This document outlines the possible scenarios for Lobos/Ventana retirement and the work to be done to accomplish these various scenarios. The goal of this work is to position us to make an informed decision by gathering information from the folks close to the ship (from support engineering) and to grease the rails for thought about a 2010 proposal if that should become necessary.

Executive Summary

The process for selling/transitioning the Point Lobos/Ventana to an external buyer is a complicated one and the scope of work largely depends on the terms of sale for both (i.e. what parts go and what stays). The lowest impact scenario would be for an external buyer to simply supply the money necessary to run the ship/ROV in its current configuration hiring the current crew who are familiar with the system while also purchasing time for support engineering to maintain the systems on the ship/ROV. This is the best scenario in our estimation. While some other scenarios might be workable, most have a large impact on the support engineering group. There are many systems on the Lobos/Ventana and depending on which are to be delivered to the purchaser, the work for MBARI could range from medium impact to man-years of effort. Things to be aware of for terms of sale:

• Data Manager/Navproc: If data manager and navproc are to be delivered with Ventana, it will take a fair chunk of work to open source and document the code (on the order of weeks to months).
• HD Camera: If the HD camera is sold with Ventana, it is inextricably linked to navproc and data manager. While the core of the vehicle can operate without navproc and data manager, the HD camera cannot.
• Extrication of Non-transferring Systems: If some systems are deemed not to transfer to the new operator, there will still be work to extricate those from the Lobos/Ventana. This work will have to be scoped when it is deemed which system would not transfer.
  • Information Systems (I.S.): On a related note, even if we continue to operate the Lobos/Ventana for an external purchaser, there will be tasks for both support engineering and I.S. to remove MBARI specific connections. Things like data flow to shore, MBARI accounts/domains, etc. will all have to be cleaned up before transitioning to external purchaser.
• System Documentation: Full documentation of the hardware and software systems for the Lobos/Ventana would have to be a joint effort between support engineering and DMO. This would be a VERY large effort as there is currently very little documentation of the hardware/software systems that comprise the Lobos/Ventana. If some systems were not delivered with Lobos/Ventana (i.e. HD camera, navproc, data manager, etc.), it would lower the amount of work, but it would still be a huge amount of work to document the full system.
• Storage: If we lay up the Lobos/Ventana or extricate non-transferring systems, we need some place to store the associated equipment.
• Licenses: Some of the systems on the Ventana are licensed and these licenses would have to be transferred (picked-up) by the purchaser.

Scenarios

• Scenario 1: Point Lobos and Ventana are sold
  • Both stay at MBARI and operate as is by external funds but existing assets.
  • Both are operated by completely different group (full transfer: local or not). (* THIS IS HIGH IMPACT)
• Scenario 2: Point Lobos is sold, Ventana is laid up.
• Scenario 3: Point Lobos is laid up, Ventana is sold as operational ROV. (*THIS IS HIGH IMPACT)
• Scenario 4: Point Lobos and Ventana are both laid up.

For Scenarios 1 and 3, there are some "categories" that would largely define work to be done:

• As is: This means that there is no obligation from MBARI to transfer any knowledge to the buyer. No new documentation, basically like handing them the keys and everything we currently have for the ship and vehicle.
• Transition Period: This would be where MBARI provides some time where we make our DMO and support engineering folks available for some amount of time to assist the buyer with learning the boat/ROV. We would not necessarily have to supply documentation to the buyer, but we would be along side them so they could develop the documentation while they learned the system and we would be there to assist.
• Fully Documented: This would be where we would supply all the documentation necessary to run and maintain the ship and ROV.

Systems on Lobos/Ventana

1. Lobos (coast guard minimum)
   1. Radar
   2. Radio
   3. Lifeboat, etc.
   4. Sperry Fiber Optic Gyro (FOG) (is this linked to the ROV?)
   5. Ships spares
   6. Large Furuno radar (with lobos)
2. Ventana
   1. Everything in forepeak
   2. TMS
   3. LRS
   4. Tether
   5. Control System (computers, software, DTEC (licenses-consultant) which is bound to software on ROV)
   6. Logging system (this could be separated from ROV, however needed for timecode and CTD, there would be cost to extract).
   7. Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU)
   8. PDU
   9. HD camera, lapbox, (would need datamanger and navproc, would they even take this?)
   10. Rack in shower-microwave gear (going to Flyer)
   11. Sonardyne Fusion system (Computer and software, blackbox)
   12. Winfrog system
   13. UCTD (CTD in the science van)
   14. Sonardyne Homer receiver
   15. Schilling T3 manipulator and spares (would we want this on Ricketts?)
   16. D5 Deck, Digital Betacam deck
   17. TSS VRU (is this connected to Fusion)
   18. DVL on vehicle
   19. HD camera, HD monitors, HD camera control lapbox, etc.
   20. Miranda Tiler
   21. Miranda DVI Ramp2 DSK
   22. Octans FOG on Ventana (underwater one on the ROV, ROV could work without it, have export controls?).  Could be spare for Ricketts with new housing). $75K. Lots on this list could be that.
   23. ROV spares
   24. Tool sleds and related hardware
   25. Misc. ROV tools, HFSS, D-Samplers FSI ACM, carousel sampler, etc...
   26. ROV mounted CTD, Optode, transmissiometer

Tasks (Under Construction)

Task Matrix (Under Construction)

Notes, Issues and Questions

1. HD camera control lapbox is fully (inextricably?) tied to navproc and datamanager
2. Rovctd data gets to the surface as a serial stream. Data could spool on to the floor or the buyer could capture it. But to get it all the way through to the current realtime display currently requires the full chain of datamanager, navproc, logger and labview gui.
3. Timecode acquisition is datamanager and navproc dependent.
4. Since we don't have docs, we could have some transition period, with some end of transfer (phase I). Phase II could have follow up time.
5. I.S. to configure any domain stuff. (DNS, routers, NTP, etc.)
6. Code is clean and ported.
7. This is an opportunity to document/open source datamanager.
8. Navproc and datamanger would not take a year to document (few weeks).
9. If DMO doesn't transfer, they may not be motivated.
10. Aging OS on 'discovery' and the hardware (top-side control for ROV).  RedHat 7 which is much older than RHEL 5.  Fragile.
11. VARS could get timecode direct from deck (but would not be logged continuously).
12. Might be cheaper to put a new ROV on ship (depending on workload).
13. High impact things (6 weeks to  depending):
    1. Documentation (minimal to make the ROV work). would consultant help here? (HD camera and lapbox, should do anyway)
    2. After transfer support (tech transfer).
    3. Extricate non-transferring systems.
    4. Deciding on where the border of what goes/stays (HD camera, beta decks, if they go, datamanager will have to transfer: CTD can fall on the floor).
    5. Hardware documentation (DMO has knowledge).  We interface with serial port (ROV is a black box for us). Support Eng cannot do this but would be involved. (some: valve pack control, telemetry, core can, etc.)
14. What does a "Working Unit" look like?
15. If we are 'selling' parts of the datamanager/navproc/logger package are we to provide (read= 'create') documentation and/or support it for the buyer?
16. Would we be just pulling off any data distribution/management/logging machines and software for corenav, timecode/vcr/cameradata, rovctd?
17. Who is responsible for the tasks above with no responsible party?
18. In any scenario, who decides what goes and what stays and what MBARI is to provide another party?
19. How do we handle all the licenses for the various components on Lobos-Ventana?
20. If we sell the ship and ROV do we have to put the systems in a state that someone else can operate them without MBARI support? (Modify for operation without Data manager...)
21. If we sell ship and ROV combination, do we have to provide documentation (which is necessary for ship/ROV operation)?
22. If we sell the ship and ROV what systems/ sub systems on the Ventana go with it and which ones get removed?
23. If we are selling without the vehicle and assuming we would remove most of the important stuff, where to we store everything?
24. Does the CTD winch and rosette go with the ship?
25. If you remove the ROV do we keep the launch and recovery crane?
26. Software lic. transfer issues (windows/ms office, labview (for rovctd), arcview(preb. remove?), winfrog, sonardyne
27. Opensource datamanager, navproc, logger? How much doc. is required to opensource.
    1. We have always wanted to document but it never gets done, may be an "opportunity" now.
    2. System differences from navproc/datamanger/logger perspectives are very similar. Code is in better shape now than its been for many years due to RedHat port and DocRicketts work.
28. Would the consultant be able to support the ROV?

What overlap or involvement does Support Engineering have with IS in the support of the computing infrastructure: operating systems, network routers, NTP servers & setup? Posted by mccann at May 10, 2009 15:37

Does Support Engineering have a boundary defining the systems it's responsible for?  See http://www.mbari.org/dmo/vessels_vehicles/Point_Lobos/ptlobos.html and http://www.mbari.org/dmo/vessels_vehicles/ventana/specifications.html for a list of systems from the ship's crew and pilot perspective. Posted by mccann at May 10, 2009 15:42