NOPP P.I.
Meeting Minutes
January 5, 1999

Present: Rollie Barnaby (UNH), Ann Bucklin, chair ( UNH), Ken Ekstrom (MIT), Cliff Goudey (MIT Sea Grant), Bob Groman (WHOI), Dave Hosom (WHOI), Joe Novello (Alpha-Tron), Craig Pendleton (NAMA - Portland Fish Exchange), Peter Wiebe (WHOI), Gary Williams (Clearwater Inst.),

Absent: Hartley Hoskins (WHOI), David Mountain (NMFS),

Guest: none

A meeting of the Project LENA investigators was held January 5, 1999 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The meeting began at 10:00am.

Ann distributed an agenda for the meeting and asked Bob to be the meeting recorder. Ann also distributed

Call for additional agenda items

Ken mentioned that he is pursuing the Value Added Program from the Maptech people in order to use their maps and programs within our system.

Peter mentioned that he had experimented with the CAP'N program and found it very useful to use during his cruises. However, he noted that the software slowed down the system the more it was used, and that eventually, after about 36 hours, the PC would require a reboot.

Specifications and selection of system hardware

There was an exchange of engineering diagrams, with Ken handing out his System Hardware and System Software diagrams again, and Joe handing out his diagram as well. [Joe, I need another copy of your diagram so I can scan it it, or send me the original digital version. Thanks.]

We discussed preparing a Powerpoint-based demonstration so that Craig, Rollie, Joe, et al. could better present the proposed capabilities of the system and allow for fishermen feedback on its design. We decided to meet before the upcoming Fishermen Forum meeting in Samosett, March 4-6, in order to review the progress of this demonstration. Bob was assigned to to lead the design of the mockup of the demonstration, with help from Ken, Joe, Rolly, and Cliff. Bob suggested that the demonstration be set up using a web browser as the front end, although all required files would be local so that the demonstration could be done on a stand-alone machine. We agreed to meet in February to review this demonstration.

Craig will look for booth space at the Fishermen Formum and Bob will meet with those interested prior to our February meeting for additional work on the user interface.

Net data

There was a discussion about net data, and whether it could be handled by the Athena data acquisition system. The answer was yes, it could, and that the polling would be not as often as other sensors. This is handled during the Athena configuration phase.

It was agreed that there was a three to one wire angle used during tows and that this could be used for the setback calculate of the net gear.

We discussed using a one (1) second sampling rate going down, and a one (1) minute sampling rate while the net was along the bottom. Tows are approximately five (5) hours long. Gary thought that 32K of memory would be sufficient to store these (compressed) data until they could be telemetered to the main system. Please provide any additional feedback to Gary by March.

We discussed the time stamping procedure for the net gear. We discussed the pros and cons of a standard repetition rate versus a variable rate. I believe that a variable rate was agreed to.

The positioning of the gear mounting sensor was also discussed. Gary estimated that it would take 30 seconds to transmit the data to the main system. Issues discussed included:

It was decided to leave the decision on connections to Gary, but they will be based on the 485 standard. T's rather than conjuction boxes will be used.

Software

We returned to software questions after lunch. It was noted, again, that there is an electronic logbood project being undertaken my NMFS and that it may prove helpful to use to follow their lead. For example, when we print out out information, we should output the information in their format. Such information as notes (via a comment window perhaps), gear changes, head gear, and weather information should follow the form as best as reasonable.

Peter noted that the Oceanus' implementation of the Athena software provides web based display of the previous 24 hours worth of data as plots. Peter will look into this (by contacting Jim Akens 508-289-3294) to see whether any of this software would be useful to us.)

We discussed the possibility of the system sending diagnostic e-mail ashore if it detects a failing/failed sensor.

There are different ways of specifying species names, including NMFS's way, as well ways defined by the fish auctions.

We need to revisit what data will doe to the U.S. GLOBEC Georges Bank data system and there was agreement that a moc-up of a "Globec view" of the data would be useful. This discussion then led into a further discussion of what are the products and features of the project, such as satellite images, smoothed data (i.e. no locations of vessels shown), and data sent to the National Weather Service.

Vessel Location System

Gary Powers and Charlies Houston can provide us with information about the VLS. It used Boat Tracs. We need to find out whether we can interface to this system. David M. should be contacted for additional information to see if this would be possible.

Laptop vs. desktop system

Ken and Cliff will pick a PC to be used at sea. These machines will be purchased via Joe's budget. Using these machines as the basis for what the machine should look like, Joe can lead a build vs. buy discussion at a future meeting. However, the actual purchase will be delayed until the machines are needed since it's likey the prices will drop the longer we wait.

Fish Auction Server Machines

Bob distribued a sample configured for a fish auction server machine. These machines will be running Linux. One of the issues is how to connect these machines to the internet since the Fish Auctions use ISP's via dial-up modems, which are usually only active when needed. There are dedicated phone and ISP charges to consider. Bob will contact the Fish Auctions in order to pin down these charges.

Budget Issues

Data sensor precision

It was noted that the WOCE requirements for sea surface temperature precision is 0.01°C accuracy. Dave said that all IMET sensors are WOCE quality instruments. But it was noted that weather forecast people who want wind, barametric pressure, don't need "climate quality" (i.e. WOCE quality) measurements, but are satisfied with sea surface temperature to 0.1°C accuracy. A new requirement by climate (WOCE specification) people is for sea surface temperature to 0.01°C from as many locations as possible.

These accuracy differences make a major impact on the cost of the basic sensor. Next time we need to revisit these costs and understand the impact of the IMET quality sensors on the costs. A sensor could be purchased at 60% of list, or about $3,725 plus $345 for calibration.

Ship mounted temperature sensor was a budget issue as well.

Inmarsat-C

Joe will be purchasing the Inmarsat C transmister/receiver via his budget and COMSAT costs are included in Peter's budget.

Bilge water and engine oil temperature sensors

These will be discussed at a future meeting.

ASLO talk

Ann requested that images and text for the ASLO presentation be sent to Peter by January 21 for preparation of viewgraphs. [The viewgraphs used are now available on-line.

Milestones

It was agreed that we should have December 1999 sea-trials demonstration of the system. This implied that we should finish hardware installation by June 1, and begin testing July 1.

The next meeting will be February 10. [Editor's note: this meeting was rescheduled to February 16.]

The meeting adjourned at 3:30pm.


Submitted by: R. Groman
Original: February 12, 1999
Edited: February 17, 1999
Edited: December 17, 1999