1 / 11

The NAIF Node PDSMC Report Addresses both NAIF Node and Core SPICE Development

The NAIF Node PDSMC Report Addresses both NAIF Node and Core SPICE Development. August 23, 2011 Chuck Acton. SPICE components are not restricted under ITAR. The NAIF Team. Chuck Acton. Nat Bachman. Sam Krening. Boris Semenov. Ed Wright. NAIF Funding Sources for 2011.

john
Download Presentation

The NAIF Node PDSMC Report Addresses both NAIF Node and Core SPICE Development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The NAIF NodePDSMC ReportAddresses both NAIF Node and Core SPICE Development August 23, 2011 Chuck Acton SPICE components are not restricted under ITAR

  2. The NAIF Team Chuck Acton Nat Bachman Sam Krening Boris Semenov Ed Wright

  3. NAIF Funding Sources for 2011 Percent of Total Available Funds The PDS funds: SPICE Development NAIF Node *Advanced Multi-Mission Operations System

  4. Summary - 1 NAIF Node • SPICE data archiving is in pretty good shape • Occasional problems with archives not produced at JPL • Plan to do a major transformation of all archived SPICE data to PDS4 standards when PDS4 is stable and ready for ingest • Will correct a few current issues at the same time • User consulting continues to be a significant part of NAIF staff daily work

  5. Summary - 2 NAIF Node, continued • Need to revise our SPICE training curriculum • Plan to break the current class into two or more units: • Beginner • Advanced • Kernel producer? • SPICE archive producer? • Training • Next SPICE training class will be September 13-15, near Pasadena • 49 people are enrolled, including 9 foreign

  6. Summary - 3 PDS funded SPICE Development • Ongoing major SPICE development work • Java Native Interface (JNI) Toolkit • Alpha-test version is already being used by several groups • New shape models • Digital terrain model • Tessellated plate model • Already in use on Hayabusa, DAWN, Rosetta, MEX and PhSRM Itokawa Phobos Vesta

  7. Summary - 4 AMMOS* funded SPICE Development • AMMOS funds three NAIF activities: • “New Development” • “WebGeocalc” • You saw the demo • Looking for your feedback • “Sustaining” • Funds used to port the Toolkit to new environments, and to accommodate infrastructure changes • “Repair” • Funds used to zap bugs *Advanced Multi-Mission Operations System

  8. Summary - 5 NASA Flight Projects (not funded by PDS) • Ongoing SPICE operations for NASA flight projects are generally going well • Upcoming NASA missions set to use SPICE are: • MSL, JUNO, GRAIL, MAVEN, SMAP (earth science) • Unknown status re SPICE • LADEE, OSIRIS-REx, Mars 2016, Mars 2018 • Archive production by missions is generally going well. However… • No sign of the final LCROSS input from Ames, needed for NAIF to complete the LCROSS SPICE archive

  9. Summary - 6 International Flight Projects (A mixed bag of funding) • ESA (MEX, VEX, Rosetta) • Occasional operations problems at ESAC • Archive increments are slow to come and often need fixes • ISRO • Say they want more SPICE training (presumably for Luna-Resurs) • RSA • NAIF cooperation with Phobos Sample Return is good • Support for Luna-Resurs (for both RSA and ISRO) will be proposed to NASA, if a SALMON or similar opportunity opens up • JAXA • NASA support for VCO was cancelled after VOI failure • A Hayabusa archive was prepared by NAIF, using a variety of inputs • Unclear as to other SPICE activities • CAS/CSSAR • YH-1 has “shelved” plans for using SPICE with NASA help • But they are using SPK for trajectory exchange with Russia

  10. Archive Status Mars Odyssey Cassini MER Rovers MRO MESSENGER New Horizons Mars Express (ESA) Venus Express (ESA) Rosetta (ESA) LRO NExT EPOXI DAWN MSL Juno GRAIL Phobos-Grunt (RSA) MAVEN Galileo Phoenix LCROSS ? LADEE Magellan

  11. NAIF’s Questions for PDS and HQS • Comments on WebGeocalc? • Does/will PDS2010 count on any SPICE capabilities not currently available? • Should PDS strive to have “all” instrument teams create at least a minimal set of consistent observation geometry parameters, to be placed in product labels and/or data set index files? • To be used in PDS4 data searches • Similar to “geolib” used on MEX and VEX • Suggest the IPDA drop SPICE from further consideration. • Little interest from the advisory group • SPICE is largely a de facto standard • Inappropriate to have a standard that is substantially unusable by a member agency • Suggestions for improving SPICE training?

More Related