U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Untitled Document
Planetary SDI
Toggle Dark/Light/Auto mode Toggle Dark/Light/Auto mode Toggle Dark/Light/Auto mode Back to homepage
  1. Planetary SDIs
  2. /
  3. Europa
  4. /
  5. Meeting Notes
  6. /
  7. 2024-1-25 Working Meeting (DRAFT)
Edit page

2024-1-25 Working Meeting (DRAFT)

Meeting Notes from: November 17, 2022

When 8PM GMT, 12PM PST, 1PM MST https://jpl.webex.com/jpl/j.php?MTID=m3c96c22ed8e335e55dbd40c9084e3763

Attendees

  • Cynthia
  • Ross
  • Mike
  • Jay
  • Paul
  • Trent

Agenda

  • Clipper Meeting
    • Clipper / EIS is starting to think about products that are going to be created.
    • How are they going to be rectified to one another?
    • EIS as a team has a handle on what they are doing. They are aware that some inter-team discussion (in the future) is needed to ensure interoperability.
    • Instruments are getting to a good place and so attention can be put onto other things.
    • Question about the SIS/labels and the formats that are going to be delivered.
      • Yes, these exist.
      • Once we have a public SIS, we can/should do a cross comparison.
      • Nominally, we think these will all be in PDS standard formats, so would need some work to become ARD that meets the ESDI standards.
      • Discussion on phases of the mission and how that might impact the evolution of the reference frame.
      • Expecting a SIS in the first PDS delivery, which is 3-6 months after launch. Perhaps by the end of this calendar year.
    • RADAR team / altimeter for topography.
  • Horizontal datum, looking at Paul’s controlled data and Mike’s data
  • Mike screen shared and shows off the updated mosaic.
  • Shows misalignment between the global mosaic and Mike’s work.
  • Original thought that this was because of the addition of JunoCAM data and/or the change in ellipsoid.
  • This is not surprising that differences exist between the control.
  • Within a pixel or two movement is expected. The hope was that the most recent iteration would remove most of that, except that cause by JunoCAM data.
  • Offsets are on the order of 4-5 km (at their worst).
  • Current question is ‘why is this occurring?’.
  • Discussion of the control, process:
    • USGS sent control network.
  • Plan is to get Mike and Paul together.
    • Assessment of what the displacement is (Paul will do that).
    • Were the right SPICE kernels used.
    • Correct ellipsoid.
    • et cetera.
  • More discussion on the data provenance - GTiff / Cub / Proj checks.
  • STAC streaming into ArcPro (Trent shared pics).

Notes

Action Items

  • Paul / Mike get together to discuss offsets in the reference.
  • Trent JMars

Next Meeting

2.22.24