Depth, 

 m 



Number of 

 Differences 



Differences, °C 



Number of Diffc 



rences 



AT 



s 



Positive 



Zero Negative 







61 



-0.01 



0.16 



30 







31 



6 



61 



0.01 



0.12 



30 







31 



11 



61 



0.02 



0.12 



33 



1 



27 



17 



61 



0.04 



0.13 



39 



1 



21 



23 



61 



0.03 



0.12 



39 







22 



28 



61 



0.02 



0.12 



37 







24 



34 



61 



0.06 



0.13 



41 



1 



19 



39 



61 



0.04 



0.11 



40 



1 



20 



45 



61 



0.04 



0.12 



40 



T 



19 



51 



61 



0.09 



0.11 



47 



2 



12 



56 



61 



0.04 



0.12 



39 







22 



62 



61 



0.05 



0.13 



42 



1 



18 



68 



61 



0.08 



0.11 



45 



4 



12 



73 



61 



0.05 



0.13 



41 



1 



19 



79 



61 



0.04 



0.13 



40 



1 



20 



85 



61 



0.03 



0.12 



35 



2 



24 



90 



61 



0.02 



0.15 



33 



3 



25 



All 



1037 



0.04 



0.13 



651 



20 



366 



Percentage 



100.0 



62.8 



1.9 



35.3 



Table 38. Statistical summary for SUDS I underway XBT and 

 thermistor chain differences. 



run numbers during which the profiles were made. An important feature of the appendix F 

 data is the lack of randomness in the distribution of differences within a specific profile and 

 in the time when consecutive profiles were made. For example, the average differences 

 are positive for 18 consecutive profiles from 207L to 225L. For eight of the 18 profiles, 

 all 17 differences were positive: for five of the profiles, 16 differences were positive. This 

 set of 18 profiles includes all of the profiles made during station 3, runs 4 and 5, and two 

 of the seven profiles made during station 3, run 3. The average differences for 10 profiles, 

 XBT 245L to 256L, were all negative and for the 10 succeeding profiles, 257L to 268L, 

 were positive. In this latter set, the individual differences for five consecutive profiles 

 were all positive. This series also includes XBT 266L and 269L, which were previously 

 eliminated from this analysis since early comparisons showed them to be erroneous. 



The data listed in appendix F are associated with the same profiles plotted in 

 appendix E. In the discussion of the appendix E plots it was noted that the distri- 

 bution of the differences for station 4, runs 3 and 4, was different from the distri- 

 bution of differences for the other data sets. It was also noted that two profiles, 

 XBT 266L and 269L, were grossly in error and were not included in the station 4, 

 runs 3 and 4, statistics presented in appendix F. Even with XBT 266L omitted from 

 the station 4, run 3, data set the average difference for the remaining XBT profiles 

 is quite different from all of the other runs. However, the average differences for the 



90 



