Sea Ice conditions in the Spitzpergen to Severmaya Zemlya axis is very precarious, has been all winter, also we note melt ponds everywhere circumpolar wise: http://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worldview/index.html?map=-958013.190435,-24076.349154,-548413.190435,180467.650846&products=baselayers,MODIS_Terra_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor~overlays,arctic_coastlines_3413&time=2013-06-08&switch=arctic of interest is the blue green pond zones coinciding with high pressure ridging, the air is warmer than the surface there, its even clearing at the Pole: http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2013/WEBCAM1/ARCHIVE/npeo_cam1_20130616082146.jpg note the ice crystal reflections, similar deposits happened further south at 75 N 3 weeks ago. Cloud cover gives the impression of no melting, the overall cyclonic flow of sea ice over the Arctic Basin also misleads in suggesting cooler weather not affecting anything. But melting has something to do with thermal rays, ice density, and sea ice variances in thickness much different then say 10 years ago. There is nothing here that suggests not another record year for a melt, there is plenty of confusing signals suggesting otherwise. Must read though the fog of appearances. Sorry Werther, mijn geheugen met naam spelling niet zo goed

We have unprecedented remote sensing coverage of Arctic Sea ice, amazing assets. I read often the basic assumptions about extent. Which is there is more ice now than 2012, therefore a lesser melt is expected. This is based on simple straight forward projections, however the ice is anything but simple, anything but straight forward, sea ice is complicated. Even the data from mass buoys- as simple as presented- is more complex. I'd like to think that there are false echoes. http://imb.crrel.usace.army.mil/irid_data/2013E_thick.png Something like fresher water mixed with ice confusing the bottom read. Extent may be presenting itself falsely as a cooler season as well, the relentless counterclockwise pushing aside from the usual clockwise rotation of the Beaufort gyre also affects extent greatly, equally confuses a comparison with 2012 http://iabp.apl.washington.edu/maps_daily_arcticbasin.html what will likely happen is a blitz opening of ice when the gyre matches the circulation with a more regular anticyclone. This will happen because the air will be warmer than the sea and ice . Then again there are more complexities to consider, I applaud Whether's close up approach.

Hi A-team, its +11 C in Cambridge now, Maximum was +12.2 yesterday , about + 10 C above average. Will be +16 tomorrow... Its melt ponds.

A-team, superb work as usual! We are seeing "pancake" ice formations which were formed likely between October and early December when the ice froze from a wide open Arctic Ocean, but was not consolidated as a whole, some pieces broke off and floated about in a topsy turvy grind and impact with other ice pans, therefore the roundish whiter ice formations are oldest, the thinner black ice consolidated everything together later, and is melting faster. Lesson learned from 2012 and from my latest refraction work, clouds appear to help the melt go faster, only place where the sun has a huge potential impact is at about the Pole from now till mid July. Elsewhere a normal diurnal day - clearer partially cloudy noon twinned with a cloudier midnight would be the most devastating, right now some sun appears to reach the surface but not a whole lot.

A-team , I can see something http://eh2r.blogspot.ca/, look closer and there is some open water and apparent thinner ice.

Hi Robert, Clive Holland was a polar historian, he would be very essential in these days of great melts. Peter basis for Ice free 2016 is too fast, because sea ice still consolidates and forms very high and thick pressure ridges. When the sea ice will become very loose, ridging will be far more scarce therefore no more MYI and quickly after no more summer sea ice. Bastardi is famous for making bad predictions, by claiming "everyone" said no ice by 2010, that explains why, he is often totally misinformed and makes grandiose theatrical statements which usually fall flat, its TV entertainment masquerading as as science news flash. PAC will fade when the opposite conditions prevail, that is cold sea or sea ice cooling the air and creating an anticyclone, or La-Nina to reign heavy, or more thick ice surviving the melt. This said, when sea water will actually cover great expanses of water the remaining pack teaming on with Greenland will cause the usual Greenland High on steroids. So wait for more open water.

I knew Wadhams well in the days of Holland at SPRI. I think ice free is a long shot at best for 2016, irrelevant really, ice free North Pole is the big thing. I believe every trans ocean shipping company waits for this signal. They apparently don't like dealing with the NW and NE passages. So I think this year may be it for the ice free North Pole, what's left of the pack will fight for its existence for years to come. When we will see much looser sea ice over the Arctic Ocean at maxima, impossible to trek by snowmobiles or amphibious vehicles alike, that is when the sea ice will vanish every summer like Baffin Bay. So cheers Peter! Still remember Clive, who would be astounded by no ice in McClintock channel.

Excellent A-team work demonstrates the particular physics at play. The floe edge of Barrow Strait did not advance, despite significantly warmer weather, and at times the high sun hitting dark sea water, The sea current is Eastwards, the ice is not so thick, yet no apparent change. What happens, as with every year, is the decay of sea ice mainly on the underside which weakens its structure and over all consolidation. Eventually huge chunks of sea ice will break and float away with the current. So goes for every other bit of ice. Remote sensing illusion is made, sea ice is holding up to the onslaught of spring and summer. But what really happens is a certain state of weak density pre flowing pack. Which one day will become nothing but sea water. For now, the sea current and tides play the major role of wreckers, after so many photons hitting the sea ice the castle will be made of wet straw.

Thanks Neven, perhaps this works SST's are very warm, more than capable of melting things fast.

Since I predicted this cyclonic activity despite the entire winter being anticyclonic, I do have a little insight on the subject. The Japanese paper cited by A-team is quite good, there has been symmetry between tropospheric and stratospheric circulations: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/images/rnl/500z_01.rnl.html and in the stratosphere: http://weather.uwyo.edu/cgi-bin/uamap?REGION=nh&OUTPUT=gif&TYPE=obs&TYPE=an&LEVEL=50&TIME=2013060900 (someone would have to tell me what: "You can use HTML tags like <b> <i> and <ul> to style your text. URLs automatically linked" I would like to post the maps here.) But that is not often the case, at least I am more aware of different patterns between the 2 lowest layers of our atmosphere. The paper citing a drier warmer atmosphere surrounding the colder Arctic ocean one does not make sense, usually the cold from a high pressure spreads out towards the warmer cyclones. In fact literally makes the winds happen. What gave me the insight was refraction observations pointing towards a strong adiabatic interface situated right above the surface. Its simple to describe, hard to understand, I make it short, Arctic sea ice and land was warmer than the air very often, there was not a lot of the opposite. Being so you have the basis for cyclonic activity, rising air, especially when and after the sun rose from the long night. Thinner ice is largely responsible. I applaud all the efforts here trying to explain why we have this Arctic weather. #1 in effort and revealing state of the science understandings.

"Cloudy, cool conditions, no strong storms. I'd think that's the best set for keeping the ice from melting. And we saw that in May until this PAS emerged." Not quite Robert, cloudy during the day when the sun is +20 degrees high (can be lower in warmer temperatures), clear at night releasing long wave radiation to space is the best way to spare the ice from a mega ice melt. Except nature usually does the opposite, which is clear during the day and cloudy foggy at night, very bad, worse conditions imaginable. Come past mid July, strictly always cloudy, very very bad (2012), as opposed to continuous clear skies which would bring up the minima earlier. Facts? 2008 for instance, when it was very clear for months in the spring, the ice thickened more, then near solstice the sun was high enough to create massive melt ponds everywhere, luckily the clear air favored maintaining the ice more then melting it.

Neil, a great North Pole melt is possible at about this time of the year because the ice is first year thinner, except its very cloudy, which is still not good for sea ice long term. If this overcast coverage continues till early August, the ice will be so frail it will be blown away to bits by any storm. This is what happened last year, the illusion of extent gets shattered by all the rot under the top of sea ice. Mass buoys do not seem to be accurate enough to display any melting or change of phase of the under ice. They indicate more accretion when its practically impossible for it to happen, if the good people at Piomas rely on its data, they should recalculate and shave a few cm (which is a rather large amount of ice volume), because its rather melting at bottom, not freezing. Say its -5 C on the surface and there is 1.5 meters of ice insulating the -5 from the -2 at its bottom. How can there be any ice forming? Rather the ice is warmer and displays an apparent false accretion. And so says the ice Horizon! Long life to boundary layers!

I also wonder if Piomas gets some of their data or comparisons from mass buoys? Of interest is a thick 343 cm mass buoy showing accretion when the surface temperatures got warmer all while when it was really cold no thickening, in fact slight thinning, fascinating! If the sonar used is not calibrated with ice temperature the reading would actually show these apparent irregularities. http://imb.crrel.usace.army.mil/irid_data/2012L_thick.png 3 meter ice should not grow, apparently to some in the know.

Thanks Neven, the model needs some work!

Hi Peter, What do you know about those mass buoys accuracy? Does the sonars compensate for temperature ? For instance Ice at -20 Cpropagates sound more faster than at 0 C... This would give the impression that ice is getting thicker (if there isn't said compensation application). There also has been a higher softer less denser growing from bottom ice column, this will also give an erroneous sonar reading of thicker ice.

The best cutting edge latest discoveries dictates 3 things: 1- Present Cyclonic circulation stems from adiabatic nature of the warmer sea ice right under a colder atmosphere. 2- In no way is this a "ice maker", accretion is finished. Even while using Lebedev the accretion would be so little. In addition mass buoys are indicating stable thicknesses. Which are not consistent in density throughout the ice column, there may be a a significant difference in the nature of the ice particularly from the bottom upwards. 3- Finally low clouds are the mortal enemy of sea ice, as per my latest research. Even when the sun is relatively high. It takes a sun at 23 degrees elevation or higher for 24 hours to make a serious continuous sun ray driven melt. This only happens around the North Pole at the solstice, therefore all eyes at the Pole or thereabouts especially when clear with a few clouds from mid to end of June, because there is 1st year ice there. . Even with open water, the flow edges are relatively stable when the sun shines high. Only warmer temperature advection (amongst other heat sources) break the apparent stalemate.

Making a sharp contrast with a month ago backwards in time , we have elegant Cyclones dominating most of the Arctic Ocean, I expected this, because there was unbelievable continuous observations of adiabatic processes at the surface to air interface, for most of the winter. The reason for the anticyclonic earlier on dominance, creating more ice accretion, was likely from the remaining pack ice melt in september 2012 prompting a natural base for anticyclonic activity standing over ice creating colder air heading towards warmer air from the wider open Arctic ocean surrounding the surviving pack. One must not forget the greatest melt in 2012 left an "adiabatic legacy" , which is lesser sea ice volume, making the sea ice ice overall warmer thermally. This has created the the apparent cooling at the center of the pack. But an adiabatic process causes more clouds, Low clouds which are essential for a great thaw. The root causes for a great melt need be more understood, while extent is a good indicator of the pending future to come, it can fool just as simply as an adiabatic process lifting warmer air to rise. Recently I observed a great turn around, from cold to warm , like someone pulled the freezer plug. I don't quite understand this switch, it was not a warming gradual process. But it is all of the sudden very very warm for most of the CAA (3 d wise not only the surface).

The only way the horizon would drop near the Pole would be for the camera to rise by several meters (like 10 giving a dip) or for the sea ice to melt in the underside and or for the sea ice physical properties to change, ie more rotten bottom side ice. I finally looked at Peter Elis Mass Buoy (a sonar result) the http://imb.crrel.usace.army.mil/irid_data/2013B_thick.png the accretion has stopped, there was a bottom melt although slight , it is pretty much like I am thinking, especially near the North Pole where the sun has a very weak variation in altitude which gives a lesser freezing diurnal variation. Further to the South, this is becoming certain, direct sun 23 degrees high in the sky or higher melts underside ice, but not completely it refreezes as the midnight sun goes lower. There is a day time melt and night time freeze cycle. Only to be broken by low clouds or a higher night time sun which will never achieve 23 degrees at 75 N, but will do at the Pole. There is always a daily midnight sun diurnal effect South of the Pole to 65 North which favors a reprieve from the melting unless the surface temperatures are warm. This suggests that there can't be any massive melt in strictly prolonged clear air as long as there is sea ice present. In other words without low clouds, massive sea ice loss is unlikely. http://eh2r.blogspot.ca/

The northpole Cam 2 shows a significant drop of the horizon, as expected, the difference with april 16 seems quite large, more so than I expected. For the time being what counts is that it indeed lowered. http://eh2r.blogspot.ca/2013/04/north-pole-horizon-drop-confirmed.html

A-team If you robotize the data acquisition of basic satellite pictures capable of detecting low clouds (on IR they have dark signatures), I would think you would have a good idea of a diurnal cloud effect. Don't know if you can do that, but read a temperature not attainable by sea or ice at this time of the year, say an ir color representing -10 C, calculate local apparent noon and midnight results ( another challenge is sectioning the polar region when its noon on one side and midnight on the other ). I think you can get a number which will reveal low cloud extent. Low clouds are strong ice melters, the sea thermal signature alone is very potent, sea thermal radiation escaping to space makes ice in darkness and in the warmer season saves it.

Nice work A-team, !! My latest observations again demonstrate a strong relation between melting of sea ice with sun higher than 25 degrees elevation in clear skies, or with sun at almost any elevation above 10 degrees when cloudy. So it is essential to find if its sunnier during afternoon or night. Cloudier at night all the time means an accelerated melt. So on your great satellite sequences, can you do the opposite than usual and enhance cloud detection in a way that we can recognize a pattern? With our ability to recognize a cloud diurnal effect we can easily estimate the rate of melting, slow if clear at night (low sun) fast if the clouds avoid radiation escaping to space. http://eh2r.blogspot.ca/

P-maker We are now equipped with the best knowledge to date, there is a short time period when direct sun has a huge impact, for the 70-80 N area its likely most of June till mid july. The rest of the season is dependent on the cloud sunlight mix. We can do a series of satellite pictures one at local apparent noon, the other at local apparent midnight. If it gets cloudy regularly only at LAM outside of the short sun sensitive period, it will be the greatest melt by a large margin.

Thanks Artful, that was a good paper, but they missed the months preceding June and following August. May and September also plays a role in any melt. The 60 % cloudiness also seems right, it wasn't that clear, even in June July at near 50%. The conclusion of .3 meter melt due to decrease cloud cover applies well for June until mid July. Because we have now the same amount of sun cover as mid July, current observations show that late clear nights are not so conducive to melting. But rather a cloud diurnal effect may be more important, such as clear during the day, and cloudy at night, if there was a way to see if the cloud radar graphs can be broken in 2. One for Local Apparent Noon and other for Local Apparent Midnight cloud cover may be more revealing. This can be usually so, a natural cycle, when the sun lowers to midnight, fog and other low clouds usually take place. A similar cloud analysis for 2012 melt season would be useful.

Neven, a serious look back at 2007 and 2012 great melts with respect to clouds should be done. My latest observations confirm again the most lethal damage to sea ice is not from direct sun light on clear days, but rather with sunlight piercing through the clouds on a partially cloudy day, especially night. I forgot the commenter's name who said 2007 wasn't that cloud free, this person was likely right. But a revisit of these 2 summer melt downs may sharpen prediction skills. Latest observations reveal a sharp brutal freezing after the midnight sun lowers diurnally , which means from April- most of May, Late July and August till mid September- clear days may offer a reprieve from a super melt down. http://eh2r.blogspot.ca/

Clouds returned on May 15, the sea ice period appeared to freeze way less from their presence. Again confirming that clear sunny Arctic skies do not necessarily mean a dramatic decrease in thickness. At least during spring time.