Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Explorers”

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 NTRS2007

Exploration Blueprint: Data Book

The material contained in this report was compiled to capture the work performed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Exploration study team in the late 2002 timeframe. The "Exploration Blueprint Data Book" documents the analyses and findings of the 90-day Agency-wide study conducted from September - November 2002. During the summer of 2002, the NASA Deputy Administrator requested that a study be performed with the following objectives: - Develop the rationale for exploration beyond low-Earth orbit - Develop roadmaps for how to accomplish the first steps through humans to Mars - Develop design reference missions as a basis for the roadmaps - Make recommendations on what can be done now to effect this future This planning team, termed the Exploration Blueprint, performed architecture analyses to develop roadmaps for how to accomplish the first steps beyond LEO through the human exploration of Mars. The previous NASA Exploration Team activities laid the foundation and framework for development of NASA's Integrated Space Plan. The reference missions resulting from the analysis performed by the Exploration Blueprint team formed the basis for requirement definition, systems development, technology roadmapping, and risk assessments for future human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit. Emphasis was placed on developing recommendations on what could be done now to effect future exploration activities. The Exploration Blueprint team embraced the "Stepping Stone" approach to exploration where human and robotic activities are conducted through progressive expansion outward beyond low-Earth orbit. Results from this study produced a long-term strategy for exploration with near-term implementation plans, program recommendations, and technology investments. Specific results included the development of a common exploration crew vehicle concept, a unified space nuclear strategy, focused bioastronautics research objectives, and an integrated human and robotic exploration strategy. Recommendations from the Exploration Blueprint included the endorsement of the Nuclear Systems Initiative, augmentation of the bioastronautics research, a focused space transportation program including heavy-lift launch and a common exploration vehicle design for ISS and exploration missions, as well as an integrated human and robotic exploration strategy for Mars.

Bret G Drake↗
NASA NTRS2003

Bio-Inspired Engineering of Exploration Systems

The multidisciplinary concept of "bioinspired engineering of exploration systems" (BEES) is described, which is a guiding principle of the continuing effort to develop biomorphic explorers as reported in a number of articles in the past issues of NASA Tech Briefs. The intent of BEES is to distill from the principles found in successful nature-tested mechanisms of specific crucial functions that are hard to accomplish by conventional methods but that are accomplished rather deftly in nature by biological organisms. The intent is not just to mimic operational mechanisms found in a specific biological organism but to imbibe the salient principles from a variety of diverse bio-organisms for the desired crucial function. Thereby, we can build explorer systems that have specific capabilities endowed beyond nature, as they will possess a combination of the best nature-tested mechanisms for that particular function. The approach consists of selecting a crucial function, for example, flight or some selected aspects of flight, and develop an explorer that combines the principles of those specific attributes as seen in diverse flying species into one artificial entity. This will allow going beyond biology and achieving unprecedented capability and adaptability needed in encountering and exploring what is as yet unknown. A classification of biomorphic flyers into two main classes of surface and aerial explorers is illustrated in the figure, with examples of a variety of biological organisms that provide the inspiration in each respective subclass. Such biomorphic explorers may possess varied mobility modes: surface-roving, burrowing, hopping, hovering, or flying, to accomplish surface, subsurface, and aerial exploration. Preprogrammed for a specific function, they could serve as one-way communicating beacons, spread over the exploration site, autonomously looking for/at the targets of interest. In a hierarchical organization, these biomorphic explorers would report to the next level of exploration mode (say, a large conventional lander/rover) in the vicinity. A widespread and affordable exploration of new/hazardous sites at lower cost and risk would thus become possible by utilizing a faster aerial flyer to cover long ranges and deploying a variety of function- specific, smaller biomorphic explorers for distributed sensing and local sample acquisition. Several conceptual biomorphic missions for planetary and terrestrial exploration applications have been illustrated in "Surface-Launched Explorers for Reconnaissance/ Scouting" (NPO-20871), NASA Tech Briefs, Vol. 26, No. 4 (April, 2002), page 69 and "Bio-Inspired Engineering of Exploration Systems," Journal of Space Mission Architecture, Issue 2, Fall 2000, pages 49-79.

Thakoor, Sanita↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Single Crew Module Concept for Exploration

Many concepts have been proposed for exploring space. In early 2010 presidential direction called for reconsidering the approach to address changes in exploration destinations, use of new technologies and development of new capabilities to support exploration of space. Considering the proposed new technology and capabilities that NASA was directed to pursue, the single crew module (SCM) concept for a more streamlined approach to the infrastructure and conduct of exploration missions was developed. The SCM concept combines many of the new promising technologies with a central concept of mission architectures that uses a single habitat module for all phases of an exploration mission. Integrating mission elements near Earth and fully fueling them prior to departure of the vicinity of Earth provides the capability of using the single habitat both in transit to an exploration destination and while exploring the destination. The concept employs the capability to return the habitat and interplanetary propulsion system to Earth vicinity so that those elements can be reused on subsequent exploration missions. This paper describes the SCM concept, provides a top level mass estimate for the elements needed and trades the concept against Many concepts have been proposed for exploring space. In early 2010 presidential direction called for reconsidering the approach to address changes in exploration destinations, use of new technologies and development of new capabilities to support exploration of space. Considering the proposed new technology and capabilities that NASA was directed to pursue, the single crew module (SCM) concept for a more streamlined approach to the infrastructure and conduct of exploration missions was developed. The SCM concept combines many of the new promising technologies with a central concept of mission architectures that uses a single habitat module for all phases of an exploration mission. Integrating mission elements near Earth and fully fueling them prior to departure of the vicinity of Earth provides the capability of using the single habitat both in transit to an exploration destination and while exploring the destination. The concept employs the capability to return the habitat and interplanetary propulsion system to Earth vicinity so that those elements can be reused on subsequent exploration missions. This paper describes the SCM concept, provides a top level mass estimate for the elements needed and trades the concept against Constellation approaches for Lunar, Near Earth Asteroid and Mars Surface missions.

Chambliss, Joe↗
NASA NTRS2004

The New National Vision for Space Exploration

From the Apollo landings on the Moon, to robotic surveys of the Sun and the planets, to the compelling images captured by advanced space telescopes, U.S. achievements in space have revolutionized humanity s view of the universe and have inspired Americans and people around the world. These achievements also have led to the development of technologies that have widespread applications to address problems on Earth. As the world enters the second century of powered flight, it is appropriate to articulate a new vision that will define and guide U.S. space exploration activities for the next several decades. Today, humanity has the potential to seek answers to the most fundamental questions posed about the existence of life beyond Earth. Telescopes have found planets around other stars. Robotic probes have identified potential resources on the Moon, and evidence of water - a key ingredient for life - has been found on Mars and the moons of Jupiter. Direct human experience in space has fundamentally altered our perspective of humanity and our place in the universe. Humans have the ability to respond to the unexpected developments inherent in space travel and possess unique skills that enhance discoveries. Just as Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo challenged a generation of Americans, a renewed U.S. space exploration program with a significant human component can inspire us - and our youth - to greater achievements on Earth and in space. The loss of Space Shuttles Challenger and Columbia and their crews are a stark reminder of the inherent risks of space flight and the severity of the challenges posed by space exploration. In preparation for future human exploration, we must advance our ability to live and work safely in space and, at the same time, develop the technologies to extend humanity s reach to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. The new technologies required for further space exploration also will improve the Nation s other space activities and may provide applications that could be used to address problems on Earth. Like the explorers of the past and the pioneers of flight in the last century, we cannot today identify all that we will gain from space exploration; we are confident, nonetheless, that the eventual return will be great. Like their efforts, the success of future U.S. space exploration will unfold over generations. The fundamental goal of this new national vision is to advance U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests through a robust space exploration program. In support of this goal, the United States will: 1) Implement a sustained and affordable human and robotic program to explore the solar system and beyond; 2) Extend human presence across the solar system, starting with a human return to the Moon by the year 2020, in preparation for human exploration of IMars and other destinations; 3) Develop the innovative technologies, knowledge, and infrastructures both to explore and to support decisions about the destinations for human exploration; and 4) Promote international and commercial participation in exploration to further U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests.

Sackheim, Robert L.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Human Space Exploration: The Moon, Mars, and Beyond

America is returning to the Moon in preparation for the first human footprint on Mars, guided by the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration. This presentation will discuss NASA's mission, the reasons for returning to the Moon and going to Mars, and how NASA will accomplish that mission in ways that promote leadership in space and economic expansion on the new frontier. The primary goals of the Vision for Space Exploration are to finish the International Space Station, retire the Space Shuttle, and build the new spacecraft needed, to return people to the Moon and go to Mars. The Vision commits NASA and the nation to an agenda of exploration that also includes robotic exploration and technology development, while building on lessons learned over 50 years of hard-won experience. Why the Moon? Many questions about the Moon's potential resources and how its history is linked to that of Earth were spurred by the brief Apollo explorations of the 1960s and 1970s. This new venture will carry more explorers to more diverse landing sites with more capable tools and equipment for extended expeditions. The Moon also will serve as a training ground before embarking on the longer, more difficult trip to Mars. NASA plans to build a lunar outpost at one of the lunar poles, learn to live off the land, and reduce dePendence on Earth for longer missions. America needs to extend its ability to survive in hostile environments close to our home planet before astronauts will reach Mars, a planet very much like Earth. NASA has worked with scientists to define lunar exploration goals and is addressing the opportunities for a range of scientific study on Mars. In order to reach the Moon and Mars within a lifetime and within budget, NASA is building on common hardware, shared knowledge, and unique experience derived from the Apollo Saturn, Space Shuttle and contemporary commercial launch vehicle programs. The journeys to the Moon and Mars will require a variety of vehicles, including the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, which transports the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle, which transports the Lunar Surface Access Module. The architecture for the lunar missions will use one launch to ferry the crew into orbit, where it will rendezvous with the Lunar Module in the Earth Departure Stage, which will then propel the combination into lunar orbit. The imperative to explore space with the combination of astronauts and robots will be the impetus for inventions such as solar power and water and waste recycling. This next chapter in NASA's history promises to write the next chapter in American history, as well. It will require this nation to provide the talent to develop tools, machines, materials, processes, technologies, and capabilities that can benefit nearly all aspects of life on Earth. Roles and responsibilities are shared between a nationwide Government and industry team. The Exploration Launch Projects Office at the Marshall Space Flight Center manages the design, development, testing, and evaluation of both vehicles and serves as lead systems integrator. A little over a year after it was chartered, the Exploration Launch Projects team is testing engine components, refining vehicle designs, performing wind tunnel tests, and building hardware for the first flight test of Ares I-l, scheduled for spring 2009. The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration lays out a roadmap for a long-term venture of discovery. This endeavor will inspire and attract the best and brightest students to power this nation successfully to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. If one equates the value proposition for space with simple dollars and cents, the potential of the new space economy is tremendous, from orbital space delivery services for the International Space Station to mining and solar energy collection on the Moon and asteroids. The Vision for Space Exploration is fundamentally about bringing the resources of the solar system within the economic sphere of humaind. Given the immense size of our solar system, the amount of available material and energy within it present an enormous economic opportunity.

Sexton, Jeffrey D.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Space and Ground Trades for Human Exploration and Wearable Computing

Human exploration of the Moon and Mars will present unique trade study challenges as ground system elements shift to planetary bodies and perhaps eventually to the bodies of human explorers in the form of wearable computing technologies. This presentation will highlight some of the key space and ground trade issues that will face the Exploration Initiative as NASA begins designing systems for the sustained human exploration of the Moon and Mars, with an emphasis on wearable computing. We will present some preliminary test results and scenarios that demonstrate how wearable computing might affect the trade space noted below. We will first present some background on wearable computing and its utility to NASA's Exploration Initiative. Next, we will discuss three broad architectural themes, some key ground and space trade issues within those themes and how they relate to wearable computing. Lastly, we will present some preliminary test results and suggest guidance for proceeding in the assessment and creation of a value-added role for wearable computing in the Exploration Initiative. The three broad ground-space architectural trade themes we will discuss are: 1. Functional Shift and Distribution: To what extent, if any, should traditional ground system functionality be shifted to, and distributed among, the Earth, Moon/Mars, and the human. explorer? 2. Situational Awareness and Autonomy: How much situational awareness (e.g. environmental conditions, biometrics, etc.) and autonomy is required and desired, and where should these capabilities reside? 3. Functional Redundancy: What functions (e.g. command, control, analysis) should exist simultaneously on Earth, the Moon/Mars, and the human explorer? These three themes can serve as the axes of a three-dimensional trade space, within which architectural solutions reside. We will show how wearable computers can fit into this trade space and what the possible implications could be for the rest of the ground and space architecture(s). We intend this to be an example of explorer-centric thinking in a fully integrated explorer paradigm, where integrated explorer refers to a human explorer having instant access to all relevant data, knowledge of the environment, science models, health and safety-related events, and other tools and information via wearable computing technologies. The trade study approach will include involvement from the relevant stakeholders (Constellation Systems, CCCI, EVA Project Office, Astronaut office, Mission Operations, Space Life Sciences, etc.) to develop operations concepts (and/or operations scenarios) from which a basic high-level set of requirements could be extracted. This set of requirements could serve as a foundation (along with stakeholder buy-in) that would help define the trade space and assist in identifying candidate technologies for further study and evolution to higher-level technology readiness levels.

Lupisella, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2016

Safety Characteristics in System Application of Software for Human Rated Exploration Missions for the 8th IAASS Conference

NASA and its industry and international partners are embarking on a bold and inspiring development effort to design and build an exploration class space system. The space system is made up of the Orion system, the Space Launch System (SLS) and the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) system. All are highly coupled together and dependent on each other for the combined safety of the space system. A key area of system safety focus needs to be in the ground and flight application software system (GFAS). In the development, certification and operations of GFAS, there are a series of safety characteristics that define the approach to ensure mission success. This paper will explore and examine the safety characteristics of the GFAS development. The GFAS system integrates the flight software packages of the Orion and SLS with the ground systems and launch countdown sequencers through the 'agile' software development process. A unique approach is needed to develop the GFAS project capabilities within this agile process. NASA has defined the software development process through a set of standards. The standards were written during the infancy of the so-called industry 'agile development' movement and must be tailored to adapt to the highly integrated environment of human exploration systems. Safety of the space systems and the eventual crew on board is paramount during the preparation of the exploration flight systems. A series of software safety characteristics have been incorporated into the development and certification efforts to ensure readiness for use and compatibility with the space systems. Three underlining factors in the exploration architecture require the GFAS system to be unique in its approach to ensure safety for the space systems, both the flight as well as the ground systems. The first are the missions themselves, which are exploration in nature, and go far beyond the comfort of low Earth orbit operations. The second is the current exploration system will launch only one mission per year even less during its developmental phases. Finally, the third is the partnered approach through the use of many different prime contractors, including commercial and international partners, to design and build the exploration systems. These three factors make the challenges to meet the mission preparations and the safety expectations extremely difficult to implement. As NASA leads a team of partners in the exploration beyond earth's influence, it is a safety imperative that the application software used to test, checkout, prepare and launch the exploration systems put safety of the hardware and mission first. Software safety characteristics are built into the design and development process to enable the human rated systems to begin their missions safely and successfully. Exploration missions beyond Earth are inherently risky, however, with solid safety approaches in both hardware and software, the boldness of these missions can be realized for all on the home planet.

capability↗
NASA NTRS1991

The exploration metaphor

NASA's experience in planetary exploration has demonstrated that the desktop workstation is inadequate for many visualization situations. The primary mission displays for the unmanned Surveyor missions to the moon during the mid-1960's, for example, were environmental images assembled on the inside surfaces of spherical shells. Future exploration missions will greatly benefit from advances in digital computer and display technology, but there remain unmet user interface needs. Alternative user interfaces and metaphors are needed for planetary exploration and other interactions with complex spatial environments. These interfaces and metaphors would enable the user to directly explore environments and naturally manipulate objects in those environments. Personal simulators, virtual workstations, and telepresence user interfaces are systems capable of providing this integration of user space and task space. The Exploration Metaphor is a useful concept for guiding the design of user interfaces for virtual environments and telepresence. To apply the Exploration Metaphor is to assert that computing is like exploration, and to support objects, operations, and contexts comparable to those encountered in the exploration of natural environments. The Exploration Metaphor, under development for user interfaces in support of NASA's planetary exploration missions and goals, will also benefit other applications where complex spatial information must be visualized. Visualization methods and systems for planetary exploration are becoming increasingly integrated and interactive as computing technology improves. These advances will benefit from virtual environment and telepresence interface technology. A key development has been the processing of multiple images and other sensor data to create detailed digital models of the planets and moons. Data from images of the Earth, Mars, and Miranda, for example, have been converted into 3D models, and dynamic virtual fly-overs have been computed as demonstrations. Similar processing of lower altitude photography and the use of computer aided design tools promise to produce very detailed models in the future.

Mcgreevy, Michael W.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Alternative Strategies for Exploring Mars and the Moons of Mars

The possible human exploration of Mars represents one of civilization s next major challenges and is an enterprise that would confirm the potential of humans to leave our home planet system and make our way outward into the cosmos. As exploration endeavors begin to set sights beyond low Earth orbit, potential exploration of the surface of Mars continues to serve as the horizon destination to help focus technology development and research efforts. Recent thoughts on exploration follow a flexible path approach beginning with missions that do not extend down into planetary gravity wells including surface exploration. Consistent with that flexible path strategy is the notion of exploring the moons of Mars, namely Phobos and Deimos, prior to exploring the surface. The premise behind this thought is that exploring Mars moons would be less costly and risky since these missions would avoid the difficulties associated with landing on the surface and subsequent ascent back to orbit. A complete assessment of this strategy has not been performed in the context of the flexible path approach and is needed to clearly understand all of the advantages and disadvantages. This paper examines the strategic implications of possible human exploration of the moons of Mars as a potential prelude to surface exploration. Various operational concepts for Phobos and Deimos exploration that include the infusion of different propulsion technologies are assessed in terms of mission duration, technologies required, overall risk and difficulty, and operational construct. Finally, the strategic implications of each concept are assessed to determine the overall key challenges and strategic links to other key flexible path destinations.

Drake, Bret G.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Alternative Strategies for Exploring Mars and the Moons of Mars

The human exploration of Mars represents one of civilizations next major challenges and is an enterprise that would confirm the potential of humans to leave our home planet system and make our way outward into the cosmos. As exploration endeavors begin to set sights beyond low-Earth orbit, exploration of the surface of Mars continues to serve as the horizon destination to help focus technology development and research efforts. Recent thoughts on exploration follow a flexible path approach beginning with missions which do not extend down into planetary gravity wells including surface exploration. Consistent with that flexible path strategy is the notion of exploring the moons of Mars, namely Phobos and Deimos, prior to exploring the surface. The premise behind this thought is that exploring Mars moons would be less costly and risky since these missions would avoid the difficulties associated with landing on the surface and subsequent ascent back to orbit. A complete assessment of this strategy has not been performed in the context of the flexible path approach and is needed to clearly understand all of the advantages and disadvantages. This paper examines the strategic implications of human exploration of the moons of Mars as a potential prelude to surface exploration. Various operational concepts for Phobos and Deimos exploration that include the infusion of different propulsion technologies are assessed in terms of mission duration, technologies required, overall risk and difficulty, and operational construct. Finally, the strategic implications of each concept are assessed to determine the overall key challenges and strategic links to other key flexible path destinations.

Drake, Bret G.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Space Biology and Medicine: Space and Its Exploration - Volume I

Perhaps one of the greatest gifts that has been given to the people of the world in the last few hundred years has been an emerging sense of the place of our planet and its inhabitants within the context of the vast universe. Our knowledge of the rest of the universe has not come quickly, nor was the process of attaining it only recently begun; however, the unprecedented acceleration of that process has benefitted from a fundamental new aspect of our species that has only manifested itself in the last 30 years or so, the ability to travel in space. Before the space age, the Universe was studied only through observations from the Earth. All that has changed with the beginning of the space age. Machines built by humans have flown to all but one of the nine planets that revolve around our Sun, have ventured billions of miles from the Earth and looked back, and have landed on three other worlds. Spacecraft in orbit around the Earth have viewed the sky at a vast number of electromagnetic wavelengths, detecting the shape of the galaxy and the universe, and even measuring the remnants of the universe's beginning. Human explorers have ventured forth, first for short stays in orbit, then, later, walking upon the Moon and living for long periods in space. As they did so, billions of people on the Earth came to view the Earth in a fundamentally different way, not just as the familiar day to- day backdrop for their lives, but as a small oasis suspended in the night sky above an alien landscape. It is this new view of the Earth that is the true gift of space exploration. Space exploration has at once given us a new perspective on the value of our world, and a new perspective from which to understand how it operates. It has shown us that the Earth is by far the most precious place in the solar system in terms of supporting human life, while revealing that other destinations may still be compelling. The exploration of space has at once become a challenge for humanity to overcome and a path to our common future. But for humanity to embark on this path, we need to understand ourselves in a new environment. As such, an understanding of the biological consequences of and opportunities in space flight is essential. In this, the first volume of a joint U.S./Russian series on space biology and medicine, we describe the current status of our understanding of space and present general information that will prove useful when reading subsequent volumes. Since we are witnesses to the beginning of a new era of interplanetary travel, a significant portion of the first volume will concentrate on the physical and ecological conditions that exist in near and outer space, as well as heavenly bodies from the smallest ones to the giant planets and stars. While space exploration is a comparatively recent endeavor, its foundations were laid much more than 30 years ago, and its history has been an eventful one. In the first part of this volume, Rauschenbach, Sokolskiy, and Gurjian address the "Historical Aspects of Space Exploration" from its beginnings to a present-day view of the events of the space age. The nature of space itself and its features is the focus of the second section of the volume. In the first chapter of the part, "Stars and Interstellar Space," the origin and evolution of stars, and the nature of the portions of space most distant from Earth are described by Galeev and Marochnik. In Chapter 2, Pisarenko, Logachev, and Kurt in "The Sun and Interplanetary Space" bring us to the vicinity of our own solar system and provide a description and discussion of the nearest star and its influence on the space environment that our Earth and the other planets inhabit. In our solar system there are many fascinating objects, remnants of the formation of a rather ordinary star in a rather obscure portion of the galaxy. Historical accident has caused us to be much more curious (and knowledgeable) about "The Inner Planets of the Solar System" than about any of these other objects. In Chapter 3, Marov describes the planets Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars, their history and origin, and their environmental conditions, and in Chapter 4 Owen provides similar information about Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto, "The Outer Planets of the Solar System." Morrison provides a thorough discussion of "Asteroids, Comets, and Other Small Bodies" in Chapter 5. The understanding of these relics of the formation of the solar system may form the center of our ability to understand the origin of solar systems in general, and of the critical role that the beginning of the solar system had on the prospects for the origin of life and its continued survival and evolution in the face of their recurrent impacts on Earth. In Chapter 6, the first chapter of the third part, Rummel describes the area of "Exobiology," the study of the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the context of the origin and evolution of the universe. The same processes that have given rise to life on Earth may have given rise to life elsewhere. In Chapter 7, the "Earth and the Biosphere," the nature and function of the Earth are discussed as a specific instance of planetary and biological evolution. The effects of biological processes on the Earth under the influence of human activities are also addressed by Moore and Bartlett in Chapter 7. The final chapter in this section concerns the prospects that life in the universe may be widespread; "SETI," the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, by Billingham and Tarter, presents the arguments for conducting a search for evidence of life elsewhere in the galaxy, and describes the various methods proposed for conducting such a search. While SETI has a distinctly exploration al character, more direct means are available for exploring the solar system around us. The fourth part of the volume addresses this subject of space exploration. Considering the prospects for research on space biology and medicine, the means of providing "Access to Space" are described by Feoktistov and Briggs in Chapter 9. This chapter addresses carriers and launch systems, the unmanned and manned spacecraft that they loft into space, and the task of mission operations by which these precious vessels are monitored, navigated, and controlled. Despite the successes of the past and the capabilities of the present, it is clear that the study of space biology and medicine will be even more rewarding in the future than it has been to date. The work of the next few years that will be undertaken by the U.S. and Russia, both independently and jointly, will focus first on enabling greater capabilities in the exploration of space, and then on using the unique characteristics of the space environment to provide insight and greater understanding into biological systems, their behavior, development, and origin. The chapters of the first volume were written by leaders in their fields from the U.S. and Russia. The material presented summarizes our current understanding of space and its exploration. We understand that the first volume will be of interest not only to medical personnel and biologists, but also to general readers who want information about space beyond their own particular fields of expertise.

Nicogossian, Arnauld E.↗
NASA NTRS2015

The Global Exploration Roadmap: Opportunities for Lunar Science

The Global Exploration Roadmap (GER) has been developed by the International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG comprised of 14 space agencies) to define various pathways to getting humans beyond low Earth orbit and eventually to Mars. Such pathways include visiting asteroids or the Moon before going on to Mars. This document has been written at a very high level and many details are still to be determined. However, a number of important papers regarding international space exploration can form a basis for this document.This poster will focus on developing the Lunar Vicinity scenario by adding detail via mapping a number of recent reportsdocuments into the GER. The documents highlighted here are in no way meant to be all encompassing and other documents can and should be added, (e.g., the JAXA Space Exploration Roadmap). This exercise is intended to demonstrate that existing documents can be mapped into the GER despite the major differences in granularity, and that this mapping is a way to promote broader national and international buy-in to the Lunar Vicinity scenario.The documents used here are: the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) Panel on Exploration report on developing a global space exploration program, the Strategic Knowledge Gaps (SKGs) report from the Lunar Exploration Analysis Group (LEAG), the Lunar Exploration Roadmap developed by LEAG, the National Research Council report Scientific Context for the Exploration of the Moon (SCEM), and two journal articles, the scientific rationale for resuming lunar surface exploration, and the astrobiological benefits of human space exploration.In addition, the ISECG is in the process of developing a Science White Paper (SWP) to accompany the next edition of the GER, due in late 2016. The SWP will be an important tool to communicate science which will be able to be accomplished at human exploration destinations to policymakers. This abstract will discuss the process of developing this SWP and ways in which the global science community can become engaged in its development.

Schmidt, Gregory↗
NASA NTRS2017

Program Options to Explore Ocean Worlds

Including Earth, roughly a dozen water ocean worlds exist in the solar system: the relict worlds Ceres and Mars, vast oceans inside most of the large Jovian and Saturnian icy moons, and Kuiper Belt Objects like Triton, Charon, and Pluto whose geologies are dominated by water and ammonia. Key pieces of the ocean-world science puzzle – which when completed may reveal whether life is widespread in the cosmos, why it exists where it does, and how it originates – are distributed among them. The eventual exploration of all these worlds will yield humanity’s total tangible knowledge about life in the universe, essentially forever. Thus, their exploration has existential significance for humanity’s self-regard, and indeed perhaps of our place in the natural scheme. The matter of planning how to pursue such a difficult and unprecedented exploration opportunity is therefore historic. The technical challenges are formidable, far harder than at Mars: missions to the Jovian and Saturnian ocean worlds are severely power-limited; trip times can be as much as a half decade and decade, respectively. And the science targets are global-scale oceans beneath kilometers of cryogenic ice. Reaching and exploring them would be a multi-generational undertaking, so again it is essential to plan and prepare. Today, we lack the instrumentation, subsystems, and remote operational-intelligence technologies needed to build and use exploration avatars as good as what we can envision needing. Each ocean world holds a piece of the puzzle, but the three priority targets are Europa at Jupiter, and Enceladus and Titan at Saturn. As with the systematic exploration of Mars, exploring these diverse worlds poses a complex technical and programmatic challenge – a strategic challenge – that needs to be designed and managed if each generation is to see its work bear fruit, and if the space science community is to make most effective use of the public money devoted to the quest. Strategic programs benefit from coherence. In only 15 years, the Mars Exploration Program (MEP) has transformed humanity’s view of Mars as a once and future habitable place, a world quite possibly holding relict evidence of life. Finding such evidence, we would study it to know if that life shared an origin common with Earth life. However, life in the ocean worlds could not have shared our origin, so exploring them opens another level in our quest to understand life in the universe: not only to places with vast salt-water seas known to contain organics and hydrothermal seafloors active today, but to places where anything alive cannot be related to us. MEP’s success – from its presence in the public consciousness to its rewriting of planetary habitability – make it an obvious template and source of lessons learned for a viable ocean worlds exploration program (OWEP). Six attributes of the MEP are analyzed for application to a potential OWEP. From this, five hypothetical programmatic scenarios are compared to the default case, and conclusions drawn. A coherent OWEP should have several parts: first, dedicated continuous investment in enabling technologies; and second, two directed-purpose, medium-class (~$1B) missions per decade that conduct pivotal investigations on a documented roadmap. Science could start in 2035, informing development of decadal flagship missions after Europa Clipper, to the places revealed to hold the most promise. The fastest pace of scientific discoveries would require access to high-performance propulsion infrastructure, e.g., the Space Launch System, Falcon Heavy, and high-power in-space solar electric propulsion, all capable of halving trip time. Not including these boosts, such a program would cost about a half-billion dollars more per year than NASA’s existing mission portfolio; the program architecture funded today cannot deliver a strategic OWEP while also sustaining balance among other solar system exploration priorities and opportunities.

Naderi, F.↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA Laboratory Analysis for Manned Exploration Missions

The Exploration Laboratory Analysis (ELA) project supports the Exploration Medical Capability Element under the NASA Human Research Program. ELA instrumentation is identified as an essential capability for future exploration missions to diagnose and treat evidence-based medical conditions. However, mission architecture limits the medical equipment, consumables, and procedures that will be available to treat medical conditions during human exploration missions. Allocated resources such as mass, power, volume, and crew time must be used efficiently to optimize the delivery of in-flight medical care. Although commercial instruments can provide the blood and urine based measurements required for exploration missions, these commercial-off-the-shelf devices are prohibitive for deployment in the space environment. The objective of the ELA project is to close the technology gap of current minimally invasive laboratory capabilities and analytical measurements in a manner that the mission architecture constraints impose on exploration missions. Besides micro gravity and radiation tolerances, other principal issues that generally fail to meet NASA requirements include excessive mass, volume, power and consumables, and nominal reagent shelf-life. Though manned exploration missions will not occur for nearly a decade, NASA has already taken strides towards meeting the development of ELA medical diagnostics by developing mission requirements and concepts of operations that are coupled with strategic investments and partnerships towards meeting these challenges. This paper focuses on the remote environment, its challenges, biomedical diagnostics requirements and candidate technologies that may lead to successful blood/urine chemistry and biomolecular measurements in future space exploration missions. SUMMARY The NASA Exploration Laboratory Analysis project seeks to develop capability to diagnose anticipated space exploration medical conditions on future manned missions. To achieve this goal, NASA will leverage existing point-of-care technology to provide clinical laboratory measurements in space. This approach will place the project on a path to minimize sample, reagent consumption, mass, volume and power. For successful use in the space environment, NASA specific conditions such as micro gravity and radiation, for example, will also need to be addressed.

Exploration Medical Capability↗
NASA NTRS2015

Exploration Architecture with Quantum Inertial Gravimetry and In-Situ ChipSat Sensors

The Dual Exploration Architecture is a mission concept that combines remote sensing and in-situ observations into a single mission to answer planetary science questions that can only be answered with both types of data. Adoption of dual exploration architectures may short circuit the long, slow cycle of missions to inaccessible bodies by eliminating the need for separate precursor and follow-up missions. Additionally, the dual architecture possesses inherent flexibility that enables the design of adaptive, event-driven missions that are very different from traditional, largely pre-planned missions. Five key observations about the state and trends of planetary science exploration lead us to the dual architecture: increasing complexity of observations; scarcity of future mission opportunities; desire to capture transitory events; continued miniaturization of spacecraft components; and the Mars exploration cycle. Our goal in this study is to explore missions that can only happen using the dual architecture concept and find technology development needs that must be filled for those missions to compete. A survey of historical and current missions finds that opportunities for exploration are becoming less frequent, causing the flexibility and dual-nature elements of each mission to become more common. The dual exploration architecture takes these trends to their far conclusion, attempting to eliminate precursor and follow-up missions while still returning more scientific payoff. A study of the future of planetary science goals through the decadal survey reveals broad applicability of dual missions to solve mysteries that cannot be answered with a traditional mission architecture. These missions fall into three broad classes: choosing a local target from a global survey; dynamic/reactive science; and global in-situ networks. Two example missions of each class are notionally described. A deeper look at these dual architecture classes reveals four technology development needs that must be addressed for wide adoption of dual missions: passive landers; guided atmospheric probes; robust sensing packages; and small, precise orbital instruments. This study pursues a specific focus on two examples of such enabling technologies: the ChipSat and cold atom gravimetry. The ChipSat is a fully functional spacecraft-on-a-chip system that has broad versatility in the dual architecture mission space. Initial studies show that ChipSats could survive as passive impactor landers on bodies up to the size of Europa. Furthermore, COTS (Commercial Off-The-Shelf) components could provide an in-situ sensor suite that readily answers a number of pressing planetary science questions. Cold atom gravimetry uses inertial sensors based on light-pulse atom interferometry in a small form factor to map the gravity field of a body to precision equaling what would normally require two full spacecraft to achieve. The cold atom gravimeter provides an example of how advanced remote sensing capability can enable dual missions by providing greater returns in a significantly smaller package. Using the above two technologies, we study an example dual-architecture mission to both characterize and sample the subsurface oceans at Europa. The greatest scientific return in terms of detecting extraterrestrial life is in those regions where Europa’s ice crust is thin. The identification of regions with thin ice should therefore precede the selection of surface targets and dispatch of probes to those targets. This two-step process, if accomplished by separate flagship-scale missions, might take decades. As a result, a combined mission to both identify thin areas of Europa’s ice and follow up with surface observations at those regions is a good candidate for the dual-exploration architecture. This example mission consists of an orbiter spacecraft carrying a cold atom gravimeter capable of sensing or inferring the ice thickness on regional to local scales, along with a number of ChipSat probes capable of landing on the moon. The small size and weight of the ChipSats allows large numbers of them to be carried, ensuring that enough can be dropped to ensure survival of a minimum number of probes and potentially allowing for the in-situ sampling of multiple locations on the moon. The example missions and Europa case study show that amazing scientific return can obtained from dual-exploration architecture missions with a single launch by breaking the long timescales of planetary exploration and providing the flexibility to capturing transitory events and collect data across the local, regional, and global scales.

Exploration↗
NASA NTRS1998

HEDS-UP Mars Exploration Forum

In the early 1990s, Duke and Budden convened a series of workshops addressing mission rationale, exploration objectives, and key constraints and issues facing human crews on Mars. The focal point was "why" the U.S. should fly humans to Mars. In the mid-1990s, strategies for a Mars mission matured and evolved, driven formally by NASA Johnson Space Center's Office of Exploration. In 1997, NASA published a report capturing the current thinking: the NASA Mars Reference Mission. In the 1997-1998 school year, HEDS-UP sponsored six universities to conduct design studies on Mars exploration, using the Reference Mission as a basis for their work. The 1998 Mars Exploration Forum presents the results of these university studies, suggesting "how" we might explore Mars, in terms of specific technical components that would enable human missions to Mars. A primary objective of the HEDS-UP Mars Exploration Forum was to provide a forum for active interaction among NASA, industry, and the university community on the subject of human missions to Mars. NASA scientists and engineers were asked to present the state of exploration for Mars mission options currently under study. This status "snapshot" of current Mars strategies set the stage for the six HEDS-UP universities to present their final design study results. Finally, a panel of industry experts discussed readiness for human missions to Mars as it pertains to the aerospace industries and technologies. A robust poster session provided the backdrop for government-industry-university discussions and allowed for feedback to NASA on the Mars Reference Mission. The common thread woven through the two days was discussion of technologies, proven and emerging, that will be required to launch, land, and sustain human crews on the Red Planet. As this decade (and indeed this millenium) draws to a close, Mars will continue to loom in our sights as the next target for human space exploration. It is our hope that the efforts of the Mars Exploration Forum will serve as one small contribution toward the ultimate goal of humans exploring Mars.

Budden, Nancy Ann↗
NASA NTRS2004

Teleoperation from Mars Orbit: A proposal for Human Exploration

For a human expedition to Mars, a case can be made that the best strategy for initial exploration is not to actually land the humans on Mars, but to put the humans into Mars orbit and operate on the surface by the technology of teleoperation. This will provide the results of human exploration, but at greatly reduced risk and cost. Teleoperation of Mars surface robots from a Mars-orbital habitat will operation near real time operation with minimum time delay, giving a virtual presence on the surface. By use of teleoperation, it is possible to vastly simplify the surface exploration mission. We now have no need to develop a human-rated Mars Lander and Mars Ascent Vehicle, and we can send geologists & biologists on the mission; not VTOL pilots. It is a cheaper, simpler, and safer way to explore, and hence it will be a faster way to explore. It has the excitement of being there, at a fraction of the price. Tele-exploration from Mars orbit also allows human (virtual) presence at a wide variety of locations. With an orbital base controlling surface telerobotics, human explorers are not stuck with one base location, but can explore all over Mars. They can explore the polar caps and also near-equatorial canyon regions, from the same orbiting base. This frees the mission from landing site constraints. With no need to select a "grab bag" site that contains a large number of geologically diverse features at or near a single location; it is now possible go to all the best sites-- paleolake sites, river beds, volcanic calderas, lava tube sites, layered terrain, canyons, possible shoreline features, the North and South poles. A near-polar inclination 24-hr 39-minute period Mars orbit, for example, will put the orbital station in line-of-sight of a given region for about 8 hours per day-- one teleoperation shift. Since present day life could exist on Mars, planetary protection is also needed to preserve the (possible) fragile Mars biosphere from competition from ferocious Earth life. Isolated biospheres on Earth have been devastated when they have been exposed to alien life forms introduced-accidentally or deliberately-- from another continent. If there is life on Mars, we will wish to protect it from having to compete with introduced Earth biota. Reverse planetary protection-protecting the Earth biosphere from exposure to Mars microorganisms-is also an important consideration. Exploring from orbit will reduce biological risk by keeping humans from exposure to possible Mars microbes. A telerobotic mission will need no quarantine on return to Earth, and avoids the difficult human question of how to isolate Mars mission astronauts infected by Martian microorganisms.

Landis, Geoffrey A.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Human Exploration of Near-Earth Asteroids and Sample Collection Considerations

In 2009 the Augustine Commission identified near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) as high profile destinations for human exploration missions beyond the Earth-Moon system as part of the Flexible Path. Subsequently, the U.S. presidential administration directed NASA on April 15, 2010 to include NEAs as destinations for future human exploration with the goal of sending astronauts to a NEA in the mid to late 2020s. This directive became part of the official National Space Policy of the United States of America as of June 28, 2010. Human Exploration Considerations: These missions would be the first human expeditions to interplanetary bodies beyond the Earth-Moon system and would prove useful for testing technologies required for human missions to Mars, Phobos and Deimos, and other Solar System destinations. Missions to NEAs would undoubtedly provide a great deal of technical and engineering data on spacecraft operations for future human space exploration while conducting in-depth scientific examinations of these primitive objects. However, prior to sending human explorers to NEAs, robotic investigations of these bodies would be required in order to maximize operational efficiency and reduce mission risk. These precursor missions to NEAs would fill crucial strategic knowledge gaps concerning their physical characteristics that are relevant for human exploration of these relatively unknown destinations. Sample Science Benefits: Information obtained from a human investigation of a NEA, together with ground-based observations and prior spacecraft investigations of asteroids and comets, will also provide a real measure of ground truth to data obtained from terrestrial meteorite collections. Major advances in the areas of geochemistry, impact history, thermal history, isotope analyses, mineralogy, space weathering, formation ages, thermal inertias, volatile content, source regions, solar system formation, etc. can be expected from human NEA missions. Samples directly returned from a primitive body would lead to the same kind of breakthroughs for understanding NEAs that the Apollo samples provided for understanding the Earth-Moon system and its formation history. International Participation: In addition, robotic precursor and human exploration missions to NEAs would allow the NASA and its international partners to gain operational experience in performing complex tasks (e.g., sample collection, deployment of payloads, retrieval of payloads, etc.) with crew, robots, and spacecraft under microgravity conditions at or near the surface of a small body. This would provide an important synergy between the worldwide Science and Exploration communities, which will be crucial for development of future international deep space exploration architectures and has potential benefits for future exploration of other destinations beyond low-Earth orbit.

Abell, Paul↗