October 10-12, 2007 Multifunction Phased Array Radar Symposium “Leveraging Technology for a...

October 10-12, 2007

Multifunction Phased Array Radar Symposium

“Leveraging Technology for a Next-Generation National Radar System”

Mr. Samuel P. WilliamsonFederal Coordinator for Meteorology

Sponsored by:

The Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting

Research

and

Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), Committee on Environment and

Natural Resources (CENR) Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction (SDR)

Multifunction Phased Array Radar Symposium

“Leveraging Technology for a Next-Generation National Radar System”

Opening Remarks

•Societal Needs / Demands for Surveillance Radars

• Importance of Interagency Partnerships

•Legacy Systems

•Risk-Reduction Implementation Approach

•Symposium Objectives

•Symposium Agenda

Overview

Societal Needs / Demands for Surveillance Radars

• Natural / technological hazards & societal impacts

– Natural Hazard Types: Convective storms (e.g., tornadoes, severe thunderstorms); winter storms (e.g., snow, ice, wind); drought; rain / floods; wildland fires; extreme temperatures (heat and cold); tropical cyclones; fog; earthquakes; volcanoes; debris flow (i.e., mudslides); tsunamis

– Technological Hazards: Technological hazards include hazardous materials incidents and nuclear power plant failures

– Impacts of hazards


• Nowcasting convective and severe weather events

• Nowcasting wind shear, microbursts and wake vortices

• Identification of icing & turbulence

• Locating precipitation & deriving precipitation rates

• Identification of precipitation types

• Initialization of NWP models

Current Weather Radar Applications

Source: Federal Research and Development Needs and Priorities for Phased Array Radar

Some Current / Potential Societal Needs / Demands

Civilian aviation / military aviation and operations Public

forecasts and safety

Fire weather and wildland fires

Transportation

Airborne releases of toxic materials

Spaceflight operations

Calibration and validation of

satellite-based remote-sensing

instruments

Debris flow (mudslides)

Air quality and health

Volcanic ash

Agriculture applications


• Civilian aircraft surveillance

– “Primary” surveillance system

• Uses radar to detect radio-wave “echo”

• Also called “skin painting” radar

• Because radar detects aircraft without any signal originating from aircraft, also called “independent” or “non-cooperative” surveillance

– Secondary surveillance• Called “cooperative surveillance” because it relies on

aircraft having a transponder on board


• Radars used for aircraft surveillance– Airport surveillance radar (ASR)– Air route surveillance radar (ARSR)

• FAA has historically used a combined primary (skin-painting) radar and secondary (transponder-based) surveillance network– Planning to shift to an entirely cooperative surveillance

system for the NAS– For homeland security needs and for aircraft lacking a

cooperative transponder, a requirement for non-cooperative surveillance throughout the NAS will continue

• DHS coordinates with FAA and DOD in tracking and responding to non-cooperative aircraft


• Societal needs / demands for weather and aircraft surveillance radars can be derived from:

– Mission analysis of all the stakeholders

• What operations deficiencies exist today?

– Operational and functional needs

• Not constrained by today’s technology

Importance of Interagency Partnerships

• Importance of interagency partnership can not be overemphasized

• Example: Weather Surveillance Radar 88 Doppler (WSR-88D)– In parallel with Joint Doppler Operational Project activity, an

OFCM-sponsored Working Group on Next Generation Weather Radar was formed• Joint Department of Commerce, Department of Defense and

Department of Transportation effort

– The OFCM, supported by interagency staff, developed a NEXRAD cross cut analysis for OMB

– Joint System Program Office (JSPO) formed– Federal Committee for Meteorological Services and Supporting

Research (FCMSSR) formed oversight committee• Genesis of OFCM-sponsored NEXRAD Program Council

Legacy Systems

Radar System Design Date Installation Date

WSR-88D 1988 1990-1997

TDWR 1986-1990 1992-1995

ARSR-1, ARSR-2 1960-1970 1965-1975

ARSR-3 1960-1970 1965-1975

ARSR-4 1985-1990 1990-1995

ASR-9 1983-1986 1987-1993

ASR-11 1998-2002 2003-2010

• OFCM-sponsored report, Federal Research and Development Needs and Priorities for Phased Array Radar

– Risk-reduction R&D activities

– Provide a sound basis for deciding between MPAR implementation versus continued maintenance and upgrade of legacy systems

Risk-Reduction Implementation Approach

• Risk-reduction implementation approach should:

– Leverage military R&D (e.g., Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, San Diego; AFRL, ONR, NRL)

– Reach out to critics

– Include outreach efforts; opportunities to:

• Participate and/or present at meetings / workshops (e.g., IEEE, AAAS, AGU, ATA, AOPA, RTCA, WGA, WMO, ICAO)

• Be included in magazines / publications

• Link with other communities, like the wildland fire community

• Conduct additional MPAR workshops / symposiums


• Risk-reduction implementation approach should:

– Involve both federal laboratories and industry

• Federal laboratories

–Roles and missions: labs in position, due to their expertise, to make recommendations on risks and areas of research; also able to perform some R&D (advanced development)

• Who are they and what have they been doing?

–NSSL

–NRL

–Lincoln Laboratory

–Others (e.g., Georgia Tech Research Institute; University of Oklahoma, Atmospheric Radar Research Center)


• Risk-reduction implementation approach should:– Involve both federal laboratories and industry (cont.)

• Industry–Roles and missions

»Develop alternative system design approach (cost effective alternative(s))

»Production feasibility study (results evaluated by government)»Acquisition and logistics / maintenance (life cycle costs)»Tests required to evaluate capability; tests need to be clearly

identified»Future trade-off studies regarding uncertainties»Site surveys and geographical coverage of MPAR»Facilities analysis / requirements (towers, etc.)»Frequency allocation analysis»Acquisition approach alternatives; best course of action to

acquire system (four phases? two phases?)

• Highlight future user PAR requirements and summarize benefits derived from PAR’s adaptive scanning capability

• Explore implementation of R&D priorities laid out in the June 2006 Interagency JAG/PAR report, accounting for: (1) work already accomplished; (2) items that still need additional focus; and (3) potential alternative configurations

• Gather perspective from the radar industry on the state of the technology, the technological uncertainties, and the challenges of delivering affordable phased array radar systems in the future

• Develop the way ahead to address MPAR risk-reduction challenges through an implementation strategy and interagency management approach

Symposium Objectives

This Afternoon

Symposium Agenda

1:45-2:00 p.m.Mr. Joseph Harroz

Vice President and General Counsel for the University of Oklahoma

2:00–2:15 p.m. Dr. Denise Stephenson Hawk

Director, Societal-Environmental Research and Education Laboratory, National Cforenter for Atmospheric Research

2:15–2:45 p.m. Break

2:45–3:00 p.m.Mr. Albert Miller

5 M Inc, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Security

3:00–4:45 p.m.

Senior Leader Perspectives on MPAR and Interagency Collaboration

Ms. Mary Glackin, Acting Deputy Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere

Ms. Victoria Cox, Vice President of Operations Planning, Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration

Mr. Randy Zeller, Director, Interagency Programs, Science and Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security

Reception / Icebreaker

NWC Atrium Exhibit Hall5:00 - 7:00 PM

Symposium Agenda

Tonight

Thursday Morning

Symposium Agenda

8:00-9:45 a.m.

Panelists:Dr. John L. Hayes, Director, National Weather

ServiceDr. Richard W. Spinrad, Director, NOAA Office of

Oceanic and Atmospheric ResearchMr. James Williams, Director of Systems

Engineering, Federal Aviation AdministrationMr. Kevin (Spanky) Kirsch, Office of Science and

Technology, Department of Homeland Security

Dr. Fred Lewis, Air Force Director of Weather

RDML(s) David Titley, Chief of Staff of Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command

Session 1: MPAR User Communities of InterestModerator: Dr. Robert Serafin, National Center for Atmospheric

Research, Director Emeritus

Thursday Morning

Symposium Agenda

10:15-11:45 a.m.

Panelists:

Dr. Richard Wittstruck, U.S. Army PEO IEW&S

Dr. Michael Pollock, Office of Naval Research

Dr. Mark Longbrake, Air Force Research Laboratory

Session 2: Current State of Military Investment in PAR Moderator: Dr. Jeffrey Herd (MIT/LL)

Thursday Lunch

Symposium Agenda

12:00-1:00 p.m.

Lunch Speaker

Dr. Elbert W. (Joe) Friday, Jr., former Director of the

National Weather Service

Topic: NEXRAD as a Successful Interagency Collaboration: What Did it Take?

Thursday Afternoon

Symposium Agenda

1:15-3:00 p.m.

Panelists:

Mr. Michael Sarcione, Chief Engineer, Sensor H/W, Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems

Mr. Kevin Leahy, Enterprise Technical Executive for RF, Northrop Grumman Projects

Dr. Douglas H. Reep. Vice President, Technical Operations, Lockheed Martin MS2

Dr. Gregory Turner, Director, Advanced Programs, Space Systems, Harris Corporation

Session 3: Latest Innovations in PAR: An Industry Perspective

Moderator: Mr. Barry Fell, Technology Services Corporation

Thursday Afternoon

Symposium Agenda

3:30-5:30 p.m.

Panelists:

Dr. Douglas Carlson, Director of Advanced Technology, Tyco Electronics, MA-COM

Mr. James Milligan, Manager of Advanced Microwave Programs, Cree Inc.

Dr. Gailon Brehm, Director, Military Business Unit, Triquint Semiconductor Texas

Mr. Daniel Steele, Senior Radar Systems Engineer, Sierra Monolithics, Inc.

Mr. Steve Nelson, VP MMIC Operations, REMEC Defense and Space, Inc.

Session 4: Component Technology: What the Future Holds in Cost and Performance

Moderator: Dr. Michael Pollock (Office of Naval Research)

Review Industry Displays

NWC Atrium Exhibit Hall5:30 - 7:00 PM

Symposium Agenda

Thursday Evening

Friday Morning

Symposium Agenda

8:00-9:45 a.m.

Panelists:

Mr. Douglas Forsyth, National Severe Storms Laboratory

Dr. Mark Weber, MIT Lincoln Laboratory

Dr. Jothiram Vivekanandan, National Center for Atmospheric Research

Dr. Chandra Chandrasekar, Colorado State University

Session 5: MPAR Alternative Configurations Moderator: Dr. Kelvin Droegemeier, Oklahoma University

Friday Morning

Symposium Agenda

10:15-11:45 a.m.

Panelists:Dr. Jeffrey Kimpel, National Severe Storms

Laboratory, NOAAMr. Bill Benner, System Engineering, FAAMr. Mike Matthews, Office of Science and

Technology, DHS

Session 6: Way Ahead to Address MPAR Risk- Reduction—Implementation Strategy and Interagency Management

ApproachModerator: Dr. Paul Try, Science and Technology Corporation

11:45 a.m. -12:00 p.m.

Review of Action Items and Closing RemarksMr. Samuel P. Williamson, Federal Coordinator for

Meteorology

Mr. Joseph Harroz

Vice President and General Counsel of the University of Oklahoma

THE UNIVERSITY OF

OKLAHOMA

Dr. Denise Stephenson Hawk

Director, Societal-Environmental Research and Education Laboratory

National Center for Atmospheric Research

Ms. Mary Glackin

Acting Deputy Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere


Ms. Victoria Cox

Vice President of Operations Planning, Air Traffic Organization

Federal Aviation Administration


Mr. Albert Miller

Assigned to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense

for Homeland Defense


Mr. Randy Zeller

Director, Interagency Programs, Science and Technology Directorate

Department of Homeland Security


Reception / Icebreaker

TonightNWC Atrium Exhibit Hall

5:00 - 7:00 PM

October 10-12, 2007 Multifunction Phased Array Radar Symposium “Leveraging Technology for a...

Documents

Transcript of October 10-12, 2007 Multifunction Phased Array Radar Symposium “Leveraging Technology for a...