Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew Return Vehicle”

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 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

Orbiter Window Hypervelocity Impact Strength Evaluation

When the Space Shuttle Orbiter incurs damage on its windowpane during flight from particles traveling at hypervelocity speeds, it produces a distinctive damage that reduces the overall strength of the pane. This damage has the potential to increase the risk associated with a safe return to Earth. Engineers at Boeing and NASA/JSC are called to Mission Control to evaluate the damage and provide an assessment on the risk to the crew. Historically, damages like these were categorized as "accepted risk" associated with manned spaceflight, and as long as the glass was intact, engineers gave a "go ahead" for entry for the Orbiter. Since the Columbia accident, managers have given more scrutiny to these assessments, and this has caused the Orbiter window engineers to capitalize on new methods of assessments for these damages. This presentation will describe the original methodology that was used to asses the damages, and introduce a philosophy new to the Shuttle program for assessing structural damage, reliability/risk-based engineering. The presentation will also present a new, recently adopted method for assessing the damage and providing management with a reasonable assessment on the realities of the risk to the crew and vehicle for return.

Estes, Lynda R.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Advanced High-Temperature Seal Development at NASA

NASA Glenn Research Center is developing advanced seals to meet the demands of next generation aircraft and rocket propulsion systems. Dr. Steinetz will summarize NASA Glenn's efforts of developing seals that can operate from ambient through rocket exhaust temperatures (> 2000 F) without cooling and summarize the extensive test capability used to qualify seal performances under these extreme conditions. NASA programs benefiting from this research, that will be reviewed, include advanced commercial and military aircraft, the Space Shuttle, the Space Station Emergency Crew Return X-Vehicle, and futuristic reusable launch vehicles. Though the seal technology is being developed for NASA and military programs, there are many commercial and industrial spin-off applications.

Steinetz, Bruce M.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Research on International Space Station - Building a Partnership for the Future

As its name implies, the International Space Station is a platform where the research programs of 16 partner nations are conducted. While each partner pursues its own research priorities, cooperation and coordination of the various national and agency research programs occurs at multiple levels, from strategic through tactical planning to experiment operations. Since 2000, a significant number of experiments have been carried out in the Russian ISS utilization program, which consists of the Russian national program of fundamental and applied research in 11 research areas and international cooperative programs and contract activities. The US research program began with simple payloads in 2000 and was significantly expanded with the addition of the US Laboratory module Destiny in 2001, and its outfitting with seven research racks to date. The Canadian Space Agency (CSA), the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) have made use of international cooperative arrangements with both the US and Russia to implement a variety of investigations in diverse research areas, and in the case of ESA included the flights of crewmembers to ISS as part of Soyuz Science Missions. In the future, ESA and JAXA will add their own research modules, Columbus and Kibo, respectively, to expand research capabilities both inside and outside ISS. In the aftermath of the Columbia accident and the temporary grounding of the Space Shuttle fleet, all ISS logistics have relied on Russian Progress and Sopz vehicles. The Russian national program has continued as before the Shuttle accident, as have international cooperative programs and contract activities, both during long-duration expeditions and visiting taxi missions. In several instances, Russian international cooperative activities with JAXA and ESA have also involved the use of US facilities and crewmembers in successful truly multilateral efforts. The US research program was rapidly refocused after the Shuttle accident to rely on greatly reduced upmass, and for the first time in the ISS program, US research hardware was launched on Progress vehicles and returned with crews on Soyuz spacecraft. It is hoped that these small but significant steps in international cooperation will lead to even greater endeavors once the remaining research modules are added to ISS.

Gindl, Heinz↗
NASA NTRS2009

Comparisons of Air Radiation Model with Shock Tube Measurements

This paper presents an assessment of the predictive capability of shock layer radiation model appropriate for NASA s Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle lunar return entry. A detailed set of spectrally resolved radiation intensity comparisons are made with recently conducted tests in the Electric Arc Shock Tube (EAST) facility at NASA Ames Research Center. The spectral range spanned from vacuum ultraviolet wavelength of 115 nm to infrared wavelength of 1400 nm. The analysis is done for 9.5-10.5 km/s shock passing through room temperature synthetic air at 0.2, 0.3 and 0.7 Torr. The comparisons between model and measurements show discrepancies in the level of background continuum radiation and intensities of atomic lines. Impurities in the EAST facility in the form of carbon bearing species are also modeled to estimate the level of contaminants and their impact on the comparisons. The discrepancies, although large is some cases, exhibit order and consistency. A set of tests and analyses improvements are proposed as forward work plan in order to confirm or reject various proposed reasons for the observed discrepancies.

Bose, Deepak↗
NASA NTRS2025

Generalized Reference Targeting for Spaceflight

For spaceflight programs to achieve some of the aggressive exploration initiatives such as visiting and landing on other celestial bodies, rendezvousing with other orbiting vehicles, and ultimately returning crew safely to Earth, an assortment of targeting algorithms to compute the necessary burns to strategically maneuver a spacecraft to a variety of destinations are required. Numerous examples exist, but rather than creating and implementing multiple targeting solutions, is it possible to have a general targeting model that can accommodate a variety of applications? Originally motivated for mission design and analysis purposes, this paper outlines a generalized reference targeting algorithm for spaceflight that may also have applications in on-orbit flight software. It accommodates arbitrary flight dynamics and both impulsive and finite burns for either absolute or relative targeting applications. It also allows for an arbitrary number of targeting design parameters such as multiple discrete correction burns or finite thrust parameters to satisfy numerous combinations of targeting constraints that can have fixed or variable time epochs. Given a reference trajectory, this targeting technique provides a general framework to quickly solve an assortment of targeting problems that may be well-defined, over-determined, or under-determined while naturally producing metrics providing insight into the controllability for a given problem formulation. Due to the derivation, speed, and accuracy of the algorithm, it lends to supporting rapid linear covariance analysis and robust trajectory design applications for a variety of flight phases such as rendezvous and docking, cislunar transfer, interplanetary flight, orbit maintenance, de-orbit, and powered descent and landing.

Targeting↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA's Astronant Family Support Office

During the NASA‐Mir program of the 1990s and due to the challenges inherent in the International Space Station training schedule and operations tempo, it was clear that a special focus on supporting families was a key to overall mission success for the ISS crewmembers pre‐, in‐ and post‐flight. To that end, in January 2001 the first Family Services Coordinator was hired by the Behavioral Health and Performance group at NASA JSC and matrixed from Medical Operations into the Astronaut Office's organization. The initial roles and responsibilities were driven by critical needs, including facilitating family communication during training deployments, providing mission‐specific and other relevant trainings for spouses, serving as liaison for families with NASA organizations such as Medical Operations, NASA management and the Astronaut Office, and providing assistance to ensure success of an Astronaut Spouses Group. The role of the Family Support Office (FSO) has modified as the ISS Program matured and the needs of families changed. The FSO is currently an integral part of the Astronaut Office's ISS Operations Branch. It still serves the critical function of providing information to families, as well as being the primary contact for US and international partner families with resources at JSC. Since crews launch and return on Russian vehicles, the FSO has the added responsibility for coordinating with Flight Crew Operations, the families, and their guests for Soyuz launches, landings, and Direct Return to Houston post‐flight. This presentation will provide a summary of the family support services provided for astronauts, and how they have changed with the Program and families the FSO serves. Considerations for future FSO services will be discussed briefly as NASA proposes one year missions and beyond ISS missions. Learning Objective: 1) Obtain an understanding of the reasons a Family Support Office was important for NASA. 2) Become familiar with the services provided for astronauts and their families and how they changed with the Program and family needs.

Beven, Gary↗
NASA NTRS2010

A Dual Launch Robotic and Human Lunar Mission Architecture

This paper describes a comprehensive lunar exploration architecture developed by Marshall Space Flight Center's Advanced Concepts Office that features a science-based surface exploration strategy and a transportation architecture that uses two launches of a heavy lift launch vehicle to deliver human and robotic mission systems to the moon. The principal advantage of the dual launch lunar mission strategy is the reduced cost and risk resulting from the development of just one launch vehicle system. The dual launch lunar mission architecture may also enhance opportunities for commercial and international partnerships by using expendable launch vehicle services for robotic missions or development of surface exploration elements. Furthermore, this architecture is particularly suited to the integration of robotic and human exploration to maximize science return. For surface operations, an innovative dual-mode rover is presented that is capable of performing robotic science exploration as well as transporting human crew conducting surface exploration. The dual-mode rover can be deployed to the lunar surface to perform precursor science activities, collect samples, scout potential crew landing sites, and meet the crew at a designated landing site. With this approach, the crew is able to evaluate the robotically collected samples to select the best samples for return to Earth to maximize the scientific value. The rovers can continue robotic exploration after the crew leaves the lunar surface. The transportation system for the dual launch mission architecture uses a lunar-orbit-rendezvous strategy. Two heavy lift launch vehicles depart from Earth within a six hour period to transport the lunar lander and crew elements separately to lunar orbit. In lunar orbit, the crew transfer vehicle docks with the lander and the crew boards the lander for descent to the surface. After the surface mission, the crew returns to the orbiting transfer vehicle for the return to the Earth. This paper describes a complete transportation architecture including the analysis of transportation element options and sensitivities including: transportation element mass to surface landed mass; lander propellant options; and mission crew size. Based on this analysis, initial design concepts for the launch vehicle, crew module and lunar lander are presented. The paper also describes how the dual launch lunar mission architecture would fit into a more general overarching human space exploration philosophy that would allow expanded application of mission transportation elements for missions beyond the Earth-moon realm.

Jones, David L.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Spaceport aurora: An orbiting transportation node

With recent announcements of the development of permanently staffed facilities on the Moon and Mars, the national space plan is in need of an infrastructure system for transportation and maintenance. A project team at the University of Houston College of Architecture and the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture, recently examined components for a low Earth orbit (LEO) transportation node that supports a lunar build-up scenario. Areas of investigation included identifying transportation node functions, identifying existing space systems and subsystems, analyzing variable orbits, determining logistics strategies for maintenance, and investigating assured crew return systems. The information resulted in a requirements definition document, from which the team then addressed conceptual designs for a LEO transportation node. The primary design drivers included: orbital stability, maximizing human performance and safety, vehicle maintainability, and modularity within existing space infrastructure. For orbital stability, the power tower configuration provides a gravity gradient stabilized facility and serves as the backbone for the various facility components. To maximize human performance, human comfort is stressed through zoning of living and working activities, maintaining a consistent local vertical orientation, providing crew interaction and viewing areas and providing crew return vehicles. Vehicle maintainability is accomplished through dual hangars, dual work cupolas, work modules, telerobotics and a fuel depot. Modularity is incorporated using Space Station Freedom module diameter, Space Station Freedom standard racks, and interchangeable interior partitions. It is intended that the final design be flexible and adaptable to provide a facility prototype that can service multiple mission profiles using modular space systems.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1989

Aerospace Vehicle Design, Spacecraft Section. Final Project Reports: Project Groups 6-8 - Volume 2

Three groups of student engineers in an aerospace vehicle design course present their designs for a vehicle that can be used to resupply the Space Station Freedam and provide emergency crew return to earth capability. The vehicle's requirements include a lifetime that exceeds six years, low cost, the capability for withstanding pressurization, launch, orbit, and reentry hazards, and reliability. The vehicle's subsystems are structures, communication and command data systems, attitude and articulation control, life support and crew systems, power and propulsion, reentry and recovery systems, and mission management, planning, and costing. Special attention is given to spacecraft communications.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1989

Aerospace Vehicle Design, Spacecraft Section. Volume 1: Project Groups 3-5

Three groups of student engineers in an aerospace vehicle design course present their designs for a vehicle that can be used to resupply the Space Station Freedom and provide an emergency crew return to earth capability. The vehicle's requirements include a lifetime that exceeds six years, low cost, the capability for withstanding pressurization, launch, orbit, and reentry hazards, and reliability. The vehicle's subsystems are analyzed. These subsystems are structures, communication and command data systems, attitude and articulation control, life support and crew systems, power and propulsion, reentry and recovery systems, and mission management, planning, and costing.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2006

Hydrogen Reduction of Ilmenite from Lunar Regolith

Each ascent vehicle returning from the lunar surface with a crew vehicle will require several tons of fuel. Most architecture studies of lunar exploration vehicles use liquid oxygen for fuel, either for LOX/LH2 or LOX/methane. Utilization of oxygen generated on the lunar surface saves mass launched from Earth, with a multiplication factor on the order of 4-5, e.g. production and utilization of 4 tons of lunar oxygen for the ascent vehicle saves 16-20 tons of initial mass in low Earth orbit (IMLEO). The paper discusses ongoing MSFC activity on oxygen production by hydrogen reduction of Ilmenite. Specifically the important project milestone is to develop the Technology Readiness Level for the generation of lunar oxygen for propellant production from 3 to 5. The paper will provide an overview of the processes for Oxygen Generation, Complete Systems Architecture for a pilot lunar plant, experimental apparatus development and initial experimental results, and future directions.

Ramachandran, N.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Orion Optical Navigation for Loss of Communication Lunar Return Contingencies

The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) will replace the Space Shuttle and serve as the next-generation spaceship to carry humans back to the Moon for the first time since the Apollo program. For nominal lunar mission operations, the Mission Control Navigation team will utilize radiometric measurements to determine the position and velocity of Orion and uplink state information to support Lunar return. However, in the loss of communications contingency return scenario, Orion must safely return the crew to the Earth's surface. The navigation design solution for this loss of communications scenario is optical navigation consisting of lunar landmark tracking in low lunar orbit and star- horizon angular measurements coupled with apparent planetary diameter for Earth return trajectories. This paper describes the optical measurement errors and the navigation filter that will process those measurements to support navigation for safe crew return.

Getchius, Joel↗
NASA NTRS1997

Mars Aerocapture Studies for the Design Reference Mission

The recent discovery of possible fossilized microbes in a Martian meteorite sample and the spectacular success of the Mars Pathfinder mission have substantially increased public interest and support for future robotic and manned exploration of Mars. NASA is currently refining a plan known as the Design Reference Mission (DRM) in which the first human landing would occur in 2014 after a series of cargo launches which would place surface systems and an Earth return vehicle at Mars two years prior to the crew's arrival. At each subsequent launch opportunity (which occur approximately every twenty-six months), an additional Earth return vehicle, surface facility and crew would depart for Mars, with each crew employing the systems launched during the previous opportunity. The mission design calls for a long-duration surface stay, rapid crew transits, in-situ manufacture of the Mars ascent propellant, nuclear thermal propulsion for the trans-Mars injection burn, and the use of aerocapture for both the cargo and crew vehicles at Mars.

Lyne, James Evans↗
NASA NTRS2019

Update to Mars Ascent Vehicle Design for Human Exploration

Astronauts on a mission to Mars will require several vehicles working together to get to Mars orbit, descend to the surface of Mars, support them while they’re there, and return them to Earth. The Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) transports the crew off the surface of Mars to a waiting Earth return vehicle in Mars orbit and is a particularly influential part of the mission architecture because it sets performance requirements for the lander and in-space transportation vehicles. With this in mind, efforts have been made to minimize the MAV mass, and its impact on the other vehicles. A minimal mass MAV design using methane and in situ generated oxygen propellants was presented in 2015. Since that time, refinements have been made in most subsystems to incorporate findings from ongoing research into key technologies, improved understanding of environments and further analysis of design options. This paper presents an overview of the current MAV reference design used in NASA’s human Mars mission studies, and includes a description of the operations, configuration, subsystem design, and a vehicle mass summary.

propulsion↗
NASA NTRS2006

Development of the J-2X Engine for the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle: Building on the Apollo Program for Lunar Return Missions

The United States (U.S.) Vision for Space Exploration directs NASA to develop two new launch vehicles for sending humans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. In January 2006, NASA streamlined its hardware development approach for replacing the Space Shuttle after it is retired in 2010. Benefits of this approach include reduced programmatic and technical risks and the potential to return to the Moon by 2020, by developing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) propulsion elements now, with full extensibility to future Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) lunar systems. This decision was reached after the Exploration Launch Projects Office performed a variety of risk analyses, commonality assessments, and trade studies. The Constellation Program selected the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne J-2X engine to power the Ares I Upper Stage Element and the Ares V Earth Departure Stage. This paper narrates the evolution of that decision; describes the performance capabilities expected of the J-2X design, including potential commonality challenges and opportunities between the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles; and provides a current status of J-2X design, development, and hardware testing activities. This paper also explains how the J-2X engine effort mitigates risk by building on the Apollo Program and other lessons lived to deliver a human-rated engine that is on an aggressive development schedule, with its first demonstration flight in 2012.

Snoddy, Jim↗
NASA NTRS2007

Development of the J-2X Engine for the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle: Building on the Apollo Program for Lunar Return Missions

The United States (U.S.) Vision for Space Exploration has directed NASA to develop two new launch vehicles for sending humans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. In January 2006, NASA streamlined its hardware development approach for replacing the Space Shuttle after it is retired in 2010. Benefits of this approach include reduced programmatic and technical risks and the potential to return to the Moon by 2020, by developing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) propulsion elements now, with full extensibility to future Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) lunar systems. The Constellation Program selected the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne J-2X engine to power the Ares I Upper Stage Element and the Ares V Earth Departure Stage. This decision was reached during the Exploration Systems Architecture Study and confirmed after the Exploration Launch Projects Office performed a variety of risk analyses, commonality assessments, and trade studies. This paper narrates the evolution of that decision; describes the performance capabilities expected of the J-2X design, including potential commonality challenges and opportunities between the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles; and provides a current status of J-2X design, development, and hardware testing activities. This paper also explains how the J-2X engine effort mitigates risk by testing existing engine hardware and designs; building on the Apollo Program (1961 to 1975), the Space Shuttle Program (1972 to 2010); and consulting with Apollo-era experts to derive other lessons lived to deliver a human-rated engine that is on an aggressive development schedule, with its first demonstration flight in 2012.

Greene, William D.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Development of the J-2X Engine for the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle: Building on the Apollo Program for Lunar Return Missions

The United States (U.S.) Vision for Space Exploration has directed NASA to develop two new launch vehicles for sending humans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. In January 2006, NASA streamlined its hardware development approach for replacing the Space Shuttle after it is retired in 2010. Benefits of this approach include reduced programmatic and technical risks and the potential to return to the Moon by 2020 by developing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) propulsion elements now, with full extensibility to future Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) lunar systems. The Constellation Program selected the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne J-2X engine to power the Ares I Upper Stage Element and the Ares V Earth Departure Stage (EDS). This decision was reached during the Exploration Systems Architecture Study and confirmed after the Exploration Launch Projects Office performed a variety of risk analyses, commonality assessments, and trade studies. This paper narrates the evolution of that decision; describes the performance capabilities expected of the J-2X design, including potential commonality challenges and opportunities between the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles; and provides a current status of J-2X design, development, and hardware testing activities. This paper also explains how the J-2X engine effort mitigates risk by testing existing engine hardware and designs; building on the Apollo Program (1961 to 1975), the Space Shuttle Program (1972 to 2010); and consulting with Apollo era experts to derive other lessons learned to deliver a human-rated engine that is on an aggressive development schedule, with its first demonstration flight in 2012.

Greene, WIlliam↗
NASA NTRS1993

Lunar lander and return propulsion system trade study

This trade study was initiated at NASA/JSC in May 1992 to develop and evaluate main propulsion system alternatives to the reference First Lunar Outpost (FLO) lander and return-stage transportation system concept. Thirteen alternative configurations were developed to explore the impacts of various combinations of return stage propellants, using either pressure or pump-fed propulsion systems and various staging options. Besides two-stage vehicle concepts, the merits of single-stage and stage-and-a-half options were also assessed in combination with high-performance liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen propellants. Configurations using an integrated modular cryogenic engine were developed to assess potential improvements in packaging efficiency, mass performance, and system reliability compared to non-modular cryogenic designs. The selection process to evaluate the various designs was the analytic hierarchy process. The trade study showed that a pressure-fed MMH/N2O4 return stage and RL10-based lander stage is the best option for a 1999 launch. While results of this study are tailored to FLO needs, the design date, criteria, and selection methodology are applicable to the design of other crewed lunar landing and return vehicles.

Hurlbert, Eric A.↗