[Smwg] Response for AI 2017-0215-2 (Planning information vs DDOR)

Barkley, Erik J (3970) erik.j.barkley at jpl.nasa.gov
Mon May 1 21:53:47 UTC 2017

CSSM Colleagues,

This is in response to AI 2017-0215-2, "For planning information output, check with DDOR operations at DSN and DDOR WG concerning how they accommodate inclusion of geometry form multiple objects (e.g. spacecraft 1...n and quasar 1...n)?".

What I have determined is that DDOR operations utilize planning information that is more or less in line with our current scope for the PIF (ie., basic communication geometry) and determines additional information as needed.  I.e., given when a spacecraft rises/sets over a particular ESLT (Earth Space Link Terminal to use cross support architecture terminology), or set of ESLTs DDOR operations subsequently determines the proper set of quasars to utilize that fit within the constraints of the rise and set etc. of the particular ESLTs. This holds true in the case of multiple spacecraft scan patterns as well.  In other words, there is no expectation for having a more sophisticated planning information output from CSSM WG that would include expression of co-constraints such as quasar visibility versus one or more spacecraft rise(s) and set(s) over a particular ESLT or set of ESLTs. This means we can proceed with the current PIF scoping and it should fit into the current DDOR operational context.

Best regards,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/smwg/attachments/20170501/1ccddd72/attachment.html>

More information about the SMWG mailing list