SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew 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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 217 records · Page 12

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2017

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.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Passive Stability on an Entry Vehicle to Enhance Crew Survival

The most desirable crew survival feature for an entry vehicle is probably a full coverage escape system. With full coverage escape, crew survival is maintained for a wide range of failures by the allowing the crew to escape from the failed vehicle and performing the entry to touchdown flight phase in an alternative system. However, there are considerable challenges in providing a separate entry capability, and for some programs, requiring full coverage escape could result in program cancellation. An alternative means of providing for crew survival if the flight control system fails is to design a return vehicle that can enter without active attitude control. A study was performed to assess the feasibility of performing a totally passive entry. Lift over drag has a major impact on performing a passive entry, so a parametric of three typical lift over drag concepts was performed. First an assessment of historical entry vehicles was completed. Second an assessment of end of mission entry trajectories and entry trajectories initiated from ascent abort profiles were made. Trajectories for a wide array of pitch, yaw, and roll rates were made. Third, six-degree-of freedom analyses of the entry were performed. FOP a truly passive return, the entry vehicle must trim in only the heat shield forward orientation. An assessment of the effect of center of gravity placement to achieve this orientation was made.

Deger, Daniel J.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Orion Launch Abort System Performance on Exploration Flight Test 1

This paper will present an overview of the flight test objectives and performance of the Orion Launch Abort System during Exploration Flight Test-1. Exploration Flight Test-1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched atop a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. This flight test was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety. This test included the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. NASA is currently designing and testing the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Orion will serve as NASA's new exploration vehicle to carry astronauts to deep space destinations and safely return them to earth. The Orion spacecraft is composed of four main elements: the Launch Abort System, the Crew Module, the Service Module, and the Spacecraft Adapter (Fig. 1). The Launch Abort System (LAS) provides two functions; during nominal launches, the LAS provides protection for the Crew Module from atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight and during emergencies provides a reliable abort capability for aborts that occur within the atmosphere. The Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) consists of an Abort Motor to provide the abort separation from the Launch Vehicle, an Attitude Control Motor to provide attitude and rate control, and a Jettison Motor for crew module to LAS separation (Fig. 2). The jettison motor is used during a nominal launch to separate the LAS from the Launch Vehicle (LV) early in the flight of the second stage when it is no longer needed for aborts and at the end of an LAS abort sequence to enable deployment of the crew module's Landing Recovery System. The LAS also provides a Boost Protective Cover fairing that shields the crew module from debris and the aero-thermal environment during ascent. Although the Orion Program has tested a number of the critical systems of the Orion spacecraft on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. A number of flight tests have been conducted and are planned to demonstrate the performance and enable certification of the Orion Spacecraft. Exploration Flight Test 1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. Orion's first flight was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety, such as heat shield performance, separation events, avionics and software performance, attitude control and guidance, parachute deployment and recovery operations. One of the key separation events tested during this flight was the nominal jettison of the LAS. Data from this flight will be used to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. The LAS nominal jettison event on Exploration Flight Test 1 occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff (See Fig. 3). The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. A suite of developmental flight instrumentation was included on the flight test to provide data on spacecraft subsystems and separation events. This paper will focus on the flight test objectives and performance of the LAS during ascent and nominal jettison. Selected LAS subsystem flight test data will be presented and discussed in the paper. Exploration Flight Test -1 will provide critical data that will enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle.

McCauley, R.↗

NASA NTRS2022

Regenerative Life Support Systems for Exploration Habitats: Unique Capabilities and Challenges to Enable Long-Duration-Mission Habitats Beyond Low Earth Orbit

The Artemis I launch of NASA’s Space Launch System and Orion crew vehicle will mark a major milestone in the agency’s efforts to return humans to the Moon. Work is underway on the Human Landing System that will carry the next astronauts to the lunar surface, and the lunar orbiting Gateway that will host science and serve as a platform to support sustained human presence on the Moon and ultimately crewed missions to Mars. Two decades of continuous human presence on the International Space Station has provided a wealth of experience operating, upgrading, and demonstrating advanced Regenerative Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (Regen ECLSS). However, habitats that enable sustained lunar surface presence and transit to Mars will encounter many unique conditions and challenges. System characteristics including reliability, maintainability, mass, and power become significantly more critical. Operating environments associated with lower total pressure, low gravity, contingency protocols, and extensive un-crewed and dormant periods impose additional functionality requirements and alter the performance of certain critical systems. Integration and combined operations with other elements such as orbiting outposts, logistics suppliers, and mobility platforms impact capability and interface requirements. Limits on allocated water and oxygen consumable mass influence the need for higher levels of water and oxygen recovery from waste products. Impacts and challenges these unique exploration circumstances impose on the suite of Regen ECLSS systems are explored and discussed herein.

David F Howard↗

NASA NTRS1990

A radiological assessment of nuclear power and propulsion operations near Space Station Freedom

Scenarios were identified which involve the use of nuclear power systems in the vicinity of Space Station Freedom (SSF) and their radiological impact on the SSF crew was quantified. Several of the developed scenarios relate to the use of SSF as an evolutionary transportation node for lunar and Mars missions. In particular, radiation doses delivered to SSF crew were calculated for both the launch and subsequent return of a Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) cargo vehicle and a Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) personnel vehicle to low earth orbit. The use of nuclear power on co-orbiting platforms and the storage and handling issues associated with radioisotope power systems were also explored as they relate to SSF. A central philosophy in these analyses was the utilization of a radiation dose budget, defined as the difference between recommended dose limits from all radiation sources and estimated doses received by crew members from natural space radiations. Consequently, for each scenario examined, the dose budget concept was used to identify and quantify constraints on operational parameters such as launch separation distances, returned vehicle parking distances, and reactor shutdown times prior to vehicle approach. The results indicate that realistic scenarios do not exist which would preclude the use of nuclear power sources in the vicinity of SSF. The radiation dose to the SSF crew can be maintained at safe levels solely by implementing proper and reasonable operating procedures.

Bolch, Wesley E.↗

NASA NTRS2010

NASA Ares I Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Reaction Control System (ReCS) Cold Flow Development Test Overview

NASA s Ares I launch vehicle, consisting of a five segment solid rocket booster first stage and a liquid bi-propellant J2-X engine Upper Stage, is the vehicle that s been chosen to launch the Orion Crew Module, which will return humans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. After First Stage booster separation, the Reaction Control System (ReCS), a monopropellant hydrazine system, will provide the Upper Stage element with three degrees of freedom control as needed. This paper provides an overview of the system level development testing that has taken place on the Ares I launch vehicle Upper Stage ReCS. The ReCS System Development Test Article (SDTA) was built as a flight representative water flow test article whose primary test objective was to obtain fluid system performance data to evaluate the integrate system performance characteristics and verify analytical models. Water is the industry standard for cold flow testing of hydrazine systems, because the densities are very close and the speeds of sound are well characterized. The completion of this development level test program was considered necessary to support the ReCS Critical Design Review. This paper will address the design approach taken in building the test article, the objectives of the test program, types of testing completed, general results, the ability of the program to meet the test objectives, and lessons learned

Dervan, Melanie↗

NASA NTRS2006

Trajectory and Aeroheating Environment Development and Sensitivity Analysis for Capsule-shaped Vehicles

Recently, NASA's Exploration Systems Research and Technology Project funded several tasks that endeavored to develop and evaluate various thermal protection systems and high temperature material concepts for potential use on the crew exploration vehicle. In support of these tasks, NASA Langley's Vehicle Analysis Branch generated trajectory information and associated aeroheating environments for more than 60 unique entry cases. Using the Apollo Command Module as the baseline entry system because of its relevance to the favored crew exploration vehicle design, trajectories for a range of lunar and Mars return, direct and aerocapture Earth-entry scenarios were developed. For direct entry, a matrix of cases was created that reflects reasonably expected minimum and maximum values of vehicle ballistic coefficient, inertial velocity at entry interface, and inertial flight path angle at entry interface. For aerocapture, trajectories were generated for a range of values of initial velocity and ballistic coefficient that, when combined with proper initial flight path angles, resulted in achieving a low Earth orbit either by employing a full lift vector up or full lift vector down attitude. For each trajectory generated, aeroheating environments were generated which were intended to bound the thermal protection system requirements for likely crew exploration vehicle concepts. The trades examined clearly pointed to a range of missions / concepts that will require ablative systems as well as a range for which reusable systems may be feasible. In addition, the results clearly indicated those entry conditions and modes suitable for manned flight, considering vehicle deceleration levels experienced during entry. This paper presents an overview of the analysis performed, including the assumptions, methods, and general approach used, as well as a summary of the trajectory and aerothermal environment information that was generated.

Robinson, Jeffrey S.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Initial Considerations for Navigation and Flight Dynamics of a Crewed Near-Earth Object Mission

A crewed mission to a Near-Earth Object (NEO) was recently identified as a NASA Space Policy goal and priority. In support of this goal, a study was conducted to identify the initial considerations for performing the navigation and flight dynamics tasks of this mission class. Although missions to a NEO are not new, the unique factors involved in human spaceflight present challenges that warrant special examination. During the cruise phase of the mission, one of the most challenging factors is the noisy acceleration environment associated with a crewed vehicle. Additionally, the presence of a human crew necessitates a timely return trip, which may need to be expedited in an emergency situation where the mission is aborted. Tracking, navigation, and targeting results are shown for sample human-class trajectories to NEOs. Additionally, the benefit of in-situ navigation beacons on robotic precursor missions is presented. This mission class will require a longer duration flight than Apollo and, unlike previous human missions, there will likely be limited communication and tracking availability. This will necessitate the use of more onboard navigation and targeting capabilities. Finally, the rendezvous and proximity operations near an asteroid will be unlike anything previously attempted in a crewed spaceflight. The unknown gravitational environment and physical surface properties of the NEO may cause the rendezvous to behave differently than expected. Symbiosis of the human pilot and onboard navigation/targeting are presented which give additional robustness to unforeseen perturbations.

Holt, Greg N.↗

NASA NTRS1997

STS-85 Day 08 Highlights

On this eighth day of the STS-85 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Curtis L. Brown, Jr., Pilot Kent V. Rominger, Payload Cmdr. N. Jan Davis (Ph.D.), Mission Specialists Robert L. Curbeam, Jr. and Stephen K. Robinson (Ph.D.), and Payload Specialist Bjarni V. Tryggvason entered the final portion of its flight. The new Mir 24 crew of Commander Anatoly Solovyev and Flight Engineer Pavel Vinogradov, who arrived on the station the same day Discovery was launched, bid farewell to Mir 23 Commander Vasily Tsibliev and Flight Engineer Alexander Lazutkin who are returning home after 185 days in space. The Soyuz vehicle carrying the Mir 23 crew home undocked from the station. Robinson again used the Southwest Ultraviolet Imaging System (SWUIS), a 7-inch imaging telescope that is pointed out of the orbiter's middeck hatch window, to observe the Hale-Bopp comet. Curbeam continued his work with the Bioreactor Demonstration System designed to perform cell biology experiments under controlled conditions. Tryggvason spent part of his time troubleshooting a computer hard drive system that supports the Microgravity Vibration Isolation Mount experiment.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2007

Apollo Seals: A Basis for the Crew Exploration Vehicle Seals

NASA s Vision for Space Exploration Replace the Space Shuttle for missions to ISS. Return to the Moon. Allow manned exploration of Mars. Apollo-like configuration. Blunt-body heat shield. Conical backshell. CEV requires seal development. Prevent ingestion of reentry gases. Prevent loss of habitable atmosphere.

Finkbeiner, Joshua R.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Mars Surface Tunnel Element Concept

When the first human visitors on Mars prepare to return to Earth, they will have to comply with stringent planetary protection requirements. Apollo Program experience warns that opening an EVA hatch directly to the surface will bring dust into the ascent vehicle. To prevent inadvertent return of potential Martian contaminants to Earth, careful consideration must be given to the way in which crew ingress their Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). For architectures involving more than one surface element-such as an ascent vehicle and a pressurized rover or surface habitat-a retractable tunnel that eliminates extravehicular activity (EVA) ingress is an attractive solution. Beyond addressing the immediate MAV access issue, a reusable tunnel may be useful for other surface applications, such as rover to habitat transfer, once its primary mission is complete. A National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) team is studying the optimal balance between surface tunnel functionality, mass, and stowed volume as part of the Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC). The study team began by identifying the minimum set of functional requirements needed for the tunnel to perform its primary mission, as this would presumably be the simplest design, with the lowest mass and volume. This Minimum Functional Tunnel then becomes a baseline against which various tunnel design concepts and potential alternatives can be traded, and aids in assessing the mass penalty of increased functionality. Preliminary analysis indicates that the mass of a single-mission tunnel is about 237 kg, not including mass growth allowance.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Launch-Off-Need Shuttle Hubble Rescue Mission: Medical Issues

The Space Shuttle Hubble repair mission (STS-125) is unique in that a rescue mission (STS-400) has to be ready to launch before STS-125 life support runs out should the vehicle become stranded. The shuttle uses electrical power derived from fuel cells that use cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen (CRYO) to run all subsystems including the Environmental Control System. If the STS-125 crew cannot return to Earth due to failure of a critical subsystem, they must power down all nonessential systems and wait to be rescued by STS-400. This power down will cause the cabin temperature to be 60 F or less and freeze the rest of the vehicle, preventing it from attempting a reentry. After an emergency has been declared, STS-125 must wait at least 7 days to power down since that is the earliest that STS-400 can be launched. Problem The delayed power down of STS-125 causes CYRO to be consumed at high rates and limits the survival time after STS-400 launches to 10 days or less. CRYO will run out sooner every day that the STS-400 launch is delayed (weather at launch, technical issues etc.). To preserve CRYO and lithium hydroxide (LiOH - carbon dioxide removal) the crew will perform no exercise to reduce their metabolic rates, yet each deconditioned STS-125 crewmember must perform an EVA to rescue himself. The cabin may be cold for 10 days, which may cause shivering, increasing the metabolic rate of the STS-125 crew. Solution To preserve LiOH, the STS-125 manifest includes nutrition bars with low carbohydrate content to maintain crew respiratory quotient (RQ) below 0.85 as opposed to the usual shuttle galley food which is rich in carbohydrates and keeps the RQ at approximately 0.95. To keep the crew more comfortable in the cold vehicle warm clothing also has been included. However, with no exercise and limited diet, the deconditioned STS-125 crew returning on STS-400 may not be able to egress the vehicle autonomously requiring a supplemented crash-and-rescue capability.

Hamilton, Douglas↗

NASA NTRS1989

STS crew escape for steady state gliding flight

The Space Transportation System goal of return to safe flight required that the Orbiter vehicle provide the crewmembers with a means of escape during controlled gliding flight. Because of its simplicity and safety the pole escape concept was selected for use during crew escape. To show that this concept would work in the Orbiter, wind tunnel tests, flight testing, and analytical simulation of the pole concept were pursued. This paper addresses each of these activities, showing how the wind tunnel test demonstrated the feasibility of the concept, how the flight testing was used to extract crew aero and Orbiter clearance margins, and how analytical simulations were used to verify Orbiter clearance margins. The analytical assessment of the Orbiter clearance margins shows that the pole concept will provide a minimum of 7-ft dispersed clearance for the NASA astronaut corps.

Millard, S. W.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Apollo: Learning From the Past, For the Future

This paper shares an interesting and unique case study of knowledge capture by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), an ongoing project to recapture and make available the lessons learned from the Apollo lunar landing project so that those working on future projects do not have to "reinvent the wheel". NASA's new Constellation program, the successor to the Space Shuttle program, proposes a return to the Moon using a new generation of vehicles. The Orion Crew Vehicle and the Altair Lunar Lander will use hardware, practices, and techniques descended and derived from Apollo, Shuttle and the International Space Station. However, the new generation of engineers and managers who will be working with Orion and Altair are largely from the decades following Apollo, and are likely not well aware of what was developed in the 1960s. In 2006 a project at NASA's Johnson Space Center was begun to find pertinent Apollo-era documentation and gather it, format it, and present it using modern tools for today's engineers and managers. This "Apollo Mission Familiarization for Constellation Personnel" project is accessible via the web from any NASA center for those interested in learning "how did we do this during Apollo?"

Grabois, Michael R.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Apollo: Learning From the Past, For the Future

Grabois, Michael R.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Planning for Crew Exercise for Deep Space Mission Scenarios

Exercise which is necessary for maintaining crew health on-orbit and preparing the crew for return to 1G can be challenging to incorporate into spaceflight vehicles. Deep space missions will require further understanding of the physiological response to microgravity, understanding appropriate mitigations, and designing the exercise systems to effectively provide mitigations, and integrating effectively into vehicle design with a focus to support planned mission scenarios. Recognizing and addressing the constraints and challenges can facilitate improved vehicle design and exercise system incorporation.

Moore, E. Cherice↗

NASA NTRS1993

Lunar transportation system

The University Space Research Association (USRA) requested the University of Minnesota Spacecraft Design Team to design a lunar transportation infrastructure. This task was a year long design effort culminating in a complete conceptual design and presentation at Johnson Space Center. The mission objective of the design group was to design a system of vehicles to bring a habitation module, cargo, and crew to the lunar surface from LEO and return either or both crew and cargo safely to LEO while emphasizing component commonality, reusability, and cost effectiveness. During the course of the design, the lunar transportation system (LTS) has taken on many forms. The final design of the system is composed of two vehicles, a lunar transfer vehicle (LTV) and a lunar excursion vehicle (LEV). The LTV serves as an efficient orbital transfer vehicle between the earth and the moon while the LEV carries crew and cargo to the lunar surface. Presented in the report are the mission analysis, systems layout, orbital mechanics, propulsion systems, structural and thermal analysis, and crew systems, avionics, and power systems for this lunar transportation concept.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2019

Operations of the Optical Communications Demonstration for the Orion EM-2 Mission

The GSFC implementation of an Optical Communication System to demonstrate an operational optical communication link for Orion EM-2. It will serve as a base for providing an operational optical communications capability for future Orion missions. GSFC plans to maintain a development path for the optical communication flight terminal to allow commercialization and implementation on future Orion missions. The Orion optical module part of the optical communications flight terminal and its control electronics have a common architecture with the ILLUMA-T optical terminal provided by GSFC for use on the ISS. The plan is to flow data from Orion through the Optical Communication Fight Terminal to the Optical Communication Ground Terminal and reverse. NASA's Orion spacecraft is an exploratory vehicle designed for longer-duration flights beyond the Moon. Following Orion's Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), during which the spacecraft will travel beyond the Moon, enter a distant retrograde orbit around the Moon and return to Earth unmanned, Exploration Mission-2 (EM-2) will see a crewed spacecraft complete a slightly different flight path. First crewed test flight of the Orion spacecraft, currently targeting a June 30, 2022 launch. The mission involves: One revolution in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) parking orbit to verify basic Orion systems functionality and deploy solar arrays. A single 42-hour Highly Elliptical Orbit (HEO) intermediate checkout orbit allows characterization of the Orion vehicle system performance prior to committing to a cis-lunar flight. Trans Lunar Injection (TLI) burn using Orion Service Module (SM) main engine, which sends Orion on a lunar flyby and free return. Skip reentry at lunar return velocities to splashdown off the coast of San Diego. Total mission duration is approximately 10 days. EM-2 is the first crewed mission of the Orion Spacecraft that crew brings more video up/downloads, file transfers, and real-time chats with family back home and high-rate communications enables live HD streaming for Crew conferences, Public Affairs Office (PAO) events, and significant mission events. Also still collecting vehicle data on numerous Orion subsystems via Development Flight Instrumentation (DFI) allows large data volume returns sooner for DFI and future science payloads, as opposed to waiting for end-of-mission. O2O is a demonstration of operational utility system tested as a Developmental Test Objective (DTO) and not required to meet mission requirements/success/ Flight Test Objectives (FTO). EM-2 architecture is as close to future mission operational architecture as possible.Orion subsystems (video, DFI, etc.) expected to generate ~250 GB of data in the first 24 hours of flight. Total data generated over the mission estimated to be more than 400 GBUsing S-Band alone, Orion limited to ~ 6GB of data downlink per day. Because of this limitation, Orion is planning to limit live video downlinks on EM-1 in order to downlink high priority fileswith 1 hour/day of Optical Communication, Orion could downlink ~6x more data per day (~ 36GB/day).The optical communication system is capable of multiple data rates up to at least 80 Mbps downlink for the transfer of Orion data to Earth while Orion is operating in the lunar vicinity.

Optical Communication↗