1. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Argo Status Argo TC, M. Belbeoch

2. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Argo Status International issues General status Metrics, Objectives, Performance Implementation: coverage status Instrumentation Conclusion & actions Conclusion

3. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 National contributions 30/38 participating countries 12 maintain 95% of the array News: Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Indonesia, Russian Fed., Vietnam, Oman, Turkey, Oman, Maghreb, Lebanon, West. I. O.

4. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 National contributions Argo needs more floats to reach the global Can national contributions grow by 10 to 20% ? Donor programmes are important (foster participation on the long run, communicate to coastal states people, access maritime zones, enhance international political support to the program, raise educational actvities) … Can also take ages. JCOMMOPS/AIC is seeking floats to contribute (co-operations, education) (bilateral not always the best) and help national contributions: – Institutional funding, Industrial partners, foundations, sponsors, sailing world, crowd sourcing Possibilities are under exploited 146 IOC Member States … concerned by ocean issues.

5. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indices #0 Active Floats – Initial array sustained for 7 years – 2 last years above 3500 – Mid-way to the global Deployments – Light decrease but above initial target in average (~800) – 2009 CTD issue sequels ? Budget cuts ?

6. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 2011-2014 Active Floats

7. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 2011-2014

8. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Deployments

9. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Deployments

10. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 National contributions Active national fleets stable or lightly increasing – USA, France, Australia, Italy, UK – Float lifetime, research projects, or punctual funding boost Some are decreasing: – Japan, Germany, Canada (-200 floats in 3 years) – Budget cut ? Hardware issues (e.g. CTD 2009)? Logistics ? Staff turnover? Float delivery or deployments – Temporary ? Array is anyway stable

11. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance of data flow To see ADMT Volume, delays, users

12. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Network Diversification Any limitation? Many positive outcomes – Grow « customers » community – Multidisciplinary applications – Medias interest – Resources sharing – Logistic sharing and why not instruments Argo has some leadership and experience New comers should fund DM and infrastructure properly See agenda 8.x

13. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Argo Label Delivered to PIs, then to manufacturers Do not order sparingly… 3 euros/units (1-2 years minimum) Do not use systematically Proposal: Charter for new customers. – Secure official Argo content and national programmes – Oversee all its components and new ones – Welcome and assist new float users – Promote and support existing services from the infrastructure in place Data management, AIC, deployments, etc. JCOMMOPS wish to develop such a « certification » for all its components Mutual interest to promote best practices (Argo being the larger float customer)

14. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 ATTENTION: Use of the official Argo label Considering the diversity of profiling float users, Argo requires that its label must be used only for those floats which are officially part of the Argo program, and not automatically affixed on any profiling float. We are developing an “Argo charter” to be made available to profiling float customers. Until this is available, the Argo label should be used only in agreement with the Argo programme. Argo float operators should adhere to the Argo Best Practices, including: International cooperation within the Argo Steering and Data Management teams Transparent practices under UN framework, and respect of international regulations (UNCLOS, IOC/UNESCO Resolution XX-6 and EC-XLI.4) Free and unrestricted data exchange (in real-time and delayed mode) Standardized practices in data and metadata distribution Careful securing and retrieval of beached instruments Instrument registration at JCOMMOPS (including deployment plans) Harmonized practices in sampling and cycling * (*) Equivalent contributions to the Argo programme with specific research objectives are also welcome. In particular, manufacturers must inform the Argo Technical Coordinator of any new allocation of these labels. Send an email to aic@jcommops.org or support@argo.netaic@jcommops.orgsupport@argo.net “Customer X wishes to operate N floats under the Argo label”.

15. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Argo label Remark from one AST member Argo / non-Argo: different pricing to encourage more participation in Argo and best practices. Issue: real Argo floats cost more in reality

16. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Objectives What is the optimal Argo array? How to build simple performance indices for a complex question? How to consider scientific (various), and operational objectives How to communicate properly outside (public, agencies, etc) – critical but important Required within AST to optimize and balance the array and detect issues ? Required by JCOMM OPA, OOPC, etc for a « system perspective » Difficult for the TC to offer tools if objectives/results are not translated into clear « algorithms ». AST guidance required Meeting in Toulouse in April (NOOA/OSMC, OOPC, IOC, WMO) 28-30 April 2014

17. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Objectives Base grid used to calculate rationally a number of metrics (AST 14) To allow tracking in time, comparisons, globally and regionally To consider Argo’s array evolution to the global and regional specificities It is not anticipated to populate each box with floats !

18. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Objectives Base grid to be refined reasonably ( + 0-500 boxes) Marginal seas, coastal areas, history, criteria ? AST to feedback A fixed grid permits to calculate routinely indices, perform « spatial analyses » Goal: build a dashboard style monitoring system

19. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Objectives Estimation in each area (basin, sub basin, specific density, custom) of: – active units, required units – yearly deployments needs – comparison to practices, plans, gaps – simple performance indices « Simple » calculations interesting to do Between the global, and the local (3X3), regional indices make more sense.

20. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #1 BASINBoxes (#)Initial (#) Global (#)Active(%) Initial Design2952 2970101 Pacific Ocean1530 1 7511671109 95 Atlantic Ocean757 96372996 76 Indian Ocean666 800889133 111 Extensions Southern Ocean3200 115 36 Arctic Ocean1400 63 45 Carribean Sea190 384 11 Med. Sea180 3634 94 Gulf of Mexico100 208 40 South China Sea100 203 15 Sea of Japan80 1636 225 Banda Sea50 100 - Black Sea30 65 83 Celebes Sea20 51 22 Makassar Strait20 41 25 Sea of Okhotsk20 40 - Sulu Sea10 20 - TOTAL Global Design34932952 4 1353559 86

21. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #1 ~600 floats are operating outside the initial array ~600 floats are required for the global.

22. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #1 133%, 111%, -89 109%, 95%, 80 96%,76%, 234 N/A, 36%, 205 N/A, 45%, 77 %vs initial, % vs global, floats required for the global

23. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #1 Marginal Seas: 58%, 68 Equatorial: 63%,89 WBC: 53%, 410 TPOS: 93%, 40 Polar: 39%, 282

24. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #1 42%, 114 44%, 140 60%, 40 90%, 8 40%, 15 70%, 33 42%, 61

25. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #1: Active units Initial array is achieved in each basin Light excess in the Indian Ocean (but not where needed) Deficit for the global in the Atlantic (WBC but not only) Array enhancements implementation is well started.

26. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #2: Deployed units Deployments required vs practices Objective: 4.1 years lifetime (150 cycles) Reality with instruments (see later) ~720 units/year required for the initial Argo ~1000 units/year for the Global Argo. We need an extra 10-20%.

27. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #2

28. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #2 133 / 162-195 386 / 372-426 245 / 184-234 36 / 0-78 27 / 0-27 AVG Deployments in 2011-2013 / target initial-global 101, 0-39

29. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #2 Pacific: – No real deficit – Yearly increase required ~40 floats Atlantic: – deficit of 234 units – but excess in yearly deployment vs global objectives (60 units) – suggestion (EU / USA) ? Indian: – Excess (2009-2011 floats ?) circulation? – Since that, recurrent deficit in deployments, even for the initial design – ?? Why budget ? International cooperation ? Southern ocean: – 200 units starting deficit – needs 25 more units per year Arctic ocean is okay Marginal seas: over sampled x2 (certainly the design is to be reviewed)

30. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Deployments - History

31. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Observations

32. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Deployments Historical challenging areas: – No local and routine scientific interest – Logistics: dedicated ship time and resources required (see 5.3) – Geopolitics (specific zones to be addressed, see 9.3)

33. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Maritime Zones

34. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Deployments / Maritime Zones

35. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Yearly Deployments: 2013

36. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Yearly Deployments

37. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 2013 Deployments vs 2013 Objectives Some areas have been implemented without clear gaps identified. Which means over sampling in 2014 in these zones Strategy (anticipating the drift) ? Update of the global design required? Lack of deployment opportunities? To send floats outside you area of scientific interest to balance the array. To ask M. Kramp assistance (see 5.3)

38. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Argo Density 6°x6° Argo Density 6°x6° to update to the new design ?

39. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Argo Density/Age Argo Density/Age (Floats weighted by their probability to survive a year, « decimal floats » - update G. Johnson)

40. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Detect and highlight gaps Hot Spots spatial/statistical analyse

41. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice: #3 - try What proportion of our array is optimally implemented ? Calculation: Sum of boxes density over the grid (initial/global), without counting the excess when the target is reached. Using Observations 2013, active floats, active aged floats

42. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice: #3 BASIN(obs/2013) (%)(active floats) (%) (active /age) (%) Initial Design735949 Pacific Ocean635445 Atlantic Ocean514237 Indian Ocean554337 Extensions Southern Ocean202522 TOTAL Global Design534438 Marginal402320 Polar232723 WBC242319 EQ403632

43. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #3 Over a year ¾ of the initial array worked optimally This is better than a random distribution (~60%) The Pacific Ocean has slightly better coverage than the other basins Metric not appropriate for the public. Can be interesting to track in time. The objective is certainly not 100%. 60 % ?

44. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #3 (%) Not sampled0 Under sampled<75 Well sampled75-125 Over sampled>125

45. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #3

46. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Needs?

47. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Needs Needs (less strict)

48. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Performance Indice #3 Beyond the need for higher density in WBC or eq. regions: – Large gaps are developing in the SW I.O. (and in the piracy zone). – In the central North Pacific – In the South Atlantic

49. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 2014 planning Almost all programmes sent their plans thanks! But we need to progress. Proposal: yearly TXT file to maintain for an automatic synchonisation between all systems. ID;WMO;LAT;LON;DATE;SHIP;CRUISE;STATUS STATUS = Probable (0), Confirmed (1), Registered (2) active (3), inactive (4), closed (5) Can be useful internally for program monitoring across a team

50. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Planning

51. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 2014 Planning

52. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Planning Some plans have to be refined Routine opportunities implie oversampling on the long run Some areas can’t still be implemented  Send floats on colleagues cruises  Use new opportunities  Set up dedicated/chartered cruises  Address EEZ access and develop cooperation

53. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Network Age

54. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Network Age Use spatial analyse to determine geographical trends (feature, weight, neighboring) Central IO and PO getting old Not the Atlantic (not suprising excess/year)

55. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Telecom. 30% Iridium

56. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Iridium vs Argos 60% dep./year 2004-2010: Slow turnover (R & D) 2011-2013: Take off (inflexion mid 2012)

57. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Float models

58. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Float market

59. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Reliability CPF= 170-180 (2005, 2006)

60. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 TO DO Conclusion TO DO Argo has demonstrated its capacity to sustain the array Its on his way to the global. IO: attention, gaps and old AO: maybe seeding elswhere (EU, USA), e..g SW IO PO: good coverage but getting old too. Float reliability looks good. But takes time to evaluate (low cost floats ? Less battery ? approrpiate) More intl cooperation, and slightly more resources (national, private, crowd) and we can reach the global We need better metrics to track its progress and build up the « Argo control dashboard ». Better planning and resources sharing required (shared cruises, charters, etc) Improve communication and cooperation with industry Communicate on the new targets and new challenges to keep Argo visible. Develop outreach …and democratize access to Argo information Clarify our position with regard to the « multidicsiplinary turn »

61. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Actions International cooperation targets for the TC and Director Label/charter proposal Planning proposal Metrics proposal Other tasks or issue for the TC ?

62. JCOMM Observation Programmes Support Centre – Argo Information Centre March 2014 Thanks. belbeoch@jcommops.org support@jcommops.org https://twitter.com/jcommops