Pitfalls in Seismic Interpretation

FINAL REPORT
2009 INDUS BASIN

3D MARINE SEISMIC SURVEY
FOR
BP PAKISTAN
USING M/V GEOWAVE CHAMPION
25th February 17th April 2009
Report No. :
EOM1171
Author(s)
John Granville &

Eryl Jones
Date
10th July 2009
BP Pakistan/EOM1171/JG/EJ/dm/df
T
F
E
W
RPS Energy,
Nelson House,
Coombe Lane, Axminster,
Devon. EX13 5AX, UK.
+44 (0)1297 34656
+44 (0)1297 33277
rpsenergy@rpsgroup.com
www.rpsgroup.com
CONTENTS
Title
Contents
Page Number
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1.
SUMMARY OF EVENTS
2. SURVEY SUMMARIES
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
POSITIONING PARAMETERS
RECORDING PARAMETERS
STREAMERS
SOURCE
3. PROJECT SUMMARY
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
3.6.
3.7.
DESIGN
SEISMIC INTERFERENCE
TIDAL AND OCEAN CURRENTS, STREAMER FEATHER ANGLES
WEATHER AND SEA CONDITIONS
CREW CHANGES
SHIPPING ACTIVITY
FISHING ACTIVITY
4. ENERGY SOURCE
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
SEAMAP GUNLINK 2000 CONTROLLER SPECIFICATIONS

COMPRESSOR PLANT
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
5. STREAMERS
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
5.4.
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
DEPTH CONTROL AND HEADING SENSORS
AUTOMATIC STREAMER RETRIEVER SYSTEM
EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCE
6. RECORDING SYSTEM
6.1.
6.2.
6.3.
1
1
4
4
5
5
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
11
11
13
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
13
13
13
7. NAVIGATION AND POSITIONING
14
7.1.
7.2.
7.3.
GEODETIC PARAMETERS
CALIBRATION AND VERIFICATION OF NAVIGATION SYSTEMS
VESSEL POSITIONING
7.3.1. GPS Positioning
7.3.2. Heading Sensors
7.3.3. Echo Sounder, Velocity Profiles and Tidal Corrections
7.3.4. Current Meter
7.4.
SOURCE AND STREAMER POSITIONING
7.4.1. Relative GPS
7.4.2. Acoustics
7.4.3. Streamer Compasses
14
14
16
16
18
19
21
21
21
22
24
7.5.
7.6.
7.7.
INTEGRATED NAVIGATION AND PROCESSING SYSTEM

3D BINNING
POSITIONING DATA QUALITY
8. DATA PROCESSING AND QC

8.1.
8.2.
8.3.
HARDWARE
SOFTWARE
QC PROCESSING FLOW
8.3.1. Reformat Processing Flow
8.3.2. Basic Stack 3D Processing Flow
8.3.3. Basic Offset QC Processing Flow Chart
8.3.4. Basic Means Processing Flow
8.4.
QUALITY CONTROL OUTPUT
8.5.
REQUIRED DELIVERABLES
8.6.
PERFORMANCE COMMENTS
25
25
26
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
33
33
33
33
9. PERSONNEL LIST
35
10. HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
37
10.1.
10.2.
10.3.
HEALTH
SAFETY
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
11. VESSELS
11.1.
11.2.
11.3.
GEOWAVE CHAMPION
SUPPORT AND STREAMER GUARD VESSEL VENTURE G
SUPPLEMENTARY CABLE GUARD VESSEL AL MASHALA
12. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

12.1.
12.2.
12.3.
12.4.
12.5.
12.6.
12.7.
12.8.
12.9.
12.10.
12.11.
12.12.
12.13.
DATA ACQUISITION
COVERAGE
HSE
CONTRACT
EQUIPMENT TOWING CONFIGURATION
STREAMERS
ENERGY SOURCE
SERCEL SEAL RECORDING INSTRUMENTATION
NAVIGATION AND POSITIONING SYSTEMS
GEOWAVE CHAMPION
PERSONNEL
MARINE MAMMAL OBSERVERS
PAKISTAN NAVAL OFFICER OPERATIONS OBSERVER
13. PROJECT TIMING ANALYSIS AND COMMENT

13.1.
13.2.
13.3.
ANALYSIS TABLE BY ACTIVITY

ANALYSIS TABLE BY CATEGORY
COMMENTS
37
37
37
39
39
39
40
41
41
41
41
42
42
42
42
42
43
43
43
44
44
45
45
45
45
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F
APPENDIX G
APPENDIX H
APPENDIX I
APPENDIX J
APPENDIX K
Location Map and Prime Lines

Coverage Plots
Examples of Inline and Crossline Stacks
Timeslices
Vessel Positioning and In-water Equipment Layout Diagrams
Vessel Specifications
Operations Log
Line Information Summaries
Project Production Tables and Charts
Timing Analysis Tables and Charts
Navigation QC Charts and Plots
FIGURES
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 8
FIGURE 9
FIGURE 10
Contour Map Image generated from all E Records extracted

from P1/90 files
Acoustic Networks
Front Acoustic Network
Source Separations (Crossline)
String to String Separations (Inline)
Streamer Head Separations (Crossline)
Overall Streamer Separations
Inline Average CofS to CNG
Average Values for Streamer Rotations
Average Values for Streamer Misclosures (Inline Misc)
TABLES
TABLE 1
TABLE 2
TABLE 3
TABLE 4
TABLE 5
TABLE 6
TABLE 7
TABLE 8
TABLE 9
TABLE 10
TABLE 11
TABLE 12
TABLE 13
TABLE 14
TABLE 15
Gyrocompass Calibration Results

DGPS Verification Results
RGPS Range and Bearing Observations of 4 Receivers
Veripos DGPS Reference Stations
Fugro MRDGPS Reference Stations
SAIV T/S Dip Results
Sippican T/S Dip Results
Binning Parameters for Offset Groups
Tapered Bin Expansion
Average Node Network Error Ellipses Semi-major axes
NRT A Priori Observation SDs
Average Source and Source Array Separations
Average Streamer Separations
Analysis by Activity
Analysis by Category
1.
INTRODUCTION
BP Pakistan contracted RPS Energy to provide on board geophysical and positioning

supervision for the duration of the 2009 Indus Basin 3D deepwater marine seismic programme.
Please find the project location and programme maps in APPENDIX A.
RPS Energy proposed and BP accepted John Granville to carry out geophysical supervision
and for Eryl Jones (also RPS Energy) for positioning. Patrick Haines (GeoGuide) was assigned
an HSE supervisory role aboard the chosen vessel throughout the entire project. With the
duration of the survey expected to be approximately 40-50 days it was agreed that the team of 3
would most likely remain on the vessel throughout, and that proved to be the case.
The contractor for the survey was Wavefield Inseis utilising their survey vessel the Geowave
Champion. Please find vessel details in APPENDIX F. The acquisition parameters were an
industry standard 10 x 6000 m spread of streamers (100 m between each) and a flip-flopping
source array of 3460 in. Please find source and streamer configuration diagrams in
APPENDIX E.
Initially the project area covered 2,014 km (full-fold) with a total of 66 lines oriented on a
312/132 heading, 33 lines with a sail length of 79.525 km (76.525 km full-fold) and 33 lines
45.550 km (42.550 km full-fold) in length. On 13th March 2009 the 33 shorter lines were
lengthened to 79.525 km, creating a final full-fold programme of 2,525.325 km. Two
programme maps in APPENDIX A display the original programme and also when the lines were
extended.
The Champion completed her previous project (for Eni Pakistan) on 20th February 2009 and
there then followed several days of streamer work (21st-24th) before she was ready to
commence acquisition for BP. It had been agreed that should the vessel be ready and the BP
Representatives had yet to arrive on board then acquisition should start. This proved to be the
case although only one line had been recorded when John Granville arrived at 16:00 (local) on
the afternoon of 25th February 2009. Once the data for the first sequence had been reviewed
and accepted the mobilisation document was signed off. Due to difficulties with the numbers of
personnel travelling (the mobilisation coincided with the scheduled crew change on 25th and 26th
February 2009), Eryl Jones and Patrick Haines were obliged to wait until the morning of 26th to
fly out to the vessel.
The focal point with respect to technical issues and general operations was Mike Smith (BP
Sunbury-On-Thames), whilst the primary recipient of the daily report was Younus Sheikh, BP
Pakistans Offshore Operations Manager based in Islamabad.
1.1.
SUMMARY OF EVENTS
Date 2009
23rd February
24th February
25th February
26th February
27th February
28th February
Event
John Granville travelled from home to Dubai, Eryl Jones was delayed due to
problems with a flight connection.
John Granville arrived in Karachi, Eryl Jones en route.
Pre-survey brief at the Ramada Hotel, BP and Wavefield staff in attendance.
Geowave Champion commenced production at 00:55 GMT.
Crew change helicopter flights commenced, John Granville aboard at 11:00.
Prime line acquisition.
Eryl Jones and Patrick Haines arrived aboard Geowave Champion on first
and second flights.
Date 2009
1st March
2nd March
3rd March
4th March
5th March
6th March
7th March
8th March
9th March
10th March
11th March
12th March
13th March
14th March
15th March
16th March
17th March
18th March
19th March
20th March
21st March
22nd March
23rd March
24th March
25th March
26th March
27th March
28th March
29th March
30th March
31st March
1st April
2nd April
3rd April
4th April
5th April
6th April
7th April
Event
Support vessel Venture G departed for Karachi for fuel and stores.
Prime line acquisition. Venture G back on station.
Prime line acquisition and a single catch-up infill.
Prime line acquisition, Sequence 021 aborted due to source problem.
Large fishing net snagged on the S7-S8 separation rope, acquisition
suspended in order to remove it.
Production resumed at 01:38 on a short section of infill.
Prime line acquisition thereafter.
Venture G alongside Champion from 08:00-17:20 local time, transferring
850 m3 of fuel.
Source separation rope from string 1 to S3 snapped, acquisition suspended
from 00:17 to 02:14.
Large fishing net snagged on S3-S4 separation rope, line continued to end
point.
Production suspended at 05:26 to recover guns and remove fishing net.
Production resumed at 04:28 with completion of reshoot (Sequence 021 on
8th March) followed by infill.
Infill acquisition.
Infill acquisition to completion of first half of the block, prime line acquisition
on the second half commenced at 12:38.
Production suspended at 08:37 to recover guns and remove fishing net.
Production resumed at 23:17 on a short section of infill.
Partial infill and prime acquisition 1 helicopter flight for crew change.
Prime and infill acquisition 3 helicopter flights for crew change.
Prime and infill acquisition 2 helicopter flights for crew change.
Prime line acquisition 1 helicopter flight for crew change.
Date 2009
8th April
9th April
10th April
11th April
12th April
13th April
14th April
15th April
16th April
17th April
Event
Prime and infill acquisition.
Infill acquisition.
Infill acquisition.
Infill acquisition finished, project satisfactorily complete.
Commenced recovery of all in-water equipment.
Recovering streamers.
Recovering streamers John Granville, Eryl Jones and Patrick Haines to
Karachi by helicopter.
Recovery of all in-water equipment complete, Geowave Champion transited
to Karachi and dropped anchor whilst awaiting clearance.
John Granville, Eryl Jones and Patrick Haines en route to London via Doha.
2.
SURVEY SUMMARIES
2.1.
POSITIONING PARAMETERS
Working Datum
WGS84
Spheroid Parameters
Spheroid
Semi-major axis
Inverse Flattening
:
:
:
WGS84
6378137.000 m
298.25722356
Projection Parameters
Type
Latitude of Origin
Longitude of Origin
False Easting
False Northing
Scale Factor
Grid Unit
Vertical Datum
: Transverse Mercator TM66NE

: 00 00 00.000 N
: 066 00 00.000 E
: 500000.000 m
: 0.000 m
: 0.9996
: 1m
: Mean Sea Level
Geoid Height
Value
Location (Survey Centre)
Origin of Value
: -48.82 m
: 22 42N, 66 46E
: EGM-96
Magnetic Declination
Value
Location
Origin of Value
: 0-164 changing by 0.042/year (24th Feb 2009)

: 22 42N, 66 46E
: IGRF-10
Vessel Positioning Systems

System 1
System 2
System 3
System 4
Source Arrays
Tailbuoys
: Fugro SkyFix-XP SDGPS

: Veripos Ultra SDGPS
: Veripos Standard Plus DGPS
: Fugro MRDGPS
: Konsberg Seatex 320
: Konsberg Seatex 220
Streamer Compass Positioning and Depth Control

Compasses
: ION DigiCOURSE 5011
Number per Streamer
: 23
Separation
: 300 m or less
Acoustics
: Sonardyne SIPS 2
Binning Parameters
X Origin
Y Origin
Azimuth J
Bin Size DX Inline
Bin Size DY Crossline
: 561696.27
: 2554775.27
: 132.0
: 6.25 m
: 25.00 m
Coverage Parameters
Nominal Fold
Offset Field Length
Number of Fields
Expanded Binning
Minimum coverage for Nears
Minimum coverage for Near Mids
Minimum coverage for Fars Mids
Minimum coverage for Fars Mids
2.2.
: 60
: 1500 m
: 4
: Tapered: 37.5 m near to 75 m far
: 90%
: 80%
: 65%
: 50%
Recording System
Number of Data Channels
Streamer 1 Starboard Outer
Streamer 2
Streamer 3
Streamer 4
Streamer 5
Streamer 6
Streamer 7
Streamer 8
Streamer 9
Streamer 10 Port Outer
Sample Rate
Record Length
Nominal Fold
Recording Start Delay
Recording Polarity
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Recording Media
Media Format
Low-cut Filter
Hi-cut Filter
Shot Interval
:
:
:
:
:
Sercel Seal Version 5.2.10

4800 plus auxiliaries
Channels 3 482
Channels 483 962
Channels 963 1442
Channels 1443 1922
Channels 1923 2402
Channels 2403 2882
Channels 2883 3362
Channels 3363 3842
Channels 3843 4322
Channels 4323 4802
2 ms
8050 ms
60
-50 ms
SEG convention - Positive pressure is recorded as a
negative number on tape
Dual recording to 3592 IBM 20 GB cartridge
SEG-D 8058 rev.132 bits IEEE
3 Hz at 6 dB/oct
200 Hz at 370 dB/oct
25 m
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Digital
Sercel Seal Oil filled
10 x 6000 m
100 m
12.5 m
12.5 m
8.0 m 1 m
16
17.4 V/bar
Evenly along section length
23 per streamer
Streamers 1, 2 and 3 2 front - 2 centre - 3 tail
Streamers 4, 5, 6 and 7 3 front - 2 centre - 3 tail
Streamers 8, 9 and 10 2 front - 2 centre - 3 tail
On each streamer rGPS and acoustics
Please see diagrams in APPENDIX E
2.3.
STREAMERS
Streamer Type
Manufacturer
Number and Active Length
Separation
Group Interval
Group Length
Streamer Depth
Hydrophones per Group
Hydrophone Sensitivity
Hydrophone Spacing
Compass/Depth Controllers
Acoustic Units
Tailbuoys
Configuration
2.4.
SOURCE
Number of Source Arrays

Number of Sub-arrays
Sub-array Layout
Shot Interval
Array Volume
Array Separation
Array Depth
Array Length
Array Width
Sub-array Separation
Gun Manufacturer and Model
Number of Guns in Full Array
Operating Pressure
Source Controller
Near Field Hydrophones
Depth Transducers
Source Acoustics
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
2
3
Please see array diagram in APPENDIX E
25 m
3460 in3
50 m
6m
15 m (centre of front pair to centre of rear pair)
15 m
10 m
Bolt LongLife 1500 LL and 1900 LLXT
30 (including spares)
2000 psi
Seamap GunLink 2000 software Version 2.5.2
On each cluster and on each single
Front, centre and rear
Pod at the rear of every array
3.
PROJECT SUMMARY
3.1.
DESIGN
The Indus Basin 3D followed on from an extensive 2D programme that BP Pakistan conducted
in 2007.
The main target of the survey was to image the biogenic gas features in the Miocene, around 2
to 3 s below the water bottom. Imaging the short wavelength channels required frequencies up
to around 70 Hz. To achieve this, the streamers were towed at 8 m, which gave good high
frequency content but at the same time did not introduce noise from the long wavelength swell
which is common in the Arabian Sea. As the AVO response of the target sands was important
for this survey, the cable length was chosen to be 6000 m which would deliver the far offset
data necessary for the AVO analysis.
The 6000 m cables were also able to image the deep structure containing the source rock which
was a secondary target. Due to the canyonised water bottom, depth conversion and depth
migration is an important objective, and the 6000 m cables were necessary to help define the
velocity model.
Results from the "fast track" migrated cube indicate that the survey geophysical objectives were
met.
3.2.
SEISMIC INTERFERENCE
No other seismic vessels were operating in the immediate vicinity of the project and no random
interference was seen from other seismic survey operations, although radio traffic and the
Champions automatic vessel identification system did pick up some ships operating far to the
southeast (in Indian waters).
Three lines (1231 Sequence 041, 1291 Sequence 033 and 1331 Sequence 029) were affected
by what remains an unidentified source of interference that (due to its regularity) can only be
man-made. The 3 lines were all shot on a heading of 132 and by assessing the shot ranges on
each, the interference occurred within a 30 km area near the submarine trench known as The
Swatch. When first seen it manifested itself as a slow rising burst of energy (over a period of
approximately 2 minutes) up to around 40 bars that on the Seals rms streamer noise monitor
affected a total of 4 shots, this was followed by silence for 6 shots, it then returned for another
period of 4 shots (2 minutes). When on one occasion it was seen to be stronger on the port
streamers, slowly weaken and then shortly afterwards become stronger on the starboard
streamers, the only conclusion that could be reached was that it was sonar emissions from a
submarine.
However, after narrowing down the locations where it was seen and finding that all 3 were in
close proximity to The Swatch it would now appear that some kind of distorted return of
Champions own shot energy was seen, but why it was only seen on the 3 lines mentioned
earlier, not on any 2 adjacent lines, and why for only 3 or 4 out of 10 shots fired cannot be
adequately explained.
The bathymetry map created from the Champions echo sounder data by navigation
representative Eryl Jones (please see APPENDIX K) shows that The Swatch extends much
further out across the northwest end of the project area than had initially been expected (based
upon the Admiralty chart) and that its northwest and southeast edges are not at all straight, the
trench meanders much like a slowly flowing river. Perhaps this explains the irregularity, line to
line and shot range to shot range, of when the interference was seen. The only way to confirm
that it was Champions own shot energy would be to reshoot one of those sections again and
see if it could be re-created.
3.3.
TIDAL AND OCEAN CURRENTS, STREAMER FEATHER ANGLES
An extensive Internet search was made at the start of the project to try to locate ocean and tidal
current data for the Arabian Sea and none that would assist in the project planning could be
found. Given the lengths of the lines (79.525 km/average online time 10.3 hours) it would have
been impossible to hold to a regular cycle using the data to optimise the coverage anyway.
Shortly after the start of the project a sample of tidal data from BP in the UK was matched with
the elevation data from the vessels position and showed a very close correlation, however
whether the irregular and unpredictable lateral movements of the streamers along any given line
on the project can be specifically attributed to tidal or ocean currents or a combination of the 2
would be speculative. The decision was made very early in the project to acquire 2 swaths and
steer the vessel as efficiently as possible.
Regardless of whether the currents were tidal or oceanic they were certainly strong and during
the initial phase of the project (the northwest half of the block) swings of 24 during a line
became normal. There was speculation that the submarine trench, The Swatch, was partly
responsible and that may well be the case, but given the fact that large and rapid changes in the
current direction were observed well away from it (which affected the ability of the Navigators to
steer the vessel and the range of the feather angles) then it is clear that strong tidal and ocean
currents move through the entire project area continuously.
Given that at times during March the total online time on the 132 heading was less than 10
hours, whilst it was more than 11 hours (close to 12 on one occasion) on the 312 heading
seems to prove that there are continuous ocean currents made stronger at certain times by tidal
movements.
3.4.
WEATHER AND SEA CONDITIONS
No weather downtime was accrued throughout the duration of the programme. The wind
direction varied on a day to day basis but rarely held above 20 knots for sustained periods and
sea conditions were never reported as having exceeded 1.5 m.
The atmospheric conditions were very stable during the month of March with very little cloud,
during early April there appeared to be a brief change with light rains and much higher humidity.
3.5.
CREW CHANGES
Crew changes took place on a 5 week on 5 off schedule via helicopter from Karachi on 25th/26th
February, 31st March, 1st and 2nd April 2009.
Wavefield Inseis contracted the Abu Dhabi Helicopter Company for the duration of the project
using a AW (Augusta-Westland) 139 aircraft throughout, with ex-patriot pilots.
The range of the project from Karachis main airport meant that the aircraft was never able to fly
with a full passenger and baggage load, the consequences being that several round trips were
needed to complete a full crew change (e.g. 6 for the 31st March-1st April 2009 crew change).
The aircraft was on stand-by in Karachi throughout the project providing medevac support if
required.
3.6.
SHIPPING ACTIVITY
As one would expect in this area of the Arabian Sea, significant shipping activity was seen
throughout the entire period of the project, mainly following a northwest-southeast track
between the Arabian Gulf and India/Southeast Asia.
The bridge officers were able to keep these vessels significantly far away such that the noise
generated by their propellers was kept to a minimum, although it was rare to record a line
without there being some noise on the records.
3.7.
FISHING ACTIVITY
Fishing was limited to small local boats and these remained outside the project area. However,
there were 3 incidents during the project that forced a suspension of data acquisition because
large fishing nets had become snagged on the front-end streamer separation ropes 7-8 (9th
March 2009), 3-4 (18th March 2009) and the starboard paravane (30th March 2009).
Fortunately the strength of the Kevlar ropes was sufficient to hold the enormous strain that was
placed upon them until the nets were removed. If they had not it would have been likely that the
nets would have snagged on one or more of the streamers instead resulting in their loss.
On the third incident (30th March 2009 when a net snagged on the point where the starboard
paravane tow rope connects to the Streamer 1-2 separation rope and Streamer 1 spur rope) the
concern was that the tow ropes to the paravane could part resulting in the collapse of all the
starboard streamers (1-5) in on themselves.
The nets themselves were extraordinarily large (weighing several tons one would guess) and
comprised the net itself, 30-40 small white pellet buoys, several large blue plastic barrels as end
of net markers and large rocks acting as weights to hold the net vertical in the water. By the
time they were pulled aboard the Champion they had become tight bundles that needed the
hydraulic winches and cranes on the gun, streamer and top decks to drag them clear. All 3
appeared to be relatively new (there was very little marine growth) and would probably be seen
as a considerable loss to their owners.
4.
ENERGY SOURCE
Number of Source Arrays

Number of Sub-arrays
Total Number of Guns
Array Length
Array Width
Array Volume
Array Depth
Nominal Operating Pressure
Primary Amplitude
Peak to Peak Amplitude
Peak to Bubble Ratio
Bubble Period (+)
Bubble Period (-)
Gun Manufacturer and Model
Source Controller
Source Timing Specification
4.1.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Seamap
Seamap GunLink 2000
2.5.2
Programmable
Hard Disk
17" AOC flat screen
Automatic individual
Typically +/- 1.00 ms
+/- 0.1 ms
Positive threshold
COMPRESSOR PLANT
Compressors
Manufacturer
Type
Maximum Output Pressure
4.3.
2
3
30 (including spares) on each array
15 m (centre of front pair to centre of rear pair)
20 m
3,460 in
6m
2000 psi
55.02 bar m
118.55 bar m
24.86
72.5 ms
125.25 ms
Bolt LongLife 1500 LL and 1900 LLXT
Seamap GunLink 2000
+/- 1.0 ms
SEAMAP GUNLINK 2000 CONTROLLER SPECIFICATIONS
Manufacturer
Model
Controller Software Version
Input gain
Parameter Back-up
Monitor
Synchronisation Model
Synchronisation
Controller Timing Accuracy
Timing method
4.2.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
3
NEA
57
1100 kW, 2000 cfm at 2,000 psi
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
All the systems performed well throughout the project and no major problems were
encountered, one airleak and one separation rope parting accounted for just 9.9 hours of
downtime, 0.84% of total project time.
As production had already commenced when John Granville arrived on the Champion, the
standard checks ahead of the first deployment on a project, solenoid click test, the physical
measurement of each sub-array, the positions of the GPS units, acoustic pods, depth
transducers and gun hydrophones and after deployment the pressure drop tests were carried
out as each array was recovered for maintenance and re-deployed.
String 1 8th March
String 4 11th March
String 2 9th March

String 5 12th March
String 3 10th March

String 6 13th March
* Precise diagrams for the individual arrays can be found in APPENDIX E.
10
5.
STREAMERS
5.1.
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
Streamer Type
Manufacturer
Number of Streamers
Active Streamer Section Length
Section Diameter
Group Interval
Group Length
Hydrophones per Group
Hydrophone Sensitivity
Streamer Depth
Cable Depth Control
5.2.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Seal Digital - Kerosene filled polymer jacket

Sercel
10
150 m
50 mm
12.5 m
12.5 m
16
17.4 V/bar
8.0 m 1 m
23 x DigiCOURSE 5011 controllers per streamer
DEPTH CONTROL AND HEADING SENSORS
Manufacturer
Model
Software Version
In-water Unit Model
:
:
:
:
DigiCOURSE
Digiscan
5.01
5011 Depth control and heading sensor
The DigiCOURSE 5011 compass bird has become almost an industry standard with respect to
the provision of data on the depth and heading orientation of towed streamers. Whilst sending
this information back to the vessels on board operators data is also provided on the following;
5.3.
Reporting current depth and temperature

Reporting battery usage in hours and minutes
Reporting wing angle with a resolution of 0.1
AUTOMATIC STREAMER RETRIEVER SYSTEM
Manufacturer
Model
Number in Use
Release Depth
5.4.
:
:
:
:
Concord Marine Systems

SRD-500S
21 - On every bird except first and last
48 m or 70 psi
EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCE
Overall the streamers were well balanced and electrically sound, it should be noted that most of
the equipment on the vessel is relatively new as the Champion was only mobilised in 2007.
However, the crew had to work hard at keeping the compass birds and acoustics within
specification by launching the workboat almost daily for several hours (when the sea conditions
permitted them to do so) and replacing units that had failed due to a drop in battery power or
that appeared to have some debris wrapped around them preventing the fins from moving.
It should be noted that when the Indus Basin project commenced on 25th February 2009 the
entire spread had been in the water for over 3 months, by the time it ended on 14th April 2009 it
was 5 months.
Two characteristics of the streamers stood out, one of which features prominently in the
comments and statistics presented by Eryl Jones in Section 7.7 and APPENDIX K. This refers
to the inconsistency of the separation distances of the inner streamers (predominantly 5 and 6),
it could be satisfactorily explained away by vessel speed, the effect of the current flow (either
11
from ahead or from behind) or where the streamers were in relation to the prop wash from the
Champion.
The second feature was the vane turbulence that created noise on the outer streamers (1 and
10) when the streamers were in a bend as they moved laterally with the changing current.
Neither could be satisfactorily explained away by the crew, nor were there any plans for the
problem to be addressed at some stage in the future. Although the authors have not worked on
every vessel in the seismic industry one would have to say that these 2 issues are not common
to all vessels, the trousering effect on the shape of the streamers yes (although on the
Champion that was not a problem) but not vane turbulence and consistent separation problems
on the inner streamers.
12
6.
RECORDING SYSTEM
6.1.
Recording System
Software Version
Number of Data Channels
Sample Interval
Record Length
Recording Polarity
:
:
:
:
:
:
Low-cut Filter
High-cut Filter
Shotpoint Interval
Fold
Tape Decks
Tape Format
Tape Medium
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
6.2.
Sercel Seal
5.2.10
10 x 480 = 4,800
2 ms
8050 ms
SEG convention - Positive pressure is recorded as a
negative number on tape.
3 Hz at 6 dB/oct
200 Hz at 370 dB/oct
25 m
60
2 x IBM
SEG-D
IBM 3592 cartridge
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
As with all the recording systems industry wide the Sercels Seal acquires, processes and
records data at variable sample rates.
The system is flexible enough to be easily integrated with all the other component parts of a
marine seismic vessels instrument room. Aboard the Geowave Champion it operated in
conjunction with the vessels Spectra navigation software system and the Seamap GunLink
2000 gun controller.
6.3.
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
No problems were encountered with the Seal and no downtime accrued throughout the project.
13
7.
NAVIGATION AND POSITIONING
7.1.
GEODETIC PARAMETERS
Datum
Ellipsoid
Semi-major Axis
Inverse Flattening
:
:
:
:
WGS84
WGS84
6378137.000 m
298.25722356
Projection
Zone Number
Latitude of Origin
Longitude of Origin
False Easting
False Northing
Scale Factor at CM
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Transverse Mercator TM66NE

N/A
00 00 00.000 N
066 00 00.000 E
500000.000 m
0.000 m
0.999600
Geoid-Ellipsoid Separation
:
:
Vertical Datum
Tidal Corrections
Unit of Measurement
:
:
:
-48.82 m (EGM-96) 22 42N, 66 46E

0-164 changing by 0.042/year (24th February 2009)
22 42N, 66 46E IGRF-10
MSL
Supplied by BP
International metre
7.2.
CALIBRATION AND VERIFICATION OF NAVIGATION SYSTEMS
No pre-survey calibration or verification programme was carried out prior to the start of the
operation. The vessel transferred directly from a previous project in the Arabian Sea without
recovery of the streamers and without visiting a local port.
Details of the most recent gyrocompass, DGPS and RGPS calibrations carried out alongside at
Singapore on 25th October 2008 were supplied for examination. The checks were carried out by
Swift Survey Pte Ltd for Wavefield Inseis Singapore Pte Ltd. The checks were considered to be
minimal with the gyrocompasses checked on only one heading and only 4 rGPS receivers
tested as a representative sample of at least 16 in use. Please find the report included in
APPENDIX K.
The details are briefly as follows:
Gyrocompasses
Three gyrocompasses were calibrated on a 45 heading only. Observations were made from
shore based reference stations to points on the vessel centre-line at the bow and at the stern,
and the true bearing derived between these 2 points.
Gyro readings were logged
simultaneously for comparison. The gyrocompasses were designated 1, 2 and 3 but there was
no indication as to which instruments these actually were. Subsequent discussions with the
Chief Navigator revealed that they were 1 - SG Brown Meridian Surveyor, 2 Simrad GC80 and
3 Robertson RGC11 respectively which was the same as the configuration for this operation.
As the calibration was carried out on one heading only any differences could not be averaged
and eccentricities in the instruments would not have been exposed. Low SDs did indicate that
sufficient time had been allowed for the gyros to settle before the data was recorded.
The results were as given in TABLE 1 below.
14
Gyro
1 - SG Brown Meridian Surveyor
2 - Simrad GC80
3 - Robertson RGC11
TABLE 1
C-O
-0.47
+0.24
-0.06
SD
0.06
0.07
0.16
Gyrocompass Calibration Results
It is apt to note that, apart from the facility of being able to compare the 3 gyro headings during
the survey, there was no precise GPS based heading sensor such as Seapath to monitor the
gyro headings, during the operation.
DGPS
Four DGPS systems were verified: SkyFix-XP, Veripos1, Veripos 2 and MRDGPS. The
technique involved observing and computing the main primary antenna (SkyFix-XP) position
from shore observations and comparing the position derived against observations of the
positions of all 4 systems logged simultaneously on board. The positions of the other 3 systems
were corrected relative to the XP antennae. The results are displayed in TABLE 2 below:
System
SkyFix-XP
Veripos 1
Veripos 2
MRDGPS
Eastings
C-O (m)
SD
-0.68
0.20
-0.94
0.04
-0.69
0.70
-0.91
0.46
TABLE 2
Northings
C-O (m)
SD
+0.76
0.07
+0.41
0.04
-0.33
0.33
-0.71
0.65
DGPS Verification Results
The reference stations used with MRDGPS were not representative of the selection used in the
prospect area.
No RINEX data was recorded whilst the vessel was alongside for online processing by Auspos
(Geoscience Australia), Precise Point Positioning (Natural Resources Canada) or a similar
service.
RGPS
Four Seatex tailbuoy rGPS receiver modules were set up on the quay and their positions
derived by observations with survey equipment from known shore stations. Observations of the
ranges and bearings to the buoys were recorded on board and compared to the computed
distances and bearings known positions. The results are shown in TABLE 3 below:
Receiver
Tb 4937
Tb 2686
Tb 2227
Tb 2269
TABLE 3
Range
C-O
SD
-0.31 m
0.64
-0.18 m
0.67
+0.13 m
1.07
+0.72 m
1.12
Bearing
C-O
SD
0.00
0.04
-0.02
0.05
-0.03
0.03
-0.06
0.04
RGPS Range and Bearing Observations of 4 Receivers
The 4 rGPS receivers were only a representative sample of at least 16 used for the operation
and the check was thus considered inadequate. However, all 22 of the receivers on board were
tested en route from Singapore to the Arabian Sea between 30th October and 1st November
2008, and the results were provided for examination. Please find these results in APPENDIX K.
15
Echo Sounder
An echo sounder check was carried out by the crew while the vessel was alongside at
Singapore. The average depth from corrected measurements using a sounding line on both
sides of the vessel was compared to the echo sounder readings. Observations were logged for
three frequencies (12 kHz, 38 kHz & 200 kHz) and the C-O values were -0.70 m, -0.50 m and 0.27 m respectively. The results were acceptable and are included in APPENDIX K.
T/S Dip Probe
A calibration certificate dated 29th January 2007 was supplied by the contractor and a copy is
included in APPENDIX K.
7.3.
VESSEL POSITIONING
GPS was used for navigation and absolute horizontal positioning of the vessels navigation
reference point (NRP). The positions of sources and receivers were referenced to the vessel
NRP for each shotpoint.
Four GPS systems were employed to derive the vessel system position: Fugros SkyFix-XP,
Veripos Ultra, Veripos Standard Plus and Fugros MRDGPS which are described below. All 4
systems were interfaced with the Concept Systems ORCA Integrated Navigation System (INS)
which maintained shot control and steering. SkyFix-XP and Veripos Ultra were totally
independent systems, provided by different contractors and were designated primary and
secondary systems respectively.
7.3.1.
GPS Positioning
Fugro SkyFix-XP SDGPS

SkyFix-XP is a decimetre level global dual frequency service provided by Fugro, utilising a
technique referred to as Satellite Differential GPS (SDGPS) capable of overcoming the distance
limitations of conventional differential GPS. The system provides global corrections for orbit and
clock errors for each satellite and is supplied by NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).
Corrections were transmitted to the vessel via the Inmarsat B IOR satellite and on the L-Band
frequency via the EA-Sat/AF-Sat High Power satellite beam. Corrections were received on the
vessel via the Inmarsat tracking dome antenna (low power) and the smaller omni-directional
SPOT antennae (high power) respectively. The corrections were routed through demodulators
before being applied to the data for the GPS satellites being tracked at the vessel location.
Comparisons of the GPS L1 and L2 frequencies at the vessel location were expected to
eliminate potential ionospheric and tropospheric errors. GPS data was acquired via a dualfrequency receiver.
SkyFix-XP operated in 3D Auto mode. The satellite elevation mask was maintained at 8.
Correction update rate was in the region of 10 to 20 s.
SkyFix-XP positions were processed through the MultiFix 5 software which also displayed
performance, statistical and QC data although this information was not available post-line.
Statistical testing for gross errors was carried out (W-test and F-test) in accordance with
UKOAA recommendations to detect and reject correction outliners prior to being fed to ORCA.
Carrier-phase smoothing reduced the random noise effects on the pseudo-ranges and assisted
in multi-path detection. Statistics transferred in the output string to ORCA included the position,
PDOP, HDOP, Number of Satellites, Error Ellipse SMA, Antenna Ellipsoid Height and Unit
Variance.
16
Veripos Ultra PPP

Veripos Ultra is a dual-frequency GPS system provided by Veripos, described as a Precise
Point Positioning service and employing in many ways similar techniques to the SkyFix-XP
system. The system claims to provide decimetre level accuracy and provides one set of
corrections for all the satellites which are valid globally. Proprietary algorithms reduce satellite
orbit, clock errors, multipath and noise while tropospheric and ionospheric errors were
minimised with the aid of the dual-frequencies. Corrections were broadcast for each satellite via
the Inmarsat 109E L-band communication satellite high-power level service and were received
on the vessel through small omni-directional antennae. The correction update rate was in the
region of 30 s. The satellite elevation mask was 10.
The Veripos Ultra position was computed through the Veripos Verify QC software using data
from the Veripos LD2 integrated mobile unit. Veripos QC provided real-time positioning and
quality control information and transferred the data to ORCA. The LD2 mobile unit included a
demodulator for the global satellite corrections and a dual-frequency GPS receiver.
Veripos Standard Plus DGPS
Veripos Standard Plus is a dual-frequency differential GPS system provided by Veripos. The
multi-reference station solution was computed through the same Veripos Verify QC software as
for Veripos Ultra and used data from the LD2 receiver/demodulator as described above. The
dual frequencies were used to mitigate the effects of any potential ionospheric errors. Data
from the Verify QC software was transferred to ORCA. The system operated in 3D mode with a
satellite elevation mask of 10.
Differential correction data was received from 5 reference stations distributed around the area of
operations. Details of these stations are shown in TABLE 4 below:
Station
Doha
Dubai
Mumbai
Kolkata
Chennai
ID
Latitude
904 25 16 49.52126 N
905 24 58 44.57070 N
906 18 59 48.08518 N
907 22 34 07.66092 N
908 13 03 37.19581 N
TABLE 4
Longitude
Distance *
051 31 44.59088 E 1575 km
055 02 36.76536 E 1220 km
072 49 09.18832 E
750 km
088 21 01.75261 E 2215 km
080 14 54.38184 E 1780 km
Veripos DGPS Reference Stations
* Approx distance from centre of prospect (22 42 00.00 N, 066 46 00.00 E)
The differential correction data was received on the vessel in the same manner as for Verify
Ultra via the High Power level service.
Fugro Starfix.MRDGPS
Starfix.MRDGPS is a single-frequency DGPS positioning system from Fugro which provides a
multi-reference station positioning solution. MRDGPS is a Starfix Navigation Suite (V 8.1)
software module. Pseudo-ranges are weighted according to user range accuracy, distance
from the reference station, age of correction data, satellite elevation and receiver noise. With
only one GPS frequency tropospheric and ionospheric corrections are computed from a model.
The software complies with UKOOA requirements for statistical testing and data rejection.
Statistical displays were available in real-time only. Data was transferred to ORCA for post-line
statistics. MRDGPS ran in 3D mode with a satellite elevation mask of 6.
The TABLE 5 includes a list of the reference stations used for the operation:
17
Station
ID
Latitude
Longitude
Distance *
Chennai
131 13 04 06.648 N 080 16 43.733 E
1785 km
Mumbai
191 19 03 38.599 N 073 00 55.099 E
765 km
Abu Dhabi
240 24 22 59.019 N 054 31 11.051 E
1265 km
Bahrain
263 26 13 04.497 N 050 34 31.507 E
1685 km
TABLE 5
Fugro MRDGPS Reference Stations
* Approx distance from centre of prospect (22 42 00.00 N, 066 46 00.00 E)
Differential correction data was available on Low Power via the Inmarsat IOR communications
satellite or on High Power via IORH, AF-Sat or AP-Sat.
GPS Systems Performance
The performance and reliability of all 4 GPS positioning systems was excellent throughout the
operation. There were no noted outages, or disturbances of any significance and no
interruption to vessel positioning. There were occasional minor jumps in position but these were
usually less than 1 m and were further diluted when combined with data from the other 3
systems to derive the vessel system position.
Comparisons were provided between all 4 GPS system positions for each line through the
ORCA end of line reports. The average radial difference between the 2 main systems, SkyFixXP and Veripos Ultra was less than 1 m and well within the required standard.
Data was continuously monitored by the system providers, Fugro and Veripos. Performance
statistics were available from the providers if quality was questionable and required further
investigation. Fortunately, there was no such occurrence that required further investigation.
7.3.2.
Heading Sensors
There were 3 gyrocompasses installed on the vessel. These included an SG Brown Meridian
Surveyor located in the instrument room together with Robertson RGC11 and Simrad GC80
gyrocompasses located on the bridge. The SG Brown gyrocompass was designated the
primary instrument. Data from all 3 instruments were logged to ORCA throughout the operation.
Heading data was used primarily for vessel navigation and vessel offset computations (e.g. for
GPS antennae, SIPS hull transceiver and echo sounder). Latitude and speed settings were
manually set on all the instruments.
All 3 gyrocompasses performed reliably throughout the operation with no noted problems and
no evidence of drift relative to each other.
The instruments were not calibrated immediately prior to the start of the operation. The most
recent calibration took place at Singapore in October 2008 (please find the report included in
APPENDIX K) and the details are discussed in Section 7.2 above. The correction values
derived from this calibration were applied in ORCA. SG Brown Meridian: -0.47, Robertson
RGC11: -0.06 and Simrad GC80: +0.24.
Time series plots of raw uncorrected heading data and comparisons, were available for each
line from the ORCA end of line reports.
It is presently not uncommon to find a GPS based heading determination system such as, for
example, Kongsbergs Seapath 200 on seismic vessels. Given the accuracy (0.05 RMS) of
these GPS based headings, the data serves effectively as a real-time calibration system
18
acceptable for continuous gyrocompass calibration. There was no such system available on the
Geowave Champion. Given that there was no calibration carried out at the start of the
operation, and that the last calibration was considered to be less than adequate, it would have
been advantageous to have had this facility available during the operation. Furthermore, there
was no motion sensor/attitude determination system on board and as a result no pitch, roll and
heave data were applied to the echo sounder.
7.3.3.
Echo Sounder, Velocity Profiles and Tidal Corrections
The Geowave Champion was equipped with a triple frequency Kongsberg Simrad EA 600
Series hydrographic single beam echo sounder operating on 3 transceiver frequencies (12 kHz,
38 kHz and 200 kHz). Only 2 frequencies (12 kHz and 38 kHz) were suitable for acquiring data
over the depth ranges encountered in the prospect area which ranged from 545 m to 1698 m
(recorded).
The depth profile for both frequencies was available continuously for monitoring on a colour
display and the digital data produced was recorded by ORCA which provided time series
profiles at the end of each line. No real-time hard copy paper trace was available.
Water depths were recorded with a fixed nominal velocity of 1500 m/s with the transducer set at
a draught of 0.0 m in accordance with industry practice. Water depths in the P1/90 were
corrected for vessel draught (5.8 m), tides and velocity of sound in water, the latter being based
upon the full column value (1515 m/s) derived from the Sippican deployments at the start of the
operation. As there was no motion sensor installed on the vessel, adjustments for pitch, roll and
heave were not applied to the echo sounder data. Tidal correction data was supplied to the
contractor by BP.
The raw water depth data acquired for both useable frequencies was consistently good
throughout despite the presence of some very steep slopes in the seabed topography.
Problems were, however, experienced with the water depth data found in a large number of
P1/90 files where it seemed that NRT, in the process of de-spiking and filtering the raw water
depth data, had actually removed data from the final product. Firstly, it was unacceptable that
NRT had removed good raw data during processing; and secondly the fact that the data was
missing and had not been discovered by the navigation team, highlighted a lack of final data
quality control on board. Where data was missing in the P1/90 files it was usually in groups of
10 to 15 shots. As a result the lines affected had to be reprocessed with Sprint to recover the
data and the P1/90 files regenerated in ORCA from the database. This problem resulted in
extensive communication between the contractor and Concept Systems with numerous
transfers of data and installation of software patches. P1/90 files with missing water depths
were still appearing sporadically right up until close to the end of the operation, indicating clearly
that the problem had not been properly resolved.
The echo sounder was last calibrated at Singapore in October 2008.
included in Section 7.2 above and in APPENDIX K.
Please find details
Water depths generally increased to the southwest. Towards the northern end of the prospect a
conspicuous submarine canyon referred to as The Swatch on the marine chart ran across the
breadth of the prospect from the northeast to the southwest. The contour map image below
has been generated from all the E records extracted from the P1/90 files.
19
FIGURE 1
Contour Map Image generated from all E Records

extracted from P1/90 files
T/S Dips
An SAIV STD/CTD SD204 velocity probe was used to acquire data for computing the velocity of
sound in water at streamer depth (8 m) for validating the streamer velocimeter data. The probe
was deployed from the workboat close to the area of operations on a more or less weekly basis
when operationally practicable. The SAIV probe was autonomous and fitted with conductivity,
temperature and pressure sensors plus a microprocessor to compute velocity values. Once the
probe had been deployed and recovered, the data was downloaded directly into a computer and
then brought back to the Geowave Champion. The probe was rated for use well beyond
streamer depth but only about 300 m of rope was available therefore it could not be used for full
water column measurements. Please find a summary of the results obtained in TABLE 6 below.
20
No
Date
1 27th Feb 2009
2
8th Mar 2009
3 15th Mar 2009
4 23rd Mar 2009
5 29th Mar 2009
6
5th April 2009
T/S Dips
Lat
Long
Velocity (at 7 m depth)
225934 663459
1536.67 m/s
224354 665028
1538.27 m/s
223806 663459
1537.94 m/s
222854 670440
1539.21 m/s
223700 664600
1539.77 m/s
222736 665221
1540.87 m/s
TABLE 6
SAIV T/S Dip Results
The velocity of sound in water as acquired from the SAIV probe for the 8 m streamer depth was
entered into ORCA. This data was only used for the calculation of the Sonardyne SIPS ranges
in ORCA if the real time velocimeter data was not available.
Measurement of the full water column was made using Sippican XBT T-5 Expendable
Bathythermograph (XBT) probes which measured temperature and computed sound velocity
data. These probes were deployed from the chase boat Venture G on 3 occasions during the
survey. TABLE 7 below lists the results of the Sippican deployments during the survey:
T/S Dips (Sippican)

No
Date
Lat
Long
1
28th Feb 2009
225800 664200
2 12th March 2009 225000 663900
3
12th April 2009 224825 665219
TABLE 7
7.3.4.
Velocity (Full Column)

1522.64 m/s (-495.3 m)
1514.53 m/s (-973.2 m)
1509.52 m/s (-1722.6 m)
Sippican T/S Dip Results
Current Meter
A Nortek Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) was installed but was not operational.
Reports indicated that a connecting cable on the hull was damaged. Current meters are always
useful tools for predicting feather changes and for optimising infill. Extreme feather angles or
sudden feather changes were generally, however, not a problem. The recording of the current
patterns and magnitudes throughout the survey for future reference in the event of further
exploration work would have been an advantage.
7.4.
SOURCE AND STREAMER POSITIONING
7.4.1.
Relative GPS
RGPS receivers were deployed on buoys to provide reference positions for the source and
streamer networks relative to the vessel NRP. The receivers, antennae and UHF telemetry
modems were installed in modules on each of the 6 gunstring floats and each of the 10
tailbuoys as part of the Fugro Seatex Seatrack 220/320 rGPS tracking system. A 320 GPS
receiver/transponder module was employed on each of the 6 gun arrays, with a 220 module on
each of the 10 tailbuoys. All tracking modules featured single-frequency GPS receiver boards.
GPS code and carrier phase data was transmitted to the vessel via low power UHF radio from
the gunstring floats and tailbuoys. On board the vessel, the Seatrack VCU 200 transceiver
module communicated with the remote units and directed the raw GPS data to the rGPS
module of the Fugro Starfix Suite (V8.1) software. Slope ranges and bearings were then
exported to ORCA for processing.
21
RGPS performance was very good overall and the receivers were resilient and reliable. RGPS
headbuoys for reinforcing the front acoustic network were not deployed and, given the overall
quality of the front network positioning there was no reason to consider using them. Acquisition
was not compromised at any time through the failure of the rGPS positioning on either the gun
arrays or the tailbuoys. The quality of the rGPS positioning was monitored for each line from
the error-ellipse statistics for each of the networked rGPS source nodes. The average values
were generally good but the maximum values were frequently unacceptable indicating that the
NRT processing was not wholly adequate. Any lines with unacceptably high maximum error
ellipse semi-major axis values were re-processed with Sprint.
There were 2 problems experienced with the rGPS system during the course of the operation:
1.
2.
7.4.2.
RGPS data on Tailbuoys 5, 6 and 7 dropped out for exactly 15 minutes from 00:15 to
00:30 just after midnight on Sunday mornings (UTC). This was attributed to software
or firmware problems with those particular receivers but the situation was not
resolved before the end of the operation. Sequences 008, 033 and 042 were
affected. The outages did not prove to be detrimental to positioning of the tail
network as the other 7 tailbuoys and the tail acoustics were operating during those
periods.
Sporadic interference to the transmissions of data from the tailbuoys to the vessel
was experienced. This did not prove to be a major problem. As VHF broadcasts
from seismic vessels had been picked up over very long distances around the same
time and because there were no potential sources anywhere in the area of
operations, the interference was attributed to E-Skip from distant sources?
Acoustics
The Sonardyne (Seismic Integrated Positioning System) SIPS 2 (V2.22.00.32) acoustic

positioning system was employed in a 3 network arrangement.
The 3 networks comprised streamer and tailbuoy mounted XSRS (Cross Streamer Ranging
System) transceivers together with HGPS (Head and Gun Positioning System) transceivers on
the vessel and gun-strings. Each XSRS had 1 transmit and 4 receive channels allowing
simultaneous ranging between transceivers and the capability to receive 4 of 60 unique digital
signals. Range data was transmitted to the vessel via the inductive coils contained within each
streamer and data from the sources were transmitted via the umbilicals. The Controller on the
vessel provided the interface between the transceivers and ORCA.
FIGURE 2
Acoustic Networks
22
The front acoustic network included a vessel hull HGPS transceiver, one HGPS shock mounted
transceiver on each gunstring, and 3 XSRS transceivers mounted on each streamer, a total of
31 units. The front network was referenced to the surface positions provided by the rGPS
receivers on each source array float.
FIGURE 3
Front Acoustic Network
The middle network included 2 XSRS acoustic transceivers on each cable a total of 20.
The tail network used 3 XSRS transceivers on each streamer, including one on each tail stretch
forward of the tailbuoy rGPS antennae a total of 30. The tail network was referenced to the
surface positions of the rGPS receivers on the tailbuoys.
The configuration and geometry of the networks presented for the project was adequate by
current standards and also included a satisfactory level of redundancy. No changes were made
to the original configuration after the start of the survey. Both one-way and 2-way ranges were
used. The orientation of the individual networks was achieved with the streamer compasses.
The reliability and performance of the acoustics system was very good overall. Situations
where 100% of the transceivers were operational were common, particularly during the second
half of the operation. There were no significant difficulties with reflections due to the water
depths and conditions where the sea surface was calm and reflective were generally not a
problem. Front end ranges were sufficiently robust to negate the need for headbuoys.
Defective transceivers, or those with expired batteries, were usually replaced by workboat as
soon as it was operationally practicable provided the sea conditions were suitable. Thirty-eight
transceivers were replaced by workboat during the survey. Network adjustment statistics were
provided at the end of each line as part of the NRT diagnostics.
Three SIPS XSRS ASV combined transceivers/velocimeters were deployed, one in the front net
on Streamer 4 (S4V1), one in the mid net on Streamer 8 (S8V1) and the third in the tail net on
Streamer 9 (S9V1). Velocimeter data was generally good from all 3 sensors but there were 2
problems. Occasionally the Sonardyne DMU would not reset before the start of the line and as
23
a result the velocimeter data would be occasionally lost for a complete line. The velocimeter
data would also occasionally become intermittent due to the growth of barnacles on the sensors
which would have to be removed to rectify the problem. The velocimeter data was ordinarily
used for computing the acoustic ranges in ORCA on a shot by shot basis. In the event that the
velocimeter data was not available, the velocity as acquired from the weekly T/S Dip was used
for the computations.
Maintenance operations involved replacing units on the streamers for various reasons. These
included replacement of batteries and defective units. Some of the transceivers had to be
replaced because of corrosion to the stainless steel casings. The corrosion appears to have
originated from a previous area of operations where the water was largely anaerobic. The
transceivers thus affected were being gradually replaced by units with carbon fibre casings.
7.4.3.
Streamer Compasses
IONs DigiCOURSE Model 5011 DigiBirds were employed on the streamers to provide compass
heading information for streamer shaping, streamer depth measurement and streamer depth
control. Twenty three compass birds were deployed along each streamer distributed at intervals
of 300 m or less. The second compass on each streamer was located between the first and
second acoustic nodes. The birds were controlled via the DMU controller.
Overall the performance of the streamer compasses was excellent; biases were low, failures
were minimal, and they met the objective of providing continuous heading data.
All compasses were filtered at source in the manufacturers software, as recommended, to
avoid undue noise in the data. Given the overall good sea conditions the data was sampled at
the minimum rate of 2 s intervals and averaged over 6 samples. The difference between the
predicted compass value and the actual compass reading was tested at each shot. If the
residual exceeded twice the standard deviation for 2 successive shots the online compass
filtering was flagged as requiring post-processing. Normally, as expected, the first, and
particularly the last compasses on each streamer were usually slightly noisier owing to the
movement generated from the towing arrangements. Compasses with persistently high biases
or correction values in excess of 1.0 were flagged for replacement and generally not used in
processing. Distances between useable compasses were never greater than 300 m during the
operation. There were no instances where 2 adjacent compasses in any part of the total
network were deemed unusable. Please find details of the compass positions on the streamers
in the drawings in APPENDIX K.
No corrections derived from static calibrations were applied in ORCA. ION DigiCOURSE set
the static corrections in new units and subsequently after servicing or repair. The manufacturer
provided a 2 year warranty and advised that afterwards it is only necessary to monitor the
compasses for persistent high biases from the dynamic calibrations or any errors following
which they should be despatched for repair and recalibration. Calibration records were
available by consulting the manufacturers website for a full list of the latest results for each
individual compass unit.
Faulty compasses were normally changed out as soon as was operationally practicable or as
the weather permitted. Eighteen compasses were replaced by workboat during the operation.
Compass statistics were provided at the end of each line as part of the ORCA and NRT
diagnostics. The reports included biases, SDs and DSDs.
The magnetic declination value for the prospect area acquired by the contractor from the
IGRF10 (International Geomagnetic Reference Field 2010) model was 0.164 changing by
24
0.042 per year based on a position near the centre of the survey area 22 42 00 N, 066 46
00 E for 24th February 2009. This data was applied in ORCA.
The value was verified using the Declination Calculator based on the IGRF10 World Magnetic
Model: this facility was available at the US National Geophysical Data Centre (NGDC) website:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomagmodels/Declination.jsp
No unusually erratic compass behaviour was observed during the operation. NOOA Solar
Activity Forecasts consulted, indicated quiet geomagnetic field levels overall with no indications
of abnormal solar geomagnetic disturbances. Archives were available at:
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/forecast.html
7.5.
INTEGRATED NAVIGATION AND PROCESSING SYSTEM
The Concept Systems ORCA (V 1.5.1) Integrated Navigation System (INS) provided real time
navigation and positioning for vessel, sources and receivers together with final processing and
on-line binning facilities. ORCA is a recent system which has evolved from the well established
Spectra INS and includes the combined functionality of Spectra, Sprint and Reflex. Processing
was carried out through the NRT (Near Real Time) module. As its title implies, NRT delivered
the final processed positioning data soon after the end of a line following which ORCA
generated the P1/90 and P2/94 files, binned the data, applied any necessary edits and
generated the statistical QC reports. ORCA system time was referenced to GPS time acquired
via a dedicated receiver. Overall, ORCA performed well and met the objectives.
The contractors component identification convention numbered the streamers from starboard
(1) to port (6). Gun arrays were similarly numbered from starboard to port. Streamer group
numbers were numbered consecutively with, for example, Group 1 (near) to 480 (far) on
Streamer 1, and Groups 481 (near) to 960 (far) on Streamer 2 and so on. The acoustic units
and streamer compasses were numbered from front to tail, for example the first acoustic unit on
the starboard outer streamer was S01T01 and the last S01T07, the first compass on Streamer 1
was S01C01, and the last S01C23.
The Simrad-Robertson Robtrak autopilot on the vessel was interfaced with ORCA and was
controlled online, and during line changes, by the Navigators who entered crossline offset
deviations to steer for coverage or otherwise manoeuvre the vessel.
At the end of each line comprehensive statistics were available, mostly numerical but with some
time series charts. Statistics were provided for quality control purposes and in a suitable format
for import into QC software.
Passive LCD displays were available in the Client Office which allowed limited graphical
monitoring of the progress of the current line together with some feather and separation data.
Access to the ORCA Web Interface in the Client Office also allowed passive monitoring of
events during the line in progress, together with information and reports for previous lines and
the survey as a whole from the ORCA database.
7.6.
3D BINNING
Binning was carried out by the ION Concept Systems Reflex system which fulfilled its function
both online and offline for the duration of the survey. The streamers were divided into 4 equal
offset groups as summarised in TABLE 8 with a minimum offset of 325 m:
25
Binning Parameters
325-1825 1825-3325 3325-4825 4825-6325
Offset Range (m)
Nears
Near-mids Far-mids
Fars
Zone
90%
80%
65%
50%
Minimum Coverage
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Used for Steering
TABLE 8
Binning Parameters for Offset Groups
Bin Expansion
Tapered bin expansion was used in assessing the coverage required ranging from 50% (nears)
to 200% (fars).

Zone
Fold 60/60 Bin Size Start (m) Bin Size End (m) Threshold
15
37.5
46.87
90%
Nears
15
46.87
56.25
80%
Near-mids
15
56.25
65.62
65%
Far-mids
15
65.62
75
50%
Fars
TABLE 9
Vessel Steering
The vessel was steered through ORCA by the Navigator who assessed, using the data
displayed as a guide, the required vessel offset needed to obtain the desired CMP coverage.
The vessel was thus steered using a computer mouse with steering offsets entered in
increments of 5 or 10 m. The steering was based on consideration of all offsets but with a main
focus on near and near-mid offsets. Small holes of limited length and up to 2 columns in width
were tolerated in the far offsets. Lines were acquired based on steering the coverage edge and
with no overlap applied.
Shooting Method
The method of shooting was the so called race track method where the vessel travelled up and
down one particular swathe acquiring lines as quickly as possible (4.5 knots) and without
waiting for the tides. In all, 2 different swathes were acquired in this way starting with the
northeastern half of the programme in February 2009 and finishing with the southwestern half
during April 2009.
7.7.
POSITIONING DATA QUALITY
The quality of the data for the source and receiver positions was of an acceptable standard for
all the lines acquired and within the required specifications. Any final NRT derived data
presented by the contractor that fell outside the required specifications was re-processed with
Sprint satisfactorily.
No lines had to be re-acquired as a result of navigation or positioning problems. The in-sea
positioning sensors were well maintained and the sea conditions were good throughout, both
factors contributing towards the success of the operation.
The designated processing system on board was the ORCA/NRT module. There was no
dedicated Sprint Navigation Processor on board but some Navigators were experienced users.
Ordinarily, processed data was available soon after the end of the line with NRT. Where further
processing was required with Sprint the flow was normally completed within a few hours of the
end of each line following which the P1/90 had to be re-created from the ORCA database. The
contractor ordinarily reprocessed the first 10 lines acquired with Sprint for comparisons.
26
Afterwards, it was customary to reprocess every fifth line and any lines flagged for Caveats or
Reprocess.
The quality of the NRT data produced was classified as either Optimal, Caveats or
Reprocess. Lines with Optimal results should have required no further processing but that
was not necessarily always the case as was discovered when water depth data was found to be
missing in some of the P1/90 files. Furthermore, large maximum error-ellipse semi-major axes
values (spikes) exceeding specifications in some nodes were also seen in reports classified as
Optimal. In both these cases the lines were reprocessed with Sprint. Lines classified with
Caveats were usually automatically reprocessed with Sprint.
Of a total of 90 line sequences acquired during the operation, one was rejected due a nonpositioning problem (source air leak), 80 (93%) had NRT Optimal status, 6 (7%) had Caveats
status and there were no lines with Reprocess status. However, 40 line sequences,
representing 45% of all acquired, had to be reprocessed due to NRT problems which leaves
much to be expected from the next version of the software.
The contractor despatched the first line acquired (Sequence 001) to FGPS Ltd, for an
independent verification of the quality of the data and the UKOOA file formats.
The adjusted total network quality for the whole operation, in terms of the average values for the
semi-major axes of the a-posteriori error-ellipse and based on the results of the contractors
statistical diagnostics is shown in TABLE 10 below. The data was provided in the usual 1
Sigma level from NRT by the contractor and subsequently converted to 2 Sigma (95%
probability level).
Average Node Network Error Ellipses

Semi-major Axes (95%)
(m)
2.4
Centre of Source
3.6
Near Receivers
5.3
Mid Receivers
3.3
Tail Receivers
TABLE 10
Average Node Network Error Ellipses Semi-major Axes
Type
DGPS
RGPS
Acoustics
Compasses
Gyro

Observation
Fugro SkyFix-XP (E, N)
Veripos Ultra (E, N)
Veripos Standard Plus (E,N)
Fugro MRDGPS (E,N)
All Ranges
All Bearings
All Ranges
Compasses 02 - 22
Compasses 01 & 23
Gyro Heading
TABLE 11
SD
2.0 m
2.0 m
2.0 m
3.0 m
2.0 m
0.2
2.0
0.7
0.9
0.0
27
Source and Streamer Separations

The geometry was monitored continuously during production and time series statistics were
provided at the end of each line to show the changes during the line.
Source and source array separations were stable and consistently good throughout the
operation. The same could not be said of the front separations, particularly between Streamers
4 and 5 and 5 and 6 which were invariably low (less than 90% of the nominal separation) after
the first 10 line sequences and remained as so until the end of the operation. Furthermore,
large variations were experienced between Streamers 5 and 6. The total front end separation
between Streamers 1 and 10, however, was always over 90% of the nominal 900 m distance.
Some adjustments were attempted but without success and the reasons for the low separations
were likely to be a combination of the vessels low average speed (4.5 knots) and currents. The
common phenomenon whereby the tail separation between the 2 centre streamers (5 and 6 in
this case) is splayed was generally not apparent. In fact, the opposite was occasionally the
case where the separation between Streamers 5 and 6 was dangerously low.
Average Source and Source Array Separations (m)
G1-G2
Array 1-2 Array 2-3 Array 3-4 Array 4-5
50.2
10.7
9.9
10.5
10.8
TABLE 12
Average Source and Source Array Separations

Source Separations (XLine)
55
54
53
52
Nominal
SD's
metres
51
50
49
48
47
46
080
083
086
089
080
083
086
077
077
074
071
068
065
062
059
056
053
050
047
044
041
038
035
032
029
026
023
019
016
013
010
007
004
001
45
Sequences
FIGURE 4
Source Separations (Crossline)
String to String Separations (Xline)

12.6
12.2
11.8
metres
11.4
11.0
10.6
10.2
9.8
Nominal
9.4
9.0
8.6
8.2
7.8
Sequences
G1_Str1-2
G1_Str2-3
FIGURE 5
G2_Str1-2
G2_Str2-3
String to String Separations (Inline)

28
089
074
071
068
065
062
059
056
053
050
047
044
041
038
035
032
029
026
023
019
016
013
010
007
004
001
7.4
7.0

Near
Mid
Far
99.7
98.9
100.8
S1-S2
101.6
98.6
96.4
S2-S3
102.2
98.5
98.6
S3-S4
88.2
89.3
S4-S5
88.8
88.4
90.8
S5-S6
84.5
98.4
97.4
98.3
S6-S7
101.9
97.7
92.8
S7-S8
104.0
99.6
100.2
S8-S9
101.6
101.9
103.2
S9-S10
882.6
869.2
870.5
S1-S9
TABLE 13
Streamer Head Separations (XLine)

150
51.0
140
48.0
130
45.0
42.0
120
39.0
36.0
100
33.0
90
30.0
SD
metres
110
27.0
80
24.0
70
21.0
089
086
083
080
077
074
071
068
065
062
059
056
053
050
047
044
041
038
035
032
029
026
023
019
016
013
010
007
15.0
004
18.0
50
001
60
Sequences
FIGURE 6
Streamer Head Separations (Crossline)

941
921
metres
901
Nominal
881
861
841
821
801
089
086
083
080
077
074
071
068
065
062
059
056
053
050
047
044
041
038
035
032
029
026
023
019
016
013
010
007
004
001
781
Sequences
Total Near Seps
Total Mid Seps
FIGURE 7
Total Far Seps
Inline Offset
The overall line by line average for the inline distance between the centre of source and the
centre of the near group was 260.85 m. There were no adjustments in this distance during the
survey but some variation was seen from line to line.
29

264
262
260
metres
258
256
254
252
250
089
086
083
080
077
074
071
068
065
062
059
056
053
050
047
044
041
038
035
032
029
026
023
019
016
013
010
007
004
001
248
Sequences
CofS-CNG
FIGURE 8
Streamer Rotations and Inline Misclosures

Average rotation values were low overall and consistent. There was no indication of significant
variation along the lines which would have been indicative of any anomalies. Inline misclosures
were also low overall. The inline misclosure for Streamer 7 was slightly larger than the
misclosures for the other streamers by approximately 5 m over the average of 4 m. This was
attributed by the contractor to a very large log which had been caught on the tailbuoys during
the preceding survey and could have lengthened the tail stretch. The streamers had not been
recovered between the surveys and consequently there had been no opportunity to change the
stretch.
FIGURE 9 and FIGURE 10 extracted from the MultiSeis database show the average values for
both Rotations and Inline Misclosures:
Streamer Rotations
0.10
0.00
-0.10
0.2
-0.30
SD
degrees
-0.20
-0.40
-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
089
086
083
080
077
074
071
068
065
062
059
056
053
050
047
044
041
038
035
032
029
026
023
019
016
013
010
007
004
001
0.0
Sequences
Rot1
Rot6
SD1
SD6
Rot2
Rot7
FIGURE 9
SD2
SD7
Rot3
Rot8
SD3
SD8
Rot4
Rot9
SD4
SD9
Average Values for Streamer Rotations
30
Rot5
Rot10
SD5
SD10
Streamer Misclosures (Inline Misc')

10.0
4.4
8.0
4.0
6.0
3.6
4.0
3.2
2.8
0.0
2.4
-2.0
2.0
-4.0
1.6
-6.0
-8.0
1.2
-10.0
0.8
089
086
083
080
077
074
071
068
065
062
059
056
053
050
047
044
041
038
035
032
029
026
023
019
016
013
010
007
0.0
004
0.4
-14.0
001
-12.0
Sequences
Rad1
Rad6
SD1
SD6
Rad2
Rad7
FIGURE 10
SD2
SD7
Rad3
Rad8
SD3
SD8
Rad4
Rad9
SD4
SD9
Rad5
Rad10
Average Values for Streamer Misclosures (Inline Misc)
31
SD5
SD10
SD
metres
2.0
8.
DATA PROCESSING AND QC
8.1.
HARDWARE
All the acquired data was processed on an SGI (Silicon Graphic Incorporated) suite of
computers using Geotrace software.
8.2.
Mainframe SGI
1 x Main frame SGI Origin 2200
2 x IBM 3592 tape drive - 512 tracks
93 x Dual XEON Linux worker nodes
5 x Dual Xeon Linux NFS file server with 10 TB of Raid disk attached
(one Raid disk replaced with 20 TB of disk)
1 x 24 port gigabit switch
SOFTWARE
Geotrace Anser
Geotrace Data Viewer
Geotrace Volume Viewer
Geotrace Xanser
Geotrace Job Scheduler
Geotrace Job Submission
Geotrace Job Monitor
8.3.
QC PROCESSING FLOW
8.3.1.
Reformat Processing Flow
8.3.2.
Reformat from disk to Geotrace internal format

Apply 3 (18) Hz dB/oct low-cut filter, correct for start of data delay (-50 ms), apply
temporal anti-alias filter and resample to 4 ms
Store raw shots to disk
Sort data into shot/channel order
Group and display near trace for both sources and one streamer
Apply 2D geometry
Group and display brute stacks and brute CDPs
Measure amplitude and display for deep, whole and data time windows, edit out bad
traces
Basic Stack 3D Processing Flow
8.3.3.
Read raw shots from Geotrace internal format

Read P1/90 navigation data
Apply NMO corrections
Complete 3D stacking
Read stack volume, scale and calculate trace amplitude values
Create timeslices as requested
Basic Offset QC Processing Flow Chart
3D - Read raw shots from Geotrace internal format

Read P1/90 navigation data
Apply and create time offset values, resample to 4 ms
Perform a seismic write for offset QC
32
8.3.4.
Basic Means Processing Flow
8.4.
Generate traces from data amplitudes

Resample to 4 ms and scale ensembles
Sort data to shot/channel order
Perform header values and 3D store for means (shot shot and channel channel)
and cable comparison analysis
QUALITY CONTROL OUTPUT
Via the Champions on board computer network the Client Representative was provided with
access to a designated common drive into which, for every sequence, 2 (one from each source)
SEG-Y formatted stacks were loaded. The streamers used in the creation of the stacks were
rotated sequence by sequence, for example on Sequence 076 Source 1/Streamer1 and Source
2/Streamer 6, on Sequence 077 Source 1/Streamer 2 and Source 2/Streamer 7.
In the Client Representatives assigned office a password protected networked computer and a
large high-resolution monitor enabled the user to load and analyse the stacks at will using the
Geotrace software, no hard copy prints were created which the author was perfectly comfortable
with. The only problem was that the Geotrace software was somewhat cumbersome in terms of
opening the programme and loading the SEG-Y files for viewing, the slightest error in terms of a
keystroke or mouse click saw a message appear indicating that a re-start would be required.
The SEG-Y stacks were also transferred to an FTP site established by Geotrace so that BP staff
could access the data any time that they wished. Any other large files, crossline stacks for
example, were also sent across to the site.
Once the first half of the project was complete the author requested sets of timeslices at 250 ms
intervals from 2.0 s down to 4.0 s, JPEG files were created and these were passed to BP in the
UK as attachments in e-mail directly to Mike Smith.
Please find examples of inline and crossline stacks plus timeslices between 1.5 and 4 s in
APPENDIX C and APPENDIX D.
8.5.
REQUIRED DELIVERABLES
8.6.
SEG-D field tapes - 2 copies, one of which to be passed to BP Pakistan

SEG-Y tapes 1 copy, with shots at 4 ms, geometry attached
Hard drive with processed gathers for input to pre-stm (Geotrace Woking)
3D stack of processed data 1 copy
3D migrated stack 1 copy
PERFORMANCE COMMENTS
All the QC processing staff members were sub-contracted in from Geotrace, Woking, United
Kingdom and are, along with all their equipment, permanently assigned to the Champion by
Wavefield Inseis.
All were competent, experienced and fully co-operative with the Author in terms of requests for
additional QC products, most of which (timeslices and crossline stacks) were directed through
the 2 lead QCs (James Wallace - 25th February to 1st April 2009 and Stuart Rodger 1st April
2009 to the end of the project).
There were several hardware issues (one particularly troublesome computer) and one tape
drive which failed completely. Fortunately, as only one copy of the SEG-Y tape was required as
an end of project deliverable, this was not of any great importance.
33
Overall the performance of the Geotrace staff was considered to be satisfactory.
34
9.
PERSONNEL LIST
Name
Arve Bukkoy
Robert Herland
Geir Inge Hoyland
Borge Vindenes
Mervin Fernandez
Feilim OMuiri
Frode Orten
Volodymyr Ponomaryov
Jose Emerson
Vladislavas Vasilevskis
Sergey Pecherskiy
John Robert Sovik
Graham Fisher
Gavin Handbury
Douglas McLeod
Anders Langeland
Gairn McLennan
Robert Reason
Linden Price
Patrick Birt
Trond Harald Petterson
Jeremy Hibberd
Robert Handal
Giovani Mariano
Darren Pettit
Jeremy Harris
George Mladineo
Quantus Ludick
Kjetil Storetvedt
Martin Frederiksen
Sandine Boudon
Emir Karcic
Tobias Johnson
Andrew Handspiker
Maria De Deuge
Beng Chung Chai
John Foss
Arne Seppola
Martin South
Oystein Foss
Rune Arseth
Espen Torgersen
Aristotle Cormero
Igor Mazepa
Norbeto Angue
Faustino Callada
Christopher Wood
Jonathan Nesbitt
David Stott
Andy Berry
Peter Huxford
Adam Powell
James Wallace
Stuart Rodger
Mark Seymour
Oliver Barroclough
Position
Captain
Captain
Chief Officer
Chief Officer
2nd Officer
Chief Engineer
Chief Engineer
1st Engineer
1st Engineer
2nd Engineer
Electrician
Electrician
Party Chief
Party Chief
Chief Observer
Shift Leader Observer
Observer
Observer
Observer
Observer
Observer
Trainee Observer
Chief Navigator
Chief Navigator
Shift Leader Navigator
Navigator
Navigator
Navigator
Navigator
Trainee Navigator
Chief Gun Mechanic
Chief Gun Mechanic
Shift Leader Mechanic
Gun Mechanic
Gun Mechanic
Gun Mechanic
Gun Mechanic
Gun Mechanic
Trainee Gun Mechanic
Medic
Medic
HSE Advisor
HSE Advisor
Chief QC Processor
Chief QC Processor
QC Data Processor
QC Data Processor
35
Nationality
Norwegian
Norwegian
Norwergian
Norwegian
Philipino
Irish
Norwergian
Ukrainian
Philipino
Lithuanian
Russian
Norwegian
British
British
Canadian
Norwegian
New Zealand
British
British
British
Norwegian
British
Norwegian
Philipino
British
British
Australian
South African
Norwegian
Norwegian
French
Swedish
British
Canadian
Australian
Malaysian
Norwegian
Norwegian
British
Norwegian
Norwegian
Norwegian
Philipino
Russian
Philipino
Philipino
British
British
British
South African
Australian
Australian
British
British
British
British
On
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
April 1st
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
April 1st
Feb 25th
April 1st
Feb 27th
April 1st
Feb 27th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
April 1st
April 2nd
April 2nd
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
April 1st
Feb 25th
April 2nd
April 1st
April 2nd
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
April 1st
April 2nd
Feb 25th
Feb 25th
April 1st
Feb 25th
April 1st
Feb 25th
April 1st
Feb 25th
April 2nd
Off
April 2nd
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 4th
April 16th
April 1st
Mar 31st
April 16th
April 1st
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 2nd
April 1st
April 2nd
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 16th
April 16th
April 1st
April 16th
April 1st
April 16th
April 2nd
April 1st
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 16th
April 16th
April 1st
April 1st
April 2nd
April 16th
April 16th
April 1st
April 1st
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 2nd
April 16th
April 1st
April 16th
Charlotte Royall-Hercoc
Frederik Sulle
Francisco Figueira
M Shah Rome
Abdul Razzer
Muhammad Sheikh
Waseem Haider Syed
John Granville
Eryl Jones
Patrick Haines
QC Data Processor
QC Data Processor
QC Data Processor
Naval Liaison Officer
Naval Liaison Officer
Marine Mammal Obs
Marine Mammal Obs
BP Geophysical Rep
BP Navigation Rep
BP HSE Rep
British
Indonesian
Brazilian
Pakistani
Pakistani
Pakistani
Pakistani
British
British
British
Feb 25th
April 2nd
April 2nd
Feb 25th
March 22nd
Feb 25th
March 22nd
Feb 25th
Feb 26th
Feb 26th
April 1st
April 16th
April 16th
Mar 17th
Apr 17th
Mar 17th
April 16th
April 16th
April 16th
April 16th
*Note Only the senior positions on the marine crew are listed, catering staff, junior engineering and
deck hands are not.
36
10.
HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
*NB A detailed report has been submitted by the BP on board HSE advisor Patrick Haines.
All of the main seismic companies have well defined HSE management systems in place and
Wavefield Inseis are no exception, although of course they are now in the process of integrating
theirs into the CGGVeritas Vision database.
Overall the crew displayed an excellent approach to all aspects of HSE, from senior
management (Party Chiefs, the Captains, the permanent HSE Advisors and Medics) down to
the less experienced members of the crew.
The project was completed without any incidents, not even a First Aid case being reported and
confirmation of that came from BPs HSE Representative Patrick Haines.
10.1.
HEALTH
The 2 Medics that were aboard the Champion for the duration of the project (Dave Stott and
Andy Berry) played a prominent role in the day to day operations, especially when it was
confirmed that the Party Chief who left the vessel on the day that the project commenced (Bjorn
Henriksen) was subsequently confirmed as having contracted Typhoid whilst in transit through
Karachi. A meeting to discuss this issue was specifically called to allay the fears of the crew
and to provide advice on the recognition of the symptoms of all tropical diseases in addition to
the prevention measures that should always be taken, no matter how short the transit time (in
Bjorns case this was only a matter of hours).
10.2.
SAFETY
The pre-survey brief provided by Mike Smith (BP Sunbury-On-Thames) focused on the BP 8
Golden Rules and the crew readily took the components of the system and wove them into their
own safety management system. As one would expect, there was a considerable degree of
similarity, e.g. Permit to Work, Energy Isolation, Confined Space Entry, Working at Height,
Lifting Operations and Management of Change, whilst obviously driving safety and ground
disturbance was not so significant.
The crews ability to keep safe operations to the forefront of their thinking was very evident in
the manner with which they dealt with 3 occasions when large fishing nets became tangled with
the streamer separation ropes and the starboard paravane tow ropes. The planning, execution
and recovery from these situations was handled expertly by the senior members of the staff
(specifically Party Chief Graham Fisher and Chief Observer Doug McLeod).
10.3.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
The crew operated a strict soft start policy on the run-in to the start of each line, there were no
requests from the Marine Mammal Observer to terminate a line due to the proximity of any
cetaceans.
Naturally, no waste materials were disposed of at sea and all 3 nets that were snagged on the
streamers were transferred to the shore, the first and second via the Venture G into Karachi and
the third when the next opportunity presented itself as it was still being held on board the
Champion when the project was completed.
A waste segregation policy was in place which required paper, glass, plastics, aluminium, tins
and food waste to be disposed of separately. Both the marine and seismic operations also
37
adhered to strict policies with respect to waste oils and any other hazardous materials that
needed to be disposed of.
38
11.
VESSELS
Please find a full set of vessel specifications and photographs in APPENDIX F.

In addition, during the project John Granville recorded two hours of video footage on mini-DVDs
that were passed on to Mike Smith (BP Sunbury-on-Thames).
11.1.
GEOWAVE CHAMPION
The Geowave Champion was originally built in 1994 as a deep sea trawler and then sold on and
converted for multi-streamer seismic operations for Wavefield Inseis in 2007. The conversion
was extensive with the bridge being moved forward from the stern and the main engine also
being moved forward by a metre or so, the heli-deck is neither on the bow or the stern, as can
be seen from the photograph in APPENDIX F, it is in the middle supported by a massive
framework that is rated to 12.8 tons that can enable all types of current oil field helicopters to
operate from it.
At 106.3 m in length the Champion is not the longest vessel in the industry, but in terms of
space on the inside it provides very comfortable living quarters for the crew, and equally as
importantly space (both internally and on the streamer and gun decks) with which to manage
the seismic equipment, it is an outstanding platform from which to conduct seismic operations.
The facilities for the crew are excellent with several lounge areas (one for smokers), a
gymnasium, sauna, full internet connectivity throughout and even a small area in one of the
lower holds where a basketball ring and small court has been set up.
The catering is not 5 star but the chefs worked hard to provide quality and variety given the
quality of the stores that were supplied from onshore. What was very noticeable was the lack of
good fresh fruit.
The accommodation for the Client Representatives was very good with all 3 having good,
reliable internet connectivity and telephone communications, a TV and DVD player, the large
library of DVDs was supplemented by access to a large number of films on a hard drive.
In addition to desks in each of the cabins the Client Representatives were provided with an
office and additional internet access from a desktop computer and, via a secondary PC network,
access to the data being acquired and that which had been processed by the Geotrace
processing team.
Apart from the vast amounts of space that there appears to be everywhere on this vessel, what
is very noticeable is how quiet it is in just about every internal work space, from the bridge to the
lower accommodation decks.
In conclusion the authors would say that the Champion is a credit to the crew that work on and
maintain it, from the marine crew from the overall maintenance perspective to the seismic
personnel that have responsibility for the seismic equipment. It was a pleasure to work on and
the crew members were a pleasure to work with.
11.2.
SUPPORT AND STREAMER GUARD VESSEL VENTURE G
The Venture G is a rarity within the seismic industry in that it was built specifically to support a
large seismic survey vessel. Although neither of the authors managed to complete a visit to it
during the course of the project, in his capacity as the BP HSE Representative on the project
Pat Haines did, and he was very complimentary with respect to her condition, her crew and the
equipment that she carries.
39
11.3.
SUPPLEMENTARY CABLE GUARD VESSEL AL MASHALA
This local wooden fishing boat was the best that could be found to replace the Venture G whilst
she completed her crew change in Karachi on 20th and 21st March 2009. Shortly after the
project began an extensive search was conducted to try to locate a vessel that could take over
from the Venture G, at one stage it was even suggested that the Pakistani Navy supply a vessel
that was better suited to operating in the deep waters 150 nautical miles/240 km off the coast,
but none was found.
It came as no surprise that Al Mashala failed the BP HSE audit that was carried out on her and
it should be taken as a cautionary note for any future offshore seismic operations that BP
Pakistan conducts, that contractors should make satisfactory plans to bring at least one primary
support vessel (that can make runs into Karachi for fuel, food and spares) along with an
additional vessel that can take over the cable protection and support duties whilst the primary
vessel is off station.
40
12.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
12.1.
DATA ACQUISITION
The survey progressed well from start to finish, even on those days when production had to be
stopped to remove the fishing nets from the streamer separation ropes data was recorded and
accepted. Prior to the start of the project the target was to complete it within 7 weeks, with
completion coming in 49 days and then 18.77% infill, so would have to be considered as a very
satisfactory result.
Over the first few weeks it was feared that large gaps would be created in the far-mid and far
offset groups due to the large feather angles that were being experienced but this proved not to
be the case. The suspicion was that a combination of tidal currents and the effects of the deep
seabed trough (marked on the Admiralty chart as The Swatch) was the cause of these lateral
movements that reached 24 on several lines. It was certainly the case that when the
Champion moved into deeper water in the second half of the project the extreme changes in the
feather angle were no longer seen, high to port or high to starboard (e.g. 12) but not on both
sides. The authors are not completely convinced that the effects of The Swatch were quite as
dramatic as several of the crew suggested, but naturally its influence could not be completely
ruled out.
Given the lengths of the lines on the project (79.525 km) there could be no plan to utilise
whatever tidal and ocean currents moved through the area to match the feather angles and so it
was a case of shoot and turn as quickly as possible, with the pressure on the duty Navigators to
optimise the near and near-mid offsets.
Of course with a regime such as this its inevitable that the vessels crossline position steadily
increases with each line that is acquired and to rectify this catch-up infill lines are run, several
were required before the swath boundary passes finally closed off each of the 2 blocks. The
first line on the project was 1011 along the northeast edge of the block, the last line on the
project was 2311, a partial infill pass, 57 km in length that squared off the southwest edge.
In looking towards any future surveys in this area then it would probably just as simple to
acquire the project using exactly the same methodology as was utilised on this one, the
unpredictable nature of the strength and direction of the currents (which appear to have a tidal
component influencing a ocean current) would make it difficult to achieve an accurate feather
match and reduce the level of infill.
It would be fair to say that the quality of the data set was excellent overall with only a couple of
lines acquired with significant levels of swell noise breaking through. APPENDIX C (inline and
crossline stacks) and APPENDIX D (timeslices) can be found some examples from the data set,
the deep trough on the inline stacks (especially those in the northwest of the block) is startlingly
evident on the timeslices from 1500 ms down to the bottom at 2000 ms. In APPENDIX K can
be found a bathymetric map of the project and it is clear that the trough reaches much further
out off the continental shelf than the Admiralty chart indicates.
12.2.
COVERAGE
As can be seen from the final coverage plots in APPENDIX B, with only 18.77% (474.013 km)
of infill acquired the coverage on all 4 offset groups is completely satisfactory.
12.3.
HSE
There was not even a first aid case during the course of the project, the crew is well managed
with respect to HSE and has a full time HSE Advisor monitoring operations.
41
The seismic operations management personnel (meaning the Party Chief, Chief Observers and
Chief Navigators) presented a clear leading role and dealt with unusual situations well,
particularly when confronted with the problems associated with removing the 3 large fishing nets
that became snagged on the streamer separation ropes and starboard paravane.
Additional comments on the subject can be found in Section 10 of this report, with a separate
more detailed report from BPs HSE Representative on the project Patrick Haines.
12.4.
CONTRACT
There were no problems at all with respect to interpretation of the contract and there were no
disputes over additional chargeable stand-by time, chargeable kilometres or data acquired
outside the technical specifications. The agreement that the vessel was satisfactorily
operational on 25th February 2009 was signed off, the project figures for the prime square
kilometres, the infill square kilometres (although there is no charge as 20% infill was built into
the contract) and the chargeable stand-by time were agreed upon down to the third decimal
point on the final day of the project.
12.5.
EQUIPMENT TOWING CONFIGURATION
Overall the towing system and configuration performed well, that is apart from the issue of the
instability with the separation distances between Streamers 4, 5 and 6. This is dealt with in
more detail by Eryl in Section 7.7 and the charts that provide the evidence can be found in
APPENDIX K.
It would be very surprising if this was an issue that has only just manifested itself on this
particular project, there being no one particular influence that causes the separations to drop as
they do. The evidence shows that it happened in various parts of the block, both in the
Northwest where the water depth comes up to less than 500 m and also in the southeast where
depths are over 1500 m. Other factors such as vessel speed, turbulence from the Champions
propeller, water speed and ocean currents (be they oceanic or tidal), all obviously play a role in
how the front ends of the spread behave, but the authors suspect that it is more than changes in
the operating environment and that Wavefield Inseis have to consider a modification to the
configuration at the front end to prevent situations where the distances regularly fall to less than
50 m.
12.6.
STREAMERS
There was good performance overall and no downtime due to the streamers. As usual Seal
had outstanding reliability.
There were several minor issues but this would not be completely unexpected given that the
streamers had been in the water for over 3 months when the project commenced, consequently
the crew had to work hard to keep them operational. Primarily this meant the replacing of
DigiCOURSE compass-birds on a regular basis along with Sonardyne acoustic units, but 2
sections were also replaced as was one tailbuoy.
12.7.
ENERGY SOURCE
As one would expect, excellent performance was achieved by the Bolt guns and the Seamap
GunLink 2000.
12.8.
SERCEL SEAL RECORDING INSTRUMENTATION
There was no downtime from this most reliable of recording systems.

42
12.9.
NAVIGATION AND POSITIONING SYSTEMS
This was a very successful survey from the navigation and positioning aspect, largely
attributable to good sea conditions, equipment performance and reliability, prompt maintenance
of equipment when required and a competent navigation team. As a result there was no time
lost due to navigation problems.
Vessel, source and receiver data standard and quality was well within the required accuracy
specifications. Vessel positioning was excellent with no outages and with the 2 main DGPS
systems positions agreeing to less than 1 m radial.
Whilst the positive aspects of the survey far outweighed the negative there were some notable
issues which need to be mentioned:
12.10.
The separation distances between Streamers 4 and 5 and 5 and 6 were low for
most of the operation and outside the agreed 10% tolerance. This was considered
to be due to a combination of lower than optimum vessel speed, front end geometry
and currents. It became apparent that it was not technically possible to increase the
vessel speed sufficiently to improve the separations and the contractor was unable
to rectify the problem through other means. This is a subject that may need to be
raised should the vessel be considered for future operations.
The performance of the ORCA-NRT processing module was somewhat of a
disappointment on 2 counts. Firstly, the network adjustment reports revealed that
many lines had unacceptably large maximum error ellipse values. Secondly, many
final P1/90 files were found to have blocks of missing water depths (E records).
Consequently, almost 45% of all line sequences acquired had to be reprocessed
with Sprint. It was necessary to conclude that the NRT software required further
development and that there was an element of over-processing as far as the water
depths were concerned.
The last calibration/verification work carried out in Singapore in October 2008 was
considered overall to be less than adequate for normal requirements. Furthermore,
the vessel was not equipped with a suitable GPS heading sensor (e.g. Seapath)
and therefore dynamic gyro verification during the course of the acquisition work
was not possible.
Notably absent from the usual range of equipment on seismic vessels were an
operational current meter (fitted but not usable) and a motion sensor for pitch, roll
and heave data.
GEOWAVE CHAMPION
The Geowave Champion is an excellent vessel from which to carry out a seismic survey, and
would be thoroughly recommend for future use.
12.11.
PERSONNEL
The Champion has a good, broad level of experienced personnel (with Wavefield Inseis being a
young company this is drawn from every other seismic company in the industry) eager to
produce a quality product, although the second shift (1st/2nd April 2009 to the end of the project)
were much less inclined to offer information and discuss issues than the first shift.
Personnel were very co-operative on both shifts though and were eager to ensure that the
projects objectives were fully met.
43
There seemed to be an air of disappointment over the company having been absorbed into the
CGGVeritas group as many had left both of those companies over the last few years seeking to
improve and find promotion with Wavefield Inseis.
All crew members provided the authors with full co-operation throughout, although perhaps
some were a little faster with the delivery than others.
12.12.
MARINE MAMMAL OBSERVERS
The MMOs carried out their duties as required, did not observe on the bridge as often as one
would normally expect. Of the 2 that covered the operation Waseem Haider Syed seemed the
most diligent (the other being Muhammad Sheikh).
When Waseem Haider Syed took over from Muhammad Sheikh (on 21st March 2009) he was
eager for the authors to include the observation and sightings record section of his daily report
with theirs which they did.
12.13.
PAKISTAN NAVAL OFFICER OPERATIONS OBSERVER
On board throughout the project was a Pakistan Naval Officer, except when the Venture G crew
changed over the period from 19th to 21st March 2009. He kept a very low profile and his
services, with respect to dealing with other vessels, was rarely needed.
44
13.
PROJECT TIMING ANALYSIS AND COMMENT
13.1.
ANALYSIS TABLE BY ACTIVITY
Event
Total Time
811.71
284.60
6.48
0.92
47.57
0.00
64.72
9.90
14.00
8.10
Recording
Line Change
Extended Line Change
Mobilisation
Stand-by
Weather Standby
Recovering Equipment
Contractor Downtime
In Port
Transit
TABLE 14
13.2.
% of Total
65.041%
22.804%
0.519%
0.074%
3.812%
0.00%
5.186%
0.793%
1.122%
0.649%
Analysis by Activity
ANALYSIS TABLE BY CATEGORY
Event
Recording
Line Change
Mobilisation
De-mobilisation
Fishing Activities
Source
Tidal Currents
Weather Stand-by
Total Time
811.71
284.60
0.92
86.82
47.57
9.90
6.48
0.00
TABLE 15
% of Total
65.041%
22.804%
0.074%
6.957%
3.812%
0.793%
0.519%
0.00%
Analysis by Category
*Daily timing analysis tables and charts can be viewed in Appendix J of this report.
13.3.
COMMENTS
The figures above are very much self explanatory. For 91.36% of the time over the 49 days
from 25th February to 14th April 2009 the Champion was either acquiring data or on a line
change. The average number of hours spent acquiring data for each day over that same period
was 16.56, of course the fact that the lines were so long at 79.525 km inflates that figure in
comparison to surveys that might have lines of just 20 km, but it is a tribute to the reliability of
the Champions equipment that she was able to keep up that rate of production whilst only
suffering a total of 9.9 hours of technical downtime.
The complete absence of any weather downtime during the project comes as something of a
surprise, although there were a couple of occasions when the seas deteriorated due to winds
that got up to about 25 knots, the sea state was never what one could call rough.
The most significant category after recording and line change is stand-by due to fishing activity,
and even this was only caused by the 3 fishing nets becoming snagged on the separation ropes
and not due to direct conflict with fishing vessels.
45
APPENDIX A
Location Map and Prime Lines
46
Please select relevant file below:

BP Pakistan 2009 Indus Basin 3D Location Map
BP Pakistan 2009 Indus Basin 3D Google Earth Image
BP Pakistan 2009 Indus Basin 3D Feb 25th
BP Pakistan 2009 Indus Basin 3D March 13th
47
APPENDIX B
Coverage Plots
48
Please select relevant folder below:

Final Coverage Plots : Fixed
Final Coverage Plots : Flexed
49
APPENDIX C
Examples of Inline and Crossline Stacks
50
Please select file below:

Examples of inline and crossline stacks
51
APPENDIX D
Timeslices
52
Please select file below for timeslices 1.5-4.0 s at 250 ms intervals:

Timeslices 1.5-4.0 seconds
53
APPENDIX E
Vessel Positioning and In-water Equipment Layout Diagrams
54

Geowave Champion - Indus Basin 3D - Source-Streamer Diagrams
Vessel Positioning & In-Water Equipment Layout
55
APPENDIX F
Vessel Specifications
56

Vessel Specifications - Geowave Champion
Vessel Specifications - Venture G
57
APPENDIX G
Operations Log
58

BP Pakistan - 2009 Indus Basin 3D - Operations Log
59
APPENDIX H
Line Information Summaries
60

BP Pakistan - 2009 Indus Basin 3D - Line Summaries
61
APPENDIX I
Project Production Tables and Charts
62

BP Pakistan - 2009 Indus Basin 3D - Production
(which includes the following worksheets: Daily Production Table; Production Chart Square
km; Production Chart Sail km and Production Chart Infill)
63
APPENDIX J
Timing Analysis Tables and Charts
64

BP Pakistan - 2009 Indus Basin 3D - Timing Analysis
(which includes worksheets Primary Timing Analysis; Primary Timing Chart; Secondary Timing
Analysis and Secondary Timing Chart)
65
APPENDIX K
Navigation QC Charts and Plots
66
Please select relevant folder below:

Bathy Charts
Calibration Reports
Changes Log
MultiSeis Databases
MultiSeis Reports
Statistical Charts
67

Pitfalls in Seismic Interpretation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pitfalls in Seismic Interpretation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pitfalls in Seismic Interpretation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What was the purpose of the seismic survey?

What was the purpose of the seismic survey?

What equipment was used to conduct the survey?

What equipment was used to conduct the survey?

FINAL REPORT

2009 INDUS BASIN

John Granville &

10th July 2009

SEAMAP GUNLINK 2000 CONTROLLER SPECIFICATIONS

7. NAVIGATION AND POSITIONING

INTEGRATED NAVIGATION AND PROCESSING SYSTEM

8. DATA PROCESSING AND QC

10. HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

12. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

13. PROJECT TIMING ANALYSIS AND COMMENT

ANALYSIS TABLE BY ACTIVITY

Location Map and Prime Lines

Contour Map Image generated from all E Records extracted

Gyrocompass Calibration Results

BP Pakistan contracted RPS Energy to provide on board geophysical and positioning

: Transverse Mercator TM66NE

: 0-164 changing by 0.042/year (24th Feb 2009)

Vessel Positioning Systems

: Fugro SkyFix-XP SDGPS

Streamer Compass Positioning and Depth Control

Sercel Seal Version 5.2.10

Number of Source Arrays

TIDAL AND OCEAN CURRENTS, STREAMER FEATHER ANGLES

WEATHER AND SEA CONDITIONS

Number of Source Arrays

SEAMAP GUNLINK 2000 CONTROLLER SPECIFICATIONS

String 2 9th March

String 3 10th March

* Precise diagrams for the individual arrays can be found in APPENDIX E.

Seal Digital - Kerosene filled polymer jacket

DEPTH CONTROL AND HEADING SENSORS

Reporting current depth and temperature

Concord Marine Systems

NAVIGATION AND POSITIONING

Transverse Mercator TM66NE

-48.82 m (EGM-96) 22 42N, 66 46E

CALIBRATION AND VERIFICATION OF NAVIGATION SYSTEMS

Gyrocompass Calibration Results

DGPS Verification Results

RGPS Range and Bearing Observations of 4 Receivers

Fugro SkyFix-XP SDGPS

Veripos Ultra PPP

Veripos DGPS Reference Stations

* Approx distance from centre of prospect (22 42 00.00 N, 066 46 00.00 E)

131 13 04 06.648 N 080 16 43.733 E

191 19 03 38.599 N 073 00 55.099 E

240 24 22 59.019 N 054 31 11.051 E

263 26 13 04.497 N 050 34 31.507 E

Fugro MRDGPS Reference Stations

* Approx distance from centre of prospect (22 42 00.00 N, 066 46 00.00 E)

Echo Sounder, Velocity Profiles and Tidal Corrections

Please find details

Contour Map Image generated from all E Records

SAIV T/S Dip Results