I Meeting Agenda
II Meeting Participant List
III NSF Viewgraphs
IV ONR Viewgraphs
V CODA Technologies
VI NSF Academic Fleet Review
VII NetCDF
VIII IMET
IX MATE Program
X On-Line Resources Subcommittee

Meeting Called to Order - The 1999 Annual RVTEC meeting was called to order on October 20^th at 9:14 am in the Auditorium of the University of Texas Marine Science Institute’s Visitor’s Center. The Vice-Chair’s new RVTEC Minute-Taking laptop immediately failed and notes of the first part of the meeting were scribbled by hand. Notes made by Annette DeSilva were used to augment the scribble. After the usual informal networking the meeting was called to order with a welcome and information on meeting logistics by Vice Chair Tony Amos of UTMSI followed by Chairman John Freitag’s introductory remarks. The meeting agenda (Appendix I) was followed as reported below.

Participant Introductions - Meeting participants introduced themselves around the table and were asked to fill in a participant information form, see Appendix II.

Acceptance of Minutes - The minutes from the 1998 RVTEC meeting were presented for acceptance. Woody Sutherland (SIO) referred to several typographic errors in the 1998 Minutes. Amos reminded the meeting that his affiliation is UTMSI, not TAMU, a point that carries weight in this State. Woody made a motion to accept with the proviso that the typos be corrected , seconded by Dale Chayes (LDEO) and the motion was carried. The corrected 1998 minutes can be accessed at: http://www.unols.org/meetings/1998/199810rvt/199810rvtmi.html.

UNOLS Reports

RVTEC Liaisons with UNOLS Subcommittees

Fleet Improvement Committee (FIC) - John Freitag reported on the last FIC meeting. The meeting included reports on new vessels. The new NOAA Fisheries Research Vessels (FRVs) will emphasize fish-stock assessment in their work. Funds have been allocated and the design will concentrate on ship noise, to produce acoustically quiet ships. Fish catches are affected by the noise levels of the fishing vessels and it is therefore necessary to cross correlate the catch effectiveness of two vessels to each other in order to be able effectively compare catches. Hydrophones will be located on centerboard and the calibration is expected to take two years. FRVs 1, 2, and 3 will be located in Alaska, the Northwest coast, and the Northeast coast, respectively. FRV4 (Gulf of Mexico) is to be 2,500 tons, have 38 berths, and spend 270 days at sea yearly. A status report was given on the new AGOR26 Swath vessel for University of Hawaii. The estimated cost for construction of the vessel has increased higher then the original appropriation of $45 million. Also discussed was a new vessel for Alaska to replace the aging ALPHA HELIX but no reports were made. R/V WALTON G SMITH, to replace R/V CALANUS, is expected to be delivered in early 2000. The future direction of the FIC was discussed.

Annette DeSilva (UNOLS) reported on the FIC document, The UNOLS Biennial Review of Sea Going Oceanographic Facilities. The goal of this report is to inform the research community, funding agencies and operators on the state of sea going oceanographic facilities and how these facilities may meet future research needs. This document is being prepared as a living document. FIC members as well as volunteers from the community are providing input to the report. It will be updated periodically as additional input or revisions are received. The document can be viewed at, http://www.unols.org/committees/fic/authship.html. The report includes a chapter on ship and shore side tech support. Anyone interested in providing input to the report should contact the UNOLS Office.

Research Vessel Operators Committee (RVOC) - Annette DeSilva then reported on the 1998 RVOC meeting that emphasized updating Research Vessel Safety Standards and Training manual. The International Safety Management (ISM) code for watch keeping was discussed. The Portable Van Study was also discussed. Many vans used on research vessels are old and substandard and there is a need for standardization in the design of future R/V vans. The RVOC will meet in November 1999. One subject on the agenda is computerization of ship maintenance records.

UNOLS Activities - Next, Annette gave the Summary of UNOLS Activities. In the past year the UNOLS Council met three times. Future fleet evolution is a high priority. She presented charts showing the entire fleet and their expected retirement dates. There will be a sharp decline in the number of vessels in the coming 20 years if we don’t start the replacement of vessels. All Class IV vessels will be retired in the next 15 years with only two intermediate vessels still on-line. For additional information on fleet planning, see http://www.unols.org/committees/fic/planning/fltplan.htm. Other items reported were on a web document on how to get access to the UNOLS fleet and the need to improve cruise assessment feedback from scientists on UNOLS vessels. The University of Minnesota’s R/V BLUE HERON entered the UNOLS fleet this year. Annette then presented the ship utilization projected for the year 2000. NSF utilization has increased while the Navy usage has slightly decreased. The UNOLS office is to transfer to Moss Landing Marine Labs in May 2000. The UNOLS office selection is made on the basis of proposals submitted to the NSF.

Arctic Icebreaker Coordinating Committee (AICC) - John Freitag reported on the AICC meeting held on 24-25 March 1999. The USCGC HEALY trials have been delayed until October 1999, consequently, changes in the schedule now have warm water testing to take place in Jan/Feb 2000 followed by the ship’s Baltimore public outreach visit. John then proceeded to reporting on Arctic Ice & Science trials. Kelly Faulkner is preparing a proposal for Teacher participation in ice trials. The continuation of science of opportunity plans for the USCG Polar Class ships are underway with a six month yard period followed by one-year cruises. The next AICC meeting will take place later this fall (1999). Tony Amos asked questions regarding HEALY ice trials (to be answered later in the meeting).

Agency Reports

National Science Foundation (NSF) - Sandy Shor reported with viewgraphs (see Appendix III) that Dolly Dieter is now doing shipboard scientific support proposals. There is presently no assistant program manager to assist her. Holly Smith (attending RVTEC) has been appointed Science Assistant for OCFS (Oceanographic Centers and Facilities Section). She will be attending meetings and will assist Dolly and Sandy in the management of the OCFS programs. OCFS Head, Don Heinrichs, will retire in 2000. Mike Reeve will most likely replace Don. NSF is recruiting personnel for various positions. Sandy gave the "Good News/Bad News" report on funding. "We got what we asked for - but didn’t ask for very much." Biocomplexity programs will require a large amount of ship time support in 2000. Tony Amos wondered about the effect replacement of the South Pole Station would have on our budgets.

On the Ship Inspection Program, RFPs are being prepared for continuation of the program. The last round of inspections has just finished. The new program will remain similar to the past program. On OCFS program Guidelines, Sandy reminded the meeting of extensive revisions of the Oceanographic Technical Services guidelines and the necessity of submitting proposals via FastLane (NSF will require FastLane submittal starting in 10/1/2000). Rich Findley asked about the use of Adobe Acrobat 3 and how to deal with attachments. (working on this). Sandy said use "NSF94-124" guidelines on all proposals. Remember the key buzzwords - training, and "customer support". Sandy urged all groups to update their information on shared-use instrumentation on institution web sites. Dale also reminded us that only three proposals per institution are allowed. What kind of equipment requires 30% institutional matching? Items in the range of >$100,00 <$2,000,000, such as ADCP outfitting, Catamaran Multi-channel seismic systems for example.

In general, NSF is "pretty optimistic" and "quite pleased." They have made adjustments to allow more use of ships. On the down side, a new regulation may restrict seismic research by eliminating use of air guns due to potential acoustic impacts on marine mammals. A ship cannot operate air guns if a whale is sighted, or if it is in fog, and may only operate air guns in daylight. This promoted some questions and comments: a questioner asked, "Is there a counter response to these regulations from scientists who know about dolphin problems?" A comment was made that every eardrum of every beached whale is damaged. The Navy is required to be environmentally sensitive. A comment was made regarding the Navy’s extensive use of XBTs (putting miles of copper wire in the ocean). The Navy has made efforts to comply with these regulations.

Office of Naval Research (ONR) - The Navy use of UNOLS ships was reported by Tim Pfeiffer, ONR, (see Appendix IV). Tim noted that the Navy is concerned with the acoustic restrictions. Tim provided the Navy budget. It is down by approximately $6M since last year. The biggest change is within the NAVO use. NAVO use of UNOLS is approximately at the $3M level as opposed to the $7.5 M level in 1999.

There was a question about ship time for the Littoral Warfare Advanced Development (LWAD) program. Jerry Gathoff is the contact in NAVO. Tim gave an AGOR 26 update: Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor and Atlantic Marine is the subcontractor for construction. R&D money, not ship construction money, will be used to support the program. Sandy asked if the time frame for construction was 22 months from contract award? Tim answered, yes. Tim told the meeting of the Defense University Research Instrumentation Program (DURIP). The program seeks proposals from Universities for equipment in the cost range of >$50,000 and <$1,000,000. There is no specific amount. Cost sharing is required. For this year they received requests totaling just over two times the amount budgeted. Tim noted that the Navy is interested in electronic proposals, too. ONR would like copies of technician proposals also--via e-mail if submitted by Fastlane. On ship inspections, the Navy inspects Navy ships under the INSURV program. Hull and Machinery will be inspected on a 5-year basis. Science inspections will be done on a two-year basis.

Naval Oceanographic Office (NAVO) - The NAVO report was given by Rick Enkoji (NAVO). NAVO is converting their CTDs from Falmouth Scientific Instruments (FSI) to Sea-Birds (Sea-Bird Electronics, Inc.). He reported that the SIO ADCP data processing is going along very smoothly.

US Coast Guard (USCG) - Commander George Dupree, USCG, gave the Coast Guard report. He saw the AICC as being "very valuable", and said that their relationship would "continue indefinitely." He said that they are close on delivery of HEALY - most likely it will be in November. Requesting ship time for HEALY would be done using UNOLS request forms. HEALY will be operating in the Arctic 180 days per year. An evening session at the 1999 American Geophysical Union (AGU) winter meeting will be held regarding long-term scientific planning for the Arctic. They have had requests for high Arctic work with two ship operations and are looking into it.

USCGC HEALY Science Systems Testing - Following Commander Dupree’s report, John Freitag informed the meeting on Healy Science Testing. He has seen some of the ship’s finished spaces. He has reservations about the scientific winch system. It has incredibly complex fair leading to sheaves with 90 degree turns in many places. The reaving is "Very complex." He asked, "Is the system going to be operable?" This is a question to be answered during ice trials. The winches also have "highly complex electronic controls." There is a low overhead in the labs. The Coast Guard is looking into raising the headroom. HEALY has fiber optic connections to scientific spaces. They made it fiber because of the unknown level of EMI generated by the AC Cycloconverter propulsion. The Coast Guard is to provide adaptors in rooms. At the moment they are improving incubation drainage and XBT launching. The ship will transit to Pensacola after delivery where the Navy has a facility to video HEALY from underwater. They will look at propeller cavitation while the ship is doing 15kt. It will proceed from there to Puerto Rico where Phase I of Warm Water Trials will test the multibeam and coring systems. Possibly, they may test the CTD winch and ADCP. Then the plan is for the ship to go to Baltimore, then to St Johns, Newfoundland, and Nuuk (ex Gothab), Greenland. Finally, a four-week science trial will commence, ending in June. HEALY will then transit to Seattle, its homeport. HEALY will be available for scientific use in January 2001.

The meeting took a Break at 11:00 and reconvened at 11:25

Winch and Wire Symposium - Following the break, discussion of the upcoming Winch and Wire (W&W) Symposium ensued. One of the reasons for convening the Symposium is because the Winch and Wire book "Yellow Book" is getting out of date and supplies are very low. It will take place from 30 Nov - 1 Dec 1999. Mike Webb of NOAA Pacific Marine Center (PMC) which provides tech support for the NOAA Pacific fleet reported that the meeting is set for New Orleans during the Work Boat Show. He said that the input from technical folks has been good, but not so good from the scientists. A show of hands for attendees was requested and approximately 30 hands were raised. An e-mail blast to the science community was recommended to let them know of the importance of the meeting. There will not be many NSF science program managers present. Last week, Dale urged the Lamont science community to participate. They were completely unaware of this meeting. Rich Findley recommended that someone from the Ship Inspection group should attend. He brought up the subject of Safe Working Load of wire and hoped that it would be addressed at the Symposium. Dale mentioned that the British "Curley Wurly" winch, which will be the subject of a talk at the W&W Symposium, was the most amazing thing that he had ever seen. He related that "Curly Wurly" was an awe inspiring mechanical device that married an external electrical conducting cable to a stress member as it was paid out and unwound them as the package was retrieved.

In summary, some suggestions for the meeting are:

• Make a video for people who cannot attend.
• Have the report and handbook put on a CD.
• Have someone like a JMS (Jamestown Marine Services, the current UNOLS inspection contractor) representative attend to provide regulatory guidance.

There was a question regarding the collaboration with OMNET. It is not yet in place. Some operators are not willing to change their present system. Rich Findley gave an example of a good use the system. he sent the ADCP manual to the ship using SeaNet as a PDF file. This would have been a $750 e-mail charge. He thinks it should be fleet wide and that billing through OMNET, independent of the ship, is a great idea. John Freitag thought it would be better if there was a central "phone company". The consensus was that a billing through, say, OMNET would be acceptable immediately. Rich posed a question to the meeting: "How many people feel wedded to their system? If someone came along and said 'here is a POP mail server' would you take it?" Antarctic Services Associates (ASA) had a recent meeting largely of scientists who wanted the ability to send large files and were willing to pay for it. Sandy gave an example of "two end members" 1) Lamont - NSF pays all their e-mail bills and 2) Miami, who charges for all usage. Between these two is a "spectrum of people" doing a bit of both. The usual lively discussion regarding e-mail billing ensued. Steve Poulos (U Hawaii) would like to see SeaNet as a "black box" that would go on each ship and require little input from the technicians. Rich asked Dale, "Are we headed for full-time connectivity?" The reply was a guarded yes.

The meeting took a Break for lunch 12:30 and reconvened at 13:45

CODA Technologies Presentation - After the lunch break, Robert Gauer, of CODA Technologies gave a presentation on Side Scan sonar and shallow-water seismic methods. Discussion ensued on compatibility. He provided a list of questions to ask your supplier when in the acquisition phase. His viewgraphs are included as Appendix V.

Tony Amos made an announcement about the Aransas Lighthouse and dinner plans. The Lighthouse, built in 1853, is now privately owned and a registered Texas Historic Landmark.

NSF Academic Fleet Review - Sandy Shor gave the NSF Report on Academic Fleet Review, see Appendix VI. Sandy reported at length on the Academic Fleet Review as relevant to RVTEC.

The review recommendations include:

- A need for a continued program of technology update and a systematic approach to safety, equipment upgrades, maintenance and development.
- Even higher standards for shared use facilities.
- Continue the UNOLS system
- A trial use of some commercial entities as UNOLS non-member operators.

SCICEX Report - Dale Chayes next gave a SCICEX (use of navy submarines for science in the Arctic) report. Goals of the program are to understand the Arctic; figure out how to use a sub for research, and obtain unclassified data. Dale detailed the differences between a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) versus Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (SCICEX was defined by a MOA). He outlined the advantages of using a submarine for under-ice research: the sub can transit 18-20 knots independent of weather. In Dale's opinion, submarines are the only effective underway platform (for underway survey) in ice-covered water. Conventional icebreakers cannot adequately get you to the areas needed. A RAND study showed that the cost of operating a nuclear submarine is not much different than for a conventional icebreaker. (Probably not full time, but maybe a half-time use). However, the maintenance/overhaul cost is about $120M -$160M for a sub, which cannot be supported by current budgets. He cited the oceanography/biology versus swath - mapping conflict on conventional vessels which are not a problem on the sub. Improvements to the submarine for use in the SCICEX cruise included navigation systems, magnetometer, and a flow-through water system. Tony Amos asked about operating procedures and it was noted that you don’t have to be a rider to get data from submarine cruises. There is a science opportunity in the fall 2000 and possible year 2000-2008 operations. This depends on operational extension of the submarine, MENDEL RIVERS.

The meeting took a Break at 15:30 and reconvened at15:50

Guidelines for Marine Technology Technicians, Internships, Training and MATE - Sandy Shor asked for a delay on discussion of the Guidelines for Marine Technology Technicians, Internships, Training and MATE until RVTEC had an opportunity to look at results of the MATE survey. He reviewed the MATE abstract and asked that the guidelines be examined overnight. Sandy would like to get feed back from RVTEC on the guidelines, both pro and con. There is an intern program associated with MATE. They plan to send 20 interns out to sea for 6-week periods on UNOLS ships over the next two years. Last summer three interns were sent out. The MATE program is broader than just the academic marine technicians. A question was posed "How many institutes offer Marine Technology Courses?" Cape Fear Technical Institute has had one for several years, also Maine. Dale said that we should recognize that this is a thing of the future and not tend to "shrug it off" (a Certified Marine Technician). Sandy Shor gave a brief update on the revisions to the Shipboard Technical Support Proposal guidelines (Appendix VI).

The meeting then moved on to:

Show and Tell/New instrumentation Presentations from Members

Rich Findley reported on automated nutrient analyzers and distributed handouts. He also reported on the 38Khz Phased Array ADCPs. They are phased array to minimize size of the low-frequency transducer. There was a statement that "We need the ‘Eric Firings of the world' to evaluate this system". Texas A&M shock-mounted their system (Desmond Rolf reported). Rich has talked with Eric about these systems. He then asked if "Anyone wants a millennium cruise?" to check out 38Khz. A discussion followed on the merits of using DVD-R (cost around $5,000) vs. CDR and asked the meeting to think about it. (Recordable DVD’s as compared to recordable CDs).

The day’s meeting was adjourned at 17:01

Dinner was held at the historic Aransas Lighthouse, Harbor Island, replete with a bagpipe serenade by Lighthouse keeper Rick Pratt. Members were transported to the lighthouse by the crew of R/V LONGHORN and R/V KATY aboard the UTMSI fleet of small boats.

DAY 2 - 21 October 1999

After Informal Networking at the UTMSI Auditorium, the meeting convened at 09:09.

Network Common Data Form (NetCDF) - A presentation on NetCDF was made by Randy Zager, Tim Deering, and Steve Poulos. Randy Zager's (University of Delaware) viewgraphs are included as Appendix VII.

Randy gave a little history. In the past he had to rewrite programs to read data from different formats, data was lost, as were time zones and other critical information (documentation, files misplaced, etc.) in data sets. He quoted from the NetCDF manual to describe what it is:

" The purpose of the Network Common Data Form (NetCDF) interface is to allow you to create, access and share array-oriented data in a form that is self describing and network-transparent."

In other data forms, one must know the dimension of the file. NetCDF can specify unlimited dimension, a file can have attributes, and variables can have attributes (units, etc.). He then gave an example of data from CAPE HENLOPEN's CTD. NetCDF Tools are in the public domain. He found it could compile on Win95/98/NT. Compilation on any UNIX is easy. The NetCDF Toolbox can be obtained at: Also commercial software such as MATLAB (Contact WHOI Field Office - Chuck Denham), IDL, or PV-Wave are options for further information. A comment was made about the annual expense of MATLAB.

A repository of NetCDF conventions is maintained at ftp://ftp.unidata.ucar.edu/pub/netcdf/Conventions

Conventions for Oceanographic data have been formulated at Cooperative Ocean/ Atmospheric Research Data Service (COARDS) and at PMEL-EPIC (NOAA). Steve Poulos asked a question regarding the use of the above conventions. For RVTEC, does Randy advocate using them? Some groups are using them extensively. A case study was presented using shipboard meteorological data (courtesy of Steve Poulos, SOEST, U. Hawaii) for a calculation of true wind speed & direction.

The meeting took a Break at 10:30 and reconvened at 11:10 for more detailed Q&A and more NetCDF description from Randy Zager. He showed a MATLAB demo with plots of S4 current meter data. Tim Pfeiffer (ONR) asked to see an ASCII dump. This was provided and showed a "Header" followed by blocks of data (Time, U-velocity, etc.). A lively discussion followed: A comment was made by Dale regarding utility of Excel (what he called "lightweight data analysis"). It makes sense to store say weather data but not seismic data. There was a question from Rich regarding transportability of data between ships by scientist on, say multi disciplinary, cruises. Dale says its up to the ship operators (you) to "give ‘em what they want." Randy says this is beyond the scope of one institution without a team of developers to design their data. Rich’s data system has one file per sensor. There was discussion regarding ASCII comma delimited files v/s NetCDF. Who wants NetCDF when scientists and technicians are perfectly happy with ASCII? Steve Poulos is trying to establish some sort of standard. It is an original mandate of RVTEC. Shawn Smith (FSU) said that it is a problem with documentation in one place and data in another. NetCDF marries the two. Marc Willis (OSU) remarked that "we’ve been having this discussion for years. Either dump it or move on. Standard data native format should be preserved". Also, if we need to accept this, we need to proceed and implement. Steve Poulos pointed out that this demo was to demonstrate how to implement NetCDF. Randy shows example of every variable RDI uses put in to a NetCDF file. Sandy Shor is prepared to send money to get this thing rolling. Question: do we want to separate say underway data from CTD data, in NetCDF? Bill Martin (UW) said he would be willing to work with Shawn Smith to put together a proposal. Sandy said we must demonstrate that data goes in and out and can be accessed by a scientist. There followed much "Discussion ... discussion". Someone said that NetCDF has to satisfy people still using Cobol and paper tape. A Question: are there tools to extract NetCDF data? Yes but they’re fairly primitive. Only recently has there been tools for Windows. A question was asked on how to handle data that comes from special equipment. Sandy said that this would not be a shared use piece of equipment. Another question was asked if this can convert data back to ASCII text file, since that is what most PIs want when they leave the ship.

Discussion followed on what users/scientists will actually want in terms of data.

Rich Findley asked, "What is the next step?" Dale suggested making a model. We need to have a collaboration of efforts to make the model for both users and operators. There was a question of how much (NetCDF) data is submitted to NODC. This is unknown.

Sandy Shor is willing to fund a lead person to put together a proposal for a NetCDF model. The data needs to be described. Once we have a known format, we need to be able to easily transform it to what the scientists want. This will need to be addressed in the proposal. Sandy stated that the system must be used.

The Lunch Break was taken at 12:33 and the meeting reconvened at 13:37.

Continuation of NetCDF discussion - Dale Chayes made a flowchart showing the data flow. He felt that a committee of no more than three people should be formed to attack this. He proposed a data exchange project using thermosalinograph data. He would be willing to participate, but he doesn't have time to do the programming. John Freitag proposed that we convene for further direction at the end of the meeting with the people who are interested in tackling the NetCDF issue.

Importance and New Applications of Underway Surface Meteorological Data - Shawn Smith (FSU) made a presentation on meteorological data collected for Comprehensive Atmospheric Data Sets (COADS) at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), see Appendix VIII. Data were collected from WOCE (World Ocean Circulation Experiment) and other cruises, including the VOS (Volunteer Observer Fleet) program. He gave examples of data coverage (considerable). They are registering data formats in NetCDF. Data can be seen at: A paper of interest is Smith et al 1999. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 939-952. Shawn stressed the errors that can easily enter meteorological data sets, especially when calculating true wind speed and direction.

Question - Sandy wanted to know if there were standards for instruments. Shawn hasn’t looked into it as yet.

The meeting took a Break at 14:43 and reconvened at 14:54.

A Global Array of Profiling Floats - Brian Guest (WHOI) gave an overview of the Global Array of Floats program. The ARGOS program will deploy about 3000 floats around the world in open water. They broadcast their position and employ various sensors. A question was asked regarding the stability of Sea-Bird sensors (good) and antifouling precautions (answer not recorded). There is no plan to recover them although they have recovered a few. One was detonated in Greenland as it was thought to be a bomb.

MATE Program - Next, Sandy Shor presented by the Marine Advanced Technology Education (MATE) program information for MATE who could not be present, see Appendix IX. They are asking to use the UNOLS logo on the cover of their guidelines. NSF is asking RVTEC for their input on this request. It was noted that more people come out of community colleges than 4-year colleges. As an example, a student might graduate community college as an ROV technician. Average age of students is 25-30. Continuation of discussion was deferred until later in the meeting.

LabView, a Data Collection System with Platform Versatility - Rich Findlay next gave an overview of LabView, a data collection system with platform versatility. LabView is a new network program he is using for data collection with modules. Rich spoke about using Smartlink (high speed data system). They plan to have the Virtual Instruments (VI’s) available on an ftp site for use by the whole community. The Kiethly modules cost $2,000 with fiberoptic interface.. Rich then introduced Doug Dieruff of Intech, Inc. who described the graphical software program that lets you design panels and flow charts. It lets you see data progress through the loop. Tim Pfeiffer (ONR) asked the question of "How difficult is it to correct this code for something not working after five years?" Rich says he can do it after a little tutorial. He said you need a 19" monitor to view the whole code diagram. There followed a discussion on how to display more than one process simultaneously. The "bottom line" is that Rich would like to work with anybody else who would like to use it (LabView). How much is it? - at different levels price varies from $900 -$2,000. Information can be had at The serial port is $1700 for 32-port device. Information can be had at This is a list server available for post only, or info-labview@pica.army.mil (also a list server).

The MATE Guidelines Discussion - Annette explained that the UNOLS Office was looking for guidance on whether or not MATE should be allowed to use the UNOLS logo on the cover of their guidelines. The MATE guidelines are designed to be an educational tool. Sandy pointed out that this is a program for technicians not necessarily for the technicians in academia - it is for technicians in industry, recreation, etc. as well. Also Sandy pointed out that it is not acceptable to promote this program as a stepping stone into a four-year program. There was a lengthy discussion on whether not the UNOLS logo and the statement; "these knowledge and skills guidelines for Marine Technicians were developed in collaboration with UNOLS" should be used in the Guidelines. Most felt that a two-year degree was not adequate to be an academic marine technician on a UNOLS vessel. There was one RVTEC member who indicated that they had some success with 2-year technicians.

A motion was made by Dale Chayes and seconded by Bill Martin to forward this issue (endorsement of the UNOLS logo and UNOLS statement on the MATE Guidelines) to the UNOLS Council for consideration. The vote was taken by raise of hands: In favor: 9, Opposed: 7. The motion passed and will be forwarded to the UNOLS Council for consideration.

Advanced Training for Marine Technicians - There followed a discussion of Advanced Training for Marine Technicians among our own group. John Freitag introduced this topic and said that it is a direct recommendation from the Fleet Improvement Committee. Sandy is very receptive to any creative ways to carry out training. John mentioned that Marc Willis is having a salinometer training course. He has some seats available (can take ten total). Tim Pfeiffer pointed out that it is very difficult to get a large group together (if not impossible). Videos and manuals (written by our own technicians) can be acceptable ideas as Sandy pointed out. He would like some creative ideas. Rich has a lot of manuals that they have been generated - these can be put on the web - or perhaps made into a training video. Tim noted that ISM code might soon require that clear documentation of operations would be required. Tim explained that ISM doesn’t care about salinity procedures but may want documentation on how you put CTD over the side. Sandy said that we should think about this on our own without consultant assistance for a year before we decide.

Woody Sutherland moved that we adjourn the meeting for the day. The motion was accepted at 1805.

Adjourn Day Two

Those interested in NetCDF convened after the official meeting.

DAY 3, 22 October 1999

The meeting convened at 08:40.

General RVTEC Business

Nominations and Election of Vice Chair - The first order of business was the Nomination and Election of the RVTEC Vice-Chair. Rich Findley (Nominating Committee Chair) reported that one nomination for vice chair has been received, Tony Amos. RVTEC voted to reelect Tony Amos as Vice Chair.

DVD-R - Rich Findley made a motion that DVD-R be accepted as an additional supported media. After discussion, Dale Chayes seconded and the motion was passed unanimously.

Salary Survey - On the question of the Salary Survey, Chair John Freitag said he would entertain a motion to drop this after two years of trying. He said that after the past two years it has been received with little enthusiasm. There followed a discussion on why the salary survey was needed. Institutions use it to compare salaries. Dale Chayes moved to shelve the Salary Survey until a small group could be formed to discuss and resolve the issue with an alternative plan. Tony Amos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Rich Findley then made a motion to make a few additional calls for salary input (with help from Annette DeSilva) to remind the community of the survey. Rich will then take the results of whatever is submitted. Rich motions that we continue Salary Survey for next two months. Rich Muller seconds. Motion carries.

INMARTECH 2000 - Annette DeSilva said that the host (NIOZ) of INMARTECH 2000 is looking for topic suggestions for INMARTECH 2000. The meeting will be in the Netherlands in the fall. Dale Chayes recommended coordinating the RVTEC around the INMARTECH and holding it at Lamont (motioned by Rich Findley, seconded by Steve Poulos). Rich's motion is that we have next year’s meeting at Lamont (New York), in conjunction with INMARTECH to make it easier to travel to Holland assuming the meeting is in the fall. However, if INMARTECH is held in the summer, we will keep our fall RVTEC meeting dates. We discussed the pros and cons of having the RVTEC meeting in the fall and summer. Assuming the meeting is in the fall, Lamont would be a convenient location for those planning to attend both meetings. Woody recommended that we hold RVTEC after the INMARTECH meeting and put up a second motion to do so. Steve Poulos seconded the motion and it passed unanimous.

Subcommittee Reports:

Online Resources Subcommittee - Tom Wilson (SUNY) was unable to attend RVTEC but submitted his subcommittee’s report (see Appendix X) via fax & e-mail, along with a letter of greeting:

To my colleagues at RVTEC:

I would like to apologize for an unfortunate combination of professional and personal commitments that has conspired this year to break my perfect attendance record at RVTEC meetings. I am sure that this annual meeting, like those before it, has been a combination of valuable professional and enjoyable personal interaction. I regret having missed out and plan to be back in the thick of things next year. In lieu of a personal appearance, I would like to offer this document to fulfill my responsibility of presenting an annual report as chair of the Online Resources Subcommittee.

John Freitag read the report. A motion was made (Rich Findley) to accept the report and to commend Tom Wilson for his excellent work and recommend he be reappointed as the subcommittee chair. Seconded by Dale and approved.

A motion was made by Dale Chayes to register a UNOLS domain name. There was a second. It was approved. Dale recommended that we investigate this carefully. The commercial world has not been around very long--not much of a track record. Dale suggests that it can be done for free from a UNOLS institution. The issue of list servers was discussed. There was a lengthy discussion on options for the UNOLS Office website and the transfer. The server does not have to be in the UNOLS Office; however, the day-to-day web maintenance should be handled by the UNOLS Office. Woody and Dale offered their support. It should be carefully thought out. Dale even suggested that another institution could support the UNOLS webserver and list server (as a separate organization). Woody noted that the infrastructure at SIO should be able to support this. A discussion ensued of the UNOLS Office move to Moss Landing. Mike Prince, the new UNOLS Executive Secretary, will need to be consulted on this issue. John will bring Tom up to speed on this.

Data Interchange Subcommittee - Steve Poulos, subcommittee chair provided the report. Steve would like each Institution to experiment with NetCDF. He would like a description of any body’s Command Description Language. At the moment the subcommittee is limiting its scope to converting thermosalinograph data. Woody asked a question regarding NOAA’s underway data format. Anyone interested in submitting thermosalinograph data should send John an e-mail.

Wire & Cable Specifications Review Subcommittee - Rich Findlay, subcommittee chair reported. He reported that he is on the Steering Committee for the Winch & Wire Symposium. A major problem with the much used .322 wire is that it is approaching Safe Working Loads (SWL). There followed considerable discussion of wire problems. The SWL is 5x breaking strength. This amounts to 2,000 lb for .322 cable. The discussion turned to whether we need 3-conductors in our cables and a brief history of this requirement ensued. Dale is looking forward to years ahead when a combination fiber-optic /copper conductor will be in .322 cable. Instrument packages used on research vessels are getting bigger and will not get smaller. Bandwidth desires will continue to grow. The community would sacrifice multi-conductors for added strength and increased bandwidth. The subcommittee voiced concern about safe working loads. A question was asked whether anyone saw a problem with using .68 cable for (long) coring for added strength. Dale said it would be OK (to use) if you’ve already fried the conductor. He pointed out that these cables are relatively fragile and that you will crush the electrical wires. It is not recommended. Also, they (.68 cables) are very expensive and should not be abused without careful consideration.

New Business

Technical Support Training. The use of hazardous materials (HAZMATs) on research vessels was discussed. George White (UW) asked who is involved with the HAZMAT material? It appears that many of the technicians take this on. George suggested that training in this area might be helpful. ISM might force everyone to become up-to-speed on HAZMAT handling. There was a discussion on the way HAZMATs are handled. Who deals with them? Who deals with training? Occasionally, scientists simply defy the regulations. What do we do? They are supposed to follow the rules and can get funding pulled if they refuse. Do we swab before and after each cruise (when using C-14)? NSF provides swabbing service. Moss Landing Marine Laboratory (MLML) requires a swab test before and after each cruise. Do we want to develop recommended procedures? Woody said Scripps is comfortable with C14 etc. but is getting more worried about the hazards of Lasers. Maybe we need a list of training available or what we should be doing in regard to training requirements.

ISM will be in-place by 2002. Large ships will not sail without it after then. Everyone should network regarding training. If someone is holding a workshop they should let the rest of the group know that it is going on. Also, if you attended a good workshop, let the gang know about it. George suggested that a checklist be compiled with suggested training courses. 2002 is the deadline for new ISM regulations and the training will be required. Dennis Donahue (U Mich) suggested we take the same approach as the merchant marine community (manuals, web-based, and video training), since it is so difficult to get technicians to sea. Chris Riffe (LUMCON) said that this is important if, say ISM can shut us down. Bill Martin volunteered to be the training committee chair. Dale suggested that the chair develop a plan and pass it along to RVTEC. Rich made a motion to establish a training subcommittee. George White seconded. It was passed. Training is for both compliance with ISM and technical training. Annette said that RVOC is going to get a consultant on this soon. It was recommended that Bill Martin get in touch with the RVOC Safety committee. The University of Washington has already hired someone to deal with this problem. The Rich Findley charge: Assess training methods and requirements and develop a plan. The goal is to have the plan on a website or circulated for approval. The motion was seconded by Dale Chayes. Motion made and seconded (White/Chayes) to nominate Bill Martin for training chair. It passed unanimously.

Ocean Data View 4.0 Software - Tony Amos described the Ocean Data View 4.0 software that allows for rapid visualization of oceanographic data during a cruise that can help both scientists to get a quick look at the data and the technicians by quickly pointing to instrument problems. It was developed by Reiner Schlitzer at the Alfred Wegener Institut (AWI) and is available free.

Phased Array ADCP - Rich Findley said he had received the 38kHz phased array ADCP report by FedEx and will look it over.

A motion was made to adjourn the meeting by Dale Chayes, seconded by Woody Sutherland, and approved by all.

Adjourn at 11:20 am.

Wednesday, October 20, 1999:

8:30 am Informal Networking

9:00 am Meeting Called to Order

9:15 am Participant Introductions

9:30 am UNOLS Reports

Summary of UNOLS Activities
RVTEC liaisons with UNOLS Subcommittees:

FIC
AICC
RVOC

11:00 am Break

11:15 am USCGC HEALY Science Systems Testing - John Freitag will report on the status of science system test programs for USCGC HEALY.

11:30 am Winch and Wire Symposium - Plans for the upcoming Winch and Wire Symposium will be discussed.

11:50 am SeaNet Update - Discussion on the installation and use of SeaNet Systems on UNOLS vessels.

12:30 pm Lunch

1:30 pm Presentation by Robert Gauer, CODA Technologies

2:00 pm NSF Academic Fleet Review - Sandy Shor will report on the recommendations from the NSF Academic Fleet review and its potential impact on shipboard technical support.

2:30 pm Shipboard Technical Support Proposal - Sandy Shor will provide a review of the revised procedures for writing the Tech Support proposals which were implemented in the past year.

3:00 pm Break

3:15 pm Guidelines for Marine Technicians, Internships, Training and MATE

3:30 pm Discussion of Status of Salary Survey

There have been few responses to the salary survey which we have discussed the past two years. We should decide whether to pursue this further or let it die.

3:40 pm International Marine Technician Symposium 2000 (INMARTECH ‘00) - Plans for INMARTECH ‘00 are underway. Organizers are requesting suggestions for technical sessions.

4:00 pm Show and Tell / New Instrumentation Presentations from Members:

5:00 pm Adjourn Day 1 Business

Thursday, October 21, 1999:

8:30 am Informal Networking

9:00 am Net-CDF Presentation - Randy Zager, Tim Deering, and Steve Poulos

10:30 am Break

10:45 am Program continuation...

12:30 pm Lunch 1:30 pm Importance and New Applications of Underway Surface Meteorological Data (e.g., IMET)

Presentation - Shawn Smith, Florida State University

2:45 pm Break

3:00 pm LabView, a data collection system with platform versatility - Doug Dieruff, Intech Inc., introduced by Rich Findley

4:30 pm Discussion of Advanced Training for Marine Techs

5:00 pm Adjourn Day 2 Business

Friday, October 22, 1999:

8:30 am Informal Networking

9:00 am General Business

9:45 am Subcommittee Reports

10:15 am New Business

Adjournment

New in l999:

Planning issues:

1. Articulate broadly-based vision for future of ocean science and technology.

Develop robust, multi-agency plan for modernization and composition of academic research fleet that responds to realistic science and funding visions.

FY2000 Budget Request

OCEAN SCIENCES FY1998 FY1999 FY2000 Increase Percnt

Ocean Sciences Research Support $112.2M 121.7M 125.0M 3.3M 2.70%
Oceanographic Centers and Facilities 46. 1M 47.3M 48.5M 1.2M 2.50%
Ocean Drilling Program 40.7M 45.6M 46.8M 1.2M 2.60%
$199.1M $214.6M $220.3M $5.7M 2.60%

NOTES:

2. Major emphases in NSF budget request:



Information Technology (IT²)-$146 million increment
Biocomplexity in the Environment (BE) - $70 million increment
"Disciplinary" programs proposed for "cost-of-living increases" only

3. No budget yet, but getting close
   

   House/Senate conference markup close to NSF FY2000 request level
   House approved conference, Senate to consider week of 10/18.
   Operating under continuing resolution for October 1-22.

   Updated OCFS Program Guidelines

   All OCFS Program Guidelines have been revised, and revisions are being reviewed and will be issued during FY2000 for use.
   Draft guidelines are posted on OCE website: http://www.geo.nsf-gov/oce/facguide.html, and use this year is strongly recommended.
   NSF will require Fastlane (electronic) submittal of all proposals beginning 10/1/2000.

   A couple of points to note:
   - Oceanographic Technical Services guidelines are extensively revised from NSF 94-124.

   Reordered sections -

   Specialized instrumentation support allowed emphasis on training and "Customer support"
   Oceanographic Instrumentation guidelines have few changes from NSF 94-124.
   For FY2000, use "NSF 94-124" as "Program Announcement" on cover page

   General Information

   Please update inventory of shared-use instruments on your institution's RVTEC web site.11.1. Link from NSF is up, but several sites are still inaccessible or outdated.
   Deadline for Major Research Instrumentation Program for FY2000 is January 18, 2000, earlier than in past - this is a firm deadline, electronic submittal required. Guidelines found on NSF webs site http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?nsf99168
   Winch and Wire Symposium in New Orleans November 30 - December 1.
   Important to get strong scientific and technical input on winch and W ire requirements looking into the future. Please spread word among technical and scientific groups at your home institutions, and encourage input and attendance.

Navy Use of UNOLS

	CY 99	CY 00
ONR	$9,175	$8,646
NRL	$ 775	$1,003
NAVO	$7,260	$2,404
NOPP	$ 962	$ 105
Other	$ 200	$ 206
Total	$18,372	$12,364
9/21/99

Research Facilities

APPENDIX V

Recommendations especially relevant to RVTEC

Ship Inspection Program

A request for proposals is in preparati on at NSF, for publication this fall/winter, accepting bids for a new inspection program for UNOLS vessels. This will replace the existing program, which has been contracted through the UNOLS Office, with a program contracted directly from NSF, We do not envision significant changes in the inspection protocols at this time.

Table of Contents

A Little History
What is NetCDF
NetCDF Tools
NetCDF Conventions
Designing a NetCDF Data File
Creating a NetCDF Data File
Working Examples
Discussion

A Little History

File Formats Change Over Time
Documentation Gets Lost
Raw Datafiles Get Misplaced
Continually re-writing software

What is NetCDF

" The purpose of the Network Common Data Form (NetCDF) interface is to allow you to create, access and share array-oriented data in a form that is self describing and network-transparent."

NetCDF User's Guide
Version 2.4
February 1996

NetCDF is a library of routines for managing scientific datasets.
NetCDF files are useable on any computer, regardless of its architecture.
There's more to data than numbers.

Components of a NetCDF File:

• Dimensions
• Length
• Limited vs. Record
• Variables
• Types
• Scalar or Multi-Dimensional
• Attributes
• Variables
• Files

Example

Dimensions: depth = 15., cast =’UNLIMITED’
Variables: float time(cast)
units = "hours since 1997-03-27 15:271:00.0 +0:00"
float temp(depth, cast)
long_name = "CTD Temperature"
units = "degree_Celsius"
Global Attribute:
SHIP_NAME = "'R/V Cape Henlopen"
CRUISE_NAME = "HFA-97 #1"

NetCDF Tools

Several Options Are Available:

• Public-Domain Tools, or
• Commercial Software
• Matlab
• IDL, or PV-Wave
• Advantages & Disadvantages  

Public-Domain Tools:

• Free Code from Unidata
• NetCDF, NetCDF-Perl, Udunits

Supported Languages:

• C, C++, Fortran, Perl, and others
• Compiles Easily on Any Unix...
• Win95/NT is harder, but this situation was improving rapidly.

Commercial Software:

• Matlab
• NetCDF toolbox developed/supported by Chuck
• Denham at USGS, not by the vendor.
• Nearly All Platforms Are Supported:
• Win95/NT,, Unix, and Mac (v5.2)
• Linux version of NetCDF toolbox is broken.

IDL, or PV-Wave:

• NetCDF is directly supported by the vendor,
• All Platforms Are Supported.
• Win95/NT, Unix, Linux, and Macintosh
• More Expensive than Matlab

Advantages & Disadvantages

• Perl-based NetCDF:
• Excellent for dealing with difficult file formats,
• Matlab:
• Very easy to write programs, and
• Good Graphics,

IDL/PV-Wave:

• Your code will end up looking like Fortran...
• But With Good Graphics

NetCDF Conventions

NetCDF provides a general API but a standard "look-and-feel" still has to be defined by the User Community. Each User Community defines how their type of data is to be represented/described, NetCDF Conventions are registered, and a Repository is maintained at: ftp://ftp.unidata.ucar.edu/pub/netcdf/Conventions

NetCDF Convention Docs Define:

• Variable naming standards
• Required attributes
• And coordinate systems
• Oceanographic Conventions
• COARDS
• PMEL-EPIC
• COARDS Conventions

Variable Names:

• Starts with A-Z, followed by A-Z, 0-9, or "_"
• Coordinate Variables
• Variable names same as a dimension

New Attributes:

• positive = "up | down"
• COARDS Conventions
• Standard Variable Attributes:
• long_name
• units
• scale_factor, add_offset
• valid range, valid_ min, valid_max
• _FillValue, missing_value

New Attributes:

• positive = "up | down"

PMEL-EPIC Conventions:

Extension of the COARDS Conventions,. New Attributes (variable & global) to support large analysis/visualization package.

New Attributes:

• Global: CREATION_DATE, Conventions
• Variable: generic_name, epic_code, FORTRAN_format
• Axis Variables: type

PMEL-EPIC Conventions:

• Additional Restrictions
• All variables are 4-dimensional (T,Z,Y,X),
• Longitude is "degrees _ west".
• Depth-axis always positive-downward.
• Use two variables for time.
• Every variable has a specific numeric code and a generic_name

PMEL-EPIC Conventions:

• Conventions for Specific Data Types:
• CTD Casts: CTD, XBT, Bottle
• Track-Line Data: Towed or Hull-mounted
• instruments
• Time-Series Data
• Gridded Data
• ADCP Data

UNOLS Conventions?

Why Do We Need More Conventions?

• Not Designed for Raw Datasets
• No Provisions for Quality Assurance
• No Instrument Configuration
• No Maintenance/Calibration History
• Need Contact Information When Sharing Data
• Between Institutions

Designing a NetCDF Data File

NetCDF Design Goals:

• Minimizes Storage Requirements
• Preserves Resolution of Raw Measurements.

Quality Assurance:

• Instrument Configuration Data
• Maintenance / Calibration info.
• Other Considerations...
• Coordinate-System info...
• Integration with a Larger System

NetCDF Design Process:

• Assign Variables to Instruments and Sensors

Variable Type Determined By:

• Range of Data Values
• Resolution of the Instrument
• Assign Attributes to Varliables As Needed
• The Dimensions are Usually Obvious
• Use Global Attributes for.
• Configuration Maintenance Data
• Other Fields Required by Conventions

Case Study.

• Shipboard Meteorological Data (courtesy of Steve Poulos, SOEST @ U. Hawaii)

What Data is Being Collected?

• Time, Temperature, Humidity,
• Wind Speed & Direction
• Precipitation and Solar Irradiance.
• Most Have Multiple Data Sources

SOEST Meteorological Data

Two Types Of Time Are Recorded:

• GPS Time (to the millisecond)
• Year, Julian Day, Hour, Minute, Seconds, Milliseconds
• Campbell Data Logger
• Only the seconds are recorded. This is used to check for clock-drift on the logging computer
• SOEST Met. Data: GPS Time
• GPS Time Needs Two Variables:
• Time_days: Just for the Julian day
• Time_msec: Just the milliseconds
• CDL Format for Time_days
• short time_days(time) ;
• long_name = "time (days)"
• units = "days since 1999-01-0100 00:00:00 +0:00"
• valid_range = 0s, 32767s;
• _FillValue = -32768s;
• SOEST Met. Data, GPS T

The Second GPS Time Variable:

• Time_msec: Just the milliseconds
• CDL Format for Time_msec
• int time_msec(time):
• long_name = "time (milliseconds)"
• units = "msec since 00:00:00 +0:00l
• valid_range = 0,86400000
• _FillValue = -2147483648

SOEST Meteorological Data:

• Time from the Campbell Data-logger
• CDL Format for Camp_sec
• int camp__sec(time)
• long_name = "seconds (Campbell Datalogger)"
• units = "seconds"
• scale_factor = 0.001f
• add_offset = 0.f
• valid_ range = 0, 59999
• _FillValue = -2147483648
• comment = "used to gauge pc/sparc clock drift."

SOEST Meteorological Data:

• Three Different Temperatures Are Recorded:
  • RTD Platinum Probe
  • Humidity Sensor
  • "Panel" Sensor
  • CDL Formats Are All Similar...
  • SOEST Met. Data: Temperature
• CDL Format for RTD Platinum Probe:
  • float temp1(time)
  • long_name = "temperature (RTD platinum probe)"
  • units = "degrees_Celsius"
  • valid_min = -273.15f // Absolute-zero
  • _FillValue = -999.f
  • comment = "fastest response-time"  
  • Using ‘floaing-point’ variable because the instrument resolution is unknown.

SOEST Meteorological Data:

• Two Wind Anemometers are in use:
• Port, and Starboard
• Recording Wind Speed & Direction
• CDL Format for Wind Speed.
• float wind_spd(time,nwind)
• long_name = "wind speed"
• units = "knots"
• valid_min = 0.f
• comment = "nwind: 1 is port, 2 is starboard."
• SOEST Met. Data: Wind

CDL Format for Wind Directoion:

• short wind_hdg(time,nwind)
• long_name = "wind heading"
• units = "degrees"
• scale_factor = 360.0/32768
• add_offset = 0.0
• valid_range = 0s, 32767s
• _FillValue = -32768s
• comment = "clockwise from true north"

SOEST Met. Data:

• Differential-GPS Latitude/ Longitude

CDL Format for D-GPS Longitude:

• int lon(time)
• long_name = "longitude (D-GPS)"
• units = "degrees_east"
• scale_factor = 180.0 / 2147483647
• add_offset = 0.0
• valid_range = -2147483646, 2147483647
• _FillValue = -2147483648
• comment = "provides centimeter resolution"
• UdeI/CMS S4 Current Meter Data

Global Attdbutes:

• Created_By
• Sta rt_Time,End Time
• Organization, Project, Experiment
• Contact_Name, Phone, Addr., EMail
• Instrument_Type, Serial_Num, Calibration_Date
• Original_Filename
• Udel/CMS S4 Current Meter Data

Scalar Variables:

• Mooring Latitude, Longitude
• Averaging Interval and Duration
• Magnetic Offset
• Why not use Global Attributes?
• These quantities have physical units, or
• Their orientation is ambiguous.

Creating A NetCDF Data File

Once the design is complete, the rest is easy.

• Open a new file
• Define your dimensions
• Define your variables along with their attributes
• Define your global attributes
• End define mode
• Write your data
• Close the file.

Note reasons for attendance:

Importance and New Application of Underway Surface Meteorology Data

Who We Are

As a background for those unfamiliar w/FSU center, we are....
Through the WOCE and TOGA/COARE programs we developed...

What We Do

Select vessels = Ships providing data for satellite work to be shown
Non-WOCE IMET equipped vessels
Metadata is key to making observed data useful to the scientific community

Quality-Control

Put in plug for morning speakers --we use netCDF format; --very nice, can easily include Metadata
Once in netCDF, our QC process involves two steps...

Feedback stories:

Found problem with R/V true winds – no heading in calculation. After contact with R/V the problem was resolved – now one of the best wind datasets
 
SLIDE 1: WOCE research vessels

Overview of our current data coverage. All WOCE cruises
Note quantity of one-minute data
Show additional high-resolution data to process

SLIDE 2: Selected none-WOCE research vessels

SLIDE 3: Number of observations

Current coverage by year – publicly available. Most data 1991-1995

SLIDE 4: Knorr 4-31 March 1993

Coverage advantage of automated R/V meteorology
IMET coverage for Knorr vs. all COADS observations within 1_ of Knorr track (Note: a data-sparse region of globe)
Comprehensive Ocean-Atmosphere Data Set (COADS)

SLIDE 5: Thompson 17-31 July 1995

Only 5 observations (COADS) per day vs. ~1400 IMET
Some applications best done with high-resolution data: flow distortion studies, cal/val.

Data Distribution

1. WWW, FTP
2. WOCE Global Data (Version 1.0-1998)
   13-CDROM volume of WOCE data
   2 additional CDROM’s of satellite data
   Over 5 GB of data and products
   Surface meteorology data and fluxes (3 CD’s)  

We wish to encourage all collectors of data to make them available (on line if possible)
More data allows more good science = more funds

Data Applications

3. Value to the WOCE program (local heat budgets and modeling efforts)


4. Feedback on measuring earth-relative (i.e., True) winds from automated systems (paper by Smith et al. 1999, J. Atmos. Ocean Technol., 939-952)
5. Satellite winds validation (Bourassa et al. 1997, EOS, 597-602)
6. Surface flux products evaluation (paper by Smith et al., 2000)
   Some cuurrent applications.
   To visualize the confusion:
   Typically ship relative winds are recorded using similar definitions. For example, oceanographers tend to record ship-relative winds, 180_ out of phase to what meteorologists expect:

SLIDE 6: Three figures based on True Wind...

The result of not reporting the direction convention used causes errors in True wind computation. Describe Figure:

SLIDE 7: Impact of 180 degree Error on True Wind Speed

(1) Note changes in ship speed. (2) Note ship relative winds. (3) Incorrect calculation (red) - ship motion should not be ?????? in true winds. (4) ????

SLIDE 8: R/V Knorr - 19 August 1995 (Fig 2)

SLIDE 9: Coverage of Tropics

SLIDE 10: Wind Speed - R/V Knorr, October 1996-March 1997)

SLIDE 11: Wind Direction Validation

SLIDE 12: Wind Speeds: QSCAT vs. R/V Atlantis

SLIDE 13: Data matches: 1990-1995

SLIDE 14: Sea-Level Pressure, Wind Speed

Ship standard error based upon R/V data
NCEP - standard error based upon the true natural variability
Small standard errors in regions of large differences show significance of result

Describe Figs:

20_ latitude band average for ship and NCEPR
Standard errors

Note: regions of underestimation

SLIDE 15: Pressure Bias, Wind Speed Bias

Wind Bias increases with increasing ship wind speed
Pressue differences split ner 990hPa; NCEPR overestimates at low P, NCEPR underestimates at high P
Expect problem with/NCEPR P gradients and underestimated winds (simplification)

SLIDE 16: Latent Heat Fluw, Sensible Heat Flux, Wind Stress

Same plotting as earlier meteorological data

(1) Note NCEPR general overestimations of fluxes. (2) Stress is pretty good

Future

That is a brief overview of some current applications of R/V meteorology data. I cannot stress enough the importance of automated measurements and their potential for scientific research. Continued collection and improved accessibility will benefit both the science community and the R/V operators (UNOLS). Final note on future plans...

ACTION ITEM:

The MATE Center would like to include the words: "These Knowledge and Skill Guidelines for Marine Technicians were developed in collaboration with UNOLS" and the UNOLS logo on the cover of the guideline report.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

On October 23, 1998 the MATE Center conducted a skills workshop in San Diego, CA to define the skills, knowledge, and abilities marine technicians need to work aboard research vessels. The workshop consisted of 11 marine technicians from 11 of the major marine research facilities that operate most UNOLS research vessels. During this workshop the technicians worked with a trained facilitator to define the job functions and tasks they perform as well as the technical knowledge and skills required to do their work. The outcome of this workshop was a draft of "Skills and Knowledge Guidelines for Marine Technicians."

After the draft guidelines were developed, a validation survey incorporating the key elements of these guidelines was sent to 300 marine technicians and supervisors at marine research facilities that host research vessels. An additional 25 surveys were sent to marine technicians at the United States Geological Survey. The validation process tested the range of applicability of the guidelines and measured the level of importance of specific job functions, tasks, technical knowledge, and skills to marine technicians. Technicians participating in this survey also had the opportunity to suggest additions or deletions to the guidelines. The Knowledge and Skill Guidelines for Marine Technicians is the consensus of 115 marine technicians and supervisors on what good marine technicians need to know and do.

The MATE Center has also developed Knowledge and Skill Guidelines for ROV Technicians and Hydrographic Survey Technicians and hopes to have Oceanographic Data Processing Technician Guidelines available in draft form this fall. The Knowledge and Skill Guidelines for Marine Technicians will be used in conjunction with the other three Guidelines (with more to come) to develop flexible academic programs that prepare students for entry level positions in a variety of related fields. The use of these guidelines is voluntary. The primary goals of Knowledge and Skill Guidelines are to allow educators to develop appropriate curriculums and programs that incorporate skills most in demand by employers and to empower students to make informed decisions about the skills they need to enter the marine technical workforce.

To my colleagues at RVTEC:

I would like to apologize for an unfortunate combination of professional and personal commitments that has conspired this year to break my perfect attendance record at RVTEC meetings. I am sure that this annual meeting, like those before it, has been a combination of valuable professional and enjoyable personal interaction. I regret having missed out and plan to be back in the thick of things next year. In lieu of a personal appearance, I would like to offer this document to fulfill my responsibility of presenting an annual report as chair of the Online Resources Subcommittee.

CURRENT STATUS OF THE RVTEC HOME PORT

Note to all -- In the following discussion I will mention methods and products that I am using to implement the RVTEC website, I mention them by name in the. hope they might prove useful to others. In general I choose tools that are reliable, reasonably economical and, most importantly, easy to learn and of value to the occasional user. I encourage others to recommend their personal picks both to myself' and the RVTEC community--expertise sharing is one of the main reasons we exist after all.

'The RVTEC website continues to function well. As discussed last year, the site has been moved from the UK web server to a SUNY server with automatic redirection from the old page URLs. Location on the SUNY server will give us more flexibility in implementing site enhancements and gives us immediate access to log files of visitors.

The home page of RVTEC is now located at: http://kilroy.msrc.sunysb.edu/rvtec

The SUNY server is a Dell Optiplex Pentium running Windows 95 and the Smartdesk Websuite web server. In addition to RVTEC, the server hosts web sites for a real time environmental data system and our research vessel Onrust. We have found the server to be quite stable and robust. During stormy weather the server gets several thousand hits a day with no perceptible degradation in performance.

Due to a mission-critical data system running on the server, we have installed a hardware watchdog card from Outsource Engineering that resets the system if it locks up. We also use Automate Pro automation task software to reboot the system periodically and to send e-mail and pager messages in case of trouble. After the brouhaha at last year's RVTEC over reboot frequency, I went home and reprogrammed the system to automatically reboot once per week. I have experienced no problems as a result of this change, so my earlier overzealousness may have been unjustified, but it still adds to my comfort level to have the watchdog and an occasional scheduled reboot in place.

For those of you who use NT as your primary operating system, let me mention that all the software I am using appears to run fine under NT. We have in fact installed a Windows NT workstation and are in the process of shifting some functions from the kilroy server to the NT machine. At this point however I have no plans to move the RVTEC website to NT unless a good reason appears.

We are currently using SoftQuad's HoTMetaL Pro to work on the website. This is a fairly economical and easy to use website editor. I like it because it allows easy switching back and forth between an interpreted view of the page and the underlying HTML code, allowing easy tweaking of the code if needed. HoTMetaL also is not from any of the combatants in the browser wars, so it is easier to produce sites that are not biased toward any particular manufacturer. You can actually specify up to eight installed browsers on your machine so with a single click you can drop a page you are editing into Netscape, Explorer, etc. to see exactly how it will display.

The Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) is a consortium that has developed software called Bobby that checks website content for accessibility to people with disabilities. If the content and presentation of the site meet guidelines, the Bobby seal of approval can be displayed on the site. I became aware of Bobby some months ago when there was a buzz about potentially requiring government websites to meet the Bobby guidelines. With some trepidation about Big Brother watching my computer, I investigated and found the rumors to be just talk (for now at least). However, CAST's guidelines are quite reasonable and intelligent suggestions for good website design. With a fix of one overlooked tag the RVTEC site met Bobby guidelines. I would therefore recommend the CAST website as a useful free resource to all of you who are maintaining local web pages.

We regularly check the site with Linkbot Pro which, when given a starting web page, exercises all the links and produces a list of problems. Unlike some competing tools, it works equally well for sites out on the web and for local files on disk during development. I would still ask for your help in giving me a heads up if you know that your website is undergoing major renovation, particularly during the busy summer field season when this type of maintenance tends to get deferred.

We have started to gather site usage statistics using the log files produced by the SUNY web server. I am using NetIntellect Lite, the free version of a more capable and expensive full commercial package. I found the Lite version quite sufficient for my needs and apparently am not alone, because the company recently removed the free version from its website. I of course responded by placing the free version on my anonymous ftp, site, from which you are welcome to retrieve it.

PLANS FOR FUTURE WORK

While a search for UNOLS or RVTEC on the main Internet search engines will find our sites, I plan to increase the visibility of both the main UNOLS site and the RVTEC site by implicitly submitting information to the search engines. This can be done manually or automatically with a growing number of software titles. Expect a report on this at, the next meeting.

As always, I would solicit links or content from RVTEC members for the web site. This can range from reports on committee work to outstanding or unusual projects undertaken by RVTEC members.

I will be in contact with the UNOLS office regarding the possibility of our registration of the UNOLS.ORG domain name. I have recently located a particularly good deal from a national commercial Internet Service Provider that will register unols.org for us, host our domain and provide additional useful services for a $200 setup fee plus $25 per month. This would give us simple Web addresses like info@unols.org, office@unols.org, or rvtec@unols.org. Control of these features is through a very simple password-protected web browser interface. We can initially set things up as automatic forwards so requests are routed to the email accounts and webservers we use now. Later on we can gracefully and incrementally move from forwarding to hosting as little or as much as desired on the commercial server. With the impending move of the UNOLS office, this might be a most propitious time to establish a permanent Internet home address.

To conclude, I would like to extend my appreciation to everyone who works to make RVTEC a valuable resource for the oceanographic community. I hope that my contributions have been useful, and would ask for the privilege of continuing to serve the organization as chair of the Online Resources Subcommittee. My wishes to all for continued success and I look forward to seeing you all again next year.

Best regards,

Torn Wilson

RESOURCES MENTIONED IN REPORT

SmartDesk Websuite web server for Win95/98/NT, $99.95, 15 day free trial,
Available online (download is less than 1 Megabyte!!)
www.smartdesk.com

Hardware watchdog cards- $60.00 - $150.00 depending on model and features.
Outsource Engineering and Manufacturing
3669 West 11987 South Salt Lake City UT 84104-4904
Tel: 801-956-0000
Fax: 801-956-0750
www.outsrc-em.com

HoTMetaL, Pro website editor: about $90.00 - $100.00 at retail. Available atCompUSA, PCConnection, and directly from the manufacturer:
SoftQuad Software, Inc,
161 Eglinton Ave, East, Suite 400
Toronto M4P IJ5 CANADA
Tel: 800-367-2777
Fax: 410-544-0300
www.softquad.com

Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) Bobby website accessibility checker.

LinkBot Pro website checking software: $295.00 (ouch - this was cheaper when I bought it!)
Watchfire
135 Michael Cowpland Dr, Suite 400
Kanata, Ontario K2M2E9
Tel: 613 599-3888
Fax: 613 599-3826
www.tetranetsoftware.com

NetIntellect Lite logfile analysis software: free but presumably unsupported.
Available by anonymous ftp to kilroy.msrc.sunysb.edu/pub/win/nilitesetup.exe