GEO-CAPEAnalysis of Mission

Implementation AlternativesFY 13 Guidance Letter – Task 8

May 7, 2013

Introduction

2

2012 was a year of great progress for GEO-CAPE • Documented NASA state of practice / readiness to use Hosted Payload (HPL) model• Completed mission risk analysis and made recommendations for Geo-Pathfinder• HQ accepted recommendation that future GEO-CAPE formulation studies focus only

on distributed HPL mission implementation• The Earth Ventures Instrument program selected an instrument (TEMPO) that will do

some GEO-CAPE atmospheric science

ESD acknowledged the impact of TEMPO on GEO-CAPE mission planning:“With the award of the Tropospheric Emissions: Monitoring of Pollution (TEMPO) instrument as the first Earth Venture Instrument (EVI-1), a partial change of direction will be needed for the GEO-CAPE activities, as the TEMPO instrument will likely achieve a significant portion of the GEO-CAPE measurement objectives.”

ESD guidance for FY13 GEO-CAPE Task - 8: “Define instrument and measurement risks (and potential mitigation activities), including integration of science products across platforms and technology maturity.”

One of the 2013 GEO-CAPE activities will be a mission implementation study to update the GEO-CAPE atmospheric composition instrument suite in response to ESD guidance

2013 Instrument and Mission Risks Assessment Overview

3

The study objectives are to• Assess remaining GEO-CAPE capabilities based on TEMPO requirements and

expected performance- The GEO-CAPE atmospheric composition instrument suite (ACIS) = TEMPO + GCIRS

• Update GEO-CAPE Atmospheric science capabilities and implementation architecture including schedule requirements

• Co-ordinate with TEMPO team and ASWG• Work with SEWG/ESTO on technology needs / recommendations / further work

The study needs to be completed by the end of March and results ready for ESD by early April

The risks were divided into two categories:• Instrument Development• Instrument Operations

4 2, 3 6

5 1

5

4

3

2

1

1 2 3 4 5

LIKELIHOOD

CONSEQUENCES

L, CTrend ID Approach Title

2, 3 1 M Lack of I & T Oversight

3, 3 2 M Environmental Testing Issues

3, 3 3 M Detector Performance Limitations

3, 2 4 M Multispectral Ozone Science Measurements

2, 2 5 M Science Data Rates

3, 4 6 M Pointing/Jitter Requirement

ApproachM – MitigateW – WatchA – AcceptR – Research

Criticality

High

Med

Low

L x C TrendDecreasing(Improving)Increasing

(Worsening)Unchanged

Summary of GEO-CAPE Instrument Risks

As of 7 May 2013

9, 8, 10

14, 15

16

5

4

3

2

1

1 2 3 4 5

LIKELIHOOD

CONSEQUENCES

L, CTrend ID Approach Title

3, 3 8 M Contamination

3, 2 9 M Field-of-View Impingement

3, 3 10 M Calibration

2, 3 14 M Launch and/or Flight Thermal Affects

2, 3 15 M Launch Loads

1, 3 16 M Operations

Summary of GEO-CAPE Operational Risks

As of 7 May 2013

ApproachM – MitigateW – WatchA – AcceptR – Research

Criticality

High

Med

Low

L x C TrendDecreasing(Improving)Increasing

(Worsening)Unchanged