03.05.2014 Views

Multi-Function Phased Array Radar (MPAR) - NOAA

Multi-Function Phased Array Radar (MPAR) - NOAA

Multi-Function Phased Array Radar (MPAR) - NOAA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Kurt D. Hondl<br />

OFCM <strong>MPAR</strong> Working Group<br />

07 March 2012


<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

FAA Deployment Scenarios<br />

FAA Scenario #1<br />

<br />

Only ASR & TDWR radars replaced by <strong>MPAR</strong><br />

FAA Scenario #2<br />

Replace ASR, TDWR, and WSR-88D radars<br />

FAA Scenario #3<br />

Replace ASR, TDWR, WSR-88D, ARSR, & FPS radars<br />

<strong>MPAR</strong> solution – 2 versions (both S-band)<br />

Full-size <strong>MPAR</strong> – 8m array<br />

Terminal <strong>MPAR</strong> – 4m array


<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

CONUS<br />

FAA Deployment Scenarios<br />

<br />

WSR-88D<br />

FAA<br />

Scenario #1<br />

FAA<br />

Scenario #2<br />

FAA<br />

Scenario #3


<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

R&D Plan & Time-Line


<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Decision (2014?)<br />

<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Needs to be involved to force both Dual Pol and<br />

weather mission in <strong>MPAR</strong><br />

FAA has not acknowledged Dual Pol weather requirement<br />

DOD may be interested in Dual Pol<br />

Wind Turbine Clutter and tracking artillery/aircraft<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> decision on <strong>MPAR</strong> could come as early as 2014<br />

Without <strong>NOAA</strong>, FAA would probably start making<br />

decisions regarding requirements without <strong>NOAA</strong>’s input<br />

NWS budget impact not until 2020 (or later)<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> also has decision to make on WSR-88D SLEP<br />

May still require some WSR-88D SLEP funds even if <strong>NOAA</strong><br />

pursues <strong>MPAR</strong> development/deployment


<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Strategies<br />

<br />

Possible <strong>NOAA</strong> strategies for <strong>MPAR</strong> participation (2014?)<br />

Strategy #1 -- <strong>NOAA</strong> “No Go”<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> could be on its own to SLEP the CONUS WSR-88Ds<br />

Strategy #2 -- <strong>NOAA</strong> “Delayed Deployment”<br />

Helps with development and maybe helps pay some<br />

deployment costs<br />

Replace WSR-88Ds towards the end of <strong>MPAR</strong> deployment<br />

Strategy #3 -- <strong>NOAA</strong> “All-In”<br />

Full partnership and deployment and O&M funding based<br />

on requirements (similar to NEXRAD Tri-Agency)


ROC<br />

WSR-88D Strategies<br />

<br />

2012<br />

You<br />

are<br />

Here<br />

2014<br />

IARD<br />

2 -- Delayed Deployment


<strong>MPAR</strong> “No Go”<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Strategy - 1<br />

<br />

If <strong>NOAA</strong> isn’t involved in the Joint-Agency<br />

agreement with FAA<br />

FAA radars may likely be single-polarization<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> left to do all dual-pol phased array development<br />

for future radar system (NEXRAD replacement)<br />

Could wait years for funding and access to FAA singlepol<br />

radar data and comms.<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> will have no say in how the radars are operated<br />

or what weather sensing capabilities or data quality<br />

concerns they will have<br />

Government maintains 2 (or more) radar baselines<br />

FAA maintains NSWRC (and WSR-88Ds)


<strong>MPAR</strong> “Delayed Deployment”<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Strategy – 2<br />

<br />

If <strong>NOAA</strong> participates in the <strong>MPAR</strong> Joint-Agency<br />

agreement with FAA (with delayed WSR-88D<br />

deployment)<br />

Forces dual-polarization solution on radar network<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> shares development cost with other agencies<br />

(OAR budget … no NWS impact until deployment)<br />

<strong>Multi</strong>ple deployment strategies and lengthy deployment<br />

spreads out NWS budget over many years (10-20)<br />

Would still require some SLEP funding for WSR-88D<br />

But highly dependent on deployment schedule


<strong>MPAR</strong> “Delayed Deployment”<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Strategy – 2<br />

<br />

CONUS Deployment strategies for “delayed deployment”<br />

28 WSR-88D radars could be shutdown due to placement of<br />

<strong>MPAR</strong>s to replace TDWRs<br />

Potential cost savings on O&M / used for spare parts<br />

42 WSR-88D radars don’t have any FAA ATC concern<br />

NEXRAD Tri-Agency participation for en-route weather<br />

Either DOD radars or radars in remote areas without major<br />

airports<br />

73 radars could change from smaller Terminal <strong>MPAR</strong>s to larger<br />

<strong>MPAR</strong>s dependent on joint-agency deployment strategy<br />

Need to know up front if NWS is participating so FAA<br />

deployment strategy and budget accounts for larger <strong>MPAR</strong>s<br />

OCONUS (HI, AK, PR) WSR-88Ds owned by FAA


<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Strategy – 2<br />

<br />

WSR-88D network<br />

143 CONUS (NWS & DOD)


<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

28 WSR-88Ds could<br />

be replaced by <strong>MPAR</strong><br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Strategy - 2<br />

<br />

73 WSR-88Ds could be<br />

upgraded to <strong>MPAR</strong><br />

where FAA plans T<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

42 WSR-88Ds<br />

replaced on NWS<br />

schedule<br />

FAA Scenario #1<br />

<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

Terminal <strong>MPAR</strong>


<strong>MPAR</strong> “All In”<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Strategy – 3<br />

<br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> fully participates in <strong>MPAR</strong> Joint-Agency<br />

program<br />

Shared cost of dual-polarization PAR development<br />

Shared deployment costs – Joint ownership<br />

Deployment costs spread over many years (15-20)<br />

ConOps satisfies NWS mission requirements<br />

Joint access to all <strong>MPAR</strong> data to meet NWS mission<br />

Access to many additional FAA <strong>MPAR</strong> radar sites with<br />

same data quality


<strong>MPAR</strong> Solution<br />

<strong>MPAR</strong> – Current Network<br />

<br />

TDWR<br />

WSR-88D


<strong>MPAR</strong> Solution<br />

<strong>MPAR</strong> – <strong>NOAA</strong> Gap-Filling Network<br />

<br />

T-<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> T-<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

Possible <strong>NOAA</strong> Gap-Filling radar locations


<strong>MPAR</strong> Solution<br />

Joint-Agency <strong>MPAR</strong><br />

Benefits<br />

Benefit from additional<br />

FAA radar sites<br />

Vastly improves radar<br />

resources (4X WSR-88D)<br />

Shared development and<br />

deployment costs<br />

Common technology for<br />

large (<strong>MPAR</strong>) and small<br />

radars (Terminal <strong>MPAR</strong>)<br />

Common signal<br />

processing and<br />

algorithm platform for<br />

<strong>MPAR</strong> & T<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

<br />

Issues<br />

Dual-Polarization<br />

calibration& X-pol<br />

Cost?<br />

Costs coming down<br />

<strong>Multi</strong>-function<br />

Ownership and<br />

resource contention<br />

May still need some<br />

gap-filling radars for<br />


<strong>MPAR</strong><br />

<strong>NOAA</strong> Decisions<br />

<br />

<strong>MPAR</strong> Investment<br />

R&D, Risk Reduction, Prototyping, <strong>Radar</strong><br />

Requirements for 2030<br />

WSR-88D SLEP<br />

What parts to SLEP? Can NEXRAD shutdown radars<br />

after <strong>MPAR</strong> deployed? Can NEXRAD cannibalize<br />

parts from decommissioned radars?<br />

Deployment Strategies<br />

Time-lines, Budget Impacts, Funding Environment,<br />

Deployment Scenarios

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!