panel 4 – arctic communications - adacadac.uaa.alaska.edu/css/images/pdf/panel 4 presentation -...

Panel 4 – Arctic Communications

ADAC Arctic‐Related Incidents of National Significance (Arctic‐Related IoNS)

Workshop

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Arctic Communications Technology AssessmentCG‐926 | Holly Wendelin

Arctic IoNS| 21 June 2016

Research Deliverables to Date2013 – Arctic Coverage and Expected Coverage

– Modeled Coverage Provided by Existing HF Infrastructure.

2013 – Modeling of Emergency Frequencies in the Arctic

– VHF/UHF emergency frequencies at eight locations from the Bering Strait along the north slope of Alaska to the Canadian Border.

2014 – Arctic High Frequency Communications Coverage As-Is vice Alternative Systems Performance

– Assessment of HF radio coverage of the Alaskan AOR.

• Recommendations to address gaps in coverage based on 2013 modeling.

2014 - State of Arctic HF Communications 2014 vs. Modeled Predictions

– Verifies previous modeling effort of current capabilities and shortfalls of HF communications in the Arctic Region.

– Gathered data on the Ao of the existing HF GOTHAM network.

2015 - Feasibility of an Iridium/Automatic Identification System (AIS) Shipboard System

– Examined AIS and LRIT technology and recommended an AIS/Iridium architecture that meets requirements while enabling two-way AIS message comms worldwide, including the Arctic region, through use of the Iridium satellite network.

2016 - Assessment of Technology Deployed to Provide Arctic Communications 2015

– Describes the results of HF Automatic Link Establishment (ALE) testing conducted in 2015 and compares those results to similar testing completed in 2014.

Arctic Coverage and Expected CoveragePhase 1 of HF Modeling Effort: Documented the current CG maritime

Arctic HF coverage that can be expected using the current communications equipment, operations specifications, and positions.– Coast Guard’s Cellular Over-the-Horizon Enforcement Network (COTHEN)

feasibility study, a field of 38 HF sites.– Spectrum-E web-based model by ADTI. Utilizes the ITU-R P.533 published HF

atmospheric predictions.– Modeling was performed for the following 6 sites: Pt. Higgins, Kodiak, Cold Bay,

Shemya, St. Paul, Nome.

Provided information to assist in identification of locations to model future HF antenna sites or alternative approaches to expand and improve Arctic comms coverage.

Seasonal and atmospheric variances have dramatic impact on HF coverage. The models show development of the northern Alaskan communications infrastructure has the potential to fill the communication gaps seen during the seasonal time the Arctic is open for maritime traffic.

Arctic High Frequency Communications Coverage Maps As-Is vice Alternative Systems Performance

Phase II of HF Modeling Effort: Identified gaps in current HF capabilities in the Arctic Region and modeled strategically located HF antennas to mitigate shortfalls.

– Model parameters included: location, antenna type, gain, transmitting power, frequency, time, date, sun spot number, and variables reflecting the environmental noise at the receiver.

– Results indicated that existing antennas in Kodiak, Shemya, Nome, and Saint Paul, along with possible antenna placement at Fairbanks oriented at 330 degrees would provide 15dB SNR HF coverage to more than 80% of the Northern AOR and significantly beyond during the summer vessel traffic season from July through September.

Existing Sites:•Kodiak•Cold Bay•Nome•Shemya•St. Paul•Pt. Higgins

Modeled Sites:•Fairbanks•Anchorage•Wainwright•Barrow•Deadhorse

90…………to……….100%

Composite map of model runs illustrating potential HF-ALE coverage for 15 dB SNR (90%, SSN10) in Summer.

HF-ALE Technology Evaluations 2014 and 2015

Test effort designed to verify previous modeling conducted by CG RDC to document current capabilities and shortfalls of HF communications in the Arctic Region.– 2014 and 2015: Tested HF-ALE communications capabilities by performing radio

checks with installed equipment while underway on USCGC HEALY.• July-August 2014 in Alaskan waters

• Existing GOTHAM network in CG District 17Site Latitude Longitude Antenna Power (KW)

Kodiak 57° 44' 19.0" N 152° 30' 17.0" W TCI-540 4000

Kodiak 57° 44' 19.0" N 152° 30' 17.0" W TCI-550 4000

Cold Bay 55° 10' 28.1" N 162° 42' 06.7" W LFHP-230 1000

Pt Higgins 55° 27' 33.7" N 131° 49' 06.8" W LFHP-230 1000

Nome 64° 29' 04.1" N 165° 14' 40.5" W LFHP-230 1000

Shemya 52° 43' 44.6" N 174° 00' 22.8" W TCI-570 1000

Shemya 52° 43' 42.1" N 174° 00' 13.4" W AS-3797 1000

St. Paul 57° 09' 04.7" N 170° 14' 56.8" W LFHP-230 1000

Pt Barrow 71° 20' 09.9" N 156° 38' 42.8" W LFHP-230 1000

Test Methodology: Link Quality Analysis (LQA) data was gathered over 160 Test Events on two types of comms:

– Voice Checks conducted by manual call-up to shore site from HEALY

– Soundings were imitated using the TMR-90 “Polling” function during which HEALY would transmit an internally generated test signal sequentially on each GOTHAM frequency. All GOTHAM sites recorded the LQA value received during the sounding.

Analysis of data indicated that previous modeling correctly analyzed existing GOTHAM coverage.– None of the test periods resulted in a complete outage of HF connectivity for

ship-to-shore comms.

HF-ALE Technology Evaluations 2014 and 2015

Arctic Technology Evaluation 2014 and 2015

Existing HF-ALE Sites

The HEALY crew established and maintained satisfactory DTCS communications between two radios on the cutter for their entire Arctic voyage (2015). – DTCS utilizes the Iridium™ constellation of satellites which provides satellite

coverage everywhere on earth as long as the user’s radio has a view of the sky.

– Current range for a DTCS Net is limited to 250 miles

– 66 satellites in Polar orbits (86.4° inclination), there is excellent coverage in the high latitude areas.

• Minimum number of satellites available at any time is 4 or 5. Communications are possible with only one satellite in view, and each satellite can support over 1,000 simultaneous calls.

– While this test did not demonstrate the ability to communicate from ship to shore except at relatively short distances, the test proved there was DTCS coverage all the way to the North Pole between the two radios in the net.

Distributed Tactical Communication System (DTCS)

Feasibility of an Iridium/Automatic Identification System (AIS) Shipboard System

Current terrestrial and satellite tracking of AIS and/or LRIT equipped vessels does not adequately provide coverage in the Arctic.

This study identified the issues involved with AIS and LRIT, and recommended an AIS/Iridium architecture.– Enables a vessel to comply with LRIT and AIS requirements,

– Enables two-way AIS message communications worldwide, including the Arctic region, without the need for deployment of an AIS terrestrial network in the Arctic.

– Recommends that the Coast Guard pay for the messaging costs for the AIS messaging in the Arctic, but identifies an offsetting cost avoidance of $250M in deployment and operating costs for an Alaskan terrestrial AIS network, which, even at that price would only cover the in-shore (within 25 nm) portion of the U. S. Exclusive Economic Zone waters in the Arctic.

Modeling of Emergency Frequencies in the Arctic

RDC performed modeling of 8 most likely sites for Very High Frequency (VHF) and Ultra High Frequency (UHF) antenna installation.– Site selection was based on infrastructure capabilities in existing towns/settlements. – The team used a Radio Frequency (RF) capabilities propagation model (Spectrum-

E) for the United States and Canada maritime distress/emergency frequencies 156.8 MHz, 406.0 MHz, 850 MHz, and 1900 MHz.

Modeled locations that had infrastructure to support proposed antenna sites and the ability to cover holes in predicted coverage.– Modeled coverage at these sites would significantly increase coverage for both

aviation and surface contacts.

Modeling results show that gaps would still exist if all 8 sites were constructed, primarily to the east and west of Pt. Barrow. – The RDC has identified three more locations to model to fill the gaps identified.

The issue is that for the three gap locations there are limited or no infrastructure capabilities.

Pt Lay

Nome

PrudhoeGordon

KaktovikDeadhorse

Barrow

Kivalina

Kotzebue

Deering

Wales

Modeled VHF Proposed Antenna Sites

Ship Uplink, 2m, 10W

Overall RecommendationsHF-ALE:

– Place new HF antenna sites at Fairbanks and Pt. Barrow. – Conduct further testing during shoulder seasons, like a longer-term automated survey effort.– Recommend attempting to test again during future voyages.

MUOS: – MUOS has been selected as the follow-on program of record for future CG military satellite

communications. MUOS is planned to be operational in summer 2016, and DoD will eventually cease supporting the legacy UFO function.

DTCS: – The CG should consider making DTCS a program of record by leveraging the DoD program of

record solution. – DTCS could provide a reliable cutter to small boat and other short range satellite communications

option at any latitude

Iridium/AIS:– Recommend initiatives to equip vessels with an AIS/Iridium architecture.

VHF:– No current plans to build VHF sites at this time.

Future Tasks in the Arctic Communications StudyTask 8: Investigate the use of the National Incident Command System (NICS) in the Arctic.

– Demonstrate the use of Next Generation Incident Command System (NICS) as part of D17 exercise “Arctic Chinook.” RDC will work with D17 exercise planners to provide NICS as a tool for use in parallel with traditional ICS forms/reports/etc during FY16 exercise “Arctic Chinook.” Mobile adhoc radios will be used to establish link between NICS mobile devices in the field and the Incident Command (without the use of an existing network). All NICS devices/systems will be linked to the NICS server (hosted on HISN) via internet connection. “Summary Report of NICS use in the Arctic” (UDI 1581)

Task 9: Communications Satellite Survey – Conduct a study on all commercial space-based communications satellites passing over the Arctic Region daily.

Information to include: country of origin, type of communication capability, time of day each pass is expected, and which government agencies subscribe and/or facilitate access to the services. “Commercial Satellite Survey Report”

Task 10: Assessment of ways to improve Arctic Communications based on Technologies investigated to date.

– Identify ways to improve transmission from the Arctic region to the District 17 Command Center. Develop communication recommendations and provide initial Life Cycle (technical and cost) information to support implementation decisions. Analyze each technology and transmission avenue with its associated cost report out the results.

– Develop a Final Report that encompasses the knowledge gained from all tasking. (UDI 1372 Final Technical Paper: “Arctic Communications Technology Recommendations and Path Forward”). NOTE: this UDI would incorporate all prior deliverables, modeling efforts, and data collected from Arctic Shield FY14 and Arctic Shield 2015.

Back-Up Slides

Feasibility of an Iridium/Automatic Identification System (AIS) Shipboard SystemCurrent terrestrial and satellite tracking of AIS and/or LRIT equipped vessels does not adequately provide coverage in the

Arctic. This study identifies the issues involved with AIS and LRIT, and recommends an AIS/Iridium architecture.

– Enables a vessel to comply with LRIT and AIS requirements,– Enables two-way AIS message communications worldwide, including the Arctic region, without the need for deployment of an AIS terrestrial

network in the Arctic. – Recommends that the Coast Guard pay for the messaging costs for the AIS messaging in the Arctic, but identifies an offsetting cost avoidance of

$250M in deployment and operating costs for an Alaskan terrestrial AIS network, which, even at that price would only cover the in-shore (within 25 nm) portion of the U. S. Exclusive Economic Zone waters in the Arctic.

The proposed solution would require a software service to be installed on the vessel and a companion software service installed at the Coast Guard Operations Systems Center, along with connectivity between the vessel’s AIS transponder and its Iridium modem.

– This configuration enables AIS messages to travel to/from the vessel over the Iridium satellite link, and permits the conversion of those messages to LRIT-compliant messages shoreside for injection into the LRIT data system.

– Would require minor changes to the AIS and LRIT standards, which would only be accomplished through cooperation of the international communities involved.

The proposed solution would enable vessels to send AIS messages over Iridium and have them received by the Coast Guard for vessel tracking, while at the same time converting them into LRIT messages for entry into the LRIT data centers.

– LRIT polling messages sent to vessels would be converted to AIS Query messages and transmitted to the vessels over Iridium, with the reply taking the reverse route back to the LRIT operator.

The proposed solution could also be extended to use INMARSAT instead of Iridium, which would then provide two-way AIS message communications to INMARSAT-equipped vessels.

– Would provide two-way AIS messaging capability to all LRIT-required vessels, extending two-way AIS messaging throughout the world.– An associated benefit would be the ability to merge the LRIT and AIS databases into one central database, with the associated savings in

maintenance, support and equipment costs.

Arctic Chinook ExerciseTest state-of-the-art line of sight (LOS) and beyond line of sight (BLOS)

communications capabilities with NICS tools during the “Arctic Chinook” field training mass rescue exercise.

Arctic Chinook involves rescuing 100+ passengers who have abandoned their cruise ship and landed at an isolated “beach” near the Bering Strait in northwest Alaska.

The project will attempt to establish a voice and data connections to the remote area via multiple technologies to include:

– mobile ad hoc network (MANET) radios

– Troposcatter

– high altitude balloon with a communications payload.

With the established connections, responders with NICS mobile devices will be able to receive tasking, request resources, message/chat with other personnel working the incident, and record situational awareness information in a shared web-based workspace and mapping tool.

2014 HEALY

Tracklines

2015 HEALY Transit to North Pole

Participants:• Lead Executive Agent: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)• Operational Sponsors: U.S. European Command (USEUCOM), U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM)• Operational Manager: Steve Spehn, USEUCOM• Technical Manager: Joe Casas, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)• Current participants/partners: Army Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center

(AMRDEC); U.S. National Ice Center (USNIC); National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration (NOAA); Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC);University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF); and Alaskan Command (ALCOM)

Arctic Collaborative Environment (ACE)In Support of Arctic Communications

June 2016

• Incidents of National Significance (IONS) will occur in the Arctic– They may be foreseeable, but they are not easily predicted– Response will be an “all‐hands” effort

• A variety of Organizations will have overlapping missions to various aspects of the IONS– Various levels of prior coordination– Various mandates, chains of command, and end‐states

• Coordination of resources and actions are key to addressing the IONS• Effective Communications is key to this Coordination

– Enable, facilitate, and encourage collaboration– Provide for a shared awareness and understanding

• An openly accessible tool enabling an ad hoc group to:– Create and control group membership– Identify relevant data– Share and update data through a common catalog– Build and share visualizations that capture understanding– Inform decision‐making– Coordinate and monitor actions

25

Supporting Communications

• Provides an open source software application that:– Is Internet based and open‐access, for georeferenced data exploitation, collaborative climate analysis, environmental

research, and situational awareness decision‐support– Integrates geo‐referenced data from existing remote sensing assets, models, and in situ observations for terrestrial,

maritime, and atmospheric domains– Provides monitoring, analysis, and visualization based on earth observation data, imagery, and modeling

• Enhances local, regional, and international cooperation and coordination– Long‐term environmental planning and near‐term actions– In response to climatic, environmental, and operational changes and events

• Enables the exchange and real‐time sharing of multi‐layer visualization workspaces of data, imagery, and models– Provides a collaborative environment for dynamic creation of communities of interest to achieve common objectives– Includes collaborative chat with automatic language translation

• Can be applied directly to other geographical regions for other purposes

26

What ACE Does

• Integration with Mobile Apps• Historical Data & Data Computation• User Annotations• Visualization Archiving• “Track Changes”• Dataset Enhancements• Additional Map Projections• Regionalized User Interface

27

Continued ACE Development

• Hardware– Small Satellites in Low‐Earth Orbit− Enhanced Software‐Defined Radios (SDRs)− Electronically‐Steerable Array Antenna− Standardized U‐Sat Modules− Affordable Launch− On‐Orbit IP Routing / Delay‐Tolerant Networking− LEO‐to‐GEO Laser Routing

– Ground Systems− Man‐portable, High‐Bandwidth, Satellite‐Tracking Antennas (e.g., the inflatable GATR)

• Software– Managed Catalog of Global Geospatial Data Sources (Real‐Time and Historical)– Fully‐Customizable, Collaborative, Data Visualization Tool– WMS and RESTful Access to Deep Data Stores (e.g., NASA Data Acquisition And Control System [DACS])– Mobile Apps for Crowd‐Sourced Geospatial Awareness (e.g., MyShake)

28

Other Arctic Communications Technologies

29

Discussion

Arctic CommunicationsNettie La Belle-Hamer, Ph.D.

Deputy Director, Geophysical Institute

Director, Alaska Satellite Facility

Arctic IoN 2016 | slide 31

•Geology•Physical geography•Ecosystems and rate of ecosystem change•Culture •Infrastructure and access•Climate and weather•Data – depth, breath, and length of record

UAF has significant expertise and experience doing research in the Arctic

The Arctic Challenge


Atmospheric Science

Snow, Ice & Permafrost

Tectonics & Sedimentation

Remote Sensing Seismology

Space Physics & Aeronomy

Volcanology

Geophysical InstituteResearch Groups

Arctic-based geophysical studies enhance basic knowledge and

available information, as well as domain awareness


Alaska Satellite Facility

Alaska Earthquake Center

Wilson AlaskaTechnical Center

Alaska Center for Unmanned Aircraft System Integration

Alaska Volcano Observatory

Geographical Information Network for Alaska

Research Computing Systems Poker Flat Research Range

Geophysical InstituteResearch Operations


Satellite Communications in the Arctic

• Geostationary satellites cannot provide adequate spatial resolution

• LEO polar orbits cannot provide adequate temporal resolution

• Changing Arctic conditions leads to greater need for communication and situational awareness


Arctic communication problems• Field-aligned irregularities and non-great-circle propagation• Auroral zone and polar-cap absorption• Ionosphere tilt and nonreciprocal radio wave propagation

Zones of particle precipitation affecting ionosphere HF and VHF radio absorption [Foppiano and Bradley, JATP 1985].

Systems affected by ionosphere high-latitude ionosphere disturbances include GPS, UHF satellite communications, HF, and OTH HF [Cannon, et al., in The Effects of Space Weather on Radio Systems 2005]


Better, Cheaper, Faster?

• More frequent coverage by using highly elliptical orbit or a flock of small satellites in the polar orbit

– Molniya orbit– cubesats

• Cheaper launch vehicles through innovations such as 3-D printing

• Cheaper launches from Kodiak and Hawai’i


1 kg, 5 W, ~$40,000

CubeSats

Alaska Space Grant PI, Denise Thorsen, Ph.D.


Orbit Picture


• Super Strypi is an expendable launch system developed by University of Hawai’i and Aerojet Rocketdyne Sandia

• Payload capacity of 250kg or 550lbs

• Sun-synchronous, low Earth Orbit


Airborne Communications in the Arctic

• Unmanned Aerial Systems could be used in high altitude platform stations

– 20 to 50 km– Covers a small region effectively– UAV either as the station or as assessment

tool for the HAPS

• Lower altitude means lower power demands and smaller round trip comm

• Rapidly deployable and easier to service


Arctic Communications Innovations using

•HF Phased array transmitter (33 acres)•2.8 to 10 MHz•5 x 3600 hp diesel engines•3.6 MW transmit power

42

High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP)


8 MHz covers range of ~1100 km to ~1800 km from radar

Offset of transmitter and receiver location2000 km range translates to about 80° latitude

Bill Bristow UAF/GI

Over the Horizon Radar Experiments


Some Challenges to be Explored

1. Can we use cubesats to increase the utility of the LEO polar orbits?

a. student cubesat lab enhancementb. cheaper launch access

2. Can the addition of metal 3-D printing create a manufacturing capability in Alaska that will reduce the construction costs of launch vehicles?

3. Can UAVs work as HAPS in the Arctic to enhance communication? Alone or with balloons?

4. Can HAARP enhance radio communication on the north slope of Alaska?

a. Crowdsource experiment on the North Slopeb. Over the horizon testing

Arctic Communications and Call Centers

ASRC Energy Services has maintained a network of seasonal regional and community call centers (Com Centers) since 2007 Initiated via Conflict Avoidance Agreement (CAA) between Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC) and oil and gas industry participantsCenters support:

Conflict resolution activities Search and Rescue (SAR) operations Activity updates in remote areas Information distribution for community interests

Overview

USCG Local Notice to Mariners encourages vessels to participate and report all activities to Com Centers

Overview

Com Center Locations:• Kaktovik• Deadhorse*• Nuiqsut• Barrow*• Wainwright• Point Lay• Point Hope• Kivalina• Wales• Kotzebue*• Deering• Savoonga• Nome*

*Regional Com Center

All Com Centers have trained personnel, and basic operating equipment Computer and internet Phone and fax VHF radio Automatic Identification System (AIS)

through Marine Exchange of Alaska (occasional)

Regional Com Centers have a Voice Over IP (VOIP) bridge Able to record local phone and all regional radio traffic in digital format

ASRC Energy Services (AES) currently has equipment installed on North Slope Borough (NSB) towers

Professional relationships to seasonally re‐install tower equipment for marine VHF receivers and other equipment as necessary

Com Center Equipment & Timing

Seasonal installation of Com Center functionality takes between two to six weeks

Com Centers’ primary function has been conflict prevention and resolution Subsistence activities, particularly bowhead whale hunts, have a significant cultural importance

throughout the arctic Have served to prevent countless potential conflicts Have facilitated numerous conflict resolutions Nearly 100% success rate at conflict avoidance for

participating parties

Conflicts tend to arise with parties who fail to report activities Subsistence users contact their local Com Centers to

report unknown vessels impacting their hunts Operators tasked with attempting to contact the unknown

vessel or reach out to several available resources to assist in identifying the vessel operator

Com Center Operator facilitates resolution of the conflict or put the vessel operator and subsistence users in contact with each other to resolve the issue

Essential Tasking

As marine traffic increases in the arctic, the potential for conflict also increases. Upcoming open water season is anticipated to be one of the busiest seasons for:

Federal offshore research activity Shipping traffic increased 40% year‐over‐year Crystal Serenity traversal via Northern Sea Route (NSR)

Marine mammals are highly sensitive to noise and activity Have the potential to deflect away from an area if disturbed

Carries the potential to impact subsistence hunts

Com Centers have the ability to mitigate these impacts before they occur

Seasonal Changes

Com Centers provide local resources and local assistance and are often the front line for current information in the midst of a SAR response

Provide information / situational awareness to emergency responders, including NSB SAR and USCG 2007 Barrow Com Center, Barrow SAR, Canadian Coast Guard joint response to emergency assistance call for

small craft taking on water 24 miles from shore, 4 person crew safely transported back to shore 2007 Barrow SAR contacted Barrow Com Center to determine vessel nearest small craft out of fuel, Barrow Com

Center located/identified the Peregrine and assisted refuel operations 2008 on‐ice stranding of 20 persons off shore from Point Hope, Point Hope Com Center and NSB SAR facilitated

safe rescue 2015 missing boat with multiple passengers out of Kaktovik 2007‐2015 Monitor EPIRB activity for whale boats

Can often respond faster than NSB SAR and USCG resources Immediate response and/or escalation of incident to response community Vital link in the communications chain

Can serve as the “eyes and ears” of state and federal government in event of unknown vessels and persons entering U.S. sovereign territory 2015 foreign film crew illegal landing in Barrow

Changing Mission – Low‐Cost Capabilities

Com Centers provide a proven Arctic communications capability Basic but extensible communications capability Trained users and 24x7 monitoring available in‐season Tower usage and information sharing agreements are scalable to accommodate rapidly expanding

NSR usage

Basic Com Center concept will become more robust with installation of Arctic fiber 2‐year time frame for phase 1 implementation Increased internet speeds / bandwidth supporting

upgraded information dissemination and fusion

Meshes with USCG and SAR needs for civilian emergency response infrastructure without up‐front infrastructure investment

Proven Communications

Investigate costs associated with routine seasonal stand‐up of Com Center infrastructure How to get ahead of the need for upgraded communication in Arctic region

Investigate upgraded communications capability to support SAR and local emergency response

For example mass rescue scenario and enhanced SA for conflict resolution Identify opportunities for inclusion into CBONS and AIFC architecture

Perform communications gap analysis to determine areas of coverage improvement Signal boosting, satellite communications, VOIP via broadband Protocols and procedures for dedicated geographically referenced emergency / SAR response Accurate picture of vessel traffic levels with and without AIS

Research Questions

ASRC Energy Services. 2009. Subsistence Advisor Program Summary North Slope, Alaska. Report dated April 2009 prepared by ASRC Energy Services, Regulatory and Technical Services for Shell Exploraiton and Production Company, Anchorage, AK.

Lefevre, Jessica S. 2013. A Pioneering Effort in the Design of Process and Law Supporting Integrated Arctic Ocean Management. The Environmental Law Reporter 43 ELR 10893.

Richardson, W.J., and B. Würsig. 1997. Influences of man‐made noise and other human actions on cetacean behavior. Marine Freshwater Behavioral Physiology 29:183‐209.

Resources

ArcticCommunications

The Overall Classification of this Briefing is: UNCLASSIFIED

Mr. Ken KucharzakANR-ALCOM/J65

Overview

The Overall Classification of this Briefing is: UNCLASSIFIED 2

• Arctic Landscape• Current Challenges• Prior Research• Base Line Technology/Gaps/Shortfalls• Recommendations

• Reliable communications are fundamental to the future of operations in Arctic Region

• The vast distances, lack ofcommunications architecture

• Harsh weather conditions, highlatitude ionic disturbances, andgeomagnetic storms

Reliable means of communication will enable the U.S. Government, to include DOD and DHS, to meet its responsibilities in the region: defending and protecting U.S. interests, search and rescue, andenvironmental response.

Arctic Landscape


Challenges

• Lack of Line of Sight (LOS) Communications Architecture in the North Polar Region

• Insufficient Beyond LOS Communications Architecture in the Arctic

• Satellite Communications above 65 degrees


Prior Research:Stratospheric Communications Node

Stratospheric Communications Node• Persistent, near-space, communications

platform

• Provides communications/services to warfighters, first responders, disaster relief agencies and other critical users

• Operational altitude: 65K – 100K ft

Payload Equipment Racks

•These components already exist – USAF is flying them now

Environmentally Controlled

Pressure Vessel•A pressure vessel allows us to use COTS

IntegratedGondola

• Same gondola designused by Red Bull Stratos (modified for payload)

StratosphericCommunications Node

•Balloon + Gondolaalready exists and isflight proven


Mobile User Objective Syst(MU

New

Implements full set ofMUOS Capabilities

Legacy Tactical RadiosUpgraded to use MUOS

MUOS terminals with reduced capability

requirements

Data Only Devices

• Navy-acquired narrowband, beyond-line-of-sight Satellite Communications system with Space, Ground, and Waveform architectural components

• Legacy Ultra High Frequency communications enabled via payload(s) on satellite(s)

• Wideband Code Division Multiple Access functionality provided via MUOS payload(s) on satellite(s), Ground system, and Waveform

PRC-155 ARC-210 , ARC-231, etc. TSN, etc. Remote Sensors

Unclassified Terminal

Type-2 Devices


USNORTHCOMArctic Communications Test

Test Objective: Gather empirical and real-world data of terminals and satellite bandwidth to the Alaskan Northern Slope

Primary Location: US Army NationalGuard Armory, Barrow Alaska

HF RX Locations:• Army MARS Facility, Anchorage AK• Alaskan Command, JBER AK

Goal: Provide narrowband, small team satellite communications and wideband satellite communications capabilities for larger operational

elements (e.g. command posts)

Core Test Capabilities• Voice Only: HF, IW, VHF/UHF &

AM/FM• Voice, Video & Chat: MUOS• Voice, Video & Data: Hawkeye

III Lite (1.2m & 2.4m Dishes)• Commercial Ku & Ka bands• Military X Band


Recommendations


• Continued collaboration and partnership withgovernment and private industries is a must

• Before a communications initiative is pursued, evaluate who will use it, to what extent, with the honest realization of what it costs to do business in the Arctic

9

The Overall Classification of this Briefing is: UNCLASSIFIED 9

Questions?

panel 4 – arctic communications - adacadac.uaa.alaska.edu/css/images/pdf/panel 4 presentation -...

Documents