Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Concept of 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.

At least 595 records · Page 33
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Heroic Reliability Improvement in Manned Space Systems

System reliability can be significantly improved by a strong continued effort to identify and remove all the causes of actual failures. Newly designed systems often have unexpected high failure rates which can be reduced by successive design improvements until the final operational system has an acceptable failure rate. There are many causes of failures and many ways to remove them. New systems may have poor specifications, design errors, or mistaken operations concepts. Correcting unexpected problems as they occur can produce large early gains in reliability. Improved technology in materials, components, and design approaches can increase reliability. The reliability growth is achieved by repeatedly operating the system until it fails, identifying the failure cause, and fixing the problem. The failure rate reduction that can be obtained depends on the number and the failure rates of the correctable failures. Under the strong assumption that the failure causes can be removed, the decline in overall failure rate can be predicted. If a failure occurs at the rate of lambda per unit time, the expected time before the failure occurs and can be corrected is 1/lambda, the Mean Time Before Failure (MTBF). Finding and fixing a less frequent failure with the rate of lambda/2 per unit time requires twice as long, time of 1/(2 lambda). Cutting the failure rate in half requires doubling the test and redesign time and finding and eliminating the failure causes.Reducing the failure rate significantly requires a heroic reliability improvement effort.

life support↗
NASA NTRS2003

Revolutionary Concepts for Human Outer Planet Exploration (HOPE)

This paper summarizes the content of a NASA-led study performed to identify revolutionary concepts and supporting technologies for Human Outer Planet Exploration (HOPE). Callisto, the fourth of Jupiter's Galilean moons, was chosen as the destination for the HOPE study. Assumptions for the Callisto mission include a launch year of 2045 or later, a spacecraft capable of transporting humans to and from Callisto in less than five years, and a requirement to support three humans on the surface for a minimum of 30 days. Analyses performed in support of HOPE include identification of precursor science and technology demonstration missions and development of vehicle concepts for transporting crew and supplies. A complete surface architecture was developed to provide the human crew with a power system, a propellant production plant, a surface habitat, and supporting robotic systems. An operational concept was defined that provides a surface layout for these architecture components, a list of surface tasks, a 30-day timeline, a daily schedule, and a plan for communication from the surface.

Power electronics↗
NASA NTRS2011

International Space Station Water Balance Operations

In November 2008, the Water Regenerative System racks were launched aboard Space Shuttle flight, STS-126 (ULF2) and installed and activated on the International Space Station (ISS). These racks, consisting of the Water Processor Assembly (WPA) and Urine Processor Assembly (UPA), completed the installation of the Regenerative (Regen) Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS), which includes the Oxygen Generation Assembly (OGA) that was launched 2 years prior. With the onset of active water management on the US segment of the ISS, a new operational concept was required, that of water balance . In November of 2010, the Sabatier system, which converts H2 and CO2 into water and methane, was brought on line. The Regen ECLSS systems accept condensation from the atmosphere, urine from crew, and processes that fluid via various means into potable water, which is used for crew drinking, building up skip-cycle water inventory, and water for electrolysis to produce oxygen. Specification (spec) rates of crew urine output, condensate output, O2 requirements, toilet flush water, and drinking needs are well documented and used as the best guess planning rates when Regen ECLSS came online. Spec rates are useful in long term planning, however, daily or weekly rates are dependent upon a number of variables. The constantly changing rates created a new challenge for the ECLSS flight controllers, who are responsible for operating the ECLSS systems onboard ISS from Mission Control in Houston. This paper reviews the various inputs to water planning, rate changes, and dynamic events, including but not limited to: crew personnel makeup, Regen ECLSS system operability, vehicle traffic, water storage availability, and Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA), Sabatier, and OGA capability. Along with the inputs that change the various rates, the paper will review the different systems, their constraints, and finally the operational challenges and means by which flight controllers manage this new concept of "water balance."

Tobias, Barry↗
NASA NTRS1993

Robotic servicing on Earth orbiting satellites

An articulated calibration experiment (ACE) concept study was conducted by GSFC to prove the feasibility of instrument calibration by a resident robot on the EOS spacecraft. This study provided a basis for determining the most suitable robot design and operations concepts required to perform accurate instrument calibration on the EOS platform. During the study, the first-order dynamics of robot walking and docking motions as it moves about were evaluated to determine the accelerations and torques imparted into the spacecraft. The major perturbation to the spacecraft was the effect of robot motion and impact on the EOS platform attitude control system. If not carefully controlled, these levels could exceed the maximum allowable levels. As a result of the EOS/ACE feasibility study, a GSFC robotic ground development effort was established. This effort, as described on the paper, will identify the technology required to resolve issues associated with robot in-space servicing dynamics and its impact on spacecraft and designs. Of primary concern are those relating to robot contact loads, docking of robotic systems on space platforms, and basic motion and mobility.

Ollendorf, Stanford↗
NASA NTRS2009

Rendezvous Integration Complexities of NASA Human Flight Vehicles

Propellant-optimal trajectories, relative sensors and navigation, and docking/capture mechanisms are rendezvous disciplines that receive much attention in the technical literature. However, other areas must be considered. These include absolute navigation, maneuver targeting, attitude control, power generation, software development and verification, redundancy management, thermal control, avionics integration, robotics, communications, lighting, human factors, crew timeline, procedure development, orbital debris risk mitigation, structures, plume impingement, logistics, and in some cases extravehicular activity. While current and future spaceflight programs will introduce new technologies and operations concepts, the complexity of integrating multiple systems on multiple spacecraft will remain. The systems integration task may become more difficult as increasingly complex software is used to meet current and future automation, autonomy, and robotic operation requirements.

Brazzel, Jack P.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Mars Surface Tunnel Element Concept

How crews get into or out of their ascent vehicle has profound implications for Mars surface architecture. Extravehicular Activity (EVA) hatches and Airlocks have the benefit of relatively low mass and high Technology Readiness Level (TRL), but waste consumables with a volume depressurization for every ingress/egress. Perhaps the biggest drawback to EVA hatches or Airlocks is that they make it difficult to keep Martian dust from being tracked back into the ascent vehicle, in violation of planetary protection protocols. Suit ports offer the promise of dust mitigation by keeping dusty suits outside the cabin, but require significant cabin real estate, are relatively high mass, and current operational concepts still require an EVA hatch to get the suits outside for the first EVA, and back inside after the final EVA. This is primarily because current designs don't provide enough structural support to protect the suits from ascent/descent loads or potential thruster plume impingement. For architectures involving more than one surface element-such as an ascent vehicle and a rover or surface habitat-a retractable tunnel is an attractive option. By pushing spacesuit don/doff and EVA operations to an element that remains on the surface, ascended vehicle mass and dust can be minimized. What's more, retractable tunnels provide operational flexibility by allowing surface assets to be re-configured or built up over time. Retractable tunnel functional requirements and design concepts being developed as part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) work will add a new ingress/egress option to the surface architecture trade space.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2008

NASA's Ares I and Ares V Launch Vehicles -- Effective Space Operations Through Efficient Ground Operations

The United States (U.S.) plans to return to the Moon by 2020, with the development of a new human-rated space transportation system to replace the Space Shuttle, which is due for retirement in 2010 after it completes its missions of building the International Space Station and servicing the Hubble Space Telescope. Powering the future of space-based scientific exploration will be the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, which will transport the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle to orbit where it will rendezvous with the Lunar Lander. which will be delivered by the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle. This new transportation infrastructure, developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), will allow astronauts to leave low-Earth orbit for extended lunar exploration and preparation for the first footprint on Mars. All space-based operations begin and are controlled from Earth. NASA's philosophy is to deliver safe, reliable, and cost-effective solutions to sustain a multi-billion-dollar program across several decades. Leveraging 50 years of lessons learned, NASA is partnering with private industry, while building on proven hardware experience. This paper will discuss how the Engineering Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is working with the Ares Projects Office to streamline ground operations concepts and reduce costs. Currently, NASA's budget is around $17 billion, which is less than 1 percent of the U.S. Federal budget. Of this amount, NASA invests approximately $4.5 billion each year in Space Shuttle operations, regardless of whether the spacecraft is flying or not. The affordability requirement is for the Ares I to reduce this expense by 50 percent, in order to allow NASA to invest more in space-based scientific operations. Focusing on this metric, the Engineering Directorate provides several solutions-oriented approaches, including Lean/Six Sigma practices and streamlined hardware testing and integration, such as assembling major hardware elements before shipping to the Kennedy Space Center for launch operations. This paper provides top-level details for several cost saving initiatives, including both process and product improvements that will result in space transportation systems that are designed with operations efficiencies in mind. The Engineering Directorate provides both the intellectual capital embodied in an experienced workforce and unique facilities in which to validate the information technology tools that allow a nationwide team to collaboratively connect across miles that separate them and the engineering disciplines that integrate various piece parts into a whole system. As NASA transforms ground-based operations, it also is transitioning its workforce from an era of intense hands-on labor to a new one of mechanized conveniences and robust hardware with simpler interfaces. Ensuring that space exploration is on sound footing requires that operations efficiencies be designed into the transportation system and implemented in the development stage. Applying experience gained through decades of ground and space op'erations, while using value-added processes and modern business and engineering tools, is the philosophy upon which a new era of exploration will be built to solve some of the most pressing exploration challenges today -- namely, safety, reliability, and affordability.

Dumbacher, Daniel L.↗
NASA NTRS1971

Mechanical/structural design implications of space-basing on shuttle system

A conceptual design study was conducted to identify some of the mechanical/structural differences which result from the use of a tug/payload combination in a space-basing mode as contrasted with a ground-based mode of operation. The basic mechanical/structural differences associated with space-basing were identified by analyzing a space-basing strategy in which the tug and payload are launched separately by the EOS and comparing it with the ground-based mode in which the tug/payload is launched as an integral unit in the EOS. This operational concept, which is the simplest of a number of possible space-basing strategies, was also used to identify the major impacts on the Earth Orbit Shuttle. The mechanical/structural differences that were identified from a comparison of payloads operating in the ground and space-based modes of operation are discussed in addition to delineating the advantages and disadvantages associated with various payload deployment/retrieval mechanisms.

Ludlow, K. G.↗
NASA NTRS1995

A Collection of Technical Papers

Papers presented at the 6th Space Logistics Symposium covered such areas as: The International Space Station; The Hubble Space Telescope; Launch site computer simulation; Integrated logistics support; The Baikonur Cosmodrome; Probabalistic tools for high confidence repair; A simple space station rescue vehicle; Integrated Traffic Model for the International Space Station; Packaging the maintenance shop; Leading edge software support; Storage information management system; Consolidated maintenance inventory logistics planning; Operation concepts for a single stage to orbit vehicle; Mission architecture for human lunar exploration; Logistics of a lunar based solar power satellite scenario; Just in time in space; NASA acquisitions/logistics; Effective transition management; Shuttle logistics; and Revitalized space operations through total quality control management.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2009

Initial Concept for Terminal Area Conflict Detection, Alerting, and Resolution Capability on or Near the Airport Surface

The Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) concept for 2025 envisions the movement of large numbers of people and goods in a safe, efficient, and reliable manner. The NextGen will remove many of the constraints in the current air transportation system, support a wider range of operations, and deliver an overall system capacity up to 3 times that of current operating levels. In order to achieve the NextGen vision, research is necessary in the areas of surface traffic optimization, maximum runway capacity, reduced runway occupancy time, simultaneous single runway operations, and terminal area conflict prevention, among others. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is conducting Collision Avoidance for Airport Traffic (CAAT) research to develop technologies, data, and guidelines to enable Conflict Detection and Resolution (CD&R) in the Airport Terminal Maneuvering Area (ATMA) under current and emerging NextGen operating concepts. In this report, an initial concept for an aircraft-based method for CD&R in the ATMA is presented. This method is based upon previous NASA work in CD&R for runway incursion prevention, the Runway Incursion Prevention System (RIPS). CAAT research is conducted jointly under NASA's Airspace Systems Program, Airportal Project and the Aviation Safety Program, Integrated Intelligent Flight Deck Project.

Green, David F.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Common Methodology for Efficient Airspace Operations

Topics include: a) Developing a common methodology to model and avoid disturbances affecting airspace. b) Integrated contrails and emission models to a national level airspace simulation. c) Developed capability to visualize, evaluate technology and alternate operational concepts and provide inputs for policy-analysis tools to reduce the impact of aviation on the environment. d) Collaborating with Volpe Research Center, NOAA and DLR to leverage expertise and tools in aircraft emissions and weather/climate modeling. Airspace operations is a trade-off balancing safety, capacity, efficiency and environmental considerations. Ideal flight: Unimpeded wind optimal route with optimal climb and descent. Operations degraded due to reduction in airport and airspace capacity caused by inefficient procedures and disturbances.

Sridhar, Banavar↗
NASA NTRS2015

Avionics Configuration Assessment for Flightdeck Interval Management: A Comparison of Avionics and Notification Methods

Flightdeck Interval Management is one of the NextGen operational concepts that FAA is sponsoring to realize requisite National Airspace System (NAS) efficiencies. Interval Management will reduce variability in temporal deviations at a position, and thereby reduce buffers typically applied by controllers - resulting in higher arrival rates, and more efficient operations. Ground software generates a strategic schedule of aircraft pairs. Air Traffic Control (ATC) provides an IM clearance with the IM spacing objective (i.e., the TTF, and at which point to achieve the appropriate spacing from this aircraft) to the IM aircraft. Pilots must dial FIM speeds into the speed window on the Mode Control Panel in a timely manner, and attend to deviations between actual speed and the instantaneous FIM profile speed. Here, the crew is assumed to be operating the aircraft with autothrottles on, with autopilot engaged, and the autoflight system in Vertical Navigation (VNAV) and Lateral Navigation (LNAV); and is responsible for safely flying the aircraft while maintaining situation awareness of their ability to follow FIM speed commands and to achieve the FIM spacing goal. The objective of this study is to examine whether three Notification Methods and four Avionics Conditions affect pilots' performance, ratings on constructs associated with performance (workload, situation awareness), or opinions on acceptability. Three Notification Methods (alternate visual and aural alerts that notified pilots to the onset of a speed target, conformance deviation from the required speed profile, and reminded them if they failed to enter the speed within 10 seconds) were examined. These Notification Methods were: VVV (visuals for all three events), VAV (visuals for all three events, plus an aural for speed conformance deviations), and AAA (visual indications and the same aural to indicate all three of these events). Avionics Conditions were defined by the instrumentation (and location) used to present IM information to crews: (1) Integrated (IM information is embedded in extant PFD (Primary Flight Display), ND (Navigation Display), EICAS (Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System) displays); (2) EFB_Aft (IM information is only supplied in an EFB and mounted in location similar to that for MITRE's UPS work); (3) EFB_Fore (IM information is only supplied in an EFB which is mounted more forward, under the side window), and (4) EFB_Aft plus use of an AGD (the same IM information is supplied in an EFB and on an AGD, both mounted in locations similar to that in MITRE's UPS work ). Twelve commercial pilot crews flew descent scenarios (VNAV Speed with the mode control panel (MCP) speed window open until flaps extended, then VNAV Path) in a commercial transport flight simulator with realistic visual scene and communications. The results of this study serve three practical aims: (1) contribute to the down-select of avionics configuration for future assessment of the ASTAR spacing algorithm at NASA; (2) provide information useful to the FAA Human Factors Division (ANG-C1)'s mission to identify issues pertinent to flight certification of, and flight standards; (3) identify methodological considerations in support of future FIM human-in-the-loop (HITL) investigations.

Latorella, Kara A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

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

Mark E Lewis↗
NASA NTRS1996

Trans-Global Mission Architectures

Mission operations utilizes both space and ground resources to achieve mission objectives. As scientists not located near the mission command center are likely to experience long delays in the delivery of the data from their instruments, the design, development, and operation of the spacecraft and of mission operations around a single operational concept which has been derived from the mission objectives will create a virtual presence for the investigator at the spacecraft and the instruments.

mission↗
NASA NTRS2012

Missions to Near-Earth Asteroids: Implications for Exploration, Science, Resource Utilization, and Planetary Defense

Introduction: In 2009 the Augustine Commission identified near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) as high profile destinations for human exploration missions beyond the Earth-Moon system as part of the Flexible Path. More recently the U.S. presidential administration directed NASA to include NEAs as destinations for future human exploration with the goal of sending astronauts to a NEA in the mid to late 2020s. This directive became part of the official National Space Policy of the United States of America as of June 28, 2010. NEA Space-Based Survey and Robotic Precursor Missions: The most suitable targets for human missions are NEAs in Earth-like orbits with long synodic periods. However, these mission candidates are often not observable from Earth until the timeframe of their most favorable human mission opportunities, which does not provide an appropriate amount of time for mission development. A space-based survey telescope could more efficiently find these targets in a timely, affordable manner. Such a system is not only able to discover new objects, but also track and characterize objects of interest for human space flight consideration. Those objects with characteristic signatures representative of volatile-rich or metallic materials will be considered as top candidates for further investigation due to their potential for resource utilization and scientific discovery. Once suitable candidates have been identified, precursor spacecraft are required to perform basic reconnaissance of a few NEAs under consideration for the human-led mission. Robotic spacecraft will assess targets for potential hazards that may pose a risk to the deep space transportation vehicle, its deployable assets, and the crew. Additionally, the information obtained about the NEA's basic physical characteristics will be crucial for planning operational activities, designing in-depth scientific/engineering investigations, and identifying sites on the NEA for sample collection. Human Exploration Considerations: These missions would be the first human expeditions to interplanetary bodies beyond the Earth-Moon system and would prove useful for testing technologies required for human missions to Mars, Phobos and Deimos, and other Solar System destinations. Current analyses of operational concepts suggest that stay times of 15 to 30 days may be possible at a NEA with total mission duration limits of 180 days or less. Hence, these missions would undoubtedly provide a great deal of technical and engineering data on spacecraft operations for future human space exploration while simultaneously conducting detailed investigations of these primitive objects with instruments and equipment that exceed the mass and power capabilities delivered by robotic spacecraft. All of these activities will be vital for refinement of resource characterization/identification and development of extraction/utilization technologies to be used on airless bodies under low- or micro-gravity conditions. In addition, gaining enhanced understanding of a NEA s geotechnical properties and its gross internal structure will assist the development of hazard mitigation techniques for planetary defense. Conclusions: The scientific, resource utilization, and hazard mitigation benefits, along with the programmatic and operational benefits of a human venture beyond the Earth-Moon system, make a piloted sample return mission to a NEA using NASA s proposed human exploration systems a compelling endeavor.

Abell, P. A.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Mission Architecture Comparison for Human Lunar Exploration

The Vision for Space Exploration outlines a bold new national space exploration policy that holds as one of its primary objectives the extension of human presence outward into the Solar System, starting with a return to the Moon in preparation for the future exploration of Mars and beyond. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is currently engaged in several preliminary analysis efforts in order to develop the requirements necessary for implementing this objective in a manner that is both sustainable and affordable. Such analyses investigate various operational concepts, or mission architectures , by which humans can best travel to the lunar surface, live and work there for increasing lengths of time, and then return to Earth. This paper reports on a trade study conducted in support of NASA s Exploration Systems Mission Directorate investigating the relative merits of three alternative lunar mission architecture strategies. The three architectures use for reference a lunar exploration campaign consisting of multiple 90-day expeditions to the Moon s polar regions, a strategy which was selected for its high perceived scientific and operational value. The first architecture discussed incorporates the lunar orbit rendezvous approach employed by the Apollo lunar exploration program. This concept has been adapted from Apollo to meet the particular demands of a long-stay polar exploration campaign while assuring the safe return of crew to Earth. Lunar orbit rendezvous is also used as the baseline against which the other alternate concepts are measured. The first such alternative, libration point rendezvous, utilizes the unique characteristics of the cislunar libration point instead of a low altitude lunar parking orbit as a rendezvous and staging node. Finally, a mission strategy which does not incorporate rendezvous after the crew ascends from the Moon is also studied. In this mission strategy, the crew returns directly to Earth from the lunar surface, and is thus referred to as direct return. Figures of merit in the areas of safety and mission success, mission effectiveness, extensibility, and affordability are used to evaluate and compare the lunar orbit rendezvous, libration point rendezvous, and direct return architectures, and this paper summarizes the results of those assessments.

Geffre, Jim↗
NASA NTRS2018

Nasa's Launch Communications Ground Segment for the 21st Century Florida Spaceport

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Near Earth Network (NEN) Project is implementing a new launch communications ground segment to provide services for the next generation of human and robotic space exploration systems. It will deliver unique and advanced capabilities to accelerate the transformation of Kennedy Space Center into a multi-user spaceport in cooperation with the United States Air Force (USAF). The project has leveraged commercial technologies and remote operations concepts matured in NASAs orbiting satellite ground systems to achieve dramatic lifecycle cost efficiencies as compared to the space shuttle-era ground segment. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the development history, capabilities and anticipated use cases of the NEN Launch Communications Segment (NEN LCS).The NASA Kennedy Space Center is co-located with the USAF Eastern Launch Range at Cape Canaveral, Florida. The USAF operates two launch communications ground stations, but they are not designed to transmit voice, commands or other data to the launch vehicle or astronauts. The bi-directional uplink-downlink communications responsibility for human missions has historically resided with the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. Several market analyses and feasibility studies investigating concepts to provide NASAs next generation launch communications services were performed during the Constellation Program prior to its cancellation in 2009, and as part of the Kennedy Space Centers follow-on efforts to transform itself into a 21st century multi-user spaceport. In 2012, the Kennedy Space Center and the USAF 45th Space Wing jointly led a study to analyze the market needs of current and future launch systems and assess the operational deficiencies of the Eastern Range infrastructure. The study team issued several recommendations, two of which ultimately became driving operational capability requirements for the NEN LCS: increased telemetry data rates of at least 20 Mbps, and S-band uplink capability. Additional capabilities identified in the requirements development process include spread spectrum modulation support, LDPC 12 and 78 error correction codes, support for IRIG-106 and CCSDS data formats, automated best source selection, and Space Link Extension (SLE) services for data distribution. The NEN LCS is comprised of two permanent ground stations, the new Kennedy Uplink Station (KUS) and refurbished Ponce de Leon (PDL) station. Both stations are remotely operated from the Global Monitor and Control Center at Wallops Flight Facility. This core architecture is extensible through host-tenant arrangements with the U.S. Air Force and deployable assets, enabling agile, tailored and robust solutions to meet the needs of civil, commercial or military customers. The NEN LCS has three use cases:1.To provide agile, tailored and robust launch communications solutions to Florida spaceport customers2.To provide orbital communications services to near-earth customers 3.To provide an experimental proving ground for Space Mobile Network concepts and technologies The NEN LCS driving mission is to support the bi-directional link with the Orion crew capsule and two 20 Mbps telemetry links from the Space Launch System core stage on Exploration Mission-1, the first integrated flight of NASAs flagship human exploration systems.

Roberts, Christopher J.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Pilot Subjective Assessments During an Investigation of Separation Function Allocation Using a Human-In-The-Loop Simulation

Two human-in-the-loop simulation experiments were conducted to investigate allocation of separation assurance functions between ground and air and between humans and automation. The experiments modeled a mixed-operations concept in which aircraft receiving ground-based separation services shared the airspace with aircraft providing their own separation service (i.e., self-separation). The two experiments, one pilot-focused and the other controller-focused, addressed selected key issues of mixed operations and modeling an emergence of NextGen technologies and procedures. This paper focuses on the results of the subjective assessments of pilots collected during the pilot-focused human-in-the-loop simulation, specifically workload and situation awareness. Generally the results revealed that across all conditions, pilots' perceived workload was low to medium, with the highest reported levels of workload occurring when the pilots experienced a loss of separation during the scenario. Furthermore, the results from the workload data and situation awareness data were complimentary such that when pilots reported lower levels of workload they also experienced higher levels of situation awareness.

Burke, Kelly A.↗