Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Support Center”

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
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Extravehicular Activity Operations Concepts Under Communication Latency and Bandwidth Constraints

The Biologic Analog Science Associated with Lava Terrains (BASALT) project is a multi-year program dedicated to iteratively develop, implement, and evaluate concepts of operations (ConOps) and supporting capabilities intended to enable and enhance human scientific exploration of Mars. This pa-per describes the planning, execution, and initial results from the first field deployment, referred to as BASALT-1, which consisted of a series of 10 simulated extravehicular activities (EVAs) on volcanic flows in Idaho's Craters of the Moon (COTM) National Monument. The ConOps and capabilities deployed and tested during BASALT-1 were based on previous NASA trade studies and analog testing. Our primary research question was whether those ConOps and capabilities work acceptably when performing real (non-simulated) biological and geological scientific exploration under 4 different Mars-to-Earth communication conditions: 5 and 15 min one-way light time (OWLT) communication latencies and low (0.512 Mb/s uplink, 1.54 Mb/s downlink) and high (5.0 Mb/s uplink, 10.0 Mb/s downlink) bandwidth conditions representing the lower and higher limits of technical communication capabilities currently proposed for future human exploration missions. The synthesized results of BASALT-1 with respect to the ConOps and capabilities assessment were derived from a variety of sources, including EVA task timing data, network analytic data, and subjective ratings and comments regarding the scientific and operational acceptability of the ConOp and the extent to which specific capabilities were enabling and enhancing, and are presented here. BASALT-1 established preliminary findings that baseline ConOp, software systems, and communication protocols were scientifically and operationally acceptable with minor improvements desired by the "Mars" extravehicular (EV) and intravehicular (IV) crewmembers, but unacceptable with improvements required by the "Earth" Mission Support Center. These data will provide a basis for guiding and prioritizing capability development for future BASALT deployments and, ultimately, future human exploration missions.

Beaton, Kara H.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Space-to-Ground Interactions While Conducting Scientific Fieldwork Under Mars Mission Constraints

The Biologic Analog Science Associated with Lava Terrains (BASALT) project is a 4-year program dedicated to iteratively designing, implementing, and evaluating concepts of operations (ConOps) and supporting capabilities to enable and enhance scientific exploration for future human Mars missions. BASALT incorporates three field deployments during which real (non-simulated) biological and geochemical field science is conducted at two high-fidelity Mars analog locations under simulated Mars mission conditions, including communication de-lays and data transmission limitations. BASALT’s primary science objective is to investigate how the redox conditions of altered basaltic environments affect the development of microbial communities in these Mars-relevant settings. Field sites include the active East Rift Zone on the Big Island of Hawaii, reminiscent of early Mars when basaltic volcanism and interaction with water were widespread, and the dormant eastern Snake River Plain in Idaho, similar to present-day Mars where basaltic volcanism is rare and most evidence for volcano-driven hydrothermal activity is relict. BASALT’s primary science operations objective is to investigate exploration ConOps and capabilities that facilitate scientific return during human-robotic exploration under Mars mission constraints. Each field deployment consists of ten extravehicular activities (EVAs) on the volcanic flows in which two extravehicular and two intravehicular (IV) crew-members conduct the science while communicating across time delay and under bandwidth constraints with an Earth-based Mission Support Center (MSC) comprised of expert scientists and operators. Communication latencies of 5 and 15-minute one-way light time and low (0.512 Mb/s uplink, 1.54 Mb/s down-link) and high (5.0 Mb/s uplink, 10.0 Mb/s downlink) bandwidth conditions are being evaluated. EVA crewmembers communicate with the MSC via voice and text messaging and provide scientific instrument data, still imagery, video streams, and GPS tracking information. The MSC reviews this data across delay and provides recommendations for presampling and sampling tasks. The scientists used dynamic leaderboards (priority rank-ing lists), to track and rank candidate samples relative to one another and against the science objectives for the current EVA and the overall mission. Updates to the dynamic leaderboards are relayed regularly to the IV crewmembers to provide scientific feedback from Earth and to help minimize crew idle time (time spent waiting for Earth input during which no productive tasks are performed). EVA timelines are strategically designed to enable continuous (delayed) feedback from an Earth-based science team while simultaneously minimizing crew idle time. Such timelines are operationally advantageous, reducing transport costs by eliminating the need for crews to return to the same locations on multiple EVAs while still providing opportunities for recommendations from science experts on Earth, and scientifically advantageous by minimizing the potential for cross-contamination across sites. This paper will highlight the space-to-ground interaction results from the three BASALT field deployments, including planned versus actual EVA time-line data, ground assimilation times (the amount of time available to the MSC to provide input to the crew), and idle time. Furthermore, we describe how these results vary under the different communication latency and bandwidth conditions. Together, these data will provide a basis for guiding and prioritizing capability development for future human exploration missions.

Beaton, Kara H.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Intra-EVA Space-to-Ground Interactions when Conducting Scientific Fieldwork Under Simulated Mars Mission Constraints

The Biologic Analog Science Associated with Lava Terrains (BASALT) project is a four-year program dedicated to iteratively designing, implementing, and evaluating concepts of operations (ConOps) and supporting capabilities to enable and enhance scientific exploration for future human Mars missions. The BASALT project has incorporated three field deployments during which real (non-simulated) biological and geochemical field science have been conducted at two high-fidelity Mars analog locations under simulated Mars mission conditions, including communication delays and data transmission limitations. BASALT's primary Science objective has been to extract basaltic samples for the purpose of investigating how microbial communities and habitability correlate with the physical and geochemical characteristics of chemically altered basalt environments. Field sites include the active East Rift Zone on the Big Island of Hawai'i, reminiscent of early Mars when basaltic volcanism and interaction with water were widespread, and the dormant eastern Snake River Plain in Idaho, similar to present-day Mars where basaltic volcanism is rare and most evidence for volcano-driven hydrothermal activity is relict. BASALT's primary Science Operations objective has been to investigate exploration ConOps and capabilities that facilitate scientific return during human-robotic exploration under Mars mission constraints. Each field deployment has consisted of ten extravehicular activities (EVAs) on the volcanic flows in which crews of two extravehicular and two intravehicular crewmembers conducted the field science while communicating across time delay and under bandwidth constraints with an Earth-based Mission Support Center (MSC) comprised of expert scientists and operators. Communication latencies of 5 and 15 min one-way light time and low (0.512 Mb/s uplink, 1.54 Mb/s downlink) and high (5.0 Mb/s uplink, 10.0 Mb/s downlink) bandwidth conditions were evaluated. EVA crewmembers communicated with the MSC via voice and text messaging. They also provided scientific instrument data, still imagery, video streams from chest-mounted cameras, GPS location tracking information. The MSC monitored and reviewed incoming data from the field across delay and provided recommendations for pre-sampling and sampling tasks based on their collective expertise. The scientists used dynamic priority ranking lists, referred to as dynamic leaderboards, to track and rank candidate samples relative to one another and against the science objectives for the current EVA and the overall mission. Updates to the dynamic leaderboards throughout the EVA were relayed regularly to the IV crewmembers. The use of these leaderboards enabled the crew to track the dynamic nature of the MSC recommendations and helped minimize crew idle time (defined as time spent waiting for input from Earth during which no other productive tasks are being performed). EVA timelines were strategically designed to enable continuous (delayed) feedback from an Earth-based Science Team while simultaneously minimizing crew idle time. Such timelines are operationally advantageous, reducing transport costs by eliminating the need for crews to return to the same locations on multiple EVAs while still providing opportunities for recommendations from science experts on Earth, and scientifically advantageous by minimizing the potential for cross-contamination across sites. This paper will highlight the space-to-ground interaction results from the three BASALT field deployments, including planned versus actual EVA timeline data, ground assimilation times (defined as the amount of time available to the MSC to provide input to the crew), and idle time. Furthermore, we describe how these results vary under the different communication latency and bandwidth conditions. Together, these data will provide a basis for guiding and prioritizing capability development for future human exploration missions.

Beaton, Kara H.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Recent Efforts in Advanced High Frequency Communications at the Glenn Research Center in Support of NASA Mission

This presentation will discuss research and technology development work at the NASA Glenn Research Center in advanced frequency communications in support of NASAs mission. An overview of the work conducted in-house and also in collaboration with academia, industry, and other government agencies (OGA) in areas such as antenna technology, power amplifiers, radio frequency (RF) wave propagation through Earths atmosphere, ultra-sensitive receivers, among others, will be presented. In addition, the role of these and other related RF technologies in enabling the NASA next generation space communications architecture will be also discussed.

Optical communications↗
NASA NTRS2018

A Flexible Control Center Architecture for Support of Diverse Spaceflight Missions

The Ames Multi-Mission Operations Center (MMOC) enables and supports flight and science operations for Ames' spaceflight missions. The MMOC is composed of the facilities, networks, information technology equipment, software, and system administration services needed by flight projects to effectively and efficiently perform all mission functions, including planning, scheduling, command, telemetry processing, and science analysis. The MMOC's ready-to-use services reduce start-up time, shorten procurement and provisioning and allow mission planning efforts to focus more on science and less on infrastructure. The architecture of the MMOC was designed from the start for flexibility, so that it can readily support multiple missions of greatly varying size and complexity while simultaneously keeping costs low.

Differding, Joan C.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mission Operations, Cubed: NASA Marshall Operations Support for SmallSats

SmallSats have come a long way since the Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center supported its first “minisatellite” mission in 2010. And just as SmallSats themselves have evolved in those 12 years, so too has the HOSC’s mission support for SmallSats. Marshall Space Flight Center has a long history with payload and mission operations, including support for the Apollo missions to the moon, the Space Shuttle program, and 21 years of continuous around-the-clock science operations support for research aboard the International Space Station. Today, the HOSC is a multi-tenant facility, supporting not only ISS, but also NASA’s Commercial Crew program, the Space Launch System, the Hubble and Chandra observatories and others – including multiple SmallSat missions. Two SmallSat solar sail missions will be among those taking advantage of the HOSC’s resources for planning, training for and executing mission operations – the Near Earth Asteroid (NEA) Scout and Solar Cruiser missions. One of 10 6U CubeSats manifest on the Artemis I launch of NASA’s Space Launch System rocket this year, NEA Scout’s three-year mission will be supported through a more traditional operations concept, with a dedicated Flight Controller staff operating within the HOSC. Scheduled to launch as part of the Interstellar Mapping and Acceleration Probe (IMAP) in February 2025, Solar Cruiser’s 11-month mission will take a next-generation approach to operations by utilizing a multi-mission flight controller concept, as well as Marshall’s Telescience Resource Kit (TreK). TreK provides a suite of software applications and libraries that allow the Mission Operations Center to serve as an in-house ground system which incorporates remote and automation capability options for engineers and scientists. This presentation will compare the approaches the HOSC will use to support these two missions as a way of demonstrating the array of options NASA MSFC offers for operations support for CubeSat and SmallSat missions.

Darren S Wallace↗
NASA NTRS2005

Middleware Evaluation and Benchmarking for Use in Mission Operations Centers

Middleware technologies have been promoted as timesaving, cost-cutting alternatives to the point-to-point communication used in traditional mission operations systems. However, missions have been slow to adopt the new technology. The lack of existing middleware-based missions has given rise to uncertainty about middleware's ability to perform in an operational setting. Most mission architects are also unfamiliar with the technology and do not know the benefits and detriments to architectural choices - or even what choices are available. We will present the findings of a study that evaluated several middleware options specifically for use in a mission operations system. We will address some common misconceptions regarding the applicability of middleware-based architectures, and we will identify the design decisions and tradeoffs that must be made when choosing a middleware solution. The Middleware Comparison and Benchmark Study was conducted at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center to comprehensively evaluate candidate middleware products, compare and contrast the performance of middleware solutions with the traditional point- to-point socket approach, and assess data delivery and reliability strategies. The study focused on requirements of the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission, validating the potential use of middleware in the GPM mission ground system. The study was jointly funded by GPM and the Goddard Mission Services Evolution Center (GMSEC), a virtual organization for providing mission enabling solutions and promoting the use of appropriate new technologies for mission support. The study was broken into two phases. To perform the generic middleware benchmarking and performance analysis, a network was created with data producers and consumers passing data between themselves. The benchmark monitored the delay, throughput, and reliability of the data as the characteristics were changed. Measurements were taken under a variety of topologies, data demands, and data characteristics, using several middleware products. All results were compared to systems using traditional point-to-point socket communication. By comparing performance results under Merent settings, inferences could be made about each middleware's ability to meet certain requirements of the GPM mission. The second phase simulated a middleware-based mission operations center. Actual mission support tools were either used or simulated to create real world demands on the middleware. Network and computer demands were watched closely to verify that no specific idiosyncrasies of mission operations activities would prove unsupportable by the middleware. In our presentation, we will address some commonly accepted misconceptions concerning middleware in mission support architectures. Specifically, we will focus on the perception that middleware solutions are too slow or impose too much overhead for real-time mission operations, and that middleware solutions are too expensive for small

Antonucci, Rob↗
NASA NTRS2001

Aerothermodynamic Environment Definition for the Genesis Sample Return Capsule

NASA's Genesis sample return mission will be the first to return material from beyond the Earth-Moon system. NASA Langley Research Center supported this mission with aerothermodynamic analyses of the sample return capsule. This paper provides an overview of that effort. The capsule is attached through its forebody to the spacecraft bus. When the attachment is severed prior to Earth entry, forebody cavities remain. The presence of these cavities could dramatically increase the heating environment in their vicinity and downstream. A combination of computational fluid dynamics calculations and wind tunnel phosphor thermography tests were employed to address this issue. These results quantify the heating environment in and around the cavities, and were a factor in the decision to switch forebody heat shield materials. A transition map is developed which predicts that the flow aft of the penetrations will still be laminar at the peak heating point of the trajectory. As the vehicle continues along the trajectory to the peak dynamic pressure point, fully turbulent flow aft of the penetrations could occur. The integrated heat load calculations show that a heat shield sized to the stagnation point levels will be adequate for the predicted environment aft of the penetrations.

Cheatwood, F. McNeil↗
NASA NTRS1994

Reengineering the Project Design Process

In response to NASA's goal of working faster, better and cheaper, JPL has developed extensive plans to minimize cost, maximize customer and employee satisfaction, and implement small- and moderate-size missions. These plans include improved management structures and processes, enhanced technical design processes, the incorporation of new technology, and the development of more economical space- and ground-system designs. The Laboratory's new Flight Projects Implementation Office has been chartered to oversee these innovations and the reengineering of JPL's project design process, including establishment of the Project Design Center and the Flight System Testbed. Reengineering at JPL implies a cultural change whereby the character of its design process will change from sequential to concurrent and from hierarchical to parallel. The Project Design Center will support missions offering high science return, design to cost, demonstrations of new technology, and rapid development. Its computer-supported environment will foster high-fidelity project life-cycle development and cost estimating.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory JPL project design concu↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Standing Review Board Handbook: Revision B

This SRB Handbook provides review guidance for the program and project communities and for the SRBs regarding the expectations, processes, products, timelines, and working interfaces with review organizations, Centers, Mission Directorates, Mission Support Organizations, and Management Councils. It provides guidelines for membership selection, review implementation, review products, and reporting of results. The SRB Handbook guidance may be tailored, with the Convening Authorities' approval, to meet the needs of the Agency, Mission Directorates, Centers, and the programs and projects being reviewed. The final review agreement of the SRB, program and project, and Convening Authorities for program and project Life-Cycle Reviews (LCRs) is documented in the terms of reference, as described in Section 4.1 and Appendix H.

Tahani R Amer↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Structures and Materials Research at NASA Langley Research Center

NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery. The Structures and Materials discipline at NASA Langley Research Center supports this mission through advanced materials and manufacturing approaches applied to innovative structural concepts. We start with synthesizing novel material systems and applying tools and methods to predict and validate their static, dynamic, durability and damage tolerance behavior. We mature materials from test tube to test flight by developing manufacturing techniques that enable the advancement of aerospace structures from concept to reality. We develop advanced measurement techniques for health management and nondestructive evaluation. We draw on our structures and materials core capabilities to enable safe, reliable lightweight aerospace structures for application in all environments. You will find the results of our work in the assembly of large structures in space and on other planets, vehicles that carry crew into space, vehicles that operate at high speeds and in extreme environments, and technology for passenger and crew safety in commercial aviation. This presentation will provide an overview of Langley Research Center’s role within the agency, then focus on how current Structures and Materials research areas support a variety of NASA missions in space operations, exploration, and aeronautics.

Structures↗
NASA NTRS2015

Recent Efforts in Communications Research and Technology at the Glenn Research Center in Support of NASA's Mission

As it has done in the past, NASA is currently engaged in furthering the frontiers of space and planetary exploration. The effectiveness in gathering the desired science data in the amount and quality required to perform this pioneering work relies heavily on the communications capabilities of the spacecraft and space platforms being considered to enable future missions. Accordingly, the continuous improvement and development of radiofrequency and optical communications systems are fundamental to prevent communications to become the limiting factor for space explorations. This presentation will discuss some of the research and technology development efforts currently underway at the NASA Glenn Research Center in the radio frequency (RF) and Optical Communications. Examples of work conducted in-house and also in collaboration with academia, industry, and other government agencies (OGA) in areas such as antenna technology, power amplifiers, radio frequency (RF) wave propagation through Earths atmosphere, ultra-sensitive receivers, thin films ferroelectric-based tunable components, among others, will be presented. In addition, the role of these and other related RF technologies in enabling the NASA next generation space communications architecture will be also discussed.

RF and Optical communications↗
NASA NTRS2019

Maturation of Dynamic Power Convertors for Radioisotope Power Systems

Dynamic Radioisotope Power Systems (DRPS) are being developed by NASA's RPS Program in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for space science and exploration missions. A development effort is currently underway to mature dynamic power convertors for infusion into a potential future flight generator. This convertor maturation effort was formulated by the RPS Program at NASA Headquarters based on successful maturation models and utilizes expertise from agency technology and mission centers to support requirements development and technology assessments. The effort is being executed by Glenn Research Center's Dynamic Radioisotope Power Systems (DRPS) project and the Thermal Energy Conversion Branch. The Dynamic Power Convertor (DPC) contracts consist of three phases to enable design, fabrication, and independent assessment after delivery to the government. The contracts are intended to gather data on candidate dynamic conversion technologies to fill knowledge gaps, support assessments of dynamic conversion technologies, and elicit generator requirements. The SRG-110 (Stirling Radioisotope Generator) and ASRG (Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator) flight development projects provided Stirling convertor demonstration units and engineering models to verify and validate convertors against performance specifications and mission requirements. These units utilize temperature resistance materials and non-contacting bearings to demonstrate wear-free, long-life operation. This maturation effort builds on past lessons learned and new requirements focused on demonstrating convertor robustness to critical environments meant to stress key aspects of each convertor within the margins of the design. This effort seeks to realize the full potential of dynamic power conversion technologies for NASA's space science and exploration missions.

Wilson, Scott↗
NASA NTRS2019

Maturation of Dynamic Power Convertors for Radioisotope Power Systems

Dynamic Radioisotope Power Systems (DRPS) are being developed by NASA’s Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) Program in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for space science and exploration missions. A development effort is currently underway to mature dynamic power convertors for infusion into a potential future flight generator. This convertor maturation effort was formulated by the RPS Program at NASA Headquarters based on successful maturation models and utilizes expertise from agency’s technology and mission centers to support requirements development and technology assessments. The effort is being executed by Glenn Research Center’s (GRC) DRPS Project and the Thermal Energy Conversion Branch. The Dynamic Power Convertor (DPC) contracts consist of three phases to enable design, fabrication, and independent assessment of prototypes after delivery to the government. The contracts are intended to gather data on candidate dynamic conversion technologies to fill knowledge gaps, support assessments of dynamic conversion technologies, and elicit generator requirements. The 110-watt Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG-110) and Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG) flight development projects provided Stirling convertor demonstration units and engineering models to verify and validate convertors against performance specifications and mission requirements. These units utilize temperature resistant materials and non-contacting bearings to demonstrate wear-free, long-life operation. This maturation effort builds on past lessons-learned and new requirements focused on demonstrating convertor robustness to critical environments meant to stress key aspects of each convertor within the margins of the design. This effort seeks to realize the full potential of dynamic power conversion technologies for NASA’s space science and exploration missions.

Wilson, Scott↗
DOE OSTI2016

Consequence-driven cyber-informed engineering (CCE)

The Idaho National Lab (INL) is leading a high-impact, national security-level initiative to reprioritize the way the nation looks at high-consequence risk within the industrial control systems (ICS) environment of the country’s most critical infrastructure and other national assets. The Consequence-driven Cyber-informed Engineering (CCE) effort provides both private and public organizations with the steps required to examine their own environments for high-impact events/risks; identify implementation of key devices and components that facilitate that risk; illuminate specific, plausible cyber attack paths to manipulate these devices; and develop concrete mitigations, protections, and tripwires to address the high-consequence risk. The ultimate goal of the CCE effort is to help organizations take the steps necessary to thwart cyber attacks from even top-tier, highly resourced adversaries that would result in a catastrophic physical effect. CCE participants are encouraged to work collaboratively with each other and with key U.S. Government (USG) contributors to establish a coalition, maximizing the positive effect of lessons-learned and further contributing to the protection of critical infrastructure and other national assets.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2004

The Center Master Plan For NASA Glenn Research Center

The Center Master Plan for NASA Glenn Research Center is a comprehensive survey of NASA Glenn's current facility assets and a vision of how we see the facilities will change over the next 20 years in order to support the changing NASA Mission. This Center Master Plan is a vital management tool used by all organizations for making near term decisions and in future planning. During the summer of 2004, I worked with Joseph Morris, the Chief Architect in the Facilities Division, on beginning this Center Master Planning Process. The previous Master Plan was completed by the Center in 1985 and contained general information on the background of the facility as well as maps detailing environmental and historic records, land use, utilities, etc. The new Master Plan is required for the Center by NASA headquarters and will include similar types of information as used in the past. The new study will provide additional features including showing how individual buildings are linked to the programs and missions that they serve. The Master Plan will show practical future options for the facility s assets with a twenty year look ahead. The Plan will be electronically retrievable so that it becomes a communications tool for Center personnel. A Center Master Plan, although required, is very beneficial to NASA Glenn Research Center in aiding management with the future direction of the campus. Keeping up-to-date information and future plans readily available to all of NASA Glenn will insure that future real property development efficiently and effectively supports the missions camed out and supported by the Center. A Center Master Plan will also facilitate coordination with Center supported programs, stakeholders, and customers. In addition, it will provide a basis for cooperative planning with local and other governmental organizations and ultimately ensure that future budgets include the Center program needs described in the plan. This will ensure that development plans are safe, practical, and cost effective. To properly formulate any future plans, background information and research are required. Before bringing in a consultant to tackle the three year process anticipated to prepare a Center Master Plan, my job was to gather information on different organizations contributions to the NASA mission, their facility needs, consistent trends they observe, etc. I conducted numerous interviews with personnel such as Directorate Representatives, Division Chiefs, Branch Chiefs, System Managers and Building Managers. I documented the information I received from them for future use. I used the information to create various color-coded maps layering the different data. This was done with the ending objective being to collect the information and place it in a database that will be linked with Aperture (a computer program that generates color-coded map layers from database information) and made electronically retrievable to the Planning Consultant, NASA personnel, program stakeholders, and other governmental agencies. My goal this summer was to gather information and ideas appropriate for use in NASA Glenn Research Center s Master Plan and organize them for future application by the Planning Consultant. By the end of the summer, after completion of my goal, I will utilize my knowledge and create an array of preliminary future plans for the facility that can be passed along as a guidance tool.

Bigach, Kristin M.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Computer support for cooperative tasks in Mission Operations Centers

Traditionally, spacecraft management has been performed by fixed teams of operators in Mission Operations Centers. The team cooperatively: (1) ensures that payload(s) on spacecraft perform their work; and (2) maintains the health and safety of the spacecraft through commanding and monitoring the spacecraft's subsystems. In the future, the task demands will increase and overload the operators. This paper describes the traditional spacecraft management environment and describes a new concept in which groupware will be used to create a Virtual Mission Operations Center. Groupware tools will be used to better utilize available resources through increased automation and dynamic sharing of personnel among missions.

Fox, Jeffrey↗