attending: Jessy, Kevin, Zoe and Jack
Kevin began with update on GLRP. He noted that he had made a presentation at the traverse workshop outlining a schedule for creation of Isi and installation of GLT there, primarily to outline the loads (fuel and especially pieces of new buildings and the telescope) that GrIT should anticipate needing to deliver. (Zoe saw this presentation.) This schedule assumed a fixed capital budget of $4M/year out to 2020. He noted that spreading the funds out over longer interval would cause the schedule to slip as well, and that he was now working on a new plan and schedule that assumed funds would flow at a rate of $2M/year. Kevin closed by noting that he was heading to Summit 13 July and would be mainly out of touch for several weeks.
Jessy then provided updates on science, DV and operational events that are planned between now and the end of summer season at Summit. It will be busy!
SCO confirmed that Jack would be participating in the end of season site visit (tentative plans had John making this trip, but his teaching schedule will not allow). We also reminded Jessy that Bob was in Greenland now, and might be in Kanger several days waiting for return flight to CONUS. We all agreed that it would be good for Bob to visit Summit, perhaps just on a turn around, if his schedule and the Herc schedules allow.
Jessy mentioned that there would be a 1-day workshop focused on how to support Neely’s SuPR Lidar on 21 July, and invited SCO to participate. It seems unlikely that any of us will travel to Denver, but we will try to join on-line.
Discussed the status of the web served Summit GIS and the virtual tour. Renee agreed that we should hold off on submitting the annual report until mid August, in hopes that both of these will be on-line, so that report can include links to them.
Renee provided some highlights of the RSL/CPS meetings that took place end of June and first several days of July.
She clarified recent reports from CPS that included big changes in the annual capital budgets to anticipate from 2015 out to 2020 or so, in regard to Summit conversion to Isi. Bottom line is that the budget is expected to be flat for the next several years (losing ground to inflation). Other demands on RSL are likely to cycle up and down, so resources available for Greenland are likely to vary in response, but should be in the range of $2-4M/per year. It may be possible for RSL to anticipate “big” years for Isi development, if the GLRP becomes better defined, and attempt to ensure that funds are available for procurement or major on-site efforts in specific critical years, but this is likely to mean leaner capital budget years just before and after.
Renee and Jen both noted that CPS and RSL had agreed on a new project management software package that should make planning and scheduling more transparent, and felt this was a very positive step.
Renee noted that the GLRP process does not seem to be working very well, and there was a lot of discussion at the meetings about how to streamline and focus it. This may mean less frequent teleconferences in favor of regular (frequency not yet defined) longer meetings to really tackle and resolve specific issues. RSL feels there needs to be a clear document outlining the “plan” and phasing, so that progress can be made as finances allow. Renee mentioned the Toolik plan as a good example (after the call she sent link to this plan to SCO).
Final topic of the call was science traverse infrastructure. Zoe had good discussion with Jay Burnside and Pat Smith during the traverse workshop about several different styles of science traverse, and they all felt it might be good to continue this discussion with a wider cross section of the science community. SCO is going to try to engage the potential user community electronically, likely leading to a virtual workshop to determine if there is a basic core traverse platform that would be flexible enough to be widely useful, and also to assess near term demand for over snow traverses to support science.
In this call, we discussed possible budget impacts to Isi/Summit developments (currently seems that there might be less funding than discussed earlier). We decided that Jack would make the annual SCO site visit in August, and if possible, Bob would try to fly to Summit during his upcoming field trip to Ilussiat. The role of the field camp coordinator, now that the Petrenko and IDPO field camps were done for the season, was questioned, and we decided to ask Jessy what tasking this person had now.
We then discussed at length the concept for the mobile science traverse. At the GrIT annual meeting, a concept which consisted of a large prime mover (i.e. CASE tractor), hard sided berthing, mobile lab space, mechanics space, and a kitchen module mounted on a GrIT sled was developed. This configuration has a noted advantage in that the CASE is able to pull enough fuel that caches are not needed. At the GrIT meeting, we also developed a second configuration using a Tucker as a prime mover with essentially half of the platform as could be hauled with the CASE (the max load for the Tucker is estimated to be around 20,000 lb). The Tucker would not be able to pull as much fuel, and fuel caches might be required depending on the desired range. There is also no berthing (but a kitchen module might be able to be included). The way forward gathering input regarding the various configurations was discussed (i.e. arrange a workshop for potential users vs. a virtual meeting) and whether something like a mobile camp is likely to be funded. The general consensus is that a workshop involving potential users to better define the requirements and to answer key questions including the kind of projects that might be supported; where the camp might be used; when the camp might be used primarily (i.e. summer and/or shoulder or winter seasons); where the station would be based and stored (most probably Isi); how to minimize drifting if it is anticipated that storage will be long-term.
Attending: Jack, Bob, Zoe and Jen (ALEX)
Jen updated us on the CPS meetings that were held at the end of June and the telescope developments. The meetings went well, and progress was made towards some of the more difficult tasks, i.e. plans for the implementation of common program management software. We also got updates about the budget (which is expected to be flat in out-years), and GrIT constraints (SCAT makes GrIT expensive, and it is still cheaper to fly cargo up to Summit if the cargo can fit in a plane). Jen also mentioned ideas to work around budget constraints and the need for large capital investments (i.e. borrowing equipment from the Antarctic division).
Kevin updated SCO regarding GLRP. The conceptual designs and ideas have been shared with ALEX and NSF and will be shared with the GLRP group as a whole on the next call. The major core module will take a year to develop. The current schedule has dramatic impacts on GrIT, as it will require triple the amount of cargo GrIT current carries. The basic development plan is for the telescope to provide its own power, berthing and fuel storage. Essentially there would be 2 camps at the same place, with the telescope personnel making up half of the camp population (~6-8 people). The building would be more traditional (i.e. not like the AWO design) with infinite legs or on skis. The power for the new station is estimated to be 175-200 kW, which does not include the telescope.
We discussed the upcoming NASA over-flight; Jack was going to check if it was an atmospheric flight. We talked about the annual SCO Summit site visit, and tentatively planned for one of us to go in August during station close. The DISC borehole was also discussed. The HEO’s have not been driving over it, but it is becoming buried. The solution to preserving the borehole for future use (i.e. the Vieregg project should it be funded) is to install a 16 ft post and to have the HEO’s continue to avoid it. It might end up as a hole. Other Summit updates include that the construction manager is planning on removing the Noone box, and the GIS updating is progressing well.
In this call, we discussed the GrIT meeting, which Zoe attended; the annual report, and the milestones we were aiming to include in the report (i.e. GIS and the virtual tour); the upcoming site visit. We agreed to distribute the white paper executive summary we have been working on, which only needs a disclaimer and some logos. The agenda items for the upcoming SCO/NSF call and the upcoming SCO/PFS call were agreed upon.
attending: Kevin, Katrine, Paul, Dave, Zoe, Jack
Kevin gave updates on Greenland Long Range Planning. The bridging documents are proceeding with validation from Martin Lewis’s trip to Summit. CPS has had internal meetings regarding the power concept, and the transition from the current to the final power configuration. CPS is working on a document that summarizes the concept. Jack discussed the idea that we discussed 4 June, which consists of 2 different power plants, 1 for the telescope and 1 for the camp, which would back each other up and be tied together. SCO would like to see smart system design so that RE can be integrated into the grid from the beginning.
Paul updated us on the telescope. The telescope group is currently working through work packages. A discussion of developments is scheduled for 1 July involving NSF, SAO and CPS in DC to discuss budgets for such items as the crane, power, the telehandler, etc. CPS is slated to pick up with contracting after the telescope is disassembled (current plans have the telescope assembled during the upcoming spring in Hanover, NH at CRREL).
NOAA updates from Katrine include that the maximum distance that NOAA wants the new AWO is 1000m from the generator module (this following discussion of exactly how far away TAWO is from Summit Station now, and what landmark is used as “Summit”).
Other Summit updates from Katrine are that the Petrenko group believes they can reach all their science objectives, and are currently working in two 10 hour shifts in order to make up for delays. Katrine got a tour of the new berthing module, which was delivered by GrIT, which consists of 4 rooms, with 8 bunks. She believes that it is a 9kW load, but it is not metered. The construction crew is currently using it.
Zoe informed us that she was invited to participate in the upcoming traverse workshop as part of the SCAT team. Sounds like a great opportunity.
We discussed the Annual Report and shared notes about what we have undertaken in the last year year. Jack agreed to create a 1st draft of report by 19 June. John and Bob agreed to try to have a prototype of the web served Summit GIS working by then too, and Zoe said she would strive to have Google “street view” photos of Summit on line and accessible as well.
In this call, the value engineering for the mobile garage is discussed in more detail, and CPS presents additional work that has been done in determining if the concept will work for the needs of the station. In particular, the mezzanine has been made taller so that the 953 can fit under the mezzanine, and the working clearance needed around the vehicle has been discussed (i.e. Martin would like 8 ft on each side of the bay around the vehicle to allow for mechanics to have enough room to work). There had been discussion of removing the stairs to add working space, but the stairs are needed for egress (a 3ft stair would be acceptable, however). There will be more follow up with operational personnel to determine if the current concept will work. The mezzanine would mostly contain manuals, a workstation for 2 people, and tool storage. The possibility of having a smaller SAR vehicle in the future was also brought up, but the vehicle needs to be large enough to at least accommodate a litter, limiting the reduction in size that is possible.
attending: SCO, RSL and ALEX
NSF updated SCO about Isi/Telescope developments. There will be a telescope virtual meeting July 1, which will most likely be a detail oriented discussion of plans to move forward. Isi documents are due to be delivered by the end of the month; Isi development work entails priorities and phasing as a follow up to the charrette meeting. We hope to see more analysis in the next phase of Isi documents. In addition to the telescope meeting, GrIT is conducting a working meeting at the end of June, and CPS will be conducting their year end review. Pat would also like to see a separate meeting to discuss what the telescope has to have to operate regardless of the CPS schedule. SCO expressed concern that the power energy group hadn’t met for months, but there is some consensus that CPS has been working on the power issues and has made some progress. We discussed Pat’s idea for the power system, which would consist of two generators, each of which is the other’s back-up.
We went over two possible garage concepts: 1) two separate garages at AWO and a separate garage at the telescope or 2) a surface garage separated from Summit, with a taxi service running to the station. This would increase fuel usage, but eliminates the problem of people using the vehicles for joyriding, and not knowing how to operate the vehicles.
Also discussed were the NOAA concerns over the distance between Summit and AWO; currently NOAA would like to limit the distance to 1km so that techs can walk between the two locations without the need of a commuting vehicle. Jack has been working to get consensus with NOAA and ICECAPS groups, who have come to an agreement that the balloon launching can stay at the main camp. SCO has also been engaged with the astrophysics group to determine the need for radio silence. The astrophysics group is working on a 2 page position paper about it. We also discussed the need to include a member of the astrophysics community in SCO. Finally, we agreed to begin to distribute the 2 page executive summary of the white paper.