SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Commercial Crew”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Industry Initiated Core Safety Attributes for Human Spaceflight for the 7th IAASS Conference

Now that the NASA Commercial Crew Program (CCP) is beginning its full certification contract for crew transportation to the International Space Station (ISS), is it time for industry to embrace a minimum set of core safety attributes? Those attributes can then be evolved into an industry-led set of basic safety standards and requirements. After 50 years of human space travel sponsored by governments, there are two basic conditions that now exist within the international space industry. The first, there is enough of a space-faring history to encourage the space industry to design, develop and operate human spaceflight systems without government contracts for anything other than services. Second, industry is capable of defining and enforcing a set of industry-based safety attributes and standards for human spaceflight to low-Earth orbit (LEO). This paper will explore both of these basic conditions with a focus on the safety attributes and standards. In the United States, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is now starting to dialogue with industry about the basic safety principles and attributes needed for potential future regulatory oversight. This process is not yet formalized and will take a number of years once approval is given to move forward. Therefore, throughout the next few years, it is an excellent time and opportunity for industry to collaborate together and develop the core set of attributes and standards. As industry engages and embraces a common set of safety attributes, then government agencies, like the FAA and NASA can use that industry-based product to strengthen their efforts on a safe commercial spaceflight foundation for the future. As the commercial space industry takes the lead role in establishing core safety attributes, and then enforcing those attributes, the entire planet can move away from governmental control of design and development and let industry expand safe and successful space operations in LEO. At that point the governmental agencies can focus on oversight of the industries' defined standards and enforcement for common welfare of the space-faring populous and overall public safety.

crew transportation↗

NASA NTRS2010

COTS/CRS: KSC Evolving Host Initiatives with Commercial Space Partners

NASA's Commercial Crew and Cargo Program Office (C3PO) leads the agency's commercial efforts to stimulate United States private companies as the shuttle program comes to a close. Through the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program, two companies, SpaceX and Orbital, were selected to demonstrate their ability to perform flights to the International Space Station. The Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) Project leverages off the COTS experience, and awarded these two private companies contracts to resupply the International Space Station after shuttle fly out. As a 2010 summer intern, I supported the COTS/CRS team in their team meetings, attended and contributed to project discussions and planning, and assisted in developing visual representations for the variety of processes and organizational endeavors required for the program to run smoothly. One aspect of the COTS/CRS program gives the involved private companies the opportunity to request available services from Kennedy Space Center (KSC); one of my projects included assisting in the development of a related Task Order Request (TOR) process. In addition, an integral part of the project was to maintain and enhance the team database for processing the variety of TORS. My experience in the project gave me great insight into the growing field of commercial space activities. The development of the TOR process involved coordinating representatives from a variety of backgrounds at KSC. A clear and concise visual representation of the TOR process in the form of a flow chart was necessary to successfully implement a task order request from one of NASA's commercial partners. The goals of the process charts were to communicate the team's ideas and foster a common thought process while at the same time allow the process to grow and evolve. It was critical that the requests from the private companies were addressed quickly and thoroughly as the process developed this summer is expected to have extensive future use.

Yohpe, Megan↗

NASA NTRS2011

Kennedy Space Center - "America's Gateway to Space"

KSC fits into the overall NASA vision and mission by moving forward so that what we do and learn will benefit all here on Earth. In January of last year, KSC revised its Mission and Vision statements to articulate our identity as we align with this new direction the Agency is heading. Currently KSC is endeavoring to form partnerships with industry, , Government, and academia, utilizing institutional assets and technical capabilities to support current and future m!issions. With a goal of safe, low-cost, and readily available access to space, KSC seeks to leverage emerging industries to initiate development of a new space launch system, oversee the development of a multipurpose crew vehicle, and assist with the efficient and timely evolution of commercial crew transportation capabilities. At the same time, KSC is pursuing modernizing the Center's infrastructure and creating a multi-user launch complex with increased onsite processing and integration capabilities.

Petro, Janet↗

NASA NTRS2024

Loads and Structural Dynamics Requirements for Spaceflight Hardware

The NASA Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate requires Crewed Space Systems (CSS) to meet the intent of a set of Engineering Technical Authority (TA) documents called out in HEOMD-003, Crewed Deep Space Systems Human Rating Certification Requirements and Standards for NASA Missions. For the Loads and Dynamics technical discipline, the document invoked by the HEOMD-003 is JSC 65829, Loads and Structural Dynamics Requirements for Spaceflight Hardware. JSC 65829 was originally developed for the NASA Commercial Crew Program as an implementation of NASA STD-5002, Load Analyses of Spacecraft and Payloads, for that Program. Since that time, tailored alternatives to JSC 65829 have been produced for the Gateway, Human Landing System, and Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Programs. Experience with those Programs has shown that the reduced set of less-prescriptive requirements in those tailored documents offers an advantage over the set of requirements in JSC 65829 Rev A and is a better fit for the paradigm of NASA procurement of commercially developed systems for crewed spaceflight. Revision B of JSC 65829 has been constructed to align with those tailored documents. The reduction in the number and specificity of requirements is balanced by a new requirement for hardware developers to create and provide a Loads Control Plan which describes how the approaches used to generate design-to loads and dynamic environments and substantiate dynamic model validity satisfy the requirements herein. The Plan will establish an agreement between the hardware developer and the TA for the loads and dynamics discipline and offer an opportunity for reengagement if the Plan changes during development.

Kenneth Schultz↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Near-Term Policy Considerations for Lunar Missions

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

Therese Jones↗

NASA NTRS2020

Recommendations on Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions

The NASA Electronic Parts & Packaging Program Manager, requested a NASA Engineering and Safety Center independent assessment to summarize Commercial Crew Program and NASA Centers’ current and best practices, and lessons learned, on use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) for all mission risk classifications, and provide recommendations that could lead to future NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging Program and/or Agency guidance on COTS parts. This document contains the outcome of the assessment.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗

NASA NTRS2024

Ensuring Safety of Government Personnel During Suborbital Spaceflight

The NASA Suborbital Crew (SubC) project is focused on enabling flights by NASA civil servants, such as scientists and engineers conducting research, on suborbital vehicles. A broader goal is ensuring that commercial human spaceflight is both viable and safe. Within the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), the SubC project is exploring game-changing methods to perform safety assessments to enable NASA personnel to fly on suborbital missions. Commercial suborbital space flight capabilities are anticipated to be more accessible, affordable, and available than missions to the International Space Station and could provide additional opportunities for testing and qualification of space flight hardware, human-tended microgravity research, and further cutting-edge research enabled by the space environment. Although NASA currently permits human tended suborbital payloads for non-civil servants under auspices of NASA’s Flight Opportunities Program, the SubC effort will enable civil servant scientists, researchers, and even engineers to accompany their experiments and tests into the space microgravity environment. Figure 1 illustrates how the SubC program complements other microgravity experimental platforms. The targeted scope for SubC includes end-to-end suborbital capabilities reaching ~80km with several minutes of sustained microgravity (Table 1). The NASA SubC project office is working with the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA-AST) and the commercial suborbital space transportation industry to develop an efficient and holistic approach to a safety review and eventual government participation in suborbital flight. The current FAA certification process for suborbital launches is congressionally mandated to only consider public safety. NASA is responsible for understanding the risks to its employees should they fly on a commercially available suborbital flight. The SubC project is employing a Safety Case approach, applied to commercial suborbital providers, which is not a traditional certification process as was used for the SpaceX Dragon and Boeing Starliner vehicles. Rather, it is an assessment using elements of NASA’s Risk-Informed Safety Case and the Armstrong Flight Research Center’s Airworthiness Assessment process.

Elizabeth C Blome↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Ensuring Safety of Government Personnel During Suborbital Spaceflight

The NASA Suborbital Crew (SubC) office is focused on enabling flights by NASA civil servants, such as scientists and engineers conducting research, on suborbital vehicles. A broader goal is ensuring that commercial human spaceflight is both viable and safe. Within the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), the SubC office is exploring game-changing methods to perform safety assessments to enable NASA personnel to fly on suborbital missions. Commercial suborbital space flight capabilities are anticipated to be more accessible, affordable, and available than missions to the International Space Station and could provide additional opportunities for testing and qualification of space flight hardware, human-tended microgravity research, and further cutting-edge research enabled by the space environment. Although NASA currently supports human tended suborbital payloads for non-civil servants under auspices of NASA’s Flight Opportunities Program, the SubC effort will enable civil servant scientists, researchers, and engineers to accompany their experiments and tests into the space microgravity environment.

Risk Management↗

NASA NTRS2022

The Standardization of In-space and Surface Docking Systems

The International Docking System Standard (IDSS) was developed and establish to aid on-orbit crew rescue and joint operations between different spacecraft. For the International Space Station (ISS), the IDSS has successfully enabled Global interoperability for Commercial Crew and it is now being extended to the Artemis campaign. Similarly, as more companies, agencies, and nations announce their intentions to explore and occupy Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and Cis-Lunar space, including the Lunar surface, it is a natural supposition that new, vehicle interface standards will be required to support the build-up of infrastructure for campaign-based exploration or permanent occupation by national and multi-national Agencies, Industries, and Companies. A surface version of the IDSS, a.k.a. IDSS-Surface (IDSS-S), is under consideration at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) by the docking discipline leads responsible for the leadership of technical development and negotiation of the original IDSS over a decade ago. The IDSS-S, like its predecessor, will ultimately detail the physical geometric mating interface and design load requirements to ensure physical interoperability and to support a broad set of design reference missions which, if accommodated, increases the probability of successful Lunar surface docking between different modules enabling the accessibility and inclusivity required for multi-national, sustainable Lunar exploration.

Docking↗

NASA NTRS2017

The Opportunity in Commercial Approaches for Future NASA Deep Space Exploration Elements

In 2011, NASA released a report assessing the market for commercial crew and cargo services to low Earth orbit (LEO). The report stated that NASA had spent a few hundred million dollars in the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program on the portion related to the development of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Yet a NASA cost model predicted the cost would have been significantly more with a non-commercial cost-plus contracting approach. By 2016 a NASA request for information stated it must "maximize the efficiency and sustainability of the Exploration Systems development programs", as "critical to free resources for reinvestment...such as other required deep space exploration capabilities." This work joins the previous two events, showing the potential for commercial, public private partnerships, modeled on programs like COTS, to reduce the cost to NASA significantly for "...other required deep space exploration capabilities." These other capabilities include landers, stages and more. We mature the concept of "costed baseball cards", adding cost estimates to NASA's space systems "baseball cards." We show some potential costs, including analysis, the basis of estimates, data sources and caveats to address a critical question - based on initial assessment, are significant agency resources justified for more detailed analysis and due diligence to understand and invest in public private partnerships for human deep space exploration systems? The cost analysis spans commercial to cost-plus contracting approaches, for smaller elements vs. larger, with some variation for lunar or Mars. By extension, we delve briefly into the potentially much broader significance of the individual cost estimates if taken together as a NASA investment portfolio where public private partnership are stitched together for deep space exploration. How might multiple improvements in individual systems add up to NASA human deep space exploration achievements, realistically, affordably, sustainably, in a relevant timeframe?

cost modeling estimation↗

NASA NTRS2015

Center Planning and Development: Multi-User Spaceport Initiatives

The Vehicle Assembly building at NASAs Kennedy Space Center has been used since 1966 to vertically assemble every launch vehicle, since the Apollo Program, launched from Launch Complex 39 (LC-39). After the cancellation of the Constellation Program in 2010 and the retirement of the Space Shuttle Program in 2011, the VAB faced an uncertain future. As the Space Launch System (SLS) gained a foothold as the future of American spaceflight to deep space, NASA was only using a portion of the VABs initial potential. With three high bays connected to the Crawler Way transportation system, the potential exists for up to three rockets to be simultaneously processed for launch. The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Master plan, supported by the Center Planning and Development (CPD) Directorate, is guiding Kennedy toward a 21st century multi-user spaceport. This concept will maintain Kennedy as the United States premier gateway to space and provide multi-user operations through partnerships with the commercial aerospace industry. Commercial aerospace companies, now tasked with transporting cargo and, in the future, astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) via the Commercial Resupply Service (CRS) and Commercial Crew Program (CCP), are a rapidly growing industry with increasing capabilities to make launch operations more economical for both private companies and the government. Commercial operations to Low Earth Orbit allow the government to focus on travel to farther destinations through the SLS Program. With LC-39B designated as a multi-use launch pad, companies seeking to use it will require an integration facility to assemble, integrate, and test their launch vehicle. An Announcement for Proposals (AFP) was released in June, beginning the process of finding a non-NASA user for High Bay 2 (HB2) and the Mobile Launcher Platforms (MLPs). An Industry Day, a business meeting and tour for interested companies and organizations, was also arranged to identify and answer any additional questions posed by potential proposers. After amending the AFP and posting additional material for potential users to consider, proposals are being accepted until July 31, at which point they will be evaluated to determine the proposer which best meets the objectives of the government. By identifying VAB HB2 as available and seeking proposals from the commercial sector for VAB HB2 and MLP use, Center Planning and Development is ensuring Kennedy Space Centers relevance in the evolving launch industry of the 21st century.

AFP↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Langley Aerothermodynamics Laboratory: Hypersonic Testing Capabilities

A description of the NASA Langley Research Center’s Langley Aerothermodynamics Laboratory (LAL) will be presented in the paper, along with descriptions and details of the facility test techniques and recent upgrades. The LAL consists of three hypersonic blow-down wind tunnels covering Mach numbers of 6 and 10 and unit Reynolds number ranges of 0.5 to 8.3 million per foot as well as a 60-ft Vacuum Sphere Test Chamber. LAL facilities are used to study and define the aerodynamic performance and aeroheating characteristics of flight vehicle concepts. Data collected in the facilities have been used for design and optimization, anchoring computational predictions, generation of aerodynamic databases and design of Thermal Protection Systems. Over the years modifications and enhancements have been made to the facility hardware and instrumentation to increase efficiency, data quality, capabilities and reliability to better meet the programmatic requirements. Recent utilization information illustrates the need for the capabilities associated with these facilities. Recent test programs include the Space Shuttle Program, Crew Exploration Vehicle/Orion/Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, Hypersonic International Flight Research Experimentation (HIFiRE), Mars Science Laboratory, Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator System (HIADS) and X-51 among others and usage has been split between NASA, Commercial Crew, Department of Defense and private company programs. Plans for future improvements to the facility infrastructure and instrumentation will also be presented.

Karen Berger↗

NASA NTRS2010

NASA Astronauts on Soyuz: Experience and Lessons for the Future

The U. S., Russia, and, China have each addressed the question of human-rating spacecraft. NASA's operational experience with human-rating primarily resides with Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Space Shuttle, and International Space Station. NASA s latest developmental experience includes Constellation, X38, X33, and the Orbital Space Plane. If domestic commercial crew vehicles are used to transport astronauts to and from space, Soyuz is another example of methods that could be used to human-rate a spacecraft and to work with commercial spacecraft providers. For Soyuz, NASA's normal assurance practices were adapted. Building on NASA's Soyuz experience, this report contends all past, present, and future vehicles rely on a range of methods and techniques for human-rating assurance, the components of which include: requirements, conceptual development, prototype evaluations, configuration management, formal development reviews (safety, design, operations), component/system ground-testing, integrated flight tests, independent assessments, and launch readiness reviews. When constraints (cost, schedule, international) limit the depth/breadth of one or more preferred assurance means, ways are found to bolster the remaining areas. This report provides information exemplifying the above safety assurance model for consideration with commercial or foreign-government-designed spacecraft. Topics addressed include: U.S./Soviet-Russian government/agency agreements and engineering/safety assessments performed with lessons learned in historic U.S./Russian joint space ventures

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2016

Flat H Frangible Joint Evolution

Space vehicle staging and separation events require pyrotechnic devices. They are single-use mechanisms that cannot be tested, nor can failure-tolerant performance be demonstrated in actual flight articles prior to flight use. This necessitates the implementation of a robust design and test approach coupled with a fully redundant, failure-tolerant explosive mechanism to ensure that the system functions even in the event of a single failure. Historically, NASA has followed the single failure-tolerant (SFT) design philosophy for all human-rated spacecraft, including the Space Shuttle Program. Following the end of this program, aerospace companies proposed building the next generation human-rated vehicles with off-the-shelf, non-redundant, zero-failure-tolerant (ZFT) separation systems. Currently, spacecraft and launch vehicle providers for both the Orion and Commercial Crew Programs (CCPs) plan to deviate from the heritage safety approach and NASA's SFT human rating requirements. Both programs' partners have base-lined ZFT frangible joints for vehicle staging and fairing separation. These joints are commercially available from pyrotechnic vendors. Non-human-rated missions have flown them numerous times. The joints are relatively easy to integrate structurally within the spacecraft. In addition, the separation event is debris free, and the resultant pyro shock is lower than that of other design solutions. It is, however, a serious deficiency to lack failure tolerance. When used for critical applications on human-rated vehicles, a single failure could potentially lead to loss of crew (LOC) or loss of mission (LOM)). The Engineering and Safety & Mission Assurance directorates within the NASA Johnson Space Center took action to address this safety issue by initiating a project to develop a fully redundant, SFT frangible joint design, known as the Flat H. Critical to the ability to retrofit on launch vehicles being developed, the SFT mechanisms must fit within the same three-dimensional envelope as current designs as well as meet structural loads requirements. There is increased mass associated with the redundant design, and the goal is to minimize the weight impact as much as possible. These requirements presented significant challenges, both technically and financially; these challenges will be explored in this paper. Perhaps greater than the technical issues confronted during this design process, were the financial considerations. These were a significant part of the story of this design and development plan. Insufficient financial and labor resources were formidable barriers to completing this project. Nevertheless, JSC personnel successfully conducted several test series at JSC with very useful results. The many lessons learned drove design improvements, performance efficiency, and increased functional reliability. This paper examines the significant technical and financial challenges that these requirements posed to the project team. It discusses the evolution of the SFT frangible joint design, including optimization, testing, and successful partnering of the Johnson Space Center (JSC) engineering and JSC safety organizations, to enhance the flight safety margin for America's next generation of human-rated space vehicles.

Diegelman, Thomas E.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Future Concepts for Integrating the Space Launch System and the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle into a Reusable Space Transportation Infrastructure

A space transportation infrastructure is described that utilizes the Space Launch System (SLS), the Mulit-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), the International Space Station (ISS), and propellant depot servicing platforms to support all foreseeable missions in the Earth-Moon vicinity and deep space out to Mars. The infrastructure utilizes current expendable launch vehicle (ELV) systems such as the Delta IV Heavy, Atlas V, and Falcon 9, for commercial crew, cargo, and propellant launches to a Low-Earth-Orbit (LEO) Depot and/or the ISS. The SLS provides all payload and propellant launches to the Earth-Moon Langrange Point 1 (EML1) Depot to support new reusable in-space transportation vehicles. The ISS or follow-on LEO Depot supports missions to Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO) for satellite servicing and to Earth-Moon L1 for EML1 Depot missions. The EML1 Depot supports Lunar, Earth-Sun L2 (ESL2), Asteroid, and Mars missions. New vehicle design concepts are presented that can be launched utilizing the SLS and current ELV systems. These new reusable vehicle concepts include a Crew Transfer Vehicle (CTV) derived from the MPCV and a reusable Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (CPS) for crew transportation between the LEO Depot, EML1 Depot and missions beyond the Earth-Moon vicinity; a new reusable Lunar Lander for crew transportation between the EML1 Depot and the lunar surface; and a new reusable Deep Space Habitat (DSH) with a CTV to support crew missions from the EML1 Depot to ESL2, Asteroids, and a Mars Orbital Depot. The LEO Depot, EML1 Depot, and Mars Orbital Depot are based on International Space Station (ISS) heritage hardware. Data provided includes the number of launches required for each mission utilizing SLS and current ELV systems (Delta IV Heavy or equivalent) and the approximate vehicle masses and propellant requirements. Also included is a discussion on affordability with ideas on technologies that could reduce the number of launches required and thoughts on how this infrastructure might be implemented incrementally over the next few decades. The potential benefits of this infrastructure include competitive bidding for ELV flights and propellant services, development of new reusable in-space vehicles, and development of a robust multiuse infrastructure that can support many government and commercial missions simultaneously.

Smitherman, David↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Developments of Thermal Protection Materials to Enable Lower Cost Space Missions

Introduction: Starting with the Commercial Crew Program, a new paradigm has emerged at NASA. Rather than designing rockets and spacecrafts for every mission optimized to achieve science, NASA has begun to use a service-based model and utilizing public-private partnership in developing the vehicles that can bring broader benefits as well as lower the cost for NASA missions. Commercial companies own and operate those vehicles. This allows NASA to not design missions from the bottom up, and has cost, risk, and schedule savings implications. On the other side, the constraints require meeting the requirements in terms of mass, volume, power, etc. By leveraging NASA developed technologies, commercial companies can quickly demonstrate the commercial mission concept, and, through technology transfer, adopt needed technology to address supply chain problems. A downside is that the technology has to be sufficiently mature to be transferred by NASA, which means that it requires significant investment, expertise, and time to develop. Space entities are focused on rapid development with an emphasis on manufacturing and integration innovation with reduced cost and schedule and quick entrance into the market. Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are mission critical, but their development takes years, and involve access to arc jets or unique test facilities. Therefore, their development is both risky and investment heavy. NASA ARC developed several new TPS materials over the last decade (C-PICA, HEEET, 3MDCP, 3DMAT, ADEPT woven TPS) and brought them to high TPS maturity, making them enablers for commercials space missions from LEO, Lunar Sample Return, Mars, and Venus missions. LEO missions are relevant to future Mars missions due to the comparable entry conditions. External Partners' Missions: C-PICA is a recent improvement on NASA’s heritage PICA lightweight TPS ablator. C-PICA is now considered an enabling technology for New Frontiers and other NASA missions. C-PICA was infused into several missions from external partners. Varda Space Industries’ Winnebago-1 spacecraft successfully returned to Earth from LEO on Feb. 21st, 2024, using a C-PICA heatshield. Inversion Space’s Ray vehicle will test both ARC’s C-PICA and SIRCA TPS materials on a LEO return mission later in 2024. The Kentucky Re-Entry Probe Experiment (KREPE) is another example of a low-cost flight experiment to demonstrate the use of small entry capsules to gather data with three instrumented Kentucky Re-entry and Universal Payload System (KRUPS) capsules. NASA Arc provided C-PICA and Soft-PICA for two of the next KRUPS capsules scheduled to re-enter Earth from the ISS later in 2024. Finally, Rocket Lab’s low-cost mission to Venus, scheduled to launch in December 2024, will search for habitable conditions in Venus’ cloud layer, making use of NASA ARC provided HEEET insulation layer heat shield, and SIRCA backshell TPS materials. Future NASA Missions: NASA’s ability to help commercial missions can lead to future low-cost missions for several reasons: Competition encourages lower cost; technology maturation is now done at an integrated system level; and a common design architecture between commercial and scientific applications requires no specialized engineering design. From an engineering perspective, both of these commercial LEO capsules aforementioned are capable of a Mars entry; the commercial payload mut be replaced with as science payload. Finally, several NASA mission concepts, that could be candidates for future SIMPLEx program calls, such as VATMOS-SR and Nephele, both proposing to target the Venusian atmosphere, would make use of the HEEET insulation layer TPS for part of their heat shield.

TPS materials↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Developments of Thermal Protection Materials to Enable Lower Cost Space Missions

TPS materials↗

NASA NTRS2011

Enabling Exploration Through the International Docking System Standard

Human exploration missions beyond low earth orbit will likely require international cooperation in order to leverage limited resources. International standards can help enable cooperative missions by providing well understood, predefined interfaces allowing compatibility between unique spacecraft and systems. The International Space Station (ISS) partnership has developed a publically available International Docking System Standard (IDSS) that provides a solution to one of these key interfaces by defining a common docking interface. The docking interface provides a way for even dissimilar spacecraft to dock for exchange of crew and cargo, as well as enabling the assembly of large space systems. This paper provides an overview of the key attributes of the IDSS, an overview of the NASA Docking System (NDS), and the plans for updating the ISS with IDSS compatible interfaces. The NDS provides a state of the art, low impact docking system that will initially be made available to commercial crew and cargo providers. The ISS will be used to demonstrate the operational utility of the IDSS interface as a foundational technology for cooperative exploration.

Hatfield, Caris A.↗