Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Commercial Crew Program”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10

Gateway Program Development Progress

This paper provides an overview and status of Gateway, humanity’s first space station to orbit the Moon providing vital support for a sustained, long-term human return to the lunar surface and a steppingstone to Mars as part of the Artemis missions. As a lunar outpost, Gateway is a destination for deep space crew expeditions and science investigations, a port for deep space transportation, including landers transiting to the lunar surface or spacecraft embarking to deep space destinations beyond the Earth-Moon system. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) leads the Program and is the integrator of the spaceflight capabilities and contributions of U.S. commercial partners and international partners to develop Gateway. This paper will provide an overview of Gateway’s major components in various stages of development. The entire Gateway spacecraft is at preliminary design level of maturity, with some components at or near critical design review. Gateway’s major components are the Power and Propulsion Element; the Habitation and Logistics Outpost; Deep Space Logistics; the International Habitation module; Gateway External Robotics System; European System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications; and an Airlock. This paper will also provide an update on the status of the integration activities necessary to fly and operate this complex, next-generation integrated spacecraft for a minimum 15 year design life, including systems engineering integrated analysis cycles, the autonomous Vehicle System Manager software, verification and validation labs, and common vehicle equipment. Expanding on the successful partnership that has provided over 20 years of continuous crew operations in low-Earth orbit on the International Space Station, Gateway is an evolution of this extraordinary partnership leveraging the capabilities of each contributor to expand humankind’s sustained exploration deeper into the cosmos. Highlighting the international program with participation from multiple space agencies, this paper will also provide a status of Gateway multilateral governance structure and international agreements.

Sean M Fuller↗

The US space station and its electric power system

The United States has embarked on a major development program to have a space station operating in low earth orbit by the mid-1990s. This endeavor draws on the talents of NASA and most of the aerospace firms in the U.S. Plans are being pursued to include the participation of Canada, Japan, and the European Space Agency in the space station. From the start of the program these was a focus on the utilization of the space station for science, technology, and commercial endeavors. These requirements were utilized in the design of the station and manifest themselves in: pressurized volume; crew time; power availability and level of power; external payload accommodations; microgravity levels; servicing facilities; and the ability to grow and evolve the space station to meet future needs. President Reagan directed NASA to develop a permanently manned space station in his 1984 State of the Union message. Since then the definition phase was completed and the development phase initiated. A major subsystem of the space station is its 75 kW electric power system. The electric power system has characteristics similar to those of terrestrial power systems. Routine maintenance and replacement of failed equipment must be accomplished safely and easily and in a minimum time while providing reliable power to users. Because of the very high value placed on crew time it is essential that the power system operate in an autonomous mode to minimize crew time required. The power system design must also easily accommodate growth as the power demands by users are expected to grow. An overview of the U.S. space station is provided with special emphasis on its electrical power system.

Thomas, Ronald L.↗

Space Launch System Spacecraft and Payload Elements: Making Progress Toward First Launch

Significant and substantial progress continues to be accomplished in the design, development, and testing of the Space Launch System (SLS), the most powerful human-rated launch vehicle the United States has ever undertaken. Designed to support human missions into deep space, SLS is one of three programs being managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Exploration Systems Development directorate. The Orion spacecraft program is developing a new crew vehicle that will support human missions beyond low Earth orbit, and the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) program is transforming Kennedy Space Center (KSC) into next-generation spaceport capable of supporting not only SLS but also multiple commercial users. Together, these systems will support human exploration missions into the proving ground of cislunar space and ultimately to Mars. SLS will deliver a near-term heavy-lift capability for the nation with its 70 metric ton Block 1 configuration, and will then evolve to an ultimate capability of 130 metric tons. The SLS program marked a major milestone with the successful completion of the Critical Design Review in which detailed designs were reviewed and subsequently approved for proceeding with full-scale production. This marks the first time an exploration class vehicle has passed that major milestone since the Saturn V vehicle launched astronauts in the 1960s during the Apollo program. Each element of the vehicle now has flight hardware in production in support of the initial flight of the SLS - Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), an uncrewed mission to orbit the moon and return, and progress in on track to meet the initial targeted launch date in 2018. In Utah and Mississippi, booster and engine testing are verifying upgrades made to proven shuttle hardware. At Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF) in Louisiana, the world's largest spacecraft welding tool is producing tanks for the SLS core stage. This paper will particularly focus on work taking place at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and United Launch Alliance (ULA) in Alabama, where upper stage and adapter elements of the vehicle are being constructed and tested. Providing the Orion crew capsule/launch vehicle interface and in-space propulsion via a cryogenic upper stage, the Spacecraft/Payload Integration and Evolution (SPIE) Element serves a key role in achieving SLS goals and objectives. The SPIE element marked a major milestone in 2014 with the first flight of original SLS hardware, the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA) which was used on Exploration Flight Test-1 with a design that will be used again on EM-1. Construction is already underway on the EM-1 Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS), an in-space stage derived from the Delta Cryogenic Second Stage. Manufacture of the Orion Stage Adapter and the Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter is set to begin at the Friction Stir Facility located at MSFC while structural test articles are either completed (OSA) or nearing completion (Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter). An overview is provided of the launch vehicle capabilities, with a specific focus on SPIE Element qualification/testing progress, as well as efforts to provide access to deep space regions currently not available to the science community through a secondary payload capability utilizing CubeSat-class satellites.

Schorr, Andrew A.↗

CubeSat Payloads on NASA’s Space Launch System Pave the Way for Artemis Moon Missions

Preparing for first launch in 2021, NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) super heavy-lift launch vehicle will usher in a new era of human spaceflight, returning astronauts to the Moon as part of the Artemis program. Although designed to send crew in the Orion spacecraft and large payloads to the Moon and beyond, SLS also provides CubeSats with rideshare opportunities for missions to deep space. The first launch of SLS and Orion, Artemis I, has 13 6U CubeSats manifested. The payloads have been tested and will soon ship to Kennedy Space Center (KSC) to be integrated into commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) dispensers and integrated into the SLS Block 1 vehicle. Leveraging launches for the Artemis program to deploy rideshare smallsats to deep space provides a low-cost opportunity to perform missions that previously would have required a larger spacecraft and a dedicated launch, and offers additional benefits to both NASA and the smallsat community. CubeSats, including those manifested on the Artemis I flight, have a valuable role to play in the Artemis program, providing data to address NASA’s identified Strategic Knowledge Gaps (SKGs) in its plans to permanently establish humanity in deep space. Payload sponsors and developers for the Artemis I CubeSats hail from a variety of NASA industry partners and mission directorates, as well as international space agencies and universities. Several payloads destined for cislunar space will demonstrate propulsion systems and other technologies useful to future exploration. Science missions manifested on the Artemis I flight include characterizing the effects of deep space radiation on living organisms, searching for hydrogen and other volatiles on the Moon’s South Pole, and studying the lunar radiation environment. Three of the payloads were selected through NASA’s Centennial Challenges Program. Those payloads are competing for prize money while meeting specific technical development goals, such as communication with Earth from millions of miles in space. Student involvement in almost half of the Artemis I payload development allows STEM engagement with SLS and NASA’s Artemis program. As the initial vehicle to fly, the SLS Block 1 vehicle will lay the foundation for a generation of human and robotic deep space exploration missions. The Block 1 core stage is undergoing final testing at Stennis Space Center in 2020 before transportation to KSC for integration and launch in 2021. Following the Block 1 vehicle, the Block 1B and Block 2 vehicles will incorporate propulsion system upgrades and other changes to increase lift capability. In addition to sending the Orion vehicle to TLI, SLS can also be outfitted with large-diameter fairings to send robotic probes to deep space. With unparalleled lift, volume and departure energy, SLS is poised to usher in a new generation of spaceflight. In addition to launching Orion and large-volume missions, CubeSats may also be a part of Artemis missions to deep space.

Kimberly Robinson↗

STS-69 Flight Day 6 Highlights

After being awakened by the Beatles song, 'A Hard Days Night', the flightcrew of the STS-69 mission, Cmdr. Dave Walker, Pilot Ken Cockrell, and Mission Specialists Jim Voss, Jim Newman, and Mike Gernhardt, began their sixth day in orbit by monitoring the free orbiting Wake Shield Facility (WSF). Later Cmdr. Walker conducted an interview with television reporters from Atlanta and Boston, answering questions about the mission and general questions about NASA's space program. The crew filmed a video for themselves performing daily routines (eating, shaving, exercising), as well as some of the physiological experiments, and shuttle equipment maintenance and checkout. One of the secondary experiments included the Commercial Generic Bioprocessing Apparatus-7 (CGBA-7), which served as an incubator and experiment station for a variety of tests (agricultural, pharmaceutical, biomedical, and environmental). Earth views included some cloud cover, the Gulf of Mexico, Texas, and the Atlantic Ocean.

Source record↗

Launching to the Moon, Mars, and Beyond

America is returning to the Moon in preparation for the first human footprint on Mars, guided by the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration. This presentation will discuss NASA's mission today, the reasons for returning to the Moon and going to Mars, and how NASA will accomplish that mission. The primary goals of the Vision for Space Exploration are to finish the International Space Station, retire the Space Shuttle, and build the new spacecraft needed to return people to the Moon and go to Mars. Unlike the Apollo program of the 1960s, this phase of exploration will be a journey, not a race. In 1966, the NASA's budget was 4 percent of federal spending. Today, with 6/10 of 1 percent of the budget, NASA must incrementally develop the vehicles, infrastructure, technology, and organization to accomplish this goal. Fortunately, our knowledge and experience are greater than they were 40 years ago. NASA's goal is a return to the Moon by 2020. The Moon is the first step to America's exploration of Mars. Many questions about the Moon's history and how its history is linked to that of Earth remain even after the brief Apollo explorations of the 1960s and 1970s. This new venture will carry more explorers to more diverse landing sites with more capable tools and equipment. The Moon also will serve as a training ground in several respects before embarking on the longer, more perilous trip to Mars. The journeys to the Moon and Mars will require a variety of vehicles, including the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle, the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, and the Lunar Surface Access Module. The architecture for the lunar missions will use one launch to ferry the crew into orbit on the Ares I and a second launch to orbit the lunar lander and the Earth Departure Stage to send the lander and crew vehicle to the Moon. In order to reach the Moon and Mars within a lifetime and within budget, NASA is building on proven hardware and decades of experience derived from the Apollo Saturn, Space Shuttle, and contemporary commercial launch vehicle programs. Less than one year after the Exploration Launch Projects Office was formed at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, engineers are testing engine components, firing test rocket motors, refining vehicle designs in wind tunnel tests, and building hardware for the first flight test of Ares I, scheduled for spring 2009. The Vision for Exploration will require this nation to develop tools, machines, materials, and processes never before invented, technologies and capabilities that can be turned over to the private sector to benefit nearly all aspects of life on Earth. This new pioneering venture, as did the Apollo Program before it, will contribute to America's economic leadership, national security, and technological global competitiveness and serve as an inspiration for all its citizens.

Sumrall, John P.↗

NASA Exploration Launch Projects Overview: The Crew Launch Vehicle and the Cargo Launch Vehicle Systems

The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration (January 2004) serves as the foundation for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. As the NASA Administrator outlined during his confirmation hearing in April 2005, these include: 1) Flying the Space Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human space flight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. In spring 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS). The ESAS team performed in-depth evaluations of a number of space transportation architectures and provided recommendations based on their findings? The ESAS analysis focused on a human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) for astronaut transport and a heavy lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) to carry equipment, materials, and supplies for lunar missions and, later, the first human journeys to Mars. After several months of intense study utilizing safety and reliability, technical performance, budget, and schedule figures of merit in relation to design reference missions, the ESAS design options were unveiled in summer 2005. As part of NASA's systems engineering approach, these point of departure architectures have been refined through trade studies during the ongoing design phase leading to the development phase that begins in 2008. Comprehensive reviews of engineering data and business assessments by both internal and independent reviewers serve as decision gates to ensure that systems can fully meet customer and stakeholder requirements. This paper provides the current CLV and CaLV configuration designs and gives examples of the progress being made during the first year of this significant effort. Safe, reliable, cost-effective space transportation systems are a foundational piece of America s future in space and the next step in realizing the plan for revitalizing lunar capabilities on the passageway to the human exploration of Mars. While building on legacy knowledge and heritage hardware for risk reduction, NASA will apply lessons learned from developing these new launch vehicles to the growth path for future missions. The elements for mission success and continued U.S. leadership in space have been assembled over the past year. As NASA designs and develops these two new systems over the next dozen years, visible progress, such as that reported in this paper, may sustain the national will to stay the course across political administrations and weather the inevitable trials that will be experienced during this challenging endeavor.

Snoddy, Jimmy R.↗

Operations Analysis of the 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle

The Space Launch Initiative (SLI) program is developing a second-generation reusable launch vehicle. The program goals include lowering the risk of loss of crew to 1 in 10,000 and reducing annual operations cost to one third of the cost of the Space Shuttle. The SLI missions include NASA, military and commercial satellite launches and crew and cargo launches to the space station. The SLI operations analyses provide an assessment of the operational support and infrastructure needed to operate candidate system architectures. Measures of the operability are estimated (i.e. system dependability, responsiveness, and efficiency). Operations analysis is used to determine the impact of specific technologies on operations. A conceptual path to reducing annual operations costs by two thirds is based on key design characteristics, such as reusability, and improved processes lowering labor costs. New operations risks can be expected to emerge. They can be mitigated with effective risk management with careful identification, assignment, tracking, and closure. SLI design characteristics such as nearly full reusability, high reliability, advanced automation, and lowered maintenance and servicing coupled with improved processes are contributors to operability and large operating cost reductions.

Noneman, Steven R.↗

NASA’s Identified Risks of Adverse Outcomes Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture in Human Spaceflight

The NASA Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has the overall responsibility for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks that it has identified to be associated with human spaceflight. As part of this process, the Board is charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to mitigate those risks, and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. One of the identified risks is due to inadequate human systems integration architecture (HSIA) and a driving factor of this risk is that given decreasing real-time ground support for execution of complex operations during future exploration missions, there is a possibility of adverse performance outcomes including that crew are unable to adequately respond to unanticipated critical malfunctions or detect safety critical procedural errors. The HSRB uses Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) as a communication tool for describing how astronaut exposure to spaceflight hazards leads to meaningful mission-level health and performance outcomes and as the basis for understanding intermediate causal relationships between risk contributing factors and countermeasures that link hazards to outcomes. The HSIA risk DAG will be presented and described. Historically, critical malfunctions requiring Crew/MCC management occurred at a rate of 1.7 times per year for ISS averaged over the lifetime and 3-4 times per year in the burn in phase for the vehicle. These averages do not include EVA data, which greatly increases the incident rate. Prior experience from the Apollo program showed 10/11 crewed missions experienced significant anomalies where crew relied heavily on MCC expertise in real-time. These failure patterns are in line with those observed in other complex engineered systems (e.g., oil rigs, launch systems, commercial aviation, etc.) It is likely that general malfunction and error rates are > 10% for short duration missions (<30 days), based on past and current spaceflight operations data. Likelihood of adverse outcomes has the potential to increase as crew conduct work with new, complex systems and with less ground support. For Low Earth Orbit missions and Lunar missions less than 30 days, assuming minimal comm delays, disruptions and bandwidth limitations, malfunctions and errors can affect mission objectives and crew health but may be mitigated by ground support. For Lunar missions greater than 30 days and any potential Mars mission malfunctions and errors can have Loss of Crew and Loss of Mission consequences due to reduced ground support (communication delays, constraints and blackouts) for more complex operations, as well as reduced resupply and evacuation options.

Daniel M Buckland↗

NASA Envisioned Future Priorities for In Situ Resource Utilization

A major objective of the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Artemis program is to create a sustainable human lunar exploration program through the establishment of lunar infrastructure and commercial space operations. A key aspect in achieving this objective is characterizing the resources that exist on the Moon and Mars, and learning how to utilize them to create products for crew, power, transportation, and infrastructure growth. Commonly known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), the ability to make products from local materials instead of bringing everything from Earth has the potential to significantly reduce mission costs, mass, risks, and dependency on Earth. To achieve this vision, NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) established a strategic framework, called the Strategic Technology Architecture Roundtable (STAR) process, to coordinate development of critical capabilities around four major Thrusts (Go, Land, Live, and Explore). To guide and drive the development of critical mission capabilities, the STAR process involves establishing a ‘grand vision’ known as an Envisioned Future for each of these capabilities. For ISRU, the Envisioned Future is “Scalable ISRU production/utilization capabilities including sustainable commodities on the lunar and Mars Surface”. This paper will discuss the STAR process, and the strategic plan and near-term priorities for achieving the ISRU Envisioned Future.

In Situ Resources Utilization↗

Habitation Concepts and Tools for Asteroid Missions and Commercial Applications

In 2009 studies were initiated in response to the Augustine Commission s review of the Human Spaceflight Program to examine the feasibility of additional options for space exploration beyond the lunar missions planned in the Constellation Program. One approach called a Flexible Path option included possible human missions to near-Earth asteroids. This paper presents an overview of possible asteroid missions with emphasis on the habitation options and vehicle configurations conceived for the crew excursion vehicles. One launch vehicle concept investigated for the Flexible Path option was to use a dual launch architecture that could serve a wide variety of exploration goals. The dual launch concept used two medium sized heavy lift launch vehicles for lunar missions as opposed to the single Saturn V architecture used for the Apollo Program, or the one-and-a-half vehicle Ares I / Ares V architecture proposed for the Constellation Program. This dual launch approach was studied as a Flexible Path option for lunar missions and for possible excursions to other destinations like geosynchronous earth orbiting satellites, Lagrange points, and as presented in this paper, asteroid rendezvous. New habitation and exploration systems for the crew are presented that permit crew sizes from 2 to 4, and mission durations from 100 to 360 days. Vehicle configurations are presented that include habitation systems and tools derived from International Space Station (ISS) experience and new extra-vehicular activity tools for asteroid exploration, Figure 1. Findings from these studies and as presented in this paper indicate that missions to near-Earth asteroids appear feasible in the near future using the dual launch architecture, the technologies under development from the Constellation Program, and systems derived from the current ISS Program. In addition, the capabilities derived from this approach that are particularly beneficial to the commercial sector include human access to geosynchronous orbit and the Lagrange points with new tools for satellite servicing and in-space assembly.

Smitherman, David↗

NASA’s Approach to Lunar Communication and Navigation: Artemis and Beyond

NASA’s Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) program is developing a support structure of networks, partners, and technologies to provide communication, position, navigation, and timing services at the Moon. In this paper, we describe the progress and status of these diverse efforts and the ways in which they will be used during NASA’s crewed lunar exploration program, Artemis. We provide an update on developments at NASA which are targeted to cislunar space, including the Orion Artemis II Optical Communications System (O2O) demonstration mission, planned Lunar Exploration Ground Sites (LEGS) that will offer a dedicated Direct to Earth (DTE) capability servicing the cislunar region, and a recently released RFP for commercial Lunar Communications Relay and Navigation Services as well as Direct to Earth communications capabilities. We also describe the current status and key role of the LunaNet Interoperability Specification (LNIS), a collaborative standards framework developed by NASA, international partner agencies, and commercial stakeholders. A common thread, weaving these efforts together, is the support of commercial enterprises that can meet the Artemis challenge. Together, these projects and activities will enable safe, robust, and reliable communications and position, navigation, and timing (PNT) services for both crewed and uncrewed missions across cislunar space. SCaN and NASA, with our partners, are helping to build the foundation for a long term, sustainable human presence at the Moon –one that will set the stage for similar efforts at Mars.

LunaNet↗

From Paper to Production: An Update on NASA's Upper Stage Engine for Exploration

In 2006, NASA selected an evolved variant of the proven Saturn/Apollo J-2 upper stage engine to power the Ares I crew launch vehicle upper stage and the Ares V cargo launch vehicle Earth departure stage (EDS) for the Constellation Program. Any design changes needed by the new engine would be based where possible on proven hardware from the Space Shuttle, commercial launchers, and other programs. In addition to the thrust and efficiency requirements needed for the Constellation reference missions, it would be an order of magnitude safer than past engines. It required the J-2X government/industry team to develop the highest performance engine of its type in history and develop it for use in two vehicles for two different missions. In the attempt to achieve these goals in the past five years, the Upper Stage Engine team has made significant progress, successfully passing System Requirements Review (SRR), System Design Review (SDR), Preliminary Design Review (PDR), and Critical Design Review (CDR). As of spring 2010, more than 100,000 experimental and development engine parts have been completed or are in various stages of manufacture. Approximately 1,300 of more than 1,600 engine drawings have been released for manufacturing. This progress has been due to a combination of factors: the heritage hardware starting point, advanced computer analysis, and early heritage and development component testing to understand performance, validate computer modeling, and inform design trades. This work will increase the odds of success as engine team prepares for powerpack and development engine hot fire testing in calendar 2011. This paper will provide an overview of the engine development program and progress to date.

Kynard, Mike↗

Assessing the Likelihood of Rare Medical Events in Astronauts

Despite over half a century of manned space flight, the space flight community is only now coming to fully assess the short and long term medical dangers of exposure to reduced gravity environments. Further, as new manned spacecraft are designed and with the advent of commercial flight capabilities to the general public, a full understanding of medical risk becomes even more critical for maintaining and understanding mission safety and crew health. To address these critical issues, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Human Research Program (HRP) has begun to address the medical hazards with a formalized risk management approach by effectively identifying and attempting to mitigate acute and chronic medical risks to manned space flight. This paper describes NASA Glenn Research Center?s (GRC) efforts to develop a systematic methodology to assess the likelihood of in-flight medical conditions. Using a probabilistic approach, medical risks are assessed using well established and accepted biomedical and human performance models in combination with fundamentally observed data that defines the astronauts? physical conditions, environment and activity levels. Two different examples of space flight risk are used to show the versatility of our approach and how it successfully integrates disparate information to provide HRP decision makers with a valuable source of information which is otherwise lacking.

Myers, Jerry G., Jr.↗

LEIA: An Investigation of Radiation Risks to Biology at the Lunar South Pole

Radiation and reduced gravity pose biological risks to crewed deep space exploration. At the cellular level, radiation damage can be amplified by reduced gravity. Empirical evidence on cellular responses to beyond low Earth orbit (BLEO) environments is imperative to develop effective countermeasures for crew health and in-space biomanufacturing. The Lunar Explorer Instrument for Space Biology Applications (LEIA) project is developing an instrument suite to be delivered to the south polar region of the Moon by the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program. This presentation will provide an overview of the LEIA hardware, experiments, and mission timeline. The LEIA instruments include the BioSensor, the ARES charged particle detector, and the Mini-FND. The BioSensor is an autonomous light emitting diode (LED)-based spectrophotometer and microfluidic incubator. The BioSensor activates yeast cultures and can measure cell growth, metabolic activity, and carotenoid production. The ARES is a Timepix-based charged particle radiation detector that measures dose, dose rate, and linear energy transfer spectra. The Mini-FND is a fast neutron detector that measures albedo neutron flux and energy spectra. Combined, these instruments will be used for yeast genetics experiments to quantify growth, metabolism, and synthetic biology-enabled production of human nutrients, while taking real time measurements of biologically relevant radiation exposure on the lunar surface. These data will be used to test the importance of selected DNA damage repair and reactive oxygen species defense pathways in mitigating cellular damage from lunar surface radiation.

Yeast↗

LEIA: An Investigation of Radiation Risks to Biology at the Lunar South Pole

Radiation and reduced gravity pose biological risks to crewed deep space exploration. At the cellular level, radiation damage can be amplified by reduced gravity. Empirical evidence on cellular responses to beyond low Earth orbit (BLEO) environments is imperative to develop effective countermeasures for crew health and in-space biomanufacturing. The Lunar Explorer Instrument for Space Biology Applications (LEIA) project is developing an instrument suite to be delivered to the south polar region of the Moon by the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program. This presentation will provide an overview of the LEIA hardware, experiments, and mission timeline. The LEIA instruments include the BioSensor, the ARES charged particle detector, and the Mini-FND. The BioSensor is an autonomous light emitting diode (LED)-based spectrophotometer and microfluidic incubator. The BioSensor activates yeast cultures and can measure cell growth, metabolic activity, and carotenoid production. The ARES is a Timepix-based charged particle radiation detector that measures dose, dose rate, and linear energy transfer spectra. The Mini-FND is a fast neutron detector that measures albedo neutron flux and energy spectra. Combined, these instruments will be used for yeast genetics experiments to quantify growth, metabolism, and synthetic biology-enabled production of human nutrients, while taking real time measurements of biologically relevant radiation exposure on the lunar surface. These data will be used to test the importance of selected DNA damage repair and reactive oxygen species defense pathways in mitigating cellular damage from lunar surface radiation.

Yeast↗

NASA Crew Launch Vehicle Overview

The US. Vision for Space Exploration, announced January 2004, outlines the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. These include: 1) Flying the Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human spaceflight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. Following the confirmation of the new NASA Administrator in April 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts from government and industry to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), which provided in-depth information for selecting the follow-on launch vehicle designs to enable these goals, The ESAS team analyzed a number of potential launch systems, with a focus on: (1) a human-rated launch vehicle for crew transport and (2) a heavy lift launch vehicle (HLLV) to carry cargo. After several months of intense study utilizing technical performance, budget, and schedule objectives, the results showed that the optimum architecture to meet the challenge of safe, reliable crew transport is a two-stage variant of the Space Shuttle propulsion system - utilizing the reusable Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) as the first stage, along with a new upper stage that uses a derivative of the RS-25 Space Shuttle Main Engine to deliver 25 metric tons to low-Earth orbit. The CEV that this new Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) lofts into space early next decade will initially ferry astronauts to the Space Station and be capable of carrying crews back to lunar orbit and of supporting missions to Mars orbit. The HLLV system will utilize the Shuttle External Tank combined with SRBs. The focus of this paper is on the CLV system, giving an overview of plans and progress to date.

Dumbacher, Daniel L.↗

Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) Synthetic Instrument Capabilities Assessment and Test Report

The role of synthetic instruments (SIs) for Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) is to provide an external lower-level diagnostic and functional test capability beyond the built-in-test capabilities of spacecraft electronics. Built-in diagnostics can report faults and symptoms, but isolating the root cause and performing corrective action requires specialized instruments. Often a fault can be revealed by emulating the operation of external hardware. This implies complex hardware that is too massive to be accommodated in spacecraft. The SI strategy is aimed at minimizing complexity and mass by employing highly reconfigurable instruments that perform diagnostics and emulate external functions. In effect, SI can synthesize an instrument on demand. The SI architecture section of this document summarizes the result of a recent program diagnostic and test needs assessment based on the International Space Station. The SI architecture addresses operational issues such as minimizing crew time and crew skill level, and the SI data transactions between the crew and supporting ground engineering searching for the root cause and formulating corrective actions. SI technology is described within a teleoperations framework. The remaining sections describe a lab demonstration intended to show that a single SI circuit could synthesize an instrument in hardware and subsequently clear the hardware and synthesize a completely different instrument on demand. An analysis of the capabilities and limitations of commercially available SI hardware and programming tools is included. Future work in SI technology is also described.

Oeftering, Richard C.↗