Results for “Starship” — Page 2

NASA NTRS1999

Vibro-Acoustics Modal Testing at NASA Langley Research Center

This paper summarizes on-going modal testing activities at the NASA Langley Research Center for two aircraft fuselage structures: a generic "aluminum testbed cylinder" (ATC) and a Beechcraft Starship fuselage (BSF). Subsequent acoustic tests will measure the interior noise field created by exterior mechanical and acoustic sources. These test results will provide validation databases for interior noise prediction codes on realistic aircraft fuselage structures. The ATC is a 12-ft-long, all-aluminum, scale model assembly. The BSF is a 40-ft-long, all-composite, complete aircraft fuselage. To date, two of seven test configurations of the ATC and all three test configurations of the BSF have been completed. The paper briefly describes the various test configurations, testing procedure, and typical results for frequencies up to 250 Hz.

Pappa, Richard S.↗

NASA NTRS2001

STS-108 Flight Day 12 Highlights

On this twelfth day of the STS-108 mission, the deployment of the Starship-3 satellite is shown. Expedition 3 Commander Frank Culbertson, STS-108 Commander Dominic Gorie, Expedition 3 Flight Engineers Mikhail Turin and Vladimir Dezhurov, and STS-108 Pilot Mark Kelly are seen in an on-orbit interview, where they answer questions about their missions. Gorie, Kelly, and STS-108 Mission Specialist Linda Godwin are seen as they stow equipment on the middeck of Endeavour.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2014

The Ergonomics of Human Space Flight: NASA Vehicles and Spacesuits

Space...the final frontier...these are the voyages of the starship...wait, wait, wait...that's not right...let's try that again. NASA is currently focusing on developing multiple strategies to prepare humans for a future trip to Mars. This includes (1) learning and characterizing the human system while in the weightlessness of low earth orbit on the International Space Station and (2) seeding the creation of commercial inspired vehicles by providing guidance and funding to US companies. At the same time, NASA is slowly leading the efforts of reestablishing human deep space travel through the development of the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) known as Orion and the Space Launch System (SLS) with the interim aim of visiting and exploring an asteroid. Without Earth's gravity, current and future human space travel exposes humans to micro- and partial gravity conditions, which are known to force the body to adapt both physically and physiologically. Without the protection of Earth's atmosphere, space is hazardous to most living organisms. To protect themselves from these difficult conditions, Astronauts utilize pressurized spacesuits for both intravehicular travel and extravehicular activities (EVAs). Ensuring a safe living and working environment for space missions requires the creativity of scientists and engineers to assess and mitigate potential risks through engineering designs. The discipline of human factors and ergonomics at NASA is critical in making sure these designs are not just functionally designed for people to use, but are optimally designed to work within the capacities specific to the Astronaut Corps. This lecture will review both current and future NASA vehicles and spacesuits while providing an ergonomic perspective using case studies that were and are being carried out by the Anthropometry and Biomechanics Facility (ABF) at NASA's Johnson Space Center.

Reid, Christopher R.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Large Vehicle Lunar Landing Surface Interaction and In-Situ Resource Based Risk Mitigation

A key capability required for the exploration of planetary bodies is the ability to land on the surface. Previous work performed by NASA and other institutions has primarily focused on landing small spacecraft on planetary surfaces and the associated small-to-medium thrusters required for the soft landing. In the case of human exploration—particularly the establishment of long duration exploration and habitation outposts—the ability to land large landers, such as the SpaceX Starship, is necessary. These larger landing systems require the use of more powerful engines, with higher temperature engine exhaust and higher landing loads. Understanding the excavation of material by the engines, as well as the potential for the landing legs to sink into the subsurface, is key in ensuring reliable and safe landings. A further improvement in landing reliability can be achieved by constructing landing/launchpads, especially with in-situ resources.

Landing Pad↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Large Vehicle Lunar Landing Surface Interaction and In-Situ Resource Based Risk Mitigation: Landing & Launch Pads

A key capability required for the exploration of planetary bodies is the ability to land on the surface. Previous work performed by NASA and other institutions has primarily focused on landing small spacecraft on planetary surfaces and the associated small-to-medium thrusters required for the soft landing. In the case of human exploration—particularly the establishment of long duration exploration and habitation outposts—the ability to land large landers, such as the SpaceX Starship, is necessary. These larger landing systems require the use of more powerful engines, with higher engine exhaust temperatures and higher landing loads. Understanding the excavation of material by the engines, as well as the potential for the landing legs to sink into the subsurface, is key in ensuring reliable and safe landings. A further improvement in landing reliability can be achieved by constructing landing / launch pads, especially with in-situ resources. Some material excavation by the plume is inevitable, leaving at least a portion of the surface scoured and uneven under the lander and ejecting regolith particles and rocks at very high velocities. One possible solution would be to robotically build landing / launch pads (ideally autonomously) at the destination using in-situ materials. In this case, the first one or few landers will need to land on unimproved surfaces at higher risk; however, they would bring the required equipment to build the landing pads with mostly local resources, thus increasing the reliability of safe landing for subsequent larger landers. A number of methods to build in-situ landing and launch pads have already been developed. These methods include no or some addition of required binder additives to the local regolith material, different processing approaches and result in varying landing pad strengths. A sub-scale rocket engine plume, was used to simulate some of the conditions of a landing on the Moon to assess the effectiveness of various materials for an in-situ built landing pad, The GO2/GCH4 rocket engine fired on 1m2 area coupons of representative pad materials. The results will allow continued development towards materials that satisfy the landing pad properties required for the effective risk reduction and increased reliability for landing people and equipment on the lunar surface. This work contained two parts: (1) computer modeling of a large rocket engine plume interacting with regolith on the Moon, using the Granular Gas Flow Solver (GGFS) provided by CFD Research Corporation as well as other computational fluid dynamics codes (CFD) such as Loci/CHEM. (2) Developing landing/launch pad materials that could be used for in-situ construction on the lunar surface in the future, to mitigate the calculated effects of a large vehicle rocket engine landing and launching on the Moon. The resulting computed values of plume impingement surface temperature, stagnation pressure, gas velocity, shear stress and heat flux were then matched as closely as possible in the Earth’s atmosphere in a sub-scale rocket engine GO2/CH4 test which was provided by Masten Space Systems in Mojave, California. The rocket engine was mounted on a test stand with vertical translation capabilities so that the landing operations of a lander could be simulated (Figure 1).The pad materials test coupons were placed at the surface of a large bin containing simulated lunar basalt regolith and subjected to a test firing as shown in Figure 2. The results of this testing will be presented with related findings, analysis and discussion.

Plume Surface Interaction↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Large Vehicle Lunar Landing Surface Interaction and In-Situ Resource Based Risk Mitigation: Landing & Launch Pads

A key capability required for the exploration of planetary bodies is the ability to land on the surface. Previous work performed by NASA and other institutions has primarily focused on landing small spacecraft on planetary surfaces and the associated small-to-medium thrusters required for the soft landing. In the case of human exploration—particularly the establishment of long duration exploration and habitation outposts—the ability to land large landers, such as the SpaceX Starship, is necessary. These larger landing systems require the use of more powerful engines, with higher engine exhaust temperatures and higher landing loads. Understanding the excavation of material by the engines, as well as the potential for the landing legs to sink into the subsurface, is key in ensuring reliable and safe landings. A further improvement in landing reliability can be achieved by constructing landing / launch pads, especially with in-situ resources. Some material excavation by the plume is inevitable, leaving at least a portion of the surface scoured and uneven under the lander and ejecting regolith particles and rocks at very high velocities. One possible solution would be to robotically build landing / launch pads (ideally autonomously) at the destination using in-situ materials. In this case, the first one or few landers will need to land on unimproved surfaces at higher risk; however, they would bring the required equipment to build the landing pads with mostly local resources, thus increasing the reliability of safe landing for subsequent larger landers. A number of methods to build in-situ landing and launch pads have already been developed. These methods include no, or some, addition of required binder additives to the local regolith material, different processing approaches and result in varying landing pad strengths. A sub-scale rocket engine plume, was used to simulate some of the conditions of a landing on the Moon to assess the effectiveness of various materials for an in-situ built landing pad, The GO2/GCH4rocket engine fired on a 1m2area coupons of representative pad materials. The results will allow continued development towards materials that satisfy the landing pad properties required for the effective risk reduction and increased reliability for landing people and equipment on the lunar surface. This work contained two parts: (1) computer modeling of a large rocket engine plume interacting with regolith on the Moon, using the Granular Gas Flow Solver (GGFS) provided by CFD Research Corporation as well as other computational fluid dynamics codes (CFD) such as Loci/CHEM. (2) Developing landing/launch pad materials that could be used for in-situ construction on the lunar surface in the future, to mitigate the calculated effects of a large vehicle rocket engine landing and launching on the Moon.

Lunar↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Options for Offloading a 90-Ton Common Habitat from its Lander on the Surface of Mars

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage liquid oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. Measuring 8.4 meters in diameter and 15.6 meters in length, it is manufactured as a habitat and launched as such into space. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. There are obvious challenges associated with the delivery of such a large habitat, which may mass as much as 90-tons when initially deployed. The Mars destination in particular imposes extreme challenges due to Martian gravity. This paper identifies initial options for the offloading of a 90-ton Common Habitat from a lander spacecraft on the surface of Mars. On Mars, the Common Habitat is part of a surface outpost where a Habitation Zone includes the Common Habitat docked to a two-chamber airlock node, up to two logistics modules, and up to two pressurized rovers. It is connected by underground conduit to a radiator farm and communications tower assembly. These elements and other surface infrastructure, including robotic systems for surface preparation, are landed prior to the Common Habitat. In the baseline Common Habitat Architecture, the Common Habitat is delivered on the third heavy cargo flight. The Habitation Zone configuration dictates that the Common Habitat needs to be offloaded from the lander. All of the docked elements require direct access to the surface and the Common Habitat must actually be placed in a trench to lower its docking ports to be level with those of the mated elements. Additionally, the habitat must be emplaced in a horizontal configuration, while for any conceivable Earth launch system it must be launched in a vertical configuration. It is true that the Common Habitat must be offloaded from its lander on both the Moon and Mars and a common offloading system must therefore work in both destinations. Mars, however, is considered the driving case for offloading in most, but not all, aspects. A four-day internal study in 2021 recommended that a modified Starship be used to land the Common Habitat on Mars and considered multiple approaches to offload the Common Habitat from the payload section and lower it to the surface. The topic was presented at a public hackathon organized by the Johnson Space Center’s Emerge Employee Resource Group. One team took on the challenge and proposed a concept in some ways similar to the previously considered jib crane. Despite the excellent innovation in the team’s work, a number of study refinements are necessary to truly establish feasibility. These and other future work needed to mature the concept are discussed in this work.

Lander Offloading↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Langley Aerothermodynamic Laboratory Testing (2019-2022)

In support of flight programs, multiple wind tunnel entries were conducted on reentry vehicle configurations to investigate blunt body aeroheating environments. Blunt body block thermal protection system (TPS) roughness, the Low-Earth Orbit Flight Test of an Inflatable Decelerator aeroshell scalloping, and a woven TPS all were tested to determine the effects of those parameters on increased surface heating to the vehicle. Commercial Crew Program studies also utilized the speed and ease of testing in the LAL to analyze parametric databases of low-earth reentry configurations, like the Boeing CST-100, and vehicles designed to travel to the moon or Mars, such as the SpaceX Starship. LAL wind tunnel investigations also supported several DoD and AFRL flight projects, such as HIFiRE 6 and BOLT. External customers leveraged the LAL testing capability to advance their research programs, including UPSTAR, RocketLab, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Academia groups benefitted from the inexpensive cost to test in the tunnels for many university collaborations, such as studies conducted in partnership with the University of Maryland on a flat plate, using a pressure rake and investigating fluid structure interactions. Multiple studies in collaboration with Purdue considered boundary layer transition on various cone configurations. Another study was conducted using a cone with shaped roughness elements borrowed from the Arnold Engineering Development Complex. Internal testing included studies using a phosphor thermography system that can measure higher temperatures than the current LAL phosphor capability and a characterization study of the noise in the wind tunnel flow. The breadth of testing across research and commercial paradigms, both internal and external to NASA, different configurations, a variety of test techniques and aerodynamic and aerothermal environments will be discussed in this overview presentation of the recent work conducted in the LAL.

wind tunnel test↗

NASA NTRS2021

ATHLETE Offloader Limb as a High-capacity Crane

A new concept for the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extra-Terrestrial Explorer (ATHLETE) robotic constructor / mobility system employs tendon-driven actuation of individual limbs, similar to high-capacity cranes in terrestrial work environments, that can offload cargo from tall landers. While maintaining mechanical joints that allow each limb to function as a highly dexterous multi-Degree-Of-Freedom (DOF) robotic arm, tendon-driven truss sections increase the capacity of moment loads for extended configurations of the limb. The tendon-driven crane-like limb will be capable of offloading cargo from tall landers such as the SpaceX Starship. This paper describes the structural analysis, operations, calibration, and actuation of limbs designed to address specific target load cases that might be required for human exploration missions on planetary surfaces.

Wilcox, Brian↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Cryogenic Fluid Management Flight Demonstration Summary: SpaceX 2020 Tipping Point

NASA Science and Technology Mission Directorate is investing in advancement of on-orbit cryogenic fluid management technologies by partnering with industry through Tipping Point contracts with the primary objective of reducing development costs and schedules for infusion into long duration missions utilizing cryogenic propellant. SpaceX was selected as a partner in 2020 to conduct a demonstration of CFM technologies on a Starship Mission. This presentation provides a summary of the top-level goals and objectives of this contract and how NASA has structured this partnership.

cryogenic fluid management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Crew Seat for Human Exploration in Multiple Gravity Environments

This work attempts to develop a single crew seating solution that is applicable across a range of gravity environments encountered by spacecraft proposed in several conceptual spacecraft architectures. All of these spacecraft will need to provide some sort of stationary accommodation for the crew for performing various activities such as work in science laboratories, maintenance and repair facilities, medical care facilities, and spacecraft operations centers, as well as for basic habitation in crew quarters, entertainment / relaxation facilities, and crew dining facilities. Depending on the spacecraft or architecture, this stationary accommodation may be experienced continuously in microgravity, such as would be the case for the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle. Alternately, it could be in continuous lunar or Martian gravity, such as the Common Habitat base camps. It could experience fractional gravity, such as a Pressurized Rover for In-Space Missions at a Near Earth Asteroid or one of the Martian moons. It could alternate between artificial gravity and microgravity, such as the Nautilus-X. It could alternate between microgravity and lunar or Martian gravity, such as the SpaceX Starship Human Landing System or the Blue Origin Blue Moon Block 2 Human Landing System. Or it could be in continuous Earth gravity, such as ground trainer systems. Prior human spaceflight systems for stationary accommodation have been focused on microgravity applications. These systems have their own limitations and cannot be used in a gravity environment. A public crowdsourcing campaign generated dozens of ideas, which ultimately generated a Gecko Mobility Aids system for crew translation and the Multi-Gravity Crew Seat (MGCS) for stationary accommodation. The MGCS functions in gravity as a traditional terrestrial seat, performing functions of load for the overall body and forearms, as well as head and neck load relief while positioning the body within range of an intended task. In microgravity, the MGCS functions as a body restraint, securing the body against inadvertent drifting by applying a restraining pressure at the front and back of the thighs, shoulders, and back. The initial MGCS concept was developed in a NASA hackathon and was refined through a review of dozens of terrestrial seating styles. Additionally, a review of anthropometry and biomechanics data related to the neutral body posture was conducted to help inform the microgravity configuration of the MGCS. A series of CAD models were iteratively developed, with subject matter expert reviews leading to design improvements. A scale model was constructed and used with a humanoid model to demonstrate MGCS accommodation of a human-like body in both gravity and microgravity modes. Work to develop a full-scale protype of the MGCS is discussed, including design and fabrication of the headrest, arm rest, seat back, seat pan, seat base, and the conversion mechanisms. A 1-g human-in-the-loop evaluation of the prototype assessed the acceptability of performing seated activities in the MGCS, collecting data on the usability, comfort, and ease of ingress/egress. Based on the evaluation results, design modifications needed for reduced gravity testing are documented and initial work is indicated for a reduced gravity test plan.

Restraints and Mobility Aids↗

NASA NTRS2024

Temporary Atmospheres Produced By Human Activities on the Moon

Outgassing from materials, whether through the ascent/descent stages of lunar vehicles, airlock depressurizing, rover or astronaut suit outgassing, may cause an effect of unwanted accumulation of volatiles at the surface and exosphere. This is especially important at (or proximal) to permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) at the lunar poles. Herein, we provide estimates of expected outgassing from various human-landed objects on the Moon, including backpacks, airlocks, rovers, landers, trash and mining operations. Astronaut suits produce some level of oxygen outgassing (Helou et al., 2022), which may transport and condense in these PSRs, even in micro- cold traps (Glavin et al., 2010).We estimate the outgassing from drill mining and trash-to-gas conversion assuming a specific technology is operating. These outgassing systems can create local, temporary atmospheres in the vicinity (∼100 km radius) of the sources. The atmosphere may be particularly high within meters of the source. To obtain column densities for these temporary atmospheres, we first bracket ranges for the gas number loss as a function of time. We then derive the maximum distance traveled and the time the released molecules remain in the exosphere for a single ballistic hop, assuming the molecules are ejected from the surface of the object at its surface temperature. In some cases, such as the astronaut backpack and the rover, the temperature is that of the source. Given this information, an average and peak local exospheric density and column density can be estimated. We find that backpacks, airlock releases, and the Starship lander can create relatively high-density local atmospheres, with local near-lander outgassing water densities exceeding 107/cm3. This local water exosphere is over 106 times greater than the LADEE-derived lower limit of the natural water exosphere at ∼3/cm3. Thus, the anthropogenic temporary water exosphere will likely dominate the environment near the lander, making an assessment of the natural exospheric water environment difficult.

Rosemary M Killen↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effect of Engine Thrust and Isp Tradeoffs and Alternate Propellants on ΔV Budget and Architecture Mass for 1st Generation Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Flight Test Systems

Following the first Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) system test, also known as DRACO, the next NTP system to be developed would be the 1st Generation NTP system. An analysis was conducted to determine the performance of different vehicle configurations utilizing hydrogen (H-NTP), ammonia (A-NTP), and methane (M-NTP) as propellants launched onboard commercial launch vehicles. This was enabled by a quasi-steady-state power balance engine model and vehicle component physics that sized the vehicle system using Master Equipment List (MEL) parameters. The analysis considered configuration cases outlined by a matrix of different mission classes and vehicle configurations that covered the design space of the 1st Generation NTP system to explore various propellant options, engine architectures, and mission scopes. Four mission classes were evaluated which included single burn missions performing maneuvers having a ΔV of 1 km/s and 2.5 km/s followed by 2-burn and 4-burn missions that aimed to exhaust the launch vehicles volume or mass limitations. In all cases, the NTP systems with the lowest thrust class had the longest burn time of which A-NTP and M-NTP systems provided the longest and shortest burn times depending on the launch vehicle used while H-NTP systems tended to cluster together in the middle. Longer burn times could be useful as a testing platform to increase the time for data accumulation. Across the multi-burn cases, H-NTP systems were found to be volume limited while A-NTP and M-NTP systems were mass limited. Both single burn missions showed that A-NTP configurations provided the lowest dry mass given that ammonia had the highest density with comparable performance to M-NTP systems and no requirement for cryocoolers. The results showed that beyond the propellant selection type, the launch vehicle selection, which included Starship, New Glenn, Vulcan, Falcon 9 (recoverable), and Falcon Heavy (recoverable), was a primary driving factor in the test vehicle’s capabilities. Trends were determined based on a set of dimensionless parameters that included the mass ratio of inert mass to initial wetted mass, ratio of specific impulse to burn time, and a dimensionless engine parameter (ratio of impulse to engine momentum). These relationships found the “knees-in-the-curves” that could be a significant point of reference for the designer as they indicate a change in the trend which is located at a specific impulse to burn time ratio of 1, a mass ratio of 0.6, and an engine performance parameter of 4. This study did not attempt to make a recommendation rather provide the tools for the reader to select their own configuration based on their needs.

Propellant↗

NASA NTRS2021

Regolith Adaptive Modification Systems (Rams) - Final Report

Establishing human habitation on the Moon or Mars requires a palette of reaction chemistries for deconstructing extraterrestrial soils to extract structural metals, fuels, and propellants, as well as consolidating the soils into load-bearing forms. This report outlines progress related to the fundamental chemistry of in-situ resource utilization that is the focus of our Regolith Adaptive Modification System (RAMS) NIAC project. The RAMS concept is a breakthrough approach for preparing surfaces for early landing sites–and subsequent settlement operations–on the Lunar and Martian surface, among others. The RAMS concept is aligned with aspirations and capabilities of planned NASA Artemis mission. The approach is predicated on the sequential delivery of microcapsules onto lunar and Martian surfaces, which upon rupture, release payloads that react with regolith to yield geopolymerized subsurface slabs and surface high-strength steel skin and anchors . Through successively more exothermic reactions, we are seeking to build subsurface geopolymer slabs and use thermite reactions to constitute micro-alloyed advanced high-strength steel (AHSS) and Ti—Al—V pads on surfaces of planetary bodies, thereby circumventing the need for energy-intensive sintering technologies. As a precursor delivery system used to constitute landingpads, RAMS can be scaled for robotic, human-class, and more prominent (i.e., Starship) landers and will be configured within pressurized delivery systems that use radio beacons to outline coordinates for precision landings. Microcapsule delivery systems are designed to impel precursors (nanothermite mixtures and organosilanes), which activate in response to stress, heat, or impact to constitute deep geopolymerized slabs and AHSS skins. Dust mitigation is accomplished by reaction/solidification chemistry that yields a subsurface slab and advanced high-strength steel skin and anchors.

2021 NIAC Phase I↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effect of Engine Thrust and Isp Tradeoffs and Alternate Propellants on ΔV Budget and Architecture Mass for 1st Generation Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Flight Test Systems

Following the first Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) system test, also known as DRACO, the next NTP system to be developed would be the 1st Generation NTP system. An analysis was conducted to determine the performance of different vehicle configurations utilizing hydrogen (H-NTP), ammonia (A-NTP), and methane (M-NTP) as propellants launched onboard commercial launch vehicles. This was enabled by a quasi-steady-state power balance engine model and vehicle component physics that sized the vehicle system using Master Equipment List (MEL) parameters. The analysis considered configuration cases outlined by a matrix of different mission classes and vehicle configurations that covered the design space of the 1st Generation NTP system to explore various propellant options, engine architectures, and mission scopes. Four mission classes were evaluated which included single burn missions performing maneuvers having a ΔV of 1 km/s and 2.5 km/s followed by 2-burn and 4-burn missions that aimed to exhaust the launch vehicles volume or mass limitations. In all cases, the NTP systems with the lowest thrust class had the longest burn time of which A-NTP and M-NTP systems provided the longest and shortest burn times depending on the launch vehicle used while H-NTP systems tended to cluster together in the middle. Longer burn times could be useful as a testing platform to increase the time for data accumulation. Across the multi-burn cases, H-NTP systems were found to be volume limited while A-NTP and M-NTP systems were mass limited. Both single burn missions showed that A-NTP configurations provided the lowest dry mass given that ammonia had the highest density with comparable performance to M-NTP systems and no requirement for cryocoolers. The results showed that beyond the propellant selection type, the launch vehicle selection, which included Starship, New Glenn, Vulcan, Falcon 9 (recoverable), and Falcon Heavy (recoverable), was a primary driving factor in the test vehicle’s capabilities. Trends were determined based on a set of dimensionless parameters that included the mass ratio of inert mass to initial wetted mass, ratio of specific impulse to burn time, and a dimensionless engine parameter (ratio of impulse to engine momentum). These relationships found the “knees-in-the-curves” that could be a significant point of reference for the designer as they indicate a change in the trend which is located at a specific impulse to burn time ratio of 1, a mass ratio of 0.6, and an engine performance parameter of 4. This study did not attempt to make a recommendation rather provide the tools for the reader to select their own configuration based on their needs.

Propellant↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effect of Engine Thrust and Isp Tradeoffs and Alternate Propellants on ΔV Budget and Architecture Mass for 1st Generation Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Flight Test Systems

Following the first Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) system test, also known as DRACO, the next NTP system to be developed would be the 1st Generation NTP system. An analysis was conducted to determine the performance of different vehicle configurations utilizing hydrogen (H-NTP), ammonia (A-NTP), and methane (M-NTP) as propellants launched onboard commercial launch vehicles. This was enabled by a quasi-steady-state power balance engine model and vehicle component physics that sized the vehicle system using Master Equipment List (MEL) parameters. The analysis considered configuration cases outlined by a matrix of different mission classes and vehicle configurations that covered the design space of the 1st Generation NTP system to explore various propellant options, engine architectures, and mission scopes. Four mission classes were evaluated which included single burn missions performing maneuvers having a ΔV of 1 km/s and 2.5 km/s followed by 2-burn and 4-burn missions that aimed to exhaust the launch vehicles volume or mass limitations. In all cases, the NTP systems with the lowest thrust class had the longest burn time of which A-NTP and M-NTP systems provided the longest and shortest burn times depending on the launch vehicle used while H-NTP systems tended to cluster together in the middle. Longer burn times could be useful as a testing platform to increase the time for data accumulation. Across the multi-burn cases, H-NTP systems were found to be volume limited while A-NTP and M-NTP systems were mass limited. Both single burn missions showed that A-NTP configurations provided the lowest dry mass given that ammonia had the highest density with comparable performance to M-NTP systems and no requirement for cryocoolers. The results showed that beyond the propellant selection type, the launch vehicle selection, which included Starship, New Glenn, Vulcan, Falcon 9 (recoverable), and Falcon Heavy (recoverable), was a primary driving factor in the test vehicle’s capabilities. Trends were determined based on a set of dimensionless parameters that included the mass ratio of inert mass to initial wetted mass, ratio of specific impulse to burn time, and a dimensionless engine parameter (ratio of impulse to engine momentum). These relationships found the “knees-in-the-curves” that could be a significant point of reference for the designer as they indicate a change in the trend which is located at a specific impulse to burn time ratio of 1, a mass ratio of 0.6, and an engine performance parameter of 4. This study did not attempt to make a recommendation rather provide the tools for the reader to select their own configuration based on their needs.

Propellant↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

SERENE: Saturn Enceladus Return Explorer with Nuclear Electric Propulsion

A ‘quick’ Enceladus sample return mission concept was developed based on the scientist recommendations at the recent ‘Accelerating Space Science with Nuclear Technology Workshop’. The Nuclear Electric Propulsion spacecraft assumed a follow-on 40 kWe nuclear reactor using the demonstrated 40 kWe Fission Surface Power system, expected in the early 2030s. The NEP vehicle also utilized a set of NEXT-C ion thrusters as well as planned Artemis commercial launchers. By launching the 40 kW NEP vehicle on a Starship and adding the propellants of 15 tankers, the 27t probe could be sent on a direct trajectory to Saturn (no Earth or Jupiter flybys) where NEP was used for Saturn capture, spiral down, spiral up and return to the Earth. A small lander obtained the surface Enceladus sample. Using the 40 kW NEP provided a round-trip time of only 16.5 years. A second option was more attractive from a science perspective whereby the NEP vehicle would deliver a large, 6t chemical lander to low Enceladus orbit where it would grab and return a sample to Earth (similar to the recent Orbilander design but in reverse). After deploying the lander, the NEP vehicle would stay in Saturn space performing a moon tour by orbiting four more moons and mapping the large moon of Titan. This option took slightly longer (18.5 yrs) due to the chemical return leg limitations. Both options demonstrated the agility, payload capability, and sample return goals the workshop recommended. An all-chemical option with two stages was roughly analyzed but took 21.5 yrs and required a Jupiter gravity assist.

Nuclear Electric Propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2026

Uranus Orbiter and Probe: Mission Challenges and Concept Updates Since the Origins, Worlds, and Life Decadal Survey

Origins, Worlds, and Life: Planetary Science and Astrobiology in the Next Decade identified a Uranus Orbiter and Probe as the highest-priority strategic mission for the decade 2023–2032, as it enables broad cross-disciplinary science in the largely unexplored Uranian system. The mission architecture evaluated by the Decadal Survey was a singular proof of concept demonstrating that a moderately instrumented mission could deliver Decadal-priority science with a reduced cost and risk posture by leveraging existing technologies to the maximum extent possible. With revised assumptions since the Decadal, we have explored a large trade space including launch vehicles, propulsion options, cruise trajectories, available power sources, viable concept of operations, and science data return for later launch dates without a Jupiter gravity assist. The most repeatable trajectory solutions employ either a commercially derived solar electric propulsion (SEP) transfer stage or the availability of a more capable launch vehicle under development, such as the SpaceX Starship. Orbit insertion has been moved farther from Uranus to acknowledge the remaining uncertainty in Uranian ring structure. A streamlined, SEP-adaptable, orbiter design was developed using two Next Gen Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators, and the probe design was matured, reducing the entry gravitational acceleration, and assuming the largest Decadal-recommended payload to provide margin for future instrument selections. With this updated design, we also constructed a detailed concept of operations for three representative science cases, returning 13–15 Gbit of science data and spacecraft telemetry per ∼34 day orbit.

Amy A Simon↗