Crossover Adjustment of New Zealand Marine Gravity Data, and Comparisons with Satellite Altimetry and Global Geopotential Models
This paper summarises the crossover adjustment of approximately 90,000-line-km of ship-track gravity observations around New Zealand. The adjustment reduced the standard deviation of the ∼106 crossovers from ∼2.0 mgal to ∼0.3 mgal. These data were then used to assess four different grids of satellite-altimeter-derived gravity anomalies. The KMS02 altimeter grid was selected for use around New Zealand as it gave a better fit to the coastal ship-track data. Least-squares collocation was then used to ‘drape’ the altimetry onto the crossover-adjusted ship-tracks to counter the well-known problems with satellite altimeter data near the coast. The precision of this merged ship-altimeter gravity dataset is estimated to be 3.5 mgal.
KeywordsGravity marine gravimetry satellite altimetry crossover adjustment geopotential model
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Andersen OB, Knudsen P, Trimmer R (2004) Improving high-resolution altimetric gravity field mapping (KMS02). Proc IUGG General Assembly, Sapporo, Japan 2003, Springer, Berlin, in pressGoogle Scholar
- Brett J (2004) Marine gravity crossover adjustment for New Zealand, Report to Land Information New Zealand, Intrepid Geophysics, Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
- Denker H, Roland M (2004) Compilation and evaluation of a consistent marine gravity data set surrounding Europe., Proc IUGG General Assembly, Sapporo, Japan 2003, Springer, Berlin, in pressGoogle Scholar
- Featherstone WE (2003) Comparison of different satellite altimeter-derived gravity anomaly grids with ship-borne gravity data around Australia, in: Tziavos IN (ed) Gravity and Geoid 2002, Dept of Surv & Geodesy, Aristotle Univ of Thessaloniki, pp.326–331Google Scholar
- Lemoine FG, Kenyon SC, Factor RG, Trimmer RG, Pavlis NK, Chinn DS, Cox CM, Klosko SM, Luthcke SB, Torrence MH, Wang YM, Williamson RG, Pavlis EC, Rapp RH, Olson TR (1998) The development of the joint NASA GSFC and the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) geopotential model EGM96, NASA Tech rep NASA/TP-1998-206861, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MarylandGoogle Scholar
- Moritz H (1980) Geodetic reference system 1980, Bull Geod 54(4): 395–405Google Scholar
- Strykowski G, Forsberg R (1998) Operational merging of satellite airborne and surface gravity data by draping techniques. in: Forsberg R, Feissl M, Dietrich R (eds) Geodesy on the Move, Springer, Berlin, 207–212Google Scholar
- Tscherning CC, Forsberg R, Knudsen P (1992) The GRAVSOFT package for geoid determination. in: Holota P, Vermeer M (eds.) Proc 1st Continental Workshop on the Geoid in Europe, Prague, May, ISBN 80-901319-2-1, pp. 327–334Google Scholar
- Wessel P, Watts AB (1988) On the accuracy of marine gravity measurements, J Geophys Res 94(B4): 7685–7729Google Scholar