Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “future Mars missions”

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 451 records · Page 25

Innovative IO Psychology Research for Future Space Exploration

Crewed space exploration is evolving. The commercialization of space includes Private Astronauts who interact with NASA astronauts on the International Space Station. Astronauts are scheduled to complete a variety of tasks within a fast paced timeline. Future exploration missions to Mars will include challenges such as a small crew living and working in an isolated and confined environment for up to 2 ½ years, with significant communication delays from Earth. This symposium brings together four innovative studies designed to mitigate the risks associated with space flight.

Suzanne Tamara Bell↗

Making or Breaking a Rover: System Engineering Parameters On-Board the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover

On February 18, 2021, Perseverance, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL’s) Mars 2020 Rover, successfully landed on Mars with all systems nominal, despite the risk surrounding the over 200,000 internal flight parameters that had to be properly configured. The Perseverance team defines these parameters as software variables that are configurable, commandable and retrievable from Earth. In 2015, the Mars 2020 project leaders focused on improving systems engineering of parameters based on their experiences from parameter management on previous Mars rovers (Curiosity, Opportunity, Spirit, and Pathfinder) and parameter failures of past missions, such as the mission-ending parameter of the Mars Climate Orbiter. The new rigorous development process allowed for efficient certification and effective implementation of the parameters, allowing the rover to approach and land on the red planet (the most challenging phase of the mission) with zero parameter issues. Although successful, the Perseverance team learned many lessons for how to better manage parameters for the continued surface operations of the Mars 2020 mission and future missions. This paper will discuss eight parameter-management topics for the Perseverance Mission. The first is parameter definition: how we define parameters on our mission, where they are physically located on the vehicle, and why we have so many of them. The second topic is the updated parameter flight software module from Curiosity, including details on the 99% reduction in parameter commands, new bulk configuration capabilities, and improved parameter traceability. The third topic is parameter selection for different mission phases; this includes improving and tweaking our preferred parameter settings until they become certification candidates and managing parameter configurations based on test venue throughout the mission life cycle. The fourth topic is our flight certification process; this includes certification of flight values for four different epochs in the mission: Launch, Entry Decent and Landing (EDL) - 6days, Landing + 5 Sols (Martian Days, still on Cruise Flight Software), and once are on Surface Flight Software (FSW). The fifth topic covers in-flight command implementation, along with details on testing, validation, and verification of those commands. In the sixth section, we will explain our use of open-source management tools, including how we used GitHub for version control and management approvals. The seventh topic will describe the ground tools used in operations, including capabilities of the in-house built tool called Parasol. The eighth and final topic will dig into lessons learned for improving parameter management in the future of this mission and others.

Roth, Brian↗

Making or Breaking a Rover- Systems Engineering Parameters On-Board the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover

On February 18, 2021, Perseverance, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL’s) Mars 2020 Rover, successfully landed on Mars with all systems nominal, despite the risk surrounding the over 200,000 internal flight parameters that had to be properly configured. The Perseverance team defines these parameters as software variables that are configurable, commandable and retrievable from Earth. In 2015, the Mars 2020 project leaders focused on improving systems engineering of parameters based on their experiences from parameter management on previous Mars rovers (Curiosity, Opportunity, Spirit, and Pathfinder) and parameter failures of past missions, such as the mission-ending parameter of the Mars Climate Orbiter. The new rigorous development process allowed for efficient certification and effective implementation of the parameters, allowing the rover to approach and land on the red planet (the most challenging phase of the mission) with zero parameter issues. Although successful, the Perseverance team learned many lessons for how to better manage parameters for the continued surface operations of the Mars 2020 mission and future missions. This paper will discuss eight parameter-management topics for the Perseverance Mission. The first is parameter definition: how we define parameters on our mission, where they are physically located on the vehicle, and why we have so many of them. The second topic is the updated parameter flight software module from Curiosity, including details on the 99% reduction in parameter commands, new bulk configuration capabilities, and improved parameter traceability. The third topic is parameter selection for different mission phases; this includes improving and tweaking our preferred parameter settings until they become certification candidates and managing parameter configurations based on test venue throughout the mission life cycle. The fourth topic is our flight certification process; this includes certification of flight values for four different epochs in the mission: Launch, Entry Decent and Landing (EDL) - 6days, Landing + 5 Sols (Martian Days, still on Cruise Flight Software), and once are on Surface Flight Software (FSW). The fifth topic covers in-flight command implementation, along with details on testing, validation, and verification of those commands. In the sixth section, we will explain our use of open-source management tools, including how we used GitHub for version control and management approvals. The seventh topic will describe the ground tools used in operations, including capabilities of the in-house built tool called Parasol. The eighth and final topic will dig into lessons learned for improving parameter management in the future of this mission and others.

Roth, Brian↗

Design and Test of the Orion Crew Module Launch Abort System Hatch

The Orion spacecraft is part of NASA’s Artemis program to establish a permanent human presence on the lunar surface and further enable future crewed missions to Mars. One of the key safety features of Orion is the Launch Abort System (LAS) which pulls the Orion Crew Module (CM) away in the event of a launch vehicle malfunction. It was necessary to design a LAS hatch that allows for crew access to the CM during pad operations. This paper describes the background and evolution of the LAS hatch design, the features used to address the crew safety requirements, the testing challenges in preparation for the Artemis crewed missions, and lessons learned.

Hatch↗

Design and Test of the Orion Crew Module Launch Abort System Hatch

The Orion spacecraft is part of NASA’s Artemis program to establish a permanent human presence on the lunar surface and further enable future crewed missions to Mars. One of the key safety features of Orion is the Launch Abort System (LAS) which pulls the Orion Crew Module (CM) away in the event of a launch vehicle malfunction. It was necessary to design a LAS hatch that allows for crew access to the CM during pad operations. This paper describes the background and evolution of the LAS hatch design, the features used to address the crew safety requirements, the testing challenges in preparation for the Artemis crewed missions, and lessons learned.

Hatch↗

Caffeine Consumption Aboard the International Space Station

INTRODUCTION: Caffeine is the most widely used performance-enhancing drug on Earth and astronaut crews have access to liquid coffee. While caffeine is a potent countermeasure to improve alertness and performance, it can also interfere with sleep. This can lead to performance deficits on the following day, driving a cycle of caffeine use to counter the effects of caffeine-induced sleep disruption. Caffeine availability may be limited during future Artemis and/or Mars missions. Accordingly, it is important that we 1) determine the prevalence of caffeine use among astronauts, 2) characterize the impact of caffeine on performance, and 3) characterize the impact of caffeine on sleep. Our aim in this study is to describe the use of caffeine aboard the ISS and begin to examine the relationship between caffeine use and sleep and performance outcomes. METHODS: Daily caffeine consumption was determined from food and beverage intake tracking for 25 astronauts on 6 month International Space Station (ISS) missions. Data were recorded using the ISS Food Intake Tracker iPad App or other detailed recording technique. On average, crew recorded dietary intake on 179.7±68.6 (mean±SD) days inflight. RESULTS: Astronauts consumed 97±92 mg caffeine per day. All astronauts (25/25) in this study consumed caffeine at some point during flight, though the frequency, amounts, and regularity differed across crewmembers. Approximately a quarter of crewmembers were regular caffeine consumers (6/25), i.e., they ingested at least 90 mg caffeine (equivalent to one cup of coffee) on 90% of inflight days.

fatigue↗

ISS External Microorganisms: Collecting Planetary Protection Samples During Extravehicular Activity

We have developed, tested, and flown a caddy capable of collecting aseptic samples from external surfaces of the ISS (International Space Station). The sampling caddy is certified for use during US EVA (extra vehicular activity) and was launched to ISS in the summer of 2023. We are scheduled to collect samples from 6 locations outside ISS during an EVA in May of 2024. We will freeze these samples at -80°C on orbit and return them to Earth. We will then extract and sequence any DNA collected during the EVA using next generation sequencing technologies to characterize the community composition and function of each sample. Measuring the type and quantity of microbes present on the exterior of ISS will allow us to address knowledge gap 2B, “Acceptable levels of microbial/organic releases from humans and support systems” described in a 2019 COSPAR report. Collecting data about microbial release from current crewed vehicles will inform requirements for acceptable leak rates for future crewed missions to Mars. The sampling kit consists of eight commercially available, sterile, DNA free, macrofoam swabs ( 23 mm. diameter ) installed in custom aluminum end effectors. Each end effector is housed in and individual aluminum canister. Each canister contains a 0.2 μm Teflon filter to allow the interior volume to accommodate pressure changes without permitting microbial contaminants to enter the sterile interior volume. A handle repurposed from the space shuttle tile repair kit is used to remove the end effector from the sample canister, collect a sample by swabbing a surface and then replace the end effector in its canister. The canisters and end effectors were cleaned and assembled on Earth. Prior to installing the sterile swab the canisters and end effectors were sterilized in an autoclave at 134°C, 215 kPA, for 7 min.. The final assembly occurred in a sterilized class II biosafety cabinet. We will collect six samples from the 1) airlock vestibule, 2) airlock thermal cover, 3) a gap in the micrometeorite shielding near the airlock, 4) a handrail near the airlock, 5) the CDRA (Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly) vent, and 6) the VES (Vacuum Exhaust System) vent. The remaining two swabs will be reserved as controls. One swab will be exposed during the EVA without touching any surfaces to act as a blank. The final swab will remain sealed until the entire sampling kit is returned to earth. Based on previously published results from the Russian segment, we hypothesize that there will be detectable microbes at some or all of these locations. Ground-based testing of this sampling caddy confirms that the swabs remain sterile as the canisters transition in and out of vacuum. We were able to retrieve, viable bacterial and fungal cells as well as DNA from samples collected from US space suits during vacuum chamber tests lasting as long as seven hours. Based on these results and feedback from the test subjects the sampling caddy was modified to improve ergonomics and meet US EVA safety requirements. Bayonet probes were added to the sides of the sample kit as alternate mounting points. Additional locking features were added to the end effector and the filter stack to prevent inadvertent release during use. The opening mechanism was changed from one where the end effector was rocked laterally to defeat a ball detent to a twist-to-open threaded closure for similar reasons. Demonstrating, this sampling caddy’s effectiveness during a US EVA will allow us to address knowledge gaps identified in COSPAR reports and begin to define planetary protection requirements for life support systems on crewed missions to mars. This kit could also be used to collect contamination control samples during Artemis missions to verify requirements and could be easily modified for robotic sample collection.

Planetary Protection↗

Size-Frequency Distributions of Rocks on Mars and Earth Analog Sites: Implications for Future Landed Missions

The size-frequency distribution of rocks and the Vicking landing sites and a variety of rocky locations on the Earth that formed from a number of geologic processes all have the general shape of simple exponential curves, which have been combined with remote sensing data and models on rock abundance to predict the frequency of boulders potentially hazardous to future Mars landers and rovers.

Mars rocks Viking landing sites Mars rock data↗

Cryogenic Curation: Isolated Technology and Mission Operational Requirements for Sample Return

Future lunar, Mars, asteroid, and comet sample return missions may collect samples that have been preserved at sub-freezing or even cryogenic temperatures. For such samples, the study of volatiles and temperature-sensitive minerals will have high priority. Valuable geochemical and mineralogical information will be lost if such samples are allowed to reach ambient temperatures on Earth. The ability to store, document, subdivide, and transport extraterrestrial geologic samples while maintaining sub-freezing or cryogenic temperatures, possibly as low as 40 K, is required for the complete scientific study of samples from cold environments.

Calaway, Michael J.↗

Supporting Increased Autonomy for a Mars Rover

This paper presents an architecture and a set of technology for performing autonomous science and commanding for a planetary rover. The MER rovers have outperformed all expectations by lasting over 1100 sols (or Martian days), which is an order of magnitude longer than their original mission goal. The longevity of these vehicles will have significant effects on future mission goals, such as objectives for the Mars Science Laboratory rover mission (scheduled to fly in 2009) and the Astrobiology Field Lab rover mission (scheduled to potentially fly in 2016). Common objectives for future rover missions to Mars include the handling of opportunistic science, long-range or multi-sol driving, and onboard fault diagnosis and recovery. To handle these goals, a number of new technologies have been developed and integrated as part of the CLARAty architecture. CLARAty is a unified and reusable robotic architecture that was designed to simplify the integration, testing and maturation of robotic technologies for future missions. This paper focuses on technology comprising the CLARAty Decision Layer, which was designed to support and validate high-level autonomy technologies, such as automated planning and scheduling and onboard data analysis.

autonomous science↗

Optical ground station site diversity for Deep Space Optical Communications the Mars Telecom Orbiter optical link

Future NASA deep space missions will fly advanced high resolution imaging instruments that will require high bandwidth links to return the huge data volumes generated by these instruments. Optical communications is a key technology for returning these large data volumes from deep space probes. Yet to cost effectively realize the high bandwidth potential of the optical link will require deployment of ground receivers in diverse locations to provide high link availability. A recent analysis of GOES weather satellite data showed that a network of ground stations located in Hawaii and the Southwest continental US can provide an average of 90% availability for the deep space optical link. JPL and AFRL are exploring the use of large telescopes in Hawaii, California, and Albuquerque to support the Mars Telesat laser communications demonstration. Designed to demonstrate multi-Mbps communications from Mars, the mission will investigate key operational strategies of future deep space optical communications network.

laser communications↗

IMP: A performance code

IMP (Integrated Mission Program) is a simulation language and code used to model present and future Earth, Moon, or Mars missions. The profile is user controlled through selection from a large menu of events and maneuvers. A Fehlberg 7/13 Runge-Kutta integrator with error and step size control is used to numerically integrate the differential equations of motion (DEQ) of three spacecraft, a main, a target, and an observer. Through selection, the DEQ's include guided thrust, oblate gravity, atmosphere drag, solar pressure, and Moon gravity effects. Guide parameters for thrust events and performance parameters of velocity changes (Delta-V) and propellant usage (maximum of five systems) are developed as needed. Print, plot, summary, and debug files are output.

Dauro, Vincent A., Sr.↗

Will Astronauts Wash Clothes on the Way to Mars?

Future human space exploration missions will lengthen to years, and keeping crews clothed without a huge resupply burden is an important consideration for habitation systems. A space laundry system could be the solution; however, the resources it uses must be accounted for and must win out over the reliable practice of simply bringing along enough spare underwear. NASA has conducted trade-off studies through its Logistics Reduction Project to compare current space clothing systems, life extension of that clothing, traditional water-based clothes washing, and other sanitizing techniques. The best clothing system depends on the mission and assumptions but, in general, analysis results indicate that washing clothes on space missions will start to pay off as mission durations approach a year.

Ewert, Michael K.↗

Integrated Systems Engineering, Safety, Reliability and Risk Management – Minimizing Black Swan Events

This paper examines key barriers that can possibly inhibit safe and reliable mission execution and, in the worst case, result in loss of human life due to many unknown contributory factors that can lead to Black Swan events. Some of the representative contributory factors include decision errors, overconfidence and a host of common causes including cultural and human factors. Decisions are always easy to criticize in hindsight when more information is available after a major accident. Depending on the type and complexity of the project and/or mission, the catastrophic risks of drifting into failure can be alleviated by implementing uniquely and strategically tailored Integrated-System-of-Systems, dynamic, risk-informed decision management processes. This paper presents some of the lessons learned from James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), NASA’s Human Space Flight program, and industry that provide motivation to organizations working on mega-complex missions to prudently accomplish targeted mission success. These lessons are important for future human Lunar, Mars and Beyond missions planned to be pursued by NASA through a public-private partnership using nimble but effective safety-conscious, proven sound engineering practices including implementation of integrated risk mitigation practices.

SLS↗

Mars Greenhouse Experiment Module: An Experiment to Grow Flowers on Mars

NASA has entered a new phase of in-depth exploration of the planets where robotic exploration of the Solar System is focusing on in-situ missions that pave the way for human exploration. Creating a human presence on Mars will require specialized knowledge and experience concerning the Martian environment and validated technologies that will provide life-supporting consumables. An understanding of the response of terrestrial organisms to the Martian environment with respect to potential deleterious effects on crew health and changes to biological processes will be paramount. In response to these challenges an innovative selfcontained flight experiment is proposed, which is designed to assess the biocompatibility of the Martian environment by germinating seeds and following their growth through to flowering. The experiment, dubbed Mars Greenhouse Experiment Module (Mars GEM), will be accomplished in a sealed pressurized growth chamber or 'Mars Greenhouse'. Seeds will be grown in Martian soil and the Mars Greenhouse will provide ultraviolet-radiation protected, thermal-controlled environment for plant growth that actively controls the CO2 (required nutrient) and O2 (generated by the plants) levels in the chamber. The simple, but visually dramatic, demonstration of the potential to grow a plant in a man-made environment on the surface of Mars should establish a strong connection between current robotic missions and future human habitation on Mars.

MacCallum, T. K.↗

Optimisation of the Future Routine Orbit for Mars Express

Mars Express (MEX), the first planetary mission of the European Space Agency (ESA), reached Mars on December 25th 2003. Since then it is performing routine operations. Its operational phase had to cover one Martian year, with the possibility of an extension for a second Martian year (i.e. until November 2007). The end of the mission extension is approaching but, given the good health of the payload instruments and the high science return of the mission, there is a strong will to achieve further extensions. Mars Express is also seen as an important asset, capable to provide relay functions for future Martian missions. The ESA Science Program Committee has recently approved a second extension of the MEX mission until May 2009 and even further extensions are possible. Mars Express has an eccentric quasi-polar orbit with a period of approximately 6.72 hours and a pericentre height of about 300 km. Science observations are mainly performed at pericentre (but not only). In addition the orbit has a resonance of 11 revolutions per 3 Martian days. This means that ground tracks corresponding to orbits separated by 11 revolutions are adjacent, such that a given area can be covered by the on-board camera without leaving gaps. The J2 effect of Mars causes a drift of both ascending node and argument of pericentre. The drift of argument of pericentre makes it possible to observe periodically all Mars latitudes from close distance. Illumination conditions at pericentre are influenced by both the drift of the argument of pericentre and the drift of ascending node, as well as by the rotation of Mars around the Sun. The original MEX routine orbit was optimized for the duration of the nominal mission and extension, such that it produced a balanced share of day-side observations (for the optical instruments) and night-side observations (for the radar). The orbit was thus not optimized for the time beyond the assumed extension. Indeed, the evolution of the ascending node and argument of pericentre would cause in the following years a drift of the pericentre towards night-side observation conditions, hence uninteresting for the optical instruments. In order to prevent this an optimisation process for the future routine orbit has taken place. The share between day-side and night-side observations can be controlled by adjusting the drift of argument of pericentre and ascending node. This can in particular be achieved by changing the semimajor axis, eccentricity and/or inclination. A change of inclination is inefficient compared to a change in semimajor axis and eccentricity, and has therefore been discarded. An in-plane maneuvre can be performed to change both semi-major axis and eccentricity, and thus the period of the orbit. Although an apocentre manoeuvre is cheaper in terms of deltaV, it would result in raising the pericentre height, which is unfavourable for close observations. Hence a pericentre manoeuvre is proposed, which will increase the apocentre height. A repeat cycle is still required to allow mapping areas with adjacent ground tracks, so the change of semimajor axis must result in a new resonance. Resonances 18:5, 25:7 and 7:2 have been considered as potential candidates. The resulting long term evolution of the observation conditions has been analysed. Finally it has been decided to perform a change of orbit to reach the 18:5. Another aspect of the optimisation process is the control of the ground track. The previous MEX reference trajectory included regular maneuvres at every apocentre in order to adjust the orbital period, such that the separation of the ground tracks would be optimal, regardless of the latitude of pericentre. The implementation of the actual delatVs on-board was done partly by optimizing the attitude of reaction-wheel desaturation activities. Despite of it, this strategy has a significant propellant cost, because it prevents to optimize reaction wheel de-saturation activities to minimize propellant consumption. Therore, with the aim at preserving propellant resources for a long time extension it has been agreed to stop the ground-track control. This requires now a more accurate science operation planning, with improved attitude pointing control. Finally, the approach to phase Mars Express to provide back-up relay functions for NASA Phoenix landing is explained. In the context of the routine trajectory optimisation a new requirement for close fly-bys at Phobos, with different observation geometries, has been specified. The approach to fulfill this requirement is explained.

Carranza, Manuel↗

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗

Human Mars Landing Site and Impacts on Mars Surface Operations

NASA has begun a process to identify and discuss candidate locations where humans could land, live and work on the Martian surface. These locations are referred to as Exploration Zones (EZs). Given current mission concepts, an EZ is a collection of Regions of Interest (ROIs) that are located within approximately 100 kilometers of a centralized landing site. ROIs are areas that are relevant for scientific investigation and/or development/maturation of capabilities and resources necessary for a sustainable human presence. The EZ also contains a landing site and a habitation site that will be used by multiple human crews during missions to explore and utilize the ROIs within the EZ. These candidate EZs will be used by NASA as part of a multi‐year process of determining where and how humans could explore Mars. In the near term this process includes: (a) identifying locations that would maximize the potential science return from future human exploration missions, (b) identifying locations with the potential for resources required to support humans, (c) developing concepts and engineering systems needed by future human crews to conduct operations within an EZ, and (d) identifying key characteristics of the proposed candidate EZs that cannot be evaluated using existing data sets, thus helping to define precursor measurements needed in advance of human missions. Existing and future robotic spacecraft will be tasked to gather data from specific Mars surface sites within the representative EZs to support these NASA activities. The proposed paper will describe NASA's initial steps for identifying and evaluating candidate EZs and ROIs. This includes plans for the "First Landing Site/Exploration Zone Workshop for Human Missions to the Surface of Mars" to be held in October 2015 at which proposals for EZs and ROIs will be presented and discussed. It will also include a discussion of how these considerations are (or will be) taken into account as future robotic Mars missions are defined and developed. One or more representative EZs, drawn from similar previous studies involving Mars sites, will be used in the proposed paper to illustrate the process NASA envisions for gathering additional data from robotic precursor missions to assist in making a final selection of an EZ for human crews as well as the steps likely to occur during the buildup of a habitation site. Examples of the systems and operations likely to be used by human crews, assisted by robotic vehicles, to explore the scientific ROIs as well as developing the resource ROIs within the example EZs will be discussed.

Bussey, Ben↗