METOC Metrics for Naval Special Warfare Metrics Data Collection Interface Design Visit to Mission Support Center 14 - 18

1. METOC Metrics for Naval Special Warfare Metrics Data Collection Interface Design Visit to Mission Support Center 14 - 18 May, 2007 Visit Summary Bruce Ford Clear Science, Inc. (CSI) A Research Development, and Transition Project Funded by SPAWAR / PMW180 San Diego, CA 18 May 2007

2. Meeting with LCDR Damon Dixon • LCDR Dixon is LCDR Bill Swick’s replacement • I quickly briefed LCDR Dixon on the project • Showed him parts of Tom’s briefing from the NSW meeting • Showed him parts of the SOCAL Small Boat report brief from NSW meeting • Explained what the aim of the operational modeling component of the project • Introduced him to the project SIPR site for more detail • Showed him who attended the March meeting • Showed him the project POA&M • Ending questions posed by LCDR Dixon • Can the time line be compressed? (Can we hurry up!) • When will we start collecting data? • Can this be applied to operating forces before those in the training pipeline? • Can this be shared with the east coast NSW commands from the beginning? • What can he do for me?

3. Meeting with LCDR Damon Dixon • Where We Left Off • LCDR Dixon will look into the SOF training manual promised by CDR Gallaudet • He is looking forward to seeing initial iteration of the collection interface • He pledges his support to the project • LTJG Thomas returns May 24th and will be our MSC point of contact • LCDR Dixon wants to be included in communications just as LCDR Swick was • LCDR Dixon’s Email • NIPR: damon.dixon@navsoc.socom.mil • SIPR: damon.dixon@navsoc.socom.smil.mil

4. NSW Metrics Collection Interface Mock-up

8. PT. LOMA, CA: METOC IMPACTS = No Impact = Marginal Impact = Significant Impact W = Surface Winds CIG = Ceiling WC = Wind Chill VIS = Visibility (NM) T = Temperature (F) RW = Rain Showers TS = Thunderstorm FG = Fog HZ = Haze DU = Dust UNR = Unrestricted OCNL = Occasional ISO= Isolated SCT = Scattered VC = In the Vicinity

12. Technical Hurdles

13. Automatic Receipt of Observations • Issue is complicated with SIPR system • A solution will serve other metrics projects (Strike, MIW, ASW) • FNMOC or JAAWIN only apparent solutions • Multiple potential solutions • Will need to consult with FNMOC or JAAWIN experts to identify possible solutions • One possible solution:

14. Automatic Receipt of Observations • Issue is complicated with SIPR system • A solution will serve other metrics projects (Strike, MIW, ASW) • FNMOC or JAAWIN only apparent solutions • Multiple potential solutions • Will need to consult with FNMOC or JAAWIN experts to identify possible solutions • One possible solution: Forecast data received that needs verification Metrics Server Production Center (FNMOC or JAAWIN)

15. Automatic Receipt of Observations • Issue is complicated with SIPR system • A solution will serve other metrics projects (Strike, MIW, ASW) • FNMOC or JAAWIN only apparent solutions • Multiple potential solutions • Will need to consult with FNMOC or JAAWIN experts to identify possible solutions • One possible solution: Forecast data received that needs verification Server sends time, lat and lon Metrics Server Production Center (FNMOC or JAAWIN)

16. Automatic Receipt of Observations • Issue is complicated with SIPR system • A solution will serve other metrics projects (Strike, MIW, ASW) • FNMOC or JAAWIN only apparent solutions • Multiple potential solutions • Will need to consult with FNMOC or JAAWIN experts to identify possible solutions • One possible solution: Decides the closest spatial and temporal ob Forecast data received that needs verification Server sends time, lat and lon Metrics Server Production Center (FNMOC or JAAWIN)

17. Automatic Receipt of Observations • Issue is complicated with SIPR system • A solution will serve other metrics projects (Strike, MIW, ASW) • FNMOC or JAAWIN only apparent solutions • Multiple potential solutions • Will need to consult with FNMOC or JAAWIN experts to identify possible solutions • One possible solution: Decides the closest spatial and temporal ob Forecast data received that needs verification Server sends time, lat and lon Metrics Server Production Center (FNMOC or JAAWIN) Pertinent ob returned

18. Location of Alpha and Beta Servers • Alpha NIPR (clear-science.com) • Alpha SIPR location possibilities • NPS • FNMOC – difficulties thus far • NAVO • Beta SIPR location possibilities • FNMOC • NAVO • CNMOC • Questions: • Do we have enough clout to request our own metrics server with our own specifications, with the aim of assembling metrics project onto one server? (This server would function at SIPR Alpha and Beta locations.) • Who would we direct such a request through? • Who purchases the equipment? Maintains it?

19. Database Selection (Postgres vs MySQL) • Postgres was originally chosen for the strike project due to FNMOC preference • Truth is, both have their advantages. Neither are perfect • An objective opinion from DOE: http://www-css.fnal.gov/dsg/external/freeware/pgsql-vs-mysql.html • Google “Postgres vs MySQL” for more opinions • Bruce’s opinion - MySQL • MySQL offers a speed advantages • The additional features that Postgres offers aren’t valuable for the metrics projects • Experience with Postgres in strike project • Postgres seemed very slow • Poor admin tools available for Postgres (when compared to what’s available for MySQL) • MySQL has become a defacto Internet standard, thus it’s development community is very active. It’s better supported.