R/V Lance serendipitously encountered an energetic wave event around 77°N, 26°E on 2 May 2010. Onboard GPS records, interpreted as the surface wave signal, show the largest waves recorded in the Arctic region with ice cover. Comparing the measurements with a spectral wave model indicated three phases of interaction: (1) wave blocking by ice, (2) strong attenuation of wave energy and fracturing of ice by wave forcing, and (3) uninhibited propagation of the peak waves and an extension of allowed waves to higher frequencies (above the peak). Wave properties during fracturing of ice cover indicated increased groupiness. Wave‐ice interaction presented binary behavior: there was zero transmission in unbroken ice and total transmission in fractured ice. The fractured ice front traveled at some fraction of the wave group speed. Findings do not motivate new dissipation schemes for wave models, though they do indicate the need for two‐way, wave‐ice coupling.

This paper presents a wave‐in‐ice model calibration study. Data used were collected in the thin ice of the advancing autumn marginal ice zone of the western Arctic Ocean in 2015, where pancake ice was found to be prevalent. Multiple buoys were deployed in seven wave experiments; data from four of these experiments are used in the present study. Wave attenuation coefficients are calculated utilizing wave energy decay between two buoys measuring simultaneously within the ice covered region. Wavenumbers are measured in one of these experiments. Forcing parameters are obtained from simultaneous in‐situ and remote sensing observations, as well as forecast/hindcast models. Cases from three wave experiments are used to calibrate a viscoelastic model for wave attenuation/dispersion in ice cover. The calibration is done by minimizing the difference between modeled and measured complex wavenumber, using a multi‐objective genetic algorithm. The calibrated results are validated using two methods. One is to directly apply the calibrated viscoelastic parameters to one of the wave experiments not used in the calibration and then compare the attenuation from the model with measured data. The other is to use the calibrated viscoelastic model in WAVEWATCH III® over the entire western Beaufort Sea and then compare the wave spectra at two remote sites not used in the calibration. Both validations show reasonable agreement between the model and the measured data. The completed viscoelastic model is believed to be applicable to the fall marginal ice zone dominated by pancake ice.

A large collaborative program has studied the coupled air‐ice‐ocean‐wave processes occurring in the Arctic during the autumn ice advance. The program included a field campaign in the western Arctic during the autumn of 2015, with in situ data collection and both aerial and satellite remote sensing. Many of the analyses have focused on using and improving forecast models. Summarizing and synthesizing the results from a series of separate papers, the overall view is of an Arctic shifting to a more seasonal system. The dramatic increase in open water extent and duration in the autumn means that large surface waves and significant surface heat fluxes are now common. When refreezing finally does occur, it is a highly variable process in space and time. Wind and wave events drive episodic advances and retreats of the ice edge, with associated variations in sea ice formation types (e.g., pancakes, nilas). This variability becomes imprinted on the winter ice cover, which in turn affects the melt season the following year.