Braatz, Lena [USA] braatz_lena at bah.com
Wed Nov 15 13:44:25 UTC 2017

Dear SLS-OPT members,

As agreed at the face-to-face meeting at The Hague, each agency in the SLS-OPT Working Group shall clarify its position regarding the primary band plan for communication and the beacon in the O3K standard (formerly known as the Low Complexity standard). In particular, please explain whether you prefer the beacon to be outside the C-band at 1589 nm or inside the C-band.

Please be prepared to discuss your agency's position at the next SLS-OPT VITS on December 12. You are welcome to present slides at the meeting to facilitate the discussion. Be sure to provide the rationale (technical or otherwise) for your position during the discussion. The rationale may involve, but is not limited to, your agency's position on the following topics:

  1.  The link scenario conditions in Dirk's presentation from the face-to-face meeting (attached); i.e., What is your agency's position regarding the requirement that the standard shall work in any atmospheric scenario and at low elevations (worst case: 5° elevation & tropical atmosphere, from sea-level)?
  2.  The atmospheric absorption information presented by Dirk, which suggests that only half of the C-Band should be used so that the worst-case link can be accommodated.
  3.  Feedback from manufacturers of optical amplifiers regarding the power that can be achieved at different wavelengths; for example, a broadband device that is spanning at least 1545-1567, possibly 1545-1590.
  4.  The required backscatter isolation in a typical O3K space terminal setup; for example, please explain your position regarding the requirement of ~80 dB optical isolation presented by Dirk.
  5.  The wavelength specifications; i.e., does your agency prefer (a) specification of a single data signal wavelength within the available part of the C-Band (e.g. 1545 nm - 1565 nm), which would allow a 20 nm spectral separation from a beacon in the C-band, or (b) use of a broader spectral range of the C-band for data signals, in which case the beacon may need to be outside of the C-Band at 1589 nm to maintain a 20 nm separation?
  6.  The way beacon isolation is achieved via Tx-Beacon wavelength separation; i.e., what devices (filters and splitters) are needed to achieve the required isolation and spectral separation (for unpolarized signals), and are the costs of such devices appropriate for the O3K-scenario?
  7.  The +-40 GHz center frequency control tolerance presented by Dirk, taking into account required thermal stabilization of sources and narrow band passes.

[cid:image002.png at 01CE3AB5.294A2660]

Lena Braatz
Lead Associate
Office 434-973-4453

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-opt/attachments/20171115/dd434903/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3591 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-opt/attachments/20171115/dd434903/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: O3K-Proposal-UPDATE_DG20171107-08 DLR.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 898617 bytes
Desc: O3K-Proposal-UPDATE_DG20171107-08 DLR.pdf
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-opt/attachments/20171115/dd434903/attachment.pdf>

More information about the SLS-OPT mailing list