Commitment to Challenge
This video gives a brief overview of the NASA JSC including the following: mission control, mission operations, and mission planning; new scientific and technologies developments; and educational programs.
Source record↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Mission Operations”
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.
Intelligent systems and advanced user interfaces for design, operation, and maintenance of command management systems
Historically, command management systems (CMS) have been large and expensive spacecraft-specific software systems that were costly to build, operate, and maintain. Current and emerging hardware, software, and user interface technologies may offer an opportunity to facilitate the initial formulation and design of a spacecraft-specific CMS as well as to develop a more generic CMS system. New technologies, in addition to a core CMS common to a range of spacecraft, may facilitate the training and enhance the efficiency of CMS operations. Current mission operations center (MOC) hardware and software include Unix workstations, the C/C++ programming languages, and an X window interface. This configuration provides the power and flexibility to support sophisticated and intelligent user interfaces that exploit state-of-the-art technologies in human-machine interaction, artificial intelligence, and software engineering. One of the goals of this research is to explore the extent to which technologies developed in the research laboratory can be productively applied in a complex system such as spacecraft command management. Initial examination of some of these issues in CMS design and operation suggests that application of technologies such as intelligent planning, case-based reasoning, human-machine systems design and analysis tools (e.g., operator and designer models), and human-computer interaction tools (e.g., graphics, visualization, and animation) may provide significant savings in the design, operation, and maintenance of the CMS for a specific spacecraft as well as continuity for CMS design and development across spacecraft. The first six months of this research saw a broad investigation by Georgia Tech researchers into the function, design, and operation of current and planned command management systems at Goddard Space Flight Center. As the first step, the researchers attempted to understand the current and anticipated horizons of command management systems at Goddard. Preliminary results are given on CMS commonalities and causes of low re-use, and methods are proposed to facilitate increased re-use.
Potter, William J.↗
Re-engineering the mission life cycle with ABC and IDEF
The theory behind re-engineering a business process is to remove the non-value added activities thereby lowering the process cost. In order to achieve this, one must be able to identify where the non-value added elements are located which is not a trivial task. This is because the non-value added elements are often hidden in the form of overhead and/or pooled resources. In order to be able to isolate these non-value added processes from among the other processes, one must first decompose the overall top level process into lower layers of sub-processes. In addition, costing data must be assigned to each sub-process along with the value the sub-process adds towards the final product. IDEF0 is a Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) process-modeling tool that allows for this functional decomposition through structured analysis. In addition, it illustrates the relationship of the process and the value added to the product or service. The value added portion is further defined in IDEF1X which is an entity relationship diagramming tool. The entity relationship model is the blueprint of the product as it moves along the 'assembly line' and therefore relates all of the parts to each other and the final product. It also relates the parts to the tools that produce the product and all of the paper work that is used in their acquisition. The use of IDEF therefore facilitates the use of Activity Based Costing (ABC). ABC is an essential method in a high variety, product-customizing environment, to facilitate rapid response to externally caused change. This paper describes the work being done in the Mission Operations Division to re-engineer the development and operation life cycle of Mission Operations Centers using these tools.
Mandl, Daniel↗
NASA Outer Solar System Exploration
A viewgraph presentation on NASA's Outer Solar System Exploration is shown. The topics include: 1) Completed Missions; 2) Operating Missions; 3) Missions in Development; and 4) Future Missions.
Bergstralh, Jay T.↗
The Effect of Center of Gravity and Anthropometrics on Human Performance in Simulated Lunar and Mars Gravity
Drawing from the experiences of the Apollo missions, it is evident that the off nominal center of gravity (CG) induced by the portable life support system (PLSS) had significant impact on the locomotion stability of the crew. This in turn is believed to have been a major contributor to the high numbers of falls and high metabolic rates experienced by the crew, and thus significantly hampered the crew s performance. With this in mind, the EVA Physiology, Systems and Performance (EPSP) group at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) has been conducting tests to assess how spacesuit CG location impacts human performance in simulated lunar and Mars gravity. The results acquired to date show correlations between CG location and performance. However, noticeable variations in the performance data have been observed across subjects for fixed CG configurations. Consequently, it was hypothesized that this variability may be attributed to the anthropometrics of the different test subjects. It was further hypothesized that trunk-to-height ratio (THR) may be directly correlated to performance in reduced gravity; i.e. subjects with increased THR may have increased performance. To test this hypothesis, lunar and Mars gravity test data acquired over three years during NASA Neural Buoyancy Lab (NBL) tests and NASA Extreme Environment Missions Operation (NEEMO) missions were analyzed against THR, height, trunk length, and subject body mass/weight. The results of the study supported the hypothesis relating THR and performance, while the other three anthropometric parameters did not provide consistent correlations with performance. This in turn suggests that human performance in reduced gravity may be more dependent on anthropometric proportions than on body segment lengths and mass/weight.
Mulugeta, Lealem↗
Orion Optical Navigation for Loss of Communication Lunar Return Contingencies
The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) will replace the Space Shuttle and serve as the next-generation spaceship to carry humans back to the Moon for the first time since the Apollo program. For nominal lunar mission operations, the Mission Control Navigation team will utilize radiometric measurements to determine the position and velocity of Orion and uplink state information to support Lunar return. However, in the loss of communications contingency return scenario, Orion must safely return the crew to the Earth's surface. The navigation design solution for this loss of communications scenario is optical navigation consisting of lunar landmark tracking in low lunar orbit and star- horizon angular measurements coupled with apparent planetary diameter for Earth return trajectories. This paper describes the optical measurement errors and the navigation filter that will process those measurements to support navigation for safe crew return.
Getchius, Joel↗
HEASARC - The High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center
The High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (HEASARC) is NASA's archive for high-energy astrophysics and cosmic microwave background (CMB) data, supporting the broad science goals of NASA's Physics of the Cosmos theme. It provides vital scientific infrastructure to the community by standardizing science data formats and analysis programs, providing open access to NASA resources, and implementing powerful archive interfaces. Over the next five years the HEASARC will ingest observations from up to 12 operating missions, while serving data from these and over 30 archival missions to the community. The HEASARC archive presently contains over 37 TB of data, and will contain over 60 TB by the end of 2014. The HEASARC continues to secure major cost savings for NASA missions, providing a reusable mission-independent framework for reducing, analyzing, and archiving data. This approach was recognized in the NRC Portals to the Universe report (2007) as one of the HEASARC's great strengths. This poster describes the past and current activities of the HEASARC and our anticipated developments in coming years. These include preparations to support upcoming high energy missions (NuSTAR, Astro-H, GEMS) and ground-based and sub-orbital CMB experiments, as well as continued support of missions currently operating (Chandra, Fermi, RXTE, Suzaku, Swift, XMM-Newton and INTEGRAL). In 2012 the HEASARC (which now includes LAMBDA) will support the final nine-year WMAP data release. The HEASARC is also upgrading its archive querying and retrieval software with the new Xamin system in early release - and building on opportunities afforded by the growth of the Virtual Observatory and recent developments in virtual environments and cloud computing.
Smale, Alan P.↗
Co-op Essay - Tour 1
The Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) is responsible for the training, planning and performance of all U.S. manned operations in space. Within this directorate all responsibilities are divided up into divisions. The EVA, Robotics & Crew Systems Operations Division performs ground operations and trains astronauts to carry out some of the more "high action" procedures in space. For example they orchestrate procedures like EVAs, or ExtraVehicular Activities (spacewalks), and robotics operations external to the International Space Station (ISS). The robotics branch of this division is responsible for the use of the Mobile Servicing System (MSS). This system is a combination of two robotic mechanisms and a series of equipment used to transport them on the ISS. The MSS is used to capture and position visiting vehicles, transport astronauts during EVAs, and perform external maintenance tasks on the ISS. This branch consists of two groups which are responsible for crew training and flight controlling, respectively. My first co-op tour took place Fall 2013. During this time I was given the opportunity to work in the robotics operations branch of the Mission Operations Directorate at NASA's Johnson Space Center. I was given a variety of tasks that encompassed, at a base level, all the aspects of the branch.
Porter, Derrick↗
The Spacecraft Fire Experiment (Saffire) - Objectives, Development and Status
Since 2012, the Spacecraft Fire Experiment (Saffire) has been under development by the Spacecraft Fire Safety Demonstration (SFS Demo) project that is funded by NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems Division in the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. The overall objective of this project is to reduce the uncertainty and risk associated with the design of spacecraft fire safety systems for NASA's exploration missions. This is accomplished by defining, developing, and conducting experiments that address gaps in spacecraft fire safety knowledge and capabilities identified by NASA's Fire Safety System Maturation Team. This paper describes the three Spacecraft Fire Experiments (Saffire-I, -II, and -III) that were developed at NASA-GRC and that will conduct a series of material flammability tests in low-gravity and at length scales that are realistic for a spacecraft fire. The experiments will be conducted in Orbital ATK's Cygnus vehicle after it has unberthed from the International Space Station. The tests will be fully automated with the data downlinked at the conclusion of the test and before the Cygnus vehicle reenters the atmosphere. The objectives of these experiments are to (1) determine how rapidly a large scale fire grows in low-gravity and (2) investigate the low-g flammability limits compared to those obtained in NASA's normal gravity material flammability screening test. The hardware for these experiments has been completed and is awaiting their respective launches, all planned for 2016. This paper will review the objectives of these experiments and how they address several of the knowledge gaps for NASA's exploration missions. The hardware development will be discussed including several novel approaches that were taken for testing and evaluation of these series payloads. The status of the missions and operational status will also be presented.
combustion↗
Flight Dynamics Planning and Operations Support for the JWST Mission
The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) was launched from Kourou Spaceport on December 25, 2021, at 12:20 UTC on an Ariane 5 launch vehicle. The launch vehicle inserted JWST into a 30-day transfer trajectory to the Sun-Earth-Moon (SEM) Lagrange point L2 region. JWST executed three mid-course correction maneuvers (MCCs) to insert the spacecraft into a quasi-halo orbit about SEM L2; JWST will maintain its trajectory about L2 for at least 5.5 years, with a goal of at least 10.5 years. This paper summarizes the flight dynamics support for JWST, including the prelaunch nominal trajectory design, the launch window analysis, contingency planning for trajectory-related anomalies, mission operations support for the first 6 months, and a comparison of the planned and achieved actual JWST trajectory results. The orbit determination strategy, both planned and executed, will be summarized, and the method of addressing the anomalies as they occurred will be included.
Space Operations↗
Flight Dynamics Planning and Operations Support for the JWST Mission
The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) was launched from Kourou Spaceport on December 25, 2021, at 12:20 UTC on an Ariane 5 launch vehicle. The launch vehicle inserted JWST into a 30-day transfer trajectory to the Sun-Earth-Moon (SEM) Lagrange point L2 region. JWST executed three mid-course correction maneuvers (MCCs) to insert the spacecraft into a quasi-halo orbit about SEM L2; JWST will maintain its trajectory about L2 for at least 5.5 years, with a goal of at least 10.5 years. This paper summarizes the flight dynamics support for JWST, including the prelaunch nominal trajectory design, the launch window analysis, contingency planning for trajectory-related anomalies, mission operations support for the first 6 months, and a comparison of the planned and achieved actual JWST trajectory results. The orbit determination strategy, both planned and executed, will be summarized, and the method of addressing the anomalies as they occurred will be included.
Karen Richon↗
Benchmark Problem for Autonomous Urban Air Mobility
This paper introduces a Community Benchmark Problem (CBP) for Intelligent Contingency Management (ICM) for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) aircraft. The CBP aims to provide a common framework for measuring and comparing the progress of autonomy solutions for UAM aircraft in handling emergency situations. The paper proposes a methodology for defining and quantifying five measures of complexity that capture the challenges and requirements of ICM for UAM: Mission, Environmental, Autonomy, Decision-Making, and Mission Fault. In addition, it proposes a methodology for defining and quantifying mission risk acceptability with the same goals: Contingency Management, Mission Success, Operational, Mission Redefinition, and Environmental. We describe how to use these measures to track progress of the development of ICM capability, as well as to create scenarios and evaluate the performance of different autonomy solutions.
autonomy↗
Community Benchmark Problem for Intelligent Contingency Management
This paper introduces a Community Benchmark Problem (CBP) for Intelligent Contingency Management (ICM) for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) aircraft. The CBP aims to provide a common framework for measuring and comparing the progress of autonomy solutions for UAM aircraft in handling emergency situations. The paper proposes a methodology for defining and quantifying five measures of complexity that capture the challenges and requirements of ICM for UAM: Mission, Environmental, Autonomy, Decision-Making, and Mission Fault. In addition, it proposes a methodology for defining and quantifying mission risk acceptability with the same goals: Contingency Management, Mission Success, Operational, Mission Redefinition, and Environmental. We describe how to use these measures to track progress of the development of ICM capability, as well as to create scenarios and evaluate the performance of different autonomy solutions.
autonomy↗
NASA Deep Space Network operating control
The primary function of the Deep Space Network (DSN) is to provide effective and reliable tracking and data acquisition for planetary and interplanetary space flight missions. This involves providing data to flight project mission operations, accepting commands from mission operations and transmitting the commands to stations and spacecraft, and providing a record of telemetry and command data to mission operations. Also included are network performance monitoring, the generation of predictions for antenna pointing and signal acquisition, network scheduling, and network validation tests. Descriptions are given of the three facilities and six systems of the DSN. Also described are interfaces, automation and standardized procedures, and discrepancy reporting. It is pointed out that the greatest challenge facing the DSN is the implementation of NASA's Network Consolidation Program, which is scheduled to be completed in 1986. The objectives of this program are enumerated.
Weisman, W. D.↗
Enabling Advanced Automation in Spacecraft Operations with the Spacecraft Emergency Response System
True autonomy is the Holy Grail of spacecraft mission operations. The goal of launching a satellite and letting it manage itself throughout its useful life is a worthy one. With true autonomy, the cost of mission operations would be reduced to a negligible amount. Under full autonomy, any problems (no matter the severity or type) that may arise with the spacecraft would be handled without any human intervention via some combination of smart sensors, on-board intelligence, and/or smart automated ground system. Until the day that complete autonomy is practical and affordable to deploy, incremental steps of deploying ever-increasing levels of automation (computerization of once manual tasks) on the ground and on the spacecraft are gradually decreasing the cost of mission operations. For example, NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (NASA-GSFC) has been flying spacecraft with low cost operations for several years. NASA-GSFC's SMEX (Small Explorer) and MIDEX (Middle Explorer) missions have effectively deployed significant amounts of automation to enable the missions to fly predominately in 'light-out' mode. Under light-out operations the ground system is run without human intervention. Various tools perform many of the tasks previously performed by the human operators. One of the major issues in reducing human staff in favor of automation is the perceived increased in risk of losing data, or even losing a spacecraft, because of anomalous conditions that may occur when there is no one in the control center. When things go wrong, missions deploying advanced automation need to be sure that anomalous conditions are detected and that key personal are notified in a timely manner so that on-call team members can react to those conditions. To ensure the health and safety of its lights-out missions, NASA-GSFC's Advanced Automation and Autonomy branch (Code 588) developed the Spacecraft Emergency Response System (SERS). The SERS is a Web-based collaborative environment that enables secure distributed fault and resource management. The SERS incorporates the use of intelligent agents, threaded discussions, workflow, database connectivity, and links to a variety of communications devices (e.g., two-way paging, PDA's, and Internet phones) via commercial gateways. When the SERS detects a problem, it notifies on-call team members, who then can remotely take any necessary actions to resolve the anomalies.The SERS goes well beyond a simple '911' system that sends out an error code to everyone with a pager. Instead, SERS' software agents send detailed data (i.e., notifications) to the most appropriate team members based on the type and severity of the anomaly and the skills of the on-call team members. The SERS also allows the team members to respond to the notifications from their wireless devices. This unique capability ensures rapid response since the team members no longer have to go to a PC or the control center for every anomalous event. Most importantly, the SERS enables safe experimentation with various techniques for increasing levels of automation, leading to robust autonomy. For the MIDEX missions at NASA GSFC, the SERS is used to provide 'human-in-the-loop' automation. During lights-out operations, as greater control is given to the MIDEX automated systems, the SERS can be configured to page remote personnel and keep them informed regarding actions taking place in the control center. Remote off-duty operators can even be given the option of enabling or inhibiting a specific automated response in near real time via their two-way pagers. The SERS facilitates insertion of new technology to increase automation, while maintaining the safety and security of mission resources. This paper will focus on SERS' overall functionality and how SERS has been designed to handle the monitoring and emergency response for missions with varying levels of automation. The paper will also convey some of the key lessons learned from SERS' deployment across of variety of missions, highlighting this incremental approach to achieving 'robust autonomy'.
Breed, Julie↗
NASA's Earth Science Flight Program Meets the Challenges of Today and Tomorrow
NASA's Earth science flight program is a dynamic undertaking that consists of a large fleet of operating satellites, an array of satellite and instrument projects in various stages of development, a robust airborne science program, and a massive data archiving and distribution system. Each element of the flight program is complex and present unique challenges. NASA builds upon its successes and learns from its setbacks to manage this evolving portfolio to meet NASA's Earth science objectives. NASA fleet of 16 operating missions provide a wide range of scientific measurements made from dedicated Earth science satellites and from instruments mounted to the International Space Station. For operational missions, the program must address issues such as an aging satellites operating well beyond their prime mission, constellation flying, and collision avoidance with other spacecraft and orbital debris. Projects in development are divided into two broad categories: systematic missions and pathfinders. The Earth Systematic Missions (ESM) include a broad range of multi-disciplinary Earth-observing research satellite missions aimed at understanding the Earth system and its response to natural and human-induced forces and changes. Understanding these forces will help determine how to predict future changes, and how to mitigate or adapt to these changes. The Earth System Science Pathfinder (ESSP) program provides frequent, regular, competitively selected Earth science research opportunities that accommodate new and emerging scientific priorities and measurement capabilities. This results in a series of relatively low-cost, small-sized investigations and missions. Principal investigators whose scientific objectives support a variety of studies lead these missions, including studies of the atmosphere, oceans, land surface, polar ice regions, or solid Earth. This portfolio of missions and investigations provides opportunity for investment in innovative Earth science that enhances NASA's capability for better understanding the current state of the Earth system. ESM and ESSP projects often involve partnerships with other US agencies and/or international organizations. This adds to the complexity of mission development, but allows for a greater scientific return on NASA's investments. The Earth Science Airborne Science Program provides manned and unmanned aircraft systems that further science and advance the use of satellite data. NASA uses these assets worldwide in campaigns to investigate extreme weather events, observe Earth system processes, obtain data for Earth science modeling activities, and calibrate instruments flying aboard Earth science spacecraft. The Airborne Science Program has six dedicated aircraft and access to many other platforms. The Earth Science Multi-Mission Operations program acquires, preserves, and distributes observational data from operating spacecraft to support Earth Science research focus areas. The Earth Observing System Data and Information System (EOSDIS), which has been in operations since 1994, primarily accomplishes this. EOSDIS acquires, processes, archives, and distributes Earth Science data and information products. The archiving of NASA Earth Science information happens at eight Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs) and four disciplinary data centers located across the United States. The DAACs specialize by topic area, and make their data available to researchers around the world. The DAACs currently house over 9 petabytes of data, growing at a rate of 6.4 terabytes per day. NASA's current Earth Science portfolio is responsive to the National Research Council (NRC) 2007 Earth Science Decadal Survey and well as the 2010 NASA Response to President Obama's Climate Plan. As the program evolves into the future it will leverage the lessons learned from the current missions in operations and development, and plan for adjustments to future objectives in response to the anticipated 2017 NRC Decadal Survey.
Flight Program↗
NASA Strategy for Technology Development
At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), foresight is a coordinated, iterative, and continual process for making informed decisions. NASA faces diverse and relatively unique challenges and opportunities as the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration. To address these challenges and leverage opportunities, NASA uses foresight to strategically plan technology development across four mission directorates: Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (recently separated into the new Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate and Space Operations Mission Directorate). The mission directorates leverage a broad community of experts and partners to incorporate technology foresight into mission and program planning. Through this process NASA realizes tangible benefits to the agency’s science, technology, and exploration programs. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides strategic advice, supported by independent assessments and rigorous analysis, to inform NASA senior leadership on key areas to align mission and agency-level activities. OTPS serves as a trusted authority to inform technology strategy at the agency to enable future missions. Specifically, OTPS coordinates and uses inputs from a broad community of experts, both internal and external to NASA, to inform decision making for technology plans, investments, and partnerships. OTPS develops and maintains the NASA Technology Taxonomy to standardize communication across the agency’s diverse technology portfolio and the related Strategic Technology Investment Plan that integrates priorities and informs technology investment. Through these efforts, OTPS has refined elements of foresight-informed strategic planning that may be applicable to other technology-driven industries where foresight is essential for resilience. This chapter describes the processes of foresight for technology development at NASA and provides insight into the value the agency derives from these processes. The chapter further describes the role of OTPS as an independent advisory office that supports NASA’s efforts to capitalize on foresight and strategic technology planning. We present these examples with consideration for how organizations in defense, security, and other technology-driven industries can operationalize foresight in their own strategic technology development.
Erica Rodgers↗