Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “rovers mission operations”

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 289 records · Page 16

Long duration mission support operations concepts

It is suggested that the system operations will be one of the most expensive parts of the Mars mission, and that, in order to reduce their cost, they should be considered during the conceptual phase of the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) program. System operations of Space Station Freedom, Lunar outpost, and Mars Rover Sample Return are examined in order to develop a similar concept for the manned Mars mission. Factors that have to be taken into account include: (1) psychological stresses caused by long periods of isolation; (2) the effects of boredom; (3) the necessity of onboard training to maintain a high level of crew skills; and (4) the 40-min time delays between issuing and receiving a command, which make real-time flight control inoperative and require long-term decisions to be made by the ground support.

Eggleston, T. W.↗

Using RSVP for analyzing state and previous activities for the Mars Exploration Rovers

Current developments in immersive environments for mission planning include several tools which make up a system for performing and rehearsing missions. This system, known as the Rover Sequencing and Visualization Program (RSVP), includes tools for planning long range sorties for highly autonomous rovers, tools for planning operations with robotic arms, and advanced tools for visualizing telemetry from remote spacecraft and landers. One of the keys to successful planning of rover activities is knowing what the rover has accomplished to date and understanding the current rover state. RSVP builds on the lessons learned and the heritage of the Mars Pathfinder mission This paper will discuss the tools and methodologies present in the RSVP suite for examining rover state, reviewing previous activities, visually comparing telemetered results to rehearsed results, and reviewing science and engineering imagery. In addition we will present how this tool suite was used on the Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) project to explore the surface of Mars.

Mars Exploration Rover (MER)↗

First 210 solar days of Mars 2020 Perseverance Robotic Operations – Mobility, Robotic Arm, Sampling, and Helicopter

This paper includes the summary, lessonslearned, and upcoming plans for the first 210 Mars solar days(sols) of the mission. The focus of the paper is on roboticoperations which has the primary responsibility for strategicplanning, uplink commanding and downlink analysis forrover mobility and navigation, robotic arm operation, thesampling and caching capability including coring, theadaptive caching assembly and the 2nd sample handlingrobotic arm, and interface to the Mars helicopter Ingenuity.As of Sol 210 the rover has driven 2663.65 meters, executed20764 robotic arm and sampling commands, and hassuccessfully completed 13 helicopter flights covering 2382meters horizontal distance. It includes the OperationsReadiness Tests in preparation for landing, landing and initialcheckouts, strategic route planning to the science destinationand waypoints, surface checkout of all of the roboticscapability of the rover. It also discusses the strategic planningand tactical agility needed for interleaving scienceinvestigation and technology demonstration of the Marshelicopter flights where a minimum distance had to bemaintained between the rover and helicopter during flights. Itdiscusses the challenges with planning robotic operations andaddressing anomalies with the larger uncertainty presentduring early mission operations. It also discusses the impacton robotic operations from lessons incorporated fromprevious missions.

Ono, Hiro↗

The PICWidget

The Plug-in Image Component Widget (PICWidget) is a software component for building digital imaging applications. The component is part of a methodology described in GIS Methodology for Planning Planetary-Rover Operations (NPO-41812), which appears elsewhere in this issue of NASA Tech Briefs. Planetary rover missions return a large number and wide variety of image data products that vary in complexity in many ways. Supported by a powerful, flexible image-data-processing pipeline, the PICWidget can process and render many types of imagery, including (but not limited to) thumbnail, subframed, downsampled, stereoscopic, and mosaic images; images coregistred with orbital data; and synthetic red/green/blue images. The PICWidget is capable of efficiently rendering images from data representing many more pixels than are available at a computer workstation where the images are to be displayed. The PICWidget is implemented as an Eclipse plug-in using the Standard Widget Toolkit, which provides a straightforward interface for re-use of the PICWidget in any number of application programs built upon the Eclipse application framework. Because the PICWidget is tile-based and performs aggressive tile caching, it has flexibility to perform faster or slower, depending whether more or less memory is available.

Norris, Jeffrey↗

A Multi-Environment Thermal Control System With Freeze-Tolerant Radiator

Future space exploration missions require advanced thermal control systems (TCS) to dissipate heat from spacecraft, rovers, or habitats operating in environments that can vary from extremely hot to extremely cold. A lightweight, reliable TCS is being developed to effectively control cabin and equipment temperatures under widely varying heat loads and ambient temperatures. The system uses freeze-tolerant radiators, which eliminate the need for a secondary circulation loop or heat pipe systems. Each radiator has a self-regulating variable thermal conductance to its ambient environment. The TCS uses a nontoxic, water-based working fluid that is compatible with existing lightweight aluminum heat exchangers. The TCS is lightweight, compact, and requires very little pumping power. The critical characteristics of the core enabling technologies were demonstrated. Functional testing with condenser tubes demonstrated the key operating characteristics required for a reliable, freeze-tolerant TCS, namely (1) self-regulating thermal conductance with short transient responses to varying thermal loads, (2) repeatable performance through freeze-thaw cycles, and (3) fast start-up from a fully frozen state. Preliminary coolant tests demonstrated that the corrosion inhibitor in the water-based coolant can reduce the corrosion rate on aluminum by an order of magnitude. Performance comparison with state-of-the-art designs shows significant mass and power saving benefits of this technology.

Chen, Weibo↗

Advanced Bayesian Method for Planetary Surface Navigation

Autonomous Exploration, Inc., has developed an advanced Bayesian statistical inference method that leverages current computing technology to produce a highly accurate surface navigation system. The method combines dense stereo vision and high-speed optical flow to implement visual odometry (VO) to track faster rover movements. The Bayesian VO technique improves performance by using all image information rather than corner features only. The method determines what can be learned from each image pixel and weighs the information accordingly. This capability improves performance in shadowed areas that yield only low-contrast images. The error characteristics of the visual processing are complementary to those of a low-cost inertial measurement unit (IMU), so the combination of the two capabilities provides highly accurate navigation. The method increases NASA mission productivity by enabling faster rover speed and accuracy. On Earth, the technology will permit operation of robots and autonomous vehicles in areas where the Global Positioning System (GPS) is degraded or unavailable.

Center, Julian↗

Beyond Control Centers

For NASA's Resource Prospector (RP) Lunar Rover Mission, we are moving away from a control center concept, to a fully distributed operation utilizing control nodes, with decision support from anywhere via mobile devices. This operations concept will utilize distributed information systems, notifications, mobile data access, and optimized mobile data display for off-console decision support. We see this concept of operations as a step in the evolution of mission operations from a central control center concept to a mission operations anywhere concept. The RP example is part of a trend, in which mission expertise for design, development and operations is distributed across countries and across the globe. Future spacecraft operations will be most cost efficient and flexible by following this distributed expertise, enabling operations from anywhere. For the RP mission we arrived at the decision to utilize a fully distributed operations team, where everyone operates from their home institution, based on evaluating the following factors: the requirement for physical proximity for near-real time command and control decisions; the cost of distributed control nodes vs. a centralized control center; the impact on training and mission preparation of flying the team to a central location. Physical proximity for operational decisions is seldom required, though certain categories of decisions, such as launch abort, or close coordination for mission or safety-critical near-real-time command and control decisions may benefit from co-location. The cost of facilities and operational infrastructure has not been found to be a driving factor for location in our studies. Mission training and preparation benefit from having all operators train and operate from home institutions.

Operations↗

Orbital Express Mission Operations Planning and Resource Management using ASPEN

As satellite equipment and mission operations become more costly, the drive to keep working equipment running with less man-power rises.Demonstrating the feasibility of autonomous satellite servicing was the main goal behind the Orbital Express (OE) mission. Planning the satellite mission operations for OE required the ability to create a plan which could be executed autonomously over variable conditions. The Automated-Scheduling and Planning Environment (ASPEN)tool, developed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, was used to create the schedule of events in each daily plan for the two satellites of the OE mission. This paper presents an introduction to the ASPEN tool, the constraints of the OE domain, the variable conditions that were presented within the mission, and the solution to operations that ASPEN provided. ASPEN has been used in several other domains, including research rovers, Deep Space Network scheduling research, and in flight operations for the ASE project's EO1 satellite. Related work is discussed, as are the future of ASPEN and the future of autonomous satellite servicing.

Automated Scheduling and Planning Environment (ASP↗

Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Remote Teleoperation Studies Under Four Lunar Communication Latencies

Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. NASA conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km (distances relevant to LTV-SYS071 and -029 requirements). Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 11.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “first-look” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.

LTV↗

INL Operations Improvements of Nuclear Enabled Missions for NASA - Presentation

The Idaho National laboratory (INL) has supported NASA missions integrate nuclear power systems since the Department of Energy (DOE) moved the Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) program in 2002 from Mound, Ohio to the Materials and Fuels Complex, INL (Argonne National Laboratory West (ANL-W) prior to 2005). This paper discusses the evolution of INL operations improvements made at INL and KSC throughout the Mars Exploratory Rovers, New Horizons, Mars Science Laboratory, and Mars 2020 missions.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Autonomous Rovers for Mars Exploration

Rovers will play a critical role in the exploration of Mars. Near-term mission plans call for long traverses over unknown terrain, robust navigation and instrument placement, and reliable operations for extended periods of time. Longer-term missions may visit multiple science sites in a single day and perform opportunistic science data collection, as well as complex scouting, construction, and maintenance tasks in preparation for an eventual human presence. The Pathfinder mission demonstrated the potential for robotic Mars exploration but at the same time indicated the need for more rover autonomy. The highly ground-intensive control with infrequent communication and high latency limited the effectiveness of the Sojourner rover. When failures occurred, Sojourner often sat idle for extended periods of time, awaiting further commands from earth. In future missions, the tasks will be more complex and extended; hence there will be even more situations where things do not go exactly as planned. Significant advances in rover autonomy are needed to cope with increasing task complexity and greater execution uncertainty. Towards this end, we have designed an on-board executive architecture that incorporates robust operation, resource utilization, and failure recovery. In addition, we have designed ground tools to produce and refine contingent schedules that take advantage of the on-board architecture's flexible execution characteristics. Together, the on-board executive and the ground tools constitute an integrated rover autonomy architecture. This work draws from our experience with the Deep Space One autonomy experiment, with enhancements to ensure robust operation in the face of the unpredictable, complex environment that the rover will encounter on Mars. The rover autonomy architecture is currently being developed and deployed on the Marsokhod rover platform at NASA Ames Research Center. The capabilities of the rover autonomy architecture to support autonomous operations will be demonstrated concretely in upcoming field tests.

Anderson, Corin↗

Roles of the ground and flight crew in Apollo operations.

The functions performed by ground personnel and flight crews of Apollo missions are reviewed, covering vehicle systems operation and management, Saturn launch vehicle, command-service and lunar modules, lunar rover, communication relay unit and ground-commanded TV assembly. Details of the flight path, scientific experiments, photographic equipment and crew health monitoring are also discussed in terms of these functions. The coordinated combination of large numbers of experts and data processing equipment on the ground with the crew's capabilities to operate the spacecraft and exercise on-the-spot judgements is viewed as the backbone of the successful fulfillment of Apollo missions.

Wolfer, B. M.↗

Human Mars Surface Science Operations

Human missions to the surface of Mars will have challenging science operations. This paper will explore some of those challenges, based on science operations considerations as part of more general operational concepts being developed by NASA's Human Spaceflight Architecture (HAT) Mars Destination Operations Team (DOT). The HAT Mars DOT has been developing comprehensive surface operations concepts with an initial emphasis on a multi-phased mission that includes a 500-day surface stay. This paper will address crew science activities, operational details and potential architectural and system implications in the areas of (a) traverse planning and execution, (b) sample acquisition and sample handling, (c) in-situ science analysis, and (d) planetary protection. Three cross-cutting themes will also be explored in this paper: (a) contamination control, (b) low-latency telerobotic science, and (c) crew autonomy. The present traverses under consideration are based on the report, Planning for the Scientific Exploration of Mars by Humans1, by the Mars Exploration Planning and Analysis Group (MEPAG) Human Exploration of Mars-Science Analysis Group (HEM-SAG). The traverses are ambitious and the role of science in those traverses is a key component that will be discussed in this paper. The process of obtaining, handling, and analyzing samples will be an important part of ensuring acceptable science return. Meeting planetary protection protocols will be a key challenge and this paper will explore operational strategies and system designs to meet the challenges of planetary protection, particularly with respect to the exploration of "special regions." A significant challenge for Mars surface science operations with crew is preserving science sample integrity in what will likely be an uncertain environment. Crewed mission surface assets -- such as habitats, spacesuits, and pressurized rovers -- could be a significant source of contamination due to venting, out-gassing and cleanliness levels associated with crew presence. Low-latency telerobotic science operations has the potential to address a number of contamination control and planetary protection issues and will be explored in this paper. Crew autonomy is another key cross-cutting challenge regarding Mars surface science operations, because the communications delay between earth and Mars could as high as 20 minutes one way, likely requiring the crew to perform many science tasks without direct timely intervention from ground support on earth. Striking the operational balance between crew autonomy and earth support will be a key challenge that this paper will address.

Bobskill, Marianne R.↗

Desert Research and Technology Studies 2008 Report

During the last two weeks of October 2008, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Advanced Extravehicular Activity (AEVA) team led the field test portion of the 2008 Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) near Flagstaff, AZ. The Desert RATS field test activity is the year-long culmination of various individual science and advanced engineering discipline areas technology and operations development efforts into a coordinated field test demonstration under representative (analog) planetary surface terrain conditions. The 2008 Desert RATS was the eleventh RATS field test and was the most focused and successful test to date with participants from six NASA field centers, three research organizations, one university, and one other government agency. The main test objective was to collect Unpressurized Rover (UPR) and Lunar Electric Rover (LER) engineering performance and human factors metrics while under extended periods of representative mission-based scenario test operations involving long drive distances, night-time driving, Extravehicular Activity (EVA) operations, and overnight campover periods. The test was extremely successful with all teams meeting the primary test objective. This paper summarizes Desert RATS 2008 test hardware, detailed test objectives, test operations, and test results.

Romig, Barbara↗

Mars Exploration Rover Spirit End of Mission Report

The Mars Exploration Rover (MER) Spirit landed in Gusev crater on Mars on January 4, 2004, for a prime mission designed to last three months (90 sols). After more than six years operating on the surface of Mars, the last communication received from Spirit occurred on Sol 2210 (March 22, 2010). Following the loss of signal, the Mars Exploration Rover Project radiated over 1400 commands to Mars in an attempt to elicit a response from the rover. Attempts were made utilizing Deep Space Network X-Band and UHF relay via both Mars Odyssey and the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. Search and recovery efforts concluded on July 13, 2011. It is the MER project's assessment that Spirit succumbed to the extreme environmental conditions experienced during its fourth winter on Mars. Focusing on the time period from the end of the third Martian winter through the fourth winter and end of recovery activities, this report describes possible explanations for the loss of the vehicle and the extent of recovery efforts that were performed. It offers lessons learned and provides an overall mission summary.

Callas, John L.↗

Challenges of Mars Sample Return Lander Entry, Descent, and Landing

The proposed Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign would be perhaps the most ambitious robotic mission ever attempted in space exploration. The notional cam-paign consists of three Flagship-class missions operating in cooperation for over a decade in order to return samples of the Martian surface and atmosphere to Earth for analysis. The Mars 2020 rover, scheduled to launch in July 2020, will cache samples and place them on the surface for possible return. The second mission would be a Sample Return Lander (SRL) that consists of a small Sample Fetch Rover (SFR) to gather the samples, a Sample Transfer Arm (STA) to load the samples into a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), and the MAV itself to launch the samples into orbit around Mars. The third mission would be an Earth Return Or-biter (ERO) designed to rendezvous and capture the Orbiting Sample (OS), return to Earth, and separate the Earth Entry Vehicle (EEV) for Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) at a location to be determined. This paper will focus on the SRL mission concept, specifically the EDL phase. Given the ambitious SRL sample re-trieval baseline surface mission, including a rocket launch of the samples into Mars orbit, it is estimated that the EDL system may be required to deliver as much as 2100 kg of dry mass to the surface. This represents an approximate 20-25% in-crease in mass capability over previous landed Mars missions. Additionally, there is a high probability that SRL would have to land very close to the samples on the surface to expedite retrieval operations; therefore, Pin Point Landing (PPL) accu-racy may be required. To address these challenges, promising EDL configuration augmentations were studied to include larger forebody/higher drag entry capsules, hypersonic/supersonic inflatable/non-inflatable aerodynamic decelerators, hypersonic trim tabs, ballute drag devices, larger parachutes, higher Mach and higher dynamic pressure parachute deployments, lower parachute deployment altitudes having shorter chute timelines necessitating more efficient terrain sensor strategies, and ad-ditional fuel for longer powered descent diverts to the target landing site. Over-arching the entire trade study was an attempt to stay as close to the experience base of past successful missions as possible to reduce implementation cost and risk. This paper will discuss the entire SRL EDL trade study in detail. The information presented about the potential MSR campaign is pre-decisional and is provided for planning and discussion purposes only.

Ivanov, Mark C.↗

Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Remote Teleoperation Studies Under Four Lunar Communication Latencies

Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km. Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 1–1.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “firstlook” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.

LTV↗