[bluusteel]

Really nice writeup! I wish more graduate students would blog about their research in this way. Could be a great way to educate the public and convey the importance of government research funding.

I wonder how big the reflection coefficient is for the air/ice interface. It seems like it would be huge. So maybe ground based techniques offer better coupling at the cost of not being able to survey as much area?

[lindzey]

We record on two channels, "high gain" and "low gain", separated by ~50dB. I showed the high gain products in this post, and the surface absolutely does saturate the detectors. The system was designed so that near-surface returns don't saturate the low gain channel.

We transmit 8kW, and the air/ice surface reflection coefficient is ~0.08 (~-11dB). Flying at ~600m above the surface, spreading loss actually contributes more to signal attenuation (1/(2*h)^2 ~= -62dB).

Our instrument is optimized for seeing through the entire ice sheet, mapping deep layers and the bed. Other (also airborne) instruments operate at higher frequencies, trading higher resolution for less penetration. I'm not super familiar with groups using ground-based ice-penetrating radar, but one big tradeoff is $$$. The airplane is hugely expensive to operate, whereas ground-based just needs a snowmobile.