Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mars Mars exploration program”

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 1,513 records · Page 84
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

An Overview of the Space Environments and Spacecraft Effects Organization Concept

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a course to expand human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) while also expanding its mission to explore our Earth, and the solar system. Destinations such as Near Earth Asteroids (NEA), Mars and its moons, and the outer planets are but a few of the mission targets. Each new destination presents an opportunity to increase our knowledge on the solar system and the unique environments for each mission target. NASA has multiple technical and science discipline areas specializing in specific space environments fields that will serve to enable these missions. To complement these existing discipline areas, a concept is presented focusing on the development of a space environment and spacecraft effects (SESE) organization. This SESE organization includes disciplines such as space climate, space weather, natural and induced space environments, effects on spacecraft materials and systems, and the transition of research information into application. This space environment and spacecraft effects organization will be composed of Technical Working Groups (TWG). These technical working groups will survey customers and users, generate products, and provide knowledge supporting four functional areas: design environments, engineering effects, operational support, and programmatic support. The four functional areas align with phases in the program mission lifecycle and are briefly described below. Design environments are used primarily in the mission concept and design phases of a program. Environment effects focuses on the material, component, sub-system, and system-level response to the space environment and include the selection and testing to verify design and operational performance. Operational support provides products based on real time or near real time space weather to mission operators to aid in real time and near-term decision-making. The programmatic support function maintains an interface with the numerous programs within NASA, other federal government agencies, and the commercial sector to ensure that communications are well established and the needs of the programs are being met. The programmatic support function also includes working in coordination with the program in anomaly resolution and generation of lessons learned documentation. The goal of this space environment and spacecraft effects organization is to develop decision-making tools and engineering products to support all mission phases from mission concept through operations by focusing on transitioning research to application. Products generated by this space environments and effects application are suitable for use in anomaly investigations. This paper will describe the scope and purpose of the space environments and spacecraft effects organization and describe the TWG's and their relationship to the functional areas.

Edwards, David L.↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA's Space Launch System: A Flagship for Exploration Beyond Earth's Orbit

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Space Launch System (SLS) Program, managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center, is making progress toward delivering a new capability for exploration beyond Earth orbit in an austere economic climate. This fact drives the SLS team to find innovative solutions to the challenges of designing, developing, fielding, and operating the largest rocket in history. To arrive at the current SLS plan, government and industry experts carefully analyzed hundreds of architecture options and arrived at the one clear solution to stringent requirements for safety, affordability, and sustainability over the decades that the rocket will be in operation. This paper will explore ways to fit this major development within the funding guidelines by using existing engine assets and hardware now in testing to meet a first launch by 2017. It will explain the SLS Program s long-range plan to keep the budget within bounds, yet evolve the 70 metric ton (t) initial lift capability to 130-t lift capability after the first two flights. To achieve the evolved configuration, advanced technologies must offer appropriate return on investment to be selected through a competitive process. For context, the SLS will be larger than the Saturn V that took 12 men on 6 trips for a total of 11 days on the lunar surface over 4 decades ago. Astronauts train for long-duration voyages on the International Space Station, but have not had transportation to go beyond Earth orbit in modern times, until now. NASA is refining its mission manifest, guided by U.S. Space Policy and the Global Exploration Roadmap. Launching the Orion Multi-Purpose Cargo Vehicle s first autonomous certification flight in 2017, followed by a crewed flight in 2021, the SLS will offer a robust way to transport international crews and the air, water, food, and equipment they need for extended trips to asteroids, Lagrange Points, and Mars. In addition, the SLS will accommodate high-priority science experiments. SLS affordability initiatives include streamlining interfaces, applying risk-based insight into contracted work, centralizing systems engineering and integration, and nurturing a learning culture that continually benchmarks its performance against successful ventures. As this paper will explain, the SLS is making measurable progress toward becoming a global infrastructure asset for robotic and human scouts of all nations by harnessing business and technological innovations to deliver sustainable solutions for space exploration.

May, Todd↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA's Space Launch System: A Flagship for Exploration Beyond Earth's Orbit

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Space Launch System (SLS) Program, managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center, is making progress toward delivering a new capability for exploration beyond Earth orbit in an austere economic climate. This fact drives the SLS team to find innovative solutions to the challenges of designing, developing, fielding, and operating the largest rocket in history. To arrive at the current SLS plan, government and industry experts carefully analyzed hundreds of architecture options and arrived at the one clear solution to stringent requirements for safety, affordability, and sustainability over the decades that the rocket will be in operation. This paper will explore ways to fit this major development within the funding guidelines by using existing engine assets and hardware now in testing to meet a first launch by 2017. It will explain the SLS Program s long-range plan to keep the budget within bounds, yet evolve the 70 metric ton (t) initial lift capability to 130-t lift capability after the first two flights. To achieve the evolved configuration, advanced technologies must offer appropriate return on investment to be selected through a competitive process. For context, the SLS will be larger than the Saturn V that took 12 men on 6 trips for a total of 11 days on the lunar surface over 4 decades ago. Astronauts train for long-duration voyages on the International Space Station, but have not had transportation to go beyond Earth orbit in modern times, until now. NASA is refining its mission manifest, guided by U.S. Space Policy and the Global Exploration Roadmap. Launching the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle s (MPCV s) first autonomous certification flight in 2017, followed by a crewed flight in 2021, the SLS will offer a robust way to transport international crews and the air, water, food, and equipment they need for extended trips to asteroids, Lagrange Points, and Mars. In addition, the SLS will accommodate high-priority science experiments. SLS affordability initiatives include streamlining interfaces, applying risk-based insight into contracted work, centralizing systems engineering and integration, and nurturing a learning culture that continually benchmarks its performance against successful ventures. As this paper will explain, the SLS is making measurable progress toward becoming a global infrastructure asset for robotic and human scouts of all nations by harnessing business and technological innovations to deliver sustainable solutions for space exploration.

May, Todd A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Life Support and Environmental Monitoring International System Maturation Team Considerations

Human exploration of the solar system is an ambitious goal. Future human missions to Mars or other planets will require the cooperation of many nations to be feasible. Exploration goals and concepts have been gathered by the International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG) at a very high level, representing the overall goals and strategies of each participating space agency. The Global Exploration Roadmap published by ISECG states that international partnerships are part of what drives the mission scenarios. It states "Collaborations will be established at all levels (missions, capabilities, technologies), with various levels of interdependency among the partners." To make missions with interdependency successful, technologists and system experts need to share information early, before agencies have made concrete plans and binding agreements. This paper provides an overview of possible ways of integrating NASA, ESA, and JAXA work into a conceptual roadmap of life support and environmental monitoring capabilities for future exploration missions. Agencies may have immediate plans as well as long term goals or new ideas that are not part of official policy. But relationships between plans and capabilities may influence the strategies for the best ways to achieve partner goals. Without commitments and an organized program like the International Space Station, requirements for future missions are unclear. Experience from ISS has shown that standards and an early understanding of requirements are an important part of international partnerships. Attempting to integrate systems that were not designed together can create many problems. Several areas have been identified that could be important to discuss and understand early: units of measure, cabin CO2 levels, and the definition and description of fluids like high purity oxygen, potable water and residual biocide, and crew urine and urine pretreat. Each of the partners is exploring different kinds of technologies. Different specific parameters may important to define or explore possible ranges depending on the system concepts. Early coordination between technology developers can create new possibilities for collaboration, and provide input to determine what combined options may provide the best overall system architecture.

Anderson, Molly↗
NASA NTRS2016

Life Support and Environmental Monitoring International System Maturation Team Considerations.

Human exploration of the solar system is an ambitious goal. Future human missions to Mars or other planets will require the cooperation of many nations to be feasible. Exploration goals and concepts have been gathered by the International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG) at a very high level, representing the overall goals and strategies of each participating space agency. The Global Exploration Roadmap published by ISECG states that international partnerships are part of what drives the the mission scenarios. It states "Collaborations will be established at all levels (missions, capabilities, technologies), with various levels of interdependency among the partners." To make missions with interdependency successful, technologists and system experts need to share information early, before agencies have made concrete plans and binding agreements. This paper provides an overview of possible ways of integrating NASA, ESA, and JAXA work into a conceptual roadmap of life support and environmental monitoring capabilities for future exploration missions. Agencies may have immediate plans as well as long term goals or new ideas that are not part of official policy. But relationships between plans and capabilities may influence the strategies for the best ways to achieve partner goals. Without commitments and an organized program like the International Space Station, requirements for future missions are unclear. Experience from ISS has shown that standards and an early understanding of requirements are an important part of international partnerships. Attempting to integrate systems that were not designed together can create many problems. Several areas have been identified that could be important to discuss and understand early: units of measure, cabin CO2 levels, and the definition and description of fluids like high purity oxygen, potable water and residual biocide, and crew urine and urine pretreat. Each of the partners is exploring different kinds of technologies. Different specific parameters may important to define or explore possible ranges depending on the system concepts. Early coordination between technology developers can create new possibilities for collaboration, and provide input to determine what combined options may provide the best overall system architecture.

Anderson, Molly↗
NASA NTRS2010

Human and Robotic Exploration of Near-Earth Objects

A study in late 2006 was sponsored by the Advanced Projects Office within NASA's Constellation Program to examine the feasibility of sending the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle to a near-Earth object (NEO). The ideal mission profile would involve two or three astronauts on a 90 to 180 day flight, which would include a 7 to 14 day stay for proximity operations at the target NEO. More recently U.S. President Obama stated on April 15, 2010 that the next goal for human spaceflight will be to send human beings to a near-Earth asteroid by 2025. Given this direction from the White House, NASA has been involved in studying various strategies for NEO exploration in order to follow U.S. space exploration policy. Prior to sending a human mission, a series of robotic spacecraft would be launched to reduce the risk to crew, and enhance the planning for the proximity and surface operations at the NEO. The human mission would ideally follow five or more years later. This mission would be the first human expedition to an interplanetary body beyond the Earth-Moon system and would prove useful for testing technologies required for human missions to Mars and other solar system destinations. Piloted missions to NEOs would undoubtedly provide a great deal of technical and engineering data on spacecraft operations for future human space exploration while conducting in-depth scientific investigations of these primitive objects. The main scientific advantage of sending piloted missions to NEOs would be the flexibility of the crew to perform tasks and to adapt to situations in real time. A crewed vehicle would be able to test several different sample collection techniques and target specific areas of interest via extra-vehicular activities (EVAs) more efficiently than robotic spacecraft. Such capabilities greatly enhance the scientific return from these missions to NEOs, destinations vital to understanding the evolution and thermal histories of primitive bodies during the formation of the early solar system. Data collected from these missions would help constrain the suite of materials possibly delivered to the early Earth, and would identify potential source regions from which NEOs originate. In addition, the resulting scientific investigations would refine designs for future extraterrestrial resource extraction and utilization, and assist in the development of hazard mitigation techniques for planetary defense.

Abell, Paul A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Simulation Development and Analysis of Crew Vehicle Ascent Abort

NASA's Commercial Crew Program is an integral step in its journey to Mars as it would expedite development of space technologies and open up partnership with U.S. commercial companies. NASA reviews and independent assessment of Commercial Crew Program is fundamental to its success, and being able to model a commercial crew vehicle in a simulation rather than conduct a live test would be a safer, faster, and less expensive way to assess and certify the capabilities of the vehicle. To this end, my project was to determine the feasibility of using a simulation tool named SOMBAT version 2.0 to model a multiple parachute system for Commercial Crew Program simulation. The main tasks assigned to me were to debug and test the main parachute system model, (capable of simulating one to four main parachute bodies), and to utilize a graphical program to animate the simulation results. To begin tackling the first task, I learned how to use SOMBAT by familiarizing myself with its mechanics and by understanding the methods used to tweak its various parameters and outputs. I then used this new knowledge to set up, run, and analyze many different situations within SOMBAT in order to explore the limitations of the parachute model. Some examples of parameters that I varied include the initial velocity and orientation of the falling capsule, the number of main parachutes, and the location where the parachutes were attached to the capsule. Each parameter changed would give a different output, and in some cases, would expose a bug or limitation in the model. A major bug that I discovered was the inability of the model to handle any number of parachutes other than three. I spent quite some time trying to debug the code logically, but was unable to figure it out until my mentor taught me that digital simulation limitations can occur when some approximations are mistakenly assumed for certain in a physical system. This led me to the realization that unlike in all of the programming classes I have taken thus far that focus on pure logic, simulation code focuses on mimicking the physical world with some approximation and can have inaccuracies or numerical instabilities. Learning from my mistake, I adopted new methods to analyze these different simulations. One method the student used was to numerically plot various physical parameters using MATLAB to confirm the mechanical behavior of the system in addition to comparing the data to the output from a separate simulation tool called FAST. By having full control over what was being outputted from the simulation, I could choose which parameters to change and to plot as well as how to plot them, allowing for an in depth analysis of the data. Another method of analysis was to convert the output data into a graphical animation. Unlike the numerical plots, where all of the physical components were displayed separately, this graphical display allows for a combined look at the simulation output that makes it much easier for one to see the physical behavior of the model. The process for converting SOMBAT output for EDGE graphical display had to be developed. With some guidance from other EDGE users, I developed a process and created a script that would easily allow one to display simulations graphically. Another limitation with the SOMBAT model was the inability for the capsule to have the main parachutes instantly deployed with a large angle between the air speed vector and the chutes drag vector. To explore this problem, I had to learn about different coordinate frames used in Guidance, Navigation & Control (J2000, ECEF, ENU, etc.) to describe the motion of a vehicle and about Euler angles (e.g. Roll, Pitch, Yaw) to describe the orientation of the vehicle. With a thorough explanation from my mentor about the description of each coordinate frame, as well as how to use a directional cosine matrix to transform one frame to another, I investigated the problem by simulating different capsule orientations. In the end, I was able to show that this limitation could be avoided if the capsule is initially oriented antiparallel to its velocity vector.

Wong, Chi S.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Summer High School Apprenticeship Research Program (SHARP)

The summer of 1997 will not only be noted by NASA for the mission to Mars by the Pathfinder but also for the 179 brilliant apprentices that participated in the SHARP Program. Apprentice participation increased 17% over last year's total of 153 participants. As indicated by the End-of-the-Program Evaluations, 96% of the programs' participants rated the summer experience from very good to excellent. The SHARP Management Team began the year by meeting in Cocoa Beach, Florida for the annual SHARP Planning Conference. Participants strengthened their Education Division Computer Aided Tracking System (EDCATS) skills, toured the world-renowned Kennedy Space Center, and took a journey into space during the Alien Encounter Exercise. The participants returned to their Centers with the same goals and objectives in mind. The 1997 SHARP Program goals were: (1) Utilize NASA's mission, unique facilities and specialized workforce to provide exposure, education, and enrichment experiences to expand participants' career horizons and inspire excellence in formal education and lifelong learning. (2) Develop and implement innovative education reform initiatives which support NASA's Education Strategic Plan and national education goals. (3) Utilize established statistical indicators to measure the effectiveness of SHARP's program goals. (4) Explore new recruiting methods which target the student population for which SHARP was specifically designed. (5) Increase the number of participants in the program. All of the SHARP Coordinators reported that the goals and objectives for the overall program as well as their individual program goals were achieved. Some of the goals and objectives for the Centers were: (1) To increase the students' awareness of science, mathematics, engineering, and computer technology; (2) To provide students with the opportunity to broaden their career objectives; and (3) To expose students to a variety of enrichment activities. Most of the Center goals and objectives were consistent with the overall program goals. Modem Technology Systems, Inc., was able to meet the SHARP Apprentices, Coordinators and Mentors during their site visits to Stennis Space Center, Ames Research Center and Dryden Flight Research Center. All three Centers had very efficient programs and adhered to SHARP's general guidelines and procedures. MTSI was able to meet the apprentices from the other Centers via satellite in July during the SHARP Video-Teleconference(ViTS). The ViTS offered the apprentices and the NASA and SHARP Coordinators the opportunity to introduce themselves. The apprentices from each Center presented topical "Cutting Edge Projects". Some of the accomplishments for the 1997 SHARP Program year included: MTSI hiring apprentices from four of the nine NASA Centers, the full utilization of the EDCATS by apprentices and NASA/SHARP Coordinators, the distribution of the SHARP Apprentice College and Scholarship Directory, a reunion with former apprentices from Langley Research Center and the development of a SHARP Recruitment Poster. MTSI developed another exciting newsletter containing graphics and articles submitted by the apprentices and the SHARP Management Team.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2008

The Ares Project: Building an Exploration Culture from the Inside Up

NASA is building its first new human-rated space exploration vehicles in nearly 40 years. This marks an important operational and cultural change from the Space Shuttle. In the wake of the Columbia disaster, the agency and the nation realized that NASA's goals and culture needed to change. The Ares Project, which is building the launch vehicles that will power human beings to the Moon, Mars, and beyond, is taking a page from the Saturn playbook by having NASA lead both the overall integration and the development of the Ares I upper stage. Ares is also creating a new culture of cooperation, openness, and informed risk taking as we set our sights on other worlds. Ares has established a team environment where issues can be discussed, information is shared, fun and teamwork are encouraged, and constructive conflict and accountability are expected. Following a "One NASA" philosophy, Ares is taking steps to strengthen cooperation among space centers, contractor partners, engineering and scientific communities, and headquarters personnel. As we learn lessons from things that went wrong with the Space Shuttle, we are also borrowing best practices from what has gone right with that program and others. All of these cultural elements will be necessary as we take the next steps beyond Earth orbit.

Cook, Stephan A.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Uplink Analysis Tool

This software analyzes Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) orbital geometry with respect to Mars Exploration Rover (MER) contact windows, and is the first tool of its kind designed specifically to support MRO-MER interface coordination. Prior to this automated tool, this analysis was done manually with Excel and the UNIX command line. In total, the process would take approximately 30 minutes for each analysis. The current automated analysis takes less than 30 seconds. This tool resides on the flight machine and uses a PHP interface that does the entire analysis of the input files and takes into account one-way light time from another input file. Input flies are copied over to the proper directories and are dynamically read into the tool s interface. The user can then choose the corresponding input files based on the time frame desired for analysis. After submission of the Web form, the tool merges the two files into a single, time-ordered listing of events for both spacecraft. The times are converted to the same reference time (Earth Transmit Time) by reading in a light time file and performing the calculations necessary to shift the time formats. The program also has the ability to vary the size of the keep-out window on the main page of the analysis tool by inputting a custom time for padding each MRO event time. The parameters on the form are read in and passed to the second page for analysis. Everything is fully coded in PHP and can be accessed by anyone with access to the machine via Web page. This uplink tool will continue to be used for the duration of the MER mission's needs for X-band uplinks. Future missions also can use the tools to check overflight times as well as potential site observation times. Adaptation of the input files to the proper format, and the window keep-out times, would allow for other analyses. Any operations task that uses the idea of keep-out windows will have a use for this program.

Khanampompan, Teerapat↗
NASA NTRS2010

Estimating the Reliability of a Soyuz Spacecraft Mission

Once the US Space Shuttle retires in 2010, the Russian Soyuz Launcher and Soyuz Spacecraft will comprise the only means for crew transportation to and from the International Space Station (ISS). The U.S. Government and NASA have contracted for crew transportation services to the ISS with Russia. The resulting implications for the US space program including issues such as astronaut safety must be carefully considered. Are the astronauts and cosmonauts safer on the Soyuz than the Space Shuttle system? Is the Soyuz launch system more robust than the Space Shuttle? Is it safer to continue to fly the 30 year old Shuttle fleet for crew transportation and cargo resupply than the Soyuz? Should we extend the life of the Shuttle Program? How does the development of the Orion/Ares crew transportation system affect these decisions? The Soyuz launcher has been in operation for over 40 years. There have been only two loss of life incidents and two loss of mission incidents. Given that the most recent incident took place in 1983, how do we determine current reliability of the system? Do failures of unmanned Soyuz rockets impact the reliability of the currently operational man-rated launcher? Does the Soyuz exhibit characteristics that demonstrate reliability growth and how would that be reflected in future estimates of success? NASA s next manned rocket and spacecraft development project is currently underway. Though the projects ultimate goal is to return to the Moon and then to Mars, the launch vehicle and spacecraft s first mission will be for crew transportation to and from the ISS. The reliability targets are currently several times higher than the Shuttle and possibly even the Soyuz. Can these targets be compared to the reliability of the Soyuz to determine whether they are realistic and achievable? To help answer these questions this paper will explore how to estimate the reliability of the Soyuz Launcher/Spacecraft system, compare it to the Space Shuttle, and its potential impacts for the future of manned spaceflight. Specifically it will look at estimating the Loss of Mission (LOM) probability using historical data, reliability growth, and Probabilistic Risk Assessment techniques

Lutomski, Michael G.↗
NASA NTRS2008

The Ares Projects Office: Building an Exploration Culture from the Inside Up

NASA is building its first new human-rated space exploration vehicles in nearly 40 years. This marks an important operational and cultural change from the Space Shuttle. In the wake of the Columbia disaster, the agency and the nation realized that NASA's goals and culture needed to change. The Ares Projects Office (APO), which is building the launch vehicles that will power human beings to the Moon, Mars, and beyond, is taking a page from the Saturn playbook by having NASA lead both the overall integration and the development of the Ares I upper stage. APO is also creating a new culture of cooperation, openness, and informed risk taking as we set our sights on other worlds. APO has established a team environment where issues can be discussed, information is shared, fun and teamwork are encouraged, and constructive conflict and accountability are expected. Following a "One NASA" philosophy, APO is taking steps to strengthen cooperation among space centers, contractor partners, engineering and scientific communities, and headquarters personnel. As we learn lessons from things that Went wrong with the Space Shuttle, we are also borrowing best practices from what has gone right with that program and others. All of these cultural elements will be necessary as we take the next steps beyond Earth orbit.

Leahy, Bartholomew↗
NASA NTRS2005

Micro-Inspector Spacecraft for Space Exploration Missions

NASA is seeking to embark on a new set of human and robotic exploration missions back to the Moon, to Mars, and destinations beyond. Key strategic technical challenges will need to be addressed to realize this new vision for space exploration, including improvements in safety and reliability to improve robustness of space operations. Under sponsorship by NASA's Exploration Systems Mission, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), together with its partners in government (NASA Johnson Space Center) and industry (Boeing, Vacco Industries, Ashwin-Ushas Inc.) is developing an ultra-low mass (<3.0 kg) free-flying micro-inspector spacecraft in an effort to enhance safety and reduce risk in future human and exploration missions. The micro-inspector will provide remote vehicle inspections to ensure safety and reliability, or to provide monitoring of in-space assembly. The micro-inspector spacecraft represents an inherently modular system addition that can improve safety and support multiple host vehicles in multiple applications. On human missions, it may help extend the reach of human explorers, decreasing human EVA time to reduce mission cost and risk. The micro-inspector development is the continuation of an effort begun under NASA's Office of Aerospace Technology Enabling Concepts and Technology (ECT) program. The micro-inspector uses miniaturized celestial sensors; relies on a combination of solar power and batteries (allowing for unlimited operation in the sun and up to 4 hours in the shade); utilizes a low-pressure, low-leakage liquid butane propellant system for added safety; and includes multi-functional structure for high system-level integration and miniaturization. Versions of this system to be designed and developed under the H&RT program will include additional capabilities for on-board, vision-based navigation, spacecraft inspection, and collision avoidance, and will be demonstrated in a ground-based, space-related environment. These features make the micro-inspector design unique in its ability to serve crewed as well as robotic spacecraft, well beyond Earth-orbit and into arenas such as robotic missions, where human teleoperation capability is not locally available.

microspacecraft↗
NASA NTRS2015

Orion Launch Abort System Performance During Exploration Flight Test 1

The Orion Launch Abort System Office is taking part in flight testing to enable certification that the system is capable of delivering the astronauts aboard the Orion Crew Module to a safe environment during both nominal and abort conditions. Orion is a NASA program, Exploration Flight Test 1 is managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched on a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. Although the Launch Abort System Office has tested the critical systems to the Launch Abort System jettison event on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. During Exploration Flight Test 1, the Launch Abort System was to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. Exploration Flight Test 1 was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. This was the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. Exploration Flight Test 1 provides critical data that enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The Exploration Flight Test 1 separation event occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff. The separation of the Launch Abort System jettison occurs once Orion is safely through the most dynamic portion of the launch. This paper will present a brief overview of the objectives of the Launch Abort System during a nominal Orion flight. Secondly, the paper will present the performance of the Launch Abort System at it fulfilled those objectives. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle.

McCauley, Rachel↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Strategy for Advancing Earth Independent Medical Operations

Exploration medical operations to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for providing in-mission medical care. The greater distance from Earth is the primary hazard that drives the need for a medical operations paradigm shift from low earth orbit mission. Increasingly complex long duration and long distance missions will have resource constraints (ex: mass, power, volume, data), a paucity of resupply or evacuation opportunities, and disruptions in real-time communications. In order to advance a more autonomous medical approach, a multi-faceted strategy will need to optimize all aspects of human health and performance in space. This strategy will include: increasing onboard medical autonomy through the development of novel crew health and performance systems; decision support capabilities to augment astronauts’ abilities in preventing, diagnosing, and treating medical conditions; creating new procedures and training tools for skill maintenance and just-in-time training; and enabling rapid crew access to data from all on-board systems, leading to better-informed, real-time, autonomous decisions. Collectively, this approach can be referred to as “Earth Independent Medical Operations” (EIMO). The Exploration Medical Capability Element of NASA’s Human Research Program has undertaken a longitudinal planning process to consensus around EIMO. Technical interchange meetings will occur with key constituents in late 2022 and again in early 2023 to define EIMO in practical terms and identify key elements of an EIMO system, with greater conceptual articulation and dissemination planned for the second half of 2023. We will share insights into the strategy for internal and external consensus building around EIMO, with a particular focus on the approach to partner stakeholders within NASA as well as commercial agencies.

Jay Lemery↗
NASA NTRS2012

Human in the Loop Integrated Life Support Systems Ground Testing

Human exploration missions beyond low earth orbit will be long duration with abort scenarios of days to months. This necessitates provisioning the crew with all the things they will need to sustain themselves while carrying out mission objectives. Systems engineering and integration is critical to the point where extensive integrated testing of life support systems on the ground is required to identify and mitigate risks. Ground test facilities (human-rated altitude chambers) at the Johnson Space Center are being readied to integrate all the systems for a mission along with a human test crew. The relevant environment will include deep space habitat human accommodations, sealed atmosphere capable of 14.7 to 8 psi total pressure and 21 to 32% oxygen concentration, life support systems (food, air, and water), communications, crew accommodations, medical, EVA, tools, etc. Testing periods will approximate those of the expected missions (such as a near Earth asteroid, Earth-Moon L2 or L1, the moon, Mars). This type of integrated testing is needed for research and technology development as well as later during the mission design, development, test, and evaluation (DDT&E) phases of an approved program. Testing will evolve to be carried out at the mission level fly the mission on the ground . Mission testing will also serve to inform the public and provide the opportunity for active participation by international, industrial and academic partners.

Henninger, Donald L.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Risk of Cardiac Rhythm Problems During Spaceflight

NASA has concerns regarding the incidence and clinical significance of cardiac arrhythmias that could occur during long-term exposure to the spaceflight environment, such as on the International Space Station (ISS) or during a prolonged (e.g., up to 3 years) sojourn to Mars or on the Moon. There have been some anecdotal reports and a few documented cases of cardiac arrhythmias in space, including one documented episode of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia. The potential catastrophic nature of a sudden cardiac death in the remote space environment has led to concerns from the early days of the space program that spaceflight might be arrhythmogenic. Indeed, there are known and well-defined changes in the cardiovascular system with spaceflight: a) plasma volume is reduced, b) left ventricular mass is decreased, and c) the autonomic nervous system adapts to the weightless environment. Combined, these physiologic adaptations suggest that changes in cardiac structure and neuro-humoral environment during spaceflight could alter electrical conduction, although the evidence supporting this contention consists mostly of minor changes in QT interval (the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave on an electrocardiogram tracing) in a small number of astronauts after long-duration spaceflight. Concurrent with efforts by NASA Medical Operations to refine and improve screening techniques relevant to arrhythmias and cardiovascular disease, as NASA enters the era of exploration-class missions it will be critical to determine with the highest degree of certainty whether spaceflight by itself alters cardiac structure and function sufficiently to increase the risk of arrhythmias.

Lee, Stuart M. C.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Prospects for Future Human Space Flight Missions to Near-Earth Asteroids

The forthcoming Near-Earth Object (NEO) Surveyor space telescope is a foundational asset designed to complete NASA’s congressionally-mandated goal of cataloging ≥90% of NEOs ≥140 meters in size as soon as practical, and discover Earth impactors far in advance. NEO Surveyor is also critical to near-Earth asteroid (NEA) exploration because it will find suitable low-Δv NEAs for robotic and human missions, often on Earth-like orbits with long synodic periods. Such NEAs have usually not been detected until imminent Earth launch opportunities because they were not observable until close to Earth. Discovering them far enough in advance to deploy missions requires a deep-space infrared survey telescope such as NEO Surveyor. In addition to posing hazards and being scientifically important, NEAs contain resources, such as water (OH), that could be utilized off-Earth. They also offer unique opportunities for the most ambitious human voyages ever undertaken. The Apollo program forever changed humanity’s perspective by showing us Earthrise from our Moon through human eyes. Crewed missions to NEAs will forever change our perspective again by showing us Earth as a distant point of light in the heavens as seen from an asteroid by astronauts. Planetary defense endeavors to understand asteroid and comet impact risks and develop mitigation capabilities. NEA exploration is synergistic in multiple ways. NEO Surveyor will discover and help characterize Earth impactors and accessible NEAs. Heavy-lift launch is highly enabling for both human NEA missions and planetary defense. Reconnaissance missions for planetary defense can also characterize NEAs prior to crewed missions. In situ resource utilization (ISRU) systems may be applicable to deflecting or destroying hazardous NEAs. NEA characterization data critically inform planetary defense efforts and indicate NEA types suitable for human exploration or ISRU. In 2010, NASA performed the Near-Earth Object (NEO) Human Space Flight (HSF) Accessible Targets Study (NHATS), creating an automated online system monitoring mission accessibility of NEAs 2 . NHATS database NEAs meet criteria that require less total mission Δv and/or round-trip mission duration than the Martian surface or even Mars orbit. There are currently 4,658 NHATS NEAs, and many rival or exceed lunar orbit/surface accessibility. Thus, NHATS NEAs could be explored by humans prior to attempting a Mars mission. Human missions to NEAs would test human-rated spacecraft systems with less cost and risk than Mars missions. Thus, human missions to NEAs are compelling in their own right while also providing prudent preparation for more demanding Mars missions. Lunar missions can offer similar opportunities, but they differ from NEA missions in important ways. Lunar missions pose less demanding psychological challenges to crew and ground staff. Earth light-time delay for communications is significantly longer during NEA missions. NEA missions are available that require more propulsion system consumables than lunar missions but less than Mars missions. In this paper, we summarize NEA accessibility for human missions, discuss motivations for such missions, survey knowledge about NEAs that informs future human missions, present exemplar mission opportunities to the currently known NHATS NEAs, and describe future work towards enabling human NEA missions.

Near-Earth asteroids↗