SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Operations”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 451 records · Page 25

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2011

Using Distributed Operations to Enable Science Research on the International Space Station

In the early days of the International Space Station (ISS) program, and as the organization structure was being internationally agreed upon and documented, one of the principal tenets of the science program was to allow customer-friendly operations. One important aspect of this was to allow payload developers and principle investigators the flexibility to operate their experiments from either their home sites or distributed telescience centers. This telescience concept was developed such that investigators had several options for ISS utilization support. They could operate from their home site, the closest telescience center, or use the payload operations facilities at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. The Payload Operations Integration Center (POIC) processes and structures were put into place to allow these different options to its customers, while at the same time maintain its centralized authority over NASA payload operations and integration. For a long duration space program with many scientists, researchers, and universities expected to participate, it was imperative that the program structure be in place to successfully facilitate this concept of telescience support. From a payload control center perspective, payload science operations require two major elements in order to make telescience successful within the scope of the ISS program. The first element is decentralized control which allows the remote participants the freedom and flexibility to operate their payloads within their scope of authority. The second element is a strong ground infrastructure, which includes voice communications, video, telemetry, and commanding between the POIC and the payload remote site. Both of these elements are important to telescience success, and both must be balanced by the ISS program s documented requirements for POIC to maintain its authority as an integration and control center. This paper describes both elements of distributed payload operations and discusses the benefits and drawbacks.

Bathew, Ann S.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Desert RATS 2011: Near-Earth Asteroid Human Exploration Operations

The Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) 2011 field test involved the planning and execution of a series of exploration scenarios under operational conditions similar to those that would be expected during a human exploration mission to a near-Earth asteroid (NEA). The focus was on understanding the operations tempo during simulated NEA exploration and the implications of communications latency and limited data bandwidth. Anchoring technologies and sampling techniques were not evaluated due to the immaturity of those technologies and the inability to meaningfully test them at D-RATS. Reduced gravity analogs and simulations are being used to fully evaluate Multi-Mission Space Exploration Vehicle (MMSEV) and extravehicular (EVA) operations and interactions in near-weightlessness at a NEA as part of NASA s integrated analogs program. Hypotheses were tested by planning and performing a series of 1-day simulated exploration excursions comparing test conditions all of which involved a single Deep Space Habitat (DSH) and either zero, one, or two MMSEVs; three or four crewmembers; one of two different communications bandwidths; and a 100-second roundtrip communications latency between the field site and Houston. Excursions were executed at the Black Point Lava Flow test site with a Mission Control Center and Science Support Room at Johnson Space Center (JSC) being operated with 100-second roundtrip communication latency to the field. Crews were composed of astronauts and professional field geologists and teams of Mission Operations, Science, and Education & Public Outreach (EPO) experts also supported the mission simulations each day. Data were collected separately from the Crew, Mission Operations, Science, and EPO teams to assess the test conditions from multiple perspectives. For the operations tested, data indicates practically significant benefits may be realized by including at least one MMSEV and by including 4 versus 3 crewmembers in the NEA exploration architecture as measured by increased Scientific Data Quality, EVA Exploration Time, Capability Assessment Ratings, and Overall Acceptability ratings by Crew, Mission Operations, Science, and Education & Public Outreach teams. A combination of text and voice was used to effectively communicate over the 100-second roundtrip communications latency and increased communication bandwidth yielded a small but practically significant improvement in Overall Acceptability as rated by the Science team, although the impact of bandwidth on scientific strategic planning was not assessed. No effect of increased bandwidth was observed with respect to Crew, Mission Operations, or EPO team ratings of Overall Acceptability.

Abercromby, Andrew↗

NASA NTRS2012

NASA Research on an Integrated Concept for Airport Surface Operations Management

Surface operations at airports in the US are based on tactical operations, where departure aircraft primarily queue up and wait at the departure runways. There have been attempts to address the resulting inefficiencies with both strategic and tactical tools for metering departure aircraft. This presentation gives an overview of Spot And Runway Departure Advisor with Collaborative Decision Making (SARDA-CDM): an integrated strategic and tactical system for improving surface operations by metering departure aircraft. SARDA-CDM is the augmentation of ground and local controller advisories through sharing of flight movement and related operations information between airport operators, flight operators and air traffic control at the airport. The goal is to enhance the efficiency of airport surface operations by exchanging information between air traffic control and airline operators, while minimizing adverse effects on stakeholders and passengers. The presentation motivates the need for departure metering, and provides a brief background on the previous work on SARDA. Then, the concept of operations for SARDA-CDM is described. Then the preliminary results from testing the concept in a real-time automated simulation environment are described. Results indicate benefits such as reduction in taxiing delay and fuel consumption. Further, the preliminary implementation of SARDA-CDM seems robust for two minutes delay in gate push-back times.

Gupta, Gautam↗

NASA NTRS2013

A Validated Set of MIDAS V5 Task Network Model Scenarios to Evaluate Nextgen Closely Spaced Parallel Operations Concepts

The Closely Spaced Parallel Operations (CSPO) scenario is a complex, human performance model scenario that tested alternate operator roles and responsibilities to a series of off-nominal operations on approach and landing (see Gore, Hooey, Mahlstedt, Foyle, 2013). The model links together the procedures, equipment, crewstation, and external environment to produce predictions of operator performance in response to Next Generation system designs, like those expected in the National Airspaces NextGen concepts. The task analysis that is contained in the present report comes from the task analysis window in the MIDAS software. These tasks link definitions and states for equipment components, environmental features as well as operational contexts. The current task analysis culminated in 3300 tasks that included over 1000 Subject Matter Expert (SME)-vetted, re-usable procedural sets for three critical phases of flight; the Descent, Approach, and Land procedural sets (see Gore et al., 2011 for a description of the development of the tasks included in the model; Gore, Hooey, Mahlstedt, Foyle, 2013 for a description of the model, and its results; Hooey, Gore, Mahlstedt, Foyle, 2013 for a description of the guidelines that were generated from the models results; Gore, Hooey, Foyle, 2012 for a description of the models implementation and its settings). The rollout, after landing checks, taxi to gate and arrive at gate illustrated in Figure 1 were not used in the approach and divert scenarios exercised. The other networks in Figure 1 set up appropriate context settings for the flight deck.The current report presents the models task decomposition from the tophighest level and decomposes it to finer-grained levels. The first task that is completed by the model is to set all of the initial settings for the scenario runs included in the model (network 75 in Figure 1). This initialization process also resets the CAD graphic files contained with MIDAS, as well as the embedded operator models that comprise MIDAS. Following the initial settings, the model progresses to begin the first tasks required of the two flight deck operators, the Captain (CA) and the First Officer (FO). The task sets will initialize operator specific settings prior to loading all of the alerts, probes, and other events that occur in the scenario. As a note, the CA and FO were terms used in developing this model but the CA can also be thought of as the Pilot Flying (PF), while the FO can be considered the Pilot-Not-Flying (PNF)or Pilot Monitoring (PM). As such, the document refers to the operators as PFCA and PNFFO respectively.

task network model↗

NASA NTRS2011

In-Flight Operation of the Dawn Ion Propulsion System Through Orbit Capture at Vesta

The Dawn mission, part of NASA's Discovery Program, has as its goal the scientific exploration of the two most massive main-belt asteroids, Vesta and Ceres. The Dawn spacecraft was launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on September 27, 2007 on a Delta -II 7925H-9.5 (Delta-II Heavy) rocket that placed the 1218 kg spacecraft into an Earth-escape trajectory. Onboard the spacecraft is an ion propulsion system (IPS) developed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory which will provide most of the ?V needed for heliocentric transfer to Vesta, orbit capture at Vesta, transfer among Vesta science orbits, departure and escape from Vesta, heliocentric transfer to Ceres, orbit capture at Ceres, and transfer among Ceres science orbits. The first 80 days after launch were dedicated to the initial checkout of the spacecraft which was followed by about ten months of full-power thrusting leading to a Mars gravity assist in February 2009 that provided 1 km/s of heliocentric energy increase and is the only part of the mission following launch in which a needed velocity change is not accomplished by the IPS. Deterministic thrusting for heliocentric transfer to Vesta resumed in June 2009 and was concluded with orbit capture at Vesta in July 2011. IPS was operated for approximately 23,400 hours, consumed approximately 250 kg of xenon, and provided a delta-V of approximately 6.7 km/s to achieve orbit capture at Vesta. IPS performance characteristics are very close to the expected performance characteristics based on analysis performed pre-launch. The only significant problem to have occurred over the almost four years of IPS operations in flight was the temporary failure of a valve driver board in DCIU-1, resulting in a loss of thrust of approximately 29 hours. Thrusting operations resumed after switching to DCIU-2, and power cycling conducted after orbit capture indicates DCIU-1 is completely operational. After about three weeks of survey operations IPS will be used to maneuver the spacecraft as needed for science operations including orbit transfers. After approximately one year of science operations IPS will then be used for escape from Vesta and begin thrusting for cruise to Ceres with a planned arrival date at Ceres in February 2015. This paper provides an overview of Dawn's mission objectives and the results of Dawn IPS mission operations through orbit capture and the start of science operations at Vesta.

Garner, Charles E.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Probabilistic Risk Assessment for Decision Making During Spacecraft Operations

Decisions made during the operational phase of a space mission often have significant and immediate consequences. Without the explicit consideration of the risks involved and their representation in a solid model, it is very likely that these risks are not considered systematically in trade studies. Wrong decisions during the operational phase of a space mission can lead to immediate system failure whereas correct decisions can help recover the system even from faulty conditions. A problem of special interest is the determination of the system fault protection strategies upon the occurrence of faults within the system. Decisions regarding the fault protection strategy also heavily rely on a correct understanding of the state of the system and an integrated risk model that represents the various possible scenarios and their respective likelihoods. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling is applicable to the full lifecycle of a space mission project, from concept development to preliminary design, detailed design, development and operations. The benefits and utilities of the model, however, depend on the phase of the mission for which it is used. This is because of the difference in the key strategic decisions that support each mission phase. The focus of this paper is on describing the particular methods used for PRA modeling during the operational phase of a spacecraft by gleaning insight from recently conducted case studies on two operational Mars orbiters. During operations, the key decisions relate to the commands sent to the spacecraft for any kind of diagnostics, anomaly resolution, trajectory changes, or planning. Often, faults and failures occur in the parts of the spacecraft but are contained or mitigated before they can cause serious damage. The failure behavior of the system during operations provides valuable data for updating and adjusting the related PRA models that are built primarily based on historical failure data. The PRA models, in turn, provide insight into the effect of various faults or failures on the risk and failure drivers of the system and the likelihood of possible end case scenarios, thereby facilitating the decision making process during operations. This paper describes the process of adjusting PRA models based on observed spacecraft data, on one hand, and utilizing the models for insight into the future system behavior on the other hand. While PRA models are typically used as a decision aid during the design phase of a space mission, we advocate adjusting them based on the observed behavior of the spacecraft and utilizing them for decision support during the operations phase.

dynamic fault trees↗

NASA NTRS2015

Converter Compressor Building, SWMU 089, Hot Spot Areas 1, 2, and 5 Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring Report, Kennedy Space Center, Florida

This Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring Report (OMMR) presents the findings, observations, and results from operation of the air sparging (AS) interim measure (IM) for Hot Spot (HS) Areas 1, 2, and 5 at the Converter Compressor Building (CCB) located at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida. The objective of the IM at CCB HS Areas 1, 2, and 5 is to decrease concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in groundwater in the treatment zones via AS to levels that will enable a transition to a monitored natural attenuation (MNA) phase. This OMMR presents system operations and maintenance (O&M) information and performance monitoring results since full-scale O&M began in June 2014 (2 months after initial system startup in April 2014), including quarterly performance monitoring events in July and October 2014 and January and May 2015. Based on the results to date, the AS system is operating as designed and is meeting the performance criteria and IM objective. The performance monitoring network is adequately constructed for assessment of IM performance at CCB HS Areas 1, 2, and 5. At the March 2014 KSC Remediation Team (KSCRT) Meeting, team consensus was reached for the design prepared for expansion of the system to treat the HS 4 area, and at the November 2014 KSCRT Meeting, team consensus was reached that HS 3 was adequately delineated horizontally and vertically and for selection of AS for the remedial approach for HS 3. At the July 2015 KSCRT meeting, team consensus was reached to continue IM operations in all zones until HSs 3 and 4 is operational, once HS 3 and 4 zones are operational discontinue operations in HS 1, 2, and 5 zones where concentrations are less than GCTLs to observe whether rebounding conditions occur. Team consensus was also reached to continue quarterly performance monitoring to determine whether operational zones achieve GCTLs and to continue annual IGWM of CCB-MW0012, CCBMW0013, and CCB-MW0056, located south of the treatment area. The next performance monitoring event is scheduled for July 2015.

Converter Compressor Building↗

NASA NTRS2014

Calculation of Operations Efficiency Factors for Mars Surface Missions

The duration of a mission--and subsequently, the minimum spacecraft lifetime--is a key component in designing the capabilities of a spacecraft during mission formulation. However, determining the duration is not simply a function of how long it will take the spacecraft to execute the activities needed to achieve mission objectives. Instead, the effects of the interaction between the spacecraft and ground operators must also be taken into account. This paper describes a method, using "operations efficiency factors", to account for these effects for Mars surface missions. Typically, this level of analysis has not been performed until much later in the mission development cycle, and has not been able to influence mission or spacecraft design. Further, the notion of moving to sustainable operations during Prime Mission--and the effect that change would have on operations productivity and mission objective choices--has not been encountered until the most recent rover missions (MSL, the (now-cancelled) joint NASA-ESA 2018 Mars rover, and the proposed rover for Mars 2020). Since MSL had a single control center and sun-synchronous relay assets (like MER), estimates of productivity derived from MER prime and extended missions were used. However, Mars 2018's anticipated complexity (there would have been control centers in California and Italy, and a non-sun-synchronous relay asset) required the development of an explicit model of operations efficiency that could handle these complexities. In the case of the proposed Mars 2018 mission, the model was employed to assess the mission return of competing operations concepts, and as an input to component lifetime requirements. In this paper we provide examples of how to calculate the operations efficiency factor for a given operational configuration, and how to apply the factors to surface mission scenarios. This model can be applied to future missions to enable early effective trades between operations design, science mission planning, and spacecraft design.

Laubach, Sharon↗

NASA NTRS2017

Operational Assessment of Apollo Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activity

Quantifying the operational variability of extravehicular activity (EVA) execution is critical to help design and build future support systems to enable astronauts to monitor and manage operations in deep-space, where ground support operators will no longer be able to react instantly and manage execution deviations due to the significant communication latency. This study quantifies the operational variability exhibited during Apollo 14-17 lunar surface EVA operations to better understand the challenges and natural tendencies of timeline execution and life support system performance involved in surface operations. Each EVA (11 in total) is individually summarized as well as aggregated to provide descriptive trends exhibited throughout the Apollo missions. This work extends previous EVA task analyses by calculating deviations between planned and as-performed timelines as well as examining metabolic rate and consumables usage throughout the execution of each EVA. The intent of this work is to convey the natural variability of EVA operations and to provide operational context for coping with the variability inherent to EVA execution as a means to support future concepts of operations.

planning and scheduling↗

NASA NTRS2018

Initial Approach to Collect Small Unmanned Aircraft System Off-Nominal Operational Situations Data

NASA is developing the Unmanned Aircraft System Traffic Management research platform to safely integrate small unmanned aircraft operations in large-scale at low-altitudes. As a part of this effort, small unmanned aircraft system off-nominal operational situations data collection process has been developed to take lessons learned and to reinforce operational compliance. In this paper, descriptions of variables used for digital data collection and an online report form for collection of observational data from the operators (contextual data) are provided. They are used to collect off-nominal data from the Unmanned Aircraft System Traffic Management National Campaign in 2017. The digital data show that 2 out of 118 campaign operations (1.7%) encountered loss of navigation. Since the campaign aircraft used Global Positioning System for navigation, it is likely that unobstructed view of the sky at the campaign locations contributed to this small number. Also, 4 out of 47 operations (8.5%) encountered loss of communications. A relatively short distance between ground control system and aircraft, ranging from 2300 feet to 4200 feet, likely contributed to this small number. There was no data to identify the loss of communications condition, aircraft received signal strength, for the remaining 71 operations suggesting that some operators may not be monitoring unmanned aircraft communications system performance or monitoring it with different parameters. For the contextual data, due to the low number of total reports during the campaign, no significant trends emerged. This is an initial attempt to collect contextual data from small unmanned aircraft operators about off-nominal situations, and changes will be made to the future data collection to improve the amount and quality of the information.

unmanned aviation systems traffic management (UTM)↗

NASA NTRS2018

Initial Approach to Collect Small Unmanned Aircraft System Off-Nominal Operational Situations Data

Jung, Jaewoo↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

History, Current Operations and Management of Water Systems on the International Space Station

In November 2000, the Expedition 1 crew to the International Space Station (ISS) arrived onboard, thus beginning a 19+ year need to provide potable water to the crew, as well as water to key life support systems. For the first 8 years of ISS operations, the water systems' operations were relatively simple. It consisted of manifesting water via cargo ships or generated via the Space Shuttle fuel cells and stored on ISS to supplement the water processing systems on the Russian segment of the ISS. In 2008, the Water Processor Assembly (WPA), Urine Processor Assembly (UPA), along with a U.S. provided toilet arrived onboard, supplementing the Oxygen Generator Assembly (OGA). This new equipment, known as Regen ECLSS (Regenerative Environmental Control and Life Support Systems), provided a significant capability in recycling fluid within the ISS and minimized manifestation needs. Early in the operations of the Regen ECLSS system, it became clear that the tank capacities were under sized. This led to excessive use of costly crew time to perform water operations. In 2012, a group of ISS flight controllers and engineers proposed and developed a new system that would provide integrated water tanks that could be fully operated from Mission Control on the ground to move water around within the systems. This system has very recently been installed on the ISS and commissioning operations have occurred. This paper will provide a general history of water operations on the ISS, as new systems arrived, and new operations were required. Challenges with water balance, to both avoid overfilling the system as well as avoid running out of water, will be discussed, along with touching on the convoluted steps the Flight Control team had to perform daily to predict future water needs. Finally, the new water storage system will be discussed and the benefits it brings to ISS water operations.

Christopher A Brown↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO)

Introduction: NASA is preparing to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon within the next decade, and ensuring the success of these missions will depend on our preparation on the ground in multiple ground-based lunar environment analogs. To achieve this, NASA has used full mission class analogs, of which NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is the longest continuously running example. Discussion: NEEMO is NASA’s long-standing undersea high-fidelity spaceflight mission analog. It focuses on exploration science, EVA techniques and tools, and maturing ISS IVA flight hardware and operations concepts. NEEMO crews are composed of groups of US and International Partner (IP) astronauts, engineers and scientists who live, work and explore in a challenging environment analogous to the environment experienced currently on ISS and what is expected for future deep space exploration destinations. NEEMO missions are conducted at Aquarius Reef Base (ARB), which includes a shore base in Tavernier, FL, and the world's only undersea research station, the Aquarius habitat, which is located 5.4 miles (9 kilometers) off Key Largo in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. ARB is owned and operated by Florida International University (FIU). Aquarius was selected due to its remote and extreme location and its ability to provide the unique isolation and risk factors that spaceflight presents. NEEMO missions allow for evaluations of end-to-end EVA and Science exploration concepts of operations with a crew that is in situ in a true extreme environment. They also allow for evaluations of flight hardware and ops tools that are either pondered or destined for ISS or Gateway in the near future. NEEMO missions feature flight-like interactions between the crew and a Mission Control Center (MCC )and Science Team, which in turn allows evaluation of mission and science operations decision making and communications techniques. One reason NEEMO missions are of such high fidelity is that so many of the participants are experienced human space flight end operators. The majority of crewmembers are trained astronauts, and many of the MCC operators have credentials as current or former certified ISS MCC operators (e.g., CapCom, EVA Officer, etc.). Mission products are generated daily by the ground team and are modeled on ISS products (but modified as needed). A planning team manages the constantly evolving mission timelines in response to the ever-changing constraints and opportunities. During NEEMO missions, suited EVA crewmembers (using diving helmets) have clear voice communications with each other, the habitat, and the MCC and Science Team back on shore. Each EVA crewmember also sends helmet cam video to the habitat and MCC and Science Teams. Appropriate communications latencies are inserted for the destination being simulated as well. NEEMO missions are made possible by a broad collaboration of participants. Astronauts from all of the ISS partner agencies are eligible for crew assignment. Often the crew includes a NASA scientist, doctor or engineer with a particular skill to contribute. Sometimes crewmembers come from external entities–generally institutes or universities. Objectives come from a wide variety of sources as well, from within NASA, IPs, government agencies, academia, commercial companies and research institutes. A typical NEEMO mission is a collaboration between at least 5 NASA centers. To date, 23 NEEMO missions have been conducted since 2001, and NEEMO 24 is planned for 2022. Conclusion: NEEMO is a high-fidelity mission analog conducted in an extreme subsea environment. It features experienced end-operators in human spaceflight, from the astronaut crewmembers to key personnel staffing Mission Control. Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank FIU and NASA’s HEO SEI/Strategic Analysis and Exploration Integration and Science Directorate organizations for the continued support that makes the NEEMO Project possible.

M L Reagan↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Identifying Common Coordination Procedures across Extensible Traffic Management (xTM) to Integrate xTM Operations into the National Airspace System

New categories of missions and vehicle types, such as drone delivery services, on-demand air taxi, and high-altitude long-endurance (HALE) vehicles are being proposed to operate using a novel, highly automated information exchange infrastructure and a community-based, cooperative traffic management concept. Collectively, these new operations are called Extensible Traffic Management (xTM). As these xTM vehicles become more prevalent, their operations will increasingly overlap with existing conventional aircraft and with each other. In order to seamlessly co-exist with current conventional aircraft operations, new coordination procedures, tools and services will be needed to integrate xTM into the future National Airspace System (NAS). In our prior work, we have identified a set of use cases for xTM interactions with air traffic control (ATC), categorized across different xTM operations based on trigger events. Events consisted of ones such as nominal xTM vehicle transition into the ATC environment or an off-nominal emergency landing situation. In this paper, we have extended the prior work to identify commonalities in the coordination procedures across xTM, as well as differences that are specific to the individual xTM operations. The overall results showed that two types of xTM-ATC interactions were prevalent: 1) xTM vehicles transitioning between xTM and ATC operational environments; 2) xTM vehicles being allowed to continue xTM operations in areas that are normally controlled by ATC. The results also suggested that emergency and rare off-nominal events may need specialized procedures for each vehicle type. The overall results suggest that there is a pathway to define a common method of handling and integrating diverse xTM operations in the future NAS, but there need to be procedures for individualized handling of xTM vehicles in infrequent, safety-critical events.

Extensible Traffic Management (xTM)↗

NASA NTRS2022

Automating Surface Attitude Positioning and Pointing Operations for Mars 2020

The Surface Attitude Positioning and Pointing (SAPP) subsystem of the Mars Perseverance rover keeps track of the rover’s position and attitude on the surface of Mars. The SAPP Downlink Engineering Operations team members receive data from the rover on a daily basis. They must interpret the data to make sure the rover is staying safe and to support uplink planning. The SAPP team keeps track of the error growth in the rover’s attitude estimate due to noise in the Rover Inertial Measurement Unit’s (RIMU) gyroscopes used to propagate that attitude estimate whenever the rover is moving. Whenever this error grows to a particular threshold, SAPP is responsible for updating the onboard attitude knowledge using the RIMU’s accelerometers to estimate rover roll and pitch and sun imaging to estimate rover yaw, thereby reducing this attitude estimation error. Accurate attitude estimation is required so that the rover can successfully point its High Gain Antenna (HGA) to receive information from Earth and as a backup to the Mars orbiters used for sending data from the rover to Earth, point instruments on its Remote Sensing Mast (RSM), and support safe movement and placement of instruments by the rover’s ARM relative to the Martian surface. The Mars 2020 Engineering Operations team has been working to increase the operational efficiency of the mission and eventually move to a five-hour timeline for daily operations. In pursuit of this goal, the SAPP Engineering Operations team has automated their downlink process by developing a centralized Jupyter notebook to analyze the data received daily from the rover. The SAPP downlink Jupyter notebook automatically collects the data relevant to the SAPP subsystem and visualizes this information in plots and tables that can be easily read by downlink operators to aid them in assessing the status of the subsystem. Various Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) have been incorporated into the downlink daily notebook to automate the collection and posting of data, such as gathering and posting data products to the cloud. The SAPP team has also developed a SAPP downlink software library that includes functions to aid the notebook in processing data. In addition to assessing the SAPP subsystem on a daily basis, operators need to assess the long-term trending behavior of the subsystem over time. An automated trending process has been developed to collect information from the daily notebooks in order to plot and analyze that data in a centralized place. These daily and trending processes have expedited the SAPP downlink assessment and laid the groundwork to completely automate the SAPP downlink process so that SAPP operators are unnecessary unless something unexpected occurs. This paper will provide an overview of the functions that the SAPP subsystem carries out on a daily basis, and will then dive into the automations that have been developed for daily and trending downlink assessment. An assessment of the downlink efficiency will be provided, along with a summary of lessons learned and work to go. Finally, the authors will discuss how these types of automated spacecraft health assessments could be more broadly used within mission operations.

Zarifian, Anais↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High Density Vertiplex: Scalable Autonomous Operations Prototype Assessment Simulation

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is a rapidly growing topic within the field of aviation because of the impact a refined ecosystem and uncrewed aerial vehicles could have on modern society, such as urban air mobility, cargo, and emergency transport. Before the UAM concept can be actualized, research is needed to understand how to integrate these new classes of vehicles and operations into the National Airspace System. One under-researched but critical piece of infrastructure required for UAM operations is Vertiport operations. Vertiports are the envisioned takeoff and landing locations for these uncrewed aerial vehicles. To accommodate the high use of the vertiport, new technologies and roles will be required for optimal use. At NASA, the High Density Vertiplex sub-project targets research into vertiports. The High Density Vertiplex team created an Urban Air Mobility ecosystem to test and evaluate different concepts and tools used to support higher density operations at vertiports. Part of the test and evaluation included the Prototype Assessment Operations simulation of highdensity operations around a vertiport to study vertiport management and vertiport operations. The research team also evaluated how the prototype Urban Air Mobility ecosystem supported fleet managers, ground control station operators, and vertiport managers in execution of nominal and off-nominal high-density operations. Results from this simulation provided insight regarding UAM ecosystem research and development and vertiport automation systems.

Small Uncrewed Aerial Vehicle (sUAS)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High Density Vertiplex: Scalable Autonomous Operations Prototype Assessment Simulation

Urban Air Mobility is a rapidly growing topic within the field of aviation because of the impact a refined ecosystem and uncrewed aerial vehicles could have on modern society, such as urban air, cargo, and emergency transport. Before the UAM concept can be actualized, research is needed to understand how to integrate these new classes of vehicles and operations into the National Airspace System. One under-researched but critical piece of infrastructure required for UAM operations is Vertiport operations. Vertiports are the envisioned takeoff and landing locations for these uncrewed aerial vehicles. To accommodate the high use of the vertiport, new technologies and roles will be required for optimal use. At NASA, the High Density Vertiplex sub-project targets research into vertiports. The High Density Vertiplex team created their own Advanced Air Mobility ecosystem to test and evaluate different concepts and tools used to support higher density operations at vertiports. Part of the test and evaluation included the Prototype Assessment Operations simulation of high-density operations around a vertiport to study vertiport management and vertiport operations. The research team also evaluated how their simulated Urban Air Mobility ecosystem supported fleet managers, ground control station operators, and vertiport managers in execution of nominal and off-nominal high-density operations. Takeaways from this simulation helped the team evaluate well how the users of the ecosystem were able to use the components of the ecosystem to complete Urban Air Mobility missions.

Small Uncrewed Aerial Vehicle (sUAS)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Operations and Navigation Experiment (CAPSTONE) Pathfinder for Artemis Gateway

The Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Operations and Navigation Experiment (CAPSTONE) mission was developed by NASA in collaboration with Advanced Space, LLC of Westminster, Colorado. This technology demonstration mission serves as a pathfinder for near rectilinear halo orbit (NHRO) operations around the Moon. The NHRO, (Perilune = 3,200 km; Apolune = 70,000 km) is the intended orbit for NASA’s Artemis Gateway, a small, human-tended space station planned for lunar orbit. The CAPSTONE mission will validate simulations and confirm operational planning for Gateway while also validating performance of navigation and station-keeping requirements for Gateway’s Power and Propulsion Element. Thus, this mission will provide operational experience to NASA, commercial, and international missions for operations in a demanding orbital regime. The CAPSTONE mission consists of a 12-unit (U) CubeSat developed, integrated, and tested by the Terran Orbital Corporation that carries a payload communications system capable of cross-link ranging with NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). CAPSTONE contains a chip scale atomic clock (CSAC) for a one-way ranging experiment with NASA’s Deep Space Network, a dedicated payload flight computer for software demonstration, and a camera. The launch, coordinated by NASA’s Launch Services Program, was provided by Rocket Lab on its Electron launch vehicle utilizing their Photon upper stage to deploy the CAPSTONE spacecraft into lunar orbit. The mission launched June 28, 2022. The CAPSTONE spacecraft deployed from Rocket Lab’s Photon stage and traversed an approximately 4 month highly efficient transfer phase entering the NRHO Novermber 13, 2022 for a six-month primary mission phase. The mission is currently in a twelve-month technology enhancement operations phase. The CAPSTONE technology demonstration mission is lead by Advanced Space, LLC. Spacecraft development and mission operations is conducted by Terran Orbital Corporation of Irvine, California. Noted accomplishments for the CAPSTONE mission include demonstration of the accessibility of NHROs, validation of key operational concepts in the NHRO environment, laying the foundation for commercial support of future lunar operations, and accelerating the availability of peer-to-peer navigation capabilities provided by the Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System (CAPS). The CAPSTONE mission is funded through NASA's Small Spacecraft Technology (SST) program, which is one of several programs within NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. The program is chartered to develop and demonstrate technologies to enhance and expand the capabilities of small spacecraft with a particular focus on enabling new mission architectures through the use of small spacecraft, expanding the reach of small spacecraft to new destinations, and augmenting future missions with supporting small spacecraft. The CAPSTONE mission launch was provided by NASA’s Exploration Systems Development Missions Directorate’s Advanced Exploration Systems Division. Coordination and acquisition of the launch was managed by NASA’s Launch Services Program. The CAPSTONE mission and project status will be presented.

Elwood Agasid↗