Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crewed”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1999

Human Mars Mission: SEP Architecture Crew Taxi Propulsion Stage Study and Design and Technology for Reaction and Control System

The Mars exploration is a candidate pathway to expand human presence and useful activities in the solar system. There are several propulsion system options being considered to place the Mars payload on its inter-planetary transfer trajectory. One propulsion option is the use of Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) to spiral out with the Mars payload from an initial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to an elliptical High Earth Orbit (HEO). This report, presented in annotated facing page format, describes the work completed on the design of a crew taxi propulsion stage used in conjunction with the SEP. Transportation system/mission analysis topics covered in this report include sub-system analysis, trajectory profile description, mass performance and crew taxi stage sizing, stage configuration, stage cost, and Trans-Mars Injection (TMI) launch window. The high efficiency of SEP is used to provide the major part of the TMI propulsion maneuver. Orbital energy is continuously added over a period of approximately twelve months. The SEP and Mars payload follow a spiral trajectory from an initial LEO to a final elliptical HEO. A small chemical stage is then used to provide the final part of the TMI. The now unloaded SEP returns to LEO to repeat another spiral trajectory with payload to HEO. The spiral phase of the SEP's trajectory takes several months to reach HEO, thus significantly increasing the exposure time of the crew to zero-gravity. In order to minimize the long zero-gravity effects, a high thrust chemical stage delivers the crew to the SEP's HEO. The crew rendezvous with the Mars payload in HEO. After a checkout period the Mars payload with the crew is injected onto a Trans-Mars Trajectory by a small chemical stage.

Young, Archie↗
NASA NTRS1999

STS-103 Crew Training

The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) team is preparing for NASA's third scheduled service call to Hubble. This mission, STS-103, will launch from Kennedy Space Center aboard the Space Shuttle Discovery. The seven flight crew members are Commander Curtis L. Brown, Pilot Scott J. Kelly, European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Jean-Francois Clervoy who will join space walkers Steven L. Smith, C. Michael Foale, John M. Grunsfeld, and ESA astronaut Claude Nicollier. The objectives of the HST Third Servicing Mission (SM3A) are to replace the telescope's six gyroscopes, a Fine-Guidance Sensor, an S-Band Single Access Transmitter, a spare solid-state recorder and a high-voltage/temperature kit for protecting the batteries from overheating. In addition, the crew plans to install an advanced computer that is 20 times faster and has six times the memory of the current Hubble Space Telescope computer. To prepare for these extravehicular activities (EVAs), the SM3A astronauts participated in Crew Familiarization sessions with the actual SM3A flight hardware. During these sessions the crew spent long hours rehearsing their space walks in the Guidance Navigation Simulator and NBL (Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory). Using space gloves, flight Space Support Equipment (SSE), and Crew Aids and Tools (CATs), the astronauts trained with and verified flight orbital replacement unit (ORU) hardware. The crew worked with a number of trainers and simulators, such as the High Fidelity Mechanical Simulator, Guidance Navigation Simulator, System Engineering Simulator, the Aft Shroud Door Trainer, the Forward Shell/Light Shield Simulator, and the Support Systems Module Bay Doors Simulator. They also trained and verified the flight Orbital Replacement Unit Carrier (ORUC) and its ancillary hardware. Discovery's planned 10-day flight is scheduled to end with a night landing at Kennedy.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1999

Human Mars Mission: SEP Architecture, Crew Taxi Propulsion Stage Study and Design and Technology for Reaction and Control System

The Mars exploration is a candidate pathway to expand human presence and useful activities in the solar system. There are several propulsion system options being considered to place the Mars payload on its interplanetary transfer trajectory. One propulsion option is the use of Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) to spiral out with the Mars payload from an initial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to an elliptical High Earth Orbit (HEO). This report, presented in annotated facing page format, describes the work completed on the design of a crew taxi propulsion stage used in conjunction with the SEP. Transportation system/mission analysis topics covered in this report include sub-system analysis, trajectory profile description, mass performance and crew taxi stage sizing, stage configuration, stage cost, and Trans-Mars Injection (TMI) launch window. The high efficiency of SEP is used to provide the major part of the TMI propulsion maneuver. Orbital energy is continuously added over a period of approximately twelve months. The SEP and Mars payload follow a spiral trajectory from an initial LEO to a final elliptical HEO. A small chemical stage is then used to provide the final part of the TMI. The now unloaded SEP returns to LEO to repeat another spiral trajectory with payload to HEO. The spiral phase of the SEP's trajectory takes several months to reach HEO, thus significantly increasing the exposure time of the crew to zero-gravity. In order to minimize the long zero-gravity effects, a high thrust chemical stage delivers the crew to the SEP's HEO. The crew rendezvous with the Mars payload in HEO. After a checkout period the Mars payload with the crew is injected onto a Trans-Mars Trajectory by a small chemical stage.

Young, Archie↗
NASA NTRS2002

STS-113/Endeavour/ISS 11A Pre-Launch - Launch On Orbit - Landing - Crew Egress

The crew of STS-113 and the Expedition 6 crew of the International Space Station (ISS) are introduced leaving the suitup room and while being assisted in their seats onboard Space Shuttle Endeavour. The shuttle's crew consisted of Commander Jim Wetherbee, Pilot Paul Lockhart and Mission Specialists Michael Lopez-Alegria and John Herrington. The Expedition 6 crew consisted of Commander Ken Bowersox, Flight Engineer Nikolai Budarin and NASA ISS Science Officer Don Pettit. Clips of the Endeavour's night launch are shown from these cameras: Beach Tracker, VAB, Pad A, OTV-60, OTV-70, Tower 1, UCS-15, Press Site Grandstand, Cocoa Beach DOAMS, Playalinda Beach DOAMS, UCS-23, and the In-Cabin Camera. While on-orbit, highlights include the docking of Endeavour with the ISS, the Change of Command Ceremony by the Expedition 5 and 6 crews of the ISS, the mating of the P1 and S0 Trusses, and three extravehicular activities (EVAs) by astronauts Lopez-Allegria and Herrington. The shuttle crew also repairs a leak in the onboard Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly. Clips of the shuttle's landing are shown from these cameras: VAB, Tower 1, Midfield, Runway South End, Runway North End, Tower 2, Playalinda DOAMS, UCS-3 Infrared, UCS-23, Midfield Infrared, and Pilot Point of View (PPOV).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

STS-114 Crew Training Clip

The crew of Space Shuttle Atlantis on STS-114 is seen conducting several training exercises in preparation for their mission. The crew consists of Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly, and Mission Specialists Soichi Noguchi and Stephen Robinson. With them are Yuri Malenchenko, Sergei Moschenko, and Edward Lu, the intended Expedition 7 crew of the International Space Station (ISS). During extravehicular activity (EVA) training in the virtual reality (VR) laboratory, crew members explore the exterior of the ISS, seen on a monitor. Suiting up with VR equipment is also shown. More EVA training takes place in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL). Here the astronauts are suited up for the NBL pool, and lowered into the water on a platform. After a crew photo session, the astronauts are seated in the Motion Base Simulator in their flight suits. The simulator is shown rocking side-to-side. The crew also hears a hands-on explanation of EVA preparations in the ISS airlock, and practices emergency egress from the CCT, a simulator shaped like an orbiter.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

Intercultural crew issues in long-duration spaceflight

Before long-duration flights with international crews can be safely undertaken, potential interpersonal difficulties will need to be addressed. Crew performance breakdown has been recognized by the American Institute of Medicine, in scientific literature, and in popular culture. However, few studies of human interaction and performance in confined, isolated environments exist, and the data pertaining to those studies are mostly anecdotal. Many incidents involving crew interpersonal dynamics, those among flight crews, as well as between flight crews and ground controllers, are reported only in non-peer reviewed books and newspapers. Consequently, due to this lack of concrete knowledge, the selection of astronauts and cosmonauts has focused on individual rather than group selection. Additional selection criteria such as interpersonal and communication competence, along with intercultural training, will have a decisive impact on future mission success. Furthermore, industrial psychological research has demonstrated the ability to select a group based on compatibility. With all this in mind, it is essential to conduct further research on heterogeneous, multi-national crews including selection and training for long-duration space missions.

long duration↗
NASA NTRS2005

Team Performance and Error Management in Chinese and American Simulated Flight Crews: The Role of Cultural and Individual Differences

This report describes results of a study conducted for NASA-Langley Research Center. This study is part of a program of research conducted for NASA-LARC that has focused on identifying the influence of national culture on the performance of flight crews. We first reviewed the literature devoted to models of teamwork and team performance, crew resource management, error management, and cross-cultural psychology. Davis (1999) reported the results of this review and presented a model that depicted how national culture could influence teamwork and performance in flight crews. The second study in this research program examined accident investigations of foreign airlines in the United States conducted by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The ability of cross-cultural values to explain national differences in flight outcomes was examined. Cultural values were found to covary in a predicted way with national differences, but the absence of necessary data in the NTSB reports and limitations in the research method that was used prevented a clear understanding of the causal impact of cultural values. Moreover, individual differences such as personality traits were not examined in this study. Davis and Kuang (2001) report results of this second study. The research summarized in the current report extends this previous research by directly assessing cultural and individual differences among students from the United States and China who were trained to fly in a flight simulator using desktop computer workstations. The research design used in this study allowed delineation of the impact of national origin, cultural values, personality traits, cognitive style, shared mental model, and task workload on teamwork, error management and flight outcomes. We briefly review the literature that documents the importance of teamwork and error management and its impact on flight crew performance. We next examine teamwork and crew resource management training designed to improve teamwork. This is followed by discussion of the potential influence of national culture on teamwork and crew resource management. We then examine the influence of other individual and team differences, such as personality traits, cognitive style, shared mental model, and task workload. We provide a heuristic model that depicts the influence of national culture and individual differences on teamwork, error management and flight outcomes. The results demonstrate the usefulness of the model for future research.

Davis, Donald D.↗
NASA NTRS2005

STS-114: Discovery Crew Arrival

George Diller of NASA Public Affairs narrates the STS-114 Crew arrival at Kennedy Space Center aboard a Gulf Stream aircraft. They were greeted by Center Director Jim Kennedy. Commander Eileen Collins introduced each of her crew members and gave a brief description of their roles in the mission. Mission Specialist 3, Andrew Thomas will be the lead crew member on the inspection on flight day 2; he is the intravehicular (IV) crew member that will help and guide Mission Specialists Souichi Noguchi and Stephen Robinson during their spacewalks. Pilot James Kelly will be operating the shuttle systems in flying the Shuttle; he will be flying the space station robotic arm during the second extravehicular activity and he will be assisting Mission Specialist Wendy Lawrence during the other two extravehicular activities; he will be assisting on the rendezvous on flight day three, and landing of the shuttle. Commander Collins also mentioned Pilot Kelly's recent promotion to Colonel by the United States Air Force. Mission Specialist 1, Souichi Noguchi from JAXA (The Japanese Space Agency) will be flying on the flight deck for ascent; he will be doing three spacewalks on day 5, 7, and 9; He will be the photo/TV lead for the different types of cameras on board to document the flight and to send back the information to the ground for both technical and public affairs reasons. Mission Specialist 5, Charles Camada will be doing the inspection on flight day 2 with Mission Specialist Thomas and Pilot Kelly; he will be transferring the logistics off the shuttle and onto the space station and from the space station back to the shuttle; He will help set up eleven lap tops on board. Mission Specialist 4, Wendy Lawrence will lead the transfer of logistics to the space station; she is the space station arm operator during extravehicular activities 1 and 3; she will be carrying the 6,000 pounds of external storage platform from the shuttle payload bay over to the space station; she is also in charge of the shuttle storage. Mission Specialist 2, Stephen Robinson is the flight engineer of the shuttle; he will be doing spacewalks with Mission Specialist Noguchi; he will set up the 11 lap top computers on board. Each crew member gave a brief message to the press. Commander Eileen later gave her final message and the crew walked back to the Astronaut Corps.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2008

Evaluation of a Seat Attenuation System for the Orion Crew Module

The function of the crew seat attenuation system for the Orion Crew Module (CM) is to provide the crew with a low injury-risk landing environment under a range of crew configurations and landing conditions. The current design for the seat attenuation system provides the crew with a low risk of injury environment based on the Brinkley criteria for most of the landing conditions considered. Furthermore, the stroking of the seat attenuation system is within limits, and the clearance between the seat support platform and vehicle is not exceeded. For the limited number of landing conditions where a low injury risk is exceeded, the risk is never beyond a moderate level. The results presented in this study are based on a CM structural model that is rigid except for the pallet struts, which attenuate landing loads and reduce the accelerations transferred to the astronauts. The CM simulations include a soft soil landing. Several different crew configurations are evaluated in this study. It is expected that situations where the risk is above low can be eliminated in future design iterations.

Lawrence, Charles↗
NASA NTRS2008

NASA Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Overview

By incorporating rigorous engineering practices, innovative manufacturing processes and test techniques, a unique multi-center government/contractor partnership, and a clean-sheet design developed around the primary requirements for the International Space Station (ISS) and Lunar missions, the Upper Stage Element of NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), the "Ares I," is a vital part of the Constellation Program's transportation system. Constellation's exploration missions will include Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles required to place crew and cargo in low-Earth orbit (LEO), crew and cargo transportation systems required for human space travel, and transportation systems and scientific equipment required for human exploration of the Moon and Mars. Early Ares I configurations will support ISS re-supply missions. A self-supporting cylindrical structure, the Ares I Upper Stage will be approximately 84' long and 18' in diameter. The Upper Stage Element is being designed for increased supportability and increased reliability to meet human-rating requirements imposed by NASA standards. The design also incorporates state-of-the-art materials, hardware, design, and integrated logistics planning, thus facilitating a supportable, reliable, and operable system. With NASA retiring the Space Shuttle fleet in 2010, the success of the Ares I Project is essential to America's continued leadership in space. The first Ares I test flight, called Ares I-X, is scheduled for 2009. Subsequent test flights will continue thereafter, with the first crewed flight of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), "Orion," planned for no later than 2015. Crew transportation to the ISS will follow within the same decade, and the first Lunar excursion is scheduled for the 2020 timeframe.

McArthur, J. Craig↗
NASA NTRS2008

NASA Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Overview

By incorporating rigorous engineering practices, innovative manufacturing processes and test techniques, a unique multi-center government/contractor partnership, and a clean-sheet design developed around the primary requirements for the International Space Station (ISS) and Lunar missions, the Upper Stage Element of NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), the "Ares I," is a vital part of the Constellation Program's transportation system. Constellation's exploration missions will include Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles required to place crew and cargo in low-Earth orbit (LEO), crew and cargo transportation systems required for human space travel, and transportation systems and scientific equipment required for human exploration of the Moon and Mars. Early Ares I configurations will support ISS re-supply missions. A self-supporting cylindrical structure, the Ares I Upper Stage will be approximately 84' long and 18' in diameter. The Upper Stage Element is being designed for increased supportability and increased reliability to meet human-rating requirements imposed by NASA standards. The design also incorporates state-of-the-art materials, hardware, design, and integrated logistics planning, thus facilitating a supportable, reliable, and operable system. With NASA retiring the Space Shuttle fleet in 2010, the success of the Ares I Project is essential to America's continued leadership in space. The first Ares I test flight, called Ares 1-X, is scheduled for 2009. Subsequent test flights will continue thereafter, with the first crewed flight of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), "Orion," planned for no later than 2015. Crew transportation to the ISS will follow within the same decade, and the first Lunar excursion is scheduled for the 2020 timeframe.

Davis, Daniel J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Observations of Crew Dynamics During Mars Analog Simulations

Crewmembers on Mars missions will face new and unique challenges compared to those in close communications proximity to Mission Control centers. Crews on Mars will likely become more autonomous and responsible for their day-to-day planning. These explorers will need to make frequent real time decisions without the assistance of large ground support teams. Ground-centric control will no longer be an option due to the communications delays. As a result of the new decision making model, crew dynamics and leadership styles of future astronauts may become significantly different from the demands of today. As a volunteer for the Mars Society on two Mars analog missions, this presenter will discuss observations made during isolated, surface exploration simulations. The need for careful crew selections, not just based on individual skill sets, but on overall team interactions becomes apparent very quickly when the crew is planning their own days and deciding their own priorities. Even more important is the selection of a Mission Commander who can lead a team of highly skilled individuals with strong and varied opinions in a way that promotes crew consensus, maintains fairness, and prevents unnecessary crew fatigue.

Cusack, Stacy L.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Hubble Space Telescope Crew Rescue Analysis

In the aftermath of the 2003 Columbia accident, NASA removed the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Servicing Mission 4 (SM4) from the Space Shuttle manifest. Reasons cited included concerns that the risk of flying the mission would be too high. The HST SM4 was subsequently reinstated and flown as Space Transportation System (STS)-125 because of improvements in the ascent debris environment, the development of techniques for astronauts to perform on orbit repairs to damaged thermal protection, and the development of a strategy to provide a viable crew rescue capability. However, leading up to the launch of STS-125, the viability of the HST crew rescue capability was a recurring topic. For STS-125, there was a limited amount of time available to perform a crew rescue due to limited consumables (power, oxygen, etc.) available on the Orbiter. The success of crew rescue depended upon several factors, including when a problem was identified; when and what actions, such as powering down, were begun to conserve consumables; and where the Launch on Need (LON) vehicle was in its ground processing cycle. Crew rescue success also needed to be weighed against preserving the Orbiter s ability to have a landing option in case there was a problem with the LON vehicle. This paper focuses on quantifying the HST mission loss of crew rescue capability using Shuttle historical data and various power down strategies. Results from this effort supported NASA s decision to proceed with STS-125, which was successfully completed on May 24th 2009.

Hamlin, Teri L.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Design/Development of Spacecraft and Module Crew Compartments

This slide presentation reviews the design and development of crew compartments for spacecraft and for modules. The Crew Compartment or Crew Station is defined as the spacecraft interior and all other areas the crewman interfaces inside the cabin, or may potentially interface.It uses examples from all of the human rated spacecraft. It includes information about the process, significant drivers for the design, habitability, definitions of models, mockups, prototypes and trainers, including pictures of each stage in the development from Apollo, pictures of the space shuttle trainers, and International Space Station trainers. It further reviews the size and shape of the Space Shuttle orbiter crew compartment, and the Apollo command module and the lunar module. It also has a chart which reviews the International Space Station (ISS) internal volume by stage. The placement and use of windows is also discussed. Interestingly according to the table presented, the number 1 rated piece of equipment for recreation was viewing windows. The design of crew positions and restraints, crew translation aids and hardware restraints is shown with views of the restraints and handholds used from the Apollo program through the ISS.

Goodman, Jerry R.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Use of Data Comm by Flight Crew in High-Density Terminal Areas

This paper describes a collaborative FAA and NASA experiment using 22 commercial airline pilots to determine the effect of using Datalink Communication (Data Comm) to issue messages in busy, terminal area operations. Four conditions were defined that span current day to future flight deck equipage levels (voice communication only, Data Comm only, Data Comm with Moving Map Display, Data Comm with Moving Map displaying taxi route), and each condition was used to create an arrival and a departure scenario at the Boston Logan Airport. These eight scenarios were repeated twice for a total of 16 scenarios for each of the eleven crews. Quantitative data was collected on subject reaction time and eye tracking information. Questionnaires collected subjective feedback on workload and acceptability to the flight crew for using Data Comm in a busy terminal area. 95% of the Data Comm messages were responded to by the flight crew within one minute; however, post experiment debrief comments revealed almost unanimous consensus that two minutes was a reasonable expectation for crew response. Eye tracking data indicated an insignificant decrease in head-up time for the Pilot Flying when Data Comm was introduced; however, the Pilot Monitoring had significantly less head-up time. Data Comm workload was rated as operationally acceptable by both crew members in all conditions in flight at any altitude above the Final Approach Fix in terms of response time and workload. Results also indicate the use of Data Comm during surface operations was acceptable, the exception being the simultaneous use of voice, Data Comm, and audio chime required for an aircraft to cross an active runway. Many crews reported they believed Data Comm messages would be acceptable after the Final Approach Fix or to cross a runway if the message was not accompanied by a chime and there was not a requirement to immediately respond to the uplink message.

Baxley, Brian T.↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Contingency Shuttle Crew Support (CSCS) Medical Operations

The genesis of the space shuttle began in the 1930's when Eugene Sanger came up with the idea of a recyclable rocket plane that could carry a crew of people. The very first Shuttle to enter space was the Shuttle "Columbia" which launched on April 12 of 1981. Not only was "Columbia" the first Shuttle to be launched, but was also the first to utilize solid fuel rockets for U.S. manned flight. The primary objectives given to "Columbia" were to check out the overall Shuttle system, accomplish a safe ascent into orbit, and to return back to earth for a safe landing. Subsequent to its first flight Columbia flew 27 more missions but on February 1st, 2003 after a highly successful 16 day mission, the Columbia, STS-107 mission, ended in tragedy. With all Shuttle flight successes come failures such as the fatal in-flight accident of STS 107. As a result of the STS 107 accident, and other close-calls, the NASA Space Shuttle Program developed contingency procedures for a rescue mission by another Shuttle if an on-orbit repair was not possible. A rescue mission would be considered for a situation where a Shuttle and the crew were not in immediate danger, but, was unable to return to Earth or land safely. For Shuttle missions to the International Space Station (ISS), plans were developed so the Shuttle crew would remain on board ISS for an extended period of time until rescued by a "rescue" Shuttle. The damaged Shuttle would subsequently be de-orbited unmanned. During the period when the ISS Crew and Shuttle crew are on board simultaneously multiple issues would need to be worked including, but not limited to: crew diet, exercise, psychological support, workload, and ground contingency support

Adams, Adrien↗
NASA NTRS2011

Achieving the Proper Balance Between Crew and Public Safety

A paramount objective of all human-rated launch and reentry vehicle developers is to ensure that the risks to both the crew onboard and the public are minimized within reasonable cost, schedule, and technical constraints. Past experience has shown that proper attention to range safety requirements necessary to ensure public safety must be given early in the design phase to avoid additional operational complexities or threats to the safety of people onboard, and the design engineers must give these requirements the same consideration as crew safety requirements. For human spaceflight, the primary purpose and operational concept for any flight safety system is to protect the public while maximizing the likelihood of crew survival. This paper will outline the policy considerations, technical issues, and operational impacts regarding launch and reentry vehicle failure scenarios where crew and public safety are intertwined and thus addressed optimally in an integrated manner. An overview of existing range and crew safety policy requirements will be presented. Application of these requirements and lessons learned from both the Space Shuttle and Constellation Programs will also be discussed. Using these past programs as examples, the paper will detail operational, design, and analysis approaches to mitigate and balance the risks to people onboard and in the public. Manned vehicle perspectives from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Air Force organizations that oversee public safety will be summarized as well. Finally, the paper will emphasize the need to factor policy, operational, and analysis considerations into the early design trades of new vehicles to help ensure that both crew and public safety are maximized to the greatest extent possible.

Gowan, John↗
NASA NTRS2012

Future Concepts for Integrating the Space Launch System and the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle into a Reusable Space Transportation Infrastructure

A space transportation infrastructure is described that utilizes the Space Launch System (SLS), the Mulit-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), the International Space Station (ISS), and propellant depot servicing platforms to support all foreseeable missions in the Earth-Moon vicinity and deep space out to Mars. The infrastructure utilizes current expendable launch vehicle (ELV) systems such as the Delta IV Heavy, Atlas V, and Falcon 9, for commercial crew, cargo, and propellant launches to a Low-Earth-Orbit (LEO) Depot and/or the ISS. The SLS provides all payload and propellant launches to the Earth-Moon Langrange Point 1 (EML1) Depot to support new reusable in-space transportation vehicles. The ISS or follow-on LEO Depot supports missions to Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO) for satellite servicing and to Earth-Moon L1 for EML1 Depot missions. The EML1 Depot supports Lunar, Earth-Sun L2 (ESL2), Asteroid, and Mars missions. New vehicle design concepts are presented that can be launched utilizing the SLS and current ELV systems. These new reusable vehicle concepts include a Crew Transfer Vehicle (CTV) derived from the MPCV and a reusable Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (CPS) for crew transportation between the LEO Depot, EML1 Depot and missions beyond the Earth-Moon vicinity; a new reusable Lunar Lander for crew transportation between the EML1 Depot and the lunar surface; and a new reusable Deep Space Habitat (DSH) with a CTV to support crew missions from the EML1 Depot to ESL2, Asteroids, and a Mars Orbital Depot. The LEO Depot, EML1 Depot, and Mars Orbital Depot are based on International Space Station (ISS) heritage hardware. Data provided includes the number of launches required for each mission utilizing SLS and current ELV systems (Delta IV Heavy or equivalent) and the approximate vehicle masses and propellant requirements. Also included is a discussion on affordability with ideas on technologies that could reduce the number of launches required and thoughts on how this infrastructure might be implemented incrementally over the next few decades. The potential benefits of this infrastructure include competitive bidding for ELV flights and propellant services, development of new reusable in-space vehicles, and development of a robust multiuse infrastructure that can support many government and commercial missions simultaneously.

Smitherman, David↗