SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
George Diller, NASA Public Affairs, introduces Jim Halsell, Director of Shuttle Launch Integration, and Mike Leinbach, Shuttle Launch Director, in this STS-104 post-launch press conference. The men give an overview of the successful launch of Atlantis and answer questions from the press.
Lisa Malone, NASA Public Affairs, introduces Jim Halsell, Shuttle Program Launch Integration Manager, and Mike Leinbach, Shuttle Launch Director, who give an overview of the successful launch of the STS-105 Discovery Orbiter. The men then answer questions from the press.
The crewmembers of STS-104, Commander Steven Lindsey, Pilot Charles Hobaugh, and Mission Specialists Mike Gernhardt, Jim Reilly, and Janet Kavandi, are heard narrating this video as footage is shown from various points in the mission. The crew is seen during suit-up, boarding the Shuttle, during launch, and performing many on-orbit activities, including the rendezvous with the International Space Station (ISS) (live and a computer animation), the three spacewalks (installing Quest Airlock and three external gas tanks), and the opening and outfitting of Quest. As the mission ends the crew bids farewell to the Expedition 2 crew (Commander Yuriy Usachev and Flight Engineers James Voss and Susan Helms) and the Atlantis Orbiter undocks from ISS, performs the fly-around of the space station, and lands.
One of the chief mysteries in the LENA perigee pass data is the lack of an apparent auroral oval in the images. Another is that in some cases ENA are seen from any direction near the Earth regardless of the latitude of the spacecraft. These facts lead one to ask a fundamental question: Is the instrument responding to ENA primarily? One possible way to get out of the "ambiguity" of the data is to assume that at least part of the signal is produced by something other than ENA. The two main candidates for this "something else" are UV light and energetic charged particles. UV light could only effect the instrument when its fan shaped aperture points toward the source. The most intense of which will be the sun, with day glow being the second strongest and the auroral zone, the third. We can rule out UV light as a prime source of counts in the perigee pass data for the following reasons: 1) The perigee pass signal is different in form and much stronger than the sun pulse signal seen just before or just after perigee; 2) There is no indication of the auroral zone, which would produce at least two peaks in the counts versus spin phase curve; 3) Mike Colliers' analysis of the sun pulse signal shows that it varies with the flux of the solar wind and not with variations in the solar UV flux. Charge particles that enter the aperture of the instrument and produce counts would show up when the instrument looks in the direction from which they come. In all of the data I am analyzing voltages were being applied to the collimators so that most charged particles should have been excluded from the instrument but this effect could still show up where the flux of energetic particles is high enough. The most likely place would be in the auroral zone where energetic electrons and protons precipitate. If these particles are producing counts then they should be seen when the instrument looks in and near the zenith direction. In nearly all of the perigee passes the zenith direction is devoid of counts.
An overview of the STS-104 mission is given through footage of each flight day. Scenes from flight days one through three show activities such as astronaut prelaunch procedures (breakfast, suit-up, and boarding Atlantis), launch, and on-orbit activities such as the opening of the payload bay doors, rendezvous and docking of the Orbiter to the International Space Station (ISS), and the opening of the hatches separating the Orbiter from ISS. The STS-104 crew (Commander Steven Lindsey, Pilot Charles Hobaugh, and Mission Specialists Mike Gernhardt, Jim Reilly, and Janet Kavandi) greets the Expedition 2 crew (Commander Yuriy Usachev and Flight Engineers James Voss and Susan Helms). Footage from flight days four through twelve can be found on the following videos: 'STS-104 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 2 of 4' (internal ID 2001214902), 'STS-104 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 3 of 4' (internal ID 2001214906), and 'STS-104 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 4 of 4' (internal ID 2001214905).
A continuation of 'STS-104 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 1 of 4' (internal ID 2001214904) and 'STS-104 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 2 of 4' (internal ID 2001214902), this video shows footage from flight days seven (continued from part two) through ten. Mission Specialists Mike Gernhardt and Jim Reilly are seen during their spacewalks, and Expedition 2 Flight Engineer Jim Voss and STS-104 Commander Steven Lindsey replace a leaking intermodular valve in the vestibule between the Unity Module and Quest Airlock. Voss is seen checking for further leaks the next day. Flight day ten is continued on 'STS-104 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 4 of 4' (internal ID 2001214905), which also shows flight days eleven and twelve.
On the fifth day of the STS-109 mission, the crewmembers and Commander Scott Altman of the Columbia Orbiter are shown in their servicing mission to the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). Selected footage is presented of the extravehicular activities (EVA) of Mission Specialists Jim Newman and Mike Massimino, who installed a new port solar array on the HST. Information is presented on the size and power capacity of the array. The reaction wheel assembly, one of four gyroscopic devices used to maneuver the HST, is also shown being replaced by the astronauts. A new insulation blanket panel was also installed at the end of the spacewalk because the astronauts had extra time.
Panel Members are: Christine M. Mitchell (Georgia Tech), Michael T. Palmer (NASA Langley), Greg Pisani (NASA Ames), and Amy R. Pritchett (MIT). The Panel members are affiliated with aviation human factors groups from NASA Ames, NASA Langley, MITCHELL Department of Aerospace and Aeronautical Engineering, and Georgia Technics Center for Human-Machine Systems Research. Panelists will describe the simulator(s) used in their respective institutions including a description of the FMS aircraft models, software, hardware, and displays. Panelists will summarize previous, on-going, and planned empirical studies conducted with the simulators. Greg Pisanich will describe two NASA Ames simulation systems: the Stone Soup Simulator (SSS), and the Airspace Operations Human Factors Simulation Laboratory. The the Stone Soup Simulator is a desktop-based, research flight simulator that includes mode control, flight management, and datalink functionality. It has been developed as a non-proprietary simulator that can be easily distributed to academic and industry researchers who are collaborating on NASA research projects. It will be used and extended by research groups represented by at least two panelists (Mitchell and Palmer). The Airspace Operations Simulator supports the study of air traffic control in conjunction with the flight deck. This simulator will be used provide an environment in which many AATT and free flight concepts can be demonstrated and evaluated. Mike Palmer will describe two NASA Langley efforts: The Langley Simulator and MD-11 extensions to the NASA Amesbury simulator. The first simulator is publicly available and combines a B-737 model with a high fidelity flight management system. The second simulator enhances the S3 simulator with MD-11 electronic flight displays together with modifications to the flight and FMS models to emulate MD-11 dynamics and operations. Chris Mitchell will describe GT-EFIRT (Georgia Tech-Electronic Flight Instrument Research Tool) and B-757 enhancements to the NASA Ames S3. GT-EFIRT is a medium fidelity simulator used to conduct preliminary studies of the CATS (crew activity tracking system). Like the Langley efforts with S3, the Georgia Tech enhancements will allow it to emulate the dynamics and operations of a widely used glass cockpit. Amy Pritchett will describe the MIT simulator(s) that have been used in a range of research investigating cockpit displays, warning devices, and flight deck-ATC interaction.
Mike Buzzetti designed a fiber optic attenuator while working at Jet Propulsion Laboratory, intended for use in NASA's Deep Space Network. Buzzetti subsequently patented and received an exclusive license to commercialize the device, and founded Nanometer Technologies to produce it. The attenuator functions without introducing measurable back-reflection or insertion loss, and is relatively insensitive to vibration and changes in temperature. Applications include cable television, telephone networks, other signal distribution networks, and laboratory instrumentation.
Mike Morris, former Associate Director of STAC, formed pHish Doctor, Inc. to develop and sell a pH monitor for home aquariums. The monitor, or pHish Doctor, consists of a sensor strip and color chart that continually measures pH levels in an aquarium. This is important because when the level gets too high, ammonia excreted by fish is highly toxic; at low pH, bacteria that normally break down waste products stop functioning. Sales have run into the tens of thousands of dollars. A NASA Tech Brief Technical Support Package later led to a salt water version of the system and a DoE Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grant for development of a sensor for sea buoys. The company, now known as Ocean Optics, Inc., is currently studying the effects of carbon dioxide buildup as well as exploring other commercial applications for the fiber optic sensor.
On the seventh day of STS-110, Mission Specialists Steven Smith and Rex Walheim are shown preparing for their second extravehicular activity (EVA) and the third of the mission, with the assistance of Mission Specialist Jerry Ross. Following this mission, Ross and Smith will be the first and second most experienced spacewalkers, respectively, in history. A camera mounted on the Space Shuttle Atlantis shows footage of the International Space Station. While Smith and Walheim are on EVA, Mission Specialists Ross and Lee Morin will provide choreography from inside the Atlantis crew cabin, Pilot Stephen Frick will operate the robotic arm, and Commander Mike Bloom will control the cameras on the robotic arm. Smith and Walheim are shown exiting the airlock hatch and then installing an PFR (Portable Foot Restraint) on the end of the robotic arm, from which much of the work will be done. Following the switching off of a circuit breaker, the main EVA task of rewiring umbilical cables that provide power, commands, and video is begun. These cables will be connected to the Mobile Transporter's (MT) robotic arm. The MT, an external transportation system which runs on rails, is seen with a helmet mounted camera as the astronauts work to release bolts that had served to secure the MT during launch. After a final check of the umbilical connections mated, the Umbilical Reconfiguration Panel is fitted over the cables, and the astronauts make their way to the airlock hatch.
Seeking to find a more effective method of filtering potable water that was highly contaminated, Mike Pedersen, founder of Western Water International, learned that NASA had conducted extensive research in methods of purifying water on board manned spacecraft. The key is Aquaspace Compound, a proprietary WWI formula that scientifically blends various types of glandular activated charcoal with other active and inert ingredients. Aquaspace systems remove some substances; chlorine, by atomic adsorption, other types of organic chemicals by mechanical filtration and still others by catalytic reaction. Aquaspace filters are finding wide acceptance in industrial, commercial, residential and recreational applications in the U.S. and abroad.
The second flight day of the STS-110 mission begins with Pilot Stephen Frick, and Mission Specialists Ellen Ochoa and Jerry Ross shown in the flight deck of the Space Shuttle Atlantis. Ellen Ochoa answers questions about the goals of the mission which are to install the S(0) truss segment on the International Space Station. Television cameras are attached to the robotic arm to take pictures of the truss in orbit. Commander Mike Bloomfield and Stephen Frick talks about the physical condition of the robotic arm.
The STS-110 Flight Day 3 begins with a view from the flight deck of The Space Shuttle Atlantis. Commander Mike Bloomfield performs engine firing from Atlantis to meet with the International Space Station. The hatch between Space Shuttle Atlantis and the International Space Station opens and Expedition Four Commander Yury Onufrienko greets STS-110 Commander Michael Bloomfield and Mission Specialist Ellen Ochoa as they enter the station. Also, much live animation of the Space Shuttle Atlantis is presented, as seen from a camera aboard the I.S.S.
The STS-107 third flight day begins with a presentation of some of the experiments inside the SPACEHAB Research Double Module aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia. STS-107 Mission Specialist Laurel Clark is shown working with the Bioreactor Experiment. The purpose of this experiment is to grow larger cells in space. She is shown performing an analysis of the concentrate of the media used to feed these cells. Mike Anderson is shown performing measurements on breathing. Payload Specialist IIan Ramon, Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla, Commander Rick Husband, and Mission Specialist Laurel Clark talk with the media about the progress of these scientific experiments in space.
On February 7-9,2003, approximately 60 scientists gathered at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas, for a workshop devoted to improving knowledge of the impact cratering process. We (co-conveners Elisabetta Pierazzo and Robert Herrick) both focus research efforts on studying the impact cratering process, but the former specializes in numerical modeling while the latter draws inferences from observations of planetary craters. Significant work has been done in several key areas of impact studies over the past several years, but in many respects there seem to be a disconnect between the groups employing different approaches, in particular modeling versus observations. The goal in convening this workshop was to bring together these disparate groups to have an open dialogue for the purposes of answering outstanding questions about the impact process and setting future research directions. We were successful in getting participation from most of the major research groups studying the impact process. Participants gathered from five continents with research specialties ranging from numerical modeling to field geology, and from small-scale experimentation and geochemical sample analysis to seismology and remote sensing.With the assistance of the scientific advisory committee (Bevan French, Kevin Housen, Bill McKinnon, Jay Melosh, and Mike Zolensky), the workshop was divided into a series of sessions devoted to different aspects of the cratering process. Each session was opened by two invited t a b , one given by a specialist in numerical or experimental modeling approaches, and the other by a specialist in geological, geophysical, or geochemical observations. Shorter invited and contributed talks filled out the sessions, which were then concluded with an open discussion time. All modelers were requested to address the question of what observations would better constrain their models, and all observationists were requested to discuss how their observations can constrain modeling efforts.
In a mature view of the subject, career development is not simply four years of college or a week at training, culminating in a diploma or a certificate to hang on an office wall. That's why we wanted to take a broad look at career development in this issue of ASK. Take for example, Dr. Gerald Mulenburg s contribution, Fly on the Wall. When Mulenburg and other members of a knowledge-sharing group at Ames were invited to observe an upcoming project review, Mulenburg thought it would be interesting to learn how another project does its reviews. Note that Mulenburg is no fresh out who's never attended a NASA project review. Not only has he been through a fair share of them as the reviewed, he has also been on the other side of the table as a reviewer. This experienced project manager recognizes that at any stage of a career there is room to grow and develop one's repertoire. Too often people associate career development with textbooks and role classroom training, far removed from project life. But classroom training need not be like this, as you'll find in our Special Feature, The Enterprise Project by Wendy Dolci, which sprung out of an APPL Advanced Project Management class in July 2003 at Ames Research Center. In addition to Dolci, some of her classmates contribute to the story. Mike Sander of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, project manager for the Mars Science Laboratory mission, who provided the assignment on which the story is based, also has a cameo in the story. We think Dolci's story is an inspiring example of what classroom training can be if it's approached imaginatively and made to serve a practical purpose. Another story from Ames, by Frank Larsen, takes a different twist on career development. At the annual Experimental Aircraft Association Fly-in in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, Larsen represented Ames at a NASA booth. While there, Larsen met a colleague from Glenn Research Center. Months later on a project with a quick turnaround, he remembered his colleague from Glenn who had equipment that might help Larsen save time and money on his project. Although they had never worked together and they had to unravel a lot of red tape before they could collaborate, they managed a way to get the job done. There are other stories in this issue that deal directly with this theme of career development. Then there are others in which it is less explicit. But if you take the view that career development happens all the time, and is as necessary to your survival as breathing, then you can read almost any story in ASK with your career development in mind. In that case, all the best, and so then-start developing.
Robotic technology being developed out of necessity to keep the Hubble Space Telescope operating could also lead to new levels of man-machine team-work in deep-space exploration down the road-if it survives the near-term scramble for funding. Engineers here who have devoted their NASA careers to the concept of humans servicing the telescope in orbit are planning modifications to International Space Station (ISS) robots that would leave the humans on the ground. The work. forced by post-Columbia flight rules that killed a planned shuttle-servicing mission to Hubble, marks another step in the evolution of robot-partners for human space explorers. "Hubble has always been a pathfider for this agency," says Mike Weiss. Hubble deputy program manager technical. "When the space station was flown and assembled, Hubble was the pathfinder. not just for modularity, but for operations, for assembly techniques. Exploration is the next step. Things we're going to do on Hubble are going to be applied to exploration. It's not just putting a robot in space. It's operating a robot in space. It's adapting that robot to what needs to be done the next time you're up there."