4 Final Report - Emits - ESA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3 Final Report Furthermore, the mission shall be capable of providing images over the whole Earth disk, with relaxed geometric, revisit, sensing, etc. requirements. Following figure shows the area to be covered by the marine application mission. The whole area can be covered by 65-70 images with a FoV of 285km x 285km: Figure 3.1-1: Coverage for marine application mission with 65-70 285km x 285km FoV images The Sun Zenith Angle (SZA) shall be < 80 deg for images acquired for the disaster monitoring, oil slick, erosion and marine application mission, whereas for the fire monitoring mission, no SZA has to be specified. The definition of the SZA determines the time window, during which the area can be observed. The operational concept shall consider an optimisation of the SZA for the marine applications. The average SZA of all acquired images within the extended observation area of one observation cycle shall be minimised. The radiometric requirements (definition of minimum radiance) shall assume a SZA < 75 deg for the disaster monitoring and < 60 deg for oil slick, erosion and marine application mission. The observation times and periods for all missions, except the fire monitoring mission, depend on the specification of the maximum allowed sun zenith angle and on the season. For summer solstice, the observation periods are longest. For this case, a mean observation time for the marine application mission of 9 hours has been considered for the mission scenarios presented within the next chapter. Due to cloud coverage, the effective coverage (=cloudfree coverage) will differ from the nominal coverage. From system side, the impact of cloud coverage can only be minimised by optimising the observation strategy of the marine applications mission. As it is assumed that emergency missions (fire and disaster monitoring) are conducted in parallel to the marine applications mission, the 2° manoeuvres which have already to be considered for the emergency missions, allow the optimisation of the image acquisition cycle for the marine application mission. Page 3-14 Doc. No: GOC-ASG-RP-002 Issue: 2 Astrium GmbH Date: 13.05.2009
3 Final Report marine fire disaster Figure 3.1-2: Optimisation of marine application is possible, since parallel fire / disaster monitoring missions assumed. As for these missions 2°-manoeuvres are considered, an optimisation without any additional manoeuvres is possible. The choice of the Field of View of one image is driven by the trade-off between resolution and the size of image FoV (constrained by detector technology). The choice of image FoV size directly influences observation scenarios by the number of required manoeuvres and image takes to cover the observation area (for marine application). Actually, the observation scenario (i.e. number of parallel fire / disaster monitoring missions per time, see below) is not a fixed user requirement. In general, the marine application mission asks for a large FoV and medium resolution, whereas high resolution is first priority for the disaster monitoring mission. For fire, disaster monitoring and oil slick / erosion missions following product FoVs are specified: Table 3.1-2: Product FoV requirements at SSP [in km x km at SSP] Threshold Goal Disaster monitoring 150 x 100 300 x 200 Fire monitoring 50 x 33 100 x 66 Oil slick 100 x 66 500 x 333 Erosion 100 x 66 500 x 333 An effective FoV of 285² km² has been implemented for all missions. Only for the panchro channel of the disaster mission, mosaic imaging with smaller single FoV sizes is considered. These FoV sizes consider pointing errors, which reduce the effective FoV compared to the implemented detector FoV. The spatial sampling distance (SSD) in N/S direction defined in the mission requirements refers to a certain latitude on Earth and do not consider the degradation of the N/S-SSD from nadir to higher latitudes. Depending on the maximum latitude in which the SSD requirement shall be fulfilled, N/S- SSD at sub-satellite point (SSP) can be derived. For the product requirements, a max. latitude of 52.5 deg, leading to a degradation factor of two has been considered. The most challenging SSD requirement is for the disaster panchro channel with an SSD in N/S direction of 5 m (goal) to 50 m (threshold) at SSP. The SSD requirements for the other channels are more relaxed (between 50 m goal to 500 m threshold). The absolute geolocation knowledge of each sample of an image observed at one instance shall be Doc. No: GOC-ASG-RP-002 Page 3-15 Issue: 2 Date: 13.05.2009 Astrium GmbH
Page 1: Geo-Oculus: A Mission for Real-Time
Page 7: DL Final Distribution List Report Q
Page 11 and 12: TOC Final Table of Content Report D
Page 13 and 14: 1 Final Report 1 Introduction 1.1 S
Page 15: 1 Final Report [RD 7] Candidate Mis
Page 18 and 19: 2 Final Report capability of existi
Page 20 and 21: 2 Final Report Figure 2.3-1: Flood
Page 22 and 23: 2 Final Report Figure 2.3-3: Algal
Page 24 and 25: 2 Final Report Figure 2.3-6: Chloro
Page 26 and 27: 2 Final Report Erosion / Sediment T
Page 28 and 29: 3 Final Report 3 System Requirement
Page 32 and 33: 3 Final Report better than 0.5 SSD
Page 34 and 35: 3 Final Report • Image post integ
Page 36 and 37: 3 Final Report Table 3.3-1: Baselin
Page 38 and 39: 3 Final Report Manoeuvre Times and
Page 40 and 41: 3 Final Report Cloud Amount [%] Num
Page 42 and 43: 3 Final Report cloud scenes where t
Page 44 and 45: 4 Final Report Alternative solution
Page 46 and 47: 4 Final Report The achieved ground
Page 48 and 49: 4 Final Report board image processi
Page 50 and 51: 4 Final Report 4.3.3.2 UV-VNIR foca
Page 52 and 53: 4 Final Report Column decoder 4 out
Page 54 and 55: 4 Final Report 4.3.3.5 Mechanical a
Page 56 and 57: 4 Final Report 4.3.3.7 Electrical a
Page 58 and 59: 4 Final Report 4.3.4 PLM budgets Th
Page 60 and 61: 4 Final Report 4.4.2 Microvibration
Page 62 and 63: 4 Final Report Figure 4.4-2: Struct
Page 64 and 65: 4 Final 4.5 Satellite Report 4.5.1
Page 66 and 67: 4 Final Report Star Tracker Figure
Page 68 and 69: 4 Final Report (Spacecraft Computer
Page 70 and 71: 4 Final Report This is based on a w
Page 72 and 73: 4 Final Report Reception of the ins
Page 74 and 75: 4 Final Report Table 4.5-2: Charact
Page 76 and 77: 4 Final Report Table 4.5-4: Compari
Page 78 and 79: 4 Final Report Table 4.5-5: EPS fue
Page 80 and 81:
4 Final Report manoeuvre. It also h
Page 82 and 83:
4 Final Report Figure 4.5-10: Basel
Page 84 and 85:
4 Final Report The CPS considered f
Page 86 and 87:
4 Final Report PPU B* FU XST Page 4
Page 88 and 89:
4 Final Report Table 4.5-17. EP mas
Page 90 and 91:
4 Final Report The primary structur
Page 92 and 93:
4 Final Report Direction MTG Scaled
Page 94 and 95:
4 Final Report 4.6.1.1 High Level F
Page 96 and 97:
4 Final Report shorter. As a conseq
Page 98 and 99:
4 Final Report 4.6.2.4 Cloud Cover
Page 100 and 101:
4 Final Report management functions
Page 102 and 103:
4 Final Report 4.6.2.8 Ground Stati
Page 104 and 105:
5 Final Report based on EUMETSAT im
Page 107 and 108:
A Final Report Annex A Abbreviation
Page 109 and 110:
A Final Report ICU Instrument Contr
Page 111:
A Final Report Doc. No: GOC-ASG-RP-
show all

4 Final Report - Emits - ESA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?