Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “NASA's Space Place”

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 433 records · Page 24

New shape in the sky

The 'dual keel' design currently under consideration for NASA's Space Station program is of rectangular configuration to yield greater space along the truss structure for the attachment of payloads, by comparison with a previously considered single-keel truss design. The placing of the pressurized modules much nearer the center of gravity of this station configuration allows accelerations that are closer to 1 micro-g than the earlier alternative. The U.S. Servicing Facility and Telerobotic System, and the Canadian Mobile Servicing Center, will be incorporated in order to meet a large variety of Space Station servicing requirements.

Aaron, J. W.↗

Use of the Orbital Maneuvering Vehicle (OMV) for placement and retrieval of spacecraft and platforms

This paper describes the Orbital Maneuvering Vehicle (OMV) and its intended role as a key element of NASA's space infrastructure. Status, plans, and operational modes are summarized. Typical mission scenarios supporting the servicing of spacecraft and platforms from both the Shuttle and the Space Station are described. Particular emphasis is placed on the orbital mechanics associated with the placement and retrieval of spacecraft and platforms. For example, the optimum placement of a Space Station co-orbiting spacecraft in order to maximize the time interval during which it can be retrieved by a Space Station based OMV is shown as a function of the ballistic coefficient of the spacecraft.

Snoddy, William C.↗

Application of Vacuum Swing Adsorption for Carbon Dioxide and Water Vapor Removal from Manned Spacecraft Atmospheres

In NASA's Vision for Space Exploration (Bush, 2004), (Griffin, 2007), humans will once again travel beyond the confines of earth's gravity, this time to remain there for extended periods. These forays will place unprecedented demands on launch systems. They must not only blast out of earth's gravity well as during the Apollo moon missions, but also liftoff the supplies needed to sustain a larger crew over much longer periods. Thus all spacecraft systems, including those for the separation of metabolic carbon dioxide and water from a crewed vehicle, must be minimized with respect to mass, power, and volume. Emphasis is also placed on system robustness both to minimize replacement parts and ensure crew safety when a quick return to earth is not possible. For short-term phases of manned space exploration, such as transit from the earth to the moon, venting of metabolic carbon dioxide and water to space is more efficient than the inclusion of large recycling systems on the spacecraft. The baseline system for the Orion spacecraft is an amine-based vacuum swing system (Smith, Perry et aI., 2006). As part of the development of an alternative approach, a sorbent-based CO2 and H2O removal system (Knox, Adams et aI., 2006), subscale testing was conducted to evaluate potential performance improvements obtainable by recuperating the heat of adsorption to aid in vacuum desorption. This bed design is shown in Figure 1, is depicted here with a lattice structure instead of reticulated foam for heat transfer. The slot widths are approximately 1.2 mm wide and 8.5 mm long. Bed depth is approximately 4.7 mm. Headers (not shown) were produced by the stereo lithography apparatus at MSFC.

Knox, J.↗

Quantifying Medical Risk on a Long Duration Lunar Mission: A Demonstration of NASA’s IMPACT Tradespace Analysis Tool

Background NASA’s human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. The distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and constraints on the medical evacuation of astronauts. Mass, volume, power, and data will be limited while higher demands will be placed on the crew to manage medical care. NASA’s Moon to Mars exploration strategy lays out increasingly complex Artemis missions both in terms of duration and operations. In these more challenging deep space missions, it is important to quantitatively estimate the human medical risk to inform a traditional heuristic approach to medical risk. Prior tools have been developed for missions in low Earth orbit, but a new tool is required to plan for future exploration missions. Methods IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a risk assessment tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design by quantitatively estimating mission medical risk. IMPACT v1.0 includes a novel evidence library baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; the addition of medical resources; and the ability for rapid and iterative analysis. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life, consideration of the need for return to definitive care (medical evacuation), and an estimate of crew time affected due to medical conditions. A notional long duration lunar orbit and lunar surface design reference mission (DRM) was chosen with a 4-astronaut crew to represent a sustained exploration Artemis mission. Results/Discussion Overall, IMPACT successfully quantified medical risk and derived an optimized medical system to support crew on a long duration lunar mission. In this DRM, the calculated loss of crew life from a medical event was 0.008 events per mission, risk of potential need for evacuation was 0.30 events per mission, and cumulative crew time affected by medical conditions was 103 days. The medical conditions that most contributed to overall medical risk were decompression sickness, trauma conditions, and respiratory failure. The conditions that had the largest effects on crew performance included musculoskeletal injuries and lunar dust exposure. The IMPACT-generated medical system included resources that target the most common and highest risk conditions. This systematic analysis demonstrates the value of the IMPACT tool in medical system design for human exploration spaceflight missions.

Missions to Mars↗

Quantifying Medical Risk on a Long Duration Lunar Mission: A Demonstration of NASA’s IMPACT Tradespace Analysis Tool

Background NASA’s human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. The distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and constraints on the medical evacuation of astronauts. Mass, volume, power, and data will be limited while higher demands will be placed on the crew to manage medical care. NASA’s Moon to Mars exploration strategy lays out increasingly complex Artemis missions both in terms of duration and operations. In these more challenging deep space missions, it is important to quantitatively estimate the human medical risk to inform a traditional heuristic approach to medical risk. Prior tools have been developed for missions in low Earth orbit, but a new tool is required to plan for future exploration missions. Methods IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a risk assessment tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design by quantitatively estimating mission medical risk. IMPACT v1.0 includes a novel evidence library baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; the addition of medical resources; and the ability for rapid and iterative analysis. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life, consideration of the need for return to definitive care (medical evacuation), and an estimate of crew time affected due to medical conditions. A notional long duration lunar orbit and lunar surface design reference mission (DRM) was chosen with a 4-astronaut crew to represent a sustained exploration Artemis mission. Results/Discussion Overall, IMPACT successfully quantified medical risk and derived an optimized medical system to support crew on a long duration lunar mission. In this DRM, the calculated loss of crew life from a medical event was 0.008 events per mission, risk of potential need for evacuation was 0.30 events per mission, and cumulative crew time affected by medical conditions was 103 days. The medical conditions that most contributed to overall medical risk were decompression sickness, trauma conditions, and respiratory failure. The conditions that had the largest effects on crew performance included musculoskeletal injuries and lunar dust exposure. The IMPACT-generated medical system included resources that target the most common and highest risk conditions. This systematic analysis demonstrates the value of the IMPACT tool in medical system design for human exploration spaceflight missions.

Missions to Mars↗

A New Architecture for Visualization: Open Mission Control Technologies

Open Mission Control Technologies (MCT) is a new architecture for visualisation of mission data. Driven by requirements for new mission capabilities, including distributed mission operations, access to data anywhere, customization by users, synthesis of multiple data sources, and flexibility for multi-mission adaptation, Open MCT provides users with an integrated customizable environment. Developed at NASAs Ames Research Center (ARC), in collaboration with NASAs Advanced Multimission Operations System (AMMOS) and NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Open MCT is getting its first mission use on the Jason 3 Mission, and is also available in the testbed for the Mars 2020 Rover and for development use for NASAs Resource Prospector Lunar Rover. The open source nature of the project provides for use outside of space missions, including open source contributions from a community of users. The defining features of Open MCT for mission users are data integration, end user composition and multiple views. Data integration provides access to mission data across domains in one place, making data such as activities, timelines, telemetry, imagery, event timers and procedures available in one place, without application switching. End user composition provides users with layouts, which act as a canvas to assemble visualisations. Multiple views provide the capability to view the same data in different ways, with live switching of data views in place. Open MCT is browser based, and works on the desktop as well as tablets and phones, providing access to data anywhere. An early use case for mobile data access took place on the Resource Prospector (RP) Mission Distributed Operations Test, in which rover engineers in the field were able to view telemetry on their phones. We envision this capability providing decision support to on console operators from off duty personnel. The plug-in architecture also allows for adaptation for different mission capabilities. Different data types and capabilities may be added or removed using plugins. An API provides a means to write new capabilities and to create data adaptors. Data plugins exist for mission data sources for NASA missions. Adaptors have been written by international and commercial users. Open MCT is open source. Open source enables collaborative development across organizations and also makes the product available outside of the space community, providing a potential source of usage and ideas to drive product design and development. The combination of open source with an Apache 2 license, and distribution on GitHub, has enabled an active community of users and contributors. The spectrum of users for Open MCT is, to our knowledge, unprecedented for mission software. In addition to our NASA users, we have, through open source, had users and inquires on projects ranging from Internet of Things, to radio hobbyists, to farming projects. We have an active community of contributors, enabling a flow of ideas inside and outside of the space community.

Trimble, Jay↗

NASA's first in-space optical gyroscope: A technology experiment on the X ray Timing Explorer spacecraft

A technology experiment on the X-ray Timing Explorer spacecraft to determine the feasibility of Interferometric Fiber Optic Gyroscopes for space flight navigation is described. The experiment consists of placing a medium grade fiber optic gyroscope in parallel with the spacecraft's inertial reference unit. The performance of the fiber optic gyroscope will be monitored and compared to the primary mechanical gyroscope's performance throughout the two-year mission life.

Unger, Glenn↗

Reducing the Risk of Human Missions to Mars Through Testing

During the summer of 2002 the NASA Deputy Administrator charted an internal NASA planning group to develop the rationale for exploration beyond low-Earth orbit. This team, termed the Exploration Blueprint, performed architecture analyses to develop roadmaps for how to accomplish the first steps beyond Low-Earth Orbit through the human exploration of Mars. The previous NASA Exploration Team (NEXT) activities laid the foundation and framework for development of NASA s Integrated Space Plan. The reference missions resulting from the analysis performed by the Exploration Blueprint team formed the basis for requirement definition, systems development, technology roadmapping, and risk assessments for future human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit. Emphasis was placed on developing recommendations on what could be done now to effect future exploration activities. The Exploration Blueprint team embraced the Stepping Stone approach to exploration where human and robotic activities are conducted through progressive expansion outward beyond low- Earth orbit. Results from this study produced a long-term strategy for exploration with near-term implementation plans, program recommendations, and technology investments. Specific results included the development of a common exploration crew vehicle concept, a unified space nuclear strategy, focused bioastronautics research objectives, and an integrated human and robotic exploration strategy. Recommendations from the Exploration Blueprint included the endorsement of the Nuclear Systems Initiative, augmentation of the bioastronautics research, a focused space transportation program including heavy-lift launch and a common exploration vehicle design for ISS and exploration missions, as well as an integrated human and robotic exploration strategy for Mars. Following the results of the Exploration Blueprint study, the NASA Administrator has asked for a recommendation by June, 2003 on the next steps in human and robotic exploration in order to put into context an updated Integrated Space Transportation Plan (post- Columbia) and guide Agency planning. NASA was on the verge of committing significant funding in programs that would be better served if longer term goals were better known including the Orbital Space Plane, research on the ISS, National Aerospace Initiative, Shuttle Life Extension Program, Project Prometheus, as well as a wide range of technology development throughout the Agency. Much of the focus during this period was on integrating the results from the previous studies into more concrete implementation strategies in order to understand the relationship between NASA programs, timing, and resulting budgetary implications. This resulted in an integrated approach including lunar surface operations to retire risk of human Mars missions, maximum use of common and modular systems including what was termed the exploration transfer vehicle, Earth orbit and lunar surface demonstrations of long-life systems, collaboration of human and robotic missions to vastly increase mission return, and high-efficiency transportation systems (nuclear) for deep-space transportation and power. The data provided in this summary viewgraph presentation was developed to begin to address one of the key elements of the emerging implementation strategy, namely how lunar missions help retire risk of human missions to Mars. During this process the scope of the activity broadened into the issue of how testing in general, in various venues including the Moon, can help reduce the risk for Mars missions.

Drake, Bret G.↗

Compression under a mechanical counter pressure space suit glove

Background: Current gas-pressurized space suits are bulky stiff shells severely limiting astronaut function and capability. A mechanical counter pressure (MCP) space suit in the form of a tight elastic garment could dramatically improve extravehicular activity (EVA) dexterity, but also be advantageous in safety, cost, mass and volume. The purpose of this study was to verify that a prototype MCP glove exerts the design compression of 200 mmHg, a pressure similar to the current NASA EVA suit. Methods: Seven male subjects donned a pressure measurement array and MCP glove on the right hand, which was placed into a partial vacuum chamber. Average compression was recorded on the palm, the bottom of the middle finger, the top of the middle finger and the dorsum of the hand at pressures of 760 (ambient), 660 and 580 mmHg. The vacuum chamber was used to simulate the pressure difference between the low breathing pressure of the current NASA space suits (approximately 200 mmHg) and an unprotected hand in space. Results: At ambient conditions, the MCP glove compressed the dorsum of the hand at 203.5 +/- 22.7 mmHg, the bottom of the middle finger at 179.4 +/- 16.0 mmHg, and the top of the middle finger at 183.8 +/- 22.6 mmHg. The palm compression was significantly lower (59.6 +/- 18.8 mmHg, p<0.001). There was no significant change in glove compression with the chamber pressure reductions. Conclusions: The MCP glove compressed the dorsum of the hand and middle finger at the design pressure.

NASA Discipline Life Sciences Technologies↗

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

This Annual Report of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) presents results of activities during calendar year 2001. The year was marked by significant achievements in the Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) programs and encouraging accomplishments by the Aerospace Technology Enterprise. Unfortunately, there were also disquieting mishaps with the X-43, a LearJet, and a wind tunnel. Each mishap was analyzed in an orderly process to ascertain causes and derive lessons learned. Both these accomplishments and the responses to the mishaps led the Panel to conclude that safety and risk management is currently being well served within NASA. NASA's operations evidence high levels of safety consciousness and sincere efforts to place safety foremost. Nevertheless, the Panel's safety concerns have never been greater. This dichotomy has arisen because the focus of most NASA programs has been directed toward program survival rather than effective life cycle planning. Last year's Annual Report focused on the need for NASA to adopt a realistically long planning horizon for the aging Space Shuttle so that safety would not erode. NASA's response to the report concurred with this finding. Nevertheless, there has been a greater emphasis on current operations to the apparent detriment of long-term planning. Budget cutbacks and shifts in priorities have severely limited the resources available to the Space Shuttle and ISS for application to risk-reduction and life-extension efforts. As a result, funds originally intended for long-term safety-related activities have been used for operations. Thus, while safety continues to be well served at present, the basis for future safety has eroded. Section II of this report develops this theme in more detail and presents several important, overarching findings and recommendations that apply to many if not all of NASA's programs. Section III of the report presents other significant findings, recommendations and supporting material applicable to specific program areas. Appendix A presents a list of Panel members. Appendix B contains the reaction of the ASAP to NASA's response to the calendar year 2000 findings and recommendations. In accordance with a practice started last year, this Appendix includes brief narratives as well as classifications of the responses as 'open,' 'closed,' or 'continuing.' Appendix C details the Panel's activities during the reporting period.

Source record↗

Aeronautics and Space Report of the President: Fiscal Year 1998 Activities

The National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 directed the annual Aeronautics and Space Report to include a "comprehensive description of the programmed activities and the accomplishments of all agencies of the United States in the field of aeronautics and space activities during the preceding calendar year. In recent years, the reports have been prepared on a fiscal year (FY) basis, consistent with the budgetary period now used in programs of the Federal Government. This year's report covers activities that took place from October 1, 1997, through September 30, 1998. The activities of agencies included are NASA, the Department of Defense, The Federal Aviation Administration, the Department of Commerce, the Department of the Interior, the Federal Communications Commission, the Department of Agriculture, the National Science Foundation, the Department of State, the Department of Energy, the Smithsonian Institution, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Information Agency. Appendices cover the U.S. Government Spacecraft Record, World Record of Space Launches Successful in Attaining Earth Orbit or Beyond , Successful Launches to Orbit on U.S. Launch Vehicles, October 1, 1997-September 30, 1998, U.S. and Russian Human Space Flights, 1961-September 30, 1998, U.S. Space Launch Vehicles, Space Activities of the U.S. Government-Historical Budget Summary, Space Activities of the U.S. Government-Budget Authority in Equivalent FY 1998 Dollars, Federal Space Activities Budget, Federal Aeronautics Budget, and a glossary

Source record↗

Space Photovoltaic Research and Technology 1985: High Efficiency, Space Environment, and Array Technology

The seventh NASA Conference on Space Photovoltaic Research and Technology was held at NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, from 30 April until 2 May 1985. Its purpose was to assess the progress made, the problems remaining, and future strategy for space photovoltaic research. Particular emphasis was placed on high efficiency, space environment, and array technology.

Source record↗

Education and Public Outreach

This Annual Report is a summary of nearly 400 Education and Public Outreach (E/PO) products and activities developed or carried out in FY2000 under NASA's Office of Space Science (OSS) E/PO program. It includes products and activities developed by OSS missions and research programs, innovative space science concepts developed under the Initiative to Develop Education through Astronomy and Space Science (IDEAS) Program, projects initiated under the Minority University Education and Research Partnership Initiative in Space Science, and a number of additional comprehensive or special purpose programs managed by OSS at NASA Headquarters. Taking into account the fact that many of the activities reported involve multiple events that took place in a variety of venues, the total number of E/PO events reported for FY2000 is over 1,500, with events having taken place in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, one US Territory (Guam), and four foreign nations (Australia, Canada, Mexico, and Peru).

Sakimoto, Philip↗

A Model-Based Framework for NASA Science Mission Formulation

This paper details an effort to implement NASA systems engineering standards and practices using a Digital System Model (DSM), which we also refer to as the system architecture model (SAM). Creating a SAM at the beginning of a design effort helps systems engineer identify errors, inconsistencies, and miscommunications as early as possible. Such issues can then be resolved before it becomes costly and requires significant rework to do so. A pre-formulation SAM also enables advanced trade studies at the earliest stage of concept development. This results in “win-wins” where architecture changes can reduce cost without decreasing effectiveness, or increase effectiveness without increasing cost. SAMs also streamline the creation of project documentation and facilitate superior dialogue between science, engineering, and management stakeholders. Common artifacts such as Master Equipment Lists (MELs), Science Traceability Matrices (STMs), and Mission Traceability Matrices (MTMs), can be automatically maintained through requirements and structural models in the SAM. Key performance parameters (and changes to them) can be tied to simulations in the SAM, allowing far more rapid and extensive trade space exploration. As will be shown in this work, these advantages have been realized for the first time in an actual NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) pre-phase A and phase A concept study. Modelbased design tools have been developed in a general, modular manner to maximize reuse on future programs. Focus is placed on structural and requirements architecture modeling. Data is ingested into the SAM from existing discipline model outputs (e.g. MS Excel spreadsheets) and used to update a SysML structural model. A mission requirements model is created within the SAM, containing mission specific as well as standard GSFC mission requirements. With the linked requirements model and structural model, automated compliance checking will be performed as mission parameters evolve without the need for discipline engineers to work directly with the SAM in SysML.

MBSE↗

Assessing the Relocation of Artemis Foundational Lunar Surface Concepts

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has defined a functionally based Moon to Mars (M2M) architecture consisting of four key human exploration segments: human lunar return (HLR), foundational exploration (FE), sustained lunar evolution (SLE), and humans to Mars (H2M). These segments are portions of the architecture which represent a stepwise increase in complexity and achievement of M2M objectives [1]. As systems are deployed during the FE segment, it may be desired or even necessary to relocate these elements on the lunar surface as the architecture transitions into the SLE segment. While some Artemis elements under development, such as rovers, are being designed for mobility during both crewed and uncrewed/dormant periods, other architectural concepts do not currently carry a mobility capability. In preparation for the Agency’s 2023 Architecture Concept Review (ACR), a team was assembled to establish a methodology for assessing the relocation feasibility of normally stationary elements. Such a capability could be applied locally or regionally, and might allow for re-purposing previously occupied terrain, expansion of exploration range, aggregation of habitation elements, or retiring systems at the end of their useful service life. The assembled NASA team investigated the relocation trade space through defining a representative concept of operations (ConOps) and assessing possible system impacts. The team focused predominately on the relocation of medium and large surface habitat architectural concepts through surface-based traverses utilizing separable mobility platforms (SMP). A representative mobility platform model was placed through simulation to analyze the possible energy requirements and dynamic illumination impacts. Preliminary assessment indicated that element relocation might be achievable, however significant system and architectural-level risks still need to be quantified. Future analysis will assist in determining what degree of element relocation provides the greatest benefit to achieving a sustained lunar presence. [1] NASA. (2022). Moon to Mars Objectives. Retrieved from: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/m2m-objectives-exec-summary.pdf

Artemis↗

Assessing the Relocation of Artemis Foundational Lunar Surface Concepts

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has defined a functionally based Moon to Mars (M2M) architecture consisting of four key human exploration segments: human lunar return (HLR), foundational exploration (FE), sustained lunar evolution (SLE), and humans to Mars (H2M). These segments are portions of the architecture which represent a stepwise increase in complexity and achievement of M2M objectives [1]. As systems are deployed during the FE segment, it may be desired or even necessary to relocate these elements on the lunar surface as the architecture transitions into the SLE segment. While some Artemis elements under development, such as rovers, are being designed for mobility during both crewed and uncrewed/dormant periods, other architectural concepts do not currently carry a mobility capability. In preparation for the Agency’s 2023 Architecture Concept Review (ACR), a team was assembled to establish a methodology for assessing the relocation feasibility of normally stationary elements. Such a capability could be applied locally or regionally, and might allow for re-purposing previously occupied terrain, expansion of exploration range, aggregation of habitation elements, or retiring systems at the end of their useful service life. The assembled NASA team investigated the relocation trade space through defining a representative concept of operations (ConOps) and assessing possible system impacts. The team focused predominately on the relocation of medium and large surface habitat architectural concepts through surface-based traverses utilizing separable mobility platforms (SMP). A representative mobility platform model was placed through simulation to analyze the possible energy requirements and dynamic illumination impacts. Preliminary assessment indicated that element relocation might be achievable, however significant system and architectural-level risks still need to be quantified. Future analysis will assist in determining what degree of element relocation provides the greatest benefit to achieving a sustained lunar presence. [1] NASA. (2022). Moon to Mars Objectives. Retrieved from: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/m2m-objectives-exec-summary.pdf

Artemis↗

Jake Garn Mission Simulator and Training Facility, Building 5, Historical Documentation

In response to President George W. Bush's announcement in January 2004 that the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) would end in 2010, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) completed a nation-wide historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned facilities and properties (real property assets) at all its Centers and component facilities. The buildings and structures which supported the SSP were inventoried and assessed as per the criteria of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in the context of this program. This study was performed in compliance with Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (Public Law 89-665), as amended; the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (Public Law 91-190); Executive Order (EO) 11593: Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment; EO 13287, Preserve America, and other relevant legislation. As part of this nation-wide study, in September 2006, historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned and managed facilities at was conducted by NASA's Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas. The results of this study are presented in a report entitled, "Survey and Evaluation of NASA-owned Historic Facilities and Properties in the Context of the U.S. Space Shuttle Program, Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas," prepared in November 2007 by NASA JSC's contractor, Archaeological Consultants, Inc. As a result of this survey, the Jake Gam Mission Simulator and Training Facility (Building 5) was determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, with concurrence by the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). The survey concluded that Building 5 is eligible for the NRHP under Criteria A and C in the context of the U.S. Space Shuttle program (1969-2010). Because it has achieved significance within the past 50 years, Criteria Consideration G applies. At the time of this documentation, Building 5 was still used to support the SSP as an astronaut training facility. This documentation package precedes any undertaking as defined by Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, and implemented in 36 CFR Part 800, as NASA JSC has decided to proactively pursue efforts to mitigate the potential adverse affects of any future modifications to the facility. It includes a historical summary of the Space Shuttle program; the history of JSC in relation to the SSP; a narrative of the history of Building 5 and how it supported the SSP; and a physical description of the structure. In addition, photographs documenting the construction and historical use of Building 5 in support of the SSP, as well as photographs of the facility documenting the existing conditions, special technological features, and engineering details, are included. A contact sheet printed on archival paper, and an electronic copy of the work product on CD, are also provided.

Slovinac, Trish↗

Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts management and control requirements for NASA space flight programs

This document establishes electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts management and control requirements for contractors providing and maintaining space flight and mission-essential or critical ground support equipment for NASA space flight programs. Although the text is worded 'the contractor shall,' the requirements are also to be used by NASA Headquarters and field installations for developing program/project parts management and control requirements for in-house and contracted efforts. This document places increased emphasis on parts programs to ensure that reliability and quality are considered through adequate consideration of the selection, control, and application of parts. It is the intent of this document to identify disciplines that can be implemented to obtain reliable parts which meet mission needs. The parts management and control requirements described in this document are to be selectively applied, based on equipment class and mission needs. Individual equipment needs should be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement should be implemented on a procurement. Utilization of this document does not preclude the usage of other documents. The entire process of developing and implementing requirements is referred to as 'tailoring' the program for a specific project. Some factors that should be considered in this tailoring process include program phase, equipment category and criticality, equipment complexity, and mission requirements. Parts management and control requirements advocated by this document directly support the concept of 'reliability by design' and are an integral part of system reliability and maintainability. Achieving the required availability and mission success objectives during operation depends on the attention given reliability and maintainability in the design phase. Consequently, it is intended that the requirements described in this document are consistent with those of NASA publications, 'Reliability Program Requirements for Aeronautical and Space System Contractors,' NHB 5300.4(1A-l); 'Maintainability Program Requirements for Space Systems,' NHB 5300.4(1E); and 'Quality Program Provisions for Aeronautical and Space System Contractors,' NHB 5300.4(1B).

Source record↗