/40 0/37 0/51 3/62 1:: L 0/2 0/22 0/6 0/6 0/0 Total 1/24 2/82 0/62 2/85 4/97 Northwind 0/5 0/7 0/9 0/17 1/29 114 Table E- 12. HC- 130H Operator Object Misinterpretations. Number of Incorrect Object Misinterpretations vs Total Number of SLAR Targets Altitude (ft) 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 s 0/12 0/12 0/12 2/11 M 1/31 0/36 1/29 2/36 L 0/4 0/4 0/5 0/4 Total 1/47 0/52 1/46 4/51 Northwind 1/8 0/8 3/7 6/8 Range (nm) 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-27 S 0/0 0/0 1/17 0/8 i/22 M 0/1 1/37 0/24 1/35 2/35 L 0/0 0/16 0/1 0/0 0/0 Total Northwind 0/1 0/0 1/53 '"'"''""1/2"""" 1/42 1/43 3/57 3/5 3/8 6/16 Table E-12 lists the distribution of the number of incorrect interpreta- tions by the HC-130H SLAR observers over the total number of SLAR targets with altitude and lateral range. This table considers only whether the target was wrongly interpreted as an iceberg or ship. Table E-13 lists the distribution of HC-130H observer misinterpretations of SLAR target size over total number of SLAR targets with altitude and lateral range. Since the HU-25B SLAR observers were inexperienced at interpreting SLAR data, they were not considered. Again, no clear conclusions can be made from the data in Tables E-12 and E-13, but some tenden- cies can be seen. Tables E-12 and E-13 indicate the HC-130H observers were more likely to misinterpret the type and size of the SLAR target at altitudes 8000 feet and higher, and at lateral ranges greater than 1 0 nm. In addition to the data given in Tables E-10 through E-13, the quality of the SLAR imagery from 4000 and 6000 feet seemed better than from 8000 or 10,000 feet. The imagery of ships from 4000 and 6000 feet was harder with sharp edges, making it easier to differentiate between a ship or an iceberg at these altitudes. 115 Table E-13. HC-130H Operator Size Misinterpretations. Number of Incorrect Size Interpretations vs Total Number of SLAR Targets Altitude (ft) 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 s 1/12 1/12 3/12 3/11 M 0/31 0/36 0/29 0/36 L 0/4 0/4 0/5 0/4 Total 1/47 1/52 3/46 3/51 Northwind 1/8 0/8 0/7 0/8 Range (nm) 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-27 S 0/0 0/0 3/17 2/8 3/22 M L 0/1 0/0 0/37 0/16 0/24 0/35 0/35 U/1 U/U U/U Total 0/1 0/53 3/42 2/43 3/57 Northwind 0/0 1/2 0/5 0/8 0/16 116 Conclusions For the given sea conditions and size of targets, all altitudes and lateral ranges out to 27 nm appear suitable for iceberg searches. For the APS-131 SLAR, an altitude of 6,000 feet and lower appears to be a slightly better altitude for iceberg reconnaissance than 8,000 feet or higher. More study is needed at higher sea states and with smaller ice targets before any final conclusions can be drawn regarding the optimum iceberg search altitude and the POD as a function of sea state, lateral range, and iceberg size. The APS-131 is very similar in its iceberg detection capability to the APS-135. These results indicate it is capable of performing the iceberg reconnaissance mission of the International Ice Patrol. Current plans for the 1989 iceberg season are for the HU-25B to complement the HC-130H recon- naissance aircraft. Due to its limited endurance, the HU-25B aircraft will not be able to replace the longer-range HC-130H. However, during certain times of the year and in certain light ice years, the HU-25B should be able to conduct the International Ice Patrol mission. 117 Bibliography Rossiter, J.R., L.D. Arsenault, E.V. Guy, D.J. Lapp, and E. Wedler, "BergSearch '84: Assessment of Airborne Imaging Radars for the Detection of Icebergs. Summary Report - Results, Conclu- sions, and Recommendations," Environmental Studies Revolv- ing Funds Project, CANPOLAR Consultants, Ltd, Toronto, Ontario, 1985. Robe, R.Q., N.C. Edwards, Jr, D.L. Murphy, N.B. Thayer, G.L. Hover, and M.E. Kop, "Evaluation of Surface Craft and Ice Target Detection Performance by the AN/APS-135 Side-Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR)", U.S. Coast Guard. Washington D.C., 1985. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1990/500-169/20016 118 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I JM I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ill I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40°: 39°i denotes the mean position of the Labrador Current :52° = 51° E50° 49° 48° E47° 46° 45° 44° b43° 42° 41° I 40° E39° 38°1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III I II II II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M II I 38^^ 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° Figure 33. This figure depicts the mean position of the Labrador Current, the main mechanism for transporting icebergs south to the Grand Banks. U. S. Department of Transportation United States Coast Guard Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic ' ""'^^' Biological tc LIBRARY Vv^ods Hole, Mass. HU-25 Aireye Falcon Introduced to Ice Petrol Service in 1988 1989 Season Bulletin No. 75 CG- 188-44 U. S. Department of Transportation United States Coast Guard Report of the International Ice Patrol In the North Atlantic HU-25 Alreye Falcon Introduced to Ice Patrol Sen/ice In 1988 1989 Season Bulletin No. 75 CG- 188-44 U.S. DeparTmenf of Transportation United States Coast Guard Commandant United States Coast Guard MAILING ADDRESS: 2100 2nd St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20593 (202)267-1450 Bulletin No. 75 REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC Season of 1989 CG-188-44 Forwarded herewith is bulletin No. 75 of the International Ice Patrol, describing the Patrol's services, ice observations and conditions during the 1989 season. J. W. LOCKWOOD Chief, Office of Navigation Safety and Waterway Services Marine Biological Laboratory LIBRARY •• I JUL 24 1991 i V/oods Hole, Mass. 1 DISTRIBUTION— SDL No. 129 a b c d e f g h i 1 k 1 m n 0 P q r s t u V w X y z 3* 1* 1* 2 1 2 2 1 1* 1* 60 NON-STANDARD DISTRIBUTION: B:a G-NIO only; B:b LANTAREA (5), PACAREA (1); B:c First Fifth Districts only; C:a CGAS Elizabeth City only; C:q LANTAREA only; SML CG-4 INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL 1989 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS I 03 INTRODUCTION 04 SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS 08 ICEBERG RECONNAISSANCE AND COMMUNICATIONS 1 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, 1 989 SEASON 21 ICE CON DITIONS, 1 989 SEASON 47 DISCUSSION OF ICE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 48 REFERENCES 49 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS APPENDICES 50 A. LIST OF PARTICIPATING VESSELS, 1989 63 B. 1989 DRIFTING BUOY PROGRAM 87 0. ICEBERG MOVEMENT DETERMINED BY SATELLITE TRACKED PLATFORMS I Introduction This is the 75th annual report of the International Ice Patrol (IIP). It contains information on Ice Patrol operations, environmental conditions, and ice conditions for the 1 989 IIP season. The U.S. Coast Guard conducts the International Ice Patrol Service in the North Atlantic under the provisions of U.S. Code, Title 46, Sections 738, 738a through 738d, and the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, regulations 5-8. This service was initiated shortly after the sinking of the RMS TITANIC on April 15, 1912 and has been provided annually since that time. Commander, International Ice Patrol, working under Commander, Coast Guard Atlantic Area, directs the IIP from offices tocated in Groton, Connecticut. IIP analyzes ice and environmental data, prepares daily ice bulletins and facsimile charts, and replies to requests for ice information. IIP uses aerial Ice Reconnaissance Detachments and surface patrol cutters to survey the southeastern, southern, and southwestern regions of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland for icebergs. IIP makes twice-daily radio broadcasts to warn mariners of the limits of all known ice. Vice AdmiralJ. C. Inwin was Commander, Atlantic Area until March 31 , 1 989, and Vice Admiral H. B. Thorsen was Commander, Atlantic Area, from March 31, 1989, to the end of the 1989 ice year. CDR S. R. Osmer was Commander, International Ice Patrol until July 31, 1989. CDR J. J. Murray commanded Ice Patrol for the remainder of the 1989 ice year. Pages Summary of Operations, 1989 The 1989 IIP year (October 1, 1 988 - SeptemberSO, 1 989) marked the 75th anniversary of the Interna- tional Ice Patrol, which was estab- lished Feboiary 7, 1914. HP's op- erating area is delineated by 40°N - 52°N, 39°W - 57°W (Figure 1). During 1 989, Coast Guard HC-1 30H aircraft equipped with the AN/APS- 135 Side-Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR) flew 44 ice reconnaissance sorties, logging over 207 flight hours, and Coast Guard HU-25B aircraft equipped with the AN/APS-131 SLAR flew 27 reconnaissance sorties, logging over 84 flight hours. Aircraft deployments were made from January 26 to 31 and February 16 to 25 to determine the preseason iceberg distribution. Based on the latter preseason de- ployment, the 1989 IIP season was opened on 1 March. From this date until August 9, 1989, an aerial Ice- berg Reconnaissance Detachment (ICERECDET) operated from New- foundland one week out of every two. The IIP base of operations in Newfoundland shifted from Gander to St. John's during the 1989 season. The seasonofficiallyclosedon July 28, 1989. Watchstanders at HP's Op- erations Center in Groton, Con- necticut analyze the iceberg sighting information from the ICERECDETs, along with sighting information from commercial shipping and Atmo- spheric Environment Service (AES) of Canada sea ice/iceberg recon- naissance flights. In 1989, IIP ac- tively pursued obtaining iceberg sighting information from additional sources, such as the Canadian Department of Defense, the Cana- dian Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and the commercial off- shore fishing industry. The IIP Operations Center received a total of 5,154 iceberg sightings in 1989, compared to 35,129 in 1988. The decrease is explained by cutbacks in AES Canada's iceberg flights and cur- tailment of offshore oil industry op- erations. Only those iceberg sightings made during the ice sea- son and within HP's operations area (40°N - 52°N, 39°W - 57°W) are entered into the IIP iceberg drift pre- diction computermodel(ICEPLOT). 1184 sightings were in HP's opera- tions area in 1989, compared to 1340 in 1988, and 1098 of these were entered into HP's computer model, compared to 1160 in 1988. Watchstanders determine whether each sighting is a resight of an ice- berg llPalready has on ICEPLOTor a new iceberg. Iceberg sightings near the Newfoundland coast are not entered into the computer model due to a lack of ocean current in- formation in these areas. HP's computer model con- sists of one routine which predicts the drift of each iceberg and another which predicts the deterioration of each. The drift prediction program uses a historical current file which is modified weekly using satellite- tracked ocean drifting buoy data, thus taking into account local, short- term, current fluctuations. Murphy and Anderson (1985) describe the IIP drift model in more detail, along with an evaluation of the model. The IIP iceberg deteriora- tion program uses daily wind, sea surface temperature, and wave height information from the U.S. Navy Fleet Numerical Oceanogra- phy Center (FNOC) to melt the ice- Table 1 Sources of International Ice Patrol Iceberg Sightings By Size Percent .^^ 335 347 205 82 1039 873 34.8 29.2 Coast Guard (IIP) ry 70 23 Commercial Ship 213 383 177 26 Offshore Oil Indust 74 47 110 84 122 28 66 26 0 6 8 269 256 9.0 non ^niirrfiQ 8.6 l-/vxi-/ vJWUIVyCO HI 0 117 1 fafa 79 Canadian AES 253 8.5 BAPS 7 66 102 29 10 14 555 1 0 5 12£ 205 6.9 0.9 2.1 100.0 Lighthouse/Shore Other Total 0 4 >25 4 15 922 13 26 1156 27 64 ] 2986 Page 4 52° N 50° N 48° N 46° N — I 44° N I 42° N 40° N 58° W 54° W 50° W 46° W Figure 1 . Bathymetry of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Pages bergs. Anderson (1983) and Hanson (1987) describe the llPdeterioration model in detail. It is the combined ability of the SLAR to detect icebergs in all weather and HP's computer models to estimate iceberg drift and deterioration which has enabled IIP to reduce its ICERECDET opera- tions from overlapping weekly de- ployments to every other week de- ployments. Table 1 shows the total iceberg sightings reported to IIP in 1 989 (including resights) which were in MP's operations area and away from the Newfoundland coast. Sightings are broken down by the sighting source and iceberg size. IIP ICERECDET and commercial shipping were the major sources of iceberg sighting reports this season. AES of Canada was not able to provide as many reports this season as last. Appendix A lists all iceberg sightings received from commercial shipping, regardless of the sighting location. Table 2 lists monthly esti- mates of the total number of icebergs that crossed 48°N during the vari- ous reconnaissance eras: pre-ln- ternational Ice Patrol, ship, aircraft visual, and aircraft SLAR eras. Table 3 compares the estimated number of icebergs crossing 48°N for each month of 1 989 with the monthly mean number of icebergs crossing 48°N for each of the four different eras. During the 1989 ice year, an estimated 301 icebergs drifted south of 48°N latitude, compared to 187 during 1988. The average number of icebergs drifting south of 48°N peryearfrom1900to 1987is 403 icebergs (Alfultis, 1987). IIP defines those ice years with less than 300 icebergs crossing 48°N as light ice years ; those with 300 to 600 crossing 48°N as average; those with 600 to 900 crossing 48°N as heavy; and those with more than 900 crossing 48°N as extreme. Thus, 1989 was an average year. Table 2: Total Icebergs South of 48*N - The four periods shown are pre-lnternational Ice Patrol (1900-1912), ship recon- naissance (1913-45), aircraft visual reconnaissance (1946-82), and SLAR reconnaissance (1983-88). Total Total Total Total 1989 1900-12 1913-45 1946-82 1983-88 OCT 27 80 2 3 3 NOV 13 93 4 11 0 DEC 38 42 11 14 0 JAN 33 87 65 13 0 FEB .::.::::::^:..:::., 372 273 239 19 MAR 898 1204 1172 450 127 < APR 1537 3308 3131 1731 68 MAY 1611 5472 2993 1275 39 iJUN 1004 2514 1865 813 35 JUL 423 773 489 586 10 ^IS^i^SSSS: 16(3^ S5;-:':Wi'-K?S:!OTflvftv:^^^« ^^00 148 0 SEP i-i-: -■ ss'-^- 188 10 43 0 Total 5,881 14,362 10,115 5,326 301 Page 6 Nine satellite-tracked ocean drifting buoys were deployed to provide operational data for MP's iceberg drift model. These buoys were the same standard size drifting buoys IIP has been deploying for fourteen years. In addition, several of these buoys were, for the first time, equipped with barometric pressure sensors. The U.S. Naval Oceanographic Command provided the funding for these barometric sensors. Drift data from these buoys are discussed in Appendix B. Prior to the start of the 1 989 season, 1 1 P modified its Air-deployed expendable BathyThermograph ( AXBT) system which was first used in 1988 (Alfultis, 1988). During the 1989 season, IIP operationally de- ployed 40 AXBT's which were pro- vided by the U.S. Naval Oceano- graphic Command. The AXBT measures temperature with depth and transmits the data back to the aircraft. Temperature data from the AXBTs were sent to the Canadian tvleteorological and Oceanographic Center (f^ETOC) in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, the U.S. Naval Eastern Oceanography Center (NEOC) in Norfolk, Virginia, and FNOC for use as inputs into ocean temperature models. IIP directly benefits from its AXBT deployments by having improved ocean tem- perature data provided to its iceberg deterioration rrrodel. To further en- hance the quality of environmental data used in its iceberg nnodels, IIP also provided weekly drifting buoy sea surface temperature (SST) and drift histories and SLAR ocean fea- ture analyses to METOC and NEOC for use in water mass and SST analyses. IIP SLAR-equipped HC-1 30 and HU-25 aircraft participated in the Labrador Ice Margin Experiment (LIMEX ) 1989. HP's goals in par- ticipating in LIMEX 89 were to investigate SLAR detection of ice- bergs and vessels near the ice mar- gin and SLAR detection of oceanic fronts. In addition, IIP used satellite- tracked beacons to monitor iceberg drift in the sea ice. Appendix C discusses MP's participation in this experiment. No U. S. Coast Guard cut- ters were deployed to act as surface patrol or oceanographic vessels this year. On April 15, 1989, IIP paused to remember the 77*'^ anni- versary of the sinking of the RMS TITANIC. During an ice reconnais- sance patrol, two memorial wreaths were placed near the site of the sinking to commemorate the nearly 1500 lives lost. Table 3: Average Number of Icebergs South of 48*N - The four periods shown are pre- International Ice Patrol (1900-1912), ship reconnaissance (1913-45), aircraft visual reconnaissance (1946-82), and SLAR reconnaissance (1983-88). Avg Avg Avg Avg 1900-12 1913-45 1946-82 1983-88 1989 1©CSP* 2 2 0 1 NOV 1 3 0 2 DEC 3 1 0 2 W JAN 2 3 2 2 0 FEB 6 11 7 40 19 MAR 69 36 32 75 127 APR 118 10Q. .... ....................85.... 288 68 MAY 124 166 81 212 39 JUN 77 76 .::.:.::-:.:.:.:.g^.:.. 136 35 JUL 32 23 13 98 10 AUG 12 7 3 25 0 SEP 4 6 0 7 0 Era 45D 434 273 888 301 Average Page 7 Iceberg Reconnaissance and Communications During the 1989 Ice Patrol year, 139 aircraft sorties were flown in support of IIP. These included preseason flights, ice observation flights during the season, , and SLAR research flights. The purpose of preseason flights was to determine iceberg concentrations north of 48°N in order to predict when icebergs would threaten the North Atlantic shipping lanes. During the active season, ice observation flights were made to locate the southwestern, southern, and southeastern limits of icebergs. Postseason flights were made to survey the iceberg distri- bution and perform logistics and li- aison in St. John's. The SLAR re- search flights were in support of LIMEX '89. Aerial ice reconnaissance was conducted with SLAR-equipped U. S. Coast Guard HC-130H and HU-25B aircraft. The HC-130H air- craft deployed from Coast Guard Air Station Elizabeth City, North Caro- lina, and HU-25B aircraft deployed from Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Both aircraft participated in LIMEX '89, and both were used on logistics flights. Tables 4, 4a, and 4b sfiow aircraft use during the 1 989 ice year. The HC-130 'Hercules' air- craft has been the platform for Ice Patrol aerial reconnaissance since 1963. This was the second year for the HU-25B to serve as an Ice Patrol platform. Although the HU-25B does not have the range of the HC-130, it can serve as an excellent comple- ment and is capable of covering a majority of the IIP operations area. Each day during the ice sea- son, IIP prepares the OOOOZ and 1 200Z ice bulletins warning mariners of the southwestern, southern, and south- eastern limits of icebergs. U.S. Coast Guard Communicatbns Station Bos- ton, Massachusetts, NMF/NIK, and Canadian Coast Guard Radb Statbn St. John'sA/ON were the primary radb statbns responsble for the dissemina- tbn of the ice bulletins. Other transmit- ting statbns for the bulletins included Canadian Forces Meteorobgical and Oceanographic Center (METOC) Halifax, Nova Scotia/CFH, and U.S. Navy LCMP Broadcast Statbns Nor- folk/NAM, Thurso, Scotland, and Keflavk, Iceland. IIP also prepares a daily facsimile chart graphically depicting the limits of all known ice for broad- cast at 1600Z. U. S. Coast Guard Communications Station Boston assisted with the transmission of these charts. Canadian Forces METOC, Halifax/CFH, and AM Ra- dio Station Bracknell/GFE, United Kingdom used Ice Patrol limits in their broadcasts. Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John's/ VON and U.S. Coast Guard Communi- cations Station Boston/N IK provided special broadcasts. Table 4 • Aircraft Use During the 1989 IIP Year (1 October 1988 - 30 September 1989) Aircraft Deployment Preseason Regular Season Post Season Total Sorties 12 120 7 139 Flight Hours 44.6 411.1 15.8 471.5 Iceberg Reconnaissance Sorties by Month Month Jan Feb Mar Sorties Flig 2 3 19 7 9 13 16 2 71 ht Hours 9.8 13.4 78.9 Apr 44.5 45.2 44.8 49.5 5.3 May Jun Jul Aug -T— A_l lOldl 291.4 Page 8 Tebl* 4a - HC-130H Aircraft Usa During tha 1 989 IIP Yaar (1 Octobar 1988 • 30 Saptamber 1989) Aircraft Daploymant Preseason Regular Season Post Season Tolal Sortlas 12 74 7 93 Right Hours 44.6 306.7 15.8 367.1 Icabarg Raconnalssanca Sortlas by Month Rtonth Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Total Sorties 2 3 8 7 9 13 0 2 44 Flight Hours 9.8 13.4 44.4 44.5 452 44.8 0.0 5.3 207.4 The International Ice Patrol requested that all ships transiting the area of the Grand Banks report ice sightings, weather, and sea sur- face tennperatures via Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John's/VON or U. S. Coast Guard Communications Station Boston/ NIK. Response to this request is shown in Table 5, and Appendix A lists all contributors. Although St John's/VON remained the primary source of relayed information, IIP received more relayed information from the following sources during the 1989 ice year than in previous years: ECAREG Halifax, Canada; U.S. Coast Guard Communications and MasterStation Atlantic, Norfolk, Virginia; and U.S. Coast Guard Au- tomated Merchant Vessel Emer- gency Response/Operational Computer Center, New York. Table 4b - HU-25B Aircraft Use During the 1989 IIP Year (1 October 1988 - 30 September 1989) Aircraft Deployment Preseason Regular Season Post Season Total Sorties 0 46 0 46 Flight Hours 0 104.4 0.0 104.4 Iceberg Reconnaissance Sorties by Month Month Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Total Sorties Rig htHc >urs 11 0 0 34.5 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 16 49.5 0 27 0.0 84.0 Pages Table 5 Iceberg and SST Reports Number of ships furnishing Sea Surface Temperature (SST) reports 97 Number of SST reports received 376 Number of ships furnishing ice reports 255 Number of ice reports received 1032 First Ice Bulletin 010000ZMAR89 Last Ice Bulletin 281200ZJUL89 Number of facsimile charts transmitted 150 Page 10 Environmental Conditions, 1989 Season The wind direction along the La- brador and Newfoundland coasts can affect the iceberg severity of each ice year since the mean wind flow can influence iceberg drift. Dependent upon wind intensity and duration, icebergs can be ac- celerated along or driven out of the main flow of the Labrador Current. Departure from the La- brador Current normally slows their southerly drift and, in many cases, speeds up their rate of deterioration. The wind direction and air tem- perature indirectly affect the ice- berg severity of each ice year by influencing the extent of sea ice. Sea ice protects the icebergs from wave action, the major agent of iceberg deterioration. If the air temperature and wind direction are favorable for the sea ice to extend to the south and over the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, the icebergs will be protected longer as they drift south. When the sea ice retreats in the spring, large numbers of icebergs will be left behind on the Grand Banks. Also, if the time of sea ice retreat is delayed by below normal air temperatures, the icebergs will be protected longer, and a longerthan normal ice season can be ex- pected. The opposite is tnje if the southerly sea ice extent is minimal, or if above normal airtemperatures cause an early retreat of sea ice from the Grand Banks. The following discussion summa- rizes the environmental conditions along the Labrador and New- foundland coasts for the 1989 ice year. January: The monthly mean pressure of the Icelandic Low was about 18 mb lower in January than normal (Figure 2). The winds for the month were from the northwest over the Labrador Coast (AES, 1989). February: The mean Icelandic Low forthe month was northeast of Iceland and lower than normal. The Azores- Bermuda High was 10 mb higher than normal (Figure 3). As a result, tfie mean winds over Newfoundland arxj Labrador during the nronth were colder and more westerly than normal (AES, 1989). March: The ninthly mean pressure for the month shows a summer-time Azores-Bermuda High and a winter- time Icelandic Low (Figure 4), and thus both were nnore intense than normal (Mariner's Weather Log, 1989a). This resulted in 20 mb negative anomalies over Iceland and lOmb positive anomalies in thie mid North Atlantic. The prevailing wirxJs continued to be nnore westerly than normal along the Labrador and east Newfoundland coasts (AES, 1989). April: The Azores-Bermuda High covered a large part of the North Atlantic and was 5 rrb higher than normal (Figure 5). As expected, the Icelandic Low spread out from La- brador to Iceland, but, unexpectedly, it also covered Europe, creating negative anomalies (Mariner's Weather Log, 1989b). Moderate northwest to westerly winds prevailed over east Newfoundbndwaters(AES, 1 989) ratherthan the normal northerly winds. May: The Azores-Bermuda High had an extension covering from Nova Scotia to eastern Europe (Fixjre 6). This extension covered the area usu- ally occupied by the Icelandic Low, resulting in a band of positive anomalies (Mariner's Weather Log, 1989b). The mean windflow was from the southwest fortfie first part of the month and then shifted to north- westerly (AES, 1989). Light southwesterlies usually prevail throughout the month. June: Although ttieAzores-Bennuda High was weaker than normal, it still covered nrost of tfie North Atlantic (Figure 7). The Icelandic Low was over Greenland, north of its normal position, resulting in a slightly higher than normal pressure off Labrador. Winds were very light over the regbn during the montfi. July: The Azores-Bermuda High covered most of the North Atlantic, and it also extended over the United Kingdom, thus creating positive anomalies in this region (Figure 8). Although a weak high normally exists over Greenland, a mild Icelandic Low persisted in this area during July (Mariner's Weather Log, 1990). The winds were typical southwesteriies. August: The Icelandic Low was centeredover Iceland and much nrx>re intense thian normal, aeating up to 10-mb negative aromalies (Figure 9). The mean pressures for the re- gion were abnormal due to the in- tense bw and a midsummer Azores- Bermuda High (Mariner's Weather Log, 1990). September: The Icelandic Low usually reappears during Septenv ber, but this year it was already present in August (Mariner's Weather Log, 1990). The Icelandic Low was nxire extensive than normal, ttxxigh, and thus aeated negative anomalies (Figure 10). The Azores-Bermuda High was approximately normal, but slightly nnore intense than normal around the edges. There was a normal westerly flow over New- foundland. Page 1 1 Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) January 1989 Page 12 Figure 2. Comparison of January 1989 monthly mean surtace pressure in mb (bottom, from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989a) with March historical average, 1948- ^1970 (tOD^. Sea Level Pressure h Monthly Mean (mb) February 1989 Figure 3. February 1989 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989a). page i3 J-VII^ML^—rt i\ \r-N_ 1 • VW# N.1 1- J L\ 1 " ' * vt|g^~J' V ' ■* 1 1 \-^^^^V\aX^^-^^^ 'i&2oW ^ 3x1/'^^ T— nv \ ' Y Ll005^ Yx/xc' h7^ . X r^eyS4iJ V 1 I 1\^^ » * / / 7~jp^ { jX/ //"■■■■-A l2>-?7^^\^ w*^^^ /XJ "^^i:^ ->xA — , y v>vZ r 1 / / 1 \ > \ ^ /A^ ^lozoX / / ^ A L Uq^^'^V^^ 'TorrnT^ ^ ^1016 • X ' )\2 -=. -^ ' A ^ -XX -NJDULH Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) March 1989 Page 14 Figure 4. March 1989 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989a). Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) Aprll1989 Figure 5. April 1989 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989b). page 15 V. / \ 30n Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) May 1989 Page 16 Figure 6. May 1989 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989b). Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) June 1989 Figure 7. June 1989 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1989b). page 17 \* K~'^W''_iV(— ■ — — '^ ^>f3Mr:^7-~--~iL^ (.\ I A I Pl^TX A/ \ Wi ^^m/Kri V^ 1016 Xv'^ Ox'-' i T \ A Jr 016^ ff#M ^A'^^ rL Z^vV-^ > / ^i^l\,-) Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) July 1989 WK Page 18 Figure 8. July 1 989 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1 990). MMMMMMMMMMMMMM* Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb] August 1989 Figure 9. August 1989 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1990). Page 19 Sea Level Pressure Monthly Mean (mb) September 1989 r^ 1 Page 20 Figure 1 0. September 1 989 (from Mariner's Weather Log, 1 990). Ice Conditions, 1989 Season The following discussion summa- rizes the sea ice and iceberg condi- tions along the Labrador and New- foundland coasts and on the Grand BanksofNewfoundlandforthe1989 ice year. The sea ice information is derived from the Thirty-Day Ice Forecast for Northern Canadian Waters published monthly by the Atmospheric Environment Service (AES) of Canada and the Southern Ice Limit published twice-monthly by the U.S. Navy-NOAA Joint Ice Center. Information on the mean sea ice extent was obtained from the Naval Oceanography Com- mand, 1986. October1988: Although sea ice does not normally extend south of 65°N in October (Naval Oceano- graphic Command, 1986), it was seen as far south as Resolution Island, approximately 62°N (Figure 11). There were 43 icebergs re- ported south of 52° N in October, and 3 of these were south of 48° N. November 1988: By mid-No- vember, there was no sea ice south of 65°N (Figure 12). The mean extent of sea ice in November is confined to the southern tip of Baffin Island with the maximum sea ice extent covering Hudson Strait, and Ungava Bay (Naval Oceanographic Command, 1986). The ice edge in November 1 988 was less than av- erage. There were no icebergs reported south of 52° N in Novem- ber. December 1988: The sea ice edge extended to the southern tip of La- brador by mid-December (Figure 13). The sea ice edge usually ex- tends only as far south as Hamilton inlet in December . Temperatures over the area during the first half of December averaged 3.6 °C below normal (AES, 1989). These colder than normal temperatures en- hanced the sea ice growth along the Labrador coast. There was only one iceberg reported south of 52° in December, and it was not south of 48 °N. January 1989: Temperatures in Labrador and Newfoundland con- tinued to be 3-5 °C below normal in January (AES, 1989). As a result, the growth and spread of sea ice along the Labrador and New- foundland coasts were about a week and a half ahead of normal, and the ice was thicker than normal (AES, 1989). By mid-January, the sea ice extended along the east coast of Newfoundland into Notre Dame Bay to Cape Freels (Figure 14). By the end of January, the freezing degree days were double that usually observed, and the ice extent and thickness were about that expected in mid-February, or two weeks ahead of normal (AES, 1989). There were 105 icebergs reported south of 52° N in January, but none of these were south of 48° N February 1989: Colder than nor- mal temperatures continued through Feboiary, averaging about 5° C below normal (AES, 1989). In addition, the winds were more westerly than normal in February. This resulted in the sea ice edge beingfarthersouth than normal due to enhanced ice growth and farther east than normal due to ice drift (Figure 15). There were 74 ice- bergs observed south of 52° N in February, and 19 of these were south of 48° N. March 1989: The sea ice edge continued to be farther south than normal in March (Figure 16). The 1989 International Ice Patrol Sea- son opened on March 1, 1989. Fig- ure 23 depicts the initial iceberg distribution. The icebergs were dis- tributed mainly north of Flemish Cap and into Flemish Pass. Only one or two icebergs were near the Tail of the Grand Banks. By mid-March, large numbers of icebergs were being reported along the sea ice edge with most of the icebergs in open water in Flemish Pass (Figure 24). Most of the icebergs seemed to be located in the Labrador Cur- rent (Figure34). By theendof March, large numbers of icebergs were distributed between the Grand Banks and south of Flemish Pass (Figure 25). These icebergs ap- peared to be moving east rather than south with the Labrador Cur- rent. There were 189 icebergs on plot the end of March. For the whole month, there were 259 icebergs south of 52° N, and 127 of these were south of 48° N. April 1989: The sea ice edge be- gan to retreat northward in April. By mid-April, open water existed along the eastern coast of Newfoundland due to the easterly drift created by the westerly winds (Figure 17). The ice edge was near its mean south- ern and eastern positions. By mid- April, the large numbers of icebergs became more widely distributed to the east with small numbers of icebergs drifting south along the Grand Banks (Figure 26). There were still large numbers of icebergs north of 48° N which appeared to be drifting in the eastern branch of the Labrador Current. Not as many icebergs were to the east at the end of April, but there were still large numbers north of Flemish Pass (Figure 27). There were 216 ice- bergs on plot the end of April. There were 1 93 icebergs south of 52° N in April, and 68 of these were south of 48° N. Page 21 May 1989: The sea ice continued to retreat northward in May, but at a faster than normal rate. By mid- May, only patches of sea ice existed off the Strait of Belle Isle, and open water existed along the Labrador coast up to Hamilton Inlet (Figure 18). Above nonnai temperatures over Newfoundland and Labrador along with southwesterly winds the first half of May enhanced the sea ice deterioration. The iceberg dis- tribution increased both in numbers and extent by mid-May with the icebergs widely scattered over rrrost of the International Ice Patrol area (Figure 28). The icebergs seemed to be drifting both south through Flemish Pass and east north of Flemish Pass. The icebergs re- mained widely distributed at the end of May (Figure 29). There were 250 icebergs on plot the end of May. There were 1 97 new icebergs south of 52° N, but only 39 of these were south of 48° N in May. August 1989: Except for some sea ice south of Greenland, there was none south of 65° N by mid-August (Figure 21). Normally, there is no sea ice south of 65° N in August. There were 73 icebergs south of 52° N in August, and none of these were south of 48° N. There were 37 icebergs on plot at the end of the month. September 1989: There was no sea ice south of 65° N in Septem- ber, which is normally the case (Figure 22). There were 13 new icebergs south of 52° N in Septem- ber, and none of these were south June 1989: Tennperatu res averaged close to nomral abng the Labrador Coast, and ice conditions were also close to nomnal. Sea ice extended along the Labrador Coast to Hamilton Inlet at mid-nronth. There were 130 icebergsonplottheendof June. There were 148 new icebergs south of 52° N in May, and only 35 of these were south of 48° N. July 1989: Tennperatures averaged near rxjrmal for the month, and sea ice deteriorated, extending south only to Cumberland Peninsula. The 1989 In- ternational Ice Patrol Seasoncbsedon July 28, 1989. Figure 33 depicts the icet)erg distribution at the end of the IIP season. Therewere30icet>ergsonplot the end of July. There were 78 new icebergs south of 52° N in July . Only 1 0 of these were south of 48° N. Page 22 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N — SON 65N — 60N — SSN SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 4SW Figure 11. Page 23 Figure 12. Page 24 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N 65N SON 3/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Joint Ice Center, 1988) 1 972—82 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Naval Oceanography Command, 1986) 60W SSW SOW 4SW Figure 13. Page 25 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 6SN — 60N — SSN — SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 4SW Figure 14. Page 26 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N — SON 6SN — 60N — SSN — SON 60W 5SW SOW — 4SN 4SW Figure 15. Page 27 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 6SN 60W 55W SOW 60N SSN — SON — 4SN 4SW Figure 16. Page 28 65N 60N 55N SON 3/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Joint Ice Center, 1989) 1 972 — 82 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Naval Oceanography Command, 1986) 60W 55W SOW FIGURE 17. Page 29 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 65N 60N 55N SON 3/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Joint Ice Center, 1989) 1 972—82 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Naval Oceanography Command, 1986) 60W S5W Figure 18. Page 30 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 65N — 60N — 55N — SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 45W Figure 19. Page 31 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N SON 6SN — 60N — SSN — SON 60W SSW SOW — 45N 4SW Figure 20. Page 32 65N 65W 60W 55W SOW 60N 55N — SON 6SN 60N — 55N — SON 60W SSW SOW — 4SN 4SW Figure 21. Page 33 3/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Joint Ice Center, 1989) 1 972—82 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Naval Oceanography Command, 1986) Figure 22. Page 34 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39= s"-| III! II 1 1 II iMiiiii I 1 1 II I I Jill I II iiiiii III I III! luiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii INI 1 1 nil II nil II 38 H I I II I II I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I i I I I M i I I I I I I I I I I II I I II II I I I M I I I I II il I I I II I II I I I I I I II J M II ij I I M I j II II II I M I I I I I n I ' 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ^ Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 23. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 01MAR89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 35 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° ^2" J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 M I (.po 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39' N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 24. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15MAR89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 36 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ml I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II II I I I II I I I I I II I I I II I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I III I I I III I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I II I I I I I I III I I I I I I I I I III I I I I I I I I 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39^ N ▲ Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 25. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30MAR89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 37 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39^ i^2"j I I I HI I I M I I I I i I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ml I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 26. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 1 5APR89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 38°4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II II I III I I II II II I I I I I I I I I II I I III I I I I II II I III I I I II I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I III II I I III I I I II I I I I I I I I f 38° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 27. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30APR89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 39 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° f-2" J ' " ' " ! It 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 ij 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 qm 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 II nil 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 1 1 1 II I II I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 III I 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 28. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15MAY89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 40 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° r|2"-j 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 mi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I III I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39^ N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 29. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30MAY89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 41 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 52°: 40°E I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I iD>J 12 5A 7 A i ± 1 X lOA A% A Newfoundland /^AA: 1 -..- 4- 1-4 1 lV I- aJ 1 1 1 1 \ Ai ..i 4 i 1 \ A \ \ L. LI L.l... i I -A. y A; [ ( 4 1 1 1 X- ■ A ■■■r'' / ; A 1 \ / \ % t \ ^Z""' f Ail ^ 7 ' A| Ia/ A i X i J^"^; 52= E40^ E39° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39^^ N A Berg Estimated limit of all known ice N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Figure 30. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15JUN89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 42 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39^ mill iiiii|iiiiiii Ill I III I II II II I iiiiiiii iiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiliiiiii iiiiiiMiiii 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 31 . Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30JUN89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 43 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39<= I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I i 1 1 1 1 1 i I II II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 II i II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I II r 38^^ 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Figure 32. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15JUL89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 44 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39' I 39° 38°4 I III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mil II I iiiii iiiiii 1 1 II II mil 1 1 III 1 1 nil II I III 1 1 nil II nil II III! II I III iiiimii III 1 1 nil 1 1 1 II 1 1 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39 1=38° o N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 33. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 28JUL89 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 45 57° 56° 55^ 54° 53^ 52° 51° 50^* 49° 48^ 47° 46^ 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° I II II I I I iMiMiiiii I MM mill iiiiii Mini Mini nil iiiiiiiii I iiii iiiiii ii ini 40' 39°: denotes the Labrador Current = 52° = 51° = 50° E49° E48^ E47° = 46° = 45° 44° = 43° j42° !4r 40° E39° •^" M I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 38 57^ 56° 55^ 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47^ 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 4r 40° 39° Figure 34: This figure depicts the Labrador Current, the main mechanism for transporting icebergs South to the Grand Banl 3/1 0) because wind-driven movement of the sea ice contaminates the drifter data, and sea ice can damage the buoy. In many cases buoys de- ployed between 50°N to 52°N move eastward to the north of Flemish Cap, and hence do not enter the region south of Flemish Pass. Be- cause Ice Patrol requires drift data in this area, it is frequently neces- sary to deploy buoys directly in the Pass to ensure that the buoy will move to the south. In this case the buoys are deployed at 47N between 46-30W and 47-30W. Despite concerns over deployment in sea ice mentioned above, during the early part of the 1989 season buoy deployment was pushed to the north to support LIMEX '89 (see Appendix C). AIRCRAFT DEPLOYMENTS Ice Patrol has deployed satellite- tracked buoys from HC-130's since 1979. The buoy is strapped into an air-deployment package and launched out the reardoor of an HC- 1 30 flying at an altitude of 500 ft ( 1 50 m) at 150 kts (77 m/s). The air- deployment package consists of a wooden pallet and a parachute, both of which separate from the buoy after it enters the water. The para- chute riser is cut by a cable-cutter that is activated by a battery ener- gized when immersed in salt water. The pallet separates when salt tab- lets dissolve and release straps holding the buoy to the pallet. The buoy then floats free and the drogue falls free and unfurts. Page 64 The manufacturer redesigned the air deployment package for use in the 1 989 season following a 50 per- cent failure rate in 1988. None of the re-designed air deployment packages failed during 1989. DATA PROCESSING Although the raw position and tem- perature data are relatively noise free, all records are reviewed before processing to ensure quality control. First, duplicate positions and posi- tions with time separations of less than 30 minutes are deleted. Then, positions less than 700 m from adja- cent positions are deleted, unless the deletion results in a time separa- tion of 4 or more hours. The quality-controlled position data are then fitted to a cubic spline curve to arrive at an evenly spaced record with time intervals of 3 hours. This process results in a slight reduction in the number of fixes per day (from 10 to 8). Next, the position records are filtered using a low-pass cosine filter with a cut-off of 1 . 1 6 x 1 0-5 Hz (one cycle per day). This filter re- moves most tidal and inertial effects. Finally, the buoy drift speeds are calculated at three-hour intervals using a two-point backward differencing scheme. The trajectory plots presented in this report are from the filtered records. Also presented for each buoy is a plot of the time history of the U (east is positive) and V (north is positive) components of velocity from the fil- tered records. Finally, a time history of the raw sea surtace temperature data is plotted for each buoy. The dates used in all of the plots are year-days, which are numbered se- quentially starting at 1 on January 1 . In the text, the year-days are in- cluded parenthetically. BUOY TRAJECTORIES The following sections discuss each buoy trajectory in chronological or- der by buoy deployment date. The discussions summarize each buoy's performance and the data that it contributed to Ice Patrol op- erations. It is not intended to be an exhaustive data analysis. The buoy data outside of the Ice Patrol op- erations area, east of 39 W and north of 52N, are not presented. The data from the IIP buoy program are archived at the IIP office in Groton, Connecticut and the Marine Envi- ronmental Data Service (MEDS), Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Halifax, N.S.. Buoy 9875 Buoy 9875 was deployed at 1937Z on 25 March (84) at 48-30N, 48- OOW. It remained within the Ice Patrol operations area for 62 days, passing north of 52°N on 26 May (146) (Figure B-la). The drogue sensor indicatedthatthe drogue was connected until 15 October (288). The buoy stopped transmitting on 23 December (357). From deployment until day 96 the buoy drifted eastward north of the 1000-m contour at roughly 20 cnvs (Figure B-lb). Between days 96 and 1 34 the motion of the buoy was complex. Speeds varied from 2 to 25 cm/s, and the temperature ranged from 3°C to 7°C. On day 134 the buoy began a northward drift with speeds increasing up to 100 cm/s and temperature increasing from 4.5°C to 9°C. Buoy 9876 Buoy 9876 was deployed at 2027Z on 25 March (84) at 48-OON, 48- 59W. It failed on 30 March (89) whilestillwithinthe Ice Patrol opera- tions area. The early failure of 9876 could have been caused by sea ice. It was deployed into an area with 2/ 10 sea ice cover, and remained within or near the ice edge for its 5- day drift. The drogue sensor indi- cated that the drogue was connected throughout its 5 operational days. During the 5 days for which drift data are available, 9876 drifted eastward between the 200-m and 1000-m isobaths (Figure B-2a). Tempera- ture was fairly constant at about - 1.6°C. Speeds varied between 10 crrVs and 70 cm/s and often changed abruptly (Figure B-2b). Bouy 4565 Buoy 4565 was deployed at 1523Z on 29 March (88) at 50-43N, 50- 40W. It remained within the Ice Patrol operations area for 97 days, drifting east of 39W on 4 July (185) (Figure B-3a). The drogue sensor indicated that the drogue was con- nected while in the Ice Patrol area, disconnecting on 19 September (262). The buoy stopped transmit- ting on 28 January 1990. After deployment, buoy 4565 drifted southeastward off the shelf and continued its southeastward drift until 20 April (110). The eastward com- ponent of this drift could have been caused by wind-driven ice drift. It was deployed in a region of 2/1 0 sea ice cover. Until mid April it was near or within the sea ice edge, typically in not more than 2/1 0 sea ice cover. The eastward drift was sufficient to drive this buoy out of the Labrador Current. Following a cyclonic loop between days 1 1 1 and 1 29, the buoy drifted northeastward and then northward. From day 91 to day 130 the temperature increased from 0°C to6.4'='C(0.16°C/day). Speeds were 1 0 to 20 cm/s from days 1 29 to 1 39, then slowed to less than 10 cnVs untilday 1 50 when the speed started to increase, reaching 90 cm/s on day 158 (Figure B-3b). Tempera- tures also started to increase on day 150, indicating that the buoy en- tered the North Atlantic Current. Between day 150 and 185, tem- peratures increased from 6°C to 14°C. Betweendays160and170, during which speeds varied between 45 and 80 cm/s and temperatures were between 9°C and 10.8°C, the buoy made an anticyclonic loop. Buoy 9879 Buoy 9879 was deployed at 1515Z on 8 April 1989 (98) at 52-03N, 49- 59W. It remained within the Ice Patrol operations area for 41 days, departing to the north on 19 May (139) (Figure B-4a). The drogue sensor indicated that the drogue was never connected. It beached in Macrihanish, Scotland around 15 April 1990 (105). Buoy 9879 initially drifted southward at 18to30cnVseastofthe 1 000-misobath. Mer 4 days it turned eastward and slightly inaeased speed (25 to 35 crrVs) t)efore slowing (1 to 10 cnrVs) between days 110 and 116 when its eastward drift was interrupted (Rgure B-4b). Its eastward drift out of the Labrador Cur- rent suggests that its drogue was not connected, and it was rTX)re influenced by wind-driven surface currents. From day 1 1 7 until 1 39, the buoy resumed its drift eastward and then northward out of Ice Patrol's area. Temperatureswereuniform(about3°C) until day 121 when the buoy turned northward and temperatures increased approximately 3°C and became more variable. Buoy 4537 Buoy 4537 was deployed at 1906Z on 10 April (100) at 47-OON, 47- 20W. It failed within the Ice Patrol operations area on 14 October(287). The drogue sensor indicated that the drogue was connected throughout its operational period. Buoy 4537 (Figure B-5a) drifted southward atongthelOOO-mcontour at speeds of 9 to 25 cm/s until day 121 when it moved offshore, possi- bly under the influence of a warm- core eddy. Sea surface temperature charts produced by the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Centre (METOC) in Halifax show the existence of such a warm-core eddy during the same period. It then drifted southward into the North Atlantic Current which transported it to the northeast. The temperature record shows an increase on day 129 (FigureB-5b) shortly after the buoy left the shelf. Between days 133 and 161 the buoy appeared to be in a rapidly advecting cyclonic eddy. During this period (days 132 to 154), the temperature increased from 1°C to 12°C. Then, between days 1 80 and 226 the buoy made 1 1 cyclonic loops (20 km - 60 km di- ameter), and during this time the temperature ranged from 9°C to 15.8°C. It then travelled to the southwest between days 226 and 250, contrary to the mean direction of the North Atlantic Current. Speeds during this period ranged from 1 to 31 cnVs,decreasingtowardday250. It then reversed direction and trav- elled to the northeast and then northwest at increasing speeds (up to 110 cm/s). Page 65 Buoy 4569 Buoy 4569 was deployed near the sea ice edge at 1500Z on 24 April (114) at 51-58N, 50-48W. It re- mained within the Ice Patrol opera- tions area for 149 days, departing on 20 September (263) (Figure B- 6a). The drogue sensor indicated that the drogue disconnected on 29 September (272). The buoy was still transmitting when it beached near Cornwall, England on 2 August 1990. Buoy 4569 drifted southward in the Labrador Current through the Flemish Pass until 9 July (1 90) when it reached the North Atlantic Current and then travelled to the northeast. Speeds in Flemish Pass ranged from 20 to 50 cm/s, and those between southern Flemish Pass and day 1 90 were 36 to 50 cm/s. Temperatures increased from -2°C to 9°C while the buoy travelled southward in the La- brador Current. After passing east of Flemish Cap, buoy speeds in the North Atlantic Cun'ent increased, reaching up to 100 cm/s. Once in the North Atlantic Current, tem- peratures only varied between 1 2°C and 16°C (Figure B-6b). The buoy made an anticyclonic loop between days 244 and 250. Speeds during this period were 64 to 92 cm/s, and temperatures were 12.6°C to 14.6°C. Buoy 4568 Buoy 4568 was deployed at 1628Z on 24 April (114) at 49-30N, 50- 40W. It remained within the Ice Patrol operations area for 78 days, departing on 11 July (192) (Figure B-7a). The drogue sensor indicated that the drogue disconnected on 1 0 August (222). The buoy was still transmitting when it beached in Ire- land on 11 February 1990. Page 66 After being deployed over the shelf, buoy 4568 drifted offshore until reaching the Labrador Current. Speeds over the shelf were less than 15 cm/s, but gradually in- creased starting on day 134. Speeds through Flemish Pass increased from 30 to 60 cm/s, and those south of Flemish Pass (days 148 to 154) decreased from 60 to 34 cm/s. It followed a trajectory similar to that of buoy 4569, but with higher speeds (up to 60 cm/s) in the Labrador Current (Figure B-7b). The tem- perature record shows an increase throughout the buoy's transit through the Ice Patrol area. Buoy 4567 Buoy 4567 was deployed at 1753Z on 5 t^ay (125) at 47-1 ON, 46-59W. It failed within the Ice Patrol area on 4 July (185) (Figure B-8a). The drogue sensor indicated that the drogue disconnected on 29 June (180). Buoy 4567 was deployed in the Flemish Pass and drifted southward along the 1000-m contour until 16 May (136) when it turned offshore. From deployment until day 139, speeds were between 36 cm/s and 50 cm/s. It drifted southeastward until being influenced by the North Atlantic Current and turning to the northeast. Between days 150 and 170 the buoy made a cyclonic loop southwest of Flemish Cap before resuming its journey to the north- east. Speeds within the cyclonic loop were less than 30 cm/s, but increased upon exiting the loop, reaching nearly 100 cm/s. The buoy made another cyclonic loop between days 175 and 184 with speeds varying from 3 to 64 cm/s. The temperature record shows three stages, each warmer than the pre- vious. The first stage lasts from deployment until day 139, the sec- ond from 146 to 161, and the third from 172 until failure. Buoy 4570 Buoy 4570 was deployed at 21 272 on 5 June ( 1 56) at 47-41 N , 47-01 W. It remained within the Ice Patrol operations area for 167 days, de- parting on 19 November (323) (Figure B-9a). The drogue sensor indicated that the drogue was con- nected until 27 November (331). The trajectory of buoy 4570 was unusual. On day 164 the buoy stopped travelling southward through Flemish Pass and started drifting eastward, passing just north of Flemish Cap. Speeds across the Cap (days 1 64 to 204) were slow (3 to 15 cm/s). The buoy trajectory to the north and west of Flemish Cap extends much further to the north and west than would be expected. The reason for this abnormal tra- jectory is not known. The tempera- ture record is not noteworthy, but shows a general increase until day 218 and then a decrease. BUOY PERFORMANCE The performance of the nine opera- tional buoys deployed during the 1989 season was adequate for IIP use (Table B-2). The average num- ber of days a buoy remained within the IIP area was 94. Although 4537 failed within the IIP area, it provided the longest period of information on the area. The average number of days the buoys transmitted data (as of 1 Sep- tember 1990) was 271 , 304 if 9876 is excluded. The failure of 9876 could have been due to its deploy- ment near sea ice since wind-driven BUOY PERFORMANCE TABLE B-2 . 1989 Operational Buoy Performance BUOY NUMBER OF DAYS IN IIP OPERA NUMBER OF DAYS DROGUE CONNECTED NUMBER OF DAYS BUOY TRANSMrTTED (AS OF 1 SEP 90) 9875 62 9876 5* 4565 97 9879 41 4537 187* 4569 149 4567 60* 4570 167 204 5 174 0 187 158 108 55 175 273 5 305 372 (beached Scotland) 187 465 (t)eached England) 316 (iDeached Ireland) 60 453 (still transmitting) Average 94 •Failed within IIP OPAREA 118 271 compaction of sea ice could damage a buoy. The period of transmission of three buoys was ended not due to failure but by beaching in Europe, and 4570 was still transmitting on 1 September 1990. Three of the nine buoys (9876, 4537, 4567) failed prematurely (transmitted less than 90 days). Data transmitted from these three indicated that the battery voltage was within the operational limits at the time of failure. The cause of the failures is unknown. Data from the drogue sensors indi- cated that the average number of days a drogue remained connected was 118. The average is 1 25 if 9876 and 4537 are excluded since these buoys stopped transmitting before the drogues disconnected, and the average is 146 if 9879 is also ex- cluded since its sensor indicated that the drogue was never con- nected. Data from buoy 9879 is viewed as suspicious. Although the data on buoy perfor- mance show that the drogues dis- connect much soonerthan the buoys stop transmitting, the average number of days the drogue is con- nected is sufficient for IIP purposes since this is greaterthanthe average time the buoy remains within the IIP area. SUIVIMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Contrary to the 1988 season, none of the buoys deployed during 1989 were recovered at sea. I^ost of the 1989 buoy trajectories followed familiar patterns. For ex- ample , buoys drifting within the 1 000- m contour (4569, 4568) passed through the Flemish Pass along this contour. However, buoys offshore of the 1 000-m contour (9875, 4565) did not pass through Flemish Pass but curved northward and moved north of Flemish Cap. The Labrador Current's temporal variability resulting from a warm- core eddy near 44N and the eastern Grand Banks was observed again in 1989. A warm-core eddy appeared to deflect the Labrador Current eastward in early May (buoys 4537 and 4567) , but there was no evidence of such an eddy in July (buoy 4569). METOC Sea surface temperature charts for 9 to 18 May (129 to 138) also suggest the existence of a warm-core eddy which could have influenced the buoys. A warm-core eddy has been observed in the same position, deflecting the Labrador Current, in May during previous IIP seasons and is discussed in more detail in Murphy (1987). The trajectories of buoys 4565 and 4569 both had anticyclonic loops of similar size in nearly the same lo- cation north of Flemish Cap. Speeds for the two buoys while in these loops were also comparable. The temperatures for 4565 were lower than those for 4569. This tempera- ture difference is probably due to 4565 making its loop about 80 days earlier. Note that the two buoys made these loops in approximately the same location despite taking very different paths prior to that. Page 67 BUOY 9875 1989 40 N 55 W 146 + 51 W + 47 W + 43 W O + 39 W Figure B-la. Trajectory for 9875. Page 68 BUOY 9875 1989 la IB 14 12 10 B 6 4 2 Q -2 ,,.,1 86 101 I I I I I I I M I I I I [ I I I J I I I I 1 1 16 YEHR-DflY 131 146 146 Figure B-1b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 9875. Page 69 Figure B-2a. Trajectory for 9876. Page 70 BUOY 9876 1989 le 1G(- 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Q -2 0- o u 99 YERR-DRY 99 YERR-DRY J I I ; I I I I I L- 99 YERR-DRY Figure B-2b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 9876. Page 71 Figure B-3a. Trajectory for 4565. Page 72 BUOY 45G5 1989 135 150 YERR-DHY -80 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I n 1 1 1 1 ] 1 1 n 1 1 1 1 1 ] u 1 1 ] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 YEHR-DHY 195 Figure B-3b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4565. Page 73 Figure B-4a. Trajectory for 9879. Page 74 BUOY 9879 1989 18 IB M 12 10 8 8 4 2 0 -2 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I [ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 115 130 145 1B0 YERR-DRY 80 80 - 40 - 20 - 0 -20 I- -40 -S0 -80 100 80 60 40 I- 20 0 -20 -40 -80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I J I I I I I I I I I I I I [ [ I I I I 115 130 145 180 YEflR-DflY -80 100 ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I J I I I I I I I I I J I I 1 15 130 YEflR-DHY I I I I I I I I I M I I I 145 160 Figure B-4b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 9879. Page 75 Figure B-5a. Trajectory for 4537. Page 76 BUOY 4537 1989 M7 162 YCBR-DHY 237 252 I " I ■ " I 1 I I I I n I Ml U ] I I L I I I I I I t I I L I i m ] M I I I L I I ] I ] I U I I I 1 l|l I ] H 1 I 147 1S2 YEflR-DBY M7 1S2 fEHR-DBY Figure B-5b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4537. Page 77 Figure B-6a. Trajectory for 4569. Page 78 BUOY 4569 • 1989 IB u IE - , A ^ M _ yj WU..;,,7VtA 3 12 - ^^ \ 1 10 ^ B - ^ V 2 B cr a: 4 ~ /^ 2 0 .JJ^. ^^^^^^i-A''^'"^-'^^'"''^ - — iff *v l*ttVWHi n nil 111 11 1 1 II H il 1 1 iiMi 1 1 11 nil II 11 nil 1 11 1 1 il 1 1 H iHi Iiii iiiiiiImiiiiiiimiiiIiiiiiihii 'I'll 1 1 lllllllllll 6 131 146 161 176 191 206 221 236 251 266 YEHR-DHY 80 _ A . nf 60 - / ^ S 10 s 5 20 \ A / /A / Wl / a. 0 1 /\ J "^:CX_^-r=i^_,^r''^ — ^^~^ — J- —:r—^^^ — — \_j, — ^ _ j— — — 8-20 ^^^\J V 7i / =" -40 - / -60 - u i -80, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 1 II 11 II II II IMM II 1 1 1 1 ti n II 1 J il 1 1 1 1 1 llllllllll llltllllllll mill 1 lllllllllll Illl G 131 146 161 176 131 206 221 236 ' 251 266 YEPR-DHY 80 _ A, 50 - rt S "0 5 20 A / k \ I 0 S -20 rV \.— o::;,^^^^- r^- t\\ > -40 J -60 - l/ \ -90, ] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n M n n il M n u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n II 1 n M n 1 1 II 1 lllllllllll llllllllllllllllll llllllllll 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 ] n 1 1 lUiiUlLLLuiuj IB 131 146 161 176 191 206 221 236 251 266 YEAR-DRY Figure B-6b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4569. Pagg yg 1 ( Figure B-7a. Trajectory for 4568. Page 80 BUOY 45S8 1989 18 u IS '^ 1 4 L u ' ^ t- ^ 12 ^ 10 te 8 z S cr -a 1 IS I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I [ M I I I I 131 M6 161 YEHR-DRY 1 I I I I 1 1 I I M I M M I M L I I I I I I I I 1 176 191 a. r o I'll '1 16 I r I I I I L I 11 I I I I I I I M I M I I I I I I I [ I I I I [ I I [ I [ i I I I I 131 146 161 176 191 YEAR-DRY aa 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -sa. 1 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 M I I I I I [ M I I I I I I I I I I I I M 1 11 I I L I I [ I I I ] M 1 1 I I I I 1 131 146 161 YERR-DRY 176 131 Figure B-7b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4568. Page 81 Figure B-8a. Trajectory for 4567. Page 82 BUOY 45B7 1989 CL 2 a: 187 -E0 -80 127 142 II I I I I I I I I I 157 YERR-DHY 172 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1B7 ml 187 Figure B-8b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (fil- tered) for 4567. Page 83 Figure B-9a. Trajectory for 4570. Page 84 BUOY 4570 1989 IS IS 14 12 la 8 E 4 2 0 -2 159 ..l....n 188 .uuiiu iiWu 203 218 YERR-DRY 233 liLiniLiiiiLiilmiiii ]hL 263 .miLu 323 158 203 218 YERR-DHY a. o u 15S 203 21S YERR-DRY 233 263 278 323 Figure B-9b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4570. Page 85 REFERENCES FENCO, 1987. Optimum Deployment of TOD's (TIROS Ocean Drifters) to Derive Ocean Currents for Iceberg Drift Forecasting. Final Report Submitted by FENCO Newfoundland, Ltd. to [Meteorological Ser vices Researcfi Branch), Atmosphieric Environment Service, 4905 Dufferin Street, Downsview, Ontario, Canada tM3H 5T4. Murphiy, D.L., 1987. Observations of a Warm-Core Eddy Neat thie Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Report of tfie International Ice Patrol in The North Atlantic, 1987 Season. International Ice Patrol, Avery Point, Groton, Connecticut 06340-6096 Summy, A.D. and I. Anderson, 1983. Operational Use of TIROS Oceanographic Drifters by International Ice Patrol (1978-1982). Proceedings of the 1983 Symposium on Buoy Technology. Marine Technology Society, 1825K Street, N.W., Suite 203, Washington, D.C. 20593, pp. 246-250. Page 86 APPENDIX C ICEBERG MOVEMENT DETERMINED BY SATEL- LITE TRACKED PLATFORMS By D. L. MURPHY and G. F. WRIGHT Introduction The International Ice Patrol (IIP) deployed four satellite-tracked plat- forms on icebergs drifting east of Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada during the 1989 iceberg season. Two were deployed on icebergs located in sea ice east of Newfoundland in March as part of Ice Patrol's participation in the 1 989 Labrador Ice Margin Experiment (LIMEX '89). Two were also de- ployed on icebergs floating in open water east of Hamilton Inlet in La- brador in mid-June. The satellite-tracked platforms were TIROS Arctic Drifters (TADs), manufactured by Polar Research Laboratory of Carpenteria, Califor- nia. They were tracked using the ARGOS Data Collection and Loca- tion System carried on two NOAA satellites of the Tl ROS family, which are polar orbiters. The system posi- tion accuracy is about 350m. Typi- cally, 6-10 fixes per day were re- ceived for each TAD. The number of fixes per day is directly propor- tional to the latitude, so the TADs depbyedfarthertothe north typically provide more positions each day. The TADs, which were powered by lithium batteries, were designed to withstand the cold temperatures of the high arctic. However, because the TADs were deployed at a rela- tively low latitude (south of 55°N) and in late winter and spring, alka- line batteries also would have been satisfactory. The TADs were sealed to prevent water damage to the electronics, and as a result they floated. Therefore, they could con- tinue to transmit even after falling oft an iceberg. As a result, additional effort is required to ensure that the drift data represent iceberg move- ment and not a TAD floating in the ocean, but even with the best efforts, this leads to much uncertainty. This issue is discussed in detail later. All four TADs were deployed from a ship-based helicopter. The TADs were fitted with slings to lower them onto the icebergs from the helicop- ter. Theywere also fitted with pointed steel legs to reduce sliding once they were on the icebergs. Figure 1 shows the configuration of TAD 2612. Theotherthree were essen- tially the same, although there were some minor differences in the physical dimensions. The approxi- mate weight of each TAD was 25 kg. Data Processing The position data were fitted to a cubic spline cun/e to obtain a record with evenly-spaced intervals of 3 hours. The interpolated position records were then filtered using a low-pass cosine filter with a cut-oft of 1.16 X 10^ Hz (about one cycle per day). This filtering removed most tidal and inertia! effects. From the filtered position data, speed and direction were calculated using a simple backward-differencing scheme. The following sections describe the two deployments and present the iceberg tracks. For convience, the dates listed in this report are accom- panied in parenthesis by the year dates, the sequential date numbers starting with 1 on 1 January. LIMEX TAD Deployments The two LIMEX TADs (4500 and 2612) were deployed as part of a pilot experiment to examine difter- ential iceberg/sea ice movement during earty spring conditions. The iceberg drift data were collected in the context of LIMEX, a large, multidisciplinary, international ex- periment designed to invest igate the physical properties and dynamics of sea ice near the Labrador ice mar- gin in the early spring. Other LIMEX investigators collected data such as sea ice distribution and movement that will support the analysis of the iceberg drift data. As these data are not yet available, so only the iceberg tracks are presented here. The strategy was to deploy the TADs on apparently stable icebergs (medium to large) far enough off- shore to minimize the possibility of grounding. They were deployed using a twin-engine Messerschmitt helicopter, which was based on the CCGC SIR JOHN FRANKLIN. On 1 1 March (70), one TAD was placed on each of two medium icebergs, which were approximately 20 and 40 km, respectively, northeast of the CCGC SIR JOHN FRANKLIN. In tx)th cases, the TAD was attached to a hook on the underside of the helicopter by a short length of line. After arriving at the iceberg, the he- licopter hovered 5- 1 0 m above it and lowered the TAD to the surface. The helicopter then circled the iceberg so that the ice observers could pho- tograph it and estimate its size. The maximum height of the iceberg Page 87 (ID 2612) 64 cm 64 cm 74 cm 10 cm 1 1/2" (4cm) angle iron Figure C-1, Page 88 above the sea surface was mea- sured using the altimeter on the he- licopter. Table 1 lists the original locations and estimated dimensions of the two icebergs tracked during the study. Figure 2 shows the results of the aerial sea ice reconnaissance from the flights made when the TADs were deployed. Both icebergs were in sea ice with concentrations > 9/ 10, which consisted of grey ice and medium and thin first year ice. The predominant form was ice cake, whichwas approximately 8/10 snow- covered. Reconnaissance For two months following the deploy- ments of 4500 and 261 2 onto icebergs, IIP periodically attempted to relocate the icebergs during routine aerial iceberg patrols. Ttie intent was twofold: first, to verify that the TADs were still on the icebergs and, second, to detemiine the extent of sea ice in the vicinity of the icetDergs. On the dates of the flights, the ice observers obtained the most recent satellite-derived TAD positions, usually about 3-6 hours old at flight time. In additon, they reviewed the photographs and video tapes of the icebergs onto which the TADs had t)een deployed. Search forthe icebergs on 29 March (88) was hampered by low clouds and poor visibility. Asurvey of area with HP's AN/APS-135 Side Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR) showed several icebergs near each of the satellite-determined positions, in neithercase was it possible to identify which iceberg had the TADs. The sea ice cover at both sites , as deter- mined by the SLAR, was approxi- mately 8/10. On 8 April (98), twenty-eight days after the TAD deployments, an Ice Patrol flight photographed both TADs, verifying that they were still aboard the icebergs. Although reli- able measurements could not be made, there was little apparent change in the shape or size of the icebergs. The sea ice concentra- tion in the vicinity of each of the icebergs on this date was about 8/10. The results of the next attempt, which was made with good visibility on 24 April (114), were not as conclusive. One of the TADs (4500), which was located at 50-20 N, 53-03 W, had stopped trans- mitting late on 23 April (113). Near the tocatbn of the last position transmitted, the ice observers saw a bbcky iceberg tfiat had recently broken into two sec- tions, neither of which had the TAD. Severaiothericebergswhichwere within a 20 km radius were examined closely, but the TAD was not tocated. At the transmitted position of TAD T8bl8 1. Data for LIMEX '89 TAD Deployments onto Icebergs Drifting in Sea Ice ARGOS ID 4500 2612 DEPLOYMENT DATE TIME LOCATION 1 1 MAR (70) 13302 1 1 MAR (70) ,4002 51-39N, 53-06W 51 -49N, 53-08W SIZE Height X Length (in meters) MEDIUM 27 m X 1 20 MEDIUM 34 m X 1 00 2612, an iceberg similar in size and shape to that filmed on 8 April was seen. However, the TAD, which was mostly white, could not be seen on the iceberg. The TAD was not evident on the video tape taken during the flight. Also, it was not possible to identify the iceberg posi- tively because of a narrow field of view of the video tape. However, the ice observers were confident that the iceberg at 261 2's position was the same iceberg as that in the 11 March photographs and the 8 April video tapes. By 24 April, however, it had developed a large melt pond in its center. Several other icebergs in the vicinity were also examined, but no TAD was sighted. There was no sea ice near either 2612 or 4500. During the period 4-1 0 May two at- tempts were made to search for TAD 261 2, but both were limited by low ceilings and poor horizontal visibility. A thorough radar search of the area around 261 2's reported position on 9 May (48-46.2 N, 49- 35.3 W) revealed one radar target that could not be identified with any confidence. There was no sea ice in the vicinity. From the flights we conclude that the entire 63-day track of 4500 rep- resents iceberg motion. The si- lencing of its transmitter on 23 April (113) probably was due to a major calving event which crushed the TAD. The only evidence that sup- ports this conclusion is the existence of a large blocky iceberg, recently broken into two pieces, at the last known position of 4500. It is likely that 2612 was on its ice- berg on 24 April (114). Although the ice observers did not see the TAD on this date, they were confident that the iceberg closest to the TAD posi- Page 89 Figure C-2. Page 90 T«sble 2. Data for Spring Deployments onto Icebergs in Open Water East of Hamilton Inlet, Labrador ARGOS ID DEPLOYMENT SIZE (ESTIMATED) DATE TIME LOCATION 4504 16JUNE(167) 1415Z 54-0 1.5N, 54-30. 5W Large 2580 I6JUNE(167) 1500Z 53-22. IN, 55-29. 4W Large tion was the iceberg they had seen in the previous photographs. It is best to assume that 24 April was the last day of useful iceberg movement data reported by 2612 because of the lack of any evidence to the con- trary. Figures 3 and 4 present the filtered position data and velocity compo- nents of TADs 4500 and 261 2. The reason for the short gap between the deployment position and the first plotted filtered position for each is that several points were lost filling the filter. This is also true at the end of the position records. The entire record of 4500 represents iceberg movement. The filled triangle along 261 2's track and in the plot of the velocity components marks the date when the TAD was last thought to have been on the iceberg (24 Apnl, 114). There was one short period, from 6 to 7 Apnl (96-97), when the data return was poor, with only one fix for each buoy over a 40-hour period. TAD 2612 transmitted po- sitions until 16 September (259) as it moved eastward across the north Atlantic. Soring Deployments The goal of the spring deployments was to study the summer movement of icebergs from the southern La- brador coast to the Ice Patrol opera- tions area, the northern boundary which is at 52° N. There are few long-term (>1 0 days) iceberg tracks reported in the literature. Using satellite-tracked platforms, Robe (1979) tracked two icebergs and Anderson ( 1 983) three in the region. Of the five, four moved eastward to the north of Flemish Cap, never crossing south of 48°N. This east- ward movement is consistent with the observation that, in some years, few icebergs are encountered south of 48°N despite large pre-season iceberg populations along the La- brador coast. Ice Patrol depbyed a TAD on each of two large bbcky icebergs atong the Labrador Coast east of Hamilton Inlet. The deployments were made with the cooperation of the Canadian Coast Guard, in particular the CCGS ANN HARVEY, whose helicopter made the deployments. The deployments were coordinated by the Canadian Coast Guard Regional Ice Operations Center in St. John's, Newfoundland. Detailed measurements of the icebergs were not made. Both icebergs were in water less than 200 m deep when the TADs were placed aboard. Table 2 summarizes the deployment data. TAD 4504 provided a 38-day posi- tion record (Figure 5), and it is likely that the entire record represents iceberg movement. The data return was excellent, with 8-12 positions recorded on most days. The iceberg tracked by TAD 4504 spent the en- tire 38-day period on or near Hamilton Bank, mostly in water less than 200 m deep. After its deployment, 4504 moved northward until 27 June (178), mostly at speeds of atx)ut 10 cm/s. The fastest iceberg movement recorded by 4504 occurred dunng the subse- quent southward track (27 June - 3 July, 178-184), most of whichwas in slightly deeper water (~ 230 m). During this period the iceberg moved at 10-30 cm/s. After this period, the iceberg returned to the shallow water on Hamilton Bank, where for a 1 0-day period (3- 13 July, 184-194) it moved very slowly. It is likely that the iceberg during this period was dragging in- termittently along the bottom. The water depth in the vicinity was about 150 m. Because there were no detailed size measurements taken, it is not possible to say with certainty that the iceberg was grounded. However, for a large iceberg (123- 213 m long), a keel depth of about 150 m is a reasonable figure, so grounding was possible. On 6 July ( 1 87) 4504 began a persistent southward movement over Hamilton Bank, beginning at speeds less than 1 0 Page 91 t 4 i Figure C-3. Page 92 Figure C-4. Page 93 -^S"^ I — + z in S •< OD > Figure C-5. Page 94 cnVs. On 20 July (201) the iceberg increased speed to 10-20 crtVs. The TAD failed on 24 July (205). One attempt was nriade to relocate and re-sight TAD 4504, but it occurred four hours after its failure on 24 July. Three icebergs were located in tfie vicinity (within 20 km) of 4504's last krxwn positbn, tfie closest of whiich was a large blocky iceberg , which fit the description of the iceberg on wtiich the TAD had been placed. However, the TAD could not be seen on the iceberg. TAD 2580 provided a7-day track before it ceased transmitting on 23 June ( 1 74) . Because of the short record, the position data were not filtered. The track pre- sented in Fgure 6 is plotted using po- sitions interpolated at 24 fx)ur intervals (at OOZ for each date). The U and V components represent 3 hourty aver- aged values. During most of the 7-day period, 2580 nxjved souttTward. In the first half of the period it averaged 1 0-20 cnVs, while in the second half it slowedto 5-8 cnVs. On the day that 2580 failed it reversed direction. Unfortunately, the tracks provided by 2580 and 4504 are not very useful additions to the data set desired by Ice Patrol. Future deployments should be made south of Hamilton Bank and in water depths greater than 200 m deep. Discussion Determining tx)w bng TADs remain on icebergs is not always easy. Because TADs nxist survive in the iceberg nrtelt ponds, they are designed not to sink wtien they fall ir b - > ^ -r -r . n o -d O Z n z H -i — en CD IS IS — I 1 H > 30 Figure C-6. Page 96 References Anderson, I., 1983. Oceanographic Conditions on the Grand Banks During the 1983 International Ice Patrol Season. Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, 1983 Season, CG-188-38, U. S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC, 1983. Robe, R.Q. and D. C. Maier, 1979. Long-Term Tracking of Arctic Icebergs. Report CG-D-36-79. U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center, Avery Point, Groton, CT 06340-6096, 35 pp. Robe, R. Q. and D. C. Maier, 1980. Long-Term Drift of Icebergs in Baffin Bay and the Labrador Sea. Cold Regions Science and Technology, Vol. 1, p 183-193. Page 97 U. S. Department of Transportation United States Coast Guard 200 Years of Service Report of the International Ice Pmm in the North Atlant c "ct s's^^ Igical Laboratory RARY Woods Hole, Mass. USCGC SPAR (WLB-403) 1990 International Ice Patrol Cruise 1990 Season Bulletin No. 76 CG- 188-45 U.S. Department of Transportation United States Coast Guard Commandant (G-NIO) United States Coast Guard MAILING ADDRESS: 2100 2nd St. SW Washington, DC 20593 (202) 267-1450 JUL 2 8 1992 Bulletin No. 76 REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC Season of 1990 CG-188-45 Marine Biological Laboratory LIBRARY OCT 81992 Woods Hole, Mass. Forwarded herewith is bulletin No. 76 of the International Ice Patrol describing the Patrol's services, ice observations and conditions during the 1990 season. W. J. ECKER Chief, Office of Navigation Safety and Waterway Services DISTRIBUTION— SDL No. 130 a b c d e f a h i i k 1 m n 0 p q r s t u V w X y z . 3* 1* 1* ? 1 2 7, 1 1* 1* fin NON-STANDARD DISTRIBUTION: B:a G-NIO only, B:b LANTAREA (5), PACAREA (1), B:c First, Fifth Districts only, C:a CGAS Elizabeth City only: C:q LANTAREA only, SlIL CG-4 C:a CGAS Cape Cod only INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL 1990 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS 03 INTRODUCTION 04 SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS 08 ICEBERG RECONNAISSANCE AND COMMUNICATIONS 11 DISCUSSION OF ICE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 32 REFERENCES 33 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS APPENDICES 34 A. LIST OF PARTICIPATING VESSELS, 1990 49 B. 1990 DRIFTING BUOY PROGRAM 76 C. MODIFICATIONS TO THE IIP SURFACE CURRENT DATA BASE Page 1 Page 2 Introduction This is the 76th annual report of the International ice Patrol (IIP). It contains information on Ice Patrol operations, environmental condi- tions, and ice conditions for the 1990 IIP season. The U.S. Coast Guard conducts the International Ice Patrol Service in the North Atlantic under the provisions of U.S. Code, Title 46, Sections 738, 738a through 738d, and the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, regulations 5-8. This service was initiated shortly after the sinking of the RMS TITANIC on April 15, 1912 and has been provided annually since that time. Commander, International Ice Patrol, working under Commander, Coast Guard Atlantic Area, directs the IIP from offices located in Groton, Connecticut. IIP analyzes ice and environmental data, prepares daily ice bulletins and facsimile charts, and replies to requests for ice information. IIP uses aerial Ice Reconnaissance Detachments and, when necessary, surface patrol cutters to survey the southeastern, southern, and south- western regions of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland for icebergs. IIP makes twice-daily radio broadcasts to warn mariners of the limits of all known ice. Vice Admiral H. B. Thorsen was Commander, Atlantic Area and CDR J. J. Murray was Commander, International Ice Patrol, during the entire 1990 ice year. Pages Summary of Operations, 1990 The 1990 IIP year (Octo- ber 1, 1989 - September 30, 1990) marked the 76th anni- versary of the International Ice Patrol, which was established February 7, 1914. HP's op- erating area is delineated by 40°N - 52°N, 39°W - 57°W (Figure 1 ). During 1 990, Coast Guard HC-130H aircraft equipped with the AN/APS- 135 Side-Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR) flew 30 ice re- connaissance sorties, logging over 186 flight hours, and Coast Guard HU-25B aircraft equipped with the AN/APS- 131 SLAR flew 23 recon- naissance sorties, logging over 70 flight hours. IIP personnel flew aboard Canadian Ice Patrol ice reconnaissance flights on January 31 and February 26 to determine the preseason iceberg distribution. Based on the latter deployment, the 1 990 IIP season was opened on March 9. From this date until August 7, 1 990, an aerial Iceberg Reconnaissance De- tachment (ICERECDET) op- erated from Newfoundland one week out of every two. The season officially closed on August 15, 1990. Watchstanders at HP's Operations Center in Groton, Connecticut analyzed the iceberg sighting information from the ICERECDETs, along with sighting information from commercial shipping and At- mospheric Environment Ser- vice (AES) of Canada sea ice/ iceberg reconnaissance flights and other sources. The IIP Operations Center received a total of 3156 sightings within its op- erations area (40°N - 52°N, 39°W - 57°W) and away from the Newfoundland coast in 1990 which were entered into MP's drift model. Forcompari- son IIP received 2986 during 1989. These sightings are broken down by type and sight- ing source in Table 1. The 3156 sightings entered into HP's drift model represented only a fraction of the total sightings reported to IIP. Sightings of targets outside MP's operations area or grounded or in areas of little or poorly defined current along the Newfoundland coast were not entered into the model. Table 1 shows that IIP ICERECDETs and commer- Siahting Source Coast Guard (IIP) Commercial Ship Other Air Recon DOD Sources Canadian AES BAPS Lighthouse/Shore Other Total Table 1 Sightings entered into HP's Drift Model Percent Growler Small Medium Large Radar Target Total of Total 270 140 66 5 18 0 2 0 501 295 251 218 56 62 4 0 0 887 381 661 92 86 19 0 7 0 126 175 32 23 7 0 0 1 1246 364 68 60 0 1 29 0 0 0 158 1140 1287 408 171 136 4 9 1 3156 36.2 40.8 12.9 5.4 4,3 .1 .3 .0 100.0 Page 4 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40°- 1000M -52° - 51° - 50° -49° - 48° -47° -46° -45° -44° -43° -42° -41° 40^ 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° Figure 1. International Ice Patrol's Operation Area showing bathymetry of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Page 5 cial shipping were the major sources of iceberg sighting reports this season. AES of Canada was not able to pro- vide as many reports this season as last. Appendix A lists all iceberg sighting re- ports, including reports of ra- dar targets, received from commercial shipping, regard- less of the sighting location. In Appendix A, a sighting re- port may represent several targets. There Is an apparent disparity between the number of sightings reported in 1990 and 1989 and the relative severity of the two seasons. Although 1990 was a much more severe season than 1989, the total sightings en- tered into the drift model were similar for the two years. This disparity is partly explained by cutbacks in AES Canada's iceberg flights in 1990 and, ironically, the severity of the 1990 season. The 1990 sea- son was severe both in terms of the number of icebergs south of 48°N and the extreme southern extent of icebergs. Eight icebergs drifted south of 40°N (normally considered the southern boundary of MP's operations area and the southern extent of HP's com- puter model which predicts iceberg drift) during the year, and the southernmost berg Page 6 sighted during the season was at 38-48°N, 47-1 9°W. Be- cause of this severity, IIP had to devote most of its aerial patrols to surveys of the southern iceberg limits. Thus, IIP was unable to patrol the interior of the operating area, which normally contains the largest number and highest concentration of icebergs. Table 2 compares the estimated number of icebergs crossing 48°N for each month of 1 990 with the monthly mean number of icebergs crossing 48°N for each of the four re- connaissance eras. During the 1990 ice year, an esti- mated 793 icebergs drifted south of 48°N latitude, com- paredto301 during 1989. The average number of icebergs drifting south of 48°N per year from 1 900 to 1 987 is 403 icebergs (Alfultis, 1987). IIP defines those ice years with less than 300 icebergs cross- ing 48°N as light ice years; those with 300 to 600 crossing 48°N as average; those with 600 to 900 crossing 48°N as heavy; and those with more than 900 crossing 48°N as extreme. Thus, 1990 was a heavy year. MP's computer model consists of one routine which Table 2: Average Number of Icebergs South of 48°N - The four periods shown are pre-lnternational Ice Patrol (1900-1912), ship reconnaissance (1913-45), aircraft visual reconnaissance (1946-82), and SLAR reconnaissance (1983-89). Avg Avg Avg Avg 1900-12 1913-45 1946-82 1983-89 1990 OCT " :...:.:.:...:.:2::.. ^"^^^^™"^2 ■ 0 1 0^ NOV 1 3 0 2 0 DEC 3 1 0 2 01 JAN 2 3 2 2 0 FEB" 6 —j^— " ■■" ^■■""■■■' —^■^37 3j| MAR 69 36 32 82 112 APR 118 100 85 257 3761 MAY 124 166 81 188 187 JUN 77 76 50 121 761 JUL 32 23 13 85 26 AUG 12 5i5f|«;ei7is;: 3 21 7. SEP 4 6 0 6 0 Era 450 434 273 804 793 Average predicts the drift of each ice- berg and another which pre- dicts the deterioration of each. The drift prediction program uses a historical current file which is modified weekly us- ing satellite-tracked ocean drifting buoy data, thus taking into account local, short-term, current fluctuations. Murphy and Anderson (1985)describe and evaluate the IIP drift model. The IIP iceberg dete- rioration program uses daily sea surface temperature and wave height information from the U.S. Navy Fleet Numeri- cal Oceanography Center (FNOC) to predict the melt of icebergs. Anderson (1983) and Hanson (1987) describe the IIP deterioration model in detail. It is the combined abil- ity of the SLAR to detect ice- bergs in all weather and MP's computer models to estimate iceberg drift and deterioration which enables IIP to schedule aerial iceberg surveys every other week rather than every week. Ten satellite-tracked ocean drifting buoys were de- ployed to provide operational data for HP's iceberg drift model. Five buoys were the standard size drifting buoys IIP has been deploying for fif- teen years. The other five were smaller drifting buoys which IIP evaluated during an oceanographic cruise and then deployed operationally from the cmise vessel. All buoys were equipped with temperature sensors, and two of the standard buoys were also equipped with baromet- ric pressure sensors. The U.S. Naval Oceanographic Com- mand provided the funding for these barometric sensors. Drift data from the buoys are discussed in Appendix B. During the 1990 sea- son, llPoperationally deployed 35 Air-deployable expendable BathyThermograph (AXBTs). The AXBT measures tem- perature with depth and trans- mits the data back to the air- craft. Temperature data from the AXBTs were sent to the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Center (METOC) in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, the U.S. Na- val Eastern Oceanography Center(NEOC) in Norfolk, Vir- ginia, and FNOC for use as inputs into ocean temperature models. IIP directly benefits from its AXBT deployments by having improved ocean temperature data provided to its iceberg deterioration model. To further enhance the quality of environmental data used in its iceberg models, IIP also provided weekly drifting buoy sea surface temperature (SST) and drift histories and SLAR ocean feature analyses to METOC and NEOC for use in water mass and SST analy- ses. IIP conducted an oceanographic cruise aboard the USCGC SPAR (WLB 403) between 8 and 23 June 1990 off the Grand Banks of New- foundland. The objectives of the cnjise were: 1 ) to conduct an operational evaluation of mini-TOD's for use as current- measuring devices, and 2) to determine the drift errors of the full-sized TOD's IIP uses. The results will be published in a U. S. Coast Guard Re- search Development Center Technical or IIP Technical Report. On April 13, 1990, IIP paused to remember the 78^*^ anniversary of the sinking of the RMS TITANIC. During an ice reconnaissance patrol, two memorial wreaths were placed near the site of the sinking to commemoratethe nearly 1 500 lives lost. Page 7 Iceberg Reconnaissance and Communications During the 1990 Ice Patrol year, 96 aircraft sorties were flown in support of IIP, 43 for transit to St. John's, Newfoundland and 53 for ice observation. The ice obser- vation flights were made to locate the southwestern, southern, and southeastern limits of icebergs. In addition 6 logistics flights were neces- sary to support and maintain the patrol aircraft. Tables 3 and 4 show aircraft use during the 1990 ice year. Aerial ice reconnais- sance was conducted with SLAR-equipped U. S. Coast Guard HC-130H and HU-25B aircraft. The HC-130H aircraft deployed from Coast Guard Air Station Elizabeth City, North Carolina, and HU-25B aircraft deployed from Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The HC-1 30 'Hercules' aircraft has been the platform for Ice Patrol aerial recon- naissance since 1963. This was the third year for the HU- 25B to serve as an Ice Patrol platform. Although the HU- 258 does not have the range of the HC-1 30, it can serve as an excellent complement and is normally capable of cover- ing a majority of the IIP op- erations area. Pages CC < LU >■ o o> a> UJ X I- o Q O UJ CO u. < O CO CO O Lf) >£) Cr^ O in =3 O X (Si ^ ui CN LD LD CT" in ro CN m ->— ' xr en ^^ o 1— ^ en OJ o UD ro ro o yo -1—' ON LD ^ c^ t_ o (f) (fi !_ o in in o o in X cri (X) m (j> -1—' in 00 r-- in CN O en ro zz 7 ^ 1 X en CD o f^ o r-- o r- J—) in ro CN in O CO cn c_ 3 o X o o — cr> o o m o CN ro CTi r- CN a> QQ CJ) in ■- CN Lu ID X en CD o cr> m kD o c^ -4— > f m CN — m o CD c o en c ^ ■i—> ^ o X c CD (J -^-' 2 CD en (- "- c CD (\3 5^ (D (^ (D fO CO en (_ O CJ ■ — CO "5 u '^ ^ 03 C_ Cl O) en '^ en -1— ' := CD !_ CD o o < Q Q. q: Q- 1— Each day during the ice season, IIP prepares the OOOOZ and 1200Z ice bulle- tins warning mariners of the southwestern, southern, and southeastern limits of ice- bergs. U.S. Coast Guard Communications Station Boston, Massachusetts, NMF/ NIK, and Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John's Newfoundland/VON were the primary radio stations re- sponsible for the dissemina- tion of the ice bulletins. Other transmitting stations for the bulletins included Canadian Forces Meteorological and Oceanographic Center (METOC) Halifax, Nova Scotia/CFH and U.S. Navy LCMP Broadcast Stations Norfolk/NAM, Thurso, Scot- land; Keflavik, Iceland; Key West, Florida; and Rota, Spain. IIP also prepares a daily facsimile chart graphically depicting the limits of all known ice for broadcast at 1 600Z. U. S. Coast Guard Communi- cations Station Boston as- sisted with the transmission of these charts. Canadian Forces METOC, Halifax/CFH, and AM Radio Station Bracknell/GFE, United King- dom used Ice Patrol limits in their broadcasts. Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John's/ VON and U.S. Coast Guard Communications Sta- tion Boston / NIK provided special broadcasts. The International Ice Patrol requested that all ships transiting the areaof the Grand Banks report ice sightings, weather, and sea surface temperatures via Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John'sA/ON or U. S. Coast Guard Communications Sta- tion Boston/NIK. Response to this request is shown in Table 5. Appendix A lists all contributors. IIP received re- layed information from the following sources during the 1990 ice year: St. John's VON; ECAREG Halifax, Canada; U.S. Coast Guard Communi- cations and Master Station Atlantic, Chesapeake, Vir- ginia; and U.S. Coast Guard Automated Merchant Vessel Emergency Response/Op- erational Computer Center, New Yori<. Commander, In- ternational Ice Patrol extends a sincere thank you to all sta- tions and ships which con- tributed. TABLE 4. ICEBERG RECONNAISSANCE SORTIES BY MONTh HU-25B HC-130 TOTAL MONTH SORTIES FLIGHT HOURS SORTIES FLIGHT HOURS SORTIES FLIGHT HOURS JAN 0 0 0 0 0 0 FEB 0 0 0 0 0 0 MAR 8 25.6 5 30.0 13 55.6 APR 4 12.8 5 25.8 9 38.6 MAY 0 0 8 61.1 8 61.1 JUN 0 0 9 52.2 9 52.2 JUL 6 18.2 3 17.4 9 35.6 AUG 5 13.5 0 0 5 13.5 TOTAL 23 70.1 30 186.5 53 256.6 Page 9 Table 5 Iceberg and SST Reports Number of ships furnishing Sea Surface Temperature (SST) reports 88 Number of SST reports received 344 Number of ships furnishing ice reports 480 Number of ice reports received 1294 First Ice Bulletin 090000Z MAR 90 Last Ice Bulletin 151200ZAUG90 Number of facsimile charts transmitted 159 Page 10 DISCUSSION OF ICE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Since more than 10,000 icebergs are calved by Greenland's glaciers into the Baffin Bay each year (Knutson and Neill, 1978), annual fluc- tuations in the generation of Arctic icebergs are not a sig- nificant factor influencing the number of icebergs passing south of 48° N annually. Rather than the supply of ice- bergs available to drift south to the vicinity of the Grand Banks, the factors that most determine the number of ice- bergs passing south of 48° N each season are those affect- ing iceberg transport (cur- rents, winds, and sea ice) and the rate of iceberg deteriora- tion (wave action, sea sur- face temperature, and sea ice). The wind direction along the Labrador and Newfound- land coasts can affect the ice- berg severity of each ice year since the mean wind flow can influence iceberg drift. De- pendent upon wind intensity and duration, icebergs can be accelerated along or driven out of the main flow of the Labrador Current (Figure 2). Departure from the Labrador Current normally slows their southerly drift and, in many cases, speeds up their rate of deterioration. The wind direction and air temperature indirectly af- fect the iceberg severity of each ice year by influencing the extent of sea ice. Sea ice protects the icebergs from wave action, the major agent of iceberg deterioration. If the air temperature and wind direction are favorable forthe sea ice to extend to the south and over the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, the icebergs will be protected longer as they drift south. When the sea ice retreats in the spring, large numbers of icebergs will be left behind on the Grand Banks. Also, ifthetimeof sea ice retreat is delayed by be- low normal air temperatures, the icebergs will be protected longer, and a longerthan nor- mal ice season can be ex- pected. The opposite is true if the southerly sea ice extent is minimal, or if above normal air temperatures cause an early retreat of sea ice from the Grand Banks. Sea ice also acts to im- pede the transport of icebergs by winds and currents. The degree to which an iceberg drift is affected depends on the concentration of the sea ice and the size of the ice- berg. Thegreatertheseaice concentration the greater the affect on iceberg drift. The larger the iceberg the less affected its drift is by sea ice. Although it slows current and wind transport of icebergs, sea ice is itself an active me- dium, continually moving to- ward the ice edge where melt occurs. Icebergs in sea ice will eventually reach open wa- ter unless grounded. The melting of sea ice is affected by snow cover (which slows melting) and air and sea wa- ter temperatures. As sea ice melt accelerates in the spring and early summer, trapped icebergs are rapidly released and then become subject to normal transport and deterio- ration. The Labrador Current, aided by northwesterly winds in winter, is the main mecha- nism transporting icebergs south to the Grand Banks. In addition to transporting ice- bergs south, the relatively cold waterof the Labrador Current keeps the deterioration of ice- bergs in transit to a minimum. The following discussion summarizes environmental, sea ice, and iceberg condi- tions along the Labrador and Newfoundland coasts and on the Grand Banks of New- foundland for the 1990 ice year. The sea ice information was derived from the Thirty Day Ice Forecast for North- ern Canadian Waters pub- lished monthly by Ice Centre Ottawa, Atmospheric Envi- ronment Service (AES) of Page 1 1 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I n I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40°E 39°E 38 Offshore Branch denotes the Labrador Current I 52° E51° E50° 49° 48° E47° E46° 45° 44° 1=43° 42° 41° E40° 39° 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° 38^ Figure 2: This figure depicts the Labrador Current, the main mechanism for transporting icebergs South to the Grand Banks. Canada, and information on the mean sea ice extent was obtained from Ice Limits Eastern Canadian Sea- board, Ice Centre Ottawa, Atmospheric Environment Page 1 2 Service, 1989. Figures 3 to 1 4 compare sea ice extents during the 1990 IIP year to mean sea ice extents. En- vironmental information was obtained from the Mariner's Weather Log and AES Thirty Day Ice Fore- casts. During January, Feb- ruary, and March 1990 the Icelandic Low was sig- nificantly lower (up to 27 mb lower in February) than normal. Temperatures were about 2°C below normal, and winds were from the west/ northwest overthe Newfound- land coast. The wind direc- tion and colder temperatures resulted in the sea ice extent being much greater than normal to the south and east during January, February, and March. Figure 8 shows the sea ice extent on 1 2 March 1990 compared to the mean sea ice edge. There were 8 new bergs south of 48°N in February, the first month with bergs in the IIP area, and 1 13 south of 48°N in March. The greaterthan normal sea ice conditions during the first part of the ice season protected icebergs from de- terioration longer. Further- more, when the ice edge re- ceded to the north in April (the ice edge receded over 500 km between mid-March and mid-April) a large num- ber of icebergs were released farther south than normal. There were 376 new bergs south of 48°N in April. From mid-April to mid-June (Fig- ures 9,10, and 11) the south- ern edge of the sea ice re- mained at about 51 °N, just inside the IIP area, and its extent was still greater than normal. During May, the IIP Limits of All Known Ice ex- tended south of 40°N, the IIP southern boundary. This ex- treme southern limit of bergs was probably influenced by the extreme southern extent and late retreat of the sea ice. Furthermore, sea surface temperature (SST) charts show that the North Atlantic Current made a southward meander in the region south of the Grand Banks (approxi- mately 40°N, 50°W) during the latter half of May. This permitted a tongue of the colder (less than 6°C) Labra- dor Current to extend farther south than normal. From 15- 25 May, the Labrador Cur- rent, the main mechanism for transporting icebergs southward, extended below 39°N before receding to the north. This tongue of colder water undoubtedly was the primary reason for the extreme southern ice- berg extent during May. Eight bergs were predicted to drift south of 40°N during May by HP's computer model, and the southernmost berg sighted during the season was at 38.8°N, 47.3°W on 26 May 1990. Because MP's computer model was not able to drift bergs south of 40°N, IIP increased aerial reconnaissance of the south- ern Limits of All Known Ice during this period of extreme iceberg extent. IIP also drew larger than standard error circles around the bergs south of 40°N and expanded the error circles daily to a maximum of 45 miles from the last sighted or predicted berg position after four days on plot. Figures 1 5 -26 show the IIP Limits of All Known Ice and the sea ice edge for the 15th and 30th of each month of the ice season. During June the south- ern berg extent began to de- crease, and between 30 May and 15Junethe IIP Limit of All Known Ice receded about 500 km to the north. Under the influence of southwest- eriy winds the sea ice finally departed the IIP area in mid- June, and by mid-July there was no sea ice south of 57°N. In summary, 1 990 was a heavy ice year in terms of the number of bergs south of 48°N and uncommonly severe in terms of the southern ex- tent of bergs. This probably resulted from the greater than normal sea ice extent protect- ing the bergs longer and re- leasing them farther south in MP's area and the anoma- lous Labrador Current flow which transported the bergs to extreme southern extents. Page 1 3 Sea Ice Conditions October 1 5, 1 989 55° 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from lc« Center Ottawa. 198S) 1962 - 87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Ice Center Ottawa, 1 989) 50° Figure 3 55° Sea Ice Conditions November 19, 1989 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn Irom Ice Center Ottawa, 1989) 1962 - 87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn Irom Ice C^enter (^awa. 1989) 50° 45° Figure 4 Page 14 55° 50° Sea Ice Conditions December 18, 1989 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Ice C«nler Ottawa, 1980) 1 962 - 87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from lc« Center Ottawa, 1 989) 55° Figure 5 SS" 50° 45° Sea Ice Conditions JANUARY 15, 1990 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Ice Center Ottawa, 1 990 ) 1962 - 87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Ice Center Ottawa, 1989) Halifax 60° 50° Figure 6 Page 15 55° Figure 7 Figure 8 Page 1 6 Figure 9 Figure 10 Page 17 Figure 1 1 55° 50° 45° Figure 12 Page 18 45° Figure 13 Sea Ice Conditions SEPTEMBER 15, 1990 55° 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from lc« Canter Ottawa. 1990) 1962 - 87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn (rom Ice Center Ottawa. 1989) ^ 50» Figure 14 Page 19 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° cpo-LLLLLLLl 1 1 1 I I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I | 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I ii 1 1 i ) 1 1 1 1 I ^11 1 1 I M 1 1 II I I I M II I n II I I ii I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I ii i i ii 1 1 n i l ^'^ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 51°- 50°E 49°= 48°E Newfoundland =^ — ^'■^-J^ /o 470Z ^y^'l 46°= r^^ 45°= • > • ' 44°= 43°= ■•"• : ?- 42°E 41 °E ■:■ i •:• 40^ 39°= -52° = 51° = 50° r49° = 48° = 47° = 46° = 45° = 44° = 43° = 42° = 41° = 40° = 39° 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 15. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 09MAR90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 20 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39= jo I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L = 40° 38~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiMiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii I r38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N Jk Growler — N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets in A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Figure 16. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15MAR90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 21 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° qp" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L cQo 38° n 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg — N M. Growler — N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice — Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Figure 17. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30MAR90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 22 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° ,o JLLLLLLI iiiiiiiiiiliiiiiinilillllll|lllll|lllil|illll)lllllliNliliiiMliiililillliliillilllllliniiiiiiiiiLcoo ^^ , i i : : \ I : : : i : : V - b^ A : I i i i \i .-^ i 1.^.^4 1 < ^ I I f j ■> i \ I , - 51° 40°= 39°r 38° = 40' = 39° ~l 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 n i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 18. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15APR90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 23 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° t ' 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° rryn I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I.I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,. I I I | I I I I I | I I I I I | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IJ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L rnn j r 51° i = 50° ■t r49° 4 ^48° z 47° ;-ij-.Tr'":H \ h 4r i I H \ = 46° •t r 45° = 44° = 43° = 42° E41° 39°= 40° = 39° 38 n I n 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 j 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I II 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 II i 1 1 II I i 1 1 1 II i I II II i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 38° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 19. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30APR90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 24 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39' CQO-LLilLLU I I M n I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H I I 11 I I I I I I I L cpo 1/ I t 1 1 t I ^ I ^ '^ ^ = 5r \ ^\ \ \ ^A \ \ \ \ I 50°- //^- i ^ \ 4 4 ^ t -r ' \ /■•< = 50° : 1/ £_^«o \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / ^ I ^49° £48° E47° z 46° r 45° = 44° r 43° = 42° = 41° = 40° = 39° 39°= 38°n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M I i 1 1 III i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 n ii n 1 1 1 1 1 M I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg Estimated limit of all known ice N A Growler Estimated limit of sea ice N X Radar Target / Contact 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 20. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15MAY90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 25 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° rpn J I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I n 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I ^1 I I |_ "^ \ i \ \ \ 38 ~i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 mi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 3 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 21. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30MAY90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 26 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° rpn 1 I I I I I I I U_| I j_l_l 1 1 1 1 1 1 H 1 1 I 1 1 1 I ! I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I L J- po f E51° f = 50° r 49° E 48° I = 47° z 46° \ 45° I = 44° f 43° r e42° { = 41° z40° r 39° 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 li 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 22. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15JUN90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 27 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° )n I I I I I I I J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I L c-no E5r E 50° I 49° E48° z47° z 46° r 45° = 44° z 43° E42° = 41° §40° = 39° 'n 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 23. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30JUN90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 28 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° cooJ-LLLLLLl I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I U I I I I I I I L j-oo 38°~l I I I I I i I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I i 1 1 1 1 I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 24. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15JUL90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 29 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° £-pn I I III IIJ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I II I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ] I I II I I I I I I I L -52° = 51° E 50° I 49° E48° z47° z 46° z45° = 44° r 43° = 42° E41° 40°z = 40° 39°r = 39° 38 ~l I I I! I i I I I I I I I I I II i I 1 1 I I i I I I II i I I I II II I I II I I I I II I I I I I I i I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I II I I I II ; I I I M I I I I I I r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 25. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30JUL90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 30 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° )n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 H n 1 L cpo 4 = 51° ■' ■ = 50° ■\ j r49° ■I i E48° = 47° 46°= 45°E-H 44°= 43°E 42°= 41°r 40°= 39°E ■} = 46° I = 45° = 44° 1 = 43° = 42° = 41° = 40° •I = 39° 38°n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I r 38° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N A. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 26. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15AUG90 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 31 References Alfultis, M.A., Iceberg Populations South of 48 N Since 1900, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, CG-1 88-42. Anderson, I. Iceberg Deterioration Model, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, CG-1 88-38. Hanson, W.E., Operational Forecasting Concerns Regarding Iceberg Deterioration, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, 1987 Season, CG-188-42, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington DC, 1987. Ice Centre Ottawa, Atmospheric Environment Service (AES), Ice Limits Eastern Canadian Seaboard, 1989, Ottawa, Ontario, K1 A 0H3. Ice Centre Ottawa, Atmospheric Environment Sen/ice (AES), Thirty Day Ice Forecast for Northern Canadian Waters, October 1989 to September 1990. Knutson, K.N. and T.J. Neili, Report of the International Ice Patrol Sen/ice in the North Atlantic for the 1977 Season, CG-1 88-32, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C., 1978. Mariners Weather Log, Summer 1990, Vol. 34, Number 3, 1990a. Mariners Weather Log, Fall 1990, Vol 34, Number 4, 1990b. Mariners Weather Log, Winter 1991, Vol. 35, Number 1, 1991. Murphy, D.L. and I. Anderson. Evaluation of the International Ice Patrol Drift Model, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, 1985 Season, CG-188-40, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C., 1985. Page 32 Acknowledgements Commander, International Ice Patrol acknowledges thie assis- tance and information provided by the Atmospheric Environment Ser- vice of Environment Canada, U.S. Naval Fleet Numerical Oceanogra- phy Center, U.S. Naval Eastern Oceanography Center, the U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center, the Coast Guard Atlantic Area Staff, and the First Coast Guard District Communications Center. We extend our sincere appreciation to the staffs of the Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John's, NewfoundlandA/ON, Ice Opera- tion St John's, Newfoundland, Air Traffic Control Gander, Newfound- land, Canadian Forces Gander and St John's, Newfoundland, the St. John's Weather Offices, and to the personnel of U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Elizabeth City, U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod, and U.S. Coast Guard Communications Station Boston fortheir excellent support during the 1990 International Ice Patrol season. It is also important to recognize the efforts of the personnel at the International Ice Patrol: CDR J. J. Murray, LCDR W. A. Hanson, Dr. D. L. Murphy, LTJG M. B. Christian, LTJG A. T. Ezman, MSTCM G. F. Wright, MSTCS D. R. Kennedy. MSTC M. F. Alles, MSTC R. H. Eckenrode, YN1 P. G. Thibodeau. MST1 C. R. Moberg, MST1 J. C. Myers, MST2 J. L. Perdue, MST3 M. E. Petrick, MST3 P. J. Reilley, MST3 R. C. Lenfenstey, MST3 M. D. Baechler, MST3 R. S. Taylor, MST3 J. A. Jordan, MST3 C. D. Quigg, MST3 P. S. Johnson and MST3 S. D. Reed. Page 33 Appendix A Ship Reports VESSEL NAME ABEL J ABITIBI CLAIBORNE ABITIBI CONCORD ABITIBI MACADO ABITIBI ORINCO ACINA ADAGORTHON ADAM ADELER ADMIRALENGRACHT AEGEAN SEA AEGIR AFRICAN EVERGREEN AIVIK AL SAMAD ALARA ALBERTA ALDABRA ALEKSANDR STAROSTENKO ALFARAHIDI ALMARE QUINTA ALMARE TERZA ALSYTA SMITS AMBER AMBROSE SHEA AMELIA DESGAGNES AMERICA EXPRESS AMKE AMSTELWAL ANANGEL CHAMPION ANANGEL PROSPERITY ANDREW H ANN HARVEY ANTINEA APJ ANAND FLAG UNKNOWN FED. REP. OF GERMANY FED. REP. OF GERMANY FED. REP. OF GERMANY FED. REP. OF GERMANY NORWAY BAHAMAS SWEDEN BAHAMAS NETHERLANDS GPSCE BURMA LIBERIA CANADA LIBERIA TURKEY GREECE UNKNOWN U. S. S. R. IRAQ ITALY ITALY NETHERLANDS PANAMA CANADA CANADA FED. REP. OF GERMANY FED. REP. OF GERMANY NETHERLANDS GRECE GREECE CYPRUS CANADA BAHAMAS INDIA SST 2 1 11 ICE REPORTS 1 7 6 1 5 3 6 1 1 2 1 6 2 1 2 2 1 2 4 4 1 2 1 4 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 5 3 1 1 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE Page 34 VESSEL NAME APPLEBY APTMARINER AQUARIUS ARCADIA ARCTIC ARGUS ARIADNE ARIS ASLCYGNUS ASTERIKS ATLANTIC CARTER ATLANTIC COMPASS ATLANTIC CONVEYOR ATLANTIC FREIGHTER ATLANTIC LINK ATLANTIC MARGARET ATLANTIC NORMA ATLANTIC OLGA ATLANTIC OPTIMIST ATLANTIC PEGGY ATLANTIC PROSPECT ATLANTIC RUTHANN ATLANTICO BACCALIEU CHALLENGER BADAK BAFFIN BALSA BALSA 33 BALSA 39 BALTIC SUN BARONIA BARRA HEAD BATAAFGRACHT BCM ATLANTIC BERGEODEL FLAG UNITED KINGDOM LIBERIA ITALY UNKNOWN CANADA LIBERIA SWEDEN PANAMA BAHAMAS LIBERIA FRANCE SWEDEN UNITED KINGDOM BAHAMAS NORWAY CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA ITALY UNKNOWN LIBERIA CANADA UNKNOWN PHILLIPINES PHILLIPINES NETHERLANDS PANAMA IRELAND NETHERLANDS CANADA NORWAY SST 1 4 ICE REPORTS 1 2 2 2 4 2 1 2 1 7 1 3 1 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 Page 35 VESSEL NAME BERGE PRINCE BERGEN BAY BERING UNIVERSAL BIBI BLACK SEA BC8BY ESTHER BOHINJ BORIS BOW FOREST BOW LADY BRAZILIAN SKY BREMONSKY BRIGHT EXPLORER BRUSSEL BURDUR C. S. IRIS CABOT CANADA MARQUIS CANADIAN EXPLORER CANMAR AMBASSADOR CANMAR EUROPE CANMAR SWIFT CANMAR VENTURE CAPE FOX CAPE ROGER CAPE ROSEWAY CARDONA CARIBBEAN EXPRESS I CARMEN CAST BEAVER CAST CARIBOU CAST HUSKY CASTMUSKdX CAST OTTER CAST POLARBEAR FLAG NORWAY NORWAY BAHAMAS UNITED KINGDOM NETHERLANDS UNKNOWN YUGOSLAVIA LIBERIA NORWAY NORWAY LIBERIA SWEDEN UNKNOWN BELGIUM TLIRKEY UNFTED KINGDOM CANADA CANADA UNfTED KINGDOM UNFTED KINGDOM BELGIUM SINGAPORE UNITED KINGDOM CANADA CANADA CANADA SPAIN PHILLIPINES SWEDEN YUGOSLAVIA YUGOSLAVIA BAHAMAS BAHAMAS BAHAMAS LIBERIA SST 1 3 1 29 ICE REPORTS 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 7 1 1 6 1 3 1 1 8 1 11 7 13 13 3 1 3 1 2 1 3 30 3 2 4 10 5 Page 36 VESSEL NAME CECILIA DESGAGNES CHEMBULK CLIPPER CHERRY VALLEY CHITRAL CHRISTINA W CHUSOVOY CLARE CLIPPER ATLANTIC CLIPPER CRUSADER CONCENSUS MOON CONCERT EXPRESS CONCORD CONFIDENCE CONTSHIP CORAL WIND CORNER BROOK CRISTOFORO COLOMBO CUENCA CZANTORIA DAND2 DAWSON DELOS REEFER DENEB DEPPE AMERICA DESGROSEILLIERS DMITRIV MEDVEDYEV DONA SOPHIA DOOYANG ELTTE DOOYANG FRONTTIER DORAOLDENDORFF DORADO DRAVA DUBROVNIK DUSSELDORF EXPRESS EAGLE ARROW FLAG CANADA LIBERIA UNITED STATES PAKISTAN DENMARK U. S. S. R. BAHAMAS CYPRUS PANAMA NORWAY SWEDEN FED. REP. OF GERMANY BAHAMAS FED. REP. OF GERMANY BAHAMAS LIBERIA ITALY BAHAMAS LIBERIA CANADA CANADA GRKCE ITALY PHILLIPINES CANADA U. S. S. R. GRffCE SOUTH KOREA SOUTH KOREA SINGAPORE ANTIGUA - BARBUBA YUGOSLAVIA YUGOSLAVIA FED. REP. OF GERMANY BAHAMAS SST ICE REPORTS 4 3 1 1 1 A 1 *t 1 6 4 ■i 1 1 1 3 1 4 4 7 1 3 4 1 3 1 1 2 8 14 18 1 1 18 3 2 3 2 1 Page 37 VESSEL NAME ECAFEG QUEST EDUARD CLAUDIUS EFF/N ELBE ORE ELIKON ELISABETH ELSAM JYLLAND ENERCHEM ASPHALT ENERCHEM TRAVAILLEUR ENLIVENER ENSOR ERROLM ESSOKAOSHIUNG EUROPA EUROPEAN SENATOR EUROS EXPLORER FAIRNES FALCON FALKLANDS DESIRE FALKNES FAUST FEDERAL CALUMET FEDERAL DANUBE FEDERAL INGER FEDERAL MAAS FEDERAL OTTAWA FEDERAL POLARIS FEDERAL ST LAURENT FEDERAL THAMES FERNCRAIG FETISH FILOMENA LEMBO FINA AMERICA FINNARCTIC ICE FLAG SST REPORTS CANADA 1 GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 1 CYPRUS 1 LIBERIA 1 BAHAMAS 1 1 CYPRUS 6 9 DENMARK 6 7 CANADA 4 CANADA 1 PANAMA 1 BELGIUM 4 BAHAMAS 1 BAHAMAS 1 LIBERIA 1 FED. REP. OF GERMANY 1 CYPRUS 1 GRffiCe 2 2 CANADA 4 NORWAY 8 UNKNOWN 1 PHILLIPINES 1 1 UNITED STATES 1 4 LIBERIA 2 CYPRUS 1 2 NORWAY 1 CYPRUS 7 BELGIUM 5 JAPAN 1 LIBERIA 4 4 CYPRUS 3 NORWAY 1 DENMARK 2 ITALY 1 BELGIUM 4 5 BAHAMAS 1 Page 38 VESSEL NAME FLAG SST FINNFIGHTER FINLAND FJORD LAND PANAMA FLYING DART CANADA FORUM PRINCE CYPRUS FREENES LIBERIA FURUNES PHILLIPINES GLOBAL DREAM CYPRUS GOLDEN RIO LIBERIA GRAND COUNT CANADA GREENLAND SAGA DENMARK GROSSWATER BAY CANADA HANCOCK TRADER CANADA HANS OSCAR NORWAY HAPPY TINE NORWAY HARP CANADA HASKERLAND NETHERLANDS HAVKATT NORWAY HAVTROLL NORWAY HENRY LARSEN CANADA HERCEGOVINA YUGOSLAVIA HERUVIM PANAMA HMCS GATINEAU UNKNOWN HOEGHFQAM BAHAMAS HOEGH FOUNTAIN BAHAMAS HOFSJOKULL ICELAND HONGKONG SENATOR FED. REP. OF GERMANY HORIZON LIBERIA HUBERT GAUCHER CANADA HUDSON CANADA HUDSONGRACHT NETHERLANDS HUMBERARM LIBERIA ICE PEARL DENMARK IGNACY DASZYKISKI POLAND IJMUIDEN MARU PANAMA IKOMA PANAMA ICE REPORTS 12 1 4 10 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 7 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 18 1 1 1 1 2 1 Page 39 VESSEL NAME IMPERIAL ACADIA IMPERIAL BEDFORD INDEPENDENT ENDEAVOR INDIRA MAHAL INDONESIA VICTdRY INN IONIAN EXPRESS IRON DUKE IRONBRIDGE IRVING ARCTIC IRVING ELM IRVING ESKIMO IRVING NORDIC IRVING OURS POLAIRE ISLAND GEM IVER FALCON J.AZ.DESGAGNES JAHRE TARGET JALVALLABH JENNIE W JINYU MARU JO GRAN JOANNM JOHGORTHON JOHAN PETERSEN JOHANNA K JOHNCHELMSING JOHN VENTURE JORITA JUGONAVIGATOR JULIA KALLIO KAPITAN KUDLAY KAPITAN REUTOV KAPITAN STANKOV FLAG CANADA CANADA FED. REP. OF GERMANY NEWHEBRIDE PHILLIPINES AUSTRALIA GRffiCe CANADA HONGKONG CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA GREECE NORWAY CANADA LIBERIA INDIA UNITED STATES JAPAN NORWAY BAHAMAS SWEDEN DENMARK PANAMA CYPRUS CANADA NORWAY YUGOSLAVIA SINGAPORE CYPRUS U. S. S. R. U. S. S. R. U. S. S. R. SSI 13 ICE REPORTS 2 6 1 1 1 4 1 1 4 6 1 1 1 1 15 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 4 2 Page 40 VESSEL NAME KARAYEL l'*'"'*'"®'"*''" KATORI KAVO YERAKAS KEIKO MARU KHUODZHNIK PROROKOV KHUDOZHNIK REPIN KIELGRACHT KINGUK KNOCK DAVIE KOELN ATLANTIC KONKAR INTREPID LA RICHARDAIS LACKENBY LAPPONIA LARINA LAS GUASIMAS LASA LATOUCHE TREVILLE LE BRAVE LE CHENE NO. 1 LEDA MAERSK LELIEGRACHT LEONARD J. COWLEY LEOPARD LIBRANAVE II LOCUST LOKPREM LONGEVITY LORETTA V LT ARGOSY LT ODYSSEY LUX CHALLENGER LYNCH MAERSK ZARAGOZA MALINSKA FLAG TURKEY PANAMA GRffiCE JAPAN U.S.S.R. U. S. S. R. NETHERLANDS CANADA PANAMA FED. REP. OF GERMANY GREECE FRANCE BAHAMAS FINLAND LIBERIA CUBA SPAIN FRANCE CANADA CANADA DENMARK NETHERLANDS CANADA U. S. S. R. BRAZIL LIBERIA INDIA PHILLIPINES CYPRUS INDIA INDIA SPAIN UNITED STATES PANAMA YUGOSLAVIA SST 1 1 1 1 38 1 ICE REPORTS 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 3 1 6 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 41 VESSEL NAME MALOJA (I MANTA MAREN MAERSK MARGUGORTHON MARIA GL MARIA GORTHON MARITA MARSHAL ZHUKOV MARYW MAYA NO. 3 MAYFAIR MCKINNEY MAERSK MEERKATZE MEGA MEGA DALE MEGA HILL MERRY DOLPHIN MERSEY VENTURE MICHAEL MARINER MIKULA MISS ALIKI MITO MGSELORE MOUTSAINA MSC CHIARA MUSSON NADEZHDA OBUKHOVA NAJA ITTUK NATAARNAQ NAUTILUS NEDLLOYDHUDSOf^ NEFTEQORSK NEW LAPIS NILAM NIMROD FLAG CYPRUS FED. REP. OF GERMANY DENMARK BAHAMAS GREECE SWEDEN PHILLIPINES U. S. S. R. DENMARK PHILLIPINES LIBERIA NORWAY FED. REP. OF GERMANY BAHAMAS NORWAY NORWAY HONGKONG CANADA CANADA CANADA CYPRUS LIBERIA LIBERIA LIBERIA ITALY U. S. S. R. U. S. S. R. DENMARK DENMARK CYPRUS UNITED STATES U. S. S. R. LIBERIA LIBERIA GREECE SST 19 ICE REPORTS 26 1 2 2 2 2 4 1 8 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 7 1 1 8 23 3 1 4 1 1 2 2 4 Page 42 VESSEL NAME NISSAN BLUEBIRD NORDHEIM NORDHOLM NORDIC NORMAN MCLEOD ROGERS NORMAN SIRINA NORTH DUCHESS NORTHERN PRINCESS NOTOS NOVAGORICA NOVI BEOGRAD NUNGU ITTUK NURNBERG ATLANTIC OBERON OBUKHOVSKAYA OBORONA ODET OHYOMARU OLYMPIC GLOW OLYMPIC MIRACLE OMISAU OMNIUM PRIDE OOCL CHALLENGE OPSTERLAND ORIENT STAR ORIENT SUN ORIENTAL PATRIOT ORJEN PACIFIC BREEZE PACIFICO PAMIUT PATMOS PELANDER PERSEVERANCE PETIMATA OT RMS PETROBULK LION FLAG LIBERIA SINGAPORE SINGAPORE LIBERIA CANADA NORWAY CPEECE CANADA CYPRUS YUGOSLAVIA YUGOSLAVIA DENMARK FED. REP. OF GERMANY JAPAN U. S. S. R. FRANCE JAPAN LIBERIA GRBECe YUGOSLAVIA CYPRUS UNITED KINGDOM NETHERLANDS LIBERIA LIBERIA CHINA YUGOSLAVIA JAPAN BAHAMAS DENMARK GRECE LIBERIA SINGAPORE BULGARIA BELGIUM SST 1 1 7 1 ICE REPORTS 2 2 1 2 1 2 13 2 2 2 5 1 3 6 1 1 1 3 1 12 2 3 1 1 1 5 1 7 2 1 1 1 Page 43 VESSEL NAME PETROBULK RAINBOW PHOLAS PONER KOLY PIVA POKKINEN POLAR NANOQ POLAR SEA PONTOKRATIS PONTTOPOROS POSEIDON BREEZE PROTEKTOR PUHOS QUEEN ELIZABETH II RADNIK RAFAEL^ S RAVENSCRAIG RAVNAAS RAVNI KOTARI RED ROSE REGINAOLDENDORFF RIALTO RIO MOA RIO VISTA RISNES ROBERTA D'ALESIO R06ELLEN RUBI RUDJER BOSKOVIC RUDOLF LEONHARD S KIROV SAAR ORE SAC MALAGA SAINT PIERRE SAN LORENZO SAN SALVADOR BAHAMAS GREENLAND UNITED STATES 18 GHbtCb GHH-a= SINGAPORE 2 SINGAPORE FLAG LIBERIA UNITED KINGDOM U. S. S. R. YUGOSLAVIA BAHAMAS GREENLANI UNITED ST GRSCE GRffiCE SINGAPORf SINGAPORE BAHAMAS UNITED KINGDOM PANAMA PANAMA BAHAMAS NORWAY YUGOSLAVIA CYPRUS UNITED KINGDOM LIBERIA CUBA UNITEOlfNGDOM UNITED STATES ITALY CYPRUS SPAIN YUGOSLAVIA GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC U. S. S. R. LIBERIA SPAIN FRANCE UNITED KINGDOM SPAIN SSI 1 4 3 2 ICE REPORTS 1 1 1 1 4 4 16 1 3 2 2 4 1 1 3 5 3 1 4 5 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 7 5 1 1 8 1 Page 44 VESSEL NAME SANKO PEARL SAPPHIRE SASKATCHEWAN PIONEER SCANDINAVIAN SUN SCANTRO SCARAB SEAHORSE SEA-LAND QUALITY SEACROSS SEALUCK III SELIGER SELKIRK SETTLER SELNES SEVASTOPOLSKAYA BUKHTA SEVEN G'S SHINKAI MARU SIC KIM SILVER FAITH SIR HUMPHREY GILBERT SISALA SIVONA SKARHEIM SKOGAFOSS SKULPTOR MATVEYEV SLOLT SPAN SNOEKGRACHT SOLIN SOLITA SORENTOUBRO SPAR SPLIT STAR FINLANDIA STAR MAGNATE STARTRONDANGER STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH FLAG LIBERIA PHILLIPINES CANADA BAHAMAS NORWAY DENMARK BURMA UNITED STATES MALTA CYPRESS U. S. S. R. UNITED KINGDOM CYPRUS U. S. S. R. UNITED STATES JAPAN UNITED STATES BAHAMAS CANADA NORWAY SWEDEN NORWAY ANTIGUA - BARBUDA U. S. S. R. LIBERIA NETHERLANDS YUGOSLAVIA BAHAMAS INDIA UNITED STATES YUGOSUVIA DENMARK UN FTED KINGDOM NORWAY INDIA SST ICE REPORTS 1 4 4 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 3 8 2 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 4 1 3 4 3 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 Page 45 VESSEL NAME STEFANOS STENHOLM STOLT ACCORD STOLT ASPIRATION STOLT CROWN STOLT FALDA STOLT PRIDE STOLT SAKRA STOLT SYDNESS STUTTGART EXPRESS SUNGALE SVANGEN TADEUSZ KOSCIUSZKO TAKACHINO MARU TAMARA TAMPA BAY TAMPERE TAVERNOR TAVI TAWAKI TEXACO BERGEN THALASSINI AVRA THANASSIS THULELAND TNT EXPRESS TOLTEK TRAVEORE TREBIZOND TRIUMPH SEA TYR UALMONTREAL UMBRINA UNITED VENTURE UNITY 1 VALDIVIA FLAG GRffiCE UNKNOWN LIBERIA LIBERIA LIBERIA NORWAY LIBERIA LIBERIA LIBERIA FED. REP. OF GERMANY ANTIGUA - BARBUDA PANAMA POLAND JAPAN MALTA UNITED STATES NORWAY CANADA FINLAND UNITED STATES NORWAY GRffiCE MALTA SWEDEN UNITED KINGDOM FED. REP. OF GERMANY CHINA LIBERIA CANADA ICELAND GREENLAND U. S. S. R. SINGAPORE PANAMA UNITED KINGDOM SST 1 2 ICE REPORTS 2 1 4 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 4 3 1 4 1 1 5 1 2 1 1 2 6 1 1 3 2 7 1 1 3 1 Page 46 VESSEL NAME VALLATHOL VARJAKKA VERMA VESALIUS VIBRO ATLANTIC VITASKY VITYAZ VOLNA VRAHOS VSEVOLOD WATER FINA WATERGIDS WATERKONING WATERSTOKER WESER GUIDE WILFRED TEMPLE MAN WILLIAM WIND SOVEREIGN WIND SPIRIT WLADYSLAW SIKORSKI WORLD ADVENTURE YIN KIM YOUNG SKIPPER YUNUS II ZAMA ZAMBES I ZAMORA ZANDBERG ZANDVOORT ZAWRAT ZEILA ZIEMIA LUBELSKA ZIEMIA OLSZTYNSKA ZIEMIA SUWALSKA ZIEMIA ZAMOJSKA FLAG INDIA BAHAMAS CYPRESS BELGIUM NORWAY PANAMA U. S. S. R. U. S. S. R. HONDURAS U. S. S. R. CYPRESS NETHERLANDS NETHERLANDS NETHERLANDS FED. REP. OF GERMANY CANADA SINGAPORE NORWAY NORWAY POLAND LIBERIA PANAMA LIBERIA TURKEY LIBERIA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA POLAND CANADA POLAND POLAND POUND POLAND SST 1 1 1 1 4 1 3 2 10 ICE REPORTS 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 3 1 1 1 11 4 1 3 10 22 2 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 5 3 1 1 3 20 Page 47 VESSEL NAME FLAG ZIM IBERIA ISRAEL ZIM KEELING ISRAEL ZIM PUSAN GREECE ZIM SAVANNAH ISRAEL ZURITA CANADA SST ICE REPORTS 1 2 2 1 Page 48 Appendix B International Ice Patrol's 1990 Drifting Buoy Program Alfred T. Ezman INTRODUCTION The 1990 iceberg season was the fifteenth con- secutive year that the Interna- tional Ice Patrol (IIP) has used satellite-tracked buoys to mea- sure currents in its operations area in the western North At- lantic Ocean. Buoy trajecto- ries are used to provide near real time current data to the Ice Patrol iceberg drift model. Currents derived from the buoy trajectories are used to tem- porarily modify the mean cur- rents in the region through which the buoys drift. Shortly after a buoy departs the re- gion, the current is reverted to its mean value (Summy and Anderson, 1983). During the 1990 Ice Patrol season the Ice Pa- trol deployed ten buoys (Table B-1). Five ofthese were in the standard configuration de- Table B-1. Summary of 1990 Deployments mocm BUOY TYPE DEPLOYMENT DATE DEPLOYMENT POSITION ID REMARKS 4530 TOD 10APR(10GJ: 4700.0°N, 4720.2°W last positton plotted 19 NOV(323} Departed OP AREA 17 NOV{321, 9877 TOD 10 MAY (130) 4349.0°N,4913.0°W FaSed in OPAREA 23 JUt.(204) Stopped transmitting 24 JUL{205) 4561 TOD W-^ BUOY 4530 1990 "saV 222 237 232 ^iV ^si' W^ "ill \ / \l\ L A /\ A hh r\ M \- f- -\--f^ A/^ V.7^^-^- iV, — ■ — ..^ =^-^ -- M^ A> i/\ ^ Ah \- --\ ■v' vv \ ^ / V V V 1 V V ^ 1 1 1 ij V 2 1 1' 132 'EHB-W 162 9? ae;* •CRB 222 -OPrt ""'i'i?*'" 252'" "' 282" g'a?"" YEBR-DflT "l'2' 1!! 1.2 5 2B ' « A /\ :-A-r A^ .^V^ "V J\.\ 4 A h \y A M J..... : " 1 1, 1 v 1 V ,y - rEnP-OBf •CBB-DnT "52 TEflH-Dflt Figure B-1b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4530. Page 57 BUOY 9877 40 N + 54 W + 52 W + 50 » + 48 W + 46 W + 44 H Figure B-2a. Trajectory for 9877 Page 58 BUOY 9877 1990 u at o ■o Q. u 2 a: 1G2 177 YEAR-DRY 222 132 III iiiiii I I I I I I I II II II I II [ I I riiiiilii I n I Miiiirili] ]i]iiii I 147 1G2 177 192 207 222 YEflR-DflY 80 r- 60 40 g 20 8-20 I > -40 -G0 -80 132 I I I mill III iimiiiiliiiiiimiiii 147 192 207 162 177 YERR-DflY Figure B-2b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 9877. 222 Page 59 BUOY 4561 174 223 o 40 N + 38 N + 53 W + 49 W + 45 W + 41 H + 37 M Figure B-3a. Trajectory for 4561 Page 60 BUOY 45G1 1990 u o ■o Q. 2 llllllllllllllll 177 I I I I I I nun I r ] i ii i I I 192 207 222 237 252 YERR-DHY 162 177 n I I I I I r I r I r n I i n ] ] n n n n i 1 1 n n n r 1 1 1 n 1 1 n n i ii 192 207 YERR-DRY 222 237 252 I 1 1 1 n n 1 1 1 1 n 1 1 n I i n n 1 1 M n n I I " " ' ' j -, "162 177 192 207 222 237 252 YERR-DRY Figure B-3b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4561. Page 61 BUOY 9878 o 291 257 38 N + 53 M + 49 M + 45 W + 41 W + 37 H Figure B-4a. Trajectory for 9878 Page 62 BUOY 9878 ,990 BUOY 9878 1990 -2 , I 'J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 ■ I ■ ■ , 1 1 1 , , , , 1 1 1 I '=« I'' 192 207 222 237 252 267 28 YEBR-DRY ' 1 1 1 1 1 ■ I ] ■ I ■ ^11 il 282 237 312 192 2B7 YEBR-DHY 252 2S7 YEBR-DSY '' ' I' Ill 282 237 312 YEHR-DHY Figure B-4b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (flitered) for 9878. Page 63 BUOY 4542 197 Figure B-5a. Trajectory for 4542. Page 64 a) o ■o Q. 3 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 (- Q -2 BUOY 4542 1990 u. 175 1' I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 190 205 220 235 YERR-DflY IS) \ u a. r o u Z) - -80 175 I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 190 205 220 235 YERR-DRY \ U Ql X. o u I > 80 p 60 - 40 - 20 - 0 -20 -40 -60 -8 ' ' I ' ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 75 190 205 YERR-DRY I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ...I 220 235 Figure B-5b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 4542. Page 65 ^A^ BUOY 11830 0 W / y 48 W + 46 M + 44 W Figure B-6a. Trajectory for 1 1830. Page 66 Sa r- 6a I- 4a I- 2a ^ a -2a h -4a |- -6a I- -aa Llu- 175 BUOY 11830 1990 nnnln.ninnnnlmini nil nimiin nliinn nin iilnn nnlmn nlnn iil^ 131 2a6 321 YEAR-DRY YERR-DflY eajn nln nln nil nln nil nIn nh nIn nl, nl^ YERR-DHY Figure B-6b. Time history of U and V velocity components (filtered) for 1 1 830. Page 67 BUOY 11831 46 M 44 M 42 H 4e ^ Figure B-7a. Trajectory for 1 1 831 Page 68 BUOY 1 1831 1990 176 191 206 221 236 YEAR-DRY 251 266 281 296 u Q. r o o I > 176 191 206 221 236 YEAR-DRY 251 266 281 296 Figure B-7b. Time history of U and V velocity components (filtered) for 1 1 831 . Page 69 BUOY 11832 54 H 5a H // 48 M 42 H * 49 M Figure B-8a. Trajectory for 1 1832. Page 70 BUOY 1 1832 1990 SB n -80. I7S 191 III ll I I II I lllllll III J lllllll III IIIMll ril I ll I mil r I I llllliri]lll]llllllllllMIM]lljlllllllUUIllll 206 221 YEflR-DHY 235 251 266 2B1 296 311 Figure B-8b. Time history of U and V velocity components (filtered) for 11832. Page 71 BUOY 9881 224 Figure B-9a. Trajectory for 9881 . Page 72 <-> 16 I- ? 14 ^ 3 12 ^ le Id 8 2 G (T CK 4 2 0 -2 BUOY 9881 1990 175 I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 111 190 205 YEHR-DflY 220 235 in \ u Q. r o u 1 _Q0 II I I I Ir I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 175 190 205 220 235 YEHR-DflY -80 175 11 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 190 205 YERR-DRY 220 235 Figure B-9b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U, and V velocity components (filtered) for 9881. Page 73 BUOY 9882 290 40 H Figure B-10a. Trajectory for 9882. Page 74 09 « TJ Q. z: u BUOY 9882 1990 -2 luimiiiiiiiil I iiiliiimi Ill 1 1 iiiiim mill II 1 1 II III 1 1 III iiiiiliii iimliiiiiiiiiiiiiil 176 191 206 221 236 251 266 281 296 YEflR-DHY i -4B U -60 -80, Ijiimiiiiiijji^ i^ljy yij-r-iiiim YERR-DflY "jti'j '^yt 176 191 206 221 236 YERR-DRY 251 266 261 296 Figure B-10b. Time history of sea surface temperature, U. and V velocity components (filtered) for 9882. Page 75 Appendix C MODIFICATIONS TO ICE PATROL'S MEAN CURRENT DATA BASE by DONALD L MURPHY WALTER E. HANSON ROSS L. TUXHORN INTRODUCTION In 1989, the Interna- tional Ice Patrol (IIP) began an extensive program to re- view and modify the mean cur- rent data base that it uses to predict iceberg drift. This re- view was made in response to problems identified by IIP watch-standersandthe results of research sponsored by the Atmospheric Environment Service (AES) of Canada. In recent years, Ice Patrol watch-standers have encountered problems in two regions of the IIP operations area: the offshore branch of the Labrador Current and the coastal waters near the island of Newfoundland (Figure C-1). Repeated sightings of icebergs moving southward in the offshore branch south of Flemish Pass showed that Page 76 the llPdrift model was predict- ing a southward movement far in excess of the observed iceberg movement. Fre- quently, iceberg resightings required the watch-standers to intervene and move the icebergs back to the north, in effect slowing the southward progress of these icebergs. In a study sponsored by AES (FENCO, 1987) current meter and drifting buoy data were compared to the mean values in this region. They found that the magnitudes of mean values in IIP data base were 2.5 times greater than the observations. Along the Newfound- land coast, the IIP current data base had some areas where no mean currents were speci- fied, particularly Notre Dame Bay, which is off the north- eastern coast, and the coastal waters off southern Newfound- land. When icebergs entered these regions, HP's iceberg drift model calculated only wind-related effects, i.e., the mean current terms became zero. As a result, the model calculations showed that ice- bergs drifting into these re- gions tended to accumulate there. Reconnaissance showed no such accumula- tions of icebergs. The primary goal of this report is to document the changes that were made to the IIP current data base dur- ing 1989-1990. In addition, this report summarizes the history of HP's mean current field and documents the changes that have occurred since it was established. HOW THE IIP CURRENT DATA BASE IS USED Ice Patrol's iceberg tracking operation relies heavily on the use of its ice- berg drift model (Mountain, 1980). Although aerial ice re- connaissance is the most ef- fective means to survey the operations area to locate ice- bergs, continuously monitor- ing the iceberg threat from the air is not practical. For ex- ample, Hanson (1989) re- ported that during a 30-day test period in June 1 988, neariy 50% of the icebergs in the IIP operations area were seen only once. This occurred de- spite an unusually large num- ber of air patrols flown during the period. There were 30 patrols, 17 by the Canadian Ice Patrol and 13 by IIP. How- ever, during the period the ice- berg limits encompassed over 1x10^ km2 of the ocean's surface and the coverage of each flight was less than 1 0% of this area. 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l_ coo 52= E51° = 50° = 49° = 48° = 47° E46° E45° = 44° = 43° = 42° E41° §40° E39° 38° ~i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38= 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° Figure C-1 : This figure depicts the Labrador Current, the main mechanism for transporting icebergs South to the Grand Banks. Page 77 The iceberg drift model affects all aspects of MP's operations. It is used to set the limits when no reconnaissance is being conducted. The model pre- dictions are also used to help identify resightings of previ- ously detected icebergs. With- out this technique, every iceberg sighting would be viewed as an initial detection, thus greatly inflat- ing the iceberg census num- bers. The accuracy of the iceberg drift model predic- tions is strongly influenced by the mean currents in the IIP database. Every week during the iceberg season IIP uses the drift of several satellite- tracked buoys to make tem- porary modifications to the current data base in the im- mediate vicinity of the buoys (Summy and Anderson, 1983). When the buoy leaves an area, the currents revert to their mean values over a period of two weeks. Despite this effort to use near real time current data from drifting buoys, the size of the IIP operations area (40-52 N, 39-57 W) and the length of the iceberg season (5-6 months) make it impos- sible to use only observed data to run the model. Hence, the mean currents of the IIP data base have a strong impact on HP's iceberg predictions. Ice Page 78 Patrol uses approximately 12 buoys per year. HISTORY OF THE IIP CURRENT DATA BASE The mean current field forms the basis of Ice Patrol's efforts at predicting iceberg movement. The grid spacing varies according to location, with most of the area divided into segments of 20 minutes of latitude by 20 min- utes of longitude. The area of the offshore branch of the La- brador Current has a finer lon- gitudinal grid spacing (20' by 10') in an attempt to resolve this narrow, southward-flow- ing current. This is also the region of the densest (in space and time) hydrographic sampling. The foundation of the mean current field is hydrographic data collected during over 1 00 surveys from 1934 to 1978. At least one survey was conducted annually during the period, with the exception oftheyears of World War II. From these surveys the distribution of mean dynamic typography was computed for each of four months (April - July) by Soule (1964). These charts were updated by Scobie and Schultz (1976). Figure C-2 presents the mean dy- namic typography for the month of April. Until 1979, Ice Patrol used four separate current files, one for each of the four months. However,the monthly variability in the current files was small and in 1979 they were averaged into a single, time-invariant mean current field (Murray, 1979). This field is based primarily on geostro- phic currents calculated from the gradients in the dynamic topography. However, in some cases, notably in the core of the offshore branch of the Labrador current in the region south of Flemish Pass, the magnitude of the current was increased from the val- ues calculated from geostrophyto reflect some lim- ited drifter data. There is no documentation for these changes. The rationale for in- creasing the current magni- tudes was based on the con- cern that calculating current speeds from the hydrographic data would lead to serious un- derestimates of the actual cur- rent speeds. For example, Soule (1964) argued that the uniform grid spacing of the normal (mean) charts tended to smooth the gradients in dynamic height, resulting in a low estimate of the current MONTHLY NORMAL DYNAMIC TOPOGRAPHY FOR APRIL 53»W 51* 49* 47» 45»W 50^N 48* 46* - 44* 42*N 1 — n — \ — r 1 — r 970 9 •% \ >.'.'•; ^--:--:-s-:vk::N>-; --' iooom«t«r« "^ - - '^U^*^- '-■- '"-i, / J L 9709 9710 971.2 1 J L J L 53*w sr 49* 47* 45*W 50* N 48' 46* 44" 42»N Figure C-2. Mean Dynamic Topography Relative to 1000 db (Scobie and Schultz, 1976). Page 79 magnitude. Scobie and Schultz (1976) substantially agreed with this position. They stated that although the cur- rent direction can be inferred realistically from isopleths of dynamic height, calculating speeds by taking measure- ments perpendicular to the isopleths leads to low esti- mates of the current magni- tude. The current magnitudes calculated from the normal charts approach a maximum of 40 cm/s only in a few loca- tions in the core of the off- shore branch of the Labrador Current south of Flemish Pass. Other studies, particu- larly Wolford (1969) sug- gested that the core speeds were about 50 cm/s to over 100 cm/s. Scobie and Schultz (1976) state that these are more reasonable. Also, us- ing geostrophy to calculate currents has several well known limitations, such as assuming a level of no mo- tion and assuming friction- less, unaccelerated flow. The intent of increasing the Labrador Current core speeds was to be conserva- tive in the operational sense. It was argued that it is better to overestimate the southward movement of icebergs toward the shipping lanes than to underestimate the extent of the iceberg threat to safe navigation. Page 80 PREVIOUS CHANGES TO THE 1979 CURRENT FILE The first documented permanent changes to the data base were recom- mended by Kasslerand Shuhy (1982). They examined the current values in three re- gions (Figure C-3). In area A, which is bounded by 50 N to 52 N and 51-20 W to 55 W, they based their recommen- dations on geostrophic cur- rent calculations from 393 hydrographic stations and the drift of one satellite- tracked buoy. The hydro- graphic data included 60 sta- tions taken by a 1981 IIP cruise and the remaining data from the archives of the National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC). Kassler and Shuhy recommended re- ducing the current speeds in A from 23 to 14 cm/s, which was the maximum average geostophic current calculated in the area. With one excep- tion, the current direction re- mained unchanged. That ex- ception was in the area of an observed anti-cyclonic loop centered at 51 N, 52 W that was observed in the hydro- graphic data and the drift of a1 980 satellite-tracked drifter. They stated that the loop was consistent with the bathymetry in the area. Kassler and Shuhy also compared drifter trajec- tories from 1 979-1 981 with the currents in areas B and C. They found good agreement in B and recommended no changes. In area C, the buoy trajectories showed a north- ward-flowing current in the area from 47 N to 51 -30 N and 42 W to 46 W. They calcu- lated the mean buoy drift through the region and rec- ommended that the data base be changed to reflect these values. At a few, iso- lated locations, marked by X's on Figure C-3, they found some internal consistencies that were corrected. Finally, they recommended the fur- ther use of drifting buoy data as a new source for calculat- ing mean currents. Anderson (1983) used 12 buoy tracks to com- pute mean currents in three 1 ° of latitude by 1° of longitude rectangles forthe region north of Flemish Pass (48-49 N, 46- 49 W). He made permanent modifications to all of the mean current values in the Ice Pa- trol data base for that region by setting all the values within each 1 ° by 1 ° rectangle to the mean value calculated forthe 1°by 1° grid. 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° Figure C-3. International Ice Patrol Operations Area showing the areas A, B, and C (Kassler and Shuhy, 1982). Page 81 1989-1990 CHANGES The permanent changes made in 1989-1990 were based on a combination of the drift of the satellite- tracked buoys that Ice Patrol uses in its operations and in- formation gathered from the scientific literature. This sec- tion describes the processing of the archived drifting buoy data and presents a brief chro- nology of the modifications made in 1989 and 1990. DATA PROCESSING The drifting buoy data set, which extends back to 1976, now has 125 buoy trajectories with a total of nearly 5000 buoy-days of drift. The trajectories are described in the yearly Ice Patrol Bulle- tins. The buoy configuration and the position data quantity and accuracy varied over the collection period. The standard buoy configuration is a 3-m-long spar hull with a 1-m-diameter flotation collar at the water- line. Most of the buoys were equipped with a 2-m x 10-m window shade drogue (some slightly larger) tethered to the hull. Over the 15-year period, the tether length varied some- what, starting at 10 m (1979- Page 82 1982), then to 30 m (1983- 1984), and finally to 50 m (1985-present). Only data for the period from March through August, roughly correspond- ing to the Ice Patrol season, were used in the data set. The number of buoy positions received each day and the accuracy of these fixes varied over the years. During the firstfewyears (1976-1 979) the buoys were tracked by the Random Access Measure- ment System (RAMS) on the NIMBUS-6 satellite. The ac- curacy of this system was about +/- 5 km and typically, 1 - 2 fixes were received each day. In 1 979 Ice Patrol began tracking buoys withthe TIROS satellites, first using a local userterminal atthe U. S. Coast Guard Oceanographic Unit (1979-1981), and finally through Service ARGOS (1982-present). This most recent period has the highest quality and most densely- sampled data in time, with position accuracy of about 350 m and 6-10 fixes per day for each buoy. About 70 percent of the data used in the modifi- cation are from this period. The trajectories were treated as a homogeneous data set. All records were scanned and obviously bad positions were removed. The quality controlled position data were then fitted to a cubic spline curve to arrive at an evenly-spaced record with an interval of 3 hours. For most of the tracks, this resulted in no net increase in the number of fixes per day. FortheNIM- BUSdataandthe early TIROS data, this process resulted in an increase of data points in the interpolated records. The interpolated position records were then filtered using a low- pass cosine filter with a cut-off of 1.17 X 10-5 Hz (one cycle/day). This filter removes most tidal and inertial effects. The filtered, interpo- lated drifter data were aver- aged in bins bounded by the midpoint between adjacent grid points of the iceberg drift model current field. For most of the IIP operations area, this resulted in the grid point that was centered in the bin. Along the boundaries between the two different longitudinal grid spacings (along 46 W and 50 W), this resulted in grid points that were slightly off center in the east-west di- rection. First, the average speed and direction of an indi- vidual buoy that moved through a bin was calculated. Then, the movement of all the buoys that drifted through the area represented by the bin were averaged to arrive at a single mean vectorforthe bin. This mean vector was calcu- lated only forcases when there were three or more buoys passing through the bin. These mean values were then blended into the existing data base using a two dimen- sional least squares spline fit based on HP's current update program (Summy and Ander- son, 1983). CHRONOLOGY The first efforts, un- dertaken before the start of the 1989 iceberg season, fo- cused on the currents in Notre Dame Bay and the coastal waters near south- east Newfoundland. These are the areas that previously had the mean currents set to zero. Because the avail- able current data are sparse, the mean currents in these areas are not well known. The changes were based on current charts provided in Dinsmore (1972), Petrie and Anderson (1983), and Greenberg and Petrie (1988). The latter is the result of a barotropic nu- merical model. These changes, which were largely subjective, affected fewer than 100 grid points. Most were changed from 0 to 10 cm/s or less and the direction approximately followed the local bathymetric contours. Early in the 1989 iceberg season (17 April 1 989), a permanent modifica- tion to the current data base was implemented that in- cluded all the buoy data col- lected in the offshore branch of the Labrador Current up to that time. The data set is de- scribed by Murphy and Hanson (1989). The most im- portant effect of this change was the reduction of the speed of the core of the offshore branch in the region south of Flemish Pass from 80-115 cm/s to 40-50 cm/s. There was very little change in the direction of the current in that region. In this area the largest amount of data were collected, with some bins representing the drift of 10-15 buoys. Between the 1989 and 1 990 seasons, acompre- hensive revision of the IIP current data base was under- taken using the entire Ice Patrol drifting buoy archive, including the data collected during the 1989 iceberg sea- son. The entire IIP opera- tions area was included in this review, including the areas affected by the permanent modifications made early in 1989. All the grid points that represented at least three buoy tracks were modified to reflect the calculated mean values. In addition to the changes based on the buoy data, the current speeds in two areas were reduced. The current speeds on the Grand Bank and the northeast Newfoundland Shelf were changed from 23 to 7 cm/s. About 200 grid points were affected by this modifi- cation. The rationale for this change was that the charac- ter of the mean flow in this area is not well known, and that wind effects were likely to be important in the shelf dynamics. Reducing the mean current speed reduced the effect of the mean current on the modeled iceberg drift and allowed the wind-driven terms of the iceberg drift model to play a greater role in the drift predictions. Finally, the currents speeds were reduced in a small area im- mediately to the east of the offshore branch of the Labrador Current from be- tween 50-52 N. About 80 grid points were affected by this change. The new speeds were approximately half those previously shown in the area. This reduction was required because the speeds in the offshore branch of the Labrador Current were ob- served to be half the 1979 values. Page 83 DISCUSSION Figure C-4 presents the modified IIP mean cur- rent data base as it now ex- ists. The digital data are avail- able on electronic medium upon request. This data base represents our best knowl- edge of the mean currents in the IIP operations area during the iceberg season, but suffers from the well known problems of mean represen- tations of oceanic circulation. It does not describe well the circulation in areas with sig- nificant temporal variability. The temporal variability of the currents in portions of the Ice Patrol operations area is well known (Petrie and Isenor, 1985), so great caution must be exercised when using this data base for drift prediction. Nonetheless, the mean repre- sentation of the offshore branch of the Labrador Cur- rent in and south of Flemish Pass is well represented in the data base. This area, known as iceberg alley, is of greatest interest to IIP be- cause it moves icebergs south- ward into the trans-Atlantic shipping lanes. The drifting buoy data clearly support the existence of core speeds lower than the previously used values of 1 00 cm/s. Page 84 Ice Patrol plans to update the data base periodi- cally. As new drifting buoy data become available, they will be incorporated into the data base, most likely every two years. Wori ^■ n a. « .M * ^«**«****«*«««*>* • •*-^-%-^-» ■♦♦■♦•♦ ik'9^ * y<»yiJi~Aia-^ ♦ t+ «^«f . ^ , . ♦^^ . . . . • « . fi ». ♦ X . » » J! 55-^54 555355555^59 » . . - • » -^ V K ^ ♦^^^ *..... * ^'5^v'^^ j» « . . . . . ■» » ->-^ ♦ .59^55^^^^ ■* •♦■♦■•■♦■♦♦* J^-fr •♦ ■♦-♦■♦■♦■♦•♦ -^-fr-^-^-»-fr-> + ■» ■► -^-^-^-^•*-»-^ + + + -♦ ■» -* -^ ■* -^ "* Td * ^iSiflS^S'jd'tf:^* « ■jS s ■* ♦ •♦♦••♦♦-♦••« -»-»-»-i>-»-»-»:»i^^-;^-;^-»-^-i»-^-»-»';^OC* »»W>t' ■»■»■»■» t>t>PDt)t)t)t>t>t)[>Ot)l) t)"!)^.?^^*^^^?^^*****^ ;«*»*«-♦■♦•»■♦»*«•. •»-»-»-»-»-W> t)t)i>l>l>P'l>Pi)t>C>D>t>t> tWOC)OOt>W>!)t>l>&i>»»»»»M»< * - ;«;»;»^.*-»-k-f-f + + -#» « . . ■^-^-^'-^-^^^^-^ -40 J^J^^^_^^^^^ t)C)[)[)t)DDC(Ott'WDc.ot>t»>** t>t>Ot>t>DCt>M>Wffi>t"'>» Figure C-4. The Mean Curents in the International Ice Patrol Operations Area after the Permanent Modifications made in 1989 - 1990. Page 85 REFERENCES Anderson, I., 1983. Oceanographic Conditions on the Grand Banks during the 1983 International Ice Patrol Season. Appendix B, Report of the International Ice Patrol Service in the North Atlantic, 1983 Season. Bulletin No. 68, CG-1 88-38, International Ice Patrol, Avery Point, Groton, CT 06340-6096, 73pp. Dinsmore, R. P. ,1972. Ice and Its Drift into the North Atlantic Ocean. International Commission for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries. Special Publication 8: p. 89-128. FENCO Newfoundland Limited, 1987. Optimum Deployment of TOD's (TIROS Ocean Drifters) to Derive Ocean Currents for Iceberg Drift Forecasting. Final Report submitted to Atmospheric Service, Downsview Ontario M3H 5T4, Canada, 153pp. Greenberg, D. H. and B. Petrie, 1988. The f^ean Barotrophic Circulation of th-^ Newfoundland Shelf and Slope. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 93(C12): p. 15,541-15,550. Hanson, W. E., 1989. Upgrade of Environmental Inputs to Iceberg Forecasting l\*1odels. Technical Report 89-05. International Ice Patrol, Avery Point, Groton, CT 06340-6095, 16pp. Kassler, R. D. and J. L. Shuhy, 1982. Update of International Ice Patrol Drift Prediction Data Base, Final Project Report. Unpublished manuscript of the Coast Guard Oceanographic Unit, International Ice Patrol, 1082 Shennecossett Road, Groton, CT 06340-6095, 17pp. Mountain, D. G., 1980. On Predicting Iceberg Drift. Cold Regions Science and Technology. Vol 1 (3&4): p. 273-282. f^urphy, D. L. and W. E. Hanson, 1989. Drifting Buoy Measurements in the Labrador Cun-ent. Proceed- ings of the Conference on Marine Data Systems (MDS 89), Marine Technology Society, 1825K Street N.W., Suite 203, Washington, DC 20006, p. 219-224. Murray, J. J., 1979. Oceanographic Conditions, Appendix B to Report of the International Ice Patrol Service in the North Atlantic Ocean, Season of 1979. Bulletin No. 65, International Ice Patrol, 1082 Shennecossett Road, Groton, CT 06340-6095, 64pp. Petrie, B. and C. Anderson, 1983. Oceans, Vol. 21 : p. 207-226. Circulation on the Newfoundland Continental Shelf. Atmosphere and Petrie, B. and A. Isenor, 1985. The Near-Surface Circulation and Exchange in the Newfoundland Grand Banks Region. Atnxjsphere-Ocean Vol. 23(3): p. 209-227. Scobie, R. W. and R. H. Schuttz, 1976. Oceanography on the Grand Banks Region, March 1971 - December 1972. U. S. Coast Guard Report No. 373-70, Internattonal Ice Patrol, 1082 Shennecossett Road, Groton, CT 06340-6095, 298pp. Soule F. M., 1964. The Normal Topography of the Labrador Current and its Environs in the Vicinity of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland during the Iceberg Season. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Ret. No. 64-36, Woods Hole, MA 02543. 9pp. Summy, A. D. and I. Anderson, 1985. Operational Use of TIROS Oceanographic Drifters by International Ice Patrol (1978-1982). Proc. 1983 Symposium on Buoy Technology (Gulf Coast Section), Marine Technology Society, 1825K Street N.W., Suite 203, Washington, DC 20006, p. 246-250. Page 86 U. S. Department of Transportation United States ia Coast Guard _ .^•^c■^:■;^•;■^;•;w■ Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic Marine Biological Laboratory LIBRARY OCT 81992 Woods Hole, Mass. PBY-5A CATAUNA flew first IIP reconnaissance flighits (1946) 1991 Season Bulletin No. 77 CG- 188-46 U.S.Departmenr of TransporTation United States Coast Guard 200, Commandant (G-NIO) United States Coast Guard MAILING ADDRESS: 2100 2nd St. SW Washington, DC 20593 (202) 267-1450 Bulletin No. 77 JUL 2 8 1992 REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC Season of 1991 CG-188-46 Woods HoIp Ma&s Forwarded herewith is bulletin No. 77 of the Tni-p-rnafinna1>_Xpg. Pf^frnl^ descriPing the Patrol's services, ice observations and conditions during the 1991 season. W. J. ECKER Chiiif, Office of Navigation Safety and Waterway Services DISTRIBUTION— SDL No. 130 a b c d e t g h i J k 1 m n 0 P q r s t u V w X y z A B 3* 1* 1* ? 1 2 2 1 C 1* 1* D 60 E F G H NON-STANDARD DISTRIBUTION: B:a G-NIO only, B:b LANTAREA (5), PACAREA (1), B:c First, Fifth Districts only, C:a CGAS Elizabeth City only, C:q LANTAREA only, SML CG-4 C:a CGAS Cape Cod TEBNATiOMAL IGE PATROL liil AMMUAL REPORT GQNTENTi 03 INTRODUCTION 04 SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS 08 ICEBERG RECONNAISSANCE AND COMMUNICATIONS 11 DISCUSSION OF ICE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 35 REFERENCES 35 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS NBJ© 36 A 48 B 49 C 50 D LIST OF PARTICIPATING VESSELS, 1991 INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL COMMANDERS NATIONS SUPPORTING INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL COAST GUARD AVIATION'S ROLE IN INTERNATIONAL ICE PATROL Page 1 Page 2 DfDttQr©dly©t5@fii This is the 77th annual report of the Internationa! Ice Patrol (IIP). It contains information on Ice Patrol operations, environmental condi- tions, and ice conditions for the 1991 IIP season. The U.S. Coast Guard conducts the International Ice Patrol Service in the North Atlantic under the provisions of U.S. Code, Title 46, Sections 738, 738a through 738d, and the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, regulations 5-8. This service was initiated shortly after the sinking of the RMS TITANIC on April 15, 1912 and has been provided annually since that time. Commander, International Ice Patrol, working under Commander, Coast Guard Atlantic Area, directs the IIP from offices located in Groton, Connecticut. IIP analyzes ice and environmental data, prepares daily ice bulletins and facsimile charts, and replies to requests for ice information. IIP uses aerial Ice Reconnaissance Detachments and, when necessary, surface patrol cutters to survey the southeastern, southern, and south- western regions of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland for icebergs. IIP makes twice-daily radio broadcasts to warn mariners of the limits of all known ice. Vice Admiral H. B. Thorsen was Commander, Atlantic Area until June 28, 1991 , when he was relieved by Vice Admiral P. A. Welling, and Commander J. J. Murray was Commander, International Ice Patrol, during the entire 1991 ice year. Page 3 ^ymmnry ©if ©p^raM^ot, liSI The 1991 IIP year (Oc- tober 1 , 1 990 - September 30, 1 991 ) marked the 77th anni- versary of the International Ice Patrol, which was established February 7, 1914. MP's op- erating area is delineated by 40°N - 52°N, 39°W - 57°W (Figure 1). MP's first aeriailceberg ReconnaissanceDe- tatchment (ICERECDET) of the year departed on Febm- ary 21, and the 1991 IIP sea- son was opened on February 23. From this date until Au- gust 23, 1991, an ICERECDET operated from Newfoundland one week out of every two. The season officially closed on August 24, 1991. Coast Guard HC-130H aircraft equipped with the AN/ APS-135 Side-Looking Air- borne Radar (SLAR) flew 39 ice reconnaissance sorties, logging over 246 flight hours, and Coast Guard HU-25B air- craft equipped with the AN/ APS-131 SLAR flew 13 re- connaissance sorties, logging over 35 flight hours. WatchstandersatllP's Operations Center in Groton, Connecticut analyzed the ice- berg sighting information from the ICERECDETs, along with sighting information from com- mercial shipping and Atmo- spheric Environment Service (AES) of Canada sea ice/ice- berg reconnaissance flights and other sources. Table 1 shows that IIP ICERECDETs and commercial shipping were the major sources of iceberg sighting reports this season. Appendix A lists all iceberg Table 1 Sources of Sightings Entered Into HP's Drift Model Percent Sighting Source Of Total Coast Guard (IIP) 34.4 Commercial Ship 51.2 aher Air Recon 9.0 DOD Sources 0.8 Canadian AES 4.4 BAPS 0.0 Lighthouse/Shore 0.2 Other 0.0 sighting reports, including re- ports of radartargets, received from commercial shipping, re- gardless of the sighting loca- tion. In Appendix A, a sighting report may represent several targets. As in 1990, AES flew almost no iceberg reconnais- sance flights during 1991 be- cause of a lack of funding. AES did acquire and relay to IIP a minimal amount of ice- berg information obtained dur- ing sea ice reconnaissance flights. Atlantic Airways, the private company which pro- vided aerial reconnaissance for the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and the oil companies operating on the Grand Banks, continued to forward iceberg data acquired during flights to IIP. Unfortunately, though, DFO only conducted a small numberof surveillance flights, and the oil industry did not have any platforms in the IIP area until near the end of the season. During 1991, the IIP Operations Center received a total of 4370 sightings within its operations area (40°N - 52°N, 39°W - 57°W) and away from the Newfoundland coast which were entered into HP's drift model, compared to 31 56 during 1990. Sighting sources and percent of total reports Page 4 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39' 40°- J I II I I I I I 1 000 M 1 — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ — \ r- 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° Figure 1. International Ice Patrol's Operation Area showing bathymetry of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Page 5 are in Table 1. The 4370 sightingsenteredintollP'sdrift model represented only a fraction of the total sightings reported to IIP. Sightings of targets outside I IP's operations area or grounded or in areas of little or poorly defined cur- rent along the Newfoundland coast were not entered into the model. Table 2 compares the estimated number of icebergs crossing 48°N for each month of 1991 with the monthly mean number of icebergs crossing 48°N from 1983 - 1990, the period during which IIP has been patrolling with SLAR- equipped aircraft. During the 1991 ice year, an estimated 1 974 icebergs drifted south of 48°N latitude, compared to 793 during 1990. llPdefinesthose ice years with less than 300 icebergs crossing 48°N as light ice years; those with 300 to 600 crossing 48°N as aver- age; those with 600 to 900 crossing 48°N as heavy; and those with more than 900 crossing 48°N as extreme. Thus, 1991 was an extreme year. HP's computer model consists of one routine which predicts the drift of each ice- berg and another which pre- dicts the deterioration of each. Page 6 The drift prediction program uses a historical current file which is modified weekly us- ing satellite-tracked ocean drifting buoy data, thus taking into account local, short-term, current fluctuations. Murphy and Anderson (1 985) describe and evaluate the IIP drift model. The IIP iceberg dete- rioration program uses daily sea surface temperature and wave height information from the U.S. Navy Fleet Numeri- cal Oceanography Center (FNOC) to predict the melt of icebergs. Anderson (1983) and Hanson (1987) describe the IIP deterioration model in detail. It is the combined abil- ity of the SLAR to detect ice- bergs in all weather and MP's computer models to estimate iceberg drift and deterioration which enables IIP to schedule aerial iceberg surveys every other week rather than every week. Twelve satellite- tracked ocean drifting buoys were deployed to provide operational data for HP's iceberg drift model. Six buoys were the standard size drifting buoys IIP has been deploying for sixteen years. The other six were smaller Table 2: Number of Icebergs ^ South of 48°N during 1991 I compared to the average for | the period 1983-90, the SLAR ■ reconnaissance period. | Avg 1983-90 1991 wmmm: 1 0 NOV 1 0 DEC 2 0 JAN 2 0 FEB 33 20 MAR 86 115 APR 272 144 MAY 187 269 JUN 117 1030 JUL 78 325 AUG 19 71 SEP 5 0 Era 803 1974 Average ^^^^ drifting buoys which IIP evaluated during the 1990 and 1991 IIP oceanographic cruises. All buoys were equipped with temperature sensors. Drift data from the buoys are discussed in the IIP 1991 Drifting Buoy Atlas, avail- able upon reqest. During the 1991 sea- son, llPsuccessfully deployed 57 Air-deployable expendable Bath yThermog rap hs (AXBTs). The AXBT mea- sures temperature with depth and transmits the data back to the aircraft. Temperature data from the AXBTs were sent to the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Center (METOC) in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, the U.S. Na- val Eastern Oceanography Center(NEOC) in Norfolk, Vir- ginia, and FNOC for use as inputs into ocean temperature models. IIP directly benefits from its AXBT deployments by having improved ocean temperature data provided to its iceberg deterioration model. To further enhance the quality of environmental data used in its iceberg models, IIP also provided weekly drifting buoy sea surface temperature (SST) and drift histories and SLAR ocean feature analyses to METOC and NEOC for use in water mass and SST analy- ses. Canada's Maritime Com- mand / Meterological and Oceanographic Centre pro- vided 252 AXBT probes for I IP use, significantly increasing the temperature data IIP could obtain. IIP conducted an oceanographic cruise aboard the USCGC BITTERSWEET (WLB 389) between April 29 and May 25,1 991 offtheGrand Banks of Newfoundland. The objectives of the cruise were: 1 ) to conduct an operational evaluation of Worid Ocean CirculationExperiment (WOCE) drifters for use as current-measuring devices, 2) to determine the drift errors of the full-sized TOD's IIP uses, and 3) to provide sur- face truth for an evaluation of the APS-137 Forward Look- ing Airborne Radar (FLAR) aboard HC-130 aircraft as an iceberg sensor. Hydrographic stations were conducted dur- ing the cnjise. The results will be published in a U. S. Coast Guard IIP Technical Report. On April 18, 1991, IIP paused to remember the 79^*^ anniversary of the sinking of the RMS TITANIC. During an ice reconnaissance patrol, two memorial wreaths were placed near the site of the sinking to commemorate the neariy 1 500 lives lost. Page 7 l(g^b^ri R(i©@gioiiisiaifi)©(§ ^n 1 1 i \J ^ I ! \ — > <•■• ■•* * !■•• •• : X \ I iX X \ A ..AA.^.. 5A A A XA |x xa 52° = 51° = 50° E49° 44°r 43°= 42°= 41 °E 40°= 39°E 38 ~i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° Al^i \ x-^ ^ >^ jX....*. .S^..A /^ =46° \ 45° i"J 1 X ; >; 4y^ 1 \ 44° ^ I i 1 = 43° ^.L •> • i- : > \ > f •> \ = 42° E41° E 40° E39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter batfiymetric curve Figure 19. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1 200 GMT 1 5 Apr 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 25 40°z I 39°= 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IJ I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I L r-OO = 51° I = 50° z 49° = 48° z 47° E46° E45° - f = 44° z 43° z 42° = 41° E 40° E 39° 38°n 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 M i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 20. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1 200 GMT 30 Apr 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 26 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° cpo-LLLLLLLi I I I I I i I 1 1 I I ll I I I I I i 1 1 i | I I I I 1 1 I I I I IJJ I I I i i i i 1 1 i | | | I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I U i i i I i i i i i i i | i i 1 1 1 1 | | | i | | 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 n L cqo 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 21 . Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1 200 GMT 1 5 May 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 27 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° Cp" I I I I M I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I y I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I L 40°z 39°r 52° = 51° 1 = 50° z49° \ 48° T = 47° = 46° ^45°' I 44<" 1 z 43°| I = 42°" z41 t = 40^ ) = 39= 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 i I II II i 1 1 II I i II II I i II I II i 1 1 II I i II 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II i 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I i II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 22. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1 200 GMT 30 May 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 28 52° 51°; 50 49° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M I I [ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ^1 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I n i 1 1 L coo E 51° = 50° z 49° E48° z 47° z 46° E45° = 44° z 43° = 42° E41° 40°z z40^ 39°r = 39^ 38° n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i I M 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 23. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 15 Jun 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 29 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I n I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L r-OO - OZ §51° E50° 1/49° I 48° z 47° = Newfoundland'Ol ./ ..•;■•/ ;:• ^:^ x 12a; 5A A-A-- 12A 46°^ 450Z 44°z 43°r 42°r 41 °z 40°= 39°r 5A 38° 8Ai 13Ai XX:/ -••ii 13A; 6A ; 9A | 7A 19A: 6A i A : a" 12A; 7A Z 46° E45° z 44° \ T = 43° i T = 42° I z41° = 40° E39° ~i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N Jk Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Figure 24. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30 Jun 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 30 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39^ Cpn-| I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ) I I I I I |_ j-^o 51°Ey A- ^1 1 \ I \ r t r i i-\ f I \ I z51° 40°- 39°= z49° z 48° = 47° z46° £ 45° r 44° = 43° = 42° = 41° = 40° = 39° 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 25. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1 200 GMT 1 5 Jul 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 31 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39' Cpn J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I n I I I I I I |_ _ -Q 39°r 39= 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 26. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 30 Jul 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 32 7A 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n 1 1 1 ^1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L coo I = 51° = 50° z 49° E48° r 3 47° = 46° I = 45° ! = 44° \ r 43° 52°: 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 50°= />>^^ 490Z nr^ = NewfouncJIand 48 = 46°z \ r 45oE':.:.4.[....,::.4::::^.[ 44°E 43°r 1 [ 42°E 41°: 40°= 39°r = 42° = 41° = 40° = 39° 38°n 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I M 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 r 38= 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Figure 27. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1 200 GMT 1 5 Aug 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 33 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39^ 52= = 51° E 50° = 49° E 48° r 47° E 46° E 45° = 44° E 43° = 42° = 41° = 40° E 39° 38°~i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M I r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N A Berg N Jk, Growler — N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice — Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathy metric curve Figure 28. Graphic Depiction Of International Ice Patrol Ice Plot For 1200 GMT 24 Aug 91 Based On Observed And Forecast Conditions Page 34 R«f«r«nc«s Anderson, I. Iceberg Deterioration Model, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, 1983 Season, CG-188-38, U.S. Coast Guard. Washington D.C., 1983. Hanson, W.E. Operational Forecasting Concerns Regarding Iceberg Deterioration, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, 1987 Season, CG-1 88-42, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C., 1987. Ice Centre Ottawa, Atmospheric Environment Service (AES), Ice Limits Eastern Canadian Seaboard, 1989, Ottawa, Ontario, K1 A 0H3. Ice Centre Ottawa, Atrrwspheric Environment Service (AES), Thirty Day Ice Forecast for Northern Canadian Waters, October 1990 to September 1991. Knutson, K.N. and T.J. Neill, Report of the International Ice Patrol Service in the North Atlantic for the 1977 Season, CG-188-32, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C.. 1978. f^ariners Weather Log, Vol. 35, Numbers 2, 3, and 4, 1991. Murphy, D.L. and I. Anderson. Evaluation of the International Ice Patrol Drift Model, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, 1985 Season, CG-1 88-40, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C.. 1985. ^Qknowl«dQ«m«nt« Commander, International Ice Patrol acknowledges the assistance and information pro- vided by the Atmospheric Environment Service of Environment Canada, Atlantic Airways of Canada, the U.S. Naval Fleet Numerical Oceanography Center, the U.S. Naval Eastern Ocean- ography Center, the U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center, the Coast Guard Atlantic Area Staff, and the First Coast Guard District Communications and Operattons Centers. We extend our sincere appreciation to the staffs of the Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John's, Newfoundland/VON, Ice Operation St John's, Newfoundland, Air Traffic Control Centers Gander, Newfoundland, and New York, Canadian Forces Gander and St John's, Newfoundland, the St. John's Weather Offices, and to the personnel of U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Elizabeth City, U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod, and U.S. Coast Guard Commu- nications Station Boston for their excellent support during the 1991 International Ice Patrol season. It is also important to recognize the efforts of the personnel at the Intemational Ice Patrol: CDR J. J. Murray, LCDR I. Anderson. Dr. D. L. Murphy, K. M. Shea, LT A. T. Ezman, LT M. B. Christian, MSTCM G. F. Wright, MSTCS D. R. Kennedy, MSTC C. R. Moberg, MST1 J. C. Myers, YN1 P. G. Thibodeau, YN2 C.B. Peters III, MST2 R. S. Taylor, MST2 S. D. Reed, MST2 C. L. Channel, MST2 P. S. Johnson, MST2 C. D. Quigg, MST3 R. V. Klarmann, MST3 J. F. Cole, MST3 V. L. Fogt. MST3 J. A. Jordan, and MST3 W. S. Barton. Page 35 App^omdlk A BO VESSEL NAME (ABITIBI CLAIBORNE ABITIBI MACADO ADAGORTHON ADRIAN MAERSK AEGIR AFRICAN GRDENIA lAIMEGAUDREAU AIVIK AKADEMIK SECHENOV AKMI AKOE ALBERTA ALDEN W. CLAUSEN ALEKSANDR STAROSTENKO ALEXITA AMAZON AMBER AMELIA DESGAGNES AMULET ANASTASIS ANDREW H ANGEL II ANN HARVEY ANNA ANSGARITOR AQUARIUS AQUILA ARAGON ARCADE EAGLE ARCTIC ARCTIC SEA ARCTIC VIKING ARI ARROW COMBINER ASL SANDERLING SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE FLAG GERMANY GERMANY BAHAMAS DENMARK BURMA LIBERIA CANADA CANADA U. S. S. R. GREECE GREECE GREECE LIBERIA U. S. S. R. NORWAY NORWAY PANAMA CANADA DENMARK GREECE CYPRUS PANAMA CANADA ST. VINCENT GRENADIN GERMANY ITALY CYPRUS GREECE NORWAY CANADA DENMARK CANADA LIBERIA NORWAY CANADA SST ICE REPORTS 7 6 2 1 6 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 3 2 7 1 2 1 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 2 Page 36 VESSEL NAME ASTRAVALENTINA ATLANTA ATLANTIC CARTER ATLANTIC CLAIRE ATLANTIC CONVEYOR ATLANTIC LINK ATLANTIC MARIE ATLANTIC MERCADO ATLANTIC PURSUIT ATLANTIC RUTHANN ATLANTIC TREASURE ATLANTICO AVIS FAITH BAJA CALIFORNIA BALLENITA BALTASAR ALVARES BALTIC BREEZE BALTIC SUN BALTIC TRADER BALTIYSKAYA SLAVA BANDAK BARKEN BARRA HEAD BARRY BAY ROSE BEECO AMERICA BERGEADRIA BERGE MASTER BERGE ODEL BERGEN BERGEN BAY BERGITTA BERTHEA BEVERLEE BIOKOVO BITTERSWEET FLAG ARGENTINE REPUBLIC MALTA FRANCE CANADA UNITED KINGDOM NORWAY CANADA CYPRESS CANADA CANADA CANADA ITALY PANAMA PANAMA NORWAY POLAND SINGAPORE NETHERLANDS PHILLIPINES U. S. S. R. NORWAY NETHERLANDS IRELAND NORWAY CANADA PANAMA NORWAY NORWAY NORWAY GERMANY NORWAY NORWAY NORWAY BAHAMAS YUGOSLAVIA UNITED STATES SST 3 6 3 1 19 ICE REPORTS 3 4 2 1 3 6 3 6 4 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 4 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 19 1 1 2 7 1 6 2 6 3 Page 37 VESSEL NAME BLUEBELL SUSANNAH BONNY BORIS BUVIN BOW FOREST BOW STAR BRENT CAMILLA CANMAR AMBASADOR CANMAR EUROPE CANMAR TRIUMPH CANMAR VENTURE CANMAR VICTORY CAPE ROGER CAPTAIN DIAMANTIS CAST BEVER CAST CARIBOU CAST HUSKY CAST MUSKOX CAST OTTER CASTILLO DE LORCA CASTILLO DE RICOTE CECILIA DESGAGNES CELINE METZ CHICKASAW CICERO CLIPPER CRUSADER CLIVIA COLDITZ COMPANION EXPRESS CONSOLIDATED VENTURE CORNER BROOK CORNIDE DE SAAVEDRA CRISTOFORO COLOMBO CRYSTAL B CYPRESS TRAIL FLAG LIBERIA BAHAMAS U. S. S. R. NORWAY NORWAY LIBERIA FINLAND UNITED KINGDOM BELGIUM UNITED KINGDOM UNITED KINGDOM UNITED KINGDOM CANADA GREECE YUGOSLAVIA YUGOSLAVIA BAHAMAS BAHAMAS BAHAMAS SPAIN SPAIN CANADA ST. VINCENT GFIENADIN UNITED KINGDOM CANADA PANAMA LIBERIA GERMANY SWEDEN LIBERIA LIBERIA SPAIN ITALY CYPRUS LIBERIA SST 18 ICE REPORTS 1 2 7 3 2 23 23 22 12 11 11 1 2 9 23 2 6 11 5 1 1 1 7 7 4 9 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 1 Page 38 VESSEL NAME DAISHOWA VOYAGEUR DALMAR SPIRIT DAPHNE DENEBOLA DIMITRISN DISCOVERY DORAOLDENDORFF DSR SENATOR DUKE OF TOPSAIL DUSSELDORF EXPRESS EAL RUBY EDWARD CORNWALLIS ELPIONERO ELBE ORE ELIKON ELISABETH ELSAM JYLLAND ENDEAVOUR ENDURANCE ENERCHEM ASPHALT ENIF ENSOR ERNST HAECKEL EUROPEAN CONFIDENCE EVELYN EVER GAINT EVIMERIA FAIR ANNE FALCON FAUST FEDERAL CALUMET FEDERAL DANUBE FEDERAL MAAS FEDERAL POLARIS FEDERAL SCHELDE FLAG PANAMA NETHERLANDS ANTILLES MALTA UNITED STATES PANAMA BELGIUM SINGAPORE LIBERIA UNITED KINGDOM GERMANY LIBERIA CANADA COLUMBIA LIBERIA BAHAMAS CYPRUS DENMARK UNITED STATES SINGAPORE CANADA SINGAPORE LUXEMBOURG GERMANY BURMA ST. VINCENT GRENADIN PANAMA GREECE LIBERIA NORWAY UNITED STATES LIBERIA CYPRUS CYPRUS JAPAN LIBERIA SST 1 2 2 8 8 1 1 6 8 ICE REPORTS 3 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 5 2 1 1 1 2 8 8 1 1 1 2 1 2 12 2 1 2 6 2 11 9 14 7 12 Page 39 VESSEL NAME FEDERAL ST CLAIR FEDERAL ST LOUIS FEERAL THAMES FETISH FINNARCTIC FINNFIGHTER FINNPOLARIS FIONA MARY FLAG PAOLA FLYING PHANTOM FORUM GLORY FREE TRADE FRONT FALCON FRONT HAWK FULLNES FURUNES GEMINI GENERAL VARGAS GEORGE N GLOBAL DREAM GOLAR LIV GOLDEN STAR GOOD FAITH GORTENE GRAND BARON HAFINA HAPPY CHANCE HARP HELENA OLDENDORF HENRY LARSEN HERCEGOVINA HOFSJOKULL HOUTMANGRACHT HUDSON HUMBERARM FLAG LIBERIA BAHAMAS CYPRUS DENMARK BAHAMAS FINLAND BAHAMAS NORWAY GREECE UNITED KINGDOM GREECE CANADA SWEDEN NORWAY LIBERIA PHILLIPINES CYPRUS PHILLIPINES CYPRUS CYPRUS LIBERIA CYPRUS LIBERIA PANAMA CANADA BAHAMAS SINGAPORE CANADA PANAMA CANADA YUGOSLAVIA ICELAND NETHERLANDS CANADA LIBERIA SST ICE REPORTS 4 1 1 16 3 1 10 2 1 6 1 4 1 4 2 1 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 9 9 2 3 1 Page 40 ICE VESSEL NAME FLAG SSI REPORTS IGMAN YUGOSLAVIA 5 5 IKALUK CANADA 1 1 16 IKAN SELAYANG SINGAPORE 1 IMPERIAL BEDFORD CANADA 7 INDEPENDANT PURSUIT GERMANY 2 INDIRA GANDHI U.S.S.R. 3 INGRIDGORTHON BAHAMAS 3 IRENES BLESSING GREECE 1 4 IRON MASTER BAHAMAS 1 IRVING ARCTIC CANADA 4 IRVING CANADA CANADA 1 IRVING CEDAR UNITED KINGDOM 1 IRVING ELM CANADA 1 IRVING ESKIMO CANADA 1 11 IRVING NORDIC CANADA 2 IVAN DERBENYEV U.S.S.R. 1 IVAN GORTHON BAHAMAS 1 J C PHILLIPS CANADA 5 JAHRE TRANSPORTER t NORWAY 1 JAPAN CARRYALL JAPAN 1 1 JENNIE W UNITED STATES 5 JO ELM NETHERUVND ANTILLES 2 JOH GORTHON SWEDEN 3 JOHAN PETERSON DENMARK 3 JOKULFELL ICELAND 1 JOMAAS NORWAY 13 13 KAAPGRACHT NETHERLANDS 2 KAMTIN UNITED KINGDOM 5 8 KAPETAN ANDREAS G CYPRUS 1 1 KASABA BRIDGE CYPRUS 1 KATSURAGI MARU JAPAN 4 KEEWATIN CANADA 1 KEIFU MARU JAPAN 1 KHUDOZHNIK PAKHO\ 10V U.S.S.R. 18 KHUDOZHNIK PROROK :0V U.S.S.R. 3 Page 41 VESSEL NAME KIHU KLOSTER KOELN ATLANTIC KOPALNIA RYDULTOWY KOSMAJ KOSMANAUT GAGARIN KRISTJAN PARLUSALU KRYMSKI GORY L' ROCHETTE L' AIGLE LJ. KOWLEY LA FRENAIS LACKENBY LADY FRANKLIN LADYLIKE LAKE CHARLES LAPPONIA LE CEDRE LE SAULE 1 LEONARD J. COWLEY LIBERTY SKY LISAD LISTRAUM LOT I LA LUCKY BULKER LUDWIGSHAFEN EXPRESS LUMAAQ LUPUS LYNCH MAR CATARINA MARE SERENO MARGITGORTHON MARGITA MARIA MARIA GL FLAG FINLAND CANADA GERMANY POLAND YUGOSLAVIA U.S.S.R. U.S.S.R. U.S.S.R. CANADA CANADA CANADA FRANCE BAHAMAS CANADA PANAMA UNKNOWN MALTA CANADA CANADA CANADA PANAMA PANAMA NORWAY BAHAMAS HONGKONG GERMANY CANADA LUPUS UNITED STATES SPAIN ITALY BAHAMAS SWEDEN NORWAY GREECE SST 14 4 1 ICE REPORTS 3 4 1 5 2 3 4 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 1 4 8 3 1 Page 42 VESSEL NAME MARIA GORTHON MARIKA MARJO MARTHA II MASSIMILIANO MATHILDA DESGAGNES MATHIDE MAERSK MAYA NO. 3 MEKHANIK KHMELEVSKITY MELISSA DESGANES MENTESE MERAN MERCADES ENVOY MERCHANT PRICE MERSEY VENTURE MERSEY VIKING MLJET MONTE BONITA MOON BIRD MORGENSTOND II MOSELORE MOTHER HEROIC MOUTSAINA MSC CHIARA MUSSON NADEZHDA OBUKHOVA NOFTILOS LS. NAUTILUS NEDROMA NEFTEKAMSK NEPTUNE GARNET NEWFOUNLAND ALERT NIKOLAYGOLOVANOV NILAM NILE DELTA NOBLE ACE NOMADIC PATRIA NOMADIC POLLUX NORD-ENERGY FLAG SWEDEN LIBERIA PANAMA NORWAY BAHAMAS CANADA DENMARK PHILLIPINES U.S.S.R. BAHAMAS TURKEY BAHAMAS PHILLIPINES BAHAMAS CANADA CANADA YUGOSLAVIA PHILLIPINES NETHERLANDS ANTILLES NETHERLANDS LIBERIA CYPRUS GREECE ITALY U.S.S.R. U.S.S.R. CYPRUS CYPRUS ALGERIA U.S.S.R. SINGAPORE CANADA U.S.S.R. LIBERIA BAHAMAS PHILLIPINES NORWAY NORWAY DENMARK SST 3 1 ICE REPORTS 2 1 1 5 1 1 3 2 4 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 31 4 1 3 11 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 3 1 1 4 2 3 Page 43 ICE VESSEL NAME FLAG SST REPORTS NORDIC LIBERIA 1 NORGAS CHALLENGER NORWAY 1 NORGAS SAILOR LIBERIA 11 NORMAN MCLEOD ROGERS CANADA 3 NORTHERN CRUISER BAHAMAS 1 NORTHERN RANGER CANADA 3 NOVA EUROPA UNITED KINGDOM 1 2 NOVOMIRGOROD U.S.S.R. 3 NURNBERG ATLANTIC GERMANY 7 OCEAN CARRIER OCEAN COMMANDER LIBERIA CYPRUS 2 d OCEAN MERCHANT CYPRUS 7 OCEAN SPIRIT LIBERIA 1 ODhI FRANCE 4 OLEANDER NETHERLANDS ANTILLES 3 OLYMPIC MELODY GREECE 3 ONDA MALTA 1 5 OOCL ASSURANCE UNITED KINGDOM 17 OOCLCHAIIFNGE UNITED KINGDOM 17 ORAGREEN BAHAMAS 1 ORIENTAL PATRIOT CHINA 1 ORIOLUS GERMANY POLAND 1 OSSOLINEUM 2 OSTROV BERINGA U.S.S.R. 2 PABLO METZ ST. VINCENT GRENADIN 5 PACIFICA PANAMA 2 PANTANASSA BAHAMAS 8 8 PASSAT U.S.S.R. 2 PATMOS GREECE 2 3 PATSY AND SONS CANADA 1 PAUWGRACHT NETHERLANDS 1 PAWNEE UNITED KINGDOM 12 12 PEACEVENTURE L GREECE 1 PhGGY BAHAMAS 4 PERMEKE LUXEMBOURG 2 PETROBULK RAINBOW LIBERIA 2 PHOLAS UNITED KINGDOM 4 5 PIERRE RADISSON CANADA 2 ■ ■ ^^ w % t 1 ^1^ ■ U * h^ 1 ^^ ^^ ^^ 1 ^ POKKINEN BAHAMAS 6 Page 44 VESSEL NAME POLAR NANOQ POLAR STAR PAMORZE ZACHODNIE PREDATOR PRINSENGRACHT PROOF GALLANT PUNICA QUEST RAINBOW HOPE RANI PADMINI REA REYKJAFOSS RIOCAUTO RIO GRANDE RIVER MAAS S. KIROV SAC FLIX SAILOR SALCANTAY SALEKHARD SAN LORENZO SAPANCA SASKATCHEWAN PIONEER SCOTIAN SURF SEA SONG SEA SPIRIT SEA TEAL SELATAN SENYA SILS SINGAACE SIR HUMPHREY GILBERT SIR JOHN FRANKLIN SIR ROBERT BOND SIR WILFRED GRENFELL SKOGAFOSS SKULPTOR MATVEYEV SLEVIK SMYRNI FLAG GREENLAND UNITED STATES POLAND MALTA NETHERLANDS LIBERIA LIBERIA CANADA UNITED STATES INDIA CYPRUS ANTIGUA-BARBUDA CUBA BRAZIL PANAMA U.S.S.R. SPAIN CYPRUS PERU U.S.S.R. UNITED KINGDOM TURKEY CANADA CANADA CYPRUS CYPRUS CYPRUS CYPRUS CYPRUS SWITZERLAND SINGAPORE CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA ANTIGUA-BARBUDA U.S.S.R. NORWAY CYPRUS SST 2 1 1 17 ICE REPORTS 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 16 2 1 6 1 3 5 2 3 5 1 1 1 Page 45 VESSEL NAME SOLIDARNOSC SOLIMAR SPLIT STAR GRINDANGER STEFAN STARZYNSKI STEFANOS STOLT ASPERATION STORK V STUTTGART EXPRESS SUWALSKA TADEUSZ KOSCIUSZKO TAMBOV TAPIOLA TAVI TAVERA TEXAS THALASSINI AVRA TORM MARINA TRAVEORE TRONES UNITED VENTURE VADASTEINUR VALIANT EXPRESS VARJAKKA VESALIUS VICTOR BUGAYEV WAASLAND WATERDRAGER WATERKLERK WATERSTROKER WERNER NIEDERMEIER WESTERN SHIELD WILLIAM WIND SUNRISE WLADYSLAW SIKORSKI WORLD DUET WORLD PRINCE ZAMORA ZEUS FLAG POLAND PERU YUGOSLVIA LIBERIA POLAND GREECE PANAMA PANAMA GERMANY POLAND POLAND U.S.S.R. NORWAY FINLAND NORWAY NORWAY GREECE DENMARK NORWAY NORWAY SINGAPORE DENMARK LIBERIA BAHAMAS BELGIUM U.S.S.R. LUXEMBOURG NETHERLANDS ANTILLES NETHERLANDS ANTILLES NETHERLANDS ANTILLES GERMANY NORWAY SINGAPORE NORWAY POLAND LIBERIA PANAMA CANADA GREECE SST 4 3 3 4 ICE REPORTS 0 1 2 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 4 1 1 6 1 6 6 2 1 1 3 2 2 IC 1 1 5 1 2 11 1 3 3 0 1 5 1 0 4 1 1 6 1 14 6 6 2 1 ■ 3 1 2 2 1 1 Page 46 VESSEL NAME ZHAN GRIVA ZIEMIA SUWALSKA ZIEMIATARNOWSKA ZIEMIA ZAMOJSKA ZIM LIVORNO ZIM PUSAN FLAG U.S.S.R. POLAND POLAND POLAND GREECE GREECE SST 5 ICE REPORTS 3 3 3 1 3 1 Page 47 ©ExsnoiK m G©mmmn4®jg ■yjiasgaa in Page 7 Table 4 Iceberg Reconnaissance Sorties By Month HU-25B J iC-130 TOTAL MONTH SORTIES FLIGHT HOURS SORTIES FLIGHT HOURS SORTIES FUGHT HOURS JAN 0 0 0 0 0 0 FEB 1 3.2 3 16.0 4 19.2 MAR 4 11.6 4 26.0 8 37.6 APR 0 0 7 46.5 7 46.5 MAY 0 0 8 53.0 8 53.0 JUN 0 0 8 47.1 8 47.1 JUL 10 26.2 5 27.3 15 53.5 AUG 0 0 8 50.5 8 50.5 SEP 0 0 7 40.8 7 40.8 TOTAL 15 41.0 50 307.2 65 348.2 Table 5 Iceberg and SST Reports Number of ships furnishing Sea Surface Temperature (SST) reports 39 Number of SST reports received 212 Number of ships furnishing ice reports 259 Number of ice reports received 668 First Ice Bulletin 071 200Z MAR 92 Last Ice Bulletin 261 200Z SEP 92 Number of facsimile charts transmitted 204 Page 8 The HC-1 30 'Hercules' aircraft has been the preliminary platform for Ice Patrol aehal reconnaissance since 1 963. This was the fifth year for the HU-25B to serve as an Ice Patrol platform. The extended iceberg distribution throughout most of the season warranted the use of the HC-1 30 rather than the HU-25B. Thus the HU-25B logged significantly less IIP flight hours than the HC-1 30. The total num- ber of flight hours and sorties increased slightly from 576.3 flight hours / 1 51 sorties in 1 991 to 623.6 flight hours/ 167 sorties in 1992. Each day during the ice season, IIP prepared the OOOOZ and 1200Z ice bulletins warning mariners of the southwestern, south- ern, and southeastern limits of icebergs. U. S. Coast Guard Communications Station Bos- ton, Massachusetts, NMF/NIK, and Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John's New- foundlandA/ON were the primary radio sta- tions responsible for the dissemination of the ice bulletins. Other transmitting stations for the bulletins included METOC Halifax, Nova Scotia/CFH, Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station HalifaxA/CS, Radio Station Bracknel, UK/GFE, and U.S. Navy LCMP Broadcast Stations Norfolk/NAM, Virginia, and Key West, Florida. IIP also prepared a daily facsimile chart graphically depicting the limits of all known ice for broadcast at 1600Z. U. S. Coast Guard Communications Station Boston assisted with the transmission of these charts. Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John'sA/ON and U.S. Coast Guard Communications Sta- tion Boston/NIK provided special broadcasts as required. the area of the Grand Banks report ice sightings, weather, and sea surface temperatures via Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John'sA/ON or U. S. Coast Guard Communi- cations Station Boston/NIK. Response to this request is shown in Table 5. Appendix A lists all contributors. IIP received relayed informa- tion from the following sources during the 1 992 ice year: Canadian Coast Guard Marine Radio Station St. John's VON ; Canadian Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Centre/Ice Operations St. John's; Ice Centre Ottawa; Canadian Coast Guard Marine Radio Halifax/VCS; ECAREG Halifax, Canada; U.S. Coast Guard Communi- cations and Master Station Atlantic, Chesa- peake, Virginia; and U.S. Coast Guard Auto- mated Merchant Vessel Emergency Re- sponse/Operations Systems Center, Martinsburg, WV. Commander, International Ice Patrol extends a sincere thank you to all stations and ships which contributed reports. The CAST POLAR BEAR was the numberone reporter. Canadian Forces 727th Communica- tions Squadron/St. John's Military Radio served as the primary facility for air ground communi- cations, and the 726th Communications Squadron/Halifax Military Radio was the sec- ondary facility. As in previous years. The International Ice Patrol requested that all ships transiting Page 9 Discussion of Ice and Environmentai Conditions Background The Labrador Current, aided by north- westerly winds in winter, is the main mecha- nism transporting icebergs south to the Grand Banks. In addition, the relatively cold water of the Labrador Current keeps the deterioration of icebergs in transit to a minimum. The wind direction and intensity along the Labrador and Newfoundland coasts has a significant effect on iceberg drift. Icebergs can be accelerated along or driven out of the main flow of the Labrador Current (Figure 2). Departure fromthe Labrador Current normally slows their southerly drift and, in many cases, speeds up their rate of deterioration. Sea ice protects the icebergs from wave action, the major agent of iceberg deteriora- tion. If sea ice extends to the south and over the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, the ice- bergs will be protected longer as they drift south. When the sea ice retreats in the spring, large numbers of icebergs will be left behind on the Grand Banks. If this time of sea ice retreat is delayed by below normal air tem- peratures, the icebergs will be protected longer, and a longer than normal ice season can be expected. Less southerly sea ice extent or above normal air temperatures may result in a shorter season. Sea ice also acts to impede the transport of icebergs. The degree de- pends on the concentration of the sea ice and the size of the iceberg. Thegreaterthesea ice concentration the greaterthe affect on iceberg drift. The larger the iceberg the less sea ice affects its drift. Sea ice is itself an active medium, causing iceberg movement, continu- ally moving toward the ice edge where melt occurs. Icebergs in sea ice will eventually reach open water unless grounded. The 1992 Season The sea ice information was derived from the Thirty Day Ice Forecast for Northern Canadian Waters published monthly by Ice Centre Ottawa, Atmospheric Environment Service (AES) of Canada, and information on the mean sea ice extent was obtained from Ice Limits Eastern Canadian Seaboard, Ice Cen- tre Ottawa, Atmospheric Environment Ser- vice, 1989. Figures 3 to 14 compare sea ice extents during the 1 992 IIP year to mean sea ice extents. Environmental information was obtained from the Mariner's Weather Log and AES Thirty Day Ice Forecasts. Figures 1 5 to 29 show the Limits of All Known Ice and the sea ice edge for the 1 5th and 30th of each month of the ice season. January and February Sea ice growth along the Labrador Coast and in East Newfoundland was three to four weeks ahead of normal (Figures 6 and 7). The intensification of the usually weak Azores- Bermuda High in conjunction with stronger than normal Icelandic Low created a very steep pressure gradient from the Grand Banks to the Norwegian Sea. The winds over the region were predominantly westerly. The mean air temperatures were lower than normal, approximately minus 6.0°C. Page 10 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39*^ I I I I I I Ml in I I I I I 40°E 39°E 38' Offshore Branch - denotes the Labrador Current 52^ E51° = 50° = 49° J48° E47° = 46° = 45° :44° = 43° = 42° = 41° E40° E39° I I I I I M I I I I I I I III! I I II II III I II I I I I II nil III I M I I IMIII III I I I III I I I I I I I I I nil II I I II I I M II I I III I I I I I II II I I I I I 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39 Figure 2 The Labrador Current, the main mechanism for transporting icebergs South to the Grand Banks. 38^ Page 1 1 March and April July The sea ice cover was more extensive tinan normal (Figures 8 and 9). There were 53 icebergs South of 48°N at the end of March and 99 icebergs South of 48°N at the end of April. Mean air temperatures remained below normal (minus 4°C) as cold air persisted over East Newfoundland waters. The gradient be- tween the Azores-Bermuda High and the Ice- landic Low remained steep. Storm tracks reflect this gradient and moved, in general, from northeastern North America northeastward to Iceland. The 1992 season opened March 07, 1992 with the IIP Limits of All Known Ice (LAKI) at 44-50°N 40-40°W (Figures 1 5, 1 6 and 1 7). The LAKI at the end of April were 42-1 0°N 41-50°W (Figures 18 and 19). May and June The sea ice continued to extend to 48°N, far beyond the norm forthis time of year (Figures 1 0 and 1 1 ). Iceberg distribution and numbers continued to increase through the typically busiest part of the year for the IIP. Southern and Eastern LAKI extended as far south as 4rN and as far east as 39°W (Fig- ures 20, 21 , 22 and 23). There were 230 icebergs south of 48°N at the end of May and 1 03 icebergs south of 48°N at the end of June. A light westerly flow prevailed over most of eastern Newfoundland waters. The mean air temperatures increased steadily and were near mean seasonal values. The sea ice retreated rapidly to north of 55°N (Figure 12). The LAKI retreated as well on 15 July 1992 (Figure 24) and then ex- panded to 41 -20°N on 30 July 1 992 (Figures 24 and 25). There was still some evidence of the Icelandic Low between Labrador and Ice- land and a light easterly wind prevailed over most of eastern Newfoundland. Mean air temperatures were slightly below normal. August and September Sea ice retreated well north of 55°N (Figure 13 and 14). LAKI on 30 August 1992 extended to 44°N and 40°W (Figures 26, 27 and 28). There were 132 icebergs south of 48°N at the end of August. The LAKI were north of 47-20°N and 46-00°W. The 1992 Ice Season closed 26 September 1992 (Figure 29). The Azores-Bermuda High covered most of the North Atlantic. Winds were generally very light and temperatures were near normal in the Grand Banks region. Page 12 55° Sea Ice Conditions OCTOBER 15, 1991 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Ice Center Ottawa, 1 991 1962 - 87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Ice Center Ottawa. 1989) 45° No sea ice edge or ice concentration in area of interest. 50° Figure 3 Page 13 45° Page 14 55° 50° 45° Page 15 Page 16 50° 45° 55° 45° Sea Ice Conditions JULY 16, 1992 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from ice Center Ottawa. 1 992 ) 1962-87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Ice Center Ottawa. 1989) Page 1 7 Sea Ice Conditions AUGUST 15, 1992 55° 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from ice Center Ottawa, 1992 1962-87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Ice Center Onawa. 1989) 50° 45° ifins No sea ice edge or ice concentration in area of interest. 50° Figure 13 55° 50° Sea Ice Conditions SEPTEMBER 15, 1992 1/10 or greater sea ice concentration (Redrawn from Ice Center Onawa, 1992 ) 1962-87 mean sea ice edge (Redrawn from Ice Center Onawa, 1989) -/>N 45° ihns No sea ice edge or ice concentration in area of interest. 50° Figure 14 Page 18 Figure 15 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 07 Mar 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° COO-ILLLLLLi I I I I I I M I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I 1 1 i I I I I I I IJI I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I L j-po z51° z 50° E49° E 48° z47° E46° 44°z 43°i 42°z 41 °E 40°z 39°E 38° z 45° z 44° z43° z 42° z41° z 40° E39° n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 19 Figure 16 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 15 Mar 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L cQo z46° z45°j 43°r 42°= 41 oz. r 43° = 42° E41° 40°r = 40° 39^ = 39^ 38° ~l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ii 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 20 Figure 17 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 30 Mar 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° cpo-LLLLLLLi 1 1 i i I 1 1 1 H I n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L4__i 1 1 i I 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 i I 1 1 1 1 U I I I i I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 1 1 i l j-qo 1:^ I |.....>..^..^..^; I ^x^ I ^ 51° " ^ r 50° X Z \ z 49° = 48° I I 47° 1 E46° = 45° I = 44° I f I I ? i ' = 43° I I =42° i j ■ T • T : r41° 40°- = 40' 39°= = 39° 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 21 Figure 18 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1 200 GMT 1 5 Apr 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° cpn I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I LM M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I L CQO "Tr: iiXA! ^ : AT A, A;^ ; A-T -^ : ^^A • i ▲ 9 A;^ 38°n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N Jk. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 22 Figure 19 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 30 Apr 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° ^52^ cp" I ' ' " ' ', I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I 1 1 I I I I J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IJ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L coo z51° 40°= = 40° 39°= = 39° 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i M 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38° 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N A Berg Estimated limit of all known ice N A Growler Estimated limit of sea ice N X Radar Target / Contact 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 23 Figure 20 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 15 May 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U^l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L cryo 40°= z40^ 39°= 38° = 39= ~i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N A Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 24 Figure 21 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 30 May 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L r-OO z51° r 50° z49° = 48° = 47° = 46° = 45° = 44° = 43° = 42° = 41° = 40° E39° 38 ~l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° 38° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 25 Figure 22 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 15 Jun 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° rp" I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ui I n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L (-Q0 ' 40°= - 40= 39°z = 39= 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 li 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler — N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice — Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Page 26 40°= Figure 23 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 30 Jun 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° o-U-LLLLLi I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I M I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I ! I 1 1 1 I M 1 1 1 I M 1 1 1 I ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I J 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I I L r-oo ^52^ r 51° r 50° z 49° = 48° = 47° = 46° E 45° = 440 = 43° = 42° = 41° £40° 39°= 39° 38 ~i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M I M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 00 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N A Berg N Ml Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 27 Figure 24 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 15 Jul 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I ] I L 52°: 1 III 1 Ill 51 ^ A- 50°E fr^,-^ ~ 490= Zr^ .~ Newfoundland 4o - -^~^2^^s^j?; '^-Cc^'l 46°E r- 45°§'--^-^vLv.::.'p:^,.. 44°= f 43°= 42°= 1 i r 41 °E i \ 40°E 1 1 1- 39°= 6 X ; 6 X: i^ X X XX AA yX A ▲ 2 X AAA Xj X 6 ▲- 1 X A ▲ ±\^... 52° z51° = 50° = 49° £ 48° = 47° 3 46° ..= 450 = 44° E43° = 42° = 41° = 40° E39° 38 ~l I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I II II I I i I I I I I I I I II I I I II I I i I I I II I I I I I II II II I i I II I li I I I I I M I I I li I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I M I I I M r 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 38° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 28 Figure 25 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 30 Jul 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39^ o-LLLLLLLi i i I i I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Jl I I I I I I I I I | I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 i I i I i i i i i l ^52° r 51° r50° = 49° E48° = 47° = 46° E45° 144° E43° = 42° = 41° = 40° E39° 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 38° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Page 29 Figure 26 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 15 Aug 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39' I I I I I I J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IJ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I |_ - -Q - O^ z51° I z50° t \ = 49° 1 E48° z 47° ' \ = 46° ^ E45° f = 44° ^ f E43° 3 42° \ I E41° I 40' 39°= 40= = 39° 38 ~i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° 38° N A Berg N M, Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 30 Figure 27 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 30 Aug 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° CQO I I I M I 1^1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ^1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L c^f^o = 40° 38°n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 li 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 M 1 1 M 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N M. Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated linnit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 31 Figure 28 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 15 Sep 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° mill; 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 II ^1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 L I7O0 ' 40°z - 40° 39°r - 39= 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 M I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N A Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 32 52°: nil II 51°z/^^o 50°= //V = '^^^ 490; r^ r Newfoundland 470Z ; P /y-^-'-J 46°= i \ '■ 45°E -l 44°= 43°r 42°z 41 °E 40°z 39°E ▲ |A 'Si .- -X 5X X *x Figure 29 International Ice Patrol Ice Plot for 1200 GMT 26 Sep 92 Showing Observed and Modeled Iceberg Positions and Forecast Sea Ice Conditions 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51 ° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41 ° 40° 39° I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 l||l I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I II I I I I I I I I I I I I L coo r 51° = 50° = 49° E48° = 47° E 46° E45° = 44° ~ 43° = 42° = 41° = 40° E 39° 38 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 38 57° 56° 55° 54° 53° 52° 51° 50° 49° 48° 47° 46° 45° 44° 43° 42° 41° 40° 39° N ▲ Berg N A Growler N X Radar Target / Contact Estimated limit of all known ice Estimated limit of sea ice 200 Meter bathymetric curve Where "N" Is The Number Of Designated Targets In A One Degree Rectangle Page 33 VESSEL NAME ABITIBI MACADO ACONU ADAGOR"mON ADAMAS AGRARI AIVIK AKRANES ALANDIA SURF ALIBAK JOSEFSEN ALSYTA SMITS AMAMi AMARYLLIS AMBER PACIFIC AMELIA DESGAGNES ANAMELI ANITA SMITS ARABIAN BREEZE ARCHANGELGRACHT ARKTIKA ATLANTA FOREST ATLANTIC CARTIER ATLANTIC CONVEYOR ATLANTIC ODYSSEY ATLANTIC PURSUIT BACESTI BAHAMAS BALEARES BARRA HEAD BARTLETT BERGE CHARLOTTE BICKERSGRACHT BILLYJEANNEA. BIOKOVO BLUE SKY BOWGERD Appendix A Ship Reports FLAG GERMANY FRANCE BAHAMAS GREECE CYPRUS CANADA CYPRUS BAHAMAS GREENLAND NETHERLANDS CYPRUS GREECE LIBERIA CANADA GREECE NETHERLANDS JAPAN NETHERLANDS U. S. S. R. MALTA FRANCE UNITED KINGDOM CANADA CANADA ROMANIA BAHAMAS NORWAY IRELAND UNITED STATES NORWAY NETHERLANDS LIBERIA YUGOSLAVIA ANTIGUA-BARBUDA NORWAY SST ICE REPORTS Page 34 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE VESSEL NAME BRETT BRIGIT MAERSK BRISTER BRITISH STEEL CALGA CALYPSO CAMELLIA CAMILLA CANMAR AMBASSADOR CANMAR EUROPE CANMAR TRIUMPH CANMAR VICTORY CAPETAN GIORGIS CARLITA CASECO CAST HUSKY CASTMUSKOX CAST OTTER CAST POLARBEAR CECELIA DESGAGNES CHEMICAL VENTURE CHICKASAW CHIMO CIKAT CLARITA CLINK CLOVER ACE CMB MERKUR CONSTANCE CORNER BROOK CRYSTAL B DANIA PORTLAND DAR MLODZIEZY DARNITSA DELORIS DESNOGORSK FLAG GERMANY SINGAPORE CANADA HONGKONG LIBERIA NETHERLANDS PANAMA FINLAND UNITED KINGDOM BELGIUM UNITED KINGDOM UNITED KINGDOM LIBERIA PANAMA CANADA BAHAMAS BAHAMAS BAHAMAS YUGOSLAVIA CANADA LIBERIA UNITED KINGDOM NORWAY YUGOSLAVIA HONGKONG SWEDEN JAPAN CYPRUS NETHERLANDS LIBERIA CYPRUS DENMARK POLAND U. S. S. R. BELGIUM CYPRUS SST 46 1 6 2 1 3 ICE REPORTS 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 14 3 6 1 1 2 1 1 1 4 48 6 1 2 1 3 4 2 2 1 17 4 1 3 4 2 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE Page 35 ICE VESSEL NAME FLAG SST REPORTS DETTIFOSS CYPRUS 6 DIAPOROS GREECE 1 3 DOBROTA ST. VINCENT GRENADIN 2 DOCEORION BRAZIL 6 DOCEVIRGO BRAZIL 9 DONAU LIBERIA 1 DORA OLDENDORhh SINGAPORE 1 DRAGOMIRESTI ROMANIA 3 DUBROVNIK YUGOSLAVIA 4 DUKE OF TOPSAIL UNITED KINGDOM 1 EIRINI L GREECE 3 ELIKON BAHAMAS 2 3 ENERCHEM ASPHALT CANADA 1 ERNST HAECKEL GERMANY 6 EURO PRIDE SINGAPORE 1 1 EUROPA GERMANY 2 EUROPEAN PANAMA 1 F. V. CONCORDIA CANADA 2 FALCON NORWAY 3 FALKONERA GREECE 2 FEDERAL AGNO PHILIPPINES 1 FEDERAL CALUMET LIBERIA 1 1 FEDERAL DANUBE CYPRUS 1 FEDERAL FUJI JAPAN 2 FEDERAL MAAS CYPRUS 2 FEDERAL MACKENZIE BAHAMAS 2 FEDERAL OTTAWA BELGIUM 2 FEDERAL SAGUENAY LIBERIA FEDERAL THAMES CYPRUS 11 FINLITH DENMARK FINNFIGHTER FINLAND FJORD LAND PANAMA 2 FLAG MARINA GREECE FRANGISKOS C. K. GREECE FRASER CANADA Page 36 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE VESSEL NAME GALLANT TIGER GARDEN STATE GOLAR ROSEMARY GONOSAN GREENLAND SAGA GUS W.DARNELL HAFNIA HANDY JACK HANDYMARINER HARP HELEN HELLENIC SPIRIT HENRY LARSEN HERCEGOVINA HOFSJOKULL HONSHU SPIRIT HUBERT GAUCHER HUDSON HUMBER ARM IKAN SELAYANG IMPERIAL ACADIA IRENES EMERALD IRON MASTER IRVING ARCTIC IRVING CANADA IRVING CEDAR IRVING NORDIC IVAN GORTHON J. C. PHILLIPS J. E. BERNIER JEAN-COLETTE JIN TIAN HAI JO BIRK JOHN C. HELMSING JOSE ANTONIO ECHEVERRIA FLAG HONGKONG MALTA LIBERIA PHILIPPINES DENMARK UNITED STATES CYPRUS PHILIPPINES LIBERIA CANADA LUXEMBOURG MEXICO CANADA YUGOSLAVIA ICELAND BAHAMAS CANADA CANADA LIBERIA SINGAPORE CANADA GREECE BAHAMAS CANADA CANADA UNITED KINGDOM CANADA BAHAMAS CANADA CANADA CANADA CHINA NETHERLANDS CYPRUS CUBA SST 4 1 15 3 3 ICE REPORTS 1 4 3 3 1 1 1 1 5 3 2 1 15 12 2 13 5 2 4 2 1 7 3 1 3 2 3 1 1 6 1 2 1 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE Page 37 VESSEL NAME JUNIPER KAAPGRACHT KAPITAN BURMAKIN KAPITAN KHLEBNIKOV KAPITAN SPIVAK KEENWN KHUDOZHNIK ROMAS KIHU KILCHEM ADRIATIC KING KINGUK KOSMAJ 1. ROCHETTE LADY FRANKLIN LADY OLIVE MARIE LARINA LAVENDER LENINSK LEROS PROGRESS LOTILA LUCKY MAN MAERSK TAIKUNG MAIN ORE MALIK II MALINSKA MANFRED SKAUN MARCHEN MAERSK MARGAREE MARIA GORTHON MARINE CLIPPER 2 MARINE PACER MARTHA 2 MASTER MATHILDA DESGAGNES MITERA VASSILIKI FLAG LIBERIA NETHERLANDS U. S. S. R. U. S. S. R. U. S. S. R. CANADA U. S. S. R. FINLAND MALTA UNITED STATES CANADA YUGOSLAVIA CANADA CANADA UNKNOWN LIBERIA NORWAY U. S. S. R. CYPRUS BAHAMAS CYPRUS SINGAPORE LIBERIA NEW HEBRIDES YUGOSLAVIA GERMANY DENMARK CANADA BAHAMAS CANADA TURKEY NORWAY UNITED STATES CANADA CYPRUS SST 7 2 11 ICE REPORTS 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 10 4 2 5 Page 38 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE VESSEL NAME MOSEL ORE MSC ALEXANDRA NADAV NANCY ORR GAUCHER NARA NEWARK BAY NEWFOUNDLAND ALERT NEWFOUNDLAND LYNX NEWFOUNDLAND OTTER NICHOLSON NIKOLAY GOLOVANOV NISHIURA MARU NOMADIC PATRIA NOMADIC POLLUX NORDEN NORDIC NORTHERN ENTERPRISE NORTHERN PRINCESS NUKA ITTUK NUNGU ITTUK OCEAN STAR ODET OOCL ASSURANCE OOCL CHALLENGE ORAGREEN ORIOLUS ORJEN PAN FIR PANACHE PARIZEAU PATSY AND SONS PETKA PETROBULK LION PHOLUS PIERRE FLAG LIBERIA PANAMA PANAMA CANADA LUXEMBOURG UNITED STATES CANADA CANADA CANADA UNITED STATES U. S. S. R. JAPAN NORWAY NORWAY FINLAND LIBERIA CANADA CANADA DENMARK DENMARK BAHAMAS FRANCE UNITED KINGDOM UNITED KINGDOM BAHAMAS GERMANY YUGOSLAVIA ITALY MEXICO CANADA CANADA YUGOSLAVIA BELGIUM UNITED KINGDOM ARGENTINE REPUBLIC SST 10 4 ICE REPORTS 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 6 1 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 ^ 5 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 4 6 2 1 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE Page 39 VESSEL NAME PLUTO POKKINEN POLAR CRYSTAL POLAR SEA POLLUX I POMORZE ZACHODNIE PORTLAND CARRIER PRINSENGRACHT PROSPEROUS PUHOS RADIANT VENTURE RAVENSCRAIG RED ROSE REGINE RELIANT RESOLUTE II RESOLUTION BAY RIO TRUANDO ROYAL VIKING SUN RYAN LEET S. J. MAGALIE SAAR ORE SAINT PIERRE SAN LORENZO SAPANCA SARGASSO SAUDI HAIL SAUNIERE SEABOURN PRIDE SEAGRACE II SELNES SIBYL W SIDI DAOUI SILVAPLANA SIR JOHN FLAG LIBERIA BAHAMAS PANAMA UNITED STATES PANAMA POLAND CANADA NETHERLANDS HONGKONG BAHAMAS LIBERIA BAHAMAS CYPRUS GERMANY GREECE MALTA UNITED KINGDOM COLUMBIA BAHAMAS CANADA CANADA LIBERIA FRANCE UNITED KINGDOM TURKEY PANAMA ITALY CANADA NORWAY UNKNOWN CYPRUS CANADA MOROCCO SWITZERLAND GREECE SST ICE REPORTS 1 3 1 5 2 1 3 1 2 6 2 4 2 2 5 1 Page 40 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE VESSEL NAME SIR ROBERT BOND SIR W. ALEXANDER SKAFTAFELL SKEENA SKOGAFOSS SLOTERSRACHT SPEEDBOAT CONCORD 2 STAVANGER STEFEN STARZYNSKI STEPHEN B STOLT CASTLE SUMY TEVERA THALASSINI AVRA THULELAND TIMUR MERCURY TROLL FOREST VANRI VARJAKKA VERGO VESTLANDIA VIRANA WAVE WESTWARD WILFRED TEMPLEMAN WIND CHALLENGER WORLD DUET ZIEMIA CHELMINSKA FLAG CANADA CANADA NORWAY CANADA ANTIGUA-BARBUDA NETHERLANDS UNKNOWN NORWAY POLAND CANADA LIBERIA U. S. S. R. NORWAY GREECE SWEDEN BAHAMAS NORWAY PHILIPPINES BAHAMAS GREECE FAEROES NORWAY CYPRUS UNITED STATES CANADA NORWAY LIBERIA POLAND SST 21 ICE REPORTS 1 6 1 5 3 1 1 29 1 1 2 5 2 1 1 5 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 6 1 1 3 SST = SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE Page 41 Appendix B Commanders of International Ice Patrol Year of N?m9 9f Y99r of Command Commander Command 1914 CAPT J.H.Quinan 1946-47 1915-16 CAPT F.A.Levis 1948 1919 CAPT H.G.Fisher 1949 1920 LCDR O.F.A. DeOtte 1950 1921 CDR A.L Gambe 1951 -54 1922-23 CDR B.M. Chiswell 1955-58 1924 LCDR W.J. Wheeler 1959 1925-26 CDR H.G.Fisher 1960-62 1927-28 CDR W.H. Munter 1963 1929 CDR T.M. Molloy 1964 1930 CAPT C. M. Gabbett 1965-66 1931 LCDR N.G. Ricketts 1967-68 1932 CAPT W.T. Stromberg 1969-70 1933 LT R.M. Hoyle 1971-73 1934 CDR W. J. Keester 1 974-77 1935 CDR E.D.Jones 1978 1936 CDR R.L.Lucas 1979-80 1937 CDR G.W. MacLane 1981-83 1938 CDR C.H. Dench 1983 1939-40 CDR E. H. Smith *1 983-86 1941 CDR P.K.Perry 1987-89 1942-43 LCDR C.A. Barnes 1989-92 1 944 - 45 LT E.R. Challender 199210 present Commodore L.W. Perkins CAPT D.G. Jacobs CAPT J.F. Jacot CAPT J.A. Glynn CAPT G. Van A. Graves CAPT K.S. Davis CAPT V.F. Tydlacka CAPT R.P. Bullard CAPT J. E. Richey CDR G. O. Thompson CAPT R. L. Fuller CDR J. E. Murray CDR J. R. Kelley CAPT E. A. Delaney CDR A. D. Super CAPT T. C. Volkle CDR J. C. Bacon CDR J. J. McClelland, Jr. LCDR A. D. Summy CDR N. C. Edwards, Jr. CDR S. R. Osmer CDR J. J. Murray CDR A.D. Summy * International Ice Patrol first became a distinct command in October, 1983. Thus, CDR N. C. Edwards, Jr. was technically the first Commander, International Ice Patrol, and those prior to 1984 were senior International Ice Patrol officers. Page 42 Appendix C Nations Currently Supporting International Ice Patrol BELGIUM NORWAY CANADA PANAMA DENMARK POLAND FINLAND SPAIN FRANCE SWEDEN GREECE UNITED KINGDOM ISRAEL UNITED STATES ITALY WEST GERMANY JAPAN YUGOSLAVIA NETHERLANDS .w}wj.v.w.vmvj9Wf.i.'i ^>:::ft::>:::::::s::>>>^:>;::::> ■^ ^'V, ■ti'ii Page 43 References Alfultis, M.A., Iceberg Populations South of 48°N Since 1900, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, CG-1 88-42. Anderson, I. Iceberg Deterioration Model, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, CG-1 88-38. Hanson, W.E., Operational Forecasting Concerns Regarding Iceberg Deterioration, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, 1987 Season, CG-1 88-42, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C., 1987. Ice Centre Ottawa, Atmospheric Environment Service (AES), Ice Limits Eastern Canadian Seaboard, 1989, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0H3. Ice Centre Ottawa, Atmospheric Environment Service (AES), Thirty Day Ice Forecast for Northern Canadian Waters, October 1989 to September 1990. Knutson, K.N. and T.J. Neill, Report of the International Ice Patrol Service in the North Atlantic for the 1977 Season, CG-1 88-32, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C., 1978. Mariners Weather Log, Summer 1 990, Vol. 34, Number 3, 1 990a. Mariners Weather Log, Fall 1990, Vol 34, Number 4, 1990b. Mariners Weather Log, Winter 1 991 , Vol. 35, Number 1 , 1 991 . Murphy, D.L. and I. Anderson. Evaluation of the International Ice Patrol Drift Model, Report of the International Ice Patrol in the North Atlantic, 1985 Season, CG-1 88-40, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C., 1985. Page 44 Acknowledgments Commander, International Ice Patrol acknowledges the assistance and information provided by: Atmospheric Environment Service of Environment Canada Navy / NOAA Joint Ice Centre U.S. Naval Fleet Numerical Oceanography Center U.S. Naval Eastern Oceanography Center U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center Coast Guard Atlantic Area Staff First Coast Guard District Communications Center We extend our sincere appreciation to the staffs of these organizations for their excellent support during the 1992 International Ice Patrol season: Canadian Coast Guard Radio Station St. John's, NewfoundlandA/ON Ice Operation St John's, Newfoundland Air Traffic Control Gander, Newfoundland Canadian Forces Gander and St John's, Newfoundland St. John's Weather Offices U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Elizabeth City U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod U.S. Coast Guard Communications Station Boston It is also important to recognize the efforts of the personnel at the International Ice Patrol: CDR J. J. Murray MST1 P. S. Johnson CDR A. D. Summy MST2 C. D. Quigg LCDR 1. Anderson MST2 V. L. Fogt Dr. D. L. Murphy MST2 R. V. Klarmann Mr. G. F. Wright MST2 C. L Channel LT A. T. Ezman MST2 M. W. Bauer LT G. A. Trivers MST3 J. A. Jordan MSTCS D. R. Kennedy MST3J. F.Cole YN2 C. B. Peters MST3 W. S. Barton MST1 R. S. Taylor Page 45 ^^22l U34