ATTREX
Airborne Topical TRopopause EXperiment
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
1
Executive Summary
Background and Scientific Importance—Recent calculations show that the climatic impact of
changes in stratospheric humidity are comparable to those of increasing greenhouse gas
concentrations. While the tropospheric water vapor climate feedback is reasonably well
represented in global models, predictions of future changes in stratospheric humidity are highly
uncertain because of gaps in our understanding of physical processes occuring in the Tropical
Tropopause Layer (TTL, ~13-18 km), the region of the atmosphere that controls the composition
of the stratosphere. Important and poorly understood processes include the effects of deep
convection on TTL water vapor and other chemical constituents; the formation of ubiquitous thin
cirrus in the TTL (which themselves have an important effect on the radiation budget and climate);
regulation of stratospheric humidity by TTL thin cirrus; rates and pathways of vertical transport
through the TTL; the effects of tropical waves on TTL thermal structure, dehydration, and
transport; and the impact of short-lived trace gases on stratospheric ozone concentration.
Observations of TTL composition are sparse compared to those in other climatically important
regions, partly because its high altitude limits aircraft sampling and partly because strong vertical
gradients limit the usefulness of
coarse-resolution
satellite
measurements. As a result, TTL
transport,
cloud
formation,
dehydration, and chemistry are
crudely represented in global models.
Future changes in TTL processes that
will affect cloudiness as well as
stratospheric humidity and ozone
represent
significant
climate
feedbacks.
Thus, addressing our
limitations in understanding of the
TTL is critically important.
We
propose to address these problems
with a series of TTL measurement
campaigns using the unique capabilies
of the long-range NASA Global Hawk
(GH) unmanned aircraft system
Figure 1. ATTREX Organization Chart
(UAS).
The proposed investigation fills several significant gaps in atmospheric science identified in the
NASA Decadal Survey involving climate change, stratospheric ozone, and stratospheretroposphere exchange. Science questions that will be addressed include the following:
1. What processes control the tropical tropopause temperature and the humidity of air entering the
stratosphere (including their seasonal cycles)?
2. What are the dominant pathways for vertical transport from convective detrainment altitudes in
the TTL up to the tropical tropopause in different seasons?
3. What are the formation processes, microphysical properties, and climate impact of TTL cirrus,
and how do these clouds regulate the humidity of air entering the stratosphere?
4. What are the chemical and transport processes that drive the budget of ozone and ozone
precursors such as short-lived halogen compounds?
5. How will TTL cirrus, stratospheric humidity, and stratospheric ozone respond to a changing
climate, and what are the resulting feedback effects?
Investigation Approach—The proposed investigation (Airborne Tropical Tropopause
Experiment, ATTREX) addresses these science questions with four airborne campaigns using the
GH UAS. The GH, with a 30-hr duration, a 65,000 ft ceiling, and a 1000 lb payload capacity, is
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
2
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
uniquely suited for TTL science
objectives.
The
proposed
instruments (Table 1) will
Instrument
Measurements
provide high spatial and
Cloud Physics Lidar (CPL)
Aerosol/cloud backscatter
temporal
resolution
measurements
of
TTL
tracers
Ozone
O3
with a broad range of lifetimes,
Advanced Whole Air Sampler (AWAS)
Numerous tracers with
cloud microphysical properties,
varying lifetimes
thermodynamic
variables,
radiative fluxes, water vapor, and
O3, CH4, N2O, SF6
UAS Chromatograph for Atmospheric
brominated gases over very large
Trace Species (UCATS)
spatial domains in the tropics.
Picarro Cavity Ringdown Spectrometer
CO2, CO
Each of the proposed instruments
UAS Laser Hygrometer (ULH)
H2O
uses
state-of-the-art,
demonstrated techniques. The
Diode Laser Hygrometer (DLH)
H2O
four campaigns will explore the
Hawkeye
Ice crystal size distributions,
seasonal variability of TTL
habits
processes. GMT2 will make
sustained measurements at high
Solar, Infrared Radiometers
Radiative fluxes
spatial resolution over vast
Meteorological Measurement System
Temperature, winds,
geographical regions. Thus, it
(MMS)
turbulence
fills the gap between coarseMicrowave Temperature Profiler (MTP) Temperature profile
resolution satellites and single,
limited-domain
conventional
BrO, NO2, OClO, IO
Differential Optical Absorption
high altitude aircraft campaigns..
Spectrometer (DOAS)
The deployment schedule (Table
2) allows almost two years for post-deployment data analysis and modeling. The broad scale
sustained measurements allow significant conclusions from aircraft data alone. However,
combination with satellite data and modeling studies is essential both in providing context for the
aircraft measurements, and validation of satellite measurements. The theory team is experienced in
aircraft data analysis and cloud, transport, and chemical modeling. Trajectory analyses, process
models, chemical transport models and climate models will be used to understand TTL processes
in the current atmosphere, improve representations of these processes in climate models, and
predict feedback effects associated with changes in TTL clouds and composition in a changing
climate.
Table 1. Global Hawk Payload
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
3
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Table of Contents
ATTREX ................................................................................................................................................ 1
Airborne Topical TRopopause EXperiment ......................................................................................... 1
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.0. Science Investigation ..................................................................................................................... 6
1.1. Science Goals and Objectives.................................................................................................... 7
1.2 Science Objectives .................................................................................................................. 8
Measurement Requirements ....................................................................................................... 14
2.0. Science Implementation ............................................................................................................... 15
2.1. Science Investigation Concept................................................................................................. 15
2.2. Science Data ............................................................................................................................. 17
2.2.1 Science Traceability ........................................................................................................... 17
2.2.2 Data Management Plan...................................................................................................... 18
2.3. Science Team............................................................................................................................ 18
3.0. Investigation Implemenation ....................................................................................................... 22
3.1. Measurement Platform System Capabilities .......................................................................... 22
3.1.1. Global Hawk Payload Capacity ....................................................................................... 22
3.1.2. Ground Control Station (GCS) ......................................................................................... 23
3.1.3. Global Hawk Mobile Operations Facility (GHMOF) ..................................................... 23
3.2. Instrumentation ....................................................................................................................... 23
3.2.1. Mission Instrument Summary ......................................................................................... 23
3.2.2. Instrument Descriptions ................................................................................................... 24
3.2.2.1. Cloud Physics Lidar (CPL) .......................................................................................... 24
3.2.2.2. Ozone (O3).................................................................................................................... 26
3.2.2.3. Advanced Whole Air Sampler (AWAS) ....................................................................... 26
3.2.2.4. UAS Chromatograph for Atmospheric Trace Species (UCATS) ................................ 27
3.2.2.5. Picarro Cavity Ringdown Spectrometer (PCRS)......................................................... 28
3.2.2.6. UAS Laser Hygrometer (ULH) .................................................................................... 29
3.2.2.7. Diode Laser Hygrometer (DLH) .................................................................................. 29
3.2.2.8. Hawkeye (Lawson, Spec Inc.)...................................................................................... 30
3.2.2.9. Solar, Infrared Radiometers (SSFR) ............................................................................ 30
3.2.2.10. Meteorological Measurement System (MMS) .......................................................... 31
3.2.2.11. Microwave Temperature Profiler (MTP) ................................................................... 32
3.2.2.12. Mini-DOAS - Differential Optical Absorption Spectrometer .................................... 32
3.3. Development Approach .......................................................................................................... 33
3.3.1. Management and Planning .............................................................................................. 33
3.3.2. Developmental Status ...................................................................................................... 33
3.3.3. Deployment Sites ............................................................................................................. 34
3.4. Assembly, Integration, Test ..................................................................................................... 34
3.4.1. Planning ........................................................................................................................... 34
3.4.2. Integration ........................................................................................................................ 34
3.4.3. Testing .............................................................................................................................. 34
3.4.4. Timeline ........................................................................................................................... 35
4.0. Management ................................................................................................................................. 36
4.1. Management Approach ............................................................................................................ 36
4.1.1. Team Member Coordination and Communication .......................................................... 36
4.1.2. Reviews and Progress Reporting to ESSP ....................................................................... 37
4.2. Risk Management .................................................................................................................... 37
4.3. Schedule .................................................................................................................................. 38
4.4. Management of Reserves, Margins, and Descope Options .................................................... 40
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
4
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
5.0. Cost and Cost Estimating Methodology...................................................................................... 41
5.1 Cost Summary ........................................................................................................................... 41
5.2 Cost Estimating Methodology .................................................................................................. 41
5.3 Reserves Level Justification ..................................................................................................... 41
APPENDICES..................................................................................................................................... 44
A.
ATTREX –Cost Table........................................................................................................ 45
B.
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) ..................................................................................... 46
C.
WBS Dictionary ................................................................................................................... 48
D.
Statement of Work (SOW) ................................................................................................... 53
E.
Master Equipment List (MEL) ............................................................................................ 54
F. Basis of Estimate Details ......................................................................................................... 55
WBS 1.0 Project Management, 2.0 Systems Engineering, 3.0 Safety & Investigation
Assurance .................................................................................................................................... 55
WBS 4.0 Instruments .................................................................................................................. 55
WBS 5.0 Flight System and Services......................................................................................... 55
WBS 6.0 Investigation Operations ............................................................................................. 55
WBS 7.0 Ground System............................................................................................................ 56
WBS 8.0 Integration and Test ..................................................................................................... 56
WBS 9.0 Science Team .............................................................................................................. 56
G.
Curriculae Vitae ................................................................................................................... 57
Dr. Eric J. Jensen ......................................................................................................................... 57
Michael T. Gaunce ...................................................................................................................... 59
Dr. Leonhard Pfister .................................................................................................................... 60
DR. David W. Fahey ................................................................................................................... 62
Co-I and Flight Scientist ............................................................................................................. 62
Dr. Hanwant B. Singh, ................................................................................................................ 64
Dr. M. Joan Alexander ................................................................................................................ 66
Dr. Matthew J. McGill ................................................................................................................ 68
Dr. Ru-Shan Gao ......................................................................................................................... 70
Dr. Elliot L. Atlas ........................................................................................................................ 72
Dr. James W. Elkins .................................................................................................................... 75
Dr. Steven C. Wofsy .................................................................................................................... 77
Dr. Robert L. Herman ................................................................................................................. 79
Glen Diskin ................................................................................................................................. 81
Dr. R. Paul Lawson ..................................................................................................................... 82
Dr. Peter Pilewskie ...................................................................................................................... 84
Dr. T. Paul Bui ............................................................................................................................. 85
Dr. Michael J. Mahoney.............................................................................................................. 86
Jochen Peter Stutz ....................................................................................................................... 88
H.
Letters of Commitment ........................................................................................................ 90
I. Current and Pending Support for PI and Co-Is ....................................................................... 92
J. Compliance with U.S. Export Laws and Regulations ............................................................ 93
K.
References ............................................................................................................................ 94
Works Cited ......................................................................................................................................... 94
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
5
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
1.0. Science Investigation
Recent studies show that changes in
stratospheric water vapor concentration
have a large impact on climate. Solomon
et al. (manuscript submitted to Science,
2009) calculated a radiative forcing (i.e.,
impact on the earth’s heat budget) from the
recent (since 2000) decrease in
stratospheric humidity of -0.098 W m-2,
which is comparable in magnitude to the
radiative forcing increase due to the
increases in carbon dioxide concentration
from 1996-2005 (+0.26 W m-2). Based on
these calculations, they estimate that the
stratospheric water decrease acted to slow
the rate of surface temperature increase Figure 1-1. The Tropical Tropopause Layer (TTL) in
over the past decade by 25% compared to the context of the overall stratospheric circulation. Air
that expected from increases in carbon moves upward into the stratosphere through the TTL,
dioxide and other greenhouse gases. where very cold temperatures control the water vapor through
Despite its importance, global model condensation. Stratospheric motion is downward at other
predictions of the response of stratospheric
humidity to a changing climate are highly latitudes.
uncertain. The proposed investigation will directly address this problem.
Air enters the stratosphere across the tropical tropopause (Figure 1-1), and the stratospheric water
vapor concentration is controlled by processes occuring in the region of the atmosphere known as
the tropical tropopause layer (TTL, Figure 1-2). TTL processes affecting the humidity of air
entering the stratosphere include injection by deep convection, transport through cold tropopause
regions, and freeze-drying by formation of thin cirrus. The TTL composition is poorly observed in
comparison to other climatically important parts of the atmosphere, partly due to the high altitude
that limits sampling with aircraft
and partly due to the strong vertical
gradients that limit the value of
coarse-resolution
satellite
measurements.
Insufficient
understanding of TTL physical
processes and poor representation of
these processes in global models
limits our confidence in predictions
of climate feedbacks associated with
changes
in
TTL
clouds,
stratospheric
humidity,
and
stratospheric
composition in a
warming climate.
Figure 1-2. Processes occurring within the Tropical Tropopause
Layer (TTL)
The occurrence of ubiquitous TTL
cirrus (which are themselves
important for the earth’s radiation
budget and climate), the regulation
of stratospheric humidity, and the
chemical composition of air entering
the stratosphere are controlled by a
complex interplay between rapid
and slow transport processes,
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
6
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
microphysical
processes,
waves,
and
chemistry. Deep convection links surface
conditions to the upper troposphere. The
strength and depth of convection affects
transport of water vapor and chemical
constituents and affects the generation of
tropical waves. Tropical waves affect
cirrus formation and drive large scale
ascent in the tropics. Cirrus have direct
radiative effects and also have indirect
effects on water vapor concentrations that
are communicated to the whole
stratosphere via the Brewer-Dobson (BD)
circulation (Figure 1-1). Through the BD
circulation, the TTL composition has a
controlling influence on production and
loss rates of stratospheric ozone.
The proposed investigation (Airborne Tropical
Tropopause Experiment (ATTREX) will
provide sustained measurements of TTL
composition, cloud properties, and radiative
environment over multipe seasons and over
large geographic regions required to address
the shortcomings in our understanding of TTL
processes and our ability to predict climate
change.
1.1. Science Goals and Objectives
Figure 1-3. TTL cirrus occurrence frequency
calculated from CALIPSO measurements. From
The proposed investigation has the following Yang et al. (2009).
overarching science goals:
1. To improve our understanding of how deep convection, slow large-scale ascent, waves, and
microphyiscs control the humidity and chemical composition of air entering the stratosphere.
2. To improve global-model predictions of feedbacks associated with future changes in TTL cirrus,
stratospheric humidity, and stratospheric ozone in a changing climate.
ATTREX fills several significant gaps in atmospheric science identified in Earth Science and
Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond (2007):
 From Chapter 6, Health and Human Security, UV Dosage Forecasting, pp 159, 162
∙ Catalytic destruction of O3 from ClO, BrO, and IO concentrations in the lower stratosphere
∙ Dynamic coupling between the troposphere and stratosphere due to CO2, CH4, etc.
∙ Role of convective injection of short-lived compounds through the TTL
 From Chapter 9, Observational Needs and Requirements, pp 260, 265
∙ How climate is affected by the balance between sunlight absorbed and emitted infrared
radiation?
∙ Composition of the atmosphere (such as greenhouse gases and aerosols), and the effects of the
various atmospheric components on radiation loss to space.
∙ Understanding the climate feedback process critical to improving climate models.
∙ Reliable climate simulations require improved treatment of the processes: clouds, aerosols, and
convective systems; and trace species across the interfaces of boundary layer and free
troposphere, troposphere-stratosphere.
 From Chapter 9, Focus Area Beta: Measurement of Convective Transports, p 292
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
7
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Figure 1-4. The seasonal variability of tropical tropopause temperature (left) and water vapor concentration
from a variety of state-of-the-art global models. Note the large variability in temperature (and correspondingly in
H2O) between different models, reflecting the uncertainty in processes controlling stratospheric humidity. From
Eyring et al. (2006).
∙ The balance between convection and radiation in the TTL plays a major role in stratospheretroposphere exchange, particularly with respect to the abundances of water vapor, aerosols, and
halogen compounds entering the stratosphere in the tropics.
∙ Measure atmospheric composition through the upper troposphere and across the tropopause to
understand the stratosphere-troposphere exchange.
1.2 Science Objectives
1.2.1. TTL Cirrus and Control of Stratospheric Humidity
Recent studies have shown that TTL cirrus regulate the humidity of air entering the stratosphere
(e.g. Jensenand Pfister, 2004; Fueglistaler et al., 2005), the local thermal budget of the TTL (with
implications for vertical transport -- Corti et al., 2006), and the net radiative flux in the tropics
(Haladay and Stephens,2009). Cirrus clouds occur with very high frequency in the TTL (Figure 13), resulting from both detrainment from deep convection and in situ formation within the TTL.
Widespread cirrus formation in the TTL is expected given the large-scale ascent that drives
adiabatic cooling and increasing relative humidity. TTL cirrus are typically laminar (Massie et al.,
2009), and optically thin (often referred to as subvisible clouds). A detailed understanding of the
detailed TTL cirrus formation processes is necessary for quantitative prediction of their impact on
the water vapor and radiation budgets. Despite the importance of stratospheric water for radiation
and climate (discussed above), predictions of TTL temperature, TTL cloud formation, and
ultimately stratospheric water are highly uncertain in current climate models (Figure 1-4).
Recent in situ observations indicated large supersaturations both within TTL cirrus and in clear
regions near the cold tropical tropopause (Jensen et al., 2005). The existence of such large
supersaturations (relative humidities with respect to ice (RHI) approaching 200%) defies
theoretical expectations that ice crystals will nucleate at 160% RHI, preventing further increase in
supersaturation, and that within TTL cirrus, ice crystal growth should rapidly deplete vapor in
excess of saturation. However, these high-supersaturation measurements have been called into
question because of persistent discrepancies in water vapor measurements made by different
instruments (Jensen et al., 2008; Kramer et al., 2008).
In addition to the issues involving large supersaturations at low temperatures, there are significant
gaps in our understanding of how cirrus form at very low temperatures. The conventional theory is
that homogeneous freezing of aqueous aerosols dominates production of ice crystals in the upper
troposphere. However, recent measurements of TTL cirrus ice concentrations, particle size
distributions, and cloud extinctions are in conflict with theoretical expectations for cirrus formed
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
8
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
via homogeneous freezing at low temperatures (1) (Jensen et al., 2009). Further, recent laboratory
measurements show that mixed sulfate/organic aerosols will transition to a glassy state at low
temperatures, effectively preventing homogeneous freezing nucleation (Zobrist et al.,2008;
Murray, 2008). Understanding TTL cirrus formation processes (which control their microphysical
properties) is important for predicting effects on radiation and the humidity of air entering the
stratosphere.
Atmospheric waves are crucial to cirrus formation and regulation of water vapor concentrations in
two ways. First, because ice nucleation typically requires substantial supersaturation, anomalously
cold temperatures associated with waves will significantly increase the incidence of cloud
formation and subsequent dehydration. Second, wave motions significantly effect air parcel
cooling rates, which, in turn, impact cloud particle size distribution (rapid cooling produces many
small ice crystals, slower cooling fewer larger crystals). Observations have demonstrated that TTL
cirrus clouds form in the cold phases of Kelvin waves (2) (3) (Boehm and Verlinde, 2000; Holton
and Gettelman, 2001; Immler at al., 2008), as well as inertia-gravity waves (Pfister at al., 2001).
Jensen and Pfister (2004) showed that wave-induced cloud formation substantially reduces water
vapor at upper levels in the TTL, and recent calculations suggest that inclusion of waves in
theoretical models of TTL cloud formation and water vapor may be required to reconcile
discrepancies with observations. However, these models are limited by our current lack of
observational knowledge of the global variations in TTL wave properties. Satellite measurements
lack sufficient vertical resolution for the lower frequency waves that have the largest temperature
perturbations. There is also a “measurement gap” between the mesoscale waves (up to a few 100
km) captured by conventional aircraft and the several thousand km scale waves captured by
satellites.
To move forward, we need to know: (1) how inertia-gravity, Kelvin, and other equatorial gravity
wave activity in the TTL varies as a function of latitude, longitude, and distance from convection;
(2) how waves actually cause a cloud to form, and (3) the amplitudes of the very small scale
gravity waves that affect the ice crystal size distributions, and how these amplitudes vary over large
regional scales.
Science questions:
Q1a. What are the formation processes of TTL cirrus and how effectively do they dehydrate
air entering the stratosphere? How are these likely to change in a changing climate?
Q1b. How do gravity waves, Kelvin waves, and other equatorial waves regulate clouds and
dehydration in the TTL?
Measurement Requirements
Addressing these questions will require measurements of the sizes and number concentrations of
ice crystals spanning the size range from ~1 m to ~1000 m. Sufficiently accurate determination
of relative humidity will require water vapor measurements with ~10% accuracy under very dry
conditions (water vapor mixing ratios as low as 1.5 ppmv) and temperature measurements with an
accuracy of about 0.3 K. Ice crystal habit (shape) measurements will also provide important
information about formation mechanisms. Long-range measurements along streamlines that pass
through cold tropopause regions will reveal (for the first time) the conditions under which TTL
cirrus form, how the clouds evolve, and their impact on water vapor concentration.
Extended duration aircraft measurements are required to characterize large regional variations in
mesoscale gravity wave characteristics (Alexander et al., 2000), as well as horizontally extensive
equatorial waves and their relationships to convection. Important components of the wave
spectrum have vertical scales that are difficult to resolve with satellite measurements.
Characterizing these waves and their effects on clouds will require the following measurements:
(1) temperature, horizontal winds, and vertical winds; (2) vertical temperature profiles along the
flight track; (3) water vapor; and (4) ice crystal habit and size distribution.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
9
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
The proposed measurements will greatly improve our understanding of TTL cirrus microphysical
properties, their interactions with waves, and their impact on TTL water vapor concentration.
Process models for understanding particular observed cloud systems. Global models will be
required to link the process knowledge to climate effects. Satellite observations (e.g., CALIPSO)
will be required to evalute the simulations of TTL cirrus throughout the tropics. We anticipate that
this project will lead to improved representation of TTL cirrus in climate models and improved
ability to predict climate feedbacks associated with TTL cirrus and stratospheric humidity.
1.2.2. TTL Temperature Structure
The formation of TTL cirrus and control of the humidity of air entering the stratosphere are
ultimately determined by tropopause temperatures. Large-scale temperature decreases with height
in the tropics from the surface to the cold point tropopause (near 17 km, with temperatures near or
below 200 K), followed by an increase with altitude in the stratosphere above. The temperature
lapse rate in the troposphere up to the altitude of frequent deep convection (~12-14 km) results
from radiative-convective balance. A small fraction of deep convection reaches above 14 km,
infrequently extending up to or across the tropopause. A balance of radiation and dynamics
determines the thermal structure above 14 km; the combined influences of cooling from carbon
dioxide, heating from ozone and dynamically-forced large-scale upwelling (the BD circulation)
results in a temperature minimum near 17 km, followed by temperature increases with height in the
stratosphere (8) (Thuburn and Craig, 2000). The BD circulation is driven by wave breaking and
momentum deposition deep in the stratosphere (Haynes and McIntyre, 19xx). However, the role of
tropical waves in driving the Brewer-Dobson circulation is poorly understood (Kerr-Munslow and
Norton, 2008). Our understanding of the properties of waves propagating into the tropical
stratosphere is insufficient for the development of parameterizations of wave effects in global
models that would permit confidence in predictions of feedback effects in a changing climate.
There is a high level of transient temperature variability within the TTL, linked to a broad spectrum
of waves forced by transient convection (Bergman and Salby, 1994) plus fluctuations in the
Brewer-Dobson upwelling. Much of this variability is difficult to observe with satellite because of
relatively short vertical scales and transient variability. Cirrus clouds themselves may also alter the
thermal structure in the TTL (9) (Hartman et al 2001).
One regularly observed mode of thermal variability is associated with planetary-scale Kelvin
waves, which are eastward-propagating waves with periods 4-20 days (10) (Randel and Wu, 2005).
There is a strong annual cycle in temperatures near and above the cold point (but not below),
related to an annual variation in the strength of the Brewer-Dobson upwelling (with strongest
upwelling and coldest temperatures during boreal winter). This annual variation in cold point
temperatures is reflected as a strong annual cycle in stratospheric water vapor, although the details
of dehydration near the tropopause (and relations to clouds) are uncertain. There are also
interannual variations in the TTL associated with the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the
stratospheric Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO) (Randel at al., 2000), plus an apparent drop in
temperature in 2001 that resulted in a correspon Rosenlof and Reid (2008) showed a correlation
with sea surface temperatures, which suggests a potentially important connection to climate
changes. Possible mechanisms include changes in the depth of convection and changes in the
waves driving the Brewer-Dobson ascent. ding decrease in stratospheric water vapor (11) (Randel
at al., 2006). The tropopause temperatures have remained anomalously cold, and the stratosphere
anomalously dry since the 2001 drop, and the underlying reason for the 2001 shift is unknown.
Characterizing small scale temperature fluctuations in the TTL and linking them to convective and
planetary wave forcing is critical for understanding the processes driving variations in clouds (and
hence water vapor and radiation) in the TTL as well as for understanding the control of the TTL
thermal structure itself.
Science questions:
Q2a. What roles do tropical waves play in the maintenance of and variability in tropical
upwelling within the stratospheric transport circulation?
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
10
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Q2b. How might the TTL thermal structure be altered in a changing climate, and what are
the potential feedback effects?
Measurement Requirements
Current satellites can only resolve tropical atmospheric waves with wavelengths longer than about
6000 km (Alexander et al 2008) , whereas conventional (manned) aircraft are best for mesoscale
waves (24) (a few 100 km – Wang et al 2006). Additional measurements are required to fill the
gap between these scales where there is considerable wave activity. Measurements of
temperatures, winds, and vertical temperature profiles over distances of at least 4000-5000 km are
required. The waves that drive circulations in the TTL will typically have periods of a few days,
and are driven by the lower frequency component of convective systems. The equatorial region is
favored for the upward propagation of such low frequency waves (Longuet-Higgins, 194X). Since
many of these wave modes have nodes at the equator, flights just off the equator (5-10 degrees)
will be required. Long flight legs (at least 5000 km) along a latitude circle with short interruptions
for vertical profiling are required to ascertain the amplitudes and structures of these waves. Ideally,
these flight legs should go as far into the Western Pacific as possible, since that region is the
generation region for many of the waves of interest. Measurement campaigns during multiple
seasons are required for investigation of seasonal variability. The information provided by
airborne measurements will need to be combined with global information about longer-period
waves from satellites and global high-resolution process models. In particular, TRMM satellite
measurements of precipitation will be used as initial conditions for wave models that will be
validated with the ATTREX measurements and satellite temperature measurements from AIRS and
MLS. The combined airborne and satellite datasets will be used to improve parameterizations of
waves in global models and to improve predictions of changes in the TTL thermal structure in a
changing climate.
1.2.3. TTL Radiation and Transport
Only in the tropics are mean verical velocities positive at the tropopause, implying that most of the
tropospheric air that eneters the stratospheric “overworld” passes upward through the TTL (Figure
1-1). As illustrated in Figure 1-2, many physical mechanisms affect TTL transport and
composition: slow, large scale ascent; episodic, rapid transport in deep convection; vertical mixing
due to turbulence, and lateral, quasi-isentropic mixing with “old” air from midlatitude stratosphere
(air that has not had tropospheric influence for an extended period). The interplay of these
mechanisms can have important chemical and climatic effects. Deep penetration of convection, for
example, can inject water vapor and short-lived reactive species and increase cloudiness in the
TTL, affecting ozone depletion (Solomon at al., 1986) and surface temperature. However, the
effects of convection are very uncertain—even the sign of convective influence on relative
humidity is unclear, since convection can modulate the thermal structure of the TTL (Rosenlof and
Reid, 2008). Within the TTL, photochemical reactions and competing physical processes are
important for chemical species whose lifetime is comparable to the ~2 months that it takes for slow
ascent to traverse the TTL. Short-lived precursors of reactive halogen radicals are more likely to
reach the stratosphere if there is significant rapid and deep convective transport (13) (“extreme”
convection in Figure 1-2) and the same convective processes may facilitate removal of reactive
inorganic species. Extensive in-mixing of air from midlatitudes will increase the age of the air in
the TTL and also reduce the input of short-lived halogen precursors into the stratosphere. Such inmixing can also reduce TTL relative humidity and cloud formation (12) (Fujiwara et al., 2009).
TTL transport mechanism are poorly understood, both in terms of mean rates and variations with
longitude and season, reflecting limited observations. Slow ascent rates at the tropopause vary by
a factor of two from boreal summer to winter (Yang at al., 2009). In the TTL, latent heat is a small
term in the energy budget, and adiabatic cooling(heating) driven by adiabatic ascent(descent) is
approximately balanced by radiative heating(cooling). Therefore, calculations or measurements of
radiative heating can be used to diagnose large-scale TTL vertical transport. Such calculations
show that, under clear-sky conditions, ascent in upper part of the TTL (above ~15.5 km) is
balanced by radiative heating (4) (e.g., Gettelman et al., 2004). The rate of vertical transport
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
11
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
through the TTL and lower stratosphere has been estimated from observations of the water vapor
“tape recorder” (Mote et al., 1996; Niwano et al., 2003; Schoeberl et al., 2008), from observations
of the CO2 gradient in the TTL (5) (Park et al., 2007), and from radiative transfer calculations
(Rosenlof et al., 1997).
Recently work shows that cirrus within the TTL play an important role in the local thermal budget.
Radiative transfer calculations have shown that thin cirrus in the TTL can experience radiative
heating of a few K/day (Jensen et al., 1996; McFarquhar et al., 2000; Comstock et al., 2002).
Using measurements from spaceborne lidar to provide information about TTL cloud distributions,
radiative transfer calculations show that when clouds are included, the tropical mean radiative
heating rate is positive above about ~13-14 km (Corti et al., 2006; Yang et al., 2009). These results
have important implications for vertical transport through the TTL. In the clear-sky view, with
large-scale ascent only above 15.5 km, outflow from typical tropical convection (~1213 km) will
simply descend back down into the middle troposphere, and only extreme convective events
detraining above 15.5 km would affect the composition of air entering the stratosphere. However,
based on the calculations including clouds, it appears that large-scale ascent may be occurring in
general above an altitude (~13 km) that is near the main convective outflow level (Figure 1-2).
There are strong longitudinal asymmetries in TTL cirrus associated with the variations in
convection and temperature. In boreal summer, for example, strong ascent occurs over the Indian
Ocean and inside the monsoon anticyclone, with descent in much of the Pacific (Yang et al 2009,
Park et al., 2007). In boreal winter, the strongest ascent is over the western Pacific (14)
(Fueglistaler at al., 2005), with descent occurring below 14 km over much of the tropics.
Convection is also zonally and seasonally asymmetric. Mid-oceanic convergent zones have
convective tops that rarely exceed 13.5 km, while a significant percentage of western Pacific boreal
winter convection (~3%) reaches the tropopause.
TTL cirrus are also directly important for the Earth’s radiation budget, and hence climate in
general. Halladay and Stephens (2009) (7) recently identified a class of optically thin cirrus that
were detected by the CALIPSO lidar measurements but not detected by the CloudSat radar
measurements. These clouds occurred almost exclusively in the TTL. The estimated effects of
these clouds on the tropical average top-of-the-atmosphere radiative fluxes were several W m-2
warming in the infrared, a few W m-2 cooling in the solar, and a few W m-2 warming for the net
flux. The ultimate role of TTL cirrus in future climate change involves feedback effects. A robust
response of climate models to greenhouse-gas increases is a strengthening of the Brewer-Dobson
circulation. Increasing TTL ascent rates will likely increase the occurrence of in situ cirrus
formation, therby increasing radiative forcing.
Exchange between the TTL and the extratropical lower stratosphere also shows large zonal
asymmetries. In the boreal winter season, the subtropical jet provides a substantial barrier to
transfer between the midlatitude lower stratosphere and the TTL below the tropopause (15)
(Haynes and Shuckburgh, 2000). In the boreal summer, however, the Asian monsoon anticyclone
produces stationary zonal asymmetries in the large scale flow, leading to extensive Rossby Wave
Breaking downstream in the Pacific (Postel and Hitchman, 1999), and subsequent inflow of
midlatitude air into the tropics. Vertical mixing due to turbulence outside of convective zones has
typically been ignored, but there is direct evidence of turbulent mixing in connection with Kelvin
waves (16) (Fujiwara et al 2003), and indirect evidence that such mixing occurs on the
equatorward side of the subtropical jet (Konopka at al., 2007).
Science questions:
Q3a. What is the relative importance of typical convection detraining at ~13 km versus
extreme convection detraining above 15 km for the humidity and composition of air entering
the stratosphere?
Q3b. What is the effect of TTL cirrus on the Earth’s radiation budget and TTL radiative
heating?
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
12
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Q3c. What are the mechanisms for transport from the midlatitudes, and how important are
they?
Measurement Requirements
Most of the tracers used to diagnose TTL transport processes (e.g., CO2, CO and SF6) either are not
measured by satellites or are measured with insufficient vertical resolution. Recent aircraft field
experiments using conventional aircraft (e.g., the Costa Rica Aura Validation Experiment
(CRAVE) and the Tropical Composition, Cloud, and Climate Coupling (TC4) missions) have
provided tracer measurements over very limited regional domains and time periods, which yielded
reasonable estimates of upward transfer rates (17) (Schoeberl at al., 2008; Aschmann et al 2009).
However, the large longitudinal and seasonal variations in TTL transport processes imply that these
observations provide a limited view of global transport through the TTL. What is required are
measurements that: (1) span both the regions of large scale ascent in the TTL and large scale
descent and (2) are able to sample the downstream output of most classes of convection (“typical”
and “extreme” in Figure 1-1). Seasonal variation is also important, both because ascent is so much
weaker in the summer, and because of the much larger zonal asymmetry (and potential midlatitude
in-mixing) in the summer. This proposal is intended to address the crtitical need for tracer
measurements that are both fine grained (obtainable only by aircraft) and sustained at large
regional scales (obtainable only by a Global Hawk mission profile).
Table 1-1. Very short lived brominated species in the troposphere*
Species
CHBr3
CH2Br2
CHBr2Cl
CH2BrCl
CHBrCl2
Trop.
Lifetime
(days)
Source
**
26
120
70
150
78
N
N
N, A
N
N, A
Estimated mean mixing ratios Estimated
(pptv) in the tropics
global
source
[Gg(Br)y-1)]
Marine boundary
layer
1.6 (max> 40)
1.1
0.3
0.5
0.3
Upper
troposphere
0.4
0.9
0.1
0.3
0.1
200-800
30-240
10-50
* The dominant brominated species in the troposphere (≈ 25% of Br) are longer-lived CH3Br and Halons and are relatively
uniformly distributed (WMO, 2007)
** N: Natural (largely oceanic); A: Anthropogenic
Bucholtz et al. (2009) (23) recently showed that the heating rate in optically thin TTL cirrus can be
measured with high-altitude aircraft (in this case the ER-2) observations of zenith and nadir
radiative fluxes above and below the clouds and as the aircraft transits through the clouds. Such
measurements of extended clouds under a variety of conditions, along with the microphysical
measurements described above, are required for evaluation and improvement of radiative transfer
calculations. Radiative transfer calculations using climatological cloud information throughout the
tropics (provided by satellites) are required to assess the overal impact of TTL cirrus on the
radiation budget. The measurements of TTL cirrus microphysical properties and radiative effects
will improve the accuracy of the global calculations.
Chemical transport models including the observed tracers (17) (e.g., Aschmann et al., 2009) will be
required to evaluate transport mechanisms and their representation in global models, and GCMs
(with improved representations of transport) will be required to predict future changes in TTL
transport and associated feedbacks.
1.2.4. TTL Chemistry
The TTL is important for setting the chemical boundary conditions of the stratosphere. This is
particularly true for very short-lived substances (VSLS) whose lifetimes are typically less than six
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
13
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
months, comparable to or shorter than the transit time through the TTL (18) (19) (Fueglistaler et
al., 2004; WMO 2007). The predominant pathways for VSLS transport into the UT/TTL are likely
to be in tropical convection regions, co-located with high emissions. An important group in this
category is made up of brominated organics which are principally of oceanic origin with sources
dominated by coastal areas and tropics (19 p. Table 1) (Table 1; WMO, 2007).
In the traditional view, the bromine budget in the stratosphere is principally controlled by longlived species such as CH3Br and Halons. Bromine monoxide (BrO) measurements in the lower
stratosphere have indicated that brominated VSLS probably contribute significantly (≈25%) to the
Br budget in this region (e.g., Ko et al., 1997; Pfeilsticker et al., 2000). Inclusion of this bromine
in models results in larger ozone destruction in the lower stratosphere via interactions of this
bromine with anthropogenic chlorine (BrO + ClO) and HOx (20) (Ko et al., 1997; Dvortsov et al.,
1999; Pfeilsticker et al., 2000; Salawitch et al., 2005). Balloon and satellite data also suggest a
global abundance of 0 to 3 ppt of BrO distributed throughout the troposphere (21) (Harder et al.,
1998; Müller et al., 2002; Richter et al., 2002; Platt and Hönninger, 2003; Dorf et al., 2006 and
2008). Several satellites (OMI, SCIAMACHY) have deduced residuals of BrO in the lower
troposphere widely believed to be involved in tropospheric O3 destruction processes.
Uncertainty in the reactive bromine role is due to variable sources and limited understanding of
VSLS transport through the TTL. The role of convection in redistributing surface emissions and
regulating transport of VSLS to the TTL region is uncertain (13) (22) (Gettelman et al 2009;
Sinnhuber and Folkins, 2006). Better constraining the distribution of VSLS in the TTL is critical
for understanding these pathways and their impact on stratospheric ozone.
The large discrepancy between the measured and modeled burden of stratospheric BrO has been
the source of much debate in the atmospheric chemistry community and is presently poorly
understood. BrO and precursor measurements from the tropical TTL region are extremely sparse
and in many cases nonexistent (e.g., Laube et al., 2008).
With we will focus our efforts in this investigation on bromine chemistry.
Science Questions:
Q4a. What is the vertical distribution of BrO and short lived halogen compounds in the TTL
and how does it vary seasonally and geographically?
Q4b. Are TTL O3 and halogen observations consistent with photochemical theoretical
models?
Measurement Requirements
The primary gap in our understanding of TTL chemistry that we propose to address is the budget of
brominated species. Highly sensitive BrO measurements (sensitivity 1 ppt; accuracy ±10%) are
required in addition to measurements of very short-lived brominated species (i.e., CHBr3, CH2Br2,
and CHBr2Cl) (sensitivity 0.5 ppt; accuracy ±5%). These measurements are required over broad
regions in the tropics as well as in different seasons. Multiple tracers of convective influence will
also be required to understand the relationship between brominated species concentrations and
transport pathways. We will also need to assemble a global database of organic and inorganic
brominated species based on previously available measurements in the troposphere and the
stratosphere. Analysis and interpretation of data from this experiment will require integration of all
acquired and assembled data with models of chemistry and transport (13) (17) (e. g. Gettleman et
al., 2009; Aschmann et al., 2009).
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
14
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
2.0. Science Implementation
2.1. Science Investigation Concept
To answer the 9 science questions posed in section 1, we propose an instrumented Global Hawk
aircraft in four separate phases over 2 years. These phases span the seasonal cycle of variation in
the basic TTL environment. The physical processes operate on a broad range of scales, requiring
the capability to examine variations from 1 to several 1000 km in size. An example of this is
science question 1b, involving the impact of waves on clouds and the TTL thermal structure.
Small scale gravity waves (1 – 10 km, time scales of minutes) affect particle size distributions in
thin cirrus clouds (Jensen et al, 2009), which affects their ability to dehydrate the tropopause
region. Large scale (5000-10000 km, seasonal time scales) variations in relative humidity create
favorable regions for cloud formation. Intermediate scale waves (100-5000 km, multi-day time
scales) induce periods of cold temperatures that allow ice nucleation to take place. Only a very
long-range aircraft can
sample variability across
all of these scales. The
Global Hawk has an
operating
radius
of
~8500km, 2.5 times that
of manned high altitude
aircraft (ER-2, see range
rings in Figure 2-1). This
and the Global Hawk’s
typical altitude of 13.8-20
km make it an an
essential
platform for
this investigation.
2.1.1
Operational
Time Line
Figure 2-1. Sample Global Hawk flight profiles for the four phases of
GMT2. The colored profiles represent different flight plans as described in the
text. All of the flights are of 28 hours duration, except for the magenta flights
in b and d, which are 24 hours. Solid and dotted black lines represent
maximum range rings for the Global Hawk and ER-2 aircraft, respectively.
The mission starts June
2010, with a kickoff
science team meeting in
July. The next twelve
months will be devoted
to: (1) adapting and
integrating
the
instruments to the Global
Hawk; and (2) adapting
existing flight planning,
forecasting, data analysis,
and modeling tools to the mission.
Test flights (Phase 1 of four) based at NASA/DFRC will be conducted in summer 2011. This
phase will include at least one full-length science flight, two examples of which are shown in
Figure 2-1a, and further discussed in 2.1.2. The first full science phase (Phase 2) takes place in
January, 2012, when the Global Hawk will be based in Guam for 32 days to make observations
during boreal winter. 32 days is sufficient to span most of the 40-50 day Madden-Julian oscillation
in large scale tropical convection. The tropical tropopause is seasonally at its coldest during this
period, and Guam is near the coldest temperatures, the lowest water vapor (Figure 2-1b), the
highest incidence of observed TTL clouds (Figure 1-3), and the region with the largest mean ascent
rate. For each main science phase there will be 200 flight hours and 8 science flights: 2 transit
missions to and from NASA/DFRC and 6 science flights based in Guam. The average length of
these flights will be 25 hours, with no flight exceeding 30 hours.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
15
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Figure 2-2. Typical vertical profiles along the flight track: (a) Alongtrack vertical profiling for FP1, FP2, and FP3, (b) Vertical profiles for
FP4.
Phase 3, based in Hawaii, will
take place in fall 2012, during
the transition from boreal
summer to winter. Phase 4
will examine the boreal
summer season, which differs
fundamentally from winter
(Phase 2), having warmer
temperatures, higher water
vapor (Figure 2-1d), slower
mean TTL ascent rates, and
stronger mass exchange with
midlatitudes due to the
zonally asymmetric monsoon
circulation. This phase will
occur in July, 2013 with the
Global Hawk based in
Darwin, Australia.
From
Darwin, the Global Hawk will
be able to examine the nearby
summer cold pool, as well as
the
Asian
monsoon
anticyclone, believed to be a
region of upward motion into the stratosphere (Park et al, 2007).
Data analysis will start after the first science flight of Phase 1 (summer, 2011). The phases are 6-9
months apart, so there is ample time (almost 2 years from Phase 4 to mission end) for data analysis
and modeling. This flexible schedule can deal with delays in aircraft readiness by moving Phase 2
to winter 2014, still leaving 1.3 years for analysis.
2.1.2 Observing Profile
The Global Hawk will conduct 4 basic types of flight profiles during the four phases, as shown by
the four different colored flight tracks in Figures 2-1(a-d). The importance of each of these flight
profiles to the 9 science questions outlined in section 1 is listed in Table 2-1.
The most important Flight Profile is FP1 (red lines in Figure 2-1) a longitudinal survey at TTL
altitudes at least 60 degrees in length within 15 degrees of the equator. It covers regions of the
TTL with different convective, water vapor and slow ascent characteristics, providing statistics to
address all the science questions. The constant latitude course is needed to perform spectral
analysis on equatorial waves whose scales are between those measured by satellites and by
conventional high altitude aircraft (questions 1b and 2a) . Transit legs from Dryden to Guam or
Darwin (Figure 2-1b, dotted red) are particularly valuable for this purpose, since they can cover
120 degrees of longitude, a third of the globe. FP1, whose typical cruise altitude will be below the
tropopause, includes along-track vertical profiling (Figure 2-2a) to capture information over the
full depth of the TTL. Meteorological forecasts will determine the placement of these profiles.
For example, the aircraft may profile a region downstream of a convective system.
FP2 (green in Figure 2-1), a latitudinal survey, addresses transport from midlatitudes, and the large
scale distribution of BrO and other short-lived halogen compounds. FP3 (blue in Figure 2-1) is a
TTL survey targeted to the Indian Ocean region during Phases 2 and 4. During boreal winter
(Phase 2), the Indian Ocean TTL is considerably moister than the Pacific region (Figure 2-1b) and
upward motion is also weaker. During boreal summer, a strong anticyclone forms over the north
Indian region, leading to a maximum in slow ascent (Figure 2-1d). Sampling in these regions is
important for understanding upward transport (question 3a) and the distribution of BrO and shortlived halogens (question 4a). As for FP1, FP2 and FP3 will both include along-track vertical
profiling (Figure 2-2a). TTL cirrus sampling will also occur during these flights.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
16
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
FP4 (magenta in Figure 2-1) investigates the evolution of water vapor and cloud along a trajectory
as it enters and exits the major TTL cold pools in the western Pacific. These regions are slightly
north of the equator in boreal winter, and on or south of it in boreal summer. As part of FP4, the
aircraft will do a cirrus cloud passage vertical maneuver (Figure 2-2b) when a cloud is detected
underneath the aircraft. The aircraft will descend through the cirrus cloud to measure radiative
fluxes and heating rates, and then return to cloud altitude in order to make measurements of water
vapor, temperature, cloud particles, and winds approximately along air parcel trajectories. Most of
FP4 will be spent at the cloud altitude near the cold point tropopause. These flights will (for the
first time) provide information about the supersaturations required for cold TTL cirrus and the
irreversible dehydration of TTL air by the clouds.
2.1.3 Flight Planning and Forecasting
The NASA Goddard flight planning software will be used for proposing flight plans and
requesting in-flight course changes. Most NASA field campaigns supported by the Upper
Atmosphere Research Program since 1993 have used this software, which has recently been
customized for the Global Hawk for GLOPAC. This software enables the scientist to efficiently
target the aircraft for maximum science return while remaining within the aircraft’s operating
parameters (i.e., range, speed, restricted flight areas). The software permits overlaying aircraft
courses and altitude profiles on meteorological fields (i.e., temperature, winds) from global
forecast models. Thus, we can either target (cold temperatures) or avoid (convection) certain
forecast features.
Meteorological forecasting is a key part of flight planning. We will use global meteorological
forecast models (NCEP Global Forecast System and NASA GSFC GEOS-5) to produce graphical
products (available to the science team via a web site) depicting the coldest temperatures (where
cirrus clouds would form), the position of the subtropical jet (to sample midlatitude air), and
regions of wave breaking (where midlatitude air enters the tropics). Other tools include trajectorybased forecasts of convective influence (for vertical profiling – see above), forecast tracer
distributions from chemical transport models (e.g., CAM, WACCM, GEOS-5), and quicklook
satellite products (CALIPSO for clouds and MLS for water vapor).
2.2. Science Data
2.2.1 Science Traceability
The Science Traceability Matrix (Table 2-1) shows the measurements, instrument requirements,
and investigation requirements (flight profiles, links with satellite data, modeling) needed to
answer the 9 science questions from section 1. The left column shows the main science objectives
and respective section numbers. The discussion here is brief, with details in section 1.
Flight profile 4 (magenta in Figure 2-1) addresses Q1a (TTL cirrus formation) by exploring the
cold regions where TTL cirrus are plentiful. We will use: (1) process models to understand the
microphysics implied by measured ice crystal size distributions and relative humidities; (2)
trajectory-based microphysical models (Jensen and Pfister, 2004) to evaluate the implications for
global TTL water and clouds (as measured by satellites); and (3) global models to evaluate climatic
effects. Flight profiles 1 and 3 address Q1b (waves) through extended surveys of TTL
meteorological variables. Measured wave distributions input into trajectory-based or 3-D global
microphysical models help us understand wave effects on TTL water and clouds. Flight Profile 1’s
extended longitudinal surveys of meteorological variables coupled with spectral analysis, satellite
data, and wave models improve our understanding of how tropical waves drive the TTL slow
ascent and thermal structure (Q2a – Figure 1-2). The improved wave parameterizations will allow
global climate models to more confidently forecast TTL thermal structure changes (Q2b).
We address the issues of upward (Q3a) and midlatitude (Q3c) transport with extended surveys
within the TTL (Flight Profiles 1 and 3) and into midlatitudes (Flight Profile 2). The measurement
requirement for these questions is ozone and a suite of tropospheric tracers (Table 2-1) with a range
of lifetimes both longer and shorter than a few months (the transit time through the TTL via slow
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
17
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
ascent). Other useful tracers have a seasonal variation in the underlying troposphere (CO2) or a
strong secular trend (SF6). For upward transfer, weak convective detrainment within the TTL
yields low abundances of short-lived (1-2 weeks) tracers, while stronger detrainment enhances
them. Long-lived tracers decay slowly and are relatively unaffected by convection. Comparisons
of measurements with results from 1-D and 3-D Chemical Transport Models (CTMs) test
convective parameterizations, thus answering Q3a. Time scales of transfer from midlatitudes are
longer, so we will use measurements of SF6, CO2, and ozone in 3-D CTMs to answer Q3c. Solar
occultation measurements from ACE (e.g., CO, C2H6), though infrequent in the tropics, have the
vertical resolution to diagnose transport in the TTL. ACE and aircraft data comparisons yield
information about interannual variability in upward transport.
Measurements of water vapor,
temperature, ozone, ice crystals, and broadband radiative fluxes made during the penetrations of
TTL cirrus (Figure 2-2b, Flight Profile 4) will address the impact of these clouds on the radiation
budget (Q3b). We will use the measurements for radiative transfer closure calculations, and apply
the results to parameterizations in global climate models.
ATTREX provides first order information about the TTL BrO and short-lived halogen distributions
(Q4a). Comparison of the measurements with 3-D CTM results will reveal the gaps in our
understanding of the chemical dynamics of these compounds (Q4b).
2.2.2 Data Management Plan
Each instrument measuring the above-described parameters is the responsibility of an individual
investigator, who will reduce and validate his or her own measurements. This is straightforward,
since versions of all the instruments have flown previously on high altitude aircraft (see section 3
for TRL levels). The first (of three) stages of data availability is quick-look data transmitted to
ground stations in real time. The science team will use these data to recommend changes in aircraft
course and altitude to enhance mission science. The following are needed in real time: cloud
vertical profile information, ozone, water vapor, winds, temperature, temperature profile,
tropopause altitude, ice crystal number density, CO, and CO2. The second stage is preliminary
digital data available in an online archive maintained by the Ames Earth Sciences Project Office
(ESPO) within 48 hours of the end of each flight (excepting quantities requiring either laboratory
analysis or complex retrievals). All except the cloud profile measurements will be in the “GainesHipskind” ascii data format, used for in-situ aircraft data by NASA’s Upper Atmosphere Research
Program (UARP) since 1987. The cloud profile information will be in a format (ascii, hdf, or
netcdf) readable by standard software. Final data (stage 3) for each of the four experimental
phases will be available to the science team within 9 months of the end of each phase, with public
release 3 months later. Auxiliary data along the aircraft flight track (winds, temperature, EPV, and
water vapor from meteorological analyses; trajectories from the aircraft track; information about
convection upstream of points along the aircraft track) will be part of the final and preliminary
datasets. As for all UARP airborned missions since 1987, espoarchive.nasa.gov, managed by
ESPO will be the final electronic archive for all of these data.
2.3. Science Team
The science team (Table 2-2) includes the PI, a deputy PI, four platform scientists, 3
meteorologists, 7 modeling and analysis scientists, and 12 instrument investigators. Several team
members have overlapping responsibilities. The PI, Dr. Eric Jensen, has extensive experience with
NASA aircraft missions; he has overall responsibility for all aspects of the mission. The deputy PI
is also Chief Meteorologist, part of a team of 3 with extensive experience in NASA field
campaigns. The four platform scientists will develop flight plans and interact with the instrument
investigators. They have extensive past experience in leading major NASA airborne deployments.
Global Hawk will be aloft for upwards of 30 hours, and science and meteorological input will be
required during the entire period, requiring 3 shifts of decision makers. Drs. Alexander, Bardeen,
Gettelman, and Randel will do modeling and will play an advisory role during the aircraft field
phases, providing input for flight planning based on their expertise on atmospheric structure and
data analysis techniques. All science team members will be involved in data analysis.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
18
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Past experience has shown that, when making precise measurements of compounds that occur in
the parts-per-trillion to parts-per-million range, assigning responsibility for each measurement to a
particular instrument PI is the best way to insure the measurement integrity. Each of the 12
instrument team leaders is responsible for one or more of the measurements needed to answer the
science questions as indicated in the Tables 2-1a and 2-1b above.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
19
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Table 2-1. Science Traceability Matrix
Science Objectives
Scientific Measurement
Requirements
Instrument
Functional
Requirements
Investigation Functional
Requirements
1.1.2.1 TTL Cirrus and
Control of Stratospheric
Humidity (Q1a, Q1b)
Vertical Profiles of aerosol
and cloud backscatter
10-5
backscatter
ratio
sensitivity,
200
meter
horizontal resolution, 30
meter vertical resolution
Flight Profile 4, Flight
Profile 1 (Q1b), Flight
Profile 3 (Q1b, desirable)
Water Vapor
10% accuracy, 200 meter
horizontal resolution
Ice
Crystal
Size
distributions and Ice Crystal
Habits
Size distributions at 1 km
resolution; size detection
from .5 microns to 500
microns
Temperature
200
meter
horizontal
resolution, .3K accuracy
Temperature Profiles (Q1b)
0.1 km vertical resolution, 5
km horizontal resolution,
1K accuracy at flight level
Winds
200
meter
horizontal
resolution., .05 meter per
second precision.
Same as for 1.1.2.1
1.1.2.2
TTL
Temperature Structure
(Q2a, Q2b)
Winds, Temperature, and
Temperature Profiles
1.1.2.3 TTL Radiation
and Transport (Q3a,
Q3b, Q3c)
Ozone
10 ppbv accuracy, 200
meter horizontal resolution
Tacers with lifetimes of 1
week to months (Q3a,Q3c)
0.5 km vertical resolution, 2
degree
horizontal
resolution, precision of .05
times the expected variation
between
the
upper
troposphere and lower
stratosphere.
Methane, CO2 (Q3a,Q3c)
2 km horizontal resolution
with 1% precision, 5%
accuracy for methane and
0.5 ppmv accuracy and .1
ppmv precision for CO2
N2O, SF6 (Q3a,Q3c)
20 km horizontal resolution
and 1% precision
CO (Q3a, Q3c)
30 km resolution and 10%
precision
Broadband radiative fluxes
and flux divergence (Q3b)
1% precision across the
visible and IR spectrum.
Water Vapor
10% accuracy, 200 meter
horizontal resolution
Temperature
Same as 1.1.2.1
1 pptv sensitivity,
5%
precision, 10% accuracy
1.1.2.4 TTL Chemistry
(Q4a, Q4b)
BrO
Short-lived
compounds
halogen
Microphysical
process
models; Trajectory-based
microphysical
global
models; Global climate
models.
CALIPSO
Flight Profile 1
TRMM, AIRS, MLS, and
modeling
1 pptv sensitivity, 5%
precision, 10% accuracy,.
Flight Profiles 1, 2, 3 (very
desirable for Q3a), and 4
(Q3b)
1-D chemical transport
models
(Q3a,Q3c),
Chemical Transport Models
(Q3a,
Q3c),
radiative
transfer calculations (Q3b)
Flight Profiles 1 and 2
critical; Flight Profile 3
desirable.
Modeling (Q4b)
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
20
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Table 2-2. Science Team
Name/Organization
Dr. Eric Jensen,
NASA/ARC
Dr. Leonhard Pfister
NASA/ARC
Dr. David Fahey
NOAA ERL
Dr. Paul Newman
NASA/GSFC
Dr. Hanwant B. Singh
NASA/ARC
Dr. Owen B. Toon
University of Colorado
Dr. M. J. Alexander
NWRA/CORA
Dr. Charles Bardeen
NCAR
Dr. Andrew Gettelman
NCAR
Dr. William Randel
NCAR
Dr. Henry Selkirk
GEST/UMBC
Dr. Steven Wofsy
Harvard University
Dr. Elliot Atlas
University of Miami
Mr. T. P. Bui
NASA/ARC
Dr. Glenn Diskin
NASA/LARC
Dr. James Elkins
NOAA ERL
Dr. Ru-Shan Gao,
NOAA/ERL
Dr. Robert Herman
NASA/JPL
Dr. Paul Lawson
SPEC, Incorporated
Dr. Matthew McGill
NASA/GSFC
Dr. M. J. Mahoney
NASA/JPL
Dr. Klaus Pfeilsticker
U Heidelberg, Germany
Dr. Peter Pielewskie
University of Colorado
Dr. Jochen Peter Stutz
UCLA
Mission Role
Pertinent Background
Principal Investigator, process microphysical modeling, global
microphysical trajectory modeling
Deputy PI, Chief Meteorologist, global microphysical trajectory
modeling,
Platform Scientist, aircraft data analysis
TC4 Flight Scientist
PI, CRYSTAL/FACE
Co-Chief Meteorologist,
GLOPAC
Co-PI, GLOPAC
Platform Scientist, 3-D Chemical Transport Modeling, Satellite
Data Analysis
Platform Scientist, Chemistry Analysis
Meteorologist, 3-D microphysical and climate modeling
Co-PI, GLOPAC,
TC4 Flight Scientist
ARCTAS and INTEX mission
scientist
TC4 Mission Scientist
Co-PI, CRYSTAL/FACE
AIRS, Aura, HIRDLS, CAMEX4,
CRYSTAL/FACE teams
Meteorologist, TC4
1-D and 3-D Chemical Transport Modeling, Climate Modeling
Climate Modeler
Satellite Data Analysis, Climate Modeling
Meteorologist, 3-D Chemical Transport Modeling,
START and HIPPO science
teams
Co-Chief Meteorologist TC-4
Multiple Trace Gas Measurements, 1-D Chemical Transport
Modeling
Multiple Trace Gas Measurements
Trace Gas Measurement PI,
HIPPO
Trace Gas Instrument PI, TC4
Meteorological Measurements
Meteorological Measurements PI,
TC4
Water Vapor PI, ARCTAS and
TC4
Trace Gas Instrument PI,
GLOPAC
Ozone
Measurements
PI,
GLOPAC
Water Vapor PI, GLOPAC and
TC4
Cloud measurement PI, TC4
Platform Scientist, 3-D microphysical modeling
Wave analysis and wave modeling, satellite data analysis
Water Vapor Measurements
Multiple Trace Gas Measurements
Ozone Measurements
Water Vapor Measurements
Ice Crystal size and habit Measurements
Cloud and Aerosol Backscatter
Vertical Temperature Profile Measurements,
BrO DOAS measurements
Broadband Radiative Fluxes
BrO DOAS measurements PI
TC4,
Cloud and Aerosol Backscatter PI,
TC4
Vertical Temperature Profile PI,
GLOPAC
Ozone Assessment Co-Author,
Full Professor, U Heidelberg
Radiative flux measurements PI,
TC4
20 yrs DOAS experience;SHARP
GSHOX,TEXAQS field progs
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
21
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
3.0. Investigation Implemenation
3.1. Measurement Platform System Capabilities
The RQ-4A Global Hawk air
vehicle is a mid-wing, highaltitude aircraft capable of
operating at altitudes in excess
of 60,000 feet. The vehicle is
unmanned
and
typically
operates as a fully autonomous
vehicle using a comprehensive
pre-loaded mission plan. As
one of the largest unmanned
aerial systems (UAS) in the
world (e.g., the air vehicle has a
wingspan slightly greater than a
Boeing 737 aircraft), the NASA
Global Hawk air vehicle
provides the customer with an
unprecedented long endurance
flight capability through the
troposphere into the lower
Figure 3-1. Global Hawk Aircraft
regions of the stratosphere.
The aircraft is powered by a
single AE-3007H turbofan engine which generates 7500 lbs thrust at sea level. (Figure 3-1)
The Global Hawk aircraft has numerous existing payload compartments, and the potential for
adding wing pods. The air vehicle has the capacity to provide science payloads with substantial
margins for payload mass, volume, and power in these payload spaces. Given the vehicle’s,
altitude, range, and payload capabilities, it is well-suited for a meso-scale research mission of the
TTL.
Two NASA Global Hawk aircraft (871 & 872) are based at the Dryden Flight Research Center.
These two aircraft were manufactured under the original Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) Program. Global
Hawk 871 was the first Global Hawk aircraft manufactured and is a well-proven air vehicle that
has flown more than 500 hours, including flights to and from Europe. Global Hawk 872 was the
sixth air vehicle manufactured and has flown less than 200 hours. Table 3-1 summarizes the
primary Global Hawk vehicle performance
parameters.
Table 3-1. Global Hawk Performance Summary
3.1.1. Global Hawk Payload Capacity
Parameter
Value
As mentioned, the NASA Global Hawk has 14 Range (nm)
11,000
payload zones with approximately 336 ft3
1200
available for science use. Seven of these zones Payload (lbs)
are environmentally conditioned pressurized Altitude (ft)
65,000 max
compartments and the remaining seven Operational Altitude Range (ft)
40,000-65,000
compartments are non-pressurized and
15,000
experience ambient temperature and pressure Max Fuel Load (lbs)
conditions during the flight.
Duration (hrs)
31
One of the ATTREX instruments will require Speed (kts)
335
under-wing mounting. New pylon attachment Power (KVA)
8.2
mounts are fully funded and under
8000
development by NGC for DFRC. This pylon Min Runway Length (ft)
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
22
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
mounting arrangement will be used for the Hawkeye Sensor. A counter-weight pylon on the
opposing wing shall be used to mount a reflectomer for use by the DHL instrument sensor.
A weight and Center of Gravity (CG) review has been conducted by the Global Hawk Payload
Manager. The ATTREX instrument arrangement described below meets the CG requirements of
the aircraft.
3.1.2. Ground Control Station (GCS)
At DFRC the Global Hawk GCS is a building-based capability located in the GH Operations
Center (GHOC) in Building 4840. The GHOC consists of two adjacent rooms - the Flight
Operations Room (FOR) and the Payload Operations Room (POR).
The FOR contains the GCS and five workstations for the command and control of the air vehicle,
monitoring of the air vehicle systems, air traffic control coordination, mission direction, and
GHOC operations. The POR contains the Ground Payload C3 System and fourteen workstations to
support all payload-related and data display functions. The GPCS provides the ground-based
integrated system associated with the aircraft's Airborne Payload C3 System (APCS). The GPCS
provides global Iridium-based narrowband and Ku-Satcom wideband communications links, data
servers, and the associated network for payload C2 and data handling.
The GPCS network architecture has been designed to be outside the DFRC firewall thereby
allowing eased access for PI's to use their own computers to communicate directly with their
instrument onboard the aircraft during a mission. PI communcation with their instruments is
Ethernet based; UDP protocol over the Iridium links, and TCP/IP over the Ku-band links. The
GPCS server architecture includes an outward-facing server for dissemination of selected real-time
instrument data to any other computer.
3.1.3. Global Hawk Mobile Operations Facility (GHMOF)
A GMOF is being developed by the Global Hawk Project for use with remote deployments of the
Global Hawk aircraft. The GHMOF is fully funded and currently under development by Dryden
Flight Research Center and will provide in a shippable trailer the complete functions of the GHOC
Flight Operations Room (FOR) capability including the full capabilities of the GCS and the lineof-sight and SatCom C2 links to the aircraft. The GHMOF is expected to be completed, and
certified for flight by March of 2011.
Because the GHMOF will be providing a replica of the baseline GHOC GCS command, control,
and communications architecture, it will be completely capable of not only launch and recovery
operations of the GH aircraft at any remote site chosen for ATTREX deployments, but also full
beyond-line-of-sight SatCom-based flight of a GH for the duration of the mission. This provides
operational risk reduction in the event that the DFRC GCS is being used to fly the other NASA
Global Hawk vehicle.
3.2. Instrumentation
3.2.1. Mission Instrument Summary
The proposed integrated ATTREX payload onboard the Global Hawk is shown in Figure 3-2.
Each instrument, with key perfromance data and associated GH payload zone location in
summarized in Table 3-2.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
23
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Figure 3-2. ATTREX Instrument Arrangement on the Global Hawk
Based on the payload location and requirements for each instrument, the Global Hawk has
approximately XXX lbs of remaining payload weight (and volume), using XX% of total available
power, and YY% of total data handling capacity. This margin will be held in reserve as a
contingency for payload or integration weight increase, but may also be available for additional
“piggy-back” instruments to be flown on the vehicle.
3.2.2. Instrument Descriptions
3.2.2.1. Cloud Physics Lidar (CPL)
(McGill, GSFC)
The CPL is a multi-wavelength backscatter lidar
originally built for use on the high altitude ER-2
aircraft and was first deployed in 2000. The CPL
provides information to permit a comprehensive
analysis of radiative and optical properties of
cirrus and subvisual cirrus clouds. A duplicate
CPL instrument has been constructed for use on
the Global Hawk, and that instrument has been
integrated and is currently awaiting first flights as
part of the GloPac field campaign.
The CPL utilizes a high repetition rate, low pulse
energy transmitter and photon-counting detectors.
The CPL is designed specifically for threewavelength operation (355, 532, and 1064 nm,
with depolarization at 1064 nm) and maximum
receiver efficiency. An off-axis parabola is used
for the telescope, allowing 100% of the laser
Figure 3-X. Cloud Physics Lidar (CPL)
energy to reach the atmosphere. The CPL is
designed with a nominal 100 microradian field of
view to minimize effects of multiple scattering. CPL data products are typically provided at 30 m
vertical resolution and 1 second horizontal resolution (~200 m at the nominal ER-2 speed of 200
m/s).
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
24
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Table 3-2. ATTREX Payload Instrument Summary
Acronym
CPL
O3
AWAS
UCATS
PCRS
ULH
DLH
Name
Measurement
Cloud Physics
Lidar
NOAA Ozone
Photometer
Advanced
Whole Air
Sampler
UAS
Chromatograph
for
Atmospheric
Trace Species
Picarro Cavity
Ringdown
Spectrometer
UAS Laser
Hygrometer
Aerosol/Cloud
Backscatter
O3
Diode Laser
Hygrometer
Hawkeye
SSFR
MMS
MTP
MiniDOAS
Solar Spectral
Flux
Radiometer
Meteorological
Measurement
System
Microwave
Temperature
Profiler
Differential
Optical
Absorption
Spectrometer
Numerous Tracers
with Varying
lifetimes
O3, CH4, N2O, SF6
Weight Power
(lb)
(W)
Sampling
Rate
Error
Uncerta
inty
1-40 Hz
> 0.05
ppmv or
1%
10%
1 prof/15 s
<1 K
<0.05 K
P/L
Zone
366
40
60
CO2, CO, CH4, or
H2O
110
H2O vapor (ppmv)
24
H2O
50
Ice Crystal size
Distributions
Radiative Fluxes
135
Temperature,
winds, turbulence
65
Temperature
Profile
24
BrO, PAN
28
2 Hz
250
(450
during
warm
up)
40
The CPL fundamentally measures the total (aerosol plus Rayleigh) attenuated backscatter as a
function of altitude at each wavelength. Considerable data processing is required to separate
backscatter from extinction and aerosol backscatter from Rayleigh. However, for trasmissive
cloud/aerosol layers, using optical depth measurements determined from attenuation of Rayleigh
and aerosol scattering, and using the integrated backscatter, the extinction-to-backscatter parameter
(S-ratio) can be directly derived. This permits unambiguous analysis of cloud optical depth since
only the lidar data is required; there is no need to use other instrumentation nor is there need for
assumption of aerosol climatology. Using the derived extinction-to-backscatter ratio, the internal
cloud extinction profile can then be obtained. This approach to directly solving the lidar equation
without assumption is a standard analysis approach for backscatter lidar and more complete detail
can be found at: http://cpl.gsfc.nasa.gov.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
25
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
3.2.2.2. Ozone (O3)
(Gao, NOAA)
The NOAA UAS Ozone photometer is an
autonomous dual beam UV absorption
photometer for in situ ozone (O3)
measurements. It has been designed to
achieve high sensitivity and fast response in
a small package with minimal power
requirements. Additionally, a compact flow
management system has been integrated that
regulates the sample flow.
The O3
concentration is calculated from a
differential
absorbance
measurement
between sample and reference cells. It has
flown on the NASA WB-57F during the
Figure 3-X. Ozone (O3) Ozone Optics
TC4 and NOVICE missions.
An optical-isolator type configuration is
utilized to fold the UV beam inside the absorption cells (see Fig. 1), giving an effective 60 cm path
length with a 30 cm absorption cell for a compact instrument. In this setup, the unpolarized output
of a mercury lamp is collimated and passes through a 254 nm band pass filter before being
vertically polarized by a polarizing beam splitter (PBS). The resulting polarized beam is then split
into two beams using a non-polarizing beamsplitter, with half of the light entering each of two
absorption cells unimpeded though another polarizing beamsplitter. On the distal end of the
absorbance cell, the polarization is rotated by 90 degrees using a precision quarter wave plate.
After the second pass through the absorption cell, only this horizontally polarized light is then split
out to a silicon photodiode.
Besides doubling the optical path length, this design minimizes wall effects and rejects any light
that may be scattered in the cell by various mechanisms. The shorter cell has the added advantage
of shorter sample air residence time inside the cells, thus leading to a better time resolution.
Furthermore, the dual pass geometry allows an optimally compact design by putting significant
optical and electronic components on one end of the cell only.
3.2.2.3. Advanced Whole Air Sampler (AWAS)
(Atlas, U. Miami)
The Whole Air Sampler (WAS) collects samples from airborne platforms for detailed analysis of a
wide range of trace gases. Detailed analysis in the laboratory is by a variety of gas
chromatographic techniques that use mass spectrometric, flame ionization, and electron capture
detection. The compounds that are typically measured from the WAS include trace gases with
sources from industrial midlatitude emissions, from biomass burning, and from the marine
boundary layer, with certain compounds (e.g. organic nitrates) that have a unique source in the
equatorial surface ocean. The use of a broad suite of tracers with different sources and lifetimes
provides powerful diagnostic information on air mass history and chemical processing that
currently is only available from measurements from whole air samples. Previous deployments of
the whole air sampler have shown that the sampling and analytical procedures employed by our
group are capable of accessing the wide range of mixing ratios at sufficient precision to be used for
tracer studies. Thus, routine measurement of species, such as methyl iodide, at <= 0.1 x 10-12
mole fraction, or NMHC at levels of a few x 10-12 mole fraction are possible.
In addition to the tracer aspects of the whole air sampler measurements, WAS measureS a full suite
of halocarbon species that provide information on the role of short-lived halocarbons in the tropical
UT/LS region, on halogen budgets in the UT/LS region, and on continuing increasing temporal
trends of HFCs (such as 134a), HCFCs (such as HCFC 141b), PFCs (such as C2F6), as well as
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
26
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
declining levels of some of the major CFCs and halogenated solvents. The measurement of those
species that are changing rapidly in the troposphere also give direct indications of the age and
origin of air entering the stratosphere across the tropical tropopause. Thus, several estimates of air
transport rates and age will be available from the measurement of species proposed here, plus the
measurement of CO2 and SF6 by others on the Global Hawk platform.
The UM sampler (formerly NCAR) has flown in an automated version a number of airborne
platforms including the NASA ER-2 and WB-57. Different versions, all operating on the same
basic principle, have been deployed over the past 15 – 20 years. On each of these platforms the
instrument was reconfigured to fit in the available space. Thus, the WAS had missions on the ER-2
nosepod, wingpod, superpod, and belly tank. On the WB-57, a 40-canister and 50-canister
configuration has been flown. For tropospheric aircraft, the WAS also has been configured into
different geometries to fit into available space. A totally redesigned WAS has recently been used
on the NSF Gulfstream. The basic components include an inlet, compressor, canisters, pressure
sensors, and computer control. The WAS-GH will take the same features of the existing and
proven technology used on the existing WAS to reconfigure the sampler into the necessary
geometry for the Global Hawk. Modifications for the WAS-GH will be lighter sample canisters to
allow a greater number of samples to be collected per mission.
3.2.2.4. UAS Chromatograph for Atmospheric Trace Species (UCATS)
(Elkins, NOAA)
The Unmanned aircraft systems Chromatograph
for Atmospheric Trace Species UCATS was
designed and built for autonomous operation
aboard the NASA Altair Unmanned Aircraft
System (UAS) in an unpressurized, ambient
temperature environment.
To date it has
amassed >140 operational flight hours in Altair
in 2005 and 2006, including three flights >20
hours in duration. UCATS has recently operated
on NCAR’s HIAPER (G-V) on the START-08
and HIPPO/1 research experiments and has over
200 hours amassed on manned aircraft.
It is
currently being integrated into payload position
on the NASA Global Hawk UAS platform
Figure 3-X. UAS Chromatograph for #15
for the Global Pacific (GloPac) experiment in
Atmospheric Trace Species (UCATS)
January-February 2010.
UCATS is three different instruments in one enclosure (Figure 3-X): (1) a two-channel gas
chromatograph (GC) that measures nitrous oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrogen (H2),
carbon monoxide (CO), and methane (CH4), (2) a dual-beam ozone photometer (OZ or O3), and (3)
a tunable diode laser (TDL) spectrometer for water vapor (WV or H2O). The H2-CO-CH4 GC
channel may be switched between flights for measurement of atmospheric chlorofluorocarbon-11
(CFC-11), CFC-12, and halon-1211 (details in Table 1). The UCATS enclosure measures 41 x 46
x 25 cm (W x L x H, 16.1 x 18.1 x 9.8 inches) and weighs 28 kg (62 lbs). Power consumption is 9
Amps @ 28 VDC (250 W), and is 16 A (450 W) during warm-up. External to the UCATS
enclosure are a Teflon-diaphragm pump (KNF, Inc) for sampling air through an external inlet, two
high-pressure aluminum aircraft cylinders for nitrogen and calibrated whole air, and an inlet. On
the ground, UCATS can have a ground station consisting of a keyboard, monitor, and mouse for
verifying operation before flight and is removed prior to flight for UAS unattended operation.
UCATS can send real time data down from the plane during flight if Iridium or ku-band satellite
communications along with on board RJ-45 local network connections is available. The data are
displayed using the Google Earth application showing preliminary mixing ratios of large signal GC
gases, ozone, and water vapor.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
27
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
3.2.2.5.
Picarro
Cavity
Ringdown
Spectrometer (PCRS)
Trace Gas
Units
Sampling Rate
Error
Accuracy
(Wofsy, Harvard)
N2O
ppb*
70 seconds
±0.2-0.5%
± 1%
The sensor will be a
SF6
ppt*
70 seconds
±0.8-1%
± 1%
Picarro
G1303-mc
cavity
ringdown
H2
ppb
140 seconds
±2-3%
± 1%
spectrometer modified
CO
ppb
140 seconds
±2-5%
± 1%
for use on our airborne
platform.
The
CH4
ppb
140 seconds
±0.4-0.8%
± 1%
instrument
will
CFC-11
ppt
70 seconds
±0.3-0.6%
± 1%
measure
concentrations of CO2,
CFC-12
ppt
70 seconds
±0.3-0.6%
± 1%
CH4, H2O, and CO
Halon-1211*
ppt
70 seconds
±0.5-0.8%
± 1%
with 5s/5 min RMS
variations of [<200
O3**
ppb
10 Econds
> of ±1
> of ±2
ppbv / <50 ppbv], [<2
ppb
or
ppb
or
ppbv / 0.7 ppbv], [100
±2%
±3%
ppmv / 50 ppmv], and
[<20 ppbv / <5 ppbv],
H2O**
ppm*
1 second
±2-3%
±3-5%
respectively. All of
*ppm … parts per million; ppb … parts per billion; ppt … parts per trillion
these
measurement
**Requires replacing H2-CO-CH4 channel
specifications
were
met or exceeded in
actual field measurements, 75 hours of flights of a prototype instrument, except for the CO channel
(see below). Picarro has successfully marketed a separate CO sensor for use on the ground, of very
similar design to the planned sensor.
The instrument will be modified for use on our platform by the Harvard team, as follows: (1)
Power supplies will be replaced to conform to platform specifications; (2) A complete calibration
system will be added to ensure that measurements are traceable with high accuracy to world
standards; (3) The sensor will be repackaged
and integrated onto the platform; (4) an inlet
will be installed. The core sensor weighs
about 45 lbs and with the calibration and
integration components the complete system
will weigh about 75 lbs.
A flight prototype of this system, measuring
Figure 3-X. Picarro Cavity Ringdown Spectrometer CO2, CH4, and H2O, was flown on our
BARCA aircraft mission in Amazonia in
(PCRS)
May, 2009, along with our airborne CO2
sensor (> 1000 hrs on the ER-2, WB-57F, and
low-altitude platforms). The flights were conducted over a period of 2 weeks in Manaus, Brazil,
under very difficult conditions (no air conditioning, no lab facilities, unpressurized aircraft). The
two independent CO2 sensors agreed to an astounding 0.02 ppm on average, with an RMS error <
0.1 ppm. Our airborne sensor was calibrated every 20 minutes in flight. The Picarro sensor was
calibrated in Jena before being shipped to Brazil, and it was never calibrated in flight. This sensor
thus exhibited unprecedented stability and performance. The performance for CH4 was also
extremely good, with very low noise and repeatability, but we did not have another continuous
sensor for checking calibration stability. Comparisons with flask samples await return of the
canisters to Germany.
We view the three channels tested in flight as TRL 8 and the CO channel as TRL 7.
Table 3-3. Trace Gases that UCATS can measure in the atmosphere.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
28
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
3.2.2.6. UAS Laser Hygrometer (ULH)
(Herman, JPL)
The UAS Laser Hygrometer (ULH) is an autonomous spectrometer to measure atmospheric water
vapor from airborne platforms. It is designed for long-duration flights of the NASA Global Hawk
UAS to monitor upper tropospheric (UT) and lower stratospheric (LS) water vapor. It is a singlechannel, near-infrared, open-path tunable diode laser spectrometer that measures atmospheric
water vapor in-situ. ULH operates in two modes: harmonic wavelength modulation spectroscopy
and direct absorption. The harmonic spectroscopy is precise and fast: averaged data are recorded
at a user-adjustable rate between 1 and 40 Hz. The direct absorption measurements are highly
accurate, and are used as an in-flight calibration of the faster harmonic data. The water vapor
volume mixing ratio is calculated from the Beer-Lambert Law. ULH is the latest in a series of
laser hygrometers that have been developed in our group at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
California Institute of Technology. It made successful measurements on all three NOVICE flights
in 2008, and is scheduled to participate in the upcoming Global Hawk Pacific Mission (GloPac) in
early 2010. Our previous laser hygrometers have participated in numerous NASA aircraft missions
from 1997 to the present, including POLARIS, CAMEX, ACCENT, SOLVE, CRYSTAL-FACE,
Aura Validation Experiment (AVE), AVE-WIIF, MidCiX, PUMA-A, Costa Rica AVE, and TC4.
ULH has several features that enhance the science and take advantage of the command, control,
and communications available on the Global Hawk platform. First and foremost, we use a stronger
water absorption line than previously used in our laser hygrometers. The stronger water absorption
improves sensitivity to measurements in the dry TTL. Laser scans are controlled by software, and
can be changed by commands uplinked from the ground. Likewise, the data rate and number of
scans to average can also be modified. This adds flexibility in how we optimize data collection,
precision, and accuracy in different parts of a Global Hawk flight. Provided that meteorological
data are available (static temperature and static pressure), real-time water vapor volume mixing
ratios can be downlinked from the instrument to the ground.
3.2.2.7. Diode Laser Hygrometer (DLH)
(Diskin, LaRC)
The NASA Langley/Ames Diode Laser Hygrometer (DLH). The DLH instrument has a rich
heritage, providing high quality (high time resolution, high accuracy/precision) measurements for
many major atmospheric field campaigns on several aircraft. The DLH is a near-infrared external
open-path diode laser spectrometer operating in the ~1.39 µm water vapor absorption band. This
series of instruments has accumulated more than 1000 flight hours providing state-of-the-art
H2O(v) measurement capabilities on the CIRPAS Twin Otter and NASA DC-8 and WB-57 aircraft
for the past 15 years.
The DLH is an open path airborne tunable diode laser-based instrument which operates in the nearinfrared spectral region at a wavelength of approximately 1.39 µm. The DLH measures the H2O(v)
mixing ratio in the atmosphere by wavelength modulated differential absorption The line-center 2F
signal is normalized by the collected DC signal, providing a resultant that is insensitive to optical
power and thus insensitive to alignment and to atmospheric obscuration along the optical path. The
absorption path utilized by the DLH is external to the aircraft, and it is formed between a laser
transceiver and a retroreflecting panel. The combination of external path and normalized 2F
detection yields a measurement which can be made accurately even in the presence of clouds and
precipitation, and which is insensitive to interferences caused by the aircraft itself (e.g.
vaporization of condensed phase H2O, cabin leaks, etc.). For more information on the DLH, see
[Diskin 2002; Podolske 2003; Vay 1998]. Since these references were published, we have made
significant changes in the operation of the DLH by replacing the operator-intensive drive and
control electronics with a new microprocessor-driven system. This fully autonomous system
controls the laser operation, including its temperature and current; conducts many short-duration
calibration events during each flight; collects, processes and stores data in real-time; and provides
an output signal to be used by the aircraft’s data system. In addition, the use of our all-digital lockin / data acquisition system allows us to capture more information on the absorption line-shape
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
29
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
during each modulation cycle. The DLH
measurements
have
been
extensively
intercompared with other water vapor sensors,
both on the DC-8 and other aircraft during
dedicated intercomparison activities, for
example, during INTEX-B and ARCTAS.
3.2.2.8. Hawkeye (Lawson, Spec Inc.)
Hawkeye is the culmination of two decades of
innovative instrument development at SPEC
Incorporated. The probe measures the size
distribution of cloud and precipitation particles,
provides high-resolution (2.3 micron pixel)
images of cloud particles and removes artifacts
from ice particle shattering.
This is
accomplished by eclectic combination of Figure 3-X. Hawkeye
technology developed in three existing SPEC
optical cloud particle probes: 1) A fast FSSP,
that measures size distributions from 1 to 50 microns and records individual particle statistics and
removes shattered particles using inter-arrival times, 2) a cloud particle imager (CPI) with
upgraded imagery capable of recording up to 500 frames per second, and 3) a 2D-S (Stereo) probe
that is configured with one channel to
provide full-view images of particles from
10 microns to 1.28 mm, and a second
channel configured to provide full-view
images of particles from 50 microns to 6.4
mm. Thus, using particle dimensions
along the direction of flight will produce
particle size distributions from 1 micron to
several cm.
Figure 3-X. Solar, Infrared Radiomoters (SSFR)
Hawkeye uses particle inter-arrival times
to remove the effects of ice particles that
shatter on the probe inlet. The probe and data acquisition system are specifically designed for
installation and autonomous (unattended) operation on NASA research aircraft, including the
Global Hawk unmanned aerial system (UAS). The instrument provides vastly improved
measurements of particle and precipitation size distributions, particle shape, extinction coefficient,
effective particle radius, ice water content and equivalent radar reflectivity.
3.2.2.9. Solar, Infrared Radiometers (SSFR)
(Pilewskie, Univ Colorado)
Two instruments are planned for measuring solar and terrestrial radiation: The Solar Spectral Flux
Radiometer (SSFR, Pilewskie et al., 2003) covers the near-ultraviolet, solar, and near-infrared
wavelength range from 360 nm to 2200 nm. The Kipp & Zonen CG4 pyrgeometer provides
broadband infrared irradiance from 4.5 – 42 μm. Optical inlets for both instruments are mounted
on top and at the bottom of a platform and provide upwelling, downwelling, and net irradiance.
The SSFR took part in numerous experiments, including NASA CRYSTAL-FACE, MILAGRO,
TC4, ARCTAS as well as the NOAA Gomaccs, ARCPAC, and ICEALOT missions. The CG4 was
deployed during NOAA ARCPAC. The two instruments together provide complete measurements
required for the cloud energy budget, radiative forcing, and heating rate. The spectral resolution of
SSFR is crucial to distinguish radiative effects of clouds from those of, e.g., the underlying surface.
It also allows an independent retrieval of cloud optical thickness and effective drop or crystal
radius.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
30
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
The SSFR consists of two rack-mounted
spectroradiometers that are connected to
the optical inlets via a fiber optic. The
wavelength range is covered by using
two spectrometers per optical inlet: a
grating spectrometer with a Silicon CCD
array (360-1000 nm, 8 nm spectral
resolution) and a spectrometer with
Indium-Gallium-Arsenide linear array
detector
(900-2200 nm,
12 nm
resolution). The spectrometers are
calibrated in the laboratory with a NISTtraceable blackbody (tungsten-halogen
1000W bulb). The radiometric stability Figure 3-X. Meteorological Measurement System (MMS)
of the SSFR is carefully tracked during
the course of a field experiment with a portable field calibration unit with a highly stable power
source and 200W lamps. The data were corrected for the angular response of the light collectors
and for changes in downward irradiance due to aircraft attitude. The CG4 provides high accuracy
measurements of infrared radiation even under direct insolation conditions, without the need for
shielding or correcting for shortwave heating effects. It is calibrated in a heat-bath with adjustable
temperatures that cover temperature and radiation regimes that occur under experiment conditions.
In addition, they are cross-calibrated with radiometers that are traced back to the world standard
from the World Radiation Centre in Davos, Switzerland.
3.2.2.10. Meteorological Measurement System (MMS)
(Bui, ARC)
The MMS, developed at NASA Ames Research Center, is a PI-led airborne instrument that
provides calibrated, science quality, in situ state measurements of static pressure, static
temperature, and three-dimensional wind and turbulence indices. Differencing the measured
aircraft ground velocity from the true air speed vector produces the 3-dimensional wind vector.
The embedded GPS inertial navigation system provides the aircraft attitude, position, velocity, and
acceleration data. The air stream velocity is obtained from the radome pressure ports, pitot-static
pressure system, and temperature probes.
System calibration of the MMS consists of: (1) individual sensor calibrations; (2) sensor dynamic
response tests; (3) laboratory determination of the dynamic behavior of the inertial navigation
system; (4) in-flight aerodynamic calibration; and, (5) comparison with radiosonde and radartracked balloons. Individual sensors are routinely re-certified to NIST standard by their respective
calibration laboratories.
In the final archival data set, the MMS will provide 20-Hz measurements of time, pressure,
temperature, wind vector (u, v, w), position, attitude (pitch, roll, heading), angle of attack, yaw
angle, true airspeed, aircraft velocity (eastward, northward, vertical), vertical acceleration, and
turbulence.
After a thorough and proper system calibration, the following accuracy is achievable:
Typical value at DC-8 Altitude
Typical value at ER-2 Altitude
Pressure (p)
200 mb± 0.3 mb
60 mb ± 0.3 mb
Temperature (T)
215 K ± 0.3 K 180 K ± 0.3 K
Horizontal wind (u, v)
30 ms-1
± 1 ms-1
30 ms-1
± 1 ms-1
Vertical wind* (w)
< 1 ms-1
0.1 ms-1 resolution < 1 ms-1
0.1
ms-1
resolution
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
31
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
The MMS team is uniquely qualified to make these measurements. It has extensive field
experience having participated in STEP-1986, AAOE-1987, AASE-1989, AASEII-1991, SPADE1992, ASHOE/MAESA-1994, STRAT-95, SUCCESS-1996, SONEX-1997, POLARIS-1997,
CAMEX-3/4-1998/2001, SOLVE-2000, CRYSTAL-FACE-2002, MidCix-2004, JuneAVE-2005,
CRAVE-2006, NAMMA-2006, TC4-2007, and NOVICE-2008. Enhancements to the MMS are
underway for observations on the NASA Global Hawk Unmanned Airborne System (UAS) with a
target field measurement campaign: Global Hawk Pacific Mission (GLOPAC) in 2010.
3.2.2.11. Microwave Temperature Profiler (MTP)
(Mahoney, JPL)
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory Microwave
Temperature Profiler (MTP) is a passive,
microwave radiometer that measure the
brightness temperature of the atmosphere
due to the natural thermal emission from
oxygen molecules near 60 GHz. During a
15-second scan cycle from near-zenith to
near-nadir in the flight direction,
measurements are made at three frequencies
and at ten elevation angles. The thirty
measured brightness temperatures are
converted to air temperature versus altitude
by using a modified statistical retrieval
procedure developed especially for the
airborne application. This quasi-Bayesian
Figure 3-X. Microwave Temperature Profiler (MTP)
procedure selects between many sets of
retrieval coefficients to determine which set
has corresponding brightness temperatures that best match the measured brightness temperatures.
This set of retrieval coefficients is then used to retrieve a temperature profile above and below
flight level. In addition, by converting temperature profiles along an aircraft's flight track to
potential temperature profiles, and then identifying levels of constant potential temperature (or
isentropes), MTP data can be used to study of atmospheric dynamics. This will be especially
important during ATTREX because recent modeling results suggest that mesoscale variability is
the primary mechanism needed to reproduce observed quantities in cirrus clouds. This is exactly
what the MTP isentropes measure!
MTPs are small, lightweight, easily integrated and can fly autonomously. They currently fly on five
research aircraft, and will fly on the first Global Hawk mission (GloPac) in January 2010. In more
than two decades of very successful airborne research, MTPs have accumulated 4443 flight hours
(on 793 flights) during 50 field campaigns. More information can be found at the MTP web site:
http://mtp.jpl.nasa.gov.
Figure 3-X. University Heidelberg Mini-DOAS instrument
3.2.2.12. Mini-DOAS - Differential
Optical Absorption Spectrometer
(Pfeilsticker, IUP Heidelberg)
The Mini-DOAS instrument (weight 14
kg, power 25 W) is an automated
UV/vis spectrometer (310-500nm),
which uses scattered solar light in the
limb (horizon) and nadir (downward)
geometry to detect path-integrated
concentrations of BrO, O3, NO2, OClO,
IO, OIO, and O4. Spectral retrieval of
trace gas slant column densities from the
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
32
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
measured absorption spectra are achieved using established DOAS methods available both at the
Univ. Heidelberg and UCLA. Past deployments of the Mini-DOAS instrument (or variants of it)
include 16 flights on high altitude research balloons (LPMA/DOAS, LPMA/IASI and MIPAS-B), the
DLR Falcon aircraft and in the near future on the DLR HALO aircraft and on the Russian Geophysica.
Table 3-4 lists the characteristics of the mixing ratios determined by the Mini-DOAS.
Table 3-4. Target Species of the Mini-DOAS instrument*
Species
Sensitivity/precision as a function
of altitude
Estimated
accuracy
(%)*
3.3.
Development
Approach
3.3.1.
Management and
Planning
10 km
15 km
20 km
BrO
0.7 ppt
0.9 ppt
1.2 ppt
8
The ATTREX project will
managed in accordance with
O3
35 ppb
80 ppb
140 ppb
2
NPR 7120.8: NASA Research
NO2
13 ppt
20 ppt
33 ppt
5
and Technology Program and
OClO
3 ppt
4.5 ppt
9 ppt
12
Project
Management
IO
0.2 ppt
0.4 ppt
0.5 ppt
25
Requirements.
OIO
0.2 ppt
0.4 ppt
0.5 ppt
55
The overall scientific and
* sensitivity and precisions are equal; accuracy estimates are derived from technical direction of the
published absorption cross sections
project will be established by
the PI, and implemented and
tracked by the Project Manager. The PM will develop the overall project plan, and other supporting
plans (system engineering, operations, etc.), and will also facilitate project status reporting between
the PI, the ESSP program, as well as other project elements.
Planning at the project level includes base lining, verifying and tracking science requirements
(compliance matrix), and conducting other system engineering activities in support of the overall
project management. The Project Manager will also oversee project level risk, configuration,
contract, and safety and mission assurance activities. The primary risk management and project
system engineering functions are the responsibility of the Project Manager.
In addition, the Project Manager is responsible for project level reviews, such as the MRR and
project status review.
For the instruments on the payload, most are fully developed at this point. However, each PI will
provide a schedule and task plan which outlines the steps prior to vehicle integration. This will be
used by the Project Manager to assess project readiness and by the Mission and Payload Managers
to develop required interface documentation and control. The primary configuration management
and payload system engineering functions are the responsibility of the Payload Manager.
The Mission Manager will coordinate appropriate safety review boards, technical briefs, and Flight
Readiness Reviews (FRRs) in accordance with the requirements of NPR 7900.3B: Aircraft
Operations Management Manual.
Science planning, including flight planning, will be lead by the PI and Deputy PI. Operations
planning will be lead by the Mission Manager. Planning for assembly, integration, and test
activities is described in § 3.4.
3.3.2. Developmental Status
All of the instruments proposed for the ATTREX mission have Technology Readiness Levels
(TRL) ranging from TRL 6 to TRL 9, i.e., from system demonstration through fully operational
capablities. Table 3-3 shows the heritage and development status for these instruments.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
33
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
3.3.3. Deployment Sites
As described in § 2.1, there are three primary deployment sites, and one integration and test site, in
the ATTREX mission: Hawaii, Guam, and Darwin, Australia, and DFRC. Initial assessment of
these sites indicates Guam and Darwin are suitable operational sites, and, in fact, the Air Force has
previoulsly deployed Global Hawks from Guam. Final decision on which deployment sites will be
used will be determined after a site survey is conducted by ESPO and the Golbal Hawk Project
Office in late FY10, and prior to the PDR.
Factors in the selection of appropriate sites include:
 Runway length and condition.
 Airspace access (including Certificates of Authorization).
 Communications (including coverage).
 Government/Foreign approvals.
 Hangars and other required facilities.
 Transport & logistics.
Table 3-5. Notional Integration Timeline
A summary of the primary deployment
Event
Weeks prior to
sites, and potential alternate sites, is
Deployment
shown in Table 3-4.
Payload Information Form (PIF)
24
Integration Design & Engr Complete
Payload Data Package
10
3.4.
Test
Assembly, Integration,
3.4.1. Planning
Planning for all ATTREX assembly,
integration, and test activities will be
PI “Hand On”
4
lead by the Global Hawk Project
All PI HW at Integration
3
Office, in conjunction with the Earth
PI “Hand Off”
2
Science Project Office, and in
accordance with the ATTREX Project
Integrated System Check
1.5
Plan. Details are provided in the
TRR/FRR
1
paragraphs below.
Test Flight(s)
1
At the begining of the integration
TRANSIT
process, each PI will provide Payload
Information Form (PIF) which
delineates the requirments of each
instrument to the vehicle, identifies potential hazards, and any unique installation of operational
constraints. This forms the basis of the engineering work to be done for instrument installation.
Once the enginnering of the istallation design is complete, and configuration-controlled Payload
Data Package (PDP) is developed and maintained. Changes to the PDP are approved by the DFRC
Configuration Review Board.
Configuration Review Board (CRB)
9
Security Access Requests
8
3.4.2. Integration
For integration and each deployment, the mission and payload managers will develop detailed
integration schedule, based on nominal planning procesdures of the Airborne Science Directorate
at DFRC, and lessons learned from the GLOPAC mission (§ 3.4.4). Integration activities will be
conducted in Hangar 4801 and the Global Hawk Research Aircraft Integration Facility (RAIF) in
Building 4840. These facilities provides office space, tools, and other accommodations to support
integration of PI instruments onto the Global Hawk.
3.4.3. Testing
Once the integration phase is completed, the Global Hawk Project Office will conduct a series of
tests prior to vehicle flight. These tests include a Bench Test, which confims operation of the
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
34
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
instrument, an Integrated System Test, which assures all instruments are performing nominally and
in concert with the entire payload, and a Functionl Test, which ensures the entire vehicle and
instrument system is ready to fly. DFRC will conduct appropriate safety review boards, technical
briefs, and Flight Readiness Reviews in accordance with the requirements of NPR 7900.3B:
Aircraft Operations Management Manual.
Prior to all Global Hawk flights, the PIs will also participate in a vehicle communications test. The
number, duration, and objectives of test flights prior to deployment will be determined by the
Platform Scientist and Mission Manager, though at least one test flight will be conducted prior to
any deployment operations.
3.4.4. Timeline
The overall mission schedule is shown in § 4.3, including estimated integration times for the test
phase and deployment operations. However, a notional integration timeline is shown in Table 3-5.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
35
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
4.0. Management
4.1. Management Approach
ATTREX assembles a world-class set of scientists and instrument teams with NASA’s latest long
endurance Unmanned Airborne System (UAS) that will bring about a successful Earth Venture-1
(EV-1) investigation. This team is led by the Principal Investigator (PI), Dr. Eric Jensen, who is
responsible to NASA Earth System Science Pathfinder (ESSP) Program Office for achieving the
ATTREX science objectives within the EV-1 cost and schedule constraints. Dr. Jensen delegates
the day-to-day implementation responsibility to the Project Manager (PM), Mr. Mike Gaunce and
the Earth Science Project Office (ESPO) at NASA ARC. The PI & PM work together on a daily
basis to maintain a clear understanding of the project overall status including all risks to science,
cost, schedule, and performance. The ATTREX management processes are designed to provide
clear lines of authority and accountability, frequent and accurate communication, rapid problem
identification and resolution, good visibility of team performance with respect to cost and
schedule, integrated risk management, and comprehensive technical and programmatic reviews.
The ATTREX investigation will
be managed according to wellestablished practices of project
management
and
systems
engineering and compliant with
NPR 7120.8. Further, ATTREX
will operate in a mode that
emphasizes the importance of
containing costs well within the
limits of the EV-1 AO and
established by ESSP. It is the
ATTREX objective to integrate
the ESSP, the PI, ESPO,
instrument teams, theory and
modeling members, and the
Global Hawk Project Office into
a single team that together will
meet the challenges of the
project.
The
ATTREX
Figure 4-1. ATTREX Organization Chart
investigation organization is
shown in Figure 4-1. In this
organization, the PI is fully responsible for the whole investigation by balancing scienctific,
technical, schedule, and cost objectives and thereby has final authority for all key decisions. The PI
reports to ESSP through the their Mission Manager. The PI leads the science team and works
directly with the PM, delegating significant authority, so that the PM can accomplish much of the
mission.
4.1.1. Team Member Coordination and Communication
Despite being a distributed team, we have setup the project to maximize project communication
and foster a great team environment. The PM is responsible for the management coordination of
ATTREX, and will lead ESPO, comprising of a Deputy PM, Business Manager, Systems
Engineering (SE) Lead, and Safety & Mission Assurance (SMA) Lead. ESPO will track
programmatic risks, costs and schedules associated with the instruments, Global Hawk, and
deployments. Members will report schedule progress, including a slack assessment on critical
paths, at monthly Management meetings. In addition, at each Management meeting, they will
review status and update a detailed list focusing on the current and coming month’s work.
The SE Lead is responsible for assuring the technical approach is consistent with requirements and
appropriately implemented and validated. The SE Lead will focus on technical status for purposes
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
36
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
of design coordination, problem resolution, and interim progress reports on key technical issues
working with the instrument teams and the GH Project Office.
4.1.2. Reviews and Progress Reporting to ESSP
The ATTREX will have key system-level reviews, tailored to the Earth Venture-1 management
approach but consistent with the requirements of NPR 7123.1, NASA Systems Engineering
Processes and Requirements. The reviews are shown in the schedule Figure 4.3-1. The two formal
gate reviews are the Confirmation Review (CR) for KDP-C and the Mission Readiness Review
(MRR) for KDP-E. The System Requirements Review (SRR), Preliminary Design Review (PDR),
Critical Design Review (CDR) are project reviews but not formal gate reviews.
In order for the ESSP Program Office to execute its responsibility for funding and oversight of the
project, the ATTREX team will provide complete, accurate and timely programmatic forecasts and
reports. ATTREX will use a reporting and review process that provides ESSP a constant level of
technical and programmatic oversight. The PI supported by the PM and ESPO will report directly
to the ESSP Mission Manager.
The PM will implement a thorough and complete system of progress reviews and reporting that
will provide adequate ATTREX project status insight to the Program Office, the ARC Center
Management Council (ACMC), and the NASA HQ/SMD/ESD. The PM will convene a joint
Management and Technical Status Meeting on a monthly basis via telecon for a comprehensive
review of the overall project status. In this forum schedule slack analysis, cost performance and
reserves, technical performance, and risk posture will be reported by each team member. The
results of these reviews will be used in preparation for the Program Office and ACMC monthly
status reviews.
Each ATTREX team member will report their technical, cost and schedule status at the monthly
Management and Technical Status Meetings, with electronic copies submitted to the project. These
data will be summarized along with 533 financial reports and reports of project-maintained
metrics, and incorporated into the monthly report from the ESPO to the Program Office. The ESSP
Mission Manager will be invited to attend all project weekly and monthly management meetings.
The ATTREX Project and ESSP will have quarterly review meetings for the full duration of the
project. For costing purposes, once a year, key project team members will travel to LaRC. It will
also be assumed that the ESSP office will travel once a year to ARC for a quarterly meeting of
similar duration. The other two quarterly meetings each year will be 1-day meetings done via
telecon and Webex so that no travel is required.
4.2. Risk Management
The establishment and implementation of the ATTREX Risk Management Plan will provide the
project team a means to identify, manage, mitigate, track, and control risks to achieve mission
success under a fixed budget and schedule. The risk management process is ultimately the
responsibility of the PM, but risk management activities will be practiced at every level within the
ATTREX project team teams to evaluate and proactively plan, address, and update associated risks.
Any member of the project can recommend an item be tracked as a risk, but the PM formally
manages the process, and therefore approves additions. The risk management approach will be
tailored from NPR 7120.8 guidelines, which support the concepts of continuous risk management
(CRM).
CRM will be incorporated into the existing Technical and Management meetings to ensure the
visibility of risk information to all parties. The Systems Engineering Lead will be assigned to
oversee the CRM process. An integral part of the success of risk management is communication.
An atmosphere of free exchange will be promoted on the ATTREX project to ensure all concerns
regarding even perceived risks are voiced. Table 4-1 has the current set of ATTREX risks.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
37
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Table 4-1. Risk Mitigation
Risk Area
Cost overruns and schedule delays in
adapting TRL6 instruments to the
Global Hawk platform
Probability
3
Consequence
2
The availability of a wing pod for the
Hawkeye instrument is delayed from
current schedule of 4/2011
Mitigation Plan
Status
-Reserves are estimated higher to compensate for
this uncertainty
G
-There is 2 additional months of schedule slack
between I&T and first science campaign
-Continue to look at a configuration that does not
require a wing pod
2
4
-Investigate the technical solution for developing a
wing blister that is adequate to fly Hawkeye
G
-Halfway during the campaign swap out CPL for
Hawkeye
-Monitor wing pod development
Obtaining Certificates of Authorization
(COA) over some regions we plan to fly
with some of the deployment sites
2
3
Cost of Deploying Global Hawk outside
of DFRC is more than budgeted
-Site visits during Phase A will identify untenable
deployment sites
G
-Early planning of deployment will identify issues and
determine if ATTREX will be the first project to
deploy a GH
3
3
-Reserves are estimated higher due to this
uncertainty
G
-First deployment is in Guam, actual costs can be
analyzed and used to move other deployments to
DRFC if considered too costly
A Global Hawk may not be available at
the campaign times laid out in the
proposal
-Upon selection, ESPO will submit flight request and
negotiate acceptable schedule with ESSP & GH PO.
2
3
-ATTREX has flexibility to move the seasonal order
of the campaigns
G
-Currently have 10 months of schedule reserve in
completing campaigns
Availability of the GH Portable
Operations Room is delayed from
current schedule of X/2011
-X months schedule margin in current plan
Hazardous weather conditions put GH
at risk of damage
-Campaign location, seasonal weather patterns, and
flight plans will be designed to minimize expected
convective air.
1
4.3. Schedule
G
-Operate first deployment from DRFC
4
G
-Flight rules on safe weather thoroughly understood
by the Team
-Deployed Meteorology team will monitor weather
before and during 30 hour flight.
The top-level view of the ATTREX master schedule is shown in Figure 4-2. The schedule shows
the modifications and deployment planning for the Investigation including the Phases A through F
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
38
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Figure 4-2. Mission Schedule
and their associated gate milestones or Key Decision Points (KDP). Other review milestones are
shown, and the deployments. A full year after the last deployment is set aside for data analysis ,
modeling, and publication of results.
ESPO at ARC will maintain the integrated master schedule showing the critical path, schedule
reserves, and detailed project milestones, including peer and system level reviews. The integrated
master schedule will be developed during Phase A. During Phase B, the master schedule will be
updated and then baselined at the Confirmation Review. Once baselined, all progress will be
measured against the fixed baselined integrated master schedule.
The PM and DPM will manage the schedule by tracking key milestones weekly, and will use the
WBS with a modified Earned Value (EV) process to track progress against dollars. The PM will
track, manage and update a detailed list focusing on the coming month’s work. This list will be
reviewed in each bi-weekly Management IPT meeting. The project master schedule will be
updated monthly. The monthly status dates are at the end-of-month, and will be tracked using
“Plan vs. Actual” format to measure progress against baseline late dates. The instrument teams will
submit schedule updates to the PM by the first week of the month. Schedule issues (inconsistencies
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
39
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
in statusing, issues, links, etc.) will be worked upon receipt and reviewed with the PM until
resolved or mitigated. Monthly, the critical path assessment will be performed to determine real or
potential drivers, along with a slack assessment to determine if work is getting done as planned.
Trending analysis is performed by comparing progress/slips from baseline plan and/or previous
update(s). Performance data will be rolled into metrics and highlighted items, and reported
monthly.
4.4. Management of Reserves, Margins, and Descope Options
The PM will manage the schedule contingency and cost reserves. Using the risk list, the PM will
apply reserves and margins to implement risk mitigations or deal with the risk outcome. The PM
Table 4-2. Descope Options
Descope
Fall deployment is stationed
from DFRC rather than Hawaii
Impact
-Less data collection time is spent in the TTL
Est. Cost
Savings ($KRYD)
Preferred
Decision
Milestone
400
After first
deployment Winter 2012
400
KDP-E
- Eliminates higher deployment travel cost for Project staff
- Eliminates overseas deployment cost and complexity for
Global Hawk
Summer
deployment
is
stationed from DFRC rather
than Hawaii
-Less data collection time is spent in the TTL
- Eliminates higher deployment travel cost for Project staff
- Eliminates overseas deployment cost and complexity for
Global Hawk
Eliminate an instrument
-Robustness of measurement will be reduced such fewer
samples or lower resolution
800-1000
PDR
Eliminate fall
completely
-No seasonal transition data collected to support model
fidelity
1000-2000
After first
deployment Winter 2012
deployment
- Eliminates higher deployment travel cost for Project staff
- Eliminates overseas deployment cost and complexity for
Global Hawk
Descope reduces baseline science mission but is above threshold science mission
will receive concurrence from the PI and report it to ESSP. Throughout the instrument modification
time, statusing allocations will be monitored by the SE Lead. Changes that affect other interfaces
must be formally documented and approved via CCB by the SE, Global Hawk Project Office,
DPM and PM before they are implemented. Any changes that affect science or programmatic
requirements must be formally documented, requested, and approved via CCB by the PI, PM and
ESSP Program Office before they are implemented. When such actions require descoping, the PI
must have the concurrence of the Program Office. The allocation and release of all resources are
under configuration control and are monitored by, and require concurrence of, the PI, PM and
DPM. The descope options are identified in Table 4-2.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
40
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
5.0. Cost and Cost Estimating Methodology
5.1 Cost Summary
The proposed PI managed investigation cost for ATTREX is $XXM (RY$) including a 15%
reserve. The ATTREX investigation team prepared a grassroots cost estimate, building the budget
from the bottom up, taking into account all known costs and adding reserves. Estimates include all
costs associated with instrument modification for the Global Hawk, Global Hawk payload
modifications, integration, flight-testing, three science deployments, and extensive data analysis
and modeling of the TTL. The ATTREX investigation master schedule is used in the grass-roots
estimate. The grassroots estimate assigns required resources by Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
element, which is defined in Appendix X. The team defined the WBS elements in sufficient detail
to allow accurate projection of staffing and associated resources required to meet programmatic
initiatives and schedules. Staffing needs were estimated by labor classification.
5.2 Cost Estimating Methodology
The ATTREX PI managed cost is based upon well-defined science requirements, assessment of
modification and integration of both the instruments and Global Hawk, and the planning for three
science deployed campaigns. The ATTREX followed a comprehensive grass-roots cost estimation
process that included the following iterative steps:
1) Establish an investigation technical baseline;
2) Develop a product and organizational level 3 WBS structure based on the AO defined level 2
WBS;
3) Establish organizational responsibility for each WBS element for development and costing;
4) Develop investigation schedule and define major milestones and activities;
5) Establish the full set of travel for the investigation as shown in Table 5-1;
6) Establish costing guidelines to ensure consistency between WBS elements and develop WBS
dictionary;
7) Each responsible WBS element estimates the investigation costs using the appropriate Basis of
Estimate;
8) Quantify the uncertainity inherent in each WBS estimate and determine cost reserve estimate
that best addresses known cost and mission risks;
9) Create a roll-up of investigation costs, including reserves
10) Assess cost credibility and estimating consistency among WBS elements;
11) Refine costs iteratively based on review findings and modifications to the technical baseline
5.3 Reserves Level Justification
The ATTREX science investigation proposal includes a total of 15% reserve based on the total
investigation. That value was crosschecked againist a reserve stratedgy assessed againist each level
2 WBS element and is shown in Table 5-2. This allows us to allocate a larger weighting in the areas
of higher uncertainity for WBS 4.0 Instruments and 8.0 Integration and Test. This approach yields
a reserve os $3,518K compared to the straight 15% assessment of $3,722K. This reserve analysis
will also be used at each of the KDP milestones.
Another reserve assessment is to quatify the cost uncertainities of the “known unknowns” and
summarized in Table 5-3. This also shows that there is still unemcumbered reserve for the
“unknown unknowns”.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
41
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Table 5-1: List of Trips Used to Estimate Travel Costs
Trip
Location
Trip Planning
Dates
# Travel
Days
NASA DFRC
7/12-16/2010
5
Science Team Meeting (ST-2)
Boulder
3/4-8/2013
5
Science Team Meeting (ST-3)
NASA GSFC
3/31-4/4/2014
5
Science Team Meeting (ST-4)
NASA ARC
3/2-6/2015
5
Quarterly Project Status Review (FY11-3)
NASA LaRC
5/3-5/2011
3
Quarterly Project Status Review (FY12-3)
NASA LaRC
5/1-3/2012
3
Quarterly Project Status Review (FY13-3)
NASA LaRC
4/30-5/2/2013
3
Quarterly Project Status Review (FY14-3)
NASA LaRC
5/6-8/2014
3
Quarterly Project Status Review (FY15-3)
NASA LaRC
5/5-7/2015
3
Hawaii, Guam,
Darwin
8/2010
14
SRR
NASA ARC
9/15/2010
3
PDR
NASA ARC
1/25/2011
4
Confirmation Review
NASA HQ
3/1-3/2011
3
CDR
NASA ARC
5/1/2011
4
Science Team Meetings
Science Team Meeting (ST-1) Kick-Off
Quarterly Reviews
Development Meetings
Deployment Site Visit
Initial Instrument Integration for Winter Deployment
NASA DFRC
7/1/2011
Instrument
Dependent
7 - 35
Flight Readiness Review
NASA DFRC
9/13-15/2011
3
NASA ARC
12/13-15/2011
3
NASA DFRC
11/28-12/9/2011
14
Yigo, Guam
1/9-2/9/2012
34
Instrument De-integration for Winter Deployment
NASA DFRC
2/14-17/2012
4
Instrument Integration for Fall Deployment
NASA DFRC
7/30-8/10/2012
14
Kauai
9/3-10/4/2012
34
Instrument De-integration for Fall Deployment
NASA DFRC
10/9-12/2012
4
Instrument Integration for Summer Deployment
NASA DFRC
5/27-6/7/2013
14
Kauai
7/1-8/1/2013
34
NASA DFRC
8/6-9/2013
4
Mission Readiness Review
Science Investigation Campaigns
Instrument Integration for Winter Deployment
Winter Deployment - Guam
Fall Deployment - Hawaii
Summer Deployment - Hawaii
Instrument De-integration for Summer Deployment
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
42
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Table 5-2: Cost Reserves Strategy
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
WBS Element
Project Management
Systems Engineering
Safety & Investigation Assurance
Instruments
Flight System & Services
Investigation Operations
Ground Systems
Integration & Test
Science Team
Subtotal
Cost ($K)
2092
589
442
11672
25
2900
380
1297
5413
Reserve (%)
10
5
5
20
0
10
10
25
5
Reserve ($K)
209.2
29.4
22.1
2334.5
0.0
290.0
38.0
324.3
270.7
24811
Reserves (15%)
3518.1
3722
Total Cost
28532
Table 5-3: Cost Uncertainty Assessment
Reserves Category
Estimated Amount ($K)
WBS
Flight Hours
350
6, 8
Fuel Surcharge
45
6
Equipment Transport
150
Instrument Modifications
Additional Ku Downlink Time
4
140
7
Global Hawk Integration
Extended Deployment
Total
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
43
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
APPENDICES
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
44
ATTREX
ATTREX –Cost Table
01 Project Management
01.01 Pjt Mgt & Planning
01.02 Mgt Reviews & Approvals
01.03 Deployment Mgt
01.04 Risk and Configuration Mgt
01.05 Contract Mgt
01.06 Reserves (bottom of Table)
02 Systems Engineering
02.01 Systems Engineering Mgt
02.02 Mission Rqmts, V&V
03 Safety & Investigation Assure
03.01 SMA Mgt
03.02 Global Hawk SMA
04 Instruments
04.01 CPL
04.02 Ozone Photometer
04.03 UCATS
04.04 ULH
04.05 MMS
04.06 MTP
04.07 AWAS
04.08 PCRS
04.09 DLH
04.10 Hawkeye
04.11 SSFR
04.12 Mini-DOAS
05 Flight System & Services
05.01 Operations Concepts
5.02 Design & Engineering
5.03 System Allocations
5.04 Airspace Access Mgt
5.05 Payload & Mission Mgt
5.06 Ground & Flight Testing
06 Investigation Operations
06.01 Flt Invest & Deployment Mgt
Instrument Cryogens & Gases
06.02 Science Flight Operations
06.03 Flt Sys Check-out & Maint
07 Ground Systems
07.01 Mobile Operations Platforms
07.02 DFRC Facilities
07.03 AGE/GSE
07.04 Support Systems
08 Integration & Test
08.01 Systems I&T Mgt
08.02 Integration & Deintegration
08.03 Test Flights
09 Science Team
09.01 Science Mgt
9.02 Mission Planning
9.03 Theory, Model, & Forecasting
9.04 Data Analysis
9.05 Science Team Meetings
9.06 Publications
Subtotal
A.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
FY10
181
139.2
5
FY11
391
287.8
11
FY12
404
295.9
11
FY13
415
309.6
3
FY14
435
324.4
3
37
92
97
102
108
37
46
36.5
68
68
92
107
92.3
157
157
34
131
33.7
98
98
0
71
0.0
52
52
0
58
0.0
54
54
1501.5
144.5
62
47.6
98.9
63
32
70
302.3
195.2
352.2
63.8
70
8
8
0
2365.6
354.8
155
141.6
173.8
144
99.7
200
237.6
126.9
452.2
80
200
13
13
0
2825.1
379.3
234
237.4
181.9
165
391.4
200
311.2
177.8
265.2
81.9
200
0
0
0
2548.1
360.9
191
157.4
278.3
166
240.3
200
333.2
157.2
176.6
87.2
200
0
0
0
1592.5
146
139
134.2
69.4
131
118
100
351.9
86.2
143.5
73.3
100
2.6
2.6
0
0
0
1948
468
10
1470
967
255
5
707
0
0
170
100
140
70
0
70
1047
140
100
70
50
0
900
147
0
405
192.9
384
0
0
0
4236
100
50
0
494
191.5
481
0
0
0
5549
0
467
195.2
540
0
0
0
4102
100
100
0
169
129.6
213
0
0
0
1895
20
400
183.9
463
0
0
20
2104
FY15 Total ($K)
266
2092
197.2
1554.1
3
36
0
0
66
501.6
0
0
163
14
427
0.0
162.5
13
442
13
442
0
839.6
11672
61.6
1447
94
875
141.6
859.8
70.7
873
107
776
46.7
928.1
20
790
218.3
1754.5
59.7
803
0
1389.7
0
386.2
20
790
1.8
25
1.8
25.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2915
723
15
2177
0
0
380
100
0
0
280
0
1297
0
1150
147
20
5413
242
2177
33.8
926.9
188
2269
0
0
0
0
20
40
1141
24399
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
45
ATTREX
Reserves (15%)
Total
B.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
284
2179
635
4871
832
6381
615
4717
316
2420
171
1312
3660
28059
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
The ATTREX Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is the basis the of the ATTREX schedule, cost,
and risk management approach. Using the Level 2 WBS categories defined in the EV-1 AO, the
project has established standard level 3 WBS elements for the ATTREX Science investigation
shown in Figure XX.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
46
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
47
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
WBS Dictionary
C.
ATTREX Work Breakdown Structure
WBS
Element
Title
Responsible
Organization
Project
Management
ARC
1.1
Project Management
& Planning
ARC
1.2
Management
Reviews &
Approvals
ARC
1.3
Contract
Management
ARC
1.4
Reserve Management
ARC
1.0
WBS Dictionary
Element 1 - Project Management: The business and
administrative planning, organizing, directing,
coordinating, analyzing, controlling, and approval
processes used to accomplish overall project objectives,
which are not associated with specific hardware or
software elements. This element includes project reviews
and documentation, and project reserves. It excludes costs
associated with technical planning and management and
costs associated with delivering specific engineering,
hardware and software products.
Lead, manage, and support the overall science
investigation. Supports the PI in fulfilling all reporting
duties to ESSP. Provide administrative assistance for staff
including travel arrangements, meeting arrangements,
facilities management (office needs). Deployment
planning activities that include site management (survey
& selection), facilities, accommodations, transportation,
shipping & logistics, communications, permits and
agreements. Lead the risk management effort. Includes
creation and maintenance of Project Risk List, integrating
risks from vendor risk lists as appropriate; interfacing
with the Project Business personnel for development and
maintenance of the Project Lien List. Configuration
Management (CM) support to the Project Team including
PI Org., Industry, university, and other members.
Provide human resources and facilities for the Project’s
formal, major internal reviews. Preparation of subsequent
Board RFAs and Board reports. Cost for Standing
Review Board is assumed to be carried by ESSP.
Initiates, manages, and closes-out of all the funding
vehicles to the instrument teams, theory & modeling
science teams, the Global Hawk Project Office, and
services for deployment
All budget reserves for the Project are contained in this
account. No reserves are distributed to other WBS
elements until approved. Reserves are planned as part of
the Project Baseline Budget. This also includes the
funding for schedule reserves. When the decision to use
reserves is made, a formal transfer from WBS 1.4 to the
appropriate WBS occurs and documents haw reserves are
spent.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
48
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Systems
Engineering
ARC
2.1
Systems Engineering
Management
ARC
2.2
Mission
Requirements,
Verification, &
Validation
ARC
Safety &
Investigation
Assurance
ARC/DFRC
2.0
3.0
3.1
SMA Management
ARC
Element 2 - Systems Engineering: The technical and
management efforts of directing and controlling an
integrated engineering effort for the project. This element
includes the efforts to define the project requirements for
instruments, Global Hawk platform and ground system,
conducting trade studies, the integrated planning and
control of the technical program efforts of design
engineering, software engineering, specialty engineering,
system architecture development and integrated test
planning, system requirements writing, configuration
control, technical oversight, control and monitoring of the
technical program, and risk mitigation activities.
Documentation products include requirements documents,
interface control documents (ICD), Systems Engineering
Management Plan (SEMP), and master verification and
validation (V&V) plan.
Lead the Project’s overall system architecture, definition
and engineering functions as the Mission System
Engineer. Includes requirements structure, flow-down,
definition, and management; defining inter-system
interfaces, Project external interfaces, and test plans;
conducting top-level trade studies; managing internal
Project technical resources and technical risk mitigation.
Runs the Project System Engineering Team and manages
the Project Technical Action-Item List. Also includes
document development tasks such as Project Review
Plans, System Engineering Reports, Project Requirements
Documents, System Description Documents, ICDs, V&V
Requirements, and Project Test Plans & Test/Verification
Matrix.
Lead the effort to define the mission requirements in
response to the science requirements, and define the
requirements flowdown to the subsystems. Plan and
develop the Project's end-to-end mission scenarios.
Includes developing planning and operational guidelines
and constraints for the mission; The main products are:
Mission Systems Requirements Document; Mission Plan.
Perform requirements V&V on the Project Systems. Key
products include the Project V&V Plan and V&V report.
Element 3 - Safety and Investigation Assurance: The
technical and management efforts of directing and
controlling the safety and mission assurance elements of
the project. This element includes design, development,
review, and verification of practices and procedures and
mission success criteria intended to assure that the
platform, ground systems, mission operations, and
payload(s) meet performance requirements. This element
excludes mission and product assurance efforts directed
at partners and subcontractors other than a
review/oversight function, and the direct costs of
environmental testing.
Lead and manage the overall Mission Assurance effort for
the Project and provide the primary Mission Assurance
interface to the Project partners. Documentation products
include: Mission Assurance Requirements (MAR)
document
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
49
ATTREX
3.2
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
Global Hawk SMA
DFRC
Instruments
ARC
Cloud Physics Lidar
(CPL)
NOAA Ozone
Photometer
UAS Chromatograph
for Atmospheric
Trace Species
(UCATS)
UAS Laser
Hygrometer (ULH)
4.5
Meteorological
Measurement System
(MMS)
4.6
Microwave
Temperature Profiler
(MTP)
4.7
Advanced Whole Air
Sampler (AWAS)
4.8
Picarro Cavity
Ringdown
Spectrometer
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
5.0
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
All SMA activities associated with the integrated Global
Hawk
Element 4 - Instruments: This element includes all the
cost of managing and implementing the development of
the instruments and their GSE (hardware & software),
integration and de-integration to the Global Hawk
platform, deployment of the instrument teams. All
instruments are starting at least at a TRL 6 level but may
have costs to accommodate the Global Hawk. Instrument
costs include hardware and software such as algorithm
and data processing development specific to each
instrument.
GSFC
NOAA
ARC
Diode Laser
Hygrometer (DLH)
Hawkeye
Solar Spectral Flux
Radiometer (SSFR)
Mini-DOAS
Flight System and
Services
DFRC
Element 5 - Flight System and Services: The NASA Global
Hawk serves as the platform for carrying instruments and
other mission-oriented equipment to the Troposphere
altitude to achieve the mission objectives. This element
also includes all design, development, production,
assembly, test efforts, and associated GSE of the GH in
preparation to accommodate the payload complement.
The GH platform sustaining engineering between
campaigns is included in this WBS. The GH integration
and test with payloads and test flights are carried under
WBS element 8. The operational science flights and
deployments are in WBS element 6.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
50
ATTREX
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Operations Concepts
Design &
Engineering
System Allocations
Airspace Access
Management
Payload & Mission
Management
Ground & Flight
Testing
Investigation
Operations
6.0
6.1
6.2
6.3
7.0
7.1
Flight Investigation
and Deployment
Management
Science Flight
Operations
Flight System
Check-out and
Maintenance
DFRC
DFRC
All GH platform hardware and software modifications to
accommodate instruments. This includes modifications
and development of investigation specific Ground Support
Equipment (GSE).
The GH platform sustaining engineering between
campaigns is included in this WBS.
DFRC
DFRC
DFRC
DFRC
ARC/DFRC
ARC
DFRC
Provide product assurance support and staff to all GH
development efforts. This includes safety, materials and
processes support, contamination control, hardware and
software quality engineering, inspection, and reliability
analysis
Element 6 - Investigation Operations: The management of
the development and implementation of personnel,
procedures, documentation, and training required to
conduct mission operations. This element includes
tracking, commanding, receiving/processing telemetry,
analyses of system status, trajectory analysis, orbit
determination, maneuver analysis, target body
orbit/ephemeris updates, and disposal of remaining endof-mission resources. This element does not include
integration and test with the other project systems.
Logistics
Manage the overall science campaign deployments.
Systems Engineering, and Safety Mission Investigation
Assurance
Deploy, operate and return the GH platform for each of
the science campaigns.
DFRC
Ground Systems
DFRC
Element 7 - Ground Systems: The complex of equipment,
hardware, software, networks, and mission-unique
facilities required to conduct mission operations of the
spacecraft systems and payloads. This complex includes
the computers, communications, operating systems, and
networking equipment needed to interconnect and host the
Mission Operations software. This element includes the
design, development, implementation, integration, test,
and the associated support equipment of the ground
system, including the hardware and software needed for
processing, archiving, and distributing telemetry and
radiometric data and for commanding the spacecraft.
Also includes the use and maintenance of the project
testbeds and project-owned facilities. This element does
not include integration and test with the other project
systems and conducting mission operations.
Mobile Operations
Platforms
DFRC
The outfitting and modifications of the Portable
Operations Center (POC) to support ATTREX
deployments. The development of a Portable Payload
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
51
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Operations Room (PPOR) that supports the payload users
during flight at the deployment site.
7.2
7.3
DFRC Facilities
AGE/GSE
DFRC
DFRC
7.4
Support Systems
DFRC
Integration and
Test
DFRC
8.1
Systems I&T
Management
DFRC
8.2
Integration & Deintegration
DFRC
8.3
Test Flights
DFRC
Science Team
ARC
9.1
Science Management
ARC
9.2
Mission Planning
ARC
8.0
9.0
9.3
9.4
9.5
Theory, Data
Analysis, Modeling,
& Forecasting
Science Team
Meetings
Publications
Theory Team
Theory Team
ARC
GHOC and PI Support Facilities
The procurement of the satellite communication time,
range safety, and other non-DFRC costs
Element 8 - Systems Integration and Testing: This element
includes the hardware, software, procedures, and projectowned facilities required to perform the integration and
testing of the instruments, Global Hawk platform, ground
systems and mission operations.
Manage the instrument integration, test flights, and
instrument de-integration
Develop integration and test procedures for integration
and de-integration of science instruments onto the Global
Hawk. All activities are planned to be at DFRC. This
includes the development or modification of any GSE for
instrument integration.
Global Hawk costs to support flight tests
Element 9 - Science: This element includes the managing,
directing, and controlling of the science investigation
aspects of the Project. The costs incurred to cover the
Principal Investigator, Project Scientist, science team
members, and equivalent personnel are included. Specific
responsibilities include defining the science requirements
and success criteria; ensuring the integration of these
requirements with the payloads, Global Hawk Platform,
ground systems, and mission operations; providing the
algorithms for data processing and analyses;
participating in mission operations as appropriate; and
performing data analysis, archiving, and publication of
science findings. This element excludes hardware and
software for onboard science investigative
instruments/payloads.
The managing and planning of science goals, objectives
including success criteria.
Initial flight concepts to achieve science measurements.
Detailed science flight planning for each campaign
Analysis of investigation instrument data and correlation
to other data sets such as satellite measurements
Cost of travel to support the four science team meetings
Developing and submitting papers, as well as travel to
conferences to present science results, including
conference fees.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
52
ATTREX
D.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Statement of Work (SOW)
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
53
ATTREX
E.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Master Equipment List (MEL)
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
54
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Basis of Estimate Details
F.
WBS 1.0 Project Management, 2.0 Systems Engineering, 3.0 Safety & Investigation
Assurance
NASA ARC estimated these elements by analyzing staffing loading for each element through all
mission phases. Consideration was taken of task duration and level-of-effort, and required skill mix.
The key personnel for project management are the PM, DPM, and Business Manager. The largest
effort is at the beginning of the investigation ensuring the modification and integration of the
instruments to the Global Hawk as well as the bulk of the deployment planning. After the
deployments the required management tasks will be quieter. Significant effort for the Business
Manager will be setting the funding for all the instrument teams, theory and modeling science team
members, and Global Hawk Project Office. The funding vehicles will vary from distribution to
multiple NASA centers, other federal institutions, universities, and commercial companies. Systems
Engineering includes
WBS 4.0 Instruments
Each of the Instruments Teams were given guidelines and the investigation schedule and provided
their estimates. They included the effort for instrument modification, integration into the Global
Hawk, deployment support, and data analysis. All travel for integration, campaigns, and science team
meetings were costed. Based on the GloPac experience during a campaign only 1 person is needed to
be within phone access during the 30 hour flight. This allows only 2 persons per instrument to go on
deployment. In order to keep things straightforward, all costs for the instruments are kept in their 4.x
WBS and not spread out to other WBS elements
WBS 5.0 Flight System and Services
As the Global Hawk is an existing platform and significant modifications and repairs are not funded
directly by the ATTREX Investigation, costs were not estimated in this WBS. Costs of modifications
to the Global Hawk, or analyses of the aircraft compatibility with the payload suite are all carried in
WBS 8.0 Integration & Test.
WBS 6.0 Investigation Operations
The cost for deployment management and travel is estimated based on per diems.
Table F-1. Derivation of Flight Hours and Associated Costs
Flight
Hours
Test
Flights
(Hrs)
Ferry
Flight
Round
Trip (Hrs)
Science
(Hrs)
Total
(Hrs)
Total ($K)
WBS
Initial I&T
12
N/A
30
42
147
8.2
11
WinterGuam
10
28
180
218
763
6.2
12
Fall-Hawaii
10
12
180
202
707
6.2
12
SummerHawaii
10
12
180
202
707
6.2
13
Subtotal
42
52
570
664
2324
-
Reserve
(15%)
-
-
-
100
349
-
-
Total
-
-
-
764
2673
-
-
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
FY
55
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
The cost rate for Global Hawk flight hours is $3500/Hr and the Global Hawk Project Office has said
that this rate is expected to remain constant for the selected Earth Venture-1 investigations. (Table F-1)
The reserve costs are calculated for the reserves justification but are not part of the baseline cost.
The base cost of the GH fuel is carried in the flight hour cost, however, a cost risk exists for a fuel
surcharge that covers the difference for a nominal gallon of fuel at DRFC versus the cost at the
deployment site. The GH consumes about 75 Gal/Hr. Assuming a fuel surcharge of $1/Gal and the
all the deployed science hours and the one way ferry hours are added together, a cost risk of ~$45K is
calculated and shown in Table 4.X.
The costs for rental of office space, hangar, and networking are accounted for each deployment. It is
anticipated that these costs could be significantly reduced or eliminated, If we can be stationed on a
military base particularly in Guam and maybe even in Hawaii. If we are stationed in a commercial
airfield these costs may be higher and represent a cost risk.
WBS 7.0 Ground System
The development of the GH Portable Operations Station is already funded and expected to be
available by 3/2011. The portable version of the Payload Operations Room has been scoped out by
DFRC, but has not been funded. The costs of computers, servers and design of this system to
support deployed operations is covered by the investigation. The Ku downlink satellite service is
purchased at a rate of $7K/Mbit/Month. With a 10 Mbit allocation the rate is $70K/Month. Between
the initial integration tests and science investigations, four months of service was costed.
WBS 8.0 Integration and Test
The tasks associated with integrating the payload complement of instruments on to the Global Hawk
platform. Six of the ATTREX instruments are on the GloPac Investigation slated for 1/2010, so they
have already been through the initial integration. One of these istruments will be moved to a different
location on the GH, but the other five will go in the same location. The other six instruments are
estimated at $150K/instrument as this is their first integration on the GH platform. The integration
and deintegration activities that occur at DFRC around each science deployment are considered as
reflights and the cost is estimated at $50K/deployment.
The initial integration and test flights and the one science flight from DRFC have their GH flight
hours cost carried in this WBS. Refer to Table XX. The cost risk for a fuel surcharge while operating
out of DRFC is very low.
WBS 9.0 Science Team
Each of the theory and modeling science team members created a cost based on their anticipated
involvement as well as support for research assistants or post-doctural staff. Labor rates are based
upon each institution. The cost for their travel to the Science Team Meetings and their cost for
publications is also contained.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
56
ATTREX
G.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Curriculae Vitae
Dr. Eric J. Jensen
Principal Investigator
Research Scientist, Climate and Radiation Studies
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
eric.j.jensen@nasa.gov
Research and Professional Experience
Research Scientist, NASA Ames Research Center, 1997-present
Research Scientist, Bay Area Environmental Research Institute, 1996-1997
Research Associate, San Jose State University, 1995-1996
Project Scientist, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 1993-1995
NRC Associate, NASA Ames Research Center, 1990-1993
Education
Ph.D., Atmospheric Science, University of Colorado, 1985–1989
B.S., Physics, Harvey Mudd College, 1981–1985
Field Experiment Management
Subsonic Aircraft: Contrail and Cloud Effects Special Study (SUCCESS) , 1996, DC-8 flight
scientist
SAGE III Ozone Loss and Validation Experiment (SOLVE), 1999/2000, DC-8 flight scientist
Florida Area Cirrus Experiment (CRYSTAL-FACE), 2002, project scientist
Polar Aura Validation Experiment (PAVE), 2005, project scientist
Water Isotope Intercomparison Flight Series (WIIF), 2005, project scientist
Costa Rica Aura Validation Experiment (CRAVE), 2006, project scientist
Tropical Clouds and Climate Coupling (TC4), 2007, WB-57 platform scientist
Recent Publications
Jensen, E. J., L. Pfister, T.-P. Bui, P. Lawson, and D. Baumgardner, Ice nucleation and cloud
microphysical properties in tropical tropopause layer cirrus, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 9,
20631-20675, 2009.
Jensen, E. J., et al., On the importance of small ice crystals in tropical anvil cirrus, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 9, 5519-5537, 2009.
Jensen, E. J., et al., Formation of large (100 m) ice crystals near the tropical tropopause,
Atmos. Chem. Phys. 8, 1621-1633, 2008.
Popp, P. J., et al., Condensed-phase nitric acid in a tropical subvisible cirrus cloud, Geophys.
Res. Lett., doi:10.1029/2007GL031832, 2007.
Jensen, E. J., A. S. Ackerman, and J. Smith, Can Overshooting Convection Dehydrate the
Tropical Tropopause Layer? , J. Geophys. Res., in press, 2007.
Jensen, E. J. and A. S. Ackerman, Homogeneous aerosol freezing in the tops of high-altitude
tropical cumulonimbus clouds, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, doi:10.1029/2005GL024928, 2006.
Smith, J., A. S. Ackerman, E. J. Jensen, and O. B. Toon, Role of deep convection in
establishing the isotopic composition of water vapor in the tropical transition layer, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 33, doi:10.1029/2005GL024078, 2006.
Popp, P. J., T. P. Marcy, E. J. Jensen, B. Kдrcher, D. W. Fahey, R. S. Gao, T. L. Thompson, K.
H. Rosenlof, E. C. Richard, R. L. Herman, E. M. Weinstock, J. B. Smith, R. D. May, H.
Vцmel, J. C. Wilson, A. J. Heymsfield, M. J. Mahoney, and A. M. Thompson, The
observation of nitric acid-containing particles in the tropical lower stratosphere, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 6, 601–611, 2006.
Jensen, E. J., J. B. Smith, L. Pfister, J. V. Pittman, E. M. Weinstock, D. S. Sayres, R. L.
Herman, R. F. Troy, K. Rosenlof, T. L. Thompson, A. M. Fridlind, P. K. Hudson, D. J.
Cziczo, A. J. Heymsfield, C. Schmitt, J. C. Wilson, Ice Supersaturations Exceeding 100% at
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
57
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
the Cold Tropical Tropopause: Implications for Cirrus Formation and Dehydration, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 5, 851–862, 2005.
Jensen, E. J., and L. Pfister, Implications of Persistent Supersaturation with Respect to Ice in
Cold Cirrus For Stratospheric Water Vapor, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32,
doi:10.1029/2004GL021125, 2005.
Jensen, E. J., L. Pfister, T.-P. Bui, A. Weinheimer, E. Weinstock, J. Smith, J. Pittman, D.
Baumgardner, M. J. McGill, Formation of a Tropopause Cirrus Layer Observed over Florida
during CRYSTAL-FACE, J. Geophys. Res., 110, doi:10.1029/2004JD004671, 2005.
Fridlind, A. M., A. S. Ackerman, E. J. Jensen, A. J. Heymsfield, M. R. Poellot, D. E. Stevens,
D. Wang, L. M. Miloshevich, D. Baumgardner, R. P. Lawson, J. C. Wilson, R. C. Flagan, J.
H. Seinfeld, H. H. Jonsson, T. M. VanReken, V. Varutbangkul, T. A. Rissman, Evidence for
the predominance of mid-tropospheric aerosols as subtropical anvil cloud nuclei, Science, 34,
718–722, 2004.
Jensen, E. J., and L. Pfister, Transport and freeze-drying in the tropical tropopause layer, J.
Geophys. Res., 109, doi:10.1029/2003JD004022, 2004.
Jensen, E. J., and K. Drdla, Nitric acid concentrations near the tropical tropopause:
Implications for the properties of tropical nitric acid trihydrate clouds, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
29, doi:10.1029/2002GS015190, 2002b.
Jensen, E. J., O. B. Toon, A. Tabazadeh, K. Drdla, Impact of Polar Stratospheric Cloud Particle
Composition, Number Density, and Lifetime on Denitrification, J. Geophys. Res., 107,
doi:1029/2001JD000440, 2002a.
Santee, M. L., A. Tabazadeh, G. L. Manney, M. D. Fromm, R. M. Bevilacqua, J. W. Waters, E.
J. Jensen, A Lagrangian approach to studying Arctic polar stratospheric clouds using UARS
MLS HNO3 and POAM II aerosol extinction measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 107,
2000JD000227, 2002.
Rapp, M., F.-J. Lьbken, A. Mullemann, G. E. Thomas, E. J. Jensen, Small-scale temperature
variations in the vicinity of NLC: Experimental and model results, J. Geophys. Res., 107,
doi:10.1029/2001JD001241, 2002.
Lin, R. F., D. O. Starr, P. J. DeMott, W. Cotton, K. Sassen, E. Jensen, B. Karcher, X. Liu., Cirrus
Parcel Model Comparison Project. Phase 1: The critical components to simulate cirrus
initiation explicitly, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 2305–2329, 2002.
Jensen, E. J., et al., Prevalence of ice supersaturated regions in the upper troposphere:
Implications for optically thin ice cloud formation, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 17253–17266,
2001b.
Jensen, E. J., L. Pfister, A. S. Ackerman, O. B. Toon, and A. Tabazadeh, A Conceptual Model
of the Dehydration of Air Due to Freeze-drying by Optically Thin, Laminar Cirrus Rising
Slowly Across the Tropical Tropopause, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 17237–17252, 2001a.
Pfister, L., H. B. Selkirk, E. Jensen, J. Podolske, G. Sachse, M. Avery, M. R. Schoeberl, M. J.
Mahoney, E. Richard, Processes controlling water vapor in the winter Arctic tropopause
region J. Geophys. Res., 108, doi:10.1029/2001JD00106717, 2002.
Pfister, L., H. B. Selkirk, E. J. Jensen, M. R. Schoeberl, O. B. Toon, E. V. Browell, W. B. Grant,
B. Gary, M. J. Mahoney, T. V. Bui, E. Hintsa, Aircraft observations of thin cirrus clouds near
the tropical tropopause, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 9765–9786, 2001.
Stone, E. M., A. Tabazadeh, E. Jensen, H. C. Pumphrey, M. L. Santee, J. L. Mergenthaler,
Onset, extent, and duration of dehydration in the Southern Hemisphere polar vortex, J.
Geophys. Res., 106, 22,979–22,990, 2001.
Vay, S. A., B. E. Anderson, E. J. Jensen, G. W. Sachse, J. Ovarlez, G. L. Gregory, S. R. Nolf, J.
R. Podolske, T. A. Slate, C. E. Sorenson, Tropospheric water vapor measurements over the
North Atlantic during the Subsonic Assessment Ozone and Nitrogen Oxide Experiment
(SONEX), J. Geophys. Res., 105, 3745–3756, 2001.
Tabazadeh, A., E. J. Jensen, O. B. Toon, K. Drdla, M. R. Schoeberl, Role of the stratospheric
polar freezing belt in denitrification, Science, 291, 2591–2594, 2001.
Sandor, B. J., E. J. Jensen, E. M. Stone, W. G. Read, J. W. Waters, J. L. Mergenthaler, Upper
tropospheric humidity and thin cirrus, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 2645-2648, 2000.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
58
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Michael T. Gaunce
Project Manager
Earth Science Project Office
NASA Ames Research Center
M/S 245-5
Moffett Field, CA 94035
650-604-1266, michael.t.gaunce@nasa.gov
Role in ATTREX Mission: Mr. Gaunce will act as the Project Manager for the mission. He
implements the management content of the project, including day-to-day project planning
activities, requirements, budgets, schedules, tasking, reviews, and reporting. He also leads the field
campaigns for the mission.
Experience Related to the Investigation:
2002–Present: Project Manager, Earth Science Project Office, NASA Ames Research Center,
Moffett Field, CA.
2000–2002: Assistant Program Director, Engineering for Complex Systems Program Office, Office
of the Center Director, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.
Education:
M.S. – Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, (Astronautics) – 1987
B.S. – Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, (Aeronautical & Astronautical Engineering) –
1984
Additional course work completed in project management, contracting, system engineering,
requirements development and management, business-government relations, team leadership, risk
management, applied statistics, remote sensing, and digital image processing. Basic proficiency in
Spanish, French, and German.
Relevant Awards and Honors:
2009 Ames Honor Award for CASIE Mission
2006 NASA Exceptional Achievement Medal
1997 NASA Space Flight Awareness “Silver Snoopy” Award
Numerous NASA Group Achievement Awards for leading or supporting Airborne Science
Missions, including SOLVE II, INTEX-A, TCSP, INTEX-B, NAMMA, CR-AVE, TC4, ARCTAS,
and SoGasEx.
Publications:
Gaunce M., Ross M., and Webster A., Streamlining Access to and Improving Utilization of
NASA’s Airborne Science Fleet, Proceedings of the 33rd International Symposium on Remote
Sensing of Environment, Stresa, Italy, May 2009.
Ross M., and Gaunce M., “Common Sensor Integration Requirements for NASA Research
Aircraft: Preliminary Assessment and Roadmap,” Aerospace Technical Report TOR-2009(2189)8768, December 2008.
Schoenung, S. with assistance of Gaunce, M., Earth Science Mission Requirements for Unmanned
Aircraft Systems, Proceedings of the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International
(AUVSI) Symposium, 2006.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
59
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Leonhard Pfister
Co-I and Ch Meteorologist
Atmospheric Sciences Branch, MS 245-5
NASA/Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000
650-604-3183 Leonhard.Pfister@nasa.gov
Role in ATTREX Mission: Dr. Pfister will lead the Meteorology Team that provides guidance on
atmospheric conditions relevant to flight planning. He will also participate directly in the flight
planning process, and provide guidance during flights to maximize science return.
Experience:
1988-present: Research Atmospheric Scientist, Earth Sciences Division, NASA/Ames Research
Center, Moffett Field, CA
1980-1987: Research Scientist, Space Sciences Division, NASA/Ames Research Center, Moffett
Field, CA
Education:
M. I. T. (Cambridge, MA)
S. B. (Earth and Planetary Science)
1972
University of Washington (Seattle, WA) Ph. D. (Atmospheric Science)
1977
Publications:
Pfister, L., H. B. Selkirk, D. O. Starr, K. Rosenlof, and P. Newman, A Meteorological
Overview of the TC4 Mission. Submitted to J. Geophysl Res. , 2009.
Froyd, K., et al., Aerosol Composition in the Tropical Troposphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys.
Discuss., 9, 9399-9456, 2009 (Co-Author)
Choi, Y., et al., Characteristics of the Atmospheric CO2 signal as observed over the coterminous
United States during INTEX-NA, J. Geophys. Res., 113, doi 10.10292007/JD008899. (Coauthor).
Jensen, E. J., et al., Formation of large (!100 μm) ice crystals near the tropical tropopause,
Atmos. Chem. Phys. 8, 1621-1633, 2008 (Co-Author).
Park, S. et al., The CO2 tracer clock for the Tropical Tropopause Layer, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7,
3989-4000, 2007 (Co-Author).
Schwarz, J. P. et al., Coatings and their enhancement of black carbon absorption in the tropical
troposphere and lower stratosphere, J. Geophys. Res.,113, doi:10.1029/2007/JD009042, 2008
(Co-Author).
Jensen, E. J., J. B. Smith, L. Pfister, J. V. Pittman, E. M. Weinstock, D. S. Sayres, R. L.
Herman, R.F. Troy, K. Rosenlof, T. L. Thompson, A. M. Fridlind, P. K. Hudson, D. J. Cziczo,
A. J. Heymsfield,,C. Schmitt, J. C. Wilson, Ice Supersaturations Exceeding 100% at the Cold
Tropical Tropopause: Implications for Cirrus Formation and Dehydration, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 5, 851–862, 2005 (Co-author)
Jensen, E. J., and L. Pfister, Implications of Persistent Supersaturation with Respect to Ice in
Cold Cirrus For Stratospheric Water Vapor, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32,
doi:10.1029/2004GL021125, 2005
Jensen, E. J., L. Pfister, T.-P. Bui, A.Weinheimer, E.Weinstock, J. Smith, J. Pittman, D.
Baumgardner, M. J. McGill, Formation of a Tropopause Cirrus Layer Observed over Florida
during CRYSTALFACE, J. Geophys. Res., 110, doi:10.1029/2004JD004671, 2005
Jensen, E. J., and L. Pfister, Transport and freeze-drying in the tropical tropopause layer, J.
Geophys. Res., 109, doi:10.1029/2003JD004022, 2004.
Jost, H., et al, In-situ observations of mid-latitude forest fire plumes deep in the stratosphere,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L11101,doi:10.1029/2003GL019253 ,2004 (Co-author)
Ridley, B., 2004, Convective transport of reactive constituents to the tropical and mid-latitude
tropopause region: I. Observations. Atmospheric Environment, 38, 1259-1274 (Co-author)
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
60
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Pfister, L. et al., Processes controlling water vapor in the Winter Arctic Tropopause Region, J.
Geophys. Res., 108, SOL57-1-15, 2003.
Spang, R., G. Eidmann, M. Riese, D. Offermann, P. Preusse, L. Pfister , and P.-H. Wang,
CRISTA observations of cirrus clouds around the tropopause, J. of Geophysical
Research,107, pp. CRI-2-1-18, 2002.
Pfister, L. et al., Aircraft Observations of Thin Cirrus Clouds near the Tropical Tropopause, J.
Geophys. Res.,106,9765-9786, 2001
Pickering, K. et al, Trace gas transport and scavenging in PEM-Tropics B South Pacific
Convergence Zone convection, J. of Geophysical Research, 106,.32591-32602. 2001 (CoAuthor)
Alexander, M. J., J. Beres, and L. Pfister, Tropical stratospheric gravity wave activity and
relationships to clouds, J. of Geophysical Research, 105, 22299-22311, 2000.
Jeker, D. et al, Measurements of Nitrogen Oxides at the Tropopause -- attribution to convection
and correlation with lightning, J. of Geophysical Research, 105, 3679-3700. 2000 (co-author)
Jost, H., M. Loewenstein, L. Pfister, J. Margitan, A. Chang, R. Salawitch, and H. Michelsen,
Laminae in the tropical middle-stratosphere: origin and age estimation. Geophysical
Research Letters,.25, 4337-40 1998 (co-author)
Pfister, L., K. R. Chan, T. P. Bui, S. Bowen, M. Legg, B. Gary, K. Kelly, M. Profitt, and W.
Starr, Gravity waves generated by a tropical cyclone during the STEP Tropical Field
program: a case study, J. of Geophysical Research, Vol. 98, pp. 8611-8638, 1993.
Pfister, L., S. Scott, M. Loewenstein, S. Bowen, and M. Legg, Mesoscale disturbances in the
tropical stratosphere excited by convection: observations and effects on the stratospheric
momentum budget, J. of the Atmospheric Sciences, Vol. 50, pp. 1058-1075, 1993.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
61
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
DR. David W. Fahey
Co-I and Flight Scientist
Earth System Research Laboratory/Chemical Sciences Division
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
325 Broadway R/CSD6
Boulder, Colorado 80305 USA
303-497-5277, david.w.fahey@noaa.gov
Professional Experience
1981–present
Research Physicist, Meteorological Chem Group, NOAA Aeronomy Laboratory
Academic Background
B.S. in Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
Ph.D. in Physics, University of Missouri, Rolla, Missouri
Professional Honors
Recipient of the 2008 Stratospheric Ozone Protection Award from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for outstanding scientific contributions to stratospheric ozone protection.
Member of the Observing Facilities Assessment Panel (OFAP), National Center for Atmospheric
Research, Boulder, CO, November 2007 – present.
Congressional Hearing Witness, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee
on Aviation, Chaired by Rep. Costello, Topic: Aviation and the Environment: Emissions, 6 May
2008.
Co-author of the 2007 climate science assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC).
Co-recipient of the U. S. Department of Commerce Bronze Medal for Meritorious Federal Service,
January 2008, for ‘For leadership in planning, preparing, and reviewing the 2006 scientific stateof-understanding update on the ozone layer for the Montreal Protocol.’
Selected Peer-reviewed Publications
Guus J. M. Velders, David W. Fahey, John S. Daniel, Mack McFarland, and Stephen O. Andersen,
The large contribution of projected HFC emissions to future climate forcing, Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 106, 10949-10954, doi_10.1073_pnas.0902817106, 2009.
David S. Lee, David W. Fahey, Piers M. Forster, Peter J. Newton, Ron C.N. Wit, Ling L. Lim,
Bethan Owen, Robert Sausen, Aviation and global climate change in the 21st century, Atmospheric
Environment, 43, 3520–3537, 2009.
P. J. Popp, T. P. Marcy, R. S. Gao, L. A. Watts, D. W. Fahey, E. C. Richard, S. J. Oltmans, M. L.
Santee, N. J. Livesey, L. Froidevaux, B. Sen, G. C. Toon, K. A. Walker, C. D. Boone, and P. F.
Bernath, Stratospheric correlation between nitric acid and ozone, Journal of Geophysical Research,
114, D03305, doi:10.1029/2008JD010875, 2009.
P.J. Popp, T.P. Marcy, L.A. Watts, R.S. Gao, D.W. Fahey, E.M. Weinstock, J.B Smith, R.L.
Herman, R.F. Troy, C.R. Webster, L.E. Christensen, D.G. Baumgardner, C. Voigt, B. Kärcher, J.C.
Wilson, M.J. Mahoney, E.J. Jensen, T.P. Bui, Condensed-phase nitric acid in a tropical subvisible
cirrus cloud, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L24812, doi:10.1029/2007GL031832, 2007.
J. R. Spackman, J. P. Schwarz, R. S. Gao, L. A. Watts, D. S. Thomson, D. W. Fahey, J. S.
Holloway, J. A. de Gouw, M. Trainer, T. B. Ryerson, Empirical correlations between black carbon
aerosol and carbon monoxide in the lower and middle troposphere, Geophysical Research Letters,
35, L19816, doi:10.1029/2008GL035237, 2008.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
62
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
J. P. Schwarz, R. S. Gao, J. R. Spackman, L. A. Watts, D. S. Thomson, D. W. Fahey, T. B.
Ryerson, J. Peischl, J. S. Holloway, M. Trainer, G. J. Frost, T. Baynard, D. A. Lack, J. A. de Gouw,
C. Warneke, L. A. Del Negro, Measurement of the mixing state, mass, and optical size of
individual black carbon particles in urban and biomass burning emissions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35,
L13810, doi:10.1029/2008GL033968, 2008.
R. S. Gao, S. R. Hall, W. H. Swartz3,J. P. Schwarz, J. R. Spackman, L. A. Watts, D. W. Fahey, K.
C. Aikin, R. E. Shetter, and T. P. Bui, Calculations of solar shortwave heating rates due to black
carbon and ozone absorption using in situ measurements, Journal of Geophysical Research, in
press, 2008.
J. P. Schwarz, J. R. Spackman, D. W. Fahey, R. S. Gao, U. Lohmann, P. Stier, L. A. Watts, D. S.
Thomson, D. A. Lack, L. Pfister, M. J. Mahoney, D. Baumgardner, J. C. Wilson, J. M. Reeves,
Coatings and their enhancement of black-carbon light absorption in the tropical atmosphere,
Journal of Geophysical Research, 113, D03203, doi:10.1029/2007JD009042, 2008.
T. P. Marcy, P. J. Popp, R. S. Gao, D. W. Fahey, E. A. Ray, E. C. Richard, T. L. Thompson, E. L.
Atlas, M. Loewenstein, S. C. Wofsy, S. Park, E. M. Weinstock, W. H. Swartz, M. J. Mahoney,
Measurements of trace gases in the tropical tropopause layer, Atmospheric Environment 41, 7253–
7261, 2007.
R. S. Gao, J. P. Schwarz, K. K. Kelly, D. W. Fahey, L. A. Watts, T. L. Thompson, J. R. Spackman,
J. G. Slowik, E. S. Cross, J.-H. Han, P. Davidovits, T. B. Onasch, D. R. Worsnop, A novel method
for estimating light-scattering properties of soot aerosols using a modified single-particle soot
photometer, Aerosol Science and Technology, 41, 125-135, 2007.
J. P. Schwarz, R. S. Gao, D. W. Fahey, D. S. Thomson, L. A. Watts, J. C. Wilson, J. M. Reeves, M.
Darbeheshti, D. G. Baumgardner, G. L. Kok, S. H. Chung, M. Schulz, J. Hendricks, A. Lauer, B.
Kärcher, J. G. Slowik, K. H. Rosenlof, T. L. Thompson, A. O. Langford, M. Loewenstein, K. C.
Aikin, Single-particle measurements of midlatitude black carbon and light-scattering aerosols from
the boundary layer to the lower stratosphere, Journal of Geophysical Research, 111 (D16207),
doi:10.1029/2006JD007076, 2006.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
63
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Hanwant B. Singh,
Platform Scientist
Earth Science Division
NASA Ames Research Center
M/S 245-5
Moffett Field, CA 94035
650-604-6769, [Hanwant.b.singh@nasa.gov; http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sgg/singh/]
Role in ATTREX Mission: Dr. Singh will act as a Flight Scientist involved in the planning and
implementation of the mission. He will be actively involved in data acquisition and analysis
Experience Related to the Investigation:
Co-Mission Scientist- SONEX/POLINAT (1995)
Mission Scientist – INTEX-A/ICARTT (2004)
Mission Scientist- INTEX-B/MILAGRO (2006)
Co-Mission Scientist –ARCTAS (2008)
1985–Present: Senior Scientist, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.
1975–1985: Director, Atmospheric Chemistry, SRI International
Education:
Ph. D. – University of Pittsburgh, 1973
B.Tech – Indian Institute of Technology (IIT)- Delhi, 1968
Relevant Awards and Honors:
- NASA Exceptional Achievement & Leadership Medals (2009, 2005, 1998).
- Fellow of the World Innovative Foundation (2005)
- In the ISI list of 25 most cited in Geosciences
- Distinguished Alumni, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi.
- Fellow of the American Geophysical Union
- HJ Allen Prize for the best scientific paper (shared with M. Kanakidou, P. Crutzen, and D. Jacob).
- Executive Editor of the international Journal of Atmospheric Environment (1990-present)
- Frank A. Chambers Award by the Air and Waste Management Association for "outstanding
achievement in the science and art of air pollution"
Publications (sample from over 200):
Singh, H. B., Brune, W. H., Crawford, J. H., Flocke, F., and Jacob, D. J.: Chemistry and transport
of pollution over the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific: spring 2006 INTEX-B campaign overview
and first results, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 2301-2318, 2009.
Singh, H. B., et al., Reactive nitrogen distribution and partitioning in the North American
troposphere
and
lowermost
stratosphere,
J.
Geophys.
Res.,
112,
D12S04,
doi:10.1029/2006JD007664, 2007.
Singh, H. B., W. H. Brune, J. H. Crawford, D. J. Jacob, and P. B. Russell, Overview of the summer
2004 Intercontinental Chemical Transport Experiment –North America (INTEX-A), J. Geophys.
Res., 111, D24S01, doi:10.1029/2006JD007905, 2006.
Jacob D. J., B. D. Field, Q. Li, D. R. Blake, J. de Gouw, C. Warneke, A. Hansel, A. Wisthaler, H.
B. Singh, A. Guenther, Global budget of methanol: Constraints from atmospheric observations, J.
Geophys. Res., 110, D08303, doi:10.1029/2004JD005172, 2005.
Singh, H. B., et al., Analysis of the atmospheric distribution, sources, and sinks of oxygenated
volatile organic chemicals (OVOC) based on measurements over the Pacific during TRACE-P, J.
Geophys. Res, 109 (D15), Art.No. D15S07 JUN 3, 2004.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
64
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Singh, H, Y. Chen, A Staudt, D. Jacob, D. Blake, B. Heikes, J. Snow, Evidence from the Pacific
troposphere for large global sources of oxygenated organic compounds, Nature, 410, 1078-1081,
2001.
Singh, H. B., A. Thompson, and H. Schlager, SONEX airborne mission and coordinated
POLINAT-2 activity: overview and accomplishments, Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 3053-3056, 1999.
Tabazadeh, A, M. Z. Jacobson, H. B. Singh, O. B. Toon, Nitric acid scavenging by mineral and
biomass burning aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 4185-4188, 1998.
Singh, H. B. et al., Low ozone in the marine boundary layer of the tropical Pacific Ocean:
photochemical loss, chlorine atoms, and entrainment, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 1907-1918, 1996.
Singh, H. B., M. Kanakidou, P. Crutzen and D. Jacob, High concentrations and photochemical fate
of carbonyls and alcohols in the global troposphere, Nature, 378, 50-54, 1995.
Singh, H. B. and J. F. Kasting, Chlorine-Hydrocarbon Photochemistry in the Marine Troposphere
and Lower Stratosphere, J. Atm. Chem. 7, 261-285, 1988.
Singh, H. B., Reactive Nitrogen in the Troposphere, Env. Sci and Technol., 21, 320-327, 1987.
Ramanathan, V., R. J. Cicerone, H. B. Singh, J. T. Kiehl, Trace Gas Trends and Their Potential
Role in Climate Change, J. of Geophys. Res., 90, 5547-5566, 1985.
Singh, H. B., and L. J. Salas, Peroxyacetyl Nitrate (PAN) in the Free Troposphere, Nature, 302,
326-329, 1983.
Singh, H. B., L. J. Salas, and R. Stiles, Methyl Halides in and over the Eastern Pacific (35°N35°S), J. Geophys. Res., 88, 3684-3690, 1983.
Singh, H. B., and P. L. Hanst, Peroxyacetyl Nitrate (PAN) in the Unpolluted Atmosphere: An
Important Reservoir for Nitrogen Oxides, Geophys. Res. Lett., 8, 941-944, 1981.
Singh, H. B., L.J. Salas, H. Shigeishi, and E. Scribner, Atmospheric Halocarbons, Hydrocarbons,
and SF6: Global Distributions, Sources, and Sinks, Science, 203, 899-903, 1979.
Singh, H. B., F.L. Ludwig, and W.B. Johnson, Tropospheric Ozone: Concentrations and
Variabilities in clean Remote Atmospheres, Atmos. Environ., 12, 2185-2196, 1978.
Singh, H. B., Phosgene in the Ambient Air, Nature, 264, 428-429, 1976.
Singh, H. B., D. P. Fowler, and T. O. Peyton, Atmospheric Carbon Tetrachloride: Another ManMade Pollutant, Science, 192,1231-1234, 1976.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
65
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. M. Joan Alexander
Science Team Member, Modeling and Analysis
Senior Research Scientist, NorthWest Research Associates, Colorado Research Associates Div.
3380 Mitchell Lane, Boulder, CO 80301 USA
Ph: 303-415-9701, FAX: 303-415-9702, Email: alexand@cora.nwra.com
Role in the Mission:
Dr. Alexander will lead modeling and analysis work on tropical atmospheric waves and their
relationship to convective clouds and precipitation, including both the Global Hawk and
satellite measurements. She will also play an advisory role in flight planning providing input
based on experience and on interpretation of measurements in the field.
Experience related to the investigation:
2003-present, Sr. Research Scientist, NorthWest Research Associates, CoRA Division,
including terms on the management council and Chair of the financial advisory committee.
2003-present, Adjoint Professor, University of Colorado, Atmosphere-Ocean Sciences.
1998-present, Affiliate Professor, University of Washington, Atmospheric Sciences
1998-2003, Research Scientist, NorthWest Research Associates, CoRA Division.
1994-1998, Research Assistant Professor, University of Washington, Atmospheric Sci.
Education:
Ph.D. Planetary & Atmospheric Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO - 1992
M.S. Planetary & Atmospheric Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO - 1989
B.S. Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, 1981
Relevant Awards and Honors:
International Space Science Institute, International Team Leader, 2009-2011.
World Climate Research Program/SPARC Gravity Wave Initiative, Project Leader, 2007-pres.
Marie-Tharp Fellow, Columbia U, Applied Mathematics and Applied Physics, 2006-07.
Fellow of the American Meteorological Society, 2006.
Lecturer Cambridge Summer School, Geophysical & Environmental Fluid Dynamics, 2003.
Lecturer Coupling, Energetics and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions (CEDAR), 2002.
Bjerknes Lecturer, American Geophysical Union, 2000.
Annual Teaching Award, University of Washington, Atmospheric Sciences, 1998.
President & President-Elect Atmospheric Sciences, American Geophysical Union, 2002-2006.
Member, Board on Atmospheric Science and Climate, Nat'l Academy of Sciences, 2005-2008.
Atmospheric Infrared Sounder, AIRS-Science Team, 2004-present.
High Resolution Dynamics Limb Sounder, HIRDLS-Aura Science Team, 1998-present.
NASA Group Achievement Award, Aura Team, 2005.
NASA Group Achievement Award, CRYSTAL-FACE Science Team, 2003.
NASA Group Achievement Award, CAMEX-4 Science Team, 2002.
NASA Group Achievement Award, POLARIS Project Team, 1998.
Participant DOE/ARM Tropical Warm Pool International Cloud Experiment (TWP-ICE), 2006.
Selected Publications:
Alexander, M. J., S. D. Eckermann, D. Broutman, and J. Ma, 2009: Momentum flux
estimates for South Georgia Island mountain waves in the stratosphere observed via
satellite, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L12816, doi:10.1029/2009GL038587.
Grimsdell, A. W., M. J. Alexander, P. T. May, and L. Hoffmann, 2009: Model study of
waves generated by convection with direct validation via satellite, J. Atmos. Sci.,
(accepted).
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
66
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Hoffmann, L. and M. J. Alexander, 2009: Retrieval of Stratospheric Temperatures from
AIRS Radiance Measurements for Gravity Wave Studies, J. Geophys. Res.,114, D07105,
doi:10.1029/2008JD011241.
Alexander, M.J., J. Gille, C. Cavanaugh, M. Coffey, C. Craig, V. Dean, T. Eden, G. Francis,
C. Halvorson, J. Hannigan, R. Khosravi, D. Kinneson, H. Lee, S. Massie, B. Nardi, A.
Lambert, 2008: Global Estimates of Gravity Wave Momentum Flux from High Resolution
Dynamics Limb Sounder (HIRDLS) Observations, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D15S18,
doi:10.1029/2007JD008807.
Evan, S. and M. J. Alexander, 2008: Intermediate-scale Tropical Inertia Gravity Waves
observed during TWP-ICE campaign, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D14104,
doi:10.1029/2007JD009289.
Kuester, M.A., M.J. Alexander, and E.A. Ray, 2008: A model study of gravity waves over
Hurricane Humberto (2001), J. Atmos. Sci., 65, 3231-3246.
Jensen, E. J., L. Pfister, T. V. Bui, P. Lawson, B. Baker, Q. Mo, D. Baumgardner, E. M.
Weinstock, J. B. Smith, E. J. Moyer, T. F. Hanisco, D. S. Sayres, J. M. St. Clair, M. J.
Alexander
Crystals Near the Tropical Tropopause, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1621-1633.
Alexander, M.J., J.H. Richter, and B.R. Sutherland, 2006: Generation and trapping of gravity
waves from convection with comparison to parameterization, J. Atmos. Sci. 63, 2963-2977.
Wang, L., M.J. Alexander, P.T. Bui, and M.J. Mahoney, 2006: Small-scale gravity waves in
ER-2 MMS/MTP wind and temperature measurements during CRYSTAL-FACE, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 6, 1091-1104.
Alexander, M. J. and P. T. May, and J. H. Beres, 2004: Gravity waves generated by
convection in the Darwin Area during DAWEX, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D20S04,
doi:10.1029/2004JD004729.
Fritts, D. C. and M. J. Alexander, 2003: Gravity wave dynamics and effects in the middle
atmosphere, Rev. Geophys., 41, no. 1, doi:10.1029/2001RG000106.
Holton, J. R., M. J. Alexander and M. T. Boehm, 2001: Evidence for short vertical
wavelength Kelvin waves in the DOE-ARM Nauru99 radiosonde data. J. Geophys. Res.,
106, 20,125-20,129.
Alexander, M. J., J. H. Beres and L. Pfister, 2000: Tropical stratospheric gravity wave
activity and relationship to clouds. J. Geophys. Res., 105, 22,299-22,309.
Alexander, M. J., 1998: Interpretations of observed climatological patterns in stratospheric
gravity wave variance. J. Geophys. Res., 103, 8627-8640.
Alexander, M. J. and J. R. Holton, 1997: A model study of zonal forcing in the equatorial
stratosphere by convectively induced gravity waves. J. Atmos. Sci., 54, 408-419.
Alexander, M. J. and L. Pfister, 1995: Gravity wave momentum flux in the lower
stratosphere over convection. Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 2029-2032.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
67
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Matthew J. McGill
Co-I for Cloud Physics Lidar (CPL) Data and Instrumentation
Research Scientist, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Code 613.1, Greenbelt, MD 20771
301-614-6281 matthew.j.mcgill@nasa.gov
ROLE IN ATTREX MISSION:
Dr. McGill will be responsible for providing the Cloud Physics Lidar (CPL) instrument and
will be responsible for providing CPL data (both real-time quick look data and fully
processed data) throughout the ATTREX mission.
EXPERIENCE RELATED TO THE INVESTIGATION:
1999 – Present, Principal Investigator responsible for the Cloud Physics Lidar.
2008 – Present, Principal Investigator for UAV-Cloud Physics Lidar as part of the GloPac
field campaign on the Global Hawk platform.
2000 – 2005, Mission Scientist for the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite
Observations (CALIPSO) mission.
EDUCATION:
Ph.D., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (Atmospheric Science), 1991.
M.S., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (Atmospheric Science), 1994.
B.S., Alma College, Alma, Michigan (Physics), 1991.
RELEVANT AWARDS AND HONORS:
2009 NASA Exceptional Service Award
2000 James J. Kerley Award for Technology Commercialization and Tech Transfer
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS:
Yorks, J.E., McGill, M., Rodier, S., Vaughan, M., Hu, Y.,and Hlavka, D., “African dust and
smoke influences on radiative effects in the tropical Atlantic using CERES and CALIOP
data,” Journal of Geophysical Research, 2009 (in press).
Vaughan, M.A., Liu, Z., McGill, M.J., and Obland, M.D., “On the spectral dependence of
backscatter from cirrus clouds: an assessment of CALIOP’s 1064 nm calibration using
Cloud Physics Lidar measurements,” Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2009,
(submitted).
McGill, M.J., Vaughan, M.A., Trepte, C.R., Hart, W.D., Hlavka, D.L., Winker, D.M., and
Keuhn, R., “Airborne validation of spatial properties measured by the CALIPSO lidar,”
Journal of Geophysical Research, 112, D20201, doi:10.1029/2007JD008768, 2007.
Winker, D., B. Hunt, and M. McGill, “Initial performance assessment of CALIOP,”
Geophysical Research Letters, 34, doi: 10.1029/2007GL030135, 2007.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
68
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Liu, Z., Hunt, W., Hostetler, C., Vaughan, M., McGill, M., Winker, D., and Hu, Y.,
“Estimating random errors in backscatter lidar observations,” Applied Optics, 45, 44374447, 2006.
Hlavka, D.L., Palm, S.P., Hart, W.D., Spinhirne, J.D., McGill, M.J., and Welton, E.J.,
“Aerosol and cloud optical depth from GLAS: results and verification for an October 2003
California fire smoke case,” Geophysical Research Letters, 32, doi:
10.1029/2005GL023413, 2005.
Jensen, E., Pfister, L., Bui, T., Weinheimer, A., Weinstock, E., Smith, J., Baumgardner, D.,
and McGill, M.J., “Formation of a tropopause cirrus layer observed over Florida during
CRYSTAL-FACE,” Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, doi: 10.1029/2004JD004671,
2005.
Liu, Z., McGill, M., Hu, Y., Hostetler, C.A., Vaughan, M., and Winker, D., “Validating lidar
depolarization calibration using solar radiation scattered by ice clouds,” Geoscience
Remote Sensing Letters, 1, doi: 10.1109/LGRS.2004.829613, 2004.
McGill, M.J., Li, L., Hart, W.D., Heymsfield, G.M., Hlavka, D.L., Racette, P.E., Tian, L.,
Vaughan, M.A., and Winker, D.M., “Combined lidar-radar remote sensing: initial results
from CRYSTAL-FACE,” Journal of Geophysical Research, 109, doi:
10.1029/2003JD004030, 2004.
McGill, M.J., “Lidar Remote Sensing,” in Encyclopedia of Optical Engineering, doi:
10.1081/E-EOE 120009862, 2003.
McGill, M.J., Hlavka, D.L., Hart, W.D., Welton, E.J., and Campbell, J.R., “Airborne lidar
measurements of aerosol optical properties during SAFARI-2000,” Journal of Geophysical
Research, 108, doi: 10.1029/2002JD002370, 2003.
McGill, M.J., Hlavka, D.L., Hart, W.D., Scott, V.S., Spinhirne, J.D., and Schmid, B., “Cloud
Physics Lidar: instrument description and initial measurement results,” Applied Optics, 41,
3725-3734, 2002.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
69
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Ru-Shan Gao
Co-I for Ozone Data and Ozone Instrumentation
NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory
325 Broadway R/CSD 6
Boulder, CO 80305
303-497-5431 (voice) 303-497-5373 (fax)
rushan.gao@noaa.gov (e-mail)
Role in ATTREX Mission:
Dr. Gao will lead the ATTREX Mission Ozone Team throughout the mission, including data
collection and interpretation.
Research Positions:
Research Physicist, Earth System Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Boulder, Colorado, December 1999 to present.
Research Scientist III, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences,
Boulder, Colorado, and Aeronomy Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Boulder, Colorado, June 1992 to December 1999.
Relevant Research Experience:
Principal Investigator or Co-Principal Investigator for reactive nitrogen, ozone, and black
carbon measurements in field campaigns (STRAT, POLARIS, ACCENT, SOLVE,
CRYSTAL-FACE, AVEs, TC-4, and GloPac) with the NASA Global Hawk, ER-2 and
WB-57F.
Design and construction of in situ instruments for the NASA ER-2, WB-57F, and Global
Hawk high-altitude aircraft.
Interpretation of the data collected in field campaigns.
Education:
Ph.D., Physics, Rice University. May 1987.
M.A., Physics, Rice University. May 1985.
B.S., Physics, Zhejiang University. January 1982.
Relevant Awards:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Group Achievement Award for
participation in:
The Tropical Composition, Cloud and Climate Coupling (TC4) campaign, 2007.
The Cirrus Regional Study of Tropical Anvils and Cirrus Layers – Florida Area Cirrus
Experiment (CRYSTAL-FACE) campaign, 2002.
The Photochemistry of Ozone Loss in the Arctic Region In Summer (POLARIS) campaign,
1997.
The Airborne Southern Hemisphere Ozone Experiment/Measurements for Assessing the
Effects of Stratospheric Aircraft (ASHOE/MAESA) campaign, 1994.
Relevant Technical Background
Design and construction of airborne instruments for measurements of atmospheric trace
gases, computer hardware for data acquisition, and high-speed, high-voltage electronics.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
70
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Mechanical design and construction of airborne scientific instruments.
Relevant Publications:
R. S. Gao, S. R. Hall, W. H. Swartz, J. P. Schwarz, J. R. Spackman, L. A. Watts, D. W.
Fahey, K. C. Aikin R. E. Shetter, P. V. Bui., Calculations of solar shortwave heating rates
due to black carbon and ozone absorption using in situ measurements, Journal of
Geophysical Research, in press, 2008.
J. P. Schwarz, R. S. Gao, D. W. Fahey, D. S. Thomson, L. A. Watts, J. C. Wilson, J. M.
Reeves, D. G. Baumgardner, G. L. Kok, S. H. Chung, M. Schulz, J. Hendricks, A. Lauer,
B. Kärcher, J. G. Slowik, K. H. Rosenlof, T. L. Thompson, A. O. Langford, M.
Loewenstein, K. C. Aikin., Single-particle measurements of midlatitude black carbon and
lights-scattering aerosols from the boundary layer to the lower stratosphere, Journal of
Geophysical Research, 111, D16207, doi:10.1029/2006JD007076, 2006.
Marcy, T.P., D.W. Fahey, R.S. Gao, P.J. Popp, E.C. Richard, T.L. Thompson, K.H. Rosenlof,
E.A. Ray, R.J. Salawitch, C.S. Atherton, D.J. Bergmann, B.A. Ridley, A.J. Weinheimer, M.
Loewenstein, E.M. Weinstock, M.J. Mahoney., Quantifying stratospheric ozone in the
upper troposphere using in situ measurements of HCl, Science, 394, 261-265, 2004.
Gao, R. S., P. J. Popp, D. W. Fahey, T. P. Marcy, R. L. Herman, E. M. Weinstock, D. G.
Baumgardner, T. J. Garrett, K. H. Rosenlof, T. L. Thompson, P. T. Bui, B. A. Ridley, S. C.
Wofsy, O. B. Toon, M. A. Tolbert, B. Kärcher, Th. Peter, P. K. Hudson, A. J. Weinheimer,
A. J. Heymsfield., Evidence that ambient nitric acid increases relative humidity in lowtemperature cirrus clouds, Science, 303, 516-520 2004.
R. S. Gao, E. C. Richard, P. J. Popp, G. C. Toon, D. F. Hurst, P. A. Newman, J. C. Holecek,
M. J. Northway, D. W. Fahey, M. Y. Danilin, B. Sen, K. C. Aikin, P. A. Romashkin, J. W.
Elkins, C. R. Webster, S. Schauffler, J. B. Greenblant, C. T. McElroy, L. R. Lait, T. P. Bui
and D. Baumgardner, Observational evidence for the role of denitrification in Arctic
stratospheric ozone loss, Geophysical Research Letters, 28, 2879-2882, 2001., Geophysical
Research Letters, V25, p3323-3326, 1998.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
71
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Elliot L. Atlas
Co-Investigator for Advanced Whole Air Sampler (AWAS)
Professor, University of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, Division
of Marine and Atmospheric Chemistry
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149
Ph: 305-421-4128
e-mail: eatlas@rsmas.miami.edu
Role in ATTREX Mission:
Dr. Atlas will lead the effort to collect whole air samples and to analyze these samples for a wide
range of trace gases.
Experience Related to the Investigation:
Professor, Department of Marine and Atmospheric Chemistry, Rosenstiel School of Marine and
Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, (Aug) 2003 – present.
Affiliate Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Oct., 2003 - present
Senior Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Section Head, 1999 – 2003
Stratospheric/Tropospheric Measurements Section Head, NCAR, Atmospheric Chemistry
Division, 1992-2003.
Scientist III, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, 19911999
Visiting Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Atmospheric Chemistry Division,
1989-1991
Associate Research Scientist, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, 1985-1991
Research Scientist, Chemistry Department, Texas A&M University, 1978-1984
Research Associate, Chemistry Department, Texas A&M University, 1976-1978
Education:
Antioch College, Yellow Springs, Ohio
Chemistry
B.S., 1970
Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon Chemical Oceanography
M.S., 1973
Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon Chemical Oceanography
Ph.D., 1975
Selected Publications:
Schauffler, S. M, E. L. Atlas, F. Flocke, R. A. Lueb, V. Stroud, W. Travnicek., Measurements of
bromine containing compounds at the tropical tropopause, Geophys. Res. Lett. 25, 317–320,
1998.
Schauffler, S. M., E. L. Atlas, D. R. Blake, F. Flocke, X. Tie, R. A. Lueb, J. M. Lee, V. Stroud, W.
Travnicek, Distributions of brominated organic compounds in the troposphere and lower
stratosphere, J. Geophys. Res. D17, 21,513-21,536, 1999.
Dvortsov, N., M. Geller, S. Solomon, S. M. Schauffler, E. L. Atlas, and D. R. Blake, Rethinking
reactive halogen budgets in the midlatitude lower stratosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 26 (12),
1699-1702, 1999.
Sen, B., G. B. Osterman, R. J. Salawitch, G. C. Toon, J. J. Margitan, J.-F. Blavier, A. Y. Chang, R.
D. May, C. R. Webster, R. M. Stimpfle, G. P. Bonne, P. B. Voss, K. K. Perkins, J. G. Anderson,
R. C. Cohen, J. W. Elkins, G. S. Dutton, P. A. Romashkin, E. L. Atlas, S. M. Schauffler and M.
Loewenstein, The budget and partitioning of stratospheric chlorine during photochemistry of
ozone loss in the Arctic region in summer, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 26,653 – 26,666, 1999.
Flocke, F., R. L. Herman, R. J. Salawitch, E. L. Atlas, C. R. Webster, S. M. Schauffler, R. A. Lueb,
R. D. May, E. J. Moyer, K. H. Rosenlof, D. C. Scott, D. R. Blake and T. P. Bui, An examination
of the chemistry and transport processes in the tropical lower stratosphere using observations of
long-lived and short-lived compounds obtained during STRAT and POLARIS, J. Geophys.
Res., 26,625 – 26,642, 1999.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
72
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Singh, H. B., et al., Distribution and fate of select oxygenated organic species in the troposphere
and lower stratosphere over the Atlantic, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 3795-3805, 2000.
Hurst, D.F., et al., The Construction of a Unified, High-Resolution Nitrous Oxide Data Set for ER2 Flights During SOLVE, J. Geophys. Res., 107, D20, 8271, doi:10.1029/2001JD000417, 2002.
Schauffler, S.M., E.L. Atlas, S.G. Donnelly, A. Andrews, S.A. Montzka, J.W. Elkins, D.F. Hurst,
P.A. Romashkin, G. S. Dutton, and V. Stroud, Chlorine budget and partitioning during the
Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment (SAGE) III Ozone Loss and Validation Experiment
(SOLVE), J. Geophys. Res. 108(D5), 4173, doi:10.1029/2001JGD002040, 2003.
Atlas, E., B. Ridley, and C. Cantrell, The Tropospheric Ozone Production Experiment (TOPSE):
Introduction, J. Geophys. Res., VOL. 108, NO. D4, 8353, doi:10.1029/2002JD003172, 2003.
Rice, A. L., et al., The carbon and hydrogen isotopic compositions of stratospheric methane: Part 1.
High precision observations from the NASA ER-2 aircraft, J. Geophys. Res., VOL. 108, NO.
D15, 4460, doi:10.1029/2002JD003042, 2003.
Rahn, T. et al., Extreme deuterium enrichments in stratospheric molecular hydrogen and its
significance for the global budget of H2, Nature, 424, 918 – 921, 2003.
Park, S., E. Atlas, and K. Boering, Measurements of nitrous oxide isotopologues in the
stratosphere: The influence of transport on the apparent enrichment factors and implications for
the global N2O isotope budget, JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 109,
D01305, doi:10.1029/2003JD003731, 2004.
Boering, K.A., T. Jackson, K. Hoag, A.S. Cole, M. Perri, M. Thiemens, and E. Atlas, Observations
of the anomalous oxygen isotopic composition of carbon dioxide in the lower stratosphere and
the flux of the anomaly to the troposphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., Vol. 31, No. 3, L03109,
10.1029/2003GL018451, 2004.
Ridley, B.A., et al., Convective Transport of Reactive Constituents to the Tropical and MidLatitude Tropopause Region: I. Observations, Atmospheric Environment, 38 (9), 1259 – 1274,
2004.
Tuck, A. F.; Hovde, S. J.; Kelly, K. K.; Reid, S. J.; Richard, E. C.; Atlas, E. L.; Donnelly, S. G.;
Stroud, V. R.; Cziczo, D. J.; Murphy, D. M.; Thomson, D. S.; Elkins, J. W.; Moore, F. L.; Ray,
E. A.; Mahoney, M. J.; Friedl, R. R., Horizontal variability 1–2 km below the tropical
tropopause, J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 109, No. D5, D05310, 10.1029/2003JD003942, 2004.
Quack B., E. Atlas, G. Petrick, V. Stroud, S. Schauffler, D. W. R. Wallace. Oceanic bromoformSources for the tropical atmosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L23S05,
doi:10.1029/2004GL020597, 2004.
Quack, B., E. Atlas, G. Petrick, D. Wallace, Bromoform and dibromomethane above the
Mauritanian upwelling: Atmospheric distributions and oceanic emissions, J. Geophys. Res.,
112, D09312, doi:10.1029/2006JD007614, 2007.
Marcy,T.P., P. J. Popp, R. S. Gao, D. W. Fahey, E. C. Richard, T. L. Thompson, E. L. Atlas, M.
Loewenstein, S. C. Wofsyf, S. Park, E. M. Weinstock, W.H. Swartz, M.J. Mahoney,
Measurements of trace gases in the tropical tropopause layer, Atmospheric Environment, 41,
7253–7261, 2007.
Wilson, J. C., S-H. Lee, J. M. Reeves, C. A. Brock, H. H. Jonsson, B. G. Lafleur, M. Loewenstein,
J. Podolske, E. Atlas, K. Boering, G. Toon, D. Fahey, T. P. Bui, G. Diskin, F. Moore, The
establishment of steady-state aerosol distributions in the extra-tropical, lower stratosphere and
the processes that maintain them. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 6617-6626, 2008.
Engel, A. , T. Möbius, H. Bönisch, U. Schmidt, R. Heinz, I. Levin, E. Atlas, S. Aoki, T. Nakazawa,
S. Sugawara, F. Moore,, D. Hurst,, J. Elkins, S. Schauffler. Long term evolution in the age of
air: no changes in the stratospheric circulation observable. Nature Geoscience 2, 28-31 (14
December 2008) doi:10.1038/ngeo388.
Leung, L. et al., Large and unexpected enrichment in stratospheric 13C18O16O and its meridional
variation. Proc.Nat’l Acad. Sciences, July 14, 2009 vol. 106 no. 28 11496-11501, 2009.
Hossaini, R. M.P. Chipperfield, B.M. Monge-Sanz, N.A.D. Richards, E. Atlas, and D.R. Blake,
Bromoform and Dibromomethane in the Tropics: A 3-D model study of chemistry and transport,
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 9, 16811-16851, 2009.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
73
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
74
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. James W. Elkins
Co-I for UCATS instrument.
Supervisory Physicist, NOAA/ESRL, Global Monitoring Division(GMD)
325 Broadway, Boulder, Colorado 80305
Phone: (303) 497-6224, E-mail James.W.Elkins@noaa.gov
ROLE IN VENTURE CLASS MISSION:
Dr. Elkins will lead the UCATS team that measures ozone, water vapor, and two airborne gas
chromatographic channels during the integration and field operation. He coordinates the
calibration, operations, and data comparison between UCATS and other ground base, satellite, and
aircraft instruments.
EXPERIENCE RELATED TO THE INVESTIGATION:
1986 – Present, P.I. of ACATS, LACE, PANTHER, and UCATS airborne chromatographs,
Halocarbons and other Atmospheric Trace Species Group, Chief, NOAA/ESRL/GMD
1979 – 1985, Physicist, Atmospheric Trace Gas Standards, NIST, formerly NBS.
EDUCATION:
Ph.D. – Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts (Applied Physics) - 1979
M. S. – Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts (Applied Physics) - 1975
B. A. – University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia (Physics – High Honors) – 1974
RELEVANT AWARDS AND HONORS:
DoC Silver Medal Award for the Annual Greenhouse Gas Index
(AGGI) with Dave Hofmann and others
Nobel Peace Prize, Member of IPCC 2006 Report Team,
shared with former VP Al Gore
EPA Team Award for Protection of the Ozone Layer
DoC Bronze Award for the NOAA UAS Demo team
NOAA Outstanding Scientific Papers of the Year (11 papers)
2008
2008
2007
2006
95-02, 05-07, 09
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS:
Engel, A. T. M., H. Bönisch, U. Schmidt, R. Heinz, I. Levin, E. Atlas, S. Aoki, T. Nakazawa, S.
Sugawara, F. Moore, D. Hurst, J. Elkins, S. Schauffler, A.Andrews, K.Boering. Age of
stratospheric air unchanged within uncertainties over the past 30 years. Nature Geoscience, doi:
10.1038/NGEO388, 2008.
Montzka, S.A., P. Calvert, B. Hall, J.W. Elkins, P. Tans, and C. Sweeney, On the global
distribution, seasonality, and budget of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide (COS) and some
similarities to CO2, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D09302, doi:10.1029/2006JD07665, 2007.
Fahey, D. W., J. H. Churnside, J. W. Elkins, A. J. Gasiewski, K. H. Rosenlof, S. Summers, M.
Aslaksen, T. A. Jacobs, J. D. Sellars, C. D. J., L., & C. Freudinger, and M. Cooper, Altair
Unmanned Aircraft System Achieves Demonstration Goals. EOS, 87, 20, 197,201, 2006.
D.F. Hurst, J. C. Lin, P.A. Romashkin, B.C. Daube, C. Gerbig, D.M. Matross, S.C. Wofsy, B. D.
Hall, and J.W. Elkins. (2006). Continuing global significance of emissions of Montreal
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
75
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Protocol-restricted halocarbons in the United States and Canada. Journal of Geophysical
Research, 111, D15302, doi: 10.1029/2005JD006785, 2006.
Montzka, S. A., J. H. Butler, J. W. Elkins, T. M. Thompson, A. D. Clarke and L. T. Lock, Present
and future trends in the atmospheric burned of ozone-depleting halogens, Nature, 398, 690-694,
1999.
Wamsley, P. R., J. W. Elkins, et al., Distribution of halon-1211 in the upper troposphere and lower
stratosphere and the 1994 total bromine budget, J. Geophys. Res., 103, (D1), 1513-1526, 1998.
Volk, C. M., Elkins, J. W., Fahey, D. W., Dutton, G. S., Gilligan, J. M., Loewenstein, M., et al.
Evaluation of source gas lifetime from stratospheric observations. Journal of Geophysical
Research, 102(D21), 25,543-25,564, 1997.
Volk, C. M., Elkins, J. W., Fahey, D. W., Salawitch, R. J., Dutton, G. S., Gilligan, J. M., et al.,
Quantifying transport between the tropical and mid-latitude lower stratosphere. Science, 272,
1763-1768, 1996
Elkins, J. W. et al., Airborne gas chromatograph for in sit u measurements of long-lived species in
the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23(4) , 347-350, 1996.
Elkins, J. W., T. M. Thompson, T. H. Swanson, J. H. Butler, B. D. Hall, S. O. Cummings, D. A.
Fisher and A. G. Raffo, Decrease in the growth rates of atmospheric chlorofluorocarbons 11 and
12, Nature, 364, 780-783, 1993.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
76
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Steven C. Wofsy
Co-I for Picarro Cavity Ringdown Spectrometer (PCRS)
Harvard University,
Room 100A, Pierce Hall,
29 Oxford St., Cambridge, MA 02138.
Telephone: 617-495-4566; FAX 617-495-4551; swofsy@seas.harvard.edu
Education:
University of Chicago, B.S., Chemistry, 1966;
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Ph.D. in Chemistry, 1971;
Harvard University – DEAS and Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, postdoctoral in
atmospheric chemistry, 1971-1973.
Professional Experience:
Harvard University, School of Engineering and Applied Science, Department of Earth and
Planetary Sciences:
February, 1995-present Professor, Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences .
September, 2003-2006 . Associate Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University
July, 1982 to February, 1995. Senior Research Fellow (Harvard DEAS).
July 1977 to June 1982. Associate Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry, (Harvard DEAS).
September 1973 to June 1977. Harvard DEAS, Lecturer/Res. Fellow, Atmospheric Chemistry
Committees:
NASA Earth System Science and Applications Advisory Committee 1995-2000 (chair, 1997-99);
NASA Advisory Council, 1997-99;
Carbon Cycle Science Plan Working Group, co-chair, 1998-1999; North American Carbon
Program writing group, chair, 2001-2003;
IPCC Working Group I, lead author, carbon cycle 2005-2006.
Educational Activities:
Educational Policy Committee, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, 2006;
Director of Undergraduate Studies, Earth and Planetary Sciences, 2006-present;
Lead author, Annenberg Foundation school curriculum, “A Habitable Planet”, Ch. 2, 2006-2007.
Aircraft Missions (> 1200 hours total):
Stratospheric (ER-2): SPADE, ASHOE, STRAT (1992-96, PI for CO2 measurements on the ER-2;
Mission Scientist, SPADE and STRAT), POLARIS, SOLVE (PI for ER-2 and OMS CO2); TC4
WB-57 Platform Scientist; START08 (PI for mission and QCLS, NCAR GV)
Tropospheric: COBRA (PI for 1999-2004, CO2 and CO on Citation II and King Air, plus overall
mission intiator and director); HIPPO (PI for mission and QCLS, NCAR GV).
Selected Publications
Bakwin, P.S., S. C. Wofsy, and S.M. Fan, and D. R. Fitzjarrald, Measurements of NOx and NOy
Concentrations and Fluxes Over Arctic Tundra. J. Geophys. Res., 97, 16,545-16,558, 1992.
Chou, W., S. C. Wofsy, R. C. Harriss, J. C. Lin, C. Gerbig, and G. Sachse, Net fluxes of CO2 in
Amazônia from aircraft data, J.Geophys. Res. 107 (D22), 4614, 10.1029/2001JD001295, 2002.
Emmons, L. K., G.G. Pfister, D.P. Edwards, J.C. Gille, G. Sachse, D. Blake, S. Wofsy, C. Gerbig, D.
Matross, P. Nédéléc, MOPITT 1 validation exercises during Summer 2004 field campaigns over
North America, J. Geophys.. Res.-Atmospheres 112 (D12): Art. No. D12S02 MAR 22 2007.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
77
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Gerbig, C., J. C. Lin, S. C. Wofsy, B. C. Daube, A. E. Andrews, B. B. Stephens, P. S. Bakwin, and
C. A. Grainger, Towards constraining regional scale fluxes of CO2 with atmospheric observations
over a continent: 2. Analysis of COBRA data using a receptor oriented framework, J. Geophys.
Res. 108,. D24, 4757 (27 pp) , 2003.
Matross, D.M., A. E. Andrews, M. Pathmathevan, C. Gerbig, J. C. Lin, S. C. Wofsy, B. C. Daube,
E. W. Gottieb, V. Y. Chow, J. T. Lee, C. Zhao, P. S. Bakwin, J. W. Munger, and D. Hollinger,
Estimating regional carbon exchange in New England and Quebec by combining atmospheric,
ground-based, and satellite data, Tellus Ser. B-Chem. phys. met. 58 (5): 344-358 NOV 2006.
Miller, S. M., D. M. Matross, A. E. Andrews, D. B. Millet, M. Longo, E. W. Gottlieb, A. I. Hirsch,
C. Gerbig, J. C. Lin, B. C. Daube, R. C. Hudman, P. L. S. Dias, V. Y. Chow, and S. C. Wofsy,
Sources of carbon monoxide and formaldehyde in North America determined from high-resolution
atmospheric data, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 8, 11395-11451, 2008.
Park, S., R. Jimenez, B. C. Daube, L. Pfister, T. J. Conway, E. W. Gottlieb, V. Y. Chow , D. J.
Curran , D. M. Matross, A. Bright , E. L. Atlas , T. P. Bui, R.-S. Gao, C. H. Twohy, and S. C.
Wofsy, The CO2 tracer clock for the Tropical Tropopause Layer Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3989–
4000, 2007.
Saleska, S. R.S. D. Miller, D. M. Matross, M. L. Goulden, S. C. Wofsy, H. R. da Rocha, P.B. de
Camargo, P. Crill, B. C. Daube, H. C. de Freitas, L. Hutyra, M. Keller, V.W. H. Kirchhoff, M.
Menton, J. W. Munger, E. H. Pyle, A. H. Rice, H. Silva, Carbon in Amazon forests: unexpected
seasonal fluxes and disturbance-induced losses, Science 302, 1554-1557, 2003.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
78
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Robert L. Herman
Co-I for Water Vapor Data
Research Scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Section 3282
Mail Stop 183-401
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, CA 91109
(818) 393-4720 robert.l.herman@jpl.nasa.gov
ROLE IN ATTREX MISSION:
Dr. Herman will provide in-situ water vapor measurements from the JPL Laser Hygrometer on the
Global Hawk.
EXPERIENCE RELATED TO THE INVESTIGATION:
1999 - Present, Principal Investigator, JPL Laser Hygrometers
2001 - Present, Research Scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
1999 - 2001, Scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
EDUCATION:
Ph.D. (Geochemistry), California Institute of Technology (1998).
M.S. (Geochemistry), California Institute of Technology (1993).
B.A. (Chemistry – General Honors), University of Chicago (1991).
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS:
Read, W. G., et al., “EOS Aura Microwave Limb Sounder Upper Tropospheric and Lower
Stratospheric Humidity Validation,” J. Geophys. Res., 112, D24S35, doi:10.1029/2007JD008752,
2008.
Popp, P. J., Herman, R. L, et al., “Condensed-phase nitric acid in a tropical subvisible cirrus
cloud,” Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L24812, doi:10.1029/2007GL031832, 2007.
Richard, E. C., Herman, R. L, et al., “High-resolution airborne profiles of CH4, O3 and water
vapor near tropical Central America in late January to early February 2004,” J. Geophys. Res., 111,
D13304, doi:10.1029/2005JD006513, 2006.
Gao, R. S., Fahey, D. W., Popp, P. J., Marcy, T. P., Herman, R. L, Weinstock, E. M., et al.
Measurements of relative humidity in a persistent contrail. Atmospheric Environment, 40(9), 15901600, 2006.
Popp, P. J., Herman, R. L, et al., “The observation of nitric acid-containing particles in the tropical
lower stratosphere,” Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discus., 6, 601-11, 2006.
Heymsfield, A. J., et al., “Ice Microphysical observations in Hurricane Humberto: comparison with
non-hurricane ice cloud layers,” J. Atmos. Sci., 63(1), 288-308, 2006.
Jensen, E., Herman, R. L, et al., “Ice Supersaturations Exceeding 100% at the Cold Tropical
Tropopause: Implications for Cirrus Formation and Dehydration,” Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discus.,4,
7433-62, 2004.
Gettelman, A., Herman, R. L, et al., “Validation of Aqua satellite data in the upper troposphere
and lower stratosphere with in-situ aircraft,” Geophys. Res. Lett., 31(22), L22107, doi:
10.1029/2004GL020730, 2004.
Garrett, T. J., Herman, R. L, et al., “Evolution of a Florida cirrus anvil,” J. Atmos. Res., 62, 235372, 2005.
Gao, R. S., Popp, P. J., Fahey, D. W., Marcy, T. P., Herman, R. L., Weinstock, E. M., et al. Evidence
that nitric acid increases relative humidity in low-temperature cirrus clouds. Science, 303(5657),
516-520, 2004.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
79
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Herman, R. L., and Heymsfield, A. J., “Aircraft icing at low temperatures in Tropical Storm
Chantal (2001),” Geophys. Res. Lett., 30(18), 1955, doi:10.1029/2003GL017746, 2003.
Herman, R. L, et al., “Hydration, dehydration, and the total hydrogen budget of the 1999-2000
winter Arctic stratosphere,” J. Geophys. Res., 108(D5), doi:10.1029/2001JD001257, 2003.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
80
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Glen Diskin
Co-I for DLH
LARC
glenn.s.diskin@nasa.gov
757-864-6268
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
81
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. R. Paul Lawson
Co-I for Hawkeye
SPEC Incorporated
3022 Sterling Circle
Boulder, CO 80301
(303)-449-1105
(303)-449-0132 (fax) plawson@specinc.com
ROLE IN MISSION:
Dr. Lawson will lead the SPEC Instrumentation and Data Analysis Teams throughout the missions,
including installation of the Hawkeye on the Global Hawk, participation in the field campaigns,
data processing and scientific analysis.
EXPERIENCE RELATED TO THE INVESTIGATION:
Dr. Lawson has been heavily involved in the development of instrumentation and analysis of
meteorological data for more than three decades. He has participated in over 50 meteorological
field programs as scientist and/or pilot including:
1989 – Present: Senior Scientist/President: SPEC Incorporated
1977 – 1980: Learjet Pilot/Scientist during HIPLEX
1981: Pilot of the NCAR instrumented sailplane and scientist during the CCOPE
1992: Flight Scientist during CASP II field programs
1995: Scientist during the Canadian Freezing Drizzle Experiment
1995: Flight Scientist for the Small Cumulus Microphysics Study
1996: Principal investigator for the NASA DC-8 SUCCESS field program.
1998: Principal investigator for the NASA FIRE.ACE field program.
1998: Learjet Pilot and Principal investigator for the NASA TRMM TEFLUN-A field program.
1998-1999: Learjet Pilot and Scientist for the NASA EOS cirrus studies.
1999-2000: Learjet Pilot and Scientist for the Alliance Icing Research Study (AIRS) in Ottawa,
Ontario
2002: Principal Investigator for the NASA CRYSTAL-FACE field program
2000 – 2006: Principal Investigator and Learjet Pilot for the NSF Wave Cloud Studies
2003 – 2006: Principal Investigator and Learjet Pilot for the NASA Cirrus Cloud Studies
2003 – 2006: Principal Investigator NSF Ice Crystal Studies at the South Pole
2004: Principal Investigator and Learjet Pilot for the NASA MidCiX field program
2006: Principal Investigator for the NASA CR-AVE field program
2007: Principal Investigator and Learjet pilot for the NSF ICE-L Wave Cloud field program
2006: Principal Investigator for the NASA NAMMA project
2007: Principal Investigator for the NASA TC4 project
2008: Principal Investigator for the NSF Tethered Balloon project in Svalbard
2008: Principal Investigator for the DOE ISDAC project
2009: Principal Investigator for the DOE SPARTICUS project
EDUCATION:
B. S. Electrical Engineering - Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan - 1969
M.S. Atmospheric Science - University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming - 1972
Ph.D. Atmospheric Science - University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming – 1988
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS:
Baker, B. A., and R. P. Lawson, In situ observations of the microphysical properties of wave,
cirrus and anvil clouds. Part 1: Wave clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 3160-3185, 2006.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
82
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Evans, K. F., R. P. Lawson, P. Zmarzly, D. O'Connor, and W. J. Wiscombe, In situ cloud sensing
with multiple scattering lidar: Simulations and demonstration, J. Atmos. Ocean Technol., 20, 15051522, 2003.
Evans, K. F., D. O'Connor, P. Zmarzly, and Jensen, E. J., In situ cloud sensing with multiple
scattering lidar: Design and validation of an airborne sensor, J. Atmos. Ocean Technol., 23, 10681081, 2006.
Lawson, R. P., B. Pilson, B. Baker, Q. Mo, E. Jensen, L. Pfister, and P. Bui, Aircraft
measurements of microphysical properties of subvisible cirrus in the tropical tropopause layer,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1609-1620, 2008.
Lawson, R. P., and B. A. Baker, Improvement in determination of ice water content from twodimensional particle imagery. Part II: Applications to collected data, J. Appl. Meteorol., 45, 12921303, 2006.
Lawson, R. P., B. A. Baker, B. Pilson, Q. Mo, In Situ observations of the microphysical properties
of wave, cirrus and anvil clouds. Part II: Cirrus Clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 3186-3203. 2006.
Lawson, R. P., B. A. Baker, P. Zmarzly, D. O’Connor, Q. Mo, J.-F. Gayet, and V. Shcherbakov,
Microphysical and optical properties of ice crystals at South Pole Station, J. Appl. Meteorol., 45,
1505-1524, 2006.
Lawson, R. P., D. O’Connor, P. Zmarzly, K. Weaver, B. A. Baker, Q. Mo, and H. Jonsson, The
2D-S (Stereo) Probe: Design and Preliminary Tests of a New Airborne, High-Speed, HighResolution Particle Imaging Probe, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 23, 1462-1477, 2006.
Lawson, R.P., B.A. Baker, C.G. Schmitt and T.L. Jensen, An overview of microphysical properties
of Arctic clouds observed in May and July during FIRE.ACE, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 14,98915,014, 2001.
Lawson, R. P., L. J. Angus, A. J. Heymsfield, Cloud particle measurements in thunderstorm anvils
and possible weather threat to aviation, J. of Aircraft, 35, 113-121, 1998.
Lawson, R. P. and R. H. Cormack, Theoretical design and preliminary tests of two new particle
spectrometers for cloud microphysics research, Atmos. Res., 35, 315-348, 1995.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
83
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Peter Pilewskie
Co-I for Solar, IR radiometers
University of Colorado
peter.pilewskie@lasp.colorado.edu
303-492-5724
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
84
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. T. Paul Bui
Co-I for Meteorological Measurement System Instrument (MMS)
Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Branch
NASA Ames Research Center, MS 245-5, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000
(650) 604-5534, Thaopaul.V.Bui@nasa.gov
Role in ATTREX Mission
Mr. Paul Bui will lead the instrument team to measure in situ temperature, winds, and turbulence
on the Global Hawk platform.
Experience:
NASA-Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
1995-Present: Principal Investigator, Meteorological Measurement System
1984-1994: Lead Engineer, Meteorological Measurement System
Principal Investigator for the Following Airborne Campaigns:
STRAT (Stratospheric Tracers and Transport, 1995-1996)
SONEX (Subsonic Assessment, Ozone and Nitrogen Oxide Experiment, 1997)
POLARIS (Photochemistry of Ozone Loss in the Arctic Region in Summer, 1997)
CAMEX-3/4 (Convection and Atmospheric Moisture Experiment, 1998, 2001)
SOLVE (Sage Ozone Loss Validation Experiment, 2000)
CRYSTAL-FACE (Cirrus Regional Study of Tropical Anvils and Cirrus Layers, 2002)
MidCix (Middle Latitude Cirrus Experiment, 2004)
AVE (AURA Validation Experiment: June2005_AVE and CRAVE_2006)
NAMMA (NASA African Monsoon Multidisciplinary Activities, 2006)
TC4 (Tropical Composition, Cloud, and Climate Coupling Experiment, 2007)
NOVICE (Newly Operating Validated Instrument Comparison Experiment, 2008)
Education:
Candidate for M. S. Meteorology, San Jose State University
B. S. Electrical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1984
Senior Thesis: X-ray Satellite Development, Astronomy Dept.
Awards:
NASA Exceptional Engineering Achievement
Relevant Publications
Gaines, S. E., S. W. Bowen, R. S. Hipskind, T.P. Bui, and K. R. Chan: Comparisons of the NASA
ER-2 meteorological measurement system with radar tracking and radiosonde data, J. Atmos.
Ocean. Tech., 9, 210-225, 1992.
Scott, S. G., T.P. Bui, K. R. Chan, and S. W. Bowen: The meteorological measurement system on
the NASA ER-2 aircraft, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 7, 525-540, 1990.
Chan, K. R., L. Pfister, T.P. Bui, S. W. Bowen, J. Dean-Day, B.L. Gary, D.W. Fahey, K.K. Kelly,
C.R. Webster, and R. D. May: A case study of the mountain lee wave event of January 6 1992,
Geophys. Res. Letters, 20, 2551-2554, 1993.
Bui, T. P., S. Bowen, C. Chang, J. DeanDay, L. Pfister, R. Castenada, P. Shulman: Evaluating WB57F and ER-2 MMS measurement confidence, CRYSTAL-FACE Science Meeting at Salt Lake
City, Feb. 2003
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
85
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Dr. Michael J. Mahoney
Co-I for Microwave Temperature Profiler (MTP) Measurements
MTP Principal Investigator
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, MS 246-102
Phone:
(818)-354-5584
California Institute of Technology
Fax:
(818)-393-0025
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Email:
Michael.J.Mahoney@jpl.nasa.gov
Pasadena, CA 91101-8099
Web Site:
http://mtp.jpl.nasa.gov/
Role in ATTREX Mission:
Dr. Mahoney will lead the Microwave Temperature Profiler (MTP) team in all aspects of the
ATTREX campaign. This will include calibration of the MTP in our laboratory before and after the
campaigns, supporting the instrument in the field, performing the data calibration, analysis and
archiving after each campaign, and attending science team meetings.
Experience Related to the Investigation:
1998-Present Microwave Temperature Profiler (MTP) Principal Investigator, JPL/Caltech
1996-1998
Submillimeter Technologist and Research Scientist, JPL/Caltech
1992-1996
Ground-Based Microwave Applications Group Supervisor, JPL/Caltech
1990-1991
Acting Manager, Precision Segmented Reflectors Program, JPL/Caltech
1987-1990
Systems Engineer, Precision Segmented Reflectors Program, JPL/Caltech
1987-1996
Design Team Manager for LDR, SMIM, and FIRST, JPL/Caltech
1976-1987
Resident Director, Clark Lake Radio Observatory, U. Maryland (College Park)
Education:
Ph. D. - University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (Physics) - 1976
M. Sc. - University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (Physics) - 1972
B. Sc. - University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (Physics - Honors) - 1968
Relevant Awards and Honors:
1999
NOAA Outstanding Paper Award
1998-2008
Eight (8) NASA Group Achievement Awards
2000-2008
Two (2) NASA Certificates of Recognition
2008
NASA Exceptional Achievement Medal
Selected Publications:
Corti, T, B. P. Luo, M. de Reus, D. Brunner, F. Cairo, M. J. Mahoney, G. Martucci, R. Matthey, V.
Mitev, F. H. dos Santos, C. Shiller, G. Shur, N. M. Sitnikov, N. Spelten, H. J. Vossing, S. Borrmann,
and T. Peter, “Unprecedented evidence for deep convection hydrating the tropical stratosphere,”
Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L10810, doi:10.1029/2008GL033641, 2008.
Nielsen-Gammon, John W., Christina L. Powell, M. J. Mahoney, Wayne Angevine, Christoph
Senff, Allen White, Carl Berkowitz, Christopher Doran, and Kevin Knupp, “Multi-Sensor
Estimation of Mixing Heights Over a Coastal City,” Journal of Applied Meteorology and
Climatology, 47(1), 27, January 2008.
Halverson, J., M. Black, S. Braun, D. Cecil, M. Goodman, A. Heymsfield, G. Heymsfield, R.
Hood, T. Krishnamurti, G. McFarquhar, M.J. Mahoney, J. Molinari, R. Rogers, J. Turk, C. Velden,
D.-L. Zhang, E. Zipser, R. Kakar, “NASA's Tropical Cloud Systems and Processes (TCSP)
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
86
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Experiment: Investigating Tropical Cyclogenesis and Hurricane Intensity Change,” BAMS, 867882, June 2007.
Eckermann, Stephen D., Dörnbrack, Andreas, Vosper, Simon B., Flentje, Harald, Mahoney, M. J.,
Bui, T. Paul, Carslaw, Kenneth S., “Mountain Wave–Induced Polar Stratospheric Cloud Forecasts
for Aircraft Science Flights during SOLVE/THESEO 2000,” Weather and Forecasting, 21(1), 4268, 2006.
Popp, P. J., T. P. Marcy, E. J. Jensen, B. Karcher, D. W. Fahey, R. S. Gao, T. L. Thompson, K.
Rosenlof, E. C. Richard, R. L. Herman, E. M. Weinstock, J. B. Smith, R. D. May, J. C. Wilson, A.
J. Heymsfield, M. J. Mahoney, and A. M. Thompson, “The observation of nitric-acid containing
particles in the tropical lower stratosphere,” Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., Vol. 5, pp 10097-10124,
18-10-2005.
Wang, Ling, M. Joan Alexander, Thaopaul V. Bui, and Michael J. Mahoney, “Small-Scale Gravity
Waves in ER-2 MMS/MTP Wind and Temperature Measurements during CRYSTAL-FACE,”
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., Vol. 5, 11377-11412, 2005.
Marcy, T. P., D.W. Fahey, R. S. Gao, P.J. Popp, E. C. Richard, T. L. Thompson, K. H. Rosenlof, E.
A. Ray, R. J. Salawitch, B. A. Ridley, M. Lowenstein, J. C. Wilson, E. M. Weinstock, M. J.
Mahoney, R. L. Herman, “Quantifying Stratospheric Ozone in the Upper Troposphere Using in
situ Measurements of HCl,” Science, 9 April 2004: 261-265.
Ridley, B., E. Atlas, H. Selkirk, L. Pfister, D. Montzka, S. Donnelly, V. Stroud, E. Richard, K.
Kelly, A. Tuck, T. Thompson, C. Brock, C. Wilson, D. Baumgardner, M. Mahoney, R. Herman, R.
Freidl, J. Elkins, F. Moore, M. Ross, D. Anderson, “Convective transport of reactive constituents to
the tropical and mid-latitude tropopause region: I. Observations,” Atmos. Environ., 38, 1259-1274,
2004.
Pan, L. L., W. J. Randel, E. Browell, B. G. Gary, M. J. Mahoney, and E. J. Hintsa, “Definitions
and sharpness of the extratropical tropopause: A trace gas perspective,” J. Geophys. Res., 109,
D23103, doi:10.1029/2004JD004982.
Dornbrack, A., T. Birner, A Fix, H. Flentje, A. Meister, H. Schmid, E. Browell, M. J. Mahoney,
“Evidence for inertia-gravity waves forming polar stratospheric clouds over Scandinavia,” J.
Geophys. Res., 107(D20), 8287, doi:10.1029/2001JD000452, 2002.
Murphy, D. M., D. S. Thomson, and M. J. Mahoney, “In Situ Measurement of Organics,
Meteoritic Material, Mercury, and Other Elements in Aerosols at 5 to 19 Kilometers,” Science,
282, 1664-1669, 1998.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
87
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Jochen Peter Stutz
University of California, Los Angeles
Tel: 310- 825-5364
Department of Atmospheric Sciences
Fax: 310-206-5219
7127 Math Science Building
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1565
email: jochen@atmos.ucla.edu
Role in GMT2 Mission: Dr. Stutz will act as PI for the Mini-DOAS instrument.
Experience Related to the Investigation:
 20 years experience in the development of DOAS instruments and analysis software.
Dissemination of the principles of DOAS via a recently published textbook [Platt and Stutz,
2008]
 Participation in multiple collaborative field studies, for example: SHARP 2009, Houston;
GSHOX 2007 and 2008, Summit, Greenland; CalHal 2006, Malibu: TRAMP/TEXAQS 2006,
Houston, TX; MIRAGE 2006, Mexico City; ICARTT 2004, Gulf of Maine; NAOPEX 2002,
Boston, MA; Phoenix Ozone Experiment 2001, AZ; VTMX 2000, Salt Lake City, UT;
TEXAQS 2000, Houston, TX.
Education
University of Heidelberg, Germany
University of Heidelberg, Germany
Diploma in physics
Ph.D. in physics
February 1992
February 1996
University of California, Irvine, U.S.A.
Postdoctoral Researcher in
Atmospheric Chemistry
Institut für Umweltphysik, University of
Heidelberg, Germany
Postdoctoral Researcher in
Atmospheric Chemistry
April 1996
- June 1997
August 1997
- June 1999
Appointments
Assistant Professor, Dept. Atmospheric Sciences, UCLA
Associate Professor, Dept Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, UCLA
July 1999
-June 2005
July 2005 – present
Awards
NSF Career Award 2005
Selected Publications
Stutz, J., Wong, K.W., Lawrence, L., Ziemba, L., Flynn, J.H., Rappenglück, B., Lefer, B. Nocturnal
NO3 radical chemistry in Houston, TX, Atmospheric Environment (2009), doi:
10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.03.004
Stutz, J., H.-J. Oh, S. I. Whitlow, C. Anderson, J. E. Dibb, J. H. Flynn, B. Rappengluck, and B.
Lefer (2009) Simultaneous DOAS and mist-chamber IC measurements of HONO in Houston,
TX, Atmospheric Environment, doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.02.003.
Platt, U. and J. Stutz, Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy: Principles and Applications,
Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, 597pp, 2008.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
88
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Stutz, J., O. Pikelnaya, S. C. Hurlock, S. Trick, S. Pechtl and R. von Glasow, Daytime OIO in the
Gulf of Maine, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L22816, doi:10.1029/2007GL031332, 2007.
Brown, S. S., W. P. Dubé, H. D. Osthoff, J. Stutz, T. B. Ryerson, A. G. Wollny, C. A. Brock, C.
Warneke, J. A. de Gouw, E. Atlas, J. A. Neuman, J. S. Holloway, B. M. Lerner, E. J. Williams,
W. C. Kuster, P. D. Goldan, W. M. Angevine, M. Trainer, F. C. Fehsenfeld1 and A. R.
Ravishankara (2007), Vertical profiles in NO3 and N2O5 measured from an aircraft: Results
from the NOAA P-3 and surface platforms during NEAQS 2004, J. Geophys. Res., 112,
D22304, doi:10.1029/2007JD008883., 2007
Keene, W. C., J. Stutz, A. P. Pszenny, J. R. Maben, E. V. Fischer, A. M. Smith, R. von Glasow, S.
Pechtl, B. C. Sive, and R. K. Varner, Inorganic chlorine and bromine in coastal New England air
during summer, J Geophys Res, 112(D10), doi: 10.1029/2006JD007689, 2007
Pikelnaya O., Hurlock S. H., Trick S., and J. Stutz, (2007), Intercomparison of multiaxis and longpath differential optical absorption spectroscopy measurements in the marine boundary layer, J.
Geophys. Res., 112, D10S01, doi:10.1029/2006JD007727.
Wang, S., R. Ackermann, J. Stutz, Vertical profiles of NOx chemistry in the polluted nocturnal
boundary layer in Phoenix, AZ: I. Field observations by long-path DOAS, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
6, 2671–2693, 2006
Williams, E. J., F. C. Fehsenfeld, B. T. Jobson, W. C. Kuster, P. D. Goldan, J Stutz, and W. A.
McClenny, Comparison of ultraviolet absorbance, chemiluminescence, and DOAS instruments
for ambient ozone monitoring, Environ. Sci. Technol., 40, 5755-5762, 2006
Stutz, J., B. Alicke, R. Ackermann, A. Geyer, A. White, and E. Williams, Vertical profiles of NO3,
N2O5, O3, and NOx in the nocturnal boundary layer: 1. Observations during the Texas Air
Quality Study 2000, J. Geophys. Res., 109, doi:10.1029/2003JD004209, 2004.
Alicke, B., Hebestreit, K., Stutz, J., Platt, U., Iodine Oxide in the Marine Boundary Layer, Nature,
397, 572 - 573, 1999.
Hebestreit, K., Stutz, J., Rosen, D., Matveev, V., Peleg, M., Luria, M., Platt, U., First DOAS
measurements of tropospheric BrO in mid latitudes, Science, 283, 55 - 57, 1999.
Stutz, J., Platt, U., Improving long-path differential optical absorption spectroscopy with a quartzfiber mode mixer, Appl. Optics, 36, 1105 - 1115, 1997.
Stutz, J., Platt, U., Numerical analysis and estimation of the statistical error of differential optical
absorption spectroscopy measurements with least-squares methods, Appl. Optics, 35, 6041 6053, 1996.
Senne, T., Stutz, J., Platt, U., Measurements of the latitudinal distribution of NO2 column density
and layer height in Oct/Nov 1993, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 805 - 808, 1996.
Kreher, K., Fiedler, M., Gomer, T., Stutz, J., Platt, U., The latitudinal distribution (50°N-50°S) of
NO2 and O3 in October/November 1990, Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 1217 - 1220, 1995.
Hoffmann, D., Bonasoni, P., De Maziere, M., Evangelisti, F., Giovanelli, G., Goldmann, A.,
Goutail, F., Harder, J., Jakoubek, R., Johnston, P., Kerr, J., Matthews, W.A., McElroy, T.,
Mount, R.M.G., Platt, U., Pommerau, J-P., Sarkissian, A., Simon, P., Solomon, S., Stutz, J.,
Thomas, A.; Van Roozendael, M., Wu, E., Intercomparison of UV/visible spectrometers for
measurements of stratospheric NO2 for the network for the detection of stratospheric change,
J. Geophys. Res., 100, 16765 - 16791, 1995.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
89
ATTREX
H.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Letters of Commitment
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
90
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
October 9, 2009
Dear Dr. Jensen:
The Mesoscale Atmospheric Processes Branch of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is pleased
to support your proposal to NASA’s Earth Venture-1 entitled, “Airborne Tropical Tropopause
Experiment.” This letter is to affirm the commitment of your Co-Investigator, Dr. Matthew
McGill, and the availability of the Cloud Physics Lidar (CPL) instrument. Dr. McGill will be
available to support the work as outlined in your proposal.
A central aspect of your proposal involves use of the CPL instrument, for which Dr. McGill is the
Principal Investigator. I can assure you that CPL will be available to support your project during
the periods identified in your proposal.
We look forward to working with you on this exciting project.
Sincerely,
Dr. David Starr
Head, Mesoscale Atmospheric Processes Branch
Laboratory for Atmopsheres
Goddard Space Flight Center
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
91
ATTREX
I.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Current and Pending Support for PI and Co-Is
Short Title
PI
on Agency
Award
POC
& Performance
Period
Total
Budget
Commitment
of PI or Co-I
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
92
ATTREX
J.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
Compliance with U.S. Export Laws and Regulations
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
93
ATTREX
K.
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
References
Works Cited
1. Jensen, E. J., et al. Ice nucleation in tropical tropopause cirrus. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.
2009, Vol. 9, pp. 20 631–20 675.
2. Boehm, M. T. and Verlinde, J. Stratospheric influence on upper tropospheric tropical cirrus.
Geophys. Res.Lett. 2000, Vol. 27, pp. 3209–3212.
3. Holton, J. and Gettelman, A. Horizontal transport and dehydration of the stratosphere.
Geophys. Res.Lett. 2001, Vol. 28, pp. 2799-2802.
4. Gettelman, A., et al. Radiation balance of the tropical tropopause layer. J. Geophys. Res.
doi:1029/2003JD004 190, 2004, Vol. 109.
5. Park, M., et al. Transport above the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone inferred from Aura
Microwave Limb Sounder tracers. J. Geophys. Res. doi:10.1029/2006JD008 294, 2007, Vol. 112.
6. Durran, D. R., et al. The mesoscale dynamics in thin tropical tropopause cirrus. J. Atmos. Sci.
2009, Vol. 1. In Press.
7. Haladay, T. and Stephens, G. L. Characteristics of tropical thin cirrus clouds deduced from
joint CloudSat and CALIPSO measurements. J. Geophys. Res. doi:10.1029/2008JD010 675, 2009,
Vol. 114.
8. Thuburn, J. and Craig, G. C. Stratospheric influence on tropopause height: The radiative
constraint. J. Atmos. Sci. 2000, Vol. 57, pp. 17-28.
9. Hartmann, D. L., Holton, J. R. and Fu, Q. The heat balance of the tropical tropopause, cirrus,
and stratospheric dehydration. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2001, Vol. 28, pp. 1969-1972.
10. Randel, W. J. and Wu, F. Kelvin wave variability near the equatorial tropopause observed in
GPS radio occultation measurements. J. Geophys. Res. D03102, doi:10.1029/2004JD005006,
2005, Vol. 110.
11. Randel, W. J., et al. Decreases in stratospheric water vapor since 2001: Links to changes in the
tropical tropopause and the Brewer-Dobson circulation. J. Geophys. Res. D12312,
doi:10.1029/2005JD006744, 2006, Vol. 111.
12. Fujiwara, M., et al. Cirrus observations in the tropical tropopause layer over the western
Pacific. J. Geophys. Res. doi:10.1029/2008JD011 040, 2009, Vol. 114.
13. Gettelman, A., et al. The Tropical Tropopause Layer 1960-2100. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2009,
Vol. 9, pp. 1621-1637.
14. Fueglistaler, S., et al. Stratospheric water vapor predicted from the Lagrangian temperature
history of air entering the stratosphere in the tropics. J. Geophys. Res. doi:10.1029/2004JD005 516,
2005, Vol. 110.
15. Haynes, P. and Shuckburgh, E. Effective diffusivity as a diagnostic of atmospheric transport
1. Stratosphere. J. Geophys. Res. 2000, Vol. 105.
16. Fujiwara, M., et al. Turbulence at the tropopause due to breaking Kelvin waves observed by
the Equatorial Atmosphere Radar. Geophys. Res.Lett. doi:10.1029/2002GL016278, 2003, Vol. 30,
p. 1171.
17. Aschmann, J., et al. Modeling the transport of very short-lived substances into the tropical
upper troposphere and lower stratosphere. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. 2009, Vol. 9, pp. 1851118543.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
94
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
18. Fueglistaler, S., Wernli, H. and Peter, T. Tropical troposphere-to-stratosphere transport
inferred from trajectory calculations. J. Geophys. Res. 109 (D03108), 2004, Vol. doi:
10.1029/2003JD004069.
19. World Meteorological Organization, Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2006. WMO
Report. 2007, Vol. 50.
20. Salawitch, R. J., et al. Sensitivity of ozone to bromine in the lower stratosphere. Geophys.
Res. Lett. 32, 2005, Vol. 32, doi:10.1029/2004GL021504.
21. Dorf, M., et al. Bromine in the tropical troposphere and stratosphere as derived from balloonborne BrO observations. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2008, Vol. 8, pp. 7265-7271.
22. Sinnhuber, B. M. and Folkins, I. Estimating the contribution of bromoform to stratospheric
bromine and its relation to dehydration in the tropical tropopause layer. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2006,
Vol. 6, pp. 4755-4761.
23. Bucholtz, A., et al. measured heating rates of a tropical subvisible cirrus cloud. J. Geophys.
Res. 2009, Vol. 1. Submitted.
24. Wang, L., et al. Small-scale gravity waves in ER-2 MMS/MTP wind and temperature
measurements during CRYSTAL-FACE. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2006, Vol. 6, pp. 1091–1104.
25. Speidel, M., et al. Sulfur dioxide measurements in the lower, middle and upper troposphere:
Deployment of an aircraft-based chemical ionization mass spectrometer with permanent in-flight
calibration. Atm. Environ. 2007, Vol. 41, pp. 2427-2437.
26. Fiedler, V., et al. East Asian SO2 pollution over Europe, Part1: Airborne trace gase
measurements and source identification by particle dispersion model simulations. ACP. 2009, Vol.
9, pp. 4717-4728.
27. Roiger, A., et al. PAN measurements in the summertime Arctic troposphere and lowermost
stratosphere using an airborne ion trap chemical ionization mass spectrometer. ACP. 2009. To be
submitted.
28. Gettelman, A. and Hönninger, G. The role of halogen species in the troposphere.
Chemosphere. 2003, Vol. 52, pp. 325-338.
29. Weidner, F., et al. Balloon-borne Limb profiling of UV/vis skylight radiances. Atmos. Chem.
Phys. 2005, Vol. 5, pp. 1409–1422.
30. Folkins, I. and Martin, R. V. The vertical structure of tropical convection, and its impact on
the budgets of water vapor and ozone. J. Atmos. Sci. 2005, Vol. 62, pp. 1560-1573.
31. Gettelman, A. and de Forster, P. M. A climatology of the tropical tropopause layer. J. Meteor.
Soc. 2002, Vol. 80, pp. 911-924.
32. Gettelman, A., et al. Transport of water vapor in the tropical tropopause layer. Geophys. Res.
Lett. 2002, Vol. 29, 1.
33. Randel, W. J., Wu, F. and Gaffen, D. Interannual variability of the tropical tropopause
derived from radiosonde data and NCEP reanalysis. J. Geophys. Res. 2000, Vol. 105, pp. 1550915524.
34. Comstock, J. M., Ackerman, T. P. and Mace, G. G. Ground based remote sensing of tropical
cirrus clouds at Nauru Island: Cloud statistics and radiative impacts. J. Geophys. Res.
doi:10.1029/2002JD002 203, 2002, Vol. 107.
35. Corti, T., et al. The impact of cirrus clouds on tropical troposphere-to-stratosphere transport.
Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2006, Vol. 6, pp. 2539–2547.
36. Folkins, I. and Martin, R. V. The vertical structure of tropical convection and its impact on
the budgets of water vapor and ozone. J. Atmos. Sci. 2005, Vol. 62, pp. 1560-1573.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
95
ATTREX
Due at NASA: 6 Nov 2009
37. Hartmann, D. L., Holton, J. R. and Fu, Q. The heat balance of the tropical tropopause,
cirrus, and stratospheric dehydration. Geophys. Res.Lett. 2001, Vols. 28, 1969-1972.
38. Boehm, M. T. and Verlinde, J. Stratospheric influence on upper tropospheric tropical cirrus.
Geophys. Res.Lett. 2000, Vol. 27, pp. 3209–3212.
39. Comstock, J. M., Ackerman, T. P. and Mace, G. G. Ground based remote sensing of tropical
cirrus clouds at Nauru Island: Cloud statistics and radiative impacts. J. Geophys. Res.
doi:10.1029/2002JD002 203, 2002, Vol. 107.
40. Corti, T., et al. The impact of cirrus clouds on tropical troposphere-to-stratosphere transport.
Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2006, Vol. 6, pp. –2547.
41. Haynes, P. and Shuckburgh, E. Effective diffusivity as a diagnostic of atmospheric transport
1. Stratosphere. J. Geophys. Res. 2000, Vol. 105, pp. 22777–22794.
Use or disclosure of information in this document is subject to the restrictions on the SBU cover sheet.
96