Reply to “Comments on ‘Characterization of Aircraft Icing Environments with Supercooled Large Drops for Application to Commercial Aircraft Certification’”

• Published in: Journal of applied meteorology and climatology 2013-07, Vol.52 (7), p.1673-1675
• Main Authors: Cober, Stewart G., Isaac, George A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aircraft; Aircraft icing; Analysis; Aquatic reptiles; Aviation; Certification; Clouds; Commercial aircraft; Contamination; CORRESPONDENCE; Crystals; Data lines; Data points; Diameters; Envelopes; Flight instruments; Geometric lines; Ice; Ice crystals; Ice formation; Icing; Image quality; Liquid phases; Liquid water content; Mathematical models; Measurement; Meteors; Methods; Moisture content; Numerical simulations; Probes; Sensors; Spectra; Spectroscopic analysis; Studies; Temperature; Two dimensional analysis; Water; Water content; Wind tunnels
• ISSN: 1558-8424; 1558-8432
• DOI: 10.1175/JAMC-D-12-0213.1

Marwitz (2013) does not provide an error estimate for the LWC value of the data point that he compares with the results of Cober and Isaac (2012). Since Ashenden and Marwitz (1998) computed the LWC of their icing events from FSSP, ID, and 2D probes, the errors with- out ice crystals or other artifacts potentially biasing the ID and 2D probes are at best ± 43% (Cober et al. 2001b; Strapp et al. 2003) and, with possible ice crystal or arti- fact contamination of the ID and 2D spectra, are likely larger. [...]the single data point suggested by Marwitz (2013) is an average of several data points, each of which has a different horizontal length scale.