Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Task Force”

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 NTRS1989

Report of NASA Lunar Energy Enterprise Case Study Task Force

The Lunar Energy Enterprise Case Study Task Force was asked to determine the economic viability and commercial potential of mining and extracting He-3 from the lunar soil, and transporting the material to Earth for use in a power-generating fusion reactor. Two other space energy projects, the Space Power Station (SPS) and the Lunar Power Station (LPS), were also reviewed because of several interrelated aspects of these projects. The specific findings of the Task Force are presented. Appendices contain related papers generated by individual Task Force Members.

Kearney, John J.↗
NASA NTRS2012

An Overview of the NOAA Drought Task Force

The charge of the NOAA Drought Task Force is to coordinate and facilitate the various MAPP-funded research efforts with the overall goal of achieving significant advances in understanding and in the ability to monitor and predict drought over North America. In order to achieve this, the task force has developed a Drought Test-bed that individual research groups can use to test/evaluate methods and ideas. Central to this is a focus on three high profile North American droughts (1998-2004 western US drought, 2006-2007 SE US drought, 2011- current Tex-Mex drought) to facilitate collaboration among projects, including the development of metrics to assess the quality of monitoring and prediction products, and the development of an experimental drought monitoring and prediction system that incorporates and assesses recent advances. This talk will review the progress and plans of the task force, including efforts to help advance official national drought products, and the development of early warning systems by the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS). Coordination with other relevant national and international efforts such as the emerging NMME capabilities and the international effort to develop a Global Drought Information System (GDIS) will be discussed.

Schubert, S.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Third Report of the Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions

In May 1994, the Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions was established by the NASA Advisory Council. Its purpose is to review Phase 1 (Shuttle-Mir) planning, training, operations, rendezvous and docking, and management and to provide interim reports containing specific recommendations to the Advisory Council. Phase 1 represents the building block to create the experience and technical expertise for an International Space Station. The Phase 1 program brings together the United States and Russia in a major cooperative and contractual program that takes advantage of both countries' capabilities. The content of the Phase 1 program consists of the following elements as defined by the Phase 1 Program Management Plan, dated October 6, 1994: Shuttle-Mir rendezvous and docking missions; astronaut long duration presence on Mir Requirements for Mir support of Phase 1 when astronauts are not on board; outfitting Spektr and Priroda modules with NASA science, research, and risk mitigation equipment Related ground support requirements of NASA and the Russian Space Agency (RSA) to support Phase 1 Integrated NASA and RSA launch schedules and manifests The first meeting of the Task Force was held at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) on May 24 and 25, 1994 with a preliminary report submitted to the NASA Advisory Council on June 6, 1994. The second meeting of the Task Force was held at JSC on July 12 and 13, 1994 and a detailed report containing a series of specific recommendations was submitted on July 29, 1994. This report reflects the results of the third Task Force meeting which was held at JSC on 11 and 12 October, 1994. The briefings presented at that meeting reviewed NASA's response to the Task Force recommendations made to date and provided background data and current status on several critical areas which the Task Force had not addressed in its previous reports.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2001

Report by the International Space Station (ISS) Management and Cost Evaluation (IMCE) Task Force

The International Space Station (ISS) Management and Cost Evaluation Task Force (IMCE) was chartered to conduct an independent external review and assessment of the ISS cost, budget, and management. In addition, the Task Force was asked to provide recommendations that could provide maximum benefit to the U.S. taxpayers and the International Partners within the President's budget request. The Task Force has made the following principal findings: (1) The ISS Program's technical achievements to date, as represented by on-orbit capability, are extraordinary; (2) The Existing ISS Program Plan for executing the FY 02-06 budget is not credible; (3) The existing deficiencies in management structure, institutional culture, cost estimating, and program control must be acknowledged and corrected for the Program to move forward in a credible fashion; (4) Additional budget flexibility, from within the Office of Space Flight (OSF) must be provided for a credible core complete program; (5) The research support program is proceeding assuming the budget that was in place before the FY02 budget runout reduction of $1B; (6) There are opportunities to maximize research on the core station program with modest cost impact; (7) The U.S. Core Complete configuration (three person crew) as an end-state will not achieve the unique research potential of the ISS; (8) The cost estimates for the U.S.-funded enhancement options (e.g., permanent seven person crew) are not sufficiently developed to assess credibility. After these findings, the Task Force has formulated several primary recommendations which are published here and include: (1) Major changes must be made in how the ISS program is managed; (2) Additional cost reductions are required within the baseline program; (3) Additional funds must be identified and applied from the Human Space Flight budget; (4) A clearly defined program with a credible end-state, agreed to by all stakeholders, must be developed and implemented.

Young, A. Thomas↗
NASA NTRS2000

International Reference Ionosphere (IRI): Task Force Activity 2000

The annual IRI Task Force Activity was held at the Abdus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy from July 10 to July 14. The participants included J. Adeniyi (University of Ilorin, Nigeria), D. Bilitza (NSSDC/RITSS, USA), D. Buresova (Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Czech Republic), B. Forte (ICTP, Italy), R. Leitinger (University of Graz, Austria), B. Nava (ICTP, Italy), M. Mosert (University National Tucuman, Argentina), S. Pulinets (IZMIRAN, Russia), S. Radicella (ICTP, Italy), and B. Reinisch (University of Mass. Lowell, USA). The main topic of this Task Force Activity was the modeling of the topside ionosphere and the development of strategies for modeling of ionospheric variability. Each day during the workshop week the team debated a specific modeling problem in the morning during informal presentations and round table discussions of all participants. Ways of resolving the specific modeling problem were devised and tested in the afternoon in front of the computers of the ICTP Aeronomy and Radiopropagation Laboratory using ICTP s computer networks and internet access.

Bilitza, D.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Report of the NASA lunar energy enterprise case study task force

The Lunar Energy Enterprise Cast Study Task Force was formed to determine the economic viability and commercial business potential of mining and extracting He-3 from the lunar soil for use in earth-based fusion reactors. In addition, the Solar Power Satellite (SPS) and the Lunar Power Station (LPS) were also evaluated because they involve the use of lunar materials and could provide energy for lunar-based activities. The Task Force considered: (1) the legal and liability aspects of the space energy projects; (2) the long-range terrestrial energy needs and options; (3) the technical maturity of the three space energy projects; and (4) their commercial potential. The use of electricity is expected to increase, but emerging environmental concerns and resource availability suggest changes for the national energy policy. All three options have the potential to provide a nearly inexhaustible, clean source of electricity for the U.S. and worldwide, without major adverse impacts on the Earth's environment. Assumption by industry of the total responsibility for these energy projects is not yet possible. Pursuit of these energy concepts requires the combined efforts of government and industry. The report identifies key steps necessary for the development of these concepts and an evolving industrial role.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1995

Fifth Report of the NASA Advisory Council Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions

The NASA Advisory Council Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir rendezvous and docking missions examine a number of specific issues related to the Shuttle-Mir program. Three teams composed of Task Force members and technical advisors were formed to address the follow issues: preliminary results from STS-71 and the status of preparations for STS-74; NASA's presence in Russia; and NASA's automated data processing and telecommunications (ADP/T) infrastructure in Russia. The three review team reports have been included in the fifth report of the Task Force.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1998

Report of the Cost Assessment and Validation Task Force on the International Space Station

The Cost Assessment and Validation (CAV) Task Force was established for independent review and assessment of cost, schedule and partnership performance on the International Space Station (ISS) Program. The CAV Task Force has made the following key findings: The International Space Station Program has made notable and reasonable progress over the past four years in defining and executing a very challenging and technically complex effort. The Program size, complexity, and ambitious schedule goals were beyond that which could be reasonably achieved within the $2.1 billion annual cap or $17.4 billion total cap. A number of critical risk elements are likely to have an adverse impact on the International Space Station cost and schedule. The schedule uncertainty associated with Russian implementation of joint Partnership agreements is the major threat to the ISS Program. The Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 budget submission to Congress is not adequate to execute the baseline ISS Program, cover normal program growth, and address the known critical risks. Additional annual funding of between $130 million and $250 million will be required. Completion of ISS assembly is likely to be delayed from one to three years beyond December 2003.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1998

Cost Assessment and Validation Task Force on the International Space Station

The Cost Assessment and Validation (CAV) Task Force was established for independent review and assessment of cost, schedule and partnership performance on the International Space Station (ISS) Program. The CAV Task Force has made the following key findings: The International Space Station Program has made notable and reasonable progress over the past four years in defining and executing a very challenging and technically complex effort; The Program, size, complexity, and ambitious schedule goals were beyond that which could be reasonably achieved within the $2.1 billion annual cap or $17.4 billion total cap; A number of critical risk elements are likely to have an adverse impact on the International Space Station cost and schedule; The schedule uncertainty associated with Russian implementation of joint Partnership agreements is the major threat to the ISS Program; The Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 budget submission to Congress is not adequate to execute the baseline ISS Program, cover normal program, growth, and address the known critical risks. Additional annual funding of between $130 million and $250 million will be required; and Completion of ISS assembly is likely to be delayed from, one to three years beyond December 2003.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1994

NASA Advisory Council Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions

The NASA Advisory Council Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir rendezvous and docking convened on May 24 and 25, 1994. Based on the meetings, the Task Force made the following recommendations: at a minimum, the mission commander and payload commander for all subsequent Shuttle-Mir missions should be named at least 18 months in advance of the scheduled launch date; in order to derive early operational experience in advance of the first Mir docking mission, the primary objective of STS-63 should be Mir rendezvous and proximity operations; and if at all possible, the launch date for STS-63 should be moved forward.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1984

Wave scheduling - Decentralized scheduling of task forces in multicomputers

Decentralized operating systems that control large multicomputers need techniques to schedule competing parallel programs called task forces. Wave scheduling is a probabilistic technique that uses a hierarchical distributed virtual machine to schedule task forces by recursively subdividing and issuing wavefront-like commands to processing elements capable of executing individual tasks. Wave scheduling is highly resistant to processing element failures because it uses many distributed schedulers that dynamically assign scheduling responsibilities among themselves. The scheduling technique is trivially extensible as more processing elements join the host multicomputer. A simple model of scheduling cost is used by every scheduler node to distribute scheduling activity and minimize wasted processing capacity by using perceived workload to vary decentralized scheduling rules. At low to moderate levels of network activity, wave scheduling is only slightly less efficient than a central scheduler in its ability to direct processing elements to accomplish useful work.

Van Tilborg, A. M.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Group Task Force on Satellite Rescue and Repair

The Group Task Force was chartered by the Administrator of NASA to recommend 'a policy outlining the criteria, the design standards, and the pricing model to guide NASA in assessing the responsibilities for government and nongovernment Satellite Rescue and Repair Missions.' Criteria for accepting such missions, risks, and benefits to all sectors of our economy involved in satellite services, adequacy of planning and training, and the impact on NASA's primary mission were reviewed. The Group began by asking a more fundamental question; is satellite rescue and repair a logical element of NASA's mission? Factors considered were: (1) the probability of rescue or repair opportunities arising; (2) the economic justification for such attempts; (3) the benefits to NASA, both from such ad hoc learning experiences in space operations and the impact on the public perception of NASA; (4) the effect of such unanticipated missions on NASA's scheduled activities; (5) any potential effect on NASA's technical capability to work in space; and (6) any potential effect on U.S. economic competitiveness.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1995

Fourth Report of the Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions

On December 6, 1994, the NASA Administrator, Mr. Daniel Goldin, requested that Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Stafford, in his role as the Chairman of the NASA Advisory Council Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions, lead a team composed of several Task Force members and technical advisors' to Russia with the goal of reviewing preparations and readiness for the upcoming international Space Station Phase 1 missions. In his directions to Gen. Stafford, Mr. Goldin requested that the review team focus its initial efforts on safety of flight issues for the following Phase 1A missions: the Soyuz TM-21 mission which will carry U.S. astronaut Dr. Norman Thagard and cosmonauts Lt. Col. Vladimir Dezhurov and Mr. Gennady Strekalov aboard a Soyuz spacecraft to the Mir Station; the Mir 18 Main Expedition during which Thagard and his fellow cosmonauts, Dezhurov and Strokalov, will spend approximately three months aboard the Mir Station; the STS-71 Space Shuttle mission which will perform the first Shuttle-Mir docking, carry cosmonauts Col. Anatoly SoloViev and Mr. Nikolai Budarin to the Mir Station, and return Thagard, Dezhurov, and Strekalov to Earth.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

Research priorities and plans for the International Space Station-results of the 'REMAP' Task Force

Recent events in the International Space Station (ISS) Program have resulted in the necessity to re-examine the research priorities and research plans for future years. Due to both technical and fiscal resource constraints expected on the International Space Station, it is imperative that research priorities be carefully reviewed and clearly articulated. In consultation with OSTP and the Office of Management and budget (OMB), NASA's Office of Biological and Physical Research (OBPR) assembled an ad-hoc external advisory committee, the Biological and Physical Research Maximization and Prioritization (REMAP) Task Force. This paper describes the outcome of the Task Force and how it is being used to define a roadmap for near and long-term Biological and Physical Research objectives that supports NASA's Vision and Mission. Additionally, the paper discusses further prioritizations that were necessitated by budget and ISS resource constraints in order to maximize utilization of the International Space Station. Finally, a process has been developed to integrate the requirements for this prioritized research with other agency requirements to develop an integrated ISS assembly and utilization plan that maximizes scientific output. c2003 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

NASA Center HQS↗
NASA NTRS1987

Space station operations task force summary report

A companion to the Space Stations Operation Task Force Panels' Reports, this document summarizes all space station program goals, operations, and the characteristics of the expected user community. Strategies for operation and recommendations for implementation are included.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1987

Space station operations task force. Panel 4 report: Management integration

The Management Integration Panel of the Space Station Operations Task Force was chartered to provide a structure and ground rules for integrating the efforts of the other three panels and to address a number of cross cutting issues that affect all areas of space station operations. Issues addressed include operations concept implementation, alternatives development and integration process, strategic policy issues and options, and program management emphasis areas.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1987

Space Station Program implications from the viewpoint of the Space Station Operations Task Force

An operational concept for the Space Station which has been developed by the Space Station Operations Task Force is described. The operations functions are described, and the relationships of these functions to the overall framework for operations are defined. Product flows for the recommended framework are discussed, and the roles and responsibilities for the proposed operations organization during both the development and the mature operations phases of the Space Station Program are examined.

Paules, Granville E.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Space station operations task force. Panel 3 report: User development and integration

The User Development and Integration Panel of the Space Station Operations Task Force was chartered to develop concepts relating to the operations of the Space Station manned base and the platforms, user accommodation and integration activities. The needs of the user community are addressed in the context with the mature operations phase of the Space Station. Issues addressed include space station pricing options, marketing strategies, payload selection and resource allocation options, and manifesting techniques.

Source record↗