Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “departure scheduling”

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 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Affordable Development and Demonstration of a Small NTR Engine and Stage: A Preliminary NASA, DOE, and Industry Assessment

In FY11, NASA formulated a plan for Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) development that included Foundational Technology Development followed by system-level Technology Demonstrations. The ongoing NTP project, funded by NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) program, is focused on Foundational Technology Development and includes 5 key task activities: (1) Fuel element fabrication and non-nuclear validation testing of heritage fuel options; (2) Engine conceptual design; (3) Mission analysis and engine requirements definition; (4) Identification of affordable options for ground testing; and (5) Formulation of an affordable and sustainable NTP development program. Performance parameters for Point of Departure designs for a small criticality-limited and full size 25 klb (sub f) (kip, or 1000 pound-force)-class engine were developed during FYs 13-14 using heritage fuel element designs for both Rover NERVA (Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Applications) Graphite Composite (GC) and Ceramic Metal (Cermet) fuel forms. To focus the fuel development effort and maximize use of its resources, the AES program decided, in FY14, that a leader-follower down-selection between GC and cermet fuel was required. An Independent Review Panel (IRP) was convened by NASA and tasked with reviewing the available fuel data and making a recommendation to NASA. In February 2015, the IRP recommended and the AES program endorsed GC as the leader fuel In FY14, a preliminary development schedule DDTE (Design Development Test and Evaluation) plan was produced by GRC (Glenn Research Center), DOE (Department of Energy) and industry for the AES program. Assumptions, considerations and key task activities are presented here. At the direction of NASA HQ (32515), NASA and DOE are to work together to formulate a detailed development plan and schedule allowing the affordable development of a small (7.5-16.5 klbf) GC engine for possible flight technology demonstration (FTD) mission within a 10-year timeframe.

Lunar Flyby Mission↗
NASA NTRS2007

A New Heavy-Lift Capability for Space Exploration: NASA's Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is developing new launch systems and preparing to retire the Space Shuttle by 2010, as directed in the United States (U.S.) Vision for Space Exploration. The Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) and the Ares V heavy-lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) systems will build upon proven, reliable hardware derived from the Apollo-Saturn and Space Shuttle programs to deliver safe, reliable, affordable space transportation solutions. This approach leverages existing aerospace talent and a unique infrastructure, as well as legacy knowledge gained from nearly 50 years' experience developing space hardware. Early next decade, the Ares I will launch the new Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) to the International Space Station (ISS) or to low-Earth orbit for trips to the Moon and, ultimately, Mars. Late next decade, the Ares V's Earth Departure Stage will carry larger payloads such as the lunar lander into orbit, and the Crew Exploration Vehicle will dock with it for missions to the Moon, where astronauts will explore new territories and conduct science and technology experiments. Both Ares I and Ares V are being designed to support longer future trips to Mars. The Exploration Launch Projects Office is designing, developing, testing, and evaluating both launch vehicle systems in partnership with other NASA Centers, Government agencies, and industry contractors. This paper provides top-level information regarding the genesis and evolution of the baseline configuration for the Ares V heavy-lift system. It also discusses riskbased, management strategies, such as building on powerful hardware and promoting common features between the Ares I and Ares V systems to reduce technical, schedule, and cost risks, as well as development and operations costs. Finally, it summarizes several notable accomplishments since October 2005, when the Exploration Launch Projects effort officially kicked off, and looks ahead at work planned for 2007 and beyond.

Sumrall, John P.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Third Flight of the Marshall Grazing Incidence X-Ray Spectrometer (MaGIXS-3)

The Marshall Grazing Incidence X-ray Spectrometer (MaGIXS) is the first X-ray slitless imaging spectrograph sounding rocket instrument designed to observe spectrally dispersed soft X-ray images of the solar corona over a wide field-of-view. During the first flight of MaGIXS (MaGIXS-1), occurred on 30 July 2021, several emission lines from coronal structures including X-ray bright points were observed. Further, MaGIXS-1 analysis also demonstrated the successful inversion of overlappograms using robust unfolding algorithms. Given the demonstrated success of MaGIXS-1, the second flight of the instrument with a simplified optical design, MaGIXS-2, is scheduled for 2024 to observe high temperature diagnostic emission lines. Results from MaGIXS-1 discovered dominant missing emission lines near 15A, arising from relatively cool plasma that peaks around 2 MK. This wavelength region hosts several closely spaced satellite lines of Fe XVII, Fe XVI and Fe XV ions, which are expected to be enhanced at lower temperatures and are currently unmodeled in the CHIANTI atomic database. This wavelength region offers one of the most unique diagnostics to measure electron temperature, as well as signatures of equilibrium state of the plasma in active regions, which has not been studied so far. The goal of MaGIXS-3 mission is the to determine coronal heating parameters, such as the spatial and temporal properties of coronal heating events, by measuring discriminating observations, such as electron temperature, effective temperature, density, abundance, and departures from thermal equilibrium of the plasma, by observing the Sun in the SXR wavelength range. To meet this goal, the MaGIXS instrument will be upgraded with a new X-ray telescope mirror that will provide higher spatial and spectral resolution and throughput, allowing for spectral lines to be observed at the relevant spatial and temporal scales. In addition, MaGIXS-3 will also carry The Resolving Inversion Context X-ray Spectrometer (TRICXS), a high dispersion Bragg crystal spectrometer to spectrally resolve the lines near 14.9 to 15.9A, critical to unlock the full diagnostic potential of this wavelength range. Here we will present the preliminary concept design of MaGIXS-3 and discuss the potential observations.

X-ray Imaging↗
NASA NTRS2007

Development of the J-2X Engine for the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle: Building on the Apollo Program for Lunar Return Missions

The United States (U.S.) Vision for Space Exploration has directed NASA to develop two new launch vehicles for sending humans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. In January 2006, NASA streamlined its hardware development approach for replacing the Space Shuttle after it is retired in 2010. Benefits of this approach include reduced programmatic and technical risks and the potential to return to the Moon by 2020, by developing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) propulsion elements now, with full extensibility to future Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) lunar systems. The Constellation Program selected the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne J-2X engine to power the Ares I Upper Stage Element and the Ares V Earth Departure Stage. This decision was reached during the Exploration Systems Architecture Study and confirmed after the Exploration Launch Projects Office performed a variety of risk analyses, commonality assessments, and trade studies. This paper narrates the evolution of that decision; describes the performance capabilities expected of the J-2X design, including potential commonality challenges and opportunities between the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles; and provides a current status of J-2X design, development, and hardware testing activities. This paper also explains how the J-2X engine effort mitigates risk by testing existing engine hardware and designs; building on the Apollo Program (1961 to 1975), the Space Shuttle Program (1972 to 2010); and consulting with Apollo-era experts to derive other lessons lived to deliver a human-rated engine that is on an aggressive development schedule, with its first demonstration flight in 2012.

Greene, William D.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Development of the J-2X Engine for the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle: Building on the Apollo Program for Lunar Return Missions

The United States (U.S.) Vision for Space Exploration has directed NASA to develop two new launch vehicles for sending humans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. In January 2006, NASA streamlined its hardware development approach for replacing the Space Shuttle after it is retired in 2010. Benefits of this approach include reduced programmatic and technical risks and the potential to return to the Moon by 2020 by developing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) propulsion elements now, with full extensibility to future Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) lunar systems. The Constellation Program selected the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne J-2X engine to power the Ares I Upper Stage Element and the Ares V Earth Departure Stage (EDS). This decision was reached during the Exploration Systems Architecture Study and confirmed after the Exploration Launch Projects Office performed a variety of risk analyses, commonality assessments, and trade studies. This paper narrates the evolution of that decision; describes the performance capabilities expected of the J-2X design, including potential commonality challenges and opportunities between the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles; and provides a current status of J-2X design, development, and hardware testing activities. This paper also explains how the J-2X engine effort mitigates risk by testing existing engine hardware and designs; building on the Apollo Program (1961 to 1975), the Space Shuttle Program (1972 to 2010); and consulting with Apollo era experts to derive other lessons learned to deliver a human-rated engine that is on an aggressive development schedule, with its first demonstration flight in 2012.

Greene, WIlliam↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Next Generation Marshall Grazing Incidence X-Ray Spectrometer (MaGIXS) Sounding Rocket Experiments

The Marshall Grazing Incidence X-ray Spectrometer (MaGIXS) is a sounding rocket experiment that carries an X-ray slitless imaging spectrograph to observe spectrally dispersed soft X-ray (SXR) images of the solar corona over a wide field-of-view. The first flight of MaGIXS occurred on 30 July 2021, during which several emission lines from coronal structures including X-ray bright points were observed. Analysis of MaGIXS-1 data demonstrated the application of new inversion techniques and opened a new arena of inverting complex spectroheliogram data, which has spatial-spectral information overlapped. The second flight of MaGIXS, with a simplified optical design, is scheduled for 2024. The goal of MaGIXS-2 is to observe high temperature diagnostic emission lines within an active region core. MaGIXS-1 discovered dominant missing emission lines near 15Å wavelength region, which hosts several closely spaced satellite lines of Fe XVII, Fe XVI, and Fe XV ions, arising from relatively cool plasma that peaks near 2MK. These lines are expected to be enhanced at lower temperatures and offers one of the most unique diagnostics to measure electron temperature, as well as signatures of equilibrium state of the plasma in active regions, which has not been studied so far. The science goal of the third sounding rocket flight of MaGIXS is to determine coronal heating parameters, such as the spatial and temporal properties of coronal heating events, by measuring discriminating observations, such as electron temperature, effective temperature, density, abundance, and departures from thermal equilibrium of the plasma, by observing the Sun in the SXR wavelength range. For this, the MaGIXS instrument will be upgraded with a new X-ray telescope mirror that will provide higher spatial and spectral resolution and throughput, allowing for spectral lines to be observed at the relevant spatial and temporal scales. In addition, MaGIXS-3 will also carry The Resolving Inversion Context X-ray Spectrometer (TRICXS), a high dispersion Bragg crystal spectrometer to spectrally resolve the lines near 15Å, critical to unlock the full diagnostic potential of this wavelength range. Here we will present the preliminary concept design of MaGIXS-3 and discuss the potential observations.

X-ray Imaging↗
NASA NTRS1963

Space Flight Handbooks. Volume 3- Planetary Flight Handbook: Supplementary Trajectory Data: Venus to Earth and Mars to Earth - Part 2

Parts 2 and 3 present tabulations of trajectory data for scheduling flights to and from Venus and Mars during the period 1960-2000. Part 2 contains information for outbound flights to these planets; Part 3 contains information for trajectories returning from the planets to Earth. Each Part contains data for single-plane transfers, as well as for broken-plane transfers which employ a midcourse plane-change to eliminate the high speed "ridges." The mathematical analyses employed for all calculations are described in Part 1 of this handbook. To facilitate the construction of round-trip trajectories, the date at the target planet is held fixed while the trip duration is varied in 10-day increments from zero days to the length of that planet's synodic period with Earth. Dates of arrival at the target planet are presented in the extreme right-hand column of Part 2, and dates of departure from the target planet are presented in the extreme left-hand column of Part 3. Thus, by holding Part 2 directly to the left of Part 3, the analyst may easily and rapidly scan all trip possibilities which involve any desired stopover time at the target planet. Within approximately 200 days of each conjunction or opposition, data are presented in 10-day increments at the target planet. Only those trips are listed for which the hyperbolic excess speeds at either or both ends of the trajectory do not exceed 0.6 EMOS (Earth Mean Orbital Speed). For the remaining mission regions, the requirements are so smoothly varying that a 50-day interval in dates at the target planet may be employed; the 10-day interval in trip times is, however, preserved here. In these regions, only those trips are listed for which either or both speeds do not exceed 0.3 EMOS.

INTERPLANETARY FLIGHT↗
NASA NTRS1963

Space Flight Handbooks. Volume 3- Planetary Flight Handbook: Supplementary Trajectory Data: Venus to Earth and Mars to Earth - Part 3

Parts 2 and 3 present tabulations of trajectory data for scheduling flights to and from Venus and Mars during the period 1960-2000. Part 2 contains information for outbound flights to these planets; Part 3 contains information for trajectories returning from the planets to Earth. Each Part contains data for single-plane transfers, as well as for broken-plane transfers which employ a midcourse plane-change to eliminate the high speed "ridges." The mathematical analyses employed for all calculations are described in Part 1 of this handbook. To facilitate the construction of round-trip trajectories, the date at the target planet is held fixed while the trip duration is varied in 10-day increments from zero days to the length of that planet's synodic period with Earth. Dates of arrival at the target planet are presented in the extreme right-hand column of Part 2, and dates of departure from the target planet are presented in the extreme left-hand column of Part 3. Thus, by holding Part 2 directly to the left of Part 3, the analyst may easily and rapidly scan all trip possibilities which involve any desired stopover time at the target planet. Within approximately 200 days of each conjunction or opposition, data are presented in 10-day increments at the target planet. Only those trips are listed for which the hyperbolic excess speeds at either or both ends of the trajectory do not exceed 0.6 EMOS (Earth Mean Orbital Speed). For the remaining mission regions, the requirements are so smoothly varying that a 50-day interval in dates at the target planet may be employed; the 10-day interval in trip times is, however, preserved here. In these regions, only those trips are listed for which either or both speeds do not exceed 0.3 EMOS.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2006

A New Heavy-Lift Capability for Space Exploration: NASA's Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is developing new launch systems in preparation for the retirement of the Space Shuttle by 2010, as directed in the United States (U.S.) Vision for Space Exploration. The Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) and the Ares V heavy-lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) systems will build upon proven, reliable hardware derived from the Apollo Saturn (1961 to 1975) and Space Shuttle (1972 to 2010) programs to deliver safe, reliable, affordable space transportation solutions. This approach leverages existing aerospace talent and a unique infrastructure, as well as the vast amount of legacy knowledge gained from almost a half-century of hard-won experience in the space enterprise. Beginning early next decade, the Ares I will launch the new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) to the International Space Station (ISS) or to low-Earth orbit for trips to the Moon and, ultimately, Mars. Late next decade, the Ares V's Earth Departure Stage will carry larger payloads such as the lunar lander into orbit, and the Crew Exploration Vehicle will dock with it for missions to the Moon, where astronauts will explore new territories and conduct science and technology experiments. Both the Ares I and Ares V systems are being designed to support longer future trips to Mars. The Exploration Launch Projects Office, located at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, is designing, developing, testing, and evaluating both launch vehicle systems in partnership with other NASA Centers, Government agencies, and industry contractors. This paper provides top-level information regarding the genesis and evolution of the baseline configuration for the Ares V heavy-lift system. It also touches on risk-based management strategies, such as building on powerful hardware and promoting common features between the Ares I and Ares V systems to reduce technical, schedule, and cost risks, as well as development and operations costs. Finally, it gives a summary of several notable accomplishments over the past year, since the Exploration Launch Projects effort officially kicked off in October 2005, and looks ahead at work planned for 2007 and beyond.

Sumrall, John P.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Simulation Activities for Evaluating UAM Concept of Operations

NASA’s vision for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) is to help emerging aviation markets to safely develop an air transportation system that moves people and cargo between places previously not served or underserved by aviation using revolutionary new aircraft types. Urban Air Mobility (UAM), the concept of expanding transportation networks by serving short flights to transport people and goods around metropolitan areas, is part of a larger paradigm shift toward AAM, in which new technologies and business models are enabling transformational applications of aviation. In NASA’s Concept of Operations for UAM, Providers of Services for UAM (PSU) play a key role to enable safe and efficient UAM operations by sharing operational data among UAM operators. PSUs provide a pre-departure strategic conflict management service that establishes operational plans for new flights and coordinates them with all relevant operations in shared airspace. The strategic conflict management aims to minimize the need for tactical separation provision, while considering anticipated traffic demand, vertiport capacity and availability, forecasted weather, and airspace restrictions. NASA is currently preparing a new lab evaluation activity with aviation industry partners, called the X4 simulation, to demonstrate their airspace services and capabilities and test new information exchange requirements for UAM operations. This simulation activity will support NASA’s National Campaign (NC) flight tests which are planned over the next several years to guide the collective community and stakeholders through a series of scenario-based test activities that involve vehicles and airspace management services operating in a live test environment. This presentation will provide an overview of the X4 simulation, including objectives, scenarios, assumptions, system architecture, and test schedule. The X4 simulation will evaluate the interconnectivity and operational intent sharing between PSUs for multiple operators, as well as the performance of strategic conflict management.

Urban Air Mobility, Simulation, Advanced Air Mobil↗
NASA NTRS2010

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

The NASA/industry team responsible for developing the J-2X Upper Stage Engine for the Constellation Program's Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles has made significant progress toward moving the design from paper to production during the past year. The J-2X exemplifies the Constellation goal of using proven technology and experience from more than 50 years of United States spaceflight experience and seeking where possible to employ common hardware in the Ares I crew launch vehicle and the Ares V cargo launch vehicle. The J-2X will power the Ares I upper stage to place the Orion crew vehicle in orbit. For the Ares V, the J-2X will place the Earth departure stage (EDS) and lunar lander in orbit and later re-start to send the Orion and lander to the Moon. Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) is under contract to develop and produce the engine, leveraging its flight-proven LH2/LOX, gas generator cycle J-2 and RS-68 engine capabilities, recent experience with the X-33 aerospike XRS-2200 engine, and development knowledge of the J-2S tap-off cycle engine. The J-2X employs a gas generator operating cycle designed to produce 294,000 pounds of thrust in primary operating mode for the Ares I and Ares V ascent phases. It also has a secondary mode, during which it operates at 80 percent thrust by altering its mixture ratio to perform the TLI burn for the Ares V lunar sortie and lunar cargo missions. The J-2X development philosophy is based on proven hardware, an aggressive development schedule, and early risk reduction. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and PWR began development of the J-2X in June 2006. The government/industry team of more than 600 people within NASA and PWR successfully completed the Critical Design Review (CDR) in November 2008, following extensive risk mitigation testing. The team is working toward a first flight of the J-2X on the Orion 1 mission in 2014. This paper will discuss the J-2X development background and provide top-level information on design and testing to date. Details will be provided on overcoming challenges such as gas generator instability, turbine blade life, and nozzle extension selection and materials.

Kynard, Mike↗
NASA NTRS2011

Qualification of Electrical Ground Support Equipment for New Space Programs

With the Space Shuttle program coming to an end, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is moving to a new space flight program that will allow expeditions beyond low earth orbit. The space vehicles required to comply with these missions will be carrying heavy payloads. This implies that the Earth departure stage capabilities must be of higher magnitudes, given the current propulsion technology. The engineering design of the new flight hardware comes with some structural, thermal, propulsion and other subsystems' challenges. Meanwhile, the necessary ground support equipment (GSE) used to test, validate, verify and process the flight hardware must withstand the new program specifications. This paper intends to provide the qualification considerations during implementation of new electrical GSE for space programs. A team of engineers was formed to embark on this task, and facilitate the logistics process and ensure that the electrical, mechanical and fluids subsystems conduct the proper level of testing. Ultimately, each subsystem must certify that each piece of ground support equipment used in the field is capable of withstanding the strenuous vibration, acoustics, environmental, thermal and Electromagnetic Interference (EMf) levels experienced during pre-launch, launch and post-launch activities. The benefits of capturing and sharing these findings will provide technical, cost savings and schedule impacts infon11ation to both the technical and management community. Keywords: Qualification; Testing; Ground Support Equipment; Electromagnetic Interference Testing; Vibration Testing; Acoustic Testing; Power Spectral Density.

SotoToro, Felix A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

CropManage Application for Vineyard Irrigation Decision-Support

CropManage is a free web-application developed by U.C. Cooperative Extension to support evapotranspiration based irrigation scheduling and nutrient management for major specialty crops. Prescribed phenology curves are used to develop daily estimates of canopy cover within a given field, based on days since planting (annual crops) or budbreak (trees, vines). These curves are modulated by a MaxCan parameter representing seasonal maximum canopy cover. Crop development observations can be used to adjust for such factors as weather anomalies or non-standard agronomic practice, as needed. Canopy cover is converted to crop coefficient and combined with reference evapotranspiration to derive daily water consumption. Guidance on crop water requirement is then conveyed to users in terms of system runtime issued on-demand for a given date, largely based on total evapotranspiration since last irrigation event. In this study, CropManage was adapted to vineyards by adding modules accounting for early-season soil moisture depletion and cover crop presence. A crop stress parameter was added to accommodate deficit irrigation practice, allowing the user to specify percentage departure from full water requirement along with start/stop dates. An initial verification exercise was performed on three winegrape vineyards located in California’s Central Coast (2020), North Coast (2020) and Central Valley (2019). Daily crop evapotranspiration was monitored by eddy-covariance fluxtowers. MaxCan was measured by ground and satellite observation. Stress regime was specified by grower practice where available, otherwise stress levels were inferred from applied water records. Mean absolute error and mean bias error of modeled cumulative evapotranspiration were computed with respect to the eddy covariance measurements collected throughout the growing season. Results indicate the modified CropManage water management module performs reasonably well for winegrape. Additional effort is planned to modify the nutrient module for vineyard use.

CropManage↗
NASA NTRS2007

Ares Launch Vehicles Overview: Space Access Society

America is returning to the Moon in preparation for the first human footprint on Mars, guided by the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration. This presentation will discuss NASA's mission, the reasons for returning to the Moon and going to Mars, and how NASA will accomplish that mission in ways that promote leadership in space and economic expansion on the new frontier. The primary goals of the Vision for Space Exploration are to finish the International Space Station, retire the Space Shuttle, and build the new spacecraft needed to return people to the Moon and go to Mars. The Vision commits NASA and the nation to an agenda of exploration that also includes robotic exploration and technology development, while building on lessons learned over 50 years of hard-won experience. NASA is building on common hardware, shared knowledge, and unique experience derived from the Apollo Saturn, Space Shuttle, and contemporary commercial launch vehicle programs. The journeys to the Moon and Mars will require a variety of vehicles, including the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, which transports the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle, which transports the Lunar Surface Access Module. The architecture for the lunar missions will use one launch to ferry the crew into orbit, where it will rendezvous with the Lunar Module in the Earth Departure Stage, which will then propel the combination into lunar orbit. The imperative to explore space with the combination of astronauts and robots will be the impetus for inventions such as solar power and water and waste recycling. This next chapter in NASA's history promises to write the next chapter in American history, as well. It will require this nation to provide the talent to develop tools, machines, materials, processes, technologies, and capabilities that can benefit nearly all aspects of life on Earth. Roles and responsibilities are shared between a nationwide Government and industry team. The Exploration Launch Projects Office at the Marshall Space Flight Center manages the design, development, testing, and evaluation of both vehicles and serves as lead systems integrator. A little over a year after it was chartered, the Exploration Launch Projects team is testing engine components, refining vehicle designs, performing wind tunnel tests, and building hardware for the first flight test of Ares I-X, scheduled for spring 2009. The Exploration Launch Projects team conducted the Ares I System Requirements Review (SRR) at the end of 2006. In Ares' first year, extensive trade studies and evaluations were conducted to refine the design initially recommended by the Exploration Systems Architecture Study, conceptual designs were analyzed for fitness, and the contractual framework was assembled to enable a development effort unparalleled in American space flight since the Space Shuttle. Now, the project turns its focus to the Preliminary Design Review (PDR), scheduled for 2008. Taking into consideration the findings of the SRR, the design of the Ares I is being tightened and refined to meet the safety, operability, reliability, and affordability goals outlined by the Constellation Program. The Ares V is in the early design stage, focusing its activities on requirements validation and ways to develop this heavy-lift system so that synergistic hardware commonality between it and the Ares I can reduce the operational footprint and foster sustained exploration across the decades ahead.

Cook, Steve↗
NASA NTRS2007

Human Space Exploration: The Moon, Mars, and Beyond

America is returning to the Moon in preparation for the first human footprint on Mars, guided by the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration. This presentation will discuss NASA's mission, the reasons for returning to the Moon and going to Mars, and how NASA will accomplish that mission in ways that promote leadership in space and economic expansion on the new frontier. The primary goals of the Vision for Space Exploration are to finish the International Space Station, retire the Space Shuttle, and build the new spacecraft needed, to return people to the Moon and go to Mars. The Vision commits NASA and the nation to an agenda of exploration that also includes robotic exploration and technology development, while building on lessons learned over 50 years of hard-won experience. Why the Moon? Many questions about the Moon's potential resources and how its history is linked to that of Earth were spurred by the brief Apollo explorations of the 1960s and 1970s. This new venture will carry more explorers to more diverse landing sites with more capable tools and equipment for extended expeditions. The Moon also will serve as a training ground before embarking on the longer, more difficult trip to Mars. NASA plans to build a lunar outpost at one of the lunar poles, learn to live off the land, and reduce dePendence on Earth for longer missions. America needs to extend its ability to survive in hostile environments close to our home planet before astronauts will reach Mars, a planet very much like Earth. NASA has worked with scientists to define lunar exploration goals and is addressing the opportunities for a range of scientific study on Mars. In order to reach the Moon and Mars within a lifetime and within budget, NASA is building on common hardware, shared knowledge, and unique experience derived from the Apollo Saturn, Space Shuttle and contemporary commercial launch vehicle programs. The journeys to the Moon and Mars will require a variety of vehicles, including the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, which transports the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle, which transports the Lunar Surface Access Module. The architecture for the lunar missions will use one launch to ferry the crew into orbit, where it will rendezvous with the Lunar Module in the Earth Departure Stage, which will then propel the combination into lunar orbit. The imperative to explore space with the combination of astronauts and robots will be the impetus for inventions such as solar power and water and waste recycling. This next chapter in NASA's history promises to write the next chapter in American history, as well. It will require this nation to provide the talent to develop tools, machines, materials, processes, technologies, and capabilities that can benefit nearly all aspects of life on Earth. Roles and responsibilities are shared between a nationwide Government and industry team. The Exploration Launch Projects Office at the Marshall Space Flight Center manages the design, development, testing, and evaluation of both vehicles and serves as lead systems integrator. A little over a year after it was chartered, the Exploration Launch Projects team is testing engine components, refining vehicle designs, performing wind tunnel tests, and building hardware for the first flight test of Ares I-l, scheduled for spring 2009. The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration lays out a roadmap for a long-term venture of discovery. This endeavor will inspire and attract the best and brightest students to power this nation successfully to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. If one equates the value proposition for space with simple dollars and cents, the potential of the new space economy is tremendous, from orbital space delivery services for the International Space Station to mining and solar energy collection on the Moon and asteroids. The Vision for Space Exploration is fundamentally about bringing the resources of the solar system within the economic sphere of humaind. Given the immense size of our solar system, the amount of available material and energy within it present an enormous economic opportunity.

Sexton, Jeffrey D.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of an Automated System for Arrival Traffic Management

The fuel-efficiencies of arrival flights that were managed by an automated system were compared to the fuel-efficiencies of arrival flights that were managed by air traffic controllers. It was infeasible to have the automated system control arrivals in real operations, so the comparison was accomplished by setting up a fast-time simulation where the automated system could manage arrivals with the same initial conditions and flight plans as those that operated in real operations during a selected comparison period and in the same background traffic. For this study, Newark Liberty International Airport was selected as the arrival airport because its high traffic load and constrained arrival procedures were expected to highlight fuel-efficiency benefits of an automated system. In the simulation, the automated system managed Newark arrivals, and the other flights (arrivals to other airports, departures, and overflights) composed the background traffic. To match the simulation and the real operations background traffic, the other flights flew in simulation the same trajectory that they flew in real operations during the comparison period. Fuel-efficiency was measured by calculating fuel burns of the arrival trajectories. The fuel-efficiencies of arrival trajectories produced in the simulation were compared with the estimated fuel-efficiencies of arrival trajectories recorded from real operations during the comparison period. Results showed that automation managed arrivals burned 346 lbs less fuel per flight on average than controller managed arrivals.

air traffic control↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of an Automated System for Arrival Traffic Management

The fuel-efficiencies of arrival flights that were managed by an automated system were compared to the fuel-efficiencies of arrival flights that were managed by air traffic controllers. It was infeasible to have the automated system control arrivals in real operations, so the comparison was accomplished by setting up a fast-time simulation where the automated system could manage arrivals with the same initial conditions and flight plans as those that operated in real operations during a selected comparison period and in the same background traffic. For this study, Newark Liberty International Airport was selected as the arrival airport because its high traffic load and constrained arrival procedures were expected to highlight fuel-efficiency benefits of an automated system. In the simulation, the automated system managed Newark arrivals, and the other flights (arrivals to other airports, departures, and overflights) composed the background traffic. To match the simulation and the real operations background traffic, the other flights flew in simulation the same trajectory that they flew in real operations during the comparison period. Fuel-efficiency was measured by calculating fuel burns of the arrival trajectories. The fuel-efficiencies of arrival trajectories produced in the simulation were compared with the estimated fuel-efficiencies of arrival trajectories recorded from real operations during the comparison period. Results showed that automation managed arrivals burned 346 lbs less fuel per flight on average than controller managed arrivals.

air traffic control↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Machine Learning Approach to Improve Air Traffic Management Initiatives

Collaborating closely with commercial air carriers and related organizations, the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA) regulates air traffic and ensures the safety and efficiency of air operations. Air traffic controllers make strategic decisions, such as delaying, rerouting, or canceling flights, partly based on guidance provided by the FAA’s Air TrafficControl System Command Center (ATCSCC). The guidance includes, among other things, control measures known asTraffic Management Initiatives (TMIs) designed to enhance safety and improve operational efficiency. TMIs play a crucial role in managing the demand and capacity within the U.S. National Airspace System (NAS). Two major TMIs that are routinely used (primarily to mitigate the adverse effects of bad weather) are Ground Delay Programs (GDPs) andGround Stops (GSs). In a GDP, flights destined for airports facing thunderstorm activity experience delays at their origin airports. This proactive approach minimizes the risk of routing aircraft through hazardous weather conditions and also replaces (fuel burning) airborne delays with ground delays. In a GS, a temporary restriction is imposed on the departure or arrival of aircraft at a specific airport or within a designated airspace. Although other TMIs (e.g., miles-in-trail) are also implemented as part of (air) traffic flow management in the NAS, the focus of this work is on GDPs and GSs. Since TMIs, by design, lead to flight delays or cancellations, it is crucial to put in place the right set of parameters(e.g., scope and duration of the GDP). For example, when the end time of a GDP extends beyond what is necessary, it imposes unnecessary delays on departing flights. This situation could occur as a result of inaccurate prediction of the(required) duration of the GDP based on the weather forecast. On the other hand, if a GDP ends prematurely before the underlying capacity constraints are resolved at the destination airport, it may result in airborne holding. The delicate balance lies in matching the termination of the GDP precisely with the resolution of capacity constraints, avoiding both the imposition of unnecessary ground delays and the need for airborne holding due to premature program termination.Failing to specify the right parameters for TMIs also leads to flight delays, creating a significant obstacle in managing the increasing traffic volumes causing increased work load for the controllers. To address this issue, we propose the integration of Machine Learning (ML) models in the traffic flow management(TFM) pipeline. In current operations, decisions are made by human experts based on extensive training, historical patterns, available traffic and weather data. Since we have an abundance of data from past events that tell us the likely impact of various TMIs, by ingesting historical data, properly trained ML models can offer valuable insights and aid human decision-making. With the FAA increasingly exploring advanced analytics, ML emerges as a focal point for enhancing TFM within the National Airspace System (NAS). As a first step, this study aims to provide traffic controllers with decision-making support for the issuance and adjustment of TMIs. Data analytics and machine learning have been previously employed to address some of the challenges associated with TMIs. Numerous studies have concentrated on various facets of TMI issuance, exploring factors influencing TMI parameters, including arrival rate, airport capacity, and delay prediction. For example, using weather forecasts, several statistical methods were used to produce probabilistic capacity profiles which in conjunction with deterministic models provided insights into the GDP planning process [1–4]. The downside of using deterministic models is that they rely on fixed inputs and predetermined rules, which lack the ability to account for the inherent uncertainty and variability present in real-world scenarios. In a separate series of studies, researchers aimed to predict the occurrences of GDPs and GSs. The majority of these studies utilized various supervised learning methods, including Decision Trees, Naive Bayes, Support VectorMachines, and Random Forests to analyze the influence of weather conditions and arrival demand on TMI incidents[5–8]. However, these studies primarily focused on predicting the incidence of TMIs without explicitly addressing the scope of TMIs, including their duration and their geographical coverage. Furthermore, the emphasis of these studies was largely on GDPs, given their higher frequency and longer duration when compared to GSs. A limited number of studies focused on predicting the parameters of TMIs, specifically addressing their duration and extent. In one such study focusing on optimizing the TMI parameters at San Francisco International Airport (SFO),the authors utilized a probabilistic forecast of fog [9]. They simulated various capacity scenarios based on the (fog)burn-off forecasts, selecting GDP parameters that minimized airborne and overall ground delays. However, this approach exclusively emphasizes stratus (fog) burn-off as the primary determinant of GDP and GS, neglecting other influential factors like severe weather events, runway closures, lower capacity than traffic demand, and other important variables. Given the complexity of predicting the TMI and determining its scope, we seek a more holistic approach. We aim to consider all significant factors that could impact TMIs and their parameters. What sets this research apart is the fusion of all data sources relevant to the issuance and adjustment of TMIs and it represents the first comprehensive attempt to optimize TMIs in this manner. Since this comprehensive solution involves various aspects, we break down the problem into smaller components and input all parameters into a unified model called the “TMI Adjuster”. Figure 1 shows the overall framework and the list of datasets used in each model. The objective of the TMI Adjuster module is to deliver reliable, consistent and expedited recommendations for the progression, adjustment, and termination of TMIs. The ML solution entails developing a pipeline capable of predicting the necessity of a TMI (e.g., GS or GDP) along with its various parameters. For example, in the case of a GS, this includes the scope of the GS either in terms of distance from the destination airport or based on pre-defined airspace sectors. Here, scope refers to those regions and departing airports that are subject to the GS. In this paper, we concentrate on the issuance of GSs in the three major airports in the New York area — LaGuardia(LGA), John F. Kennedy International (JFK), and Newark Liberty International (EWR). We fuse traffic, weather and other relevant aviation data from years 2017 to 2019 to train and validate the ML models. In particular, we use the following datasets: •Terminal Aerodrome Forecast (TAF): meteorological forecasts specific to each airport, issued four times a day, covering predefined time periods. •TMI data: includes all GSs and GDPs along with their respective parameters. •Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM): includes traffic related data such as aircraft delays, arrival, and departure rates. •Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs): utilized to extract runway closure data and manage interdependencies between terminals in close proximity. •Flight cancellation data •Airspace Flow Programs (AFP): includes information on flight airborne holdings caused by TMIs. The data preprocessing entails transforming ASPM, TMI, AFP, NOTAMs, and weather data into an hourly format and consolidating all datasets by merging them based on date and time as the primary key. The TMI Adjuster framework comprises two parallel models: one dedicated to GS and a second model focused on GDP. As previously mentioned, our specific focus is on the GS model as a multi-classification problem. In this framework, each data point of the GS model input summarizes ten hours of data. Specifically, the data loader for the GS model generates the input and output of the model as follows: at a given time step, the input includes the actual traffic, weather, and TMI data from the two-hour window before the time step, alongside the weather forecast and scheduled traffic for the next 8 hours starting from the time step. Based on this information, the output of the GS model for each time interval consists of three dimensions. The first dimension represents a binary decision on whether there should be a GS in place for the next hour or not. The second dimension is related to the scope of the GS in the United States, and the third dimension is related to the scope of the GS in Canada (i.e., to determine if the GS impacts airports in Canada).One of the challenges with TMI modeling is the sparsity of TMI events, particularly regarding its scope. To address this challenge in the scope of the GS model output, we implement grouping. The GS scope for the US region is defined based on a list of centers that should be included when the GS is in place. With 20 centers in the US, we utilized historical data to group them into 4 categories. In particular, we summarized our historical data in a graph format where nodes represent centers, and link weights are defined based on the co-occurrence of centers in the scope parameter ofTMIs. By identified strongly connected components in this graph, we were able to partition the centers into four groups. We consider two model structures for the GS Model. Firstly, a hierarchical classification model [10], where the human decision-making for a GS is of hierarchical nature. The decision-maker first decides whether there is a need fora GS, and if the answer is yes, determines the scope. A hierarchical classification model organizes the problem into a class hierarchy, typically a tree or a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) structure, and considers the dependency of the decision in the previous step to the next component [10]. Here, we employ the local classifier per level approach, which involves training one multi-class classifier for each level of the class hierarchy. The second structure is the independent structure. In this setting, as the name suggests, we do not consider the dependency of the decisions in the different dimensions of the output of the model. Instead, for each dimension, we train a multi-class classifier independently. Table 1 summarizes GS model statistics for training, validation and testing. The table documents the effect of limiting data to the time steps when there was actually a TMI in place or when a TMI had just terminated. This resulted in a more balanced distribution of the GS class(GS positive class)versus “No GS”(GS negative class), which might help the training process. While JFK and LGA follow very similar distributions, with 40% and 42% GS positive class respectively, EWR has proportionally fewer GS incidents at 28%. Our subsequent phase involves evaluating the performance of both hierarchical structure and independent structure using different state-of-the-art multi-class classifier models such as Random Forest, Decision Trees, K-nearest Neighbors, and Logistic Regression and forecast the duration and scope of the GSs.

Farzan Masrour Shalmani↗