Parker Solar Probe Science Gateway

Home , Flyby (spaceflight), Parker Solar Probe, WISPR

Parker Solar Probe SWG Telecon April 2, 2021 Project Status Helene Winters Project Science Nour Raouafi Payload Status SB,JK,DM,ML Solar Orbiter T. Nieves-Chinchilla SOC Activities Martha Kusterer Payload SE Telecon Sarah Hamilton Theory Group P. Mostafavi/M. Velli Upcoming Meetings Nour Raouafi

Science Highlights: Guillermo Stenborg: Pristine PSP/WISPR Observations of the Circumsolar Dust Ring Near Venus' Orbit Glyn Collinson: Depleted plasma densities in the ionosphere of Venus near solar minimum from Parker Solar Probe observations of upper hybrid resonance emission Parker Solar Probe Project Status SWG Telecon April 2, 2021 Project Manager: Helene Winters Deputy PM: Susan Ensor Project Scientist: Nour Raouafi Mission System Eng: Jim Kinnison System Assurance Manager: Linda Burke Operations Timeline: Orbit 8

Today

5/28/21

Orbit 8 Mission science data available to the public Parker Solar Probe – Project Status Summary

Jan Feb Mar Comments All spacecraft subsystems are performing nominally. In Orbit 8, as of 8 March; exited encounter 7 on 23 January. TCM-18 successfully executed on 15 February, making 18C unnecessary; cancelled TCM-19 (scheduled for 7 March). Technical G G G 4th Venus gravity assist was successfully executed on 20 February to bring the spacecraft closer to the Sun’s surface on subsequent encounters (20 RS -> 16 RS). A Pre-encounter 8 review was held 25 March. Ka-band tracks concluded 28 March, the first period to continue through aphelion. Orbit 8: 8 March-21 June; Encounter 8: 24 April-4 May; Perihelion: 29 April Beacon tones: 25 April (weak), 2 May Ka-band science downlink: 5-7 May & 15-28 May. Schedule G G G TCM-20/20C: 15/17 May Data releases for 2021: Encounter 6: 5 April; Encounter 7: 21 June; Encounter 8: 21 October. Parker One science conference rescheduled to 14-18 Jun 2021 at APL, targeting a hybrid attendance (in-person vs. hybrid decision delayed; registration opened 15 February); planning is underway. Worked with DSN to ready DSS-56 (Madrid) for use on PSP. Potential exists for reduction in support from Madrid stations in the near term due to COVID-19. Resources G/Y G/Y G/Y The project is reconciling prior-years’ fee charging. Task plan reconciliation has been completed and updated numbers provided to the program office – in follow-up discussions. Status will be changed from G/Y to G once project lagging fee has been cleared.

Planning ”PSP Scholars”, a program for students and early career scientists, with the first meeting being 27 April. Awaiting PPBE guidance, although expected later than usual this year, with PPBE still early April. Programmatic G G G To begin preparing for PPBE23, coordinated with instrument teams to gather updated actuals and projections. PSP Project has no Phase E cost reserves and has limited funds available to deal with anomalies. Continue to follow plans to avoid and mitigate effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and monitor the situation. Spacecraft Status: 3/22/2021-3/28/2021 Solar Distance: 0.749 to 0.701 AU↓

Spacecraft/ Subsystem Status On-Going Issues Weekly Highlights All subsystems performing nominally at end of period; spacecraft at umbra orientation, +Z Spacecraft to Sun, heading inbound in orbit 8 Fault Management & Autonomy Avionics Various issues with file handling, most notably playback of SSR files at high data rates via Ka- Investigating recent occurrences of a Zero Block File (SP-A-821, Monitor – Block of zeros Flight Software band (Monitoring SP-A-817 and SP-A-821) in played back file) and checksum errors (SP-A-901 – Checksum errors on Playback) Star tracker demotions due to dust impacts being Nominal performance during planned commanded momentum dumps on March 24th, 26th, Guidance and Control characterized. No significant impact to operations and 27th (2021/083, 085, and 086) PDU (Power Distribution Unit) EPS (Electrical Power System)

Propulsion SACS (Solar Array Cooling System) Exterior component temperatures not matching thermal model predictions at aphelion variable Thermal orientations (SP-A-844)

Telecommunications Radio A reset prior to REM side switch (SP-A-877, (RF) closed) Radio B reset (SP-A-880, monitor) Nominal performance during Ka-band tracks during this period Science Instrument Status

Instrument Status Commissioning Status Recorder Issues/ Constraints New Weekly Highlights Usage Anomalies

EPI-Hi No Calibration of Heavy 47.8% None None Instrument powered on and collecting science data Ions: FSW update Feb. between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends 8th to trigger incident March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. electrons, protons, He EPI-Lo No Calibration of Heavy 66.7% None SP-A-857 2nd Instrument powered on and collecting science data Ions Epi-Lo dust between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends penetration March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. FIELDS 95.6% SCM Bx Antenna lost None Instrument powered on and collecting science data sensitivity between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. SWEAP 98.8% 1. SPC Cross-Talk None Instrument powered on and collecting science data observed on collection between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends plates (SP-A-902) March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. FSW upload 2. Ongoing Monitoring scheduled for March 30th SPC electronics box temperature WISPR 80.7% Investigation continues None Instrument powered on and collecting science data for internal Alarm OS between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends Bad Address after turn- March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. on Top-10 Risk Matrix Last Risk Board: 1 April 2021

Top Code Trend Title 5- Very Ten High 1 354 Unchanged Dust Penetration (Risk ID PSP-13)

4- High 2 353 Unchanged File System Corruption

3- 3 355 Increasing Dusk Risk for PSP Instruments Moderate

4 357 Unchanged SV Access via CRC Memory Dump 2- Low PSP-R-353 PSP-R-354 +PSP-R-355 5 360 Decreasing Covid-19 DSN Risk

1- Very PSP-R-342 PSP-R-357 Low - PSP-R-350-PSP-R-360 6 362 Unchanged SPC Temperature Trending =PSP-R-352 PSP-R-362 PSP-R-363 7 342 Unchanged Processor Margin Degradation 1 - Very 2 - Low 3 - 4 - High 5 - Very Low Moderate High 8 350 Decreasing G7C Model Functionality into CLCC

9 352 Unchanged Phase E Project Reserve Levels

10 363 New Star Track 1 Failure Winters’ Backup Slides COVID-19 Pandemic Mitigations Steps Remain in place

§ All staff are working from home unless there is a specific need to be physically present in a facility § Contingency planning information has been provided to the program office § Emergency personnel who may need to come on site were identified § APL is at stage 3 (and NASA centers have returned to stage 4), allowing APL staff to come to the campus, if needed § All non-essential travel is presently on hold § APL has an enhanced disinfecting process § APL has added significantly to the number of simultaneous WebEx users allowed, telephone bandwidth, and internet bandwidth, and has procured a government version of Zoom which is now in use § APL does have a few cases of COVID-19; contract tracing process executed rigorously § MOPS is extending the command-loss timer and the period covered by spacecraft command loads as proactive measures in case of any unexpected DSN outages during the pandemic § MOPS is leveraging automated and remote support for DSN contacts as appropriate; when in-MOC support is needed, precautions are being taken to enhance the safety of team members § Masks are mandatory in any common areas PSP Risk Rating Scoresheet

Risk Likelihood Criteria

Safety Technical Cost/Schedule Likelihood (Likelihood of safety event (Likelihood of not meeting mission (Likelihood of not meeting allocated occurrences) technical performance requirements) Cost/Schedule requirement or margin) -1 5 Very High (PSE > 10 ) (PT > 50%) (PCS > 75%) -2 -1 4 High (10 < PSE ≤ 10 ) (25% < PT ≤ 50%) (50% < PCS ≤ 75%) -3 -2 3 Moderate (10 < PSE ≤ 10 ) (15% < PT ≤ 25%) (25% < PCS ≤ 50%) -6 -3 2 Low (10 < PSE ≤ 10 ) (2% < PT ≤ 15%) (10% < PCS ≤ 25%) -6 1 Very Low (PSE ≤ 10 ) (0.1% < PT ≤ 2%) (PCS ≤ 10%)

Risk Consequence Criteria

LEVEL Minimal (1) Minor (2) Medium (3) Major (4) Very High (5)

Negligible Minor injury with no lost work Injury with lost Death or permanent Safety Severe injury safety impact time work time disabling injury Decrease in spacecraft or payload capability/margin, but all mission Major loss of Loss of one or Negligible Loss of spacecraft, requirements met, or need for capability of more Level-1 Technical technical instrument, or requirement definition or spacecraft or science impact payload design/implementation payload requirements workaround Project cost Project cost Project cost Project cost overrun overrun of less Project cost overrun between 1% overrun between overrun between Cost of greater than than 1% of to 3% of allocated 3% to 10% of 10% to 20% of 20% of allocated allocated allocated allocated Schedule slip affecting critical Schedule slip Negligible path but not Schedule slip of 1 Schedule Schedule slip not on critical path greater than 3 schedule slip launch or post- to 3 months months launch critical event

5 x 5 Matrix

Very High (5) High (4) Moderate (3)

Likelihood Low (2) Very Low (1) Minimal Minor Medium Major Very High Risk Matrix (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence

Page 2 353 - Star Tracker 1 Failure Status: Mitigate POC: John Wirzburger

Very High Statement: IF Star Tracker 1 was to fail, THEN data (5) High (4) downlink during large +Z to Sun off-points may be Moderate (3) Likelihood reduced due to Star Tracker 2 temperature limitations, Low (2) which may result in loss of data Very Low (1) X Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) Latest Update: (5) (16 Mar 2021) John Wirzburger: Consequence Risk Likelihood = 1-2, the likelihood of a star tracker failure is low, I would like to say below 2% (therefor a 1) based on run-time already incurred, but do not have the full equations used to verify this calculation, so 2 would be more conservative and bound the vendor lifetime calculations.

Risk Consequence = 2, decrease in spacecraft capability, but all mission requirements met.

From Leonardo document ASR7015903 rev A (SPP Reliability Analysis)

Scheduled for Review May 2021 354 - Dust Penetration (Accepted pre-launch as Risk 13) Status: Watch POC: Doug Mehoke

Very High (5)

Statement: IF a dust particle penetrates the cooling High (4) system, THEN it will result in loss of mission. Moderate (3) Likelihood Low (2) X Very Low (1) Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Latest Update: Consequence (01APR2021) D. Mehoke: The updated dynamical dust model has been incorporated into the updated risk model The data consistency between the dust model input and risk model output have been verified Updated spacecraft risks predictions have been provided for Orbits 7 and 8 The dynamical dust model inputs are being generated for the rest of the PSP orbit sets and will be processed through the risk model The FIELDS data continue to show a larger local peak before closest approach and a smaller local peak after WISPR streaking shows similar before and after closest approach peaks Since orbit 4 there have been 7 ST demotions, 5 of which appear to be dust related

Schedule for Review Quarterly 352 - Phase E Project Reserve Levels Status: Watch POC: Helene Winters

Very High Statement: IF PSP encounters an issue (5) High that is beyond what we have in the (4) Moderate (3) Likelihood Low Operations Plan, THEN we would need (2) Very Low additional funding for that effort. (1) X Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence

Latest Update: (04MAR2021): H. Winters: We no longer have project reserves in Phase E. We do have additional funding in under-run. Beyond that, we would need work with the program office. L: 1 x C: 2

Not Scheduled for Review/Watch Status 360 – Covid-19 DSN Risk Status: Watch POC: Jim Kinnison

Very High Statement: IF DSN capability is reduced (5)

High due to the Covid-19 virus, THEN mission (4) Moderate (3) Likelihood operations and science may be impacted. Low (2) Very Low (1) X Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence

Latest Update: (01APR2021) L. Burke: Change from L:2 x C: 3 to L:1 x C:3

Scheduled for Quarterly Review 350 - G&C Model Functionality into CLCC Status: Mitigate POC: Daniel Hals

Statement: IF the G&C model in the Very High (5) Command Load Constraint Checker (CLCC) High (4) Moderate (3)

is not updated, THEN there is a possibility Likelihood Low (2) X that a command sequence may be aborted Very Low (1) Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High and the spacecraft demoted to Op-Level 2. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence

Latest Update: (01APR2021) L. Burke: Changed from a L:2 x C:2 to a L:1 x C:2

(29MAR2021) D. Hals: All test cases successfully passed on March 23rd! Once Maria completes the artifacts, it will have formally passed the Acceptance Testing, but functionally speaking, the testing was successful.

All we have left to do is for her to wrap up the documentation and for us to do the deployment. We’re holding off on the deployment until this networking/Isilon issue has stabilized. I assume we want to wait to close the Risk until after the deployment, but I could argue we’re good to close it now (since the testing was the big unknown). Scheduled for Review May 2021 353 - File System Corruption Status: Watch POC: Chris Krupiarz

Very High Statement: IF corruption of data files from (5) High the spacecraft occurs upon transmission, (4) Moderate (3) Likelihood Low THEN the received instrument and (2) X Very Low spacecraft data will be incorrect. (1) Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence

Latest Update: (01APR2021) C. Krupiarz: We had three checksum errors during file transmission in the past month plus another occurrence of the 0-block file. All files that had checksum errors were retransmitted successfully. FSW is continuing to investigate..

Scheduled for Review Quarterly 351 - Spacecraft / Instrument Thermal Exceedances Status: Mitigate POC: John Wirzburger

Statement: IF thermal predictions are realized Very High (5) THEN projected data downlink Conops will High (4) Moderate (3) need modification to prevent damage to Likelihood Low (2) Spacecraft and Instrument Components, which Very Low (1) X Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High may result in loss of data. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence

Latest Update: (01APR2021) L. Burke: This risk was closed as a result of the 01 April 2021 Meeting. The residual risk was accepted and captured by opening a new risk (PSP Risk 363 - Star Tracker 1 Failure).

This risk was closed at the 01 April 2021 Risk Board Meeting. 357 – SV Access via CRC Memory Dump Status: Watch

POC: John Wirzburger

Statement: If a CRC memory object dump Very High (5)

High prevents access to a storage variable that (4) Moderate (3)

should be manipulated as part of an on-going Likelihood Low (2) autonomy response, then the altered response Very Low (1) X Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High may not clear the fault as intended, possibly (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) resulting in a critical fault condition and safing. Consequence

Latest Update: (01APR2020) L. Burke: Move to a Watch/No Review Status

(08JUL2020) J. Wirzburger: Watching. No additional events.

Not Scheduled for Review/Watch Status 362 - SPC Temperature Trending Status: Mitigate POC: Sarah Hamilton/Tony Case

Statement: IF the SPC electronics box Very High (5) temperature rises more quickly than expected as High (4)

Moderate perihelion distance decreases, THEN the SPC (3) Likelihood Low electronics box could be damaged. (2) Latest Update: Very Low (1) X (04MAR2021) L. Burke: Review at the May 2021 Risk Board Meeting after Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) Orbit 8. (5) Consequence (03MAR2021) T. Case: Housekeeping data from encounter 7 (20 Rs; same perihelion distance as encounter 6) have now been analyzed. On average, the SPC electronics show a slightly lower temperature (0.5-1 degree C) than the previous encounter. This is in-line with previously observed trends that the instrument is running slightly cooler on each successive encounter. The first image shows all data from all encounters, zoomed out to show the entire range of radial distances and temperatures. The following image is zoomed in, and shows the SPC electronics temperature for encounters 6 and 7 (in gray and orange, respectively), and for encounters 4 and 5 (in cyan and magenta, respectively). The lower part of each curve is the inbound portion of the orbit, which is cooler than the outbound portion by 0.5-1 degree. Each successive encounter is slightly cooler than the previous.

Scheduled for Review May 2021 342 - Processor Margin Degradation Status: Watch POC: Chris Krupiarz

Very High Statement: IF processor margin degrades as a (5) High result of needing to make flight software (4) Moderate (3) Likelihood Low updates for issues that arise or processor (2) Very Low (1) X loading is higher than expected during the Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) mission; THEN there may be an impact to Consequence mission operations and science.

Latest Update: (01APR2021) C. Krupiarz: Continuing to monitor. No issues.

Scheduled for Review Quarterly 355 - Dust Risk for PSP Instruments (Accepted pre-launch as Risk 337) Status: Watch POC: Doug Mehoke / Sarah Hamilton

Very High (5) Statement: IF dust impacts to Instrument sensors High (4) Moderate (3) during flight are harsher than predicted; THEN the Likelihood Low (2) X science results may be compromised. Very Low (1) Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence

Latest Update: (01APR2021) S. Hamilton: • EPI-Lo has experienced two instances of dust impact. The instrument consists of 80 detectors across 8 wedges. • The first impact occurred on 4/3/2019 during Encounter 2. Likely caused by a β-meteoroid about ~100nm in size. • The second impact occurred on 12/30/2020 during a Ka-Band pass just prior to Encounter 7. The impact hole is consistent with an α-meteoroid on the order ~micron • Both of these impacts occurred on 2 different detectors within the same wedge. • No significant impact to EPI-Lo science products at this time. This assessment will change if more impacts occur • A Working Group consisting of Spacecraft, Dust, Mission Design, and EPI-Lo members will evaluate dust risk over PSP’s orbit and evaluate if the spacecraft rotation can be minimized to avoid placing EPI-Lo at further risk • Anomaly Report SP-A-857 contains the details of the two dust impacts

(01APR2021) L. Burke: L:1 x C:2 was increased to L:2 x C:2. Schedule for Review Quarterly PSP Risk Rating Scoresheet

Risk Likelihood Criteria

Risk Consequence Criteria

LEVEL Minimal (1) Minor (2) Medium (3) Major (4) Very High (5)

5 x 5 Matrix

Very High (5) High (4) Moderate (3)

Likelihood Low (2) Very Low (1) Minimal Minor Medium Major Very High Risk Matrix (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence

Page 2 Parker Solar Probe – Project Science SWG Telecon – April 2, 2021 Project Scientist: Nour E. Raouafi Deputy Project Scientist: Rob Decker Acting Deputy Project Scientist: Bob DeMajistre PSP SWG Spring Meeting

• Orbit 6 Data Release Monday, April 5, 2021 • PSP Scholar First Meeting April 27, 2021 – https://sppgway.jhuapl.edu/psp_scholars • SWG Spring meeting April 29, 2021, 10:00 am – 16:00pm EDT • Parker One Conference June 14-18, 2021 http://parkersolarprobe.jhuapl.edu/News-Center/Events/Parker-Series/ PSP SWG Telecon March 5, 2021 Switchback observations & Model Overviews • Extended telecon: March 5, 2021 1:00-3:30pm EST • Status slides will be shared but not presented at the telecon • Agenda: § 1:00-1:22 pm – Observations Overview (17 mins presentation + 5 mins Q&A) by Stuart Bale & Tim Horbury § 1:22-1:40 pm – Overview of the Switchback Models (13 mins presentation + 5 mins Q&A) by Marco Velli § 1:40-1:58 pm – “In-situ Switchback Formation in the Expanding Solar Wind” by Jonathan Squire § 1:58-2:16 pm – “Shear-driven Transition to Isotropically Turbulent Solar Wind Outside the Alfvén Critical Zone” by Bill Matthaeus § 2:16-2:34 pm – “The Origin of Switchbacks in the Solar Corona: Linear Theory” by Gary Zank § 2:34-2:52 pm – “Switchbacks as signatures of magnetic flux ropes generated by interchange reconnection in the corona” by Jim Drake § 2:52-3:10 pm – “Switchbacks Explained: Super-Parker Fields - the Other Side of the Sub-Parker Spiral” by Nathan Schwadron § 3:10-3:30 pm – Open discussion

Parker Solar Probe Scholars Website: https://sppgway.jhuapl.edu/psp_scholars • PSP Scholars will be § a regular virtual meeting series – a half to a full day meeting every three months. § open to all scientists interested in Parker Solar Probe and heliophysics science, the priority will be given to early-career scientists. • Senior scientists are also invited to attend and participate in the discussions, mentor, and advise. • All information about the meeting series (e.g., how to join the mailing list, present your work, and attend the meetings) is available at the Parker Solar Probe Scholars website: https://sppgway.jhuapl.edu/psp_scholars. • First meeting: April 27, 2021 • Registrants: 210

Parker Solar Probe Scholars Website: https://sppgway.jhuapl.edu/psp_scholars Reconstructed Ephemeris Releases Orbits with a single DCP First Release Second Release Reconstructed Ephemeris Releases Orbits with two DCPs First Release Second Release PSP Document Updates SDMP updates dues Feb. 28, 2021

• Working with NASA HQ on documentations that might be used for the senior review and the mission’s long term. • Reasons for this activity: § NASA’s new requirements for the senior review are demanding in terms of documentations. We want to learn about these new requirements to align our effort as much as possible with the PSP senior review. § Parker Solar Probe prime missions is a long (seven years) mission. Usually, the science teams of typical heliophysics missions start working on their senior review proposals a year (or so) into the mission’s prime phase. The Parker team will begin working on the senior review proposal in the last two years of the prime mission (i.e., five years into the prime mission; three to four years from now). § Additionally, after so many years, the core team would have moved to other projects, which is typical for any mission. We already started seeing this in the Parker team. Waiting too long, we risk losing essential knowledge for the senior review and the mission’s long-term outcome. Science Data Management Plan: updated version sent out for review. PSP Publication Tracking

• Report your publications • Highlights of important results: we had several press releases over the last couple of months. At least two more release are coming soon. • Please add the contract number to the acknowledgments of your publications. Use the following Parker Solar Probe was designed, built, and is now operated by the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory as part of NASA’s Living with a Star (LWS) program (contract NNN06AA01C). Support from the LWS management and technical team has played a critical role in the success of the Parker Solar Probe mission. WHPI Meeting: September 2021

Need to PSP presence at this meeting -- Important for synergies with ground- based observatories and other space- born missions Please consider contributing to this meeting PSP A&A Special Issue

• 38 papers o 37 accepted (available online: https://www.aanda.org/component/toc/?task=topic&id=1326) o 1 still under review

o We want the special issue to be published in June o Return proofs ASAP Six Planets in One Images

PSP/WISPR June 7, 2020

“Like everyone in the Sector, we were really excited by the image you showed of six planets observed by Parker! We have been discussing in Slack ways that these types of images could be used to derive exoplanet analog science. Do you think the Parker team would be willing to let our exoplanet postdocs work with some of this data as a cross-divisional effort?” Kathy Mandt Parker Solar Probe – VGA 3 Offers Stunning View of Venus

Venus gravity assist on July 11, 2020, WISPR captured a striking image of the planet’s nightside from 7,693 miles away

“That is really intriguing. One of the follow-ups I want to do is check more deeply into the Akatsuki, Venus Express, and MESSENGER and other flyby observations. It’s a tall order to check everything, but I really want to check if there are previous observations that noted this or failed to see it or note it.” Noam Izenberg Parker Solar Probe – VGA 4 Science Operations Center Status

• Supported Meetings • Science Operations continued § Missions Operations, Operations Planning, Payload System Engineering, § 3/30/21 – 4/9/21: Orbit 8 Segment 4 PASF merge CCB/Risk, APFR and MOPs/GS § 4/6/21: Start of DCP 8A • SOC Telecons on March 26th (discussed the newly released SPADER build) and § 4/9/21: DCP 8B negotiated data volume delivery upcoming on April 9th § 4/12/21: Formal approval of Orbit 8 Segment 3 timeline • Data Releases § 4/13/21 – 4/16/21: Merge of full Orbit 9 PASF § April 5, 2021: Orbit 6 § 4/19/21: Orbit 8 and Segment 3 start § June 28, 2021: Orbit 7 § 4/20/21 – 4/30/21: Orbit 8 Segment 5 merge • SDMP • Science Planning Tools § Science Data Management Plan: Currently reviewing new version before § SPADER Upcoming Build will feature: distribution for instrument team review. ‣ Updated DSN schedules • GSEOS ‣ Improved the accuracy, visibility and selection of PASF Merger ChartView plotted short duration activities § No issues ‣ Improved activity staggering around blackout periods in PASF Merger • Science Gateway ‣ Auto downloading § Working on the Parker ONE agenda on the Gateway ‣ 3D Orbit Plot § Updated the List of Contacts on Science Gateway Gateway ‣ Orbit Plot improvements • Frame Kernels ‣ Thanks for suggestions and bug reports! § Received FIELDS comments on frames and instrument kernels, made • Science Downlink Planning changes and are now setting up a peer review § Supported Project Science for data collection periods 08A, 08B, and 09A • Science Operations § Supported Project Science and Mission Ops for Orbit 8, 9, and 10 planning § Currently in Orbit 8 Segment 2 and Data Collection Period (DCP) 7A § 3/19/21: Delivered Orbit 8 Segment 3 PASF PSP Payload Systems Engineering

o Purpose : To Provide Instrument Insight to Spacecraft Systems and Operations o Bi-Weekly Meetings o Last meeting held 3/18 o Discussion on coordinating Spacecraft SLS Calibration with SWEAP instrument powered on for the Calibration o Benefit for Solar Wind Measurements o Request from Mission Systems for instrument teams to check data for Single Event Upsets (SEU) and Science Events o Correlate with previously observed S/C RF and SSR SEU’s o Discussion to understand SPDF Definition of Data Set Authors o Martha invited SPDF team to SOC meeting for clarification/answer team questions o Next meeting scheduled for April 15th

o Orbit 10 Preparation. o Orbit Planning Kick-off Meeting Late April o Special Requests due June 14th

PSP Science Working Group 02/05/21 PSP Theory Group

Hosts: Parisa Mostafavi & Marco Velli Cadence: monthly – every 4th Thursday, 12:00 − 13:00 (EST) Webpage: http://sppgway.jhuapl.edu/TG_Telecons (Presentation + Zoom recording)

Last Telecon: March 25, 2021 Speakers: Gary Zank and Haoming Liang (UAH)

Topic: The Origin of Switchbacks in the Solar Corona

Next Telecons:

April 22, 2021: Joe Giacalone (University of Arizona):

Energetic Particles Associated with a CME-driven shock Interacting with an Isolated Magnetic Structure

4/2/21 41 • March 24-25, SWT#28 >160 participants. • On March 31st, the SWA redundant DPU was powered up successfully using the new modified procedures. The recovery activities will take place during April. • Two RSCW(2-3) during Feb/March to characterize and calibrate instruments, to optimize downlink and coordinated activities among RS instruments. There was a simultaneous CME observation with EUI, Metis and SOLOHI. Next RSCW will be a dress- rehearsal before nominal mission phase. • A&A First Results Special Issue. Papers were due on 3/31/2021 https://www.aanda.org/component/toc/?task=topic&id=1340

Upcoming Activities: T. Nieves • SOWG – 20-21 April 2021 [virtual] (LTP04) David Lario NASA SOC Project Science • EGU 19-30 Apr 2021. Solar Orbiter session on 27 Apr, 11:00-15:00 (CEST) team https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU21/session/40155#vPICO_presentations Teresa.Nieves@nasa.gov • SWT#29 – 19-20 May 2021 [virtual] [email protected] HQ Update & Payload Status

• Updates from NASA/HQ • FIELDS Stuart Bale • SWEAP Justin Kasper • IS�IS David McComas • WISPR Mark Linton Parker Solar Probe SWG Telecon – April 2, 2021 Science Highlights

Guillermo Stenborg (NRL; ) Pristine PSP/WISPR Observations of the Circumsolar Dust Ring Near Venus' Orbit ApJ (in press)

Glyn Collinson (GSFC; ) Depleted plasma densities in the ionosphere of Venus near solar minimum from Parker Solar Probe observations of upper hybrid resonance emission GRL (in press)