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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Human Exploration of Phobos

This study developed, analyzed, and compared mission architectures for human exploration of Mars' Moons within the context of an Evolvable Mars Campaign. METHODS: All trades assumed conjunction class missions to Phobos (approximately 500 days in Mars system) as it was considered the driving case for the transportation architecture. All architectures assumed that the Mars Transit Habitat would remain in a High Mars Orbit with crewmembers transferring between HMO and Phobos in a small crew taxi vehicle. A reference science / exploration program was developed including performance of a standard set of tasks at 55 locations on the Phobos surface. Detailed EVA timelines were developed using realistic flight rules to accomplish the reference science tasks using exploration systems ranging from jetpacks to multi-person pressurized excursion vehicles combined with Phobos surface and orbital (L1, L4/L5, 20km Distant Retrograde Orbit) habitat options. Detailed models of propellant mass, crew time, science productivity, radiation exposure, systems and consumables masses, and other figures of merit were integrated to enable quantitative comparison of different architectural options. Options for pre-staging assets using solar electric propulsion (SEP) vs. delivering all systems with the crew were also evaluated. Seven discrete mission architectures were evaluated. RESULTS: The driving consideration for habitat location (Phobos surface vs. orbital) was radiation exposure, with an estimated reduction in cumulative mission radiation exposure of up to 34% (vs. Mars orbital mission) when the habitat is located on the Phobos surface, compared with only 3-6% reduction for a habitat in a 20km DRO. The exploration utility of lightweight unpressurized excursion vehicles was limited by the need to remain within 20 minutes of Solar Particle Event radiation protection combined with complex GN&C systems required by the non-intuitive and highly-variable gravitational environment. Two-person pressurized excursion vehicles as well as mobile surface habitats offer significant exploration capability and operational benefits compared with unpressurized EVA mobility systems at the cost of increased system and propellant mass. Mechanical surface translation modes (i.e. hopping) were modeled and offer potentially significant propellant savings and the possibility of extended exploration operations between crewed missions. Options for extending the utilization of the crew taxi vehicle were examined, including use as an exploration asset for Phobos surface exploration (when combined with an alternate mobility system) and as an EVA platform, both on Phobos and for contingency EVA on the Mars Transit Habitat. CONCLUSIONS: Human exploration of Phobos offers a scientifically meaningful first step towards human Mars surface missions that develops and validates transportation, habitation, and exploration systems and operations in advance of the Mars landing systems.

Abercromby, Andrew F. J.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Implementing NASA's Capability-Driven Approach: Insight into NASA's Processes for Maturing Exploration Systems

NASA is engaged in transforming human spaceflight. The Agency is shifting from an exploration-based program with human activities focused on low Earth orbit (LEO) and targeted robotic missions in deep space to a more sustainable and integrated pioneering approach. Through pioneering, NASA seeks to address national goals to develop the capacity for people to work, learn, operate, live, and thrive safely beyond the Earth for extended periods of time. However, pioneering space involves more than the daunting technical challenges of transportation, maintaining health, and enabling crew productivity for long durations in remote, hostile, and alien environments. This shift also requires a change in operating processes for NASA. The Agency can no longer afford to engineer systems for specific missions and destinations and instead must focus on common capabilities that enable a range of destinations and missions. NASA has codified a capability driven approach, which provides flexible guidance for the development and maturation of common capabilities necessary for human pioneers beyond LEO. This approach has been included in NASA policy and is captured in the Agency's strategic goals. It is currently being implemented across NASA's centers and programs. Throughout 2014, NASA engaged in an Agency-wide process to define and refine exploration-related capabilities and associated gaps, focusing only on those that are critical for human exploration beyond LEO. NASA identified 12 common capabilities ranging from Environmental Control and Life Support Systems to Robotics, and established Agency-wide teams or working groups comprised of subject matter experts that are responsible for the maturation of these exploration capabilities. These teams, called the System Maturation Teams (SMTs) help formulate, guide and resolve performance gaps associated with the identified exploration capabilities. The SMTs are defining performance parameters and goals for each of the 12 capabilities, developing maturation plans and roadmaps for the identified performance gaps, specifying the interfaces between the various capabilities, and ensuring that the capabilities mature and integrate to enable future pioneering missions. By managing system development through the SMTs instead of traditional NASA programs and projects, the Agency is shifting from mission-driven development to a more flexible, capability-driven development. The process NASA uses to establish, integrate, prioritize, and manage the SMTs and associated capabilities is iterative. NASA relies on the Human Exploration and Operation Mission Directorate's SMT Integration Team within Advanced Exploration Systems to coordinate and facilitate the SMT process. The SMT Integration team conducts regular reviews and coordination meetings among the SMTs and has developed a number of tools to help the Agency implement capability driven processes. The SMT Integration team is uniquely positioned to help the Agency coordinate the SMTs and other processes that are making the capability-driven approach a reality. This paper will introduce the SMTs and the 12 key capabilities they represent. The role of the SMTs will be discussed with respect to Agency-wide processes to shift from mission-focused exploration to a capability-driven pioneering approach. Specific examples will be given to highlight systems development and testing within the SMTs. These examples will also show how NASA is using current investments in the International Space Station and future investments to develop and demonstrate capabilities. The paper will conclude by describing next steps and a process for soliciting feedback from the space exploration community to refine NASA's process for developing common exploration capabilities.

Williams-Byrd, Julie↗
NASA NTRS2016

Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute: Year Three Annual Report 2016

NASA's Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) is pleased to present the 2016 Annual Report. Each year brings new scientific discoveries, technological breakthroughs, and collaborations. The integration of basic research and development, industry and academic partnerships, plus the leveraging of existing technologies, has further opened a scientific window into human exploration. SSERVI sponsorship by the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) continues to enable the exchange of insights between the human exploration and space science communities, paving a clearer path for future space exploration. SSERVI provides a unique environment for scientists and engineers to interact within multidisciplinary research teams. As a virtual institute, the best teaming arrangements can be made irrespective of the geographical location of individuals or laboratory facilities. The interdisciplinary science that ensues from virtual and in-person interactions, both within the teams and across team lines, provides answers to questions that many times cannot be foreseen. Much of this research would not be accomplished except for the catalyzing, collaborative environment enabled by SSERVI. The SSERVI Central Office, located at NASA Ames Research Center in Silicon Valley, California, provides the leadership, guidance and technical support that steers the virtual institute. At the start of 2016, our institute had nine U.S. teams, each mid-way through their five-year funding cycle, plus nine international partnerships. However, by the end of the year we were well into the selection of four new domestic teams, selected through NASA's Cooperative Agreement Notice (CAN) process, and a new international partnership. Understanding that human and robotic exploration is most successful as an international endeavor, international partnerships collaborate with SSERVI domestic teams on a no-exchange of funds basis, but they bring a richness to the institute that is priceless. The international partner teams interact with the domestic teams in a number of ways, including sharing students, scientific insights, and access to facilities. We are proud to introduce our newest partnership with the Astrophysics and Planetology Research Institute (IRAP) in Toulouse, France. In 2016, Principal Investigator Dr. Patrick Pinet assembled a group of French researchers who will contribute scientific and technological expertise related to SSERVI research. SSERVI's domestic teams compete for five-year funding opportunities through proposals to a NASA CAN every few years. Having overlapping proposal selection cycles allows SSERVI to be more responsive to any change in direction NASA might experience, while providing operational continuity for the institute. Allowing new teams to blend with the more seasoned teams preserves corporate memory and expands the realm of collaborative possibilities. A key component of SSERVI's mission is to grow and maintain an integrated research community focused on questions related to the Moon, Near-Earth asteroids, and the moons of Mars. The strong community response to CAN-2 demonstrated the health of that effort. NASA Headquarters conducted the peer-review of 22 proposals early in 2017 and, based on recommendations from the SSERVI Central Office and NASA SSERVI program officers, the NASA selecting officials determined the new teams in the spring of 2017. We are pleased to welcome the CAN-2 teams into the institute, and look forward to the collaborations that will develop with the current teams. The new teams are: The Network for Exploration and Space Science (NESS) team (Principal Investigator (PI) Prof. Jack Burns/U. Colorado); the Exploration Science Pathfinder Research for Enhancing Solar System Observations (ESPRESSO) team (PI Dr. Alex Parker/Southwest Research Institute); the Toolbox for Research and Exploration (TREX) team (PI Dr. Amanda Hendrix/ Planetary Science Institute); and the Radiation Effects on Volatiles and Exploration of Asteroids & Lunar Surfaces (REVEALS) team (PI Prof. Thomas Orlando/ Georgia Institute of Technology). In this report, you will find an overview of the 2016 leadership activities of the SSERVI Central Office, reports prepared by the U.S. teams from CAN-1, and achievements from several of the SSERVI international partners. Reflecting on the past year's discoveries and advancements serves as a potent reminder that there is still a great deal to learn about NASA's target destinations. Innovation in the way we access, sample, measure, visualize, and assess our target destinations is needed for further discovery. At the same time, let us celebrate how far we have come, and strongly encourage a new generation that will make the most of future opportunities.

Pendleton, Yvonne↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Exercise System (EES) Development

Exploration class missions will be required to have an exercise device that is lightweight, has a small footprint, and is capable of providing enough physical stimulus and exercise variability to be an effective countermeasure against muscle and bone loss that results from the microgravity environment. Exploration exercise device prototypes should be evaluated on the ground and in-orbit for feasibility of use in microgravity for long and short duration exploration missions and efficacy of the device to maintain multi-system health and performance. The European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D) was selected as the exploration prototype device to be evaluated on ISS for efficacy and feasibility of use as a single multi-modality device for the exercise system for exploration missions. This effort supports the continued development, testing, and verification of E4D hardware and software, internal NASA integration (Human Health and Performance, ISS Vehicle Office, Engineering, and Flight Operations), and external integration across NASA, ESA, and the Danish Aerospace Company (DAC). Providing a feasibility and acceptability assessment from a physiological efficacy and hardware durability standpoint are critical for informing use and risk associated with use on exploration missions. Clearly defined objectives from end users, stakeholders, and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) will be tested by crewmembers during acute use sessions and long duration use of the exercise device while on ISS. This effort will include a flight study where crewmembers will be asked to exercise using only the E4D during the duration of their mission and participate in a battery of physiological testing to evaluate the efficacy. Hardware is scheduled to launch in FY25 followed by 2 years of operational use after activation and checkout. A final recommendation will be provided to the Artemis program on acceptability of the device for exploration missions. The E4D needs a vibration isolation stabilization (VIS) system that serves as a platform for the exercise hardware to protect the vehicle from loads imparted during exercise. Exploration forward VIS systems will need to protect the vehicle and provide sufficient stabilization for the exerciser during performance of all critical exercises. These enabling capabilities need to be achieved within exploration vehicle power, thermal, mass, and volume limitations.

Kent Lawrence Kalogera↗
NASA NTRS2024

Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate: Moon to Mars Architecture Definition Document

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery. Extending the reach of humanity through the human exploration of the Moon, Mars, and beyond is key to that mission. NASA’s Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives document establishes long-term goals and objectives for crewed deep space exploration; however, satisfying NASA’s Moon to Mars Objectives requires an innovative approach to the definition, management, and execution of NASA’s Moon to Mars Architecture. An architecture offers a high-level unifying structure and defines a system. It provides rules, guidelines, and constraints that define a cohesive and coherent framework that identifies constituent parts, relationships, and connections and establishes how those parts fit and work together. This Architecture Definition Document (ADD) establishes the process for the decomposition of objectives empowers the agency’s success in achieving human exploration of the cosmos. NASA updates this document annually to reflect the maturation of the architecture and the progress NASA and partners make toward achieving exploration objectives. The ADD is not a manifest or requirements document. Instead, it serves as a tool for the programs, projects, and engineers who will implement and execute NASA’s bold ambitions for crewed exploration of deep space. As established in the Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives, “Why” we explore encompasses three pillars: Science, Inspiration, and National Posture. Ensuring success in all three areas requires an architectural approach that incorporates innovation, collaboration, and partnerships that can be sustained across a multi-decadal effort. This second revision (Rev-B) of the ADD, developed to support NASA’s 2024 Architecture Concept Review (ACR), incorporates several key updates to support the continued evolution of the architecture. Since the last revision of the ADD, NASA has significantly improved the clarity of the objective decomposition, which distills exploration objectives into the characteristics and needs and use cases and functions needed to achieve them. The updated decomposition incorporates findings from internal studies and diverse stakeholder feedback. A model-based systems engineering approach ensures coherence and consistency, removing inconsistency and repetition. Revision B also incorporates advancements to NASA’s Mars architecture, including insight into initial capabilities, systems, and operations necessary to support the Humans to Mars segment. Updates to objective decomposition for Mars add significant detail to the ADD and hint at areas of forward work and future study. An appendix adds greater depth in the future decisions needed for Mars that will drive lunar needs. They are not the only decisions to be made, but they will have huge effects on subsequent decisions. NASA continues to introduce new exploration systems into the architecture. Two new elements — initial surface habitat and lunar surface cargo lander—successfully passed mission concept review in 2024 as a result of extensive analysis, concept refinement, and studies. These elements and their respective reference missions appear in this revision. NASA also continues to apply architecture processes to cross-agency efforts and coordination with external stakeholders by including definitions of architecture technology gaps — essential areas for engagement across and beyond the agency. The technology gaps appendix identifies areas that need attention and innovation to enable future exploration. In publishing this information, NASA communicates the technologies and capabilities that may benefit from partnership with industry, academia, other U.S. government agencies, and international space agencies. Ultimately, NASA established the Moon to Mars Architecture approach to communicate and facilitate humanity’s journey into the universe according to the principles and recurring tenets of NASA’s Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives. The NASA architecture team thanks their many stakeholders, participants, and partners for their efforts to review and provide feedback. Their support has been critical to the success of this approach.

Elements↗
NASA NTRS1987

Planetary exploration: To boldly go - or what?

The direction of solar system exploration in the U.S. is examined. Planetary exploration missions from 1961-1976 are reviewed. The objectives of the Viking and Voyager missions are described. The effects of launch vehicles and access to space, the cost of exploration, the balance of planetary exploration with other space sciences, and international planet exploration missions on future planetary exploration programs are discussed. Inner and outer solar system exploration, comet exploration, extensive human visitations to Mars, joint U.S.-Soviet programs, and exploration beyond the solar system are proposed as future planetary missions.

Allen, Lew, Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Workshop on Science and the Human Exploration of Mars

The exploration of Mars will be a multi-decadal activity. Currently, a scientific program is underway, sponsored by NASA's Office of Space Science in the United States, in collaboration with international partners France, Italy, and the European Space Agency. Plans exist for the continuation of this robotic program through the first automated return of Martian samples in 2014. Mars is also a prime long-term objective for human exploration, and within NASA, efforts are being made to provide the best integration of the robotic program and future human exploration missions. From the perspective of human exploration missions, it is important to understand the scientific objectives of human missions, in order to design the appropriate systems, tools, and operational capabilities to maximize science on those missions. In addition, data from the robotic missions can provide critical environmental data - surface morphology, materials composition, evaluations of potential toxicity of surface materials, radiation, electrical and other physical properties of the Martian environment, and assessments of the probability that humans would encounter Martian life forms. Understanding of the data needs can lead to the definition of experiments that can be done in the near-term that will make the design of human missions more effective. This workshop was convened to begin a dialog between the scientific community that is central to the robotic exploration mission program and a set of experts in systems and technologies that are critical to human exploration missions. The charge to the workshop was to develop an understanding of the types of scientific exploration that would be best suited to the human exploration missions and the capabilities and limitations of human explorers in undertaking science on those missions.

Duke, M. B.↗
NASA NTRS2004

The Vision for Space Exploration

With last year's budget, NASA released a new Strategic Plan outlining a new approach to space exploration using a 'building block' strategy to explore scientifically valuable destinations across our solar system. At the same time that we released the Strategic Plan, our Nation and the NASA family also suffered the loss of the seven brave astronauts aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia. The report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board emphasized the need for a clearer direction from which to drive NASA's human exploration agenda. On January 14, 2004, the President articulated a new vision for space exploration. You hold in your hands a new, bolder framework for exploring our solar system that builds upon the policy that was announced by the President after months of careful deliberations within the Administration. This plan does not undertake exploration merely for the sake of adventure, however exciting that may be, but seeks answers to profound scientific and philosophical questions, responds to recent discoveries, will put in place revolutionary technologies and capabilities for the future, and will genuinely inspire our Nation, the world, and the next generation. Our aim is to explore in a sustainable, affordable, and flexible manner. We believe the principles and roadmap set down in this document will stand the test of time. Its details will be subject to revision and expansion as new discoveries are made, new technologies are applied, and new challenges are met and overcome. This plan is guided by the Administration's new space exploration policy, 'A Renewed Spirit of Discovery: The President's Vision for U.S. Space Exploration,' a copy of which is provided on the following pages. NASA is releasing this plan simultaneously with NASA's FY 2005 Budget Justification. This plan is fiscally responsible, consistent with the Administration s goal of cutting the budget deficit in half within the next five years. I cannot overstate how much NASA will change in the coming years as this plan is implemented. I also cannot overstate how profound the rewards will be on this new course. With the support of Congress, the science community, the NASA civil and contractor workforce, and most importantly, the American public, we will embark on this very exciting future. When Christopher Columbus made his voyages across the Atlantic in the 15th and 16th centuries, his ships carried the inscription 'Following the light of the sun, we left the Old World.' I look forward to joining you as we follow the light of the planets and the stars into the new worlds of the 21st century.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

Exploration Rover Concepts and Development Challenges

This paper presents an overview of exploration rover concepts and the various development challenges associated with each as they are applied to exploration objectives and requirements for missions on the Moon and Mars. A variety of concepts for surface exploration vehicles have been proposed since the initial development of the Apollo-era lunar rover. This paper provides a brief description of the rover concepts, along with a comparison of their relative benefits and limitations. In addition, this paper outlines, and investigates a number of critical development challenges that surface exploration vehicles must address in order to successfully meet the exploration mission vision. These include: mission and environmental challenges, design challenges, and production and delivery challenges. Mission and environmental challenges include effects of terrain, extreme temperature differentials, dust issues, and radiation protection. Design methods are discussed that focus on optimum methods for developing highly reliable, long-life and efficient systems. In addition, challenges associated with delivering a surface exploration system is explored and discussed. Based on all the information presented, modularity will be the single most important factor in the development of a truly viable surface mobility vehicle. To meet mission, reliability, and affordability requirements, surface exploration vehicles, especially pressurized rovers, will need to be modularly designed and deployed across all projected Moon and Mars exploration missions.

Zakrajsek, James J.↗
NASA NTRS2005

An Overview of Power Capability Requirements for Exploration Missions

Advanced power is one of the key capabilities that will be needed to achieve NASA's missions of exploration and scientific advancement. Significant gaps exist in advanced power capabilities that are on the critical path to enabling human exploration beyond Earth orbit and advanced robotic exploration of the solar system. Focused studies and investment are needed to answer key development issues for all candidate technologies before down-selection. The viability of candidate power technology alternatives will be a major factor in determining what exploration mission architectures are possible. Achieving the capabilities needed to enable the CEV, Moon, and Mars missions is dependent on adequate funding. Focused investment in advanced power technologies for human and robotic exploration missions is imperative now to reduce risk and to make informed decisions on potential exploration mission decisions beginning in 2008. This investment would begin the long lead-time needed to develop capabilities for human exploration missions in the 2015 to 2030 timeframe. This paper identifies some of the key technologies that will be needed to fill these power capability gaps. Recommendations are offered to address capability gaps in advanced power for Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) power, surface nuclear power systems, surface mobile power systems, high efficiency power systems, and space transportation power systems. These capabilities fill gaps that are on the critical path to enabling robotic and human exploration missions. The recommendations address the following critical technology areas: Energy Conversion, Energy Storage, and Power Management and Distribution.

Davis, Jose M.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Exploration-Related Research on ISS: Connecting Science Results to Future Missions

In January, 2004, the U.S. President announced The Vision for Space Exploration, and charged the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) with using the International Space Station (ISS) for research and technology targeted at supporting U.S. space exploration goals. This paper describes: What we have learned from the first four years of research on ISS relative to the exploration mission; The on-going research being conducted in this regard; and Our current understanding of the major exploration mission risks that the ISS can be used to address. Specifically, we discuss research carried out on the ISS to determine the mechanisms by which human health is affected on long-duration missions, and to develop countermeasures to protect humans from the space environment. These bioastronautics experiments are key enablers of future long duration human exploration missions. We also discuss how targeted technological developments can enable mission design trade studies. We discuss the relationship between the ultimate number of human test subjects available on the ISS to the quality and quantity of scientific insight that can be used to reduce health risks to future explorers. We discuss the results of NASA's efforts over the past year to realign the ISS research programs to support a product-driven portfolio that is directed towards reducing the major risks of exploration missions. The fundamental challenge to science on ISS is completing experiments that answer key questions in time to shape design decisions for future exploration. In this context, exploration relevant research must do more than be conceptually connected to design decisions - it must become a part of the mission design process.

Rhatigan, Jennifer L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Langley Research Center Systems Analysis & Concepts Directorate Participation in the Exploration Systems Architecture Study

The NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Systems Analysis & Concepts Directorate (SACD) began studying human exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) in the year 1999. This included participation in NASA s Decadal Planning Team (DPT), the NASA Exploration Team (NExT), Space Architect studies and Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concepts (RASC) architecture studies that were used in formulating the new Vision for Space Exploration. In May of 2005, NASA initiated the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS). The primary outputs of the ESAS activity were concepts and functional requirements for the Crewed Exploration Vehicle (CEV), its supporting launch vehicle infrastructure and identification of supporting technology requirements and investments. An exploration systems analysis capability has evolved to support these functions in the past and continues to evolve to support anticipated future needs. SACD had significant roles in supporting the ESAS study team. SACD personnel performed the liaison function between the ESAS team and the Shuttle/Station Configuration Options Team (S/SCOT), an agency-wide team charged with using the Space Shuttle to complete the International Space Station (ISS) by the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 2010. The most significant of the identified issues involved the ability of the Space Shuttle system to achieve the desired number of flights in the proposed time frame. SACD with support from the Kennedy Space Center performed analysis showing that, without significant investments in improving the shuttle processing flow, that there was almost no possibility of completing the 28-flight sequence by the end of 2010. SACD performed numerous Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM) trades to define top level element requirements and establish architecture propellant needs. Configuration trades were conducted to determine the impact of varying degrees of segmentation of the living capabilities of the combined descent stage, ascent stage, and other elements. The technology assessment process was developed and implemented by SACD as the ESAS architecture was refined. SACD implemented a rigorous and objective process which included (a) establishing architectural functional needs, (b) collection, synthesis and mapping of technology data, and (c) performing an objective decision analysis resulting in technology development investment recommendations. The investment recommendation provided budget, schedule, and center/program allocations to develop required technologies for the exploration architecture, as well as the identification of other investment opportunities to maximize performance and flexibility while minimizing cost and risk. A summary of the trades performed and methods utilized by SACD for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESAS) activity is presented along with how SACD is currently supporting the implementation of the Vision for Space Exploration.

Keyes, Jennifer↗
NASA NTRS2009

From LEO, to the Moon and then Mars: Developing a Global Strategy for Exploration Risk Reduction

Most nations currently involved in human spaceflight, or with such ambitions, believe that space exploration will capture the imagination of our youth resulting in future engineers and scientists, advance technologies which will improve life on earth, increase the knowledge of our solar system, and strengthen bonds and relationships across the globe. The Global Exploration Strategy, published in 2007 by 14 space agencies, eloquently makes this case and presents a vision for space exploration. It argues that in order for space exploration to be sustainable, nations must work together to address the challenges and share the burden of costs. This paper will examine Mars mission scenarios developed by NASA, ESA and other agencies and show resulting conclusions regarding key challenges, needed technologies and associated mission risks. It will discuss the importance of using the International Space Station as a platform for exploration risk reduction and how the global exploration community will develop lunar exploration elements and architectures that enable the long term goal of human missions to Mars. The International Space Station (ISS) is a critical first step both from a technology and capability demonstration point of view, but also from a partnership point of view. There is much work that can be done in low earth orbit for exploration risk reduction. As the current "outpost at the edge of the frontier", the ISS is a place where we can demonstrate certain technologies and capabilities that will substantially reduce the risk of deploying an outpost on the lunar surface and Mars mission scenarios. The ISS partnership is strong and has fulfilled mission needs. Likewise, the partnerships we build on the moon will provide a strong foundation for establishing partnerships for the human Mars missions. On the moon, we build a permanently manned outpost and deploy technologies and capabilities to allow humans to stay for long periods of time. The moon is interesting from a scientific point of view, but it is extremely important for development and demonstration the technologies and capabilities needed for human missions to Mars. This paper will show the logic and strategy for addressing technological, operational and programmatic challenges by using low earth orbit and lunar missions to enable the long term goal of exploration of our solar system.

Laurini, Kathleen C.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Daylight Exploration

With 1 rover, 2 astronauts and 3 days, the Apollo 17 Mission covered over 30 km, setup 10 scientific experiments and returned 110 kg of samples. This is a lot of science in a short time and the inspiration for a barebones, return-to-the-Moon strategy called Daylight Exploration. The Daylight Exploration approach poses an answer to the question, What could the Apollo crew have done with more time and today s robotics? In contrast to more ambitious and expensive strategies that create outposts then rely on pressurized rovers to drive to the science sites, Daylight Exploration is a low-overhead approach conceived to land near the scientific site, conduct Apollo-like exploration then leave before the sun goes down. A key motivation behind Daylight Exploration is cost reduction, but it does not come at the expense of scientific exploration. As a goal, Daylight Exploration provides access to the top 10 science sites by using the best capabilities of human and robotic exploration. Most science sites are within an equatorial band of 26 degrees latitude and on the Moon, at the equator, the day is 14 Earth days long; even more important, the lunar night is 14 days long. Human missions are constrained to 12 days because the energy storage systems required to operate during the lunar night adds mass, complexity and cost. In addition, short missions are beneficial because they require fewer consumables, do not require an airlock, reduce radiation exposure, minimize the dwell-time for the ascent and orbiting propulsion systems and allow a low-mass, campout accommodations. Key to Daylight Exploration is the use of piloted rovers used as tele-operated science platforms. Rovers are launched before or with the crew, and continue to operate between crew visits analyzing and collecting samples during the lunar daylight

Griffin, Brand Norman↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Single Crew Module Concept a Streamlined Way to Explore

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, and the advantages it provides to accomplish exploration objectives.

Chambliss, Joe↗
NASA NTRS2012

Innovative Technologies for Global Space Exploration

Under the direction of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD), Directorate Integration Office (DIO), The Tauri Group with NASA's Technology Assessment and Integration Team (TAIT) completed several studies and white papers that identify novel technologies for human exploration. These studies provide technical inputs to space exploration roadmaps, identify potential organizations for exploration partnerships, and detail crosscutting technologies that may meet some of NASA's critical needs. These studies are supported by a relational database of more than 400 externally funded technologies relevant to current exploration challenges. The identified technologies can be integrated into existing and developing roadmaps to leverage external resources, thereby reducing the cost of space exploration. This approach to identifying potential spin-in technologies and partnerships could apply to other national space programs, as well as international and multi-government activities. This paper highlights innovative technologies and potential partnerships from economic sectors that historically are less connected to space exploration. It includes breakthrough concepts that could have a significant impact on space exploration and discusses the role of breakthrough concepts in technology planning. Technologies and partnerships are from NASA's Technology Horizons and Technology Frontiers game-changing and breakthrough technology reports as well as the External Government Technology Dataset, briefly described in the paper. The paper highlights example novel technologies that could be spun-in from government and commercial sources, including virtual worlds, synthetic biology, and human augmentation. It will consider how these technologies can impact space exploration and will discuss ongoing activities for planning and preparing them.

Hay, Jason↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Single Habitat Module Concept a Streamlined Way to Explore

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 technologies and capabilities that NASA was directed to pursue, the Single Habitathabitat module (SHMSHM) concept for a more streamlined approach to the infrastructure and conduct of exploration missions was developed. The SHM 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 SHM concept, and the advantages it provides to accomplish exploration objectives.

Chambliss, Joe↗
NASA NTRS2013

Lunar Polar In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) as a Stepping Stone for Human Exploration

A major emphasis of NASA is to extend and expand human exploration across the solar system. While specific destinations are still being discussed as to what comes first, it is imperative that NASA create new technologies and approaches that make space exploration affordable and sustainable. Critical to achieving affordable and sustainable exploration beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) are the development of technologies and approaches for advanced robotics, power, propulsion, habitats, life support, and especially, space resource utilization systems. Space resources and how to use them, often called In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), can have a tremendous beneficial impact on robotic and human exploration of the Moon, Mars, Phobos, and Near Earth Objects (NEOs), while at the same time helping to solve terrestrial challenges and enabling commercial space activities. The search for lunar resources, demonstration of extraterrestrial mining, and the utilization of resource-derived products, especially from polar volatiles, can be a stepping stone for subsequent human exploration missions to other destinations of interest due to the proximity of the Moon, complimentary environments and resources, and the demonstration of critical technologies, processes, and operations. ISRU and the Moon: There are four main areas of development interest with respect to finding, obtaining, extracting, and using space resources: Prospecting for resources, Production of mission critical consumables like propellants and life support gases, Civil engineering and construction, and Energy production, storage, and transfer. The search for potential resources and the production of mission critical consumables are the primary focus of current NASA technology and system development activities since they provide the greatest initial reduction in mission mass, cost, and risk. Because of the proximity of the Moon, understanding lunar resources and developing, demonstrating, and implementing lunar ISRU provides a near and early opportunity to perform the following that are applicable to other human exploration mission destinations: Identify and characterize resources, how they are distributed, and the material, location and environment in which they are found; Demonstrate concepts, technologies, and hardware that can reduce the cost and risk of human exploration beyond Earth orbit; Use the Moon for operation experience and mission validation for much longer missions that are farther from Earth Develop and evolve ISRU to support sustained, economical human presence beyond Earth's orbit, including promoting space commercialization As Table 1 depicts, the Moon provides environments and resources applicable to Mars and NEOs. Two lunar ISRU resource and product pathways that have notable synergism with NEO, Phobos/Demos, and Mars ISRU are oxygen/metal extraction from regolith, and water/volatile extraction from lunar polar materials. To minimize the risk of developing and incorporating ISRU into human missions, a phased implementation plan is recommended that starts with prospecting and demonstrating critical technologies on robotic and human missions, then performing pilot scale operations (in non-mission critical roles) to enhance exploration mission capabilities, leading to full utilization of space resources in mission critical roles. Which lunar ISRU pathway is followed will depend on the results of early resource prospecting/proof-ofconcept mission(s), and long-term human exploration plans.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗