Results for “Operability” — Page 28

NASA NTRS2018

Addressing Human Error in International Space Station Flight Control Teams: Advances in Ground Training for Science Operators

In flight control, as with any human in the loop system, operator error is an inevitable reality. On the International Space Station (ISS) where crew time and physical resources are precious and often irreplaceable, operator errors can result in significant, irreversible consequences. Flight controllers at the Payload Operations Integration Center (POIC) located at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama know this reality well. At the POIC, operator errors can be caused by a variety of factors, from poor hardware or software design to environmental factors such as time pressure or fatigue. The most difficult errors to address, however, are those which result from ineffective teamwork.Academic research in teamwork has resulted in the identification of many factors which make cross-functional teaming difficult, including leadership, trust building, and communication challenges. These factors, especially when combined with the challenging environmental factors flight control teams must contend with daily, make the goal of minimizing operator errors in payload operations challenging to achieve. To address such teamwork errors, trainers at the POIC have drawn best practices from high reliability industries such as commercial aviation, healthcare, and nuclear power plants, as well as from our sister ISS control center in Houston, Texas, to develop and institute a new training program focused specifically on teamwork skills.This training program, called the Team Skills Curriculum, is based on the concept of Crew Resource Management (CRM) which was developed by NASA in the 1970s for the commercial aviation industry in response to a series of aviation disasters resulting from ineffective teamwork. CRM was later tailored by the Johnson Space Center (JSC) for use in astronaut and flight control training. The result, called Space Flight Resource Management (SFRM) was formally introduced into manned spaceflight training in the late 90s. SFRM has evolved over the years, but the focus has remained on helping operators develop the skills needed to work as part of an effective team. Using these concepts as well as the latest research in cross-functional teaming and data on specific errors occurring at the POIC, trainers in the integrated flight control training branch created a custom training program for both new and certified payload operations specialists.

Harris, Samantha S.↗

NASA NTRS2016

International Space Station (ISS) Payload Autonomous Operations Past, Present and Future

Draper Laboratorys Timeliner is a scripting and automation system that runs onboard computers in the International Space Station (ISS). Timeliner is fully integrated with ISS and can be used to automate ISS operations tasks. Some of the most challenging aspects of operating a payload in low earth orbit are communication delays, ground equipment failures, and human errors. How does a Payload Developer (PD) know their equipment is operating nominally and collecting science in the most efficient way possible or even powered at any given time? During a ground Loss of Signal (LOS) data outage, PDs have no insight into their experiments state, and benefit greatly from Timeliner scripts executing on ISS to perform telemetry monitoring and commanding operations. This paper will discuss current software designs, and new operational uses for Timeliner. Existing Timeliner capabilities discussed will include: autonomous EXPRESS Rack activation and deactivation; autonomous science data downlinks; Minus Eighty Degree Freezer (MELFI) Dewar autonomous safing; JAXA and ESA module autonomous payload facility safing; as well as many others. New operational concepts discussed will include allowing Timeliner on the payload computer to issue core commands (Thermal, Power, Fire Detection), creation of new ground tools that will monitor the current status of Payload Racks as well as all the messaging from autonomous scripts executing, decreasing approval time for Timeliner bundles, and opening up the Payload MDM Enhanced Processor Integrated Communications Card (EPIC) interface. The EPIC interface could provide a new crew interface for PL Timeliner execution. The new interface could operate on either a Payload Computer System (PCS) or a Station Support Computer (SSC) that is plugged into either the Payload LAN or the Operations LAN which will make communicating to the PL MDM more flexible and greatly increase band width for communication.

Space Mission Automation↗

NASA NTRS2019

Long Term Biological Treatment of Space Habitation Waste Waters in a One Stage MABR: Comparison of Operation for N and C Oxidation With and Without Simultaneous Denitrification

Aerobic biological stabilization has been previously demonstrated for full size MABR?s (CoMANDR 1.0, CoMANDR 2.0, and R-CoMANDR) over operating periods of ~1 year. These systems have successfully treated a variety of possible habitation waste streams including an ISS (urine + flush and humidity condensate) and Early Planetary Base (EPB) wastewater (urine, flush water, hygiene wastewater, and laundry). Biological stabilization has a number of advantages including: 1) elimination of hazardous pre-treat chemicals; 2) production of NOx species (that can be easily rejected by evaporative or membrane systems); 3) elimination of volatile organic constituents; 4) a low pH effluent that facilitates membrane and distillation processes; and 5) a effluent that produces a better quality and less hazardous brine for water recovery. Previous work has primarily evaluated aerobic operation in which organic carbon and nitrogen is converted to CO2 and NOx-, respectively. An alternative to aerobic operation would be to include anoxic operation to promote denitrification and production of N2 gas. This allows for production of make-up gas as well as reduces the O2 demand and can increase ammonia oxidation efficiency. We evaluated the operation of a full scale (2 crew/day) MABR operated to perform oxidation of organic carbon and nitrogen with and without simultaneous reduction of oxidized N to N2 gas, simultaneous nitrification denitrification (SNDN). The system was challenged with a variety of space habitation wastewaters ranging from an ISS composition to a possible EPB waste stream under both continuous and on-production feeding modes. The system has been operated for over 2.5 years. We report on an overall comparison of aerobic oxidation and SNDN operational regimes to evaluate the system with the best overall attributes to support recycling of space habitation waste streams.

Biological water processing↗

NASA NTRS2016

On the Maneuvers Operational Response for NASA’s Soil Moisture Active-Passive (SMAP) Mission

The Soil-Moisture Active-Passive (SMAP) spacecraft requires various kinds of in-orbit maneuvers over the course of its three-year mission. The types of maneuvers include pre-planned commissioning maneuvers to reach its science orbit, regularly executed orbit maintenance maneuvers to overcome drag and other nominally occurring phenomena, as well as (the possibility of) collision avoidance maneuvers. The architecture of the spacecraft – in terms of availability of commanding via ground assets, the inherited avionics' ability to sequence and execute commands, and the capability of available subsystems able to carry out maneuvers – was well defined early in the development of the spacecraft and mission, well before the operational plan for responding to maneuver requests was cemented. The systems engineering challenge became: how to accommodate all three types of maneuvers in the confines of this well-defined architecture. This paper will describe how the operations team on SMAP successfully met this challenge. Specifically, it will dive into the three pronged approach that SMAP developed to handle each type of maneuver described above – to meet the timeliness requirements leveraged on the operations team to execute said maneuvers, while continuing to fit within the allotted staffing profile during nominal operations. Defining this paradigm to fit the mission’s architecture meant re-defining the original paradigm, (planned maneuvers being thought of separately than collision avoidance maneuvers), and re-classifying all responses to maneuver requests as variations and permutations of a singular operational response to a maneuver request. This paper will also describe the tools that were created to simplify the human interface and automate as much of the response as was possible. Finally, this paper will describe, at a very high level, some of the problems encountered and lessons learned by the operations team when this process was executed the first four times during the first ninety days of operations. Though the architecture of the operations team's response to maneuver requests will never be repeated exactly, the flexibility that was inserted via redefining the scope of the problem and by redefining the human interfaces should influence future projects' architectures earlier in their development – in the hopes that said influence will save time and money in the future.

Tirona, Joseph↗

NASA NTRS2018

Predicting Crew Time Allocations for Lunar Orbital Missions Based on Historical ISS Operational Activities

As the National Aeronautics and Space Administration continues to define candidate architectures for the planned lunar “Gateway”, it will be necessary to have a detailed understanding of how the crew will inhabit, operate, and maintain the spacecraft. The nature of the Gateway vehicle systems configuration and operations will have a direct impact on the scope of work activities required of the crew. Crew work schedules are sensitive to variations in spacecraft architecture, visiting vehicle activities, and logistics operations – particularly within short duration missions as initially planned for the lunar Gateway. These system and operational configurations must be taken into account when planning for crew time availability to conduct science activities on Gateway missions. This paper presents a methodology that is used to predict crew time distributions for lunar Gateway missions, as applied in NASA’s Exploration Crew Time Model (ECTM). The process utilized for evaluating crew time distributions is based on the categorization of all crew activities into a standardized ontology. Historical ISS daily crew timeline data from July 20, 2011 (post STS retirement) to present day was captured via the Operational Planning Timeline Integration System (OPTimIS) database and characterized according to the standardized ontology. This process enabled correlation and statistical analysis of the ISS data according to common mission parameters such as crew size, ECLSS system design, vehicle traffic operations, and logistics delivery operations. The results of the statistical analysis are a set of crew time distributions for each activity category. These distributions are then utilized within the ECTM to examine crew time allocations based on mission parameter inputs, which serve to characterize the Gateway mission configurations. Results for predicted crew time allocations for representative short duration Gateway missions are presented. These results can be used to evaluate crew schedule availability for science and utilization activities. Variations in expected mission architectures and mission operations are accounted for to correct crew time predictions. The analysis is being leveraged to plan utilization capability objectives that are achievable on the Gateway missions, as well as inform the viability of various mission architecture options.

Stromgren, Chel↗

NASA NTRS2020

Airspace Operations: Vision for 2045 and Beyond

We are seeing interesting changes in airspace operations. We are experiencing growth in global aviation for passenger and cargo travel. At the same time, drones of all sizes, urban air mobility, electric aircraft, commercial space transportation, supersonics, hypersonics, and increasingly autonomous vehicles will continue to mature. These operations along with current aviation will require access to airspace operations. Such access and scalability needs will only continue to increase in the future. Given that systems and procedures that will enable and support the future density and diversity takes a considerable amount of time to build and harmonize across the globe, it is appropriate that research efforts to enable 2045 operations begin now. A perfect storm is brewing as a number of factors are coming together, including: anticipated growth in diversity and density; limitations of our current system to support the growth and diversity; lack of utilization of latest technologies in an increasingly digitized world to support air traffic management; and a long lead time to conduct research, develop requirements, and built and deploy air traffic management systems. All these factors indicate that now is the time to start thinking about the needs of 2045 and beyond. In a limited manner, Unmanned Aircraft System Traffic Management (UTM) has shown that new thinking and implementation paths for airspace operations is possible. The current system as it exists is based on many assumptions and limitations of technologies (e.g., radar, human-centered voice communications) which may not be true moving forward given the technologies around us are changing. The panel will discuss the following and related topics: 1. Expected growth in density, diversity, and needed scalability, 2. Likely requirements of air traffic management system to enable and support 2045 and beyond operations, 3. Assumptions related to air traffic management and operations that need to reevaluated based on technology trends, 4. Identification of research priorities and harmonization of research across the globe, and 5. Transition approaches from current air traffic operations to new vision 2045. The panel discussion will be useful for global air traffic management researchers, managers, strategists, airspace users, air traffic management system developers and integrators, and academic researchers.

Kopardekar, Parimal H.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluation of Performance, Fatigue and Workload During Real-time, Reactive Telerobotic Mission Control Operations

Real-time, reactive telerobotic mission control operations require personnel to actively operate and manage remotely controlled vehicles or robots in real time. Due to the physical separation of the vehicle from the operator, such operations present many additional factors that can influence fatigue (i.e., degraded mental performance) and workload (i.e., mental and physical cost of task requirements), making it difficult to assess how long an individual can safely and accurately conduct operations. The upcoming Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) mission involves remotely controlling a lunar vehicle from an Earth-based mission control station. METHODS: In order to determine how long personnel could successfully maintain alertness and performance while operating a rover, we studied seven trained operators (i.e., 5 drivers, 2 real-time scientists) in a simulated mission control environment. We further assessed workload in order to determine whether perceived workload levels would change relative to time on task and by time of day. Operators completed two five-hour simulations in a randomized order, beginning at noon and at midnight. Performance was evaluated every 30 minutes using the psychomotor vigilance task (PVT), Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS), and NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). RESULTS: On average, participants rated themselves as sleepier (5.06 ± 2.28) on the night drives compared to the day drives (3.12 ± 1.44; P < .0001). Workload was rated higher during the day drives (37.93 ± 20.09) compared to night (32.09 ± 21.74; P < .01). Lastly, participants had no change in average reaction time between the two drives. CONCLUSIONS: From the analysis, we observed performance began to degrade after approximately three hours of driving. Our findings suggest that rotating drivers at least every three hours would be prudent to allow for breaks, and to minimize performance degradation, particularly during night shifts.

fatigue↗

NASA NTRS2006

Implementing distributed operations : a comparison of two Deep Space Missions

Two very different deep space exploration missions—Mars Exploration Rover and Cassini—have made use of distributed operations for their science teams. In the case of MER, the distributed operations capability was implemented only after the prime mission was completed, as the rovers continued to operate well in excess of their expected mission lifetimes; Cassini, designed for a prime mission of four years, had planned for distributed operations from its inception. The rapid command turnaround timeline of MER, as well as many of the operations features implemented to support it, have proven to be conducive to distributed operations. These features include: a single science team leader during the tactical operations timeline, highly integrated science and engineering teams, processes and file structures designed to permit multiple team members to work in parallel to deliver sequencing products, web-based spacecraft status and planning reports for team-wide access, and near-elimination of paper products from the operations process.

Larsen, Barbara↗

NASA NTRS2006

Cassini distributed instrument operations – what we’ve learned since Saturn orbit insertion

The Cassini mission to Saturn is complex with 12 science teams conducting distributed operations across the United States and Europe. Each Team includes scientists from around the world who actively participate in operations, including observation design, instrument commanding, downlink processing, and archiving. This represents a change in how JPL complex deep-space missions have been operated. Since Saturn Orbit Insertion (SOI), the Cassini Project has spent 17 months conducting science operations and has gained realworld experience that has tested the assumptions and rationale for this approach. We have learned that many of the expected benefits have been realized, but there were numerous unexpected challenges as well. This paper will discuss the lessons learned from the Cassini Tour experience to date. It will revisit the assumptions and rationale behind the distributed instrument operations design and will describe the results, good and bad, of implementing this method of operations. We will describe how Instrument Teams are structured, their roles and responsibilities, what challenges they faced going into orbital operations (the “tour”) and what creative solutions were proposed when funding limitations and schedule milestones prevented optimum solutions. We will also discuss the problems that have been encountered both on the ground and with the instruments, how these problems and anomalies were overcome, and what was learned along the way about the characteristics of distributed instrument operations.

Woncik, Pam↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ISS Payload Operations Training During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Impacts and Solutions

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic brought a dramatic and rapid transformation to almost every aspect of humanity in 2020. The world’s space agencies and their missions were not immune to the wide-sweeping changes. One discipline principally affected was mission operations and the various groups supporting that function. Mission support teams, especially for complex and crewed missions like the International Space Station were forced to rapidly rethink how and where control center staff performed their vital work. Operations training – an essential element to mission ops, had unique hurdles to overcome. Operations training is responsible for preparing astronaut crews for their missions, providing training to flight controllers, as well as ensuring that new team members are ready to join their colleagues. Every element of training was impacted by COVID restrictions. From orientation and introductory classes for new controllers, simulations and advanced lessons, On the Job Training and final evaluations; all aspects faced new challenges. Trainers at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, were forced to become more efficient with trainees and resources to continue supporting payload operations. The pandemic started in the USA in March 2020. Immediately, NASA mandated that the support for ISS real-time operations was critical. As a result, physical access to key facilities was restricted. Trainers and trainees had to quickly shift to 100 percent remote learning. In the short term, this was not a problem. However, instructors discovered lessons that they were accustomed to delivering in a classroom environment did not translate to remote teaching. Another hurdle to operations training was the mandate that all simulations could only be held remotely. The logistics of even small simulations proved to be challenging due to IT restrictions and public internet limitations. With simulations essentially stopped, as well as the restrictions on most OJT, trainees were essentially stopped in their advancement towards certification. Once limitations were identified, trainers prioritized new options. Transitioning to all electronic learning materials was a relatively easy fix. Teaching to large groups took additional shifts in the training paradigm. Methods for preparing astronauts for their missions were revised. Simulation supervisors found more efficient techniques to provide realistic training experience. Communication and approvals from management was essential. In every case, the payload operations instructors found novel solutions to all functions listed. This paper will discuss the factors and solutions payloads operations trainers found to keep scientific research on the ISS flying forward to mission success.

ISS↗

NASA NTRS2021

Concept of Operations for OSIRIS-REx Optical Navigation Image Planning

Optical navigation (OpNav) is a critical subsystem of the OSIRIS-REx asteroid sample return mission, which operated in the vicinity of near-Earth asteroid (101955) Bennu from August 2018 through April 2021. A substantial amount of mission resources across multiple subsystems and institutions is required to ensure that the OpNav data are successfully acquired. The KinetX OpNav team, part of the Flight Dynamics System (FDS), is responsible for performing required analysis to develop the OpNav operations plans; requesting, reviewing and verifying the plans; and ultimately using the image data for critical navigation operations. The FDS team, responsible for the mission navigation, is operated by KinetX Aerospace with management and operations support from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. The Science Processing and Operations Center (SPOC), located at the University of Arizona’s Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, is responsible for generating the planning products for all science and most OpNav data. These plans are integrated into the spacecraft sequences, tested, and commanded by the Mission Support Area (MSA) at Lockheed Martin Space. To ensure mission-critical navigation image data are successfully acquired, the plan is developed through a waterfall of planning cycles over the course of 3 months prior to onboard plan execution. During the initial strategic planning for a mission phase, detailed analysis is performed by the OpNav team to conceptualize the concept of operations (ConOps) for image data collection. This phase OpNav Narrative is included along with other strategic planning documents for the key ground segment stakeholders to review and provide feedback. The detailed OpNav plans get defined in the tactical planning cycle, which spans 8 to 3 weeks before the week-long integrated sequence is executed on-board the spacecraft. During the tactical cycle, the initial OpNav Request is submitted along with the science requests, kicking off development of the science and OpNav plans. Once the initial plan is drafted, interfaces are exercised so that the plan can be reviewed and iterated, if necessary. A rigorous schedule is followed by the planning teams during the implementation cycle, spanning the last 18 days before uplink, to ensure all the necessary integration, testing, and reviewing can occur on time. The development of the OpNav planning ConOps, including responsibilities, interfaces, timelines, and procedures, took extensive collaboration across mission elements and institutions. The process was robust throughout the 137 weeks of continuous Optical Navigation Operations at Bennu, which concluded on April 9th, 2021.

Coralie D. Adam↗

NASA NTRS2022

NASA System-Wide Safety Wildland Firefighting Operations Workshop Report

On March 9-11, 2022, NASA’s System-Wide Safety Wildland Firefighting Operations Workshop engaged the broader wildland firefighting management ecosystem in a safety-oriented discussion via a virtual platform. This enabled a better understanding of how NASA and community expertise can be leveraged in the safe development of current and future firefighting systems and operations. The goals of the workshop were to: (1) identify and prioritize the top safety-oriented risks, gaps in capabilities, and emerging technologies to enhance wildland firefighting for both near-term and far-term concepts, with a specific focus on aviation operations and (2) engage the stakeholder community in defining emergent safety-oriented scope, roles, responsibilities, and procedures for agents undergoing increasingly complex wildland firefighting operations in information-rich, but uncertain environments. Workshop participants were solicited from wildland firefighting stakeholders across government, industry, and academia. All levels of government were engaged, as NASA sought attendees from federal, state, local, and tribal government agencies. Industry participants from traditional wildland firefighting domains such as data visualization and equipment manufacturers were invited, and corporate attendees from novel application domains such as aerial robotics and autonomous systems were present as well. The top three findings were as follows: (1) Enhancing situation awareness is a safety priority, especially in the use of aerial assets; (2) Timely access to information along with data fusion and integrated displays will enhance safety-critical decision-making both inside and outside aviation contexts; and (3) Tailorable standards and common operating pictures in the field will enhance inter-agency cooperation in the wildland firefighting lifecycle and enable the optimal use of limited resources such as aerial assets. The workshop helped inform NASA of the relevant safety-related wildland firefighting concerns and aided the broader ecosystem in understanding the potential safety-oriented role NASA might play in this community. Increased engagement with crucial governmental stakeholders (e.g., U.S. Forest Service, CAL FIRE, etc.) along with industry partners in cutting- edge information -centric domains is a fundamental next step. Additionally, the workshop findings will help define the first of a series of operationally challenging demonstrations, held in concert with strategic ecosystem partners, known as the Safety Demonstrator Series for NASA’s System-Wide Safety project. The first demonstration is set in the wildland firefighting application domain and will: (1) examine high risk operational scenarios to reduce their overall risk via services, functions or capabilities that act as risk mitigators (or transfer that risk to automated systems better able to tolerate it) and (2) explore novel tools and technologies that will enhance safety margins by enabling non-traditional or neoteric operational paradigms.

wildland firefighting↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human-Autonomy Teaming Research in Support of m:N Operations

Since 2019, the NASA and industry partners have been involved in research focused on a novel paradigm for operations of remotely piloted aircraft. This paradigm involves multiple people sharing a fleet of multiple vehicles between them. Referred to as m:N (pronounced “em-to-en”), this configuration describes a ratio where m is the number of operators and N is the number of vehicles. Through force and asset multiplication, the m:N concept seeks to enable a scalable and resilient operation of remotely crewed vehicles. The primary means of obtaining such a robust operation is through allowing a flexible crew of variable size to dynamically attend to the needs of assets in while performing real-time operator workload management. It is in that sense that assets are shared between operators: as needed (such as in events of elevated workload) an operator in an m:N context can “handoff” the responsibility for some amount of assets, nh < N, to be absorbed by the m – 1 crew members on staff. At some time later, these nh assets could be returned to their original owner or they may be further distributed to other crew if called for by the mission. During this panel, I will elaborate on the research activity undertaken by the Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center over the previous three years. The studies conducted by the HAT Lab range from interviews with subject matter experts, a cognitive walkthrough, a task analysis, and two simulation experiments to-date. During experimentation, pilots made use of an advanced Ground Control Station developed by the HAT Lab and industry partners to simulate m:N operations in two large, metropolitan areas of Southern California: Los Angeles and San Diego. Further experimentation planned over the next few years. Results from our research to-date indicates that pilots of a moderately sized fleet of about a dozen remotely crewed aircraft adequately maintained safety performance and situation awareness of their aircraft, even when presented with unexpected situations of heightened workload.

multi-vehicle control↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Extensible Traffic Management (xTM) - High-altitude Operations and Beyond

The technology development of balloons, airships, and high-altitude long-endurance (HALE) high-aspect-ratio wing aerial vehicles has expedited the deployment of high-altitude operations above Flight Level (FL) 600. It allows broader communication service area coverage than at ground level and enables efficient and precise earth observation to help address global climate change. Meanwhile, a record number of orbital launches were conducted in 2021. New mission concepts including those for small satellites, satellite constellations, suborbital tourism and point to point cargo transport are being developed. To enable efficient and safe operations of new-entrant vehicles and to alleviate the potential burden on air traffic controllers, the concept of Unmanned aircraft systems Traffic Management (UTM) explored a different approach requiring cooperative operations among operators/pilots through operational intent sharing and coordination. This concept has been extended and proposed by the community to handle traffic management for high-altitude operations. While the concept and basic system were tested in UTM, there are many critical capabilities needed for high-altitude operations. This talk will introduce the challenges brought by high-altitude operations and space operations and on-going research activities in developing critical capabilities for extensible traffic management at NASA.

Extensible Traffic Management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Delay Tolerant Networks: Operational, Evolving, an Ready for Expansion

The future of humanity’s presence beyond Earth depends on the successful commercialization of space. For commercialization to succeed, companies need cost-efficient architectures to support their business models and minimize risks for human capital, design, development, and operations. An ongoing challenge to any space enterprise is the reality that terrestrial network technologies are insufficient to provide reliable communications between assets in space. Whether you need to ensure your valuable data is safely transmitted to the ground or reliably delivered between platforms in orbit, ensuring data integrity over intermittent communication links is a necessity. Current solutions to space communications rely heavily on manual recording, storing, and retrieval of data from spacecraft. The current standard in space communication protocols, Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) Space Packet standard, is reliant on inflexible network architectures based around mission-critical infrastructure to ensure data delivery. However, by automating the recording, storing, retrieval, and verification of data with Delay Tolerant Networks (DTN), the operator is freed from the dependence on manual data management and expensive mission critical infrastructure. NASA has been developing delay tolerant systems since the late 1990’s. Multiple DTN implementations have been established during that time, each suited to different use cases. Most notably, the DTN deployment for the International Space Station (ISS) includes demonstration of two DTN technologies: Interplanetary Overlay Network (ION) and Delay Tolerant Network Marshall Enterprise (DTNME). Beyond ISS, there are even more NASA DTN deployments being considered. Now that DTN implementations are maturing, it is appropriate to reflect upon these decades of work, review the integration and performance of the existing ISS deployment, and explore the future possibilities for DTN deployment industry-wide. The ISS DTN deployment is a complex architecture consisting of different DTN implementations for the onboard and ground network environments. The ION DTN implementation is being used in the on-board network. The Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) DTN implementation, DTNME, is used by the ground network supporting ISS and will soon be a second onboard gateway too. The two implementations work cooperatively to provide high fidelity data services to flight operations users and payload developers across the globe. Though the two implementations yield a quality service, limitations are evident. Data rate, data storage, and device management are constrained by the services themselves and the complex nature of the deployment. Evolution of operations concepts will improve system capabilities and stability, but significant improvement will require additional development to the implementations themselves and to the overall deployment architecture. Taking advantage of the ongoing development and operation of the ISS DTN service will be central to the success of the future evolutions of NASA DTN deployments while demonstrating the benefits of DTN’s low-cost reliable data communication protocols for the growing commercial space industry. A broad effort on DTN integration and support is necessary to promote expansion beyond existing applications. NASA is developing several useful DTN implementations across a number of different systems: ION, DTNME, High-Rate DTN (HDTN), Bundle Protocol Library (BPLib), and others. To prevent fragmentation, DTN implementation teams need to communicate, collaborate, and integrate with one another to build a solid operational foundation for new DTN deployments. The establishment of a group that can assist new DTN users with understanding the purpose of each DTN implementation, provide best practices, and serve as a general knowledge base is paramount. Potential use of DTN on Gateway and other future NASA missions further drives the need for streamlined communication between DTN implementation teams. A well-integrated and highly engaged NASA DTN working group should help provide system architects the best DTN solutions for future commercial space efforts. This paper will first review the history of DTN implementations, explore the shortcoming of current space networking solutions given available limits in technology, and therefore establish the need for Delay Tolerant Networking in space communications. Secondly, the authors will explore NASA’s array of DTN implementations and highlight their usefulness to space applications. Thirdly, this paper will establish general DTN implementation distinguishing factors. Fourthly, the authors will discuss attempts to create a generic DTN comparison matrix, and the authors will review potential future topics in DTN innovation and collaboration, highlighting several key future efforts. Finally, this paper will describe how the institution of a NASA DTN Working Group will benefit DTN adoption across the governmental and commercial space sector. The goal of this paper is to encourage enthusiasm for DTN, share strategies for improving DTN on both current and future applications, promote the collaboration of DTN implementation groups within the international space operations community, and open the conversations about DTN, priorities, complexities, and innovation to the wider spaceflight industry.

DTN↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Delay Tolerant Networks: Operational, Evolving, an Ready for Expansion

The future of humanity’s presence beyond Earth depends on the successful commercialization of space. For commercialization to succeed, companies need cost-efficient architectures to support their business models and minimize risks for human capital, design, development, and operations. An ongoing challenge to any space enterprise is the reality that terrestrial network technologies are insufficient to provide reliable communications between assets in space. Whether you need to ensure your valuable data is safely transmitted to the ground or reliably delivered between platforms in orbit, ensuring data integrity over intermittent communication links is a necessity. Current solutions to space communications rely heavily on manual recording, storing, and retrieval of data from spacecraft. The current standard in space communication protocols, Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) Space Packet standard, is reliant on inflexible network architectures based around mission-critical infrastructure to ensure data delivery. However, by automating the recording, storing, retrieval, and verification of data with Delay Tolerant Networks (DTN), the operator is freed from the dependence on manual data management and expensive mission critical infrastructure. NASA has been developing delay tolerant systems since the late 1990’s. Multiple DTN implementations have been established during that time, each suited to different use cases. Most notably, the DTN deployment for the International Space Station (ISS) includes demonstration of two DTN technologies: Interplanetary Overlay Network (ION) and Delay Tolerant Network Marshall Enterprise (DTNME). Beyond ISS, there are even more NASA DTN deployments being considered. Now that DTN implementations are maturing, it is appropriate to reflect upon these decades of work, review the integration and performance of the existing ISS deployment, and explore the future possibilities for DTN deployment industry-wide. The ISS DTN deployment is a complex architecture consisting of different DTN implementations for the onboard and ground network environments. The ION DTN implementation is being used in the on-board network. The Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) DTN implementation, DTNME, is used by the ground network supporting ISS and will soon be a second onboard gateway too. The two implementations work cooperatively to provide high fidelity data services to flight operations users and payload developers across the globe. Though the two implementations yield a quality service, limitations are evident. Data rate, data storage, and device management are constrained by the services themselves and the complex nature of the deployment. Evolution of operations concepts will improve system capabilities and stability, but significant improvement will require additional development to the implementations themselves and to the overall deployment architecture. Taking advantage of the ongoing development and operation of the ISS DTN service will be central to the success of the future evolutions of NASA DTN deployments while demonstrating the benefits of DTN’s low-cost reliable data communication protocols for the growing commercial space industry. A broad effort on DTN integration and support is necessary to promote expansion beyond existing applications. NASA is developing several useful DTN implementations across a number of different systems: ION, DTNME, High-Rate DTN (HDTN), Bundle Protocol Library (BPLib), and others. To prevent fragmentation, DTN implementation teams need to communicate, collaborate, and integrate with one another to build a solid operational foundation for new DTN deployments. The establishment of a group that can assist new DTN users with understanding the purpose of each DTN implementation, provide best practices, and serve as a general knowledge base is paramount. Potential use of DTN on Gateway and other future NASA missions further drives the need for streamlined communication between DTN implementation teams. A well-integrated and highly engaged NASA DTN working group should help provide system architects the best DTN solutions for future commercial space efforts. This paper will first review the history of DTN implementations, explore the shortcoming of current space networking solutions given available limits in technology, and therefore establish the need for Delay Tolerant Networking in space communications. Secondly, the authors will explore NASA’s array of DTN implementations and highlight their usefulness to space applications. Thirdly, this paper will establish general DTN implementation distinguishing factors. Fourthly, the authors will discuss attempts to create a generic DTN comparison matrix, and the authors will review potential future topics in DTN innovation and collaboration, highlighting several key future efforts. Finally, this paper will describe how the institution of a NASA DTN Working Group will benefit DTN adoption across the governmental and commercial space sector. The goal of this paper is to encourage enthusiasm for DTN, share strategies for improving DTN on both current and future applications, promote the collaboration of DTN implementation groups within the international space operations community, and open the conversations about DTN, priorities, complexities, and innovation to the wider spaceflight industry.

DTN↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparative Analysis of Airspace System Accessibility for Uncrewed Aircraft Systems for Regional Operations

As part of newly developing aviation markets, fixed-wing Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (UAS) are projected to impact airspace systems and conventional air traffic in the future. The initial introduction of fixed-wing cargo UAS for regional operations is anticipated to occur at smaller under-utilized airports. Therefore, this paper assesses the integration potential of regional fixed-wing cargo UAS into the airspace system. A baseline is established to identify potential airports for UAS operations in different areas. Additionally, using 2022 data, regional aircraft eligible for future cargo UAS operations are investigated. Finally, the accessibility of these regional aircraft at the identified airports was analyzed. Based on the availability of current certified landing systems needed for initial UAS operations, the potential airports for UAS operations are compared in the areas of Germany, Texas, and California. Despite 173 identified airports for potential UAS operations in Germany, 376 in Texas, and 227 in California, only eleven of these airports provide current certified landing systems needed for initial UAS operations. However, other landing system technologies that are currently under development, such as vision-based landing systems, might support UAS accessibility at the identified airports for potential UAS operations in the future.

Uncrewed aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Incorporating UAS Traffic Management into Wildland Firefighting Operations: Initial Findings of Subject Matter Expert Interviews

Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (UASs) are being utilized throughout the disaster and emergency response domain, including in wildland firefighting operations. While UASs can offer safety benefits in comparison to crewed aircraft, such as removing the human pilot from the vehicle so that they are not exposed to the same risks and the ability to operate in low-visibility conditions, they are not without tradeoffs. For example, it can be challenging for UAS pilots (UASPs) to build situation awareness of the airspace in which their UAS is operating. In order to address some of the challenges associated with using UASs and provide greater assistance to the firefighters and incident personnel in the wildland firefighting environment, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) launched the Advanced Capabilities for Emergency Response Operations (ACERO) project. Building on previous NASA research, ACERO will explore the implementation of a traffic management system in the wildland fire environment to enhance safety and support situation awareness. ACERO draws on the UAS Traffic Management (UTM) system previously demonstrated in an urban environment. However, a traffic management system implemented in the wildland fire environment is expected to look and function much differently in order to meet the unique needs of this domain. At the outset of the ACERO project, interviews were conducted with five UASPs who operate UASs at wildland fire incidents. The interviews focused on exploring UASPs’ initial insights about the application of a traffic management system in wildland firefighting and understanding the unique needs of this environment. The UASPs discussed a range of topics including, the shape, size, and organization of UAS operations in the wildland fire environment, information needs for a user interface, such as traffic and map information, an alerting function when other traffic nears their operation area, and the importance of conformance monitoring. The UASPs also discussed their willingness to share operational information to support safety. In this paper, we describe the foundational work upon which ACERO will build and summarize the information and insights gathered during the UASP interviews, some of which have already informed the development of the ACERO work.

Uncrewed Aircraft System (UAS)↗