GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS OCD - Emits - ESA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS OCD Issue 1 Revision 2 (draft) - 25.07.2010 GMES-GSEG-EOPG-TN-09-0008 page 122 of 350 In practice, such acquisitions will be handled such as to avoid any impact on the overall baseline mission objectives (e.g. timeliness conflicts), possibly using the margin left within the available downlink budget. Nevertheless, the mission-planning capabilities will provision for the possibility of acquisition campaigns to take precedence over the nominal acquisition scenario if needed. To provide for additional trade-off, the MSI acquisition scenarios will take advantage of Sentinel-2 constellation capabilities and embed load balancing between the spacecraft acquisition plans (e.g. alternate acquisition campaigns on Sentinel-2A and Sentinel-2B spacecrafts). As detailed in section 4.5.4.10, additional and possibly interfering acquisitions will be performed recurrently for Cal/Val activities. Although generally taking precedence over the nominal plan, the impact of Cal/Val requirements on the mission plan will be very limited. To satisfy the MSI constraint described in section 4.3.8.3, the MSI acquisition plan will ensure that the instrument nominally enters standby mode when the spacecraft reaches eclipse after the descending measurement pass. At the end of the eclipse period, the MSI will be switched back into idle mode to reach thermal stability 300 seconds before the start of image acquisitions at the next pass. Exceptions to this rule will however be permitted to allow for seldom acquisitions to be performed during night time (e.g. for dark-signal acquisitions or specific acquisition campaigns). In this case and according to the planned night-time observations, the instrument commanding to standby (resp. from standby) will be delayed (resp. anticipated) to satisfy at best the constraint when better qualified. The detailed MSI acquisitions scenario implemented during phase-E2 will be implemented from HLOP input along the principles defined above. During Phase-E1 of any spacecraft, the PDGS Commissioning Plan (CP) will supersede the HLOP for the operations relevant to that spacecraft. 4.5.4.1.2 Ancillary Data Acquisitions The processing of MSI data on-ground requires time-correlated satellite ancillary data. To this end, satellite ancillary data will be nominally acquired on-board without interruption and stored into the dedicated Ancillary-data memory store. This memory will be managed as a circular buffer such that newly acquired data systematically and autonomously replaces the oldest one within the total allocated buffer size. It is assumed this recording operation is not requiring any specific triggering at PDGS mission-planning [Assumption-16]. 4.5.4.2 Core Mission Data-Recovery On-Ground The operation scenario for Sentinel-2 satellite downlinks aims for: ○ The systematic recovery on-ground of all satellite generated data with an optimised apportioning of RT, NRT and nominal timeliness characteristics driven through the HLOP; ○ A very systematic and steady process to the maximum feasible extent. ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use © ESA The copyright of this document is the property of ESA. It is supplied in confidence and shall not be reproduced, copied or communicated to any third party without written permission from ESA.
GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS OCD Issue 1 Revision 2 (draft) - 25.07.2010 GMES-GSEG-EOPG-TN-09-0008 page 123 of 350 ○ Making best possible usage of the overall downlink budget available through the CGS network in this respect. This section describes the approach followed referring when relevant to all operation constraints applicable to this process listed in section 4.3. 4.5.4.2.1 Problem Logic This section summarises the overall logic applicable to the definition of the downlink scenario, starting from the characterisation of the CGS network and ending at the recurrent detailed downlink planning fulfilling all operation constraints applicable to the process. The PDGS mission-planning operations will follow the logic described here as four-steps approach: ○ In a first step, the CGS resources globally selected to support the data reception from the GSC Sentinels will be characterised for use within the Sentinel-2 PDGS. This step will embed a first level of optimisation aimed at mapping at best the high-level scenario within the PDGS end-to-end operation objectives, constraints (cf. section 4.3.10.4) and target performance (e.g. timeliness); ○ In a second step, the characterised downlink resources will be mapped to each Sentinel-2 spacecraft. This will include the necessary allocations dedicated to Sentinel- 2 amongst the other Sentinels and a first-level of load-balancing optimisation among the Sentinel-2 spacecrafts resulting in a coarse downlink budget applicable to each spacecraft; ○ In a third step, the detailed downlink scenario will be derived based on the actual MSI acquisition plan, the data-timeliness priorities set in the HLOP and will implement all operation constraints not taken into account in the previous steps. This step will finally trigger the mission planning loop with the FOS to carry out spacecraft scheduling; ○ In a last step, the ground stations (CGS and LGS) will be scheduled for acquisition. The two first steps will be carried out at least once in an initial interactive configuration operation. They will be repeated as needed following HLOP high-level changes, evolutions in the CGS network resources or their relative apportionments to Sentinel-2, or to perform general load-balancing optimisations. In counterpart, the third step will be automated and embedded in the recurrent missionplanning activity performed in closed-loop with the FOS (cf. section 4.5.3.1.1). The last step will be triggered independently based on the detailed downlink plan settled at the term of step-three and according to the ground station scheduling constraints (typically daily). The following paragraphs detail this four-step logic. 4.5.4.2.1.1 Characterisation of the CGS Resources This first configuration step aims at globally characterising the CGS resources and providing an apportionment of their usage in the overall distributed data-recovery scenario mapped to their physical capabilities (e.g. accessibility and sizing). ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use © ESA The copyright of this document is the property of ESA. It is supplied in confidence and shall not be reproduced, copied or communicated to any third party without written permission from ESA.
Page 1 and 2:
document title/ titre du document P
Page 3 and 4:
GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS OCD issue 1 rev
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS OCD Issue 1 Rev
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
[RD-33] Sentinel-2 MSI - Level 2A A
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
LES LGS Land Equipped Sites Local G
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
3.5.2 MULTI-SPECTRAL INSTRUMENT CHA
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68: ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use
Page 69 and 70: GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS OCD Issue 1 Rev
Page 97 and 98: Table 4-5 Radiometric image quality
Page 99 and 100: Product- Type On-Line retention Off
Page 103 and 104: 4.5.1.5 Scalability and Flexibility
Page 117: GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS OCD Issue 1 Rev
Page 159 and 160: 4.6.3 OPERATIONAL TRANSFER BASELINE
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Product- Type Identifier S2MSI0 S2M
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
5 PDGS DESIGN GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS O
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
○ Effective processing resources
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
o preserving integrity of exchanged
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
6 DETAILED OPERATIONS CONCEPTS GSC
Page 245 and 246:
o Report generation frequency and c
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
○ MSI L1A, L1B, L1C and TCI produ
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Some relevant use cases are present
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Two main mapping services have been
Page 327 and 328:
The requirement on the cloud covera
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
show all

GSC Sentinel-2 PDGS OCD - Emits - ESA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?