Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “retirement”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2006

Safety and Mission Assurance Knowledge Management Retention: Managing Knowledge for Successful Mission Operations

Knowledge Management is a proactive pursuit for the future success of any large organization faced with the imminent possibility that their senior managers/engineers with gained experiences and lessons learned plan to retire in the near term. Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) is proactively pursuing unique mechanism to ensure knowledge learned is retained and lessons learned captured and documented. Knowledge Capture Event/Activities/Management helps to provide a gateway between future retirees and our next generation of managers/engineers. S&MA hosted two Knowledge Capture Events during 2005 featuring three of its retiring fellows (Axel Larsen, Dave Whittle and Gary Johnson). The first Knowledge Capture Event February 24, 2005 focused on two Safety and Mission Assurance Safety Panels (Space Shuttle System Safety Review Panel (SSRP); Payload Safety Review Panel (PSRP) and the latter event December 15, 2005 featured lessons learned during Apollo, Skylab, and Space Shuttle which could be applicable in the newly created Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV)/Constellation development program. Gemini, Apollo, Skylab and the Space Shuttle promised and delivered exciting human advances in space and benefits of space in people s everyday lives on earth. Johnson Space Center's Safety & Mission Assurance team work over the last 20 years has been mostly focused on operations we are now beginning the Exploration development program. S&MA will promote an atmosphere of knowledge sharing in its formal and informal cultures and work processes, and reward the open dissemination and sharing of information; we are asking "Why embrace relearning the "lessons learned" in the past?" On the Exploration program the focus will be on Design, Development, Test, & Evaluation (DDT&E); therefore, it is critical to understand the lessons from these past programs during the DDT&E phase.

Johnson, Teresa A.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Development of a Portable Oxygen Monitoring System for Operations in the International Space Station Airlock

NASA is currently engaged in an activity to facilitate effective operations on the International Space Station (ISS) after the Space Shuttle retires. Currently, the Space Shuttle delivers crew and cargo to and from ISS. The Space Shuttle provides the only large scale method of hardware return from ISS to the ground. Hardware that needs to be periodically repaired, refurbished, or recalibrated must come back from ISS on the Shuttle. One example of NASA flight hardware that is used on ISS and refurbished on the ground is the Compound Specific Analyzer for Oxygen (CSA-O2). The CSA-O2 is an electrochemical sensor that is used on orbit for about 12 months (depending on Shuttle launch schedules), then returned to the ground for sensor replacement. The shuttle is scheduled to retire in 2010, and the ISS is scheduled to operate until 2016. NASA needs a hand held sensor that measures oxygen in the ISS environment and has a 5-10 year service life. After conducting a survey of oxygen sensor systems, NASA selected a Tunable Diode Laser Absorption Spectrometer (TDLAS) as the method of measurement that best addresses the needs for ISS. These systems are compact, meet ISS accuracy requirements, and because they use spectroscopic techniques, the sensors are not consumed or altered after making a measurement. TDLAS systems have service life ratings of 5-10 years, based on the lifetime of the laser. NASA is engaged in modifying a commercially available sensor, the Vaisala OMT 355, for the ISS application. The Vaisala OMT 355 requires three significant modifications to meet ISS needs. The commercial sensor uses a wall mount power supply, and the ISS sensor needs to use a rechargeable battery as its source of power. The commercial sensor has a pressure correction setpoint: the sensor can be adjusted to operate at reduced pressure conditions, but the sensor does not self correct dynamically and automatically. The ISS sensor needs to operate in the airlock, and make accurate measurements in an environment that can change from 14.7 psia to 10.2 psia in 15 minutes. The commercial sensor needs to be repackaged into a configuration that is more compact, and better suited for ISS airlock operations. NASA has recently completed a prototype of the reconfigured system. The unit has been repackaged in a way that the optical path of the spectrometer is unchanged, but the electronics has been integrated into a case measuring 10.7 X 7.2 X 3.0 inches. Two flight qualified rechargeable batteries have been integrated into system. The batteries can power the sensor for 10 hours on a single charge. A pressure sensor has been added to the system. The modified unit automatically compensates for changes in pressure, and meets 0.2% accuracy requirements for oxygen measurements in an environment with 18 to 32% oxygen across a pressure range of 10.0 to 15.0 psia.

Graf, John↗
NASA NTRS2010

Ares V: Enabling Unprecedented Payloads for Space in the 21st Century

Numerous technical and programmatic studies since the U.S. space program began in the 1960s has emphasized the need for a heavy lift capability for exploration beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). The Saturn V once embodied that capability until it was retired. Now the Ares V cargo launch vehicle (CaLV) promises to restore and improve on that capability, providing unprecedented opportunities for human and robotic exploration, science, national security and commercial uses. This paper provides an overview of the capabilities of Ares V, both as an opportunity for payloads of increased mass and/or volume, and as a means of reducing risk in the payload design process. The Ares V is part of NASA s Constellation Program, which also includes the Ares I crew launch vehicle (CLV), Orion crew exploration vehicle (CEV), and Altair lunar lander. This architecture is designed to carry out the national space policy goals of completing the International Space Station (ISS), retiring the Space Shuttle fleet, and expanding human exploration beyond LEO. The Ares V is designed to loft upper stages and/or cargo, such as the Altair lander, into LEO. The Ares I is designed to put Orion into LEO with a crew of up to four for rendezvous with the ISS or with the Ares V Earth departure stage for journeys to the Moon. While retaining the goals of heritage hardware and commonality, the Ares V configuration continues to be refined through a series of internal trades. The current reference configuration was recommended by the Ares Projects and approved by the Constellation Program during the Lunar Capabilities Concept Review (LCCR) June 2008. The reference configuration defines the Ares V as 381 feet (116m) tall with a gross lift-off mass (GLOM) of 8.1 million pounds (3,704.5 mT). Its first stage will generate 11 million pounds of sea-level liftoff thrust. It will be capable of launching 413,800 pounds (187.7 mT) to LEO, 138,500 pounds (63 mT) direct to the Moon or 156,700 pounds (71.1 mT) in its dual-launch architecture role with Ares I. It could also launch 123,100 pounds (55.8 mT) to Sun-Earth L2. Assessment of astronomy payload requirements since Spring 2008 has indicated that Ares V has the potential to support a range of payloads and missions. Some of these missions were impossible in the absence of Ares V s capabilities. Collaborative design/architecture inputs, exchanges, and analyses have already begun between scientists and payload developers. A 2008 study by a National Research Council (NRC) panel, as well as analyses presented by astronomers and planetary scientists at two weekend conferences in 2008, support the position that Ares V has benefit to a broad range of planetary and astronomy missions. This early dialogue with Ares V engineers is permitting the greatest opportunity for payload/transportation/mission synergy and with the least financial impact to Ares V development. In addition, independent analyses suggest that Ares V has the opportunity to enable more cost-effective mission design. 1

Creech, Steve↗
NASA NTRS2010

Propulsion Risk Reduction Activities for Non-Toxic Cryogenic Propulsion

The Propulsion and Cryogenics Advanced Development (PCAD) Project s primary objective is to develop propulsion system technologies for non-toxic or "green" propellants. The PCAD project focuses on the development of non-toxic propulsion technologies needed to provide necessary data and relevant experience to support informed decisions on implementation of non-toxic propellants for space missions. Implementation of non-toxic propellants in high performance propulsion systems offers NASA an opportunity to consider other options than current hypergolic propellants. The PCAD Project is emphasizing technology efforts in reaction control system (RCS) thruster designs, ascent main engines (AME), and descent main engines (DME). PCAD has a series of tasks and contracts to conduct risk reduction and/or retirement activities to demonstrate that non-toxic cryogenic propellants can be a feasible option for space missions. Work has focused on 1) reducing the risk of liquid oxygen/liquid methane ignition, demonstrating the key enabling technologies, and validating performance levels for reaction control engines for use on descent and ascent stages; 2) demonstrating the key enabling technologies and validating performance levels for liquid oxygen/liquid methane ascent engines; and 3) demonstrating the key enabling technologies and validating performance levels for deep throttling liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen descent engines. The progress of these risk reduction and/or retirement activities will be presented.

Smith, Timothy D.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Propulsion Risk Reduction Activities for Nontoxic Cryogenic Propulsion

The Propulsion and Cryogenics Advanced Development (PCAD) Project s primary objective is to develop propulsion system technologies for nontoxic or "green" propellants. The PCAD project focuses on the development of nontoxic propulsion technologies needed to provide necessary data and relevant experience to support informed decisions on implementation of nontoxic propellants for space missions. Implementation of nontoxic propellants in high performance propulsion systems offers NASA an opportunity to consider other options than current hypergolic propellants. The PCAD Project is emphasizing technology efforts in reaction control system (RCS) thruster designs, ascent main engines (AME), and descent main engines (DME). PCAD has a series of tasks and contracts to conduct risk reduction and/or retirement activities to demonstrate that nontoxic cryogenic propellants can be a feasible option for space missions. Work has focused on 1) reducing the risk of liquid oxygen/liquid methane ignition, demonstrating the key enabling technologies, and validating performance levels for reaction control engines for use on descent and ascent stages; 2) demonstrating the key enabling technologies and validating performance levels for liquid oxygen/liquid methane ascent engines; and 3) demonstrating the key enabling technologies and validating performance levels for deep throttling liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen descent engines. The progress of these risk reduction and/or retirement activities will be presented.

Smith, Timothy D.↗
NASA NTRS2010

H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) and the Operations Concept for Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Hardware

With the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet imminent in 2011, a new concept of operations will become reality to meet the transportation challenges of the International Space Station (ISS). The planning associated with the retirement of the Space Shuttle has been underway since the announcement in 2004. Since then, several companies and government entities have had to look for innovative low-cost commercial orbital transportation systems to continue to achieve the objectives of ISS delivery requirements. Several options have been assessed and appear ready to meet the large and demanding delivery requirements of the ISS. Options that have been identified that can facilitate the challenge include the Russian Federal Space Agency's Soyuz and Progress spacecraft, European Space Agency's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's (JAXA's) H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) and the Boeing Delta IV Heavy (DIV-H). The newest of these options is the JAXA's HTV. This paper focuses on the HTV, mission architecture and operations concept for Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) hardware, the associated launch system, and details of the launch operations approach.

Chullen, Cinda↗
NASA NTRS2011

H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) and the Operations Concept for Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Hardware

With the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet imminent in 2011, a new operations concept will become reality to meet the transportation challenges of the International Space Station (ISS). The planning associated with the retirement of the Space Shuttle has been underway since the announcement in 2004. Since then, several companies and government entities have had to look for innovative low-cost commercial orbital transportation systems to continue to achieve the objectives of ISS delivery requirements. Several options have been assessed and appear ready to meet the large and demanding delivery requirements of the ISS. Options that have been identified that can facilitate the challenge include the Russian Federal Space Agency's Soyuz and Progress spacecraft, European Space Agency's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's (JAXA s) H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV). The newest of these options is the JAXA's HTV. This paper focuses on the HTV, mission architecture and operations concept for Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) hardware, the associated launch system, and details of the launch operations approach.

Chullen, Cinda↗
NASA NTRS2011

Current Status of the Nitrogen Oxygen Recharge System

This paper presents an overview of the Nitrogen Oxygen Recharge System (NORS) to date and the current development status of the system. NORS is an element of the International Space Station (ISS) Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) used to resupply the ISS with Nitrogen and Oxygen following the impending retirement of the Space Shuttle. The paper will discuss why NASA is developing NORS, including a summary of other concepts considered, and other related concepts currently being developed by NASA. The current system architecture will be described, along with a summary of the current design of the NORS. The overall programmatic schedule of the NORS in the context of the upcoming shuttle retirement and future launch vehicle development will also be presented. Finally, the paper will examine the significant technical challenges encountered during the requirements and preliminary design phase of NORS development. A key challenge to the development of NORS is the international shipment - and associated regulations - of pressurized Oxygen, which is necessary due to the use of launch vehicles based in Japan and French Guiana to send NORS gasses to the ISS. The storage and use of relatively large quantities of high pressure (41,000 kPa) Oxygen and Nitrogen within the ISS, which is unprecedented both on the ISS and other space vehicles, has had a significant impact on the design and architecture of the system. The high pressure of the system also poses unique thermal considerations, which has led to the development of a heater system for thermal conditioning of high pressure gas to avoid thermal impacts on downstream hardware. The on-orbit envelope allocated to the NORS has changed (gotten smaller) and has impacted both the design and architecture of the system. Finally, the balance of safety considerations associated with these high pressure gasses, particularly high pressure Oxygen, with the functionality of the system has profoundly impacted the form of the system and will be discussed.

Dick, Brandon↗
NASA NTRS2011

Attitude Control and Orbital Dynamics Challenges of Removing the First 3-Axis Stabilized Tracking and Data Relay Satellite from the Geosynchronous ARC

Launched on April 4, 1983 onboard STS 6 (Space Shuttle Challenger), the First Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TDRS 1) was retired above the Geosynchronous Orbit (GEO) on June 27, 2010 after having provided real-time communications with a variety of low-orbiting spacecraft over a 26-year period. To meet NASA requirements limiting orbital debris 1, a team of experts was assembled to conduct an End-Of-Mission (EOM) procedure to raise the satellite 350 km above the GEO orbit. Following the orbit raising via conventional station change maneuvers, the team was confronted with having to deplete the remaining propellant and passivate all energy storage or generation sources. To accomplish these tasks within the time window, communications (telemetry and control links), electrical power, propulsion, and thermal constraints, a spacecraft originally designed as a three-axis stabilized satellite was turned into a spinner. This paper (a companion paper to Innovative Approach Enabled the Retirement of TDRS 1, paper # 1699, IEEE 2011 Aerospace Conference, March 5-12, 2011 sup 2) focuses on the challenges of maintaining an acceptable spinning dynamics, while repetitively firing thrusters. Also addressed are the effects of thruster firings on the orbit characteristics and how they were mitigated by a careful scheduling of the fuel depletion operations. Periodic thruster firings for spin rate adjustment, nutation damping, and precession of the momentum vector were also required in order to maintain effective communications with the satellite. All operations were thoroughly rehearsed and supported by simulations thus lending a high level of confidence in meeting the NASA EOM goals.

Benet, Charles A.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Ground Processing Affordability for Space Vehicles

Launch vehicles and most of their payloads spend the majority of their time on the ground. The cost of ground operations is very high. So, why so often is so little attention given to ground processing during development? The current global space industry and economic environment are driving more need for efficiencies to save time and money. Affordability and sustainability are more important now than ever. We can not continue to treat space vehicles as mere science projects. More RLV's (Reusable Launch Vehicles) are being developed for the gains of reusability which are not available for ELV's (Expendable Launch Vehicles). More human-rated vehicles are being developed, with the retirement of the Space Shuttles, and for a new global space race, yet these cost more than the many unmanned vehicles of today. We can learn many lessons on affordability from RLV's. DFO (Design for Operations) considers ground operations during design, development, and manufacturing-before the first flight. This is often minimized for space vehicles, but is very important. Vehicles are designed for launch and mission operations. You will not be able to do it again if it is too slow or costly to get there. Many times, technology changes faster than space products such that what is launched includes outdated features, thus reducing competitiveness. Ground operations must be considered for the full product Lifecycle, from concept to retirement. Once manufactured, launch vehicles along with their payloads and launch systems require a long path of processing before launch. Initial assembly and testing always discover problems to address. A solid integration program is essential to minimize these impacts, as was seen in the Constellation Ares I-X test rocket. For RLV's, landing/recovery and post-flight turnaround activities are performed. Multi-use vehicles require reconfiguration. MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) must be well-planned--- even for the unplanned problems. Defect limits and standard repairs need to be in-place as well as easily added. Many routine inspections and maintenance can be like an aircraft overhaul. Modifications and technology upgrades should be expected. Another factor affecting ground operations efficiency is trending. It is essential for RLV's, and also useful for ELV's which fly the same or similar models again. Good data analysis of technical and processing performance will determine fixes and improvements needed for safety, design, and future processing. Collecting such data on new or low-frequency vehicles is a challenge. Lessons can be learned from the Space Shuttle, or even the Concorde aircraft. For all of the above topics, efficient business systems must be established for comprehensive program management and good throughput. Drawings, specifications, and manuals for an entire launch vehicle are often in different formats from multiple vendors, plus they have proprietary constraints. Nonetheless, the integration team must ensure that all data needed is compatible and visible to each appropriate team member. Ground processing systems for scheduling, tracking, problem resolution, etc. must be well laid-out. The balance between COTS (commercial off the shelf) and custom software is difficult. Multiple customers, vendors, launch sites, and landing sites add to the complexity of efficient IT (Information Technology) tools.

Ingalls, John↗
NASA NTRS2011

Standards and Specifications for Ground Processing of Space Vehicles: From an Aviation-Based Shuttle Project to Global Application

Proprietary or unique designs and operations are expected early in any industry's development, and often provide a competitive early market advantage. However, there comes a time when a product or industry requires standardization for the whole industry to advance...or survive. For the space industry, that time has come. Here, we will focus on standardization of ground processing for space vehicles and their ground systems. With the retirement of the Space Shuttle, and emergence of a new global space race, affordability and sustainability are more important now than ever. The growing commercialization of the space industry and current global economic environment are driving greater need for efficiencies to save time and money. More RLV's (Reusable Launch Vehicles) are being developed for the gains of reusability not achievable with traditional ELV's (Expendable Launch Vehicles). More crew/passenger vehicles are also being developed. All of this calls for more attention needed for ground processing-repeatedly before launch and after landing/recovery. RLV's should provide more efficiencies than ELV's, as long as MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) is well-planned-even for the unplanned problems. NASA's Space Shuttle is a primary example of an RLV which was supposed to thrive on reusability savings with efficient ground operations, but lessons learned show that costs were (and still are) much greater than expected. International standards and specifications can provide the commonality needed to simplify design and manufacturing as well as to improve safety, quality, maintenance, and operability. There are standards organizations engaged in the space industry, but ground processing is one of the areas least addressed. Challenges are encountered due to various factors often not considered during development. Multiple vehicle elements, sites, customers, and contractors pose various functional and integration difficulties. Resulting technical publication structures and methods are incongruent. Some processing products are still done on paper, some electronic, and many being converted in between. Business systems then are not fully compatible, and paper as well as electronic conversions are time-consuming and costly. NASA and its Shuttle contractors setup rules and systems to handle what has produced over 130 RLV launches, but they have had many challenges. Attempts have been made to apply aviation industry specifications to make the Shuttle more efficient with its ground processing. One efficiency project example was to make a Shuttle Maintenance Manual (SMM) based on the commercial ATA (Air Transport Association of America) Spec 100 for technical publications. This industry standard, along with others, has been a foundation for efficient global MRO of commercial airlines for years. A modified version was also made for some military aircraft. The SMM project found many similarities in Spec 100 which apply to the Shuttle, and room for expansion for space systems/structures not in aircraft. The SMM project team met with the ATA and representatives from NASA's X-33 and X-34 programs to discuss collaboration on a national space standard based on Spec 100. A pilot project was enabled for a subset of Shuttle systems. Full implementation was not yet achieved, X-33 and X-34 were cancelled, and the Shuttles were then designated for retirement. Nonetheless, we can learn from this project how to expand this concept to all space vehicle products. Since then, ATA has joined with ASD (AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe) and AIA (Aerospace Industries Association) to form a much-enhanced and expanded international specification: Sl000D, International Specification for Technical Publications. It includes air, land, and sea vehicles, missiles, support equipment, ordnance, and communications. It is used by a growing number of countries for commercial and government products. Its modular design is supported by a Common Source Dabase (CSDB), and COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) software is available for production of IETP's (Interactive Electronic Technical Publications). A few space industry products in Europe have begun to apply Sl000D already. Also, there are other related standards/specifications which have global implications. We have an opportunity to adapt Sl000D and possibly other standards for use with space vehicles and ground systems. Sl000D has plenty of flexibility to apply to any product needed. To successfully grow the viability of the space industry, all members, commercial and government, will need to engage cooperatively in developing and applying standards to move toward interoperability. If we leverage and combine the best existing space standards and specifications, develop new ones to address known gaps, and adapt the best applicable features from other industries, we can establish an infrastructure to not only accelerate current development, but also build longevity for a more cohesive international space community.

Ingalls, John↗
NASA NTRS2013

An Onboard ISS Virtual Reality Trainer

Prior to the retirement of the Space Shuttle, many exterior repairs on the International Space Station (ISS) were carried out by shuttle astronauts, trained on the ground and flown to the station to perform these repairs. After the retirement of the shuttle, this is no longer an available option. As such, the need for the ISS crew members to review scenarios while on flight, either for tasks they already trained or for contingency operations has become a very critical subject. In many situations, the time between the last session of Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) training and an Extravehicular Activity (EVA) task might be 6 to 8 months. In order to help with training for contingency repairs and to maintain EVA proficiency while on flight, the Johnson Space Center Virtual Reality Lab (VRLab) designed an onboard immersive ISS Virtual Reality Trainer (VRT), incorporating a unique optical system and making use of the already successful Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphical (DOUG) graphics software, to assist crew members with current procedures and contingency EVAs while on flight. The VRT provides an immersive environment similar to the one experienced at the VRLab crew training facility at NASA Johnson Space Center. EVA tasks are critical for a mission since as time passes the crew members may lose proficiency on previously trained tasks. In addition, there is an increased need for unplanned contingency repairs to fix problems arising as the ISS ages. The need to train and re-train crew members for EVAs and contingency scenarios is crucial and extremely demanding. ISS crew members are now asked to perform EVA tasks for which they have not been trained and potentially have never seen before.

Miralles, Evelyn↗
NASA NTRS2013

Efficient Cells Cut the Cost of Solar Power

If you visit Glenn Research Center, you might encounter a photovoltaic (PV) array that looks unlike anything you've ever seen. In fact, what one would normally identify as the panel is actually a series of curved mirrors called solar concentrators, engineered to reflect sunlight rather than absorb it. These concentrators gather, intensify, and focus sun beams upward, aiming at a fixture containing specialized silicon concentrated PV chips the actual solar cells. If you stay by the array for a while, you'll notice that the solar concentrators follow the path of the sun throughout the day, changing position to best capture and utilize the sunlight. The specialized chips that make the technology possible are the brainchild of Bernard Sater, an engineer who had worked at Glenn since the early 1960s before retiring to pursue his unique ideas for harnessing solar power. Sater contributed to multiple PV projects in the latter part of his career at the Center, including research and development on the International Space Station s solar arrays. In his spare time, he enjoyed tinkering with new approaches to solar power, experiments that resulted in the system installed at Glenn today. Sater s basic idea had two components. First, he wanted to create a silicon cell that was smaller, more efficient, and much lower cost than those available at the time. To ensure that the potential of such a chip could be realized, he also planned on pairing it with a system that could concentrate sunlight and focus it directly on the cell. When he retired from Glenn in 1994 to focus on researching and developing the technology full time, Sater found that NASA was interested in the concept and ready to provide funding, facilities, and expertise in order to assist in its development.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2009

Shuttle Shortfalls and Lessons Learned for the Sustainment of Human Space Exploration

Much debate and national soul searching has taken place over the value of the Space Shuttle which first flew in 1981 and which is currently scheduled to be retired in 2010. Originally developed post-Saturn Apollo to emphasize affordability and safety, the reusable Space Shuttle instead came to be perceived as economically unsustainable and lacking the technology maturity to assure safe, routine access to low earth orbit (LEO). After the loss of two crews, aboard Challenger and Columbia, followed by the decision to retire the system in 2010, it is critical that this three decades worth of human space flight experience be well understood. Understanding of the past is imperative to further those goals for which the Space Shuttle was a stepping-stone in the advancement of knowledge. There was significant reduction in life cycle costs between the Saturn Apollo and the Space Shuttle. However, the advancement in life cycle cost reduction from Saturn Apollo to the Space Shuttle fell far short of its goal. This paper will explore the reasons for this shortfall. Shortfalls and lessons learned can be categorized as related to design factors, at the architecture, element and sub-system levels, as well as to programmatic factors, in terms of goals, requirements, management and organization. Additionally, no review of the Space Shuttle program and attempt to take away key lessons would be complete without a strategic review. That is, how do national space goals drive future space transportation development strategies? The lessons of the Space Shuttle are invaluable in all respects - technical, as in design, program-wise, as in organizational approach and goal setting, and strategically, within the context of the generational march toward an expanded human presence in space. Beyond lessons though (and the innumerable papers, anecdotes and opinions published on this topic) this paper traces tangible, achievable steps, derived from the Space Shuttle program experience, that must be a part of any 2l century initiatives furthering a growing human presence beyond earth.

Zapata, Edgar↗
NASA NTRS2013

An Onboard ISS Virtual Reality Trainer

Prior to the retirement of the Space Shuttle, many exterior repairs on the International Space Station (ISS) were carried out by shuttle astronauts, trained on the ground and flown to the Station to perform these specific repairs. With the retirement of the shuttle, this is no longer an available option. As such, the need for ISS crew members to review scenarios while on flight, either for tasks they already trained for on the ground or for contingency operations has become a very critical issue. NASA astronauts prepare for Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) or Spacewalks through numerous training media, such as: self-study, part task training, underwater training in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL), hands-on hardware reviews and training at the Virtual Reality Laboratory (VRLab). In many situations, the time between the last session of a training and an EVA task might be 6 to 8 months. EVA tasks are critical for a mission and as time passes the crew members may lose proficiency on previously trained tasks and their options to refresh or learn a new skill while on flight are limited to reading training materials and watching videos. In addition, there is an increased need for unplanned contingency repairs to fix problems arising as the Station ages. In order to help the ISS crew members maintain EVA proficiency or train for contingency repairs during their mission, the Johnson Space Center's VRLab designed an immersive ISS Virtual Reality Trainer (VRT). The VRT incorporates a unique optical system that makes use of the already successful Dynamic On-board Ubiquitous Graphics (DOUG) software to assist crew members with procedure reviews and contingency EVAs while on board the Station. The need to train and re-train crew members for EVAs and contingency scenarios is crucial and extremely demanding. ISS crew members are now asked to perform EVA tasks for which they have not been trained and potentially have never seen before. The Virtual Reality Trainer (VRT) provides an immersive 3D environment similar to the one experienced at the VRLab crew training facility at the NASA Johnson Space Center. VRT bridges the gap by allowing crew members to experience an interactive, 3D environment to reinforce skills already learned and to explore new work sites and repair procedures outside the Station.

Miralles, Evelyn↗
NASA NTRS2015

Email-Based Informed Consent: Innovative Method for Reaching Large Numbers of Subjects for Data Mining Research

Since the 2010 NASA authorization to make the Life Sciences Data Archive (LSDA) and Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) data archives more accessible by the research and operational communities, demand for data has greatly increased. Correspondingly, both the number and scope of requests have increased, from 142 requests fulfilled in 2011 to 224 in 2014, and with some datasets comprising up to 1 million data points. To meet the demand, the LSAH and LSDA Repositories project was launched, which allows active and retired astronauts to authorize full, partial, or no access to their data for research without individual, study-specific informed consent. A one-on-one personal informed consent briefing is required to fully communicate the implications of the several tiers of consent. Due to the need for personal contact to conduct Repositories consent meetings, the rate of consenting has not kept up with demand for individualized, possibly attributable data. As a result, other methods had to be implemented to allow the release of large datasets, such as release of only de-identified data. However the compilation of large, de-identified data sets places a significant resource burden on LSAH and LSDA and may result in diminished scientific usefulness of the dataset. As a result, LSAH and LSDA worked with the JSC Institutional Review Board Chair, Astronaut Office physicians, and NASA Office of General Counsel personnel to develop a "Remote Consenting" process for retrospective data mining studies. This is particularly useful since the majority of the astronaut cohort is retired from the agency and living outside the Houston area. Originally planned as a method to send informed consent briefing slides and consent forms only by mail, Remote Consenting has evolved into a means to accept crewmember decisions on individual studies via their method of choice: email or paper copy by mail. To date, 100 emails have been sent to request participation in eight HRP-funded studies. The development of the Remote Consent process, the laws allowing transmission of consent via electronic means, total metrics to date, and remaining challenges (e.g., response issues, use of International Partner data, biospecimens/genetic data) for the research use of LSAH/LSDA data will be described.

Lee, Lesley R.↗
NASA NTRS2015

2014 Space Radiation Standing Review Panel

The 2014 Space Radiation Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) participated in a WebEx/teleconference with members of the Space Radiation Program Element, representatives from the Human Research Program (HRP), the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI), and NASA Headquarters on November 21, 2014 (list of participants is in Section XI of this report). The SRP reviewed the updated Research Plan for the Risk of Cardiovascular Disease and Other Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure (Degen Risk). The SRP also received a status update on the Risk of Acute and Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation Exposure (CNS Risk), the Risk of Acute Radiation Syndromes Due to Solar Particle Events (ARS Risk), and the Risk of Radiation Carcinogenesis (Cancer Risk). The SRP thought the teleconference was very informative and that the Space Radiation Program Element did a great job of outlining where the Element is with respect to our state of knowledge on the risks of carcinogenesis, central nervous system effects, and the risk of cardiovascular disease and other degenerative tissue effects from exposure to space radiation. The SRP was impressed with the quality of research that is being conducted and the progress the Space Radiation Program Element has made in the past year. While much work has been done, the SRP had a few remaining questions regarding the broad applicability of these findings to a manned deep space mission (in terms of cognitive function, the paradigms were still hippocampal based and also using Alzheimer disease models). The SRP believes that NASA should consider developing an approach to follow astronauts long-term (beyond retirement) for potential side-effects/risks of space exposure that may be unknown. Radiation toxicities often occur decades after exposure, and potential consequences would be missed if intensified exams stop after retirement of the astronauts. In addition, while cancer is one consequence of radiation exposure that is monitored, potential other side effects (CNS, Alzheimer Disease, loss of cognitive function, etc.) are not included in long-term studies and would be missed. Inclusion of long-term data would be of benefit to the astronauts themselves who have given their service to the corps but also to future astronauts and the future of space exploration.

Steinberg, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2010

Flexible-Path Human Exploration

In the fourth quarter of 2009 an in-house, multi-center NASA study team briefly examined "Flexible Path" concepts to begin understanding characteristics, content, and roles of potential missions consistent with the strategy proposed by the Augustine Committee. We present an overview of the study findings. Three illustrative human/robotic mission concepts not requiring planet surface operations are described: assembly of very large in-space telescopes in cis-lunar space; exploration of near Earth objects (NEOs); exploration of Mars' moon Phobos. For each, a representative mission is described, technology and science objectives are outlined, and a basic mission operations concept is quantified. A fourth type of mission, using the lunar surface as preparation for Mars, is also described. Each mission's "capability legacy" is summarized. All four illustrative missions could achieve NASA's stated human space exploration objectives and advance human space flight toward Mars surface exploration. Telescope assembly missions would require the fewest new system developments. NEO missions would offer a wide range of deep-space trip times between several months and two years. Phobos exploration would retire several Marsclass risks, leaving another large remainder set (associated with entry, descent, surface operations, and ascent) for retirement by subsequent missions. And extended lunar surface operations would build confidence for Mars surface missions by addressing a complementary set of risks. Six enabling developments (robotic precursors, ISS exploration testbed, heavy-lift launch, deep-space-capable crew capsule, deep-space habitat, and reusable in-space propulsion stage) would apply across multiple program sequence options, and thus could be started even without committing to a specific mission sequence now. Flexible Path appears to be a viable strategy, with meaningful and worthy mission content.

Augustine↗