Scanning polarization lidar LOSA-M3: opportunity for research of crystalline particle orientation in the ice clouds

Kokhanenko, Grigorii P.; Balin, Yurii S.; Klemasheva, Marina G.; Nasonov, Sergei V.; Novoselov, Mikhail M.; Penner, Iogannes E.; Samoilova, Svetlana V.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-1113-2020

Articles | Volume 13, issue 3

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-1113-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-1113-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 13, issue 3

Research article

|

09 Mar 2020

Research article |

| 09 Mar 2020

Scanning polarization lidar LOSA-M3: opportunity for research of crystalline particle orientation in the ice clouds

Grigorii P. Kokhanenko, Yurii S. Balin, Marina G. Klemasheva, Sergei V. Nasonov, Mikhail M. Novoselov, Iogannes E. Penner, and Svetlana V. Samoilova

Download

Final revised paper (published on 09 Mar 2020)
Preprint (discussion started on 10 Sep 2019)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Overall good work. Needs minor revisions.', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Sep 2019
- AC1: 'Responses to reviewer', Grigorii Kokhanenko, 30 Sep 2019
- AC2: 'Revised text after reviewer 1', Grigorii Kokhanenko, 30 Sep 2019
RC2: 'Review to Grigorii P. Kokhanenko et al. "Scanning Polarization Lidar LOSA-M3: Opportunity for Research of Crystalline Particle Orientation in the Clouds of Upper Layers"', Anonymous Referee #2, 08 Oct 2019
- AC3: 'Responses to reviewer 2', Grigorii Kokhanenko, 28 Oct 2019
- AC4: 'Revised text after rev. 2 and 3', Grigorii Kokhanenko, 28 Oct 2019
RC3: 'Scanning Polarization Lidar LOSA-M3: Opportunity for Research of Crystalline Particle Orientation in the Clouds of Upper Layers', Anonymous Referee #3, 15 Oct 2019
- AC5: 'responces to reviewer 3', Grigorii Kokhanenko, 28 Oct 2019
- AC6: 'Revised text after rev. 2 and 3', Grigorii Kokhanenko, 28 Oct 2019
RC4: 'Review', Anonymous Referee #4, 27 Oct 2019
- AC7: 'Response to Reviewer 4', Grigorii Kokhanenko, 01 Nov 2019
- AC8: 'Revised text after reviewer 4', Grigorii Kokhanenko, 01 Nov 2019

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Grigorii Kokhanenko on behalf of the Authors (06 Dec 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (09 Jan 2020) by Ulla Wandinger

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (13 Jan 2020)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

The authors describe a new scanning polarization lidar that can be used to help detect the presence of oriented particles in the atmosphere. The description includes a summary of the system design, calibration procedures and results and some very interesting and convincing example observations of ice clouds that have oriented crystals.

The authors have produced a good manuscript worthy of publication. I have a couple minor comments. It is at the authors’ discretion if or how they want to address them.

1. In the first paragraph of the introduction it is noted that oriented ice crystals may have an impact on radiative transfer. I noticed there was a paper published in JGR stating possible evidence for this based on observations. I bring this to the authors attention in case they would want to include the reference.
Stillwell et al, "Radiative Influence of Horizontally Oriented Ice Crystals over Summit, Greenland", DOI: 10.1029/2018JD028963, 2019.

2.Pg 2, Line 52: ”Depolarization of backscattered radiation has a maximum at a lidar tilt of 30 degrees…”
I think it is better to replace “Depolarization” with “Depolarization ratio”. It is my understanding that the depolariation itself does not change so much as the other polarization properties of the ice crystal at these angles. I generally think of “depolarization” as a distinctive polarization effect, different from retardance and polarizance. In contrast I think of “depolariation ratio” as a measurement of cross polarized channel divided by parallel polarized channel which may be caused by any number of polarization effects.

3. I noticed that the change in polarization subscripts is the result of responding to reviewer 2 from the first round. I actually disagree with that reviewer. When describing the complex electric field vector, RHC and LHC polarizations are clearly orthogonal and make a perfectly acceptable basis set. So the use of those parallel and perpendicular subscripts is accurate. Also, I think those subscripts make a more elegant and concise description than the “co” and “cross” subscripts.
I think the authors should certainly consider reviewer 2’s comments. But ultimately they should use whatever notation they feel is best. Acceptance for publication should not be predicated on them satisfying either my or reviewer 2’s opinions on this matter.

Hide

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (15 Jan 2020)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (22 Jan 2020)

ED: Publish as is (26 Jan 2020) by Ulla Wandinger

AR by Grigorii Kokhanenko on behalf of the Authors (29 Jan 2020)

Short summary

Cirrus clouds consist of crystals (plates, needles) that can orient themselves in space as a result of free fall. This leads to the appearance of various types of optical halo and to specular reflection of solar radiation. The presence of such particles significantly affects the passage of thermal radiation through the mid- and high-level ice clouds. Using the properties of polarization, a scanning lidar makes it possible to identify cloud areas with oriented crystals.