These minutes can be downloaded as a pdf document by clicking: <200302scomi.pdf>
Scientific Committee for Oceanographic Aircraft Research (SCOAR)
Inaugural Meeting
February 25 & 26, 2003
Center for Interdisciplinary Remotely-Piloted Aircraft Studies (CIRPAS)
Marina, CA
Appendix III: UNOLS Presentation (2 MB ppt file)
Appendix IV: CIRPAS Presentation
Appendix V: NOAA Presentation (9 MB ppt file)
Tuesday, Feb. 25:
Discussion of objectives for SCOAR
1. Plan for future aircraft facilities, replacement aircraft, and new aircraft.
2. Provide information through the website, articles, etc about currently available aircraft facilities. (Make it “User Friendly”.)
a. Aircraft facilities
b. Instruments that are available
c. Examples of data or samples collected using aircraft
d. Examples of complementary uses of aircraft with ships, moorings, satellites, etc.
3. Promote cost accounting, scheduling and funding mechanisms that promote broad access to aircraft facilities.
4. Promote aircraft facilities as viable tools for ocean science.
a. Provide input to Observatories work group or conduct similar effort
b. Promote utilization of aircraft facilities so that the necessary critical mass of utilization helps ensure the availability of these facilities.
Impact of the UNOLS committee on CIRPAS
1. Make the capabilities of CIRPAS more commonly known.
2. Simplify the mechanisms for interacting with PIs.
3. Learn what types of measurements the ocean science community will need.
4. Determine what can be measured in a meaningful way from aircraft
a. Sampling instruments
i. Mostly met sensorsb. Remote sensors
c. Rapidly deployed in situ sensors
i. AXBTs
ii. Sonobuoys
iii. Drifters
Actions by or for the committee
1. Make information available on the web site.
a. Facility capabilities
b. Instruments
c. Operating procedures
d. Links to other aircraft operations (NCAR, NOAA, NASA, Universities)
2. Services to users of CIRPAS.
a. How do they request use of the facility
i. Use other request forms for templates, link to NOAA NMOA webpage, NASA and NCAR request forms, post and perhaps revise current CIRPAS form.b. How to propose use of facility to funding agencies
c. How to plan operations
3. Make recommendations about aircraft facility needs and mechanisms for funding them.
4. Clearinghouse for aircraft technologies (CIRPAS)
Wednesday, Feb. 26:
Introductions and welcome by Bob Bluth (CIRPAS) and Carl Friehe (Chair, UC Irvine),
Reviewed agenda
UNOLS Report — Mike Prince (UNOLS)
Reviewed Formation of the committee and terms of reference. SCOAR was formed by UNOLS Membership vote at the annual meeting in September, 2002. The UNOLS Charter, Annex II, allows UNOLS to create National Oceanographic Facilities as long as there is an oversight committee. SCOAR/CIRPAS was modeled to some extent after DESSC/NDSF.
UNOLS is a group of 64 academic institutions oriented towards ensuring broad and equal access to oceanographic facilities. UNOLS is also an advisory body, working to improve operations and plan for future facilities.
SCOAR would also serve as an advisory body within UNOLS — providing recommendations and advice to facility operators and funding agencies, work on scheduling improvements (utilization and capabilities), and promote coordination/collaboration among scientific users of aircraft facilities. The committee’s initial goal is to broaden usage of Oceanographic Aircraft Facilities.
SCOAR is composed of scientists from different institutions that are interested in oceanographic and atmospheric processes and interactions. The committee can add more members as the number of facilities and needs grow.
SCOAR should consider working with RVTEC and DESSC.
SCOAR would recommend the designation new national facilities (with the consent of the operator), which would then be voted upon by the UNOLS Council and Membership. Facilities should provide access to anyone who is funded, and to scientists who would otherwise not have the ability to use aircraft in their research.
Funding: At this point only ONR is funding SCOAR, and has the ultimate approval for meeting times. Meetings will be held approximately 2 times per year with varying locations (facilities, universities, or agencies). Meetings will consist of agency and facility reports as well as other organizations (i.e. FOFC, ICCAGRA, etc.), making sure that all operator(s) issues are covered.
There was a discussion about the significance of designating CIRPAS as a National Oceanographic Facility. Jim Huning asked whether or not the UNOLS use would take priority. The answer is no, that the existing mechanisms allow for broad use and the designation would ensure equal opportunities for access to all users, regardless of program. Overlapping programs are left to the PIs, sponsors and funding agencies to work out who has priority. Having more than one aircraft allows better handling of multiple programs (Haf Jonsson).
Use the UNOLS website to disseminate information about Vessels and Aircraft Facilities
BREAK
CIRPAS Report — Bob Bluth (CIRPAS)
CIRPAS History
Established in 1996 — for airborne oceanographic research
Designated a UNOLS National Facility in September 2002
Aircraft Assets
NAT 750 — small predator type UAV no VFR
Pelican (2) — Surrogate UAV— Converted Cesna 337, ok to use over cities.
Altus — high altitude IFR
Predator (2)
UV 18-A Twin Otter — 5.5 hr duration
Ground Control Station (2) Limiting factor for operations (only two)
Ground Based Assets
Mobile Storm Radar (MPQ-64) — 60 km range (could it go on a ship?)
Cloud Radar (95 gHz)
Winds LIDAR (Light Radar — similar to ADCP using Doppler to measure winds)
Marina Facility
Hanger and office space (will be moving to larger one soon)
Camp Roberts Facility
Friendly airspace for testing and training with UAVs, controlled by CIRPAS
Not a sterile environment!
Altus and NAT almost solely for military use at this time, cost being a large factor. Altus can fly for 48 hrs which is good for research on diurnal atmospheric changes.
Bob showed the CIRPAS Operations Diagram.
There was a question and discussion about the rationale for using a contractor (CALTECH) for aircraft operations.
U-Mass is the subcontractor for RADAR.
Subcontract allows for intellectual partnership with CALTECH, a more efficient procurement and hiring process and through the Navy Contracting mechanism, an external safety check on flight operations.
CIRPAS Team
CIRPAS STAFF
Bob Bluth
Haf Jonsson
Gintas Buzorius
NPS Members
Steve Ramp
Jeff Paduan
Jeff Knorr
Phil Pace
Qing Wang
External Members
John Seinfeld, Caltech
Dean Hegg, UW
Bruce Albrecht, Miami
Carl Friehe, UC Irvine
Patrick Chung
Dave Emmit
Rick Flagan
Others
Discussed the SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research) program for funding the development of instrumentation. This program involves institutional mentors and SBA funding to small businesses. The initiative for development of facilities comes from the science community. The process teams the PI with a development company. The instrument then becomes government property and could eventually be integrated with the facility equipment.
The SBA SBIR homepage is: http://www.sba.gov/sbir/indexsbir-sttr.html
Use of these instruments is open to others but should be done with assistance and cooperation from the mentor.
Bob showed several examples of instrumentation available as a result of the SBIR program.
Differential Mobility Analyzer (DMA) — particle size measurements, extends the range of small particle sizes beyond the limitation of the Optical probes which cannot measure particle size below 0.1 micron.
Stabilized Radiometer Platform — 2 sensors — one on top and one on the bottom. There are problems with the platform when changing the attitude of the plane (pointing towards and away from the sun, not straight up).
Showed a project planned for the future. A Navy Towed Target that will be adapted for low altitude atmospheric flux platform. This allows the sensor platform to fly at 20 feet above the sea surface while the aircraft flies at 1000 feet. Will use steel tow cable and three radio modems to transfer data.
Some work with micro dispensable, expendable sensors, buoys and sondes.
In the course of their operations, CIRPAS becomes aware of instrumentation or equipment that have possible future applications for scientific research. Bob believes that one of the useful roles that CIRPAS can play for the oceanographic community is to serve as a clearinghouse for this type of information.
An example is the small NEPTUNE UAV. This is a small UAV that was designed for ocean work. It is a mature product that will be going into production soon. The NEPTUNE is about 6 — 8 feet in width, with an endurance of approximately 4-6 hours. It is capable of water landing and could be integrated into ship operations with a minimal amount of infrastructure. The NEPTUNE comes self-contained and can be operated within FAA guidelines, especially when flown away from land. It can be equipped with a camera and potentially a small payload. Good for advance mapping to find desired ocean features or air-sea interactions.
Ken Melville asked about the effectiveness of UAVs for scientific measurements. The biggest restrictions for instrumentation are power, endurance, and documentation. (This is why the CIRPAS SBIR program is unique. Mentors help with the instruments that they created so that there will be no questions about usage.) The technology is not as mature and the documentation is not as great for most of the smaller UAVs compared to the larger military vehicles. Airspace problems whenever you are within 3 miles of land are another factor. Also, the higher the flight the less a UAV can carry.
Bob’s recommendations for acquisition of UAVs include a review of operational history, documentation, number of hours of operation, training for use, spare parts support, and heritage of the aircraft.
We should use the slides of the instrumentation as part of developing the information regarding available facilities on the web site.
Agency Reports
ONR — John Freitag
This is a learning experience for John. ONR is the sponsoring agency for SCOAR and for a lot of the programs that use CIRPAS. He is impressed by the amount of interest in the aircraft facilities. John sees the need for normalization of rates and for a scheduling process in the future. Assistance from the UNOLS office will probably be needed (making new aircraft request forms and scheduling forms).
Ken Melville stated that one of the goals would be to integrate aircraft facility support in to a UNOLS like mode where the cost and assignment of facilities is done outside of the Science grants and proposals.
John Bane reiterated that it seems to be an important goal for this committee to recommend that NSF adopt a facilities funding mode for CIRPAS similar to what ONR appears to be doing. Eventually the same should be true for any other National Aircraft Facilities. This would need to take the form of a letter of recommendation from UNOLS to Margaret Leinen, drafted by SCOAR.
Carl Friehe asked about DURIP proposals. CIRPAS cannot submit a DURIP proposal, but PIs at other institutions can submit proposals for instrumentation that might be used on CIRPAS aircraft.
There was a question about whether or not designation will support more funding for ONR. In fact the designation may lead to broader use and proportionally less support needed from ONR (ONR already pays for 2/3 of CIRPAS operations).
NSF — Jim Huning
Jim is a program manager in the Atmospheric Sciences Division and for observing facilities. This includes the operating budget for aircraft, ground radars, etc. Most facilities are operated by NCAR. There is a potential problem with operation and control of civilian aircraft owned by NSF. The C-130Q is the only NSF-owned aircraft asset.
The budget is around $3.5 million per year to deploy assets. Grants have increased, deployment has increased, but acquisition and maintenance budgets have not increased significantly. Deployment budgets do not include maintenance and overhaul costs. These are included in the block funding to NCAR.
They use an MOU with NRL for use of one of their aircraft (to fly the ELDORA airborne Doppler radar). This is more cost effective and allows for simultaneous missions with the C130, but the increased operations may be straining NRL’s resources.
The NCAR structure for funding and operating aircraft facilities should be examined for the purposes of comparison to CIRPAS.
Operational tempo and the proposal pressure are stressing the available facilities and personnel.
Each June or December, all facility requests are due at NCAR and then they prepare a cost estimate. In either October or April, the science proposals are evaluated and the facility requests are evaluated. Facilities are then allocated. The OFAP (Observing Facilities Advising Panel) includes science community people for three-year terms. This committee meets twice a year.
NSF is purchasing a new aircraft: the “High-Performance Instrumented Airborne Platform for Environmental Research” (HIAPER). This is an 81-plus million dollar project. HIAPER is a mid-altitude GulfStream Jet. A report was created called HIAPER Instrumentation Priorities. This will go to panel review and then there will be an open call for proposals to create the instrumentation. An investigator’s handbook for developers of instrumentation will be provided. The deployment budget will have to go up by about $3 million to operate this aircraft.
NCAR has been operated by UCAR since the Sixties. UCAR’s performance is periodically reviewed. At the next renewal the competition for operation of the NCAR facility is expected to be an open competition.
In terms of interaction between the atmospheric sciences and the UNOLS community, Jim recommends that one or more people from SCOAR and/or the UNOLS office attend the OFAP meeting scheduled for April 21 at 1 pm.
Mike asked if there has been support for Ocean Sciences Division projects by NCAR facilities in the past? There may have been some limited amount in the past, but Jim sees more interaction as being possible in the future, especially for interdisciplinary work.
NOAA — Jim McFadden
Aircraft Operations Center (AOC) located at MacDill Air Force base in Tampa, FL.
Access to the facility is difficult because of military security procedures, especially for foreign nationals. Also they may need to move in two years. Most of the work done by NOAA aircraft is: hurricane research, charting/mapping ocean and land features, and marine mammal research.
Jim discussed the NOAA organization. NOAA Marine and Aviation Operations is a line office that supports the other line offices with aircraft, vessels and diving.
Jim then showed the organizational chart for AOC.
Issue: Charter of Aircraft — What are appropriate safety standards? Apparently, DOE has one of the more stringent set of regulations for chartering aircraft that could be emulated.
NOAA Aircraft — 13 aircraft with a total of 3000 hours of operation
Discussed funding for research projects:
The total budget for aircraft operations is about 14 million, which includes all the fixed costs (funded aircraft: 2 P-3’s, G IV, Shrike, and Citation). Operational missions must be flown and the costs for these programs are covered first. Research projects are then supported with remaining funding. Support for operational projects take about 11 million and approximately 3 million is available for NOAA research projects. Additional costs apply for projects funded outside of NOAA. Projects funded by agencies and institutions outside of NOAA add to the total support for aircraft operations.
NOAA aircraft allocation process starts with base program requests by March 1st. These go to NMAO and AOC. Then they go to an allocation council. The line offices work out a draft allocation plan during the April to May period. The allocation council approves the plans and they usually know by June what the planned operations will be for the next year. The funding for research and reimbursable use of smaller aircraft is tentative until NOAA funding is known, late in the year.
If you want to buy time on NOAA Aircraft you fill out a request form that AOC uses to complete a cost estimate. The cost estimate is approved by the user and then this is used to set up an MOU for each individual project.
According to the 1931 Chicago Convention and ICAO rules, to operate outside of your home country requires an airworthiness certificate, unless you are classified as a "state" aircraft. To date, with the exception of a couple NASA aircraft, the only aircraft given "state" designation are from the Dept of Customs (which is now under the new Dept of Homeland Security), police and military. So, if countries want to enforce the existing rules, which they are doing more and more, non "state" designated aircraft without an FAA airworthiness certificate will probably more and more often not be given permission to operate in foreign countries. Thus, our civilian agencies are working to get some relief by having science research aircraft designated as "state." Right now civilian agency aircraft (i.e., NSF C-130Q and NOAA aircraft) are operated as public aircraft, which do not fall under FAA jurisdiction, do not have to have airworthiness certificates, and are self insured.
For more information on NOAA aircraft go to:
http://www.omao.noaa.gov
http://www.aoc.noaa.gov
NASA & ICCAGRA — Cheryl Yuhas
ICCAGRA report:
The Interagency Coordinating Committee for Airborne Geosciences Research and Applications (ICCAGRA) includes program managers from NSF, DOE, NASA, ONR, and NOAA. Cheryl is the current chair, which is a rotating position. Their purpose is to improve coordination of government airborne geo-science research programs and enhance opportunities for interagency sharing of aircraft resources. There is currently no formal relationship with the Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee (FOFC), but they have made presentations to them and might consider a more formal relationship in the future.
Challenges
NASA report:
NASA Vision
To improve life here
To extend life to there
To find life beyond
NASA Mission
To understand and protect our home planet; to explore the Universe and search for life; to inspire the next generation of explorers...only as NASA can.
This is interpreted to mean that if it is not related to aerospace technologies and missions then NASA shouldn’t do it.
Cheryl reviewed the NASA suborbital program, covering the following subjects:
Five basic research ideas, leads to 12 national applications
Suborbital Science is an integral part of NASA’s Earth Science Program
FY 2003 Activities, Missions and Aircraft used.
FY04 Budget Constraints for Program Restructure
Program content reconsidered within context of agency Vision/Mission
Agency’s focus is on high-risk projects that bring aerospace technology
Being pushed towards an interagency fleet of aircraft assets
Cheryl is proposing the use of some sort of resource allocation panel for suborbital assets. She anticipates continuing to operate high-risk aircraft such as those used for high altitude missions.
Proposal for a restructured NASA Suborbital Science Program.
Need to transition the P3 and the DC8 to another operator during FY04, NASA would buy 200 hours of DC8 time (use or lose) — other aircraft: ER2, Twin Otter (International — Owned by Univ. of Nevada), DOE B-200 (Owned by Univ. of Nevada), NOAA Citation, UND Citation.
UAV initiative
SCOAR Committee objectives and priorities
The meeting concluded with a discussion of the immediate and future objectives of SCOAR, during which the following list of action items was developed:
Action items:
Immediately:
1. Determine who will attend OFAP and ICCAGRA meetings
2. Who goes to Coastal Observing system meeting?
Now:
1. Expand the content of the web page
2. Compile a coherent list of available aircraft facilities and make available
3. Find out to what extent aircraft facilities have been used for ocean sciences
4. Ask users, operators and funding agencies
5. Consider the aircraft needs for observatory initiatives
6. Help to define a basic payload for oceanographic research for the aircraft
7. Develop a flyer and notice regarding the need for new member and chair of SCOAR to send to UNOLS representatives
Soon:
1. Develop aircraft request forms and develop scheduling/allocation process (Standardize! Require aircraft requests? CIRPAS mentors also deserve some consideration when scheduling)
2. Develop a method for a more effective funding mechanism with NSF, write letter to the Director of Geosciences.
3. Posters and models in UNOLS booth, EOS article, BAMs article, UNOLS news article. New Chair and members? Advertise with articles?
4. Survey of facility and instrumentation requirements on UNOLS website.
5. Check with FOFC about the Aircraft Facilities brochure and look into ICAP brochure
6. Coordinate SCOAR meeting with ICCAGRA meeting in July
Eventually:
1. Start to look at what other aircraft facilities could be designated as national facilities