Presentation on theme: "NP Release Flag Conflict Toshimichi Otsubo Kashima Space Research Center National Institute of Information and Communications Technology ILRS Fall 2005."— Presentation transcript:
NP Release Flag Conflict Toshimichi Otsubo Kashima Space Research Center National Institute of Information and Communications Technology ILRS Fall 2005 Workshop, 4 Oct 2005
Everyone makes mistakes, so... ILRS Normal Point: Data Record, Column 48 A flag to indicate the data release 0: first release of data 1: first replacement release of the data, 2: second replacement release, etc. It helps to keep the data set consistent at all ACs/AACs. 99999 7603901052508834100153200013583700000500907411200920001 261382714349048949913575000009009422289207300160000078 262054722460048297702910000009509422289207300400000055 263139735422047369036380000009309422289107300190000065 275684381884049423608823000008909424290407000270000080 276827395595050684305837000009609424290407000360000082
Wettzell case: acceptable for all ACs? (Block A) (Block B) Shouldn’t be 1 NP block = 1 pass? We have modified the data collecting software to adapt this at NICT, but not sure for other analysis centres. Flag = “0” pass NP bin Legal or otherwise, this is confusing e.g. with: Flag = “0” Flag should be “1”, but sometimes “0”
Various SLR Outliers Detected in Daily Multi-Satellite Analysis Toshimichi Otsubo Kashima Space Research Center National Institute of Information and Communications Technology ILRS Fall 2005 Workshop, 4 Oct 2005
Upgraded QC analysis at NICT More frequent! –Daily analysis (used to be weekly) –Daily webpage updates, email AIUB; weekly SLReport. More satellites! –16 Sats at maximum. Typ. 11 to 14. More accurate! –‘concerto v4’ –IERS Conventions 2003 compatible
Discussions (a) Spikes 1-return NP: Handle with care (how did NASA overcame this?) Don’t jump to a conclusion that all 1-return NPs should be rejected. Reconsider the fitting function? (b) Constant RB/TB Some stations tend to repeat this. Needs self QC? (c) Wrong Sat, Wrong Date/Time and LeapSec Wrong year: seen in January. Leap Second on 1 Jan 2006! (d) Unexplainable??? Much improvement, compared to 90’s. Little harm to analysts, for densely tracked satellites. Hidden 3 cm error is more guilty than 3 m error.