1 / 49

Partnering Earth Observations for People Living Environmentally PEOPLE JCTD FY11-12 Candidate Nomination Board CNB 25

PEOPLE JCTD Candidate Overview. 8/30/2012. 2. National and Commander EUCOM guidanceEnhance arctic awarenessPartner with RussiaBuild partner capacityInternational / interagency partneringCandidate Team:NASA MSFC

mele
Download Presentation

Partnering Earth Observations for People Living Environmentally PEOPLE JCTD FY11-12 Candidate Nomination Board CNB 25

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Partnering Earth Observations for People Living Environmentally (PEOPLE) JCTD FY11-12 Candidate Nomination Board (CNB) 25 May 2010 Participants COCOM Sponsor: EUCOM Oversight Executive: Elmer Roman, RFD, DDR&E OSD Operational Manager: Steve Desautel, EUCOM Technical Manager: Jeff McCracken, NASA Transition Manager: Marty Kress, VCSI Other participants / partners / interested parties: NORTHCOM, SOUTHCOM, DLR, UAH, PDC, CRREL, ORNL, AMRDEC, NIC, NSF, Environment Canada, AARI, NOAA POC name and contact data: Steve Desautel, 011-49-711-680-7009, stephen.desautel@eucom.mil 1 8/31/2012

    2. PEOPLE JCTD Candidate Overview 8/31/2012 2

    3. National Direction 8/31/2012 3

    4. 4 8/31/2012

    5. 2008 Sea Ice Coverage 5 8/31/2012

    6. What is the PEOPLE JCTD? Technical Idea A military & civilian whole of government web-based, open-source, environmental decision support system for Arctic Region, integrating disparate data, models, tools and products from US agencies and foreign countries, including Russia Low cost, modularized software, standardized hardware and systems architecture, providing decision support tools to a variety of end users Capitalize on proven NASA architecture, data and modeling integration expertise, and COTS technologies Military Requirement / Operational Problem / Warfighter Problem Addressed Facilitate COCOM, Interagency, Partner Nations (PN) regional & local entities partnering through information sharing Provide tools to conduct long-term environmental planning and near-term cooperative actions in response to environmental changes occurring in the Arctic Region, as the first focus area Enhance regional security by providing a better capability to plan for, monitor, and respond to, natural disasters and environmental & humanitarian challenges through cooperation and interdependence References: EUCOM Commander Priority; NSPD-66 Arctic Region Policy; QDR Feb 2010; U.S. Navy Arctic Roadmap, Oct 2009 (See back-ups), International Polar Year, NOAA Arctic Policy, NSF Arctic Observing Network Expected Outcome Year 1 (2011) deliverables: An open-source web-based Arctic Region & National decision support system with integrated data from existing remote sensing, buoy, and in-situ data (e.g. , sea ice flow, permafrost melt). Regional and multi-national cross border, detection, monitoring, analysis, visualization, predicting and decision support tools deployed to partner nations. CONOPS & TTP. Additional partnering with Russia Metrics: 5 Capabilities; 13 Tasks / Attributes; # of validated models / data sets; # of partnerships (See Top Level Capabilities and Metrics Tables in back-up) Year 2 (2012) deliverables: Transition to Interagency (e.g., NOAA), Partner Nations (e.g., Russia, Canada, Europe), MSFC / NASA; EUCOM; NORTHCOM;. 6 8/31/2012

    7. 7 8/31/2012

    8. JCTD Year 1 Operational Demonstration Configuration 8 8/31/2012

    9. 9 8/31/2012 Schedule

    10. Cost Plan 8/31/2012 10

    11. Funding Plan 11 8/31/2012

    12. Summary Technical idea and operational purpose Idea: Leverage NASA assets/architecture – demonstrate Arctic Environmental Decision Support System Capitalize on proven low cost existing NASA system architecture for processing existing models and datasets from US and foreign entities Leverage NASA & other gov’t agencies’ investment & experience – build common interest area – the Arctic Create a decision support system to monitor, analyze and visualize environmental issues Purpose: Building Partnerships, enable military / civilian long-term environmental planning and/or near term cooperative actions in response to climatic change & environmental degradation in the Arctic Region Used by EUCOM, NORTHCOM, Navy, NOAA, interagency & partner nations, regional and local users Test / demonstration approach 2011: Component tests; technical and operational demonstrations with EUCOM, NASA, DLR, UA Huntsville, VCSI and Partner Nations (PN) Operators / Analysts and Decision-makers; OUA Reports STEM: Integrate college interns & students in initial operations demonstration including exchanges with partners Metrics: 5 Capabilities; 13 Tasks / Attributes; # of validated models / data sets; # of partnerships Deliverables 2011: An Arctic Decision Environmental Support System with 1 Regional, 2 Partner Nation system nodes and 3 Remote Access Sites with cross border, detection, monitoring, analysis, visualization, predicting and decision-making system capabilities; CONOPS, TTPs 2012: Transition to PNs and Organizations; NOAA, Earth Science Office, MSFC / NASA, EUCOM, NORTHCOM Funding, sources and amounts by year: RFD recommendation: USD(AT&L) approve PEOPLE JCTD 12 8/31/2012

    13. 13 8/31/2012

    14. Back-ups 14 8/31/2012

    15. PEOPLE Node Equipment 15 8/31/2012

    16. Anticipated Facility Requirements 16 8/31/2012

    17. Scalable National/Regional Node (Computing and Operations Room Examples) 17 8/31/2012

    18. NSPD-66 Arctic Region Policy 8/31/2012 18

    19. Quadrennial Defense Review 8/31/2012 19

    20. U.S. Navy Arctic Roadmap 8/31/2012 20

    21. The Current Situation Developed and third world countries face security risks because of an inability to plan for, monitor, and respond to disasters in the Arctic & other areas of the world: Environmental change (albedo, permafrost, oil spills and biodiversity) Natural disasters (sea ice depth and flows) Humanitarian challenges (vector born disease, fresh water, human health, mobility) Involvement is in U.S. best interest; especially providing low-cost decision support systems that enhance a country’s or region’s awareness and preparedness Partner nations need enhanced day-to-day resource management and emergency preparedness: Prepare for, monitor, and coordinate responses Efficiently manage ecological resources and address environmental trends Sharing Earth Observation data and analysis is acknowledged by over 72 nations as a “must accomplish” activity – solutions are many years off The Arctic represents a great opportunity to integrate disparate parties to address a common area of interest and to integrate disparate data sets, tools and models to produce a recognized decision support system 8/31/2012 21

    22. Partner Nations / Joint / Interagency Operational Problem 8/31/2012 22 No overarching operational architecture or universal core system for data & tool integration Slow pace of enabling data sharing polices Insufficient ability to build partnership capacity to address environmental and resource management issues Insufficient ability to develop plans for Arctic Ocean passages, environmental & ecological management - for all partners! Evacuation, land, water, and ocean use, and environmental disasters (Ice characteristics and spatial distribution: ice breakup, ice temperature, snow depth, etc)

    23. Desired Capabilities by FY12 A monitoring, analysis, and visualization decision support system for environmental resource management, humanitarian and hazard risk forecasting and management Capitalize on existing space, air, ground-based, and NASA decision support architecture & tools Integrate & interoperate w/ existing & developing satellite imagery, in-situ, and disparate data sources Strengthening engagements with Partner Nations and research organizations (e.g., Group on Earth Observations, Sustainable Arctic Observing Network) engaged in collaborative data sharing and product and model development Integration of data in standardized data formats and taxonomy provided by partner nations and participating organizations Management tools for decision making A cross-border, interdependent, regional, and national decision support system Capable of delivering land, sea and atmospheric conditions measurement and monitoring capabilities (e.g., water resources, pollution, urban development, fires, sea ice dept and flows) Display and overlay multiple geospatial data information products (e.g. fires, weather prediction, climate change, permafrost, land cover mapping, and flooding data) CONOPS and TTP Compatible with and supportive of broader Building Partnerships (BP) strategies 23 8/31/2012

    24. 8/31/2012 24

    25. Capabilities Solution Combined hardware and software system consisting of the following: Processing and Service Software Web services (HTTP / HTTPS) Application Relational Data base Management Software Database Interface (Web Map Service) Geographic Information System (GIS) application Image Processing Software Applications Product Generation Software Google Earth Professional Edition Spatial Datasets and Analysis Satellite Data (e.g., Landsat, MODIS (Aster and Terra), EO-I ALI, QuickBird, IKONOS, FORMOSAT, RADARSAT, ENVISAT, TERRASAR-X, COSMOS SKYMED Airborne Data (e.g., AirSAR, Star – 3i, Aerial Photography, LIDAR Marine data (e.g., MODIS: Sea Surface Temperature; surface winds (buoy) ) Tabular Data (e.g., stream gauge, surface temperature, surface winds, soil saturation, weather radar, seismic , buoy data etc.) Framework Data (e.g. topographic, political, geologic, transportation, land cover, etc.) Geophysical and human dimension model results (e.g., WRF) Network and Security Services Infrastructure (scalable, equitable, interoperable, tailorable) Unclassified, commercially secured Internet / Intranet connectivity Continuous 24/7 information access Hardware (dedicated web, database, data archive servers, displays) & workstations CONOPS and TTP 25 8/31/2012

    26. 26 8/31/2012

    27. Top Level Capabilities & Metrics (1 of 5) 27 8/31/2012

    28. Top Level Capabilities & Metrics (2 of 5) 28 8/31/2012

    29. 29 8/31/2012 Top Level Capabilities & Metrics (3 of 5)

    30. 30 8/31/2012 Top Level Capabilities & Metrics (4 of 5)

    31. 31 8/31/2012 Top Level Capabilities & Metrics (5 of 5)

    32. Overall Demonstration Strategy Operates at unclassified and commercially secured information levels Ability to access data in a Web-based construct Participants: EUCOM, NASA, DLR, UA Huntsville, VCSI and Partner Nations Operators / Analysts and Decision-makers Technical and Operational Demonstrations, 2011 Technical: Performs final component integration test and demonstration Reduces risk via test-fix-test approach and operator / user input TD serve as “dress rehearsal” for operational demonstration (OD) TD: Oct / Nov 2011, National Space Science and Technical Center (NSSTC), MSFC NASA Operational: Captures independent operator / user assessments and determines operational utility OD: Nov / Dec 2011: 1 Regional [NIC U.S.], 2 National nodes [Canada, Russia]; 3 Remote Access Sites [EUCOM Germany, NORAD Colorado, Fairbanks, Alaska]; 1 System Administration node [MSFC NASA] OUA: Jan / Feb 2012 32 8/31/2012

    33. 8/31/2012 33 Top Level Regions & Scenarios (1 of 3)

    34. Top Level Regions & Scenarios (2 of 3) 34 8/31/2012

    35. 35 8/31/2012 Top Level Regions & Scenarios (3 of 3)

    36. Core Technologies 36 8/31/2012

    37. Description of Products / Deliverables 8/31/2012 37

    38. Critical Operational Issues 38 8/31/2012

    39. Follow-on Development / Production / Fielding / Sustainment Products and deliverables transitioned pending successful OUA and resource sponsor commitment: Targeted Programs: Partner Nations; Interagency; NOAA, Earth Science Office, MSFC / NASA Limited follow-on development [6mos] required if PEOPLE JCTD configuration replicated Obtain and reestablish the data feeds Obtain alternative data feed if the original is not available Update framework data for new area Update data products for new area Develop and establish as applicable community of interest of Partner Nations Follow-on development [18mos] of custom product generation required to support additional specific user needs Determine institutional eligibility Define user requirements Determine feasibility of system to meet user requirements Develop and establish as applicable community of interest of Partner Nations Develop specific system tools, data, models as applicable Deployment and fielding starts FY13 Equipment should be COTS / GOTS to the greatest extent possible 39 8/31/2012

    40. Limited Operational Use If conducted, resourced through transition funding (if approved) Conduct Limited Operational Use with operational components at demonstration sites in FY11 Pending OUA, starts in 2Q FY12 12 months maximum Includes hardware, software, and documentation (see Products / Deliverables) Finalizes CONOPS, TTP, training package, and DOTMLPF recommendations Qualitative feedback iterated with: EUCOM, Partner Nations, Partner Organizations, NASA MSFC Earth Sciences Office (ESO), NOAA NASA TM provides technical support Requires positive OUA Requires Partner Nations and Partner Organizations commitment for post-demonstration time frame Does not enhance capability or continue assessments 40 8/31/2012

    41. 8/31/2012 41

    42. Battlespace Awareness (BA) JCA Environmental Measurements & Visualization Monitoring 42 8/31/2012

    43. Battlespace Awareness (BA) JCA Environmental Analysis 43 8/31/2012

    44. Battlespace Awareness (BA) JCA Predict Environment Forecast and Management Analysis 44 8/31/2012

    45. Battlespace Awareness (BA) JCA Exploit Environment Decision Set 45 8/31/2012

    46. JCTD Risk Management and Mitigation Approach 46 8/31/2012

    47. 47 8/31/2012 JCTD Partnerships

    48. Organizations 48 8/31/2012

    49. 49 8/31/2012 Building Partnerships (BP) Functional Capability Area (FCA) Definitions

More Related