[MOIMS-NAV-EXEC] FW: Proposed Draft Orbit Hybrid Message (OHM)

Thu Mar 5 18:29:45 UTC 2015

Dave:

OMMs are posted on the Space-track website... see https://www.space-track.org/#/catalog far right column.

For that reason, as far as I'm concerned, the OMM should stay.

David

From: SkySentry <finklemand at skysentry.net<mailto:finklemand at skysentry.net>>
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 8:14 PM
To: David Berry <David.S.Berry at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:David.S.Berry at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Cc: "moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org>" <moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: Re: [MOIMS-NAV-EXEC] FW: Proposed Draft Orbit Hybrid Message (OHM)

I have no objection to the addition.  I agree that it would overcome a deficiency for many users and potential users.   However, there are certainly other essential revisions that should be implemented in the mandatory reconfirmation review.  For example, I think that the OMM should be removed.  As far as I can tell, no one uses it.  It was my attempt to bring the USAF into the rest of the world by accommodating TLE content in a standard formalism.  Now the USAF has gained momentum in providing OEM and OPM formats, particularly in the CDM.  OMM can go.  There may be new elements of information, particularly for small satellites or for intentional rather than accidental close approaches, as in ADR.

We should pursue diligently a full review and assessment.  Dan's contribution is a good start. I believe that opening things up briefly will not affect the bureaucracy of implementing the OHM.

ברכות מתל אביב

Dave

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 5, 2015, at 12:46 AM, Berry, David S (3920) <david.s.berry at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:david.s.berry at jpl.nasa.gov>> wrote:

All:

Attached is Dan Oltrogge's work on the ODM revisions for your review and comment.  If you have a chance to take a look prior to the meetings that start 23-March-2015 that would be great.

David

P.S.:  More to come!!!

From: <Oltrogge>, Daniel <doltrogge at agi.com<mailto:doltrogge at agi.com>>
Date: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 5:38 AM
To: David Berry <David.S.Berry at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:David.S.Berry at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Subject: Fwd: Proposed Draft Orbit Hybrid Message (OHM)

Proposed OHM draft document, for distribution to the group.

// Dan Oltrogge
// SDC Program Mgr & Sr Research Astrodynamicist
// 719-482-4552 | oltrogge at agi.com<mailto:oltrogge at agi.com>

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Oltrogge, Daniel" <doltrogge at agi.com<mailto:doltrogge at agi.com>>
To: "moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org>" <moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Cc: "'Dan Oltrogge (oltrogge at agi.com<mailto:oltrogge at agi.com>)'" <oltrogge at agi.com<mailto:oltrogge at agi.com>>
Subject: Proposed Draft Orbit Hybrid Message (OHM)

All –

From our last NAV WG meeting in London, I was tasked with scoping out an Orbit Hybrid Message (OHM) to augment the existing Orbit Data Message (ODM) types (OMM, OPM and OEM).

For your consideration and as promised (and even on time!), a proposed draft of this new message type is attached.  To save you some time, most of the relevant OHM content is contained in Section 6, with additional verbiage in the earlier sections and in Section 7 and in the appendices.

As a reminder, the principal drivers for the new message are:

(1)    Additional use cases:

a.       Satellite operators needing a succinct message type to contain covariance, ephemeris and/or orbital states, maneuver info

b.      Small satellite (e.g. CubeSat or “sprites” mission) en masse deployments containing between 50 and 200 objects per deployment;

c.       Space tracking agencies (e.g. STRATCOM, ESA, JSpOC, ISON, ComSpOC, etc) needing to share large quantities of orbital ephemeris and satellite physical characteristics info for as many as 200,000 objects as much as three times per day.

(2)    Need to make the messages smaller by:

a.       Allowing more optional data within a standardized set of options, so that the user only has to share the information which the user will ultimately need;

b.      Combining the requisite features of multiple message types (OMM, OPM and OEM) into a single message to eliminate duplicative message header information.

I want to thank Dave Finkleman and Doug Cather and several SDA operators for their willingness to review and provide suggestions on the message and to Dave Vallado and Sal Alfano for working with me to develop overall message content.

I look forward to discussing this new proposed message format and content with you.  We can discuss in detail at the upcoming meetings in Pasadena as well.

Thanks,

Dan

Daniel L. Oltrogge
SDC Program Manager & Senior Research Astrodynamicist
Center for Space Standards and Innovation
Analytical Graphics Incorporated
Voice: 719-660-5142; E-mail: oltrogge at agi.com<mailto:oltrogge at agi.com>

<ODM_OHM_New_Draft_v22.pdf>
_______________________________________________
MOIMS-NAV-EXEC mailing list
MOIMS-NAV-EXEC at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:MOIMS-NAV-EXEC at mailman.ccsds.org>
http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/moims-nav-exec
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/moims-nav-exec/attachments/20150305/ecfaeffe/attachment.html>