# Presentation: 186741

## GOES Users’ Working GroupSept. 12, 2001 

## General Topics for Discussion:  

- Suggest formation of sub-groups
- Assign tasks to appropriate groups
- Review list of recommendations from the GUC
- Prioritize recommendations
- Consider importance and feasibility
- Begin process of plan development for implementation of feasible recommendations;
- Where solutions are unclear identify need for further study
- Discuss use of Bulletin Board to track progress on issues;

## General Topics for Discussion:  

- Discuss need for outreach/ coordination with user agencies;
- Need for briefing upper level management;
- For validating new requirements, signature from DAA (NWS, NOS, NMFS, or OAR) required;
- Cost Benefits Analysis (CBA)
- Need to bring climate community onboard;
- Begin plans for next GUC;
- What additional resources does this WG need:
- People/ Expertise
- Plan for next WG meeting in Madison;
- Develop action item list;
- Information from this WG meeting on BB?

## Sub-committees:  

- Data and New Product Needs
- Instruments of Opportunity
- Data and Product Distribution
- Data and Product Archiving
- New Data and Product Integration into Operational Data Stream
- User Education
- NWP
- Space Weather?

## Sub-committees:  Data and new Product Needsco-chairs:  Paul Menzel;  Tim Schmit

- Dennis Chesters;  Gary Ellrod;   Mark DeMaria
- Don Gray;   Jim Gurka;    Jeff Hawkins;  Jim Heil;
- Gary Hufford;   Del Jenstrom;  Tony Mostek;
- Kevin Schrab;   Chris Velden

## Sub-committees:  Instruments of OpportunityChair:  Mark DeMaria

- Dennis Chesters;  Gerry Dittberner;  Gary Ellrod;
- Al Gasiewski;  Del Jenstrom;  Jim Heil;
- Kevin Schrab;

## Sub-committees:  Data and Product DistributionChair:  TBD

- Gerry Dittberner;  Jeff Hawkins;   Jim Heil
- Dave Helms;  Tom Renkevens;  Dick Reynolds;
- Steve Short;

## Sub-committees:  Data and Product ArchivingChair:  TBD

- Don Gray;  Jim Gurka;   Jim Heil;  Dave Helms;
- Tim Schmit;  Steve Short;

## Sub-committees:  New Data Integration into Operational Data StreamChair:  Kevin Schrab

- Bob Aune;  Dennis Chesters;  Gary Ellrod:
- Don Gray;  Jim Gurka;  Dave Helms;
- Gary Hufford;  Ralph Petersen;  Tom Renkevens;
- Tim Schmit;  Tim Walsh;

## Sub-committees:  User EducationChair:  Tony Mostek

- Jim Gurka;  Jeff Hawkins;  Gary Hufford;

## Sub-committees:  NWPChair:  Ralph Petersen

- Bob Aune;  Jim Gurka;  Steve Koch;
- Paul Menzel;  Tim Schmit;

## Data and New Product Needs

- A minimum of 12 imager channels required
- 0.64μ, 0.86μ, 1.375μ, 1.60μ, 3.90μ, 6.15μ, 7.0μ, 8.5μ, 10.35μ, 11.2μ, 12.3μ, 13.3μ
- Strong recommendation for 0.47μ, and 9.6μ
- Valuable but lower priority: 4.57μ, and 14.2μ
- Progress:  memo from G. Dittberner to S. Kirkner
- Recommended:  12 channel new threshold
- Recommended trade studies for 2 additional channels
- Recommendations?  Further action?
- Provide clear writeup of environmental information needed from imager that necessitates 12/ 14/ 16 channels
- New requirements inherent in NWS Strategic Plan?

## Data and New Product Needs

- ABI should provide FD every 5 min.
- Impact on data rate?
- Provide 1000 x 1000km every 30sec
- Simultaneous with 5 min. FD?
- Revert to 15 min. FD during rapid scan?
- Recommendation:  determine impact of simultaneous RS and 5 min FD.
- Sounder should provide near FD coverage/ hour
- Sounder FOV no larger than 4 km
- Visible Imager channels should be calibrated onboard

## Data and New Product Needs

- 0.86μ Imager channel should have .5 km resolution to match the 0.64μ.
- Paves the way for quantitative vis products
- Recommendation:  need stronger argument...more specific on type of products...who will benefit?
- Funding for R & D of new satellite products should be part of satellite acquisition budget.
- Calibration information and algorithms  to generate products should be made available to the user community.

## Data and New Product Needs

- Satellite soundings are needed in cloudy areas:
- From ABS, above low level cloud layers;
- Use polar microwave to complement Geo soundings;
- Support concept of Geo microwave;
- As instrument of opportunity?
- As instrument on bus separate from GOES
- Sounder should be flexible with option for RSO
- Users need access to non-operational satellite data, such as MODIS and AIRS as a complement to operational data.

## Data and New Product Needs

-  New or improved product needs (not prioritized)
- ID what spectral bands/ satellites to be used:
- a) atmospheric aerosols;  b) cloud phase;  c) cloud particle size;  d)  cloud climatology products (fog, convective clouds etc)  e)  surface properties;  f) satellite derived winds;  g) QPE;  h)  moisture flux;  i) volcanic ash product;  j) probability of rainfall for each pixel;  k) low cloud and fog product;  l) cloud layers;  m) SST;  n) true color product;  o) cloud optical depth;  p)  SO2 concentration;  q) aircraft icing threat;  r)  ocean color;  s)  under (ocean) surface features;  t) sea ice products;  u) improved vegetation index;  v) ozone layers;  w) surface emmissivity;  x)  moisture and temperature profiles;  y) clear sky cloud masks for imager and sounder

## Instruments of Opportunity

- Prioritize candidate IOOs based on potential value and impact on mission complexity, power, volume, expense, and risk.
- Lightning mapper
- Special Events Imager
- Microwave Sounder
- Provide recommendations on S/C capabilities to host an IOO or IOOs;
- Who should provide S/C accommodation costs?

## Instruments of Opportunity

- If not feasible to host a microwave sounder on GOES, should we pursue a separate mission solely for a Geo microwave sounder?
- How do we convince the budget folks that one or all the candidates will provide value above the accommodation costs?

## Data and Product Distribution

- Multiple tiers of data distribution are needed to meet broad range of user needs;
- Must include low cost and low data rate options;
- We need to validate list of who needs
- All the imager and sounder data in real time (NWP...driver)
- All the imager and sounder data, delayed
- Minimal data set: low cost low data rate;
- All the data but over a limited geographic area

## Data and Product Distribution

- Discuss pros and cons of:
- Direct broadcast from GOES
- L band
- X band
- Commercial re-broadcast
- Land lines
- WWW
- User access from server via ftp
- Use of old GOES
- Optimal mix of above
- Who do we need on this team?

## Data and Product Archive Needs

- Users need full spectrum of GOES products, ranging from raw data to highly processed products;
- For applications from nowcasting scale to climate scale
- User friendly format;
- Minimal cost to user;
- Quick delivery to user
- Most requests filled < 1 day;
- Extremely large requests in < 1 week;
- Users need to browse, select products, and submit requests via internet;

## Data and Product Archive Needs

- Potential delivery methods for large requests:
- ftp;   CD-ROMS;  DVDs
- Users need metadata
- Including info on product quality trends due to variations in instrument and satellite performance;
- Users need access to query system (i.e. tornado cases, hurricanes, fog events etc);
- Monthly storage in range of terrabytes;
- We should provide info on user needs to:
- NCDC;    developers of the GAA

## New Data Integration

- Use AIRS and GIFTS data to prepare for ABS; MODIS to prepare for ABI;
- ID needs for operational algorithms (by spring 2002);
- Develop plans for algorithm completion by June 2005;
- Develop plan for providing users with access to sample data sets by July 2006;
- Develop plan to have NOAA educate users on use of new algorithms and data sets;
- Develop plan for a fully operational infrastructure for reception, processing, distribution, and archiving of test data sets prior to GOES-R launch;
- Develop plan for integrating data into AWIPS or follow-on

## NWP

- Develop prioritized list of Imager and Sounder products (both individual and combined):
- Layered moisture;  moisture flux;  cloud cover;  cloud layers;  cloud particle size;  cloud phase;  aerosols;  thin cirrus;  surface properties;  temperature and moisture profiles;  radiances;  ozone layers;  winds;  etc
- Products to include information on degree of confidence in product quality/ accuracy;
- Determine format requirements for products;

## NWP

- The use of other satellite data as a complement to GOES data;
- Combined GOES/ Polar products;
- Develop plan for product development:
- Who, when, where, how?
- User option for quality vs latency;
- Determine needs of data distribution for NWP (NCEP/ DOD/ etc)

## NWP

- Develop plan for coordination with JCSDA;
- Impact of data compression;
- User should be able to choose between varying degrees of data compression;
- Targeted observations;
- Workshop focused on NWP issues;

## User Education

## Cost Benefits Analysis (CBA)(MITRE Corp.)

- Marginal CBA for both ABI and ABS
- Develop benefit analysis with input from:
- NOAA users and external users
- Translate delta in sensor performance to:
- User benefit/cost savings and or avoidance

## Cost Benefits Analysis (CBA)(MITRE Corp.)

- Based on comparison of proposed vs current
- What environmental and weather obs would be impacted?
- What models would be impacted?
- What products and services would be improved?
- By how much?
- Who would benefit from both?
- Identify all key users that would be impacted;
- For each user/product combination quantify the improvement;
- Determine impact on users if improvements not provided;

## GUC Bulletin Board

- Need to encourage more use;
- Identify items from this meeting to post;
- Notify GUC participants via e-mail to check postings
- This group should set example;
- http://www.osd.noaa.gov/GOES/feedback/sign.asp

## Coordination with User Agencies

- Develop briefing package:
- ABI;  ABS;  IOO;  Input from GUC;
- Provide results of CBA;
- Set up schedule to brief DAAs:
- NWS, NOS, NMFS, OAR;
- DOD?
- Request ORD
- Recommendations for briefers?
- Small team of experts?

## Climate Issues

- We need to get the climate community engaged:
- Recommendations:

## Resources

- What additional resources does this group need:
- People/  expertise

## Plans for Next GUC

- May 2002 in Boulder?
- Pro:
- Infrastructure in place: facilities, facilitators, NIST personnel;
- With annual meeting, more likely to keep participants active in process;
- We may need only 2 day meeting: not starting from scratch.
- Boulder worked well (If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it);
- Con:
- Planning must begin NOW!
- Other locations/ venues might attract more international participation;

## Plans for Next GUC

- November 2002 in Miami?
- Coincident with OSDPD meeting for South American and Central American users.
- Pro:
- More international participation;
- Larger audience
- Con:
- Most international participants will be interested in LRIT/ DCS etc;
- Unfamiliar territory for meeting logistics;
- Facilitators?
- Setting up breakout sessions: more complicated
- Less focused meeting;

## Plans for Next GWG

- October 17,  noon- 2pm in Madison
- Luncheon meeting
- Sub-groups report on action item progress;
- Room:  TBA