Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “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 487 records · Page 27
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Logistics and Supportability for Crewed Missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit

NASA’s future missions aim to establish a sustained human presence on the lunar surface and send humans to Mars. These missions will send crews farther from home than previous missions, limiting the opportunities for resupply missions. Additionally, the use of multiple launches and reusable elements will increase mission and campaign complexity. Logistics and supportability analysis evaluates the link between mission and system characteristics and key metrics such as logistics and spares mass and volume, crew time, and risk. As missions become increasingly complex and crews are logistically isolated for longer periods of time, logistics and supportability will become more powerful drivers of risk and cost and, therefore, more important considerations during system and mission development. When logistics and supportability are considered from the beginning of system and mission development, opportunities arise to create more efficient, lower-risk systems. Design choices made without detailed consideration of logistics and supportability have the potential to result in greater risks and increased costs as all options may not have been analyzed. This paper provides an overview of a methodology used for space mission logistics and supportability analysis, including key metrics, assumptions, and required inputs. Example applications of this methodology to explore the impacts of system architecture, dormancy, and synergies between lunar and Mars missions are also presented. Conducting these holistic analyses enables informed decision-making for mission planning and system design, which can help mitigate the risk of loss of mission, vehicle, or crew. Using the knowledge of historical missions, experiences gained on the lunar surface, and logistics and supportability analyses, NASA can examine and optimize supportability characteristics for safer and more effective operations for future lunar and Mars missions.

Supportability↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Logistics and Supportability for Crewed Missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit

NASA’s future missions aim to establish a sustained human presence on the lunar surface and send humans to Mars. These missions will send crews farther from home than previous missions, limiting the opportunities for resupply missions. Additionally, the use of multiple launches and reusable elements will increase mission and campaign complexity. Logistics and supportability analysis evaluates the link between mission and system characteristics and key metrics such as logistics and spares mass and volume, crew time, and risk. As missions become increasingly complex and crews are logistically isolated for longer periods of time, logistics and supportability will become more powerful drivers of risk and cost and, therefore, more important considerations during system and mission development. When logistics and supportability are considered from the beginning of system and mission development, opportunities arise to create more efficient, lower-risk systems. Design choices made without detailed consideration of logistics and supportability have the potential to result in greater risks and increased costs as all options may not have been analyzed. This paper provides an overview of a methodology used for space mission logistics and supportability analysis, including key metrics, assumptions, and required inputs. Example applications of this methodology to explore the impacts of system architecture, dormancy, and synergies between lunar and Mars missions are also presented. Conducting these holistic analyses enables informed decision-making for mission planning and system design, which can help mitigate the risk of loss of mission, vehicle, or crew. Using the knowledge of historical missions, experiences gained on the lunar surface, and logistics and supportability analyses, NASA can examine and optimize supportability characteristics for safer and more effective operations for future lunar and Mars missions.

Supportability↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

VIPER Lunar Rover Agile Mission Systems

Agile development methods, which have gone from outlier to mainstream in software development, are poised to expand into all aspects of space mission development. Modern software development operates on a principle of continuous deployment, where progress is verified not with conventional metrics, but with a continuous build, available to key stakeholders, enabling direct examination of the state of the code base, and assessment of progress through demonstration of capability. Delivery times are measured in weeks, not months. Stakeholders are part of the process on an ongoing basis. The cost of change is comparatively low and requirements, which often are not precisely defined at the start of a project, may be iteratively refined in a series of agile development cycles. Agile methods are compatible with traditional system engineering methods and may be tailored to the space operations environment. The low cost of change and iterative development cycles of agile enable requirements to be defined as outcomes and constraints, with design details to be refined during the development cycle. We are now at a point where agile methods may be extended beyond software, to Mission Systems, including the Mission Operations System and the Ground Data System. For NASA’s VIPER Lunar Rover Mission, scheduled to land at a lunar pole in late 2023, we are developing the Mission System using agile methods. As in agile software, where the measure of progress is working code, in agile mission system development, the measure of capability is what we can demonstrate. Demonstrations over presentations. We demonstrate mission system capability using simulations. The concept of operations, from commanding, to driving the rover, to how we downlink images for evaluation for a near-real time command cycle, will be tested and proven in simulation, years before we begin the traditional simulation cycle for training. “Say it then simulate it.” We develop and refine our designs using simulations, with an emphasis on new components of the system that are not well known early. For example, the required duration of a mission planning cycle for a lunar surface asset such as VIPER, that operates twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, with continuous communications and a unique set of constraints based on the physics of the lunar poles and the line of site to Earth, is a unique problem in mission planning that is unlikely to be solved in a series of meetings. A small number of requirements specifying the outcomes may serve as the jumping off point to an agile development cycle, with demonstration in simulations. We have already demonstrated this process with simulations of rover driver decision time. VIPER is driven using near-real time command and control to waypoints. The driver decision time between waypoints is a fundamental enabling unit of productivity to accomplish the mission timeline. We have validated driver decision time in simulations of rover driving at the lunar South Pole, using the prototype mission tools for driving, command and control. The capability to develop and refine designs using simulations as part of agile Mission System development cycle changes the nature of team interactions, creating a focus on doing, rather than analyzing and documenting. Waterfall development cycles were, in part, a product of the significant cost of change in the early days of spaceflight. When the cost of change is high, it is vital to get your requirements right at the outset, because the system will be built to those specifications, and, when change is expensive, you better get it right early. However, modern technology has greatly lowered the cost of change, enabling iterative, rapid development cycles, in which key operations concepts may be tested and refined during development. Extending agile development to the Mission System for VIPER is a significant step in moving agile development methods for space operations beyond software, to the Mission System.

Agile↗
NASA NTRS2000

Solar Sail Trajectories for Solar Polar and Heliopause Missions

Over the last several years, interest in a more vigorous space exploration program has renewed interest in the use of solar sails for the more demanding space missions. Solar sail is eminently suited for some of the higher energy missions since no fuel is consumed and the only criteria is that of the total time required to perform a particular mission. Although solar sail missions to planets and small bodies have been examined previously, and reported in the literature' classes of space missions with no well defined target body have received little attention. These Space Physics missions include some with extremely high energy requirements. Not only are these missions difficult, if not impractical, to accomplish with conventional chemical propulsion spacecraft, but they are also difficult to perform in the near future using projected electric-propulsion systems. Solar sail trajectories for two of the high energy Space Physics missions, a Solar Polar mission and a Heliopause mission, are examined in this paper. The object of the Solar Polar mission is to place 'a payload into a short period orbit around the Sun at a 90 degree inclination to either the ecliptic plane or the equatorial plane of the sun. A forerunner for this type of mission was the Ulysses spacecraft which used a gravity assist of Jupiter to place the spacecraft into a 90 degree inclination orbit around the Sun with a perihelion distance of around .55 AU. The orbital period for the Ulysses mission was around 5 years however, and future Solar Polar missions require many observational passes over the pole of the Sun each year thus implying a significantly shorter orbit period than that for Ulysses.

Sauer, Carl G., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1994

(abstract) A Low-Cost Mission to 2060 Chiron Based on the Pluto Fast Flyby

The Pluto Fast Flyby-based mission to Chiron described in this paper is a low cost, scientifically rewarding, focused mission in the outer solar system. The proposed mission will make a flyby of 2060 Chiron, an active 'comet' with over 10(sup 4) times the mass of Halley, and an eccentric, Saturn-crossing orbit which ranges from 8.5 to 19 AU. This mission concept achieves the flyby 4.2 years after launch on a direct trajectory from Earth, is independent of Jupiter launch windows, and fits within Discovery cost guidelines. This mission offers the scientific opportunity to examine a class of object left unsampled by the trail-blazing Mariners, Pioneers, Voyagers, and missions to Halley. Spacecraft reconnaissance of Chiron addresses unique objectives relating to cometary science, other small bodies, the structure of quasi-bound atmospheres on modest-sized bodies, and the origin of primitive bodies and the giant planets. Owing to Chiron's large size (180<D<370 km), unique nature, and unusual orbit, this mission is likely to draw significant public interest. As described by COMPLEX, the SSEC, and later the SSES, flybys are the appropriate scale missions for initial reconnaissance missions. Carrying three sophisticated instruments, the proposed flyby will return critical data about Chiron's size, shape, polar obliquity, atmosphere, surface morphology, surface composition, internal structure, surface activity (including the nature of Chiron's outbursts), and origin. Engineering analysis indicates that the spacecraft is capable of navigating to and encountering Chiron at close approach distances of less than 5 000 km, well inside the 50 000 to 150 000 km coma, and perhaps within the collisional chemistry zone of the coma. The low cost of the proposed Chiron mission is based on the opportunity to use the planned Pluto Flyby spare spacecraft and a Proton Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) (the pluto spacecraft is being designed to be compatible with a Proton launch). Backup launch opportunities on Delta II and Atlas ELVs are available. The Pluto Fast Flyby mission plans to develop a low cost ($150M), lightweight (<150 kg) outer planet spacecraft which is well suited to flyby reconnaissance in the outer solar system. This Chiron flyby mission is designed to leverage SSED's Pluto spacecraft investment into a scientifically valuable successor mission within the Discovery cost cap. Taking advantage of the spare spacecraft, we estimate the Discovery Chiron intercept mission can be launched for less than $100 M. We believe this makes a highly attractive proposal, which maintains US presence and leadership in the study of the outer solar system, and enables the first-time exploration of a wholly new class of planetary target, an outer solar system planetesimal.

2060 Chiron planetesimal flyby Pluto Fast Flyby sp↗
NASA NTRS2002

INTEGRITY - Integrated Human Exploration Mission Simulation Facility

It is proposed to develop a high-fidelity ground facility to carry out long-duration human exploration mission simulations. These would not be merely computer simulations - they would in fact comprise a series of actual missions that just happen to stay on earth. These missions would include all elements of an actual mission, using actual technologies that would be used for the real mission. These missions would also include such elements as extravehicular activities, robotic systems, telepresence and teleoperation, surface drilling technology-all using a simulated planetary landscape. A sequence of missions would be defined that get progressively longer and more robust, perhaps a series of five or six missions over a span of 10 to 15 years ranging in duration from 180 days up to 1000 days. This high-fidelity ground facility would operate hand-in-hand with a host of other terrestrial analog sites such as the Antarctic, Haughton Crater, and the Arizona desert. Of course, all of these analog mission simulations will be conducted here on earth in 1-g, and NASA will still need the Shuttle and ISS to carry out all the microgravity and hypogravity science experiments and technology validations. The proposed missions would have sufficient definition such that definitive requirements could be derived from them to serve as direction for all the program elements of the mission. Additionally, specific milestones would be established for the "launch" date of each mission so that R&D programs would have both good requirements and solid milestones from which to .build their implementation plans. Mission aspects that could not be directly incorporated into the ground facility would be simulated via software. New management techniques would be developed for evaluation in this ground test facility program. These new techniques would have embedded metrics which would allow them to be continuously evaluated and adjusted so that by the time the sequence of missions is completed, the best management techniques will have been developed, implemented, and validated. A trained cadre of managers experienced with a large, complex program would then be available.

Henninger, Donald L.↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA's Lunar Polar Ice Prospector, RESOLVE: Mission Rehearsal in Apollo Valley

After the completion of the Apollo Program, space agencies didn't visit the moon for many years. But then in the 90's, the Clementine and Lunar Prospector missions returned and showed evidence of water ice at the poles. Then in 2009 the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite indisputably showed that the Cabeus crater contained water ice and other useful volatiles. Furthermore, instruments aboard the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) show evidence that the water ice may also be present in areas that receive several days of continuous sunlight each month. However, before we can factor this resource into our mission designs, we must understand the distribution and quantity of ice or other volatiles at the poles and whether it can be reasonably harvested for use as propellant or mission consumables. NASA, in partnership with the Canadian Space Agency (CSA), has been developing a payload to answer these questions. The payload is named RESOLVE. RESOLVE is on a development path that will deliver a tested flight design by the end of 2014. The team has developed a Design Reference Mission using LRO data that has RESOLVE landing near Cabeus Crater in May of2016. One of the toughest obstacles for RESOLVE's solar powered mission is its tight timeline. RESOLVE must be able to complete its objectives in the 5-7 days of available sunlight. The RESOLVE team must be able to work around obstacles to the mission timeline in real time. They can't afford to take a day off to replan as other planetary missions have done. To insure that this mission can be executed as planned, a prototype version of RESOLVE was developed this year and tested at a lunar analog site on Hawaii, known as Apollo Valley, which was once used to train the Apollo astronauts. The RESOLVE team planned the mission with the same type of orbital imagery that would be available from LRO. The simulation team prepositioned a Lander in Apollo Valley with RESOLVE on top mounted on its CSA rover. Then the mission simulation began as the operations team's consoles came alive with data and images. They executed the mission just like the real mission with lunar communications delays and limited bandwidth and a realistic remote mission control room. This paper will describe the RESOLVE payload in detail and describe the results of the mission simulation in Hawaii.

Larson, William E.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Mars Sample Return Using Commercial Capabilities: Mission Architecture Overview

Mars Sample Return (MSR) is the highest priority science mission for the next decade as recommended by the recent Decadal Survey of Planetary Science. This paper presents an overview of a feasibility study for an MSR mission. The objective of the study was to determine whether emerging commercial capabilities can be used to reduce the number of mission systems and launches required to return the samples, with the goal of reducing mission cost. We report the feasibility of a complete and closed MSR mission design using the following scenario that covers three synodic launch opportunities, beginning with the 2022 opportunity: A Falcon Heavy injects a SpaceX Red Dragon capsule and trunk onto a Trans Mars Injection (TMI) trajectory. The capsule is modified to carry all the hardware needed to return samples collected on Mars including a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), an Earth Return Vehicle (ERV), and hardware to transfer a sample collected in a previously landed rover mission to the ERV. The Red Dragon descends to land on the surface of Mars using Super Sonic Retro Propulsion (SSRP). After previously collected samples are transferred to the ERV, the single-stage MAV launches the ERV from the surface of Mars. The MAV uses a storable liquid bi-propellant propulsion system to deliver the ERV to a Mars phasing orbit. After a brief phasing period, the ERV, which also uses a storable bi-propellant system, performs a Trans Earth Injection (TEI) burn. Upon arrival at Earth, the ERV performs Earth and lunar swing-bys and is placed into a lunar trailing circular orbit - an Earth orbit, at lunar distance. A later mission, using Dragon and launched by a Falcon Heavy, performs a rendezvous with the ERV in the lunar trailing orbit, retrieves the sample container and breaks the chain of contact with Mars by transferring the sample into a sterile and secure container. With the sample contained, the retrieving spacecraft makes a controlled Earth re-entry preventing any unintended release of pristine martian materials into the Earth's biosphere. The analysis methods employed standard and specialized aerospace engineering tools. Mission system elements were analyzed with either direct techniques or by using parametric mass estimating relationships (MERs). The architecture was iterated until overall mission convergence was achieved on at least one path. Subsystems analyzed in this study include support structures, power system, nose fairing, thermal insulation, actuation devices, MAV exhaust venting, and GN&C. Best practice application of loads, mass growth contingencies, and resource margins were used. For Falcon Heavy capabilities and Dragon subsystems we utilized publically available data from SpaceX, published analyses from other sources, as well as our own engineering and aerodynamic estimates. Earth Launch mass is under 11 mt, which is within the estimated capability of a Falcon Heavy, with margin. Total entry masses between 7 and 10 mt were considered with closure occurring between 9 and 10 mt. Propellant mass fractions for each major phase of the EDL - Entry, Terminal Descent, and Hazard Avoidance - have been derived. An assessment of the effect of the entry conditions on the thermal protection system (TPS), currently in use for Dragon missions, shows no significant stressors. A useful payload mass of 2.0 mt is provided and includes mass growth allowances for the MAV, the ERV, and mission unique equipment. We also report options for the MAV and ERV, including propulsion systems, crewed versus robotic retrieval mission, as well as direct Earth entry. International planetary protection policies as well as verifiable means of compliance will have a large impact on any MSR mission design. We identify areas within our architecture where such impacts occur. We also describe preliminary compliance measures that will be the subject of future work. This work shows that emerging commercial capabilities as well as new methodologies can be used to efficiently support an important planetary science objective. The work also has applications for human exploration missions that use propulsive EDL techniques

Red Dragon↗
NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis in a Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single mission-type support to multi-mission, service-oriented support for operating a variety of mission types. At the same time, available money for projects is shrinking and competition for new missions is increasing. These factors drive the need for an accurate and flexible model to support estimating service costs for new or extended missions; the cost model in turn drives the need for an accurate and efficient approach to service cost analysis. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides operations services to a variety of customers around the world. HOSC customers range from launch vehicle test flights; to International Space Station (ISS) payloads; to small, short duration missions; and has included long duration flagship missions. The HOSC recently completed a detailed analysis of service costs as part of the development of a complete service cost model. The cost analysis process required the team to address a number of issues. One of the primary issues involves the difficulty of reverse engineering individual mission costs in a highly efficient multi-mission environment, along with a related issue of the value of detailed metrics or data to the cost model versus the cost of obtaining accurate data. Another concern is the difficulty of balancing costs between missions of different types and size and extrapolating costs to different mission types. The cost analysis also had to address issues relating to providing shared, cloud-like services in a government environment, and then assigning an uncertainty or risk factor to cost estimates that are based on current technology, but will be executed using future technology. Finally the cost analysis needed to consider how to validate the resulting cost models taking into account the non-homogeneous nature of the available cost data and the decreasing flight rate. This paper presents the issues encountered during the HOSC cost analysis process, and the associated lessons learned. These lessons can be used when planning for a new multi-mission operations center or in the transformation from a dedicated control center to multi-center operations, as an aid in defining processes that support future cost analysis and estimation. The lessons can also be used by mature service-oriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Felton, Larry↗
NASA NTRS2014

Implementation Options for the PROPEL Electrodynamic Tether Demonstration Mission

The PROPEL ("Propulsion using Electrodynamics") flight demonstration mission concept will demonstrate the use of an electrodynamic tether (EDT) for generating thrust, which will allow the propulsion system to overcome the limitations of the rocket equation. The mission concept has been developed by a team of government, industry, and academia partners led by NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). PROPEL is being designed for versatility of the EDT system with multiple end users in mind and to be flexible with respect to platform. Previously, we reported on a comprehensive mission design for PROPEL with a mission duration of six months or longer with multiple mission goals including demonstration of significant boost, deboost, inclination change, and drag make-up activities. To explore a range of possible configurations, primarily driven by cost considerations, other mission concept designs have been pursued. In partnership with the NASA's Office of Chief Technologist (OCT) Game Changing Program, NASA MSFC Leadership, and the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office, a mission concept design was developed for a near-term EDT propulsion flight validation mission. The Electrodynamic Tether Propulsion Study (ETPS) defined an EDT propulsion system capable of very large delta-V for use on future missions developed by NASA, DoD, and commercial customers. To demonstrate the feasibility of an ETPS, the study focused on a space demonstration mission concept design with configuration of a pair of tethered satellite busses, one of which is the Japanese H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV). The HTV would fly its standard ISS resupply mission. When resupply mission is complete, the ISS reconfigures and releases the HTV to perform the EDT experiment at safe orbital altitudes below the ISS. Though the focus of this particular mission concept design addresses a scenario involving the HTV or a similar vehicle, the propulsion system's capability is relevant to a number of applications, as noted above. The ETPS builds on prior work on long-life, failure-resistant, conducting tethers and includes an instrument suite with demonstrated heritage capable of performing necessary diagnostics to measure performance against predictions for a given system size (to be determined) and boost rate. Mission designs in other configurations and launch vehicle options are being developed such that the system can be demonstration should a flight opportunity be identified. We will report on past and ongoing implementation options for PROPEL.

Bilen, Sven G.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Systems Engineering Lessons Learned for Class D Missions

One of NASA's goals within human exploration is to determine how to get humans to Mars safely and to live and work on the Martian surface. To accomplish this goal, several smaller missions act as stepping-stones to the larger end goal. NASA uses these smaller missions to develop new technologies and learn about how to survive outside of Low Earth Orbit for long periods. Additionally, keeping a cadence of these missions allows the team to maintain proficiency in the complex art of bringing spacecraft to fruition. Many of these smaller missions are robotic in nature and have smaller timescales, whereas there are others that involve crew and have longer mission timelines. Given the timelines associated with these various missions, different levels of risk and rigor need to be implemented to be more in line with what is appropriate for the mission. Thus, NASA has four different classifications that range from Class A to Class D based on the mission details. One of these projects is the Resource Prospector (RP) Mission, which is a multi-center and multi-institution collaborative project to search for volatiles in the polar regions of the Moon. The RP mission is classified as a Class D mission and as such, has the opportunity to more tightly manage, and therefore accept, greater levels of risk. The requirements for Class D missions were at the forefront of the design and thus presented unique challenges in vehicle development and systems engineering processes. This paper will discuss the systems engineering process at NASA and how that process is tailored for Class D missions, specifically the RP mission.

Rojdev, Kristina↗
NASA NTRS2018

Trajectory Design Considerations for Exploration Mission 1

Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1) will be the first mission to send an uncrewed Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) to cislunar space in the fall of 2019. EM-1 was originally conceived as a lunar free-return mission, but was later changed to a Distant Retrograde Orbit (DRO) mission as a precursor to the Asteroid Redirect Mission. To understand the required mission performance (i.e., propellant requirement), a series of trajectory optimization runs was conducted using JSC's Copernicus spacecraft trajectory optimization tool. In order for the runs to be done in a timely manner, it was necessary to employ a parallelization approach on a computing cluster using a new trajectory scan tool written in Python. Details of the scan tool are provided and how it is used to perform the scans and post-process the results. Initially, a scan of daily due east launched EM-1 DRO missions in 2018 was made. Valid mission opportunities are ones that do not exceed the useable propellant available to perform the required burns. The initial scan data showed the propellant and delta-V performance patterns for each launch period. As questions were raised from different subsystems (e.g., power, thermal, communications, flight operations, etc.), the mission parameters or data that were of interest to them were added to the scan output data file. The additional data includes: (1) local launch and landing times in relation to sunrise and sunset, (2) length of eclipse periods during the in-space portion of the mission, (3) Earth line of sight from cislunar space, (4) Deep Space Network field of view looking towards cislunar space, and (5) variation of the downrange distance from Earth entry interface to splashdown. Mission design trades can also be performed based on the information that the additional data shows. For example, if the landing is in darkness, but the recovery operations team desires a landing in daylight, then an analysis is performed to determine how to change the mission design to meet this request. Also, subsystems request feasibility of alternate or contingency mission designs, such as adding an Orion main engine checkout burn or Orion completing all of its burns using only its auxiliary thrusters. This paper examines and presents the evolving trade studies that incorporate subsystem feedback and demonstrate the feasibility of these constrained mission trajectory designs and contingencies.

Dawn, Timothy F.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Operations and Navigation Experiment (CAPSTONE) Mission

NASA has partnered with Advanced Space to develop and build the Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Operations and Navigation Experiment (CAPSTONE) mission which will serve as a pathfinder for Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NHRO) operations around the Moon. The NHRO, (Perilune = 3,200 km; Apolune = 70,000 km) will be the intended orbit for the NASA’s Artemis Gateway lunar orbital platform. The CAPSTONE mission will validate simulations and confirm operational planning for Gateway while also validating performance of navigation and station-keeping requirements for the 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 baseline for CAPSTONE is to fly a 12U cubesat developed, integrated, and tested by Tyvak Nanosatellite Systems carrying a payload communications system capable of cross-link ranging with the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), a dedicated payload flight computer for software demonstration, and a camera. The launch, coordinated by NASA Launch Services Program, will be provided by a Rocket Lab launch vehicle utilizing their new Proton upper stage to deploy the CAPSTONE spacecraft into the lunar orbit. The CAPSTONE mission is targeting a launch no earlier than September 23, 2021. Upon launch, the spacecraft will traverse a highly efficient transfer taking approximately three months to enter a primary demonstration phase in an NRHO for six months followed by a twelve month technology enhancement operations phase. The CAPSTONE Project is lead by Advanced Space, LLC of Boulder Colorado. Spacecraft development and mission operations will be conducted by Tyvak Nanosatellite Systems of Irvine, California. Noted objectives for the CAPSTONE mission will be to demonstrate the accessibility of NHROs, validate key operational concepts in the NHRO environment, lay a foundation for commercial support of future lunar operations and accelerate 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 Program (SSTP), which is one of several programs in NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. SSTP 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 launch for the CAPSTONE Mission is provided by Human Exploration & Operations Missions Directorate Advanced Exploration Systems Division. Coordination and Acquisition of the Launch is managed by NASA’s Launch Services Program. The CAPSTONE Mission and project status will be presented.

CAPSTONE↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mission Operations, Cubed: NASA Marshall Operations Support for SmallSats

SmallSats have come a long way since the Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center supported its first “minisatellite” mission in 2010. And just as SmallSats themselves have evolved in those 12 years, so too has the HOSC’s mission support for SmallSats. Marshall Space Flight Center has a long history with payload and mission operations, including support for the Apollo missions to the moon, the Space Shuttle program, and 21 years of continuous around-the-clock science operations support for research aboard the International Space Station. Today, the HOSC is a multi-tenant facility, supporting not only ISS, but also NASA’s Commercial Crew program, the Space Launch System, the Hubble and Chandra observatories and others – including multiple SmallSat missions. Two SmallSat solar sail missions will be among those taking advantage of the HOSC’s resources for planning, training for and executing mission operations – the Near Earth Asteroid (NEA) Scout and Solar Cruiser missions. One of 10 6U CubeSats manifest on the Artemis I launch of NASA’s Space Launch System rocket this year, NEA Scout’s three-year mission will be supported through a more traditional operations concept, with a dedicated Flight Controller staff operating within the HOSC. Scheduled to launch as part of the Interstellar Mapping and Acceleration Probe (IMAP) in February 2025, Solar Cruiser’s 11-month mission will take a next-generation approach to operations by utilizing a multi-mission flight controller concept, as well as Marshall’s Telescience Resource Kit (TreK). TreK provides a suite of software applications and libraries that allow the Mission Operations Center to serve as an in-house ground system which incorporates remote and automation capability options for engineers and scientists. This presentation will compare the approaches the HOSC will use to support these two missions as a way of demonstrating the array of options NASA MSFC offers for operations support for CubeSat and SmallSat missions.

Darren S Wallace↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Ground Multi-Mission Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) for Free-Space Optical Communications

Once confined to the realm of laboratory experiments and theoretical papers, space-based laser communications (lasercomm) are on the verge of achieving mainstream status. Organizations from Facebook to NASA, and missions from cubesats to Orion are employing lasercomm to achieve gigabit communication speeds at mass and power requirements lower than that of traditional radio frequency (RF) methods. Since first demonstrating free-space optical communications services with Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) in 2013, NASA has invested in developing optical communications technologies and capabilities to enhancing its space communications networks. Along with evolving optical space terminals, NASA is also developing lasercomm grounds stations capable of meeting the rapidly increasing data volume demands of upcoming missions, from low-earth to lunar orbits and beyond and integrating these advanced capabilities into its Near-Space and Deep Space Networks. To meet this emerging need, the Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) project at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is designing, building and validating a prototype for a flexible, multi-mission, and economical optical ground terminal that could be used as a blueprint for a global network of optical ground stations, capable of supporting a wide variety of missions. To date a major impediment to widespread adoption of laser communication has been the lack of an existing ground network infrastructure. A mission that wishes to take advantage of laser communication not only needs to invest in an optical space terminal, but it must also finance the creation of ground terminals to receive the downlink signal. This adds significant additional cost. Missions that do decide to incur the cost of financing a network of ground terminals end up building highly specialized optical receivers that are operable as receivers for that specific mission only. Significant Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost is invested to build highly specialized one-of-a-kind ground terminals that go into storage after that particular mission is over. This is not an economical approach and does nothing to grow the number of optical ground stations available to future missions. In essence each mission that wants to take advantage of the benefits of lasercom has to start from scratch to provide a ground terminal network to support it. As long as this is the case, the cost for using laser communications will be too high for most missions to consider. LCOT intends to close this gap in technology by designing and developing a standard optical ground terminal design that is flexible enough to serve as a receiver for a wide range of future missions – a ground terminal that can be quickly reconfigured to receive downlinks at different wavelengths using different signal formats. Not only does LCOT have the industry-building objectives of utilizing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to the maximum extent possible, but also spurs the commercial development of other necessary lasercomm components not currently offered by industry. Finally, LCOT will give NASA scientists and engineers a facility where they can gain real-world experience with optical communications. It will give engineers a cost-effective way to try out new concepts and processes by providing the infrastructure for such testing. In this way it is hoped LCOT will serve as a stimulus for innovation in optical communications and speed its widespread adoption by future missions. The LCOT is comprised of five subsystems: Free-Space Optical, Transceiver, Amplifier, Monitor and Control, and Observatory Infrastructure. In August 2021, the LCOT team installed a 70 cm telescope, developed by Planewave Instruments that was optimized for optical communications. Free-Space Optical subsystem comprises of the telescope and its associated hardware, including a transmitter optical assembly, wide field cameras, two optical benches, and an adaptive optics subsystem. The transmit optical assembly, a unique concept design, is a cluster of four functionally independent transmit subassemblies located on the receive telescope. In addition to receiving optical signals and directing the expanded beam with high precision to the space terminal, it also performs tracking functions. The transmit optical assembly will support operations from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) through lunar and will be used as a template for industry manufacturing. The Optical Infrastructure subsystem is responsible for providing environmentally controlled shelters for LCOT equipment and various other systems. To maintain the safety and proper functionality of the telescope, a 16 ft Astrohaven clamshell dome procured which provides all-sky coverage without the need to rotate the dome. Additionally, Atmospheric Monitoring Assembly (AMA) will be part of optical infrastructure subsystem to ensure accurate performance of the LCOT. Like existing optical ground stations, LCOT will measure standard weather station parameters, infrared all sky image of cloud cover, and cloud height. LCOT, however, adds requirements for measuring night time seeing and, in the future, daytime seeing. Unlike other optical ground terminals, the LCOT is transceiver agnostic; user transceivers may be duplex transceivers, standalone receivers, or standalone transmitters with or without acquisition beacon functionality. As such, the LCOT project accommodates testing with external customer transceivers in a flexible manor, further complimenting its intended multi-mission goals. Another unique component of LCOT is the use of a new amplifier technology – the Very Large Mode Area (VLMA) amplifiers. This new technology allows LCOT to avoid the issues faced by previous laser communications ground terminals, gives users more flexibility and modular capability, and is capable of reaching an order of magnitude higher peak power than traditional High Power Optical Amplifiers (HPOA). One drawback of the VLMA HPOA approach is that the amplified light is output into free-space. The solution developed by LCOT is an optics train that couples the output of the VLMA amplifier into a short fiber for transport to the transmit telescopes with high efficiency. Like many of the LCOT components, a set of detailed manufacturing drawings have been created for the optics train to allow any machine shop with a multi-axis Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine to fabricate the piece parts from commonly available materials. In line with the goals of LCOT, the monitor and control functions are developed as a modular and flexible system with the ability to support future hardware or algorithm changes, minimizing disruptions. A main priority of development in the Monitor and Control Subsystem (MCS) is the safety monitor system.

laser communication↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Ground Multi-mission Low Cost Optical Terminal(LCOT) for Free-Space Optical Communication

Once confined to the realm of laboratory experiments and theoretical papers, space-based laser communications (lasercomm) are on the verge of achieving mainstream status. Organizations from Facebook to NASA, and missions from cubesats to Orion are employing lasercomm to achieve gigabit communication speeds at mass and power requirements lower than that of traditional radio frequency (RF) methods. Since first demonstrating free-space optical communications services with Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) in 2013, NASA has invested in developing optical communications technologies and capabilities to enhancing its space communications networks. Along with evolving optical space terminals, NASA is also developing lasercomm grounds stations capable of meeting the rapidly increasing data volume demands of upcoming missions, from low-earth to lunar orbits and beyond and integrating these advanced capabilities into its Near-Space and Deep Space Networks. To meet this emerging need, the Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) project at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is designing, building and validating a prototype for a flexible, multi-mission, and economical optical ground terminal that could be used as a blueprint for a global network of optical ground stations, capable of supporting a wide variety of missions. To date a major impediment to widespread adoption of laser communication has been the lack of an existing ground network infrastructure. A mission that wishes to take advantage of laser communication not only needs to invest in an optical space terminal, but it must also finance the creation of ground terminals to receive the downlink signal. This adds significant additional cost. Missions that do decide to incur the cost of financing a network of ground terminals end up building highly specialized optical receivers that are operable as receivers for that specific mission only. Significant Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost is invested to build highly specialized one-of-a-kind ground terminals that go into storage after that particular mission is over. This is not an economical approach and does nothing to grow the number of optical ground stations available to future missions. In essence each mission that wants to take advantage of the benefits of lasercom has to start from scratch to provide a ground terminal network to support it. As long as this is the case, the cost for using laser communications will be too high for most missions to consider. LCOT intends to close this gap in technology by designing and developing a standard optical ground terminal design that is flexible enough to serve as a receiver for a wide range of future missions – a ground terminal that can be quickly reconfigured to receive downlinks at different wavelengths using different signal formats. Not only does LCOT have the industry-building objectives of utilizing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to the maximum extent possible, but also spurs the commercial development of other necessary lasercomm components not currently offered by industry. Finally, LCOT will give NASA scientists and engineers a facility where they can gain real-world experience with optical communications. It will give engineers a cost-effective way to try out new concepts and processes by providing the infrastructure for such testing. In this way it is hoped LCOT will serve as a stimulus for innovation in optical communications and speed its widespread adoption by future missions. The LCOT is comprised of five subsystems: Free-Space Optical, Transceiver, Amplifier, Monitor and Control, and Observatory Infrastructure. In August 2021, the LCOT team installed a 70 cm telescope, developed by Planewave Instruments that was optimized for optical communications. Free-Space Optical subsystem comprises of the telescope and its associated hardware, including a transmitter optical assembly, wide field cameras, two optical benches, and an adaptive optics subsystem. The transmit optical assembly, a unique concept design, is a cluster of four functionally independent transmit subassemblies located on the receive telescope. In addition to receiving optical signals and directing the expanded beam with high precision to the space terminal, it also performs tracking functions. The transmit optical assembly will support operations from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) through lunar and will be used as a template for industry manufacturing. The Optical Infrastructure subsystem is responsible for providing environmentally controlled shelters for LCOT equipment and various other systems. To maintain the safety and proper functionality of the telescope, a 16 ft Astrohaven clamshell dome procured which provides all-sky coverage without the need to rotate the dome. Additionally, Atmospheric Monitoring Assembly (AMA) will be part of optical infrastructure subsystem to ensure accurate performance of the LCOT. Like existing optical ground stations, LCOT will measure standard weather station parameters, infrared all sky image of cloud cover, and cloud height. LCOT, however, adds requirements for measuring night time seeing and, in the future, daytime seeing. Unlike other optical ground terminals, the LCOT is transceiver agnostic; user transceivers may be duplex transceivers, standalone receivers, or standalone transmitters with or without acquisition beacon functionality. As such, the LCOT project accommodates testing with external customer transceivers in a flexible manor, further complimenting its intended multi-mission goals. Another unique component of LCOT is the use of a new amplifier technology – the Very Large Mode Area (VLMA) amplifiers. This new technology allows LCOT to avoid the issues faced by previous laser communications ground terminals, gives users more flexibility and modular capability, and is capable of reaching an order of magnitude higher peak power than traditional High Power Optical Amplifiers (HPOA). One drawback of the VLMA HPOA approach is that the amplified light is output into free-space. The solution developed by LCOT is an optics train that couples the output of the VLMA amplifier into a short fiber for transport to the transmit telescopes with high efficiency. Like many of the LCOT components, a set of detailed manufacturing drawings have been created for the optics train to allow any machine shop with a multi-axis Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine to fabricate the piece parts from commonly available materials. In line with the goals of LCOT, the monitor and control functions are developed as a modular and flexible system with the ability to support future hardware or algorithm changes, minimizing disruptions. A main priority of development in the Monitor and Control Subsystem (MCS) is the safety monitor system.

Haleh Safavi↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Space Transportation Sensitivity to Roundtrip Mission Duration and Mars Vicinity Stay Time

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate has been developing architecture concepts for human missions to Mars in alignment with the agency’s Moon-to-Mars Strategy & Objectives. One of the key components of a human Mars mission is the in-space transportation system that delivers crew and cargo to Mars vicinity and returns the crew safely back to Earth. The Mars Architecture Team within ESDMD’s Strategy and Architecture Office has been evaluating multiple in-space transportation options to satisfy this functional need. The first step of this evaluation is to understand key architectural drivers for in-space transportation systems. Lunar and Mars missions have unique challenges, and systems designed for one may not be directly applicable to the other as they have different energy and mission needs. In addition, the time and distance for a Mars mission will be drastically different from the historical and current programs, requiring a new paradigm for mission architects. This paper investigates the impact of mission duration on a variety of different transportation options. As mission duration decreases, the total energy required to perform a roundtrip Mars mission increases exponentially, significantly increasing the required Earth departure mass. Sensitivity analyses of various in-space transportation system concepts were shown in this paper to begin mapping out the in-space transportation trade space. Each of the transportation systems has its own strengths and weaknesses, especially in the context of the continuous mission duration and vicinity stay time trade space. Although mission duration and Mars vicinity stay time may be key architecture drivers from an in-space transportation perspective, the decision of acceptable mission duration cannot be made solely from this perspective. Mission duration also has tangible impacts to crew health and performance, as well as system reliability and other key architecture considerations. The integrated nature of the architecture decision road map will be the primary focus of the Mars Architecture Team in the coming analysis cycle. This in-space transportation analysis will serve as the first guidepost of this critical activity that will guide the Moon-to-Mars Architecture into the humans to Mars segment.

Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Space Transportation Sensitivity to Roundtrip Mission Duration and Mars Vicinity Stay Time

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate has been developing architecture concepts for human missions to Mars in alignment with the agency’s Moon-to-Mars Strategy & Objectives. One of the key components of a human Mars mission is the in-space transportation system that delivers crew and cargo to Mars vicinity and returns the crew safely back to Earth. The Mars Architecture Team within ESDMD’s Strategy and Architecture Office has been evaluating multiple in-space transportation options to satisfy this functional need. The first step of this evaluation is to understand key architectural drivers for in-space transportation systems. Lunar and Mars missions have unique challenges, and systems designed for one may not be directly applicable to the other as they have different energy and mission needs. In addition, the time and distance for a Mars mission will be drastically different from the historical and current programs, requiring a new paradigm for mission architects. This paper investigates the impact of mission duration on a variety of different transportation options. As mission duration decreases, the total energy required to perform a roundtrip Mars mission increases exponentially, significantly increasing the required Earth departure mass. Sensitivity analyses of various in-space transportation system concepts were shown in this paper to begin mapping out the in-space transportation trade space. Each of the transportation systems has its own strengths and weaknesses, especially in the context of the continuous mission duration and vicinity stay time trade space. Although mission duration and Mars vicinity stay time may be key architecture drivers from an in-space transportation perspective, the decision of acceptable mission duration cannot be made solely from this perspective. Mission duration also has tangible impacts to crew health and performance, as well as system reliability and other key architecture considerations. The integrated nature of the architecture decision road map will be the primary focus of the Mars Architecture Team in the coming analysis cycle. This in-space transportation analysis will serve as the first guidepost of this critical activity that will guide the Moon-to-Mars Architecture into the humans to Mars segment.

Mars↗