Supernova/Acceleration Probe (SNAP) Mission/Science Operations Irene Bibyk Tim Rykowski Bob Schweiss June 28, 2001

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 2 Mission/Science Operations Topics  Recommended Implementation Approach  Recommended Operations Staffing Approach  Critical Requirements and Assumptions  Cost Summary  Options Presented  Basis of Estimate  Additional Trades to Consider  Risk Assessment  Issues and Concerns  Back-up Slides

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 3 Mission/Science Operations Recommended Development Approach  Use Berkeley SSL MOC as basis for SNAP MOC development  Will meet all operational requirements for SNAP operations  Proven system operationally (FAST support, will support HESSI)  Includes basic functionality, plus automation tools to support SNAP operations in an 8x5 manner  Use NERSC at Berkeley for L0 and higher level data processing  Significant storage and computing resources currently available  Potential modifications to this system were not considered as part of this study and may need to be investigated  Minimal modifications will be required to Berkeley SSL MOC to support SNAP operations  Some hardware upgrades are necessary (additional dedicated string for SNAP R/T support, additional general purpose workstations, network hardware)  SNAP software-specific modifications, primarily to support  Flight dynamics operations (I.e., lunar flyby) during commissioning  Command management  Mission/Science planning and scheduling

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 4 Mission/Science Operations Recommended Operations Staffing Approach  Recommend 8x5 (weekday, prime shift) staffing profile for routine mission operations  Most cost-effective solution for SNAP Mission Operations  Appropriate for both 3 and 5 ground station option  Scheduling complexity not much different between two options  Relatively simple mission operations concept allows 8x5 operations approach to be pursued:  Minimal instrument planning and scheduling (target observations uplinked once every 4 days)  No orbit maneuvers beyond commissioning phase  Minimal recovery operations conducted for data lost or not available  Spectroscopy and spacecraft housekeeping data stored on-board, replay from storage can be automated and accommodated in nominal 55 Mbps downlink  No attempts to store/recover other data lost due to link problems, gaps in station coverage

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 5 Mission/Science Operations Critical Requirements and Assumptions  Data rates:  Average SNAP instrument data rate: ~52 Mbps  Includes lossless compression plus CCSDS overhead  Average SNAP HK data rate: 16 kbps  Data Latency:  ~4 days latency to deliver raw instrument data to NERSC is acceptable.  Space-Ground contact profile  One 8 hour contact per day at each of three sites (Berkeley, France, Japan)  Some gaps in coverage expected, gaps would be reduced by optional use of Hawaii, Santiago stations  MOC functionality:  MOC provides “standard” set of functionality to support Mission Operations (e.g., S/C and instrument commanding,mission planning/scheduling, RT TLM monitoring, offline analysis,  Facilities/Resources available:  Berkeley SSL MOC used for Mission Operations  NERSC used for Level zero/higher level science data processing  Sufficient communications bandwidth available at no cost to SNAP from both France and Japan ground station sites  ~10 Mbps communications capability required from each remote ground site to Berkeley to satisfy latency requirements

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 6 Mission/Science Operations Cost Basis of Estimate  Mission Operations Cost Assumptions  Existing Berkeley SSL MOC serves as development basis  One additional equipment string costed for real-time support  Existing equipment strings can be used to provide hot backups, off- line test/maintenance function  Years costed for software development  Primarily to tailor existing Berkeley SSL MOC system to support SNAP mission  Bandwidth from France, Japan stations available at no cost to SNAP  No additional costs for Level 0/Science data processing (assume use of NERSC system)  Operations Staffing Cost Assumptions  First year (L-30 mos. to L-18 mos.): 1.8 heads for ops planning activities  Second year (L-18 mos. To L-6 mos.): 5.2 heads for development/test of ops products and plans  L-6 mos. to L+3: 9.5 heads for pre-launch ops rehearsals/sims, launch support, early orbit checkout, etc.  Nominal (6.3 heads) staffing level reached at L+12

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 7 Mission/Science Operations Additional Trades to Consider  3 ground stations option  Add capability to store on-board full SNAP science bandwidth during gaps in coverage, with later downlink  (+) Increases percentage of data recovery  (-) Increases costs for C&DH and Mission Operations as a minimum.

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 8 Mission/Science Operations Risk Assessment  No risks identified

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 9 Mission/Science Operations Issues and Concerns  No issues or concerns

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 10 Mission/Science Operations Backup Charts

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 11 Mission/Science Operations Driving Mission Characteristics  Launch: October 2008  Mission lifetime: Nominal mission duration 2 years, with 5 year goal  Orbit overview: 19x57 Re  Space-Ground contacts:  3 ground station option: 3 station contacts per day at Northern Latitude ground stations (Berkeley CA, Lyon France, Japan)  Data rates:  Average instrument data rate: 52 Mbps aggregate (assumes lossless compression and overhead)  Engineering/HK: 16 kbps (assumed )

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 12 Mission/Science Operations Driving Mission Characteristics (cont.)  Spacecraft summary:  CCSDS compliant  24 hours of on-board data storage for spectrometer and engineering data  Operations summary:  No orbit adjustments necessary after commissioning  Well defined instrument observations  Sequence of targets uplinked to spacecraft every 4 days  No target of opportunity observations envisioned.  Majority of commanding is preplanned and is needed no more than once per day.  Latency requirements:  4 days to deliver raw telemetry from ground stations to NERSC for Level 0 and higher level data processing

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 13  Support operations of SNAP satellite  Processing/display of real-time telemetry and status data  Spacecraft and instrument commanding  Attitude determination and orbit analysis  HK Dump data receipt and processing for contingency  Ground Station (GS) scheduling  Engineering data analysis  Interact with ground station for satellite communications  Telemetry, command and status data  Electronic transfer of data to MOC/NERSC during each contact  Station scheduling  Voice communications Mission Operations Driving Requirements

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 14 Mission Operations Driving Requirements (cont.)  Level 0 processing provided by National Energy Research and Scientific Computing Center (NERSC)  Architecture for Level 0 processing not provided or costed for this mission  Provide automation to facilitate reduced operations staffing, to include “lights-out” operations on weekday off-shifts and weekends  Automatically recognize alarm conditions and notify remote operations personnel during unstaffed operations  Automatically handle receipt of data dumps from GS’s and generation/delivery of Level 0 data products

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 15 Mission Operations Assumptions  “Lights-Out” operations approach acceptable for normal operations to minimize operations costs  Satellite can nominally operate for up to 3 days without ground contact  Spacecraft and instruments autonomously manage health-and- safety (i.e., they will detect problems and safe themselves when necessary)  Typical Real-Time System Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability (RMA) is required  Hot backups needed for critical telemetry and command processors and provided as part of “infrastructure” available at Berkeley Space Science Laboratory (SSL)  Typical command constraint checking is sufficient  Minimal planning and scheduling needed given simplicity of spacecraft and instrument operations

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 16 Mission Operations Technologies Required  MOC must be able to support the automated handling of specific functions/activities  Automatically process real-time data (housekeeping and science)  Automatically monitor telemetry, recognize error/alarm conditions, and notify offsite operations staff  Provide remote offsite operations personnel with remote access to data without violating security requirements  Automatically perform engineering analysis on housekeeping data  Generate trend plots, statistics reports, etc. for FOT analysis  Recognize error/alarm conditions and notify remote operations personnel  Berkeley SSL MOC contains all required technologies

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center Mission/Science Operations Page 17 Mission/Science Operations Subsystem Summary  Technology Readiness Level: 8-9 (all required technologies have been at least demonstrated, most in currently operational systems)  Space-GND contacts: nominally 3 per day of 8 hours each at Northern Latitude ground stations (Berkeley, France, Japan)  Avg Aggregate Instrument Data Rate: ~52 Mbps (includes lossless compression plus overhead)  Planning and Scheduling Requirements: Minimal  Science Data Processing Requirements: Delivery science data to NERSC from ground stations with no more than 4 day latency  Technology Complexity: Minimal, currently available/operational technology proposed  Risk: Minimal