CEN/BT/WG 202 ______document title/ titre du document
______reference/reference EOEP-INPR-EOPG-TN-2008-0001 issue/edition 1 revision/revision 1 date of issue/date d’édition May 2008 Document type/type de document Technical Note
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 2 of 209 ______
APPROVAL
Title CEN Space Standardisation, EO, GMES and Dual Use State of issue 1 revision 0 Play titre issue revision
Editors P.G. Marchetti ESA EOP-GR date 23 May 2008 A. Biancalana (Datamat) ESA Engineering Support date Contributors J. Aschbacher ESA EOP-E S. Badessi ESA TEN-TP L. Balestra ESA TEC-QR G. Bernede EUMETSAT F. Cade’ EUMETSAT Y. Coene Spacebel L. Colaiacomo, EUSC P. Delclaux Infoterra Global L. Del Monte ESA DG-PS D. Giacobbo Spot Image J-P. Gleyzes CNES D. Havlik ARCS A.K. Jain DLR R. Koopman ESA EOP-GQ A. Mantineo ESA OPS-CQ J. Martin ESA EOP-GU M. Merri ESA OPS-GDA G. Ottavianelli ESA EOP-GQ T. Parriniello ESA EOP-GS N. Peccia ESA OPS-GI C. Reix Thales Alenia Space A. Simonini ESA EOP-BQ P. Smits JRC SDI Unit C. Steenmans EEA G. Triebnig ARCS H. Wensink Argoss M. Wybierala Thales Alenia Space
approved date by date approuvé by CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 3 of 209 ______
CHANGE LOG
reason for change /raison du changement issue/issue revision/revision date/date
First Issue 0 7 February 2008
RIDs/Comments during internal meeting in ESA on 0 12 March 2008 15-2-2008 and meeting in DIN Berlin 20-2-2008 Additional RIDs received 0 14 March 2008 Additional RIDs 0 15 April 2008 Added SEIS And recommendations 1.0 May 2008
CHANGE RECORD
Issue: 0 Revision: 14
reason for change/raison du changement page(s)/page(s) paragraph(s)/paragraph(s)
Additional RIDs received All
Issue: 0 Revision: 15
reason for change/raison du changement page(s)/page(s) paragraph(s)/paragraph(s)
added GML JP2 123 6.3.2 Added reference to methodology for scenario 160 9.2.2 definition Issue: 1 Revision: 0
reason for change/raison du changement page(s)/page(s) paragraph(s)/paragraph(s)
Added changes related to SEIS 87 Added conclusions and recommendations 182 11 Issue: 1 Revision: 1
reason for change/raison du changement page(s)/page(s) paragraph(s)/paragraph(s)
Added Input from QA4EO 6.4.6.7
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 4 of 209 ______
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION...... 13 1.1 Purpose and Scope ...... 13 1.2 Reference Documents...... 13 1.3 Web References...... 15 1.4 Acronyms and Definitions ...... 17 1.5 Document Overview ...... 17 2 Earth Observation Standardisation Background ...... 19 2.1 Importance of Engineering Standardisation...... 19 2.2 European Standardisation...... 19 2.3 Programming Mandate M/415...... 21 2.4 Standardisation Programme Roadmap & Method Of Operation...... 22 2.5 Standardisation Bodies ...... 23 2.5.1 European standards organisations...... 23 2.5.1.1 CEN (European Committee for Standardisation) ...... 23 2.5.1.2 Cenelec (European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation) ...... 24 2.5.1.3 ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) ...... 24 2.5.1.4 ECSS (European Cooperation for Space Standardisation) ...... 25 2.5.1.5 European Space Agency ...... 25 2.5.2 International Standards Organisations ...... 27 2.5.2.1 ISO ...... 27 2.5.2.2 NATO-STANAG ...... 28 2.5.2.3 ANSI...... 28 2.5.2.4 United States Defense Standards...... 28 2.5.2.5 ITU-T ...... 29 2.5.3 Other International Associations and Forums ...... 29 2.5.3.1 OGC ...... 29 2.5.3.2 W3C ...... 30 2.5.3.3 OASIS ...... 30 2.5.3.4 OMG...... 32 2.5.3.4.1 OMG Space Domain Task Force...... 32 2.5.3.5 CCSDS...... 33 2.5.3.6 CEOS ...... 34 2.5.3.7 DGIWG...... 35 2.5.3.8 IEEE ...... 35 2.5.3.9 SISO...... 35 2.5.3.10 IETF ...... 36 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 5 of 209 ______
2.5.3.11 WS-I ...... 36 2.5.3.12 WMO ...... 37 3 Existing and Planned European EO Systems...... 38 3.1 Overview...... 38 3.2 Main European Earth Observation Missions ...... 38 3.2.1 GMES Sentinels (ESA) ...... 38 3.2.1.1 Sentinel-1 ...... 38 3.2.1.2 Sentinel-2 ...... 40 3.2.1.3 Sentinel-3 ...... 41 3.2.1.4 Sentinel 4 & 5...... 43 3.2.2 Meteorological Missions (EUMETSAT) ...... 44 3.2.2.1 Meteosat First Generation...... 44 3.2.2.2 Meteosat Second Generation ...... 45 3.2.2.3 Eumetsat Polar System...... 45 3.2.3 COSMO- SkyMed (Italy)...... 45 3.2.4 Pleiades (France) ...... 46 3.2.5 TerraSAR-X (Germany)...... 46 3.2.6 TanDEM-X (Germany) ...... 47 3.2.7 EnMAP (Germany) ...... 47 3.2.8 SAR-Lupe (D)...... 48 3.2.9 Radarsat-1/2 (Canada)...... 48 3.2.10 Envisat (ESA) ...... 48 3.2.11 DMC Constellation ...... 49 3.2.12 RapidEye...... 50 3.2.13 TopSat...... 51 3.2.14 SEOSAT...... 51 3.2.15 Spot ...... 52 3.2.15.1 SPOT 1, 2, and 3 ...... 52 3.2.15.2 SPOT 4 ...... 53 3.2.15.3 SPOT 5 ...... 53 3.3 Other Missions...... 53 3.3.1 ODIN ...... 53 3.3.2 IKONOS-GeoEye ...... 54 3.3.3 Quickbird & WorldView-1 ...... 55 3.3.4 FORMOSAT-2...... 56 3.3.5 KOMPSAT-2...... 56 3.3.6 ASTROTERRA...... 57 3.3.7 IRS ...... 58 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 6 of 209 ______
3.4 Scientific EO Missions ...... 60 3.4.1 ESA Earth Explorers ...... 60 3.4.1.1 Core missions ...... 61 3.4.1.2 Opportunity missions...... 61 3.4.2 CNES Missions ...... 61 3.4.2.1 Calipso ...... 62 3.4.2.2 Parasol ...... 62 3.4.2.3 Jason 1 and 2...... 63 3.4.2.4 Venµs...... 64 4 Interaction with Other Space Systems...... 65 4.1 Navigation ...... 65 4.1.1 DORIS ...... 65 4.2 Data Relay Systems ...... 66 4.2.1 Introduction...... 66 4.2.2 ARTEMIS ...... 66 4.2.3 European Data Relay Satellite ...... 67 4.3 Data Dissemination via Satellite ...... 68 4.3.1 Direct Broadcast...... 68 4.3.2 ESA DDS...... 68 4.3.2.1 Introduction ...... 68 4.3.2.2 The Ku-band DVB-S service for European users ...... 69 4.3.2.3 The C-band DVB-S service for African users...... 70 4.3.2.4 The Amerhis regenerative DVB-RCS DDS ...... 71 4.3.3 Commercial telecommunication satellites ...... 72 4.3.4 Eumetcast ...... 72 4.3.5 GEONETCast...... 74 4.4 Mission in the loop ...... 74 5 Terrestrial Systems Interoperating with Space Systems...... 77 5.1 European Programs ...... 77 5.1.1 The Complete European Context (SEIS-INSPIRE-GMES)...... 77 5.1.2 GMES...... 78 5.1.2.1 Overview ...... 78 5.1.2.2 GMES Services...... 79 5.1.2.2.1 Emergency Response Core Service - ERCS ...... 81 5.1.2.2.2 Land Monitoring Core Service - LMCS...... 81 5.1.2.2.3 Marine Core Service - MCS...... 82 5.1.2.2.4 GMES Atmosphere Pilot Service...... 83 5.1.2.2.5 Security Pilot Service - G-MOSAIC ...... 83 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 7 of 209 ______
5.1.2.3 GMES Projects...... 84 5.1.2.3.1 Overview...... 84 5.1.2.3.2 SANY...... 85 5.1.3 INSPIRE ...... 85 5.1.4 SEIS ...... 87 5.1.5 Disaster Management Systems ...... 88 5.1.5.1 GITEWS ...... 88 5.1.5.2 NaDiNe...... 89 5.1.5.3 RIMAX...... 90 5.1.5.4 SAR-HQ ...... 90 5.1.6 VGISC ...... 90 5.2 Institutions ...... 91 5.2.1 European Institutions...... 91 5.2.1.1 ESA ...... 91 5.2.1.2 European Maritime Safety Agency...... 91 5.2.1.3 European Union Satellite Centre...... 92 5.2.1.4 Joint Research Centre -IPSC...... 93 5.2.1.5 European Environment Agency ...... 94 5.2.1.6 European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts...... 95 5.2.2 International institutions...... 96 5.2.2.1 United Nations...... 96 5.2.2.1.1 United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs ...... 96 5.2.2.1.2 UNOSAT...... 96 5.2.2.1.3 World Meteorological Organization...... 97 5.2.2.1.4 World Intellectual Property Organization ...... 97 5.2.2.2 FAO...... 98 5.2.2.2.1 GeoNetwork...... 99 5.2.2.2.2 Spatial Standard and Norms...... 99 5.2.2.2.3 The Global Sub national Land Use Database ...... 99 5.2.2.3 NATO ...... 100 5.2.2.4 Disaster Charter ...... 100 5.2.2.5 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ...... 100 5.2.2.6 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ...... 101 5.2.2.6.1 National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) ..... 102 6 State of Play In Space Standardisation ...... 103 6.1 Overview...... 103 6.2 ESA Approved Space Standards ...... 107 6.2.1 General...... 107 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 8 of 209 ______
6.2.2 Space Engineering ...... 107 6.2.3 Space Project Management ...... 110 6.2.4 Space Product Assurance...... 111 6.2.5 Other Published ECSS Standards ...... 114 6.3 Space Standards for Earth Observation ...... 114 6.3.1 Heterogeneous Missions Access - The GMES Multi-Mission Approach...... 114 6.3.2 Archiving and Product Formats Standardisation ...... 119 6.3.3 Work in Progress in ESA Mission Control Standardisation ...... 124 6.3.4 XML Telemetric & Command Exchange (XTCE) ...... 134 6.3.5 OGC Standards...... 135 6.4 Other Standards ...... 136 6.4.1 Architecture ...... 136 6.4.1.1 RM-ODP...... 136 6.4.1.2 CCSDS 311.0-R-1 Reference Architecture For Space Data Systems...... 138 6.4.1.3 ISO 19119:2005 ...... 139 6.4.2 Simulation...... 139 6.4.3 Quality Management System Standardisation – ISO 9000 ...... 141 6.4.3.1 Process and tool standardization ...... 142 6.4.3.2 Risk management ...... 142 6.4.3.3 Improvement and cross-fertilization ...... 142 6.4.4 Safety ...... 142 6.4.4.1 ISO 14620 ...... 143 6.4.4.2 ECSS-Q-40B...... 144 6.4.5 Information Security Management ...... 145 6.4.5.1 ISO Information Security Management Standards...... 145 6.4.5.2 CCSDS Security Standards ...... 146 6.4.6 Cal/Val and Intercalibration of EO Instruments: Status of Harmonisation Guidelines.. 148 6.4.6.1 Introduction ...... 148 6.4.6.2 Cal/Val Methodologies ...... 148 6.4.6.3 Cal/val scenarios...... 149 6.4.6.4 Satellite and in situ Cal/Val data access ...... 150 6.4.6.5 Harmonisation of Quality Information...... 150 6.4.6.6 The GECA Project...... 150 6.4.6.7 A Quality Assurance Framework for Earth Observation (QA4EO)...... 151 7 Interoperability Issues ...... 153 7.1 Systems of Systems...... 153 7.1.1 GMES...... 153 7.1.2 GEOSS...... 153 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 9 of 209 ______
7.2 The European Perspective ...... 154 7.3 European Coordination Initiatives ...... 155 7.3.1 The GIGAS Project...... 155 7.3.2 Single Information Space for the Environment in Europe ...... 157 7.3.3 GMOSS Network of Excellence ...... 159 8 Dual Use...... 161 8.1 Civil Use of Dual Use Missions ...... 161 8.2 Defence Use of Dual use Missions ...... 161 9 Proposed Approach, Issues and Requirements...... 162 9.1 Specific High Level Objectives for a Space Standardisation Programme...... 162 9.2 Lessons Learned ...... 162 9.2.1 Lessons Learned within the HMA Project ...... 162 9.2.2 Interoperability Scenario/Use Case Definition Methodology ...... 163 9.3 The Need of a Persistent Testbed...... 164 9.3.1 Objectives...... 164 9.3.2 High Level Requirements ...... 165 9.3.3 Issues ...... 166 9.4 The Need of a Conformance Testing and Certification Environment...... 167 9.4.1 Objectives...... 167 9.4.2 High Level Requirements ...... 167 9.4.3 Issues ...... 168 9.5 Intellectual Property Rights...... 169 9.5.1 Intellectual Property Rights and Standardisation ...... 169 9.5.1.1 Copyright and Intellectual Property ...... 169 9.5.1.2 Digital Rights Management ...... 169 9.5.1.3 Rights on Standards...... 169 9.5.2 Ownership and IPR in EO ...... 170 9.5.3 Digital Rights Management for EO...... 171 9.5.4 Access to EO Data ...... 171 9.5.4.1 Organisation of Data Distribution ...... 171 9.5.4.2 Satellite Operators and Commercial Operators ...... 171 9.5.4.3 Intellectual Property Rights - IPR ...... 173 9.5.4.4 Licensing ...... 174 9.5.4.5 Summary...... 175 9.5.5 Examples...... 177 9.5.5.1 International Charter ...... 177 9.5.5.2 Collective Agreements ...... 177 9.5.5.3 Agriculture ...... 178 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 10 of 209 ______
9.6 SME Requirements and Identified Issues ...... 178 10 Priorities ...... 179 10.1 Comparative Macro Analysis of European EO Standardisation...... 179 10.2 European vs. Global Standardisation ...... 181 10.2.1 OGC-ISO/TC211 Liaison...... 182 10.2.2 ISO Recognition of WMO as an International Standardizing Body ...... 182 10.3 Prioritizing High Level Objectives...... 183 11 Recommendations...... 185 12 ANNEXES...... 187 12.1 Annex 1 ISO/IEC brochure on Copyright, standards and the internet...... 187 12.2 Annex 2 OGC License Agreement...... 188 12.3 Annex 3 CEN Workshop Agreement ...... 190 12.4 Annex 4 ISO 27001 HMA Tailoring ...... 191 12.5 Annex 5 EO Data Access Portfolio (EODAP)...... 208
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 11 of 209 ______
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 1 DMC Constellation ...... 49 Table 2 GMES Projects ...... 84 Table 3 GMES-HMA Related Standards ...... 119 Table 4 Archive and Product Formats Standards ...... 124 Table 5 Work in Progress in ESA Mission Control Standardisatio...... 134 Table 6 High Level Objectives ...... 162 Table 7 Satellite operator and commercial operator for major satellite systems ...... 173 Table 8 Macro Analysis of Space Standards ...... 181 Table 9 Prioritized Objectives ...... 184 Table 10 Recommendations ...... 186 Table 11 ISO 27001 HMA Tailoring ...... 207 Table 12 Draft List of mission group # 1, 2, 3 ...... 208 Table 13 Draft list of mission group # 4, 5 ...... 209
Figure 1 Organisation of Engineering Standardization in ESA ...... 27 Figure 2 GMES Sentinel 1 ...... 39 Figure 3 GMES Sentinel 2 ...... 41 Figure 4 GMES Sentinel 3 ...... 43 Figure 5 Meteorological Missions ...... 45 Figure 6 Cosmo Skymed ...... 46 Figure 7 Pleiades ...... 46 Figure 8 TerraSAR-X ...... 47 Figure 9 TanDEM-X ...... 47 Figure 10 EnMAP...... 47 Figure 11 Radarsat-1/2 ...... 48 Figure 12 Envisat ...... 49 Figure 13 RapidEye ...... 50 Figure 14 Topsat...... 51 Figure 15 SEOSAT ...... 52 Figure 16 Spot 5 ...... 53 Figure 17 IKONOS...... 54 Figure 18 Quickbird...... 56 Figure 19 WorldView-1 ...... 56 Figure 20 KOMPSAT-2 ...... 57 Figure 21 ASTROTERRA ...... 58 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 12 of 209 ______
Figure 22 IRS-P6 Resourcesat-1...... 59 Figure 23 IRS-P5 Cartosat-1 ...... 59 Figure 24 IRS Cartosat-2 ...... 60 Figure 25 Calypso...... 62 Figure 26 Parasol...... 63 Figure 27 Jason ...... 63 Figure 28 Artemis...... 67 Figure 29 ESA European DDS ...... 70 Figure 30 ESA African DDS...... 71 Figure 31 Eumetcast System...... 74 Figure 32 Mission in the Loop...... 75 Figure 33 GMES Home Page ...... 78 Figure 34 GMES Schema ...... 79 Figure 35: INSPIRE Geoportal...... 86 Figure 38 Earth Observation Scenario...... 103 Figure 39 Extended Earth Observation Scenario ...... 106 Figure 40 HMA Technical Context ...... 116 Figure 41 XTCE Schema ...... 135 Figure 42: Elements of GEOSS ...... 154 Figure 43 General scheme for data distribution...... 172 Figure 44 Licensing networks ...... 174
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 13 of 209 ______
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose and Scope
This document is a preliminary feasibility study for the establishment of Space Industry standards requested by the European Commission with the Programming Mandate M/415 [RD01]. The mandate is an element of the European Space Programme. The mandate M/415 has been accepted by CEN/BT [RD02] with the creation of BT/WG 202 Space to respond to mandate M/415. CENELEC and ETSI have agreed for CEN to take the lead on this work. The mandate M/415 indicates the following targets for standardisation • The Galileo satellite navigation system • The GMES programme and other satellite applications for the environment, safety & security • Satellite telecommunications • Soyuz launch systems at Kourou • The ‘value chain’ of commercial space systems • The International Space Station and other international co-operative programmes. This feasibility study is focused on the second bullet, “the GMES programme and other satellite applications for the environment, safety & security” according to the Mandate statement. This feasibility study aims to identify the current state of play in space Standardisation, to identify the priorities for a wide range of elements and applications and the actors who should participate in each area of work. It is to be remarked that the standards related to the development, testing, launch and in orbit validation of the satellite, as well as the telecommunication related standards are only outlined in section 6.2. The work in progress on FOS is addressed in this document as it represents an important interface for the exploitation of EO missions in particular in the context of high resolution missions, security and dual use.
1.2 Reference Documents
The following documents, though not formally part of this document, amplify or clarify its content:
RD01 M / 415 EN, Brussels 25 June 2007 Programming Mandate addressed to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI to establish Space Industry standards
RD02 RESOLUTION BT C61/2007
RD03 Brussels July 2007 EU Study on the specific policy needs for ICT standardisation - Executive summary of the final CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 14 of 209 ______
report
RD04 HMA-DD-DAT-EN-001 Issue 1.7 GMES Heterogeneous Mission Accessibility 14/09/2007 Architectural Design Technical Note
RD05 OGC 07 038r1 Version: 0.1.8 OGC™ Cataloguing of ISO Metadata (CIM) using the 2007-11-21 ebRIM profile of CS-W
RD06 OGC 06-131r3 Version: 0.1.7 OGC™ Catalogue Services Specification 2.0 2007-11-29 Extension Package for ebRIM (ISO/TS 15000-3) Application Profile: Earth Observation Products
RD07 0GC 06-080r3 Version: 0.9.1 GML 3.1.1 Application schema for Earth Observation 2007-08-01 products
RD08 06-141r2 Version: 0.9.1 2007-09- Ordering Services for Earth Observation Products 14
RD09 OGC 07-018 Version: 0.9.4a 2007- OpenGIS® Sensor Planning Service Application 09-28 Profile for EO Sensors
RD10 CCSDS 311.0-R-1 Red Book Reference Architecture For Space Data Systems January 2007
RD11 ISO/IEC 17799 Second edition Information technology — Security techniques — 2005-06-15 Code of practice for information security management
RD12 ISO/IEC 27001 First edition 2005- Information technology — Security techniques — 10-15 Information security management systems — Requirements
RD13 ISO/IEC15408 Evaluation criteria for IT security (i.e. Common Criteria)
RD14 Directive 2007/2/EC of the Establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information European Parliament and of the in the European Community (INSPIRE) Council of 14 March 2007
RD15 CEN WORKSHOP AGREEMENT Interfaces for Heterogeneous Missions Accessibility (Earth Observation Ground Segment Interfaces) CWA 15808 February 2008
RD16 Brussels, 1.2.2008 COM(2008) 46 Communication from the Commission to the Council, final the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Towards a Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS)
RD17 ISO/TC 211 N 2404 Recognition of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) as an international standardizing body 2008-03-11 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 15 of 209 ______
1.3 Web References
Part of the information contained into this document was extracted from the following web sites which are also a valid support for retrieving additional information on the related topics. WR01 http://earth.esa.int/gscb/ GSCB Web site
WR02 http://www.rapideye.de/ RapidEye Web Site
WR03 http://www.dmcii.com/ DMC Web site
WR04 http://www.geoeye.com/ GeoEye Web site
WR05 http://www.eurimage.com/ Eurimage Web site
WR06 http://ec.europa.eu/ EC Web site
WR07 http://www.gmes.info/ GMES Web site
WR08 http://earth.esa.int/SAFE/index.html SAFE Web page
WR09 http://www.rm-odp.net/ RM-ODP Web site
WR10 http://www.iso.org/ ISO Web site
WR11 http://www.emsa.europa.eu/ EMSA Web site
WR12 http://www.eusc.europa.eu/ EUSC Web site
WR13 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/ JRC Web site
WR14 http://www.eea.europa.eu/ EEA Web Site
WR15 http://www.ecss.nl/ ECSS Web Site WR16 http://www.nato-pa.int/default.Asp?SHORTCUT=1004 NATO description of MUSIS Study
WR17 http://www.eumetsat.int/HOME/Main/What_We_Do/EUMETCast/index EUMETCAST Web .htm Site
WR18 http://www.iso.org/ ISO Web Site
WR 19 http://www.opengeospatial.org/ OGC Web site
WR 20 http://www.omg.org/ OMG Web site
WR 21 http://www.w3c.org/ W3C Web site
WR 22 http://www.unoosa.org/ UNOOSA Web Site
WR23 http://www.fao.org/spatl/index_en.asp FAO Spatial web site
WR24 http://www.oasis-open.org/ OASIS Web Site
WR25 http://www.ccsds.org/ CCSDS Web Site CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 16 of 209 ______
WR26 http://www.ceos.org/ CEOS Web Site
WR27 http://www.dgiwg.org/ DGIWG Web Site
WR28 http://www.ieee.org/ IEEE Web Site
WR29 http://www.nato.int/ NATO Web Site
WR30 http://www.disastercharter.org/ Disaster Charter Web Site
WR31 http://gmoss.jrc.it/ GMOSS Web Site
WR32 http://inspire.jrc.it/ INSPIRE Web Site
WR33 http://www.ecmwf.int/ ECMWS Web Site
WR34 http://www.ipcc.ch/ IPCC Web Site
WR35 http://unosat.web.cern.ch/unosat/ UNOSAT Web site
WR36 http://www.wmo.ch/pages/index_en.html WMO Web Site
WR37 http://www.noaa.gov/ NOAA Web Site
WR38 http://www.sisostds.org/ SISO Web Site
WR39 http://www.ietf.org/ IETF Web Site
WR40 http://www.ws-i.org/ WS-I Web Site
WR41 http://www.cnes.fr/web/461-cnes-programmes.php?items_category=3 CNES EO Web Site http://smsc.cnes.fr/html-images/HomeGB.html
WR42 http://www.iso.org/iso/copyright_information_brochure.pdf ISO/IEC Brochure on copyrights
WR43 http://www.wipo.int/ WIPO Web Site
WR44 http://www.esa.int/esaLP/LPearthexp.html ESA Earth Explorers Web Site
WR45 http://www.cen.eu/cenorm/homepage.htm CEN Web Site
WR46 http://www.cenelec.eu/ CENELEC Web Site
WR47 http://www.etsi.org/ ETSI Web Site
WR48 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/seis/what.htm SEIS Web Site
WR49 http://calvalportal.ceos.org CEOS CalVal Portal CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 17 of 209 ______
1.4 Acronyms and Definitions
Standard/European Standard Standards are documented, voluntary agreements which establish important criteria for products, services and processes. Standards, therefore, help to make sure that products and services are fit for their purpose and are comparable and compatible. This is equally true for European standards. However, for a standard to be European, it has to be adopted by one of the European standards organisations and be publicly available.
CEN European Committee for Standardisation Cenelec European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation DDS Data Dissemination Satellite DEM Digital Elevation Model DRS Data Relay Satellite EO Earth Observation ESA European Space Agency ETSI European Telecommunications Standards Institute EUMETSAT EUropean organisation for the exploitation of METeorological SATellites GCM GMES Contributing Missions GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System HMA Heterogeneous Missions Accessibility ISMS information Security Management System NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NRT Near Real Time ODP Open Distributed Processing OGC Open Geospatial Consortium PDGS Payload Data Ground Segment RM Reference Model SME Small and Medium Size Enterprise
1.5 Document Overview The present document is divided into the following parts:
Section 1: Introduction (this section)
Section 2: Earth Observation Standardisation Background
Section 3: Existing and Planned European EO Systems CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 18 of 209 ______
Section 4: Interaction with Other Space Systems
Section 5: Terrestrial Systems Interoperating with Space Systems
Section 6: State of Play in Space Standardisation
Section 7: Interoperability Issues
Section 8: Dual Use
Section 9: Proposed Approach, Issues and Requirements
Section 10: Priorities
ANNEXES CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 19 of 209 ______
2 EARTH OBSERVATION STANDARDISATION BACKGROUND
2.1 Importance of Engineering Standardisation
The importance of standardisation for space activities in Europe is growing as the Agencies and European Industry are faced with new technical challenges within more demanding economic constraints. Missions and satellites have challenging performance and lifetime requirements; the technology is becoming more sophisticated with more and more reliance on on-board intelligence and autonomy while schedule and costs have to be reduced. Engineering standards contribute to the technical quality of the space products and the cost effectiveness of the development and operations thus making these achievements possible. Space missions are a risky business where technology is pushed to the limit and the associated cost is significant. Additionally, the space environment often does not offer the option of correcting problems that were not identified before launch. All this imposes a very strict approach to the engineering of the space and ground segments. For these reasons, space Agencies and Industry have invested in Engineering Standardisation as a mean to decrease the risks of failure and to reduce the development and operations costs. Risks are decreased because standardisation offers proven and consolidated processes, methodologies and interfaces. Cost is reduced as standardisation spreads the investment for technological developments across different space missions and requires less expensive testing campaigns. Additionally, standardisation supports interoperability: this means that, if standards are properly applied, the facilities of several space Agencies and Industry for testing and operations can be shared, thus reducing investment and maintenance costs. As space exploration is quite a recent endeavour of mankind, international Engineering Standardisation in space has developed over the last 20 years. Before, the various space Agencies developed internal or proprietary standards, which implies multiple developments and little interoperability.
2.2 European Standardisation
Standardisation is a voluntary process based on consensus amongst different economic actors (industry, SMEs, consumers, workers, environmental NGOs, public authorities, etc) [WR06/standardisation]. It is carried out by independent standards bodies, acting at national, European and international level. The European Union has, since the mid-1980s, made an increasing use of standards in support of its policies and legislation.
The European Standards Organisations are CEN, CENELEC and ETSI.
Standardisation has contributed significantly to the support of the completion of the Internal Market in the context of the New Approach legislation, which refers to European standards developed by CEN, CENELEC and ETSI.
Furthermore, European standardisation supports European policies in the areas of competitiveness, ICT, public procurement, interoperability, environment, transport, energy, consumer protection, etc. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 20 of 209 ______
Today’s main challenges are: • the development of standards within acceptable time frames according to the market needs • the availability of expertise within the standardisation process • the access to information on the results of standardisation for standardisation users • the use of standards.
The European Commission has expressed its wish to use standardisation as a policy tool for encouraging the competitiveness of European Industry, whilst taking global developments in the ICT sector into account. More specifically, the European Commission wishes to rely upon a European ICT standardisation system capable of responding to industrial and societal stakeholders expectations. Further, ICT standardisation should be a tool capable of supporting and complementing various related European policies such as the Lisbon agenda, Industrial policy, Health policy, eLearning, eAccessibility etc. European standards are powerful means of enhancing the competitiveness of enterprises in the EU. They can help to protect the health, safety and environment of Europe's citizens. Standards offer technical solutions to problems and facilitate trade and cooperation across the European Community. The Commission promotes the voluntary use of standards where it thinks they can play a useful role. Industry and business are encouraged to use them where they help competition and improve quality or safety. Authorities are encouraged to use them if they help to implement European or national legislation. The Commission works with all recognised standards bodies to pursue common goals such as openness, transparency and efficiency in their systems. It also helps the European standards organisations to interpret Community and international policies, such as those governing trade, where these are relevant to their work. The Commission gives financial support to the secretariats of the European standards organisations and can also fund special groups to take part in standardisation to represent, for example, consumer, SME and environmental views. Where necessary, the Commission contributes towards the costs of developing some specific standards and often helps to fund related research projects.
The creation of a single market by 31 December 1992 could not have been achieved without a new regulatory technique that set down only the general essential requirements, reduced the control of public authorities prior to a product being placed on the market, and integrated quality assurance and other modern conformity assessment techniques. Moreover, the decision-making procedure needed to be adapted in order to facilitate the adoption of technical harmonisation directives by a qualified majority in the Council. A new regulatory technique and strategy was laid down by the Council Resolution of 1985 on the New Approach to technical harmonisation and standardisation, which established the following principles. • Legislative harmonisation is limited to essential requirements that products placed on the Community market must meet, if they are to benefit from free movement within the Community. • The technical specifications of products meeting the essential requirements set out in the directives are laid down in harmonised standards. • Application of harmonised or other standards remains voluntary, and the manufacturer may always apply other technical specifications to meet the requirements. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 21 of 209 ______
• Products manufactured in compliance with harmonised standards benefit from a presumption of conformity with the corresponding essential requirements.
2.3 Programming Mandate M/415
The European Commission has issued the programming mandate M/415 [RD01] addressed to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI to establish space industry standards. According with [RD01] statements the mandate purpose and scope are This mandate establishes a programme for space related standards to: • ensure an adequate safety level for space hardware and services, • foster European Union projects such as the Galileo satellite navigation system, the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) and projects in the satellite telecommunications field, • stimulate the emergence of European end-user terminals, • mitigate space related threats such as debris and • support the international competitiveness of the European space industry.
From [RD01] the targets of the activities are The European Space Programme should establish and implement a single set of European space standards for all future and existing space projects, including: • The Galileo satellite navigation system • The GMES programme and other satellite applications for the environment, safety & security • Satellite telecommunications • Soyuz launch systems at Kourou • The ‘value chain’ of commercial space systems • The International Space Station and other international co-operative programmes.
The European Space Programme takes account of international demands and obligations. It establishes a European position and participates in the development of standards that are required for issues for European policies and future European/global legislation: space debris, planetary protection, militarization of space, etc. The anticipated standards shall set criteria for performance, accuracy, interoperability and compatibility, safety, user-friendliness that are essential for modern space-based infrastructures. This mandate provides the necessary support from the European Commission and the Member States to European standards organisations and stakeholders to ensure the coordinated preparation of the necessary standards
From [RD01] the standardisation roadmap involves The standardisation programme as an element of the European Space programme shall be carried out in two steps: CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 22 of 209 ______
• First, a feasibility study which shall identify the state of play in space standardisation, priorities amongst the various elements and sectors, as well as the particular actors to be involved for each area of work; • Second, for every identified sector, identification of standardisation needs and preparation of a comprehensive standardisation programme in the form of sectorial dossiers.
From [RD01] the expected outputs are The Commission hereby requests CEN, CENELEC and ETSI in coordination to carry out the work described above CEN, CENELEC and ETSI shall provide, within 8 months of acceptance of the mandate, a feasibility study and a draft roadmap for the progress of the work. CEN, CENELEC and ETSI shall provide, within 15 months of acceptance of the mandate, the standardisation programme. While executing the mandate, CEN, CENELEC and ETSI shall take into account the work carried out by the European Co-operation for Space Standardisation and co-ordinate their activities in order to avoid any duplication. CEN, CENELEC and ETSI shall take scientific/technical knowledge of the European Space Agency and national space agencies into account.
2.4 Standardisation Programme Roadmap & Method Of Operation
As requested by the mandate, the standardisation programme will consist of two steps: • Feasibility study, • Identification of the needs. This document deals in particular with the GMES programme and other satellite applications for the environment, safety & security.
The Step 1 Feasibility study has to • Identify the state of play in space standardisation by • Making inventory of existing and planned European space systems • Making inventory of terrestrial systems with which these space systems need to operate • Identifying issues for inter-operability (based on above) • Making inventory of the state of play in standardisation • Identify priorities amongst these elements and sectors • Identify actors to be involved for each area The step is scheduled to close and produce a deliverable on 30-June-08.
The Step 2: Identification of needs has to • Identify standardisation needs • Prepare a dossier which CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 23 of 209 ______
• Tackles issues of design and manufacture of equipment, environmental aspects, services, quality, safety and interoperability • Establishes EU position on future international legislation • Proposes how to provide the necessary assistance to industry & relevant agencies (training, promotion…) • Supports innovation: involve scientific/technical knowledge The step is scheduled to close and produce a deliverable on Jan-09
2.5 Standardisation Bodies
2.5.1 European standards organisations.
2.5.1.1 CEN (European Committee for Standardisation)
CEN, the European Committee for Standardization [wr45], was founded in 1961 by the national standards bodies in the European Economic Community and EFTA countries. CEN deals with all sectors except the electro technology and telecommunication sectors. Now CEN is contributing to the objectives of the European Union and European Economic Area with voluntary technical standards which promote free trade, the safety of workers and consumers, interoperability of networks, environmental protection, exploitation of research and development programmes, and public procurement. CEN is a system of formal processes to produce standards. The responsibilities are shared principally between: • 30 National Members and the representative expertise they assemble from each country. These members vote for and implement European Standards (ENs); • 7 Associate Members and two Counsellors; • The CEN Management Centre, Brussels. CEN works closely with the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC), the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). It also has close liaisons with European trade and professional organizations. CEN produces a number of different standards publications.
All European Standards (EN) and drafts (prEN), as well as any other approved document (Technical Specifications (CEN TS), Technical Reports (CEN TR) and CEN Workshop Agreements (CWA), can be obtained from any of the National Members. But CEN itself does not sell these publications. CEN has published 12903 publications (end December 2007).
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 24 of 209 ______
2.5.1.2 Cenelec (European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation)
CENELEC, the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization [wr46], was created in 1973 as a result of the merger of two previous European organizations: CENELCOM and CENEL. Nowadays, CENELEC is a non-profit technical organization set up under Belgian law and composed of the National Electrotechnical Committees of 30 European countries. In addition, 8 National Committees from neighbouring countries are participating in CENELEC work with an Affiliate status. CENELEC members have been working together in the interests of European harmonization since the 1950s, creating both standards requested by the market and harmonized standards in support of European legislation and which have helped to shape the European Internal Market. CENELEC works with 15,000 technical experts from 30 European countries. Its work directly increases market potential, encourages technological development and guarantees the safety and health of consumers and workers. CENELEC’s mission is to prepare voluntary electrotechnical standards that help develop the Single European Market/European Economic Area for electrical and electronic goods and services removing barriers to trade, creating new markets and cutting compliance costs. A Resolution of 7th May 1985 of the European Council formally endorsed the principle of reference to European standards within the relevant European regulatory work (Directives), thereby paving the way to a New Approach in the philosophy of regulations and standards in Europe. In the light of this New Approach, CENELEC is developing and achieving a coherent set of voluntary electrotechnical standards as a basis for the creation of the Single European Market/European Economic Area without internal frontiers for goods and services. In addition to the traditional European standard deliverables, the dynamic Workshop (CWA: CENELEC Workshop Agreement) has been included in its portfolio, offering an open platform to foster the development of pre-standards for short lifetime products where time-to-market is critical.
2.5.1.3 ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute)
The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) [wr47] is an independent, non-for- profit, standardization organization of the telecommunications industry (equipment makers and network operators) in Europe, with worldwide projection. ETSI has been successful in standardizing the GSM cell phone system and the TETRA professional mobile radio system. Significant ETSI standardisation bodies include TISPAN (for fixed networks and Internet convergence). ETSI inspired the creation of, and is a partner in 3GPP. ETSI was created by CEPT in 1988 and is officially recognized by the European Commission and the EFTA secretariat. Based in Sophia Antipolis (France), ETSI is officially responsible for standardization of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) within Europe. These technologies include telecommunications, broadcasting and related areas such as intelligent transportation and medical electronics. ETSI has 696 members from 62 countries/provinces inside and outside Europe, including manufacturers, network operators, administrations, service providers, research bodies and users — in fact, all the key players in the ICT arena. ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) covers the telecommunications field and some aspects of broadcasting. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 25 of 209 ______
2.5.1.4 ECSS (European Cooperation for Space Standardisation)
The ECSS [WR15] was established in 1993 to develop a coherent, single set of standards for use in all design and development European space activities. The set-up was in a spirit of true cooperation between European space agencies and European Industry. Historically, the European space business had to support multiplicity of different standards and requirements from the various space Agencies in Europe. Although the Agencies’ requirements were essentially similar, the impact of the differences in standards was serious and led to higher costs, lower effectiveness and, moreover, a less competitive Industry. Input into the ECSS comes from European space Agencies and from Industry. Initially, the thrust was mainly on Management and Product Assurance standards, but later Engineering standards were considered. ECSS standards, once approved, are adopted as CEN (European Committee for Standardization, www.cenorm.be) and ISO standards.
2.5.1.5 European Space Agency
The European Space Agency (ESA) is a major contributor to the European Engineering Standardization effort. Approximately 20 man years of effort are spent annually to support the related activities. ESA staff participate at various levels in the ECSS and CCSDS organisations to help guide the Standardization efforts and develop standards in the various working groups put in place for this purpose. The development of standards is extended by a proactive approach to apply the developed standards in ESA projects and improve them. In ESA, the coordination of standardization falls upon the ESA Standardization Steering Board (ESSB), an inter-Directorate steering group mandated by the Director General (DG) to address the three branches of standards: Management, Product Assurance and Engineering. For space engineering, this Board is supported by the Engineering Standardization Board (ESB), responsible for the identification of the standardization needs of the ESA Projects and the coordination of the standards development. The ESB is also involved in generating feedback on the utilisation of standards by collating data, through experiences of its members, feedback from Projects through lessons learnt, from agencies and Industry. This ensures that standards are not only being fully and correctly utilised by projects but are also revised if needed. The ESB has 7 Sub-Boards, each one dealing with a specific aspect of space-engineering as follows: • Systems Engineering Standardization Board (SESB): covers standardization in the field of Systems Engineering applied to space. Standards development has been undertaken by both ECSS and the CCSDS. As an example, the System Engineering Process Standard, ECSS E- 10 Part 1, is considered to be the keystone standard for all space projects as it implements the system engineering principles into a space dedicated process and provides a process framework, modulated through all affected project phases. Several other ECSS standards covering inherent system engineering aspects and disciplines, like verification, data exchange, mechanical engineering, software, communications etc. refer to ECSS E-10 Part 1 as a process framework. D/OPS is involved in SESB work. • Electrical Engineering Standardization Board (EESB): covers standardization in the field of Electrical and Electronic Engineering applied to space. As an example, the Electrical and Electronic standard, ECSS E-20A, establishes the basic rules and general principles applicable to the electrical, electronic, electromagnetic, microwave and optical engineering processes. Currently, a standard on the Electromagnetic compatibility is being developed. Typically, D/OPS is not involved in EESB work. Mechanical Engineering Standardization Board (MESB): covers standardization in the field of Mechanical Engineering applied to space. As an example, the Structural standard, ECSS E-30 Part 2A, defines the requirements to be considered in all engineering aspects of structures: requirement definition and specification, design, development, verification, production, in-service and eventual disposal. Other topics CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 26 of 209 ______
covered are thermal control, Mechanisms, Environment Control and Life Support (ECLS), Propulsion, Pyrotechnics, Mechanical Parts and Materials. Typically, D/OPS is not involved in MESB work. • Board for Software Standardization and Control (BSSC): covers standardization in the field of Software Engineering applied to space. As an example, the Software standard, ECSS E-40, covers all aspects of space software engineering including requirements definition, design, production, verification and validation, transfer, operations and maintenance. D/OPS is involved in BSSC work. • Standards Approval Board for Telemetry and Data Handling (STAB): covers standardization in the field of the space-to-ground communication. Standards development has been undertaken by both ECSS and the CCSDS Space Telematics Domain. As examples, the CCSDS Packet Telemetry and Packet Telecommand standards have been and are being used systematically by several spacecraft. • The Radio Frequency and Modulation standard, ECSS E-50-05, defines the radio communication techniques used for the transfer on information between spacecraft and Earth stations in both directions while the Ranging standard, ECSS E-50-02, covers the tracking systems used for orbit determination. The Proximity-1 Space Link Protocols suite, CCSDS 211.x, allows the communication between the Earth and a lander on a planet via a spacecraft orbiting around that planet. D/OPS is involved in STAB work. • Control Engineering Standardization Board (CESB): covers the engineering guidelines for the control of space systems and ground control systems (if control loops are closed via the ground). Currently, the main fields of standardization are on control performance and star sensors. D/OPS is involved in CESB work. • Ground Systems & Operations Standardization Board (GOSB): covers standardization in the field of ground facilities for mission operations (ground stations, mission control centres, ground interconnection infrastructures) and ground support equipment for spacecraft assembly integration and testing. Standards development in this branch has been undertaken by both ECSS and CCSDS. As an example, the Telemetry & Telecommand Packet Utilization Standard, ECSS-E-70-41, addresses the utilization of telecommand packets and telemetry source packets for the purposes of remote monitoring and control of subsystems and payloads. The Space Link Extension suite, CCSDS 911 and 912, provides a standard protocol between ground station and mission control centre. D/OPS is involved in GOSB work. These Sub-Boards are supported by ESA technical experts in the relevant fields and by Project representatives, who ensure that space standards developments are technically sound and meet the needs of ESA Space Projects. Experts on these Sub-Boards, mainly from the ESA technical Directorates, also support Projects and Industry on meeting the Project requirements through tailoring of standards. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 27 of 209 ______
Figure 1 Organisation of Engineering Standardization in ESA
2.5.2 International Standards Organisations
2.5.2.1 ISO
ISO (International Organization for Standardization) [WR18] is the world's largest developer and publisher of International Standards. ISO is a network of the national standards institutes of 157 countries, one member per country, with a Central Secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland, that coordinates the system. ISO is a non-governmental organization that forms a bridge between the public and private sectors. On the one hand, many of its member institutes are part of the governmental structure of their countries, or are mandated by their government. On the other hand, other members have their roots uniquely in the private sector, having been set up by national partnerships of industry associations. Therefore, ISO enables a consensus to be reached on solutions that meet both the requirements of business and the broader needs of society. ISO has more than 16500 International Standards and other types of normative documents in its current portfolio. ISO's work programme ranges from standards for traditional activities, such as agriculture and construction, through mechanical engineering, manufacturing and distribution, to CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 28 of 209 ______
transport, medical devices, information and communication technologies, and to standards for good management practice and for services.
2.5.2.2 NATO-STANAG
The North Atlantic Threaty Organisation (NATO) [WR29] is an alliance of 26 countries from North America and Europe committed to fulfilling the goals of the North Atlantic Threaty signed on 4 April 1949. In accordance with the threaty, the fundamental role of the NATO is to safeguard the freedom and security of its member countries by political and military means. NATO safeguards the Allies’ common values of democracy, individual liberty, the rule of law and the peaceful resolution of disputes, and promotes these values throughout the Euro-Atlantic area. Standardisation is one of the NATO key activities. At the birth of the NATO Alliance, the early contacts between members quickly revealed the cultural differences between the defence organisations involved. The then members agreed on the priority need for common logistics tools and a common language, as this was considered essential to allow interoperability of member forces The tool used by NATO to steer member countries’ efforts was the Standardisation Agreement (STANAG). An agreed STANAG is the final result of contributions from all members. A STANAG defines a common solution to a shared problem or need. This approach ensures that there is no duplication of efforts and results in economies of scale and improved joint effectiveness. Compliance with STANAGs is the venue for interoperability in procedures and material for the member nations of the NATO Alliance.
2.5.2.3 ANSI
The American National Standards Institute or ANSI is a private non-profit organization that oversees the development of voluntary consensus standards for products, services, processes, systems, and personnel in the United States. The organization also coordinates U.S. standards with international standards so that American products can be used worldwide. For example, standards make sure that people who own cameras can find the film they need for them anywhere around the globe.
ANSI accredits standards that are developed by representatives of standards developing organizations, government agencies, consumer groups, companies, and others. These standards ensure that the characteristics and performance of products are consistent, that people use the same definitions and terms, and that products are tested the same way. ANSI also accredits organizations that carry out product or personnel certification in accordance with requirements defined in international standards.
2.5.2.4 United States Defense Standards
A United States Defense Standard, often called a military standard, "MIL-STD", or "MIL-SPEC", is used to help achieve standardization objectives by the U.S. Department of Defense. Standardization is beneficial in achieving interoperability, ensuring products meet certain requirements, commonality, reliability, total cost of ownership, compatibility with logistics systems, and similar defense-related objectives. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 29 of 209 ______
Defense Standards are also used by other non-Defense government organizations, technical organizations, and industry.
2.5.2.5 ITU-T
The ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) coordinates standards for telecommunications on behalf of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and is based in Geneva, Switzerland. The standardization work of ITU dates back to 1865, with the birth of the International Telegraph Union. It became a United Nations specialized agency in 1947, and the International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee (CCITT), (from the French name "Comité Consultatif International Téléphonique et Télégraphique") was created in 1956. It was renamed ITU-T in 1993. ITU has been an intergovernmental public-private partnership organization since its inception and now has a membership of 191 countries (Member States) and over 700 public and private sector companies as well as international and regional telecommunication entities, known as Sector Members and Associates, which undertake most of the work of the Sector.
2.5.3 Other International Associations and Forums
2.5.3.1 OGC
The Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc (OGC) [WR19] is an international industry consortium of 350 companies, government agencies and universities participating in a consensus process to develop publicly available interface specifications. OpenGIS® is a Registered Trademark of the Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc (OGC) and is the brand name associated with the Specifications and documents produced by the Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc (OGC). OpenGIS specifications are developed in a unique consensus process supported by OGC industry, government and academic members to enable geoprocessing technologies to interoperate, or "plug and play". The OpenGIS® trademark may be associated with products that implement or comply to OGC specifications. OpenGIS® Specifications support interoperable solutions that "geo-enable" the Web, wireless and location-based services, and mainstream IT. The specifications empower technology developers to make complex spatial information and services accessible and useful with all kinds of applications. OGC aims to serve as a global forum for the collaboration of developers and users of spatial data products and services, and to advance the development of international standards for geospatial interoperability. The OGC Strategic Goals are: • Provide free and openly available standards to the market, tangible value to Members, and measurable benefits to users. • Lead worldwide in the creation and establishment of standards that allow geospatial content and services to be seamlessly integrated into business and civic processes, the spatial web and enterprise computing. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 30 of 209 ______
• Facilitate the adoption of open, spatially enabled reference architectures in enterprise environments worldwide. • Advance standards in support of the formation of new and innovative markets and applications for geospatial technologies. • Accelerate market assimilation of interoperability research through collaborative consortium processes. The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) has been the most active geospatial standardization body in recent years. In 1995, OGC established a Class A Liaison with ISO/TC211 and in 1999 the two organizations signed an agreement that allows both organizations to take full advantage of the contributions of the other. In the following years, a number of OGC standards were endorsed by ISO/TC211, and became a part of the “nineteen-hundred” (191** - “Geographic information”) series of standards.
2.5.3.2 W3C
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) [WR21] is an international consortium where Member organizations, a full-time staff, and the public work together to develop Web standards. W3C's mission is to lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing protocols and guidelines that ensure long-term growth for the Web. W3C primarily pursues its mission through the creation of Web standards and guidelines. Since 1994, W3C has published more than 110 such standards, called W3C Recommendations. W3C also engages in education and outreach, develops software, and serves as an open forum for discussion about the Web. In order for the Web to reach its full potential, the most fundamental Web technologies must be compatible with one another and allow any hardware and software used to access the Web to work together. W3C refers to this goal as “Web interoperability.” By publishing open (non-proprietary) standards for Web languages and protocols, W3C seeks to avoid market fragmentation and thus Web fragmentation. Organizations located all over the world and involved in many different fields join W3C to participate in a vendor-neutral forum for the creation of Web standards. W3C Members and a dedicated full-time staff of technical experts have earned W3C international recognition for its contributions to the Web. W3C Members (sample testimonials), staff, and Invited Experts work together to design technologies to ensure that the Web will continue to thrive in the future, accommodating the growing diversity of people, hardware, and software. W3C's global initiatives also include nurturing liaisons with national, regional and international organizations around the globe. These contacts help W3C maintain a culture of global participation in the development of the World Wide Web. W3C coordinates particularly closely with other organizations that are developing standards for the Web or Internet in order to enable clear progress.
2.5.3.3 OASIS
OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards) [WR24] is a not-for- profit consortium that drives the development, convergence and adoption of open standards for the global information society. The consortium produces more Web services standards than any other organization along with standards for security, e-business, and Standardisation efforts in the public sector and for application-specific markets. Founded in 1993, OASIS has more than 5,000 participants representing over 600 organizations and individual members in 100 countries. OASIS is distinguished by its transparent governance and operating procedures. Members themselves set the OASIS technical agenda, using a lightweight process expressly designed to CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 31 of 209 ______
promote industry consensus and unite disparate efforts. Completed work is ratified by open ballot. Governance is accountable and unrestricted. Officers of both the OASIS Board of Directors and Technical Advisory Board are chosen by democratic election to serve two-year terms. Consortium leadership is based on individual merit and is not tied to financial contribution, corporate standing, or special appointment. The Consortium hosts two of the most widely respected information portals on XML and Web services standards, Cover Pages and XML.org. OASIS Member Sections include CGM Open, IDtrust, LegalXML, and Open CSA. OASIS was founded in 1993 under the name SGML Open as a consortium of vendors and users devoted to developing guidelines for interoperability among products that support the Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML). OASIS changed its name in 1998 to reflect an expanded scope of technical work, including the Extensible Markup Language (XML) and other related standards. The mission of OASIS is “To drive the development, convergence and adoption of open standards for the global information society“. The corresponding tag line is “Advancing open standards for the information society". This mission shapes the policies, processes and programs that directly affect OASIS members, and also affects how OASIS works with non-member constituents. Non-members include organizations or individuals that comment on proposed or existing standards, and that implement or recommend their use. Four strategic goals guide OASIS in achieving its mission: 1. Continually strive to provide the most effective, efficient, open and transparent environment for the development, coordination, and maintenance of high quality standards. 2. Broaden international representation and diversity of the OASIS membership to ensure that all those affected by standards have a voice in the collaborative process. 3. Support all stages of the standards lifecycle, including requirements definition, specification development, best practices advocacy, and adoption services. 4. Cultivate productive relationships with policy setters, analysts, and decision makers affected or potentially affected by OASIS work, in order to (a) remain receptive to external input, (b) evangelize the accomplishments of our members, (c) advocate the values of the open standards process, and (d) ensure our work remains relevant within the broadest possible context. The mission and strategic goals of OASIS will be driven through the following strategic actions: 1. Review and improve alignment of the organizational structure and tools provided to OASIS members with mission and strategic goals.(Relates to goal #1) 2. Increase membership outreach and support in under-represented areas. (Relates to goal #2) 3. Expand support for the standards lifecycle to include requirements and adoption activities. (Relates to goal #3) 4. Educate the community (press, members, non-members) on the advantages of the OASIS process, the status of OASIS activities and the benefits of approved OASIS standards. (Relates to goal #4)
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 32 of 209 ______
2.5.3.4 OMG
The Object Management Group (OMG) [WR20] is an international, open membership, not-for-profit computer industry consortium. Any organization may join OMG and participate in the standards-setting process. The one- organization-one-vote policy ensures that every organization, large and small, has an effective voice in the process. The membership includes hundreds of organizations, with half being software end- users in over two dozen vertical markets, and the other half representing virtually every large organization in the computer industry and many smaller ones. Most of the organizations that shape enterprise and Internet computing today are represented on the OMG Board of Directors. OMG Task Forces develop enterprise integration standards for a wide range of technologies, including: Real-time, Embedded and Specialized Systems, Analysis & Design, Architecture-Driven Modernization and Middleware and an even wider range of industries, including: Business Modeling and Integration, C4I, Finance, Government, Healthcare, Legal Compliance, Life Sciences Research, Manufacturing Technology, Robotics, Software-Based Communications and Space. OMG’s modeling standards, including the Unified Modeling Language™ (UML®) and Model Driven Architecture® (MDA®), enable powerful visual design, execution and maintenance of software and other processes, including IT Systems Modeling and Business Process Management. OMG’s middleware standards and profiles are based on the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA®) and support a wide variety of industries. The requirements document that initiates each OMG standard-setting activity (the Request for Proposal) and other key documents are available for viewing by anyone, member or not. Email discussion, meeting attendance, and voting are restricted to members; though prospective members are invited to attend a meeting or two as a guest observer. Dozens of standards organizations and other consortia maintain liaison relationships with OMG. OMG is an ISO PAS submitter, able to submit our specifications directly into ISO’s fast-track adoption process. OMG’s UML, MOF™ and Interface Definition Language (IDL™) standards are already ISO standards and ITU-T recommendation.
2.5.3.4.1 OMG Space Domain Task Force
The OMG Space Domain Task Force includes Space professionals committed to greater interoperability, reduction in costs, schedule, and risk for space applications through increased space Standardisation.
The Space Task Force’s goals include: • Clarify space, satellite and ground system requirements • Provide a transparent space standards development environment open to participation by all. • Encourage the development and use of CORBA based space, satellite and ground system domain software components, thereby growing the object technology market. • Encourage the use of UML to describe the architectures of their distributed systems in a standard way. • Encourage continued space industry member participation leverage existing OMG specifications.
To satisfy these goals the Space Task Force will : CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 33 of 209 ______
• Use the Object Management Group (OMG) technology adoption process to standardize interfaces for software components, services and frameworks in space applications. • Create a Space Architecture and Roadmap for the Space Industry world-wide. • Leverage existing OMG specifications. • Involve all interested members of the OMG in the OMG Space Domain Task Force. • Issue RFIs, RFPs and RFCs for CORBA-based technology relevant to space. • Identify relevant standards, architectures, research and technologies in space applications. • Assist and advise the Liaison Sub-Committee regarding its relationship with related Standards Organizations and Consortia. • Participate and present in other space industry consortium to encourage further OMG participation.
The task force Work in Progress includes: • T & C Data Spec XML Telemetric and Command Exchange (XTCE) • Spacecraft Operations Language Metamodel • Ground Equipment Monitoring Service (GEMS) • Reference Architecture
2.5.3.5 CCSDS
The Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) [WR25] was formed in 1982 by the major space agencies of the world to provide a forum for discussion of common problems in the development and operation of space data systems. It is currently composed of ten member agencies, twenty-two observer agencies, and over 100 industrial associates. Since its establishment, it has been actively developing Recommendations for data- and information- systems standards to a) reduce the cost to the various agencies of performing common data functions by eliminating unjustified project-unique design and development, and b) promote interoperability and cross support among cooperating space agencies to reduce operations costs by sharing facilities. The major space agencies of the world recognize that there are benefits in using standard techniques for handling space data and that, by cooperatively developing these techniques, future data system interoperability will be enhanced. In order to assure that work towards standardization of space- related information technologies provides the maximum benefit for the interested agencies, both individually and collectively, an international Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) is established as a forum for international cooperation in the development of data handling techniques supporting space research, including space science and applications. The purposes of the CCSDS are as follows: • to provide a forum whereby interested agencies may exchange technical information relative to the development or application of standards for space-related information technologies; • to identify those common elements of space data systems which, if implemented in a standardized way, will result in significant enhancements in the operation of future cooperative space missions, or in the sharing of mission products; CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 34 of 209 ______
• to develop through consensus appropriate Recommendations that will guide the development of agency infrastructure so that interoperability is maximized; • to facilitate and promote the use of software and hardware developed under the CCSDS program by all participating agencies; • to promote the application of the Recommendations within the space mission community; and • to maintain cognizance of other international standardization activities that may have direct impact on the design or operation of space mission data systems. The CCSDS develops recommendations, called Blue Books, for standards in order to: • Reduce the cost of performing space missions • Enable cross support for space missions • Improve understanding of space related data • Preserve archived space related data
2.5.3.6 CEOS
The Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) [WR26] is an international coordinating mechanism charged with coordinating international civil spaceborne missions designed to observe and study planet Earth. Comprising 26 Members (most of which are space agencies) and 20 Associates (associated national and international organizations), CEOS is recognized as the major international forum for the coordination of Earth observation satellite programs and for interaction of these programs with users of satellite data worldwide. CEOS was created in 1984 in response to a recommendation from the Economic Summit of Industrialized Nations Working Group on Growth, Technology, and Employment’s Panel of Experts on Satellite Remote Sensing. This group recognized the multidisciplinary nature of satellite Earth observation and the value of coordination across all proposed missions. Convened under the original name of International Earth Observations Satellite Committee (IEOSC), the organization combined the previously existing groups for Coordination on Ocean Remote-Sensing Satellites (CORSS) and Coordination on Land Observing Satellites (CLOS) and established a broad framework for coordinating all spaceborne Earth observation missions. Individual participating agencies make their best efforts to implement CEOS recommendations. The main goal of CEOS is to ensure that critical scientific questions relating to Earth observation and global change are covered and that satellite missions do not unnecessarily overlap each other. The three primary objectives of CEOS are as follows: • to optimize benefits of spaceborne Earth observations through cooperation of its participants in mission planning and in development of compatible data products, formats, services, applications, and policies; • to serve as a focal point for international coordination of space-related Earth observation activities; and • to exchange policy and technical information to encourage complementarity and compatibility of observation and data exchange systems. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 35 of 209 ______
2.5.3.7 DGIWG
Digital Geospatial Information Working Group (DGIWG) [WR27] is the multi-national body responsible for geospatial standardisation for the defence organizations of member nations. DGIWG has been established under a memorandum of understanding between member nations, and addresses the requirements for these nations to have access to compatible geospatial information for joint operations. It supports the requirements of NATO and the other alliances that its member nations participate in, including UN sanctioned peace keeping. The requirements have been identified to address a specific set of operational scenarios. The DGIWG geospatial standards are built upon the generic and abstract standards for geographic information defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO TC/211). DGIWG makes use of the service specifications endorsed by the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC). DGIWG defines information components for use in the development of product specifications and application schemas for military geospatial data. DGIWG also establishes service specifications, encoding formats and testing methodologies to meet military geospatial intelligence requirements. DGIWG also maintains an extensive Knowledge Base of documents related to geospatial standardization, and historical documents such as previous versions of the DGIWG DIGEST exchange standard.
2.5.3.8 IEEE
The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.) is the world's leading professional association for the advancement of technology. IEEE is a non-profit organization, The IEEE name was originally an acronym for the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Today, the organization's scope of interest has expanded into so many related fields, that it is simply referred to by the letters I-E-E-E. Through its global membership, IEEE is a leading authority on areas ranging from aerospace systems, computers and telecommunications to biomedical engineering, electric power and consumer electronics among others. IEEE's core purpose is to foster technological innovation and excellence for the benefit of humanity. IEEE will be essential to the global technical community and to technical professionals everywhere, and be universally recognized for the contributions of technology and of technical professionals in improving global conditions. Members rely on IEEE as a source of technical and professional information, resources and services. To foster an interest in the engineering profession, IEEE also serves student members in colleges and universities around the world. Other important constituencies include prospective members and organizations that purchase IEEE products and participate in conferences or other IEEE programs.
2.5.3.9 SISO
The Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO) [wr38] is an international organization dedicated to the promotion of modeling and simulation interoperability and reuse for the benefit of a broad range of M&S communities. SISO's Conference Committee organizes Simulation Interoperability Workshops (SIWs) in the US and Europe. SISO's Standards Activity Committee develops and supports simulation interoperability standards, both independently and in conjunction CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 36 of 209 ______
with other organizations. SISO is recognized as a Standards Development Organization (SDO) by NATO and as a Standards Sponsor by IEEE. In addition, SISO is a Category C Liaison Organization with ISO/IEC (JTC 1) for the development of standards for the representation and interchange of data regarding Synthetic Environment Data Representation and Interchange Specification (SEDRIS).
2.5.3.10 IETF
The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) [wr39] develops and promotes Internet standards, cooperating closely with the W3C and ISO/IEC standard bodies and dealing in particular with standards of the TCP/IP and Internet protocol suite. It is an open standards organization, with no formal membership or membership requirements. All participants and leaders are volunteers, though their work is usually funded by their employers or sponsors. It is organized into a large number of working groups and informal discussion groups (BoF)s, each dealing with a specific topic. Each group is intended to complete work on that topic and then shut down. Each working group has an appointed chair (or sometimes several co-chairs), along with a charter that describes its focus, and what and when it is expected to produce. The working groups are organized into areas by subject matter. Current areas include: Applications, General, Internet, Operations and Management, Real-time Applications and Infrastructure, Routing, Security, and Transport. Each area is overseen by an area director (AD), with most areas having two co-ADs. The ADs are responsible for appointing working group chairs. The area directors, together with the IETF Chair, form the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), which is responsible for the overall operation of the IETF.
2.5.3.11 WS-I
The Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I) [wr40] is an industry consortium chartered to promote interoperability amongst the stack of web services specifications. It is governed by a Board of Directors consisting of the founding members (IBM, Microsoft, BEA Systems, SAP, Oracle, Fujitsu, Hewlett-Packard, and Intel) and two elected members (currently, Sun Microsystems and webMethods). The organization's deliverables include profiles, sample applications that demonstrate the profiles' use, and test tools to help determine profile conformance. The WS-I issued a test tool suite in 2004. Two tools are included: • A monitor designed to intercept live SOAP messages and the associated HTTP headers during a test session. This functionality is ensured through the use of the man in the middle principle. • An analyzer designed to analyze profile conformance of a Web Service artifacts. The profile is chosen with a Test Assertion Document (*.TAD) file. The different artifacts are : o The Web Service description file, actually a WSDL file o The Web Service discovery artifact, actually an UDDI entry o The messages and associated envelopes exchanged during a test session and captured with the test tools These test tools are not designed to be used as a full certification tool. They can only be used as indicator of profile compliance. The WS-I is not a certifying authority thus every vendor can claim to be compliant to a profile. However the use of the test tool is required before a company can claim a product to be compliant. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 37 of 209 ______
2.5.3.12 WMO
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) [wr36] is a specialized agency of the United Nations. It is the UN system's authoritative voice on the state and behaviour of the Earth's atmosphere, its interaction with the oceans, the climate it produces and the resulting distribution of water resources. WMO has a membership of 188 Member States and Territories(since 24 January 2007). It originated from the International Meteorological Organization (IMO), which was founded in 1873. Established in 1950, WMO became the specialized agency of the United Nations in 1951 for meteorology (weather and climate), operational hydrology and related geophysical sciences. As weather, climate and the water cycle know no national boundaries, international cooperation at a global scale is essential for the development of meteorology and operational hydrology as well as to reap the benefits from their application. WMO provides the framework for such international cooperation. Since its establishment, WMO has played a unique and powerful role in contributing to the safety and welfare of humanity. Under WMO leadership and within the framework of WMO programmes, National Meteorological and Hydrological Services contribute substantially to the protection of life and property against natural disasters, to safeguarding the environment and to enhancing the economic and social well-being of all sectors of society in areas such as food security, water resources and transport. WMO promotes cooperation in the establishment of networks for making meteorological, climatological, hydrological and geophysical observations, as well as the exchange, processing and standardization of related data, and assists technology transfer, training and research. It also fosters collaboration between the National Meteorological and Hydrological Services of its Members and furthers the application of meteorology to public weather services, agriculture, aviation, shipping, the environment, water issues and the mitigation of the impacts of natural disasters. WMO facilitates the free and unrestricted exchange of data and information, products and services in real- or near-real time on matters relating to safety and security of society, economic welfare and the protection of the environment. It contributes to policy formulation in these areas at national and international levels. In the specific case of weather-, climate and water-related hazards, which account for nearly 90% of all natural disasters, WMO's programmes provide vital information for the advance warnings that save lives and reduce damage to property and the environment. WMO also contributes to reducing the impacts of human-induced disasters, such as those associated with chemical and nuclear accidents, forest fire and volcanic ash. Studies have shown that, apart from the incalculable benefit to human well-being, every dollar invested in meteorological and hydrological services produces an economic return many times greater, often ten times or more. WMO plays a leading role in international efforts to monitor and protect the environment through its Programmes. In collaboration with other UN agencies and the National Meteorological and Hydrological Services, WMO supports the implementation of a number of environmental conventions and is instrumental in providing advice and assessments to governments on related matters. These activities contribute towards ensuring the sustainable development and well-being of nations.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 38 of 209 ______
3 EXISTING AND PLANNED EUROPEAN EO SYSTEMS
3.1 Overview
The following paragraphs contain an outline of the main missions/satellites/space systems running or to be run in the next years within the European context. The Ground Segment Coordination Body website [WR01] and specific mission websites are additional references.
3.2 Main European Earth Observation Missions
3.2.1 GMES Sentinels (ESA)
The ESA Sentinels, composed of five satellites, constitute the first series of operational satellites responding to the EO needs of the GMES programme, a joint initiative of the European Commission and ESA. Sentinel mission requirements focus on the continuity of existing services exploiting EO data and satisfying user requirements derived from GMES applications. • Sentinel-1 will ensure the continuity of C-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data with ESA’s ERS and Envisat satellites. • Sentinel-2 and 3 satellites will support land and ocean monitoring. • Sentinel-4 and 5 will be dedicated to meteorology and climatology through atmospheric chemistry. Two spacecraft in orbit are needed to meet the coverage and observation frequency requirements for the Sentinel-1, -2 and -3 missions. However, an incremental deployment of capabilities is assumed. The Segment 1 of the ESA GSC Programme, as approved by the ESA Member States participating in the programme includes the development, launch and in-orbit verification of the first satellite only, of a series for each of the Sentinel-1, -2 and -3 missions. Drawing on the preliminary work of the definition studies (Phases-A/B1), the key aspects of the individual Sentinel missions are described below.
3.2.1.1 Sentinel-1
Sentinel-1 is an imaging radar mission in C-band (5405 MHz) for marine and land monitoring, aimed at ensuring continuity of data provision from ERS and ENVISAT missions, and fulfilling the data requirements for the GMES services. To provide guaranteed weather independent day-and-night revisit time of 6-days globally and 2 days over Europe and Canada the Sentinel-1 mission is based on the simultaneous operation of a pair of identical “3 axis stabilised” satellites phased by 180 deg. in a common orbital plane, with a frozen CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 39 of 209 ______
Sun-synchronous orbit of 693 km mean spherical altitude, a mean local solar time at ascending node of 18:00 hours, and 14+7/12 revolutions per day. The operational scenario foresees the development of two spacecrafts in order to reach full operational capabilities (including the necessary coverage and redundancy). Further spacecraft procurement will be required to cover the target operational service period, currently estimated at 15 years. The mission is tailored to 95% monthly averaged product availability (excluding mission loss). The Sentinel-1 payload consists of a Synthetic Aperture Radar operating in the C-band with a centre frequency of 5405 MHz. It offers four nominal operational modes designed for inter-operability with other systems for full compliance with user requirements. With its greatly improved revisit, coverage and timeliness performance (compared to other existing or planned SAR missions) Sentinel-1 is designed for the provision of guaranteed data services. A single main operational mode, the Interferometric Wide Swath Mode (IW) is designed to satisfy most currently known service requirements thus avoiding conflicts and preserving revisit performance. This provides robustness and reliability of service while simplifying mission planning and facilitating building up a consistent long-term data archive. The routine operations would normally not be interrupted but the system is designed to respond to emergency requests to support disaster management in crisis situations. Data delivery to the end user will be within 1 hour from ground station reception. The spacecraft is designed to meet a 7 years lifetime in orbit, including 3 months commissioning phase, with EOL reliability of 0.75. Consumables such as fuel and battery cells are sized for 12 years. The launch of the first Satellite is planned for 2011. Access to the satellites is protected by telecommand authentication. Advanced Failure Detection Isolation and Recovery Strategies will be used.
Figure 2 GMES Sentinel 1 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 40 of 209 ______
3.2.1.2 Sentinel-2
Sentinel-2 will provide improved continuity for the Spot multispectral optical data, carrying a push- broom imager operating in the visible/near-IR and shortwave IR in a Sun-synchronous orbit at about 800 km altitude. The first launch is planned for 2011. The Sentinel-2 mission is based on the simultaneous operation of two identical satellites phased by 180 deg. in a common orbital plane in a frozen sun-synchronous orbit. The operational scenario foresees the development of two spacecrafts in order to reach full operational capabilities (including the necessary coverage and redundancy). Further spacecraft procurement will be required to cover the target operational service period, currently estimated at 15 years. The mission is tailored to 95% monthly averaged product availability (excluding mission loss). The Sentinel-2 multispectral instrument is based on the push-broom concept and provides a spatial resolution in the 10 m (VNIR channels) to 20 m (SWIR channels) range, with an instantaneous swath width of 285 km. The Level 1b product is available within 3 hours (near-real time products) to 24 hours (not time-critical products) after sensing. The geometric revisit time is equal to 5 days over the complete globe (with a two Satellite constellation), and the geometric coverage time is better than 3 days over Northern Europe. An extended mode using satellite pointing allows access to any part of the globe in less than 2 days (with a two Satellite constellation). The geo-location of pixels is better than 20 m 3sigma for Level 1b products with the utilisation of an accurate DEM. The baseline data acquisition scenario is based on the permanent utilisation of 2 to 4 ground stations (e.g. Kiruna plus Svalbard to cover the blind orbits, complemented by Mas Palomas and Prince Albert), with a data downlink bit rate of 465 Mbps during overpass, and an internal mass memory of 2 Terabits. A Real Time transmission capability allowing direct data downlink is also available. The downlink sub-system is a candidate for commonalization with other Sentinels. An optical DRS terminal is being considered. Sentinel-2 will provide a large quantity of data, approximately 6 Terabits of data per day for each satellite. A significant proportion of these data (between 50% and 80% depending on the area and on the season) are however expected to be cloud-covered, so that an efficient cloud screening is required before disseminating data from the PDGS to the service segment. The satellite is designed to be largely autonomous and simple to operate: continuous imaging mode over land, with a period of 2 weeks without reprogramming need under nominal operations, and acquisition of housekeeping and science data telemetry over each ground station pass. Similarly to Sentinel-1, and -3 access to the satellite is protected by telecommand authentication. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 41 of 209 ______
Figure 3 GMES Sentinel 2
3.2.1.3 Sentinel-3
Sentinel-3, with a first launch in 2012, will monitor oceans and land/ atmosphere at a global scale. The Sentinel-3 mission is based on a medium-size 3-axis stabilised satellite flying in a sun- synchronous frozen orbit at 799.8 km altitude, corresponding to 14 + 7/27 orbital periods per day. The orbit repeat period is therefore 27 days, as required for sea surface topography sampling. However, the altitude is close to that of a 4 days short-repeat orbit such that, considering the wide swath of the optical instruments, the optical observations can achieve the desired rapid global coverage. The local time at descending node (LTDN) will be 10:00 to 10:30, which is the best compromise between the constraints of the ocean and land colour observations and those of continuity for the sea surface temperature observations. In trade offs between instrument complexity and development risk, considering the robustness required for an operational system, and considering the recommendations of the Marine Core Service Implementation Group, it has been determined that the Sentinel-3 mission is fulfilled by a constellation of two satellites. The operational scenario foresees the development of two spacecrafts in order to reach full operational capabilities (including the necessary coverage and redundancy). Further spacecraft procurement will be required to cover the target operational service period, currently estimated at 20 years. The mission is tailored to 95% monthly averaged product availability (excluding mission loss). The Sentinel-3 payload consists of an optical payload and a microwave payload. The Sentinel-3 optical payload comprises the Ocean and Land Colour Instrument (OLCI), a pushbroom-type imaging spectrometer with strong heritage from MERIS, the Sea and Land Surface Temperature Instrument (SLST), a dual-conical scanning imager operating in the Visible and Infrared down to Termal InfraRed, with strong heritage from AATSR. The Sentinel-3 microwave payload includes CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 42 of 209 ______
the radar altimeter, derived from the SIRAL instrument on Cryosat-2; the microwave water vapour radiometer derived from the similar instrument on ENVISAT, with several technological updates and features; the precise orbit determination package including • a dual-frequency GNSS (GPS and Galileo) receiver; • a laser ranging retro-reflector, for calibration and back-up; • a Doris receiver The mission requirements do not put very demanding requirements on the platform performance. The payload mass is <600 kg and its power consumption is <400W. The required pointing performance and data storage and downlink needs are all within the capabilities of PRIMA or similar platforms with ample margins. The satellite is designed for cost-effective operations, maximising autonomy in both space segment and ground segment. Mission planning allows for continuous imaging, inclusive mode transitions and data-dumps, over sea, coastal zones and land for periods of at least 2 weeks without re- programming. The transition between the different payload modes over sea, coastal zones and land is autonomous, based on on-board precise position information acquired from GNSS and on pre-defined maps of land and coastal zones. The system allows also for direct downlink to selected local users. Access to the satellite is protected by telecommand authentication. The autonomous on-board Failure Detection Isolation and Recovery (FDIR) strategies minimize the probability to enter Safe Mode. The present concept is compatible with the NRT delivery within 3 hours from sensing of all Level 2 products. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 43 of 209 ______
Figure 4 GMES Sentinel 3
3.2.1.4 Sentinel 4 & 5
The GMES Space Component shall also address the monitoring of the atmospheric composition, which includes three major areas: • ozone and UV radiation, • air quality, • climate forcing. These are addressed at three levels: • monitoring of international treaties and protocols, • services, • scientific understanding. Sentinel 4 and 5 are dedicated to atmosphere composition monitoring. Considering the timescale of the GMES Atmosphere Service and the need to cater for preparatory activities, the ESA study on “Operational Atmospheric Chemistry Monitoring Mission” (“CAPACITY”) has been used to gather all the various inputs, including those of the GMES Service Element project PROMOTE, of the EC funded projects GMES GATO, GEMS and others, as well as inputs for the CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 44 of 209 ______
IGOS IGACO report. The study generated comprehensive operational requirements (by environmental theme, by user group, and by observational system, i.e. ground and airborne vs. spaceborne) and assessed the contributions of existing missions to the fulfilment of these requirements. Finally, it identified potential observation techniques for GMES missions. The corresponding mission requirements have been gathered in the GMES Sentinel 4/5 MRD issued in April 2007. The Sentinel 4/5 MRD identifies two main requirements of high priority and achievable with proven remote sensing techniques: • High temporal and spatial resolution monitoring of tropospheric composition down to the Planetary Boundary Layer (PBL) for air quality applications; • High spatial resolution and high precision monitoring of tropospheric climate forcing gases and aerosols with sensitivity to PBL concentrations for climate protocol monitoring. A range of combined temporal sampling and geographical coverage requirements is also identified and the implementation priorities, within the GMES framework and subject to further system analyses, are defined as follows: Use a LEO satellite with UV vis, SWIR and thermal IR spectrometers to serve air quality and climate protocol monitoring. This satellite, contributing to all temporal sampling/geographical coverage requirement scenarios, will provide enhanced continuity to OMI and SCIAMACHY. To extend this mission to obtain regularly a revisit time ≤ 1 – 4 hours as required for air quality applications. This extension could consist of other LEO satellites in constellation or of a GEO satellite carrying instrumentation with similar observation performance. These implementation priorities basically support the two GMES atmospheric composition monitoring missions identified at the start of the GSC Programme, namely the element in geostationary Earth orbit (GEO), Sentinel 4, and the element in low Earth orbit (LEO), Sentinel 5. Sentinel 4 is motivated by the frequent revisit objective, i.e. to observe rapid changes in atmospheric composition. There is no experience of atmospheric composition monitoring from GEO, but there is considerable experience from LEO with similar instrumentation. The baseline is to implement Sentinel 4 as payload on MTG missions Sentinel 5 is the component in LEO, exploiting the advantages of such orbits, namely global coverage, better spatial resolution and stronger signal to noise ration. The experience with GOME, GOME 2, AIRS, IASI, OMI, SCIAMACHY, MIPAS, GOMOS, ODIN, MOPPIT and other sensors provide a very solid scientific and technical basis on which to build for Sentinel 5. The baseline is to implement Sentinel 5 as payload on post EPS missions. Phase 0 industrial and scientific activities are now running, to be completed in 2008, and following the confirmation of the optimum concept, will be followed by Phase A studies as part of Segment 1 of the GSC Programme. Recommendations from the GMES Atmosphere Service Implementation Group will be the basis for the definition of the necessary missions.
3.2.2 Meteorological Missions (EUMETSAT)
3.2.2.1 Meteosat First Generation
The first generation of Meteosat geostationary satellites has provided images of the full Earth disc and data for weather forecasts in a continuous and reliable stream for a quarter of a century. The first was CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 45 of 209 ______
launched in 1977, with the last (Meteosat-7) following in 1997 and still operational. These satellites provide data 24 hours a day from the three spectral channels (visible, IR, water vapour) of the main instrument every 30 minutes.
3.2.2.2 Meteosat Second Generation
The Meteosat Second Generation (MSG) is a significantly improved follow-on system. It consists of four geostationary meteorological satellites, along with their ground infrastructure, that will operate consecutively until 2018. MSG has brought major improvements in response to user requirements and serves the needs of Nowcasting and Numerical Weather Prediction, in addition to providing important data for climate monitoring and research. The key instrument is the Spinning Enhanced Visible and InfraRed Imager (SEVIRI) radiometer, which delivers daylight images of weather patterns with a resolution of 3 km. The Geostationary Earth Radiation Budget (GERB) instrument measures the Earth’s radiation balance.
3.2.2.3 Eumetsat Polar System
The Eumetsat Polar System (EPS) is Europe’s first polar-orbiting operational meteorological satellite system. It is the European contribution to the Initial Joint Polar-Orbiting Operational Satellite System (IJPS) with the US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The prime objective is to provide continuous, longterm datasets for operational meteorology, environmental forecasting and global climate monitoring. EPS consists of a series of three MetOp satellites, together with their ground system, with an operational life of at least 14 years. The first was launched in October 2006. MetOp is flying in a Sun-synchronous orbit at an altitude of about 840 km, carrying a payload of 11 instruments that includes a new generation of operational instruments developed by Eumetsat, ESA and CNES, in addition to core instruments already flown on NOAA satellites. Global data from new NOAA satellites hosting a subset of MetOp instruments will also be received and processed by the EPS ground segment.
Figure 5 Meteorological Missions
3.2.3 COSMO- SkyMed (Italy)
COSMO-SkyMed is funded by ASI and the Italian Ministry of Defence. The system, now being built, consists of a constellation of four low Earth orbit mid-sized satellites, each carrying a multi-mode high- resolution X-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), and a global ground segment. The launch of the first COSMO spacecraft took place on June 8, 2007. The primary mission is to provide services for CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 46 of 209 ______
land monitoring, territory strategic surveillance, management of environmental resources, maritime and shoreline control and law enforcement, topography and scientific applications.
Figure 6 Cosmo Skymed
3.2.4 Pleiades (France)
The Pleiades optical system will consist of two small satellites (1 tonne each) offering resolutions of 70 cm panchromatic and 2.8 m multispectral with a field of view of 20 km.. In addition, thanks to a very high level of agility, the system can collect large areas in a single pass and can acquire near- instantaneous stereoscopic doubles (or even triples) of 20 x 300 km. The highly accurate pinpointing of the acquired images (< 1 m with ground control points) allows optimal use of the data in geographical information systems. The first launch is planned for 2009.
Figure 7 Pleiades
3.2.5 TerraSAR-X (Germany)
Based on their experience with SAR technology from various national (SIR-C, SRTM) and ESA missions (ERS, Envisat), DLR and Astrium signed a public-private partnership agreement in March 2002, under which DLR is procuring from Astrium the innovative TerraSAR-X satellite. The 1023 kg satellite equipped with an active antenna delivers X-band SAR data in various modes. The Spot-Light mode yields the finest resolution data, with 1 m pixels for a 10 x 10 km image. The StripMap mode offers a 30 km-wide swath with a 3 m resolution. The ScanSAR mode delivers 16 m resolution in a 100 km-wide swath. A special ‘split antenna’ mode allows experimental in-track interferometry, such as the mapping of moving objects. The satellite was launched on 15 June 2007 from Baikonur and flies in a 514 km-high dawn-dusk orbit (local time 6:00, 18:00 at Equator crossing). An "emergency" tasking and fast delivery can make full use of its "all weather" characteristics to collect data when "time to user" is critical. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 47 of 209 ______
Figure 8 TerraSAR-X
3.2.6 TanDEM-X (Germany)
In 2003, DLR issued a call for proposals for a national follow-on to TerraSAR-X. One of the two accepted proposals is TanDEM-X, which consists of a near identical satellite flying in a close tandem configuration with TerraSAR-X by 2009. This will allow interferometric digital elevation models to be generated globally to the highest precision (‘DTED-3’ quality, with 10 m footprint and 2 m vertical accuracy).
Figure 9 TanDEM-X
3.2.7 EnMAP (Germany)
The second national German mission, to be launched around 2010, is the hyperspectral EnMAP (Environmental Mapping and Analysis Programme). EnMAP covers the spectral range 420–2450 nm with more than 200 bands of 5–10 nm spacing. The 30 m pixels cover a swath of 30 km; off-nadir viewing enables 5-day repeat coverage. EnMAP will help the study of ecosystems and the monitoring of natural resources.
Figure 10 EnMAP CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 48 of 209 ______
3.2.8 SAR-Lupe (D)
SAR-Lupe is Germany's first reconnaissance satellite system. SAR is an abbreviation for Synthetic Aperture Radar and "Lupe" is German for magnifying glass. The SAR-Lupe program consists of five identical (720kg) satellites, developed by the German aeronautics company OHB-System, and one ground station at the “Zentrum für Nachrichtenwesen der Bundeswehr (ZNBw), which is responsible for controlling the system and analysing the retrieved data. SAR-Lupe's "high-resolution" images can be acquired day or night through all weather conditions. The first satellite was launched from Plesetsk in 2006,; further satellites will be launched at roughly six- month intervals, and the entire system will be fully operational by September 2008. The five satellites operate in three 500-kilometre orbits in planes roughly sixty degrees apart. They use an X-band radar with a three-metre dish, providing a resolution of about 50 centimetres over a frame size of 5.5km on a side ('spotlight mode', in which the satellite rotates to keep the dish pointed at a single target) or about one metre over a frame size of 8km x 60km ('stripmap mode', in which the satellite maintains a fixed orientation over the earth and the radar image is formed simply by the satellite's motion along its orbit). Response time for imaging of a given area is ten hours or less. On 30 July 2002 a cooperation treaty between Germany and France was signed, under which the SAR-Lupe satellites and the French Helios optical reconnaissance satellite will operate jointly. Other EU countries have been invited to join as well and Italy has shown considerable interest.
3.2.9 Radarsat-1/2 (Canada)
The Radarsat-2 follow-up to Radarsat-1, launched in 1995, is a collaboration between government (CSA) and industry (MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd). It is designed to provide C-band SAR data similar to those from Radarsat-1 for continuity. Significant technical improvements were made, including a 3 m high-resolution mode, a full range of signal polarisation modes to improve discrimination between various surface types, superior data storage and more precise measurements of satellite position and attitude. Radarsat-2 will operate in a Sunsynchronous orbit identical to that of Radarsat-1 but with an offset. The launch is planned in summer 2007.
Figure 11 Radarsat-1/2
3.2.10 Envisat (ESA)
Envisat was launched on 1 March 2002 and since then has operated with a 35-day repeat cycle, 30 minutes ahead of ERS-2. The instruments address four major areas: radar imaging; optical imaging CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 49 of 209 ______
over oceans, coastal zones and land; observation of the atmosphere; altimetry. About two-thirds of the data are transmitted to the ground via ESA’s Artemis relay satellite, providing Europe with data acquisition for any location worldwide. A total of 78 product types is generated, amounting to 250 GBytes per day. Most of these products are available on the Internet in nearrealtime. The Envisat data are used in many fields of Earth science, including atmospheric pollution, fire extent, sea ice motion, ocean currents and vegetation change, as well as for operational activities such as mapping land subsidence, monitoring oil slicks and watching for illegal fisheries.
Figure 12 Envisat
3.2.11 DMC Constellation
The Disaster Monitoring Constellation (DMC) was designed as a proof of concept constellation, capable of multispectral imaging of any part of the world every day. It is unique in that each satellite is independently owned and controlled by a separate nation, but all satellites have been equally spaced around a sun-synchronous orbit to provide daily imaging capability. The satellites are all designed and built at Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. (SSTL) in the UK. Through the support of the British National Space Centre, SSTL owns and operates the UK satellite in the constellation. Country Designation Type Imager Launch
Algeria Alsat-1 DMC 32m MS 2002
China Beijing-1 DMC+4 32m MS / 4m Pan 2005
Nigeria Nigeriasat-1 DMC 32m MS 2003
Turkey Bilsat-1 Mission Completed 2006
UK UK-DMC DMC 32m MS 2003
Spain Deimos-1 DMC 22m MS 2008
UK UK-DMC2 DMC 22m MS 2008
Table 1 DMC Constellation Although its headline objective is to support the logistics of disaster relief, its main function is to provide independent daily imaging capability to the partner nations; Algeria, Nigeria, Turkey, UK and China.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 50 of 209 ______
The DMC satellites provide a unique Earth Observation resource that enables daily revisit anywhere in the world. This is possible with only a few satellites because they are designed to image a large area of up to 600 x 600km. This greatly improves the value of the data as it often avoids the need for mosaics of images from different seasons.
All DMC Members agree to provide 5% of capacity free for daily imaging of disaster areas, and this data is channelled to aid agencies through Reuters AlertNet in the beginning. The DMC Consortium has agreed to consider participation in the International Charter for Space in Major Disasters, contributing daily imaging capability to fill the existing 3-5 day response gap. UK-DMC also provides data through an ESA project called RESPOND. In addition the DMC Members are interested in encouraging the use of DMC data for scientific and commercial applications.
3.2.12 RapidEye
The RapidEye constellation of Earth observation satellites is an imaging system capable of collecting multispectral image data at high resolution over large areas with the capability to reach any point on Earth every day. The system can collect more than 4 million square kilometers of per day. With multispectral data spanning visible to near-infrared portions of the spectrum in high-resolution detail, the RapidEye satellite constellation offers abilities in differentiating land cover, assessing vegetative conditions and distinguishing human-scale ground features in a single data set. These capabilities make RapidEye also a one-stop source of imagery data and products for any mapping application, especially those requiring guaranteed coverage of large regions in a short period of time or on a periodic basis. The RapidEye business concept was initiated in 1996 by Kayser-Threde GmbH, a German space engineering company, with support from the German Space Agency (DLR). RapidEye was established as an independent company in December 1998 once the concept had matured enough to receive seed financing from the German Space Agency (DLR) and Vereinigte Hagelversicherung (VH), the largest German agro-insurance company, as well as a few private investors. The long anticipated launch of the RapidEye satellite system is targeted for the first half of 2008, allowing for commercial operations by next summer. Currently, RapidEye is assembling an international staff of professionals with expertise and backgrounds both in customer-related industries as well as in remote sensing, space engineering and other professions.
Figure 13 RapidEye CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 51 of 209 ______
3.2.13 TopSat
Topsat is an electro-optical small satellite•launched on 27thOctober 2005. It is•Jointly funded by UK MoD and British National Space Centre. Topsat is a technology demonstrator showing what can be achieved with low-cost small satellites. Topsat has been in orbit and operational for ~18 months. Imagery has been provided to MoD, BNSC, the academic community and commercial customers through Infoterra Ltd.. The TopSat Consortium has completed a successful technical development programme and operations underway on a commercial basis
Figure 14 Topsat
3.2.14 SEOSAT
Spanish Earth Observation Spanish SATellite (SEOSAT) is a Spanish public initiative funded by CDTI. SEOSAT is an EO mission devoted to land optical imaging with very high spatial resolution. Primary mission is Spain “carpet mapping” Areas of interest on-demand are: • Europe -GMES • North-Africa, Central-and South-America • Emergency-security requests (crisis) The use as Scientific mission is TBD. SEOSAT consists of • Space Segment (1 satellite) • Ground Segment located in Spain. The scheduled Launch date is Q4 2010 (operative in 2011). CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 52 of 209 ______
Figure 15 SEOSAT
3.2.15 Spot
SPOT (Satellite Pour l'Observation de la Terre) is a high-resolution, optical imaging earth observation satellite system operating from space. It is run by Spot Image based in Toulouse, France. It was initiated by the CNES (Centre national d'études spatiales – the French space agency) in the 1970s and was developed in association with the SSTC (Belgian scientific, technical and cultural services) and the Swedish National Space Board (SNSB). It has been designed to improve the knowledge and management of the earth by exploring the earth's resources, detecting and forecasting phenomena involving climatology and oceanography, and monitoring human activities and natural phenomena. The SPOT system includes a series of satellites and ground control resources for satellite control and programming, image production, and distribution. The satellites were launched with the ESA rocket launcher Ariane 2, 3, and 4. The company SPOT Image is marketing the high-resolution images, which SPOT can take from every corner of the earth. The SPOT orbit is polar, circular, sun-synchronous, and phased. The inclination of the orbital plane combined with the rotation of the earth around the polar axis allows the satellite to fly over any point on earth within 26 days. The orbit has an altitude of 822 kilometers, an inclination of 98.7 degrees, and 14 + 5/26 revolutions per day depending.
3.2.15.1 SPOT 1, 2, and 3
Since 1986 the SPOT family of satellites has been orbiting the earth and has already taken more than 10 million high quality images. SPOT 1 was launched with Ariane 2 on February 22, 1986. Two days later, the 1800 kg SPOT 1 transmitted its first image with a spatial resolution of 10 or 20 meters. SPOT 2 joined SPOT 1 in orbit on January 22, 1990 and SPOT 3 followed on September 26, 1993. The satellite loads were identical, each including two identical HRV (High Resolution Visible) imaging instruments that were able to operate in 2 modes, either simultaneously or individually. The two spectral modes are panchromatic and multispectral. The panchromatic band has a resolution of 10 meters, and the 3 multispectral bands have resolutions of 20m. They have an image swath of 3600km2 and a revisit interval of 1 to 4 days depending on the latitude. Because the orbit of SPOT 1 was lowered in 2003, it will gradually lose altitude and break up naturally in the atmosphere. Although the recorders aboard SPOT 2 do not work anymore, it still provides measurements and high-quality images. SPOT 3 is not working anymore either due to problems with its stabilization system. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 53 of 209 ______
3.2.15.2 SPOT 4
SPOT 4 was launched on March 24, 1998 and features major improvements over SPOT 1, 2, and 3. The principal feature was the modification of the HRV, becoming a high-resolution visible and infrared (HRVIR) instrument. It has an additional band at mid-infrared wavelengths (1.58-1.75 micrometre), intended to provide capabilities for geological reconnaissance, vegetation surveys, and survey of snow cover, with a resolution of 20 meters. The two HRVIR imaging instruments are programmable for independent image coverage, increasing the number of imaging opportunities. Its lifetime was increased from 3 to 5 years, and its telescopes and recording capacities were improved.
3.2.15.3 SPOT 5
SPOT 5 was launched on May 3, 2002 and has the goal to ensure continuity of services for customers and to improve the quality of data and images by anticipating changes in market requirements. SPOT 5 has two high resolution geometrical (HRG) instruments that were deduced from the HRVIR of SPOT 4. They offer a higher resolution of 2.5 to 5 meters in panchromatic mode and 10 meters in multispectral mode. SPOT 5 also features an HRS imaging instrument operating in panchromatic mode. HRS points forward and backward of the satellite. Thus it is able to take stereopair images almost simultaneously to map relief.
Figure 16 Spot 5
3.3 Other Missions
3.3.1 ODIN
ODIN is an international collaboration (France, Finland, Canada, Sweden) for a low cost project (–50 M€ including payload and launch). Since 2007 it is a Third Party Mission with ESA. Based on a small and very compact spacecraft (–240 kg), it includes • An astronomy mission to learn about our solar system and star formation. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 54 of 209 ______
• An aeronomy mission to study the ozone related chemistry in the stratosphere and the distribution of water up into the mesosphere. • A dual purpose mission with high pointing accuracy
3.3.2 IKONOS-GeoEye
GeoEye successfully launched the IKONOS® satellite in 1999, being the world’s first one-meter commercial remote sensing satellite. Since then, GeoEye has set the standard for quickly delivering large volumes of tonally balanced, map accurate, mosaicked images for a variety of industries and applications. To date, IKONOS, derived from the Greek word for "image," has collected more than 275 million square kilometers of imagery available in a digital archive. Moving over the ground at approximately seven kilometers per second, IKONOS collects black-and- white and multispectral data at a rate of over 2,000 square kilometers per minute. IKONOS satellite imagery provides access to any location on the Earth’s surface. Through the nearly fifteen, 98-minute journeys it makes around the globe each day, IKONOS collects vital statistics about the Earth’s ever- changing features—from fluctuations in land and water resources to the build-out of new urban areas. Commercial and governmental organizations rely on GeoEye’s high-resolution imagery to view, map, measure, monitor and manage global activities. Applications range from national security and disaster assessment to urban planning and agricultural monitoring.
Figure 17 IKONOS GeoEye-1 will be equipped with the most advanced technology used in a commercial remote sensing system. The satellite will be able to collect images at 0.41-meter panchromatic (black & white) and CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 55 of 209 ______
1.65-meter multispectral resolution*. GeoEye-1 will be able to precisely locate an object to within 3 meters of its true location on the surface of the Earth. The satellite will be able to collect up to 700,000 square kilometers of panchromatic (and up to 350,000 square kilometers of pan-sharpened multispectral) imagery per day. This capability is ideal for large scale mapping projects. GeoEye-1 will be able to revisit any point on Earth once every three days or sooner. Customers will have a choice of ordering BASIC, GEO, ORTHO and STEREO imagery as well as imagery-derived products, including DEMs (digital elevation models) and DSMs (digital surface models), large area mosaics and feature maps. A polar orbiting satellite, GeoEye-1 will make 12 to 13 orbits per day flying at an altitude of 684 kilometers or 425 miles with an orbital velocity of about 7.5 km/sec or 16,800 mi/hr. Its sun- synchronous orbit allows it to pass over a given area at about 10:30 a.m. local time every day. The entire satellite will be able to turn and swivel very quickly in orbit to point the camera at areas of the Earth directly below it, as well as from side to side and front to back.
Dulles, VA-based GeoEye is the prime contractor responsible for developing the entire GeoEye-1 satellite system. GeoEye-1 is designed and manufactured by General Dynamics/C4 Systems (Gilbert, AZ). ITT (Rochester, NY) is providing the electro-optical camera to General Dynamics, including the optical telescope assembly, the detectors and focal plane assembly and the high-speed digital processing electronics. MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates and Orbit Logic are upgrading elements of GeoEye’s ground segment. Receiving antennae will be located at the Company’s headquarters in Dulles, VA and Barrow, AK. Kongsberg Satellite Services will provide leased ground terminal services in Tromso, Norway and Troll, Antarctica.
3.3.3 Quickbird & WorldView-1
The QuickBird satellite collects both multi-spectral and panchromatic imagery concurrently, and 60cm Pan-sharpened composite products in natural or infrared colours are offered. Strips up to 250 km in length can be collected in a single pass.
DigitalGlobe’s QuickBird satellite provides large swath width, large on-board storage, and high resolution products as a commercial satellite. QuickBird is designed to efficiently and accurately image large areas with industry-leading geolocational accuracy. The QuickBird spacecraft is capable of acquiring over 75 million km2 of imagery data annually (over three times the size of North America), allowing the archive to be populated and updated at high speed. DigitalGlobe™ successfully launched its QuickBird satellite on the Boeing Delta II launch vehicle on October 18, 2001. Eurimage is the Exclusive Distributor for Quick Bird products for customers in Europe and the Mediterranean basin (excluding non-international organisations in Italy)
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 56 of 209 ______
Figure 18 Quickbird Offering panchromatic imagery at 50cm resolution, DigitalGlobe’s WorldView-1 is a high resolution commercial earth-observation satellite now operating. With accuracy giving map ready imagery – 1:12,000 US scale or better – right off the satellite, while exceptional agility means acquistion of multiple targets on each pass and faster collection, up to 750,000 km2/day. Combined with QuickBird and WorldView-2 (to be launched in 2008) it will be part of a constellation offering very high revisit and large area collection capacity.
Figure 19 WorldView-1
3.3.4 FORMOSAT-2
FORMOSAT-2 (F-2) is owned by Taiwan National Space Organisation (NSPO). It is designed and manufactured by Astrium. The orbit is polar, sun-synchronous as well as geosynchronous (it flies over the same areas every day, making it suitable for monitoring applications). The equator crossing is at 9:30. The swath is 20 km wide, and the resolution is 2 m in Panchromatic and 8 m in Multispectral Spot Image is the exclusive worldwide commercial distributor. Targeted markets are • Defence& security • Environment • Mapping& cadastral Design drivers are • Daily revisit • High Resolution • Reactivity
3.3.5 KOMPSAT-2
KOMPSAT-2 (K-2) is a part of a long term plan (15 satellites) of the Korean Aerospace Research Institute (KARI). CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 57 of 209 ______
Spot Image is the exclusive worldwide commercial distributor (outside Korea, USA and Middle East). The orbit is polar, sun-synchronous (equator crossing at 10:50). The camera operates in Panchromatic (1 m resolution) and Multispectral (4 bands at 4 m resolution). The swath is 15 km wide. Targeted markets are • Defence& security • Mapping& cadastral • Urbanplanning • Environment Design drivers are • Very High Resolution • Acquisition capacity • Image quality
Figure 20 KOMPSAT-2
3.3.6 ASTROTERRA
ASTROTERRA is an Initiative proposed by Spot Image to ensure SPOT service continuity. It is currently under joint study by Spot Image and Astrium. It is scheduled to be launched end-2010. Targeted markets are • European institutions • National Defences CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 58 of 209 ______
• Commercial market Design drivers are • Acquisition capacity • Agility • Reactivity
Figure 21 ASTROTERRA
3.3.7 IRS
IRS-P6 Resourcesat-1 was launched on October 17, 2003 It provides • data continuity to 1C/1D programs with improved cameras • Global coverage through Onboard Solid State Recorder Minimum mission life of five years is envisaged. Follow on satellite is approved CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 59 of 209 ______
Figure 22 IRS-P6 Resourcesat-1 IRS-P5 Cartosat-1 was launched on May 5, 2005. It provides • Global coverage through Onboard Solid State Recorder • In flight stereo viewing with 2.5 m resolution Minimum mission life of five years is envisaged.
Figure 23 IRS-P5 Cartosat-1 IRS Cartosat-2 was launched on January 10, 2007. It provides • Global coverage through Onboard Solid State Recorder CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 60 of 209 ______
• <1 m resolution, PAN, 10 bit, 9.6 km swath Minimum mission life of five years is envisaged.
Figure 24 IRS Cartosat-2 IRS-P6´s improved cameras result in improved products. Follow-on missions to provide data continuity over the next decade are approved. IRS is a source for 5 m natural colour area-wide base maps IRS-P6 LISS-III is an ideal gap filler for Landsat type data. It is a valuable tool for applications in agriculture, forestry, hydrology and different types of mapping. ESA compatible data interface is in reach through DLR.
3.4 Scientific EO Missions
3.4.1 ESA Earth Explorers
The biggest environmental issue currently under discussion is global change, which encompasses not only climate change but also the large-scale impact that a growing global population and continued economic growth are having on the Earth and its environment. The Earth Explorer series of satellites [WR44] are designed to address critical environmental issues providing an important contribution to the global endeavour to further our understanding of the Earth system. Earth Explorer missions form the science and research element of the Living Planet Programme and focus on the atmosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere and the Earth's interior with the overall emphasis on learning more about the interactions between these components and the impact that human activity is having on natural Earth processes. Earth Explorer missions are divided into two categories – Core and Opportunity. The user-driven approach is fundamental for both type of mission. The process of mission selection has given the Earth science community an efficient tool for advancing the understanding of the Earth system. The science questions addressed also form the basis for development of new applications of Earth observation. To date, there have been three Core missions and three Opportunity missions selected for implementation. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 61 of 209 ______
3.4.1.1 Core missions
Core missions respond directly to specific areas of public concern and are selected through widespread consultation with the science community. GOCE The Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE) is the first Earth Explorer Core mission, and is scheduled for in spring 2008. GOCE will provide high spatial resolution gravity gradient data with which to improve global and regional models of the Earth's gravity field and geoid. ADM-Aeolus The prime aim of the Atmospheric Dynamics Mission is to demonstrate measurements of vertical wind profiles from space, using a high performance Doppler Wind Lidar based on direct-detection interferometric techniques. ADM-Aeolus is due for launch in 2009. EarthCARE Earth Clouds Aerosols and Radiation Explorer (EarthCARE) will improve the representation and understanding of the Earth's radiative balance in climate and numerical forecast models. EarthCARE is due for launch in 2013.
3.4.1.2 Opportunity missions
Opportunity missions are smaller, low-cost satellites that are relatively quick to implement so that they are to address areas of immediate environmental concern. CryoSat-2 The CryoSat-2 satellite replaces CryoSat, which was lost as a result of launch failure in October 2005. Scheduled for launch in 2009, CryoSat-2 will measure fluctuations in the thickness of ice on both land and sea to provide conclusive evidence as to whether there is indeed a trend towards diminishing ice cover, furthering our understand of the relationship between ice and global climate. CryoSat-2 will carry an innovative SAR/Interferometric Radar Altimeter (SIRAL). SMOS The Soil Moisture and Ocean Salinity (SMOS) mission, scheduled for launch in 2008, will exploit an innovative instrument designed as a two-dimensional interferometer for acquiring brightness temperature observations at L-band (1.4 GHz) for the estimation of soil moisture and ocean salinity to further our understanding of the Earth's water cycle. Swarm The objective of this mission is to provide the best every survey of the geomagnetic field and its temporal evolution in order to gain new insights into the Earth system by improving our understanding of the Earth's interior and climate. Swarm is due for launch in 2010.
3.4.2 CNES Missions
The complete list of CNES EO missions can be accessed at [WR41]. Here follows the descriptions of Calipso, Parasol, Jason and Venµs. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 62 of 209 ______
3.4.2.1 Calipso
The Calipso mission, which CNES is pursuing in collaboration with NASA, aims to provide global, curtain-like vertical profiles of the atmosphere at a resolution of 30 m starting by end of 2005. By determining the geographic location, altitude and optical properties of cloud layers and aerosols, Calipso helps scientists to gain a closer understanding of how they shape climate processes, thereby enhancing our ability to predict climate change and seasonal variations. Calipso and its companion microsatellite Parasol are part of an unprecedented French-U.S. formation of 6 satellites called the A-Train that is set to yield a wealth of complementary data.
Figure 25 Calypso
3.4.2.2 Parasol
Led by CNES, the Parasol mission flies a microsatellite from its Myriade series. Parasol is relying heavily on previous developments conducted for the Polder instrument to measure the direction and polarization of light reflected by the Earth’s land surfaces and atmosphere.
Data collected by Parasol are being compared with those from Aqua, Aura, and CloudSat—the other satellites making up the new French-U.S. A-Train space observatory dedicated to studying the atmosphere and climate. This "spatial train" should be completed with a new satellite, Oco, in 2008.The unique synergies between these missions should help scientists to reduce the uncertainties surrounding our planet’s global radiation budget.
Such data will be vital for modelling long-term climate change and seasonal or inter-annual climate variations. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 63 of 209 ______
Figure 26 Parasol
3.4.2.3 Jason 1 and 2
Following the success of the experimental Topex/Poseidon programme, launched in 1992, its successor Jason-1 took over in December 2001, to meet a new challenge—operational oceanography.It ensures service continuity for scientific research and the delicate task of preparating applications such as weather bulletins, charts to aid navigation and real-time monitoring of the seas. Jason-2 will take over from 2008 on the same orbit as its predecessors. It will respond to the needs of international programmes for studying and observing the oceans and climate, which are aiming to set up an ocean observation system (OSTM, the Ocean Surface Topography Mission) to cover the entire planet. Jason-2 will be this mission's first satellite. The OSTM will ensure operational continuity for the collection and distribution of high-resolution data on ocean currents and their variations, as well as sea surface height measurements. This mission, which is expected to last for 20 years, will be carried out by a series of satellites, with Jason-2, scheduled to be operational for fixe years, leading the way.
Figure 27 Jason CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 64 of 209 ______
3.4.2.4 Venµs
CNES and the Israeli Space Agency (ISA) have developed the microsatellite Venµs (Vegetation and Environment monitoring on a new Micro-Satellite). Once every 2 days, Venµs will alternately cover 50 sites representative of the main terrestrial and coastal ecosystems in the world. Operating in the visible to the near infrared range, the camera will cover a total of 12 spectral bands in order to improve diagnostics of the state of plants. The data provided on vegetation monitoring will be particularly useful for better estimating the evolution of water requirements and thus should enable a more rational management of water resources. Scientists are also hoping to improve our understanding of the impact of climate changes on ecosystems. This scientific demonstration mission is part of the programme for Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES programme).
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 65 of 209 ______
4 INTERACTION WITH OTHER SPACE SYSTEMS
4.1 Navigation
The use of on-board receivers of navigation data (currently GPS, Galileo in the future) provides additional benefits for satellites including: • Real time position knowledge, • Precise (e.g. +/-60m) position information • Time reference The use of star trackers and high-quality GPS receiver provides the necessary positional and pointing accuracy. Examples of current satellites carrying on board GPS receivers are GOCE, Radarsat-2 and Cosmo- Skymed. GNSS receivers are envisaged on board of the ESA sentinels.
4.1.1 DORIS
Doppler Orbitography and Radiopositioning Integrated by Satellite (DORIS) is a french satellite system used for the determination of satellite orbits (e.g. TOPEX/Poseidon) and for positioning. The DORIS system, designed and developed by CNES in collaboration with GRGS and IGN, has a dual purpose. It is used to determine the orbit of satellites equipped with DORIS receivers with centimetre accuracy using a network of ground stations as reference points on Earth. Via this system, it is also now possible to precisely tie points to the International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF). This dual capability has enabled DORIS to be used in numerous applications since 1992. The system is used in ocean or ice fields altimetry missions, studies of the shape and movements of Earth, as well as many location services. A so called beacon is installed on the ground and emits a radio signal, which is received by the satellite. A frequency shift of the signal occurs that is caused by the movement of the satellite (Doppler effect). From this observation satellite orbits, ground positions, as well as other parameters can be derived. About 70 stations are equally distributed over the earth and ensure a good coverage for orbit determination. Apart from orbit determination the DORIS observations are used for positioning of ground stations. The accuracy is a bit lower than with GPS, but it still contributes to the International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF). The best known satellites equipped with DORIS are the two altimetry satellites TOPEX/Poseidon and Jason. Other DORIS satellites are ERS-1 and ERS-2 and the SPOT satellites. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 66 of 209 ______
4.2 Data Relay Systems
4.2.1 Introduction
Communications systems are a key element of the current lifestyle. With the advent of mobile communications, the internet and multi-media, space technology is a solution to help in the quest for a truly global network. Satellites are the key to satisfying that demand. There are more than 200 telecommunication satellites in geostationary orbit. Over the last three decades they have revolutionised society, changed the way the economies work and introduced new dimensions to communications, television and entertainment. Satellites have changed the way and speed of communications. A few examples • Two out of every three intercontinental telephone calls are transmitted via telecommunication satellites today. • The everyday business communications between retail chains and banks, national lottery systems and even petrol and water pipelines are often operated in some form by satellite. • Broadcast, text or audio news distributed by agencies is mostly sent via satellite links. • Sports or other events happening just a few kilometres away are just as likely to be transmitted via satellite link. • Access to the backbone of the internet in many countries of the world is by satellite communications. • Satellite systems are an indispensable component of global mobile communication networks. Systems such as Inmarsat have changed the way that sea-faring vessels communicate with the rest of the world.
4.2.2 ARTEMIS
Artemis, which stands for Advanced Relay Technology Mission, was launched on 12 July 2001 on an Ariane 5 from Europe’s spaceport in Kourou, French Guiana. It shared the launcher with the BSAT-2b direct broadcasting satellite. Artemis carries three sophisticated payloads for the fulfilment of navigational, mobile communication and data relay missions: • The provision of voice and data communications between mobile terminals, mainly for trucks, trains or boats in remote areas of Europe and North Africa, as well as on the Atlantic. • Performing a key role within Europe's EGNOS satellite Navigation System by broadcasting enhanced GPS and Glonass signals for use by civilian 'safety critical' transport and navigational services. • The provision of inter-orbit satellite links using advanced S and Ka band frequencies and laser technology. Artemis acts as a focal point - a kind of space based interpreter. Onboard it carries an advanced data relay payload developed by ESA. Known as the SKDR, it is the first system to operate both the S Band and Ka Band frequencies as well as optical wavelengths through a unique laser called SILEX. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 67 of 209 ______
Artemis not only communicates information between scientists based on the International Space Station and Earth, but also has a key role to play in Earth observation by receiving data from Earth observing satellites in low earth orbit and relaying it directly to the relevant ground station in a fraction of the time The French Spot 4 satellite, which already includes a SILEX terminal, is linked with Artemis and image data can be sent to the Toulouse processing centre in near 'real-time'. Without the data relay via Artemis, this could take up to a day to reach its final destination. ESA's giant Earth observing satellite, Envisat, successfully launched on 1 March 2002 (CET), benefits from Artemis' high-rate data-relay capabilities to send information quickly and efficiently down to Earth.
Figure 28 Artemis
4.2.3 European Data Relay Satellite
The European Space Agency is preparing a programme proposal for a European Data Relay Satellite (EDRS) infrastructure. This concept is to be presented at the Ministerial Conference taking place in November 2008. The EDRS concept consists of relaying information from platforms such as LEO/MEO satellites, aerial vehicles or launchers directly to ground stations, headquarters or processing centres in Europe or vice-versa through a geostationary satellite. This concept brings the advantage of providing near-real-time information (NRT) thereby significantly decreasing the time-to-customer and increasing the quality of space-based services. EDRS can provide secure and fast communication services for main European space programmes such as the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES), Galileo, and the European Guaranteed Access to Space (EGAS), thereby increasing European independency for these strategic services. The link from the data collecting platform to the processing centres via the DRS satellite(s) will bring a very wide range of new applications for time-critical and life-critical missions. The concept also brings up many technical, development and operational issues. As a result, several studies are currently running within ESA. An Advanced Research in Telecommunications Systems (ARTES) 1 study is looking at the collection of the needs of all possible future users, depicting the requirements and possible system structures. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 68 of 209 ______
Two additional unsolicited studies are investigating a Public Private Partnership approach. These studies purposely involve two commercial operators who declared their interest in investigating the PPP approach. These two studies mainly investigate the potential user needs and the system needed along with the operational scenarios. An economical assessment with the involvement of commercial operators will be performed at the end of the study.
4.3 Data Dissemination via Satellite
This section describes the various means of near real time dissemination of satellite data and products as well as their distribution by other means such as via the Internet and retrieval from archives.
4.3.1 Direct Broadcast
Direct broadcast of data from both geostationary and polar orbiting satellites provides suitably equipped users with real-time access independent of any telecommunications infrastructure except the data receiving station. For geostationary satellites the data are usually broadcast having first undergone a preliminary processing to level 1.5. Users within the satellite's field-of-view can receive such data via dedicated user reception systems employing a fixed antenna. The latest generation of geostationary satellites broadcast data to users of High Rate User Stations (HRUS) and Low Rate User Stations (LRUS) making use of the High Rate Information Transmission (HRIT) or Low Rate Information Transmission (LRIT) standards respectively. More information on HRIT/LRIT is contained in the satellite data formats and standards section. For polar orbiting satellites instrument data at level 0 (see satellite data processing section) may be received via dedicated user reception systems employing a tracking antenna whenever a satellite is within reception range (i.e. when the elevation of the overpassing satellite at the reception site is greater than around 5°). The latest generation of polar orbiting satellites broadcast data to users of High Resolution Picture Transmission (HRPT) reception systems and Low Resolution Picture Transmission (LRPT) reception systems making use of the HRPT or LRPT standards respectively. More information on HRPT/LRPT is contained in the satellite data formats and standards section.
4.3.2 ESA DDS
4.3.2.1 Introduction
Initially designed for the dissemination of Envisat data (for the calibration and validation of its sensors and products), the DDS (Data Dissemination System) is disseminating in full operations since March 2002 near-real-time E.O. data in Europe, with extensions in Africa and South America progressively added. The system is based on two uplink sites located at Kiruna (Sweden) and at ESRIN (Italy) and encompasses a basis of about 50 operational receiving stations located on three continents. The DDS network utilizes a 8.2 MHz Ku-band satellite capacity on Eutelsat's W1 satellite for European service coverage, 7 MHz of C-band capacity on Eutelsat’s AB3 for African service coverage CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 69 of 209 ______
and since recently a slot of 2 Mbps on the Amerhis regenerative payload on board of Hispasat’s Amazonas satellite for South American service coverage. Beyond current provision of E.O. dissemination services, current satellite network assets can play an active role for additional bi-directional integrated application (based over the DVB-S and DVB-RCS techniques), especially in emerging countries where the lack of broadband ground telecommunication infrastructures is at the root of the well known “digital divide” issue.
4.3.2.2 The Ku-band DVB-S service for European users
European users (as well as North African and partially Middle East users) are served by the DVB-S Ku-band DDS. The system is currently using two Ku-band uplink stations located at Kiruna (S) and ESRIN (Frascati, I) where Envisat raw data are acquired, processed and injected in the system. The leased telecommunication bandwidth (extended up to the current figure of 8.2 MHz since beginning of the operations) required for the dissemination of the data is hosted on a transparent transponder on Eutelsat W1. For the orbits acquired at ESRIN, a Ka-band inter-satellite link is exploited between Envisat and Artemis (an ESA geostationary telecommunication satellite used as Data Relay System). It is to be noted that the very high reliability of the receiving performances (exceeding 99.5 % of transmitted data) is obtained through a M&C return channel provide by a low band terrestrial Internet return link. Without the return channel, the dissemination performances settle down to about 97-98%. On users’ side, the complete professional receiving platform (1.2 m antenna included) costs about 2K€. Apart from serving efficiently central European users, the service coverage also allows to provide emerging areas (like Algeria, Marocco, and Middle East) with global and systematic near-real-time Envisat data. It is to be noted that the Eutelsat satellite provides good service coverage also in East Europe. The service is provided free of charge. Small companies, universities, civil protections and even privates are thus steadily joining the service. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 70 of 209 ______
Figure 29 ESA European DDS
4.3.2.3 The C-band DVB-S service for African users
Dissemination over Africa is obtained using a single C-band uplink station at ESRIN, where files to be multicast are directly injected from the Ku-band system and from remote data providers via high speed ground links. In addition, a dedicated route from other internal ESA data sources has recently been set-up in order to serve users with products currently not distributed by the Ku-band system. The leased telecommunication bandwidth (7MHz) required for the dissemination of the data is hosted on a transparent transponder of Eutelsat AB3. The dissemination performances (with or without the terrestrial Internet return channel) are comparable with the one achieved by the European DDS service. On users’ side a professional receiving platform (2.4m antenna included) costs about 5K€. A satellite dissemination service (alike the C-band DDS) is probably the only effective service capable of delivering large amounts of near-real-time E.O. data over the wide African continent, often characterized by a lack of terrestrial communication infrastructures. Similarly to European users, the C-band DDS service is provided by ESA free of charge to any potential requestor. Several African national and regional institutions (as well as universities) are steadily joining the service, in particular for environmental forecast (i.e. desertification, coastal pollution, etc…) in the frame of GMFS (Global Monitoring for Food Security). Beside the Envisat near-real-time E.O. dissemination, the DVB-S C-band DDS service is being also used in order to deliver some Third Party Mission Products (i.e. SPOT off-line vegetation index products) and once-off general Electronic contents, useful for remote learning and trainings. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 71 of 209 ______
Figure 30 ESA African DDS
4.3.2.4 The Amerhis regenerative DVB-RCS DDS
ESA Telecom department has been co-funding over the last years the development of the regenerative Amerhis payload, now embarked on board of the Hispasat satellite Amazonas. In addition to the regenerative payload, the Amerhis system consists of a Network Control Center (NCC), a Management Station (MS) and various types of satellite terminals based on DVB-RCS. In return for the contribution, ESA has the opportunity to use part of the transponder capacity to support specific activities hosted in the different ESA programmes. The AmerHis payload is currently connected to 4 different spots, which are optimized for covering respectively Western Europe, North America, South America (except Brazil) and Brazil. Connectivity is available between different spots and routing is done at baseband level, on board of the satellite. The payload itself is controlled by Hispasat. In late July 2007, a one year dissemination pilot has started in order to deliver near-real-time Envisat data from an Amerhis uplink station at ESRIN to an Amerhis station located in Chile (Mariscope Chilena, Puerto Montt). The encouraging statistics collected over a previous tests campaign carried out in 2006 with European terminal as well as the first results obtained by the ongoing pilot have demonstrated that the DDS DVB-S protocols can be adapted to a regenerative bidirectional satellite payload with a limited effort. In particular the most challenging part consisted in adapting and tuning the Restricted Reliable Multi Protocol on the satellite return link. Without going into technical details, since late July 2007 hundreds of near-real-time Envisat E.O. products (up to 15 GB/day peak load) are systematically injected from the European Ku-band DDS system into the Amerhis uplink station hosted in ESRIN and from there delivered to a fist pilot user in Chile (Mariscope Chilena, Puerto Montt). The data traffic link (Forward link) is of about 2 Mbps, whereas the Return link for M&C is of 256 Kbps. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 72 of 209 ______
Currently the system is fine-tuned with respect to multicast transmission parameters and the good test results will be further confirmed by the ongoing Pilot, after which a renegotiation of the capacity will follow with Hispasat for higher rate services and for the deployment of an operational dissemination scenario, consisting of several TX/RX nodes able to exchange E.O. data among the European and the American continent. In fact, apart from extending an operational dissemination service from Europe and Africa to South America, the bidirectional capabilities of the Amerhis payload provide also the interesting opportunity to repatriate ESA Sensing data from the entire American continent to Europe. In addition, the Amerhis uplink platform at ESRIN is being provided with advanced terrestrial interfaces/connectivity capable of pushing into the system also remote data providers’ products and additional bi-directional services (i.e. video conferencing, distance learning, etc…) with high reliability, small round-trip delay and without relying on any terrestrial communication infrastructure.
4.3.3 Commercial telecommunication satellites
In recent years emphasis has been placed on the use of commercially available telecommunications satellites for the purpose of distributing meteorological satellite data and products. Data distribution can be optimized from a pure telecommunications point of view and evolve with time in order to meet new requirements and benefit from the most cost-efficient technology. Additionally, when the meteorological platform does not have to support dissemination functions, the position keeping requirements can be relaxed, which facilitates extended lifetime operations. The most widespread approach involves file transmission with Internet Protocol (IP) by Digital Video Broadcast by Satellite (DVB-S) as available from various telecommunications operators around the world. This allows data rates of tens of Mbps to be received with standard low-cost equipment. Dissemination is performed in Ku-Band or in C-band. C-band offers more robust signal strength in intertropical regions because of its lower attenuation by water vapour and liquid water. It is however more sensitive to local interference with radars. These services can offer unified access to various sources of data including different satellites, geostationary, LEO or R&D, as well as multi-satellite composite products, high-level products and non-satellite information. Satellite data dissemination via such systems is not specific to the satellite world and is a component of the WMO Information System (WIS).
4.3.4 Eumetcast
EUMETCast - EUMETSAT’s Broadcast System for Environmental Data, is a multi-service dissemination system based on standard Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) technology. It uses commercial telecommunication geostationary satellites to multicast files (data and products) to a wide user community. EUMETCast is the EUMETSAT contribution to GEONETCast. EUMETCast is now available for use by Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS), the European Global Monitoring for Environmental and Security (GMES) initiatives and other environmental data providers. EUMETCast is also a EUMETSAT contribution to the Integrated Global Data Dissemination Service (IGDDS), a component of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) information service. The key features of EUMETCast are: • Secure delivery allows multicasts to be targeted to a specific user or group of users thus supporting any required data policy CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 73 of 209 ______
• handling of any file format, allowing the dissemination of a broad range of products • use of DVB turnarounds allows the easy extension of geographical coverage • one-stop-shop delivery mechanism allows Users to receive many data streams via one reception station • an installed User base of over 1700 User stations • use of off-the-shelf, commercially available, DVB reception equipment • highly scalable system architecture The following environmental datastreams and products are delivered via EUMETCast: • Meteosat first generation image data • Meteosat second generation image data • GOES East and West image data • MTSAT image data • DCP and MDD in-situ forecast data • EUMETSAT meteorological products • Land and Ocean Sea Ice SAF products • NOAA/NESDIS meteorological products • NOAA/NESDIS Ocean colour products • DWDSAT products from DWD • SPOT VEGETATION products from VITO • Basic Meteorological Data (BMD) for WMO RA VI • ERS SCAT and QuikSCAT products from KNMI
It is planned to introduce the following services on EUMETCast: • Metop Global and Regional Data Services • NOAA POES Global Area Coverage • GRAS and Ozone SAF products • MODIS Ocean colour products
Within the current EUMETCast configuration, the multicast system is based upon a client/server system with the server side implemented at the EUMETCast uplink site and the client side installed on the individual EUMETCast reception stations. Files are transferred via a dedicated communications line from EUMETSAT to the uplink facility. These files are encoded and transmitted to a geostationary communications satellite for broadcast to user receiving stations. Each receiving station decodes the signal and recreates the data/products according to a defined directory and file name structure. A single reception station can receive any combination of the services provided on EUMETCast. Data, for which access is restricted in accordance with EUMETSAT Data Policy, is made secure by the USB decryption scheme. The system uses a DVB/MPEG-2 based transport for carrying IP datagrams. It uses a set of broadcast satellite forward channels, but does not use the return channel. The forward links are CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 74 of 209 ______
provided by a set of geostationary, digital telecommunications satellites. The components involved include: • Data providers (DP) • Service management (SM) • Uplink service provider (USP) • Turn around service provider (TSP) • Satellites • Reception Stations
Figure 31 Eumetcast System
4.3.5 GEONETCast
GEONETCast is a near real time, global network of satellite-based data dissemination systems designed to distribute space-based, airborne and in situ data, metadata and products to diverse communities. GEONETCast is a Task in the GEO Work Plan and is led by EUMETSAT, the United States, China, and WMO. Many GEO Members and Participating Organizations contribute to this Task. Currently GEONETCast consists of four component systems, EUMETCast-Europe, EUMETCast- Americas, EUMETCast-Africa and FengYunCast-Asia.
4.4 Mission in the loop
The mission-in-the-loop is a scenario analysed within the HMA project dealing with interoperability across different (earth observation) missions where (product) orders are placed but the execution of part of the order is dependant on the observation made in the products of so-called triggering missions. An external service manages the hierarchy of orders. The user places a high level order with a set of triggering conditions to the so-called Mission-in-the- loop service which will organise the orders in a cascade of dependencies. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 75 of 209 ______
The top layer of the order is placed to the respective missions with a description of the triggering events. The triggering missions will process the order and return the requested product(s) to the Mission-in-the-loop service function that will analyse it with respect to the triggering condition (an option would be that the analysis of the data is made by an independent service provider). The Mission-in-the-loop service manages all orders placed in the context of the service. If the triggering condition is met the Mission-in-the-loop service will initiate the next layer of orders. When the last layer of order is reached, the overall high level order is fulfilled and the products delivered to the user. All the order layers should be based on the HMA ordering ICD [RD04] and all the process should follow the relevant HMA standards. It may be envisaged that the "mission in the loop" service receives mission information (orbit data, instrument availability, meteo data, satellite agility parameters, etc.) and planning information (already planned acquisitions) r from the "triggering and triggered missions". These information are important as they allow efficient acquisition programming and selection of "triggering missions".
A simplified scenario with a two-level schema including only one triggering mission and one triggered mission is reported into the following figure.
Mission-in-the-Loop Service Triggering Mission Triggered Mission
User/Operator
High Level Order with Triggering Conditions Order for Triggering Product
Order Processing
Triggering Product
Analyse Product vs Triggering Conditions
If Triggering Condition is verified Order for Triggered Product
Order Processing
Product
Order Completion
Figure 32 Mission in the Loop CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 76 of 209 ______
This scenario allows optimising the use of the missions’ capabilities. A typical example would be oil spill monitoring for which, after initial discovery of the spill by a mission with low resolution and wide swath products, several missions would be triggered to acquire high resolution data on the limited area affected. Other possible scenarios deal with the capability to manage complex orders such as mapping of large area of interest (using patch-work) or stereo images via the interfaces between "mission in loop" and "triggering/triggered missions". This may be considered a desirable interoperability service with a longer term perspective. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 77 of 209 ______
5 TERRESTRIAL SYSTEMS INTEROPERATING WITH SPACE SYSTEMS
5.1 European Programs
5.1.1 The Complete European Context (SEIS-INSPIRE-GMES)
In 2005 the Environment Policy Review Group (EPRG) endorsed a proposal by the European Commission on a vision for how the Commission and Member States could develop monitoring and information systems in which data would be a shared and accessible resource. According to this vision Member States would share and coordinate data collection and dissemination at all the levels within an agreed infrastructure based on data policy principles and standards for information exchange. SEIS is an evolution which builds on discussions that began in early 2000s on how to streamline reporting of data and information by Member States to the European level. The system seeks to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the latest developments in information and communication (ICT) and geographic information (GIS) technologies. Various initiatives have contributed to the establishment of SEIS building blocks at European level. An example of such an initiative is the Water Information System for Europe (WISE), which was initially designed as a reporting tool for the Water Framework Directive, but has now been extended to integrate reporting data flows from a number of existing and future water-related directives and water related data. Another example is the European environment information and observation network (EIONET) which includes the 'Reportnet' reporting tool for improving data and information flows. At horizontal level the INSPIRE Directive establishing an infrastructure for spatial information in Europe entered into force in May 2007. It contains provisions aiming to improve the accessibility and interoperability of spatial data. INSPIRE is based on similar principles to SEIS. Its successful implementation will go a long way towards overcoming existing inefficiencies relating to the usability and use of spatial data stored by public authorities. It is important to recognise, however, that INSPIRE will not directly address data of a non-spatial or non-numerical nature or documents, it will not by itself constitute an integrated e-reporting system related to EU environmental legislation, and will not lead directly to an improvement in the quality and comparability of data. The Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) initiative aims to provide operational information services based on Earth monitoring data obtained from satellites and in-situ observations on water, air and land. But at present there is not an integrated platform that can link all these initiatives into a shared and common system. SEIS aims to fill in this gap. With the help of Member States this new system will modernise the production, exchange and use of environmental data and information based on the latest information technology. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 78 of 209 ______
5.1.2 GMES
5.1.2.1 Overview
GMES (Global Monitoring for Environment and Security) is a European initiative for the implementation of information services dealing with environment and security. GMES Services will be based on observation data received from Earth Observation satellites and ground based information. These data will be coordinated, analysed and prepared for end-users. GMES is jointly supported by the European Commission (representing the 25 (+2) Member States of the European Union) and the European Space Agency (ESA), which complements the activities and investments of all the European actors involved in understanding our planet with the development of the Space Component of GMES. GMES is the European solution to respond to the needs of citizens in Europe to access reliable information on the status of their environment. GMES will mainly support decision-making by both institutional and private actors. Decisions could concern either new regulations to preserve our environment or urgent measures in case of a natural or man–made catastrophes (i.e. floods, forest fires, water pollution). The widespread and regular availability of technical data within GMES will allow a more efficient use of the infrastructures and human resources. It will help the creation of new models for security and risk management, as well as better management of land and resources.
Figure 33 GMES Home Page
GMES is the European participation in the worldwide monitoring and management of our planet Earth and the European contribution to GEO. The global community acts together for a synergy of all techniques of observation, detection and analysis.
At the World Summit on Earth Observation in Washington in July 2003, the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) was established, with the goal of addressing the information requirement for the environment on a global scale. This work was completed in Brussels in February 2005 by the adoption of a 10 year implementation plan of an integrated Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS see section 7). CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 79 of 209 ______
GMES will be the main European contribution to GEOSS. During the initial phase, and as part of the GMES Space Component Programme, GMES shall provide harmonised access to the ESA, national, Eumetsat and other Third Party Earth Observation Missions for the GMES Fast Track Services, and therefore satisfying at the maximum extent the GMES spaced-based observation needs. In this context, the required interoperability framework to allow the harmonised access to the national and Eumetsat missions, including the operational concept and architecture is under definition and implementation. This short-term objective has provided an additional push for the definition of the interoperability standards. In the framework of the GMES Preparatory activities, the Heterogeneous Mission Accessibility - Interoperability (HMA-I) has the purpose of defining the interoperability concept across the ground segments of the European and Canadian missions which will contribute to the GMES initial phase. These missions have developed or are in the process of developing EO satellite that can offer essential capacity to the GMES Space Component according to their own objective and now need to be adapted to these requirements. In the framework of the HMA-I contract the Agency has defined in collaboration with these organisations the ground segment architecture and interoperability standards for an across-missions harmonised data access that is general and independent from the set of missions supported. The implementation phase will be supported as well by an HMA testbed allowing testing and evolution of agreed standards. The INSPIRE directives are a major driver for GMES-HMA.
5.1.2.2 GMES Services
GMES and its overall infrastructure are one of the sectors addressed by the M/415 mandate and the specific target of this document. GMES is a European initiative for the implementation of information services dealing with environment and security. GMES will be based on observation data received from Earth Observation satellites and ground based information. These data will be coordinated, analysed and prepared for end-users. Through GMES the state of the environment and its short, medium and long-term evolution will be monitored to support policy decisions or investments. GMES is a set of services for European citizens helping to improve their quality of life regarding environment and security.
Figure 34 GMES Schema CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 80 of 209 ______
GMES will be built up gradually: it starts with a pilot phase which targets the availability of a first set of operational GMES services by 2008 followed by the development of an extended range of services which meet user requirements. GMES is now in its concrete implementation phase, in accordance with the action plan published in February 2004. By its nature GMES is complex and requires the integration of data from space-based and in-situ earth observation capacities into user-driven operational application services. The capacity has to be built up gradually, based on clearly identified priorities and by using existing elements wherever possible. The objective is to gradually develop and validate a number of pilot operational services, based on selected R&D projects extending and strengthening the current actions. Today, efforts on GMES are placed on a user's service driven approach rather than on a technology- push approach. The main purpose of the current phase of GMES is the gradual setting up of a number of "initial GMES services", which should move away from the short-term logic of a "project" and evolve into truly long-term sustainable services to the users. The services provided by GMES can be classified in three major categories: • Mapping, including topography or road maps but also land-use and harvest, forestry monitoring, mineral and water resources that do contribute to short and long-term management of territories and natural resources. This service generally requires exhaustive coverage of the Earth surface, archiving and periodic updating of data. • Support for emergency management in case of natural hazards and particularly civil protection institutions responsible for the security of people and property. This service concentrates on the provision of the latest possible data before intervening. • Forecasting is applied for marine zones, air quality or crop yields. This service systematically provides data on extended areas permitting the prediction of short, medium or long-term events, including their modelling and evolution. The widespread and regular availability of technical data within GMES will allow a more efficient use of the infrastructures and human resources. It will help the creation of new models for security and risk management, as well as better management of land and resources.
Three GMES services have been identified as first candidates for “fast track” treatment, with the objective of being operational by 2008. This selection has been performed on the basis of the following criteria: • their maturity, • uptake by user communities • long term sustainability of demand and supply.
As a result, three "fast track" services have been identified: • A service on emergency response (ERCS - Emergency Response Core Service) • A service on land monitoring (LMCS - Land Monitoring Core Service) • A service on marine (MCS - Marine Core Service) For each of these, a user workshop was organised to kick-start work by identifying service requirements and implementation roadmap. After the workshops, Implementation Groups have been established with the objective to: CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 81 of 209 ______
Supervise and validate the implementation of the "fast track" services, in particular by organising regular progress reviews during the development period and to report on its progress to the GMES management structure; Help organising workshops and conferences where appropriate during the implementation period in order to improve user awareness of the "fast track" services and consolidate and enlarge their user base, with a specific emphasis on regional issues.
Implementation Groups delivered in February 2007 Strategic Implementation Plans for the "fast track" services: Based on the work of the Groups, the first version of the three "fast track" services will be developed via the projects under the 7th Research Framework Programme (FP7) Pre-operational validation of the three "fast track" services is planned for 2008.
In addition to the three Fast Track Services, the implementation of other pilot services will be initiated in the short term. In particular, atmosphere-related issues such as: air quality, climate change/forcing, stratospheric ozone and solar radiations will be soon addressed through a GMES Atmosphere Service.
5.1.2.2.1 Emergency Response Core Service - ERCS
The Emergency Response Core Service (ERCS) has been selected with the objective to reinforce the European capacity to respond to crises and emergencies associated with natural, technological and humanitarian disasters. ERCS focus will be on the provision of rapid mapping and assessment services. ERCS will provide support to Civil Protection and other relief agencies authorities in the form of: • Provision of geo-spatial database and information (in all forms and for a variety of sources including remote sensing) for region of concern; • Assessment of events and impacts; • Access to monitoring tools for the duration of the crisis; • Delivery of tailored solutions and services.
The European Commission has organised on November 7-8, 2005 a topical workshop with the objective to reach a common view on the definition of the ERCS fast track service and on the necessary steps towards its sustained operation from 2008. The conclusions of this workshop were presented to the GMES Advisory Council (GAC) on November 14, 2005.
5.1.2.2.2 Land Monitoring Core Service - LMCS
The Land Monitoring Core Service (LMCS) has been selected on the basis of existing and mature capacities and structures, on user uptake and on perspectives for long-term sustainability. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 82 of 209 ______
A regular and independent satellite coverage of Europe and a derived land-cover database constitute the outline of this fast track service. LMCS will comprise: • Land-cover mapping at European scale for implementation, review and monitoring of EU policies (e.g. water framework directive, biodiversity strategy, common agricultural, regional policies) and also for reporting obligations under international treaties (e.g. the Kyoto Protocol), in line with national land-cover / land-use inventories in the Member States; • Land-cover mapping at local scale for instance for city planning, construction, noise modelling, mining, monitoring “hot spots” where rapid changes are occurring.
LMCS will also include change detection possibilities and release of acquired satellite imagery for direct use by the “GMES family”.
The European Commission has organised on October 20-21, 2005 a topical workshop with the objective to reach a common view on the definition of the LMCS fast track service and on the necessary steps towards its sustained operation from 2008. The conclusions of this workshop were presented to the GMES Advisory Council (GAC) on November 14, 2005.
5.1.2.2.3 Marine Core Service - MCS
The Marine Core Service (MCS) has been selected with the objective to streamline consistent European capacities for forecasting, monitoring and reporting on the ocean state, and to foster derived applications on specific environmental and safety issues, for both the global ocean and the regional European seas. MCS will address the requirements from national and European policies, international conventions, as well as European and international agencies (e.g. EEA, ICES, WCRP, UNFCCC), for data, information products and indicators on the environment at local to global scales.
MCS will contribute to: • Better exploit and manage ocean resources (e.g. offshore oil and gas industry, fisheries); • Improve safety and efficiency of maritime transport, shipping, and naval operations; • Anticipate and mitigate the effects of environmental hazards and pollution crisis (e.g. oil spills, harmful algal blooms); • Marine research (e.g. better understanding of the oceans and their ecosystems, of ocean climate variability); • Seasonal climate prediction; • Implement specific services for coastal management and planning (e.g. coastal flooding and erosion). The European Commission has organised on October 27-28, 2005 a topical workshop on the MCS fast track service with the objective to reach a common view on the definition of this pilot service. The conclusions of this workshop were presented to the GMES Advisory Council (GAC) on November 14, 2005. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 83 of 209 ______
5.1.2.2.4 GMES Atmosphere Pilot Service
The GMES Atmosphere Service will provide coherent information on atmospheric variables in support of European policies and for the benefit of European citizens. Services are proposed to cover: air quality, climate change/forcing, and stratospheric ozone and solar radiation. The main functions of the GMES Atmosphere Service will be the acquisition and processing of space and in-situ observations (Near-Real-Time, historic and ancillary), analysis and forecasting, product generation, dissemination and archiving. In particular, the GMES Atmosphere Service will provide: • Standard European data, on which downstream services will be based; • Information for process assessments; • Day-by-day analysis of the atmosphere at various space/time scales; • Key information on long range transport of atmospheric pollutants; • European overviews and initial and boundary conditions for air quality models; • Sustained monitoring of green-house gases, aerosols and reactive gases such as tropospheric ozone.
On December 6-7, 2006, the European Commission organised a workshop in order to reach a common view on the objectives and requirements of the GMES Atmosphere Service and to discuss its implementation and sustainability. Orientation Paper and Final Workshop Report are both available here in the library.
5.1.2.2.5 Security Pilot Service - G-MOSAIC
Within the context of GMES Initiative, G-MOSAIC Collaborative Project aims at identifying and developing products, methodologies and pilot services for the provision of geo-spatial information in support to EU external relations policies directed to attain and maintain a peaceful and prosperous global society, and at contributing to define and demonstrate sustainability of GMES global security perspective. In particular, G-MOSAIC services will support the prevention and management of external Regional Crisis (and the relevant EU intervention) for, i.a. peace keeping, peace enforcing, crisis prevention, EU citizens rescue. The main expected results of the proposed project are: • New GMES services for security o Organize service chains and infrastructure for the provision of pre-operational pilot services in support to security activities, in particular focusing on External Regional Crises, o Develop pre-operational Core Services for Security, and identify related Downstream Services, based on what was developed in previous GMES security and emergency response projects, o Develop a prototype portal for the management and harmonization of the different service cases in a secure service network, • New users involvement o Disseminate the knowledge on GMES potential impact on Security related User Community, and to contribute to build a political consensus on GMES Services for Security, CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 84 of 209 ______
o Promote the construction of a European inter-pillar capability for the monitoring services and related infrastructures, o Directly involve users in scenarios definition, to be continuously updated based on feedback collection, in order to guarantee the integration of geo-information supplied into their workflow and decision making process, • Contribution to GMES sustainability o Assess a sustainable provision and funding model for GMES Security Services, o Derive recommendations for the development of the GMES Earth Observation space component, o Study architectural models and prototype suitable solutions for security services provision, addressing specific requirements related to confidentiality of sensitive data and information handling. GMOSAIC will develop services in order to: • Support intelligence and early warning, with the objective to deploy and validate those information services, that contribute to the analysis of the causes leading to regional crises, such as the evaluation of synthetic crisis indicators, the monitoring of critical assets, borders, routes, proliferation and illegal activities and their relations to regional crises. • Support Crisis Management Operations, with the objective to deploy and validate those information services, that contribute to support the planning for EU intervention during crises, the EU intervention and citizen repatriation during crises, the crisis consequences management, reconstruction & resilience.
5.1.2.3 GMES Projects
5.1.2.3.1 Overview
The following table contains a list of GMES-related projects classified per type. Type Project EU-funded Integrated Projects developing pre- GEOLAND - MERSEA - PREVIEW - GEMS – operational GMES services (Enterprise and LIMES Industry Directorate General) ESA GMES Services Element Forest - Land - TerraFirma - Risk-EOS - Respond - GMFS - MARCOAST - Polar View - MARISS - PROMOTE Network of Excellence in support of security GMOSS applications under GMES GMES Infrastructure Projects OASIS - ORCHESTRA - WIN - ASTRO+ - HUMBOLDT - BOSS4GMES – OSIRIS GMES in-situ projects SANY – Inter-Risk Table 2 GMES Projects Moreover the FP7 SPACE-2007-1 CALL addresses GMES issues: SAFER in the Risk Management domain, and GEOLAND-2 for the Land Cover / Land Management are among the projects which have been selected. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 85 of 209 ______
5.1.2.3.2 SANY
The SANY “Sensors ANYwhere” is an FP6 Integrated Project which addresses the objective 2.5.12 – ICT for Environmental Risk Management, more specifically the integration of in-situ monitoring into a future GMES infrastructure. SANY pursues five major objectives: • Specify a standard open architecture for fixed and moving sensors and sensor networks capable of seamless "plug and measure" and sharing (virtual networks), applicable to all kinds of in-situ sensors, classical and ad-hoc sensor networks, virtual sensors (sensor-like software), roving and airborne sensors, and ensure interoperability between ground and in- orbit sensors. • Develop and validate re-usable data fusion and decision support service building blocks. • Assure a reference implementation of the architecture, i.e. an on-demand environment for accessing the GMES information and services is operational as GMES building block in 2008. • Assure the new architecture is generic and provides added value for end users. • Assure the outcome of SANY is accepted by end users and international organisations and contributes to a future standard applicable to GMES. SANY specifications shall be validated by experts through OGC technical committee consultations and realised in three innovative risk management applications covering the areas of air quality management, marine risks and geo hazards. All SANY architecture specifications shall be publicly available and compatible with EU and ESA infrastructure initiatives, such as INSPIRE (standard interfaces with geospatial information) and Heterogeneous Missions Accessibility project (standard interfaces for EO Ground Segments). SANY started in September 2006. In its first project year, SANY analysed the state of the art in sensor networks and decided to embrace and extend the architecture and services from ORCHESTRA, OGC Sensor Web Enablement (SWE), and ESA MASS/SSE. A first version of the SANY architecture shows that these three “legacy” technologies can indeed be merged in a coherent sensor network infrastructure. However, the resulting architecture is neither self-describing nor self-configuring, and unlikely to allow scaling necessary for GMES. In its second and third project year, SANY shall concentrate on the known deficiencies of the currently available technology, such as: self-configuration; handling large data sets; moving and ad-hoc sensors, events and alerts; sensor networks security; and data fusion and visualization. In the terms of standardization, SANY currently maintains the ORCHESTRA architecture (OGC best practice paper 07-097) and closely cooperates with OGC, especially with the OGC Sensor Web Enablement working group.
5.1.3 INSPIRE
INSPIRE is a European directive (2007/2/EC) [WR32] establishing the legal framework for setting up and operating an Infrastructure for Spatial (in this paragraph “spatial” is synonym of “geo-spatial” see annexes I, II and III of [RD13]) Information in Europe based on infrastructures for spatial information established and operated by the European Member States.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 86 of 209 ______
Figure 35: INSPIRE Geoportal The purpose of such infrastructure is, in the first instance, to support the formulation, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of Community environmental policies, and to overcome major barriers still affecting the availability and accessibility of pertinent data, which include: • inconsistencies in spatial data collection with gaps and duplications • lacking or incomplete documentation of available spatial data; • incompatibility of spatial data sets and services which cannot be integrated; • lack of interoperability of the infrastructures to find, access and use spatial data; • Cultural, institutional, financial and legal barriers preventing or delaying the sharing of existing spatial data.
The key elements of INSPIRE to overcome these barriers include: • metadata to describe existing information resources so that they can be more easily found and accessed; • harmonization of key spatial data themes needed to support environmental policies in the European Union; • agreements on network services and technologies to allow discovery, viewing, download of information resources, and access to related services; • establishment of a European geo-portal providing access to services operated by Member States; • policy agreements on sharing and access, including licensing and charging; • coordination and monitoring mechanisms; • Implementation process and procedures.
From the outset of the INSPIRE initiative in 2001 it was recognized that to overcome some of the barriers highlighted above it would be necessary to develop a legislative framework requiring Member States to coordinate their activities and agree on a minimum set of common standards and processes. This in turn requires the wide support of the Member States to the objectives of INSPIRE. Therefore, a very collaborative process was put in place to formulate the INSPIRE proposal. This process in particular involved the establishment of an expert group with official representatives of all CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 87 of 209 ______
the Member States, and working groups with expertise in the fields of environmental policy and geographic information to formulate proposals and forge consensus. From this process, it was agreed that the key principles of INSPIRE should be: • That spatial data should be collected once and maintained at the level where this can be done most effectively; • That it must be possible to combine seamlessly spatial data from different sources across the EU and share it between many users and applications; • That it must be possible for spatial data collected at one level of government to be shared between all the different levels of government; • That spatial data needed for good governance should be available with conditions that do not restrict its extensive use; • That it should be easy to discover which spatial data is available, to evaluate its fitness for a purpose and to know which conditions apply for its use.
5.1.4 SEIS
The European Commission published a Communication on a Shared Environmental information System for Europe on 1 February 2008 [RD16]. This is the first step in creating an integrated environmental information system in the European Union. The Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS) [WR48] is a collaborative initiative of the European Commission and the European Environment Agency (EEA) to establish together with the Member States an integrated and shared EU-wide environmental information system. This system would tie in better all existing data gathering and information flows related to EU environmental policies and legislation. It will be based on technologies such as the internet and satellite systems and thus make environmental information more readily available and easier to understand to policy makers and the public. The underlying aim of SEIS is also to move away from paper-based reporting and reports to a system where information, is managed as close as possible to its source and made available to users in an open and transparent way. According to the SEIS concept, environmentally-related data and information will be stored in electronic databases throughout the European Union. These databases would be interconnected virtually and be compatible with each other. The proposed SEIS is a decentralised but integrated web- enabled information system based on a network of public information providers sharing environmental data and information. It will be built upon existing e-infrastructure, systems and services in Member States and EU institutions. Timely, reliable and relevant information on the state of the environment is essential for sound policy making. Policy makers and the public need to know in a timely manner how the climate is changing, whether European waters are getting cleaner or more polluted, how nature is reacting to pollution and changing land use and whether policies are effectives. This information should be made available to all in a way that everyone can understand the changes to the environment and their impact. More than 70 of the several hundred pieces of environmental legislation in force in the European Union require Member States to report on specific aspects of the environment within their territory. A large amount of environmental data is thus collected by various levels of public authorities throughout the EU. This information is used to analyse trends and pressures on the environment and is vital when drawing up policy or assessing whether policy is effective or being properly implemented. At present, this wealth of information is neither made available in a timely manner nor in a format that policy CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 88 of 209 ______
makers and the public can readily understand and use. This is due to a range of obstacles of a legal, financial, technical or procedural nature. Once a Shared Environmental Information System exists, all players can efficiently share information via shared areas SEIS will take advantage of the possibilities provided by information and communication technology to put into practice the principle 'monitor once for timely and multipurpose use'. This will enable real-time data to be made available to decision-makers and allow them to make immediate and life-saving decisions. Experiences of forest fires, floods and droughts show how much timely environmental information can make a difference during an emergency. SEIS will allow seamlessly combining data and information from various sources and thus quickly performing cross thematic and cross-sectorial analyses that EU environmental policy requires. For example, the health effects of air pollution can be evaluated if statistics on air quality, population concentrations and health statistics are overlapped for a specific region or geographical area and analysed collectively. Action can then follow based on the results.
5.1.5 Disaster Management Systems
The destructive power of extreme natural events is causing more and more material damages and losses of life. With the number of natural disasters globally increasing, coordinated disaster management is getting more important.
5.1.5.1 GITEWS
GITEWS is a project of the German Government at the reconstruction of the tsunami-prone region of the Indian Ocean. The German conception of the establishment of a Tsunami Early Warning System for the Indian Ocean is based on different kinds of sensor systems. In ca. 90 % a tsunami is generated by an earthquake but also volcanic eruptions and landslides may be the triggering events. The conception aims at achieving indicators of a tsunami and its dimension by the analysis of different measurements at a very early stage. While a tsunami wave in the wideness of the sea spreads out with a speed up to 700 km/h, in the treated region a period of about 20 minutes elapses between the wave's generation and the first contact with the Indonesian mainland. In this timeframe the sensors, which will be installed at different locations inside the considered propagation areas, are able to rapidly detect deviations from normality (anomalies). The sensors of the Tsunami Early Warning System comprise seismometers, GPS instruments, tide gauges and buoys as well as ocean bottom pressure sensors. In a central warning center in Indonesia remarkable sensor data immediately is verified with a multitude of pre-tailored tsunami simulations to derive and to deliver trusted warnings. GITEWS is accomplished by a consortium of nine institutions: • GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (GFZ), • Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), • Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR), • German Aerospace Center (DLR), • GKSS Forschungszentrum Geesthacht, • Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 89 of 209 ______
• Konsortium Deutsche Meeresforschung (KDM), • Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences (IFM-GEOMAR), • United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS).
5.1.5.2 NaDiNe
NaDiNe is the Natural Disasters Networking Platform of the Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres. The mission of the platform is: • Bundling and linking the existing scientific expertise within the Helmholtz Association in order to support actors in disaster management • Provision of data, models and scientific information products to ministries, authorities and relief organisations for applications in disaster prevention and mitigation • Scientific preparation of information on natural hazards and ongoing disasters for the press and the public During the past years, several research centers within the Helmholtz Association established extensive expertise in the field of disaster management. Via the Natural Disaster Networking Platform (NaDiNe), this expertise will be provided a larger number of users beyond the realm of scientific facilities. The major tasks of NaDiNe are: • Bundling of scientific expertise The expertise in natural disasters and hazards existing in the Helmholtz Association will be brougth together by the establishment of cross-center expert groups, focussing on different fields of research. An interdisciplinary exchange amongst scientists is ensured by meetings held regularly, jointly conducted projects and the use of the communication infrastructure provided by NaDiNe. • Provision of data, models and scientific information products Data existing or collected in the Helmholtz Association will be provided and processed by scientific models and procedures to obtain information products for the use in disaster management. The infrastructure needed for this task will be conceptually designed and established, including the provision of interfaces to external information services. • Preparation of information for the press and the public Regarding the topics earthquakes, floods, oil spills, storms and storm surges as well as tsunami, background information will be offered. In case of a catastrophic event, up-to-date information will be edited and evaluated from a scientific point of view for the press and the public. For the time being, centers actively participating in the NaDiNe project are: • German Aerospace Center (DLR) • Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research (AWI) • GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (GFZ) • GKSS Research Center Geesthacht CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 90 of 209 ______
5.1.5.3 RIMAX
Aim of the German research programme RIMAX (Risk Management of Extreme Flood Events) is to integrate different disciplines and several participants to develop and implement improved instruments of flood risk management. RIMAX concentrates on extreme flood events which occur once in a hundred years or even less often with a highly destructive potential. This programme is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, main centers actively participating are: • GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (GFZ) • Research Center Karlsruhe (PTKA-WTE)
5.1.5.4 SAR-HQ
The aim of SAR-HQ (Flood and damage assessment using very high resolution SAR data) is to explore and expand the applicability of very high resolution X-band SAR data for flood mapping and damage assessment. Since flood events are usually accompanied by overcast sky conditions, weather-independent SAR platforms are particularly suitable for obtaining spatially-explicit information about inundated areas in a time- and cost-efficient manner. While past and current C-band platforms (ERS-2, ENVISAT ASAR, RADARSAT) have a proven track- record for large-scale flood mapping, their potential for deriving flood perimeters in complex and small-scaled scenarios such as urban areas is clearly limited. However, with the advent of the new European X-Band SAR platforms TerraSAR-X and Cosmo-SkyMed which are capable of providing very high spatial resolutions, a very detailed assessment of flood extent and damages should be possible. Since an efficient flood mapping requires data acquisitions to match the maximum water level as closely as possible, a synergy of utilizing both X-band SAR-satellites complementary may also offer new opportunities in the temporal domain. In order to adapt to the demands and capabilities of these instruments, SAR-HQ is developing dedicated processing and analysis techniques. The project aims towards the integration of SAR data into operational processing and mapping workflows to ensure a fast and reliable access to detailed crisis information. By combining SAR-derived flood maps with ancillary data sources such as topographic and digital elevation data, information products will be generated which are vital tools for disaster management, risk assessment and post-hazard reconstruction. SAR-HQ is embedded in the interdisciplinary oriented RIMAX programme, funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).
5.1.6 VGISC
The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) in 2002 created a project for the development of a Global Information System Centre (GISC) within the WMO Information System (WIS). Much like modern library systems, WIS is designed around catalogues that contain metadata describing the full set of data and products available across WMO. These catalogues, plus metadata describing dissemination options, will be hosted by up to ten GISCs. Collaboration across all GISCs will assure that each not only supports comprehensive search across catalogues, but each can disseminate WMO data and products intended for global exchange and hold them for at least 24 hours. Data and products will flow to a GISC from Data Collection or Production Centres (DCPCs) and from National Centres (NCs) within its area of responsibility. The national weather services of France (Météo- France), Germany (DWD) and the UK (UKMO) volunteered to work jointly on the concept of a virtual CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 91 of 209 ______
GISC (VGISC) shared by their services and to include ECMWF, EUMETSAT and the Norwegian Meteorological Institute into the concept. The initial development of VGISC was partly done in SIMDAT, a project funded by the European Commission, Framework VI. In addition the partners have identified a set of software components, necessary for the operational phase of the VGISC that needs to be developed. To continue the VGISC development the partners intend to procure, under the direction of DWD, software which provides the functions of a virtual GISC and several Data Collection or Production Centres (DCPCs) within WIS. An Invitation to Tender (ITT) for VGISC is scheduled for Q2 2008.
5.2 Institutions
5.2.1 European Institutions
5.2.1.1 ESA
See 2.5.1.5 European Space Agency.
5.2.1.2 European Maritime Safety Agency
The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) [WR11] was created in the aftermath of the Erika disaster. It will contribute to the enhancement of the overall maritime safety system in the Community. Its goals are, through its tasks, to reduce the risk of maritime accidents, marine pollution from ships and the loss of human lives at sea. Maritime transport is of fundamental importance to Europe and the rest of the world. To put this in perspective, over 90% of European Union external trade goes by sea and more than 1 billion tonnes of freight a year are loaded and unloaded in EU ports. This means that shipping is the most important mode of transport in terms of volume. Furthermore, as a result of its geography, its history and the effects of globalisation, maritime transport will continue to be the most important transport mode in developing EU trade for the foreseeable future. In this context, European citizens have the right to expect their maritime passenger and goods transport to be safe, secure and clean. So, in support of these goals, and particularly in the wake of the Erika and Prestige oil tanker accidents, the set up of EMSA (under Regulation (EC) Nº 1406/2002 of 27 June 2002) is one of the key EU level initiatives aimed at improving the situation. The Agency's main objective is to provide technical and scientific assistance to the European Commission and Member States in the proper development and implementation of EU legislation on maritime safety, pollution by ships and security on board ships. To do this, one of EMSA's most important supporting tasks is to improve cooperation with, and between, Member States in all key areas. In addition, the Agency has operational tasks in oil pollution preparedness, detection and response. As a body of the European Union, the Agency sits at the heart of the EU maritime safety network and collaborates with many industry stakeholders and public bodies, in close cooperation with the European Commission. In general terms, the Agency will provide technical and scientific advice to the Commission in the field of maritime safety and prevention of pollution by ships in the continuous process of updating and CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 92 of 209 ______
developing new legislation, monitoring its implementation and evaluating the effectiveness of the measures in place. Agency officials will closely cooperate with Member States maritime services. Some of the key areas where the Agency will be active are: strengthening of the Port State Control regime; auditing of the Community-recognised classification societies; development of a common methodology for the investigation of maritime accidents and; the establishment of a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system. The Agency will work very closely with Member States. It will respond to their specific requests in relation to the practical implementation of Community legislation, such as the recently adopted directive on traffic monitoring, and may organise appropriate training activities. The Agency will facilitate co-operation between the Member States and disseminate best practices in the Community. The Agency will also play a positive role in the process of European Union enlargement, by assisting the accession countries in the implementation of Community legislation on maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by ships. The Agency will contribute to the process of evaluating the effectiveness of Community legislation by providing the Commission and the Member states with objective, reliable and comparable information and data on maritime safety and on ship pollution. Following major shipping disasters in European waters, such as the sinking of the ferry Estonia and the tankers Erika and Prestige, very substantial packages of EU legislation have been adopted to improve maritime safety and to reduce pollution from ships. An overview of the most important directives and regulations is presented in this website. To ensure a proper, harmonised and effective implementation of this vast package of legislation, an ongoing process of dialogue and cooperation is necessary between all the parties concerned. In summary, the main task of EMSA is to organise and structure this dialogue between 27 European States and the European Commission.
5.2.1.3 European Union Satellite Centre
The mission of the European Union Satellite Centre (EUSC) [WR12] is to support the decision-making of the European Union by providing analysis of satellite imagery and collateral data. The EUSC is an Agency of the Council of the European Union. It is one of the key institutions for European Union’s Security and Defence policy, and the only one in the field of space. The staff of the Centre consists of experienced imagery analysts, geo-spatial specialists and supporting personnel, recruited from EU Member States. The Centre also hosts seconded experts from Member States and Third States. The EU Satellite Centre assures technical development activities in direct support to its operational activities, as well as specialised training for its image analysts, including external participants from Member States and Third States. It is located in Torrejón de Ardoz, in the vicinity of Madrid, Spain. The EUSC shall, in coherence with the European Union Security Strategy, support the decision- making of the European Union in the field of the Common Foreign and Security Policy and in particular the European Security and Defence Policy, including European Union crisis management operations, by providing products resulting from the analysis of satellite imagery and collateral data, and related services. Furthermore, the Centre shall ensure close cooperation with Community space-related service. The EUSC shall also establish contacts with other national and international institutions in the field of space. The Satellite Centre’s areas of priority reflect the key security concerns as defined by the European Security Strategy, such as monitoring regional conflicts, state failure, organized crime, terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The EUSC gives, for example, support to EU deployed operations (such as the EUFOR in Bosnia and Herzegovina and EUFOR R.D. Congo) and CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 93 of 209 ______
humanitarian aid missions and peacekeeping missions. The Centre is also an important early warning tool, facilitating information for early detection and possible prevention of armed conflicts and humanitarian crises. The Centre carries out tasks in support of the following activities: • General Security Surveillance over areas of interest • Petersberg type tasks • Support to humanitarian and rescue tasks • Support to peacekeeping tasks • Tasks of combat forces in crisis management, including peacemaking • Treaty verification • Contingency planning • Arms and Proliferation control (including Weapons of Mass Destruction) • Support to Exercises • Other activities, such as judicial enquiries The Centre is providing its support to UN missions, an example of this is the support provided to peacekeeping and humanitarian operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo and in Sudan.
5.2.1.4 Joint Research Centre -IPSC
The Joint Research Centre (JRC) [WR13] is a research based policy support organisation and an integral part of the European Commission. The JRC is providing the scientific advice and technical know-how to support a wide range of EU policies. Its status as a Commission service, which guarantees the independence from private or national interests, is crucial for pursuing the mission. "The mission of the JRC is to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of EU policies. As a service of the European Commission, the JRC functions as a reference centre of science and technology for the Union. Close to the policy-making process, it serves the common interest of the Member States, while being independent of special interests, whether private or national." The JRC has seven scientific institutes, located at five different sites in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain, with a wide range of laboratories and unique research facilities. Through numerous collaborations, access to many facilities is granted to scientists from partner organisations. JRC work ranges from detecting and measuring genetically modified organisms (GMO) in food and feed to developing nuclear forensics technology for combating illicit trafficking of nuclear material and to using satellite technologies for monitoring land use, climate change and emergency situations such as fires and floods. JRC activities focus on three main pillars: food, chemical products and health; environment and sustainability; and nuclear safety and security. These are supported by competencies in science and technology foresight; reference materials and measurements; and public security and antifraud. The JRC budget comes from the EU's research budget. Further income is generated through the JRC's participation in indirect actions, additional work for Commission services and contract work for third parties, such as regional authorities and industry. The JRC Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen (IPSC) provides research-based, systems-oriented support to EU policies so as to protect the citizen against economic and technological risk. The Institute maintains and develops its expertise and networks in information, communication, space and engineering technologies in support of its mission. The strong cross- CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 94 of 209 ______
fertilisation between its nuclear and non-nuclear activities strengthens the expertise it can bring to the benefit of customers in both domains. Through its strong competencies in key technologies such as satellite images analysis, web/data mining and nuclear and sensor technologies, the IPSC addresses the following broad research themes in support to EU policies: • IPSC provides scientific and technical support to EU external relations and security related policies, particularly in the areas of global security & stability, border management, fight against terrorism and crime, as well as in nuclear, transport and energy security. For this purpose, IPSC applies its expertise and competencies in nuclear safeguards/non-proliferation, open source and geo-spatial intelligence and analysis, information technologies as well as systems engineering and analysis. • IPSC works in support of risk prevention and management, notably in the fields of the industrial accidents (Seveso II Directive), the vulnerability assessment of buildings and IT infrastructure, the risk assessment of landslides and avalanches. • IPSC applies its expertise in space and IT technologies (including intelligence gathering and advanced analytical techniques) to enhance the EU's capacity in compliance monitoring and to detect and monitor fraud against the EU budget in several fields including agriculture, fisheries, customs, and external assistance. • Moreover, IPSC performs quantitative econometric analysis in support to competitiveness and growth, with emphasis on financial services, macro-economic modelling, business cycles analysis, and the development and assessment of statistical indicators. IPSC provides also tools for the assurance of scientific information quality.
5.2.1.5 European Environment Agency
The European Environment Agency (EEA) [WR14] is the EU body dedicated to providing sound, independent information on the environment. EEA is a major information source for those involved in developing, adopting, implementing and evaluating environmental policy, and also the general public. EEA aim is to help the EU and member countries make informed decisions about improving the environment, integrating environmental considerations into economic policies and moving towards sustainability. EEA provides a wide range of information and assessments. This covers the state of the environment and trends in it, together with pressures on the environment and the economic and social driving forces behind them. It also covers policies and their effectiveness. EEA tries to identify possible future trends, outlooks and problems using scenarios and other techniques. EEA publishes a number of reports every year and — increasingly — short briefings on particular issues. The information provided by the EEA comes from a wide range of sources. One major source is the European environment information and observation network (Eionet). The EEA is responsible for developing the network and coordinating its activities. EEA works closely together with the national focal points, typically national environment agencies or environment ministries in the member countries. They are responsible for coordinating national networks involving many institutions. To support data collection, management and analysis EEA works closely with five European topic centres covering water, air and climate change, biological diversity, resource and waste management, and the terrestrial environment. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 95 of 209 ______
Other important sources of information are European and international organisations, such as the Statistical Office (Eurostat) and the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the World Health Organization (WHO).
5.2.1.6 European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts
The European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF, the Centre) [WR33] is an independent international organisation supported by 30 States. Its Member States are: Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Austria, Portugal, Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom . The principal objectives of the Centre are: • the development of numerical methods for medium-range weather forecasting; • the preparation, on a regular basis, of medium-range weather forecasts for distribution to the meteorological services of the Member States; • scientific and technical research directed at the improvement of these forecasts; • collection and storage of appropriate meteorological data. In addition, the Centre: • makes available a proportion of its computing facilities to its Member States for their research; • assists in implementing the programmes of the World Meteorological Organisation; • provides advanced training to the scientific staff of the Member States in the field of numerical weather prediction; • makes the data in its extensive archives available to outside bodies. The principal goal of ECMWF in the coming ten years will be to maintain the current, rapid rate of improvement of its global, medium-range weather forecasting products, with particular effort on early warnings of severe weather. Complementary goals are: • To improve the quality and scope of monthly and seasonal-to-interannual forecasts • To enhance support to Member States’ national forecasting activities by providing suitable boundary conditions for limited-area models • To deliver real-time analyses and forecasts of atmospheric composition • To carry out climate monitoring through regular re-analyses of the Earth-system • To contribute towards the optimization of the Global Observing System. ECMWF will sustain effort on consolidating its existing tools, improving the Integrated Forecasting System (IFS) and making optimal use of observations, particularly from satellite systems. It will continue developing a fully coupled, modular Earth-system model, comprising all components relevant for the time scales of its missions (from medium-range to seasonal time scale).
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 96 of 209 ______
5.2.2 International institutions
5.2.2.1 United Nations
5.2.2.1.1 United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs
The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) [WR22] is the United Nations office responsible for promoting international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space. The Office serves as the secretariat for the General Assembly's only committee dealing exclusively with international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space: the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS). The Committee has two subcommittees: the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee and the Legal Subcommittee. The United Nations Programme on Space Applications (PSA) is implemented by UNOOSA and works to improve the use of space science and technology for the economic and social development of all nations, in particular developing countries. Under the Programme, the Office conducts training courses, workshops, seminars and other activities on applications and capacity building in subjects such as remote sensing, communications, satellite meteorology, search and rescue, basic space science and satellite navigation. On behalf of the Secretary-General, UNOOSA maintains the Register of Objects Launched into Outer Space and disseminates information contained therein. An index of all functional space objects launched into outer space, including information contained in the Register, is available online. UNOOSA prepares and distributes reports, studies and publications on various fields of space science and technology applications and international space law. Documents and reports are available in all official languages of the United Nations through the website. The Office provided substantive secretariat services for the three United Nations Conferences on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNISPACE), which were held in 1968, 1982 and 1999. The Office now supports and participates in the implementation of the recommendations of UNISPACE III.
5.2.2.1.2 UNOSAT
UNOSAT [WR35] is the UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) Operational Satellite Applications Programme, implemented in co-operation with the UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS) and the European Organisation of High Energy Physics (CERN).
UNOSAT is a programme delivering satellite solutions to relief and development organisations within and outside the UN system to help make a difference in the life of communities exposed to poverty, hazards and risk, or affected by humanitarian and other crises. The UNOSAT core team consists of UN fieldworkers as well as satellite imagery experts, geographers, geologists, development experts, database programmers and internet communication specialists. UNOSAT created an extended network of public and private partners, and collaborates with the majority of UN agencies, space agencies and several international initiatives active in satellite technologies field. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 97 of 209 ______
Created initially to exploit fully the potential of satellite earth observation, UNOSAT has developed skills in additional technical areas such as satellite navigation and telecommunications and is today looking into the future of integrated solutions. UNOSAT mission is to deliver integrated satellite-based solutions for human security, peace and socio-economic development, in keeping with the mandate given to UNITAR by the UN General Assembly since 1963. The goal is to make satellite solutions and geographic information easily accessible to the UN family and to experts worldwide who work at reducing the impact of crises and disasters and plan sustainable development. UNOSAT tasks and activities include • Satellite imagery search and procurement assistance • Image processing • Map production including information extraction & analysis • Research and Methodology (design and guidance) • Field and remote technical assistance, including strategic consulting • Training and capacity development • Integrated satcoms solutions • Data storage and Information & Communications Technology (ICT) solutions
UNOSAT delivers services 24 hours a day 7 days a week through a web-based geographic interface or imagery data bank and also through direct contact. UNOSAT created in 2003 a new humanitarian rapid mapping service that is today fully developed and has been activated over 100 times by UN relief and coordination agencies. This work implies very quick acquisition and processing of satellite imagery and data for the creation of map and GIS layers in support of emergency response and humanitarian relief coordination (UNDAC teams, impact assessment missions, damage estimates, etc). UNOSAT remains engaged beyond the emergency phase by supporting early recovery and recovery activities. A growing number of national and international development projects receive support from UNOSAT for strategic territorial planning and advanced GIS applications. UNOSAT is committed also on developing capacity locally and help communities retain this capacity. To do so, UNOSAT develops and implements integrated training modules and programmes that sometimes include the design and realization of GIS and cartographic centres that can continue to exist after the conclusion of a cooperation project, for example as self-supporting geo-information centres.
5.2.2.1.3 World Meteorological Organization
See 2.5.3.12 WMO.
5.2.2.1.4 World Intellectual Property Organization
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) [WR43] is a specialized agency of the United Nations. It is dedicated to developing a balanced and accessible international intellectual property (IP) CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 98 of 209 ______
system, which rewards creativity, stimulates innovation and contributes to economic development while safeguarding the public interest. WIPO was established by the WIPO Convention in 1967 with a mandate from its Member States to promote the protection of IP throughout the world through cooperation among states and in collaboration with other international organizations. Its headquarters are in Geneva, Switzerland. WIPO’s vision is that IP is an important tool for the economic, social and cultural development of all countries. This shapes its mission to promote the effective use and protection of IP worldwide. Strategic goals are set out in a four yearly Medium Term Plan and refined in the biennial Program and Budget document. The five strategic goals defined in the 2006 – 2007 Program and Budget are: • To promote an IP culture; • To integrate IP into national development policies and programs; • To develop international IP laws and standards; • To deliver quality services in global IP protection systems; and • To increase the efficiency of WIPO’s management and support processes. WIPO’s core tasks and program activities are all aimed at achieving these goals.
5.2.2.2 FAO
Over the last few years Food and Agricolture Organisation (FAO) [WR23] has established geo- referenced data bases on land cover, global land and water resources, on worldwide forest resources and has created a global fisheries information system. FAO has also initiated global inventories of livestock production systems and initiated the mapping of generalized farming systems. Appropriate geo-referenced information on physical and socio-economic resources for agriculture in the broadest sense (including forestry and fisheries) is of substantial value in the analysis of economic feasibility and environmental acceptability of agricultural and rural development and food security programmes. Data on land use are being compiled by various countries using divergent methods for selected points of time. The Statistics Division develops methods, standards and techniques for creating internationally comparable geo-referenced statistical data on land use by taking into account data collected by member nation. FAO remains the lead agency providing national land use statistics and provides the most comprehensive on-line overview of crop characteristics, ecology and management. The Environment and Natural Resources Service (SDRN) holds the ARTEMIS satellite-based environmental and agro- meteorological databases and analysis tools and assures the documentation (metadata) and distribution of FAO's spatial information through the GeoNetwork. In addition, FAO has developed a number of analytical decision support tools for the interpretation and use of these databases: The Agro-ecological Zoning (AEZ) methodology and related decision support tools allow the analysis of land productivity, crop intensification, food production and sustainability issues. The Terrestrial Ecosystem Monitoring Sites (TEMS) metadatabase, is a geo-referenced registry of sites around the world that are engaged in making long measurements of environmental conditions and trends. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 99 of 209 ______
ProMIS (Programme Mangement Information System) a field initiative is designed to provide an integrated information management capacity to the UN, NGO and donor community opertaing in Afghanistan. WAICENT provides gateways on the web to make information easily accessible available to outside users and is developing corporate tools and standards to enhance its presentation. Given the wide range and varied subjects of the spatial information concerned, there is a growing awareness that the development of the various databases should be better coordinated, in order to assure the availability and compatibility among the in-house users and enhancing the corporate standards for outside distribution.
5.2.2.2.1 GeoNetwork
GeoNetwork provides Internet access to interactive maps, satellite imagery and related spatial databases. Its purpose is to improve access to and integrated use of spatial data and information. GeoNetwork promotes and enhances multidisciplinary approaches to sustainable development and supports decision making in agriculture, forestry, fisheries and food security. GeoNetwork allows to easily share spatial data among different FAO Units, other UN Agencies, NGO's and other institutions. GeoNetwork, which is under active further development, can be accessed at http://www.fao.org/geonetwork
5.2.2.2.2 Spatial Standard and Norms
FAO is establishing GIS guidelines and spatial standards and norms for internal use in order to rationalize, harmonize and advance its GIS and cartographic activities and to support GeoNetwork. At the same time several base maps are being developed with a number of partners for internal and external use.
5.2.2.2.3 The Global Sub national Land Use Database
FAO, IFPRI and SAGE set up in early 2002, an informal collaborative consortium, Agri-MAPS, aimed at compiling a consistent global spatial database based on selected sub-national agricultural statistics. Coordination of FAO's contribution to Agri-MAPS has been facilitated by the Task Force on 'Sub- national land use information' of the SPATL-PAIA. Agri-MAPS outputs are: • A global spatial dataset of statistics on crop production, area harvested and yield, aggregated at the second administrative sub-division level, where available. • Demonstration studies, highlighting the utility of the Agri-MAPS data in several thematic areas, viz, land degradation, early warning, food security, farming systems studies, nutrient balance and climate change. • Specialized database query tools; interactive web sites for display of maps of major crops and to facilitate information exchange. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 100 of 209 ______
Agri-MAPS (Mapping of Agricultural Production Systems) can be accessed at http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/default.stm and at http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/globalmap/default.jsp.
5.2.2.3 NATO
See 2.5.2.2 NATO-STANAG.
5.2.2.4 Disaster Charter
Following the UNISPACE III conference held in Vienna, Austria in July 1999, the European and French space agencies (ESA and CNES) initiated the International Charter "Space and Major Disasters", with the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) signing the Charter on October 20, 2000. In September of 2001, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) also became members of the Charter. The Argentine Space Agency (CONAE) joined in July 2003. The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) became a member in February 2005. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has also joined the Charter as part of the U.S. team. BNSC/DMC became a member in November 2005. The China National Space Administration (CNSA) joined in May 2007. The International Charter was declared formally operational on November 1, 2000.
The International Charter aims at providing a unified system of space data acquisition and delivery to those affected by natural or man-made disasters through Authorized Users. Each member agency has committed resources to support the provisions of the Charter and thus is helping to mitigate the effects of disasters on human life and property.
An Authorized User can now call a single number to request the mobilization of the space and associated ground resources (RADARSAT, ERS, ENVISAT, SPOT, IRS, SAC-C, NOAA satellites, LANDSAT, ALOS, DMC satellites and others) of the member agencies to obtain data and information on a disaster occurrence. A 24-hour on-duty operator receives the call, checks the identity of the requestor and verifies that the User Request form sent by the Authorized User is correctly filled up. The operator passes the information to an Emergency On-Call Officer who analyzes the request and the scope of the disaster with the Authorized User, and prepares an archive and acquisition plan using available space resources. Data acquisition and delivery takes place on an emergency basis, and a Project Manager, who is qualified in data ordering, handling and application, assists the user throughout the process.
5.2.2.5 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [wr34] is a scientific body tasked to evaluate the risk of climate change caused by human activity. The panel was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), two organizations of the United Nations. The IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President of the United States Al Gore. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 101 of 209 ______
The IPCC does not carry out research, nor does it monitor climate or related phenomena. A main activity of the IPCC is publishing special reports on topics relevant to the implementation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), an international treaty that acknowledges the possibility of harmful climate change; implementation of the UNFCCC led eventually to the Kyoto Protocol. The IPCC bases its assessment mainly on peer reviewed and published scientific literature. The IPCC is only open to member states of the WMO and UNEP. IPCC reports are widely cited in almost any debate related to climate change. National and international responses to climate change generally regard the UN climate panel as authoritative.
The summary reports (i.e. Summary for Policymakers), which draw the most media attention, include review by participating governments in addition to scientific review.
5.2.2.6 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) [WR37] is a scientific agency within the United States Department of Commerce focused on the conditions of the oceans and the atmosphere. NOAA warns of dangerous weather, charts seas and skies, guides the use and protection of ocean and coastal resources, and conducts research to improve understanding and stewardship of the environment. In addition to its civilian employees, NOAA research and operations are supported by 300 uniformed service members who make up the NOAA Corps. The agency's mission is "to understand and predict changes in the Earth's environment and conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to meet our nation's economic, social, and environmental needs." In support of its vision and mission, has four goals to guide its suite of operations. Each goal corresponds to activities focusing on ecosystems, climate, weather and water, and commerce and transportation. Specifically, NOAA operates to: • Ensure the sustainable use of resources and balance competing uses of coastal and marine ecosystems, recognizing both their human and natural components. • Understand changes in climate, including global climate change and the El Niño phenomenon, to ensure that Americans can plan and respond properly. • Provide data and forecasts for weather and water cycle events, including storms, droughts, and floods. • Provide weather, climate, and ecosystem information to make sure individual and commercial transportation is safe, efficient, and environmentally sound. NOAA conducts an end-to-end sequence of activities, beginning with scientific discovery and resulting in a number of critical environmental services and products. The five "fundamental activities" are: • Monitoring and observing Earth systems with instruments and data collection networks. • Understanding and describing Earth systems through research and analysis of that data. • Assessing and predicting the changes of these systems over time. • Engaging, advising, and informing the public and partner organizations with important information. • Managing resources for the betterment of society, economy and environment. NOAA works toward its mission through these six major organizations in addition to several special program units: • The National Weather Service CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 102 of 209 ______
• The National Ocean Service • The National Marine Fisheries Service • The National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service • NOAA Research • Program Planning and Integration
5.2.2.6.1 National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS)
The National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) was created by the NOAA to operate and manage the United States environmental satellite programs, and manage the data gathered by the NWS and other government agencies and departments. The service operates and manages many geosynchronous satellites. In 1975 Tiros-1 (also known as GEOS-1), NOAA's first owned and operated geostationary satellite was launched. In 1983 NOAA assumed operational responsibility for LANDSAT satellite system. In 1984 the Tropical Ocean-Global Atmosphere program (TOGA) program began. In 1977 the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) deployed the first successful moored equatorial current meter - the beginning of the Tropical Atmosphere/Ocean (TAO) array. In 1979 NOAA's first polar-orbiting environmental satellite was launched. Current operational satellites include NOAA-15, NOAA-16, NOAA-17 and NOAA-18.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 103 of 209 ______
6 STATE OF PLAY IN SPACE STANDARDISATION
6.1 Overview
The following picture shows a simplified schema of the whole processing/product chain and workflow linked to the space observation. The picture aims to identify all the steps, the operations, the data flows and the processing involved in the observed scenario. These elements will be addressed in order to define the current state of play in space standardisation aiming to get a systematic approach.
ESA Approved Standards - General - Space Engineering - Space Project Management - Space Product Assurance Satellite
P Other ECSS / /L
link ink T Approved Up nl M C ow D Standards T D o TM w n K l H in k
Target Area
S-Band Station P/L TM In
X-Band Station TC Out HK TM In
Mission Plan Orders
Processor Planner Mission Control User Services Simulation Models Product Archive Catalogue Access FD Data FD Inputs Simulation Exchange Data User Orders Products
Flight Dynamics Cal/Val
Architecture Quality Safety Security Simulation Engine User
Figure 36 Earth Observation Scenario
Here follows a short description of the workflow shown in the picture. For simplicity sake the starting point is the User, a generic customer of a space observation system. In the picture it is shown as a person working at a personal computer connected via internet to a User Services server. The user may be also a large scale service receiving data from the system but this is not an issue within this purely functional schema.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 104 of 209 ______
The User browses a catalogue and issues orders to get products. Product has to be intended as a generic term including a wide range of items to single images/products to huge data sets (e.g. wide coverages, continuous or periodic monitoring etc.), moreover the products may have different levels of processing. Product orders may be referred to • Products already available in the Product Archive which are quickly delivered (delivery mode may be electronic, media etc.) after retrieval and (optional) processing; • Products requiring the acquisition of new data triggering the process described in the next lines (in a simplified manner).
Orders for the acquisition of new data are passed from User Services to a Planner entity. The Planner builds a mission plan allocating the acquisition of new data by the satellite in the next period. The mission plan takes into account information coming from Flight Dynamics/Mission Control including satellite orbit, unavailability etc.
The Planner sends the mission plan to the Mission Control entity which converts the plan into a set of telecommands (TC) to be uplinked to the satellite via the S-band Antenna during the visibility periods. The set of TC uplinked includes also housekeeping TC for satellite maintenance and guidance. The Mission Control receives and processes housekeeping telemetry (HK TM) coming from the satellite mainly reporting the satellite status and the TC results. The Mission Control interacts with Flight Dynamics providing and receiving data related to satellite maintenance and guidance.
During the visibility periods the Satellite (for simplicity sake a single satellite is shown but the description can be easily extended to a constellation) receives the TC from the S-band Antenna executes them (immediately or at scheduled times) and downloads back HK TM.
The uplinked TC include • commands to perform new acquisitions. The Satellite takes the images through the on board sensors (optical, radar etc.) as soon as it flies over the target areas according with the uplinked commands. • commands to download the data related to the acquired “images”. The Satellite downloads the data to the X-band station as payload telemetry (P/L TM) as soon as it is in visibility.
The P/L TM acquired by the X-Band station are transferred to the Processor entities which generate the final products to be stored into the Product Archive and/or disseminated/delivered to the User, closing the loop started with the product order.
This download/generation schema includes near real time patterns where • data are acquired by the satellite and downlinked in pipeline at the same time during a visibility over the X-band station, • data are received at the X-band station processed and immediately delivered (electronically) to the user.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 105 of 209 ______
Moreover the Earth Observation scenario is completed with • Simulation systems consisting of o A simulation engine o A set of models • Calibration/validation (Cal/Val) systems and activities.
The picture contains additional items: • Architecture • Quality, • Safety, • Security. These aspects are distributed over the whole process and they have a paramount relevance even on the standardisation framework.
Last but not least the picture highlights the existing space standards, mainly from ECSS, covering the overall earth observation process classified as approved or not approved (only a few) by ESA.
The picture currently includes only the narrower EO scenario. A wider scope of the document is expected to also include SatCom and SatNav systems (on the satellite side) and a fairly complex set of GMES-related services (on the terrestrial side) as outlined into the next picture.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 106 of 209 ______
Figure 37 Extended Earth Observation Scenario The picture contains the missing service groups and adds the "Spatial Data Infrastructure/Services" as the service interoperability turn-table, aiming not to include "everything" but to keep the focus on GMES. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 107 of 209 ______
6.2 ESA Approved Space Standards
The European Cooperation for Space Standardization is an initiative established to develop a coherent, single set of user-friendly standards for use in all European space activitites. ESA has in place a list of approved standards, applicable at large to all its activities. The list includes mainly standards from ECSS and CCSDS and a few previously existing standards, e.g. Military standards (MIL-Std) and ESA Procedures, Standards and Specifications (PSS), which do not yet have an ECSS or CCSDS equivalent. The following standards have been approved by the ESA Standardization Steering Board (ESSB) for use within ESA.
6.2.1 General
ID Title Published
ECSS-P-001B Glossary of terms 14-Jul-2004
ECSS-S-00A ECSS System: Description and implementation 13-Dec-2005
6.2.2 Space Engineering
ID Title Published
ECSS-E-00A Policy and principles 19-Apr-1996
ECSS-E-10 Part 1B System engineering - Part 1: Requirements and 18-Nov-2004 process (Custodian: TEC-SW. Set up by J. Miro + M. Klein convenor)
ECSS-E-10 Part 6A rev.1 System engineering - Part 6: Functional and technical 31-Oct-2005 specifications (Custodian: TEC-SW. Set up by J. Miro + M. Klein convenor)
ECSS-E-10 Part 7A System engineering - Part 7: Product data exchange 25-Aug-2004 (Custodian: TEC-MC. Set up by H.P. de Koning convenor)
ECSS-E-10-02A Verification 17-Nov-1998 (Custodian: TEC-TC, mainly mechanical)
ECSS-E-10-03A Testing 15-Feb-2002 (Custodian: TEC-TC, mainly mechanical)
ECSS-E-10-04A Space environment 21-Jan-2000
ECSS-E-10-05A Functional analysis 13-Apr-1999
ECSS-E-20A Electrical and electronic 04-Oct-1999 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 108 of 209 ______
ID Title Published
ECSS-E-20-01A Multipaction design and test 05-May-2003
ECSS-E-20-08A Photovoltaic assemblies and components 30-Nov-2004
ECSS-E-30 Part 1A Thermal control 25-Apr-2000
ECSS-E-30 Part 2A Structural 25-Apr-2000
ECSS-E-30 Part 3A Mechanisms 25-Apr-2000
ECSS-E-30 Part 4A Mechanical - Part 4: Environmental control and life 05-Aug-2005 support
ECSS-E-30 Part 5.1A Propulsion - Liquid and electric propulsion for 02-Apr-2002 spacecraft
ECSS-E-30 Part 6A Pyrotechnics 25-Apr-2000
ECSS-E-30 Part 7A Mechanical parts 25-Apr-2000
ECSS-E-30 Part 8A Materials 25-Apr-2000
ECSS-E-30-01A Fracture control 13-Apr-1999
ECSS-E-30-11A Modal survey assessment 20-Sep-2005
MIL-STD-1522A Structural design and verification of pressurized hardware
PSS-03-40 Environmental Control and Life Support Dec-1992
PSS-03-401 Atmosphere Quality Standards in Manned Space Jun-1992 Vehicles
PSS-03-402 Water Quality Standards in Manned Space Vehicles Oct-1994
PSS-03-70 Human factors Jul-1994 Volume 1 Chapter 1-3 Volume 1 Chapter 4-7 Volume 2 Chapter 8-9 Volume 2 Chapter 10-End Volume 2 Glossaries
ECSS-E-40 Part 1B Software - Part 1: Principles and requirements 28-Nov-2003
ECSS-E-40 Part 2B Software - Part 2: Document requirements definitions 31-Mar-2005 (DRDs)
ECSS-E-50 Part 1A Communications - Part 1: Principles and requirements 20-Oct-2003
ECSS-E-50 Part 2A Communications - Part 2: Document requirements 04-Jul-2005 definitions (DRDs)
ECSS-E-50-01A Space data links - Telemetry synchronization and 06-Nov-2007 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 109 of 209 ______
ID Title Published channel coding
ECSS-E-50-02A Ranging and Doppler tracking 24-Nov-2005
ECSS-E-50-03A Space data links - Telemetry transfer frame protocol 06-Nov-2007
ECSS-E-50-04A Space data links - Telecommand protocols, 14-Nov-2007 synchronization and channel coding
ECSS-E-50-05A Radio frequency and modulation 24-Jan-2003
ECSS-E-50-12A SpaceWire - Links, nodes, routers and networks 24-Jan-2003
CCSDS 121.0-B-1 Lossless Data Compression Blue Book. Issue 1. (ISO May-1997 15887)
CCSDS 122.0-B-1 Image Data Compression Nov-2005
CCSDS 122.0-B-1 Corr.1 Technical Corrigendum 1 to Image Data Compression Jul-2006 (CCSDS 122.0-B-1, issued Nov-2005)
CCSDS 131.0-B-1 TM Synchronization and Channel Coding. Blue Book. Sep-2003 Issue 1. (ISO 22641) (Temporary: to be replaced in 2007 by ECSS standard)
CCSDS 132.0-B-1 TM Space Data Link Protocol. Blue Book. Issue 1. Sep-2003 (ISO 22645) (Temporary: to be replaced in 2007 by ECSS standard)
CCSDS 133.0-B-1 Space Packet Protocol. Blue Book. Issue 1. (ISO Sep-2003 22646)
CCSDS 133.1-B-1 Encapsulation Service. Issue 1. Jun-2006
CCSDS 135.0-B-2 Space Link Identifiers. Blue Book. Issue 2. (ISO Nov-2005 22647)
CCSDS 211.0-B-4 Proximity-1 Space Link Protocol - Data Link Layer. Jul-2006 Blue Book. Issue 4.
CCSDS 211.1-B-3 Proximity-1 Space Link Protocol - Physical Layer. Mar-2006 Blue Book. Issue 3.
CCSDS 211.2-B-1 Proximity-1 Space Link Protocol - Coding and Apr-2003 Synchronization Sublayer. Blue Book. Issue 1.
CCSDS 231.0-B-1 TC Synchronization and Channel Coding. Blue Book. Sep-2003 Issue 1. (ISO 22642) (Temporary: to be replaced in 2007 by ECSS standard)
CCSDS 232.0-B-1 TC Space Data Link Protocol. Blue Book. Issue 1. Sep-2003 (ISO 22664) (Temporary: to be replaced in 2007 by ECSS standard)
MIL 1553-B-Notice 2 Digital Time Division Command/Response Muliplex Sep-1986 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 110 of 209 ______
ID Title Published Data Bus
CCSDS 301.0-B-3 Time Code Formats. Blue Book. Issue 3. (ISO 11104) Jan-2002
CCSDS 727.0-B-3 CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP). Blue Book. Jun-2005 Issue 3. (ISO 17355)
CCSDS 732.0-B-2 AOS Space Data Link Protocol. Blue Book. Issue 2. Jul-2006
ECSS-E-60A Control engineering 14-Sep-2004
ECSS-E-70 Part 1A Ground systems and operations - Part 1: Principles 25-Apr-2000 and requirements
ECSS-E-70 Part 2A Ground systems and operations - Part 2: Document 02-Apr-2001 requirements definitions (DRD)
ECSS-E-70-11A Space segment operability 05-Aug-2005
ECSS-E-70-31A Ground systems and operations - Monitoring and 09-Oct-2007 control data definition
ECSS-E-70-32A Test and operations procedure language 24-Apr-2006
ECSS-E-70-41A Telemetry and telecommand packet utilization 30-Jan-2003
CCSDS 502.0-B-1 Orbit Data Messages Sep-2004
CCSDS 910.4-B-2 Cross Support Reference Model - Part 1: Space Link Oct-2005 Extension Services. Blue Book. Issue 2. (ISO 15396)
CCSDS 911.1-B-2 Space Link Extension - Return all frames service Nov-2004 specification. Blue Book. Issue 2. (ISO 22669)
CCSDS 911.2-B-1 Space Link Extension - Return Channel Frames Nov-2004 Service Specification
CCSDS 911.5-B-1 Space Link Extension - Return Operational Control Nov-2004 Fields Service Specification
CCSDS 912.1-B-2 Space Link Extension - Forward CLTU service Nov-2004 specification. Blue Book. Issue 2. (ISO 22671)
CCSDS 912.3-B-1 Space Link Extension - Forward Space Packet Nov-2004 Service Specification
6.2.3 Space Project Management
ID Title Published
ECSS-M-00B Policy and principles 29-Aug-2003 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 111 of 209 ______
ID Title Published
ECSS-M-00-02A Tailoring of space standards 25-Apr-2000
ECSS-M-00-03B Risk management 16-Aug-2004
ECSS-M-10B Project breakdown structures 13-Jun-2003
ECSS-M-20B Project organisation 13-Jun-2003
ECSS-M-30A Project phasing and planning 19-Apr-1996
ECSS-M-30-01A Organization and conduct of reviews 01-Sep-1999
ECSS-M-40B Configuration management 20-May-2005
ECSS-M-50B Information/documentation management 11-May-2007
ECSS-M-60B Cost and schedule management 26-Jun-2006
ECSS-M-70A Integrated logistic support 19-Apr-1996
6.2.4 Space Product Assurance
ID Title Published
ECSS-Q-00A Policy and principles 19-Apr-1996
ECSS-Q-20B Quality assurance 08-Mar-2002
ECSS-Q-20-04A Critical-item control 31-Mar-2005
ECSS-Q-20-07A Quality assurance for test facilities 31-Jul-2002
ECSS-Q-20-09B Nonconformance control system 08-Mar-2002
PSS-01-202 Preservation, Storage, Handling and Transportation of ESA Hardware
PSS-01-204 Particulate Contamination Control in Clean Rooms by Particle Fall-out Measurements
ECSS-Q-30B Dependability 08-Mar-2002
ECSS-Q-30-01A Worst case circuit performance 31-Mar-2005
ECSS-Q-30-02A Failure modes, effects and criticality analysis 07-Sep-2001 (FMECA)
ECSS-Q-30-09A Availability analysis 07-Dec-2005
ECSS-Q-30-11A Derating - EEE components 24-Apr-2006 ECSS-Q-30-11A (24 April 2006) cancels and CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 112 of 209 ______
ID Title Published replaces the derating requirements applicable to electronic, electrical and electromechanical components in ECSS-Q-60-11A.
ECSS-Q-40B Safety 17-Apr-2002
ECSS-Q-40-02A Hazard analysis 14-Feb-2003
ECSS-Q-40-04A Part 1 Sneak analysis - Part 1: Method and procedure 14-Oct-1997
ECSS-Q-40-04A Part 2 Sneak analysis - Part 2: Clue list 14-Oct-1997
ECSS-Q-40-12A Fault tree analysis - Adoption notice ECSS/IEC 14-Oct-1997 61025
ECSS-Q-60B EEE components 17-Jul-2007
ECSS-Q-60-02A ASIC and FPGA development 17-Jul-2007
ECSS-Q-60-05A Generic procurement requirements for hybrid 07-Apr-2006 microcircuits
ECSS-Q-60-11A EEE components - Derating and end-of-life 07-Sep-2004 parameter drifts NOTE: The Derating requirements are covered in ECSS-Q-30-11A. After publication of ECSS- Q-30-12A this standard will be withdrawn.
ECSS-Q-60-12A Design, selection, procurement and use of die 25-Aug-2006 form monolithic microwave integrated circuits (MMICs)
PSS-01-604 Generic Specification for Silicon Solar Cells Sep-1988
PSS-01-605 Capability Approval Programme for Hermetic May-1990 Thin Film Hybrid Micro-Circuits
PSS-01-606 Capability Approval Programme for Hermetic Jul-1986 Thick Film Hybrid Micro-Circuits
ECSS-Q-70B Materials, mechanical parts and processes 14-Dec-2004
ECSS-Q-70-01A Contamination and cleanliness control 11-Dec-2002
ECSS-Q-70-02A Thermal vacuum outgassing test for the 26-May-2000 screening of space materials
ECSS-Q-70-03A Black-anodizing of metals with inorganic dyes 07-Apr-2006
ECSS-Q-70-04A Thermal cycling test for the screening of space 04-Oct-1999 materials and processes
ECSS-Q-70-05A Detection of organic contamination of surfaces 31-Aug-2005 by infrared spectroscopy
PSS-01-706 The Particle and Ultraviolet (UV) Radiation Mar-1983 Testing of Space Materials CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 113 of 209 ______
ID Title Published
ECSS-Q-70-07A Verification and approval of automatic machine 20-Jan-1998 wave soldering
ECSS-Q-70-08A Manual soldering of high-reliability electrical 06-Aug-1999 connections
ECSS-Q-70-09A Measurement of thermo-optical properties of 29-Aug-2003 thermal control materials
ECSS-Q-70-10A Qualification of printed circuit boards 23-Nov-2001
ECSS-Q-70-11A Procurement of printed circuit boards 23-Nov-2001
ECSS-Q-70-13A Measurement of the peel and pull-off strength 04-Oct-1999 of coatings and finishes using pressure E- sensitive tapes
ECSS-Q-70-18A Preparation, assembly and mounting of RF 31-Aug-2001 coaxial cables
ECSS-Q-70-20A Determination of the susceptibility of silver- 19-Dec-2000 plated copper wire and cable to "red-plague" corrosion
ECSS-Q-70-21A Flammability testing for the screening of space 04-Oct-1999 materials
ECSS-Q-70-22A The control of limited shelf-life materials 21-Jan-2000
ECSS-Q-70-25A The application of the black coating Aeroglaze 30-Jul-1999 Z306
ECSS-Q-70-26A Crimping of high-reliability electrical 13-Feb-2001 connections
ECSS-Q-70-28A The repair and modification of printed circuit 21-Jun-2002 board assemblies for space use
ECSS-Q-70-29A The determination of offgassing products from 30-Jul-1999 materials and assembled articles to be used in a manned space vehicle crew compartment
ECSS-Q-70-30A The wire wrapping of high-reliability electrical 04-Oct-1999 connections
ECSS-Q-70-33A The application of the thermal control coating 30-Jul-1999 PSG 120 FD
ECSS-Q-70-34A The application of the black electrically 30-Jul-1999 conductive coating Aeroglaze H322
ECSS-Q-70-35A The application of the black electrically 30-Jul-1999 conductive coating Aeroglaze L300
ECSS-Q-70-36A Material selection for controlling stress- 20-Jan-1998 corrosion cracking CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 114 of 209 ______
ID Title Published
ECSS-Q-70-37A Determination of the susceptibility of metals to 20-Jan-1998 stress-corrosion cracking
ECSS-Q-70-38A Rev.1 High-reliability soldering for surface-mount and 05-Dec-2007 mixed technology
ECSS-Q-70-45A Standard methods for mechanical testing of 29-Aug-2003 metallic materials
ECSS-Q-70-46A General requirements for threaded fasteners 13-Feb-2004
PSS-01-748 Requirements for ESA-Approved Skills Mar-1992 Training and Certification (Electronic Assembly Techniques)
ECSS-Q-70-71A rev.1 Data for selection of space metarials and 18-Jun-2004 processes
ECSS-Q-80B Software product assurance 10-Oct-2003
6.2.5 Other Published ECSS Standards
These ECSS Standards have been published, but are NOT on the list of ESA Approved Standards. Updated: 11-Jan-2008.
ID Title Published
ECSS-E-50-14A Spacecraft discrete interfaces 19-Dec-2007
ECSS-Q-30-08A Components reliability data sources and their use 16-Jan-2006
ECSS-P-00A Standardization policy 04-Apr-2000
6.3 Space Standards for Earth Observation
6.3.1 Heterogeneous Missions Access - The GMES Multi-Mission Approach
The Heterogeneous Mission Accessibility - Interoperability (HMA-I) Study started in 2005 in the framework of the GMES Preparatory activities with the purpose of defining the interoperability concept across the ground segments of the European and Canadian missions which will contribute to the GMES initial phase. These missions have developed or are in the process of developing EO satellites that can offer essential capacity to the GMES Space Component according to their own objective and now need to be adapted to these requirements. EO data users require accessing multiple data sources from different providers. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 115 of 209 ______
The need to define the interoperability standards to ease the EO data access in Europe has been highlighted during the initial phase of GMES, and as part of the GMES Space Component Programme, the Agency shall provide harmonised access to the ESA, national, Eumetsat and other Third Party Earth Observation Missions ground segment services for the GMES Fast Track Services, and therefore satisfying at the maximum extent the GMES spaced-based observation needs. The GMES Space Component (GSC) establishes an access to Earth Observation data for a number of different GMES Services during the pre-operations period (2008-2010). Responding to the requirements of the GMES Services, the EO Data Access Portfolio (EODAP) – see Annex 5 - describes the Earth Observation (EO) data being made available in a coordinated way by the GMES Space Component (GSC) to the operators of GMES Services during the GMES pre-operations period (i.e. from 2008 to end 2010) including the conditions (e.g. ordering mechanisms, processing level, delivery timeliness) and constraints (e.g. data quantities, satellite tasking, data licensing). Within the GMES scenario, the required interoperability framework to allow the harmonised access to the national and Eumetsat missions, including the operational concept and architecture will be defined and implemented. This short-term objective has provided an additional push for the definition of the interoperability standards. In the framework of the HMA-I contract, the Agency has defined in collaboration with a consortium of industrial parters and GMES contributing missions the architecture (see [RD04]) and interoperability standards for an across-missions harmonised data access that is general and independent from the set of missions supported and includes: • Collection and service discovery • Catalogue search • Programming and Order • Mission analysis • Online Data Access • User Management
The objectives of HMA-I were to: • Involve the stakeholders (namely national space agencies, satellite or mission owners and operators) in the harmonization and standardization process. • Collect all the use cases scenarios and requirements arising from national initiatives and from the planned GMES missions. • List already used standards, identify gaps vis-à-vis requirements, define the requirements for new or updated standards for multiple mission inter-accessibility • Define the standards and the Interface Control Documents, prototype and demonstrate the concepts, the scenario of utilization permitting to develop an harmonized interface between the GMES Service Users and the different EO data providers, to allow an easy and cost effective harmonized access to heterogeneous EO mission data coming from multiple missions including the ESA sentinel missions, national missions, commercial missions. • Define the architecture for an interoperable “EO Data Access Integration Layer” within the future European Ground Segment
Additional contracts are in place or ready to be issued in order to implement the EO DAIL and the related interfaces at participating GCM ground segments. The implementation phase will be supported as well by an HMA testbed allowing testing and evolution of agreed standards.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 116 of 209 ______
The following figure depicts the HMA technical context which was used to define the standards.
Figure 38 HMA Technical Context The above figure identifies ESA, other European and national earth observation missions (i.e. the potential partner ground segments) and their respective GSs and interfaces, including the EO Data Access Integration Layer (DAIL). At this stage, the architecture definition focuses on the interfaces involving: • the ESA missions GS, • other European Mission GS, • the static geo-spatial data (addressed in the INSPIRE Directive [RD13]). Note: Geo-spatial data is data with a geographical reference providing information about a specific region, site or object. Objects are represented as points, lines, polygons or grids in databases. Maps (either digital or analogue) are a means of visualising a combined set of spatial data at a certain scale and in a certain layout. Although interfaces to non-European agencies GS are part of the scheme, in particular in view of Third Party Missions (TPM), they were not within the scope of the first phase of the scenario definition work. The same applies to interfaces of in-situ non-space systems. The latter were considered within the framework of ESA cooperation within the EC Inspire initiative through a series of dedicated HMA workshops. The interfaces with the Service Access Layer will be addressed when the GMES Service interoperability requirements will become available.
All the ICDs resulting from the standardisation activities performed in HMA have been submitted to CEN and collected into a CEN Workshop Agreement [RD15].
The following table contains a list of standards currently applicable or under definition within the earth observation domain with a specific remark on those analysed or defined by the HMA project. The table has three columns where: • The first column contains a reference to the target element of the previously defined earth observation workflow (see Figure 36 Earth Observation Scenario) • the second column contains a more precise identification of the item/category under standardisation, CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 117 of 209 ______
• The third column contains a summary of the standard(s) applicable on that category and their status.
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Catalogue Product ISO 19115:2003 [WR10] defines the schema required for describing Access Description geographic information and services. It provides information about the Schema identification, the extent, the quality, the spatial and temporal schema, spatial reference, and distribution of digital geographic data. ISO 19115:2003 is applicable to: the cataloguing of datasets, clearinghouse activities, and the full description of datasets; geographic datasets, dataset series, and individual geographic features and feature properties. ISO 19115:2003 defines: mandatory and conditional metadata sections, metadata entities, and metadata elements; the minimum set of metadata required to serve the full range of metadata applications (data discovery, determining data fitness for use, data access, data transfer, and use of digital data); optional metadata elements - to allow for a more extensive standard description of geographic data, if required; a method for extending metadata to fit specialized needs. Though ISO 19115:2003 is applicable to digital data, its principles can be extended to many other forms of geographic data such as maps, charts, and textual documents as well as non-geographic data. Catalogue Geographic ISO/TS 19139:2007 defines Geographic MetaData XML (gmd) encoding, Access MetaData an XML Schema implementation derived from ISO 19115. Catalogue Collection and This topic has been tackled within the GMES-HMA. Access Service The OGC Catalogue Services 2.0 specification (OGC 07-006r1) [RD05] Discovery establishes a general framework for implementing catalogue services that can be applied to meet the needs of stakeholders in a wide variety of domains. This specification complements the ebRIM application profile of CS-W for the cataloguing of ISO 19115 and ISO 19119 compliant metadata record. It defines for this purpose a Core ISO Metadata extension package of ebRIM. A catalogue implementation that conforms to this specification provides facilities for discovering and advertising information resources described through ISO 19115 and ISO 19119 compliant metadata records, with a specific focus on geospatial dataset, dataset collections and services. Catalogue Catalogue This topic has been tackled within the GMES-HMA. Access The OGC™ Catalogue Services Specification 2.0 Extension Package for ebRIM (ISO/TS 15000-3) Application Profile: Earth Observation Products (OGC 06-131r3) [RD06] describes the mapping of Earth Observation Products to an ebRIM structure within an OGC™ Catalogue 2.0.2 (Corrigendum 2 Release) [OGC 07-006r1] implementing the OpenGIS® Web Registry Service (WRS) [OGC 07-110]. It defines the way HMA (Heterogeneous Earth Observation Missions Accessibility) resources (Earth Observation products metadata) are organized and implemented in the Catalogue for the discovery, retrieval and management. It is based on the [OGC 06-080r3] OGC™ GML Application Schema for EO CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 118 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Products [RD07]. It enables CSW-ebRIM catalogues to handle a variety of metadata pertaining to earth observation, like EO Products defined in [OGC 06-080r3] Product GML Application This topic has been tackled within the GMES-HMA. Archive Schema for EO The Standard OGC 06-80r3 [RD07]defines an application schema of the Products Geography Markup Language (GML) version 3.1.1 for describing Earth Observation products (EO products) within the HMA (Heterogeneous EO Missions Accessibility) Application Profile for the OGCTM Catalogue Services Specification v2.0.0 (with Corrigendum) [OGC 04-021r3]. It is a GML application schema as specified in Subclause 23 of [OGC 03-105r1]. The Geography Markup Language is an XML grammar written in XML Schema for the modelling, transport, and storage of geographic information. The intent of this Standard is to describe a core interface for EO data product described as a GML version 3.1.1 application schema that can be supported by many data providers (satellite operators, data distributors …). The metadata described is that which is commonly provided through catalogue interfaces, it does not necessarily include all of the metadata that is present in the actual EO data product (e.g. calibration coefficients etc.). Product SensorML SensorML is an improved OGC Implementation Specification currently at Archive version 1.0. It is an XML language allowing the description of sensors and sensor data, which can be used with GML since it is a GML application schema. It was designed from the start to be robust enough to describe complex Remote Sensing instruments. SensorML should be considered as priority because allowing interoperability between Sensors (CAL/VAL) and increasing interoperability of processing for the Products. SensorML was used in two other projects lead by ESA: • EO CalVal Portal: used to describe detailed calibration metadata (gain and offset tables, frequency response) • EO Product Harmonization: used t describe detailed metadata about missions/instruments as well as products and process chains to derive products (level1A, level2A, etc…) User Orders Ordering This topic has been tackled within the GMES-HMA. The standard OGC-06-141r2 [RD08] describes a profile to order Earth Observation data products, separating the order services from the catalogue services. The final goal is to agree to a coherent set of interfaces for ordering of EO products to support access to data from heterogeneous systems dealing with derived data products from satellite based measurements of the earth’s surface and environment. This proposed implementation specification describes the interfaces, bindings and encodings required to order Earth Observation (EO) products User Orders Programming This topic has been tackled within the GMES-HMA. The candidate implementation specification in OGC 07-018 [RD09] explains how Sensor Planning Service is organised and implemented for the Earth Observation domain. The final goal is to agree to a coherent set of interfaces for sending a programming request for EO products to support access to data from heterogeneous systems dealing with derived data products from satellite based measurements of the earth’s surface and environment. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 119 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. This SPS EO profile specifies at a lower level the interfaces and parameters for requesting information describing the capabilities of a Sensor Planning Service dedicated to the EO Sensor domain, for determining the feasibility of an intended sensor planning request, for submitting such a request, for inquiring about the status of such a request, for updating or cancelling such a request, and for requesting information about further OGC Web services that provide access to the data collected by the requested task. Table 3 GMES-HMA Related Standards
6.3.2 Archiving and Product Formats Standardisation
The following table contains a list of standards currently in place for Earth Observation archives and product formats. The table has three columns where: • The first column contains a reference to the target element of the previously defined earth observation workflow (see Figure 36 Earth Observation Scenario) • the second column contains a more precise identification of the item/category under standardisation, • The third column contains a summary of the standard(s) applicable on that category and their status. Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Product Product The SAFE (Standard Archive Format for Europe) [WR08] has been designed to act Archive Format as a common format for archiving and conveying data within ESA Earth Observation archiving facilities. SAFE intends to resolve the major challenges coming from the packaging and the long-term preservation of Earth Observation data. Special attention has been taken to ensure that SAFE conforms to the ISO 14721:2003 OAIS (Open Archival Information System) reference model and related standards such as the emerging CCSDS/ISO XFDU (XML Formatted Data Units) packaging format. Although the primary goal of SAFE is to handle EO data with processing levels close to the usually called "level 0", no limitation exists regarding the packaging of higher level products as well as other technical and scientific information. Actually, experience has demonstrated that packaging and archiving higher processing levels or auxiliary data in a common format may be effective in many situations. SAFE embodies this concept by offering a single framework for packaging a large variety of information. Product Product ISO 14721:2003 specifies a reference model for an open archival information Archive Format system (OAIS). The purpose of this ISO 14721:2003 is to establish a system for archiving information, both digitalized and physical, with an organizational scheme composed of people who accept the responsibility to preserve information and make it available to a designated community. This reference model addresses a full range of archival information preservation functions including ingest, archival storage, data management, access, and dissemination. It also addresses the migration of digital information to new media and forms, the data models used to represent the information, the role of software in information preservation, and the exchange of digital information among CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 120 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. archives. It identifies both internal and external interfaces to the archive functions, and it identifies a number of high-level services at these interfaces. It provides various illustrative examples and some "best practice" recommendations. It defines a minimal set of responsibilities for an archive to be called an OAIS, and it also defines a maximal archive to provide a broad set of useful terms and concepts. The OAIS model described in ISO 14721:2003 may be applicable to any archive. It is specifically applicable to organizations with the responsibility of making information available for the long term. Product Product CCSDS format/ISO 12175:1994 Archive Format Space data and information transfer systems - Standard formatted data units - Structure and construction rules Lays down the requirements for structure and construction rules for standard formatted data units for space data and information transfer systems. CCSDS stands for Consultative Comittee on Space Data System and this format is normalized (ISO 12175) since October 1993. Each file contains a header composed of fixed length records. All file headers are coded in ASCII and follow the CCSDS format convention. Headers provide identification, processing history and content information. A header include SFDU identifiers (Standard Formatted Data Unit ). The SFDU label is coded as one line (ASCII record), and is recorded with 20 characters padded with ASCII spaces to maintain a fixed length of the header. All other header entries follow a "KEYWORD = VALUE" syntax. Product Product CEOS format enables to access the products written on a medium (exabyte or CD- Archive Format ROM) with this format convention. A medium in CEOS format contains the following files : • one volume directory file. • one leader file. • one data file containing all the products. If the medium is a CD-ROM, there is one file of this type per orbit and all the data files can be found on a specific CD-ROM directory. • one null directory file ending the medium. The first two files contain general information on the distributed products, but the products are found in the data file(s). If the medium is an exabyte, it is then necessary to skip those two files to be able to read the products in the data file. The products in a data file are organised in the following format : • one header record ( file descriptor record ) of 360 bytes. • N data records corresponding to N products. Product Product HDF stands for Hierarchical Data Format . It is developed by NCSA (National Archive Format Center for Supercomputing Applications) and its first aim was to help scientists to work and exchange graphical and numerical data. It can be seen as three interface layers built upon a physical file format. • At its lowest level, it is a physical file format for storing data like any other format. • At its highest level, HDF is a collection of utilities and applications for CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 121 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. manipulating data in HDF files. • Between these levels, HDF is a software library. A user doesn't have to know how is implemented the lowest level to manipulate data stored in a HDF format. HDF is a versatile file format : it supports different data models. Each data model defines a specific type of data and provides a convenient interface for reading, writing and organizing a unique set of data elements. HDF can stores several different types of data in the same file or in separate files (multi-file interface). HDF is a self-describing format, allowing an application to interpret the structure and contents of a file without any outside information. HDF is a flexible file format: related objects can be grouped together and then accessed as a group or as individual objects. There are pre-defined sets and users can create their own grouping structure (vgroup feature). HDF is an extensible file format: it can accomodate new data models. HDF is a portable file format: HDF files can be shared across plateforms. HDF currently supports the following data structures types : • Raster images (general, 8-bit, 24-bit), • color palettes, • text entries, • SDS (scientific data sets) : multi-dimensional arrays to store items of the same type (floats, integers...), • Vdata : two-dimensional array to store items of different types, • Vgroup : a structure for associating sets of data objects. The HDF library contains two parts: the base library and the multi-file library. HDF functions can be called from C and Fortran user application program. Product Product NetCDF (network Common Data Form) is a machine-independent format for Archive Format representing scientific data. This format is widely used in the scientific community. NetCDF files can be handled by numerous softwares such has IDL (native), Matlab (requires a toolbox). C, Fortran, Java, etc libriaries are also available to read/write netcdf data files. NetCDF data is: • Self-Describing: A netCDF file includes information about the data it contains. • Architecture-independent: A netCDF file is represented in a form that can be accessed by computers with different ways of storing integers, characters, and floating-point numbers. • Direct-access: A small subset of a large dataset may be accessed efficiently, without first reading through all the preceding data. • Sharable: One writer and multiple readers may simultaneously access the same netCDF file. Product Product The GeoTIFF spec defines a set of TIFF tags provided to describe all Archive Format "Cartographic" information associated with TIFF imagery that originates from satellite imaging systems, scanned aerial photography, scanned maps, digital elevation models, or as a result of geographic analyses. Its aim is to allow means for tying a raster image to a known model space or map projection, and for describing those projections. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 122 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. GeoTIFF does not intend to become a replacement for existing geographic data interchange standards, such as the USGS SDTS standard or the FGDC metadata standard. Rather, it aims to augment an existing popular raster-data format to support georeferencing and geocoding information. The tags documented in this spec are to be considered completely orthogonal to the raster-data descriptions of the TIFF spec, and impose no restrictions on how the standard TIFF tags are to be interpreted, which color spaces or compression types are to be used, etc. GeoTIFF fully complies with the TIFF 6.0 specifications, and its extensions do not in any way go against the TIFF recommendations, nor do they limit the scope of raster data supported by TIFF. Product Product JPEG2000 and GeoJP2™ Archive Format JPEG2000 is a new ISO specification (ISO/IEC 15444) for a wavelet based lossy compressed format for storing images. It is intended to supersede traditional JPEG format for many applications, providing better compression and a more flexible imaging model. This section is intended to deal on geospatial application of JPEG2000 format. GeoJP2™ is a format extension to JPEG2000 for embedding coordinate system and georeferencing information in a JPEG2000 JP2 format file. The GeoJP2™ format is essentially a degenerate GeoTIFF file (with no image data) embedded in a UUID box in the JPEG2000 file to provide coordinate system information and a mapping between pixel coordinates and georeferenced coordinates. Product Product JPEG 2000 and GMLJP2 Archive Format The OpenGIS Geography Markup Language (GML) standard (http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/gml) is an XML grammar for the encoding of geographic information including geographic features, coverages, observations, topology, geometry, coordinate reference systems, units of measure, time, and value objects. The ISO JPEG 2000 standard (http://www.jpeg.org/jpeg2000) is a wavelet based encoding for imagery that provides the ability to include XML data for description of the image within the JPEG 2000 data file. This specification defines the means by which GML is to be used within JPEG 2000 images for geographic imagery. This includes the following: • Specification of the uses of GML within JPEG 2000 data files. • Packaging mechanisms for including GML within JPEG 2000 data files. • Specific GML application schemas to support the encoding of OGC coverages within JPEG 2000 data files. The GMLJP2 OpenGIS encoding specification defines the means by which the OpenGIS Geography Markup Language (GML) is to be used within JPEG 2000 images for geographic imagery. This specification is the result of work in the GML in JPEG 2000 Interoperability Experiment. In 2004, the submitting organizations introduced a candidate specification document (04-045) which later became an OGC public Discussion Paper and the basis for conducting the Interoperability Experiment. The Activity Plan for the GML in JPEG 2000 Interoperability Experiment was formally approved by the Open Geospatial Consortium in February 2005. This specification applies to the encoding and decoding of JPEG 2000 images that contain GML for use with geographic imagery. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 123 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. This OGC® document specifies the use of the Geography Markup Language (GML) within the XML boxes of the JPEG 2000 data format. The document also establishes the roles of GML in JPEG 2000 and specifies the encoding and packaging rules for GML use in JPEG 2000. This OGC® document is applicable to those interested in using JPEG 2000 as a standardized geographic image format. It specifies a minimally required GML definition for georeferencing images and gives guidelines for augmenting that definition to address the additional encoding of metadata, features, annotations, styles, coordinate reference systems, and units of measure. This document treats the case of packaging a single geographic image and the case of packaging multiple geographic images. Product Product HRIT/LRIT Archive Format High Rate Information Transmission (HRIT) and Low Rate Information Transmission (LRIT) are the CGMS standards agreed upon by satellite operators for the dissemination of digital data originating from geostationary satellites to users via direct broadcast. The distinction between the two standards, as their names suggest, is the data rate (bandwidth) necessary to convey the data content. LRIT data are typically disseminated at speeds up to around 256 Kbps while HRIT data are typically disseminated at speeds up to 10 Mbps. Commonly the content of LRIT data streams are subsets of the equivalent HRIT data, with subsampling and lossy compression applied. Global format specifications for these digital data transmission standards, based on the application and presentation layers of the OSI reference model are described in HRIT/LRIT Global Format Specifications. Individual satellite operators have discretion to make mission-specific implementations of the lower layers of the OSI reference (to implement such elements as data compression methods, data encryption, etc) and these are described for EUMETSAT's Meteosat Second Generation (MSG) and for JMA's Multifunction Transport Satellite (MTSAT) for JMA-HRIT and JMA-LRIT. It should be noted that the file structure of HRIT/LRIT data are sometimes used to distribute data via other mechanisms, for example in the EUMETCast data dissemination service and as retrieval formats for archived data. Product Product HRPT/LRPT Archive Format High Rate Picture Transmission (HRPT) and Low Rate Picture Transmission (LRPT) are the CGMS standards agreed upon by satellite operators for the dissemination of digital data originating from low earth orbit satellites to users via direct broadcast. In a very similar way to HRIT/LRIT, described above, the distinction between the two standards is the data rate (bandwidth) necessary to convey the data content. LRPT data are typically disseminated at speeds less than 150 Kbps while HRPT data are typically disseminated at speeds greater than 0.5 Mbps. Global format specifications for these digital data transmission standards, based on the application and presentation layers of the OSI reference model are described in HRPT/LRPT Global Format Specifications. Product Product WMO binary data exchange formats - BUFR, GRIB Archive Format The WMO Binary Universal Form for the Representation of meteorological data (BUFR) is a binary code designed to represent any meteorological data set employing a continuous binary stream. It has been designed to achieve efficient exchange and storage of meteorological and oceanographic data. It is self defining, table driven and very flexible data representation system, especially for huge volumes of data. Similarly, another widely used bit-oriented data exchange scheme is the WMO CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 124 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. GRIddedBinary (GRIB) format. GRIB is an efficient vehicle for transmitting large volumes of gridded data to automated centers over high-speed telecommunication lines using modern protocols. An updated version of GRIB, commonly abbreviated to GRIB-2, is currently being introduced and is most relevant for use with satellite data. These two WMO Table Driven Code Forms have been widely adopted for the distribution of meteorological satellite products, especially those processed to level 2 or beyond (see the Imagery and Derived Products section). They are described in the Operational Codes and Manual on Codes. By packing information into the BUFR or GRIB code, data records can be made more compact than character oriented bulletins, resulting in faster computer-to-computer transmissions. The formats can equally well serve as a data storage formats, generating the same efficiencies relative to information storage and retrieval devices. Product Product McIDAS Archive Format The Man computer Interactive Data Access System (McIDAS) is not simply a satellite data format, it is rather a suite of applications for analyzing and displaying meteorological data for research and education. McIDAS has been in use and under continual development by the University of Wisconsin-Madison Space Science and Engineering Center (SSEC) since 1972. The Unidata McIDAS software (a superset of SSEC McIDAS) has been under development since 1985 and in distribution since 1988. The software can be used with conventional observational, satellite, and grid-point data. Product Product Dimap Archive Format Dimap is mainly a metadata format designed by Spot Image, Satellus and CNES (the French National Space Agency) to document digital imagemaps. It was designed taking into account the early experiences of GIS-Geospot and GIS- Image. Dimap stands for Digital Image Map. Dimap metadata part allows to properly describing a dataset which contains geographic information representing a digital map. Namely, metadata describes in details, in a standard way, all the characteristics of the dataset. The Dimap set of metadata is specifically tailored to image (raster) description, it also contains a few tags for vector types of data. Dimap is an open initiative of its creators. No Trade Mark nor Brand name has been registered, anyone can use Dimap for its own purposes. Moreover, the XML implementation leaves the possibility to add some new tags without disrupting other parsers. Anyone can contribute and make proposals for evolutions, provided they show the interest of the additions and can fully document it. By adopting GeoTIFF as the primary image layer and XML to describe metadata, any basic internet browser may be used to access and view Dimap databases. Table 4 Archive and Product Formats Standards
6.3.3 Work in Progress in ESA Mission Control Standardisation
This section presents an overview of the standardisation activities in progress (at ESA) mainly in the field of the mission control, i.e. on the FOS area. The FOS is addressed in the following as it represents an important interface for the exploitation of EO missions in particular in the context of high resolution missions, security and dual use. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 125 of 209 ______
The table has three columns where: • The first column contains a reference to the target element of the previously defined earth observation workflow (see Figure 36 Earth Observation Scenario) • the second column contains a more precise identification of the item/category under standardisation, • The third column contains a summary of the standard(s) applicable on that category and their status.
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Satellite Star Tracker Star Tracker Standard This standard defines the terminology and specification definitions for the performance of star trackers (in particular autonomous star trackers). It defines terms and definitions relevant to star trackers, functional requirements and performance requirements. Ref: ECSS-E-60-20 Status: Under Approval Available: Dec-07 Satellite AOCS Standard Satellite AOCS Requirements Specification The document will define a standard structure and typical set of AOCS requirements (functional, operational, AOCS related FDIR, performance, design and implementation, verification & validation). The intended standard shall provide a baseline for the AOCS requirements, which are used in the contractual relation between customer and supplier (typically as a part of the System Requirements Document). Ref: ECSS-E-60-30 Status: Drafting Available: Jul-08 HK TM In Telemetry E50-03 Telemetry transfer frame protocol transfer frame Adopt/adapt the options of the CCSDS Telemetry Standards such that only protocol those really relevant for European Space Missions are retained with - where needed - existing ESA peculiarities. Ref: ECSS-E-50-03 Status: Approved Available: Nov-07 TC Out Telecommand E50-04 Telecommand protocols, synchronization and channel coding Adopt/adapt the options of the CCSDS Telecommand Standards such that only those really relevant for European Space Missions are retained with - where needed - existing ESA peculiarities. Ref: ECSS-E-50-04 Status: Approved Available: Nov-07 HK TM In Telemetry E50-01 Telemetry synchronization and channel coding synchronization Adopt/adapt the options of the CCSDS Channel Coding Standards such and channel that only those really relevant for European Space Missions are retained coding with - where needed - existing ESA peculiarities. Ref: ECSS-E-50-01 Status: Approved Available: Nov-07 HK TM Flexible Serially SLS Space link services Downlink Concatenated New generations of space missions require telecommand and telemetry Convolutional capabilities with new needs for higher data rates and better link Turbo Codes performances. A wide range of environments (e.g. near Earth congested with Near- bands and deep space link operations in extreme conditions of Signal to Shannon Bound Noise Ratio, etc.) require coding systems with different levels of power Performance for efficiency and bandwidth efficiency, or different levels of link reliability or Telemetry delivered data quality. Applications CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 126 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Ref: CCSDS 131.2-O-1Status: Approved Available: Sep-07 Ranging Pseudo-Noise SLS Space link services (PN) Ranging The next generation of interplanetary missions starting with ESA's Bepi- Systems Colombo and NASA's New Horizon combine radio science experiments with the classical transponder and have orbit determination requirements that cannot be met by the standard ranging system. Having recognized the strategic importance of being able to support such missions, ESA and NASA have started the development of a Pseudo-Noise Ranging standard using such two different missions (one to Mercury and one to Pluto) as main design drivers. Ref: CCSDS 414.1 Status: Drafting Available: Apr-09 RF Link Radio SLS Space link services Frequency and Due to spectrum congestion at the lower frequency bands, it is strategic for Modulation ESA to start developing RF and Modulation standard for the newly Systems--Part 1: allocated frequency bands at 26 and 32 GHz. The bandwidth requirements Earth Stations and propagation impairments associated with such high frequency bands and Spacecraft demand a more involved relationship between coding and modulation. Additionally, new modulation schemes based on CDMA have to be developed for constellation missions that are all visible simultaneously from the same station antenna. This implies an update/upgrade of the Frequency and Modulation standard. Ref: CCSDS 401.0-B Status: Drafting Available: Apr-10 Ground Randomizer for SLS Space link services Station High Data Rates New generations of space missions require telecommand and telemetry WB capabilities with new needs for higher data rates and better link performances. The Pseudo-Randomizer currently adopted has recently shown some limitations when high data rates and long size telemetry frames are used. A White Book will eventually be used for updating the relevant Green Book and possibly including a new standardized Randomizer. Ref: CCSDS Status: Drafting Available: Dec-08 Ground Long Erasure SLS Space link services Station Codes New generations of space missions require telecommand and telemetry capabilities with new needs for higher data rates and better link performances. A wide range of environments (e.g. near Earth congested bands and deep space link operations in extreme conditions of Signal to Noise Ratio, etc.) require coding systems with different levels of power efficiency and bandwidth efficiency, or different levels of link reliability or delivered data quality. Ref: CCSDS Status: Drafting Available: Dec-08 RF Link Digital Video SLS Space link services Broadcasting New generations of space missions require telecommand and telemetry Usage by Space capabilities with new needs for higher data rates and better link Missions (DVB- performances. A wide range of environments (e.g. near Earth congested S2) bands and deep space link operations in extreme conditions of Signal to Noise Ratio, etc.) require coding systems with different levels of power efficiency and bandwidth efficiency, or different levels of link reliability or delivered data quality. Ref: CCSDS Status: Under Approval Available: Jun-08 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 127 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. RF Link Radiofrequency E50-05 Radio Frequency and Modulation and modulation Correct problems in E-50-05A and update it in light of regulatory constraints entered in force since. Ref: ECSS-E-50-05 Status: Under Review Available: Oct-08 TC Uplink Repeated TC SLS Space link services Frame The current version of the CCSDS TC Standards (as well as the related Transmission for ECSS versions) applies a “go back n” approach that is very suitable for Deep Space near earth mission while it is considered less efficient for deep space missions. Based on operations experience, a change is proposed to increase the probability of onboard reception. Eventually the modification will have to be taken into account by ECSS E-50-03 too. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: Jun-09 RF Link Communications E-50 Part1B general Update of the level 2 document to bring it in line with the new E-50 level 3 requirements series Ref: ECSS-E-50 Status: Planned Available: Dec-08 Satellite Monitoring and Monitoring and control data definition control data During the mission operations preparation phase, documentation and data definition of different types is exchanged between the spacecraft supplier and ground segment customer. The purpose of this standard is to define the data to be provided by the spacecraft supplier to the ground segment customer in order to be able to monitor and control the spacecraft once in space. Formally, this data is part of the user’s manual for the corresponding element of the space system. Ref: ECSS-E-70-31 Status: Approved Available: Oct-07 Mission XML Telemetric XML Telemetric and Command Exchange (XTCE) Control and Command The XML Telemetric and Command Exchange (XTCE) is an XML based Exchange format aim at facilitating the exchange of spacecraft telemetry and (XTCE) command databases between different organizations and systems during any mission phase. Such a non-proprietary format avoids the need for customized import/export tools, and the validation and new implementation of mission databases, which are often error-prone. The scope of XTCE is limited to the exchange of satellite telemetry and commanding databases. XTCE can be used to exchange a database between spacecraft manufacturers, instrument manufacturers, and different systems of the ground segment. It can also be used as an exchange mechanism between different development teams or between missions, which enhances database re-use. Ref: CCSDS 660.0-B-1 Status: Approved Available: Oct-07 Flight Tracking Data Navigation WG Dynamics Message It specifies a standard message format for use in exchanging spacecraft tracking data between space agencies. Ref: CCSDS 503.0-R-1 Status: Under Approval Available: Nov-07 Flight Attitude Data Navigation WG Dynamics Messages It specifies standard message formats for use in transferring spacecraft attitude information between space agencies. Ref: CCSDS 504.0-R-1 Status: Under Review Available: Mar-08 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 128 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Flight XML Navigation WG Dynamics Specification for It describes an integrated XML schema that is suited to inter-agency Navigation Data exchanges of navigation data messages (i.e. orbit, attitude and tracking Messages data messages). Ref: CCSDS 505.0-R-1 Status: Under Review Available: Jun-08 Mission SLE - Service Service Management WG Control Management - It defines a set of Space Link Extension (SLE) Service Management (SLE- Service SM) services by which space link service providers and space missions Specification exchange information needed to arrange spacecraft contact periods and establish the operating parameters of the space link services and SLE transfer services during those contact periods. Ref: CCSDS 910.11-R-2 Status: Under Review Available: Mar-08 Mission SLE - Procedure Cross Support Transfer Services WG Control Definition for It specifies the standard building blocks (toolkit) to be used for the Cross-Support specification of the future cross-support services. The following services Transfer have been identified: Return Unframed Telemetry, Radiometric, Monitoring, Services Catalogue, … Ref: CCSDS Status: Drafting Available: Apr-08 Mission SLE - Cross Support Transfer Services WG Control Application This Recommended Practice defines a C++ Application Program Interface Program (API) for CCSDS Space Link Extension (SLE) Transfer Services, which is Interface for the independent of any specific technology used for communications between Transfer an SLE service user and an SLE service provider. Services - Core Specification Ref: CCSDS 914.0-M-0.1 Status: Under Approval Available: Jan-08 Mission SLE - Cross Support Transfer Services WG Control Application It defines Recommended Practices specifying API for RAF. Program Interface for the Ref: CCSDS 915.1-M- 0.1 Status: Under Approval Available: Jan-08 Return All Frames Service Mission SLE - Cross Support Transfer Services WG Control Application It defines Recommended Practices specifying API for RCF. Program Interface for the Ref: CCSDS 915.2-M-0.1 Status: Under Approval Available: Jan-08 Return Channel Frames Service Mission SLE - Cross Support Transfer Services WG Control Application It defines Recommended Practices specifying API for ROCF. Program Interface for the Ref: CCSDS 915.5-M-0.1 Status: Under Approval Available: Jan-08 Return Operational Control Fields Service Mission SLE - Cross Support Transfer Services WG Control Application It defines Recommended Practices specifying API for CLTU. Program Interface for the Ref: CCSDS 916.1-M-0.1 Status: Under Approval Available: Jan-08 Forward CLTU CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 129 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Service Mission SLE - Cross Support Transfer Services WG Control Application It defines Recommended Practices specifying API for FSP. Program Interface for the Ref: CCSDS 916.3-M-0.1 Status: Under Approval Available: Jan-08 Forward Space Packet Service Mission SLE - Internet Cross Support Transfer Services WG Control Protocol for It defines a protocol for transfer of SLE Protocol Data Units over TCP/IP. Transfer Services Ref: CCSDS 913.1-R-1 Status: Under Approval Available: Jan-08 Mission SM&C Message Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Abstraction It provides an interoperable protocol between the Consumer and Provider Layer sides of the service framework. This, together with specialised bindings between the Mission Operations Service Framework layers, ensures that different implementations of the service framework can interoperate across the service interfaces, providing the underlying communications protocol stack is equivalent on both sides of the interface. Ref: CCSDS 521.0-R-1 Status: Under Review Available: Mar-08 Mission SM&C Message Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Abstraction Ultimate responsibility for mission operations is vested in a team of people. Layer Java API The interactive user interfaces provided by the Mission Control System allow this team to monitor current operations status and initiate control actions. There have always been cases, however, where it is necessary for the automated systems to alert the human operators to a significant event; typically this is achieved through the raising of alarms. Ref: CCSDS Status: Drafting Available: Dec-08 Mission SM&C Common Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Services It provides a common service infrastructure for all Mission Operations services. This ensures a common approach, simplifies the task of implementing each Mission Operations service, and isolates the Mission Operations service layer from the underlying implementation technology. Ref: CCSDS 521.1-R-1 Status: Under Review Available: Mar-08 Mission SM&C Core Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Services It provides basic monitoring and control capability through basic classes of information. Ref: CCSDS 522.0-R-1 Status: Under Review Available: Mar-08 HK TM In XML Telemetric XML Telemetric and Command Exchange (XTCE) and Command TC Out This Magenta Book is a recommended practice report, which defines the Exchange tailoring of XTCE for CCSDS-based missions. CCSDS-based missions are (XTCE) for space mission that are compliant to basic CCSDS Packet Telemetry and CCSDS Telecommand standards. Missions Ref: CCSDS 660.0-M Status: Drafting Available: Oct-08 Planner SM&C Planning Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Service The Planning Request service allows a consumer application to raise a request (and responses) for an operational task or goal to be included in a plan. The service would be provided by a Mission Planning application. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 130 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Mission SM&C Software Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Management This service supports the management of software loaded into the remote Service system. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Mission SM&C Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Scheduling The Scheduling service is one of two services that support automation of Service mission operations. Scheduling is concerned with the distribution, monitoring and control of scheduled timelines of mission operations intended for automated execution. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Mission SM&C Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Automation It is the second of the two services that support automation of mission Service operations. The service provider is an application capable of executing pre- defined Procedures (or autonomous Functions), whether ground-based or on-board the spacecraft. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Mission SM&C Data Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Product The Data Product Management service is concerned with the management Management and transfer of sizeable binary data products. This is typically observation Service or payload data gathered on-board the spacecraft, but it could also be used to manage the output of analysis and reporting functions. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Flight SM&C Location Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Dynamics Service It supports the provision of spacecraft positioning information. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Flight SM&C Flight Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Dynamics Dynamics They are concerned with the provision of information classes that are Services specific to Flight Dynamics.
Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Mission SM&C Remote Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Buffer As the connection to the spacecraft may be intermittent, many missions Management implement intermediate buffering of data either on-board the spacecraft or Service within a ground station. Such remote buffers may contain messages relating to any or all of the services described above. The purpose of the Remote Buffer Management Service is to provide a standardised approach to the operation of such buffers. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Mission SM&C Operator Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Interaction Ultimate responsibility for mission operations is vested in a team of people. Service The interactive user interfaces provided by the Mission Control System allow this team to monitor current operations status and initiate control actions. There have always been cases, however, where it is necessary for the automated systems to alert the human operators to a significant event; typically this is achieved through the raising of alarms. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 131 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD Mission SM&C Time Spacecraft Monitoring & Control WG Control Service Time correlation between on-board clocks and the system reference time is required to support mission operations, for basic M&C purposes, on-board scheduling and flight dynamics. Ref: CCSDS Status: Planned Available: TBD HK TM In Mapping E-70- Mapping E-70-31 into XTCE HB 31 into XTCE TC Out The E-70-31 specifies what data is to be exchanged between the different HB actors of the overall space system development and operations. Basically, the HB will ensure compatibility between CCSDS (XTCE) and ECSS (E-70- 31). To support ESA missions, how the data is to be exchanged should also be specified in a technical memorandum or handbook. This will be done by mapping E-70-31 to the CCSDS XML Telemetric and Command Exchange (XTCE) format as recommended by the ECSS TF2. Ref: E-HB-70-31 Status: Planned Available: Aug-08 Mission PUS Update, PUS Update - Phase 1 Control phase 1 The version E-70-41A was produced in January 2003. This version has been used by many projects. Lessons learned from project experience together with accumulated feedback from users will be collected to identify possible areas of update/upgrade. It is noted that phase 1 consists only in the collection of the information and not the actual update of the PUS. Ref: E-70-41B Status: Planned Available: Dec-08 Product Producer- Data Archive Ingestion WG Archive Archive Agencies need to reduce the cost and increase the automation associated Interface with acquiring and ingesting data and metadata to archives. Archives, Specification including both mission and final, need appropriate metadata to accompany data objects to facilitate long term preservation. Currently, submission requirements are usually totally ad hoc by mission, or by a given multi- mission archive or final archive. Producers of information for archives often seek guidance on how to submit such information. The Open Archival Information System (OAIS) reference model and the Producer-Archive Interface Methodology Abstract Standard set a context for all archives. Further, registries are of increasing importance as the holders of re-usable metadata in the exchange of information. This work will establish an extensible framework for a Submission Information Package (SIP). It will include mandatory and optional elements, with the ability to recognize categories of information and relationships. Ref: CCSDS 651.1 Status: Drafting Available: Mar-08 Products XML Formatted Information Packaging & Registries WG Data Unit Agencies need to reduce the cost and increase the automation among (XFDU) Green applications associated with the exchange of information applications and Book those facilities that produce, distribute and store the information. CCSDS has been a leader in the development of data packaging techniques and their association with the registration of schemas/data definitions. CCSDS has produced several standards in this area that are in active usage within agencies and include those known as Standard Formatted Data Units, Parameter Value Language, Control Authority Procedures, and Control CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 132 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Authority Data Structures. However the speed of technology change including the emergence of XML as a standard data description language, the vast increase in the size and interrelationships of space data and the emergence of the Internet as a data delivery mechanism require vastly different versions of these documents be written. Also, the vast increases in space hardened computer power and communications bandwidth allow techniques that previously were considered ground system only to be utilized in the end to end space data systems. The large size and binary nature of space prevents the direct usage of commercial or International earth based standards. It defines a method for the packaging of data and its metadata into a single package (e.g. file) to facilitate information transfer and archiving. Ref: CCSDS Status: Drafting Available: Nov-07 Products XML Formatted Information Packaging & Registries WG Data Unit Agencies need to reduce the cost and increase the automation among (XFDU) applications associated with the exchange of information applications and Structure and those facilities that produce, distribute and store the information. CCSDS Construction has been a leader in the development of data packaging techniques and Rules their association with the registration of schemas/data definitions. CCSDS has produced several standards in this area that are in active usage within agencies and include those known as Standard Formatted Data Units, Parameter Value Language, Control Authority Procedures, and Control Authority Data Structures. However the speed of technology change including the emergence of XML as a standard data description language, the vast increase in the size and interrelationships of space data and the emergence of the Internet as a data delivery mechanism require vastly different versions of these documents be written. Also, the vast increases in space hardened computer power and communications bandwidth allow techniques that previously were considered ground system only to be utilized in the end to end space data systems. The large size and binary nature of space prevents the direct usage of commercial or International earth based standards. It defines a method for the packaging of data and its metadata into a single package (e.g. file) to facilitate information transfer and archiving. Ref: CCSDS 661.0 Status: Under Approval Available: Nov-07 Flight Reference E10 Part 12 Reference Coordinate Systems Dynamics Coordinate The work consists in standardizing the reference coordinate systems to be Systems used for space missions. Ref: ECSS-E10-09A Status: Under Approval Available: Mar-08 Mission Engineering E10 Part 9 Engineering Database Control Database The work consists in standardizing the engineering database. Ref: ECSS-E-TM-10-23 Status: Drafting Available: Oct-08 Flight Space E10-04 Space Environment Dynamics Environment Update of the ECSS Space Engineering - Space Environment Standard The standard comprises models of the Earth's gravity potential, its magnetic field, its neutral and charged particle atmosphere, and its debris and meteoroid environment. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 133 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. Ref: ECSS-E-10-04 Status: Under Review Available: Aug-08 Satellite ISO Space ISO Orbital Debris Coordination WG Debris Mitigation Develop international standards for Space Debris Mitigation through space Standards system design and operation. Ref: ISO 24113 Status: Drafting Available: Mar-11 Satellite On-Board On-Board Control Procedure Control On-Board Control Procedures (OBCP) are becoming more and more used Procedure above all for spacecraft that require autonomous decisions such as the deep space missions. Currently, each mission defines and develops its own OBCPs with little possibility of re-use across missions. Additionally, OBCP is a very critical tool that, if not properly tested, could cause the loss of the mission. In this context, this activity will establish a well-founded concept for OBCPs and harmonize the functional capabilities of the procedures loaded on-board to control the satellite. Ref: ECSS-E-70-01 Status: Drafting Available: Dec-08 Mission Ground systems E-70B Update Ground systems & operations general requirements Control & operations The work consists in the revision of version A of this standard, which general contains the basic rules, principles and requirements to be applied to the requirements engineering of the ground segment and mission operations, which form an integral part of the overall system implementing a space mission. It includes development of ground segment, operations preparation activities, mission planning activities, mission evaluation activities, the conduct of operations proper, and all post-operational activities. The ground segment comprises the ground systems (i.e. all ground facilities, hardware and software) and all operational aspects such as personnel and related data repositories required on ground to perform mission operations. Ref: ECSS-E-70 Status: Under Approval Available: Dec-07 Space System E10 Part 17A (DRD 14) System Engineering Engineering Engineering The work consists in the rewrite of E-10 Part 1B with the separation of requirements and handbook. Ref: ECSS-E-10 Part 17A Status: Under Review Available: Jun-08 Space Ground E40-HB-03 Ground Segment Software Engineering Engineering Segment Space Engineering: Ground Segment Software Software In 2005 the ESA Board for Software Standardisation and Control (BSSC) issued the Tailoring of ECSS Software Engineering Standards for Ground Segments in ESA (Parts A – D) (SETG) (AD-01). The SETG concerns the development and maintenance of ground segment software. It covers all aspects of ground segment software development, including requirements definition, design, production, verification, validation and maintenance, as well as management and quality assurance. This document is a unified and complete tailoring of the requirements of ECSS-E-40, ECSS-Q-80 and the ECSS management standards as concerns ground segment software development and maintenance and reflects ESOC practices. It is currently applicable to all ESOC software projects. In late 2005 the ECSS Steering Board appointed two task forces, • Task Force #1 “Organisation of ECSS” • Task Force #2 “ECSS ContentTask Force”. Task Force 2 (TF2) has considered all ECSS published material as well as CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 134 of 209 ______
Workflow Category Standardisation Summary Ref. all drafts in the ECSS workplan 2006 and documented its findings in a report. The report includes the TF2 recommendations for all standard domains. In relation to Ground Software, in view of the generality of ECSS E-40 and the need of tailoring of this standard for different domains and kinds of software projects, in its report TF2 acknowledged the need for two additional standards covering: • The engineering Requirements for Operational Ground Software in ECSS E40-03. This standard shall be • based on the SETG • The Engineering Requirements for non-operational Ground Software in ECSS E40-08. TF2 also acknowledge the need for a “Software Engineering Handbook”, E- HB-40-03A. This handbook shall be derived from a consolidation of the current ECSS E40-03, which is a guide to the use of ECSS-E- 40 for the engineering of software for the ground segments of space systems, and the advisory material in the SETG. The development of the new standards is planned to start in 2007, as soon as ECSS establishes the related WGs. Ref: ECSS E-40-03 Status: Planned Available: Dec-08 Space Ground E-HB-40-03A Ground Segment Guidelines Engineering Segment Ground Segment Software Engineering Handbook See BSSC05. Guidelines Ref: ECSS E-HB-40-03A Status: On hold Available: TBD Space Software Reuse E-HB-40-06 Software Reuse Engineering Engineering Engineering Software Reuse Engineering Handbook Software reuse is a strategy for both cost reduction and risk reduction. Reuse reduces the amount of code and documentation that has to be developed and maintained. Risk is reduced because software that is already field proven is used. For mission control software there is a cumulative effect the software is progressively exposed to new stresses as it is applied for different missions. The approach also brings the advantage that systems have a similar “look and feel”. This reduces users training cost and eases staff mobility between missions. The aim of E-HB-40-06 is to provide guidelines for the engineering of software reuse and for the development of software to be reused. The Handbook development is planned to start in 2007. Ref: ECSS E-HB-40-06 Status: Planned Available: Sep-09 Table 5 Work in Progress in ESA Mission Control Standardisatio
6.3.4 XML Telemetric & Command Exchange (XTCE)
This specification (under development by the OMG Space Domain with ESA playing a major role) is an information model for spacecraft telemetry and commanding data. For a given mission there are a number of lifecycle phases that are supported by a variety of systems and organizations. Additionally, many of these organizations support multiple heterogeneous missions using a common ground segment infrastructure. Telemetry and command definitions must be exchanged among all of these phases, systems, and organizations. This is made difficult and costly because there is no standard CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 135 of 209 ______
method for exchanging this information. The lack of standardization currently requires custom ingestion of the telemetry and commanding information. This customization is inherently error-prone, resulting in the need to revalidate at each step in the lifecycle. A typical example of this process is between the spacecraft manufacturer and spacecraft-operating agency. The spacecraft manufacturer defines the telemetry and command data in a format that is much different than the one used in the ground segment. This creates the need for database translation, increased testing, software customization, and increased probability of error. Standardization of the command and telemetry data definition format will streamline the process allowing dissimilar systems to communicate without the need for the development of mission specific database import/export tools. Ideally, a spacecraft operator should be able to transition from one ground system to another by simply moving an already existing command and telemetry database compliant with this command and telemetry database specification.
Figure 39 XTCE Schema
6.3.5 OGC Standards
Most widely used OGC Standards include: Web Map Service (ISO 19128), Web Feature Service (ISO 19142), Web Coverage Service (ISO 19123) and Geography Markup Language (ISO19136). Other OGC specifications of high interest to GEOSS and GMES include: • Geospatial Digital Rights Management Reference Model (GeoDRM RM) – Framework for web service mechanisms and rights languages to articulate, manage and protect the rights of all participants in the geographic information marketplace, including the owners of intellectual property and the users who wish to use it. • Observations & Measurements (O&M) - Standard models and XML Schema for encoding observations and measurements from a sensor, both archived and real-time. • Sensor Model Language (SensorML) - Standard models and XML Schema for describing sensors systems and processes associated with sensor observations; provides information needed for discovery of sensors, location of sensor observations, processing of low-level sensor observations, and listing of taskable properties, as well as supports on-demand processing of sensor observations. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 136 of 209 ______
• Transducer Model Language (TransducerML or TML) - The conceptual model and XML Schema for describing transducers and supporting real-time streaming of data to and from sensor systems. • Sensor Observations Service (SOS) - Standard web service interface for requesting, filtering, and retrieving observations and sensor system information. This is the intermediary between a client and an observation repository or near real-time sensor channel. • Sensor Planning Service (SPS) - Standard web service interface for requesting user-driven acquisitions and observations. This is the intermediary between a client and a sensor collection management environment. • Sensor Alert Service (SAS) - Standard web service interface for publishing and subscribing to alerts from sensors. • Web Notification Services (WNS) - Standard web service interface for asynchronous delivery of messages or alerts from SAS and SPS web services and other elements of service workflows.
6.4 Other Standards
6.4.1 Architecture
The following sections contain models of architectures currently in use for modelling EO systems.
6.4.1.1 RM-ODP
The Reference Model of Open Distributed Processing (RM-ODP) or ISO 10746 [WR09] provides a co-ordinating framework for the standardisation of open distributed processing (ODP). It is a joint effort by ISO/IEC and ITU-T that creates an architecture within which support of distribution, interworking, and portability can be integrated. The RM-ODP family of recommendations and international standards defines essential concepts necessary to specify open distributed processing systems from five prescribed viewpoints and provides a well-developed framework for the structuring of specifications for large-scale, distributed systems. RM-ODP defines five viewpoints. A viewpoint (on a system) is an abstraction that yields a specification of the whole system related to a particular set of concerns. The five viewpoints defined by RM-ODP have been chosen to be both simple and complete, covering all the domains of architectural design. These five viewpoints are: • the enterprise viewpoint, which is concerned with the purpose, scope and policies governing the activities of the specified system within the organization of which it is a part; • the information viewpoint, which is concerned with the kinds of information handled by the system and constraints on the use and interpretation of that information; • the computational viewpoint, which is concerned with the functional decomposition of the system into a set of objects that interact at interfaces - enabling system distribution; • the engineering viewpoint, which is concerned with the infrastructure required to support system distribution; CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 137 of 209 ______
• the technology viewpoint, which is concerned with the choice of technology to support system distribution. For each viewpoint there is an associated viewpoint language which can be used to express a specification of the system from that viewpoint. The object modelling concepts give a common basis for the viewpoint languages and make it possible to identify relationships between the different viewpoint specifications and to assert correspondences between the representations of the system in different viewpoints.
ODP standards define functions and structures to realize distribution transparencies. Distribution transparencies enable complexities associated with system distribution to be hidden from applications where they are irrelevant to their purpose. Finally, RM-ODP also provides a framework for assessing system conformance. The basic characteristics of heterogeneity and evolution imply that different parts of a distributed system can be purchased separately, from different vendors. It is therefore very important that the behaviours of the different parts of a system are clearly defined, and that it is possible to assign responsibility for any failure to meet the system's specifications. The RM-ODP consists of: • ITU-T Rec. X.901 | ISO/IEC 10746-1: Overview, which contains a motivational overview of ODP, giving scoping, justification and explanation of key concepts, and an outline of the ODP architecture. It contains explanatory material on how the RM-ODP is to be interpreted and applied by its users, who may include standards writers and architects of ODP systems. It also contains a categorisation of required areas of standardisation expressed in terms of the reference points for conformance identified in ITU-T Rec X.903 | ISO/IEC 10746-3. This part is not normative. • ITU-T Rec. X.902 | ISO/IEC 10746-2: Foundations, which contains the definition of the concepts and analytical framework for normalised description of (arbitrary) distributed processing systems. It introduces the principles of conformance to ODP standards and the way in which they are applied. This is only to a level of detail sufficient to support ITU-T Rec X.903 | ISO/IEC 10746-3 and to establish requirements for new specification techniques. This part is normative. • ITU-T Rec. X.903 | ISO/IEC 10746-3: Architecture, which contains the specification of the required characteristics that qualify distributed processing as open. These are the constraints to which ODP standards must conform. It uses the descriptive techniques from ITU-T Rec X.902 | ISO/IEC 10746-2. This part is normative. • ITU-T Rec. X.904 | ISO/IEC 10746-4: Architectural semantics, which contains a formalisation of the ODP modelling concepts defined in clauses 8 and 9 of ITU-T Rec X.902 | ISO/IEC 10746-2. The formalisation is achieved by interpreting each concept in terms of the constructs of one or more of the different standardised formal description techniques. This part is normative. The RM-ODP model has been used for the architectural design within the projects • ORCHESTRA (EC FP6) • WIN (EC FP6) • HMA (ESA-DEOP) CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 138 of 209 ______
6.4.1.2 CCSDS 311.0-R-1 Reference Architecture For Space Data Systems
The Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (RASDS) [RD10] is intended to provide a standardized approach for description of data system architectures and high-level designs, which individual CCSDS working groups may use within CCSDS. This approach is aligned with best current practices in the fields of system and software architecture and is specifically adapted for the space domain. While it is intended for use within CCSDS it is also suitable for use by mission and project design teams, to describe system architectures and designs within the space domain. A number of different standard methodologies are currently in use or are being developed for description of software-intensive systems architectures. These include • the ISO Reference Model of Open Distributed Systems (RM-ODP), • the Recommended Practice for Architectural Descriptions of Software-Intensive Systems (IEEE 1471-2000) • Standard for Application and Management of the System Engineering Process (IEEE 1220- 2005), • OMG Unified Modeling Language (UML), • Systems Modeling Language (SysML), • DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF), • the Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF), • the ISO Basic Reference Model (ISO-BRM), and others. All of these share the concepts of developing a consistent set of elements, terminology, viewpoints, views, and specifications, with which to describe systems and their architectures. All of these standard methodologies typically assume that the elements of these systems are fixed in place and that they are in continuous communication over what are nominally error-free communications channels that suffer only occasional disruptions. Space data systems violate all of these assumptions. RASDS, on the other hand, provides guidelines for the description of space data systems that take into account the realities of operating in the space environment. This is a domain-specific architectural approach adapted to the requirements of space data systems. RASDS directly addresses the fact that some elements of these distributed systems • will be operated at great distances from one another. • may only occasionally be in contact with one another, • require use of very expensive and over-subscribed ground communications assets, • are strongly affected by the physical environment in which they have to operate. These environmental issues affect what must be done to provide reliable communications between elements, how control interactions may be designed, and how these systems may be operated. The RASDS framework extends the RM-ODP framework and provides five specific and complementary viewpoints on the system and its environment: • The Enterprise Viewpoint focuses on the purpose, scope, and policies for the space data system. It describes the organizational entities and relationships; their roles, requirements, goals, objectives, scenarios, constraints; and how to meet them. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 139 of 209 ______
• The Functional Viewpoint describes the functional decomposition of the space data system into abstract objects that interact at interfaces. It describes the functionality provided by the space data system, the behavior of the functional elements, and their functional decomposition. • The Connectivity Viewpoint describes the engineered decomposition of the space data system into components (nodes) that interact across connectors (links). The Connectivity Viewpoint describes the physical aspects of the space data system and the external environment within which it operates, the physical behavior (and motion) of the nodes, and their physical decomposition. The links may be manifestly physical (network or data cables), or they may be more ethereal (RF and optical signals). The Connectivity Viewpoint also addresses the allocation of implemented functions (as engineered software or hardware objects) to these Nodes. Note that RASDS addresses only data system components, but a full space system design would include other classes of components and connectors not addressed here. • The Communications Viewpoint focuses on the mechanisms and functions required to engineer and implement the protocols and communications standards for the space data system, including implementation choices and specifications, and allocation of communications functionality to engineered components of the system. This Viewpoint is a subset of the RM-ODP Engineering and Technical Viewpoints, but it is treated separately in RASDS because it is central to describing how to handle many communication issues in space data systems. • The Information Viewpoint focuses on the kinds of information handled by the system, the semantics of the information, and the interpretation of that information. It describes the information managed by the space data system along with the structure, content, semantics, type, relationships, and constraints on the data used within the system. Although separately specified, the Viewpoint Specifications are not completely independent; key items in each are related to items in the other Viewpoints.
6.4.1.3 ISO 19119:2005
ISO 19119:2005 [WR10] • identifies and defines the architecture patterns for service interfaces used for geographic information, • defines its relationship to the Open Systems Environment model, • presents a geographic services taxonomy and a list of example geographic services placed in the services taxonomy. It also prescribes how to • create a platform-neutral service specification, • derive conformant platform-specific service specifications. It provides guidelines for the selection and specification of geographic services from both platform- neutral and platform-specific perspectives.
6.4.2 Simulation
In space projects, Modelling & Simulation has traditionally been considered as a support discipline applied in many different areas of the project in an independent and uncoordinated way. Even though different disciplines and project phases have different needs, use of Modelling and Simulation in a CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 140 of 209 ______
coherent way across the lifecycle of a project potentially yields significant benefits to a project. It reduces risk and cost and acts as an enabling technology for a complete virtual model driven development process that could not be done before. ECSS: E10 Part 13 System Modeling & Simulations It is recognised as a good practice to procure simulation products in a consistent manner across the project. In this way, commonality between the different areas (e.g. AIT and Operations) can be reinforced and may be exploited to reduce costs if the different requirements can be adequately met. The purpose and justification for this standard is: To maximise the benefits of using M&S in support to the Systems Engineering function To reduce effort in developing and maintaining simulators To preserve investment in modelling a system, independently of the tools To improve collaboration between involved teams / communities by addressing distribution and interoperability aspects To facilitate reuse from phase to phase, project to project. Ref: ECSS-E-TM-10-21 Status: On hold Available: TBD ECSS: E-40-07 Simulator Model Platform The main strategic objective is standardising more and more the on-board interfaces so that spacecraft could be built up by re-use of components as long as they comply with the specified interfaces. This extends seamlessly to the area of spacecraft simulators where currently the ESA software infrastructure, SIMSAT, covers only about 30% of the simulator’s functionality. The ability to standardise the simulator model interfaces will allow a much greater re-use of models from the spacecraft manufacturer and/or from spacecraft to spacecraft, thus reducing the bespoken development for spacecraft simulator. The Standard will include the definition of simulation model interfaces, in order to enable the portability of models among different simulation environments and operating systems, and their re-use. This will build on the work already done for the Simulator Model Portability (SMP-2) standard, which was developed by ESA with the participation and contribution of space industry. Ref: ECSS E-40-07 Status: Drafting Available: Jun-08 IEE 1516: High Level Architecture The High Level Architecture (HLA) is a general purpose architecture for distributed computer simulation systems. Using HLA, computer simulations can communicate to other computer simulations regardless of the computing platforms. Communication between simulations is managed by a Run-Time Infrastructure (simulation) (RTI). The High Level Architecture (HLA) consists of the following components: Interface Specification. The interface specification document defines how HLA compliant simulators interact with the Run-Time Infrastructure (simulation) (RTI). The RTI provides a programming library and an application programming interface (API) compliant to the interface specification. Object Model Template (OMT). The OMT specifies what information is communicated between simulations and how it is documented. HLA Rules. Rules that simulations must obey to be compliant to the standard. Common terminology is used for HLA. A HLA compliant simulation is referred to as a federate. Multiple simulations connected via the RTI using a common OMT are referred to as a federation. A collection of related data sent between simulations is referred to as an object. Objects have attributes (data fields). Events sent between simulations are referred to as interactions. Interactions have parameters (data fields). CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 141 of 209 ______
HLA is defined under IEEE Standard 1516: Prior to publication of IEEE 1516, the HLA standards development was sponsored by the US Defense Modeling and Simulation Office. The final version of the standard was known as HLA 1.3. HLA (in both the current IEEE 1516 version and its ancestor "1.3" version) is the subject of the NATO draft standardization agreement (STANAG 4603) for modelling and simulation: Modelling And Simulation Architecture Standards For Technical Interoperability: High Level Architecture (HLA). The IEEE 1516 standard is currently being revised under the SISO HLA-Evolved Product Development Group.
6.4.3 Quality Management System Standardisation – ISO 9000
Quality Management System (QMS) standardisation under ISO 9000 accounts for two major experiences at ESA: • Operations and Infrastructure Directorate which operates a certified ISO 9001 Quality Management System since year 1999.The scope of certification includes the design, development and maintenance Infrastructure for Ground Segments for Mission Operations, Information Technology (IT) Systems and Estates, Buildings and related Facilities; Managing and executing spacecraft operations (including network and station operations, in-orbit payload operations and testing, space debris and flight dynamics). The system is currently being extended to cover development and operations of Ground Segment Control system for human spaceflight (time horizon: 2009).
• Earth Observation Programmes Directorate which operates a certified ISO 9001 Quality Management System since year 2001. The scope of certification includes Mission Requirements Management, Mission Operations, Data Payload Ground Segment and Applications Development. The system is currently being expanded to cover also Spacecraft Procurement (time horizon: 2009). A further QMS/ISO initiative is currently being started by ESA Head Quarters for the achievement of one ESA ISO 9000 Management System by year 2012 (AIMS Project). The aforementioned QMS implementations have fully encompassed the traditional ESA Product Assurance approach by complementing the product compliance issues with a process management and improvement focus (Quality Assurance) and shifting the attention from correction (for compliance to standards) to prevention (for effective and efficient process planning, implementation, evaluation and improvement). Quality and Product Assurance, both integrated under the requirements of ISO 9001, contribute to pursue cost reduction in the frame of Ground Systems and Mission Operations. This cost reduction results as the positive balance between the reduction of cost for non-quality (the ones associated with the correction of non-conformities) and the additional costs associated to prevention (cost of quality investments). To this one it shall be added the benefit associated to the increase of standardization obtained by sharing and streamlining the processes. The major contributors to cost reduction can be associated to the following activities: • Process and tool standardization • Risk management • Improvement and cross fertilization The effort invested in process standardization and formalization, common tools, risk management and continual improvement is considered as cost of prevention and yield significant savings on the overall cost of Ground Segments development and Operations. It does reduce the cost of non-quality and does contribute to process efficiency. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 142 of 209 ______
6.4.3.1 Process and tool standardization
The avoidance of “reinventing the wheel” for each new project and system not only reduces these recurrent costs but has also a strong synergetic effect on moving (or sharing) personnel and their know-how. The appointed staff will not need to relearn the “how to” as it is the same as for their previous project and would then be able to concentrate only on the new technical challenges. However this is a difficult task as usually high level of resistance to change will be faced. The resistance to the process and/or tool reutilization (the syndrome of the non-invented here) is mostly due to the fear of change under the pressure of milestone achievement and usually has a consequence increasing the real costs. The overall expected results are significant cost reduction against the investment necessary to start using the new tool.
6.4.3.2 Risk management
The approach to manage the identified risks (severity and likelihood assessed via rough order of magnitude) constitutes an effective way to proactively address potential problems well before their possible occurrence (with associated recovery costs). A risk likelihood reduction implies a decrease of the problems to be faced and the associated “non- quality” costs: redelivery, extended qualification, extended simulation, operational errors, service interruptions…..
6.4.3.3 Improvement and cross-fertilization
The analysis of the problems in terms of “root causes” allows shifting from immediate solution / restore of the service, to the avoidance of the reoccurrence of the same incident in the same system or similar system. The identification of the “lessons learned”, their analysis and validation constitutes an extremely valuable base of knowledge at corporate level that provides benefit to all future activities in terms of problem prevention, process efficiency and know how preservation. In this case the cost reductions are linked to the avoidance of experiencing the same problem from one project to the other and reducing the training/experience necessary to obtain the same level of competence on staff.
6.4.4 Safety
Safety is defined as “System state where an acceptable level of risk with respect to: • fatality, • injury or occupational illness, • damage to launcher hardware or launch site facilities, CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 143 of 209 ______
• damage to an element of an interfacing manned flight system, • the main functions of a flight system itself, • pollution of the environment, atmosphere or outer space, and • damage to public or private property is not exceeded.” The term safety is defined differently in ISO/IEC Guide 2 as “freedom from unacceptable risk of harm”.
6.4.4.1 ISO 14620
ISO 14620 deals with safety aspects in space systems. It consists of three parts: • ISO 14620-1:2002 Space systems -- Safety requirements -- Part 1: System safety • ISO 14620-2:2000 Space systems -- Safety requirements -- Part 2: Launch site operations • ISO 14620-3:2005 Space systems -- Safety requirements -- Part 3: Flight safety systems
ISO 14620-1:2002 defines the safety programme and the technical safety requirements that are implemented in order to comply with the safety policy as defined in ISO 14300-2. It is intended to protect flight and ground personnel, the launch vehicle, associated payloads, ground support equipment, the general public, public and private property, and the environment from hazards associated with space systems. Launch site operations are described by ISO 14620-2. The safety policy is applied by implementing a system safety programme, supported by risk assessment, which can be summarized as follows: hazardous characteristics (system and environmental hazards) and functions with potentially hazardous failure effects are identified and progressively evaluated by iteratively performing systematic safety analyses; the potential hazardous consequences associated with the system characteristics and functional failures are subjected to a hazard reduction sequence whereby hazards are eliminated from the system design and operations, hazards are minimized, and hazard controls are applied and verified; the risks that remain after the application of a hazard elimination and reduction process are progressively assessed and subjected to risk assessment, in order to show compliance with safety targets, support design trades, identify and rank risk contributors, support apportionment of project resources for risk reduction, assess risk reduction progress, and support the safety and project decision-making process (e.g. waiver approval, residual risk acceptance); the adequacy of the hazard and risk control measures applied are formally verified in order to support safety validation and risk acceptance; safety compliance is assessed by the project and safety approval obtained from the relevant authorities. ISO 14620-1:2002 is applicable to all space projects where during any project phase there exists the potential for hazards to personnel or the general public, space flight systems, ground support equipment, facilities, public or private property, or the environment. The imposition of these requirements on the project suppliers' activities requires that the customer's project product assurance and safety organization also respond to these requirements in a manner which is commensurate with the project's safety criticality. When viewed from the perspective of a specific programme or project context, the requirements defined in ISO 14620-1:2002 should be tailored to match the genuine requirements of a particular profile and circumstances of a programme or project. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 144 of 209 ______
ISO 14620-3:2005 sets out the minimum requirements for Flight Safety Systems, including flight termination systems (externally controlled system or on-board automatic system), tracking systems, and telemetry data transmitting systems for commercial or non commercial launch activities of orbital or sub-orbital, unmanned space vehicles. The intent is to minimize the risk of injury or damage to persons, property or the environment resulting from the launching of space vehicles. ISO 14620-3:2005 can be applied by any country, by any international organization, whether intergovernmental or not, and by any agency or operator undertaking the launching of space vehicles.
ISO 14620-3:2005 is intended to be applied by any person, organization, entity, operator or launch authority participating in commercial or non-commercial launch activities of orbital or sub-orbital, unmanned space vehicles unless more restrictive requirements are imposed by the launch site country.
6.4.4.2 ECSS-Q-40B
This Standard meets or exceeds the requirements of ISO DIS 14620-1. This Standard defines the safety programme and the technical safety requirements that are implemented in order to comply with the ECSS safety policy as defined in ECSS-Q-00. It is intended to protect flight and ground personnel, the launch vehicle, associated payloads, ground support equipment, the general public, public and private property, and the environment from hazards associated with European space systems. The ECSS safety policy is applied by implementing a system safety programme, supported by risk assessment, which can be summarized as follows: • hazardous characteristics (system and environmental hazards) and functions with potentially hazardous failure effects are identified and progressively evaluated by iteratively performing systematic safety analyses; • the potential hazardous consequences associated with the system characteristics and functional failures are subjected to a hazard reduction sequence whereby: o hazards are eliminated from the system design and operations; o hazards are minimized; o hazard controls are applied and verified. • the risks that remain after the application of a hazard elimination and reduction process are progressively assessed and subjected to risk assessment, in order to: o show compliance with safety targets; o support design trade-offs; o identify and rank risk contributors; o support apportionment of project resources for risk reduction; o assess risk reduction progress; o support the safety and project decision-making process (e.g. waiver approval, residual risk acceptance). • the adequacy of the hazard and risk control measures applied are formally verified in order to support safety validation and risk acceptance; • safety compliance is assessed by the project and safety approval obtained from the relevant authorities. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 145 of 209 ______
This Standard is applicable to all European space projects where during any project phase there exists the potential for hazards to personnel or the general public, space flight systems, ground support equipment, facilities, public or private property, or the environment. The imposition of these requirements on the project suppliers’ activities requires that the customer’s project product assurance and safety organization also responds to these requirements in a manner which is commensurate with the project’s safety criticality. When viewed from the perspective of a specific programme or project context, the requirements defined in this Standard should be tailored to match the genuine requirements of a particular profile and circumstances of a programme or project.
6.4.5 Information Security Management The following analysis is based on the information security management approach for the GMES contributing missions as discussed within the heterogeneous Missions Accessibility (HMA) project. It has to be noted that military and/or dual use specific requirements are not taken into account in the following which concentrates on the civil exploitation of civil and dual use EO missions.
The proposed approach is therefore based on: • generic “information security” requirements • Information Security norms and/or legislation being issued by Member States e.g. o Remote Sensing Space Systems Act, Regulatory Impact Assessment for Radarsat-2 in Canada o Law in Germany
The objective of the proposed approach is to ensure systematization in the Information Security Management in order to: • identify all possible risks • properly estimate each of the requirement implications • save time and resources on a focused approach
6.4.5.1 ISO Information Security Management Standards
The standardisation of security and more in detail of information security is covered by the following set of ISO standards which are briefly described. ISO/IEC 17799:2005 This International Standard [RD11] establishes guidelines and general principles for initiating, implementing, maintaining, and improving information security management in an organization This Standard may serve as a practical guideline for developing organizational security standards and effective security management practices and to help build confidence in inter-organizational activities. ISO/IEC 27001 This International Standard [RD12] specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, operating, monitoring, reviewing, maintaining and improving a documented Information Security Management System ISMS within the context of the organization’s overall business risks It covers all types of organizations (e.g. agencies, commercial, government). It has ISO/IEC 17799:2005 among the Normative References. ISO/IEC 15408 CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 146 of 209 ______
This International Standard [RD13] provides a common set of requirements (common criteria) for the security functions of IT products and systems and for assurance measures applied to them during a security evaluation It consists of three parts Introduction and General Model Security functional requirements Security assurance requirements
Moreover within the framework of the HMA project an additional study on information security has been performed in the GMES perspective. The first step was the production of a HMA IS tailoring of the ISO standards. The HMA IS Tailoring is based on the table in Annex 1 of ISO/IEC 27001 (for clarity sake it is included in Annex 4 ISO 27001 HMA Tailoring of this document).
The HMA tailoring has been analysed by Spot and DLR/Infoterra which mapped the tailoring on their information security systems.
A further step was the creation of an information security document with a direct derivation from the above ISO standards and from the related HMA tailoring. The document aims to • define a consistent and common approach for all the GMES/HMA involved entities, in particular for the GMES Contributing Missions (GCM). • cover all the possible aspects affecting information security, even reusing previous studies on the topic.
Each GMES Contributing Mission is expected to a. apply the document as it is b. prepare and apply a tailoring with justifications c. create its own document with a traceability to this document
In case the GCM performs a tailoring or writes its own GCM security requirement document, the following recommendations apply: Each partner should identify of the mandatory/desirable/nice-to-have IS issues; Any non compliance or partial compliance shall be justified; The traceability to the ISO standards (or HMA tailoring) is maintained.
6.4.5.2 CCSDS Security Standards
Additional security studies on space systems may be found in CCSDS documents. Among them CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 147 of 209 ______
CCSDS 350.1-G-1 - Security Threats Against Space Missions Informational Report This document is a CCSDS report that describes the threats that could potentially be applied against space missions. It characterizes threats against various types of missions and examines their likelihood and the results of their having been carried out. CCSDS 350.4-G-1 - CCSDS Guide For Secure System Interconnection Informational Report This document presents guidelines for interconnecting space agency networks and IT systems, specifically to support secure cross support. However, this document may also be used as a guide for interconnecting agency networks and IT systems for other purposes as determined to be required by the agencies themselves. CCSDS: Security activities Encryption MB Status: Drafting Available: Jun-08 Purpose: Recommending an encryption practice including operational modes for providing confidentiality on CCSDS missions. Originally foreseen as "Standard", it will be a "Recommended Practice" (i.e. Magenta Book). Authentication MB Status: Drafting Available: Dec-08 Purpose: Recommending an authentication practice including operational modes for providing e D/OPS Engineering Standardization (DES) authentication and integrity on CCSDS missions. Originally foreseen as "Standard", it will be a "Recommended Practice" (i.e. Magenta Book). Key Management MB Status: Drafting Available: Dec-08 Purpose: Recommending a key management practice for key handling and exchange in CCSDS missions. Originally foreseen as "Standard", it will be a "Recommended Practice" (i.e. Magenta Book). Key Management GB Status: Drafting Available: Jun-09 Purpose: Recommending a key management practice for key handling and exchange in CCSDS missions. This book shall complement the related Magenta Book. Security Architecture MB Status: Drafting Available: Jun-08 Purpose: This book will define a set of standards for a security infrastructure for CCSDS missions. Adhering to these standards, missions will be able to support interoperability between their security architectures. Originally foreseen as "Security Infrastructure Standard" it has been renamed "Security Architecture Recommended Practice" (i.e. Magenta Book).
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 148 of 209 ______
6.4.6 Cal/Val and Intercalibration of EO Instruments: Status of Harmonisation Guidelines
6.4.6.1 Introduction
For GEOSS to be fully successful, the calibration, validation and intercalibration between instruments are activities of primary importance. Harmonised procedures for such activities would ensure the required data quality control and the sensors interoperability in the framework of long-term and multi- mission applications.
The Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS), the space contribution to GEOSS, identified the need to take a lead in tackling these issues. The CEOS Working Group on Calibration and Validation (WGCV), established consensus within the international community on a roadmap towards the establishment of Cal/Val best practices built upon the key principle of demonstrating traceability to internationally agreed references. These best practices will be issued as CEOS endorsed guidelines, under the auspices of GEO, for implementation by the agencies.
These cal/val guidelines shall cover all aspects of the data processing chain and will allow data to have an ascribed ‘quality’ associated with it. These protocols would identify current best practices and could, with time, be improved upon to accommodate new sensors, technology and methodologies improvement.
The CEOS-endorsed harmonisation guidelines for calibration, validation and intercalibration processes shall: • Establish best practices and methodologies, incorporating internationally recognised standards, on Pre-launch, Onboard and Post-launch procedures. • Define or identify test scenarios (aka “sites”) for Cal/Val of EO measurements. • Populate, maintain and evolve a long-term open-access archive of cal/val data both space borne and in-situ to allow a coordinated international effort for cal/val and intercalibration.
6.4.6.2 Cal/Val Methodologies
For Cal/Val, a set of endorsed methodological best practices would provide the community with a benchmark upon which to plan and execute their activities. Currently, activities are somewhat disjointed and there would be great benefit in the use of a common set of information and full documentation of methodologies used. In essence, there should be enough information for someone to really understand the process and procedure used in order to show that the Cal/Val requirements are being met in a common way. Should this be achieved, the global Cal/Val community would be able to function and communicate much more effectively.
The methodologies should cover all EO instruments / specialities and address: (1) Pre-launch activities: CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 149 of 209 ______
(a) Full instrument cycle test (including instrument and environmental modeling) to ensure every element is traceable to SI standards where possible (b) All calibration data and procedures should be documented and kept
(2) Onboard calibration devices and activities (when applicable): (a) Should be concept proven and characterized (b) Should be traceable (c) The witness samples should be kept
(3) Post launch activities: (a) Vicarious calibration using ground sites/scenarios (b) Permanent reference sites that can be used for cal/val and inter-calibration of other satellite sensors via simultaneous and collocated observations
(4) Auxiliary tools and methods such as Radiative Transfer Models, as well as full end-to-end system simulation tools for all sensors must be documented, maintained and openly available.
6.4.6.3 Cal/val scenarios
The harmonisation guidelines shall establish a set of internationally-approved and fully-maintained Cal/Val sites that seek to serve all sectors of the Cal/Val community and that are endorsed by CEOS. The sites should span the specific needs of the different EO instruments / specialities requiring Cal/Val.
In this context, a reference site could either be a single site or may well be a series of linked (by common protocols and facilities) ‘sites’, e.g. the Network for Detection of Atmospheric Climate Change (NDACC) series would be regarded as a ‘reference site’.
Within the process, there would be the requirement that the site owners would maintain the site and make the data freely available to Cal/Val users. Unless the data is freely available for Cal/Val purposes the site should not be endorsed. The site would also have to be reviewed, perhaps annually, in order to ensure that continued endorsement is justified.
The number of sites and the priorities that are attached to them (for specific applications and performance) should be limited to a core list. It is noted, however, that it is the processes, characteristics and facilities that is being emphasising for a particular site, and some of these can be subject to change over time.
Each WGCV subgroup (representing each major thematic EO specialisation) is currently tasked to define their requirements for Cal/Val sites and the characteristics that they should exhibit in order to define a list of sites within each subgroup domain. In addition to characterisation best practices and test site requirements, the WGCV subgroups have also been asked to define their criteria for site classification with reference to its suitability for a particular application. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 150 of 209 ______
6.4.6.4 Satellite and in situ Cal/Val data access
The objective is to allow free and effective access of satellite and in situ data for Cal/Val purposes to the Cal/Val community. Preliminary services are currently being provided through the CEOS Cal/Val Portal developed by ESA.
In the specific issue of Cal/Val data, totally open access can hurt the Cal/Val activity dramatically if users erroneously ‘re-do’ calibrations, and so it would be important to clearly define who is part of the Cal/Val community. This would ensure that the input would be two-way with both data provider and data user feeding back into the process. The access to data would have to be governed by a dedicated Cal/Val data policy (code of use) that would ensure both the quality and traceability of the ‘raw’ data and also any results from using these data in an analytical way.
Given an effective data policy, there would be no inhibition from new countries contributing to the process merely because their data does not fully meet standards. Indeed, any data could effectively be contributed to the process as long as it contains a full traceability chain and its limitations are clearly defined. The CEOS data policy should be in line with the GEO data sharing principles already published.
The provision of Cal/Val data to the community is proposed through a dedicated centralised ‘portal’. This will be a managed system that will source endorsed Cal/Val data and provide easy access to it for the dedicated Cal/Val user (i.e. those who have signed up to the CEOS data policy). The data will include complete documentation of the entire process to ensure that there is full traceability. There should also be caveats attached to early release data and if people want access to this data on the premise of Cal/Val then it should be a default that they need to feed their results back for comment and review by the mission team. The employment of a dedicated Cal/Val portal would ensure that datasets are not duplicated unduly and would ensure efficient and secure knowledge transfer.
6.4.6.5 Harmonisation of Quality Information
Harmonisation guidelines should also address data quality information and the way it is presented to the EO users. The computation and presentation of data accuracy levels, error bars, completeness and correctness of the final products should be harmonised. All processes need to be traceable and shall contain the required quality information needed to understand the suitability of the procedures used and to progress in the chain of analysis.
6.4.6.6 The GECA Project
The GECA (Generic Environment for Cal/Val Analysis) project has two main scopes,: • Cal/Val: o Correlative Data access (extend access to correlative databases), promote peer to peer datacentre access and data sharing. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 151 of 209 ______
o Support repetitive operations, by automating some of the routine operations o Support Cal/Val campaigns coordination o Metadata standardisation through the extension of Envisat/Aura metadata guidelines • Product Quality Information: o – Study of a-posteriori quality metadata o – Standardisation of quality information and associated action protocol o – Handling of Quality information and action protocol
In the context of the GECA Project a Cal/Val Data Centre (GVDC) will be developed. • GVDC builds on the experience from Aura and Envisat Data Centres: continued collaboration with NASA during this project, continued compatibility with Aura/Envisat. • Includes guidelines for harmonization and extension of metadata format. • It expands the scope and supersedes the Envisat Validation Data Centre to include correlative data for upcoming missions (In particular Earth Explorers and GMES). • The project includes studies for interaction between ground-segments (e.g.: with HMA*- compatible interfaces) and correlative data centres, and for interaction between data centres. Results will be shared with Agencies/CEOS to initiate discussion on standardisation. • The project includes a stand-alone correlative data upload portal as example for a future single CEOS portal. It provides data submitters with a single entry point. Subsequently it handles distribution to various data centres from agencies.
In the context of the GECA (Generic Environment for Cal/Val Analysis) Project a study and implementation of a “Quality Information and Action Protocol” will be performed. The study will: • Review sources and forms of quality information • Review current methods for application of quality information • Propose a harmonised formulation of applicable quality information • Propose a mechanism for traceable exchange and application of quality information between information sources and users. The implementation will demonstrate a subset of these proposed standards in the operational ESA EO environment
6.4.6.7 A Quality Assurance Framework for Earth Observation (QA4EO)
The Group on Earth Observations (GEO)’s Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) must deliver comprehensive “knowledge/information products” worldwide and in a timely manner to meet the needs of its nine “societal themes”. This will be achieved through the synergistic use and combination of data derived from a variety of sources (satellite, airborne and in situ) through the coordinated resources and efforts of the GEO members. To accomplish this vision, starting from a system of disparate systems that were built for a multitude of applications, the establishment of an operational framework is required to facilitate interoperability and harmonisation. The success of this framework, in terms of “data”, is dependent upon the CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 152 of 209 ______
successful implementation of two key principles – Accessibility / Availability and Suitability / Reliability. Success also necessitates the means to efficiently communicate these attributes to all stakeholders.
To enable these principles to be implemented in an harmonised manner, the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS), the space arm of GEOSS, has established a quality assurance (QA) strategy to facilitate interoperability of GEO systems. This strategy is based upon a set of operational guidelines derived from “best practices” for implementation by the community. The guidelines have been structured into an operational framework based on interoperability requirements. As a result of agreement at two workshops held with calibration and validation (Cal/Val) experts from around the world, the guidelines have been collated into three theme areas – Data Quality, Data Policy and Communication & Education. The Data Quality theme is built upon the guiding principle that ‘All data and derived products must have associated with them a Quality Indicator based on documented quantitative assessment of its traceability to community agreed reference standards. This requires all steps in the data and product delivery chain (collection, archiving, processing and dissemination) to be documented with evidence of their traceability.’* The philosophy underpinning the Data Policy theme is that ‘The data must be freely and readily available / accessible / useable in an unencumbered manner for the good of the GEOSS community, for both current and future users. This necessitates that all Cal/Val data and associated support information (metadata, processing methodologies, Quality Assurance, etc.) is associated with the means to effectively implement a Quality Indicator. In return, the data provider must be consistently acknowledged.’* For effective Communication & Education, ‘Interoperability requires all stakeholders to have a clear understanding of the adequacy of the information that they are accessing and using for their specific application, i.e. its “fitness for purpose”. The evidence for this clarity will be accessible through a single portal [WR49] and will be fully traceable to its origins. The traceability and interoperability process must be understandable by any appropriately trained individual throughout GEOSS and efforts must be made to encourage the wider usage of information and facilitate the training of GEOSS users.’* This QA4EO framework strategy, being completed and endorsed by CEOS for GEO task DA-06-02, will be recommended for integration and use throughout the GEO community. Work is underway to optimise an implementation strategy for endorsement at CEOS plenary in November 2008, and its potential evolution to meet any additional specific needs of data providers, for example those related to in situ measurements. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 153 of 209 ______
7 INTEROPERABILITY ISSUES
7.1 Systems of Systems
7.1.1 GMES
The GMES Space Component is a system of systems. GMES is the European contribution to GEOSS.
7.1.2 GEOSS
As a “system of systems”, GEOSS is composed of contributed Earth Observation systems, ranging from primary data collection systems to systems concerned with the creation and distribution of information products. Although all GEOSS systems continue to operate within their own mandates, GEOSS systems can leverage each other so that the overall GEOSS becomes much more than the sum of its component systems. This synergy develops as each contributor supports common arrangements designed to make shared observations and products more accessible, comparable, and understandable.
GEOSS is overseen by the Group on Earth Observations (GEO), an intergovernmental organization at the ministerial level. The GEO vision is to realize a future wherein decisions and actions for the benefit of humankind are informed via coordinated, comprehensive and sustained Earth observations and information. This vision follows from international recognition that the data and information associated with Earth Observations are crucial to enhancing human health, safety and welfare, including poverty reduction, environmental protection, disaster loss reduction, and sustainable development achievements.
GEO was created through a series of Earth Observation Summits, starting in July 2003. By February 2005, GEO had established the GEOSS 10-Year Implementation Plan and Reference Document, describing how GEO will: achieve comprehensive, coordinated, and sustained Earth observations. The purpose of GEOSS is to achieve comprehensive, coordinated and sustained observations of the Earth system, in order to improve monitoring of the state of the Earth, increase understanding of Earth processes, and enhance prediction of the behaviour of the Earth system.
The GEOSS 10-Year Implementation Plan underscores the point that the success of GEOSS will depend on data and information providers accepting and implementing a set of interoperability arrangements, including technical specifications for collecting, processing, storing, and disseminating shared data, metadata, and products. GEOSS interoperability will be based on non-proprietary standards, with preference to formal international standards.
The GEOSS Architecture and Data Committee (ADC) supports GEO in all architecture and data management aspects of the design, coordination, and implementation of the GEOSS as described in the GEO Rules of Procedure. ADC has an oversight and coordination role on all the architecture CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 154 of 209 ______
Tasks and most all data management Tasks in the 2007 2009 GEO Work Plan. The Objectives of the ADC as approved by GEO Plenary are to: • Enable GEO, based upon user requirements and building on existing systems and initiatives, to define the components of GEOSS, and to converge or harmonize observation methods, and to promote the use of standards and references, inter-calibration, and data assimilation. • Enable GEO to define and update interoperability arrangements to which GEO Members and Participating Organizations agree to adhere, including technical specifications for collecting, processing, storing, and disseminating shared data, metadata and products. • Enable GEO to facilitate data management, information management, and common services, and will help to promote data sharing principles for the full and open sharing and exchange of data and information, recognizing relevant international instruments and national policies and legislation.
Figure 40: Elements of GEOSS
In 2007, ADC focused its efforts on two Tasks that were considered as "foundational” from a GEOSS architecture perspective: Task AR-07-01 – Enabling Deployment of GEOSS Architecture; and Task AR-07-02 – GEOSS Architecture Implementation Pilot.
7.2 The European Perspective
Europe has clear objectives for sustainable development related to climate change, clean energy, sustainable transport, sustainable production and consumption. Achieving these requires a stronger European capacity for mastering, predicting and managing the environment and resources by making use of ICT tools for reliable interoperation within a single information space. Currently, several initiatives in Europe are gearing towards achieving these goals including INSPIRE, GMES and GEOSS. The three initiatives: GMES, INSPIRE and GEOSS seek to make available data and information critical for environmental monitoring and management in the most open and interoperable way. GMES is seen as the main European contribution to GEOSS, whereas INSPIRE is considered fundaments for GMES. These initiatives aim to design and institutionalize an open service-oriented architecture and software infrastructure using, whenever feasible, already established standards. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 155 of 209 ______
This information infrastructure will be a major element in achieving Europe’s goal as stated above. However, several problems are still encountered, including how to harmonise architectures and standards coming out of these initiatives and projects. It is clear that while architectures are being developed they are not fully harmonised across projects, as there are gaps between the architectures. Moreover some proposed standards are not in a mature stage. As stated in the INSPIRE architecture position paper, where relevancy is perceived, synergies need to be built in order to ensure coherence between INSPIRE and GMES and thereby GEOSS.
7.3 European Coordination Initiatives
7.3.1 The GIGAS Project
The GEOSS INSPIRE and GMES Action in Support (GIGAS) proposal addresses the objective: ICT for environmental management and energy efficiency (ICT-2007.6.3). Acknowledging the need for concerted effort to harmonise and align activities related to standards and architectural development of GEOSS , GMES and INSPIRE initiatives, GIGAS seeks to carry out a Support Action (SA) aiming at a rapid adoption of standards, protocols, and open architectures in support of INSPIRE, GMES, and GEOSS initiatives. GIGAS will identify and define what is needed to enable a full integration of the architectures of the three initiatives via a consensus. The following sections describe this interoperability scenario defined by INSPIRE, GEOSS, GMES and GIGAS. The GEO 10-Year Implementation Plan Reference Document advocates the use of existing Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) components as institutional and technical precedents in areas such as geodetic reference frames, common geographic data, standard protocols, and interoperable system interfaces, among other components. Consequently INSPIRE currently contributes directly to GEO by: • Making accessible interoperable spatial data and services operated by Member States in Europe, and European Community institutions • Developing standards and specifications relevant to the GEO effort • Contributing with the European geo-portal to the GEO Clearinghouse and Geo-portal
GEO in turn contributes to the development of standards and specifications of relevance to INSPIRE, provides the opportunity for promoting interoperability between GEO and the European Spatial Data Infrastructure and to the wider accessibility of interoperable earth observation data and services.
INSPIRE, as the European SDI contributes to the cross-cutting initiatives, technologies and systems of GEO through the provision of standards protocols improving data access and sharing, advancing interoperability between systems and related standards, developing mechanisms for the allocation, transfer, and use of data and information products and services, developing detailed specifications and standards, and demonstrating the value of an underlying architecture based on the system of systems approach through the infrastructures operated by the Member States.
The development of INSPIRE provides a major contribution to the efforts of the GEOSS Architecture and Data Committee, and specifically tasks AR.07.01 and AR.07.02 (the INSPIRE geo-portal has been registered a GEOSS Community Portal, the INSPIRE catalogue as GEOSS service and the CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 156 of 209 ______
INSPIRE implementing rules will contribute to the design of the GEOSS architecture and clearing- house).
The Directive was approved in January 2007, and came into force on May 15th 2007. The Members States of the European Union have two years to adopt national legislation to achieve the objectives set out by the Directive, and 10 years after that to implement it in all its aspects. Current activities focus on the development of detailed technical specifications and standards to ensure the coherent implementation of the infrastructure across its key components: metadata, interoperability of spatial data and services, network services, data sharing policies, and implementation monitoring measures.
An open and participative approach including all the key stakeholders has been put in place to develop such technical implementation rules. In addition the European Commission is developing the European geo-portal to act as point of access to the spatial data infrastructures operated by the Member States. A brief description of GMES was already provided in section 5.1. The above descriptions of the three initiatives INSPIRE, GEOSS and GMES • Show an explicit commonality between their objectives, missions and tasks. • Contain explicit references to interactions already in place among them.
Concepts as “interoperability” and “standardisation” are the core elements of the three systems, which provide complementary approaches to the same goals and objectives. At the same time the different processes with which the three programmes/activities are run, in term of way of execution, actors involved and different time-frame bring in the risk of a substantial divergence of the process outcome with duplication of efforts delays in implementation time-lines, increases of costs, additional barriers in data access and exploitation.
The GIGAS programme aims to go one step ahead and to raise this interoperability and standardisation one level up. With the exploitation of synergies among INSPIRE, GEOSS and GMES, GIGAS is promoting an initiative to enhance the interoperability level between the three systems and to provide a stronger support to standardisation activities with a wider scope. The broad objectives of GIGAS are outlined here as: • To ensure architectural coherence between INSPIRE, GMES, and GEOSS, thus facilitating collection of and harmonisation/convergence of respective service requirements at the level of standards. More specifically; o Contribute to speed up and streamline the development of the INSPIRE network services o Contribute to GEOSS architecture development providing comments, advising GEOSS Architecture and Data Committee ADC tasks, and participating in the design of selected international standards, innovative architecture tasks and to advance interoperability o Ensure the link with GMES by addressing the Space Ground Segment and the requirements of GMES Fast Track Services, Pilot Services and downstream ones • Support and strengthen European interests in harmonising INSPIRE, GMES, and GEOSS, and represent the European voice in international standards initiatives and fora • Facilitate the European participation in strategic international pilots that aim at designing innovative architectures and advances in interoperability CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 157 of 209 ______
• Provide a platform to assess/integrate European ICT FP projects that could contribute to INSPIRE, GMES, and GEOSS and identify research challenges to be further addressed in future (2011 onward) The main outcomes of GIGAS are summarised here as follows: • Putting in place the consensus process that facilitates communication between INSPIRE, GEOSS, GMES and the standardisation bodies described o Strengthen coherence in reciprocal work programmes o Increase and reinforce European participation • Understanding requirements, commonalities and discrepancies between INSPIRE, GEOSS and GMES architectures and identify common interoperability needs: o Design upgrades aiming to an increased immediate interoperability between the systems o List and propose standards/specifications to be revised/adopted o Identify and plan long term updates to its design aiming to an increased interoperability in the future • Contribute to a rapid uptake of standards including the definition and design of an open, persistent test-bed in which organisations or external projects can integrate their (compliant) services o Facilitate OGC, ISO, CEN processes • Facilitate European participation in GEOSS Standard Interoperability Forum and relevant international interoperability pilots o Define the requirements, management approach and sustainability scheme for a persistent test environment including conformance test tools (the OGC’s CITE being a possible model) • Assessment of FP6/FP7 investments o List of successful FP6/FP7 R&D contributions and identified areas of concerns (bottlenecks and new challenges) o Recommendations for the new research agenda 2011-2012 • Outreach and information dissemination o Raising awareness and capacity building o Provide a platform for EC funded project aiming at contributing to the architectural work
7.3.2 Single Information Space for the Environment in Europe
The i2010 strategy is the EU policy framework for the information society and media. It promotes the positive contribution that information and communication technologies (ICT) can make to the economy, society and personal quality of life. The European Commission presented it in June 2005 as the new initiative for the years up to 2010. The i2010 strategy has three aims:
• to create a Single European Information Space, which promotes an open and competitive internal market for information society and media services, CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 158 of 209 ______
• to strengthen investment and innovation in ICT research, • to support inclusion, better public services and quality of life through the use of ICT. The Single Information Space for the Environment in Europe (SISE) offers an ICT perspective for research and deployment activities of European added value. The SISE data features include: • Multiple data sources • New sensors / platforms o Miniaturised, low cost, intelligent sensors -> massive use o Portable sensors -> random measurements o Soft sensors • Smarter Networks (adaptative, flexible system approach) • Data fusion tools o GIS at various scales with permanent updating o How to deal with uncertainty propagation, missing data • 3D (Visualisation tools for DSS) • Real time information SISE is also expected to provide a modelling, simulation and decision support tool including • Prospective scenarios • Systemic analysis of risk • Virtual teams and communities • Complex patterns extraction • GRID technologies for distributed ecosystem modelling • 3D models with higher resolution • Automatic forecasting • Hybrid modelling. In terms of standardisation SISE involves • No proliferation, use of existing standards • Along with open source reference implementations The SISE objectives include • Smart Monitoring: Towards a dynamic management of heterogeneous sensor networks for full situation awareness; • Collaborative Information Systems: Towards dynamic data flows from monitoring to reporting, alert and response; • Dynamic Chaining of Services: Towards on-demand access to and chaining of services on the Web. SISE aims to evolve from a scenario with • A patchwork of disparate systems • Heterogeneous information models CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 159 of 209 ______
• Manual searches on different portals • Manual downloads and FTPs To • Consolidated information from disparate systems • Dynamic management of heterogeneous networks of sensor • Dynamic data flows from monitoring to reporting, alert andresponse in true collaboration • Interacting service nodes on the Web Additional SISE requirements involve • For users with or without special knowledge/training • From scientific investigations to real operations • For single actor and multi actor decisions or actions • One-stop-portal with adaptation to user profiles offering advanced simplicity (versus complex datasets) • Open access with accumulation of knowledge and stakeholders’ participation • Network transparency.
Summarising the SISE • Is more than just measurements and data exchange • Includes models, knowledge, services and tools • Requires a transparent backend system of systems • Is not limited to the borders of the EU • Has Local, regional, global scales
7.3.3 GMOSS Network of Excellence
The Global Monitoring for Security and Stability (GMOSS) [WR31] is a network of excellence in the aeronautics and space priority of the Sixth Framework Programme funded by the European Commission's Directorate General Enterprise & Industry. The aim of the GMOSS network of excellence is to integrate Europe’s civil security research so as to acquire and nourish the autonomous knowledge and expertise base Europe needs if it is to develop and maintain an effective capacity for global monitoring using satellite earth observation. The science and technology encompassed within the Network includes: • the generic methods, algorithms and software needed for the automatic interpretation and visualization of imagery including feature recognition, change detection and visualisation; • the specific science and technology needed to provide: o effective monitoring of international treaties protecting against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; o better estimates of static and dynamic populations on a global scale; o better monitoring of infrastructure and borders; CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 160 of 209 ______
o rapid remote assessments of damage; • investigations of present and future threats to security and the needs for exchange of information between stakeholders during crises; GMOSS will run for four years and initially consists of 25 organisations from the public and private sectors. The joint programme of research will aim to meet the priorities of users from the civil security sector. Actually the network is composed by 22 partners.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 161 of 209 ______
8 DUAL USE
The term “dual use” refers to technologies that have both a civilian and a military use. Dual use missions are (space) missions owned/used both by military and civil communities.
8.1 Civil Use of Dual Use Missions
The European dual use missions are Cosmo Skymed and Pleiades. The civil use of these missions in the context of GMES has been addressed in the HMA Project described in Chapter 6.1. It has led to the tailoring of ISO 27001 for what concerns the Information Security Management objectives and to the specification of a set of proposed standards addressing (see chapter 6.2): • Service and Collection Discovery • Catalogue Search • Product metadata • Product order • Programming • User Management • Online data Access
8.2 Defence Use of Dual use Missions
[WR161] In Europe, there are five satellite observation programmes: three that are strictly military (Hélios I and Hélios II optical systems and SAR-Lupe radar system) and two that are for dual use (Pléiades optical system and Cosmo-Skymed radar system). The Hélios I system, developed through tripartite co-operation among France, Italy and Spain, has been operational since October 1995. The Hélios II system, developed under four-power co-operation involving France, Belgium, Spain and Italy, has been operational since the beginning of April 2005. The SAR-Lupe system is being developed by Germany with entry into service expected at the beginning of 2007. Finally, the Pléiades system developed under co-operation among France, Belgium, Sweden, Spain and Austria, should be put into service in 2009. In addition, six European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Belgium and Greece) are about to commit the initial architecture studies for a multinational observation system for security and defence purposes (MUSIS: Multinational Space-Based Imaging System for surveillance, reconnaissance and observation) intended to take over from the present systems which are expected to end their useful lives in the 2014-2016 timeframe. In the SIGINT area, no operational systems exist in Europe; currently there are only some demonstration operations run by France.
1 Text taken from NATO site. To be updated
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 162 of 209 ______
9 PROPOSED APPROACH, ISSUES AND REQUIREMENTS
9.1 Specific High Level Objectives for a Space Standardisation Programme The following high level objectives are the driver for the standardization plan HL-OBJ-EO-01 Manage and reduce technical risks in EO systems and operations HL-OBJ-EO-02 Manage and reduce cost of EO systems and operations HL-OBJ-EO-03 Establish the baseline for the development of the European Space infrastructure in the context of the GMES Programme capable of harmonize and exploit relevant national initiatives and assets HL-OBJ-EO-04 Allow interoperability within and across organisations HL-OBJ-EO-05 Increase competitiveness of European Space (and downstream) industry HL-OBJ-EO-06 Maintain the leadership in EO systems and operations and avoid insurgence of undesired standards HL-OBJ-EO-07 Ensure that technology drivers for the European guaranteed access to Space are lead by European requirements Table 6 High Level Objectives
9.2 Lessons Learned
9.2.1 Lessons Learned within the HMA Project
• Industry and SME uptake o Specific actions are needed to support product and software evolution • Protocol definition and standardisation: o time & resource consuming process o OGC process very open, convergence very slow, conformance testing very weak o CEN Workshop Agreement “easy” to manage for project specific scope Lack of acknowledgement as “official” standard binding • Identity management: o GMES Contributing Missions - GCM requirements are very challenging in a federated scenario, o COTS and Open Source available but integration is far from straightforward o Trade off between requirements and implementation options needed • Security o ISO 27001 very useful in a multi partner context o Information Security Management System implications still to be addressed • GMES Services CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 163 of 209 ______
o No specific recommendation given in the framework of the call for Fast Track Services nor in the Pilots • standardisation/harmonisation as a project o the standardisation/harmonisation activity managed via a project structure (vs voluntary based) is proven successful and timely.
9.2.2 Interoperability Scenario/Use Case Definition Methodology
The following Interoperability Scenario/Use Case Definition Methodology has been successfully and effectively used in HMA and can be reused in other interoperability-harmonisation-standardisation related scenarios. Use Cases • The interoperability-harmonisation context is modelled through a set of use cases defining the system, the subcomponents and the external interfaces. • Use Cases are broken down into scenarios describing the interactions across "centres" (or Ground Segments) performing "services" and external interfaces Scenarios • Scenarios describe Interactions with UML-like sequence diagrams • A Pareto-like approach shall be used addressing common scenarios (20%) which can be shared by most of the stakeholders (80%) • Common Scenarios shall not retain the identification of the "owner" or the initiator • Whenever possible the role of a centre shall be anthropized to represent the typical user • System interfaces shall be abstracted to 2-3 high levels across centres • System and implementation specific aspects are out of scope • Whenever possible "Centre" or GS shall replace the specific service (TBV) • Only scenarios which reach consensus are formalised Requirements • High level requirements shall be derived from each scenario • High level requirements shall be associated with the high level services and the centre or GS • The distribution of roles across centres and/or GS shall be limited to what necessary for the definition of interfaces • High level requirements shall be traced into Service Interface Requirements Architecture • High level requirements and Service Interface Requirements shall be traced to the architecture • Architecture shall trace the service ICDs
The methodology requires two sessions: a brainstorming session and a workshop/requirement capture session.
The above process may be applied recursively at different level of definition and focus. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 164 of 209 ______
Scenarios at system level (i.e. where the system is shown as a single black-box entity), may be expanded into lower lever scenarios. These lower level scenarios may contain a breakdown of the system into the main services or subcomponents, showing internal system interactions and identifying more precisely the external interfaces. These lower level scenarios put the focus on the system sub- components. With the same mechanism, if the system level scenarios help to identify system level requirements (i.e. “the system shall..”) then the lower level scenarios lead to sub component level scenarios (i.e. “Sub-component X shall..”, “Sub component Y shall..”). Brainstorming conventions among the stakeholders are needed • To describe a "real" case, use only the civilian equivalent (e.g. referring to NGOs...) • Defence Requirements are not addressed in the civil or dual use context • The term security is ambiguous, use always the term Information Security Management when referring to technical/management aspects
9.3 The Need of a Persistent Testbed
9.3.1 Objectives
In order to fulfil the needs of the current EO users/customers in terms of high-level operational information services, it is necessary to integrate EO products and space data also with other kinds of data and information. The complexity of this next generation of integrated services may also require a network of partners who will contribute to the production of information services. It is therefore necessary to develop tools to allow • the orchestration of data acquisition and handling, • transformation of formats, • geomatic functions • the needed access, processing and value adding chains. To this end, the identification of a set of common EO related standards for services and data and the support of a neutral and open service-enabling environment becomes mandatory to respond to the need for EO services and “information products” closer to user expectations and processes (easily understandable and ready-to-use).
The envisaged persistent testbed aims to fulfill the above objectives and it is assumed to provide • A set of tools supporting the target interfaces, • a permanent test environment optionally including conformance test tools (CITE), • an open, permanent infrastructure in which organisations or external projects (e.g. EC projects, OGC FEDEO etc.) can integrate their (compliant) services.
The testbed should implement an open service-oriented and distributed environment, enabling the orchestration and integration of data and services from multiple sources with an EO main target. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 165 of 209 ______
The testbed permanent service-enabling environment facilitates service provision and orchestration, allowing each organisation to exploit the know-how and service provision ability of the others, also for the creation of new services from a horizontal set of basic services supplied by multiple service providers.
A testbed satisfying the above features is a key element and a valid support to • widen range of actors involved in standardisation and prototyping (sme, institutional, university,…), • widen implementation base, • shorten development length, • foster cooperation across developers and users, The testbed is designed to provide a valid support in any standardization and harmonization process including • verify the standards in use, • identify gaps vis a vis requirements, • define the requirements for new or updated standards for an increased interoperability and multiple mission inter-accessibility, • validate new requirements/scenarios
Additional objectives/features of the testbed are the capabilities to • Allow rapid prototyping of servers for o Further protocol design, o Service development, • Offer a one stop shop for geospatial o Development, o Testing, o Integration, o Collaboration (via workflow).
9.3.2 High Level Requirements
The persistent testbed shall: • support interoperability and compliance testing of web services. • provide a stable set of services to facilitate web service composition and chaining in scientific manner (repeatable results). • be persistent. • be focused on EO. • be based on open standards. • maintain a reference implementation of the supported services. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 166 of 209 ______
• have its own web hosting for a wider visibility and a neutral identification. • be connected to catalogues, to facilitate the discovery of services offered. • support the evolution and maintenance of services. • shall be scalable. • be an open system into which, at later stages, additional services and functions can be added.
9.3.3 Issues
As the testbed will have a set of tools supporting the interfaces, it could be easy to use the testbed as part of projects (GMES) to connect to EO missions for the purpose of demonstration or to provide pre- operationnal services. It may be envisaged either a specific instance of the tesbed in ESA premises or the use of the testbed in industrial own premises assuming IPR issues are solved. As the testbed is developed via a European initiative and as its purpose is to facilitate access to EO mission, the source code might be available free of charge to any entitled requesting parties.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 167 of 209 ______
9.4 The Need of a Conformance Testing and Certification Environment
9.4.1 Objectives
The envisaged Conformance Testing and Certification Environment is assumed to provide • a permanent test environment including conformance test tools • an open, permanent infrastructure in which organisations or external projects (e.g. EC projects, OGC and GEO interoperability programs, etc.) can integrate their (compliant) services and receive a certification of compliance.
The environment should implement an open service-oriented and distributed environment, enabling the orchestration and integration of data and services from multiple sources with an EO main target.
An environment satisfying the above features is a key element and a valid support to • implement the interoperability across applications and institutions, • foster cooperation across standard developers, certifiers and users,
The environment is designed to provide a valid support in any certification process including • verify the compliance with the standards of the service/application in use, • define criteria for evaluating the compliance and assigning the certification, • validate new services
Additional objectives/features of the testbed are the capabilities to • Allow rapid prototyping of servers for o Further protocol design, o Service development, • Offer a one stop shop for (geospatial) o Development, o Testing, o Integration.
9.4.2 High Level Requirements
The conformance testing and certification environment shall: • support conformance and certification of web services. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 168 of 209 ______
• provide a set of assertions to be used within the conformance testing and certification process. • be persistent. • be certifiable, • be managed by an adequate authority/body. • be based on open standards. • maintain the reference implementation of the supported services/standards. • Include a set of reference scripts for certification • have its own web hosting for a wider visibility and a neutral identification. • be connected to catalogues, to facilitate the discovery of services offered. • be scalable. • be an open system into which, at later stages, additional services and functions can be added. • prevent the applications/services under certification process to access and alter the reference infrastructure.
9.4.3 Issues
As the environment will have a set of tools supporting the interfaces, it could be easy to access the environment as part of projects (EO missions) for the purpose of demonstration or validation and verification services. It may be envisaged either a specific instance of the envisaged in ESA or certification authority premises or the use of the environment in industrial own premises assuming IPR and security issues are solved.
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 169 of 209 ______
9.5 Intellectual Property Rights
9.5.1 Intellectual Property Rights and Standardisation
9.5.1.1 Copyright and Intellectual Property
Copyright is defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary as: "the exclusive legal right, given to the originator or his or her assignee for a fixed number of years, to print publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic or musical material, and to authorize others to do the same". Simply put, copyright protects the ownership and identity of the work of its creator. The concept of copyright is included in a broader one known as Intellectual Property. The World Intellectual Property Organization defines intellectual property as any creation of the mind; inventions, literary and artistic works, and symbols, names, images and designs used in commerce. Copyright infringement occurs when intellectual property is reproduced, performed, broadcast, translated or adapted without the express permission of the creator or the group/individual licensed to handle the material in question.
9.5.1.2 Digital Rights Management
There are currently a number of different Digital Rights Management (DRM) techniques in use to protect standards from copyright abuse. Embedding digital watermarks is one of the non-intrusive techniques (e.g. chosen by ISO and IEC see [WR42]). The watermark is added to a document to identify the rightful licensee. In the case of downloaded standards in particular, using a watermark is a means of personalizing each standard downloaded. The watermark typically displays the name of the customer and his company, and the download date on each page of the standard. It shows that the named customer is the rightful licensee of that standard. Other techniques preventing files from being altered, shared or copied have also been implemented (e.g. by ISO and/or IEC members) in the context of specific offerings like pay-per-view or subscriptions services.
9.5.1.3 Rights on Standards
A limited number of rights are given to customers when they purchase a standard. When a standard is ordered in electronic format from an online store, these rights are described in a license agreement which the customer has to read and accept before being authorized to download the requested document. Typically, the customer is allowed to print one copy only and is not authorized to make copies or transfer the electronic file which he or she has purchased, or reproduce parts of it. See also [WR42]. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 170 of 209 ______
9.5.2 Ownership and IPR in EO
Intellectual property rights for remotely sensed data and products must be implemented internationally to protect the European space industry from an unfair use of such data by non-European governments and companies. Nevertheless, the protection should not be a constraint for the dissemination of data to European public users. As recognised in “Data Policy Assessment for GMES” (Harris and Browning, 2004), protection and pricing policy are strongly related: “It is important to realise that intellectual property protection for proprietary data in the GMES program can be used as an economic tool to shape the remote sensing industry”. In remote sensing, a single geographic information system may have data from multiple sources, both space and ground-based. Tracking rights to the various components can be a difficult and expensive undertaking. Encouraging use of digital works while protecting their components, not just the total work, from unauthorised use is a common problem across information industries (e.g., music, stock photography, publishing, film and software). Copyright clearinghouses and royalty collection services have been developed for audio and written works to prevent infringement while still permitting access to the desired digital components. A similar European institution may be needed by the commercial remote sensing industry. This would apply to data that are more complex than photographs or art works. Such a clearinghouse could provide a common interface point for institutions seeking to use commercial data. Analysis of the existing practices used by satellite operators to protect data through licensing policies demonstrates that those practices are not suitable for GMES users as they limit the number of users thus constricting data sharing. Licences should allow the users to share the data through web services, to modify the data and produce added-value products through cooperative work, to disseminate the results to end-users and ultimately the public. Associated licences should implement the above capabilities for public European users while limiting the rights of other users thus protecting the data providers. Several actions could be undertaken at European level with the cooperation of the remote sensing industry to: • define an European legal framework for remote sensing data and products; • define an European position in international discussions on changes to copyright and contract law for intellectual property, taking into account the particularities of Earth observation data; • create standard commercial data purchase policies that take into account the requirements from European public institutions; • design guidelines for an institution in charge of copyright clearance, data licensing and revenue collection. Summarising • Ownership of fundamental data sets and associated property rights often remains with the individuals or organizations that produced them. Access is granted provided the interests of these owners are protected. Restricted access applies to data that may be protected by confidentiality and use provisions and are only made available to interested parties by agreement of the data owner on an individual case basis. • Intellectual property rights remain with the producers of the dataset, even if the data are made freely available. • Products derived from the data must contain an acknowledgement of the source, data quality statements and any disclaimers required. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 171 of 209 ______
9.5.3 Digital Rights Management for EO
The internet has facilitated new types of business transactions, such as e-business, business-to- business and business-to-consumer applications. These models may be based on recouping cost through transaction fees, subscription services, rental fees, royalties, or advertising instead of traditional data sales. Such models, not yet well developed in the space data industry, are good examples on how to use Digital Rights Management (DRM) to improve the distribution of data while protecting the author/owner. Improvement of the legal framework and of the technologies for DRM may provide some solutions for the future. DRM could be a way of managing a multi-tier structure of users, paying different prices and having different rights. DRM could implement security measures that may include encryption, digital watermarks, or information embedded in metadata headers within the data. The effort by data providers to adapt their licensing policies to the situation that may arise due to the development of the web services would be a constructive move. In the future, licences will have to include provisions to manage the dissemination and sharing of data through web services. Summarising • All data must be accompanied by a valid licence when transferred. • Licence agreements are required to ensure that spatial information is accessible, while protecting copyright, intellectual property, privacy and confidentiality. • Provision must be made to allow for data sharing through web services.
9.5.4 Access to EO Data
9.5.4.1 Organisation of Data Distribution
Traditionally, Earth observation has been a public investment but has moved to a private business in recent years. In Europe, Earth observation systems launched or to be launched over the next few years (such as PLEIADES, COSMO and TERRASAR) involve both public entities (national space agencies) and private companies who share the burden of the investment and expect reasonable revenues from data distribution. These dramatic changes in the way to control and to fund the remote sensing activities are reflected by: • Distribution of remote sensing data performed through complex commercial networks and a rigid structure of commercial and legal agreements; • Protection of the investment controlled through licensing policies that ensure the respect of the ownership of the data; and • Cost of remote sensing data governed by the principle of economic return on investment.
9.5.4.2 Satellite Operators and Commercial Operators
Two main actors are involved in the distribution of satellite data: • the satellite operator is the public or private body that owns and operates the satellites and is the owner of the rights on the satellite data; CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 172 of 209 ______
• the commercial operator is the public or private body that is in charge, through a contract with the satellite operator, to distribute the satellite data to the users community. Generally, the commercial operator has a world-wide exclusivity for the distribution of the data and organises data policies independently of the satellite operator. There can be restriction in the exclusivity granted to the commercial operator when the satellite operator wants to control data distribution on a specific market segment or a specific area. Examples are: • ESA distributes ENVISAT data directly to Category 1 users (scientific and R&D projects, Principal Investigators, etc.) and has contracted two consortia (SARCOM and EMMA) for distribution to commercial users; • NSPO, the Taiwanese space agency, has granted Spot Image with a world-wide exclusivity for the distribution of FORMOSAT-2 data, with the exception of Taiwan and China.
Satellite Operator
Commercial Operator
Users directly addressed by Users under the exclusivity the satellite operator of the commercial operator
Figure 41 General scheme for data distribution The payment received by the satellite operator from the commercial operator can be based on a combination of: • a fixed fee on each data sale; • a percentage of the revenue of the commercial operator; • a contribution to the cost incurred for the operation of the satellites. There are strong/established interfaces between the satellite operator and the commercial operator for all the matters that have an impact on commercial operation: that is system availability, system performances and data quality. There are cases where the satellite operator and the commercial operator are the same entity. This mainly occurs when the satellite operator is a private company that has invested in the space segment to generate revenues from data sales. The following table illustrates the scheme for the main satellite systems of potential interest to GMES:
Satellite system Satellite operator Commercial operator
ENVISAT (ASAR, MERIS) ESA ESA for Category 1 users CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 173 of 209 ______
Satellite system Satellite operator Commercial operator
ERS SARCOM and EMMA for other users
FORMOSAT-2 NSPO SPOT IMAGE
IKONOS SPACE IMAGING SPACE IMAGING + regional affiliates
IRS ISRO ANTRIX / SPACE IMAGING
KOMPSAT-2 KARI SPOT IMAGE
LANDSAT NASA USGS
ORBVIEW-3 ORBIMAGE ORBIMAGE
QUICKBIRD DIGITAL GLOBE DIGITAL GLOBE
RADARSAT1-2 CSA MDA GEOSPATIAL SERVICES
SPOT2, 4, 5, including HRS and CNES SPOT IMAGE VEGETATION instruments
TERRASAR-X DLR INFOTERRA Gmbh
Table 7 Satellite operator and commercial operator for major satellite systems
9.5.4.3 Intellectual Property Rights - IPR
As data are processed and enriched with additional information, it is necessary to define to what extent a satellite operator can retain ownership and copyright on its data. It is one of the main issues when dealing with IPR on satellite data to analyse the fuzzy frontier between the products that are protected by copyright and those that are free from the data owner. There are two ways to break down the different “levels of change” in the original data, one in terms of “technical changes”, the other in terms of “ownership changes”. An example of the first is given in the UN resolution 41/65 that distinguishes three types of data based on levels of information: • "primary data" is defined as “the raw data that are acquired by remote sensors borne by a space object and that are transmitted or delivered to the ground from space by telemetry in the form of electromagnetic signals, by photographic film, magnetic tape or any other means”; • "processed data" is defined as “the products resulting from the processing of the primary data, needed to make such data usable”; • "analysed information" is defined as “the information resulting from the interpretation of processed data, inputs of data and knowledge from other sources”. The second breakdown considers different levels of products, depending on the rights of the satellite operator: • products on which the owner rights are applicable to their full extent; • products on which the owner recognises the rights of another party but still maintain some of its own rights ; • products on which the owner has waived its rights of ownership. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 174 of 209 ______
The licensing policy of the commercial operator maps both kinds of breakdown to define which rights apply to which type of data and what are the obligations of the customers when producing added value on the data.
9.5.4.4 Licensing
As long as IPR issues are involved, distribution of satellite data consists of granting a licence to use a product. As seen before, the satellite operator retains the copyright and ownership on the data. Neither the commercial operator, nor the various components of its commercial network have any rights on the data. They trade licences and they deliver copies of an original product that is archived and owned by the satellite operator. More complex cases may occur when archiving is shared between several ground stations but it is a rare situation. Another general rule is that the satellite operator grants the commercial operator with an exclusive and transferable licence and that the satellite operator grants its sub-licencees (retailers, value-added company, end-users) with non- exclusive and non-transferable licences, as shown in the next Figure.
Satellite Operator
Exclusive and transferable license
Commercial Operator
Non-exclusive and non- Non-exclusive and non- transferable license transferable license
Users directly addressed by Users under the exclusivity the satellite operator of the commercial operator
Figure 42 Licensing networks
A licence generally defines the: • entities that are authorised to use the product under the licence; • use of the product that is authorised under the licence; • use of the product that is excluded under the licence; • price that the user has to pay for the licence. The licence defines explicitly who is entitled to use the data. Generally, the licensee is analysed according to its status: CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 175 of 209 ______
• Private companies may be granted licences including or excluding their subsidiaries, in the same country or in different countries; • Public administrations may be granted licences for the whole administration or for a limited number of departments or offices; • International organisations may be granted licences for the host nation or for all the branches; • Non-governmental organisations or not-for-profit organisations may be granted licences for the host nation or for all the branches. A single licence is granted to a single entity with the limitations stated above. Whereas, a multi-licence is granted to several entities who want to share the data. The entities have to be identified comprehensively at the time of purchase. Once the licencees are clearly identified, the licence defines the authorisations for the use of the data. Generally, the licence authorises the following operations: • Install the data on customer’s computers and customer’s internal computer network; • Copy the data for customer’s internal use; • Reformat the data into different formats or media from those it is delivered; • Use the data for customer’s internal use only; • Produce and use, for internal use, added value products and derivative works; • Use the added value products for customer’s internal use only; • Freely use and distribute on a commercial basis the derivative works; • Make available the data and/or the added value products to contractors and consultants, only for use on behalf of the customer; • Distribute extract of the data (with limitation on the size of the extract) and sub-sampled data (with limitation of the sampling ratio) through internet, on a non-commercial basis. and excludes the following operations: • Transfer of the licence; • Distribute the data, even on a non-commercial basis, to parties that are not expressly authorised in the licence; • Use the data and value added products without the copyright notice; • Alter or remove the copyright notice. Any extension of the number of the licences or any addition of the authorised use in the licence will cause an increase in the price. The price uplift depends on the amount of flexibility that is required by the customer. It can vary from 10% for a multi-licence inside a single organisation to 90% for a multi- licence involving an unlimited number of users. The market for commercial satellite data is competitive and that the application of the licence conditions is very loose in practise. Actually, data providers are very reluctant to sue customers that breach the licence conditions.
9.5.4.5 Summary
Summarising Access to Data: • Exclusive partnership agreements must be respected CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 176 of 209 ______
• All data produced must be archived (unless prevented due to commercial, confidentiality, copyright or contractual agreement). This ensures the availability of data for continuous monitoring purposes. • International standards shall be adopted wherever appropriate, particularly those from the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) and OASIS applicable for access to data. Two kind of protection mechanism has to be considered. The first mechanism maintains a persistent protection and should be handled by specification such as GeoDRM-RM. This specification allows transferring the data and the license or IPR associated with data. The second mechanism consists to manage the IPR only during the access to the data. That mechanism is typically used for online control at the time the user initiates a request to the service or before the corresponding response is submitted to the user. After the geographic information has left the service, it is no longer managed by the access control system. In this case, the complexity of the security system can be reduced significantly by merely using an Access Control System. This is in contrast to the case for a Security System implementing a comprehensive rights management policy. Then, it is considered that GeoXACML is complementary to GeoRM. The recently approved OGC GeoXACML standard represents a spatial extension of the XACML (eXtensible Access Control Markup Language) OASIS Standard. This GeoXACML specification was developed in close collaboration with the OASIS XACML Technical Committee and should be considered as a good candidate to be the relevant standard for Online Data Access. However the use of international standard shall not be a constraint to the dissemination and other standard as watermarking should be used. • Content standards for metadata: A coherent structure of standards is essential to enable efficient data and metadata flows. At a minimum, the metadata structure shall be compliant with ISO 19115 for the core aspect. The metadata dedicated to policy shall be defined as a standard and applicable for all the EO data. • If any, the encryption process should be accompanied by licences to decrypt the data: sophisticated decryption keys can be specific to data, products, time periods, locations etc. as well as providing a tailored service to individual users, analogous to “pay-per-view” broadcasts of satellite television broadcasters. • Licences: Access to information on the ownership and licence conditions of the data is essential and must be explicit (i.e., unambiguous). • Standardisation can add value by coordinating the various arrangements that data suppliers make for licensing and intellectual property rights protection for the data used within GMES. Indeed, improved licence arrangements with data suppliers to allow multiple use of data within specific GMES operational services. Recent progress within this style of arrangement is evident, including ESA’s Third Party Mission (TPM) agreements, currently covering category 1 (scientific users) access to data .It is very common for licences to be restricted to specific projects or single applications (see 4.1). However, given the wide application of earth observation data, there is increasing demand by users to have more flexible licence arrangements to enable/encourage more wide use of data. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 177 of 209 ______
9.5.5 Examples
9.5.5.1 International Charter
Two dedicated licences exist: one that applies to during the event and a second for crisis follow-up. These licences can be found at annex A. The main data policy implications for this activity are highlighted below: • The data / product remains the property of Spot Image, given that it is produced from SPOT satellite data belonging to CNES. This property is protected by both the French and international copyright laws and by the French Industrial Property Code. • The origin of the data shall be credited on any publication using the data, or on any medium reproducing the data and the user shall have credit conspicuously displayed in or affixed to any Value Added Product. • The licences include a long list of prohibited actions. In particular, any anonymous redistribution of the data and/ or Derivative Work and/ or Value Added Product via the Internet or any other IT network is strictly prohibited. • The licences are effective once the Authorized User uses the data and/ or Value Added Product and cover the duration of the Crisis or Crisis Follow Up for which the data and/ or Value Added Product has been requested. • Use of the data and/or Value Added Product is only granted for non-commercial research. Data is reserved for a use or for activities solely and directly, for the purposes of a Crisis / Crisis Follow Up, within the framework of international cooperation related to a natural or technological disaster as defined in the Charter. • Commercial use of the Product and/ or Value Added Product is strictly forbidden.
9.5.5.2 Collective Agreements
Collective agreements for data providers are becoming increasingly common place and reflect the state of the market and data providers’ willingness to meet customer demands. Particular examples specific to the TPM data policy are highlighted below: • The Category 1 Principal Investigator (PI) acknowledges the full title and ownership, including all derived rights, by the data provider of all data covered under the agreement • Acceptance of the terms and conditions includes general acceptance of the data provider’s data policy. • The Category 1 PI is authorised to duplicate the datasets as necessary for the performance of the project, without any charges. • The Category 1 PI must provide ESA with a detailed list of all co-investigators. • All data received must be used exclusively for purposes of the project. • The Category 1 PI undertakes that the data supplied shall not be copied, transferred or made available to third parties without written consent of data provider. • Data utilisation beyond the duration of the project is not permitted CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 178 of 209 ______
• The Category 1 PI accepts to modify, suspend or terminate the use of data when requested by ESA or the data provider. • The Category 1 PI is charged the cost of data reproduction as well as programming fees where appropriate. • The Category 1 PI clearly marks all TPM data and analysed information, irrespective of its form and not withstanding their own copyrights(s), as follows: c [data provider] through ESA (year of reception). • Use of the data and/or Value Added Product is only granted for non-commercial research.
9.5.5.3 Agriculture
Below are listed data policy implications, with reference to a specific agricultural application, that emphasize the relationship between data and service providers: • As for the International Charter example, any anonymous redistribution of the data via the Internet or any other IT network is strictly prohibited. • Spot Image grants the service provider a non-exclusive, non-transferable usage licence for SPOT data products limited to the scope of the defined precision agriculture project. • Restrictions are also placed on the service provider in terms of the number of SPOT data products that may be used to produce certain value-added products. • Without written authorisation the service provider is similarly restricted in terms of copying, transferring, publishing or selling SPOT data products. • As for the International Charter example, any anonymous redistribution of the data via the Internet or any other IT network is strictly prohibited. • In terms of intellectual property, the service provider is bound to acknowledging the data provider’s exclusive rights. • In addition, certain geographical areas / territories are exclusive, such that the service provider would have to acquire the data directly from a Channel Partner rather than from the commercial operator/data provider direct.
9.6 SME Requirements and Identified Issues
The whole standardization issue is becoming quite important, not only for space agencies but also for value adding companies. As an example of an SME, a major concern is that no standards exist and it is clear the importance of having a standard as soon as possible. It is to be noticed that in the shipping, coastal and offshore environmental monitoring and service market there is no(t yet a) standard with the exception of IHO and some extend IMO for navigational purposes but related to mainly non spatial data (with the exception of bathymetry charts). However, the sector is using what they call best practices. This makes services difficult and often too expensive because interfacing with individual clients requires (often) additional efforts This is one reason to involve big into a process to extend the existing standards and to define new (non existing) standards. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 179 of 209 ______
10 PRIORITIES
10.1 Comparative Macro Analysis of European EO Standardisation
This paragraph aims to collect all the information about the EO standardisation in the European scenario given into the previous sections of this document and to provide a top level aggregate view trying to identify • areas where the standardisation is consolidated, • areas where there is not a satisfactory level of standardisation. Then a second aspect to be evaluated is the level of application of the listed standards by the actors of the EO scenario, with a specific attention on the main roles, i.e. agencies and major companies. The final purpose of this section is to define the starting elements for the second phase of the mandate, with the scope of identifiying the standardisation needs and preparing a comprehensive standardisation programme. At a first glance it seems that the current set of standards, mainly ECSS and CCSDS, gives a reasonable coverage of the following areas: • space engineering, covering o satellite o mission control o satellite links o data acquisition o product processing o verification and testing o system engineering o operations o environmental • project management • product assurance The above standards are almost systematically applied by the main EO systems and therefore by the main agencies and companies. The list of approved ESA standards into this document is a good example.
Quite complete standards are currently available in other areas like • Safety • Information Security Management (Security) The applicability of these standards is not yet complete as not all the systems/actors feel these areas as relevant issues. Furthermore an agreement about the tailoring of the Information Security Management standards and a coordinated implementation plan is not yet in place. On the other hand in the following areas the standardisation process related to the interface between the ground segment and the service and geospatial infrastructure elements seem not yet CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 180 of 209 ______
consolidated, or may need additional work for either harmonisation or wider consolidation and acceptance: • user/services • interfaces, • product formats, • cal/val, • data consumption, • data transfer, • processing on demand Actually this lack of standardisation may be an effect of the current evolution of the EO system towards the use and exploitation of data and products by value-added services and chains. In the specific case of product formats a set of “standardised” formats exist but their applicability is restricted to specific systems or small set of systems. Actually in this case the term “standard” cannot be fully accepted as it is in contrast with the limited applicability. Standardisation activities are on going in • Architecture • Simulation Where a few (sometimes de-facto) standards begin to exist. Another area where a significant improvement is expected is the management of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). The main organisations have their own procedures and protocols (even driven by their scope and purposes) , as shown in the examples in the annexes 1, 2, 3 of this document (i.e. ISO, CEN, OGC) but an evolution may be expected. Another area where the standardisation effort is necessary is dual use. The following table aims to summarise the concepts above listed. The table has four columns: • The first column contains the area/topic • The second column indicates which type of standards exist (e.g. ISO, ECSS etc.) • The third column defines the status of standardisation in terms of quantity (e.g. number of standards, coverage of the topics) and quality (e.g. maturity, completeness), three values are used: High, Medium, Low • The fourth column defines the application status in terms of how frequently the standardisation is applied among the main systems/agencies/companies; three values are used: High, Medium, Low
Area Type of Standards Status Application Status space engineering ECSS, CCSDS High High project management ECSS High High product assurance ECSS, PSS High High Safety ECSS, ISO High Medium Security ISO High Medium/Low CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 181 of 209 ______
Area Type of Standards Status Application Status Cal/Val CEOS Low Low Interfaces HMA, OGC Medium Low Product Formats various Medium Low Data Consumption OGC Low Low Data Transfer IETF High Low Processing on Demand OGC, Other Low Low Architecture UML, RM-ODP, High Low RASDS Simulation SMP-2, HLA Low Low IPR ISO, CEN, OGC Medium Low Dual Use Not Applicable Low Low Table 8 Macro Analysis of Space Standards
10.2 European vs. Global Standardisation
The European Standardisation Program shall be framed into a wider scope at global/world level. The integration at global level of the European Standardisation has a two-fold aspect. The first aspect is to promote the adoption of European Standards at world level and to raise the international weight of the European Standardisation bodies. This can be achieved by: • Strengthening the “voice of Europe” in international standards initiatives as well as in the international initiatives themselves. The consensus process that will be developed and applied will be a platform to bring together European needs and interests, exchange opinions on them, and use one strong voice on an international level • Ensuring European participation in strategic international activities and pilot systems advancing the interoperability • Exploiting the quality of European activities on an international level and strengthening the visibility of Europe’s research and industries in the related fields will make European contributors more attractive for international activities; on the other hand, being better involved and respected on an international level by a “strong European voice” will make international initiatives more attractive for potential European contributors The final goal is the fast take up of European Standards at world level.
On the other hand the applicability within Europe of valid existing international standards (e.g. OGC, CEN and ISO) shall be encouraged and harmonised with the European Standardisation Program.
As a trade-off between the two above mentioned aspects the European standardisation bodies and programs are expected to create liaisons and Joint Advisory Groups (JAG) like the ones between OGC and ISO/TC211 or between ISO/TC211 and WMO hereafter. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 182 of 209 ______
10.2.1 OGC-ISO/TC211 Liaison
OGC is an international voluntary consensus standards organization supported by its industry and government members. ISO is a "de jure" standards organization in which appointed representatives from the world's nations develop and adjudicate international standards. In 1995, OGC established a Class A Liaison with ISO/TC211 and in 1999 the two organizations signed an agreement that allows both organizations to take full advantage of the contributions of the other. The agreement spells out the intellectual property rights related to documents that fall under the agreement and calls for the alignment of ISO and OGC procedures. This is a close relationship designed to foster and facilitate not only coordination but also single-effort work on appropriate topics. OGC and ISO TC 211 have agreed to identify areas of common interest and work closely to insure harmonization of effort. The joint OGC and TC 211 collaboration is facilitated in a group called the Joint Advisory Group (JAG, formerly known as the TOCG). The JAG provides a common forum for ISO and OGC members to meet on a regular basis and to discuss coordination and collaboration opportunities of common interest. Over the years, several ISO Standards have been adopted in their entirety by the OGC membership and several more are in the process or being adopted. In addition, three OGC specifications, Simple Features, Web Map Service and Geography Markup Language have all been submitted to ISO. Two others, Web Feature Service and Filter Encoding are being submitted for ISO consideration this spring. In addition many active members of OGC also represent their countries on TC 211. To lament the fact that OGC has failed to align itself with TC 211 is to fail completely in learning about the depth of the alignment that is the core of how OGC does business.
10.2.2 ISO Recognition of WMO as an International Standardizing Body
Another example of synergies/interactions between two distinct standardisation entities is in [RD17], where ISO recognizes WMO as a standardization body. The ISO document {RD17} states Council, • noting the confirmation by the TMB that the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) fulfils the prerequisites laid down in 1.1 and 1.2 of Council resolution 42/1999, • accepts the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) as an international standardizing body for the purpose of Council Resolution 42/1999 with a view to WMO documents being processed as ISO International Standards where there is no competent ISO technical committee, following the procedure set out in Council Resolution 42/1999. Moreover in [RD17] … working arrangements for the implementation of the above resolution are being finalized by ISO and WMO; their aim is to strengthen the development of International Standards and to avoid duplication of work on standards related to meteorological, climatological, hydrological, marine and related environmental data, products and services. … The above extracts and the rest of [RD17] show the intention of the two organizations to avoid the duplication of efforts and the availability of a standardisation body of reusing/adopting consolidated standards coming from another body fulfilling adequate pre-requisites (e.g. in terms of quality procedures and of technical expertise), taking also into account areas of overlapping and issues of copyright. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 183 of 209 ______
10.3 Prioritizing High Level Objectives
The following table aims to give a priority order on the high level objectives of the European Standardisation Program listed into the previous chapter. The priority is given by a trade-off/combination between the feasibility of the objective (in terms of difficulty or facility of its implementation or achievement) and the benefits deriving from the successful implementation. The table has four columns • the first has the objective • the second the feasibility of the objective with three values Short (means easy, feasible in a short term), Medium and Long (difficult, feasible in long term) • The third the benefits with three values High, Medium and Low • The fourth a comment with the rationale of the classification. The objectives in the table are sorted, on the top are objectives with Short feasibility (can be implemented in short term) and High benefits. Objective Feasibility BenefitsRationale HL-OBJ-EO-01 Medium High Reducing costs is a major driver. This objective can be fully achieved in the long Manage and reduce cost of EO term after a high standardisation level is systems and operations reached. Anyway intermediate results can be significant HL-OBJ-EO-02 Long High Reducing risks has also the additional benefits of reducing costs. Significant Manage and reduce technical risks in results cannot be achieved in the short EO systems and operations term unless a well planned coordinated effort HL-OBJ-EO-03 Short Medium This can be matched with the purpose and scope of the Single Information Space for Establish the baseline for the Environment in Europe which is already in development of the European Space progress. infrastructure in the context of the GMES Programme capable of harmonize and exploit relevant national initiatives and assets HL-OBJ-EO-04 Short/Medium Medium The feasibility of a strong European Standardisation presence into the Ensure that technology drivers for the international market is not so difficult if a European guaranteed access to properly financed program is in place. Space are lead by European requirements HL-OBJ-EO-05 Medium Medium This objective can be fully achieved in the long term after a high standardisation level Allow interoperability within and is reached. Anyway intermediate results across organisations can be significant HL-OBJ-EO-06 Medium Medium The availability of European Systems based on standardised technologies with Increase competitiveness of European reduced technical risks and costs raises Space (and downstream) industry the competitiveness of the European industry. Intermediate results can be significant HL-OBJ-EO-07 Long/Medium Medium Getting and maintaining the leadership in CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 184 of 209 ______
Objective Feasibility BenefitsRationale an evolving scenario like EO requires a Maintain the leadership in EO coordinated approach systems and operations and avoid insurgence of undesired standards Table 9 Prioritized Objectives
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 185 of 209 ______
11 RECOMMENDATIONS
This section contains a set of recommendations on standardisation in earth observation. The recommendations are derived from the snapshot of the state of the art of the standardisation in the EO scenario which is the EO contribution to the feasibility study covering the first phase of the programming mandate M/415 [RD01]. The recommendations aim to be a bridge towards the second phase of the programming mandate M/415 leading to the preparation of a comprehensive standardisation programme. For simplicity sake the recommendations are numbered. Id Description High Level Objective REC-EO-GEN-01 Continue to support the standardisation process HL-OBJ-EO-01 related to the interface between the ground segment HL-OBJ-EO-02 and the service and geospatial infrastructure. Areas/elements which either need consolidation, or may need additional work for either harmonisation or wider acceptance are: • user/services • interfaces, • product formats, • cal/val, • data consumption, • data transfer, • processing on demand REC-EO-GEN-02 Increase competitiveness by measures in support of HL-OBJ-EO-06 fast take up of standards by European industry and SMEs REC-EO-GEN-03 Expand the consensus platform (see e.g. GIGAS) into HL-OBJ-EO-03 a normative reference beyond current Joint Advisory Groups REC-EO-SAF-01 Support the adoption of existing safety standards to HL-OBJ-EO-01 wider communities HL-OBJ-EO-02 REC-EO-SEC-01 Support the adoption of existing information security HL-OBJ-EO-01 management standards to wider communities HL-OBJ-EO-02 REC-EO-DU-01 Address at European level the standardisation of dual HL-OBJ-EO-04 use ground segment interfaces REC-EO-IPR-01 Support and promote Intellectual Property Rights HL-OBJ-EO-04 management on standards and their adoption at European level REC-EO-EU-01 Promote the adoption of European Standards at world HL-OBJ-EO-07 level and raise the international weight of the European Standardisation bodies REC-EO-EU-02 The applicability within Europe of valid existing HL-OBJ-EO-07 international standards and best practices (e.g. OGC, and OASIS) shall be encouraged and harmonised with CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 186 of 209 ______
Id Description High Level Objective the European Standardisation Program. REC-EO-EU-03 Streamline the input to the European standardisation HL-OBJ-EO-06 bodies and programs beyond current liaisons and Joint Advisory Groups (JAG) (e.g. OGC and ISO/TC211) REC-EO-TB-01 Define the governance and establish a persistent HL-OBJ-EO-03 testbed with European resources HL-OBJ-EO-05 REC-EO-TB-02 Define the governance and establish a Conformance HL-OBJ-EO-03 Testing and Certification Environment with European resources Table 10 Recommendations CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 187 of 209 ______
12 ANNEXES
12.1 Annex 1 ISO/IEC brochure on Copyright, standards and the internet
The complete text of the brochure can be found at [WR42], here follows an abstract. The Internet has made it easier to find and obtain ISO and IEC International Standards. The purpose of this brochure is to help users and customers of ISO and IEC International Standards and their national versions to benefit from the new opportunities provided by the availability of standards over the Internet without falling into the traps of copyright infringement and abuse of intellectual property. Failure to respect copyright and intellectual property may result in breaking the law and in legal penalties. It may also deprive the developers of standards of a fair return on their work and ultimately jeopardize the development of future standards. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and their respective members support the protection of copyright in both the paper and electronic worlds. They are committed to promoting the importance of copyright and to doing their part to ensure that the integrity of all types of created works is upheld. At the same time, they are committed to making sure standards are implemented as widely as possible and that users can make the appropriate use of the standards they need. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 188 of 209 ______
12.2 Annex 2 OGC License Agreement
Here follows the Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc. License Agreement To be acknowledged before of downloading any document from the OGC web site [WR19]
BEFORE YOU CLICK ON THE ACCEPT BUTTON AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT, CAREFULLY READ ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT. BY CLICKING ON THE ACCEPT BUTTON, YOU ARE CONSENTING TO BE BOUND BY AND ARE BECOMING A PARTY TO THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO ALL OF THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, CLICK THE "DO NOT ACCEPT" BUTTON AND DO NOT DOWNLOAD THIS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
Readers of this document are requested to submit to Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc. ("Licensor"), with their comments, notification of any relevant patent rights or other intellectual property rights of which they may be aware which might be infringed by any use of the copyrighted material that follows (the "Intellectual Property"), as appropriate, and to provide supporting documentation.
Open Geospatial Consortium Inc., OGC, OPENGIS, and the OGC CERTIFIED COMPLIANT logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of Licensor in the United States and in other countries.
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge and subject to the terms set forth below, to any person obtaining a copy of this Intellectual Property and any associated documentation, to deal in the Intellectual Property without restriction (except as set forth below), including without limitation the rights to implement, use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, and/or sublicense copies of the Intellectual Property, and to permit persons to whom the Intellectual Property is furnished to do so, provided that all copyright notices on the intellectual property are retained intact and that each person to whom the Intellectual Property is furnished agrees to the terms of this Agreement.
If you modify the Intellectual Property, all copies of the modified Intellectual Property must include, in addition to the above copyright notice, a notice that the Intellectual Property includes modifications that have not been approved or adopted by LICENSOR.
THIS LICENSE IS A COPYRIGHT LICENSE ONLY, AND DOES NOT CONVEY ANY RIGHTS UNDER ANY PATENTS THAT MAY BE IN FORCE ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD.
THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NONINFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS. THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR HOLDERS INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE DO NOT WARRANT THAT THE FUNCTIONS CONTAINED IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR THAT THE OPERATION OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE. ANY USE OF THE INTELLECTUAL CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 189 of 209 ______
PROPERTY SHALL BE MADE ENTIRELY AT THE USER’S OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR ANY CONTRIBUTOR OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS TO THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, OR ANY DIRECT, SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM ANY ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OR ANY LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR UNDER ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION, USE, COMMERCIALIZATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
This license is effective until terminated. You may terminate it at any time by destroying the Intellectual Property together with all copies in any form. It will also terminate if you fail to comply with any term or condition of this Agreement. Except as provided in the following sentence, no such termination of this license shall require the termination of any third party end-user sublicense to the Intellectual Property which is in force as of the date of notice of such termination. In addition, should the Intellectual Property, or the operation of the Intellectual Property, infringe, or in LICENSOR’s sole opinion be likely to infringe, any patent, copyright, trademark or other right of a third party, you agree that LICENSOR, in its sole discretion, may terminate this license without any compensation or liability to you, your licensees or any other party. You agree upon termination of any kind to destroy or cause to be destroyed the Intellectual Property together with all copies in any form, whether held by you or by any third party.
Except as contained in this notice, the name of LICENSOR or of any other holder of a copyright in all or part of the Intellectual Property shall not be used in advertising or otherwise to promote the sale, use or other dealings in this Intellectual Property without prior written authorization of LICENSOR or such copyright holder. LICENSOR is and shall at all times be the sole entity that may authorize you or any third party to use certification marks, trademarks or other special designations to indicate compliance with any LICENSOR standards or specifications.
This Agreement is governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The application to this Agreement of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is hereby expressly excluded. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed unenforceable, void or invalid, such provision shall be modified so as to make it valid and enforceable, and as so modified the entire Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. No decision, action or inaction by LICENSOR shall be construed to be a waiver of any rights or remedies available to it.
None of the Intellectual Property or underlying information or technology may be downloaded or otherwise exported or reexported in violation of U.S. export laws and regulations. In addition, you are responsible for complying with any local laws in your jurisdiction which may impact your right to import, export or use the Intellectual Property, and you represent that you have complied with any regulations or registration procedures required by applicable law to make this license enforceable. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 190 of 209 ______
12.3 Annex 3 CEN Workshop Agreement
Here follows the statement on the front page of any CEN Workshop Agreement
This CEN Workshop Agreement has been drafted and approved by a Workshop of representatives of interested parties, the constitution of which is indicated in the foreword of this Workshop Agreement. The formal process followed by the Workshop in the development of this Workshop Agreement has been endorsed by the National Members of CEN but neither the National Members of CEN nor the CEN Management Centre can be held accountable for the technical content of this CEN Workshop Agreement or possible conflicts with standards or legislation. This CEN Workshop Agreement can in no way be held as being an official standard developed by CEN and its Members. This CEN Workshop Agreement is publicly available as a reference document from the CEN Members National Standard Bodies. CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 191 of 209 ______
12.4 Annex 4 ISO 27001 HMA Tailoring
The following table is Annex 1 of “International Standard ISO/IEC 27001 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements” The control objectives and controls listed in the Table are directly derived from and aligned with those listed in ISO/IEC 17799:2005 Clauses 5 to 15. The lists in Table are not exhaustive and an organization may consider that additional control objectives and controls are necessary. Control objectives and controls from these tables shall be selected as part of the ISMS process specified in ISO/IEC 27001 4.2.1. ISO/IEC 17799:2005 Clauses 5 to 15 provide implementation advice and guidance on best practice in support of the controls specified in the table.
The Table contains the following Columns: • Id is the reference to the ISO /IEC 17799:2005 Clause • Title • Control/Objective is o For lower level (leaves) clauses the control expressed as a requirement; o For higher level clauses (grouping sub-clauses) the high level objective; objectives are explicitly identified • AP is the applicability of the control; the following values are used: o C, Critical, a mandatory requirement with critical impact which SHALL be expanded, detailed at deeper level, traced and implemented; o M, Mandatory, a requirement which SHALL be traced and implemented; o D, Desirable, a requirement which SHOULD be traced and implemented; o O, Optional, a requirement which MAY be traced and implemented. For clarity sake Desirable requirements are more important than Optional ones and their traceability is more significant. • Note is a generic remark detailing the applicability purpose and scope when necessary.
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note 5 Security policy 5.1 Information security Objective: To provide management policy direction and support for information security in accordance with business requirements and relevant laws and regulations. 5.1.1 Information security An information security policy M ESA and GCMs shall prepare policy document document shall be approved by and distribute a security policy management, and published and document CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 192 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note communicated to all employees and relevant external parties. 5.1.2 Review of the The information security policy shall be M ESA and GCMs shall information security reviewed at planned intervals or if periodically or on changes policy significant changes occur to ensure its review the security policy continuing suitability, adequacy, and document. The document shall effectiveness. contain details on these reviews. 6 Organization of information security 6.1 Internal organization Objective: To manage information ESA (and GCMs) should setup security within the organization. an internal organization dealing with security aspects 6.1.1 Management Management shall actively support M ESA and GCMs commitment to security within the organization through information security clear direction, demonstrated commitment, explicit assignment, and acknowledgment of information security responsibilities. 6.1.2 Information security Information security activities shall be M This is valid both within any coordination co-ordinated by representatives from organisation (ESA and GCM) different parts of the organization with and within the whole HMA with relevant roles and job functions. representatives of ESA and GCMs 6.1.3 Allocation of All information security responsibilities M The security roles shall be information security shall be clearly defined. assigned to identified persons responsibilities 6.1.4 Authorization A management authorization process M process for for new information processing facilities information shall be defined and implemented. processing facilities 6.1.5 Confidentiality Requirements for confidentiality or non- C DAA and SLA shall be agreements disclosure agreements reflecting the continuosly reviewed organization’s needs for the protection of information shall be identified and regularly reviewed. 6.1.6 Contact with Appropriate contacts with relevant D Government, army and police authorities authorities shall be maintained. technical corps 6.1.7 Contact with special Appropriate contacts with special D Standardisation entities, interest groups interest groups or other specialist certification entities, security security forums and professional specialists associations shall be maintained. 6.1.8 Independent review The organization’s approach to M See also the regular reviews of of information managing information security and its security policy documentation security implementation (i.e. control objectives, controls, policies, processes, and procedures for information security) shall be reviewed independently at planned intervals, or when significant changes to the security implementation occur. 6.2 External parties Objective: To maintain the security of The exchange of data with CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 193 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note the organization’s information and external (apparently trusted) information processing facilities that entities is the core of HMA. are accessed, processed, communicated to, or managed by external parties. 6.2.1 Identification of risks The risks to the organization’s C ESA and GCMs shall identify related to external information and information processing the risks of granting access to parties facilities from business processes their assets to external parties. involving external parties shall be identified and appropriate controls implemented before granting access. 6.2.2 Addressing security All identified security requirements M ESA and GCMs shall identify when dealing with shall be addressed before giving the security requirements customers customers access to the organization’s when granting access to their information or assets. assets to customers. 6.2.3 Addressing security Agreements with third parties involving C To be covered within DAA and in third party accessing, processing, communicating SLA agreements or managing the organization’s information or information processing facilities, or adding products or services to information processing facilities shall cover all relevant security requirements. 7 Asset management 7.1 Responsibility for Objective: To achieve and maintain assets appropriate protection of organizational assets. 7.1.1 Inventory of assets All assets shall be clearly identified and C ESA and GCMs shall identify an inventory of all important assets the HMA assets or items to be drawn up and maintained. protected 7.1.2 Ownership of assets All information and assets associated M ESA and GCMs shall assign with information processing facilities the responsibility of each asset shall be ‘owned’ by a designated part to an office or to an individual of the organization. 7.1.3 Acceptable use of Rules for the acceptable use of M ESA and GCMs shall put these assets information and assets associated with rules into the security policy information processing facilities shall document be identified, documented, and implemented. 7.2 Information Objective: To ensure that information classification receives an appropriate level of protection. 7.2.1 Classification Information shall be classified in terms C ESA and GCMs shall classify guidelines of its value, legal requirements, the relevant information for a sensitivity and criticality to the later mapping to access rights organization. for user profiles 7.2.2 Information labelling An appropriate set of procedures for C ESA and GCMs shall put these and handling information labeling and handling shall rules into the security policy be developed and implemented in document accordance with the classification scheme adopted by the organization. 8 Human resources ESA and GCMs have their CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 194 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note security own policies for managing the employees (includes also security certifications for the individuals and non disclosure agreements). These policies shall be disclosed to the partners for the part relevant to the management of HMA partner data. 8.1 Prior to employment Objective: To ensure that employees, O contractors and third party users understand their responsibilities, and are suitable for the roles they are considered for, and to reduce the risk of theft, fraud or misuse of facilities. 8.1.1 Roles and Security roles and responsibilities of M ESA and GCMs shall put these responsibilities employees, contractors and third party data into the security policy users shall be defined and documented document in accordance with the organization’s information security policy. 8.1.2 Screening Background verification checks on all O candidates for employment, contractors, and third party users shall be carried out in accordance with relevant laws, regulations and ethics, and proportional to the business requirements, the classification of the information to be accessed, and the perceived risks. 8.1.3 Terms and As part of their contractual obligation, O conditions of employees, contractors and third party employment users shall agree and sign the terms and conditions of their employment contract, which shall state their and the organization’s responsibilities for information security. 8.2 During employment Objective: To ensure that all employees, contractors and third party users are aware of information security threats and concerns, their responsibilities and liabilities, and are equipped to support organizational security policy in the course of their normal work, and to reduce the risk of human error. 8.2.1 Management Management shall require employees, M responsibilities contractors and third party users to apply security in accordance with established policies and procedures of the organization. 8.2.2 Information security All employees of the organization and, M ESA and GCMs shall distribute awareness, where relevant, contractors and third the security policy document to education and party users shall receive appropriate the employees training awareness training and regular CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 195 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note updates in organizational policies and procedures, as relevant for their job function. 8.2.3 Disciplinary process There shall be a formal disciplinary D process for employees who have committed a security breach. 8.3 Termination or Objective: To ensure that employees, change of contractors and third party users exit employment an organization or change employment in an orderly manner. 8.3.1 Termination Responsibilities for performing D responsibilities employment termination or change of employment shall be clearly defined and assigned. 8.3.2 Return of assets All employees, contractors and third D party users shall return all of the organization’s assets in their possession upon termination of their employment, contract or agreement. 8.3.3 Removal of access The access rights of all employees, M rights contractors and third party users to information and information processing facilities shall be removed upon termination of their employment, contract or agreement, or adjusted upon change. 9 Physical and ESA and GCMs have their environmental own measures for managing security the physical security. These measures shall be disclosed to the partners for the part relevant to the management of HMA partner data (e.g. user info, data under partner’s IPR). The management of HMA partner data is the core of this section for HMA project 9.1 Secure areas Objective: To prevent unauthorized Secure areas are those physical access, damage and hosting HMA servers, product interference to the organization’s and user archives or premises and information. databases 9.1.1 Physical security Security perimeters (barriers such as M perimeter walls, card controlled entry gates or manned reception desks) shall be used to protect areas that contain information and information processing facilities. 9.1.2 Physical entry Secure areas shall be protected by M controls appropriate entry controls to ensure that only authorized personnel are allowed access. 9.1.3 Securing offices, Physical security for offices, rooms, M CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 196 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note rooms and facilities and facilities shall be designed and applied. 9.1.4 Protecting against Physical protection against damage M In terms of reducing impacts external and from fire, flood, earthquake, explosion, (e.g. remote backup centers environmental civil unrest, and other forms of natural and data, fire proof cases for threats or man-made disaster shall be backup data etc.) designed and applied. 9.1.5 Working in secure Physical protection and guidelines for M ESA and GCMs shall put these areas working in secure areas shall be data into the security policy designed and applied. document 9.1.6 Public access, Access points such as delivery and M delivery and loading loading areas and other points where areas unauthorized persons may enter the premises shall be controlled and, if possible, isolated from information processing facilities to avoid unauthorized access. 9.2 Equipment security Objective: To prevent loss, damage, theft or compromise of assets and interruption to the organization’s activities. 9.2.1 Equipment siting Equipment shall be sited or protected M In terms of reducing impacts and protection to reduce the risks from environmental (e.g. remote backup centers threats and hazards, and opportunities and data, fire proof cases for for unauthorized access. backup data etc.) 9.2.2 Supporting utilities Equipment shall be protected from M power failures and other disruptions caused by failures in supporting utilities. 9.2.3 Cabling security Power and telecommunications cabling D Depending on the carrying data or supporting information classification of data. services shall be protected from “Tempest” areas may be interception or damage. excessive for scientific or commercial data. 9.2.4 Equipment Equipment shall be correctly M maintenance maintained to ensure its continued availability and integrity. 9.2.5 Security of Security shall be applied to off-site O To be verified if it applies equipment equipment taking into account the offpremises different risks of working outside the organization’s premises. 9.2.6 Secure disposal or All items of equipment containing D Material for disposal shall be re-use of equipment storage media shall be checked to checked for the presence of ensure that any sensitive data and sensible information or assets. licensed software has been removed or securely overwritten prior to disposal. 9.2.7 Removal of property Equipment, information or software M To be analysed in case of shall not be taken off-site without prior moving data belonging or with authorization. IPR of HMA partners 10 Communications and operations management CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 197 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note 10.1 Operational Objective: To ensure the correct and procedures and secure operation of information responsibilities processing facilities. 10.1.1 Documented Operating procedures shall be M ESA and GCMs should operating documented, maintained, and made prepare and apply operational procedures available to all users who need them. procedures for HMA services administration and service operation 10.1.2 Change Changes to information processing M management facilities and systems shall be controlled. 10.1.3 Segregation of Duties and areas of responsibility shall M Do not create Single Point of duties be segregated to reduce opportunities Failure for unauthorized or unintentional Split responsibilities and know- modification or misuse of the how between different entities organization’s assets. (persons-offices) 10.1.4 Separation of Development, test and operational C ESA and GCMs shall specify development, test facilities shall be separated to reduce how to manage at least and operational the risks of unauthorised access or nominal GS operations, facilities changes to the operational system. maintenance, HMA integration 10.2 Third party service Objective: To implement and maintain delivery the appropriate level of information management security and service delivery in line with third party service delivery agreements. 10.2.1 Service delivery It shall be ensured that the security C ESA and GCM shall monitor controls, service definitions and and verify the delivery levels delivery levels included in the third and modes stated by DAA and party service delivery agreement are SLA implemented, operated, and maintained by the third party. 10.2.2 Monitoring and The services, reports and records C Assuming SLA monitoring and review of third party provided by the third party shall be reports by GCM services regularly monitored and reviewed, and audits shall be carried out regularly. 10.2.3 Managing changes Changes to the provision of services, C ESA and GCMs shall to third party including maintaining and improving periodically review the services existing information security policies, DAA/SLA and in parallel the procedures and controls, shall be security impacts and risks managed, taking account of the criticality of business systems and processes involved and re-assessment of risks. 10.3 System planning Objective: To minimize the risk of and acceptance systems failures. 10.3.1 Capacity The use of resources shall be C Assuming SLA monitoring and management monitored, tuned, and projections reports by GCM made of future capacity requirements to ensure the required system performance. 10.3.2 System acceptance Acceptance criteria for new information M It is assumed as tests systems, upgrades, and new versions restricted to security aspects CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 198 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note shall be established and suitable tests of the system(s) carried out during development and prior to acceptance. 10.4 Protection against Objective: To protect the integrity of M malicious and software and information. mobile code 10.4.1 Controls against Detection, prevention, and recovery M malicious code controls to protect against malicious code and appropriate user awareness procedures shall be implemented. 10.4.2 Controls against Where the use of mobile code is O TBV if mobile code is used mobile code authorized, the configuration shall ensure that the authorized mobile code operates according to a clearly defined security policy, and unauthorized mobile code shall be prevented from executing. 10.5 Back-up Objective: To maintain the integrity and availability of information and information processing facilities. 10.5.1 Information back-up Back-up copies of information and M software shall be taken and tested regularly in accordance with the agreed backup policy. 10.6 Network security Objective: To ensure the protection of Network monitoring and management information in networks and the control is vital for HMA protection of the supporting infrastructure. 10.6.1 Network controls Networks shall be adequately C ESA and GCMs shall analyse managed and controlled, in order to be the threats on network protected from threats, and to maintain connections and implement security for the systems and the adequate counter- applications using the network, measures including information in transit. 10.6.2 Security of network Security features, service levels, and C Expand the aspects of services management requirements of all exchange of user data or network services shall be identified and assets under IPR included in any network services agreement, whether these services are provided in-house or outsourced. 10.7 Media handling Objective: To prevent unauthorized ESA and GCMs shall also disclosure, modification, removal or analyse the media in terms of destruction of assets, and interruption delivered products (e.g. data to business activities. on CD/DVD) 10.7.1 Management of There shall be procedures in place for D removable media the management of removable media. 10.7.2 Disposal of media Media shall be disposed of securely M and safely when no longer required, using formal procedures. 10.7.3 Information handling Procedures for the handling and M procedures storage of information shall be established to protect this information CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 199 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note from unauthorized disclosure or misuse. 10.7.4 Security of system System documentation shall be M There are specific issues for documentation protected against unauthorized access. dual use missions 10.8 Exchange of Objective: To maintain the security of information information and software exchanged within an organization and with any external entity. 10.8.1 Information Formal exchange policies, procedures, M exchange policies and controls shall be in place to protect and procedures the exchange of information through the use of all types of communication facilities. 10.8.2 Exchange Agreements shall be established for C Assume DAA agreements the exchange of information and software between the organization and external parties. 10.8.3 Physical media in Media containing information shall be M It is mainly referred to media transit protected against unauthorized access, for delivery misuse or corruption during transportation beyond an organization’s physical boundaries. 10.8.4 Electronic Information involved in electronic M messaging messaging shall be appropriately protected. 10.8.5 Business information Policies and procedures shall be C Core aspect of user systems developed and implemented to protect management. Single sign-on, information associated with the remote registration, etc. interconnection of business information systems. 10.9 Electronic Objective: To ensure the security of Core aspect of user commerce services electronic commerce services, and management for commercial their secure use. users. Material already available from Spot? 10.9.1 Electronic Information involved in electronic C commerce commerce passing over public networks shall be protected from fraudulent activity, contract dispute, and unauthorized disclosure and modification. 10.9.2 On-line transactions Information involved in on-line C transactions shall be protected to prevent incomplete transmission, mis- routing, unauthorized message alteration, unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized message duplication or replay. 10.9.3 Publicly available The integrity of information being made M information available on a publicly available system shall be protected to prevent unauthorized modification. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 200 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note 10.10 Monitoring Objective: To detect unauthorized information processing activities. 10.10.1 Audit logging Audit logs recording user activities, M ESA and GCMs shall log user exceptions, and information security activities and security events events shall be produced and kept for and shall check them. an agreed period to assist in future investigations and access control monitoring. 10.10.2 Monitoring system Procedures for monitoring use of M use information processing facilities shall be established and the results of the monitoring activities reviewed regularly. 10.10.3 Protection of log Logging facilities and log information M ESA and GCMs shall take care information shall be protected against tampering of protecting access to log files and unauthorized access. which are a perfect source for hackers 10.10.4 Administrator and System administrator and system M operator logs operator activities shall be logged. 10.10.5 Fault logging Faults shall be logged, analyzed, and M appropriate action taken. 10.10.6 Clock The clocks of all relevant information M Nice to have feature. Low cost synchronization processing systems within an solutions (e.g. NTP) may be organization or security domain shall applied in particular for be synchronized with an agreed monitoring performances accurate time source. 11 Access control Core aspect of user management These requirements shall be taken and deeply expanded as they are critical for HMA 11.1 Business Objective: To control access to requirement for information. access control 11.1.1 Access control An access control policy shall be C It Includes policy enforcement policy established, documented, and aspects and ESA and GCMs reviewed based on business and shall document it into the security requirements for access. security policy document 11.2 User access Objective: To ensure authorized user management access and to prevent unauthorized access to information systems. 11.2.1 User registration There shall be a formal user C Expand with federated registration and de-registration aspects, single point procedure in place for granting and registration etc. revoking access to all information systems and services. 11.2.2 Privilege The allocation and use of privileges M management shall be restricted and controlled. 11.2.3 User password The allocation of passwords shall be M management controlled through a formal management process. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 201 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note 11.2.4 Review of user Management shall review users’ M access rights access rights at regular intervals using a formal process. 11.3 User responsibilities Objective: To prevent unauthorized user access, and compromise or theft of information and information processing facilities. 11.3.1 Password use Users shall be required to follow good M It is mandatory for security practices in the selection and administration tasks. The use use of passwords. of password by Customers may be ruled by guidelines. 11.3.2 Unattended user Users shall ensure that unattended D Assuming administration tasks equipment equipment has appropriate protection. 11.3.3 Clear desk and clear A clear desk policy for papers and D Mainly for administration tasks, screen policy removable storage media and a clear but automatic shutdown of screen policy for information inactive customer sessions processing facilities shall be adopted. may be in scope. 11.4 Network access Objective: To prevent unauthorized All the main topics of this control access to networked services. section are critical 11.4.1 Policy on use of Users shall only be provided with C network services access to the services that they have been specifically authorized to use. 11.4.2 User authentication Appropriate authentication methods C for external shall be used to control access by connections remote users. 11.4.3 Equipment Automatic equipment identification M TBV if it is used identification in shall be considered as a means to networks authenticate connections from specific locations and equipment. 11.4.4 Remote diagnostic Physical and logical access to M and configuration diagnostic and configuration ports shall port protection be controlled. 11.4.5 Segregation in Groups of information services, users, C ESA and GCMs shall networks and information systems shall be implement network segregated on networks. segregation and firewalling measures helping physical and logical network separation and improved protection 11.4.6 Network connection For shared networks, especially those C Interoperability is the HMA control extending across the organization’s Core boundaries, the capability of users to connect to the network shall be restricted, in line with the access control policy and requirements of the business applications (see 11.1). 11.4.7 Network routing Routing controls shall be implemented M control for networks to ensure that computer connections and information flows do not breach the access control policy of the business applications. 11.5 Operating system Objective: To prevent unauthorized CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 202 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note access control access to operating systems. 11.5.1 Secure log-on Access to operating systems shall be D For Administration tasks procedures controlled by a secure log-on procedure. 11.5.2 User identification All users shall have a unique identifier C Expand with single sign-on, and authentication (user ID) for their personal use only, trust authentication from and a suitable authentication technique remote GS etc. shall be chosen to substantiate the claimed identity of a user. 11.5.3 Password Systems for managing passwords shall M management system be interactive and shall ensure quality passwords. 11.5.4 Use of system The use of utility programs that might D TBV if it is used utilities be capable of overriding system and application controls shall be restricted and tightly controlled. 11.5.5 Session time-out Inactive sessions shall shut down after D Nice to have feature also for a defined period of inactivity. user sessions 11.5.6 Limitation of Restrictions on connection times shall D Same as above connection time be used to provide additional security for high-risk applications. 11.6 Application and Objective: To prevent unauthorized information access access to information held in control application systems. 11.6.1 Information access Access to information and application M General requirement about restriction system functions by users and support access control valid both for personnel shall be restricted in administration tasks and for accordance with the defined access customer access control policy. 11.6.2 Sensitive system Sensitive systems shall have a M Related to segregation and isolation dedicated (isolated) computing physical protection. environment. E.g. cryptographic servers, highly secured servers may be isolated and adequately protected 11.7 Mobile computing Objective: To ensure information and teleworking security when using mobile computing and teleworking facilities. 11.7.1 Mobile computing A formal policy shall be in place, and O TBV if it is needed and communications appropriate security measures shall be adopted to protect against the risks of using mobile computing and communication facilities. 11.7.2 Teleworking A policy, operational plans and O TBV if it is needed procedures shall be developed and implemented for teleworking activities. 12 Information systems acquisition, development and maintenance 12.1 Security Objective: To ensure that security is an CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 203 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note requirements of integral part of information systems. information systems 12.1.1 Security Statements of business requirements M ESA and GCMs shall evaluate requirements for new information systems, or security aspects after any analysis and enhancements to existing information system change specification systems shall specify the requirements for security controls. 12.2 Correct processing Objective: To prevent errors, loss, in applications unauthorized modification or misuse of information in applications. 12.2.1 Input data validation Data input to applications shall be M Focus also on user inputs, validated to ensure that this data is implement checks on explicit correct and appropriate. confirmation, double check, alternate clicks, negative default, semantic checks 12.2.2 Control of internal Validation checks shall be incorporated M See above processing into applications to detect any corruption of information through processing errors or deliberate acts. 12.2.3 Message integrity Requirements for ensuring authenticity M and protecting message integrity in applications shall be identified, and appropriate controls identified and implemented. 12.2.4 Output data Data output from an application shall M In particular focus on products validation be validated to ensure that the for delivery processing of stored information is correct and appropriate to the circumstances. 12.3 Cryptographic Objective: To protect the Standard policies and rules for controls confidentiality, authenticity or integrity crypto of information by cryptographic means. 12.3.1 Policy on the use of A policy on the use of cryptographic M cryptographic controls for protection of information controls shall be developed and implemented. 12.3.2 Key management Key management shall be in place to M Control support the organization’s use of cryptographic techniques. 12.4 Security of system Objective: To ensure the security of Administration tasks files system files. 12.4.1 Control of There shall be procedures in place to M ESA and GCMs shall take into operational software control the installation of software on account impacts on the service operational systems. (HMA systems temporarily not available) 12.4.2 Protection of system Test data shall be selected carefully, M Test data may include real test Data and protected and controlled. data with sensible information 12.4.3 Access control to Access to program source code shall M program source be restricted. code 12.5 Security in Objective: To maintain the security of Nominal procedures for ESA development and application system software and standard software engineering CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 204 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note support processes information. processes 12.5.1 Change control The implementation of changes shall M procedures be controlled by the use of formal change control procedures. 12.5.2 Technical review of When operating systems are changed, M applications after business critical applications shall be operating system reviewed and tested to ensure there is changes no adverse impact on organizational operations or security. 12.5.3 Restrictions on Modifications to software packages M changes to software shall be discouraged, limited to packages necessary changes, and all changes shall be strictly controlled. 12.5.4 Information leakage Opportunities for information leakage M In particular user databases shall be prevented. 12.5.5 Outsourced software Outsourced software development D development shall be supervised and monitored by the organization. 12.6 Technical Objective: To reduce risks resulting Vulnerability from exploitation of published technical Management vulnerabilities. 12.6.1 Control of technical Timely information about technical M ESA and GCMs shall setup a vulnerabilities vulnerabilities of information systems team keeping under control being used shall be obtained, the state of the art technology and organization's exposure to such know-how aiming to counter- vulnerabilities evaluated, and act any known defect of OS or appropriate measures taken to address any other leading to hacking the associated risk. 13 Information security incident management 13.1 Reporting Objective: To ensure information information security security events and weaknesses events and associated with information systems weaknesses are communicated in a manner allowing timely corrective action to be taken. 13.1.1 Reporting Information security events shall be M ESA and GCMs shall use the information security reported through appropriate reporting mechanism to events management channels as quickly as identify bugs of the security possible. infrastructure and to improve 13.1.2 Reporting security All employees, contractors and third M weaknesses party users of information systems and services shall be required to note and report any observed or suspected security weaknesses in systems or services. 13.2 Management of Objective: To ensure a consistent and information security effective approach is applied to the incidents and management of information security improvements incidents. 13.2.1 Responsibilities and Management responsibilities and M ESA and GCMs shall assign CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 205 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note procedures procedures shall be established to precise roles and tasks for a ensure a quick, effective, and orderly quick response to incidents. response to information security The security policy document incidents. shall contain them 13.2.2 Learning from There shall be mechanisms in place to M Part of the risk management information security enable the types, volumes, and costs and mitigation procedures incidents of information security incidents to be quantified and monitored. 13.2.3 Collection of Where a follow-up action against a O ESA and GCMs shall consider evidence person or organization after an legal aspects for security and information security incident involves identify legal offices legal action (either civil or criminal), evidence shall be collected, retained, and presented to conform to the rules for evidence laid down in the relevant jurisdiction(s). 14 Business continuity management 14.1 Information security Objective: To counteract interruptions Part of SLA monitoring and aspects of business to business activities and to protect control in terms of RAM figures continuity critical business processes from the management effects of major failures of information systems or disasters and to ensure their timely resumption. 14.1.1 Including information A managed process shall be C ESA and GCMs shall put it into security in the developed and maintained for business the security policy document business continuity continuity throughout the organization management that addresses the information security process requirements needed for the organization’s business continuity. 14.1.2 Business continuity Events that can cause interruptions to M ESA and GCMs RAMS experts and risk assessment business processes shall be identified, shall correlate RAMS events along with the probability and impact of and figures with security such interruptions and their impacts consequences for information security. 14.1.3 Developing and Plans shall be developed and M Part of nominal RAMS implementing implemented to maintain or restore procedures continuity plans operations and ensure availability of including information information at the required level and in security the required time scales following interruption to, or failure of, critical business processes. 14.1.4 Business continuity A single framework of business M ESA and GCMs shall setup a planning framework continuity plans shall be maintained to joint BCP exploiting HMA ensure all plans are consistent, to sinergies. consistently address information The development of a BCP security requirements, and to identify has five main phases: priorities for testing and maintenance. • Analysis • Solution design • Implementation • Testing and organization acceptance • Maintenance. CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 206 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note 14.1.5 Testing, maintaining Business continuity plans shall be M and reassessing tested and updated regularly to ensure business continuity that they are up to date and effective. plans 15 Compliance 15.1 Compliance with Objective: To avoid breaches of any Mainly respect of DAA/SLA legal requirements law, statutory, regulatory or contractual contractual obligations. obligations, and of any security ESA and GCMs legal offices requirements. are involved 15.1.1 Identification of All relevant statutory, regulatory and M applicable legislation contractual requirements and the organization’s approach to meet these requirements shall be explicitly defined, documented, and kept up to date for each information system and the organization. 15.1.2 Intellectual property Appropriate procedures shall be M In particular IPR on delivered rights (IPR) implemented to ensure compliance products. with legislative, regulatory, and contractual requirements on the use of material in respect of which there may be intellectual property rights and on the use of proprietary software products. 15.1.3 Protection of Important records shall be protected M organizational from loss, destruction and falsification, records in accordance with statutory, regulatory, contractual, and business requirements. 15.1.4 Data protection and Data protection and privacy shall be M In particular privacy and non privacy of personal ensured as required in relevant disclosure rules on user data information legislation, regulations, and, if applicable, contractual clauses. 15.1.5 Prevention of Users shall be deterred from using M Employees shall be trained misuse of information processing facilities for and made aware of any legal information unauthorized purposes. implication related to their processing facilities activities, in order to minimise voluntary or involuntary bad actions 15.1.6 Regulation of Cryptographic controls shall be used in D cryptographic compliance with all relevant controls agreements, laws, and regulations. 15.2 Compliance with Objective: To ensure compliance of This section deals with the security policies and systems with organizational security periodical review of the standards, and policies and standards. security policies and standards technical compliance by ESA and GCMs driven by the security policy document. Reviews are periodical and after any system change. 15.2.1 Compliance with Managers shall ensure that all security M ESA and GCMs shall take care security policies and procedures within their area of of periodical independent standards responsibility are carried out correctly checks and audits on the CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 207 of 209 ______
Id Title Control/Objective Ap Note to achieve compliance with security security infrastructure policies and standards. 15.2.2 Technical Information systems shall be regularly M compliance checking checked for compliance with security implementation standards. 15.3 Information systems Objective: To maximize the audit considerations effectiveness of and to minimize interference to/from the information systems audit process. 15.3.1 Information systems Audit requirements and activities D ESA and GCMs shall take care audit controls involving checks on operational of performing audits without systems shall be carefully planned and impacts on the service agreed to minimize the risk of disruptions to business processes. 15.3.2 Protection of Access to information systems audit D ESA and GCMs shall take care information systems tools shall be protected to prevent any of protecting audit tools and audit tools possible misuse or compromise. data if they can be used harmfully Table 11 ISO 27001 HMA Tailoring CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 208 of 209 ______
12.5 Annex 5 EO Data Access Portfolio (EODAP)
The following draft tables list missions belonging to Group # 1, 2 & 3, and # 4 & 5 respectively.
Table 12 Draft List of mission group # 1, 2, 3
CEN/BT/WG 202 Issue 1.0 Page 209 of 209 ______
Table 13 Draft list of mission group # 4, 5