Seven fields, plus two eligibility checks.
The 7 fields
| # | Field | In plain terms |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Name | What is it called? |
| 2 | Background/Purpose | What does it do? |
| 3 | OPERATIONS | How much crew time? Is sample return needed? |
| 4 | Category | What kind of science does it support? |
| 5 | Status | Active, Legacy, or In Development |
| 6 | Date of First Launch | When did it first fly? |
| 7 | Source or Study Link | At least one link or citation so others can verify the entry |
That is enough to find an instrument, understand what it is for, compare it to others, and trust where the information came from.
Before SPLASH publishes it (OSDR / SPLASH curator review)
These are not enforced by the submit form. They are checked when SPLASH reviewers (admin/curator role on the SPLASH side) accept an entry into the public catalog.
- It supports NASA Biological and Physical Sciences research
- It is flown, previously flown, or flight-qualified (not an early concept)
What can wait
Mass, power, size, and other specs can stay blank if they are not publicly available.
Where we are today
SPLASH already requires the first 6 fields on submit. It does not yet require a source link.
In the live catalog (147 instruments), Sources and Study Links are still 0% filled. Adding one verifiable link is the smallest fix that would help most.
Feedback welcome. @HardwareAWG @jessica.a.lee @RushiGuppy @luis.depombopuerta
Verified against live SPLASH on 2026-06-24: submit form enforces 6 fields (name, background, operations, category, status, date_of_first_launch); public catalog has 147 instruments; sources and study_links are 0/147.