1. ESOC | Chris Watson | ESA/ESOC | Page 1 SOC-Instrument Team interfaces CHRIS WATSON ESAC

2. ESOC | Chris Watson | ESA/ESOC | Page 2 EFECS – Planning Skeleton Useful comments via EMC-WG, thank you MAIS actions clearly work Version 0_3 on the SOC public, since yesterday Main changes Expansion of a few generic events into multiple more specific events POINT, ROLL, RS_EXT, TAC Open points added on HS-door operations, MOC maintenance windows, back-up MTP plans => some new keywords coming Overall the product becomes a bit of a monster I.e. many different sorts of events, no one team will be interested in every event type I think this is an inevitable consequence of a mission built around parallel observing and with interdependencies, like e.g. EMC-quiet We will need SW to help us build this – not in place yet

3. ESOC | Chris Watson | ESA/ESOC | Page 3 EFECS – Planning Skeleton Long-term planning exercise This exercise illustrates the process by which the EFECS content is fixed. We plan to produce an EFECS example file based on what comes out of the exercise Will take some months. We don’t have the software yet. These example file could be used later as an input into an MTP planning exercise (where the instrument teams generate their own IORs)

4. ESOC | Chris Watson | ESA/ESOC | Page 4 TMC – Telemetry Corridor Comments from EUI METIS Version 0_4 on the SOC public, since yesterday Main changes Several clarifications concerning the minimum curve Was not clear to people what it represents Preparing the planning exercise we realise that especially in periods of it makes a real difference if we model instrument TM production stating on a particular day, and then in reality you start production later You could bear this in mind during the planning exercise – do you commit to generate data on the day the plan assumes? Needs some thought offline to resolve. Aggressive margins in planning => inefficient use of downlink As for the EFECS We will produce example files based on the exercise These could be used as input for a later MTP exercise

5. ESOC | Chris Watson | ESA/ESOC | Page 5 IOR – Instrument Commanding Comments from EUI Minor clarification from SPICE Version 0_6 on the SOC public, since yesterday Main changes Clarifications on VSTP In NMP/EMP, STP is now always 1 week (it does not extend to span RSWs) Need for filenaming extension to support backup LTP plans Example files Should come from Instrument Teams Instrument flight procedures (and therefore, which is what the IOR calls) should be largely in place before we attempt this, I think Proposal for first examples: Oct this year

6. ESOC | Chris Watson | ESA/ESOC | Page 6 TM-interface EDDS STF listen-in MOC/SOC listen-in to SFTs (or debug runs) TM captured and passed to three instrument teams as early exposure to flight-like TM-provision MAG.  PHI.  RPW. No feedback received We will try to do this for other instruments where we can, but Formal SFT data provision is from Airbus MOC-SOC provision is informal and best-effort only New approach of parallel ETB/OTB tracks may limit our listen-in ability

7. ESOC | Chris Watson | ESA/ESOC | Page 7 Pending ICDs Summary of interfaces to be defined File transfer Boresight definition Selective requests Power allocation Auxiliary data Other interfaces to be tested (in similar way to the TM – first exposure to flight-like formats) TC History Out-of-limits

8. ESOC | Chris Watson | ESA/ESOC | Page 8 Upcoming work File transfer is the next priority This is the means of transferring file products (IORs, EFECS, etc. etc.) between the Instrument Teams and SOC We confused people by referring to GFTS, but in fact in a GFTS implementation, GFTS would reside only at SOC / MOC, and instrument teams would just have an FTP site. Anyway, at SOC, we are dithering about whether to use GFTS Proposed first draft of ICD by next SOWG