OFCM Weadon Nat Academy MPAR Panel by ywp5Yn

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 4

									                National Academy Panel
          Evaluation of MPAR Planning Process

Paul L. Smith, Chair (Professor, South Dakota School of Mines and
Technology)
Steven Rutledge (Professor, Colorado State University)
Marilyn Wolfson (Research Scientist, MIT Lincoln Lab)
Bob Serafin (Director Emeritus, NCAR)
Dave McLaughlin (University of Massachusetts)
Robert Palmer (Professor, University of Oklahoma)
Eastwood Im (Research Scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory)
Scott Sandgathe (Research Scientist, University of Washington)
Jim Davis (Senior Engineer, The Aerospace Corporation)

Curtis Marshall (Executive Secretary)
            National Academy Panel
      Evaluation of MPAR Planning Process

Provide an independent assessment on the OFCM-sponsored
report, Federal Research and Development Needs and
Priorities for Phased Array Radar (2006), and follow-on work in
four areas:

    • Analysis of current and future Federal agency needs that
     can be met by a domestic ground radar system

    • Description of potential benefits that can be realized from
      MPAR technology in meeting these needs

    • Proposed R&D plan to evaluate MPAR options

    • Preliminary cost analysis for MPAR
               National Academy Panel
        Evaluation of MPAR Planning Process
              Initial Meeting 14 January
10:00 A.M. Welcome and introductions --Paul Smith, Chair

10:15 A.M. Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and
Supporting Research -- Sam Williamson, Mark Weadon, Mark Welshinger

11:30 A.M. Overview of Phased Array Radar Technology --Merrill Skolnik, NRL

12:30 P.M. Working Lunch – Continued Discussion

1:15 P.M. Meteorological Applications of MPAR --Dusan Zrnic, NOAA/NSSL

2:15 P.M. Aviation Applications of MPAR -- William Benner, FAA

3:15 P.M. Break

3:30 P.M. Private Sector Developments --Michael Sarcione, Raytheon
Timothy Ehret; Lockheed Martin

4:30 P.M. Discussion and Comments
              National Academy Panel
       Evaluation of MPAR Planning Process
             Initial Meeting 14 January
-Thematic Questions
  -- How are requirements being addressed? How quantified?
  -- Has boundary layer coverage from the 334 notional MPARs been
     quantified?
  -- What impact does sensor failure have on various missions covered by
     an MPAR? (i.e. multiple missions means impact is proportionally
     greater from failure of a single unit)
  -- Is there a need for more than one type of MPAR radar?
  -- What does “graceful degradation” really mean, and how is it
     quantified? (need MTBF data; failure analysis of current PARs)
  -- Has the $10M per MPAR unit price estimate considered the
     considerable cost of software development (i.e. total cost of system
     may be far more than simply the sum of its components)

- “Where’s the beef”—urgent need for far more engineering rigor than
   shown in the JAG report

								
To top