February 8-10, 2010 Cordoba, ARGENTINA

1. Mission Operations Review SECTION 16.x Aquarius Science Commissioning and Acceptance Draft 2 Prepared by: Gary Lagerloef, Aquarius PI David Le Vine, Aquarius DPI + Science Team February 8-10, 2010 Cordoba, ARGENTINA Vrsn 1 100105

2. Science Commissioning Approach • Post-launch in-orbit checkout simulation: During the period from launch to L+25 days, the science team will compute simulated Tb and σ0 based on the final orbit maneuvers (Science Task 1). • These data will provide “Expected Values” for each beam along-track to compare quantitatively with observations for both the engineering and science acceptance analyses. • The science team will carry out an analysis sequence (Science Tasks 2-7) at each stage of the instrument turn-on sequence. • Acceptance criteria are limited: • The timeline only allows for one 7-day cycle after the instrument is fully turned on. • Assess whether the data are “as expected” in qualitative terms and the sensor is “calibrate-able”. • Gross geographical and geophysical features are as expected, biases can be removed, stability is reasonable, polarization differences are appropriate, etc. (details below)

3. Preliminary Acceptance Criteria • Engineering Evaluation of the Instrument Complete • All internal checks are complete and nominal • All instrument L3 requirements are met • Radiometer Specific Criteria • Radiometer thermal calibration verified (correction for changes in temperature) • Operation is free of gain glitches • Antenna Pointing Verified (scenes and transitions where expected) • Stable behavior (repeatable signals over constant scenes and crossovers) • No detectable interference from Scatterometer or CONAE instruments • Predictable Science Response (consistent with simulations) • Land - ocean features evident in radiometer brightness temperature (Tb) both in contrast and location; • Relative polarization levels (V compared to H) for each beam are consistent with the emissivity model; • Relative levels of Tb among beams is consistent with emissivity model (e.g. V-pol signal increasing and H-pol decreasing with increased incidence angle); • The 3rd Stokes signal consistent with expectation (small signal varying with Faraday rotation); • Reasonable initial “first-look” 7-day salinity map consistent with climatology • Scatterometer Specific Criteria • Repeatable behavior • σ0 sensitivity to wind speed within expectations for each channel.

4. Aquarius Commissioning Science Tasks

5. Science Task 1 • Task: Generate simulated data for radiometer (TA) and scatterometer (sigma0); • Simulation reflects actual orbit and spacecraft attitude; • 7-10 days of data simulated; • Prepared 5 days prior to instrument turn-on (for use by engineering team) and updated as necessary. • Available to engineering team on location at MOC. • Objectives: • Engineering: Simulated TA and sigma0 for the engineering team to use during on-orbit check out to judge reasonableness of the actual measured signals; • Science: A reference signal for use by science team to begin evaluation of the science quality of the first signals. • Representative Roles and Responsibilities: • Wentz: Radiometer TA simulations; • Yueh: Scatterometer Sigma0 simulations.

6. Science Task 2 • Task: Examine radiometer data to judge whether or not the radiometer data is reasonable • Begins on day 4 after radiometer is completely turned on; • Continues through end of commissioning (PLAR); • Initially, thermal stability may not be ideal. • Objectives: • Collect reference data prior to the turn on of other instruments (Scat and CONAE) as baseline to judge interference; • Collect data to assess acceptance criteria for PLAR; • Representative Roles and Responsibilities: • Wentz: Examine TA to asses pointing accuracy; • Le Vine: Evaluate T3 and retrieved Faraday rotation; • Ruf: Evaluate RFI environment and detection algorithm; • Brown: Compare histograms of actual and model TB; • Lagerloef: Start processing AVDS matchups.

7. Science Tasks 3 - 5 • Task: Examine scatterometer data during turn on of the instrument • Days 5-7 during 3-day turn-on sequence for the scatterometer; • Radiometer is on and collecting data. • Objectives: • Examine radiometer data for evidence of scatterometer interference (engineering team will also be looking at raw data); • Examine scatterometer data for reasonable behavior. • Representative Roles and Responsibilities • Yueh and scatterometer engineering team: Examine loopback power, noise only measurements and echo power; • Yueh: Analyze correlation of sigma0 with winds (NCEP). • Radiometer team (Wentz, Le Vine, Brown, others): Examine radiometer data before and after scatterometer turn-on for evidence of interference.

8. Science Task 6 • Task: Examine Aquarius instrument data (scatterometer and radiometer) for nominal behavior • Days 8-10 after both instruments are turned on completely; • First nominal operation; • Objectives: • Continue with radiometer science data evaluation begun in Task 2; • Begin evaluation of scatterometer data in nominal mode; • First look at instrument stability; • Comparison of data at reference sites and at cross-over points. • Representative Roles and Responsibilities • Ruf: Collect data for first look at “vicarious” calibration; • Le Vine: Compare Faraday rotation retrieved from T3 with in situ (ground sounders) truth; • Wentz: Pointing accuracy and effect of Sun; • Yueh: First look at roughness correction for radiometer.

9. Science Task 7 • Task: Nominal Aquarius instrument operation (radiometer and scatterometer) and CONAE instrument turn on; • Day 11 - TBD: Nominal Aquarius operation • CONAE instruments start turn on. • Science team activities continue from previous tasks. • Objectives: • Examine radiometer data for evidence of interference from CONAE instruments; • Generate first 7-day global map of SSS • Continue to collect data to assess acceptance criteria for PLAR. • Representative Roles and Responsibilities • Science Team: Coordinate data collection with CONAE instrument turn-on to search for evidence of interference; • Lagerloef: Generate reference SSS map from Argo data and de-bias Aquarius SSS output; • Yueh: Roughness correction and correlation of sigma0 with NCEP and other sources of data on winds.

10. Implementation Milestones • 1 March 2010: Science simulator – CY2007 Level 2 (swath) and Level 3 (gridded map) files released • 9-11 March 2010: Aquarius algorithm science team workshop, Santa Rosa, CA • 30 March 2010 until Launch: • Operational simulator generates daily files, • Analysis and evaluation by science team • 1 April – to – ORR: • Science team develops and tests Aquarius commissioning phase analysis tools. • Use simulators and tools to develop and test case studies, anomalies and rehearsals. • 19-21 July 2010: Aquarius/SAC-D Science Team meeting, Seattle • ORR: Final commissioning phase plan; analysis tools tested and ready.