Mission Operations Review February 8-10, 2010 Cordoba, ARGENTINA SECTION 16.x Aquarius Science Commissioning and Acceptance Draft 2 Prepared by: Gary Lagerloef, Aquarius PI David Le Vine, Aquarius DPI + Science Team Vrsn

2 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review Post-launch in-orbit checkout simulation: During the period from launch to L+25 days, the science team will compute simulated Tb and σ 0 based on the final orbit maneuvers (Science Task 1). –These data will provide “Expected Values” for each beam along-track to compare quantitatively with observations for both the engineering and science acceptance analyses. The science team will carry out an analysis sequence (Science Tasks 2-7) at each stage of the instrument turn-on sequence. Acceptance criteria are limited: –The timeline only allows for one 7-day cycle after the instrument is fully turned on. –Assess whether the data are “as expected” in qualitative terms and the sensor is “calibrate-able”. –Gross geographical and geophysical features are as expected, biases can be removed, stability is reasonable, polarization differences are appropriate, etc. (details below) Science Commissioning Approach

3 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review Engineering Evaluation of the Instrument Complete –All internal checks are complete and nominal –All instrument L3 requirements are met Radiometer Specific Criteria –Radiometer thermal calibration verified (correction for changes in temperature) –Operation is free of gain glitches –Antenna Pointing Verified (scenes and transitions where expected) –Stable behavior (repeatable signals over constant scenes and crossovers) –No detectable interference from Scatterometer or CONAE instruments –Predictable Science Response (consistent with simulations) Land - ocean features evident in radiometer brightness temperature (Tb) both in contrast and location; Relative polarization levels (V compared to H) for each beam are consistent with the emissivity model; Relative levels of Tb among beams is consistent with emissivity model (e.g. V-pol signal increasing and H-pol decreasing with increased incidence angle); The 3 rd Stokes signal consistent with expectation (small signal varying with Faraday rotation); –Reasonable initial “first-look” 7-day salinity map consistent with climatology Scatterometer Specific Criteria –Repeatable behavior –σ 0 sensitivity to wind speed within expectations for each channel. Preliminary Acceptance Criteria

4 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review Aquarius Commissioning Science Tasks

5 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review Science Task 1 Task: Generate simulated data for radiometer (TA) and scatterometer (sigma0); Simulation reflects actual orbit and spacecraft attitude; 7-10 days of data simulated; Prepared 5 days prior to instrument turn-on (for use by engineering team) and updated as necessary. Available to engineering team on location at MOC. Objectives: Engineering: Simulated TA and sigma0 for the engineering team to use during on-orbit check out to judge reasonableness of the actual measured signals; Science: A reference signal for use by science team to begin evaluation of the science quality of the first signals. Representative Roles and Responsibilities: Wentz: Radiometer TA simulations; Yueh: Scatterometer Sigma0 simulations.

6 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review Science Task 2 Task: Examine radiometer data to judge whether or not the radiometer data is reasonable Begins on day 4 after radiometer is completely turned on; Continues through end of commissioning (PLAR); Initially, thermal stability may not be ideal. Objectives: Collect reference data prior to the turn on of other instruments (Scat and CONAE) as baseline to judge interference; Collect data to assess acceptance criteria for PLAR; Representative Roles and Responsibilities: Wentz: Examine TA to asses pointing accuracy; Le Vine: Evaluate T3 and retrieved Faraday rotation; Ruf: Evaluate RFI environment and detection algorithm; Brown: Compare histograms of actual and model TB; Lagerloef: Start processing AVDS matchups.

7 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review Science Tasks Task: Examine scatterometer data during turn on of the instrument Days 5-7 during 3-day turn-on sequence for the scatterometer; Radiometer is on and collecting data. Objectives: Examine radiometer data for evidence of scatterometer interference (engineering team will also be looking at raw data); Examine scatterometer data for reasonable behavior. Representative Roles and Responsibilities Yueh and scatterometer engineering team: Examine loopback power, noise only measurements and echo power; Yueh: Analyze correlation of sigma0 with winds (NCEP). Radiometer team (Wentz, Le Vine, Brown, others): Examine radiometer data before and after scatterometer turn-on for evidence of interference.

8 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review Science Task 6 Task: Examine Aquarius instrument data (scatterometer and radiometer) for nominal behavior Days 8-10 after both instruments are turned on completely; First nominal operation; Objectives: Continue with radiometer science data evaluation begun in Task 2; Begin evaluation of scatterometer data in nominal mode; First look at instrument stability; Comparison of data at reference sites and at cross-over points. Representative Roles and Responsibilities Ruf: Collect data for first look at “vicarious” calibration; Le Vine: Compare Faraday rotation retrieved from T3 with in situ (ground sounders) truth; Wentz: Pointing accuracy and effect of Sun; Yueh: First look at roughness correction for radiometer.

9 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review Science Task 7 Task: Nominal Aquarius instrument operation (radiometer and scatterometer) and CONAE instrument turn on; Day 11 - TBD: Nominal Aquarius operation CONAE instruments start turn on. Science team activities continue from previous tasks. Objectives: Examine radiometer data for evidence of interference from CONAE instruments; Generate first 7-day global map of SSS Continue to collect data to assess acceptance criteria for PLAR. Representative Roles and Responsibilities Science Team: Coordinate data collection with CONAE instrument turn-on to search for evidence of interference; Lagerloef: Generate reference SSS map from Argo data and de-bias Aquarius SSS output; Yueh: Roughness correction and correlation of sigma0 with NCEP and other sources of data on winds.

10 of 7 February 8-10, 2010 Section 01 – Welcome – Agenda – MRB Introduction Mission Operations Review 1 March 2010: Science simulator – CY2007 Level 2 (swath) and Level 3 (gridded map) files released 9-11 March 2010: Aquarius algorithm science team workshop, Santa Rosa, CA 30 March 2010 until Launch: –Operational simulator generates daily files, –Analysis and evaluation by science team 1 April – to – ORR: –Science team develops and tests Aquarius commissioning phase analysis tools. –Use simulators and tools to develop and test case studies, anomalies and rehearsals July 2010: Aquarius/SAC-D Science Team meeting, Seattle ORR: Final commissioning phase plan; analysis tools tested and ready. Implementation Milestones