Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew Module”

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 343 records · Page 19
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1989

Magnets promise productivity

The use of advanced magnetic suspension and balance systems (MSBS) in wind tunnels is examined. The advantages of MSBS are discussed, including accurate dynamic stability and free manipulation of the model aircraft allowing the free-flying model to respond dynamically to aerodynamic forces. Examples of wind tunnel tests employing MSBS are presented, including tests of a hypersonics parasol wing configuration and the simulation of the ejection of the crew-escape module from an aircraft.

Lawing, Pierce L.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Advanced technologies for rocket single-stage-to-orbit vehicles

A single-stage-to-orbit vertical takeoff/horizontal landing rocket vehicle was studied to determine the benefits of advanced technology. Advanced technologies that were included in the study were variable mixture ratio oxygen/hydrogen rocket engines and materials, structures, and subsystem technologies currently being developed in the National Aero-Space Plane Program. The application of advanced technology results in an 85 percent reduction in vehicle dry weight. With advanced materials, an external thermal protection system, like the Space Shuttle tiles, was not required. Compared to an all-airbreathing horizontal takeoff/horizontal landing vehicle using the same advanced technologies and mission requirements, the rocket vehicle is lighter in dry weight and has fewer subsystems. To increase reliability and safety, operational features were included in the rocket vehicle-robust subsystems, 5 percent additional margin, no slush hydrogen, fail-operational with an engine out, and a crew escape module. The resulting vehicle grew in dry weight and was still lower in dry weight than the airbreathing vehicle.

Wilhite, Alan W.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Space transfer concepts and analysis for exploration missions. Implementation plan and element description document (draft final). Volume 6: Lunar systems

NASA's two Office of Space Flight (Code M) Space Transfer Vehicle (STV) contractors supported development of Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) lunar transportation concepts. This work treated lunar SEI missions as the far end of a more near-term STV program, most of whose missions were satellite delivery and servicing requirements derived from Civil Needs Data Base (CNDB) projections. Space Transfer Concepts and Analysis for Exploration Missions (STCAEM) began to address the complete design of a lunar transportation system. The following challenges were addressed: (1) the geometry of aerobraking; (2) accommodation of mixed payloads; (3) cryogenic propellant transfer in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO); (4) fully re-usable design; and (5) growth capability. The leveled requirements, derived requirements, and assumptions applied to the lunar transportation system design are discussed. The mission operations section includes data on mission analysis studies and performance parametrics as well as the operating modes and performance evaluations which include the STCAEM recommendations. Element descriptions for the lunar transportation family included are a listing of the lunar transfer vehicle/lunar excursion vehicle (LTV/LEV) components; trade studies and mass analyses of the transfer and excursion modules; advanced crew recovery vehicle (ACRV) (modified crew recovery vehicle (MCRV)) modifications required to fulfill lunar operations; the aerobrake shape and L/D to be used; and some costing methods and results. Commonality and evolution issues are also discussed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2004

A History of Full-Scale Aircraft and Rotorcraft Crash Testing and Simulation at NASA Langley Research Center

This paper summarizes 2-1/2 decades of full-scale aircraft and rotorcraft crash testing performed at the Impact Dynamics Research Facility (IDRF) located at NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. The IDRF is a 240-ft.-high steel gantry that was built originally as a lunar landing simulator facility in the early 1960's. It was converted into a full-scale crash test facility for light aircraft and rotorcraft in the early 1970 s. Since the first full-scale crash test was preformed in February 1974, the IDRF has been used to conduct: 41 full-scale crash tests of General Aviation (GA) aircraft including landmark studies to establish baseline crash performance data for metallic and composite GA aircraft; 11 full-scale crash tests of helicopters including crash qualification tests of the Bell and Sikorsky Advanced Composite Airframe Program (ACAP) prototypes; 48 Wire Strike Protection System (WSPS) qualification tests of Army helicopters; 3 vertical drop tests of Boeing 707 transport aircraft fuselage sections; and, 60+ crash tests of the F-111 crew escape module. For some of these tests, nonlinear transient dynamic codes were utilized to simulate the impact response of the airframe. These simulations were performed to evaluate the capabilities of the analytical tools, as well as to validate the models through test-analysis correlation. In September 2003, NASA Langley closed the IDRF facility and plans are underway to demolish it in 2007. Consequently, it is important to document the contributions made to improve the crashworthiness of light aircraft and rotorcraft achieved through full-scale crash testing and simulation at the IDRF.

Jackson, Karen E.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Safe, Advanced, Adaptable Isolation System Eliminates the Need for Critical Lifts

The Starr Soft Support isolation system incorporates an automatically reconfigurable aircraft jack into NASA's existing 1-Hertz isolators. This enables an aircraft to float in mid-air without the need for a critical lift during ground vibration testing (GVT), significantly reducing testing risk, time, and costs. Currently incorporating the most advanced technology available, the 60,000-poundcapacity (27-metric-ton) isolation system is used for weight and measurement tests, control-surface free-play tests, and structural mode interaction tests without the need for any major reconfiguration, often saving days of time and significantly reducing labor costs. The Starr Soft Support isolation system consists of an aircraft-jacking device with three jacking points, each of which has an individual motor and accommodates up to 20,000 pounds (9 metric tons) for a total 60,000-pound (27-metric-ton) capacity. The system can be transported to the aircraft by forklift and placed at its jacking points using a pallet jack. The motors power the electric actuators, raising the aircraft above the ground until the landing gear can retract. Inflatable isolators then deploy, enabling the aircraft to float in mid-air, simulating a 1-Hertz free-free boundary condition. Inflatable isolators have been in use at NASA for years, enabling aircraft to literally float unsupported for highly accurate GVT. These isolators must be placed underneath the aircraft for this to occur. Traditionally, this is achieved by a critical lift a high-risk procedure in which a crane and flexible cord system are used to lift the aircraft. In contrast, the Starr Soft Support isolation system eliminates the need for critical lift by integrating the inflatable isolators into an aircraft jacking system. The system maintains vertical and horizontal isolating capabilities. The aircraft can be rolled onto the system, jacked up, and then the isolators can be inflated and positioned without any personnel needing to work underneath the aircraft. Also, the system accommodates changes in aircraft configuration, automatically adapting to changes in mass, and it can adjust the height of the isolators in one basic setup. Dryden personnel used the Starr Soft Support system to successfully perform a GVT on an F-15 being structurally modified by Gulfstream, Dryden's Gulfstream III used for science research and the crew exploration module and adaptor cone assembly.

Ginn, Starr↗
NASA NTRS2017

Vented Launch Vehicle Adaptor for a Manned Spacecraft with "Pusher" Launch Abort System

A system, method, and apparatus for a vented launch vehicle adaptor (LVA) for a manned spacecraft with a "pusher" launch abort system are disclosed. The disclosed LVA provides a structural interface between a commercial crew vehicle (CCV) crew module/service module (CM/SM) spacecraft and an expendable launch vehicle. The LVA provides structural attachment of the module to the launch vehicle. It also provides a means to control the exhaust plume from a pusher-type launch abort system that is integrated into the module. In case of an on-pad or ascent abort, which requires the module to jettison away from the launch vehicle, the launch abort system exhaust plume must be safely directed away from critical and dangerous portions of the launch vehicle in order to achieve a safe and successful jettison.

Vandervort, Robert E.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Cloud Computing Methods for Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit Trajectory Design

Complicated mission design problems require innovative computational solutions. As spacecraft depart from a proposed Gateway in a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO), recontact analysis is required to avoid risk of collision and ensure safe operations. Escape dynamics from NRHOs are governed by multiple gravitational bodies, yielding a trajectory design space that is exhaustively large. This paper summarizes the recontact analysis for departure from the NRHO and describes how the Deep Space Trajectory Explorer (DSTE) trajectory design software incorporates high performance cloud computing to compute and visualize the orbit design space. Recent focus on exploration missions to cislunar space has kindled accelerated interest in multibody orbit solutions. Trajectory analysis in the presence of multiple gravity fields is complex, and innovative computational tools are needed to simplify complicated design spaces, to generate large quantities of data quickly, and to visualize the output for user accessibility. The Gateway mission is a prime example. The Gateway1 is proposed as a human outpost in deep space. The current baseline orbit for the Gateway is a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO) near the Moon.2 The NRHO exists in a regime that experiences the gravitational effects of the Earth and the Moon simultaneously, complicating orbit analysis. The mission design process benefits greatly from updated computational tools for multibody missions like the Gateway. As an example, consider the problem of assessing the risk of collision in an NRHO. As a staging location to missions to the lunar surface and beyond the Earth-Moon system, the Gateway will experience spacecraft and other objects regularly arriving and departing. Departing objects potentially include spent logistics modules, visiting crew vehicles, debris objects, wastewater particles, and cubesats. Each departure is governed by the dynamics of the Gateway orbit and the surrounding dynamical environment. Over time, any unmaintained object in such an orbit eventually departs due to the small instabilities associated with the NRHOs. A separation maneuver speeds the departure from the NRHO, but the effects of the maneuver on the spacecraft behavior depend on the location, magnitude, and direction of the burn. Escape dynamics from the NRHO with regard to these maneuver options open up an enormous potential trajectory design space where subtle changes in input can produce dramatically large changes in the results. Any departing object must avoid recontacting the Gateway as it leaves the lunar vicinity, and a recontact analysis thus involves a significant number of computations and extensive output data. To explore the dynamics of this extensive design space, the Deep Space Trajectory Explorer3 (DSTE) trajectory design software incorporates new High Performance Computing (HPC) services and novel interactive visualizations. This paper details the HPC and cloud infrastructure techniques that are implemented in the DSTE, applying the new capabilities to analysis of recontact risk with the Gateway in NRHO. NEAR RECTILINEAR HALO ORBITS The Gateway is planned to fly in a lunar NRHO as its baseline orbit. The NRHO families of orbits are subsets of the larger halo families, which originate from planar orbits near the L1 and L2 libration points; the Earth-Moon L2 halo family appears in Figure 1. Each halo orbit is perfectly periodic in the Circular Restricted 3-Body Problem (CR3BP) and becomes a quasi-periodic orbit in a higher fidelity ephemeris force model. The NRHOs are defined as those members of the halo family with bounded stability properties;2 they pass near the Moon at perilune and are nearly polar. Families exist with apolunes located both above the lunar north pole and above the lunar south pole; the Gateway is planned to reside in a southern L2 NRHO in a 9:2 resonance with the lunar synodic period. The 9:2 NRHO is characterized by a period of about 6.5 days, a perilune radius of about 3,500 km, and an apolune radius of about 71,000 km; it is strongly affected by the gravity of both the Earth and the Moon simultaneously. This NRHO offers extended communications with assets on the south pole of the Moon,4 as well as low-cost orbit maintenance and attitude control,5 favorable eclipse avoidance properties,6 and inexpensive transfers from Earth and to other destinations.5,7 The NRHO portion of the southern L2 halo family is highlighted in black in Figure 1, and the 9:2 NRHO appears in blue.

Phillips, Sean M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Optical Modem Enabling Broadband Datacom Links for Crewed Cis-Lunar Missions

We report on the design, development, and testing of our high-power broadband optical modem supporting NASA’s crewed Artemis-2 mission. The O2O modem will be mounted in the crewed Orion module and provide a broadband 505,000 km bi-directional optical link back to earth while en route to the moon. The full-duplex modem consists of a high-power optical transmitter and receiver optimized for serially-concatenated pulse-position modulation (SCPPM). The transmitter is a master-oscillator power-amplifier optical architecture using efficient cladding-pumped amplification in erbium-ytterbium co-doped fiber. The transmitter outputs up to 1 W at ≈1550 nm (limited for eye safety) and supports 6 different user-rates ranging from 20.39 Mb/s to 260.95 Mb/s using PPM16 and PPM32 modulation formats. The optical receiver supports two user-rates: 10.19 Mb/s and 20.39 Mb/s with both rates employing PPM32. The narrowband receiver filtering is optimized to simultaneously accept four separate wavelength channels to mitigate atmospherics through spatial diversity. A configurable interleaver provides additional protection against atmospherics-based signal fading and a powerful soft-decision error correction scheme enables highly sensitive detection. The measured sensitivities at the two bit-rates are -73.8 and -71.8dBm, respectively. The architecture was designed for reliable operation in space, featuring automatic hardware interlocks, pump sparing for the amplifiers, and autonomous operation of all internal hardware and software control loops. The protoflight unit (PFU) was put through rigorous environmental testing which included pyroshock, vibration, electromagnetic interference/compatibility, and thermal-vacuum testing. The modem successfully passed all the environmental screening and has been declared at Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6.

space communications↗
NASA NTRS1991

Utilization of common pressurized modules on the Space Station Freedom

During the preliminary design review of Space Station Freedom elements and subsystems, it was shown that reductions of cost, weight, and on-orbit integration and verification would be necessary in order to meet program constraints, particularly nominal Orbiter payload launch capability. At that time, the Baseline station consisted of four resource nodes and two 44 ft modules. In this study, the viability of a common module which maintains crew and payload accommodation is assessed. The size, transportation, and orientation of modules and the accommodation of system racks and user experiments are considered and compared to baseline. Based on available weight estimates, a module pattern consisting of six 28 ft. common elements with three radial and two end ports is shown to be nearly optimal. Advantageous characteristics include a reduction in assembly flights, dual egress from all elements, logical functional allocation, no adverse impacts to international partners, favorable airlock, cupola, ACRV (Assured Crew Return Vehicle), and logistics module accommodation, and desirable flight attitude and control characteristics.

Gould, Marston J.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Utilization of common pressurized modules on the Space Station Freedom

During the preliminary design review of Space Station Freedom elements and subsystems, it was shown that reductions of cost, weight, and on-orbit integration and verification would be necessary in order to meet program constraints, particularly nominal Orbiter payload launch capability. At that time, the Baseline station consisted of four resource nodes and two 44 ft modules. In this study, the viability of a common module which maintains crew and payload accommodation is assessed. The size, transportation, and orientation of modules and the accommodation of system racks and user experiments are considered and compared to baseline. Based on available weight estimates, a module pattern consisting of six 28 ft common elements with three radial and two end ports is shown to be nearly optimal. Advantageous characteristics include a reduction in assembly flights, dual egress from all elements, logical functional allocation, no adverse impacts to international partners, favorable airlock, cupola, ACRV (Assured Crew Return Vehicle), and logistics module accommodation, and desirable flight attitude and control characteristics.

Mazanek, Daniel D.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Thermal Control System Development to Support the Crew Exploration Vehicle and Lunar Surface Access Module

All space vehicles or habitats require thermal management to maintain a safe and operational environment for both crew and hardware. Active Thermal Control Systems (ATCS) perform the functions of acquiring heat from both crew and hardware within a vehicle, transporting that heat throughout the vehicle, and finally rejecting that energy into space. Almost all of the energy used in a space vehicle eventually turns into heat, which must be rejected in order to maintain an energy balance and temperature control of the vehicle. For crewed vehicles, Active Thermal Control Systems are pumped fluid loops that are made up of components designed to perform these functions. NASA has recently evaluated all of the agency s technology development work and identified key areas that must be addressed to aid in the successful development of a Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) and a Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM). The technologies that have been selected and are currently under development include: fluids that enable single loop ATCS architectures, a gravity insensitive vapor compression cycle heat pump, a sublimator with reduced sensitivity to feedwater contamination, an evaporative heat sink that can operate in multiple ambient pressure environments, a compact spray evaporator, and lightweight radiators that take advantage of carbon composites and advanced optical coatings.

Anderson, Molly↗
NASA NTRS2005

Human Factors in Space Flight

After forty years of experience with human space flight (Table 1), the current emphasis is on the design of space vehicles, habitats, and missions to ensure mission success. What lessons have we learned that will affect the design of spacecraft for future space exploration, leading up to exploring Mars? This chapter addresses this issue in four sections: Anthropometry and Biomechanics; Environmental Factors; Habitability and Architecture; and Crew Personal Sustenance. This introductory section introduces factors unique to space flight. A unique consideration for design of a habitable volume in a space vehicle is the lack of gravity during a space flight, referred to as microgravity. This affects all aspects of life, and drives special features in the habitat, equipment, tools, and procedures. The difference in gravity during a space mission requires designing for posture and motion differences. In Earth s gravity, or even with partial gravity, orientation is not a variable because the direction in which gravity acts defines up and down. In a microgravity environment the working position is arbitrary; there is no gravity cue. Orientation is defined primarily through visual cues. The orientation within a particular crew station or work area is referred to as local vertical, and should be consistent within a module to increase crew productivity. Equipment was intentionally arranged in various orientations in one module on Skylab to assess the efficiency in use of space versus the effects of inconsistent layout. The effects of that arrangement were confusion on entering the module, time spent in re-orientation, and conflicts in crew space requirements when multiple crew members were in the module. Design of a space vehicle is constrained by the three major mission drivers: mass, volume and power. Each of these factors drives the cost of a mission. Mass and volume determine the size of the launch vehicle directly; they can limit consumables such as air, water, and propellant; and they impact crew size and the types of activities the crew performs. Power is a limiting factor for a space vehicle. All environmental features (e.g., atmosphere, temperature, lighting) require power to maintain them. Power can be generated from batteries, from fuel cells, or from solar panels. Each of these sources requires lifting mass and volume from Earth, driving mission cost. All engineering decisions directly impact the design for habitation design and usage. For instance, if fuel cells are used they produce water, which is used for drinking and food preparation. If a different power source is used water has to be carried and stored on the vehicle which then directly impacts the food system choice as well as the launch weight of the vehicle.

Woolford, Barbara J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Crew considerations in the design for Space Station Freedom modules on-orbit maintenance

The paper presents an approach to the maintenance process currently planned for the Space Station Freedom modules. In particular, it describes the planned crew interfaces with maintenance items, and the anticipated implications for the crew in performing the interior and exterior maintenance of modules developed by U.S., ESA, and NASDA. Special consideration is given to the maintenance requirements, allocations, and approach; the maintenance design; the Maintenance Workstation; the robotic mechanisms; and the developemnt of maintenance techniques.

Stokes, Jack W.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Empirical models for spacecraft damage from orbital debris penetration and effects on spacecraft survivability

Semi-empirical models of hole diameter and tip-to-tip crack length for different multi-wall shielding systems currently under development for the International Space Station are presented. These equations were developed using light gas gun test data at impact velocities of 6.5 km/s and inhibited shaped charge test data for an impact velocity of 11.3 km/s. These models are incorporated into a survivability analysis using the manned spacecraft crew survivability computer code to determine whether or not module unzipping or crew incapacitation would occur under a specific set of impact conditions.

Williamsen, Joel↗
NASA NTRS1987

Crew factors in the design of the Space Station

The designing of Space Shuttle modules and equipment in order to provide a stimulating and efficient work atmosphere and a pleasant living environment is examined. The habitation module for the eight crew members is divided into four areas: ceiling, floor, port, and starboard. The module is to consist of crew quarters, a wardroom, a galley, a personal hygiene facility, a health maintenance facility, and stowage areas. There is a correlation between the function of the module and its location; for example the galley will be near the wardroom and the personal hygiene facility near the crew quarters. The designs of the equipment for crew accommodation and of the equipment to be maintained and repaired by the crew will be standarized. The design and functions of the crew and equipment restraints, crew mobility aids, racks to contain equipment, and functional units are described.

Robinson, Judith L.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Design Optimisation and Mass Saving of the Structure of the Orion-MPCV European Service Module

This paper presents an overview of the design optimisation measures that have been proposed and analysed in order to reduce the mass of the structure, including the MMOD (Micro-Meteoroid and Orbital Debris) protection system, of the ESM (European Service Module) for the “Orion” MPCV (Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle). Under an agreement between NASA and ESA, the NASA Orion MPCV for human space exploration missions will be powered by a European Service Module, based on the design and experience of the ATV (Automated Transfer Vehicle). The development and qualification of the European Service Module is managed and implemented by ESA. The ESM prime contractor and system design responsible is Airbus Defence and Space. Thales Alenia Space Italia is responsible for the design and integration of the ESM Structure and MMOD protection system in addition to the Thermal Control System and the Consumable Storage System. The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle is a pressurized, crewed spacecraft that transports up to four crew members from the Earth’s surface to a nearby destination or staging point. Orion then brings the crew members safely back to the Earth’s surface at the end of the mission. Orion provides all services necessary to support the crew members while on-board for short duration missions (up to 21 days) or until they are transferred to another orbiting habitat. The ESM supports the crew module from launch through separation prior to re-entry by providing: in-space propulsion capability for orbital transfer, attitude control, and high altitude ascent aborts; water and oxygen/nitrogen needed for a habitable environment; and electrical power generation. In addition, it maintains the temperature of the vehicle's systems and components and offers space for unpressurized cargo and scientific payloads. The ESM has been designed for the first 2 Lunar orbit missions, EM-1 (Exploration mission 1) is an un-crewed flight planned around mid-2020, and EM-2, the first crewed flight, is planned in 2022. At the time where the first ESM is about to be weighted, the predicted mass lies slightly above the initial requirement. For future builds, mass reduction of the Service Module has been considered necessary. This is being investigated, together with other design improvements, in order to consolidate the ESM design and increase possible future missions beyond the first two Orion MPCV missions. The mass saving study has introduced new optimised structural concepts, optimisation of the MMOD protection shields, and optimised redesign of parts for manufacturing through AM (Additive Manufacturing).

Micro-Meteroids and Orbital Debris Protection Syst↗
NASA NTRS2000

Toxicological Assessment of the International Space Station Atmosphere

Space-faring crews must have safe breathing air throughout their missions to ensure adequate performance and good health. Toxicological assessment of air quality depends on the standards that define acceptable air quality, measurements of pollutant levels during the flight, and reports from the crew on their in-flight perceptions of air quality. Air samples from ISS flight 2A showed that contaminants in the Zarya module were at higher concentrations than the Unity module. At the crew's first entry, the amount of non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs) in Zarya was 23 Mg/cubic meter, whereas in the amount of NMVOCs in Unity was 5.3 mg/cubic meter. Approximately 26 hours later at egress from the modules, the NMVOCs were comparable indicating good mixing of the atmospheres. The 2A crew reported no adverse health effects related to air pollution during their flight. Ingress air samples from 2A.1, which was flown more than 5 months after 2A, again showed that the Zarya had accumulated more unscrubbed pollutants than Unity. The NMVOCs in Unity were 3.5 mg/cubic meter, whereas the were 20 mg/cubic meter in Zarya. After almost 80 hours of ISS operations, the NMVOCs were 7.5 and 12 mg/cubic meter in Unity and Zarya, respectively. This suggests that the atmospheres in the modules were not mixing very well. The 2A.1 crew felt that the air quality in Zarya deteriorated when they were working in a group at close quarters, when the panels had been removed, and after they had worked in an area for some time. The weight of evidence suggests that human metabolic products (carbon dioxide, water vapor, heat) were not being effectively removed from the crew's work area, and these caused their symptoms. Additional local measurements of pollutants are planned for the 2A.2 mission to the ISS.

James, John T.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Why Deep Space Habitats Should Be Different from the International Space Station

It is tempting to view the International Space Station (ISS) as a model for deep space habitats. This is not a good idea for many reasons. The ISS does not have a habitation module; instead the individual crew quarters are dispersed across several modules, the galley is in the US Laboratory and the waste hygiene compartment is in a Node. This distributed arrangement may be inconvenient but more important differences distinguish a deep space habitat from the ISS. First, the Space Shuttle launch system that shaped, sized, and delivered most ISS elements has been retired. Its replacement, the Space Launch System (SLS), is specifically designed for human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit and is capable of transporting more efficient, large diameter, heavy-lift payloads. Next, because of the Earth's protective geomagnetic field, ISS crews are naturally shielded from lethal radiation. Deep space habitat designs must include either a storm shelter or strategically positioned equipment and stowage for radiation protection. Another important difference is the increased transit time with no opportunity for an ISS-type emergency return. It takes 7 to 10 days to go between Earth and cis-lunar locations and 1000 days for the Mars habitat transit. This long commute calls for greater crew autonomy with habitats designed for the crew to fix their own problems. The ISS rack-enclosed, densely packaged subsystems are a product of the Shuttle era and not maintenance friendly. A solution better suited for deep space habitats spreads systems out allowing direct access to single-layer packaging and providing crew access to each component without having to remove another. Operational readiness is another important discriminator. The ISS required over 100 flights to build, resupply, and transport the crew, whereas SLS offers the capability to launch a fully provisioned habitat that is operational without additional outfitting or resupply flights.

Griffin, Brand↗