Comments and questions from the audience, noted during the "Satellite Direct Readout Users
Conference for the Americas." This summary is not meant to be complete, and has been edited
and condensed.

Day One - December 9

Re: POES: We are using IR data from NOAA 12, 14, 15, 16,17 AVHRR, and HRPT data stream:
Why are there only 2 official operational satellites? How does this affect the operations of the
other "non-operational" satellites? We would like to have at least 3 operational satellites
providing AVHRR/HRPT data.

Will METOP 1 and 2 be relayed over DOMSAT similar to NOAA KLM series? Will format of
METOP data (AVHRR) HIRS, AMSU be similar to K-L-M? Where can more information
regarding NOAA's plans for METOP data be found? Will METOP be encrypted over Antarctica
(direct broadcast) or elsewhere?

What is the planned overlap between GOES-P and GOES-R ?  (Meteosat and MSG have about 2
years.

Question for Hans Peter (WMO): With the launch of NOAA-M (17), operational NOAA polar
satellites sacrificed the optional 6 hour spacing, for a 2-polar configuration, to an approximately
3 hour, 9 hour spacing, and basically no early morning look.  Recent results (English, UKMO)
report a degradation in weather forecast compared to 6 hours spacing. Why was this done? And
sanctioned by WMO.

Integrated Joint Polar System chart showed communication between NOAA satellite control and
METOP satellite control, but did not show how data is exchanged.. What level of processing
takes place on ground for Meteosat MSG  before being uplinked for rebroadcast to SDUS and
PDUS?

Data from which other geostationary satellite data is relayed via Meteosat.  Can a direct readout
terminal which can receive and display Meteosat, also receive and display this other metsat data
without any hardware or software modifications?

For Jim Dodge re:MODIS. I am interested in this system for the Bahamas.  We will provide
information throughout the Bahamas and Turks and Caicos islands.  What equipment do we need
and what are the costs?  I see that there is a station near or in Florida.

Day two - December 10

Re: NOAA LRIT. EUMETSAT and the JMA offered specifications to user community; will
NOAA do the same? (Reply: NOAA specifications are available on-line and the final version
will be on line in January 2003.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. Where can you get construction details for the LRIT receiver? Reply: The
afternoon (NASA) presentation will discuss the details.)

Re: NOAA LRIT.  Is there sufficient detail on the web site to construct a system? (Reply: That is
the goal for NOAA.)

Re: NOAA LRIT.  Reed Solomon chips are being discontinued, how will that effect the future.
(Reply:  NOAA is looking at other codes, but NOAA also believes that the chips are not totally
going away. Also software implementation can replace the chips.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. Is the LRIT software Windows based? (Reply: Yes.  But it is usable on Unix
as well.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. Will compression techniques by used for the LRIT data? (Reply: Yes, a new
compression technique for compressing images will be part of the software suite.  The
compression ratio will be about 3 to1.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. Will there be more visible and infrared bands available? (Reply: There will be
full disc imagery every 3 hours.  Visible, water vapor, and IR at 4 km resolution.  There will also
possibly be CONUS. There could also be South American imagery if there are strong requests. A
products schedule has not been finalized.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. Are there LRIT transmissions on a spare satellite for testing now ?  (Reply:
No.  But some time in early 2003 there will be tests of LRIT transmissions and a schedule will be
posted on the web.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. Will LRIT software be available to users? (Reply: Software will be available
to the users in C++ language.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. How will the system design be presented to the users? (Reply: Only a high
level design is being presented.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. How is Viturbi decoding done?  (Reply: At the front of the receiver.)

Re: NOAA LRIT. Has the demod cost been included in the $5000 estimated cost? (Reply: Yes.) 
What dose the $5000 include? (Reply: It will include the antenna, software, and demodulator, but
not the PC.)

Re: Argos. What is current bandwidth and future bandwidth? (Reply: 30 khz for Argos1, then 40
khz for Argos2, then going to 80khz.)

Re: Argos. How is the Argos service obtained, and why is it considered a value added process?
(Reply: One can only get into service through a private company, e.g. Service Argos in U.S.)

Day 3 - December 11

Re: ATOVS. How is the determination made of what constitutes the operational satellite
designation when there are a number of satellites in orbit at the same time? (Reply: The
determination is flexible and is associated with the actual function that a satellite is performing
and performance of individual instruments.)

Re: U. Of Wisconsin/CIMSS software. Are the timing errors dependent on the application?
Attitude errors?  (Reply: Attitude errors are not important in geo-location errors, rather it is
dominantly a timing issue.)

Re: Transmission frequncies. Users have been having cell phone interference, is there anything
going to be done to prevent it in  L band? (Reply: NOAA is not aware of any thing being done to
prevent or eliminate the noise.)

Re: NPOESS. If data denial is in effect (e.g. due to war) would it be total or only for selective
instruments?   (Reply: It could be either way.  Instrument by instrument or possibly even
selective channels.  If you have a key, you must develop your own access scenario.)

Re: NPOESS. Which channels will be on the LRD and HRD transmissions?  (Reply: The
interface control documentation is not available yet.  Documentation should be available by late
2003, or in 2004.  Keep looking at the web site (www.ipo.noaa.gov) for available information.)


Day 4 - December 12

Re: GOES-MNOP Image data. There is degradation on the visible GOES 8 imager; ill GOES 12
be any better? (Reply: It should be about the same.)

Re: Future GOES Data Compression. How are you dealing with data between channels, vs. data
between pixels (pixel differences).  (Reply: 3-d data is excluded, and what is lost is mostly noise
and not signal. The data compression techniques should reveal the anomalies.)

Re: Future GOES Data Compression. Are you compressing the interferogram? (Reply: If an
interferometer is used than the data (interferogram) would have to be compressed.  There has
been some testing using interferograms, and there does not seem to be much difference.)

Re: GOES-MNOP.  Are there any plans for using spare assets (e.g. for the Southern hemisphere
or Rapid Scan)? (Reply: NOAA does not expect to have spare assets.  There will only be a 2
satellite constellation.)

Re: GOES-9. What are the plans for using GOES 9 when it is on station in the Western Pacific?
(Reply: Data will be received at Fairbanks, and then distributed from Suitland, Maryland as
usual.)

Re: GOES-R image/sounder. What are the capabilities for varying the resolution, etc.? (Reply: 
Spatial is fixed.  An interferometer offers some possibilities with varying spectral resolution, and 
some consideration for flexible scanning.)

Re: GOES-R DCS service. When will the transition from TDMA DCS to CDMA occur? (Reply:
CDMA will not be enabled prior to GOES-R.)

Re: GOES-R aviation weather. How will the data be delivered to the aircraft pilots. (Reply: It
will use the same data link that the airline telephones use.)

Written comment/question: The Southern Hemisphere is frequently adversely impacted by rapid
scan mode.  Could the spare ground station and surplus GOES (such as goes-8) be operated as a
third satellite with continuous full disk mode?  The U.S. national centers would benefit as well as
south American countries.  The station keeping could be limited to conserve fuel and just let the
inclination exceed the current specs.

Day 5 - December 13

Day 5 was a panel discussion and moderated discussion open to all attendees. Below are a
summary of the remarks made by various representatives during these sessions.

Real time data are most important to users. Mexico would like to have full coverage of sounder
data.

Rapid scan operations are very important to the south American users over their areas of interest.
Again real time data was emphasized as a critical need.

Needs of research community for Mexico, and South America are important. Regarding scanning
further south, would users be willing to give up some East-West coverage? The bottom line is
that there is a need for more extended coverage for the southern hemisphere.

Consideration is being given to distributing raw data vs. derived products in GOES-R era.  What
is the suite of products from GOES-R that could be distributed from NESDIS?   NOAA indicates
there needs to be work done within NESDIS to plan for this; this is still very early in planning.

GOES satellite imagery is used for television in Costa Rica.  Therefor,e would like the imagery
to be widely available for public display, in a timely manner.

Pilots need preflight satellite imagery as well as in-flight imagery.  Pilots generally do not have
the training to interpret satellite imagery, and the weather systems are dynamically changing
quickly making the picture obsolete.  This is a problem to be considered in future distribution
systems (Peru).

South American (Colombia) users are applying models to the satellite data, and are training to
increase their proficiency in using satellite data.

There is going to be a "storm" of data in 15 years; how is NESDIS preparing for this?  South
America (Brasil) wants to provide a service, and analysts need to be able to understand the 
image (data) that they are seeing.  But there is very limited education in radiation physics, since
most meteorological students are trained in dynamics (for weather forecasting).   So the software
developed by NOAA needs to be on level that is applicable to the region that will be using it. 
There needs to be an interaction between countries, and appropriate university/professional staff
interaction with the users.

Mexico wants to utilize with Sounder data. But they are having a difficult time working with the
data.  Is NOAA planning to modify the complex data format?  NOAA replied that the GVAR
format is going to be discarded and replaced with a more convenient one.

Mexico would like some help from NOAA in moving ahead with their Sounding application
development.  NOAA responded that there is an obvious need for closer coordination between
NOAA and the other hemispheric nations. There is not a clear plan on how to do this.

Peru commented that training of analysts of satellite data is best done in the universities.  How
can NOAA help train students at the university in Peru to interpret satellite data.   Often they do
not know how to use the available software. Training for the next generation (GOES-R) is going
to be a significant problem for the Latin American users. NOAA commented that there is an
Internet-based virtual lab that should aid in training and is used to train NOAA meteorologists
scattered across the United States.

Bolivia noted they operate a GOES station in support of aviation.  They are seeking models and
support from outside Bolivia for these applications.  They have had some software problems for
acquiring and processing the data.  He also requested that in the future the meetings provide
materials in Spanish as well as English.