UNOLS Observatory Working Group
Meeting
Holiday Inn - Logan Airport Hotel
Embassy IV Room
February 26, 2003
MEETING MINUTES
To download a pdf copy of these
minutes, click here <200302owgmi.pdf>
II.
Participant List
III.
Working Group
Task Statement
IV.
H2O Observatory (Alan Chave)
V.
NEPTUNE and Cable Installation Tools (Gene Massion)
VI.
Deck Handling and Mooring Deployment/Recovery Needs
(Worcester/Wooding)
VII.
ROV and AUV Requirements (Dana Yoerger)
VIII.
Mapping Requirements (Larry Mayer)
IX.
Coastal Observatory Requirements – West Coast (Mike
Kosro)
X.
Coastal Observatory Requirements – East Coast (Scott
Glenn)
Introductions, charge to the working group and meeting
goals – Alan Chave opened the meeting
at 0830. Meeting participants introduced
themselves. The meeting agenda is
included as Appendix I and the participant list is included
as Appendix II.
Alan provided the group with background information about why the working
group had been formed. There are a variety of major ocean observatory
development efforts underway on global, regional and local scales.
Some of these observatories have already been established and are operational.
The Ocean Studies
Board has established a committee to study “Implementation of a Seafloor Observatory
Network for Oceanographic Research.” Bob
Detrick (WHOI) is chair of this committee. Their study will develop an implementation plan to establish a network
of seafloor-based observatories to support multidisciplinary research. This
network would include both cabled seafloor nodes and moored buoys, located
in both coastal and open-ocean areas. The committee has been tasked to provide
advice on the design, construction, management, operation, and maintenance
of the network, including the need for scientific oversight and planning,
appropriately phased implementation, data management, and education and outreach
activities of the observatories. Additionally,
they have been asked to examine the impacts on the UNOLS fleet and current
submersible and ROV/AUV assets in the research community.
Bob Detrick, in turn, has asked UNOLS for input regarding observatory
facility needs and the impact these needs will have on the UNOLS fleet.
In response, the UNOLS Council recommended the formation of a working
group with individuals familiar with the establishment and operation of ocean
observatories. The tasking for the
working group is contained in Appendix III.
Deep ocean observatory requirements for UNOLS vessels:
H2O Experience
- Alan Chave provided a report on the H2O experiment. His viewgraphs are included as Appendix IV.
The viewgraphs include pictures of the installation and cable handling
operations. H2O was the first deep water installation of
an observatory by a UNOLS vessel, R/V THOMPSON. The observatory has been in operation for five years. ROV Jason was used for the installation and
worked well.
A summary of Alan’s comments, observations and recommendations
follow:
·
The deck
gear on UNOLS ships is not adequate for installation and servicing of deep
ocean observatories. Deck equipment
with the ability to handle heavier loads than those currently installed on
UNOLS vessels is needed for installation and service of observatories like
H2O.
·
Synthetic
cable is needed.
·
Experienced
personnel, including a cable handler, are needed. An experienced cable handler assisted the H2O installation.
·
A
well-designed cable grabber tool is needed.
·
A fantail
“chute” is needed for cable handling.
·
A cable
spicing capability is needed on UNOLS vessels.
This does not currently exist in UNOLS.
There is industry expertise in this area.
·
There are
safety concerns that will need to be addressed. Heavier gear and work with heavier loads will require experienced
support.
·
User-friendly
ROVs are needed.
·
Below deck
winches (fiber optic) would be beneficial.
The best scenario would be to have two below deck traction winches (not
just two spools).
·
The ships
will require a large, clear aft deck.
Alan described the H2O junction box deployment operations. The ROV work vehicle (Jason) support was
very adequate during these operations.
Jason could do everything that was planned. Pre-cruise planning and knowing the vehicle’s capabilities were
instrumental. There needs to be a
strong interactive relationship between the user and vehicle operator for
successful operation. Prior to the H2O
cruise, trial runs with Jason were carried out at the pier. In the future, as the servicing and
installation procedures are well established, these sorts of cable operations
might be able to be done with commercially available ROVs.
NEPTUNE and Cable Installation Tools - Gene Massion continued with
a report on NEPTUNE installation and servicing facility requirements. His viewgraphs are included as Appendix V.
The NEPTUNE observatory is designed as a regional network of cabled
seafloor nodes. There will be 30 nodes.
Gene’s observations, comments and recommendations are included
below:
·
NEPTUNE
facility requirements are estimated to require three months of ROV and UNOLS
Class I ship time for servicing of nodes.
A typical academic ROV would be adequate. The three months includes the time needed to service the 30
nodes.
–Node weight - app 2000 lbf, 2.5m x 1.5m x 1m
–Cable weight – 3300 lbf for 4000m
·
UNOLS Class
I vessels as they are currently configured are too small to meet the NEPTUNE
support requirements. More deck space
is needed. Much of the required handling
equipment can be cross-decked to a UNOLS vessel, but added deck space and deck
strengthening would be needed.
·
Procedures
for safe handling of the heavy loads associated with observatory work are
needed. This is a major safety concern.
Gene reviewed the handling equipment possibilities for NEPTUNE support:
-
Aft
chute for cable handling
-
20000
lbf safe working load (swl) winch
-
2
capstans (10000 lbf swl each for handling soft line) and stoppers applied on deck.
-
The minimum requirements
plus…
-
20000
lbf swl (while rotating) a-frame.
-
All
of the above plus…
-
Either
2 LCEs or 2 cable drums (2-3m diameter, 3m required for routine passage of a
joint).
-
Capstans/tuggers,
-
Grappling
gear,
-
Hard/soft
stoppers,
-
Cable
splicing gear (several transportainers),
-
Added
deck space
As part of the Neptune process, they will look at various ship
support options. These include:
·
Leasing
Commercial vessels
·
Buying a
commercial vessel
·
Building a
new UNOLS vessel designed for support of observatory.
In closing, Gene showed slides of a typical cable repair ship.
Deck handling and mooring deployment/recovery needs – Peter Worcester reported on the DEOS facility needs. His viewgraphs are included as Appendix VI.
He reviewed the design constraints for moored-buoy observatories.
There are three types of buoys:
- No power to the seafloor - low bandwidth, acoustically-linked discus buoy
- Powered to the seafloor - Low-bandwidth, cable-linked discus buoy
- Powered to the seafloor - High-bandwidth, cable-linked spar buoy
Peter showed a map with locations of moored-buoy locations. The map provided locations of the sites that are currently operating or funded, as well as those sites to be implemented during the pilot phase of DEOS.
Some of the sites are in
high latitudes where high sea state conditions can be expected. This map is a good graphic for future
reference.
UNOLS vessels currently have the capabilities needed to service
discus type buoys. No added handling
gear is needed. In terms of ship time,
however, there will be much higher demand.
Peter reviewed the DEOS spar buoy conceptual drawing features and
service requirements:
-
Requires
servicing once or twice a year.
-
The spar
buoy is 40 m long and will not fit on a UNOLS vessel.
-
For
servicing and fueling, the ship and buoy would need to be secure to each
other. Fuel spills are a concern during
fueling operations.
-
Between
20-40 DEOS spar buoys are planned.
-
Deployments
in high latitude regions are desired.
-
The spar
buoy design should be ready in FY06.
-
Charter
ships can be considered for servicing.
-
Ship demand
for the servicing is unknown.
-
The oil
industry currently deploys much larger spar buoys and their expertise should be
explored.
Beecher Wooding continued the discussion and described a discus
buoy deployment sequence. He remarked
that the oil industry doesn’t hesitate to service the anchor mooring of the
buoy. The NDSF probably would be
hesitant to operate the ROV in the area of the mooring anchor. The anchor depth can be in 5000 meter of
water, which would require a Jason-type vehicle for moored buoy installations.
General ship needs for moored-buoy operations:
-
More deck
space, increased deck strengthening, and heavy-lift deck handling equipment.
-
Two traction
winches, or the ability to make a quick transfer of wire spools.
General discussion followed and a variety of facility suggestions
were made:
-
Explore the
concept of a dedicated UNOLS ship for support of observatory work and perhaps
long core operations. The ship would be
capable of cable laying and servicing, spar buoy installation and servicing,
and perhaps long coring. The ship would
have a specialized crew with expertise in heavy load handling. It would be a specialized facility.
-
Explore the
market of used commercial vessels. The cable
industry currently has used ships on the market that could be obtained at
relatively low cost. Determine if there
are any constraints in acquiring a used ship that was foreign built.
-
Observatory
support will require specially trained people experienced in deployments and
recovery of heavy loads. A dedicated
support team is recommended. This
dedicated crew could also serve to train others within UNOLS for observatory support.
-
Operations
in higher sea states will be desired, including ROV operations. Ships, crew, and equipment will need to be
able to support these types of operations.
-
Explore
using heavy load winches that have been surpluses by the Navy.
ROV and AUV requirements – Dan Yoerger reported on ROV and AUV requirements for
ocean observatories. His viewgraphs
are included as Appendix VII.
ROVs are needed during four observatory phases: planning, installation,
preliminary operations, and general operations.
The ROVs would be involved with two different types of observatory
activities, installation and support of the infrastructure and the science
resulting from the observatory. The intervention
tasks related to the infrastructure (once established) should be predictable
and well defined, therefore should be appropriate for commercial ROV
contracts. It is envisioned that
observatories will generate much work similar to our conventional vehicle science
operations, and are probably best suited to a facility such as we operate
presently.
The ship/ROV tasks related to o
bservatory installation and maintenance will require a focused capability, rather than general-purpose vehicles. However, the regional observatories will demand a higher sea-state capability for year-round operations. More sophisticated DP systems than are currently available in the UNOLS fleet will be required. These should be designed with the ship. The sea state conditions typical of regional observatories should be evaluated so that ROV launch/recovery operations can be carried out in these conditions.
The following are suggested as sufficient ROV capabilities for service of observatories:
Dana continued with discussion on the status of AUV development. The AUV development needs to transition from expeditionary operations to observatory-based operations. AUV support for observatories is still a long way off. There is a long, planned process for developing an AUV servicing capability:
- Vehicles
- Docking systems
- Sensor packages
- Navigation/comms infrastructure
AUVs offer exciting scientific capabilities for research
applications.
ROV/AUV Recommendations:
·
Include a
dedicated ROV on the observatory support ship.
The ROV does not need to be as sophisticated as Jason II.
·
The
conventional science ROV capability will need to be expanded in terms of
numbers.
·
Explore
development of an AUV servicing capability.
Mapping requirements – Larry Mayer reviewed ocean observatory mapping requirements. His viewgraphs are included in Appendix VIII. From a regional context, mapping is needed for cable route surveys. Large area coverage with the best resolution possible is needed for site selection. Surveys could include bathymetry mapping and sidescan sonar. If the cable is to be buried, coring and CPT may be required. Surveys are needed for detection of obstacles with 1 m lateral dimension and to d
etect hazards such as, surface faulting, tectonic deformation, turbidity flows, unstable slopes, potential liquefaction, gas charged sediment, rocky outcrops, hard bottom (if ploughed), steep slopes, pinnacles, boulders, seismic activity, high currents, trawl marks, anchor marks, proximity to cables, pipelines, manmade debris or hazardous materials, signs of oil or oil exploration
-
, etc. Real time processing or near real-time for
decision-making is needed during mapping operations.
Larry reviewed multibeam system features and capabilities. There are tradeoffs between swath width and
capability. Many of the multibeam
systems can now do backscanning. The
challenge that they face is correction of roll, pitch and yaw. Larry reviewed the advances that have been
made in offshore positioning, motion sensors and computing power.
The UNOLS Fleet includes several multibeam systems:
· REVELLE - EM120 (12 kHz)
· ATLANTIS - SB2000 (12kHz)
· THOMPSON - EM300 (30 kHz) + Hydrosweep DS (15kHz)
· EWING - Hydrosweep DS-2 (15 kHz)
· MELVILLE - SB2000
· KNORR - SB2000
· KILO MOANA - EM120 (12 KHz) + EM1002 (95 kHz)
The CAPE HENLOPEN replacement vessel is being designed to include a Reson 8101, 240 kHz system.
Additionally, the Polar vessels are equipped with:
· NATHANIEL PALMER - EM120 (12 kHz)
· HEALY - SB2100 (0 kHz)
There are several
high-frequency systems available (mostly EM3000 - 300 kHz), including systems
at SUNY Stony Brook and USF. Other mapping assets are available to the
community and include:
·
AUVs
·
ABE w/ Simrad
SM2000 - 200 kHz
·
Mesotech and
other 675 KHz sector scanners
·
MBARI w/ Reson
7000 series
·
ROVs - JASON
and others - SM2000 sector and scanning sonar - very fine bathymetry
·
Towed Vehicles
- single beam bathy and sidescan
·
DSL-120 - phase
comp bathy
·
Deep-Tow
Larry reviewed the swath-mapping beam forming sonars and interferometric sonars. There are also “hybrid” sonars that use interferometry for high-quality imagery and some beam forming for ambiguity resolution. The trend is for better algorithms for interferometric solutions which translates to higher resolution bathymetry while maintaining high-quality, co-registered imagery and wide swath
. “Focused” sonars compensate for
wavefront curvature to allow focusing in the near field. There is much higher
target resolution. The future of sonar systems is the CHIRP
multibeam sonars. Its benefits include:
·
Increased
bandwidth = increased temporal resolution
·
Increased
bandwidth = “multispectral” thematic mapping
·
Increased
bandwidth = multiple pings in water = increased sounding density
There are advances in data processing resulting in faster,
cheaper, better products. The products
include:
- Real-time 3-D updates and data fusion for quality control and
interpretation.
- Near-real-time derivative maps
.
In concluding, Larry commented that the UNOLS fleet capabilities
appear to be sufficient to meet many of the observatory survey needs. More shallow water systems may be
needed. Chartering of commercial ships
for survey work could be considered; however, there is usually a mobilization
cost, which can be approximately $300k.
This would be in addition to the regular ship day rate. Collaborations should be considered if
chartering is to be used.
Lastly, it is important that survey work be included in planning
for ocean observatory initiatives.
Coastal observatory requirements – Mike Kosro began the presentation
on coastal observatory requirements. His
viewgraphs are included as Appendix IX.
There is a wide range of “observatory” groups:
Mike went on to describe the components of the Oregon coastal
observing system:
.
·
Ship-based CTD,
ADCP, zooplankton, nutrients, fluorescence, bioacoustics
Newport Hydrographic Line: long-term record:
-
1961-1971, typically 6-12 repeats/year
- 1997-present, 5 repeats/year
- 2/month sampling from small Elakha
during spring and summer
Four occupations/yr of lines at Heceta Head, Coos Bay, Rogue River, and Crescent City
·
Drifter
Releases - 5 drifters, 3 times
per year (Apr, July, Sept)
·
SeaSoar Surveys
- High horizontal resolution,
repeated over 4 years
· Newport Long-Term Mooring:
-
80m on the
Newport Line (NH10)
Near historical CUE mooring sites.
Coos Bay Long-Term Mooring- 1981-1991 (OSU); 1997-present (Hickey)
· Rogue River Mooring
· COAST moorings
· COAST met buoy
·
PISCO buoys
·
PISCO shore
stations
The Oregon
HF mapping array on the shelf
(conventional-range systems) started in
1997 with two sites and they have operated continuously. It is expanded now to five sites. The resolution is 2km range and 5 degrees
angle. They combine measurements from
different sites to get full vector currents.
Hourly maps in near real time are produced.
The HF mapping array on the slope
(Long-range systems) is a long-range array of 180 km. It is always on and
measures surface currents. The
resolution is 6 km range and 5 degrees angle.
Data is brought from coast every two hours. The maps are to be presented on web in near real-time. They recently expanded to four coastal
measurement sites.
Mike reviewed the components of the Center for Integrated Marine Technology: DATA, which consists of satellite-based measurements, shore-based measurements, mooring-based measurements, and ship-based measurements. In detail, these include:
·
Satellite-based
Measurements:
-
Sea surface temperature
(AVHRR)
-
Surface
chlorophyll (SeaWIFS)
-
Primary
production
Sea surface winds
·
Shore-based
Measurements
-
Surface Currents
·
Mooring-based
Measurements
-
Atmospheric
pressure
-
Wind
-
Sea Surface
Temperature
-
Ocean
Temperature at Depth
-
Chlorophyll at
Depth
-
Ocean Currents
at Depth
-
Macronutrients –
Nitrate, Silicate
-
Micronutrients –
Iron
-
Phytoplankton
Abundance and Structure
-
Zooplankton
Abundance– active hydroacoustics
·
Ship-based
Measurements
-
Water
temperature with depth
-
Macro/Micronutrient
distribution and abundance
-
Sea surface
chlorophyll
-
Phytoplankton
community structure
-
Zooplankton
abundance and distribution
-
Zooplankton
community structure
-
Schooling fish
distribution and relative abundance
-
Seabird
distribution and abundance
-
Marine mammal distribution
and abundance
-
Sea turtle
distribution and abundance
The observatories will provide more real-time data on ocean conditions and in turn will make adaptive
sampling more feasible. Data assimilating
models will provide inspiration for adaptive sampling. There will be an increased need for flexible
ship scheduling and low operating costs.
Mike closed by commenting that observatories will require two-way high bandwidth information exchange
:
· Satellite SST, color, and altimetry
· HF current maps
· Model now-casts and forecasts
-
Provide
ship-based results to shore quickly
· Share with partner investigators in coordinated surveys
· Provide input for model assimilation
-
Provide access
to the wider world of information via www.
· Emphasis on http for data discovery in present planning.
Integrated coastal observatory – Scott Glenn continued with a presentation on an integrated
coastal observatory, LEO-15. His viewgraphs
are included as Appendix X.
LEO-15 is a regional ocean modeling system (ROMS).
Its features include:
-
Cabled
observatory
-
AUV –
propeller type and gliders
-
Moored buoys
-
Satellites
-
Adaptive
sampling with aircraft sensors
-
Small
aircraft
-
High flying
-
Slow flying
-
Autonomous
Rutgers University marine remote
sensing includes use of the L-Band
satellite that has been operational since 1992. It tracks
NOAA-12, 16, 17, SeaWiFS, FY1-C, and FY1-D.
The X-Band satellite senor will be installed in 2003 and will track
MODIS Aqua/Terra, Oceansat, Radarsat, ADEOS 2, and HY1.
Scott showed an example of a nested Multi-Static CODAR Array, which consist of a beach unit, buoys, and boats. Aircraft
sensors, as well as, the REMUS
AUVs have been used for adaptive sampling of coastal observatories.
Coastal work requires small vessels with simplified handling
systems. In the next decade a national
network of regional observatories could evolve. It is estimated that there will be 121 offices nationwide
with 34 coastal offices.
Scott described the UNOLS vessels that have been and are being
used for coastal observatory work.
These include:
-
ENDEAVOR
-
CAPE
HENLOPEN
-
CAPE
HATTERAS
-
SAVANNAH
-
ALPHA HELIX
Other, non-UNOLS vessels that have been used include:
-
R/V
CONNECTICUT
-
FAY SLOVER
-
ARGO MAINE
Scott provided more detailed descriptions of the various UNOLS and
non-UNOLS ships used for coastal observatory operations:
·
R/V ENDEAVOR is owned
by the National Science Foundation and operated by the Graduate School of
Oceanography at the University of Rhode Island. Originally built in 1975, the ship underwent a major mid-life
refit in 1993. In many respects, this
size vessel is too large for coastal observatory work.
·
R/V CAPE
HENLOPEN is a general purpose, coastal research vessel operated by the
University of Delaware. The ship’s
normal operating area is the Delaware and Chesapeake Bays and the adjacent
coastal waters out to 200 nautical miles. However, work is periodically
conducted as far north as the Gulf of Maine, as far south as Florida, and as
far off shore as Bermuda. The ship can accommodate up to 12 scientists on
missions lasting up to 10 days. It is equipped with a full range of
oceanographic instrumentation including portable chemistry labs; a
conductivity, temperature, and depth profiling system; an acoustic Doppler
current profiler; a meteorological and sea-surface mapping system; and a
variety of sediment and water sampling equipment. This is a good platform for
support of coastal observatories.
·
R/V CAPE
HATTERAS is owned by the National Science Foundation and operated the
Duke/University of North Carolina Oceanographic Consortium. Areas of
operation are the North American coast from Nova Scotia to the Caribbean, and
beyond Bermuda. The vessel is operated primarily as a coastal zone
research vessel and is a good platform for coastal observatories.
·
R/V CONNECTICUT
is a steel hull, single screw, diesel powered research vessel, outfitted for
year-round coastal and near continental shelf service. The vessel was
launched in July 1998 and is homeported at the Marine Sciences & Technology
Center in Groton, CT. The vessel can accommodate up to 30 people for day
trips and up to 12 people for overnight and extended science missions.
Endurance is 7-10 days. The design favors stability and precise low speed
handling and positioning capability, which is accomplished with bow and stern
pump jet thruster. The ship features wet and dry laboratory spaces and a
mid-ship mounted, 20" diameter, instrument wet well which allows
transducers or sampling gear to be installed through a main deck access hatch.
Hardwire connections can be routed to all science spaces. Science vans up to 20'
in length can be placed on the large work deck and a full suite of deck
machinery is available. This is a good
platform for coastal observatory support.
·
R/V SAVANNAH entered the UNOLS fleet in September 2001. The ship is operated by the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography.
The R/V SAVANNAH is ideal for biological, chemical, physical, and geological
oceanographic studies in estuarine and continental shelf waters throughout the
southeastern US Atlantic and Gulf Coasts.
·
Old Dominion University’s
new vessel, R/V FAY SLOVER is 55-ft LOA and offers an expanded research
capability in the Hampton Roads and Chesapeake Bay regions. High horsepower
diesel engines power the ship to speeds of 20 - 24 knots, thereby expanding the
daily range of research operations.
The ship is outfitted with onboard instrumentation and monitoring
equipment.
·
The 133-foot UNOLS research vessel, ALPHA HELIX, is
operated by the University of Alaska for the National Science Foundation. The ship's homeport is Seward, Alaska. ALPHA
HELIX is maintained and used as a year-round platform supporting oceanographic
research on the open ocean and in Alaska's shelf and coastal waters. Its
ice-strengthened hull permits surveys in regions covered by seasonal sea ice
and in areas adjacent to the numerous tidewater glaciers occurring in Alaska's
coastal zone. The vessel accommodates 15 scientists and a crew of nine. Working
spaces include a large general-purpose laboratory opening to the working area
on the stern, an electronics room, a walk-in freezer, a temperature control
room, a machine and wood shop, a library, and a wet laboratory. A bow thruster
is available for station keeping at sea. Modern sampling equipment includes a
global position system (GPS) navigation, an acoustic Doppler current profiler,
a quantitative echo-sounding and integration system, on board computers and
satellite voice and data links to the Fairbanks campus and worldwide. This
vessel is the oldest in the UNOLS Fleet.
Scott reviewed the coastal science facility recommendations that have been made from the CoOP and SCOTS reports.
The CoOP Report recommends a “Pioneer Array” to consist of 30-40 moorings. Mobile platforms (ships and AUVs) will be required. Also needed will be remote platforms, such as, hyperspectral satellites and HF Radars. The
SCOTS Report recommends cross-shelf lines of cabled science nodes with
spidering subnodes deployed in water depths from shallow diver-serviced depths
to deep water.
Scott reviewed the capabilities/features that a midsize coastal vessel
should have if it was to support observatory operations:
-
Send data back
in real time
-
Access
observatory datasets of websites
·
Computer Lab
·
Electronics
Shop
·
Wet Lab
·
Deck space for
a portable Lab van
·
Towing
Capabilities (Outside the wake, both sides)
-
Undulaters
(ex., SeaSoar)
-
Towbodies (ex.,
Batfish)
·
Autonomous
Vehicle Operations
-
Short-term
propeller-driven AUVs when stationary
-
(Ultra Short
baseline navigation)
-
Mission-duration
(or longer) Glider AUVs
-
Autonomous
Aircraft
·
Mooring
Servicing
-
Atmosphere/Ocean
Physical/Bio-optical Moorings - (typically four 2-m diameter moorings per trip)
-
HF Radar
transmitter moorings
·
Bottom System
servicing
-
Cabled observatory
nodes
-
Bottom tripods
deployment and recovery
-
ROV
capabilities for servicing and sampling
·
Acoustically
quiet
·
Ice Capable -
Alaska
How many midsize vessels will be
needed to support coastal observatory requirements? There is a trade off
between shorter duration missions and the transit time between staging
facilities. The typical mission duration is 5 to10 days. There will be multiple ship demands during
peak periods. As an examples, the peak
spring discharge from the estuaries will increase demand on ship time. Additionally, multiple ships for the same
experiment will be needed. There will
be increased need for servicing missions to maintain long-term, continuous observations,
both scheduled and emergency
maintenance. There will be an increased
need for rapid response to events.
Currently, the scheduling process for the UNOLS fleet does not provide a
mechanism for rapid response operations.
Regional priorities may require differ types and numbers of ships. A first-cut at the locations that will
require facility support for coastal observatories include:
·
Gulf of Maine
·
Middle Atlantic
Bight
·
South Atlantic
Bight
·
Eastern Gulf of
Mexico
·
Western Gulf of
Mexico
·
Southern
California
·
Northern
California
·
Oregon
·
Washington
·
Southern Gulf
of Alaska
·
Northern Gulf
of Alaska
·
Bearing Sea
·
Arctic Seas
Vessel characteristics, possible improvements, and recommendations
for new vessel designs -
Wes Hill, Relief Captain for R/V REVELLE (UNOLS Class I vessel), commented on
ship capabilities that would be needed to meet the observatory installation and
servicing requirements. This sparked
discussion among the meeting participants.
Suggestions, comments and recommendations are listed below:
·
High
latitude work will require the ability to work in high sea states.
·
Redundancy
in the DP system is recommended. This
is common on industry cable ships.
·
Investigate
collaborations with Integrated Ocean Drilling program.
·
INCREASED
SAFETY MEASURES – provide special training to ship’s crew for observatory
operations (cable handling and buoy servicing).
·
Power safety
for handling cables – they must be powered down before servicing.
·
Examine the
feasibility of modifying UNOLS Class I ships to accommodate observatory
work. This could include:
-
Remove the
hanger and lab space, to make more desk space.
-
Improved
visibility to aft is needed for over-the-side and end operations.
-
Move
bridge/superstructure forward for added aft deck space.
-
Single
staterooms for increased crew habitability.
-
Deck
strengthening and more capable handling equipment with ability to handle heavy
loads
-
Taller
frames with greater reach
-
Cranes –
greater reach, increased load
-
Shrouded
nozzles for protection from propeller/cable interference.
Action List – Alan closed the meeting by providing a
list of action items and responsibilities.
He circulated this list by e-mail after the meeting. Responses to the action items should be
completed in roughly a month.
1.
Investigate the issues surrounding the servicing of large buoys from UNOLS
Class I vessels, including dealing with oil spills during refueling and general
operations involving refueling (Hill/Schwartz).
2.
Investigate the issues surround switching between trawl and f/o cables on
REVELLE and the feasibility of using two traction heads vs. one that opens up
to avoid having to reterminate (Wooding).
3. Get
information on long core winch and deck hardware (Wooding/Chave).
4. Get
information on cable repair ship or comparable ship capability and availability
(Chave/Massion/Hill/Schwartz).
5. Get
information on industry ROV types and capability (Bowen/Yoerger).
6.
Investigate feasibility of purchase or lease of multipurpose heavy lift shift,
including crew trained for heavy lift ops. Ship should be capable of large core
ops, large buoy (including 40 m spar) ops, and some types of cable ops
(Chave/Massion/Hill/Schwartz).
7.
Investigate issues surrounding shifting vessel flag from foreign to US (with
Ewing as a key example) (DeSilva/Chave).
8. Produce a
first cut at ROV and AUV needs for deep ocean and coastal ops
(Bowen/Yoerger/Glenn/Kosro).
9. Produce a
set of recommendations re mapping sonars for UNOLS vessels suitable for
observatory ops (Mayer).
10.
Investigate regional class vessel SMR and compare to proposed midsize coastal vessel
functional requirements. Either make suggested changes to regional SMR or put
together new one (Glenn/Kosro).
11. Document
aircraft needs for coastal observatories (Glenn/Kosro).
12.
Investigate improvements to AGOR-23 DP similar to those recently accomplished
on KNORR (Yoerger/Hill).
13. Get
feedback on observatory ops from marine crew (Hill).
14.
Investigate trade-offs between lab space and deck space on AGOR-23 class, with
possibility of removing hangar and aft lab space to increase deck space. Added
benefits include improved visibility of fantail from bridge and improved deck
load. Two scenarios are envisioned: short-term changes and those associated
with mid-life refit (Worcester/Chave/Wooding/Hill/Schwartz).
15. Review
ocean class SMR and comment (all).
16.
Investigate a-frame deck strengthening issues, with particular emphasis on how
these were handled for Atlantis. The goal is to double a-frame capability
(Chave/Wooding).
17.
Investigate the use of shrouded nozzles for z-drives on AGOR-23 (Hill/Schwartz)
18.
Investigate redundant DP systems for UNOLS Class I vessels (Hill/Schwartz).
19. Put
together conceptual deck layout for cabled observatory maintenance ops
(Massion/Wooding/Chave).