Results for “Artemis III” — Page 3

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Testing the Exploration Conops (Excon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into three distinct tests titled after the EVA & Human Surface Mobility (HSM) Program (EHP) integrated test team: Joint EVA & HSM Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1 was conducted near Kilbourne Hole by El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept of operations (con-ops), risks and technology. JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff, Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission including a Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Exploration Concept of Operations (ExCon) mockup space suit. The ExCon mockup suit is a lightweight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Space Launch System Completes Key Hotfire Test And Begins Vehicle Integration

NASA and its commercial and international partners are on the way back to the Moon. As directed by the White House in 2019, the agency team is striving to return humans to the Moon and land the first woman and the first person of color on the lunar surface. NASA and its commercial partners made significant progress in the second half of 2020 and the first half of 2021 on the agency’s Space Launch System (SLS), one of the key parts of the Artemis program. The team is preparing for a 2021 launch of Artemis I, the first integrated launch of the Block 1 variant of SLS with the Orion crew capsule. Hardware for the Artemis II launch, which will be the first to launch crew on SLS and Orion, is progressing through assembly, and hardware for Artemis III has started manufacturing. Artemis IV manufacturing has also started, and engines for Artemis V are in development/manufacturing. This paper will discuss the progress made in the last year and the items currently in work on for future SLS flights and variants.

Bruce R Askins↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Early Artemis Surface Navigation: Challenges, Approaches, and Opportunities

The early Artemis missions represent the return of humanity to the surface of the Moon and provide opportunities for meeting early science and exploration goals. Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) capabilities are a fundamental element and inform operational design, flight rules, and the ability to meet these. This paper provides an overview of the needs, potential implementations, challenges, and concepts of operations in the initial human surface missions, Artemis III and IV. These early excursions are a crucial learning opportunity to gain more experience in the actual operational environment for Artemis V and beyond where exploration objectives and complexity increases. As part of the study, the team defined a threshold performance navigation requirement (including position and orientation) to meet crew safe return and assessed a breadth of navigation approaches that could be deployed to augment the crew’s baseline navigation capability. Data was collected in terms of size, mass, power, operational constraints, environment constraints, interface, and performance to define the technical metrics. Given these, the trade team conducted polling among the various Artemis Campaign elements to capture preference, integration challenges, and operational impacts. These were used to develop weightings and inform a ranked order of solutions across each of the early missions. The results of the study recommended augmenting the initial orientation capability with additional navigation sensors to provide coarse position and heading information to the crew to enable a safe contingency walk-back when out of video range. The team identified opportunities for embedding this hardware in future scenarios to provide an integrated solution. With the deployment of the LunaNet’s Lunar Augmented Navigation System, the crew will be able to maintain accurate real-time navigation knowledge with minimal physical impacts. Discussion of future testing and continued analysis is included in this paper. These forward plans and long-term architecture systems will enable a powerful navigation approach for orbiting and surface users, enabling a high level of scientific return and crew safety.

Evan Anzalone↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Early Artemis Surface Navigation: Challenges, Approaches, and Opportunities

The early Artemis missions represent the return of humanity to the surface of the Moon and provide opportunities for meeting early science and exploration goals. Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) capabilities are a fundamental element and inform operational design, flight rules, and the ability to meet these. This paper provides an overview of the needs, potential implementations, challenges, and concepts of operations in the initial human surface missions, Artemis III and IV. These early excursions are a crucial learning opportunity to gain more experience in the actual operational environment for Artemis V and beyond where exploration objectives and complexity increases. As part of the study, the team defined a threshold performance navigation requirement (including position and orientation) to meet crew safe return and assessed a breadth of navigation approaches that could be deployed to augment the crew’s baseline navigation capability. Data was collected in terms of size, mass, power, operational constraints, environment constraints, interface, and performance to define the technical metrics. Given these, the trade team conducted polling among the various Artemis Campaign elements to capture preference, integration challenges, and operational impacts. These were used to develop weightings and inform a ranked order of solutions across each of the early missions. The results of the study recommended augmenting the initial orientation capability with additional navigation sensors to provide coarse position and heading information to the crew to enable a safe contingency walk-back when out of video range. The team identified opportunities for embedding this hardware in future scenarios to provide an integrated solution. With the deployment of the LunaNet’s Lunar Augmented Navigation System, the crew will be able to maintain accurate real-time navigation knowledge with minimal physical impacts. Discussion of future testing and continued analysis is included in this paper. These forward plans and long-term architecture systems will enable a powerful navigation approach for orbiting and surface users, enabling a high level of scientific return and crew safety.

Evan Anzalone↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Successful First Flight of NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) Super Heavy-Lift Rocket Lays Groundwork for U. S.’s Most Ambitious Missions

In late 2022, NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) super heavy-lift rocket launched for the first time. Artemis I sent an uncrewed Orion spacecraft on a 25.5-day round-trip mission to lunar orbit. The near-perfect performance laid the groundwork for the next flights and for NASA’s return of humans to the Moon. The SLS team is now preparing for the launch of Artemis II, which will be the first launch of astronauts to cislunar space since Apollo 17 in December 1972. In addition to preparations on the Artemis II launch vehicle, significant progress is being made on the hardware and software for future flights. Artemis II will include a test of a new military-grade GPS system, which will be fully utilized on Artemis III. Progress is also being made on the exploration upper stage (EUS) for the Block 1B SLS variant, which will debut on Artemis IV. New production RS-25 liquid-propellant engines will be used beginning with Artemis V. These new engines, which are in a final qualification test firing program at the time of writing, realize a cost savings of at least 30 percent and reduced production time due to streamlined manufacturing and advances in technology, including additive manufacturing. The evolved solid rocket boosters, which will debut on Artemis IX as part of the Block 2 variant, are in development now. In addition to propulsion updates, each variant of SLS maintains payload configuration flexibility and can fly crew-only, cargo-only, and crew-cargo combinations. This adaptability ensures that SLS, with its significant mass and volume capability – including the ability to launch large co-manifested payloads with Orion directly to trans-lunar injection (TLI) – can support the country’s most ambitious missions. Results from the Artemis I mission, as well as progress to the next flights and SLS variants, will be covered in the paper and presentation.

Bruce R. Askins↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Successful First Flight of NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) Super Heavy-Lift Rocket: Laying Groundwork for U. S.’s Most Ambitious Missions

In late 2022, NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) super heavy-lift rocket launched for the first time. Artemis I sent an uncrewed Orion spacecraft on a 25.5-day round-trip mission to lunar orbit. The near-perfect performance laid the groundwork for the next flights and for NASA’s return of humans to the Moon. The SLS team is now preparing for the launch of Artemis II, which will be the first launch of astronauts to cislunar space since Apollo 17 in December 1972. In addition to preparations on the Artemis II launch vehicle, significant progress is being made on the hardware and software for future flights. Artemis II will include a test of a new military-grade GPS system, which will be fully utilized on Artemis III. Progress is also being made on the exploration upper stage (EUS) for the Block 1B SLS variant, which will debut on Artemis IV. New production RS-25 liquid-propellant engines will be used beginning with Artemis V. These new engines, which are in a final qualification test firing program at the time of writing, realize a cost savings of at least 30 percent and reduced production time due to streamlined manufacturing and advances in technology, including additive manufacturing. The evolved solid rocket boosters, which will debut on Artemis IX as part of the Block 2 variant, are in development now. In addition to propulsion updates, each variant of SLS maintains payload configuration flexibility and can fly crew-only, cargo-only, and crew-cargo combinations. This adaptability ensures that SLS, with its significant mass and volume capability – including the ability to launch large co-manifested payloads with Orion directly to trans-lunar injection (TLI) – can support the country’s most ambitious missions. Results from the Artemis I mission, as well as progress to the next flights and SLS variants, will be covered in the paper and presentation.

Bruce Askins↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Chemical Reactivity of In-Situ Lunar Dust for Biotoxicity Assessment

Introduction: How does the chemical reactivity of in-situ lunar dust compare to Apollo samples currently stored in curation facilities here on Earth? Essential investigations of this question will help us to further mitigate exploration risks for future human explorers on the Moon and will also provide critical information for astrobiologists and space biologists using the Moon for scientific inquiry. Discussion: Apollo 14 dust biotoxicity studies, carried out by the NASA Lunar Airborne Dust Toxici-ty Assessment Group (LADTAG), included numerous physiochemical studies[1] and cellular and animal ex-periments. Intratracheal instillation [2] and inhalation studies [3] in rats both showed Apollo 14 dust to be intermediate in toxicity compared to low-tox titanium dusts and high-tox quartz dusts of similar particle siz-es. The collective results were used in models [4] to establish a safe exposure limit for astronauts [5]. Alt-hough LADTAG took extensive steps to preserve what chemical reactivity may still have existed in the sam-ples, it is simply unknown if they possessed true in-situ chemical reactivity or if that reactivity has de-cayed. Initial gas loss on collection and other altera-tions, and even intermittent exposure to Earth-normal conditions during subsequent decades of handling, obscure a forensic reconstruction of the initial state. Because a mineral dust’s chemical reactivity influ-ences its biotoxicity [6], researchers have developed methods to “activate” lunar dust and simulants [7][8]. Past studies that modeled impact processes and radia-tion [9] in the lunar environment suggest that in-situ lunar dust is likely to be more chemically reactive than Earth-exposed samples. Because of these results, in-situ measurements are warranted [10]. Other studies have examined the hydroxyl generating capability of iron bearing mineral phases [11][12] and further em-phasize the role iron plays in chemical reactivity of lunar material, as well as decay of chemical reactivity in mineral dusts [12]. Recent observations of the lunar surface reveal the presence of hematite [13], a finding that further supports the hypothesis that in-situ lunar dust is reactive. Since the lunar surface is heterogene-ous, dust biotoxicity is expected to vary from site to site [14] due to particle size, mineralogy, physical characteristics, degree of space weathering, and chemi-cal reactivity (Figure 1). This circumstance dictates dust assessments at a suite of lunar sites enabled by upcoming NASA and commercial lunar payload ser-vices (CLPS) opportunities. Dose, location, and dura-tion of particle exposure will also affect biological responses. In-situ chemical reactivity measurements can inform cross-cutting collaborative research cam-paigns such as astrobiology studies examining regolith interactions with organisms and its ability to preserve chemical and structural biomarkers, as well as space biology investigations that examine regolith-microbe interactions relating to life support systems, plant growth, biomining, and development of regolith bio-composites. Figure 1: Environment conditions on the lunar surface that may alter regolith reactivity. Summary A series of in-situ measurements of lu-nar dust free radical chemistry at future Artemis and CLPS landing sites, combined with LADTAG-like studies of freshly collected lunar dust specimens, will reveal the true chemical reactivity of in-situ lunar dust and generate scientific data that can be compared to the chemical reactivity and biotoxicity of samples from Apollo landing sites. Furthermore, results from in situ measurements and biotoxicity studies of freshly col-lected specimens can also be used to validate, or re-quire revision of, the current astronaut permissible exposure limit [15]. References: [1] McKay D et al (2015), Acta As-tronaut 107:163–176. [2] Rask J et al (2013), LPSC, p 3062. [3] Lam CW et al (2013), Inhal Toxicol 25:661–678. [4] James JT, et. al. (2013) , Inhal Toxicol 25:243–256. [5] Scully RR, et.al. (2013), Inhal Toxi-col 25:785–793. [6] Porter, D. W., et.al., (2002), Tox-icology 175, 63–71. [7] Wallace WT, et.al., (2009), Meteorit Planet Sci 44:961–970. [8] Wallace WT, et.al., (2010), Earth Planet Sci Lett 295:571–577. [9] Loftus D, Rask J, et.al., (2010), Earth Moon Planet 107:95–105. [10] Rask J, et.al., (2009) LEAG p 57. [11] Turci F, et.a., (2015), Astrobiology. 2015;15(5):371-380. [12] Hendrix DA, et.al., (2019), Geohealth. 2019;3(1):28-42. [13] Li, S., et.al., (2020), Science advances, 6(36), p.eaba1940. [14] Rask J. (2018), In: Cudnik B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Lunar Science. Springer, Cham. [15] Rask, J, (2020), LPI, Artemis III Sci. def. paper 2120.

chemical reactivity↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Near-Term Policy Considerations for Lunar Missions

Near-Term Policy Considerations for Lunar Missions. Therese Jones1, Gabriel Swiney,1 and Katie McBrayer,2 1NASA HQ, 300 Hidden Figures Way SW, Washington, D.C. 20546, 2NASA Langley Re-search Center, 1 NASA Drive, Hampton, VA, 23666. (Contact: therese.m.jones@nasa.gov) Introduction: More than two dozen lunar missions are planned prior to the Artemis III crewed lunar landing, from Russian, Chinese, Indian, Japanese and U.S. government orbiters and landers to Commercial Lunar Payload Ser-vices missions to commercial crewed flybys. While the Artemis Accords have established an international consortium of countries seeking to mitigate interference between operations on the Moon, a number of unaddressed policy issues remain that may be critical to lunar operations. In this lightning talk, we build upon NASA’s Of-fice of Technology, Policy, and Strategy’s Sep-tember 2022 Report “Lunar Landing and Oper-ations Policy Analysis” [1], to give an overview of policy questions that remain open, including: whether to prioritize certain landing locations or avoid certain scientifically valuable locations, design and coordination of safety zones, notifi-cation of other actors of potential dangers posed by landing, whether to avoid placing equipment in operationally valuable locations, and end-of-life disposal. We will also discuss how these policy implications could apply to planned missions.. References: [1] Swiney, G., and Hernandez, A. Lunar Landing and Operations Policy Analy-sis, NASA Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy, September 30, 2022 https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa-otps-lunar-landing-and-operations-policy-analysis-final-report_2.pdf

Therese Jones↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) Rocket Ready for Artemis II Lunar Mission

In early 2026, NASA will launch the Artemis II mission, an approximately 10-day long lunar mission that will fly three NASA astronauts and one CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut on a free-return trajectory around the Moon, following a one-day checkout of their Orion spacecraft in Earth orbit. The mission will be the first to launch astronauts aboard NASA’s Orion spacecraft and on top of the agency’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket. The mission will also deploy four 12U CubeSats as secondary payloads from the Orion stage adapter, following Orion separation and departure. The payloads, developed by four of NASA’s international partners, will perform a variety of science and technology investigations. The SLS and Orion for the mission are currently stacked in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida and are undergoing final preparations to rollout to Launch Pad 39B for a tanking test before launch. In addition to preparations for the Artemis II mission, significant progress is being made on the SLS for the Artemis III mission, which is targeted to return astronauts to the lunar surface no later than 2029. Major components of the core stage and solid rocket boosters are already at NASA Kennedy undergoing build-up for the mission. Data from the Artemis II launch and mission, as well as progress to subsequent missions, as available, will be presented.

Bruce R Askins↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) Rocket Ready for Artemis II Lunar Mission

In early 2026, NASA will launch the Artemis II mission, an approximately 10-day long lunar mission that will fly three NASA astronauts and one CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut on a free-return trajectory around the Moon, following a one-day checkout of their Orion spacecraft in Earth orbit. The mission will be the first to launch astronauts aboard NASA’s Orion spacecraft and on top of the agency’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket. The mission will also deploy four 12U CubeSats as secondary payloads from the Orion stage adapter, following Orion separation and departure. The payloads, developed by four of NASA’s international partners, will perform a variety of science and technology investigations. The SLS and Orion for the mission are currently stacked in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida and are undergoing final preparations to rollout to Launch Pad 39B for a tanking test before launch. In addition to preparations for the Artemis II mission, significant progress is being made on the SLS for the Artemis III mission, which is targeted to return astronauts to the lunar surface no later than 2029. Major components of the core stage and solid rocket boosters are already at NASA Kennedy undergoing build-up for the mission. Data from the Artemis II launch and mission, as well as progress to subsequent missions, as available, will be presented.

Bruce Askins↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Initial Artemis Human Landing System

In April 2020, NASA announced the selection of three companies to begin the initial phase of development of human landing systems to take the first woman and the first person of color to the lunar surface through NASA’s Artemis lunar exploration program. The selected companies were a Blue Origin-led team with Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, and Draper; Dynetics (a Leidos company); and SpaceX. Contracts were awarded shortly after, kicking off a ten-month base period during which NASA worked closely with each company to finalize functional and performance requirements, confirm lander development standards, and establish baseline designs, schedules, and management plans for contract execution and human spaceflight certification. At the end of the base period, in the Spring of 2021, NASA awarded a single follow-on Option A contract to SpaceX to continue their work on Human Landing System (HLS) Starship development. Currently NASA and SpaceX are working collaboratively on Option A which will ultimately culminate in one uncrewed and one crewed mission to the lunar surface under Artemis III. This paper will provide a look at the Option A phase of development for the Human Landing System Program, including publicly available information on SpaceX’s HLS Starship design as well as near-term and future milestones for HLS and the Artemis program.

Lisa Watson-Morgan↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Space Launch System Stands Ready on Doorstep of Maiden Voyage Launch and Progress Made to Future Missions

NASA and its partners made significant progress towards the Artemis I launch in 2022. The integrated Space Launch System (SLS)vehicleand Orion spacecraft were first rolled out of the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in March. SLS is a super heavy-lift vehicle to send large, strategic payloads to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. It isthebackbone of the Artemis human lunar exploration program. Rollout transported the vehicle to Launch Pad 39B for a series of tests, including the wet dress rehearsal (WDR). Multiple attempts were required to complete WDR, each building on the one before. Following the WDR campaign, NASA teams refined hardware and launch procedures, and the vehicle was prepared for its first launch attempt scheduled for August 29. Challenges with the weather and hardware resulted in a scrub on the 29th, and the second attempt was set for Sept. 3. A hydrogen leak on the tail service mast umbilical forced a scrub. NASA teams completed repairs and testing on the vehicle on Launch Pad 39B to preserve a launch attempt at the end of September. Managers chose to return the vehicle to the VAB to protect it fromthe threat of Hurricane Ian. Within the VAB, NASA further inspected and prepared SLS for selected November windows. In addition to progress to the Artemis I mission, significant progress was made on the Artemis II and Artemis III rockets. Progress was also made towards on the Block 1B and Block 2 variants, beginning on the fourth and ninth flight, respectively. Both variants will provide significant improvements in both launch mass and mission flexibility to multiple destinations. This paper will discuss Artemis I vehicle integration, testing, and available results from the launch campaign to date.

Bruce Askins↗

NASA NTRS2024

LESSH Lunar Experiment Support System and Handling Battery Charger Module

Beginning with Artemis III, NASA plans to deploy science instruments on the moon near a South Pole landing site. To extend lunar science operations, an EVA compatible LESSH Battery Charger Module (BCM) enables recharging and hard-line data transfer at the modular GFP Interface Bank on the Human Landing System (HLS) or other Artemis vehicles. The LESSH BCM provides an ergonomic interface for astronauts to connect instruments to HLS power and data interfaces. The BCM provides battery charge monitoring and enables data transfer via a flexible harness. LESSH-Placed is an instrument package that can be deployed by astronauts and re-charged via an Artemis vehicle, enabling extended science operations.

LESSH↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ExMC Systems Engineering Developments

The Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element within the Human Research Program (HRP) applies systems engineering (SE) principles along with the use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) tools to identify and communicate the requirements for medical and crew health and performance (CHP) systems. In the past fiscal year, the MBSE approach sought to advance the digital engineering toolset for medical and CHP system representation. These digital artifacts provide enhanced views of the relationships among requirements, standards, functions, and capabilities, to name a few, that is best suited for a user’s objectives. The MBSE tools and SE practices were applied to the development of the revised Earth Independent Medical Operations (EIMO) medical system and the Artemis III and IV CHP System models. In addition, a System of Systems concept was integrated into the EIMO model to facilitate the identification of system interfaces that interact with the medical system. Finally, the ExMC SE team has initiated several efforts to bring operationally relevant digital engineering practices to the Human Health and Performance Directorate (HHPD). This included the development of a pilot program within the directorate to help foster utilization of tools such as MagicDraw for system modeling and Power BI for visualizing extracted data in an easily accessible dashboard format. Additionally, with the increase in complexity of the integration effort for Artemis missions, ExMC has endeavored to bring digital engineering strategies to potentially increase efficiency in review processes. This talk will provide a high-level overview of the ExMC SE team accomplishments since the last Investigators’ Workshop, an introduction to upcoming SE talks, and the ongoing systems engineering work.

systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2020

NASA’s Space Launch System: Launch Capability for Lunar Exploration and Transformative Science

Excitement is building for the first launch of NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS), a unique exploration asset for the agency’s Artemis lunar program as well as for a new generation of science missions. SLS is designed for an array of missions beyond Earth’s orbit. The flexible system, which can be configured for Orion, cargo or Orion with co-manifested payload missions, offers high escape velocities to send more mass to deep space destinations. When configured with an 8.4 m-diameter fairing, SLS offers unmatched payload volume for human exploration and science missions. The initial Block 1 variant will insert at least 26 metric tons (t) to trans-lunar injection (TLI) and the more powerful Block 1B vehicle will launch 34-37 t to TLI using a new-development upper stage. Much of the initial SLS Block 1 vehicle is complete, including the upper stage and payload section, the core stage, engines and the solid rocket boosters. The first mission, Artemis I, launching from modernized and upgraded facilities at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), will be an uncrewed test flight of SLS, Orion and ground processing, with a primary objective of testing Orion’s heat shield at lunar re-entry velocity. Artemis I will have accommodations for 13 6U CubeSat payloads. These CubeSat missions will be deployed along the upper stage disposal trajectory after Orion separates from the vehicle. A rare opportunity for CubeSats to be deployed beyond low Earth orbit (LEO), Artemis I CubeSat missions range from searching for hydrogen and other volatiles on the lunar South Pole to studying the acceleration mechanisms of solar and interplanetary particles from a heliocentric trajectory. With manufacturing of the initial vehicle complete, fabrication and procurement is progressing for the second flight of SLS and Orion, Artemis II. Also an SLS Block 1 and Orion flight launching from KSC, Artemis II will mark the return of American astronauts to deep space with a lunar flyby-free return trajectory mission. With the Artemis III flight, NASA has the goal to land the first woman and the next man on the Moon. Infrastructure beyond SLS will be required for this effort, including elements of the lunar Gateway as well as lunar rovers, landers and additional commercially supplied launch services. SLS, as the only vehicle with the capability to lift 26 t of mass to TLI in its initial Block 1 variant, will remain a key component of this new-era exploration program. Future variants – Block 1B and Block 2 –will lift 34-45 t to TLI. This paper will discuss the status of testing and integration for the Artemis I vehicle, manufacturing progress for the second vehicle and the manifest outlook for primary, co-manifested and secondary payloads in the current deep space exploration environment.

Creech, Stephen D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Orbit Determination Comparison Study and Demonstration for Rendezvous and Docking in a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit from the Lunar Surface

For the upcoming NASA Artemis III mission and those that follow, both the Human Landing System (HLS) and Orion programs are invested in understanding the impacts of ground tracking performance in supporting rendezvous and docking in a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO). Several critical questions must be answered to ensure mission success and crew safety and an assortment of analysis tools are being incorporated to address them. Two of these tools, LINCOV and MONTE, are currently providing program decision making results through HLS Insight, HLS NASA-collaborations, and Orion/Gateway cross-program analysis. To ensure consistency in the orbit determination performance, a comparison trade-study is performed using a low-lunar orbit to NRHO rendezvous scenario anticipated for the upcoming Artemis missions. An overview of the two analysis tools is provided along with a detailed step-by-step evaluation of the core capabilities and models related to the orbit determination process. This incremental comparison effort reveals both tools produce consistent solutions for the criteria investigated. Given the confidence in the orbit determination process and solutions generated, these results are then applied to demonstrate an integrated, closed-loop system performance where the HLS lander ascends from the lunar surface and successfully inserts into the NRHO relative to the Orion spacecraft in preparation for the final rendezvous and docking phase.

Linear Covariance Analysis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Orbit Determination Comparison Study and Demonstration for Rendezvous and Docking in a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit from the Lunar Surface

For the upcoming NASA Artemis III mission and those that follow, both the Human Landing System (HLS) and Orion programs are invested in understanding the impacts of ground tracking performance in supporting rendezvous and docking in a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO). Several critical questions must be answered to ensure mission success and crew safety and an assortment of analysis tools are being incorporated to address them. Two of these tools, LINCOV and MONTE, are currently providing program decision making results through HLS Insight, HLS NASA-collaborations, and Orion/Gateway cross-program analysis. To ensure consistency in the orbit determination performance, a comparison trade-study is performed using a low-lunar orbit to NRHO rendezvous scenario anticipated for the upcoming Artemis missions. An overview of the two analysis tools is provided along with a detailed step-by-step evaluation of the core capabilities and models related to the orbit determination process. This incremental comparison effort reveals both tools produce consistent solutions for the criteria investigated to within 0.3\% difference in the absolute position state estimate at key decision making epochs with all errors sources activated.

orbit determination↗