1. Background  EM16 SGS+TEC met with FD 1 year ago  Both sides agreed that there was a “performance gap:  SGS prepared a TN with 2 main options to bridge this gap (EM16 near-term solutions)  TN also included set of requirements for future missions (if time & money available!)  Prepared together with TEC ExoMars Project 1

2. EXOMARS USAGE OF FD SERVICES Presentation given to FD on 18/06/2014 ExoMars Project 2

3. Science Operations Concept  Core elements (re-use from Mars Express).  MAPPS will be used for ExoMars 2016  Additional ExoMars 2016 extensions, mainly in support of LTP Concept Elements:  Long Term Planning (to meet SWT science goals & priorities)  contain representative observations and operational valid  Plan Construction and Validation (MTP)  Constraint Checks, Models, Simulation - all have a dependency on the pointing  Operations Request Generation (POR and PTR) 3 ExoMars 2016 SGS 18 th June 2014 FD/TEC/SOC meeting

4. Medium Term Planning Timeline  -12 weeks: Kick-off of MTP activities  Science preparation telecon, delivery of baseline observations  -12 to -8 weeks:  Refine MTP observations  Generation of validated candidate plans  -8 weeks: MTP approved by teams  SOC generates PTR, MTP POR and deliver to MOC 4 SOC + PI teams will use MAPPS to construct pointing (+ check all other constraints) SOC + PI teams will use MAPPS to construct pointing (+ check all other constraints) ExoMars 2016 SGS 18 th June 2014 FD/TEC/SOC meeting

5. Typical MTP Orbit NADSOSO SPSP NADIRSOSO NADWOL 1234567n/day 5  NOMAD/ACS Solar Occultation (SO)  2 solar occultation per orbit, every orbit  NADIR in remainder of orbit (day-side rider, night-side driver)  CaSSIS Images:  1 stereo pair (SP) per orbit  1 non-stereo image per orbit  FREND: Rides along with other instrument pointings  Wheel Off-loading: SOC will insert WOL slots based on rule from FD ExoMars 2016 SGS 18 th June 2014 FD/TEC/SOC meeting

6. MTP PTR construction Each observation in the MTP links to a PTR segment. SOC relies on MAPPS to construct the full MTP PTR:  FIT pointing blocks around well determined pointing blocks (SO/SP/WOL)  slew estimation (fitting) to set start/end times for NADIR blocks.  Binary search to converge on slew time.  MERGE pointing blocks  Compatible observations (driver/rider)  Consecutive observations with the same pointing (avoid intermediate slew) 6 ExoMars 2016 SGS 18 th June 2014 FD/TEC/SOC meeting

7. MTP PTR Size  ~ 7 baseline pointing blocks in 1 orbit + WOL  > 340 orbits/MTP  ~ 2500 pointings/MTP, and as a result:  ~ 2500 slew fitting/MTP  multiple checks to search for each slew duration During the MTP a number of versions of the science plan will be generated before converging on the approved PTR  PTR construction needs to be interactive (responsive) to support science planning decisions  PTR checks will be performed by parallel users 7 ExoMars 2016 SGS 18 th June 2014 FD/TEC/SOC meeting

8. EXOMARS 16 PROPOSED SOLUTION Contained in TN from October 2014 ExoMars Project 8

9. Analysed Options Several integration options considered: 1.MEX/VEX: FD provide s/w to DTEC 2.Rosetta: follow option 1 for planning iterations, use FD service for validation 3.Distributed usage of FD service (PI teams) 4.Pre-computation: FD services to pre-compute all possible pointings 5.Reconfigure SOC systems. Modify the MAPPS architecture 6.Reconfigure FD systems: SGS and TEC provide requirements Options in green selected for further analysis ExoMars Project 9

10. EM 16 Science Operations Sizing Expected # of pointings > 3000 / MTP so also > 3000 intermediate slews 15 steps to fit each slew = 45000 slew checks 2 MTP versions (1 selected for refinement) 2 refinement cycles 2 possible HGA configurations 20% delta for pointing definitions ~ 450,000 checks/MTP ExoMars Project 10

11. Option A: MAPPS + FD Services 1.Configuration of MAPPS/AGM for attitude computation, slew estimation, constraint checks and HGA outage checks. 2.For the planning period synchronise MAPPS + FD service inputs (e.g. same orbit file). 3.Conduct the MTP iterations with the PI teams using MAPPS. 4.Validate the final generated PTR using the FD services. Drawback with this approach is the potential for misalignment with the FD checks  Will need regular MAPPS/AGM validations against FD services (e.g. at the start of each LTP period). 11

12. Option B: Precomputation 1.Use MAPPS to generate PTR snippets for all possible pointing blocks. 2.Call FD service filter out invalid pointing. (overnight) 3.Call FD service generate reference attitude data set (overnight) for MAPPS to query during planning. 4.Slews and HGA checks performed by MAPPS 5.If any pointing modified, recompute with FD service and update attitude data set (overnight) 6.Validate the final generated PTR using the FD services.  New MAPPS functionality  Overnight computation or non-interactive steps ExoMars Project 12

13. Conclusion  Option A for testing & mission analysis  Uses available MAPPS/AGM that includes the + HGA computations within MAPPS.  configuration effort and additional validation of the AGM results versus the FD web-tool.  Initially considered as back-up for Operations – now most likely configuration.  Option B considered feasible for ExoMars  Required level of performance for science planning (query precomputed attitude)  Only feasible given relative simplicity of the mission.  Could be available in remaining development time. 13