[Smwg] Potential "RID" for PIF

[Barkley, Erik J (3970)]

Colin,

To follow up from our telecon earlier today, I suggest the following revisions for the occType parameter in the PIF:

HARD - remove this and replace with BODY - the semantics in the data format being that this represents the view of the spacecraft being occulted by a celestial body
ATMOSPHERE - leave as is
UMBRA - leave as is
PENUMBRA - leave as is
SOFT - remove this - the "soft" types of occultation are already addressed via the above.

Best regards,
-Erik



From: Barkley, Erik J (3970)
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 11:50
To: Colin.Haddow at esa.int
Cc: CCSDS Service Mgmt WG <smwg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: FW: Potential "RID" for PIF

Meant to copy the WG for cognizance.

-Erik

From: Barkley, Erik J (3970)
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 11:48
To: Colin.Haddow at esa.int<mailto:Colin.Haddow at esa.int>
Subject: Potential "RID" for PIF

Hello Colin,

In working on the PIF prototype test plan, I have come across values of "HARD", "SOFT", as potential values for the optional occultation type parameter. Additionally there are ATMOSPHERE, UMBRA, PENUMBRA. It seems to me that the "soft" occultations  are already listed via the values other than "hard" and that "hard" truly means going behind the planet rather than grazing through the atmosphere or the shadow of a planet. Should we at least remove "soft"?  And perhaps re-defined "HARD" to be something like "PLANET" or "BODY" and also set this as the default meaning and/or make that parameter mandatory so there is no confusion as to the type of occultation that is predicted to occur?

Best regards,
-Erik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/smwg/attachments/20181120/7e53b766/attachment.html>