PAPUA NEW GUINEA TECHNICAL REPORT

EU-SOPAC Project Report 115 Reducing Vulnerability of Pacific ACP States

PAPUA NEW GUINEA TECHNICAL REPORT High-Resolution Bathymetric Survey

Fieldwork undertaken from 28 May to 15 June 2006

October 2008

Three-dimensional perspective image of Madang bathymetry.

Prepared by:

Jens Krüger and Salesh Kumar

SOPAC Secretariat

September 2008

PACIFIC ISLANDS APPLIED GEOSCIENCE COMMISSION

c/o SOPAC Secretariat

Private Mail Bag

GPO, Suva

FIJI ISLANDS

http://www.sopac.org

Phone: +679 338 1377

Fax: +679 337 0040

www.sopac.org

[email protected]

Important Notice

This report has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Community; however, the views expressed herein must never be taken to reflect the official opinion of the

European Community.

Bathymetry in Papua New Guinea EU EDF – SOPAC Reducing Vulnerability of Pacific ACP States – iii

EU-SOPAC Project Report 115 – Krüger and Kumar 2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ 1

1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 2

1.1 Background 2 1.2 Geographic Situation 2 1.3 Tectonic Setting 3 1.4 Previous Bathymetry Compilations 3

2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................................................................. 6

2.1 Multibeam Bathymetry 6 2.2 Morphological Features 6

3. DATA ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING ............................................................ 11

3.1 Survey Particulars 11 3.2 Field Personnel 11 3.3 Geodetic Reference System 11 3.4 Vessel Description and Static Offsets 12 3.5 Positioning Control 14 3.6 Survey Computer 14 3.7 Multibeam Echosounder 14 3.8 Multibeam Echosounder Data Processing 15 3.9 Multibeam Backscatter 16 3.10 Tidal Information 16 3.11 Sound Velocity Profiling 16

4. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 22

APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 24

Appendix 1 – Statement of Accuracy and Suitability for Charting 24 Appendix 2 – Multibeam Echosounder Coverage 28 Appendix 3 – CTD Profiles 30 Appendix 4 – High-Resolution A0 Charts 33 Appendix 5 – Multibeam Log Sheets 34

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summary geography of Papua New Guinea ..................................................... 3

Table 2. Recent cruises and MBES datasets for PNG .................................................... 5

Table 3. Geodetic datumWGS84 .................................................................................. 11

Table 4. Post-processing sequence .............................................................................. 15

Table 5. Map production sequence ............................................................................... 15

Table 6. CTD profile details ........................................................................................... 17

Table 7. Generalised Digital Environmental Model Data (GDEM) ................................ 20

Table 8. Sound velocity data sources ........................................................................... 20

Table 9. Recommended accuracy of survey orders ...................................................... 23

Table 10. Values for calculating error limits for depth accuracy ...................................... 24

Table A1.1. Projected footprint size under varying water depths ....................................... 26

iv – Bathymetry in Papua New Guinea EU EDF – SOPAC Reducing Vulnerability of Pacific ACP States


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Location map of Pacific Island countries and territories constituting SOPAC. v

Figure 2. Map of Papua New Guinea with approximate exclusive economic zone. ........ 2

Figure 3. Tectonic microplates of the Melanesian region. ............................................... 4

Figure 4. MBES coverage completed by the RV Kairai in 1999. ..................................... 4

Figure 5. MBES coverage completed by the RV Kilo Moana in 2004. ............................ 5

Figure 6. Main morphological elements offshore Sissano. .............................................. 7

Figure 7. Three dimensional perspective image of Madang. .......................................... 7

Figure 8. Three-dimensional perspective image of Vanimo. ........................................... 7

Figure 9. Shaded relief map of Madang. ......................................................................... 8

Figure 10. Slope angle map of Madang. ........................................................................... 8

Figure 11. Shaded relief map of Vanimo. .......................................................................... 9

Figure 12. Slope angle map of Vanimo. ............................................................................ 9

Figure 13. Shaded relief map of Sissano. ....................................................................... 10

Figure 14. Slope angle map of Sissano. ......................................................................... 10

Figure 15. Three-dimensional perspective image of Sissano. ........................................ 10

Figure 16. The chartered survey vessel RV Summer Spirit. ........................................... 12

Figure 17. Diagrams and measurements of the vessel Summer Spirit. .......................... 13

Figure 18. Map showing the location and dates of CTD profiles for Sissano. ................. 18

Figure 19. Map showing the location and dates of CTD profiles for Vanimo. ................. 18

Figure 20. Map showing the location and dates of CTD profiles for Madang. ................. 19

Figure 21. Sound velocity profiles used for MBES data correction. ................................ 21

Figure A1.1. Conceptual illustration of bathymetric data acquisition with an MBES. .......... 25

Figure A2.1. Map showing the SOPAC/EU MBES coverage for the Madang area. ........... 28

Figure A2.2. Map showing the SOPAC/EU MBES coverage for the Sissano area. ........... 28

Figure A2.3. Map showing the SOPAC/EU MBES coverage for Vanimo area. .................. 29

Bathymetry in Papua New Guinea EU EDF – SOPAC Reducing Vulnerability of Pacific ACP States – v


Figure 1. Location map of Pacific Island countries and territories constituting SOPAC.

vi – Papua New Guinea Bathymetry EU EDF – SOPAC Reducing Vulnerability of Pacific ACP States


Acronyms and their meaning

ACP African, Caribbean, and Pacific

ADCP Acoustic Doppler current profilers

ARGO Array for real-time geostrophic oceanography

ASCII American standard code for information interchange

CD Chart datum

CTD Conductivity – temperature – depth

DEM Digital Elevation Model

DTM Digital terrain model

EEZ Exclusive economic zone

GDEM Generalised digital environmental model

GEBCO General bathymetric chart of the oceans

GPS Global positioning system

LAT Lowest astronomical tide

MBES Multibeam echosounder

MRU Motion reference unit

MSL Mean sea level

NTC National Tide Centre

PI-GOOS Pacific Islands global ocean observing system

RTK Real-time-kinematic GPS (centimetre accuracy)

SMNT Seamount Catalogue

SOPAC Pacific Islands Applied Geoscience Commission

SPCZ South Pacific convergence zone

SRTM Shuttle radar topography model

TAO Tropical atmosphere ocean array

UTM Universal transverse Mercator

WGS World geodetic system

Bathymetry in Papua New Guinea EU EDF – SOPAC Reducing Vulnerability of Pacific ACP States – 1


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Krüger, J. and Kumar, S. 2008. High-Resolution Bathymetric Survey in Papua New Guinea. EU EDF 8 & 9 – SOPAC Project Report 115. Pacific Islands Applied Geoscience Commission: Suva, Fiji. vi + 43 p. + 3 charts.

The Pacific Islands Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC) carried out a marine survey for Papua New Guinea around, Madang, Sissano and Vanimo. The objective was to investigate the seabed and provide information about water depths in the coastal areas using a Multibeam echosounder (MBES).

This report describes the high-resolution bathymetric mapping survey carried out over a period of three weeks from 28 May to 15 June 2006, resulting in the acquisition of over 733 line-km of MBES data. The survey achieved variable coverage of 50–100% (less for shallow water areas) of the seafloor from approximately 50 m in the inshore area to an average offshore distance of 4 km, reaching maximum water depths of some 2000 m.

The data was used to produce bathymetry charts for Madang, Vanimo and Sissano at a scale of 1 : 50 000. These charts also include additional MBES data that was available in the public domain. The new bathymetric maps provide a descriptive picture of the ocean bottom terrain, vividly revealing the size, shape and distribution of underwater features. This can and serve as the basic tool for scientific, engineering, hazard, marine geophysical and environmental studies, as well as for marine and coastal resource management.

2 – Bathymetry in Papua New Guinea EU EDF – SOPAC Reducing Vulnerability of Pacific ACP States


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

A marine survey for Papua New Guinea was carried out around Madang, Sissano, and Vanimo (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The objective was to investigate the seabed and provide information about water depths in the coastal areas using a Multibeam echosounder (MBES). The wave and current regime inside Madang lagoon and Vanimo harbour was also investigated by deploying acoustic Doppler current meter profilers. This report presents the results of the MBES survey (oceanographic data collected are covered elsewhere). This work was initiated by the SOPAC/EU Reducing Vulnerability of Pacific ACP States Project, under the European Development Fund.

Figure 2. Map of Papua New Guinea. Dashed line illustrates approximate boundary of PNG’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Survey areas are indicated by the labelled boxes. (Bathymetry and topography source: S2004 described in Marks and Smith (2006)).

1.2 Geographic Situation

Papua New Guinea is located in the Southwest Pacific Ocean on the eastern half of the island of New Guinea. The territory includes the Bismarck and Louisiade Archipelagos as well as the Trobriand and D'Entrecasteaux Islands and other offshore islands including New Britain, New Ireland and Bougainville. It is bound by the Gulf of Guinea and the Coral Sea to the south, Indonesia to the west, the Solomon Sea to the east and the Bismarck Sea to the northeast. The central part of the island rises into a wide ridge of mountains known as the Highlands. Key geographic characteristics of Papua New Guinea are provided in Table 1.



Table 1. Summary geography of Papua New Guinea

Location Centre at 06° 00’S, 147° 00’E

Population 5 190 786 (2000 census)

Land area 462 243 km2

Coastline Dominated mostly by coral reefs, with mountain ranges rising directly from the sea or from narrow coastal plains.

Tides Semi-diurnal

Climate Monsoonal climate characterized by high temperatures and humidity throughout the year. The NW Monsoon season is from December to March while the SW Monsoon season is from May to October. Rainfall is at its heaviest in the highlands with average annual precipitation varying between 2000 and 5000 mm. Average temperature ranges in Port Moresby are from 26 degrees Celsius to 28 degrees Celsius all year.

Exclusive Economic Zone, EEZ

3 120 000 km2

1.3 Tectonic Setting

The Woodlark Basin is located in the Solomon Sea southeast of Papua New Guinea. The present-day tectonics of the region is the result of interactions between microplates (Figure 3) caught in and formed during oblique convergence between the Pacific and Indo-Australian plates (Benes et al. 1994; Tregoning et al. 1998). Counter clockwise rotation of the Solomon microplate within this plate boundary zone led to the development of an oceanic spreading centre. Magnetic anomalies indicate that the seafloor spreading centre has propagated westward into eastern Papua New Guinea since at least 6 million years (Ma) (Weissel et al. 1982; Benes et al. 1994; Taylor et al. 1995, 1999; Goodliffe et al. 1997). Progressive opening of the western Woodlark Basin due to seafloor spreading led to separation of the formerly contiguous crust of the Pocklington and Woodlark Rises. The seafloor spreading tip is currently located at 9.8°S, 151.7°E. West of the seafloor spreading centre, continental extension is manifested by full and half grabens, active metamorphic core complexes, and rift-related peralkaline volcanism (e.g., Smith and Simpson 1972; Davies 1973; Smith 1976; Hegner and Smith 1992; Davies and Warren 1988; Hill et al. 1992, 1995; Hill and Baldwin 1993; Baldwin et al. 1993; Stolz et al. 1993; Hill 1994).

1.4 Previous Bathymetry Compilations

Bathymetric maps are topographic maps of the seafloor, giving a descriptive picture of the ocean bottom terrain. With an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of approximately 3 120 000 km2, the available bathymetric data is limited and the exact nature of seafloor is poorly known. Most available bathymetric data originates from sparse single-beam soundings from oceanographic cruises, and since the early 1970s, from MBES systems as well as satellite-derived predicted depth. Two bathymetric datasets previously collected by visiting oceanographic research vessels were relevant to the data presented in this report: they are shown in Table 2.



Figure 4. MBES coverage completed by the RV Kairai in 1999 shown in colour (see also Figure 6). Sections of this data (200 m grid) are included on the Sissano and Vanimo charts. Land is shown in black, depth in metres below sea level, and projection is in latitude/longitude WGS84. Grey-shaded relief bathymetry shown as the backdrop is S2004 described in Marks and Smith (2006).

Figure 3. Tectonic microplates of the Melanesian region. Arrows show net plate motion relative to the Australian Plate (source: http://volcano.und.nodak.edu).



Table 2. Recent cruises and MBES datasets for PNG

RV Kairei, 1999 (JAMSTEC KR98-13)

As part of the Sissano Offshore Survey in response to the 17 July 1998 tsunami across the northern shore of PNG, the vessel Kairei carried out an MBES survey acquiring data in the area offshore of Sissano and Vanimo between 2º 00’ and 3º 20’S and 141º 00’ and 143º 20’E as shown in Figure 4 (Tappin 1999).

RV Kilo Moana, 2004 (University of California, Santa Cruz, KM0419)

The aims of this survey were to investigate, map and date natural hazards such as debris avalanche deposits and coastal tsunami deposits in the north New Guinea volcanic arc (Silver 2005). The results of the MBES bathymetry mapping completed after the 36 day cruise on the Kilo Moana is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. MBES coverage completed by the RV Kilo Moana in 2004 shown in colour. Permission was obtained to include the relevant portion of this data (50 m grid) on the Madang chart. Land is shown in black, depth in metres below sea level and projection is in latitude/longitude WGS84. Grey-shaded relief bathymetry shown as the backdrop is S2004 described in Marks and Smith (2006).



2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

2.1 Multibeam Bathymetry

The Multibeam echosounder (MBES) bathymetry acquired during this study and the two previous cruises by the RV Kairei and Kilo Moana (see Table 2 above) are shown on three separate charts, one each for the areas of Madang, Sissano, and Vanimo. The charts are drawn at a scale of 1 : 50 000 with contour intervals varying from 10 to 100 m, depending on water depth and seabed terrain. The surveyed areas extend from the inshore coastal area to an average offshore distance from the coast to approximately 4 km. Parts of Madang lagoon were also surveyed and are shown on Chart 1.

Water depths within the surveyed area generally ranged from 50 m on the outer reef slopes or shelf areas with depths becoming deeper in a general seaward direction at a mean slope angle of approximately 30º towards the limits of the coverage. Maximum water depths of some 2000 m were recorded in the offshore areas, as dictated by the operational limit of the MBES. Locally, the seabed is expected to be quite irregular with highly variable slope angles ranging from 0º to 83º from the horizontal.

2.2 Morphological features

2.2.1 Summarised Description of Seabed around Madang

The maximum depth of coverage in the lagoon was 50 m at the entrance around the southern end, near Madang harbour. The average water depth in the lagoon was around 15 m. The captured seafloor appeared to be relatively featureless with few coral heads.

The seafloor around Madang drops off sharply at an angle of about 45–50º (Figure 9) to about 200 m water depths. A very prominent southwest trending fault scarp is seen about 5 km north of the Madang harbour entrance channel. The seafloor appears featureless to the south of this fault scarp with an exception of a pinnacle (planet rock) rising from a depth of around 300 m to about 5 m below sea level.

To the north of the fault scarp, numerous small canyons are seen to be originating from the 600m contour and levelling off at around 1 300 m water depths. Only one canyon penetrates upslope to the coast, and is seen originating at the entrance of the northern end of the lagoon and levels off at around 1200 m water depth.

2.2.2 Summarised Description of Seabed around Sissano

The seafloor offshore Sissano is dominated by two canyons. The seafloor is relatively featureless to an offshore distance from the coast of approximately 10 km, with an average slope angle of around 3º (Figure 13). The water depth within this area is around 100 m. A canyon originates at approximately 3 km to the north of Yalingi River, in water depths of around 200 m. This canyon runs northeast for approximately 3 km and then trends toward the north northeast direction. Numerous slump features are visible on either side of the canyon, with few small seamounts on the edge of the canyon which have partly succumbed to the slumping.

A second much smaller canyon was mapped at about 6 km to the north of Raihu River. This canyon originates in about 100 m water depth, runs approximately about 2 km northeast, then trends north and levels off in about 700 m water depth. Few smaller canyons are seen to the west of this canyon.

The main morphological features of the area further offshore (water depths > 200 m) are shown in Figure 6.



Figure 6. Main morphological elements offshore Sissano, showing the bathymetry collected by the JAMSTEC RV Kairei, 1999 survey (Tappin et al. 2001).

2.2.3 Summarised Description of the Seabed around Vanimo

The seafloor along the coast of Vanimo is dominated by numerous small canyons originating at the base of the 100 m contour. The largest canyon originates near the mouth of the Neumayer River.

Figure 7. Three-dimensional perspective image of Madang. Shallow to deep from red to purple. Two times vertical exaggeration.

Figure 8. Three-dimensional perspective image of Vanimo. Two times vertical exaggeration.



366000 368000 370000 372000 374000 376000 378000

941

8000

942

0000

942

2000

942

4000

942

6000

942

8000

943

0000

943

2000

943

4000

943

6000

943

8000

944

0000

9442

000

9444

000

9446

000

9448

000

0km 1km 2km 3km 4km

Figure 9. Shaded relief map of Madang. Sun illumination is from the northwest.

366000 368000 370000 372000 374000 376000 3780009418

000

9420

000

9422

000

9424

000

9426

000

9428

000

9430

000

9432

000

9434

000

9436

000

9438

000

9440

000

9442

000

9444

000

9446

000

9448

000

0km 1km 2km 3km 4km

0º

10º

20º

30º

40º

50º

60º

70º

80º

slope angle

Figure 10. Slope angle map of Madang.



510000520000

530000540000

550000560000

570000580000

590000

9690000 9700000 9710000

0km 1km 2km 3km 4km

Figure 11. Shaded relief map of Vanimo. Sun illumination is from the northwest.

5100

0052

0000

5300

0054

0000

5500

0056

0000

5700

0058

0000

5900

00

9690000 9700000 9710000

0km 1km 2km 3km 4km

5º

10º

15º

20º

25º

30º

35º

40º

45º

50º

slope angle

Figure 12. Slope angle map of Vanimo.



600000 610000 620000 630000 640000 650000 660000 670000 680000 690000

9650000

9660000

9670000

9680000

0km 10km 20km

Figure 13. Shaded relief map of Sissano. Sun illumination from the northwest.

600000 610000 620000 630000 640000 650000 660000 670000 680000 690000

9650000

9660000

9670000

9680000

0º5º10º15º20º25º30º35º40º45º50º55º

Slope angle in degrees

0km 10km 20km

Figure 14. Slope angle map of Sissano.

Figure 15. Three dimensional perspective image of Sissano. Shallow to deep from red to purple. Two times vertical exaggeration.



3. DATA ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING

3.1 Survey Particulars

Survey vessel: RV Summer Spirit

Fieldwork date: 28/05/06 to 15/06/06

Equipment used: Reson 8160, deep water MBES, Reson 8101, shallow water MBES.

All dates and times in this report are given in the local PNG time zone (GMT+ 10h).

3.2 Field Personnel

SOPAC: Jens Krüger (Chief Scientist), Salesh Kumar (Technical Officer), Peni Musunamasi (Electronic Technician)

Vessel: Brian Hennings (Master), Tomasi (Officer), Sakiusa (Engineer), Ram Reddy (Cook)

3.3 Geodetic Reference System

The survey results were mapped in terms of the following geodetic reference system:

Table 2. Geodetic datum WGS84

Ellipsoid WGS84

Semi-major axis (a) 6378137.000

Semi-major axis (b) 6356752.314

Inverse flattening (1/f) 298.257223563

Eccentricity sq. (e2 ) 0.0066943800

Projection UTM zone 55 south (Madang)

Projection type Transverse Mercator

Origin latitude 00° 00' 00.000" North

Origin longitude 147° 00' 00.000" East

Origin false easting 500000.0000

Origin false northing 10000000.0000

Scale factor 0.9996000000

Grid unit Metres

Geodetic transformation From WGS84 (GPS satellite datum) to UTM 55 South

Source coordinate system WGS84

Target coordinate system UTM 55 South

Transformation parameters

dX 0.00

dY 0.00

dZ 0.00

rX 0.00000



rY 0.00000

rZ 0.00000

Scale 0.00000

Projection UTM Zone 54 South (Sissano, Vanimo)

Projection type Transverse Mercator

Origin latitude 00° 00' 00.000" North

Origin longitude 141° 00' 00.000" East

Origin false easting 500000.0000

Origin false northing 10000000.0000

Scale factor 0.9996000000

Grid unit metres

Geodetic transformation From WGS84 (GPS satellite datum) to UTM 54 South

Source coordinate system WGS84

Target coordinate system UTM 54 South

Transformation parameters

dX 0.00

dY 0.00

dZ 0.00

rX 0.00000

rY 0.00000

rZ 0.00000

Scale 0.00000

3.4 Vessel Description and Static Offsets

The survey vessel is shown in Figure 16. Details regarding the survey vessel are shown in Figure 17.

Figure 16. The chartered survey vessel RV Summer Spirit.



Sensor X (m) Y (m) Z (m)

Reference point at water level 0.00 0.00 0.00

Motion Reference Unit (MRU) 0.00 0.00 1.82

Positioning Antenna (GPS) 1.92 –6.92 –6.29

Multibeam Echo Sounder (MBES) 8160 0.86 –3.96 1.52

Multibeam Echo Sounder (MBES) 8101 –2.15 –2.82 1.34

Winch –14.29 1.92 3.00

Vessel

Name Summer Spirit

Length overall 25 m

Breadth (mid) 6 m

Draft (mid) 2.5 m

Displacement 65 t

Port of registry Brisbane

Registration No. IQ115Q

Call Sign 3DTF

Vessel Type Mono-hull Motor yacht (Fig. 16)

Figure 17. Diagrams and measurements of the chartered survey vessel Summer Spirit.

MBES

Winch

GPS

-Z

+Z

+Y-Y

Water level

MRU

+X

-X

+Y-Y

Winch MBES

MRU

GPS

Not to scale



3.5 Positioning Control

The vessel’s reference point (X=0, Y=0, Z=0) was the motion reference unit (MRU) position at the waterline. Positioning was by stand-alone GPS, using an Ashtech Aquarius dual-frequency P-code receiver. A good satellite constellation status was observed throughout the survey. The patch test was conducted in Suva, Fiji, using RTK GPS.

3.6 Survey Computer

The survey computer was a Windows 2000 PC running Hypack 4.3. This computer was used for continuous on-line data logging and computation of positioning and digital bathymetry. The package also provided a line control display for the helm. The on-line operator continuously monitored a range of quality control parameters.

An off-line Hypack 4.3A package was used in the office for replaying and post-processing of track data and bathymetry. An A0 plotter was available for the production of full-size charts (841 x x1189 mm).

3.7 Multibeam Echosounder

A Reson SeaBat 8160 and 8101 multibeam echosounder (MBES) was temporarily installed on MV Summer Spirit, and used to provide swath bathymetry data. A MBES provides high-resolution information about the depth of water from the surface to the seafloor in a water body. The main instrumental and operating parameters are listed below. Patch tests were done using RTK GPS, and bar checks were carried out to determine transducer vertical offsets.

Instrumentation Item Reson SeaBat 8160 Reson SeaBat 8101

Transducer mount Starboard hull-mounted Port side hull-mounted

Motion reference unit TSS DMS 2-05 Dynamic Motion Sensor

TSS DMS 2-05 Dynamic Motion Sensor

Gyro SG Brown Meridian Surveyor Gyro Compass

SG Brown Meridian Surveyor Gyro Compass

Sound velocity probe at transducer

Installed N/A

Operating Parameters Reson SeaBat 8160 Reson SeaBat 8101

Transducer Frequency 50 kHz 240 kHz

General water depth 10–2500 m 0–250 m

Average ship's speed 7 knots (3.6 m/s) 7 knots (3.6 m/s)

Transmit Power Variable 1–16 Variable 1–16

Pulse length Variable 0.5–10.0 ms Variable 0.5–10.0 ms

Horizontal coverage Approximately two times water depth

Approximately two times water depth

No of beams / beam spacing

126 / 1.5 ° 101 / 1.5 °

Ping rate Variable, maximum of 4 Hz Variable, maximum of 4 Hz



Dynamic Offset Calibration Vanimo, 12/06/2006. Reson 8101

Suva, 25/04/2006. Reson 8160

Roll correction –1.60 –1.30

Pitch correction –2.00 –1.00

Yaw correction –1.00 0.00

GPS Latency correction 0.00 0.40

Gyro correction Not determined Not determined

3.8 Multibeam Echosounder Data Processing

On return to the SOPAC office in Suva, Hypack 4.3A software was used for the post-processing of the MBES survey data. The production of contour maps was done using surfer 8.05 software. The processing and gridding sequences are listed below.

Table 3. Post-processing sequence

Phase 1 Tidal and sound velocity corrections. Navigation checked for poor GPS positioning.

Phase 2 Removed poor-quality beams (quality<3) and outliers from individual survey lines.

Phase 3 Applied 4th standard deviation filter to remove outliers from median depth. Further manual cleaning of outliers.

Output ASCII XYZ file using actual positions of median sounding depths in the project coordinate system.

Table 4. Map production sequence

Input

XYZ output data from Hypack reduced to 1 mm at charting scale (e.g. 50 m grid size for a chart at 1 : 50 000).

Surface Model XYZ output data were gridded using the Kriging method in Surfer 8.05. Data gaps were interpolated using three times the grid spacing.

Output DXF contours, PDF chart, backdrop images, and DTM model in the project coordinate system.

See appendix 5.

Various levels of smoothing were applied to the contours and DTM, which gave a realistic impression of the seabed without removing any real features from the data set.



3.9 Multibeam Backscatter

The MBES records echo strength data (reflected energy) that can be presented as seabed backscatter maps, similar to sidescan sonar mosaic, or backscatter image, and shows information on the composition of the seafloor. The backscatter signal recorded offshore was of very poor quality and therefore not processed or interpreted.

The backscatter intensity is largely a function of the properties of the superficial seafloor material, particularly the physical shape of individual components, and the angle of incidence of the sonar beam as it encounters a reflective surface. The offshore surveyed area consisted of generally steep seafloor with an average slope of 31 from the horizontal. The steep nature of the seafloor resulted in very high incidence angles of the sonar beam, with swath width dropping to less than one times the water depth. MBES settings such as pulse length, range, and transmit power were continuously modified in order to maintain optimum quality and maximum coverage of depth soundings. The overall quality of backscatter was therefore poor, with data showing very high amplitude returns on the channel facing the island flank, whilst the channel facing offshore and down slope contained little or no returns. Good-quality bathymetry data was therefore acquired at the expense of the backscatter data.

3.10 Tidal Information

Soundings were reduced to the Chart Datum using the Admiralty Tide Tables (Madang), Volume 4, 2006, Pacific Ocean, UK Hydrographic Office.

3.11 Sound Velocity Profiling

The accuracy of the depth soundings depends in part on the variation of the speed of sound with water depth. Sound velocity profiles are therefore required in order to find the correct depth and location of water depth soundings. The speed of sound in seawater varies with temperature, salinity and depth, and was determined by measuring the conductivity, temperature and depth (CTD) through the water column. The main instrumental, operational, processing parameters are listed below.

CTD Instrumentation

Make SeaBird Electronics

Model SeaCat 19+ (self-powered, self-contained)

Serial number 4172

Depth rating 3000 m

Operating Parameters

Sample rate 1 scan every 0.5 s

Maximum depth Limited to 400 m due to wire rope length

Data recorded Profiles of conductivity, temperature, and pressure



Data Processing

Positioning The profile position was taken at the GPS antenna near the start of the downcast. Vessel drift may have been significant (~500 m) over the duration of the profile.

Data conversion Converted raw data (.hex) to a .cnv file. The following values are output from the recorded data:

Pressure, dbar

Depth, m (derived using salt water at local latitude)

Temperature, deg C (ITS-90)

Salinity, psu (derived)

Density, kg m–3 (derived)

Sound velocity, m/s (derived using Chen and Millero 1977)

Bin average Average data into 1 m depth bins. No filtering was applied.

Output Processed data is saved in ASCII text format with the file name date_location_bin.cnv.

The CTD profile details are listed in Table 5. The summaries of the CTD profiles that were used for the data processing are shown in Appendix 3.

Table 5. CTD profile details

Profile location Date Time Easting Northing Depth (m)

Madang offshore 29/05/06 10:23 374627.87 9421679.79 609

Madang N lagoon ADP1 31/05/06 08:45 368376.22 9438917.24 18

Madang lagoon ADP2 31/05/06 11:25 368364.34 9434739.21 17

Madang offshore 01/06/06 12:04 372410.61 9438656.19 540

Madang offshore 02/06/06 09:21 371861.21 9440103.87 584

Madang outside ADP2 02/06/06 16:43 368414.01 9434801.84 17

Madang lagoon 03/06/06 07:06 367409.3 9438454.7 35

Sissano 05/06/06 10:54 640345.23 9663260.18 605

Sissano 07/06/06 10:41 654056.4 9660777.25 574

Sissano 08/06/06 06:46 638908.6 9663184.52 575

Vanimo 10/10/06 12:59 545743.62 9704315.05 508

Vanimo 12/06/06 11:16 508365.09 9716051.62 1120

Vanimo patch test area 12/06/06 16:59 532477.57 9706552.71 95

Vanimo 13/06/06 12:55 540346.9 9705472.56 603

Vanimo Harbour 14/06/06 09:36 532791.44 9703375.23 6



The on-board CTD probe could only be operated to a maximum depth of 400 m due to restrictions on the wire rope length. The ship-based profile data were complemented with external sources of sound velocity data, in order to ensure corrections for depth soundings exceeding 400 m. These sources consisted of measured temperature and salinity profile data from an Argo float and a predicted sound velocity profile from the Generalised Digital Environmental Model (GDEM). The Argo data were collected and made freely available by the international Argo Project and the national programmes that contribute to it (www.Argo.ucsd.edu and argo.jcommops.org). Argo is a pilot programme of the Pacific Islands Global Observing System (PI-GOOS). The GDEM is a global climatology model developed by the U.S Naval Oceanographic Office and provides a monthly temperature, salinity, and sound velocity profiles on a global ¼ degree grid (https://128.160.23.42/gdemv/gdemv.html). Parameters of these sources are given in Table 8.

Figure 18. Map showing the location and dates of CTD profiles for Sissano.

Figure 19. Map showing the location and dates of CTD profiles for Vanimo.



Figure 20. Map showing the location and dates of CTD profiles for Madang. The locations of acoustic Doppler profilers are also shown (current velocity data are described elsewhere).



Table 6. Generalised Digital Environmental Model Data (GDEM)

Madang Sissano Vanimo

Data file version 3.0, URL accessed on 16/08/2006

3.0, URL accessed on 14/08/2006

3.0, URL accessed on 14/08/2006

Date Monthly average for May

Monthly average for July

Monthly average for July

Latitude 7.50º S 2.00º S 2.00º S

Longitude 152.50º W 142.00º W 142.00º W

Easting 1107719.28 611213.30 611213.30

Northing 832838.81 221094.87 221094.87

Available data Depth, temperature, salinity, sound velocity

Depth, temperature, salinity, sound velocity

Depth, temperature, salinity, sound velocity

Bin size From 0 to 3800 m, increasing with depth

From 0 to 3400 m, increasing with depth

From 0 to 3400 m, increasing with depth

Maximum Depth 3800 m 3400 m 3400 m

ARGO

Data type H13

Date 03/06/2006

Latitude 7º 25.08’S

Longitude 152º 36.36’E

Easting 1119583.85

Northing 823880.54

Available data Pressure, temperature and salinity

Bin size From 0 to 2000 m, increasing with depth

Maximum Depth 2000 m

The Argo profile data were used to calculate the speed of sound utilising the Chen-Millero equation (Chen and Millero 1977). This is the same method used by the SeaBird CTD software. The GDEM model provided a monthly mean of sound velocity.

The final sound velocity profiles used to correct MBES data were therefore constructed from three sources as summarised in Table 8. Figure 18, Figure 19 and Figure 20 show the location of the CTD profiles and a plot of the sound velocity data of the various sources is shown in Figure 21.

Table 7. Sound velocity data sources

Sound Velocity Data Source Water Depth

CTD casts 0 to a maximum of approximately 400 m

GDEM model 0 to 3800 m

ARGO profile 0 to 2000 m



0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

3400

3600

3800

4000

1480 1490 1500 1510 1520 1530 1540 1550

Sound velocity (m/s)

Dep

th (

m)

GDEM

ARGO

CTD

Figure 21. Example plot showing the sound velocity profiles used for MBES data correction.



4. REFERENCES

Array for real-time geostrophic oceanography. ARGO. http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/

Baldwin, S.L., Lister, G.S., Hill, E.J., Foster, D.A. and McDougall, I. 1993. Thermochronologic constraints on the tectonic evolution of active metamorphic core complexes, D’Entrecasteaux Islands, Papua New Guinea, Tectonics 12: 611–628.

Benes, V., Scott, S.D. and Binns, R.A. 1994. Tectonics of rift propagation into a continental margin: western Woodlark Basin, Papua New Guinea. Journal of Geophysics Research 99: 4439–4455.

Chen, C.T. and Millero, F.J. 1977. Speed of sound in seawater at high pressure. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 32(10): 1357 p.

Davies, H.L. 1973. Fergusson Island 1 : 250,000. Geolog. Ser.-Explanatory Notes, Dep. Miner. Energy, Bur. Miner. Res. (Aust.).

Davies, H.L. and Warren, R.G. 1988. Origin of eclogite-bearing. Domed, layed metamorphic complexes (“core complexes”) in the d’Entrecasteaux Islands, Papua New Guinea. Tectonics 7: 1–21.

Generalised Digital Environmental Model. GDEM. https://128.160.23.42/gdemv/gdemv.html

Global Topography. GTOPO. http://topex.ucsd.edu/marine_topo/mar_topo.html. Global topography data is available from: http://topex.ucsd.edu/cgi-bin/get_data.cgi

Goodliffe, A.M., Taylor, B., Martinez, F., Hey, R.N., Maeda, K. and Ohno, K. 1997. Synchronous reorientation of the Woodlark Basin spreading center. Earth Planet. Science Letters 146: 233–242.

Gordon, L. and Lohrman, A. 2001. Near-shore Doppler current meter wave spectra, NortekUSA, 11 p. http://www.nortekusa.com/principles/Waves.html

Hegner, E. and Smith, I.E.M. 1992. Isotopic compositions of late Cenozoic volcanics from southeast Papua New Guinea: evidence for multi-component sources in arc and rift environments. Chemical Geology 97: 233–249.

Hill, E.J. 1994. Geometry and kinematics of shear zones formed during continental extension in eastern Papua New Guinea. Journal of Structural Geology 16: 1093–1105.

Hill, E.J. and Baldwin, S.L. 1993. Exhumation of high pressure metamorphophic rocks during crustal extension in the D’Entrecasteaux Islands, Papua New Guinea, J. Metamorph. Geol.: 261–277.

Hill, E.J., Baldwin, S.L. and Lister, G.S. 1992. Unroofing of active metamorphic core complexes in the D'Entrecasteaux Islands, Papua New Guinea. Geology 20: 907–910.

Hill, E.J., Baldwin, S.L. and Lister, G.S. 1995. Magmatism as an essential driving force for formation of active metamorphic core complexes in eastern Papua New Guinea. Journal of Geophysics Research 100: 10441–10451

National Tidal Facility Australia, 2002. Pacific Country Report, Sea Level & Climate: Their Present State, Tuvalu. 22 p.

Reson. 2002. SeaBat 8160 Multibeam Echo Sounder System operator’s manual, v3.00.

Silver, E. 2005. KM04-19 Cruise Report. University of California, Santa Cruz, 64 p.



Smith, I.E.M. 1976. Peralkaline rhyolites from the D'Entrecasteaux Islands, Papua New Guinea. In: Johnson, R.W. (ed.) Volcanism in Australasia: Amsterdam (Elsevier), pp. 275–285.

Smith, I.E. and Simpson, C.J. 1972. Late Cenozoic uplift in the Milne Bay area, eastern Papua New Guinea. Bur. Min. Resour. Aust. Bull. 125: 29–35

Stolz, A.J., Davies, G.R., Crawford, A.J. and Smith, I.E.M. 1993. Sr, Nd and Pb isotopic compositions of calc-alkaline and peralkaline silicic volcanics from the D'Entrecasteaux Islands, Papua New Guinea, and their tectonic significance. Mineral. Petrology 47: 103–126.

Sontek, 2001. SonWave-PRO: Directional wave data collection, SonTek Technical Notes, 12 p. http://www.sontek.com/apps/waves/dirwave/wavemeas.htm

Tappin, D. 1999. Tsunami – offshore surveys after the Papua New Guinea Event of July 1998. SOPAC Projects summary PJ0013, 12 p.

Tappin, D.R., Watts, P., McMurty, G.M., Lafoy, Y., and Matsumoto, T. 2001. The Sissano, Papua New Guinea tsunami of July 1998 – offshore evidence on the source mechanism. Marine Geology 175: 1–23.

Taylor, B., Goodliffe, A., Martinez, F. and Hey, R. 1995. Continental rifting and initial sea-floor spreading in the Woodlark Basin. Nature 374: 534–537.

Tregoning, P., Lambeck, K., Stolz, A., Morgan, P., McClusky, S., van der Beek, P., McQueen, H., Jackson, R., Little, R., Laing, A. and Murphy, B. 1998. Estimation of current plate motions in Papua New Guinea from global positioning system observations. Journal of Geophysics Research 103(12): 181–12, 203.

Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Project. TAO. http://tao.noaa.gov/

Weissel, J.K., Taylor, B. and Karner, G.D. 1982. The opening of the Woodlark basin, subduction of the Woodlark spreading system, and the evolution of northern Melanesia since mid-Pliocene time. Tectonophysics 87: 253–277.



APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – Statement of Accuracy and Suitability for Charting

Bathymetric maps are topographic maps of the sea floor. The bathymetric map serves the basic tool for performing scientific, engineering, marine geophysical and environmental studies. The information presented in this report and enclosed charts are intended to assist persons and authorities engaged in recreation, tourism, marine resource related industries, Hydrographic mapping, coastal development, trade and commerce, sovereignty and security, and environmental management. It is therefore important that users be informed of the uncertainties associated with the data and with products constructed from it. The following is an outline of the survey equipment used and the operating principles, including limitations and estimates regarding the data accuracy.

A1.1 Horizontal positioning

The methods used to acquire survey data will affect the final product accuracy. The global positioning system, GPS, uses radio signals from satellites that orbit the earth to calculate the position of the GPS receiver. Stand alone GPS has an estimated accuracy as good as approximately 10 m, depending on satellite configuration and atmospheric conditions. In addition to this, equipment and measurements errors also need to be considered.

A general rule of thumb is that surveys should be conducted with a positioning accuracy of 1 mm at the scale of the chart. Therefore, at a scale of 1 : 10 000, the survey would be required to be accurate to 10 m.

The present S-44 4th Edition Standard of the International Hydrographic Office (IHO) includes a depth-dependent factor that takes into account the added uncertainty of the positions of soundings from Multibeam echo sounder systems as depth increases. The relevant survey orders are listed in Table A1.1, with Multibeam surveys conducted by SOPAC generally falling into orders 2 and 3.

Table A1.1. Recommended accuracy of survey orders

Survey order Application Recommended Accuracy

Order 1 Harbours and navigation channels 5 m + 5% of depth

Order 2 Depths < 200 m 20 m + 5% of depth

Order 3 Depths > 200 m 150 m + 5% of depth

For the purpose of this survey, it was assumed that the use of GPS provided adequate precision in terms of horizontal position. Therefore, it is not recommended to interpret nearshore data at scales larger than 1 : 10 000, or a grid size smaller than 10 m. For areas with water depths greater than 200 m, a charting scale of least 1 : 50 000 is recommended.

A1.2 Depth measurements

Bathymetric maps provide information about the depth of water from the water surface to the seabed. Through the use of detailed depth contours and full use of bathymetric data, the size, shape and distribution of underwater features are clearly revealed. The depth is measured using a ship-mounted Multibeam echo sounder (MBES). The MBES transducer produces an acoustic pulse designed as a fan that is wide in the across-track and narrow in the along-track direction (Figure A1.1). The swath of seabed covered by this transmit beam is typically twice the water depth. The pulse of sound emitted from the MBES travels through the water column and is reflected back as an echo and received as numerous narrow beams by the receiving elements



of the MBES. The measurements are time based, and by using the speed of sound in seawater each time is converted first to a range and then, knowing the beam angle, to a depth. The distance to the seabed is then combined with the movement of the vessel to stabilise it into a real-world framework. The framework is then positioned to provide XYZ soundings for each beam’s interaction with the seabed. A series of these swaths are then combined to produce a three-dimensional representation of the seafloor topography.

The accuracy of the MBES system is critically dependent on the corrections applied for vessel motion (heave, pitch, roll, yaw, and heading). However, the absolute accuracy of single beam and multibeam bathymetry depends on several factors that are not easy to determine. For single beam data, probably the principal errors that may be introduced are due to topographic features falling between survey lines. Multibeam systems give far better coverage.

The S-44 4th Edition Standard of the IHO lists values “a” and “b” (Table A1.2) that should be introduced into the following equation to calculate the error limits for depth accuracy:

22 dba , where d = depth.

Table A1.2. Values for calculating error limits for depth accuracy

Survey order Application Constants

Order 1 Harbours and navigation channels a = 0.5 m, b = 0.013

Order 2 Depths < 200 m a = 1.0 m, b = 0.023

Order 3 Depths > 200 m a = 1.0 m, b = 0.023

For example, the IHO recommends that a near-shore coastal survey (Order 2) in water depths of 20 m should have a maximum error of ±1.1 m.

A MBES has, as any other measuring instrument, an inherent limit in its achievable accuracy. The total measurement accuracy, i.e. the uncertainty in the depth and location of the soundings, also depends upon the errors of the auxiliary instruments such as the motion reference unit, the gyro compass, and the measurements of the speed of sound through the water column. The sea state at the time of the survey also contributes significantly to the quality of the data. The possible accuracy of the measured depths may be estimated by considering the following main error sources.

Figure A1.1. Conceptual illustration of bathymetric data acquisition with a Multibeam echosounder, MBES (source: http://www.rcom.marum.de, accessed 10/01/2007)



A1.3 Error budget analysis for depths

Measurement The nadir-beam bottom detection range resolution of the multibeam system has a maximum limit of 0.1 m (Reson, 2002). However, multibeam systems are particularly susceptible to errors in the far range (outer beams), and detection is estimated at ±0.3 m plus 0.5 % of the depth. Errors also include the detection of the sea floor due to local variations of depth within the beam footprint, especially in the outer beams, and a varying density of the bottom material. This may be significant if a relatively low frequency transducer is used on soft marine muds in shallow water.

Transducer draft The transducer depth may be accurate to ± 0.1 m. However, the draft of the vessel due to the variability in vessel loading, e.g. fuel and fresh water storage, was not determined. It is estimated that this introduced a water depth independent error of up to ± 0.2 m. Dynamic draft errors, e.g. vessel squat, may also be significant.

Sound velocity The sound velocity profiles measured by the conductivity-temperature-depth sensor (CTD) probe did not reach full survey depths in waters exceeding 400 m water depths. An inaccurate sound path from the transducer to the bottom and back will affect not only the observed depth of water, but also the apparent position of the observed sounding. This error is presumed to exceed 0.5% of the water depth beyond the direct CTD measurements. In order to minimise this error, ARGO and GDEM data may be used to supplement the CTD data.

Heave This error is directly dependent on the sea state and the sensitivity of the motion sensor and installation parameters. The MRU installation did not account for the offset distance between MRU, the centre of gravity, and the MBES transducer mount. The software was able to perform lever arm calculations and heave compensation during post-processing, and the vertical error is assumed to be significant only in heavy seas.

Tide/water level Uncertainties due to tides may be significant, especially where predicted tides some distance from the survey area are used. Perhaps ± 0.3 m for uncertainty in tidal datum need to be considered.

From the listing above, it is estimated that the measured depths in 20 m have an accuracy of ± 1.5 m. However, the complete bathymetric model, or digital terrain model (DTM), is based on some form of interpolation between the sampled depths from several survey lines. Consequently, the total uncertainty associated with a bathymetric model will include uncertainties due to horizontal positioning, and uncertainties introduced by the interpolation process, and will therefore be larger than the depth sounding uncertainty.

A1.4 Multibeam echosounder data density

The density of data used to construct a bathymetric grid is an important factor in its resolution – the denser the data, the higher the resolution that can be achieved. Sounding density is critical in terms of seabed feature detection and delineation. The two main factors that control the potential bathymetric target resolution capability of a multibeam echosounder are the distance between individual soundings (both in the cross-track and along-track dimensions), and the footprint size. The footprint is the area on the bottom covered by the sound pulse. Footprint size is a function of range, beam angle, and receiver and transmitter beam widths. A high sounding density and small footprint will result in higher resolution data. Conversely, the target detection capability is going to decay as a result of a growing projected beam footprint and decreasing data density.

The along-track spacing is controlled by the ping rate, which in turn is limited by the two-way travel time from the source to the furthermost point imaged. The maximum across-track spacing depends again primarily on the range, but also on the equiangular beam spacing. The size of the



beams received by the MBES system is between one and one and a half degrees. This means that a system mounted on a ship will have a larger projected footprint as the water depth increases. The footprint will also be larger at the outer beams than at the centre of the swath, as the range and incident angles increase with distance from the nadir beam. It is possible to have local variations of depth within the beam footprint, causing vertical error and affecting amplitude detection.

Table A1.3 shows a summary of the projected beam footprint size under varying water depths for the two MBES systems currently in use by SOPAC. It should be noted that the higher frequency system (SeaBat 8101) is not appropriate for applications in waters deeper than 200 m. Due to the constant beam width; the sounded area varies according to the depth and slope, which results in a variable data density in the survey area.

Table A1.3. Projected footprint size under varying water depths

Water depth

SeaBat 8160 (deep water)

50 kHz, 126 beams at 1.2

SeaBat 8101 (shallow water)

240 kHz, 101 beams at 1.5

(m) Inner footprint, nadir (m)

Outer footprint (m) Inner footprint, nadir (m)

Outer footprint (m)

20 0.4 5.8 0.5 3.5

50 1.0 14.4 1.3 17.6

100 2.1 28.8 2.6 35.3

200 4.2 57.6 5.2 70.6

500 10.5 143.9 N/A N/A

1000 20.9 287.9 N/A N/A

1500 31.4 431.8 N/A N/A

Table A1.3 above assumes a horizontal seabed, and shows the variation in across-track footprint size with water depth and beam angle. The sounding density and swath width will also vary when surveying steep slopes, or highly incised margins, as the footprint size varies strongly with topography. Therefore, deeper sections have larger projected footprints and fewer data point. This has the effect that a bathymetric feature whose lateral dimensions are less than the beam footprint size will not be resolved.

It should also be noted that the along-track resolution usually exceeds the across-track resolution due to ping rates, especially in deep water. Since ping rates are limited by the two-way travel time, rates for water depths of 20 m and 1500 m are 12.9 and 0.2 pings per second, respectively. Using maximum ping rates, or when surveying in deep water, the same area may be measured with the outer beams for several pings, which may give inconsistent sounding data due to the poor repeatability on uneven seabed.

In order to take into account depth-dependent point density, it is generally accepted to grid bathymetric data at a resolution that is on the order of the average beam footprint size, typically 10% of the water depth.



Appendix 2 – MBES Data Coverage

Figure A2.1. SOPAC/EU MBES coverage for the Madang area.

Figure A2.2. SOPAC/EU MBES coverage for the Sissano area.



Figure A2.3. SOPAC/EU MBES coverage for Vanimo area.



Appendix 3 – CTD Profiles







Appendix 4 – High-Resolution A0 Charts, Papua New Guinea

Charts are available from SOPAC, and can be downloaded from its website (www.sopac.org). Full size is 841 x 1189 mm. (Low-resolution A4 representations follow.)

Chart No Title Scale Drawing No.

1 Madang, Papua New Guinea 1 : 50 000 ER115.1

2 Sissano, Papua New Guinea 1 : 50 000 ER115.2

3 Vanimo, Papua New Guinea 1 : 50 000 ER115.3



Appendix 5 – Multibeam Log Sheets

SOPAC MULTIBEAM ONLINE LINE LOG 8101

Static Offsets Hypack Project Name: PG_Madang

GPS: X = 1.92; Y = -6.92; Z = -6.29 Country: Papua New Guinea

MRU: X = 0.00; Y = 0.00; Z = 1.28 Area: Madang

MBES Head: X = -2.15; Y = -2.82; Z = 1.34 Vessel: Summer Spriti

Dynamic Offsets MBES System: Reson 8101 Yaw = 0; Pitch = 0; Roll = 0; Latency = 0; not yet determined Positioning: Stand alone

Date Location Line No.

Time Fix HDG SPD

Filename (.HSX)

Log File (.LOG)

Line QC Comments / Online changes SOL EOL SOL EOL

31/05/2006 Madang 7 06:16 06:26 520 524 68 7.17 007_0616 sk madang port

1 06:27 07:28 525 550 23 5.7 001_0627 sk

8 07:28 08:00 551 565 1.4 6.2 008_0728 sk

9 08:04 08:09 567 569 204 6.15 009_0804 sk into lagoon to deploy adp

N passage 5 08:12 08:29 570 574 var 2.3 005_0812 sk

Madang lagoon 10:33 10:36 576 577 228 6.3 006_1033 jk from N passage ADP1 to ADP2

Madang lagoon 10:37 10:57 578 588 167 7 004_1037 sk ADP1 to ADP2

Madang lagoon 11:35 11:43 589 592 5 7.5 002_1135 jk going over ADP2 location

Madang lagoon 11:44 11:46 593 594 33 6.3 003_1144 jk going over ADP2 location

Madang lagoon 11:47 12:35 595 617 190 7.2 007_1147 jk ADP2 to S channel

12:37 13:04 618 631 180 7.2 001_1237 sk

outside 13:10 13:36 632 644 42 7.6 008_1310 sk

13:38 13:59 526 655 28 7.6 009_1338

14:07 14:09 656 657 60 005_1407 gap fill

14:10 14:25 658 665 195 7 006_1410 sk

Madang lagoon 14:34 14:39 666 668 252 7.4 004_1434 jk near wharf



02/06/2006 Madang lagoon 15:26 16:03 1030 1051 19 8 005_1526 jk from town to madang lagoon nth

Madang lagoon 16:59 17:14 1054 1059 6 5 006_1659 jk near ADP2 looking for anchorage

Madang lagoon 17:42 17:45 1062 1064 306 7.8 004_1741 jk

Madang lagoon 17:48 17:52 1066 1068 250 6.2 002_1748 jk short line to anchorage

03/06/2006 Madang lagoon 07:47 08:04 1079 1082 329 4 006_0747 sk

Madang lagoon 08:06 08:20 1083 1089 64 5.5 007_0806 sk

Madang lagoon 08:21 08:32 1090 1094 189 4.4 020_0821 sk stopped .. Too shallow

Madang lagoon 08:39 08:49 1095 1088 183 5.5 009_0838 sk

08:57 09:10 1101 1105 295 5.8 020_0856 sk stopped .. Too shallow

09:12 09:31 1106 1113 85 6.6 001_0912 sk

09:32 09:33 1114 1115 300 7 002_0931 sk

09:33 09:42 1116 1121 6 7 003_0933 sk lagoon passage

09:44 09:49 1122 1125 244 8 004_0944 sk

09:54 1126 dnp

SOPAC MULTIBEAM ONLINE LINE LOG 8160

Static Offsets Hypack Project Name: PG_Madang

GPS: X = 1.92; Y = -6.92; Z = -6.29 Country: Papua New Guinea

MRU: X = 0.00; Y = 0.00; Z = 1.28 Area: Madang

MBES Head: X = 0.86; Y = -3.96; Z = 1.52 Vessel: Summer Spriti

Dynamic Offsets MBES System: Reson 8160

Yaw = 0.00; Pitch = -1.00; Roll = -1.30; Latency = 0.40 Positioning: Stand alone


Time Fix HDG SPD

Filename (.HSX)

Log File (.LOG)


29/05/2006 Madang 09:47 10:18 3 41 76 8 001_0947 JK from old wharf through S channel out

Madang 3 10:53 11:12 42 51 221 7.6 003_1053 sk



Madang 1 11:18 13:16 52 114 356 8 001_1118 sk gyro problem

Madang 5 13:27 14:56 115 159 170 7.8 005_1327 sk gyro problem

Madang 6 14:59 15:18 163 173 173 7.8 006_1459 sk gyro problem

Madang 15:25 15:35 174 178 var 004_1525 sk into madang lagoon

01/06/2006 Madang outside 06:23 06:45 669 680 36 8 000_0623 jk

Madang outside 06:51 08:16 681 722 306 7.5 000_0651 jk

Madang outside 08:23 09:33 723 758 190 8 000_0823 jk

Madang outside 09:36 09:41 759 762 128 8.5 000_0936 jk gap fill



Madang outside 11:03 11:50 799 823 228 8 000_1103 jk

Madang outside 12:38 13:16 824 842 333 7.3 000_1238 sk near shore

Madang outside 13:24 13:56 843 857 167 7.2 000_1324 sk

Madang outside 14:11 14:26 858 865 358 7.3 000_1411 SK





02/06/2006 Madang outside 06:36 07:05 944 956 172 7.2 002_0636 sk

Madang outside 07:10 07:37 957 970 327 6 003_0709 sk

Madang outside 07:44 08:06 971 981 230 7 007_0743 sk



Madang outside 08:52 08:57 1002 1004 90 8.2 012_0852 sk planet rock fill

Madang outside 09:39 09:52 1006 1013 262 8.1 013_0936 sk back from ctd cast



Madang outside 10:09 10:19 1023 1029 8 8.5 009_1009 sk gap fill



SOPAC MULTIBEAM ONLINE LINE LOG (8101)

Installation

Offsets Calibration Offsets Hypack Project Name: PG_Sissano

Device X Y Z Yaw Pitch Roll Lat Country: Papua New Guinea

GPS 1.92 -

6.92 -

6.29 0.00 Area: Sissano

Gyro ? 0.00 Vessel: Summer Spriti

MRU 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 MBES System: Reson 8101

MBES Head -2.15

-2.82 1.34

-1.00

-2.00

-1.60 0.00 Positioning: Stand alone

Patch test not yet performed


Time Fix HDG SPD

Filename (.HSX)

Log File (.LOG)


05/06/2006 Sissano 14:32 14:43 231 237 195 8 001_1432 jk find optimum working depth for 8101

Sissano 2 14:53 15:43 238 261 50 7.6 002_1453 jk SS not updated near 247

Sissano 2 15:43 15:43 262 263 115 7 012_1543 jk

Sissano 2 15:45 16:55 264 297 125 7 002_1544 sk Arnold R. influence on outer beams?

Sissano 2 16:56 17:09 301 309 129 8 002_1656 jk

Sissano 2 17:09 17:09 310 311 141 8.3 012_1709 jk line mixup. Small file ok

Sissano 2 17:09 17:09 312 313 141 8.3 001_1709 jk line mixup. Small file ok

Sissano 2 17:10 18:08 314 344 141 8.3 002_1709 jk

07/06/2006 Sissano 06:50 07:14 674 683 235 6 006_0649 sk from anchorage point to Aitape

Sissano 07:23 07:59 684 700 72 6 010_0722 sk from Aitape to line 10

Sissano 10 07:59 08:01 701 702 287 8.2 019_0759 sk short line change direction

Sissano 10 08:01 08:25 703 716 269 8.2 010_0801 sk

Sissano 19 08:30 08:58 717 731 100 8 019_0830 sk squall coming in

Sissano 16:11 16:25 865 872 59 7.2 007_1611 sk from Aitape wharf to line 7

Sissano 7 16:25 17:17 873 899 281 8.6 007_1625 spike 881,882

08/06/2006 Sissano 14 14:19 15:07 1181 1211 307 8.6 014_1419 closest to shore 10 fathom line

Sissano




Installation

Offsets Calibration Offsets Hypack Project: PG_Sissano

Device X Y Z Yaw Pitch Roll Lat. Country: Papua New Guinea

GPS 1.92-

6.92 -

6.29 0.40 Area: Sissano

Gyro ? 0.00 Vessel: Summer Spirit

MRU 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 MBES System: Reson 8160 MBES Head 0.86

-3.96 1.52 0.00

-1.00


Patch test performed in Suva on 25/04/2006


Time Fix HDG SPD

Filename (.HSX)


04/06/2006 Sissano 32 17:24 17:55 993 1024 287 8.4 032_1724 sk approaching Survey area. Events reset to start at 1

05/06/2006 Sissano 32 06:56 08:29 1 50 273 7.9 032_0656 jk approaching Survey area from E

Sissano 08:30 09:19 51 76 307 8.9 012_0830 jk approaching Survey area from E

Sissano 12 09:20 10:24 77 113 300 8.9 012_0920 jk start of first line. GPS spike near 104-105

Sissano 12 10:24 10:25 114 115 271 9 001_1014 jk v. short file

Sissano 12 10:25 10:44 116 126 274 9 012_1025 jk

Sissano 10:46 10:49 127 129 43 8.6 001_1046 jk heading NE into deeper water for CTD cast

Sissano 12 11:35 12:45 130 170 275 8.6 012_1134 sk

Sissano 12:45 12:53 171 176 281 9.1 001_1245 sk

Sissano 12 12:53 14:23 177 230 288 9.2 012_1253 jk

05/06/2006 Sissano 18:27 19:07 345 367 24 8.6 002_1827 jk heading offshore to drift overnight

06/06/2006 Sissano 4 06:20 07:21 368 398 173 7.9 004_0620 jk along E canyon area

Sissano 4 07:32 08:57 399 443 160 8 004_0732 jk low relief shore parallel ridges (414)

Sissano 9 09:00 09:26 444 458 268 8.9 009_0900 sk

Sissano 10 09:30 09:56 459 473 105 8.3 010_0930 sk

Sissano 5 09:59 11:02 474 509 261 8.6 005_0959 sk



Sissano 5 11:02 11:27 510 524 272 8.7 005_1102 jk

Sissano 11:29 11:37 525 529 253 8.8 016_1129 jk heading for SOL 16

Sissano 16 11:38 12:00 530 542 161 8.4 016_1138 jk

Sissano 7 12:01 12:30 543 557 314 8.5 007_1201 jk GPS spike

Sissano 15 12:32 13:03 558 573 148 8.4 015_1232 jk very shallow at EOL <5m

Sissano 6 13:07 13:31 574 587 332 7.6 006_1307 jk

Sissano 14 15:01 15:36 588 606 121 8 014_1501 sk

Sissano 13 15:40 16:08 607 622 318 8.2 013_1540 sk

Sissano 11 16:12 16:37 623 636 137 8 011_1612 sk

Sissano 16:43 16:46 637 639 206 8.4 006_1643 jk heading for line 6

Sissano 6 16:48 17:52 640 673 94 8.1 006_1648 sk

07/06/2006 Sissano 20 19:13 732 734 020_1913 DNP matrix problem

Sissano 09:18 09:19 735 736 020_0918 DNP test file

Sissano 20 09:21 09:43 737 750 288 7.6 020_0921 sk

Sissano 21 09:47 09:52 751 754 19 8.6 021_0946 sk perpendicular to line 20

Sissano 18 09:55 10:24 755 769 81 8.2 018_0955 sk

Sissano 10:29 10:34 770 773 302 9.1 022_1029 jk heading for line 22

Sissano 22 11:06 12:02 774 805 280 9 022_1106 JK

Sissano 26 12:06 12:12 806 810 129 8.2 026_1206 jk

Sissano 27 12:16 12:21 811 814 274 9.2 027_1216 jk

Sissano 28 12:25 12:34 815 819 125 7.8 028_1224 jk

Sissano 25 12:41 13:04 820 832 94 025_1241 sk

Sissano 29 13:09 13:22 833 840 276 8.5 029_1309 sk

Sissano 30 13:24 13:37 841 849 98 8.5 030_1324 sk

Sissano 13:38 14:07 850 864 113 8.5 030_1338 sk heading to Aitape wharf

Sissano 1 17:26 17:43 900 910 96 8.9 001_1726 sk

Sissano 2 17:45 18:06 911 922 274 8.3 002_1745 sk

Sissano 1 18:15 18:56 923 943 63 8.5 001_1815 sk

Sissano 19:30 19:25 944 956 7 8.5 001_1903 sk off to drift



08/06/2006 Sissano 06:08 06:39 957 969 190 6 002_0607 jk heading S into survey area after overnight drift

Sissano 06:39 06:43 970 972 277 7 002_0639 jk heading for CTD cast

Sissano 16 07:17 08:18 973 1008 313 8.5 016_0717 jk

Sissano 18 08:24 08:58 1009 1029 125 8.1 018_0824 jk

Sissano 13 09:11 09:22 1030 1037 143 8.2 013_0910 jk

Sissano 12 09:26 10:10 1038 1063 326 8.8 012_0926 sk

Sissano 10 10:14 11:00 1064 1089 161 8.4 010_1014 jk

Sissano 8 11:06 11:46 1090 1114 335 8.8 008_1106 jk

Sissano 6 11:51 15:52 1115 1148 132 8.1 006_1151 jk

Sissano 4 13:02 13:34 1149 1168 336 8.8 004_1302 sk

Sissano 2 13:43 14:02 1169 1180 116 8.4 002_1343 sk

Sissano 1 15:24 15:28 1212 1214 318 8.8 001_1524 sk DNPmatrix problem

Sissano 15:28 15:28 1215 1216 318 8.8 014_1528 sk DNP

Sissano 15:29 16:54 1217 1258 288 8.9 002_1529 sk 50 fathom contour

Sissano 2 17:01 17:28 1259 1276 277 9.5 002_1701 jk line continued in project PG_Vanimo


Installation

Offsets Calibration Offsets Hypack Project: PG_Vanimo

Device X Y Z Yaw Pitch Roll Lat Country: Papua New Guinea

GPS 1.92-

6.92 -

6.29 0.00 Area: Vanimo

Gyro N/A 0.00 Vessel: Summer Spirit

MRU 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 MBES System: Reson 8101 MBES Head

-2.15

-2.82 1.34

-1.00

-2.00


Patch test not yet performed




Time Fix HDG SPD

Filename (.HSX)

Log File (.LOG)


10/06/2006 Vanimo 16:01 17:38 342 384 100 7 002_1601 sk

17:39 15:50 391 396 239 7.7 002_1739 sk into harbour

11/06/2006 Vanimo 06:43 06:51 405 408 311 4.8 002_0643 jk out from hrbour

Vanimo 06:54 417 104 6.6 003_0653 jk

Vanimo 10:02 12:21 517 554 151 7.1 006_1002 sk

Vanimo 11:27 557 002_1127 DNP

Patch test performed with LRK differential GPS

12/06/2006 Vanimo patch test 1 15:49 15:52 814 816 304 6.2 001_1549 jk roll 1

Vanimo patch test 1 15:58 16:01 817 819 120 6.2 001_1558 jk roll 2

Vanimo patch test 2 16:09 16:12 820 822 26 6.2 002_1609 jk Pitch 1

Vanimo patch test 2 16:16 16:20 823 825 200 6 002_1616 jk Pitch 2 & Yaw 1

Vanimo patch test 2 16:28 16:33 826 828 26 4 002_1628 jk Latency 1

Vanimo patch test 3 16:42 16:45 829 831 209 6.5 003_1642 jk Yaw 2

Vanimo patch test 2 16:50 16:52 832 834 27 8.4 002_1650 jk Latency 2

Performance test performed with LRK differential GPS

12/06/2006 Vanimo performance test 6 17:13 17:16 835 837 183 6 006_1713 jk 5 pings/s

Vanimo performance test 7 17:20 17:23 838 839 359 6 007_1720 jk

Vanimo performance test 8 17:28 17:30 840 841 183 6 008_1728 jk

Vanimo performance test 9 17:35 17:38 842 843 3 5.8 009_1735 jk





ADP search performed with LRK differential GPS

14/06/2006 Vanimo ADP search all lines from today are over ADP site

8101 fitted and running. 20m; 5.0 p/s; Power 5; Pulse 38us; Gain 35; TVG.




Installation Offsets Calibration Offsets Hypack Project: PG_Vanimo

Device X Y Yaw Pitch Roll Lat. Country: Papua New Guinea

GPS 1.92 -6.92 0.40 Area: Vanimo

Gyro ? 0.00 Vessel: Summer Spirit

MRU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MBES System: Reson 8160 MBES Head 0.86 -3.96 0.00 -1.00 -1.30 0.00 Positioning: Stand alone

Patch test performed in Suva on 25/04/2006


Time Fix HDG SPD

Filename (.HSX)

Line QC Comments / Online changesSOL EOL SOL EOL

08/06/2006 approaching Vanimo 2 17:47 18:51 996 1069 294 9.2 002_1747 sk Line continued from last line in PG_Sissano

approaching Vanimo 2 18:51 19:50 1070 1106 285 9.5 002_1851 jk

GPS drops near 1083,1089,1096,1097,1100. Stopped logging as off course due to debris from river

10/06/2006 Vanimo 06:35 06:45 7 12 18 7.8 001_0635 jk Events reset to 1. Heading out of bay into deep

Vanimo 1 06:47 08:08 19 67 283 8.9 001_0647 jk

Vanimo 1 08:08 08:19 82 89 300 8.9 001_0808 jk

Vanimo 3 08:26 09:27 90 128 131 6.5 003_0826 sk

Vanimo 4 08:26 09:27 129 133 130 6.7 004_0927 sk dnp

Vanimo 3 09:28 10:40 134 165 100 6.7 003_0928 sk

Vanimo 3 10:40 11:44 174 216 103 6.9 003_1040 sk

Vanimo 3 11:44 12:17 217 231 110 6.6 003_1144 jk

Vanimo 1 12:24 12:50 232 248 289 8.8 001_1223 jk

Vanimo 1 13:31 14:27 251 283 287 8.3 001_1331 jk

Vanimo 14:43 15:44 291 325 294 8.8 001_1443 jk

11/06/2006 Vanimo 2 07:08 08:39 429 470 120 6.5 002_0708 jk



Vanimo 4 08:44 09:49 471 507 301 8.5 004_0844 jk GPS spike 484

Vanimo 12:14 12:32 558 568 294 8.5 000_1214 jk

Vanimo 1 12:44 13:08 569 584 284 8.3 001_1244 jk

Vanimo 2 13:09 13:13 585 587 168 6.5 002_1309 jk

Vanimo 3 13:15 13:38 588 602 321 7.6 003_1315 jk

Vanimo 3 13:42 13:45 603 605 116 7.3 003_1342 jk

Vanimo 5 13:47 13:54 606 610 299 8.3 005_1347 sk

Vanimo 4 14:15 14:37 611 627 302 8.7 004_1415 sk

Vanimo 14:47 15:16 633 646 89 7 001_1447 sk

Vanimo 15:18 15:22 647 650 271 9 001_1518 sk gap fill

Vanimo 15:26 15:36 651 656 185 8 001_1526 sk into harbour for anchor overnight

12/06/2006 Vanimo 06:33 06:40 657 661 357 6.4 000_0633 sk out of harbour

Vanimo 06:44 06:47 668 671 210 7.7 000_0644 sk dnp too shallow abondoned

Vanimo 06:59 07:04 672 675 282 8.9 000_0659 sk gap fill



Vanimo 07:33 08:42 684 720 291 8.5 000_0733 sk indonesian border line

Vanimo 08:49 09:42 721 745 107 7.1 00_0849 sk

Vanimo 09:44 10:22 746 761 296 7 000_0944 sk gap fill

Vanimo 10:29 10:45 762 768 227 5 000_1029 sk

Vanimo 10:51 11:08 769 777 19 7.7 000_1051 sk parallel line to border

Vanimo 11:37 12:44 778 808 110 6.9 000_1137 jk offshore line

Vanimo 12:52 13:02 809 813 105 6.8 000_1252 jk gap fill

13/06/2006 Vanimo 11:24 12:45 858 897 94 7.4 000_1124 jk outside line

Vanimo 13:15 14:26 898 929 126 7.1 000_1315 sk GPS spike at 922,

Vanimo 14:33 14:42 930 935 292 7.8 000_1433 sk

Documents

PAPUA NEW GUINEA TECHNICAL REPORT