English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

. The performance of two direct-detection atmospheric lidar systems with very different methods of generating and detecting laser radiation is compared as the result of a field experiment held in March 2015, in Chico, California. During the noncontinuous, 11-day test period, in which the systems operated side by side, the micropulse lidar was operated at its maximum pulse repetition frequency (15 kHz) and integrated elastic backscatter over the interpulse period of the analog direct-detection lidar (0.1 s). Operation at the high pulse repetition frequency resulted in second-trip echoes that contaminated portions of the data. The performance of the micropulse lidar varied with background brightness—as expected with a photon-counting receiver—yet showed equal or larger backscatter intensity signal-to-noise ratio throughout the experiment. Examples of wind fields and time series of wind vectors from both systems during the Chico experiment are presented. In addition, scans over the ocean that were collected by the micropulse lidar during a subsequent deployment on the northern California coast are presented. We conclude by reviewing the advantages and disadvantages of each system and make some suggestions to improve the design and performance of future systems.

journal of applied remote sensing

Comparison of an analog direct detection and a micropulse aerosol lidar at 1.5 - μ m wavelength for wind field observations—with first results over the ocean