OLSG Report_Final_06_05_12 - Interagency Operations Advisory ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Optical Link Study Group (OLSG) Final Report IOAG.T.OLSG.2012.V1 can see the overall lunar geometry varying over the course of the month, governing the general pattern of the elevation angle to both sites. The Haleakala site, however, has consistently higher elevation angles than the Table Mountain site, because the latitude of the two ground sites differs, with higher elevation angles occurring nearer the equator. Figure 29: Access from LLGT/LLOT to LLST. One can also see the similarity in time of the accesses from the two ground sites. Since the two sites are in the same hemisphere, the Moon (and hence the LLST) is often visible to both sites when one has access. This feature is apparent in Figure 30, which shows the access over a single 24-hour period (from June 1-2, 2013). For most of the illustrated passes, the link can be made to either site; however, though the Haleakala site has the largest maximum elevation angle, it does not always have the higher elevation angle for each pass. Figure 31 summarizes the overlap of access from the two sites. Figure 31 shows that over the course of a month, most of the passes have access to either site, with only a few passes having access to only one or the other. During days 6 and 7, however, only the Haleakala site has access to any pass, due to the elevation angle restrictions placed upon the OCTL site. On those days, the lunar geometry never rises above the minimum elevation angle, meaning that OCTL has no access to LLST. Figure 31 also shows that the two ground sites do not provide access diversity in terms of independent passes. The two ground sites do, however, provide significant weather Page | 62
Optical Link Study Group (OLSG) Final Report IOAG.T.OLSG.2012.V1 diversity. Thus, in passes where both sites have geometric access, the probability of cloud free line of sight to at least one of the sites improves the probability of communicating during that pass. The CFLOS analysis is quantified in section 3.4.4. Figure 30: LLGT/LLOT access to LLST June 1-2, 2013. Page | 63
Page 1 and 2:
IOAG.T.OLSG.2012.V1 Interagency Ope
Page 3 and 4:
Optical Link Study Group (OLSG) Fin
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12: Optical Link Study Group (OLSG) Fin
Page 17 and 18: Page | 17 Optical Link Study Group
Page 33 and 34: 2.4.5 Weather and Atmospheric Monit
Page 43 and 44: 3.1.2.1 Space Terminal Potential Im
Page 61: 3.2 Highly Elliptical Earth Orbit (
Page 73 and 74: 3.5.1.2 Scenario Concept of Operati
Page 103 and 104: 3.7.6 Ground Station Cost Optical L
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
5.3 Standardization Considerations
Page 141 and 142:
Functional breakdown Cross support
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
7.3 Astronomical Site Survey Optica
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Appendix A. List of Acronyms 2-PSK
Page 163 and 164:
show all

OLSG Report_Final_06_05_12 - Interagency Operations Advisory ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?