[Seavox] Platform Codes

Tue Jul 23 21:00:46 BST 2013

Hello

1. In addition to ice buoys, there are Ice-Tethered Profilers and Polar Ocean Profiling Systems, which also become trapped when the sea ice develops (or who are deployed in the ice). They are similar to profilers used by the Argo program in many respects. The name "surface ice buoy" would perhaps help avoid confusion with those instruments, or "ice buoy" as long as definition mentions "undrogued" and "surface".

2. The Canadian Ice Service of Environment Canada uses "pack ice" or "drift ice", which means : "any area of ice, other than fast ice, no matter what form it takes or how it is disposed." Then "pack ice" is used for concentrations >7/10 and "drift ice" for concentrations <=6/10. More details here: http://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/default.asp?lang=En&n=501D72C1-1&def=show08AD15449#8AD15449 This is perhaps more technical for the needs at hand but can be used as one of many references.

3."AUV" can be used indeed for 4 of the 5 types of submersible gliders described here http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/glider/ ; and wave gliders can be lumped with "autonomous surface water vehicle". 

The WMO Code Table 1770 currently doesn't have an entry for gliders, but perhaps it will change soon. I assume JCOMMOPS would be the right forum to get WMO to add a code for gliders. From what I know, most glider data broadcasters use "830", which is the code for "CTD", until something more specific comes along. Until then, WMO ID number rules allow for determination of gliders.

Regards

Mathieu Ouellet
613-990-8570
mathieu.ouellet at dfo-mpo.gc.ca
Chef de section, SDMM | Section Head, MEDS
Gestion des données scientifiques intégrées | 
Integrated Science Data Management
Pêches et Océans | Fisheries and Oceans Canada
12W095, 200 Kent Ottawa, ON K1A 0E6
Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada

________________________________

From: seavox-bounces at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk [mailto:seavox-bounces at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk] On Behalf Of John Graybeal
Sent: July 23, 2013 10:40 AM
To: Lowry, Roy K.
Cc: seavox at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [Seavox] Platform Codes

Yes to all :-) -- ice buoy is a nice idea (trying to think of something that hints at the dual role, but can't); definition in #2 looks good; adding glider is a good thing. 

I have found value in distinguishing gliders that are constrained to be near the surface to get power (wave gliders), from those that can run long periods at depth without surfacing. (The former having broadMatch the latter.)  Since there is no clear demarcation between the two, your mileage may vary.

John

On Jul 23, 2013, at 01:27, "Lowry, Roy K." <rkl at bodc.ac.uk> wrote:

		Dear All,

	Time for SeaVoX to opo out of hibernation for a while. The L06 vocabulary for platform categories has been stable since the end of 2008.  However, recent activity between SeaDataNet and JCOMMOPS to manage platform instance and their identifiers has raised some questions that I would like us to consider.

	1.	There are undrogued drifting surface buoys that are released at Arctic latitudes when the area is ice-free but become trapped when the sea ice develops.  Thus for part of the year they are tracking currents but for the rest they are tracking ice movements.  It has been proposed that we add an additional entry (ice buoy) to L06 to cover these. Comments? 
	2.	The 'cryosphere' section of L06 was set up on the basis of conversations between myself and a colleague at the British Antarctic Survey, which resulted in two categories being set up for 'ice island' and 'ice shelf'. Now this has something of a southern bias as it ignores the Arctic sea ice with is neither an ice island nor an ice shelf with a rate of movement somewhere between the other two. Consequently, it has been proposed that we add a category 'ice pack' with a DRAFT definition 'Sea ice that has sufficient bulk to inhibit free movement by currents but is not attached to land.' Comments - including improvements to the definition which came off the top of my head. 
	3.	There has been a rapid expansion in the last couple of years in the number of gliders. The question has therefore been asked whether these should continue to be categorised as 'autonomous underwater vehicles' or have their own category that would of course have a broadMatch to 'autonomous underwater vehicles' (L06 is a hierarchy). Again comments? If we go down this path are there any other AUV sub-categories that we should be considering?

	Cheers, Roy.

	Please note that I now work part-time from Tuesday to Thursday.  E-mail response on other days is possible but not guaranteed!

	  ________________________________  
	This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.

	_______________________________________________
	Seavox mailing list
	Seavox at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk
	http://mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/seavox

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk/pipermail/seavox/attachments/20130723/233c4a11/attachment-0001.html 