Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Constellation”

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 19 records

CONSTELL: NASA's Satellite Constellation Model

The CONSTELL program represents an initial effort by the orbital debris modeling group at NASA/JSC to address the particular issues and problems raised by the presence of LEO satellite constellations. It was designed to help NASA better understand the potential orbital debris consequences of having satellite constellations operating in the future in LEO. However, it could also be used by constellation planners to evaluate architecture or design alternatives that might lessen debris consequences for their constellation or lessen the debris effects on other users of space. CONSTELL is designed to perform debris environment projections rapidly so it can support parametric assessments involving either the constellations themselves or the background environment which represents non-constellation users of the space. The projections need to be calculated quickly because a number of projections are often required to adequately span the parameter space of interest. To this end CONSTELL uses the outputs of other NASA debris environment models as inputs, thus doing away with the need for time consuming upfront calculations. Specifically, CONSTELL uses EVOLVE or ORDEM96 debris spatial density results as its background environment, debris cloud snapshot templates to simulate debris cloud propagation, and time dependent orbit profiles of the intact non- functional constellation spacecraft and upper stages. In this paper the environmental consequences of the deployment of particular LEO satellite constellations using the CONSTELL model will be evaluated. Constellations that will undergo a parametric assessment will reflect realistic parameter values. Among other results the increase in loss rate of non-constellation spacecraft, the number of collisions involving constellation elements, and the replacement rate of constellation satellites as a result of debris impact will be presented.

Theall, Jeffrey R.

Multisatellite constellation configuration selection for multiregional highly elliptical orbit constellations

The Archimedes Project is a joint effort of the European Space Agency (ESA) and the National Space Development Agency of Japan (NASDA). The primary goal of the Archimedes project is to perform a technical feasibility analysis and preliminary design of a highly inclined multisatellite constellation for direct broadcast and mobile communications services for Europe, Japan and much of North America. This report addresses one aspect of this project, specifically an analysis of continuous satellite coverage using multiregional highly elliptical orbits (M-HEO's). The analysis methodology and ensuing software tool, named SPIFF, were developed specifically for this project by the author during the summer of 1992 under the STA/NSF Summer Institute in Japan Program at Tsukuba Space Center.

Matossian, Mark G.

Review of the Constellation Level II Safety, Reliability, and Quality Assurance (SR&QA) Requirements Documents during Participation in the Constellation Level II SR&QA Forum

At the request of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) and the Constellation Program (CxP) Safety, Reliability; and Quality Assurance (SR&QA) Requirements Director, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) participated in the Cx SR&QA Requirements forum. The Requirements Forum was held June 24-26; 2008, at GRC's Plum Brook Facility. The forums purpose was to gather all stakeholders into a focused meeting to help complete the process of refining the CxP to refine its Level II SR&QA requirements or defining project-specific requirements tailoring. Element prime contractors had raised specific questions about the wording and intent of many requirements in areas they felt were driving costs without adding commensurate value. NESC was asked to provide an independent and thorough review of requirements that contractors believed were driving Program costs, by active participation in the forum. This document contains information from the forum.

Cameron, Kenneth D.

Constellations: A New Paradigm for Earth Observations

The last decade has seen a significant increase in the number and the capabilities of remote sensing satellites launched by the international community. A relatively new approach has been the launching of satellites into heterogeneous constellations. Constellations provide the scientists a capability to acquire science data, not only from specific instruments on a single satellite, but also from instruments on other satellites that fly in the same orbit. Initial results from the A-Train (especially following the CALIPSO/CloudSat launch) attest to the tremendous scientific value of constellation flying. This paper provides a history of the constellations (particularly the A-Train) and how the A-Train mission design was driven by science requirements. The A-Train has presented operational challenges which had not previously been encountered. Operations planning had to address not only how the satellites of each constellation operate safely together, but also how the two constellations fly in the same orbits without interfering with each other when commands are uplinked or data are downlinked to their respective ground stations. This paper discusses the benefits of joining an on-orbit constellation. When compared to a single, large satellite, a constellation infrastructure offers more than just the opportunities for coincidental science observations. For example, constellations reduce risks by distributing observing instruments among numerous satellites; in contrast, a failed launch or a system failure in a single satellite would lead to loss of all observations. Constellations allow for more focused, less complex satellites. Constellations distribute the development, testing, and operations costs among various agencies and organizations for example, the Morning and Afternoon Constellations involve several agencies within the U.S. and in other countries. Lastly, this paper addresses the need to plan for the long-term evolution of a constellation. Agencies need to have a replenishment strategy as some satellites age and eventually leave the constellation. This will ensure overlap of observations, thus providing continuous, calibrated science data over a much longer time period. Thoughts on the evolution of the A-Train will also be presented.

Kelly, Angelita C.

Assessing Utility of Different Orbits for a Lunar PNT Constellation

"As the Artemis program establishes a long-term presence on the lunar surface, lunar surface users will need an accurate source of Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT). Under the LunaNet framework, NASA has proposed the Lunar Navigation System (LNS), a constellation of satellites in lunar orbit which will broadcast LunaNet’s Augmented Forward Signal (AFS) [1] to the lunar surface. LNS will have the objective of providing user position accuracies of 10 m and timing accuracies of 10 microseconds on the lunar surface and up to 200 km above the surface. Several classes of orbits are possibilities for the LNS constellation, including circular orbits, eccentric orbits, and various families of 3-body orbits. Each of these orbit classes have both advantages and disadvantages in their utility as PNT constellations. In this study we examine a wide variety of potential LNS constellations and evaluate their performance against several metrics, including: a. Dilution of Precision (DOP) performance over the lunar service volume and the South Pole region, during both the constellation buildup and after the constellation is completed. b. Number of satellites required to achieve required DOP performance. c. Relative dynamics of LNS satellites with respect to surface users. d. Signal in space error (SISE) performance, assuming orbit determination that includes the Global Positioning System (GPS), crosslinks, and monitor sites on the surface of the moon. e. Constellation insertion, station keeping, and disposal costs. f. Specific Concept of Operations (CONOPS) and engineering challenges associated with establishing and operating the constellations. (E.g., frequent station keeping, variable signal strength, divergent CONOPS for different planes of the constellation.) The system’s performance is considered both independently and in combination with other proposed systems, such as NASA’s Lunar Communication Relay and Navigation System (LCRNS) and ESA’s Moonlight constellation. The study concludes that a 3-plane Walker constellation at 6 lunar radii (slightly higher than GPS’s 4.2 earth radii from a geometry perspective, but significantly closer in an absolute sense) is a good candidate for the LNS constellation, providing the user with good SISE and DOP performance, while not requiring excessive station keeping or complex CONOPS. However, other viable concepts exist and could be chosen if early South Pole coverage is a driving factor in the system design."

navigation

Systems and Methods for Transmitting Data Using Parallel Decode Capacity Optimized Symbol Constellations

Transmitters are described that use non-uniformly spaced symbol constellations that have increased capacity compared to conventional constellations. In many embodiments, a transmitter includes a coder configured to receive bits and output encoded bits, a mapper configured to map said encoded bits to symbols in a non-uniform symbol constellation selected from a plurality of symbol constellations, and a modulator configured to generate a signal for transmission via the communication channel using symbols generated by the mapper. In a variety of embodiments, wherein the non-uniform symbol constellation comprises a set of non-uniformly spaced constellation points, and the location points in the non-uniform symbol constellation are chosen to optimize parallel decode capacity of the non-uniform symbol constellation subject to at least one optimization constraint. In many embodiments, the non-uniform symbol constellation is a quadrature amplitude modulation constellation or a phase shift keyed constellation.

Barsoum, Maged F.

Conjunction Assessment and Deconfliction Paradigm for Co-Located Satellite Constellations With on-Spacecraft “Autonomous” Flight Dynamics Control

Satellite constellations that employ on-spacecraft flight dynamics and conjunction assessment (CA) approaches face particular challenges. First, they must arrange to obtain and upload to the constellation satellite close approach information, such as Conjunction Data Messages, so that their on-board systems will have the data they need to make informed CA decisions. Second, given current latencies in obtaining CA screening information, such systems often cannot obtain dedicated screenings of their proposed maneuvers before they are executed. Third, they usually cannot engage in real time with owner/operators (O/Os) with whom they may come into conjunction, relying instead on pre-arranged courses of action that may or may not fit a given situation well. Despite these difficulties, it is nonetheless possible, as operators such as SpaceX have demonstrated, to operate safely using on-board CA calculations, in the presence of a largely collaborative operating environment. The situation breaks down, however, when two constellations that operate with such a paradigm are placed in the same orbital region and will experience conjunctions with each other. Each may have a vague idea of where the other’s satellites are, or perhaps even a somewhat precise idea if they exchange O/O ephemerides, but neither will know the other’s more immediate maneuver intentions, especially for situations in which they are in a high-risk conjunction with each other and a mitigation maneuver is required. As there is no formalized way for these automated systems to ascertain each other’s intentions for this type of conjunction, it is quite possible that each spacecraft may choose a maneuver that results in the two objects’ colliding. An opportunity to develop a solution to this problem was presented by the NASA “Starling” project, a small experimental constellation developed to demonstrate autonomous satellite control and constellation reconfiguration and for which a launch was obtained that, serendipitously, will place this constellation close to the SpaceX Starlink constellation. Because the NASA constellation is experimental, an extended mission part of the mission has been negotiated to implement and test mechanisms for resolving the problem of co-located constellations with on-board flight dynamics control. For the last eighteen months, a consortium among NASA Ames (the Starling satellite providers), NASA CARA (the Agency organization responsible for conjunction assessment), Space X, and the Department of Commerce (in observer status) has met regularly to assemble a concept of operations for a robust solution to this problem and has developed a prototype ground node that will serve as a needed CA screening and information dispensary. The approach and methods, as well as the active employment of the developed ground node, will be tested both in simulation before actual use and then in actual spacecraft operations, which are anticipated to begin in January 2024. This paper will describe the co-located autonomously-controlled constellation problem and the developed solution in detail, outlining what ground node (i.e., government) infrastructure and features are required, what particular capabilities are needed by the constellations themselves in order to make use of this deconfliction paradigm, and the migration path forward to allow such a capability set to be incorporated by the Department of Commerce’s space traffic coordination system.

Conjunction Assessment

Constellation Operations: Lessons Learned For Future Exploration

The Earth science community has long advocated placing numerous instruments in space to study the Earth and its environment. Space agencies from many countries have responded to this call with a wide range of orbiting satellites. Scientists also envisioned placing some satellites in constellations, to enable diverse remote sensing instruments to observe the same part of the Earth (or its atmosphere) at about the same time, thereby increasing the opportunities for coincident science observations. The Earth Science Afternoon Constellation is answering this call, but there have been unique challenges on the way to its deployment. Currently, the Afternoon Constellation is to comprise six satellites. Three are currently on orbit: NASA's Earth Observing System (EOS)-Aqua (2002) and EOS-Aura (2004), and CNES's Polarization & Anisotropy of Reflectances for Atmospheric Sciences coupled with Observations from a Lidar (PARASOL) (2004). Two more satellites, the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO) and Cloudsat, are to be jointly launched in late 2005, followed by the Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) in 2008. The Afternoon Constellation is unlike most satellite constellations in that: 1) It is not a homogenous mix of identical satellites; rather it comprises several satellites with complementary observational capabilities; 2) The satellites are not spaced around the Earth to provide instantaneous, global coverage (as for a communications satellite constellation); rather they orbit in close proximity so observations occur at about the same time over approximately the same region; and 3) Lastly, the satellites are not managed and controlled by one organization; rather the list of organizations is diverse: CNES in France, NASA Centers at Goddard, Langley, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and the US Air Force facility in New Mexico. The PARASOL launch and early orbit (L&EO) phase proved to be a learning experience for constellation members (including Constellation management). Prior to launch, all members signed an operations coordination document that spelled out basic requirements for keeping the constellation safe and resolving non-nominal events. Once PARASOL reached orbit and the mission teams gained experience using the newly-developed constellation monitoring tools, it became clear that some of the guidelines in the signed agreements had to be adjusted. This paper presents the L&EO lessons learned and how they were used to prepare for the next phase - the period following the CloudSat/CALIPSO launch.

Kelly, Angelita C.

Launching Science: Science Opportunities Provided by NASA's Constellation System

In 2004 NASA began implementation of the first phases of a new space exploration policy. This implementation effort included the development of a new human-carrying spacecraft, known as Orion; the Altair lunar lander; and two new launch vehicles, the Ares I and Ares V rockets.collectively called the Constellation System (described in Chapter 5 of this report). The Altair lunar lander, which is in the very preliminary concept stage, is not discussed in detail in the report. In 2007 NASA asked the National Research Council (NRC) to evaluate the science opportunities enabled by the Constellation System. To do so, the NRC established the Committee on Science Opportunities Enabled by NASA's Constellation System. In general, the committee interpreted "Constellation-enabled" broadly, to include not only mission concepts that required Constellation, but also those that could be significantly enhanced by Constellation. The committee intends this report to be a general overview of the topic of science missions that might be enabled by Constellation, a sort of textbook introduction to the subject. The mission concepts that are reviewed in this report should serve as general examples of kinds of missions, and the committee s evaluation should not be construed as an endorsement of the specific teams that developed the mission concepts or of their proposals. Additionally, NASA has a well-developed process for establishing scientific priorities by asking the NRC to conduct a "decadal survey" for a particular discipline. Any scientific mission that eventually uses the Constellation System will have to be properly evaluated by means of this decadal survey process. The committee was impressed with the scientific potential of many of the proposals that it evaluated. However, the committee notes that the Constellation System has been justified by NASA and selected in order to enable human exploration beyond low Earth orbit.not to enable science missions. Virtually all of the science mission concepts that could take advantage of Constellation s unique capabilities are likely to be prohibitively expensive. Several times in the past NASA has begun ambitious space science missions that ultimately proved too expensive for the agency to pursue. Examples include the Voyager-Mars mission and the Prometheus program and its Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter spacecraft (both examples are discussed in Chapter 1). Finding: The scientific missions reviewed by the committee as appropriate for launch on an Ares V vehicle fall, with few exceptions, into the "flagship" class of missions. The preliminary cost estimates, based on mission concepts that at this time are not very detailed, indicate that the costs of many of the missions analyzed will be above $5 billion (in current dollars). The Ares V costs are not included in these estimates. All of the costs discussed in this report are presented in current-year (2008) dollars, not accounting for potential inflation that could occur between now and the decade in which these missions might be pursued. In general, preliminary cost estimates for proposed missions are, for many reasons, significantly lower than the final costs. Given the large cost estimates for many of the missions assessed in this report, the potentially large impacts on NASA's budget by many of these missions are readily apparent.

Source record

Investigating Low-Altitude Constellations of Ad-Hoc Lunar PNT System for Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy

In this study, we examine a low-altitude Lunar Position, Navigation, and Timing (LPNT) constellations and the localization performance of Centralized Extended Kalman Filter (CEKF) and Decentralized Extended Kalman Filter (DEKF) algorithms. The primary investigation involves a 100-node swarm operating at a 100 km altitude, in contrast to previous studies that examined a 21-node asset in a frozen-orbit at 5,500 km. The autonomous operation of large-scale swarm is based on two-way Inter-Satellite Link (ISL) measurements, which involve pseudoranges and relative velocities among swarm nodes. We perform a numerical assessment of the two filtering approaches, utilizing ‘fully sampled’ measurements from all available assets as well as ‘two ISL’ measurements where each spacecraft is restricted to only two antennas. This research includes an analysis of CEKF under 2-ISL constraints and evaluates the performance of DEKF in a 100-node swarm, which has not been explored in previous studies. In addition, we examine the impact of increasing the sampling frequency for DEKF, showing that the update cycle can be shortened from a 10-minute interval. A novel approach for ‘2-ISL limited’ DEKF will also be introduced, using a matching formulation that exhaustively enumerates all potential matches. This study provides valuable insights into large-scale distributed swarm operations, considering various filter configurations, sampling frequencies, matching strategies, and scalability of CEKF and DEKF for low-altitude LPNT applications. The Lunar PNT technology plays a key role in providing reliable and robust navigation services on the Moon's surface and the South pole, where the primary Lunar missions are planned. To support upcoming Lunar missions, including small satellites from NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, the Lunar PNT system must be adaptable to smaller platforms like CubeSats. Driven by the growing involvement of public and private exploration partnerships, the traditional low Earth orbit missions are shifting to beyond geosynchronous orbit [1]. These upcoming missions aim to foster a sustainable and innovative exploration program, in collaboration with commercial and international partners, to facilitate human expansion throughout the solar system and return new knowledge and opportunities to Earth [2]. As part of this trend, there are increasing efforts to utilize science missions in Lunar orbit to develop a non-dedicated and ad-hoc PNT network system. Two traditional approaches, the Deep Space Network (DSN) and the weak signal Global Positioning System (GPS), are established deep-space navigation technologies for missions beyond the geosynchronous orbit. Beginning in 1958, the DSN was developed to communicate with the Explorer 1 spacecraft based on the use of radiometric tracking in spacecraft navigation [3]. The DSN is capable of providing nearly unfettered coverage to spacecraft beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO), however, increased space mission volume has created concerns about future expectations of DSN usage for spacecraft navigation [4]. For cislunar mission applications, the position accuracy using DSN achieves 100 m (3σ) with at least three geometrically diverse ground stations when using radiometric tracking alone [5]. The DSN's dependence on Earth-based ground stations restricts its operational capabilities to periods of Earth visibility. This limitation, coupled with its poor localization performance, renders the DSN unsuitable for future lunar missions that demand continuous tracking and precise positioning. To satisfy the increasing requirements of DSN in Lunar applications, spacecrafts are also required to improve their onboard antenna power and efficiency of the transmission. However, there is an important aggregate cost trade between adding capabilities to every spacecraft and adding to a capacity on the ground that serves multiple spacecraft [6]. A weak GPS system can provide PNT service while the user spacecraft is bound to the Moon, leveraging a single, steerable high gain antenna with the relatively narrow beam which includes all the sources in its field of view [7]. However, the higher the altitude the receiver is above the GPS constellations, the poorer and the weaker are the relative geometry and the received signal powers, respectively, leading to a significant navigation accuracy reduction [8]. The transmitted power becomes weaker with increasing distance from the Earth as well as signals tracked from one of the side lobes of the GPS antenna pattern. As a results, the number of visible satellites and relative geometric condition of the GPS satellites at very high altitude drops dramatically and reduces the navigation solution accuracy. Therefore, the weak GPS system is also not an ideal way to provide PNT service to upcoming Lunar missions when considering its limited geometric condition and the recued navigation accuracy. Another navigation approach on the Moon is being developed, similar to the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) on Earth, aiming to offer navigation service with continuous 24/7 coverage across the entire Lunar surface. For example, lunar communications relay and navigation systems (LCRNS) by NASA and Lunar navigation satellite systems (LNSS) by JAXA are designed to serve as dedicated Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) systems for the Moon. However, designing a dedicated LNSS and PNT service involves additional challenges, which are unique to the lunar environment, including limited payload capacity for the CubeSat platform, i.e., the size, weight, and power (SWaP) of the onboard clock, limited lunar ground monitoring stations, and limited financial investment as compared to the legacy Earth-GPS [9]. NASA’s focus on utilizing CubeSat platforms on the Moon leads to an alternative Lunar navigation platform that leverages the existing Lunar science and exploration assets. The small satellites used in Lunar missions can be used to create a low-cost, autonomous, ad-hoc, and on-demand mission-centric Lunar PNT swarm capable of providing PNT services to these low-cost lunar missions [10]. As upcoming Lunar missions will often operate at low-altitude about 30 km to 100 km for scientific observations and mapping purposes, the low-altitude orbital constellations could be employed to create an ad-hoc Lunar PNT system. However, several issues must be addressed, such as the instability of these orbits, which often require maintenance or are only suitable for short-duration missions, operating for fewer than 90 days. Additionally, at an altitude of 100 km, the satellites have a limited period during which they are above the horizon and capable of providing PNT service to users. The implementation of a non-dedicated, ad-hoc Lunar navigation constellation facilitates on-demand PNT services. A preliminary study of ad-hoc Lunar PNT system was conducted using 21 spacecraft in 5,5000 km altitude frozen orbits to test its feasibility and a basic performance of orbital asset localization among ad-hoc Lunar constellations in small satellites format [10]. These swarm assets are designed for autonomous localization with minimal Earth interaction, reducing dependency on bandwidth and ground resources. The design in [10] demonstrated the feasibility of a decentralized PNT approach, specifically employing a DEKF approach for state estimation, which helps minimize onboard operating costs. The DEKF method distributes computation across individual satellites, which lightens the computational load while maintaining accuracy in orbit ephemeris and clock offsets, similar to centralized systems [11]. In a follow-on study [12], each spacecraft was limited to 2 communications antennae, forcing the selection of measurements and scheduling spacecraft activities to perform the measurements. A matching algorithm is implemented to select the best measurements and schedule position estimation updates. The decentralized localization performance is also investigated with increasing levels of network degradation for swarm assets considering the impact of intermittent and permanent communication failure, to demonstrate the robustness and fidelity of the decentralized Lunar PNT service [13]. This study confirmed that the ad-hoc PNT constellations in frozen orbit are highly robust and resilient to communication failures. However, unlike frozen orbit swarm assets, the low-altitude satellites have a limited ground view at an altitude of 100 km, where the ad-hoc Lunar constellation consists of 98 low-altitude satellites, evenly distributed across seven circular polar orbital planes, alongside two satellites in a frozen orbit at an altitude of 5,500 km (Figure 1). Therefore, the number of satellites visible to ground users is significantly limited in low-altitude orbit constellations. As each visibility of a spacecraft remains intact for only a few ticks before it moves out of the field of view, the ground user encounters challenges in maintaining continuous navigation service, resulting in sparse availability and provision of Lunar PNT system. Consequently, service availability is primarily restricted to the Lunar South Pole region (Figure 2). Given these limitations and concerns, the localization performance of low-altitude swarm assets will be assessed in this study. We focus on the investigation of the localization performance of low-altitude swarm assets and ground users near the Lunar South Pole. The overall flow of the Lunar PNT simulation incorporates the DEKF approach of asset localization and the weighted least-squares approach in user localization (Figure 3). The autonomous Lunar PNT simulation is primarily implemented in MATLAB, where the DEKF based on the matching scheduler is implemented with Google’s OR-tools as a model builder and Gurobi optimization tool as a backend solver. The General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) is utilized to generate ephemeris data for swarm assets, and accounts for satellite orbital details, mass, and perturbations like solar radiation pressure and drag coefficients. Each ephemeris dataset is produced in the Moon International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF) inertial coordinate system. For state estimation, the distributed swarm assets rely on two-way Inter-Satellite Link (ISL) measurements, which involve tracking pseudoranges and relative velocities between visible satellites and anchor nodes during each observation. Numerical evaluations of the decentralized localization process are conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of the low-altitude PNT system in providing reliable navigation services. The main approach involves using DEKF and CEKF to localize 100 satellites in low-altitude constellations, where the CEKF is implemented to serve as a baseline for comparing the performance of distributed algorithms. In both cases, we evaluate ‘fully sampled’ measurements from all available assets, and ‘two ISL’ measurements when spacecraft are constrained to have only two antennas. We test four estimation techniques: CEKF fully sampled, CEKF two ISL, DEKF fully sampled, and DEKF two ISL filters. As the DEKF update cycle is comprised of network setup, communication, and computations, a global broadcast network and 2-way ISL network setup will take from 4 to 6 minutes as maximum [12]. In this simulation, the DEKF update cycle is set to 10 minutes, including a 4-minute latency for obtaining and computing the actual measurement updates. We experiment an increased update cycle to demonstrate the feasibility and evaluate the impact on localization performance using various tuning values for measurement noise covariances (Figures 4 and 5). By comparing centralized and decentralized approaches using a matching algorithm, we analyze the influence of cross-correlation factors in the covariance matrix, assuming 100% reliability of all assets and measurements. The increased frequency and the adjustments of tuning parameters reveal distinct error patterns between the two scenarios. The localization accuracy of the swarm assets and ground users is assessed by taking the median error across 100 assets and one ground user (84.9°S, 137.5°E) over 7-day simulation period (Table 1). Since the user localization accuracy is significantly affected by the performance of the swarm assets, it is crucial to maintain high localization accuracy within the swarm. This study will continue to explore decentralized filtering for autonomous LPNT operations, with further investigation of an 'iterative' matching approach which enumerates every valid matching pair, planned for the following month.

Yeji Kim

A Methodology for Reliability Assessments of Arbitrary Satellite Constellations

The commercial success of small satellite development and multi-satellite missions has led to constellation missions being proposed in every sector of the market. This paradigm shift has the potential to enable more capable and cost-effective space science missions. However, these novel approaches to space missions have outstripped existing policy and analysis methods for assessing the reliability of multi-satellite missions. Mission designers and decisionmakers need new methods and standards for modeling how the reliability of constituent spacecraft elements affect the aggregate reliability of constellations across a wide range of concepts and application-specific requirements. The Space Mission Analysis Branch at NASA’s Langley Research Center has developed a methodology for simulating the on-orbit reliability of arbitrary spacecraft constellations. In this paper, the authors describe the methodology and provides examples of how it can be used to evaluate specific constellation designs. To demonstrate the flexibility of the approach, several different constellation configurations are considered, including both homogenous and heterogenous designs. Next, the authors demonstrate the ability to perform broad parameter sweeps to develop greater insight into the intrinsic reliability trends associated with constellation concepts. Finally, the authors provide tables and novel data graphics which enable decisionmakers to quickly discern the relationships between constellation sizes, topologies, replenishment strategies, and overall constellation reliability.

satellite

Flying the Earth Observing Constellations

Prior to the launch of the Earth Observing System (EOS) Terra and Landsat-7 satellites in 1999, the Project Scientists for the two missions and the Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS) Project at the Goddard Space Flight Center signed an inter-project agreement document describing their plan to fly in loose formation, approximately 20 minutes within each other. In November 2000, a technology demonstration satellite, Earth Observer-1 (EO-1), was launched into the same orbit as that of Landsat-7 and Terra, with a goal of flying within a minute from Landsat-7. The SAC-C satellite, developed and operated by the government of Argentina, was launched along with EO-1, with a goal of flying near both Terra and Landsat-7. This formation enables the scientists to make use of the scientific synergy among the instruments on the different spacecraft. This group of satellites constitutes the morning constellation, which is led by the Landsat-7, which has a mean local time (MLT) at 10:00 a.m. In May 2002, the EOS Aqua satellite was launched into an orbit with an altitude of 705 km. and a 1:30 p.m. MLT. Two smaller satellites, CALIPSO (a joint U.S./French mission), and CloudSat (a joint NASA/Colorado State University/Air Force mission), plan to fly in tight formation, within 15 seconds of each other. In addition, CALIPSO and CloudSat also plan to be within 30 to 60 seconds of the Aqua satellite. A third satellite, PARASOL, managed by the French Space Agency, CNES, will be placed within a minute of the CALIPSO satellite. In 2004, the Aura satellite will be launched and phased in relation to the Aqua satellite, such that the instruments on Aura will be able to view the same mass of air no later than 8 minutes after the instruments on Aqua have observed it. Representatives from each mission are currently documenting a plan on how they will coordinate on-orbit operations. Why are all these satellites planning to fly as a constellation? The answer is that as a constellation. the scientists will be able to acquire science data not only from their specific instruments on a single satellite, but science data from the other satellites which will have been taken at approximately the same time, thus resulting in coordinated science observation data. This leads to better quality science. This paper describes how the mission design has been driven by the science requirements. The morning and the afternoon constellations present operational challenges, which had not previously been encountered. Operations planning must address not only how the satellites of each constellation operate safely together, but also, how the two constellations fly on the same orbits without interfering with each other as they downlink data to their respective ground stations. This paper describes the operations experience gained from the morning constellation and the planning for the afternoon constellation.

Kelly, Angelita C.

Science Opportunities Enabled by NASA's Constellation System: Interim Report

In 2004 NASA initiated studies of advanced science mission concepts known as the Vision Missions and inspired by a series of NASA roadmap activities conducted in 2003. Also in 2004 NASA began implementation of the first phases of a new space exploration policy, the Vision for Space Exploration. This implementation effort included development of a new human-carrying spacecraft, known as Orion, and two new launch vehicles, the Ares I and Ares V rockets.collectively called the Constellation System. NASA asked the National Research Council (NRC) to evaluate the science opportunities enabled by the Constellation System (see Preface) and to produce an interim report on a short time schedule and a final report by November 2008. The committee notes, however, that the Constellation System and its Orion and Ares vehicles have been justified by NASA and selected in order to enable human exploration beyond low Earth orbit, and not to enable science missions. This interim report of the Committee on Science Opportunities Enabled by NASA s Constellation System evaluates the 11 Vision Mission studies presented to it and groups them into two categories: those more deserving of future study, and those less deserving of future study. Although its statement of task also refers to Earth science missions, the committee points out that the Vision Missions effort was focused on future astronomy, heliophysics, and planetary exploration and did not include any Earth science studies because, at the time, the NRC was conducting the first Earth science decadal survey, and funding Earth science studies as part of the Vision Missions effort would have interfered with that process. Consequently, no Earth science missions are evaluated in this interim report. However, the committee will evaluate any Earth science mission proposal submitted in response to its request for information issued in March 2008 (see Appendix A). The committee based its evaluation of the preexisting Vision Missions studies on two criteria: whether the concepts offered the potential for a significant scientific advance, and whether or not the concepts would benefit from the Constellation System. The committee determined that all of the concepts offered the possibility of a significant scientific advance, but it cautions that such an evaluation ultimately must be made by the decadal survey process, and it emphasizes that this interim report s evaluation should not be considered to be an endorsement of the scientific merit of these proposals, which must of course be evaluated relative to other proposals. The committee determined that seven of these concepts would benefit from the Constellation System, whereas four would not, but it stresses that this conclusion does not reflect an evaluation of the scientific merit of the projects, but rather an assessment of whether or not new capabilities provided by the Constellation System could significantly affect them. Some of the mission concepts, such as the Advanced Compton Telescope, already offer a significant scientific advance and fit easily within the mass and volume constraints of existing launch vehicles. Other mission concepts, such as the Palmer Quest proposal to drill through the Mars polar cap, are not constrained by the launch vehicle, but rather by other technology limitations. The committee evaluated the mission concepts as presented to it, aware nevertheless that proposing a far larger and more ambitious mission with the same science goals might be possible given the capabilities of the Ares V launch vehicle. (Such proposals can be submitted in response to the committee s request for information to be evaluated in its final report.) See Table S.1 for a summary of the Vision Missions, including their cost estimates, technical maturity, and reasons that they might benefit from the Constellation System. The committee developed several findings and recommendations.

Source record

Infusing Stretch Goal Requirements into the Constellation Program

In 2004, the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) was announced by the United States President's Administration in an effort to explore space and to extend a human presence across our solar system. Subsequently, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) established the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) to develop a constellation of new capabilities, supporting technologies, and foundational research that allows for the sustained and affordable exploration of space. Then, ESMD specified the primary mission for the Constellation Program to carry out a series of human expeditions, ranging from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to the surface of Moon, Mars, and beyond for the purposes of conducting human exploration of space. Thus, the Constellation Program was established at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) to manage the development of the flight and ground infrastructure and systems that can enable continued and extended human access to space. Constellation Program's "Design Objectives" call for an early attention to the program's life cycle costs management through the Program's Need, Goals, and Objectives (NGO) document, which provides the vision, scope, and key areas of focus for the Program. One general policy of the Constellation Program, found in the Constellation Architecture Requirements Document (CARD), states: "A sustainable program hinges on how effectively total life cycle costs are managed. Developmental costs are a key consideration, but total life cycle costs related to the production, processing, and operation of the entire architecture must be accounted for in design decisions sufficiently to ensure future resources are available for ever more ambitious missions into the solar system....It is the intent of the Constellation Program to aggressively manage this aspect of the program using the design policies and simplicity." To respond to the Program's strong desire to manage the program life cycle costs, special efforts were established to identify operability requirements to influence flight vehicle and ground infrastructure design in order to impact the life cycle operations costs, and stretch goal requirements were introduced to the Program. This paper will describe how these stretch goal requirements were identified, developed, refined, matured, approved, and infused into the CARD. The paper will also document several challenges encountered when infusing the stretch goal requirements into the Constellation Program.

Operability

Methodology and Method and Apparatus for Signaling with Capacity Optimized Constellations

Design Methodology and Method and Apparatus for Signaling with Capacity Optimized Constellation Abstract Communication systems are described that use geometrically PSK shaped constellations that have increased capacity compared to conventional PSK constellations operating within a similar SNR band. The geometrically shaped PSK constellation is optimized based upon parallel decoding capacity. In many embodiments, a capacity optimized geometrically shaped constellation can be used to replace a conventional constellation as part of a firmware upgrade to transmitters and receivers within a communication system. In a number of embodiments, the geometrically shaped constellation is optimized for an Additive White Gaussian Noise channel or a fading channel. In numerous embodiments, the communication uses adaptive rate encoding and the location of points within the geometrically shaped constellation changes as the code rate changes.

Barsoum, Maged F.