SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Topics include: International Space Station assembly sequence; Electrical power substation; Thermal control substation; Guidance, navigation and control; Command data and handling; Robotics; Human and robotic integration; Additional modes of re-supply; NASA and International partner control centers; Space Shuttle ground operations.
Description of tasks and facilities involved in the processing of Space Shuttle missions at the Kennedy Space Center. Responsibilities considered include vehicle integration and launch, recovery and refurbishment of the spent solid rocket motors, and landing and refurbishment of the Orbiter vehicles. Facility options are evaluated for transportation, on-site processing, mating, and recovery of the booster, drop tank, and Orbiter elements. Processing flow patterns are outlined for assembly, maintenance, checking, safing, refurbishment, and launch operations.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Space Shuttle-related payload processing operations at the Kennedy Space Center have resulted in a major increase in the number of items being simultaneously processed, with two or more intermediate spacecraft being prepared, along with several smaller payload items, for launch on the same mission. When full operational status is achieved, some elements of three or more Space Shuttle flight cargoes will undergo processing at the Center simultaneously. It is also expected that long lead time items will often arrive earlier than those requiring a shorter checkout span. These and other complications due to the progressive increase in the scale of operations have prompted facility modifications, new operational procedures, and advance planning.
Space Shuttle landings at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) are of special concern to NASA's landing community because of Florida's rapidly changing weather conditions. Since a large number of Shuttle landing attempts occur in the morning hours (just after sunrise) fog and stratus development are a problem. The deorbit burn decision for a landing at KSC is typically made 90 minutes before Shuttle touchdown. In that 90 minutes weather conditions can change very rapidly. Fog to the west of KSC an advect in and reduce visibility to less than 7 miles. The most important difference between Shuttle and normal aircraft landings is that the Shuttle has no go-around capability requiring a forecast with little room for error. To help guard against rapidly changing weather conditions, flight rules have been developed as guidelines for all landings. This paper concerns fog development that would affect less than 7-statue mile visibility rule which is in effect for End-Of-Mission (EOM) Shuttle landings at KSC (Rule 4-64(A)). Data used for this analysis included hourly surface observations at the X68 Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) and upper-air observations form the CCAFS (Cape Canaveral Air Force Station-72794) rawinsonde site for the five year period, 1986 to 1990. This investigation focused on rapidly developing fog or stratus that developed between decision time and landing.
Upgrade of data acquisition and controls systems software at Johnson Space Center's Space Environment Simulation Laboratory (SESL) involved the definition, evaluation and selection of a system communication architecture and software components. A brief discussion of the background of the SESL and its data acquisition and controls systems provides a context for discussion of the requirements for each selection. Further framework is provided as upgrades to these systems accomplished in the 1990s and in 2003 are compared to demonstrate the role that technological advances have had in their improvement. Both of the selections were similar in their three phases; 1) definition of requirements, 2) identification of candidate products and their evaluation and testing and 3) selection by comparison of requirement fulfillment. The candidates for the communication architecture selection embraced several different methodologies which are explained and contrasted. Requirements for this selection are presented and the selection process is described. Several candidates for the software component of the data acquisition and controls system are identified, requirements for evaluation and selection are presented, and the evaluation process is described.
Space debris presents many challenges to current space operations. Although, the probability of collision between an operational spacecraft and a piece of space debris is quite small, the potential losses can be quite high. Prior to 1990, characterization of the orbital debris environment was divided into two categories. Objects larger than 10 cm are monitored by the United States Space Surveillance Network (SSN) and documented in the U.S. Space Command (USSPACECOM) catalog. Knowledge of debris smaller than 0.1 cm has come from the analyses of returned surfaces. The lack of information about the debris environment in the size range from 0.1 to 1 0 cm led to a joint NASA-DOD effort for orbital debris measurements using the Haystack radar and the unbuilt Haystack Auxiliary (HAX) radars. The data from these radars have been critical to the design of shielding for the International Space Station and have been extensively used in the creation of recent models describing the orbital debris environment. Recent debris campaigns have been conducted to verify and validate through comparative measurements, the results and conclusions drawn from the Haystack/HAX measurements. The Haystack/HAX measurements and results will be described as well as the results of the recent measurement campaigns.
The US civil aerospace program has been a great contributor to the creation and implementation of techniques and methods to identify, analyze, and confront risk. NASA has accomplished mission success in many instances, but also has had many failures. Anomalies have kept the Agency from achieving success on other occasions, as well. While NASA has mastered ways to prevent risks, and to quickly and effectively react and recover from anomalies or failures, it was not until few years ago that a comprehensive Risk Management process started being implemented in some of its programs and projects. A Continuous Risk Management (CRM) cycle process was developed and has been promoted and used successfully in programs and projects across the Agency.
This audit was initiated in response to a hotline complaint regarding the review, approval, and release of scientific and technical information (STI) at Johnson Space Center. The complainant alleged that Johnson personnel conducting export control reviews of STI were not fully qualified to conduct those reviews and that the reviews often did not occur until after the STI had been publicly released. NASA guidance requires that STI, defined as the results of basic and applied scientific, technical, and related engineering research and development, undergo certain reviews prior to being released outside of NASA or to audiences that include foreign nationals. The process includes technical, national security, export control, copyright, and trade secret (e.g., proprietary data) reviews. The review process was designed to preclude the inappropriate dissemination of sensitive information while ensuring that NASA complies with a requirement of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (the Space Act)1 to provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination of information resulting from NASA research activities. We focused our audit on evaluating the STI review process: specifically, determining whether the roles and responsibilities for the review, approval, and release of STI were adequately defined and documented in NASA and Center-level guidance and whether that guidance was effectively implemented at Goddard Space Flight Center, Johnson Space Center, Langley Research Center, and Marshall Space Flight Center. Johnson was included in the review because it was the source of the initial complaint, and Goddard, Langley, and Marshall were included because those Centers consistently produce significant amounts of STI.
In June 1966, at the start of the Gulf Coast hurricane season, the Johnson Space Center (JSC) celebrated the opening of its new 4,000-square foot, state-of-the-art Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The new EOC has been upgraded and enhanced to support a wide spectrum of emergencies affecting JSC and neighboring communities. One of the main features of the EOC is its premier computerized dispatch center. The new system unites many of JSC's critical emergency functions into one integrated network. It automatically monitors fire alarms, security entrances, and external cameras. It contains the JSC inventory of hazardous materials, by building and room, and can call up Material Safety Data Sheets for most of the generic hazardous materials used on-site. The EOC is available for community use during area emergencies such as hurricanes and is a welcome addition to the Clear Lake/Galveston Bay Area communities' emergency response resources.
Johnson Space Center accomplishments in new and advanced concepts during 1988 are highlighted. This year, reports are grouped in sections Space System Technology, Solar System Sciences, Space Transportation Technology, and Medical Sciences. Summary sections describing the role of Johnson Space Center in each program are followed by descriptions of significant tasks. Descriptions are suitable for external consumption, free of technical jargon, and illustrated to increase ease of comprehension.
Johnson Space Center accomplishments in new and advanced concepts during 1983 are highlighted. Included are research funded by the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology; Advanced Programs tasks funded by the Office of Space Flight; and Solar System Explorations, Life Sciences, and Earth Sciences and Applications research funded by the Office of Space Sciences and Applications. Summary sections describing the role of the Johnson Space Center in each program are followed by one-page descriptions of significant projects. Descriptions are suitable for external consumption, free of technical jargon, and illustrated to increase ease of comprehension.
Johnson Space Center accomplishments in new and advanced concepts during 1984 are highlighted. Included are research funded by the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology; Advanced Programs tasks funded by the Office of Space Flight; and Solar System Exploration and Life Sciences research funded by the Office of Space Sciences and Applications. Summary sections describing the role of the Johnson Space Center in each program are followed by one page descriptions of significant projects. Descriptions are suitable for external consumption, free of technical jargon, and illustrated to increase ease of comprehension.
Johnson Space Center accomplishments in new and advanced concepts during 1985 are highlighted. Included are research funded by the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology; Solar System Exploration and Life Sciences research funded by the Office of Space Sciences and Applications; and Advanced Programs tasks funded by the Office of Space Flight. Summary sections describing the role of the Johnson Space Center in each program are followed by one-page descriptions of significant projects. Descriptions are suitable for external consumption, free of technical jargon, and illustrated to increase ease of comprehension.
Johnson Space Center accomplishments in new and advanced concepts during 1986 are highlighted. Included are research funded by the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology; Solar System Exploration and Life Sciences research funded by the Office of Space Sciences and Applications; and Advanced Programs tasks funded by the Office of Space Flight. Summary sections describing the role of the Johnson Space Center in each program are followed by one-page descriptions of significant projects. Descriptions are suitable for external consumption, free of technical jargon, and illustrated to increase ease of comprehension.
Johnson Space Center accomplishments in new and advanced concepts during 1987 are highlighted. Included are research projects funded by the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology, Solar System Exploration and Life Sciences research funded by the Office of Space Sciences and Applications, and advanced Programs tasks funded by the Office of Space Flight. Summary sections describing the role of the Johnson Space Center in each program are followed by descriptions of significant projects. Descriptions are suitable for external consumption, free of technical jargon, and illustrated to increase ease of comprehension.
Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida has been utilized for space missions over many years with a gradually increasing number of rocket launches. There have been multiple studies where air-coupled acoustic waves and infrasound originating from launched rockets were used for operational purposes, such as locating booster trajectories as a function of changing atmospheric conditions. However, no study has utilized the acoustoelastic waves as a signal source for subsurface seismic investigations. We conducted a dispersion analysis using the seismic energy recorded from the Artemis I rocket launch at KSC in November 2022, and from these results we generated depth-sensitivity kernels at different wave frequencies. The kernels were compared with sedimentary core data to verify boundaries of carbonate layers above the Floridan Aquifer System. Accumulative information of bedrock-sediment boundary across the sedimentary platform could especially provide geo-structural evidence that manifests the configuration of coastal features. Continuous dispersion analysis of seismic recordings from consecutive rocket launches also has potential to identify non-stationary environmental effects, such as reorientation of sedimentary structures and fluctuation of the saltwater/groundwater lens from gravitational tides, which may affect erosional susceptibility of coastal features.