Engineering topics

Linick, Susan H.

Publications and source records attributed to Linick, Susan H..

5 records

NASA NTRS2006

Cassini Distributed Instrument Operations: What We've Learned Since Saturn Orbit Insertion

The Cassini mission to Saturn is complex with 12 science teams conducting distributed operations across the United States and Europe. Each Team includes scientists from around the world who actively participate in operations, including observation design, instrument commanding, downlink processing, and archiving. This represents a change in how JPL complex deep-space missions have been operated. Since Saturn Orbit Insertion (SOI), the Cassini Project has spent 17 months conducting science operations and has gained real-world experience that has tested the assumptions and rationale for this approach. We have learned that many of the expected benefits have been realized, but there were numerous unexpected challenges as well. This paper will discuss the lessons learned from the Cassini Tour experience to date. It will revisit the assumptions and rationale behind the distributed instrument operations design and will describe the results, good and bad, of implementing this method of operations. We will describe how Instrument Teams are structured, their roles and responsibilities, what challenges they faced going into orbital operations (the 'tour') and what creative solutions were proposed when funding limitations and schedule milestones prevented optimum solutions. We will also discuss the problems that have been encountered both on the ground and with the instruments, how these problems and anomalies were overcome, and what was learned along the way about the characteristics of distributed instrument operations.

Cassini↗

NASA NTRS2006

Cassini distributed instrument operations – what we’ve learned since Saturn orbit insertion

The Cassini mission to Saturn is complex with 12 science teams conducting distributed operations across the United States and Europe. Each Team includes scientists from around the world who actively participate in operations, including observation design, instrument commanding, downlink processing, and archiving. This represents a change in how JPL complex deep-space missions have been operated. Since Saturn Orbit Insertion (SOI), the Cassini Project has spent 17 months conducting science operations and has gained realworld experience that has tested the assumptions and rationale for this approach. We have learned that many of the expected benefits have been realized, but there were numerous unexpected challenges as well. This paper will discuss the lessons learned from the Cassini Tour experience to date. It will revisit the assumptions and rationale behind the distributed instrument operations design and will describe the results, good and bad, of implementing this method of operations. We will describe how Instrument Teams are structured, their roles and responsibilities, what challenges they faced going into orbital operations (the “tour”) and what creative solutions were proposed when funding limitations and schedule milestones prevented optimum solutions. We will also discuss the problems that have been encountered both on the ground and with the instruments, how these problems and anomalies were overcome, and what was learned along the way about the characteristics of distributed instrument operations.

Woncik, Pam↗

NASA NTRS2004

Execution of the Spitzer In-orbit Checkout and Science Verification Plan

The Spitzer Space Telescope is an 85-cm telescope with three cryogenically cooled instruments. Following launch, the observatory was initialized and commissioned for science operations during the in-orbit checkout (IOC) and science verification (SV) phases, carried out over a total of 98.3 days. The execution of the IOC/SV mission plan progressively established Spitzer capabilities taking into consideration thermal, cryogenic, optical, pointing, communications, and operational designs and constraints. The plan was carried out with high efficiency, making effective use of cryogen-limited flight time. One key component to the success of the plan was the pre-launch allocation of schedule reserve in the timeline of IOC/SV activities, and how it was used in flight both to cover activity redesign and growth due to continually improving spacecraft and instrument knowledge, and to recover from anomalies. This paper describes the adaptive system design and evolution, implementation, and lessons learned from IOC/SV operations. It is hoped that this information will provide guidance to future missions with similar engineering challenges

operations↗

NASA NTRS1994

Shared mission operations concept

Historically, new JPL flight projects have developed a Mission Operations System (MOS) as unique as their spacecraft, and have utilized a mission-dedicated staff to monitor and control the spacecraft through the MOS. NASA budgetary pressures to reduce mission operations costs have led to the development and reliance on multimission ground system capabilities. The use of these multimission capabilities has not eliminated an ongoing requirement for a nucleus of personnel familiar with a given spacecraft and its mission to perform mission-dedicated operations. The high cost of skilled personnel required to support projects with diverse mission objectives has the potential for significant reduction through shared mission operations among mission-compatible projects. Shared mission operations are feasible if: (1) the missions do not conflict with one another in terms of peak activity periods, (2) a unique MOS is not required, and (3) there is sufficient similarity in the mission profiles so that greatly different skills would not be required to support each mission. This paper will further develop this shared mission operations concept. We will illustrate how a Discovery-class mission would enter a 'partner' relationship with the Voyager Project, and can minimize MOS development and operations costs by early and careful consideration of mission operations requirements.

Spradlin, Gary L.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Voyager uplink planning in the interstellar mission era

The Voyager Project has entered its last phase of discovery--the Voyager Interstellar Mission (VIM). Because of the reduced scope of the project and a lower budget, new ways had to be developed to program two spacecraft with fewer people and to allow for some sequence development flexibility without additional risk. In the previous cruise era, it took a seven-person sequence team 12 weeks to develop a nominal eight week cruise sequence. Today it takes a three-person team six weeks to develop a 13 week sequence load. This paper will describe in detail the sequencing strategy which reduces the volume and frequency of sequence loads, and the new tools and processes developed which reduce the manual effort required to generate these sequences without adding risk.

Linick, Susan H.↗