AOS Tandem Stereographic Camera RFP Vendor parameter input.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 159 KB Posted
- Attached to
- AOS Camera Suite Study Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 80NSSC22779075Q1
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFQ 80NSSC22779075Q1 Questions and Answers.pdf | ||
| AOS Tandem Stereographic Camera Instrument SOW.pdf | ||
| RFQ 80NSSC22779075Q1.pdf | ||
| AOS Tandem Stereographic Camera Target Parameter List.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
1 General_Information
| Instrument General Information | Entry | Optional Remarks (For Supporting Information) |
| Instrument Name | ||
| Instrument Manufacturer | ||
| Expected platform (e.g. sub-orbital, constellation, cubesat, small sat, medium size) | ||
| Heritage (previous) demonstration(s) (sub-orbital or spaceflight) | ||
| List any instrument redundancy | ||
| Reliability/electroncis parts grade |
2 Camera Performance
| Tandem Stereographic Cameras Parameters | Values | Optional Remarks (For Supporting Information) |
| Assumed operating altitude or acceptable altitude range (km) | ||
| Spectral Regions (e.g., UV, VIS, SWIR) |
(Add/delete columns to the right if needed) Wavelengths of channel(s) (nm) and bandwidths (in parentheses) (indicate polarized channels by “*” (e.g., 410, 443*)
| Along-track view angle range (deg) | |
| Number of along-track view angles | |
| Method of along-track viewing (fixed or actuated) | |
| Cross-track swath width seen in common at all view angles (km) | |
| Instantaneous cross-track field of view (deg) | |
| Accessible cross-track field of regard (deg) | |
| Footprint per pixel at nadir, center of field (cross-track x along-track, m x m) (i.e., best case) | |
| Footprint per pixel at most oblique view angle, edge of field (cross-track x along-track, m x m) (i.e., worst case) | |
| Cross-track sample spacing | |
| Along-track sample spacing | |
| Along-track spatial coverage (continuous, intermittent, targeted) (km) | |
| Absolute radiometric uncertainty (%) | |
| Angle-to-angle radiometric uncertainty (%) | |
| Channel-to-channel radiometric uncertainty (%) | |
| Radiometric calibration technique (e.g., on-board, vicarious) | N/A |
| Signal to Noise Ratio at Earth's reflectance of 0.01, 0.1, 0.5, 1, 1.3 | |
| Dynamic Range (equivalent number of bits and/or dB) | |
| Radiometric stability (%/time) |
3 Supplemental Information
| Use this section to provide additional information on the instrument that could be useful for the ATMOS team, and/or explanations/remarks on any of the instrument parameter entries that may be necessary. These could include, for intance: |
| Scalability of instrument/subsystem (e.g. antenna or telescope size, PRF, etc. for operating at different orbit altitudes) without lowering the technology readiness level |
| Or, identify efforts (e.g., cost/schedule) required to get back to the same TRL for anticipated instrument modification(s) to align with ACCP science objectives |
| Terminology definition (e.g., orbit average power vs. Day-in-Life average power) |
| Calibration approaches and their maturity levels |
| On-boarding processing schemes and their maturity levels |
| Instrument heritage (shown on first tab) |
| Assumptions used to derive detection/measurement sensitivities |
| Assumptions used to derive detection/measurement accuracies/precisions |
| Description of retrieval algorithms/techniques and their heritage |
| ROM cost(s) - this information would not be disclosed publically |
| Basis of the cost Estimate |
| Identify what is included in the cost estimate (spaceflight qualification testing, electrical and mechanical GSE, any flight spare components or subassemblies, programmable logic (e.g. S/W, FPGA and/or ASIC code), calibration GSE, etc) |
4 Spacecraft Accommodation
| Mechanical Accomodation | Response |
| Is there a CAD model available? | |
| Total Instrument Mass (kg), with an indication if this is Current Best Estimate (CBE) or Maximum Expected Value (MEV) | |
| If possible, please break down the instrument mass (kg) into engineering subsystems, and identify as CBE or MEV (electrical, optical, electro-mechanical (mechanisms), electro-optical (detectors), thermal, and structural/mechanical). Responder may provide a Master Equipment List (MEL) as attachment to response. | |
| Instrument Approximate Shape |
(configuration 1, 2 or 3? See diagram to right)
| Dimensions (SI, cm prefered) |
| Science Field of View |
(degrees, full-angle) (Science measurement FOV) FOV Shape (Configuration A or B?)
Science Field of Regard (degrees, full-angle) (Field of View needed to prevent stray light, glint or other issues) FOR Shape (Configuration A or B?)
| Instrument pointing relative to orbit or spacecaft |
| Does the spacecraft need to provide any mechanisms or special structure to the instrument? |
(Examples: deployable boom, sun-shield,launch locks, etc) Any special mounting requirements (vibration isolation, kinematic mounts, etc)
| Does the instrument spin or has moving parts? |
| Does instrument support spacecraft yaw maneuvers? Describe how. |
| Thermal Accomodation |
| Operational and survival temperature limits (degrees K) |
| Thermal FOV |
(clear FOV need for radiators on instrument)
| Does the instrument have thermal radiators that need to be accommodated on the spacecraft? |
| Does the instrument need a hot or cold side to the spacecraft? |
| Operating Modes |
| Add a line for each mode, pre-launch through disposal (e.g. Science, Standy, Diagnostic, Save) |
| Power Accomodation |
| Peak Power (W) |
| Orbit Average Power (W) (Include operational heaters, provide conops basis for Orbit Average Power calculation) |
| Survival Heater Power (W) |
| Data Accomodation |
| Data Interface |
(1553, RS422, Spacewire, etc) Peak Data Rate (Mpbs) List associated instrument mode
| Orbit Average Data Rate (Mbps), provide conops basis for Orbit Average Rate calculation |
| Data Latency Requirement |
| Does this instrument use data compression? What type (lossy, lossless)? What is the compression ratio? |
| Does the instrument need the spacecraft to perform data compression? |
| Does this instrument have any mission unique data reduction algorithms? |
| Timing Requirements |
| What is the absolute timing requirement that the instrument requires from the spacecraft? |
| Contamination, Venting |
| Contamination requirements, issues, concerns, T0 purge |
| Out-gassing requirments, issues, concerns |
| Miscellaneous |
| Does the instrument require any cryo-coolers? |
| List any other considerations important for spacecraft design |
5 Orbit and Attitude
| Orbit Implied | Response | Optional Remarks (For Supporting Information) |
| Min & Max operating altitude | ||
| Range of nominal orbit e.g. range of altitude or size of sun-synch control box | ||
| If more than 1 spacecraft is required describe relative geometry or navigation requirements. Describe formation flying requirements if required | ||
| Can GPS provide all needed orbit determination? |
For day-to-day ops?
For science data product reconstruction Describe Operations Concept, e.g. downlink strategy, calibration plans, (place in narrative response if more convenient).
| Attitude | Response | Optional Remarks (For Supporting Information) |
| Nominal pointing attitude or frame e.g. LVLH, geodetic/geocentric | ||
| Pointing Accuracy Requirement (arcsec, 1 sigma) | ||
| Pointing Knowledge Requirement (arcsec, 1 sigma) | ||
| Jitter Requirement (arcsec over 0.5 seconds, 1 sigma) | ||
| Stability (long-term) Requirement (arcsec over 45 seconds, 1 sigma) |
6 TRL
| Suitable instrument candidates must be Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6 by the AtmOS Instrument Preliminary Design Review (PDR). In addition to asking about the traditional TRL metrics, we wish to understand if the instrument as a system has measured the desired observables. | ||
| TRL Level | Response | Basis of Estimates and Other Remarks |
| Describe TRL level of instrument(s) | ||
| Are any elements or subsystems of the instrument below TRL 6, if so describe path to maturation by PDR. This includes identifying the elements or subsystems below TRL 6, defining the functional or performance or environmental parameters that haven't been demonstrated, listing the required testing, providing a cost and schedule estimate to accomplish that work. | ||
| Is instrument system at TRL 6? If not describe path to maturation by PDR. | ||
| Identify the funding source(s) supporting the effort to achieve TRL 6 and the intended application and environment. |
image1.jpeg
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .