Forum on NOAA's National Spatial Reference System (1994)

Several individuals were asked to prepare written critiques of the document National Geodetic Survey: Its Mission, Vision, and Strategic Goals in advance of the forum. Those asked to contribute were chosen to provide a wide range of disciplinary perspectives. The critiques appear in the order presented, with minor editing for continuity of style. The last presenter, Edward Butt, submitted a paper entitled Railroad Navigational and Control System based on a National Spatial Reference System in lieu of a formal critique. His paper is available from the Committee on Geodesy.

MITRE

NSRS Specifics Good for Aeronautical Use

• Framework of monumented 3D points located in GPS-space

  Accurate to ± 1-2 cm rel each other and Earth's C of G

  NOS funded Federal Base Network (FBN) of 1.3K points

  + Cooperatively funded Base Network (CBN), 15K points

  Expected funding sources for the CBN in aviation?

• Each monumented point to

  Have good satellite visibility

  Be about 25 km (13.5 nm) apart

  A subset to be GPS-reference stations

  Significance of on-line access to ref stations to aviation?

• More accurate geoid to represent the Earth's MSL surface

  Zero reference for GPS-measured elevations and altitudes

  Expected future role for barometric altimetry in aviation?

Proposed Change to NSRS Poses No Major Administrative Challenges

• Distributing Navigational Reference Updates

  World uses ICAO's AIRAC System to synch updates

  (AIRAC = Aeronautical Information Regulation and Control)

  Updates distributed every 28 days, 13 times a year

  Updates to be posted to all users with = 42 days leadtime

• Geodetic Datum Changeover experienced recently

  Prior to 15 Oct 92, NAD-27 was FAA's Reference Datum

  Then NAD-83 (same as GPS's WGS-84) replaced NAD-27

  No show-stopping problems emerged from that

  Changeover date/specifics advertised with = 1 year lead

Some Questions

• NAD-83 and NAVD-88 to be compatible with the FBN/CBN grid

  Aviation community now relies on NAD-83 and NGVD-29

  NGVD-29 defines height relative to local vertical and MSL

  Implications of NAVD-88, FBN/CBN grid, new geoid to av?

• NOAA's Digitized Chart Data Bases and On-line Access

  What is the assumed relationship to FAA programs?; e.g.,

  Operational Data Management System (ODMS?)

  Obstruction Evaluation #038; Airport/Airspace Analysis

  Airways, Routes, Approach #038; Departure proc design

• Surveying #038; Recording Facts vs. Arbitrating Planned Change

  FAR Part 77: power to control navigation hazards limited

  FAA often is slow to learn of the existence of a hazard

  Is this a problem along coastlines and in waterways?

  Can NOAA #038; FAA work more effectively in this regard?

John A. Thorpe

Analytical Surveys, Inc.

(critique written by Eric DesRoche, Measurement Science Inc.)

Strategic Goal #1

The NGS mandate has always been to maintain the National database and distribute it to the public. We do not understand what there is to gain by changing the name from NGRS to NSRS.

The NGS state advisors, for the most part, are of little value to the geodetic and mapping industry. We believe that many of them are not well educated in the subject and only tend to mislead the land surveying community. In addition, they tend to take a back seat to the State DOT administrators. An example is Wisconsin, where the DOT routinely advises cities and counties on geodetic issues and have outlined their own standards and procedures while ignoring NGS. As a result, control projects are being undertaken and are not blue-booked.

Strategic Goal #2

The FGCS Standards and Specifications do not keep up with demands of the user community and the changing survey technologies. For example, the current GPS standards were prepared in May, 1988 and reprinted in August, 1989. The control network standards and specifications (H and V) are September, 1984 reprinted May, 1987.

Some examples where this tardiness has affected our companies are the following:

• The use of digital leveling technology in Fairfax County

• The use of Rapid-Static GPS surveying in Montgomery, MD

Strategic Goal #3

This goal is impressive from the scientific standpoint and perhaps required in other areas of research, i.e., tectonic plate motion studies, tide variations etc., but offers little to the user community.

Strategic Goal #4

A tightening of the existing horizontal control network was required to support city, county, and even state-wide mapping and GIS projects. The CBN (order B network) has done this. However, we do not fully support the NGS approach of adjusting these high precision networks on a state-by-state basis. This has caused some problems at state boundaries with changing coordinate values, etc.

Strategic Goal #5

Blue-Booking has always been a fundamental service of NGS. This provides an economical QA/QC on geodetic control projects, provides cities and counties with qualified subcontractors and thus a quality product, and provides a means by which to disseminate the data to the public.

The current time-frame on getting a blue-book project accepted by NGS is far too long.

Strategic Goal #6

Research eventually benefits everyone. However, the problem with NGS and other agencies is that they do not collaborate on their efforts and results. An example is GPS-Assisted photogrammetry where the USGS, NGS and others tend to do their own thing. More collaboration with the private sector would be beneficial, perhaps through the CBD?

Strategic Goal #7

Could this goal not be more easily and economically obtained by involving the private sector much like the USGS NAPP?

Strategic Goal #8

Private Sector involvement?

Strategic Goal #9

With real-time differential corrections being the area of considerable research, I feel that making corrections available 24 hours after the fact will be a dated technology before it is fully operational. Several companies are currently providing corrections via FM sub-carriers.

Strategic Goal #10

Heighting has always been the weakest link with GPS. A more accurate geoidal model would be useful to the mapping and surveying communities.

Strategic Goal #11

One federal agency redefining GPS orbital information should be sufficient to support the user community. At present, do NGS, USGS, DMA, Scripps collaborate on this? For most commercial applications, the broadcast ephemeris is sufficient.

Strategic Goal #12

A nation-wide datum such as NAVD 88 is required. It would be beneficial if all agencies would convert their information to this datum and request that all future surveys also use this datum.

Strategic Goal #13

Improvement in this area has been made with the control data being made available on CD-ROM.

Section 1.5

How does NOAA plan to provide jobs to the private sector?

NOAA has addressed the urgent need to update nautical charts, coastal mapping, densification of control etc. However, the current production rates will not meet their goals.

Section 3.1

What private companies are contracted to NOAA?

How does the private sector apply?

I feel that in order for NOAA to reach its goals and provide the required data to the user community, well qualified companies must be involved. NGS is required to:

• oversee all high precision geodetic work (i.e., blue-booking #038; independent adjustments)

• prepare current Standards and Specifications

• maintaining the national database

• distributing data to the public

• research such as improved geoidal models

• technical advice (but not through uneducated state advisors)

In our opinion, NGS should not be:

• Using federal funds to compete with the private sector.

• Involved with projects outside of the U.S., even if the World Bank or U.S. AID is involved. For example, what is the role of NGS in Romania?

• Undertaking fieldwork that can be performed more economically by private companies.

Engineering Consultant

• Cadastral surveys "…relating to land boundaries and subdivisions, made to create units suitable for transfer or to define the limitations of title."

• Control surveys in support of design professions and construction industry

• Data collection surveys in support of design professions and construction industry

• Data collection surveys in support of title transfer industry

• Control surveys for mapping

• Data collection surveys for mapping

• Post-construction surveys to memorialize position of features

• Surveys performed by the local surveyor ordinarily relate to local control systems rather than geographic coordinates. However, in some jurisdictions surveyors are required by law to reference their surveys to geodetic coordinate systems.

• Location and extent of land parcels are evidenced by monumentation recognized as reflecting original intent. The law ordinarily recognizes monumentation of lines and corners as controlling over other definition. In some jurisdictions the law may recognize record coordinates as evidence of position but will nearly always hold to local monumentation over geodetic definition.

• As GPS technology expands, both in its development and application by the surveying profession, legal institutions may in the future recognize record coordinates as controlling parcel location.

• Control and data collection surveys for design professionals and the construction and title transfer industries are ordinarily performed with reference to local vertical datums and horizontal control systems in order to relate to local infrastructure. Geodetic positioning is applied for construction projects involving long lines, such as highways.

• Post-construction surveys are ordinarily referenced to the same systems as pre-construction surveys.

• In some jurisdictions surveyor access to a qualified geodetic reference system is required by law, therefore accessibility of the National Geodetic Reference System is a necessity.

• Access to the National Geodetic Reference System will be vital to the local surveyor in cadastral work when legal institutions recognize geodetic position as controlling parcel definition.

• Access to the National Geodetic Reference System is necessary for the surveyor performing control surveys requiring geodetic positioning.

• The application of GPS currently being used by the local surveyor in cadastral surveys is usually for measuring rather than for positioning. Line distances and vectors can be determined by differential application. The positioning application is more apt to be utilized by the surveyor primarily for mapping and control, and for this application access to the National Geodetic Reference System is vital.

• Control network of monumented stations at 1 × 1 spacing will be of little value to local surveyors in cadastral applications, and of limited value in other forms of surveying for surveyors using conventional surveying techniques. Surveyors equipped with GPS equipment may access such a network for major projects requiring geodetic positioning but for community-based operations this spacing is too great to be economical for the local surveyor.

• Surveyors equipped with single frequency GPS equipment may find that Federal Base Network spacing produces insufficient accuracies.

• FGCS standards for static positioning must be followed to produce acceptable results, but users and suppliers of GPS equipment are developing new procedures such as "rapid static" and "real time kinematic" for which FGCS standards have not been established.

These observations are made from the perspective of the "local surveyor." The local surveyor is typically a practitioner with a scope of operations within his

community and within a ring of communities two deep encircling his or her own location. Constraints on the local surveyor determining techniques and procedures to be applied in any survey include:

• Minimum standards established by regulation and common practice

• Client requirements

• Client budgets

• Competitive pressures

These constraints discourage surveyors from adventuring into innovative applications of technology for the sake of future efficiencies. The practice of surveying on the local level is an exercise in pragmatic decision-making. On the other hand surveyors in some jurisdictions are already taking steps to expand monumented networks. In Michigan the state survey remonumentation program is providing for 80 monumented positions in addition to 40 stations being established by the National Geodetic Survey.

A broader perspective of the issue derives a more compelling conclusion. Area mapping, resource inventory, multi-states infrastructure construction and management, geographic information systems, and other activities in which geodetic surveying is to be a central component will make intense use of the Federal Base Network. Cooperative Base Networks and User Densification Networks will become a logical extension of the FBN. Eventually even the local surveyor will make use of these networks, especially when purchasers of surveying services and the legal institutions that make the final determination of parcel location finally demand positioning information with more than a local reference.

California Department of Transportation

We applaud NGS for its exhaustive efforts to develop a strategic plan for fulfilling current and future spatial referencing needs, and for soliciting reviews from geodetic data users.

• The evaluation of NGS's existing goals and development of a strategic plan for the 21st century is essential and timely given (a) today's limited federal resources, (b) the tremendous advances in positioning technology created by GPS, (c) the expanding use of spatial data, especially for nonsurveying purposes, (d) the spatial referencing needs of today 's information and management systems such as GIS, and (e) the opportunities to improve commerce through modern positioning and referencing technologies.

• An in-depth review of NGS's strategic plan by geodetic data users is necessary to ensure the plan meets the needs of the users and also to foster acceptance and use of the proposed, new national spatial referencing system (NSRS).

• Is the NSRS compatible with systems currently used? In general, the proposed NSRS is compatible with geodetic control currently used by local surveyors (NGS's historical control networks or control based on these networks). However, there will be differences which will require education for the local surveyor. For example: The coordinates of stations directly referenced to the state High Accuracy Reference Network will not be exactly consistent with those that were not directly referenced. This will limit the available control for some surveys. Also, procedures for dating coordinate values should be implemented to clearly identify the basis of the coordinate values shown on survey documents.

• Does the plan meet the needs of the community? For horizontal control, the proposed NSRS does meet the local needs, providing viable partnerships are developed between NGS and state, local agency, and private surveying organizations to implement the NSRS in a timely manner. For vertical control, the same comments apply, with the additional stipulation that GPS-derived orthometric heights become feasible in the near future; otherwise, local vertical control needs may not be fulfilled (this might be an issue only in regions where the implementation of NAVD88 is sparse).

• What are the three key goals? Goals Nos. 4, 9, 10, and 12 are key goals. Are other goals necessary? Additional goals are suggested below.

• Does the local community need a link to NGS for implementing the NSRS; and if yes, what form? There is a definite need for a link between the local users and NGS. The successful implementation of the NSRS depends on effective local efforts by NGS to foster NSRS support, develop cooperative projects, and provide education. This can best be accomplished by enhancing the NGS State Geodetic Advisor Program.

General:

• The direction established for NGS by the draft strategic plan is timely and correct. A national spatial reference system with appropriate federal support and maintenance is the only practical means to fulfill the expanding and critically required spatial referencing needs of the 21st century.

• In some cases, the goals are broad general statements with meritorious (lofty) objectives, but without time frames. To be meaningful, the goals should be measurable; i.e., specific accomplishments within a specified time period.

• Currently, some important geodetic control needs are not being met; future needs are in jeopardy. Time is of the essence. Urgent needs are (a) standards and specifications for high-production GPS surveys (fast static, etc.), (b) full implementation of NAVD88 in California and other regions lacking sufficient NAVD88 control, (c) standards and specifications for

continuously operating GPS reference stations, (d) policies and procedures for crustal motion regions (vertical and horizontal), and (e) standards and specifications for GPS surveys for determining heights.

Vision: The "Vision" statement is somewhat technical and detailed; some items might be more appropriate in a specific research/development goal (Goal 6). The inclusion of broad national benefits - improving commerce (transportation, etc.), aiding resource management, enhancing environment protection activities, facilitating the national spatial data infrastructure, etc. - would make the vision statement more meaningful to those who are unfamiliar with the ultimate benefits of NGS's activities and a NSRS.

Goal 1: A more definitive approach to this goal is suggested; e.g., "NGS will transition to a new national spatial reference system over the next ?? years by archiving portions of the existing NGRS and creating a new NSRS consisting of… ." Specifics should be added to make this goal meaningful; e.g., define the NSRS; add time frames; explain disposition of existing NGRS data; emphasize the role of State Geodetic Advisors, etc.

Goal 2: An important activity of NGS, as the nation's geodetic survey "leader", is to develop geodetic survey standards and specifications for general use. This crucial responsibility should be emphasized as a separate goal.

• It is suggested that these goals be combined to describe, in total, the proposed NSRS (use of a table might clarify the various networks within the NSRS).

• NGS is commended for including the crustal motion values. This is important for high-accuracy surveys in California and other states with crustal motions.

• A single set of stations (one network) for both horizontal and vertical control is consistent with emerging GPS technology, provided GPS-derived orthometric heights become feasible soon. Otherwise, additional vertical control may be required in regions without adequate NAVD88 control.

• Time frames should be added to Goals 3 and 4.

• The accuracy standards and station spacings are acceptable, except as noted below for the Cooperative Base Network (CBN).

• The CBN is the "key" to the successful implementation, acceptance, and use of a new NSRS. Suggested modifications to this goal statement are as follows:

  • Delete statement: "Many of these stations … ." The CBN must serve all users; an emphasis on one use might be misleading. Also, airports are difficult to access.

  • A fixed 15' × 15' spacing will not fulfill all needs effectively. A variable spacing guideline would be more appropriate; e.g., 50 km -sparsely populated, 25 km - rural, 10-15 km - urban. The total number of stations need not change significantly.

  • A statement should be included that the CBN will be designed (station spacing, location, etc.) in cooperation with professional surveyor organizations and state and local agencies and within each state. This coordination should be a responsibility of the State Geodetic Advisor.

  • It is requested that an accuracy standard of B-order, class II (1:500,000) be established and be acceptable for the CBN.

• If conventional leveling procedures are used, considerable resources will be required to establish the orthometric heights for Goals 3 and 4, especially in regions where implementation of NAVD88 is weak. Given the current availability of internal NGS resources, it is unlikely that these heights will be established in a reasonable time period. Thus, alternative and interim solutions should be developed and described to enable the timely implementation of these networks; e.g., consider establishing high-accuracy interim GPS-derived orthometric heights through refined techniques and/or consider performing the required leveling through contracts with private surveying consultants. (If adopted, Goals 3 and 4 would have a relationship with Goal 12).

Goal 6: Priority research activities should be listed and described with appropriate target dates for completion.

Goals 7 and 8: A concern of the general professional surveyor is that these essential activities will consume NGS resources at the expense of establishing and maintaining the NSRS and other geodetic positioning and referencing activities.

Goal 9: Concur; but add time frames. A specific goal statement to provide real-time capabilities from the CORS sites should be considered.

Goals 10: Concur. This goal should be a high priority. The successful implementation, acceptance, and use of the new NSRS for vertical control will depend, to a large extent, on achieving Goal 10. When achieved, the orthometric height accuracy standard for the CBN could be increased to second-order, class II.

Goals 11, 12, and 13: Concur; but add time frames where feasible.

Goals 14 and 15: For the most part, these goals are "a means to the end" and have less direct importance to the user. It is suggested that they be combined and shortened; specific time frames should be included where feasible. Institution of "customer oriented" management philosophy is heartily endorsed.

The following priority issues are suggested for your consideration as added strategic goals or increased emphasis in the existing goals.

Leadership: NGS should consistently and aggressively act to maintain its position as the geodetic survey "leader" for the nation. Others now have the ability to perform activities that historically were unique to NGS. Although the assistance of others should be actively pursued, NGS must retain the leadership to ensure the continued permanency and consistency of geodetic survey data.

Also, Washington is far removed from most users; methods to reduce this perceived distance should be developed and implemented, including strengthening the State Geodetic Advisor Program (see below).

Standards/Specifications: A priority responsibility of NGS should be to establish, in a timely manner, standards and specifications for geodetic surveys. The current FGCS process requires excessive development time and fails to keep current with

technology. A new process should be developed to ensure the nation 's geodetic surveys are conducted in accordance with consistent and appropriate standards.

Reengineer NGS Processes: NGS should review their processes and reengineer (not simply automate) those processes that require updating. Reengineering objectives should include (a) improved time frames for completing efforts and providing services, (b) simplified submittal procedures for geodetic surveys, station recovery information, etc., and (c) modern, accessible data distribution systems (included in Goal 13).

Partnerships: As noted above, others can now perform NGS-related activities. NGS should aggressively pursue the establishment of partnerships with others to augment and enhance the NGS efforts. Potential partnerships include federal, state and local agencies, universities, and the private sector. Partnership as used here includes contracting out appropriate work efforts.

NGS State Geodetic Advisor Program: For over 100 years, surveyors and others have relied almost totally on NGS for geodetic control. The draft strategic plan makes a significant shift of responsibilities from the federal to the state and local levels. An extensive effort of promotion, coordination, and assistance will be required to successfully achieve this shift. To aid this effort, the existing State Geodetic Advisor Program should be strengthened. Suggestions are:

• Regionalize the advisor program so every state has an advisor.

• Eliminate the cost-sharing aspect of the program, with NGS assuming all costs associated with the program. NGS will then have more freedom to specify the activities performed by the advisors. Also, this facilitates the goal that every state has an advisor.

• Reevaluate the activities performed by the state advisors and make them consistent from region to region. Preferred activities are higher-level tasks such as promotion, development and coordination of projects, and education; not routine tasks such as mark maintenance, data distribution, etc.

The University of Calgary

1. INTELLIGENT - SYSTEMS REVOLUTION

   • Smart Offices, Smart Homes and Smart Factories - Smart Vehicles

   • RTI - Road Transportation Informatics

   • IVHS - Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems

   • AVLN - Automatic Vehicle Location and Navigation

2. IVHS NAVIGATION PROBLEM

   • OECD, Paris 1988: Billions of dollars lost annually due to the lack of navigation-related information for drivers

   • President of IVHS America ISATA '91 Meeting, Florence, Italy: Two billion vehicle hours of delay per year in the USA

   • VNIS '91 Meeting, Dearborn, Michigan: Annual loss of 30 billion dollars in the U.S.

   • This figure will increase by 500% by the year 2005 if no corrective measure is taken

   • Canadian and U.S. Strategy: Make inroads immediately

   • Technology and know-how available

3. CATEGORIES OF INTELLIGENT VEHICLE NAVIGATION SYSTEMS

   • Autonomous - 29 systems

   • Advisory - 26 systems

   • Fleet Management - 68 systems

   • Inventory - 14 systems

   • Portable - 10 systems

   • TOTAL - 147*

4. IVHS NAVIGATION BENEFITS

   • Customers: -Accurate estimate of arrival times

   • Dispatchers -Continuous knowledge of vehicle proximity to call

     -Accurate ETA

   • Drivers -On-line route guidance and advice

     -Increased driver security and safety

   • Managers -Optimal allocation of people and resources

     -Total Quality Control Management (TQCM)

5. NOAA's DEFINITION OF USERS NEEDS

   "The United States depends on a high-accuracy, national coordinate system for a wide array of vital environmental, commercial, defence, and civilian governmental activities. The NSRS is the Nation's positional framework to serve the rapidly evolving needs of surveyors and navigators, while accommodating the Earth dynamics. The demands for higher accuracy and the proliferation of Global Positioning System (GPS) for positioning and navigation now require a transition to the new NSRS."

6. PROBLEM DEFINITION - NOAA

   "Mapping, charting, and navigational systems for sea, air, and land require a seamless network and the new generation of digital systems now coming on line are making the current "localized" reference networks obsolete. Unless a high accuracy spatial data reference system is established, Federal, state and local governments and the private sector will spend tens of billions of dollars in developing uncoordinated, incompatible local data bases."

7. POSITIONING MARKET SIZE (DGPS)

   • 20 billion over next decade

8. NUMBER OF US TRUCKS

   Trucks in U.S. Total	('000s) Local	Short-Range	Long-Range	Off Road	Not Reported
   44,572.2	33,684.8	6,612.0	1,997.3	1,933.7	344.4

9. HOW MANY IVHS USERS WILL THERE BE?

   • Millions of mobile users instead of the former figure of thousands of static users.

10. VEHICLE POSITIONING - NAVIGATION USER REQUIREMENTS

    • Positional accuracy ranges from about 1m for inventory systems, to 10m for navigating to an address, and to 10's m for fleet management position

      - reporting applications.

11. FORCES ACTING ON NOAA's NSRS

    • User community changing from

      - Suppliers to consumers

      - A few 10's of thousand to millions.

    • Convergence of digitally based technologies

      - Voice, images, and data with telecommunications, electronics and computing

    • Satellite related technologies

      - Navigation (GPS, GLONASS, RDSS).

      - Telecommunications (Geostationary, LEO)

    • Computing power and storage

      - Microchip technology

      - CD-ROM, CD-I.

2. CONVERGENCE OF POSITIONING AND LOCATING

   • Combination of positions (coordinates) of the mathematical world with locations (addresses) of the map - real world.

3. MAP BASED FUNCTIONS EMPLOYING POSITIONS

   • Map matching - snapping the vehicle to the road nearest the reported position.

   • Address matching - converting position (coordinates) to location and vice versa.

   • Best route calculation - determining an optimum route through a road network.

   • Route guidance - guiding the driver to the selected destination along the computed best route by means of kinematic positioning.

4. POSITIONS AND LOCATIONS - FUTURE TRENDS

   • As navigable digital road maps become available, navigation systems that offer path finding will flourish and hence drive down the cost of the maps.

   • Manufacturers of navigation systems will provide support for maps from multiple map suppliers, opening up new markets for their systems.

   • Portable navigation systems should soon offer path finding and digital yellow pages to complement the portable electronic business card directories and daily planners that are now common.

5. CYCLES OF INNOVATION - PROVEN TECHNOLOGIES

   • We have passed by three peaks of the industrial revolution.

   • Presently we are reaching the first peak of the information revolution.

   • The number of innovations are at an all time high.

   • It is now possible to build innovative and intelligent navigation systems.

6. COMPUTING IN THE FUTURE - PDA

   • Portable - Personal Data Assistant.

   • Communication Medium - Telephone, pager, clock, alarm, electronic mail.

   • Personal Information Resource - Notepad, address book, diary, calendar, reminders.

   • Reference Source - Newspaper, dictionary, encyclopedia.

   • Personal Navigation Resource - Maps, positioning, traffic conditions, route planner, route related information system, route guidance.

7. THE ELEMENTS OF THE NSRS INCLUDE

   • Federal Base Network*

   • Cooperative Base Network*

   • User Densification Network*

   • National Earth Orientation Service

   • Continuously Operating Reference Stations*

   • Precise GPS Orbits

   • Geoid Models

   • International Terrestrial Reference Frame

18. REVIEW OF DRAFT PLAN

    • Is the NSRS compatible with systems currently used in your community?

      • Yes and no. GPS is referred to a geocentric reference frame while maps are often referred to non-geocentric datums. Confusion exists in the IVHS community over these differences and inconsistences.

    • Does the plan meet the current and future needs of your community? Why/why not?

      • Yes. If fully implemented, it would assist the IVHS community to fully realize their mobile positioning and locating objectives.

• What are the three key goals in the strategic plan for your community? Are there other goals that should incorporated in the plan?

  • Strategic goals 1,2,3,4,5,9,13,14, and 15 are important to the IVHS community.

  • The three most important strategic goals are as follows: #5 - User Densification Network; #/9 - Continuously Operating Reference Stations for DGPS; and #13 - Data Access.

  • An additional goal of reconciling the GPS geocentric positioning world with the location world of addresses is needed; especially within the context of coordinate tagging and addressing of information in the digital yellow pages, traffic and other road-related information.

• Does your community need a link to the NGS for assistance in implementing the NSRS? If so, what form should that link take?

  • Yes. NGS needs to work closely with IVHS America and its members in ensuring that positioning and mapping standards are adhered to for the various spatially-related information used in IVHS.

Chevron Petroleum Technology Company

• The NOAA/NGS plan as proposed is more than adequate to meet existing and anticipated future needs through year 2005.

• In fact, the existing NAD 83 and NAVD 88 datums are satisfactory for oil industry positioning needs.

• It is difficult to imagine or believe that all the proposed goals will be adequately funded. I was disappointed that monetary budget estimates were not included in the plan.

• I encourage NOAA/NGS to prioritize the goals of this plan and include $ estimates subsequent to this forum.

My personal preferences on factors to use in prioritizing the plan are (in order of importance):

• Air safety

• Safety at sea

• Environmental concerns

• Other positioning needs of government and industry

• Positioning needs of scientific community

My order of importance of proposed strategic goals:

SG 8 — Airport Surveying and Mapping

SG 7 — Mapping the Coastal Zone

SG 12 — NAVD 88 Implementation

SG 10 — GPS Leveling

SG 13 — Data Access

SG 11 — GPS Orbits

SG 9 — CORS

SG 6 — Geodetic Research

SG 2 — Coordination of Federal Geodetic Activities

SG 1 — Transition to NSRS

SG 3 — Federal Base Network

SG 4 — Cooperative Base Network

SG 5 — User Densification Network

American President Lines

(critique written and presented by Carl Seiberlich)

1. Is the NSRS compatible with systems currently used in your community?

   • Yes

2. Does the plan meet the current and future needs of your community? Why/why not?

   • Yes, but careful management of the transition must be made.

3. What are the three key goals in the strategic plan for your community? Are there any other goals that should be incorporated in the plan?

   • By far goal 1, the transition to NSRS is of greatest importance. Goals 7, 9, 10, 11 and 13 are important to the marine community.

4. Does your community need a link to the NGS for assistance in implementing the NSRS? If so, what form should that link take?

   • This appears to be covered in current goals.

1. Continued availability of charts and nautical publications

2. Electronic Chart Systems

   1. Provision of digital chart data

   2. Development of international standards

3. c. Maintenance of fax weather information and time checks during transition period

4. Major problem in calibration of RDF equipment with shut down of radio beacons in many areas. This situation requires a major review.

5. Development of satellite based cellular telephone systems for reliable, worldwide use.

6. Continued monitoring of GMDSS program.

University of New Brunswick

The following points are made from a broad user perspective with emphasis on a wide interpretation of GIS and spatial data management.

• increasing need to integrate multiple data sets (vertical integration, horizontal integration, and integration of different formats as well as types of data);

  Example: local to national/global level; satellite imagery with conventional map data; local land records system development

• need for real time, static positioning information direct to users Example: cadastral surveys; personal location devices and anti-theft tracking devices

• need for three dimensional and dynamic positioning capabilities Example: DTMs; monitoring systems; vehicle navigation

• need to support development of national spatial data infrastructures Example: NRC report

• increasing use of GPS positioning

• access to data

• incompatibility of data being collected and captured: different datums; different accuracies (conflation programs); different epochs, etc.

• long term reliability and updating systems

• duplication of effort

• responsibility and liability

• audit trails

• Data Access

• Coordination

• Cooperative Base Network

• User Densification

• CORS

• NAVD 88 implementation

• Data Access needs to be given greater emphasis and higher priority; e.g., what mechanisms will be used? How can users be tracked for updates?

• CORS needs to be more specific; how will it deal with real time positioning?

• Coordination of Federal Geodetic Activities: how will compliance to standards be monitored and enforced?

• NAVD 88 Implementation: how will this effect existing data bases? What effect will this have on state and regional systems?

• Transition of NSRS: how does this differ from existing system?

• Cooperative Base Network: who maintains data and who is legally responsible for quality?

• User Densification Network: what incentives are there for participation?

• Mapping the Coastal Zone: why will a federal agency carry the cost? What real needs are there for comprehensive coastal zone mapping? Will it be user driven or mandate driven?

• Airport Surveying and Mapping: will this be user driven or mandate driven?

• need to be user and need driven vs. mandate driven (costs!!!)

• need to emphasize user access

• need to emphasize how coordination can be achieved

• need to be more concerned with liability/responsibility issues

• need to look 10-20 years ahead and perhaps put much more emphasis on GPS, Active Control, and improving user access to data and to updates.

Scripps Institution of Oceanography

Federal Base Network (FBN) #038; Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS)

• It appears to be difficult to discard old concepts:

  Let's face it, monument-only geodetic stations are obsolete

• Let's not take partial measures,

Entire FBN should consist of CORS at the proposed l00-km spacing

• NSRS is fully defined and accessible as follows:

  Precise coordinates and velocities of FBN/CORS are given in International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF) maintained by International Earth Rotation Service (IERS)

  Precise orbits are available in near real-time in cooperation with International GPS Service for Geodynamics (IGS)

  FBN/CORS data are easily accessible through electronic/bulletin board arrangements in near real-time at high sampling rates

  GPS surveys then become “point-positioning” exercises relative to the nearest FBN/CORS stations.

• Cost to install FBN/CORS (1300 stations) if starting from scratch ~$30,000,000

  Cooperative effort is needed with other entities to maximize resources

• Cost to operate FBN/CORS ~$4,000,000/Year

• What about Cooperative Base Network (CBN) of 25,000 monuments?

  Probably not necessary — NOAA should not waste energy #038; resources, except to expand CORS in select areas

• Not now, current performance needs improvement

  e.g., Orbit quality not adequate, tracking sites not providing highest quality data, not enough attention to detail

• Quality, Quality, Quality — how to achieve?

  This comes with motivation

  Motivation comes when well-chosen personnel are given adequate resources — this is not the situation today

  TQM is not enough

  Some advice and interaction from the outside is required — grants program should be established, links with academic and research community enhanced

• Futuristic outlook is very important

There are too many outmoded concepts

Draft Implementation Plan has the correct concepts scattered throughout, but it gets obscured by the “old” ideas

John E. Chance #038; Associates, Inc.

STRATEGIC GOALS 7 & 8

Whereas the NGS should well be the Government researchers and coordinators of Geodetic activities the private sector is well capable of performing coastal mapping as well as Airport surveying and mapping.

• Take the example of the Army Corps of Engineers in developing supervisory and contract administration to facilitate and build a working relationship with private industry to provide the survey product.

• Institute joint developments with private industry to design and build survey systems that will address the needs of the 21st century.

• Realize when field operations are conducted as a business in a competitive climate, efficient and cost effective products result.

• Help set up a survey curriculum that will support the new national spatial reference system.

• Provide National Geodetic Survey personnel to the universities as teachers and advisors for the survey curriculum on a temporary basis.