[CMC] Fw: IOAG: Response to Action on Lunar & Mars Missions
Nestor.Peccia at esa.int
Nestor.Peccia at esa.int
Tue Mar 1 13:25:56 UTC 2016
You will find below the response of the IOAG Chair upon my request, done
as CCSDS-IOAG liaison, and as a consequence of the action placed upon the
CESG Chairs in the last CMC meeting
----- Forwarded by Nestor Peccia/esoc/ESA on 01/03/2016 14:23 -----
From: Michael Schmidt/esoc/ESA
To: Nestor Peccia/esoc/ESA at ESA
Cc: Jean-Marc.Soula at cnes.fr, martin.pilgram at dlr.de,
rolf.kozlowski at dlr.de, shigeta.tsutomu at jaxa.jp,
philip.e.liebrecht at nasa.gov, MCOSBY at qinetiq.com, siahn at kari.re.kr,
pierre.jean at asc-csa.gc.ca, kenneth.lord at canada.ca, xuyansong at cnsa.gov.cn,
fabio.damico at asi.it, li.lj at 263.net.cn, heshanbao at cast.cn,
stephanie.wan at nasa.gov, barbara.adde at nasa.gov, wallace.s.tai at jpl.nasa.gov
Date: 01/03/2016 07:50
Subject: IOAG: Response to Action on Lunar & Mars Missions
I have asked the IOAG delegates to confirm whether a working group should
be created to assess the standardisation needs for the future Moon and
Mars missions. I have received a response from most of the agencies (UKSA,
CNSA, ASI, KARI, CNES, DLR, ESA, CSA). The response is positive, i.e. the
IOAG intend to perform the requested assessment of the standardisation
needs. At this point in time I intend to establish a coordination team
that collects and discuss the inputs that might be provided. I will ask
the delegates to confirm this approach. We might decide at a later stage
to establish a formal WG with the task of creating a formal report.
For the time being the following questions were raised:
a) Should we look at Moon and Mars missions or only at Moon missions?
b) Should we limit ourselves to the 4 questions identified by NASA in
1.Are your Lunar missions planning to be cross-supported by any
communication assets, e.g., ground station or relay orbiter, of any other
2.What are the standards, CCSDS or industry standards, to be used by your
3.Do you know if there are any standards that your Lunar missions would
like to use but currently are not accepted by IOAG?
4.Do you know if there are any capabilities that your Lunar missions would
like to use but currently are not available?
c) Should we limit ourselves to the currently planned Lunar and Mars
missions or should we also look at potential future missions, e.g.
Cubesats? There is for example an initiative to look at a possible
commercial communications network to support Moon / Mars missions.
The vast majority of the agencies agreed to look at the Moon and Mars
missions. One of the reasons is that the upcoming Moon missions should be
considered as a precursor to the future Mars missions and it should be
avoided to create specific infrastructure or standards only for the Moon
missions. They should be applicable if possible also for the Mars
missions. However, the emphasis of this assessment at this point in time
will probably be on the Moon missions.
All agencies also expressed their intention to provide cross-support. The
details are still to be defined.
The answers concerning the specific standards under point b (see above)
are not yet very extensive. All agencies expressed their intention to
apply the CCSDS standards but they didn?t yet identify the gaps. This will
be performed in the second step of this exercise.
In addition several agencies suggested to limit the assessment not only to
the institutional missions but also to take into account commercial
missions and potentially also cubesats.
If considered useful I can also provide the detailed responses from the
Please let me know if you require any further inputs at this point in
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CMC