Continuity of SAR Data
-
Action for UWG:
Draft a letter to Ghassem Asrar regarding the importance
of access to new SAR data acquisitions after the expiration
of the Radarsat MoU in November, and the importance in general
of continuous SAR coverage of the Earth without big time gaps.
In other words, encourage extension of NASA/CSA MoU and
negotiation of NASA/ESA MoU. This will be signed by all members
of the UWG, who represent the SAR user community.
Bill Potter will suggest an appropriate "CC" list, which
should include other NASA managers as well as the committee
members of the National Academy of Science's "Review of NASA's
Polar Geophysical Data Sets".
* Harry has written a first draft, circulated it to everyone,
and is making revisions.
* Time frame - Will mail out as soon as acceptable version
is written, as soon as possible.
Strategic Plan
The purpose of the strategic plan is to provide ASF with direction
over the next several years. The audience is NASA managers and ASF itself.
The ASF management team will write the document, with input and feedback
from the UWG. Verne distributed an outline before the meeting.
Harry suggested an alternative outline at the meeting, along these lines:
I. Introduction to ASF, its strengths and successes
II. Current Mode of Operation - reception, processing, distribution
III. Outlook for Future SAR Missions and ASF Budget
IV. Plan for 0-2 Years - objectives and how to achieve them
V. Plan for 2-5 Years - objectives and how to achieve them
VI. Plan for 5-10 Years - objectives and how to achieve them
-
Here are some of the discussion points (not necessarily
general agreement on all of these):
- Bill Potter said the ASF budget will be way down by 2003.
There is no committment from NASA past 2003. ASF has to diversify
its funding to include other government agencies or foreign governments.
- ASF should be: (1) the DAAC for LightSAR data; (2) the U.S.
processing node for ALOS data; (3) a Radarsat-2 ground station.
- ASF must adopt a global perspective, not restricted to the
Fairbanks and McMurdo station masks.
- NASA should make use of the Svalbard receiving station for
Envisat, ALOS, and LightSAR, and send the data to ASF for processing.
- ASF should focus on what it does best: supporting large mapping projects
by processing large volumes of SAR data in a timely and consistent manner.
ASF has gained expertise in handling large data volumes even before
the first EOS satellite was launched.
- ASF must partner with other institutions at UAF: IARC, ARSC, etc.
- ASF should acquire and archive other data besides SAR,
e.g. QuikScat(?), Seawinds(?), ADEOS-2.
- ASF should engage in data fusion (multiple sensors), data mining
(of its archive), large-scale mosaicking,
and Level 2 product development (e.g. RGPS, interferometry).
- What are the "science drivers" that give ASF its reason for existence?
The future science needs will help shape the Strategic Plan. We broke up
into four groups: sea ice and oceans; ice sheets; land; operations.
Each group made several viewgraphs with bullets to contribute to the
Strategic Plan. Copies of all the viewgraphs have been sent to Verne.
Some of them may require clarification from the authors.
-
Action for Verne and ASF management:
Prepare a draft Strategic Plan.
* Time frame - In time for UWG review before the
next telecon (mid-April).
ALOS Node
Verne thought he had an agreement to pursue an American data node
for ALOS data with EDC and USGS, in which ASF would get the PALSAR
data and EDC would get the data from the other two sensors.
However, no follow-up meetings have been scheduled.
Even though NASA is apparently not interested in ALOS, Verne has
pursued it with NASDA anyway. It appears that NOAA has been talking
independently with EDC about ALOS data.
-
Action for Cheryl:
Find out what NOAA is doing as far as seeking access to ALOS
data. Is there a proposal for a U.S. ALOS node?
* Time frame - Please get in touch with Verne in the next 2-4 weeks.
-
Action for Verne:
Talk to Earnest Paylor, Diane Wickland, and Helen Wood
about support for a U.S. ALOS node.
* Time frame - One month.
Data Processing
-
Action for Jason Williams:
What is the backlog for Tromso data, i.e. how many tapes (and
datatakes) have been received but not scanned?
* Time frame - Please report on or before the next telecon (mid-April).
-
Recommendation:
Turn on the ASP for dedicated JERS processing.
Do not process ERS-1 CCSD on the ASP.
-
Note: SAR browse images from Gatineau and Prince Albert are
available at this CCRS web site:
http://ceocat.ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca/.
Starting in late 2000, ASF will begin migrating its raw data
archive to Level 0 (L0) format. The migration will take several years.
The plan is to produce browse images from the L0 data
in the course of the migration.
Seasat
-
Action for Brett/ASF:
Figure out what must be done and how much effort is required
to get Seasat data into the ASF archive.
* Discussion -
John Curlander estimated it would cost $200k.
There was no argument about the value of this data set.
Howard suggested putting it in L0 format and letting users do
their own processing. Ben said that images (L1 products) must
be available on demand.
* Time frame - ASF please report at the next telecon (mid-April).
-
Action for Bill Potter:
Find the money to get Seasat data into the ASF archive.
Perhaps talk to Earnest Paylor, Diane
Wickland about contributions.
* Time frame - Please report on progress on or before
the next telecon (mid-April).
Data Quality
Jeremy Nicoll presented the Data Quality Problem Matrix
and the Long Term Trending plan. A new person has been hired
for long term monitoring of data quality. There was some discussion
about the need for long term monitoring and whether the money
for a new hire could have been better spent on other things.
Also, the problem of image saturation and automatic gain control (AGC)
was seen as a very high priority. Jeremy indicated that he knew
how to fix the problem.
-
Action for Jeremy and/or Nettie:
Present to the UWG some more details of the long term
data quality monitoring plan and the level of effort anticipated.
* Time frame - Report at the next telecon (mid-April).
-
Action for Jeremy:
Provide your method for fixing the saturation problem to
Ron Kwok, Ben Holt, Ken Jezek, and Paris Vachon for review.
* Time frame - As soon as possible.
-
Action for Jeremy:
Put together a complete list of image quality problems.
* Time frame - Send to UWG in one month.
-
Action for UWG:
Prioritize the calibration of Radarsat beams.
(What are the choices here? Which beams are users asking for
that are still uncalibrated?)
* Mark D - Make a recommendation and circulate to UWG.
* Time frame - In time for the UWG to make a recommendation at
the next telecon (mid-April).
ASF/User Communication
-
Action for User Services:
Make a formal database of problems and questions from users.
For example, every new contact by e-mail, phone, or fax could be
given an ID number. Subsequent contacts would be logged under
this ID. The database could indicate action taken and current status.
* Time frame - Report on progress at the next telecon (mid-April).
-
Action for Nettie:
Send the ESE User Survey to the UWG so we can decide whether
to attach ASF-specific questions to it before it gets sent to all users.
* Time frame - Whenever the ESE survey comes out.
-
Action for UWG:
Send ideas for an ASF Newsletter to Nettie. Also send ideas for
mailing list.
* Discussion - Harry proposed a monthly ASF Newsletter
to inform users about ongoing activities at ASF and to broadcast
relevant news such as Announcements of Opportunity. The newsletter
would be 2-4 pages (one sheet of paper) hard-copy, sent by snail-mail.
It could also be posted on the ASF web site.
* Time frame - Before the next telecon (mid-April).
UWG Membership / Future Meetings
-
Recommendation for Kim and Verne:
Send letters to Minden, Liu, Raney thanking them for their
service on the ASF User Working Group and telling them that they
have been rotated out in accord with the schedule established
by Verne and Prasad for rotation of membership.
Also, Pete Mouginis-Mark indicated in e-mail that he
could no longer participate in the UWG. Please send him
a letter too.
-
Note: Here are the members of the UWG and the disciplines
that they represent.
Please
send corrections to Harry.
Bertoia - Operations
Brown - Biological oceanography
Chapman - Forest mapping
Drinkwater - Antarctic sea ice
Fahnestock - Ice sheets
Holt - Coastal oceanography
Isacks - Glaciers, hydrology
Jezek - Antarctic ice sheets
Kwok - Arctic sea ice
Morrissey - Land, ecology
Pichel - Operations
Ranson - Land, forestry
Rignot - Ice streams, interferometry
Stern - Arctic sea ice
Vachon - Oceans, atmosphere
Zebker - Volcanoes, interferometry
-
Action for Nettie:
Send out a list of ASF users with research disciplines included,
so UWG members know who they are representing.
* Time frame - Before the next telecon (mid-April).
-
Action for Kim and/or Verne:
It was suggested that we add a new member from NASDA and
a new member from IARC. Please look into this.
* Bruce suggests:
"Masanobu Shimada of the Earth Observation Research Center (EORC),
NASDA, Tokyo, Japan.
Masanobu Shimada is quite familiar with ASF, and I
think would be a good candidate; he also has a
high position at NASDA's EORC." His e-mail address is
shimada@eorc.nasda.go.jp
* I think Nettie had a name in mind too(?)
* Time frame - Contact in the next three months.
-
Harry suggests that Dean Flett (CIS) and either Ted Scambos
or Ron Weaver (NSIDC) be invited as
observers or guests to future meetings and teleconferences, OK?
-
Harry proposed a UWG teleconference every three months
and a meeting every nine or ten months. We are shooting for a telecon
in mid-April and another telecon in July or August. The next meeting
would be in November, after the Antarctic Imaging Campaign (October).
OK? Let Harry know.
Miscellaneous
-
Action for UWG:
Metrics - This is an old one that came up again.
What metrics (statistics, charts, graphics, numbers, data, information)
should ASF present to the UWG in order to help us assess
their performance and see how they are allocating resources?
For example, which of these is a more meaningful statistic: the
number of *minutes* or the number of *frames* processed and distributed?
* Mark D - Take a crack at this one.
* Everybody -
Send your thoughts and ideas to Mark.
* Time frame - Far enough in advance of the next meeting or telecon
that ASF can assemble and present the requested metrics.
-
At the meeting of the Antarctic Mapping Planning Group that immediately
followed our meeting, Satish Srivastava of CSA gave a presentation
on Radarsat-1. Here are two of the conclusions:
- Radarsat-1 mission life most likely driven by reliability of
power available from solar array.
- Preliminary estimate 7.4 +/- 0.5 years total life for nominal power -
therefore Radarsat-1 is expected to last until April 2003 +/- 6 months.
-
Request to Ron, Ben, Ken, Cheryl:
Robin Porter is putting together a booklet of all the presentations
at the meeting. Please send copies of your viewgraphs to her at ASF.
She already has copies from the other presenters (ASF people, Kim,
Mike Manore, Harry).
* Time frame - As soon as convenient.
-
Here are some SAR-related web sites.
-
Launch dates of current and future SAR missions:
- ERS-1 - July 1991 - design lifetime 2-3 years - currently in standby mode
- ERS-2 - April 1995 - design lifetime 2-3 years
- JERS-1 - XXX 1992 - failed October 1998
- Radarsat-1 - November 1995 - estimated operational for 7-8 years total
- Envisat - June 2001 - design lifetime 5 years
- Radarsat-2 - October 2002 - design lifetime 7 years
- ALOS - early 2003
- LightSAR - 2005?
