1. World Meteorological Organization Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO Ship Observations Team~ integrating and coordinating international ship-based observing programmes for JCOMM ~ Report of the Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs SOT-IV 16-21 April 2007, Geneva, Switzerland Sarah North

2. Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs • Tasks Assigned – • Continue to monitor the cost implications of Inmarsat Satellite communications sent by Code 41 • Report to SOT IV on relevant issues/proposals

3. The requirement for ships to carry Inmarsat communications systems is derived from SOLAS/GMDSS requirements Depending upon the sea areas they operate in, Inmarsat is required for all ocean going ships The majority of ship observations are therefore sent by Inmarsat C using SAC 41 Inmarsat communications has proven to be very reliable with approximately 95% of ship observations being received within HH+120 ( based on UK/Goonhilly figures) A list of LES stations accepting SAC 41 messages is maintained on the WMO website at http://www.wmo.ch/web/aom/marprog/Operational-Information/inmarsat-code41-stations.htm Suitable LES for sending Code 41 messages are also detailed in TurboWin SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Special Access Code 41

4. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Special Access Code 41 • Under the SAC 41 procedures the costs for ship observations are borne by the small number of National Met Services that host Inmarsat Land Earth Stations (LES) - The shipowner does not pay. • These NMS bear the costs irrespective of the country that recruited the ship to do weather observations • The problem appears to be of greater concern to European NMS • As the majority of VOS observations (SHIP and TEMP Code) are still sent via Inmarsat this imposes an unreasonable cost burden on those countries that host LES which accept Code 41 observations • There is no clear ownership of the SAC 41 list, or responsibility to maintain it up to date • There have been problems with some LES e.g. Arvi, Eik etc

5. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Special Access Code 41 The cost burden has been amplified in recent years by...… • Closure of some LES and mergers between Inmarsat Suppliers • Relocation of shipowners with large fleets to other countries, and consequent re-routing of observations. • The increase in the number of ASAP TEMP messages being sent via LES • The increasing use of shipborne AWS sending hourly observations

6. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs

7. Note 1: Arvi will accept code 41 reports from within Metarea VIII (N) only.Note 2: Ships previously reporting through Perth (renamed to Station 12) must use SAC 1241 when sending weather reports through POR 312 or IOR 212

8. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Background Various detailed proposals were made by the Task Team at SOT II and SOT III to resolve the cost burden problem at an international level. These included .. • development of a Global Cost Sharing Scheme with costs paid through a central (WMO) Fund • Appointment of an Accounting Authority to oversee the payment of Code 41 transmission costs However these proposals were not successful

9. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Developments since SOT III - E-SURFMAR • Following SOT III it was therefore left for solutions to the VOS cost burden problem to be developed on a regional basis. • Within Europe this has been addressed through the E-SURFMAR programme • Since 2005 the E-SURFMAR Programme has compensated its member countries for their VOS data transmission costs. Member countries contribute to this programme based upon their GNI and are then compensated according to the number of SHIP code reports received via their GTS originating centres. The compensation is therefore mainly directed to those members that host LES i.e. France, Netherlands, Greece and UK

10. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Developments since SOT III - E-SURFMAR • Compensation under the E-SURFMAR programme amounted to 0.182 Euros in 2005 and increased to 0187 Euros in 2006 for each VOS message (compared with the actual cost of approx 1 Euro/observation when using traditional Inmarsat Code 41) • However it must be remembered that a significant percentage (~20%) of the Inmarsat reports paid by E-SURFMAR members emanate from non-E-SURFMAR Ships • In its current 2007-2008 phase it is anticipated that Inmarsat C text reports will be maintained at ~0.187 Euros, with AWS compensated at on third of this level ( 0.062 Euros)

11. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Developments since SOT III - Bilateral Agreements • Whilst the E-SURFMAR compensation agreement goes some way to resolving the problem within Europe, it was recognised that bilateral agreements would also be needed to lessen the burden in some cases. Agreements have been reached - between DWD and the UK Met Office to reimburse the cost of German ship observations sent via Goonhilly. - between DWD KNMI and for the cost of observations sent via Burum/Station 12 following the closure of Raisting LES • Arrangements have also been agreed under the E-ASAP Programme, starting in 2005, for the UK Met Office to be reimbursed for the cost of E-ASAP upper air TEMP messages sent through Goonhilly LES

12. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs E-SURFMAR Technical Developments - Data Compression • To further reduce the Inmarsat cost burden from conventional manned VOS, E-SURFMAR ( under the leadership of Pierre Blouch ) has developed a ‘HALF – COMPRESSED’ system • Messages remain alphanumeric but are contained within two blocks of 32 characters (compared with 5 blocks for a conventional uncompressed VOS message) • Cost reduction is correspondingly reduced to approx 0.4 Euros ( compared to ~1 Euro for a conventional VOS message) • However the system cannot be used with SAC 41 - new SACs are needed. Currently the system is being tested using dedicated SAC 412 via Aussaguel LES. • The new Half Compressed facility has been incorporated into the latest version of TurboWin and approx 6 ships are now using the system satisfactorily • Météo France intend to make the necessary software available to other NMS so that they may also decompress the messages and insert them on the GTS. At present the software is limited to SHIP code, but there are plans to extend it to BUFR code

13. Code 41 Management Payments FM-13 SHIP LES-2 LES-1 VOS-OP-2 NMS-2 LES-3 GTS NMS-1 GTS VOS-OP-1 NMS3 GTS GTS NMS-4 GTS NMS-5 VOS-OP-5 LES-4 - Ships report to several LES - Communications are paid by the NMSs who receive the data and relay them onto the GTS

14. Half Compression Management Payments FM-13 SHIP HC data SAC 414 Inmarsat Provider A VOS-OP-2 SAC 413 NMS-2 GTS NMS-1 GTS VOS-OP-3 NMS3 GTS GTS NMS-4 SAC 412 GTS NMS-5 VOS-OP-4 Inmarsat Provider B - Each ship reports to a single LES (belonging to a service provider) - Communications are paid by the VOS operator of that ship - A few NMSs are processing the raw HC data

15. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs E-SURFMAR Technical Developments - Data Compression • The Half Compressed technique therefore offers the long term potential of becoming a fairer system whereby each NMS is responsible for paying the cost of its own VOS fleet transmissions • To expand its use national VOS operators will need to establish individual arrangements with their Inmarsat LES providers. They will need to establish their own dedicated SACs • As with Code 41 there are no charges incurred by the shipowner • It could be run in parallel with the established Code 41 procedure

16. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs E-SURFMAR Technical Developments - Data Compression • Météo France & E-SURFMAR have also developed compression software to greatly reduce the cost of Inmarsat messages sent from BATOS AWS systems. Savings will allow greater volume of data to be sent with same budget • The system was successfully tested in 2006 the Inmarsat C Data Reporting Service and is now being rolled out to all BATOS systems • Messages are currently sent via Burum or Aussaguel LES and then routed by email to Météo France for decompression and insertion onto the GTS • The cost for one report is now ~0.15 Euros/report ….almost 7 times less than the cost of a standard VOS observation sent via Code 41 • Software will be made available to other NMS that wish to process their own data and to other AWS manufacturers, It will also be extended to BUFR • [Conditional upon being visible to only one Inmarsat satellite ?]

17. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Other Communication Systems A number of other Communication Systems now offer the potential to reduce VOS transmission costs, Including, in particular… • IRIDIUM – being introducedfor use on drifting buoys (to help reduce Argos transmission costs), on moored buoys (to replace analogue Meteosat DCP’s) and on new shipborne AWS ( e.g. BAROS). Has potential for two way email communication. VOS report should cost ~ 0.09 Euro • GLOBALSTAR - being tested for E-ASAP ships to reduce current Inmarsat costs. Already used on Norwegian weather ship Mike. Less than 10% of Inmarsat costs Other factors that are likely to help reduce costs in the coming years include…. • E-MAIL– as ship owners introduce Inmarsat broadband communications for their fleets they may be increasingly and absorb the costs of weather observations by email • SMART transmission – As with new SMART technology being developed for drifting buoys it is possible to adapt shipborne AWS software so that observations are only sent when needed i.e. reduce transmission intervals when weather conditions are sensed to be within certain parameters

18. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs

19. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Developments since SOT III - Closure of Goonhilly LES • In November 2006 the company that operates Goonhilly LES – Stratos – advised that they were closing Goonhilly for Inmarsat C services and re- routing observations via Burum LES in the Netherlands • This was done with no prior notification or testing and resulted in data losses and major delays in the delivery of SHIP and TEMP messages – due to inability to provide telex nodes capable of dealing with the volume of data at synoptic hours • Presented major problems for E-ASAP data and almost all ships had to re route their data via alternative LES (mainly Aussaguel LES)

20. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Developments since SOT III - Closure of Goonhilly LES • A meeting was held with Stratos in February to raise concerns (which also related to issuance of SafetyNet High Seas forecasts and warnings for Metarea 1) • Stratos agreed to investigate the possibility changing the routing of messages by telex (which involves third party companies) to an email system. Hopefully testing will begin in near future • It is understood that Stratos will maintain the Goonhilly ID numbers, so as to appear seamless to the ships. In effect Goonhilly will be a ‘virtual’ LES • The problems caused by the closure of Goonhilly highlight the need to ensure future data continuity. SOT is therefore invited to consider the need to establish emergency ‘back-up’ LES strategies to ensure data is not lost or delayed in the event of future closures or failures

21. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs Developments since SOT III - LES Consolidation • The operation of Inmarsat LES is in the process of major consolidation. Recent mergers have resulted in there being two main operating groups – Stratos and Apax. Also Inmarsat itself recently made a bid to takeover Stratos • In recent years we have seen the closure of Raisting LES in Germany, and now Goonhilly LES in the UK. In addition Perth LES ID 22 recently changed to ID 12 ( i.e. Station 12 – Burum) • As a result there is a decreasing number of LES that accept Code 41 messages • However, it allows more global coverage by fewer operators

22. SOT IV – Task Team on Satellite Communications Costs SOT is invited to consider the Task Teams report and to .. • Recommend the extended use of the ‘Half compressed’ system for conventional manned VOS • Encourage VOS operators to investigate and start migrating their fleets to the use of dedicated SAC systems (in parallel with existing Code 41 procedures) • Recommend that VOS operators and AWS manufacturers consider adapting their AWS systems to use Inmarsat Data Reporting Service • Address the need for emergency back up procedures to ensure that observations are re-routed in the event of LES closures or failures • Assign, if possible, the responsibility for keeping the Code 41 list up to date • Revise the Task Teams Terms of Reference as necessary to include other communication systems • Encourage the increased use of email for sending observations