Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “phased mission systems”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

Systematic Phase Curve Study of Known Transiting Systems from Year One of the TESS Mission

We present a systematic phase curve analysis of known transiting systems observed by the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) during year one of the primary mission. Using theoretical predictions for the amplitude of the planetary longitudinal atmospheric brightness modulation, stellar ellipsoidal distortion and Doppler boosting, as well as brightness considerations to select targets with likely detectable signals, we applied a uniform data processing and light-curve modeling framework to fit the full-orbit phase curves of 22 transiting systems with planet-mass or brown dwarf companions, including previously published systems. Statistically significant secondary eclipse depths and/or atmospheric brightness modulation amplitudes were measured for HIP 65A, WASP-18, WASP-19, WASP-72, WASP-100, WASP-111, WASP-121, and WASP-122/KELT-14. For WASP-100b, we found marginal evidence that the brightest region of the atmosphere is shifted eastward away from the substellar point. We detected significant ellipsoidal distortion signals in the light curves of HIP 65A, TOI-503, WASP-18, and WASP-30, with HIP 65A, TOI-503 and WASP-18 also exhibiting Doppler boosting. The measured amplitudes of these signals agree with the predictions of theoretical models. Combining the optical secondary eclipse depths with previously published Spitzer 3.6 and 4.5 μm measurements, we derived dayside brightness temperatures and visible-light geometric albedos for a subset of the analyzed systems. We also calculated updated transit ephemerides combining the transit timings from the TESS light curves with previous literature values.

Ian Wong↗
NASA NTRS1976

STS payloads mission control study phase A-1, volume 1, phases A and A-1

The Space Transportation System (STS) Payloads Mission Control Phase A-1 Study results are summarized. The composite resources required to accomplish Joint STS-Payload preflight preparation for joint flight operations, including flight planning, training, and simulations are presented. The Standard Payload Operations Control Center (POCC) concept was developed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2006

A Holistic Approach for Risk Management During Design

In this paper, an approach for the identification, assessment, mitigation and continuous management of risks during the process of designing a space mission is presented. This approach has been developed by observing the risk patterns that occur at the Project Design Center of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (TeamX) which develops conceptual, concurrent design of Space Missions. TeamX develops an end-to-end conceptual design of a Space Mission in a matter of one or two weeks. As the risk chair in TeamX, the author has had the opportunity to observe the risk patterns that occur during design over the course of many design sessions. This paper introduces an abstraction and generalization of those patterns. Risk is defined as anything that can go wrong, along with its approximate likelihood and consequence. The indicators, and causes, and effects of these risks are cross cutting across the multiple levels of people and processes involved in the design, and the actual design product itself.

reliability analysis↗
NASA NTRS2019

Managing Flagship Missions to Reduce Cost and Schedule

Flagship missions are highly complex with highly nested systems. This level of complexity poses unique management problems as complexity influences risk which, in turn, affects cost and schedule. Establishing a strong technical and programmatic leadership team is critical to mission success. Developing and using a mission architecture is critical to informing the management organization, product ownership, interface and integration relationships, schedule organization, and integration and test paths. In highly nested systems, the mission phasing can be significantly out of sync with product phasing. Targeted technology development prior to Phase A is critical to reducing risk. Early architecture, concept design, and requirements development is critical to reducing risk. Modular design; pathfinders; parallel manufacturing and integration and test paths; and properly handling institutional requirements across interfaces are all management techniques that can be applied to reduce risk. NASA’s large strategic missions, sometimes referred to as flagship missions, are designed to provide answers to some of the most compelling scientific questions being asked. These types of missions are a series of highly nested subsystems that pose unique management problems when compared to more traditional instrument and spacecraft designs. They typically have an overall architecture that is very complex and nested; they typically require a tremendous amount of technology development; they typically involve many contractors and subcontractors with many associated contracts; and they typically involve staff from all over the world. Successful management of a flagship requires the balance between science requirements, engineering and technology capabilities, and resource constraints. Mismanaging these flagship missions can and will lead to significant cost and schedule growth, both of which are detrimental to NASA’s overall reputation which, in turn, is detrimental to the development of future flagship missions. While many of the same management principles used on smaller instruments and spacecraft are relevant, managing flagship missions requires an evolution of those current best practices to better address the specific needs and additional complexity and vastness of these missions. This paper explores how to leverage lessons learned from previous flagship missions to better manage flagship missions in the future.

Hylan, Jason↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aggregate Risk Tool for Human Space Flight

This project utilized Data fusion capabilities developed from the 2020-2022 Information Fusion (IFDA) IRAD to enhance functionality of a Human Spaceflight (HSF) Aggregate Risk Product developed by the JSC Flight Safety Office. The tool compiles and presents risk data from multiple Program and Commercial Provider vehicles to provide a holistic assessment of residual risk to Program Managers and Technical Authorities prior to HSF Launches. The aggregation or coupling of risks from multiple sources (Examples: PRA, variances, anomaly data bases, Program Risk Management data bases, technical review board minutes, Hazard Analysis, etc.) when analyzed, identify potential areas of elevated risk in components, systems or mission phases that would otherwise be undetected by nonintegrated program risk management tools and possesses.

Patrick Huckaby↗
NASA NTRS2022

Aggregate Risk Tool for Human Space Flight

This tool utilizes Data fusion capabilities developed from the 2020-2022 Information Fusion (IFDA) IRAD to enhance functionality of a Human Spaceflight (HSF) Aggregate Risk Product developed by the JSC Flight Safety Office. The tool compiles and present risk data from multiple Program and Commercial Provider sources to provide a holistic assessment for Program Managers and Technical Authorities to evaluate residual risk prior to HSF Launches. The aggregation, or coupling of risks from multiple sources (Ex: PRA, variances, anomaly data bases, CRM data, technical review board minutes, Hazard Analysis, etc.) identifies areas of elevated risk in components, systems or mission phases that would otherwise be undetected by non-integrated program risk management tools and possesses. Data is then displayed in an interactive user interface/dashboard that enables users to see potential areas of concern requiring more in-depth analysis.

Patrick M Huckaby↗
NASA NTRS2016

Design Considerations for Spacecraft Operations During Uncrewed Dormant Phases of Human Exploration Missions

NASA is transforming human spaceflight. The Agency is shifting from an exploration-based program with human activities in low Earth orbit (LEO) and targeted robotic missions in deep space to a more sustainable and integrated pioneering approach. However, pioneering space involves daunting technical challenges of transportation, maintaining health, and enabling crew productivity for long durations in remote, hostile, and alien environments. Subject matter experts from NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) are currently studying a human exploration campaign that involves deployment of assets for planetary exploration. This study, called the Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) study, explores options with solar electric propulsion as a central component of the transportation architecture. This particular in-space transportation option often results in long duration transit to destinations. The EMC study is also investigating deployed human rated systems like landers, habitats, rovers, power systems and ISRU system to the surface of Mars, which also will involve long dormant periods when these systems are staged on the surface. In order to enable the EMC architecture, campaign and element design leads along with system and capability development experts from HEOMD's System Maturation Team (SMT) have identified additional capabilities, systems and operation modes that will sustain these systems especially during these dormant phases of the mission. Dormancy is defined by the absence of crew and relative inactivity of the systems. For EMC missions, dormant periods could range from several months to several years. Two aspects of uncrewed dormant operations are considered herein: (1) the vehicle systems that are placed in a dormant state and (2) the autonomous vehicle systems and robotic capabilities that monitor, maintain, and repair the vehicle and systems. This paper describes the mission stages of dormancy operations, phases of dormant operations, and critical system capabilities that are needed for dormant operations. This paper will compare dormancy operations of past robotic missions to identify lessons that can be applied to planned human exploration missions. Finally, this paper will also identify future work and analysis planned to assess system performance metrics and integrated system operations.

Williams-Byrd, Julie↗
NASA NTRS1972

Tracking and data system support for the Mariner Mars 1971 mission. Prelaunch phase through first trajectory correction maneuver, volume 1

The DSN command system provided the capability to enter commands in a computer at the deep space stations for transmission to the spacecraft. The high-rate telemetry system operated at 16,200 bits/sec. This system will permit return to DSS 14 of full-resolution television pictures from the spacecraft tape recorder, plus the other science experiment data, during the two playback periods of each Goldstone pass planned for each corresponding orbit. Other features included 4800 bits/sec modem high-speed data lines from all deep space stations to Space Flight Operations Facility (SFOF) and the Goddard Space Flight Center, as well as 50,000 bits/sec wideband data lines from DSS 14 to the SFOF, thus providing the capability for data flow of two 16,200 bits/sec high-rate telemetry data streams in real time. The TDS performed prelaunch training and testing and provided support for the Mariner Mars 1971/Mission Operations System training and testing. The facilities of the ETR, DSS 71, and stations of the MSFN provided flight support coverage at launch and during the near-earth phase. The DSSs 12, 14, 41, and 51 of the DSN provided the deep space phase support from 30 May 1971 through 4 June 1971.

Laeser, R. P.↗
NASA NTRS1972

A study of system requirements for Phobos/Deimos missions. Volume 4: Phase 3 results, combined missions to Mars and its satellites

Combined missions to Mars and Phobos/Deimos were considered in relation to large scientific returns at a low total cost. A matrix of all feasible major combined mission concepts was compiled. The most promising approach was selected from which a nominal mission profile was developed. A systems analysis was performed to trade off performance, configuration, and cost characteristics of candidate mission concepts. Configuration and subsystem optimization analysis were then conducted from which a baseline and an alternate program were selected. Program schedules and cost estimates were prepared for the recommended and alternate program.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

Conceptual definition of a 50-100 kWe NEP system for planetary science missions

The Phase 1 objective of this project is to assess the applicability of a common Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) flight system of the 50-100 kWe power class to meet the advanced transportation requirements of a suite of planetary science (robotic) missions, accounting for differences in mission-specific payloads and delivery requirements. The candidate missions are as follows: (1) Comet Nucleus Sample Return; (2) Multiple Mainbelt Asteroid Rendezvous; (3) Jupiter Grand Tour (Galilean satellites and magnetosphere); (4) Uranus Orbiter/Probe (atmospheric entry and landers); (5) Neptune Orbiter/Probe (atmospheric entry and landers); and (6) Pluto-Charon Orbiter/Lander. The discussion is presented in vugraph form.

Friedlander, Alan↗