Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “mission management”

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 271 records · Page 15

Overview of Intelligent Power Controller Development for Human Deep Space Exploration

Intelligent or autonomous control of an entire spacecraft is a major technology that must be developed to enable NASA to meet its human exploration goals. NASA's current long term human space platform, the International Space Station, is in low Earth orbit with almost continuous communication with the ground based mission control. This permits the near real-time control by the ground of all of the core systems including power. As NASA moves beyond low Earth orbit, the issues of communication time-lag and lack of communication bandwidth beyond geosynchronous orbit does not permit this type of operation. This paper presents the work currently ongoing at NASA to develop an architecture for an autonomous power control system as well as the effort to assemble that controller into the framework of the vehicle mission manager and other subsystem controllers to enable autonomous control of the complete spacecraft. Due to the common problems faced in both space power systems and terrestrial power system, the potential for spin-off applications of this technology for use in micro-grids located at the edge or user end of terrestrial power grids for peak power accommodation and reliability are described.

Space Flight↗

Transformational Autonomy and Personal Transportation: Synergies and Differences Between Cars and Planes

Highly automated cars have undergone tremendous investment and progress over the past ten years with speculation about fully-driverless cars within the foreseeable, or even near future, becoming common. If a driverless future is realized, what might be the impact on personal aviation? Would self-piloting airplanes be a relatively simple spin-off, possibly making travel by personal aircraft also commonplace? What if the technology for completely removing human drivers turns out to be further in the future rather than sooner; would such a delay suggest that transformational personal aviation is also somewhere over the horizon or can transformation be achieved with less than full automation? This paper presents a preliminary exploration of these questions by comparing the operational, functional, and implementation requirements and constraints of cars and small aircraft for on-demand mobility. In general, we predict that the mission management and perception requirements of self-piloting aircraft differ significantly from self-driving cars and requires the development of aviation specific technologies. We also predict that the highly-reliable control and system automation technology developed for conditionally and highly automated cars can have a significant beneficial effect on personal aviation, even if full automation is not immediately feasible.

Goodrich, Kenneth H.↗

Potential Improvements to the Nuclear Safety and Launch Approval Process for Nuclear Reactors Utilized for Space Power and Propulsion Applications

This study examines potential improvements that could be made to the nuclear safety and launch approval process for fission reactors to reduce the associated uncertainties in cost and schedule while continuing to ensure public safety and environmental protection. It concentrates on the launch approval and mission safety of fission power and propulsion applications of nuclear energy. Improvements to the launch approval process for radioisotope power systems (RPSs) are being considered elsewhere but are acknowledged throughout the report. The study considered technical, process, and organizational improvements to the launch approval processes. The study exclusively evaluated reactors that would not be started up prior to achieving a “sufficiently high orbit,” per United Nations (UN) Resolution 47/68.Potential criticality accidents were considered that could occur during a launch failure or abort or during reentry. Numerous scenarios were examined that might involve one or more Earth flybys as well as potential transportation missions that could intentionally return an active, or previously active fission reactor to Earth orbit. The Study Group was guided in its deliberations according to a number of fundamental principles. These included the paramount importance of adequate and appropriate levels of public safety and environmental protection as well as the importance of the inclusion of independent scientific, engineering, and safety reviews of the applications and proposals as a critical part of the process. Also considered was the need for the development of launch approval processes that might be different, depending upon the source of the application for launch approval, whether it be derived as a governmental launch, a commercial launch, or a hybrid/combination of the two. It is clear that all launches of nuclear reactors into space should have similar safety requirements; however, the safety review effort and the details of the analysis that are required should be commensurate with the potential hazards and the actual risk, which may differ based on the reactor design and its intended purpose. Finally, the study aimed at ensuring that whatever processes and procedures are developed should maximize the sufficiency, simplicity, and transparency of the processes. The Study Group reached five Conclusions and makes thirteen Recommendations. The Conclusions and Recommendations presented here are extensions of those presented previously in other studies. This report attempts to add specificity to the actions that need to be taken in order to move forward with successful space fission reactor programs. Without action to address the perceived and real problems in the launch approval process, designers and mission managers will be reluctant to commit the resources necessary to make space fission reactors a reality.

Camp, Allen↗

NASA Undergraduate Student Instrument (USIP) Project--Lessons Learned

NASA offers real-world experiences, with the goal of developing students’ skills and capabilities in science, technology, engineering and math, skills critical to building a STEM-literate workforce and achieving the nation's exploration goals. In 2016, the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and the Office of Education National Space Grant Program (OE Space Grant) awarded $8 million through the Undergraduate Student Instrument Project (USIP) to 47 student teams to conduct hands-on research with 23 of the projects being CubeSat projects. The USIP student teams proposed science or technology experiments that are relevant to NASA missions, and the platform to fly their payload. The platforms include sounding rockets, scientific and hand-held balloons, aircraft, suborbital reusable and commercial launch vehicles, and CubeSats launched as a secondary payload on an orbital vehicle. The mission management for USIP was the responsibility of NASA Goddard Space Flight Centers Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) in Virginia. The university faculty supporting USIP attest to the benefits students are receiving in the hands-on aspects of the projects, as well as the real-world problem resolution. The USIP university teams are receiving an authentic NASA educational experience that will encourage the students to be part of NASA’s or the Nations’ future workforce and leaders.

Winterton, Joyce L.↗

EVA Swab Kit: Tools and Techniques for Collecting Aseptic Samples from Crewed Space Missions

Introduction: When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed spacecraft meet planetary protection requirements—and to protect our science from human contamination—we'll need to assess and verify whether micro-organisms may be leaking/venting from our spacesuits. This requires collecting samples under Extravehicular Activity (EVA) conditions. Detailed, systematic research on forward contamination from robotic spacecraft has been steadily progressing since the Viking missions, but systematic studies of contamination from space suits has not been conducted in many years. The modern EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) suit used by NASA is designed to leak at rates as high as 100 cc/min. Before humans land on Mars there is a critical need to understand the types and quantities of microbes that could be introduced via space suits. The Human Forward Contamination Assessment team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) has developed a prototype EVA swab tool [1,2,3,4] designed for use in space to sample cleaned and uncleaned space suits to determine the present day microbial load and eventually the rate of leakage. The ability to assess microbial leakage early in advanced space suit and life support system design cycles will help avoid costly hardware redesign later. Test Objectives: The primary objective of EMU testing was to characterize the type of micro-organisms typically found on or near selected suit pressure joints under suit differential pressure conditions. Most human-borne microbes can fit through a 0.5 to 1.0 µm gap. Knowing which joints are more likely to leak will inform hardware design decisions. Knowing which types of micro-organisms may leak from EVA suits provides a basis for subsequent studies to characterize the viability of those organisms under destination conditions, as well as how far they might spread through natural or human-influenced processes. That data, in turn, will inform exploration mission operations and hardware design. The secondary objective of testing was to evaluate the interface between a fully suited test subject and the EVA swab tool at vacuum. Bulky EVA suits can restrict movement and limit visibility through the helmet visor. Fully suited testing is important for identifying tool design issues prior to flight. At exploration destinations, such as Mars, suited crew may be required to periodically sample their suits as part of an environmental monitoring protocol. Suit Microbial Sampling Results: This report details results of microbial swabs collected from current flight suit configurations worn by crew members assigned to upcoming ISS expedition missions as well as swabs collected from prototype suits intended for use on the Orion spacecraft. These tests were intended to characterize the types of contaminants found on flight suits under current, typical handling conditions. No attempt was made to change suit handling procedures, provide additional sterilization, or to limit typical potential contaminant sources. Using culture based techniques, we cultivated 235 CFU (colony forming units) comprised of 26 bacterial species and one fungal species on the outside of the suits. The fungal species and 14 of the bacterial species were unique to the suit surfaces and were not detected in any of the background samples collected within the chambers. We sequenced 755,434 ribosomal fragments on all of the suit surfaces from swab samples. 557,016 of these sequences represent DNA that survived at least 4 hours at vacuum. These sequences formed 2,464 OTU's (Operational Taxonomic Units, 97% similarity) showing low diversity in the samples. The most abundant sequences that survived vacuum belong to the genera Staphyloccocus, Ralstona, Bacillus and Rhodobacter all of which are common to the human microbiome. [5] See Danko et al., (2021) for more complete details of these first analyses. Further analysis of EVA suit materials with respect to the efficacy of various cleaning protocols and engineered containment solutions is planned to inform suit design for NASA’s Artemis Moon to Mars program crew testing. Swab Tool Function Results: The kit was demonstrated for fit and function in suited subject vacuum tests to determine how well the tool worked as an aseptic microbial sampling device as well as to identify any design elements that could be upgraded for EVA task specific improvement. It was found that sample acquisition efficacy could be enhanced by redesign of the sample canister to end-effector interface. Several modifications of the sample caddy assemblies to optimize EVA safety and functionality were also identified. Consequently, fabrication of the redesigned sample canister to end-effector assembly interfaces and and the sample caddy assemblies are required. Fabrication of sixteen flight sample canister assemblies (8 per each of two EVA Swab Kits) and two sample caddy assemblies are in process to be followed by hardware testing and certification to produce two flight-certified EVA Swab Kits for transport to ISS no earlier than summer of 2022. Sampling Strategy: The International Space Station is an ideal testbed for systematic studies of contamination from crewed vehicles since it has been continuously occupied for 20 years and exposed to non-terrestrial conditions. We will sample the exterior of the ISS during EVA using a purpose-built swab tool capable of maintaining sterility while undergoing temperature changes from -151 to +121°C under hard vacuum. Prior to each EVA, the project team will work with ISS mission managers to identify precise sampling locations, which will vary by EVA based on the translation paths and worksites scheduled for that particular EVA. Ideally, translation path handrails and areas near ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System) external vent openings on a spacecraft would be assessed. There are currently more than a dozen ECLSS external vents on the ISS. Some are connected to systems that vent waste products, while others are intended to equalize cabin pressure. As EVA opportunity allows, microbial samples from any of these external vents would provide a valuable data point, though some will be more useful than others. Four criteria have been identified to help prioritize sampling sites near vents: • EVA Accessibility: To minimize cost, it is desired to piggy-back onto a planned EVA. Therefore, the sampling location must be readily accessible by an EVA crew • Type of Vented Products: Vent products that have been in direct contact with crew, such as cabin air, are more likely to contain microorganisms than vent products associated with isolated systems, such as experiment module combustion products. • Mass of Vented Products: Higher-flow vents are more likely to contain detectible levels of microbial contaminants than lower-flow vents. • Local Environment: Sample locations with relatively benign local conditions, such as warm surfaces shielded from direct ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure, may be more likely to support microbial growth than locations with harsher local environmental conditions. Because EVA accessibility is the most important criteria, the proposal team worked with an astronaut and flight controllers using the Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics (DOUG) tool. The DOUG virtual environment allows an operator to “fly” around the current ISS vehicle configuration to assess EVA translation paths, attach points, and keep-out zones. While analysis on station or rapid return to Earth would be preferable, samples collected from the exterior of the ISS have already been exposed to temperature variations between -157 and +121 °C as well as hard vacuum. Therefore, they should be fairly stable and robust. We hypothesize that samples collected from the ISS exterior could be stored for up to 6 months at -80°C without degradation. Sample canisters will be returned to Earth while frozen at -80°C for analysis, and sterilized canisters can be re-flown back to ISS to support additional sampling opportunities Relevance to NASA Exploration Objectives: These data will allow us to identify new or improved methods, technologies, and procedures for spacecraft sterilization and leakage mitigation to minimize the amount of contamination introduced to the environment by human explorers. This work is funded by NASA research grant: NNH18ZDA001N-PPR References: [1] Bell, M.S. et al. (2015) LPS XLVI, Abst. #1832 [2] Rucker et al. (2018) 42nd COSPAR (PPP.3) [3] Bell, M.S. et al. (2019) Mars Extant Life Conference, Abst. #5096.[4] Bell, M.S. et al., (2020) 43rd COSPAR (BO.2).[5] Danko D, et.al.,(2021)Front.Microbiol.12:608478.

Mary Suzanne Bell↗

NASA Astrophysics Division Technology Heritage Study

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Astrophysics Division (APD) funds and manages missions and studies that seek to broaden our understanding of our place in the universe. These science missions are enabled by technologies developed through APD’s technology development programs. APD has funded approximately seven different technology development programs over the last ten years which support basic research and target varying Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs). The funding has targeted technology for future space flight experiments as well as suborbital science investigations. To understand the overall impact of APD’s investment on astrophysics technology advancement through their grants and contracts, APD engaged The Aerospace Corporation to conduct an independent, comprehensive Astrophysics Technology Heritage Study. The study was conducted in the 2021-2022 timeframe, first focusing priority on infusion of competed grants and general trends, followed by directed grants and further trend analysis and technology characterization. The study included three major components: a grants database, a missions database, and a survey of Principal Investigators (PIs). The study found that APD grants and contracts fund a healthy portfolio of technologies that resulted in an overall 62% infusion rate, as suborbital missions provide ample science and technology maturation and platform transition opportunities. Within the 62% of infused grants, 12% were infused into space missions and another 31% were suborbital. The study also looked at various other characteristics of the grant awards including the organizations they were awarded to and award trends by PI. Technology focus areas and detector types were also investigated, as well as technology platform transitions from on mission environment (e.g., suborbital to space). Additional feedback from PIs was also requested and evaluated including alternative benefits of grants and reasons development did, or did not, succeed.

NASA↗

Management experience of an international venture in space The Ulysses mission

The management of the Ulysses project, a probe which will fly a solar polar orbit, is described. The 5-yr mission will feature a flyby of Jupiter to deflect the spacecraft into a high-inclination orbit. Data on the solar corona, solar wind, the sun-wind interface, the heliospheric magnetic field, solar and nonsolar cosmic rays, etc., will be gathered as a function of the solar latitude. NASA will track and control the probe with the Deep Space Network. JPL provides project management for NASA while the Directorate of Scientific Programs performs ESA management functions. The DOE will provide a radioisotope thermoelectric generator while NASA and ESA each supply half the scientific payload. A NASA-ESA Joint Working Group meets about twice per year to monitor the project and discuss the technical and scientific requirements. Safety issues and measures which are being addressed due to the presence of the Pu-238 heat source for the RTG are discussed.

Yoshida, Ronald Y.↗

Charting the Course: Life Cycle Management of Mars Mission Digital Information

This viewgraph presentation reviews the life cycle management of MER Project information. This process was an essential key to the successful launch of the MER Project rovers. Incorporating digital information archive requirements early in the project life cycle resulted in: Design of an information system that included archive metadata, Reduced the risk of information loss through in-process appraisal, Easier transfer of project information to institutional online archive and Project appreciation for preserving information for reuse by future projects

information life cycles↗

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗

Safety and Mission Assurance Knowledge Management Retention

This viewgraph presentation reviews the issues surrounding the management of knowledge in regards to safety and mission assurance. The JSC workers who were hired in the 1960's are slated to retire in the next two to three years. The experiences and knowledge of these NASA workers must be identified, and disseminated. This paper reviews some of the strategies that the S&MA is developing to capture that valuable institutional knowledge.

Johnson, Teresa A.↗

The Faster, Better, Cheaper Approach to Space Missions: An Engineering Management Assessment

This paper describes, in viewgraph form, the faster, better, cheaper approach to space missions. The topics include: 1) What drives "Faster, Better, Cheaper"? 2) Why Space Programs are Costly; 3) Background; 4) Aerospace Project Management (Old Culture); 5) Aerospace Project Management (New Culture); 6) Scope of Analysis Limited to Engineering Management Culture; 7) Qualitative Analysis; 8) Some Basic Principles of the New Culture; 9) Cause and Effect; 10) "New Ways of Doing Business" Survey Results; 11) Quantitative Analysis; 12) Recent Space System Cost Trends; 13) Spacecraft Dry Weight Trend; 14) Complexity Factor Trends; 15) Cost Normalization; 16) Cost Normalization Algorithm; 17) Unnormalized Cost vs. Normalized Cost; and 18) Concluding Observations.

Hamaker, Joe↗

Improving Life-Cycle Cost Management of Spacecraft Missions

This presentation will explore the results of a recent NASA Life-Cycle Cost study and how project managers can use the findings and recommendations to improve planning and coordination early in the formulation cycle and avoid common pitfalls resulting in cost overruns. The typical NASA space science mission will exceed both the initial estimated and the confirmed life-cycle costs by the end of the mission. In a fixed-budget environment, these overruns translate to delays in starting or launching future missions, or in the worst case can lead to cancelled missions. Some of these overruns are due to issues outside the control of the project; others are due to the unpredictable problems (unknown unknowns) that can affect any development project. However, a recent study of life-cycle cost growth by the Discovery and New Frontiers Program Office identified a number of areas that are within the scope of project management to address. The study also found that the majority of the underlying causes for cost overruns are embedded in the project approach during the formulation and early design phases, but the actual impacts typically are not experienced until late in the project life cycle. Thus, project management focus in key areas such as integrated schedule development, management structure and contractor communications processes, heritage and technology assumptions, and operations planning, can be used to validate initial cost assumptions and set in place management processes to avoid the common pitfalls resulting in cost overruns.

Clardy, Dennon↗

Data management in the mission data system

As spacecraft evolve from simple embedded devices to become more sophisticated computing platforms with complex behaviors it is increasingly necessary to model and manage the flow of data, and to provide uniform models for managing data that promote adaptability, yet pay heed to the physical limitations of the embedded and space environments.

mission data system (MDS)↗

Manned Mars mission communication and data management systems

A manned Mars mission will involve a small crew and many complex tasks. The productivity of the crew and the entire mission will depend significantly on effective automation of these tasks and the ease with which the crew can interface with them. The technology to support a manned Mars mission is available today; however, evolving software and electronic technology are enabling many interesting possibilities for increasing productivity and safety while reducing life cycle cost. Some of these advanced technologies are identified.

White, Ronald E.↗

Planning Mars Memory: Learning from the Mer Mission

Knowledge management for space exploration is part of a multi-generational effort at recognizing, preserving and transmitting learning. Each mission should be built on the learning, of both successes and failures, derived from previous missions. Knowledge management begins with learning, and the recognition that this learning has produced knowledge. The Mars Exploration Rover mission provides us with an opportunity to track how learning occurs, how it is recorded, and whether the representations of this learning will be optimally useful for subsequent missions. This paper focuses on the MER science and engineering teams during Rover operations. A NASA team conducted an observational study of the ongoing work and learning of the these teams. Learning occurred in a wide variety of areas: how to run two teams on Mars time for three months; how to use the instruments within the constraints of the martian environment, the deep space network and the mission requirements; how to plan science strategy; how best to use the available software tools. This learning is preserved in many ways. Primarily it resides in peoples memories, to be carried on to the next mission. It is also encoded in stones, in programming sequences, in published reports, and in lessons learned activities, Studying learning and knowledge development as it happens allows us to suggest proactive ways of capturing and using it across multiple missions and generations.

Linde, Charlotte↗

Momentum Management Tool for Low-Thrust Missions

A momentum management tool was designed for the Dawn low-thrust interplanetary spacecraft en route to the asteroids Vesta and Ceres, in an effort to better understand the early creation of the solar system. Momentum must be managed to ensure the spacecraft has enough control authority to perform necessary turns and hold a fixed inertial attitude against external torques. Along with torques from solar pressure and gravity-gradients, ion-propulsion engines produce a torque about the thrust axis that must be countered by the four reaction wheel assemblies (RWA). MomProf is a ground operations tool built to address these concerns. The momentum management tool was developed during initial checkout and early cruise, and has been refined to accommodate a wide range of momentum-management issues. With every activity or sequence, wheel speeds and momentum state must be checked to avoid undesirable conditions and use of consumables. MomProf was developed to operate in the MATLAB environment. All data are loaded into MATLAB as a structure to provide consistent access to all inputs by individual functions within the tool. Used in its most basic application, the Dawn momentum tool uses the basic principle of angular momentum conservation, computing momentum in the body frame, and RWA wheel speeds, for all given orientations in the input file. MomProf was designed specifically to be able to handle the changing external torques and frequent de - saturations. Incorporating significant external torques adds complexity since there are various external torques that act under different operational modes.

Swenka, Edward R.↗

Managing the Lucy Mission

Lucy is NASA’s 13th Discovery-class mission. It will be the first mission to encounter seven Trojan asteroids in a series of five flybys. Lucy is led by Dr. Hal Levison of the Southwest Research Institute. As the Principal Investigator, Dr. Levison is accountable to NASA for the success of the investigation, with full responsibility for its scientific integrity and execution within committed cost and schedule. Day to day management of the Lucy project is delegated to Goddard Space Flight Center. During Lucy’s development, the project experienced a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic that threatened the team’s ability to meet the planetary launch window. Despite this challenge, Lucy launched on time and under budget. This chapter discusses key factors that enabled project success.

Project Management↗