Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human spaceflight 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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2022

The Cooling Loop A Anomaly of 2013: A Case Study in Human-Systems Resilience

Throughout the history of human spaceflight, NASA has employed an operational paradigm of 24/7 dependence on experts in Mission Control Center (MCC). In addition to nominal flight control and mission operations, these 85+ experts per shift manage anomaly detection, diagnosis, and response, and support the crew in real-time in performing maintenance and repair, procedure execution, and other complex mission operations. Future long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO) will not operate successfully using this same Human-Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA) where crew rely on ground controllers, have ready access to resupply, and have a fallback plan of evacuation. As distance from Earth increases and the communication delay grows, crews will need to respond independently and adequately to time-critical vehicle malfunctions. It will not always be sufficient or even possible to ‘safe the system’ and then wait upon ground intervention. A new and radically different HSIA is needed to accommodate the paradigm shift of deep-space travel. Historical International Space Station (ISS) data show that for a 30-day mission, the likelihood of a high-consequence vehicle anomaly of uncertain origin that requires rapid response is greater than 10%. The likelihood of such an event is 50% by the fourth month of the mission, and it grows exponentially with time. Our team has conducted in-depth investigations into these events and their corresponding anomaly resolution activities. Using MCC and Mission Evaluation Room (MER) anomaly resolution artifacts (including meeting summaries, caution and warning data, and ISS daily summaries), we created timelines detailing ground actions and in-orbit events for two significant anomalies. We then mapped these timelines onto Mars transit conditions, introducing a ground-crew communications time delay and shifting immediate response, time-critical task execution, and vehicle commanding to the crew. In detailing successful anomaly resolution in transit to Mars, the timelines highlight where effective resolution requires drastically evolved onboard capabilities. Though this research has yielded a rich data set based on ground response in past missions, there is still insufficient knowledge to assess the potential impact of inflight anomalies on a small autonomous crew on future LDEMs beyond LEO. To begin building an evidence base that will inform future HSIA standards and requirements, we are developing an approach to systematically capture crew anomaly response and procedure execution during early Artemis missions. Being the first human spaceflight beyond LEO since Apollo, early Artemis missions provide a rare and unique opportunity to serve as a testbed for Mars missions. Our work aims to capitalize on planned data collection to derive crew operational responses to anomalous events in real-time. Our team is also researching the level of simulation fidelity required for empirically validating proposed HSIA standards and evaluating HSIA implementations for LDEMs beyond LEO. This work will produce a trade space study of HSIA simulation objectives and fidelity requirements. Ultimately, these research efforts will assist in developing the standards and technologies needed to build a next-generation HSIA for LDEMs beyond LEO.

human-systems integration architecture↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

HERA in the Artemis ERA

As NASA shifts its mission objectives to the lunar surface and the return of humans to the moon in the next few years, analogs that simulate lunar transit or surface exploration are in a unique position to support spaceflight research that is aligned with future Artemis missions, especially a sustained lunar presence. NASA’s spaceflight analogs have historically focused on mission scenarios and operations for Mars exploration, including recent campaigns staged at the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) analog at Johnson Space Center. However, beginning in Campaign 8, future HERA missions are planned to mimic lunar operations and support research objectives that directly address knowledge gaps for lunar exploration and habitation. The Research Operations and Integration (ROI) HERA team will present a look-back over HERA mission scenarios and operations supporting NASA’s Human Research Program and international partners’ spaceflight research. An overview of critical capabilities in HERA and other similar analogs will also be presented, such as methods of simulating EVAs. Presenters will then discuss the transition to a high-fidelity lunar surface exploration mission scenario envisioned for Campaign 8, slated to begin in 2026. Operations changes that will be discussed will include simulated lunar surface exploration using a two-person simulated pressurized rover in combination with virtual reality, lunar-relevant communication delays, changes to concepts of how crew communicate with Earth-based mission supports, increased access to family & friends’ communication compared to prior campaigns, and a new mission scenario referencing Artemis mission objectives and tasks. ROI analog mission designs are driven by science objectives. The ROI HERA team will describe how the changes for Campaign 8 support ongoing spaceflight research interests and provide opportunities for investigators to design experiments more closely aligned to lunar missions. A questions and answers session will follow with attendees encouraged to ask questions.

B J Caldwell↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA/MOD Operations Impacts from Shuttle Program

Operations plays a pivotal role in the success of any human spaceflight program. This paper will highlight some of the core tenets of spaceflight operations from a systems perspective and use several examples from the Space Shuttle Program to highlight where the success and safety of a mission can hinge upon the preparedness and competency of the operations team. Further, awareness of the types of operations scenarios and impacts that can arise during human crewed space missions can help inform design and mission planning decisions long before a vehicle gets into orbit. A strong operations team is crucial to the development of future programs; capturing the lessons learned from the successes and failures of a past program will allow for safer, more efficient, and better designed programs in the future. No matter how well a vehicle is designed and constructed, there are always unexpected events or failures that occur during space flight missions. Preparation, training, real-time execution, and troubleshooting are skills and values of the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) flight controller; these operational standards have proven invaluable to the Space Shuttle Program. Understanding and mastery of these same skills will be required of any operations team as technology advances and new vehicles are developed. This paper will focus on individual Space Shuttle mission case studies where specific operational skills, techniques, and preparedness allowed for mission safety and success. It will detail the events leading up to the scenario or failure, how the operations team identified and dealt with the failure and its downstream impacts. The various options for real-time troubleshooting will be discussed along with the operations team final recommendation, execution, and outcome. Finally, the lessons learned will be summarized along with an explanation of how these lessons were used to improve the operational preparedness of future flight control teams.

Fitzpatrick, Michael↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Ground Segment Operations Concept for the Orion Artemis-2 Optical Communications System

The ACCESS Project (formerly Space Network) will implement an optical communications ground segment to support the Orion Artemis II Optical Communications (O2O) demonstration as part of the next manned human spaceflight mission to the moon, Artemis II. O2O implements laser communication (lasercomm) technology for operational use on the Orion series of spacecraft, as a development test objective (DTO), in order to demonstrate the feasibility and operational utility of lasercomm for human spaceflight missions. O2O consists of three segments: Space Segment, Ground Segment, and Operations Segment. The Space Segment consists of the Space Terminal Element and the Orion spacecraft. The Space Terminal Element effort is managed by the GSFC Laser-Enhanced Mission Communications Navigation and Operational Services (LEMNOS) project in collaboration with MIT Lincoln Laboratory. The Ground Segment consists of an optical ground terminal (GT) at the White Sands Complex (WSC), which is being developed in collaboration with MIT Lincoln Laboratory, the Ground Segment Operations and Analysis (GSOA) element and Ground Data Element (GDE), and a second optical GT in the Optical Communications Telescope Laboratory (OCTL) at the JPL Table Mountain Facility. The Operations Segment consists of the Artemis II Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lasercomm Space Terminal Console (LSTC), and the Lasercomm Link Planning & Analysis Center (LPAC), all located at the Johnson Space Center (JSC). O2O utilizes pulse-position modulation (PPM) direct-to-earth services resulting in an 80 Mbps downlink data rate from lunar orbit. The O2O concept of operations is to provide optical services for a minimum of 1 hour per day for each day of the Artemis II mission. O2O will utilize a 10-20 Mbps uplink data rate and 40-260 Mbps downlink data rate, depending on the Artemis II mission phase. The ACCESS project will also provide a centralized mission data interface for user data distribution and storage to the MCC and perform planning and scheduling of services in coordination with the Operations Segment for the O2O Ground Segment. The O2O Ground Segment will support the following O2O mission phases: Pre-Mission Planning; Daily Operations Planning; Event Execution; and Post-Pass Reporting. O2O will be used to exchange data files between Orion and the MCC and to distribute real-time video through the optical downlink service to the MCC; which would not be possible without the high-bandwidth link that O2O will provide to Orion. In this paper, I will discuss the O2O Ground Segment development approach and how it will support these critical O2O functions: plan and schedule the contact; acquire and track the optical link; flow information bidirectionally; distribute information; and control and accommodate the system.

optical communications↗
NASA NTRS2009

The Effects of Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Glove Pressure on Hand Strength

With the new vision of space travel aimed at traveling back to the Moon and eventually to Mars, NASA is designing a new spacesuit glove. The purpose of this study was to baseline hand strength while wearing the current Extravehicular Activity (EVA) glove, the Phase VI. By varying the pressure in the glove, hand strength could be characterized as a function of spacesuit pressure. This finding is of extreme importance when evaluating missions that require varying suit pressures associated with different operations within NASA's current human spaceflight program, Constellation. This characterization fed directly into the derivation of requirements for the next EVA glove. This study captured three types of maximum hand strength: grip, lateral pinch, and pulp-2 pinch. All three strengths were measured under varying pressures and compared to a bare-hand condition. The resulting standardized data was reported as a percentage of the bare-hand strength. The first wave of tests was performed while the subjects, four female and four male, were wearing an Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) suit supported by a suit stand. This portion of the test collected data from the barehand, suited unpressurized, and suited pressurized (4.3 psi) conditions. In addition, the effects of the Thermal Micrometeoroid Garment (TMG) on hand strength were examined, with the suited unpressurized and pressurized cases tested with and without a TMG. It was found that, when pressurized and with the TMG, the Phase VI glove reduced applied grip strength to a little more than half of the subject s bare-hand strength. The lateral pinch strength remained relatively constant while the pulp-2 pinch strength actually increased with pressure. The TMG was found to decrease maximum applied grip strength by an additional 10% for both pressurized and unpressurized cases, while the pinch strengths saw little to no change. In developing requirements based on human subjects, it is important to attempt to derive results that encompass the variation within the entire population. The current EMU does not accommodate humans at the extremes of the anthropometric spectrum. To account for this and to ensure that these requirements cover the population, another phase of testing will be conducted in a differential pressure glove box. This phase will focus on smaller females and very large males that do not have a properly fitted EMU suit. Instead, they would wear smaller or larger gloves and be tested in the glove box as a means to compare and contrast their strength capabilities against the EMU accommodated hand size subjects. The glove box s ability to change pressures easily will also allow for a wider range of glove pressures to be tested. Compared to the data collected on the subjects wearing the EMU suit, it is expected that there will be similar ratios to bare-hand. It is recommended that this topic be sent to the Physical Ergonomics Board for review.

Rajulu, Sudhakar↗
NASA NTRS2015

SLS Test Stand Site Selection

Test site selection is a critical element of the design, development and production of a new system. With the advent of the new Space Launch System (SLS), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had a number of test site selection decisions that needed to be made early enough in the Program to support the planned Launch Readiness Date (LRD). This case study focuses on decisions that needed to be made in 2011 and 2012 in preparation for the April 2013 DPMC decision about where to execute the Main Propulsion Test that is commonly referred to as "Green Run." Those decisions relied upon cooperative analysis between the Program, the Test Lab and Center Operations. The SLS is a human spaceflight vehicle designed to carry a crew farther into space than humans have previously flown. The vehicle consists of four parts: the crew capsule, the upper stage, the core stage, and the first stage solid rocket boosters. The crew capsule carries the astronauts, while the upper stage, the core stage, and solid rocket boosters provide thrust for the vehicle. In other words, the stages provide the "lift" part of the lift vehicle. In conjunction with the solid rocket boosters, the core stage provides the initial "get-off-the-ground" thrust to the vehicle. The ignition of the four core stage engines and two solid rocket boosters is the first step in the launch portion of the mission. The solid rocket boosters burn out after about 2 minutes of flight, and are then jettisoned. The core stage provides thrust until the vehicle reaches a specific altitude and speed, at which point the core stage is shut off and jettisoned, and the upper stage provides vehicle thrust for subsequent mission trajectories. The integrated core stage primarily consists of a liquid oxygen tank, a liquid hydrogen tank, and the four core stage engines. For the SLS program, four RS-25 engines were selected as the four core stage engines. The RS-25 engine is the same engine that was used for Space Shuttle. The test plan for the integrated core stage was broken down into several segments: Component testing, system level testing, and element level testing. In this context, components are items such as valves, controllers, sensors, etc. Systems are items such as an entire engine, a tank, or the outer stage body. The core stage itself is considered to be an element. The rocket engines are also considered an element. At the program level, it was decided to perform a single green run test on the integrated core stage prior to shipment of it to Kennedy Space Center (KSC) for use in the EM-1 test flight of the SLS vehicle. A green run test is the first live fire of the new integrated core stage and engine elements - without boosters of course. The SLS Program had to decide where to perform SLS green run testing.

Crowe, Kathryn↗
NASA NTRS2017

Interactive Exploration Robots: Human-Robotic Collaboration and Interactions

For decades, NASA has employed different operational approaches for human and robotic missions. Human spaceflight missions to the Moon and in low Earth orbit have relied upon near-continuous communication with minimal time delays. During these missions, astronauts and mission control communicate interactively to perform tasks and resolve problems in real-time. In contrast, deep-space robotic missions are designed for operations in the presence of significant communication delay - from tens of minutes to hours. Consequently, robotic missions typically employ meticulously scripted and validated command sequences that are intermittently uplinked to the robot for independent execution over long periods. Over the next few years, however, we will see increasing use of robots that blend these two operational approaches. These interactive exploration robots will be remotely operated by humans on Earth or from a spacecraft. These robots will be used to support astronauts on the International Space Station (ISS), to conduct new missions to the Moon, and potentially to enable remote exploration of planetary surfaces in real-time. In this talk, I will discuss the technical challenges associated with building and operating robots in this manner, along with lessons learned from research conducted with the ISS and in the field.

Fong, Terry↗
NASA NTRS1999

NASA Historical Data Book: NASA Launch Systems, Space Transportation, Human Spaceflight and Space Science, 1979-1988 - Volume 5

In 1973, NASA published the first volume of the NASA Historical Data Book, a hefty tome containing mostly tabular data on the resources of the space agency between 1958 and 1968. There, broken into detailed tables, were the facts and figures associated with the budget, facilities, procurement, installations, and personnel of NASA during that formative decade. In 1988, NASA reissued that first volume of the data book and added two additional volumes on the agency's programs and projects, one each for 1958-1968 and 1969-1978. NASA published a fourth volume in 1994 that addressed NASA resources for the period between 1969 and 1978. This fifth volume of the NASA Historical Data Book is a continuation of those earlier efforts. This fundamental reference tool presents information, much of it statistical, documenting the development of four critical areas of NASA responsibility for the period between 1979 and 1988. This volume includes detailed information on the development and operation of launch systems, space transportation, human spaceflight, and space science during this era. As such, it contains in-depth statistical information about the early Space Shuttle program through the return to flight in 1988, the early efforts to build a space station, the development of new launch systems, and the launching of seventeen space science missions. A companion volume will appear late in 1999, documenting the space applications, support operations, aeronautics, and resources aspects of NASA during the period between 1979 and 1988. NASA began its operations as the nation's civilian space agency in 1958 following the passage of the National Aeronautics and Space Act. It succeeded the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA). The new organization was charged with preserving the role of the United States "as a leader in aeronautical and space science and technology" and in its application, with expanding our knowledge of the Earth's atmosphere and space, and with exploring flight both within and outside the atmosphere. By the 1980s, NASA had established itself as an agency with considerable achievements on record. The decade was marked by the inauguration of the Space Shuttle flights and haunted by the 1986 Challenger accident that temporarily halted the program. The agency also enjoyed the strong support of President Ronald Reagan, who enthusiastically announced the start of both the Space Station program and the National Aerospace Plane program.

Rumerman, Judy A.↗
NASA NTRS2012

The International Space Station: Unique In-Space Testbed as Exploration Analog

Final assembly of the International Space Station (ISS) was completed in 2011. As articulated in the 2011 NASA Strategic Plan, the Agency's first goal is to extend and sustain human activities across the solar system. Thus, the emerging NASA vision is to launch a bold and ambitious new space initiative to enable human space exploration beyond low-Earth orbit to Lagrange points, the moon, near-Earth asteroids (NEAs), and Mars and its environs. To accomplish this vision, it is necessary to develop and validate innovative exploration technologies and operational concepts. With the extended life of the ISS to 2020 and possibly 2028, NASA has a mandate to maximize the potential of the Nation's newest National Laboratory. Exploration and ISS teams within NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) have initiated a cooperative effort: the ISS Testbed for Analog Research (ISTAR), a high-fidelity operational analog that complements existing NASA terrestrial laboratory and field testing. To maximize use of the ISS platform to evaluate new exploration technologies, capabilities, and operational concepts to better comprehend and mitigate human spaceflight risks, ISTAR seeks out and encourages investigations dubbed "exploration detailed test objectives" (xDTOs). These xDTOs, building blocks of ISTAR missions, develop and optimize the operations concepts and the use of new technologies that should reduce risks and challenges facing astronauts on long exploration spaceflight voyages. In this paper, we describe (1) the rationale behind ISTAR, (2) a five-year strategic plan, (3) the approach for mission formulation, development, integration, and execution, (4) concepts for near-term missions that implement a phased approach for using ISS as an exploration testbed, and (5) the planned Mars mission simulation using the ISS. This paper will also document several challenges ISTAR must address to execute its missions.

Analog Mission↗
NASA NTRS2025

Private Astronaut Post-Mission Debrief Interviews Study

BACKGROUND The commercialization of space will increasingly include individuals that are not rigorously-selected, highly-trained professional astronauts. Private astronaut missions (PAMs), such as Axiom-1 in 2022, will continue to travel to the International Space Station in the coming years, but the risk of integrating private astronauts with NASA astronauts has not been clearly quantified nor mitigated. An earlier internal NASA operations assessment, which consisted of a comprehensive literature review and interviews of current NASA experts, found that PAMs are likely to increase the risk to NASA astronauts during integrated missions (Landon, Whiting, Russell, Schorn, Passmore, & Roma, 2022). There are ongoing efforts at NASA to mitigate concerns from a medical, psychological, and technical perspective. NASA experts are working closely with PAM providers to offer recommendations and best practices beyond the limits of requirements to ensure crew health and safety. However, efforts are siloed between groups to some extent, and with the rate of PAMs likely to increase, a more comprehensive and integrated process is needed to reduce the burden on NASA resources. AIMS The purpose of this project is to understand private astronauts’ motivations for journeying to space, their pre-mission preparation period, and their experiences in space. Data will be collected via private astronaut post-mission debrief interviews. This data will inform training needs and in-mission support needed for missions that include private astronauts; the preparation NASA astronauts and mission support personnel will need to work with these integrated crews; and gaps in knowledge to guide research and countermeasure development. Our study aims to (1) Characterize risks posed by commercialization and private astronaut crew integration in spaceflight operations, as it relates to Team, Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), and Behavioral Medicine (BMed) Risks, (2) Recommend potential countermeasures and identify gaps in current research. Countermeasures may be related to crew selection and composition, training, crew support systems (e.g., medical/psychological support, support from Mission Control, on-board resources), and habitability and human factors design. METHOD The BHP Lab will conduct 30-minute interviews with up to eight (8) private astronaut mission (PAM) astronauts (e.g., Axiom) and spaceflight participants (e.g., SFPs or “free flyers” on Polaris Dawn) per year from 2024-2030 to discuss knowledge gaps and needs related to selection and assessment, crew composition, training, crew support systems (e.g., medical/psychological support, support from Mission Control, onboard resources), and habitability and human factors design, which may influence the risk to NASA astronauts. Interviews will then be coded using thematic analysis and interpreted with the assistance of lexical analysis software (e.g., LIWC). As of the end of 2024, we have collected data from one PAM crew. At the conclusion of data collection in 2030, a final report will be prepared integrating all data collected by 2031. SUMMARY Post-return interviews of private astronauts are being conducted to understand their experiences and inform training and countermeasures to ensure the safety of all who journey to the ISS.

Private Astronaut Missions↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance Risk Model (PRisM) Proof-of-Concept: An Operational Decision Support Tool to Predict Crew Performance in Space from Available Performance Tests

The Crew Health and Performance-Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CHP-PRA) team at NASA Glenn Research Center has developed a range of tools to evaluate astronaut health during spaceflight and to optimize the medical set required for missions. Among these, the Performance Risk Model (PRisM) represents a novel advancement, extending CHP-PRA’s focus beyond medical systems into the domain of human performance. Such tool could be pivotal in optimizing astronaut capabilities during space travel, thereby enhancing overall mission success. PRisM leverages data from well-established performance assessments conducted during previous crewed space missions and Earth analogs to strategically predict outcomes for planned tasks, even when direct performance testing has not been conducted for those specific tasks. To evaluate performance, PRisM references the various metrics outlined in NASA-STD-3001 and employs a methodology to integrate different performance scales. This framework analyzes the contribution of various human system task categories (HSTCs) to task execution and compares these contributions to the HSTCs’ involvement in other known tests. The model further employs a Monte Carlo simulation to sample performance scores from their distribution in operationally relevant tests such as those in Mulavara et al. (2018) and, by leveraging similarities in HSTC involvement, transfers this knowledge to actual mission tasks, such as those outlined in the "Human Exploration of Mars: Preliminary List of Crew Tasks”. The current PRisM proof-of-concept includes analyses of the impact of exercise and specific medications on astronauts’ performance, with provisions to incorporate additional countermeasures as data becomes available. Furthermore, the tool is customizable to include any system necessary to fully encompass the domain of human systems and can be adapted to evaluate performance for any spaceflight activities as requested by operational stakeholders. PRisM has the potential to assist the Human Research Program in exploring the capabilities trade space for optimized crew performance.

performance modeling↗
NASA NTRS2024

Earth Independent Medical Operations [EIMO] Definition Workshop

As the vanguard of human spaceflight increasingly transitions from one of low Earth orbit (LEO) to Lunar and subsequently Martian missions, there is a commensurate imperative for Earth-based medical authority to transition to space-based assets for the continued assurance of optimal astronaut health and performance. The transition to Earth Independent Medical Operations (EIMO) will be a process that enables progressively resilient systems and crews to reduce risk and enhance wellness and overall mission success for deep space exploration. Terrestrial assets will continue to be paramount in pre-mission screening, planning, maintenance, and prevention. Yet on-board care, response to unexpected medical events, and management of communication delays and dropouts will increasingly become the purview of the crew for primary management.

John Lemery↗
NASA NTRS2011

JSC Design and Procedural Standards, JSC-STD-8080

This document provides design and procedural requirements appropriate for inclusion in specifications for any human spaceflight program, project, spacecraft, system, or end item. The term "spacecraft" as used in the standards includes launch vehicles, orbital vehicles, non-terrestrial surface vehicles, and modules. The standards are developed and maintained as directed by Johnson Space Center (JSC) Policy Directive JPD 8080.2, JSC Design and Procedural Standards for Human Space Flight Equipment. The Design and Procedural Standards contained in this manual represent human spacecraft design and operational knowledge applicable to a wide range of spaceflight activities. These standards are imposed on JSC human spaceflight equipment through JPD 8080.2. Designers shall comply with all design standards applicable to their design effort.

Punch, Danny T.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Future Visions for Scientific Human Exploration

Today, humans explore deep-space locations such as Mars, asteroids, and beyond, vicariously here on Earth, with noteworthy success. However, to achieve the revolutionary breakthroughs that have punctuated the history of science since the dawn of the Space Age has always required humans as "the discoverers," as Daniel Boorstin contends in this book of the same name. During Apollo 17, human explorers on the lunar surface discovered the "genesis rock," orange glass, and humans in space revamped the optically crippled Hubble Space Telescope to enable some of the greatest astronomical discoveries of all time. Science-driven human exploration is about developing the opportunities for such events, perhaps associated with challenging problems such as whether we can identify life beyond Earth within the universe. At issue, however, is how to safely insert humans and the spaceflight systems required to allow humans to operate as they do best in the hostile environment of deep space. The first issue is minimizing the problems associated with human adaptation to the most challenging aspects of deep space space radiation and microgravity (or non-Earth gravity). One solution path is to develop technologies that allow for minimization of the exposure time of people to deep space, as was accomplished in Apollo. For a mission to the planet Mars, this might entail new technological solutions for in-space propulsion that would make possible time-minimized transfers to and from Mars. The problem of rapid, reliable in-space transportation is challenged by the celestial mechanics of moving in space and the so-called "rocket equation." To travel to Mars from Earth in less than the time fuel-minimizing trajectories allow (i.e., Hohmann transfers) requires an exponential increase in the amount of fuel. Thus, month-long transits would require a mass of fuel as large as the dry mass of the ISS, assuming the existence of continuous acceleration engines. This raises the largest technological stumbling block to moving humans on site as deep-space explorers, delivering the masses required for human spaceflight systems to LEO or other Earth orbital vantage points using the existing or projected fleet of Earth-to-orbit (ETO) launch vehicles. Without a return to Saturn V-class boosters or an alternate path, one cannot imagine emplacing the masses that would be required for any deep-space voyage without a prohibitive number of Shuttle-class launches. One futurist solution might involve mass launch systems that could be used to move the consumables, including fuel, water, food, and building materials, to LEO in pieces rather than launching integrated systems. This approach would necessitate the development of robotic assembly and fuel-storage systems in Earth orbit, but could provide for a natural separation of low-value cargo (e.g., fuel, water).

Garvin, James↗
NASA NTRS2011

Legacy of Biomedical Research During the Space Shuttle Program

The Space Shuttle Program provided many opportunities to study the role of spaceflight on human life for over 30 years and represented the longest and largest US human spaceflight program. Outcomes of the research were understanding the effect of spaceflight on human physiology and performance, countermeasures, operational protocols, and hardware. The Shuttle flights were relatively short, < 16 days and routinely had 4 to 6 crewmembers for a total of 135 flights. Biomedical research was conducted on the Space Shuttle using various vehicle resources. Specially constructed pressurized laboratories called Spacelab and SPACEHAB housed many laboratory instruments to accomplish experiments in the Shuttle s large payload bay. In addition to these laboratory flights, nearly every mission had dedicated human life science research experiments conducted in the Shuttle middeck. Most Shuttle astronauts participated in some life sciences research experiments either as test subjects or test operators. While middeck experiments resulted in a low sample per mission compared to many Earth-based studies, this participation allowed investigators to have repetition of tests over the years on successive Shuttle flights. In addition, as a prelude to the International Space Station (ISS), NASA used the Space Shuttle as a platform for assessing future ISS hardware systems and procedures. The purpose of this panel is to provide an understanding of science integration activities required to implement Shuttle research, review biomedical research, characterize countermeasures developed for Shuttle and ISS as well as discuss lessons learned that may support commercial crew endeavors. Panel topics include research integration, cardiovascular physiology, neurosciences, skeletal muscle, and exercise physiology. Learning Objective: The panel provides an overview from the Space Shuttle Program regarding research integration, scientific results, lessons learned from biomedical research and countermeasure development.

Hayes, Judith C.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Solving The Space Weather Problem: A 15+ Year Roadmap to Revolutionize Space Weather Research, Protect NASA Space Assets, and Enable Robust Operations

The White Paper (WP) describes a roadmap to address the Space Weather (SpWx) problem. It presents a strategic vision of how a community-wide effort could be organized and implemented to enable transformative advancement in SpWx research and ultimately, in applications. We envision a ‘system-of-systems’—an integrated web of SpWx stations and state-ofthe-art modeling facilities to enable a transformative advance in SpWx nowcasting and forecasting (Figure 1). The Space Weather Aggregated Network of Systems (SWANS) will enable space situational awareness for end-users invested in spaceflight operations, infrastructure risk mitigation, and future human endeavors in space exploration while profoundly transforming Heliophysics research.

A Vourrlidas↗
NASA NTRS2007

The Ares I-1 Flight Test--Paving the Road for the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle

In accordance with the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration and the nation's desire to again send humans to explore beyond Earth orbit, NASA has been tasked to send human beings to the moon, Mars, and beyond. It has been 30 years since the United States last designed and built a human-rated launch vehicle. NASA is now building the Ares I crew launch vehicle, which will loft the Orion crew exploration vehicle into orbit, and the Ares V cargo launch vehicle, which will launch the Lunar Surface Access Module and Earth departure stage to rendezvous Orion for missions to the moon. NASA has marshaled unique resources from the government and private sectors to perform the technically and programmatically complex work of delivering astronauts to orbit early next decade, followed by heavy cargo late next decade. Our experiences with Saturn and the Shuttle have taught us the value of adhering to sound systems engineering, such as the "test as you fly" principle, while applying aerospace best practices and lessons learned. If we are to fly humans safely aboard a launch vehicle, we must employ a variety of methodologies to reduce the technical, schedule, and cost risks inherent in the complex business of space transportation. During the Saturn development effort, NASA conducted multiple demonstration and verification flight tests to prove technology in its operating environment before relying upon it for human spaceflight. Less testing on the integrated Shuttle system did not reduce cost or schedule. NASA plans a progressive series of demonstration (ascent), verification (orbital), and mission flight tests to supplement ground research and high-altitude subsystem testing with real-world data, factoring the results of each test into the next one. In this way, sophisticated analytical models and tools, many of which were not available during Saturn and Shuttle, will be calibrated and we will gain confidence in their predictions, as we gain hands-on experience in operating the first of two new launch vehicle systems. The Ares I-1 flight test vehicle (FTV) will incorporate a mix of flight and mockup hardware, reflecting a configuration similar in mass, weight, and shape (outer mold line or OML) to the operational vehicle. It will be powered by a four-segment reusable solid rocket booster (RSRB), which is currently in Shuttle inventory, and will be modified to include a fifth, inert segment that makes it approximately the same size and weight as the five segment RSRB, which will be available for the second flight test in 2012. The Ares I-1 vehicle configuration is shown. Each test flight has specific objectives appropriate to the design analysis cycle in progress. The Ares I-1 demonstration test, slated for April 2009, gives NASA its first opportunity to gather critical data about the flight dynamics of the integrated launch vehicle stack, understand how to control its roll during flight, and other characterize the severe stage separation environment that the upper stage will experience during future operational flights. NASA also will begin the process of modifying the launch infrastructure and fine-tuning ground and mission operational scenarios, as NASA transitions from the Shuttle to the Ares/Orion system.

Davis, Stephan R.↗