Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “ADVISORY ACTIVITIES”

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 199 records · Page 11

Earth observations from space: History, promise, and reality. Executive summary

In this report the Committee on Earth Studies (CES), a standing committee of the Space Studies Board (SSB) within the National Research Council (NRC), reviews the recent history (nominally from 1981 to 1995) of the U.S. earth observations programs that serve civilian needs. The principal observations programs examined are those of NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The Air Force' s Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) is discussed, but only from the perspective of its relationship to civil needs and the planned merger with the NOAA polar-orbiting system. The report also reviews the interfaces between the earth observations satellite programs and the major national and international environmental monitoring and research programs. The monitoring and research programs discussed are the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program (IGBP), the World Climate Research Program (WCRP), related international scientific campaigns, and operational programs for the sharing and application of environmental data. The purpose of this report is to provide a broad historical review and commentary based on the views of the CES members, with particular emphasis on tracing the lengthy record of advisory committee recommendations. Any individual topic could be the subject of an extended report in its own right. Indeed, extensive further reviews are already under way to that end. If the CES has succeeded in the task it has undertaken. This report will serve as a useful starting point for any such more intensive study. The report is divided into eight chapters: ( I ) an introduction, (2) the evolution of the MTPE, (3) its relationship to the USGCRP, (4) applications of earth observations data, (5) the role that smaller satellites can play in research and operational remote sensing, (6) earth system modeling and information systems, (7) a number of associated activities that contribute to the MTPE and the USGCRP, and (8) organizational issues in the conduct of civil earth observations programs. Following the body of the report is a series of appendixes: after a list of acronyms and abbreviations and collected short biographies of CES members, six brief tutorials discuss several scientific topics important to the science and applications of earth observations. Highlights from the eight chapters follow.

Source record↗

Medical and surgical evaluation and care of illness in space

This report summarizes the work done on the contract NAG9-567, which was activated at the New Jersey Medical School-UMDNJ in April 1992 and carried on during the 1992-93 year to the present 1993-94 year which was terminated in May 1994. The initial examination stage was completed of an interactive program for the recording of physical and physiologic injury information obtained from examination of an injured person, who might be an astronaut sustaining traumatic injury, due to a burn or physical trauma, either in space or in an earth bound training environment. In this report three aspects will be discussed: 1) a description of the system of diagnostic examination graphics, 2) a description of the organization of the therapeutic advisory systems with a demonstration of two specific modules, and 3) a brief technical description of the organization of the programming system carried out on a UNIX based work station using a WINDOWS environment.

Siegel, John H.↗

Report to the administrator by the NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel on the Skylab program. Volume 1: Summary report

Contractor and NASA technical management for the development and manufacture of the Skylab modules is reviewed with emphasis on the following management controls: configuration and interface management; vendor control; and quality control of workmanship. A review of the modified two-stage Saturn V launch vehicle which focused on modifications to accommodate the Skylab payload; resolution of prior flight anomalies; and changes in personnel and management systems is presented along with an evaluation of the possible age-life and storage problems for the Saturn 1-B launch vehicle. The NASA program management's visibility and control of contractor operations, systems engineering and integration, the review process for the evaluation of design and flight hardware, and the planning process for mission operations are investigated. It is concluded that the technical management system for development and fabrication of the modules, spacecraft, and launch vehicles, the process of design and hardware acceptance reviews, and the risk assessment activities are satisfactory. It is indicated that checkout activity, integrated testing, and preparations for and execution of mission operation require management attention.

Source record↗

Reducing Barriers in Space Weather Research and Operations with Next-Generation Simulation Services at the Community Coordinated Modeling Center (CCMC)

Space weather forecasting capabilities are becoming increasingly important to the health of advanced technological infrastructure. The Community Coordinated Modeling Center (CCMC, https://ccmc.gsfc.nasa.gov) serves as a key liaison in the US space weather program between the research and operations communities by providing a wide range of tools and capabilities that help to evaluate, compare, exercise, and archive the results of simulations of a growing list of space weather models. With its unique toolset, CCMC supports space weather research and model development that advances our understanding of space weather phenomena and improves forecasting skill, while also facilitating development of space weather applications and deployment of operational capabilities. Guided by experience from over 20 years of providing simulation services, feedback from its research, operational and educational users world-wide, recommendations from CCMC Advisory Group and Programmatic Review Panel, the CCMC has begun work on the next generation system for its simulation services and model output archives. The new system has been envisioned to employ state-of-the-art technologies and standards to provide a user-oriented experience while improving ease of access, transparency, interoperability with partner systems, and enhancing reliability by incorporating advanced automation for performance monitoring and intelligent failover. In the presentation, we will give an overview of the current CCMC ecosystem and discuss updates to some of the key services of the system, including Runs-on-Request, Instant Runs, and Continuous Runs. We will also describe how a planned expansion and standardization of data archival activities will enhance the role of CCMC as a world-class provider of heliophysics information for the research and analysis of space weather. It is our hope that this evolution of the services can further reduce the barriers and burdens on researchers, forecasters and decision makers who rely on CCMC for their daily research and operations.

Space Weather↗

Planetary exploration through year 2000, a core program: Mission operations

In 1980 the NASA Advisory Council created the Solar System Exploratory Committee (SSEC) to formulate a long-range program of planetary missions that was consistent with likely fiscal constraints on total program cost. The SSEC had as its primary goal the establishment of a scientifically valid, affordable program that would preserve the nation's leading role in solar system exploration, capitalize on two decades of investment, and be consistent with the coordinated set of scientific stategies developed earlier by the Committe on Planetary and Lunar Exploration (COMPLEX). The result of the SSEC effort was the design of a Core Program of planetary missions to be launched by the year 2000, together with a realistic and responsible funding plan. The Core Program Missions, subcommittee activities, science issues, transition period assumptions, and recommendations are discussed.

Source record↗

The Maintainable Fusion Pilot Plant

The US fusion community has coalesced around the goal of building an FPP as described by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). In addition to demonstrating the viability of the technologies necessary to operate such a plant, including demonstration of net energy and electricity production, NASEM found that a “fusion pilot plant will need to demonstrate the ability to efficiently perform remote maintenance and replacement in support of the design of a power plant, taking into account details of the consequences of the fusion environment, such as material activation and tritium retention in components.” Current designs of fusion demonstration reactors do usually foresee a regular exchange of their first wall modules, including the tritium breeding blankets. In the European Power Plant Conceptual Studies, it is assumed that a fusion reactor will need to change its divertor every 2 years and its first wall blanket module every 5 to 6 years to reach acceptable availability. Underlying this capability are remote-handling technologies to keep the outage for the exchange of these components short. There are many uncertainties in the remote-handling schemes, and most schemes are at a preconceptual level at best. In addition, the exchange of these components would either produce an enormous rad-waste stream or would require an enormous refurbishment activity with huge cost-prohibitive hot-cells. Past Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF) preconceptual studies have led to hot cell dimensions of an unbelievable size, likely costing tens of billions of dollars. Already at The Way (previously International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, ITER), hot-cells have become cost-prohibitive, demanding redesigns of the ITER first wall to reduce the toxic rad-waste/inventory. In this in-situ PFC repair project, a concept for a long-life, maintainable first wall module concept is developed and tested. This first wall concept relies on innovative remote handling to repair the first wall modules in-situ, avoiding costly refurbishments outside of the tokamak vessel. This approach was highlighted in the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) report on Transformative Enabling Capabilities for Efficient Advance Toward Fusion Energy. In general, the damage of the first wall armor is due to particle and radiation exposures. Load conditions vary from one fusion reactor design to another. In tokamaks, first wall Plasma Facing Components (PFCs) are exposed to far-Scrape-Off-Layer plasma fluxes, electromagnetic radiation, energetic CX neutrals, and potentially runaway electron beams. Protecting the first wall to the worst-case load conditions would require the design of a very thick first wall armor. Transient heat and particle fluxes due to disruptions or edge localized modes can lead to excessive heat loads resulting potentially in melting PFCs down to the cooling channel. Catastrophic events like these need to be avoided by appropriate disruption mitigation systems. However, failure of these systems will still put a first wall at an unacceptable risk. Hence, a first wall design needs to accommodate the occasional transient heat loads by introducing sacrificial limiters, which will absorb these transients.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

High-Resolution Mesoscale Model Setup for the Eastern Range and Wallops Flight Facility

Mesoscale weather conditions can have an adverse effect on space launch, landing, ground processing, and weather advisories, watches, and warnings at the Eastern Range (ER) in Florida and Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) in Virginia. During summer, land-sea interactions across Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) lead to sea breeze front formation, which can spawn deep convection that can hinder operations and endanger personnel and resources. Many other weak locally-driven low-level boundaries and their interactions with the sea breeze front and each other can also initiate deep convection in the KSC/CCAFS area. These convective processes often last 60 minutes or less and pose a significant challenge to the local forecasters. Surface winds during the transition seasons (spring and fall) pose the most difficulties for the forecasters at WFF. They also encounter problems forecasting convective activity and temperature during those seasons. Therefore, accurate mesoscale model forecasts are needed to better forecast a variety of unique weather phenomena. Global and national scale models cannot properly resolve important local-scale weather features at each location due to their horizontal resolutions being much too coarse. Therefore, a properly tuned local data assimilation (DA) and forecast model at a high resolution is needed to provide improved capability. To accomplish this, a number of sensitivity tests were performed using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model in order to determine the best DA/model configuration for operational use at each of the space launch ranges to best predict winds, precipitation, and temperature. A set of Perl scripts to run the Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI)/WRF in real-time were provided by NASA's Short-term Prediction Research and Transition Center (SPoRT). The GSI can analyze many types of observational data including satellite, radar, and conventional data. The GSI/WRF scripts use a cycled GSI system similar to the operational North American Mesoscale (NAM) model. The scripts run a 12-hour pre-cycle in which data are assimilated from 12 hours prior up to the model initialization time. A number of different model configurations were tested for both the ER and WFF by varying the horizontal resolution on which the data assimilation was done. Three different grid configurations were run for the ER and two configurations were run for WFF for archive cases from 27 Aug 2013 through 10 Nov 2013. To quantify model performance, standard model output will be compared to the Meteorological Assimilation Data Ingest System (MADIS) data. The MADIS observation data will be compared to the WRF forecasts using the Model Evaluation Tools (MET) verification package. In addition, the National Centers for Environmental Prediction's Stage IV precipitation data will be used to validate the WRF precipitation forecasts. The author will summarize the relative skill of the various WRF configurations and how each configuration behaves relative to the others, as well as determine the best model configuration for each space launch range.

Watson, Leela R.↗

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

The Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) provided oversight on the safety aspects of many NASA programs. In addition, ASAP undertook three special studies. At the request of the Administrator, the panel assessed the requirements for an assured crew return vehicle (ACRV) for the space station and reviewed the organization of the safety and mission quality function within NASA. At the behest of Congress, the panel formed an independent, ad hoc working group to examine the safety and reliability of the space shuttle main engine. Section 2 presents findings and recommendations. Section 3 consists of information in support of these findings and recommendations. Appendices A, B, C, and D, respectively, cover the panel membership, the NASA response to the findings and recommendations in the March 1992 report, a chronology of the panel's activities during the reporting period, and the entire ACRV study report.

Source record↗

A New Compendium of Unsteady Aerodynamic Test Cases for CFD: Summary of AVT WG-003 Activities

With the continuous progress in hardware and numerical schemes, Computational Unsteady Aerodynamics (CUA), that is, the application of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) to unsteady flowfields, is slowly finding its way as a useful and reliable tool (turbulence and transition modeling permitting) in the aircraft, helicopter, engine and missile design and development process. Before a specific code may be used with confidence it is essential to validate its capability to describe the physics of the flow correctly, or at least to the level of approximation required, for which purpose a comparison with accurate experimental data is needed. Unsteady wind tunnel testing is difficult and expensive; two factors which dramatically limit the number of organizations with the capability and/or resources to perform it. Thus, unsteady experimental data is scarce, often classified and scattered in diverse documents. Additionally, access to the reports does not necessarily assure access to the data itself. The collaborative effort described in this paper was conceived with the aim of collecting into a single easily accessible document as much quality data as possible. The idea is not new. In the early 80's NATO's AGARD (Advisory Group for Aerospace Research & Development) Structures and Material Panel (SMP) produced AGARD Report No. 702 "Compendium of Unsteady Aerodynamic Measurements", which has found and continues to find extensive use within the CUA Community. In 1995 AGARD's Fluid Dynamics Panel (FDP) decided to update and expand the former database with new geometries and physical phenomena, and launched Working Group WG-22 on "Validation Data for Computational Unsteady Aerodynamic Codes". Shortly afterwards AGARD was reorganized as the RTO (Research and Technology Organization) and the WG was renamed as AVT (Applied Vehicle Technolology) WG-003. Contributions were received from AEDC, BAe, DLR, DERA, Glasgow University, IAR, NAL, NASA, NLR, and ONERA. The final publication with the results of the exercise is expected in the second part of 1999. The aim of the present paper is to announce and present the new database to the Aeroelasticity community. It is also intended to identify, together with one of the groups of end users it targets, deficiencies in the compendium that should be addressed by means of new wind tunnel tests or by obtaining access to additionally existing data.

Ruiz-Calavera, Luis P.↗

The role of the Consultative Committee on International Radio (CCIR) in time and frequency

The Consultative Committee on International Radio (CCIR) is a technical advisory group that, within the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), provides formal recommendations, technical advice, and technical information related to the allocation and use of the radio spectrum. The CCIR does its work through a number of separate study groups, each of which deals primarily with one or more radio based services recognized by the ITU. One of these, Study Group 7, is called 'Science Services' and deals with, among other things, time and frequency services, and related topics. This part of CCIR is probably best known for its development and implementation of the UTC time system in 1972. The U.S. National Administration develops proposed recommendations and provides other technical input to the CCIR through an organization of U.S. Study Groups that parallel those functioning internationally. Both the private and government sectors participate actively under the general oversight of the U.S. State Department and its U.S. CCIR National Committee. Current and projected future activities of U.S. and international Study Group 7 are described, including some examples of current recommendations, handbooks, and other documentation that might be useful for working with time and frequency applications.

Roger E. Beehler↗

Space Science for the 21st Century. Strategic Plan for 1995-2000

This publication is one of three volumes in 'Space Science for the 21st Century', the Office of Space Science Strategic plan for 1995-2000. The other two volumes are the recently released Integrated Technology Strategy and the Education Plan, which is in preparation at this publication date. The Science Plan was developed by the Office of Space Science (OSS) in partnership with the Space Science Advisory Committee. The mission of the OSS is to seek answers to fundamental questions about: the galaxy and the universe; the connection between the Sun, Earth, and Heliosphere; the origin and evolution of planetary systems; and the origin and distribution of life in the universe. The strategy to answer these questions includes completing the means to survey the universe across the entire electromagnetic spectrum; completing the survey of cosmic rays through their highest energies, and of interstellar gas; carrying out a basic new test of the Theory of General Relativity; completing development of the means to understand the mechanisms of solar variability and its effects on Earth; completing the first exploration of the inner and outer frontiers of the heliosphere; determining the plasma environments of the solar system planets and how those environments are affected by solar activity; completing development of the means to finish the reconnaissance of the entire solar system from the Sun to Pluto; beginning the comprehensive search for other planets around other stars; resuming surface exploration of solar system bodies to understand the origin and evolution of the Sun's planetary system; continuing the study of biogenic compounds and their evolution in the universe; and searching for indicators of past and present conditions conducive to life.

Source record↗

NASA Strategy for Technology Development

At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), foresight is a coordinated, iterative, and continual process for making informed decisions. NASA faces diverse and relatively unique challenges and opportunities as the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration. To address these challenges and leverage opportunities, NASA uses foresight to strategically plan technology development across four mission directorates: Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (recently separated into the new Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate and Space Operations Mission Directorate). The mission directorates leverage a broad community of experts and partners to incorporate technology foresight into mission and program planning. Through this process NASA realizes tangible benefits to the agency’s science, technology, and exploration programs. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides strategic advice, supported by independent assessments and rigorous analysis, to inform NASA senior leadership on key areas to align mission and agency-level activities. OTPS serves as a trusted authority to inform technology strategy at the agency to enable future missions. Specifically, OTPS coordinates and uses inputs from a broad community of experts, both internal and external to NASA, to inform decision making for technology plans, investments, and partnerships. OTPS develops and maintains the NASA Technology Taxonomy to standardize communication across the agency’s diverse technology portfolio and the related Strategic Technology Investment Plan that integrates priorities and informs technology investment. Through these efforts, OTPS has refined elements of foresight-informed strategic planning that may be applicable to other technology-driven industries where foresight is essential for resilience. This chapter describes the processes of foresight for technology development at NASA and provides insight into the value the agency derives from these processes. The chapter further describes the role of OTPS as an independent advisory office that supports NASA’s efforts to capitalize on foresight and strategic technology planning. We present these examples with consideration for how organizations in defense, security, and other technology-driven industries can operationalize foresight in their own strategic technology development.

Erica Rodgers↗

Space Station redesign option A: Modular buildup concept

In early 1993, President Clinton mandated that NASA look at lower cost alternatives to Space Station Freedom. He also established an independent advisory committee - the Blue Ribbon Panel - to review the redesign work and evaluate alternatives. Daniel Goldin, NASA Administrator, established a Station Redesign Team that began operating in late March from Crystal City, Virginia. NASA intercenter teams - one each at Marshall Space Flight Center, Johnson Space Center, and Langley Research Center provided engineering and other support. The results of the Option A study done at Marshall Space Flight Center are summarized. Two configurations (A-1 and A-2) are covered. Additional data is provided in the briefing package MSFC SRT-001, Final System Review to SRT-002, Space Station Option A Modular Buildup Concept, Volumes 1-5, Revision B, June 10, 1993. In June 1993, President Clinton decided to proceed with a modular concept consistent with Option A, and asked NASA to provide an Implementation Plan by September. All data from the Option A redesign activity was provided to NASA's Transition Team for use in developing the Implementation Plan.

Source record↗

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

During 1997, the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) continued its safety reviews of NASA's human space flight and aeronautics programs. Efforts were focused on those areas that the Panel believed held the greatest potential to impact safety. Continuing safe Space Shuttle operations and progress in the manufacture and testing of primary components for the International Space Station (ISS) were noteworthy. The Panel has continued to monitor the safety implications of the transition of Space Shuttle operations to the United Space Alliance (USA). One area being watched closely relates to the staffing levels and skill mix in both NASA and USA. Therefore, a section of this report is devoted to personnel and other related issues that are a result of this change in NASA's way of doing business for the Space Shuttle. Attention will continue to be paid to this important topic in subsequent reports. Even though the Panel's activities for 1997 were extensive, fewer specific recommendations were formulated than has been the case in recent years. This is indicative of the current generally good state of safety of NASA programs. The Panel does, however, have several longer term concerns that have yet to develop to the level of a specific recommendation. These are covered in the introductory material for each topic area in Section 11. In another departure from past submissions, this report does not contain individual findings and recommendations for the aeronautics programs. While the Panel devoted its usual efforts to examining NASA's aeronautic centers and programs, no specific recommendations were identified for inclusion in this report. In lieu of recommendations, a summary of the Panel's observations of NASA's safety efforts in aeronautics and future Panel areas of emphasis is provided. With profound sadness the Panel notes the passing of our Chairman, Paul M. Johnstone, on December 17, 1997, and our Staff Assistant, Ms. Patricia M. Harman, on October 5, 1997. Other changes to the Panel composition during the past year were: the resignation of Mr. Dennis E. Fitch as a Consultant; the appointment of Mr. Roger D. Schaufele as a Consultant; and the assignment of Ms. Susan M. Smith as Staff Assistant.

Source record↗

Partners in Freedom: Contributions of the Langley Research Center to U.S. Military Aircraft of the 1990's

Established in 1917 as the nation#s first civil aeronautics research laboratory under the National Advisory Commit-tee for Aeronautics (NACA), Langley was a small laboratory that solved the problems of flight for military and civil aviation. Throughout history, Langley has maintained a working partnership with the Department of Defense, U.S. industry, universities, and other government agencies to support the defense of the nation with research. During World War II, Langley directed virtually all of its workforce and facilities to research for military aircraft. Following the war, a balanced program of military and civil projects was undertaken. In some instances Langley research from one aircraft program helped solve a problem in another. At the conclusion of some programs, Langley obtained the research models for additional tests to learn more about previously unknown phenomena. The data also proved useful in later developmental programs. Many of the military aircraft in the U.S. inventory as of late 1999 were over 20 years old. Langley activities that contributed to the development of some of these aircraft began over 50 years prior. This publication documents the role, from early concept stages to problem solving for fleet aircraft, that Langley played in the military aircraft fleet of the United States for the 1990's.

Chambers, Joseph R.↗

ARES Biennial Report 2012 Final

Since the return of the first lunar samples, what is now the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) Directorate has had curatorial responsibility for all NASA-held extraterrestrial materials. Originating during the Apollo Program (1960s), this capability at Johnson Space Center (JSC) included scientists who were responsible for the science planning and training of astronauts for lunar surface activities as well as experts in the analysis and preservation of the precious returned samples. Today, ARES conducts research in basic and applied space and planetary science, and its scientific staff represents a broad diversity of expertise in the physical sciences (physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy), mathematics, and engineering organized into three offices (figure 1): Astromaterials Research (KR), Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation (KT), and Human Exploration Science (KX). Scientists within the Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office preserve, protect, document, and distribute samples of the current astromaterials collections. Since the return of the first lunar samples, ARES has been assigned curatorial responsibility for all NASA-held extraterrestrial materials (Apollo lunar samples, Antarctic meteorites - some of which have been confirmed to have originated on the Moon and on Mars - cosmic dust, solar wind samples, comet and interstellar dust particles, and space-exposed hardware). The responsibilities of curation consist not only of the longterm care of the samples, but also the support and planning for future sample collection missions and research and technology to enable new sample types. Curation provides the foundation for research into the samples. The Lunar Sample Facility and other curation clean rooms, the data center, laboratories, and associated instrumentation are unique NASA resources that, together with our staff's fundamental understanding of the entire collection, provide a service to the external research community, which relies on access to the samples. The curation efforts are greatly enhanced by a strong group of planetary scientists who conduct peerreviewed astromaterials research. Astromaterials Research Office scientists conduct peer-reviewed research as Principal or Co-Investigators in planetary science (e. g., cosmochemistry, origins of solar systems, Mars fundamental research, planetary geology and geophysics) and participate as Co-Investigators or Participating Scientists in many of NASA's robotic planetary missions. Since the last report, ARES has achieved several noteworthy milestones, some of which are documented in detail in the sections that follow. Within the Human Exploration Science Office, ARES is a world leader in orbital debris research, modeling and monitoring the debris environment, designing debris shielding, and developing policy to control and mitigate the orbital debris population. ARES has aggressively pursued refinements in knowledge of the debris environment and the hazard it presents to spacecraft. Additionally, the ARES Image Science and Analysis Group has been recognized as world class as a result of the high quality of near-real-time analysis of ascent and on-orbit inspection imagery to identify debris shedding, anomalies, and associated potential damage during Space Shuttle missions. ARES Earth scientists manage and continuously update the database of astronaut photography that is predominantly from Shuttle and ISS missions, but also includes the results of 40 years of human spaceflight. The Crew Earth Observations Web site (http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/Education/ESS/crew.htm) continues to receive several million hits per month. ARES scientists are also influencing decisions in the development of the next generation of human and robotic spacecraft and missions through laboratory tests on the optical qualities of materials for windows, micrometeoroid/orbital debris shielding technology, and analog activities to assess surface science operations. ARES serves as host to numerous students and visiting scientists as part of the services provided to the research community and conducts a robust education and outreach program. ARES scientists are recognized nationally and internationally by virtue of their success in publishing in peer-reviewed journals and winning competitive research proposals. ARES scientists have won every major award presented by the Meteoritical Society, including the Leonard Medal, the most prestigious award in planetary science and cosmochemistry; the Barringer Medal, recognizing outstanding work in the field of impact cratering; the Nier Prize for outstanding research by a young scientist; and several recipients of the Nininger Meteorite Award. One of our scientists received the Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Meritorious Civilian Service Award (the highest civilian honor given by the DoD). ARES has established numerous partnerships with other NASA Centers, universities, and national laboratories. ARES scientists serve as journal editors, members of advisory panels and review committees, and society officers, and several scientists have been elected as Fellows in their professional societies. This biennial report summarizes a subset of the accomplishments made by each of the ARES offices and highlights participation in ongoing human and robotic missions, development of new missions, and planning for future human and robotic exploration of the solar system beyond low Earth orbit.

Stansbery, Eileen↗

UAM Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) UAM Maturity Level (UML) 4

This Vision ConOps is intended as a foundation to engage members of the UAM community and provide a consensus on the future vision of UAM operations. It provides a concept for more detailed discussion and a basis for the exploration of ideas using a common framework to inform the continued development and integration of UAM as part of the broader transportation system. Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) encompasses a range of innovative aviation technologies (small drones, electric aircraft, automated air traffic management, etc.) that are transforming aviation’s role in everyday life, including the movement of goods and people. Urban Air Mobility (UAM) represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft, providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities. This concept has generated tremendous interest and industry investment. UAM envisages a future in which advanced technologies and new operational procedures enable practical, cost-effective air travel as an integral mode of transportation in metropolitan areas. It represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities. For this reason, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) selected UAM as the initial goal of its AAM efforts and the focus of this Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) document. UAM Community Vision ConOps: This Vision ConOps effort was led by experts from NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) in collaboration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Deloitte’s Ecosystem Advisory Group (a cohort of advisers with aviation, aerospace, and regulatory expertise). To develop this Vision ConOps, NASA, FAA, and Deloitte built upon the current body of aeronautical research and consulted with more than 100 stakeholder organizations. This UAM community includes entities ranging from legacy aviation leaders to innovators and new market entrants. Stakeholders consulted included the federal government, state and local government, aerospace original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), local transportation organizations, prospective UAM operators, academia, industry standards-setting bodies, airports, service suppliers, and others (as described in Appendix G). This input was captured through the following methods: • A series of more than two dozen interviews with industry experts, federal regulators, state and local governments, and industry trade groups provided insight into the challenges of UAM integration into the National Airspace System (NAS), as well as technology developments and a variety of perspectives as to how UAM systems will integrate. • A series of two-day community workshops enabling active, detailed engagement of nearly 100 industry, academic, federal, and state stakeholder individuals. These workshops, hosted by NASA and Deloitte, explored UAM concepts in detail, and stakeholders were invited to collaboratively analyze and propose solutions to some of the greatest conceptual challenges behind UAM at an intermediate state. • A review of more than 160 sources of UAM literature from across government, industry, and academia, which are listed in Appendix H. • The public sharing of workshop input and document drafts for review and input across the UAM community. Feedback in the form of more than 1,000 comments and inputs on the document was received from industry groups, individual companies, academia, and government (federal, state, and local), among others. Although effort was made to incorporate inputs from across the UAM stakeholder group, not all comments could ultimately be incorporated in this version. The team resolved conflicting comments or ideas while maintaining consistency with the known direction of regulators and ensuring the document was coherent and consistent. It is recognized that this is a rapidly evolving area and that concepts will likely change over time; as such, this Vision ConOps is a living document and is expected to evolve as concepts mature. The ConOps does, however, provide a vision of UAM concepts and solutions based on the broad insights from across the UAM stakeholder community at the time of its publication and is intended to serve as a UAM North Star for continued research and development of UAM. As a broad Vision ConOps, is not a detailed engineering document; rather, it focuses primarily on outlining a broad, high-level vision across all aspects of a UAM transportation system.

Urban Air Mobility↗

The Office of Space Science and Applications strategic plan, 1990: A strategy for leadership in space through excellence in space science and applications

A strategic plan for the U.S. space science and applications program during the next 5 to 10 years was developed and published in 1988. Based on the strategies developed by the advisory committees of both the National Academy of Science and NASA, the plan balances major, moderate, and small mission initiatives, the utilization of the Space Station Freedom, and the requirements for a vital research base. The Office of Space Science and Applications (OSSA) strategic plan is constructed around five actions: establish a set of programmatic themes; establish a set of decision rules; establish a set of priorities for missions and programs within each theme; demonstrate that the strategy will yield a viable program; and check the strategy for consistency within resource constraints. The OSSA plan is revised annually. This OSSA 1990 Strategic Plan refines the 1989 Plan and represents OSSA's initial plan for fulfilling its responsibilities in two major national initiatives. The Plan is now built on interrelated, complementary strategies for the core space science and applications program, for the U.S. Global Change Research Program, and for the Space Exploration Initiative. The challenge is to make sure that the current level of activity is sustained through the end of this century and into the next. The 1990 Plan presents OSSA's strategy to do this.

Source record↗