Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “development timelines”

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 541 records · Page 30

Design of a 2-Hour Prebreathe Protocol for Space Walks (EVAs) from the International Space Station (ISS)

The majority of extravehicular activities (EVAs) performed from the shuttle use a 10.2 psi staged decompression. The International Space Station (ISS) will operate at 14.7 psi, requiring crews to "campout" in the airlock at 10.2 psi. The constraints associated with campout (crew isolation, oxygen usage, and waste management), provided the rationale to develop a 2-hour prebreathe protocol from 14.7 psi. Previous studies on the affect of microgravity and exercise during prebreathe suggested the feasibility of this approach. Various combinations of adynamia (nonwalking subjects), prebreathe exercise doses, and space suit donning options (10.2 vs. 14.7 psi) were analyzed against timeline and consumable constraints. Prospective decompression sickness (DCS) and venous gas emboli (VGE) accept/reject criteria were defined from statistical analysis of historical DCS data, combined with risk management of DCS under ISS mission circumstances. Maximum operational DCS levels were defined based on protecting for EVA capability with two crew members at 95% confidence, throughout ISS lifetime (within the constraints of NASA DCS disposition policy JPG 1800.3). The accept / reject limits were adjusted for greater safety (including Grade IV VGE criteria) based on analysis of related medical factors. Monte-Carlo simulation was performed to design a closed sequential, multi-center laboratory trial, including the capability of rejecting the primary protocol and testing at least one alternate exercise dose, within the 2-hour prebreathe. The 2-hour protocol incorporates 0, breathing for 5 0 min at 14.7 psi, including 10 min dual cycle ergometry at 75%VO(2max). It requires an additional 30 minO2breathing during depress from 14.7 to 10.2 psi, followed by a 30-60 min suit donning break at 10.2 psi/26.5% O2. It concludes with a 40 min in-suit O2 prebreathe. The protocol would be accepted for operations, if the incidence of DCS was less than 15% and Grade IV VGE less than 20%, both at 95% confidence. The above protocol and accept/reject limits were implemented in a multi-center study.

Gernhardt, M. L.↗

Implementing Strategic Planning Capabilities Within the Mars Relay Operations Service

Since the Mars Exploration Rovers (MER), Spirit and Opportunity, began their travels across the Martian surface in January of 2004, orbiting spacecraft such as the Mars 2001 Odyssey orbiter have relayed the majority of their collected scientific and operational data to and from Earth. From the beginning of those missions, it was evident that using orbiters to relay data to and from the surface of Mars was a vastly more efficient communications strategy in terms of power consumption and bandwidth compared to direct-to-Earth means. However, the coordination between the various spacecraft, which are largely managed independently and on differing commanding timelines, has always proven to be a challenge. Until recently, the ground operators of all these spacecraft have coordinated the movement of data through this network using a collection of ad hoc human interfaces and various, independent software tools. The Mars Relay Operations Service (MaROS) has been developed to manage the evolving needs of the Mars relay network, and specifically to standardize and integrate the relay planning and coordination data into a centralized infrastructure. This paper explores the journey of developing the MaROS system, from inception to delivery and acceptance by the Mars mission users.

tactical planning↗

Knowledge-Based Intelligent Software Support of Cellular Adaptation to Microgravity Investigations

One of the most significant new opportunities that the Space Station affords cell biologists is the ability to do long-term cultivation of cells in the space environment. This facility is essential for investigations that are primarily focused on effects requiring a longer timeline of observation than that provided by the STS (Space Transportation System) platform. Such work requires both very strong laboratory skills to properly and quickly interact with the hardware hosting the culture and deep knowledge of the cell biology domain in order to optimally react to unanticipated scientific developments. Such work can be enabled by advanced automation techniques that have recently been used in the STS-based Spacelab, and that are being readied for the Space Station. In this paper, we describe the adaptation of PI-in-a-Box, the first interactive space science assistant system, to the study of the effects of space flight on cell cycle progression and proliferation.

Groleau, Nick↗

Towards a Characterization of Scheduling Task Complexity

Future long-duration missions will require astronauts to act more autonomously, manage their schedules, and replan timelines as anomalies and discoveries occur. Astronauts are not professional planners, however, and the complexity of schedules that novice planners can complete successfully is not fully understood. To identify the primary factors which contribute to scheduling task complexity, we conducted a human-in-the-loop study and developed planning algorithms to investigate how the type and amount of constraints affect the difficulty of scheduling and rescheduling. We created rankings of difficulty using a combination of human performance metrics from experimental planning tasks and metrics describing the final plans that participants scheduled. Using the results of our scheduling and rescheduling algorithm algorithms, we created a similar ranking with which to compare. We created rankings which compared well between the experimental and algorithm results for the scheduling task, but the rescheduling task proved more difficult to estimate.

scheduling↗

Towards a Characterization of Scheduling Task Complexity

Future long-duration missions will require astronauts to act more autonomously, manage their schedules, and replan timelines as anomalies and discoveries occur. Astronauts are not professional planners, however, and the complexity of schedules that novice planners can complete successfully is not fully understood. To identify the primary factors which contribute to scheduling task complexity, we conducted a human-in-the-loop study and developed planning algorithms to investigate how the type and amount of constraints affect the difficulty of scheduling and rescheduling. We created rankings of difficulty using a combination of human performance metrics from experimental planning tasks and metrics describing the final plans that participants scheduled. Using the results of our scheduling and rescheduling algorithm algorithms, we created a similar ranking with which to compare. We created rankings which compared well between the experimental and algorithm results for the scheduling task, but the rescheduling task proved more difficult to estimate.

scheduling↗

Entry Systems Modeling and Ground Testing: Enabling Flight Performance and Risk Reduction

Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) comprise a relatively small portion of a mission’s timeline, however, it is typically among the largest risks. Flying through a body’s atmosphere reliably and accurately – from orbit to ground or via aerocapture – is a critical step toward successful in situ exploration. This exhibit will highlight EDL simulation and ground test capabilities, both existing and under development, that could support mission design, risk reduction, and post-flight analysis for Planetary Science mission concepts displayed in the 2023 SMD Planetary Science Technology Showcase.

Entry Systems↗

Trustworthy Autonomy for Gateway Vehicle System Manager

The Vehicle System Manager (VSM) is the highest-level software control system in the Gateway hierarchical Autonomous System Management Architecture. The VSM provides four function categories: Mission Management and Timeline Execution, Resource Management, Fault Management, Vehicle Control and Operation. VSM provides various levels of automation ranging from fully autonomous operations with no flight crew and minimal ground monitoring to advisory automation when Gateway is crewed and has full ground monitoring. Trustworthiness is achieved via verified specification, comprehensive development verification, and real-time verification using assume-guarantee contracts. Development verification includes semantic verification of the data model via peer review and testing and assume-guarantee contracts implemented using the PlusCal/TLA+ environment. VSM also uses runtime assume-guarantee contracts, implemented in R2U2 via a runtime monitor that feeds the necessary telemetry data to R2U2 and which receives and responds to the R2U2 verdict stream. The full lifecycle verification approach and use of assume-guarantee contracts provides increased trustworthiness to VSM. Preliminary results provide encouragement that VSM can be both autonomous and trustworthy.

Assume-guarantee contracts↗

A New Architecture for Visualization: Open Mission Control Technologies

Open Mission Control Technologies (MCT) is a new architecture for visualisation of mission data. Driven by requirements for new mission capabilities, including distributed mission operations, access to data anywhere, customization by users, synthesis of multiple data sources, and flexibility for multi-mission adaptation, Open MCT provides users with an integrated customizable environment. Developed at NASAs Ames Research Center (ARC), in collaboration with NASAs Advanced Multimission Operations System (AMMOS) and NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Open MCT is getting its first mission use on the Jason 3 Mission, and is also available in the testbed for the Mars 2020 Rover and for development use for NASAs Resource Prospector Lunar Rover. The open source nature of the project provides for use outside of space missions, including open source contributions from a community of users. The defining features of Open MCT for mission users are data integration, end user composition and multiple views. Data integration provides access to mission data across domains in one place, making data such as activities, timelines, telemetry, imagery, event timers and procedures available in one place, without application switching. End user composition provides users with layouts, which act as a canvas to assemble visualisations. Multiple views provide the capability to view the same data in different ways, with live switching of data views in place. Open MCT is browser based, and works on the desktop as well as tablets and phones, providing access to data anywhere. An early use case for mobile data access took place on the Resource Prospector (RP) Mission Distributed Operations Test, in which rover engineers in the field were able to view telemetry on their phones. We envision this capability providing decision support to on console operators from off duty personnel. The plug-in architecture also allows for adaptation for different mission capabilities. Different data types and capabilities may be added or removed using plugins. An API provides a means to write new capabilities and to create data adaptors. Data plugins exist for mission data sources for NASA missions. Adaptors have been written by international and commercial users. Open MCT is open source. Open source enables collaborative development across organizations and also makes the product available outside of the space community, providing a potential source of usage and ideas to drive product design and development. The combination of open source with an Apache 2 license, and distribution on GitHub, has enabled an active community of users and contributors. The spectrum of users for Open MCT is, to our knowledge, unprecedented for mission software. In addition to our NASA users, we have, through open source, had users and inquires on projects ranging from Internet of Things, to radio hobbyists, to farming projects. We have an active community of contributors, enabling a flow of ideas inside and outside of the space community.

Trimble, Jay↗

Geosynchronous platform definition study. Volume 7: Geosynchronous transporation requirements

The analyses and trade studies are presented which were conducted to define the interfaces between geosynchronous platforms and the space transportation system. Mission timelines are synthesized for both manned and unmanned placement and servicing operations. Physical, operational, and functional interfaces between platforms and the space shuttle and tug are derived from the timelines. Where interface incompatibilities exist, alternate approaches are evaluated and a preferred approach is defined. An evaluation of the adaptation of the solar electric propulsion (SEP) stage for geosynchronous operations is presented. A comparison of geosynchronous platform programs with and without the SEP stage in the transportation system is developed.

Myers, H. L.↗

Orbiter Capability for Providing Water to the International Space Station according to the Most Probable Flight Attitudes

Water to be generated by, delivered to, and processed by the International Space Station (ISS) is a critical Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) element, especially for the early ISS missions. A significant portion of the water required by the ISS shall be provided by the Shuttle Transportation System (STS) Orbiter. The balance of water generated by the Orbiter Fuel Cells (FC), minus that water consumed by the Orbiter Flash Evaporator System (FES) and crew, is available for transfer to the ISS. During later missions, crew respired and perspired water, as well as effluent water from the Orbiter LiOH canisters, will be collected as condensate and available for transfer to the ISS. Orbiter radiator performance provides the most variance in determining the amount of net Orbiter water available for transfer to the ISS. As radiator performance decreases, the dependence upon the FES (and FC water) increases for rejecting Orbiter waste heat. Generally, radiator performance decreases as the ISS assembly size increases (especially as solar arrays are added), and also as beta angle increases. ISS solar array deployment necessitates the use of models with articulating solar arrays (for Earth local-vertical attitudes), as array position dramatically affects Orbiter radiator performance. Recent developments in the relaxation of beta angle limitations have also increased the complexity and difficulty of providing water to the ISS. Other factors that may hinder the ability to transfer water are the number of empty Contingency Water Containers (CWCs) available, duration of open-hatch time, crew activity timeline, and full CWC storage capability. A parametric study has been accomplished that provides a quick-reference table for determining expected water generation rates for ISS missions 2A.2 through 7A.1. An hourly Orbiter water generation rate is reported according to a matrix that consists of: (1) (six) significant changes in ISS assembly configuration; (2) (four) beta angles (0 deg. , +37 deg., +53 deg. , and +75 deg.); (3) the (three) most representative ISS attitudes (XPOP-O, XPOP-180 and +XVV); (4) (four) Orbiter radiator configurations (both stowed, starboard deployed, port deployed, and both deployed) and (5) the (two) conditions (radiator inlet temperatures and fuel cell power) most consistent with sleep and wake periods. Those permutations of higher probability of occurrence than others have been identified. Another parametric study has been accomplished that provides a quick-reference table for determining expected water generation rates for ISS assembly complete missions. An hourly Orbiter water generation rate is reported according to a matrix that consists of: (1) (seven) beta angles (-75 deg., -60 deg., -30 deg., 0 deg., +30 deg., +60 deg., and +75 deg.); (2) the (nine) PYR angles that define the corners of the envelope; (3) (four) Orbiter radiator configurations (both stowed, starboard deployed, port deployed, and both deployed) and (4) the (two) conditions (radiator inlet temperatures and fuel cell power) most consistent with sleep and wake periods.

Dunaway, Brian↗

I Know I'm Right, But Does My Phone?

Transportation is the largest source of green-house gas emissions in the United States. Reducing transportation emissions depends on human travel behavior, which relies on local land use and planning. Travel diaries, consisting of sequences of trips between places for a particular individual, are typically used to instrument human travel behavior. However, these diaries are only as accurate as the underlying methods used to construct them. Travel diary algorithms have been a popular research topic since the advent of GPS tracking surveys. Mode inference algorithms in particular have been well represented in literature. However, these algorithms have typically been validated using prompted recall of pre-segmented trips, which doesn't account for segmentation error, thus disregarding the continuity of mode inference. Furthermore, phone operating systems and applications have adopted battery-conserving techniques, but we are not aware of prior work that has characterized the resulting data collection errors or evaluated procedures to mitigate them. We introduce a framework to evaluate accuracy of trip length computations and mode inference. We develop a temporal alignment procedure in analyzing continuous mode-segmented trajectories for groups of trips. We then apply our framework to evaluate an example set of travel diary algorithms from the open-source OpenPATH travel diary platform against MobilityNet, a public dataset containing information from three artificial timelines that cover 15 different travel modes. Our results show that inference based on an integration with map features results in weighted F_1 scores of 0.60 (iOS) and 0.74 (android). We also show that OpenPATH tends to under count trip length, with mean of signed relative error of -0.0438 on android and -0.0704 on iOS. We hope that other travel diary algorithms will be evaluated using this standardized process, and that the results used to understand and improve the state-of-the-art in this field.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS,ENERGY PLANNING, POLIC↗

Assessing Relay Communications for Mars Sample Return Surface Mission Concepts

The Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is a 3-mission campaign concept supported by NASA and ESA to return samples from the Mars surface. MSR will, for the firsttime ever, present a need to communicate with multiple surfaceassets that are co-located on Mars in a coordinated effort toaccomplish the unified objective of fetching, transporting, andreturning samples from Mars. Currently, Mars surface assetsrelay data to and from Earth using a number of orbiters inwhat’s known as the Mars Relay Network (MRN). This networkis characterized by a small number of surface assets distributedacross the Martian globe and a larger number of orbiters toprovide relay services. As of June 2020, there are two surfaceassets for which five orbiters are providing relay. During theMSR Campaign, there will be two rovers and a lander that allwill require relay communication from a small number of Marsorbiters to meet the aggressive MSR timeline. The inversion ofthe current MRN paradigm, a system of many surface assetsrequiring relay and few orbiters to provide relay, necessitatesthe unique challenge of optimally allocating relay passes tomaximize the operational capability of all assets. The allocationmust consider a large number of trade variables includingMars asset operational requirements and Earth ground systemconstraints, including staffing schedules, operations planningacross time zones, and more. To address these telecommunicationchallenges, the Mars Asset Relay Mission Link AllocationDesign Environment (MARMLADE) tool was developed. Itis a MATLAB-based tool to assign orbiter passes or Direct-From-Earth (DFE) links to each of the three surface assets andquantify the operational efficiency of each surface asset.MARMLADE uses a data set of simulated Mars relay orbitergeometry and telecommunication capabilities provided by JPL’sTelecom Orbit Analysis and Simulation Tool (TOAST) softwareto compute which asset should get each pass based on a seriesof heuristics and predictions of all assets’ states. WithinMARMLADE, the user can provide inputs including the optionfor time-based pass splitting, fixed FWD data rate capabilities,DFE communication capabilities, and link parameters allowingfor the assessment of complex operations and hardware tradesusing surface mission operational efficiency as a primary figureof merit. As the MSR mission concepts continue to mature,MARMLADE is being used to assess ability of all MSR elementsto meet the surface mission timeline requirements and to provide relay link allocations to each of the MSR surface assets.

Lee, Charles↗

Genesis Solar Wind – Capture, Return, Curate and Analyze: Looking Backward and Creating a Timeline

Introduction: In 1997 NASA’S Discovery Program selected the Genesis mission proposal to return solar wind samples to Earth for laboratory analyses. Principal Investigator Donald S. Burnett and the science team defined the purity of collector materials and ability to analyze solar wind composition to the precision required for planetary science. As a small mission, focused on a well-defined science goal, yet needing careful attention to engineering details, the communication among scientists and engineers, nurtured by Don Burnett, was exceptional. Genesis Mission and Curation Legacy: Genesis, as the first U. S. spacecraft to return astromaterial samples since Apollo, not only integrated the mission planning and flight teams, but also the science and sample curation teams during the mission development period. Since Genesis is a sample return mission, the Science Team was essential in certifying the collectors (sample containers for solar atoms). From inception, Genesis established mission funding for returned sample curation. JSC was lead in contamination control during mission preparation, including establishment of an ISO 4 cleanroom facility and use of ultrapure water (UPW) for cleaning flight hardware (and, as it turned out, for cleaning collectors after the mishap). Reliable, fast communication among scientists, engineers and curators at the hands-on level established deep respect among team members and efficient decision-making. JSC’s 50-years of astromaterial sample curation provided experienced sample processors onsite during recovery in Utah (a deep bench for emergency response). Post-recovery curation included iterative collaboration with science sample users to clean or verify cleanliness of samples. The science legacy from Genesis is addressed by Burnett and Jurewicz, this volume. In The Beginning: After Apollo sample return, Burnett and Marcia Neugebauer at JPL began discussing a solar wind sample return, with Neugebauer arguing that separate collection of solar wind regimes was essential science. By 1992 a solar wind sample return mission was presented at a workshop, and by 1994 a mission was proposed named Suess-Urey. The mission was re-proposed under a new name GENESIS and selected in 1997. Susan Niebur captured the Genesis mission history and stories, from high level management documents and from many interviews with participants [2]. Her account lets readers glimpse personality of participants in quotations from interviews. Need and Scope for Detailed Technical Timeline: A timeline constructed from lower level task documents has been initiated to document the resources and skills actually used, as well as task sequence or concurrency. Timelines for high level mission events are captured in two documents [1] [2] and for detailed re-entry events in [3]. A detailed technical timeline for Genesis mission and curation activities will provide data points for lower level tasks, such as ISO 4 curation facility construction time, preparation for nominal sample field recovery, mishap recovery, and UPW expansion. Changes in technology context 1990-2024: Semiconductor technologies were easily accessible in the U.S.A. (1990-1999), and the Genesis team used those resources for cleanroom design and UPW system expansion. Image documentation was changing from film to digital during cleanroom construction and payload cleaning (1997-2001). Engineering design was done using computer aided design proprietary software, making more difficult the archiving of payload configuration and materials. Email of documents, tracked delivery service and virtual meeting capability greatly improved communication efficiency. Information sources – Pre-launch mission preparation: Examples of mission science, engineering and contamination control are collector purity testing, payload design/fabrication and ISO 4 cleanroom construction. Information on timing of these activities comes from facility readiness reviews, management reviews, shipping documents, procurement documents, test reports, travel documents, laboratory logs, Quality Assurance documents, dates on images, participant notebooks and emails. Information sources – Sample return re-entry and field recovery activities: Information comes from event timelines produced by Mid-Air Recovery team, Lockheed team lead notes and from chase video, JPL Quality Assurance. Information also comes from images and logbooks from UTTR cleanroom operations and from curatorial documents. Information sources – Resulting science and sample cleaning processes: Agendas from the annual gatherings of the science team initially trace testing for collector purity/cleanliness, and after sample recovery, include collector cleaning and cleanliness assessment. Post-recovery documents include curatorial orders and procedures, sample allocation documents and LPSC abstracts. Timeline Objectives: A simple spreadsheet timeline with headers DATE, EVENT, PEOPLE, COMMENT, INFORMATION SOURCE has been initiated and currently has over 90 entries. While this is not definitive historical research, it is a quick look at the evolution of Genesis curation with pointers to documents or people with information. Engineers for future missions may find useful points of comparison for development of facilities. References:[1] Genesis Mission Reference Document, (2011) JPL D-62382.[2] Niebur S. M., edited by Brown D. W. (2023) NASA’s Discovery Program: The First 20 Years of Competitive Planetary Exploration, NASA-SP-2023-4238.[3] Genesis Mishap Investigation Board Report, Vol. 1 (July 2005).

solar wind↗

Development of In Situ Instruments for Planetary Exploration - Unique Challenges in Design, Development, and Execution

A viewgraph presentation describing in situ instruments for NASA missions is shown. The topics include: 1) In Situ Instrumentation; 2) Planetary Extremes; 3) Mars Surface Environment; 4) Lunar Precursor Mission Environment; 5) Europa Surface Analogue; 6) Other Parameters; 7) Space In Situ Instrumentation still in its Infancy; 8) Needed Capabilities For In Situ Science; 9) Framework For Putting The Pieces Together; 10) The Wild World of Astrobiology; 11) Timeline; 12) Example: MOD; 13) In Situ Sample Analysis Laboratories are more complex; 14) technologies In Situ Sample Analysis Requires Integration of Many Emerging Advanced Concepts; 15) Supporting technologies for In Situ Laboratories; 16) Micro-laboratory example; 17) In Situ Instrument Classes; and 18) Key for Analytical Instrument:Sample Preparation.

In Situ Instrumentation↗

Balancing Participation and Speed: A Polycentric Governance Lens on Renewable‐Energy Siting

Siting and permitting for renewable projects vary in process and authority structures. Such variation can create coordination challenges and inconsistent public participation processes. We develop a Governance Trade-Off Matrix to classify permitting processes by (1) authority structure (polycentric vs. monocentric) and (2) procedural extensiveness (minimal vs. extensive). The matrix shows when jurisdictional dispersion enables timely implementation and when it creates coordination breakdowns. We propose testable hypotheses on how governance design affects project timelines, conflict escalation, and local acceptance. Here, the framework highlights design levers, like single lead agencies, structured public involvement, and statutory shot clocks, to reconcile meaningful local input with urgent climate imperatives.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Crew procedures and workload of retrofit concepts for microwave landing system

Crew procedures and workload for Microwave Landing Systems (MLS) that could be retrofitted into existing transport aircraft were evaluated. Two MLS receiver concepts were developed. One is capable of capturing a runway centerline and the other is capable of capturing a segmented approach path. Crew procedures were identified and crew task analyses were performed using each concept. Crew workload comparisons were made between the MLS concepts and an ILS baseline using a task-timeline workload model. Workload indexes were obtained for each scenario. The results showed that workload was comparable to the ILS baseline for the MLS centerline capture concept, but significantly higher for the segmented path capture concept.

Summers, Leland G.↗

The Lucy Spacecraft

The Lucy spacecraft is developed from a combination of heritage components used on other NASA deep space missions, combined with a set of newly developed hardware specific to Lucy’s mission, most critically the solar arrays. These components are configured into a spacecraft capable of launching on the least expensive Atlas launch vehicle, deploying into a power-safe configuration, executing the high-precision Trojan asteroid encounters, and surviving the 12-year mission timeline.

planetary↗

Reinventing User Applications for Mission Control

In 2006, NASA Ames Research Center's (ARC) Intelligent Systems Division, and NASA Johnson Space Centers (JSC) Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) began a collaboration to move user applications for JSC's mission control center to a new software architecture, intended to replace the existing user applications being used for the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station. It must also carry NASA/JSC mission operations forward to the future, meeting the needs for NASA's exploration programs beyond low Earth orbit. Key requirements for the new architecture, called Mission Control Technologies (MCT) are that end users must be able to compose and build their own software displays without the need for programming, or direct support and approval from a platform services organization. Developers must be able to build MCT components using industry standard languages and tools. Each component of MCT must be interoperable with other components, regardless of what organization develops them. For platform service providers and MOD management, MCT must be cost effective, maintainable and evolvable. MCT software is built from components that are presented to users as composable user objects. A user object is an entity that represents a domain object such as a telemetry point, a command, a timeline, an activity, or a step in a procedure. User objects may be composed and reused, for example a telemetry point may be used in a traditional monitoring display, and that same telemetry user object may be composed into a procedure step. In either display, that same telemetry point may be shown in different views, such as a plot, an alpha numeric, or a meta-data view and those views may be changed live and in place. MCT presents users with a single unified user environment that contains all the objects required to perform applicable flight controller tasks, thus users do not have to use multiple applications, the traditional boundaries that exist between multiple heterogeneous applications disappear, leaving open the possibility of new operations concepts that are not constrained by the traditional applications paradigm.

Trimble, Jay Phillip↗