[CESG] OMG SW Defined Radio (SDR) spec, was: Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
Shames, Peter M (US 312B)
peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov
Thu Jun 8 19:16:41 UTC 2023
Dear Jonathan, Ignacio, Bernie, et al,
I have recently been in discussion with Steve Laird of the OMG. What prompted this was the announcement that OMG was producing a standard for “optical space communications”. Since this appeared, at first blush, to be squarely in the CCSDS “territory” I found it somewhat alarming and asked for more details.
Having now had the time (and the current document) to review what I believe that they are proposing my own concerns have abated. That said, I am sending this on to you to alert you as to what is in process and to see if this is something you wish to engage with for any reason. The current Space Telecommunications Interface (STI) spec, which is focused on RF comms, is attached. What is apparently proposed it to extend this nominally RF spec to also include optical comm. And there appears to be some intent on the part of OMG to make this into an ISO spec and to offer it up to CCSDS as well, in some capacity. See comments below.
After looking over the spec it seems pretty clear to me that this is only vaguely related to CCSDS interests in any way. The spec is really an abstract definition of the interfaces and functions of a generic software defined radio (SDR). It does distinguish application interfaces, internal functions for signal processing (digital data and “waveforms”), and radio/hardware and system control interfaces. It mentions CCSDS only once, in the form of identifying CCSDS (& IP) “networking functions”. There is no mention at all of any CCSDS standards for data link, coding, modulation, networking or upper layer functions.
My analysis is that this most closely meets the CCSDS document type of Magenta Book. It might be of interest to the SOIS Area, largely because it is intended to be a description of what might become a flight hardware component. In its form it is a rather thorough, and relatively well done, abstract model of radio functionality and it provides a set of APIs, all documented using SysML. I am sure that it could be extended to adopt SOIS EDS as interface specifications, SLS link, coding, and modulation specs, and even SIS DTN specs, but it does not now make any reference to any of these. Nor does it presently cover anything related to optical comm, although that is supposed to be supported in the next iteration.
Please review the attached spec and reach your own conclusions. And ask if this is something that we would get any value out of endorsing.
Thanks, Peter
From: Steve MacLaird <Maclaird at omg.org>
Date: Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 8:28 AM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, "Bugenhagen, Jay (GSFC-5830)" <john.l.bugenhagen at nasa.gov>
Cc: Sami Asmar <sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov>, Tim Pham <timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov>, Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>, "Briones, Janette C. (GRC-LCI0)" <janette.c.briones at nasa.gov>, Jeff Smith <jeff.smith at sncorp.com>, Char Wales <charwingomg at gmail.com>, "Briones, Janette C. (GRC-LCI0)" <janette.c.briones at nasa.gov>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] FW: Abstract Deadline Extension - Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
Peter –
Thanks for you email. I rec’d a call from Janette Briones the Space Telecommunications Interface (STI) (formerly known inside of NASA as the Space Telecommunications Radio Service (STRS)) program manager. She has asked me some questions to which I’m getting answers on which may occur later this week. Will send a separate email on a telecon between you, Jay & I.
For those on this email, I’m going to provide a short summary in laymen’s speak to describe what STI is and how it evolved. In 2001 – 2002, OMG aided the US Department of Defense in designing a Software Communications Architecture (SCA) specification. The SCA Specification Standard was published in July 2002 and has been updated throughout the years since. In 2004, NASA asked the DoD Joint Tactical Radio Systems (JTRS) Joint Program Office (JPO) for the background information on the SCA, studied it and took 95% of the specification, added new capabilities for space, and then tested it utilizing the US Space Shuttle and International Space Station to test the capability know as STRS. In 2017, I approached NASA Glen, to turn that specification into and Object Management Group (OMG) endorsed specification.
The team of NASA and OMG interested parties decided to turn the UML based STRS Specification Standard into a Systems Modeling Language (SysML) based specification standard and in doing that renamed STRS to STI. It took OMG about 2.5 years to transition the UML background into SysML and then gain approval of the OMG Architecture Board (AB). The OMG AB approved STI as a specification standard and it is available online for free download: https://www.omg.org/spec/STI/1.0/About-STI<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/www.omg.org/spec/STI/1.0/About-STI__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!JjkEGHgRfd5JcQR6n8sH42N4FgwUZrJzO4-IJAP_j0n25HftAao0rBeTPJy_TxkFMZbVI9_jK-rIf2t6yYomg8dw$>
In the late 2017 / 2018 timeframe, the NASA Glen team decided to port the STRS / STI specification in a optical com test bed and did so successfully after fixing a few bugs over what was described to me aa “less than 2 weeks to fix”. Not sure if a report was done, but it was determined to be a successful test.
I have suggested sending the STI Specification Standard on to ISO and there seems to be some traction to do that. FYI, OMG has a standing Fast Track Agreement with ISO and generally, it takes OMG 19 – 20 months to get a specification approved through the OMG AB and writes all OMG specification standards in ISO format. To date, OMG has been requested and successfully obtained ISO endorsements for 15 of our OMG standards. That ISO Fast Track process takes an average of 36 months. Although some think that 56 months is a long period, the typical ISO process take 8 – 9 years, so OMG cuts that by about 3 – 4 years.
Based upon the interest, OMG is exploring sending an abstract in by June 16th to CCSDS and submitting STI to ISO for consideration. None of this has been decided on as of this time, so consider this as work in process. More to follow after OMG’s meeting in Orlando, June 19th – 23rd.
Steve
Steven A. MacLaird, Col (Ret), USAF
SVP, Government & Industry Strategy
[See the source image]
+1 703.231.6335
[cid:image002.png at 01D99A03.13DC3BC0]
Steve MacLaird
Senior Vice President (SDO)
Object Management Group, Inc
Dallas / Fort Worth, TX, USA UTC-06
From: Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2023 5:43 PM
To: Steve MacLaird <Maclaird at omg.org>; Bugenhagen, Jay (GSFC-5830) <john.l.bugenhagen at nasa.gov>
Cc: Asmar, Sami W (US 9100) <sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov>; Pham, Timothy T (US 3300) <timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov>; Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>; Briones, Janette C. (GRC-LCI0) <janette.c.briones at nasa.gov>; Jeff Smith <jeff.smith at sncorp.com>; Char Wales <charwingomg at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] FW: Abstract Deadline Extension - Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
Hi Steve,
I just talked to Dan Smith and he informed me of what he believes Jay Bugenhagen is supposed to be doing as the NASA rep to OMG. I will be following up with them.
As you mentioned, the CCSDS liaison to OMG is an open position at this point. I will be working with the CCSDS leadership, copied on this email, to get that opening filled in a useful way.
After talking to Dan he confirmed my opinion that, for the most part, the CCSDS and OMG orbits do not overlap much, mostly in the SDTF, but possibly elsewhere. In order to sort this out I believe we need to have a coordination meeting where we share info on our respective work plans. Since the members of, and motivations for, the two organizations are largely disjoint there may not be much overlap, but it would be good to understand just where that does exist.
The CCSDS Organization chart can be found here (https://cwe.ccsds.org/default.aspx<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/cwe.ccsds.org/default.aspx__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!JjkEGHgRfd5JcQR6n8sH42N4FgwUZrJzO4-IJAP_j0n25HftAao0rBeTPJy_TxkFMZbVI9_jK-rIf2t6ycFQPdua$>), along with linked pages to the various Areas and Working Groups (WG).
Please do organize a joint phone call when you and Jay are both present. Before June 24 works best for me. After that I will be out of the country until mid July.
Other comments <<inline>> below.
Cheers, Peter
From: Steve MacLaird <Maclaird at omg.org<mailto:Maclaird at omg.org>>
Date: Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 7:58 AM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>, "Bugenhagen, Jay (GSFC-5830)" <john.l.bugenhagen at nasa.gov<mailto:john.l.bugenhagen at nasa.gov>>
Cc: Sami Asmar <sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov>>, Tim Pham <timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov>>, Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int<mailto:Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>>, "Briones, Janette C. (GRC-LCI0)" <janette.c.briones at nasa.gov<mailto:janette.c.briones at nasa.gov>>, Jeff Smith <jeff.smith at sncorp.com<mailto:jeff.smith at sncorp.com>>, Char Wales <charwingomg at gmail.com<mailto:charwingomg at gmail.com>>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] FW: Abstract Deadline Extension - Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
Peter –
My comments embedded below in Blue. I have added Jay Bugehagen to the “To” line since he is the NASA POC to OMG. I need to talk with Jay in Orlando on the NASA / CCSDS / OMG Liaison and in the course of that, may try to call you to include you in on discussions.
WRT to your last paragraph, my response is: Sharing overall plans is good. IF the SNC WG agrees to respond to the CCSDS RFP, then I can engage on that. I need time to discuss with Janette & Jeff and then can get back with you. Please give me to the end of the month to respond, but I will try to act NLT June 24th, IF, I can circle the wagons.
<<I do not know what the “CCSDS RFP” relates to.>>
Steve
Steven A. MacLaird, Col (Ret), USAF
SVP, Government & Industry Strategy
[See the source image]
+1 703.231.6335
[cid:image004.png at 01D99A03.13DC3BC0]
Steve MacLaird
Senior Vice President (SDO)
Object Management Group, Inc
Dallas / Fort Worth, TX, USA UTC-06
From: Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2023 8:47 PM
To: Steve MacLaird <Maclaird at omg.org<mailto:Maclaird at omg.org>>
Cc: Asmar, Sami W (US 9100) <sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov>>; Pham, Timothy T (US 3300) <timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov>>; Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int<mailto:Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>>; Briones, Janette C. (GRC-LCI0) <janette.c.briones at nasa.gov<mailto:janette.c.briones at nasa.gov>>; Jeff Smith <jeff.smith at sncorp.com<mailto:jeff.smith at sncorp.com>>; Char Wales <charwingomg at gmail.com<mailto:charwingomg at gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] FW: Abstract Deadline Extension - Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
Hi Steve,
Thanks for the rapid reply. It does appear that communications between our two orgs has somewhat broken down over the years. Our two orgs have largely been on our own tracks and in mostly different directions, but it seems we have some degree of overlap here between the SDTF and CCSDS. Let’s figure out how to improve communications first and foremost and then tackle what may be the thornier issue of optical comm. My CCSDS Liaison, Mario Merri is in long term vacation status before retiring in Oct 2023 – I was not aware of his status and have not rec’d a replacement name. Prior to Dan Smith’s retirement, he and I regularly discussed CCSDS and OMG. I have failed to establish that type of relationship with Jay and will correct that in our upcoming Orlando Technical Conference (TC). I need to better understand your play in the CCSDS / NASA / OMG mix and that may include a discussion between you, Jay & I.
<<In CCSDS I am a member of the Engineering Steering Group, which I believe is the equivalent of the OMG Architecture Board. I also am the Area Director for the Systems Engineering Area, which includes Systems Architecture, Security, and two other Working Groups (WG). CCSDS has six Areas and a total of 24 WG.>>
You are correct in that Mario Merri has retired. It’s up to CCSDS to appoint a new OMG Liaison person, and clearly we have dropped the ball on that. So that must be priority one on our side. If you can help stimulate CCSDS into reaching out to me, I would appreciate it.
Making sure that you, and anyone else who needs to be made aware, have visibility into the extensive CCSDS body of standards is another priority. I think the easiest thing to do there might be to share the recent work plan set of overview charts from our May working and management meetings. I’ve copied the CCSDS Management Council (CMC) Chair, Sami Asmar, and the CCSDS Engineering Steering Group (CESG) chair, Klaus-Juergen Schulz, on this email. We will discuss how best to handle this. Agree
<<As noted, I have copied the CCSDS Secretariat (Sami Asmar) and the CESG Chair (Klaus-Juergen Schulz). I will work with them to get this sorted.>>
If you wish to specifically discuss STI and any optical comm proposal we had best get the Working Group (WG) chair for that involved as well. Not sure what you mean by WG Chair. OMG has WGs. I have reached out to Janette Briones & Jeff Smith who ran the OMG Space Network Communications (SNC) WG that has now disbanded. Today, I called Janette & left a msg and in the process of “stirring this up”, found out that Louis Handler, Janette’s right hand man, has retired.
<<CCSDS also has WG, including one for Optical Comm. I do not know what the scope was for the OMG SNC WG. We do have a very active CCSDS Delay Tolerant Networking (DTN) WG. Maybe those folks want to come join our effort?>>
Did you want to start by sharing the overall plans of work for the two orgs as a way to get back in synch, or do you think the optical work is a higher priority for you? There is also some middleware and application services work going on in CCSDS, but I think that has less urgency than these other matters. Sharing overall plans is good. IF the SNC WG agrees to respond to the CCSDS RFP, then I can engage on that.
<<There is no “CCSDS RFP” that I know of. >>
Best regards, Peter
From: Steve MacLaird <Maclaird at omg.org<mailto:Maclaird at omg.org>>
Date: Saturday, June 3, 2023 at 11:50 AM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Cc: Sami Asmar <sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov>>, Tim Pham <timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov>>, Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int<mailto:Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>>, "Briones, Janette C. (GRC-LCI0)" <janette.c.briones at nasa.gov<mailto:janette.c.briones at nasa.gov>>, Jeff Smith <jeff.smith at sncorp.com<mailto:jeff.smith at sncorp.com>>, Char Wales <charwingomg at gmail.com<mailto:charwingomg at gmail.com>>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] FW: Abstract Deadline Extension - Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
Peter –
Great to hear from you after a long time ! I have not heard back from NASA yet, but heard that Louis Handler has since retired. No I wasn’t aware that CCSDS was working on Optical Comm despite me being the Liaison between OMG and CCSDS. Frankly, I rarely heard from my counterpart, Mario Merri and upon sending this out, found out that he is on long term vacation before retiring.
Object Management Group (OMG) has a long standing Fast Track Agreement with ISO that usually get’s their endorsement in 30 – 36 Months. OMG spouts that we normally, our standards get finalized within 19 – 20 months from RFP request and if someone wants to go with ISO, then add another 36 months which = 56 months versus the 8.5 average by going through ISO directly. This is why I mentioned below, moving out on this.
My understanding from Louis Handler & Janette Briones was that STI, previously known as STRI, was tested with optical comms as a standard and came out with flying colors (no pun intended). The difference between STRI and STI is that STRI is UML based and STI specifically moved to SysML.
Could I suggest a telecon to discuss later next week, so I can better understand your perspectives and what you are aware of? Thinking Janette Briones & Jeff Smith may want to attend also. Char Wales is the Chair of the Middleware And Related Services (MARS) Platform Task Force (PTF) and may be interested also. Thanks.
Steve
Steven A. MacLaird, Col (Ret), USAF
SVP, Government & Industry Strategy
[See the source image]
+1 703.231.6335
[cid:image006.png at 01D99A03.13DC3BC0]
Steve MacLaird
Senior Vice President (SDO)
Dallas / Fort Worth, TX, USA UTC-06
+1 781 444 0404; 106
maclaird at omg.org<mailto:maclaird at omg.org>
[cid:image007.png at 01D99A03.13DC3BC0]
From: Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Sent: Friday, June 2, 2023 10:23 PM
To: Steve MacLaird <Maclaird at omg.org<mailto:Maclaird at omg.org>>
Cc: Asmar, Sami W (US 9100) <sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:sami.w.asmar at jpl.nasa.gov>>; Pham, Timothy T (US 3300) <timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:timothy.t.pham at jpl.nasa.gov>>; Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int<mailto:Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>>
Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] FW: Abstract Deadline Extension - Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
Importance: High
Dear Steve,
I just got this passed along from one of my ex-NASA colleagues. I was a little surprised that this announcement did not appear in any OMG-CCSDS traffic since it appears to be specifically about space communication and mentions both NASA and ESA, each of whom are leading organizations in CCSDS.
You may not be aware of this, but there is already a vey robust standardization effort in CCSDS for optical comm which is supported by both NASA and ESA, among other agencies. Perhaps this is aimed at another part of space operations than our normal comm standards, that start at the ISO BRM Layer 1 and extend up through Layer 3-4 to Layer 7?
As an aside, please be aware that CCSDS already does have a very active liaison agreement with ISO. We standardize most of the CCSDS Blue Books (interoperability standards) and Magenta Books (recommended practices) through the ISO TC20/SC13. There are already more than 100 of these with ISO numbers assigned.
Perhaps we need to have a coordination meeting to avoid stepping on one another’s toes?
Best regards, Peter Shames
Peter Shames
Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS)
Systems Engineering Area Director
Jet Propulsion Laboratory / Interplanetary Network Directorate
4800 Oak Grove Drive
MS 301-490
Pasadena, CA 91109
peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
O: 818-354-5740
C: 818-687-7901
https://cwe.ccsds.org/sea/default.aspx<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/cwe.ccsds.org/sea/default.aspx__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!fgncIVD-iu0I_1xWlmq78lUqf1aK_WZzB2gUhx7cfOlLefMQluIGVhXTKIrzYkYoUsYraXcV$>
From: Steve MacLaird <Maclaird at omg.org<mailto:Maclaird at omg.org>>
Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2023 7:35 AM
To: space at omg.org<mailto:space at omg.org>; Briones, Janette C. (GRC-LCI0) <janette.c.briones at nasa.gov<mailto:janette.c.briones at nasa.gov>>; Handler, Louis M. (GRC-LCA0) <louis.m.handler at nasa.gov<mailto:louis.m.handler at nasa.gov>>
Cc: Dark, William T. (GRC-LCA0)[HX5, LLC] <william.t.dark at nasa.gov<mailto:william.t.dark at nasa.gov>>; Jeff Smith <jeff.smith at sncorp.com<mailto:jeff.smith at sncorp.com>>; Mike Bennett <bennett at omg.org<mailto:bennett at omg.org>>; Bill Hoffman <hoffman at omg.org<mailto:hoffman at omg.org>>; Char Wales <charwingomg at gmail.com<mailto:charwingomg at gmail.com>>
Subject: FW: Abstract Deadline Extension - Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
Importance: High
Space Co-Chairs, MARS Chair, Janette & Louis –
Rec’d this yesterday and upon reading, thought of the Space Telecommunications Interface (STI) Specification Standard that we received OMG AB approval back in 2021. As I remember, STI has proven optical capabilities. My question is twofold:
1. Should NASA and OMG consider moving the STI specification standard to ISO, knowing the Europeans prefer ISO over OMG? OMG has a Fast Track Agreement with ISO and that is a 3 year average process. (Note, OMG has 15 ISO endorsed specification standard success stories to date).
2. Should NASA and the OMG Space Domain Task Force (DTF) consider working together to submit a response to ESA and meet the time line requested before?
One noteworthy point on STI; as you know, STI is based upon OMG’s Systems Modeling Language (SysML). ESA is high on SysML and recently the OMG AB approved SysML 2.0. With STI based on SysML 1.6, it is a positive approach for ESA to accept STI as the solution – This is as a huge opportunity for OMG, the MARS PTF, Space DTF and NASA.
I’m interested in your thoughts and recommendations, as well as NASA’s update on current use of STI. Looking forward to responses soon.
Steve
Steven A. MacLaird, Col (Ret), USAF
SVP, Government & Industry Strategy
[See the source image]
+1 703.231.6335
[cid:image009.jpg at 01D99A03.13DC3BC0]
Steve MacLaird
Dallas / Fort Worth, TX, USA UTC-06
From: ESA Conference Bureau <esaconferencebureau at atpi.com<mailto:esaconferencebureau at atpi.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2023 11:46 AM
To: Steve MacLaird <Maclaird at omg.org<mailto:Maclaird at omg.org>>
Subject: Abstract Deadline Extension - Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, 6 - 10 November 2023, ESTEC, The Netherlands
[Image removed by sender. Header Image]
Dear colleague,
Following multiple requests of extension of the abstract submission deadline of the 4th edition of the Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics, we would like to inform you that the abstract submission deadline will be extended to 16th of June 2023 .
The workshop will take place from Monday 6 November to Friday 10 November 2023 at the ESA-ESTEC located in Noordwijk, the Netherlands. To access the latest information, please visit the website by clicking here<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fatpi.eventsair.com*2Fwitso-2023&data=05*7C01*7Cspace*40omg.org*7C5851b521df97455a66f508db629cae42*7C43ba4fbcdc0a4269b50364f0363799d8*7C0*7C0*7C638212197319710431*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=Bo7m6qd6EIsiTFTWUM1hPi3uePhDwy*2BPxp8HObvv8ko*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!OpS64cOPdSn6JS2zgBmAJZW4sEVl2MpOKpjEov343WEZNl6qD4M3Z6l78Z8Pxo3VsgnGhD1-SQ6UHtwBCyoaFJQlrH6ALz3cFro$>.
This workshop will focus on selected topics on key innovative optical technologies identified as enabling for future space missions or critical for the improvement of current mission concepts. It will provide the opportunity to collaborate, network, and share your latest findings in an informal and fruitful environment.
This 4th edition will comprise 3 specific workshop topics dedicated to :
1) Optical Payloads for NewSpace: current status and perspectives for Earth Observation and Science with Cube and Small Satellites.
2) Game-changers: novel optical components and technologies unlocking new architectures, performances and functionalities for small to large Earth Observation and Science optical payloads
3) Straylight: analysis, characterisation, prevention and correction.
With the extended submission deadline the registration for this event is intended to open now on 19th of June.
Abstracts shall be submitted by 16th of June 2023 to the technical chair of the corresponding topic. To view the details of abstract submission, please visit the dedicated webpage available here<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fatpi.eventsair.com*2Fwitso-2023*2Fabstract-submission&data=05*7C01*7Cspace*40omg.org*7C5851b521df97455a66f508db629cae42*7C43ba4fbcdc0a4269b50364f0363799d8*7C0*7C0*7C638212197319710431*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=8vxtpx92E34wSq4vxeDdo0mtLaRWxEEwPaSq7dsowhw*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!OpS64cOPdSn6JS2zgBmAJZW4sEVl2MpOKpjEov343WEZNl6qD4M3Z6l78Z8Pxo3VsgnGhD1-SQ6UHtwBCyoaFJQlrH6Akh4cJFw$>.
The website will host more information about the workshop in the coming months.
We look forward to welcoming you at ESTEC in November!
On behalf of the Workshop on Innovative Technologies for Space Optics Organising Committee,
ATPI Corporate Events
ESA Conference Bureau
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ Noordwijk, The Netherlands
PO Box 299, 2200 AG Noordwijk, The Netherlands
T: +31 71 565 8602
E: esaconferencebureau at atpi.com<mailto:esaconferencebureau at atpi.com>
W: www.atpi.com<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fprotect-eu.mimecast.com*2Fs*2Fb1F5CJZruORxPGFzrOQ8&data=05*7C01*7Cspace*40omg.org*7C5851b521df97455a66f508db629cae42*7C43ba4fbcdc0a4269b50364f0363799d8*7C0*7C0*7C638212197319710431*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=*2BE2kSMt8b3bOvVdcFByXHLHYt9nS6JRx1AWJXcxyuN0*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!OpS64cOPdSn6JS2zgBmAJZW4sEVl2MpOKpjEov343WEZNl6qD4M3Z6l78Z8Pxo3VsgnGhD1-SQ6UHtwBCyoaFJQlrH6AhZ8NHbY$>
[Image removed by sender. Footer image]
Unsubscribe<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fatpi.eventsair.com*2FUnsubscribe*2Fd85db974-8655-4f8f-b6be-f2fbe62f9ea0*2F6bc561f6-77cc-4c69-9178-400ef779847a&data=05*7C01*7Cspace*40omg.org*7C5851b521df97455a66f508db629cae42*7C43ba4fbcdc0a4269b50364f0363799d8*7C0*7C0*7C638212197319710431*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=cHXHDBhFog*2BJ*2FsX*2BrlVCRORbSan9Mfl5VZve5cnMTY4*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!OpS64cOPdSn6JS2zgBmAJZW4sEVl2MpOKpjEov343WEZNl6qD4M3Z6l78Z8Pxo3VsgnGhD1-SQ6UHtwBCyoaFJQlrH6AZWhoPvU$>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2045 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0005.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 41437 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2046 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0006.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 41438 bytes
Desc: image004.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2047 bytes
Desc: image005.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0007.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.png
Type: image/png
Size: 41439 bytes
Desc: image006.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image007.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8704 bytes
Desc: image007.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0007.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image008.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2048 bytes
Desc: image008.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0008.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image009.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8933 bytes
Desc: image009.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0009.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OMG STI Spec ptc-22-12-02.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 2847881 bytes
Desc: OMG STI Spec ptc-22-12-02.pdf
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20230608/8c9e1335/attachment-0001.pdf>
More information about the CESG
mailing list