There's observations from CryoSat, which is a satellite. But as it observes only swathes of the Arctic, a couple of miles across (I forgot how much), I'm not sure if it's picking up this event. Plenty of freeboard, though. I don't know if they're doing Operation IceBridge this year (measuring with planes), but if they are, they're not doing it now.
I still like PIOMAS best overall, but whatever you pick, it's best to compare interannually, and not compare models with each other (like: this one says it's 3 metres there, and the other one says it's 1.5).
The problem with ACNFS, or CICE, or Hycom, or whatever the name is, is that there's different versions with different inconsistencies. It's also run for and by the government/military, not for scientific purposes, which makes it more difficult to check what they do exactly. I don't have the time or inclination to constantly check how accurate it is, but I do notice it's occasionally used by both alarmists and climate risk deniers, meaning it can sometimes show what people want to see.
I'm not sure about the DMI or Mercator/TOPAZ models either. But hey, it's really difficult to model sea ice thickness. I think PIOMAS gives a good general idea of what's going on. It has proven itself over the years, as far as I'm concerned.