Multi-Function Phased Array Radar (MPAR) - NOAA
Multi-Function Phased Array Radar (MPAR) - NOAA
Multi-Function Phased Array Radar (MPAR) - NOAA
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