Minutes of the
Second ESEAS-RI Project Team Meeting
Place:
EARS
Date:
5-6 November 2003
| 
|
Participants:
Hans-Peter Plag (HPP),
NMA,
(Coordinator, Task leader 2.4)
Hanne Heiberg (HH),
NMA,
(Project manager, Task leader 1.3)
Per Knudsen (PK),
KMS,
(WP3 leader)
Richard Bingley (RB),
UNOTT,
(WP2 leader, Task leader 1.1 + 2.8)
Dov Rosen (DR),
IOLR,
(WP4 leader)
Mirko Orlic (MO),
PMF
Igor Strojan (IS),
EARS
Ivica Vilibic (IV),
HHI
Begona Perez Gomez (BPG),
PE,
(Task leader 1.4)
Belen Martin Miguez (BMM),
PE
Eimuntas Parseliunas (EP),
GI
Elizabeth Bradshaw (EB),
NERC-POL
Fabio Raicich (FR),
CNR-ISMAR-TS
Hasan Yildiz (HY),
GCM
Luciana Fenoglio-Marc (LFM),
TUD,
(Task leader 3.2)
Jorge Garate (JG),
ROA
Jose Martin Davila (JMD),
ROA
Juan Jose Martinez-Benjamin (JJMB),
UPC
Maria-Jesus Garcia (MJG),
IEO,
(Task leader 1.2)
Marzenna Sztobryn (MSZ),
IMGW
Mikis Tsimplis (MT),
NERC-SOC,
(Task leader 3.1)
Mira Pasaric (MP),
PMF
Mojca Susnik (MSU),
EARS
Mojca Robic (MR),
EARS
Ole B. Andersen (OBA),
KMS,
(Task leader 3.3)
Palle Bo Nielsen (PBN),
Royal Danish Administration of Navigation and Hydrography
Ryszard Zdunek (RZ),
SRC,
(Task leader 4.4)
Theodoros Kardaras (TK),
HNHS
Waldemar Stepko (WS),
IMGW
Kay Suselj (KS),
EARS
Zlatko Mikulic (ZM),
EARS
Agenda:
1 Welcome
2 Discussion of Agenda
3 Minutes from PT-1
4 Status of Action Items from PT-1 meeting
5 WP1: Status and Results so far
6 WP2: Status and Results so far
7 WP3: Status and Results so far
7.1 Introduction to WP3
7.2 Summary of Task 3.1
7.3 Other activities
7.4 Discussion of results and progress
7.5 Next year - Task 3.2
8 WP4: Status and Results so far
9 Review of the overall project status
10 Annual Report (Nov. 2002 - Oct. 2003)
11 Management Report (May 2003 - Oct. 2003)
12 Discussion of the report to the ESEAS GB
13 List of Action Items
14 AOB
15 Date and time of the next PT meeting
1 Welcome
The meeting was opened by the representative of the hosting
institute, Igor Strojan. The Head of the Monitoring Office,
Dr. Silvo \v{Z}lebir, welcomed all participants and emphasised the importance
of the project for EARS and in general. The Coordinator,
Hans-Peter Plag
,
also welcomed all participants to this first major
milestone of the ESEAS-RI project.
2 Discussion of Agenda
The Agenda was discussed and adpoted as proposed.
3 Minutes from PT-1
The minutes from the first PT meeting were accepted with the following changes
(pointed out by
Dov Rosen
):
Nadia Panardi is coordinator of MFSTEP under FP5, not coordinator of MAMA.
In the minutes it is written that Silvana Vallerga is president of MEDGOOS,
she is also coordinator of MAMA Program for FP5 of EU.
4 Status of Action Items from PT-1 meeting
The coordinator reviewed the list of Action Items
from the first PT meeting:
Action Item
PT-1-1:
Send an e-mail to all ESEAS members to
support the GLOSS proposal through their national
IOC members.
Responsible:
ESEAS Central Bureau,
Deadline:
20 May 2003.
Rational:
For GLOSS, a new status report has been produced, which
also includes a draft proposal for the further implementation
of GLOSS. The PT agreed to closely follow the further fate of the
proposal in order to see whether support can be given.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-1:
DONE.
The GLOSS proposal was distribute to all ESEAS members but
no letter was requested. The proposal was accepted by IOC. Done.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-2:
Hans-Peter Plag
to take contact with the coordinator of EDIOS.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
30 May 2003.
Rational:
The European Directory of the Initial Ocean Observing System
(EDIOS), which is a directory of ongoing operational measurements
relevant to EuroGOOS. Coordinator is Jennifer Weaduin. ESEAS should
establish a cooperation.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-2:
Delayed.
EDIOS has not been contacted so far.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Change of Action Item
PT-1-2:
EDIOS still should be contacted in order to establish a cooperation.
Changed at: PT-2
New Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Action Item
PT-1-3:
Hans-Peter Plag
to contact J. Dow to find out about the ESEAS proposal.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
30 May 2003.
Rational:
Concerning the IGS TIGA project, the issue how IGS TIGA and
ESEAS can cooperate is still not clarified.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-3:
Delayed.
Hans-Peter Plag
has been in contact with IGS and participated in the
TIGA WG meeting at the EGS meeting in Nice. There, IGS promised
to come with a response soon. Tilo Schoene was expected
to come to the second PT meeting but cancled his participation in
the last minute.
Reported at PT-2.
Change of Action Item
PT-1-3:
The issue needs to be clarified soon. Therefore, J. Dow needs
to be contacted again.
Changed at: PT-2
New Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Action Item
PT-1-4:
Hans-Peter Plag
to send an e-mail to ESEAS GB to prepare the meeting
and ask for changes in the membership.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
30 May 2003.
Rational:
This refers to the November 2003 GB meeting.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-4:
Delayed.
Will be taken up at the GB meeting.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-5:
Richard Bingley
to send an e-mail to ESEAS TEC to prepare the meeting
and ask for changes in the membership.
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
30 May 2003.
Rational:
This refers to the TEC meeting planned for November 2003.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-5:
Delayed.
Not done. No TEC meeting was organised. Needs to be
taken up at the GB meeting.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-6:
Richard Bingley
to produce a new version of the requirements and
classification based on a lower number of
applications.
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
15 June 2003.
Rational:
The number of applications proposed by
Richard Bingley
in the last version
of the requirements and classification was rather large.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-6:
Closed.
Action was carried out and number of applications reduced to four
with one split into two.
Reported at PT-2 by
Richard Bingley.
Action Item
PT-1-7:
Lesley J. Rickards
to revise the quality control document
and to distribute it to the task members.
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
15 June 2003.
Rational:
Maria-Jesus Garcia
has produced a QC-Document for the first PT meeting. This
document needs through revision.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-7:
Delayed.
Not done
Reported at PT-2 by
Elizabeth Bradshaw.
Action Item
PT-1-8:
Hans-Peter Plag
and
Hanne Heiberg
to define the structure of the data flow from
Data Centres to user through the Web Page to ask the
Data Centres to start uploading.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
31 May 2003.
Rational:
The final website and the should
place minimum requirements on software, hardware
and procedures at the data centres and users.
This requires a heterogenous system, which most
available systems do not allow for.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-8:
Delayed.
In progress. First data up-loaded.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-9:
Hanne Heiberg
with help from Halfdan Kierulf and others
to establish the CGPS archive at the ESEAS CB server.
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
31 May 2003.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-9:
Closed..
Work done in October 2003.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-10:
Hans-Peter Plag
to send information to Guy Woppelmann/TIGA about the
ESEAS CGPS archive.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
31 May 2003.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-10:
Pending.
Is not needed as long as the issue between TIGA/ESEAS is not clarified.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-11:
Hans-Peter Plag
to send out an inquiry to get input concerning the
contents of the time series files.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
31 May 2003.
Rational:
Concerning AI WP2/WG2-1-11, no
information has been received so far. Therefore, the
contents of the time series file need clarification.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-11:
Delayed.
Some input received but not assessed so far.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-12:
Hanne Heiberg
to send out an inquiry to get the data for the
spectra of at least two (tbd) of the control stations
for combined plots.
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
31 May 2003.
Rational:
The
results obtained so far for the control stations differ very much
between the groups. For the different
spectra produced for the control
stations, a plot combining the spectra should be produced
for comparison. For that, the partners should submit the
data used to produce the plots.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-12:
Delayed.
Some input received but not assessed so far.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-13:
Hans-Peter Plag
to produce combined plots of the
spectra of control stations for comparison.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
15 June 2003.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-13:
Delayed.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
Action Item
PT-1-14:
Per Knudsen
to ask the task leader to take immediate action
to resolve the discrepancies in the spectra of the control
stations computed by different partners in
order to be able to start the sea level data
analysis as soon as possible and meet the first deadline
of June 2003.
Responsible:
Per Knudsen,
Deadline:
Soon.
Rational:
The results concerning the comparison of the
spectra for the control stations (SPECCOM) reveal
serious problems. The comparison shows that some spectra are similar while
others show discrepancies.
This needs to be rectified.
Hans-Peter Plag
suggests in order to do
so, that spectra of theoretical time series should be
computed and compared. However, it was agreed to leave it to the task leader
to decide how to resolve the discrepancies.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-14:
Done.
Reported at PT-2 by
Per Knudsen.
Action Item
PT-1-15:
Richard Bingley
to contact P8 to inform that the experiment is
not suited to determine the altimeter drift but only
a calibration of the bias. For this purpose, a
week of GPS observations would be enough and the
CGPS receiver could be used to the final location
soon after that period has been recorded.
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
31 May 2003.
Rational:
The plans of P8 is to install a
CGPS for satellite calibration on a platform.
It is planned to move the receiver after about two years
to a different site. Moreover, the sampling interval of 10 min.
is not practical for geodetic purposes.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-15:
Done.
Reported at PT-2 by
Richard Bingley.
Action Item
PT-1-16:
Hans-Peter Plag
to invite articles to the newsletter according to the
list established at the meeting.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
30 May 2003.
Status of Action Item
PT-1-16:
Obsolete.
Reported at PT-2 by
Hans-Peter Plag.
5 WP1: Status and Results so far
Richard Bingley
reported on Task 1.1 (see
pdf
or
ppt
). The word
Specification
used in the task
description in DoW was replaced by the word
Requirements
to indicate
that the task is to provide requirements for ESEAS Observing Sites,
which can be used to test sites for their suitability of being a ESEAS
Observing Site (OS).
At PT-1, it was requested to reduce the number of applications for
ESEAS OS from the suggested 9 applications to four or five.
This led to four main applications similar to those defined
by EOSS, with the application for satellite altimetry being split
into two, namely C1 and C2. A preliminary classification of
all ESEAS OS has been carried out.
Richard Bingley
briefly showed the resulting tables for tide gauges, benchmarks,
GPS stations and absolute gravity as well as the resulting
proposal for classification of the sites. All these documents are
available as working documents on the task's status web page.
The following Action Items were agreed:
Action Item
PT-2-1:
Richard Bingley
to prepare a new version of the tables resulting from
ESEAS-RI Task 1.1, which are then frozen as Version 1.0.
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Rational:
The tables keep changing. It is now necessary to freeze them
at the current status and then to update them later based on the info
available at the ESEAS DS.
Action Item
PT-2-2:
Hanne Heiberg
to make all Version 1.0 files resulting from ESEAS-RI Task 1.1 available on the web
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
Hans-Peter Plag
commented that the data on the ESEAS Data Server (DS) has to be
delivered with
all meta information required to create updated classification tables
automatically. Thus, the structure of the master files on the DS
need to account for the information required for the classification.
Maria-Jesus Garcia
briefly presented the quality control document produced under
T1.2 (see
pdf
or
Word doc
). The most recent
draft is available on the task's web page.
The report had been sent to the task participants, though
with little response. The report gives an overview of procedures
to detect errors and to quality assurance. The preferred exchange
formats are given and available software is reviewed. For each value,
a quality flag is suggested indicating the status of the
value (e.g. ok, suspicious, erroneous, interpolated).
The criteria for different error conditions were discussed.
There were no comments concerning date and time checks for sequential
order, spikes, and jumps. Concerning the check of values being within a
predefined
(broad) range,
Hans-Peter Plag
pointed out that this criterium was criticised
at the GLOSS Group of Expert Meeting 8 (GE8) in Paris as being
problematic. A broad range makes only sense if it is not too
broad, but then there is always the danger that there may be
a new event associated with sea levels exceeding this range.
Concerning time errors, where
Maria-Jesus Garcia
stated that it is not clear how these
should be corrected,
Hans-Peter Plag
pointed out that these errors should
no longer be accepted. With relatively cheap clocks based on
GPS, time errors larger than a second can be avoided. However,
time errors can be corrected assuming a linear clock
drift between to check points and using this to interpolate
values at the desired sampling time.
Dov Rosen
pointed
out that such GPS clocks can be bought for USD 200.
There was considerable discussion concerning the suggested removal
of land movement for test purposes.
Mikis Tsimplis
and
Hans-Peter Plag
pointed out that,
clearly, the tide gauge data provided by ESEAS cannot be corrected
for vertical land movement.
The tide gauge data has to be relative to the benchmark on land. Time series
of vertical land movement will be provided separately. There seems to be
no gain in removing small linear land movements from e.g. post-glacial
rebound models for quality control purposes. The respective part of the
document needs to be removed or rewritten to account for a treatment
of e.g. earth quakes.
At the end, the following AIs were agreed
Action Item
PT-2-3:
Lesley J. Rickards
to provide the revised Quality Control Document to the ESEAS CB.
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-4:
Hanne Heiberg
to make the revised Quality Control Document available on the
Status Web page.
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
For Task 1.3,
Hanne Heiberg
presented briefly the ESEAS-RI web site and
a working page for the ESEAS Data Portal. ESEAS web pages are built in
Python, php and html. Python is
server-side based (unlike Java) and not client site
dependent. A goal is to make the web site as far
as possible independent of the user installation.
Since the Data Portal
is very preliminary and will be changed considerably, the
following AI was agreed:
Action Item
PT-2-5:
Hanne Heiberg
to deactivate the link to the ESEAS Data Portal.
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
20 November 2003.
Rational:
The Data Portal is very preliminary and should therefore not
publically available. If necessary, it can be made available under the
status page of Task 1.3
Concerning the Website Map,
Dov Rosen
suggested to include information on
the date of last changes for each link. It may also be considered to use
icons/colour if a given link changed within the last months. The resulting
AI is:
Action Item
PT-2-6:
Hanne Heiberg
to include task titles on the respective ESEAS-RI
web pages and
for each link on the
ESEAS and ESEAS-RI website maps.
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
30 December 2003.
Rational:
Inclusion of date of last change, and possibly an icon for links
change within the last months will make it easier for an user
to locate pages that are worthwhile to look at.
Currently, the ESEAS DS can be accessed via ssh (secure shell),
ftp and scp (secure copy) only. ssh and scp encrypt the username and
password. Access via telnet was requested for those having ssh not available.
Action Item
PT-2-37:
To contact the administrators of the server ftp.gdiv.statkart.no and ask
if they will allow login by telnet.
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
10 November 2003.
Hans-Peter Plag
presented the status of the ESEAS DS and Data Portal (DP)
(see
pdf
).
The concept and implementation of the Data Server and Data Portal is based on
six principles. The structure on the Data Server is according to ESEAS
Operational
Centres and under these according to ESEAS OSs (EOS). An EOS
is
owned
by the ESEAS Operational Centre (OC)
operating the tide gauge itself. This organisation is responsible
for updating all information on the ESEAS DS. All data on the DS
are owned by the
respective owner of the EOS or the ESEAS Analysis Centres (AC) creating
the data.
Meta information and site documentation are contained in so-called
master files, which are currently developed as plain ASCII files.
Later, the master files can be transferred to XML or placed into a database.
The contents of the master files is described in a ESEAS DP definition
document, which is planned to be available before the end of November.
Currently, PE is providing data in order to test the programs and
to fully develop the master files. All Operational Centres are urged to come
with comments and input.
In the discussion, it was asked how a single tide gauge is treated if
data comes from several different organisations having operated the tide gauge.
Also in these cases, the EOS is owned by the organisation currently
operating the tide gauge and this organisation should make available
all information, including older data.
Elizabeth Bradshaw
presented
the status of Task 1.4, where a
questionnaire has been sent out requesting information about stations, the
available analog and digital data, the
lengths of records etc. The collected information is
available as a data catalog, which will be made available on the
ESEAS web page.
Action Item
PT-2-7:
Lesley J. Rickards
to make available the Catalog of paper-based tide gauge records
compiled in Task 1.4.
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Rational:
The catalog is an ESEAS-RI deliverable and needs to be available through the ESEAS web page.
Action Item
PT-2-8:
Hanne Heiberg
to place the Catalog of paper-based tide gauge records
on the ESEAS-RI web page as a deliverable.
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
Ivica Vilibic
presented the work by HHI within taks 1.4.
HHI developed a software package for digitalisation, surveyed the need
for data rescue, and started the quality check of the digitised
data (see
ppt
and
pdf
).
Elizabeth Bradshaw
also commented briefly on Task 1.5. The data rescue has started and is
partly
scheduled for the second project year. Delivery of the data requires that
the ESEAS DS is established.
6 WP2: Status and Results so far
Richard Bingley
presented an overview of the status (see
pdf
or
ppt
) and started by discussing
the EOS of which 27 are co-located with CGPS
while 16 more sites are in preparation of co-location. In total, it
is expected that in the end, there will be approximately
48 observing sites with CGPS.
Up to now, special focus has been on Tasks 2.1 and 2.3.
Hans-Peter Plag
reported on the status of Tasks 2.1 and 2.3, which are led by
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf
(see
pdf
). Version
1.0 of the Deliverable 2.1 (GPS Strategy definition document, see
pdf
) has been sent
out to the Task Group Members. The strategy is based on a separation
of the computation of global parametres (e.g. satellite orbits and clocks)
and local parametres (such as station coordinates and local atmospheric
patametres). Several different programs and analysis strategies are
to be used.
In its present version, the document also contains information on the
implementation of the strategy. Currently, five
ACs are included. However, implementation of the strategy is
expected to evolve in time and this has delayed the finalisation of the
document.
Therefore, the following AI was agreed:
Action Item
PT-2-9:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf
to split up the Version 1.0 strategy document of D2.1, into strategy and implementation.
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Rational:
The strategy is expected not to change much in time while
implementation will evolve over time. Therefore, the two
parts should be separate documents.
The ACs have analysed the GPS data
of the first three months of 2003 for 24 CGPS stations.
Comparison of the results reveal significant differences
in the mean station coordinates as well as the
trends computed for the time series (despite the very large
uncertainties in these rates). The differences may be due to
various ways to align the solutions with ITRF2000. The following
AI was agreed:
Action Item
PT-2-10:
Juan Jose Martinez-Benjamin
, UPC to add the results for their processing using GIPSY/OASIS II with PPP and JPL products to the ESEAS CGPS data a
Responsible:
Juan Jose Martinez-Benjamin,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-11:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf
to make the SINEX files and solution time series files from
all CGPS ACs available in the ESEAS CGPS DS.
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
16 Nov 2003.
Rational:
Making the SINEX files available will allow all Task group members
to compare the results and to find reasons for the differences in the coordinates.
Action Item
PT-2-12:
All members of the Task 2.3 team to look at their own processing
of the extended sample data set and investigate how their results may
be improved, considering the results from the other members of the
task T2.3 team
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
31 Dec 2003.
Rational:
The differences in the solutions are too large to be accepted. One step
is that every Analysis Centre tries to
UNOTT used the Bernese software in precise point positioning (PPP) mode
together with the IGS products for satellite orbits and clocks. The results
are quite different from the other results with large trends over the
three months. The discussion indicated that these differences may be due
to Bernese not being appropriate for PPP, and/or IGS products not being
appropriate for PPP. The following AIs were agreed:
Action Item
PT-2-13:
GCM and SRC to investigate any issues relating to their strategy for reference frame definition.
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-14:
NMA and ROA to re-process the extended sample data set using
GIPSY/OASIS II with PPP and IGS products and add these results to the
ESEAS CGPS data archive
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Rational:
The results produced by UNOTT using Bernese with IGS products in precise
point positioning approach are considerable worse than all other solutions.
It is not clear whether this is due to the IGS products or Bernese ppp or
the combination of the two. Using GIPSY PPP with IGS, which seems to result
in degraded time series, will help to clarify the situation.
Action Item
PT-2-15:
UNOTT to make a conclusion regarding Bernese 4.2 with PPP and IGS products;
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
There was also considerable discussion on how to determine the accuracy
of the daily coordinate estimates.
Hans-Peter Plag
claimed that the differences
in results from different groups using different ways to
transform the results to ITRF indicates the actual uncertainty
with respect to ITRF.
Mikis Tsimplis
commented that comparing trends is propobably not a good way
to discuss the differences between the results from different groups.
Hasan Yildiz
added that the software first should be tested on
certain time series.
Hans-Peter Plag
responded that the trends for all time
series samples were computed with the same program. The absolute values
were not used in the comparison, just significant
differences of trends determined for the different time series
for any given station.
Correlation studies would reveal even larger differences
between the groups.
Richard Bingley
discussed the status of Task 2.2 (see
pdf
or
ppt
). The draft document for the time series
analysis strategy is available since May, describing in particular the
stochastic approach to be applied by several groups. The part describing
the deterministic approach to be applied mainly by NMA is still
missing.
Action Item
PT-2-16:
Hans-Peter Plag
to provide input for the strategy definition document for Task 2.2.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
With respect to Task 2.4,
Hans-Peter Plag
reported that the SBL is currently
computing global grids of atmospheric loading for the last 10 years.
It is also expected that near-real time computations of
the atmospheric loading signal will be operational before the end of the
year.
Richard Bingley
reported on Task 2.6 (see
pdf
or
ppt
).
Trevor F. Baker
has carried out a survey
for ESEAS concerning abs. gravity measurements at tide gauges in Europe.
Observations at more than 40 sites have been offered by the different European
groups. POL itself has carried out measurements at three sites in Europe.
Hasan Yildiz
reported on Task 2.7, which is led by
Coskun Demir
(see
pdf
or
ppt
).
Up to now, work has concentrated on development of forms
and software, which was done on the basis of data from
Antalya.
Two forms have been prepared, namely (1) for
historical and current levelling info, and (2) for
information about the benchmarks. The program is
basically for computation of relative land movements with respect to the
primary tide gauge benchmark.
In conclusion, the OCs are asked
to prepare information about precise levelling data between the
primary TGBM and any other geodetic markers within a few
km of the TG and upload the
input files to the ESEAS DS. Together with NMA, a master file
for levelling will be defined and made available for
update by the OCs.
Action Item
PT-2-17:
Coskun Demir
and
Hans-Peter Plag
to define the master file for the levelling information.
Responsible:
Coskun Demir,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
It was discussed whether levelling data including back and forth measurements should be collected or whether
storing the height differences for the different markers would be sufficient.
It was suggested that height differences are sufficient.
However, it would amke sense to contact other projects such as
ELVN to find out what and how information is collected.
Action Item
PT-2-18:
Coskun Demir
to contact others projects such as the EULVN project to find out which an how levelling information is compiled.
Responsible:
Coskun Demir,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
In a general discussion, the issue of what can be an ESEAS
Observing Site was taken up.
Maria-Jesus Garcia
pointed out that the Canary
Islands are missing from the ESEAS Map and wanted this
location to be included.
Hans-Peter Plag
extended the question and
asked whether all gauges operated by a European Institute
can be an ESEAS site or whether the ESEAS network should
be defined on geographical basis.
Mikis Tsimplis
suggested to
define the network on the basis of oceanographic regions.
It was concluded that this issue needs to be discussed
by the ESEAS GB.
7 WP3: Status and Results so far
Per Knudsen
gave a brief overview of the status in WP3
(see
pdf
or
ppt
).
The work in the first 12 months
concentrated on Task 3.1. The work is based on
monthly means from PSMSL as well as satellite altimetry data.
There has been asucessful workshop at POL. There agreement
was reached on the strategy and methodolgy for the analyses of the
tide gauge data. Each partner involved in Task 3.1 was supposed
to analyse data from a certain European region and a non-European
region. Prior to that, the time series of 10 control stations
was to be analysed in order to compare the methodology.
At the workshop, also the methodology to be used for
altimetry was agreed upon. In order to be consistent with the
tide gauge data, non IB-correction should be used for the
altimetry data.
Mikis Tsimplis
as leader of Task 3.1 gave a brief overview of the
progress the first year
which focused on quality control of the monthly means as
well as the intercomparison of the methods for time series
analysis and the analysis of the interannual sea level variability.
Concerning the result of the quality control, the following
AIs were agreed:
Action Item
PT-2-19:
Mikis Tsimplis
to give feedback concerning data errors of the analysis to PSMSL
Responsible:
Mikis Tsimplis,
Deadline:
30 Dec 2003.
Rational:
The quality control work done in Task 3.1 should be made available
to a larger community. This can be achieved through information made
available to PSMSL.
Action Item
PT-2-20:
Mikis Tsimplis
to provide corrected tide gauge monthly data to ESEAS CB
Responsible:
Mikis Tsimplis,
Deadline:
30 Dec 2003.
The intercomparison of the power spectra computed by the participating
partners for the control stations turned out to be inconsistent for
unclear reasons.
Mikis Tsimplis
asked how important these differences are, and he
considered the issue not so important.
Action Item
PT-2-21:
Mikis Tsimplis
to provide a discussion and potential explanation of
the differences in the spectra calculated by the different partners.
Responsible:
Mikis Tsimplis,
Deadline:
25 Dec 2003.
The current strategy for the analysis is based on
records of monthly means longer than 20 years as well as
all records after 1993 for comparison with satellite altimetry.
A goal is to determine EOF representation of regionally coherent
sea level variability.
Technical problems are due to gaps, where different approaches are
used for interpolation and EOF analyses accounting for gaps.
A preliminary report compiling all available input from the different
partners has been produced. This led to
Action Item
PT-2-22:
Hanne Heiberg
to make the draft report from Task 3.1 available on the
Status web page (under Task 3.1).
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
11 Nov 2003.
In conclusion,
Mikis Tsimplis
stated that the objectives nearly have been achieved.
Currently, the work is being documented.
The remaining tasks include a merging of the version 1.0 datasets and
circulating them for cross checks. In the geographical region studied by
POL, variability with spatial coherence can be seen, which
is most likely related to El Nino.
The next step is to establish the link to satellite altimetry.
Luciana Fenoglio-Marc
reported on initial work related to Task 3.2
(see
pdf
and
ppt
).
The task will use input from T3.1 (e.g. quality controlled monthly
means). The activities are to estimate
spatial and temporal variation, correlations with NAO and ENSO
and interpolation in space of the variability seen at the
tide gauges.
Luciana Fenoglio-Marc
pointed out that tide gauges having large trends cannot be included in the study
(e.g. Ancona).
The work in the task will continue with an EOF analysis of the data,
estimate the accuracy, consider the NAO and ENSO signal
in the sea level and to separate decadal variability from
long-term trends.
There was some discussion how to best utilise the
EOF in order to approach the final goal, i.e. the
emphirical model of the sea level variations in the last century.
Mikis Tsimplis
pointed out that the result of Task 3.1 should be published.
Hans-Peter Plag
emphasised that besides the list of deliverables given in the DoW,
it is expected that the project will result in quite a number
of scientific papers.
Mikis Tsimplis
added that anyone is welcome to take a lead in
writing the paper(s), with
Mikis Tsimplis
being willing to give support.
Action Item
PT-2-23:
Mikis Tsimplis
to draft a paper reporting the results of Task 3.1.
Responsible:
Mikis Tsimplis,
Deadline:
20 Jan 2004.
Ole B. Andersen
reported on Task 3.3 (see
pdf
or
ppt
). A comparison of power spectra
from tide gauges and satellite altimetry shows that
spectra are similar if similar time intervals are chosen.
However, altimetry and tide gauges are not consistent everywhere,
differences are found in particular for complex regions.
Moreover, the power spectrum at a given location/region is time dependent.
Concerning EOFs, it is found that a few
modes describe most of the
variance of the data. In some areas, the first mode
captures a high fraction of the variance.
Problems are caused by the fact that only few tide gauges
have data from 2000 onward. This is due to very slow
delivery of monthly means to PSMSL. It is suggested that ten
years of simultaneous tide gauge and satellite altimetry data
are needed, but only 8 years are currently available.
A better distribution of tide gauges is also expected to
allow more solid conclusions.
The next steps are to extend the time interval with
simultaneous data to 10 years as well as to increase
the number of stations. The preliminary results need to
be studied further and the reliability needs to be checked.
It was pointed out that a comparison of tide gauge data and satellite
altimetry on the basis of monthly means may be misleading since
monthly means computed from Topex/Poseidon are based on three temporal
samples only.
It was also suggested to extend the analysis, which is currently
strongly focused on frequencies only, to consider amplitudes as well.
Hans-Peter Plag
raised the question whether it is possible to build
an empirical model for sea level variability on the basis
of EOFs if these turn out not to be constant in time. It was suggested
to study smaller regions where the EOF might be more stable
in time.
In a general discussion, it was concluded that in some cases, it would
make sense to have an easy way to exchange data or draft documents.
For that, an ESEAS-RI user will be set up for ftp on the eseas server.
Action Item
PT-2-24:
Hanne Heiberg
to set up ESEAS-RI user for ftp-server (ftp.gdiv.statkart.no)
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
15 Nov 2003.
It was strongly recommended to organise the next WP3 meeting in conjunction
with a WP1 meeting. The two meetings were tentatively scheduled for
late January 2004.
Action Item
PT-2-25:
Per Knudsen
to organise WP3 in conjunction with WP1 meeting
Responsible:
Per Knudsen,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
7.1 Introduction to WP3
Already discussed under TOP 7.
7.2 Summary of Task 3.1
Already discussed under TOP 7.
7.3 Other activities
Already discussed under TOP 7.
7.4 Discussion of results and progress
Already discussed under TOP 7.
7.5 Next year - Task 3.2
Already discussed under TOP 7.
8 WP4: Status and Results so far
Dov Rosen
gave a brief introduction to WP4 status
(see
pdf
or
ppt
).
Begona Perez Gomez
reported on Task 4.1. The test site for comparing of
different tide gauge sensors was set up by PE and at this site,
different sensors have been tested for one year. In addition,
results obtained by IEO and POL were used. In total, 9 instruments
with four different types of sensors were tested. The types
used are acoustic, radar, pressure and float sensors.
A preliminary conclusion so far is that radar sensors require
reduced maintainance and that this sensor meets the
accuracy requirements of 1 cm proposed for an ESEAS
Observing Site. However, up to now gauges have only run a few months
in parallel and more time is needed for compare the sensors
particularly concerning the longterm stability.
Begona Perez Gomez
pointed out that POL has just installed their tide gauge at the
test site and therefore, PE wants to continue the Task longer than
originally planned in order to get a good comparison of the
gauges currently running in parallel.
Concerning Task 4.2,
Dov Rosen
reported that 15 tide gauges are to be
upgraded with modern equipment. Originally, the equipment was to be chosen
on the basis of the results of Task 4.1. However, some partners
choose to upgrade their gauges already in the first year and thus
had to select the equipment on the basis of other criteria.
Partner 11 pointed out that there are two tide gauges
not mentioned in the report that are upgraded.
In the frame of Task 4.3, several new CGPS sites will be established
at ESEAS Observing Sites.
With respect to Task 4.4, it was reported that there were 16 GPS campaign
sites, distributed in Spain, Turkey,
Lithuania, Israel, and Poland.
The status of WP4 can be summarised as follows: Task 4.1 will continue
for several months to compare the tide gauge sensors now including a bubbler
gauge. Thus, the final report for Task 4.1 will be delayed a few months. The
upgrading of the tide gauges is
expected to be completed in the second year.
Submission of data from the upgraded gauges will be done in near-real time
to the ESEAS Data Server.
The new CGPS stations are expected to become operational early in
the second year and the sites will deliver data to the ESEAS GPS DS
as well as to regional ACs.
Hans-Peter Plag
pointed out that at the WP4 meeting in Paris, an AI concerning
the selection of new CGPS sites was agreed. This AI was again
emphasised:
Action Item
PT-2-26:
All partners planning to install a new CGPS site to prepare a
brief description of the new site and provide it to WP2 leader for
assessment.
Responsible:
Dov Rosen,
Deadline:
Rational:
New CGPS sites are in most cases choosen by non-experts (tide gauge
operators). In order to avoid unnecessary problems due to unfavourable
site conditions, an assessment by CGPS experts is necessary prior to
the installation of the site.
The AI was extended by the following:
Action Item
PT-2-27:
At proposed new CGPS sites, test GPS measurements have to be
carried out at each potential location for the GPS antenna (preferably
over two consequtive days) and the
data have to be assessed and analysed by the ESEAS GPS ACs.
Responsible:
Dov Rosen,
Deadline:
31 Jan 2004.
Rational:
Experience shows that GPS conditions can vary considerably
over short distances and without actual measurements, it is
extremely difficult to assess GPS conditions thoroughly. In
order to ensure good site quality, test observations with
GPS receivers of geodetic quality are required.
9 Review of the overall project status
Hans-Peter Plag
reviewed the status on the basis of the presentations given
so far (see
pdf
). He pointed out that the project
appears to be in good
shape. Starting up the project was a key task in the first year and
this has been fully achieved. All tasks planned to be active
during the first year have started and carried out considerable work.
The project structure is in place. Major milestones have been
achieved. For most deliverables due in the first year, at least
preliminary versions are available.
However, many deliverables are still in preliminary form.
Hans-Peter Plag
requested more focus on final deliverables. He pointed out
that deliverables can be published with several version with
later additions. It may also be helpful to split
documents in several parts so that parts easily to be
finalised can be published at an earlier date.
Therefore, each WP should consider what can be made final in the near future.
Hans-Peter Plag
also pointed out that communication can be improved. The ESEAS-RI
status web pages can be used more actively to inform about the status
in each task. Therefore, task leaders and also task members
are welcome to send information to the ESEAS CB, which will include
the information on the respective status web page.
Hans-Peter Plag
emphasised the obligation to publish scientific papers and
stated that already now, plans for papers should be made.
Concerning the main points for the second year,
Hans-Peter Plag
emphasised for WP1 the setting up of the ESEAS Data Server and
Data Portal. This work requires input from
all participants in form of data and meta data. For WP2,
the operational implementation of the CGPS processing is a
major step to be achieved. WP3 has to finalise the analysis
of the interannual to multi-decadal sea level variability and
to make initial progress towards the emphirical model. Within
WP4, completion of tide gauge upgrading and installation of the
new CGPS sites has main priority.
In the discussion, it was agreed to plan for two
ESEAS WP meetings. A joint WP1/WP3 meeting was suggested
for end of January 2004, potentially in Darmstadt. Tentative
dates are 28-30 January.
Luciana Fenoglio-Marc
has to check whether this meeting
can be hosted in Darmstadt.
Action Item
PT-2-28:
Luciana Fenoglio-Marc
to check whether the WP1/WP3 meeting can be held on
28-30 January in Darmstadt.
Responsible:
Luciana Fenoglio-Marc,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
A combined WP2/WP4 meeting is tentatively scheduled for early
February 2004 in Madrid.
Action Item
PT-2-29:
Begona Perez Gomez
to check whether the WP2/WP4 meeting can be held on
11-13 February in Madrid.
Responsible:
Begona Perez Gomez,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
The next Project Team meeting was moved to 13-14 May 2004 and will be held in
Copenhagen.
The ESEAS-RI midterm workshop is scheduled for
13-17 September 2004.
Action Item
PT-2-30:
Dov Rosen
to check whether the ESEAS-RI midterm workshop
can be held in the week 13-17 September 2004 in Malta.
Responsible:
Dov Rosen,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Hans-Peter Plag
reviewed the status of the milestones,
and during the discussion the following comments were made
and/or AI defined:
Action Item
PT-2-31:
With respect to M1.7,
Lesley J. Rickards
to provide information
about which data are supposed to be digitized
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
31 Dec 2003.
M2.6 appears to be delayed. However, the time series may exist at POL and should be
included on www.eseas.org.
Action Item
PT-2-32:
With respect to M2.6,
Richard Bingley
to contact POL in order
to get the absolute gravity time series for eseas.org.
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
M3.3 may be hard to reach.
M4.2 is still pending. A report can be given with preliminary recommendation, but
not the final recommendations.
M4.4: some station are still not co-located.
Concerning D3.1,
Mikis Tsimplis
asked whether the data sets for D3.1 should
be made available or whether focus should only be
on the report.
Hans-Peter Plag
responded that several datasets were included in the
list of deliverables and the data sets should be made available.
If errors are found, then they should be reported to
PSMSL.
Mikis Tsimplis
pointed out that PSMSL cannot exclude data, only flag them.
In WP3, suspicious data freely can be excluded. PSMSL is aware of most
of the problems. However,
Hans-Peter Plag
urged to provide PSMSL with a list of excluded data, so that
they can flag any data not already flagged.
D4.1 will be slightly delayed until February 2004
D4.2 is also delayed.
Dov Rosen
suggested that a software package for quality control should be made
available so that it could be used by all partners.
Hans-Peter Plag
stated that the software for quality control and who
performs the control should be discussed at the next WP1 meeting.
Earlier it had been suggested that a package should be available on the
server so that everybody could use it. However, this package would have to
be fully automatic. It was mentioned that Fabio Raicich has done work
to report on quality control routines applied by ESEAS partners. It was
emphasised that the ESEAS members should specify their quality control procedures and give
this information to Douwe Dillingh.
10 Annual Report (Nov. 2002 - Oct. 2003)
Hans-Peter Plag
pointed out that for the report, the EC guidelines from 15 June
have to be followed.
The ESEAS CB will compile the forms with participants information,
and the members must check it and provide changes.
For Section 1,
Hans-Peter Plag
ask for input from the
members.
Section 2 will be written by the coordinator and sent to the
members for comments.
For this section, full references to publications are needed.
These need to be separated into peer-reviewed journals and
other reports. For other reports, the type
(reports, posters, proceesings, etc.) has to be specified.
Conference presentations will be included in additional table in Section 2.
Planned publications need to be specified, too.
Action Item
PT-2-33:
All partners to provide references to presentations and publications
for Section 2 of the Annual Report.
Responsible:
all
Deadline:
20 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-34:
All partners to provide posters and presentations
to the ESEAS CB for inclusion on eseas.org.
Responsible:
all
Deadline:
open.
The publishing policy was discussed.
ESEAS-RI members planning to prepare a publication related
to the work in ESEAS should invite other task members to participate
in the publication. Work in the ESEAS-RI can usually not be considered to be
done by a single person alone, since open discussions take place
in the project meetings. In order to be open, all partners must
be sure that their ideas are not used by others. Plans for
publications should therefore be discussed on task or even
WP level.
Publications must always mention the EU funding and the ESEAS-RI contract
number EVR1-2002-40025.
Potential publications are e.g. the results of the test station (T4.1),
and the results concerning the use of Bernese for ppp (T3.4).
Hans-Peter Plag
writes Section 3 of the report and send it out for review.
There was some discussion about the efficiency of the structure specified in the guidelines,
however, this is what the EC wants.
Concerning the Technical Implementation Plan (TIP), the Commission
does not expect a draft TIP
in the first annual report. In 2004,
Hans-Peter Plag
will
set up a web page and register the participants. After that,
the members are to provide the information in the forms as indicated
in the TIP guidelines.
Sections 5 and 6 apply only for the final report.
Partners who have spent more than planned for the
first year can include this in the cost statement. However, this
will reduce the funds available for the following years. The total
funds cannot be exceeded.
Several partners have spent more on travel due to increased
prices after 11 September 2001.
Hans-Peter Plag
pointed out that using significantly less money than
planned leads to problems as this will reduce the
prepayment for all partners.
Only costs documented by invoices can be charged to the project.
This excludes a number of costs from consumables
(e.g. printer paper, phone calls, etc.).
Formally, partners need to document who worked when on the project.
Action Item
PT-2-35:
Hans-Peter Plag
to inform everybody about the requirements for
documentation of who worked when on the project.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-36:
All ESEAS-RI partners to provide table with planned and spent personmonths
for the last 12 months. More than 20 % deviation from planned personmonths
requires an explanation.
Responsible:
all
Deadline:
13 November 2003.
11 Management Report (May 2003 - Oct. 2003)
This item was covered in the previous one.
12 Discussion of the report to the ESEAS GB
An issue to be discussed and decided by the
ESEAS GB is the question whether to define
the ESEAS on a geographical region (European Waters) or on an
institutional basis (all tide gauges operated by European institutes)
or a mixture.
It was also asked that providing hourly data for all ESEAS Observing sites
should be taken up by the ESEAS GB.
13 List of Action Items
Action Item
PT-2-1:
Richard Bingley
to prepare a new version of the tables resulting from
ESEAS-RI Task 1.1, which are then frozen as Version 1.0.
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Rational:
The tables keep changing. It is now necessary to freeze them
at the current status and then to update them later based on the info
available at the ESEAS DS.
Action Item
PT-2-2:
Hanne Heiberg
to make all Version 1.0 files resulting from ESEAS-RI Task 1.1 available on the web
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
Action Item
PT-2-3:
Lesley J. Rickards
to provide the revised Quality Control Document to the ESEAS CB.
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-4:
Hanne Heiberg
to make the revised Quality Control Document available on the
Status Web page.
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
Action Item
PT-2-5:
Hanne Heiberg
to deactivate the link to the ESEAS Data Portal.
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
20 November 2003.
Rational:
The Data Portal is very preliminary and should therefore not
publically available. If necessary, it can be made available under the
status page of Task 1.3
Action Item
PT-2-6:
Hanne Heiberg
to include task titles on the respective ESEAS-RI
web pages and
for each link on the
ESEAS and ESEAS-RI website maps.
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
30 December 2003.
Rational:
Inclusion of date of last change, and possibly an icon for links
change within the last months will make it easier for an user
to locate pages that are worthwhile to look at.
Action Item
PT-2-7:
Lesley J. Rickards
to make available the Catalog of paper-based tide gauge records
compiled in Task 1.4.
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Rational:
The catalog is an ESEAS-RI deliverable and needs to be available through the ESEAS web page.
Action Item
PT-2-8:
Hanne Heiberg
to place the Catalog of paper-based tide gauge records
on the ESEAS-RI web page as a deliverable.
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
Action Item
PT-2-9:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf
to split up the Version 1.0 strategy document of D2.1, into strategy and implementation.
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Rational:
The strategy is expected not to change much in time while
implementation will evolve over time. Therefore, the two
parts should be separate documents.
Action Item
PT-2-10:
Juan Jose Martinez-Benjamin
, UPC to add the results for their processing using GIPSY/OASIS II with PPP and JPL products to the ESEAS CGPS data a
Responsible:
Juan Jose Martinez-Benjamin,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-11:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf
to make the SINEX files and solution time series files from
all CGPS ACs available in the ESEAS CGPS DS.
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
16 Nov 2003.
Rational:
Making the SINEX files available will allow all Task group members
to compare the results and to find reasons for the differences in the coordinates.
Action Item
PT-2-12:
All members of the Task 2.3 team to look at their own processing
of the extended sample data set and investigate how their results may
be improved, considering the results from the other members of the
task T2.3 team
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
31 Dec 2003.
Rational:
The differences in the solutions are too large to be accepted. One step
is that every Analysis Centre tries to
Action Item
PT-2-13:
GCM and SRC to investigate any issues relating to their strategy for reference frame definition.
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-14:
NMA and ROA to re-process the extended sample data set using
GIPSY/OASIS II with PPP and IGS products and add these results to the
ESEAS CGPS data archive
Responsible:
Halfdan Pascal Kierulf,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Rational:
The results produced by UNOTT using Bernese with IGS products in precise
point positioning approach are considerable worse than all other solutions.
It is not clear whether this is due to the IGS products or Bernese ppp or
the combination of the two. Using GIPSY PPP with IGS, which seems to result
in degraded time series, will help to clarify the situation.
Action Item
PT-2-15:
UNOTT to make a conclusion regarding Bernese 4.2 with PPP and IGS products;
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-16:
Hans-Peter Plag
to provide input for the strategy definition document for Task 2.2.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-17:
Coskun Demir
and
Hans-Peter Plag
to define the master file for the levelling information.
Responsible:
Coskun Demir,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-18:
Coskun Demir
to contact others projects such as the EULVN project to find out which an how levelling information is compiled.
Responsible:
Coskun Demir,
Deadline:
15 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-19:
Mikis Tsimplis
to give feedback concerning data errors of the analysis to PSMSL
Responsible:
Mikis Tsimplis,
Deadline:
30 Dec 2003.
Rational:
The quality control work done in Task 3.1 should be made available
to a larger community. This can be achieved through information made
available to PSMSL.
Action Item
PT-2-20:
Mikis Tsimplis
to provide corrected tide gauge monthly data to ESEAS CB
Responsible:
Mikis Tsimplis,
Deadline:
30 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-21:
Mikis Tsimplis
to provide a discussion and potential explanation of
the differences in the spectra calculated by the different partners.
Responsible:
Mikis Tsimplis,
Deadline:
25 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-22:
Hanne Heiberg
to make the draft report from Task 3.1 available on the
Status web page (under Task 3.1).
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
11 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-23:
Mikis Tsimplis
to draft a paper reporting the results of Task 3.1.
Responsible:
Mikis Tsimplis,
Deadline:
20 Jan 2004.
Action Item
PT-2-24:
Hanne Heiberg
to set up ESEAS-RI user for ftp-server (ftp.gdiv.statkart.no)
Responsible:
Hanne Heiberg,
Deadline:
15 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-25:
Per Knudsen
to organise WP3 in conjunction with WP1 meeting
Responsible:
Per Knudsen,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-26:
All partners planning to install a new CGPS site to prepare a
brief description of the new site and provide it to WP2 leader for
assessment.
Responsible:
Dov Rosen,
Deadline:
Rational:
New CGPS sites are in most cases choosen by non-experts (tide gauge
operators). In order to avoid unnecessary problems due to unfavourable
site conditions, an assessment by CGPS experts is necessary prior to
the installation of the site.
Action Item
PT-2-27:
At proposed new CGPS sites, test GPS measurements have to be
carried out at each potential location for the GPS antenna (preferably
over two consequtive days) and the
data have to be assessed and analysed by the ESEAS GPS ACs.
Responsible:
Dov Rosen,
Deadline:
31 Jan 2004.
Rational:
Experience shows that GPS conditions can vary considerably
over short distances and without actual measurements, it is
extremely difficult to assess GPS conditions thoroughly. In
order to ensure good site quality, test observations with
GPS receivers of geodetic quality are required.
Action Item
PT-2-28:
Luciana Fenoglio-Marc
to check whether the WP1/WP3 meeting can be held on
28-30 January in Darmstadt.
Responsible:
Luciana Fenoglio-Marc,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-29:
Begona Perez Gomez
to check whether the WP2/WP4 meeting can be held on
11-13 February in Madrid.
Responsible:
Begona Perez Gomez,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-30:
Dov Rosen
to check whether the ESEAS-RI midterm workshop
can be held in the week 13-17 September 2004 in Malta.
Responsible:
Dov Rosen,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-31:
With respect to M1.7,
Lesley J. Rickards
to provide information
about which data are supposed to be digitized
Responsible:
Lesley J. Rickards,
Deadline:
31 Dec 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-32:
With respect to M2.6,
Richard Bingley
to contact POL in order
to get the absolute gravity time series for eseas.org.
Responsible:
Richard Bingley,
Deadline:
30 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-33:
All partners to provide references to presentations and publications
for Section 2 of the Annual Report.
Responsible:
all
Deadline:
20 Nov 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-34:
All partners to provide posters and presentations
to the ESEAS CB for inclusion on eseas.org.
Responsible:
all
Deadline:
open.
Action Item
PT-2-35:
Hans-Peter Plag
to inform everybody about the requirements for
documentation of who worked when on the project.
Responsible:
Hans-Peter Plag,
Deadline:
30 November 2003.
Action Item
PT-2-36:
All ESEAS-RI partners to provide table with planned and spent personmonths
for the last 12 months. More than 20 % deviation from planned personmonths
requires an explanation.
Responsible:
all
Deadline:
13 November 2003.
14 AOB
There was a discussion about the ESEAS Newsletter and its contents.
There is a need for an editor since the CB cannot carry out this task.
Eimuntas Parseliunas
advertise for publishing in the Lithuanian Journal, where
a short time from submission to publishing can be an advantage.
15 Date and time of the next PT meeting
The next PT meeting will take place 13-14 May 2004 in Copenhagen.
The minutes were written by
Hans-Peter Plag
and
Hanne Heiberg
.
First Draft was made available 9 December 2003
Last Correction was carried out 6 January 2003.