NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Human Systems Integration of the Mars Ascent Vehicle
Retrieve Mars samples and return to Earth.
HSI↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Earth Return Vehicle”
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.
The Planetary Protection Strategy of Mars Sample Return’s Earth Return Orbiter Mission
The Mars Sample Return campaign aims to use three flight missions and one ground element to safely bring rock cores, regolith and atmospheric samples from the surface of Mars to Earth to answer key questions about the geologic and climate history of Mars, including the potential for ancient life. Since its landing in Jezero Crater in 2021, the first mission, NASA’s Mars 2020, has collected a number of samples on the crater floor and on the delta using the Perseverance rover. Subsequent missions would recover the sealed sample tubes, launch them into Mars orbit, and transport them back to Earth. The ground element would be a high-containment facility that would isolate and protect the samples during initial sample characterization, which would include sample safety assessments and time-sensitive scientific investigations. These elements are currently in the planning and design stages of development, and represent an international effort of NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and many industry partners. The work presented here provides an overview of the planetary protection strategy of the third flight mission, the ESA-led Earth Return Orbiter (ERO), which hosts the NASA-provided Capture, Containment, and Return System (CCRS). ERO-CCRS would capture the container with up to 30 sealed tubes previously put in Martian orbit, contain them in redundant containers to ensure that no potentially hazardous Mars particles are released, and return them to Earth through an entry vehicle. Both NASA and ESA policies comply with the United Nations’ Outer Space Treaty by planning to protect Earth’s biosphere from any potential adverse effects from material returned from solar system bodies beyond the Earth-Moon system. In the conduct of Mars Sample Return, the two agencies have agreed to apply approaches consistent with their own planetary protection standards to the campaign elements each provides.
Mars Sample Return↗
The Planetary Protection Strategy of Mars Sample Return Earth Return Orbiter Mission
The Mars Sample Return campaign aims to use three flight missions and one ground element to safely bring rock cores, regolith and atmospheric samples from the surface of Mars to Earth to answer key questions about the geologic and climate history of Mars, including the potential for ancient life. Since its landing in Jezero Crater in 2021, the first mission, NASA’s Mars 2020, has collected a number of samples on the crater floor and on the delta using the Perseverance rover. Subsequent missions would recover the sealed sample tubes, launch them into Mars orbit, and transport them back to Earth. The ground element would be a high-containment facility that would isolate and protect the samples during initial sample characterization, which would include sample safety assessments and time-sensitive scientific investigations. These elements are currently in the planning and design stages of development, and represent an international effort of NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and many industry partners. The work presented here provides an overview of the Planetary Protection strategy of the third flight mission, the ESA-led Earth Return Orbiter (ERO), which hosts the NASA-provided Capture, Containment, and Return System (CCRS). ERO-CCRS would detect and capture the container with up to 30 sealed tubes previously put in Martian orbit, contain them in redundant containers to ensure that no potentially hazardous Mars particles are released, and return them to Earth through an entry vehicle. Both NASA and ESA policies comply with the United Nations’ Outer Space Treaty by planning to protect Earth’s biosphere from any potential adverse effects from material returned from solar system bodies beyond the Earth-Moon system. In the conduct of Mars Sample Return, the two agencies have mutually agreed to apply approaches consistent with their own planetary protection standards to the campaign elements they each provides.
mars sample return↗
The Planetary Protection Strategy of Mars Sample Return’s Earth Return Orbiter Mission
The Mars Sample Return campaign aims to use three flight missions and one ground element to safely bring rock cores, regolith and atmospheric samples from the surface of Mars to Earth to answer key questions about the geologic and climate history of Mars, including the potential for ancient life. Since its landing in Jezero Crater in 2021, the first mission, NASA’s Mars 2020, has collected a number of samples on the crater floor and on the delta using the Perseverance rover. Subsequent missions would recover the sealed sample tubes, launch them into Mars orbit, and transport them back to Earth. The ground element would be a high-containment facility that would isolate and protect the samples during initial sample characterization, which would include sample safety assessments and time-sensitive scientific investigations. These elements are currently in the planning and design stages of development, and represent an international effort of NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and many industry partners. The work presented here provides an overview of the planetary protection strategy of the third flight mission, the ESA-led Earth Return Orbiter, which hosts the NASA-provided Capture, Containment, and Return System. The orbiter would detect and capture the container with up to 30 sealed tubes previously put in Martian orbit, contain them in redundant containers to ensure that no potentially hazardous Mars particles are released, and return them to Earth through an entry vehicle. Both NASA and ESA policies comply with the United Nations’ Outer Space Treaty by planning to protect Earth’s biosphere from any potential adverse effects from material returned from solar system bodies beyond the Earth-Moon system. In the conduct of Mars Sample Return, the two agencies have mutually agreed to apply approaches consistent with their own planetary protection standards to the campaign elements they each provide.
Mars Sample Return↗
Winged cargo return vehicle conceptual design
NASA is committed to placing a permanent space station in Earth orbit in the 1990's. Space Station Freedom (SSF) will be located in a 220 n.m. orbit at 28.5 degrees inclination. The Winged Cargo Return Vehicle's (CRV) primary mission is to support SSF crew by flying regular resupply missions. The winged CRV is designed to be reusable, dry land recoverable, and unmanned. The CRV will be launched inline on three liquid hydrogen/oxygen rocket boosters with a payload capacity of 113,000 lbs. The three boosters will take the CRV to an orbit of 50 by 110 n.m. From this altitude the orbital manuevering engine will place the vehicle in synchronous orbit with the space station. The winged CRV will deliver cargo modules to the space station by direct docking or by remaining outside the SSF command zone and using the Orbital Maneuvering Vehicle (OMV) to transfer cargo. After unloading/loading, the CRV will deorbit and fly back to Kennedy Space Center. The CRV has a wing span of 57.8 feet, a length of 76.0 feet, and a dry weight of 61.5 klb. The cargo capacity of the vehicle is 44.4 klb. The vehicle has a lift-drag ratio of 1.28 (hypersonic) and 6.0 (subsonic), resulting in a 1351 n.m. cross range. The overall mission length ranges between 18.8 and 80.5 hr. The operational period will be the years 2000 to 2020.
Source record↗
Aerothermodynamic environments for Mars entry, Mars return, and lunar return aerobraking missions
The aeroheating environments to vehicles undergoing Mars aerocapture, earth aerocapture from Mars, and earth aerocapture from the moon are presented. An engineering approach for the analysis of various types of vehicles and trajectories was taken, rather than performing a benchmark computation for a specific point at a selected time point in a trajectory. The radiation into Mars using the Mars Rover Sample Return (MRSR) 2-ft nose radius bionic remains a small contributor of heating for 6 to 10 km/sec; however, at 12 km/sec it becomes comparable with the convection. For earth aerocapture, returning from Mars, peak radiation for the MRSR SRC is only 25 percent of the peak convection for the 12-km/sec trajectory. However, when large vehicles are considered with this trajectory, peak radiation can become 2 to 4 times higher than the peak convection. For both Mars entry and return, a partially ablative Thermal Protection System (TPS) would be required, but for Lunar Transfer Vehicle return an all-reusable TPS can be used.
Rochelle, W. C.↗
Mars sample return missions, precursors to manned planetary exploration
Technologies and concepts applicable to eventual manned exploration of Mars, as demonstrated by the Mars Sample Return Mission, are presented. These include aerocapturing at Mars; safe and accurate descent and landing effectively using aerobraking and propulsion; launch and ascent from the Martian surface; rendezvous and docking with an orbiting return vehicle; and a safe return to earth. Critical mission elements are expected to function independently of either earth or astronaut control to ensure human safety. The Mars Rover Sample Return Mission includes such elements as autonomous functions in this unmanned mission. Based on the analyses performed and the concepts investigated, it is suggested that robotic missions are feasible for late 1990s without any major technology development being required.
Stager, D. N.↗
STS-112 Flight Day 5 Highlights
On this fifth day of the STS-112 mission, the crewmembers Atlantis will begin transferring equipment and supplies to the orbiting laboratory. The crew reviews procedures for Saturday's spacewalk. Mission Specialists, Dave Wolf and Piers Sellers will prepare the tools and other equipment for use during Saturday's spacewalk. The spacewalkers reverse positions for most of the EVA, with Sellers riding the arm and Wolf free-floating while tethered to the station. They will attach umbilicals, install a second camera, install spool positioning devices to quickly disconnect fittings on ammonia lines and release radiator beam launch locks. The crewmembers will move a number of scientific experiments back and forth between the vehicles to return completed experiments to Earth and deploy new experiments at the station. One experiment transferred includes a set of liver cell tissue samples from an experiment studying the function of human liver cells in micro-gravity experiments were moved from the station onto the shuttle for return to Earth. Payload experiments such as Marshall Space Flight Center's protein crystals in micro-gravity experiments were moved to and from the station.
Source record↗
Orion Capsule Handling Qualities for Atmospheric Entry
Two piloted simulations were conducted at NASA's Johnson Space Center using the Cooper-Harper scale to study the handling qualities of the Orion Command Module capsule during atmospheric entry flight. The simulations were conducted using high fidelity 6-DOF simulators for Lunar Return Skip Entry and International Space Station Return Direct Entry flight using bank angle steering commands generated by either the Primary (PredGuid) or Backup (PLM) guidance algorithms. For both evaluations, manual control of bank angle began after descending through Entry Interface into the atmosphere until drogue chutes deployment. Pilots were able to use defined bank management and reversal criteria to accurately track the bank angle commands, and stay within flight performance metrics of landing accuracy, g-loads, and propellant consumption, suggesting that the pilotability of Orion under manual control is both achievable and provides adequate trajectory performance with acceptable levels of pilot effort. Another significant result of these analyses is the applicability of flying a complex entry task under high speed entry flight conditions relevant to the next generation Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle return from Mars and Near Earth Objects.
Tigges, Michael A.↗
An Alternative Approach to Human Servicing of Crewed Earth Orbiting Spacecraft
As crewed spacecraft have grown larger and more complex, they have come to rely on spacewalks, or Extravehicular Activities (EVA), for assembly and to assure mission success. Typically, these spacecraft maintain all of the hardware and trained personnel needed to perform an EVA on-board at all times. Maintaining this capability requires up-mass, volume for storage of EVA hardware, crew time for ground and on-orbit training, and on-orbit maintenance of EVA hardware. This paper proposes an alternative methodology, utilizing either launch-on-need hardware and crew or regularly scheduled missions to provide EVA capability for space stations in low Earth orbit after assembly complete. Much the same way that one would call a repairman to fix something at their home these EVAs are dedicated to maintenance and upgrades of the orbiting station. For crew safety contingencies it is assumed the station would be designed such the crew could either solve those issues from inside the spacecraft or use the docked Earth to Orbit vehicles as a return lifeboat, in the same manner as the International Space Station (ISS) which does not rely on EVA for crew safety related contingencies. This approach would reduce ground training requirements for long duration crews, save Intravehicular Activity (IVA) crew time in the form of EVA hardware maintenance and on-orbit training, and lead to more efficient EVAs because they would be performed by specialists with detailed knowledge and training stemming from their direct involvement in the development of the EVA. The on-orbit crew would then be available to focus on the immediate response to any failures such as IVA systems reconfiguration or jumper installation as well as the day-to-day operations of the spacecraft and payloads. This paper will look at how current unplanned EVAs are conducted on ISS, including the time required for preparation, and offer an alternative for future spacecraft. As this methodology relies on the on-time and on-need launch of spacecraft, any space station that utilized this approach would need a robust transportation system, possibly including more than one launch vehicle capable of carrying crew. In addition, the fault tolerance of the future space station would be an important consideration in how much time was available for EVA preparation after the failure. Ideally the fault tolerance of the station would allow for the maintenance tasks to be grouped such that they could be handled by regularly scheduled maintenance visits and not contingency launches. Each future program would have to weigh the risk of on-time launch against the increase in available crew time for the main objective of the spacecraft. This is only one of several ideas that could be used to reduce or eliminate a station's reliance on rapid turnaround EVAs using on-board crew. Others could include having shirt-sleeve access to critical systems or utilizing low pressure temporarily pressurized equipment bays.
Mularski, John R.↗
Titan Sample Return Using In Situ Propellants: NIAC Phase I Study Status
Status of NIAC Phase I study for NIAC Symposium (remote). An overview of the Insitu Titan Sample Return concept. The Compass team developed a concept to return 3 kg of cryogenic samples from the surface of Saturn's moon Titan by gathering ~3000 kg of ice and methane to fuel an inflatable, 3 stage launch vehicle to propel a return vehicle and aeroshell back to earth. Note: This presentation does not include voice information and is not available for this record.
Titan↗
Technology requirements for advanced earth-orbital transportation systems, dual-mode propulsion
The application of dual-mode propulsion concepts to fully reusable single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) vehicles is discussed. Dual-mode propulsion uses main rocket engines that consume hydrocarbon fuels as well as liquid hydrogen fuel. Liquid oxygen is used as the oxidizer. These engine concepts were integrated into transportation vehicle designs capable of vertical takeoff, delivering a payload to earth orbit, and return to earth with a horizontal landing. Benefits of these vehicles were assessed and compared with vehicles using single-mode propulsion (liquid hydrogen and oxygen engines). Technology requirements for such advanced transportation systems were identified. Figures of merit, including life-cycle cost savings and research costs, were derived for dual-mode technology programs, and were used for assessments of potential benefits of proposed technology activities. Dual-mode propulsion concepts display potential for significant cost and performance benefits when applied to SSTO vehicles.
Haefeli, R. C.↗
Orion Heat Shield Manufacturing Producibility Improvements for the EM-1 Flight Test Program
This paper describes how the Orion program is incorporating improvements in the heat shield design and manufacturing processes reducing programmatic risk and ensuring crew safety in support of NASA’s Exploration Missions. The Orion program successfully completed the EFT-1 flight test in 2014 and is currently developing the EM-1 spacecraft to meet the test objectives of an orbital mission to the moon and return to earth in 2019. Lessons learned from the EFT-1 manufacturing and flight test experience are being incorporated into a wide variety of vehicle systems and manufacturing processes to reduce risk to the Orion missions and flight crew. A critical contributor to crew safety is the heat shield that protects the crew capsule during re-entry through the earth’s atmosphere for return from deep space. The first flight test vehicle, EFT-1, was manufactured and tested in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout (O&C) facility at KSC to demonstrate early risk reduction including the functionality of the Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) for capsule safe return to earth. The approach for the EFT-1 heat shield utilized a low risk approach using Apollo heritage design and manufacturing processes using an Avcoat TPS ablator with a honeycomb substrate to provide a one piece heat shield to meet the mission re-entry heating environments. The manufacturing processes used honeycomb cell injection guns which were redeveloped from the Apollo Lunar Program processes to build the EFT-1 heat shield. The completed heat shield was transported across the country by aircraft to the O&C at KSC for installation onto the capsule. The EFT-1 heat shield successfully performed its mission and experienced ~80% of the re-entry velocity (50% heating rate) for a lunar return for an Exploration Mission. The second flight test vehicle is the EM-1 mission which will have additional flight systems installed to fly to the moon and return. Heat shield design and producibility improvements have been incorporated in the EM-1 vehicle to meet deep space mission and programmatic requirements. The design continues to use the Avcoat material, but in a “block” configuration to enable improvements in the application processes as well as additional improvements in the carrier structure design and manufacturing operations. Incorporating flight test results and producibility improvements from EFT-1 for the heat shield system design and processes have improved the thermal protection capability, improved the producibility, and cost for EM-1 flight test.
Producibility↗
In-situ propellant advantages for fast transfer to Mars
The advantages of in situ propellant for a fast transfer to Mars were studied as compared to all earth-based propellants and other options for reduction of total masss in low earth orbit. For a 10-year, 10-mission model and a baseline vehicle taken from the literature, the total reduction in number of earth launches was calculated. The scenario in which the return propellants are transferred to Mars on a slow cargo vehicle provides a 29-percent reduction in ALS launches over the baseline scenario in which all propellants are brought directly from earth. The scenarios in which in situ propellants are used for a successively greater portion of the total mission continue to reduce the number of launches required. With Mars propellant used for the Mars ascent vehicle and the return leg of the mission, a 59-percent reduction in launches is obtained. Finally, if the oxygen, or oxygen and fuel, for the outbound leg of the mission is also obtained by in situ production, from the moon for example, then the total reduction in number of earth launches is more than 80 percent.
Galecki, Diane L.↗
MBSE Applications for the MSR SRC Mars Ascent Vehicle
The objective of the NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is to collect samples from the surface of Mars and return them to Earth for scientific research. The Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) will be integrated into a larger Mars Sample Retrieval Lander (SRL) for transit to and storage on Mars. After all Martian samples have been collected and loaded into the MAV payload assembly, MAV will deliver the samples from the Martian surface to Mars orbit. A separate spacecraft, the Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) will retrieve the samples from Mars orbit and return them to Earth. To address common systems engineering challenges associated with using traditional systems engineering practices on complex projects, the MAV systems engineering team has explored implementation of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) tools and languages. This paper describes the current state of implementation and development of the MAV MBSE model with the Systems Modeling Language (SysML) within the scope of the MAV Systems Requirement Cycle (SRC) systems engineering workflow. The MAV MBSE model has been developed within Magic Draw – a SysML editor commonly used to implement MBSE. The MAV MBSE model has been used to develop mission phase functional flow diagrams for the Concept of Operations, decompose mission to vehicle subsystem functions, develop a functional decomposition, derive functional requirements, trace requirements up to customer-imposed requirements, trace requirements within MAV requirement space, identify requirements trace gaps, define and map the physical design space architecture, allocate requirements to subsystems, develop validation items, define assembly, integration, and test (AI&T) operations, and trace these items across driving goals to develop an integrated digital thread of systems engineering information used to drive design specifications, decision making, and ultimately design verification and validation. Findings and results associated with implementing MBSE in these ways, alongside traditional methods will be discussed.
MBSE↗
MBSE Applications for the MSR SRC Mars Ascent Vehicle
The objective of the NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is to collect samples from the surface of Mars and return them to Earth for scientific research. The Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) will be integrated into a larger Mars Sample Retrieval Lander (SRL) for transit to and storage on Mars. After all Martian samples have been collected and loaded into the MAV payload assembly, MAV will deliver the samples from the Martian surface to Mars orbit. A separate spacecraft, the Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) will retrieve the samples from Mars orbit and return them to Earth. To address common systems engineering challenges associated with using traditional systems engineering practices on complex projects, the MAV systems engineering team has explored implementation of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) tools and languages. This paper describes the current state of implementation and development of the MAV MBSE model with the Systems Modeling Language (SysML) within the scope of the MAV Systems Requirement Cycle (SRC) systems engineering workflow. The MAV MBSE model has been developed within Magic Draw – a SysML editor commonly used to implement MBSE. The MAV MBSE model has been used to develop mission phase functional flow diagrams for the Concept of Operations, decompose mission to vehicle subsystem functions, develop a functional decomposition, derive functional requirements, trace requirements up to customer-imposed requirements, trace requirements within MAV requirement space, identify requirements trace gaps, define and map the physical design space architecture, allocate requirements to subsystems, develop validation items, define assembly, integration, and test (AI&T) operations, and trace these items across driving goals to develop an integrated digital thread of systems engineering information used to drive design specifications, decision making, and ultimately design verification and validation. Findings and results associated with implementing MBSE in these ways, alongside traditional methods will be discussed.
MBSE↗
Convective and radiative heating for vehicle return from the Moon and Mars
The aerothermal environment is examined for two vehicle forebodies near the peak heating points of lunar and martian return-to-earth trajectories at several nominal entry velocities. The first vehicle forebody is that of a 70 deg aerobrake for entry into earth orbit; the second, a capsule of Apollo configuration for direct entry into the earth's atmosphere. The configurations and trajectories are considered likely candidates for such missions. Two-temperature, thermochemical nonequilibrium models are used in the flow field analyses. In addition to Park's empirical model for dissociation under conditions of thermal nonequilibrium, the Gordiets kinetic model for the homonuclear dissociation of N2 and O2 is also considered. Temperature and emission profiles indicate nonequilibrium effects in a 2 to 5 cm post shock region. Substantial portions of the shock layer flow appear to be in equilibrium. The shock layer over an aerobrake for return from the moon exhibits the largest extent of nonequilibrium effects of all considered missions. Differences between the Gordiets and Parks kinetic model were generally very small for the lunar return aerobrake case, the greatest difference of 6.1 percent occurring in the radiative heating levels.
Greendyke, Robert B.↗
Mars Sample Return Using Solar Sail Propulsion
Many Mars Sample Return (MSR) architecture studies have been conducted over the years. A key element of them is the Earth Return Stage (ERS) whose objective is to obtain the sample from the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) and return it safely to the surface of the Earth. ERS designs predominantly use chemical propulsion [1], incurring a significant launch mass penalty due to the low specific impulse of such systems coupled with the launch mass sensitivity to returned mass. It is proposed to use solar sail propulsion for the ERS, providing a high (effective) specific impulse propulsion system in the final stage of the multi-stage system. By doing so to the launch mass of the orbiter mission can be significantly reduced and hence potentially decreasing mission cost. Further, solar sailing offers a unique set of non-Keplerian low thrust trajectories that may enable modifications to the current approach to designing the Earth Entry Vehicle by potentially reducing the Earth arrival velocity. This modification will further decrease the mass of the orbiter system. Solar sail propulsion uses sunlight to propel vehicles through space by reflecting solar photons from a large, mirror-like surface made of a lightweight, reflective material. The continuous photonic pressure provides propellantless thrust to conduct orbital maneuvering and plane changes more efficiently than conventional chemical propulsion. Because the Sun supplies the necessary propulsive energy, solar sails require no onboard propellant, thus reducing system mass. This technology is currently at TRL 7/8 as demonstrated by the 2010 flight of the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA, IKAROS mission. [2]
Johnson, Les↗